The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My Public Portal About06 June 8, 2016 CommissionNM Mom Riverside County Trargoriatian {nmmission MEETING AGENDA TIME/DATE: 9:30 a.m. / Wednesday, June 8, 2016 LOCATION: BOARD ROOM County of Riverside Administrative Center 4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside drW, COMMISSIONERS eet Chair — Scott Matas Vice Chair — John F. Tavaglione Second Vice Chair — Dana Reed COMM-COMM-00058 Kevin Jeffries, County of Riverside John F. Tavaglione, County of Riverside Chuck Washington, County of Riverside John J. Benoit, County of Riverside Marion Ashley, County of Riverside Deborah Franklin / Art Welch, City of Banning Lloyd White / Mike Lara, City of Beaumont Joseph DeConinck / Tim Wade, City of Blythe Ella Zanowic / Joyce McIntire, City of Calimesa Dawn Haggerty / Jordan Ehrenkranz, City of Canyon Lake Greg Pettis / Shelley Kaplan, City of Cathedral City Steven Hernandez / To Be Appointed, City of Coachella Karen Spiegel / Randy Fox, City of Corona Scott Matas / Russell Betts, City of Desert Hot Springs Adam Rush / Clint Lorimore, City of Eastvale Linda Krupa / Paul Raver, City of Hemet Dana Reed / Douglas Hanson, City of Indian Wells Michael Wilson / Glenn Miller, City of Indio Frank Johnston / Brian Berkson, City of Jurupa Valley Robert Radi / To Be Appointed, City of La Quinta Bob Magee / Natasha Johnson, City of Lake Elsinore Scott Mann / John Denver, City of Menifee Yxstian Gutierrez / Jesse Molina, City of Moreno Valley Rick Gibbs / Jonathan Ingram, City of Murrieta Berwin Hanna / Ted Hoffman, City of Norco Jan Harnik / Susan Marie Weber, City of Palm Desert Ginny Foat / Geoffrey Kors, City of Palm Springs Daryl Busch / Rita Rogers, City of Perris Ted Weill / To Be Appointed, City of Rancho Mirage Rusty Bailey / Andy Melendrez, City of Riverside Andrew Kotyuk / Crystal Ruiz, City of San Jacinto Michael S. Naggar / Michael McCracken, City of Temecula Ben Benoit / Timothy Walker, City of Wildomar John Bulinski, Director, Governor's Appointee Caltrans District 8 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 Commission TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Jennifer Harmon, Clerk of the Board DATE: June 1, 2016 SUBJECT: Possible Conflicts of Interest — Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda of June 8, 2016 The June 8, 2016 agenda of the Riverside County Transportation Commission includes items that may raise possible conflicts of interest. A Commissioner 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. 8H — Agreement with Nossaman LLP for On -Call Strategic Partnership Advisor Services Consultant(s): Nossaman LLP Corey Boock, Partner 777 South Figueroa Street, 34th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90017 Agenda Item No. 13A — Closed Session — Conference With Real Property Negotiators For the Mid County Project Item APN(s) RCPN Property Owner(s) 1 305-020-019 1001 State of California Dept. of Transportation 2 305-020-030 1002 Ritchie Brothers Prop Inc. 3 305-050-006 1003 Thuy, Uyen Ngo 4 305-050-029 1005 Franco, Alejandro & Maria G. 5 305-050-035 1006 Cepeda, Marisa 6 305-050-036 1007 Frewing, David W. & Janet L., et.al. 7 305-050-049 _ 1008 State of California Dept. of Transportation 8 305-050-051 1009 Barker Family Trust 9 305-050-055 1010 Barker Family Trust 10 305-050-057 1011 State of California Dept. of Transportation 11 305-060-010 1012 Kim, Chang Z. & Young H., Grant S. RCTC Potential Conflicts of Interest June 1, 2016 Page 2 Item APN(s) RCPN Property Owner(s) 12 305-060-021 1015 Thompson, Victor C. 13 305-060-023 1016 Thompson, Victor C. 14 305-060-025 1017 Thompson, Victor C. 15 305-060-030 1018 State of California Dept. of Transportation 16 305-060-035 1019 Coudures Family Ltd. Partnership 17 305-090-040 1020 Buchko, William S. & John C. 18 305-090-045 1021 Beckner, Mary 19 305-090-046 1022 State of California Dept. of Transportation 20 305-090-055 1023 Coudures Family Ltd. Partnership 21 317-230-034 1024 Ritchie Brothers Prop Inc. 22 317-240-032 1025 Oakmont Perris Harvil Street 23 317-240-034 1026 State of California Dept. of Transportation 24 317-260-029 1027 State of California Dept. of Transportation 25 317-260-030 1028 CLA VAL Co. 26 305-080-088 1029 Bacon, Melton L. & Katherine L. Trust 27 305-080-092 1030 Coreslab Structure, Inc. 28 305-070-003 1031 Coudures Family Ltd. Partnership 29 305-040-017 1032 Pacific Continental Modular Enterprises 30 305-040-036 1033 City of Perris 31 305-040-043 1034 Pacific Continental Modular Enterprises 32 305-040-047 1035 Pacific Continental Modular Enterprises 33 305-040-049 1036 Pacific Continental Modular Enterprises 34 305-040-051 1037 Pacific Continental Modular Enterprises 35 305-040-053 1038 Pacific Continental Modular Enterprises 36 300-020-001 1039 T A INV 37 300-020-007 1040 Cal Walnut Street Real Estate 38 300-020-008 1041 Cal Walnut Street Real Estate 39 300-020-013 1042 Jackson, Robin Z. 40 300-020-014 1043 Leon, Luis & Rosilda 41 300-020-021 1044 Santos, Victor 42 300-020-022 1045 Hall, Richard & Grajales, Myriam 43 300-020-023 1046 Scarpino, Vincent M. & Valerie Jean 44 300-020-024 1047 Torres, Sabina & Avalos, Maria G. 45 300-090-001 1048 Larkins, George J. & Jean Trust 46 300-090-002 1049 Riverside County Flood Control District 47 300-090-007 1050 Perris Land Co. 48 300-090-008 1051 Riverside County Flood Control District 49 300-170-003 1052 Wang, Ching Fu & Hsiao, Hsiang Fen 50 300-170-005 1053 Wang, Tung Hsun & Ying Lang 51 300-170-011 1054 Lennox, Robert C. & Sandra M. 52 300-170-012 1055 Peterson Dev 53 300-170-013 1056 Peterson Dev 54 300-170-014 1057 Peterson Dev 55 300-210-018 1058 Stagliano, Vincert J. & Peggy S. Trust RCTC Potential Conflicts of Interest June 1, 2016 Page 3 Item APN(s) RCPN Property Owner(s) 56 300-210-019 1059 Stagliano, Vincert J. & Peggy S. Trust 57 300-210-020 1060 Smith, Alice Elaine 58 300-210-021 1061 Stevenson, Douglas E. & Becky Leigh 59 300-210-022 1062 Wang, Di 60 307-050-008 1063 McCanna Hills 61 307-070-004 1064 Ranch Haven; Golden Hill Country 62 307-080-008 1065 Ranch Haven; Golden Hill Country 63 307-090-001 1066 Ranch Haven; Golden Hill Country 64 307-410-001 1067 McCanna Hills 65 307-410-002 1068 McCanna Hills 66 300-020-002 1069 Lopez, Francisco & Eva Trust 67 308-130-008 1081 Lauda, Frank S., & Pagliuso, Sandra D. 68 308-130-005 1082 Lauda, Frank S., & Pagliuso, Sandra D. 69 308-140-006 1083 Lauda, Frank S., & Pagliuso, Sandra D. 70 430-120-012 1070 Spyksma, John A. & Yanita J. 71 553-220-023 1071 McAlister Investments, Inc. 72 422-170-001 1072 Shook, Loretta & Greer, Joetta 73 422-220-002 1073 Shook, Loretta & Greer, Joetta 74 422-240-014 1074 R B Ventures 75 422-240-015 1075 R B Ventures 76 423-190-004 1076 R B Ventures 77 423-100-016 1077 Ahome Real Estate For the State Route 60 Truck Climbing Lanes Project 78 422-030-007 422-030-008 1078 Professors Highlanderson Properties Partners, GP. 79 422-040-012 1079 Raceway Properties, GP. 80 422-050-028 422-050-032 1080 Riverside County Regional Park and Open Space District Tara Byerly From: Tara Byerly Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2016 3:42 PM To: Tara Byerly Cc: Jennifer Harmon Subject: RCTC: June Commission Agenda - 06.08.2016 Importance: High Good afternoon Commissioners: The June Agenda for the Commission meeting scheduled for Wednesday, June 8, 2016 @ 9:30 a.m. is available. Please copy the link: http://www.rctc.org/uploads/media items/iune-8-2016.original.pdf Also, attached for your review and information is the conflict of interest memo and form. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you. Conflict of Conflict of Interest Form.pdf interest Memo.pdf Respectfully, Tara S. Byerty Deputy Clerk of the Board Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 (951) 787-7141 1 Tara Byerly From: Tara Byerly Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2016 3:44 PM To: Tara Byerly Subject: RCTC: June Commission Agenda - 06.08.2016 Importance: High Good afternoon Commission Alternates: The June Agenda for the Commission meeting scheduled for Wednesday, June 8, 2016 @ 9:30 a.m. is available. Please copy the link: http://www.rctc.org/uploads/media items/iune-8-2016.original.pdf Respectfully, Tara S. yerty Deputy Clerk of the Board Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 (951) 787-7141 1 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION www.rctc.org AGENDA* *Actions may be taken on any item listed on the agenda 9:30 a.m. Wednesday, June 8, 2016 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, Government Code Section 54954.2, and the Federal Transit Administration Title VI, please contact the Clerk of the Board at (951) 787-7141 if special assistance is needed to participate in a Commission meeting, including accessibility and translation services. Assistance is provided free of charge. Notification of at least 48 hours prior to the meeting time will assist staff in assuring reasonable arrangements can be made to provide assistance at the meeting. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. 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. 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 11, 2016 Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda June 8, 2016 Page 2 6. PUBLIC HEARING — PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016/17 Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 1 1) Receive input on the proposed budget for FY 2016/17; 2) Close the public hearing on the proposed Budget for FY 2016/17; 3) Approve the salary schedule effective July 7, 2016, located in Appendix B of the proposed budget; and 4) Adopt the proposed Budget for FY 2016/17. 7. ADDITIONS / REVISIONS — The Commission may add an item to the Agenda after making a finding that there is a need to take immediate action on the item and that the item came to the attention of the Commission subsequent to the posting of the agenda. An action adding an item to the agenda requires 2/3 vote of the Commission. If there are less than 2/3 of the Commission members present, adding an item to the agenda requires a unanimous vote. Added items will be placed for discussion at the end of the agenda. 8. CONSENT CALENDAR — All matters on the Consent Calendar will be approved in a single motion unless a Commissioner(s) requests separate action on specific item(s). Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be placed for discussion at the end of the agenda. 8A. APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016/17 Page 4 Overview This item is for the Commission to adopt Resolution No. 16-013, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Establishing the Annual Appropriations Limit", for Fiscal Year 2016/17. 8B. QUARTERLY FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Page 11 Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Quarterly Financial Statements for the period ended March 31, 2016. 8C. QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORT Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Quarterly Investment Report for the quarter ended March 31, 2016. Page 19 Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda June 8, 2016 Page 3 8D. QUARTERLY SALES TAX ANALYSIS Page 79 Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file the sales tax analysis for Quarter 4, 2015 (4Q 2015). 8E. RATIFY EXPENDITURES FOR CONSTRUCTION ZONE ENHANCED ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM AND OTHER STATE FURNISHED MATERIALS FOR THE STATE ROUTE 91 CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Page 88 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Ratify the scope of state furnished materials (SFM) defined in the design -build cooperative Agreement No. 12-31-070-00, as amended, between the Commission and Ca!trans for the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project (SR-91 CIP) to include Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program (COZEEP) and other SFM in the amount of $4.3 million, plus a contingency amount of $400,000, for a total amount not to exceed $4.7 million; and 2) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve the use of the contingency amount as may be required for the project. 8F. RIVERSIDE 91 EXPRESS LANES ORDINANCE FOR ENFORCEMENT OF TOLL VIOLATIONS Page 91 Overview This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve the introduction of and introduce Ordinance No. 16-001, "An Ordinance of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Establishing Ordinance No. 16-001 Relating to the Administration of Tolls and the Enforcement of Toll Violations for the Riverside 91 Express Lanes"; and 2) Approve the toll evasion penalties for a violation of Ordinance No. 16-001 in the amounts identified in Schedule A of Ordinance No. 16-001. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda June 8, 2016 Page 4 8G. SECTION 214 FUNDING AGREEMENT WITH THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS FOR INTERSTATE 15 EXPRESS LANES PROJECT Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 104 1) Approve Agreement No. 16-31-096-00 between Riverside County Transportation Commission and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Los Angeles District, for Section 214 funding agreement in the amount of $15,000, plus a contingency amount of $45,000, for a total amount not to exceed $60,000; 2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve the use of the contingency amount as may be required for the project. 8H. AGREEMENT WITH NOSSAMAN LLP FOR ON -CALL STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP ADVISOR SERVICES Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 115 1) Approve Agreement No. 06-66-028-13, Amendment No. 10 to Agreement No. 06-66-028-00, with Nossaman LLP (Nossaman) for the on -call strategic partnership advisor services by extending the contract term to December 31, 2020, and augmenting the agreement in the amount of $5.7 million, plus a contingency amount of $300,000, for an additional amount of $6 million, and a total amount not to exceed $14,352,935; 2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve the use of the contingency amount as may be required for the project. 81. RESOLUTION NO. 16-011 REGARDING THE INTERSTATE 15 EXPRESS LANES TOLL POLICY GOALS AND TOLL POLICIES Page 127 Overview This item is for the Commission to adopt Resolution No. 16-011, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Regarding Interstate 15 Express Lanes Toll Policy Goals and Toll Policies". Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda June 8, 2016 Page 5 8J. INTERSTATE 15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Page 178 Overview This item is for the Commission to adopt the Interstate 15 Express Lanes Investment Grade Traffic and Revenue Study. 8K. RESOLUTION NO. 16-010 REGARDING THE 2016 TITLE VI PROGRAM REPORT UPDATE, INCLUDING THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN AND LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PLAN Page 180 Overview This item is for the Commission to adopt Resolution No. 16-010, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Regarding the 2016 Title VI Program Report Update, Including the Public Participation Plan and Language Assistance Plan", in compliance with Federal Transit Administration (FTA) requirements. 8L. CLINTON KEITH ROAD EXTENSION — MULTI FUNDING CALL FOR PROJECTS UTILIZATION OF PROJECT SAVINGS FOR PHASE III Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 183 1) Approve the request by the county of Riverside (County) to utilize $2,717,000 in project savings from the Clinton Keith Road Extension Phase II project (Phase II) for the Clinton Keith Road Extension Phase III project (Phase III); 2) Approve Agreement No. 14-72-099-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 14-72-099-00 with the County to reprogram $2,717,000 from Phase II to Phase III and reduce 2009 Measure A Western County Regional Arterial (MARA) funding by $214,047; and 3) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 8M. SURPLUS OF REAL PROPERTY Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 187 1) Declare as surplus the eight real properties, comprised of 10 Assessor's Parcel Numbers (APN), adjacent to State Route 74, as described in this agenda item and attached maps; Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda June 8, 2016 Page 6 2) Authorize the Executive Director to notify public agencies and contiguous land owners for seven of the properties, pursuant to Government Code 54220 et.seq, that the properties are available for purchase; and 3) If no response is received from public agencies and contiguous land owners, authorize the Executive Director to offer the surplus property for sale to the public. 8N. FISCAL YEARS 2016/17 — 2018/19 SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLANS Page 198 Overview This item is for the Commission to approve the Fiscal Years 2016/17 — 2018/19 Short Range Transit Plans (SRTPs) for the cities of Banning, Beaumont, Corona, and Riverside; Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency (PVVTA); Riverside Transit Agency (RTA); SunLine Transit Agency (SunLine); and the Commission's Western Riverside County Rail Program and Coachella Valley Rail Program. 80. FUNDING AGREEMENT WITH THE CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL FOR FREEWAY SERVICE PATROL SUPERVISION Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 203 1) Approve Agreement No. 16-45-094-00 with the California Highway Patrol (CHP) to provide supervision and operation of the Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) program in Riverside County in an amount not to exceed $793,181; and 2) Authorize the Chair, or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 8P. AMENDMENT TO FREEWAY SERVICE PATROL AGREEMENT Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 216 1) Approve Agreement No. 11-45-053-05, Amendment No. 4 to Agreement No. 11-45-053-00, with Tri-City Towing, Inc. (Tri-City) to provide Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) services on Beat No. 7 for an additional amount of $60,000, and a total amount not to exceed $1,110,000; and 2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda June 8, 2016 Page 7 8Q. FISCAL YEAR 2016/17 MEASURE A COMMUTER ASSISTANCE BUSPOOL SUBSIDY FUNDING CONTINUATION REQUESTS Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 221 1) Authorize payment of $1,645/month maximum subsidy per buspool for the period July 1, 2016 to June 30, 2017, to the existing Riverside, Riverside II, and Mira Loma buspools; and 2) Require subsidy recipients to meet monthly buspool reporting requirements as supporting documentation to receive payments. 9. PROPOSED METROLINK BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016/17 Overview This item is for the Commission to: Page 227 1) Adopt the Fiscal Year 2016/17 Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) operating and capital budget, which results in a total operating and capital subsidy of $19,233,000 from the Commission; 2) Support an amendment to the FY 2016/17 SCRRA operating and capital budget in an amount not to exceed $6 million for the expansion of the Riverside Downtown Layover Facility and additional track improvements on the corridor; 3) Receive and file a report on the Commission's portion of the FY 2016/17 SCRRA operating and capital budget. 10. STATE LEGISLATIVE UPDATE Overview This item is for the Commission to receive and file an update on state legislation. 11. ITEM(S) PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA 12. COMMISSIONERS / EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT Overview Page 274 This item provides the opportunity for the Commissioners and the Executive Director to report on attended meetings/conferences and any other items related to Commission activities. Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda June 8, 2016 Page 8 13. CLOSED SESSION 13A. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 Agency Negotiator: Executive Director or Designee Property Owner(s): See Below Item APN(s) RCPN Property Owner(s) 1 305-020-019 1001 State of California Dept. of Transportation 2 305-020-030 1002 Ritchie Brothers Prop Inc. 3 305-050-006 1003 Thuy, Uyen Ngo 4 305-050-029 1005 Franco, Alejandro & Maria G. 5 305-050-035 1006 Cepeda, Marisa 6 305-050-036 1007 Frewing, David W. & Janet L., et.al. 7 305-050-049 1008 State of California Dept. of Transportation 8 305-050-051 1009 Barker Family Trust 9 305-050-055 1010 Barker Family Trust 10 305-050-057 1011 State of California Dept. of Transportation 11 305-060-010 1012 Kim, Chang Z. & Young H., Grant S. 12 305-060-021 1015 Thompson, Victor C. 13 305-060-023 1016 Thompson, Victor C. 14 305-060-025 1017 Thompson, Victor C. 15 305-060-030 1018 State of California Dept. of Transportation 16 305-060-035 1019 Coudures Family Ltd. Partnership 17 305-090-040 1020 Buchko, William S. & John C. 18 305-090-045 1021 Beckner, Mary 19 305-090-046 1022 State of California Dept. of Transportation 20 305-090-055 1023 Coudures Family Ltd. Partnership 21 317-230-034 1024 Ritchie Brothers Prop Inc. 22 317-240-032 1025 Oakmont Perris Harvil Street 23 317-240-034 1026 State of California Dept. of Transportation 24 317-260-029 1027 State of California Dept. of Transportation 25 317-260-030 1028 CLA VAL Co. 26 305-080-088 1029 Bacon, Melton L. & Katherine L. Trust 27 305-080-092 1030 Coreslab Structure, Inc. 28 305-070-003 1031 Coudures Family Ltd. Partnership 29 305-040-017 1032 Pacific Continental Modular Enterprises 30 305-040-036 1033 City of Perris 31 305-040-043 1034 Pacific Continental Modular Enterprises 32 305-040-047 1035 Pacific Continental Modular Enterprises 33 305-040-049 1036 Pacific Continental Modular Enterprises 34 305-040-051 1037 Pacific Continental Modular Enterprises Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda June 8, 2016 Page 9 Item APN(s) RCPN Property Owner(s) 35 305-040-053 1038 Pacific Continental Modular Enterprises 36 300-020-001 1039 T A INV 37 300-020-007 1040 Cal Walnut Street Real Estate 38 300-020-008 1041 Cal Walnut Street Real Estate 39 300-020-013 1042 Jackson, Robin Z. 40 300-020-014 1043 Leon, Luis & Rosilda 41 300-020-021 1044 Santos, Victor 42 300-020-022 1045 Hall, Richard & Grajales, Myriam 43 300-020-023 1046 Scarpino, Vincent M. & Valerie Jean 44 300-020-024 1047 Torres, Sabina & Avalos, Maria G. 45 300-090-001 1048 Larkins, George J. & Jean Trust 46 300-090-002 1049 Riverside County Flood Control District 47 300-090-007 1050 Perris Land Co. 48 300-090-008 1051 Riverside County Flood Control District 49 300-170-003 1052 Wang, Ching Fu & Hsiao, Hsiang Fen 50 300-170-005 1053 Wang, Tung Hsun & Ying Lang 51 300-170-011 1054 Lennox, Robert C. & Sandra M. 52 300-170-012 1055 Peterson Dev 53 300-170-013 1056 Peterson Dev 54 300-170-014 1057 Peterson Dev 55 300-210-018 1058 Stagliano, Vincert J. & Peggy S. Trust 56 300-210-019 1059 Stagliano, Vincert J. & Peggy S. Trust 57 300-210-020 1060 Smith, Alice Elaine 58 300-210-021 1061 Stevenson, Douglas E. & Becky Leigh 59 300-210-022 1062 Wang, Di 60 307-050-008 1063 McCanna Hills 61 307-070-004 1064 Ranch Haven; Golden Hill Country 62 307-080-008 1065 Ranch Haven; Golden Hill Country 63 307-090-001 1066 Ranch Haven; Golden Hill Country 64 307-410-001 1067 McCanna Hills 65 307-410-002 1068 McCanna Hills 66 300-020-002 1069 Lopez, Francisco & Eva Trust 67 308-130-008 1081 Lauda, Frank S., & Pagliuso, Sandra D. 68 308-130-005 1082 Lauda, Frank S., & Pagliuso, Sandra D. 69 308-140-006 1083 Lauda, Frank S., & Pagliuso, Sandra D. 70 430-120-012 1070 Spyksma, John A. & Yanita J. 71 553-220-023 1071 McAlister Investments, Inc. 72 422-170-001 1072 Shook, Loretta & Greer, Joetta 73 422-220-002 1073 Shook, Loretta & Greer, Joetta 74 422-240-014 1074 R B Ventures 75 422-240-015 1075 R B Ventures 76 423-190-004 1076 R B Ventures 77 423-100-016 1077 Ahome Real Estate Riverside County Transportation Commission Agenda June 8, 2016 Page 10 Item APN(s) RCPN Property Owner(s) 78 422-030-007 422-030-008 1078 Professors Highlanderson Properties Partners, GP. 79 422-040-012 1079 Raceway Properties, GP. 80 422-050-028 422-050-032 1080 Riverside County Regional Park and Open Space District 13B. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL: EXISTING LITIGATION Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (d)(1) Case No(s). RIC 1511130 and RIC 1602030 14. ADJOURNMENT The next meeting of the Commission is scheduled to be held on Wednesday, July 13, 2016, Board Room, First Floor, County Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside. JOHN F. TAVAGLIONE SECOND DISTRICT SUPERVISOR BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE June 1, 2016 STAFF JOHN FIELD, Chief of Staff KAREN CHRISTENSEN, Deputy Chief of Staff/ Sr. Legisative Asst LILIANA ALLIN, Office Administrator/Legislative Assistant JASON FARIN, Board Assistant Proxy Vote — Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) Supervisor John Benoit, committee member of Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) - has approval to cast my vote (June 8, 2016 meeting) during my absence. Sincerely, (Second Di rict Sup 4080 LEMON STREET • 5TH FLOOR • PO. BOX 1646 • RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92502-1646 • (951) 955.1020 www.rivcodistr'Ict2.org RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ROLL CALL JUNE 8, 2016 Present Absent County of Riverside, District I )21" ❑ County of Riverside, District II 0 Yo.e, County of Riverside, District IIICk!..„ )414 County of Riverside, District IV 0 County of Riverside, District V City of Banning .010 City of Beaumont � 0 City of Blythe .10 City of Calimesa Y O City of Canyon Lake O City of Cathedral Cityr/7; City of Coachella � 0 City of Corona City of Desert Hot Springs � 0 City of Eastvale City of Hemet � 0 City of Indian Wells ,L City of Indio � 0 City of Jurupa Valley City of La Qu i nta � 0 City of Lake Elsinore City of Menifee O City of Moreno Valley ❑ City of Murrieta � 0 City of Norco City of Palm Desert � 0 City of Palm Springs City of Perris � 0 City of Rancho Mirage City of Riverside ,0' 0 City of San Jacinto /12' City of Temecula � 0 City of Wildomar � 0 Governor's Appointee, Caltrans District 8 -,12r 0 AGENDA ITEM 5 MINUTES RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES Wednesday, May 11, 2016 1. CALL TO ORDER The Riverside County Transportation Commission was called to order by Chair Scott Matas at 9:30 a.m. in the Board Room at the County of Riverside Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside, California, 92501. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Matas led the Commission in a flag salute. 3. ROLL CALL Commissioners/Alternates Present Commissioners Absent Rusty Bailey* Bob Magee Ben Benoit Scott Matas John J. Benoit Michael Naggar Daryl Busch Robert Radi Christy Conners Dana Reed Joseph DeConinck Karen Spiegel John Denver John F. Tavaglione Deborah Franklin Ted Weill Rick Gibbs Lloyd White Dawn Haggerty Michael Wilson Jan Harnik Ella Zanowic Ted Hoffman Kevin Jeffries Frank Johnston Shelley Kaplan Andrew Kotyuk *Arrived after the meeting was called to order 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS Marion Ashley Ginny Foat Yxstian Gutierrez Steven Hernandez Linda Krupa Adam Rush Chuck Washington Anne Mayer presented Transit Manager Fina Clemente with a 10-year service award and Clerk of the Board Jennifer Harmon with a 15-year service award. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes April 13, 2016 Page 2 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — APRIL 13, 2016 M/S/C (Radi/Harnik) to approve the April 13, 2016 minutes as submitted. 6. PUBLIC HEARING — PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016/17 Michele Cisneros, Deputy Director of Finance, presented the proposed FY 2016/17 Budget and discussed the following areas: • Budget process; • FY 2016/17 Budget considerations and summary; • Sources and expenditure by breakdown and comparison; • Capital department expenditure highlights; • Functional expenditures breakdown and comparison; and • Next steps. At this time, Commissioner Rusty Bailey joined the meeting. At this time, Chair Matas opened the public hearing and asked for public comments. There were no requests to speak. At Commissioner Karen Spiegel's request for clarification, Michele Cisneros explained the differences between Table 2 — Uses FYs 2015-2017 in the Executive Summary and the functional expenditures breakdown that was presented. Commissioner Spiegel then requested a copy of the Budget presentation and asked if active transportation is reflected separately in the budget. Anne Mayer replied active transportation is incorporated into the Commission's planning and programming exercises and the Commission's funding allocations depend on whether or not active transportation is an eligible expense. She explained Measure A does not have a separate component for active transportation. The Commission's funding sources are generally from the state and federal governments for active transportation. She then used the Santa Ana River Trail as an example where the Commission has an agreement with Riverside County Parks to implement the Santa Ana River Trail project. She explained the Commission is not funding it, however, that workload is incorporated into the Commission's capital program budget and is not called out separately. Commissioner Jeffries expressed appreciation to staff for its detailed budget and requested clarification on the budget amounts for motorist assistance and projects and operations. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes April 13, 2016 Page 3 Michele Cisneros replied the significant increase includes call box upgrades as well as Construction Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) for the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project and Interstate 15 Express Lanes project. In response to Commissioner Jeffries' request for clarification regarding the funding for FSP, Anne Mayer replied the Commission pays for the tow services being provided. For construction projects, the Commission pays for construction FSP and California Highway Patrol (CHP) overtime. She explained the Commission is advocating at the state level for the legislature to increase FSP funding for Caltrans and CHP staffing, as there has been a flat budget for over 10 years. Commissioner Jeffries stated the Commission is doing the state's mission and responsibility of improving infrastructure and the Commission is being charged by the state. Anne Mayer concurred and stated staff is hopeful the bill will be successful. Partners in the Bay area and Los Angeles also see the value in this program and are advocating for increased funding. At Commissioner Dawn Haggerty's request, Michele Cisneros explained the budget for toll and non -toll revenue related to toll operations. Anne Mayer explained with the startup of a toll facility, the Commission needs to bring customers in and get the whole system moving forward so it is not uncommon in the first few years to have an operating deficit where it is costing more to maintain, though revenue is coming in. In response to Commissioner Haggerty's questions regarding how to contact FSP, Anne Mayer explained a motorist should get the vehicle to a safe location, if possible, and keep the seatbelt on. The FSP tow trucks are constantly roving the corridor and will stop immediately for a disabled vehicle. One of the challenges is when there is a congested corridor, it is difficult for the FSP tow trucks to get there in a timely manner. Ms. Mayer stated the commuter and motorist assistance staff has shortened the beats so there is a shorter distance for the FSP tow trucks to rove in order to respond more quickly. If a motorist calls 911, CHP dispatch is responsible for dispatching an FSP tow truck. Chair Matas suggested implementing FSP service in the Coachella Valley and San Gorgonio Pass Area during major holidays and concerts. M/5/C to continue the public hearing for the proposed Budget for FY 2016/17 to the Commission meeting on June 8, 2016. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes April 13, 2016 Page 4 7. ADDITIONS / REVISIONS There were no additions or revisions to the agenda. 8. CONSENT CALENDAR M/S/C (Gibbs/Johnson) to approve the following Consent Calendar items. Recuse: Jeffries on Agenda Item 8B. 8A. SINGLE SIGNATURE AUTHORITY REPORT Receive and file the Single Signature Authority report for the third quarter ended March 31, 2016. 8B. RECURRING CONTRACTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016/17 1) Approve the recurring contracts for Fiscal Year 2016/17; and 2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements on behalf of the Commission. 8C. AGREEMENT FOR AUDIT SERVICES FOR THE MEASURE A RECIPIENTS AND TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT CLAIMANTS 1) Award Agreement No. 16-19-055-00 to Conrad LLP (Conrad) for the provision of audit services for the Eastern Riverside County (Eastern County) Measure A local streets and roads recipients and Transportation Development Act (TDA) claimants for a three-year term, and two one- year options to extend the agreement, in an amount of $274,225, plus a contingency amount of $27,775, for a total amount not to exceed $302,000; 2) Award Agreement No. 16-19-089-00 to Macias Gini & O'Connell LLP (MGO) for the provision of audit services for the Western Riverside County (Western County) Measure A local streets and roads recipients and TDA claimants for a three-year term, and two one-year options to extend the agreement, in an amount of $641,490, plus a contingency amount of $64,510, for a total amount not to exceed $706,000; 3) Award Agreement No. 16-19-090-00 to BCA Watson Rice LLP (BCAWR) for the provision of audit services for the Western County Measure A specialized transit recipients for a three-year term, and two one-year options to extend the agreement, in an amount of $235,140, plus a contingency amount of $23,860, for a total amount not to exceed $259,000; Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes April 13, 2016 Page 5 4) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements, including option years, on behalf of the Commission; and 5) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve contingency work up to the total not to exceed amount as required for these services. 8D. EXPRESS LANES PRIVACY POLICY Adopt Resolution 16-008, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Regarding the Express Lanes Privacy Policy". 8E. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION CERTIFYING THE LA SIERRA STATION PARKING LOT EXPANSION PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVAL OF THE LA SIERRA STATION PARKING LOT EXPANSION PROJECT 1) Adopt Resolution No 16-009, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Approving a Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program for the La Sierra Station Parking Lot Expansion Project and Approving the Project"; and 2) Approve the La Sierra Station parking lot expansion project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). 8F. AGREEMENTS FOR ON -CALL PAINTING SERVICES FOR THE COMMUTER RAIL STATIONS AND RIVERSIDE DOWNTOWN OPERATIONS CONTROL CENTER 1) Award the following agreements to provide on -call painting services for a three-year term, and two two-year options to extend the agreement, in an amount of $1.2 million, plus a contingency amount of $150,000, for a total amount not to exceed an aggregate value of $1,350,000; a) Agreement No. 16-24-013-00 with Interlog Corporation dba Interlog Construction; and b) Agreement No. 16-24-076-00 with U.S. National Corp. dba Jimenez Painting Company; 2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreements, including option years, on behalf of the Commission; 3) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to execute task orders awarded to contractors under the terms of the agreements; and 4) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve contingency work as may be required for the project. Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes April 13, 2016 Page 6 8G. AGREEMENT FOR ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE, INSPECTION, AND REPAIR SERVICES 1) Award Agreement No. 16-24-060-00 to Pacific Coast Elevator dba Amtech Elevator Services (Amtech) for the provision of elevator maintenance, inspection, and repair services for a three-year term, and two two-year options to extend the agreement, in an amount of $550,000, plus a contingency amount of $55,000, for a total amount not to exceed $605,000; 2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement, including option years, on behalf of the Commission; 3) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to execute task orders awarded to the contractor under the terms of the agreement; and 4) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve contingency work up to the total not to exceed amount as required for these services. 8H. FISCAL YEAR 2016/17 SAN BERNARDINO ASSOCIATED GOVERNMENTS AGREEMENT FOR INLAND EMPIRE RIDESHARE AND 511 SERVICES 1) Approve Agreement No. 16-41-088-00 with the San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG) to reimburse the Commission in an amount not to exceed $1.5 million for Fiscal Year 2016/17 commuter/employer rideshare and Inland Empire (IE511) programs administered by the Commission, on behalf of both agencies, as part of an ongoing bi-county partnership; and 2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 81. AMENDMENT TO RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY'S FISCAL YEAR 2015/16 SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN 1) Approve modification to Riverside Transit Agency's (RTA) Fiscal Year 2015/16 operating assistance funding to reflect an additional $460,410 in state Low Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP) funds to cover anticipated operating expenses related to the Perris Valley Line (PVL); 2) Reprogram the Local Transportation Fund (LTF) operating amount of $460,410 originally identified for the PVL operating expenses to capital funding to support the development of RTA's central operations and maintenance facility; 3) Approve modification to RTA's FY 2015/16 capital program to reflect an additional $911,498 in FY 2014/15 Proposition 1B California Transit Security Grant Program —California Transit Assistance Funds (CTSGP- Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes April 13, 2016 Page 7 CTAF) and $257,009 in Proposition 18 Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement and Service Enhancement Account (PTMISEA) program residual amount from the FYs 2008/09 and 2009/10 appropriations; and 4) Approve amendments to RTA's Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) to reflect the changes outlined above. 