Loading...
06 June 7, 2012 Commission• • • RECORDS Riverside County Transportation (omission MEETING AGENDA TIME/DATE: 9:30 a.m. / Thursday, June 7, 2012 - PLEASE NOTE DATE LOCATION: BOARD ROOM County of Riverside Administrative Center 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside ite COMMISSIONERS .44 Chair - John J. Benoit First Vice Chair - Karen Spiegel Second Vice Chair - Marion Ashley Bob Buster, County of Riverside John F. Tavaglione, County of Riverside Jeff Stone, County of Riverside John J. Benoit, County of Riverside Marion Ashley, County of Riverside Bob Botts / Don Robinson, City of Banning Roger Berg / Jeff Fox, City of Beaumont Joseph DeConinck / To Be Appointed, City of Blythe Ella Zanowic / Jeff Hewitt, City of Calimesa Mary Craton / Barry Talbot, City of Canyon Lake Greg Pettis / Kathleen DeRosa, City of Cathedral City Steven Hernandez / Eduardo Garcia, City of Coachella Karen Spiegel / Eugene Montanez, City of Corona Scott Matas / Yvonne Parks, City of Desert Hot Springs Adam Rush / Ike Bootsma, City of Eastvale Larry Smith / Robert Youssef, City of Hemet Douglas Hanson / Patrick Mullany, City of Indian Wells Glenn Miller / Michael Wilson, City of Indio Frank Johnston / Micheal Goodland, City of Jurupa Valley Terry Henderson / Don Adolph, City of La Quinta Bob Magee / Melissa Melendez, City of Lake Elsinore Darcy Kuenzi / Wallace Edgerton, City of Menifee Marcelo Co / Richard Stewart, City of Moreno Valley Rick Gibbs / Kelly Bennett, City of Murrieta Berwin Hanna / Kathy Azevedo, City of Norco Jan Harnik / William Kroonen, City of Palm Desert Ginny Foat / Steve Pougnet, City of Palm Springs Daryl Busch / Al Landers, City of Perris Scott Hines / Gordon Moller, City of Rancho Mirage Steve Adams / Andy Melendrez, City of Riverside Andrew Kotyuk / Scott Miller, City of San Jacinto Ron Roberts / Jeff Comerchero, City of Temecula Ben Benoit / Timothy Walker, City of Wildomar To Be Appointed, Governor's Appointee Comments are welcomed by the Commission, if you wish to provide comments to the Commission, please complete and submit a Speaker Card to the Clerk of the Board. Riverside County Transportation Connnission TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Jennifer Harmon, Office and Board Services Manager DATE: May 30, 2012 SUBJECT: Possible Conflicts of Interest Issues - Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda of June 7, 2012 The June 7, 2012 agenda of the Riverside County Transportation Commission includes items which may raise possible conflicts of interest. A RCTC member may not participate in any discussion or action concerning a contract or amendment if a campaign contribution of more than $250 is received in the past 12 months or 3 months following the conclusion from any entity or individual listed. Agenda Item No. 8F - Recurring Contracts for Fiscal Year 2012/13 Consultant(s) AMMA Transit Planning 393 Two Trees Road Riverside, CA 92507 Heather Menninger, Principal Bechtel Infrastructure 5257 Westview Drive Fredrick, MD 21703 Donald Marshall, President Best, Best & Krieger LLP 3750 University A venue, Suite 400 Riverside, CA 92501 Steve DeBaun, Partner Case Systems, Inc. 5 Goddard Irvine, CA 92618 Sebastian Gutierrez, President/CEO Epic Land Solutions, Inc. 2601 Airport Drive, Suite 115 Torrance, CA 90505 Holly Rockwell, President Fieldman Rolapp & Associates 19900 MacArthur Boulevard, Suite 1100 Irvine, CA 92612 Dan Wiles, Principal and General Counsel Fulbright & Jaworski L.L.P. 555 South Flower Street, 41 s` Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071 Victor Hsu, Partner Geographics 4178 Chestnut Street Riverside, CA 92501 Dawn Hassett, Managing Partner GCAP Services, Inc. 3525 Hyland Avenue, #260 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Edward Salcedo, Jr., President JETT - Consulting Services (Formerly Bernard J. Arroyo) 13939 Barrymore Street San Diego, CA 92129 Barnard Arroyo, President Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP 777 South Figueroa Street, Suite 3200 Los Angeles, CA 90017-5855 Greg Harrington, Partner Paladin Investigative Services, LLC P.O. Box 596 Cumming, GA 30041 Ron De Laby, President Trapeze Software Group, Inc. 8360 East Via de Ventura, Suite L-200 Scottsdale, AZ 85258 Rick Bacchus, President Agenda Item No. 8G - Agreement with PlanetBids for Online Vendor and Bid Management System Consultants) PlanetBids, Inc. Alan Zavian, President and CEO 5850 Canoga Avenue, Suite 301 Woodland Hills, Ca 91367 Tara Byerly From: Tara Byerly Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2012 1:34 PM To: Tara Byerly Cc: Jennifer Harmon Subject: RCTC June Commission Agenda for !Pad Users Attachments: Conflict of Interest Form.pdf; Conflict of Interest Memo.pdf Importance: High Good Afternoon Commissioners, The June Commission Agenda for the meeting scheduled for Thursday, June 7 @ 9:30 a.m. for the IPad Users is available. PLEASE NOTE THE DATE. Please copy this link: http://www.rctc.org/uploads/media items/may-9-201 2.original.pdf In addition, attached is the conflict of interest memo and the form for your review. Please let me know if you have any questions. Respectfully, Tara S. Byerly Senior Administrative Assistant 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 (951) 787-7141 1 Tara Byerly From: Tara Byerly Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2012 6:46 AM To: Tara Byerly Subject: RCTC June Commission Agenda Importance: High Good Morning Commission Alternates: Attached below is the link to the June 7, 2012 Commission Meeting Agenda. Please copy the link below and paste it into a web page http://www.rctc.org/uploads/media items/may-9-2012.original.pdf Respectfully, Tara S. Byerly Senior Administrative Assistant 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 (951) 787-7141 attrq trf SUPERVISOR JEFF STONE THIRD DISTRICT June 4, 2012 Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 RE: RCTC Meeting I will be unable to attend the above -reference commission meeting held on June 7, 2012. In my absence, I hereby designate Supervisor Buster to serve as my proxy vote for items on the agenda. Should you have any questions, please contact my office. Thank you. Sincerely, S Supervisor E RI%ERSIDF OFFICE 4080 LEMON SMITE, 5TH FLOOR Kn E.Rsow, CA 92501 (951) 955-1030 FAX:(951) 955-2194 DISTRICT OFFICE: FRENCH VALLEY 37600 SKY CANYON DRIVE, #505 MURRIETA, CA 92563 Ton FREE 1-866-383-2203 (951) 698-7326 • FAx: (951) 677-0669 www.supjeffstone.org VERNE LAURITZEN, CHIEF OF STAFF E-n1.vL: district3(a rcbos.org HEMEr OFFicE 43950 E. ACACIA, SCITE A HENIET, CA 92543 (951) 791-3490 FAX: (951) 791-3465 RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON www.rctc.org AGENDA* *Actions may be taken on any item listed on the agenda 9: 30 a.m. Thursday, June 7, 2012 BOARD ROOM County of Riverside Administrative Center 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside, CA In compliance with the Brown Act and Government Code Section 54957.5, agenda materials distributed 72 hours prior to the meeting, which are public records relating to open session agenda items, will be available for inspection by members of the public prior to the meeting at the Commission office, 4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor, Riverside, CA, and ` on the Commission's website, www.rctc.org. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and Government Code Section_ 54954.2, if special assistance is needed to participate in a Commission meeting, please contact the Clerk of the Board at (951) 787-7141. Notification of at least 48 hours prior to meeting time will assist staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility at the meeting. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS — Each individual speaker is limited to speak three (3) continuous minutes or less. The Commission may, either at the direction of the Chair or by majority vote of the Commission, waive this three minute time limitation. Depending on the number of items on the Agenda and the number of speakers, the Chair may, at his/her discretion, reduce the time of each speaker to two (2) continuous minutes. In addition, the maximum time for public comment for any individual item or topic is thirty (30) minutes. Also, the Commission may terminate public comments if such comments become repetitious. Speakers may not yield their time to others without the consent of the Chair. Any written documents to be distributed or presented to the Commission shall be submitted to the Clerk of the Board. This policy applies to Public Comments and comments on Agenda Items. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda June 7, 2012 Page 2 Under the Brown Act, the Commission should not take action on or discuss matters raised during public comment portion of the agenda 'that are not listed on the agenda. Commission members may refer such matters to staff for factual information or to be placed on the subsequent agenda for consideration. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES -MAY 9, 2012 6. PUBLIC HEARING - PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012/13 This item is for the Commission to: Page 1 1) Receive input on the proposed Budget for FY 2012/13; 2) Close the public hearing on the proposed Budget for FY 2012/13; and 3) Adopt the proposed Budget for FY 2012/13. 7. ADDITIONS / REVISIONS - The Commission may add an item to the Agenda after making a finding that there is a need to take immediate action on the item and that the item came to the attention of the Commission subsequent to the posting of the agenda. An action adding an item to the agenda requires 2/3 vote of the Commission, if there are less than 2/3 of the Commission members present, adding an item to the agenda requires a unanimous vote. Added items will be placed for discussion at the end of the agenda. CONSENT CALENDAR - All matters on the Consent Calendar will be approved in a single motion unless a Commissioner(s) requests separate action on specific item(s). Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be placed for. discussion at the end of the agenda. 8A. FISCAL YEAR 2010/11 TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT AND MEASURE A AUDIT RESULTS Page 5 Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Transportation Development Act (TDA) and Measure A audit results report for the FY 2010/11. 8B. APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012/13 Page 14 Overview This item is for the Commission to Resolution No. '12-017, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Establishing the Commission's Appropriations Limit for Fiscal Year 2012/13". Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda June 7, 2012 Page 3 • 8C. ANNUAL INVESTMENT POLICY REVIEW Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 21 1) Adopt Resolution No. 12-016, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Regarding the Revised Investment Policy"; and 2) Adopt the Annual Investment Policy: 8D. QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORT Page 37 Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Quarterly Investment Report for the quarter ended March 31, 2012. 8E. QUARTERLY SALES TAX ANALYSIS Page 56 Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file the sales tax analysis for Quarter 4 (Q4) 2011. 8F. RECURRING CONTRACTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012/13 Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 64 1) Approve the recurring contracts for FY 2012/13; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda June 7, 2012 Page 4 8G. AGREEMENT WITH PLANETBIDS FOR ONLINE VENDOR AND BID • MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Page 71 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 12-19-091-00 with PlanetBids, Inc. (PlanetBids) for the use of the PlanetBids BidsOnline vendor and bid management system software for a three-year term, and two one-year options to extend the agreement, in an amount not to exceed $65,000; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 8H. STATE ROUTE 91 PROJECT AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES Page 84 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 09-31-081-01 Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 09-31-081-00, with Parsons Transportation Group, Inc. (Parsons) to provide additional services for Phase 1 of the SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project (SR-91 CIP) widening and extension of the 91 Express Lanes in the amount of $18,434,545, plus a. contingency of $1,850,000, for a total amount not to exceed $20,284,545, and a total authorized contract value of $60,084,545; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve contingency work as may be required for the project. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda June 7, 2012 Page 5 81. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 12-021 FOR COMMISSION ELECTION TO HEAR FUTURE RESOLUTIONS OF NECESSITY FOR THE STATE ROUTE 91 CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AND DESIGNATION OF COMMISSION'S GENERAL COUNSEL Page 90 Overview This item is for the Commission to adopt Resolution No. 12-021, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Electing to Hear Future Resolutions of Necessity for the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project and Designation of Commission's General Counsel to Process Resolution of Necessity Packages for the Project". 8J. STATE ROUTE 91 HIGH OCCUPANCY VEHICLE PROJECT COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT AMENDMENT Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 93 1) Reprogram federal Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds from construction savings to cover the increase in Caltrans' expenditures for the plans, specifications, and estimates (PS&E) related to the State Route 91 high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes project; 2) Approve Agreement No. 06-31-062-02, Amendment No. 2 to Agreement No. 06-31-062-00, to increase funding by the amount of $1,225,534 for the PS&E phase for the SR-91 HOV lanes project; and 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda June 7, 2012 Page 6 8K. STATE ROUTE 60 TRUCK CLIMBING/DESCENDING LANE PROJECT - • PROJECT APPROVAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 95 1) Agree to sponsor the project approval and environmental document (PA&ED) phase of the State Route 60 truck climbing lane project; 2) Approve the programming of Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) funds in the amount of $3,006,000 for PA&ED; 3) Approve Cooperative Agreement No. 12-31-092-00 with Caltrans for the PA&ED phase for the SR-60 truck climbing lane project; 4) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 5) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute any future non -funding related amendments. 8L. CITY OF CORONA FUNDING REQUEST FOR FOOTHILL PARKWAY Page 120 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve programming $7 million of Western County's 2009 Measure A Regional Arterial (MARA) funds as local match to $7 million of Proposition 1 B State -Local Partnership Program (SLPP) formula funds for the city of Corona's (Corona) Foothill Parkway westerly extension project; 2) Submit the Foothill Parkway project nomination forms for SLPP funding of $7 million to the California Transportation Commission; 3) Approve Agreement No. 12-72-093-00 with Corona to program $7 million in MARA funds; 4) Approve reprogramming approximately $7 million of TUMF regional arterial funds from Foothill Parkway right of way phase to the construction phase; 5) Approve Agreement No. 06-72-540-03, Amendment No. 3 to Agreement No. 06-72-540-00, with Corona to reflect the reprogramming of right of way savings to construction; and 6) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements. • Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda June 7, 2012 Page 7 8M. FISCAL YEAR 2012/13 — FISCAL YEAR 2014/15 SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLANS Page 124 Overview This item is for the Commission to review and approve, in concept, the FY 2012/13 - FY 2014/15 Short Range Transit Plans (SRTPs) for the cities of Banning, Beaumont, Corona, Riverside, Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency (PVVTA), Riverside Transit Agency (RTA), SunLine Transit Agency (SunLine), and the Commission's Commuter Rail Program, as presented. 8N. FISCAL YEAR 2012/13 SB 821 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES PROGRAM FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS Page 129 Overview This item is for the Commission to approve the FY 2012/13 SB 821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Program recommended funding of $1,389,433. 80. FISCAL YEAR 2012/13 MEASURE A COMMUTER ASSISTANCE BUSPOOL SUBSIDY FUNDING CONTINUATION REQUESTS Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 134 1) Authorize payment of $1,645/month maximum subsidy per buspool for the period July 1, 2012 to June 30, 2013, to the existing Corona, Mira Loma, and Riverside buspools; and 2) Require subsidy recipients to meet monthly buspool reporting requirements as supporting documentation to receive payments. 8P. CITY OF LA QUINTA'S AMENDED BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION PLAN Page 141 Overview This item is for the Commission ` to approve the city of La Quinta's (La Quinta) amended Bicycle Transportation Plan (BTP) as submitted. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda June 7, 2012 Page 8 8Q. IOWA AVENUE GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT Overview Page 143 This item is for the Commission to allocate $500,000 in federal Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) funds to the city of Riverside (Riverside) to provide a match, if needed, in support of the Iowa Avenue grade separation project, 9. PROPOSED METROLINK BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012/13 Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 145 1) Adopt the preliminary FY 2012/13 Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) operating and capital budget with anticipation of a 5 to 9 percent fare increase;- 2) Approve the additional Inland Empire Orange County (IEOC) service with an additional peak period round trip and expanded year round weekend service; and 3) Allocate the Commission's funding commitment to the SCRRA in an amount not to exceed of $7,575,300 in Local Transportation Fund (LTF) funds for train operations and maintenance of way plus a contingency of $2,424,700 in LTF funds for new service options and $250,000 for capital projects to be funded by State Transit Assistance funds (STA). 10. STATE ROUTE 91 DESIGN -BUILD PROCUREMENT Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 151 1) Authorize staff, subject to approval by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), to issue a request for proposal (RFP) and future addenda for design -build services in accordance with Public Contract Code sections 6800 et seq. for the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project (SR-91 CIP) to the four pre -qualified design -build teams; 2) Approve the selection criteria and process for selection of the pre -qualified firm providing the best -value to the Commission, otherwise known as apparent best value (ABV) proposer; • • • Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda June 7, 2012 Page 9 3) Authorize the Executive Director to select the three top -ranked ABV Proposers for design -build services, based on the criteria and selection procedures identified in the RFP and any addendum(s) thereto, and subsequently to conduct limited negotiations with the top -ranked ABV proposer; 4) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to negotiate with the second -ranked ABV proposer if negotiations fail with the top -ranked ABV proposer and with the third -ranked ABV proposer should negotiations fail with both the top -ranked and second -ranked ABV proposers; 5) Authorize the Executive Director to issue a request for a best and final offer (BAFO) to the proposers if found to be in the best interests of the Commission, to make changes to the RFP, solicit BAFOs from proposers, evaluate revised proposals, select an ABV proposer, negotiate with the top -ranked proposer and second and third -ranked if necessary, and make a recommendation of contract award based upon the revised proposals in accordance with 23 CFR Part 636; 6) Authorize the Executive Director to return to the Commission with a recommendation to award a contract for design -build services. The recommendation shall be accompanied by a written decision supporting the recommendation and stating the basis for the award; 7) Authorize the Executive Director to pay a stipend to unsuccessful proposers that meet the RFP criteria for stipend payment up to $650,000 per unsuccessful proposers or a total not to exceed of $2.6 million for all unsuccessful proposers after final action by the Commission on the RFP; and 8) Approve and find, based on the facts set forth in the staff report, that particular materials, products, or services that are elements of the proposed design -build services for the SR-91 CIP are to be designated in the RFP by specific brand names or trade names to match and be interoperable with other products used by the Commission and other related facilities as authorized by Public Contracts Code, section 3400(c). 11. RCTC 91 EXPRESS LANES TOLL POLICY Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 166 1) Adopt Resolution 12-019, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Regarding the RCTC 91 Express Lanes Toll Policy"; and 2) Adopt the Riverside County 91 Express Lanes Extension Investment Grade Study (Traffic and Revenue Study). Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda June 7, 2012 Page 10 12. ITEM(S) PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA 13. COMMISSIONERS / EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT Overview This item provides the opportunity for the Commissioners and the Executive Director to report on attended meetings/conferences and any other items related to Commission activities. 14. CLOSED SESSION 14A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL Existing Litigation Pursuant to Section 54956.9(a) Case Number(s): Case No. RIC 10013326, RIC 10013327, and RIC 1113896 149. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 Agency Negotiator: Executive Director or Designee Property Owners: See the List Below Item APN(s) Property Owner(s) 1 327-200-001 327-020-009 Intex Properties Perris Valley, L.P. 2 31 1-100-021 County of Riverside 3 313-1 14-005 American Legion Perris Post 595 4 313-1 14-001 Jorge A. Caldera, Jorge A. & Aicantar, Maria 5 310-150-002 Sanchez, Orlando & Matilde 6 313-282-048 Sanchez, Apoliner & Florinda 7 313-272-009 Pentecostal Church of God 8 310-140-019 Munoz, Arturo & Isabel Gonzalez, Sal & Frances 9 310-160-065 Stamper, Richard & Marianne 10 247-170-024 Chapman Brothers Partnership 11 251-032-004 City of Riverside 12 251-060-016 251-070-006 Riverside City School District 15. ADJOURNMENT The next Commission meeting and is scheduled to be held at 9:30 a.m., Wednesday, July 11, 2012, Board Chambers, First Floor, County Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside. • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION COMMISSIONER SIGN -IN SHEET JUNE 7, 2012 NAME GENCY E MAIL ADDRESS /0 aytee,546:2?6V-6-‘ b S' ./e 8�-,�u t 1J �� 0 `,7 e-ivci0 [ -K°5/-) _ Afo-vuo ; c..-- a7),) n s)rrn Jr Valle 1 n .7 -1,9 A A 4,--:3"-{° ,A------ A R- q.-. j vinci- frt /----ktm ffr etilizt 5 d A) Qt1 i -iq �� j. ? 1-z Skf 9 7-11v Ciitr,--11ht/S orAd 7 /Sa-uo c r %1 i✓Co II CrNanu . � t--v1 � .tom /) F C, (2A v -'%-j C7tv j � 7 ""rjC � c t) C >.‘.,› frea,-+_� C A ^ y d cF r-J )t=a - LIt-f} 7A-Aio wi v 62; As.e5.4 a t1 //s � ynvA� � ✓l. I �L� � � ---3 ‘, w /03 '7 ' _? v V ini° OL VILA --(_. ragno, t6vikAr, 04N ult2N l K. PPCUA 1 6 �•2_T v + /2 Di s-r-,.�, iiccr{ .sp ,L.. , s //4-r-tks , ' ' kt4:4— NI fi t a 1!0 4S. �. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ROLL CALL JUNE 7, 2012 Present Absent County of Riverside, District 1 Pf0 County of Riverside, District II O County of Riverside, District III O r. County of Riverside, District IV gr../ 0 County of Riverside, District V0 City of Banning 0 City of Beaumont 0 P City of Blythe O City of Calirnqisa ef 0 City of Canyon Lake O City of CatheOral City 0 City of Coachella � 0 City of Corona O City of Desert Hot Springs O City of EastvSle � 0 City of Hemet A 0 City of Indian Wells O X City of Indio � 0 City of Jurupt Valley � 0 City of La Quinta � 0 City of Lake Elsinore �' 0 City of Menifee � 0 City of Moreno Valley � 0 City of Murrieta O City of Norco'l . 0 City of Palm Desert � 0 City of Palm Springs,Qf 0 City of Perris ) 0 City of Rancho Mirage O City of Riversideir...,0 City of San J4cinto 0 City of Temecula 'X 0 City of Wildor{nar 71. 0 Governor's Appointee, Caltrans District 8 ; 0 AGENDA ITEM 5 MINUTES RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES Wednesday, May 9, 2012 CALL TO ORDER The Riverside County Transportation Commission was called to order by Chair John J. Benoit at 9:32 a.m. in the Board Room at the County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside, California, 92501. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE At this time, Commissioner Karen Spiegel led the Commission in a flag salute. 3. ROLL CALL Commissioners/Alternates Present Commissioners Absent Steve Adams Marion Ashley Ben Benoit John J. Benoit Roger Berg* Bob Botts David Bricker Daryl Busch Bob Buster Marcelo Co Mary Craton Kathleen DeRosa Ginny Foat Rick Gibbs Jan Harnik Terry Henderson Steven Hernandez Frank Johnston Andrew Kotyuk Darcy Kuenzi Bob Magee Scott Matas Glenn Miller Ron Roberts Adam Rush Larry Smith Karen Spiegel Jeff Stone Berwin Hanna John F. Tavaglione Douglas Hanson Ella Zanowic *Arrived after the meeting was called to order 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS Joseph DeConinck Scott Hines Anne Mayer, Executive Director, presented a five-year service award to Ruby Arellano, Administrative Assistant. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes May 9, 2012 Page 2 Chair Benoit and Anne Mayer presented RCTC Chairman's awards for the coordination efforts of the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) and Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) applications, and the development of program and projects for the State Route 91 and Interstate 15 Corridor Improvement Projects to the following staff: Michael Blomquist, Toll Program Director; Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer; Cathy Bechtel, Project Development Director; Robert Yates, Multimodal Services Director; Aaron Hake, Government Relations Manager; David Thomas, Toll Project Manager; and Tanya Love, Goods Movement Manager. Anne Mayer expressed appreciation to the Commissioners that volunteered their time to review the funding applications and traveled to Washington, D.C. with staff to support this project. Chair Benoit expressed appreciation to those involved in the lobbying efforts for this project. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — APRIL 11, 2012 M/S/C (Zanowic/Stone) to approve the minutes as submitted. Abstain: Foat and Smith At this time, Commissioner Roger Berg arrived at the meeting. 6. PUBLIC HEARING — PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012/13 Michele Cisneros, Accounting and Human Resources Manager, presented the proposed Budget for FY 2012/13, and discussed the following areas: • Budget process; • FY 2012/13 Budget considerations; • Budget summary; • Sources by breakdown and comparison; • Expenditures by department; • Expenditures breakdown by department and comparison; • Functional expenditure breakdown and comparison; • Next steps. Chair Benoit commended Michele Cisneros for an outstanding presentation. • Riverside County Transportation Commission •Minutes May 9, 2012 Page 3 At Commissioner Adam Rush's request for clarification, Michele Cisneros provided additional details regarding TUMF revenues. In response to Commissioner Ginny Foat's question about the projects and operations funding allocations for rail maintenance and operations, Michele Cisneros discussed the funding difference related to a contribution to Southern California Regional Rail Authority for new rail cars. Anne Mayer discussed the sources of funding for the rail program for Western Riverside County, noting there is currently no funding source for rail in the Coachella Valley. She then discussed the options to develop the state rail plan and stated staff will return to the Commission with an update. At this time, Chair Benoit opened the public hearing and requested comments from the public. No comments were received from the public and the Chair announced the continuance of the public hearing to the Commission meeting on June 7, 2012. M/S/C to continue the public hearing for the proposed Budget for FY 2012/13 to the Commission meeting on June 7, 2012. 7. ADDITIONS / REVISIONS There were no additions/revisions to the agenda. 8. CONSENT CALENDAR Chair Benoit requested Agenda Item 8C, "Construction Change Order Policies", be pulled from the Consent Calendar for further discussion. M/S/C (Kotyuk/Henderson) to approve the following Consent Calendar items: Abstain on 8E: Ashley 8A. REVISED AB 1234 REIMBURSEMENT POLICY 1) Approve the revisions to the Riverside County Transportation Commission Legislative Body Reimbursement Policy; and 2) Adopt Resolution No. 12-014, A Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Regarding the Revisions to the Riverside County Transportation Commission Legislative Body Reimbursement Policy. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes May 9, 2012 Page 4 8B. SINGLE SIGNATURE AUTHORITY REPORT Receive and file the Single Signature Authority report for the third quarter ended March 31, 2012. 8D. COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE FOR THE STATE ROUTE 91 CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 1) Approve Agreement No. 12-31-080-00, a cooperative agreement between the Commission and the county of Riverside (County) related to the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project (SR-91 CIP); and 2) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 8E. INTERSTATE 215 SCOTT ROAD TO NUEVO ROAD — UTILITY AGREEMENTS AND CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT 1) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the utility agreements related to the Interstate 215 Scott Road to Nuevo Road Central widening project on behalf of the Commission; 2) Approve Agreement No. 12-31-082-00 with Caltrans for construction and maintenance of the Ethanac Overhead Bridge; and 3) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 8F. AGREEMENT WITH HDR CONSTRUCTION CONTROL CORPORATION FOR CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE INTERSTATE 215/BLAINE STREET TO MARTIN LUTHER KING BOULEVARD WIDENING PROJECT 1) Award Agreement No. 12-31-057-00 to HDR Construction Control Corporation (HDR) to provide construction management (CM), materials testing, and construction surveying services for the Interstate 21 5/Blaine Street to Martin Luther King Boulevard widening project, in the amount of $242,055, plus a contingency amount of $24,206, for a total amount not to exceed $266,261; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes May 9, 2012 Page 5 3) Authorize the Executive Director to approve contingency work as may be required for the project. 8G. AMENDMENT WITH STV, INCORPORATED FOR FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION COORDINATION AND SMALL STARTS SUPPORT FOR THE PERRIS VALLEY LINE 1) Approve Agreement No.. 08-33-069-03, Amendment No. 3 to Agreement 08-33-069-00, with STV Incorporated (STV) for additional assistance with Federal Transit Administration (FTA) coordination and Small Starts program support for the Perris Valley Line project in the amount of $1 15,000, for a total contract amount of $315,709; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of thg Commission. 8H.PERRIS VALLEY LINE — UTILITY AGREEMENTS Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute utility agreements and utility service agreements related to the Perris Valley Line (PVL) commuter rail project on behalf of the Commission. 81. AMENDMENT TO RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY AND SUNLINE TRANSIT AGENCY'S FISCAL YEAR 2011 /12 SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLANS 1) Approve modification to Riverside Transit Agency's (RTA) FY 201 1 /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; 2) Allocate $1 .305 million in Transportation Development Act (TDA) Local Transportation Fund (LTF) funds to provide capital matching funds for the FY 201 1 /12 Section 5309 program funds awarded to RTA for its paratransit revenue vehicle purchase and facility rehabilitation projects; 3) 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; Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes May 9, 2012 Page 6 4) Approve modification to SunLine Transit Agency's (SunLine) FY 201 1 /12 operating assistancefunding 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; 5) Approve modification to SunLine's FY 201 1 /12 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 (STA) funds 6) Allocate $546,430 in STA funds to provide capital matching funds for the FY 201 1 /12 Section 5308 program funds awarded to SunLine for the fuel cell buses; and 7) Approve amendments to RTA and SunLine's Short Range Transit Plans (SRTP) to reflect the changes outlined above. 8J. AGREEMENT FOR THE OPERATION OF THE FREEWAY SERVICE • PATROL PROGRAM IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY 1); Approve Agreement No. 12-45-068-00 with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) for the operation of the Riverside County Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) program in the amount of $1,653,564 in state funding for FY 2011 /12; and 2} Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 8K. AMENDMENTS TO FREEWAY SERVICE PATROL AGREEMENTS 1) , Approve Agreement No. 1 1-45-146-01, Amendment No. 1 to. Agreement No. 1 1-45-146-00, with Pepe's to provide FSP services on Beat No. 4 in the amount of $800,000; 2) Approve Agreement No. 07-45-134-04, Amendment No. 4 to Agreement No. 07-45-134-00, with Pepe's Towing (Pepe's) to provide Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) services on Beat No. 18 in the amount of $1 15,000; 3) Approve Agreement No. 07-45-136-03, Amendment No. 3 to Agreement No. 07-45-136-00, with Pepe's to provide FSP services on Beat No. 19 in the amount of $200,000; and Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes May 9, 2012 Page 7 4) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 8L. FREEWAY SERVICE PATROL COST EFFECTIVENESS EVALUATION 1) Approve Agreement No. 12-45-079-00 with DKS Associates (DKS) to provide a Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) cost effectiveness evaluation in the amount of $25,000; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 8M. CITY OF RIVERSIDE'S AMENDED BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION PLAN Approve the city of Riverside's (Riverside) amended Bicycle Transportation Plan (BTP) as submitted. AGREEMENT WITH JACOBS PROJECT MANAGEMENT CO. FOR CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES AND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH CALTRANS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE INTERSTATE 215 CENTRAL WIDENING PROJECT FROM SCOTT ROAD TO NUEVO ROAD, IN THE CITY OF PERRIS At this time Commissioner Ashley recused himself due to a conflict of interest. Lisa DaSilva, Capital Projects Manager, provided an overview for the agreement with Jacobs Project Management Company for construction management services and the cooperative agreement with Ca[trans for construction of the 1-215 Cenfral widening project from Scott Road to Nuevo Road, in the city of Perris. Commissioner Darcy Kuenzi expressed appreciation and support for the project and commended Commissioner Stone for spearheading the project. Anne Mayer discussed the Commission's funding approach for this project. and the final permit necessary in order to proceed with the project. In response to Commissioner Terry Henderson's question regarding project costs, Lisa DaSilva replied the current engineer's estimate for the construction phase is $95 million, with construction management costs at 14 to 15 percent. Anne Mayer explained it is typical as construction management costs to run between 10 to 15 percent depending on the complexity of the project. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes May 9, 2012 Page 8 At Commissioner Henderson's request, Lisa DaSilva discussed the required permit from the Army Corps of Engineers and the process to acquire it. Anne Mayer stated the challenge is the California Transportation Commission (CTC) requirements for CMIA savings funding require all permits before funds are allocated. Therefore, the permit schedule has been accelerated from September to the beginning of May. Commissioner Henderson requested staff notify Commissioners when the permit is received. In response to Commissioner Rush's question about CMIA, Anne Mayer stated Riverside County has generated $65 million in CMIA savings, which went back into the statewide pool to be allocated for additional projects. She then discussed the CTC's adopted savings policy and criteria. M/S/C (Kuenzi/Spiegel) to: 1) Award Agreement No. 12-31-034-00- to Jacobs Project Management Co. (Jacobs) to provide construction; management (CM) services, materials testing, and construction surveying for the 1-215 Central widening project, Scott Road to Nuevo Road, in the city of Perris, in the amount of $11,807,334 plus a contingency amount of $1,192,666, for a total amount not to exceed $13 million; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; 3) Authorize the Executive Director to approve contingency work as may be required for the project; 4) Approve Cooperative Agreement No. 12-31-078-00 with Caltrans for construction of the project; and 5) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the cooperative agreement and future non - funding related amendments to this agreement. At this time, Commissioner Ashley returned to the meeting. 10. UPDATE ON STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATION Aaron Hake, Government Relations Manager, presented the bill positions and an overview of state and federal legislative activities. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes May 9, 2012 Page 9 In response to Commissioner Henderson's question regarding SB 1316 (Correa), Aaron Hake replied the bill became law in 2008, authorizing the Commission to collect tolls on SR-91 and creating the SR-91 Advisory Committee. Anne Mayer added AB 2405 (Blumenfield) would allow the state to step in on top of an already granted authority and dictate toll policy. She expressed concern that if zero or low emission vehicles do not have to pay at the gas pump and are exempt for the tolls, how do they pay for the use of the system which is another issue that has been raised. Commissioner Henderson replied this creates an argument in favor of a per mileage use tax, which she does not support. She then expressed concern for AB 1780 (Bonilla). Anne Mayer discussed the shift in financial responsibility, the arguments to support the bill and its goals. She noted the Legislative Analyst Office has weighed in on this issue in support. M/S/C (Henderson/Spiegel) to: 1) Receive and file an update on the state and federal legislation; 2)Adopt the following bill positions: a) AB 2405 (Blumenfield) -Oppose; b) AB 1780 (Bonilla)- Support; c) AB 2498 (Gordon) - Support In Concept; and d) SB 1549 (Vargas) - Support In Concept. At this time, Commissioner Kathleen DeRosa left the meeting. 11. ITEM(S) PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR 8C. CONSTRUCTION CHANGE ORDER POLICIES Per Chair Benoit's request, this item was pulled for further discussion. Anne Mayer explained there was extensive discussion about the Commission's change order process as a result of an item brought to the Commission in January to increase a contract amount for the SR-74 interchange project for approximately $1 million. She discussed the concerns raised for the change orders for the project. Marlin Feenstra, Project Deliver Director, provided an overview for the change order process to receive additional funding for construction Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes May 9, 2012 Page 10 contingencies. He stated in the event there is no committee staff is proposing the Chair appoint an ad hoc committee to consider that item to allow adequate oversight and to keep these projects moving quickly to avoid additional costs to the Commission. M/S/C (Kuenzi/Spiegel) to: 1) Review the Commission's existing change order procedure; and 2) Require committee action when contract change orders exceed the previously -approved contingency. 12. COMMISSIONERS/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT 12A. Anne Mayer announced: Based on information from the Commission's database and working with local agencies, there is $654 million of projects recently completed or under construction in Riverside County with another $1 .6 billion of projects starting construction within the next two years. The May 21 Committees and June 7 Commission meeting agendas will be substantial. The regular meetings .were rescheduled due to the Memorial Day holiday and the Riverside County Board of Supervisor's public hearing on its budget. At this time, Commissioners Buster, Foat, Hanson, Kotyuk, and Miller Left the meeting along with the Caltrans District 8 representative David Bricker. 13. CLOSED SESSION 13A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL Existing Litigation Pursuant to Section 54956.9(a) Case Number: Case No. RIC 1205364 The Commission authorized legal counsel to defend the Commission in this case. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes May 9, 2012 Page 11 14. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business for consideration by the Riverside County Transportation Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 11:05 a.m. The next Commission meeting is scheduled to be held at 9:30 a.m., Thursday, June 7, 2012, in the Board Room, at the County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside, California. Respectfully submitted, OU"4"'-1-4(._ Jennifer Harmon Clerk of the Board AGENDA ITEM 6 PUBLIC HEARING REVISION TO AGENDA ITEM 6 Additions are noted by Bold Italics, Deletions are noted by Strikethrough RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: June 7, 2012 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Michele Cisneros, Accounting and Human Resources Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Proposed Budget for Fiscal Year 2012/13 This item is for the Commission to: 1) Receive input on the proposed Budget for FY 2012/13; 2) Close the public hearing on the proposed Budget for FY 2012/13; and 3) Adopt the proposed Budget for FY 2012/13. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The annual fiscal budget is the result of staff determining the operating and capital needs for FY 2012/13 and identifying the resources to fund those needs. The budget process began in December 2011. The goals and objectives approved by the Commission on March 14 were the basis of this budget. The goals and objectives considered during the preparation of the budget relate to mobility initiatives, goods movement, improved system efficiencies, environmental stewardship, economic development, intermodalism and accessibility, and public and agency communications, and financial and administrative policies. On May 9, staff presented the proposed budget to the Commission. Subsequent to that presentation, staff updated the document as a result of the following changes, resulting in a net increase of $9,162,400 to the projected ending fund balance: Adjustments to Fiscal Year 2011 /12 Projected Amounts • Net increases in Measure A and LTF sales tax revenues, reimbursements and operating transfers in of $4,000,000, $2,000,000, $94,100, respectively, less net decrease of $3,674,500 in projects and operations expenditures after further review and analysis of department worksheets. Agenda Item 6 Adjustments to Fiscal Year 2012/13 Budgeted Amounts • An increase in Measure A and Local Transportation Fund (LTF) sales tax revenues of $8,000,000 and $4,000,000 respectively, due to encouraging recent trends and stabilization of sales tax revenues; • A net decrease of $4,451,000 in federal and state reimbursements on the Perris Valley Line project as a result of the recent update to project funding; • A $240,300 increase in federal reimbursements on the Interstate 215/Blaine Street project due to a change in the engineer's cost estimate; • A $450,000 increase in federal reimbursements in rail operations for reprogrammed federal grant funding; • A $42,500 increase in federal reimbursements for administration of the Measure A Western County Specialized Transit program; • A net decrease of $218,000 in operating transfers in related to revised Short Range Transit Plans (SRTP) submissions; • A $44,200 increase in investment income as a result of a net increase in revenues; • A $193,800 increase in personnel salary and benefits due to filling the capital projects contract and claims manager position; • A $470,000 increase in professional services related to disclosure counsel services for the issuances of toll and sales tax revenue bonds, financial advisory services, various procurement services, and graphic design and printing services; • A net increase of $19,700 in support services related to Commission -owned station ground maintenance needs and travel costs related to the issuance of toll and sales tax revenue bonds after further review and analysis; • A $19,200 decrease in program management expenditures for Bechtel Infrastructure (Bechtel) services based on a reconciliation to the proposed Bechtel contract amount; • A $777,600 increase in construction costs on the Perris Multimodal facility after further review of claims pending settlement; • A $920,000 increase in construction and construction management costs on the State Route 74 curve realignment project related to a change in the engineer's cost estimate; • A $240,300 increase in construction and construction management costs on the I-215/Blaine Street project due to a change in the engineer's cost estimate; • A $2,500,000 increase in construction costs on the Corona Foothill Parkway project after further review and analysis; • An increase of $163,000 in Measure A specialized transit expenditures based on review and analysis of the SRTP submissions; • A net increase of $1, 513,000 in LTF expenditures based on review and analysis of the SRTP submissions; Agenda Item 6 • A net decrease of $325,000 in State Transit Assistance expenditures based on review and analysis of the SRTP submissions; • An increase of $2,464,000 in local streets and roads expenditures due to the related increase in Measure A sales tax revenues; • A $15,000 increase in capital outlay expenditures for information technology equipment upgrades; • A net decrease of $218,000 in operating transfers out related to revised SRTP submissions. A public hearing to allow for public comment on the proposed budget, as revised, is required prior to the adoption of the proposed budget. The public hearing was opened at the May 9 Commission meeting. After the public hearing is closed on June 7, adoption of the proposed budget for FY 2012/13 will follow. In accordance with the Commission's fiscal policies, the budget must be adopted no later than June 15 of each year. Attached is the proposed budget for FY 2012/13. This document contains the executive summary, as revised, that was presented at the May 9 Commission meeting; the Gann Appropriations Limit; the guiding policies related to the preparation of the budget; a summary of the budget process; fund budgets; details of program revenues and other sources; debt; department budgets; a community profile; and appendices including a glossary of acronyms, funding definitions, and program/general terms. A summary of the proposed Budget for FY 2012/13 is as follows: Revenues and other financing sources: Sales taxes -Measure A, LTF, and STA Reimbursements (federal, state, and other) TUMF Other revenues Interest on investments 7,365,900 Debt proceeds 1,2/10,172,000 Transfers in Total revenues and other financing sources 1,884,744,600 Expenditures and other financing uses: Personnel salary and fringe benefits Professional services Support services Projects and operations Capital outlay FY 2012/13 Budget $ 21 1,212,500 93,758,400 5,257,300 882,800 7,265,900 1,220,172,000 326,095,700 1, 864, 644, 600 6,971,100 14,361,200 5,346,300 464, 246, 800 447,700 Agenda Item 6 Debt service (principal, interest and costs of issuance) Transfers out Total expenditures ,and other financing uses Excess of revenues and other financing sources over expenditures and other financing uses 923,862,800 Beginning fund balance Ending fund balance 143,413,000 326,095,700 960,881,800 903, 762, 800 556,693,300 1,480,556,100 $ 1,460,456,100 Attachment: FY 2012/13 Proposed Budget - Posted on the Commission Website Agenda Item 6 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: June 7, 2012 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Michele Cisneros, Accounting and Human Resources Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Proposed Budget for Fiscal Year 2012/13 This item is for the Commission to: 1) Receive input on the proposed Budget for .FY 2012/13; 2) Close the public hearing on the proposed Budget for FY 2012/13; and 3► Adopt the proposed Budget for FY 2012/13. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The annual fiscal budget is the result of staff determining the operating and capital needs for FY 2012/13 and identifying the resources to fund those needs. The budget process began in December 2011. The goals and objectives approved by the Commission on March 14 were the basis of this budget. The goals and objectives considered during the preparation of the budget relate to mobility initiatives, goods movement, improved system efficiencies, environmental stewardship, economic development, intermodalism and accessibility, and public and agency communications, and financial and administrative policies. On May 9, staff presented the proposed budget to the Commission. Subsequent to that presentation, staff updated the document as a result of the following changes, resulting in a net increase of $9,162,400 to the projected ending fund balance: Adjustments to Fiscal Year 201 1 /12 Projected Amounts Net increases in Measure A and LTF sales tax revenues, reimbursements and operating transfers in of $4,000,000, $2,000,000, $94,100, respectively, less net decrease of $3,674,500 in projects and operations expenditures after further review and analysis of department worksheets. 1 Agenda Item 6 Adjustments to Fiscal Year 2012/13 Budgeted Amounts • An increase in Measure A and Local Transportation Fund (LTF) sales tax revenues of $8,000,000 and $4,000,000 respectively, due to encouraging recent trends and stabilization of sales tax revenues; • A net decrease of $4,451,000 in federal and state reimbursements on the Perris Valley Line project as a result of the recent update to project funding; • A $240,300 increase in federal reimbursements on the Interstate 215/Blaine Street project due to a change in the engineer's cost estimate; • A $450,000 increase in federal reimbursements in rail operations for reprogrammed federal grant funding; • A $42,500 increase in federal reimbursements for administration of the Measure A Western County Specialized Transit program; • A net decrease of $218,000 in operating transfers in related to revised. Short Range Transit Plans (SRTP) submissions; • A $44,200 increase in investment income as a result of a net increase in revenues; • A $193,800 increase in personnel salary and benefits due to filling the capital projects contract and claims manager position; • A $470,000 increase in professional services related to disclosure counsel . services for the issuances of toll and sales tax revenue bonds, financial advisory services, various procurement services, and graphic design and printing services; • A net increase of $19,700 in support services related to Commission -owned station ground maintenance needs and travel costs related to the issuance of toll and sales tax revenue bonds after further review and analysis; • A $19,200 decrease in program management expenditures for Bechtel Infrastructure (Bechtel) services based on a reconciliation to the proposed Bechtel contract amount; • A $777,600 increase in construction costs on the Perris Multimodal facility after further review of claims pending settlement; • A $920,000 increase in construction and construction management costs on the State Route 74 curve realignment project related to a change in the engineer's cost estimate; • A $240,300 increase in construction and construction management costs on the I-215/Blaine Street project due to a change in the engineer's cost estimate; • A $2,500,000 increase in construction costs on the Corona Foothill Parkway project after further review and analysis; • An increase of $163,000 in Measure A specialized transit expenditures based on review and analysis of the SRTP submissions; • A net increase of $1,513,000 in LTF expenditures based on review and analysis of the SRTP submissions; 2 • • Agenda Item 6 • A net decrease of $325,000 in State Transit Assistance expenditures based on review and analysis of the SRTP submissions; • An increase .of $2,464,000 in local streets and roads expenditures due to the related increase in Measure A sales tax revenues; • A $1 5,000 increase in capital outlay expenditures for information technology equipment upgrades; • A net decrease of $218,000 in operating transfers out related to revised SRTP submissions: A public hearing to allow for public comment on the proposed budget, as revised, is required prior to the adoption of the proposed budget. The public hearing was opened at the May 9 Commission meeting. After the public hearing is closed on June 7, adoption of the proposed budget for FY 2012/13 will follow. In accordance with the Commission's fiscal policies, the budget must be adopted no later than June 15 of each year. Attached is the proposed budget for FY 2012/13. This document contains the executive summary, as revised, that was presented at the May 9 Commission meeting; the Gann Appropriations Limit; the guiding policies related to the preparation of the budget; a summary of the budget process; fund budgets; details of program revenues and other sources; debt; department budgets; a community profile; and appendices including a glossary of acronyms, funding definitions, and program/general terms. A summary of the proposed Budget for FY 2012/13 is as follows: FY 2012/13 Budget Revenues and other financing sources: Sales taxes -Measure A, LTF, and STA $ 211,212,500 Reimbursements (federal, state, and other) 93,758,400 TUMF 5,257,300 Other revenues 882,800 Interest on investments 7,365,900 Debt proceeds 1,240,172,000 Transfers in 326,095,700 Total revenues and other financing sources 1,884,744,600 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) 6,971,100 14,361,200 5,346,300 464, 246, 800 447,700 143,413,000 3 Agenda Item 6 Transfers out Total expenditures and other financing uses Excess of revenues and other financing sources over expenditures and other financing uses Beginning fund balance Ending fund balance 326,095,700 960,881,800 923,862,800 556,693,300 $ 1,480,556,100 Attachment: FY 2012/13 Proposed Budget - Posted on the Commission Website Agenda Item 6 Riverside County Transportation Commission June 7, 2012 Honorable Commissioners Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside, California FY 2012/13 Budget Introduction Investing in the Future Thank you for your interest in the Fiscal Year 2012/13 budget for the Riverside County Transportation Commission (Commission or RCTC). Budgets are often considered to be documents that look forward, providing forecasts of expected revenues and expenditures and chock full of graphs, charts, and financial data. While that's certainly true of RCTC's budget, the numbers and charts reveal a compelling story. It's a story of unprecedented investment in Riverside County's transportation future with even more to come in the future. Using a term like "unprecedented" isn't just hyperbole to get your attention. The fact is that this is the largest budget in RCTC's 35-year history. Thanks to our voter -approved Measure A sales -tax program, a recently approved $444 million federal Transportation Infrastructure Financing and Innovation Act (TIFIA) loan, and state bond funding, RCTC is poised to move forward on a number of major projects including the widening of State Route (SR) 91 and Interstate (I) 215 and the Perris Valley Metrolink extension. In addition to building our own projects, RCTC has been a conduit for financing a number of local projects as well. In just three years inclusive of 2011 through 2013, more than $2 billion in construction spending will be devoted to transportation projects constructed by RCTC, the County of Riverside (County), local cities, or the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). The obvious reason for this commitment is to invest in a better transportation system resulting in better mobility, but we are also investing in Riverside County's future. It's .a future that should include more local jobs, new businesses being formed, employers moving to the area, and making it easier to access numerous locales that will appeal to visitors throughout the world. People Working — Building a Better Future Construction crews are becoming a common site in Riverside County, and additional work is slated for a number of freeway interchanges, freeway widenings, transit enhancements, and local street and road projects. The Commission and its project partners at Caltrans, local jurisdictions, and transit agencies are investing in transportation using a variety of local, state, and federal sources to build projects, plan and design new improvements, and get people working and contributing to the local economy. During FY 2012/13, the Commission will invest $371 million in capital projects that include highway, regional arterial, and rail projects. The Commission's overall budget will exceed $634 million and includes funding of transit operations, payments to cities and the County for street and road improvements, and management of smaller programs such as motorist and commuter assistance. The Commission's status has become somewhat unique in Southern California. As many transportation agencies have consolidated functions and grown in size, the Commission remains true to the original intent of the state of California (State) legislation that first created it —now operating with a staff of 42 budgeted positions. This maintains the original vision of the Legislature when it created the Commission in 1976. By doing so, the Commission remains effective in its role as a transportation planning and funding agency by maintaining. productive relationships with other agencies. For example, Measure A pays for a score of lesser -known projects that are extremely important to local residents. In FY 2012/13, the Commission will return $39 million in funding to local cities and the County for local streets and roads needs. The Commission also receives and programs funding from state and federal sources. This includes the State's Transportation Development Act program dollars that are allocated primarily to the County's major public transit providers. Measure A also pays its share by funding transit fare discounts and programs for senior citizens, persons with disabilities, and individuals of limited means and by operating a commuter assistance program that provides traveler information and ridesharing assistance to employers and commuters. Maior Corridors Seeing Maior Investment 1-215: Construction crews are adding a new lane in each direction along a six -mile stretch of the southern segment of I-215—a project which is being funded through Measure A and state bond funding. This project will be open to traffic in the summer of 2012 and will be followed by a similar project along a 12.5-mile portion of the central segment of 1-215. Two projects were completed in the last fiscal year through the use of federal stimulus funding including an improved interchange at Clinton Keith Road and the interchange at 4ch Street and SR-74 in the city of Perris. At the northern edge of the 1-215 and SR-60, the East Junction carpool lanes connector project is underway. The Commission completed the project development for this effort, and Caltrans is responsible for the construction activities. Additionally, a new carpool lane is set to be added north of the 60/91/215 interchange all the way into San Bernardino County with construction planned for late 2012. The lead agency for this bi-county project is the San Bernardino Associated Governments. 1-10: Construction has been completed on rebuilt and expanded freeway interchanges at Palm Drive, Indian Canyon Drive, Bob Hope Drive, and Date Palm Avenue in the Coachella Valley. The completion of these projects in early 2012 marked the culmination of years of project development work to secure funding and environmental approvals by RCTC's partner agency, the Coachella Valley Association of Governments. The completed projects were funded through a combination of federal, state, Measure A, and Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee funding. Two additional projects on Jefferson Avenue and Monterey Avenue are currently in project development. Caltrans and the County are the lead agencies for these projects. SR-91: Construction has begun on the addition of a carpool lane along a six -mile stretch of SR-91 through downtown Riverside. The project will not only widen SR-91 through downtown Riverside but will also rebuild and improve a number of interchanges and local connections with the freeway. Perris Valley Line: The Perris Valley Line project has received a favorable rating from the Federal Transit Administration and approval for a total of $75 million in federal Small Starts Program funding. In order to receive these dollars, the Commission has participated in a competitive process which has resulted in favorable reviews for the cost effectiveness of the Perris Valley Line project. The environmental work for the project will be completed in summer 2012. The total project budget for the Perris Valley Line is estimated at $247 million. The SR-91 Corridor Improvement Proiect in Corona: A Triumph of Teamwork In April 2012, the Commission learned that the final funding piece for the widening of the SR-91 freeway in Corona was in place with the award of a federal $444 million TIFIA loan from the United States Department of Transportation. This project will add two tolled express lanes and a general purpose in each direction of SR-91 between the Orange County line and 1-15. Additional project improvements will include enhanced transit service along the corridor, a collector -distributor lane system near the 1-15 and Main Street, and better connections between SR-91 and 1-15 including a direct connector to the Express Lanes from the northbound 1-15. The $1.3 billion project, which should break ground in 2013, is expected to generate 16,000 new jobs and will be the largest ever funded by the Commission. This year's budget reflects an ongoing investment in project development work which will include the acquisition of needed right of way. The approval of the TIFIA loan was made possible due to a cooperative effort that involved local officials, the business community, and Riverside County's Senate and Congressional delegations. Special recognition is merited for Senators Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer as well as Congressional representatives Ken Calvert, Jerry Lewis, and Mary Bono Mack; business organizations such as the Monday Morning Group, Greater Riverside Chamber of Commerce, and Greater Corona Valley Chamber of Commerce; and regional coalitions including Mobility 21 and Inland Action. This widespread support combined with the work of RCTC's Commissioners resulted in the largest federal award that the Commission has ever received for a single transportation project. A Commitment to Riverside County Ensuring local funding for transportation will require ongoing outreach to the public and transparent oversight and management that ensures public confidence in the Commission's fiduciary, oversight, and visionary roles. This budget document is intended to demonstrate the Commission's commitment to the public as well as documenting the Commission's dedication to sound budget practices. This budget document is one of many ways the Commission works to ensure public accountability and full transparency of its actions. We welcome public input and participation and invite you to visit our website at www.rctc.org or to follow us on Twitter @RCTC. GFOA Distinguished Budget Award The Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA) presented a Distinguished Budget Presentation Award to RCTC for its annual budget for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2011. In order to receive this award, a governmental unit must publish a budget document that meets program criteria as a policy document, an operations guide, a financial plan, and a communications device. The award is valid for a period of one year only. The Commission believes that this budget continues to conform to program requirements, and it will be submitted to GFOA to determine the Commission's eligibility for another award. Acknowledgements The preparation of this budget has been a collaborative effort of the Commission's staff. The budget reflects the Commission's desire to communicate the components of the budget in terms that are easily understandable and supportable for the general public. Staff acknowledges and appreciates the guidance and leadership of the Board of Commissioners and the sense of renewal and commitment it has and continues to inspire. Signature on file Signature on file Anne Mayer, Executive Director Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer TABLE OF CONTENTS COMMISSION INTRODUCTION EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Introduction Budget Overview Commission Personnel Department Initiatives Fund Balances Budget Comparative Operating and Capital Budget Budget by Governmental Fund Type Highway, Regional Arterial, and Rail Programs GANN APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT Section 1: GUIDING POLICIES Commission Policy Goals and Objectives Financial and Administration Policies Policy Matrix Section 2: BUDGET PROCESS SUMMARY Budget Process Functional Organization Chart Staff Organization Chart Section 3: FUND BUDGETS Budgetary Basis and Fund Structure General Fund Special Revenue Funds Capital Projects Funds Debt Service Fund Section 4: REVENUES AND OTHER SOURCES Revenues and Other Sources Funding Sources Program Revenues Section 5: COMMISSION DEBT Debt Debt Capacity Analysis Debt Service Schedule Outstanding Debt and Debt Service Requirements Program and Geographic Debt Legal Debt Margin Section 6: DEPARTMENT BUDGETS Budget Comparison by Department 6.1: MANAGEMENT SERVICES Executive Management Administration Legislative Affairs and Communications Finance 6.2: REGIONAL PROGRAMS Planning and Programming Rail Public and Specialized Transit Commuter Assistance Motorist Assistance Narrative discussion of the history of the Commission and list of principal officers Narrative overview of the operational and financial factors considered Summarized narrative overview, charts, and tables of sources and uses Personnel expenditures and full-time equivalents Major initiatives and summarized uses by department Projected fund balances by governmental fund type and program Schedule of budget by summarized line item Schedule of budget classified by operating and capital purposes Schedule of budget by governmental fund type Listing of budgeted capital project expenditures by program Narrative discussion of the appropriations limit Narrative description of policy goals and objectives Description of financial policies Linkage of policy goals to departmental goals and objectives Narrative description of various budget stages Organization chart by Commission functions Organization chart of budgeted staff Narrative description of budgetary basis and fund structure Overview; narrative and charts of sources and uses Overview; narrative and charts of sources and uses by Measure A and non -Measure A special revenue funds Overview; narrative and charts of sources and uses Overview; narrative and charts of sources and uses Narrative description of various revenues and other sources Schedule of funding sources by department/program Narratives of revenues by program Narrative discussion of debt programs Charts and accompanying narrative demonstrating debt capacity Schedule of debt maturities by year Description of outstanding debt and related debt service requirements as of June 30, 2012 Charts of debt service by program and geographic area Schedule of calculation of legal debt margin Schedule of revenues, expenditures, and other financing sources (uses) by department Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted uses Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted uses Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted uses Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted uses Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted uses Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted uses Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted uses Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted uses Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted uses 6.3: CAPITAL PROJECTS Capital Project Development and Delivery Location of Capital Projects Capital Projects Summary Section 7: COMMUNITY PROFILE Riverside County Demographics Statistical Information Commission Facts Section 8: APPENDICES Glossary of Acronyms Funding Definitions Program Terms General Terms Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted uses Local map of major capital projects for current year Narrative description of each capital project Narrative discussion of Riverside County's community profile Charts of various demographic data Charts and tables of various statistical information Narrative overview of the Commission's programs and services Explanation of commonly used abbreviations Narrative description of various funding sources Description of Commission programs and related terms Commonly used terms in governmental accounting and finance Commission Introduction State of California (State) law created the Riverside County Transportation Commission (Commission or RCTC) in 1976 to oversee the funding and coordination of all public transportation services within Riverside County (County). The Commission's mission is to assume a leadership role in improving mobility in the County. The governing body consists of all five members of the County Board of Supervisors, one elected official from each of the County's 28 cities, and one non -voting member appointed by the Governor of California. The Commission is responsible for setting policies, establishing priorities, and coordinating activities among the County's various transit operators and other agencies. The Commission also programs and/or reviews the allocation of federal, state, and local funds for highway, transit, rail, non -motorized travel (bicycle and pedestrian), and other transportation activities. The Commission serves as the tax authority and implementation agency for the voter approved Measure A Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). Measure A was originally approved by the County's electorate in 1988 and imposed a one-half of one cent transaction and use tax (sales tax) to fund specific programs that commenced in July 1989 (1989 Measure A). The 1989 Measure A was approved for 20 years and expired on June 30, 2009. On November 5, 2002, the voters of Riverside County approved the renewal of Measure A beginning in July 2009 through June 2039 (2009 Measure A). Additionally, the Commission provides motorist aid services designed to expedite traffic flow. These services include the Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies (SAFE), a program that provides call box service for motorists; the Freeway Service Patrol (FSP), a roving tow truck service to assist motorists with disabled vehicles on the main highways of the County during peak rush hour traffic periods; and Inland Empire 511 (IE511), a traveler information system. These services are provided at no charge to motorists and are funded through a $1 surcharge on vehicle registrations. The Commission is also legally responsible for allocating Transportation Development Act (TDA) funds, the major source of funds for transit in the County. The TDA provides two sources of funding: the Local Transportation Fund (LTF), which is derived from a one -quarter of one cent state sales tax, and State Transit Assistance (STA), which is now derived from the statewide sales tax on diesel fuel. Prior to 2010, STA revenues included the tax on gasoline. Finally, the Commission has been designated as the Congestion Management Agency (CMA) for the County. As the CMA, the Commission coordinates with local jurisdictions in the establishment of congestion mitigation procedures for the County's roadway system. Riverside County Transportation Commission List of Principal Officials Board of Commissioners Name Title Agency Bob Buster Member County of Riverside, District 1 John F. Tavaglione Member County of Riverside, District 2 Jeff Stone Member County of Riverside, District 3 John J. Benoit Chair (Commission) County of Riverside, District 4 Marion Ashley 2nd Vice Chair (Commission) County of Riverside, District 5 Bob Botts Member City of Banning Roger Berg Member City of Beaumont Joseph DeConinck Member City of Blythe Ella Zanowic Vice Chair (Budget and Implementation Committee) City of Calimesa Mary Craton Member City of Canyon Lake Greg Pettis Member City of Cathedral City Steven Hernandez Member City of Coachella Karen Spiegel Vice Chair (Commission) City of Corona Scott Matas Vice Chair (Eastern Riverside County Programs and Projects City of Desert Hot Springs Committee) Adam Rush Chair (Western Riverside County Programs and Projects City of Eastvale Committee) Larry Smith Member City of Hemet Douglas Hanson Member City of Indian Wells Glenn Miller Member City of Indio Frank Johnston Member City of Jurupa Valley Terry Henderson Chair (Eastern Riverside County Programs and Projects City of La Quinta Committee) Bob Magee Member City of Lake Elsinore Darcy Kuenzi Member City of Menifee Marcelo Co Member City of Moreno Valley Rick Gibbs Chair (Budget and Implementation Committee) City of Murrieta Berwin Hanna Member City of Norco Jan Harnik Member City of Palm Desert Ginny Foat Member City of Palm Springs Daryl Busch Member City of Perris Scott Hines Member City of Rancho Mirage Steve Adams Member City of Riverside Andrew Kotyuk Vice Chair (Western Riverside County Programs and City of San Jacinto Projects Committee) Ron Roberts Member City of Temecula Ben Benoit Member City of Wildomar To be appointed Governor's Appointee Caltrans, District 8 Management Staff Anne Mayer, Executive Director John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director Cathy Bechtel, Project Development Director Michael Blomquist, Toll Program Director Marlin Feenstra, Project Delivery Director Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer Robert Yates, Multimodal Services Director 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 2.57% 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 .92% of Measure A revenues. • Continue to maintain prudent cash reserves to provide some level of insulation for unplanned expenditures. • Maintain current positive bond ratings with rating agencies. • Move forward on Measure A projects for highways and regional arterials using sales tax revenues, TUMF revenues, and state and federal funding as well as financing alternatives such as commercial paper, sales tax revenue bonds, toll revenue bonds, and federal loans. • 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 $1,864,644,600, which is an increase of 279% over FY 2011/12 projected sources and a 305% increase over the FY 2011/12 budget. Total sources are comprised of revenues of $318,376,900, transfers in of $326,095,700, and debt proceeds of $1,220,172,000. 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 $519,677,300. Accordingly, total funding available for the FY 2012/13 budget totals $2,384,321,900. Table 1— Sources FY 2011-2013 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Measure A Sales Tax $ 123,439,800 $ 124,000,000 $ 128,000,000 $ 132,000,000 $ 8,000,000 6% LTF Sales Tax 60,772,800 61,000,000 63,000,000 65,000,000 4,000,000 7% STA Sales Tax 9,537,000 14,073,600 14,212,500 4,675,500 49% Intergovernmental 40,569,000 48,667,600 50,576,000 93,758,400 45,090,800 93% 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 7,265,900 5,441,900 298% Operating Transfers In 185,354,800 169,739,100 166,343,400 326,095,700 156,356,600 92% Debt Proceeds 170,000,000 38,000,000 60,000,000 1,220,172,000 1,182,172,000 3111% TOTAL Sources $ 596,140,300 $ 460,144,400 $ 492,232,300 $ 1,864,644,600 $ 1,404,500,200 305% 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. 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 i� FY 08/09 FY 09/10 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 +Measure A Sales Tax f—LTFSales Tax —r1e—STASales Tax TUMF —)I- Federal, State, Local Revenues —0— Operating Transfers 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 of the 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 LTF Sales Tax Tax 3% 7% STA Sal es Tax 1% Intergovernmental 5% TUMF Revenue 0% Investment 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 of $132,000,000 for FY 2012/13 will increase by 3% from the FY 2011/12 revised projection of $128,000,000. 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 LTF for public transportation needs, local streets and roads, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities. The majority of LTF funding received by the County and available for allocation is distributed to all public transit operators in the County, and the Commission receives allocations for administration, planning, and programming in addition to funding for rail operations included in the commuter rail Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP). The LTF sales tax revenue received from the State is budgeted at $65,000,000, an increase of 3% from the FY 2011/12 revised projection of $63,000,000. 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 $73,151,900, state sources of $17,917,800, 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 increase in FY 2012/13 as a result of higher cash balances, although investment yields remain low. 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 $326,095,700 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 $1,120,172,000 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 $326,095,700, are budgeted at $960,881,800, an increase of 56% from the prior year budget amount of $615,387,900. Program expenditures and transfers out totaling $804,559,600 represent 84% of total budgeted uses in FY 2012/13. Program costs have increased by 49% from $539,143,400 in FY 2011/12. Table 2 — Uses FY 2011-2013 FY 10/11 FY 11/12- FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Capital Highway, Rail, and Regional Arterials $ 300,680,000 $ 352,537,600 $ 296,779,100 $ 632,471,700 $ 279,934,100 79% Capital Local Streets and Roads 36,857,000 36,025,000 38,166,600 39,357,000 3,332,000 9% Commuter Assistance 2,831,900 9,386,400 4,391,400 4,190,100 (5,196,300) -55% Debt Service 123,364,100 62,995,000 62,964,000 143,413,000 80,418,000 128% Management Services 8,394,000 13,249,500 17,564,100 12,909,200 (340,300) -3% Motorist Assistance 4,761,900 6,377,600 6,400,900 6,169,300 (208,300) -3% Planning and Programming 4,564,600 7,459,500 4,065,300 4,522,600 (2,936,900) -39% Public and Specialized Transit 64,024,400 105,858,700 73,559,300 103,295,600 (2,563,100) -2% Rail Maintenance and Operations 12,865,700 21,498,600 21,012,900 14,553,300 (6,945,300) -32% TOTAL Uses $ 558,343,600 $ 615,387,900 $ 524,903,600 $ .960,881,800 $ 345,493,900 56% Note: Management Services includes Executive Management, Administration, Legislative Affairs and Communications, and Finance. Capital highway, rail, and regional arterials budgeted uses of $632,471,700, are 79% 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 corridorimprovement project in addition to transfers out of debt proceeds from capital projects funds to finance 2009 Measure A Western County highway project costs. Debt Service of $143,413,000 has increased 128% 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 $4,190,100 are 55% lower than FY 2011/12 due to a $5,000,000 budgeted transfer in FY 2011/12 to other rail projects to offset the multimodal benefits of the Perris Valley Line. Planning and Programming budgeted expenditures of $4,522,600 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 $6,945,300 decrease in Rail Department budgeted expenditures of $14,553,300 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 Public and Specialized Transit Programming Rail Maintenance and 0% 11�, Operations Motorist Assistance 1% Management Services 1% DebtService 15% Commuter Assistance 0% Capital Local Streets and Roads 4% f 2% Commission Personnel The Commission's salary and fringe benefits total $6,971,100 for FY 2012/13. This represents an increase of 6% or $394,200 over the FY 2011/12 budget of $6,576,900 (Chart 4). The increase relates to the addition of 1.0 full-time equivalent (FTE) for a capital projects toll program manager, 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 FY 2007/08. 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 FY 2012/13 FTE of 42.0 positions is comparable to the FY 2011/12 level (Table 3) and reflects a 1.0 FTE increase for the recruitment of a capital projects toll program manager. 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 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Executive Management 0.3 0.2 0.3 Administration 4.3 4.5 4.6 Legislative Affairs and Communications 2.0 2.3 2.0 Finance 6.2 6.9 6.7 Planning and Programming 5.2 4.8 4.7 Rail Maintenance and Operations 3.8 3.4 3.3 Public and Specialized Transit 2.6 2.6 2.4 Commuter Assistance 1.5 1.8 1.6 Motorist Assistance 0.9 0.9 1.2 Capital Project Development and Delivery 12.2 13.6 15.2 TOTAL 39.0 41.0 42.0 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 (CaIPERS), postretirement health care, deferred compensation, and employee assistance program. The compensation components are shown in Chart 5. Chart 5 — Personnel Salary and Benefits Other Fringes 1% Department Initiatives 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 10/11 ' FY_11/12 - FY 11/12 FY 12/13 - Dollar ` Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Personnel $ 128,000 $ 83,600 $ 61,600 $ 120,600 $ 37,000 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 $ 283,200 $ 38,900 16% Administration • Provide highouali'y 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 Personnel Professional Support Capital Outlay Debt Service TOTAL FY 10/11 Actual $ 400,700 $ 97,000 558,400 29,000 25,300 $ 1,110,400 $ FY 11/12 Revised Budget 412,400 $ 132,000 670,800 20,000 FY 11/12 Projected 372,400 $ 100,900 586,200 5,000 FY 12/13 Dollar Budget Change 460,300 $ 47,900 114,500 640,600 140,000 1,235,200 $ 1,064,500 $ 1,355,400 $ Percent Change 12% (17,500) -13% (30,200) -5% 120,000 600% N/A 120,200 10% 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 Personnel Professional Support TOTAL FY 10/11 FY 11/12' Actual Revised Budget 321,300 $ 437,100 $ 385,200 688,500 145,100 171,400 851,600 $ 1,297,000 $ FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Projected Budget 367,500 $ 395,000 $ 420,500 687,500 170,100 188,000 958,100 $ 1,270,500 $ Dollar Percent ChangeChange (42,100) -10% (1,000) 0% 16,600 10% (26,5 -2% 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. • 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 Personnel Professional Support Capital Outlay Transfers Out TOTAL FY 10/11 FY 11/12 Actual Revised Budget $ 778,200 $ 818,500 $ 4,483,500 3,956,000 544,700 569,000 24,700 129,500 5,000,000 $ 5,831,100 $ 10,473,000 $ FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Projected Budget 659,300 $ 828,600 $ 4,116,800 575,700 4,000 10,000,000 5,000,000 15,355,800 $ 10,000,100 $ Dollar Percent Change Change 10,100 1% 3,520,500 (435,500) -11% 651,000 82,000 14% (129,500) -100% 0% (472,900) -5% Planning and Programming • Monitor funding authority and responsibility related to the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) and impacts on the STIP caused by the state budget issues. • Ensure STIP and Proposition 1B funded projects are administered and implemented consistent with California Transportation Commission (CTC) and California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) policies. • Continue to strategically program projects and obligate funds in an expeditious manner for the maximum use of all available funding, including monitoring the use of such funding to prevent funds from lapsing. • Focus on interregional 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. Table 8 — Planning and Programming Personnel Professional Support Projects and Operations Transfers Out TOTAL FY 10/11 - FY 11/12 FY 11/12 .. FY 12/13 Dollar Percent -.. Actual'- Revised'Budget .. Projected ---Budget 'Change Change -. $ 817,600 $ 833,000 $ 788,600 $ • 835,800 $ 2,800 0% 102,500 351,000 207,700 362,800 11,800 3% 9,800 18,800 18,400 24,300 5,500 29% 3,634,700 6,247,500 1,3,E,600 3,299,700 (2,947,800) -47% - 9,200 - - (9,200) -100% $ 4,564,600 $ 7,459,500 $ 4,065,300 $ 4,522,600 $ (2,936,900) -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 FY 10/11 Actual Personnel $ 491,500 Professional 128,100 Support 1,209,200 Projects and Operations 11,021,600 Capital Outlay 15,300 TOTAL $ 12,865,700 FY 11/12 Revised Budget 494,300 $ 317,000 1,640,700 18,985,900 60,700 21,498,600 $ FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Projected Budget 429,300 $ 496,700 $ 178,100 421,000 1,640,000 1,775,100 18,740,800 11,794,800 24,700 65,700 21,012,900 $ 14,553,300 $ Dollar Percent Change Change 2,400 0% 104,000 33% 134,400 8% (7,191,100) -38% 5,000 8% (6,945,300) -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 TransTrack 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. Table 10 — Public and Specialized Transit FY 10/11 • FY 11/12 Actual Revised Budget Personnel $ 320,900 $ 361,900 $ Professional 129,600 187,300 Support 11,400 23,800 Projects and Operations 46,288,000 86,469,800 Transfers Out 17,274,500 18,815,900 TOTAL $ 64,024,400 $ 105,858,700 $ FY 11/12 FY 12/13 _ Dollar Percent Projected _ Budget Change Change 338,400 $ 326,200 $ (35,700) -10% 159,000 291,500 104,200 56% 10,400 18,900 (4,900) -21% 57,008,000 84,049,300 (2,420,500) -3% 16,043,500 18,609,700 (206,200) -1% 73,559,300 $ 103,295,600 $ (2,563,100) -2% 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 it - Commuter Assistance Personnel Professional Support Projects and Operations Capital Outlay Transfers Out TOTAL FY 10/11 FY 11/12 Actual Revised Budget 197,600 $ 230,700 309,100 2,079,000 15,500 2,831,900 $ FY 11/12 Projected 228,900 $ 264,800 $ 805,100 663,600 503,400 505,000 2,559,000 2,668,000 130,000 130,000 5,160,000 160,00.0 9,386,400 $ 4,391,400 $ . FY 12/13 Budget 218,900 $ 640,300 529,200 2,633,400 17,000 151,300 4,190,100 $ Dollar Percent Change Change (10,000) -4% (164,800) -20% 25,800 5% 74,400 3% (113,000) -87% (5,008,700) -97% (5,196,300) -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 1E511 system in accordance with national 511 implementation standards in partnership with SANBAG. • Enhance the 1E511 with more personalized traffic information services. Table 12 - Motorist Assistance Personnel Professional Support Projects and Operations Transfers Out TOTAL FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change 103,800 $ 112,200 $ 196,900 $ 175,900 $ 63,700 57% 649,500 1,008,700 916,000 717,500 (291,200) -29% 435,600 599,300 587,900 874,600 275,300 46% 2,341,800 3,543,100 3,585,800 3,080,000 (463,100) -13% 1,231,200 1,114,300 1,114,300 1,321,300 207,000 19% 4,761,900 $ 6,377,600 $ 6,400,900 $ 6,169,300 $ (208,300) -3% Capital Project Development and Delivery • Continue project development, right of way, and construction activities on remaining 1989 Measure A projects including SR-74 curve widening, 74/215 interchange, SR-91 high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes/Adams Street to 60/91/215 interchange, and 60/215 East Junction HOV lane connectors. • 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. • 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 Personnel $ 2,308,900 Professional 5,450,000 Support 309,200 Projects and Operations 162,557,000 Capital Outlay 62,800 Debt Service 123,338,800 Transfers Out 166,849,100 TOTAL $ 460,875,800 FY 11/12 FY 11/12 Revised Budget Projected $ 2,795,000 $ 3,026,500 9,601,500 6,202,200 813,000 459,200 235,537,400 186,055,200 176,000 177,000 62,995,000 62,964,000 139,639,700 139,025,600 $ 451,557,600 $ 397,909,700 FY 12/13 Budget 3,113,100 7,500,600 587,000 359,389,600 225,000 143,413,000 301,013,400 815,241,700 Dollar Percent Change Change 318,100 11% (2,100,900) -22% (226,000) -28% 123,852,200 53% 49,000 28% 80,418,000 128% 161,373,700 116% 363,684,100 81% Fund Balances The total fund balance as of June 30, 2012 is projected at $556,693,300. The Commission's budgeted activities for FY 2012/13 are expected to result in a $903,762,800 increase of total fund balance at June 30, 2013 to $1,460,456,100. 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. Table 14 — Projected Fund Balances by Governmental Fund Type and Program at June 30, 2013 Riverside County Transportation Commission $1,460,456,100' General Fund Special Revenue Funds Cgital Projects Funds - . Debt Seryice Fund . $13,665,600 $416,257,300 $1,025,826,700 $4,706,500 Management Services Planning and Programming Rail Maintenance and Operations Budget Summary $6,256,000 Measure A Westem County: 1,817,100 Bond Finandng 5,592,500 Commuter Assistance Economic Development Highways Local Streets and Roads New Corridors Public and Specialized Transit Rail Regional Arterials $2,363,800 12,914,000 3,572,000 120,431,800 1,300 40,940,900 8,852,200 60,246,600 30,602,500 Measure A Coachella Valley: Highways and Regional Arterial 1,417,600 Local Streets and Roads 1,600 Specialized Transit 1,103,800 Measure A Palo Verde Valley Local Streets and Roads 600 Motorist Assistance 4,629,500 State Transit Assistance 43,456,700 Local Transportation Fund 69,912,800 TUMF: CETAP 15,096,700 Regional Arterials 712,900 Highways $ 1,025,826,700 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. Table 15 — Budget Comparative by Summarized Line Item FY 2011-2013 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11/12 Actual Revised Budget Projected Revenues Measure A Sales Tax LTF Sales Tax STA Sales Tax Federal Reimbursements State Reimbursements Local Reimbursements TUMF Revenue Other Revenue Investment Income TOTAL Revenues Expenditures Personnel Salary and Benefits Professional and Support Professional Services Support Costs TOTAL Professional and Support Costs Projects and Operations Program Operations - General Engineering Construction Design Build Right of Way/Land Operating and Capital Disbursements Special Studies Local Streets and Roads Regional Arterials TOTAL Projects and Operations Debt Service Principal Payments Interest Payments Cost of Issuance TOTAL Debt Service Capital Outlay TOTAL Expenditures Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures Other Financing Sources (Uses) Transfers In Transfers Out Debt Proceeds Bond Discount Net Financing Sources (Uses) Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures and Other Financing Sources (Uses) Beginning Fund Balance ENDING FUND BALANCE $ 123,439,800 60,772,800 17,735,600 17,811,800 5,021,600 9,157,900 2,321,800 4,524,200 240,785,500 5,868,500 12,115,400 3,571,400 15,686,800 10,554,500 27,545,300 24,414,800 16,272,900 44,663,000 58,516,500 459,500 36,857,000 8,638,600 227,922,100 109,607,200 11,296,300 1,493,100 122,396,600 147,300 $ 124,000,000 61,000,000 9,537,000 23,650,700 23,935,100 1,081,800 6,784,300 592,400 1,824,000 252,405,300 6,576,900 17,149,100 5,068,900 22,218,000 16,827,000 41,568,800 41,777,600 14,438,000 76,127,000 109,547,300 770,000 36,025,000 16,262,000 353,342,700 46,500,000 16,495,000 62,995,000 516,200 $ 128,000,000 63,000,000 14,073,600 24,393,600 23,250,200 2,932,200 6,397,400 450,800 3,391,100 265,888,900 6,505,300 13,034,800 4,607,000 17,641,800 14,057,700 27,796,100 30,670,100 11,000,000 54,535,100 77,193,600 280,000 38,166,600 17,409,200 271,108,400 FY 12/13 Budget $ 132,000,000 65,000,000 14,212,500 73,151,900 17,917,800 2,688,700 5,257,300 882,800 7,265,900 318,376,900 Dollar Percent Change, Change' $. $ 8,000,000 6% 4,000,000 7% 4,675,500 49% 49,501,200 209% (6,017,300) -25%, 1,606,900 149% (1,527,000) -23% 290,400 49% 5,441,900 298% 65,971,600 26% 6,971,100 394,200 6% 14,361,200 5,346,300 19,707,500 16,586,500 24,312,600 127,024,800 29,050,000 109,476,500 97,239,000 800,000 39,357,000 20,400,400 464,246,800 (2,787,900) -16% 277,400 5% (2,510,500) -11% (240,500) -1% (17,256,200) -42% 85,247,200 204% 14,612,000 101% 33,349,500 44% (12,308,300) -11% 30,000 4% 3,332,000 9% 4,138,400 25% 110,904,100 31% 46,500,000 126,800,000 80,300,000 173% 16,464,000 16,613,000 118,000 1% - - N/A 62,964,000 143,413,000 80,418,000 128% 340,700 447,700 (68,500) -13% 372,021,300 (131,235,800) 185,354,800 (185,354,800) 170,000,000 (967,500) 169,032,500 37,796,700 551,567,900 $ 589,364,600 445,648,800 (193,243,500) 169,739,100 (169,739,100) 38,000,000 38,000,000 (155,243,500) 589,364,600 $ 434,121,100 $ 358,560,200 634,786,100 189,137,300 42% (92,671,300) (316,409,200) (123,165,700) 64% 166,343,400 (166,343,400) 60,000,000 60,000,000 326,095,700 156,356,600 92% (326,095,700) (156,356,600) 92% 1,220,172,000 1,182,172,000 3111% N/A 1,220,172,000 1,182,172,000 3111% (32,671,300) 903,762,800 1,059,006,299 -682% 589,364,600 556,693,300 (32,671,300) -6% 556,693,300 $ 1,460,456,100 $ 1,026,335,000 236% Table 16 — Operating and Capital Budget FY 2012/13 Revenues Measure A Sales Tax LTF Sales Tax STA Sales Tax Federal Reimbursements State Reimbursements Local Reimbursements TUMF Revenue Other Revenue Investment Income TOTAL Revenues Expenditures Personnel Salary and Benefits Professional and Support Professional Services Support Costs TOTAL Professional and Support Costs Projects and Operations Program Operations - General Engineering Construction Design Build Right of Way and Land Operating and Capital Disbursements Special Studies Local Streets and Roads Regional Arterials TOTAL Projects and Operations Debt Service Principal Payments Interest Payments TOTAL Debt Service Capital Outlay TOTAL Expenditures Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures Other Financing Sources (Uses) Transfers In Transfers Out Debt Proceeds Net Financing Sources (Uses) Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures and Other Financing Sources (Uses) FY 12/13 Operating Budget $ 12,677,000 65,000,000 14, 212, 500 1,404,300 4,460,000 2,167, 300 768,700 FY 12/13 .. Capital Budget . $ 119,323,000 71,747,600 13,457,800 521,400 5,257,300 882,800 6,497, 200 FY 12/13 TOTAL Budget $ 132,000,000 65,000,000 14, 212, 500 73,151, 900 17,917,800 2,688,700 5,257,300 882,800 7,265,900 100,689,800 3,847,200 4,156,600 4,739,300 217, 687,100 3,123,900 10,204,600 607,000 318,376,900 6,971,100 14, 361, 200 5,346,300 8,895,900 7,048,200 60,000 96,989,000 760,000 10,811,600 9,538,300 24,312,600 126,964,800 29,050,000 109,476,500 250,000 40,000 39,357,000 20,400,400 19, 707, 500 16, 586, 500 24, 312, 600 127,024,800 29,050,000 109,476,500 97,239,000 800,000 39, 357,000 20,400,400 104,857,200 359,389,600 126,800,000 16,613,000 464, 246, 800 126,800,000 16,613,000 222,700 143,413,000 225,000 143,413,000 447,700 117,823,000 516,963,100 634, 786,100 (17,133, 200) 20,484,400 (20,082,300) (299,276,000) 305,611,300 (306,013,400) 1,220,172,000 (316,409,200) 326,095,700 (326,095,700) 1,220,172,000 402,100 1,219,769,900 1,220,172,000 (16,731,100) 920,493,900 903,762,800 Beginning Fund Balance 171,265,700 385,427,600 556,693,300 ENDING FUND BALANCE $ 154,534,600 $ 1,305,921,500 $ 1,460,456,100 Table 17 — Budget by Governmental Fund Type FY 2012/13 General Fund $ 2,700,000 Revenues Measure A Sales Tax LTF Sales Tax STA Sales Tax Federal Reimbursements State Reimbursements Local Reimbursements TUMF Revenue Other Revenue Investment Income TOTAL Revenues Expenditures Personnel Salary and Benefits Professional and Support Professional Services Support Costs TOTAL Professional and Support Costs Projects and Operations Program Operations - General Engineering Construction Design Build Right of Way/Land Operating and Capital Disbursements Special Studies Local Streets and Roads Regional Arterials TOTAL Projects and Operations Debt Service Principal Payments Interest Payments TOTAL Debt Service Capital Outlay TOTAL Expenditures Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures Other Financing Sources (Uses) Transfers In Transfers Out Debt Proceeds Net Financing Sources (Uses) Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures and Other Financing Sources (Uses) Beginning Fund Balance ENDING FUND BALANCE 470,000 910,000 225,200 67,900 FY 12/13 Special Revenue Capital Projects Debt Service TOTAL Budget $ 129,300,000 65,000,000 14,212,500 69,699,900 17,007,800 2,463,500 5,257,300 882,800 2,071,000 $ - $ 5,103,600 $ 132,000,000 65,000,000 14,212,500 2,982,000 73,151,900 17,917,800 2,688,700 5,257,300 882,800 23,400 7,265,900 4,373,100 3,350,800 2,687,300 3,328,500 6,015,800 1,394,800 12,939,700 760,000 305,894,800 3,620,300 11,673,900 2,017,800 13,691,700 15,191,700 23,993,500 127,024,800 29,050,000 106,452,400 84,299,300 40,000 39,357,000 20,400,400 5,103,600 319,100 3,024,100 3,005,400 318,376,900 6,971,100 14,361,200 5,346,300 19,707,500 16,586,500 24,312,600 127,024,800 29,050,000 109,476,500 97,239,000 800,000 39,357,000 20,400,400 15,094,500 445,809,100 3,343,200 120,000,000 433,000 464,246,800 6,800,000 126,800,000 16,180, 000 16, 613,000 205,700 120,433,000 22,980,000 143,413,000 242,000 447,700 24,666,800 463,363,100 123,776,200 22,980,000 634,786,100 (20,293,700) (157,468,300) 19,447,400 150,092,900 (72,300,900) (118,672,600) (19,974,600) (316,409,200) 136,889,600 (253,144,800) 1,220,172,000 19,665,800 326,095,700 (650,000) (326,095,700) 1,220,172,000 19,447,400 77,792,000 1,103,916,800 19,015,800 .1,220,172,000 (846,300) (79,676,300) 985,244,200 (958,800) 903,762,800 14,511,900 495,933,600 40,582,500 5,665,300 556,693,300 $ 13,665,600 $ 416,257,300 $ 1,025,826,700 $ 4,706,500 $ 1,460,456,100 Table 18 — Highway, Regional Arterial, and Rail Programs FY 2012/13 Description Projects and Operations Bechtel Program Management $ 7,442,800 SCRRA Program Management 1,028,600 TOTAL PROJECTS -GENERAL $ 8,471,400 Highway Engineering SR-60 Truck Climbing Lanes $ 3,000,000 91/71 Connectors 4,000,000 1-15 Corridor Improvements 8,000,000 1-215 Corridor Improvement (Central Segment)/Scott Road to Nuevo Road 1,000,000 1-215 Corridor Improvement Southbound Connector 750,000 Mid County Parkway 2,000,000 SR-91 Corridor Improvements 2,000,000 SR-91 HOV Lanes/Adams Street to 60/91/215 Interchange 150,000 General 419,100 SUBTOTAL HIGHWAY ENGINEERING 21,319,100 Regional Arterial Engineering Various Western County TUMF Regional Arterial Projects, including SR-79 realignment 1,952,000 SUBTOTAL REGIONAL ARTERIAL ENGINEERING 1,952,000 Rail Engineering Perris Valley Line and Other Rail Projects SUBTOTAL RAIL ENGINEERING TOTAL HIGHWAY, REGIONAL ARTERIAL, AND RAIL ENGINEERING 1,041,500 1,041,500 $ 24,312,600 Highway Construction 60/215 East Junction HOV Lane Connectors $ 30,000 74/215 Interchange 1,820,000 1-215 Corridor Improvements (South and Central Segments)/I-15 to Nuevo Road 14,780,000 I-215/Blaine Street to Martin Luther King Boulevard Widening 1,990,300 I-15/Los Alamos Road Bridge Replacement 2,000,000 SR-74 Curve Widening 3,420,000 SR-91 Corridor Improvements 4,000,000 SR-91/1a Sierra Interchange 110,600 SR-91/Van Buren Interchange 3,184,300 General (details presented in Section 6.3 Motorist Assistance) 60,000 SUBTOTAL HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION 31,395,200 Regional Arterial Construction Various Western County TUMF Regional Arterial Projects 29,746,000 SUBTOTAL REGIONAL ARTERIAL CONSTRUCTION 29,746,000 Rail Construction Perris Valley Line and Other Rail Projects 64,996,000 North Main Corona Station Parking Structure 20,000 Perris Multimodal Facility 867,600 SUBTOTAL RAIL CONSTRUCTION 65,883,600 TOTAL HIGHWAY, REGIONAL ARTERIAL, AND RAIL CONSTRUCTION $ 127,024,800 Highway Design Build SR-91 Corridor Improvements TOTAL HIGHWAY DESIGN BUILD $ 29,050,000 $ 29,050,000 Highway Right of Way and Land 74/215Interchange $ 550,000 60/215 East Junction HOV Lane Connectors • 265,000 1-215 Corridor Improvement (Central Segment)/Scott Road to Nuevo Road 1,303,000 Mid County Parkway 20,000 SR-74 Curve Widening 310,000 SR-74/1-15 to 7th Street 38,200 91/71 Connectors 1,250,000 SR-91 Corridor Improvements 60,400,000 SR-91 HOV Lanes/Adams Street to 60/91/215 Interchange 14,195,000 Coachella Valley MSHCP 3,024,100 SUBTOTAL HIGHWAY RIGHT OF WAY AND LAND 81,355,300 Regional Arterial Right of Way and Land Various Western County TUMF Regional Arterial Projects 10,488,700 SUBTOTAL REGIONAL ARTERIAL RIGHT OF WAY AND LAND 10,488,700 Rail Right of Way and Land Perris Valley Line and Other Rail Projects 17,632,500 SUBTOTAL RAIL RIGHT OF WAY AND LAND 17,632,500 TOTAL HIGHWAY, REGIONAL ARTERIAL, AND RAIL RIGHT OF WAY AND LAND $ 109,476,500 GRAND TOTAL HIGHWAY, REGIONAL ARTERIAL, AND RAIL PROGRAMS $ 298,335,300 Gann Appropriations Limit In November 1979, the voters of the State approved Proposition 4, commonly known as the Gann Initiative. The Proposition created Article XIIIB of the State Constitution, placing limits on the amount of revenue that can be spent by public agencies from the "proceeds of taxes." In 1980, the State Legislature added Section 7910 to the Government Code, providing that the governing body of each local jurisdiction must establish, by resolution, an appropriations limit for the following year. The appropriations limit for any fiscal year is equal to the previous year's limit adjusted for population changes and changes in the California per capita income. The Commission is subject to the requirements of Article XIIIB. Gann appropriations limits are calculated for and applied to the Commission. In accordance with the requirements of Article XIIIB implementing legislation, the Board approved Resolution No. 12-017 on June 7, 2012, establishing appropriations limits for the Commission at $348,861,382. The FY 2012/13 budget appropriated $255,940,300 in taxes for the Commission, falling well within the limits set by the Gann Initiative. Based on historic trends and future projections, it appears the Commission's use of the proceeds of taxes, as defined by Article XIIIB, will continue to fall below the appropriations limit. The calculation for the FY 2012/13 appropriations limit is as follows: 2011-2012 Appropriations Limit $ 332,891,501 2012-2013 adjustment: Change in California per capita personal income = 3.77% Change in Population, Riverside County = 0.99% Per Capital Cost of Living converted to a ratio: 3.77 + 100 100 1.0377 Population converted to a ratio: 0.99 + 100 = 1.0099 100 Calculation of factor for FY 2012-2013: 1.0377 x 1.0099 = 1.04797323 $332,891,501 X 1.04797323 = $348,861,382 2012-2013 Appropriations Limit $ 348,861,382 Source: California per capita income — California Department of Finance Population, Riverside County— California Department of Finance Riverside County Transportation Commission Commission Policy Goals and Objectives In addition to financial and administration policies, the Commission has seven long-term policy goals: promote mobility, mitigate and address the impact of goods movement, encourage economic development, ensure improved system efficiencies, foster environmental stewardship, support transportation choices through intermodalism and accessibility, and prioritize public and agency communications. For each of these policy goals, the objectives and initiatives that were considered in the framework of the work plan for the FY 2012/13 budget are identified below. While Riverside County grapples with the challenges of a weak real estate market, high unemployment, and a recovering economy, the need for better transportation remains a top public priority. The Commission is poised to address these challenges via the seven policy goals. In moving forward with an aggressive program of projects and services, the Commission will face the challenge of fluctuating Measure A, TUMF, and TDA revenues and uncertainty regarding the availability of federal and state transportation revenues. Due to the long-term nature of many of the Commission's programs, many of the policy goals' objectives and initiatives are ongoing from year to year. Promote Mobility The Commission, in cooperation with local, state, and federal agencies, will strive to create a transportation system that promotes efficient mobility both within the County and region. • Complete projects and programs included in the 1989 Measure A and determine use(s) for any unexpended revenues. • Continue to aggressively pursue completion of the environmental, design, and construction processes on key components of the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan, which includes the SR-91, 1-15, and 1-215 corridor improvement projects. • Continue to develop the toll program consistent with the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan including executing toll program agreements with key regional and state partners namely Caltrans, Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA), toll operator, city of Corona, California Highway Patrol (CHP), and others. • Develop requests for proposals for SR-91 corridor improvement project design -build contract and pursue funding opportunities via the TIFIA loan program. • Continue the preliminary engineering and environmental clearance for the Mid County Parkway and SR- 79 realignment projects. • Continue to work with state and federal agencies to fund and construct projects programmed in the STIP, Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP), Proposition 1B bond programs, and Measure A program as well as other high priority regional projects. • Maximize obtaining all available transportation funds and strategically program funds to meet funding deadlines and to prevent the lapse and loss of funds. • Maximize the effective application and use of Western County TUMF funds to deliver eligible Commission priority projects. • Work closely with local jurisdictions to implement the TUMF Regional Arterial Program and facilitate the delivery of arterial improvements in Western County. • Actively participate in the SR-91 Advisory Committee to facilitate near and long-term improvements to SR-91, enhance intercounty public transit options, and foster mobility improvements between the two counties. • Advocate streamlining efforts at the state and federal levels that will reduce costs, time, and delays currently associated with project delivery including, but not limited to, timely project reviews and approvals. • Continue to coordinate and provide public access to commuter information via the 1E511 system and focus commuter assistance and 1E511 outreach efforts under one brand. • Continue cooperation with the FTA regarding the Small Starts process to support the initiation of the Perris Valley Line commuter rail service in 2014. • Continue to work with the public transit operators to control costs and increase system efficiencies in order to accommodate fluctuating revenues from local, state and federal sources. • Continue to develop transit service to further promote seamless intracity, intercity, and regional transit connectivity for County residents. Mitigate and Address the Impact of Goods Movement The Commission will work with federal, state, and local governments to facilitate the movement of goods and services to, within, and through the County, recognizing the vital role goods movement mobility plays in the economic health of the County, the State, and the nation. • Seek funding and local agency concurrence to implement the Commission's approved, high -priority railroad grade separation priority list to mitigate the impact of increased goods movement demands on the transportation system. • Encourage Congress to create a federal freight trust fund, or similar program with a dedicated and firewalled revenue structure, in order to treat the nation's multimodal national goods movement network as a system rather than individual projects. • Remain committed to a regional approach regarding goods movement issues in order to maximize funding from state and federal sources to goods movement needs in Southern California. • Continue working with the Ports and regional transportation commissions to develop a funding mechanism for needed projects and mitigation on a regional basis. Encourage Economic Development Transportation decisions will consider the economic benefits derived from any improvement, and, where feasible and practical, will pursue transportation alternatives that enhance or complement economic development. • Commit to seek opportunities related to transportation projects that will create jobs and improve the economic base in the County. • Support local agencies in the design and construction of interchanges that are in proximity to regional economic centers and developments. • Support local projects, consistent with countywide transportation goals, which enhance business development, local employment, and area tourism. Ensure Improved System Efficiencies The Commission will select projects and allocate funds in a manner that will improve safety and reduce congested traffic corridors. • Advocate the development and use of advanced technologies for transportation applications that are affordable and practical. • In partnership with SANBAG, refine and enhance the 1E511 system through the deployment of an iPhone and Android App, which will make real-time traffic information, real-time bus and rail transit trip planning information, and rideshare information available to commuters for the purpose of trip planning and reducing congestion. • Assure the effectiveness of transit planning through coordination with the County's eight transit operators, Citizens' Advisory Committee, and annual SRTP process with a goal toward promoting program productivity, efficiency, and effectiveness. • Provide innovative commuter rideshare programs to reduce single occupant vehicle trips and coordinate with other regional rideshare service providers to address intercounty commute trips. • Work with local jurisdictions, Caltrans, and the CHP to continue efficient delivery of a comprehensive motorist aid system which includes an 1E511 traveler information service, a call box program, and an FSP program, including temporary services in freeway construction zones. • Leverage resources to incorporate park and ride facilities and additional connecting bus service at Metrolink stations that may have available capacity. • Continue working with Caltrans to monitor traffic conditions for the purpose of focusing transportation funds on congested corridors and system deficiencies. • Work with Caltrans and regional agencies in developing resources for preservation and maintenance of the highways and regional arterials. Foster Environmental Stewardship The Commission will achieve its mobility goals while promoting environmental stewardship and protecting the area's natural resources and quality of life. • Continue working with the Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority (RCA), Caltrans, and state/federal resource agencies to implement the Multi -Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). • Work with the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), sub -regional agencies, and local jurisdictions to implement an RTP and sustainable communities strategy that meets regional air quality goals, conformity guidelines, and SB375 green house reduction targets for the SCAG region. • Support a variety of outreach channels and educational programs that promote the benefits of ridesharing, public and specialized transit, rail, and availability of commuter resources for the purposes of reducing vehicle trips and vehicle miles traveled. • Facilitate private/public use of clean fuels technology. • Continue to develop sustainable and green commuter rail stations and provide upgrades and rehabilitation projects to reduce the environmental impact of the existing stations. Support Transportation Choices through Intermodalism and Accessibility County residents will be served, where economically feasible, through the development of transportation alternatives and travel options that consider the needs of a wide range of citizens. • Work with transit providers and local social service agencies to provide specialized transit service to meet a broad spectrum of socio-economic transit needs of seniors and persons of low income and/or with disabilities. • Leverage commuter assistance and freeway service patrol outreach channels in order to increase the awareness of and foster the use of alternative commuting modes. • Implement the Commission's commuter rail SRTP and SCRRA's plan for commuter rail services with an emphasis on the Perris Valley Line, an extension from Riverside to Perris via Moreno Valley. • Advocate for the provision of Amtrak commuter and/or passenger rail services to the Pass Area and the Coachella Valley. . • Continue to pursue the goals and objectives as outlined in the Coordinated Public Transit -Human Services Transportation Plan (Coordinated Plan) for Riverside County related to a unified, comprehensive but flexible strategy for transportation service delivery to address transportation gaps and/or barriers focusing on unmet transportation needs of elderly individuals, persons with disabilities, and individuals of limited income. • Enhance security, surveillance, and emergency response capabilities of County transit facilities and roadway infrastructure through proactive planning, interagency coordination, and investment. Prioritize Public and Agency Communications The Commission will provide timely, informative, and accurate information to encourage informed public and agency participation in the Commission's decision -making processes. • Promote a close working relationship with news and civic entities to increase interest and understanding of transportation and related issues. • Enhance the provision of public information through various forms of communication (e.g., website, annual report, monthly newsletter, television, Speakers Bureau, print media, radio, etc.). • Maintain an ongoing effort of informing Riverside County's Congressional and State Legislative delegations regarding County transportation issues. • Develop an effective long-range legislative strategy regarding the reauthorization of the federal transportation bill to ensure that the federal government participates as a full partner in funding Riverside County projects that are of national and regional significance. • Protect and enhance flexibility in the Commission's use of state and federal transportation revenue in addressing regional priorities and needs. • Advocate for sufficient funding for Riverside County transit and transportation projects from various federal and state revenue sources including, but not limited to, annual federal appropriations, economic recovery programs, STIP, and Proposition 18 bond programs. • Seek legislative flexibility for innovative financing and delivery methods. • Maintain ongoing efforts to educate commuters, businesses, and the public regarding the Commission's toll planning efforts and specific project development efforts currently underway. Financial and Administration Policies Financial Planning Policies • Administrative costs, including salaries and benefits, shall be funded by allocations from Measure A, LTF, FSP, SAFE, and TUMF funds. • The Commission shall budget no more than one percent (1%) of Measure A sales tax revenues for administrative salaries and benefits. • Administrative program delivery costs will be budgeted at whatever is reasonable and necessary, but not to exceed four percent (4%) of Measure A sales tax revenues (inclusive of the one -percent salary limitation). The Commission shall budget 100% of the annual required contribution related to the postretirement health care benefits. • The Commission shall utilize unexpended 1989 Measure A funds only for projects and programs included in the 1989 Measure A. Sales tax revenues from the 2009 Measure A shall be expended only for projects and programs included in the 2009 Measure A. • Amounts will be budgeted by fiscal year for multi -year projects, based on best available estimates, with the understanding that, to the extent actuals vary from those estimates and the project is ongoing, adjustments will be made on a continual basis. • The fiscal capital budget should be consistent with the strategic plan and deviations appropriately noted, explained, and justified. • A balanced budget shall be adopted annually with operating and capital expenditures and other financing uses equal to or less than identified revenues and other financing sources as well as available fund balances. Revenue Policies • Sales tax revenue projections will be revised semi-annually to ensure use of current and relevant data. Staff may adjust annual amounts during the budget preparation process to reflect the most current economic trends. • A strategic application of local funding sources will be used to maximize federal and state funding of projects. • Fiduciary responsibility regarding Western County TUMF revenues shall be exercised, and revenues will be allocated pursuant to Commission direction and the approved 2009 Measure A. Debt Management Policies • Outstanding sales tax revenue bonds shall not exceed $975 million. • The Commission will maintain 2.0x debt ratio coverage on all senior sales tax revenue debt. • Debt issuance will be for major capital projects including engineering, right of way, and construction. Debt secured by Measure A revenues may be used to advance projects included in the 2009 Measure A expenditure plan. • Operating requirements, if any, must be paid from current ongoing revenues and may not be financed. • Costs of issuance, including the standard underwriter's discount, will not exceed two percent (2%). • The Commission may enter into interest rate swaps to better manage assets and liabilities and take advantage of market conditions to lower overall costs and reduce interest rate risk. • While it is the intent of the Commission to establish a cash debt reserve for long term bond issuance, as necessary, surety bonds can be obtained when beneficial to the Commission. • All sales tax revenue debt must mature prior to the termination of 2009 Measure A on June 30, 2039. Expenditure Accountability Policies • Established priorities for planning and programming of capital projects will be reviewed annually with the Commission. • Actual expenditures will be compared to the budget on at least a quarterly basis, and significant deviations will be appropriately noted, explained, and justified. Reserve Policies • The Commission will maintain program reserves in accordance with Measure A and TDA policies and guidelines. • The Commission will establish and maintain a transit operator's reserve of ten percent (10%) for the Coachella Valley and Palo Verde Valley. Additionally, a ten percent (10%) reserve will be established and maintained for each of the Western County transit operators (public bus and commuter rail). Cash Management and Investment Policies • Where possible, the Commission will encourage receipt of funds by wire transfer to its accounts. • Balances in the bank operating account will be maintained at the amount necessary to meet monthly expenditures. • Idle funds will be invested per the Commission's established investment policy emphasizing in order of priority: 1) safety, 2) liquidity, and 3) yield. • Cash disbursements to local jurisdictions and vendors/consultants will be completed in an expeditious and timely manner. Auditing, Accounting, and Financial Reporting Policies • The Commission will maintain its financial software system in order to integrate project accounting needs and improve accounting efficiency. • The Commission will issue a Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) in accordance with the GASB Statement 34 financial reporting model. • An audit is to be conducted annually on the Commission's accounting books and records. As long as the Commission has outstanding bonds, an independent accounting firm must conduct the audit. • The Commission is responsible for ensuring that audits of Measure A and TDA funding recipients are completed and reviewed for compliance and other matters in a timely manner. • An internal audit program will be maintained to identify improvements in controls and procedures as well as best practices. Human Resources Management Policies • Commission staffing levels will be consistent with the intent of its enabling legislation, which envisioned a small, but effective staff. • Contract staff and consultants will be used to augment staff efforts as much as possible to support programs or workloads, which do not appear to be of a permanent nature. ' Information Technology Management Policy • Significant effort will be made to maintain efficient and cost-effective technology infrastructure by continuously upgrading network equipment and software to ensure quality performance, productivity, and connectivity among staff, other agencies, and the public. Network security will continue to be a top priority to maintain the integrity of the Commission's network and information. Linking Commission Policy Goals and Departmental Goals and Objectives The following matrix (Table 19) illustrates the linkage of the Commission's overall policy goals described in this section to the individual departmental goals and objectives included in Section 6. Table 19 — Relationship Between Commission and Departmental Goals Management Services Executive Management X X X . Administration Legislative Affairs & Communications X X X Finance Regional Programs Planning and Programming X X X Rail Maintenance and Operations X X Public and Specialized Transit X X Commuter Assistance X X Motorist Assistance . X X Capital Project Development & Delivery X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X ^X X X X X X X X X Riverside Coon Transportation Commission Mtn ad Budget Process Summary The budget is the primary performance tool used to measure and control accountability of public agencies for taxpayer dollars. The budget communicates to all stakeholders (i.e., elected officials, regional agencies, and citizens) how the investment they made will be put to use by providing detailed information on the specifics of resource allocation and expenditures. Progress is monitored on a monthly basis, and revisions and updates are made as deemed necessary to reflect changing dynamics and accommodate unplanned requests. This results in a budget document that is useful and meaningful as a benchmark against which to evaluate government accomplishments and/or challenges and to assess compliance with fiscal accountability. Unlike many governments that provide direct services to the general public, the Commission has the overall responsibility of managing transportation planning and funding for Riverside County. As a result its budget, in terms of dollars, is comprised primarily of capital -related programs and projects; the operating component of the budget is related to multimodal programs (commuter and motorist assistance services, rail operations, and transit planning). Management services, which consist of executive management, administration, legislative affairs and communications, and finance, provide support to both capital and operating programs and projects. Chart 7 depicts the organization of the Commission's oversight and management functions. The budget process consists of six primary tasks conducted in phases throughout the fiscal year. Chart 6 illustrates the budget process for the development of the FY 2012/13 budget and monitoring of the FY 2011/12 budget. A summary of each task is described below. Chart 6 — Budget Process ID Task Name Duration 2011 2012 J I A I S I O I N I D J I F IMI A IMI J I 1 Short Term Strategic Direction Phase 140 days _ , — 2 Resource Identification and Allocation Phase 200 days 3 Needs Assessment Phase ' 120 days 4 Development and Review Phase 150 days 5 Adoption and Implementation Phase 45 days 6 Budget Roles and Responsibilities 365 days Short -Term Strategic Direction Phase The first phase of the budget process is to determine the direction of the Commission in the short-term and to integrate this with the Commission's long-term goals and objectives, including the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan as discussed in Section 6.3. Annually a workshop is held for the Board to evaluate and determine where the Commission plans to be and what it desires to accomplish over the next five to ten years. Annual reviews allow for timely responsiveness to any . significant political, legislative, or economic developments that may occur locally, statewide, or nationally. Staff then adjusts its course based on the long-term strategic direction of the policy makers. Staff convenes in early January to both assess actual results, compared to the current year budget, and map changes in strategy for the ensuing fiscal year by reviewing and, if necessary, redefining departmental mission statements and setting goals. Those goals, upon review by the Board, become the Commission's short-term strategic direction. Chart 7 — Functional Organization Chart FY 2012/13 Multimodal Programs Board of Commissioners Pol_Committrsjs • W RC Programs and Projects ERC Programs and Projects • Budget & Implementation Advgory_Committem •Technical Advisory .Citizens Advisory J Administration Executive Committee Legal Counsel Executive Management I Legislative Affairs & Communications Capital Project Development & DePvery Finance Resource Identification and Allocation Phase Simultaneous with the short-term strategic direction phase, staff focuses on what funding sources are available and what monies are estimated as carryover from the current year. Additionally, the Commission's fund balances, that is the excess of fund assets over fund liabilities, are analyzed for available appropriation in the following fiscal year. In actuality, resource identification occurs throughout the year, but it is finalized in the upcoming fiscal year budget. Amounts to be borrowed are determined as parts of the long-term strategic planning process, but such amounts are adjusted in the annual budget to reflect more current information. Needs Assessment Phase Staff and consultants evaluate what projects and studies need to be accomplished. Project priority and sequencing set in the long-term strategic plan are the top candidates for budget submission. However, priorities may have changed due to economic necessities or political realities, resulting in projects being rescheduled by acceleration or postponement. New projects may be added or existing priorities deleted based on Commission direction. Development and Review Phase Using all the data and information gathered from the previously mentioned stages, department managers submit their desired budgets to the Finance Department. The information, along with staff and overhead allocations, is compiled into a preliminary or draft budget. After review by the Executive Director and inclusion of the desired changes, the draft budget is presented to the Board for input. Adoption and Implementation Phase The proposed budget is submitted to the Commission at its May meeting. A hearing is scheduled to allow for public comment on the proposed budget. The Commission may choose, after public hearing, to adopt the budget or to request additional information and/or changes to the budget. The budget must be adopted no later than June 15 of each year. Upon adoption by the Commission, the budget is entered into the accounting system effective July 1 for the next fiscal year. Budget Roles and Responsibilities Involvement in the budget permeates all staffing levels, as presented in Chart 8, at the Commission from clerical support staff to policy makers. Each program manager develops a detailed line item budget that consists of the operating and/or capital components. Those budgets, by program, are submitted to the department director for review and concurrence. The department managers submit their budgets to the Chief Financial Officer by mid -March. The Finance Department compiles the department budgets. Both the capital and operating budgets are combined into the draft budget for the entire Commission. The Chief Financial Officer and Executive Director review the entire budget for overall consistency with both the short- and long-term strategic direction of the Commission, appropriateness of funding sources for the identified projects and programs, and reasonableness of the operating and capital budget expenditures. Expenditure activities of the funds are controlled at the budgetary unit, which is the financial responsibility level (General, Measure A, Motorist Assistance, LTF, STA, TUMF, Capital Projects, and Debt Service Funds) for each function (i.e., administration, programs, intergovernmental distributions, debt service, capital outlay, and other financing uses). These functions provide the legal level of budgetary control (i.e., the level at which expenditures cannot legally exceed the appropriated amount). Budget -to -actual reports are available to program managers and directors on a real-time basis through the ERP system for informational and management purposes, including identification and evaluation of any significant budget variations. During the fiscal year management has the discretion to transfer budgeted amounts within the financial responsibility unit according to function or may provide support for supplemental budget appropriations requests. Supplemental budget requests require the authorization of the Commission. The Commission may take action at any monthly meeting to amend the budget. In some years, the Finance Department may compile miscellaneous requests and submit a budget appropriations adjustment at mid -year to the Commission for approval. Those budget amendments approved by the Commission are incorporated into the budget, as they occur, and are reflected in the CAFR in the final budget amounts reported in the budgetary schedules. Chart 8 — Staff Organization Chart FY 2012/13 Chief Financial Officer Procurement Administrator rt?ilfir •�I;1�ru�,T AccountingSenior Administrative Supervisor.: Assistant Accounting Administrative Assistant — Technician (2) (3) — Accounting Assistant — Accounting Clerk Senior Office Assistant Legal Counsel Board of Commissioners Executive Director Deputy Executive Director Multimodal Services Director rf nbSti r Staff Analyst Staff Analyst Project Development Director ��iiGi'l!rli7Tt. V-Eseia-cargir.brit � Senior, Staff Analyst, 'Staff Analyst Project Deli eryDirector Senior Staff Analyst Staff Analyst Toll Program Director Riverskle County Transportation Commission Fund Budgets Budgetary. Basis The Commission accounts for its budgeted governmental funds using the modified accrual basis of accounting and the current financial resources measurement focus. The basis of accounting is the same as the basis of budgeting. Revenues are recognized as soon as they are both measurable and available to meet current year obligations. Revenues are considered to be available when they are guaranteed as to receipt, based on expenditure of funds (i.e., government matching funds), or certain to be received within 180 days of the end of the fiscal year. Expenditures are generally recorded when a liability is incurred; however, debt service expenditures are recorded when the payment is due. Total sources and uses by governmental fund type for the FY 2012/13 budget are shown in Chart 9. Chart 9 —Total Sources and Uses by Governmental Fund Type FY 2012/13 ■ Total Sources 1% ■ Total Uses 2% 17 Total Sources 73% Q Total Uses 39% Fund Structure ■ Total Sources 1% ■ Total Uses 3% ■ General Fund ■ Special Revenue Funds Capital Projects Funds ■ Debt Service Fund ■ Total Sources 25% ■ Total Uses 56% There are 27 funds (Chart 10) that account for the Commission's budgeted resources and are categorized into four governmental fund types: General fund, special revenue funds, capital projects funds, and Debt Service fund. All of the Commission's funds are budgeted. There are three funds reported in the General fund and 21 in the special revenue funds. Two capital projects funds are used to account for capital project expenditures financed with short - or long-term debt proceeds. In addition, the Commission has one Debt Service fund to account for debt -related activity. Chart 10 — Budgeted Funds Structure FY 2012/13 S ecjal ReVenue:Ftin . s , „ tapitajil:rgie0s;F.uridS • • :••• •:, Debt SerUace Fund • ".'