8J. AGREEMENT WITH HDR ENGINEERING, INC. FOR RAIL FORECASTING SERVICES FOR THE COACHELLA VALLEY-SAN GORGONIO PASS RAIL CORRIDOR SERVICE DEVELOPMENT PLAN 1) Approve Agreement No. 14-25-072-02, Amendment No. 2 to Agreement No. 14-25-072-00, with HDR Engineering, Inc. (HDR) for rail forecasting services related to Phase 2 of the Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service Development Plan for an additional amount of $4,085,000, and a total amount not to exceed $6,002,095; 2) Approve a budget adjustment for Fiscal Year 2015/16 to increase revenues for a federal grant and expenditures for study costs each in the amount of $300,000; and 3) Authorize the Chair or the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. 9. 2016 STATE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM UPDATE Shirley Medina, Planning and Programming Director, provided an update for the 2016 State Transportation Improvement Program. At Commissioner Spiegel's request, Shirley Medina noted the agencies that reduced their STIP project funding less than their fair share target and possible reasons why this occurred. Anne Mayer stated staff was monitoring this issue to ensure it was an equitable process. Some agencies did not have a project to remove. In the case of the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, every project except one was deleted from its STIP program since that one was a capital purchase. Ms. Mayer stated from the documentation reviewed and direct conversations with the California Transportation Commission (CTC), the CTC did its best with a difficult situation and was fair and utilized consistent criteria across the state. She expressed appreciation to the CTC for its efforts and noted CTC Commissioner Joe Tavaglione has been closely monitoring this as well. M/S/C to receive and file an update on the 2016 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes April 13, 2016 Page 8 10. STATE LEGISLATIVE UPDATE Aaron Hake, Government Relations Manager, presented an update on the state legislative activities. In response to Commissioner Dana Reed's request for clarification if SB 885 (Wolk) is sponsored by the American Council of Engineering Companies, Aaron Hake concurred. Commissioner Reed expressed the need for a measured response to the legislature since this bill is outrageous and there should be some repercussion. Anne Mayer expressed staff strongly recommends an opposed position on this bill. The Commission always wants to be a business -friendly owner and encourage competition amongst the professionals seeking to do work with the Commission in that the requirements set in place are actually implementable, pragmatic, and reasonable. She stated even though staff is recommending an opposed position, the Commission welcomes design professionals, small and large firms alike. M/S/C (Gibbs/B. Benoit) to: 1) Receive and file an update on state legislation; and 2) Adopt the following bill position: 11. ITEM(S) PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR FOR DISCUSSION There were no items pulled from the Consent Calendar. 12. COMMISSIONERS/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT 12A. Commissioner Gibbs expressed appreciation on behalf of the city of Murrieta to Anne Mayer and County of Riverside Transportation and Land Management Director Juan Perez for their help in moving the Clinton Keith Road Extension Phase II project forward. 12B. Commissioner Andrew Kotyuk requested an update on the incident that occurred last week on the SR-91 corridor and plans to address similar incidents in the future. David Thomas explained the Green River Road ramp was installed for use during construction and staff is working on an operational plan so it can be implemented as a permanent feature after the project is closed. Additionally, staff is looking to implement gates similar to those on 1-10. He explained there will be two gates in the median barrier, one in Orange County and in Riverside Riverside County Transportation Commission Minutes April 13, 2016 Page 9 County located near SR-71, and become part of the Commission's toll facility incident management plan. He discussed how the gates would be used to safely get the traffic off the freeway if there was an accident or incident. 12C. Anne Mayer announced: • The 1-15 Express Lanes DBE/SBE Summit held on April 28 at Circle City Center in Corona was a tremendous event. Attendance was terrific, and the feedback received from the prime contractors and small businesses expressed this event was the most efficient way to network, contact, and meet business providers. She expressed appreciation to Commissioners Rush and Zanowic for their attendance as well as a representative from Commissioner Jeffries' office; and • The 91/Perris Valley Line Metrolink service commences on Monday, June 6. There will be a robust outreach program that will include station locations, how to purchase a ticket, how to use the mobile handheld app, and most importantly how to be safe. At this time, a video from the St. Anthony's Operation Lifesaver joint outreach event in the Mecca area was shown. 13. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business for consideration by the Riverside County Transportation Commission, Chair Matas adjourned the meeting at 10:34 a.m. The next Commission meeting is scheduled to be held at 9:30 a.m., Wednesday, June 8, 2016, Board Chambers, First Floor, County Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside. Respectfully submitted, Os1)^-49-4(-- H Jennifer Harmon Clerk of the Board AGENDA ITEM 6 PUBLIC HEARING RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 8, 2016 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Michele Cisneros, Deputy Director of Finance THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Proposed Budget for Fiscal Year 2016/17 BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Receive input on the proposed budget for FY 2016/17; 2) Close the public hearing on the proposed Budget for FY 2016/17; 3) Approve the salary schedule effective July 7, 2016, located in Appendix B of the proposed budget; and 4) Adopt the proposed Budget for FY 2016/17. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The annual fiscal budget is the result of staff determining the operating and capital needs for FY 2016/17 and identifying the resources to fund those needs. The budget process began in January 2016. The goals and objectives approved by the Commission on March 9 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, public and agency communications, and financial and administrative policies. Staff presented the proposed budget to the Commission on May 11. Subsequent to that presentation, staff updated the document as a result of the following changes resulting in a net decrease of $8,087,600 to the projected fund balance at June 30, 2017. Adjustments to Fiscal Year 2015/16 Projected Amounts • An increase in debt service interest payments of $59,000 for the interest cost of outstanding commercial paper notes on the Interstate 15 Express Lanes project; and • A net increase of $9,500,700 in operating transfers related to reimbursement of Mid County Parkway project expenditures to the 2009 Measure A Western County highway fund from the 2009 Measure A Western County new corridor fund. Agenda Item 6 Adjustments to Fiscal Year 2016/17 Budgeted Amounts • A decrease of $4 million and $1.5 million in Measure A and Local Transportation Fund (LTF) sales tax revenues, respectively, based on current sales tax receipts and economic data; • A decrease of $3.7 million in local reimbursements due to the incorrect classification of sales tax funding after further review and analysis; • A decrease of $22,300 in investment income as a result of a decrease in sales tax revenues and local reimbursements; • A decrease of $316,900 in program management expenditures for Bechtel Infrastructure (Bechtel) services based on a reconciliation to the proposed Bechtel contract amount; • A decrease of $33,800 in operating and capital disbursements due to decreased LTF revenue projections; • A decrease of $1,229,000 in local streets and roads expenditures due to the decreased Measure A revenue projections; • An increase in debt service interest payments of $386,000 for the interest cost of outstanding commercial paper notes on the 1-15 Express Lanes project; and • A net decrease of $45,000 in operating transfers due to decreased LTF revenue projections. A public hearing to allow for public comment on the proposed budget, as revised, is required prior to the adoption of the proposed budget, including the proposed salary schedule. The public hearing was opened at the May 11 Commission meeting. After the public hearing is closed on June 8, adoption of the proposed budget for FY 2016/17 will follow. In accordance with the Commission's fiscal policies, the budget must be adopted no later than June 15 of each year. The proposed budget for FY 2016/17 is attached. This document contains the executive summary, as revised, that was presented at the May 11 Commission meeting; the 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, salary schedule effective July 7, 2016, funding definitions, and program/general terms. A summary of the proposed budget for FY 2016/17 is as follows: Agenda Item 6 2 FY 2016/17 Budget Revenues and other financing sources: Sales taxes -Measure A, LTF, and STA $ 268,821,600 Reimbursements (federal, state, and other) 47,333,200 TUMF 18,520,000 Toll revenues 3,798,000 Other revenues 2,518,000 Interest on investments 1,849,000 Debt proceeds 128,269,200 Transfers in 241,687,700 Total revenues and other financing sources 712,796,700 Expenditures/Expenses and other financing uses: Personnel salary and fringe benefits 9,500,400 Professional services 22,053,700 Support services 10,053,400 Projects and operations 583,172,800 Capital outlay 1,916,000 Debt service (principal, interest and costs of issuance) 54,015,800 Transfers out 241,687,700 Total expenditures/expenses and other financing uses 922,399,800 Excess of expenditures/expenses and other financing uses over (209,603,100) revenues and other financing sources Beginning fund balance 741,082,700 Ending fund balance $ 531,479,600 Attachment: FY 2016/17 Proposed Budget (Posted on Commission Website) Agenda Item 6 3 MU Riverside County Transportation Commission FISCAL YEAR 2016/17 June 8, 2016 Honorable Commissioners Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside, California FY 2016/17 Budget Introduction A County on the Move — Completed Projects and Active Construction Highlight a Busy Year Thank you for reviewing the Fiscal Year (FY) 2016/17 budget for the Riverside County Transportation Commission (Commission or RCTC). This document provides an opportunity to evaluate the financial backbone of an innovative and active public transportation agency. The upcoming fiscal year continues a concerted effort of unprecedented investment and construction in Riverside County's (County) transportation infrastructure. The results of the investment are becoming more obvious as a number of high -profile projects were completed in late 2015 and early 2016 and as work speeds ahead on the widening of State Route (SR) 91 in Corona. The completion of the projects will assure better mobility and provide a positive and ongoing boost for local businesses and employers. Projects to be Completed by FY 2016/17 In terms of high -profile project completion, the Perris Valley Line (PVL) Metrolink Extension project represents the first expansion of the five -county Metrolink train system since the mid-1990's. For the County, the PVL expands and revitalizes public transit service by establishing a transit backbone for Western Riverside County that includes more trains, enhanced bus service, new commuter options, and an allure for new employers to locate to the County. This major construction effort to extend Metrolink another 24 miles into the County wrapped up in spring 2016 with new service to new stations at Perris -South, Perris -Downtown, Moreno Valley/March Field, and Riverside -Hunter Park. In addition to funding new service, the Commission also invested in improved rail infrastructure by funding a number of railroad grade separations, many of which were completed in FY 2015/16. In September 2015, the city of Corona completed construction on the Auto Center Drive grade separation which was funded through a combination of funding sources including state of California (State) Proposition 1B funding allocated by the Commission. The city of Coachella soon followed in December with the opening of the Avenue 52 Grade Separation. The city of Riverside completed the Riverside Avenue and Streeter Avenue Grade Separations in February 2016, and the city of Banning soon followed with the opening of the Sunset Avenue Grade Separation in March. In May the Clay Street Grade Separation was completed in Jurupa Valley. All of these grade separations were made possible through productive partnerships with RCTC obtaining funding from a variety of sources to assist local governments with project delivery. The result is added safety and capacity for residents and motorists who are impacted by freight trains on a daily basis. Progress on freeway projects has also been notable; in downtown Riverside, the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) completed work on the SR-91 high occupancy vehicles lane project which will dramatically improve mobility and circulation throughout areas of the city near the freeway. The six -mile project opened to traffic in March 2016. The only remaining work to be completed is to replace a railroad bridge which crosses the freeway. The Commission, in cooperation with Caltrans, will issue a procurement in mid-2016 to complete that work. Work to widen a 12.5-mile segment of the Interstate (I) 215 between Scott and Nuevo Roads has been completed easing access into the city of Perris, which is home to the Commission's largest public transit project —the PVL. Projects Moving Forward 91 Project in Corona: Full Speed Ahead In December 2013, the Commission broke ground on a $1.4 billion project to widen SR-91 through Corona. The project consists of two tolled express lanes and the addition of a general purpose lane in each direction of SR-91 between the Orange County line and 1-15. The work will create 16,000 new jobs and is the largest ever funded by the Commission. A total of 32 new bridges are to be constructed; 14 are complete and work is underway on the remaining bridges including the direct connector between the SR-91 and southbound 1-15. The eventual completion of the project will culminate in a transformation of Riverside County's transportation system with reduced congestion, toll lane options, and enhanced transit service. The overall economic effect for the County will be significant and will aid economic development opportunities throughout the region. One recent accomplishment which took place in February during the construction of the 91 Project was a 55-hour full freeway closure which enabled significant advancement of work at three key locations on the project including the installation of falsework at the westbound Maple Street flyover on -ramp, paving at the 1-15 interchange, and the demolition of half of the old Maple Street Bridge. The closure required close cooperation with a number of public safety and neighboring agencies and proved to be highly successful without resulting in major traffic problems during the weekend in which it took place. 1-10 Jefferson Interchange in Indio Breaks Ground Over the last few years, the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG), a key RCTC partner, has completed construction on a number of key interchanges along 1-10. Construction has been completed on rebuilt and expanded freeway interchanges at Palm Drive, Indian Canyon Drive, Bob Hope Drive, Date Palm Avenue, and Monterey Avenue. The attention now shifts slightly eastward to another 1-10 interchange at Jefferson Avenue in the city of Indio. The $42.3 million project to transform the interchange which connects the Coachella Valley's largest city to the freeway broke ground in early 2015 and is expected to be completed in early 2017. The project is being funded through a variety of state and local funding. Looking Forward to an Exciting Future Commission Approves Mid County Parkway Environmental Document On April 8, 2015, the Commission approved the California Environmental Quality Act portion of the final Environmental Impact Report (EIR)/Environmental Impact Summary (EIS) for the proposed Mid County Parkway (MCP) project. Later in the year, the Federal Highway Administration approved the federal EIS. Project development has now been sidetracked with a legal challenge to the state EIR, although the Commission has taken action to set aside funding to purchase needed right of way for the project. Work will continue to resolve the legal matter to allow for additional project development. When completed, the $1.7 billion MCP project will construct a 14.3-mile, six -lane freeway from 1-215 in the city of Perris to SR-79 in the city of San Jacinto. The project will also provide more convenient access to multimodal bus and rail facilities in the city of Perris, including the new PVL extension of Metrolink service. With the environmental document approved, design and engineering work will begin followed by property acquisition. Yet another new corridor is also undergoing environmental studies. The SR-79 realignment project continues to progress, and Commission action to approve the EIR is expected in 2017. Unlike much of urbanized California, Riverside County still has a need to develop new transportation corridors to provide added capacity for cars, trucks, public transit, and active transportation uses such as bicycling and walking. Developing new capacity can be done in a manner that is complementary in maintaining the environment and improving the quality of life for local residents. Transportation interacts with a variety of human needs including better air quality, a reduction in water runoff, reducing the creation of greenhouse gases, and transportation alternatives that promote better health through walking or bicycling. By taking a more holistic approach, the importance of transportation actually grows larger and is valued as a vital necessity, but that can only happen as long as capacity continues to grow. Is Enhanced Coachella Valley Rail Service in our Future? Added capacity includes more rail service in underserved corridors. RCTC, in coordination with Caltrans, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), and CVAG, is studying the expansion of Amtrak passenger rail service to the Coachella Valley and San Gorgonio Pass. The service is envisioned to provide an integrated, sustainable travel mode; promote economic opportunities; and foster more livable communities. Currently, there are very limited transit connections between Los Angeles and the Coachella Valley. This service would provide new travel options between job centers and Coachella Valley tourism destinations. The study took a big step forward in mid-2015 with the approval of a $2.98 million grant from the FRA which fully funds the Commission's efforts to complete a federally -required Alternatives Analysis and Preliminary Service Planning. While a number of steps are still required before the service can be added, the project offers an exciting opportunity to offer a new transportation option for those seeking to travel to and from the Coachella Valley from anywhere in southern California. People Working — Building a Better Future 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. A recent success story in early 2016 demonstrated how transportation investments can create jobs and economic opportunity. The Commission worked closely with a combination of public and private sector interests in a successful effort to convince the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to relocate its main scientific facility and headquarters to Riverside. While CARB's main reason for moving to Riverside was the opportunity for collaboration with the University of California at Riverside, transportation facilities — including the PVL Metrolink extension — were cited as important factors in bringing more than 500 high -paying, skilled jobs to the area. The Commission's Commuter Assistance Program will also provide support to CARB's current employees who will be changing their commute patterns when the facility opens in a few years. During FY 2016/17, the Commission will invest $444 million in capital projects that include highway, regional arterial, local streets and roads, and rail projects. The Commission's overall budget will exceed $680 million and also 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 legislation that first created it —now operating with a staff of 49 budgeted positions. This maintains the original vision of the State 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 funds local transportation priorities and needs. In FY 2016/17, the Commission will return $51.4 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. 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. Yet another Commission priority is in customer service and is demonstrated in our investment in the Inland Empire 511 Traveler Information Service —known as IE511—and other motorist service programs such as outreach to employers for ridesharing assistance, the establishment and maintenance of freeway call boxes, and the Freeway Service Patrol program. As the Commission adds more responsibilities to become a toll facility operator, it will increase RCTC's interaction with the public that will only strengthen our commitment to communicating in an effective and proactive manner. 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, 2015. 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 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 Funds Structure General Fund Special Revenue Funds Capital Projects Funds Debt Service Funds Section 4: REVENUES AND OTHER SOURCES Revenues and Other Sources Program Revenues and Other Sources Section 5: COMMISSION DEBT Debt Debt Capacity Analysis Aggregate Debt Service Schedule Outstanding Debt and Debt Service Requirements Program and Geographic Debt Outstanding 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 and 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 funds 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; definitions and background Narratives of revenues by program; revenue trends Narrative discussion of debt programs Charts and accompanying narrative demonstrating debt capacity Schedule of debt maturities by year for sales tax bonds Description of outstanding debt and related debt service requirements 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: TOLL OPERATIONS Riverside 91 Express Lanes 6.4: CAPITAL PROJECTS Capital Project Development and Delivery Location of Capital Projects Capital Projects Summary Local Streets and Roads Summary Section 7: COMMUNITY PROFILE Riverside County Demographics Statistical Information Commission Facts Section 8: APPENDICES A —Glossary of Acronyms B—Salary Schedule C—Funding Definitions D—Program Terms E—General Terms Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted uses Goals and objectives, key assumptions and budgeted uses Local map of major capital projects for current year Narrative description of each capital project Schedule of local streets and roads disbursements by local agency 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 Schedule of salaries in accordance with state law 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 Kevin Jeffries Member County of Riverside, District 1 John F. Tavaglione Vice Chair (Commission) County of Riverside, District 2 Chuck Washington Member County of Riverside, District 3 John J. Benoit Member County of Riverside, District 4 Marion Ashley Member County of Riverside, District 5 Deborah Franklin Vice Chair (Western Riverside County Programs and City of Banning Projects Committee) Lloyd White Member City of Beaumont Joseph DeConinck Member City of Blythe Ella Zanowic Member City of Calimesa Dawn Haggerty Member City of Canyon Lake Greg Pettis Member City of Cathedral City Steven Hernandez Member City of Coachella Karen Spiegel Member City of Corona Scott Matas Chair (Commission) and Vice Chair (Eastern Riverside City of Desert Hot Springs County Programs and Projects Committee) Adam Rush Member City of Eastvale Linda Krupa Member City of Hemet Dana Reed 2nd Vice Chair (Commission) City of Indian Wells Michael Wilson Member City of Indio Frank Johnston Member City of Jurupa Valley Robert Radi Member City of La Quinta Bob Magee Chair (Budget and Implementation Committee) City of Lake Elsinore Scott Mann Member City of Menifee Yxstian Gutierrez Member City of Moreno Valley Rick Gibbs Member City of Murrieta Berwin Hanna Member City of Norco Jan Harnik Vice Chair (Budget and Implementation Committee) City of Palm Desert Ginny Foat Member City of Palm Springs Daryl Busch Member City of Perris Ted Weill Member City of Rancho Mirage Rusty Bailey Member City of Riverside Andrew Kotyuk Member City of San Jacinto Michael S. Naggar Member City of Temecula Ben Benoit Chair (Western Riverside County Programs and Projects City of Wildomar Committee) John Bulinski Interim Governor's Appointee Caltrans, District 8 Management Staff Anne Mayer, Executive Director John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director Michael Blomquist, Toll Program Director Marlin Feenstra, Project Delivery Director Shirley Medina, Planning and Programming Director Theresia Trevino, Chief Financial Officer Robert Yates, Multimodal Services Director Executive Summary Introduction The budget for Fiscal Year (FY) 2016/17 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 9, 2016 to prepare this budget. In addition to the Commission's guiding principles, long-term goals, and strategic plan, the short-term factors listed below were used to guide the development of the budget. Operational • Aggressively pursue completion of the environmental, design, right of way, and construction processes on the State Route (SR) 91 project (91 Project), Interstate (I) 215 corridor improvement project, and 1-15 Express Lanes project included in the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan, as these projects create jobs and improve the economic base in the County. (Mobility, Economic Development) • Enhance corridor mobility and traveler choice by completing property acquisition and construction on the 91 Project and continuing to develop a plan of finance for tolled express lanes on 1-15. (Mobility) • Provide leadership in the planning and development of the Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Pass corridor rail service. (Mobility) • Work closely with local jurisdictions to implement the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Regional Arterial Program and facilitate the delivery of eligible arterial improvements in western Riverside County (Western County). (Mobility) • Work closely with partners in the Coachella Valley to ensure the implementation of Measure A funding priorities. (Mobility) • Complete projects and programs included in the 1989 Measure A ordinance and determine uses for any unexpended revenues. (Mobility) • Complete the environmental permitting, preliminary engineering, and environmental mitigation for the Mid County Parkway and SR-79 realignment projects. (Mobility) • Work with local and regional agencies in developing resources for preservation and maintenance of the highways and regional arterials. (Mobility) • Continue active engagement in state and federal efforts to streamline and reform the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). (Mobility, Environmental Stewardship) • Consider future rail expansion opportunities including the potential for extension of the Perris Valley Line (PVL) to the Hemet/San Jacinto and Temecula areas. (Mobility) • Support innovative programs that provide transit assistance in hard to serve rural areas or for riders with special transit needs. (Intermodalism & Accessibility) • Support cost controls and promote operating efficiency for transit operators. (Intermodalism & Accessibility, System Efficiencies) • Maintain effective partnerships among commuters, employers, and government to increase the efficiency of our transportation system by encouraging and promoting motorized and non -motorized transportation alternatives. (Intermodalism & Accessibility, System Efficiencies) • Continue to provide a motorist aid system that ensures safety and convenience to freeway motorists. (System Efficiencies) • Maintain an active involvement in state and federal legislative matters to ensure that the Commission receives proper consideration for transportation projects and funding. (Communications) • Explore local options for sustainable funding in addressing long-term transportation and quality -of -life needs for the County. (Communications, Environmental Stewardship) " Commence the first ten-year update of the 2009 Measure A Expenditure Plan, as required by the ordinance and initiate the development of a county -wide transportation plan. (Mobility) " Develop and implement express lane marketing and promotion campaigns for the Commission's toll facilities to increase customer accounts and lane usage. (Communications, Mobility) " Maintain close communication with Commissioners and educate policy makers on all issues of importance to the Commission. (Communications) " Develop and execute a long-term communications and customer engagement strategy for the purposes of public education and customer service. (Communications) Financial " Fund administrative costs with allocations from Measure A, LTF, FSP, SAFE, and TUMF funds. (Financial Planning) " Maintain administrative program delivery costs below the policy threshold of 4% of Measure A revenues; the FY 2016/17 Management Services budget is 2.95% of Measure A revenues. (Financial Planning, Expenditures) " Maintain administrative salaries and benefits at less than 1% of Measure A revenues; the FY 2016/17 administrative salaries and benefits is .94% of Measure A revenues. (Financial Planning, Expenditures) " Continue to maintain prudent cash reserves to provide some level of insulation for unplanned expenditures. (Reserves, Cash Management & Investment) " Continue to maintain current strong bond ratings with rating agencies. (Debt Management) " 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. (Debt Management, Expenditures) " Establish and maintain revenues and reserves generated from toll operations to be available for debt service in accordance with toll supported debt agreements; maintenance, repair, rehabilitation, administration and operations; and capital projects within the corridor. (Reserves, Revenues) " Conduct enhanced outreach to businesses and contractors located in the County regarding opportunities to provide competitive and qualified goods and/or services to the Commission. (Procurement) " Maintain the enterprise resource planning (ERP) system to integrate project accounting needs and improve accounting efficiency. (Auditing, Accounting & Financial Reporting) " Manage Commission projects and programs, including toll operations, with a small but effective staff by augmenting staff efforts with contract staff and consultants. (Human Resources Management) Budget Overview Total sources (Table 1) are budgeted at $712,796,700 which is a decrease of 18% over FY 2015/16 projected sources and a 10% decrease over the FY 2015/16 revised budget. Total sources are comprised of revenues of $342,839,800, transfers in of $241,687,700, and debt proceeds of $128,269,200. The projected fund balance at June 30, 2016 available for expenditures/expenses (excluding reserves for debt service of $81,845,500 and advances receivable of $30,245,500) is $628,991,700. Accordingly, total funding available for the FY 2016/17 budget totals $1,341,788,400. Table 1— Sources FY 2015-2017 FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Measure A Sales Tax LTF Sales Tax STA Sales Tax Intergovernmental TUMF Revenue Toll Revenue Other Revenue Investment Income Transfers In Debt Proceeds TOTAL Sources 163,092,800 81,332,500 13,484,300 110,515,600 17,400,800 2,542,400 6,258,200 232,626,100 48,904,100 676,156,800 170,000,000 $ 170,000,000 83,000,000 83,000,000 13,372,400 13, 372,400 110,810,700 110, 307,400 18,053,800 18, 041, 000 787,000 185,000 2,456,300 5,663,000 136,326, 500 181,186,600 261,277,900 291,880,700 796,084,600 $ 873,636,100 $ 173,000,000 85,000,000 10,821,600 47,333,200 18,520,000 3,798,000 2,518,000 1,849,000 241,687,700 128,269,200 $ 712,796,700 $ 3,000,000 2% 2,000,000 2% (2,550,800) -19% (63,477,500) -57% 466,200 3% 3,798,000 N/A 1,731,000 220% (607,300) -25% 105,361,200 77% (133,008,700) -51% $ (83,287,900) -10% Riverside County has specific competitive advantages over nearby coastal counties (Los Angeles, Orange, and San Diego) including housing that is more available and affordable as well as plentiful commercial real estate and land available for development at lower costs. Riverside County's economy is benefitting from employment gains that are a function of the County's ability to attract businesses with lower commercial rents and a skilled labor force. Population migration to the Inland Empire (i.e., Riverside and San Bernardino counties) has occurred due to these employment opportunities and a lower cost of living compared to the coastal counties; however, wage growth has been flat and centered on lower and moderate incomes. Nonetheless since the last recession, improvements in the local labor market combined with increased economic activity support stable sales tax revenue growth as noted on Chart 1. Chart 1— Sources: Five -Year Trend $700,000,000 $600,000,000 $500,000,000 $400,000,000 $300,000,000 $200,000,000 $100,000,000 FY 12/13 FY 13/14 FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 Measure A Sales Tax ilmLTE Sales Tax a, STA Sales Tax BTU M F a Federal, State, Local Revenues Toll Revenue u Transfers In Debt Proceeds Sales tax revenues have continued to rebound from the economic downturn's low point in 2010. The Commission's economic outlook for FY 2016/17 continues to be cautiously optimistic; 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 fluctuate and the availability of federal and state revenues continue to be uncertain, the timing and scope of the Commission's projects and programs may be impacted. 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 Investment Income 0% Other Revenue 0% LTF Sales Tax 12% Toll Revenue 1% STA Sales Tax 1% Intergovernmental 7% TUMF Revenue 3% 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 5.3%; however, the Commission is not basing its estimate of revenues solely 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 projects Measure A sales tax revenues of $173,000,000 for FY 2016/17. This is a 2% increase from the FY 2015/16 revised projection of $170,000,000. 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 Western County rail operations included in the commuter rail Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP). The LTF sales tax revenue received from the State is budgeted at $85,000,000, an increase of 2% from the FY 2015/16 revised projection of $83,000,000. 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. The STA transit allocation, which is based on recent State estimates, for FY 2016/17 is $10,821,600. Intergovernmental revenues include reimbursement revenues from federal sources of $28,007,100, state sources of $8,830,000, and local agencies of $10,496,100 for highway and rail capital projects, rail operations and station maintenance, commuter assistance, and motorist assistance programs as well as planning and programming activities. The significant decrease of 57% in FY 2016/17 compared to the FY 2015/16 revised budget is due to substantial completion of the PVL and 1-215 corridor improvement projects. 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 2016/17 TUMF fees are projected at $18,500,000 and are slightly higher than the FY 2015/16 revised projection of $18,000,000 and reflect the encouraging signs in the housing market in the Inland Empire. Additional TUMF zone reimbursements of $20,000 are expected for the 74/215 interchange project. FY 2016/17 will mark the initial year of toll operations for the Riverside 91 Express Lanes following substantial completion of the 91 Project anticipated in January 2017. Estimated toll revenues of $3,798,000 are derived from the Riverside County 91 Express Lanes Extension Investment Grade Traffic and Revenue Report and 2013 financing assumptions. Other revenue of $2,518,000 is projected to increase 220% from the prior year's budget of $787,000 and is related to miscellaneous non -toll revenues generated in connection with the Riverside 91 Express Lanes. Investment income in FY 2016/17 is anticipated to decrease by $607,300 or 25% compared to the FY 2015/16 budget due to substantial use of sales tax and toll revenue bond proceeds on the 91 Project. 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 $241,687,700 relate primarily to the transfer of available debt proceeds for highway 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 funds. Debt proceeds consist of draw downs of $100,269,200 from the federal Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) loan related to the 91 Project and issuance of $28,000,000 in commercial paper notes related to the 1-15 Express Lanes project. Total uses (Table 2), including transfers out of $241,687,700, are budgeted at $922,399,800, a decrease of 12% from the prior year budget amount of $1,052,893,300. Program expenditures and transfers out totaling $849,077,500 represent 92% of total budgeted uses in FY 2016/17. Program costs have decreased by 13% from $980,951,900 in FY 2015/16 due to significant completion of several projects identified below. Table 2 — Uses FY 2015-2017 FY 14/15 FY 15/16 Actual Revised Budget FY 15/16 FY 16/17 Projected Budget Dollar Change Percent Change Capital Highway, Rail, and Regional Arterials Capital Local Streets and Roads Commuter Assistance Debt Service Management Services Motorist Assistance Planning and Programming Public and Specialized Transit Rail Maintenance and Operations Toll Operations TOTAL Uses 663,672,400 48,612,900 3,050,900 53,325,000 7,660,700 5,323,400 2,419,000 105,643,900 14,122,600 $ 742,994,300 50,679,000 3,846,800 53,919,900 18,021,500 6,476,900 7,207,800 143,558,600 26,188,500 903,830,800 $ 1,052,893,300 660,292,900 50,679,000 3,896,700 53,671,800 17,952,600 6,478,300 4,460,400 117,614,400 21,309,700 936,355,800 599,803,700 51,358,000 3,579,900 54,015,800 19,306,500 6,851,900 12,037,100 134,796,600 34,097,200 6,553,100 922,399,800 (143,190,600) 679,000 (266,900) 95,900 1,285,000 375,000 4,829,300 (8,762,000) 7,908,700 6,553,100 (130,493,500) -19% 1% -7% 0% 7% 6% 67% -6% 30% N/A -12 % Note: Management Services includes Executive Management, Administration, Legislative Affairs and Communications, and Finance. Capital highway, rail, and regional arterials budgeted uses of $599,803,700 are 19% lower compared to the FY 2015/16 budget due to significant completion of the 60/215 East Junction high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane connectors, SR-74 curve widening project, I-215 corridor improvement project, and PVL project. Local streets and roads expenditures of $51,358,000 reflect an increase of 1% over the FY 2015/16 budget and represent the disbursements to local jurisdictions for the construction, repair, and maintenance of local streets and roads. Commuter assistance budgeted expenditures of $3,579,900 are 7% lower than FY 2015/16 budget due to anticipated completion of 1E511 commuter system enhancements, contractor transition, and relief of funding Perris -Downtown station security. Debt service of $54,015,800 is comparable to the FY 2015/16 revised budget. Management services expenditures have increased 7% or $1,285,000 from the FY 2015/16 budget due to information technology equipment upgrades, preparation for toll operations, financial advisory services, and debt service contribution. Motorist assistance expenditures have increased 6% or $375,000 from the FY 2015/16 budget as a result of call box hardware upgrades and increased FSP construction service. Planning and programming budgeted expenditures of $12,037,100 reflect a 67% increase from the FY 2015/16 budget due to increased projects and operations activities in connection with LTF disbursements for planning and programming, signal synchronization projects, and Fundtrak project database upgrades. Public and specialized transit budgeted expenditures of $134,796,600 are 6% lower than the FY 2015/16 budget due to decreased transit capital expenditures for public transit. The 30% increase in rail maintenance and operation's budgeted expenditures of $34,097,200 is primarily due to commencement of PVL operations, maintenance of four new stations along the Perris Valley Line, and additional consultant work needed to perform planning and modeling for rail projects including the Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Pass corridor rail service. Toll operations expenses are budgeted at $6,553,100 and represent approximately six months in FY 2016/17 to manage the operations, maintenance, and capital support of the Riverside 91 Express Lanes. Total uses included in the FY 2016/17 budget by major categories are illustrated in Chart 3. Chart 3 — Uses: Major Categories Planning and Programming 1% Rail Maintenance Toll Operations and Operations r1% 4% Public and Motorist Assistance \ SpecializedTransit 1% • 0 �� Management Services "'" 2% �_: Commuter Assistance 0% Capital Local Streets and Roads 5% Commission Personnel Capital Highway, Rail, and ; Regional Arterials 65% The Commission's salaries and benefits total $9,500,400 for FY 2016/17. This is comparable to the FY 2015/16 revised budget of $9,499,800 (Chart 4) and includes a 4% pool for merit -based salary increases. The Commission's salary schedule for FY 2016/17 is included in Appendix B and complies with Government Code §20636 "Compensation Earnable" and California Code of Register §570.5, "Requirements for a Publicly Available Pay Schedule." Chart 4 - Salaries and Benefits Cost: Five -Year Comparison $10,000,000 $9,000,000 $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 12/13 FY 13/14 FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 The FY 2016/17 full-time equivalents (FTE) of 49 positions are unchanged from the FY 2015/16 level (Table 3). As the Commission prepares for significant organization changes that include large transportation capital projects resulting in toll operations and the investment of billions of dollars requiring substantial attention at many staff levels, 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 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 - Full -Time Equivalents by Department FY 2015-2017 FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 Executive Management 0.6 0.4 Administration 4.9 5.0 Legislative Affairs and Communications 2.2 2.3 Finance 7.6 7.4 Planning and Programming 5.9 5.5 Rail Maintenance and Operations 4.0 4.1 Public and Specialized Transit 2.3 2.2 Commuter Assistance 2.0 1.9 Motorist Assistance 0.8 1.0 Capital Project Development and Delivery 13.7 19.2 Toll Operations 0.0 0.0 TOTAL 44.0 49.0 0.4 4.7 1.9 7.9 6.3 4.6 2.3 1.5 0.9 17.4 1.1 49.0 The Commission provides a comprehensive package of benefits to employees. The package includes: health, dental, vision, life insurance, short and long-term disability, workers' compensation, tuition assistance, sick and vacation leave, retirement benefits in the form of participation in the 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 Salaries and Benefits Other Fringes 7% Health 12% Retirement 15% Department Initiatives Salaries 66% The preparation of each department's budget was based on key assumptions, accomplishments in FY 2015/16, major initiatives for FY 2016/17, and department goals and related objectives. Following are the key initiatives and summary of expenditures/expenses for each department (Tables 4 through 14). Executive Management • Continue project development and delivery as the key Measure A priority. • Serve as lead agency on two notable, high -profile projects: the 91 Project in Corona and the 1-15 Express Lanes project. • Continue planning efforts to advance passenger rail service in the Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Pass corridor. • Advocate for state and federal investments in transportation to fund needed transportation priorities in the County and stimulate the local economy. • Initiate a Riverside County Transportation Plan for use in establishing an integrated transportation vision and priorities. • Maintain regional cooperation and collaboration as a significant effort consistent with the philosophy and mission of the Commission. • Enhance communication with the public by implementing a comprehensive social media effort focused on current projects and Commission activities. • Maintain an effective mid -sized transportation agency with a small and dedicated staff. Table 4 — Executive Management FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Personnel $ 171,500 $ 95,400 $ 95,400 Professional 246,300 360,000 300,000 Support 63,400 87,100 83,700 TOTAL $ 481,200 $ 542,500 $ 479,100 Administration $ 90,600 325,000 87,100 $ 502,700 $ (4,800) -5% (35,000) -10% 0% $ (39,800) -7% • Provide high quality support services to the Commission and to internal and external customers. • Continue to enhance 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. " Continue to employ and recruit a dynamic and talented workforce. Table 5-Administration FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Personnel $ 586,600 $ 617,600 $ 617,600 Professional 271,700 448,500 271,000 Support 677,200 746,700 643,100 Capital Outlay 364,600 175,000 50,000 Debt Service 24,900 - - TOTAL $ 1,925,000 $ 1,987,800 $ 1,581,700 Legislative Affairs and Communications $ 590,700 398,000 734,800 175,000 $ 1,898,500 $ (26,900) -4% (50,500) -11% (11,900) -2% 0% N/A $ (89,300) -4% " 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 and play an active role in the implementation of the Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act. " Continue a leadership role in formulating a countywide direction on federal transportation policies. " Take a leadership role on the modernization of CEQA. " Engage in essential legislative negotiations to stabilize and increase transportation funding pursuant to Commission action on funding principles generated by the strategic assessment study. " Seek an active role to ensure the implementation of a road charge pilot program addresses the needs and concerns of County residents and businesses. " Continue to heighten Commission presence on matters pertaining to tolling policy. " Conduct a concerted outreach effort to new federal and state representatives on local transportation issues. " Continue to develop a broad public information program regarding the Commission's responsibilities and accomplishments through a variety of media formats and presentation opportunities, including expanding the use of social media and other emerging technologies. " Continue to place an emphasis on providing proactive public communications support related to major project development efforts. " Conduct a public outreach program, "Operation Lifesaver", targeting schools in close proximity to railroad tracks on rail safety education, engineering, and enforcement. " Provide new Commissioner -orientation meetings and other continuing education opportunities for Commissioners. Table 6 - Legislative Affairs and Communications FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Personnel $ 438,900 $ 600,500 $ 600,500 $ 537,000 $ (63,500) -11% Professional 439,600 728,200 608,000 751,000 22,800 3% Support 48,000 187,700 81,600 169,400 (18,300) -10% TOTAL $ 926,500 $ 1,516,400 $ 1,290,100 $ 1,457,400 $ (59,000) -4% Finance • Continue appropriate uses of long- and short-term financing to advance 2009 Measure A projects of the Commission. • Apply the sales tax revenue forecast update to update a financing plan to support the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan and Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) highway and regional arterial projects. • Work in partnership with the toll operations contractor's back office to develop and implement accounting and financial policies and processes. • Continue to keep abreast of Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) technical activities affecting the Commission's accounting and financial reporting activities and implement new pronouncements. • Continue to strengthen the ERP system to benefit all staff in the management of accounting and project information and automation of a paperless workflow system. • Manage 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. • Conduct outreach activities to encourage disadvantaged business enterprise (DBE) and small business enterprise (SBE) participation in various contracts. Table 7 — Finance FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Personnel $ 1,009,000 $ 1,077,900 $ 1,077,900 $ 1,085,200 $ 7,300 1% Professional 2,564,500 2,648,300 2,615,700 3,065,000 416,700 16% Support 773,700 1,190,700 903,100 1,247,700 57,000 5% Capital Outlay 3,000 50,000 5,000 50,000 0% Transfers Out 2,700 9,007,900 10,000,000 10,000,000 992,100 11% TOTAL $ 4,352,900 $ 13,974,800 $ 14,601,700 $ 15,447,900 $ 1,473,100 11% 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/Regional Improvement Program (RIP), Active Transportation Program (ATP), and other funded projects are administered and implemented consistent with California Transportation Commission (CTC), California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), and Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) 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 multi -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 (GHG) implementation guidelines. • Secure funding through the FAST Act 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. • Participate in the development of the ATP guidelines to represent the County's best interest in program funding. • Administer the SB821 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Program (SB821). • Work with the Southern California Consensus Group regarding goods movement issues impacting the County. • Initiate the development of a countywide integrated long-range transportation plan and support next generation toll and rail feasibility studies. Table 8 — Planning and Programming FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Personnel $ 1,065,300 $ 1,149,000 $ 1,148,300 $ 1,264,000 $ 115,000 10% Professional 189,600 168,000 212,100 413,500 245,500 146% Support 20,800 23,300 16,000 20,900 (2,400) -10% Projects and Operations 1,143,300 5,817,500 3,084,000 10,338,700 4,521,200 78% Transfers Out - 50,000 - - (50,000) -100% TOTAL $ 2,419,000 $ 7,207,800 $ 4,460,400 $ 12,037,100 $ 4,829,300 67% Rail Maintenance and Operations • As a member of the Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA), continue active participation in the governance and operations of the Metrolink commuter rail system. • Continue the planning and implementation of capital improvements at the commuter rail stations in the County, including security and rehabilitation projects and parking requirements. • Continue to support and evaluate activities related to the implementation of PVL service. • Establish best approach to build, maintain, and operate cost effective and environmentally sustainable facilities that meet the public's transportation needs. • Lead the service development process and actively coordinate with all stakeholders along the Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Pass corridor for intercity passenger rail service. • Develop the next generation rail feasibility study to evaluate future growth opportunities for passenger rail in the County. Table 9 — Rail Maintenance and Operations FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Personnel $ 618,300 $ 760,600 $ 759,400 Professional 1,178,100 2,075,000 1,313,500 Support 1,346,400 2,936,200 1,906,600 Projects and Operations 10,979,800 20,256,300 17,293,000 Capital Outlay - 160,400 37,200 TOTAL $ 14,122,600 $ 26,188,500 $ 21,309,700 Public and Specialized Transit $ 852,800 4,691,000 3,054,100 25,458,300 41,000 $ 34,097,200 $ 92,200 12% 2,616,000 126% 117,900 4% 5,202,000 26% (119,400) -74% $ 7,908,700 30% • 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. • Continue long-range planning activities to ensure that anticipated revenues are in line with projected levels of service by transit operators. • Continue public transit operator oversight and fiduciary responsibilities to ensure that annual fiscal audits and state triennial performance audits are conducted in accordance with TDA regulations. • Provide availability for local matching funds to Western County applicants seeking Federal Transit Administration (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. • Coordinate with transit operators to provide connecting bus service to the new PVL stations. Table 10 - Public and Specialized Transit FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Personnel $ 335,600 $ 353,600 $ 353,600 Professional 125,200 290,000 252,300 Support 9,900 30,100 57,400 Projects and Operations 88,694,100 117,455,800 93,722,000 Transfers Out 16,479,100 25,429,100 23,229,100 TOTAL $ 105,643,900 $ 143,558,600 $ 117,614,400 Commuter Assistance $ 387,500 181,800 54,200 110,658,100 23,515,000 $ 134,796,600 $ 33,900 10% (108,200) -37% 24,100 80% (6,797,700) -6% (1,914,100) -8% $ (8,762,000) -6% • 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 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/buspool arrangements and facilitate transit connections. • Operate a cost-effective program within the County that results in reduction of single occupant vehicles. Table 11- Commuter Assistance FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Personnel $ 297,500 $ 341,000 $ 341,500 Professional 369,600 419,000 569,500 Support 300,300 209,300 193,200 Projects and Operations 1,924,000 2,718,000 2,633,000 Transfers Out 159,500 159,500 159,500 TOTAL $ 3,050,900 $ 3,846,800 $ 3,896,700 Motorist Assistance $ 273,100 457,400 204,400 2,645,000 $ 3,579,900 $ (67,900) -20% 38,400 9% (4,900) -2% (73,000) -3% (159,500) -100% $ (266,900) -7% • 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. • Implement a seamless service transition to call box hardware upgrades in anticipation of cellular technology migrations. • Utilize the opportunity to enhance coordination between California Highway Patrol (CHP) and Caltrans on traveler information. Table 12 - Motorist Assistance FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Personnel $ 90,700 $ 168,700 $ 166,900 Professional 668,500 739,900 738,900 Support 385,400 940,100 934,300 Projects and Operations 3,173,400 3,642,500 3,652,500 Transfers Out 1,005,400 985,700 985,700 TOTAL $ 5,323,400 $ 6,476,900 $ 6,478,300 Toll Operations $ 130,600 666,900 919,300 4,026,200 1,108,900 $ 6,851,900 (38,100) -23% (73,000) -10% (20,800) -2% 383,700 11% 123,200 12 375,000 6% • Commence Riverside 91 Express Lanes operations on SR-91 between the Orange County line and 1-15 in early 2017. • Continue collaboration between the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) and the Commission to jointly operate and maintain the 91 Express Lanes. • Manage toll operations using investment grade traffic and revenue studies and cost estimate assumptions specific to each express lane facility. " Continue 1-15 Express Lanes toll planning through development of toll policies, business rules, future contract requirements, and agency agreements. " Provide timely and effective reporting of toll operation metrics including revenue, transactions, carpool usage, and performance indicators. " Participate in the California Toll Operators Committee to advance regional and statewide tolling initiatives, technology, interoperability, and coordination among California toll agencies. Table 13 Toll Operations FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Personnel Professional Support and Maintenance Projects and Operations Capital Outlay TOTAL $ $ $ Capital Project Development and Delivery $ 268,400 307,000 2,674,900 3,052,800 250,000 $ 6,553,100 268,400 N/A 307,000 N/A 2,674,900 N/A 3,052,800 N/A 250,000 N/A $ 6,553,100 N/A " Complete construction, right of way, and close-out activities on remaining 1989 Measure A projects. " Continue project work on the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan projects, including the 91/71 connectors; the 91 Project; 1-15 Express Lanes project; SR-60 truck climbing lanes; SR-79 realignment; and Mid County Parkway. " Provide Western County Measure A regional arterial TUMF funding and support to local jurisdictions for regional arterial project engineering, right of way acquisition, and construction. " Provide 2009 Measure A funding to the incorporated cities, CVAG, and the County for local streets and roads maintenance, repair, and construction. " Provide funding and support of 2009 Measure A highway and regional arterial projects. " Develop strategies to implement alternative financing structures including public toll roads. " Develop a next generation toll feasibility study to evaluate future opportunities for toll facilities in the County. " Maintain a right of way acquisition and management program in support of capital projects. " Manage right of way acquisition in the most cost effective manner and within project schedules, while adhering to federal and state regulations. " 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 14 Capital Project Development and Delivery FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Personnel $ 2,752,000 $ 4,335,500 $ 4,330,500 Professional 5,795,600 9,160,100 8,557,400 Support 397,700 918,100 675,400 Projects and Operations 488,252,800 674,991,700 549,996,300 Capital Outlay 107,800 3,573,600 600,000 Debt Service 53,300,100 53,919,900 53,671,800 Transfers Out 214,979,400 100,694,300 146,812,300 TOTAL $ 765,585,400 $ 847,593,200 $ 764,643,700 Fund Balances $ 4,020,500 10,797,100 886,600 426,993,700 1,400,000 54,015,800 207,063,800 $ 705,177,500 $ (315,000) -7% 1,637,000 18 (31,500) -3% (247,998,000) -37% (2,173,600) -61% 95,900 0% 106,369, 500 106 $ (142,415,700) -17% The total fund balance as of June 30, 2016 is projected at $741,082,700. The Commission's budgeted activities for FY 2016/17 are expected to result in a $209,603,100 decrease of total fund balance at June 30, 2017 to $531,479,600. The primary cause of the decrease is related to the project activities in FY 2016/17 related to the 91 Project, 1-15 Express Lanes project, 1-215 corridor improvement project, and Mid County Parkway. Table 15 presents the components of fund balance by fund type and program at June 30, 2017. Table 15 — Projected Fund Balances by Fund Type and Program at June 30, 2017 Riverside County Transportation Commission 5531,479,600 General Fund Special Revenue Funds Capital Projects Funds Debt Service Fund $6,548,200 $416,399,700 $59,315,200 $46,482,100 Enterprise Fund $2,734,400 Management Services $1,337,000 Planning and Programming 1,394,700 Rail Maintenance and Operations 3,816,500 Budget Summary Measure A Western County: Bond Financing $6,828,900 Commuter Assistance 14,564,700 Economic Development 5,557,800 Highways 99,633,300 Local Streets and Roads 900 New Corridors 19,098,700 Public and Specialized Transit 7,129,000 Rail 34,454,300 Regional Arterials 19,519,000 Measure A Coachella Valley: Highways and Regional Arterial 12,865,500 Local Streets and Roads 1,300 Specialized Transit 1,293,900 Measure A Palo Verde Valley Local Streets and Roads 600 Other Agency Projects Fund 501,300 Coachella Valley/San Gorgonio Pass 329,600 Motorist Assistance 6,114,800 State Transit Assistance 58,883,800 Local Transportation Fund 79,840,900 TUMF: CETAP Regional Arterials 22,943,100 26,838,300 Highways $59,315,200 Riverside 91 Express Lanes $2,734,400 The overall budget for FY 2016/17 is presented in Table 16 by summarized line items, Table 17 by operating and capital classifications, and Table 18 by fund type, and highway, rail, and regional arterial program expenditures by project are summarized in Table 19. Table 16 — Budget Comparative by Summarized Line Item FY 2015-2017 FY 14/15 Actual FY 15/16 FY 15/16 Revised Budget Projected FY 16/17 Budget Dollar Change Percent Change Revenues Measure A Sales Tax LTF Sales Tax STA Sales Tax Federal Reimbursements State Reimbursements Local Reimbursements TUMF Revenue Toll Revenue Other Revenue Investment Income TOTAL Revenues Expenditures/Expenses Personnel Salaries and Benefits Professional and Support Professional Services Support Costs TOTAL Professional and Support Costs Projects and Operations Program Operations 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/Expenses Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures/Expenses Other Financing Sources (Uses) Transfers In Transfers Out Debt Proceeds TIFIA Loan Proceeds Net Financing Sources (Uses) Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures/Expenses and Other Financing Sources (Uses) Beginning Fund Balance ENDING FUND BALANCE $ 163,092,800 81,332,500 13,484,300 57,614,000 50,623,800 2,277,800 17,400,800 2,542,400 6,258,200 394,626,600 7,365,400 11,848,700 4,022,800 15,871,500 14,168,800 8,198,600 142,654,000 191,599,200 71,999,800 99,376,400 274,400 48,612,900 17,283,300 594,167,400 7,411,700 45,913,300 53,325,000 475,400 671,204,700 $ 170,000,000 83,000,000 13,372,400 50,595,800 56,130,600 4,084,300 18,053,800 787,000 2,456,300 398,480,200 9,499,800 17,037,000 7,269,300 24,306,300 23,474,900 20,260,900 158,550,600 284,681,200 105,090,400 149,700,800 1,844,000 50,679,000 30,600,000 824,881,800 7,800,000 46,119,900 53,919,900 3,959,000 916,566,800 $ 170,000,000 83,000,000 13,372,400 39,712,800 61,395,600 9,199,000 18,041,000 185,000 5,663,000 400,568,800 9,491,600 15,438,400 5,494,400 20,932,800 19,996,600 5,531,500 123,909,100 279,380,700 42,324,100 115,907,000 1,752,800 50,679,000 30,900,000 670,380,800 7,800,000 45,871,800 53,671,800 692,200 755,169,200 $ 173,000,000 85,000,000 10,821,600 28,007,100 8,830,000 10,496,100 18,520,000 3,798,000 2,518,000 1,849,000 342,839,800 9,500,400 22,053,700 10,053,400 32,107,100 20,550,700 17,671,200 87,389,000 146,955,600 84,587,900 141,178,800 2,965,000 51,358,000 30,516,600 583,172,800 8,100,000 45,915,800 54,015,800 1,916,000 680,712,100 $ 3,000,000 2,000,000 (2,550,800) (22,588,700) (47,300,600) 6,411,800 466,200 3,798,000 1,731,000 (607,300) (55,640,400) 600 5,016,700 2,784,100 7,800,800 (2,924,200) (2,589,700) (71,161,600) (137,725,600) (20,502,500) (8,522,000) 1,121,000 679,000 (83,400) (241,709,000) 300,000 (204,100) 95,900 (2,043,000) (235,854,700) 2% 2% -19% -45 % -84 % 157% 3% N/A 220% -25% -14% 0% 29 % 38% 32% -12% -13% -45 % -48% -20% -6% 61% 1% 0% -29% 4% 0% 0% -52% -26% (276,578,100) 232,626,100 (232,626,100) 48,904,100 48,904,100 (518,086,600) 136,326,500 (136,326,500) 261,277,900 261,277,900 (354,600,400) (337,872,300) 180,214,300 181,186,600 (181,186,600) 20,000,000 271,880,700 291,880,700 241, 687, 700 105,361,200 (241,687,700) (105,361,200) 28,000,000 28,000,000 100,269,200 (161,008,700) 128,269,200 (133,008,700) -35% 77% 77% N/A -62% -51 % (227,674,000) 1,031,476,400 $ 803,802,400 (256,808,700) 803,802,400 $ 546,993,700 $ (62,719,700) (209,603,100) 47,205,600 803,802,400 741,082,700 741,082,700 (62,719,700) $ 531,479,600 $ (15,514,100) -18% -8% -3% Table 17 — Operating and Capital Budget FY 2016/17 FY 16/17 Operating Budget FY 16/17 Capital Budget FY 16/17 TOTAL Budget Revenues Measure A Sales Tax LTF Sales Tax STA Sales Tax Federal Reimbursements State Reimbursements Local Reimbursements TUMF Revenue Toll Revenue Other Revenue Investment Income TOTAL Revenues Expenditures/Expenses Personnel Salaries and Benefits Professional and Support Professional Services Support Costs TOTAL Professional and Support Costs Projects and Operations Program Operations 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/Expenses Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures/Expenses Other Financing Sources (Uses) Transfers In Transfers Out TIFIA Loan Proceeds Net Financing Sources (Uses) Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures/Expenses and Other Financing Sources (Uses) $ 16,224,000 85,000,000 10,821,600 3,132,500 4,832,000 4,025,500 435,600 $ 156,776,000 24,874,600 3,998,000 6,470,600 18,520,000 3,798,000 2,518,000 1,413,400 124,471,200 5,122,700 9,052,100 6,483,700 218,368,600 4,377,700 13,001,600 3,569,700 15,535,800 10,343,800 250,000 3,375,000 132,518,800 2,150,000 16,571,300 10,206,900 17,421,200 84,014,000 146,955,600 84,587,900 8,660,000 815,000 51,358,000 30,516,600 148,637,600 434,535,200 8,100,000 45,915,800 266,000 54,015,800 1,650,000 169,562,100 511,150,000 (45,090,900) (292,781,400) 32,881,800 208,805,900 (24,623,900) (217,063,800) 100,269,200 108,527,100 19,742,100 63,436,200 (273,039,300) Beginning Fund Balance 207,739,900 533,342,800 ENDING FUND BALANCE $ 271,176,100 $ 260,303,500 $ 173,000,000 85,000,000 10,821,600 28,007,100 8,830,000 10,496,100 18,520,000 3,798,000 2,518,000 1,849,000 342,839,800 9,500,400 22,053,700 10,053,400 32,107,100 20,550,700 17,671,200 87,389,000 146,955,600 84,587,900 141,178,800 2,965,000 51,358,000 30,516,600 583,172,800 8,100,000 45,915,800 54,015,800 1,916,000 680,712,100 (337,872,300) 241,687,700 (241,687,700) 100,269,200 128,269,200 (209,603,100) 741,082,700 $ 531,479,600 Table 18 — Budget by Fund Type FY 2016/17 FY 16/17 General Fund Special Revenue Capital Projects Debt Service Enterprise TOTAL Budget Revenues Measure A Sales Tax $ 3,250,000 $ 169,750,000 $ - $ LTF Sales Tax 85,000,000 STA Sales Tax 10,821,600 Federal Reimbursements 25,240,100 State Reimbursements 900,000 7,930,000 Local Reimbursements 1,632,500 8,863,600 TUMF Revenue 18,520,000 Toll Revenue Other Revenue 173,000 Investment Income 16,300 1,038,400 441,500 2,767,000 346,000 3,798,000 2,345,000 6,800 TOTAL Revenues 5,798,800 327,336,700 441,500 3,113,000 6,149,800 Expenditures/Expenses Personnel Salaries and Benefits 4,444,900 4,787,100 268,400 Professional and Support Professional Services 4,121,000 17,625,700 307,000 Support Costs 5,350,900 2,027,600 2,674,900 TOTAL Professional and Support Costs 9,471,900 19,653,300 2,981,900 Projects and Operations Program Operations 3,672,600 13,825,300 3,052,800 Engineering 17,671,200 Construction 1,175,000 86,214,000 Design Build 146,955,600 Right of Way/Land - 84,587,900 Operating and Capital Disbursements 21,860,700 119,318,100 Special Studies 2,150,000 815,000 Local Streets and Roads - 51,358,000 RegionaIArterials - 30,516,600 TOTAL Projects and Operations 28,858,300 551,261,700 3,052,800 Debt Service Principal Payments 8,100,000 Interest Payments 386,000 45,529,800 TOTAL Debt Service 386,000 53,629,800 Capital Outlay 266,000 1,400,000 - 250,000 TOTAL Expenditures/Expenses 43,041,100 577,102,100 386,000 53,629,800 6,553,100 Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures/Expenses (37,242,300) (249,765,400) 55,500 (50,516,800) (403,300) Other Financing Sources (Uses) Transfers In 35,800,100 150,591,100 29,501,900 22,656,900 3,137,700 Transfers Out (105,951,800) (132,780,900) (2,955,000) Debt Proceeds - 28,000,000 TIFIA Loan Proceeds - 100,269,200 Net Financing Sources (Uses) 35,800,100 144,908,500 (75,279,000) 19,701,900 3,137,700 Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures/Expenses and Other Financing Sources (Uses) (1,442,200) (104,856,900) (75,223,500) (30,814,900) 2,734,400 $ 173,000,000 85,000,000 10,821,600 28,007,100 8,830,000 10,496,100 18,520,000 3,798,000 2,518,000 1,849,000 342,839,800 9,500,400 22,053,700 10,053,400 32,107,100 20,550,700 17,671,200 87,389,000 146,955,600 84,587,900 141,178,800 2,965,000 51,358,000 30,516,600 583,172,800 8,100,000 45,915,800 54,015,800 1,916,000 680,712,100 (337,872,300) 241,687,700 (241,687,700) 28,000,000 100,269,200 128,269,200 (209,603,100) Beginning Fund Balance 7,990,400 521,256,600 134,538,700 77,297,000 741,082,700 ENDING FUND BALANCE $ 6,548,200 $ 416,399,700 $ 59,315,200 $ 46,482,100 $ 2,734,400 $ 531,479,600 Table 19 — Highway, Regional Arterial, and Rail Programs FY 2016/17 Description Highway engineering 91/71 interchange improvement 1-15 Express Lanes Mid County Parkway SR-91 HOV lanes/Adams Street to 60/91/215 interchange Riverside County - Santa Ana River Trail SUBTOTAL HIGHWAY ENGINEERING Regional arterial engineering Various Western County TUMF regional arterial projects, including SR-79 realignment SUBTOTAL REGIONAL ARTERIAL ENGINEERING Rail engineering Riverside Downtown/Pedley station improvements La Sierra station improvements Perris Valley Line and other rail projects Other - Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Pass corridor (details presented in Section 6.2 Rail) SUBTOTAL RAIL ENGINEERING TOTAL HIGHWAY, REGIONAL ARTERIAL, AND RAIL ENGINEERING Highway construction 74/215interchange 1-215 corridor improvements (central segment)/Scott Road to Nuevo Road Pachappa underpass 91 Project SR-91 HOV lanes/Adams Street to 60/91/215 interchange Riverside County - Santa Ana River Trail General (details presented in Section 6.3 Planning and Programming) SUBTOTAL HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION Regional arterial construction Various Western County TUMF regional arterial projects, including SR-79 realignment Various Western County Measure A regional arterial projects SUBTOTAL REGIONAL ARTERIAL CONSTRUCTION Rail construction Riverside Downtown/Pedley station improvements La Sierra station improvements Station rehabilitation Perris Valley Line and other rail projects Corona Auto Center Drive traffic signal Other- Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Pass corridor (details presented in Section 6.2 Rail) SUBTOTAL RAIL CONSTRUCTION TOTAL HIGHWAY, REGIONAL ARTERIAL, AND RAIL CONSTRUCTION Highway design build 91 Project 1-15 Express Lanes TOTAL HIGHWAY DESIGN BUILD Highway right of way and land SR-60 truck climbing lanes 60/215 East Junction HOV lane connectors 1-215 corridor improvements (central segment)/Scott Road to Nuevo Road Pachappa underpass Mid County Parkway SR-74 curve widening 1-15 Express Lanes SR-74/1-15 to 7th Street 91/71 interchange improvement 91 Project SR-91 HOV lanes/Adams Street to 60/91/215 interchange MSHCP land acquisition in Western County Riverside County - Santa Ana River Trail General SUBTOTAL HIGHWAY RIGHT OF WAY AND LAND Regional arterial right of way and land Various Western County TUMF regional arterial projects, including SR-79 realignment SUBTOTAL REGIONAL ARTERIAL RIGHT OF WAY AND LAND Rail right of way and land Perris Valley Line and other rail projects La Sierra station improvements General SUBTOTAL RAIL RIGHT OF WAY AND LAND TOTAL HIGHWAY, REGIONAL ARTERIAL, AND RAIL RIGHT OF WAY AND LAND GRAND TOTAL HIGHWAY, REGIONAL ARTERIAL, AND RAIL PROGRAMS $ 50,000 750,000 11,000,000 15,000 490,000 12,305,000 4,976,200 4,976,200 65,000 55,000 20,000 250,000 390,000 $ 17,671,200 20,000 5,300,000 11,070,000 16,471,200 803,000 3,800,000 1,175,000 38,639,200 381,400 33,848,700 34,230,100 1,417,800 2,709,900 2,000,000 5,942,000 250,000 2,200,000 14,519,700 $ 87,389,000 $ 125,955,600 21,000,000 $ 146,955,600 $ 1,700,000 22,000 170,000 450,000 19,500,000 337,000 4,000,000 700,000 1,552,000 46,931,100 1,700,000 3,000,000 85,000 50,500 80,197,600 2,765,300 2,765,300 1,365,000 10,000 250,000 1,625,000 $ 84,587,900 $ 336.603.700 Gann Appropriations Limit In November 1979, the voters of the State approved Proposition 4, commonly known as the Gann Initiative (Gann). 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. 16-013 on June 8, 2016, establishing appropriations limits for the Commission at $419,316,693. The FY 2016/17 budget appropriated $218,551,200 in taxes for the Commission, falling well within the limits set by the Gann. 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 2016/17 appropriations limit is as follows: 2015-2016 Appropriations Limit $392,995,203 2016-2017 adjustment: Change in California per capita personal income Change in Population, Riverside County Per Capital Cost of Living converted to a ratio: 5.37 + 100 100 5.37% 1.26% 1.0537 Population converted to a ratio: 1.26 + 100 = 1.0126 100 Calculation of factor for FY 2016-2017: 1.0537 x 1.0126 = 1.06697662 $392,995,203 x 1.06697662 = $419,316,693 2016-2017 Appropriations Limit $419,316,693 Source: California per capita income —California Department of Finance Population, Riverside County —California Department of Finance Commission Policy Goals and Objectives The Commission's vision related to the future of the County's transportation system is stated in five guiding principles: • Together, we are implementing an efficient transportation system for the good of all in the County. • We are the people we serve. Economic prosperity and quality of life is enhanced with proper transportation. The public trust is vital to our mission. • We operate in a dynamic environment. We will remain flexible in order to respond to change and opportunity. We will focus on projects and allocate funds that support the quality of life in the County. We collaborate in partnerships to maximize our ability to get people where they want to go and when they want to get there. • Our priority is to serve the public need. We will invest in a transportation system that moves community members, visitors, and goods. This system will support our economy and our future prosperity and is vital to attract and retain quality jobs to our region. • We are dedicated to environmental stewardship. We will use existing regional and countywide plans, such as the Riverside County Integrated Plan, as a framework for our decisions. We know that goods moving to, within, and through the County are vital to our economy; however, we desire and will work toward a future where there is a balance between goods movement and our quality of life. In addition to financial and administration policies, the Commission has seven long-term policy goals that support the Commission's vision for transportation in the County: 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 2016/17 budget are identified below. While the County's economic outlook is positive, the Commission remains cautious about revenue availability to support the funding and development of critical transportation projects and programs. The need for better transportation remains a top public priority as demonstrated in the Commission's vision statements, and the Commission is poised to address this challenge via the seven policy goals. In moving forward with an aggressive program of projects and services, the Commission may face 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 and accommodates and supports multiple travel choices. • Continue to aggressively pursue completion of the environmental, design, and construction processes on key components of the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan. • Commence the first ten-year update of the 2009 Measure A Expenditure Plan, as required by the ordinance, and initiate the development of a county -wide transportation plan. • Enhance corridor mobility and traveler choice with the continued development of tolled express lanes on SR-91 and 1-15. • Continue active engagement in state and federal efforts to streamline and reform CEQA and NEPA to improve the ability to deliver critical projects that enhance mobility within the County and the region. • Continue to provide leadership in the planning and development of the Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Pass corridor rail service through the Alternatives Analysis Report and continue to seek out grant opportunities with federal and state agencies for project funding. Work closely with partners in the Coachella Valley, including CVAG and SunLine Transit Agency (SunLine) to ensure the implementation of Measure A funding priorities. " Complete projects and programs included in the 1989 Measure A ordinance and determine use(s) for any unexpended revenues. " Complete environmental permitting and develop an implementation plan for the Mid County Parkway project, including commencement of the design phase of the first project segment. " Complete the preliminary engineering and environmental clearance for the SR-79 realignment project. " Continue to collaborate with state and federal agencies and local partners to develop and fund projects programmed in the STIP, Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP), Proposition 1B bond programs, ATP, Cap and Trade programs, and Measure A programs as well as other high priority regional projects. " Maximize obtaining all available transportation funds and strategically program funds to meet funding and allocation deadlines and to prevent the lapse and loss of funds. " Leverage the effective application and use of Measure A Western County regional arterial funds with local, state and federal funds to deliver eligible regional arterial projects. " Work closely with local jurisdictions to implement TUMF regional arterial program projects and facilitate the delivery of eligible 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 511 system and focus commuter assistance and 511 outreach efforts under the IE Commuter brand. " Continue cooperation with the FTA regarding the Small Starts process to support the new PVL commuter rail service. " Continue to work with the public transit operators to control costs and increase system efficiencies in order to accommodate and adjust to 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. " Consider future rail expansion opportunities including the potential for extension of the PVL to the Hemet/San Jacinto and Temecula areas. " Consider future opportunities to implement tolling. " Work with transit operators, cities, and the County to review funding opportunities for Cap and Trade funding. 