.. ••••• „ • General Fund Overview The General fund of the Commission is used to account for all activities not legally required or designated by Board action to be accounted for separately. For many public agencies, the General fund is the largest fund; however, it is less significant for the Commission. The Commission's largest revenue source is Measure A, a locally levied sales tax that legally must be accounted for separately in special revenue funds. In addition to Commission administration and general operations, other General fund activities include commuter rail operations as well as planning and programming. The FY 2012/13 budget for the General fund is presented in Table 20, followed by a discussion of significant components of the budget. Table 20 - General Fund FY 2011- 2013 FY 30/11 FY 11/12 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Revenues Measure A Sales Tax $ 2,700,000 $ 2,700,000 $ 2,700,000 $ 2,700,000 $ 0% Federal Reimbursements 299,600 30,500 7,000 470,000 439,500 1441% State Reimbursements 2,012,700 663,000 484,000 910,000 - 247,000 37% Local Reimbursements 314,100 - 221,800 225,200 225,200 N/A Other Revenue 254,300 187,200 - (187,200) -100% Investment Income 62,500 66,600 48,900 67,900 1,300 2% TOTAL Revenues 5,643,200 3,647,300 3,461,700 4,373,100 725,800 20% Expenditures Personnel Salary and Benefits 3,227,700 3,304,600 2,856,900 3,350,800 46,200 1% Professional and Support Professional Services 2,530,800 2,563,500 1,740,000 2,687,300 123,800 5% Support Costs 2,737,900 3,141,000 3,052,600 3,328,500 187,500 6% TOTAL Professional and Support Costs 5,268,700 5,704,500 4,792,600 6,015,800 311,300 5% Projects and Operations Program Operations - General 1,630,700 1,465,900 1,405,800 1,394,800 (71,100) -5% Construction 500,000 - N/A Right of Way/Land 28,400 - - N/A Operating and Capital Disbursements 12,228,500 23,077,500 20,185,600 12,939,700 (10,137,800) -44% Special Studies 402,800 690,000 200,000 760,000 70,000 10% TOTAL Projects and Operations 14,790,400 25,233,400 21,791,400 15,094,500 (10,138,900) -40% Debt Service Principal Payments 23,200 N/A Interest Payments 2,000 N/A Cost of Issuance 52,200 N/A TOTAL Debt Service 77,400 - - N/A Capital Outlay 69,000 210,200 33,700 205,700 (4,500) -2% TOTAL Expenditures 23,433,200 34,452,700 29,474,600 24,666,800 (9,785,900) -28% Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures (17,790,000) (30,805,400) (26,012,900) (20,293,700) 10,511,700 -34% Other Financing Sources (Uses) Transfers In 18,053,000 30,955,100 27,552,700 19,447,400 (11,507,700) -37% Transfers Out (9,200) 9,200 -100% Net Financing Sources (Uses) 18,053,000 30,945,900 27,552,700 19,447,400 (11,498,500) -37% Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures and Other Financing Sources (Uses) Beginning Fund Balance ENDING FUND BALANCE 263,000 140,500 1,539,800 (846,300) (986,800) -702% 12,709,100 12,972,100 12,972,100 14,511,900 1,539,800 12% $ 12,972,100 $ 13,112,600 $ 14,511,900 $ 13,665,600 $ 553,000 4% The sources for the General fund (Chart 11) consist of allocations from Measure A sales tax revenues; various other federal, state and local reimbursements for planning activities and commuter rail station maintenance; investment income; transfers from LTF, TUMF, and motorist services for administration; transfers of LTF sales tax revenues for planning, programming, and monitoring (PPM) activities; transfers of LTF Article 4 allocations for commuter rail transit operations and capital; and other transfers for rail station maintenance of park and ride facilities. Chart 11— General Fund Sources FY 2012/13 Measure A Sales Tax 11% Federal Reimbursements 2% State Reimbursements 4% Local Reimbursements 1% Investment Income 0% Measure A sales tax revenues allocated for administration of $2,700,000 are unchanged from the prior year. The administrative allocation may be adjusted at mid -year based on required expenditures, but in no event will exceed four percent (4%) of total Measure A revenues (including administrative salaries and benefits). Federal reimbursements primarily represent funding for commuter rail station landscaping. State reimbursements include STIP revenues to fund PPM activities, which may vary annually. Local reimbursements represent reimbursements from other local agencies related to a portion of the security costs at the commuter rail stations. LTF sales tax revenues from the Local Transportation Fund, a special revenue fund, are allocated and transferred to the General fund for administration, planning and programming, and rail transit operations and capital for the following purposes: • Administration allocations from LTF sales tax revenues have remained unchanged at $700,000 in FY 2011/12 and FY 2012/13. • Planning allocations are set by law at three percent (3%) of estimated LTF sales tax revenues. The FY 2011/12 revised budget of $2,139,000 includes the effect of the mid -year projection adjustment. This adjustment usually includes the unapportioned carryover amount, which is not determined until after the prior year's fiscal year end, and revised revenue projections. The FY 2012/13 budget for planning allocations is $1,950,000. • Transit funding for commuter rail, which is tied to sales tax revenues, is based on operating and capital needs to the extent that revenues and reserved fund balance are available. The FY 2012/13 budget includes $13,935,000 in LTF and $151,300 in Measure A Commuter Assistance allocations primarily to fund operating and capital contribution expenditures to SCRRA as well as rail ,station operations and maintenance. The FY 2011/12 budget was $21,728,000 and included a significant capital contribution for rail cars. • Allocations aggregating $4,453,900 for local jurisdictions' grade separation projects were included in the FY 2011/12 General fund revised budget. The FY 2012/13 budget includes LTF allocations of $1,774,700 for grade separation projects. Administrative transfers in from TUMF and motorist assistance of $936,400 in FY 2012/13 decreased from $1,934,200 in FY 2011/12. Chart 12 — General Fund Uses FY 2012/13 Personnel Salary and Capital Outlay Benefits 1% 14% Professional Services 11% Support Costs 13% General fund uses are depicted in Chart 12. Personnel salary and benefits expenditures increased 1% because of changes in FTE allocations, set -aside pool of 3% for cost of living adjustments, and 3% for merit -based salary increases. Professional and support costs increased 5% due to increased professional services required for administration, finance, and rail operations and support services for utilities, repairs, and maintenance at the commuter rail stations. Project and operations expenditures decreased 40%, primarily because the FY 2011/12 budget included $9,975,000 in rail capital contributions to SCRRA and $4,453,900 in allocations for local jurisdictions' grade separation projects. The FY 2012/13 budget includes no allocation for rail capital contributions and $1,774,700 for grade separation projects. Capital outlay expenditures decreased 2% due to the completion of the ERP system in FY 2011/12. Special Revenue Funds Overview The Commission's special revenue funds are legally restricted as to use for Measure A projects and programs, TUMF projects, motorist assistance services, and funding transit operations and capital in the County. The special revenue funds' budgets are summarized in Table 21, and individual budgets are presented in Tables 22 through 29 along with respective discussions. Table 21— Special Revenue Funds FY 2011— 2013 FY 10/11 Actual Revenues Measure A Sales Tax LTF Sales Tax STA Sales Tax Federal Reimbursements State Reimbursements Local Reimbursements TUMF Revenue Other Revenue Investment Income TOTAL Revenues Expenditures Personnel Salary and Benefits Professional and Support Professional Services Support Costs TOTAL Professional and Support Costs Projects and Operations Program Operations - General Engineering Construction Design Build Right of Way/Land Operating and Capital Disbursements Special Studies Local Streets and Roads Regional Arterials TOTAL Projects and Operations Capital Outlay TOTAL Expenditures Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures Other Financing Sources (Uses) Transfers In Transfers Out Net Financing Sources (Uses) Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures and Other Financing Sources (Uses) FY.11/12 FY 11/12 Revised Budget Projected $ 120,739,800 $ 60,772,800 17,436,000 15,799,100 903,300 9,157,900 2,067,500 2,388,600 229,265,000 2,640,800 9,558,800 833,500 10,392,300 8,923,800: 27,545,300 23,914,800 16,272,900 44,634,600 46,288,000 56,700 36,857,000 8,638,600 213,131,700 78,300 226,243,100 3,021,900 43,290,600 (45,816,800) (2,526,200) 121,300,000 $ 125,300,000 61,000,000 63,000,000 9,537,000 14,073,600 23,620,200 21,404,600 23,272,100 22,766,200 1,081,800 2,710,400 6,784,300 6,397,400 405,200 450,800 1,406,900 1,286,000 248,407,500 257,389,000. 3,272,300 3,648,400 14,585,600 11,294,800 1,927,900 1,554,400 16,513,500 12,849,200 15,361,100 12,651,900 41,568,800 25,243,200 39,877,600 30,670,100 14,438,000 11,000,000 71,127,000 52,588,000 86,469,800 57,008,000 80,000 80,000 36,025,000 38,166,600 16,262,000 17,409,200 321,209,300 244,817,000 306,000 , 307,000 341,301,100 261,621,600 (92,893,600) (4,232,600) 110,624,300 94,964,000 (86,334,100) (58,842,700) 24,290,200 36,121,300 FY 12/13 Budget 129,300,000 65,000,000 14,212,500 69,699,900 17,007,800 2,463,500 5,257,300 882,800 2,071,000 305,894,800 3,620,300 11,673,900 2,017,800 13,691,700 Dollar Change Percent Change $ 8,000,000 7% 4,000,000 7% 4,675,500 49% 46,079,700 195% (6,264,300) -27% 1,381,700 128% (1,527,000) -23% 477,600 118% 664,100 47% 57,487,300 23% 348,000 11% (2,911,700) -20% 89,900 5% (2,821,800) -17% 15,191,700 (169,400) -1% 23,993,500 (17,575,300) -42% 127,024,800 87,147,200 219% 29,050,000 14,612,000 101% 106,452,400 35,325,400 50% 84,299,300 (2,170,500) -3% 40,000 (40,000) -50% 39,357,000 3,332,000 9% 20,400,400 4,138,400 25% 445,809,100 124,599,800 39% 242,000 (64,000) -21% 463,363,100 122,062,000 36% (157,468,300) (64,574,700) 70% 150,092,900 (72,300,900) 77,792,000 39,468,600 36% 14,033,200 -16% 53,501,800 220% 495,700 (68,603,400) 31,888,700 Beginning Fund Balance 463,549,200 464,044,900 ENDING FUND BALANCE $ 464,044,900 $ 395,441,500 464,044,900 $ 495,933,600 $ - (79,676,300) (11,072,900) 16% 495,933,600 416,257,300 $ 31,888,700 a 7% 20,815,800 5% Measure A and LTF sales taxes, STA allocations, Western County TUMF, state budgetary allocations, and vehicle registration fees are all accounted for in the 21 special revenue funds. Federal, state, and local reimbursements and transfers in consisting principally of debt proceeds are used to supplement the Measure A sales tax revenues. Chart 13 illustrates the various special revenue fund sources. Chart 13 — Special Revenue Funds Sources FY 2012/13 Investment Income 1% TUMF Revenue 1% Local Reimbursements 1% State Reimbursements 4% The special revenue funds' resources are expended on County highway, rail, regional arterial, and new corridors engineering, right of way acquisition, and construction; local streets and roads maintenance, repair, and construction; economic development incentives; bond financing; bicycle and pedestrian facilities; education and incentive programs to encourage use of alternate modes of transportation; special social service transportation programs; public transit operations and capital needs; and motorist towing and freeway call box assistance. As shown in Chart 14, projects and operations expenditures represent the primary use of special revenue fund resources. Chart 14 — Special Revenue Funds Uses FY 2012/13 Transfers Out 14% Capital Outlay 0% Personnel Salary and Benefits 1%_ Professional Services 2% SupportCosts 0% fi Measure A Special Revenue Funds Of the special revenue funds, 16 are funded primarily with Measure A sales tax revenue which is allocated to the three geographic areas of the County (Chart 15). The Measure A funds are comprised of two 1989 Measure A and ten 2009 Measure A Western County operating funds, three 2009 Measure A Coachella Valley operating funds, and one 2009 Measure A Palo Verde Valley operating fund. Chart 15 — Measure A Sales Tax Revenues by Geographic Area Palo Verde Valley 1% Since the 1989 Measure A terminated on June 30, 2009, the remaining 1989 Measure A Western County operating funds will be closed upon the completion of the specific highway and rail projects. With the commencement of the 2009 Measure A on July 1, 2009, the 14 operating funds will be in existence for the 30-year term. These funds account for all Measure A project and program expenditures and transfers of debt service for capital projects. The Measure A special revenue funds expend monies on capital construction and improvements to highways, commuter rail, regional arterials, new corridors, and local streets and roads. Funding is also reserved for commuter assistance, public and specialized transit, and economic development incentives programs as well as bond financing costs. The Commission is a self-help county, and, as such on major highway projects, the Commission supplements the State's spending. Upon completion of most highway projects, Caltrans takes over the maintenance and operations of the projects. All revenues from the Measure A sales tax have been pledged as security for the Commission's senior sales tax revenue bonds and commercial paper notes. Debt service on the bonds is recorded in the Debt Service fund, and most of the resources for the cash payments are provided through transfers out by the Measure A special revenue funds for the 2009 Measure A bonds. Debt service for the commercial paper notes is recorded in a capital projects fund, as the notes will be paid from 2009 Measure A sales tax revenues or retired with proceeds from sales tax revenue bonds. Western County Measure A Operating Funds The Western County Measure A Operating special revenue funds account for Western County's approximately 76% share of the Measure A sales tax. As demonstrated in Table 22, most of the Commission's reimbursements flow through these funds, since the sales tax leverages state and federal dollars. Table 22 — Western County Measure A Operating Funds FY 2011— 2013 • FY 10/11 FY.11/12 FY 11/12 Actual Revised Budget 'Projected Sources Measure A Sales Tax Bond Financing Commuter Assistance Economic Development Incentives Highways Local Streets and Roads New Corridors Public Bus Transit Rail Regional Arterials Specialized Transit Total Measure A Federal Reimbursements State Reimbursements Local Reimbursements TUMF Revenue Other Revenue Investment Income Transfers In TOTAL Sources Uses Personnel Salary and Benefits Professional Services Support Costs Projects and Operations Program Operations - General Engineering Construction Design Build Right of Way/Land Operating and Capital Disbursements Special Studies Local Streets and Roads TOTAL Projects and Operations Capital Outlay - Transfers Out TOTAL Uses $ 7,334,500 1,358,300 1,086,600 27,708,300 26,350,000 10,051,000 1,385,400 5,541,700 8,149,500 2,309,000 91,274,300 17,436,000 12,362,200 151,500 2,664,900 1,372,300 1,318,200 32,006,500 158,585,900 2,340,100 8,457,200 397,200 6,321,500 20,734,500 21,262,800 16,272,900 27,142,500 4,345,800 56,700 25,829,000 121,965,700 78,300 26,889,400 160,127,900 $ 7,378,000 1,366,000 1,093,000 27,871,000 26,505,000 10,110,000 1,394,000 5,574,000 8,198,000 2,323,000 91,812,000 23,257,200 19,872,100 916,100 2,784,300 405,200 894,400 89,474,300 229,415,600 2,840,500 13,339,000 1,324,600 11,476,700 34,431,400 33,068,000 14,438,000 60,478,000 4,771,200 80,000 26,050,600 184,793,900 306,000 35,678,600 238,282,600 $ 7,621,000 1,411,000 1,129,000 28,790,000 27,380,000 10,444,000 1,440,000 5,758,000 8,469,000 2,399,000 94,841,000 21,404,600 19,176,200 2,101,700 2,397,400 450,800 666,000 89,345,400 230,383,100 3,254,100 10,158,600 964,400 8,806,600 20,175,800 27,134,300 11,000,000 39,758,300 3,752,800 80,000 26,925,600 137,633,400 307,000 36,065,000 188,382,500 FY 12/13 Budget $ 7,884,000 1,460,000 1,168,000 29,786,000 28,325,000 10,805,000 1,489,000 5,957,000 8,761,000 2,483,000 98,118,000 69,699,900 13,457,800 1,933,900 1,257,300 882,800 1,392,800 130,834,000 317,576,500 3,206,500 10,555,800 1,138,900 11,882,800 20,041,500 99,718,800 29,050,000 95,943,700 5,189,000 40,000 27,870,000 289,735,800 242,000 33,924,800 338,803,800 Dollar Percent Change Change . $ 506,000 7% 94,000 7% 75,000 7% 1,915,000 7% 1,820,000 7% 695,000 7% 95,000 7% 383,000 7% 563,000 7% 160,000 7% 6,306,000 .7% 46,442,700 200% (6,414,300) -32% 1,017,800 111% (1,527,000) -55% 477,600 118% 498,400 56% 41,359,700 46% 88,160,900 38% 366,000 13% (2,783,200) -21% (185,700) -14% 406,100 4% (14,389,900) -42% 66,650,800 202% 14,612,000 101% 35,465,700 59% 417,800 9% (40,000) -50% 1,819,400 7% 104,941,900 57% (64,000) -21% (1,753,800) -5% 100,521,200 42% Excess. (deficiency) of Sources over (under) Uses $ (1,542,000) $ (8,867,000) $ 42,000,600 $ (21,227,300) $ (12,360,300) 139% The budgeted Western County Measure A sales tax revenues reflect a 7% increase compared to the prior year. Taxable sales changes between jurisdictions within the County periodically affect the geographic allocation formula from year to year. Federal reimbursements for highway and rail projects and the commuter assistance program, which are higher than the FY 2011/12 budget, relate to funding from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), FTA, Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ), Surface Transportation Program (STP), and earmarks. The increase in federal reimbursements is primarily attributable to the commencement of construction on the Perris Valley Line project. State reimbursements are lower compared to the FY 2011/12 budget and reflect fluctuations in STIP and Proposition 1B funding for various highway and rail projects. Local reimbursement increases are attributable to the commuter assistance program and the Perris Valley Line and other rail projects. TUMF revenue represents reimbursements from TUMF zone funds administered by WRCOG for the 74/215 interchange construction and right of way acquisition. Other revenue is related to property management lease revenues, which increased as a result of properties acquired in connection with the SR-91 corridor improvement project. Investment income is higher compared to the prior year budget due to higher ending projected cash balances. As in prior years, a significant portion of transfers in consists of debt proceeds of $129,479,000 primarily from sales tax revenue bonds and commercial paper notes to fund 2009 Measure A Western County highway projects. Other significant transfers in include funding from STA and debt service reserve funds aggregating $900,000 for rail capital projects and $455,000 for regional arterials in accordance with the 2009 Measure A related to a city not eligible to receive the local street and roads funds. Measure A Western County professional services expenditures in FY 2012/13 consist of general legal services for the various programs and capital projects, specialized legal and financial advisory services related to the SR-91 and 1-15 corridor improvement projects, other professional services for rail capital and commuter assistance projects, and liquidity facility and professional fees related to the Commission's debt programs. Reductions in liquidity facility fees for the commercial paper program and the variable rate bonds issued in 2009 (2009 Bonds) as a result of substituted or amended agreements, respectively, account for a significant portion of the 21% decrease in professional fees. Support costs comprise operations for the commuter assistance program and property management services. General program operations comprise the program management with outside consultants for the highway and rail capital and commuter assistance programs, permits required for capital projects, and subsidies and certificates for . the commuter assistance program. Such levels of operations typically fluctuate as project activities transition to another phase. Many of the Commission's Western County rail and highway projects funded by Measure A have been in the project development phase for several years and are now near or in the construction phase. Accordingly, engineering expenditures are expected to decrease 42%, while construction and design -build activities are anticipated to increase 202% and 101%, respectively. Projects still in the engineering and/or final design phase but at a decreased level of costs include the SR-91 and I- 15 corridor improvements, various Western County TUMF regional arterials, and Perris Valley Line. The 74/215 interchange and 1-215 corridor improvements south segment, which commenced construction in June 2010 and March 2011, respectively, will continue through FY 2012/13. Several Western County TUMF regional arterial projects will be under construction in FY 2012/13. After many years of project development, the Perris Valley Line project is anticipated to begin construction in FY 2012/13, subject to obtaining final environmental and FTA approvals. Major design -build activities related to the SR-91 corridor improvements during FY 2012/13 include the procurement of a design -build contractor; federal TIFIA loan application; utility and railroad agreements; and the agency, legal, financial, and engineering consultant staff to support these activities. Right of way acquisition is another major project activity for which the process can be lengthy. Significant right of way acquisitions will benefit the SR-91 corridor improvements, SR-91 HOV lanes, various Western County TUMF regional arterial, and Perris Valley Line projects. Operating and capital disbursements are comparable to the FY 2011/12 budget and relate to Western County intercity bus service and specialized transit expenditures funded by Measure A. Local streets and roads comprise turnback payments to local jurisdictions and increased as a result of the higher Measure A sales tax revenues. Capital outlay includes equipment and improvements for the rail and commuter assistance programs. Significant transfers out include funding for debt service payments of $16,000,000; reimbursements of $16,889,600 of commercial paper proceeds for the 91/71 interchange improvements and 1-215 corridor improvement —south and central segment projects; rail operating and capital needs of $151,300 from 2009 Measure A Western County commuter assistance funds; 1989 Measure A Western County highway fund contribution of $386,900 for a County TUMF project on SR-79; 2009 Measure A Western County local streets and roads fund allocation of $455,000 to 2009 Measure A Western County regional arterials fund; and $42,000 for CHP freeway service patrol on the 1-215 corridor improvements south segment project. Coachella Valley Measure A Operating Funds These special revenue funds account for Coachella Valley's 23% share of the Measure A sales tax. Table 23 - Coachella Valley Measure A Operating Funds FY 2011- 2013 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11/12 Actual Revised Budget Projected Sources Measure A Sales Tax Highways & Regional Arterials Local Streets and Roads Specialized Transit Total Measure A Investment Income Transfers In TOTAL Sources Uses Personnel Salary and Benefits Professional Services Support Costs Projects and Operations Program Operations - General Construction Operating and Capital Disbursements Local Streets and Roads Regional Arterials TOTAL Projects and Operations Transfers Out TOTAL Uses Excess (deficiency) of Sources over (under) Uses $ 14,299,400 $ 14,311,000 10,009,500 10,017,000 4,289,800 4,293,000 28,598,700 28,621,000 38,700 2,100 1,678,200 30,315,600 28,623,100 1,400 100 2,600 4,000 $ 14,783,000 10,345,000 4,435,000 29,563,000 25,800 29,588,800 1,900 3,000 FY 12/13 Budget Dollar Change $ 15,150,000 $ 839,000 10,604,000 587,000 4,545,000 252,000 30,299,000 1,678,000 12,600 10,500 30,311,600 1,688,500 2,700 3,500 Percent Change 6% 6% 6% 6% 500% N/A 6% 100 4% (500) -13% N/A 17,300 26,000 6,000 6,800 (19,200) -74% 1,631,100 N/A 3,773,000 4,343,800 4,256,900 4,500,000 156,200 4% 10,121,800 9,343,600 10,345,000 10,604,000 1,260,400 13% 8,638,600 16,047,000 17,409,200 20,400,400 4,353,400 27% 24,181,800 29,760,400 32,017,100 35,511,200 5,750,800 19% 2,869,200 - - (2,869,200) -100% 24,183,300 32,636,200 32,022,000 35,517,400 2,881,200 9% $ 6,132,300 $ (4,013,100) $ (2,433,200) $ (5,205,800) $ (1,192,700) 30% As shown in Table 23, overall budgeted Coachella Valley Measure A sales tax revenues increased 6% due to revised Measure A sales tax revenue projections. Taxable sales changes among the geographic areas impact the geographic allocation formula from year to year. The Coachella Valley operating and capital disbursements represent specialized transit funds distributed to SunLine Transit Agency (SunLine) for transit operations. Local streets and roads comprise turnback payments to local jurisdictions and are directly affected by changes in Measure A sales tax revenues. Regional arterial projects are highway and regional arterial projects managed by CVAG. Transfers out budgeted in FY 2011/12 were related to debt service for 2009 Measure A debt issued for CVAG highway and regional arterial and city of Indio local streets and roads projects under advance funding agreements. In order to be consistent with the accounting in the financial records, the classification of these debt service expenditures are reflected in projects and operations beginning in FY 2012/13. Palo Verde Valley Measure A Operating Fund This special revenue fund accounts for Palo Verde Valley's 1% share of the Measure A sales tax. Table 24 - Palo Verde Valley Measure A Operating Fund FY 2011- 2013 FY 10/11 FY'11/12 FY 11/12 ' Sources Measure A Sales Tax Local Streets and Roads Investment Income TOTAL Sources Uses Local Streets and Roads TOTAL Projects and Operations Transfers Out TOTAL Uses ' FY 12/13 Dollar Percent 'Actual ' Revised. Budget Projected Budget • Change Change $ 866,800 $ 867,000 $ 896,000 $ 883,000 $ 16,000 2% 200 - (200) -100% 866,800 867,200 896,000 883,000 15,800 2% 906,200 630,800 896,000 883,000 906,200 630,800 896,000 883,000 - 236,200 252,200 40% 252,200 40% (236,200) -100% Excess (deficiency) of Sources over (under) Uses $ 906,200 867,000 896,000. 883,000 16,000 2% (39,400) $ 200 $ - $ - $ (200) -100% The Measure A sales tax revenues are affected by the impact of shifts in taxable sales changes on the geographic allocation formula as well as updated revenue projections. In the Palo Verde Valley as noted in Table 24, expenditures are for local streets and roads; however, transfers out in FY 2011/12 were related to debt service for the city of Blythe local streets and roads projects under an advance funding agreement. These debt service expenditures are reflected in projects and operations beginning in FY 2012/13 to be consistent with the financial records. Non -Measure A Special Revenue Funds The non -Measure A special revenue funds account for LTF disbursements; TUMF Western County project costs; motorist assistance expenditures for towing service, freeway call boxes, and 1E511 system operations; and transit disbursements from STA. These activities are budgeted in the LTF, TUMF, FSP and SAFE, and STA special revenue funds, respectively. Local Transportation Fund The LTF special revenue fund derives its revenue from one quarter of one cent of the state sales tax that is returned to source and provides for funding of public transit operations in the County, bicycle and pedestrian facility projects, planning, and administration (Table 25). Table 25 — Local Transportation Fund FY 2011— 2013 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 - Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Sources LTF Sales Tax $ 60,772,800 $ 61,000,000 $ 63,000,000 65,000,000 $ 4,000,000 7% Investment Income 359,800 297,500 251,600 347,800 50,300 17% TOTAL Sources 61,132,600 61,297,500 63,251,600 65,347,800 4,050,300 7% Uses Projects and Operations Operating and Capital Disbursements 37,363,800 57,887,300 46,548,300 60,505,300 2,618,000 5% TOTAL Projects and Operations 37,363,800 57,887,300 46,548,300 60,505,300 2,618,000 5% Transfers Out 16,434,500 17,877,900 15,483,500 18,359,700 481,800 3% TOTAL Uses 53,798,300 75,765,200 62,031,800 78,865,000 3,099,800 4% Excess (deficiency) of Sources over (under) Uses $ 7,334,300 $ (14,467,700) $ 1,219,800 $ (13,517,200) $ 950,500 -7% The LTF sales tax revenue in FY 2012/13 is projected to increase 7% from the prior year. Investment income is expected to increase slightly due to higher ending projected cash balances in FY 2012/13. In FY 2012/13, approximately 82% and 18% of the LTF transit expenditures of $58,631,800 are for operating and capital purposes, respectively. LTF operating allocations consist of 78% to Western County, 20% to Coachella Valley, and 2% to Palo Verde Valley public bus operators. While LTF transit allocations are typically for operations, a significant portion is budgeted in FY 2012/13 for the Riverside Transit Agency's (RTA) bus replacement program. The actual allocations will not be approved until July 2012. Other operating and capital disbursements include allocations for SB821 bicycle and pedestrian projects of $1,404,000 and planning and administration allocations of $469,500 to the County Auditor -Controller and SCAG. Transfers out include allocations to the Commission's General fund for planning and administration of $2,650,000, rail operations and station maintenance of $13,935,000, and grade separation projects of $1,774,700. Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Fund The TUMF fund accounts for the Commission's share of developer fee assessments on new residential and commercial developments in Western County for regional arterials and CETAP corridors (Table 26). TUMF revenue is projected to remain unchanged due to the weak housing market. The transfers in for FY 2012/13 relate to funding from the 1989 Measure A Western County highways fund of $386,900 for the County's SR-79 regional arterial project and TUMF CETAP of $17,835,000 for the city of Temecula's regional arterial projects along 1-15. Table 26 — Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Fund FY 2011— 2013 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11/12. Actual Revised Budget Projected, Sources TUMF Revenue Other Revenue Investment Income Transfers In TOTAL Sources Uses Personnel Salary and Benefits Professional Services Support Costs Projects and Operations Program Operations - General Engineering Construction Right of Way/Land Regional Arterials TOTAL Projects and Operations Transfers Out TOTAL Uses Excess (deficiency) of Sources over (under) Uses $ 6,493,000 $ 4,000,000 $ 695,100 426,000 83,700 8,699,300 20,000,000 16,313,400 24,083,700 195,600 317,000 452,000 333,600 600 3,700 243,200 315,300 6,810,800 7,137,400 1,020,900 6,809,600 17,492,100 10,649,000 215,000 FY 12/13. - Dollar Budget" Change 4,000,000 $ 4,000,000 $ 187,400 78,600 4,818,600 18,221,900 9,006,000 22,300,500 195,500 217,200 2,100 253,500 5,067,400 3,535,800 12,829,700 235,200 397,100 4,300 282,100 3,952,000 27,246,000 10,508,700 (5,100) (1,778,100) (1,783,200) Percent Change 0% N/A -6% -9% -7% (81,800) -26% 63,500 19% 600 16% (33,200) -11% (3,185,400) -45% 20,436,400 300% (140,300) -1% (215,000) -100% 25,567,000 421,700 26,636,900 25,126,300 27,619,900 53,400,500 21,686,400 5,619,900 27,721,100 41,988,800 18;445,100 61,070,500 16,862,500 67% (9,174,800) -33% 7,670,000 14% $ (10,323,500) $ (29,316,800) $ (18,715,100) $ (38,770,000) $ (9,453,200) 32% Personnel salary and benefits have decreased due to the allocation of FTEs, and professional costs have increased 19% due to legal services related to property acquisitions. Projects and operations costs increased 67%, as many regional arterial projects move into the right of way acquisition and construction phases. Approximately 67% of the projects and operations costs is attributable to programmed regional arterial projects, including the SR-79 realignment project. The remaining 33% relates to CETAP projects such as the Mid County Parkway preliminary engineering and right of way acquisitions. Transfers out represent administrative allocations of $610,100 to the General fund and CETAP funding of $17,835,000 for two city of Temecula regional arterial projects along 1-15, which are within the CETAP Winchester to Temecula corridor limits. Freeway Service Patrol Fund The FSP fund accounts for the state and local resources provided to cover the costs of servicing stranded motorists in covered service areas and construction zones by means of towing, changing tires, and providing fuel (Table 27). The State's funding share of $2,100,000 is unchanged from the FY 2011/12 budget. Local reimbursements of $85,600 are related to towing service in construction zones .for Caltrans or city construction projects, respectively, on County highways. Transfers in represent Commission match funds of $995,000 from the SAFE special revenue fund and reimbursements of $42,000 from the 2009 Measure A Western County highway funds for construction FSP service related to the 1-215 corridor improvements south segment. Table 27 - Freeway Service Patrol Fund FY 2011- 2013 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11/12 Actual Revised Budget Projected Sources State Reimbursements $ 1,808,900 $ 2,100,000 $ 2,100,000 $ Local Reimbursements 102,700 103,700 103,700 Other Revenue 100 Investment Income 1,700 3,200 700 Transfers In 906,600 1,150,000 800,000 TOTAL Sources 2,820,000 3,356,900 3,004,400 FY 12/13 Budget 2,100,000 $ 85,600 1,900 1,037,000 3,224,500 Dollar Change Percent Change 0% (18,100) -17% N/A (1,300) -41% (113,000) -10% (132,400) -4% Uses Personnel Salary and Benefits 58,300 59,000 59,000 50,400 (8,600) -15% Professional Services 25,700 37,000 44,000 37,000 0% Support Costs 42,000 61,400 50,800 49,900 (11,500) -19% Projects and Operations Program Operations - General 2,243,300 2,888,500 2,888,500 2,910,000 21,500 1% TOTAL Projects and Operations 2,243,300 2,888,500 2,888,500 2,910,000 21,500 1% Transfers Out 150,400 176,300 176,300 174,800 (1,500) -1% TOTAL Uses 2,519,700 3,222,200 3,218,600 3,222,100 (100) 0% Excess (deficiency) of Sources over (under) Uses $ 300,300 $ 134,700 $ (214,200) $ 2,400 $ (132,300) -98% Operating costs for towing services in FY 2012/13 are comparable to the FY 2011/12 budget. Transfers out are administrative allocations to the General fund. Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies Fund The SAFE fund accounts for the $1 per vehicle registration fee levied by the State on all registered vehicles within the County. It funds the installation and implementation of emergency aid call boxes located strategically on the highways throughout the County as well as the operations of the 1E511 system (Table 28). Table 28 - Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies Fund FY 2011- 2013 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11/12 Actual Revised Budget Projected Sources Federal Reimbursements State Reimbursements Local Reimbursements Investment Income TOTAL Sources Uses Personnel Salary and Benefits Professional Services Support Costs Projects and Operations Program Operations - General Construction TOTAL Projects and Operations Transfers Out TOTAL Uses Excess (deficiency) of Sources over (under) Uses $ - $ 1,628,000 649,100 32,100 2,309,200 45,400 623,900 393,600 98,500 363,000 1,300,000 62,000 23,800 1,748,800 53,200 872,000 537,900 $ - $ 1,490,000 505,000 13,700 2,008,700 137,900 872,000 537,100 FY 12/13 Budget - $ 1,450,000 444,000 21,100 1,915,100 125,500 680,500 824,700 654,600 697,300 110,000 60,000 Dollar Change (363,000) 150,000 382,000 (2,700) 166,300 72,300 (191,500) 286,800 Percent Change -100% 12% 616% -11% 10% 136% -22% 53% (544,600) -83% 60,000 N/A 98,500 1,080,800 2,242,200 654,600 938,000 3,055,700 697,300 938,000 3,182,300 170,000 1,146,500 2,947,200 (484,600) -74% 208,500 22% (108,500) -4% $ 67,000 $ (1,306,900) $ (1,173,600) $ (1,032,100) $ 274,800 -21% Local reimbursements represent the pass -through funds from SANBAG as its share of the 1E511 system operating costs and the recoveries from call box knockdowns, which service is provided by a collection agency. Personnel costs have increased $72,300 due to an increase in FTE allocations and salaries to manage the call box and 1E511 systems. The decrease in professional services is substantially offset by higher support costs due to increased 1E511 media ads. Projects and operations costs decreased as a result of the exclusion of the 1E511 Caltrans detection expansion project at the 60/91/215 interchange in FY 2012/13. The transfers out reflect a matching contribution to the State's contribution for towing services of $995,000 to the FSP special revenue fund and administrative allocations to the General fund of $151,500. State Transit Assistance Fund The STA fund accounts for the state budgetary allocation .of gas tax revenues designated for rail and bus transit operations and capital requirements (Table 29). The allocation is based on estimates of diesel fuel sales tax revenues provided by the Controller of the State of California, subject to an annual state budget appropriation. Due to the State's budget issues, the STA allocations were suspended periodically in prior years. Table 29 — State Transit Assistance Fund FY 2011— 2013 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Sources STA Sales Tax Investment Income TOTAL Sources - $ 9,537,000 $ 14,073,600 $ 14,212,500 $ 4,675,500 49% 212,100 102,000 140,800 216,200 114,200 112% 212,100 9,639,000 14,214,400 14,428,700 4,789,700 50% Uses Support Costs 300 - (300) -100% Projects and Operations Operating and Capital Disbursements 805,400 19,467,500 2,450,000 14,105,000 (5,362,500) -28% TOTAL Projects and Operations 805,400 19,467,500 2,450,000 14,105,000 (5,362,500) -28% Transfers Out 840,000 938,000 560,000 250,000 (688,000) -73% TOTAL Uses 1,645,400 20,405,800 3,010,000 14,355,000 (6,050,800) -30% Excess (deficiency) of Sources over (under) Uses $ (1,433,300) $ (10,766,800) $ 11,204,400 . $ 73,700 $ 10,840,500 -101% Investment income is expected to increase because of higher cash balances due to continued state allocations. The operating and capital disbursements consist of allocations for bus capital purposes. In FY 2012/13, 76% of the allocations are in Western County, 21% in Coachella Valley, and 3% in Palo Verde Valley. Transfers out represent rail capital allocations to the General fund. Similar to the LTRallocations, the actual STA allocations will not be approved until July 2012. Capital Projects Funds Overview The capital projects funds account for all debt proceeds from commercial paper notes and sales tax revenue bonds (Table 30). Table 30 - Capital Projects Funds 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 Local Reimbursements $ 2,304,900 $ - $ - $ - $ N/A Investment Income 1,814,200 168,800 1,950,300 5,103,600 4,934,800 2923% TOTAL Revenues 4,119,100 168,800 1,950,300 5,103,600 4,934,800 2923% Expenditures Professional and Support Professional Services 25,800 N/A TOTAL Professional and Support Costs 25,800 N/A Projects and Operations Engineering 2,552,900 319,100 319,100 N/A Construction 1,900,000 (1,900,000) -100% Right of Way/Land 5,000,000 1,947,100 3,024,100 (1,975,900) -40% TOTAL Projects and Operations 6,900,000 4,500,000 3,343,200 (3,556,800) -52% Debt Service Principal Payments 103,284,000 40,000,000 40,000,000 120,000,000 80,000,000 200% Interest Payments 4,942,900 225,000 11,000 433,000 208,000 92% Cost of Issuance 1,440,900 - N/A TOTAL Debt Service 109,667,800 40,225,000 40,011,000 120,433,000 80,208,000 199% Capital Outlay - - N/A TOTAL Expenditures 109,693,600 47,125,000 44,511,000 123,776,200 76,651,200 163% Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures (105,574,500) (46,956,200) (42,560,700) (118,672,600) (71,716,400) 153% Other Financing Sources.(Uses) Transfers In 103,284,000 6,442,700 29,038,700 136,889,600 130,446,900 2025% Transfers Out (137,859,800) (73,699,000) (64,349,000) (253,144,800) (179,445,800) 243% Debt Proceeds 170,000,000 38,000,000 60,000,000 1,220,172,000 1,182,172,000 3111% Bond Discount (967,500) N/A Net Financing Sources (Uses) 134,456,700 (29,256,300) 24,689,700 1,103,916,800 1,133,173,100 -3873% Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures and Other Financing Sources (Uses) 28,882,200 (76,212,500) (17,871,000) 985,244,200 1,061,456,700 -1393% Beginning Fund Balance ENDING FUND BALANCE 29,571,300 58,453,500 58,453,500 40,582,500 (17,871,000) -31% $ 58,453,500 $ (17,759,000) $ 40,582,500 $ 1,025,826,700 $ 1,043,585,700 -5876% As illustrated in the following charts, capital projects funds sources primarily consist of debt proceeds and transfers in (Chart 16), and the significant uses of the capital projects funds are retirement of commercial paper notes and transfers out (Chart 17). In 2005 a commercial paper program was established to advance project development and land and right of way acquisition related to the 2009 Measure A projects. The commercial paper program anticipates the issuance of sales tax revenue bonds to refinance the outstanding commercial paper notes. In FY 2010/11, the Commission issued $150,000,000 in sales tax revenue bonds (2010 Bonds) to retire all of the outstanding commercial paper notes and fund 2009 Measure A highway projects. During FY 2011/12, the Commission projected the issuance of $60,000,000 in commercial paper notes. In FY 2012/13, the Commission .expects to issue $100,000,000 in commercial paper notes prior to the SR-91 corridor improvement project financing, which is expected near the end of FY 2012/13. This financing assumes the issuance of $512,300,000 in sales tax revenue bonds (2013 Bonds) and $163,750,000 in toll revenue bonds as well as a $444,122,000 TIFIA loan. Chart 16 — Capital Projects Funds Sources FY 2012/13 Investment1 Income \ 0% Transfers In 10% Transfers in represent bond proceeds of $120,000,000 to retire outstanding commercial paper notes and the reimbursement of $16,889,600 of commercial paper proceeds used on the 1-215 corridor improvement —south and central segment projects. Chart 17 — Capital Projects Funds Uses FY 2012/13 Projects and Operations 1% Commercial paper proceeds will continue to fund Coachella Valley land mitigation and a portion of the highway and regional arterial projects subject to an advance funding agreement with CVAG as well as debt service interest on outstanding commercial paper notes. In FY 2012/13, commercial paper and bond proceeds of $129,479,000 will be transferred out to the 2009 Measure A Western County Highway special revenue funds for capital projects. Additionally, $120,000,000 of bond proceeds will be transferred to retire commercial paper notes, and $3,665,800 of annual debt service payments received under advance funding agreements recorded in the capital projects funds will be transferred out to the Debt Service fund for the payment of debt. Debt Service Fund Overview Under the 2009 Measure A program, as amended by Measure K in November 2010, the Commission has the authority to issue sales tax revenue bonds subject to a debt limitation of $975,000,000. The, debt service fund of the Commission is used to account for all activities related to the sales tax revenue bonds debt incurred by the Commission (Table 31). The Commission's largest single expenditure is debt service. The debt agreements require the trustee to hold all debt proceeds and a portion of the sales tax revenues and to segregate all funds into separate amounts. These monies are included in the restricted investments held by trustee in the capital projects funds and the Debt Service fund. Under the agreements, the Commission may use sales tax revenues for any lawful purpose related to the Riverside County TIP after the trustee has satisfied debt service requirements. In order to advance project development activities, the Commission established a commercial paper program in 2005. Periodically a portion of the commercial paper notes issued has been retired with sales tax revenue bonds. 'Table 31— Debt Service Fund 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 Federal Reimbursements $ $ - $ 2,982,000 $ 2,982,000 $ 2,982,000 N/A Local Reimbursements 1,499,300 - - N/A Investment Income 258,900 181,700 105,900 23,400 (158,300) -87% TOTAL Revenues 1,758,200 181,700 3,087,900 3,005,400 2,823,700 1554% Expenditures Debt Service Principal Payments 6,300,000 6,500,000 6,500,000 6,800,000 300,000 5% Interest Payments 6,351,400 16,270,000 16,453,000 16,180,000 (90,000) -1% TOTAL Debt Service 12,651,400 22,770,000 22,953,000 22,980,000 210,000 1% TOTAL Expenditures 12,651,400 22,770,000 22,953,000 22,980,000 210,000 1% Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures (10,893,200) (22,588,300) (19,865,100) (19,974,600) 2,613,700 -12% Other Financing Sources (Uses) Transfers In 20,727,200 21,717,000 14,788,000 19,665,800 (2,051,200) -9% Transfers Out (1,678,200) (9,696,800) (43,151,700) (650,000) 9,046,800 -93% Net Financing Sources (Uses) 19,049,000 12,020,200 (28,363,700) 19,015,800 6,995,600 58% Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures and Other Financing Sources (Uses) 8,155,800 (10,568,100) (48,228,800) (958,800) 9,609,300 -91% Beginning Fund Balance ENDING FUND BALANCE 45,738,300 53,894,100 53,894,100 5,665,300 (48,228,800) -89% $ 53,894,100 $ 43,326,000 $ 5,665,300 $ 4,706,500 $ (38,619,500) -89% Reimbursements consist of federal cash subsidy payments related to the 2010 Series B designated as build America bonds (BABs). The FY 2011/12 budget reflected such payments as offsets to interest expenditures. Transfers in represent the primary source of funding for the Debt Service fund (Chart 18). Transfers in consist of Measure A funds from the 2009 Measure A Western County Highways and Bond Financing; Coachella Valley Highways and Regional Arterials; and Western County, Coachella Valley, and Palo Verde Valley Local Streets and Roads special revenue funds for debt service payments on the sales tax revenue bonds. Chart 18 — Debt Service Fund Sources FY 2012/13 Investment Income 0% Debt Service fund uses (Chart 19) consist of debt service on the sales tax revenue bonds as well as transfers out of $650,000 from excess 1989 Measure A debt reserves to the 1989 Measure A Western County Rail Capital special revenue fund for a San Jacinto Branch Line (SJBL) rail project. In FY 2011/12, such reserves were projected to be substantially transferred to 1989 Measure A special revenue funds for capital project purposes. Chart 19 — Debt Service Fund Uses FY 2012/13 Riverside County Transportation Commission Revenues and Other Sources Total revenues and other sources are budgeted at $1,864,644,600, and consist of Measure A sales tax of $132,000,000, (or 7% of total sources); LTF sales tax of $65,000,000 (or 3% of total sources); STA revenues of $14,212,500 (or 1% of total sources); federal revenues of $73,151,900 (or 4% of total sources); state revenues, including vehicle registration fees, of $17,917,800 (or 1% of total sources); TUMF of $5,257,300 (or less than 1% of total sources); debt proceeds of $1,220,172,000 (or 66% of total sources); transfers in of $326,095,700 (or 17% of total sources) and other revenues of $10,837,400 (or less than 1% of total sources). The specific revenue funding sources are shown in Table 32. Table 32 — Revenues and Other Sources FY 2012/13 Department/Program Measure A Management Services $ 2,700,000 $ Sales Tax LTF STA Federal State Local/Other Funding Sources - $ - $ - S - $ 31,100 $ 2,731,100 MEASURE A AND OTHER CAPITAL PROGRAMS Bond Financing 7,884,000 11,800 7,895,800 CETAP 2,075,100 2,075,100 Economic Development 1,168,000 17,800 1,185,800 Highways 44,936,000 21,248,600 12,977,600 7,908,400 87,070,600 Local Streets and Roads 39,812,000 - 39,812,000 New Corridors 10,805,000 203,700 11,008,700 Rail 5,957,000 50,499,000 480,200 786,100 57,722,300 Regional Arterials 8,761,000 2,155,800 10,916,800 REGIONAL PROGRAMS Public and Specialized Transit 8,517,000 65,000,000 14,212,500 42,500 613,500 88,385,500 Planning and Programming 910,000 9,000 919,000 Rail Station Maintenance/Operations 470,000 253,000 723,000 Commuter Assistance 1,460,000 891,800 1,476,800 3,828,600 Motorist Assistance 3,550,000 552,600 4,102,600 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES Debt Proceeds - 1,220,172,000 1,220,172,000 Transfers In - 326,095,700 - 326,095,700 TOTAL Funding Sources $ 132,000,000 $ 65,000,000 $ 14,212,500 $ 73,151,900 $ 17,917,800 $ 1,562,362,400 $ 1,864,644,600 Revenues —Definitions and Background Measure A: Measure A is a one-half of one percent transactions and use tax that was first approved by Riverside County voters in 1988 and expired on June 30, 2009 after a 20-year term. On November 5, 2002, the voters of Riverside County approved the renewal of Measure A through 2039. The 2009 Measure A is expected to raise more than $6.8 billion (in nominal dollars) during its lifespan. The amount raised by the Measure A levy has increased as the County and its economic base have grown during the past two decades, peaking in FY 2005/06 at $157 million. As a result of an economic slowdown, Measure A revenues decreased the, subsequent four years but have since stabilized. Measure A revenues are projected to approximate $128,000,000 and $132,000,000 in FY 2011/12 and FY 2012/13, respectively. Measure A requires that all sales taxes collected may only be used for transportation purposes including administration and the construction, capital acquisition, maintenance, and operation of streets, roads, highways, including state highways and public transit systems and for related purposes. These purposes include expenditures for planning, environmental reviews, engineering and design costs, and related right of way acquisition. The Commission historically has obtained and updated Measure A revenue projections through a consultant for budget and strategic project planning purposes. The most recent economic forecast was completed in January 2012, and the Commission's sales tax services consultant provides Measure A revenue projections in connection with its quarterly sales tax analysis. Measure A revenue projections, based on such updates and other factors, for the next five fiscal years are presented in Chart 20 below. Chart 20 — Forecasted Measure A Sales Tax Revenues 2013 — 2017 $180,000,000 $160,000,000 $140,000,000 $120,000,000 $100,000,000 $80,000,000 $60,000,000 $40,000,000 $20,000,000 $- J J i i • 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 The following additional assumptions were used in the development of the. Commission's revenue forecast for FY 2012/13: • The Inland Empire economy will continue its recovery through FY 2012/13. • The State does not change mix of items subject to the sales tax from what has been included historically. • The relative sales and property tax rates of Riverside and surrounding counties do not change from historical levels. • Internet sales will have minimal impact on revenue. The Measure A sales tax revenue projections are considered in the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan financing strategy. Geographic Allocation - Riverside County is comprised of three geographic areas: Western County, Coachella Valley, and Palo Verde Valley. The percentage of Measure A revenues allocated to each of these areas based on return to source is approximately 76% for Western County, 23% for Coachella Valley, and 1% for Palo Verde Valley (Chart 21). These percentages will experience some variations from year to year based on changes in levels of taxable sales among the geographic areas. Chart 21— Geographic Allocation of Measure A Revenues Palo Verde r Valley 1%- Program Allocation - The 2009 Measure A TIP defines the manner in which the sales tax revenues are to be spent, as presented in the Table 33. In Western County, public transit includes funding for specialized transit, commuter rail, intercity bus service, and commuter assistance. For the Coachella Valley, public transit includes specialized transit and public bus services. Table 33 - Program Allocation of 2009 Measure A Revenues Western County •Bond Financing - ^o •Economic Cevelohment ncenti,res - I�, •Highways - 30P; •Local Free.- and Roads - 29'; •New Corridors - 115; •PLIbilf TrallSr: - 1 .- •Rezonal Arterials -95 Coachella Valley •Highways and Regional Arterials - 50`'. •Local Streets and Roads - 35% • Fublic Transit. - 15'.5 Palo Verde Valley •Local Streets and Roads - 100% Local streets and roads allocations to the local jurisdictions within each geographic area are based on population (in Western County and Palo Verde Valley) or dwelling units (in Coachella Valley) and taxable sales. Based on the projected Measure A sales tax revenues of $132,000,000 for FY 2012/13, the geographic and program allocations are presented in Table 34.. Table 34 - Geographic Allocation of Measure A Revenues by Program FY 2012/13 Program Administration Western County Coachella Valley Palo Verde Valley Total Administration $ 2,700,000 $ $ $ - $ 2,700,000 Bond Financing 7,884,000 - 7,884,000 Economic Development Incentives - 1,168,000 - 1,168,000 Highways 29,786,000 29,786,000 Highways and Regional Arterials 15,150,000 - 15,150,000 Local Streets and Roads 28,325,000 10,604,000 883,000 39,812,000 New Corridors 10,805,000 10,805,000 Public Transit 11,389,000 4,545,000 - 15,934,000 Regional Arterials 8,761,000 8,761,000 TOTAL $ 2,700,000 $ 98,118,000 $ 30,299,000 $ 883,000 $ 132,000,000 Local Transportation Fund: LTF, established in state law by the TDA, is funded through a one -quarter of one cent of the State's 7.25% sales tax. The intent of the legislation was to provide a dependable revenue stream for public transportation operations. Based upon an annual projection of LTF sales taxes that considers economic forecast revenue projections prepared by a consultant, local economic factors, and monthly receipt trends, the vast majority of LTF revenue in the County is allocated to the eight public transit operators, including the Commission for its share of Metrolink operations costs. Much like Measure A revenue, LTF had increased with the growth of the County and its economy until the recent economic recession and has stabilized in recent years. Revenues received from LTF are allocated for regional and local transportation planning, program administration, SB821 bicycle and pedestrian facilities projects, public bus transit, and rail transit, including the Commission for its share related to commuter rail operations in Western County. The Commission administers these funds on behalf of the County in a special revenue fund. State Transit Assistance: STA provides additional TDA state funding of transit operations and capital for urban counties, including the County's eight public transit operators. Due to the State's budgetary issues, it suspended the STA allocations for FY 2009/10 and FY 2010/11; however, allocations were made and funded at the end of. FY 2009/10. Sales taxes on gasoline and diesel fuels have historically generated the STA funding; however, recent legislation eliminated the tax on gasoline. State Transportation Improvement Program: Administered by Caltrans, the STIP is funded through state and federal gas tax dollars and is California's primary transportation fund. Dollars are allocated to each county based on a formula that takes into consideration population and highway centerline miles. Actual programming decisions for 75% of STIP dollars are made by local transportation agencies such as the Commission. STIP reimbursement estimates are based on budgeted expenditures for specific projects with STIP allocations approved by the CTC. Proposition 1B: In November 2006, the voters in California approved Proposition 1B, which funds various transportation programs from bonds issued by the State. Programs that are funded include Corridor Mobility Improvement Account (CMIA), transit capital, STIP supplement, and Trade Corridors Improvement Fund (TCIF). CMIA and transit capital revenues for certain highway and rail projects nominated by the Commission and approved by the CTC are included in state reimbursement revenues. Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) Registration Fees: State law allows county SAFE agencies to impose a $1 surcharge on vehicle registrations within the County to pay for call box purchases and operations; excess SAFE revenues may be used for 511 operations and as a match for FSP operations. The call boxes enable motorists to summon help should they encounter mechanical or emergency problems while on the road, whereas the 1E511 system provides real-time traffic and transit trip information available via the internet or telephone. Caltrans Freeway Service Patrol Allocations: Caltrans is the primary sponsor of the FSP and provides the majority of funding for the program, including towing services in construction zones. The State provides nearly 80% of the funding for the FSP program based on population, freeway miles, and level of congestion throughout the State. The Commission administers and implements the program along with the CHP and Caltrans. Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality: The CMAQ program is federally funded and is targeted for transportation improvements in areas with air quality problems. This program pays for improvements that reduce congestion while improving air quality. The Commission has also used CMAQ dollars to include commuter assistance programs, signal interconnects, HOV lanes, and transit projects. CMAQ reimbursement estimates are based on budgeted expenditures for specific projects with CMAQ allocations. Federal Transit Administration: FTA funding is generally allocated annually by the federal government to urbanized areas and is based on calculated miles of service. On a reimbursement basis, the federal government provides funding for qualified capital investments in rail facilities, track, and vehicles. Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee: In connection with the 2009 Measure A, the TUMF program was established in the Western County to provide additional funding for regional arterial projects. TUMF is administered by WRCOG. As a result of an MOU with WRCOG, the Commission will receive 48.7% of the TUMF revenues, which are divided equally between the regional arterial and CETAP programs. TUMF revenues maintained by WRCOG are allocated for regional. arterial zone improvements and regional transit facilities. TUMF revenue estimates are based on monthly receipt trends and consideration of local housing and commercial construction activity in the County. Rail and Highway Licenses: The Commission owns parcels of land and right of way for highway, rail, and regional arterial projects in selected areas throughout the County. The ownership provides licensing opportunities for fiber- optic cable, advertising signs, and business tenants. The amount of funding received from the licenses provides revenue to partially support the cost of owning and maintaining the Commission's land and facilities. Investment Income: The Commission has established a prudent investment policy for cash on hand that is intended to maximize return while providing absolutesafeguards on principal and liquidity, as noted in Section 1. Interest earnings on the State and County investment pools are estimated at an interest rate of .50%. The earnings on funds held by the trustee for debt service and projects are assumed to be at .50%. Program Revenues and Other Sources Revenues and other financing sources for FY 2012/13 are allocated to the various Commission programs as follows: Management Services The primary funding sources for management services are Measure A allocations of $2,700,000 as well as LTF allocation transfers in of $700,000 and administration funding transfers in of $936,900 from TUMF, SAFE, and FSP. Interest revenues in FY 2011/12 are $31,100. Bond Financing Measure A Western County revenues of $7,884,000 will be used to support bond financing costs. Interest revenues are $11,800. CETAP The Western County CETAP program will receive $2,000,000 from TUMF for development of new CETAP corridors. Additionally, other local revenues include $75,100 representing investment income. Economic Development In order to attract commercial and industrial development and jobs to locate in the Western County area, Measure A Western County revenues of $1,168,000 will be used to create an infrastructure improvement bank to improve and construct interchanges, provide public transit linkages or stations, and make other improvements to the transportation system. Interest earnings are $17,800. Highways Funding for the highway program includes 2009 Measure A sales tax revenues of $44,936,000 for Western County highways and Coachella Valley highways and regional arterials programs. The 2009 Measure A Western County sales tax revenues will be used primarily for the SR-91, 1-15, and 1-215 corridor improvements. Unexpended 1989 Measure A Western County revenues from prior years will be used on remaining projects such as SR-74 widening from 1-15 to 7th Street and curve realignment, 74/215 interchange, SR-91 HOV lanes, 60/215 East Junction HOV lane connectors as well as for pass -through funding to the city of Riverside for interchange improvements for SR-91 at La Sierra Avenue and Van Buren Boulevard. Federal funds for highways projects include $719,900 in demonstration funds for the 74/215 interchange, $8,321,800 in CMAQ funds for the SR-91 HOV lanes, $3,000,000 in CMAQ funds for the SR-60 truck climbing lane, $1,990,300 in STP funds for the I-215/Blaine Street project, $234,600 in STP funds for the 60/215 East Junction HOV lane connectors, and $4,000,000 in demonstration funds for the 91/71 interchange improvements. Other ' federal funds include $2,982,000 for BABs subsidy payments related to the 2010 bonds. State funds include STIP funding totaling $7,976,800 will be used for the 1-215 corridor improvements. The 1-215 corridor improvements on the southern segment will receive $5,000,800 in Proposition 1B CMIA funds. Additional local funding includes' $1,257,300 in TUMF zone reimbursements from WRCOG for the 74/215 interchange, $832,800 in lease revenues, $50,000 in carpool violations, $35,000 in local property management revenues, and interest revenue of $5,733,300. . In FY 2012/13, the Commission anticipates the issuance of $100,000,000 in commercial paper notes, $512,300,000 in sales tax revenue bonds, $163,750,000 in toll revenue bonds, and $444,122,000 in TIFIA loans to fund 2009 Measure A projects, particularly the SR-91 corridor improvement design -build project. Transfers in include $129,479,000 in bond and commercial paper proceeds to fund the 2009 Measure A projects, $19,665,800 to the Debt Service fund for Measure A Western County and Coachella Valley highways debt service, $16,889,600 to the commercial paper fund for project reimbursements, and $120,000,000 from sales tax revenue bond proceeds to retire the commercial paper notes. Local Streets and Roads Measure A allocations of $39,812,000 for the local streets and roads program are distributed to the cities and the County for local street repairs, maintenance, and construction. New Corridors To leverage local, state, and federal funding for four new transportation corridors identified through CETAP, Measure A Western County revenues of $10,805,000 will be available for environmental clearance, right of way acquisition, and construction of these new corridors. Interest revenues of $203,700 are included in local revenues. Rail Unexpended 1989 Measure A Western County revenues will be used primarily for the Perris Valley Line and other rail capital projects. The 2009 Measure A Western County's public transit program allocated $5,957,000 for rail. FTA funding for the Perris Valley Line project consists of $44,509,100 from Small Starts, $4,989,900 from CMAQ, and $1,000,000 from Section 5307. State Proposition 1B transit allocations of $440,200 will fund the Perris Transit Center and station security projects. STIP revenues of $40,000 will fund the Perris Valley Line. Local revenues include investment income of $299,700, reimbursements of $436,400 related to the Perris Transit Center, and property management revenues of $50,000. Transfers in of $250,000 and $650,000 from STA and excess reserves, respectively, are for a rail project. Regional Arterials The Western County regional arterial program will receive funds from Measure A and TUMF in the amounts of $8,761,000 and $2,000,000, respectively. The new TUMF revenues along with unexpended TUMF revenues from prior years will be the primary source of funding TUMF regional arterial projects, including the SR-79 realignment. Other local revenues also consist of investment income of $155,800. Transfers in consist of $18,221,900 from 1989 Measure A Western County highways and TUMF CETAP as a match for TUMF regional arterial projects and $455,000 from 2009 Measure A Western County local streets and roads, in accordance with the 2009 Measure A, related to a city not eligible to receive those funds. Public and Specialized Transit LTF sales tax revenues of $65,000,000 are allocated primarily for public bus and rail transit operations and capital in the County. A small portion of these revenues is used for LTF planning and administration allocations as well as SB821 bicycle and pedestrian facilities grants. STA allocations of $14,212,500 are allocated to the County's public transit operators. For the FY 2012/13 budget, unexpended LTF and STA revenues from prior years will also be used to fund transit operations as well as bicycle and pedestrian facilities grants. Under the 2009 Measure A, public transit funding of $8,517,000 has been allocated for Western County specialized transit and intercity bus services and Coachella Valley specialized and public transit services. Federal revenues consist of $42,500 in FTA Job Access and Reverse Commute (1ARC) Section 5316 funding. Local revenues represent investment income of $613,500. Planning and Programming Transportation planning studies are funded with an LTF off -the -top allocation transfer in of $1,950,000, or three percent of estimated LTF revenues. An LTF allocation transfer in of $1,774,700 will fund grade separation projects for the cities of Riverside and Corona and the County. STIP in the amount of $910,000 will fund PPM activities of the Commission and CVAG. Local revenues consist of investment income of $9,000. Rail Station Maintenance and Operations Rail operations, which include Metrolink operating and capital contributions, station maintenance, and support will be funded with LTF allocation transfers in of $13,935,000. A federal grant of $450,000 will fund landscaping at the stations, and a $20,000 federal grant will fund an intern. In addition to interest revenues of $27,800, local revenues include $210,000 in reimbursements primarily from SCRRA for security costs, $5,000 for Metrolink violators citations, and $10,200 for miscellaneous vending machine revenues. Other transfers in include 2009 Measure A Western County commuter assistance funding of $151,300 for maintenance of the park and ride facility at the Perris Transit Center. Commuter Assistance The Commuter Assistance program will receive funding of $1,460,000 from 2009 Measure A Western County public transit to assist in implementing services to commuters and employers in promoting use of alternate modes of transportation in Western County. The Commission will also receive CMAQ funds of $849,800 to support the commuter assistance program and JARC revenues of $42,000 for a ridesharing project in the Coachella Valley. Local revenues consist of other agency reimbursements of $1,412,500 for support of the San Bernardino commuter assistance program and regional ridematching as well as investment income of $64,300. Motorist Assistance SAFE is funded from $1,450,000 in revenues received through DMV registration fees, while Caltrans will allocate $1,700,000'in State highway account funds to cover the FSP, and $400,000 for special FSP services required for construction projects. The Commission will also receive local revenues of $429,000 to support SANBAG's share of the.1E511 system operations. Local revenues represent investment and other income of $23,600, cost recoveries of $15,000 from responsible parties related to call box knockdowns, and reimbursements of $85,000 from cities for potential FSP services required on highway construction projects. The State's FSP contribution is matched with an operating transfer in from SAFE of $995,000; the 2009 Measure A Western County highway program will transfer in $42,000 for construction FSP services related to the 1-215 corridor improvements south segment project. 11 Riverside County Tronspodation Commission 11 a Commission Debt The Commission's current debt under the 2009 Measure A has been incurred for highway, regional arterial, economic development, and local streets and roads projects for which title usually vests or, upon completion, will vest with Ca!trans or local jurisdictions. Future Measure A sales taxes are pledged to cover Measure A debt service payments on the sales tax revenue bonds. Beginning in FY 2012/13, the Commission will also issue toll revenue bonds and obtain a federal TIFIA loan that will be repaid from toll revenues generated by the RCTC 91 Express Lanes, which is part of the SR-91 corridor improvement project. Since these projects are not assets of the Commission for which the Commission will have operating responsibilities, except for the intangible rights to operate the RCTC 91 Express Lanes, future operating costs related to these projects cannot be determined and are not applicable. However, for toll and rail assets, operating budget impacts are considered in future project development. Table 35 presents a summary of the anticipated changes in the Commission's debt during FY 2012/13. Table 35 — Changes in Commission Debt Projected Balance Projected Balance July 1, 2012 Additions Reductions June 30, 2013 Commercial Paper $ 20,000,000 $ 100,000,000 $ (120,000,000) $ 2009 Sales Tax Bonds 168,200,000 (6,800,000) 161,400,000 2010 Sales Tax Bonds 150,000,000 150,000,000 2013 Sales Tax Bonds 512,300,000 512,300,000 Toll Revenue Bonds 163,750,000 163,750,000 TIFIA Loan 444,122,000 444,1.22,000 $ 338,200,000 $ 1,220,172,000 $ (126,800,000) $ 1,431,572,000 Commercial Paper In March 2005 the Commission established a commercial paper program to advance project development and land and right of way acquisition under the 2009 Measure A TIP. In October 2010 the Commission reduced the commercial paper program to $120,000,000. Maturities of commercial paper notes are rolled over to new issuances of commercial paper. Regarding the commercial paper notes, the Commission currently maintains a P-1 and an A-1+ rating from Moody's Investors Service (Moody's) and Standard and Poor's Rating Service (S&P), respectively. Interest payments are made from available commercial paper proceeds or sales tax revenues. Although the Commission issued $40,000,000 in commercial paper notes in February 2012, those notes were retired in March 2012. Currently there are no outstanding commercial paper notes; however, the Commission anticipates the issuance of $20,000,000 and $100,000,000 in commercial paper notes during FY 2011/12 and 2012/13, respectively, for capital project funding for a projected outstanding amount of $120,000,000 during June 30, 2013. All of the outstanding commercial paper notes are expected to be retired with proceeds from the issuance of sales tax revenue bonds in FY 2012/13. The Commission will pay $433,000 in estimated commercial paper interest payments during the year. Commercial paper debt service expenditures are reflected in the Commercial Paper capital projects fund. In April 2012 the Commission substituted irrevocable direct draw letters of credit and reimbursement agreements with The Bank of Tokyo -Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd., acting through its New York Branch (Bank of Tokyo), and Union Bank, N.A. (Union Bank), following the expiration of the Bank of America, N.A. (Bank of America) facility, as credit and liquidity support for the commercial paper notes. The letters of credit in the amount of $60,750,000 for each series of notes expire in October 2014. The costs for the liquidity support, which decreased significantly from the previous reimbursement agreement, are reflected in the 2009 Measure A Western County Bond Financing special revenue fund. Sales Tax Revenue Bonds As a means to achieve a greater level of interest rate stability, the Commission entered into two interest rate swaps for a total notional amount of $185,000,000 at a fixed rate for 20 years effective October 2009; the counterparties pay the Commission a floating rate equal to 67% of the one -month London Interbank Offer Rate, or LIBOR. The counterparty for the first swap ($100,000,000 notional amount) at a fixed rate of 3.679% is Bank of America, and the counterparty for the second swap ($85,000,000 notional amount) at a fixed of 3.206% is Deutsche Bank AG (Deutsche Bank). As of June 30, 2013, the projected notional amounts for the Bank of America and Deutsche Bank swaps are $87,200,000 and $74,200,000, respectively. In connection with the commencement of the interest rate swaps in October 2009, the Commission issued $185,000,000 in variable rate sales tax revenue bonds to retire outstanding commercial paper notes, refund bonds issued in 2008, fund a portion of the debt service reserve, and pay costs of issuance. The 2009 Bonds are secured by standby bond purchase agreements (SBPAs) with JP Morgan Chase Bank (JPMorgan), which expire in September 2014. In connection with the extension of the original SBPAs with JPMorgan in September 2011, the Commission obtained the release of the debt service reserve for capital project funding purposes and a reduction in the fee. The costs for these liquidity facilities are accounted for in the 2009 Measure A Western County Bond Financing special revenue fund. For FY 2012/13, the Commission has budgeted debt service principal and interest payments of $6,800,000 and $6,649,000, respectively. In November 2010 the Commission issued $37,630,000 in fixed rate tax-exempt bonds (Series A Tax -Exempt) and $112,370,000 in fixed rate taxable bonds (Series B Taxable) designated as BABs under ARRA. The aggregate amount issued of $150,000,000 for the 2010 Bonds was used to retire approximately $103,300,000 of outstanding commercial paper notes, provide funds for 2009 Measure A Western County capital projects, and pay costs of issuance. A portion of the BABs were designated as recovery zone economic development bonds (RZEDBs). The Commission expects to receive a cash subsidy from the United States Treasury equal to 35% of the interest payable on the BABs or 45% of the interest payable on the Series B bonds additionally designated as RZEDBs. Estimated net debt service payments for the 2010 Bonds in FY 2011/12 are $0 for principal and $9,531,000 for interest payments, which are offset by the $2,982,000 cash subsidy payment. In connection with the SR-91 corridor improvement financing that is anticipated to be completed in June 2013, the Commission anticipates the issuance of $512,300,000 in additional sales tax revenue bonds. These 2013 Bonds are expected to have maturity dates through June 30, 2039. The Commission's has received long-term debt ratings of Aa1, AA+, and AA from Moody's, S&P, and Fitch Ratings, respectively on its currently outstanding sales tax revenue bonds. Toll Revenue Bonds and TIFIA Loan In April 2012 the United States Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT) announced that the Commission received an invitation to the 2012 TIFIA program, which, combined with the Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) TIFIA grant received in December 2011, provided the final puzzle piece needed for the full funding of the SR-91 corridor improvement project. During FY 2012/13, the Commission will submit a TIFIA loan application for a projected loan of approximately $444,122,000. The TIFIA loan provides low cost subordinate financing secured by toll revenues to be generated by the RCTC 91 Express Lanes. Considered "patient financing", interest repayment can be deferred for up to five years from substantial completion of the project and principal repayment can be sculpted around the revenue stream supporting the senior debt toll revenue bonds. The maximum repayment term of the TIFIA loan is 35 years from substantial completion, which would approximate June 2051 for the SR-91 corridor improvement project. , Toll revenue bonds estimated at $163,750,000 will consist of current interest bonds (CIBs) and capital appreciation bonds (CABS). The CIBs, which are expected to comprise approximately 70% of the toll revenue bonds issued, are projected to have maturity dates through June 2034, while the CABS will have projected maturity dates through June 2051. In July 2010 the Commission authorized the issuance of up to $900,000,000 in toll revenue bonds in anticipation of the financing requirements for the SR-91 corridor improvement project. Debt Capacity Analysis The Commission is legally prohibited from issuing additional sales tax revenue debt if its debt coverage ratio is less than 1.5 to 1 on all senior sales tax revenue debt. The Commission has adopted a higher standard of 2 to 1 as part of its debt management policy. As Chart 22 and Table 36 indicate, the Commission has successfully met its policy standard for sales tax revenue .debt issued under the 2009 Measure A, even in a declining sales tax revenue environment. The 1989 Measure A related debt consistently exceeded the Commission's standard, and coverage for the 2009 Measure A related debt of 6.6 is anticipated for FY 2012/13. Any coverage less than 2 to 1 would necessitate using other program funding to cover all debt service expenditures. Chart 22 — Measure A Debt Capacity Analysis $140,000,000 $120,000,000 $100,000,000 $80,000,000 $60,000,000 $40,000,000 $20,000,000 $- FY 2011/12 Table 36 — Measure A Debt Capacity Analysis Sales Tax Revenues Senior Debt Service Coverage Ratio - Senior Debt Long -Term Debt Rating Commercial Paper Rating Debt Service Schedule 9 Senior Debt Service MI Available Revenues FY 2012/13 _FY 11/17 FY 12/13 128,000,000 $ 132,000,000. 19,970,000 $ 19,997,600 6.4 6.6 . Aa 1/AA+/AA Aa 1/AA+/AA P-1/A-1+ P-1/A-1+ Debt service requirements for the sales tax revenue bonds are based on amortization schedules for the 2009 Bonds and 2010 Bonds and include the BABs cash subsidy payments. Since commercial paper is expected to be refinanced with sales tax revenue bonds, debt service requirements for commercial paper are not included in Table 37; however, the debt service interest expenditures in FY 2012/13 for the commercial paper notes are estimated at $433,000. Table 37 — Commission Sales Tax Revenue Bonds Net Debt Service Requirements Fiscal Year Principal Interest Subsidy Payments Net Debt. Service 2013 $ 6,800,000 $ 16,179,726 $ (2,982,113) $ 19,997,613 2014 7,100,000 15,912,326 (2,982,113) 20,030,213 2015 7,400,000 15,633,526 (2,982,113) 20,051,413 2016 7,800,000 15,356,926 (2,982,113) 20,174,813 2017 8,100,000 15,036,526 (2,982,113) 20,154,413 2018-2022 46,400,000 70,109,230 (14,910,563) 101,598,666 2023-2027 57,800,000 60,133,930 (14,910,563) 103,023,366 2028-2032 64,960,000 47,481,830 (14,910,563) 97,531,266 2033-2037 76,530,000 28,096,914 (11,358,688) 93,268,226 2038-2039 35,310,000 3,627,450 (1,632,353) 37,305,098 Total $ 318,200,000 $ 287,568,382 $ (72,633,294) $ 533,135,088 Outstanding Debt as of June 30, 2013 Under the provisions of the 2009 Measure A, the Commission has the authority to issue bonds subject to a bond debt limitation of $975,000,000, reflecting an increase from the original authorization of $500,000,000 as a result of the voter approval of Measure K in November 2010. The following is a summary of debt issued and secured by 2009 Measure A revenues, receipt of which began in FY 2009/10: 2005 Commercial Paper Notes (Limited Tax Bonds), Series A and Series B: In February 2005, the Commission authorized a $200,000,000 commercial paper program. In March 2005, the Commission established the program for $185,000,000 Commercial Paper Notes (Limited Tax Bonds), Series A and B. In October 2010, the program was reduced to $120,000,000. The repayment of principal and interest on the commercial paper notes is secured by irrevocable direct draw letters of credit issued by Bank of Tokyo and Union Bank, and the Measure A sales tax revenues secure such repayment. Maturities of the commercial paper notes may range from one to 270 days, and interest rates are variable and dependent on current market conditions. The note agreements require the trustee to hold all note proceeds and a portion of sales tax revenues and to segregate all funds into separate accounts as required by the indenture. 2009 Sales Tax Revenue Bonds (Limited Tax Bonds), Series A, B, and C: In October 2009, the Commission issued $185,000,000 principal amount of serial bonds to refinance the 2008 bonds, retire a portion of the outstanding principal amount of the commercial paper notes and a portion of accrued interest on the notes, and fund a reserve fund. The bonds mature in annual installments ranging from $6,500,000 to $13,700,000 on various dates through June 1, 2029 with variable interest rates set on a weekly basis. The 2009 Bonds are integrated with the interest rate swaps, thereby creating synthetic fixed rate debt. The 2009 Bond agreements require the trustee to hold all bond proceeds and a portion of sales tax revenues and to segregate all funds into separate accounts as required by the indentures Debt service requirements for the 2009 Bonds are summarized in Table 38. Table 38 — 2009 Sales Tax Fiscal Year 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018-2022 2023-2027 2027-2029 Total Revenue Bonds Debt Service Requirements Principal $ 6,800,000 7,100,000 7,400,000 7,800,000 8,100,000 46,400,000 57,800,000 26,800,000 Interest $ 6,649,200 6,381,800 6,103,000 5,826,400 5,506,000 22,456,600 12,481,300 1,675,200 Total Debt Service 13,449, 200 13,481,800 13,503,000 13,626,400 13,606,000 68,856,600 70,281,300 28,475,200 $ 168,200,000 $ 67,079,500 $ 235,279,500 2010 Sales Tax Revenue Bonds (Limited Tax Bonds), Series A Tax -Exempt and Series B Taxable: In November 2010, the Commission issued $150,000,000 principal amount of serial bonds to retire all of the outstanding principal amount of the commercial paper notes and fund project costs. The bonds mature in annual installments ranging from $12,105,000 to $17,980,000 on various dates from June 1, 2030 through June 1, 2039. Interest rates for the Series A Tax -Exempt and Series B Taxable bonds are 5% and 6.807%, respectively. The Commission expects to receive cash subsidies from the U.S. Treasury related to the Series B Taxable bonds. The 2010 Bond agreements require the trustee to hold all bond proceeds and a portion of sales tax revenues and to segregate all funds into separate accounts as required by the indentures. Debt service requirements, net of subsidy payments, for the 2010 Bonds are summarized in Table 39. Table 39 — 2010 Sales Tax Revenue Bonds Net Debt Service Requirements Fiscal Year 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018-2022 2023-2027 2028-2032 2033-2037 2038-2039 Total Principal Interest Subsidy 9,530,526 $ (2,982,113) 9,530,526 (2,982,113) 9,530,526 (2,982,113) 9,530,526 (2,982,113) 9,530,526 (2,982,113) 47,652,630 (14,910,563) 47,652,630 (14,910,563) 38,160,000 45,806,63.0 (14,910,563) 76,530,000 28,096,914 (11,358,688) 35,310,000 3,627,450 (1,632,353) Net Debt Service $ 6,548,413 6,548,413 6,548,413 6,548,413 6,548,413 32,742,066 32,742,066 69,056,066 93,268,226 37,305,098 150,000,000 220,488,882 $ (72,633,294) 297,855,588 The allocation of the sales tax revenue bonds to the 2009 Measure A programs is presented in Chart 23. Chart 23 — Program Long -Term Debt Local Streets and Roads 1% The allocation of the sales tax revenue bonds by the benefiting geographic area is presented in Chart 24. Chart 24 — Long -Term Debt by Geographic Area Palo Verde Valley 0% Coachella Valley 8% Outstanding Debt and Legal Debt Margin at June 30, 2013 A summary of the Commission's outstanding debt secured by Measure A sales tax revenues and related legal debt margin projected at June 30, 2013 is presented in Table 40: Table 40 — Legal Debt Margin 2009"Measure A Authorized Sales Tax Revenue Debt $ 975,000,000 2005 Commercial Paper Notes 2009 and 2010 Bonds 2013 Bonds 311,400,000 512,300,000 Total Outstanding Debt 823,700,000 Legal Debt Margin $ 151,300,000 Riverside County Transportation Commission t7N1u; Table 41— Budget Comparison by Department FY 2011— 2013 Revenues Measure A Sales Tax LTF Sales Tax STA Sales Tax Federal Reimbursements State Reimbursements Local Reimbursements TUMF Revenue Other Revenue Investment Income Total Revenues Expenditures Management Services: Executive Management Administration Legislative Affairs and Communications Finance Total Management Services Regional Programs: Planning and Programming Services Rail Maintenance and Operations Public and Specialized Transit Commuter Assistance Motorist Assistance Total Regional Programs Capital Project Development and Delivery Debt Service: Principal Payments Interest Payments Cost of Issuance Total Debt Service Total Expenditures Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures Other Financing Sources (Uses) Transfers In Transfers Out Debt Proceeds Bond Discount Net Financing Sources (Uses) Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures and Other Financing Sources (Uses) Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance FY 10/11 Actual $ 123,439,800 60,772,800 17,735,600 17,811,800 5,021,600 9,157,900 2,321,800 4,524,200 240,785,500 FY 11/12 Revised Budget FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Dollar Percent Projected Budget Change Change $ 124,000,000 $ 128,000,000 $ 132,000,000 $ 8,000,000 6% 61,000,000 63,000,000 65,000,000 4,000,000 7% 9,537,000 14,073,600 14,212,500 4,675,500 49% 23,650,700 24,393,600 73,151,900 49,501,200 209% 23,935,100 23,250,200 17,917,800 (6,017,300) -25% 1,081,800 2,932,200. 2,688,700 1,606,900 149% 6,784,300 6,397,400 5,257,300 (1,527,000) -23% 592,400 450,800 882,800 290,400 49% 1,824,000 3,391,100 7,365,900 5,541,900 304% 252,405,300 265,888,900 318,476,900 66;071,600 26% 626,200 244,300 185,700 283,200 38,900 16% 1,085,100 1,235,200 1,064,500 1,355,400 120,200 10% 851,600 1,297,000 958,100 1,270,500 (26,500) -2% 5,831,100 5,473,000 5,355,800 5,000,100 (472,900) -9% 8,394,000 8,249,500 7,564,100 7,909,200 (340,300) -4% 4,564,600 7,450,300 4,065,300 4,522,600 (2,927,700) -39% 12,865,700 21,498,600 21,012,900 14,553,300 (6,945,300) -32% 46,749,900 87,042,800 57,515,800 84,685,900 (2,356,900) -3% 2,831,900 4,226,400 4,231,400 4,038,800 (187,600) -4% 3,530,700 5,263,300 5,286,600 4,848,000 (415,300) -8% 70,542,800 125,481,400 92,112,000 112,648,600 (12,832,800) -10% 170,687,900 248,922,900 195,920,100 370,815,300 121,892,400 49% 109,607,200 46,500,000 46,500,000 126,800,000 80,300,000 173% 11, 296, 300 16,495,000 16,464, 000 16,613,000 118,000 1% 1,493,100 - - N/A 122,396,600 62,995,000 62,964,000 143,413,000 80,418,000 128% 372,021,300 445,648,800 358,560,200 634,786,100 189,137,300 42% (131,235,800) (193,243,500) (92,671,300) (316,309,200) (123,065,700) 64% 185,354,800 (185,354,800) 170,000,000 (967,500) 169,032,500 169,739,100 166,343,400 326,095,700 156,356,600 92% (169,739,100) (166,343,400) (326,095,700) (156,356,600) 92% 38,000,000 60,000,000 1,240,172,000 1,202,172,000 3164% N/A 38,000,000 60,000,000 1,240,172,000 1,202,172,000 3164% 37,796,700 (155,243,500) (32,671,300) 923,862,800 1,079,106,300 -695% 551,567,900 $ 589,364,600 $ 589,364,600 589,364,600 556,693,300 (32,671,300) -6% 434,121,100 $ 556,693,300 $ 1,480,556,100 $ 1,046,435,000 241% Riversirde County Transportation Commission 1V1 ( j ,,, Executive Management Mission Statement: "To maintain the highest level of achievement and professionalism possible while managing the activities of the Commission with a small staff, complemented with consultants, to effectuate sound transportation policies and legislation compatible with environmental standards." Chart 25 — Executive Management Expenditures Executive Management has a budget of $283,200 (Table 42), an increase of 16% from last year's budget, for oversight of all Commission functions. The. increase is primarily related to personnel costs as affected by an increase in FTE allocations. Professional costs of $105,000 include legal fees and consulting services. Support costs include various membership dues and staff -related travel costs of $57,600. Table 42 — Executive Management Expenditure Detail FY10/11 FY11/12 FY11/12. FY12/13 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget _ Projected Budget, Change Change . Salaries and Benefits $ 128,000 $ 83,6C0 $ 61,6C0 $ 120,600 $ 37,000 44% Professional Costs Legal Services 59,300 52,030 60,003 65,000 13,000 25% Professional Services -General 4C0,000 50,030 10,000 40,000 (10,000) -20% Total Professional Costs 459,303 102,000 70,000 105,003 3,000 3% Support Costs 38,900 58,7C0 54,103 57,600 (1,100) -2% TOTAL Executive Management $ 626,200 $ 244,300 $ 185,703 $ 283,200 $ 38,900 16% Executive Management_ Staffing Summary Position FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Administrative Assistant 0.01 0.01 0.01 Deputy Executive Director 0.09 0.02 0.15 Executive Director 0.21 0.20 0.19 FTE 0.31 0.23 0.35 Department Budget Overview Department Description The Executive Director is responsible for and provides strong leadership in developing and implementing new strategies at the local, regional, and statewide levels to assure delivery of transportation improvements and programs throughout the County. Furthermore, Executive Management is committed to fostering a positive and supportive work environment for staff that emphasizes quality work and encourages teamwork and open communication, with a commitment to serving the public. This is accomplished through a productive and collaborative effort with the members of the Commission and the oversight of the Commission's Executive Committee. Key Assumptions • The Executive Director will play a prominent role with external audiences with an emphasis on working with Congress, the California Legislature, Riverside County business organizations, and Southern California transportation agencies and local governments regarding the reauthorization of the federal transportation act and on advancing transportation policy in California. • Project delivery will be a top priority in FY 2012/13 as construction has commenced on the 60/215 East Junction HOV lanes connector, SR-91 HOV lane project, and 1-215 corridor improvement project south segment. During the next fiscal year, construction will begin on the 1-215 corridor improvement project central segment, 1-215 bi-county project, SR-74 curve project and the Perris Valley Line Metrolink extension. • Yet another component of project delivery will include the need to complete the environmental review process on a number of high -profile projects including the SR-91 corridor improvement project, Mid County Parkway, and SR-79 realignment. • The advancement of construction on a number of projects will require a requisite increase in public outreach to the media and local governments as well as the need for watchful oversight to make the most of lower construction and right of way costs. • The development of the Perris Valley Line project will mark Riverside County's first major rail expansion in more than 13 years and will require significant effort from the Executive Director to obtain approvals from the FTA, local railroads, and community. • The Commission will have a high profile throughout the State due to its procurement of a design -build contractor for the construction of the SR-91 corridor improvement project in Corona. • The Commission will play a leadership role in advocating for the approval of a federal transportation bill to fund needed transportation priorities in Riverside County with an emphasis on goods movement infrastructure, priority transportation corridors, and expansion of the federal TIFIA Program. Accomplishments FY 2011/12 saw extraordinary accomplishments at the Commission, placing it in the top tier of California transportation organizations. In several areas, the Commission stood by itself in successful advocacy, innovation, and leadership. • Completed construction on the 74/215 interchange in Perris, one of six major interchange projects in Riverside County to be funded through the ARRA program. • Awarded a $20 million TIFIA subsidy payment from the TIGER III program for the SR-91 corridor improvement project. The amount received was the largest grant award from the program in the entire nation. • Invited to apply for TIFIA loan for the SR-91 corridor improvement project. This represents the final piece needed for full funding of the project. The Commission was one of only five projects throughout the nation to receive TIFIA funding in the April 2012 selections. • Continued to implement components of the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan. • Completed construction on the 1-215 corridor improvement project south segment in Murrieta. • Continued progress on the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) process for the Perris Valley Line project, which included a number of public hearings and presentations to stakeholder groups, including the March Joint Powers Authority and the Riverside Unified School District. • Continued right of way acquisition for the SR-91 HOV lanes project in downtown Riverside, culminating in a contract award and start of construction in March 2012. • Guided the Commission through an uncertain economic environment with costs savings and successful adherence to limits on salaries and administrative expenditures. • Partnered with SANBAG to release a smart phone application to make the 1E511 system more accessible to motorists, transit users, and carpoolers. Major Initiatives FY 2012/13 will be a year of constant activity and will feature efforts to launch a number of projects while continuing to be challenged by a slow economy. In early 2012, Ca!trans began construction to add HOV lanes on SR-91 through downtown Riverside. The Commission played an active role in acquiring right of way for the project and will take a proactive role in public outreach and communications for the project. At the same time, a number of other planned improvements will continue through project development work with an eye on construction in the near future. This includes substantially completing environmental work on the Mid County Parkway and SR-79 realignment projects. The largest project currently in development is the SR-91 corridor improvement project through Corona, a $1.3 billion dollar effort that will add general purpose and express lanes to a 10-mile stretch of one of Southern California's most congested freeways. Environmental work on the project will be completed along with advance right of way acquisition and the solicitation of a design -build team. Financing the project has taken a major step forward thanks to the award of a $444 million TIFIA loan from the U.S. DOT. The project was one of only a handful to receive this type of funding and received funding on two separate occasions during FY 2011/12. On a larger scale, a major concern in moving forward is the state of California's financial position and commitment to funding infrastructure and transportation. The Commission will continue to take an aggressive and active role in advocating for state investments in transportation. The Commission is an active member of the Self -Help Counties Coalition (SHCC) and Mobility 21, and a major focus will be placed on advocacy for transportation in the state budget. Federal funding is also an important factor for the Commission's future, and the Commission will advocate strongly for the approval of a federal transportation bill. Congress's priorities will need to include funding for Positive Train Control and for goods movement and freight -related projects in Southern California. In Riverside County, goods movement investments will continue to focus on the need to complete highway/rail grade separation projects. The success of many of these efforts will rely on enhanced external communications. Media relations will continue to be a priority, and press releases will remain a major effort along with social media and the Commission's On the Move monthly newsletter and annual report. An expanding and systematic outreach to business and civic groups, focusing on Commission efforts in terms of funding, construction, and services, will be the central feature of the communications program. While actively participating in all of these major endeavors, the Executive Director will maintain and improve administrative efficiency and fiscally sound practices characteristic of the Commission. With a total of 42 budgeted staff positions, the Commission organization remains consistent with Commission direction. The Commission must continue to be competitive in the employment market and retain capable staff as well as attract high quality applicants. Staff training and development will continue, enabling our small and dedicated staff to enhance skills, productivity, and value. Our goal is to maintain the most effective mid -sized transportation agency in California. • Department Goals Maximize funding for transportation improvements in Riverside County through legislative advocacy. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Goods Movement) Objectives: • Implement the Commission's early development project priorities outlined in the recent Commission workshops, focusing on the first ten years of the 2009 Measure A, which will include an emphasis on project development for the SR-91 corridor improvement project and the Perris Valley Line. • Place an emphasis on initiating federally authorized and funded projects included within the new federal transportation bill and the Commission's ongoing project priorities. • Advocate federal appropriations for current projects and regional efforts to reduce the community impacts of rail goods movement. • Advocate for an increase in TIFIA funding with an emphasis on reaching financial close of a TIFIA loan for the SR-91 corridor improvement project. • Continue to advocate for federal investment in freight and goods movement infrastructure with the goal of mitigating community impacts while increasing capacity and local job creation and economic development. • Continue implementation of Transit Vision while addressing short- and long-term funding constraints. Focus on timely and effective completion of capital projects. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Goods Movement, Intermodalism & Accessibility) Objectives: • Serve as the lead agency for the construction of the 1-215 corridor improvement projects. • Work closely with Ca!trans on construction of the 60/215 East Junction HOV lane connector project in Moreno Valley as well as the SR-91 HOV lanes project in downtown Riverside and 1-215 bi-county project. • Ensure effective communication with the public regarding construction and project details throughout the county. • Embark on construction for the Perris Valley Line Metrolink extension. Support regional transportation solutions in cooperation with surrounding counties that are of benefit to Riverside County. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Goods Movement, System Efficiencies) Objectives: • Continue work on grade separation and rail capacity projects funded through the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) and TCIF as well as those called for in the Commission's $561 million Grade Separation Plan adopted in October 2006 and updated in 2009. • Work with neighboring counties regarding corridor improvements on SR-91 as well as on 1-15 and 1-215. • Maintain an effective working relationship with the agencies that comprise Metrolink to ensure that Riverside County commuter rail needs are served in an efficient, effective, and safe manner. • Partner with SANBAG to enhance and publicize the 1E511 system and work with agencies in San Diego, Orange, and Los Angeles counties to provide effective, regional 511 traveler information services. • Play an active role in potential legislative efforts to revamp the implementation of intercity rail and commuter rail service in the Los Angeles -San Diego -San Luis Obispo (LOSSAN) corridor. • Be an active participant in discussions involving high-speed rail —especially concerning connectivity investments in the overall rail system in Southern California. • Work toward advocating additional intercity rail service to the Coachella Valley. 11,0aintain effective working relationships with Commissioners to strengthen and expand the Commission's leadership in transportation policy decision -making at all levels of government. (Policy Goal: Communications) Objectives: • Facilitate Commissioner participation at the regional, state, and federal levels to raise the interests of the Commission and seek favorable action. • Continue regular communication between the Executive Director, senior staff and the Commissioners. • Continue collaborative efforts with member agency staff regarding local priorities and funding challenges. While maintaining a relatively small staff, promote the Commission's effectiveness by improving and developing staff skills, using state-of-the-art working tools, and fostering an environment that encourages and rewards individual and team effort. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Continue to maintain a well -documented employee appraisal process that provides clear, understandable, and measurable performance criteria for all employees. • Maintain and encourage staff morale and effectiveness. • Retain quality staff as the economy improves. Develop the framework for a Commission culture that enhances productivity, encourages regular and open communication among staff, and promotes the mutual achievement of individual and organizational goals and objectives. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Conduct a semi-annual review of organization accomplishments as measured against planned objectives to determine progress in meeting those objectives and action steps needed. • Facilitate open communications and coordination between management, professional staff, and support staff through regular meetings. Executive Management Performance/Workload Indicators FY 10/11 Estimate FY 10/11 Actual FY 11/12 Estimated FY 12/13 Projected Expenditures $417,425,900 $372,021,300 $358,560,200 $634,786,100 Staffing levels 39 39 41 42 Administration costs as percentage of expenditures 2% 2% 3% 3% Administration Mission Statement: "To provide quality and efficient services to the Board of Commissioners, staff, and external customers and to comply with applicable federal and state requirements." Chart 26 - Administration tDebtSzvice 10 )11 Professional Costs 9% Expenditures As noted in Table 43, the Administration Department's total budget is $1,355,400 for office operations including management of office space, lease, and equipment; records; Commission and committee meetings; and special events as well as for the clerk of the board and human resources functions. Salaries and benefits expenditures of $460,300 reflect an increase in FTEs. Professional costs of $114,500 cover various services including, but not limited to, Commissioners' per diem, legal fees, and consultant and other professional services. Support costs of $640,600 cover administrative overhead including office maintenance; information technology updates, support, and maintenance; and recruitments. Capital outlay of $140,000 reflects an increase due to information technology equipment upgrades. Table 43 - Administration Expenditure Detail FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget - Change Change Salaries and Benefits $ 400,700 $ 412,400 $ 372,400 $ 460,300 $ 47,900 12% Professional Costs Commissioner Per Diem 58,300 55,000 60,000 65,000 10,000 18% Legal Services 4,800 28,000 8,400 ',- 19,000- (9,000) -32% Professional Services -General 33,900 49,000 32,500 30,500 (18,500) -38% Total Professional Costs 97,000 132,000 100,900 114,500 (17,500) -13% Support Costs 558,400 670,800 586,200 640,600 (30,200) -5% Capital Outlay 29,000 20,000 5,000 140,000 120,000 600% Debt Service 25,300 - - N/A TOTAL Administration $ 1,110,400 $ 1,235,200 $ 1,064,500 $ 1,355,400 $ 120,200 10% Administration Staffing Summary Position - FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Accounting and Human Resources Manager 0.12 0.10 0.25 Acconting Supervisor 0.00 0.00 0.01 Accounting Technician 0.03 0.05 0.00 Administrative Assistant 1.19 1.38 1.38 Office and Board Services Manager 1.00 1.00 1.00 Senior Administrative Assistant 1.00 1.00 1.00 Senior Office Assistant 0.94 0.93 0.95 FTE 4.28 4.46 4.59 Department Budget Overview — Office Operations Department Description Office Operations oversees the daily maintenance needs of the Commission's office facility and staff; manages information technology and records management systems; oversees the office lease; purchases office supplies and equipment; posts public notices on the website and local newspaper and notices of project completion; maintains a safe working environment for Commission board members, staff, and consultants; and provides support services. Office Operations continues to operate with a small staff of six consisting of the Office and Board Services Manager, Senior Administrative Assistant, three Administrative Assistants, and Senior Office Assistant. Key Assumptions • Support is provided to 42 full-time Commission staff. • Requests for project proposals and project notices of completion are posted in accordance with applicable federal, state, and local regulations. • Information technology systems are upgraded and maintained to ensure efficiency. • An accurate and efficient records management system is maintained. • Requests for public records are responded to in accordance with the California Records Act. Accomplishments • Updated the web page in a timely manner for the postings of public notices. • Maintained efficient information technology infrastructure. • Maintained the electronic records management system to ensure accurate and efficient processing of incoming and outgoing correspondence and documents. • Maintained a disaster recovery plan to ensure uninterrupted Commission operations. • Responded to public records requests in accordance with the California Public Records Act. Major Initiatives The Commission will continue to maintain a robust electronic records management system. Achieving greater efficiencies and strengthening the Commission's records management processes and procedures,the system pertains to the management, storage, and accessibility of the Commission's actions and documents and the retention capability for incoming and internally created records. Office Operations will continue to provide high quality support services to the Board of Commissioners and to internal and external customers by providing a work environment that enhances the overall mission of the Commission. Department Goal — Office Operations Ensure quality service that demonstrates responsiveness and flexibility. and provides services at the most reasonable cost. (Policy Goals: Communications, Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Support 42 full-time staff. • Provide accessibility to meeting agendas, legal notices, requests for proposal, and employment opportunities through the Commission's web page. • Continue to improve administrative efficiency through automation of records processing. • Provide a safe working environment with the maintenance of an injury and illness prevention program. • Post legal notices and requests for proposals on the Commission's web page and in the newspapers on a timely basis. • Provide office supplies, equipment, and services consistent with intended quality and capabilities at the most advantageous price afforded in the market. • Manage the Commission's information technology systems. Department Budget Overview — Clerk of the Board Department Description The Clerk of the Board provides support services to the Board of Commissioners and its alternates and for Commission and committee meetings. It serves as an important resource for the Commission and has the responsibility for recording, publishing, preserving, and filing meeting proceedings of documents acted upon by the Commission and its committees; posting legal notices; processing claims against the Commission; fulfilling requirements of the Commission and the committees as it relates to the Conflict of Interest Code; serving as the Filing Officer for Economic Interest and Campaign Disclosure statements and legal claims against the Commission; coordinating Commission special events and meetings; and performing all duties required by law, rules, or order of the Board of Commissioners. As such, this department has a direct link and responsibility to serving local taxpayers and the public while supporting the actions of the Commission. The need to be accountable to the public at large is further amplified by the need to comply with federal and state law requiring prompt responses to California Public Records Act requests. Key Assumptions • Staff support and meeting services are provided to 34 Commissioners and their alternates, the Commission, four established committees, and a number of ad hoc committees. • Monthly agenda packets and supporting documents are published and distributed in accordance with the Brown Act. • Officers and members of the Commission are kept informed by providing them with the most current and accurate data to assist them and facilitate their decision making responsibilities. • Frequent communication with Commissioners continues to provide news and updates on Commission items and transportation -related meetings. • Available technology is used to provide simplified access of agenda items and Commission actions to the public, local agencies, and staff. Accomplishments • Updated the web page and the bulletin board for the agenda, minutes, and supporting documents. • Posted legal notices in local newspapers and on the Commission's web page. • Regularly advised officers and members of the Commission and their staff on changes to Commission meetings and other transportation -related meetings. • Arranged Commission and committee meetings and special events of the Commission. • Processed and transmitted Commission -approved resolutions to appropriate agencies in a timely manner. Major Initiatives Each year, local agencies make changes to their appointments regarding their representation on the Commission. Staff will continue to make every effort to ensure that the newly appointed representatives, as well as their respective staff, are aware of operational policies of the Commission and other transportation -related meetings. There will be continued emphasis on the utilization of electronic mail with Commissioners for more efficient communications. Clerk of the Board staff will continue to provide high quality support services to the Board of Commissioners. Staff will also continue to update technology to streamline processes and procedures for easier access to Commission actions, minutes, resolutions, and ordinances, including electronic agenda distribution. Department Goals — Clerk of the Board Ensure coordination and documentation of Commission and committee meetings and provide public accessibility to agenda items as required by state regulations. (Policy Goals: Communications, Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Provide accurate, high quality agenda packets for Commission and committee meetings. • Continue to provide support to Commission members, staff, and attendees of Commission and committee meetings. • Post meeting agendas and supporting documents in compliance with Brown Act requirements. • Maintain an accurate list of Commissioners and alternates and submit membership roster changes to the Secretary of State. • Maintain and .file all Commission and committee meetings and official records of the Commission. • Perform all duties within mandated deadlines. • Maintain and promote good Commission and staff relations. Facilitate access of information to Commission records. (Policy Goal: Communications) Objectives: • Continue to respond to requests for records and information on a timely basis and in accordance with state law. • Continue to improve the Commission's recordkeeping practices by updating the electronic records management system. • Maintain Commission agreements, amendments, memoranda of understanding, resolutions, and ordinances. • Maintain a centralized database for Commissioners, agencies, and consultant contact information. • Coordinate special activities, meetings, events, and conferences as requested by the Executive Director and the Commission. Department Budget Overview — Human Resources Department Description Human Resources responsibilities include administering the recruitment, selection, and appraisal process; updating and conducting a biennial survey of comparable salaries and benefits; maintaining personnel policies and procedures; and scheduling periodic sessions for staff to review benefits and personnel rules and for supervisors to review the performance evaluation process. Key Assumptions • The use of consultant services for Human Resources administration is maximized. • The assessment of Human Resources practices and procedures will continue. • Continuous improvement in communication with employees regarding Human Resources information will be an ongoing process. • Compliance with state and federal labor law regulations is achieved. Accomplishments • Provided the annual Benefit Statement to all employees. • Regularly provided information to employees on changes to health insurance, 401(a) defined contribution, 457 deferred compensation plans, and the personnel policies and procedures manual through the Commission's intranet. • Recruited and filled one intern and five full-time positions. • Held training sessions on violence in the workplace,. harassment -free workplace, and drug -free workplace. • Disclosed employees' compensation on the Commission's website in compliance with the State Controller's Office and CaIPERS. • Revised the Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual. • Major Initiatives Human Resources focuses on managing employees and consists of a framework of activities and practices that support and develop a motivated workforce while at the same time complying with legislation and regulations that govern the employer/employee relationship. Staff will use written position descriptions and performance expectations in order to give each employee a clear and consistent understanding of what is expected. Additionally, staff will utilize qualified human resources consultants to assist in establishing good human resources management practices, based on policies to establish parameters for fair and consistent decision -making, and to institute good workplace practices. The Commission's practice is to conduct a compensation program review every two years to ensure fair compensation is established to attract and retain the most qualified employees. Beginning in FY 2008/09, the Commission opted to postpone the compensation program review due to the slowdown in the economy and decline in sales tax revenues. The Commission will reintroduce the compensation program review when the economy is stable. The Commission will provide a one-time 3% cost of living adjustment and return the merit - based performance review system that will provide up to a 3% annual merit increase for staff in FY 2012/13. Department Goals — Human Resources Administer human resources policies, procedures, and programs in order to align personnel laws and the Commission's policies with continuous improvement principles. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Review and update personnel policies and procedures to comply with federal and state requirements. • Provide information to enhance the employee's knowledge of current personnel policies and procedures in various forms including electronic access, workshops, and printed information. • Ensure that employee personnel records are updated timely for various personnel actions. Continueto employ and recruit a dynamic and talented workforce. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Maintain a compensation program that ensures internal equity and external competitiveness within the pay structure for Commission employees. • Exercise care in making high -quality, diverse appointments. Develop people to be their best in order to meet the needs of the organization. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Build and maintain an effective performance system to include timely performance evaluations, personal development, and a supportive work environment. • Provide appropriate and timely training to meet the demands of the organization. • Foster teamwork through cooperative efforts and support for shared success. Understand and consistently deliver excellent customer service to all employees. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objective: • Focus on "employee as customer" and consistently strive to exceed expectations by supporting and maintaining individual respect, appreciation, management accessibility, and communication. Improve the quality of the work culture. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Develop and maintain a safe working environment. • Maintain a proactive employee relations process. • Promote a work/family balance. • Recognize and reward individual contributions, innovation, and learning from experience. Administration Performance/Workload Indicators FY 10/11 Estimated FY 10/11 Actual FY 11/12 Estimated FY 12/13 Projected Employee rules/Benefits review sessions held 1 1 1 1 Recruitments 2 2 6 2 Positions filled 2 2 6 2 Legal notices 15 26 18 20 Commission/Committee/Ad Hoc meetings 46 55 50 52 Commissioners supported (including alternates) 59 59 61 61 Staff supported: Regular full-time Temporary/Seasonal 39 2 39 2 41 1 42 2 Legislative Affairs and Communications Mission Statement: "To strive to improve the mobility of Riverside County residents by working through the legislative process and by maintaining effective interagency relationships. This is supported by facilitating interactive communications with the public and transportation stakeholders through various outreach and media efforts." Chart 27 — Legislative Affairs and Communications Expenditures The Legislative Affairs and Communications Department has a total budget of $1,270,500 (Table 44). Staffing costs make up 31% of the total department expenditures and reflect a decrease in FTEs from 2.27 to 1.97. Professional costs of $687,500 include legislative advocacy, graphic design, and website updates. Support costs of $188,000 are comparable to last year's budget. Table 44 — Legislative Affairs and Communications Expenditure Detail FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Salariesand Benefits $ 321,300 $ 437,100 $ 367,500 $ 395,000 $ (42,100) -10% Professional Costs Legal Services 1,300 2,500 2,500 2,500 0% Professional Services - General 383,900 686,000 418,000 685,000 (1,000) 0% Total Professional Costs 385,200 688,500 420,500 687,500 (1,000) 0% Support Costs 145,100 171,400 170,100 188,000 16,600 10% TOTALLegislative Affairs and Communications $ 851,600 $ 1,297,000 $ 958,100 $ 1,270,500 $ (26,500) -2% Legislative Affairs and Communications Staffing Summary Position FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Administrative Assistant 0.19 0.21 0.19 Community Relations Manager 0.06 0.10 0.15 Commuter and Motorist Assistance Manager 0.01 0.00 0.00 Deputy Executive Director 0.69 0.70 0.65 Executive Director 0.02 0.00 0.05 Goods Movement Program Manager 0.00 0.30 0.05 Government Relations Manager 1.00 0.95 0.85 Procurement Administrator 0.00 0.00 0.03 Procurement Manager 0.03 0.01 0.00 FTE 2.00 2.27 1.97 Department Budget Overview Department Description Legislative Affairs Transportation issues and system enhancements affect a number of jurisdictions and stakeholders. Through increased participation, the Commission is able to play a stronger leadership role at all levels of government to advance its interests and policy goals. The importance of this is magnified when the Commission is seeking changes in law or needs legislative authorization to move forward with a specific project. The Commission's Legislative Affairs efforts focus on taking full advantage of opportunities at both thefederal and state levels when there is a potential impact to Commission programs. In doing so, the Commission maintains its role as a major legislative force and a statewide leader on a broad range of issues affecting transportation policy such as project delivery and enhanced funding. This requires the establishment and maintenance of ongoing communication with Riverside County's legislative delegations in Washington and Sacramento. The Commission accomplishes this via a combined effort that includes Commissioners, staff, and legislative consultants in the two capitals. The effort also requires working with other transportation agencies throughout the State in order to collaborate on issues of mutual concern. This cooperation takes place in a number of forums including a monthly meeting of transportation commission chief executive officers, a legislative roundtable of regional transportation advocates, Mobility 21, SHCC, and Coalition for America's Gateways and Trade Corridors (CAGTC). A chief concern continuing through FY 2012/13 will be the approval of a federal surface transportation authorization bill. This legislation will include changes in policy but will also set funding levels for major federal programs the Commission relies upon including CMAQ and STP. Ideally Congress will approve a multi -year bill rather than a short-term extension so that the Commission can be assured of federal funding levels during an extended period of time. In FY 2012/13, the Commission will advocate to protect transportation funding sources at both the state and federal level. The keys to the effort will be in warding off attempts to divert state transportation funding to close California's budget gap and to ensure that the state can meet its commitments on voter -approved Proposition 1B infrastructure bonds. In terms of federal action on specific. projects, the Commission will seek to reach financial close of the TIFIA loan it was selected to apply for in April 2012 related to the SR-91 corridor improvement project. The Commission's project was one of 26 letters of interest submitted for a total request exceeding $13 billion, and it was one of only five selected to submit a TIFIA loan application. Additionally, in late 2011, the Commission was awarded a $20 million TIFIA payment from the TIGER III program for the SR-91 corridor improvement project. More than 800 projects vied for TIGER III funding, making it one of the most competitive federal funding opportunities in recent history. The SR-91 corridor improvement project was one of only four projects nationwide that received the maximum award of $20 million from TIGER III. Together, these two funding decisions reflect the effectiveness of the Commission's legislative program on a national scale and the need to continue a strong presence in Washington for future actions the Commission will seek. As a long-term goal for the new authorization bill, the Commission will join with a number of other agencies to seek a more robust level of federal funding for programs such as TIFIA that can provide low-cost financing for major infrastructure projects. With the recent success of the SR-91 corridor improvement project in the TIFIA program, the Commission may consider future TIFIA financing for projects such as the 1-15 corridor improvement project. Regional and statewide rail issues will be on the front burner this year and could significantly impact the Commission's future plans for rail service in Riverside County. In Sacramento, there is much discussion about high-speed rail. as well as new governance for the LOSSAN corridor. These projects have a direct impact on the Commission's contractual rail rights between Fullerton and Los Angeles which were purchased in 1993. The Commission's interest is to ensure that its access and ability to provide commuter rail service to Los Angeles and Orange counties is not disrupted. Another rail -related issue is service operated by Amtrak to and from the Coachella Valley. The service is currently provided only a few times per week, and an expansion to daily service is warranted. The line is included in the state rail plan, but additional funding and cooperation with the freight railroad is necessary for the expansion to daily service. Communications The Commission is committed to communicating with and educating a broad arena of interested parties on the roles and responsibilities of the agency. An emphasis will continue to be placed on informing Riverside County residents and businesses about transportation projects and services and maintaining open communication with other transportation stakeholders. Various forms of media and communication tools are used in these outreach efforts with the overall objectives to provide accurate, informative, and easily accessible information; facilitate public participation in the Commission processes; and increase interagency coordination and cooperation. The Deputy Executive Director is responsible for communications with the news media and prepares text for Commission materials, presentations, and speeches. Along with the Executive Director, the Deputy Executive Director, Community Relations Manager, and individual project managers actively participate in public presentations at the local, regional, and state levels to represent the Commission's interests. Strong relationships with the news media are very important to ensure that the public is well informed regarding the Commission's progress in determining funding priorities, designing infrastructure improvements, and constructing projects. There are many points throughout these processes in which the public can and should play a role in shaping the future of the County's transportation network. Key Assumptions • The Government Relations Manager will oversee legislative affairs work efforts with guidance from the Executive Director and the Deputy Executive Director. • The annual report to the public will be distributed throughout the County. • The On the Move newsletter will be published and distributed electronically and posted on the Commission website. • The Speakers Bureau effort will continue to seek local community opportunities to expand outreach regarding the Commission's activities. • The Commission's website will be updated and refreshed on a regular basis. • Additional communications tools and opportunities will be explored for incorporation into the ongoing program to help build public awareness of Commission activities including radio, television, social media outlets such as Twitter, and the internet. • The Commission will take a leadership role in formulating a countywide direction on federal transportation policy. • Public outreach will take a heightened role as project development activities accelerate on projects such as the SR-91 corridor improvement project, 1215 corridor improvements, the 60/215 East Junction project, SR-91 HOV lanes, Perris Valley Line project, Mid County Parkway, and SR-79 realignment. • Goods movement will remain a key policy priority for the Commission, and there will be an emphasis to ensure that Riverside County receives significant funding for this need from state and federal governments. • Governmental relations will assist the Commission in reaching financial close on the federal TIFIA loan to complete financing for the SR-91 corridor improvement project. • Another priority is the protection of the Commission's rights and interests regarding passenger rail service in Southern California. Accomplishments • Obtained invitation to apply for $444 million TIFIA loan from the U.S. DOT for the SR-91 corridor improvement project. • Obtained a $20 million TIGER TIFIA payment that will provide the basis for a significant portion of the overall financing needed for the SR-91 corridor improvement project. The $20 million payment provides a portion of the TIFIA loan for which the Commission has been selected to apply. • Published a four -page annual report supplement in three major newspapers —The Press Enterprise, Desert Sun, and The Californian. • Hosted and met with Senator Barbara Boxer and other key legislators on Riverside County transportation needs. • Met with and provided SR-91 corridor improvement project tour for Senator Dianne Feinstein. • Updated the look and functionality of the Commission's website. • Continued effective relationships with the news media resulting in informative coverage regarding local and regional transportation issues and Measure A project delivery. • Provided extensive public outreach support as part of the project development process for the Mid County Parkway, Perris Valley Line, SR-91 corridor improvement project, the 60/215 East Junction, and improvements to 1-215. • Conducted multiple public meetings as part of the environmental review process for a number of efforts including the Perris Valley Line, 1-215 corridor improvement, SR-91 corridor improvement, 74/215 interchange, and 91/71 interchange projects. • Supported the Rail Department in the development of various marketing materials and advertisements including weekend and holiday train services. • Continued to take a leadership role and collaborate with neighboring counties, local business leaders, Mobility 21, and CAGTC on many transportation policy issues in Sacramento and Washington. • Continued work with the Southern California National Freight Gateway collaboration to foster cooperation, coordination, and collaboration to facilitate the movement of goods through Southern California. • Developed new collateral materials for an overview of the Commission's programs and projects as well as construction projects planned for Western County, which are often distributed at public events. • Improved and maintained the Commission's photo library to assist with documenting the project delivery progress of the voter -approved Measure A tax program. The photo library has been used to develop PowerPoint presentations, information brochures, and TIGER grant and TIFIA loan submissions. • Maintained a presence on the social networking site Twitter which can be accessed at http://twitter.com/RCTC. • Held widely attended events for the 74/215 interchange completion and SR-91 HOV lanes groundbreaking. • Took an active role in providing comments and ensuring that Riverside County projects were included in the RTP. • Actively participated in a region -wide effort to expand the reach of Mobility 21, a Southern California transportation advocacy group, to the Inland Empire. The emphasis resulted in co -hosting a major conference in Los Angeles in late 2011. The conference will take place once again in Anaheim in late 2012. • Upgraded a new Commissioner orientation program that bolsters Commissioner knowledge and participation regarding Commission projects and activities and was presented to every new Commissioner. Major Initiatives Legislative Affairs The Commission will continue to advocate strategically and effectively on the policy issues described above in Washington and Sacramento, utilizing our contract advocacy teams, coalitions, and partnerships. The Commission will seek to build on its recent successes in both capitals and continue to maintain a strong presence as a respected, knowledgeable and effective resource to policy leaders and decision -makers. Communications The Commission provides information to the public through various channels including: 1) participation at public meetings, chambers of commerce, industry associations, and service clubs; 2) production and provision of resource materials and fact sheets; 3) maintenance and enhancement of the Commission's website; and 4) development of newspaper press releases, radio and television interviews, and cable television spots. The Commission's largest publication effort to provide widespread understanding of its projects and expenditures is its four -page annual report which has been published in three area newspapers throughout the County. Broad distribution of the On the Move, an e-mail newsletter highlighting actions of the Commission and emerging topics, will continue as part of the Commission's communications efforts. Efforts will continue to update and expand the Commission's contact database including e-mail addresses in order to support distribution of the Commission's public information materials. A continuing emphasis will be placed on providing communications support to major project development efforts including the Perris Valley Line, the Mid County Parkway, the SR-91, and the 1-215 construction projects. The need for proactive public communication and outreach remains important, as the Commission continues to move forward with the delivery of the 2009 Measure A work program. This is an area of emphasis, as the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan places the Commission in a high -profile role to deliver large-scale highway projects. This will require additional contact with the public by the Community Relations Manager. The Commission's outreach will include a proactive effort to work closely with various media formats such as print, radio, internet, and television to increase their understanding and interest in transportation issues and to generate a higher level of media coverage. Toward that end, opportunities will be identified for live or taped interviews and presentations that speak to local residents and employers and their questions concerning transportation issues. Appropriate forums may include city council meetings, local cable television, and radio. New Commissioner orientation meetings will be provided by the Executive Director, Deputy Executive Director, and Clerk of the Board in individualized settings. To supplement individual Commissioner meetings with the Executive Director, continuing education opportunities at the small group level will also be provided to Commissioners that focus on timely issues. Department Goals Foster the Commission's full involvement and input in a broad range of local, regional, state, and federal government settings. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Goods Movement, System Efficiencies) Objectives: • Participate in the SHCC; California Transit Association; Southern California Legislative Roundtable; League of Cities; Mobility 21; CAGTC; Southern California National Freight Gateway Collaboration; regional, state and federal transportation agencies; and community/business organizations to influence funding and policy decisions that impact Riverside County. • Maintain a leadership role in local and regional transportation venues related to project development efforts and current and emerging issues. • Provide leadership to the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) of the Mobile Source Air Pollution Reduction Review Committee (MSRC) to ensure that funding for air quality -related transportation improvements is fully distributed to Riverside County jurisdictions. • Work with SCAG, WRCOG, and CVAG to monitor and respond to transportation issues involving the implementation of SB375 on smart growth planning. • Continue regular meetings at the Executive Director/Chief Executive Officer level with transportation agencies throughout the region. • Conduct ongoing meetings and communication with transit providers in Riverside County, Implement the Commission's state and federal legislative program to, maximize flexibility in the use of existing transportation revenues by supporting legislation to protect and increase current funding levels, ensuring an equitable distribution of available resources, streamlining administrative procedures to reduce costs and time of project development, and accelerating the allocation and use of existing resources. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Goods Movement) Objectives: • Coordinate legislative activities of federal and state legislative consultants and obtain monthly reports on activities performed. • Work with board members to establish policy positions, review and analyze legislation, visit with elected representatives in Sacramento and Washington, draft legislation, and maintain strong relationships with key decision -makers. • Provide regular updates to the Commission regarding state and federal government issues. • Effectively represent the Commission before the state and federal legislative bodies, the CTC, and other agencies in funding, programming, and policy matters. • Convene meetings with state, federal, and legislative staff members. Support the continuing education of Commissioners to increase their understanding of transportation -related issues at local, state, and federal levels to maximize the effectiveness of the Commission in affecting policy and funding actions. (Policy Goal: Communications) Objectives: • Provide orientation training for new Commissioners. • Produce and distribute a monthly e-mail newsletter, On the Move, highlighting actions and activities of the Commission. • Provide periodic educational workshops or study sessions for Commissioners. Develop and maintain an information program which educates the public and other stakeholders on the roles and responsibilities of the Commission as it relates to accomplishments achieved through Measure A or other funding sources controlled or administered by the Commission. (Policy Goals: Communications, Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Expand, maintain, and update information on the Commission's website including individual project websites and social media. • Annually produce a report that informs the public regarding Measure A progress and other Commission programs. • Issue news releases to the local media announcing significant achievements and providing information on Commission actions and activities. • Develop and maintain open lines of communication with news reporters to facilitate adequate and accurate news coverage. • Schedule periodic media information briefings or news conferences when a particular issue warrants it. • Expand the stock of video footage for use in production of cable television spots that feature transportation projects funded and/or implemented by the Commission. • Periodically use cable television and other forms of media such as internet sites and blogs, if appropriate, to communicate information to the public regarding the Commission's activities and services. • Coordinate and oversee message content of all Commission publications and communications to provide uniformity of message and direction. • Support the development and planning of projects in regard to public outreach and communication efforts. • Require the use of Measure A project/program signage by funding recipients to increase public awareness of Measure A accomplishments. • Continue to administer and expand the use of the Speakers Bureau to reach community members in service and other organizations. • Monitor and distribute media coverage from various outlets in the County and throughout the region to Commissioners and staff to enable them to closely follow transportation policy trends. • Provide oversight and coordination to Commission departments in the development of communications' materials. Foster and maintain effective communications with other agencies to heighten their understanding of the roles and responsibilities of the Commission and increase interagency coordination and cooperation. (Policy Goal: Communications) Objective: • Assign designated staff members to attend other agency meetings and require staff to provide written/verbal communication on topics of discussion during regular staff meetings. Legislative Affairs and Communications Performance/Workload Indicators FY 10/11 Estimated FY 10/11 Actual FY 11/12 Estimated FY 12/13 Projected Speakers bureau presentations 30 30 35 35 Legislative action submittals to Commission 9 9 9 9 Commissioner and state and federal legislator in -person meetings 55 55 45 50 Southern California legislative staff roundtables 9 9 8 8 Finance Mission Statement: "To safeguard the Commission's assets and maintain strong and prudent fiscal controls in investing, accounting, budgeting, procurements, and financial reporting including ongoing disclosure to all interested parties. Seek financing alternatives that complement the Commission's strategic direction." Chart 28 — Finance Salaries and Benefits 8% Pl.11111 Support Costs 7% Expenditures The Finance Department's total budget is $10,000,100 (Table 45) and reflects a 5% decrease over the prior year's budget. Department staffing costs will total $828,600, reflecting an increase of 1%. Professional costs of $3,520,500 include various services related to general and specialized legal, financial advisory, external and internal audits, debt management, CAFR and annual budget graphic design, and procurement. Support costs of $651,000 are 14% higher than the prior year's budget due to increased operations costs, including insurance and printing. A transfer out of $5,000,000 is related to funding a portion of the debt service interest payment from the 2009 Measure A Western County bond financing program. . Table 45 - Finance Expenditure Detail prim FY11/12 FY17/12 FY12/13 Della Parent Acted Revised Budget Projected Ductal Charge, Charge Salaries and Benefits $ 77$a0 $ 818533 $ 031300 $ 603 $ 7Ig1e0 1% Professional Costs Camissioner Per Clem Legal Services 34,730 A4.uitServiaes 401,E Hnaidal Adasay 1..1100 Prafessiael Services -General 4(81,5:0 Tod Professional Casts 448I5O Support Cc6ts 544,E Projects and Cperator s PrtgamCperations Endneerirg tea, Fight ofW3y Special Stucies - Cperalingand Capital Cisbuserrenls Tod Projects andCperadans - N/A Capital Cutlay 24XO 129,5Z0 4,000 (14531 -100 CebtService - N/A Trarisfers0.1 - 50:10:0 40371003 5033033 - CP/ TOTAL Rnance $ 50,100 $ 74474033 $ 153583:1 $ 21001103 $ (47Z933) N/A zom 3Ac o 231cco (34531 -13Y0 5(IVO) 44000 4E13003 (51CO3 -� 4850:0 8q0co 785yo 137,0:0 289% 113193) 1312011 Z€6%9D -14Y0 1SE6(CO 4M8C0 15211533 W4501 -11% 5E0,003 575700 E.MO ROOD 14''/o N/A N/A N/A _ wA N/A - N/A N/A Finance Staffing Summary Position FY.10/11 FY 11/12 FY 12/13' Accounting and Human Resources Manager 0.86 0.90 0.75 Accounting Assistant 0.00 1.00 1.00 Accounting Clerk 1.00 1.00 1.00 Accounting Supervisor 1.00 1.00 0.99 Accounting Technician 1.97 1.95 2.00 Administrative Assistant 0.40 0.25 0.22 Chief Financial Officer 0.74 0.60 0.60 Executive Director 0.04 0.04 0.03 Procurement Administrator 0.02 0.05 0.04 Procurement Manager 0.09 0.05 0.00 Senior Office Assistant 0.04 0.05 0.04 Toll Program Director 0.02 0.00 0.00 FTE 6.18 6.89 6.67 Department Budget Overview Department Description Finance and Accounting Commission resources are allocated to assure financial stability and fiscal accountability. Finance activities include investing the Commission's cash resources, planning and directing financial transactions, and subsequent monitoring of legal and regulatory requirements. Adequate cash flow must be maintained while at the same time prudently investing idle funds. Borrowing needs are carefully planned using both short- and long-term debt. Once debt is issued, there are ongoing responsibilities including interaction with financial advisors, bankers, dealers and remarketing agents, underwriters, bond counsel, bond insurers, trustees, issuing and paying agents, arbitrage consultants, and rating agencies as well as providing regular and consistent information disclosure to investors. Fiscal accountability involves receiving all funds due the Commission, paying all Commission obligations, maintaining the general ledger, reporting regularly on the Commission's fiscal results, and preparing and monitoring the budget. Fiscal accountability requires the coordination of budget planning and monitoring and the accurate and timely accounting for all funding sources, including compliance with all applicable laws and regulations governing those funds. Accounting encompasses cash receipt and disbursement functions, maintenance of the general ledger including project cost accounting, payroll processing, quarterly and annual financial reporting, and retention of and coordination with independent auditors. The Commission also recognizes the importance of accountability for the organization. As a result, the Commission is highly regarded by individuals, peers, other organizations, and government officials at a local, regional, state, and national basis. A formal organizational accountability program was approved in January 2006 to address fraud risk, ethical conduct, financial and operational disclosure, and maintaining the public's confidence in the Commission. Accordingly, measures have been implemented based on a conceptual framework related to oversight, reporting, fraud, internal control, and ethics. Procurement Management In the management of the procurements and contracts process, the responsibility of the procurement management function is to ensure that the procurement policies approved by the Commission are followed and procurement procedures are updated as required. The function is responsible for the purchase of all goods and services, except for real property acquisition, in accordance with Commission policies and federal and state funding requirements to ensure the implementation of the Commission's projects and programs. This includes the administration of the Commission's disadvantaged business enterprise (DBE) and small business enterprise (SBE) programs. Procuring goods and services for the Commission is a cooperative effort. All Commission staff involved in procurements for their projects and programs are responsible to employ sound judgment and appropriate standards of ethics and fairness to procure in a manner most advantageous to the Commission. The Procurement division also conducts a review of and updates insurance coverage for the Commission and its properties. Key Assumptions • The commercial paper program will continue as a short-term financing vehicle for the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan and Coachella Valley highway and regional arterial projects. • The sales tax revenue bond SBPAs and commercial paper program letter of credit facilities will be maintained with the current short-term ratings. • Proceeds from the sales tax revenue bonds will be used to fund 2009 Measure A capital projects. • The Commission will pay 100% of the annual required contribution related to postretirement health care benefits based on a new actuarial valuation. • Arbitrage calculations related to the outstanding debt issues will be performed by a consultant on an annual basis. • Directors and program .managers will continue to have adequate project budget and accounting information to make informed decisions. • Investments will be maintained primarily in state and local agency investment pools for short-term liquidity purposes; however, investments in mid-term treasury and federal agency securities may be made as available funds are identified and yields increase. The overall interest rate is conservatively projected to be .50%. • A revised, comprehensive procurement policies and procedures manual will be irwlemented. • A standardized procurement filing system will be developed and implemented and centralized procurement files will be maintained. • Procurement will conduct outreach activities to encourage DBE and SBE participation in various contracts. Accomplishments • Continued to institute new business processes in the finance department and provide customized reporting as a result of the implementation of Eden an ERP financial management system. • Conducted internal audit review of right of way activities. • Extended the term of the SBPAs with JPMorgan related to the 2009 Bonds through September 2014 at a reduced cost. • Substituted new letters of credit with Bank of Tokyo and Union Bank for the commercial paper program through October 2014 at a reduced cost. • Maintained Commission's AA rating related to sales tax revenue bonds. • Supported the continued development of a financing plan for the SR-91 corridor improvement project, including a presentation to Fitch Ratings for a preliminary rating assessment of a TIFIA loan. • Obtained financial reporting excellence award from the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) (19th year) related to the CAFR for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2011. • Obtained GFOA distinguished budget award (16th year) for annual budget for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2011. • Generated over $2 million in additional Measure A sales tax revenue since the engagement of a firm in January 2008 to provide sales tax audit services in order to detect and correct reporting errors. • Established project goals for the SR-91 corridor improvement and Perris Valley Line projects. • Implemented SBE program to encourage contractors to allow small business enterprise participation in contracts. • Participated in small business networking activities and met with potential DBE and SBE vendors. Major Initiatives Finance and Accounting The commercial paper program has been in place for over seven years and has provided short-term, advance funding for projects included in the 2009 Measure A and related Western Riverside County Delivery Plan. Commission management will .continue to consider appropriate uses of commercial paper to advance 2009 Measure A projects. The letters of credit supporting the commercial paper program expire in October 2014. In connection with the 2009 variable rate bonds, the Commission entered into SBPAs with JPMorgan, which were extended through September 2014. The Commission will monitor the credit quality of the banks providing these liquidity facilities for any actions which may affect the short-term ratings of the commercial paper program and 2009 Bonds. Staff continues to develop a comprehensive financing plan to support the highway and rail capital projects to be delivered through 2019 and to assess future financing requirements. This financing plan incorporates revised sales tax revenue forecasts as well as other potential federal, state, and local revenue sources, including tolls. Based on the updated cost estimates for these projects and identified revenues, potential project funding shortfalls may result in project deferrals or require alternative financing strategies. Financing alternatives to be considered include commercial paper, long-term bond issues to finance Measure A and toll projects, and federal loan programs. During FY 2012/13, the Finance Department and its finance consulting team will continue to support the TIFIA and toll revenue bond financing efforts for the SR-91 corridor improvement project. Internal audit projects will continue to be developed as part of the organizational accountability program. An outcome of the projects will be operational solutions such as process improvements. The internal audit risk assessment and audit plan will continue to be updated periodically. To ensure that the Commission receives the proper of amount of Measure A sales taxes, the Commission will continue to engage a firm to conduct sales tax audit services. The firm will also provide quarterly sales tax analysis and reporting services, of which a summary report is presented to the Commission on a quarterly basis. The Finance Department will continue to keep abreast of GASB technical activities affecting the Commission's accounting and financial reporting activities. Various new standards will be considered for early implementation as part of the preparation of the CAFR for the year ended June 30, 2012. The Finance Department will continue the implementation of Eden, an ERP financial management software system that will integrate data processing across the Commission, automate administrative processes, and embrace data integration. The ERP implementation efficiency gains include an automated paperless workflow system, advanced project accounting, multi -year budgeting, multi -year contract management, grant tracking, and readily available scanned images that can be retrieved by all users. Procurement Management A centralized procurements process will continue to be implemented to manage requests for proposals, qualifications, invitations for bids, small purchases, and related contract administration issues. The Procurement Policies and Procedures Manual will be revised to reflect current best practices and applicable laws and regulations. Accordingly, the procurement system will strengthen controls to ensure consistency in the development and application of procurement policies and procedures and adherence to applicable laws and regulations, especially those related to federal and state grants. Procurement Management is responsible for developing, implementing, and monitoring DBE and SBE program requirements incoordination with contractors and other appropriate officials. Duties and responsibilities include establishing DBE attainment goals, monitoring reporting and utilization by contractors, gathering and reporting statistical data and other information as required, reviewing third party contracts and purchase requisitions for compliance with the program, ensuring that bid notices and requests for proposals are made available to DBEs and SBEs in a timely manner, reporting to and advising the Executive Director and Commission on DBE and SBE matters, and providing outreach to DBEs and SBEs to fully advise them of contracting opportunities. During FY 2012/13 the Commission will host and attend several outreach events in order to acquaint potential vendors with the Commission's procurement procedures and opportunities. Additionally it will implement an e-procurement solution for online vendor and procurement management. Staff also consults with the Commission's insurance broker in procuring competitive quotes, on an annual basis, for various insurance coverages secured by the Commission in order to provide cost effective solutions to meet its diverse insurance needs. Department Goals Protect the Commission's cash resources by regular monitoring of investment practices to ensure consistency with established investment policy. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objective: • Achieve a rate of return at least equal to the County of Riverside Treasury Pool rate. Manage the Commission's outstanding debt ensuring compliance with applicable laws and regulations and continued investor awareness and receptivity to the Commission's program. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Provide an annual update and review of the debt programs with one or more of the rating agencies no later than June 30, 2013. This will be accomplished by presenting the SR-91 corridor improvement project financing plan, including the investment grade traffic and revenue study, in order to obtain ratings for the sales tax revenue bonds, toll revenue bonds, and TIFIA loan. • Meet continuing disclosure requirements of the debt program. • Prepare arbitrage calculations as required. Ensure the Commission and funding recipients comply with Measure A and TDA laws and regulations as they relate to the annual financial and compliance audits as well as close cooperation and coordination with independent auditors. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Minimize the number of substantive management letter comments and compliance findings requiring corrective action by the Commission. • Maintain appropriate fiduciary review and monitoring procedures for Measure A recipient and TDA claimant audits. Maintain fiscal and budgetary control through monitoring of periodic results and ensuring consistency with the Commission's strategic direction. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Obtain the GFOA Distinguished Budget Award for the FY 2012/13 budget. • Facilitate a comprehensive budgeting approach that effectively involves management staff, requiring full accountability for all department expenditures. • Fund 100% of the annual required contribution related to the postretirement health care benefits. Assure fiscal accountability for Commission funds with general ledger accounting and financial reporting consistent with generally accepted accounting principles. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Ensure proactive communication and timely responses to any noted errors, corrections, and budget transfers related to program management reviews of accounting and budget information. • Obtain an unqualified opinion on the basic financial statements. • Receive financial reporting excellence award from the GFOA related to the preparation and issuance of the CAFR. • Stay abreast of finance, accounting, and financial reporting developments by attending training and conferences in these general areas or in specialized areas applicable to job duties. • Update and maintain the fiscal policies and procedures manual. • Update and maintain complete accounting desk procedures manual for Eden implementation to facilitate cross training. • Assist local governments with Measure A funding by providing timely allocation of funds for eligible projects and financing opportunities to the extent funding does not impact other programs and is financially feasible and prudent. • Maintain financial software to reflect technical updates and current technology. Develop and maintain an organizational accountability program encompassing financial and operational functions. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Establish and implement measures related to oversight, fraud, internal control, and ethics. • Issue annual disclosure statements related to financial and operational responsibilities. • Develop an annual internal audit plan to include relevant internal audit projects and update business risk analysis at least on an annual basis. Procure goods and services from qualified consultants, contractors, and other vendors in accordance with laws and regulations at a competitive price. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Assist departments and programs to procure and obtain goods and services in a cost effective and efficient manner. • Ensure that procurements are conducted in accordance with a comprehensive Procurement Policies Manual. • Ensure that agreements, amendments, and MOUs are entered into with appropriate legal considerations. • Process agreements, amendments, and MOUs in a timely and efficient manner. • Ensure that consistent procedures, processes, and tools are used for procurements. Review existing procurement policies and procedures. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Ensure that the procurement polices reflect Commission requirements and practices. • Segregate policies and procedures so that procedures can be easily updated without Commission approval. • Ensure that procurement policies and procedures reflect the requirements of the Commission's federal, state, and other funding sources. • Create an easy to read desktop quick procurement policies reference guide for use by Commission staff. • Maximize the value received for the Commission's expenditure of public funds. • Provide all vendors an equal opportunity to provide needed goods and/or services. Finance Performance/Workload Indicators FY 10/11 Estimated FY 10/11 Actual. FY 11/12 Estimated FY 12/13 . Projected Sales tax revenue bond rating Aa1/AA+/AA Aal/AA+/AA Aal/AA+/AA Aa1/AA+/AA Commercial paper rating P-1/A-1+ P-1/A-1+ P-1/A-1+ P-1/A-1+ GFOA Certificate of Achievement Awarded Awarded Awarded Awarded GFOA Distinguished Budget Award Proficient Proficient Proficient Proficient Invoices processed 5,700 5,620 4,100 4,900 Checks processed 3,700 3,731 3,100 3,400 Audit adjustments 0 0 0 0 Average yield on investments .50% .40% .50% .50% Payroll hours processed 87,000 82,646 72,700 77,700 Accounts receivable invoices processed 165 197 160 170 Agreements processed 250 235 180 200 River0de County Transportation Com mission Planning and Programming Mission Statement: "To exert leadership in transportation planning and the programming of funds to improve mobility, foster environmental stewardship, expedite project delivery, and form partnerships with regional, state, and federal agencies resulting in maximum return on local investment. Support a coordinated regional approach to solving transportation funding issues." Chart 29 - Planning and Programming Professional Costs 8% - Support Costs 1% Expenditures Planning and Programming expenditures of $4,522,600 have decreased 39% from last year's budget (Table 46). Salaries and benefits represent 18% of total expenditures. Professional services totaling $362,800 have increased 3% compared to the FY 2011/12 budget. Professional services include CMP implementation efforts, air quality analysis, project database management, local and regional planning activities, on -call goods movement consultants, and legal services. Projects and operations costs have decreased 47% due to a decrease in LTF disbursements of rail allocations related to grade separation projects in the cities of Riverside and Corona and the County. Table 46 - Planning and Programming Expenditure Detail Salaries and Benefits Professional Costs Legal Services Audit Services Professional Services -General otal Professional Costs Support Costs Projects and Operations Program Operations Construction Special Studies Operating and Capital Disbursements otal Projects and Operations ransfers Out FY 30/11 FY 11/12 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Dollar _ Percent Actual _ Revised Budget Projected Budget, _ Change _ _ Change $. 817,600 $ 833,003 $ 788,603 $ 835,800 $ 2,800 0% 8,400 5,700 88,400 102,500 9,800 14,000 500,000 390,300 2,730,400 3,634,700 490,030 5,742,500 6,247,500 9,200 21,500 329,500 351,0:0 18,800 15,000 200,000 610,000 2,850,600 2,689,700 3,050,600 3,299,700 188,80D 207,700 18,400 18,903 21,903 340,900 362,800 • 24,300 11,400 11,800 5,500 400 2% N/A 3% 3% 29% (15,0:0) -100% N/A 120,000 24% (3,052,800) -53% (2,947,800) -47% 9,200 -100% OTAL Plan= and Pro rammm $ 4,564,600 $ 7,459,503 $ 4,065,303 $ 4,522,600 $ 2,936,900 -39% Planning and Programming Staffing Summary Position FY 10/11 FY 11/12' FY 12/13. Administrative Assistant 0.40 0.39 0.45 Chief Financial Officer 0.01 0.02 0.02 Commuter and Motorist Assistance Manager 0.00 0.01 0.00 Deputy Executive Director 0.13 0.15 0.13 Executive Director 0.36 0.36 0.36 Goods Movement Manager 1.00 0.70 0.70 Planning and Programming Manager 0.96 0.95 0.95 Procurement Administrator 0.01 0.00 0.02 Procurement Manager 0.04 0.01 0.00 Project Development Director 0.17 0.13 0.06 Senior Staff Analyst 1.00 1.00 0.97. Staff Analyst 1.09 1.08 1.09 FTE 5.17 4.80 4.75 Department Budget Overview Department Description The Commission is responsible for short- and long-range transportation planning and programming. Short-range planning and programming involves the development of the five-year STIP and preparation of the five-year FTIP for Riverside County. These programming documents identify projects and their respective funding and schedules. The Commission's involvement with long-range planning efforts includes the coordination and input into planning efforts throughout the County and southern California region. These efforts involve participation in local, bi- county, and regional corridor studies, including the continued development of the CETAP corridors. Regional planning efforts are incorporated in the RTP (a 30-year transportation plan) developed by SCAG in conjunction with county transportation commissions, sub -regional agencies, local agencies, transit operators, and other interested parties. The Commission is responsible for approving projects for Regional Improvement Program (RIP) funds in Western County and coordinating with Caltrans on the selection of Interregional Improvement Program (IIP) funds as part of the STIP approved by the CTC every two years. The Commission has delegated the authority to nominate projects for RIP funds in the Coachella Valley to CVAG. A MOU between the city of Blythe, representing Palo Verde Valley, and the Commission allows the city to trade RIP funds for local Measure A funds. In November 2006, Proposition 1B was approved by the voters of California, which provided $20 billion in transportation infrastructure funding. Various program categories were established including a $2 billion infusion into the STIP. Other competitive program categories included CMIA and TCIF; Riverside County was successful in receiving CMIA funding for the SR-91 HOV and 1-215 widening projects as well as TCIF funding for 12 grade separation projects and a ground access improvement project at the I-215/Van Buren interchange, which is currently beginning construction. The Commission is a member of the Southern California Consensus Group that developed and submitted project proposals for the TCIF program. As with the RIP and IIP funds, Proposition 1B funds are administered and allocated by the CTC. Given the current economic conditions, Proposition 1B funds have been the most reliable state funding source for transportation projects. Proposition 1B CMIA allocations are legislatively set to expire by the end of 2012; TCIF funds will expire on December 31, 2013, per CTC policy. State Local Partnership Program (SLPP) funding is another program authorized by Proposition 1B. A formula program has been established for transportation agencies that administer self-help transportation sales tax programs. SLPP funds must be programmed for construction and matched by the sales tax on a 50-50 basis. Projects nominated by the Commission for SLPP funding must request fund allocations from the CTC by June 2013. Programming specifically involves the development, review, and approval of projects for various funding programs. Additionally programming involves the monitoring of projects from project selection through construction close- out. In order to receive federal funds and approvals, all projects funded with federal and state dollars, or local projects that are regionally significant, must be included in the FTIP. SCAG is responsible for incorporating all six - county (Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Ventura) transportation improvement programs into one regional programming document and conducting a conformity analysis with the adopted air plans to ensure compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. This FTIP update effort is performed every 18 to 24 months. Multiple amendments occur within the 18 to 24 month FTIP update cycle for minor project changes that do not affect the conformity analysis. The Commission is responsible for allocating the following local, state, and federal funding sources: Local Sources: • 1989 and 2009 Measure A • Western County TUMF Regional Arterial Program State Sources: • SB821 bicycle and pedestrian projects • RIP • Proposition 1B Federal Sources: • Congressional discretionary programs, such as ARRA • Transportation Enhancements (TE) • STP • CMAQ The Commission also serves as the CMA for the County and is responsible for developing and updating the CMP. The CMP was developed to meet state legislation and federal Congestion Management System (CMS) requirements, which includes an enhanced traffic monitoring system. The CMP's highways and regional arterials are regularly monitored to ensure that they are not operating at deficient levels [Level of Service (LOS) "F"]. If a deficiency occurs along the CMP system, a deficiency plan must be prepared that identifies mitigation measures and/or projects that will improve the LOS to "E" or higher. Partnership development, public and private, is critical to the Commission's continued success in affecting positive transportation decisions to meet future demands. Commission staff works in close coordination with its partners to advocate for federal, state, and local funding to improve mobility and mitigate the impacts of goods movement. Key Assumptions • The Commission will continue its efforts in working with transportation partners to streamline and improve project delivery. • Consultant contracts are maintained to provide assistance with the CMP, TUMF, air quality analysis, project database monitoring, and other related planning activities. • The Commission will utilize all available funding sources on transportation projects identified in the 1989 Measure A and the 2009 Measure A as well as other regional high priority projects, including TUMF regional arterial projects. • The Commission will continue participation in local, bi-county, and regional planning efforts representing the interests of the County. • The Commission will work with the CTC, Caltrans, and local project sponsors to implement projects funded with STIP-RIP, CMIA, and TCIF to ensure that the programming and timing of allocations are consistent with project schedules. • The Commission will continue to manage and host the project management database to improve efficiencies in monitoring projects and funding and in reporting to state and federal agencies. • The Commission will continue to assist local project sponsors with the processing of state and federal funding approvals/obligations and overall project delivery. Accomplishments • Processed 11 STIP allocation/extension/amendment requests to the CTC. • Completed the technical studies and prepared the draft recirculated environmental document and project report for the modified Mid County Parkway project. • Completed four local agency agreements and/or amendments for the implementation of TUMF regional arterial projects. • Processed over 287 project amendments into the 2011 FTIP. • Prepared and submitted to SCAG the 2013 FTIP for Riverside County consisting of 348 projects. • Coordinated with Caltrans and project sponsors regarding the obligation of federal and state funding, met obligation deadlines, and prevented loss of funding to Riverside County. • Monitored federal funding expenditures of inactive projects to ensure funds are not deobligated. • Advised local agencies and coordinated the use of toll credits and local match waiver for CMAQ projects, which saved the Commission and local agencies up to $10 million in local match funds for federal funds (STP, CMAQ, and federal earmarks). • Reviewed and approved 2009 Measure A maintenance of effort (MOE) base year levels for each city. • Prepared the 2011 CMP Update for Commission adoption in December 2011. • Updated project list for 2012 RTP and participated in SCAG's 2012 RTP development, including submittal of comments on the draft RTP. • Completed a reconciliation effort to ensure appropriate accounting and payback of Commission loans to Caltrans. • Monitored port expansion projects for each of the Ports. • Monitored TCIF project development to ensure timely completion of the 12 grade separations and a ground access improvement project to improve the I-215/Van Buren interchange as required for the $162.7 million Proposition 1B TCIF funds. One project (Columbia Avenue in Riverside) was completed in March 2010; an additional project (Magnolia Avenue in Riverside) was completed in January 2012. Two additional projects, Auto Center Drive and Iowa Avenue, are projected to start construction by June 2012. The remaining seven TCIF projects will start construction no later than August 2013. • Selected four consultants following a procurement for on -call goods movement consultant services. • Developed the 2012 Grade Separation Priority Update Study for Alameda Corridor East projects. • Continued to take a leadership role and work together with the five -county consensus working group, Mobility 21, and SCAG's Southern California National Freight Gateway Collaboration on goods movement issues. Major Initiatives Each county transportation commission throughout the State is responsible for programming RIP funds, which represents 75% of the total STIP funding available statewide for capital enhancement projects. The 75% funding level is then further distributed with 60% of the funds allocated to Southern California and 40% to Northern California. A population formula is then applied to determine county funding levels called "county shares." The Commission is responsible for ensuring that projects funded with STIP funding are administered and implemented consistent with CTC and Caltrans policies. It is the Commission's policy to set aside 2% off the top for staff support to carry out STIP PPM activities. The remaining RIP funds are further distributed geographically among Western County, Coachella Valley, and Palo Verde Valley per the Commission's intra-county STIP formula. The Commission also may consider a call for projects for RIP discretionary funds. Federal TE funds are also administered through the STIP. TE funds are not subject to general fund diversions; however, TE funds are authorized each year by the passage of the state budget. Draft federal transportation bills have indicated that TE funds may be distributed and/or administered in a different manner. Staff is closely monitoring these proposals. CMIA and TCIF funds are monitored by Caltrans and the CTC. Baseline agreements are developed for each project under these programs. Any changes to project funding, scope, or schedule will require an amendment to the baseline agreement. The CTC allocates the CMIA and TCIF funds, and the process for allocating the funds is similar to the process established for STIP funds. TUMF funds are collected and administered by WRCOG. Approximately half of the TUMF funds collected are set aside for WRCOG's zone projects and regional transit facilities. After the deduction of an administrative fee, WRCOG provides the other half of the TUMF revenues to the Commission. These funds are further distributed to the Commission's TUMF CETAP Corridors and Regional Arterial Programs. In September 2004 the Commission established a 5-year program and approved the programming of 24 regional arterial projects. To date, $79 million of TUMF regional arterial funds has been programmed. Four projects have completed construction, two projects are currently under construction, and three projects are fully funded and will start construction in the next 3 to 4 months. Based on current schedules four additional projects will be ready to go to construction in FY 2012/13. Planning and Programming also manages the 2009 Measure A Western County Regional Arterial Program. The expenditures for these regional arterial capital projects are included in the Capital Projects Department budget. Transportation Planning The Commission's role in planning throughout the year will involve working with SCAG, sub -regional agencies, local agencies, and the other county transportation commissions in the region on various planning efforts relative to the implementation of the 2012 RTP/Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS), corridor studies, goods movement studies, and efforts to update transportation computer models and project databases. In FY 2012/13 the Commission will continue its work efforts on the intracounty CETAP corridors. An updated environmental document and project report has been prepared for the Mid County Parkway to address changes made to the project limits, which are now between SR-79 and 1-215. It is expected that the draft document will be ready for public review and comment in summer 2012. Work on a portion of the north -south CETAP corridor is underway with the Commission's 1-215 south widening project and improvements to the French Valley Parkway interchange being led by the city of Temecula. Given funding constraints, work on the two intercounty CETAP corridors by the Commission is not expected in this fiscal year. The FY 2012/13 CMP effort will involve monitoring the CMP system and reviewing any new state and federal requirements. Transportation Programming As mentioned above, the Commission is responsible for allocating various state and federal funds. The funds are monitored to ensure that regulations are adhered to in order to prevent funds from lapsing. The following summarizes the status of these funding programs: Local Fundina Western County TUMF Regional Arterial Program Project monitoring of TUMF regional arterial projects by Planning and Programming staff will occur according to the agreements between local agencies and the Commission. In addition, Commission staff will work with local agencies regarding amendments to agreements and any issues regarding project delivery. To date, 23 project agreements have been executed totaling approximately $79 million of TUMF Regional Arterial funds. During FY 2012/13, a total of $39.6 million is anticipated to be reimbursed to local agencies using TUMF regional arterial funding. These project expenditures are included in the Capital Projects Development and Delivery Department. 2009 Measure A Western County Regional Arterial Program A call for projects was initiated in a previous year for the 2009 Measure A Western County Regional Arterial program. Due to the economic downturn and limited funds available, the selection of projects was postponed. As fund amounts increase, this funding source will be reviewed for qualifying projects on a case by case basis. The Foothill Parkway project in the city of Corona is a project that will be presented to the Commission for approval of $7,000,000 of these funds and is included in the FY 2012/13 budget. 2009 Measure A Local Streets and Roads In order to receive Measure A local streets and roads funding, each year local jurisdictions are required to submit their 5-year capital improvement plans (CIPs) based on Measure A revenue projections. Additionally the local jurisdictions are required to submit an MOE certification consistent with adopted MOE guidelines and participate in the MSHCP and in the local agency's respective TUMF program, as applicable. Amendments to CIPs are processed administratively for minor changes that do not affect the total programmed amount or are within budget levels. Significant changes require Commission approval. State Funding STIP- RIP/IIP STIP funding continues to be unstable with a minimal amount of programming capacity resulting from the last two STIP cycles. Proposition 1B has provided funding for STIP projects and other bond program categories such as CMIA, TCIF, and SLPP. However, the State's declining revenues and budget impasses have limited the frequency and timing of bond issuances. The economic downturn has created an advantage for construction projects with a low bid environment. Cost savings for STIP and Proposition 1B projects have resulted in additional programming capacity, and the Commission will be prepared to apply for these additional funds. This year Commission staff will continue to deliver projects programmed in the 2012 STIP and work with local agencies to ensure that bond funds are allocated by the respective deadlines. 58821 Annually, the Commission releases a call for bicycle and pedestrian projects in April. These projects are funded by 2% of LTF revenues, as required by SB821. The Commission establishes an evaluation committee to rank eligible projects that meet the established criteria. Project recommendations are approved by the Commission in June of each year. The Commission approved eight projects in the amount of $1.09 million for FY 2011/12. The FY 2012/13 call for projects will have new funding of approximately $1.16 million available for award. These expenditures are included in the LTF special revenue fund, which is reflected in the Transit Department since this fund's activities relate primarily to transit funding. Federal Funding CMAQ STP, and TE The Commission is responsible for allocating CMAQ, STP, and TE funds to transportation projects. In 2003, the Commission directed staff to program SAFETEA-LU funds (CMAQ and STP) to projects that were impacted by the state budget crisis and/or the rise in construction material costs with the exception of the CMAQ funding that is apportioned to the Salton Sea Air Basin (SSAB). The Commission delegates the selection of projects for CMAQ funds apportioned to the SSAB to CVAG. In 2007, the Commission approved 25% of future CMAQ and STP funds for grade separation projects approved in the Proposition 1B TCIF program. With the decline in State revenues over the past few years, the Commission has focused funds toward high priority regional projects that are ready for construction. Once Congress approves a new transportation bill, staff will present the Commission with a plan for programming these funds including funding options for the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan projects. TE funds are administered and programmed in the STIP by the CTC. Although TE funds are federal, state budget authority must be granted in order for the funds to be allocated by the CTC. If the state budget approval is delayed, the TE funds cannot be allocated until the state budget is passed. In 2005, the Commission approved 18 projects totaling $17.6 million. To date, 14 projects have been delivered, and the remaining four projects will be allocated between FY 2011/12 and FY 2012/13. In FY 2011/12 the Commission partnered with Caltrans and wildlife agencies on a transportation enhancement project in the Santa Ana Canyon. The Commission approved use of regional TE funds for the improvement of the B Canyon .wildlife corridor, which is widely used by small to mid -sized mammals between the Cleveland National Forest, Santa Ana River, and the Puente -Chino Hills. Funding from the partner agencies is still being secured. Construction will be coordinated with construction of the SR-91 corridor improvement project. . Project Monitoring The high demand for reporting and monitoring the progress of projects is essential to prevent funds from lapsing. The programming project database, Fundtrack, allows for efficient monitoring of project schedules and funding. Local agencies have been provided access to project information as well as the capability to update their respective project information in a timely manner. The Programming Department provides assistance to the Capital Project Development and Delivery Department and local agencies by participating in regular project delivery team meetings and preparing and submitting requests for authorization (RFA)/allocation of federal and state funding. In addition, Programming monitors allocation and award deadlines, expenditures, and project closeouts of federal and state funded projects to prevent loss of funds. Regional Issues The Commission's work effort will remain focused on facilitating ongoing commitments as well as being responsive to various emerging issues. These include bi-county issues with the counties of San Bernardino, Orange, Imperial, and San Diego as well as goods movement. The Commission will continue working with partners from the Southern California Consensus Group. (Ports, Alameda Corridor Transportation Authority, Alameda Corridor East Construction Authority, SANBAG, OCTA, Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Ventura County Transportation Commission, SCAG, and SCRRA) regarding goods movement issues. A priority will be to coordinate with legislative staff and advocacy groups such as Mobility 21 and CAGTC to secure funding through the federal transportation bill for goods movement -related needs such as the funding of Alameda Corridor East grade separations in Riverside County and/or the creation of a federal freight trust fund, or similar program with a dedicated and firewalled revenue structure, in order to treat the nation's multimodal national goods movement network as a system rather than individual projects. The Commission will continue to monitor the Ports' projects for possible impacts on Riverside County by reviewing agendas and requesting notices for projects under CEQA and the Brown Act. Department Goals Build upon relationships with local, state, and federal agencies to coordinate short- and long-range planning to ensure that transportation projects receive funding and approvals. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Environmental Stewardship, Intermodalism & Accessibility) Objectives: • Work with CVAG, WRCOG, Ca!trans, transit operators, local agencies, and SCAG to coordinate project amendments to the 2012 RTP. • Provide the Commissioners information to assist in advocating Commission projects. • Continue CETAP intracounty corridor work. • Continue working with the RCA to implement the MSHCP. • Maintain maximum flexibility in project selection in the next transportation bill to serve the diverse needs of Riverside County. Continue to seek a stronger role for county transportation commissions in state and regional transportation and air quality programs in order to direct funding for programs and projects that will improve air quality and mobility in Riverside County. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Environmental Stewardship) Objectives: • Support efforts to seek additional funding at the local, state, and federal levels for projects that improve air quality. • Support ongoing efforts to regulate federal emission sources. • Support efforts that allow more flexibility in funding transit operating and capital costs. Continue implementation of the CMP in cooperation with SCAG, WRCOG, CVAG, Caltrans, and local agencies and maintain federal certification for the CMP. (Policy Goal: Mobility) Objectives: • Implement the CMP to meet federal CMS requirements cited under the metropolitan planning organization (i.e., SCAG) planning regulations. • Provide data collected on the CMP system to SCAG and Caltrans for reporting on the Highway Performance Monitoring System. • Provide data collected on the CMP system to local agencies and other interested parties. • Continue monitoring the CMP system to ensure the minimum adopted level of service threshold is met. Continue working with Caltrans to monitor traffic conditions for the purpose of focusing transportation funds on congested corridors and system deficiencies. (Policy Goal: System Efficiencies) Objectives: • Review Caltrans' Performance Monitoring System count data to infill segments that currently do not have Smart Call Boxes or loop detectors to monitor traffic. • Identify congested corridors for potential funding opportunities. Continue to advocate for jobs/housing balance and attracting high income jobs to Riverside County in addition to addressing intercounty congestion. (Policy Goal: Economic Development) Objectives: • Participate in ongoing studies and activities regarding the jobs/housing imbalance between Orange and Riverside counties and San Diego and Riverside counties. • Support the County interests pertaining to transportation planning as population, job, and housing forecasts are developed by SCAG and the State. Maintain Fundtrack project database to allow for efficient monitoring of projects and funding with the ability to share project information with local jurisdictions. (Policy Goals: Communications, Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Maintain consultant contract to manage and host the Commission's web -based project management database. • Work with SCAG and other county transportation commissions to refine and maintain the SCAG regional database, including the coordination of the Commission's database with SCAG's FTIP database. • Coordinate with Caltrans to assure database compatibility and promote information sharing including timely reporting of fund obligation information. Ensure maximum funding and flexibility for projects funded with STIP-RIP, Proposition 1B, SAFETEA- LU, and future federal reauthorization funds. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Goods Movement) Objectives: • Participate in statewide efforts to implement projects and fully utilize all available funds from Proposition 1B funding programs. • Work with Caltrans and the CTC to meet the intent of the CMIA and TCIF programs related to implementing projects within the timeframes specified in the baseline project agreements. • Advocate that regions which program local and federal funds to replace state funding due to the state budget shortfall (or limited allocation capacity) be given high priority for repayment when funds are available, or in future programming in the next STIP programming cycle. • Participate in various forums regarding authorization of the federal transportation bill to increase funding levels, streamline programming processes, and provide flexibility in obligating funds. • Support efforts advocating the continuation and protection of state transportation funding and the payback of loans taken from state transportation accounts. • Advocate that RIP county share reserves receive priority programming over counties that advance shares. • Continue to strategically program and fund projects in an effort to obligate and/or allocate funds in an expeditious manner for the maximum use of all available funding. • Participate in Southern California Programming Roundtable meetings to ensure that 100% of federal obligation authority (OA) for CMAQ and STP funding is obligated within the SCAG region. • Continue to monitor project implementation through the use of milestone reporting on a quarterly basis to maintain maximum funding levels for projects and prevent loss of funds to Riverside County. Provide support to the Commission's Capital Project Development and Delivery and Finance departments to maintain project funding and schedules and minimize programming issues. (Policy Goal: Mobility, Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Provide input to the budget development process. • Attend regular meetings with the Capital Projects Development and Delivery Department. • Serve in an oversight role regarding project invoicing and close-outs. • Prepare project agreement summaries. • Coordinate project RFA/OA packages. • Monitor progress of project milestones and RFAs as they are processed through Caltrans Headquarters and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). • Prepare CTC allocation requests, extensions, and amendments for STIP and Proposition 1B funded projects. Provide assistance to local agencies to facilitate and streamline project delivery. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Communications) Objectives: • Continue coordination of TAC meetings. • Provide information regarding project programming data, including funding status, to project sponsors on a quarterly basis. • Provide local agencies with recommendations on project programming to minimize unnecessary requirements and delays. • Upon request, attend local agency project delivery team meetings to provide advice on programming issues. • Meet regularly with Caltrans local assistance staff to monitor project submittals and resolve project implementation and obligation issues. • Assist local agencies in preparing RFAs, STIP submittals, and inactive reporting justifications. Continue to work with state and federal agencies to streamline processes for funding and project approvals. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Environmental Stewardship, Communications) Objectives: • Maintain relationships with key staff at regional, state and federal agencies. • Participate in SCAG's National Freight Gateway Collaboration to define a system that meets the region's long- term mobility, safety, environmental, and energy needs including developing a brand specific to goods movement projects in Southern California. • Identify problematic areas with project delivery and/or programming and work with federal lobbyists to develop solutions for streamlining and clarifying processes for the next federal transportation bill. • Participate in regional, state, and federal forums addressing issues related to project programming, implementation, and air quality conformity. Facilitate development of regional transportation solutions that benefit Riverside County, including implementation of Proposition 1B TCIF projects and the Commission's Grade Separation Plan. (Policy Goals: Goods Movement, Intermodalism & Accessibility) Objectives: • Monitor progress made in constructing the TCIF-funded projects through discussions with staff from partner agencies including Ca[trans; cities of Banning, Coachella, Corona, and Riverside; and the County of Riverside. Timely completion of the TCIF projects is required to demonstrate the region's ability to deliver projects consistent with the CTC's direction when the Proposition 1B funding was allocated. • Develop a 2012 Grade Separation Funding Strategy, due to the completion of several grade separation projects to help secure new sources of revenue for funding shortfalls. A Determine where future efforts regarding addressing Riverside County goods movement issues would prove most effective. (Policy Goal: Goods Movement) Objectives: • Identify drivers of demand for goods movement services and performance of modal systems and services as well as public benefits, specific areas of inefficiency, and the impacts of goods movement on communities. • Implement the Commission's 2012 Grade Separation Funding Strategy through coordination of advocacy efforts with Legislative Affairs and Communications. Facilitate public and private investments in clean air technology in support of the broader air quality programs for SCAG, SCAQMD, and Riverside County local entities. (Policy Goal: Environmental Stewardship) Objectives: • Monitor the impact of AB32 (greenhouse gas emission reduction) application to Commission transportation projects. • Monitor the impact of SB375 (greenhouse gas emission reduction) from light trucks and automobiles through the implementation of the 2012 RTP/SCS. • Actively participate on the MSRC's TAC to ensure equitable funding is available in support of capital projects within Riverside County. Planning and Programming Performance/Workload Indicators FY 10/11 Estimated FY 10/11 Actual FY 11/12 Estimated FY 12/13 Projected Federal projects monitored for obligation authority delivery 35 59 61 65 TUMF Regional Arterial projects monitored 24 15 15 13 TUMF agreements/amendments 4 5 5 2 FTIP amended projects 180 226 287 361 STIP/Prop 1B allocations, amendments, and extensions for: Commission projects 6 9 1 7 Local agency projects 9 6 10 12 Rail Mission Statement: "To develop and support passenger rail transportation options for increased mobility within Riverside County and the region." Chart 30 — Rail Salaries and Capital Outlay Benefits 1% 3% Expenditures Professional Costs 3% Support Costs 12% Rail expenditures of $14,553,300 include Metrolink operations and capital support as well as maintenance and operations of the five Commission -owned and operated commuter rail stations and the Perris Transit Center (Table 47). Professional costs, which include legal and consultant services, have increased 33% due to on -call rail consultants. Support costs, which reflect an increase of 8%, include station maintenance, media ads, printing services, and marketing incentives. Station maintenance includes property management, utilities, grounds maintenance, repairs, cleaning, and security services at the five Commission -owned commuter rail stations, adjacent parking structures, and the Perris Transit Center. The increase in support costs is primarily related to station repairs and rehabilitation. Certain rehabilitation costs were included in Capital Projects Development and Delivery in prior years. Projects and operations costs reflect an overall decrease of 38% and include an operating contribution of up to $10,000,000 to SCRRA for Metrolink operations, which includes new service and $250,000 to connect transit to RTA and Corona Cruiser buses. The Commission's commuter rail program intends to utilize existing mechanisms within Metrolink to assess and monitor operations and budget performance. Program operations relate primarily to station operations. Table 47 — Rail Expenditure Detail FY10/11 FY11/12 FY11/12 FY12/13 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Salaries and Benefits $ 491,500 $ 494,300 $ 429,300 $ 496,700 $ 2,400 0% Professional Costs Legal Services 91,603 118,000 118,020 123,003 5,000 4% Professional Services - General 36,500 199,000 60,100 298,000 99,000 50% Total Professional Costs 128,100 317,000 178,103 421,020 104,000 33% Support Costs 1,209,200 1,640,700 1,640,030 1,775,100 134,400 8% Projects and Operations Program Operations 1,511,000 1,450,900 1,405,800 1,394,203 (56,100) -4% Spedal Studies 12,500 200,000 150,003 (50,000) -25% Operating and Capital Disbursements 9,498,100 17,335,030 17,335,000 10,250,003 (7,085,000) -41% Total Projects and Operations 11,021,600 18,985,900 18,740,800 11,794,803 (7,1.91,10D) -38% Ca.italOutla 15,300 60,700 24,703 E5,700 5,003 8% TOTAL Rail Mai ntenance and 0 rations 12,865,700 $ 21,498,600 $ 21,012,930 $ 14,553,300 $ 6,945,300 -32% Rail Staffing Summary Position FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Accounting and Human Resources Manager 0.02 0.00 0.00 Administrative Assistant 0.09 0.07 0.12 Capital Projects Manager 0.00 0.00 0.40 Chief Financial Officer 0.03 0.02 0.04 Community Relations Manager 0.01 0.00 0.00 Deputy Executive Director 0.00 0.03 0.00 Multimodal Services Director 0.27 0.15 0.27 Procurement Administrator 0.76 0.85 0.30 Procurement Manager 0.61 0.56 0.12 Project Delivery Director 0.00 0.00 0.01 Rail Manager 1.00 0.90 1.00 Senior Office Assistant 0.02 0.02 0.01 Staff Analyst 1.01 0.80 1.04 FTE 3.82 3.40 3.31 Department Budget Overview -Rail Operations Department Description The Commission has directed efforts in the areas of regional commuter rail, intercity passenger rail, high speed rail, and capital improvements to support enhanced passenger and freight rail service. The entire program includes elements of planning, programming, commuter rail development and support, station and corridor management, mitigation of community and environmental impacts, legislative and regulatory advocacy, and construction of capital projects. Many elements are managed or supported by other Commission departments, legal counsel, and consultants. Departmental efforts contributing to the rail program are found throughout the budget document. Coordination and consultation also occur with a variety of public and private entities including the CTC, Ca!trans, California Public Utilities Commission, California High Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA), Federal Railroad Administration, FTA, Amtrak, environmental agencies, the University of California, transit providers, SCAG, WRCOG, CVAG, San Diego Association of Governments, LOSSAN Rail Corridor Agency, local governments, private freight railroads, businesses, and property owners. The Commission participates in the ongoing funding and governance of Metrolink through SCRRA, a joint powers authority consisting of the county transportation commissions' of Riverside, San Bernardino, Orange, Los Angeles, and Ventura counties. The Commission holds two voting positions on SCRRA's eleven member board. Commission staff serves on the five -county TAC which negotiates service and funding levels, based upon the County's established priorities. The TAC provides technical assistance, coordination between various SCRRA and Commission departments, and linkages to local communities. Of the seven commuter rail lines operated by Metrolink, three routes consisting of the Riverside, Inland Empire - Orange County (IEOC), and 91 Lines directly serve Western County. Unlike the other SCRRA member agencies, the Commission owns and operates the commuter rail stations serving Riverside County: Riverside Downtown, Pedley, La Sierra, West Corona, North Main Corona (Chart 31). The Commission is also the owner of and the operating partner with RTA at the Perris Transit Center, a multimodal transportation facility. Station operation and maintenance costs are included in the Rail Department budget with services currently coordinated by the Capital Projects Development and Delivery Department. New and ongoing construction projects at these stations are described in the capital budget managed by the Capital Project Development and Delivery Department. Chart 31— Riverside County Metrolink Station Locations Riverside County Meirolink Service Regale, Or. SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY RIVERSIDE COUNTY1��_ PEOLEY STA I CORONA A CORONA EXISTING STATIONS 0 PROPOSED STATIONS **+*+*+ PH+Pfr METROLINK LINE +M+++Hiiii+++ PROPOSED PERRIS VALLEY LINE Key Assumptions RIVERSIDE PARK STATION MARCH AIR RESERVE BASE MORENO VALLEY PER • IS 6atleckb be. f ' SINK Ave. I4 ae¢a,ae_ • Metrolink's preliminary FY 2012/13 budget is adopted by the Commission and SCRRA. In the event that additional funds are needed during the budget year, a mid -year budget adjustment will be presented to the Commission for approval. • Ridership and fare revenues continue to grow slightly on the Riverside, IEOC, and 91 Lines (Chart 32). • The Commission manages the station security guard contract. Estimated costs are based on the actual contract terms with a portion reimbursed by SCRRA. Chart 32 — Metrolink Average Daily Ridership 14000 12000 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 2011 Accomplishments 2012 2013 a 91 Line ■ IEOC ■ Riverside/LA • Gained ex-officio status on the LOSSAN board and now have a voice in the governance discussions taking place to establish local control for the Southern California intercity rail service. • Secured FTA Section 5309 grants for a commuter rail state of good repair project to fully fund the SCRRA 5- year capital plan that includes locomotive and rail car rehabilitation along with station and layover projects. • Continued to implement the recommendations of the comprehensive safety and security assessment and emergency response plan at the Metrolink stations. • Successfully transitioned and trained the new security guard contractor while implementing tougher standards and accountability in the security program. • Supported the holiday toy train event at the La Sierra and North Main Corona rail stations. The community continues to support this event with strong local participation. This event also generates needed donations for the Spark of Love Toy Drive for local charities. Major Initiatives Over the last 19 years, more than $110 million in capital improvements has been made in developing stations and securing access to support the Commission's commuter rail services operations. The development of the Perris Valley Line project and its operational impacts will continue to be pursued and evaluated, respectively. The four Perris Valley Line stations (see Chart 31) are currently at 90% design. In addition, plans are being pursued to expand peak period rail service on the IEOC and 91 lines to better meet the needs of Inland Empire commuters. Department Goals —Rail Operations Improve utilization and increase efficiency of commuter rail lines serving Riverside County. (Policy Goals: System Efficiencies, Intermodalism & Accessibility) Objectives: • Support improved Metrolink system safety and security initiatives. • Implement enhanced safety and security features at all stations. • Work with Metrolink staff to increase patronage on Riverside County lines. • Continue to expand service on Metrolink lines with increased train frequencies. • Coordinate with Metrolink staff to develop future service plans to best meet the needs of Riverside County residents. • Continue to monitor Metrolink's financial performance to ensure Riverside County transportation funds are used efficiently and responsibly. Maximize opportunities for public use of rail -related investment. (Policy Goal: Intermodalism & Accessibility) Objectives: • Support transit operator efforts to expand availability and use of connecting transit in order to improve access and reduce demand on parking capacity; costs associated with transfers are currently reimbursed to the transit operators by the Commission and are budgeted. • Explore track rights opportunities. • Expand opportunities with the Commuter Assistance Program's park and ride operations for the designation of specific car/vanpool parking at commuter rail stations with available capacity. • Expand opportunities for interline travel through coordination of schedules with Amtrak intercity and long distance trains, such as the Sunset Limited, and other Metrolink lines, including encouraging joint ticketing options. Implement energy efficient systems and generate revenue to offset maintenance costs of rail properties. (Policy Goal: Environmental Stewardship, Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Explore track rights opportunities and potential for joint development opportunities at stations. • Explore the installation of cell phone towers as a revenue source to offset operating costs. • Explore additional revenue potential at the rail stations. • Evaluate alternative and emergency power systems. Department Budget Overview --Rail Development In order to expand passenger rail options throughout the County, the Commission conducts feasibility studies to assess the viability of commuter rail expansion. In 2005, the Commission completed the Commuter Rail Feasibility Study that examined the viability of extending Metrolink commuter rail service largely within existing rail rights of way. The Commission approved the study and recommended advanced study of extensions on the SJBL to Hemet/San Jacinto and Murrieta/Temecula. The next phase of Alternatives Analysis for these corridors will be pursued in future years as funding availability allows. San Jacinto Branch Line The Commission holds title to and manages the 38-mile SJBL (Chart 33) and several adjacent properties, preserved for future passenger rail service. Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railroad holds the freight rights in the corridor, providing service to local shippers, and performs maintenance on the line. Chart 33 — San Jacinto Branch Line San Jacinto Branch Line SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY "- — u F RIVERSIDE NAPLP A fl PFSEPYE BASF / MathewO SAN JACINTO BRANCH LINE r' �` `,�� CAN ANON EC FORE,6.. Perris Valley Line Small Starts Project MORENO VALLEY \ l E�enwndVaAay RErsxve Lake BEAUMONT SAN JACINTO HEMET BANNII In June 2000, the Commission allocated $20 million of Measure A funds for capital and operating expenditures related to the implementation of passenger rail service on the initial operating segment of the SJBL, known as the Perris Valley Line (see Chart 31). Project cost estimates have been revised and are now approximately $247 million. Staff is seeking a project construction grant agreement from the FTA Small Starts Program to fund $75 million of the project cost with the balance to be funded by other federal, state, and local funding sources, as illustrated in Table 48 and Chart 34. Since 2008, $75 million in Small Starts funding has been federally appropriated. Details on this capital project are included in the Capital Project Development and Delivery section. Chart 34 — Perris Valley Line Funding Chart Table 48 — Perris Valley Line Funding Plan Total Federal: STP $ 500,000 FTA 5307 26,157,000 FTA 5309 Small Starts 75,000,000 CMAQ 24,659,000 State: STIP 52,978,000 Proposition 18 State -Local Partnership Program 14,869,000 Local: Measure A 53,052,000 Total Perris Valley Line Project Estimate $ 247,215,000 The project has received FTA approval to begin project development and advance preliminary engineering. The NEPA draft environmental assessment was circulated for public review in 2004, and a new Supplemental Environmental Assessment was released in 2010 and again in 2012. The CEQA document was finalized in 2011. The Commission anticipates that the project construction grant agreement will be in place by October 2012 and construction will begin in late 2012. The FY 2012/13 budget in the Capital Project Development and Delivery section includes total expenditures of $87.9 million for the Perris Valley Line and other rail projects. The public outreach program for this project continues to be a priority with ongoing efforts to reach all the communities including residents,, businesses, and schools along the corridor. Passenger Rail to Coachella Valley In recent years the Commission has also focused attention on the creation of intercity passenger rail service between the Coachella Valley, Riverside, and the Los Angeles basin through advocacy efforts with state, federal, and local government entities and negotiation with the freight railroads. The Commission's current efforts include seeking capital and operating funds and coordinating with Amtrak and Caltrans. The Commission has worked closely with CVAG to update the feasibility studies to include current cost and travel time information. The Commission has taken additional efforts to advocate for service improvement of the Amtrak Sunset Limited to operate daily through this region. There has been enhanced coordination with CVAG, Amtrak, and the State on this project. High Speed Rail The Commission continues to play a proactive role in the development of a statewide, high speed passenger rail system, including routing of the backbone corridor through the Inland Empire with possible stations in the Riverside/Corona and Murrieta/Temecula areas. With the passage of Proposition 1A in November 2008, there is now a proposed funding mechanism to move the state high speed rail project forward. The CHSRA has begun work on a project level environmental assessment and corridor alignment study for the section between Los Angeles and San Diego via the Inland Empire. The Commission has directed the review to include an alignment alternative along 1-15 for analysis. The Commission has entered into an MOU to be supportive in the development of this high speed rail project and is participating in the Southern California Inland Corridor Group meetings. The Commission actively contributed to the development of the supplemental Alternatives Analysis released in spring 2012 and continues to coordinate local participation at Technical Working Group meetings attended by local stakeholders. Work on this effort has slowed down with the release of the latest business plan that extends the development of this Phase II section from Los Angeles to San Diego via the Inland Empire to beyond 2030. The Commission signed an MOU along with the other Southern California transportation entities and SCAG to commit $1 billion in unallocated Proposition 1A funds for early investment to be spent locally for rail transportation improvement projects. Key Assumptions • Project development on the Perris Valley Line will continue in FY 2012/13. • Construction may begin on the Perris Valley Line in FY 2012/13. Accomplishments • Having received a medium -high rating from the FTA on the Perris Valley Line in December 2007, continued project development activities including progress on environmental documents and the related public reviews. The project has now completed 90% design. • Established an on -call rail consultant bench to provide future rail study and service modeling services for the region. Major Initiatives As discussed above, project development and right of way acquisition related to the Perris Valley Line project is expected to continue. Following receipt of the project construction grant agreement which is anticipated during FY 2012/13, construction should begin shortly thereafter. Department Goals —Rail Development Identify and plan for capital improvements necessary to increase the scope, appeal, and reliability of commuter rail operations. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Intermodalism & Accessibility, Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Continue efforts to fully fund the Perris Valley Line. • Finalize the station design elements for the Perris Valley Line. • Continue to review parking requirements and develop plans to address projected parking deficiencies. Maintain efforts with local agencies, other Southern California counties, and the state and federal governments to expand intercity passenger rail service into Riverside County and the Coachella Valley. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Intermodalism & Accessibility) Continue to support and influence state efforts in the creation of a high speed passenger rail system along an Inland Empire alignment through coordination with state and local agencies. In addition, continue to identify and advocate for high speed rail funding to be spent on beneficial local rail projects in Riverside County. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Intermodalism & Accessibility) Rail Performance/Workload Indicators FY 10/11 Estimated FY 10/11 Actual FY 11/12 Estimated FY 12/13 Projected Average daily ridership on existing commuter lines • Riverside Line 5,177 5,205 3,825 2,265 • IEOC Line 3,865 5,279 4,142 2,254 • 91 Line 2,289 5,456 4,073 2,465 Farebox recovery ratio • Riverside Line 59.0% 58.25% 29.49% 52.37% • IEOC Line 29.1% 58.33% 31.31% 49.74% • 91 Line 51.6% 56.12% 31.67% 45.06% Public and Specialized Transit Mission Statement: "To coordinate the operation of all public transportation services within the County with a goal toward promoting compliance and improving mobility as well as program efficiency and effectiveness between transit operators. To maintain and enhance, as resources allow, mobility options for seniors, persons with disabilities, and persons of limited means through innovative solutions and better coordination of existing services." Chart 35 — Public and Specialized Transit Professional Costs Salaries and 0% Support Costs Benefits f 0% 0% Expenditures Public and specialized transit uses are budgeted at $103,295,600 for FY 2012/13, as presented in Table 49, and consist primarily of projects and operations costs as well as transfers out to Commission funds for administration, planning, and rail purposes. LTF disbursements consist of transit operating and capital allocations to public transit operators of $58,631,800, bicycle and pedestrian facilities allocations to cities and the County of $1,404,000, and planning and administration allocations to other agencies of $469,500. STA disbursements of $14,105,000 are primarily for bus capital purposes in Western County and Coachella Valley, as minimal fund balances for the Palo Verde Valley areas are projected to be available in FY 2012/13. Transfers out comprise $14,185,000 for rail operations and capital, $1,774,700 for grade separation projects, $1,950,000 for planning, and $700,000 for administration. The LTF transit allocations reflect the use of $13,517,200 in fund balances. Measure A disbursements include $2,460,000 for Western County specialized transit funding of the second year of the 2011 two-year call for projects. The majority of Measure A disbursements relate to 2011 Measure A public transit programs: $624,000 for Western County Consolidated Transportation Service Agency (CTSA) allocations, $4,500,000 for Coachella Valley public and specialized transit, and $1,855,000 for Western County intercity bus services. The Western County allocations are disbursed monthly to RTA, the major transit provider in the Western County, while the Coachella Valley allocation is disbursed monthly to SunLine, the major transit provider in the Coachella Valley. Table 49 — Public and Specialized Transit Expenditure Detail FY 10/11 Actual Salaries and Benefits Professional Costs Legal Services Audit Services Professional Services - General Total Professional Costs Support Costs Projects and Operations Operating and Capital Disbursements Total Projects and Operations Transfers Out FY 11/12 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Revised Budget Projected Budget 320,900 $ 361,900 $ 338,400 . $ 326,200 $ 14,000 22,000 14,000 28,500 100,000 115,600 165,300 145, 000 163,000 129,600 187,300 159,000 291,500 11,400 23,800 10,400 18,900 46,288,000 46,288,000 17,274,500 TOTAL Public and S.ecialized Transit $ 64,024,400 $ 86,469,800 86,469,800 18,815,900 57,008,000 57,008,000 16,043,500 84,049,300 84,049,300 18,60'3,700 Dollar Percent Change Change (35,700) -10% 6,500 100,000 (2,300) 104,200 (4,900) (2,420,500) (2,420,500) (206,200) 30% N/A -1% 56% -21% 105,858,700 $ 73,559,300 $ 103,295,600 $ (2,563,100 -2% Public and Specialized Transit Staffing Summary Position Administrative Assistant Chief Financial Officer Executive Director Multimodal Services Director Staff Analyst Transit Manager FTE Department Budget Overview Department Description FY 10/11 0.11 0.08 0.01 0.44 1.00 1.00 FY 11/12 0.05 0.08 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.00 FY 12/13 0.10 0.08 0.01 0.20 1.00 1.00 2.64 2.63 2.39 The Measure A specialized transit program provides a valuable service to the community by serving the needs of commuters, mainly seniors and persons with disabilities, whose transportation needs are not met by traditional services. Specialized transit operations are typically managed by social service and nonprofit agencies. The Commission also allocates funding, following a competitive call for projects, through the FTA Section 5310 program that is administered by Caltrans. This program provides funding to nonprofit transportation and social service agencies and public operators under special circumstances for the purchase of capital equipment. With the passage of SAFETEA-LU, the following are two relatively new federal funding sources for specialized transit services: • JARC (Section 5316) program provides funding for the development and maintenance of jobs access projects to transport welfare recipients and eligible low-income individuals to and from work during non - peak hours as well as provide reverse commute options for workers in suburban areas. • New Freedom (Section 5317) program provides funding for new public transportation services and alternatives for people with disabilities beyond the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990. In accordance with the provisions of SAFETEA-LU, recipients under these programs must comply with all federal coordinated planning requirements to be eligible for funds. Projects selected for funding under these programs must be derived from a locally developed Coordinated Plan and must be developed through a process that includes representatives of the public, private, and nonprofit transportation and human service providers. The update of the Coordinated Plan was completed in April 2012, and the third Universal Call for Projects will be issued by December 2012. Approval of Measure A and JARC/New Freedom grant awards under the 2013 Universal Call for Projects will be obtained in April 2013 for the Coachella Valley and Western County applicants, and approved projects will begin provision of services on July 1, 2013. The Commission is responsible for short-range transportation planning and programming. Planning includes the development of the countywide SRTPs for eight public transit operators consisting of the cities of Banning, Beaumont, Corona, and Riverside; SCRRA's Metrolink commuter rail; Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency; RTA; and SunLine. The Commission assists in coordinating the annual development, review, and approval of the operator SRTPs and allocates Measure A, LTF, STA, and FTA Sections 5307, 5309, 5311, 5316, and 5317 transit funding resources to public transit programs. The Commission is responsible for the disbursement of Measure A, LTF, and STA funds, while federal transit funds are administered by the FTA. In partnership with the County's transit operators, the Commission coordinates the allocation of available Proposition 1B transit (capital and security) funding and ensures that proposed projects meet the mobility needs of the County. Proposition 1B funds are annually appropriated by the legislature and used for transit related capital purchases, infrastructure/facility improvements, and security enhancements. The Riverside County operators annually apply for Proposition 1B funds; however, due to the state's ongoing financial crisis, the release of funds is contingent upon available proceeds from future bond sales. The Commission has public transit operator oversight and fiduciary responsibilities to ensure that annual fiscal audits and a state triennial performance audit are conducted in accordance with TDA regulations. The Commission is also charged with annually reviewing public transit operator activities and recommending potential productivity improvements to lower operating costs. To ensure that specialized transit allocations are expended and required service goals are met in accordance with funding agreements, the Commission engages an audit firm to perform certain agreed -upon procedures for the Measure A specialized transit funding recipients, some of which also receive JARC and New Freedom funds. Key Assumptions • LTF, STA, and Measure A disbursements are based on projected. budgetary allocations but may be adjusted after the Commission approves actual allocations in July 2012. • Fluctuating LTF and Measure A revenues will require continued efforts to streamline operating expenses by all operators while maintaining efficiency and quality of service. • Transit Vision, adopted by the Commission in June. 2008, established a 25% allocation of 2009 Measure A Western County Specialized Transit funds to the RTA as the CTSA for Western County. Accomplishments • Oversaw the successful first year implementation of the new specialized transit services resulting from the 2011 Universal Call for Projects funding allocation process. • Received approval notification of 18 capital projects awarded to five successful Riverside County recipients of funding under the FY 2009/10 and FY 2010/11 FTA Section 5310 program. Projects are derived from a locally- developed Coordinated Plan. • Incorporated FY 2010/11 Proposition 1B Public Transportation, Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account (PTMISEA) funds with transit capital funding sources following Ca!trans' release of program funding covering a three-year period need for fiscal years 2010/11— 2012/13. • Approved allocation of FY 2010/11 Proposition 1B California Transit Security Grant Program —California Transit Assistance Funds for eligible transit safety and security projects identified by transit operators following release of program funding and guidelines by the Governor's Office of Homeland Security. • Completed the documentation of the Coordinated Plan 2012 Update as a result of five workshops and transit needs public hearings held in different areas of the County. Major Initiatives The Commission has long demonstrated a strong commitment to assist in the mobility of those with specialized transit needs. Through its 1989 Measure A Specialized Transit Program, the Commission provided millions of dollars to public and nonprofit transit operators for the provision of special transit services to improve the mobility of seniors and persons with disabilities. Along with support of traditional dial -a -ride services, the Commission supports innovative programs that provide transit assistance in hard to serve rural areas or for riders having very special transit needs. The riders, many frail and elderly, have come to depend on these services that provide a higher level of assistance than can be provided by the public transit providers and/or operate in areas not served by public transit. As a result of the 2009 Measure A, these specialized transit programs will continue through 2039. In July 2012, 17 programs in Western County and four programs in Coachella Valley will begin their second year of specialized transit services under the 2011 Universal Call for Projects, including the non -emergency medical transportation component. Eleven of these projects are fully funded with Measure A funds, while the other 10 projects will be funded by a mix of Measure A, JARC, and New Freedom funds. As identified in the Coordinated Plan, the specialized transit projects approved for funding will require implementation and yearlong performance monitoring. In order to assure the availability of funds to support matching of FTA Section 5310 capital grants, $120,000 on an annual basis is budgeted for Western County applicants to meet the 11.47% local match requirement for such grants. Due to the recent fluctuations of Measure A and LTF revenues and STA funding from the state, staff will continue monitoring long-range planning activities to ensure that both anticipated revenues and on -hand reserves are properly utilized and in line with projected levels of service by the public operators. Staff will also work with the operators to plan and coordinate major capital purchases and investments into new rolling stock and other system improvements in order to maintain a viable on -hand reserve. Department Goals Provide timely information to the public regarding Commission -implemented projects and support public relations activities of Measure A, JARC, and New Freedom funded programs by grant recipients. (Policy Goal: Communications) Objectives: • Complete implementation of projects under the 2011 Universal Call for Projects and begin application evaluation, funding award, and contract agreement execution processes for the third Universal Call for Projects to start on July 1, 2013. • Produce and distribute public information materials as needed including press releases, flyers, brochures, marketing materials, and newspaper ads. In addition, staff will also leverage the 1E511 traveler information system in order to more fully market the availability of specialized transit programs. Allocate Measure A Specialized Transit and federal funds to support services that will maintain and/or enhance mobility by alleviating transportation barriers for seniors, persons with disabilities, and the truly needy. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Intermodalism & Accessibility, Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Monitor performance of specialized transit grant recipients through analysis of their quarterly performance reports. • Support the FTA Section 5310, 5316 and 5317 grant processes to improve mobility for seniors, persons with disabilities and individuals of limited means by working with Ca[trans, public operators, and social service agencies to ensure a competitive process statewide for the allocation of federal transportation dollars for social service programs. • Provide technical assistance and program support to agencies offering specialized transit programs to ensure the maximum benefit of funding for improved mobility for seniors, persons with disabilities, and individuals of limited means. • Seek Commission approval on funding allocations for the third Universal Call for Projects. Coordinate the operation of all public transportation services within the County with a goal toward promoting program efficiency and harmony between transit operators as outlined in state law. (Policy Goals: Mobility, System Efficiencies, Intermodalism & Accessibility, Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Review transit planning, resource allocation, and service implementation policy requirements including appropriate coordination of commuter rail, intercounty and intercity bus, local bus and paratransit, and social service transportation services to ensure convenient service for passengers. • Assure the ongoing effectiveness of the SRTP process and work with the County's eight transit operators to assure productivity and efficiency as well as compliance with the productivity improvement program. • Coordinate regional transit connections among commuter rail, buses, and paratransit services to ensure convenient service for passengers. • Monitor transit operators' quarterly capital grants reports. • Monitor transit operators' performance through analysis of their quarterly performance reports using the TransTrack computer -based tracking program. Continue to provide staff resources to assist and support the coordination of transit services within the County and throughout the State. (Policy Goals: Mobility, System Efficiencies, Intermodalism & Accessibility, Communications) Objectives: • Participate and influence intercounty discussions between Riverside, Orange, and San Diego counties regarding the enhancement of intermodal options. This includes additional transit services (rail and express bus) and rideshare services. • Regularly participate in meetings that focus on the coordination of transit services, such as the California Association for Coordinated Transportation, SunLine's Access Committee, RTA's ADA Committee, the Riverside County Foundation on Aging Board of Directors, the Older Californian Traffic Safety Task Force, and the Commission's Citizens Advisory Committee/Social Service Transportation Advisory Council. • Continue the development of a marketing and distribution network for communicating specialized transit mobility options to seniors, the disabled, and persons of limited means. Public and Specialized Transit Performance/Workload Indicators FY 10/11 Estimated FY 10/11 Actual FY 11/12 Estimated FY 12/13 Projected SRTPs submitted by operators and reviewed 8 8 8 8 SRTP amendments 3 0 3 3 Specialized Transit grants awarded 22 21 21 21 One-way trips provided by Measure A funded projects 151,000 105,320 150,000 200,000 One-way trips provided by JARC & New Freedom funded agencies 77,000 212,213 250,000 300,000 One-way trips reimbursed through the Western County Transportation Reimbursement and Information Project 70,000 69,242 75,000 80,000 Transit tickets provided through the Transportation Access Program 55,000 68,502 64,976 65,000 Clients served through Blindness Support Services 60 35 42 50 Commuter Assistance Mission Statement: "To encourage and promote transportation alternatives for commuters through employer partnerships, information services, technological innovation, and community outreach." Chart 36 — Commuter Assistance Transfers Out Salaries and 4% Benefits Capital Outlay 1 5% 0% Expenditures Commuter Assistance expenditures and transfers out total $4,190,100, which represents a 55% decrease from last year's budget (Table 50). Professional costs of $640,300 have decreased 20% over the prior year due to ,the completion of the MSRC eRideguide/transit itinerary project in FY 2011/12. Support costs totaling $529,200 include mail and printing services, computer and vehicle maintenance, communications, and other office expenditures. Projects and operations expenditures of $2,633,400 consist of park and ride lease payments of $115,000, regional transportation consultant services totaling $1,853,800 to manage and implement the program, and merchant vouchers valued at $664,600. Capital outlay expenditures include $17,000 to upgrade the hardware and network equipment which supports the regional rideshare database. Reimbursements from local county transportation commissions for regional rideshare services provided by the Commission are included in revenues to offset these expenditures. Transfers out consist of $151,300 to the General fund for costs related to maintenance of the park and ride facility at the Perris Transit Center. Table 50 — Commuter Assistance Uses Detail FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change . Change Salaries and Benefits $ 197,600 $ 228,900 $ 264,800 $ 218,900 $ (10,000) -4% Professional Costs Legal Services 23,600 30,000 25,000 25,000 (5,000) -17% Professional Services -General 207,100 775,100 638,600 615,300 (159,800) -21% Total Professional Costs 230,700 805,100 663,600 640,300 (164,800) -20% Support Costs 309,100 503,400 505,000 529,200 25,800 5% Projects and Operations Program Operations 2,079,000 2,559,000 2,668,000 2,633,400 74,400 3% Total Projects and Operations 2,079,000 2,559,000 2,668,000 2,633,400 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 Commuter Assistance $ 2,831,900 $ 9,386,400 $ 4,391,400 $ 4,190,100 $ (5,196,300) -55% Commuter Assistance Staffing Summary Position FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Administrative Assistant 0.12 0.15 0.15 Chief Financial Officer 0.01 0.01 0.01 Commuter and Motorist Assistance Manager 0.57 0.65 0.58 Multi modal Services Director 0.17 0.25 0.27 Procurement Administrator 0.00 0.00 0.01 Procurement Manager 0.00 0.01 0.04 Staff Analyst 0.69 0.72 0.55. FTE 1.56 1.79 1.61 Department Budget Overview Department Description While much of the Commission's work is focused on increasing transportation infrastructure and capacity, there is significant value in ensuring that the transportation systems are used efficiently. To help foster more efficient use of these systems, the Commission's Commuter Assistance Program seeks to encourage Riverside County constituents and commuters to make a mode -shift decision away from single occupancy vehicle commuting and into alternative modes of transportation such as a carpool, vanpool, buspool, public bus, Metrolink, walking, bicycling, or telecommuting. The Commuter Assistance Program seeks to efficiently influence driver behavior by fostering a mode -shifting decision at both the employer and commuter levels via the following methods: • The provision of employer services to foster the implementation of employer -based mode -shift and rideshare programs; • The use of incentives both for beginning and then maintaining a mode-shift/rideshare arrangement; • Public information services including the dissemination of personalized commute options and traveler information to educate commuters of all travel options available and to foster congestion avoidance behavior when traveling; and • Leverage technology to deliver easy to use online resources and tools to more efficiently serve employer partners, their employees, and all other commuters. The Commission's Commuter Assistance Program was implemented as a specific requirement under Measure A to address congestion mitigation. While ridesharing has a beneficial impact on air quality, first and foremost, it is a strategy to improve mobility through increased use of alternative travel modes. Key Assumptions • The Commission will continue to contract with a consulting firm to administer the Commuter Assistance Program. • Maintaining its long-term partnership with the Commission, SANBAG will contract with the Commission to manage and implement a "sister" Commuter Assistance Program for its residents and employers in San Bernardino County. • At the regional level, four county transportation commissions (Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, and Ventura) will contract with the Commission for the provision of regional ridematching database and network operations. Accomplishments • Maintained program participation levels during a period of economic downturn. • Developed a new and more cost effective ridematching system with new features that will launch in FY 2012/13. In addition, the new hosted rideshare system will no longer require hardware or a network administrator to maintain it. • Developed an 1E511 mobile application to provide mobile users with enhanced access to traffic, park and ride lots, rideshare, and rail and bus transit information. • Continued to operate the report card program for both program participants and employer partners which translates individual or worksite rideshare participation into money saved, congestion reduced, and emissions reduced. This outreach is intended to recognize rideshare efforts and to motivate participants to continue ridesharing and/or grow employer program participation. • Continued to operate, maintain, and enhance the regional ridematching system on behalf of the five -county region. • Continued use of the Program Measurement Tool to evaluate program performance. • Continued to provide rideshare services to employers and commuters in the Coachella Valley, leveraging JARC funds which were secured for another two-year period. • Renewed leases for park and ride facilities with the following locations: Canyon Community Church of the Nazarene (Corona), Living Truth Christian Fellowship (Corona), Corona Friends Church (Corona), Elsinore Naval Military School (Lake Elsinore), Lake Elsinore Outlets (Lake Elsinore), Revival Christian Fellowship (Menifee), Mount San Jacinto College (San Jacinto), Hope Lutheran Church (Temecula), Orchard Christian Fellowship (Temecula), and the United Methodist Church (Temecula). • Continued partnering with the Rail Department to provide a permitted section of park and ride spaces in the city of Corona at the North Main Corona station. Major Initiatives A cornerstone of the Commuter Assistance Program is its continued partnership among commuters, employers, and government. The partnership, based on voluntary efforts, makes a collective difference in increasing the efficiency of our transportation system —local roads, freeways, commuter rail, and public bus. The combined effort results in less congestion, decreased vehicle miles traveled, and improved air quality. The major initiatives to continue these partnerships and efforts in FY 2012/13 are described below. Grow Employer Partnerships: Given that the highest percentage of rideshare arrangements is formed at work sites, voluntary employer participation is critical to addressing congestion and air quality goals; employers are the conduit to directly influencing their employees' personal transportation choices. The ongoing success of the core Western County rideshare program and the explosive success of the now five-year old Coachella Valley rideshare program demonstration is a testament to the significance of employer partnerships in the program's success. However, the current economic environment will pose challenges in terms of maintaining and/or growing these partnerships. Employer Transportation Coordinators (ETCs) have to do more with less. Delivery of value-added services and tools to make the ETC's job easier will be a critical motivation to continue the partnership. Roll Out New Program Tools: The Commission is continuously looking for opportunities to enhance the suite of services and outreach to both our program participants and employer partners to improve participation, partnerships, and program efficiencies. Commuter Assistance will launch its new ridematching software in FY 2012/13. As part of this effort, the program will feature brand new services, including state-of-the-art trip planning, individual user profiles, and a customizable employer portal for ETCs to more effectively manage their company's rideshare programs. Support Multimodal Travel: In addition to ridematching, information services, and incentives to facilitate ridesharing, the Commuter Assistance Program also implements park and ride facilities to support ridesharing efforts. The last Caltrans park and ride facility in Riverside County was built in 1999. The Commission leases park and ride spaces from property owners to supplement the network of park and ride spaces in Riverside County. A continued focus for FY 2012/13 will be to monitor and optimize the number of spaces leased and coordinate with ridesharers and transit and rail partners to identify areas where the lease program can help support car/vanpool arrangements as well as facilitate transit connections. Department Goals Operate a cost-effective Commuter Assistance Program within Riverside County that results in a demonstrable reduction in single occupant vehicle trips, thus assisting with congestion mitigation and improving air quality. (Policy Goals: Mobility, System Efficiencies, Environmental Stewardship) Objectives: • Continue to offer short-term incentives for commuters to try a transportation mode other than driving alone. • Continue to provide a rewards program for long-term ridesharers to encourage their continued use of alternative modes of transportation. • Ensure the effectiveness of the Commuter Assistance Program through program analysis and recurring assessments of participation and retention of ridesharers. The Commission will continue to look for ways to pare program costs without impacting service delivery or participation. • Explore opportunities to further enhance the 511 mobile application by integrating incentive enrollment and/or tracking. • Extend the mode-shift/rideshare incentive and services to the Coachella Valley using awarded 1ARC funds commencing at the beginning of FY 2012/13. • Increase participation and use of on-line service by employer partners to reduce administrative costs. • Optimize the number of park and ride spaces leased and address park and ride gaps in the system. • Assess vanpool program funding opportunities. Ensure the coordination of ridesharing programs throughout the Inland Empire and the southern California region. (Policy Goals: System Efficiencies, Intermodalism & Accessibility, Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Continue to administer a "sister" Commuter Assistance Program in San Bernardino County on a contract basis, thus expanding the reach and effectiveness of commuter programs throughout the Inland Empire area. • Continue to provide leadership with regard to the ongoing operation, maintenance, and enhancement of both the regional ridematching database and network. • Fund and participate in regional rideshare marketing programs to enhance awareness of and encourage participation in commute modes that provide an alternative to driving alone. • Coordinate with regional partners with respect to the implementation of ridematching alternatives. • Investigate the modification of the regional vanpool agreement with the regional partners in order to provide for more service availability and a revision to the current cost sharing formula. • Implement the revised Guaranteed Ride Home model that is more suitable to the region's interests. Strategically broaden the reach of the program to encourage the use of alternative transportation modesamongst all travelers and continue to grow the core target base of employers and their employees. (Policy Goals: System Efficiencies, Communications) Objectives: • Develop and implement a rideshare brand strategy and streamlined communications plan anchored by the 1E511 system. • Develop and support on-line resources and tools for employers to more effectively manage and market their organizations' rideshare programs. • Continue the dissemination of the report card program for both program participants and employer partners that translates individual or worksite rideshare participation into money saved, congestion reduced, and emissions reduced. • Publicize the participation of local employers in the Commission's Commuter Assistance Program through various media options. • Continue the operation of the Commuter Exchange vehicle to include 50 site visits for the FY 2012/13. • In partnership with the four county transportation commissions and others, utilize the regional ridesharing database and website, www.ridematch.info. Commuter Assistance Performance/Workload Indicators FY 10/11 Estimated FY 30/11 Actual FY 11/12 Estimated FY 12/13 Projected Number of one-way single occupant vehicle trips reduced as a result of Rideshare Incentives 105,932 91,154 93,888 96,704 Number of Rideshare Plus Rewards Members 7,292 6,690 6,890 7,096 Number of incoming 1-866-RIDESHARE telephone calls 2,209 1,257 1,294 1,332 Number of services provided by Inland Empire Commuter Services to support employer trip reduction efforts at worksites: • Employers requesting survey services 159 . 149 153 157 • RideGuides produced 26,184 28,703 29,564 30,450 Number of events participated in by the Commuter Exchange in total, and as identified individually below: , • Public events 8 3 2 2 • Employer work sites 2 4 3 3 • Elementary schools 40 45 45 45 Motorist Assistance Mission Statement: "To improve safety, reduce congestion, and enhance access to traveler information for motorists through the provision of a comprehensive motorist aid system." Chart 37 — Motorist Assistance Salaries and Benefits 3% Expenditures Professional Costs 12% Motorist Assistance expenditures and uses are budgeted at $6,169,300 for FY 2012/13, or a decrease of 3% compared to the prior year budget (Table 51). Salaries and benefits reflect an increase of $63,700 primarily due to a change in the mix of FTEs. Professional costs of $717,500 decreased 29% due to the transition of 1E511 from implementation to operation and include legal services and contracted consultants to monitor the Commission's motorist aid programs and provide monthly operating and statistical reports for the program. Support costs of $874,600 increased $275,300, or 46%, primarily due to the 1E511 communication costs. Reimbursement from SANBAG for half of all 1E511 related expenditures is included in revenues. Budgeted expenditures for project operations include $2,670,000 in towing contract costs for the FSP program. Projects and operations costs have decreased 13% due to the exclusion of the 1E511 Ca!trans detection expansion project at the 60/91/215 interchange in FY 2012/13. Construction relates to call box removals. Transfers out represent SAFE's matching funds of $995,000 to state funding for FSP services and a $326,300 allocation for administrative costs. Table 51— Motorist Assistance Uses Detail FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Salaries and Benefits $ 103,800 $ 112,200 $ 196,900 $ 175,900 $ 63,700 57'/0 Professional Costs Legal Services 17,300 34,000 34,000 30,000 (4,000) -12% Professional Services - General 632,200 974,700 882,000 687,500 (287,200) -29% Total Professional Costs 649,500 1,008,700 916,000 717,500 (291,200) -29% Support Costs 435,600 599,300 587,900 874,600 275,300 46% Projects and Operations Program Operations 2,341,800 3,543,100 3,585,800 3,020,000 (523,100) -15% Construction 60,000 60,000 N/A Total Projects and Operations 2,341,800 3,543,100 3,585,800 3,080,000 (463,100) -13% iransfersOut 1,231,200 1,114,30Q 1,114,300 1,321,300 207,000 19% iOTALMotorist Assistance $ 4,761,900 $ 6,377,600 $ 6,400,900 $ 6,169,300 $ (208,300) -3% Motorist Assistance Staffing Summary Position FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Administrative Assistant 0.05 0.10 0.03 Chief Financial Officer 0.01 0.01 0.01 Commuter and Motorist Assistance Manager 0.42 0.34 0.42 Multimodal Services Director 0.12 0.10 0.26 Procurement Administrator 0.03 0.05 0.06 Procurement Manager 0.04 0.05 0.09 Staff Analyst 0.21 0.20 0.32 FTE 0.88 0.85 1.19 Department Budget Overview Department Description As a SAFE, the Commission is responsible for providing a motorist aid system for Riverside County. This system is comprised of three components: 1) call boxes, 2) FSP, and 3) an 1E511 traveler information system. The call box system allows motorists to call for assistance in the event of a mechanical breakdown, accident, or other emergency on the freeway. The FSP clears small debris on freeways and assists stranded motorists on the most congested Riverside County freeways by towing, changing flat tires, and temporarily taping cooling system hoses at no charge to the motorists. FSP service is also provided in construction zones through separate funding agreements with Caltrans to help mitigate congestion. The 1E511 system is a telephone and web -based service that delivers real-time traffic information, including incidents and travel times, bus and rail trip planning, and rideshare information. Key Assumptions • Annual maintenance costs are based on a flat -fee contract based on the number of call boxes. • Current percentage levels of vandalism, knockdowns, and miscellaneous repairs to call boxes will remain consistent with the past year. • The Freeway Service Patrol will continue as long as state funding support is available. • Tow truck contractor costs for the nine existing FSP beats are based on Commission -approved contracts. • In partnership with SANBAG, the Commission will maintain and operate the 1E511 system in accordance with national 511 implementation standards. • The Commission will maintain and operate an 1E511 system to be funded 50% by the Commission and 50% by SANBAG. The Commission's share of operating costs will be funded with SAFE revenues. • The Commission will enhance 1E511 with the roll -out of a more personalized traffic information service. Accomplishments • Performed a comprehensive assessment that identified additional call box reduction opportunities to improve program efficiencies and maintain an effective "safety -net" for stranded motorists. • Continued the "cost recovery" program for call box knockdowns in an effort to collect reimbursements from motorists involved in accidents that damage Commission property. • Achieved one of the highest benefit -to -cost ratios statewide for FSP in the latest Statewide FSP Management Information System Report. • Maintained competitive rates across all tow operators as a result of exercising option years with no cost increases and obtaining competitive rates for new tow contracts awarded. • Implemented a new digital radio system for FSP that addresses coverage gaps, significantly improves reception, and complies with the Federal Communications Commission's narrowband radio conversion regulation. • Implemented enhancements to the 1E511 system including enhanced voice recognition software, revamped interactive voice response (IVR) script, and expanded access to system through local agency websites. • Migrated 1E511 to a new IVR phone platform for expanded functionality and cost savings. • Developed an 1E511 mobile application for Apple and Android markets, leveraging MSRC funding. Major Initiatives Major Motorist Assistance initiatives will focus on system efficiencies and evaluating and/or implementing enhanced program services or coverage. The call box system program has served as a "safety -net" for stranded motorists in Riverside County since 1991. However, call box usage has declined over the years with the proliferation of mobile phone use. In response, call box reductions have been made and upon award of a new call box maintenance contractor, additional reductions will be made based on call box removals identified in the call box reduction planning assessment. In addition, staff will focus on maintaining a high benefit -to -cost ratio and seek opportunities to maximize funding to not only improve the level of service but to potentially expand FSP coverage as well. The Commission, along with its partner, SANBAG, will continue to operate and maintain the 1E511 system. This system includes a website interface and an IVR telephone system that serves Riverside and San Bernardino county residents and commuters. While several enhancements have been made to the system since its launch, new enhancements will focus on the development of serving more personalized traffic information services specific to a commuter's route and time of travel. Department Goals Provide efficient delivery of a comprehensive motorist aid system (Call Box, FSP, 1E511) and an outstanding level of service to the traveling public. (Policy Goal: Mobility, System Efficiencies, Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Work in coordination with CHP and Caltrans to implement call box reductions identified in the planning assessment. • Along with San Bernardino County SAFE, continue to monitor the operation of the call answering center contractor. • Research new technologies to streamline FSP processes and develop new tools to automate the production of reports that track the performance of FSP tow operators. • Evaluate opportunities to provide more efficient FSP coverage through changes in service days, service hours, or number of vehicles assigned to each beat; perform budget assessments to identify potential service expansion (i.e., holiday service, weekend service on select beats) opportunities that can be supported. • Review proposed construction projects with Caltrans and local cities and coordinate the use of temporary tow service to mitigate congestion. • Work in coordination with the CHP and Caltrans on the Traffic Management Center relocation without disruption to FSP or call box operations during the migration. Enhance access to real-time traveler information. (Policy Goal: System Efficiencies, Communications, Objectives: • Develop access to, or delivery of, more personalized traffic information services specific to a commuter's route and time of travel. • Grow the number of users with more personalized offerings, services, and cost effective marketing efforts. • Continue to refine and enhance 1E511 web content, applications, and outreach. • Continue to leverage existing resources, such as traffic data, provided by Caltrans District 8, existing IVR software, and Google Transit to minimize costs. • Coordinate with Caltrans on expanding traffic detection and feeding that traffic data into the 1E511 system. • Utilize the opportunity at the new Caltrans District 8 Traffic Management Center to enhance coordination between CHP and Caltrans on traveler information. Motorist Assistance Performance/Workload Indicators FY 10/11 Estimated FY 10/11 Actual FY 11/12 Estimated FY 12/13 Projected Number of call boxes 614 611 611 550 Number of call box calls 5,700 5,251 5,094 4,942 Number of vehicle assists 49,761 45,751 47,123 48,536 Number of 1E511 phone calls 494,164 489,036 503,707 518,818 Number of 1E511 web visits 206,148 244,277 251,605 259,153 Riverside County Transportation Conunissiorr Capital Project Development and Delivery Mission Statement: "To keep the Commission's contract with the voters of Riverside County by accelerating the planning, programming, and implementation of projects and programs in the Measure A Transportation Improvement Plan, as enhanced by the Toll Program, to the extent that funds are available. To ensure that capital projects are environmentally acceptable, expertly designed, and implemented in a cost effective manner. To acquire and manage required right of way in the most economical, efficient, and timely manner." Chart 38 — Capital Project Development and Delivery Salaries and Professional Benefits Costs 0%N 1% il Expenditures The budgeted expenditures and transfers out total $815,241,700 to cover all of the Commission's major capital projects (Table 52). Personnel costs represent less than 1% of the budgeted uses. Professional costs of $7,500,600 are primarily related to general legal costs, specialized legal and financial advisory services related to the toll program, debt management services, and BNSF services related to a rail capital project. Support costs of $587,000 consist primarily of services needed to maintain the Commission's real properties in a condition that complies with all local codes and regulations governing property maintenance. General project costs include $9,538,300 related to program management provided by Bechtel Infrastructure (Bechtel), SCRRA, and permits for highway and rail capital projects. Significant projects included in engineering expenditures of $24,312,600, are SR-91, 1-15, and 1-215 corridor improvements; 91/71 interchange improvements project; SR-60 truck climbing lanes; Mid County Parkway; SR-79 realignment; various Western County TUMF regional arterial projects; Perris Valley Line and other rail projects; and Coachella Valley highway projects subject to an advance funding agreement. Construction expenditures of $126,964,800, are primarily related to the 74/215 interchange, 1-215 corridor improvements —south and central segments, SR-91 Van Buren interchange, SR-91 corridor improvements, SR-74 curve widening, 1-15 Los Alamos Road bridge replacement, I-215/Blaine to Martin Luther King widening, various Western County TUMF regional arterial projects, and Perris Valley Line and other rail projects. Design -build costs of $29,050,000 pertain to the SR- 91 corridor improvement project. Approximately 31% of the projects and operations costs represent right of way expenditures of $109,476,500 on significant projects including SR-91 corridor improvement project, SR-91 HOV lanes, 1-215 corridor improvements central segment, 91/71 interchange improvements, 74/215 interchange, SR-74 curve widening, Mid County Parkway, various Western County TUMF regional arterial projects, and Perris Valley Line and other rail projects. Funding will also be provided for CVAG's MSHCP land mitigation acquisitions. Local turnback payments to cities and the County for local streets and roads repair, maintenance, and construction amount to $39,357,000, net of an allocation of $455,000 to the 2009 Measure A Western County Regional Arterial special revenue fund related to the ineligibility of city of Beaumont for its local streets and roads allocation. Disbursements to CVAG for the 2009 Measure A Coachella Valley highway and regional arterial program comprise substantially all of the regional arterial expenditures. Special studies of $40,000 are related to the SJBL. Operating and capital disbursements of $250,000 are related to Metrolink station rehabilitation costs. Rail capital equipment purchases for the station security project represent 100% of the capital outlay expenditures. Interest payments on outstanding commercial paper and the 2009 Bonds and 2010 Bonds .are approximately $16,613,000. Principal payments of $126,800,000 are related to the 2009 Bonds and retirement of all of the outstanding commercial paper notes. Significant transfers out include the following: • $129,479,000 in commercial paper proceeds to fund 2009 Measure A Western County and Coachella Valley highway projects such as the SR-91 and 1-15 corridor improvement projects, 1-215 corridor improvements —south and central segment projects, and the 91/71 connector project; • $123,665,800 in debt proceeds and advance funding agreement payments received to fund debt service and retire outstanding commercial paper notes; • $17,835,000 from the TUMF CETAP reserves for two city of Temecula regional arterial projects along 1-15 and the 1-215 corridor improvements south segment project; • $16,889,600 from 2009 Measure A Western County highway funds to the Commercial Paper capital projects fund related to project reimbursements received from federal and state agencies; • $11,000,000 from 2009 Measure A Western County highway funds to the Debt Service fund; • $650,000 from 1989 Measure A excess debt service reserves for a rail project; • $610,100 from TUMF for administrative allocations to the General fund; • $455,000 from 2009 Measure A Western County local streets and roads to the 2009 Measure A Western County regional arterial program for the city of Beaumont's local streets and roads allocation; • $386,900 from 1989 Measure A Western County highway reserves to TUMF regional arterial projects for a County project on SR-79; and • $42,000 for construction FSP service related to the 1-215 corridor improvement south segment project. Table 52 - Capital Project Development and Delivery Uses Detail FY14111 FY11/12 FY11/12 FY12/13 Dollar Percent Acid Revised Budget Projected Bucipt Charge Charee Salaries and Benefits $ 2,3L$900 $ 2795,000 $ 1024930 $ 3,113,103 $ 318100 11% Professional Casts CorrnissianerPer Diem 1,533 N/A Legal Services 1817,X0 5231933 3RE6,103 4,545200 (€8i330) -13% AucitSenrices 78900 52,000 2,933 65933 11,500 2N Frandal Ads isow 214X0 2,378000 401030 914020 0,4E50E0) -EN Professional Services- &neral 1,347,700 1,943)003 1,834,200 1,975900 35933 N Total Professional Costs 5,454000 9 (331,9:0 62132X0 7,500,E (2,103931 -2N Support Costs 304200 815020 458,2O 587,000 (22W331 -28'// Projects and Operations Program Clzerations 4,60Q700 9,259000 5395100 5535300 275300 3% Etneerire 27,545320 41935830 27,735100 24,312,ECO (17,255XO) -4N Construction 25914)800 41,777,600 3191100. 125964,8C0 85,187,20 MI% Design Build 16272,900 14,435030 11,OO = 29,0501003 14,612,000 101% Right ofWay and land 44,661000 X1127,003 54)535100 K9,475903 35349,500 44% Local Streets and Roads 35857,003 35025,003 351E5E00 35357,030 5332,000 9% Re®onal Arterials 8631600 1522,030 17,403,20D 24401400 4)135400 29% Spada) Studies 55XO 81030 &LOCO 41000(4g030) -W0 Operatirg and Capital asbusernents - • I4000 254030 N/A TotalProjects and Operatiors 162,557,033 225S7,400 1E5055203 3313E9,110 125262,203 53% Capital Outlay 6Z800 175003 177,030 225,00D *OM 2EP/o Debt Service 123,335E00 b2,995,000 62,% 000 145413,000 81414003 1 N Transfers Out 16584st100 139,639,7:0 135025,E00 301,015400 1b1,374700 118/0 TOTAL Capital Project DzveloprentandCelivery $ 4E4875i830 $ 457,S67,600 $ 397,909,700 $ 815241,7:0 $ 33,EE4100 81% Capital Project Development and Delivery Staffing Summary Position FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Administrative Assistant 0.44 0.39 0.35 Capital Projects Manager 3.00 4.00 3.60 • Chief Financial Officer 0.12 0.26 0.24 Community Relations Manager 0.93 0.90 0.85 Deputy Executive Director 0.09 0.10 0.07 Executive Director 0.36 0.40 0.36 Goods Movement Manager 0.00 0.00 0.25 Government Relations Manager 0.00 0.05 0.15 Planning and Programming Manager 0.04 0.05 0.05 Procurement Administrator 0.18 0.05 0.54 Procurement Manager 0.19 0.31 0.75 Project Delivery Director 1.00 1.00 0.99 Project Development Director 0.83 0.87 0.94 Rail Manager 0.00 0.10 0.00 Right of Way Manager 1.00 1.00 1.00 Senior Staff Analyst 1.00 1.00 1.03 Staff Analyst 1.00 1.20 1.00 Toll Program Director 0.98 1.00 1.00 Toll Project Manager 1.00 1.00 2.00 FTE 12.16 13.68 15.17 Department Budget Overview Department Description The primary responsibility of Capital Projects is the development and delivery of major highway and rail capital projects where the Commission is identified as the lead agency. The delivery of a capital project can include tasks such as feasibility studies, preliminary engineering, environmental clearance, final design, right of way acquisition, construction, and construction management. Funding is also provided through Capital Projects for local jurisdiction highway and regional arterial projects based on funding agreements with the Commission. Approximately 58% of the Commission's FY 2012/13 budgeted expenditures originates in this department managed by the Toll Program,. Project Delivery, and Project Development Directors responsible for the capital program. Capital Projects accelerates delivery of the Measure A, toll, state, and federally funded highway, regional arterial, and rail capital improvement projects throughout the County. Highway improvements currently in progress include the addition of mixed flow, carpool, and tolled express lanes; widening and realignment projects; and interchange improvements as well as a new CETAP corridor. Regional arterial capital improvements include funding for Western County TUMF regional arterial projects. Commuter rail capital improvements include the expansion of commuter rail service in Riverside County. This department also provides the necessary coordination between the Commission and Caltrans for the development of scope, cost, and project delivery schedules for Measure A projects that are funded by the STIP and Proposition 1B CMIA. The 2009 Measure A program includes funding to the incorporated cities and the County for local streets and roads maintenance, repair, and construction. The budgeted amount is set by formula established in the Measure A TIP. To be eligible to receive these Measure A funds, each city in the Western County and Coachella Valley areas and the County must participate in the TUMF program, which is administered by WRCOG in Western County and by CVAG in Coachella Valley. Additionally, for Western County jurisdictions, they must also participate in the MSHCP. Annually all cities and the County are required to submit a five-year CIP and meet an MOE requirement. Each jurisdiction's respective allocation is based on population (Western County and Palo Verde Valley) or dwelling unit (Coachella Valley) and the amount of sales tax generated. The city of La Quinta does not participate in the Coachella Valley TUMF Program, and the city of Beaumont was determined to be in noncompliance with the Western County TUMF program. Accordingly, La Quinta's Measure A allocation is remitted to CVAG in lieu of the TUMF, and Beaumont's Measure A allocation istransferred to the Commission's 2009 Measure A Western County regional arterial program. Given the support required to oversee and participate in the project development work, costs for Commission staff and related support have been included in this department budget. The projects identified in the FY 2011/12 budget funded by Measure A, TUMF, state, or federal funds as well as future toll revenues require the continued support of the Bechtel program management team which includes program managers, project engineers, construction engineers, inspectors, contracts administration, and support staff. Right of Way Acquisition and Support Services The primary goal of the Right of Way Management Division is to deliver right of way in the most cost effective manner and within project schedules, while adhering to federal and state regulations. Commission staff required to supervise and manage right of way services and related support for individual projects are included in the Capital Project Development and Delivery Department budget. The Commission authorized the development of a Right of Way Acquisition Program in 2006. To implement the Commission's directive, staff procured the services of on -call right of way consultant services in the fields of title and escrow, right of way engineering and surveying, environmental assessment, appraisal and appraisal review, acquisition and relocation, feasibility studies and cost estimates, property management, and utility relocation. These consultants are managed and supervised by the Right of Way Management Division. Property Management The Commission strives to manage its real property with the objective of maximizing existing and future public transportation benefits, safety, and income by means of professional property management policies and procedures. This includes issuing licenses and rights of entry for authorized third -party uses, as well as investigating and resolving issues regarding uses that are not authorized by the Commission. On certain occasions, the Commission may also grant easements. General maintenance activities and security measures are also part of the property management scope of work on all Commission -owned properties. The demolition and clearance of structures and other improvements on acquired property, excluding commuter rail stations, is included in the property management function. Additionally, the Commission must manage real property acquired for a project until it is required for construction. Since 1990, the Commission has acquired property assets in the course of rail and highway project implementation. To date, the rail properties number over 225 parcels. The Commission acquired approximately 500 parcels for the SR-74 widening project (Segments 1 and 2), and most of these parcels, which were related to Segment 1, have been transferred to Caltrans. In addition approximately 100 properties have been acquired for the SR-91 HOV lanes, Mid County Parkway, SR-79 realignment, Perris Valley Line, and SR-60 HOV lanes/I-215 to Redlands Boulevard projects. Property acquisition for the SR-91 corridor improvement project began in 2010 with 12 properties acquired to date. These properties were acquired in fee, and some will be transferred primarily to Caltrans upon completion of the projects. Upon project completion, all remaining properties within every project are reassessed and deemed surplus when it has been determined that the continued retention of the property no longer supports the Commission's policy goals and objectives. Long -Term Strategic Planning Several years ago, the strategic plan for the 1989 Measure A highway program was updated and provided the guidance for completion of the 1989 Measure A highway projects. A significant effort was completed in December 2006 to develop an implementation plan strategy for the 2009 Measure A state highway program, with a focus on the first 10 years of the program through 2019. An objective -based assessment of the Western County portion of the 2009 Measure A TIP was completed along with the prioritization of the program of projects. Four highway corridors, 1-215, 1-15, 1-10, and SR-91, were selected as the priority focus for the first 10 years of the 2009 Measure A program, and long-term development work was approved for large scale projects such as the development of the Mid County Parkway, realignment of SR-79, and the bi-county widening of 1-215 to San Bernardino County. Project development activities for these projects have been ongoing. As a result of the recession and related decline in Measure A revenues, staff commenced an update of project' costs and anticipated funding in mid-2009. After several months of review of funding issues with an ad hoc committee, an update and reprioritization of the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan was presented to the Commission at its annual workshop in January 2010. Various actions were taken on the four priority highway projects (SR-91, 1-10, 1-15, and 1-215). Four of the 1-215 corridor projects were selected as a top priority (1-215 south and central segments, 1-215 bi-county gap closure, and French Valley interchange), while the 1-215 north segment was deferred to a later year. Preliminary engineering and environmental clearance activities for the 1-15 corridor project will be completed; however, final design will be deferred for a few years. A scope reevaluation and related project reassessment of this project is expected to be completed in summer 2012. The 1-10 truck climbing lanes project was deferred several years. The SR-91 corridor improvement .project will continue to move forward with a procurement of a design -build team and achievement of financial close expected in late FY 2012/13. For the strategic projects, preliminary engineering and environmental clearance will be completed for the Mid County Parkway and SR-79 realignment; right of way acquisition for Mid County will be considered for extraordinary acquisitions on a pay-as-you-go basis, while right of way acquisitions for SR-79 realignment will be suspended due to lack of available funding. Project costs and anticipated funding for these projects have been updated annually, and a status update has been included in each of the annual workshops in 2011 and 2012. Updated capital project implementation strategic plans are expected in 2019 and 2029, as required by the 2009 Measure A. CVAG has developed a strategic plan for Coachella Valley highway and regional arterial projects based upon a transportation project prioritization study that is updated periodically. The Perris Valley Line is the most significant rail capital project, and it was included in the 1989 and 2009 Measure A programs. Other rail capital projects are developed in coordination with SCRRA as well as the implementation of the Perris Valley Line. Four new Western County transportation corridors were identified through CETAP and are eligible for 2009 Measure A Western County new corridor and TUMF CETAP funding. Given the size and anticipated cost of these new corridors, they are moving forward on varied schedules with the work on the internal corridors, the Mid County Parkway and 1-215 corridor improvement project south segment to French Valley interchange, being the most advanced. Western County TUMF regional arterial projects were approved in 2004 based on a call for projects, which is discussed in the Planning and Programming Department in section 6.2 of this document. Additionally, the Commission will participate in the improvement of a wildlife corridor crossing under SR-91, B Canyon, in collaboration with Caltrans, U.S. Fish and Wildlife, U.S. National Forest, California Department of Fish and Game, and the Department of Parks and Recreation. The actual construction of this enhancement will be done subsequent to the construction on the SR-91 corridor improvement project. These strategic planning activities play a significant part of the Commission's annual budget process, in particular the capital budget. Key Assumptions • The Commission will continue its emphasis on the closeout of the 1989 Measure A program. • The Western Riverside County Delivery Plan serves as the basis for defining the 2009 Measure A project selection and prioritization. • Western County TUMF regional arterial projects are based on the list approved by the Commission in 2004. • Agreements for the advancement of 2009 Measure A funds have been obtained from CVAG and cities participating in the debt programs. The annual principal and interest payments for these loans will be deducted by the Commission from each agency's respective disbursements based on the terms of the loan agreements. • Highway project costs are based on engineers' estimates and scope agreements with Caltrans. • Construction projects are competitively bid to minimize costs. • All projects will be built to required standards. • All highway projects, with the exception of tolled express lane facilities, are transferred upon completion to Caltrans; operation of these facilities is the responsibility of Caltrans. Tolled express lane facilities, when completed, will be operated and maintained by the Commission for 50 years by agreement between Caltrans and the Commission. • The Commission will develop strategies to implement alternative financing structures including public toll roads. • 2009 Measure A Western County regional arterial projects will be selected and programmed when revenues are at a level that can sustain reasonable cash flow to fund the construction projects selected for this program. • Development of the SR-79 realignment and Mid County Parkway strategic projects through preliminary engineering and environmental clearance will continue. Accomplishments • Continued implementation of the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan. • Continued construction phase for 1-215 corridor improvement project south segment widening from Murrieta Hot Springs Road to Scott Road and the 60/215 East Junction HOV project. • Completed the final design and right of way acquisitions, continued to perform utility relocations, and advertised and awarded the construction contract for the SR-91 HOV lanes project. • Completed final design, right of way acquisition, and utility relocations and initiated procurement for a construction management team for the SR-74 curve realignment project and the I-215/Blaine Street to Martin Luther King Boulevard widening project. • Substantially completed the final design, right of way acquisitions, and utility relocations for the 1-215 corridor improvement project central segment widening from Scott Road to Nuevo Road. • Completed the design and right of way acquisition and utility relocations for the I-215 bi-county HOV project. • Began the project report and environmental phase for the 1-215 corridor improvement project south connectors. • Received a $20 million TIGER grant and selected to submit an application for a federal federal TIFIA loan under the U.S. DDT's TIFIA and TIGER programs to significantly benefit the financing of the SR-91 corridor improvement project. • Earned a preliminary investment grade rating of the SR-91 corridor improvement project financing. • Reached agreement with OCTA to jointly operate and maintain the 91 Express Lanes and with Caltrans for a 50-year lease of the SR-91 median to allow the Commission to operate the 91 Express Lanes when they are extended in the future. • Made substantial progress on the project report and environmental studies for the following projects: ■ SR-91 corridor improvement project (96% complete): issued the Draft Environmental Document and conducted a public hearing; and ■ 1-15 corridor improvement project (66% complete). • Completed the project report and environmental studies and started final design for the 91/71 interchange improvements project. • Continued construction phase for the 74/215 interchange project. • Initiated updated technical studies and engineering modifications to address the reduced project limits of the proposed Mid County Parkway project. • Made substantial progress related to the environmental process for the SR-79 realignment project. • Continued successful negotiations with the FTA related to the Small Starts funding authorization for the Perris Valley Line. • Made substantial progress related to the environmental process for the Perris Valley Line project. • Completed preliminary engineering and began advanced preliminary engineering for the Perris Valley Line project. • Supported public outreach activities by providing graphics from the right of way project management database for Commission presentations to facilitate public understanding of project issues. • Declared property no longer needed for transportation purposes as surplus. Major Initiatives FY 2012/13 will mark the fourth year as the Commission closes out the 1989 Measure A programs and continues project activities related to the 2009 Measure A programs, of which the highway, rail, regional arterial, and local streets and roads programs represent the majority of the funding allocations. While most of the 1989 Measure A highway projects have been completed, a few projects will continue such as the SR-91 HOV lanes from Adams Street to 60/91/215 interchange, SR-74 curve widening, 74/215 interchange improvements, and 60/215 East Junction HOV lane connectors. The 1-215 bi-county HOV gap closure project and Perris Valley Line rail projects will continue, as both are also included in the 2009 Measure A. Various stages of project development work for projects included in the Western County Highway Delivery Plan will continue in FY 2012/13. Detailed descriptions of the capital projects, including local streets and roads funding, that are included in the FY 2012/13 budget follow the Performance/Workload Indicators. Department Goals Build upon and strengthen the partnership with Caltrans toward timely delivery of identified Measure A, CMIA, toll program, and STIP projects. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Environmental Stewardship, Economic Development) Objectives: • Develop agreements with Caltrans and FHWA, as may be required, to finalize project scoping and cost issues for the STIP, federal demonstration, toll, and Measure A funded highway projects in Riverside County. • Meet the project milestones identified in the CMIA agreements between Commission, Caltrans, and the CTC. To the extent permitted by law, pursue reasonable involvement of local DBE and SBE firms in contract work. (Policy Goal: Communications) Objective: • Maintain and monitor goal for a minimum DBE participation in all federally funded contracts. Provide effective communication of project progress to the Commission board members, city councils, the County Board of Supervisors, Caltrans, CTC, FTA and FHWA. (Policy Goal: Communications) Objectives: • Develop a strategy with Caltrans District 8 that would allow the Commission to advance specific projects identified in the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan to take advantage of any unexpected state or federal funding which may become available through increased state or federal budget authorizations, federal stimulus, or potential loan programs to advance construction. • Conduct quarterly meetings with FTA and report on progress of Perris Valley Line project. Work with Caltrans and other agencies toward completion of preliminary engineering and environmental clearance of all projects. (Policy Goal: Mobility) Objectives: • Work with Caltrans, the County, and the cities in Riverside County to complete preliminary design and environmental clearance for Measure A projects that could be eligible to receive additional or early funding from various sources that could become available if a project is sufficiently developed. • Release for public review and comment the updated NEPA and CEQA environmental documents for the Perris Valley Line. • Release for public review and comment the NEPA and CEQA environmental documents for the 1-215 corridor improvement project southbound connector. • Circulate for public review the draft environmental document related to the SR-79 realignment project. • Release the recirculated environmental document for the modified Mid County Parkway project. • Complete the project approval and environmental document for the SR-91 corridor improvement project. • Initiate the project approval and environmental document of the SR-60 truck climbing lane project. Construct the highway projects identified in the budget. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Economic Development, Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Complete construction of the 74/215 interchange project. • Commence and complete construction of the SR-74 curve realignment project and the I-215/Blaine Street to Martin Luther King Boulevard widening project. • Continue construction on the 1-215 corridor improvement project south segment, the first project in the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan to reach construction. • Commence construction on the 1-215 corridor improvement project central segment between Scott Road and Nuevo Road. • Continue construction of the 60/215 East Junction HOV project. • Commence construction on the SR-91 HOV project and the 1-215 bi-county HOV project. • Complete the procurement of a design -build contractor to design and construct the SR-91 corridor improvement project. In coordination with the Rail Program Manager, construct capital improvements at existing commuter rail stations as identified in the budget. (Policy Goals: Mobility, System Efficiencies, Environmental Stewardship, Intermodalism & Accessibility, Financial & Administration) Objective: • Continue advance preliminary engineering, complete environmental clearance and final design, and start right of way acquisition for the Perris Valley Line. Acquire right of way for rail and highway projects identified in the budget. (Policy Goal: Mobility, Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Acquire right of way for the following projects: SR-91 corridor improvement project, SR-74 curve realignment project, 1-215 corridor improvement project central segment, and Perris Valley Line. • Protect and maintain properties acquired for future projects. Identify alternative financing strategies in order to fully fund projects identified in the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan. (Policy Goal: Mobility) Objectives: • Continue the assessment and evaluation of available strategies. • Submit a TIFIA application and complete the application and negotiation process to obtain a federal loan under the U.S. DOT'S TIFIA and TIGER programs to benefit the SR-91 corridor improvement project. Location of Major FY 2012/13 Projects within Riverside County INSERT MAP HERE 1) SR-74 Construction for the curve widening on SR-74 from Calvert Avenue to California Avenue. 2) 74/215 Construction of the interchange. 3) SR-79 Realignment between Gilman Springs Road and Domenigoni Parkway including project study report, project report, and environmental document. 4) SR-91 (A) Construction of HOV lanes from Adams Street to the 60/91/215 interchange. (B) Final design for the 91/71 interchange improvements. (C) Preliminary engineering, environmental studies, and design -build procurement for toll and mixed flow lanes from SR-241 to Pierce Street. 5) Mid County Parkway 6) Perris Valley Line 7) Local Streets and Roads Preliminary engineering, project report, and environmental documentation for the project. Advanced preliminary engineering and right of way acquisition for the Perris Valley Line (Riverside -Moreno Valley -Perris) along the SJBL. Allocation of Measure A revenues to each city and the County to improve, maintain, and repair high priority local streets and roads. 8)60/215 9) 1-215 Bi-County HOV Gap Closure Project Construction of the East Junction HOV lane connectors. Construction and utility relocations for HOV lanes on the 1-215 from the 60/91/215 interchange to Orange Show Road in San Bernardino County. 10) 1-215 (A) Construction of the south segment from 1-15 to Scott Road. (B) Final design and construction for the central segment from Scott Road to Nuevo Road. (C) Construction of the I-215/Blaine to Martin Luther King Boulevard widening. 11) 1-15 Preparation of engineering .and environmental document for the addition of mixed flow, HOV, and tolled express lanes from SR-60 to I- 215 in Temecula. 12) SR-60 Truck Climbing Lane Begin project approval and environmental document of the truck climbing lane project. Capital Project Development & Delivery Performance/Workload Indicators FY 30/11 Estimated FY 10/11 Actual FY 11/12 Estimated FY 12/13 Projected Preliminary Engineering (project reports and environmental documentation) Contracts awarded 4 2 2 1 Plans, specifications, and estimates contracts awarded 1 1 2 1 Number of projects with active right of way acquisition 3 7 7 5 Construction awards 3 2 2 5 Highway and Rail project close-outs 2 1 2 3 License agreements managed 50 52 60 74 Appraisals and appraisal reviews completed 122 76 379 384 Capital Projects Summary The following is a summary of the capital projects included in the FY 2012/13 budget. Costs are, generally categorized by preliminary engineering, final design, right of way, construction, and design -build phases in addition to other project -related costs such as salaries and benefits, Bechtel project management, and legal fees. Western County Highway and Regional Arterial Projects SR-74/1-15 to 7`h Street (P003001) Complete right of way acquisition closeout for Segment II related to the realignment and widening of four -lane roadway between Wasson Canyon Road in the city of Lake Elsinore and 7th Street in the city of Perris. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 38,200 Right of way acquisition/support services $ 20,400 Other project -related costs Costs will be funded using 1989 Measure A. N/A; state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. 74/215 Interchange (PO03015) Preliminary engineering began in 2006 and was completed in 2009. Final design was completed in 2009. Construction began in mid-2010 and is scheduled to be completed in 2012. The total project cost is estimated at $30 million. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 1,820,000 Construction $ 550,000 Right of way acquisition/support services $ 223,500 Other project -related costs Costs will be funded using 1989 Measure A highway funds, TUMF zone contributions, ARRA funds, and a federal earmark. N/A; state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. SR- 74 Curve. Widening (PO03009) Continue with right of way acquisition. Construction of the project should begin 2013. The total estimated project cost is $4.2 million. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 3,420,000 Construction/construction management $ 310,000 Right of way acquisition/support services $ 238,600 Other project -related costs Costs will be funded using 1989 Measure A highway funds. N/A; state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. SR-79 Realignment (PO03003 & PO05127) Perform realignment environmental and preliminary engineering services from Gilman Springs Road to Domenigoni Parkway. The total estimated project cost is $1.2 billion. The project is expected to be completed with the environmental phase in 2014. Initiation of subsequent phases will be dependent upon the availability of funding. FY 2012/13 Cost $ 1,300,000 Preliminary engineering $ 253,000 Other project -related costs Measure A Budget Impact None; costs have been funded using TUMF regional arterial, federal earmarks, and SAFETEA-LU federal funds. Operating Budget Impact N/A; state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. SR-79 Widening/Thompson to Domenigoni (PO05114) Provide funding and support to complete right of way for the widening of SR-79 to four lanes. Right of way acquisition should be complete in 2011/12. FY 2012/13 Cost $ 838,800 Construction $ 386,900 Right of way acquisition/support services Measure A Budget Impact Costs will be funded using 1989 Measure A highway funds with the County of Riverside as lead agency. The Measure A funding commitment for this project was $7.1 million. Operating Budget Impact N/A; state highway and regional arterial operations are the responsibility of Caltrans and the local jurisdiction, respectively. SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project (PO03026 & PO03028) Continue the preliminary engineering and environmental study, financing, property acquisition, and design -build contract procurement phases for the toll and mixed flow lanes project from SR-241 to Pierce Street, including tolled express lanes connectivity to 1-15 and improvements to the 15/91 interchange. The SR-91 corridor improvement project cost is estimated at $1.3 billion, and project development activities began in September 2007. The project is expected to be open to traffic in 2017. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 2,000,000 Preliminary engineering $ 4,000,000 Construction $ 60,400,000 Right of way acquisition $ 29,050,000 Design -build $ 5,414,200 Other project -related costs, including toll feasibility work Project development costs will be funded using 2009 Measure A highway funds, including sales tax revenue bonds. Toll revenue bonds are expected to be issued in 2013 to provide project financing in addition to securing a federal TIFIA loan to complete the funding plan. Operation and maintenance of future tolled express lanes facilities are the responsibility of the Commission, while all other state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. Preliminary estimates of annual operating and maintenance costs are $11,200,000. Such costs will be paid from the collection of toll revenues. 91/71 Interchange Improvements Project (PO03021) Continue final design for interchange improvements to the 91/71 interchange. The total estimated project cost is $114 million. Preliminary engineering began in February 2008. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 4,000,000 Final design $ 1,250,000 Right of way acquisition/support services $ 542,000 Other project -related costs Costs for final design and right of way acquisition will be primarily funded using Congressionally -designated federal funding remaining from previous area projects. The balance of funding will come from 2009 Measure A highway funds. N/A; state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. SR-91 HOV Lanes/Adams Street to 60/91/215 Interchange (PO03005) Begin construction and complete right of way acquisitions. Preliminary engineering began in 2001. Construction of the project should be completed in the summer of 2015. The estimated total project cost is $273 million. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 150,000 Final design $ 14,195,000 Right of way acquisition/support services $ 777,300 Other project -related costs Final design costs will be funded using Letter of No Prejudice funds received and CMAQ with 1989 Measure A highway funds for local match. Right of way costs will be funded using STIP-RIP, Traffic Congestion Relief Program, CMAQ, and 1989 Measure A highway funds. CMAQ and CMIA funds generated by Proposition 1B will be used for construction activities. Caltrans is the lead agency. N/A; state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. SR-91/La Sierra Avenue Interchange (P003014) Provide funding and support to complete construction to widen and fully improve La Sierra Avenue from SR-91 to El Sobrante Road. The landscaping and plant establishment portion of the project is expected to be completed in mid-2013. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 110,600 Construction Costs will be funded using 1989 Measure A highway funds with the city of Riverside as lead agency. The Measure A funding commitment for this project was $27.2 million. N/A; state highway and regional arterial operations are the responsibility of Caltrans and the local jurisdiction, respectively. SR-91/Van Buren Boulevard Interchange (P003008) Provide funding and support for construction to widen and fully improve the interchange at Van Buren Boulevard. This project is expected to be completed in 2014. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 3,184,300 Construction Costs will be funded using 1989 Measure A highway funds with the city of Riverside as lead agency. The Measure A funding commitment for this project was $7.6 million. N/A; state highway and regional arterial operations are the responsibility of Caltrans and the local jurisdiction, respectively. I-15 Corridor Improvement Project (P003027) Continue preliminary engineering and environmental studies to add two tolled express lanes and one mixed flow lane in each direction from SR-60 to SR-74 and to add one HOV lane in each direction from SR-74 to 1-215. Preliminary engineering and environmental work started in April 2008. Project development beyond preliminary engineering for final design and construction is dependent upon the ongoing toll feasibility studies and are not currently budgeted. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 8,000,000 Preliminary engineering $ 705,600 Other project -related costs, including toll feasibility work Project development costs will be funded using 2009 Measure A highway funds. It is anticipated that toll revenue bonds will be issued in the future to provide project financing and secure a federal TIFIA loan to complete the project funding plan. Operation and maintenance of future tolled express lanes facilities are the responsibility of the Commission, while all other federal and state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. Preliminary estimates of annual operating and maintenance costs are $15 million. Such costs will be paid from the collection of toll revenues. 1-15/Los Alamos Road Bridge Replacement (P003036) Provide funding and support to begin construction in 2013. Construction of the project is expected to be completed by 2014. The total project cost is estimated at $3.8 million. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 2,000,000 Construction 2009 Measure A highway funds will be used for construction. The Measure A funding commitment for this project was approximately $2.9 million. The city of Murrieta is the lead agency for construction. N/A; state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. SR-60 Truck Climbing Lanes (PO03029) Begin preliminary engineering in 2013. Construction of the project is expected to be completed by 2020. The total project cost is estimated at $122 million. FY 2012/13 Cost $ 3,000,000 Preliminary engineering $ 79,100 Other project -related costs Measure A Budget Impact CMAQ will be used for preliminary engineering. Caltrans will be performing the preliminary engineering. Operating Budget Impact N/A; state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. 60/215 East Junction HOV Lane Connectors (PO03017) Continue construction. Final design and right of way acquisition were completed in 2010. Preliminary engineering began in 2006. Construction of the project is expected to be completed by 2014. The total project cost is estimated at $42 million. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 30,000 Construction/construction management $ 265,000 Right of way acquisition/support services $ 68,000 Other project -related costs STP and CMAQ, with STIP-RIP and STIP-IIP for local match funds, will be used for construction. Caltrans is the lead agency for construction. N/A; state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. 1-215 Corridor Improvements (South Segment)/1-15 to Scott Road (PO03022) Continue construction to add one mixed flow lane in each direction. Final design began in 2008 and was completed in 2010. Preliminary engineering began in 2007 and was completed in 2008. Construction is expected to finish in 2013. The total project cost is estimated at $33 million. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 6,320,000 Construction/construction management $ 581,700 Other project -related costs Costs will be funded using STIP-RIP funds and 2009 Measure A highway funds; CMIA funds generated by Proposition 1B bonds will be used for construction activities. N/A; federal highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. 1-215 Corridor Improvements (Central Segment)/Scott Road to Nuevo Road (PO03023) Continue final design and right of way acquisition to add one mixed flow lane in each direction. Preliminary engineering began in 2007 and was completed in 2011. Final design began in 2011, and construction will begin in 2013. Construction of the project is expected to be completed by 2016. The total project cost is estimated at $120 million. FY 2012/13 Cost $ 1,000,000 Final design $ 8,460,000 Construction/construction management services $ 1,303,000 Right of way acquisition/support services $ 1,464,100 Other project -related costs Measure A Budget Impact Costs will be funded using CMIA, STIP-RIP, and 2009 Measure A highway funds. Operating Budget Impact N/A; federal highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. 1-215 Corridor Improvement Southbound Connector (P003031) Continue preliminary engineering, which began in 2010, to widen southbound connector to 1-15 with construction expected to be completed by 2019. The total project cost is estimated at $8.5 million. FY 2012/13 Cost $ 650,000 Preliminary engineering $ 100,000 Final design $ 166,200 Other project -related costs Measure A Budget Impact Costs will be funded using 2009 Measure A highway funds. Operating Budget Impact N/A; federal highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. I-215/Blaine Street to Martin Luther King Boulevard Widening (P003035) Construction to widen the 1-215 from Blaine Street to Martin Luther King Boulevard. Total project cost is $2 million. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 1,990,300 Construction/construction management $ 137,600 Other project -related costs Costs will be funded using 1989 Measure A highway funds and STP. N/A; federal highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. Mid County Parkway (P002302 & P005123) Perform activities related to the development of a recirculated project report and environmental document for a new corridor from 1-215 to SR-79. This phase is anticipated to be completed in FY 2012/13. Construction of this new facility will be completed over many years as funding becomes available and is estimated to cost $1.6 billion. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 2,000,000 Preliminary engineering/environmental $ 20,000 Right of way acquisition/support services $ 380,700 Other project -related costs and uses Costs will be funded with TUMF CETAP funds and 2009 Measure A new corridor funds. N/A; responsibility for highway operations has not been determined. Various Western County Highway Projects (P623999) Provide funding and support for the engineering, construction, and right of way activities related to various Western County highway projects. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact S 100,000 Engineering Costs will be funded using 2009 Measure A highway funds. N/A; federal highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. Various Western County TUMF Regional Arterial Projects (P005102, P005103, P005105, P005106, P005107, P005108, P005113, P005115, P005116, P005118, P005119, P005120, P005128, P005128, P665102 & P725000) Provide TUMF funding and support for the engineering, right of way, and construction activities related to various Western County TUMF regional arterial projects approved by the Commission in September 2004 following a call for projects. Total project costs approved for TUMF regional arterial projects approximate $79 million. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 652,000 Engineering and design $ 28,907,200 Construction $ 10,101,800 Right of way acquisition $ 320,400 Other project -related costs None; costs will be funded using TUMF regional arterial funds with various local jurisdictions as lead agency for their respective projects. N/A; regional arterial operations are the responsibility of the local jurisdictions. Coachella Valley Highway and Regional Arterial Projects MSHCP Land Acquisition in Coachella Valley (P318100) Provide funding and support for the acquisition of land as mitigation for the cumulative and indirect impacts associated with construction of future highway and regional arterial projects as required by 2009 Measure A under an advance funding agreement with CVAG. In September 2005 the Commission approved the advance funding of 2009 Measure A highway and regional arterial funds in the amount of $15.025 million for CVAG's land mitigation acquisitions. CVAG began expending these funds in FY 2008/09 following completion of federal permit and other matters. As of June 30, 2012, the projected remaining funding commitment for this project is approximately $0. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 3,024,100 Land acquisition Costs will be funded using debt proceeds as an advance of 2009 Measure A highway and regional arterial funds. N/A; land mitigation operations are the responsibility of CVAG. Various Coachella Valley Highway and Regional Arterial Projects (P563999) Provide funding and support for the Monterey Avenue corridor in Rancho Mirage and Jackson Street, Avenue 42, and Jefferson Street in Indio under an advance funding agreement with CVAG. In September 2005 the Commission approved the advance funding of 2009 Measure A highway and regional arterial funds in the amount of $28.275 million for nine regional transportation projects in the cities of Coachella, Indio, Palm Desert, and Rancho Mirage and the County. As of June 30, 2012, the projected remaining funding commitments for these projects are approximately $9 million. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact Rail Projects $ 319,100 Engineering Costs will be funded using debt proceeds as an advance of 2009 Measure A highway and regional arterial funds with the cities or County as lead agencies for their respective projects. N/A; highway and regional arterial operations are the responsibility of Ca!trans and the local jurisdictions, respectively. North Main Corona Station Parking Structure (P003808) Complete construction close-out of a parking structure at the North Main Corona station. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 20,000 Construction/support services $ 56,300 Other project -related costs 1989 Measure A Western County Commuter Rail funds. Operations of this parking structure will be the responsibility of the Commission. Annual operating costs are estimated at $300,000 to be funded with LTF. Perris Multimodal Facility.(P003816) Complete construction close-out of the Perris Transit Center. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 867,600 Construction/support services $ 90,200 Other project -related costs None; costs will be funded using Proposition 1B PTMISEA and a contribution from the 2009 Measure A Western County Commuter Assistance fund. Operations of this facility will be the responsibilities of the Commission and RTA, as defined in a cooperative agreement. Of the estimated $76,100 annual operating costs, the Commission will be responsible for approximately $31,000 to be funded by 1989 and 2009 Measure A Western County Commuter Assistance funds. Perris Valley Line and Other Rail Projects (PO03800, PO03823, PO03824, PO03825, PO03827, PO03828, PO03829, PO03830, PO03831, PO03832, PO03833, and PO03834) Continue advanced preliminary engineering and right of way acquisition and complete environmental clearance for extension of commuter rail services to Perris. Project commenced in December 2007 when the Commission received approval from FTA to move into project development. Other rail projects include adding a fourth main track between the Riverside Downtown station to the connector to the SJBL branch line at Highgrove as well as right of way acquisition. Expected completion date of the Perris Valley Line is November 2014 for a total project cost of $247 million. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact Local Streets and Roads $ 7,500 Engineering/support services $ 1,034,000 Final design $ 64,996,000 Construction/support services $ 17,632,500 Right of way acquisition/support services $ 4,257,600 Other project -related costs Costs will be funded using FTA and 1989 Measure A rail funds as well as proceeds from sales of surplus properties. Subsequent year costs will also include STIP funding. Rail station operations related to this project, which will be the responsibility of the Commission upon completion of the project, will be funded with LTF and property management fees. Rail service and capital operations will be the responsibility of Metrolink and will be funded by the Commission with LTF and STA based on an allocation determined by Metrolink. Annual station operations approximate $300,000 per station, or $1,200,000 annually in the aggregate for four proposed stations. Annually monitor the MOE requirements to ensure local agencies are expending funds according to the 2009 Measure A ordinance. Review local agency 5-year CIPs to ensure Measure A funds are expended on eligible local street and road projects. Western County Area Distribute local return funding for local streets and roads projects in Western County. FY 2012/13 Cost $ 425,000 0 120,000 135,000 2,936,000 681,000 1,297,000 1,424,000 895,000 1,123,000 2,830,000 1,660,000 482,000 1,069,000 5,340,000 619,000 2,197,000 440,000 4,061,000 591,000 Banning Beaumont Calimesa Canyon Lake Corona Eastvale Hemet Jurupa Valley Lake Elsinore Menifee Moreno Valley Murrieta Norco Perris Riverside San Jacinto Temecula Wildomar Riverside County Commission Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact Coachella Valley 28,325,000 Total Western County (455,000) Less: Allocation to Western County regional arterials $ 27,870,000 Total Western County, net All costs will be distributed in accordance with 2009 Measure A local streets and roads funds. N/A; local streets and roads operations are the responsibility of the local jurisdiction. Distribute local return funding for local streets and roads projects in Coachella Valley. FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact Palo Verde Valley Area Distribute local return funding for FY 2012/13 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 1,128,000 Cathedral City 508,000 Coachella 369,000 Desert Hot Springs 197,000 Indian Wells 1,330,000 Indio 0 La Quinta 2,185,000 Palm Desert 1,648,000 Palm Springs 734,000 Rancho Mirage 1,271,000 Riverside County 1,234,000 CVAG (La Quinta allocation) $ 10,604,000 Total Coachella Valley All costs will be distributed in accordance with 2009 Measure A local streets and roads funds. N/A; local streets and roads operations are the responsibility of the local jurisdiction. local streets and roads projects in Palo Verde Valley. $ 715,000 168,000 $ 883,000 Blythe Riverside County Total Palo Verde Valley All costs will be distributed in accordance with 2009 Measure A local streets and roads funds. N/A; local streets and roads operations are the responsibility of the local jurisdiction. Riverside County Transportation Commission 17 -) Community Profile Riverside County is the fourth largest county in California, stretching westward nearly 200 miles from the Colorado River and comprising more than 7200 square miles that include 28 incorporated cities. This includes the newly - incorporated cities of Eastvale and Jurupa Valley. Riverside County can trace its beginning back to 1893 when voters approved the formation of a new county. The area was carved from parts of San Bernardino and San Diego counties. In its 115 years of existence, the County's economy has diversified and prospered. Originally, Riverside County was a very agricultural area, known for a wide variety of crops grown on its fertile soils. The County remains a strong agricultural area, but it is increasingly becoming a leader in manufacturing, transportation, construction, and tourism. Demographics The success of the area has brought dramatic population growth to Riverside County (Chart 39). Since the 1980's, the County has been one of the fastest growing counties in the State. Chart 39 — Population — Last Ten Years 2,500,000 2,000,000 1,500,000 1,000,000 500,000 0 L 3 5 0 1 0 0 ti �p0 yp0 LO� 0 101 00 ry0�00 ry00 �00 ry01 ry0ti Source: California Department of Finance The available and affordable housing in Riverside County has attracted many people to the County (Chart 40); however, a housing slowdown has occurred in recent years primarily as a result of the effect of the subprime mortgages, ensuing credit crisis, and recession. Chart 40 — Home Price Advantage Home Value Advantage Riverside County and Southern California Markets (February, 2012) ■ Median Home Values ❑ Riverside County Advantage 500000 400000 300000 200000 100000 0 Riverside Los Angeles San Diego Ventura Source: DataQuick News County Orange During the growth period, jobs also increased as many firms relocated to the area and moved away from older communities; however, the current economic slowdown has caused the County's unemployment rate to rise from its near all-time lows (Chart 41). Chart 41— Unemployment Rate (%) — Last Ten Years 16.0% 14.0% 12.0% 10.0% 8.0% 6.0% 4.0% 2.0% 0.0% O.t' OHO 01ti0 1ti ,10 ,10 ,y0 .ti0 .�0 .ti0,y0 Source: California Employment Development Department The overall economic outlook for Riverside County is expected to continue to improve in 2012 based on various economic forecasts. The area is preparing for its future as well in supporting better education. The County is home to a number of colleges and universities including University of California, Riverside. Retail Sales As a result of demographic changes and growth, retail sales in the County increased through 2006 (Chart 42 and Table 53); however, the effect of the recession on retail sales was noted in sales tax receipts beginning in 2007 through 2010. FY 2011/12 retail sales have shown improvements from these previous years. Chart 42 — Retail Sales (%) - $23 Billion — 2010 Data Apparel Stores 6.02 % Source: State Board of Equalization Household & Electronics 3.81% Building Materials 5.32% Table 53 —Riverside County Taxable Sales Apparel Stores General Merchandise Food Stores Eating & Drinking Household & Electronics Building Materials Automotive Other Retail Sales Total all other services & outlets Source: State Board of Equalization by Business Type (in 000's) 2010 1,391,174 $ 2,947,905 1,267,758 2,317,486 883,109 1,232,145 5,306,408 1,480,601 6,326,196 — Last Five Years 2009 1,293,271 2,855,733 1,251,220 2,266,853 858,098 1,237,518 4,749,994 1,442,875 6,272,315 2008 2007 2006 1,121,543 $ 1,171,013 $ 1,080,385 3,389,936 3,593,134 3,553,554 1,254,366 1,352,609 1,309,782 2,340,554 2,388,039 2,316,422 816,379 843,945 948,217 1,435,337 1,961,911 2,390,236 6,126,512 7,137,075 6,956,756 3,250,335 2,794,790 1,024,551 6,268,633 7,781,093 10,236,334 23,152,782 $ 22,227,877 $ 26,003,595 $ 29,023,609 $ 29,816,237 The 2010 taxable sales generation by jurisdiction in the County, including ranking compared to 2001, is presented in Table 54. Table 54 —Taxable Sales Generation by Jurisdiction in Riverside County for 20101 City of Riverside City of Corona City of Temecula City of Palm Desert City of Moreno Valley City of Murrieta City of Palm Springs City of Hemet City of La Quinta City of Lake Elsinore City of Indio City of Cathedral City City of Perris City of Menifee City of Rancho Mirage City of Norco City of Beaumont City of Coachella City of San Jacinto City of Banning City of Blythe City of Wildomar City of Desert Hot Springs City of Indian Wells City of Calimesa City of Canyon Lake Incorporated Unincorporated county area Countywide California Source: California State Board of Equalization 1 Year represents most recent data available Taxable Sales (in 000's) $ 3,692,302 2,454,989 2,180,304 1,266,834 1,067,546 903,640 806,540 772,608 633,545 599,836 582,332 559,069 516,944 370,469 355,204 354,729 292,339 259,829 182,110 146,742 135,094 104,184 89,328 74,996 51,057 14,010 % of Total 15.9% 10.6% 9.4% 5.5 % 4.6% 3.9 % 3.5 % 3.3% 2.8 % 2.7% 2.5 % 2.4% 2.2 % 1.6% 1.5 % 1.5% 1.3 % 1.1% 0.8 % 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.4% 0.3 % 0.2 % 0.1% 2010 Rank 2001 Rank 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 11 8 9 9 8 10 14 11 13 12 10 13 7 14 15 15 N/A 16 16 17 12 18 20 19 18 20 21 21 17 22 19 23 N/A 24 22 25 23 26 24 27 25 18,466,580 4,686,200 79.8 % 20.2 % 1 1 $ 23,152,780 100.0 % $ 477,347,986 Measure A Sales Taxes Measure A is a one-half of one cent transaction and use tax for transportation improvements in Riverside County. The County had a 7.75% sales tax rate including the Measure A rate through March 2009, 8.75% from April 2009 through March 2011, and 7.75% thereafter (Table 55). Table 55 - Direct and Overlapping Sales Tax Rates - Last Five Years Fiscal Year Measure A Direct Rate County of Riverside 2012 0.50% 7.75% 2011 0.50% 8.75% 2010 0.50% 8.75% 2009 0.50% 8.75% 2008 0.50% 7.75% Source: Commission Finance Department and California State Board of Equalization During the recent economic slowdown, changes have occurred in the economic categories in which the Measure A sales tax was generated (Table 56). General retail and transportation represented the two highest economic categories and more than 53% of sales taxes generated. Transportation has improved in recent years due to high fuel prices. 'Construction, which was comprised of the building materials wholesale and building materials retail segments, was a significant contributor but has continued to experience declines due to the lingering effects of the recession and housing slowdown. Table 56 - Sales Tax by Economic Category Economic Category 2008/4 2009/4 2010/4 2011/4 % of Total % of Total % of Total % of Total General Retail 28.2% 30.9% 30.9% 29.9% Transportation 25.0% 22.8% 25.0% 27.1% Food Products 15.9% 17.8% 17.0.% 16.4% Business to Business 16.4% 15.2% 14.5% 14.1% Construction 12.3% 11.1% 10.5% 10.5% Miscellaneous 2.2% 2.2% 2.1% 2.0% Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Source: MuniServices, LLC Each economic category consists of several economic segments, which provide additional information regarding economic activity in the County. In 2006 the top five economic segments consisted of auto sales -new, department stores, building materials wholesale, service stations, and restaurants. Over the next four calendar years, auto sales -new fell from the leading economic segment to fourth and building materials wholesale dropped to sixth, while department stores, service stations, and restaurants rose to the top three economic segments. The top five economic segments in 2011 with comparisons to previous years are presented in Table 57. Table 57 - Sales Tax by Economic Segment Top Five Economic Segments (Category) Service Stations (Transportation) Department Stores (General Retail) Restaurants (Food Products) Auto Sales - New (Transportation) Miscellaneous Retail (Miscellaneous) Source: MuniServices, LLC 2008/4 2009/4 2010/4 2011/4 % of Total . % of Total - -% of Total % of Total 11.2% 10.0% 11.6% 12.9% 11.6% 12.9% 12.6% 11.8% 9.9% 11.0% 10.7% 10.3% 8.9% 7.9% 8.4% 9.1% 6.1% 6.5% 6.7% 6.6% Commission Facts Programs and Services Measure A: The Commission administers Measure A, the local half -cent sales tax for new transportation projects in the County. Under Measure A, funding is used to improve highways, commuter rail, regional arterials, local streets and roads, transit and specialized transportation services including commuter assistance, economic development, new corridors, and Commission administration. Measure A expires in 2039. Transportation Development Act: The TDA is comprised of two elements: Local Transportation Fund and State Transit Assistance funding. The Commission administers the LTF one -quarter of one cent of the state sales tax on behalf of the County. STA is generated from the statewide sales tax on diesel fuel and is allocated by the State to the Commission on the basis of population andas a percentage of transit fare revenues. TDA funding is allocated primarily to bus and rail transit operators for transit operating and capital needs. Additionally, LTF funding is available for bicycle and pedestrian facilities, planning, and administration and allocated to the Commission and local jurisdictions in the County. Highways: The Commission assists with the planning and funding for highway improvements. Major current projects include: 60/215 HOV lanes connector, 74/215 interchange, SR-79 realignment, SR-91 corridor improvement project, SR-91 HOV lanes/Adams Street to the 60/91/215 interchange, 1-15 corridor improvement project, 1-215 corridor mobility improvement projects, and Mid County Parkway. State highway maintenance is generally the responsibility of Caltrans. Local Streets and Roads: The Commission administers funding to local jurisdictions to improve streets, intersections, signal coordination, and pavement. Local streets and roads maintenance is the responsibility of the local jurisdictions. Commuter Rail: The Commission funds and oversees Metrolink rail services within the County. The Commission's three Metrolink lines are the Riverside, IEOC, and 91 lines. The Commission owns and maintains five Metrolink stations located at: ➢ Riverside Downtown Station, 4066 Vine Street, Riverside ➢ La Sierra Station, 10901 Indiana Avenue, Riverside ➢ Pedley Station, 6001 Pedley Road, Riverside ➢ North Main Corona Station, 250 E. Blaine Street, Corona ➢ West Corona Station, 155 S. Auto Center Drive, Corona Motorist Assistance: The Commission provides emergency call boxes through the SAFE and offers emergency towing services through the FSP. Commuter Assistance: The Commission provides a variety of rideshare services both to employers and commuters. Through voluntary participation, commuters and employers receive a direct benefit from their sales tax dollars, and the entire region benefits from reduced traffic congestion and improved air quality. Specialized Transit: The Commission maintains a strong commitment to assist in the mobility of those with specialized transit needs. Through its Specialized Transit Program, the Commission has provided millions of dollars to public and nonprofit transit operators to assist in the provisions of special transit services to improve the mobility of seniors and persons with disabilities. Glossary of Acronyms ADA — Americans with Disabilities Act ARRA* — American Recovery and Reinvestment Act BABs — Build America Bonds Bank of America — Bank of America, N.A. Bank of Tokyo — The Bank of Tokyo -Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd., acting through its New York Branch Bechtel — Bechtel Infrastructure BNSF — Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad Board — Board of Commissioners for the Riverside County Transportation Commission CABS — Capitalized Appreciation Bonds CAFR — Comprehensive Annual Financial Report CaIPERS — California Public Employees Retirement System • Ca!trans — California Department of Transportation CAGTC — Coalition for America's Gateways and Trade Corridors CEQA - California Environmental Quality Act CETAP — Community Environmental Transportation Acceptability Process CHP — California Highway Patrol CHSRA — California High Speed Rail Authority CIBs — Current Interest Bonds CIP — Capital Improvement Plan CMA — Congestion Management Agency CMAQ* — Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality CMIA — Corridor Mobility Improvement Account (Proposition 1B funding category) CMP — Congestion Management Program CMS — Congestion Management System Commission — Riverside County Transportation Commission Coordinated Plan — Coordinated Public Transit —Human Services Transportation Plan County — County of Riverside CTC — California Transportation Commission CTSA — Consolidated Transportation Service Agency CVAG — Coachella Valley Association of Governments Deutsche Bank — Deutsche Bank AG DBE — Disadvantaged Business Enterprise DMV — Department of Motor Vehicles ERP — Enterprise Resource Planning ETC — Employer Transportation Coordinators FHWA* — Federal Highway Administration FSP — Freeway Service Patrol FTA* — Federal Transit Administration FTE — Full-time Equivalent FTIP — Federal Transportation Improvement Program FY — Fiscal Year GASB — Governmental Accounting Standards Board GFOA — Government Finance Officers Association HOV — High Occupancy Vehicle (Carpool Lane) 1 — Interstate 1E511 — Inland Empire 511 IEOC - Inland Empire —Orange County Metrolink Service IIP* — Interregional Improvement Program Inland Empire — Region covering Riverside and San Bernardino counties IVR — Interactive Voice Response JARC — Jobs Access Reverse Commute (FTA Section 5316) JPMorgan — JP Morgan Chase Bank LIBOR — London Interbank Offer Rate LOS — Level of Service LOSSAN — Los Angeles -San Diego -San Luis Obispo, a rail corridor LTF* — Local Transportation Fund . Measure K — Increase of sales tax revenue bonds debt limit to $975 million approved by voters in November 2010 Metrolink — Operating Name for SCRRA (see SCRRA) Moody's — Moody's Investors Service MOE — Maintenance of Effort MOU — Memorandum of Understanding MSHCP — Multi -Species Habitat Conservation Plan MSRC — Mobile Source Air Pollution Reduction Review Committee (AB 2766) NEPA — National Environmental Policy Act OA — Obligation Authority OCTA — Orange County Transportation Authority Perris Valley Line — Perris Valley Line Metrolink Extension Project Ports — Port of Los Angeles and Port of Long Beach PPM — Planning, Programming, and Monitoring PTMISEA — Public Transportation, Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account (Proposition 1B transit funding category) RCA — Regional Conservation Authority RCTC — Riverside County Transportation Commission RFA — Request for Authorization RIP* — Regional Improvement Program RTA — Riverside Transit Agency RTP — Regional Transportation Plan RZEDBs — Recovery Zone Economic Development Bonds S&P — Standard & Poor's Rating Service SAFE — Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies SAFETEA-LU* — Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users Sales Tax — Reference including transaction and use tax such as Measure A SANBAG — San Bernardino Associated Governments SB375 — Senate Bill 375 (Steinberg) California's Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act SB821 — Senate Bill 821 LTF Bicycle and Pedestrian Funds SBE — Small Business Enterprise SBOE — State Board of Equalization SBPAs — Standby Bond Purchase Agreements SCAG — Southern California Association of Governments SCAQMD — South Coast Air Quality Management District SCRRA — Southern California Regional Rail Authority SCS — Sustainable Communities Strategy Series A Tax -Exempt— Series of tax-exempt bonds issued under 2010 Bonds Series B Taxable — Series of taxable Build America Bonds issued under 2010 Bonds SHCC — Self -Help Counties Coalition SJBL — San Jacinto Branch Line SLPP — State Local Partnership Program SR — State Route SRTP — Short Range Transit Plan SSAB — Salton Sea Air Basin STA* — State Transit Assistance State — State of California STIP* — State Transportation Improvement Program STP*, — Surface Transportation Program SunLine — SunLine Transit Agency TAC — Technical Advisory Committee TCIF — Trade Corridors Improvement Fund (Proposition 1B funding category) TDA* — Transportation Development Act TE* — Transportation Enhancements TIFIA — Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act TIGER — Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery TIP — Transportation Improvement Plan TUMF* — Transportation/Traffic Uniform Mitigation Fee (Western County/Coachella Valley) Union Bank — Union Bank, N.A. U.S. DOT — United States Department of Transportation Western County — Western area of Riverside County WRCOG — Western Riverside Council of Governments 1989 Measure A — Original 1/2 cent transportation sales tax measure approved by voters in November 1988 2009 Measure A — Extension of sales tax measure approved by voters in November 2002 which became effective upon expiration of original sales tax measure on July 1, 2009 2009 Bonds — Sales Tax Revenue Bonds, Series A, B and C issued in October 2009 2010 Bonds — Sales Tax Revenue Bonds, Series A Tax-exempt and Series B Taxable issued in November 2010 2013 Bonds — Sales Tax Revenue Bonds anticipated to be issued in June 2013 * Additional information provided in Funding Definitions. Funding Definitions Federal Funding Sources Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act The TIFIA program provides credit assistance for qualified projects of regional and national significance that are critical improvements to the nation's surface transportation system. It is designed to fill market gaps and leverage substantial private and non-federal co -investment by providing supplemental and subordinate capital. TIFIA credit assistance is often available on more advantageous terms than in the financial market making it possible to obtain financing, in the form of a secured loan, loan guarantee, and/or standby line of credit, for needed projects when it might not otherwise be possible. American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Commonly referred to as the Stimulus or The Recovery Act, ARRA is an economic stimulus package "intended to create jobs and promote investment and consumer spending" during the recent recession. It includes domestic spending in infrastructure with investment transportation, environmental protection, and other infrastructure providing long-term economic benefits. ARRA also created the Build America Bond program, which authorized state and local governments to issue in 2009 and 2010 such bonds as taxable bonds to finance capital expenditures for which would otherwise be financed with tax-exempt governmental bonds. State and local governments issuing BABs receive a direct federal subsidy payment for a portion of their borrowing costs on BABs equal to 35 to 45 percent of the total coupon interest paid to investors. The BAB program was intended to assist state and local governments finance capital projects at lower borrowing costs and to stimulate the economy and create jobs. Federal Transit Administration Section 5307 formula funds made available to urbanized areas for operating subsidies, capital projects and planning. Operating match is up to 50% of the net operating cost; capital and planning match is 80% federal and 20% local. Section 5309 discretionary funds generally provided to urbanized areas for funding new start rail projects, major bus fleet replacement, and transit facility construction. Matching ratios range from 50/50 to 80% federal and 20% local. Section 5310 funds made available to states for providing capital support to private non-profit and, in certain circumstances, public transit operators. This is a state administered discretionary program providing funds on an 88.53% federal and 11.47% local basis. Section 5311 funds provided to support rural transit operating subsidies and capital projects. Operating match is up to 50% of the net operating cost; capital match is 80% federal and 20% local. Section 5316 funds provided for the development and maintenance of jobs access projects to transport welfare recipients and eligible low-income individuals to and from work during non -peak hours as well as supply reverse commute options for workers in suburban areas. Section 5317 funds made available for new public transportation services and alternatives for people with disabilities beyond the requirements of the ADA of 1990. Federal Highway Administration In 1991, the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) was approved by Congress to replace the former Federal Aid Urban/Federal Aid System funding programs. ISTEA was established as a six -year funding program and was reauthorized for another six years in 1997. This new transportation act was renamed as the Transportation Equity Act of the Twenty-first Century (TEA21) and was extended through August 10, 2005 when the President signed into law SAFETEA-LU. With guaranteed funding for highways, highway. safety, and public transportation totaling $244.1 billion, SAFETEA-LU represents the largest surface transportation investment in our nation's history. Under these programs the following fund sources are allocated to each county, and the Commission further allocates these funds based on federal provisions. Surface Transportation Program Funds allocated lay the Commission and administered by Caltrans that provide funding for local street and road improvements. Current matching rate is 88.53% federal and 11.47% local. Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Funds allocated by the Commission for transportation related air quality improvement projects in air quality non -attainment areas. Current matching rate is 88.53% federal and 11.47% local. Safety projects can qualify for 100% of CMAQ funding. Transportation Enhancements The amount of funds made available under this program is 10% of the state apportionment of STP funds. Projects are qualified and prioritized by the Commission and submitted to the California Transportation Commission for inclusion in the State Transportation Improvement Program. The basic definition of a transportation enhancement project is an improvement that is over and above the base transportation project. Project categories are pedestrian and bicycle facilities, scenic or historic highways, scenic beautification, historic preservation, rehabilitation of historic transportation facilities, preservation of abandoned railway corridors, control/removal of outdoor advertising, archaeological planning and research, .and mitigation of water pollution due to highway runoff. Current matching rate is 88.53% federal and 11.47% local. State Local Funding Sources State Transportation Improvement Program The STIP consists of RIP and IIP funds. The RIP and IIP programs are mainly supported by Proposition 42 funding. The RIP component represents 75% of STIP funds available for capacity projects. Regional Transportation Planning Agencies are responsible for selection of projects proposed for RIP funds. The IIP component represents the remaining 25% of STIP funds available for capacity projects and Caltrans is responsible for the selection of IIP-funded projects. The Commission and Caltrans District 8 work closely in coordinating projects for these fund sources. Proposition 1B Program In November 2006, the voters in California approved Proposition 1B, which will fund various transportation programs from bonds issued by the state of California. Programs to be funded include CMIA, transit capital (PTMISEA), transit security (CTSGP-CTAF), STIP supplement, goods movement (TGIF), state -local partnership funds, and cities and counties. Transportation Development Act The TDA is comprised of two elements: LTF and STA funds. LTF funds are derived from 1/4 of one cent of the state sales tax and are returned to source. There are three areas of apportionment within Riverside County comprised of Western County, Coachella Valley, and Palo Verde Valley (Blythe). The Commission administers the LTF on behalf of the County of Riverside. Funds are provided for program administration, Southern California Association of Governments regional planning, local transportation planning, and transit services in Western County and the Coachella Valley. In the Palo Verde Valley, funds support transit services and local street and road improvements. Funds are also provided to the County for local street and road improvements in unincorporated areas. Additionally, under SB 821, 2% of LTF funds are made available for bicycle and pedestrian projects. STA funds are generated from the statewide sales tax on gasoline and diesel fuel and are allocated by the state to the Commission based on population and as a percentage ' of transit fare revenue. The Commission has generally used these funds to support capital purchases and improvements as these funds have been subject to state budgetary actions. Local Funding Sources Measure A Measure A is a half -cent local retail transaction and use tax that was initially approved by the voters in November 1988 for 20 years (Ordinance 88-1) and extended in November 2002 for an additional 30 years (Ordinance 02-001), through June 2039, to help fund key transportation improvements in Riverside County. It provides funds to improve highways, regional arterials, and local streets and roads; to develop new transportation corridors; to expand commuter rail, public transit, specialized transportation services, and commuter programs; develop a program of economic incentives to attract commercial and industrial development and jobs; and support bond financing. These types of improvements are needed to maintain and improve the quality of fife in the County, reduce current congestion, and provide adequate transportation facilities to accommodate reasonable growth. Since existing state and federal sources provide only a limited amount of funding for a limited number of projects, Measure A will cover the shortfall for key projects with a funding source that is under local control. It will use the revenue generated in Western County, Coachella Valley, and Palo Verde Valley to meet the unique transportation needs of each of those areas. Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee The TUMF program was adopted by all local jurisdictions in the Western County area of Riverside County in July 2003. Under this program, which is administered by the WRCOG, fees are assessed on new residential and commercial development in Western County to ensure that new development pays its fair share toward providing the needed infrastructure improvements on the regional system of highways and arterials. In accordance with the extension of Measure A in 2002 and an amended Memorandum of Understanding with WRCOG, the Commission shall receive 48.7% of the TUMF revenues to fund equally the regional arterial system and the development of new corridors. Program Terms The following explanations of terms are presented to aid in understanding the various program terms used and discussed in the narrative. Bicycle and Pedestrian LTF provides revenues for the construction of bicycle and pedestrian facilities and related right-of-way costs. Bond Financing In order to accomplish the construction of the highway and rail projects and implementation of the local streets and roads and other programs identified in the Measure A TIP as soon as possible, some level of borrowing will be required. A portion of the revenues generated in the Western County will be made available for this purpose. Commuter Assistance The purpose of this program is to provide short-term incentives to encourage single occupant vehicle drivers to use alternate modes of transportation including carpools, vanpools, bus pools, public bus, commuter rail, walking, and bicycling. Commuter•Rail Measure A provides operating and capital revenue for commuter rail service to Orange and Los Angeles counties. LTF provides revenue for commuter rail operations in Riverside County. These trains operate on existing railroad tracks parallel to major freeways. Commuter rail service provides a safe and reliable transit alternative to driving alone during the peak period. Plans to expand commuter rail service in Western Riverside County from Riverside to Perris via Moreno Valley are currently underway. Economic Development Measure A will be used to create an infrastructure improvement bank to improve existing interchanges, construct new interchanges, provide public transit linkages or stations, and make other improvements to the transportation system in Western County. These incentives are intended to attract commercial and industrial development and jobs to locate within the Western County area. Highways Measure A provides revenues to widen existing highways, expand interchanges, and improve remote freeways. These improvements are needed to control traffic congestion in Western County and improve access and safety in Coachella Valley. Costs of these improvements will be covered by funds from state and federal sources. Measure A revenue will be used to supplement —not replace —these other sources and to accelerate work on projects deferred for lack of funding. Local Streets and Roads Measure A provides revenues to local jurisdictions for the construction, repair, and maintenance of local streets and roads. The County and local cities are required to supplement those expenditures with other previously dedicated revenue sources to maintain road improvements at a level equal to or greater than the base year amount. LTF provides revenue for local street and road improvements in the Palo Verde Valley and unincorporated areas of the County. Metrolink The Commission's commuter rail program is part of the regional network operated by SCRRA operating under the name of Metrolink, a five -county joint powers agency composed of the transportation commissions of Los Angeles, San Bernardino, Orange, Riverside, and Ventura. The purpose of this agency is to manage the operation and maintenance of commuter rail in the five -county metropolitan area. Motorist Assistance The Motorist Assistance program has three elements. The FSP is a special ,team -of tow trucks that travel on selected Riverside County freeways during peak commuter hours to assist drivers when their cars break down. Another element is the call box system, which installation and operation is made possible with revenue provided by the public. Call boxes are being provided by the Commission, which serves as the County's SAFE. The third element is the Inland Empire 511 traveler information system. One dollar per year from every motor vehicle registration pays for the call boxes and their operation and maintenance, 1E511 operations, and matching funds for FSP. New Corridors Four new transportation corridors were identified through the CETAP. Measure A and TUMF funds will be used for environmental clearance, right of way, and construction of these new corridors. Public Transit The Commission is the agency responsible for short-range transportation planning and programming and coordinating the operation of all public transportation service within the County. The Commission allocates and disburses TDA as well as Measure A funds to the transit operators for operating and capital purposes. Regional Arterials Measure A funds generated within the Western County and Coachella Valley areas are used for major regional road projects. The system is to be implemented with a mix of funding required from new development under a Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee to be paid by developers from new development and from Measure A funds returned to the Western County and Coachella Valley areas. The Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee schedule shall be established in order to generate at least the equivalent of Measure A funding toward the regional arterial system. Specialized Transit Measure A provides public transit revenues to improve transportation services for seniors, persons with disabilities and commuters. For seniors and persons with disabilities, it provides dial -a -ride cab service at night for emergency purposes, guarantees half-price bus fares, and assists centers with their transit programs. For commuters, it improves express bus service and expands ridesharing programs. In the Coachella Valley, revenues also are available for bus replacement and local bus service. Transportation Improvement Plan This plan also acts as the County's expenditure plan and was prepared by the Commission for the proposed 1/2% local retail transaction and use tax for transportation purposes to be collected. This was proposed by the Commission as a means to fill the funding shortfall to implement needed highway, regional arterial, economic development incentives, and new corridors; local street and road programs; commuter rail projects and operations; public bus transit and specialized transportation improvements; commuter assistance programs; and bond financing. General Terms The following explanations of terms are presented to aid in understanding the narrative discussions and illustrations included in this budget document and the terminology generally used in governmental accounting, auditing, financial reporting, and budgeting. Accountability The state of being obliged to explain one's actions, to justify what one does. Accountability requires a government to answer to its citizenry to justify the raising of public resources and the purposes for which they are used. Accounting System The methods and records established to identify, assemble, analyze, classify, record, and report a government's transactions and to maintain accountability for the related assets and liabilities. Accrual Basis of Accounting The accounting of the financial effects of transactions, events, and interfund activities when they occur, regardless of when cash is received or paid. Audit A systematic collection of the sufficient, competent evidential matter needed to attest to the fairness of management's assertions in the financial statements or to evaluate whether management has efficiently and effectively carried out its responsibilities. The auditor obtains this evidential matter through inspection, observation, inquiries, and confirmations with third parties. Balanced Budget The identification of revenues and other financing sources as well as available fund balances to fund operating and capital expenditures and other financing uses on an annual basis. Basis of Accounting A term used to refer to when the effects of transactions or events are recognized for financial reporting purposes. For example, the timing of recognition can be when the transaction or event occurs (accrual basis) or when cash is received or paid (cash basis). Bond A written promise to pay a specified sum of money (face or principal amount) at a specified date or dates in the future (maturity date), together with periodic interest at a specified rate. Bonds are primarily used to finance capital projects. Budget A plan of financial activity for a specified period indicating all planned revenues and expenditures for the budget period. Annual budgets are usually required by law and are essential to sound financial management. The Commission prepares an annual budget that is applicable to a single fiscal year. Budgetary Control The control or management of a government in accordance with an approved budget to keep expenditures within the limitations of available appropriations and available revenues. Budget Document The instrument used by the budget -making authority to present a comprehensive financial program to the appropriating governing body. Capital Outlay Expenditures resulting in the acquisition of or addition to the government's capital assets or assets to be transferred to Ca!trans, such as highway projects. Capital Project A long-term strategic project requiring relatively large sums of revenues, accumulated reserves, and/or financing to acquire, develop, construct, improve, and/or maintain a capital asset such as land, buildings, and infrastructure. Capital Projects Fund A governmental fund type created to account for financial resources to be used for the acquisition or construction of major capital projects. The Commission has two capital projects funds for Commercial Paper and Sales Tax Bonds to account for debt proceeds from 2009 Measure A commercial paper notes and 2009 Measure A sales tax revenue bonds related to highway, commuter rail, regional arterial, and local streets and roads projects. Commercial Paper An unsecured short-term promissory note issued primarily by corporations with maturities ranging from two to 270 days. The credit risk of almost all commercial paper is rated by a rating service. Comprehensive Annual Financial Report A financial report that encompasses all funds of the government. In the financial section of the CAFR are the basic financial statements and required supplementary information as well as combining and individual fund financial statements, as necessary. The CAFR also contains introductory information and statistical data. Current Financial Resources Measurement Focus A measurement focus that reports on the near -term or current inflows, outflows, and balances of spendable financial resources. This focus is unique to accounting and financial reporting for state and local governments and is used for reporting the financial position and results of operations of governmental funds. Debt An obligation resulting from the borrowing of money or from the purchase of goods and services. Debts of governments include bonds, time warrants, and notes. Debt Coverage Ratio The ratio of pledged revenues to related debt service for a given year. Debt Limit The maximum amount of outstanding gross or net debt legally permitted. Debt Proceeds The difference between the face amount of debt and the issuance discount or the sum of the face amount and the issuance premium. Debt proceeds differ from cash receipts to the extent issuance costs, such as underwriters' fees, are withheld by the underwriter. Debt Service Fund A governmental fund type created to account for the accumulation of resources for and payment of general long-term debt principal and interest. The Commission has one debt service fund for its sales tax revenue bonds. Expenditures Represents decreases in net financial resources on the transfer of property or services for acquiring an asset, service, or settling a loss. Financial Advisor In the context of the issuance of debt, a consultant who advises the issuer on any of a variety of matters related to the issuance. The financial advisor sometimes also is referred to as the fiscal consultant. Financial Audit An audit made to provide independent assurance whether the financial statements of a government are presented fairly in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles. Financial Resources Resources that are or will become available for spending and include cash, resources ordinarily expected to be converted to cash such as receivables, inventory, and prepaid assets. Fiscal Year For the Commission, the 12-month period that begins July 1 and ends June 30 of the designated fiscal or operating year for accounting and budgeting purposes. Fund A fiscal and accounting entity with a self -balancing set of accounts in which cash and other financial resources, all related liabilities, and residual equities or balances, and changes therein, are recorded and segregated to carry on specific activities or attain certain objectives in accordance with special regulations, restrictions, or limitations. Fund Balance The excess of a governmental fund's assets over its liabilities. Fund Type Any one of eleven classifications into which all funds are categorized in governmental accounting. Governmental fund types include general, special revenue, debt service, capital projects, and permanent funds. Proprietary fund types include enterprise and internal service funds. Fiduciary fund types include pension trust, investment trust, and private -purpose trust funds and agency funds. GASB 34 Statement No. 34 issued by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board that was implemented by the Commission in FY 2001/02. GASB 34 established new financial reporting standards for state and local governments. Under the new financial reporting model, governmental financial statements include basic financial statements that present both government -wide and fund financial statements and required supplementary information, including Management's Discussion and Analysis. GASB 45 Statement No. 45, Accounting for Other Postemployment Benefits (OPEB), issued by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board implemented . by the Commission in FY 2007/08. GASB 45 requires recognition of postretirement health care costs on an accrual basis over a period approximating the employees' years of service and to provide information about actuarial accrued liabilities associated with these benefits and whether and to what extent progress is being made in funding the plan. General Fund The governmental fund type used to account for all financial resources, except those required to be accounted for in another fund. General Ledger A record containing the accounts needed to reflect the financial position and the results of operations of a government. In double -entry bookkeeping, debit balances equal the credit balances in the general ledger. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) Minimum standards and guidelines for financial accounting and reporting. GAAP encompasses the conventions, rules, and procedures that serve as the norm for the fair presentation of financial statements. The GASB is the primary authoritative accounting and financial reporting standard -setting body on the application of GAAP to state and local governments. Generally Accepted Auditing Standards (GAAS) Rules and procedures established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) for the conduct of a financial audit. There are ten basic GAAS, classified into three broad categories: general standards, standards of fieldwork, and standards of reporting. The Auditing Standards Board of the AICPA publishes Statements on Auditing Standards (SAS) and related interpretations to comment and expand upon these basic standards. Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards (GAGAS) Standards established by the General Accounting Office (GAO) in its publication, Government Auditing Standards, for the conduct and reporting of both financial and performance audits in the public sector. GAGAS set forth general standards applicable to both types of audits and separate standards of fieldwork and reporting for financial and performance audits. The GAGAS standards of fieldwork and reporting for financial audits incorporate and build upon GAAS. Governmental Funds Funds generally used to account for tax -supported activities. The Commission's governmental funds are comprised of general, special revenue, debt service, and capital projects funds. Grant A contribution by a government or other organization to support a particular function or program. Independent Auditor An auditor meeting the independence criteria set forth in GAAS and GAGAS. Internal Audit An independent appraisal of the diverse operations and controls within a government entity to determine whether acceptable policies and procedures are followed, established standards are met, resources are used efficiently and economically, and the organization's objectives are being achieved. The term covers all forms of appraisal of activities undertaken by auditors working for and within an organization. Internal Control Policies and procedures established to provide reasonable assurance that specific government objectives will be achieved. Joint Venture A legal entity or other organization resulting from a contractual agreement and that is owned, operated, or governed by two or more participants as a separate and specific activity for the benefit of the public or service recipients and in which the government retains an ongoing financial interest or ongoing financial responsibility. The Commission is a member agency of Metrolink. Legal Level of Budgetary Control The level at which a government's management may not reallocate resources without special approval from the legislative body. Loans Receivable An asset account reflecting amounts loaned to individuals or organizations external to the Commission, including notes taken as security for such loans. Measurement Focus The objective of a measurement, that is what is being expressed in reporting a government's financial performance and position. A particular measurement focus considers not only which resources are measured (financial or economic), but also when the effects of transactions or events involving those resources are recognized (basis of accounting). The measurement focus of the Commission's government - wide and fiduciary fund financial statements is economic resources, whereas the measurement focus of governmental fund financial statements is current financial resources. Modified Accrual Basis The accrual basis of accounting adapted to the governmental funds' measurement focus according to which revenues and other financial resource increments (e.g., bond issue proceeds) are recognized when they become susceptible to accrual, that is when they become both "measurable" and "available to finance expenditures of the current period." Expenditures are recognized when the fund liability is incurred except for unmatured interest on general long-term debt and certain similar accrued obligations when due. The Commission's governmental funds are accounted for using the modified accrual basis of accounting. Other Financing Sources Amounts classified separately from revenues to avoid distorting revenue trends that represent an increase in current financial resources. Other financing sources generally include general long-term debt proceeds, amounts equal to the present value of minimum lease payments arising from capital leases, proceeds from the sale of general fixed assets, and transfers in. Other Financing Uses Amounts classified separately from expenditures to avoid distorting expenditure trends and represent a decrease in current financial resources. Other financing uses generally include transfers out and the amount of refunding bond proceeds deposited with the escrow agent. Overhead Indirect costs that cannot be specifically associated with a given service, program, or department and thus, cannot be clearly associated with a particular functional category. Principal In the context of bonds other than deep -discount debt, the face value or par value of a bond or issue of bonds payable on stated dates of maturity. Program Group activities, operations, or organizgtional units directed to attaining specific purposes or objectives. Program Budget A budget wherein expenditures are based primarily on the functions or activities of a government rather than to specific items of cost or to specific departments. Purchase Order A document authorizing the delivery of specified merchandise or the rendering of certain services and the making of a charge for them. Refunding Bonds Bonds issued to retire bonds already outstanding. The proceeds of refunding bonds may be used to repay the previously issued debt (current refunding) or to be placed with an escrow agent and invested until used to pay principal and interest on old debt at a future date (advance refunding). Reimbursement Grant A grant for which a potential recipient must first incur qualifying expenditures to be eligible. Restricted Fund Balance Those portions of fund balance which are restricted for specific purposes by third parties or enabling legislation. Special Revenue Fund A governmental fund type used to account for the proceeds of specific revenue sources (other than major capital projects) that are legally restricted to expenditure for specified purposes. The Commission maintains special revenue funds for Measure A Western County, Coachella Valley, and Palo Verde Valley; Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee; Freeway Service Patrol; Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies; State Transit Assistance; and Local Transportation Fund. Transfers All interfund transfers representing flows of assets between funds of the government without equivalent flows of assets in return and without a requirement for repayments. Trustee A fiduciary holding property on behalf of another. ._ an, _.- Budget Adjustments (Draft to Final) Fund Balance FY 2012/13 Ending Fund Balance (as reported 5/9/12) $1,471,393,700 Projected FY 2012 Adjustme nts: Increase in sales tax and reimbursements 6,094,100 Decrease in project operations 3,674,500 Budget FY 2013 Adjustme nts: Increase in Measure A sales tax revenues 8,000,000 Increase in LTF sales tax revenues 4,003,000 Decrease in federal and state reimbursements (3,718,200) Decrease in operating transfers in (218,000) Decrease in debt proceeds (20,000,000) Decrease In Investment income (55,800) Increase in salaries and benefits (193,800) Increase in professional costs (470,000) Increase in support services (19,700) Decrease in program management costs 19,203 Increase in construction costs (4,437,900) Increase in transit operating & capital distributions (1,351,000) Increase in local streets & roads distributions (2,464,000) Increase in capital outlay (15,000) Decrease in operating transfers out 218,000 FY 2012/13 Ending Fund Balance (per final budget 6/7/12) $1,460,456,100 RCTC aim 1 i ,eginninr Fund Ba ante • Pievenues $3131,376,%0 • Debt Proceeds $1,220,172,000 • TEM:A .in f.126,dlK,700 Iota" Estimated Expenditures/L.;5es •Eependiu.••• 1,373.300 • Debt Service $143,413,000 • }rarah+sOut S326,095.700 over 1 x urstrlluri`i/Users 'Ending Fund Balance FY 2012/13 i Funding Sources �C1 Revenues ClMeasure A Sales Tax U LTF Sales Tax [`r1 STA Sales Tax r -1 \ (O Federal reimbursements \ State reimbursements N O (1) Local reimbursements r•l TUMF U• (1} Other revenues Investment income CC Sources Debt proceeds Transfers in Total Revenues/Sources $ 132,000,000 65,000,000 14,212,500 73,151,900 17,917, 800 2,688,700 5,257,300 882,800 7,265,900 1,220,172,000 326,095,700 $ 1,864,644,600 2 Funding Sources Com iarison ar �� a.daa+43�e+ea.rr FY2010/11 FY2011/12 FY2011/12 FY2012/13 Percent Actual Budget Projected Budget Change Measure A Sales Tax $123,439,800 $124,000,000 $128,000,000 $ 132,000,000 6% LTFSales Tax 60,772,800 61,000,000 63,000,000 65,000,000 7% STASales Tax 9,537,000 14,073,600 14,212,500 49% Federal reimbursements 17,735,600 23,650,700 24,393,600 73,151,900 209% State reimbursements 17,811,800 23,935,100 23,250,200 17,917,800 -25% Local reimbursements 5,021,600 1,081,800 2,932,200 2,688,700 149% TUMF 9,157,900 6,784,300 6,397,400 5,257,300 -23% Other revenues 2,321,800 592,400 450,800 882,800 49% Investment income 4,524,200 1,824,000 3,391,100 7,265,900 298% Total Revenues 240,785,500 252,405,300 265,8813,900 318,376,900 26% Debt proceeds 170,000,000 38,000,000 60,000,000 1,220,172,000 3111% Transfers in 185,354,800 169,739,100 166,343,400 326,095,700 92% Total Revenues/Sources $596,140,300 $460,144,400 $492,232,300 $1,864,644,600 305% Summary of Uses RCTC Total Expenditures/Uses $960,881,800 Management Services Expenditures $7,909,200 S1Y,HS,06D Transfers Out Uses $326,095,700 (38 /0 Capital Project Development and Delivery Expenditures S370,915,300 6 3 Management Services Expenditures/Uses Management Services FY2010/11 FY2011/12 FY2011/12 FY 2012/13 Actual Budget Projected Budget Executive Management S 626,200 $ 244,300 $ 185,700 $ 283,200 Administration 1,085,100 1,235, 200 1,064,503 1,355,400 Legislative Affairs and Communications 851,600 1,297,000 958,100 1,270,503 Finance 5,831,100 5,473,000 5,355,800 5,000,103 Debt Service 7L300' - - - Total Expenditures 8,419,300 8,249,500 7,564,100 7,909,200 Transfers Out - 5,000,000 10,000,000 5,000,000 Total Management Services $ 8,419,300 $ 13,249,500 $ 17,564,100 $ 12,909,200 Executive Management 4% Legislative Administration Affairs and Carnmun;:ati_ as 17% 16% Finance 63% Planning and Programming Services Rail Maintenance and Operations Public and Specialized Transit Commuter Assistance Motorist Assistance Total Expenditures Transfers Out Total Regional Programs Rail Maintenance and Operations 13% FY2010/11 FY2011/12 FY2011/12 FY 2012/13 Actual Budget Projected Budget 4,564,600 $ 7,450,300 $ 4,065,300 $ 4,522,600 12,865,700 21,498,603 21,012,900 14,553,300 46,749,900 87,042,800 57,515,800 84,685,900 2,831,900 4,226,400 4,231,400 4,038,800 3,530,700 5,263,300 5,286,600 4,848000 $ 89,048,500 $ 150,571,600 $ 109,429,800 $ 132,730,900 Public and Specialized Transit 75% 4 Capital Program Uses RCTC Capital Program Expenditures/Uses FY2010/11 FY2011/12 FY2011/12 FY 2012/13 Actual Budget Projected Budget Salaries and benefits $ 2,308,900 $ 2,795,000 5 3,026,500 $ 3,113,100 Professional costs 5,450,000 9,601,500 6,202,200 7,500,600 Support costs 309,200 813,000 459,200 587,000 Projects and operations: Program operations 4,608,703 9,259,000 6,398,103 9,538,300 Engineering 27,545,300 41,568,800 27,796,100 24,312,600 Construction 23,914,800 41,777,600 30,670,100 126,964,800 Design build 16,272,900 14,438,000 11,000,000 29,050,000 Right of way and land 44,663,000 76,127,000 54,535,100 109,476,500 Local streets and roads 36,857,000 36,025,000 38,166,600 39,357,000 Regional arterials 8,638,600 16,262,000 17,409,200 20,400,400 Other 119,500 256,000 257,000 515,000 Debt service 123,338.800 62,995,000 62,964,000 143,413,000 Total Expenditures 294,026,700 311,917,900 258,884,103 514,228,300 Transfers out 166,849,100 139,639,700 139,025,600 301,013,400 Total Capital Project Development & Delivery 5460,875,800 $ 451,557,600 $ 397,909,700 5 815,241,700 9 Capital Projects & Operations Expenditures Debt servke lax Professbnalcosts Prefects and Operations 44% Lodes and benefits 1% D% Engineering 3% Constructbn 16% Design build 4% Right of way and land 13% rocd nrr.raand raedr 5% xeliavl rrtenrr tx 5 RIFExpenditure Highlights Capital Project SR-91 HOV Lanes/Adams Street to 60/91/215 Interchange 74 Curve and 74/215 Interchange SR-91, 1-15 and 1-215 Corridor Improvements r ws PARK � -- ti RIDE Functional Uses Breakdown lir ROTC Personnel Professional Support Projects and operations Capital outlay Debt service Total Expenditures Transfers out Total Expenditures/Uses Personnel, Professional, Support, and Capital Outlay $27,126,300 FY2010/11 FY2011/12 FY2011/12 FY 2012/13 Actual Budget Projected Budget $ 5,868,500 $ 6,576,900 $ 6,505,300 $ 6,971,100 12,115, 400 17,149,100 13, 034, 800 14, 361, 200 3,571,400 5,068,900 4,607,000 5,346,300 227,922,100 353,342,700 271,108,400 464,246,800 147,300 516,200 340,700 447,700 122,396,600 62,995,000 62,964,000 143,413.000 372,021,300 445,648,800 358,560,200 634,786,100 185, 354,800 169,739,100 166,343,400 326,095,700 $557,376,100 $ 615,387,900 $ 524,903,600 $ 960,881,800 Projects & Operations Expenditures $464,246,800 Debt Service Expenditures $143,413,000 Transfers Out Uses • $326,095,700 6 Measure A Management ServicesR`TC Fr 12/13 Budget oP°.1. °O. 10 1 1 hi Salaries and Benefits 4 Administrative Costs 304. 13 Measure A administrative management services salaries and benefits Funding needs for projects and transit operators Sales tax and TUMF revenue trends Timeliness of federal and state reimbursements Close ',c hearing and adopt budget Review the final budget draft, close the public hearing, and adopt the final budget 7 AGENDA ITEM 8A RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 7, 2012 TO: RiversideCounty Transportation Commission FROM: Audit Ad Hoc Committee Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Fiscal Year 2010/11 Transportation Development Measure A Audit Results Act and AUDIT AD HOC AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Transportation Development Act (TDA) and Measure A audit results report for the FY 2010/11. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In May 2011, Thompson, Cobb, Bazilio & Associates, P.C. (TCBA) and Macias Gini O'Connell LLP (MGO) were selected to perform the financial and compliance audits and agreed -upon procedures (audits) of Riverside County's TDA claimants and Measure A recipients, respectively, except for the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) and the city of Beaumont (Beaumont). The RTA and Beaumont audits were completed by their auditors. The FY 2010/11 audits represent the first year that TCBA and MGO performed these audits for the Commission. The firm and the other agencies' auditors have completed the audits of and issued the audit reports for the local governments, non-profit agencies, and transit agencies that received TDA and Measure A funds. The following is a summary of the 58 audits performed: Funding Type Type of Procedure TCBA (Western County) MGO (Eastern Other County & Auditors Riv. Co.) Total TDA Article 3 (bicycle and pedestrian projects) TDA Article 4 (transit) TDA Article 8 (local streets and roads) Measure A specialized transit Measure A local streets and roads Agenda Item 8A Financial and compliance audit Financial and compliance audit Financial and compliance audit Agreed -upon procedures Agreed -upon procedures 6 6 3 1 13 2 2 7 0 2 11 0 15 10 0 2 11 25 5 Following are highlights of the results of these audits: TDA Article 3 (Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects) • Ten jurisdictions have deferred revenues and/or fund balances aggregating $767,912 that has not been expended. Since funding is based on approved projects, remaining funds should be expended by June 30, 2012, or for completed projects, returned to the Commission. • One jurisdiction has a liability to the Commission for the return of $4,461 in excess funds following the completion of a project. TDA Article 4 (Transit) • All transit operators met the fare ratio requirement with the exception of one jurisdiction. This is the first year of noncompliance for the jurisdiction; noncompliance in each of the next two fiscal years may result in a penalty assessment. • SunLine Transit Agency had two material weaknesses in internal control over financial reporting, one of which was also an instance of noncompliance, based on the audit of the financial statements. One of the material weaknesses related to the accounting for risk management activities: 1) workers' compensation liability and expenditures were understated by $494,671, and 2) a deposit with its risk management pool had been expensed as premium payments in prior years resulting in an overstatement of insurance expenses for each year the deposit was maintained. Therefore, net assets as of July 1, 2011, were understated by $681,339. Audit adjustments were recorded in the financial statements for these items, including a restatement of beginning net assets. The other material weakness and compliance finding was related to the understatement of federally reimbursed expenses in the amount of $791 ,272 in the schedule of. federal awards. The schedule was adjusted to reflect the correct amounts. TDA Article 8 (Local Streets and Roads) The city of Blythe (Blythe) has a fund deficit of $719,067, and the county of Riverside has a fund balance of $176,654. Article 8 funds have not been approved since 2007, as Palo Verde Valley TDA funds are used primarily for transit needs. In the Commission's most recent state triennial performance audit, a recommendation was made for the Commission to work with these agencies to resolve the use of the LTF funds in order to eliminate the need for the annual audits of these funds. Staff discussed this with Blythe and the county of Riverside and expects these funds to be closed as of June 30, 2012. Agenda Item 8A • Measure A Specialized Transit • Four agencies did not meet the required individual cash or in -kind match requirement; however, two of these agencies did receive cash and/or in -kind contributions, which in the aggregate exceeded the total match requirement. A third agency did not meet its total requirement by $396, or .3 percent. • Four agencies receiving Measure A and federal funds did not have certain written policies required by the federal funds; however, no instances of noncompliance were noted. • Two agencies had potential excess funds approximating $5,324 as of June 30, 2011, that the Commission may request be returned. This reflects a significant decrease from the FY 2009/10 results and is due to the change in funding to a reimbursement basis and monthly reporting process. Measure A Local Streets and Roads • One jurisdiction met its maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement using the prior year carryover, as permitted under the MOE Guidelines. • Six cities have fund balances that are in excess of three years of revenues. The Commission policy suggests that such amounts should not exceed three years. • One city and the county have recorded overhead expenditures that were not included in the Five -Year Capital Improvement Plans (CIPs) submitted to and approved by the Commission. The cities may submit amendments to the CIPs, which may be administratively approved by the Executive Director. • Two additional cities recorded overhead costs in excess of 8 percent of revenues. The Commission has a policy that overhead should not exceed 8 percent of revenues. • One city did not allocate interest income to the Measure A fund, which is not in accordance with the Commission's policy. Staff is in the process of resolving the significant matters. Attached is the summary of transportation and transit fund operations and related audit results for the various types of TDA (Articles 3, 4, and 8) and Measure A (specialized transit and local streets and roads) funding. Each schedule provides information for each claimant and recipient regarding the revenues, expenditures/expenses, and change in fund balance/net assets for the year ended June 30, 2011, and other financial and compliance information. Attachments: 1) FY 2010/1 1 Transportation Development Act Article 3 Schedule 2) FY 2010/1 1 Transportation Development Act Article 4 Schedule 3) FY 2010/1 1 Transportation Development Act Article 8 Schedule 4) FY 2010/1 1 Measure A Specialized Transit Schedule 5) FY 2010/1 1 Measure A Local Streets and Roads Schedule Agenda Item 8A ATTACHMENT 1• Transportation Development Act Article 3 Schedule Year Ended June 30, 2011 Desert Cathedral Hot Lake Rancho San County of Banning Beaumont City Springs Hemet Indio Elsinore La Quinta Mirage Riverside Jacinto Wildomar Riverside Revenues: Intergovernmental allocations: Article 3 $242,647 $ 84,588 $ 43,333 $ - $ 75,000 $ 92,240 $ 31,878 $81,472 $ 111,588 $ 119,470 $ 16,713 $ 79,626 $681,401 Other. - 11,805 - 37,371 - 57,350 - 181,023 - - Interest income 67 10 4 - - - - 111 - 4,323 Total revenues 242,647 84,655 55,148 - 112,371 92,244 31,878 138,822 111,588 300,493 16,824 79,626 685,724 Total expenditures 512,714 84,512 55,171 112,371 92,751 31,878 138,822 187,440 300,493 79,626 673,900 Excess (deficiency) of revenues over (under) expenditures (270,067) 143 (23) (507) (75,852) 16,824 11,824 Transfers in (out) 358,787 (15,755) Excess (deficiency) of revenues and transfers in over (under) expenditures 88,720 143 (23) (507) (75,852) 69 11,824 Prior period adjustment Fund balances at beginning of year Fund balances at end of year Deferred revenues at end of year Due to RCTC $ - $ - $ 333 (75,705) 30 $ 13,015 $ 143 $ 7 $ - $ - $ (174) $ - $142,142 $ 11,501 $ 3,091 $ 92,509 $ - $ 137,597 $ - $ (75,852) $ 92 - 26,290 - $ 161 $ - $ 38,114 - $ 115,067 $ - $107,134 $107,431 Source. 2011 Financial Statements Section 99234 5/7/2012 8 Transportation Development Act Article 4 Schedule Year Ended June 30, 2011 Banning Beaumont Corona • Riverside PWTA SunLine RTA Total operating revenues $ 120,261 $ 215,230 $ 329,830 $ 344,367 $ 78,756 $ 4,284,916 $ 9,410,428 Operating expenses: Depreciation and amortization Other operating expenses Total operating expenses Operating loss Nonoperating revenues (expenses) Grants: Local Transportation Funds 1,085,059 1,051,666 1,478,137 2,195,075 653,089 11,069,277 19,027,566 State Transit Assistance 795,980 733,305 16,257 111,762 8,641 152,379 499,326 Federal - - 527,418 33,575 9,484,886 18,917,380 Measure A specialized transit - - - 3,773,000 2,310,058 Propdsition 1B 45,389 28,530 35,000 48,198 56,723 847,120 291,000 Other - - - 1,818,821 4,077,551 Interest income 1,891 150 41,662 2,109 3,042 8,573 73,744 Interest expense - (17,954) - - (238,013) Transfers in (out) - - Gain (loss) on sale of property (4,778) - (8,969) 17,585 Other 92,809 - - 910,662 Total nonoperating revenue (expense) 1,928,319 1,813,651 1,566,278 2,959,417. 755,070 27,145,087 45,886,859 Net increase (decrease) 666,740 661,049 (182,089) (198,450) (12,879) 5,210,989 (498,121) Prior period adjustment 17,392 - (17,181) 681,339 Net assets at beginning of year 299,732 207,257 1,844,584 2,139,557 612,731 37,261,899 30,454,457 Net assets at end of year $ 983,864 $ 868,306 $ 1,662,495 $ 1,941,107 $ 582,671 $43,154,227 $ 29,956,336 138,061 134,452 228,567 560,866 69,924 4,566,134 9,630,139 1,243,779 1,233,380 1,849,630 2,941,368 776,781 21,652,880 46,165,269 1,381,840 1,367,832 2,078,197 3,502,234 846,705 26,219,014 55,795,408 (1,261,579) (1,152,602) (1,748,367) (3,157,867) (767,949) (21,934,098) (46,384,980) Deferred revenue at end of year: Operating $ 2,944 $ $ 77,653 $ - $ 39,219 $ 70,779 $ 4,004,399 Capital 95,313 142,018 276,844 1,655,593 444,797 3,887,289 9,228,885 Total deferred revenue at end of year $ 98,257 $ 142,018 $ 354,497 $ 1,655,593 $ 484,016 $ 3,958,068 $ 13,233,284 Required fare ratio Actual fare ratio 10.00% 10.00% 20.00% 10.00% 10.00% 17.97% 17.09% 9.90% 17.49/D 20.08 A 11.71 /0 11.30/0 19.83/0 27.52/0 Fare ratio compliance status Not Met Met Met Met Met Met Met Source: 2011 Financial Statements Note 1 The audits for RTA and Beaumont were completed by other auditors hired by each entity. Section 99260 ATTACHMENT 2 III 5/7/2012 ATTACHMENT 3 Transportation Development Act Article 8 Schedule Year ended June 30, 2011 Revenues: Intergovernmental allocations: Article 8 Other revenues Interest income Total revenues Total expenditures Excess (deficiency) of revenues over (under) expenditures Transfers in (out) Excess (deficiency) of revenues over (under) expenditures Prior period adjustments Fund balances at beginning of year Fund balances at end of year Source: 2011 Financial Statements • County of Blythe Riverside $ - 413,807 413,807 366,33E 1,151 1,151 47,469 1,151 47,469 1,151 (766,536) 175,503 $(719,067) $ 176,654 Note: Article 8 allocations for Western County and Coachella Valley ended in 1993 and 1987, respectively, as available LTF funds are now used to meet transit needs. Article 8 allocations for Palo Verde Valley are subject to an annual unmet needs hearing. City and County have been advised to clear deficit and spend fund balance, respectively, in FY 2011.in order to need for annual audit.) Section 99400 (a) 5/7/2012 10 Operating revenues: Measure A In -kind match Cash match: federal JARC/NF Cash match: other revenue Total operating revenues Operating expenses -in kind Operating expenses -salaries & benefits Operating expenses-nonpersonnel Operating expenses -administrative overhead Total operating expenses/capital expenditures Change in net assets Prior period adjustment Net assets at beginning of year Net assets at end of year Match requirement -cash Match requirement -in kind Actual match -cash Actual match -in kind Match requirement compliance status Source: 2011 Financial Statements ATTACHMENT 4 Measure A Specialized Transit Schedule Year Ended June 30, 2011 Boys & Girls Club of Blindness Southwest Care Support' County Care -A -Van Connexxus CASA Friends of Moreno Valley Inland AIDS City of Project" Norco" Independent Living Partnership` Riverside County Regional Medical Volunteer Center Center' $ 56,541 $ 189,058 27,105 94,234 39,806 195,192 190,581 411,355 137,104 39,360 14,117 190,581 (1,196) 1,196 $ - $ 27,105 244,735 1 12, 758 26,757 411,355 $ 340,378 57,773 37,109 83,034 518,294 57,773 319,040 145,068 521,881 (3,587) $ 227,253 22,970 11,925 95,134 357,282 5,877 $ 2,290 $ 22,970 154,312 153,535 26,465 357,282 $ 53,460 $ 59,685 330,651 5,623 30,000 384,111 95,308 330,651 5,623 49,184 87,297 4,276 384,111 92,920 2,388 $ 69,036 $ 78,591 40,490 26,141 •95,177 119,081 40,490 48,742 52,643 46,435 20,558 5,390 95,177 119,081 646 - $ 3,034 $ $ 485,492 $ 189,697 $ 199,673 779,786 100,872 118,784 48,385 216,766 19,642 1,313,663 525,247 320,187 779,786 100,872 163,206 413,306 56,936 365,041 111,941 137,156 17,180 28,399 1,325,213 525,247 323,363 (11,550) (3,176) (9,753) 1,934 9,753 $ (9,616) $ - $ (3,176) $ 242 $ 76,514 $ 113,208 $ 95,500 $ - .$ 30,000 $ 57,596 $ - $ 23,490 $ 105,353 $ 19,642 $ 38,033 $ 18,000 $ 61,792 $ 23,000 $ 252,000 $ 2,250 $ - $ 40,486 $ 182,615 $ - $ 83,697 $ 39,806 $ 195,192 $ 120,143 $ 95,134 $ - $ 30,000 $ 26,141 $ - $ 48,385 $ 216,766 $ 19,642 $ - $ 27,105 $ 57,773 $ 22,970 $ 330,651 $ 5,623 $ - $ 40,490 $ 779,786 $ - $ 100,872 In --kind not met; overall met Met In -kind not Not met by. mel: overall met total of S396 Met Met Not met Met Mel Met Met • Measure A Specialized Transit 5/7/2012 Measure A Local Streets and Roads Schedule Year ended June 39, 2011 Revenues: Intergovernmental allocations: Measure A Reimbursements Other revenues Interest income Other financing sources -transfers in Total revenues Expenditures and other financing uses, Construction and maintenance 339,320 1,211,427 582,000 3,592,324 2,744,022 - 164,800 1,893,292 178,371 998,726 Other - - 516,037 - - - Administrative overheadloverhead allocations/indirect costs 10,000 29,785. - 120,723 - Capital outlay 495,519 648,877 3,765.074 36.066 Debt service: Principal - - - - Interest - - - •Transfersout 369,616 • - 218,15'9 - 732,264 - 470,637 177,625 - Total expenditures and other financing uses 708,936 1,221,427 582,000 4,335.787 2,744,022. 1,164,914 164,800 5,779,089 910,635 1,034,792 959,391 7,497,668 489,321 838,132 229.482 Excess (deficiency) of revenues over (under) expenditures and other financing uses (276,990) (308,792) (433,070) (1,181,311) (1,471,248) (321,877) 871,344 (1,905,456) 894,724 (464,725) (35,199) 6,345,291 57,883 1.449,364 191,193 ATTACHMENT 5 Banning Calimesa Lake Corona Hemet Lake Elsinore Menifee Moreno Valley Murrieta Norco Perris Riverside San Jacinlo Temecula Wildomar $ 424,300 $ 117,995 5 143,616 $ 2,961,488 5 1,253,199 5 821,031 $ 1,022,477 $ 2,591.821 $ 1,644,293 5 558,904 $ 897,899 5 5,226,001 $ 532,244 $ 2,211.045 $ 420,539 792,100 - 1,147,057 - - 8,403,203 - - - - 2,145 1,393 38,893 - - - 136 7.646 2,540 5,314 190,843 19,575 20,613 13,667 95,862 161,066 11,163 26,293 213.755 - 14,960 76,451 Prior period adjustment/rounding Fund balances at beginning of year Fund balances at end of year 431,946 912,635 148,930 3,154,476 1,272,774 843,037 1,036,144 3,873,633 1,805,359 570,067 924,192 13.842,959 547,204 2, 287,496 420,675 660,507 194,858 18,684 34,624 959,391 7.497,668 805 (135,042) • - 1,003,866 (28,242) 117,947 558,538 2 - - - 1,357,055 723.567 682.039 8,223.138 3,828,197 20,831 1,500.390 11,564,600 8,807,646 3,316,455 2.748,479 10,481,608 1,804,905 7,360,637 512,373 $ 1,080,870 $ 279,733 $ 248,969 $ 7,041,827 $ 2,356,949 $ 702,820 $ 2,343,492 $ 9,659,144 $ 9,820,317 $ 2,851,730 $ 3.271,818 $ 16,826,901 $ 1,862,788 $ 8.810,001 $ 703,566 Fund balance by year received: 2011 $ 431,946 $ 279,733 $ 148,930 $ 3,154,476 $ 1,272,774 $ 2010 369,041 - 100,039 2.777,172 1,084,175 2009 279,883 • 1,110,179 2008 &.Prior - Total fund balances by year received $ 1,080,870 $ 279,733 $ 2413,969 $ 7,041.827 $ 2,356,949 $ Cash and investments Amount of Excess MOE'at end of year MOE compliance status Source: 2011 Financial Statements Measure A Local Streets Roads 702,820 $ 1,036,144 $ 3, 873.633 $ 1,805.359 $ 570,067 $ 924, 192 $ 13,842,959 $ 547,204 $ 2,287, 496 $ 420.675 - 838,758 5,785.511 1,476,255 447.152 966,784 2, 983.942 459,220 1.915,487 282,891 468,590 2,394,502 726,730 1.380,842 856,364 3,052,874 - '4,144',201 ]1107,781 1.,554,144 • 702,820 $ 2,343,492 $ 9,659,144 $ 9,820,317 $ 2,851,730 $ 3,271,1318 $ 16,826,901 $ 1,862.788 $ 8,810,001 $ 703,566 $ 1,040,821 $ 357,319 $ 250,620 $ 6,737,603 $ 2,573,884. $ 645,582 $ 2,146,319 $ 9.881,746 $ 9,589,259 $ 2,738,989 $ 3,251.111 $ 9.412,305 $ 384,592 $ 8,424.175 $ 638,359 $ 3,323,113 $ 147,138 $ 55,201 $ 35,743,768 $ 13,560 $ 13,246,519 N/A $ 30,396,780 $2,190,279 $ 4,052,699 $ 14,441,243 $ 56,925.999 $ 16,232,036 $ 534,614 N/A Met Met Met Met Mel Met , N/A Met Met Met Met Met Met Met N/A 1 of 5/7/2012 12 Measure A Local Streets and Roads Schedule Year ended June 30, 2011 • Revenues: Intergovernmental allocations: Measure A Reimbursements Other revenues Interest income Other financing sources -transfers in coachella VElEy Coachella Valle -f .. Valley) -:I $ 978,548 $ 434.325 $ 300,041 $ 175,838 $ 1,080.074 $ 1,875,080.. E 1.390,267 $ 647,356 $ 476,891 $ 5,398,536 • 252,810 1,002,461 1.419.851 95,443 342,595 - 13,959 - - • 17,644 - 7,089 528 3,881 123,196 79,872 79,502 14,348 114,282 360, 388 - - - - - - Total revenues 1,352,895 441,414 300,569 175,838 1,336,765 3,000,737 2,907,634 822,301 833,834 5,512.818 • Expenditures and other financing uses: - Construction and maintenance 1,152,105 - 600,837 423,396 864,272 2,520,066 339,997 3,444,657 Other - 247 - - Administrative overhead/overhead allocations/indirect costs . - 44,425- Capital outlay - Debt service: Principal - - 386,683 - Interest - 230,584 Transfers out 161,502 500,000 - 167,000 - - 807,160 - Total expenditures and other financing uses 1,313.607 500,247 600,837 167,000 - 1,040,663 864,272 2,520,066 339,997 851,585 3.444.657 Excess (deficiency) of revenues over (under) expenditures • and other financing uses 39,288 (58,833) (300.268) 8,838 296,102 2,136,465 387,568 482,304 (17,751) 2,068,161 Prior period adjustment/rounding Fund balances at beginning of year Fund balances at end of year Fund balance by year received: 2011 2010 (1) 111,059 (1) 2 (63,144) 6,187 - - (18,399) 507, 928 614,501 - 348,841 18,225,127 7.825,289 3,874,958 2,875,530 15,455,410 $ 20,888 $ 560,154 $ 314,232 $ 8,838 $ 644,945 $ 20,361,592 $ 8, 149, 713 $ 4,363.449- $ 2,857,779 $ 17.523,571 $ 20, 888 $ 441.414 $ 300,569 $ 8,838 $ 644,945 $ 3,000, 737 $ 2,907,634 $ 822.301 $ 833,834 $ 5, 512, 818 3,499,967 2,127,134 2,291,705 926,746 6,731,374 2009 2,433.714 2,554,832 1.249,443 736,064 5.279,379 .200&B Prior 11,427174 7;r 560;713` 361,135 Total fund balances by year received Amount of Excess MOE at end of year MOE compliance status Source: 2011 Financial Statements Measure A Local Streets Roads • 118,740 13,663 $ 20,888 $ 560,154 $ 314,232 $ 8,838 $ 644,945 $ 20,361,592 $ 8,149,713 $ 4,363,449 $ 2,857,779 $ 17,523,571 - $ 503,988 $ 250.382 $. 607,194 $ 20,078,640 $ 8,289.066. $ 4,170,504 $ 2.754,719 $ 17,508,868 $ 7, 064,370 $ 14,166,669 $ 1,355,427 $ 24.613.879. $ 47 216,366 $ 123,995,179 $ 41,258,816 $ 34,110,225. $ 5,048,000 N/A Met with use Met Met Met Met Met Met Met Met N/A e'carprover 2 of 5/7/2012 • AGENDA ITEM 8Ei RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: June 7, 2012 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Michele Cisneros, Accounting and Human Resources Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Appropriations Limit for Fiscal Year 2012/13 BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to approve Resolution No. 12-01 7, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Establishing the Commission's Appropriations Limit for Fiscal Year 2012/13". BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Section 7910 of the California Government Code implements Article XIIIB of the California Constitution by requiring each local jurisdiction to establish, by resolution, its appropriations limit for each fiscal year and to make documentation used to determine the appropriations Limit available to the public 15 days prior to adoption of the resolution establishing the appropriations limit. Staff has performed the calculations necessary to determine the limit. The resolution and documents supporting the calculation are attached. The Commission chose to use the percentage change in the California per capital personal income and the population change within Riverside County as the factors in determining the appropriations limit. As required, the adoption of the Commission's FY 2012/13 Appropriations Limit was posted in the local newspaper. Attachments: 1) Resolution No. 12-017 2) California Per Capital _Income and Population, Riverside County — California Department of Finance Agenda Item 8B 14 RESOLUTION NO. 12-017 RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ESTABLISHING THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR FY 2012/13 WHEREAS, Article XIIIB of the California Constitution places an annual limitation upon appropriations from proceeds of taxes by each local government of the State of California; and WHEREAS, in 1988, pursuant to Article XIIIB, section 4 of the California Constitution, the Riverside County Transportation Commission established its appropriations limit at $75 million for FY 1988/89 under ordinance No. 88-1; and WHEREAS Section 7910 of the California Government Code implements Article XIIIB of the California Constitution by requiring each local jurisdiction to establish, by resolution, its appropriations limit for each fiscal year and to make the documentation used in determining the appropriations limit available to the public 15 days prior to adoption of the resolution establishing the appropriations limit; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Senate Constitutional Amendment No. 1 approved by the voters of the state effective June 6, 1990, beginning with FY 1990/91 and for each fiscal year thereafter, the Commission's Board of Commissioners is required to select either the percentage change in California per capita personal income or the percentage change in the local assessment roll due to the addition of local non-residential construction, and either the population change within the Commission or the population change within Riverside. County, as the two factors to be applied in calculating the appropriations limit for each fiscal year; and WHEREAS, this Board wishes to select, as factors in determining the Commission's appropriation limit for FY 2012/13 the, percentage change in California per capita personal income and also the population change within Riverside County; and WHEREAS, this Commission has documented its calculations of the Commission's appropriations limit for FY 2012/13 and said calculations have been made available to the public at least 15 days prior to the adoption of this resolution. • NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners of the Riverside County Transportation Commission as follows: 1. For FY 2012/13, the factors selected for calculating the appropriations limit are (a) the percentage change in California per capita personal income, and (b) the population change within the County of Riverside. 2. The appropriations limit applicable to this agency pursuant to Article XIIIB of the California Constitution for FY 2012/13 are hereby established and determined to be $348,861,382. 3. A copy of the documentation used in the determination of the appropriations limit for FY 2012/13 shall be affixed hereto and shall be available for public inspection. 4. Pursuant to Section 7910 of the California Government Code, any judicial action or proceeding to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the establishment of the appropriations limit as set forth herein must be commenced within forty-five days of the adoption of this resolution. ADOPTED this 7th day of June, 2012. John J. Benoit, Chair Riverside County Transportation Commission ATTEST: Jennifer Harmon, Clerk of the Board Riverside County Transportation Commission 16 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION 2012-2013 APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT 2011-2012 Appropriations Limit $ 332,891,501 2012-2013 adjustment: Change in California per capita personal income = 3.77% Change in Population, Riverside County = 0.99% Per Capital Cost of Living converted to a ratio: 3.77 + 100 = 1.0377 100 Population converted to a ratio: 0.99 + 100 = 1.0099 100 Calculation of factor for FY 201 1-2012: 1.0377 x 1.0099 = 1.04797323 $ 332,891,501 X 1.04797323 = $ 348,861,382 2012-2013 Appropriations Limit $ 348,861,382 Source: California per capita income - California Department of Finance Population, Riverside County - California Department of Finance 17 • ,LIST br r n i a. ` i +� llli n o m _ DEPARTMENTT OF ^ May 2012 Dear Fiscal Officer: EDMUND G., BROWN JR. • GOVERNOR Subject: Price and Population Information 915 L STREET IF SACRAMENTO CA m 9561 A-3706 ■ wwW.o Or.cA.GOV Appropriations Limit The California Revenue and Taxation Code, Section 2227, mandates the Department of Finance (Finance) to transmit an estimate of the percentage change in population to local governments. Each local jurisdiction must use their percentage change in population factor for January 1, 2012, in conjunction with a change in the cost of livina, or price factor, to calculate their appropriations limit for fiscal year 2012-2013. Enclosure I provides the change in California's per capita personal income and an example for utilizing the price factor and population percentage change factor to calculate the 2012-2013 appropriations limit. Enclosure li provides city and unincorporated county population percentage changes, and Enclosure IIA provides county and incorporated areas' summed population percentage change. The population percentage change data excludes federal and state institutionalized populations and military populations. Population Percent Change for Special Districts Some special districts must establish an annual appropriations limit. Consult the Revenue and Taxation Code, Section 2228 for further information regarding the appropriations limit. You can access the Code from the following website: "http:ifww.v.leginfo,ca.gov;calaw.htmi" check box: "Revenue and Taxation Code' and enter 2228 for the search term to learn more about the various population change factors available to special districts to calculate their appropriations limit. Article MU B, Section 9(C), of the State Constitution exempts certain special districts from the appropriations limit calculation mandate. Consult the following website: "http://vir rw.leosnto.ca.govl,consti.article 13B" for additional information. Special districts required by law to calculate their appropriations limit must present the calculation as part of their annual audit. Any questions special districts have on this issue should be referred to their respective county for clarification, or to their legal representation, or to the law itself. No State agency reviews the local appropriations limits. Population Certification The population certification program applies only to cities and counties. Revenue and Taxation Code Section 11005.6 mandates Finance to automatically certify any population estimate that exceeds the current certified population with the State Controller's Office. Finance will certify the higher estimate to the State Controller by June 1, 2012. Please Note: Prior year's city population estimates may be revised. If you have any questions regarding this data, please contact the Demographic Research Unit at (916)323-4086. ANA J. MATOSANTOS Director By: MICHAEL COHEN . Chief Deputy Director Enclosures 18 Fiscal Year 2012-2013 May 2012 Enclosure I A. Price Factor: Article XIII B specifies that local jurisdictions select their cost -of -living factor to compute their appropriation limit by a vote of their governing body. The cost -of -living factor provided here is per capita personal income. If the percentage change in per capita personal income is selected, the percentage change to be used in setting the 2012-2013 appropriation limit is: Per Capita Personal Income Fiscal Year (FY) Percentage change over prior year 2012-2013 3.77 B. Following is an example using sample population change and the change in California per capita personal income as growth factors in computing a 2012-2013 appropriation limit. 2012-2013: Per Capita Cost of Living Change = 3.77 percent Population Change = 0.68 percent Per Capita Cost of Living converted to a ratio:. Population converted to a ratio: Calculation of factor for FY 2012-2013: 3.77 + 100 = 1.0377 100 0.68 + 100 = 1.0068 100 1.0377 x 1.0068 = 1.0448 19 Fiscal Year 2012-2013 Enclosure II Annual Percent Change in Population Minus Exclusions January 1, 2011 to January 1, 2012 and Total Population, January 1, 2012 Total County Percent Change --- Population Minus Exclusions - Population City 2011-2012 1-1-11 1-1-12 1-1-2012 Riverside Banning 0.81 29,723 29,965 29,965 Beaumont 2.15 38,034 38,851 38,851 Blythe 0.98 13,201 13,330 20,400 Catimesa 1.11 7,910 7,998 7,998 Canyon Lake 0.78 10,606 10,689 10,689 Cathedral City 1.07 51,353 51,901 51,952 Coachella 1.37 41,339 41,904 41,904 Corona 0.96 153,047 154,520 154,520 Desert Hot Springs 1.32 27,277 27,638 27,638 Easlvale 2.80 54,090 55,602 55,602 Hemet 0.98 79,309 80,089 80,089 Indian Wells 0.90 4,990 5,035 5,035 Indio 1.62 78,817 78,065 78,065 Lake Elsinore 1.40 52,149 52,879 53,024 La Quinta 1.03 37,688 38,075 38,075 Menifee 1.83 79,139 80,589 80,589 Moreno Valley 1.05 194,451 196,495 196.495 Murrieta 0.90 104,051 104,985 104,985 Norco 0.78 22,837 23,015 27,053 Palm Desert 1.13 48,920 49,471 49,471 Palm Springs 1.00 44,829 45,279 45,279 Perris 0.97 69,506 70,180 70,180 Rancho Mirage 0.60 17,399 17,504 17,504 Riverside 0.80 306,010 308,452 308,511 San Jacinto 0.86 44,421 44,803 44,803 Temecula 1.81 101,255 103,092 103,092 Wildomar 0.94 32,414 32,719 32,719 Unincorporated 3.05 451,347 452,725 453,089 County Total 0.99 2,194,112 2,215,850 2,227,577 (') Exclusions include residents on federal military installations and group quarters residents in state mental institutions, state and federal correctional institutions and veteran homes. Page 1 20 AGENDA ITEM 8C RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 7, 2012 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Annual Investment Policy Review BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Adopt Resolution No. 12-016, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Regarding the Revised Investment Policy'; and 2) Adopt the Annual Investment Policy. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Section XIV of the Investment Policy requires an annual investment policy review and specifically states that the "Chief Financial Officer shall annually render. to the Board a statement of investment policy, which the Board must consider at a public meeting. Any changes to the policy shall also be considered by the Board at a public meeting." Based on a review of the Investment Policy approved by the Commission on May 11, 2011, and consideration of changes to the California Government Code as of January 1, 2012, staff in consultation with the County Treasurer's Office staff has determined that changes should be made to: 1) Define basis of percentage limitations applicable to an investment; 2) Provide flexibility for the Chief Financial Officer to act immediately regarding a security if a rating change brings it below a minimum specified rating requirement; 3) Specify a maximum maturity for municipal bonds; 4) Delete adjustable municipal notes and bonds which are generally covered by existing descriptions, as focus on long-term rates of issuer is similar to investor view of security; 5) Limit repurchase agreements to tri-party agreements for safety purposes and to minimize counterparty risk; Agenda Item 8C 21 6) Revise policy for time deposits in generic terms due to other available products; and 7) Delete reference to use of performance benchmark as Commission currently invests most of its cash with the Riverside County Investment Pool Fund due to low interest rate environment. Attachments: 1) Resolution No. 12-016 2) Draft Investment Policy Agenda Item 8C 22 RESOLUTION NO. 12-016 RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION REGARDING THE REVISED INVESTMENT POLICY WHEREAS, the Riverside County Transportation Commission (the "Commission") currently retains the authority to add, delete or otherwise modify the Commission's policies and procedures. NOW, THEREFORE, the Riverside County Transportation Commission does hereby resolve as follows: Section 1. The Riverside County Transportation Commission hereby adopts the Investment Policy, as revised on June 7, 2012, and attached as Exhibit A. APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 7`h day of June, 2012. John J. Benoit, Chair Riverside County Transportation Commission ATTEST: Jennifer Harmon Clerk of the Board 23 Riverside County lronsportotion Commission INVESTMENT POLICY Introduction The purpose of this document is to identify policies and procedures that enhance opportunities for a prudent investment program and to organize and formalize investment -related activities. II. Scope It is intended that this Policy cover all funds (except retirement funds) and investment activities under the direction of the Commission. III. Delegation of Authority Pursuant to the Commission's Administrative Code, the Board's management responsibility for the investment program is hereby delegated for a one-year period to the Executive Director who shall monitor and review all investments for consistency with this investment policy. Subject to review, the Board. may renew the delegation of authority pursuant to this section each year. The Executive Director may delegate these duties to his designee ("Chief Financial Officer"). The Commission may delegate its investment decision making and execution authority to an investment advisor. The advisor shall follow this Policy and such other written instructions as are provided. IV. Prudence All persons authorized to make investment decisions . on behalf of the Commission are subject to the prudent investor standard. Investments shall be made with care, skill, prudence and diligence under circumstances then prevailing, including, but not limited to, the general economic conditions and the anticipated needs of the Commission that a prudent person acting in a like capacity and familiarity with those matters would use in the conduct of funds of a Like character and with like aims, to safeguard the principal and maintain the liquidity needs of the Commission. Revised -May 11. _'Qi 1-,lune 7.201'_ 24 Authorized individuals acting in accordance with this Policy and written procedures and exercising due diligence shall be relieved of personal responsibility for an individual security's credit risk or market price changes, provided deviations from expectations are reported in a timely fashion. V. Objective The Commission's primary investment objectives, in priority order, shall be: 1. Safety. Safety of principal is the foremost objective of the investment program. Investments of the Commission shall be undertaken in a manner that seeks to ensure preservation of capital in the portfolio. 2. Liquidity. The investment portfolio of the Commission will remain: sufficiently liquid to enable the Commission to meet its cash flow requirements. 3. Return on Investment. The investment portfolio of the Commission shall be designed with the objective of maximizing return on its investments, but only after ensuring safety and liquidity. The Commission may from time to time sell securities that it owns in order to better reposition its portfolio assets in accordance with updated cash flow schedules, yield opportunities existing between market sectors, or simply market timing. VI. Investments California Government Code Section 53601 governs the investments permitted for purchase by the Commission. Within the investments permitted by Code, the Commission seeks to further restrict eligible investments to the investments listed in Section V1.1 below. Percentage limitations applicable to an investment, where indicated, ;apply atwill be based on the market values of investments as of the time of each purchase. Percentage holdings with any one non-U.S. Government issuer or non - Federal Agency issuer are further restricted to a maximum of 10% (direct and indirect commitments). Rating requirements where indicated, apply at the time of purchase. In the event a security held by the Commission is subject to a rating change that brings it below the minimum specified rating requirement, the Chief Financial Officer shall be authorized to act immediately and to notify the Board of the--eh-angeany actions taken in regards to the security. The Chief Financial Officer's course of action to be Revised Niar 1 1. 201 1 4;11e ?. 20 i 7 • 25 4-e-1-Ir ed--will then be docidcdvary on a case -by -case basis, considering depending on such factors as the reason for the rate drop, prognosis for recovery or further rate drops, and the market price of the security. 1. Eligible Investments A. U.S. Government Issues. United States Treasury notes, bonds, bills, or certificates of indebtedness, or those for which the faith and credit of the United States are pledged for the payment of principal and interest. B. Federal Agency Securities. Federal agency or United States government -sponsored enterprise obligations, participations, or other instruments, including those issued by or fully guaranteed as to principal and interest by federal agencies or United States government -sponsored enterprises. C. Municipal Bonds. Registered treasury notes or bonds of any of the other 49 United States, in addition to California, payable solely out of the revenues from a revenue -producing property owned, controlled, or operated by a state or by -a department, board, agency or authority of any of the other 49 United States, in addition to California. Such securities must have a maximum maturity of five (5) years and ratings from at least two of three ratings as follows: "Aa3" by Moody's Investors Service, or "AA-" by Standard & Poor's, or "AA-" by Fitch_Ratings; or as otherwise approved by the Commission. Registered general obligation treasury notes or bonds of any of the 50 United States. Such securities must have a maximum maturity ,of five (5) years and ratings from two of three ratings as follows: at least "Aa3" by Moody's Investors Service, or "AA-" by Standard & Poor's, or "AA-" by Fitch Ratings; or as otherwise approved by the Commission. Adjustable rate regi.,tered treasury notes or bonds of any of tf e 5-0- 4-n i-tees--St a t c s , -in-c i-Eldi , p �► pie afef �t� t- f-t kie authority -of ---any- -of-the of-hor--^tea---U-n ted States, iA--adeii4on-to of -three -ratings -as -follows-: "P-1-" by-Me4dy-s-A-nvestor-s--Ser-vic-ep Revised May 1 t, 201 i tune ? 701 26 or "A 1 "try Standard & Poor's, or "F 1 " by FitchR9tings; or - as....o- herwi-se.--aporoVeo-try-44e-C—om ission-- Adiustable--rate-notes--or--bonds warrefi s,-er--ot-her--eviderees-o# indebtedness of any local agency within the State of California inritl-s n�ir.ErrzE 4Yi �4 r, " ' ther "P 1 by MoodysInvestor;; g-ervice, or- "A -1..=' by-_ -Standoff 8r--Poem, -er- „F 1 " evidences of indebtedness po yable solely out of the revenues from----a---r-eve-n .le-pr-odue-i-nQ----prop-erty awned, eo+}frolfed - or agene-y, or aut-horit-y-of-the-lec-al-ageheyT or ofany-foe-af-agency within this .)rate. Taxable or tax-exempt bonds, notes, warrants, or other evidences of indebtedness of any local agency within the State of California with a maximum maturity of five (5) years and minimum rating of either "Aa3" by Moody's Investors Service, or "AA-" by Standard & Poor's, or "AA-" by Fitch_Ratings (the minimum rating shall apply to the local agency, irrespective of any credit enhancement), including bonds, notes, warrants, or other evidences of indebtedness payable solely out of the revenues from a revenue -producing property owned, controlled, or operated by either the local agency, a department, board, agency, or authority of the local agency, or of any local agency within this state. Investments in municipal bonds are further limited to 15% of surplus funds. D. Tri-Party Repurchase Agreements. Tri-party prepurchase agreements are to be used solely as short-term investments not to exceed 30 days. The Commission may enter into tri-party repurchase agreements with primary government securities dealers rated "A" or better by two nationally recognized rating services. Counterparties should also have (i) a short-term credit rating of at least A-1 /P-1; (ii) minimum assets and capital size of $25 billion in assets and $350 million in capital; (iii) five years of acceptable audited financial results; and (iv) -) -a strong reputation among market participants. The following collateral restrictions will be observed: Only U.S. Treasury securities or Federal Agency securities, as described in V.1 A and B, will be acceptable collateral. All securities Revised May 1 . 201 1.1 tine ?_ 2012 27 underlying tri-party repurchase agreements must be delivered to the Commission's custodian or fiscal agent bank versus payment or be handled under a properly executed tri-party repurchase agreement. The total market value of all collateral for each to -party repurchase agreement must equal or exceed 102 percent of the total dollar value of the money invested by the Commission for the term of the investment. For any t:ri- party repurchase agreement with a term of more than one day, the value of the underlying securities must be reviewed on an on -going basis according to market conditions. Market value must be calculated each time there is . a substitution of collateral. The Commission, or its trustee, or designated custodian shall have a perfected first security interest under the Uniform Commercial Code in all securities subject to tri-party repurchase agreement. The Commission shall have properly executed a PSA agreement (or a similar agreement as may be determined by the Commission) with each counterparty with which it enters into a tri-party repurchase agreements. E. U.S. Corporate Debt. Medium -term notes, defined as all corporate and depository institution securities with a maximum remaining maturity of five years or less, issued by corporations organized and operating within the United States or depository institutions licensed by the United .States or any state and operating within the United States. Eligible investment shall be rated "AA" or better by one or more nationally recognized rating service. Investments in U.S. Corporate Debt are further limited to 20% of surplus funds F. Commercial Paper. Commercial paper rated in the highest category by one or more nationally recognized statistical rating organization (NRSRO). The entity that issues the commercial paper shall meet all of the following conditions in either paragraph (1) or paragraph (2): (1)The entity meets the following criteria: (A) Is organized and operating in the United States as a general corporation. (B) Has total assets in excess of five hundred million dollars ($500,000,000). (C) Has debt other than commercial paper, if any, that is rated "A" or higher by a NRSRO. (2) The entity meets the following criteria: (A) Is organized within the United States as a special purpose corporation, Revised May .11, 203 1 Tune ?. 2012 28 trust, or limited liability company. (B) Has program -wide credit enhancements, including, but not limited to, over collateralization, letters of credit, or surety bond. (C) Has commercial paper that is rated "A-1" or higher, or the equivalent, by a NRSRO. Purchases of eligible commercial paper may not exceed 270 days maturity nor represent more than 10 percent of the outstanding paper of an issuing corporation. Investments in commercial paper are limited to a maximum of 30% of surplus funds. G. Banker's Acceptances. Banker's acceptances issued by domestic or foreign banks, which are eligible for purchase by the Federal Reserve System. Purchases of banker's acceptances may not exceed 180 days maturity. Eligible banker's acceptances are restricted to issuing financial institutions with short-term paper rated in the highest category. by one or more nationally recognized rating service. Investments in banker's acceptances are further limited to 40% of surplus funds with no more than 30% of surplus invested in the banker's acceptances of any one commercial bank. H. Money Market Mutual Funds. Shares of beneficial interest issued by diversified management companies that are money market funds registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission under the Investment. Company Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. Sec. 80a-1, et seq.) and that invest solely in U.S. treasuries, obligations of the U.S. Treasury, and repurchase agreements relating to such treasury obligations. The Commission may invest in shares of beneficial interest issued by accompany shall have met either of the following criteria: (1) Attained the highest ranking or the highest letter and numerical rating provided by not less than two nationally recognized rating services. (2) Retained aninvestment adviser registered or exempt from registration with the Securities and Exchange Commission with not less than five years' experience managing money market mutual funds with assets under management in excess of five hundred million dollars ($500,000,000). The purchase price of shares of beneficial interest purchased pursuant to this subdivision shall not include any commission I Revised lay ! 1. u41 1 Jude 7. 11 29 that the companies may charge. Investments in Money Market Mutual Funds are further limited to 20% of surplus funds. I. Riverside County Pooled Investment Fund ("RCPIF"). The Commission may invest in the Riverside County Pooled Investment Fund. As on -going due diligence, the Chief Financial Officer shall obtain the information listed below: • A description of eligible investment securities and a written statement of investment policy. • A description of the interest calculation, the frequency of interest distributions, and the treatment of gains and losses in the portfolio. • A description of how often the securities are priced, how the securities are safeguarded, and the audit arrangements. • A description of who may invest in the program, how often they may invest, and what size deposits and withdrawals are allowed. • A schedule for receiving statements and portfolio listings. • A fee schedule, and when and how fees are assessed. • The composition of the investment fund for each reporting period. J. State of California Local Agency Investment Fund ("LAIF" ). The Commission may invest in LAIF. As on -going due diligence, the Chief Financial Officer shall obtain the information listed below: • A description of eligible investment securities and a written statement of investment policy. • A description of the interest calculation, the frequency of interest distributions, and the treatment of gains and losses in the portfolio. • A description of how often the securities are priced, how the securities are safeguarded, and the audit arrangements. • A description of who may invest in the program, how often they may invest, and what size deposits and withdrawals are allowed. • A schedule for receiving statements and portfolio listings. • A fee schedule, and when `and how fees are assessed. • The composition of the investment fund for each reporting period. Revised May l I, 201 l.iune?. 20I2 30 K. Certificates of Deposit. Negotiable Certificates of Deposit (NCD's): NCDs are. money market instruments issued by a bank. They specify that a sum of money has been deposited, payable with interest to the bearer of the certificates on a certain date. NCDs are issued by nationally or state chartered bank or state or federal savings and loan association. All purchases must be from institutions rated by a nationally recognized rating organization, as designated by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. The maturity of NCDs shall not exceed 180 days to maturity, and purchases of NCDs shall not exceed fifteen percent (15%) of the Commission's investment portfolio. NCDs shall be evaluated in terms of the credit worthiness of the issuing institution, as these deposits are uninsured and uncollateralized promissory mites. FDIC -insured Certificates of Deposit: The principal amount of the investment must be federally insured through the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). No more than the prevailing FDIC insured coverage amount may be invested with any one deposit. Certificates of Deposit placed through the Certificate of Deposit Account Registry Service (CDARS) shall be considered fully insured, assuming that the total amount invested with any participating bank is limited to the prevailing FDIC insured coverage amount. Interest on the principal must be paid to the Commission at least annually. The placement of Certificates of Deposit. with local banks that qualify in accordance with Government Code section 53601(h) is encouraged. The Commission, at its discretion, may invest a portion of its surplus funds in certificates of deposit at a commercial bank, savings bank, savings and loan association, or credit union using a private sector entity to assist in the placement of such certificates, provided that it complies with Government Code Section 53601.8. Such investments may not exceed in total twenty percent (20%) of the Commission's funds invested pursuant to Government Code Sections 53601 .8, 53635.8 and 53601, and shall have a maximum maturity of one year from the date of the deposit. Collateralized Certificates of Deposit: For investments . exceeding $100,000, there will be a waiver of collateral for the first $100,000 deposited and protected by FDIC insurance. The remainder of the deposit shall be fully collateralized by U.S. Revised May } 1, 20 l.tune. ?. 20I2 31 Treasury and Federal Agency securities having maturities less than five years. The District must receive written confirmation that these securities have been pledged in repayment of the time deposit. The securities pledged as collateral must have a current market value greater than the dollar amount of the deposit in keeping with the ratio requirements specified in Section 53652 of the Government Code. Additionally, a statement of the collateral shall be provided to the Commission on a monthly basis. Such investments may not exceed in total fifteen percent (15%) of the Commission's funds invested pursuant to Government Code Sections 53601.8, 53635.8 and 53601, and shall have a maximum maturity of one year from the date of the deposit. L. Time Deposits. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation insured money market savings accounts or time deposits which are deposited through depository institutions with each depository institution holding no more than the maximum amount of principal qualifying for deposit insurancewhich arc partieipant-----of-t-hp---McRey--Pillar e-t Insured Deposit ACCOLInt Service ("IVIMIDAS"}. 2. Eligible Investments for Bond Proceeds Bond proceeds , shall be invested in securities permitted by the applicable bond documents. If the bond documents are silent as to permitted investments, bond proceeds will be invested in securities permitted by this Policy. With respect to maximum maturities, the Policy authorizes investing bond reserve fund proceeds beyond the five years if prudent in the opinion of the Chief Financial Officer. 3. Ineligible Investments As provided in California Government Code Section 53601.6, the Commission shall not invest any funds in inverse floaters, range notes, mortgage derived interest -only strips or in any security that could result in zero interest accrual if held to maturity. The purchase of any security not listed in Section V1.1 above, but permitted by the California Government Code, is prohibited unless the Board approves the investment either specifically or as a part of an investment program approved by the Board. 1 Revised tl,r ! }., 201 1 iune ?. 2012 32 VII. Maximum Maturities Maturities of investments will be selected to provide necessary liquidity, minimize interest rate risk, and maximize earnings. Current and expected yield curve analysis will be monitored and the portfolio will be invested accordingly. Because of inherent difficulties in accurately forecasting cash flow requirements, a portion of the portfolio should be continuously invested in readily available funds. Where this Policy does not specify a maximum remaining maturity at the time of the investment, no investment shall be made in any security, other than a security underlying a repurchase or reverse repurchase agreement authorized by this section, that at the time of the investment has a term remaining to maturity in. excess of five years, unless the Board has granted express authority to make that investment either specifically or as a part of an investment program approved by the Board no less than three months prior to the investment. VIII. Performance Standards The Chief Financial Officer shall continually monitor and evaluate the portfolio's performance. A eomparison of the porgyfolio's perfor-manco against a perfernlance benchmark shall be included in the Chief Financial Af iecr's- goartfrrl-y- report, -Tkhe--G-h-+ef--Fieor-c+al---Qf-#iscr 1ia11- selee ar} benchmark. IX. Reporting The Chief Financial Officer shall prepare and provide to the Board and the Executive Director, within 30 days following the end of the quarter, a portfolio report, which includes the following information: • Type of investment • Name of issuer • Date of maturity • Date of purchase • Par value • Original purchase cost • Call date (if applicable) • Current market value of securities • Unrealized market value gain/loss • Coupon rate, if applicable Revised May } (. 201 Mine ?. 201 33 • Yield to maturity • Credit quality, as determined by one or more nationally recognized credit rating services, of each investment • Average duration of portfolio • Listing of all investment transactions during the quarter • A statement that the portfolio complies with the investment policy, or the manner in which the portfolio is not in compliance • A statement denoting the ability of the Commission to meet its liquidity requirements for the next six months, or provide an explanation as to why sufficient money shall, or may not be, available. X. Investment Procedures The Chief Financial Officer, as. the Board's designee, is responsible for ensuring compliance with the Commission's investment policies and establishing written procedures and internal controls for the operation of the investment program. No person may engage in investment transactions except as provided under the terms of this Policy and the written procedures established by the Chief Financial Officer. The written procedures should address: delegation of authority to subordinate staff members, control of collusion, separation of transaction authority from accounting and record keeping, written confirmations of transactions, reconciliation of custody statements, and wire transfer procedures and agreements. An independent analysis by an external auditor shall be conducted annually to review internal control, account activity, and compliance with policies and procedures. XI. Authorized Broker Dealers and Financial Institutions The Chief Financial Officer shall maintain a list of authorized broker/dealers and financial institutions which are approved for investment purposes.. It shall be the Commission's policy to purchase securities only from .those authorized institutions and firms. Separate lists shall be maintained for broker/dealers and financial institutions approved for repurchase agreements and those approved for the purchase of other securities. If an investment advisor is used, they may use their own list of approved broker/dealers and financial institutions for investment purposes. To be eligible, a firm must meet the following minimum criteria: (i) an institution licensed by the state as a broker -dealer, or from a member of a federally regulated securities exchange, from a national or state -chartered bank, from a federal or state association or from a brokerage firm designated as a primary government dealer by the Federal Reserve bank; and (ii) all broker/dealer firms and individuals must be properly registered with the 1 Revised May }!. 20 liune ?. 2012 34 NASD and/or SEC to transact business in the relevant geographic locations and product sectors. In addition, counterparties for Repurchase Agreements shall be limited to primary government securities dealers rated "A" or better by two nationally recognized rating services. Counterparties shall also have (i) a short-term credit rating of at least A-1 /P-1; (ii) minimum assets and capital size of $25 billion in assets and $350 million in capital; (iii) five years of acceptable audited financial results; and (iv) a strong reputation among market participants. The Chief Financial Officer shall select broker/dealers and other financial institutions on the basis of the firm's expertise and credit worthiness. The Commission shall annually send a copy of the current investment policy to all dealers approved to do business with the Commission. Each broker dealer or financial institution that has been authorized by the Commission shall be required to submit and annually update a Broker/Dealer Questionnaire which includes the firm's most recent financial statements. The Chief 'Financial Officer shall maintain a file for each firm, approved for investment purposes, which includes the most recent Broker/Dealer Questionnaire. XII. Safekeeping and Custody To protect the Commission's assets, all securities owned by the Commission shall be held in safekeeping in the Commission's name by a third party bank trust department, acting as agent for the Commission under the terms of a custody agreement executed by the bank and the Commission. All securities will be received and delivered using standard delivery versus payment (DVP) procedures; the Commission's safekeeping agent will only release payment for a security after the security has been properly delivered. Physical delivery securities shall be avoided whenever possible, as book entry securities are much easier to transfer and account for since actual delivery of a document never takes place. In addition, delivered securities must be properly safeguarded against loss or destruction. The potential for fraud and loss increases with physically delivered securities. XIII. Ethics and Conflicts of Interest The Commission adopts the following policy concerning conflicts of interest: 1. Officers and employees involved in the investment process shall refrain from personal business activity that could conflict with proper execution of the investment program or which could impair their ability to make impartial investment decisions. Revised 4'lay 11 _ _'Q1 1 Tune 7. 201 35 2. Officers and employees involved in the investment process shall ,disclose any material financial interest in any financial institution that conducts business with the Commission, and they shall further disclose any large personal financial/investment positions that could be related to the performance of the Commission's portfolio. 3. Officers shall refrain from undertaking personal investment transactions with the same individual with whom business is conducted on behalf of the Commission. XIV. Investment Policy Review The Chief Financial Officer shall annually render to the Board a statement of investment policy, which the Board must consider at a public meeting. Any changes to the policy shall also be considered by the Board at a public meeting. Revised May ! }. 01 1 June ?. 2012 36 AGENDA ITEM 8D RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 7, 2012 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Anne Hallberg, Accounting Supervisor Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Quarterly Investment Report . BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AN STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Quarterly Investment Report for the quarter ended March 31, 2012. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Attached are the quarterly investment and cash flow reports as required by state law and Commission policy. The county of Riverside's Investment Report for the month ended March 31, 2012, is also attached for review. Attachments: 1) Quarterly Investment Report for the quarter ended March 31, 2012 2) County of Riverside Investment. Report for the month ended March 31, 2012 Agenda Item 8D 37 Riverside County Transportation Commission Investment Portloii, Report Period Ended'. March 31, 2012 OPERATING FUNDS Crty National Bank Deposits County Treasurer's Pooled Investment Fund Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) Agency/Treasury Securities: Subtotal Operating Funds FUNDS HELD IN TRUST County Treasurer's Pooled Investment Fund. Local Transportation Fund . Subtotal Funds Held in Trust COMMISSION BOND PROJECT FUNDS/DEBT RESERVE US. Bank MoneyMarket Investment Agreements County of Riverside Pool investment First American Government Obligation Fund First American Treasury Obligations Fund • Held in Trust Subtotal Bond Project Funda/Debt Reserve TOTAL All Cash and Investments FAIR VALUE RATING MOODYS/FITCH COUPON PAR PURCHASE MATURITY YIELD TO PURCHASE MARKET UNREALIZED S&P RATE VALUE DATE DATE MATURITY COST VALUE GAIN (LOSS) 1,469,558 A3/BBB+ N/A N/A 424,112,849 Aaa/MR1/AAAN1 N/A 0.49% 3,603,059 Not Rated N/A - N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 429,185,466 71,030,462 Aaa-MR1/AAAN1 N/A 049% 71,030 462 Aaa/AAAm Aaa/MR1/AAAN1 158 Aaa/AAAm Aaa/AAAm 158 4 500,216,086 N/A N/A 0.49 N/A N/A N/A Investment Transactions for the Quarter Ended March 31, 2012 Purchases: None Maturities: Par Value at Maturity Maturity Date Coupon Rate None SUMMARIZED INVESTMENT TYPE Banks 1,469,558 County Pool 495.143.311 County Pool investment - LAIF 3,603.059 Mutual Funds: CNI Charter US Bank Money Market First American Government Obligation Fund Sub • Total Mutual Funds Federal Agency securities Certificates of Deposit U.S. Treasury securities Corporate Note/Commercial Paper Investment Agreements 158 158 TOTAL E 500,216,086 38 Statement of Compliance Nature of Investments Operating Funds 82.88% Bond Projects 1.90% Debt Reserve 1.50% Trust Funds 13.72% County PooUlnvestment 1.56% All of the above investments and any investment decisions made for the quarter ended March 31, 2012 were in full compliance with the Commission's investment policy as adopted on May l 1, 2011. ' The Commission has adequate cash flows for six months of operations. Signed by: Chief Financial Officer 39 • County of Riverside Treasurer's Pooped Investment Fund 2012 /larch "Mixed March" Well, here we are at the end of the 1st quarter, and it seems there is no clear direction for the economy as some of the indicators continue to be mixed, partially re- lated to a much warmer winter across the U.S. Our stock market, on the other hand, has seen its best returns for the first three months since the late 1990's_ . The Fed met at its regularly sched- uled meeting of March 13th and said nothing we were not expecting to hear. They stated, "The unemployment rate has declined nota- bly in recent months but remains elevated. Household spending and business fixed in- vestment have continued to advance. The housing sector remains depressed. Inflation has been subdued in recent months, al- though prices of crude oil and gasoline have increased lately. The recent increase in oil and gasoline prices will push up inflation tem- porarily." The economy is slowly moving in the right direction but if you read the tea leaves in the Fed's statements, there is much room for .downside risk, and, the massive budget deficit and national debt still needs to be addressed. Most of the recent euphoria is due to positive unemployment numbers, however, if they falter, it could de- rail the momentum in the stock market and cause a flight to safety in bonds. This has happened in the last few days, thus further raising the possibility of further stimulus by the Fed, only to place our economy back on life support. In addition, let's not forget, Europe remains unsettled. The last action they took, Operation Twist, is set to expire in June. The latest news we have been reading suggests that market watchers are looking for another ren- dition in an effort to keep rates lower longer, and to continue to push investors into the "risk on" trade. Let's face it, Americans tend to feel better. if they have a job, their 401 k or retirement plan statements don't show implo- sion, and they can continue to finance pur- chases of real estate at historic lows. It's all related and feeds into our confidence as con- sumers and psyche as to how we feel about the.economy as a whole. We will continue to read the eco- nomic tea leaves and watch closely as the next few months worth of economic data will be very telling of whether we see the green shoots of a lasting spring or crab grass grow- ing in the garden. Our hope is for a modest and sustainable recoveryso that markets can react reasonably and so we can invest our depositors' funds accordingly. Don Kent Treasurer -Tax Collector Capital Markets Team Treasurer -Tax Collector Dort Kent Asst. Treasurer -Tax Collector Jon Christensen Investment Manager Giovane Pizano Asst.:Investment Manager Angela Tre.ssler Investment Objectives The primaryobjective of the treasurer shall be to safe- guard the principal of the funds under the treasurer's control, meet the li- quidity needs of the depositor, and achieve a return on the.. Funds under his or her control. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TREASURER'S POOLED INVESTMENT FUND IS CURRENTLY RATED: Aaa-bf/MR1 BY MOODY'S INVESTOR'S SERVICE: AND AAA/VI BY FITCH RATINGS Month End Month End Book Paper Gain or Paper Gain Book Yrs to Modified Market Value ($)* Value ($) Loss ($) or Loss (%) ' Yield (%) Maturity Duration The Treasurer's Pooled Investment Fund is comprised of the County, Schools, Special Districts, and other Discretionary Depositors. 40 Current Market Date Economic Indicators Released on: Indicator 4/6/2012 Nonfarm Payrolls - M/M change 4/6/2012 Unemployment Rate Definition Counts the number of paid employees working part-time or full-time in the nation's business and government establishments. Measures the number of unemployed as a percentage of the labor force. Consensus Actual 201,000 120,000 8.3 % 8.2% 3/28/2012 Durable Goods Orders- Reflects the new orders placed with domestic M/M change 3/29/2012 Real Gross Domestic Product - Q/Q change 3/27/2012 Consumer Confidence 4/3/2012 Factory Orders - M/M change manufacturers for immediate and future delivery of factory hard goods. The broadest measure of aggregate economic activity and encompasses every sector of the economy. GDP is the country's most comprehensive economic scorecard. Measures,consunaer attitudes on present economic. condit©ns'aiiil expectations of future conditions. Represents the dollar level of new orders for both durable and nondurable goods. 2.9 3.0 % 70_9 ' 1.5% 2_2% 3.0% 1.3% 3J1b/2072 Stock Indices Consumer Price Index - MN change' The Consumer, Price Index is a measure of the average price level of a fixed basket of goods and services purchased by consumers;. Value Chan:e Dow Jones (DJIA) S&P 500 Index NASDAQ 13,212. 259.9=1';. 1,408.47 42.79 3/091-57 124.68 Commodities Nymex Crude Gold (USD/OZ) Value Chan e 103,02 $ (4,05) 1,668.35 S (28.50) U.S. Treasuries Fed Funds Tar• et Rate Current Fed: Funds Fed Move Probability for Probability for FOMC Date FOMC Date 04/25/12 06/20/12 Decrease to 0♦00% Increase to 0.25 % Increase to 0.50 % . Increase to 0.75% Increase to 1 % 440 %. 56.0 % 0.0% 0.0% 0`0% 41 55.3 % 0 3:41 0.0% 0.0% HIST ATE RANGE RICAL YIELD CURVE E}F2 ' — Yield (%) Change (%) 3-Month 6-Month 12-Month 2-Year 3-Year 5-Year 7-Year. , 10-Year 30-Year 0.07" 0.13 0.17 0.33 0,.50 1.04 1, 61 2.21 3.34 0.0`1) 0.01 {lfi1` 0.04 0.18 0.24 a40`` RIVERSIDE COUNTY TREASURER -TAX COLLECTOR 41 2 • TIMMI • AAA Rated Prime Institutional Money -Market Funds Fidelity Prune Insti4thonal MMF FIPXX 0.20% : Federated Prime Obligations Fund POIXX 0.19% :Wells Fargo Advant ge Heritage WFJXX Morgan Stanley Institutional Prime Liquidity Fund The Treasurer's Institutional Money Market Index (TIMMI) is compiled and reported by the Riverside County Treasurer's Capital Markets division. It is a composite index derived from five AAA rated prime institutional money market funds. Similar to the Treasurer's Office, prime money market funds invest in a diversified portfolio of U.S. dollar denominated money market instruments including U.S. Treasuries, government agencies, commercial paper, certificates of deposits, repurchase agreements, etc. TIMMI is currently comprised of the five multi billion dollar funds listed to the left_ 1.00 % - 0.80 % - 0.60 % - 0.40 - 0.20 % - 0.00 % Mar-11 May-11 Jul-11 Sep 11 Pool Yield TIMMI Cash Flows Month Monthly Receipts Monthly Disbursements Difference Required Matured Investments Actual Investments Balance Maturing Available to Invest > 1 Year 04 f 2012 ,F ' 04/2012 05' 201 , 06/2012 07/2012 08/2012 09/.2012„ 10/2012 11/2012. 12/2012 01/2013 ; 02/2013 03/ 2013 1,404.16 2 884.08 41 • 95, 518.23 49 54 669.49 . 1,500.00 629 05 460.00 3_ 733.64 1,035' 1,220.61 82631` 711.33 75.0 826.92 676 800.00 930.00 00, 670.52 89 63) (336.53) 3.5 (193.10) :(100A6) (157A3) 700.00 635 39); (470.00) 73.33.' 234.45 1,076.57 450.41 6.6 272.95 172 40. 15.06 , 170.94 870.94 �35„�55 0.00 389.00 31,$K66 294.50 23,0 225.72 14$04 192.80 139.1.2 105.00 179.90 u TOTALS 10,003.42 10,575.39 (567.17) 234.45 4.69 % 2,804.54 4,763.00 56.12% 95.31% All vales reported in millions (,$). •The Pooled Investment Fund cash flow requirements are based upon a 12 month historical cash flow model. Based upon projected cash receipts and maturing investments, there are sufficient funds to meet future cash flow disburse- ments over the next 12 months. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TREASURER -TAX COLLECTOR 42 3 Asset Allocation MMKT CALTRUST FND LOCAL AGCY INVST' DDA/PASSBK LOCAL AGCY US TREAS BONDS FHLMC DISC NOTES FHLMC BONDS FNMA DISC NOTES FNMA BONDS FHLB DISC NOTES FHLB BONDS FFCB DISC NOTES FFCB BONDS FMAC DISC NOTES FARMER MAC MUNI BONDS COMM PAPER NCDS Scheduled Scheduled 54,000.00 50,000.00 200,000.00 560.00' 50,000.00 100,000.00 20,000.00 643,641.00 100,000.00 898,850.00 145,000.00 1,953,180.00 82,000.00 263,705.00 123,000.00 37,500.00 88,735.00 150,000.00 35,000.00 54,000.00' 50,000.00 200,000.00 560.00 49,915.47 100,318.55 19,971.40 643,825.62 99,866.03' Market 35,000.00' 54,000.00 50,000.00 200,000.00 560.00 49,930.22 100,283.00 20,000.00' 644,678.10 99,906.25' 899,788.64 901,614.08 144,752.28 144,921.96 1,954,615.24 1,955,197.79 81,861.43 81,906.25 264,019.44 264,382.22 122,751.08 123,000.00 37,502.38 88,970.55 149,730.70 37,589.06 88,970.55' 149,872.25 100.00 % 100.00 % 100.00 % 100.00 % 100.00 % 100.03 % 99,96 % 100.14 % 100.13 % 100.04 100.20 % 100.12% 100.03% 100.05 100.14% 100.20 % 100.23 100.00 100.09 % Yield 0.04 % .003 .003 0.38 % .003 0.09% .003 0.99% 8.214' 0.19% .858 0.22% .782 0.16% .302'. 0.76% , 1.230 0.14% .676 0.84% .854! 0.17% .535' 0.37%. .773 0.19% .762 0.62%'. 0.21 % 0.61 % 0.45 % 0.35 % 0.42 % at.+ .003 .003 .003 .003 8.214 .858 .782 .302 2.253 .676 2.366 .535 .965 .762 .915 1.034 .217.217 1.093' 1.093 .381 .381 .192 .192 r95171.00'. ,a 0 2,000,000 00 1,000,000.00 0 000 LOCAL AGCY MYST END DDA/PASSBK LOCAL AGCY OBLIG US TREAS BILLS Scheduled Book US TREAS BONDS FHLMC DISC NOTES FHLMC BONDS Market FHLB DISC NOTES FNLB BONDS FFCB DISC NOTES FFCB BONDS FMAC DISC NOTES MU'NI BONDS COMM PAPER SCHEDULED PAR 010 MMKT-1% GALTRUST FND - 1% LOCAL AGCY INVST FND - 1% DDA/PASSBK - 4% LOCAL AGCY OBLIG - O% US TREAS BILLS - 1% US TREAS BONDS - 2% FHLMC DISC NOTES - O% FHLMC BONDS - 13% FNMA DISC NOTES - 20/o ✓ r FNMA BONDS -- la% iYi FHLB DISC NOTES - 36/o ® FHLB BONDS - 39% o FFCB DISC NOTES - 2% o FFCB BONDS - 5% c FMAC DISC NOTES - 2% am FARMER MAC - 1%a mi MUNI BONDS - 2% ® COMM PAPER - 3% RIVERSIDE COUNTY TREASURER -TAX COLLECTOR 43 • Maturity Distribution Schedule :Pa (000's; Mas -12' 2 MMKT CALTRUST FND LOCAL AGCY INVST FND DDA/PASSBK LOCAL AGCY OBLIG US TREAS BONDS FHLMC DISC NOTES FHLMC BONDS FNMA DISC NOTES FNMA BONDS FHLB DISC NOTES FHLB BONDS FFCB DISC NOTES FFCB BONDS FMAC DISC NOTES FARMER MAC MUNI BONDS COMM PAPER 0-1 Mos 35,000.00 54,000.00 50,000.00 200,000.00 10,000.00 10,000.00 - 50,000.00 ' . 90,000.00 20,000.00 - 89,121.00 100,000.00 95,000.00 - 145,000.00 5,000.00 323,810.00 940,295.00 7,000.00 75,000A0 5,000 00 71,500.00 74,205.00 45,000.00 78,000.00 226,000.00 216500.00 340,000.00 260,000.00 532,585.00 85,990.00 78,000 00 25,000.00 10,000.00 - 37,500.00 - 25,850.00 55,745.00 5,140.00 ' 2;000.00 30,000 00 85 000.00 , . 35,000.00 1-3 Mos YEAR IN MATURITY Herr MUM MOM 112,020.00 183,850.00 35,000.00 54,000.00 50,000.00 200,000.00 560.00 560.00 - 50,000.00 100,000.00 2p 000.00 643,641.00 100 OOOAO 898,850.00 145 000.00 65.500.00 ; 1,953,180.00 82,000.00 263,705.00- 123,000.00 37,500.00 88,735.00 ........... . 150,000.00 MMKT Scheduled Par CALTRUST FND - Scheduled Par LOCAL AGCY INVST FND - Scheduled Par ODA/PASSBK - Scheduled Par LOCAL AGCY OBLIG - Scheduled Par US TREAS BILLS - Scheduled Par US TREAS BONDS Scheduled Par FHLMC DISC NOTES - Scheduled Par ftILMC BONDS - Scheduled Par - 1111111111111 FNMA DISC NOTES - Scheduled Par FNMA -BONDS -Scheduled Per Seallowt FNLB DISC NOTES - Schedule! Par FNLBBONDS- Scheduled Par FFCB DISC NOTES - Scheduled Par FMB BONDS - Scheduled Par MOP FMAC DISC NOTES - Scheduled Par yr FARMER MAC -Scheduled Par reimmi MUNI BONDS - Scheduled Par mum COIaM PAPER- Scheduled Par RIVERSIDE COUNTY TREASURER -TAX COLLECTOR 44 Credit Quality Moody (000's) Aaa Aa1 Aa2 Aa3 NR 4,412,491.00 8,580.00 138,040.00 25,000.00 411,060.00 Bookx Market 4,414,999.91 4,418,857.39 8,580.27 8,580.27 137,829.42 137,999.26 25,225.75 25,225.75 410,813.46 411,149.06 <T/Bonk 100.09% 100.00% 100.12% 100.00% 100.08% old: 0.51 % 0.93 0.41 % 0.25 % 0.21 % Totals°:{000' 95,E 71..0 4,997;448 00.09 MOODY'S ® Aaa - 88% p Aa3 -1% lAal-O% NR-8% ! Aa2 -3% S&P ® AAA - 27% MEI AA- - 1% fAA+-64% MEI NR-8% ® AA - 0% S&P (000's AAA AA+ AA AA- NR 1,337,426.00 3,197,205.00 24,480.00. 25,000.00 411,060.00 w Book 1,340,489.61 1,343,226.38 3,196,439.71 3,197,730.26 24,480.2724,480.27 25,225.75 25,225.75 410,813.47, 411,149.07 ar KT%Sook � �YYe1�l 100.20 % 0.64 % 100.04%` 0.46% 100.00% 0.68% 100.00% 0.25% 100.08% 0.21% 4 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TREASURER -TAX COLLECTOR 45 Month End Portfolio Holdings CUSIP Description Maturity Maturity Date Coupon To Mat Par Value Book Value Market Price - Market Unrealized Modified Years To Value Gain/Loss Duration Maturity 1KT X ,X IX FIPXX GOIXX MVRXX FEDERATED PRIME WELLS FARGO HERITAGE BLACKROCK FIDELITY MMF FEDERATED GOV MORGAN STANLEY GOV CALTRUST FND CLTR CALTRUST SHT TERM FUND LOCAL AGCY 1NV ST FND LAIF LAIF : _. S DDA/PASSBK CASH UBOC MANAGED RATE LOCAL AGCY OBLIG LAO US DIST COURTHOUS 04/01/2012 04/01/2012 04/01/2012 04/01/2012 04/01/2012 04/01/2012 09- .108 .149 .151 .010 .047 097 .108 149 .151 .010 .047 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5,000,000.00 30 000 000.00 0.00 .000000 0.00 .000000 0.00 .000000 0.00 .000000 5,000,000.00 100.000000 30 000 000.00 100.000000 0.00 0 00 0.00 0.00 5,000,000.00 30,000,000.00 0.00 0-00 0.00 0.00 0.00 000 000 .000 f100 .003 .003 003 .003 .003 .003 .003 .003 US TREAS BILLS 9127955Z0 U.S. TREASURY BILL US TREAS BONDS 912828PH7 912828NX9 912828PR5 912828QZ6 912828QK9 912828PR5 U.S. TREASURY BOND U.S. TREASURY BOND US. TREASURY BOND U.S. TREASURY BOND U.S. TREASURY BOND U.S. TREASURY BOND FHLMC DISC NOTES 3133%ZQ9 FHLMC DISC NOTE 3133%ZN6 FHLMC DISC NOTE IMMO. elan FHLMC BONDS 3137EACG2 FHLMC 3134G1GQ1 FHLMC 3134G1GQ1 FHLMC 31340 GQ1 FHLMC it1GQ1 FHLMC AC LI FHLMC 1SG0 FHLMC3.5YrNc6Mo 1WT7 FHLMC 3139G1XG4 FHLMC 2YrNc6Mo 3137EACK3 FHLMC 2.2Yr 3137EACR8 FHLMC 3Yr 3137EACR8 FHLMC 3Yr 3134G1VG6 FHLMC 2Yr' 3134G2CL4 3137EACP2 3137EACL1 3134G2FT4 3134G2UP5 3134G2Y'K2 3134G2Y K2 3134G2Z14 3134G2ZN5 3137EACK3 3134G2YJ5 3134G2N81 3134G2N81 3134G2YJ5 3134G2T28 3134G2Q62 3134G2U91 3134G2T69 3134G2U42 3134G2 W 40 3134G2W40 3134G2W40 3134G2W40 3134G2W40 3137EACY3 3137EACY3 3134G2 W 99 3134G2W73 3134G2Y89 3134G2Y55 3134G22H4 3134G22H4 3134G22H4 3134G23J9 illG23M2 23M2 ACZO G3BQ2 3134G3BF6 FHLMC 3Yr FHLMC 2Yr _ FHLMC 3Yr FHLMC 2.25Yr FHLMC 5YrNc1 YrB FHLMC 2YrNc1 YrE FHLMC 2YrNc1YrE FHLMC 5YrNc3MoB FHLMC 5YrNc3MoB FFI LMC 11 Mo FH LMC 3Yr FHLMC 5YrNc6MoB FHLMC 5YrNc6MoB FHLMC 3Yr FHLMC 3YrNc6Mo6 FHLMC 2YrNc6MoB FHLMC 5YrNc6MoB FHLMC 5YrNc6MoB FHLMC 2Yr _ FH LMC 3YrNc6MoB FHLMC 3YrNc6MoB FHLMC 3YrNc6MoB FHLMC 3YrNc6MoB FHLMC 3YrNc6MoB FHLMC 3Yr FHLMC 3Yr FH LMC 5YrNc6MoB FHLMC 2YrNd YrE FHLMC 3.5YrNc1 YrB FH LMC 2YrNc6MoB FHLMC 2YrNc6IstoB FHLMC 2YrNc6MoB FHLMC 2YrNc6MoB FI-1LMC 2YrNc6MoB FHLMC 2YrNc66.4o13 FHLMC 2YrNc6MoB FH LMC 2Yr FHLMC 5YrNc1YrB FHLMC2Yr 04 O1/2012 .424 424 Nt AC . 21- 04/01/2012 .381 04 01/2012 092 .092 993 06/15/2020 .381 12:3k,- - 02/07/2013 .185 .185 '"WiEtiMiltintitiOttWit 08/31/2012 09/30/2012 01/31/2013 05/31/2013 02/28/2013 01/31/2013 07/20/2012 . 0718/2012 Pl�u" fit, 01/09/2013 08/28/2012 08/28/2012 08(28/2012 08/28/2012 10/28/2013 03/03/.2014 11/26/2012 10/29/2012 07/27/2012 02/25/2014 02/25/2014 10/30/2012 04/29/2014 11/30/2012 10/28/2013 08/13/2013 08/22/2016 09/06/2013 09/06/2013 09/06/2016 . 09/06/2036 07/27/2012 09/19/2014 09/29/2016 09/29/2016 09/19/2014 10/17/2014 10/03/2013 ' 10/13/2016 10/13/2016 10/15/2013 10/24/2014 10/24/2014 10/24/2014 10/24/2014 10/24/2014 11/25/2014 11/25/2014 10/13/2016 10/18/2013 04/24/2015 10/25/201) 11/04/2013 11/04/2013 11/04/2013 11/15/2013 11/08/2013 11/08/2013 11/27/2013 11/28/2016.. 12/23/2013 - .375 .375 .625 .500 .625 62 342 ,327 .151 .181 .176 .199 ix 54,000,000 00 50,000,000.00 54,000,000.00 100.000000 544110 1**NOO 50,000,000.00 100.000000 inttaItMASIOMPIr- 200,000,000.00 200,000,000.00 560,000.00 ilk40Q0Matk 101. 560,000.00 100.000000 100.000000 50,000,000 00 49�915 465.28 99.860447 ASSESMOIN 15,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 45,000,000 00 .160 .160 10,000,000.00 .150 150 10 000,000 00 1.375 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 .875 1.250 .515 .500 1.125 1.375 1.375 .625 1.350 375 .875 .875 1.750 .450 .450 1.000 1.125 1.125 .500 1.250 1.250 .500 .750 500 1.000 1.125 .375 .800 800 800 .800 .800 .750 .750 1.250 OO 1.000 .550 .700 .700 .700 .600 .630 .630 .375 1.375 .625 1.407 .709 .694 .732 .699 .937 1.250 .470 .500 .514 1.375 1.465 .650 1.160 .385 .790 .611 1.750 .450 .450 1.000 1.125 .203 .500 1.250 1.250 .599 .750 .520 1.010 1.156 .483 .800 .800 .800 .800 .808 .755 .761 1.250 .516 1.007 .550 .700 .700 .700 .600 .630 .630 .580 1.375 .626 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000-00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,0 30,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 14,121,00000 -11,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,0130,000.00 10,000,000.00 7,020,000.00 10,000,000-00 5,000,000-00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000-00 5,000,00000 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,00000 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 • 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,0130.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 15,006,445.31 10,006,640.63 -10,047,265.63 10,042,187.50 10,047,265.63 45168,750.00 9,985,066.67 9�986k333 33 40 9,990,300.00 5,029,450.00 10,061,850.00 10,054,100.00 5,030,400.00 4,990,300.00 5,000,000.00 5,004,700.00 5,000,000.00 10,102,700.00. 5,000,000.00.. 9,973,100.00 4,998,000.00 5,027,800.00 14,118,881.85 11,022,330.00 5,028,775.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,086,400.00 10,000,000-00 10,000,000.00 7,020,000.00 9,970,700.00 5,000,000.00 4,998,000.00 4,997,500.00 4,992,500.00 14,%7,300.00 10,000,000.00 - 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000 00 9,997,500.00 9,998,467.22 4,9913,300.00 5,000,000.00 4,998,437.50 4,998,750.00 5,000,000.00 5,030,00000 - 5,000,000.00 5,010,000.00 10,0.00,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000-00 9,958,700.00 5,000000.00 9,999,800-00 100.090000 100.130000 100.350000 100.290000 100.370000 351TNQ,U0060= -. -.ail'ft ,� - 54,000,000.00 50,000,000-00 St 4 200 000,000 00 21111OO.Og e?; 560,000.00 0.00 .003 .003 0.00 0.00 0.00 49,930,223.64 14,758.36 AftligiWiEatisoggic .003 .003 4.221 003 .003 8.214 855 .858 em ,.. 15,013,500.00 7,054.69 .418 .419 10,011,000.00 4,359.37 .500 .501 10,035,000.00-12,265.63 .831 .838 10,029,000.00-13,187.50 - 1.162 1.167 10,037,000.00 -I 0,265.63 .914 .915 100.3500130 45,157 I r.00 11 250.00 .831 .838 100.000000 100.000000 100.875000 100.343750 100.343750 100.343750 100.343750 100.812500 101.343750 100.218750 100.031250 100.312500 102.125000 102.125000 100.250000 101.906250 100.156250 100.812500 100.656250 100.593750 100.000000 100.000000 100.093750 100.125000 100.312500 99.937500 100.187500 100.187500 99.937500 -100.031250 100.000000 100.031250 100.031250 100.031250 99.625000 99.625000 99.625000 99.625000 99.625000 100.500000 100.500000 100.031250 100.031250 100.187500 100.031250 100.031250 100.031250 100,031250 100.031250 100.031250 100.031250 100.031250 100.437500 10).375000 10,087,500.00 5,017,187.50 10,034,375.00 10,034,375-00 5,017,187.50 5,040,625.00 5,067,187.50 5,010,937.50 5,001,562.50 10,031,250.00 5,106,250.00 10,212,500.00 5,012,500.00 5,095,312.50 14;143,069.06 13,089,375.00 5,032,832.50 10,059,375.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,004,687.50 10,012,500.00 10,031,250-00 9,993,750.00 10,018,750.00 7,033,162.50 9,993,750.00 5,001,562.50 5,000,000.00 5,001,562.50 5,001,562.50 15,004,687.50 9,%2,500.00 4,981,250.00 4,981,250.00 ' 4,981,250.00 9,%2,500.00 10,050,000.00 5,025,000.00 5,001,562.50 • 5,001,562.50 5,009,375.00 5,001,562.50 5,001,562.50 5,001,562.50 5,001,562.50 10,003,125.00 10,003,125.00 5,001,562.50 10,003,125.00 5,021,875.00 10,037,500.00 F - 14,933.33 .303 304 13,666.67 ,(� .298 .299 IM yy 97,200.00 -12,262.50 -27,475.00 -19,725.00 -13,212.50 50,325.00 - 67,187.50 6,237.50 1,562.50 -71,450.00 106,250.00. 239,400.00 14,500.00 67,512.50- 24,182.21 67,095.00 4,037.50 59,375-00 0.00 0.00 4,687.50 12,500.00 - 55,150.00 -6,250.130 18,750.00 13,162.50 23,050.00 1,562.50 2,000.00 4,062.50 9,062.50 37,387.50 - 37,500.00. -18,750.00- -18,750-00 -18,750.00 -35,000.00 51,532.78 26,700.00 1,562.50 3,125.00 10,625.00 1,562.50 1,562.50 1,562.50 1,562.50 3,125.00 3,125.00 1,562.50 44,425.00 21,87500 • 37,700.00 .763. .409 .409 .409 . .409 1.555 1.892 ..650 .575. .322 1.867 1.866 .580 2.033 .664 1.556 1.356 4 202 1.424 . 1.424 4.320 4.307 323 2.448 4.357 4 357 2.447 2.507 1.494 4.401 4.384 1,530 2.524 2.524 2.524 2.524 2.524 2.612 2.612 4.369 1.536 2.997 1.554 1.576 1.576 1576 1.608 1.588 1 588 1.650 4.477 1.713 .778 .411 .411 .411 .411 1.578 1.923 .658 .581 .323 1.907 1.907 .584 2.079 .668 1.578 1.370 4.397 1.436 1.436 4.438 4.438 .323 2.471 9.501 4.501 2.471 2.548 1.510 4.540 4.590 1.542 2.567 2.567 , 2.567 2.567 2.567 2.655 2.655 4.540 1.551 3.066 1.570 1.597 1.597 1.597 1.627 1.608. 1.608 1.660 4.666 1.732 RIVERISIDE COUNTY TREASURER -TAX COLLECTOR 7 46 Month End Portfolio Holdings Maturity Maturity Par Book Alarket - Market Unrealized Modified Years To CUSIP Description Date Coupon ToMat Value. Value Price "alue Gain/Loss Duration- Maturity 3134G31358 FH LMC 2YrNcl YrE 3134G3B58 FH LMC 2YrNc1YrE 3134G3BL3 FH LAIC 3YrNclYrB 3134G3BL3 FHLMC 3YrNclYrB 3134G3BL3 FH LMC 3YrNc1YrB 3134G3BL3 FHLMC 3YrNc1YrB 3134G3BL3 FHLMC 3YrNc1YrB 3134G3BA7 FHLMC 2YrNcl YrB 3134G3BL3 • FHLMC 3YrNcl YrB 3134G3010 FHLMC 3YrNcl YrB 3134G3DP2 FHLMC 3.5YrNcl YrB 3134G3EB2 FHLMC 3.5YrNc2YrE 3134G3DY3 FHLMC 3YrNcl YrB 3134G3EN6 FHLMC 3.5YrNc2YrE 3134G2U42 FHLMC 1.5Yr 3134G3GG9 FHLMC 3YrNclYr13 3134G3GZ7 FHLMC 2YrNc1YrE 3134G3H D5- FH LMC 2YrNcl YrB 3134G3H D5 FHLMC 2YrNcl YrB 3134G3H D5 FHLMC 2YrNcl YrB 3134G3H Al FH LMC 3YrNcl YrB 3134G3H Al FHLMC 3YrNcl YrB 3134G3HA1 FHLMC 3YrNcl YrB 3134G3H Al FH LMC 3YrNc1YrB 3134G3MM9 FHLMC 2YrNclYrE . 3134G3MM9 FH LMC 2YrNcl YrE 3134G3LA6 FHLMC 2Yr 3134G3LZ1 FH LMC 2YrNc1 YrB 3134G3MY3 FHLMC 3.5YrNc2YrE 3134G3MY3 FHLMC 3.5YrNc2YrE 3134G3NC0 FH LMC 3YrNc1YrB 3134G3NL0 FHLMC 3YrNc2YrE 3134G3PD6 FHLMC 3YrNc2YrE 3134G3NS5 FHLMC 2Yr 3134G3QW3 FHLMC 3YrNc2YrE 3134G3QW3 -FHLMC 3YrNc2YrE 3134G3RP7 FHLMC 3YrNc2YrE -3134G3SH4 FHLMC 5YrNc1YrB 3134G3SS0 FHLMC 2.5YrNclYrE- 3134G3QW3 FHLMC 3YrNc2YrE 3134G3SB7 FHLMC 2Yr 3134G2U42 FHLMC 19Mo 3137EADD81 FH LMC 3Yr 3134G3SB7 FHLMC 2.16Yr 3134G31X9 FHLMC 3Yr FNMA DISC NOTES 313588M85 . FNMA DISC NOTE 313589AC7 FNMA DISC NOTE FNMA BONDS 31398AV90 FNMA 3YrNc2Yr. 31398A3N0 FNMA 31398A3A8 FNMA 3136FPEL7 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 3136FPE L7 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 3136FPE L7 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 3136FPE L7 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 3136FPEL7 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 31398A3N0 FNMA 31398A3L4 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 31398A3L4 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 31398A3L4 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 31398A3L4 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 31398A3L4 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 3136FPGA9 FNMA 3YrNc2Mo 3136FPEX1 FNMA 3.25YrNc6Mo 31398A3R1 FNMA 3.5YrNc6Mo 31398AH54 FNMA 31398A4H2 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 31398A4H2 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 31398A4H2 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 31398AP71 FNMA 2.2Yr 31398AT77 FNMA 2.2Yr 31398AT77 FNMA 2.2Yr 31398A5Z1 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 31398A5Z1 FNMA 3YrNc6Mo 3136FPXX0 FNMA 4Yr 3136FPZD2 FNMA 4YrNc2Mo 3136FP6X0 FNMA 5Yr 3136FPUC9 FNMA 2Yr 3136FPUC9 FNMA 2Yr 31398A3K6 FNMA 4Yr 3136FRGK3 FNMA 3.25YrNc1YrE 31398A5W8 FNMA 3Yr 3136FPUC9 FNMA 2Yr 31398AVZ2 FNMA 5Yr • 3136FRKM4 FNMA 4.25YrNc1 YrE 31398A5Z1- FNMA 3Yr 31398A6F4 FNMA 1.75 Yr 12/06/2013 l2/06/2013 12/05/2014 12/05/2014 12/05/2014 12/05/2014 12/05/2014 12/05/2013 12/05/2014 12/19/2014 06/19/2015 06/30/2015 12/19/2014 06/30/2015 10/15/2013 01/09/2015 01/03/2014 01/24/2014 01/24/2014 01/24/2014 01/23/2015 01/23/2015 01/23/2015 01/23/2015 02/27/2014 02/27/2014 02/27/2014 02/21/2014 08/28/2015 08/28/2015 02/27/2015 02/24/2015 02/27/2015 . 03/21/2014 03/06/2015 03/06/2015 03/12/2015 03/28/2017 09/22/2014 03/06/2015 04/28/2014 10/15/2013 04/17/2015 04/28/2014 01/30/2015 11/01/2012 01/03/2013 1.050 .540 .625 .375 .375 .500 .375 .650 .140 , .190 - .700 .700 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 .700 1.000 1.000 1.020 1.000 .875 1.000 .375 .850 .500 .600 .600 .600 .875 .875 .875 .875 .400 .400 .375 . .500 .650 .650. .550 .500 .550 300 .625 .625 .700 .700 • 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 .700 1.000 1.000 1.020 1.000 .875 1.000 .400 .850 .500 .600 .600 .600 .875 :875 .875 .875 .400 .400 .394 .500 .650 .650 .567 .581 .594 .378 .625 .625 .650 .650 1.050 .540 .628 .427 323 .611 .460 .662 5,000.000 00 5,000,000_00 5,000,0(10-00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000,00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000 00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 6,500,000.00 5,003,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000-00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000130 5,000,000.00 10,000,000-00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000000.00 5,000,000.00- 5,000,000.00 5,000,000-00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 4,997,700.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,0:0,000.00 6,500,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 9,996,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 4,997,500.00 4,988,000.00 4,993,500.00 9,984,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000LO 10,000,000.00 5,030,000.00 5,000,000.00 4,999,500.00 4,994,400.00 5,004,183.00 10,000,000.00 9,966,500.00 5,000,000.00 4,991,050.00 100.031250 100.031250 100.156250 100.156250 100.156250 100.156250 100.156250 100.093750 100.156250 100.062500 100.156250 100.125000 100.093750 100.062500 100.031250 100.125000 100.125000 100.125000 100.125000 100.125000 100.000000 100.000000• 100.000000 100.000000 100.000000 100.000000 99.968750 100.000000 99.593750 99.593750 99.718750 99.593750 99.875000 99.875000 99.906250 99.906250 99.968750 99.843750 99.906250 99.906250 99,875000 100.031250 99.593750 99.875000 5,001,562.50 5,001.562.50 5,007,812.50 5,007,812.50 5,007,812.50 5,007.812.50 5,007,812.50 5,004,687.50 10,015,625.00 5,003,125.00 10,015,625.00 5,006,250.00 5,004,687.50 5,003,125.00 5,001,562.50 10,012,500.00 5,006,250.00 5,006,250.00 5,006,250.00 5,006,250.00 5,0130,000-00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000 00 6,500,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 9,996,875.00 5,000,000.00 4,979,687.50 4,979,687.50 4,985,937.50 4,979,687.50 4,993,750.00 9,987500.00 4,9)5,312.50 4,995,312.50 9,996,875.00' 4,992,387.50 4,995,312.50 4,995,312.50 4,993,750.00 5,001,562.50 9,959,375.00 4,993,750.00 5,000,000.00 4 998,250 00 99 968750 4,998,437.50 3 t y1,0400,i,1a, ;. �i,43,8?0a RIMI�1��M1Ol tl .....; Ee44,678og .140 50,000,000.00 49,935,444.44 140 50,000,00000 49 930 583.33 100,000100110 99.937500 49,968,750.00 99.875000 49,937,500.00 tailMOVO 1,562.50 1,562.50 7,812.50 7,812.50 7,812.50 7,812.50 7,812.50 4,687.50 '15,625.00 3,125.00 15,625.00 6,250.00 4,687.50 3,125.00 3,862.50 12,500.00 6,250.00 6,250.00 6,250.00 6,250.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 875.00 0.00 -20,312.50 -20,312.50 -11,562.50 -8,312.50 250.00 3,500.00 4,687.50 .4,687.50 -3,125.00 -7,812.50 -9,687.50 -4,187.50 -650.00 -2,620.50 -7,125.00 2,700.00 187.50 33,305.56 6,916.67 1.664 1.664 2.623 2.628 2.628 2.682 2.628 2.682 2.628 2.682- 1.662 1.682 2.628 2.682 2.666 2.721 3.148 3.219 3.197 3.249 2.672 2.721 3.197 3.249 1.530 1.542 2.729 - 2.778 1.744 1.762 1.800 1.819 1.800 1.819 1.800- 1.819 2.767 2-816 2.767 2.816 2.767 2.816 2.767 2.816 1.896 1.912 1.896 1.912 1.895 1.912 1.877 1.896 3.373 3.411 3.373 3.411 2.877 2.912 2.870 2.904 2.877 1.969 2.898 2.898 2.919 4.850 2.455 2 898 2.058 1.531 3.027 2.058 2. 2.797 588 .760 07/16/2013 1.300 1.317 - 5,000,000.00 4,997,500.00 100.281250 5,014,062.50 1.6,562.50 1.274 09/24/2012 ..625. .700 _ 5,000,030.00 4,992,300.00 100.250000 5,012,500.00 20,200.00 - A83 09/03/2013 1.050 1.05& 5,000,000.00 4,998,750.00 100.843750 5,042,187.50 43,43730 1.407 09/09/2013 1.050 1.050 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.812500 5,040,625.00 40,625.00 1.424 09/09/2013 - 1.050 1.050 5,000,000.00 - 5,000,000.00 10).817_500 5,040,625.00 40,625.00 - - 1.424 - 09/09/2013 1.050 1.050 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.812500' 5,040,625.00 40,625.00 1.424 09/09/2013 1..050 1.084 5,000,000.00 4,995,000.00 100.812500 5,040,625.00 45,625.00 1.423 09/09/2013 1.050 1.050 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.812500 5,040,625.00 40,625.00 1.424 09/24/2012 .625 .704 5,003,000.00 4,992,000.00 100.250000 5,012,500.00 20,500.00 .483 09/17/2013 1.125 1.132 5,000,000.00 4,999,000.00 101.031250 5,051,562.50 52,562.50 1.445 09/17/2013 1.125 1.125 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 101.031250 10,103,125.00 103,125.00 1.445 09/17/2013 1.125 1.125 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 101.031250 5,051,562.50 51,562.50 1.445 09/17/2013 1.125 1.125 5,000,000.00 ,5,000,000.00 101.031250 5,051,562.50 51,562.50 1.445 09/17/2013 1.125 1.125 5,000,000.W 5,000,000.00 101.031250 5,051,562.50 51,562.50 1.445 09/20/2013 1.000 1.017 5,000,000.00 4,997,500.00 100.062500 5,003,125.00 5625.00 1.455 - 12/17/2013 1:125 1.141 5,000,000.00 4,997,500.00 101.125000-5,056,250.00 58,750130 1-685 03/21/2014 1.350 1.350 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 101.468750 5,073,437.50 73,437.50 1.939 04/04/2012 1.000 110 10,000,000.00 10,088,900.00 100.000000 10,000,000.00 88,903.00 - .011 10/08/2013 - 1.125 1.125 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 101.187500 5,059,375.00 59,375.00 1.494. 10/08/2013 1.125 1.125 5,000,000.00 - 5;0130,0130.00 101.187500 - 5,059,375.00 59,375.00 1A94 10/08/2013 1.125 1.125 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 101.187500 5,059,375.00 59,375.00 1.494 06/22/2012 1.250 .. .348 - 10,000000.00 - 10,145;800.00 ' 100.250000 10,025,000.00 120,800M .227 07/30/2012 1.125 .403 10,000000.00 10,124,000.00 100.312500 - 10,031,250.00-92,750.00 .331 07/30/2012 1..125 .458 10,000,000.00 10114,300.00 100.312500 10,031,250.00.-83,050.00 .331 11/19/2013 . .800 .800 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 100.531250 10,053,12500 53,125.00 1.615 11/19/2013 .800 .800 - 5,000,000.00. 5,000,000.00 100.531750 5,026,562.50 26,562.50 1.615 11/26/2014 1.050 1.050 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 100.500000 10,050,000.00 50,000.00 2.600 12/03/2034 1.125 1.125 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 100.500000 10,050,000.00 50,000.00 2.616 02/04/2016 .561 .586 10,000,000.00 9,990,000.00 100.312500 10,031,250.00 41,250.00 3.810 10/30/2012 .500 .550 15,000,000.00 14,988,000.00 100.125000 15,018,750.00 30,750.00 .580 10/30/2012 .500 .557 10,000,000.00 9,991,000.00 100.125000 10,012,500.00 21,500.00 .580 03/14/2014 1.250 1.278. 5,000,000130 4,996,000.00 101,625000 5,081,250.00 • 85,250.00 1.922 07/25/2014 1.700 11700 5,000,000.00 - 5,000,000.00 100,093750 5,004,687.50 4,68750 2.256 12/18/2013 .750 1.194 5,000,000.00 - 4,941,950.00 1(0.687500 5,034,375.00 92,425.00 1.693 10/30/2012 .500 .473 5,000,000.00 5,002000.00 100.125000. 5,006,7_50.00 4,250.00 .581 03/13/2014 2.750 1.128 10,000,000-00 10,45-1,500.00 104781250 - - - 10,478,125.00 23,625.00 1.900 08/24/2015 2.000 2.000 5,000,000.00 5,0130,0130.00 100.21.8750 - 5,010,937.50 10,937.50 3.262 11/19/2013 $00 .870 5,000,000.00 - 4,991,250.00 100.531250 5,026,562.50 35,312.50 1.614 12/28/2012. - 375 .349 5,000,000.00 5,002,000.00 . 100.156250 5,007,812.50 '5,812.50 .739 1.685 1. 2. 2.912 1.973 2932 2932 2.948 4.995 2479 2.932 2.077 1.542 3.047 589 762 1.293 .485 1.427- 1.444 1.444 1.444 1.444 1.444 .485 1.466 1.466 1.466 1.466 1.466 1.474 1.715 1.973 .011 1-523 1.523 1.523 .227 .332 .332 1.638 1.639 2.658 2.677 3.849 .584 • .584 1-953 2.318 1.718 15 1 1. 745 RIVERISIDE COUNTY TREASURER -TAX COLLECTOR 47 8 Nvoivoi�lNn��r; �Q a� za$Mv$$e<8ve�Nv^iM.^D'$.ND�.ND.NDND.ND$N•D•.'^o,�F:$ •F, ^ N tl1 M M P P P P N n •lV •lV N '- e- N N N v N C • m C S< CI N C N N N .- ^ r- a a C? C C l^! N eV � N (V n • n n n n. •i- C! •Ci d� n n n n n n 0T7 '4 7 E pm M P Lf aN. N E g M N Np pNp V1 r. � m �1 T M Mil M s s C C a R N VM1 § R O LG b b n 5 .MO .Mo K. °6 C i g i i 4$ C R n.sb b� R n R i i .D n n .O y W ^W d g; 8 l 00 ' N FI N (+1 N o�S PLOT to M a Ma M V� ^ ,- fV [V '- ry N V lV < el lV < fV N N^^ '- a C R a< C N fJ C! r CJ N .� �- n n n n .� N N a' n n n n n a o N N N N N N .. n n ✓188O Y1 OO a 8808 R 8 OOOa R888.88888 p V88� 8.8888 8888888o88$RP,888$8�5iNOOERORE F,,OO�llR 8 pip RO QF?RO8OO ROOD OR yo$ �F,, R8y8 y8 y8� O.9R000.80O8pR pPp �t8N R O8O R GO �( M O M pF. a n N F .N- O M M^ O N Gp NN N CND- M M 8 N Of m M v Of v d S A P aND- N A N O ill ill A 0- `.° M� O M 2 d N O N aD .N- N N'* N O A N N N N ^ d8 N- M ill " O 2 O N Y�f Q� ' m q n ? V O O e O o rri cri Ki Nl ^ P e N e rN- N oD Nl n P P N cri W O Ol N P N N N.•+ O nV M .- .= .. n. .� nNl- Al nN- Q� V ^ Ol O O F. .O N. l�l l�l l+: lry r•+ d '+ '+ .O N rr Al v O m M S N M CD Vl .� O Ol Al .98888288N88$8$2888988188'18888"8888888888888N�8888888N�88�N�p88828RR8RN888R888.8�8598888854F1088888882.1pBQ�88R C^i O O O. .NO M P O f O M .ND .ND M0 No Nn O O O O M M O OQ m O O oNo- O tq h V1 r+ b O M O O o^0 .N- .N- u�'1 N N y�-� r O rvW CNO M Vt M O C=D O 1� O CND` d BsNosNs§sogaggagsssss§§??oa§ggs88os.00��os 888888s 8 88o88§so8a8888888^88gSgS88§8t18ogse<g88g88 Jl OO OO �/t N i!'i N O G N N N u-i V1 N V1 Vl p V1 N V1 V1 a C O N N u-i O O V1 N O VI ^ OO. O O N N O O N N u-i u-i OO u'i i!'i O i!'i V1 O V1 V1 ill ^ O N vl N N Vi V1 O J1 N V1 OO O N N N a? O u-i O V1 R N T N R< u'i N R$ R88�8"9888"9888R?�888'88888 888 m�E,?Jl OONo888$,888888EEEEIEE88F,88F$,��Q$8�8EL288� ,D � 5? � .+ N 4 O uuuuuN"''''''��11 � N ��(( ��(( 8888888888888888888888&&8888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888&&888888&8&&88 8888888°8888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888 M8Ns8888a8888§ M g§8 88oaa§888M88888888a8888§888888§§§§8888888$8888$8§88§§§88M888888 N P O� N Jl N .li O O N N N N N Q N Q F, < N N a N vl O N N N O O C N O Q N O O O N ill O O N N N ill ill N O N N O N N O ul N N N O N N vl N u'i N O ill N ul O O ul N N Vi ill N O Vi O Vl Q N O N N J1 i!'i V1 $88$$$$8$8.8.8$$$$$$$$$$$88$$$88888888888.$ $$$$$8888888888.$ 8.88.$$$.888$$$$$$8888$8888888$$$$$ §gg§§§§§§§§§§§8§§1§§§§§§§§§§H§§§§g8§k§§§§§§§§§g8§§g§gg§§§§§g§§§§§ §§ M§ §§§§§§§§§k §§§§ 8888888gg8888888888888888888888888g88888g88888888888888888888888888888888888888888e<888888 ✓t O O Vl N V1 �l1 O O N N N N N ul ul vl < V1 V1 N V1 N vl O N N, u-i O O u"i N O N^ O OO O V1, �l1 O O N N N N N �/1 O i!'i N O u'i ^ O N Vi ill ^ O N N �/1 N O N i!'i N OO O N N N v1 V1 u1 OO u-i O N C N O V1 V1 V1 N N 0 8 " 4 288"885? 2R em$ M2P N 8 r N �^nss^ n��.... ������^^�8 �n��8 8 ^BNnn nnn a n n � .O .G n n� � d���� aD M n n 88g8ns8�eM§H "§oE$,5,1Eaa8m888��� 8§88§ i§§IIM�.���§���§�§§§H§§ �M§E§F4�������8���8M, N a M .D a .D N .D .D .D .D a. a s .D b .D .D .D .D a a a M a a M M a a .D M M M M M M .D a M M' M M .D .D .D a a a .O M N N N M M N N N M a M M a M M a a a N a M M M M M M M M a M M a N O O On ,9N N Mi-. O N N N N a M N ra- g N N N N O N O O N N N N N 0 0 0 0 7 N N N P O N N N N N N N N N O O O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N n 0 0 0 0^^ 8 N O M \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ON N N \ N 0 0 0\ 0 0 0 O O n n n n n n n\\ n n ^. n N N n n n n n r- \ N. N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 880000�$$$�8\`S8o88a'a'88` o �S\`a' ^000b'b'b^S"b"b' T m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m - m w w w w w w m m m m0 m m m m m m mmm m- m m m m ar w w r w w w w m w.m m m m m w o 0 o m o 0 0 0 o m m.m m o w o m m o o o m o 0 o m o 0 0�0 0 o m m o w o 0 0 0 o m m m w w o 0 0 0 o m o o m m w o mmm o =^ i-,,t, i;t:> � 222 r222222i,wit�=2r�rr272r222 LrM222i:i:2>:22' 'LLLL^rrrr22222i22ir^`r`Li^rn2 n ... .O .O .O .O .O r+ n n � n .- .O .G n .O .D .D .D •- •- N .D .O .O .O .O .D •- •- N N .D .D n .D n .y n .D Z N Z Z N Z Z Z Z Z Z Z o Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z - Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z'Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z r>•>->-, rrrrrnrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr>-rr>-rrrrrrrrrrrrr M N N M n M M M, M n N N M M. M F N N N N N M M M N M M N N N N M M N N N N N N N M N M N N N N N N N M M M M N M M M N N N M Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q .* Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q¢¢ Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q¢ Q¢¢ Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q¢ Q Q¢ Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q¢ Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 L 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 zzzzzzzzz4zzLLzzyzzzzzzz4LL4zzzzzzzzzzzzEZEz4z4zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzLLzz4z4zzzzzzzzz LL LL LL LL LL LL' la. LL LL LL LL LLL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL 4 LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL L� LL LL LL LL L� L� 4 LL LL LL LL L� LL L� L� L� {i N M r- .D •D P O N n N � N N N N N N M '- N 0 0 N ry P P N p a Z� K X N� a� (O(��' �>�)) ((>�� ��Z)) � Q `D jam` ` ,� 'pD Q Z y�j � H p Z C C> o� o� s X "' 2 0' H Q { may 2 Q Q Q in LL 3� } a N Q Q QuutgggQ Q Q F- =_ LL � Uj LL� j �wj LL ( V7 (lJ7 (a7 l7 a S d 2 2 I;� ii C K ii 3 I,�- � �ND `l�• m 'O p X X m m N U Y O 6 0 6 y ig� H Ul N g � l J a U cIL w w w 4 ,i LL LL LL LL LL LL ii g Q' g g g 2 2 i5 i5 i5 6 O O - VI H �� .> N N m X N N= O O O t[ Q C, Q LL O� Q� u C C . 0 0. 6 O 'O LL C O O o O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O uuuLL8LLLLl4uNuu uLLmLL LLLL mm uuu� LLLLAAAB`mA `mAPA uAAP.mA `mmmAAuuuuuuumu AAA AAuNAAAAAAA AA .D ,O .O TA N m .D m d .D .D � N N N ,O .D .D .D AAA �+N1 N .D .O � N AAA.D .D N .O m N M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M MM M M M. M M M M M M M M M t� M M M F, M M M M M CN^, m M Ml M M M M F, M M M M F, M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M n', M M M M M • M M M M to MMM M M F. M M M M M MMM M MMM M M F, M F, M MMMM MMM RNERISIDE COUNTY TREASURER -TAX COLLECTOR Month End Portfolio Holdings Maturity Maturity Par Book Market Market Unrealized Modified Years To CUSIP Description Date Coupon To Mat Value Value Price Value Gain/Loss Duration Maturity 3136FT2K4 FNMA 5YrNc1YrB 3136FT2K4 FNMA 5YrNcl YrB 3135GOJG0 FNMA 3YrNcl YrB 3135G0HG1 FNMA 3Yr 3135GOBR3 FNMA 1.4Yr 3135G0p3 FNMA 3YrNcl YrB FHLB D1SC NOTES 31338,4 ZN2 FH LB DISC NOTE. 313389C80 FHLB DISC NOTE 313384D71 FHLB DISC NOTE 313384F61 FHLB DISC NOTE 313389 M71 FH LB DISC NOTE 313385BD7 FHLB DISC NOTE FHLB BONDS 03/20/2017 03/20/2017 03/13/ 2015 03/16/2015 08/09/2013 03/26/2015 1.100 1.104 5,000,000.00 1.100 1.100 4,400,00000 .700 700 5,000,00000 375 .550 5,000,000.00 .500 330 5,000,000.00 .700 .725 5,000,000.00 4,996250.00 .844 .898;850r0,0,0.00 - 899,788,64058. 4,999,000 00 4,400,000.00 5,000,000.00 4,97 3,800-00 5,011,850.00 100.062500 5,003,125.00 4,125.00 4.822 100.093750 5,004,687 50 4,687.50 4.842 4. 100.093750 S,W4,637.SU 4,637.50 2.914 2 99.250000 4,962,500.00-11,300.00 2.936 2. 100.250000 5,012,500.00. 650.00 1.350 1.35 100.375000 5,018,750.00 22,500.00 2.949 2.986 100,307513 ,901,614117657 ; -1;825 35, 99 2314 , 4.973 07/18/2012 .160 .160 10,000,000.00 9,985,15556 99.985000 9,998,50000 13,34444 .298 .299 08/21/2012 .200 200 30,000,000.00 29,939,500.00 99.976333 29,992,900.00 53,400.00 391 .392 08/28/2012 170 .170 20,000,000.00 19,965,716.66 99.975167 19,995,03333 29,316-67 410 411. 