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 list to mitigate the impact of increased goods movement demands on the transportation system. Work with federal and state agencies regarding the nomination and implementation of projects for FAST Act funding. " Encourage Congress to aggressively fund projects to develop the nation's multimodal national goods movement network. " 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 Port of Los Angeles and Port of Long Beach (Ports) and regional transportation commissions to develop a funding mechanism for needed projects and mitigation on a regional basis. " Continue to provide input to the National Freight Advisory Committee regarding the establishment of a national freight network and California State Freight Advisory Committee regarding regional freight priorities. 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 operating and planned regional economic centers and developments. • Support local projects, consistent with countywide transportation goals and Commission commitments, which enhance business development, local employment, educational institutions, and area tourism. Ensure Improved System Efficiencies The Commission will select projects and allocate funds in a manner that will improve safety, reduce congested traffic corridors, and provide travel choices. • Advocate the development and use of advanced technologies for transportation applications that are affordable and practical. • In partnership with SANBAG, continue to explore alternatives to 1E511 for improved deployment of 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 on a regional scale. • 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. • Collaborate with local jurisdictions, Caltrans, and the CHP to continue efficient delivery of a comprehensive motorist aid system which includes a 511 traveler information service, a call box program, and a 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. • Collaborate with Caltrans and regional agencies in developing resources for preservation and maintenance of the highways and regional arterials. • Support the implementation of active transportation facilities that support transportation alternatives and enhance the transportation system. • Continue to deliver the "Annual State of Public Transit Report" to the Commission in order to assess accomplishments and potential improvements. 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). • Collaborate with SCAG, South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), sub -regional agencies, and local jurisdictions to implement the current RTP and sustainable communities' strategy that meets regional air quality goals, conformity guidelines, and SB375 California's Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act (SB375) GHG 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, vehicle miles traveled, and emissions. " 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, veterans, persons with disabilities, and low income residents. " Leverage commuter and motorist assistance outreach channels in order to increase the awareness and use of alternative commuting modes. " Implement the Commission's commuter rail SRTPs and SCRRA's plan for Metrolink commuter rail services. " Implement an update to and continue to pursue the goals and objectives as outlined in the Coordinated Public Transit -Human Services Transportation Plan (Coordinated Plan) for the County related to a unified, comprehensive but flexible strategy for transportation service delivery to address transportation gaps between current services and 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. " Collaborate with public transit operators to ensure connecting bus service to new PVL stations. Prioritize Public and Agency Communications The Commission will provide timely, informative, and accurate reporting 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, social media, annual report, monthly newsletter, television, Speakers Bureau, print media, radio, etc.). " Maintain an ongoing effort of informing the County's Congressional and State Legislative delegations regarding transportation issues. " Develop an effective long-range legislative strategy regarding state and federal funding and policy. " Protect and enhance flexibility in the Commission's use of state and federal transportation revenue in addressing regional priorities and needs. " Explore local options for sustainable funding in addressing long-term transportation and quality -of -life needs for the County. " Seek legislative flexibility for innovation in financing, construction, and maintenance of regional transportation projects. " Pursue policy objectives contained in the Commission's comprehensive adopted legislative platforms. " Maintain ongoing efforts to educate commuters, businesses, and the public regarding the Commission's toll planning efforts and specific project development efforts underway. " Keep the public informed about construction -related impacts from projects. " Develop and execute a long-term communications and customer engagement strategy for the purposes of public education and customer service. " Develop and implement express lane marketing and promotion campaigns for the Commission's toll facilities to increase customer accounts and lane usage. 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 payment related to the Commission's proportionate share of the net pension liability. • The Commission shall budget 100 percent 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. • Adopted toll revenue policies will establish congestion pricing in order to maximize throughput on toll facilities. Such pricing will be adjusted periodically by pre -defined formulas. • Revenues generated from the operation of toll facilities will be available for expenses related to: o Debt issued to construct or repair any portion of the toll facility, payment of debt service, and satisfaction of other covenants and obligations related to indebtedness of the toll facility, including applicable reserves; o Development, maintenance, repair, rehabilitation, improvement, reconstruction, administration, and operation of the toll facilities, including toll collection and enforcement and applicable reserves; and o Projects within the corridor from which the revenue was generated. • Proceeds from the disposition, in accordance with federal, state and local regulations, of excess properties owned by the Commission will be returned to the programs which provided the funding sources for the property acquisition. Debt Management Policies • The Debt Management Policy, as revised on April 10, 2013, and the Interest Rate Swap Policy, as adopted July 12, 2006, shall be updated as necessary for matters related to sales tax revenue and toll -supported indebtedness. • Outstanding sales tax revenue debt shall not exceed $975 million, in accordance with Measure K approved by a majority of the voters in November 2010. • Toll revenue supported debt may be issued for specific highway projects and may comprise toll revenue bonds and federal loans. • The Commission will maintain 2.0x debt ratio coverage on all senior sales tax revenue debt and 1.3x debt ratio coverage on all toll revenue debt. • Debt issuance will be for major capital projects including engineering, right of way, construction, and design -build. Operating requirements, if any, must be paid from current ongoing revenues and may not be financed except for initial toll operations. • 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. • All toll revenue supported debt must mature prior to the expiration of toll facility agreements. Expenditure/Expense Accountability Policies • Established priorities for planning and programming of capital projects will be reviewed annually with the Commission. • Actual expenditures/expenses will be compared to the budget on at least a quarterly basis, and significant deviations will be appropriately noted, explained, and justified. • Operations and maintenance agreements for toll operations will be implemented, and related costs will be compared to toll financing assumptions. 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). • The Commission will establish and maintain reserves for toll operations, capital improvements, and debt service in accordance with toll supported debt agreements. 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/expenses. • Construction and operating funds will be invested per the Commission's established Investment Policy, as revised on April 13, 2016, 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. Procurement Policies • The Commission will conduct enhanced outreach to businesses and contractors located in the County regarding opportunities to provide the Commission with competitive and qualified goods and/or services. • The Commission will continuously evaluate its procurement program and policies to ensure competitive, transparent, objective, and fair selection processes. • The Commission will continue to expand and improve vendor access to contracting opportunities. Auditing, Accounting, and Financial Reporting Policies • The Commission will maintain its ERP system in order to integrate project and toll operations accounting needs and improve accounting efficiency. • The Commission will issue a Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR); separate financial reports for the LTF, STA, Proposition 1B Rehabilitation and Security Project Accounts, Low Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP), and toll operations; and State Controller's Transportation Planning Agency Financial Transactions Report as well as Government Compensation in California Report. • An audit is to be conducted annually on the Commission's accounting books and records. As long as the Commission has outstanding bonds and federal loans, 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. Human Resources Management Policies • While accommodating the assumption of toll operation responsibilities, 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 necessary 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, toll operator, 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 20) 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 20 — Relationship between Commission and Departmental Goals Goods npna rtmpnt System Environmental Economic Intermodalism& Financial& Mnhility Mnvpmpnt Fffiripnripc Stpwarrlchin f)pvpinnmpnt Arrpccihility rnmmuniratinnc Gdminictratinn Management Services Executive Management X X X X X X X X Administration X X Legislative Affairs & Communications X X X X Finance X Regional Programs Planning and Programming X X X X X X X X Rail Maintenance and Operations X X X X X Public and Specialized Transit X X X X X Commuter Assistance X X X X X X Motorist Assistance X X X X X X Toll Operations X X X X X X X X Capital Project Development & Delivery X X X X X X X X 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 uses. 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 the 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, toll 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 2016/17 budget and monitoring of the FY 2015/16 budget. A summary of each task is described below. Chart 6 — Budget Process ID Task Name Short Term Strategic Direction Phase Resource Identification and Allocation Phase Needs Assessment Phase Development and Review Phase Adoption and Implementation Phase Budget Roles and Responsibilities Duration 140 days 200 days 120 days 150 days 60 days 365 days Short -Term Strategic Direction Phase 2015 2016 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 6.4. 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 2016/17 Board of Commissioners Policy Committees • WRC Programs & Projects • ERC Programs & Projects • Budget& Implementation Advisory Committees • Technical Advisory • Citizens Advisory Executive Committee I I Administration _Clerk of the Board & Board Relations Claims Administration Human Resources Office & Records Management Finance Budget Development Contract Management & Procurement Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Financial Management Insurance Administration Legislative Affairs & Communications Goods Movement Legislative Advocacy & Analysis Media Relations Public Information & Communications Resource Identification and Allocation Phase I Multimodal Programs — Call Box Program — Commuter Assistance — Freeway Service Patrol Rail Operations Transit Planning Capital Project Development & Delivery — Congestion Management _ Highway & Rail Capital Programs New Corridors — Property Management Regional Transportation Plan State Transportation Improvement Program TUMF Program - Station Maintenance Toll System - Development Financing Operations 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 are 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, including the salary schedule, must be adopted no later than June 15 of each year. Upon adoption by the Commission, the budget is entered into the ERP 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/expenses. Expenditure/expense activities of the funds are controlled at the budgetary unit, which is the financial responsibility level (General, Measure A, Motorist Assistance, LTF, STA, TUMF, Other Agency Projects, Capital Projects, Debt Service Funds, and Enterprise Fund) for each function (i.e., administration, operations, 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/expenses 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 appropriation 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 2016/17 Procurement Analyst Senior Administrative Assistant — Accountant (2) — Senior Financial Analyst — Accounting Technician (2) — Accounting Assistant — Senior Office Government Relatl Manager Administrative Assistant Legal Counsel Board of Commissioners Human Resources Administrator Deputy Clerk of the Board Records Technician Deputy Executive Director Moltimodal Services Director Management Management Management Analyst Planning & Programming Director Senior Management Analyst Management Analyst Project Deli ery Director Toll Progr m Director Senior Management Analyst (2) Management Analyst Facilities Administrator Toll Technology Manager Toll Senior Management Analyst Fund Budgets Budgetary Basis The Commission accounts for its budgeted funds using the modified and current financial resources measurement focus for governmental funds and the accrual basis of accounting and the economic resources measurement focus for enterprise funds. The basis of accounting is the same as the basis of budgeting. Governmental fund revenues are recognized as soon as they are both measurable and available to meet current year obligations. Such 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. Governmental expenditures are generally recorded when a liability is incurred; however, debt service expenditures are recorded when the payment is due. Enterprise fund revenues are recognized when earned, and expenses are recorded when a liability is incurred, regardless of the timing of related cash flows. Total sources and uses by fund type for the FY 2016/17 budget are shown in Chart 9. Chart 9 — Total Sources and Uses by Fund Type FY 2016/17 90% 1 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 70Z 5% 78% 74% 14% 9% 'MAW 2% 1% General Fund Special Revenue Capital Projects Debt Service Fund Enterprise Fund Funds Funds Fund Structure oTotal Sources 1/Total Uses There are 32 funds (Chart 10) that account for the Commission's budgeted resources and are categorized into five fund types: General fund, special revenue funds, capital projects funds, debt service, and enterprise funds. All of the Commission's funds are budgeted. There are three funds reported in the General fund and 23 in the special revenue funds. Three capital projects funds are used to account for capital project expenditures financed with short- or long-term debt proceeds. The Commission has two debt service funds to account for debt -related activity. In addition, the Commission has one enterprise fund to record operational activity for the Riverside 91 Express Lanes. Chart 10 — Budgeted Funds Structure FY 2016/17 General Fund *Administration *Rail Operations & Maintenance •Planning& Programming i Special Revenue Funds '1989 Measure • Western County • Highway • Rail 2009 Measure • Western County • H ighways • Local Streets & Roads • Public Transit •Specialized Transit • Bus Transit •Rail Transit •Commuter Assistance • New Corridors •Bond Financing • Regional Arterials • Economic Development • Coachella Valley • Highway&Regional Arterials • Local Streets & Roads • Specialized Transit • Palo Verde Valley • Local Streets & Roads 1 J r • FSP •SAFE • Local Transportation Funds • State Transit Assistance •TUMF • Coachella Valley Rail • Other Agency Projects Fund Capital Projects Funds • Commercial Paper • Sales Tax Bonds • Toll Revenue Bonds Debt Service Funds L • Sales Tax Bonds • Toll Revenue Bonds Enterprise Fund • Riverside 91 Express Lanes 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 maintenance and operations as well as planning and programming. The FY 2016/17 budget for the General fund is presented in Table 21, followed by a discussion of significant components of the budget. Table 21- General Fund FY 2015 - 2017 FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Revenues Measure A Sales Tax $ 2,900,000 $ Federal Reimbursements 13,500 State Reimbursements 436,400 Local Reimbursements 107,200 Other Revenue 1,311,800 Investment Income 44,300 TOTAL Revenues 4,813,200 Expenditures Personnel Salaries and Benefits Professional and Support Professional Services Support Costs TOTAL Professional and Support Costs Projects and Operations Program Operations Construction Operating and Capital Disbursements Special Studies TOTAL Projects and Operations Debt Service Principal Payments Interest Payments TOTAL Debt Service Capital Outlay TOTAL Expenditures 4,024,100 2,136,300 2,929,900 3,000,000 $ 4,000,000 841,200 500,000 375,000 11,100 3,000,000 664,000 984,900 5,100 8,727,300 4,654,000 4,433,200 4,391,600 3,905,000 5,171,700 3,021,400 3,667,600 5,066,200 1,889,800 10,129,100 102,100 9,076,700 6,689,000 2,546,300 1,793,000 500,000 75,000 19,245,000 16,495,000 1,764,000 1,704,000 12,121,000 11,700 13,200 24,055,300 20,067,000 24,900 367,600 385,400 92,200 21,603,800 37,950,600 31,239,800 Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures (16,790,600) (29,223,300) (26,585,800) Other Financing Sources (Uses) Transfers In Transfers Out Net Financing Sources (Uses) Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures and Other Financing Sources (Uses) 16,386,000 (2,700) 26,593,400 (57,900) 24,393,400 16,383,300 26,535,500 24,393,400 (407,300) Beginning Fund Balance 10,590,100 (2,687,800) (2,192,400) 10,182,800 10,182,800 ENDING FUND BALANCE $ 10,182,800 $ 7,495,000 $ 7,990,400 $ 3,250,000 900,000 1,632,500 16,300 5,798,800 4,444,900 4,121,000 5,350,900 9,471,900 3,672,600 1,175,000 21,860,700 2,150,000 28,858,300 266,000 43,041,100 (37,242,300) 35,800,100 35,800,100 (1,442,200) 7,990,400 $ 6,548,200 $ 250,000 8% (4,000,000) -100% 58,800 7% 1,132,500 227% (375,000) -100% 5,200 47% (2,928,500) -34% 11,700 0% 216,000 6% 179,200 3% 395,200 4% 1,126,300 44% 675,000 135% 2,615,700 14% 386,000 22% 4,803,000 20% N/A N/A N/A (119,400) -31% 5,090,500 13 (8,019,000) 27% 9,206,700 35% 57,900 -100% 9,264,600 35% 1,245,600 -46% (2,192,400) -22% $ (946,800) -13% 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 operations and maintenance; investment income; transfers from LTF, TUMF, and motorist assistance for administration; transfers of LTF sales tax revenues for planning, programming, and monitoring (PPM) activities; and transfers of LTF Article 4 allocations for commuter rail transit operations and capital. Chart 11— General Fund Sources FY 2016/17 MeasureA Sales Tax 8% *_ State Reimbursements 2% Transfers In 86% Local Reimbursements 4% Measure A sales tax revenues allocated for administration of $3,250,000 has increased 8% compared to the prior year to offset increased expenditures. 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 in the previous fiscal year anticipated federal start-up funding for PVL operations. State reimbursements include STIP funds for PPM activities. Local reimbursements and other revenues from local agencies are related to rail station security and traffic signal synchronization projects. 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 of $1,000,000 in FY 2016/17 have increased $100,000 compared to the prior year to offset increased expenditures. • Planning allocations are set by law at three percent (3%) of estimated LTF sales tax revenues. The FY 2015/16 revised budget of $2,739,100 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 2016/17 budget for planning allocations is $2,550,000. • 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 2016/17 budget includes $17,800,000 in LTF allocations primarily to fund operating contribution expenditures to SCRRA and rail studies. • The FY 2016/17 budget includes LTF allocations of $2,000,000 for grade separation projects. The 2009 Measure A Western County rail fund will transfer in $11,355,800 in FY 2016/17 for rail station maintenance and operations; in prior years, LTF allocations funded rail stations. Administrative transfers in from TUMF and motorist assistance of $1,094,300 in FY 2016/17 decreased slightly from $1,194,800 in FY 2015/16. Chart 12 — General Fund Uses FY 2016/17 Capital Outlay Personnel Salaries 1% and Benefits 10% Support Costs 12% Professional Services 10% General fund uses are depicted in Chart 12. Personnel salaries and benefits expenditures increased $11,700 because of a change in the allocation of FTEs and a 4% pool for merit -based salary increases. Professional costs increased 6% due to increased professional services for information technology consultants and rail planning and station development in the Coachella Valley. Support costs increased 3% due to increased station maintenance and operations, utilities, and security at the four new PVL stations. Projects and operations expenditures increased 20% because of increased program operations expenditures related to new PVL station operations, increased operating contribution to SCRRA for PVL operations, development of a countywide integrated long-range transportation plan, and construction for signal synchronization projects. The FY 2016/17 operating and capital disbursements budget includes no allocation for rail capital contributions and $2,000,000 for grade separation projects. Capital outlay expenditures decreased 31% due to cyclical station maintenance improvements. 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, other agency project coordination, and funding transit operations and capital in the County. The special revenue funds' budgets are summarized in Table 22, and individual budgets are presented in Tables 23 through 32 along with respective discussions. Table 22 — Special Revenue Funds FY 2015 — 2017 FY 14/15 FY 15/16 Actual Revised Budget FY 15/16 FY 16/17 Projected Budget Dollar Change Percent Change 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 Salaries and Benefits Professional and Support Professional Services Support Costs TOTAL Professional and Support Costs Projects and Operations Program Operations 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 $ 160,192,800 81,332,500 13,484,300 54,836,100 50,187,400 2,170,600 17,400,800 1,230,600 2,196,300 $ 167,000,000 83,000,000 13,372,400 43,828,800 55,289,400 3,584,300 18,053,800 412,000 897,400 $ 167,000,000 83,000,000 13,372,400 36,945,800 60,731,600 8,214,100 18,041,000 185,000 720,000 383,031,400 385,438,100 388,209,900 3,341,300 5,066,600 5,100,000 9,712,400 13,132,000 12,417,000 1,092,900 2,097,600 1,826,800 10,805,300 15, 229, 600 14, 243, 800 12,279,000 8,198,600 142,654,000 191,599,200 71,999,800 89,247,300 172,300 48,612,900 17,283,300 20,928,600 20,260,900 158,050,600 284,681,200 105,090,400 130,455,800 80,000 50,679,000 30,600,000 18,203,600 5,531,500 123,834,100 279,380,700 42,324,100 99,412,000 48,800 50,679,000 30,900,000 582,046,400 107,800 800,826,500 3,573,600 650,313,800 600,000 596,300,800 824,696,300 670,257,600 Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures (213,269,400) (439,258,200) (282,047,700) Other Financing Sources (Uses) Transfers In Transfers Out TIFIA Loan Proceeds Net Financing Sources (Uses) 161,261,800 (76,583,500) 48,904,100 54,504,700 (89,791,600) 261,277,900 106,376,700 (106,250,600) 271,880,700 133,582,400 225,991,000 272,006,800 Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures and Other Financing Sources (Uses) (79,687,000) (213,267,200) (10,040,900) Beginning Fund Balance 610,984,500 531,297,500 531,297,500 ENDING FUND BALANCE $ 531,297,500 $ 318,030,300 $ 521,256,600 $ 169,750,000 85,000,000 10,821,600 25,240,100 7,930,000 8,863,600 18,520,000 173,000 1,038,400 327,336,700 4,787,100 17,625,700 2,027,600 19,653,300 13,825,300 17,671,200 86,214,000 146,955,600 84,587,900 119,318,100 815,000 51,358,000 30,516,600 551,261,700 1,400,000 577,102,100 (249,765,400) 150,591,100 (105,951,800) 100,269,200 144,908,500 (104,856,900) 521,256,600 $ 416.399.700 $ 2,750,000 2,000,000 (2,550,800) (18,588,700) (47,359,400) 5,279,300 466,200 (239,000) 141,000 2% 2% -19% - 42% -86% 147% 3% - 58% 16% (58,101,400) -15% (279,500) -6% 4,493,700 34% (70,000) -3% 4,423,700 29% (7,103,300) -34% (2,589,700) -13% (71,836,600) -45% (137,725,600) -48% (20,502,500) -20% (11,137,700) -9% 735,000 919% 679,000 1% (83,400) 0% (249,564,800) -31% (2,173,600) -61% (247,594,200) -30% 189,492,800 -43% 96,086,400 176% (16,160,200) 18% (161,008,700) -62% (81,082,500) -36% 108,410,300 -51% (10,040,900) -2% $ 98,369,400 31% Measure A and LTF sales taxes, STA allocations, Western County TUMF, state budgetary allocations, and vehicle registration fees are all accounted for in the 23 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 2016/17 Transfers In 26% TUMF Revenue \ \ `STA Sales Tax 3% Stated 2% Local Reimbursements Reimbursements L Federal Reimbursements 0 ° 1% 4% The special revenue funds' resources are expended on County highway, rail, regional arterial, and new corridors engineering, right of way acquisition, construction, and design build; 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 2016/17 Personnel Salaries and Benefits 1% Transfers Out r 15% F Measure A Special Revenue Funds Professional Services 3% Support Costs 0% 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 funds, three 2009 Measure A Coachella Valley funds, and one 2009 Measure A Palo Verde Valley fund. Chart 15 — Measure A Sales Tax Revenues by Geographic Area Palo Verde Valley 1% I Since the 1989 Measure A terminated on June 30, 2009, the remaining 1989 Measure A Western County 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, 14 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 Sales Tax Bonds 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. Western County Measure A Funds The Western County Measure A special revenue funds account for Western County's approximately 77% share of the Measure A sales tax compared to 76% share in FY 2015/16. As demonstrated in Table 23, most of the Commission's reimbursements flow through these funds, since the sales tax leverages state and federal dollars. Table 23 — Western County Measure A Funds FY 2015 — 2017 FY 14/15 FY 15/16 Actual Revised Budget FY 15/16 Projected FY 16/17 Budget Dollar Change Percent Change 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 TIFIA Loan Proceeds TOTAL Sources $ 9,751,900 1,805,900 1,444,700 36,840,400 35,034,500 13,363,700 1,842,000 7,368,100 10,835,400 3,070,000 $ 10,166,000 1,883,000 1,506,000 38,406,000 36,524,000 13,932,000 1,920,000 7,681,000 11,296,000 3,200,000 10,166,000 1,883,000 1,506,000 38,406,000 36,524,000 13,932,000 1,920,000 7,681,000 11,296,000 3,200,000 121,356,600 54,836,100 46,077,900 1,335,000 823,200 1,079,600 152,689,900 48,904,100 126,514,000 43,828,800 51,547,400 1,471,900 53,800 405,000 406,400 47,306,900 261,277,900 126,514,000 36,945,800 56,942,100 6,379,200 41,000 185,000 232,700 103,414,200 271,880,700 427,102,400 Uses Personnel Salaries and Benefits 2,903,800 Professional Services 7,970,700 Support Costs 700,800 Projects and Operations Program Operations 8,619,900 Engineering 3,618,600 Construction 131,251,800 Design Build 191,599,200 Right of Way/Land 69,431,600 Operating and Capital Disbursements 5,707,500 Special Studies 172,300 Local Streets and Roads 34,294,400 532,812,100 602,534,700 4,451,500 4,367,300 10,635,300 10,832,700 1,141,800 876,700 16, 692, 600 14, 253, 200 13,513,500 2,417,700 145, 917, 300 114, 442, 900 284,681,200 279,380,700 84,140,800 37,914,100 18, 950, 000 11, 290, 000 80,000 48,800 35,752,000 35,752,000 TOTAL Projects and Operations 444,695,300 Capital Outlay 107,800 Transfers Out 58,678,700 TOTAL Uses 599,727,400 3,573,600 56,159,900 495,499,400 600,000 80,452,200 515,057,100 675,689,500 592,628,300 Excess (deficiency) of Sources over (under) Uses $ (87,954,700) $ (142,877,400) $ 9,906,400 10,457,000 1,937,000 1,549,000 39,506,000 37,569,000 14,330,000 1,975,000 7,901,000 11,619,000 3,293,000 130,136,000 22,340,100 3,998,000 3,282,800 20,000 173,000 515,700 147,289,300 100,269,200 408,024,100 4,277,400 12,662,700 1,092,300 9,406,900 10,955,000 79,832,600 146,955,600 62,237,600 14,792,600 815,000 36,744,000 361,739,300 1,400,000 78,843,700 460,015,400 $ (51,991,300) $ 291,000 54,000 43,000 1,100,000 1,045,000 398,000 55,000 220,000 323,000 93,000 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3,622,000 (21,488,700) (47,549,400) 1,810,900 (33,800) (232,000) 109,300 99,982,400 (161,008,700) (124,788,000) 3% - 49 % -92% 123% - 63 % -57% 27% 211% - 62% - 23 % (174,100) -4% 2,027,400 19% (49,500) -4% (7,285,700) -44% (2,558,500) -19% (66,084,700) -45% (137,725,600) -48% (21,903,200) -26% (4,157,400) -22% 735,000 919% 992,000 3% (237,988,100) -40% (2,173,600) -61% 22,683,800 40% (215,674,100) -32% $ 90,886,100 -64% The budgeted Western County Measure A sales tax revenues reflect a 3% increase compared to the prior year due to Measure A sales tax projections. Taxable sales changes between jurisdictions within the County also periodically affect the geographic allocation formula from year to year. Federal reimbursements for highway and rail projects and the commuter assistance program, are significantly lower in the FY 2016/17 budget and relate to funding from the FTA, Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ), Surface Transportation Program (STP), and earmarks. The 49% decrease in federal reimbursements is primarily attributable to allocations of federal funding for project activity on the PVL project in the previous fiscal year. State reimbursements are lower by 92% compared to the FY 2015/16 budget and reflect funding from STIP and Proposition 1B funding for various highway and rail projects, particularly the 1-215 corridor improvement project, rail station rehabilitation, and the Perris Valley Line, in the previous fiscal year. The local reimbursement increase of 123% is attributable to the Riverside County Regional Park and Open Space District's (District) Santa Ana River Trail project, traffic signal synchronization projects, and 91 Project betterments. TUMF revenue represents reimbursements from TUMF zone funds administered by WRCOG for the 74/215 interchange construction, and the decrease in these TUMF reimbursements reflects the substantial completion of the project. Other revenue is related to property management lease revenues, which reflects a decrease from the prior year and is related to properties acquired in connection with the 91 Project. Investment income is slightly higher compared to the previous year's budget due to higher investment yields. As in prior years, a significant portion of transfers in consists of debt proceeds of $125,721,300 from sales tax revenue bonds, toll revenue bonds, and commercial paper notes to fund the 91 Project and 1-15 Express Lanes project. Other significant transfers in include $7,976,000 from the 2009 Measure A Western County rail fund for the PVL; $10,000,000 from the 2009 Measure A bond financing fund to fund a portion of Western County debt service; $2,767,000 for the build America bonds' (BABs) subsidy payment from the Debt Service fund; and $825,000 for regional arterials in accordance with the 2009 Measure A related to a city not eligible to receive the local street and roads funds. TIFIA loan proceeds of $100,269,200 will be used to pay eligible 91 Project expenditures. Personnel salaries and benefits expenditures decreased 4% resulting from the allocation of FTEs offset by a 4% pool for merit -based salary increases. Measure A Western County professional services expenditures in FY 2016/17 consist of general legal services for the various programs and capital projects, specialized legal and financial advisory services related to the 91 Project and 1-15 Express Lanes project, other professional services for rail capital and commuter assistance projects, and professional fees related to the Commission's debt programs. The increase of 19% in FY 2016/17 reflects the current year activity in advisory services and legal services related to the 1-15 Express Lanes project. Support costs decreased 4% due to restructuring of printing, communications, and vehicle maintenance for the commuter assistance program and to completion of the PVL. Support costs comprise operations for the highway and rail capital, 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 various phases of engineering, right of way, construction, and design -build activity. These activities are expected to decrease 19%, 26%, 45%, and 48%, respectively, due to significant completion of the 60/215 East Junction HOV lane connectors, SR-74 curve widening, 1-215 corridor improvement, and PVL projects in FY 2015/16 and substantial completion of the 91 Project expected in FY 2016/17. A major project still in the design -build and right of way phase but at a decreased level of costs is the 91 Project. Several Western County TUMF regional arterial projects will be under construction in FY 2016/17. In addition to the design -build and construction activities of the 91 Project, other related activities during FY 2016/17 include utility and railroad relocations and the interagency, legal, financial, and other 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 91 Project and Mid County Parkway project. Operating and capital disbursements are lower by 22% compared to the FY 2015/16 budget and relate to Western County intercity bus service and specialized transit expenditures funded by Measure A. Special studies increased 919%, or $735,000 compared to the FY 2015/16 budget and relates to the toll feasibility study. Local streets and roads comprise turn back payments to local jurisdictions and increased because of the higher Measure A sales tax revenues. Capital outlay includes equipment and improvements for the rail program and reflects a 61% decrease due to a change in the classification of station rehabilitation and improvement expenditures. Significant transfers out include funding for debt service payments of $28,735,000; contribution of $29,501,900 from the 2009 Measure A Western County new corridors fund to the Sales Tax Bonds capital projects fund for the 91 Project equity contribution; funding for rail operating and maintenance needs of $11,355,800 from 2009 Measure A Western County rail fund; $7,976,000 from the 2009 Measure A Western County rail fund for the PVL; funding for TUMF regional arterial projects of $450,000 from the 2009 Measure A Western County highway fund; and 2009 Measure A Western County local streets and roads fund allocation of $825,000 to 2009 Measure A Western County regional arterials fund. Coachella Valley Measure A Funds These special revenue funds account for Coachella Valley's 22% share of the Measure A sales tax compared to a 23% share in FY 2015/16. Table 24 — Coachella Valley Measure A Funds FY 2015 — 2017 FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Sources Measure A Sales Tax Highways & Regional Arterials Local Streets and Roads Specialized Transit Total Measure A Investment Income Transfers In TOTAL Sources $ 18,859,800 $ 19,661,000 $ 19,661,000 13, 201, 800 13, 763, 000 13, 763, 000 5,657,900 5,898,000 5,898,000 37,719,500 39,322,000 39,322,000 139,200 51,000 43,600 188,200 - 188,000 38,046,900 39,373,000 39,553,600 Uses Personnel Salaries and Benefits 4,200 3,200 6,300 Professional Services 7,900 4,000 1,400 Projects and Operations Program Operations 24,000 7,800 9,000 Operating and Capital Disbursements 5,846,000 6,493,000 6,492,100 Local Streets and Roads 13,201,800 13,763,000 13,763,000 Regional Arterials 16,683,300 30,000,000 30,000,000 TOTAL Projects and Operations 35,755,100 50,263,800 50,264,100 TOTAL Uses 35,767,200 50,271,000 50,271,800 Excess (deficiency) of Sources over(under)Uses $ 2,279,700 $ (10,898,000) $ (10,718,200) $ 19,231,000 13,462,000 5,769,000 38,462,000 35,300 188,000 38,685,300 1,400 6,100 6,050,000 13,462,000 30,000,000 49,518,100 49,519,500 $ (10,834,200) $ (430,000) -2% (301,000) -2% (129,000) -2% (860,000) -2% (15,700) -31% 188,000 N/A (687,700) -2% (3,200) -100% (2,600) -65% (1,700) -22% (443,000) -7% (301,000) -2% 0% (745,700) -1% (751,500) -1% $ 63,800 -1% As shown in Table 24, overall budgeted Coachella Valley Measure A sales tax revenues decreased 2%. Although total Measure A sales tax revenues increased 2%, taxable sales changes among the geographic areas also impact the geographic allocation formula from year to year. The Coachella Valley operating and capital disbursements represent specialized transit funds distributed to SunLine for transit operations. Local streets and roads comprise turn back 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. Debt service funding for CVAG highway and regional arterial and the city of Indio local streets and roads projects under advance funding agreements is reflected in projects and operations in order to be consistent with the accounting in the ERP system. Palo Verde Valley Measure A Fund This special revenue fund accounts for Palo Verde Valley's 1% share of the Measure A sales tax. Table 25 — Palo Verde Valley Measure A Fund FY 2015 — 2017 FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Sources Measure A Sales Tax Local Streets and Roads TOTAL Sources Uses Projects and Operations Local Streets and Roads TOTAL Uses $ 1,116,700 $ 1,164,000 $ 1,164,000 1,116, 700 1,164,000 1,164,000 1,116, 700 1,164,000 1,164,000 1,116,700 1,164,000 1,164,000 Excess (deficiency) of Sources over (under) Uses $ $ 1,152,000 1,152,000 1,152,000 1,152,000 $ (12,000) -1% (12,000) -1% (12,000) -1% (12,000) -1% $ N/A 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 revenue projections. In the Palo Verde Valley as noted in Table 25, expenditures are for local streets and roads. Debt service funding for the city of Blythe local streets and roads projects under an advance funding agreement is reflected in projects and operations in order to be consistent with the accounting in the ERP system. 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; transit disbursements from STA; Coachella Valley rail planning and development, and interagency activities. These activities are budgeted in the LTF, TUMF, FSP, SAFE, STA, Coachella Valley Rail, and Other Agency Projects 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 26). Table 26 — Local Transportation Fund FY 2015 — 2017 FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Sources LTF Sales Tax Other Revenue Investment Income TOTAL Sources Uses Projects and Operations Operating and Capital Disbursements Transfers Out TOTAL Uses 81,332,500 $ 83,000,000 $ 83,000,000 3,100 385,700 243,200 184,000 81,721,300 83,243,200 83,184,000 69,482,200 82,732,800 76,995,900 16,013,100 25,239,100 23,039,100 85,495, 300 107,971,900 100,035,000 Excess (deficiency) of Sources over (under) Uses $ (3,774,000) $ (24,728,700) $ (16,851,000) 85,000,000 199,100 85,199,100 77,260,500 23,350,000 100,610,500 $ (15,411,400) $ 2,000,000 2% N/A (44,100) -18% 1,955,900 2% (5,472,300) -7% (1,889,100) -7% (7,361,400) -7% $ 9,317,300 -38% The LTF sales tax revenue in FY 2016/17 is projected to increase 2% from the prior year. Investment income is expected to decrease slightly due to decreased cash balances. In FY 2016/17, approximately 92% and 8% of the LTF transit expenditures of $74,810,000 are for operating and capital purposes, respectively. LTF operating allocations are comprised of 76% to Western County, 22% to Coachella Valley, and 2% to Palo Verde Valley public bus operators. The actual allocations will not be approved until July 2016. Other operating and capital disbursements include allocations for SB821 bicycle and pedestrian projects of $1,801,000 and planning and administration allocations of $649,500 to the County Auditor -Controller and SCAG. Transfers out include allocations to the Commission's General fund for planning and administration of $3,550,000, rail operations of $17,800,000, and grade separation projects of $2,000,000. 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 27). TUMF revenue is projected to increase slightly based on the recovering housing market. The transfers in for FY 2016/17 relate to funding from TUMF CETAP of $2,234,100 for the city of Temecula's regional arterial projects along 1-15. Table 27 - Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Fund FY 2015 - 2017 FY 14/15 FY 15/16 Actual Revised Budget FY 15/16 FY 16/17 Projected Budget Dollar Change Percent Change Sources TUMF Revenue Investment Income Transfers In TOTAL Sources Uses Personnel Salaries and Benefits Professional Services Support Costs Projects and Operations Program Operations Engineering Construction Right of Way/Land Regional Arterials TOTAL Projects and Operations Transfers Out TOTAL Uses $ 17,400,800 $ 271,100 7,055,500 18,000,000 $ 39,800 6,436,600 18,000,000 85,400 2,013,300 24,727,400 24,476,400 20,098,700 289,800 347,700 424,300 239,100 592,800 128,700 1,000 12,000 12,100 459,500 520,200 268,900 4,580,000 6,407,400 2,823,800 11,402,200 10,683,300 9,391,200 2,568,200 20,786,600 4,410,000 600,000 600,000 900,000 19,609,900 38,997,500 17,793,900 420,300 7,216,900 1,583,600 20,560,100 47,166, 900 19,942, 600 Excess (deficiency) of Sources over (under) Uses $ 4,167,300 $ (22,690,500) $ 156,100 $ 18,500,000 124,100 2,234,100 20,858,200 250,100 560,400 12,300 272,400 5,976,200 381,400 22,265,300 516,600 29,411,900 2,484,200 32,718,900 $ (11,860,700) $ 500,000 84,300 (4,202,500) 3% 212% -65 % (3,618,200) -15% (97,600) (32,400) 300 (247,800) (431,200) (10,301,900) 1,478,700 (83,400) -28% -5 % 2% -48 % -7 % -96% 7% -14% (9,585,600) -25% (4,732,700) -66% (14,448,000) -31% $ 10,829,800 -48% Personnel salaries and benefits have decreased 28% due to allocation of FTEs offset by a 4% pool for merit -based salary increases. Professional services have decreased 5% due to legal services activities on the Mid County Parkway project. Projects and operations costs decreased 25%, as many regional arterial projects move into various stages of engineering, right of way acquisition, and construction. Approximately 29% of the projects and operations costs are attributable to programmed regional arterial projects. The remaining 71% relates to CETAP projects such as the Mid County Parkway preliminary engineering and right of way acquisitions. Transfers out represent administrative allocations of $700,100 to the General fund and CETAP funding of $1,784,100 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 28). The State's funding share of $2,232,000 has increased 9% from the FY 2015/16 budget due to increased CHP support needed for highway construction projects. Local reimbursements of $675,000 include construction FSP for the 91 Project. Transfers in represent Commission match funds of $714,700 from the SAFE special revenue fund. Table 28 - Freeway Service Patrol Fund FY 2015 - 2017 FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Sources State Reimbursements $ 2,264,700 $ 2,042,000 $ 2,089,500 Local Reimbursements 1,178,100 1,060,000 Other Revenue 383,000 Investment Income 2,800 1,800 300 Transfers In 548,700 571,200 571,200 TOTAL Sources 3,199,200 3,793,100 3,721,000 Uses Personnel Salaries and Benefits Professional Services Support Costs Projects and Operations Program Operations TOTAL Projects and Operations Transfers Out TOTAL Uses 56,500 86,900 86,900 70,700 66,000 65,000 39,900 59,300 53,500 3,095,100 3,547,500 3,557,500 3,095,100 3,547,500 3,557,500 159,800 248,300 248,300 3,422,000 4,008,000 4,011,200 Excess (deficiency) of Sources over (under) Uses $ (222,800) $ (214,900) $ (290,200) 2,232,000 675,000 600 714,700 3,622,300 97,100 66,000 53,500 3,931,200 3,931,200 232,700 4,380,500 $ (758,200) $ 190,000 9% (503,100) -43% N/A (1,200) -67% 143,500 25% (170,800) -5% 10,200 12% 0% (5,800) -10% 383,700 11% 383,700 11% (15,600) -6% 372,500 9% $ (543,300) 253% Personnel salaries and benefits have increased 12% due to the allocation of FTEs and a 4% pool for merit -based salary increases. Professional services and support costs are comparable to the prior year's budget. Operating costs for towing services in FY 2016/17 are higher than the FY 2015/16 budget due to increased support levels needed on the 91 Project. 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 29). Table 29 - Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies Fund FY 2015 - 2017 FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Sources State Reimbursements Local Reimbursements Other Revenue Investment Income TOTAL Sources Uses Personnel Salaries and Benefits Professional Services Support Costs Projects and Operations Program Operations Transfers Out TOTAL Uses 1,844,800 $ 1,700,000 $ 1,700,000 326,900 371,300 378,300 21,300 7,000 28,400 15,200 3,100 2,221,400 2,093,500 2,081,400 34,200 81,800 80,000 597,800 673,900 673,900 345,500 880,800 880,800 78,400 845,600 95,000 737,400 95,000 737,400 1,901,500 2,468,900 2,467,100 Excess (deficiency) of Sources over (under) Uses $ $ 1,700,000 317,500 14,700 2,032,200 33,500 600,900 865,800 95,000 876,200 2,471,400 0% (53,800) -14% (7,000) -100% (500) -3% (61,300) -3% (48,300) -59% (73,000) -11% (15,000) -2% O% 138,800 19% 2,500 0% 319,900 $ (375,400) $ (385,700) $ (439.200) $ (63,800) 17% 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 salaries and benefits have decreased 59% due to the allocation of FTEs. Professional services and support costs have decreased due to 1E511 system enhancements completed in the previous year. Projects and operations costs are comparable to the previous year's budget. The transfers out reflect a matching contribution to the State's contribution for towing services of $714,700 to the FSP special revenue fund and administrative allocations to the General fund of $161,500. 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 30). The allocation is based on estimates of diesel fuel sales tax revenues provided by the Controller of the State, subject to an annual state budget appropriation. Table 30 - State Transit Assistance Fund FY 2015 - 2017 FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Sources STA Sales Tax Investment Income TOTAL Sources Uses Professional Services Projects and Operations Operating and Capital Disbursements Transfers Out TOTAL Uses $ 13,484,300 $ 13,372,400 $ 13,372,400 2 71, 000 13 5, 400 167,800 13,755,300 13, 507, 800 13, 540, 200 8,211,600 22,280,000 800 4,634,000 46 6, 000 19 0, 000 19 0, 000 8,677,600 22,470,000 4,824,800 Excess (deficiency) of Sources over (under) Uses $ 5,077,700 $ (8,962,200) $ 8,715,400 $ 10,821,600 146,800 10,968,400 800 21,215,000 165,000 21,380,800 $ (10,412,400) $ (2,550,800) -19% 11,400 8% (2,539,400) -19% 800 N/A (1,065,000) -5% (25,000) -13% (1,089,200) -5% $ (1,450,200) 16% Investment income is expected to increase because of an increase in projected cash balances. The operating and capital disbursements consist of allocations for bus capital purposes. In FY 2016/17, 54% of the allocations are in Western County, 45% in Coachella Valley, and 1% in Palo Verde Valley. Transfers out represent rail capital allocations to the Coachella Valley Rail fund. Similar to the LTF allocations, the actual STA allocations will not be approved until July 2016. Coachella Valley Rail Fund The Coachella Valley Rail fund accounts for state funding for the planning and development of the new Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Pass corridor rail service (Table 31). Table 31- Coachella Valley Rail Fund FY 2015 - 2017 FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Sources Federal Reimbursements $ - $ - $ Investment Income 18,500 4,500 3,100 Transfers In 779,500 190,000 190,000 TOTAL Sources 798,000 194,500 193,100 Uses Personnel Salaries and Benefits 46,200 60,600 60,600 Professional Services 826,200 1,160,000 702,500 Support Costs 5,700 3,700 3,700 Projects and Operations Program Operations 10,000 Engineering 250,000 Construction 1,200,000 TOTAL Projects and Operations 1,460,000 TOTAL Uses 878,100 2,684,300 766,800 Excess (deficiency) of Sources over (under) Uses $ (80,100) $ (2,489,800) $ (573,700) $ 2,900,000 800 165,000 3,065,800 56,900 3,706,000 3,700 250,000 2,200,000 2,450,000 6,216,600 $ (3,150,800) $ 2,900,000 N/A (3,700) -82% (25,000) -13% 2,871,300 1476% (3,700) -6% 2,546,000 219% O% (10,000) -100% O% 1,000,000 83% 990,000 68% 3,532,300 132% $ (661,000) 27% Federal reimbursements represent a Federal Rail Administration (FRA) grant of $2,900,000 for rail station planning and development. Transfers in of $165,000 reflect STA allocations. Personnel salaries and benefits decreased 6% due to allocation of FTEs. Professional services and projects and operations increased 219% and 68%, respectively, and represent exploring passenger rail options, conducting detailed studies, and station construction planning and development on the Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Pass rail corridor. Other Agency Projects Fund The fund accounts for interagency cooperative planning and development of projects in the County. The Commission entered into a MOU with the District for the Santa Ana River Trail projects. The projects are a joint effort with several public and private agencies including the counties of Orange and San Bernardino. The District is the lead agency for environmental compliance for NEPA and CEQA, and the Commission will be responsible for project oversight and approval, final design, and construction. Table 32 - Other Agency Projects Fund FY 2015 - 2017 FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Sources Local Reimbursements Investment Income TOTAL Sources Uses Personnel Salaries and Benefits Professional Services Projects and Operations Program Operations Engineering Construction Right of Way/Land TOTAL Projects and Operations TOTAL Uses $ 508,700 $ 508,700 6,600 2,100 563,000 $ 396,600 100 563,100 396,600 34,900 74,600 12,000 55,500 20,000 90,000 290,000 250,000 163,000 2,100 558,500 310,000 8,700 593,400 396,600 Excess (deficiency) of Sources over (under) Uses $ 500,000 $ (30,300) $ $ 4,588,300 1,300 4,589,600 72,100 27,500 113,700 490,000 3,800,000 85,000 4,488,700 4,588,300 $ 1,300 $ 4,025,300 715% 1,200 1200% 4,026,500 715% 37,200 107% 27,500 N/A 58,200 105% 400,000 444% 3,550,000 1420% (78,000) -48% 3,930,200 704% 3,994,900 673% $ 31,600 -104% The District is responsible for 100% of the Santa Ana River Trail project costs. It will reimburse the Commission, including providing an advance deposit, for all salaries and benefits, project management, engineering, and construction costs (Table 32). Capital Projects Funds Overview The capital projects funds account for all debt proceeds from commercial paper notes, sales tax, and toll revenue bonds (Table 33). Table 33 - Capital Projects Funds FY 2015 — 2017 FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Revenues Investment Income TOTAL Revenues Expenditures Debt Service Interest Payments TOTAL Expenditures $ 2,833,700 $ 879,500 $ 2,679,700 2,833,700 879,500 2,679,700 59,000 59,000 Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures 2,833,700 879,500 2,620,700 Other Financing Sources (Uses) Transfers In 32,793,400 27,776,600 27,776,600 Transfers Out (153,094,200) (46,477,000) (71,981,000) Debt Proceeds 20,000,000 Net Financing Sources (Uses) (120,300,800) (18,700,400) (24,204,400) Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures and Other Financing Sources (Uses) (117,467,100) Beginning Fund Balance 273,589,500 ENDING FUND BALANCE (17,820,900) (21,583,700) 156,122,400 156,122,400 $ 156,122,400 $ 138,301,500 $ 134,538,700 $ 441,500 441,500 386,000 386,000 55,500 29,501,900 (132,780,900) 28,000,000 (75,279,000) (75,223,500) 134,538,700 $ 59,315,200 $ (438,000) -50% (438,000) -50% 386,000 N/A 386,000 N/A (824,000) -94% 1,725,300 6% (86,303,900) 186% 28,000,000 N/A (56,578,600) 303% (57,402,600) 322% (21,583,700) -14% $ (78,986,300) -57% As illustrated in the following charts, capital projects funds sources primarily consist of transfers in (Chart 16), and the significant uses of the capital projects funds are 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. In FY 2013/14, the Commission issued $462.2 million in sales tax revenue bonds (2013 Sales Tax Bonds) and $176.7 million in toll revenue bonds (2013 Toll Bonds) and executed a $421.1 million federal TIFIA loan to finance the 91 Project. A significant portion of the remaining proceeds of the 2013 Sales Tax Bonds along with the 2013 Toll Bonds has been and will continue to be drawn upon to pay a portion of costs of the 91 Project. During FY 2015/16 the Commission issued $20,000,000 in commercial paper notes for the I-15 Express Lanes project, and in FY 2016/17 the Commission expects to issue another $28,000,000 in commercial paper notes. Chart 16 — Capital Projects Funds Sources FY 2016/17 Investment Income 1% Debt Proceeds 48% Transfers In i 51% Transfers in of $29,501,900 represent a portion of the required equity contribution for the 91 Project. It will be funded from the 2009 Measure A Western County new corridor fund in FY 2016/17. Chart 17 — Capital Projects Funds Uses FY 2016/17 Debt Service 0% Transfers Out 100 % _Or In FY 2016/17, sales tax and toll revenue bond proceeds of $94,049,300 will be transferred out to the 2009 Measure A Western County Highway special revenue fund for the 91 Project; commercial paper proceeds of $31,672,000 will be transferred out to the 2009 Measure A Western County Highway special revenue fund for the I-15 Express Lanes project; $3,921,900 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 service; and $3,137,700 of 2013 Toll Bond proceeds will be transferred out to the Enterprise fund for operations and maintenance upon substantial completion of the 91 Project. Debt Service Funds 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 Sales Tax Bonds 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 34). The Commission's largest single expenditure is debt service. The debt agreements require the trustees to hold all debt proceeds, a portion of the sales tax revenues and, upon commencement of toll operations in FY 2016/17, the toll revenues from the Riverside 91 Express Lanes 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 funds. Under the sales tax indentures, 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. Under the toll indentures, which include the TIFIA loan, the use of toll revenues is prescribed by a flow of funds to be administered by the trustee. 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 including those bonds issued in 2009 (2009 Bonds), 2010 (2010 Bonds), and 2013 Sales Tax Bonds. Table 34 — Debt Service Funds FY 2015 — 2017 FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Revenues Federal Reimbursements $ 2,764,400 $ 2,767,000 $ 2,767,000 Investment Income 1,183,900 668,300 2,258,200 TOTAL Revenues 3,948,300 3,435,300 5,025,200 Expenditures Debt Service Principal Payments Interest Payments TOTAL Debt Service 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) Beginning Fund Balance ENDING FUND BALANCE 7,400,000 45,900,100 7,800,000 7,800,000 46,119,900 45,812,800 53,300,100 53,919,900 53,612,800 53,300,100 53,919,900 53,612,800 (49,351,800) (50,484,600) (48,587,600) 22,184,900 27,451,800 22,639,900 (2,945,700) (2,955,000) 19,239,200 27,451,800 19, 684, 900 (30,112,600) (23,032,800) (28,902,700) 136,312,300 106,199,700 106,199,700 $ 106,199,700 $ 83,166,900 $ 77,297,000 $ 2,767,000 346,000 3,113,000 8,100,000 45,529,800 53,629,800 53,629,800 (50,516,800) 22,656,900 (2,955,000) 19,701,900 (30,814,900) 77,297,000 $ 46,482,100 0% (322,300) -48% (322,300) -9% 300,000 4% (590,100) -1% (290,100) -1% (290,100) -1% (32,200) 0% (4,794,900) -17% (2,955,000) N/A (7,749,900) -28% (7,782,100) 34% (28,902,700) -27% $ (36,684,800) -44% Reimbursements consist of federal cash subsidy payments related to the 2010 Bonds Series B designated as BABs. The BABs subsidy payments reflect a reduction due to federal sequestration cuts. Investment income is significantly lower than the previous fiscal year due to lower investment balances resulting from the use of sales tax and toll revenue bonds through FY 2016/17 for the 91 Project. Transfers in represent the primary source of funding for the debt service funds (Chart 18) and consist of funds from the 2009 Measure A Western County Highways and Bond Financing special revenue funds. Chart 18 — Debt Service Funds Sources FY 2016/17 Federal Reimbursements 11% Transfers In 88% yny r Investment Income 1% Debt Service fund uses (Chart 19) consist of debt service on the sales tax and toll revenue bonds and transfer of the BABs subsidy payments to the 2009 Measure A Western County Highways and 2009 Measure A Coachella Valley Highway funds. Chart 19 — Debt Service Funds Uses FY 2016/17 Transfers Out 5% Debt Service 95% i Enterprise Fund Overview The Riverside 91 Express Lanes is a four -lane, eight -mile toll road in the median of the SR-91 that extends the OCTA 91 Express Lanes at the Orange County/Riverside County line to the SR-91/I-15 interchange. Toll operation revenues generated will fund maintenance and operating costs, rehabilitation, capital expenses, and debt service (Table 35). The Riverside 91 Express Lanes toll collection system is all electronic transactions, with no toll collection booths. Commuters on SR-91 in Corona will have a choice of using either the express lanes or the general purpose lanes. Table 35 — Enterprise Fund FY 2015 — 2017 FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Revenues Toll Revenue Other Revenue Investment Income TOTAL Revenues Expenses Personnel Salaries and Benefits Professional and Support Professional Services Support Costs TOTAL Professional and Support Costs Program and Operations Program and Operations Capital Outlay TOTAL Expenses Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenses Other Financing Sources (Uses) Transfers In Net Financing Sources (Uses) Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenses and Other Financing Sources (Uses) Beginning Fund Balance ENDING FUND BALANCE $ - $ - $ $ 3,798,000 2,345,000 6,800 6,149, 800 268,400 307,000 2,674,900 2,981,900 3,052,800 250,000 6,553,100 (403,300) 3,137, 700 3,137, 700 2,734,400 $ 2,734,400 $ 3,798,000 N/A 2,345,000 N/A 6,800 N/A 6,149,800 N/A 268,400 N/A 307,000 N/A 2,674,900 N/A 2,981,900 N/A 3,052,800 N/A 250,000 N/A 6,553,100 N/A (403,300) N/A 3,137,700 N/A 3,137,700 N/A 2,734,400 N/A N/A $ 2,734,400 N/A Toll revenues of $3,798,000 are based on a half year of estimated toll transactions derived from the Riverside County 91 Express Lanes Extension Investment Grade Traffic and Revenue Report and 2013 financing assumptions. Other revenue of $2,345,000 consists of violations and other non -toll transactions. Interest income represents earnings on funds held for operations. Transfers in of $3,137,700 consist of 2013 Toll Bond proceeds from the Capital Projects fund for operations and maintenance upon substantial completion of the 91 Project. Chart 20 — Enterprise Fund Sources FY 2016/17 Transfers In 34% Toll Revenue 41% i Toll operations expenses represent approximately six months in FY 2016/17 to manage the operations, maintenance, and capital support of the Riverside 91 Express Lanes. Personnel salaries and benefits represent 4% of the total budget. Professional and support costs is 45% of total expenses and includes system, equipment, and road maintenance; insurance; violation enforcement; consulting services; and marketing. Program and operations of $3,052,800 consist of the contracted operator's expenses related to operating and maintaining the toll lane hardware and software and customer service center, toll processing, and violation collection processing. Chart 21— Enterprise Fund Uses FY 2016/17 Capital Outlay 4% .",m.. Personnel Salaries and Benefits 4% Professional and Support 45% Revenues and Other Sources Total revenues and other sources are budgeted at $712,796,700, and consist of Measure A sales tax of $173,000,000, (or 24% of total sources); LTF sales tax of $85,000,000 (or 12% of total sources); STA revenues of $10,821,600 (or less than 2% of total sources); federal revenues of $28,007,100 (or 4% of total sources); state revenues, including vehicle registration fees, of $8,830,000 (or 1% of total sources); TUMF of $18,520,000 (or 2% of total sources); debt proceeds of $128,269,200 (or 18% of total sources); transfers in of $241,687,700 (or 34% of total sources); toll revenues of $3,798,000 (or less than 1% of total sources); and other revenues of $14,863,100 (or 2% of total sources). The specific revenue funding sources are shown in Table 36. Table 36 — Revenues and Other Sources FY 2016/17 Department/Program Sales Tax Measure A LTF STA Federal State Local/Toll/Other Funding Sources Management Services $ 3,250,000 $ - $ - $ $ $ 3,700 MEASURE A AND OTHER CAPITAL PROGRAMS Bond Financing 10,457,000 - - - 17,000 CETAP - - - 9,307,200 Economic Development 1,549,000 - - 13,900 Highways 58,737,000 - - 15,390,600 3,250,000 2,958,600 Local Streets and Roads 52,183,000 - - New Corridors 14,330,000 - - 47,600 Rail 7,901,000 - - 12,384,000 748,000 271,500 Regional Arterials 11,619,000 - - 9,365,600 REGIONAL PROGRAMS Public and Specialized Transit Planning and Programming Rail Station Maintenance/Operations Commuter Assistance Motorist Assistance 11,037,000 1,937,000 85,000,000 10,821,600 232,500 366,900 900,000 5,768,100 466,600 1,436,800 3,932,000 1,007,800 Toll Operations - - - - - 6,149,800 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES Debt Proceeds Transfers In 128,269,200 241,687,700 TOTAL Funding Sources $ 173,000,000 $ 85,000,000 $ 10,821,600 $ 28,007,100 $ 8,830,000 $ 407,138,000 Revenues —Definitions and Background $ 3,253,700 10,474,000 9,307,200 1,562,900 80,336,200 52,183,000 14,377,600 21,304,500 20,984,600 107,225,500 6,668,100 466,600 3,606,300 4,939,800 6,149,800 128,269,200 241,687,700 $ 712,796,700 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 approximately $10 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 2014/15 at $163 million. Measure A revenues are projected to approximate $170,000,000 and $173,000,000 in FY 2015/16 and FY 2016/17, 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 May 2016, 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 22 below. Chart 22 — Forecasted Measure A Sales Tax Revenues 2013 — 2021 $250,000,000 $200,000,000 $150, 000, 000 $100, 000, 000 $50, 000, 000 $- 1 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Actual Actual Actual Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected The following additional assumptions were used in the development of the Commission's revenue forecast for FY 2016/17: • The Inland Empire economy will continue to expand through FY 2016/17 due to steady gains in the Inland Empire's labor market, population growth, and increased consumer and business spending. • 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 77% for Western County, 22% for Coachella Valley, and 1% for Palo Verde Valley (Chart 23). These percentages will experience some slight variations from year to year based on changes in levels of taxable sales among the geographic areas. For example, in FY 2014/15, the actual allocations were approximately 76% for Western County, 23% for Coachella Valley, and 1% for Palo Verde Valley. Chart 23 — Geographic Allocation of Measure A Sales Tax Revenues Palo Verde 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 37. 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 37 - Program Allocation of 2009 Measure A Sales Tax Revenues Western County *Bond Financing -8% *Economic Development Incentives -1% *Highways - 30 % *Local Streets and Roads - 29% *New Corridors -11% *Public Transit -12% *Regional Arterials -9% Coachella Valley *Highways and Regional Arterials -50% *Local Streets and Roads -35% *Public Transit -15% 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 $173,000,000 for FY 2016/17, the geographic and program allocations are presented in Table 38. Table 38 - Geographic Allocation of Measure A Sales Tax Revenues by Program FY 2016/17 Western County Coachella Valley 10,457,000 1,549,000 39,506,000 Program Administration Bond Financing Economic Development Incentives Highways Highways and Regional Arterials Local Streets and Roads New Corridors Public Transit Regional Arterials TOTAL Administration $ 3,250,000 37,569,000 14,330,000 15,106,000 11,619,000 Palo Verde Valley Total 19,231,000 13,462,000 1,152, 000 5,769,000 $ 3,250,000 $ 130,136,000 $ 38,462,000 $ 1,152,000 $ 3,250,000 10,457,000 1,549,000 39,506,000 19,231,000 52,183,000 14,330,000 20,875,000 11,619,000 $ 173,000,000 Local Transportation Fund: LTF, established in state law by the TDA, is funded through a one -quarter of one cent of the State's 8.00% 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 (Chart 24). 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. Chart 24 - Local Transportation Fund Sales Tax Revenue Trend 2013 - 2017 90, 000, 000 88, 000, 000 86, 000, 000 84, 000, 000 82, 000, 000 80, 000, 000 78, 000, 000 76, 000, 000 74, 000, 000 72, 000, 000 70, 000, 000 FY 12/13 Actual FY 13/14 Actual FY 14/15 Actual FY 15/16 Projected FY 16/17 Projected 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. Sales taxes on gasoline and diesel fuels have historically generated the STA funding; however, recent legislation eliminated the tax on gasoline (Chart 25). Chart 25 - State Transit Assitance Sales Tax Revenue Trend 2013 - 2017 15, 000, 000 14, 000, 000 13, 000, 000 12, 000, 000 11, 000, 000 10, 000, 000 9,000,000 FY 12/13 Actual FY 13/14 Actual FY 14/15 Actual FY 15/16 Projected FY 16/17 Projected State Transportation Improvement Program: Administered by Ca!trans, the STIP is funded through state and federal gas tax dollars and is California's primary transportation fund. The State's revenues are generated by a price -based excise tax on gasoline. 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. As a result of alternative fuel vehicles, overall vehicle fuel efficiency, and lower gas prices, STIP revenues have steadily declined. STIP reimbursement estimates are based on budgeted expenditures for specific projects with STIP allocations approved by the CTC. Due to decreased funding levels, the CTC recently reduced programming for and deleted or delayed projects statewide in order to stay within available funding. Cap and Trade Program: State legislation in 2006 requires GHG emissions in the State to be reduced. A key element of the GHG reduction program is the Cap and Trade Program in which entities regulated under the program can "trade" or buy and sell a portion of emission allowances issued by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) at auctions held during the year. The revenues generated for the State through these auctions are appropriated for infrastructure investments that include LCTOP and road programs, high speed rail projects, and transit and intercity rail projects. LCTOP revenues for commuter rail operations 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 a 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 (Chart 26) estimates are based on monthly receipt trends and consideration of local housing and commercial construction activity in the County. Chart 26 — Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Revenue Trend 2013 — 2017 19, 000, 000 18, 000, 000 17, 000, 000 16, 000, 000 15, 000, 000 14, 000, 000 13, 000, 000 12, 000, 000 11, 000, 000 10, 000, 000 9,000,000 FY 12/13 Actual FY 13/14 Actual FY 14/15 Actual FY 15/16 Projected FY 16/17 Projected 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 and leasing opportunities for fiber-optic cable, advertising signs, and business tenants. The amount of funding received from the licenses and leases provides revenue to partially support the cost of owning and maintaining the Commission's land and facilities. Toll Revenue: In 2011 the Commission and OCTA entered into a cooperative agreement for the Riverside 91 Express Lanes and OCTA 91 Express Lanes to be interoperable and operated by the same toll operator. In 2013 a subsequent agreement among the Commission, OCTA, and the operator results in a single operator providing most operations and first line maintenance services for a single 91 Express Lanes system in Riverside and Orange counties. Notwithstanding their physical connection and use of the same toll operator, the Riverside 91 Express Lanes and OCTA 91 Express Lanes are independent enterprises, and tolls on each agency's express lanes will be charged independently. FY 2016/17 toll revenues represent a half year of projected toll transactions for the Riverside 91 Express Lanes based on the Riverside County 91 Express Lanes Extension Investment Grade Traffic and Revenue Report and 2013 financing assumptions. Non -toll Revenues: The 2011 cooperative agreement between the Commission and OCTA regarding the 91 Express Lanes also included cost and revenue sharing among other provisions. Non -toll revenues are sources of revenues not attributable directly to toll transactions and are derived through administration by the operator of transaction -based fees and account -based fees in addition to interest revenues on customer balances, net of uncollectible tolls. FY 2016/17 non -toll revenues, which are reported as other revenue, are based on historical information provided by OCTA related to the OCTA 91 Express Lanes. Investment Income: The Commission has established a prudent investment policy for cash on hand that is intended to maximize return while providing absolute safeguards on principal and liquidity, as noted in Section 1. Interest earnings on the State and County investment pools are estimated at an interest rate of 0.25%. The earnings on funds held by the trustee for debt service and projects are assumed to be at 0.75%. Program Revenues and Other Sources Revenues and other financing sources for FY 2016/17 are allocated to the various Commission programs as follows: Chart 27 — Program Revenues FY 2016/17 $250,000,000 $200,000,000 $150,000,000 $100,000,000 $50,000,000 $ e�oee ac`c� LOOP e\oQ mac r s` o �aca�e�ec,�S O°05o cc oDy eesaca �`ot c ae t 0 0 Management Services ■,■,■,■,�,-, -,- -, 9 a5 Q` t,a\5 QS O� \Op5 cGe cLe \OCZ aaS `ZOO \pie ea`a�.F Qua ZSti z 5a era Qtooe zye oca a\ti �06 e\O etP Pz \\OQ e ac Pe6o Qep acaQ cac' PJ o°i5 O cay .coo . � a c` z` ",, Q\ate `Oct" ya P� ■ Measure A ■ LTF O STA ■ Federal Y State Y Local/Toll/Other The primary funding sources for management services are Measure A allocations of $3,250,000 as well as LTF allocation transfers in of $1,000,000 and administration funding transfers in of $1,094,300 from TUMF, SAFE, and FSP. Other revenues include $400 for administrative activities. Interest revenues in FY 2016/17 are $3,300. Bond Financing Measure A Western County revenues of $10,457,000 will be used to support bond financing costs. Interest revenues are $17,000. CETAP The Western County CETAP program will receive $9,250,000 from TUMF for development of new CETAP corridors. Additionally, other local revenues include $57,200 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 $1,549,000 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 $13,900. Highways Funding for the highway program includes 2009 Measure A sales tax revenues of $58,737,000 for Western County highways and Coachella Valley highways and regional arterial programs. The 2009 Measure A Western County sales tax revenues will be used primarily for the 91 Project, 1-15 Express Lanes project, 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, SR-91 HOV lanes, and Pachappa underpass project. Federal funds for highway projects include $1,416,500 and $9,738,300 in CMAQ funds for the SR-91 HOV lanes and Pachappa underpass, respectively, and $1,468,800 in demonstration funds for the 91/71 interchange improvements. Other federal funds include $2,767,000 for BABs subsidy payments related to the 2010 Bonds. State funds include STIP funding of $2,900,000 will be used on the 1-215 corridor improvements, SR-60 truck climbing lanes, and toll feasibility study. Other state revenues include $350,000 for the 91 Project. Additional local funding includes $20,000 in TUMF zone reimbursements from WRCOG for the 74/215 interchange, $5,000 in lease revenues, $60,000 in carpool violations, $1,805,500 in 91 Project reimbursements, and interest revenue of $1,068,100. In FY 2016/17, the Commission anticipates $100,269,200 in a federal TIFIA loan drawdown to fund the 91 Project and the issuance of $28,000,000 in commercial paper notes for the 1-15 Express Lanes project. Transfers in include $94,049,300 in sales tax and toll revenue bond proceeds to fund the 91 Project; $31,672,000 from commercial paper proceeds to fund the 1-15 Express Lanes project; $22,656,900 to the Sales Tax Bonds debt service fund for Measure A Western County and Coachella Valley highways debt service; $29,501,900 to the Sales Tax Bonds capital projects fund for the 91 Project equity contribution from the 2009 Measure A Western County new corridors fund; $10,000,000 to the 2009 Measure A Western County highways fund from the 2009 Measure A Western County bond financing fund for debt service; and $2,955,000 to the 2009 Measure A Western County highways and 2009 Measure A Coachella Valley highways funds from the Sales Tax Bonds debt service fund for BABs subsidy payments on the 2010 Sales Tax Bonds. Local Streets and Roads Measure A allocations of $52,183,000 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 $14,330,000 will be available for environmental clearance, right of way acquisition, and construction of these new corridors. Interest revenues of $47,600 are included in local revenues. Rail Unexpended 1989 Measure A Western County revenues will be used for the PVL. The 2009 Measure A Western County's public transit program allocated $7,901,000 for rail. Federal FTA funding consists of $9,484,000 for station rehabilitation and security projects and $2,900,000 for the development of Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Pass corridor rail service. State Transportation Enhancement revenues of $748,000 will fund station rehabilitation and security projects. Local revenues include investment income of $86,700, reimbursements of $16,800 related to the Perris -Downtown rail station, and property management revenues of $168,000. Transfers in of $165,000 are from STA for the development of Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Pass corridor rail service and $7,976,000 from the 2009 Measure A Western County rail fund for the PVL. Regional Arterials The Western County regional arterial program will receive funds from Measure A and TUMF in the amounts of $11,619,000 and $9,250,000, respectively. The new TUMF revenues along with unexpended TUMF revenues from prior years will be the primary source of funding TUMF regional arterial projects. Other local revenues also consist of investment income of $115,600. Transfers in consist of $2,234,100 from TUMF CETAP as a match for TUMF regional arterial projects and $825,000 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 $85,000,000 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 $10,821,600 are allocated to the County's public transit operators. For the FY 2016/17 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 $11,037,000 has been allocated for Western County specialized transit and intercity bus services and Coachella Valley specialized and public transit services. Local revenues represent investment income of $366,900. Planning and Programming Transportation planning studies are funded with a LTF off -the -top allocation transfer in of $2,550,000, or three percent of estimated LTF revenues. A LTF allocation transfer in of $2,000,000 will fund grade separation projects for the city of Corona. STIP in the amount of $900,000 will fund PPM activities of the Commission and CVAG. Local revenues consist of $1,175,000 for a traffic signal synchronization coordination project, $4,588,300 for the District's projects, and investment income of $4,800. 