09/12/2012 .170 .170 10,000,000.00 9,982,811.11 99.963556 9,996,355.56 13,544.45 451 .452 10/31/2012 .170 .170 50,000,000-00 49,914,291.67 99.940833 49,970,416.67 56,125.00 .585 .586 01/28/2013 140 .140 25,000,000.00 24,964,805.56 99.875000 24,968,750.00 3,944.44 .828 .830 145,000,000..00 144,752,280.56, 9%946176, 144,927955.56,E ,, 1656751 ' ." „'.53.4 .555; 3133XVNT4 FHLB 3Yr 12/14/2012 1.750 1.612 5,000,000.00 5,020,050.00 101.062500 5,053,125.00 33,075.00 .693 .707 3133XWKU2 FHLB 2,5Yr 06/08/2012 1.375 1.212 5,000,000,00 5,017,100.00 100.218750 5,010,937.50-6,162.50 .188 .189 3133XXTU1 FH LB 2.25Yr 07/12/2012 1.260 1,260 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.312500 5,015,625.00 15,625.00 .280 .282 3133XYHD0 FHLB 06/14/2013 1.625 1.198 15,000,000.00 15,185,100.00 101.625000-15,243,750.00 58,650.00 - 1.184 1.205 3133702E7 FHLB 04/02/2012 .750 750 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.000000 5,000,000.00 0.00 .005 .005 313370TA6 FH LB 3Yr 08/28/2013 .875 .851 5,0)0,000.00 5,003,500.00 100.781250 5,1139,062.50 35,562.50 1.396 1.411 313370T B4 FH LB 3Yr 07/29/2013 .850 .840 5,000,000.00 5,001,442.61 100.718750 5,035,93750 34,494.89 1316 1.329 3133XWKU2 FHLB 2Yr 06/08/2012 1.375 .642 10,000,000.00 10,126,900.00 100.218750 10,021,875.00-105,025.00 .138 .189 3133XXPV3 FH LB 2.2Yr 05/18/2012 1.125 459 10,000,000.00 10,108,600.00 100.125000 I0,012,500.00-96,100.00 .131 .132 3133XX PV3 FH LB 2.2Yr 05/18/2012 1.125 .453 10,000,000.00 10,109,600.00 100.125000 10,012,500.00-97,100.00 .131 .132 3133XWKU2 FHLB 2Yr 06/08/2012 1.375 .370 5,000,000.00 5,081,600.00 100.218750 -5,010,937.50-70,662.50. .189 .189 3133XXPV3 FH LB 2.2Yr 05/18/2012 1.125 .342 10,000,000.00 10,119,200.00 100.125000 10,012,500.00-106,700.00 .131 .132 313371 PM2 FH LB 2.6Yr 06/26/2013 .500 .590 10,001,000.00 9,976,500.00 100.250000 10,025,000.00 48,500.00 1.229 1.238 3133XX PV3 FH LB 2.2Yr 05/18/2012 1.125 .445 20,000,000.00 20,206,000.00 100.125000 20,025,000.00-181,000.00 .131 .132 313371 UC8 FH LB 3.2Yr 12/27/2013 ..875 .934 10,000,000.00 9,982,000.00 101.093750 10,109,37500 127,375.00 1.718 1.742 3133XX PV3 FH LB 2.2Yr 05/18/2012 1.125 .485 10,000,000.00 10,095,500.00 100.125000 10,012,500.00.-83,000.00 .131 .132 313372KE3 FH LB 4Yr 02/04/2015 .471 .471 15,000,000_00 15,000,000.00 100.312500 15,046,875.00 46,875.00 2.828 2.899 3133XYVC6 FH LB 5Yr 06/18/2015 .974 .408 5,000,000.00 5,091,325.00 101.593750 5,079,687.50-11,637.50 3.172 3.216 3133XWKV0 FH LB 3Yr - 03/14/2014 2.375 1.404 5,000,000.00 5,140,200.00 103.843750 5,192,187.50 51,987.50 1.905 1.953 3133736HO FH LB 2.5Yr 09/26/2013 1.000 1.000 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.968750 5,048,437.50 413,437.50 1.471 1.490 313373A51 FH LB 3Yr 04/29/2014 1.350 .1.350 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 101.875000 10,187,500.00 187,500.00 2.031 2.079 3133XWBW8 FH LB 2.5Yr. 05/15/2052 1.210 .422 5,000,000.00 5,044,075.00 100.125000 5,006,250.00-37,825.00 .123 .123 313373CZ3 FH LB 3Yr 05/27/2014 1.500 1.500 - 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 102.218750 5,110,937.50 110,937.50 2.103 2.156 313373F98 FH LB 2.25Yr. 08/15/2013 1.000 1.000 7,500,000.00 7,500,000.00 100.937500 7,570,312.50 70,312.50 1.358 1.375 313373JR4. FH LB 3Yr 05/28/2014 1.375 1.419 10,000,000.00 9,986,700.00 102.125000 10,212,500.00 225,800.00 2.109 2159 313373RC8 FH LB 3.25Yr 07/30/2014 1.250 1.250 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 101.687500 5,084,375.00 89,375.00 2.285 - 2.332 313373Y22 FHLB 1Yr 05/23/2012 .250 250 35,000,000.00 35,000,000.00 100.000000 35,000,000.00 0.00 .145 .145 313373Y22 FH LB 1Yr. 05/23/2012 .250 .230 10,000,000.00 10,001,985.40 100.000000 10,000,000.00-1,985.40 .145 313374285 FH LB 1Yr 05/29/2012 .230 .230 20,000,000-00 20,000,000.00 100.000000 20,000,000.00 0.00 ,161 313373537 FH LB 2.25Yr 08/28/2013 750 .671 5,000,000.00 5,008,850.00 100.593750 5,029,687.50 20,837.50 1.398 1. 313373Y22 FH LB 1Yr 05/23/2012 250 .234 5,000,000.00 5,000,800.00 100.000000 5,000,000.00-800.00 .145 .14 313373Y22 FH LB 1Yr 05/23/2012 .250 .203 13,810,000.00 13,816,07640 100.000000 13,810,000.00-6,076.40 .145 .145 3133XXPV3 FH LB 1Yr 05/18/2012 1.125 .213 7,000,000.00 7,058,783.69 100.125000 7,008,750.00-50,033.69 131 .132 313374 EY2 FH LB 1Yr 06/20/2012 .250 .250 10,000,000.00 ' 10,000,000.00- 100.031250 10,003,125.00 3,125.00 .221 .222 313374EY2 FHLB 1Yr 06/20/2012 .250 .250 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 100.031250 10,003,125.00. 3,125.00 .221 .222 313374EY2 FHLB 1Yr 06/20/2012 250 -.250 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 100.03.1250 10,003,125.00 3,125.00 - .221 .222 313374EY2 FH LB 1Yr 06/20/2012 .250 .250 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 100.031250 10,003,125.00 3,125.00 .221 .222 313374 EY2 FH LB 1Yr .06/20/2012 .250 .250' 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 100.031250 10,003,125.00 3,125.00 .221 .222 3133747C8 FH LB 3YrNc1 YrE 06/20/2014 1.000 1.000 5,990,000.00 5,990,000.00 100.125000 5,997,487.50 7,487.50 2.184 2.222 313374 EV8 FH LB 2YrNc1 YrB 06/28/2013 600 .600 5,000,000.00 5,000,000_00 100.062500 5,003,125.00 3,125.00 1.233 1.244 313374FU9 FHLB 3Yr 07/07/2014 .910 .910 10,000,000.00 10,000,0)0.00 100.937500 10,093,750.00 93,750.00 2.234 2.268 313374KV1 FHLB 1YrNc3MoB 07/25/2012 .350 .360 5,000,000.00 4,999,500.00 100.000080 5,003,00000 500.00 - .317 .318 313374 N63 FH LB 2Yr 05/30/2013 .500 .500 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 100.250000 10,025,000.00 25,000.00 1158 1.164. 313374L81 FH LB 1Yr 07/06/2012 .270 .270 10,000,000.00 10,0o0,o00.00 100.031250 10,003,125.00 3,125.00 .265 .266 313374L81 FHLB 1Yr 07/06/2012 .270 .270 5,000,000.00 5,000,000,00 100.031250 5,001,562.50 1,562.50. .265 .266 3133XXPV3 FH LB 1Yr - 05/18/2012 1125 .223 5,000,000.00 5,038,900.00 100.125000 5,006,250.00-32,650.00 .131 .132 3133XXPV3 FHLB 1Yr 05/18/2012 1.125 .214 10,000,000.00 10,078,600.00 100.125000 10,012,500.00-66,100.00 .131 .132 3133745V3 FH LB 1Yr 07/30/2012 .250 .255. 5,000,000.00 4,999,750.00 100.031250 5,001,56250 1,812.50 .331 332 3133745U5 FHLB 1YrNc3MoB 08/10/2012 .350 .350 1,875,000.00 1,875,000.00 100.031250 1,375,585.94 - 585.94 .361 .362 3133745V3 FHLB 1Yr - 07/30/2012 .250 .250 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 100.031250 10,003,125.00 3,125.00 .331 - .332 3133745V3 FH LB 1Yr 07/30/2012 .250 .264 5,000,000.00 4,99,3,274.10 - 100.03)250 5,001,562.50 2,288.40 .331 .332 3133745U5 FH LB 1YrNc3MoB 08/10/2012 .350 .350 625,000.00 625,000.00 100.031250 625,195.31 195.31 .361 362 3133745U5 FHLB 1YrNc3MoB 08/10/2012 .350 .350 1,250,000.00 1,250,000.00 100.031250 1,250,390.63 390.63 .361 .362 313374YB0 FHLB 1Yr 07/25/2012 250 .274 10,000,000.00 9,997,573.00 100.031250 10;003,125.00 5,552.00 .317 .318 313374 Y61 FHLB 2Yr 08/28/2013 .500 .567 10,000,000.00 . 9,986,100.00 100.250000 -10,025,000.00 38,900.00 1.401 , 1.411 3133XYW B7 FH LB 1.75Yr 08/22/2012 .875 .311 10,000,000.00 10,059,900.00 - 100.281250 10,028,125.00-31,775.00 .394 - .395 3133755F0 FH LB 1Yr 07/30/2012 250 .304 20,000,000.00 19,989,319.60 100.031250 20,006,250.00 16,930.40 .331 332 3133756E2 FHLB 1Yr 08/24/2012 .310 310 20,000,000.00 - 20,000,000.00 100.062500 20,012,500.00 12,500.00 .399 400 3133756E2 FH LB 1Yr - 08/24/2012 .310 .259 16,700,000.00 16,708,491.95 100.062500 16,710,437.50 1,945.55 .399.400 313375A HO FH LB 1Yr 08/08/2012 .125 .241 9,000,000.00 8,989,650.00 100,000000 - 9,000,000-00 10,350.00 355 .356 313375BG1 FH LB 9Mo ' 05/11/2012 .200 .223 - 15,000,000.00 14,997,396.00 100.000000 15,000,000.00 2,609.00 .112 112 313375BN6 FHLB 1Yr 08/16/2012 200 .200 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 100.031250 10,003,125.00 3,125.00 377 .378 313374UA6 FHLB 11Mo 07/16/2012 .260 .183 5,040,000.00 5,043,528.00 100.031250 5,041,575.00-1,953.00 293 293 313375C62 FH LB 9Mo 05/15/2012 .130 .172 25,000,000.00 24,992,250.00 100.000000 25,000,000.00 7,750.00 .123 .123 313375FN2 FH LB 1Yr 09/14/2012 .240 .240 30,000,000.00 30,000,000.00 100.031250 30,009,375.00 9,375.00. .457 .458 313375EU7 FH LB 113Mo 06/07/2012 .160 .203 28,000,000.00 27,990,480.00 100.000000 28,000,000.00 9,520.00 .186 .186 313375K R7 FH LB 9Mo 06/07/2012 .150 .188 5,000,000.00 4,998,586.70 100.000000 5,000,000.00 • 1,413.30 186 .1136 313374VY3 FH LB 1.5Yr 01/29/2013 .375 .250 5,000,000.00 5,008,800.00 100.125000. 5,006,250.00-2,550.00 .826 .833 313375KR7 FH LB 9Mo 06/07/2012 .150 .193 10,000,000.00 9,996,8130.00 100.000080 10,000,000.00 3,200.00 .186 .186 313375C70 FHLB 1Yr 08/22/2012 .160 .203 10,000,000-00 9,995,800.00 100.000080 10,000,000.00 4,200.00 :394 010 313375M53 FH LB 1.5YrNc3MoB 03/27/2013. .375 .392 10,0)0,000.00 9,997,500.00 100-000000 10,000,000-00 2,500.00 .986 313375RP4 FH LB 1Yr 09/19/2012 .125 .215 5,000,000.00 4,995,500.00 100:000000 5,000,000.00 4,500.00 .470 313375 UB7_ FH LB 1YrNc3MoB 10/19/2012 .340 340 25,001,000.00 25,000,000.00 100.000000 25,000,000.00 0.00 .548 313374VY3 FH LB 1.2Yr 01/29/2013 '.375 .315 20,001,000.00 20,015,866.20 100.125000 20,025,000.00. 9,133.80 .826 .833 RIVERISIDE COUNTY TREASURER -TAX COLLECTOR 49 10 Month End Portfolio Holdi FA' O h Km O N O O O OP ',° P N O OT O 2 O 1 0 0 0 N n^ N n � O cT� T°? rn T aa} 'eG V o N N Q^ o o N N rn N T rn m m m N s; pp M p O P 7 N N N N N O V 7 h. O+ T O 8 N v O O, N D` 00 O 8 � °� N S �O n •q a .- N `r1' n `r1'. ° N `r1' �. �. i:. m ,N- is i:, is is ry m r., c ; 2S ry m oo ry o ao m �9i, ao ao � RR8888R8R8, 88888R8R8RR8RR888888.8881888QPR8.8R8888&3R88888R8R8888.88888,2888888�R8RRRRR4R88g a oul,o,mm,N e $,�80 . ^�� �8m o n o o� �� �� m� om o ���mmM �8 ��B�T �8s m mvaoc��a° agva°o m n m .O m T N to <- Ki m m [A e e -N N RR8888R8R8R8R88888R8R8RR8RR88,8888888,88888RR8,8,R88888PR88888R8R8,888888,88$88888,88R8RRRRR8R88R r°' �$R8 .° 8� ,N 888MN`�� N „io „i vi N o 00 �,nN�nNN '. o m8 N '< Nub^mm8�88m�o88o88888��8�8� 8 8�8m88a8�8nn88��M. a e�� �88OO8�88888888O88O8OOil8Oo8i88s888888888OO88O88888ml88go808O888888O8888"s88888gggggggg&8�� r. eo 0 oo,n eeeo 00 0 o,n ,n o,ri,rio,n,ri o,no o,n +io eF: 00 e0L4 i oone2. 000.e,I ao N ooe,,f o00 e o.vi o00 o eo a 00o a'a>v'a'v a'a'a'T ri o: T „0o8o0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 88gS�RR8R 8 8 RR R8� R gR R g8 g I g8R8 88 LZ `M^8^^ m�m� �� r� N�8M��mm8�^8��8m8M8�8� �mN�e��N�MN 8e82e 88888 8m8�,8doom8'S^'8o S^', 3= 888 S 8888 E E ..S o ..O"d^.oO8O"'^b'.8O888 ,8 �o n§US 1Vgg � 888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888R"" " " 8RR 88.88.88.8888,828,8.8888888888,8,88888888888. 8,883R888888882P,888888888888,8$8.888,m888.888,$88,8,8888�888� `'888R8888R8488888888888888888888e888.888i6�`R88`R`RR88��a8°�`888��8888888�8:8$8888;8&888��°''RS8M &8&8Hl ri i8i8Vi88i888888888818Fi8W8fi8ssF8s8HM88N8fg888�8888888&88888888g8&888hg88 g t..ei O e O P e ,n ,. vi P O D, D, O ,n vi O ,n v) O e e O u'i O e u'i R O O D e O e e P .O N c oC e e e O vt .O O OO ,/t O O N O e O e 0 0 v1 O ,/1 0 0 0 e N T. vt N N T T v1 N e T 888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888 888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888 Rggggggggggggggggggggggg8g8g8gggg8ggggggggggggggggg88888888888888888888888888888888888888 ;.e0000eee,,;g 000e�;o�, ^o�;oo, �000000eo��;ooe.6F., eg 000eoe0000eoe0000eeeeeeeee,,ioe OoRa,r, n0ROoOOO^,84e'8OoO4OO,n,nO,nOB4n°'P.8n48°"'me�N44Lgr8882R82 RR44,o 0 0 do rn m ,/1 Q O O O O O O O O O O O O u'� u� O N O ,n O ,n O O O O O O O O 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O R 8 ^^8N^ ^8 ^888&� 8T T. : N m T m M m M T m m N N. N^ N N n V� m, o,, ry [v T. N m n m m n m n rn m n n m rn rn N K N N N N N rry T N N T T m T m T K K- m m K m N K m m m m m m m m N N N K K K N N m N m N N m m N K N m K m m m m m m m T m m m m m mm n n C O C G O O O O O O O O O O O C O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O . O.pp .P.pp p Np�� Q�Q�� ^ N O p Np�� aNa N� O NONN p Oppp 8 0 0 0 8 0 0 0^ 7-^ \ ^ O O 8 O^ O 8 8 8 8 O 8 8 O O 8 0 0 0 O O 8 O O 8 8 8 8 O 8 O 8 r. 8 8 8 O O 8 8 O 8 O 8 O 8 8 8 O O 8 8 O 8 0 0 0 O O 8 O 8 8 8 O 8 g 8 O CO W W m m m CO W Lcl CO m d co ° CO ° m m° CO CO m m O W W O ° O G O O O O O L p O O O O O O 2 O O 2 P L< 755 LO m Z m .D m m L m m ,577,5 Z T, .°LO 2 Z L Z ` Z Z Z Z Z Z Z N ", Z o 0 0 o z o o o ,-Lneeeeeeeeer,,,,eeHe .-- _ __ .r__ .r^_ .^,r^`re__ .%r`,nr` . imm_ .r^`.%%,nr.`n.nN_m_%. D P mcommcommmmcommmmmmmmmoommmmoommmmmmcommmmmmmcommmmmmeommmmoommmcommmeommmcommmeommcommeommmcommcommeommmcomm xxxxxiiJ J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J) J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J LL LL LL LL LL LL L=i I=i LL LL LL LL LL LL = = I=LL = L=t 4 t=i. _ = W LL = _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ [t I=i [t [=i I=i [t [=i [t = _ _ [=i [=i [t [t [=i [Ti 4 [t [=i LL 4 [t = I=i L [=i I=i = LL 4 L=i = I=i I=i I=i [=i I=i LL L=i = I=i = I=i [=i I=i I=i = = I=i I=i I=i LL L=i ..� LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL C,. LL LL LL LL LL LL O O m ,nc'""'SU ^o �� Cm V e � � ��88 � c �mm�mYp �Dwmm� �r"HH'"'QmCmm}F, 3 %<uc0_ ", r: r: '. `" " 1°r: n n n nn D Nn nn r t`n nt 222n n n 2n 2r: nN Nnn i22222hRh Dn n �'rm� rmn 'rmn cmnm of rmnmmcmn rmn m mmrn cmn mcmn cmn cmnM mcmn `22222 222 2222222m mmmK,m K,m K,mm mmmmKm i m c^nm r,m c^nrn r^nm m mr^n �rnmm m c^n rn 7n Mr;mmm mm m T, P.,, m m mr•=, rn c,m mM; mr•=,mmmmr+ m K, mr+ r^n RIVERISIDE COUNTY TREASURER -TAX COLLECTOR Month End Portfolio Holdings Maturity Maturity Par Book Markel Market Unrealized Modified Years To . CUSI' Description Date Coupon To Mat Value Value Price Value , Gain/Loss Duration Maturity 313373464 FHLB 1Yr 02/08/2013 .170 .170 5,000.00000 5,000,000.00 99-968750 4,998,437.50 3133784 A6 FH LB 3YrNcl MoB 02/27/2015 .600 .600 5,000,00000 5,000,000.00 99.812500 4,990,625.00 313376UY9 FH LB 1.5Yr - 08/05/2013 .250 .250 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 99.906250-4,995,312..50 3133784F5 FH LB 5YrNcl A4oB 02/28/2017 1.000 1.000 3,500,000.00 3,500,000.00 99.593750 3,485,781.25 3133784F5 FH LB 51'rNc1 A1oB 02/28/2017 1.000 1.000 6,50(7,00000 6,500,000.00 99.593750 6,973,593.75 3133784T5 FHLB 1.5Yr 08/09/2013 .250 .250 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 99.906250 4,995,312.50 313376VB8 FH LB 1.5Yr 07/30/2013 .250 .266 5,000,000.09 4,9'48,809.00 99.937500 4,996,875.00 3133784 N8 FH LB 1.5YrNc3kloB 03/08/2013 .200 .200 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 99.968750 4,998,437.50 3133784 kl0 FH LB'I.5YrNcl Mob 03/08/2013 .210 .210 - 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 99.968750 4,998,437.50 313378957 FHLB 1Yr 02/11/2013 .170 .170 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 99-937500 4,996,875.00 313376Y P4 FH LB 5YrNcl ktoB 02/27/2017 1.000 1.000 5,500,000.00 5,500,000.00 99.281250 5,960,468.75 31337841'9 FHLB 5YrNc1MoB 02/28/2017 1.000 1.000 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 99.531250 . 4,976,562.50- 313378AC5 FH LB 3Yr 05/22/2015 .509 .500 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 99.343750 4,967,187.50 313378A50 FH LB 5YrNcl kloB 02/28/2017 1.000 1.000 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 99.468750 9,946,875.00 313378CE9 FH LB 1.2Yr 05/07/2013 .260 .260 15,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 100.000000 15,000,000.00 313378659 FH LB 1Yr 02/28/2013 .190 .219 5,000,000-00 4,998,550.00 99.968750 4,998,437.50 3133781377 FH LB 1Yr 02/15/2013 .190 .219 5,000,000.00 4,998,550.00 99.968750 4,998,437.50 313378CP4 FH LB 1YrNc6MoE 02/28/2013 250 .250 15,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 100-031250 15,004,687.50 313378CP4 FH 1:B.1 YrNc6MoE 02/28/2013 250 - .250 20,000,000.00 20,0110,000.00 100-031250 20,006,250.00 313378DG3 FH LB 13Mo3Mo6 03/19/2013 .270 .270 10,000,00300 10,000,000.00 100.031250 10,003,125.00 313378DB4 FH LB 2YrNcl kloE 03/12/2014 .500 - .500 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 100.000000 10,000,000.00 313378ED9 FHLB 1.5Yr 09/09/2013 .310 .310 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 99.968750 9,996,875.00 313378DG3 FHLB 1YrNc3MoB 03/19/2013 .270 .270 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 100.031250 10,003,125.00 313378 EN7 FH LB 5YrNc3114oB 03/15/2017 1.000 1.000 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 99.750000 4,987,500.00 3133783D1 FH LB 2YrNc 02/13/2014 .300 .379 '5,000,000.00 4,992,300.00 991343750 4,992,187.50 313378H79 FH LEI 1.5Yr 09/09/2013 300 .300 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 99.968750 4,998,437.50 313376ZQ7 FH LB 3Yr 03/13/2015 .375 .551 5,003,000-00 4,973,550.00 99.187500 4,959,375.00 313378151 FH LB 2YrNc6MB 03/05/2019 .430 .430 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 99.937500 9,996,875.00 .313378KU4 FHLB2.5YrNc6k1oB 09/12/2014 .5130 .5130 51300,000.130. 5,000,000130 99.843750 4,992,187.50 - 313378KU4. FH LB 2.5YrNc6MoB 09/12/2014 -.500 '.500 5,0130,000.00 5,0)0,000.00 99.843750 4,992,187.50 313378ED9 FH LB 1.5Yr 09/09/2013 310 .291 - 5,000,000.00 5,001,450,00 99.968750 - 4,998,437.50 313378L25 FH LB 5YrNc3MoB - 03/29/2017 1.050 - 1.050- 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 99.906250 9,990,625.00 313378JN2 FH LB 1Yr 03/05/2013 .125 .228 5,000,000.00 .4,994,955.00 99.906250 4,995,312.50 313378J N2 FH LB 3Yr 03/05/2013 .125 .213 5,000,000.00 4,995,700.00 99.906250 4,995,312.50 313376ZQ1 FH LB 3yr- 03/13/2015 .375 .689 5,000,0)0.00 4,953,525.00 99-187500 4,959,375.00 313378P88 - FH LB 13MoNc1 MoB 04/15/2013 .300 .300 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 1001103000 10,000,000.00 313376YC3 FH LB 1Yr 02/06/2013 .150 -.250 10,000,000.00 9,991,100.00 99.937500 9,993,750.00 313378LW9. FHLB1.5Yr 09/12/2013 .280 .348 5,000,000.00 4,994,950.00 99.937500• 4,996,875.00 313378QE4 FHLB2YrNc7YrA 03/28/2014 .500 .500 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.187500 5,009,375.00 3133767Z8 FH LB 1Yr 02/27/2013 370 .240 9,900,000.00 9,893,565.00 99.937500 9,893,812.50 313378BF7 - FH LB 1Yr 02/28/2013' .180 .240 10,000,000.130 9,994,400.00 99.968750 9,996,875.00 313378JN2- FH LB 1Yr 03/05/2013 -125 .254 5,000,000.00 4,993,850.00 99.906250 4,595,312.50 313378577 FH LB 5YrNc1MoB 03/27/2017 1.250 1.271 5,000,000.00 4,995,000.00 100.062500 5,003,125.00 313378TF8 FH LB 1Yr 03 27/2013 250 258 30,000,00000 9,999,16400 100000000 10000000.�00 ., ., ., , .. ..:. ;i-,:'�2$, •' .'Wiz', `�;,'�'n�.$t1.00ai10 �u -', f15,2L3,''', ""11�Tt 1;..,,.. . �c.�ecr `: FFCB DISC NOTES 313312WG7 FFCB DISC NOTE 05/01/2012 .240 .241 • 7,000,000.00 6,983,01333 100000000 7,000,000.00 16,986.67 - ..085- .08 313313809 FFCB DISC NOTE 01/28/2013 -140 .140 25,000,000.00 24,964,805.56 99.875000 24,968,750.00 3,944.44 .828 - .830 313313BA5 FFCB DISC NOTE 01 25/2013 200 200 50000,00000 49913611.1.1 99.875000 49937500.00 _23,88889 820 .822 n,. �:.�,1;1�, ,1. �k� 111u '"fi'a'11$5, �T s r000.1 SS���k:!!�i<i 99-8 �r K &1��1ONAl, 0 0,.,.... _ :; FFCB BONDS 31331GNQ8 FFCB .04/24/2012 2.250 1.762 5,000,000.00 5,066,900.00 100.125000 - - 5,1306,250.00-60;650.00 .065 - .066 • 31331GYP8 FFCB 3Yr - 06/18/2012 2.125 2.210 5,000,0)0.00 4,988,000.00 100.406250 5,020,312.50- 32,31250 214 216 31331GYP8 FFCB 3Yr 06/18/2012 2.125 2.210 3,000,000.00 2,992,800.00 100.406250 - 3,012107.50 _ 19,387.50 .214 .216 31331GYP8 FFCB 3Yr 06/18/2012 2.125 1.374 8,500,000.00 8,637,785.00 100.406250 8,539,531.25 -103,253.75 .215 .216 31331JQU0 - FFCB 3Yr. 06/03/2013 1.600 .752 10,000,000.00 10,211,890.00 107.531250 10,153,325.00 58,765.00 1.156 1.175 31331JY56 FFCB 2Yr 11/02/2012 .400 .590 10,000,000.00 9,972,900.00 100.125000 10,012,500110 39,600.00 .589 .592 .31331J6A6 FFCB 3Yr 12/23/2013 1.300 1.300 5,000,000_00 5,000,000.00 101.375000 5,068,750.00 - '68,750.00 1.697 1.732 - 31331 J6A6 FFCB 3Yr - 12/23/2013 1.300 1.300 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 101.375000 5,068,750.00 68,750.00 1.697 1.732 31331J7A5 FFCB 1.5Yr - 07/10/2012 .500 .500 - 10,000,000.00 ' 10,000,000.03-100.093750 ' 10,009,375.00 9,375.00 - .276 - - .277. 31331 J7A5 FFCB 1.5Yr 07/10/2012 .500 .500 9,205,000.00 9,205,000.00 100-093750 9,213,629.69 8,629.69 .276 .277 31.331)6A6 FFCB 3Yr 12/23/2013 1.300 1.184 5,000,000.00 5,015,550.00 101.375000 5,068,750.00 53,200.00 1.698 1.732 31331KET3 FFCB 2.5Yr 09/23/2013 .980 _ 1.029 10,000,000.00 9,988;000130 100.843750 .. 10,084,375.00 96,375.00 - 1.463 1.482 31331KGN4 FFCB 3Yr D4/07/2014 1.400 1:400 - ' 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 101.593750 10,159,375.00 159,375.00 1.968 2019 31331KH V5 FFCB 5Yr 04/20/2016 .312 .324 10,000,000.00-. 9,995,000.00 100.125000 10,012,500.00 17,500.00 4.07.8 -4.058 31331KKT6 FFCB 1Yr 05/16/2012 210 .224 25,000,000.00 29,996,600.00 100.000000 25,000,000.00 - 3,400.00 .126 .126 31331KEV8 FFCB 1Yr 06/22/2012 .290 .294 5,000,000.00 5,002,450.00 100.031250 5,001,562.50-887.50 .227 .227 31331 KNH9 FFCB 1Yr 06/13/2012 .240- .240 20,0130,000.00 20,0130,000.00 100.031250 20,006,250.00 6,250.00 .202 .203 31331KPC8 FFCB 2.2Yr 08/20/2012 250 -.250 20,000,000.00 20,003,000.00 100.031250 20,006,250.00 6,250.00 .388 .389 31331 KQU7 FFCB 1.5Yr .01/07/2013 A00 .400 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.130. 100.125000 - 5,006,250.00 - 6,250.00 .764 .773 31331 KPD6 FFCB 2.5Yr 11/20/2013 .625 .700- 5,000,000-00 4,991,100.00 100.250000 - 5,012,500.00 21,400.00 1.621 1.641 31331KM41 FFCB 1Yr 06/01/2012 .210 .213 5,000,000.00 4,999,850.00 100.000000 5,000,000.00 150.00 .170. .170 31331KMM9 FFCB 1.5Yr 12/03/2012 :350 .376 10,000,000.00 9,996,600.00 100.093750 10,009,375.00 12,775.00 .670 .677 31331 KMM9 FFCB 1.5Yr 12/03/2012 .350 .340 5,000,000.130 5,000,650.00 100.093750 5,004,68750 4,03750 .670 .677 31331 KUW8 FFCB 225YrNc3MoA 11/18/2013 .500 .522 5,000,000.00 4,997,500.00. 99.906250 4,995,312.50 _-2,187.50 1.619 1.636 31331 KZJ2 FFCB 2Yr 09/23/2013 .350 .400 - 10,000,000.00 9,990,100.00 99.906250. _ 9,990,625.00- - 525.00 - 1.472 1.482 31331 KB82 FFCB 2Yr 10/03/2013 .350 .400 5,000;000.00 4,995,050.00 99.906250 4,995,312.50 262.50 1.497 1.510 31331KZK9 FFCB 1.25Yr 11/23/2032 .240 .254 5,000,000.00 9,999,200;00 100.031250 5,001,562.50 2,362.5,0 .643 .649 31331 KK74 FFCB 3YrNcl YrA. 11/07/2014 .850 .850 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.156250 5,007,8,12.50 7,812.50 2,558 2.605. 31331 KK74 FFCB 3YrNc7YrA 11/07/2014 .850 .850- - 5,000,000.00 5,000,0)0.00 100-156250 5,1307,812.50 - 7,817_50 2.558 2.605 31331 K5K2 FFCB 2Yr 01/03/2014 .400 .420 6,000,000.00 5,997,600.00 99.812500 5,988,750.00-8,850.00 1.746 1.762 3133EACJ5 FFCB 1.5YrNc3MoE 08/07/2013 .180 .240 5,000,00000 4,595,500.00 99.750000 4,987,500:00-8,003.00 - 1.348 1.353 3133EADY1 FFCB 2YrNcl YrA 02/21/2014 .330 .380 5,000,000.00 4,995,000.00 99.562500 4,978,125.00-16,875.00 1.880 1.896 31331 KZFO FFCB 21 MoNc1 MoA 12/23/2013 .470 .471 2,000,000.00 3,999,980.00 99.781250 1,995,625.00-4,355.00 1.717 1.732 3133EAHP6 FFCB 3Yr 03 16/2015 520 598 5000,00000 4988,430.00 99250000 4962500.00 -25 00 2930 2.959 ;,1 �I �" i4 F i'� /. .100.55811'. ''- ; 'ar r..irs� -`� WiYgnititigikt ig FMAC DISC NOTES - 31315KWW6 FMAC DISC NOTE 05/15/2012 .210 210 25,000,00000 24,946,770.83 100.0000(10 25000,000.00 53,229.77 .123 31315KXU9 FMAC DISC NOTE 06/06/2012 .210 .210 20,000,000.00 19,957,416.67 100.000000 20,000,000.00 92,583.33 .183 .1. 31315KYT7 FMAC DISC NOTE - 06/29/2012 .220 .220 20,000,000.00 19,955,511,11 100.000000 20,000,000.00 49,988.89 .246 .297 -1,562.50 -9,375.00 -4,687.50 -14,218.75 -26,406.25 -4,687.50 -1,925.09 -1,562.50 -1,562.50 -3,125.00 -39,53125 -23,437.50 -32,812.50 -53,125.00 0.00 -112.50 -112.50 4,687.50 6,250.00 3,125.00 0.00 -3,125.00 3,125.00 -12,500,00 -112.50 -1,562.50 -14,175.00 3,125.00 -7,812.50 -7,812.50 -3,012.50 -9,375.00 357.50 -387.50 5,850130 0.00 2,650.00 1,925.00 9,375.00 247.50 Z475.00 1,462.50 8,125.00 836.00 ,, g4ta =' 852 2.875 1.342 4.782 4.782 1.352 1.327 .935 .935 .860 4.771 4.782 3.108 4.782 1.097 .915 .871 .915 .915 .%5 1.935 1.434 .965 4.821 1.859 1.434 2.925 1.917 2.429 2.429 1.434 4,853 .926 .926 2.923 1.035 .846 1.443 1.979 .904 .915 .926 4.821 987 .860 2 1 4: 4.918 1.359 1:332 .937 .937 .868 4.915 4.918 3)42 4.910 1.101 .915 .879 :915 •.915 .967 1.948 1.444 .967 4.959 1.874 1 A44 2.951 1.929 2,452 2.452 1.444 4.997 .929 .929 2951 1.041 .855 1.452 1.992 .912. .915 .929 4.99.2 RIVERISIDE COUNTY TREASURER -TAX COLLECTOR 51 12 Month End Portfolio Holdings CUSIP Description Maturity Maturity Date Coupon- To Mat Par Value Book Value Market Price Market . Value Unrealized Modified - Years To Gain/Loss Duration - Maturity i5KZ FO FMAC DISC NOTE 5KYW4 FN1AC DISC NOTE RMER MAC 31315PVU0 313'15PVU0 31315PV UO 31315PSH3 FARMER MAC GTD FARMER MAC GTD FARMER MAC GTD FARMER MAC GTD §11501 07/11/2012 07/02/2012 • 4 MUNI BONDS 20775BND4 CI HFA 041042RK0 ARKANSAS ST 649791 EB2 STATE OF NEW YORK 801320AV4 COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA 677521 LG9 OHIO STATE GO 677521 LH7 OHIO STATE GO 880541QG5 STATE OF TENNESSEE 646039TR8 NEW JERSEY ST TRAN 05/10/2013 05/10/2013 05/10/2013 09 25/2073 �„ .. 210 210 8,000,000 00 7,982,966.67 100 000000 8,000,000.00 17,03133 210 210 50,000,000 00 49,908,416.67 100 000000 50,000,00000 91,583 33 ',2YR • .2I,2 wU = . i 31** .n0-v .-, 'Iu.04$ _-. ` 111(1 - �'11N:1040ci m . a £44.#e ifs .760 760 760 403 4OK 760 760 750 .403 5,0(10,000.00 5,00(1,000.00 12,503,000.00 15 000,000 00 �;81O0� 279 .254 '41 .279 .255 5,000,000.00 100.312500 5,015,625.00 15,625.00 1.098 - 1.110 5,000,000.00 100.312500 5,015,625.00 15,625.00 1.098 1.110 12,502,375.00 100.312500 32,539,062.50 36,687.50 1.099 1.110 15,00�0/000.00 100125003 15,018 750.00 18,750 00 1.063 1.068 T30't 3' lfD t:11r. >iFt1il :3:St .i.`r.'' EN*1 �. 1 Q'.. 10'13` 05/15/2012 2.180 2180 850,000.00 850,000.00 07/01/2012 1.250 1.240 - 1,440,000.00 1A40,273.60 09/01/2012 .650 .650 23,040,00000 23,040,000.00 06/29/2012 .270 .270 25,000,000.00 25,000,000.00 05/01/2013 740 .740 5,140,000.00 5,140,000.00 05/01/2014 1.190 1.190 2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 08/01/2012 .500 .301 6,265,000.00 6,274,522.80 06/21/2012 2.000 .250 25,000,000.00 25,225,750.00 COMM PAPER - 36959HD46 GE CAPITAL CORP 36959HEF0. GE CAPITAL CORP 36959H FD4 GE CAPITAL CORP 36959H)57 GE CAPITAL CORP 04/04/2012 05/15/2012 06/13/2012 09/05/2012 100.000000 850,000.00 100-019000 1,440,273.60 100.000000 23,040,000-00 100.000000 25,000,000.00 100.000000 5,140,000.00 100.000000 - - 2,030,000.00 100.15211IA 6,274,522.80 100.903000 25,225,750.00 94 S; - �°4,MOSS l8897{J 9%4II 10041411111 1 .351 381 330 .331 29,946,625.00 49,894,444.44 34,948,345.83 34,941,287.50 y X7 AVM. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 .122 .250 .420 .244 1.075 2.045 336 .222 .123 .252 .422 .247 1.085 2.085 337 • .225 99.997917 - 29,999,375.00 99.969444 49,984,722.22 99.929028 34,975,159.72 99.751417 34,912,995.83 12BZ 52,750.00 90,277.78 26,813.89 :28,291.67 .011 .123. .202 .431 .011 .123 .203 .433 RIVERISIDE COUNTY TREASURER -TAX COLLECTOR 52 13 Full Compliance The Treasurer's Pooled Investment Fund was in FULL COMPLIANCE with the Treasurer's Statement of Investment Policy. The County's Investment Policy is more restrictive than the California Government Code. This policy is reviewed annually by the County's Investment Oversight Committee and approved by the County Board of Supervisors. Investment Category MUNICIPAL BONDS (MUN U.S. TREASURIES LOCAL AGENC OBLIGATIONS "(LAO) FEDERAL AGENCIES COMMERCIAL" PAPER`"(CP) CERTIFICATE & TIME DEPOSITS (NCD & TCD) REPURCHASE AGREEMENTS (REPOy REVERSE"REPOS MEDIUM .tERM' NOTES "(MTNO) CALTRUST SHORT TERM FUND MONEY MARKET MUTUAL FUNDS (IviMF) LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FUND (LAIF) CASH/DEPOSIT. ACCOUNT Maximum Authorized Maturity % Limit 5 YEARS NO LIMIT 5 YEARS NO LIMIT 5 YEARS NO LIMIT 5 YEARS 30% 1 YEARS ..:_ NO LIMIT 92 DAYS 20 % 5 YEARS 30 NA NA NA NA NA AAA NA NA NA NA Quality Maximum Authorized S&P/ Maturity, % Limit Moody's 3 YEARS 15% - AA_ / Aa3/ AA- 5 YEARS 100% NA INVESTME NT GRADE 5 YEARS 100% NA 270DAYS hD°lo Al/P1/F1 1 YEAR 25% Al/Pl/Fl Combined 45 DAYS 04 max, Al/P1/F1' 25% in term' repo over.7' 60 DAYS 10 NA 3 YEARS 20 % AA/Aa2/ ; AA DAILY 1.0 NA LIQUIDITY DAILY 20% AAA by 2 LIQUIDITY Of 3 RATINGS DAILY Max $50 NA LIQUIDITY miIIion NA NA " NA , 1 Mutual Funds maturity may be interpreted as weighted average matnrihj not exceeding 60 days. z Or must have an investment advisor with not less than 5 years experience and with assets under management of $500,000,000. 7 THIS COMPLETES THE REPORT REQUIREMENTS OF CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE 53646 • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TREASURER -TAX COLLECTOR 53 14 AGENDA ITEM 8E RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: June 7, 2012 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Quarterly Sales Tax Analysis BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file the sales tax analysis for Quarter 4 (Q4) 2011. BACKGROUND INFORMATION; At its December 2007 meeting, the Commission awarded an agreement to MuniServices, LLC (MuniServices) for quarterly sales tax reporting services plus additional fees contingent on additional sales tax revenue generated from the transactions and use tax (sales tax) audit services. The services performed under this agreement pertain to only the Measure A sales tax revenues. Since the commencement of these services, MuniServices submitted an audit update, which reported findings that have been generated and submitted to the State Board of Equalization (SBOE) for review and determination of errors in sales tax reporting related to 222 businesses. Through Q4 2011 for October through December 2011, the SBOE has approved corrections for 156 of these accounts for a total sales tax revenue recovery of $2,016,315. If the SBOE concurs with the error(s) for the remaining claims, the Commission would receive additional revenues; however, the magnitude of the value of the remaining findings was not available. It is important to note that while the recoveries of additional revenues will be tangible, it will not be sufficient to alter the overall trend of sales tax revenues. Additionally, MuniServices provided the Commission with the quarterly sales tax summary report for the fourth quarter of calendar year 2012 for October through December 201 1 IQ4 2011). Most of the Q4 2011 Measure A sales tax revenues was received by the Commission in the first, quarter of calendar 2012, during January through March 2012, due to a lag in the sales tax calendar. The summary section of the Q4 2011 report is attached and includes an overview of California sales tax receipts, local results, historical cash collections analysis, summary of the Agenda Item 8E 56 top 25 sales tax contributors, historical sales tax amounts, sales tax by business category, economic trends for significant business category (general retail), and results. The following observations were noted in the Q4 2011 report: • Sales tax receipts for Riverside County were 10 percent higher compared to the Q4 2010, and slightly higher than the state. This supports the previous quarterly reports' analyses that an economic recovery statewide and locally is underway; however, the Commission should continue to be cautious as service stations is one of the top three economic segments throughout the state leading this recovery. A significant portion of this growth is attributable to the high fuel prices. • Taxable transactions for the top 25 tax contributors in Riverside County, which generated 23 percent of the taxable sales for the year ended Q4 2011, were comparable to the year ended Q4 2010. The top 100 tax contributors generated 37 percent of the taxable sales in Q4 2011 and Q4 2010. • For the fourth consecutive period, all economic categories experienced increases in the Q4 2011 benchmark year comparison to Q4 2010. Transportation had the largest increase at 19 percent, which was primarily related to the service station segment increase. Construction had the next highest increase at 9.9 percent, which was primarily related to a new business in the building materials -wholesale segment. The remaining four economic categories had increases ranging from 2.8 percent to 6.8 percent. General Retail 29.9 / 6.2 29.7 / 4.5 ECONOMIC CATEGORY ANALYSIS 29.4 / 4.9 30.1 / 1.9 31.6 / 4.8 29.7 / 4.6 28.2 / 4.9 29.4 / 2.8 32.4 / 1.0 Food Products 16.4 / 5.6 19.1 / 5.4 19.8 / 6.2 16.9 / 2.2 16.5 / 4.6 19.6 / 5.6 16.7 / 4.8 18.6 / 2.8 30.4 / 4A Construction Transportation Business to Business 10.5 / 9.9 27.1 / 19.2 14.1 / 6.8 8.5 / 6.6 24.1 / 15.8 17.4 / 7.1 8.2 / 7.7 20.8 / 15.2 20.7 / 6.1 10.3 / 5.9 26.8 / 14.9 14.2 / 3.1 10.6 / 11.1 25.7 / 19.4 14.3 / 17.2 7.9 / 5.5 24.3 / 15.4 17.5 / 7.3 9:9 / 7A 28.1 / 18.3 15.0 / 3.9 12.0 / 3.5 29.5 / 12.4 9.4 / 11.5 8.6 / -3.3 21.7 / 16.6 5.8 / 0.9 Miscellaneous Total 2.1 / 2.8 100.0. / 9.8 1.2 / -1.2 100.0 / 7.8 1.1 / -1.7 100.0 / 7.6 1.6 / 6.7 100.0 / 5.8 1.3 / 18.6 100.0 / 10.8 1.1 / -6.0 100.0 / 7.7 2.1 / 5.4 100.0. / 8.5 1.1 / 12.7 100.0 / 6.4 1.1 / -28.3 100.0 / 4.2 General Retail: Apparel Stores, Department Stores, Furniture/Appliances, Drug Stores, Recreation Products, Florist/Nurse y, and Misc. Retail Food Products:. Restaurants, Food Markets, Liquor Stores, and Food Processing Equipment Construction: Building Materials Retail and BuildingMaterials 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 • Eight of the top 10 segments (service stations, department stores, restaurants, auto sales -new, miscellaneous retail, building materials - wholesale, apparel stores, and food markets) sales reached a new high point during Q4 2011. • Service stations, department stores, and restaurants continue to represent the three largest economic segments for Riverside County, or 35 percent of Agenda Item 8E • 57 total sales taxes. Auto sales -new represents the fourth largest economic segment at 9.1 percent of total sales taxes. California Statewide ECONOMIC SEGMENT ANALYSIS S:F. Bay Area Sacramento ,a, Valley South Coa! ana pine h Coast Central toast Largest Segment Service Stations Restaurants Restaurants Department Stores Department Stores Restaurants Service Stations Service Stations Restaurants % of Total / % Change 12.9 / 22.1 13.0 / 5.7 13.8 / 6.9 12.8 / 2.5 14.8 / 3.1 13.9 / 5.9 12.9 / 21.7 14.4 / 16.5 19.9 / 4.0 2nd Largest Segment Department Stores Department Stores Department Stores Service Stations Service Stations Service Stations Department Stores Department. Stores Service Stations % of Total/ % Change n / 3.3 10.8 / 3.8 9.7 / 4.3 10.9 / 18.1 12.4 / 25.6 10.8 / 21.9 11.2 / 2.2 12.5 / 1.8 10.1 / 22.1 3rd Largest Segment Restaurants Service Stations Service Stations Restaurants Restaurants Department Stores Restaurants Restaurants Mist Retail %of Total / %Change 10.3 / 5.3 10.8 / 22.2 9.3 / 23.6 10.4 / 1.0 96 / 4.0 10.5 / 4.2 10.6 / 4.8 9.7 / 2.0 10.1 / -0.9 During the review of the Q4 2011 detailed report with MuniServices, information regarding sales tax comparisons by city and change by economic category from Q4 2010 to Q4 2011 was provided, and is attached. Newly incorporated cities such. as Eastvale and Jurupa Valley will be listed when sufficient comparative information is available. 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 recent trends in assessing such projections. Attachments: 1) Sales Tax Analysis Q4 2011.. 2) Sales Tax Comparison by City for Q4 2010 to Q4 2011 Agenda Item 8E 58 Riverside County Transportation Commission Sales Tax Digest Summary Collections through March 2012 Sales through December 2011 (2011Q4) CAUFORNIA'S ECONOMIC OUTLOOK For the 4th Quarter of 2011, overall California sales tax receipts increased by 8.0% over the same quarter from the previous year, with Northern California reporting an 8.4% increase compared to 7.7% for Southern California. Receipts for the RCTC changed by 10.0% over the same periods. The state appears to be in a midst of a modest, drawn -out recovery. New -car dealerships sold 1.29 million new cars and trucks in 2011 - a 9.9% improvement over 2010. They should see an additional 8.5% growth in 2012. Though the construction, agriculture and food services industries have barely kept pace with inflation, high-technology industries, the professional services sector and a robust global demand for California's exports are primarily responsible for an economic growth rate that is now keeping pace with the, national rate. Senior Economist, Jerry Nickelsburg from UCLA predicts that California's employment growth will be 1.4% for 2012 and 2.1% for 2013. The state labor market should continue to improve, with a projected payroll growth of 1.2% for 2012 and 2.0% for 2013. Existing home sales were up in 2011 compared to 2010, but at the expense of falling prices. Though the state housing market is still struggling to regain price stability, foreclosure rates for the 4th Quarter of 2011 dropped to the second -lowest level in more than four years. The worst may be over for California. We can expect slow and steady growth as we rebuild a healthy, well-balanced economy. LOCAL RESULTS Net Cash Receipts Analysis Local Collections Share of County Pool 0.0% Share of State Pool 0.0% SBE Net Collections Less: Amount Due County 0.0% Less: Cost of Administration Net 402011 Receipts Net 402010 Receipts Actual Percentage Change $35,727,662 0 0 35,727,662 .00 (329,200) 35,398,462 32,194,968 10.0% Business Activity Performance Analysis Local Collections Less: Payments for Prior Periods $35,727,662 (1,927,672) www.MuniServices.com (800) 800-8181 59 Page 1 Riverside County Transportation Commission Preliminary 4Q2011 Collections Projected 4Q2011 Late Payments Projected 4Q2011 Final Results Actual 402010 Results Projected Percentage Change HISTORICAL CASH COLLECTIONS ANALYSIS BY QUARTER 33,799,990 735,180 34,535,170 31,996,447 7.9% $40,000 $35,000 $30,000 $25,000 $ 2 0,000 $1 5,000 $10,000 S5,000 SO (in thousaads of S) 3Q2009 4Q2009 1Q2010 2Q2010 3Q2010 4Q2010 1Q2011 2Q2011 3Q2011 4Q2011 Net Receipts -SHOE Admit' Fees Due $400 S350 $300 S250 in 0 $2 00 $150 $100 S50 So e 'CJ TOP 25 SALES/USE TAX CONTRIBUTORS The following list identifies RCTC's Top 25 Sales/Use Tax contributors. The list is in alphabetical order and represents sales from. The Top 25 Sales/Use Tax contributors generate 22.8% of RCTC's total sales and use tax revenue. BEST BUY STORES CARMAX THE AUTO SUPERSTORE CHEVRON SERVICE STATIONS CIRCLE K FOOD STORES COSTCO WHOLESALE DEPT OF MOTOR VEHICLES DESERT SUNLIGHT HOME DEPOT K MART STORES KOHL'S DEPARTMENT STORES LOWE'S HOME IMPROVEMENT MACY'S DEPARTMENT STORE MOBIL SERVICE STATIONS RALPH'S GROCERY COMPANY RITE AID DRUG STORES ROSS STORES SAM'S CLUB SEARS ROEBUCK & COMPANY SHELL SERVICE STATIONS STATER BROS MARKETS TARGET STORES VERIZON WIRELESS W.W. GRAINGER WAL MART STORES WALGREEN'S DRUG STORES www.MuniServices.com (800) 800-8181 Page 2 60 • • Riverside County Transportation Commission HISTORICAL SALES TAX AMOUNTS The following chart shows the sales tax level from sales through December 2011, the highs, and the lows for each segment over the last two years. (in thousands of$) ■4Q2011 •High •Low $18,000 $16,000 1 S14,000 ' $12,000 ' ■ ■ r $10,000 ■ ■ $8,000 $6,000 $4,000 $2,000 ' ■ ■ ■ ' ■ ■ ■ ■ —11 ■ ■ ■ ' ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ 1 1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ 1 SO 5` a?. �s° 1�.. o 5 ��s ��� �1++ boa ��s a�`t �� �� C7 °� �`� �{ oa v` �`s 5`"{ cos{ 4 °�o `a>�+ lbR P44 io v�o, sago P #ti it 0 ANNUAL SALES TAX BY BUSINESS. CATEGORY (in thousands of S) 4 Q 2 0 1 1 VW° - 6.41ek03r" . - - 3 Q 2 0 1 1 kt-.`.3!W.za'EMS*, 9 9 2 Q 2 0 1 1 5_:!`�;�: ,7igi19'��1*.`at<._�,:��f'b? g f I Q 2 0 1 1 +, Y Xi:159T�4 '4t°��"° ��-�� 4 Q 2 0 1 0 WrGAffei6ViVIO z -MMINMENIMMI�- 2Q2010 •F27 Ckr,i 10 s s 1 Q 2 0 1 0 ; d6"850 '. 2::tom; s �IIMMIIMMIIHNIMERIMMIN111.1e� 4 Q 2 0 0 9 �'-'4 062%W - ��� 3 Q 2 0 0 9 ``;` 2 5 7 A3: r,t i..yv - s $0 520,000 S40,000 $60,000 S80,000 S100,000 S120,000 $140,000 1=G IRetail IMFood Products OTransportation INC oostro etioo r H usiuess To H naive's MIN iscella www.MuniServices.com (800) 800-8181 61 Page 3 Riverside County Transportation Commission FIVE-YEAR ECONOMIC TREND: General Retail S14,000 312,000 S10,000 $8,000 $6,000 $4,000 S2,000 $0 (in thousands of $) I �iI�l�llii'�1fi�! 0000000000000 00000000000000 CY s .. N s .. a a a a a a a a o o o' o N N N N es a a ee s FINAL RESULTS: July -September 2011 Sales Local Net Cash Collections Less: Pool Amounts Less: Prior Quarter Payments Add: Late Payments Local Net Economic Collections after Adjustments Percent Change from July -September 2010 Sales MUNISERVICES' ON -GOING AUDIT RESULTS This Quarter $157,479 Total to Date $1,557,126 $30,820,537 ($-329,200) ($1,482,078) $1,683,442 $31,351,101 UP BY 8.8% www.MuniServices.com (800) 800-8181 page 4 62 ATTACHMENT 2 Southern California: Sales Tax Comparison -Oct-Dec 2010 Sales to Oct -Dec 2011 Sales - Juri r R diction �,,��d 4ANSPORTATlON AUTHORITY General Retail Food Products Trans, Const. Business to Business Misc. Oct -Dec 2011 Total Oct -., 2010 Total % Chg Largest Gain 2nd largest Gain largest Decline 2nd L., st Decline RCTC r 6,3% 7.9% 12.9% 27.2% 7.8% 70.0% 35,261,434 31,955,756 ,10.2%BIdg.Matls-Whsle AutoSaies - New Office Equipment Leasing IVERSIDE COUNTY Banning -4.8% 2.6% 13.0% -12.2% 49.2% -22.4% 383,414 360,263 6.4% Service Stations Auto Sales - New BIdg.Matis-Whsle Miscellaneous Other Beaumont -1.7% 0.0% 34.6% -5.9% -5.8% -19.5% 744,629 699,915 6,4% Service Stations Miscellaneous Retail BIdg.Matls-Retall Department Stores Blythe -3.5% 1.4% 8.5% 35.2% 102.9% 1.8% 360,614 316,261 14.0% Energy Sales Auto Sales - New Auto Parts/Repair Florist/Nursery Calimesa -27.4% 2.9% 23.9% 6.8% -35.5% 23.6% 144,918 136,159 6.4% Service Stations Liquor Stores Light Industry Apparel Stores Canyon Lake -29.5% 44.3% -70.5% 0.9% -60.7% -64.9% 31,687 38,405 -17.5% Restaurants Liquor Stores Auto Parts/Repair Department Stores Cathedral City -9.9% 5.4% 5.1% 22.6% 2.3% 9.4% 1,380,718 1,334,338 3.5%Auto Sales - New Food Markets Miscellaneous Retail, Furniture/Appliance Coachella 6.6% 4.3% 13.6% -11.9% 6.8% 26.3% 731,104 673,638 8.5% Service Stations Auto Parts/Repair BIdg.Matls-Whsle BIdg.Matls-Retail Corona 7.2% 1.5% 23.7% 11.9% 11.4% -12.6% 7,022,130 6,281,232 11.8% Service Stations BIdg.Matls-Whsle Office Equipment Food Markets Desert Hot Springs 2.9% 4.2% 128.6% 72.0% 29.1% 29.4% 271,173 189,181 43.3% Service Stations Restaurants Department Stores Food Markets Hemet -2.4% 1.6% 14.4% -5.8% 12.2% -9.9% 1,918,621 1,817,290 5.6% Auto Sales - New Service Stations Apparel Stores BIdg.Matls-Whsle Indian Wells 1.2% -7.1% -17.4% 7.4% 50.1% 1100.0% 92,603 97,241 -4.8% Recreation Products Light Industry Restaurants Food Markets Indio 9.4% 2.3% 11.8% 12.2% 10.8% -18.6% 1,449,739 1,326,643 9.3% Auto Sales - New Service Stations Health & Government Recreation Products La Quinta -2.5% 7,7% 27.3% -0.8% -1.2% -31.7% 1,293,724 1,245,909 3.8% Auto Sales - New Restaurants Department Stores Office Equipment Lake Elsinore 4,9% 13.0% 4.2% 0.7% 50.8% -18.3% 1,705,734 1,595,026 6.9% Department Stores Food Markets Miscellaneous Retail BIdg.Matls-Whsle Menifee 13.4% 1.9% 32.7% 3.1% 9,3% 48.6% 1,015,429 892,451 13.8% Service Stations Furniture/Appliance Energy Sales Food Markets Moreno Valley 2.2% 4.4% 15.2% -10.6% 31.5% -7.7% 2,753,800 2,581,905 6.7%Auto Sales - New Service Stations Bldg Matls-Whsle Department Stores Murrieta 5.5% 6.4% 20.8% -3.7% -3.2% -13.5% 2,362,691 2,210,500 6.9% Service Stations Auto Sales • New Furniture/Appliance BIdg.Matis-Whsle Norco 4.4% 2.8% 19.2% -0.9% 5.5% 24.6% 999,301 903,150 10.6% Auto Sales - New Service Stations Leasing BIdg.Matls-Retail Palm Desert 4.0% 13.5% -4.6% 22.9% 7.4% 2.6% 4,013,286 3,776,421 6.3% Department Stores Food Markets Furniture/Appliance Service Stations Palm Springs -5.6% 13.9% 19.7% 5.3% 10.6% 3.3% 2,377,238 2,206,222 7.8% Restaurants Auto Sales - New Furniture/Appliance Health & Government Perris 5.2% 0.6% 23.7% 1.4% -2.8% 5.9% 1,472,397 1,352,713 8.8% Service Stations Auto Sales - New Heavy Industry Chemical Products Rancho Mirage 25,4% 8.0% -8.0% 3.8% -32.1% -4.2% 730,492 700,603 4,3% Miscellaneous Retail Restaurants Light Industry Auto Sales - New Riverside 1.6% 2.4% 16.2% 26.3% 1,4% -7.0% 9,995,453 9,204,190 8.6% Auto Sales - New Bldg,Matls-Whsle Florist/Nursery Heavy Industry Riverside County San Jacinto -18.7% 3.2% 0.3% -1.6% 18.9% 13.6% 5.0% -14.3% 3.3% -35.9% -9.5% -38.7% 5,976,718 461,268 6,028,842 451,432 -0.9% Service Stations 2 2% Service Stations . BIdg.Matls-Whsle Florist/Nursery Department Stores Light Industry Miscellaneous Retail Food Markets Temecula 4.5 % -1,0% 19,3% 5.0% -0.6% 9.2% 5,766,047 5,389,771 7.0% Auto Sales - New Service Stations. Light Industry Food Processing Eqp Wildomar 1.3% 4.4% 16.8% 13.6% -1.9% -5.6% 287,645 262,958 9.4% Service Stations Food Markets Liquor Stores - Miscellaneous Retail 63 MuniServices, LLC AGENDA ITEM 8F RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: June 7, 2012 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Marla Modell, Procurement Administrator Matt Wallace, Procurement Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Recurring Contracts for Fiscal Year 2012/13 BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve the recurring contracts for FY 2012/13; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: As in previous years, the Commission annually evaluates existing contracts for professional services that are due to expire within the next fiscal year. These contracts may be placed on the calendar for a new procurement solicitation, allowed to expire because they are no longer required, or included in the annual recurring contracts list that is subject to Commission approval. Most contracts for professional services are subject to a competitive process. This year's list of recurring contracts includes consultants that are providing unique or specialized services and working closely with staff on long-term projects. Staff desires to retain a limited number of consultants on the recurring contracts list because of their historical knowledge, unique experience, and understanding of the Commission and specific Commission projects. Under limited circumstances, staff believes it is more efficient and cost effective to retain the consultants on the recurring contracts list rather than rebidding the services at this particular time. Approval of the recurring contracts list will allow the Commission to continue work on existing projects without interruptions and maintain consistency. The list of proposed recurring contracts for FY 2012/13, followed by a summary for each consultant supporting its inclusion on the recurring contracts list is as follows: Agenda Item 8F 64 Consultant Name Description of Services Budget FY 11/12 Budget FY 12/13 Dollar Change FY 12 - FY 13 AMMA Transit Planning (AMMA) Consultant support for administration of Specialized Transit Program under Measure A and federal programs $100,000 $100,000 $0 Bechtel Infrastructure (Bechtel) Capital project program management services 6,444,000 7,442,800 998,800 Best, Best & Krieger LLP (BB&K) General legal services 2,325,000 2,258,100 (66,900) Case Systems, Inc. (Case) Call box maintenance 250,000 250,000 0 Epic Land Solutions, Inc. (Epic) Support services for property management of Commission -owned properties and related contracts 440,000 684,000 244,000 Fieldman Rolapp & Associates (Fieldman) Financial advisory services 180,000 650,000 470,000 Fulbright & Jaworski LLP (Fulbright) Disclosure counsel services 60,000 165,000 105,000 GCAP Services, Inc. Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) support services 20,000 75,000 55,000 Geographies Graphic design and web services for Multimodal Services Department 750,000 1,229,500 479,500 Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP (Orrick) Bond Counsel Services 190,000 550,000 360,000 Trapeze Regional rideshare software 60,000 45,000 (15,000) McGladrey & Pullen, LLP (McGladrey) Annual audit services 136,000 - 144,200 8,200 Total $10,955,000 $13,593,600 $2,638,600 Budget FY 11/12 Budget FY 12/13 5-Year Contract Bernard J. Arroyo (Bernard Arroyo►' Freeway Service Patrol and Call Box system consultant services $ 25,000 $25,000 $125,000 Paladin Investigative Services (Paladin)1 Call box recovery service 7,000 7,000 35,000 Total $32,000 $32,000 $160,000 'These are contracts with consultants providing specialized services on long-term projects at a fixed price. These contracts do not need to be negotiated annually as service level and pricing is not expected to change during the period of performance. Staff desires to enter into a five-year agreement with each of these consultants for the aggregate amount shown in the Budget FY 2012/13 area above. Agenda Item 8F 65 A MMA In February 2007, AMMA was selected under a competitive procurement process to provide consulting services for the development and implementation of the Coordinated Public Transit -Human Services Transportation Plan (Coordinated °Plan), as well as the nexus of the Coordinated Plan to the receipt of federal Jobs Access Reverse Commute and New Freedom grant funds. AMMA also guides staff regarding the grant application process for the Federal Transit Administration Section 5310 Elderly and Disabled Specialized Transit program. Additionally, AMMA advises staff regarding the management of operator reporting for the current Specialized Transit Universal Call for Projects and assists in the development of the application and eligibility guidelines for the Specialized Transit Universal Call for Projects pertaining to the next two-year funding cycle. Bechtel The Bechtel contract for FY 2012/13 reflects a 15 percent increase over last year, due to increases in staffing. Several of the Commission's projects, including the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project (SR-91 CIP), Perris Valley Line (PVL), and widening projects on the Interstate 215 are entering the more labor-intensive design -build or construction phases, necessitating an increase in staffing to support this work. Bechtel is continuing program management and construction management activities of highway and rail projects for the 2009 Measure A program, as well as the wrap-up of delivery for the remaining projects for the 1989 Measure A program. Bechtel possesses the knowledge and background history of the Commission's capital projects, which is necessary to deliver the Commission's Measure A projects. The flexibility of obtaining additionalsupport from Bechtel as needed for specific project requirements is also important and avoids the need to increase Commission staff. BB&K The BB&K contract for FY 2012/13 reflects a decrease of 3% in legal costs. A high level of general legal services is generally required for capital project activities, including right of way, and Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) regional arterial projects. The decrease is primarily attributable to the wrap-up and delivery of 1989 Measure A highway and commuter rail projects. In recent years, the Commission has engaged other legal firms for specific matters involving potential conflicts of interest as well as specialized legal services. Case Case (formerly Comarco Wireless Technologies) provides for routine corrective and preventive maintenance of call boxes, including knockdowns and vandalism. Case was selected as a result of a competitive procurement in 2001, in which it was the only responsive bidder. In addition, Case provided these services since the inception of the call box program. A competitive procurement is anticipated in FY 2012/13. Agenda Item 8F 66 Epic Epic was selected through a competitive procurement process for property management services, including reviewing the ownership of all Commission -owned properties; identifying, inventorying, and cataloging leases, licenses, easements, and encroachments on Commission -owned property; evaluating fair market value of the uses of Commission -owned property; establishing and maintaining a database to capture all of the Commission's property and contract information; marketing and selling excess land; and resolving complex title issues. Due to its accumulated knowledge and development of various property management projects, resources, and databases associated with the multitude of Commission -owned properties, including but not limited to those along the San Jacinto Branch Line (SJBL), staff determined that Epic can most efficiently and cost effectively provide the services described above. The contract amount is anticipated to increase by $244,000, as some of the support activities that Epic is performing are related to the PVL project, which has critical tiineframes in FY 2012/13. Specific examples of PVL support activities include providing utility information for utility relocation efforts, researching street crossing rights, street vacations, and perfecting and correcting title issues such as Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway easement to fee conversions and land rights swaps with Ca!trans. In addition to an expedited schedule for PVL activities, the number of leases, licenses, easements, and encroachments on the SJBL has been found to be 1,030 instead of the 600 originally anticipated. The work on the SJBL tenant contracts will be expedited in order to more quickly reduce Commission liability and increase licensing revenues. In. FY 2012/13, Epic will continue to evaluate excess Commission properties for sales opportunities. Fieldman Fieldman was selected as the Commission's financial advisor in late 2003, following a procurement process, and has provided financial advisory services on general finance matters and specific financing transactions related to the 2009 Measure A program. Fieldman is significantly involved in the toll financing activities related to the SR-91 CIP that are expected to occur in FY 2012/13; these activities include the issuance of sales tax revenue and toll revenue bonds and the federal Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) loan. Based on current financing activities in progress, as well as Fieldman's knowledge and understanding of the Commission, staff determined it would be more efficient and cost-effective for continuity purposes to retain Fieldman. Staff intends to solicit new proposals for financial advisory services following the conclusion of the SR-91 CIP financing transactions. Fulbright In July 2009, the Commission awarded a professional services agreement to Fulbright for disclosure counsel services in connection with the Commission's 2009 bond issuance. The agreement has been periodically amended for the Commission's subsequent debt transactions. Staff has been satisfied with Agenda Item 8F 67 Fulbright's high level of service and recommends that Fulbright's agreement be amended to include disclosure counsel services related to the issuance of sales tax revenue bonds and toll revenue bonds in connection with the SR-91 CIP financial close. GCAP GCAP provides DBE program consulting and compliance services, including goal calculations, program development, and outreach to small and disadvantaged businesses. Since October 2011, GCAP has been assisting the Commission in the DBE calculation of contract goals and the development of its Small Business Enterprise (SBE) program to meet state and federal requirements. GCAP's level of effort is expected to increase in FY 2012/13 due to essential outreach services for the PVL project, the Commission's triennial DBE goal calculation, and the continued development and implementation of the Commission's SBE program. Geographics Upon the completion of a competitive procurement process in December 2006, Geographics was awarded a professional services agreement to support the Commission with the provision of graphic design and communications services, including but not limited to advertising design and production, website development, collateral and publication design, and media buys. These services are especially critical as it relates to multimodal services programs (commuter assistance, motorist assistance, rail, and transit) that account for a majority of the Commission's outreach. In addition, three mission critical projects are currently underway: • Transition of many aspects of the Commuter Assistance Program to an interactive, web -based environment hosted through the Inland Empire 511 (IE51 1) website; • Increasing deployment of 1E511 as the Commission's public face for multimodal services; and • Deployment of brand new region wide average vehicle ridership (AVR) calculation and commuter survey software for which Geographics provides programming and technical support. As architect of the 1E511 system, a technologically advanced and complex web environment, Geographics is uniquely able to advance the Commission's goals for this program. Additionally, as the Commission's consultant for the transition of the AVR and survey process from end of life software and hardware to a cloud -based environment with a cost-effective future, .Geographics' advice is critical to the program's success. Based on these required services, Geographics' contract for FY 2012/13 reflects an increase of $479,500. Since the Commission manages both the Riverside County and San Bernardino County Commuter Assistance and Agenda Item 8F 68 1E511 programs, San Bernardino Associated Governments will reimburse approximately 50 percent of the total Geographics contract cost for the related services that are provided to or otherwise benefit the San Bernardino County programs. Orrick Orrick was selected as bond counsel in late 2004, following a competitive procurement process and has provided bond counsel services in connection with the financings and other matters related to the 2009 Measure A program, including the SR-91 CIP. Orrick has a high level understanding of the Commission's 2009 Measure A program and related financings and has significant experience with other transportation agencies, especially self-help counties. Accordingly, staff determined that it would be more efficient and cost-effective to continue to retain Orrick in order to complete the SR-91 CIP financing activities. Staff intends to solicit proposals for bond counsel services following the completion of the SR-91 CIP financing activities. Trapeze An agreement for a ridematching software program for the Inland Empire was awarded to Trapeze in 2002 following a competitive procurement process. Subsequently, the software/License agreement was expanded to include Orange, Los Angeles, and Ventura Counties functionality. The software has been customized over the past years in response to the unique regional air quality requirements. As a result of a recent procurement for a new regional rideshare software, this contract has been included in the recurring contracts for software maintenance services for a six-month period to facilitate a seamless transition due to the existing system's customization for the regional partnership. McGladrey In March 2008 following a procurement process, McGladrey was awarded a professional services agreement to perform the Commission's annual audits for a five-year period concludes with the completion of the FY 2011 /12 audit in November 2012. Due to the significant increase in finance activities in FY 2012/13 as a result of involvement in the SR-91. CIP design -build procurement and financing efforts, management determined that conducting a procurement for audit services during that period would create a significant strain on available resources. Additionally, the Commission's current debt indentures require the Commission to obtain a report and opinion of a nationally recognized public accounting firm, such as McGladrey. Based on McGladrey's knowledge and understanding of the Commission's operations and programs, it will be important to retain the firm as a result of these significant transactions. Agenda Item 8F 69 Specialized Services on Long -Term Projects for Multiple Year Contracts Bernard Arroyo The Commission has maintained an agreement with Bernard Arroyo since 2005, for various services relating to the motorist assistance programs. The contractor provides support for the Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) electronic data collection system, including device -level user support; SQL database management; receiving,. processing, and tracking assist data; providing the assist data in monthly and quarterly operational reports; running data analyses on FSP beat efficiency; and running data analyses on call box productivity and effectiveness among other services. Bernard Arroyo has historical and relevant experience working on Commission projects. Staff recommends that the current contract be extended for a five-year period for a total not to exceed amount of $125,000, which reflects no change in the annual cost Accordingly, the FY 2012/13 budget is $25,000 with $100,000 for similar services in the subsequent four-year period. Paladin An important component of administering the call box program in Riverside County is the ability to recover costs for loss and damage, when possible. The Commission has maintained a professional services agreement with Paladin since 2009. Paladin renders cost recovery services resulting from damages caused by motorists and others to the Commission's call box system. There is no cost to engage in a contract with Paladin other than to pay 33 percent of any costs recovered. Staff recommends that the current contract be extended for a five-year period for a total not to exceed amount of $35,000, which reflects no change in the annual cost. Accordingly, the FY 2012/13 budget is $7,000 with $28,000 for similar services in the subsequent four-year period. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2012/13 Amount: $13,625,600 Source of Funds: Measure A, TDA, TUMF, FSP, SAFE Fees, Interest, and Other Reimbursements Budget Adjustment: N/A GLA No.: Various Fiscal Procedures Approved: \1 14 Date: 05/14/12 Agenda Item 8F 70 AGENDA ITEM 8G RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 7, 2012 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Marla Modell, Procurement Administrator Matt Wallace, Procurement Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer,. Executive Director SUBJECT: Agreement with PlanetBids for Online Vendor and Bid Management System BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 12-19-091-00 with PlanetBids, Inc. (PlanetBids) for the use of the PlanetBids BidsOnline vendor and bid management system software for a three-year term, and two one-year options to extend the agreement, in an amount not to exceed $65,000; and 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. - BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Vendor and bid management system software, most often a web -based e-procurement application, became more prevalent in the late-1990s. These web -based applications streamline the complete bidding process and further enable the collection, analysis, and leverage of all aspects of vendordata, purchasing activities, and corresponding history. The Commission currently does not have a vendor and bid management system. DISCUSSION: Procurement staff currently relies on the Commission's website, project managers, and local print advertisement when soliciting requests for proposal (RFP), requests for qualifications (RFQ), and invitations for bids (IFB). As part of the Commission's efforts to administer and manage an efficient procurements process and conduct outreach to small businesses and disadvantaged business enterprises (DBE) for future Commission projects and programs, an off -the -shelf vendor and bid management system is anticipated to be a cost-effective solution. Agenda Item 8G 71 Staff researched available e-procurement solutions during the past few months by investigating what local cities and other transportation agencies are currently utilizing. Staff evaluated multiple software options and took part in demonstrations with BIDSYNC, eBid Systems, and PlanetBids. Staff also considered a bid and quote module available through EDEN, the Commission's financial management system. After evaluating the three demonstrations and comparing the EDEN module's available features against the minimum requirements available through the other three options, staff determined that PlanetBids provides a superior vendor and bid management system that meets the Commission's needs at a reasonable cost. Established in 1998 PlanetBids is a privately held company based in Woodland Hills, California. PlanetBids developed its productto help customers better connect with its current and potential vendors and conduct competitive purchases of goods and services efficiently and cost effectively. It provides a modular suite of leading web -based e-procurement solutions to state and local government agencies, educational institutions and private corporations. The following governmental agencies in Southern California currently use PlanetBids: • California State University Office of the Chancellor and campuses at Channel Islands, Northridge, and San Marcos; • Cities of Anaheim; Burbank, Chula Vista, El Cajon, Fontana, Garden Grove, Irvine, Lake Elsinore, La Mesa, Long Beach, Ontario, Pasadena, Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino, Santa Monica, and Temecula; • Coachella Valley Water District; • Metropolitan Water District of Southern California; • Orange County Fire Authority; • Orange Unified School District; • San Diego Association of Governments; • San Diego Metropolitan Transit System; • San Diego Regional Airport Authority; • San Diego Unified Port District; • Santa Monica College; • Southern California Association of Governments; and • Southern California Regional Rail Authority. The expected efficiency gains from PlanetBids BidsOnline include: • Vendor registration and profile management; • Greater outreach to vendors; • Bid document distribution, including automatic addendum notification and acknowledgments; • Custom email notifications; • Online question and answer management; • Secure e-bidding, including line itemization, calculation with net terms, etc.; • Robust reporting, analysis, charts, and audit trails; Agenda Item 8G 72 • Sealed bids/lock box; • Bid specification library; and • RFP/RFQ/IFB evaluation tools. Based on the information provided, staff recommends that the Commission approve Agreement No. 12-19-091-00 with PlanetBids for a three-year term, and two one- year options to extend the agreement, in the amount of $56,263, plus extra work to be identified through future task orders in the amount of $8,737, for a total amount not to exceed $65,000. Upon approval of the agreement with PlanetBids, estimated implementation is scheduled for the beginning of FY 2012/13. Financial Information Yes FY 2012/13 $15,875 In Fiscal Year Budget: N/A Year: FY 2013/14+ Amount: $49,125 Measure A, TDA, TUMF, FSP, SAFE No Source of Funds: Fees, and Interest Budget Ad ustment: N/A GLA No.: 001001 65520 00000 0001 101 19 65520 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \144a,1 Date: 05/10/12 Attachments: Draft Support Service Agreement Agenda Item 8G 73 Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street — 3rd floor Riverside, CA 92501 Finance/Procurement Marla Modell Procurement Administrator Net 30_ Days Le -air7ot eyPrr errem•a» SW.oliams Carirv:.cting EBtuyers 8 Sitppli€rrs ffic:ientlyi 5850 Canoga Avenue•8uiie 301•Woodland Hills•CA•91387.•818-992-1771 BIDSONLINETm SUPPORT SERVICES AGREEMENT This SUPPORT SERVICES AGREEMENT ("Agreement"), which describes the terms and conditions applicable to your use of the PlanetBids Online Support Services, is made and entered as of into as of the 7th day of June, 2012, by and between PLANETBIOS, INC., a California corporation, ("PlanetBids") and the following customer ("Customer') for the period from July 1, 2012 to June 30, 2015. Customer shall have the option, in its sole discretion, to extend the term of this Agreement for two (2) additional one-year option periods, each to be exercised pursuant to an amendment to this Agreement. Customer Name: Street Address City, State ZIP Department: Principal Contact: Title: Term of Payment: THEREFORE, PlanetBids;and the Customer agree as follows: 1. PlanetBids Services Upon acceptance of this Agreement, PlanetBids shall provide the following Support,: Services to Customer, subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement and in accordance with all applicable laws, rules and regulations. a) "Services" shag include the following: 1) use of the PlanetBids "BidsOnlineTm" Vendor and Bid management system for the purpose of vendor registration, posting and tracking Bid Requests and other information on Customer's website or private internet network, 2) up to two (2) licensed user access to and use of the BidsOnlineTm system by the Customer Procurement Department 3) ability to process and distribute Bid Requests to additionally available PlanetBids suppliers within their selected categories at no additional cost. b) PlanetBids shall have access and the right to market or otherwise promote any or all of its services to any vendor or supplier of Customer that registers with BidsOnlineTm via Customer's website. Planetbids will not sell vendor data to any third parties without a written consent from Customer. c) Internet related equipment by its nature, is not fault tolerant, but PlanetBids will use reasonable efforts to make the Services available 24 hours per day, 7 days per week, • l ©2000-2012 PlanetBids, Inc (818) 992-1771 Confidential & Proprietary, R15914-12 74 except for downtime for scheduled and unscheduled maintenance, and will promptly investigate any technical problems that Customer reports. PlanetBids cannot, however, guarantee continuous service, service at any particular time or the integrity of data transmitted via the Internet. Further, PlanetBids shall not be responsible for the inadvertent disclosure, corruption or erasure of data transmitted, received or sorted on the BidsOnline"' system. d) PlanetBids may make improvements and/or amendments to the BidsOnline"' system at any time, and may provide other optional services, including enhanced versions of standard features or functions, for an additional fee as agreed in advanceby the Customer. Any and all relevant portions of these terms and conditions will automatically apply to all improvements, amendments and/or optional services as they, appear. e) PlanetBids represents that the Services will conform to the minimum specifications and standards of performance set forth in Exhibit "A" attached to this Agreement and incorporated herein by reference. . PlanetBids does not guarantee that use of the Services will produce any quotes, business opportunities orotherinformation '..helpful to the business of Customer, nor does it guarantee that any contact provided will be adequate or best suited .for any transaction. 2. Fees and Payments. a) Support Fees. Customer: agrees to pay to PlanetBids the total amount of $35,477.18 for the initial three (3) year term of this Agreement, vvhich fees shall be due and payable 30 days from the time of execution of thisAgreement, except as otherwise specified below, and include the following: 1), Set -Up Fee. Customer shall; pay a one-time set-up fee of $6,500.00 (discounted` from $7,500.00) for the .installation, configuration and testing of the BidsOnlineTm system link to Customer's website, plus administrator set-up and a one- time online user training up to two (2) users. Further details are available in Statement of Work (Exhibit "A"). (i) Acceptance Period. Customer shall be entitled to a thirty (30) day acceptance period to; test the BidsOnline system and ensure that the Services conform to the minimum specifications and standards of performance as set forth in Exhibit "A". The Set -Up Fee shall be due and payable ten (10) days following acceptance by Customer of the Services, and receipt by Customer of an invoice therefor from PlanetBids. 2) Service Fee Payment. Customer agrees to pay a service fee of $5,875.00 for the first year of the initial term of this Agreement, for the use of the BidsOnlineT"' system, which fee shall increase at the rate of three (3) percent increase per year. 3) Additional Add-on/Module. Customer agrees to pay a special service fee of $3,500.00 for the RFP Evaluation add -on module for the initial term of this Agreement. A onetime setup fee of $750.00 is waived. A three (3) percent increase per year applies to the Services Fee for the option terms. 2 ©2000-2012 PlanetBids, Inc (818) 992-1771 Confidential & Proprietary, R15914-12 75 b) Support Fees for Option Term. If the term of this Agreement is extended pursuant to Customer's exercise of one or both extension options, Customer shall pay the amount for the applicable option year as set forth in Table (A) below 30 days from execution of the amendment to extend the term of this Agreement. The total amount for the two (2) option terms shall not exceed $20,785.95. c) Total Support Fees for Initial and Option Term. The total not -to - exceed amount for the initial term of this Agreement, plus the two (2) option terms shall not exceed $56,263.13. Table (A) M© i.E 4 - SETUP YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 (Optional) YEAR 5 (Optional) , BidsOnlinen4 Vendor &, Bid Mgmt. • $ 6,500.00 $ 5,875.00 $ 6,051.25 $ 6,232.78 $ 6,419.77 $ 6,612.36 . RFP Evaluation Atld-on.„--,'•4 t $0.00 $ 3,500.00; $ 3,605.00 . $ 3,713.15 $ 3,824.54 $ 3,929.28 Sub -Total . $ 6,500.00 $ 9,375.00 $ 9,656.25 $ 9945.93 $ 10,244.31 $ 10,541.64 TOTAk $ 15,875.00 $ 9,656.25 $ 9,945.93 $ 10,244.31 $ 10,541.64 Additional Services; Fees. If requested by Customer, in writing, PlanetBids will provide any or all of the following additional services: " 1) Special customization work -up shall be provided at PlanetBids' current standard rates jursuart to an estimate provided by PlanetBids. 2) Training to Customer's designated risers, in addition to that provided pursuant to Section, 2(a)(1), is available as oftoday at the rate of $500.00 for up toy 3 hours online, or $1,47.5.00 for up to 3 hours per class plus reasonable „;travel, living, and parking`` expenses of the instructor, as applicable. 3) PlanetBids wilt record at no cost a back-up copy of all data appearing on Customer's wepsite on a daily basis. Services related to the retrieval or restoration of any;of; Customer's data from such back-up files are available at-PlanetBids current standard rates, which will vary depending onthe level of services required, but not less than $125.00 per hour. A late fee of 3% per month will be charged on the total amount due if payment,,is not received within the terms of this agreement. 3. Use of Services. a) PlanetBids is not responsible for the content and/or transactions on Customer's website. Notwithstanding the foregoing, PlanetBids reserves the right to monitor content that uses the Services and to remove content which PlanetBids reasonably determines to be offensive, harmful or otherwise in violation of its operating policies. 1) PlanetBids shall have the right to impose reasonable rules and regulations from time to time regarding the use of the Services, and shall promptly provide copies of any such rules to Customer. Customer agrees to comply with all such rules and regulations and with applicable laws, ordinances and regulations related to the use of Services and not make any unauthorized commercial use of the Services or of the PlanetBids name, marks or logos. Further, Customer agrees to not use the PlanetBids websites to (1) post information anonymously or under a false name; (2) post any unlawful, threatening, abusive, harassing, libelous, defamatory, obscene, pornographic, 3 ©2000-2012 PlanetBids, Inc (818) 992-1771 Confidential & Proprietary, R1591.4-12 76 profane or otherwise" objectionable information of any kind, such as inducements to conduct that would constitute a criminal offense or give rise to civil or other liability. 2) If Customer uses standard identification codes, PlanetBids shall have the right to request for inspection an original copy of such codes and any necessary authorizations for use. If such identification codes are proprietary codes of third parties, such as NIGP, SIC or CSI, it shall be the responsibility of Customer to obtain the necessary licenses and Customer indemnifies and holds harmless PlanetBids from the unauthorized use or publication of any such identification codes with respect to the Services. 3) Customer represents and warrants (a) the information provided is current, complete and accurate, (b) that the person signing this Agreement is authorized to bind Customer, (c) Customer will update the information (including credit card information, if applicable) as required to keep such information current, complete and accurate. 4) In addition, Customer agrees to use information obtained through the Services only as necessary to the transaction of Customerand; shall not use the Services for the benefit of any third party. 5) Upon request,, provide PlanetBids with a record of all transactions and payments related to Bid Requests Made through the use of the Services. 6) It shall be the responsibility of Customer to collect and pay any taxes, duties, imposts tariffs that are aeable to =sales via the Services. b) EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED IN THIS SECTION 3(b), THE SERVICES ARE PROVIDED "AS IS." PLANETBIDS MAKES NO WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING WITHOUT ; LIMITATION,_ IMPLIEDWARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A. PARTICULAR -:.PURPOSE, OR NONINFRINGEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ORAOTH'ER VIOLATION OF RIGHTS, °EVEN IF PLANETBIDS HAS BEEN MADE AWAREAN ADVANCE OF, SUCH POTENTIAL RISK. FURTHER, PLANETBIDS DOES NOT. WARRANT OR MAKE ANY REPRESENTATIONS REGARDING THE ACCURACY, LIKELY RESULTS, OR RELIABILITY OF THE USE OF THE SERVICES OR SITES LINKED THERETO. NOTWITHSTANDING THE"FOREGOING, CUSTOMER SHALL HAVE THE RIGHT TO TERMINATE THIS AGREEMENT FOR CAUSE IF THE SERVICES ° DO NOT CONFORM TO THE MINIMUM SPECIFICATIONS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT "A", IF THE SERVICES ARE FOUND BY A COURT OF— COMPETENT JURISDICTION TO INFRINGE ON THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OF ANOTHER PARTY OR VIOLATE ANY OTHER RIGHTS, OR FOR ANY REASON SPECIFIED IN SECTION 4(a) OF THIS AGREEMENT. c) PlanetBids does not at any time come into possession of the products or services acquired through the Services and is not aware of the specific use to which those items will be put. In using the Services, Customer hereby releases PlanetBids and its agents, employees, and affiliates from any liability arising from any claims, demands, costs and damages (actual and consequential) of every kind and nature arising out of, or in anyway connected with, Bid Requests and uncompleted or completed transactions related to the Services. 4. Termination a) Termination For Cause. ©2000-2012 PlanetBids, Inc (818) 992-1771 Confidential & Proprietary, R15914-12 77 1) This Agreement may be terminated by either party by providing the non - terminating party with no less than ten (10) business days written notice (and reasonable opportunity to cure) upon the occurrence of any breach of any material term or condition of this Agreement or any representation or warranty herein; 2) This Agreement may be terminated by Customer by providing PlanetBids with no less than ten (10) business days written notice (and reasonable opportunity to cure) upon the occurrence of any change or discontinuation in any aspect or feature of the BidsOnline' system; or 3) This Agreement may be terminated by Customer by providing PlanetBids with no less than ten (10) business days written notice (and reasonable opportunity to cure) upon the failure of PlanetBids to maintain its Internet website located at URL www.planetbids.com so that Customer may access the BidsOnline' system for more than ten (10) days within a thirty (30) day period. c) if this Agreement is terminated as set forth herein, Customer shall be entitled to a refund of a pro-rata share of the total fees paid by Customer for each full 12 month period remaining in the then -current term of this Agreement. 5. Confidentiality. PlanetBids shall take reasonable measures not to disclose website communications or information about its Customers, except to the extent that PlanetBids believes in good faith that:,,such action` is within the scope of the Services or reasonably necessary to (a) comply with the law or the directives of courts or governmental agencies; (b) enforce this Agreement;' (c) respond to claims of any third party; or (d) protect the legitimate interests of PlanetBids or its customers. Notwithstanding the foregoing, PlanetBids shall first provide Customer with ten (10) days advance written notice prior to disclosing any confidential information, pursuant to items (a), (b)r:(c) or (d) of the foregoing sentence. Notwithstanding the foregoing, all communications directed to �PlanetBiids via the website such as questions, comments, inquiries shall be deemed to be not confidential, unless specifically agreed otherwise in advance by PlanetBids or unless identified as confidential by Customer. Further, PlanetBids will have the right to use any Customer's name in connection with the advertising or promotion of the Services. 6. Copyright Protection. The BidsOnlineTm system and all materials appearing on the PlanetBids website are protected by worldwide copyright laws and related international treaties. None of the materials may be copied, reproduced, modified, published, uploaded, posted, transmitted, or distributed in any form or by any means other than as described herein. All rights not expressly granted herein are reserved. Any unauthorized use of the materials appearing on PlanetBids website may violate copyright, trademark and other applicable laws and could result in criminal or civil penalties. a) Customer shall not reproduce, duplicate, copy, sell, resell or exploit for any commercial purpose the Services, website content, the BidsOnlineTm system or any other PlanetBids tools. Customer shall not reverse engineer, decompile, or otherwise attempt to derive source code from any software or tools accessible or available through the Services. b) Special use requests should be sent to customerservice(u�PlanetBids.com. Permission to use shall be granted in the sole discretion of PlanetBids. 5 ©2000-2012 PlanetBids, Inc (818) 992-1771 Confidential & Proprietary, R15914-12 78 7. Security. (a) The PlanetBids ordering and posting processes are protected by the Secure Sockets Layer (SSL) protocol, which encrypts your information and confirms the identity of the PlanetBids server before .allowing a transaction to .be completed. Firefox 3.5+ (or better) and Internet Explorer 8.0+ (or better) support the SSL protocol are acceptable, but we recommend that you use the latest browsers to ensure that you are protected by advances in security technology. For more detailed information, please refer to the PlanetBids Privacy Policy. (b) Password -protection techniques will be provided to restrict access under Customer's account to authorized individuals. REGISTRANT ACKNOWLEDGES, HOWEVER, THAT ACCESS RESTRICTIONS, BY THEIR NATURE, ARECAPABLE OF BYPASS AND PLANETBIDS DOES NOT GUARANTEE THAT THE SERVICES CANNOT BE ACCESSED BY UNAUTHORIZED PERSONS. Customer shall at all times 'maintain as confidential its user names and passwords. If Customer is a corporation or other business entity, then it may allow employees to use its user name and password, but the Customer shall be responsible for all activity and charges incurred by such employees. Permitting third parties to use the Services is prohibited and a violation of this Agreement. (c) If a security breach occurs with respect, to any account, the Customer must immediately change its password and notify PlanetBids at customerservice(c�PlanetBids.com. Customer shall be liable any unauthorized use of t e _"Services until PlanetBids is notified _r the security breach. Other Provisions.` a) Notices. PlanetBids shall provide' notice to Customer via email, with a copy sent via certified U.S. Mail, to the address _provided on the membership registration or such other address provided by Customer to PlanetBids. Customer shall provide notice to PlanetBids via email to customerserviceCa)PlanetBids.corn, with a copy sent via certified U.S. Mail to the address,.on°the membership registration. Notices will be effective 6 hours after sending if sent via email (unless the sender;_ receives a response indicating that the message was undelivered) or 3 business days after the,_ mailing date, whether or not received. b) Assignment. Neither party shall assign this Agreement or any of its rights or obligations without the prior written consent of the other party, and any such attempted assignment will be void. Subject to the above, this Agreement will be binding upon the parties' respective successors and permitted assigns. c) No Waiver. ' The failure of either party to exercise or enforce any right or provision under this Agreement will not constitute a waiver of such right or provision. If any. provision of this Agreement is found by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the parties nevertheless agree that the court should endeavor to give effect to the parties' intentions as reflected in the provision, and the other provisions of the these terms and conditions shall remain in full force and effect. d) Governing Law. The interpretation and enforcement of this Agreement shall be governed by laws of the United States of America and the State of California, excluding its choice of law rules and subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the court located in Riverside County, California. ©2000-2012 PlanetBids, Inc (818) 992-1771 Confidential & Proprietary, R15914-12 79 e) Force Majeure. PlanetBids will not be liable in any amount for failure to perform any obligation under this Agreement if such failure is caused by Internet outages or delays, unauthorized access (hacking), earthquakes, communications outages, fire, flood, war, an act of God, or the occurrence of any other unforeseen contingency beyond the reasonable control of PlanetBids. f) Indemnification. Each party shall hold harmless, defend, indemnify and hold the other party and its officials, officers, employees, consultants, subcontractors and agents free and harmless from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, costs, expenses, liability, loss, damage or injury, in law or equity, to property or persons,; including wrongful death, arising out any gross negligent acts or omissions or willful misconduct of indemnifying party or its officers, employees, consultants, subcontractors and agents arising out of or in connection with the performance of this Agreement,. g) Independent Contractor Status. The parties agree that PlanetBids is an independent contractor under this Agreement and will in no way be considered to be an agent, partner, joint venturer or employee of Customer. h) Attorney Fees. If either party commences an action against^ the other party, either legal, administrative or otherwise, arising out of or in;corinection with thrs Agreement, the prevailing party in such litigation shalt be entitled to have and recover from the losing party reasonable attorney's fees and all other, costs of such action. i) Counterparts. This Agreernent may be executed in counterparts and each such counterpart will be deemed an original 'copy of this Agreement,; when so executed and the counterparts will, when taken together, constitute and be one and the same instrument. j) Amendment or Modification. This Agreement may be amended or modified only by a written instrument signed by all parties or their, successors in interest. k) Authority. The individuals executing this Agreement for each party or entity are duly authorized representatives and each such individual has the requisite authority to enter into this Agreement on behalf of his or her principal. (Signatures on following page] ©2000-2012 PlanetBids, Inc (818) 992-1771 Confidential & Proprietary, R15914-12 80 SIGNATURE PAGE TO BIDSONLINETm SUPPORT SERVICES AGREEMENT AGREED effective as of the date first written above. PLANETBIDS, INC. CUSTOMER: By: By;; Alan Zavian, President & CEO John J. Benoit Chair (Date) ©2000-2012 PlanetBids, Inc (818) 992-1771 Confidential & Proprietary, R15914-12 81 EXHIBIT "A" STATEMENT OF WORK FOR SETUP, IMPLEMENTATION AND TRAINING 1. BidsOnline TM Vendor and Bid Management Access Services: PlanetBids rate for maintaining the BidsOnline vendor and bid management system is based upon an unlimited number of monthly transactions (Bids) and up to two (2) registered users. BidsOnline Access Services include the following: • System Administration— PlanetBids will be responsible for system and data back-ups, disaster recovery, system reliability, availability, privacy, and security • Hosting Infrastructure — PlanetBids will be responsible for hosting BidsOnline, maintaining the network, hardware and software infrastructure • Customer Service — "Level 2" customer service is available from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. PST, Monday through Friday (see Help Desk definition below) • Account Management — PlanetBids will provide a dedicated Account Manager for post - sales support, BidsOnline system questions. " ,. • System requirement - Adobe Flash,�Player 11., 0+ is:required and available for free at www.adobe.com . 2. BidsOnline Set-up; Implementation and Training:_ • PlanetBids wilt initially load tap to two (21»sers, for Customer • PlanetBids will provide online; training for BidsOnline user administration BidsOnline set-up, implementation and training is further defined below: A. Initial program. definition The PlanetBids, implementationmanager will work with one (1) designated Customer project manager to develop a roadmap for system implementation. The implementation manager will define and present a, project management schedule to the Customer project manager. Customer will be required to submit information according with the project management schedule. Upon completion and review of the BidsOnline system by Customer, PlanetBids will train all assigned users on -site "at the Customer's training facility. B. System implementation and administration. PlanetBids will enter and configure Customer requirements into BidsOnline for up to two (2) users for Customer. The following implementation services will be provided: a. Setup PlanetBids portal and provide links for Customer to activate from its website . b. Online configured vendor registration form and ability to have vendors maintain their profiles. c. Complete management tools access to all users (i.e. buyers, project managers...). d. Customer specific database. e. Complete bid management from bid submission to awarding. 9 ©2000-2012 PlanetBids, Inc (818) 992-1771 Confidential & Proprietary, R15914-12 82 f. Electronic bidding - Vendors submit bid quotes/responses online; Buyers analyze bid responses and award. g. Daily backups. h. BidsOnline TM users and vendor support for the duration of the contract. 3. Professional Services PlanetBids will provide consulting services for custom reports or BidsOnline customizations, specific to Customer, not covered by this Statement of Work at an additional charge. Additional consulting services requested in writing by Customer will be billed at a rate of $125/hour, billed in 1 hour increments. No work will begin on professional services before a mutually agreed - upon statement of work is completed. All on -site travel expenses will be passed -through to Customer. No travel will be expensed without the prior approval of Customer's management. 4. Help Desk The PlanetBids Help Desk is available for "Level 2" support (as defined below) via our toll -free telephone number from 8:00am to 5;00pm PST, Monday through Friday. Email Support, support@PlanetBids.com as well as on-line help services are also available. Customer will be responsible for all "Level 1 support: • A level 1 support representative will attempt to answer mostaor all questions, including help to vendors with'simple problems "(edit prole, etc:). or general "how-to" questions (search functionality, bidding, etc.). More complex, technical questions should be directed to a PlanetBids level support representative.: A PlanetBids representative will; be responsible for "Level 2" support: • . A Level 2 support is more technical in nature. Level 2 questions may, for example, deal with Customer users`.(i.e. BidsOnline system administrative users including buyers, project administrators, etc.) or with, password issues requiring special assistance, or with possible product bugs or failures. In this case, some research and investigation may be required: 5. Additional Module(s,): The same terms and conditions outlined in this Exhibit A shall also apply to the RFP Evaluation Add -on module. 10 ©2000-2012 PlanetBids, Inc (818) 992-1771 Confidential & Proprietary, R15914-12 83 AGENDA ITEM 8H RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: June 7, 2012 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee David Thomas, Tall Project Manager Michael Blomquist, Toll Program Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: State Route 91 Project and Construction Management Services WESTERN RIVERS/DE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 09-31-081-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 09-31-081-00, with Parsons Transportation Group, Inc. (Parsons) to provide additional services for Phase 1 of the SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project (SR-91 CIP) widening and extension of the 91 Express Lanes in the amount of $18,434,545, plus a contingency of $1,850,000, for a total amount not to exceed $20,284,545, and a total authorized contract value of $60,084,545; 2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve contingency work as may be required for the project. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Due to the passage of the 2009 Measure A extension in 2002, the Commission adopted the 2009 Measure A Western County Highway 10-Year Delivery Plan (10-Year Delivery Plan) in December 2006. In this action, the Commission also directed staff to proceed with development of a , project report/environmental document for all the new projects identified in the plan. The SR-91 corridor improvement project (SR-91 CIP) was included in the 10-Year Delivery Plan and given high priority by the Commission. In September 2007, the Commission approved an agreement with PB Americas and authorized staff to proceed with preliminary engineering/environmental services for the SR-91 CIP: This project report/environmental document is currently scheduled to be completed in the summer 2012. Agenda Item 8H 84 In October 2009, the Commission approved an agreement with Parsons to provide design -build services through final design and construction of the SR-91 CIP and authorized staff to proceed with the first work phase - Phase 1 Project and Construction Management (PCM) services - for a not to exceed amount of $39.8 million that includes a contingency amount of $4,260,701. These Phase 1 PCM services included working on interagency agreements, right of way acquisition, utility relocations, advanced final engineering, and procurement of a design -builder. The cost for the Phase 1 PCM Services was based upon a schedule duration of two years. Staff will negotiate a contract amendment with the PCM to provide Phase 2 services to deliver the SR-91 CIP through final engineering, construction, and toll operation start up.. Staff will return to the Commission with a contract amendment request to authorize staff to proceed with Phase 2 services. Structuring the work in two phases results in a key decision point for the Commission. Phase 1 covers all work necessary from the PCM prior to the sale of toll revenue and sales tax bonds. The successful sale of toll revenue and sales tax bonds is paramount in order to commence Phase 2 activities. Phase 2 contract authorization could be provided upon a successful sale of toll revenue and sales tax bonds. A two-phase approach allows the Commission to control whether and when to begin Phase 2 activities. The initially assumed two-year duration for the PCM Phase 1 services was based upon the assumption, at that time, that the successful sale of toll revenue and sales tax bonds would occur in fall 201 1 /winter 2012. There are several factors that caused this duration to extend approximately 18 months to the current scheduled date in .July 2013. Among these factors are: 1. Completing environmental approval for the project, which was initially scheduled for the spring/summer of 2011, but now scheduled for the summer of 2012; and 2. Success in obtaining an invitation for Transportation Investment Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) funding, which recently occurred on April 24, 2012, and was the trigger for finalizing the design -build procurement schedule. Staff, working with the PCM team, successfully continued to work beyond the initial two-year duration (approximately nine additional months), keeping within the Commission authorized agreement not to exceed amount. With the successful invitation for the Commission to apply for. a TIFIA loan to complete the required funding for the project, staff, on May 7, 2012, invited the four prequalified design - build firms to perform an industry review of the draft request for proposal (RFP) for the SR-91 CIP. This kicked off the process for the final selection of a design - builder for the SR-91 CIP. This process is currently scheduled to be complete in April 2013 with the award of a design -build contract by the Commission. The PCM Agenda Item 8H 85 • will be an integral part of this selection process, and this will be a major part of the PCM scope of work for the coming fiscal year. The other main PCM scope of work efforts, over the next year, will include the following items: 1. The continuing work effort involved with right of way acquisition for the project; 2. Coordinating with the five major utilities that are in conflict with the proposed SR-91 CIP improvements for relocation of utilities and procurement of long lead items; 3. Coordinating with .the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railroad for construction and maintenance agreements required to allow access on the BNSF property; and 4. Continued coordination with the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) and its express lane toll operator, Cofiroute, for planning of the Commission's integration with the existing facility. The following list is the PCM's scope summary of Phase 1 services to be continued through the extended Phase 1 duration: 1. Agency Coordination (Federal Highway Administration, Caltrans, Corona, Riverside County, OCTA, resource agencies); 2. Right of Way Acquisition and Mitigation Planning (right of way engineering, appraisals, fee acquisitions, utility easements, relocations, etc.); 3. Railroad Agreements and Utility Relocation (agreements, coordination, and advanced utility relocation plans); 4. Procurement of Design -Builder (industry review, RFP, one-on-one meetings, alternate technical proposals, design -build contract provision input, selection process, contract negotiations, contract award process); 5. Advanced Engineering to Support the RFP and Agreements (Perform limited, advanced engineering in several areas including long lead time bridges, surveying, stage construction, geotechnical explorations/reports, etc. prior to the procurement of a design -builder. Coordinate with existing project approval and environmental document firm(s) as necessary for information and engineering work in support of the design -build RFP); 6. Project Controls and Implementation Planning (schedule, budget, document control system, forecasting, reporting, project management plan, project procedures); 7. Tolling Technology Requirements and Agreements (tolling management plan, systems integration contract, business rules, operations agreement, etc.); and 8. Public Information/Outreach (web sites, public meetings, newsletters, media reports, community outreach presentations, etc.). Agenda Item 8H 86 Staff recommends approval of Agreement No. 09-31-081-01 , Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 09-31-081-00, with Parsons to provide additional services for Phase 1 of the SR-91 CIP for an additional amount of $ 18,434,545, plus a contingency of $1,850,000 for a total amount not to exceed $20,284,545. This would bring the total authorized contract value to $60,084,545. Staff further recommends that the Commission authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission and authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve contingency as may be required for the project. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes N/A Year. FY 2012/13 FY 2013/14 Amount: $17,100,000 $3,184,545 Source of Funds: Measure A/debt proceeds Budget Adjustment: No N/A GL/Project Accounting No.: 003028 81601 262 31 81601 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \11 Date: 05/10/12 Attachment: PCM Amendment No. 1 Budget Summary Agenda Item 8H 87 5/9/2012 • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (RCTC) SR91 CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT PARSONS(PCM) LIMITED NOTICE TO PROCEED #6 BUDGET FINAL WBS Total Cost by Number Activity Description Hours Parsons GCAP Arellano HDR Southstar OPC Psomas Cofiroute Total Cost Task TASK 100 - Proiect Management 10101 Project Management - - Project Management 2,080 $ 689,260 $ 689,260 Admin Support 3,600 $ 292,395 - $ 292,395 10201 Project Support 0 5 - Safety 50 $ 8,165 $ 8,165 QA/QC 50 $ 8,165 $ 8,165 ....Insurance 0 $ - $ - Financing/ g/ Funding Support 320 $ 74,058 $ 74,058 Agency Support 520 $ 120, 345 $ 120,345 Right of Way Mitigation Coordination 0 $ - $ - Partnering 0 $ - $ - ProjectLaborAgreement 0 $ - $ - Process Improvement 0 $ - $ - Management Startup Support 0 $ - 5 11101 Risk Management 520 5 84,917 $ 84,917 11301 Policies, Plans and Manuals 1,300 $ 230,557 $ 230,557 15501 Community/Government Relations 1,380 $ 266,852 $ 266,852 15601 Labor and DBE Compliance 1,266 $ .142,224 _ _ $ 142,224 $. 1,916,938 TASK 200 - Planning & Design 20101 Planning and Design Management 2,080 $ 336,359 $ 336,359 202 01 Design Support Activities 2,637 $ 293,201 $ 293, 201 203 01 Structures (Bridges &_Retaining Walls) 100 $ 24,124 _ $ 24,124 204 01 Civil (Roadways and Drainage) 0 $ - - _ _ .$ - 205 01 • Traffic, MOT, ITS 100 $ 22,003 $ 22,003 20601 GeoTechnical Oversight _ 100 $ 14,846 - $ 14,846 207 01 ITS, Electrical, Lighting 0 $ - $ - 20801 Landscape and Aesthetics 100$ 24,124 $ 24,124 20901 Roadway Conditions 100 $ 31,812 $ 31,812 21001 Environmental 162 5 23,620 - $ 23,620 21101 Permits 320 $ 42,416 - - $ 42,416 21201 k Utility. Management 207 $ 21,950 ,$ 21,950 25101 Survey/ROW Engineering 6,372 $ 1,004,877 $ 1,004,877 25201 R/W Acquisition 49,474 $ 8,284,368 $ 8,284,368 • 25301 Utilities Planning 100 $ 20,113 $ 20;113 . 25401 Utilities Planning 0 $ - - 25501 Geotechnical 0 $ - . 25601 _ Civil (Roadways and Drainage) 270 _ _ _ _ $ 44,352 $ 44,352 25611 • Roadway Conditions _ - $ - 25701 _ Railroad Coordination 823 $ 160,327 $ 160,327 25801 ROW -Property Management 5,000 _ _ $ 482,080 $ as 2,086 25811 Property Management Costs 8,125 $ 475,304 $ 475,304 25821 Property Management Costs • Vendor $ 250,000 $ 250,000 25901 Design Management and Support 520 $ 110,034 $ 110,034 88 1 OF 10 LNTP 6 Budget - Rev 2 - FINAL.xlsx 5/9/2012 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (ROTC) SR91 CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT PARSONS(PCM) LIMITED NOTICE TO PROCEED k6 BUDGET FINAL WBS Number Activity Description ,Hours Parsons GCAP Arellano HDR Southstar OPC Psomas Cofiroute Total Cost Total Cost by Task $ 11,665,911 TASK 300 - Tolling & Operations 30101 Tolling and Operation Planning 4,220 $ 669,011 $ 669,011 35101 Tolling and Operation. Planning 60 $ 109,044 $ 109,044 35201 Operations and Business Planning 354 01 Tolling and Operations Planning 974 $ 144,017 S 144,017 $ 922,072 TASK 400 • Contracts & Procurement 40101 Contract/Procurement Management 2,600 $ 419,070 - $ 419,070 40401 Request for Proposals(RFP) 880 $ 203,660 - $ 203,660 45301. Request for Proposals(RFP) 1,060 $ 224,240 $ 224,240 $ 846,970 TASK 500 - Proiect Controls 50101 Project Controls Management 2,080 $ 325,331 $ 325,331 50201 Cost Engineering 2,158 $ 183,704 $ 183,704 50301 Scheduling 1,040 $ 151,637 $ 151,637 50401 Document Controls Management 2,080 $ - 132,338 $ 132,338 50501 Cost Estimating 104 $ 21,505 $ 21,505 TASK 600 - Construction Management $ 814,514 60101 Construction Planning 2,080 $ 472,446 $ 472,446 60201 Field Services Support 1,040 $ 157,289 5 157, 289 60301 ROW Parcel Construction Mitigation 2,500 $ 539,252 $ 539,252 TASK 700 - Other Direct Cost S 1,168,987 ODC's $ 403,480 $ - 408 $ 4,320 $ 32,076 $ 2,664 $ 30,750 $ 154,220 $ 5,452 $ 633,370 - $ 633,370 Sub Total $ 6,021,040 $ 142,632 $ 271,172 $ 680,073 $. 22,777 $ 9,522,502 $ 1,159,097 $ 149,468 $ 17,968,763 4.0% b MC, 3.5 Suark Up (on OP%n others) _._. _._.._ _.___.. • $ _ 465,783 °"�4` r�.., za�.,li; � $ ,22E$03 �_...� �i�,W 38t390Q; $„ ;40,$58 $«s,`: : $,23. $_ 465,783 $_ 465,783 „9431 TOTAL Contract Value by Firm 110,552 $ 6,486,823 $ Mlle 271,172 $ 680,073_ $ 22,777 $ 9,522,502 $ 1,159,097 $ 149,468. $ 18,434,545 $ 18,434,545 89 2 of 10 LNTP 6 Budget - Rev 2 - FINAL.xlsx AGENDA ITEM 81 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: June 7, 2012 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: David Thomas, Toll Project Manager THROUGH: Michael Blomquist, Toll Program Director SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution No. 12-021 for Commission Election to Hear Future Resolutions of Necessity for the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project and Designation of Commission's General Counsel STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to adopt Resolution No. 12-021, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Electing to Hear Future Resolutions •of Necessity for the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project and Designation of Commission's General Counsel to Process Resolution of Necessity Packages for the Project". BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The SR-91 CIP will widen the SR-91 through the County, extend the existing 91 Express Lanes from the Orange County line to Interstate 15, improve five local interchanges, reconstruct a portion of the 15/91 interchange, and provide other regular and express lane improvements within the SR-91 corridor. The Commission is acquiring the right of way necessary for the construction of the project. Under special legislation, the Commission has authority to grant Resolutions of Necessity along SR-91 within the project limits between SR-241 and 1-15. The project limits, however, extend along SR-91 further east of 1-15 and include segments along 1-15 north and south of SR-91. Therefore, there is a need to extend Commission authority to grant Resolutions of Necessity within these remaining segments of the project limits. By adopting Resolution . No. 12-021, the Commission agrees to follow all procedures for the resolution of necessity process as outlined in the Caltrans Right of Way manual, which requires condemnation evaluation and condemnation panel review meetings under certain circumstances, prior to seeking resolutions of necessity. Attachment: Resolution No.12-021 Agenda Item 81 90 RESOLUTION NO. 12-021 RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ELECTING TO HEAR FUTURE RESOLUTIONS OF NECESSITY FOR THE STATE ROUTE 91 CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT FOR PROPERTIES BEYOND THE PROJECT LIMITS AND DESIGNATION OF . COMMISSION GENERAL COUNSEL TO PROCESS RESOLUTION OF NECESSITY PACKAGES FOR THE SAME WHEREAS, the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("RCTC") is empowered to acquire by eminent domain any property to carry out its powers or functions pursuant to Public Utilities Code section l 30220.5; WHEREAS, property may properly be acquired by eminent domain for the State Highway System pursuant to Streets and Highways Code section 102; WHEREAS, RCTC's Measure A and State statute authorizes the construction of new lanes, connectors and related improvements on State Route 91 between Interstate 15 and the Riverside/Orange County line (the "State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project"), a project on the State of California Highway System, and State of California Department of Transportation ("Caltrans") has authorized RCTC to perform right of way activities for said project; WHEREAS, all local public agency projects on the State of California Highway System, within the existing or proposed State of California rights of way are subject to the requirements of the State of California Department of Transportation ("Caltrans") Right of Way Manual, and recent provisions to the Caltrans Right of Way Manual now require a local public agency to pass a resolution, by a four -fifths vote, making an election to hear all the Resolutions of Necessity for the project; and WHEREAS, RCTC will follow State statute requirements and the Caltrans Right of Way Manual processes in the issuance of the Notice of Intent to adopt a Resolution of Necessity and in the adoption of a Resolution of Necessity, and the RCTC General Counsel is designated to process and approve the resolution packages(s); NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Riverside County Transportation Commission has approved, by a four -fifths vote, that it will hear Resolutions of Necessity associated with the construction of new lanes, connectors and related improvements for the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project for properties within the project limits beyond the limits authorized by State statute. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Riverside County Transportation Commission designates its General Counsel to prepare, review, process, and approve the Resolution of Necessity packages for the project for properties within the project limits beyond the limits authorized by State statute. 91 PASSED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of June, 2012. ATTEST: By: Jennifer Harmon Clerk of the Board By: John J. Benoit, Chair Riverside County Transportation Commission 92 AGENDA ITEM 8J RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 7, 2012 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Shirley Medina, Planning and Programming Manager Cathy Bechtel, Project Development Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: State Route 91 High Occupancy Vehicle Project Cooperative Agreement Amendment WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Reprogram federal Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds from construction savings to cover the increase in Caltrans' expenditures for the plans, specifications, and estimates (PS&E) related to the State Route 91 high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes project; 2) Approve Agreement No. 06-31-062-02, Amendment No. 2 to Agreement No. 06-31-062-00, to increase funding by the amount of $1,225,534 for the PS&E phase for the SR-91 HOV lanes project; and 3) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The SR-91 HOV lanes project was awarded by Caltrans on March 8, 2012. The construction phase was funded with Proposition 1 B Corridor Mobility Improvement Account (CMIA) and federal CMAQ funds. As a result of the low bid, construction savings resulted in the amount of $37,007,000 in CMIA savings and $9,352,000 in CMAQ savings. Project cost savings are returned back to the respective funding pots with the California Transportation Commission responsible for reprogramming CMIA savings, and the Commission responsible for reprogramming CMAQ savings. Caltrans recently finalized its expenditures for the PS&E phase, which Commission staff reviewed. Final expenditures for PS&E resulted in an increase to the current cooperative agreement in an amount of $1,225,534. The design cost increase was due to modifications to right of way, utility, and railroad requirements, and operational and safety improvements. Agenda Item 8J 93 Staff recommends approval of the cost increase and proposes to reprogram $1,084,965 CMAQ savings from the construction phase to cover the increase in the PS&E phase, and $140,569 of Measure A funds required to match federal CMAQ funds. The CMAQ funds are directly reimbursed to Caltrans; therefore, the financial impact to the Commission's budget will only reflect the Measure A match. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2012/13 Amount: $ 140,569 Source of Funds: 1989 Measure A Western County Highway Budget Adjustment: No GL/Project Accounting No.: 003005 81 102 222 31 81 102 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \jinx 3 Date: 05/10/12 Agenda Item 8J 94 AGENDA ITEM 8K RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: June 7, 2012 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Patricia Castillo, Capital Projects Manager Marlin Feenstra, Project Delivery Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: State Route 60 Truck Climbing/Descending Lane Project - Project Approval and Environmental Document WESTERN RIVERS/DE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Agree to sponsor the project approval and environmental document (PA&ED) phase of the State Route 60 truck climbing lane project; 2) Approve the programming of Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) funds in the amount of $3,006,000 for PA&ED; 3) Approve Cooperative Agreement No. 12-31-092-00 with Caltrans for the PA&ED phase for the SR-60 truck climbing lane project; 4) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 5) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute any future non -funding related amendments. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The 2009 Measure A passed by voters in 2002 included a project to add a truck climbing lane on SR-60 in the Badlands area east of Moreno Valley. The 10-Year Western Riverside County Highway Delivery Plan approved by the Commission in December 2006 did not include the SR-60 Truck Climbing Lane but did include the truck climbing lane project on Interstate 10 from the San Bernardino County line to SR-60. However, at the Commission workshop in 2011, staff presented traffic volume and accident rate comparisons between the two projects, demonstrating that there is a more urgent need for improvements to SR-60 in the Badlands area than to 1-10. 95 Agenda Item 8K In July 2011, Caltrans completed a project study report (PSR) that analyzes three alternatives for improving SR-60 in the Badlands area. The three alternatives and cost estimate ranges are: 1) Eastbound truck climbing lane only, plus standard shoulders at a cost of $40-42 million; 21 Truck climbing and descending lane plus standard shoulders at a cost of $74-82 million; or 3) Shoulder widening only, both directions at a cost of $49-57 million. At the February 2012 workshop, the Commission gave its approval to substituting the SR-60 truck climbing lane project for the 1-10 truck climbing lane project in the 10-year delivery plan. Currently, Caltrans District 8 is working on a proposed safety project within the same limits of the SR-60 in the Badlands project area that will widen the shoulders in the westbound direction to standard widths (5-feet inside shoulder and 10' feet outside shoulder), at a cost up to $27 million (construction cost). The project also has up to $2 Million available for the PA&ED phase. This project is scheduled to be under construction in early 2016. Given that the scope of the safety project is one of the elements of Alternative #3 as described in the PSR of the SR-60 truck climbing lane project, and the timing of the construction of this proposed safety project overlaps with the timing of the Commission's SR-60 project, and to reduce the impact to the travelling public, staff and Caltrans propose to combine the SR-60 truck climbing lane project with the safety project. Combining the projects would result in Caltrans being responsible for $27 million of construction costs, and the Commission responsible for the other $47-55 million of construction costs. It is anticipated that CMAQ funds would be used for all phases of this project. In view of the fact that one of the programming constraints of the safety project is that the project be ready to list by June 2016, the combined project also needs to be ready to list by June 2016. Reviews of the proposed schedule indicate that meeting this date is feasible. Staff is proposing that the Commission sponsor the combined project with Ca!trans District 8 taking the lead on the PA&ED phase. Caltrans' estimate to complete the PA&ED phase is $5,006,000, based on the following assumptions: • The scope of the project is based on the approved PSR, alternative 2. • The overhead rate, currently 32.52 percent, is used; this is subject to change each year based on audits of the Department's overhead costs. This has not changed significantly in recent years. 96 Agenda Item 8K • • The anticipated environmental document is an initial study -environmental assessment leading to a negative declaration/finding of no significant impact. Caltrans will contribute up to $2 million available for the safety project, and the Commission will be responsible for the balance of the combined project. Staff recommen'ds that the Commission program $3,006,000 in CMAQ funds. The item approved by the Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee indicated that the state would contribute $2 million, but that is now corrected to reflect proportional contribution based on the percentage of cost attributable to the safety project improvements, up to $2 million. This has no impact on the Commission budget because the federal funds proposed for the project would flow directly to Caltrans. Attachment: Draft Cooperative Agreement with Caltrans 97 Agenda Item 8.K 08-RIV-60-22.2/26.5 EA: ON690 District Agreement 08-1543 Project Number 0800000537 Draft:-5/1;0/11 COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT This agreement, effective on , is between the State of California, acting through its Department of Transportation, referred to as CALTRANS; and: Riverside County Transportation Commission, a public entity referred to as RCTC. For the purpose of this agreement, the term PARTNERS collectively refers to CALTRANS and RCTC (all signatory parties to this agreement). The term PARTNER refers to any one of those signatory parties individually. RECITALS I . California Streets and Highways Code sections 114 and 130 authorize PARTNERS to enter into a cooperative agreement for performance of work within the State Highway System (SHS) right of way. 2. For the purpose of this agreement, addition of eastbound truck climbing lane and westbound truck descending lane, and upgrading existing inside and outside shoulder to current standards on State Route 60 (SR-60) between Gilman Springs Road (PM 22.2) and Jack Rabbit Trail (PM 26.5) will be referred to as PROJECT. All responsibilities assigned in this agreement to complete the Project Approval and Environmental Document will be referred to as OBLIGATIONS. This agreement outlines the terms and conditions of cooperation between PARTNERS to complete OBLIGATION for PROJECT. 3. Prior to this agreement, CALTRANS developed the Project Initiation Document. 4. The estimated date for OBLIGATION COMPLETION is December 31, 2025. 5. In this agreement capitalized words represent defined terms and acronyms. The Definitions section contains a complete definition for each capitalized term. 6. From this point forward, PARTNERS define in this agreement the terms and conditions under which they will accomplish OBLIGATIONS. RESPONSIBILITIES 7 RCTC is SPONSOR for 100% of PROJECT. PACT Version 10.1.2011 02 18 98 District Agreement 08-1543 RCTC may provide 1QA for the portions of WORK outside existing and proposed SHS right of way. 9. CALTRANS and RCTC will each be a FUNDING PARTNER for this agreement. Their funding commitments are defined in the FUNDING SUMMARY. 