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 $17,800,000 and $11,355,800 in 2009 Measure A Western County rail funds. In addition to interest revenues of $9,500, local revenues include $434,400 in reimbursements primarily from SCRRA for security costs, $4,000 for Metrolink violator citations, and $18,700 for miscellaneous vending machine revenues. Commuter Assistance The Commuter Assistance program will receive funding of $1,937,000 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 federal funds of $232,500 to support the commuter assistance program. Local revenues consist of other agency reimbursements of $1,400,500 for support of the San Bernardino commuter assistance program and regional ridematching as well as investment income of $36,300. Motorist Assistance SAFE is funded from $1,700,000 in revenues received through DMV registration fees, while Caltrans will allocate $2,232,000 in State highway account funds to cover FSP services. The Commission will also receive local revenues of $310,500 to support SANBAG's share of the 1E511 system operations, $675,000 in 91 Project reimbursements, investment income of $15,300, and cost recoveries of $7,000 from responsible parties related to call box knockdowns. The State's FSP contribution is matched with an operating transfer in from SAFE of $714,700. Toll Operations Toll operations for the Riverside 91 Express Lanes are funded from toll revenues of $3,798,000 and represent one- half year of operations. The Riverside 91 Express Lanes will also receive $2,345,000 from miscellaneous non -toll revenue and $6,800 investment income. Transfers in of $3,137,700 consist of 2013 Toll Bond proceeds from the Capital Projects fund for operations and maintenance upon substantial completion of the 91 Project. Commission Debt The Commission's current debt under the 2009 Measure A has been incurred for highway, new corridor, regional arterial, and local streets and roads projects for which title usually vests or, upon completion, will vest with Caltrans or local jurisdictions for ongoing operations and maintenance. Future Measure A sales taxes are pledged to cover Measure A debt service payments on the sales tax revenue bonds and commercial paper notes. Future toll revenues generated on the Riverside 91 Express Lanes, which is part of the 91 Project, are pledged to pay debt service on the 2013 Toll Bonds and federal TIFIA loan. The Commission may also issue commercial paper notes for other 2009 Measure A projects. Since the financed projects are not assets of the Commission for which the Commission will have operating responsibilities, except for the intangible rights to operate the express lanes on SR-91 and 1-15, 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 39 presents a summary of the anticipated changes in the Commission's debt during FY 2016/17. Accretion amounts related to capital appreciation bonds and the TIFIA loan are excluded, as they do not affect the annual budget activities. Table 39 — Changes in Commission Debt Projected Balance Projected Balance July 1, 2016 Additions (Reductions) June 30, 2017 Commercial Paper 2009 Sales Tax Bonds 2010 Sales Tax Bonds 2013 Sales Tax Bonds 2013 Toll Bonds TIFIA Loan Commercial Paper $ 20,000,000 139,100,000 150,000,000 462, 200, 000 176,654,600 320, 785, 200 $ 28,000,000 100,269,200 (8,100,000) $ 1,268,739,800 $ 128,269,200 $ (8,100, 000) $ 48,000,000 131,000,000 150,000,000 462, 200,000 176,654,600 421,054,400 $ 1,388,909,000 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 September 2013 the Commission reduced the commercial paper program from $120,000,000 to $60,000,000. 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. The Commission issued $20,000,000 of commercial paper notes in FY 2015/16 and anticipates the issuance of $28,000,000 of commercial paper notes in FY 2016/17 related to the funding for the 1-15 Express Lanes project. The projected outstanding amount of commercial paper at June 30, 2017 is $48,000,000. The Commission projects commercial paper interest payments of $59,000 and $386,000 in FY 2015/16 and FY 2016/17, respectively. The commercial paper debt service expenditures are reflected in the Commercial Paper capital projects fund. The Commission has an irrevocable direct draw letter of credit in the amount of $60,750,000 and reimbursement agreement with State Street Bank and Trust Company (State Street Bank), which expires in October 2017, as credit and liquidity support for the commercial paper notes. The costs for the liquidity support are reflected in the 2009 Measure A Western County Bond Financing special revenue fund. Sales Tax Revenue Bonds 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 sales tax bonds are secured by a pledge of the 2009 Measure A revenues. All sales tax revenue bonds mature on or before June 2039, prior to the expiration of the 2009 Measure A. 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, N.A. (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, 2017, the projected notional amounts for the Bank of America and Deutsche Bank swaps are $70,800,000 and $60,200,000, 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 The Bank of Tokyo -Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd. (BTMU), which expire in March 2019. The costs for these liquidity facilities are accounted for in the 2009 Measure A Western County Bond Financing special revenue fund. For FY 2016/17, the Commission has budgeted debt service principal and interest payments of $8,100,000 and $4,838,300 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 the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA). The aggregate amount issued of $150,000,000 for the 2010 Bonds was used to retire outstanding commercial paper notes, provide funds for 2009 Measure A Western County capital projects, and pay costs of issuance. A portion of the BABs was 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 Taxable bonds additionally designated as RZEDBs; however, in FY 2015/16, the BABs subsidy was reduced approximately 6.8% due to federal sequestration cuts, similar to the prior year. If sequestration continues, the FY 2016/17 BABs subsidy is expected to be reduced by approximately 7.2%. Estimated net debt service payments for the 2010 Bonds in FY 2016/17 are $0 for principal and $9,530,500 for interest payments. The $2,767,000 projected cash subsidy payment is reflected as federal reimbursements. In July 2013 the Commission issued $462,200,000 in fixed rate sales tax revenue bonds, at a premium, in connection with the 91 Project. The proceeds of the 2013 Sales Tax Bonds were used to fund a portion of the costs of the 91 Project, retire outstanding commercial paper notes, pay capitalized interest through December 2017, and pay costs of issuance. Estimated debt service payments for the 2013 Sales Tax Bonds in FY 2016/17 are $0 for principal and $24,041,100 for interest payments. The Commission has received long-term debt ratings of Aa2, AA+, and AA from Moody's, S&P, and Fitch Ratings (Fitch), respectively on its currently outstanding sales tax revenue bonds. Toll Revenue Bonds and TIFIA Loan 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 91 Project. In July 2013 the Commission issued $176,654,600 in toll revenue bonds, at a discount, that consist of $123,825,000 in current interest bonds (CIBs) and $52,829,600 in capital appreciation bonds (CABS). The CIBs have maturity dates through June 2048, while the CABS have maturity dates commencing June 2022 through June 2043 at the accreted value. Estimated debt service payments for the 2013 Toll Bonds in FY 2016/17 are $0 for principal and $7,119,900 for interest payments. The 2013 Toll Bonds are secured by a lien on the trust estate, which consists primarily of toll revenues and account revenues less operating and maintenance expenses of the Riverside 91 Express Lanes. In July 2013 the Commission executed a federal TIFIA loan with the United States Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT) in an amount up to $421,054,400, which provided the final puzzle piece needed for the full funding of the 91 Project. The TIFIA loan is a toll revenue bond that is subordinate to the 2013 Toll Bonds unless and until the occurrence of a bankruptcy related event. Proceeds of the TIFIA loan may be drawn upon after certain conditions have been met. Interest on outstanding disbursements is 3.47% and is compounded semiannually. The TIFIA loan matures on the earlier of June 2051 and the date that is 35 years after the substantial completion date of the 91 Project, which is anticipated in January 2017. Interest payments commence on the fifth anniversary of the substantial completion date or the first interest payment date occurring prior to the fifth anniversary date. Accordingly, semiannual interest payments are anticipated to commence December 2021; principal payments commence annually in June 2030. The Commission is required to fund a $20,000,000 TIFIA debt service reserve no later than July 2019 from sale proceeds of excess land acquired for the 91 Project. The TIFIA loan is also secured by the trust estate, similar to the 2013 Toll Bonds. The 2013 Toll Bonds and the TIFIA loan received long-term ratings from S&P and Fitch of BBB-. 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 28 and Table 40 indicate, the Commission has successfully met its policy standard for sales tax revenue debt issued under the 2009 Measure A, even in a fluctuating 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 3.9 is anticipated for FY 2016/17. Any coverage less than 2 to 1 would necessitate using other program funding to cover all debt service expenditures. Chart 28 — Measure A Sales Tax Debt Capacity Analysis $200,000,000 $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 $- FY 2015/16 Table 40 — Measure A Sales Tax Debt Capacity Analysis FY 2016/17 u Senior Debt Service NI Available Revenues FY 15/16 FY 16/17 Sales Tax Revenues Senior Debt Service Coverage Ratio - Senior Debt Long -Term Debt Rating Commercial Paper Rating 170,000,000 $ 43,817,900 $ 3.9 Aa2/AA+/AA P-1/A-1+ 173,000,000 44,430,600 3.9 Aa2/AA+/AA P-1/A-1+ The toll -supported debt consists of the 2013 Toll Bonds as senior debt and the TIFIA loan as subordinate debt. Beginning in the first full fiscal year following substantial completion, the Commission is required to establish and collect tolls in connection with the toll road to produce net revenues equal to or in excess of the following ratios: • 150% on senior lien debt; • 130% on senior lien, second lien, and subordinate debt; and • 100% on outstanding debt plus reserve deposits and certain other funds established under the indenture. Toll operations are anticipated to commence in January 2017 upon substantial completion of the 91 Project. Proceeds from the 2013 Bonds related to capitalized interest will be used to pay interest on the 2013 Bonds through and including December 2017. Accordingly, the toll coverage ratio requirements will be applicable commencing in FY 2017/18. Aggregate Debt Service Schedule for Sales Tax Bonds Debt service requirements for the sales tax revenue bonds are based on amortization schedules for the 2009 Bonds; 2010 Bonds, including the BABs cash subsidy payments; and the 2013 Sales Tax Bonds. Since commercial paper is expected to be refinanced with sales tax revenue bonds, debt service requirements for commercial paper are not included in Table 41; however, the debt service interest expenditures in FY 2016/17 for the commercial paper notes are estimated at $386,000. Table 41— Commission Sales Tax Revenue Bonds Net Debt Service Requirements Fiscal Year 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022-2026 2027-2031 2032-2036 2037-2039 Total Principal $ 8,100,000 31,460,000 20,990,000 21,990,000 22,925,000 132,740,000 164,095,000 202,210,000 146,790,000 Interest $ 39,077,600 38,759,300 37, 277,400 36,334,000 35,323,200 159,770,600 125,330,100 78,747,600 17,290,700 Subsidy Payments $ (2,747,000) (2,982,100) (2,982,100) (2,982,100) (2,982,100) (14,910,600) (14,910,600) (12,797,700) (3,175,500) Net Debt Service $ 751,300,000 $ 567,910,500 $ (60,469,800) Outstanding Debt and Debt Service Requirements as of June 30, 2017 $ 44,430,600 67,237,200 55,285,300 55,341,900 55,266,100 277,600,000 274,514,500 268,159,900 160,905,200 $ 1,258,740,700 The following is a summary of debt issued and secured by 2009 Measure A sales tax revenues, receipt of which began in FY 2009/10: 2005 Commercial Paper Notes (Limited Tax Bonds), Series A: 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; in September 2013, the program was further reduced to $60,000,000. The repayment of principal and interest on the commercial paper notes is secured by an irrevocable direct draw letter of credit issued by State Street 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 indentures. 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. In September 2011, the reserve fund was released to fund project costs in connection with an extension of the SBPAs. The repayment of principal and interest on the 2009 Bonds is secured by the SBPAs with BTMU, and the Measure A sales tax revenues secure such repayment. 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 42. Table 42 — 2009 Sales Tax Revenue Bonds Debt Service Requirements Fiscal Year 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022-2026 2027-2029 Total Principal $ 8,100,000 8,500,000 8,900,000 9,300,000 9,600,000 55,300,000 39,400, 000 Interest $ 5,506,000 5,187, 700 4,853,800 4,514,900 4,138,600 14,653,900 3,264,100 Total Debt Service 139,100,000 $ 42,119,000 $ 13,606,000 13, 687, 700 13,753,800 13,814,900 13,738,600 69,953,900 42, 664,100 $ 181,219,000 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 43. Table 43 — 2010 Sales Tax Revenue Bonds Net Debt Service Requirements Fiscal Year Principal Interest 2017 $ 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022-2026 2027-2031 24,815,000 2032-2036 73,215,000 2037-2039 51,970,000 - $ 9,530,500 9,530,500 9,530,500 9,530,500 9,530,500 47, 652, 600 47,047,400 32,849,100 7,165, 000 Subsidy $ (2,747,000) (2,982,100) (2,982,100) (2,982,100) (2,982,100) (14,910,600) (14, 910, 600) (12,797,700) (3,175,500) Net Debt Service Total $ 150,000,000 $ 182,366,600 $ (60,469,800) $ 6,783,500 6,548,400 6,548,400 6,548,400 6,548,400 32,742,000 56,951,800 93,266,400 55,959,500 $ 271,896,800 2013 Sales Tax Revenue Bonds (Limited Tax Bonds), Series A Tax -Exempt: In July 2013, the Commission issued $462,200,000 principal amount of serial bonds at a premium of $38,328,800 to retire all of the outstanding principal amount of commercial paper notes, fund a portion of the 91 Project costs, pay capitalized interest during construction, and pay costs of issuance. The $286,065,000 of serial bonds mature in annual installments ranging from $12,090,000 to $24,450,000 on various dates from June 1, 2018 through June 1, 2033 at interest rates ranging from 5.00 to 5.25%. The $176,135,000 of term bonds are due on June 1, 2039 with annual sinking fund payments ranging from $25,735,000 to $33,235,000 on June 1, 2034 through June 1, 2039 at an interest rate of 5.25%. The 2013 Sales Tax 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 2013 Sales Tax Bonds are summarized in Table 44. Table 44 — 2013 Sales Tax Revenue Bonds Debt Service Requirements Fiscal Year Principal Interest Total Debt Service 2017 $ - $ 24,041,100 2018 22,960,000 24,041,100 2019 12,090,000 22,893,100 2020 12,690,000 22,288,600 2021 13,325,000 21,654,100 2022-2026 77,440,000 97,464,100 2027-2031 99,880,000 75,018,600 2032-2036 128,995,000 45,898,500 2037-2039 94,820,000 10,125,700 Total $ 462,200,000 $ 343,424,900 $ 24,041,100 47,001,100 34,983,100 34,978,600 34,979,100 174, 904,100 174,898,600 174,893,500 104,945,700 $ 805,624,900 2013 Toll Revenue Bonds, Series A (Current Interest Obligations): In July 2013, the Commission issued $123,825,000 principal amount of serial CIBs to fund a portion of the 91 Project, pay capitalized interest during construction, fund a debt service reserve fund, fund an initial amount for an Operations and Maintenance Fund, and pay costs of issuance. The CIBs consist of a serial bond maturing on June 1, 2044 in the amount of $39,315,000 at an interest rate of 5.75% and a term bond due on June 1, 2048 in the amount of $84,510,000 with annual sinking funds payments of $42,255,000 on June 1, 2047 and June 1, 2048 at an interest rate of 5.75%. The Toll Revenue Bond agreements require the trustee to hold all bond proceeds and segregate funds into separate accounts as required by the indentures. Debt service requirements for the 2013 Toll Revenue CIBS are summarized in Table 45. Table 45 — 2013 Toll Revenue Current Interest Obligation Bonds Debt Service Requirements Fiscal Year 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022-2026 2027-2031 2032-2036 2037-2041 2042-2046 2047-2048 Total Principal Interest Total Debt Service $ $ 7,119,900 7,119,900 - 7,119,900 7,119,900 - 7,119,900 35,599,700 - 35,599,700 35,599,700 - 35,599,700 39,315,000 31,078,500 84,510,000 7,289,000 $ 123,825,000 $ 216,365,800 $ 7,119,900 7,119,900 7,119,900 7,119,900 7,119,900 35,599,700 35,599,700 35,599,700 35,599,700 70,393,500 91,799,000 $ 340,190,800 2013 Toll Revenue Bonds, Series A (Capital Appreciation Obligations): In July 2013, the Commission issued $52,829,600 principal amount of serial CABS to fund a portion of the 91 Project, pay capitalized interest during construction, fund a debt service reserve fund, fund an initial amount for an Operations and Maintenance Fund, and pay costs of issuance. The CABS will not pay current interest as interest will be compounded commencing December 2013 semiannually and paid at maturity. Therefore, the CABS will increase in value, or accrete, by the accumulation of such compounded interest from its initial principal amount to the maturity value in installments ranging from $3,440,000 to $34,220,000 on various dates from June 1, 2022 through June 1, 2043. Interest rates and yield to maturity range from 5.30% to 7.15%. The Toll Revenue Bond agreements require the trustee to hold all bond proceeds and segregate funds into separate accounts as required by the indentures. Debt service requirements for the 2013 Toll Revenue CABS are summarized in Table 46. Table 46 — 2013 Toll Revenue Capital Appreciation Obligation Bonds Debt Service Requirements Fiscal Year Principal Accreted Interest Total Debt Service 2022-2023 $ 5,494,800 $ 3,655,200 2024-2028 18,364,700 22,490,300 2029-2033 15,215,000 34,850,000 2034-2038 1,963,300 6,196,700 2039-2041 11,791,800 78,458,200 Total $ 52,829,600 $ 145,650,400 $ 9,150,000 40,855,000 50,065,000 8,160,000 90,250,000 $ 198,480,000 TIFIA Loan Agreement: In July 2013, the Commission executed a TIFIA loan of up to $421,054,400 for the 91 Project. In FY 2016/17, the Commission is expected to draw the balance of the TIFIA loan, or $100,269,200 principal amount of TIFIA loan proceeds, for the 91 Project. During construction and for a period of up to five years following substantial completion, interest is compounded and added to the initial TIFIA loan. The TIFIA loan requires mandatory debt service payments at a minimum and scheduled debt service payments to the extent additional funds are available. TIFIA debt service payments are expected to commence on December 1, 2021, which is five years after substantial completion of the 91 Project, through June 1, 2051. The interest rate of the TIFIA loan is 3.47%. Based on a projected draw schedule, Table 47 presents an estimate of mandatory and scheduled debt service. Table 47 —TIFIA Debt Service Requirements Mandatory Scheduled Fiscal Year Principal Interest Total Principal Interest 2019-2023 2024-2028 2029-2033 2034-2038 2039-2043 2044-2048 2049-2051 Total Accretion Initial Loan $ - $ 3,855,300 $ 3,855,300 $ - $ 31,193,000 - 23,682,500 23,682,500 - 63,962,300 202,000 73,988,700 74,190,700 - 13,597,600 97,873,700 82,059,600 179,933,300 - - 99,539,200 61,564,000 161,103,200 - - 178,019,200 41,424,700 219,443,900 - - 129,385,500 6,542,600 135,928,100 400 - 505,019,600 $ 293,117,400 $ 798,137,000 $ 108,752,900 (83,965,200) $ 421,054,400 In connection with the 2013 financing for the 91 Project, the Commission covenanted to deposit amounts with the toll trustee as an equity contribution to the 91 Project. The FY 2015/16 equity contribution is funded by transfers from the 1989 Measure A Western County highway fund and 2009 Measure A Western County new corridors fund, and the FY 2016/17 equity contribution is funded by a transfer from the 2009 Measure A Western County new corridors fund. The allocation of the sales tax revenue bonds to the 2009 Measure A programs is presented in Chart 29. A significant portion of the sales tax revenue bonds were allocated for highway and regional arterial projects in the Western County and Coachella Valley; however, less than 1% was allocated for local streets and roads projects in the Coachella Valley and Palo Verde Valley. Chart 29 — Program Long -Term Debt Highways and Regional Arterials 100% •iNgionwP4( The allocation of the sales tax revenue bonds by the benefiting geographic area is presented in Chart 30. Chart 30 — Long -Term Debt by Geographic Area Coachella Valley 2% Western County` • 98% ! Outstanding Debt and Legal Debt Margin at June 30, 2017 A summary of the Commission's outstanding debt secured by Measure A sales tax revenues and related legal debt margin projected at June 30, 2017 is presented in Table 48: Table 48 — Legal Debt Margin Authorized Sales Tax Revenue Debt 2005 Commercial Paper Notes 2009 Bonds 2010 Bonds 2013 Sales Tax Bonds Total Outstanding Debt Legal Debt Margin 2009 Measure A $ 975,000,000 48,000,000 131,000,000 150,000,000 462,200,000 791,200,000 $ 183,800,000 Table 49 — Budget Comparison by Department FY 2015 — 2017 FY 14/15 Actual FY 15/16 Revised Budget FY 15/16 Projected FY 16/17 Budget Dollar Change Percent Change Revenues Measure A Sales Tax LTF Sales Tax STA Sales Tax Federal Reimbursements State Reimbursements Local Reimbursements TUMF Revenue Toll Revenue Other Revenue Investment Income Total Revenues Expenditures/Expenses 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 Toll Operations Debt Service: Principal Payments Interest Payments Total Debt Service Total Expenditures/Expenses Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures/Expenses Other Financing Sources (Uses) Transfers In Transfers Out Debt Proceeds TIFIA Loan Proceeds Net Financing Sources (Uses) Excess (deficiency) of Revenues over (under) Expenditures/Expenses and Other Financing Sources (Uses) $ 163,092,800 81,332,500 13,484,300 57,614,000 50,623,800 2,277,800 17,400,800 2,542,400 6,258,200 394,626,600 481,200 1,900,100 926,500 4,350,200 7,658,000 2,419,000 14,122,600 89,164,800 2,891,400 4,318,000 112,915,800 497,305,900 7,411,700 45,913,300 53,325,000 671,204,700 $ 170,000,000 83,000,000 13,372,400 50,595,800 56,130,600 4,084,300 18,053,800 787,000 2,456,300 $ 170,000,000 83,000,000 13,372,400 39,712,800 61,395,600 9,199,000 18,041,000 185,000 5,663,000 398,480,200 400,568,800 542,500 479,100 1,987,800 1,581,700 1,516,400 1,290,100 4,966,900 4,601,700 9,013,600 7,157,800 26,188,500 118,129,500 3,687,300 5,491,200 160,654,300 692,979,000 7,800,000 46,119,900 53,919,900 916,566,800 7,952,600 4,460,400 21,309,700 94,385,300 3,737,200 5,492,600 129,385,200 564,159,600 7,800,000 45,871,800 53,671,800 755,169,200 (276,578,100) 232,626,100 (232,626,100) 48,904,100 48,904,100 (518,086,600) (354,600,400) 136,326,500 (136,326,500) 261,277,900 261,277,900 181,186,600 (181,186,600) 20,000,000 271,880,700 291,880,700 (227,674,000) Beginning Fund Balance 1,031,476,400 (256,808,700) (62,719,700) 803,802,400 803,802,400 Ending Fund Balance $ 803,802,400 $ 546,993,700 $ 741,082,700 $ 173,000,000 85,000,000 10,821,600 28,007,100 8,830,000 10,496,100 18,520,000 3,798,000 2,518,000 1,849,000 342,839,800 502,700 1,898,500 1,457,400 5,447,900 9,306,500 12,037,100 34,097,200 111,281,600 3,579,900 5,743,000 166,738,800 444,097,900 6,553,100 8,100,000 45,915,800 54,015,800 680,712,100 (337,872,300) 241,687,700 (241,687,700) 28,000,000 100,269,200 128,269,200 (209,603,100) 741,082,700 $ 531,479,600 $ 3,000,000 2,000,000 (2,550,800) (22,588,700) (47,300,600) 6,411,800 466,200 3,798,000 1,731,000 (607,300) (55,640,400) (39,800) (89,300) (59,000) 481,000 292,900 4,879,300 7,908,700 (6,847,900) (107,400) 251,800 6,084,500 (248,881,100) 6,553,100 300,000 (204,100) 95,900 (235,854,700) 2% 2% -19 % -45% -84 % 157% 3% N/A 220% -25% -14% -7 % -4% -4% 10% 3% 68% 30% -6% -3% 5% 4% -36% N/A 4% 0% 0% -26% 180,214,300 105,361,200 (105,361,200) 28,000,000 (161,008,700) (133,008,700) -35% 77% 77% N/A -62 % -51% 47,205,600 -18% (62,719,700) -8% $ (15,514,100) -3% 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 31— Executive Management F Expenditures Support Costs 17% Salaries and Benefits 18% .40 f Professional Costs 65% Executive Management has a budget of $502,700 (Table 50) for oversight of all Commission functions. The 5% net decrease in salaries and benefits reflects the allocation of FTEs to other programs and a 4% pool for merit -based salary increases. Professional costs of $325,000 include legal fees to defend recently enacted design -build legislation and other matters and consulting services for organizational training. Support costs include various membership dues and staff -related travel costs of $87,100. Table 50 — Executive Management Expenditure Detail FY 14/15 FY 15/16 Actual Revised Budget FY 15/16 FY 16/17 Projected Budget Dollar Change Percent Change Salaries and Benefits Professional Costs Legal Services Professional Services - General Total Professional Costs Support Costs TOTAL Executive Management $ 171,500 $ 95,400 $ 95,400 202,900 210,000 43,400 150,000 246,300 63,400 $ 481,200 $ 360,000 87,100 542,500 $ 150,000 150,000 300,000 83,700 479,100 $ 90,600 175,000 150,000 325,000 87,100 $ 502,700 $ (4,800) -5% (35,000) -17% O% (35,000) -10% 0% $ (39,800) -7% Executive Management Staffing Summary Position FY 14/15 FY 15/16 Administrative Assistant 0.01 0.01 Deputy Executive Director 0.07 0.05 Executive Director 0.28 0.14 Senior Administrative Assistant 0.01 0.01 Senior Office Assistant 0.19 0.15 FTE 0.56 0.36 Department Budget Overview Department Description FY 16/17 0.00 0.06 0.10 0.01 0.26 0.43 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, Southern California transportation agencies, and local governments regarding advancing transportation policy in California. Policy concerns include the need for ongoing transportation investment, flexibility in project delivery methods, streamlining of environmental processes, and a renewed focus of the connection between transportation projects and the overall quality of life in the County. • Project delivery will be a top priority in FY 2016/17 with construction proceeding on a number of capital projects. The Commission is serving as the lead agency on two notable, high -profile projects: the 91 Project in Corona and the 1-15 Express Lanes project. The combined budget for these projects is approximately $2 billion. In addition to serving as the lead agency for the above -mentioned projects, the Commission is the primary funding agency of many other projects including the 1-10 Jefferson interchange in the Coachella Valley and the SR-60 truck climbing lanes. • Another component of project delivery will include the need to complete the environmental review process on the SR-79 realignment project. • There will be a continued focus on enhanced cost-effective Metrolink and Los Angeles -San Diego -San Luis Obispo (LOSSAN) Rail Corridor service along with continuing development of a Service Development Plan (SDP) and environmental document for intercity rail service for the Coachella Valley/San Gorgonio Pass Corridor. • The advancement of construction on a number of projects will require a requisite increase in public outreach to the media and local governments. • A renewed emphasis, as part of a regionwide effort, will be placed on working with local governments and stakeholders to advance active transportation projects such as bicycling, walking, and transit use. • The Commission will remain an active participant as part of a concerted statewide effort to seek additional transportation funding while advocating for process improvements to ease project development. • Enhanced communication with the public will result from the implementation of a comprehensive social media effort focused on current projects and Commission activities. Accomplishments FY 2015/16 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. " Substantially completed construction on the PVL with regular service scheduled to begin in June 2016. " Continued construction on the widening of 91 Project in Corona which also includes the extension of the 91 Express Lanes from the Orange County Line to 1-15. " Continued to implement components of the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan. " Continued progress on project development for the Mid County Parkway and SR-79 realignment projects. " Funded the completion of the SR-91 HOV lane project in Downtown Riverside. " Continued a successful partnership with SANBAG to complete the 1-215 bi-county project which adds a HOV lane in each direction of the 1-215 from SR-60 to 1-10. " Continued to fund the acquisition of needed habitat for the Western Riverside County MSHCP as outlined in the 2009 Measure A Expenditure Plan. " Completed project work to ensure the allocation of Proposition 1B TCIF funding for a number of railroad grade separation and trade corridor projects. During the past fiscal year, construction was completed on the Auto Center Drive, Avenue 52, Avenue 56/Airport Boulevard, Magnolia Avenue, Riverside Avenue, and Sunset Avenue grade separation projects. " Advanced the Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Pass corridor rail service study garnering regional, state, and federal support for the planning process. Major Initiatives FY 2016/17 will be a year of constant activity and will feature efforts to manage a number of high profile projects. Chief among them will be the 91 Project through Corona, a $1.4 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. This will be the County's largest transportation project and one of the most valuable, in terms of project cost, in the entire state. Along with the 91 Project, the Commission will continue to serve as the lead agency on preliminary engineering and design -build phases on the 1-15 Express Lanes project. Caltrans and the Commission continue to partner on developing a truck climbing lanes and shoulder widening project on SR-60 to improve safety and provide congestion relief. The Commission has approved significant state funding for the I-10/Jefferson Street interchange which began construction in FY 2014/15. While the focus will certainly be on construction, project development work continues for the Mid County Parkway and SR-79 realignment projects. The Commission will continue alternatives analysis and planning efforts to advance the goal of additional passenger rail service to serve the Coachella Valley/San Gorgonio Pass rail corridor. A federal grant from the FRA has been received to fund the second phase of the project which includes the development of an environmental impact report and conceptual service plan. The Commission is taking an active role throughout the County to advance active transportation projects for bicyclists and pedestrians. Working in partnership with the District, the Commission will provide project delivery support services for Santa Ana River Trail projects. The focus on these type of projects remains consistent with southern California's RTP which seeks to limit GHG emissions. In terms of advancing policy, 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 protecting existing transportation funding and advocating for State investments in transportation. The Commission is an active member of the Self -Help Counties Coalition (SHCC), California Association of Councils of Governments (CALCOG), 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 play an active role in allocating and competing for funding which has been made available with the approval of a new federal transportation bill known as FAST Act. The success of many of these efforts will rely on proactive 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. Riverside County has also seen a major change in its state legislative delegation which will require a concerted outreach effort to new representatives on local transportation issues. 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 49 budgeted staff positions, the Commission's organization remains consistent with the Commission's 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 Focus on timely and effective completion of capital projects and implementation of needed transportation services. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Goods Movement, Intermodalism & Accessibility) Objectives: • Successfully manage financial responsibilities and investments for the 91 Project. • Continue with implementation of Toll Program Management Strategy. • Complete PVL project construction and provide successful service on the new line. • Continue progress and outreach for Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Pass corridor rail service study. • Initiate a Riverside County Transportation Plan for use in establishing integrated transportation visions and priorities. • Continue project development on SR-79 and Mid County Parkway projects. • Continue progress on 1-15 Express Lanes and SR-60 truck climbing lanes projects. • Maintain Metrolink coordination and engage in collaborative efforts to address significant funding and organizational challenges. • Continue engagement in rail discussions regarding Metrolink, the LOSSAN rail corridor, and high-speed rail to ensure protection of Riverside service and the Commission's rights. • Support CVAG's transportation initiatives and projects. • Continue coordination with the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) on integration of express bus service into its operational plans. • Continue collaboration with other agencies on planning, funding, and construction of local and regional bike, trail and pedestrian facilities. • Implement Commission's adopted state and federal legislative platforms. • Pursue all funding opportunities to keep projects funded. • Ensure the Commission's active participation in RTP implementation. • Maintain strong and effective regional partnership with neighboring transportation agencies. • Continue collaborative efforts with local agencies regarding priorities. • Communicate effectively and timely with community groups and leaders. Maximize funding for transportation improvements in Riverside County through legislative advocacy. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Goods Movement) Objectives: • Place an emphasis on implementing federally authorized and funded projects and services that are consistent with the new federal transportation bill and the Commission's ongoing project priorities. • 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. • Advocate for additional funding for the State's Cap and Trade program for projects in Riverside County. Support regional transportation solutions in cooperation with surrounding counties that are of benefit to Riverside County. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Goods Movement, System Efficiencies) Objectives: • Work with neighboring counties regarding corridor improvements on SR-91, 1-15, and 1-215. • Maintain an effective working relationship with the agencies that comprise Metrolink to ensure that the 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 the implementation of revamping the implementation of intercity rail and commuter rail service in the LOSSAN rail corridor. • Be an active participant in discussions involving high-speed rail, especially concerning connectivity investments in the overall rail system in southern California. • Advocate for and take an active effort for additional intercity rail service to the Coachella Valley/San Gorgonio Pass corridor. Maintain effective working relationships with Commissioners to strengthen and expand the Commission's leadership in transportation policy decision -making at all levels of government. (Policy Goal: Communications) Objectives: • Facilitate Commissioner participation at the regional, state, and federal levels to raise the interests of the Commission and seek favorable action. • Continue regular communication between the Executive Director, senior staff, and the Board. • Continue collaborative efforts with member agency staff regarding local priorities and funding challenges. • Work with other levels of local government such as the County Transportation Department, County Health Department, District, and local universities on quality of life issues that are connected to transportation such as air quality and the environment. • Provide assistance to Commissioners who serve on outside boards such as SCAG, Metrolink, LOSSAN, and the Mobile Sources Air Pollution Review Committee (MSRC) to assist their efforts to represent the County. 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 and evaluate staff retention strategies and options. • Complete and implement organizational initiatives. • Seek continuous improvement of staff effectiveness. Develop the framework for a Commission culture that enhances productivity, encourages regular and open communication among staff, and promotes the mutual achievement of individual and organizational goals and objectives. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objective: • Facilitate open communications and coordination between management, professional staff, and support staff through regular meetings. Executive Management Performance/Workload Indicators FY 14/15 Estimated FY 14/15 Actual FY 15/16 Estimated FY 16/17 Projected Expenditures $727,201,200 $671,204,900 $755,169,200 $680,712,100 Staffing levels 46 44 49 49 Administration costs as percentage of expenditures 1.16% 85% 1.92% 2.09% 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 32 - Administration Capital Outlay 9%-\ 16. Support Costs 39% Expenditures Salaries and Benefits 31% Professional Costs 21% As noted in Table 51, the Administration Department's total budget is $1,898,500 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 $590,700 reflect a net decrease of 4% related to the allocation of FTEs and a 4% pool for merit -based salary increases. Professional costs of $398,000 cover various services including, but not limited to, Commissioners' per diem, legal fees, and consultant and other professional services and reflects a decrease of 11%. Support costs of $734,800 cover administrative overhead including office maintenance; information technology updates, support, and maintenance; and recruitments. Capital outlay of $175,000 covers information technology support services and equipment upgrades. Table 51-Administration Expenditure Detail FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Salaries and Benefits $ 586,600 $ 617,600 $ 617,600 Professional Costs Commissioner Per Diem 52,700 65,000 60,000 Legal Services 28,000 37,000 11,000 Professional Services - General 191,000 346,500 200,000 Total Professional Costs 271,700 448,500 271,000 Support Costs 677,200 746,700 643,100 Capital Outlay 364,600 175,000 50,000 Debt Service 24,900 TOTAL Administration $ 1,925,000 $ 1,987,800 $ 1,581,700 $ 590,700 65,000 37,000 296,000 398,000 734,800 175,000 $ 1,898,500 $ (26,900) -4% 0% 0% (50,500) -15% (50,500) -11% (11,900) -2% 0% N/A $ (89,300) -4% Administration Staffing Summary Position FY 14/15 FY 15/16 Administrative Assistant 0.11 0.11 Clerk of the Board 1.00 1.00 Deputy Clerk of the Board 1.00 1.00 Deputy Executive Director 0.00 0.01 Executive Director 0.00 0.01 Human Resources Administrator 1.00 1.00 Procurement Analyst 0.03 0.06 Procurement Manager 0.00 0.02 Records Technician 1.00 1.00 Senior Administrative Assistant 0.26 0.26 Senior Office Assistant 0.51 0.53 FTE 4.91 5.00 Department Budget Overview - Office Operations Department Description FY 16/17 0.17 1.00 1.00 0.01 0.02 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.01 0.47 4.68 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. Key Assumptions • Support is provided to 49 full-time Commission staff. • Requests for 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 Public Records Act. Accomplishments • Updated the Commission's web page in a timely manner for the postings of public notices. • Upgraded the 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 work to enhance its electronic records management system in order to achieve greater efficiencies and strengthen 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 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 49 full-time Commission staff. • Provide accessibility to meeting agendas, legal notices, requests for proposal, and employment opportunities through the Commission's website. • Continue to improve administrative efficiency through automation of records processing. • Post legal notices and requests for proposals on the Commission's website 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. 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 website. • 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. • Responded to 72 California Public Records Act requests in FY 2015/16 compared to 67 in FY 2014/15. 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. 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, MOUs, 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 planning, administering, and implementing human resources programs, including the recruitment, selection, and appraisal process; employee training and development; classification and compensation studies; benefits administration; employee relations; and recommending, implementing and maintaining personnel policies, procedures, and practices. Key Assumptions • Quality service levels will be maintained in all human resources programs. • The assessment of Human Resources policies, 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 • Updated and maintained the new employee performance appraisal system. • Provided the annual Benefit Statement to all employees. • Regularly provided information to employees on changes to health insurance, 401(a) defined contribution, and 457 deferred compensation plans and the personnel policies and procedures manual through the Commission's intranet and quarterly employee newsletter. • Recruited and filled four interns and three full-time positions. • Held mandatory harassment -training for supervisors. • Conducted training sessions on business writing, intermediate and advanced Microsoft Excel, CEQA/NEPA laws, sexual harassment, and public interaction. • Disclosed employees' compensation on the Commission's website in compliance with the State Controller's Office and CaIPERS. • Participated with Cambria consultants on the Toll Operations Study in preparing for the recruitment of three new Toll Operations staff members including a Toll Operations Manager, Toll Technology Manager, and Toll Senior Management Analyst. • Coordinated, facilitated, and implemented the Classification and Compensation Study which identified 11 title changes and five reclassifications. 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 and ensuring parameters for fair and consistent decision -making and good workplace practices. Staff use written position descriptions and performance expectations in order to obtain a clear and consistent understanding of what is expected. 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 documented and updated timely for various personnel actions. Continue to 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 and implement a comprehensive new employee orientation program. 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 and professional growth and development of all staff members. " Foster teamwork through cooperative efforts and support for shared success. Understand and consistently deliver excellent customer service to all employees. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objectives: " Focus on "employee as customer" and consistently strive to exceed expectations by supporting and maintaining individual respect, appreciation, management accessibility, and communication. " Determine system requirements and identify options for an employee intranet. " Assist employees in utilizing employer -provided benefits to enhance their health, wellness, and quality of life. Improve the quality of the work culture. (Policy Goal: Financial & Administration) Objectives: " Develop and maintain a safe and healthy working environment by retaining open lines of communication throughout the organization, compliance with established federal, state, and local regulations, and best practices in preventing safety and legal risk. " Provide a safe working environment with the maintenance of an injury and illness prevention program. " Maintain a proactive employee relations process by facilitating a collaborative, professional working environment with all staff members. " Promote a work/family balance. " Recognize and reward individual contributions, innovation, and learning from experience. Administration Performance/Workload Indicators FY 14/15 Estimated FY 14/15 Actual FY 15/16 Estimated FY 16/17 Projected Employee rules/Benefits review sessions held 5 2 2 2 Recruitments 9 2 3 3 Positions filled 10 2 3 3 Legal notices 24 19 22 20 Commission/Committee/Ad Hoc meetings 42 43 50 45 Commissioners supported (including alternates) 62 62 62 62 Staff supported: Regular full-time 46 44 49 49 Temporary/Seasonal 4 0 0 0 Legislative Affairs and Communications Mission Statement: "To improve the mobility of Riverside County residents by working through the public policy process and by strengthening effective community outreach." Chart 33 — Legislative Affairs and Communications 11111100' Expenditures The Legislative Affairs and Communications Department has a total budget of $1,457,400 (Table 52). Salaries and benefits reflect a net decrease of 11% related to a change in FTEs and a 4% pool for merit -based salary increases. Professional costs of $751,000 include legislative advocacy, graphic design, and website updates and reflect an increase of 3% due to public outreach and marketing efforts related to the commencement of PVL commuter rail operations and education regarding rail safety. Support costs of $169,400 include publications and advertising, various membership dues, and staff -related travel costs and reflect a 10% decrease primarily due to the reduction of printed collateral material and moving toward electronic media and outreach. Table 52 — Legislative Affairs and Communications Expenditure Detail FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Salaries and Benefits $ 438,900 $ 600,500 $ 600,500 Professional Costs Legal Services 14,100 12,000 10,500 Professional Services - General 425,500 716,200 597,500 Total Professional Costs 439,600 728,200 608,000 Support Costs 48,000 187,700 81,600 TOTAL Legislative Affairs and Communications $ 926,500 $ 1,516,400 $ 1,290,100 $ 537,000 11,000 740,000 751,000 169,400 $ 1,457,400 Legislative Affairs and Communications Staffing Summary Position FY 14/15 FY 15/16 Administrative Assistant 0.26 0.25 Deputy Executive Director 0.81 0.84 Executive Director 0.02 0.00 Goods Movement Manager 0.01 0.10 Government Relations Manager 0.91 0.93 Procurement Analyst 0.02 0.04 Public Affairs Manager 0.15 0.15 FTE 2.18 2.31 Department Budget Overview Department Description Legislative Affairs FY 16/17 0.22 0.73 0.03 0.00 0.75 0.00 0.15 1.88 Improved mobility for Riverside County residents requires the financial resources and public policy to implement transportation projects and programs. Through proactive advocacy at all levels of government (state, federal, and local), the Commission plays a strong influential leadership role to advance the interests of County taxpayers and constituents. The importance of legislative engagement is magnified when the Commission seeks: • Specific items in the state or federal budgets; • Changes in law; or • Legislative authorization, acceleration, clarification, or removal of policy barriers for a specific project or program. The Commission's Legislative Affairs efforts aim to take full advantage of opportunities at both the federal and state levels when there is a potential impact to Commission programs and projects. Professional and skilled execution of an advocacy program requires ongoing communication with the County's legislative delegations in Washington D.C. and Sacramento. The Commission accomplishes this via a team effort that includes Commissioners, staff, and legislative consultants in the two capitals. The Commission retains three legislative consultants who are under contract through the end of the 2016 calendar year. Two consultants are based in Washington, D.C. and one is in Sacramento. All are paid on a monthly retainer and the FY 2016/17 budget does not contemplate any budget increases for these legislative consultants. Advocacy by staff is primarily carried out by the Government Relations Manager with frequent engagement by the Executive and Deputy Executive Directors. The Commission has yielded significant results with this small and effective team, especially considering that other southern California transportation agencies commit comparatively greater staff and consultant resources to legislative advocacy. The Commission's advocacy 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; CALCOG; California Toll Operators Committee; and International Bridge, Tunnel and Turnpike Association. Four State Assembly Members representing the County legislators serve on the Assembly Transportation Committee and one State Senator from the County is on the Senate Transportation and Housing Committee. These appointments place Riverside County in a prominent policy -making role on transportation issues in the State Legislature. Also, the new Assembly Republican Leader represents portions of Riverside County. The Commission will need to engage these elected officials to ensure that our region is represented in state policy. An emerging issue that the Commission must take a lead role is how the State will implement provisions of the new federal transportation bill known as the FAST Act. The approval of the five-year transportation legislation is welcome news; but implementation of new provisions will require legislative action in Sacramento as well. An ongoing issue is the development of a road charge pilot program that could replace the excise tax on gasoline. A pilot program will be launched by the State in 2016 and the Commission will closely track how this kind of funding scheme will affect County residents as well as how it might impact state transportation revenue. The Commission's Executive Director will continue to serve as the Chair of an advisory committee for this statewide program. A continuing concern through FY 2016/17 is modernization of CEQA. In 2015 the Legislature approved SB743 which places a higher priority on vehicle miles traveled rather than measures of congestion. The changes to this law could have significant benefits to the Commission's ability to deliver needed projects that improve mobility and benefit the environment. In terms of federal action on specific projects, the Commission will seek a TIFIA loan for the 1-15 Express Lanes project, similar to the TIFIA loan executed for the 91 Project in 2013. In November 2015, the Commission submitted a letter of interest for a TIFIA loan for the 1-15 Express Lanes project and in January 2016 advanced to the creditworthiness review phase. The 1-15 Express Lanes project has also been accepted into the White House's Building America Transportation Investment Center for enhanced assistance from the U.S. DOT for achieving timely federal approvals. The Commission will continue to heighten its policy presence on matters pertaining to tolling policy. In recent years, federal and state legislators have given significant attention to how tolling on highways is regulated. With the 91 Project under construction and 1-15 Express Lanes project on the near -term horizon, the Commission will be impacted by these policy discussions. The Commission must also continue to monitor legislation governing how these projects are procured. Moreover, the Commission voted as part of the RCTC Strategic Assessment to initiate a "next generation" toll feasibility study of potential future toll projects. Finally, funding will be a fundamental focus of the Legislative Affairs program at the Commission. The State Board of Equalization reduced the price -based fuels excise tax in 2015 and is expected to do so again in 2016, resulting in significant revenue losses to cities and the County and to the Commission's funding capacity to program projects in the STIP. In 2015, led by the Commission's Government Relations Manager, the Commission addressed this issue with the completion of the RCTC Strategic Assessment. The strategic assessment examined a wide variety of existing transportation plans, analyzed economic and demographic growth trends, conducted extensive public outreach, and identified an ongoing multi -billion funding gap for transportation projects in the County over the next 20 years. 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 the 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 maintain effective relationships. 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, Public Affairs 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. The RCTC Strategic Assessment identified a gap in public awareness of the Commission and its work. Communications will continue to expand its use of social media and utilize other emerging technologies that can be incorporated into the overall outreach efforts of the Commission. Key Assumptions • The Government Relations Manager will oversee and implement legislative advocacy with guidance from the Executive Director and the Deputy Executive Director. • Communications will oversee the annual report to the public and will post it on the Commission's website in a printable format. • The On the Move monthly newsletter will be published and distributed electronically and posted on the Commission's 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, and social media outlets such as Twitter, Facebook, and other emerging technologies. • The Commission will continue to take a leadership role in formulating a countywide direction on state and federal transportation policy. • Goods movement will continue as a policy priority for the Commission. • The Commission will play an active role in the implementation of the FAST Act. • The Commission will advocate for the State to approve new funding for transportation projects, pursuant to previous Commission actions on funding principles and the RCTC Strategic Assessment. • The Government Relations Manager will assist the Commission in taking a leadership role in Sacramento on reforms to reduce project delivery costs and delays, including the modernization of CEQA. Accomplishments • Assisted with the passage of AB 194 (Frazier) to create a unified approach to approving toll projects in California. • Established the Commission as a leader in statewide advocacy to bring more equity in how State Cap and Trade revenues are distributed. • Testified at Senate Transportation and Housing Committee hearings on the transportation funding crisis. • Assisted in drafting and championing amendments to the FAST Act sponsored by U.S. Representatives Ken Calvert, Mark Takano, and Pete Aguilar, in addition to providing legislative language regarding goods movement that was written into proposed legislation by the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works. • Successfully advocated for the Commission to receive a $3 million FRA grant for the Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Pass corridor rail study. • Developed a four -page annual report and posted it on the Commission's website in a printable format. • Provided project tours of the 91 Project, PVL, and other projects for legislators and their staff. • Hosted U.S. Deputy Secretary of Transportation Victor Mendez for a tour of the 91 Project and a discussion with Inland Empire transportation leaders. • Held five public Transportation Summits around the County and one Transportation Workshop in Blythe to directly engage citizens and stakeholders in visioning the future of transportation in the County. • Completed the RCTC Strategic Assessment, which was presented at the Board workshop in January; several recommendations related to the future of transportation in Riverside County were approved by the Board for implementation in the FY 2016/17 budget. • Continued to update the 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 for the Mid County Parkway, PVL, 91 Project, and 1-215 corridor improvement (central segment) projects. " Conducted multiple public meetings as part of the environmental review process for a number of projects including the Mid County Parkway and SR-79 realignment projects. " Conducted an aggressive speaking outreach campaign on the active and preconstruction projects totaling over 30 presentations delivered to council meetings, community service groups, and transportation -oriented groups. " Supported the Rail Department in the development of various marketing materials and advertisements including weekend and holiday train services. " Developed a new marketing campaign to encourage Metrolink ridership during the SR-91 construction projects and the impending completion of the PVL. " Continued to take a leadership role and collaborate with neighboring counties, local business leaders, Mobility 21, SHCC, and CALCOG on many transportation policy issues in Sacramento and Washington D.C. " 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. " Revised collateral materials, which are often distributed at public events, for an overview of the Commission's programs and projects as well as construction projects planned for Western County. " Improved and maintained the Commission's photo library to assist with documenting the project delivery progress of the voter -approved Measure A sales tax programs. The photo library has been used to develop PowerPoint presentations, information brochures, TIFIA loan submissions, and capital project collateral material. " Maintained a presence on the social networking site Twitter which can be accessed at http://twitter.com/RCTC. " Took an active role in providing comments and ensuring that Riverside County projects were included in the RTP. Major Initiatives Legislative Affairs The Commission will continue to advocate strategically and effectively on the policy issues described above in Washington D.C. and Sacramento, utilizing its 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, cable television spots, social media outreach and project videos. The Commission's largest publication effort to provide widespread understanding of its projects and expenditures is its four -page annual report which is posted on the Commission's website in a printable format. A continuing emphasis will be placed on providing communications support to major project development efforts including the Mid County Parkway, 91 Project, 1-15 Express Lanes, and the 1-215 corridor improvement (central segment) projects. The need for proactive public communication and outreach remains important, as the Commission continues to move forward with the delivery of the 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 continued contact with the public by the Public Affairs Manager. As the Commission commences operations on the PVL, there is a need for community outreach in two areas: rail safety and marketing. A pilot program has begun for community education in rail safety known as Operation Lifesaver. The Communications Department has developed an outreach program that has targeted the schools along the PVL and other areas in the County where schools are in close proximity to the railroad tracks. Additionally, staff is working with Metrolink to develop a marketing strategy focusing on the areas along the PVL in order to prepare the communities for this expanded service. The overall goal is to bring awareness to the communities of the new transit option of the extended Metrolink service and educate them on how to behave in a safe manner around an active rail line. The Commission's outreach will include a proactive effort to work closely with various media formats such as print, radio, internet, social media, 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, radio, and regular 91 Project videos posted to the project website via YouTube. Broad distribution of 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 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. 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 meeting's 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; CALCOG; Mobility 21; Southern California National Freight Gateway Collaboration; regional, state and federal transportation agencies; and community/business organizations to influence funding and policy decisions that impact the 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 MSRC to ensure that funding for air quality -related transportation improvements is fully distributed to the County jurisdictions. • Work with SCAG, WRCOG, and CVAG to monitor and respond to transportation issues involving the implementation of SB375 on smart growth planning and the State's Cap and Trade program. • Coordinate with other local agencies and business interests to modernize and reform CEQA to improve project delivery and deter frivolous lawsuits and challenges that delay projects. • 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 the 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 D.C., 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, 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. • Provide on -going updates to Commissioners, via e-mail, on topical issues including projects, funding and newsworthy events impacting the Commission. 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: • Increase awareness of the Commission and the services and benefits it provides to taxpayers and its new toll customers. • Build public and stakeholder engagement around the County's transportation challenges. • 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. " Provide oversight and coordination to Commission departments in the development of communications' materials. " Expand the use of social media to better inform the public and encourage interaction between the Commission, taxpayers, stakeholders, and customers. 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 14/15 Estimated FY 14/15 Actual FY 15/16 Estimated FY 16/17 Projected Speakers bureau presentations/events 130 148 196 150 Legislative action submittals to Commission 7 6 8 8 Items of state or federal legislation sponsored by the Commission 9 2 4 4 Finance Mission Statement: "To safeguard the Commission's assets and maintain strong and prudent fiscal controls in accounting, budgeting, procurements, debt financing, investing, and financial reporting including ongoing disclosure to all interested parties. To seek financing alternatives that complement the Commission's strategic direction." Chart 34 — Finance Transfers Out 65% Expenditures Support Costs 8% Salaries and Benefits 7% Professional Co 20% • The Finance Department's total budget is $15,447,900 (Table 53) and reflects an 11% increase over the prior year's budget. Department staffing costs will total $1,085,200, reflecting an increase due to FTE allocations and a 4% pool for merit -based salary increases. Professional costs of $3,065,000 include various services related to general and specialized legal, financial and investment advisory, external and internal audits, debt management, CAFR and annual budget graphic design, and procurement. Support costs of $1,247,700 include insurance, printing, and staff training. Capital outlay of $50,000 includes ERP updates. A transfer out of $10,000,000 is related to funding a portion of the debt service interest payments from the 2009 Measure A Western County bond financing program. Table 53 — Finance Expenditure Detail FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Salaries and Benefits $ 1,009,000 $ 1,077,900 $ 1,077,900 $ 1,085,200 $ 7,300 1% Professional Costs Legal Services 335,800 110,000 50,700 185,000 75,000 68% Audit Services 345,300 500,000 425,000 500,000 0% Financial Advisory 366,400 550,000 780,000 910,000 360,000 65% Professional Services - General 1,517,000 1,488,300 1,360,000 1,470,000 (18,300) -1% Total Professional Costs 2,564,500 2,648,300 2,615,700 3,065,000 416,700 16% Support Costs 773,700 1,190,700 903,100 1,247,700 57,000 5% Capital Outlay 3,000 50,000 5,000 50,000 0% Transfers Out 2,700 9,007,900 10,000,000 10,000,000 992,100 11% TOTAL Finance $ 4,352,900 $ 13,974,800 $ 14,601,700 $ 15,447,900 $ 1,473,100 11% Finance Staffing Summary Position FY 14/15 FY 15/16 Accountant 2.00 2.00 Accounting Assistant 1.00 1.00 Accounting Technician 2.00 2.00 Administrative Assistant 0.00 0.01 Chief Financial Officer 0.65 0.65 Deputy Director of Finance 0.97 1.00 Executive Director 0.01 0.00 Procurement Analyst 0.25 0.10 Procurement Manager 0.11 0.03 Senior Administrative Assistant 0.30 0.31 Senior Office Assistant 0.30 0.32 Toll Financial Analyst 0.00 0.00 Toll Program Director 0.01 0.00 FTE 7.60 7.42 Department Budget Overview Department Description Finance and Accounting FY 16/17 2.00 1.00 2.00 0.00 0.45 0.88 0.00 0.15 0.10 0.69 0.27 0.30 0.00 7.84 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 operating and capital 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, investment managers, 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, debt and investment management, 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 DBE and 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 letter of credit and sales tax revenue bond SBPAs facilities will be maintained with strong short-term ratings. • The Commission will maintain strong AA category long-term credit ratings related to its sales tax bonds and investment grade ratings related to its toll bonds and TIFIA loan. • Proceeds from the 2013 Sales Tax Bonds, 2013 Toll Bonds, TIFIA loan, and equity contributions will be used to fund the 91 Project. • The financing plan for the I-15 Express Lanes project will include federal funds, sales tax contributions, issuance of toll revenue bonds, and a TIFIA loan. • Arbitrage calculations related to the outstanding debt issues will be performed by a consultant on an annual basis. • The Commission will pay 100% of the actuarially determined contribution related to postretirement health care benefits based on a current actuarial valuation. • Directors and program managers will continue to have adequate project budget and accounting information to make informed decisions. • Toll operations accounting information will be processed and provided by the toll operations contractor's back office, and a service organization report, or SOC1-Type 2 report, will be obtained annually. • Construction fund bond proceeds will be invested in mid-term securities that mature in accordance with the construction draw schedule. Operating funds will be invested in state and local agency investment pools for short-term liquidity purposes and in mid-term treasury and federal agency securities as available funds are identified. The overall interest rate is conservatively projected to be 0.25% for operating funds managed by state and County investment pools as well as an investment management firm and 0.75% for debt service and construction funds managed by an investment management firm. • Procurements will be conducted in accordance with the Commission's procurement policy manual. • Procurement will continue to maintain a standardized procurement filing system and centralized procurement files. • Procurement will conduct outreach activities to encourage DBE and SBE participation in various contracts and projects. Accomplishments • Implemented GASB Statement No. 68 related to the accounting and financial reporting for pensions. • Prepared and submitted to TIFIA the Financial Plan Annual Update for the 91 Project. • Prepared and submitted required continuing disclosure reports related to the 91 Project financing to TIFIA and/or the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board's Electronic Municipal Market Access System, including the monthly construction progress report. • In coordination with OCTA staff, developed a master custodian agreement for the deposit and distribution of funds related to the use of the 91 Express Lanes. • Supported the development of a financing plan for the 1-15 Express Lanes project, including submittal of a letter of interest for TIFIA credit assistance and a presentation and tour to Fitch for an indicative rating assessment of a TIFIA loan. • Presented an update to the rating agencies of the Commission's sales tax and toll financing programs. • Updated the Commission's investment policy in April 2016. • Issued a request for proposals and awarded a contract for the Commission's annual TDA claimant and Measure A recipient audits. " Obtained financial reporting excellence award from the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) (23rd year) related to the CAFR for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015. " Obtained GFOA distinguished budget award (20th year) for annual budget for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2015. " Generated approximately $5.7 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 sales tax reporting errors. " Revised the procurement policies manual, which was adopted by the Commission in September 2015. " Implemented the outsourcing of automated administration of the insurance certificate tracking process related to agreements. " Participated in small business networking activities and met with potential DBE and SBE vendors. " Held 1-15 Express Lanes project DBE/SBE summit event for shortlisted toll services provider and design -builder proposers to network and identify subcontracting opportunities. Major Initiatives Finance and Accounting The commercial paper program has been in place for 11 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 utilize the commercial paper program in FY 2016/17 to fund the 1-15 Express Lanes project through financial close. The current credit and liquidity support for the commercial paper program is $60,000,000, and the existing letter of credit and reimbursement agreement with State Street Bank expires in October 2017. In connection with the 2009 variable rate bonds, the Commission's current SBPAs with BTMU expire in March 2019. 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 maintains 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. Similar to the 91 Project financing, the Commission's financial team is developing a plan of finance for the 1-15 Express Lanes project considering such financing alternatives. A letter of interest for a TIFIA loan was submitted in November 2015, and the Commission has advanced to the creditworthiness stage. The Commission anticipates an invitation from TIFIA in early FY 2016/17 to submit an application for the loan. Prior to financial close related to the issuance of bonds and a TIFIA loan for the 1-15 Express Lanes project, Finance staff will conduct a procurement for an investment manager of the 1-15 Express Lanes debt proceeds. In connection with the 91 Project financing, a master custodian agreement for the collection of toll and other revenues related to the 91 Express Lanes operations has been developed together with OCTA, the owner of the OCTA 91 Express Lanes. Upon selection of the master custodian and execution of the agreement, the Commission will continue to plan and coordinate the implementation of the master custodian function in advance of the beginning of toll operations on the Riverside 91 Express Lanes. As a result of the significant financing proceeds received in connection with the 91 Project plan of finance, the Commission has invested such funds with the advice and assistance of an investment management and advisory firm. Operating funds available for investment are coordinated with the assistance of a second investment management and advisory firm. Investments are made in accordance with the Commission's priorities of safety, liquidity, and then yield. The investment managers and advisors will continuously review the Commission's investment policy for any required updates and other recommendations. To ensure that the Commission receives the proper 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 Commission will also continue to engage a consultant to provide semi-annual sales tax forecasts for use in the development of revenue projections for the annual budget process and comprehensive financing plan updates. The Finance Department will continue to keep abreast of GASB technical activities affecting the Commission's accounting and financial reporting activities. Various new standards, including other postemployment benefits accounting and financial reporting standards, will be considered for implementation as part of the preparation of the CAFR for the year ended June 30, 2018, unless implemented earlier. The Finance Department will also continue to consider changes to accounting and financial reporting related to the commencement of toll operations in FY 2016/17 and will continue to assess financial policies, procedures, and reporting and ensure proper internal control. Consultants may be engaged to assist staff in the development of efficient accounting and reporting processes, administrative cost allocation alternatives, and development of an investor relations page on the Commission's website. The Finance Department will continue to update its ERP system that integrates data processing across the Commission, automate administrative processes, and embrace data integration. The continued ERP efficiency gains include an automated paperless workflow system, advanced project accounting, budgeting, multi -year contract management, grant tracking, and readily available scanned images that can be retrieved by all users. In order to improve automation and efficiencies during the annual budget process, during FY 2016/17 the Finance Department may develop a procurement for a comprehensive budget application that can be integrated with the ERP system. Procurement Management A centralized procurements process will continue to be maintained to manage requests for proposals, qualifications, invitations for bids, small purchases, and related contract administration issues. The Procurement Policy Manual reflects best practices and applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations. The procurement system has strengthened 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 utilizes PlanetBids to assist staff in its efforts to administer and manage an efficient procurement process and conduct outreach to small businesses and DBEs for Commission projects and programs. PlanetBids is a web -based vendor and bid management software. The PlanetBids e-procurement application helps streamline the complete bidding process and enables the collection and analysis of all aspects of vendor data, purchasing activities, and corresponding history. PlanetBids has provided a better service and convenience to vendors and automatically notifies potential vendors of bid alerts. In order to improve the efficiency and productivity of resources, the Commission will continue to outsource the administration of the insurance certificate tracking process related to agreements. Procurement Management is responsible for developing, implementing, and monitoring DBE and SBE program requirements in coordination 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. Additionally, the Commission recognizes the vital role that local businesses play in the County, and it strongly encourages, supports, and promotes the participation of local businesses in providing goods and services to the Commission. Procurement is committed to providing contracting opportunities to local businesses to strengthen the County's local economy and to promote the development of the small, local business community. During FY 2016/17 the Commission will jointly participate in other outreach events in order to acquaint potential local, small, and disadvantaged businesses with the Commission's procurement procedures and opportunities. 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) Objectives: • Utilize investment management and advisory services to prudently invest operating and capital funds in accordance with the Commission's investment policies. • Achieve a rate of return at least equal to the County of Riverside Treasury Pool rate for operating funds. • Establish an appropriate benchmark for the investment of debt proceeds and excess operating funds. 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, 2017. • Meet continuing disclosure requirements of the sales tax and toll revenue debt programs and comply with the TIFIA loan reporting requirements. • Enhance the Commission's website to provide timely and useful information to investors. • 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 audit adjustment, 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 2016/17 budget. • Facilitate a comprehensive budgeting approach that effectively involves management staff, requiring full accountability for all department expenditures. • Fund 100% of the actuarially determined 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 and project management reviews of accounting and budget information. • Obtain an unmodified 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 ERP system to facilitate cross training. " Support staff and consultants with training opportunities in order to effectively utilize the ERP system capabilities. " Assist local governments with Measure A funding by providing timely allocation of funds for eligible projects and programs. " Maintain ERP system to reflect technical updates and current technology. " Develop and implement accounting and financial processes with the operator of the 91 Express Lanes and OCTA for start of toll operations on the Riverside 91 Express Lanes in 2017. 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. " Continue to revise and develop finance and accounting policies and procedures that reflect the requirements of federal, state, and local requirements and the Commission's operating practices. 