10. CALTRANS is the CEQA lead agency for PROJECT. 11. CALTRANS is the NEPA lead agency for PROJECT. 12. CALTRANS is IMPLEMENTING AGENCY for PA&ED. SCOPE Scope: General 13. PARTNERS will perform all OBLIGATIONS in accordance with federal and California laws, regulations, and standards; FHWA STANDARDS; and CALTRANS STANDARDS. 14. IMPLEMENTING AGENCY for a PROJECT COMPONENT will provide a Quality Management Plan (QMP) for that component as part of the PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN. 15. Any PARTNER may, at its own expense, have representatives observe any OBLIGATIONS performed by another PARTNER. Observation does not constitute authority over those OBLIGATIONS. 16. Each PARTNER will ensure that all of its personnel participating in OBLIGATIONS are appropriately qualified, and if necessary, licensed to perform the tasks assigned to them. 17. PARTNERS will invite each other to participate in the selection and retention of any consultants who participate in OBLIGATIONS. 18. if WORK is done under contract (not completed by a PARTNER's own employees) and is governed by the California Labor Code's definition of "public works" (section 1720(a)(a)), that PARTNER will conform to sections 1720 — 1815 of the California Labor Code and all applicable regulations and coverage determinations issued by the Director of Industrial Relations. 19. IMPLEMENTING AGENCY for each PROJECT COMPONENT included in this agreement will be available to help resolve problems generated by that component for the entire duration of PROJECT. PACT Version 10.1.2011 02 18 2 of 22 99 District Agreement 08-1543 20. CALTRANS will issue, upon proper application, the encroachment permits required. for WORK within SHS right of way. Contractors and/or agents, and utility owners will not perform WORK without an encroachment permit issued in their name. 21. If any PARTNER discovers unanticipated cultural, archaeological, paleontological, or other protected resources during WORK, all WORK in that area will stop and that PARTNER will notify all PARTNERS within 24 hours of discovery. WORK may only resume after a qualified professional has evaluated the nature and significance of the discovery and a plan is approved for its removal or protection. 22. PARTNERS will hold all administrative drafts and administrative final reports, studies, materials, and documentation relied upon, produced, created, or utilized for PROJECT in confidence to the extentpermitted by law. Where applicable, the provisions of California Government Code section 6254.5(e) will govern the disclosure of such documents in the event that PARTNERS share said documents with each other. PARTNERS will not distribute, release, or share said documents with anyone other than employees, agents, and consultants who require access to complete PROJECT without the written consent of the PARTNER authorized to release them, unless required or authorized to do so by law. 23 If any PARTNER receives a public records request, pertaining to OBLIGATION`S, that PARTNER will notify PARTNERS within five (5) working days of receipt and make PARTNERS aware of any disclosed public records. PARTNERS will consult with each other prior to the release of any public documents related to the PROJECT. 24. If HM-1 or. HM-2 is found during a PROJECT COMPONENT, IMPLEMENTING AGENCY for that PROJECT COMPONENT will immediately notify PARTNERS. 25. CALTRANS, independent of PROJECT, is responsible for any HM-1 found within the existing SHS right of way. CALTRANS will undertake or cause to be undertaken HM MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES related to HM-I with minimum impact to PROJECT schedule. 26. If HM-1 is found within PROJECT limits and outside the existing SHS right of way, responsibility for such HM-I rests with the owner(s) of the parcel(s) on which the HM-1 is found. RCTC, in concert with the local agency having land use jurisdiction over the parcel(s), will ensure that HM MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES related to HM-1 are undertaken with minimum impact to PROJECT schedule.) 27. If HM-2 is found within PROJECT limits, the public agency responsible for the advertisement, award, and administration (AAA) of the PROJECT construction contract will be responsible for HM MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES related to HM-2. PACT Version 10.1.2011_02_18 3 of 22 100 District Agreement 08-1543 28. CALTRANS' acquisition or acceptance of title to any property on which any HM-1 or HM-2 is found will proceed in accordance with CALTRANS' policy on such acquisition. 29. PARTNERS will comply with all of the commitments and conditions set forth in the environmental documentation, environmental permits, approvals, and applicable agreements as those commitments and conditions apply to each PARTNER's responsibilities in this agreement. 30. IMPLEMENTING AGENCY for each PROJECT COMPONENT will furnish PARTNERS with written quarterly progress reports during the implementation of OBLIGATIONS in that component. 31. Upon OBLIGATION COMPLETION, ownership or title to all materials and equipment constructed or installed for the operations and/or maintenance of the SHS within SHS right of way as part of WORK become the property of CALTRANS. CALTRANS will not accept ownership or title to any materials or equipment constructed or installed outside SHS right of way. 32. IMPLEMENTING AGENCY for a PROJECT COMPONENT will accept, reject, compromise, settle, or litigate claims of any non -agreement parties hired to do WORK in that component. 33. PARTNERS will confer on any claim that may affect OBLIGATIONS or PARTNERS' liability or responsibility under this agreement in order to retain resolution possibilities for potential future claims. No PARTNER will prejudice the rights of another PARTNER until after PARTNERS confer on claim. 34. PARTNERS will maintain, and will ensure that any party hired by PARTNERS to participate in OBLIGATIONS will maintain, a financial management system that conforms to Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), and that can properly accumulate and segregate incurred PROJECT costs, and provide billing and payment support. 35. PARTNERS will comply with the appropriate federal cost principles and administrative requirements outlined in the Applicable Cost Principles and Administrative Requirements table below. These principles and requirements apply to all funding types included in this agreement. 36. PARTNERS will ensure that any party hired to participate in OBLIGATIONS will comply with the appropriate federal cost principles and administrative requirements outlined in the Applicable Cost Principles and Administrative Requirements table below. rinciples and Administration ..Requirements PACT Version 10.1.2011 02 18 4 of 22 101 • District Agreement 08-1543 The federal cost principles and administrative requirements associated with each organization type apply to that organization. Organization Type Cost Principles Administrative Requirements Federal Governments 2 CFR Part 225 OMB A-102 State and Local Government 2 CFR, Part 225 49 CFR, Part 18 Educational Institutions 2 CFR, Part 220 2 CFR, Part 215 Non -Profit Organizations 2 CFR, Part 230 2 CFR, Part 215 For Profit Organizations 48 CFR, Chapter 1, Part 31 49 CFR, Part 18 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) OMB (Office of Management and Budget) Related URLs: • Various OMB Circular: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants_circulars • Code of Federal Regulations: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/CFR 37. PARTNERS will maintain and make available to each other all OBLIGATIONS -related documents, including financial data, during the term of this agreement. 38. PARTNERS will retain all OBLIGATIONS=related records for three (3) years after the. final voucher. 39. PARTNERS have the right to audit each other in accordance with generally accepted governmental audit standards CALTRANS, the state auditor, FHWA, and RCTC will have access to all OBLIGATIONS -related records of each PARTNER, and any party hired by a PARTNER to participate in OBLIGATIONS, for audit, examination, excerpt, or transcription. The examination of any records will take place in the offices and locations where said records are generated and/or stored and will be accomplished during reasonable hours of operation. The auditing PARTNER will be permitted to make copies of any OBLIGATIONS -related records needed for the audit. The audited PARTNER will review the draft audit, findings, and recommendations, and provide written comments within 30 calendar days of receipt. Upon completion of the final audit, PARTNERS have 30 days to refund or invoice as necessary in order to satisfy the obligation of the audit. Any audit dispute not resolved by PARTNERS is subject to dispute resolution. Any costs arising out of the dispute resolution process will be paid within 30 calendar days of the final audit or dispute resolution findings. PARTNERS will undergo an annual audit in accordance with the Single Audit Act of OMB Circular A-133. PACT Version 10.1.2011 02 18 5 of 22 102 District Agreement 08-1543 41. Any PARTNER that hires another party to participate in OBLIGATIONS will conduct a pre -award audit of that party in accordance with the Local Assistance Procedures Manual. 42. PARTNERS will not incur costs beyond the funding commitments in this agreement. If IMPLEMENTING AGENCY anticipates that funding for WORK will be insufficient to complete WORK, IMPLEMENTING AGENCY will promptly notify SPONSOR. IMPLEMENTING AGENCY has no obligation to perform WORK if funds to perform WORK are unavailable. 43. if WORK stops for any reason, IMPLEMENTING AGENCY will place all facilities impacted by WORK in a safe and operable condition acceptable to CALTRANS. 44. If WORK stops for any reason, each PARTNER will continue to implement all of its applicable commitments and conditions included in the PROJECT environmental documentation, permits, agreements, or approvals that are in effect at the time that WORK stops, as they apply to each PARTNER's responsibilities in this agreement, in order to keep PROJECT in environmental compliance until WORK resumes. 45. Each PARTNER accepts responsibility to complete the activities that it selected on the SCOPE SUMMARY. Activities marked with "N/A" on the SCOPE SUMMARY are not included in the scope of this agreement. Scope; Environmental Permits, Approvals and Agreements 46. Each PARTNER identified in the Environmental Permits table below accepts the responsibility to complete the assigned activities. Permit 404 USACOE Coordinate CALTRANS Environmental P`e.rmits, Prepare CALTRANS Obtain CALTRANS Implement CALTRANS Renew CALTRANS Amend CALTRANS 401 RWQCB NPDES S W RCB CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS FESA Section 7 USFWS CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS FESA Section ]0 USFWS CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS 1602 DFG CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS CALTRANS PACT Version 10.1.2011 02 18 6 of 22 103 District Agreement 08-1543 Scope: Project Approval and Environmental Document (PA&ED) 47. CALTRANS is the CEQA lead agency for PROJECT. CALTRANS will determine the type of environmental documentation required and will cause that documentation to be prepared. 48. Any PARTNER involved in the preparation of CEQA environmental documentation will follow the CALTRANS STANDARDS that apply to the CEQA process including, but not limited to, the guidance provided in the Standard Environmental Reference available at www.dot.ca.gov/ser. 49. Pursuant to SAFETEA-L" U Section 6004 and/or 6005, CALTRANS is the NEPA lead agency for PROJECT. CALTRANS will assume responsibility for NEPA compliance and will prepare any needed NEPA environmental documentation or will cause that documentation to be prepared. 50. Any PARTNER involved in the preparation of NEPA environmental documentation will follow FHWA STANDARDS that apply to the NEPA process including, but not limited to, the guidance provided' in the FHWA Environmental Guidebook available at www.fhwa.dot.gov/hep/index.htm. 51. CALTRANS will prepare the appropriate CEQA environmental documentation to meet CEQA requirements. 52. CALTRANS will prepare the appropriate NEPA environmental documentation to meet NEPA requirements. 53. Any PARTNER preparing any portion of the CEQA environmental documentation, including any studies and reports, will submit that portion of the documentation to the CEQA lead agency for review, comment, and approval at appropriate stages of development prior to public availability. 54. Any PARTNER preparing any portion of the NEPA environmental documentation (including, but not limited to, studies, reports, public notices, and public meeting materials, determinations, administrative drafts, and final environmental documents) will submit that portion of the documentation to CALTRANS for CALTRANS' review, comment, and approval prior to public availability. 55. CALTRANS will prepare, publicize, and circulate all CEQA-related public notices and will submit said notices to the CEQA lead agency for review, comment, and approval prior to publication and circulation. 56. CALTRANS will prepare, publicize, and circulate all NEPA-related public notices. CALTRANS will work with the appropriate federal agency to publish notices in the Federal Register. PACT Version 10.1.2011 02 18 104 7 of 22 District Agreement 08-1543 57. The CEQA lead agency will attend all CEQA-related public meetings. . 58. CALTRANS will plan, schedule, prepare materials for, and host all CEQA-related public meetings and will submit all materials to the CEQA lead agency for review; comment, and approval at least 10 working days prior to the public meeting date. 59. The NEPA lead agency will attend all NEPA-related public meetings. 60. CALTRANS will plan, schedule, prepare materials for, and host all NEPA-related public meetings. 61. If a PARTNER who is not the CEQA or NEPA lead agency holds a public meeting about PROJECT, that PARTNER must clearly state its role in PROJECT and the identity of the CEQA and NEPA lead agencies on all meeting publications. All meeting publications must also inform the attendees that public comments collected at the meetings are not part of the CEQA or NEPA public review process. That PARTNER will submit all meeting advertisements, agendas, exhibits, handouts, and materials to the appropriate lead agency for review, comment, and approval at least 10 working days prior to publication or use. If that PARTNER makes any changes to the materials, it will allow the appropriate lead agency to review, comment on, and approve those changes at least three (3) working days prior to the public meeting date. The CEQA lead agency maintains final editorial control with respect to text or graphics that could lead to public confusion over CEQA-related roles and responsibilities. The NEPA lead agency has final approval authority with respect to text or graphics that could lead to public confusion over NEPA-related roles and responsibilities. 62. The PARTNER preparing the environmental documentation, including thestudies and reports, will ensure that qualified personnel remain available to help resolve environmental issues and perform any necessary work to ensure that PROJECT remains in environmental compliance. COST Cost• General 63. The cost of any awards, judgments, or settlements generated by OBLIGATIONS is an OBLIGATIONS COST. 64. CALTRANS, independent of PROJECT, will pay all costs for HM MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES related to HM-1 found within the existing SHS right of way. PACT Version 10.1.2011 02 18 8 of 22 105 District Agreement 08-1543 . 65. Independent of PROJECT, all costs for HM MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES related to HM-1 found within PROJECT limits and outside the existing SHS right of way will be the responsibility of the owner(s) of the parcel(s) where the HM-1 is located. 66. HM MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES costs related to HM-2 are CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT and CONSTRUCTION CAPITAL costs. 67. The cost to comply with and implement the commitments set forth in the environmental documentation is an OBLIGATIONS COST. 68. The cost to ensure that PROJECT remains in environmental compliance is an OBLIGATIONS COST. 69. The cost of any legal challenges to the CEQA or NEPA environmental process or documentation is an OBLIGATIONS COST. 70. Independent of OBLIGATIONS COST, CALTRANS will fund the cost of its own IQA for WORK done within existing or proposed future SHS right of way. 71. Independent of OBLIGATIONS COST, RCTC will fund the cost of its own IQA for WORK done outside existing or proposed future SHS right of way. 72. CALTRANS will provide encroachment permits to PARTNERS, their contractors, consultants and agents, at no cost. 73. Fines, interest, or penalties levied against a PARTNER will be paid, independent of OBLIGATIONS COST, by the PARTNER whose actions or lack of action caused the levy. 74. Travel, per diem, and third -party contract reimbursements are an OBLIGATIONS COST only after those hired by PARTNERS to participate in OBLIGATIONS incur and pay those costs. Payments for travel and per diem will not exceed the rates paid rank and file state employees under current California Department of Personnel Administration (DPA) rules current at the effective date of this agreement. If RCTC invoices for rates in excess of DPA rates, RCTC will fund the cost difference and reimburse CAL TRANS for any overpayment. PACT Version 10.1.2011 02 18 9 of 22 106 District Agreement 08-1543 75. The cost of any engineering support performed by CALTRANS includes all direct and applicable indirect costs. CALTRANS calculates indirect costs based solely on the type. of funds used to pay support costs. State and federal funds are subject to the current Program Functional Rate. Local funds are subject to the current Program Functional Rate and the current Administration Rate. The Program Functional Rate and the Administration Rate are adjusted periodically. 76. If CALTRANS reimburses RCTC for any costs later determined to be unallowable, RCTC will reimburse those funds. 77. The cost to place PROJECT right of way in a safe and operable condition and meet all environmental commitments is an OBLIGATIONS cost. 78. Because IMPLEMENTING AGENCY is responsible for managing the scope, cost, and schedule of a project component, if there are insufficient funds available in this agreement to place the right of way in a safe and operable condition, the appropriate IMPLEMENTING AGENCY accepts responsibility to fund these activities until such time as PARTNERS amend this agreement. That IMPLEMENTING AGENCY may request reimbursement for these costs during the amendment process. 79. If there are insufficient funds in this agreement to implement applicable commitments and conditions included in the PROJECT•environmental documentation, permits, agreements, and/or approvals that are in effect at a time that WORK stops, each PARTNER implementing commitments or conditions accepts responsibility to fund these activities, as they apply to each PARTNER's responsibilities, until such time as PARTNERS amend this agreement. Each PARTNER may request reimbursement for these costs during the amendment process. 80. CALTRANS will administer all federal subvention funds identified on the FUNDING SUMMARY. Cost: Environmental Permits, Approvals and Agreements 81. The cost of coordinating, obtaining, complying with, implementing, and if necessary renewing and amending resource agency permits, agreements, and/or approvals is an OBLIGATIONS COST. Cost: Project Approval and Environmental Document (PA&ED) PACT Version 10.1.2011 02 18 10 of 22 107 District Agreement 08-1543 82. The cost to prepare, publicize, and circulate all CEQA and NEPA-related public notices is an OBLIGATIONS COST. 83. The cost to plan, schedule, prepare, materials for, and host all CEQA and NEPA-related public hearings is an OBLIGATIONS COST. SCHEDULE 84. PARTNERS will manage the schedule for OBLIGATIONS through the work plan included in the PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN. GENERAL CONDITIONS 85. PARTNERS understand that this agreement is in accordance with and governed by the - Constitution and laws of the State of California. This agreement will be enforceable in the State of California. Any PARTNER initiating. legal action arising from this agreement will file and maintain that legal action in the Superior Court of the county in which the CALTRANS district office that is signatory to this agreement resides, or in the Superior Court. of the county in which PROJECT is physically located. 86. All OBLIGATIONS of CALTRANS under the terms of this agreement are subject to the appropriation of resources by the Legislature, the State Budget Act authority, and the. allocation of funds by the California Transportation Commission. 87. Any PARTNER performing 1QA does so for its own benefit. No one can assign liability to that PARTNER due to its IQA activities. 88. Neither RCTC nor any officer or employee thereof is responsible for any injury, damage or liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by CALTRANS and/or its agents under or in connection with any work, authority, or jurisdiction conferred upon CALTRANS under this agreement. It is understood and agreed that CALTRANS will fully defend, indemnify, and save_ harmless RCTC and all of its officers and employees from all claims, suits, or actions of every name, kind, and description brought forth under, but not limited to, tortious, contractual, inverse condemnation, or other theories or assertions of liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by CALTRANS and/or its agents under this agreement. PACT Version 10.1.2011 02 18 108 11 of 22 District Agreement 08-1543 89. Neither CALTRANS nor any officer or employee thereof is responsible for any injury, damage, or liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by RCTC and/or its agents under or in connection with any work, authority, or jurisdiction conferred upon RCTC under this agreement. It is understood and agreed that RCTC will fully defend, indemnify, and save harmless CALTRANS and all of its officers and employees from all claims, suits, or actions of every name, kind, and description brought forth under, but not limited to, tortious, contractual, inverse condemnation, or other theories or assertions of liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by RCTC and/or its agents under this agreement. 90. PARTNERS do not intend this agreement to create a third party beneficiary or define duties, obligations, or rights in parties not signatory to this agreement. PARTNERS do not intend this agreement to affect their legal liability by imposing any standard of care for fulfilling OBLIGATIONS different from the standards imposed by law. 91. PARTNERS will not assign or attempt to assign OBLIGATIONS to parties not signatory to this agreement. 92. PARTNERS will not interpret any ambiguity contained in this agreement against each other. PARTNERS waive the provisions of California Civil Code section 1654. 93. A waiver of a PARTNER's performance under this agreement will not constitute a continuous waiver of any other provision. An amendment made to any article or section of this agreement does not constitute an amendment to or negate all other articles or sections of this agreement. 94. A delay or omission to exercise a right or power due to a default does not negate the use of that right or power in the future when deemed necessary. 95. If any PARTNER defaults in its OBLIGATIONS, a non -defaulting PARTNER will request in writing that the default be remedied within 30 calendar days. if the defaulting PARTNER fails to do so, the non -defaulting PARTNER may initiate dispute resolution. 96. PARTNERS will first attempt to resolve agreement disputes at the PROJECT team level. If they cannot resolve the dispute themselves, the CALTRANS district director and the executive officer of RCTC will attempt to negotiate a resolution. if PARTNERS do not reach a resolution, PARTNERS' legal counsel will initiate mediation. PARTNERS agree to participate in mediation in good faith and will share equally in its costs. Neither the dispute nor the mediation process relieves PARTNERS from full and timely performance of OBLIGATIONS in accordance with the terms of this agreement. However, if any PARTNER stops fulfilling OBLIGATIONS, any other PARTNER may seek equitable relief to ensure that OBLIGATIONS continue. PACT Version 10.1.2011 02 18 12 of 22 109 District Agreement 08-1543 Except for equitable. relief, no PARTNER may file a civil complaint until after mediation, or 45 calendar days after filing the written mediation request, whichever occurs first. PARTNERS will file any civil complaints in the Superior Court of the county in which the CALTRANS district office signatory to this agreement resides. The prevailing PARTNER will be entitled to an award of all costs, fees, and expenses, including reasonable attorney fees as a result of litigating a dispute under this agreement or to enforce the provisions of this article including equitable relief. 97. PARTNERS maintain the ability to pursue alternative or additional dispute remedies if a previously selected remedy does not achieve resolution. 98. if any provisions in this agreement are deemed to be, or are in fact, illegal, inoperative, or unenforceable, those provisions do not render any or all other agreement provisions invalid, inoperative, or unenforceable, and PARTNERS will automatically sever those provisions from this agreement. 99. PARTNERS intend this agreement to be their final expression and supersede any oral understanding or writings pertaining to OBLIGATIONS. 100. If during performance of WORK additional activities or environmental documentation is necessary to keep PROJECT in environmental compliance, PARTNERS will amend this agreement to include completion of those additional tasks. 101. PARTNERS will execute a formal written amendment if there are any changes to OBLIGATIONS. 102. This agreement will terminate upon OBLIGATION COMPLETION or an amendment to terminate this agreement, whichever occurs first. However, all indemnification, document retention, audit, claims, environmental commitment, legal challenge, and ownership articles will remain in effect until terminated or modified in writing by mutual agreement. 103. The following documents are attached to, and made an express part of this agreement: SCOPE SUMMARY, FUNDING SUMMARY. DEFINITIONS CALTRANS — The California Department of Transportation CALTRANS STANDARDS — CALTRANS policies and procedures, including, but not limited to, the guidance provided in the Guide to Capital Project Delivery Workplan Standards (previously known as WBS Guide) available at http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/projmgmt/guidance.htm. PACT Version 10.1.2011 02 18 110 13 of 22 District Agreement 08-1543 CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) — The act (California Public Resources Code, sections 21000 et seq.) that requires state and local agencies to identify the significant environmental impacts of their actions and to avoid or mitigate those significant impacts, if feasible. CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) — The general and permanent rules published in the Federal Register by the executive departments and agencies of the federal government. COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT CLOSURE STATEMENT — A document signed by PARTNERS that verifies the completion of all OBLIGATIONS included in this agreement and in all amendments to this agreement. COST — The responsibility for cost responsibilities in this agreement can take one of three assignments: • OBLIGATIONS COST — A cost associated with fulfilling OBLIGATIONS that will be funded as part of this agreement. The responsibility is defined by the funding commitments in this agreement. • PROJECT COST — A cost associated with PROJECT that can be funded outside of OBLIGATIONS. A PROJECT COST may not necessarily be part of this agreement. This responsibility is defined by the PARTNERS' funding commitments at the time the cost is incurred. • PARTNER COST— A cost that is the responsibility of a specific PARTNER, independent of PROJECT. FHWA — Federal Highway Administration FHWA STANDARDS — FHWA regulations, policies and procedures, including, but not limited to, the guidance provided at www.fhwa.dot.gov/topics.htm. FUNDING PARTNER — A PARTNER that commits a defined dollar amount to fulfill OBLIGATIONS. Each FUNDING PARTNER accepts responsibility to provide the funds identified on the FUNDING SUMMARY under its name. FUNDING SUMMARY — The table that designates an agreement's funding sources, types of funds, and the PROJECT COMPONENT in which the funds are to be spent. Funds listed on the FUNDING SUMMARY are "not -to -exceed" amounts for each FUNDING PARTNER. GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Principles) — Uniform minimum standards and guidelines for financial accounting and reporting issued. by the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board that serve to achieve some level of standardization. See http://www.fasab.gov/accepted.html. HM-1 — Hazardous material (including, but not limited to, hazardous waste) that may require removal and disposal pursuant to federal or state law whether it is disturbed by PROJECT or not.. PACT Version 10.1.2011_02_18 14 of 22 111 District Agreement 08-1543 HM-2 Hazardous material (including, but not limited to, hazardous waste) that may require removal and disposal pursuant to federal or state law only if disturbed by PROJECT. HM MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES — Management activities related to either HM-1 or HM-2 including, without limitation, any necessary manifest requirements and disposal facility designations. IMPLEMENTING AGENCY — The PARTNER responsible for managing the scope, cost, and schedule of a PROJECT COMPONENT to ensure the completion of that component. IQA (Independent Quality Assurance) — Ensuring that IMPLEMENTING AGENCY's quality assurance activities result in WORK being developed in accordance with the applicable standards and within an established Quality Management Plan (QMP). IQA does not include any work necessary to actually develop or deliver WORK or any validation by verifying or rechecking work performed by another partner. NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act of 1969) — The federal act that establishes a national policy for the environment and a process to disclose the adverse impacts of projects with a federal nexus. OBLIGATION COMPLETION — PARTNERS have fulfilled all OBLIGATIONS included in this agreement, and all amendmentsto this agreement, and have signed a COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT CLOSURE STATEMENT. OBLIGATIONS — All responsibilities included in this agreement. OBLIGATIONS COST — See COST. OMB (Office of Management and Budget) — The federal office that oversees preparation of the federal budget and supervises its administration in Executive Branch agencies. PA&ED (Project Approval and Environmental Document) — See PROJECT COMPONENT. PARTNER — Any individual signatory party to this agreement. PARTNERS —The term that collectively references all of the signatory agencies to this agreement. This term only describes the relationship between these agencies to work together to achieve a mutually beneficial goal. It is not used in the traditional legal sense in which one PARTNER's individual actions legally bind the other partners. PROJECT = The undertaking to Adding eastbound truck climbing lane and westbound truck decending lane, and upgrading existing inside and outside shoulder to current standards on State Route 60 (SR-60) between Gilman Springs Road (PM 22.2) and Jack Rabbit Trail (PM 26.5) PROJECT COMPONENT — A distinct portion of the planning and project development process of a capital project as outlined in California Government Code, section 14529(b). PACT Version 10.1.2011 02 18 112 15 of 22 District Agreement 08-1543 • PID (Project Initiation Document) - The activities required to deliver the project initiation document for PROJECT. • PA&ED (Project. Approval and Environmental Document) — The activities required to deliver the project approval and environmental documentation for PROJECT. • PS&E (Plans, Specifications, and Estimate) — The activities required to deliver the plans, specifications, and estimate for PROJECT. • R/W (Right of Way) SUPPORT —The activities required to obtain all property interests for PROJECT. • R/W (Right of Way) CAPITAL — The funds for acquisition of property rights for PROJECT. • CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT — The activities required for the administration, acceptance, and final documentation of the construction contract for PROJECT. CONSTRUCTION CAPITAL — The funds for the construction contract. PROJECT COST — See COST. PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN — A group of documents used to guide a project's execution and control throughout that project's lifecycle. QMP (Quality Management Plan) — An integral part of the Project Management Plan that describes IMPLEMENTING AGENCY's quality policy and how it will be used. SAFETEA-LU — Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users SCOPE SUMMARY — The attachment in which each PARTNER designates its commitment to specific scope activities within each PROJECT COMPONENT as outlined by the Guide to Capital Project Delivery Workplan Standards (previously known as WBS Guide) available at http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/projmgmt/guidance.htm. SHS (State Highway System) — All highways, right of way, and related facilities acquired, laid out, constructed, improved, or maintained as a state highway pursuant to constitutional or legislative authorization. SPONSOR — Any PARTNER that accepts the responsibility to establish scope of PROJECT and the obligation to secure financial resources to fund PROJECT. SPONSOR is responsible for adjusting the PROJECT scope to match committed funds or securing additional funds to fully fund the PROJECT scope. If a PROJECT has more than one SPONSOR, funding adjustments will be made by percentage (as outlined in Responsibilities). Scope adjustments must be developed through the project development process and must be approved by CALTRANS as the owner/operator of the SHS. WORK - All scope activities included in this agreement. PACT Version 10.1.2011_02_18 CONTACT INFORMATION 16 of 22 113 District Agreement 08-1543 The information provided below indicates the primary contact data for each PARTNER to this agreement. PARTNERS will notify each other in writing of any personnel or location changes. Contact information changes do not require an amendment to this agreement. The primary agreement contact person for CALTRANS is: Rahguram Radhakrishnan, Project Manager 464 West 4th Street, 6th Floor San Bernardino, California 92401-1400 Office Phone: (909) 383-6288 Email: raghuram.radhakrishnan@dot.ca.gov The primary agreement contact person for RCTC is: Patricia Castillo, Capital Projects Program Manager 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, California 92501 Office Phone: (951) 787-7141 Email: PCastillo@rctc.org PACT Version 10.1.2011_02_18 17 of 22 114 District Agreement 08-1543 SIGNATURES PARTNERS declare that: 1. Each PARTNER is an authorized legal entity under California state law. 2. Each PARTNER has the authority to enter into this agreement. 3. The people signing this agreement have the authority to do so on behalf of their public agencies. STATE OF CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION APPROVED APPROVED By: Syed Raza By: Acting District 8 Director Anne Mayer Executive Director Date: CERTIFIED AS TO FUNDS: By: By: Lisa Pacheco Budget Manager Date: PACT Version 10.20110217 Date: Best, Best, and Krieger General Council Date: 18 of 22 115 08-RIV-60-22.2/26.5 EA:ON690 District Agreement 08-1543 Project Number 0800000537 SCOPE SUMMARY c o Q d 0 cn z J Q 0 re 100 Project Management X 2 160 Perform Preliminary Engineering Studies and Draft Project Report X 05 Updated Project information X 10 Engineering Studies X 15 Draft Project Report X 20 Engineering and Land Net Surveys X 30 Environmental Study Request (ESR) X 40 NEPA Delegation X 45 Base Maps and Plan Sheets for Project Report and Environmental Studies X 2 165 Perform Environmental Studies and Prepare Draft Environmental Document X -05 Environmental Scoping of Alternatives Identified for Studies in Project Initiation Document X 10 General Environmental Studies X 65 Paleontology(PIR/PER/PMP) X 15 Biological Studies X 20 Cultural Resource Studies X 05 Archaeological Survey X 05 Area of Potential Effects/Study Area Maps X 10 Native American Consultation X 15 Records and Literature Search X 20 Field Survey X 25 Archaeological Survey Report X 99 Other Archaeological Survey Products X 10 Extended Phase I Archaeological Studies X 05 Native American Consultation X 10 Extended Phase 1 Proposal X 15 Extended Phase I Field Investigation X 20 Extended Phase I Materials Analysis X 25 Extended Phase I Report X 99 Other Phase I Archaeological Study Products X 15 Phase II Archaeological Studies X 05 Native American Consultation X 10 Phase it Proposal X 15 Phase II Field Investigation X 20 Phase II Materials Analysis X 25 Phase II Report X PACT Version 9.1 3.31.08 19 of 22 116 District Agreement 08-1543 99 Other Phase II Archaeological Study Products X 20 Historical and Architectural Resource Studies X 05 Preliminary Area of Potential Effects/Study Area Maps for Architecture X 10 Historic Resources Evaluation Report - Archaeology X 15 Historic Resource Evaluation Report - Architecture (HRER) X 20 Bridge Evaluation X 99 Other Historical and Architectural Resource Study Products X 25 Cultural Resource Compliance Consultation Documents X 05 Final Area of Potential Effects/Study Area Maps X 10 PRC 5024.5 Consultation X 15 Historic Property Survey ReporUHistoric Resources Compliance Report X 20 Finding of Effect X 25 Archaeological Data Recovery Plan/Treatment Plan X 30 Memorandum of Agreement X 99 Other Cultural Resources Compliance Consultation Products X 25 Draft Environmental Document or Categorical Exemption/Exclusion X 10 Section 4(F) Evaluation X 20 Environmental Quality Control and Other Reviews X 25 Approval to Circulate Resolution X 30 Environmental Coordination X 99 Other Draft Environmental Document Products X 30 NEPA Delegation X 2 170 Permits, Agreements, and Route Adoptions during PAGED component X 05 Required permits X 15 Railroad Agreements X 20 Freeway Agreements X 25 Agreement for Material Sites X 30 Executed Maintenance Agreement X 40 Route Adoptions X 45 MOU From Tribal Employment Rights Office (TERO) X 55 NEPA Delegation X 2 175 Circulate Draft Environmental Document and Select Preferred Project Alternative Identification X 05 DED Circulation X 10 Public Meeting X 10 Public Hearing X 15 Public Comment Responses and Correspondence X 20 Project Preferred Alternative X 25 NEPA Delegation X 2 180 Prepare and Approve Project Report and Final Environmental Document X 05 Final Project Report X 10 Final Environmental Document X 05 Approved Final Environmental Document X 05 Draft Final Environmental Document Review X 10 Revised Draft Final Environmental Document X PACT Version 10.20110217 117 20 of 22 • District Agreement 08-1543 15 Section 4(F) Evaluation X 20 Findings X 25 Statement of Overriding Considerations X 30 CEQA Certification X 40 Section 106 Consultation and MOA X 45 Section 7 Consultation X 50 Final Section 4(F) Statement X 55 Floodplain Only Practicable Alternative Finding X 60 Wetlands Only Practicable Alternative Finding X 65 Section 404 Compliance X 70 Mitigation Measures X 10 Public Distribution of Final Environmental Document and Respond To Comments X 15 Final Right of Way Relocation Impact Document X 99 Other Final Environmental Document Products X 15 Completed Environmental Document X 05 Record of Decision (NEPA) X 10 Notice of Determination (CEQA) X 20 Environmental Commitments Record X 99 Other Completed Environmental Document Products X 20 NEPA Delegation X PACT Version 10.20110217 21 Of 22 FUNDING SUMMARY STATE CALTRANS SHOPP $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 Subtotals by Component $5,006,000 $5,006,000 $5,006,000 344,788 • 08-R IV-60-22.2/26.5 EA: ON690 District Agreement 08-1543 Project Number 0800000537 Funds utilization will be based on a percentage split of 40% CMAQ and 60%, up to a maximum of $2 Million for SHOPP funds.. The SPONSOR is responsible for any additional funding needs. PACT Version 9.1 3.31.08 22 of 22 119 AGENDA ITEM 8L. RIVERS/DE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: June 7, 2012 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Technical Advisory Committee Shirley Medina, Programming and Planning Manager Cathy Bechtel, Project Development Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: City of Corona Funding Request for Foothill Parkway TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve programming $7 million of Western County's 2009 Measure A Regional Arterial (MARA) funds as local match to $7 million of Proposition 1 B State -Local Partnership Program (SLPP) formula funds for the city of Corona's (Corona) Foothill Parkway westerly extension project; 2) Submit the Foothill Parkway project nomination forms for SLPP funding of $7 million to the California Transportation Commission; 3) Approve Agreement No. 1 2-72-093-00 with Corona to program $7 million in MARA funds; 4) Approve reprogramming approximately $7 million of TUMF regional arterial funds from Foothill Parkway right of way phase to the construction phase; 5) Approve Agreement No. 06-72-540-03, Amendment No. 3 to Agreement No. 06-72-540-00, with Corona to reflect the reprogramming of right of way savings to construction; and 6) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements. BACKGROUND INFORMATION; Corona's Foothill Parkway project is included in the Commission's Western County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) regional arterial program. The project is concluding its right of way phase, and Corona is now requesting construction funding in the amount of $14 million. The TUMF regional arterial program identifies a total of $7..2 million available for the construction phase of this project. However, all available TUMF regional arterial funds have been fully programmed. Agenda Item 8L 120 Earlier this year, Corona staff notified Commission staff that the Foothill Parkway project would be ready for construction at the end of the calendar year. At the April 2012 Commission meeting, the Commission approved Foothill. Parkway as a candidate project for SLPP formula funds. SLPP formula funds can only be used for construction and are required to be matched by county half -cent transportation sales tax revenues, or Measure A in Riverside County. Staff recommends funding the $14 million needed to complete the funding of Foothill Parkway with $7 million of SLPP formula funds matched with $7 million of MARA funds. The city of Corona's local contribution, as required by the TUMF agreement, is $2.5 million, and approximately $7 million in savings from the right of way phase is recommended to be reprogrammed to construction. The right of way savings amount will be finalized upon the completion of right of way acquisition. The reprogramming of right of way savings to the construction phase and MARA funds would replace the TUMF regional arterial funds that were originally identified for the construction phase. MARA funds are part of the 2009 Measure A specifically identified for regional arterials such as those identified on the TUMF network. The Commission previously programmed $2 million of MARA funds. To date, MARA accumulated revenues available total approximately $20 million: The programming of MARA funds for Corona's Foothill Parkway project is consistent with the Commission's direction to review all available fund sources for Western County TUMF regional. arterial projects previously approved by the Commission that are ready for construction. Financial Information Yes FY 2012/13 $2,500,000 In Fiscal Year Budget: N/A Year: FY 2013/14 Amount: $4,500,000 Source of 2009 Measure A Western County No Funds: Regional Arterials Budget Adjustment: N/A GL/Project Accounting No.: 665102 81301 266.72 81301 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \Pai,davi � Date: 05/10/12 Attachment: City of Corona Request for Construction funding - Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension Project Agenda Item 8L 121 (951) 736-2266 (951) 279-3627 (FAX) Kip.Field@ci.corona.ca.us May 1, 2012 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 400 SOUTH VICENTIA AVENUE, P.Q. BOX 940, CORONA, CALIFORNIA 92879-0940 CITY HALL - ON LINE ALL THE TIME (http://www.discovercorona.com) Anne Mayer, Executive Director Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor Riverside, CA 92502 SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR CONSTRUCTION FUNDING - FOOTHILL PARKWAY WESTERLY EXTENSION PROJECT 4'04 Dear Ms. .yes: The Foothill Parkway Westerly Extension Project is nearly ready for construction and the City of Corona is requesting the assistance of RCTC to help secure the unfunded construction cost balance. Foothill Parkway is a TUMF regional arterial of critical importance to the City of Corona and the region. The City has been vigorously working on this project for the past several years. The Environmental Impact Report was completed and adopted on February 4, 2009, and the design is complete. The City is in the process of finalizing the necessary right-of-way acquisitions. If all funding were in place, the City could begin construction by the end of 2012. Based on our discussion with your staff, we were informed that State and Local Partnership Program funds (SLPP) and matching Measure "A" funds are potentially available for allocation to this project. The total construction cost is estimated at approximately $31 million, including construction support. Of the original $17.282 million TUMF allocation, $10 million has been appropriated to right-of-way acquisition, and $7.282 remains allocated, but not appropriated, to construction. We understand that any further appropriation of TUMF funds would have to be discussed with the Regional Public Works Committee. 122 It is anticipated that the City will have a fund balance of approximately $7 million at the completion of right -of --way acquisition, which could be utilized for the construction phase. In addition to the City's significant contribution of funds to the design and environmental phases, Corona's local contribution match for the construction is $2.518 million per the agreement. In order to construct the project as currently designed, the City of Corona is in need of an additional $14 million, provided that the remaining allocated TUMF regional funds are appropriated to the project. We look forward to working with RCTC on this request, and thank you in advance for your consideration. Sincerely, /4 D.2_(;)" Kip D. Field, P.E. Public Works Director Cc: Karen Spiegel Shirley Medina Clint Herrera 123 AGENDA ITEM 8M • • RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: June 7, 2012 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Citizens Advisory Committee/Social Services Transportation Advisory Council Josefina Clemente, Transit Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Fiscal Year 2012/13 — Fiscal Year 2014/15 Short Range Transit Plans CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE/SOCIAL SERVICES TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COUNCIL AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to review and approve, in concept, the FY 2012/13 - FY 2014/15 Short Range Transit Plans (SRTPs) for the cities of Banning, Beaumont, Corona, Riverside, Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency (PVVTA), Riverside Transit Agency (RTA), SunLine Transit Agency (SunLine), and the Commission's Commuter Rail Program, as presented. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Commission, under state law, is tasked with the responsibility to identify, analyze, and recommend potential productivity improvements for transit operators. While reviewing and analyzing individual route productivity remains with the transit operators and their governing boards, the Commission has a fiduciary responsibility to ensure that transit operators are utilizing Transportation Development Act (TDA) funds efficiently and effectively with the need to provide high quality service. The SRTPs were developed to meet the Commission's Productivity Improvement Program (PIP), which was adopted as part of a comprehensive effort to work with the county's public transit operators to maintain financially sustainable transit systems that maximize productivity and mobility for residents that travel within the region. The SRTPs provide a detailed description of each operator's profile of existing transit services and ridership, an analysis of potential transit demand and performance indicators, as well as an assessment of operating improvements including changes to routes and schedules and capital needs for a planning period of three years. The SRTP process requires that transit operators address recommendations that are made by regular performance audits. In addition, the SRTP is used as documentation to support projects included in the regional transportation plan prepared by the Southern California Association of Agenda Item 8M 124 Governments, the region's metropolitan planning organization, which also provides opportunities for Operators to be eligible for Federal Transit Administration (FTA) grants to support operations and equipment needs. The Riverside County FY 2012/13 - FY 2014/15 SRTPs are comprised of plans that cover the county apportionment areas of Western Riverside, Coachella Valley, and Palo Verde Valley. With a slight improvement in the economic outlook this coming fiscal year, the transit operators are focusing on initiating new enhancements in operating and capital improvements to meet the growing demand for transit services. This annual update aims to continue evaluating current transit service and performance measures to keep up with substantial increase in travel demand within the region as well as improving necessary access and mobility for the large segment of the county's elderly, disabled and lower -income populations. Staff is requesting that the SRTPs be approved in concept only, as requests for financial allocations will be made at the July Commission meeting. City of Banning The city of Banning (Banning) works closely with the city of Beaumont (Beaumont) to provide a seamless transit system for the residents of Banning, Beaumont, and the unincorporated areas of Cabazon, Cherry Valley, and the commercial area of the Morongo Band of Mission Indians reservation. Planned services for FY 2012/13 include: • Reinstate full Saturday and Sunday services on Routes 1, 5 and 6 with reduced headways; • In a cooperative effort with Beaumont, a comprehensive operational analysis (COA) of both cities of Banning and Beaumont will be conducted; • Purchase one fixed route coach bus for expansion and install auto display and enunciator equipment for fixed route fleet; and • Install six additional shelters and continue placement of bus stop signs to reduce number of flag stops. City of Beaumont Beaumont Transit provides both dial -a -ride and fixed route services and works closely with Banning to provide a seamless transit system in the Pass area. Planned services for FY 2012/13 include: • A COA study will be performed in a cooperative effort with Banning; • Increase service on current routes by adding additional buses at peak times and improve regional connectivity with San Bernardino County; • • 125 Agenda Item 8M • Purchase GPS system for all vehicles compatible with Banning's system to track vehicle locations and install additional bus shelters and benches throughout the service area; • Finalize a systemwide map showing all Beaumont and Banning routes; and • Continue collaborative efforts with Banning to improve coordination of routes, schedules, passenger amenities, and fares for seamless transit service in the Pass area. City of Corona The city of Corona (Corona) operates a fixed route system known as the Corona Cruiser and a general public dial -a -ride program. Corona closely coordinates all transfers with both RTA and the Commission's commuter rail services. Planned services for FY 2012/13 include: • Place into service ten new replacement dial -a -ride buses and one replacement Corona Cruiser bus; • Purchase four Corona Cruiser buses for replacement; • Potential restoration of some Saturday trips eliminated in FY 2010/11 when the city cut unproductive services to reduce cost; • Conduct a competitive bid process to select the best qualified contractor to operate the city transit service. Current contract will expire in October 2012; and • Promote alternative modes of transportation by improving pedestrian and bicycle facilities, identify new sidewalk and in -fill needs and continue expansion of bicycle route network. City of Riverside Special Services Riverside Special Services (RSS) operates a 24-hour advance reservation dial -a -ride for seniors and persons with disabilities within the Riverside city limits. The program serves as an alternative to RTA's transit service for seniors and persons with disabilities unable to use fixed route service. Planned services for FY 2012/13 include: • The new compressed natural gas (CNG) vehicle maintenance facility will be operational starting July 2012. The facility includes six bays, an office, and a' large storage area for parts and equipment; • Install additional slow fill stations at the Riverside Corporation Yard to meet fueling demand; • Purchase eight paratransit vehicles for replacement using federal 5307 and Proposition 1 B grant funds; and Expand and modernize the operations facility to include a larger dispatch center and a separate conference room. 126 Agenda Item 8M Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency The PVVTA provides fixed route and a transportation reimbursement program for individuals who cannot ride the public bus system. The fixed route can deviate up to three-quarters of a mile away from the actual fixed route. Service is provided within the city of Blythe and surrounding unincorporated county areas in the Palo Verde Valley. Planned services for FY 2012/13 include: • Modify Blue Route 1 to add service to the new shopping center and to the Baldwin Senior Apartments and Casa Encinas every other scheduled hour; • Route 2 will provide extended route to the Palo Verde College only when school is open and continue the additional round trip on Route 3 to the California State Prisons; • Green Route 4 scheduled service will be reduced to 3 trips daily with timed transfers to other routes in the system; • Implement the PVVTA X-Tend-A-Ride, a demand response service to address special times when community events require general public service that are not available on the existing fixed route system; and • Continue upgrade completion of the newly purchased transit facility. Riverside Transit Agency RTA provides local, intercity, and regional transportation services. As the Consolidated Transportation Service Agency (CTSA) for western Riverside County, it is responsible for coordinating transit services throughout the service area, providing driver training and assistance with grant applications. Planned services for FY 2012/13 include: Update RTA's three-year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and continue the procurement process for 85 heavy duty vehicles and paratransit vehicles for replacement; Conduct a COA study to review existing operational services and provide a strategic plan for service enhancements; No major service modifications in FY 2012/13 but additional vehicles will be deployed on Routes 1, 16 and 19. Service changes are planned in FY 2014 and 2015 to improve connectivity and meet ridership demand; Implement the county employee shuttle service (Route 54) for a full year and discontinue the UC-Riverside Bear Runner service (Route 53) due to low ridership; and Increase operating budget by approximately 7 percent over FY 201 1 /12 budget. • 127 Agenda Item 8M • • SunLine Transit Agency SunLine is the CTSA for Coachella Valley and is responsible for coordinating transit services in the valley, which covers a service area of approximately 1,120 square miles. SunLine provides both local and regional transportation services with 11 fixed routes and demand response dial -a -ride services known as SunDial. Planned services for FY 2012/13 include: • Implement the new Palm Desert — Riverside Commuter Express bus service; • Finalize plan to enhance performance of Palm Desert Line 53; • Commence construction of the new administrative building project in Thousand Palms; • Implement Line 81 in the city of Indio to offer transit service to new retail and commercial stores north of I-10 and realign Line 80 based on comments received from the city to provide service to unserved areas; and • Continue the Taxi Voucher program in Coachella Valley. Commission's Commuter Rail Program The Southern California Regional Rail Authority operates seven commuter rail lines with 52 locomotives and 150 commuter rail cars. Three routes, the Riverside to Los Angeles Line, the Inland Empire to Orange County Line (IEOC), and the Riverside to Los Angeles via Fullerton Line (91 Line) directly serve western Riverside County with connecting service available to destinations on the other four Metrolink lines. Planned services for FY 2012/13 include: • The FY 12/13 operating cost reflects a $4.7 million cost increase due to rising fuel cost; • Potential service increase on 91 Line; • Increase service with the addition of a fifth IEOC Line weekday train and additional year-round IEOC weekend service; and. • Continue discussion with Metrolink Board and JPA partner agencies for the implementation of a fare increase. Attachments: FY 2012/13-FY 2014/15 Operator SRTPs (7) — Posted on Commission Website Agenda Item 8M 128 PASSTRANSIT City of Banning/Beaumont SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN FY 2012/13 - FY 2014/15 TABLE OF CONTENTS Contents CHAPTER 1 - SYSTEM OVERVIEW 3 POPULATION PROFILE AND DEMOGRAPHIC PROJECTIONS 4 RIDERSHIP DEMOGRAPHICS 5 FIXED ROUTE TRANSIT SERVICES 7 PARATRANSIT SERVICES 7 REGIONAL EXPRESS BUS SERVICE 8 FARE STRUCTURE 8 FLEET CHARACTERISTICS 10 FACILITIES 10 CHAPTER 2 - EXISTING SERVICE AND ROUTE PERFORMANCE 11 FIXED ROUTE SERVICE 11 DIAL -A -RIDE SERVICE 13 KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS 13 PRODUCTIVITY IMPROVEMENT EFFORTS 14 MAJOR TRIP GENERATORS AND PROJECTED GROWTH 15 EQUIPMENT, PASSENGER AMENITIES AND FACILITY NEEDS 16 CHAPTER 3 - PLANNED SERVICE CHANGES AND IMPLEMENTATION 17 RECENT SERVICE CHANGES 17 MARKETING PLANS AND PROMOTION 17 CHAPTER 4 - FINANCIAL AND CAPITAL PLANS 19 OPERATING AND CAPITAL BUDGET 19 FUNDING PLANS TO SUPPORT PROPOSED OPERATING AND CAPITAL PROGRAM 19 REGULATORY AND COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS 19 2 CHAPTER 1 - SYSTEM OVERVIEW The Pass Transit System is the result of a cooperative effort between the City of Banning (Banning Municipal Transit System) and the City of Beaumont (Beaumont Municipal Transit Agency). The Pass Transit System consists of two independent, but well coordinated, transit systems. The coordinated service area of Pass Transit includes the cities of Banning, Beaumont and Calimesa, the unincorporated areas of Cabazon and Cherry Valley, and the commercial area of the Morongo Band of Mission Indians Reservation. Both fixed route and dial -a -ride services are provided throughout the service area. There are three major thoroughfares passing through the Pass Area including Interstate 10, State Highway 60, and Route 79. Major employers within the area include the Casino Morongo, Lowe's Distribution Center, Beaumont and Banning Unified School Districts, San Gorgonio Memorial Hospital, 2nd Street Marketplace which includes the WalMart Supercenter, Desert Hills Premium Outlets, and several manufacturing companies. Pass Transit was created as a combined effort between Banning Transit System and Beaumont Transit System started in November 2004. Routes 1 and 2 were modified from the previous Banning Transit System Cabazon Route and Beaumont Transit System Route 1. Banning's Northern Route was renumbered Route 5 and Banning's Southern Route was renumbered Route 6. Beaumont's existing Routes 3 and 4 remained the same. A Memorandum of Understanding was developed to allow each city's Dial -A -Ride services to cross jurisdictional boundary lines so that a passenger did not have to transfer. A new joint Rider's Guide was developed, combined transfers and ten -ride ticket books were printed, buses and bus stop signs were decaled `Pass Transit' and fares were established to be the same for the convenience of riders. Within the service area of Pass Transit there are ten elementary schools, three middle schools, two intermediate schools and two high schools as well as one community day school, two alternative high schools, two adult education schools, one private school and Mt San Jacinto Community College Pass Campus. Four fifty-five plus communities and various mobile home parks are also served by Pass Transit, oftentimes providing a vital link to necessary medical services at the San Gorgonio Memorial Hospital, as well as Beaver Medical Group, Loma Linda Medical Offices and Rancho Paseo Medical Group. 3 It should be noted that this Short Range Transit Plan incorporates the elements of the Pass Area Transit Plan that addresses service within the system's service area. Although the majority of this plan will be a joint effort, tables and charts will be submitted individually based on the stats of each system. Even though the two transit service providers operate closely in providing a seamless service to the residents of the Pass Area, the transit agencies are separate entities. Nothing in this document is intended to indicate anything more than a cooperative effort between the two transit systems. The two cities meet regularly to discuss the future of Pass Transit and several options are being explored at this time. Population Profile and Demographic Projections The latest available statistics from the California Department of Finance show residential population within Beaumont and the entire Pass Transit System's service area had a 13% increase from year 2009 (32,500) to year 2010 (36,877). The unincorporated area of Cherry Valley had a population of 6,362 residents in 2010. In 2008 and 2010, Beaumont was named the second fastest growing city in the State of California with a 224% increase from 2000 to 2010. This coincides with Riverside County being the fastest growing county in the state in 2010 with a 42% increase over the year 2000. The 2010 census indicated that the Beaumont community is ethnically diverse with a makeup of: Caucasian (63%), Hispanic (40%), Black (6%), Asian and Pacific Islander (8%), and all other races (16%). Senior citizens (age 65+) make up 11 % of the population, indicating a potential for growth in the demand for Dial -A -Ride services and a slight growth in Fixed Route services. Youth (age 18 and under) also make up a substantial portion of the population (30%). The 2010 census showed the median household income within Beaumont was $34,254, well below the national average of $41,994. This indicates the potential of an exceptional need for transit services. However, in 2007, the average home price was $322,500 noting a high percentage of two -income families and a much higher median household income than reported at the 2000 census. This translates to less of a need for transit services today than in previous years on much of Beaumont's system. Finally, it is important to note that Beaumont's Route 2 stretches into Cabazon and the City of Banning, where 14% of households are below poverty level, according to the 2000 census, indicating the presence of a number of transit dependent individuals specifically on that route. The 2010 United States Censuel reported that Banning had a population of 29,603. The population density was 1,282 people per square mile (494.8/km2). The racial makeup of Banning was 19,164 (64.7%) White, 2,165 (7.3%) African American, 641 (2.2%) Native American, 1,549 (5.2%) Asian, 39 (0.1 %) Pacific Islander, 4,604 (15.6%) from other races, and 1,441 (4.9%) from two or more races. Hispanic or Latino of any race was 12,181 persons (41.1 %). 4 The Census reported that 28,238 people (95.4% of the population) lived in households, 254 (0.9%) lived in non -institutionalized group quarters, and 1,111 (3.8%) were institutionalized. There were 10,838 households, out of which 3,083 (28.4%) had children under the age of 18 living in them, 5,106 (47.1%) were opposite -sex married couples living together, 1,488 (13.7%) had a female householder with no husband present, 592 (5.5%) had a male householder with no wife present. There were 700 (6.5%) unmarried opposite -sex partnerships, and 75 (0.7%) same -sex married couples or partnerships. 3,092 households (28.5%) were made up of individuals and 2,085 (19.2%) had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.61. There were 7,186 families (66.3% of all households); the average family size was 3.19. The population was spread out with 6,777 people (22.9%) under the age of 18, 2,730 people (9.2%) aged 18 to 24, 6,048 people (20.4%) aged 25 to 44, 6,387 people (21.6%) aged 45 to 64, and 7,661 people (25.9%) who were 65 years of age or older. The median age was 42.3 years. For every 100 females there were 93.4 males. For every 100 females age 18 and over, there were 90.7 males. With the median household income being $36,268, and the median family income being $41,585 there is a significant need for public transportation within the City of Banning. Ridership Demographics This section provides demographic information that shows our passenger profile including the gender, age, ethnicity, and income of the riders. Data available is from ridership surveys taken from 2010 to 2011 for Beaumont. The majority of riders are female (62%). Eleven percent (11 %) of the riders are under 19 years of age. Eighty percent (80%) of the riders are of working age (19 to 60). Finally, nine percent (9%) of riders are over 60. The ethnic distribution of riders shows that a majority are Hispanic or Black with 40% of the ridership being Caucasian. 5 Ridership Ethnicity Indian, 2% Asian, 1% Hispanic, 43% Ethnicity Other, 1% White, 40% Black, 12% Thirty-nine percent (39%) of riders are employed either full or part time and sixteen percent (16%) are students. Retirees make up nine percent (9%) of the ridership while the unemployed are fifteen percent (15%) of total ridership. Income levels of bus riders are low. About seventy-three percent (73%) make less than $20,000 per year. Bus riders also are transit dependent and seventy-six percent (76%) of them do not have a car available for the trip they were taking. Approximately one-half of our riders use transit to get to their place of employment. It should be noted that of the riders that do own a vehicle, thirty-three percent (33%) of those ride the bus because driving is too expensive. Ridership Household Income Ridership Household Income 2% 46% ■ Under$10,000 ■ $10,001-$19,999 1:1$20,000 - $29,999 ■ $30,000 - $39,999 ■ $40p00-$49,999 ■ $50,000 - $74,999 ■ $75,000+ 6 Ridership Employment Status Additional ridership statistics: • Seventy-six percent (76%) of riders do not own a car. • Ninety-eight percent (98%) of riders walk 4 or fewer blocks to the bus stop. • Twenty percent (20%) of riders said they were using the bus to go to school. • Eighty percent (80%) of the riders are of working age (19 to 60). • Nine percent (9%) of riders are over 60. • Thirty-seven percent (37%) ride at least five (5) days every week. Fixed Route Transit Services The Pass Transit System operates eleven fixed routes, one express route and one commuterlink. Routes 2, 3, 4, 7, 9, 10, 11, 17 and CommuterLink 120 are operated by the Beaumont Transit System. Routes 1, 5, and 6 are operated by the Banning Transit System. Routes 3 through 6 operate on one -hour headway. Routes 1 and 2 complement each other offering two-hour headway throughout the commercial areas of Beaumont, Banning, Cabazon, and the Morongo commercial development. Routes 7, 9, 10 and 17 offer limited services in the mornings and afternoons. Route 11 offers limited services in the mornings. Commuterlink 120 offers on demand limited service to the city of Calimesa and the San Bernardino Metrolink station three times per day. Fixed route service hours are: Monday — Friday Saturday and Sunday 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Limited service (8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.) is provided on Martin Luther King, Jr.'s Birthday, Presidents' Day, Veterans' Day, and the day after Thanksgiving Day. No service is provided on New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Paratransit Services Dial -A -Ride provides service to seniors, persons with disabilities, and individuals certified for complementary paratransit service under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Service hours for the dial -a -ride service are: Elderly and Disabled without ADA certification Monday - Sunday 8:15 a.m. to 4:45 p.m. Persons with ADA Complementary Paratransit Certification 7 Monday - Friday 6.00 a.m. to 7.00 p.m. Saturday and Sunday 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Through a cooperative memorandum of understanding, Pass Transit Dial -A -Ride operated by the Beaumont Transit system will provide its residents with service in Banning and within a % mile boundary of Route 2 in Cabazon. Pass Transit Dial -A -Ride operated by the Banning Transit System will provide its residents with service in the city limits of Beaumont (excluding Cherry Valley). Limited service (8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.) is provided on Martin Luther King, Jr.'s Birthday, Presidents Day, Veteran's Day, and the day after Thanksgiving Day. No service is provided on New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Regional Express Bus Service Pass Transit began operating regional service on a limited basis in March 2012 and anticipates a growth in that service in the future. Additionally, passengers can use Day Passes to transfer between the Pass Transit System fixed routes and the RTA Line 31 to Hemet and Line 35 to Moreno Valley. There is a latent demand for better connections into eastern Riverside and San Bernardino counties for medical and social services as well as westward to the Palm Desert area for employment purposes. We look forward to working with SunLine as they implement a connector route from the desert communities. Fare Structure The fare structure was adjusted in April 2012 for the Pass Transit System. The current fixed route fare is $1.15 /one-way trip for general passengers. Student passengers pay $1.00/one-way. The fare is $.65/one-way trip for senior citizens and persons with disabilities. A zone fare of $.25 exists for travel between Banning and Cabazon/Morongo Reservation service areas. (The route is twice the length of any other route in the system. The zone fare helps to recover operating costs.) Passengers under 46" in height pay $.25. Ten -ride ticket books are offered for $10.35 each; senior citizens and persons with disabilities can purchase the books at a reduced cost of $5.85/10-ride book. Day passes are sold for $3.00 each; senior citizens and persons with disabilities can purchase the passes for $1.80. Monthly passes are $36.00; youth are $25.00; senior citizens and persons with disabilities are $21.50 each. In addition to those passes, a 10 tripper pass is offered for both dial -a -ride and youth passengers at a rate of $18.00 and $10.00 respectively. 8 Pass Area Transit Fare Structure FIXED ROUTE Fare Categories FARES Bone Faye H [ Dravei+�ersexact Day Pass fare d# caa>aaE orarearse cnan. 10-Tripper Punch Pass wrhee9eebus arrives. 10-Ticket Bank Monthly Pass General $1.15 $3.00 IVA S 1 D.35 530.00 Youth girrauee 1-12) $1 _CC $3.0D $1 D_DD MA 525.O0 Senior {65*)" SAM $'.50 IVA 55.8E 521 80 Disabled" $.155 $l.BC. NIA $5.85 $21_50 Child (45'13e ar [Mall $.25 NiA IVA MA K."A ZonerDeviations $.25 NIA t;1A WA f3:A GO PaSS I RIDE FREE "1fyou plan triuse asenorre- disableddisoourhtedfarer the bus. You vrstako show proper You musk shorn pope' ID ea=h time you boa id ID to purchase discounted passesrt+cket. Have exact Fare ready whey Dues arrives. Dial -A -Ride FARES I Drivers. cannot make chaise. Fare Cahegories Base Fare I 10-Ride Punch Card Dneuliray Companion P-CA {w11_Ie_}" No Shaw Child $2 00 $3.00 FREE $18.011 NIA FREE NIA NIA Dial -A -Ride is a transportation service for ADA, disabled and active adukts over 55 }ears of age. Reservations axe required 24-hours in advance and may be made by calling (951) 769-M32. •+If you plan to use a pCA (Personal Care Aden- dant) free fare, you must show proper II} each time you board the bus, COMM1tTERfE]CPRESS FARES Hare exact Farr ready wrnen bus arrives. Drivers annoy make change. Fare Categories Cnrernu#er Express Fare Fare 11Ro.ute 81 !Route 1201 General Youth Wake 1-12) Senior {e•5+}" dsabled" Child $3.0U $200 $2.00 $aCC $2.00 $2.5D $2.O0 $2.00 $2.00 S2.i]D Commuter and Express rout are regiana,i transportation services for a8 passengers. Reservations are required 24-hours in advance and may be- made by calling (951) 769-B530. •+If you plan to use a senior or disabled dis- counted Fare, you must show proper ID each time you board the bus. You must also show proper ID to purchase discounted pass ticketr, *Express Route 8 to be eliminated 9 Fleet Characteristics Pass Transit operates thirteen fixed route vehicles (eight in revenue service and five in reserve). Nine of the vehicles are CNG-powered, two are diesel -powered, and two are gasoline powered. All are equipped with bicycle racks and ADA compliant with wheelchair lifts and tie -down stations. The transit system also operates four Dial -A -Ride vehicles (three in revenue service and one in reserve). All are gasoline -powered. Three of the four vehicles are ADA compliant with wheelchair lifts and tie -down stations. Between Banning and Beaumont, four new unleaded buses were purchased in the last year and are currently in service. Two CNG vehicles were purchased this year and are also in service. The CNG buses are fueled at fueling stations located at the Beaumont Unified School District's transportation yard and at the City of Banning corporate yard. The fueling stations are currently the only CNG stations in the Pass Area large enough to meet the transit system's demand. The remaining two diesel -powered buses will be replaced with CNG within the next month. Purchase orders have been issued and staff is awaiting delivery. Facilities Administrative services for Beaumont are provided by staff from various City of Beaumont departments with the majority of operations located at the Transit Services yard. Effective July 1, 2011, all customer service type functions, including bus passes, maps and schedules, and general transit information are performed at the following locations with extended service hours at two of the locations: Beaumont Civic Center Hours: Monday -Thursday Friday 8:00am to 5:00pm 8:00am-Noon Beaumont Police Dept. Hours: Monday -Friday 7:00am-7:00pm Saturday and Sunday 7:00am-Noon Community Recreation Center Hours: Sunday -Saturday 6:00am-8:00pm Responsibility for overall administration of the transit system is provided by the City Resources Director. Maintenance of the vehicles is provided by Transit staff. Banning Transit System functions as a department within the City and utilizes existing facilities. Transit Administrative staff is housed at the City's Community Center located 10 at 789 North San Gorgonio Avenue, where bus passes are sold, schedules are available and all ADA applications are processed. Dispatch and general telephone information is also provided at the transit office within the Community Center. Banning Transit Office Hours: Monday — Thursday 8:OOam to 6:OOpm Friday 8:OOam to 3:OOpm The maintenance, parking, fueling of the buses, and storage of bus stop amenities are performed at the City's Corporation Yard located at 176 East Lincoln Street. Maintenance of the vehicles is performed by the Public Works Department, Fleet Maintenance Division. CHAPTER 2 - EXISTING SERVICE AND ROUTE PERFORMANCE Systemwide ridership for FY 2012 was 316,161. Estimated ridership for FY 2013 is projected at 328,428. Fixed Route Service The Pass Transit System operates eight fixed routes, one express route, and one commuterlink. Routes 2, 3, 4, 7, 9, 10, 11, 17 and CommuterLink 120 are operated by the Beaumont Transit System. Routes 1, 5, and 6 are operated by the Banning Transit System. Routes 3 through 6 operate on one -hour headway. Routes 1 and 2 complement each other offering two-hour headway throughout the commercial areas of Beaumont, Banning, Cabazon, and the Morongo commercial development. Routes 7, 9, and 10 offer limited services in the mornings and afternoons. Route 11 offers limited service in the mornings. Commuterlink 120 offers on -demand limited service three times per day to the city of Calimesa and the San Bernardino Metrolink station. Route 1- Banning to Cabazon This route operates on two-hour headway and is complemented by an overlap with Route 2 along 75% of the route. Route 1 is the only service to the remote Esperanza & Elm area of southeastern Cabazon. The route also provides service to the residential areas of Cabazon, James Venable Cabazon Community Center, Casino Morongo, Desert Hills Premium Outlets and Cabazon Outlets, the commercial areas along Ramsey Street and Highland Springs Avenue in Banning, and the commercial areas along 6th Street and Beaumont Avenue in Beaumont. Route 2- Beaumont to Cabazon This route operates on two-hour headway and is complemented by an overlap with Route 1 that reduces headway on 75% of the route to one hour. The route provides service to the residential area along the western portion of Beaumont, the commercial areas along 6th Street, Beaumont Avenue, Oak Valley Parkway and Highland Springs 11 Avenue in Beaumont, including the Rite -Aid, Wal-Mart Supercenter shopping center, the commercial areas along Ramsey Street in Banning, the Cabazon Community Center, Casino Morongo, and Desert Hills and Cabazon Outlet Malls. Route 3- Beaumont High to Wal-Mart This route operates on one -hour headway and serves the residential areas of Beaumont (north of 1-10 freeway). It also serves the commercial areas of Beaumont including the Oak Valley and Wal-Mart Supercenter shopping centers and Beaumont High School. In FY 09 Beaumont improved Route 3 by making the routing more direct, eliminating fixed route service to most of Cherry Valley in favor of deviated service on demand and by adding routing through the Sundance development. A tripper bus has been added to accommodate for passenger increase during peak times. Route 4- Downtown Wal-Mart This route operates on one -hour headway and serves downtown Beaumont and the residential areas of the city of Beaumont including a small portion south of Interstate 10. In FY 10-11, Beaumont improved Route 4 by simplifying some routing while maintaining neighborhood coverage. It was determined that the best way to maintain the coverage is through a one-way loop which is not the most effective routing option for transit. Route 4 continues to serve the commercial and industrial areas of Beaumont. This route interlines with Route 11. Route 5- Northern Banning This route operates on a 75 minute headway and provides service to the residential areas of the City of Banning that lie north of the 1-10 freeway, Nicolet Middle School, Hoffer Elementary School, Banning Public Library, Coombs Intermediate School, Hammering Elementary School and the commercial areas along Ramsey Street and Highland Springs Avenue. Route 6- Southern Banning The route operates on a 75 minute headway and provides service to the residential areas south of the 1-10 freeway and the MSJC Pass Campus, a small residential section north of Ramsey Street at the east end of the City of Banning, the commercial areas along Ramsey Street and Highland Springs Avenue, Banning High School, Smith Correctional Facility, apartment complexes in the south, and the Banning Municipal Airport. Route 7- Tournament Hills & Fairway Canyon This route operates on half-hour headway between the hours of 6:30am and 8:OOam and again between the hours of 3:OOpm and 5:30pm. The route services the Rite -Aid shopping center, the Oak Valley community, the westerly portion of Interstate 10 more commonly referred to as the Tournament Hills area, Cherry Valley, the high school and commercial areas. A second bus in service was added to meet the growing demand of passengers on this route, allowing buses stopping at certain time points approximately every 15 minutes. 12 Route 8- Express Route This route is to be eliminated for FY 2012/13. Route 9- Seneca Springs to Cherry Valley This route operates on half-hour headway between the hours of 6:30am and 8:OOam and again between the hours of 3:OOpm and 4:OOpm. The route services the southerly portion of Interstate 10, Loma Linda Medical Center, the Seneca Springs community, downtown, the middle schools and the high school. A tripper bus service has been added to meet the growing demand of passengers on this route. Route 10- Beaumont High to Downtown Beaumont This route interlines with Route 3 and operates on a one -hour headway during the hours of 11:OOam — 12:OOpm and then again between the hours of 2:OOpm and 3:OOpm. The route services the high school, two middle schools, Sundance, the Civic Center, Three Rings Ranch, community recreation centers and downtown. The route provides a direct link to child care facilities in Beaumont. Route 11- Banning to Pennsylvania This route interlines with Route 4 and operates on three-quarter hour headway between 6:30am and 7:20am. This route services the westerly portion of Banning more commonly referred to as "Midway", downtown Beaumont, Oak Valley and Beaumont High School. Route 17- Tournament Hills to Fairway Canyon This route operates on half-hour headway between the hours of 6:30am and 8:OOam and again between the hours of 3:OOpm and 3:45pm. The route services areas west of the 1-10 in an area known as Tournament Hills, Brookside Elementary, the high school and jr. high, Rite -Aid and Noble Creek Park. A tripper bus service has been added to meet the growing demand of passengers on this route. Route 120- Commuter Link This route operates on one -hour headway as a modified on -demand commuterlink to shuttle passengers directly to the San Bernardino Metrolink station from Wal-Mart in Beaumont. This route was introduced in March of 2012. Dial -A -Ride Service Dial -A -Ride operates on a reservation system. Passengers are asked to call at least 24-hours in advance to schedule a pick-up. Key Performance Indicators The Riverside County Transportation Commission has adopted a Productivity Improvement Plan (PIP) for the transit and commuter rail operators of Riverside County. The PIP sets forth efficiency and effectiveness standards that the transit operators are to meet. Progress towards these standards is reported quarterly to the Commission. 13 Below is a table of the operating performance indicators adopted in the PIP and this plan's projections for FY 2011/12. Beaumont Municipal Transit Agency Beaumont Municipal Transit Agency FY 2011 FY 2012 %Increase/ FY 2013 Audited Projected Decrease Planned Performance Statistics Unlinked Passenger Trips Operating Cost Per Revenue Hours Farebox Recovery Ratio Subsidy per Passenger Subsidy per Passenger Mile Subsidy per Revenue Hour Subsidy per Revenue Mile Passengers per Revenue Hour Passengers per Revenue Mile 168,776 179,905 7% 184,337 • $77.99 ' $80.03 3% F $87.31 17.45% .- 16.47% -6% 4 1Q.00% $6.03 $4.39 -27% r $6.92 ✓ $2.96 P. $2.18 -26% $6.88 $64.38' $55.00 -15%> $78.58 t- $4.46, $3.26 -27% $6.88 .. c r. 10.7 9.10 -15% 11.4 .74 .74 00/0 .99 Banning Transit System Banning Transit System FY 2011 FY 2012 %Increase/ FY 2013 Audited Estimated Decrease Projected Performance Statistics Unlinked Passenger Trips 128,244 136,256 6% 144,091 Operating Cost Per Revenue Hours • $92.64 - $85.24 -8%� $85.40 Farebox Recovery Ratio u 9.90%P 10.88% 10% R 10.59% Subsidy per Passenger f $8.71 $8.25 -5% , $8.13 Subsidy per Passenger Mile • $3.41x $2.89 -15% $2.63 Subsidy per Revenue Hour r, $83.47' $75.86 -9%' $76.35 Subsidy per Revenue Mile $5.18 - $3.19 -38% $4.89 Passengers per Revenue Hour 9.6 10.3 7% 4 9.4 Passengers per Revenue Mile .6� .43 -28%k .60 Productivity Improvement Efforts Pass Area transit has made a significant effort to improve productivity in the last two fiscal years and will continue to do so in the future, as evident by our passenger increase. Such notable improvements include fiscal responsibility, increasing passenger fares to meet increased operational costs for transit services, more efficient 14 data compilation, and combining staffing assignments to reduce personnel overhead. Beaumont and Banning have both been working to increase student ridership for elementary through college -level students. Effective July 1, 2011, the Beaumont Pass Transit began offering customer service type functions at three locations including: Beaumont Civic Center, Beaumont Police Department, and the Community Recreation Center. With the addition of two locations to serve the needs of our customers and the added benefit of operating hours early in the morning, later in the evening and over the weekend, we anticipate more effective communication with our passengers and are hopeful that we will continue to grow and expand our system. The Community Services Director of Banning regularly visits the Banning Senior Center and Nutrition Site providing information on the Fixed Route and Dial -A -Ride and answering any questions or concerns that current and potential passengers may have. In order to meet the PIP staff will review all routes to make sure that service is warranted and will eliminate any unproductive areas. Analyzing all routes and monitoring them for unproductive service areas continues to be an ongoing activity. Pass Area Transit is currently putting out to bid a Request for Proposals for a Comprehensive Operations Analysis to increase productivity and get a more extensive demographical analysis so that routes can be adjusted to meet the population's needs. Major Trip Generators and Projected Growth Major trip destinations include the high school and middle schools, MSJC Pass Campus, commercial areas along Beaumont Avenue, 6th Street, 2nd Street Marketplace, Oak Valley shopping center, Ramsey Street and Highland Springs Avenue; the Super Wal- Mart transfer point; area elementary, intermediate and high schools; Desert Hills Outlet Malls, Cabazon Outlet Mall, and Casino Morongo; Beaver Medical and the Highland Springs medical offices adjacent to the San Gorgonio Memorial Hospital and thrift store; Riverside County Department of Public Social Services; Banning Mental Health and public health clinic; and H.E.L.P. In August 2009, the Beaumont Unified School District terminated all transportation services to both middle schools and the high school forcing students to find alternate transportation. All of the routes that specifically accommodate student passengers are at capacity. A tripper bus was added to Routes 3, 9, and 17 to accommodate the overflow of passengers that travel on that route. A second bus was recently added to Route 7 to offer more time points and faster service for those passengers. Beaumont Transit staff is currently working closely with Beaumont Unified School staff in anticipation of an increase in elementary -aged passengers, should the school district terminate busing all home to school students in August 2012. Should that occur, staff anticipates an increase in service by approximately four routes and over 250 passenger trips per day. 15 Providing service to major employers, including Stater Brothers, Duraplastics, Wal-Mart Supercenter, Lowe's Distribution Plant, and Home Depot, was anticipated to increase ridership. Ridership has increased to the Wal-Mart Supercenter. Future warehouse distribution centers are anticipated in the next two years as well as the Mid -County Justice Center, staff will monitor these developments closely and plan route changes in accordance with work hours. Ridership to Home Depot and the Oak Valley shopping center has not increased as anticipated. The service to these centers and its utilization will be part of an ongoing system evaluation and monitoring. Finally, expanded outreach efforts to elementary -aged passengers, senior citizen organizations, schools and major employers are included in the plan for FY 2013. Equipment, Passenger Amenities and Facility Needs The system's fixed route buses are equipped with passenger -operated bicycle racks. All revenue service vehicles are equipped with wheelchair lifts and tie -down stations. Eight vehicles are equipped with seatbelts. Bus stops in commercial areas are equipped with benches. Kiosks have been installed at all bus stop signs. Waste containers are available at many of the commercial bus stops. Flag down stops are utilized in a few of the residential areas of Beaumont. Currently, Beaumont Transit has bus shelters located at five of the most utilized stops. Six more bus shelters are to be purchased and installed in May 2012 with solar lighting. Upgrades to the remaining shelters including new glass, new mesh steel panels and new paint were performed in the past year. In April 2012, Banning Transit replaced 13 current shelters with new shelters that have the added amenity of solar lighting. In addition, a new shelter was placed at the MSJC Pass Campus. Bus benches have been replaced throughout town and new schedule kiosks are being installed as well. All bus stop amenities and a new shop truck were purchased with STA capital funds during FY 2011/12. Also purchased during FY 2011/12 were digital security cameras for all buses in the fleet and the necessary viewing equipment. This project was funded through Prop 1 B Security Funds. This past month, staff entered into an agreement with a GIS consultant to design a system -wide map to include all routes in the Pass area. We anticipate completion including printing and distribution by June 2012. At the end of 2010, staff completed training and implementation on Google Transit, with the assistance of RCTC staff. All bus stops and times are accessible via the web on Google Transit. 16 CHAPTER 3 - PLANNED SERVICE CHANGES AND IMPLEMENTATION Recent Service Changes New Service Routes In FY 2012, a new Commuterlink route (Route 120) was created to service passengers traveling to and from the San Bernardino Metrolink station. Routes 3, 9 and 17 added tripper buses during peak times. An additional bus was added to Route 7 which has increased time points for passengers. Route 25, a shopper shuttle with a 30-minute headway servicing local businesses during the holiday season was in service for 30 days and was well -received by passengers. Staff anticipates making this a permanent route in July 2012. Route 121, a modified on -demand shuttle to and from the Loma Linda Veteran's Hospital is also being considered for FY 2013. Route 6 was expanded in 2011 to accommodate the need for service to the MSJC Pass Campus. Survey and planning studies are scheduled for fall of 2012 to assess the need for additional hours of operation for this route based on the projected growth of students traveling to and from the campus. Pass Area Transit also now offers Sunday service. Staff continually reviews existing routes for productivity and for needed improvement to service. Future changes to routes will include adding a bus to existing routes during peak times to accommodate the growing number of passengers in certain identified areas. Marketing Plans and Promotion Efforts have been made to market the Pass Transit System over the past year and will continue in the coming year. These efforts include purchasing advertising on a map of the San Gorgonio Pass Area, distribution of route maps through the utility bills, delivering route maps to the library, chamber of commerce, local businesses and shelters. Route maps have also been placed on all of the buses in map holders. This past month, staff entered into an agreement with a GIS consultant to design a system wide map to include all routes in the Pass area. We anticipate completion including printing and distribution by June 2012. Kiosks have been installed at all bus stop signs with current maps and time points included. A sub -committee of the Transportation Now Chapter was created in 2009 to address marketing efforts to students in the Pass Area. From that sub -committee, a co- sponsored event between Banning, Beaumont, RTA and the Mt. San Jacinto Community College took place in August to market college students and encourage them to ride mass transit to and from the community college. With that, Pass Transit 17 followed RTA's lead and allowed all GoPass holders to ride Pass Transit free. Staff will continue to support this effort in the coming year. During school orientation, staff met with students and parents to educate them on their transit options in the Pass Area. We have been invited back for the coming school year and look forward to the upcoming events. In Beaumont, a scholarship program was implemented in January 2010 after we were contacted by a local family and the school district seeking assistance in transporting two students from the Banning Midway area to Beaumont High School. Staff met with the family and agreed upon a series of transit related assignments to be performed and completed in exchange for monthly bus passes. From that, a committee was formed to set criteria, receive applications, and monitor the progress of the recipients. Council formally adopted the program for the FY 2012 school year. Finally, providing Banning Pass Transit and Dial -A -Ride information on the local television channel, staff appearances at Banning Unified School District Back to School Nights and Open Houses, flyers and posters placed throughout the city and outside areas (Beaumont and Cabazon) serviced by the transit system and newspaper ads can all be utilized to educate the public about the Banning Pass Transit and Dial -A -Ride services available. The following marketing efforts will be undertaken to promote ridership growth. 1. Continue outreach programs to schools and at community events. 2. Attend senior community meetings to provide information. 3. Participate in the Mt. San Jacinto Jr. College GO -PASS Program to encourage ridership of college students. 4. Enclose flyers with transit information in city utility bills. Both cities' websites at www.ci.banning.ca.us and www.ci.beaumont.ca.us provide basic Pass Transit route and schedule information. Additionally, a link to Google Transit is on the web page. Transit staff is currently working to make information about routes and services more accessible. Customers can submit comments, complaints, concerns and suggestions through the city website. 18 CHAPTER 4 - FINANCIAL AND CAPITAL PLANS Operating and Capital Budget Although the State reduction in funding has adversely impacted our operating budget, staff feels confident that all of the following will greatly improve our operations and we will be able to meet the budget limitations set by the State: • Continue to concentrate on marketing the youth in the Pass Area to increase ridership • Re -organize routes to better accommodate ridership and reduce overhead costs • Offer more information on system routes with extended customer service hours The majority of the capital improvement projects were completed in the last year with the purchase of six new buses. We will continue to aggressively complete the final projects in the next year. Funding Plans to Support Proposed Operating and Capital Program Capital projects are funded through STA funds and Proposition 1 B grants for both Banning and Beaumont. Regulatory and Compliance Requirements The American with Disabilities Act of 1990 The Dial -A -Ride services provide ADA complementary paratransit service for the fixed route services. The system uses a self -certification process with professional verification. The Pass Area Transit has allowed RTA to certify its ADA passengers and work under the umbrella of RTA's ADA policy as a provider of ADA paratransit. Title VI The Pass Transit System does not utilize federal funds for operating expenses. As such, Title VI requirements do not currently apply to the transit system. Alternatively Fueled Vehicles (RCTC Policy) The Pass Transit System operates CNG-powered buses on multiple fixed -routes. The balance of the system's revenue service vehicles is diesel and gasoline -powered. Future vehicle purchases will be in compliance with the RCTC and SCAQMD policies regarding alternative fuel transit vehicles. CNG fueling stations are available in both cities which will assist with expanded fueling needs and fast fueling capability. STA Compliance Both Banning and Beaumont do not utilize State Transit Assistance (STA) funding for operating expenses. As such, compliance with the Public Utilities Commission requirement is not applicable. 19 BANNING TABLES �EM= om Riwrside (only Trmspatofian {omsrissiun Bus (Motorbus) / Directly Operated Table 1 - Fleet I n ventory FY2012/ 13 Short Range Transit Plan City of Banning Average Lifetime # of Life to Date Miles Per Active Active # of Life to Date Vehicle Miles Vehicle As Of Lift and Fuel Vehicles Contingency Vehicle Miles through Year -To -Date Year Mfg. Model Seating Ramp Vehicle Type FY Vehicles Prior Year End March (e.g., March) Built Code Code Capacity Equipped Length Code 2011/ 12 FY 2011/ 12 FY 2010/ 11 FY 2011/ 12 FY 2011/ 12 2009 CMD Malibu 5 1 HG 1 0 4,338 7,009 7,009 1998 EDN Transmark 33 2 35 CN 2 0 295,955 283,459 141,730 2001 EDN Transmark 33 1 35 CN 1 0 414,658 436,467 436,467 2004 EDN Transmark 33 2 35 CN 2 0 594,806 623,859 311,930 2010 EDN XH F 31 2 34 CN 2 0 44,349 112,023 56,012 2002 FRD Ranger 2 0 12 GA 1 0 50,824 57,843 57,843 2003 FRD Ranger 2 0 12 GA 1 0 42,743 45,831 45,831 2010 FRD Ranger 2 0 GA 1 0 6,704 13,285 13,285 Totals: 141 8 11 0 1,454,377 1,579,776 143,616 Trans Track Manager TM Page I of 5/23/2012 �EM= om Riwrside (only Trmspatofian {omsrissiun Demand Response / Directly Operated Table 1 - Fleet I n ventory FY2012/ 13 Short Range Transit Plan City of Banning Average Lifetime # of Life to Date Miles Per Active Active # of Life to Date Vehicle Miles Vehicle As Of Lift and Fuel Vehicles Contingency Vehicle Miles through Year -To -Date Year Mfg. Model Seating Ramp Vehicle Type FY Vehicles Prior Year End March (e.g., March) Built Code Code Capacity Equipped Length Code 2011/ 12 FY 2011/ 12 FY 2010/ 11 FY 2011/ 12 FY 2011/ 12 2010 EBC Aerotech 16 1 25 GA 1 0 18,830 24,640 24,640 2010 EBC EDN 16 1 GA 1 0 20,377 30,579 30,579 2001 EDN Aerotech 12 1 25 GA 1 0 224,474 232,958 232,958 2003 EDN Aerotech 12 1 25 GA 1 0 209,093 214,977 214,977 2008 777 Ford 14 1 26 GA 1 0 50,681 55,603 55,603 Totals: 70 5 5 0 523,455 558,757 111,751 Trans Track Manager TM Page 2 of 5/ 23/ 2012 Illlllllr Mmi Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Table 2 -- City of Banning -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2012/ 13 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2009/ 10 Audited FY 2010/ 11 Audited FY 2011 / 12 Plan FY 2011 / 12 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2012/ 13 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 5 5 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $1,220,116 $1,240,257 $1,260,587 $843,489 $1,310,135 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $133,374 $122,797 $133,643 $91,770 $138,780 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $1,086,742 $1,117,460 $1,126,944 $751,719 $1,171,355 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 127,932 128,244 131,834 102,192 144,091 Passenger Miles 342,161 327,258 340,578 261,056 445,041 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 14,468.1 13,387.3 13,574.0 9,896.9 15,341.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 233,761.2 215,531.2 219,100.0 234,971.1 239,460.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 244,325.6 224,148.1 228,265.0 239,332.5 268,924.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $84.33 $92.64 $92.87 $85.23 $85.40 Farebox Recovery Ratio 10.93% 9.90% 10.60% 10.88% 10.59% Subsidy per Passenger $8.49 $8.71 $8.55 $7.36 $8.13 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $3.18 $3.41 $3.31 $2.88 $2.63 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $75.11 $83.47 $83.02 $75.96 $76.35 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $4.65 $5.18 $5.14 $3.20 $4.89 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 8.8 9.6 9.7 10.3 9.4 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.55 0.60 0.60 0.43 0.60 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager TM 5/23/2012 Page 1 of 1 Illlllllr Mmi Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Table 2 -- Banning -BUS -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2012/ 13 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2009/ 10 Audited FY 2010/ 11 Audited FY 2011 / 12 Plan FY 2011 / 12 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2012/ 13 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 3 3 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $1,106,023 $1,111,207 $1,111,327 $719,104 $1,156,076 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $124,985 $114,215 $122,843 $82,742 $127,180 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $981,038 $996,992 $988,484 $636,363 $1,028,896 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 118,394 120,018 121,989 95,389 134,005 Passenger Miles 307,824 297,645 282,095 236,565 405,091 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 12,774.0 11,934.0 11,295.0 8,906.0 12,766.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 199,700.2 186,568.2 175,595.0 215,061.1 196,746.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 205,519.6 191,831.1 181,460.0 217,848.5 202,486.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $86.58 $93.11 $98.39 $80.74 $90.56 Farebox Recovery Ratio 11.30% 10.28% 11.05% 11.51% 11.00% Subsidy per Passenger $8.29 $8.31 $8.10 $6.67 $7.68 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $3.19 $3.35 $3.50 $2.69 $2.54 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $76.80 $83.54 $87.52 $71.45 $80.60 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $4.91 $5.34 $5.63 $2.96 $5.23 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 9.3 10.1 10.8 10.7 10.5 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.59 0.64 0.69 0.44 0.68 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager TM 5/23/2012 Page 1 of 1 Illlllllr Mmi Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Table 2 -- Banning-DAR -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2012/ 13 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2009/ 10 Audited FY 2010/ 11 Audited FY 2011 / 12 Plan FY 2011 / 12 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2012/ 13 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 2 2 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $114,093 $129,050 $149,260 $124,385 $154,059 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $8,390 $8,582 $10,800 $9,029 $11,600 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $105,704 $120,468 $138,460 $115,356 $142,459 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 9,538 8,226 9,845 6,803 10,086 Passenger Miles 34,337 29,614 58,483 24,491 39,950 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 1,694.1 1,453.3 2,279.0 990.9 2,575.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 34,061.0 28,963.0 43,505.0 19,910.0 42,714.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 38,806.0 32,317.0 46,805.0 21,484.0 66,438.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $67.35 $88.80 $65.49 $125.53 $59.83 Farebox Recovery Ratio 7.35% 6.65% 7.23% 7.26% 7.52% Subsidy per Passenger $11.08 $14.64 $14.06 $16.96 $14.12 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $3.08 $4.07 $2.37 $4.71 $3.57 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $62.40 $82.89 $60.75 $116.42 $55.32 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $3.10 $4.16 $3.18 $5.79 $3.34 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 5.6 5.7 4.3 6.9 3.9 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.28 0.28 0.23 0.34 0.24 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager TM 5/23/2012 Page 1 of 1 IlllI= Mmi Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Data Elements Table 3 - SRTP Route Statistics City of Banning -- 1 FY 2012/ 13 All Routes Route # Day Type Peak Vehicles Passengers Passenger Revenue Total Revenue Total Operating Passenger Net Miles Hours Hours Miles Miles Cost Revenue Subsidy BAN-1 Total 1 46,251 146,547 4,195.0 4,207.0 71,735.0 73,648.0 $425,467 $53,359 $372,108 BAN-5 Total 1 51,048 123,199 4,376.0 4,195.0 59,569.0 59,930.0 $391,472 $39,560 $351,912 BAN-6 Total 1 36,706 135,345 4,195.0 4,311.0 65,442.0 68,908.0 $339,137 $34,261 $304,876 BAN-DAR Total 2 10,086 39,950 2,575.0 3,810.0 42,714.0 66,438.0 $154,059 $11,600 $142,459 Service Provider Totals 5 144,091 445,041 15,341.0 16,523.0 239,460.0 268,924.0 $1,310,135 $138,780 $1,171,355 TransTrack Manager TM 5/23/2012 Page > of 2 11 IME Mmi Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Performance I ndicators Table 3 - SRTP Route Statistics City of Banning -- 1 FY 2012/ 13 All Routes Operating Operating Farebox Subsidy Per Subsidy Per Subsidy Per Cost Per Cost Per Cost Per Recovery Subsidy Per Passenger Revenue Revenue Passengers Passengers Route # Day Type Revenue Hour Revenue Mile Passenger Ratio Passenger Mile Hour Mile Per Hour Per Mile BAN-1 Total $101.42 $5.93 $9.20 12.54% $8.05 $2.54 $88.70 $5.19 11.0 0.64 BAN-5 Total $89.46 $6.57 $7.67 10.10% $6.89 $2.86 $80.42 $5.91 11.7 0.86 BAN-6 Total $80.84 $5.18 $9.24 10.10% $8.31 $2.25 $72.68 $4.66 8.7 0.56 BAN-DAR Total $59.83 $3.61 $15.27 7.52% $14.12 $3.57 $55.32 $3.34 3.9 0.24 Service Provider Totals $85.40 $5.47 $9.09 10.59% $8.13 $2.63 $76.35 $4.89 9.4 0.60 TransTrack Manager TM 5/23/2012 Page 2 of 2 TABLE 3A: INDIVIDUAL ROUTE DESCRIPTION Route 1 — Beaumont/Banning/Cabazon Pass Transit Route 1 provides service predominately along Ramsey Street & 6th Street between Beaumont City Hall, Banning and Cabazon, while serving the Casino Morongo, Cabazon neighborhoods and Cabazon shopping areas. This route operates on a two- hour and nine minute headway and is complemented by an overlap with Route 2 (operated by Beaumont Transit System) along 75% of the route. Route 1 provides service to the remote Esperanza and Elm area of Cabazon. The route also provides service to the residential areas of Cabazon, James Venable Community Center, Casino Morongo, Desert Hills Premium Outlets and Cabazon outlets, and the commercial areas along 6th Street and Beaumont Avenue in Beaumont. This route provides riders access to many civic, educational and county sponsored public social service offices within the City of Banning and the unincorporated community of Cabazon. Destinations on Route 1 include: K-Mart, Albertsons, Stater's, Food-4-Less, Wal-Mart Supercenter, Beaumont City Hall, Greyhound Crucero Agency, Amtrak California Thruway bus stop, Banning City Hall, The Gas Company, San Gorgonio Memorial Hospital, Fox Cinemas, Banning Police Department, Desert Hills Premium Outlets, Cabazon Outlets, Casino Morongo and James Venable Community Center. Route 5 — Northern Banning This route operates on a 78 minute headway and provides service to the residential areas of the City of Banning that lie north of the 1-10 Freeway, the Riverside County Courthouse, the Banning Municipal Library, the Coombs Intermediate School, and the commercial areas along Ramsey Street and Highland Springs Avenue. This neighborhood feeder route provides connections to many civic, educational and county sponsored public social service offices, Banning City Hall, Banning Police Department, Fox Cinemas, K-Mart, Albertsons, Stater's, Food-4-Less, Rite Aid Pharmacy, Walgreens Pharmacy, San Gorgonio Memorial Hospital, Banning Chamber of Commerce, Riverside County Superior Court, Banning Public Library, Banning Community Center, Banning Senior Center, Repplier Park Aquatics Center, U.S. Post Office, and various other shopping and school locations within the community. Route 6 — Southern Banning This route operates on a 82 minute headway and provides service to the residential areas south of the 1-10 Freeway, a small residential section north of Ramsey Street at the east end of the City of Banning, the commercial areas along Ramsey Street and Highland Springs Avenue, Banning High School, apartment complexes, the Riverside County Smith Correctional Facility, and the Mt. San Jacinto College. This neighborhood feeder route provides connections to many civic, educational and county sponsored public social service offices, Banning City Hall, Banning Police Department, Fox Cinemas, Stater's, Food-4-Less, K-Mart, Albertsons, Rite Aid Pharmacy, Walgreens Pharmacy, San Gorgonio Memorial Hospital, Banning High School, the Riverside County Smith Correctional Facility, The Banning Municipal Airport, U.S. Post Office, and various other shopping and school locations within the community. Route 5/6 Combo This route operates on a 102 minute headway and provides service to the residential areas south of the 1-10 Freeway, a small residential section north of Ramsey Street at the east end of the City of Banning, the commercial areas along Ramsey Street and Highland Springs Avenue, Banning High School, apartment complexes, the Riverside County Smith Correctional Facility, and the Mt. San Jacinto College. It also provides service to the residential areas that lie north of the 1-10 Freeway, the Riverside County Courthouse, the Banning Municipal Library and the commercial areas along Ramsey Street and Highland Springs Avenue. This neighborhood feeder route provides connections to many civic, educational and county sponsored public social service offices, Banning City Hall, Banning Police Department, Fox Cinemas, K-Mart, Albertsons, Stater's, Food-4-Less, Rite Aid Pharmacy, Walgreens Pharmacy, San Gorgonio Memorial Hospital, Banning Chamber of Commerce, Riverside County Superior Court, Banning Public Library, Banning Community Center, Banning Senior Center, Repplier Park Aquatics Center, U.S. Post Office, and various other shopping and school locations within the community Pass Transit Dial -A -Ride Pass Transit Dial -A -Ride is provided within the entire city limits of Banning and Beaumont and within a % mile boundary of Routes 1 and 2 services in Cabazon. The City of Banning provides the ADA certification for Pass Transit Dial -A -ride services operated by the cities of Banning and Beaumont. Seniors (age 60 years and older), persons with disabilities, and ADA eligible passengers are eligible for dial -a -ride throughout the entire service area. Service hours vary for non-ADA eligible passengers. These categories of passengers also are required to fill out a certification application to determine eligibility of service. Once certified, a card is issued to the applicant. General public passengers (ages 5 — 59 years) are not eligible for dial -a -ride service. The primary uses of Pass Transit Dial -A -Ride are for transportation to medical appointments, workshop programs for persons with disabilities, shopping areas, employment, and connections with Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) and Pass Transit Fixed Routes. Effective July 1, 2012 the Banning Pass Transit Combo Route 5/6 route will no longer be provided as we will return to offering three (3) routes, Route 1 Cabazon, Route 5 Northern and Route 6 Southern on Saturday's and Sunday's from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.. City of Banning FY 2012/13 Summary of Funds Requested Short Range Transit Plan Table 4 - Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2012/13 Project Description Capital Project Number (1) Total Amount of Funds LTF STA Prop 1 B (PTMISEA) Prop 1 B Security Measure A Fare Box Other'2) FY 2012/13 Operating Assistance $1,310,135 $1,170,105 $138,780 $1,250 Subtotal: Operating $1,310,135 $1,170,105 $0 $0 $0 $0 $138,780 $1,250 F/Y 12-01 Subtotal: Capital $o $o $o $o $o $o $o Total: Operating & Capital $1,310,135 $1,170,105 $0 $o $o $0 $138,780 $1,250 Note: Other (2) is from Interest Income 10.68821 % Revised 4/30/2012 Summary of FY 2012/13 Funds Requested.xls City of Banning FY 2013/14 Summary of Funds Requested Short Range Transit Plan Table 5.1 - Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2013/14 Project Description Capital Project Number (1) Total Amount of Funds LTF STA Prop 1 B (PTMISEA) Prop 1 B Security Measure A Fare Box Other'z FY 2013/14 Operating Expenses $1,348,145 $1,205,208 $141,687 $1,250 Subtotal: Operating $1,348,145 $1,205,208 $0 $0 $0 $0 $141,687 $1,250 No Requests Subtotal: Capital $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total: Operating & Capital $1,348,145 $1,205,208 $0 $0 $o $0 $141,687 $1,2501 Note: Other (2) is from Interest Income Revised 4/30/2012 Summary of FY 2013/14 Funds Requested.xls City of Banning FY 2014/15 Summary of Funds Requested Short Range Transit Plan Table 5.2 - Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2014/15 Project Description Capital Project Number (1) Total Amount of Funds LTF STA Prop 1 B (PTMISEA) Prop 1 B Security Measure A Fare Box Other'z FY 14/15 Operating Expensed $1,384,122 $1,235,338 $147,354 $1,250 Subtotal: Operating $1,384,122 $1,235,338 $0 $0 $0 $0 $147,354 $1,250 No Requests Subtotal: Capital $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total: Operating & Capital $1,384,122 $1,235,338 $0 $0 $o $0 $147,354 $1,2501 Note: Other (2) is from Interest Income Revised 4/30/2012 Summary of FY 2014/15 Funds Requested.xls TABLE 6 — AUDIT Audit Recommendations (Covering FY 2006/07 — FY 2008/09) Action(s) Taken And Results 1. Banning Transit should implement the remaining three prior audit recommendations: ♦ Provide Passenger Mile data in TransTrack ♦ Continued Recruitment of Drivers • Provide incentives for drivers to maintain longevity Passenger Mile data in TransTrack was implemented in 2006 The hiring process for drivers has been greatly improved through developing better communication with Human Resources. Employee Recognition program is in place honoring employees at each 10 year mark. We also provide an excellent retirement package and recognize seniority for scheduling. 2. Develop and enforce employee policies and rules specific to providing consistent transit service. Policies and procedures have been updated as of October 2011. Safety and training meetings are held a minimum of eight times per year, at these meeting policies and rules and rules are reiterated. Drivers are required to strictly adhere to all guidelines and are individually monitored on a monthly basis by the Lead Driver Trainer. 3. Conduct daily reconciliation of farebox revenues with passenger counts. A procedure has been developed and implemented that allows for daily reconciliation of farebox revenues with passenger counts. IMME Mmi� Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Table 7 -- Service Provider Performance Targets Report FY 2011/ 12 Short Range Transit Plan Review City of Banning Data Elements FY 2011/ 12 Plan FY 2011/ 12 Target FY 201 1 / 12 Year to Date Through 3rd Quarter Year to Date Performance Scorecard Unlinked Passenger Trips 131,834 Passenger Miles 340,578 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours 13,574.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles 219,100.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 228,265.0 Total Operating Expenses $1,260,587 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $133,643 Net Operating Expenses $1,126,944 Performance I ndicators Mandatory: 1. Farebox Recovery Ratio I 10.60% 1 > = 10.00% 1 10.88% 'Meets Target Discretionary: 1. Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour $92.87 <_ $82.23 $85.23 Fails to Meet Target 2. Subsidy Per Passenger $8.55 >_ $6.51 and <_ $8.81 $7.36 Meets Target 3. Subsidy Per Passenger Mile $3.31 > _ $2.55 and <_ $3.45 $2.88 Meets Target 4. Subsidy Per Hour $83.02 >_ $62.19 and <_ $84.15 $75.96 Meets Target 5. Subsidy Per Mile $5.14 >_ $3.86 and <_ $5.22 $3.20 Better Than Target 6. Passengers Per Revenue Hour 9.70 >= 8.08 and <= 10.93 10.30 Meets Target 7. Passengers Per Revenue Mile 0.60 >= 0.50 and <= 0.68 0.43 Fails to Meet Target Note: Must meet at least 4 out of 7 Discretionary Performance Indicators Productivity Performance Summary: Meets FY 11/12 Farebox Ratio Requirement. Meets 5 of 7 Discretionary Indicators. Meets RCTC PIP Program. Service Provider Comments: TransTrack Manager TM 5/23/2012 Page 1 of 1 1.1.1�� Bionide (war Trmsporrofian (omsrissiun FY 2012/ 13 - Table 8 -- SRTP Performance Report Service Provider: City of Banning All Routes Performance I ndicators FY 2010/ 11 End of Year Actual FY 2011 / 12 3rd Quarter Year -to -Date FY 2012/ 13 Plan FY 2012/ 13 Target Plan Performance Scorecard (a) Passengers 128,244 102,192 144,091 None Passenger Miles 327,258 261,056 445,041 None Revenue Hours 13,387.3 9,896.9 15,341.0 None Total Hours 14,737.0 10,842.0 16,523.0 None Revenue Miles 215,531.2 234,971.1 239,460.0 None Total Miles 224,148.1 239,332.5 268,924.0 None Operating Costs $1,240,257 $843,489 $1,310,135 None Passenger Revenue $122,797 $91,770 $138,780 None Operating Subsidy $1,117,460 $751,719 $1,171,355 None Operating Costs Per Revenue Hour $92.64 $85.23 $85.40 <= $86.73 Meets Target Operating Cost Per Revenue Mile $5.75 $3.59 $5.47 None Operating Costs Per Passenger $9.67 $8.25 $9.09 None Farebox Recovery Ratio 9.90% 10.88% 10.59% > = 10.0% Meets Target Subsidy Per Passenger $8.71 $7.36 $8.13 >= $6.26 and <= $8.46 Meets Target Subsidy Per Passenger Mile $3.41 $2.88 $2.63 >= $2.45 and <= $3.31 Meets Target Subsidy Per Revenue Hour $83.47 $75.96 $76.35 >= $64.57 and <= $87.35 Meets Target Subsidy Per Revenue Mile $5.18 $3.20 $4.89 >= $2.72 and <= $3.68 Fails to Meet Target Passengers Per Revenue Hour 9.60 10.30 9.40 >= 8.76 and <= 11.85 Meets Target Passengers Per Revenue Mile 0.60 0.43 0.60 >= 0.37 and <= 0.49 Better Than Target a) The Plan Performance Scorecard column is the result of comparing the FY 2012/13 Flan to the FY 2012/13 Primary Target. TransTrack Manager TM 5/23/2012 Page 1 of 1 TABLE 9 - HIGHLIGHTS OF 2012/13 SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN ■ Purchase and install auto display and enunciator equipment in fixed route fleet. ■ Purchase and install 6 additional bus shelters, benches and trash receptacles ■ Purchase one fixed route coach ■ Continue to install additional bus stop signs along routes 1, 5, and 6, thereby, reducing the number of flag stops. ■ Reinstate full Saturday and Sunday Service to three routes with reduced headway ■ Closely monitor service to the MSJC Pass Campus and address needs as necessary ■ The addition of an Administrative Transit Specialist position to increase the efficiency and reporting of data and financial tracking within the transit department ■ In a cooperative effort with the City of Beaumont, contracting for a Comprehensive Analysis of Operations of both services to increase productivity of overall services in the two cities and outlying areas (Cabazon and Calimesa) currently serviced by Pass Transit. ■ Closely monitor service to the MSJC Pass Campus and address needs as necessary ■ Continue working with the City of Beaumont staff regarding the coordination of routes, schedules, passenger amenities, and fares to ensure that Pass Transit is seamless and simple to use by Pass Area residents. BANNING TRANSIT SYSTEM/PASS TRANSIT FY 2008/09 Audited FY 2009/10 Audited FY 2010/11 Audited FY 2011/12 Estimate (Based on 3rd Quarter Actuals) FY 2012/13 Planned Systemwide Ridership 173,351 127,932 128,244 136,256 147,156 Operating Cost Per Revenue Hours $88.15 $84.33 $92.64 $84.80 $86.34 BEAUMONT TABLES �EM= om Riwrside (only Trmspatofian {omsrissiun Bus (Motorbus) / Directly Operated Table 1 - Fleet I n ventory FY2012/ 13 Short Range Transit Plan City of Beaumont Average Lifetime # of Life to Date Miles Per Active Active # of Life to Date Vehicle Miles Vehicle As Of Lift and Fuel Vehicles Contingency Vehicle Miles through Year -To -Date Year Mfg. Model Seating Ramp Vehicle Type FY Vehicles Prior Year End March (e.g., March) Built Code Code Capacity Equipped Length Code 2011/ 12 FY 2011/ 12 FY 2010/ 11 FY 2011/ 12 FY 2011/ 12 2002 BBB 35 2 34 CN 1 0 0 81,119 81,119 2000 BBB CSRE 30 2 32 DF 1 0 289,493 300,997 300,997 2000 BBB CSRE 30 2 32 DF 1 0 262,495 275,526 275,526 2010 CMD GMC 5500 28 2 32 GA 1 0 7,786 53,654 53,654 2005 EDN 14 2 24 GA 1 0 207,535 215,419 215,419 2001 GCC 14 2 24 GA 1 0 250,567 263,721 263,721 2009 GMC C-5500 28 2 32 CN 1 0 42,467 53,876 53,876 2009 STR 28 2 32 CN 1 0 11,386 39,537 39,537 2010 STR 30 2 32 DF 1 0 8,994 37,159 37,159 Totals: 237 18 9 0 1,080,723 1,321,008 146,779 Trans Track Manager TM Page I of 5/23/2012 �EM= om Riwrside (only Trmspatofian {omsrissiun Demand Response / Directly Operated Table 1 - Fleet I n ventory FY2012/ 13 Short Range Transit Plan City of Beaumont Average Lifetime # of Life to Date Miles Per Active Active # of Life to Date Vehicle Miles Vehicle As Of Lift and Fuel Vehicles Contingency Vehicle Miles through Year -To -Date Year Mfg. Model Seating Ramp Vehicle Type FY Vehicles Prior Year End March (e.g., March) Built Code Code Capacity Equipped Length Code 2011/ 12 FY 2011/ 12 FY 2010/ 11 FY 2011/ 12 FY 2011/ 12 2010 FRD Ford E450 16 2 24 GA 1 0 23,151 47,443 47,443 2010 FRD Ford E-450 16 2 24 GA 1 0 21,219 40,089 40,089 2010 FRD Ford E-450 16 0 24 GA 1 0 17,710 35,650 35,650 2001 GCC Ford E-450 16 2 24 GA 1 0 248,691 263,646 263,646 Totals: 64 6 4 0 310,771 386,828 96,707 Trans Track Manager TM Page 2 of 5/23/2012 Illlllllr Mmi Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Table 2 -- City of Beaumont -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2012/ 13 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2009/ 10 Audited FY 2010/ 11 Audited FY 2011 / 12 Plan FY 2011 / 12 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2012/ 13 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 12 13 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $1,336,326 $1,233,381 $1,402,000 $755,029 $1,417,500 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $257,420 $215,229 $190,983 $116,817 $179,280 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $1,078,906 $1,018,152 $1,211,017 $638,212 $1,238,220 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 141,629 169,665 181,418 134,932 184,256 Passenger Miles 293,736 345,935 226,535 272,059 367,291 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 16,840.6 15,856.4 15,756.0 12,197.1 16,215.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 235,662.0 228,901.0 226,535.0 181,987.8 233,134.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 249,998.0 243,657.3 241,379.0 198,228.8 256,919.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $79.35 $77.78 $88.98 $61.90 $87.42 Farebox Recovery Ratio 19.26% 17.45% 13.62% 15.47% 12.64% Subsidy per Passenger $7.62 $6.00 $6.68 $4.73 $6.72 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $3.67 $2.94 $5.35 $2.35 $3.37 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $64.07 $64.21 $76.86 $52.32 $76.36 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $4.58 $4.45 $5.35 $3.51 $5.31 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 8.4 10.7 11.5 11.1 11.4 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.60 0.74 0.80 0.74 0.79 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager TM 5/23/2012 Page 1 of 1 Illlllllr Mmi Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Table 2 -- City of Beaumont -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2012/ 13 Short Range Transit Plan Non -Excluded Routes FY 2009/ 10 Audited FY 2010/ 11 Audited FY 2011 / 12 Plan FY 2011 / 12 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2012/ 13 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 3 6 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $1,192,951 $1,059,850 $282,000 $636,420 $1,026,100 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $226,148 $165,075 $19,556 $71,190 $102,610 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $966,804 $894,775 $262,444 $565,230 $923,490 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 119,177 112,034 21,167 79,816 106,159 Passenger Miles 251,077 236,436 44,360 167,339 218,907 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 15,611.6 13,808.9 3,727.0 10,371.1 13,730.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 209,050.0 192,974.0 44,360.0 150,532.8 189,496.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 218,409.0 201,618.4 46,946.0 156,541.8 198,390.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $76.41 $76.75 $75.66 $61.36 $74.73 Farebox Recovery Ratio 18.95% 15.58% 6.93% 11.19% 10.00% Subsidy per Passenger $8.11 $7.99 $12.40 $7.08 $8.70 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $3.85 $3.78 $5.92 $3.38 $4.22 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $61.93 $64.80 $70.42 $54.50 $67.26 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $4.62 $4.64 $5.92 $3.75 $4.87 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 7.6 8.1 5.7 7.7 7.7 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.57 0.58 0.48 0.53 0.56 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager TM 5/23/2012 Page 1 of 1 Illlllllr Mmi Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Table 2 -- City of Beaumont -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2012/ 13 Short Range Transit Plan Excluded Routes FY 2009/ 10 Audited FY 2010/ 11 Audited FY 2011 / 12 Plan FY 2011 / 12 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2012/ 13 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 9 7 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $143,375 $173,531 $1,120,000 $118,609 $391,400 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $31,273 $50,154 $171,427 $45,627 $76,670 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $112,102 $123,378 $948,573 $72,982 $314,730 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 22,452 57,631 160,251 55,116 78,097 Passenger Miles 42,659 109,499 182,175 104,720 148,384 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 1,229.0 2,047.5 12,029.0 1,826.0 2,485.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 26,612.0 35,927.0 182,175.0 31,455.0 43,638.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 31,589.0 42,038.9 194,433.0 41,687.0 58,529.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $116.66 $84.75 $93.11 $64.96 $157.51 Farebox Recovery Ratio 21.81 % 28.90% 15.30% 38.47% 19.58% Subsidy per Passenger $4.99 $2.14 $5.92 $1.32 $4.03 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $2.63 $1.13 $5.21 $0.70 $2.12 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $91.22 $60.26 $78.86 $39.97 $126.65 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $4.21 $3.43 $5.21 $2.32 $7.21 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 18.3 28.1 13.3 30.2 31.4 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.84 1.60 0.88 1.75 1.79 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager TM 5/23/2012 Page 1 of 1 Illlllllr Mmi Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Table 2 -- Beaumont -BUS -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2012/ 13 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2009/ 10 Audited FY 2010/ 11 Audited FY 2011 / 12 Plan FY 2011 / 12 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2012/ 13 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 9 10 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $976,550 $889,114 $1,120,000 $559,930 $1,135,500 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $180,959 $194,706 $171,427 $98,289 $151,080 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $795,591 $694,408 $948,573 $461,641 $984,420 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 120,014 148,988 160,251 121,170 169,164 Passenger Miles 228,027 283,077 182,175 230,223 321,411 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 12,230.7 12,097.3 12,029.0 9,359.4 12,431.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 182,431.0 183,214.0 182,175.0 148,897.8 189,014.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 193,318.0 195,076.5 194,433.0 162,530.8 209,322.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $79.84 $73.50 $93.11 $59.83 $91.34 Farebox Recovery Ratio 18.53% 21.90% 15.30% 17.55% 13.30% Subsidy per Passenger $6.63 $4.66 $5.92 $3.81 $5.82 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $3.49 $2.45 $5.21 $2.01 $3.06 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $65.05 $57.40 $78.86 $49.32 $79.19 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $4.36 $3.79 $5.21 $3.10 $5.21 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 9.8 12.3 13.3 12.9 13.6 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.66 0.81 0.88 0.81 0.89 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager TM 5/23/2012 Page 1 of 1 Illlllllr Mmi Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Table 2 -- Beaumont-DAR -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2012/ 13 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2009/ 10 Audited FY 2010/ 11 Audited FY 2011 / 12 Plan FY 2011 / 12 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2012/ 13 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 3 3 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $359,776 $344,267 $282,000 $195,099 $282,000 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $76,461 $20,523 $19,556 $18,528 $28,200 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $283,315 $323,744 $262,444 $176,571 $253,800 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 21,615 20,677 21,167 13,762 15,092 Passenger Miles 65,710 62,858 44,360 41,836 45,880 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 4,609.9 3,759.1 3,727.0 2,837.7 3,784.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 53,231.0 45,687.0 44,360.0 33,090.0 44,120.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 56,680.0 48,580.8 46,946.0 35,698.0 47,597.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $78.04 $91.58 $75.66 $68.75 $74.52 Farebox Recovery Ratio 21.25% 5.96% 6.93% 9.50% 10.00% Subsidy per Passenger $13.11 $15.66 $12.40 $12.83 $16.82 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $4.31 $5.15 $5.92 $4.22 $5.53 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $61.46 $86.12 $70.42 $62.22 $67.07 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $5.32 $7.09 $5.92 $5.34 $5.75 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 4.7 5.5 5.7 4.8 4.0 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.41 0.45 0.48 0.42 0.34 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager TM 5/23/2012 Page 1 of 1 Ill I= Mmi Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Data Elements Table 3 - SRTP Route Statistics City of Beaumont -- 2 FY 2012/ 13 All Routes Route # Day Type Peak Passenger Revenue Vehicles Passengers Miles Hours Total Revenue Total Operating Passenger Net Hours Miles Miles Cost Revenue Subsidy BEA-10 BEA-11 BEA-120 BEA-17 BEA-2 BEA-3 BEA-4 BEA-7 BEA-9 BEA-DAR Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 3 15,141 5,969 252 15,156 32,167 25,932 32,968 25,147 16,432 15,092 28,768 11,341 479 28,796 61,117 49,271 62,639 47,779 31,221 45,880 448.0 156.0 199.0 477.0 3,829.0 2,704.0 3,413.0 788.0 417.0 3,784.0 448.0 217.0 309.0 682.0 4,023.0 2,895.0 3,545.0 1,132.0 580.0 4,108.0 4,896.0 2,867.0 5,220.0 9,213.0 68, 874.0 38, 776.0 37, 726.0 15, 536.0 5,906.0 44,120.0 4,896.0 3,368.0 9,684.0 12, 756.0 71, 896.0 40,018.0 38, 879.0 20,116.0 7,709.0 47, 597.0 $48, 000 $48, 000 $4,900 $78, 600 $254, 700 $234, 700 $254, 700 $126, 000 $85, 900 $282, 000 $9, 600 $9, 600 $490 $15, 600 $25,470 $23,470 $25,470 $25,200 $16,180 $28, 200 $38,400 $38,400 $4, 410 $63, 000 $229, 230 $211,230 $229,230 $100, 800 $69, 720 $253, 800 Service Provider Totals 13 184,256 367,291 16,215.0 17, 939.0 233,134.0 256, 919.0 $1,417,500 $179,280 $1,238,220 TransTrack Manager TM 5/23/2012 Page > of 2 IIIIIIIME Mmi Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Performance I ndicators Table 3 - SRTP Route Statistics City of Beaumont -- 2 FY 2012/ 13 All Routes Route # Day Type Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour Operating Cost Per Revenue Mile Farebox Subsidy Per Subsidy Per Subsidy Per Cost Per Recovery Subsidy Per Passenger Revenue Revenue Passenger Ratio Passenger Mile Hour Mile Passengers Passengers Per Hour Per Mile BEA-10 BEA-11 BEA-120 BEA-17 BEA-2 BEA-3 BEA-4 BEA-7 BEA-9 BEA-DAR Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total $107.14 $307.69 $24.62 $164.78 $66.52 $86.80 $74.63 $159.90 $206.00 $74.52 $9.80 $16.74 $0.94 $8.53 $3.70 $6.05 $6.75 $8.11 $14.54 $6.39 $3.17 $8.04 $19.44 $5.19 $7.92 $9.05 $7.73 $5.01 $5.23 $18.69 20.00% 20.00% 10.00% 19.84% 10.00% 10.00% 10.00% 20.00% 18.83% 10.00% $2.54 $6.43 $17.50 $4.16 $7.13 $8.15 $6.95 $4.01 $4.24 $16.82 $1.33 $3.39 $9.21 $2.19 $3.75 $4.29 $3.66 $2.11 $2.23 $5.53 $85.71 $246.15 $22.16 $132.08 $59.87 $78.12 $67.16 $127.92 $167.19 $67.07 $7.84 $13.39 $0.84 $6.84 $3.33 $5.45 $6.08 $6.49 $11.80 $5.75 33.8 38.3 1.3 31.8 8.4 9.6 9.7 31.9 39.4 4.0 3.09 2.08 0.05 1.65 0.47 0.67 0.87 1.62 2.78 0.34 Service Provider Totals $87.42 $6.08 $7.69 12.64% $6.72 $3.37 $76.36 $5.31 11.4 0.79 TransTrack Manager TM 5/23/2012 Page 2 of 2 sprimgenbe}i gm% Si/a103 M le MeawnS ZIOErears Palm% 0$ '0$ ()SLIMS 0$ 0$ 0$ 000'0914 05 IMILS `0094L9511$ -. 1e31dB0 V Sul;sled° :181•01 0$ • 0$ 0$ 0# 000'00i$ 0$ 000a01.1 "isndso :11101g1nS 000'OSit 000'051$ 10-£4 M equewenadwl Bullgur's 0$ OSL'14iS 0$ 0$ 0$ 0$ 08L'BaIs 009'L4104$ iW>eiBd° :111401gn$ NV MIS • /09eSLS'1.$ 00r'LWIS • sesuedr3 WowedO mho x0e e+ed V ann. Avinoeg HI dWd cVaslnid? Ell. dwd Vie 111 spun 40Proury fewi 40 JequinN MOW l IO* 11001.10S3(1 PO [OM euziorki Peraonbed epuria, ao AewwnS - ti elael mid pilau etuey Uo4S peisenbeti tpunj lali+ewumg SW4403 M 1110000ee9 40 kip SRTP FY 12-13 Table 4 -- Capital Protect Justification PROJECT NUMBER .FY 13-01 PROJECT NAME Building Improveinents PROJECT DESCRIPTION This project will include updating the transit office, shop area, bathrooms and driveway. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION The transit office is over 60 years old. The mechanics are working in the elements as most of the shop is outdoors. The driveway is cracked and dangerous. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES {REQUESTED} STA Funds $150,000 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED — INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER None slx•palsenbed sound b4/E40Z Rd }o kewwng Z40Z/ZZ/S pewied 0$ 000`5ti L$ 0$ as o$ 000`OOE$ 000`s0E` L$ 000`Ose L$ ismds3 le 6uge.aadp :isiol 0$ 0$ 0$ 0$ 0$ 000`OOS$ 0$ oonoss pude° :ielo;gns oo0`0o£$ 0onoE$ 40-174 Ad uolsuedxa Jo} sesng L adAi Z 0$ 000`544$ o$ 0$ o$ 0$ 000`90S' 4$ 000`0917' 4$ 6uROJed0 :10104C nS 000'gtI$ 000`50£'4$ 000'0517'4$ sesuadx3fiAimed° (0 Jaylp t xog aged y amseen Alp roaS 9 4 dad � (b3S1111d) g 4 dad VlS All sound }o lunowy lelol (4) JegwnN Ioefad lelldeD u00.10Sa❑ 100f0.1d ti LIE LOZ Ad ao} pa;sanbaa spund teuewuunS - L•S alqui. ueld pm' e6ueb po4s pa}senbad spund }o fuswwng 174/£I0Z Jed tuownseg ;o AID SRTP FY 12-13 TABLE 5.1A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY 14-01 PROJECT NAME Procure 2 Type VII Buses. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2 Type VI Buses are planned to be procured for expansion. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION This type of bus is needed for utilizing on routes. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) STA Funds $300,000 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SMILIAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED — INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER None slx•pelsenbea spund 9 L/b LOZ Ad }o kewwnS ZLOZIZZ19 pasinad 0$ 00s`ipi.$ 0$ o$ o$ o00`OOS$ OOS`L.Z£` L$ 000`sul-$ leildeo'S BuReaado :lelol 0$ o$ 0$ o$ o$ aao`ooE$ o$ 000`oos$ isucle3 :ploygns 000`00£$ 00o'o0£$ L0-9 L Ad }uaweogldayuopugdxe Jo} sesng L adhl Z 0$ 009'L171-$ 0$ 0$ 0$ 0$ o09`LZE'LS 000'9Lb`L$ 6ugwado :IelolgnS 009'Lb1-$ 009`LZE`L$ 000'SLb`1-$ sesuadx3 Bunmedo rm 191110 xog amA y ainsgayy AminoeS g L dad ('d3SIWld) g L dad ylS Ali spund }o lunowy Iglal (L) JaquinN 409Kud lellde0 uNdposea pafaad 9141KZ AA ao; paisanbaa spund ;o Anuwwns - Z'S alclel ueid aBugd boys palsanbad spund }a %gwwns 9 111740Z A3 wowneag ;o Apo SRTP FY 12-13 TABLE 5.2A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY 15-01 PROJECT NAME Procure 2 Type VII Buses. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2 Type VI Buses are planned to be procured for expansion and possible replacement. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION This type of bus is needed for utilizing on routes. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) STA Funds $300,000 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SMILIAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED — INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER None CITY OF BEAUMONT TRANSIT SYSTEM SRTP 2012/13-2014/15 TABLE 6 — PROGRESS TO IMPLEMENT TRIENNIAL PERFORMANCE AUDIT Audit Recommendations (Covering FY 2006/07 — FY 2008/09) Action(s) Taken And Results (1) 1. Need to ensure that the State Controller Reports are completed and submitted in a timely manner. COMPLETED Recommendation to implement policies and Procedures are in place to prevent further procedures to ensure that the State Controller delays in completion of these important Reports are prepared and submitted in a timely manner as required by PUC Section 99243. documents. (1) If no action take, provide schedule for implementation or explanation of why the recommendation is no longer relevant. IMME Mmi� Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Table 7 -- Service Provider Performance Targets Report FY 2011/ 12 Short Range Transit Plan Review City of Beaumont Data Elements FY 2011/ 12 Plan FY 2011/ 12 Target FY 201 1 / 12 Year to Date Through 3rd Quarter Year to Date Performance Scorecard Unlinked Passenger Trips 181,418 Passenger Miles 226,535 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours 15,756.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles 226,535.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 241,379.0 Total Operating Expenses $1,402,000 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $190,983 Net Operating Expenses $1,211,017 Performance I ndicators Mandatory: 1. Farebox Recovery Ratio I 13.62% 1 > = 10.00% 1 15.47% 'Meets Target Discretionary: 1. Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour $88.98 <_ $62.88 $61.90 Meets Target 2. Subsidy Per Passenger $6.68 > _ $4.40 and <_ $5.96 $4.73 Meets Target 3. Subsidy Per Passenger Mile $5.35 > _ $2.16 and <_ $2.92 $2.35 Meets Target 4. Subsidy Per Hour $76.86 >_ $47.46 and <_ $64.22 $52.32 Meets Target 5. Subsidy Per Mile $5.35 > _ $3.30 and <_ $4.46 $3.51 Meets Target 6. Passengers Per Revenue Hour 11.50 >= 9.18 and <= 12.42 11.10 Meets Target 7. Passengers Per Revenue Mile 0.80 >= 0.64 and <= 0.86 0.74 Meets Target Note: Must meet at least 4 out of 7 Discretionary Performance Indicators Productivity Performance Summary: Meets FY 11/12 Farebox Ratio Requirement. Meets 7 of 7 Discretionary Indicators. Meets RCTC PIP Program. Service Provider Comments: TransTrack Manager TM 5/23/2012 Page 1 of 1 1.1.1�� Bionide (war Trmsporrofian (omsrissiun FY 2012/ 13 - Table 8 -- SRTP Performance Report Service Provider: City of Beaumont All Routes Performance I ndicators FY 2010/ 11 End of Year Actual FY 2011 / 12 3rd Quarter Year -to -Date FY 2012/ 13 Plan FY 2012/ 13 Target Plan Performance Scorecard (a) Passengers 169,665 134,932 184,256 None Passenger Miles 345,935 272,059 367,291 None Revenue Hours 15,856.4 12,197.1 16,215.0 None Total Hours 17,330.2 13,462.7 17,939.0 None Revenue Miles 228,901.0 181,987.8 233,134.0 None Total Miles 243,657.3 198,228.8 256,919.0 None Operating Costs $1,233,381 $755,029 $1,417,500 None Passenger Revenue $215,229 $116,817 $179,280 None Operating Subsidy $1,018,152 $638,212 $1,238,220 None Operating Costs Per Revenue Hour $77.78 $61.90 $87.42 <= $62.99 Fails to Meet Target Operating Cost Per Revenue Mile $5.39 $4.15 $6.08 None Operating Costs Per Passenger $7.27 $5.60 $7.69 None Farebox Recovery Ratio 17.45% 15.47% 12.64% > = 10.0% Meets Target Subsidy Per Passenger $6.00 $4.73 $6.72 >= $4.02 and <= $5.44 Fails to Meet Target Subsidy Per Passenger Mile $2.94 $2.35 $3.37 >= $2.00 and <= $2.70 Fails to Meet Target Subsidy Per Revenue Hour $64.21 $52.32 $76.36 >= $44.47 and <= $60.17 Fails to Meet Target Subsidy Per Revenue Mile $4.45 $3.51 $5.31 >= $2.98 and <= $4.04 Fails to Meet Target Passengers Per Revenue Hour 10.70 11.10 11.40 >= 9.44 and <= 12.77 Meets Target Passengers Per Revenue Mile 0.74 0.74 0.79 >= 0.63 and <= 0.85 Meets Target a) The Plan Performance Scorecard column is the result of comparing the FY 2012/13 Flan to the FY 2012/13 Primary Target. TransTrack Manager TM 5/23/2012 Page 1 of 1 Table 9 HIGHLIGHTS OF SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN • Complete a Comprehensive Operations Analysis in conjunction with the City of Banning, RTA and Sunline • Implement minor route changes to existing routes to increase service and improve customer service ▪ Increase bus service on current routes by adding additional buses at peak times • Increase service regionally to San Bernardino County • Purchase GPS system for all vehicles to track vehicle locations • Coordinate Tenant Improvements on existing Transit office • Install more bus shelters and bus benches throughout service area to improve and enhance service provided with the city of Beaumont • Expand outreach efforts to senior citizen organizations, schools and major employers • Finalize and print a system -wide map showing all Beaumont and Banning routes • Continue to work with the City of Banning to improve coordination of routes, schedules, passenger amenities, and fares to ensure that Pass Transit is seamless and simple to use by Pass Area residents Operating and Financial Data FY 08/09 Audited FY 09/10 Audited FY 10/11 Audited FY 11/12 Estimated FY 12/13 Planned Systemwide Ridership 98,039 141,629 168,776 179,905 184,256 Operating Costs per Revenue Hour $85.91 $79.35 $77.99 $80.03 $87.42 City of Corona Short Range Transit Plan Fiscal Years 207 2/7 3-2014/7 5 CORONA "THE UK LE CITY' 1n<nforated Iu1y 13, 1896 May 24, 2012 Table of Contents Chapter 1 — System Overview Page 1.0 Introduction 1 1.1 Description of Service Area 1 1.2 Population Profile and Demographic Projections 4 1.3 Fixed Route Transit Services and Paratransit Service 5 1.4 Current Fare Structure and Proposed Fare Structure 6 1.5 Revenue Fleet 7 1.6 Existing Facility/Planned Facilities 8 Chapter 2 — Existing Service and Route Performance 2.1 Fixed Route Service — Route by Route Analysis 8 2.2 Dial -A -Ride Service — System Performance 8 2.3 Key Performance Indicators 8 2.4 Productivity Improvement Efforts 10 2.5 Major Trip Generators and Projected Growth 10 2.6 Equipment, Passenger Amenities and Facility Needs 10 Chapter 3 — Planned Service Changes and Implementation 3.1 Recent Service Changes 11 3.2 Recommended Local & Express Route 11 3.3 Marketing Plans and Promotion 11 3.4 Budget Impact and Proposed Changes 12 Chapter 4 — Financial and Capital Plans 4.1 Operating and Capital Budget 12 4.2 Funding Plans to Support Proposed Operating and Capital Program 14 4.3 Regulatory and Compliance Requirements 14 Table 1 — Fleet Inventory 16 Table 2 — Service Summary 18 Table 3 — Route Statistics 21 Table 3A — Individual Route Descriptions and Area Served 23 Table 4 — Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2012/13 24 Table 5.1 — Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2013/14 26 Table 5.2 — Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2014/15 28 Table 6 — Progress Implementing Triennial Performance Audit Recommendations 30 Table 7 — Service Provider Performance Targets FY 2011/12 31 Table 8 — Performance Report FY 2012/13 32 Table 9 — City of Corona Transit Service Highlights FY 2012/13 33 Chapter 1 — System Overview 1.0 Introduction The Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) sets the objectives and strategies for FY 2012/13 for the City of Corona Transit Service (CCTS) by evaluating current transit system performance, projected demographic changes, operating and capital funding needs, anticipated funding from federal, state and local sources and other factors to create a reasonable projection of conditions over the next three years (FY 2012/13 — 2014/15). To address rising costs and uncertain funding, the CCTS reduced service and raised fares on July 5, 2010. As anticipated, ridership has been impacted and remains approximately 8 percent below pre -service and fare change. An increase in students using transit services is partially offsetting ridership lost to service reductions and fare increase. 1.1 Description of Service Area The CCTS operates a general public, demand response Dial -A -Ride (DAR) and fixed route dubbed the `Corona Cruiser.' DAR service commenced in 1977 and provides curb -to -curb service throughout the City of Corona and neighboring county areas of Coronita, El Cerrito and Home Gardens as well as satellite locations in the City of Norco (Department of Motor Vehicles, Department of Public Social Services and Norco College). Door-to-door service is available upon request for riders certified under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Corona Cruiser fixed route began operating in 2001 and serves the city -center as well as commercial, retail and residential areas on the eastern and southern portion of the city. See service maps on the following pages: 1 Vlno3w31 O1 oy avoalroa 3015a3Na 01 4 N 00aON 01 Tin d3SInd3 MOH 3 l Aava3n OS A1Nnoo 30NO1VH0 a31N3J V NOIIV1..VH3a V O103a IOOHOS VNOLOJ NOIH 31tlI03Na31N] H IVAIdSOH d 30I11 @ Natld r IOOHOS 116IN33 NNIl0a1314 3JI110 .0d TOM AlIJ :SNOIIVNI1S34 21Vlfld0d dN3J3l 31,1I1 31118 a35IONJ vN02103 WI 314I1 O. N.M. VNONOJ 33In2135 AO SV.V A.M03 AavaNnos VNONOJ 1011I3 S3111021 lISNVlil N lano oils oo3soo a 3]IJ-V-7W ] MOH 0 1 1 1 1 OONON Ol 1 133211s N LO 1 .•416 1131 3031100 kmempaoo 1 1 onena3a�sd34d—Nv oovox nwo0 l 031.3 .n.s., ,� 3a1a q sn.a d 'S LI mg lIR lIo sO1N3:SNOILVNI1S3O HVlfldOd3OR1-V-lVIO VNONOD 31411 3r,e n3=.11n3 VHOYOJ iiiiMao., 03,. ass.sao.00noa TitgTtIgnri • -WM ON3J3l 1.2 Population Profile and Demographic Projections The CCTS serves an ethnically diverse population of nearly 152,400 residents. The city encompasses 39 square miles. That diversity is reflected in the table below. City Population and Diversity !lir Population and Ethnicity Number Percent of Population Total Population 152,374 100% White 90,967 59.7% Some other race 27,732 18.2% Asian 15,085 9.9% Black or African American 8,990 5.9% Two or more races 7,771 5.1 % American Indian and Alaska Native 1,219 0.8% Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 609 0.4% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census The table below lists rider characteristic for the DAR and Cruiser service. This data was compiled over the first nine months of fiscal year (FY) 2011/12. Rider Characteristics _ Corona Dial -A -Ride lir Corona Cruiser Senior / Disabled 82.2% General Public 39.6% General Public 11.3% Senior / Disabled 30.6% Metrolink Transfer 3.4% Student 16.5% Attendant (no fare) 2.3% Child 65.6% Child 0.8% RTA Transfer 6.0% Metrolink Transfer 1.6% 4 1.3 Fixed Route Transit Services and Paratransit Service System -wide ridership in FY 2010/11 totaled 210,721. This represents an 8 percent decrease from the previous year's ridership of 229,820. As anticipated, ridership decreased following a service reduction and fare increase implemented July 5, 2010. Using ridership from the first nine months of FY 2011/12 as a basis for estimating year end ridership, ridership should increase by 1 percent over FY 2010/11. Ridership is projected to be stable for FY 2012/13 (0.4% increase). Corona Cruiser — Blue and Red Lines The Blue Line serves the McKinley Street retail area then travels on to Magnolia Avenue and Main Street to the River Road area. This route passes by many trip generators such as hospitals, medical facilities, public service agencies, library, civic center, and commercial/retail areas. This route also serves the unincorporated area of Home Gardens. The Red Line connects the residential areas of central Corona with commercial areas along Sixth Street and the Ontario Avenue/California Avenue retail area. The Red Line also covers South Corona along Ontario Avenue/Temescal Canyon Road to serve the county area of El Cerrito and The Crossings shopping complex at Cajalco Road/Temescal Canyon Road. The Cruiser schedule is: Blue Line Red Line Monday — Friday 6:42 a.m. — 7:09 p.m. 7:00 a.m. — 7:05 p.m. Saturday 8:52 a.m. — 3:50 p.m. 9:07 a.m. — 4:15 p.m. Sunday no service no service The Cruiser does not operate on the following holidays: New Year's Day; Memorial Day; Independence Day; Labor Day; Thanksgiving Day; and Christmas Day. Cruiser ridership totaled 152,568 during FY 2010/11. Using ridership from the first nine months of FY 2011/12 as a basis for estimating year end ridership, ridership should increase by 0.5 percent over FY 2010/11. Ridership is projected to be stable for FY 2012/13 (0.4% increase). This is the second year, the Cruiser began serving the Corona Transit Center, owned and operated by the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA). The Corona Transit Center provides a safe and efficient transfer point between local and regional bus lines as well as regional commuter train lines serving Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino counties accessible via a pedestrian bridge to the adjacent North Main Corona Metrolink commuter rail station. To incentivize multimodal transportation, valid Metrolink pass -holders ride at no charge on Cruiser Blue and Red Lines to and from the Corona Transit Center. The CCTS and RTA have a reciprocal agreement that allows valid pass -holders a no -cost, one- way transfer between the Cruiser and RTA routes 1 and 3 at selected transfer points. Transfers between bus purveyors are an effective way to promote public transit as a low cost, eco-friendly and stress -free alternative to automobile trips. 11��111 �V METROLINK CQRo►v a CRUISER Alwereide Tranei! Agency 5 Corona Dial -A -Ride Dial -A -Ride provides service to the general public, seniors, persons with disabilities, and individuals certified for complementary paratransit service under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Reservations can be made from one to fourteen days in advance; however, same day service may be accommodated if space is available. Dial -A -Ride provides curb -to -curb service throughout the City of Corona and neighboring county areas of Coronita, El Cerrito and Home Gardens as well as satellite locations in the City of Norco (Department of Motor Vehicles, Department of Public Social Services and Norco College). Door -to -Door assistance for ADA certified passengers is available upon request. Door-to-door service is available when: • Drivers can see the bus at all times; • The outermost door is within 150 feet from the bus; • Driver safety and security is maintained; and • Where a safe parking area is available. For individuals certified for ADA complementary service, service hours are expanded to match Cruiser hours. ADA complementary service also provides priority service for reservations made in advance (1 to 14 days). Trips are scheduled within 1 hour of the requested time. Voicemail message reservations are accepted for ADA clients on Sundays and Holidays for next day service. The Dial -A -Ride schedule is: General Public Monday — Friday 6:42 a.m. — 6:00 p.m. Saturday 8:52 a.m. — 4:15 p.m. Sunday no service ADA Complementary Paratransit 6:42 a.m. — 7:09 p.m. 8:52 a.m. — 4:15 p.m. no service Dial -A -Ride service does not operate on the following holidays: New Year's Day; Memorial Day; Independence Day; Labor Day; Thanksgiving Day; and Christmas Day. Dial -A -Ride ridership totaled 58,153 in FY 2010/11. Using ridership from the first nine months of FY 2011/12 as a basis for estimating year end ridership, ridership should increase by 2.7 percent over FY 2010/11. Ridership is projected to level off for FY 2012/13. 1.4 Current Fare Structure and Proposed Fare Structure The current fare structure appears on the next page. 6 Fare Structure Fare Type Corona Cruiser Cash -General $1.50 Cash-Senior/Disabled/Medicare $0.70 Cash -Child (46" tall or under) $0.25 Day pass -General $4.00 Day pass-Senior/Disabled/Medicare $2.00 15 day pass -General $25.00 $17.50 15 day pass -Student $17.50 $12.25 15 day pass-Senior/Disabled/Medicare $11.50 $8.05 31 day pass -General $50.00 $35.00 31 day pass -Student $35.00 $24.50 31 day pass-Senior/Disabled/Medicare $23.00 $16.10 Dial -A -Ride General $4.00 Senior/Disabled/Medicare $2.50 Child $0.50 Note: Medicare means Medicare Card Holder. Current Fare Structure implemented July 5, 2010. To incentivize the use of public transit as a viable alternative to automobile trips, the CCTS is using Air Quality Management District (AQMD) funds to subsidize multi -day passes (15 day and 31 day passes) on the Cruiser. The use of these funds allows the CCTS to reduce the cost of multi -day passes for Cruiser riders but enables the CCTS to recover an adequate fare. 1.5 Revenue Fleet The CCTS operates a fleet of 14 light and medium -duty transit buses. All CCTS buses are compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirement for accessibility and wheelchair securement. The Dial -A -Ride fleet consists of ten buses made up of six Goshen and four El Dorado National Type II gasoline -powered buses. Sufficient federal and state grant funds have been accumulated to purchase replacement buses in a single procurement. Ten replacement buses are scheduled to be delivered by June 2012. Four medium -size, medium -duty El Dorado National Type VII vehicles are used to operate Cruiser service. All four buses are powered with clean -burning compressed natural gas. Fire destroyed a fifth Cruiser bus in February 2011. A replacement bus should be delivered by fall 2012. Replacement of the four existing Cruiser buses is slated for spring 2013. 1.6 Existing Facility/Planned Facilities The CCTS operates from a newer facility at 735 Corporation Yard Way. Transportation Concepts, the vendor retained to operate transit service, provides administrative and dispatching service from this location as well as fueling and vehicle parking. Maintenance is performed by a third party at an off -site garage. Chapter 2 — Existing Service and Route Performance 2.1 Fixed Route Service — Route by Route Analysis The CCTS operates the Cruiser along two fixed routes — the Blue Line and Red Line. As anticipated, the service reduction and fare increase has negatively impacted ridership. As the immediate impact of a fare increase diminishes, ridership will recover; conversely, ridership lost to the reduction in operation hours may not. Schedules that do not allow for a flexible start/finish time may preclude former patrons from using the Cruiser with a reduced operating day. These riders may not resume riding. Providing trips to and from area schools has softened the impact of a shorter operating day and fare increase. The state budget challenge has forced the Corona -Norco Unified School District to reduce their school bus program. Fortunately, the Cruiser is an alternative for some students. Students made up 8 percent of Cruiser riders in FY 2010/11. Students now make up 16.5 percent of Cruiser riders. 2.2 Dial -A -Ride Service — System Performance As with the Cruiser, ridership on Dial -A -Ride has declined. Early morning and later evening hours were eliminated as a cost saving measure. As such, Dial -A -Ride buses are no longer able to meet the early morning/later evening train schedule. As a result, trips to the city's two Metrolink Stations have declined by half. Despite the reduction in ridership, Dial -A -Ride continues to provide Corona's general public and senior and disabled residents with curb -to -curb service. Senior/Disabled riders make-up 82.2 percent of Dial -A -Ride riders, representing the largest group of riders on the system. General public and Metrolink riders make up 14.7 percent of DAR riders. Due to a higher fare ($4 instead of $2.50 for Senior/Disabled riders) the general public/Metrolink rider contributes 22 percent of fare revenue. 2.3 Key Performance Indicators The Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) is the designated Regional Transportation Planning Agency (RTPA) with fiduciary and administrative oversight of transit operators in Riverside County. Each year, the RCTC reviews and approves the Short Range Transit Plan (SRTPs) and allocates local, state and federal funding. To ensure productivity, the RCTC has developed and monitors eight performance indicators that measure productivity — some of these measures are operating cost, service hours and miles, passengers and revenues/subsides. There are eight performance indicators — one mandatory and seven discretionary. By statute, transit operators serving urban areas must recover a minimum of 20 percent of operating cost through fare revenue. Fare revenue include passenger fares, interest on investments, advertising revenue, local contributions and the proceeds from the sale of 8 surplus vehicles. A farebox recovery ratio below 20 percent endangers the receipt of local funding. Farebox recovery ratio is a mandatory performance indicator. Transit operators must meet at least four of seven discretionary performance indicators to remain in good standing. Through the first nine months of FY 2011/12, CCTS has met the farebox ratio and seven of seven discretionary indicators. These indicators are shown below. Key Performance Indicators Performance Indicators Year -to -Date Performance Mandatory: Farebox Recovery Ratio Discretionary: Operating cost per revenue hour Subsidy per passenger Subsidy per passenger mile Subsidy per hour Subsidy per mile Passengers per revenue hour Passengers per revenue mile 20.47% $63.75 $6.78 $1.60 $50.70 $3.90 7.5 0.57 Table 7, Service Provider Performance Targets Report shows greater detail on FY 2011/12 performance targets and actual performance by indicator. Table 8, SRTP Performance Report, provides a similar comparison for next year's performance. The Cruiser and Dial -A -Ride service meets seven out of seven discretionary key performance indicators; however, the plan for next year exceeds the target set for the Operating Cost per Revenue Hour. On a system -wide basis, the plan cost is estimated at $69.51 per revenue hour. Overall, FY 2012/13 is planning fewer revenue hours compared to the current year; this is not a reduction in service, merely a more concise budgeting of revenue hours. The proposed plan for FY 2012/13 estimates a reduction of 0.5% in Cruiser hours and 4.7% in Dial -A -Ride hours from the hours budgeted in the current fiscal year which will be sufficient to continue providing the same level of service. Operating costs have a fixed and variable component. The cost of revenue hours and fuel are the largest components of variable costs. Fixed costs typically do not vary with service levels. Administrative, utilities, rent, insurance, advertising/marketing and legal fees are examples of fixed costs. When service increases, fixed costs are spread over more revenue hours which lower the cost per revenue hour for the fixed cost portion of the operating budget. Conversely, when budgeted revenue hours are decreased, as they are proposed for FY 2012/13, fixed costs are spread over fewer hours which increase the cost per revenue hour. Of course there are break points when the magnitude of a service change requires a reciprocal change in fixed costs but no such change is occurring here. Simply put, the fixed cost portion of the 9 operating budget is distributed over fewer revenue hours, thus contributing to the increase in operating costs per revenue hour. 2.4 Productivity Improvement Efforts The fare and schedule change has had a positive impact on productivity. The fare change has increased revenues and assisted the CCTS meet the mandatory farebox recovery ratio. During FY 2009/10, fares collected from passengers made up 14% of the farebox recovery ratio. Through the first nine months of FY 2011/12, fares from passengers are projected to contribute 17.4% towards the mandatory farebox return. (Interest on Investments, bus shelter advertising revenues and a contribution from the City's General Fund make up the difference.) While reducing service impacted some riders by truncating operating hours (eliminating 13 of 64 weekday trips and 15 of 45 Saturday trips), the Cruiser trips eliminated were the least productive as measured by passengers per hour. Reducing less productive trips has increased productivity. Passengers per hour have increased 20 percent from 9 passengers per hour in FY 2009/10 to 10.8 during the first nine months of FY 2011/12. DAR productivity increased from 4 passengers per hour to 4.2 during the same period (5 percent increase). A continued effort to increase passengers per hour on Corona Cruiser and Dial -A -Ride service is an on -going goal. 2.5 Major Trip Generators and Projected Growth Major trip destinations within the city are the commercial/retail areas along McKinley Street and Sixth Street, The Crossing shopping area on Cajalco Road and Temescal Canyon, medical facilities along Magnolia Avenue, regional transit facilities along Sixth Street and Main Street, the Corona Public Library, Senior Center and civic center. Many Dial -A -Ride passengers use the service to get to daily work programs/care centers, doctor visits and Corona's two Metrolink Stations. Cruiser patrons use the service for work, shopping trips, making stops at pharmacies and grocery stores, and accessing restaurants and movie theaters. Historically, ridership on the Cruiser has been relatively stable while ridership on Dial -A -Ride continued to increase at a small yet steady pace. These trends have been interrupted by the fare and schedule change. Some riders may ride less frequently to compensate for increased fares while others may cease to ride at all. The CCTS does hope to gain back these riders over time. Likewise, the schedule change has impacted riders. The hope is that impacted riders are able to migrate from early morning and later evening trips eliminated on July 5, 2010, to mid -day service. 2.6 Equipment, Passenger Amenities and Facility Needs The CCTS continues to upgrade existing bus stops and add new ones to improve the convenience of riding buses for our patrons. Two bus stops along RTA's route 1 bus line will undergo upgrades to afford bus riders using mobility devices to access the stops. In response to requests, two stops will be added to Cruisers routes. Improvements in bus stop amenities create a more inviting environment that may encourage and attract new riders to the Corona Cruiser system. New shelters will be installed throughout the Cruiser service area and along both the Blue and Red Lines. In the spring of 2012, the CCTS purchased 26 bus shelters, benches and trash baskets. Site improvements to accommodate shelters and their installation are planned for the fall of 2012. 10 Chapter 3 — Planned Service Changes and Implementation 3.1 Recent Service Changes To fill the gap between revenues and expenses, the CCTS implemented a fare increase to boost revenues and a service reduction to lower costs in July 2010. Trimming the least productive hours was a reasonable starting place. Early morning and later evening hours were less productive than mid -day hours. The service change eliminated the least productive weekday and Saturday hours. However, some productive Saturday afternoon hours were eliminated to balance revenue and expenses. Aligning Dial -A -Ride service hours with Cruiser hours also helped reduce operating costs. By statute, the CCTS must recover at least 20 percent of operating costs in passenger fares to maintain state funding. When passenger fares do not meet the required 20 percent requirement, the City of Corona's General Fund makes up the difference. Restoring some Saturday afternoon service may be considered when the City's General Fund becomes capable of sustaining additional funding to meet the required 20 percent recovery ratio (between operating cost and passenger fares) to accommodate the additional cost of Saturday service. CCTS staff wants to ensure that any increase in service is sustainable over the next several years. The CCTS will continue to look to a private sector firm to operate transit services, as opposed to City employees operating transit services, as the most cost effective way to provide bus service. The current five-year contract expires October 2012; CCTS will be looking for competitive prices to continue transit service from the next contract operator. The cost to provide transit service over the next five-year contract is a large factor in the City's ability to restore service lost in July 2010. 3.2 Recommended Local & Express Route Modifications Because of the service and fare changes implemented recently (July 5, 2010), no schedule or fare modifications are anticipated for FY 2012/13. 3.3 Marketing Plans and Promotion Increasing ridership is another way to augment passenger fares. The CCTS staff is looking at strategies to increase Cruiser ridership. These marketing strategies include: o Poetry on the Bus Program — in cooperation with Centennial High, Corona High and Lee Pollard High, CCTS conducted its fourth successful poetry contest inviting students to submit original poetry to be displayed on the interior of Cruiser buses. Selected poems are rotated each month. The program works as an outreach effort and marketing campaign at high schools while providing a creative outlet for students. Cruiser patrons are rewarded with expressive, introspective and entertaining poems to read and ponder during their time on the bus. o Art on the Bus Program — replicates the Poetry on the Bus Program but broadens it to include student artwork. This program has completed three annual cycles and incorporates artwork from high school -aged students. The success for the program to introduce students to public transit will ensure its continued success. o Distribute promotional items and route/schedule information at various community events such as — 4th of July Parade, Earth Day celebrations, Cinco De Mayo Parade and Festival, Senior Health Fair and the Mayor's Water Conservation Day Kick -Off. o Distribute recently developed promotional flyers promoting Cruiser service by highlighting businesses and schools served along the Red and Blue Lines. 11 o Providing travel training clinics at the Corona Senior Center and other community -based centers and housing developments. 3.4 Budget Impact and Proposed Changes As mentioned, declining revenues and increasing costs forced the CCTS to implement a fare increase and reduce the span of service. While CCTS passengers have been impacted, the goal throughout the process was to align revenues and expenses to provide as much service as possible to the most passengers. The fare and schedule change brought in balance revenues and expenses. These measures were taken in addition to cost cutting on departmental expenses such as conferences, training and equipment maintenance. Efforts to reduce costs in FY 2012/13 will not impact service hours nor increase fares. Chapter 4 — Financial and Capital Plans 4.1 Operating and Capital Budget To continue to provide Corona Cruiser fixed route and Dial -A -Ride service, the CCTS is proposing a balanced budget of $2,001,936 for FY 2012/13, representing less than a 2% increase over the current year budget. Retirement costs are driving the 3 percent increase in salary and benefit costs. Reductions in office supplies and equipment contribute to an overall reduction in the Materials, Marketing and Utilities category. The cost of gasoline is the cost driver in fuel cost; however, the replacement of 10 gasoline -powered buses with 6 gasoline -powered and 4 Compressed Natural Gas (CNG)-powered buses tends to slow the increase in total fuel cost. Although miles per gasoline gallon equivalent (GGE) units for CNG-powered buses is less than MPG for gasoline -powered buses, the cost of CNG is less than half the cost of gasoline. The overall cost to provide contracted transit service is estimated to increase slightly (0.2%) in FY 2012/13. The current five-year contract for transportation services expires in October 2012. While CCTS staff is hoping for competitive pricing in the next five-year contract, only when bids are received will the true cost of contracted transit service be known. Please see Budget by Item and Mode on the proceeding page: 12 Budget by Item and Mode Budget Item Mode FY2011/12 SRTp FY2012/13 Plan Variance $ % Sa la ries & Benefits Dia I -A -Fad e Cruiser Subtotal 175,998 179,966 3,968 2.3% 173,860 180,309 6,449 3.7% 349,858 360,275 10,417 3.0% Materials, Marketing and Utilities Dia I -A -Fad e 32,568 Cruiser 38,518 Fuel 32,323 37,962 (245) -0.8% (556) -1.4% Subtotal 71,086 70,285 (801) -1.1% Dia I -A -Fad e Cruiser Qabtotal 110,300 133,060 82,000 84,670 22,760 20.6% 2,670 3.3% 192,300 217,730 25,430 13.2% Contracted Transit Service Dia I -A -Fad e 685,420 672,123 (13,297) -1.9% Cruiser 666,000 681,523 15,523 2.3% Total 8.ibtotaI 1,351,420 1,353,646 2,226 0.2% Dia I -A -Fad e 1,004,286 1,017,472 13,186 1.3% Cruiser 960,378 984,464 24,086 2.5% Total $1,964,664 $2,001,936 $37,272 1.9% 13 4.2 Funding Plans to Support Proposed Operating and Capital Program The CCTS is proposing a funding plan that includes state funding (Local Transportation Fund) to support 80 percent of operating costs. The remaining 20 percent will be generated by passenger fares, bus shelter advertising and local funds. The CCTS plans on purchasing a new reservation and dispatch system in FY 2012/13. Funding to cover this capital purchase consists of State Transit Assistance and Proposition 1 B/Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement & Service Enhancement Program funding. 4.3 Regulatory and Compliance Requirements Half Fare During Non -Peak Hours According to federal statute, transit operators must allow 1) elderly persons, 2) persons with disabilities, and 3) Medicare cardholders to ride fixed route service during off-peak hours for a fare that is not more than one-half the base fare charged to other persons during peak hours. The base fare for Cruiser service is $1.50 during peak and non -peak hours. The fare for an elderly person (60+), a person with disabilities and Medicare cardholders is $0.70 throughout the service day. Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) The ADA requires that complementary paratransit service be available to ADA certified persons during the same hours and days of operation available to Cruiser (fixed route) passengers. Complementary paratransit service must be provided within 3/4 of a mile of a fixed route. The CCTS operates a general population Dial -A -Ride that extends beyond the 3/4 mile corridor to the city limits, into the county areas of Coronita, El Cerritos and Home Gardens as well as satellite locations in the City of Norco (Department of Motor Vehicles, Department of Public Social Services and Norco College). When demand exceeds capacity, requests for service from ADA certified passengers receive priority. As such, the CCTS maintains zero denials for ADA certified passengers. Provision of Service - ADA complementary paratransit must be provided to an ADA eligible individual, including those with temporary eligibility, a personal care attendant (PCA) if necessary, and one other individual accompanying the ADA-eligible individual, if requested. Additional companions may be provided service, if space is available. Service also must be provided to visitors. Any visitor who presents ADA eligibility documentation from another jurisdiction must be provided service. Type of Service — The ADA specifies "origin to destination" service. In certain instances, this might require service beyond strict curb -to -curb. Door -to -Door assistance for ADA certified passengers is available upon request. Door-to-door service is available when: • Drivers can see the bus at all times; • The outermost door is within 150 feet from the bus; • Driver safety and security is maintained; and • Where a safe parking area is available. Fares — The ADA complementary paratransit fare cannot exceed twice the fare for a trip of similar length, at a similar time of day, on the Cruiser (fixed route system). No fares maybe charged for Personal Care Attendants (PCAs). ADA certified individuals are charged $2.50 per trip which is less than twice the fare for a trip on the Cruiser ($1.50 x 2 = $3.00). 14 Title VI In compliance with the Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, no person on the basis of race, color, or national origin, is excluded from participation in, or is denied the benefits of, or is subjected to discrimination within the scope of services offered by the CCTS. Notification to passengers of their right to file a complaint is included on the City of Corona website and service brochures. Transportation Development Act Triennial Audit The CCTS underwent a Transportation Development Act (TDA) Triennial Performance Audit in March 2010 covering fiscal years 2006/07 through 2008/09. Audit results suggest a continuing efficient operation meeting the major goals and objectives of the TDA program. Room for improvement is always paramount with the audit suggesting more scrutiny of performance data and continuity between National Transit Database and TransTrack/performance-based reporting. Federal Transit Administration Triennial Review The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) conducted a Triennial Review of fiscal years 2007/08 through 2009/10 in August 2011. Four of five corrective actions were closed out in five days. These actions ranged from including combining all federal funded equipment into a single list to adding language regarding door-to-door assistance to the City's web page and brochure to adding the term "Medicare Card Holder" to the fare structure on promotional materials. The fifth item, a maintenance monitoring plan, was submitted for FTA approval. National Transit Database The National Transit Database (NTD) approved CCTS' request to submit transit financial and performance data through a Small Systems Waiver starting in report year 2011; the waiver is available to transit providers operating 30 or fewer buses. (CCTS currently operates 14 buses.) The NTD closed out the annual report in early December 2011. Alternative Fueled Vehicles (RCTC Policy) The Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) encourages all Riverside County transit operators to transition from diesel -powered transit buses to alternative fuel buses. Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) and liquefied natural gas (LNG) are recognized as preferred options. The CCTS currently runs a mixed fleet of gasoline and CNG-powered buses. Ten Dial -A -Ride buses are slated for replacement next year. As planned, four of these buses will be powered with Compressed Natural Gas (CNG). While gasoline is a recognized alternative fuel for demand response/Dial-A-Ride buses, the CCTS will integrate CNG-powered Dial -A -Ride buses with funding through the federal government's American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) program. Replacement DAR buses will be arriving in May/June 2012. The CCTS anticipates replacing its Cruiser buses in 2013. Each bus will remain CNG-powered. 15 IMMO MM• Rioride {nmlr Trasp ention [omnissun Bus (Motorbus) / Purchased Transportation Table 1 - Fleet Inventory FY 2012/13 Short Range Transit Plan City of Corona Year Built Mfg. Code Model Code Seating Capacity Lift and Ramp Equipped Vehicle Length Fuel Type Code # of Active # of Vehicles Contingency FY Vehicles 2011/12 FY 2011/12 Life to Date Vehicle Miles Prior Year End FY 2010/11 Life to Date Vehicle Miles through March FY 2011/12 Average Lifetime Miles Per Active Vehicle As Of Year -To -Date (e.g., March) FY 2011/12 2006 EDN AeroElite 30 4 33 CN 4 0 585,345 682,171 170,543 Totals: 30 4 4 0 585,345 682,171 170,543 TransTrack Manager'"' Page 1 of I 5/21/2012 IMMO MM• Rioride {nmlr Trasp ention [omnissun Demand Response / Purchased Transportation Table 1 - Fleet Inventory FY 2012/13 Short Range Transit Plan City of Corona Year Mfg. Built Code Model Code Seating Capacity Lift and Ramp Equipped Vehicle Length Fuel Type Code # of Active Vehicles FY 2011/12 # of Contingency Vehicles FY 2011/12 Life to Date Vehicle Miles Prior Year End FY 2010/11 Life to Date Vehicle Miles through March FY 2011/12 Average Lifetime Miles Per Active Vehicle As Of Year -To -Date (e.g., March) FY 2011/12 2007 2005 2004 EDN EDN GCC AeroTech E-450 E-450 18 18 20 2 2 6 26 26 26 GA GA GA 2 2 6 0 0 0 271,904 393,681 1,341,935 318,928 438,473 1,459,690 159,464 219,237 243,282 Totals: 56 10 10 0 2,007,520 2,217,091 221,709 TransTrack Manager'"' Page 1 of I 5/17/2012 1.1.1 IlllllM• Biwride [Dump. Trasp ention [omnissun Table 2 -- City of Corona -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2012/13 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2009/10 Audited FY 2010/11 Audited FY 2011/12 Plan FY 2011/12 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2012/13 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 11 11 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $2,031,211 $1,849,629 $1,964,664 $1,361,323 $2,001,936 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $422,981 $371,492 $392,933 $278,655 $400,388 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $1,608,230 $1,478,137 $1,571,731 $1,082,668 $1,601,548 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 229,820 210,721 212,207 159,682 213,700 Passenger Miles 976,002 893,263 959,718 677,654 900,891 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 34,372.8 28,526.8 29,571.0 21,353.0 28,800.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 442,700.0 364,347.0 375,552.0 277,906.0 378,308.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 475,072.0 401,454.0 397,630.0 303,515.0 412,953.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $59.09 $64.84 $66.44 $63.75 $69.51 Farebox Recovery Ratio 20.82% 20.08% 20.00% 20.47% 20.00% Subsidy per Passenger $7.00 $7.01 $7.41 $6.78 $7.49 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $1.65 $1.65 $1.64 $1.60 $1.78 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $46.79 $51.82 $53.15 $50.70 $55.61 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $3.63 $4.06 $4.19 $3.90 $4.23 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 6.7 7.4 7.2 7.5 7.4 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.52 1 0.58 0.57 0.57 0.56 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager'"' 5/17/2012 Page 1 of I 1.1.1 EM• Bioride {bier Tmsp edion [omnissun Table 2 -- Corona -BUS -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2012/13 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2009/10 Audited FY 2010/11 Audited FY 2011/12 Plan FY 2011/12 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2012/13 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 4 4 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $1,004,386 $907,827 $960,378 $672,611 $984,464 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $217,613 $182,526 $192,076 $139,735 $196,894 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $786,773 $725,301 $768,302 $532,876 $787,570 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 165,131 152,568 153,832 114,905 154,000 Passenger Miles 650,616 600,753 666,093 452,426 600,600 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 18,285.6 14,225.0 14,571.0 10,682.9 14,500.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 215,553.0 167,939.0 170,623.0 125,956.0 174,676.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 226,485.0 179,439.0 179,708.0 134,907.0 187,003.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $54.93 $63.82 $65.91 $62.96 $67.89 Farebox Recovery Ratio 21.66% 20.11% 20.00% 20.77% 20.00% Subsidy per Passenger $4.76 $4.75 $4.99 $4.64 $5.11 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $1.21 $1.21 $1.15 $1.18 $1.31 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $43.03 $50.99 $52.73 $49.88 $54.32 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $3.65 $4.32 $4.50 $4.23 $4.51 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 9.0 10.7 10.6 10.8 10.6 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.77 0.91 0.90 0.91 0.88 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager'"' 5/17/2012 Page 1 of I IMO EM• Bioride firmer Trasp edion [omnissun Table 2 -- Corona-DAR -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2012/13 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2009/10 Audited FY 2010/11 Audited FY 2011/12 Plan FY 2011/12 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2012/13 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 7 7 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $1,026,825 $941,801 $1,004,286 $688,712 $1,017,472 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $205,368 $188,965 $200,857 $138,920 $203,494 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $821,457 $752,836 $803,429 $549,792 $813,978 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 64,689 58,153 58,375 44,777 59,700 Passenger Miles 325,386 292,510 293,625 225,228 300,291 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 16,087.2 14,301.8 15,000.0 10,670.2 14,300.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 227,147.0 196,408.0 204,929.0 151,950.0 203,632.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 248,587.0 222,015.0 217,922.0 168,608.0 225,950.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $63.83 $65.85 $66.95 $64.55 $71.15 Farebox Recovery Ratio 20.00% 20.06% 19.99% 20.17% 19.99% Subsidy per Passenger $12.70 $12.95 $13.76 $12.28 $13.63 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $2.52 $2.57 $2.74 $2.44 $2.71 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $51.06 $52.64 $53.56 $51.53 $56.92 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $3.62 $3.83 $3.92 $3.62 $4.00 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 4.0 4.1 3.9 4.2 4.2 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.28 0.30 0.28 0.29 0.29 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager'"' 5/17/2012 Page 1 of I MN NM= Biwrside 6urrtt Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Data Elements Table 3 - SRTP Route Statistics City of Corona -- 3 FY 2012/13 All Routes Route # Day Type Peak Vehicles Passengers Passenger Miles Revenue Hours Total Hours Revenue Miles Total Miles Operating Cost Passenger Revenue Net Subsidy COR-BLUE COR-DAR COR-RED Total Total Total 2 7 2 79,000 59,700 75,000 308,100 300,291 292,500 7,260.0 14,300.0 7,240.0 7,568.0 15,889.0 7,561.0 91,344.0 203,632.0 83,332.0 95,637.0 225,950.0 91,366.0 $492,927 $1,017,472 $491,537 $98,586 $203,494 $98,308 $394,341 $813,978 $393,229 Service Provider Totals 11 213,700 900,891 28,800.0 31,018.0 378,308.0 412,953.0 $2,001,936 $400,388 $1,601,548 TransTrack Manager'"' 5/17/2012 Page 1 of 2 MN NM= Biwrside 6urrtt Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Performance Indicators Table 3 - SRTP Route Statistics City of Corona -- 3 FY 2012/13 All Routes Route # Day Type Operating Operating Cost Per Cost Per Revenue Hour Revenue Mile Cost Per Passenger Farebox Recovery Ratio Subsidy Per Passenger Subsidy Per Passenger Mile Subsidy Per Revenue Hour Subsidy Per Revenue Mile Passengers Passengers Per Hour Per Mile COR-BLUE COR-DAR COR-RED Total Total Total $67.90 $71.15 $67.89 $5.40 $5.00 $5.90 $6.24 $17.04 $6.55 20.00% 19.99% 20.00% $4.99 $13.63 $5.24 $1.28 $2.71 $1.34 $54.32 $56.92 $54.31 $4.32 $4.00 $4.72 10.9 4.2 10.4 0.86 0.29 0.90 Service Provider Totals $69.51 $5.29 $9.37 20.00% $7.49 $1.78 $55.61 $4.23 7.4 0.56 TransTrack Manager'"' 5/17/2012 Page 2 of 2 Table 3A — Individual Route Descriptions and Area Serviced Line Route Description Area / Site Served Cruiser Red Line The Crossings shopping area at Cajalco Road and Temescal Canyon to the El Tapatio at West Sixth Street via downtown / Civic Center The Crossings shopping area, Taber Park and Ride, California Avenue Post Office, Centennial High, Corona Transit Center/North Main Corona Metrolink Station, City Library, Senior Center, Civic Center, Corona High and El Tapatio on west Sixth Street Blue Line Wal-Mart at McKinley Street west to River Run Apartments via Mountain Gate Park and downtown / Civic Center McKinley Street shopping areas, Magnolia Avenue, Centennial High, medical facilities, Senior Center, City Library, Corona Transit Center/North Main Corona Metrolink Station, Fender museum, north Main Street shopping area and restaurants Dial -A -Ride City-wide Demand response / reservation based service City-wide, neighboring county areas of Coronita, El Cerrito and Home Gardens as well as satellite locations in the city of Norco - Department of Motor Vehicles, Department of Public Social Services and Riverside Community College/Norco Campus 23 •uoynquiuooAT!0 pue 6uppanpeiallayssnq apniouisanuanaiJay10„ sassed Aep-glnwJesiru0 ezmueoui oispunl uoponpai uope!we pue uogse6uo0 ggLZgysapnloul „ 885`L8$ 008`ZLE$ - L617`L6Z$ - E05`Z8E$ 8175`309`6$ 9E6`1.09`3 lellde3v 6ugeaado aelol - - - L617`LLZ - £05`Z8E$ - 000`009$ !Rdeo :Ielows - - - L6b`LlZ - E04'Z8E 000'009 - E6 waist y0ledsia pue umenuas% esegamd - El. Ad 885`L8$ 008`ZI.E$ - - - - 8175`609`6$ 9£6`600`Z$ Gugeiado :lelolgns 885`L8 008'ZL£ - 8179'1,09'1, 9E6`1,00`Z senuenab 6wleaad0-£1,Ad =.aa430 ,xog aced vzn ouipiewee ue5/epi eAH -L0£5 uoil0ag b3SIWLd lelide096 doad dJ610 llunoag 96 dal,' VIS AD spund ielol 'oN loarad uonduosea loarad euoaoolo fq!3 £1./Z140Z M ao} pa;sanbaH spunA }o /Gewwns -17 alael Table 4 — Capital Project Justification Number: FY 13-1 Title: Dispatching and Reservation Software and Equipment Description: This project provides funds for: • Replace existing dispatching software and equipment. Justification: Upgrading the existing system is not feasible so replacement is required. Funding Source(s): Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement & Service Enhancement Program State Transit Assistance $ 217,497 $ 382,503 $ 600,000 25 Ta ble 5.1 - Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2013/ 14 City of Corona Project Description Project No. Total Funds OF STA Prop 1B Security C ISL,P Prop 1BCapital PTMISEA Section 5307- Riverside/San Bernardino UZA Fare Box* Other** FY 14 -Operating Revenues 2,082,013 1,665,610 325,312 91,092 Subtotal: Operating $2,082,013 $1,665,610 - - - - $325,312 $91,092 FY 14 -Purchase Land and Mobile- based Radio System FY 14 - 1 600,000 522,350 77,650 Subtotal: Capital $600,000 - $522,350 $77,650 - - - - Total: Operating&Capital $2,682,013 $1,665,610 $522,350 $77,650 - $325,312 $91,092 * IncludesAB2766 congestion and emission reduction fundsto incentivize Cruiser multi -day passes ** Other revenues include busshelter advertising and City contribution. Table 5.1 — Capital Project Justification Number: FY 14 - 1 Title: Purchase land- and mobile -based radio system Description: This project provides funds for: • Replace the existing land -based dispatch radio equipment and mobile radio system on- board buses. Justification: Communication between dispatch/management staff and buses/drivers in -route promotes the efficient use of available transit service. This is important for safety and security and extends the reach of supervision/management into the field. The existing system and equipment is in need of upgrading and replacement. Funding Source(s): Proposition 1 B / CTSGP $ 77,650 State Transit Assistance - $ 522,350 Total $ 600,000 27 Table 5.2 - Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2014/ 15 City of Corona Project Description Project No. Total Funds LTF STA Prop 1B security CTSGP Prop 1BCapital pTMIgA Section 5307- Riverside/&in Bernardino UZA Fare Box* Other** FY 15 - Operating Revenues 2,165,294 1,732,234 338,324 94,735 Subtotal: Operating $2,165,294 $1,732,234 - - - $338,324 $94,735 FY 15 - Purchase Rolling Stock (FY2010/11 & FY2011/12) FY 15 - 1 970,442 970,442 Subtotal: Capital $970,442 - - - 970,442 - - - Total: Operating & Capita l $3,135,736 $1,732,234 - - $970,442 - $338,324 $94,735 * IncludesAB2766 congestion and emission reduction fundsto incentivize Cruiser multi -day passes **Other revenues include busshelter advertising and City contribution. Table 5.2 — Capital Project Justification Number: FY 15 - 1 Title: Purchase of rolling stock Description: This project provides funds for: • Purchase rolling stock to address the potential expansion of the city's service area. Justification: The City of Corona may increase in physical size in the near future. The purchase of rolling stock to meet the future needs is planned here. Funding Source(s): Proposition 1 B/Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality and Port Security Bond Act of 2006 Total $ 970,442 29 Table 6 — Progress Implementing Triennial Performance Audit Recommendations Audit Recommendation Action / Remedy Work with the contract operator to electronically submit the monthly performance report that is compatible with the City computer system (carry-over FY 2003/04-2005/06 audit). Change in contract operator is the next best opportunity to define and implement electronic submission of transit performance data. Contract renewal will occur in the fall 2012. Closer monitoring of performance reporting by contractor (FY 2006/07-2008/09 audit). On -going. Ensure National Transit Database and TransTrack performance data ties (FY 2006/07-2008/09 audit). On -going. 30 1.1.1 llllilili • Bioffide firmer Trmspnmtion [omnissun Table 7 -- Service Provider Performance Targets Report FY 2011/12 Short Range Transit Plan Review City of Corona Data Elements FY 2011/12 Plan FY 2011/12 Target FY 2011/12 Year to Date Through 3rd Quarter Year to Date Performance Scorecard Unlinked Passenger Trips 212,207 Passenger Miles 959,718 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours 29,571.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles 375,552.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 397,630.0 Total Operating Expenses $1,964,664 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $392,933 Net Operating Expenses $1,571,731 Performance Indicators Mandatory: 1. Farebox Recovery Ratio I 20.00%1 >= 20.00% ( 20.47%1 Meets Target Discretionary: 1. Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour $66.44 <= $65.32 $63.75 Meets Target 2. Subsidy Per Passenger $7.41 >= $6.02 and <= $8.14 $6.78 Meets Target 3. Subsidy Per Passenger Mile $1.64 >= $1.42 and <= $1.92 $1.60 Meets Target 4. Subsidy Per Hour $53.15 >= $44.03 and <= $59.57 $50.70 Meets Target 5. Subsidy Per Mile $4.19 >= $3.46 and <= $4.68 $3.90 Meets Target 6. Passengers Per Revenue Hour 7.20 >= 6.21 and <= 8.40 7.50 Meets Target 7. Passengers Per Revenue Mile 0.57 >= 0.49 and <= 0.67 0.57 Meets Target Note: Must meet at least 4 out of 7 Discretionary Performance Indicators Productivity Performance Summary: Meets FY 11/12 Farebox Ratio Requirement. Meets 7 of 7 Discretionary Indicators. Meets RCTC PIP Program. Service Provider Comments: TransTrack Manager'"' 5/17/2012 Page 1 of I 1.1.1 r Biwride [ounry Trmspnmtion (omrrissiun FY 2012/13 - Table 8 -- SRTP Performance Report Service Provider; City of Corona All Routes Performance Indicators FY 2010/11 End of Year Actual FY 2011/12 3rd Quarter Year -to -Date FY 2012/13 Plan FY 2012/13 Target Plan Performance Scorecard (a) Passengers 210,721 159,682 213,700 None Passenger Miles 893,263 677,654 900,891 None Revenue Hours 28,526.8 21,353.0 28,800.0 None Total Hours 31,030.7 23,000.7 31,018.0 None Revenue Miles 364,347.0 277,906.0 378,308.0 None Total Miles 401,454.0 303,515.0 412,953.0 None Operating Costs $1,849,629 $1,361,323 $2,001,936 None Passenger Revenue $371,492 $278,655 $400,388 None Operating Subsidy $1,478,137 $1,082,668 $1,601,548 None Operating Costs Per Revenue Hour $64.84 $63.75 $69.51 <= $64.87 Fails to Meet Target Operating Cost Per Revenue Mile $5.08 $4.90 $5.29 None Operating Costs Per Passenger $8.78 $8.53 $9.37 None Farebox Recovery Ratio 20.08% 20.47% 20.00% >= 20.0% Meets Target Subsidy Per Passenger $7.01 $6.78 $7.49 >= $5.76 and <= $7.80 Meets Target Subsidy Per Passenger Mile $1.65 $1.60 $1.78 >= $1.36 and <= $1.84 Meets Target Subsidy Per Revenue Hour $51.82 $50.70 $55.61 >= $43.10 and <= $58.31 Meets Target Subsidy Per Revenue Mile $4.06 $3.90 $4.23 >= $3.32 and <= $4.49 Meets Target Passengers Per Revenue Hour 7.40 7.50 7.40 >= 6.38 and <= 8.63 Meets Target Passengers Per Revenue Mile 0.58 0.57 0.56 >= 0.48 and <= 0.66 Meets Target a) The Plan Performance Scorecard column is the result of comparing the FY 2012/13 Plan to the FY 2012/13 Primary Target. TransTrack Manager"' 5/17/2012 Page 1 of 1 Table 9 — CCTS Highlights FY 2012/13 Operations o To ensure a least -cost operation, the City of Corona provides transit service by contracting with a private section company. In October 2012, the existing five-year contract expires. CCTS staff will put together bid documents, conduct a competitive bid process and select the best qualified and most responsible and responsive company to continue to provide CCTS patrons with safe, reliable and responsive transit service. o In FY 2010/11, the CCTS implemented a fare increase and reduced service to address an imbalance between decreasing revenues and increasing costs. Corona Cruiser bus trips were eliminated as a cost saving measure. CCTS staff may look for opportunities to restore some Saturday trips eliminated to reduce costs; however, financial sustainability would be a prerequisite to any potential restoration of a trip or trips. o Continue to work with the Corona Norco Unified School District to identify times and locations where the Corona Cruiser can transport students commuting between home and school if state funding for school busing is further constrained. o Promote alternative modes of transportation by improving pedestrian and bicycle facilities. Identify new sidewalk and in -fill needs as well as expanding the bicycle route network. Pedestrian and bicycle facility improvements make these modes of transportation a viable option to automobiles and improves access to public transportation. o Continue to survey bus stops for Americans with Disabilities Act compliance. Capital Projects o Test, accept and place into service ten new Dial -A -Ride buses. o Purchase and place one Corona Cruiser bus into revenue service. o Purchase four replacement Corona Cruiser buses. o Assemble bid documents and conduct a competitive bid process for a new scheduling and dispatch system. Performance Measures Fiscal Year 2008/09 Actual 2009/10 Actual 2010/11 Actual 2011/12 Year End Estimate 2012/13 Plan System -wide Ridership 229,866 229,820 210,721 212,909 213,700 Cost per Revenue Hour $57.62 $59.09 $64.84 $63.75 $69.51 33 Carr of RIVERSIDE 2012/13-2014/15 SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN City of Riverside 2012/13-2014/15 Short Range Transit Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS System Overview 1 Existing Service and Route Performance 3 Planned Service Changes and Implementation 6 Financial and Capital Plans 7 Table 1 - Fleet Inventory 9 Table 2 - SRTP Service Summary 10 Table 3 - SRTP Route Statistics 11 Table 4 - Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2012/13 13 Table 4A - Capital Project Justification, Project No 13-1 14 Table 4A - Capital Project Justification, Project No 13-2 15 Table 4A - Capital Project Justification, Project No 13-3 16 Table 4A - Capital Project Justification, Project No 13-4 17 Table 4A - Capital Project Justification, Project No 13-5 18 Table 5.1 - Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2013/14 19 Table 5.2 - Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2014/15 19 Table 5.1A - Capital Project Justification, Project No 14-1 20 Table 5.2A - Capital Project Justification, Project No 1 5-1 21 Table 6 - Progress to Implement Triennial Performance Audit 22 Table 7 - Service Provider Performance Targets Report 23 Table 8 - SRTP Performance Report 24 Table 9 - Highlights of 2012/13 - 2014/15 Short Range Transit Plan 25 City of Riverside 2012/13-2014/15 Short Range Transit Plan I. SYSTEM OVERVIEW 1.1 Service Area Special Transportation, a section within the City of Riverside Parks, Recreation and Community Services Department, has been offering Paratransit services to the Riverside community since 1975. This dial -a -ride transportation service is provided within the 87.4 square mile incorporated city limits of the City of Riverside, shown below in Figure 1-1. Figure 1-1 RIVERSIDE NEIGHBORHOODS Lev tee» iejven5iul • 1.2 Population Profile According to the 2010 demographic data published by the United States Census Bureau, the population of the City of Riverside totals 303,871 residents. The senior population within the City of Riverside (those over 60 years of age) accounts for approximately 13% of the City population. Staff anticipates an increase in the senior population and in ridership due to the age demographics of the City. -1- City of Riverside 2012/13-2014/15 Short Range Transit Plan Ridership has been trending upward for the past several years and continues to increase. 1.3 Paratransit Services Owned and operated by the City of Riverside, Special Transportation is an origin -to - destination rideshare transportation service. The service is limited to senior citizens (60 years and older) and persons with disabilities (disabilities require a physician's documentation). Operating hours for Special Transportation are Monday through Friday, from 8:00 am - 5:30 pm and 9:00 am - 4:00 pm during weekends and holidays. In order to reserve a ride, passengers must call Special Transportation's reservation phone number during the office hours of 8:00 am - 5:00 pm, Monday through Friday, and 9:00 am - 3:00 pm on weekends and holidays. A message machine is available after business hours for cancellations. 1.4 Current Fare Structure and Proposed Fare Structure Fare for a one-way trip is $2.00 per passenger. Clients may pay their fare in cash at boarding time, or purchase tickets or a punch card in advance of their scheduled ride. A ticket may be purchased for $2.00 and is worth one ride; a punch card may be purchased for $40 and is worth 20 rides. There are no proposals for an increase in fares during fiscal year 2012/13. 1.5 Revenue Fleet The City of Riverside Special Transportation has been operating a fleet of 30 Paratransit compressed natural gas (CNG), alternative fuel, Type III vehicles. In the past, twenty-five Paratransit vehicles and twenty-five routes have typically met daily ridership demands. Special Transportation is preparing to expand its fleet by five vehicles and replace eight vehicles during the 2012/13 fiscal year. Although not assigned to a route and typically used as an alternative vehicle, Special Transportation also owns one Paratransit van equipped to hold 6 passengers and one wheelchair. 1.6 Existing Facility/Planned Facilities Special Transportation facilities are located at the City of Riverside corporation yard. Included in the facilities are administrative office space, dispatch room, training and conference room, and parking space for transit vehicles. Special Transportation's vehicles are maintained in the City's fleet bay, which is used for all city vehicles. - 2 - City of Riverside 2012/13-2014/15 Short Range Transit Plan Special Transportation is currently completing construction of a new CNG Vehicle Maintenance Facility to be used primarily for maintaining Special Transportation's vehicles. Construction will be complete by June 2012. The facility will include 5 bays, an office, and an upstairs area for parts and storage. The facility will be outfitted with all safety equipment required to maintain alternative fuel vehicles. Following construction completion of the CNG Vehicle Maintenance Facility, Special Transportation will begin to make progress on Special Transportation's Slow Fill Station Expansion project and Operations Facility Modernization and Expansion project. In order to meet fueling demands, Special Transportation staff anticipates installing five slow fill stations. The project will be funded by federal and local funds. Special Transportation was awarded Proposition 1 B funds to expand and modernize its operation facility. In-house City staff is currently working on the design of this project to include expansion of the drivers' break room and dispatch office. II. EXISTING SERVICE AND ROUTE PERFORMANCE 2.1 Dial -A -Ride Service — System Performance Special Transportation served approximately 171,000 passengers during the 201 1 /12 fiscal year, representing a 6% increase from the previous fiscal year and 12% from the 2009/10 fiscal year. The number of passengers served represents the highest number served within the past six years. Ridership levels for the 2012/13 fiscal year are expected to increase. 2.2 Key Performance Indicators Special Transportation continues to meet its performance targets in eight critical areas. During fiscal year 201 1 /12, Special Transportation met its mandatory farebox recovery ratio target and met all targets in the seven discretionary performance areas, as shown in Figure II-1 . - 3 - City of Riverside 2012/13-2014/15 Short Range Transit Plan Figure II-1 Performance Indicators Performance Scorecard' Mandatory: 1 . Farebox Recovery Ratio Meets Target Discretionary: 1. Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour Meets Target 2. Subsidy Per Passenger Meets Target 3. Subsidy Per Passenger Mile Meets Target 4. Subsidy Per Hour Meets Target 5. Subsidy Per Mile Meets Target 6. Passengers Per Revenue Hour Meets Target 7. Passengers Per Revenue Mile Meets Target 2.3 Productivity Improvement Efforts Special Transportation strives to operate an efficient and effective service and continues to seek ways to decrease costs while maintaining high productivity. Specifically, staff has been focusing on implementing the most efficient routes possible in order to maintain or decrease operating costs. Special Transportation has taken the step to assign one dispatcher the task of analyzing routes every day in order to ensure that driver overtime costs are as minimal as possible. Special Transportation is currently in the process of hiring additional part-time drivers to meet the high ridership demand. Part-time drivers will be used mid -day during peak time, effectively shortening travel times between pickups and drop offs currently scheduled in routes driven by full-time drivers. Utilizing additional part- time drivers will allow for more effective scheduling and a decrease in overtime costs. 2.4 Major Trip Generators and Projected Growth Over Next Two Years Due to the demographics of the City and current trends, staff anticipates an increase in ridership in the next several years. Senior population within the City amounts to approximately 13% and residents nearing the age of 60 amount to 18% of the population, as shown in Figure II-2, leading staff to anticipate a higher demand for Special Transportation services in the future. ' Performance Scorecard based on FY 2011/12 3rd quarter data. - 4 - City of Riverside 2012/13-2014/15 Short Range Transit Plan Figure II-2 25,000 N 20,000 c ar y 15,000 a L 10,000 z z 5,000 Q City of Riverside Age Demographics 45-49 50-54 55-59 60-64 65-69 70-74 75-79 80-84 85 and Over Age Group 2.5 Equipment, Passenger Amenities and Facility Needs ■ Population Special Transportation is in the process of meeting its immediate equipment and facility needs by completing construction of a new CNG Vehicle Maintenance Facility to be used primarily for maintaining Special Transportation's vehicles. Following construction completion of the CNG Vehicle Maintenance Facility, Special Transportation will begin to make progress on Special Transportation's Slow Fill Station Expansion project. In order to meet fueling demands of an expanding fleet, Special Transportation staff anticipates installing five slow fill stations. Special Transportation will also utilize Proposition 1 B funds to expand and modernize its operation facility. The improved facility will include expansion of the drivers' break room, dispatch office and a reception area for passengers. In-house City staff is in the process of designing a more user friendly and efficient layout for employees and customers alike. - 5 - City of Riverside 2012/13-2014/15 Short Range Transit Plan III. PLANNED SERVICE CHANGES AND IMPLEMENTATION 3.1 Recent Service Changes Special Transportation did not implement any service changes during the 2011 /12 fiscal year. 3.2 Recommended Modification to Paratransit Services Due to peak ridership demand, Special Transportation will add four additional routes to weekday services. Adding four additional routes will allow Special Transportation staff to more effectively and efficiently serve its clients. In order to maintain its spare ratio, Special Transportation is expanding its fleet by five vehicles. 3.3 Marketing Plans and Promotion Although ridership has increased in record numbers, Special Transportation continues to promote its services. Special Transportation has installed advertisements on the back windows of several vehicles in order to market the services it offers. The advertisements include information such as the cost of fare and the phone number to call in order to make a reservation. Special Transportation regularly prints out flyers and brochures to distribute to the City's community centers and senior centers and also includes ads on other City publications such as the department's activity guide and senior guide. Staff makes an effort to be present at special events (wellness fairs, grand openings, concerts, etc.) to conduct outreach to the public and distribute promotional products. In order to obtain feedback on the services it offers to the public, Special Transportation staff is distributing the 2nd Annual Passenger Satisfaction Survey to its passengers during the fiscal year 2012 in order to obtain feedback regarding the transportation services it provides to the community. Survey categories included customer service, safety, ease of scheduling a reservation, and vehicle cleanliness. Staff will review and consider passenger feedback in making policy and operational changes. Results of the survey will be compiled by July 2012. 3.4 Budget Impact on Proposed Changes Special Transportation expects to maintain its farebox recovery ratio after adding four additional routes and will request additional maintenance funds from FTA in order to sustain the costs of maintaining additional vehicles. Special Transportation is required to maintain a 10% farebox recovery ratio. During the 2011 /12 fiscal year, Special Transportation maintained a 12.54% farebox recovery ratio. - 6 - City of Riverside 2012/13-2014/15 Short Range Transit Plan IV. FINANCIAL AND CAPITAL PLANS 4.1 Operating and Capital Budget Special Transportation relies on Local Transportation Funds (LTF) to support its operating budget with the exclusion of the preventative maintenance budget. Special Transportation utilizes 5307 federal funds to fund the preventative maintenance of its fleet. Special Transportation's overall budget for the 2012/13 fiscal year has increased by 4% in comparison to the 201 1 /12 fiscal year, as shown in Figure IV-1. Special Transportation requested an additional $54,999 in LTF funds and $40,000 in FTA funds to cover increasing operating expenses. Figure IV-1 FY 2011/12 FY 2012/13 Budget Item SRTP Plan Variance $ Amount % Salaries & Benefits 2,008,651 2,035,419 26,768 1% Materials & Supplies 225,435 241,911 16,476 7% Fuel 225,000 225,000 0 0% Maintenance 350,000 400,000 50,000 14% Contract Services 0 15,000 15,000 Other Expenses 369,931 387,814 17,883 5% TOTAL 3,179,017 3,305,144 126,127 4% Personnel costs, in the form of driver staff hours and related benefits, have risen due to increased ridership. Special Transportation will also be opening the new CNG Vehicle Maintenance Facility and expanding its fleet, increasing facility and vehicle maintenance and repair costs. Software maintenance costs, for the RouteMatch software used in the dispatch office and in the mobile data computers located in every minibus, are increasing from the previous fiscal year. Lastly, Special Transportation is partially funding a contracted security guard for the 2012/13 fiscal year in order to enhance security of the parking lot and CNG Vehicle Maintenance facilities. - 7 - City of Riverside 2012/13-2014/15 Short Range Transit Plan 4.2 Funding Plans to Support Proposed Operating and Capital Program Special Transportation will continue to take advantage of available grant opportunities, such as the California Department of Transportation Proposition 1 B Public Transportation Modernization, Improvements, and Service Enhancement Account (PTMISEA), in order to support its capital programs. Special Transportation is applying for PTMISEA funds to purchase five replacement vehicles and supplement the existing capital budget for the Operations Facility Modernization and Expansion project. Special Transportation is also applying for Proposition 1 B Security Funds to install security lighting and cameras and using a combination of State Transit Assistance (STA) and 5307 federal funds to support the lease of a Xerox machine. 4.3 Regulatory and Compliance Requirements Special Transportation strives to remain compliant with all local, state and federal regulations. Staff stays abreast of legislative information and developments by attending workshops, trainings, and conferences which are frequently offered free of charge to transit operators. Special Transportation complies with FTA reporting requirements such as the submission of monthly and annual National Transit Database (NTD) reports. Special Transportation closed the annual NTD report for FY 2010/1 1 with no issues. Special Transportation completed its last FTA Triennial Review in 2009 with no deficiencies. The next FTA Triennial Review is scheduled for August of 2012. In accordance with the 2010 Transportation Development Act Performance Review recommendations, Special Transportation implemented a passenger satisfaction survey to distribute annually to its passengers. Additionally, staff is reviewing the possibility of terminating subscription service due to lack of public interest. Special Transportation received a satisfactory score on its 201 1 /12 California Highway Patrol Safety Compliance Terminal Inspection. In compliance with Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) requirements, Special Transportation purchases solely alternative fuel vehicles for its revenue rolling stock fleet. - 8 - IMME Mmi Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Demand Response / Directly Operated Table Z - Fleet Inventory FY 2012/13 Short Range Transit Plan City of Riverside Year Mfg. Model Built Code Code Lift and Seating Ramp Vehicle Capacity Equipped Length # of Active # of Fuel Vehicles Contingency Type FY Vehicles Code 2011/12 FY 2011/12 Life to Date Vehicle Miles Prior Year End FY 2010/11 Life to Date Vehicle Miles through March FY 2011/12 Average Lifetime Miles Per Active Vehicle As Of Year -To -Date (e.g., March) FY 2011/12 2008 2005 2007 2008 2008 2010 2011 CMD EDN EDN EDN FRD FRD FRD BU BU BU BU BU BU BU 7 12 14 14 16 16 16 1 2 5 1 8 10 4 15 25 25 25 25 25 25 GA CN CN CN CN CN CN 1 2 5 1 8 10 4 24,543 564,233 359,833 78,057 586,098 300,367 39,532 25,608 304,164 515,051 92,713 733,354 511,837 137,369 25,608 152,082 103,010 92,713 91,669 51,184 34,342 Totals: 95 31 31 1,952,663 2,320,096 74,842 TransTrack Manager'"' 5/2/2012 Page 9 IMME Mmi� Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Table 2 -- City of Riverside -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2012/13 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2009/10 Audited FY 2010/11 Audited FY 2011/12 Plan FY 2011/12 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2012/13 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 24 29 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $2,976,261 $2,941,368 $3,179,017 $2,192,579 $3,305,143 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $400,971 $344,366 $336,000 $274,913 $367,127 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $2,575,290 $2,597,002 $2,843,017 $1,917,666 $2,938,016 Operating Characteristics 1 Unlinked Passenger Trips 152,472 161,242 161,110 128,429 178,088 Passenger Miles 594,641 935,204 654,107 744,888 971,953 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 42,002.0 43,234.0 43,543.0 34,737.0 48,172.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 611,656.0 613,384.0 654,107.0 504,943.0 673,257.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 695,739.0 690,556.0 817,633.0 564,840.0 783,244.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $70.86 $68.03 $73.01 $63.12 $68.61 Farebox Recovery Ratio 13.47% 11.71% 10.56% 12.54% 11.10% Subsidy per Passenger $16.89 $16.11 $17.65 $14.93 $16.50 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $4.33 $2.78 $4.35 $2.57 $3.02 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $61.31 $60.07 $65.29 $55.21 $60.99 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $4.21 $4.23 $4.35 $3.80 $4.36 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 3.6 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.25 0.26 0.25 0.25 0.26 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager'"' 5/16/2012 Page 10 �EM= om Riwrside (only Trmspatofian {omsrissiun Data Elements Table 3 - SRTP Route Statistics City of Riverside -- 4 FY 2012/13 All Routes Route # Day Type Peak Vehicles Passenger Miles Revenue Hours Total Hours Revenue Miles Total Miles Operating Cost Passenger Revenue Net Subsidy RSS-DAR Total 29 178,088 971,953 48,172.0 53,282.0 673,257.0 783,244.0 $3,305,143 $367,127 $2,938,016 Service Provider Totals 29 178,088 971,953 48,172.0 53,282.0 673,257.0 783,244.0 $3,305,143 $367,127 $2,938,016 TransTrack Manager'?" 5/16/2012 Page 11 �EM= om Riwrside (only Trmspatofian {omsrissiun Performance Indicators Table 3 - SRTP Route Statistics City of Riverside -- 4 FY 2012/13 All Routes Route # Day Type Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour Operating Cost Per Revenue Mile Cost Per Passenaer Farebox Recovery Ratio Subsidy Per Passenaer Subsidy Per Passenger Mile Subsidy Per Revenue Hour Subsidy Per Revenue Mile Passengers Passengers Per Hour Per Mile RSS-DAR Total $68.61 $4.91 $18.56 $16.50 $3.02 $60.99 $4.36 3.7 0.26 Service Provider Totals $68.61 $4.91 $18.56 $16.50 $3.02 $60.99 $4.36 3.7 0.26 TransTrack Manager'?" 5/16/2012 Page 12 City of Riverside FY 2012/13 Summary of Funds Requested Short Range Transit Plan Table 4 - Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2012/13 Project Description Capital Project Number (1) Total Amount of Funds LTF STA Prop 1 B (PTMISEA) Prop 1B Security Section 5307 - Riv- San. Bndo Fare Box Other (') Local Transportation Funds $2,905,143 $2,538,016 $367,127 Operating Assistance Capitalized Preventive $400,000 $80,000 $320,000 Maintenance Subtotal: Operating $3,305,143 $2,618,016 $0 $0 $0 $320,000 $367,127 $0 Operations Facility Modernization and Expansion (2009/10) FY 13 - 1 $266,289 $266,289 Vehicle Replacement - Five Vehicles FY 13 - 2 $613,361 $613,361 (2010/11 - 2011/12) Special Transportation Security and Safety Improvements FY 13 - 3 $47,545 $47,545 (2010/11) Lease of Office FY 13 - 4 $20,000 $4,000 $16,000 Equipment Operations Facility Modernization and Expansion (2010/11 - 2011/12) FY 13 - 5 $100,000 $100,000 Subtotal: Capital $1,047,195 $0 $4,000 $979,650 $47,545 $16,000 $0 $0 Total: Operating 8 Capital $4,352,338 $2,618,016 $4,000 $979,650 $47,545 $336,000 $367,127 $0 -13- Revised 5/22/2012 Summary of FY 2012/13 Funds Requested.xls Table 4A - Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER: FY 13-1 PROJECT NAME: Operation Facility Modernization and Expansion PROJECT DESCRIPTION: To modernize and expand Special Transportation's Operation Facility. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: Staff would like to expand and modernize its current operations facility in order to accommodate a larger dispatch center, separate conference room, and a reception area for clients seeking to purchase bus passes. Expanding this operation facility will increase efficiencies within the transit operation and enhance passenger access. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): PTMISEA (2009/10) $266,289 STA $0 Total $266,289 PR/OR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE - OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED - INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance - 14 - Table 4A - Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER: FY 13-2 PROJECT NAME: Vehicle Replacement (Five Vehicles) PROJECT DESCRIPTION: To replace vehicles that have accrued 150,000 miles. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: Special Transportation replaces vehicles that have reached 150,000 miles, in accordance with Federal Transit Administration (FTA) guidelines. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): PTMISEA (10/11-11/12) $613,361 STA $0 Total $613,361 PR/OR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE - OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED - INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance n/a PTMISEA (2009/10) Vehicle Replacement 475,000 CA-90- Y948-00 n/a Vehicle Replacement 475,000 Total $950, 000 - 15 - Table 4A - Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER: FY 13-3 PROJECT NAME: Security and Safety Improvements PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Lighting and security cameras. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: Special Transportation will install additional lighting and security cameras in order to enhance safety and security within the Special Transportation facilities. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): Prop 1 B Security $47,545 STA $0 Total $47,545 PR/OR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE - OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED - INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance -16- Table 4A - Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER: FY 13-4 PROJECT NAME: Lease of Support Equipment PROJECT DESCRIPTION: To lease support equipment (division Xerox machine). PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: Special Transportation would like to lease support equipment needed for operations (division Xerox machine). PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): Sec 5307 $16,000 STA $4,000 Total $20,000 PR/OR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE - OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED - INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance -17- Table 4A - Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER: FY 13-5 PROJECT NAME: Operation Facility Modernization and Expansion PROJECT DESCRIPTION: To modernize and expand Special Transportation's Operation Facility. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: Staff would like to expand and modernize its current operations facility in order to accommodate a larger dispatch center, separate conference room, and a reception area for clients seeking to purchase bus passes. Expanding this operation facility will increase efficiencies within the transit operation and enhance passenger access. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): PTMISEA (10111-11112) $100,000 STA $0 Total $100,000 PR/OR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE - OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED - INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance n/a PTMISEA (2009/10) Operation Facility Modernization and Expansion $266,289 - 18 - City of Riverside FY 2013/14 and FY 2014/15 Summary of Funds Requested Short Range Transit Plan Table 5.1 Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2013/14 Project Description Capital Project Number (1) Total Amount of Funds LTF STA Prop 1 B (PTMISEA) Section 5307 - Riv- San. Bndo Fare Box Other (2) Local Transportation Funds Operating Assistance Capitalized Preventive Maintenance $3,020,000 $450,000 $2,650,000 $90,000 $360,000 $370,000 Subtotal: Operating $3,470,000 $2,740,000 $360,000 $370,000 Paratransit Vehicles for Replacement - Seven Vehicles FY 14 - 1 $800,000 $160,000 $640,000 Subtotal: Capital $800,000 $160,000 $640,000 Total: Operating & Capital 1 $4,270,0001 $2,740,0001 $160,0001 I $1,000,000 $370,000 Table 5.2 Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2014/15 Project Description Capital Project Number (1) Total Amount of Funds LTF STA Prop 1 B (PTMISEA) Section 5307 - Riv- San. Bndo Fare Box Other (2) Local Transportation Funds Operating Assistance Capitalized Preventive Maintenance $3,020,000 $450,000 $2,648,000 $90,000 $360,000 $372,000 Subtotal: Operating $3,470,000 $2,738,000 $360,000 $372,000 Paratransit Vehicles for Replacement - Seven Vehicles FY 15 - 1 $800,000 $160,000 $640,000 Subtotal: Capital $800,000 $160,000 $640,000 Total: Operating & Capital $4,270,000 $2,738,000 $160,000 $1,000,0001 $372,0001 -19- Revised 5/21/2012 Summary of Funds Requested FY 2013/14 FY 2014/15.xls Table 5.1A - Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER: FY 14-1 PROJECT NAME: Vehicle Replacement (Seven Vehicles) PROJECT DESCRIPTION: To replace vehicles that have accrued 150,000 miles. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: Special Transportation replaces vehicles that have reached 150,000 miles, in accordance with Federal Transit Administration (FTA) guidelines. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): Sec 5307 $640,000 STA $160,000 Total $800,000 PR/OR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE - OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED - INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance CA-90- Y948-00 N/A Vehicle Replacement $475, 000 PTMISEA Vehicle Replacement $475, 000 Total $950, 000 - 20 - Table 5.2A - Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER: FY 15-1 PROJECT NAME: Vehicle Replacement (Seven Vehicles) PROJECT DESCRIPTION: To replace vehicles that have accrued 150,000 miles. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: Special Transportation replaces vehicles that have reached 150,000 miles, in accordance with Federal Transit Administration (FTA) guidelines. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): Sec 5307 $640,000 STA $160,000 Total $800,000 PR/OR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE - OR PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED - INCLUDE FTA GRANT NUMBER AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT NUMBER FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance CA-90- Y948-00 N/A Vehicle Replacement $475, 000 PTMISEA Vehicle Replacement $475, 000 Total $950, 000 -21 - TABLE 6 — PROGRESS TO IMPLEMENT TRIENNIAL PERFORMANCE AUDIT Recent Audit Recommendation (Covering FY 2006/07 — FY 2008/091) Action(s) Taken And Results To Date2 1 . Need to Conduct Surveys of Riders and Non -Riders on a More Frequent Basis Formal surveys of riders and non -riders have not been performed in the last few years. Although customer survey comment cards are available to all riders and are located in the Paratransit vehicles, the comment cards are strictly voluntary and do not necessarily capture key information that will assist STS in improving service. Surveys of both riders and non -riders may provide valuable input to the operator in order to address the needs of the community and to understand the rider's perception of the dial -a -ride service. As such, a more formal survey performed at least annually is warranted. Special Transportation staff now distributes annual surveys to its riders. Survey categories include safety, cleanliness, timeliness, and customer service. Complete. The 2012 Passenger Satisfaction Survey results will be completed in July, 2012. 2. Need to Publish Information Regarding the Availability of Premium Subscription Services Information regarding the availability of premium subscription services that provides unlimited rides for $90.00 per month is not disclosed in STS' brochure or on the City's webpage for Special Transportation. As an STS goal has been to offer a subscription service to riders that is both affordable and cost effective, it would be prudent to actively publish and market this information wherever possible to reach out to both riders and the general public. Staff is reviewing the possibility of terminating subscription service due to lack of public interest. In progress. I Triennial performance audit for FY 2006/07 through FY 2008/09 was conducted in FY 2009/10 and completed 6/30/10. 2 If no action taken, provide schedule for implementation or explanation of why the recommendation is no longer relevant. - 22 - r�Mmi� Biwrside 6urrtr. Trmspatnlian {amsrissiun Table 7 -- Service Provider Performance Targets Report FY 2011/12 Short Range Transit Plan Review City of Riverside Data Elements FY 2011/12 Plan FY 2011/12 Target FY 2011/12 Year to Date Through 3rd Quarter Year to Date Performance Scorecard Unlinked Passenger Trips 161,110 Passenger Miles 654,107 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours 43,543.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles 654,107.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 817,633.0 Total Operating Expenses $3,179,017 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $336,000 Net Operating Expenses $2,843,017 Performance Indicators Mandatory: 1. Farebox Recovery Ratio I 10.56%I >= 10.00%I 12.54%I Meets Target Discretionary: 1. Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour $73.01 <_ $66.79 $63.12 Meets Target 2. Subsidy Per Passenger $17.65 >_ $13.38 and <_ $18.10 $14.93 Meets Target 3. Subsidy Per Passenger Mile $4.35 >_ $2.30 and <_ $3.12 $2.57 Meets Target 4. Subsidy Per Hour $65.29 >_ $49.67 and <_ $67.21 $55.21 Meets Target 5. Subsidy Per Mile $4.35 >_ $3.54 and <_ $4.78 $3.80 Meets Target 6. Passengers Per Revenue Hour 3.70 >= 3.15 and <= 4.26 3.70 Meets Target 7. Passengers Per Revenue Mile 0.25 >= 0.22 and <= 0.30 0.25 Meets Target Note: Must meet at least 4 out of 7 Discretionary Performance Indicators Productivity Performance Summary: Meets FY 11/12 Farebox Ratio Requirement. Meets 7 of 7 Discretionary Indicators. Meets RCTC PIP Program. Service Provider Comments: TransTrack Manager'"' 5/16/2012 Page 23 E Bioar,ide {oumir Tronsprrrorian {omsrissiun FY 2012/13 - Table 8 -- SRTP Performance Report Service Provider; City of Riverside All Routes Performance Indicators FY 2010/ 11 End of Year Actual FY 2011/ 12 3rd Quarter Year -to -Date FY 2012/13 plan FY 2012/13 Target Plan Performance Scorecard (a) Passengers 161,242 128,429 178,088 None Passenger Miles 935,204 744,888 971,953 None Revenue Hours 43,234.0 34,737.0 48,172.0 None Total Hours 50,346.0 38,423.0 53,282.0 None Revenue Miles 613,384.0 504,943.0 673,257.0 None Total Miles 690,556.0 564,840.0 783,244.0 None Operating Costs $2,941,368 $2,192,579 $3,305,143 None Passenger Revenue $344,366 $274,913 $367,127 None Operating Subsidy $2,597,002 $1,917,666 $2,938,016 None Operating Costs Per Revenue Hour $68.03 $63.12 $68.61 <= $64.23 Fails to Meet Target Operating Cost Per Revenue Mile $4.80 $4.34 $4.91 None Operating Costs Per Passenger $18.24 $17.07 $18.56 None Farebox Recovery Ratio 11.71% 12.54% 11.10% >= 10.0% Meets Target Subsidy Per Passenger $16.11 $14.93 $16.50 >= $12.69 and <= $17.17 Meets Target Subsidy Per Passenger Mile $2.78 $2.57 $3.02 >= $2.18 and <= $2.96 Fails to Meet Target Subsidy Per Revenue Hour $60.07 $55.21 $60.99 >= $46.93 and <= $63.49 Meets Target Subsidy Per Revenue Mile $4.23 $3.80 $4.36 >= $3.23 and <= $4.37 Meets Target Passengers Per Revenue Hour 3.70 3.70 3.70 >= 3.15 and <= 4.26 Meets Target Passengers Per Revenue Mile 0.26 0.25 0.26 >= 0.21 and <= 0.29 Meets Target a) The Plan Performance Scorecard column is the result of comparing the FY 2012/13 Plan to the FY 2012/13 Primary Target. TransTrack Manager'"' 5/16/2012 Page 24 TABLE 9 — HIGHLIGHTS OF 2012/13 — 2014/15 SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN ■ Proposition 1 B Security Grant — To enhance safety and security, Special Transportation is applying for almost $50,000 to install additional lighting and cameras in its parking lot and newly constructed CNG Vehicle Maintenance Facility. Staff is also planning to purchase emergency response equipment. ■ Proposition 1 B Capital Grant — Special Transportation is applying for approximately $615,000 to purchase five 16-passenger Paratransit vehicles. ■ 2011/12 Annual Passenger Satisfaction Survey — In May of 2012, Special Transportation distributed a passenger satisfaction survey in order to obtain feedback regarding the transportation services it provides to the community. Survey categories included customer service, safety, ease of scheduling a reservation, and vehicle cleanliness. ■ Special Transportation Marketing and Advertisements — In order to increase ridership, Special Transportation installed advertisements of its services on the back windows of several minibuses. The advertisements contained a slogan and information regarding the City's transportation service. ■ Capital Projects — o CNG Vehicle Maintenance Facility Construction — The construction of the CNG Vehicle Maintenance Facility will be complete in June 2012. The facility is being constructed with 6 bays, an office, and a large, upper level storage area for parts and equipment. o Slow Fill Stations Installation — Following completion of the CNG Vehicle Maintenance Facility Construction Project, Special Transportation staff will be installing additional slow fill stations at the City of Riverside Corporation Yard in order to meet fueling demands. Staff plans to install five slow fill stations during the 2012/13 fiscal year. o Vehicle Procurement and Delivery — Special Transportation will be replacing eight 16 passenger, Paratransit vehicles with grant funds received through the Federal Transit Administration and a Proposition 1 B capital grant. Vehicles will be delivered by the end of the 2012 calendar year. - 25 - o Operations Facility Modernization and Expansion - Staff is currently working on the design plan of modernizing and expanding Special Transportation's operations facility. Included in the Special Transportation's operation facility are administrative offices, dispatch room, and training and conference room. Expanding and modernizing the existing facilities will accommodate a larger dispatch center, separate conference room, and a reception area for clients seeking to purchase bus passes. Expanding this operational facility will increase efficiency within the transit operation and enhance passenger access. ■ Performance Target Report - Special Transit plans to meet the mandatory farebox recovery ratio target and meet five of the seven discretionary performance indicators in the FY 2012/13 (shown in Table 9-A). Transit operators are required to meet at least four of the seven discretionary performance indicators. Table 9-A Status Performance Indicators Performance Scorecard Mandatory :................................................................... Farebox Recovery Ratio :................................................................................................................................................................................. Operating Cost Per Revenue Discretionary Hour :....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Subsidy Per Passenger :................................................................................................................................................................................. Subsidy Per Passenger Mile :................................................................................................................................................................................. Subsidy Per Hour :................................................................................................................................................................................. Subsidy Per Mile :................................................................................................................................................................................. Passengers Per Revenue Hour Passengers Per Revenue Mile -26- Meets Target Fails to Meet Target :.......................................................................................................................... Meets Target :.......................................................................................................................... Fails to Meet Target :.......................................................................................................................... Meets Target Meets Target Meets Target Meets Target Operating and Financial Data for the past 4 years and for the 2012/13 fiscal year are shown below. Table 9-B Operating & Financial Data System wide Ridership Operating Cost per Revenue Hours FY FY FY FY 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011 /12 157,743 $71.17 152,472 $70.86 161,242 $68.03 171,239 $63.12 FY 2012/13 (plan) 178,088 $68.30 -27- PALO VERDE VALLEY TRANSIT AGENCY BLYTHE, CALIFORNIA Amerce The 8eautifu!...$weef land Of Liberty? DESERT ROADRUNNER SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN FISCAL YEAR 2012/13 - 2014/15 TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1— System Overview Page Service Area 4 Demographics 4 Service Profile 4 System Map 5 Fare Schedule 6 Fleet & Maintenance 7 Chapter 2 — Services & Performance Blue Route 1 Blythe City Circulator 9 Gold Route 2 Palo Verde College Crosstown 10 Red Route 3 CA Prisons Express 11 Green Route 4 Rural Rider 12 Silver Route 5 Saturday Service 13 Desert Road TRIP 14 Blythe Mobility Management 15 PVVTA X-Tend-A-Ride 16 Performance 17 Growth and Planning 18 Chapter 3 — Service Changes Route Changes and Modifications Promotions Chapter 4 — Finances & Capital Plans 20 21 Operating Budget 23 Capital Budget 23 Compliance Requirements 23 Data Tables (Start) 24 2 Chapter 1— System Overview 3 Service Area Geographically, the Palo Verde Valley is located approximately 170 miles east of Riverside along Interstate 10 at the Colorado River. The service area is primarily based within the City of Blythe, and the unincorporated Riverside County areas of Mesa Verde and Ripley. Also part of the greater area is the California State Prison facilities of Ironwood and Chuckawalla, approximately 20 miles west of the valley along Interstate 10. Demographics The valley's population is approximately 25,000 residents. Population growth in the valley is increasing at an average of about 2% per year. The valley is agriculturally diverse providing many outdoor jobs and direct support to the local community. Major employers include the California State Prisons Ironwood and Chuckawalla. Service Profile The PVVTA provides many transit options to serve senior citizens, persons with disabilities, and the general public. PVVTA services are known to the general public under the marketing name "Desert Roadrunner". PVVTA provides four deviated fixed routes in the Palo Verde Valley which serve Blythe, Ripley, Mesa Verde, Palo Verde College, California Department of Corrections facilities and limited service to Ehrenberg, Arizona. ADA Para -transit is also provided after hours on the Fixed Routes through route deviation requests. The routes can deviate up to 3/4 of a mile away from the actual mapped routes. Hours of operation for the Fixed Route system are: Monday -Friday from 5:00 am to 6:10 pm and 8:00 am to 3:00 pm on Saturday and limited holidays. Finally, Desert RoadTRIP provides transportation reimbursement to individuals unable to access PVVTA Fixed Route services. The PVVTA's transit services are contracted with Transportation Concepts of Irvine, California. Transportation Concepts has been providing transit service for PVVTA since October of 2003. PVVTA also has an agreement with the Independent Living Partnership to administer the Transportation Reimbursement and Information Project (Desert RoadTRIP) that has been in place since 1995. 4 "t1 ❑ *'.131 A 1.1 •-- §% ]I>]] v§%> >1119d 9H nc 3}Ik*1V1���51 ]n w]a% ztI � A .MO V:19 Ie % |71 w § ii y ¥ Sid j � 2 0 ]Olw]w 2 / aNVN�� O V V:iVe N OIM'4'J ,m _ X A ldld § u � :om:a ulos ,ems! idtt X m]1 £ I$] A.VAAVo1S NVH) 3nN3AV 9OL &MIN 111131SAS VlikAd m Pry 3 :13 ¥g m 393110 H3� olV d ■nfil AV 99 d • • |SNOSI d ✓ 7| ✓ E| § §■ - — gVDsoll N m Fare Schedule PVVTA's fare structure is sensitive to the local economy while attempting to maintain the mandated 10% Farebox Recovery Ratio. The schedule includes full fare and discounted ride tickets. PVVTA implemented a modest fare increase on July 1, 2010. In fiscal year 2014/15, staff may propose a base increase to the fare structure in order to maintain the Farebox Recovery Ratio. Prior to any proposed increases, PVVTA would hold a public hearing in order to receive public input on any change to the Fare Schedule. PVVTA Current Fare & Pass Schedule Fixed Route Cash Fare — Routes 1, 2, 4 General Public (ages 5-59 years old) $1.65 Seniors (ages 60 years or older) $0.80 Persons with Disabilities (with ADA or Medicare Card) $0.80 Children ages 5 and under* (first boarding with full fare adult) Free Children ages 5 and under* (second & third boarding with full fare adult) $0.80 * Free for the first (1) child, $0.80 for child 2 & 3 boarding with a fare paying adult; Full Fare for all other accompanying children. Additional Zone Fare for travel to and from Ehrenberg, AZ** $1.65 ** Does not include deviation fare, valid for all passengers traveling to & from Ehrenberg, AZ excluding ride- alongs. Fixed Route Cash Fare — Route 3 Express General Public, Seniors, & Persons with Disabilities Route Deviations (one way to or from route) Route Deviations — All Fixed Routes Route Deviations (one way to or from route) DV8 Card (8 one way deviation fares)*** ***Not valid for initial passenger fare, only for payment of route deviation fee. Fixed Route Go Passes 10-Ride Punch Pass S/D 10-Ride Punch Pass General Public 31-Day Pass Seniors 31-Day Pass Persons with Disabilities 10-Ride Punch Pass **** (Routes 1, 2, 3 Local, 4 & 5) (Routes 1, 2, 3 Local, 4 & 5) (Routes 1, 2, 3 Local, 4 & 5) (Routes 1, 2, 3 Local, 4 & 5) (Routes 1, 2, 3 Local, 4 & 5) (Ehrenberg, AZ) **** Does not include deviation fare, valid for all passengers traveling to & from Ehrenberg, AZ ride-alongs. 10-Ride Punch Pass 20-Ride Punch Pass General Public 31-Day Pass (Route 3 Express) (Route 3 Express) (Route 3 Express) $3.30 $0.80 $0.80 $6.40 $16.50 $ 8.00 $43.00 $28.00 $28.00 $33.00 excluding $ 33.00 $ 66.00 $120.00 Other Cash Fare — X-Tend-A-Ride General Public, Seniors, & Persons with Disabil