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 the Procurement Policy 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. " Continue to provide 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 14/15 Estimated FY 14/15 Actual FY 15/16 Estimated FY 16/17 Projected Sales tax revenue bond rating Aa2/AA+/AA Aa2/AA+/AA Aa2/AA+/AA Aa2/AA+/AA Toll revenue bond rating BBB -/BBB- BBB -/BBB- BBB -/BBB- BBB-/BBB- TIFIA loan rating BBB- BBB- BBB- BBB - 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 6,200 6,710 7,000 7,500 Checks processed 4,200 4,342 4,400 4,600 Audit adjustments 0 0 0 0 Average yield on investments 0.25% operating/0.75% debt proceeds 0.70% operating/0.63% debt proceeds 0.25% operating/0.75% debt proceeds 0.25% operating/ 0.75% debt proceeds Payroll hours processed 86,900 92,961 96,500 105,000 Accounts receivable invoices processed 200 241 250 250 Agreements processed 370 310 275 325 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 local regional, state, and federal agencies resulting in maximum returns on local investment. Support a coordinated regional approach to solving transportation funding issues." Chart 35 — Planning and Programming Projects and Operations 86% Expenditures Professional Costs 3% Support Costs of Planning and Programming expenditures of $12,037,100 have increased 67% from last year's budget (Table 54). Salaries and benefits represent 10% of total expenditures and reflect a change in FTE allocations and a 4% pool for merit -based salary increases. Professional services totaling $413,500 have increased 146% due to Fundtrack project database upgrades. 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. Support costs decreased by 10% or $2,400 and include various membership dues and staff -related travel costs. Projects and operations costs have increased 78% primarily due to signal synchronization projects. Special studies include development of a countywide integrated long-range transportation plan, the CMP update, and database modeling. Table 54 - Planning and Programming Expenditure Detail FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Salaries and Benefits Professional Costs Legal Services Audit Services Professional Services - General Total Professional Costs Support Costs Projects and Operations Program Operations Engineering Construction Right of Way Special Studies Operating and Capital Disbursements Total Projects and Operations Transfers Out TOTAL Planning and Programming $ 1,065,300 $ 1,149,000 $ 1,148,300 8,900 13,000 147,100 180,700 155,000 65,000 189,600 168,000 212,100 20,800 23,300 16,000 2,100 55,500 20,000 90,000 290,000 750,000 75,000 163,000 102,100 1,514,000 1,454,000 1,039,100 3,245,000 1,245,000 1,143,300 5,817,500 3,084,000 - 50,000 - $ 2,419,000 $ 7,207,800 $ 4,460,400 $ 1,264,000 33,500 10,000 370,000 413,500 20,900 113,700 490,000 4,975,000 85,000 1,400,000 3,275,000 10,338,700 $ 12,037,100 Planning and Programming Staffing Summary Position FY 14/15 FY 15/16 Administrative Assistant 0.13 0.13 Capital Projects Manager 0.06 0.00 Chief Financial Officer 0.02 0.00 Commuter and Motorist Assistance Manager 0.00 0.01 Deputy Executive Director 0.02 0.00 Executive Director 0.47 0.48 Goods Movement Manager 0.99 0.90 Government Relations Manager 0.05 0.00 Management Analyst 1.01 1.04 Multimodal Services Director 0.04 0.00 Planning and Programming Director 0.90 0.90 Planning and Programming Manager 0.99 0.82 Procurement Analyst 0.01 0.00 Procurement Manager 0.02 0.03 Project Delivery Director 0.01 0.00 Public Affairs Manager 0.00 0.05 Senior Administrative Assistant 0.24 0.23 Senior Management Analyst 1.00 0.99 Toll Program Director 0.02 0.00 FTE 5.98 5.58 Department Budget Overview Department Description $ 115,000 10% 20,500 158% 10,000 N/A 215,000 139% 245,500 146% (2,400) -10% 58,200 105% 400,000 444% 4,225,000 563% (78,000) -48% (114,000) -8% 30,000 1% 4,521,200 78% (50,000) -100% $ 4,829,300 67% FY 16/17 0.21 0.30 0.03 0.00 0.08 0.38 0.95 0.20 1.06 0.03 0.90 0.99 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.17 1.02 0.00 6.32 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 the County. These programming documents identify projects, including those identified in the short-range transit plan, 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 SCAG 2016 RTP incorporates a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) required under SB375. The SCS component establishes goals for projects, programs, and land -use designed to reduce GHG emissions. The Commission is responsible for approving projects for 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 sales tax 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; the County was successful in receiving CMIA funding for the SR-91 HOV lanes and 1-215 widening projects, which have recently substantially completed construction, with the exception of the Pachappa underpass portion of the SR-91 HOV lanes project that was split off as a separate project and will be funded with non-CMIA funding. TCIF funding was approved for 11 grade separation projects and a ground access improvement project at the I-215/Van Buren interchange. 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. Proposition 1B funds were instrumental during the economic recession as they became the most reliable state funding source for transportation projects. The deadline to award Proposition 1B CMIA projects expired at the end of 2013. The TCIF program was originally set to expire in December 2014, but was extended indefinitely by statute in 2014, (SB 1228 — Hueso), to allow receipt of funds from non -Proposition 1B sources to fund California's freight and goods movement infrastructure. Although the TCIF program was extended by statute, the CTC adopted a deadline of December 2016 for all TCIF projects to start construction and, at its March 2016 meeting, extended the savings utilization policy to December 2019. 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 RTP and FTIP. SCAG, as the metropolitan planning organization (MPO), 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 and GHG reduction targets adopted by CARB. The RTP/SCS is updated every four years, and the FTIP update effort is performed every 18 to 24 months. Multiple amendments occur within each FTIP cycle; RTP amendments are less frequent as they require air quality conformity analyses. FTIP amendments can occur for minor project changes that do not affect the conformity determination. The Commission is responsible for allocating the following local, state, and federal funding sources: Local Sources: • 1989 and 2009 Measure A sales tax • Western County TUMF regional arterial program State Sources: • SB821 bicycle and pedestrian projects • RIP • ATP MPO share Federal Sources: • STP • CMAQ • Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) 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 operating at acceptable levels (above 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. It is anticipated that the next CMP update will occur in 2017. 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, air quality analysis, project database management, 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 and grade separation 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, SCAG, and local project sponsors to implement projects funded with STIP/RIP, ATP, or other available fund sources to ensure that the programming and allocations are consistent with project schedules. • The Commission will continue to assist local project sponsors with the processing of state and federal funding approvals/obligations/allocations and overall project delivery. Accomplishments • Processed 28 STIP actions that consisted of, but were not limited to: ATP Cycle 1 awards, financial allocations, extensions of time, request of Proposition 1B Traffic Congestion Relief Program payment for a completed County project, and addition of TCIF projects to Proposition 1B program. • Completed four local agency agreements and/or amendments for the implementation of TUMF regional arterial projects. • Processed over 85 project amendments into the 2015 FTIP. • Submitted the 2017 FTIP Update consisting of 385 projects. • Submitted the 2016 RTP/SCS consisting of 584 projects. • Coordinated with Caltrans and project sponsors regarding the obligation of federal and state funding, met obligation deadlines, and prevented loss of funding to the County. • Monitored federal funding expenditures of inactive projects to ensure funds were not deobligated. • Advised local agencies and coordinated the use of toll credits and local match waiver for federally funded projects funded at the maximum reimbursement level, saving the Commission and local agencies up to $901,000 in local match funds programmed in FY 2015/16. • Reviewed and approved the Measure A five-year capital improvement plans (CIP) for each local agency in the County. • Worked with SCAG and southern California agencies to develop ATP Cycle 2 funding distribution recommendations for the MPO region. • Monitored TCIF project development to ensure timely completion of the 11 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. TCIF projects completed to date include grade separations at Auto Center Drive, Avenue 52, Clay Street, Columbia Avenue, Iowa Avenue, Magnolia Avenue/Union Pacific (UP), Riverside Avenue, Streeter Avenue, and Sunset Avenue and the I-215/Van Buren interchange. Two additional grade separation projects are under construction: Avenue 56/Airport Boulevard and Magnolia Avenue/BNSF Railway (BNSF). • Developed a successful application for the Avenue 66/Union Pacific Railroad Grade Separation Bypass project under the TCIF program. • Continued to take a leadership role and work collaboratively 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 of new programming capacity 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 when sufficient programming capacity is available. Federal TAP funds will be administered through the CTC similar to STIP funds under the State's new ATP that was created by SB99 and AB101 to encourage increased use of active modes of transportation, such as biking and walking. Federal TAP funds are not subject to general fund diversions; however, TAP funds are authorized each year by the passage of the state budget. TUMF funds are collected and administered by WRCOG. Approximately half of the TUMF funds collected are set aside for WRCOG's zone arterial 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 program and approved the programming of 23 regional arterial projects. To date, $135 million has been programmed for TUMF regional arterial projects. Due to fluctuating TUMF revenues over the past few years, $14.5 million in 2009 Measure A Western County Regional Arterial (MARA) funds and $25.5 million in TUMF CETAP funds were programmed on two projects to fulfill the TUMF commitment. Of the 23 TUMF regional arterial projects, 15 projects have completed construction, five projects are currently under construction or in pre - construction, and three projects are in the development phase and remain to be programmed for future TUMF funds. Planning and Programming also manages the 2009 Western County MARA program and to date approximately $40 million has been programmed. The expenditures for these regional arterial capital projects are included in the Capital Project Development and Delivery Department budget. Transportation Planning The Commission's role in planning throughout the year will involve working with Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), FTA, Caltrans, 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 2016 RTP/SCS, corridor and goods movement studies, and efforts to update transportation computer models and project databases. In addition, at its January 2016 workshop the Commission approved moving forward with the development of a countywide integrated long-range transportation plan as well as "next generation" toll and rail feasibility studies. These planning efforts will be supported through consultant contracts in FY 2016/17 using LTF planning and STIP PPM funds. In FY 2016/17 the Commission will continue its work efforts on the intra-county CETAP corridors. An updated environmental document and project report has been prepared for the Mid County Parkway project to address changes made to the project limits, which are now between SR-79 and 1-215. The recirculated/supplemental draft environmental document was released for public review and comment in January 2013. Additional quantitative analysis for air quality, GHG emissions, and climate change effects for Mid County Parkway was released for public review in January 2014. Federal NEPA/MOU signatory agency concurrence for the least environmentally damaging practicable alternative for Alternative 9 Modified was received in February 2014. Final project approval and conclusion of the environmental phase was obtained in summer 2015, and final design will begin in summer 2016. Work on a portion of the north -south CETAP corridor that includes the 1-215 south widening project was completed in November 2012. The 1-215 central widening project was completed in October 2015, and an improvement to the French Valley Parkway interchange is being led by the city of Temecula. Given funding constraints, work on the two inter -county CETAP corridors (i.e., Riverside to San Bernardino and Riverside to Orange County) by the Commission is not expected in this fiscal year. The CMP update will involve the procurement of a consultant to assist in the preparation of a CMP that addresses state and/or federal regulations and aligning requirements for consistency with the RTP/SCS. Transportation Programming As mentioned above, the Commission is responsible for programming and allocating various local, state and federal funds. These funds are monitored to ensure that regulations are adhered to in order to prevent funds from lapsing. The following summarizes the status of these funding programs: Local Funding Western County TUMF Regional Arterial Program Project monitoring of TUMF regional arterial projects by Planning and Programming staff will occur based on 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, project agreements with local agencies have been executed for CETAP TUMF and regional arterial funds totaling approximately $135 million. By the end of FY 2016/17 the majority of expenditures will have been reimbursed to local agencies for TUMF regional arterial projects. These project expenditures are included in the Capital Projects Development and Delivery Department. Project programming for the remaining projects will be forwarded to the Commission and will be based on project readiness and funding availability. Staff will coordinate future programming of additional TUMF regional arterial projects with WRCOG and local agency staff. 2009 Measure A Western County Regional Arterial Program During the 2014 multi -funding call for projects, an additional $24 million of MARA funds were approved for five projects in Western Riverside County. Prior to the call, $40 million of MARA funds were programmed on six projects. Of the 11 MARA funded projects, six are under construction and three have been completed; two will begin construction by end of FY 2015/16. 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 five-year CIP based on Measure A revenue projections. Additionally, the local jurisdictions are required to submit a Maintenance of Effort (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 STI P/RIP/11 P Proposition 1B provided funding for STIP projects and other bond program categories such as CMIA, TCIF, and State Local Partnership Program (SLPP). However, with the expiration of these Proposition 1B programs, the STIP remains unsteady without the identification of a new fund source dedicated to transportation improvements or an increase in the gasoline tax. This year Commission staff will continue to deliver projects programmed in the STIP and work with local agencies to ensure that bond funds are allocated and expended by the respective deadlines. Staff will also be involved with the development and implementation of current and future ATP cycles, working with the CTC, Caltrans, SCAG, and regional transportation planning agencies to ensure projects in the County are successful in this funding program. S8821 SB821 projects are funded by 2% of LTF revenues; the expenditures under this program are included in the LTF special revenue fund, which is reflected in the Public and Specialized Transit Department since this fund's activities related primarily to transit funding. Call for projects are held on a biennial basis. Federal Funding CMAQ, STP, and TAP/ATP The Commission is responsible for allocating CMAQ and STP funds to transportation projects in the County. The Commission selects and approves CMAQ funds and STP funds through a call for projects in addition to programming funds for Measure A projects. The Commission delegates the selection of projects for CMAQ funds apportioned to the Salton Sea Air Basin to CVAG. In 2007 the Commission approved 25% of future CMAQ and STP funds for grade separation projects in FYs 2007/08 through 2015/16. In January 2014, the Commission approved projects through a multi -funding call for projects, which included 18 CMAQ projects in Western County totaling $56 million and 10 STP projects countywide totaling $63 million. Through SB99 and AB101 the State developed the ATP, which consolidated federal and state funding that traditionally funded bicycle and pedestrian projects. The ATP is administered by the CTC and is designed to encourage increased use of active modes of transportation such as biking and walking. Staff has been involved with the development of the guidelines and participates in workshops and through the Regional Transportation Planning Agencies group to represent the County's best interest for each programming cycle. Project Monitoring The high demand for reporting and monitoring the progress of projects is essential to prevent funds from lapsing. The department's 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. During FY 2016/17 Fundtrack will be updated to improve functionality, compatibility with other external databases, and reporting capabilities. The Planning and 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, staff monitors allocation and award deadlines, expenditures, project closeouts, and inactive projects 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, such as goods movement, with the counties of San Bernardino, Orange, Imperial, and San Diego. Issues regarding funding are addressed through various working groups, including SCAG region chief executive officers, legislative, and programming. 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. Recently the Commission coordinated with legislative staff and advocacy groups such as Mobility-21, and SHCC to secure funding through the FAST Act for goods movement - related needs such as the funding of Alameda Corridor East grade separations in the County. A direct result of this effort nationally was authorization of $10.8 billion in funding dedicated to freight and goods movement; $6.3 billion will be available through an existing formula based on current apportionment data and $4.5 billion will be allocated pursuant to a merit -based, multi -modal competitive grant program. Department Goals Build upon relationships with local, state, and federal agencies to coordinate short- and long-range planning to ensure that transportation projects receive funding and approvals. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Environmental Stewardship, Intermodalism & Accessibility) Objectives: • Work with CVAG, WRCOG, Caltrans, transit operators, local agencies, and SCAG to coordinate project amendments to the RTP and/or FTIP. • Provide the Commissioners information to assist in advocating Commission projects. • Continue CETAP intra-county corridor work. • Continue working with the RCA to implement the MSHCP. • Maintain maximum flexibility in project selection for FAST Act or state fund sources to serve the diverse needs of the 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 the 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, Environmental Stewardship) Objectives: • Implement the CMP to meet federal CMS requirements cited under the MPO (i.e., SCAG) planning regulations and consistency with the RTP/SCS. • 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 LOS 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 CMP segments that currently do not have smart call boxes or loop detectors to monitor traffic. • Identify congested corridors for potential funding opportunities. • Work with Caltrans and local agencies to review project alternatives that include travel demand management or integration of mode choices. Continue to advocate for jobs/housing balance and attracting high income jobs to the County in addition to addressing intercounty congestion. (Policy Goal: Economic Development) Objectives: • Participate in ongoing studies and activities to improve the job market and housing demand in Riverside County. • 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 and support of SCAG regional database to allow for efficient monitoring of projects and funding obligations with the ability to share project information with local jurisdictions. (Policy Goals: Communications, Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Maintain a consultant contract to upgrade, 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 FTIP database including updates to the regional transportation model. • 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, ATP, and federal FAST Act funds. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Goods Movement) Objectives: • Participate in statewide efforts to implement projects and fully utilize all available state funds. • Advocate that regions that program local and federal funds to replace state funding or advance an allocation due to state budget issues (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 state and federal forums to increase funding levels, streamline programming and allocation 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 to meet local, state, and federal goals and 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 percent of federal obligation authority (OA) for CMAQ and STP funding is obligated within the SCAG region. • Participate at CTC and Caltrans forums in preparing and evaluating ATP projects for the statewide and MPO funding programs. • 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 the County. • Monitor and influence the development of the National Freight Network required under FAST Act. • Advocate to increase funding to regions based on FAST Act distribution language. 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 Goals: 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 reporting, invoicing, and close-outs. • Coordinate project RFA/OA packages. • Monitor progress of project milestones and RFAs as they are processed through Caltrans headquarters and FHWA. • Prepare CTC allocation requests, extensions, and amendments for STIP and Proposition 1B funded projects. Provide assistance to local agencies in reviewing funding guidelines and grant applications, and facilitate allocation and obligation processes required for 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 reviewing and preparing grant applications, air quality conformity, 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 state/federal lobbyists to develop solutions for streamlining and clarifying processes under FAST Act. • 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 the County, including implementation of remaining Proposition 1B TCIF projects and the Commission's Grade Separation Plan. (Policy Goals: Goods Movement, Intermodalism & Accessibility) Objective: • Monitor progress made in constructing the TCIF-funded projects through discussions with staff from partner agencies. Timely completion of the remaining 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. As a result of goods movement funding available under the FAST Act, determine where future efforts regarding addressing the 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. • Update the Commission's 2012 Grade Separation Priority Update Study for remaining at -grade crossings through coordination of advocacy efforts with the Legislative Affairs and Communications departments. Facilitate public and private investments in clean air technology in support of the broader air quality programs for SCAG, SCAQMD, and the County local entities. (Policy Goal: Environmental Stewardship) Objectives: • Monitor the impact of AB32/SB375 GHG emission reduction from light trucks and automobiles through the implementation of the 2016 RTP/SCS. • Actively participate on the MSRCs TAC to ensure equitable funding is available in support of capital projects within the County. • Work with local agencies in identifying projects that can compete for state Cap and Trade funding programs. Submit grant applications for Cap and Trade funding for three grade separation projects at McKinley Street, Jurupa Road, and Hargrave Street. Planning and Programming Performance/Workload Indicators FY 14/15 Estimated FY 14/15 Actual FY 15/16 Estimated FY 16/17 Projected Federal projects monitored for obligation authority delivery 21 42 34 36 Active Transportation Program projects monitored for allocation 0 17 23 20 TUMF Regional Arterial projects monitored for implementation/expenditures 23 11 11 11 TUMF agreements/amendments 4 4 2 4 MARA projects monitored for implementation/expenditures 16 9 6 6 MARA agreements/amendments 5 5 3 3 RTP/FTIP amended projects 165 227 85 180 STIP/Proposition 16 programming, allocations, amendments, and extensions for Commission projects/local agency projects 15 5 5 5 Rail Mission Statement: "To develop and support passenger rail transportation options for increased mobility within Riverside County and the region." Chart 36 — Rail Salaries and Benefits Capital Outlay 2% 0% Expenditures Professional Costs 14% Support Costs 9% Rail expenditures of $34,097,200 include Metrolink operations and capital support as well as maintenance and operations of the nine Commission -owned and operated commuter rail stations (Table 55). Salaries and benefits reflect a 12% increase due to the allocation of FTEs and a 4% pool for merit -based salary increases. Professional costs, which include legal and consultant services, have increased 126% due to on -call rail consultants who will be used to support rail grants applications, management, and oversight and perform service planning and modeling for the Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Pass corridor rail service. Support costs include station maintenance, media ads, printing services, and marketing incentives. Projects and operations expenditures of $25,458,300 increased 26% compared to the previous year's budget and includes station construction planning and development for the Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Pass corridor rail service and an operating contribution of up to $18,400,000 to SCRRA for Metrolink operations, which includes new PVL service. 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, and engineering and construction expenditures relate to the Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Pass corridor. The "next generation" rail feasibility study is included in special studies. Capital outlay reflects a 74% decrease and is due to a change in classification of station rehabilitation and improvement expenditures. Table 55 - Rail Expenditure Detail FY 14/15 FY 15/16 Actual Revised Budget FY 15/16 FY 16/17 Projected Budget Dollar Change Percent Change Salaries and Benefits Professional Costs Legal Services 58,600 Professional Services- General 1,119,500 $ 618,300 $ 760,600 $ 759,400 170,000 93,500 1,905,000 1,220,000 Total Professional Costs 1,178,100 Support Costs 1,346,400 Projects and Operations Program Operations Engineering Construction Special Studies Operating and Capital Disbursements 2,075,000 1,313,500 2,936,200 1,906,600 1,889,800 2,556,300 1,793,000 250,000 1,200,000 250,000 250,000 9,090,000 16,000,000 15, 250,000 Total Projects and Operations 10,979,800 Capital Outlay TOTAL Rail Maintenance and Operations $ 14,122,600 20,256,300 160,400 $ 26,188,500 17,293,000 37,200 $ 21,309,700 Rail Staffing Summary Position Administrative Assistant Capital Projects Manager Chief Financial Officer Deputy Executive Director Executive Director Facilities Administrator Government Relations Manager Management Analyst Multimodal Services Director Procurement Analyst Procurement Manager Project Delivery Director Public Affairs Manager Rail Manager Senior Administrative Assistant FTE Department Budget Overview -Rail Operations Department Description FY 14/15 0.05 0.12 0.04 0.03 0.03 1.00 0.03 0.99 0.34 0.08 0.20 0.02 0.01 1.00 0.02 $ 852,800 171,000 4,520,000 4,691,000 3,054,100 3,672,600 250,000 2,200,000 750,000 18,585,700 25,458,300 41,000 $ 34,097,200 FY 15/16 0.05 0.00 0.03 0.04 0.04 1.00 0.05 1.00 0.30 0.14 0.25 0.03 0.10 1.00 0.02 3.96 4.05 $ 92,200 12% 1,000 1% 2,615,000 137 2,616,000 126% 117,900 4% 1,116,300 44% 0% 1,000,000 83% 500,000 200% 2,585,700 16 5,202,000 26% (119,400) -74% $ 7,908,700 30% FY 16/17 0.11 0.00 0.03 0.01 0.01 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.45 0.45 0.25 0.20 0.10 1.00 0.02 4.63 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 and intercity 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 California State Transportation Agency, CTC, Caltrans, California Public Utilities Commission, California High Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA), FRA, 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 commission's 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 (IE0C), and 91/Perris Valley Lines directly serve Western County. Unlike the other SCRRA member agencies, the Commission owns and operates the commuter rail stations serving the County: Riverside Downtown, Pedley, La Sierra, West Corona, North Main Corona, Riverside —Hunter Park/University of California at Riverside (UCR), Moreno Valley/March Field, Perris -Downtown, and Perris -South (Chart 37). The Riverside Downtown Operations Control Center (RDOCC), located at the west end of the Riverside Downtown station, provides monitoring of closed circuit televisions (CCTV) at the stations as well as facilities for train crews. Layover track facilities are located at the Riverside Downtown and Perris -South stations; however, the layover facilities are maintained by SCRRA. Station operation and maintenance costs are included in the Rail Department budget with services currently coordinated by the Capital Projects Development and Delivery Department through the Facilities Administrator. New and ongoing construction projects at these stations are described in the capital budget managed by the Capital Project Development and Delivery Department. Chart 37 — Riverside County Metrolink Station Locations Riverside County Metrolink Service SA N AERXARCM COUNTY '.EASIOE COUNT i 9 Ntrif Ig N COMA STATION WEST CORONd� STATION IL CORONA EXISTING STATIONS * +* METROLINK LINE PE DIET STATION �a Ti. ! yz. t 11 *V r:�. . d�l�WI. RIVERSIDE DOWNTOWN STATION , 7 RIYER51[1E Rosa. LA SIERRA STATION RL HUNTER PARK] t1CR STATION MORENO VALLEY! MARCH FIELD STATION 1.41i . • $ES=Aai aa<,E MORENO VALLEY ��-0 PERRIS DOWNTOWN PERRIS STATION 6 \,. SIR PERRIS STATION, Lake Parris In addition to Metrolink, the Commission participates in the governance of the LOSSAN Rail Corridor which is a 351-mile network through a six -county coastal region in southern California and is the second busiest intercity passenger rail corridor in the United States (Chart 38). The LOSSAN Rail Corridor Agency is a joint powers authority originally formed in 1989 that works to increase ridership, revenue, capacity, reliability, coordination, and safety on the coastal rail line between San Diego, Los Angeles, and San Luis Obispo. The Commission is the newest voting member of the 11-member Board of Directors composed of elected officials representing rail owners, operators, and planning agencies along the rail corridor. The LOSSAN has benefited from recent legislative action to establish more local control over the service. The LOSSAN Rail Corridor Agency has recently completed negotiations of a transfer agreement with Caltrans that allowed LOSSAN to take a broader role in the management and coordination of the southern California rail services. The Commission is involved to promote travel options and connections for our residents and to be engaged in decisions impacting the rail track rights the Commission purchased for commuter rail service. Commission staff also participates in the TAC that provides technical assistance, service planning, and coordination between various agencies to improve customer service. Chart 38 — Southern California Passenger Rail System Map tiEP-Il�ti:�. r A ,L i F i s Passenger Roil Stofion Q Amtrak Pacik Sul -Hiner © Matruhnk • COASTER ✓ SPRINTER {light Railj Passenger Rail Service - Amnak Patine Surfliner Melralink Maniere County Line - Melrolink Aneelope Volley tine - Merroliek San Bernardina line - Menolink Riverside line - Mena[ink 41 line - Me mlink Orgnge Cowry ime Metrank Inland Empire Orange County Line - COASTER - SPRINTER jlighl Rullj .Mra..k COOS i rP etit e�o-okfdiloroie r� METRQLIN K. GN1[111 rom manolinko-am. com Southern California Passenger Rail SYSTEM MAP M O Dx x R MR fl OR /� Ill RRIY M �Q�x�r x 0 5 10 15 20 30 40 Miles Key Assumptions • Metrolink's preliminary FY 2016/17 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/Perris Valley Lines. • The 91/PVL extension will be operational for its first full year and provide new options for the County's commuters. • LOSSAN will demonstrate its effectiveness with local control, and the Commission will be an active voting member in the process. Accomplishments • Developed detailed operating plans and implemented an optimized 91 Line service to maximize the benefit of the nine available train slots to Los Angeles. • Initiated early marketing efforts to establish a ridership base for the PVL and expanded Metrolink service. • Actively participated as voting membership on the LOSSAN board. " Continued to implement the recommendations of the comprehensive safety and security assessment and emergency response plan at the Metrolink stations. This includes the construction of the RDOCC and establishment of a back up control center at the North Main Corona station. " Continued efforts to manage the security guard contractor to provide protection of Commission assets and a sense of safety and security for riders. Major Initiatives Over the last 23 years, more than $125 million in capital improvements have been made in developing stations and securing access to support the Commission's commuter rail services operations. The PVL project and related projects will add over $250 million more in local investment in commuter rail. The PVL construction, including four new commuter rail stations, is substantially completed, and regular service is scheduled to begin in June 2016. Unlike the other SCRRA member agencies, the Commission owns and maintains the commuter rail stations serving the County. A general description of each of the Commission -owned rail station facilities is presented in Chart 39. Chart 39 Commission -Owned Rail Station Facilities Location In Service Size Date Transit Services Primary Features Riverside Downtown (P244001) 4." " Vin" r--t Riverside June1993 26.5 Rail:91/PVL 2 platforms with 4 boarding tracks :��li' ��ir'.,�� '^-4Y acres Line 4 parking lots (1,240 spaces) Riverside Line Enclosed pedestrian bridge, elevators, stairwells Amtrak Bus: RTA SunLine Amtrak MegaBus Pedley(P244002) 6001 Pedley Road, Jurupa \? `,IA 3 Valley June 1993 4.5 Rail: Riverside Line Platform with boarding track acres Bus: RTA Parking lot (288spaces) La Sierra (P244003) 109011ndiana Avenue, Riverside October 24.69 Rail:91/PVL Platform with 2 boarding tracks 1995 acres 1E0CLine Parking lot (1,065 spaces) 1�� II Bus: RTA Enclosed pedestrian bridge, elevators, stairwells r. ��Ys .. West Corona (P244004) 155 South Auto Center Drive, Corona October 5.49 Rail: 91/PVL Platform with 2 boarding tracks " 1995 acres IEOC Line Parking lot (564spaces) y^; Bus: RTA Enclosed pedestrian bridge, elevators, stairwells ��--" r, Corona Cruiser _ North Main Corona (P244006) 250 East Blaine Street, Corona November 6.72 Rail: 91/PVL Platform with 2 boarding tracks _ 2002 acres IEOC Line Parking lot (579spaces) .r--7'e, w : Bus: RTA Parking structure (1,000 spaces) Corona Cruiser Enclosed pedestrian bridge, elevators, stairwells Location In Service Size Date Transit Services Primary Features Perris -Downtown (P244010) 121 South C Street, Perris June 2016 5.5 Rail: 91/PVL Platform with boarding track s I (bus transit acres Bus: RTA Parking lot (444 spaces) center opened FEMME 2010) Riverside -Hunter Park/UCR (P244020) 1101 Marlborough Avenue, Riverside June 2016 9.35 Rail: 91/PVL Platform with boarding track i In 1 1 acres Bus: RTA Parking lot (528 spaces) HLINTEN PARK UCR Moreno Valley/March Field (P244021) 14160Meridian Parkway, Riverside June 2016 14.47 Rail: 91/PVL Platform with boarding track ilinosto9•" oft.r.`� ! M.1i._.__ li M VALLEY/ MAAGA *IELO acres Bus: RTA Parking lot (476 spaces) Amtrak Stairwell Perris -South (P244022) 1304Case Road, Perris June 2016 40.57 Rail: 91/PVL Platform with boarding track ifirit n anurx PERIM acres Bus: RTA Parking lot (907 spaces) Amtrak Riverside Downtown Operations Control Center (P244024) 4344Vine Street, Riverside April 2016 3,000 N/A CCTV operations center square Offices and meeting rooms feet Station maintenance includes property management, utilities, grounds maintenance, repairs, cleaning, and security services at the Commission -owned commuter rail station facilities, including adjacent parking areas. Through FY 2015/16 station operating costs were primarily funded with LTF Western County rail allocations. As a result of the new PVL service, the LTF allocations will be used for Metrolink operating contributions, and 2009 Measure A Western County rail funds will be used for station maintenance. Table 56 summarizes the station maintenance costs, which are included in the Rail Operations support costs. Table 56 - Rail Station Maintenance Summary FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 Actual Budget Projected Budget Equipment Maintenance $ 140,700 $ 342,000 $ 451,600 and Repairs Grounds Maintenance 431,300 535,400 604,200 and Repairs Utilities and Support 284,800 304,000 301,200 Property Management 336,400 380,500 210,400 and Operations Security 1,115,400 1,275,800 1,331,200 Improvements 13,100 — 37,200 $ 728,800 1,137, 600 602,400 336,500 2,367,300 Total Expenditures $ 2,321,700 $ 2,837,700 $ 2,935,800 $ 5,172,600 Department Goals —Rail Operations Improve utilization and increase efficiency of commuter rail lines serving the 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 the County lines, including the new 91/PVL. • Continue to expand service on Metrolink lines with increased train frequencies. • Coordinate with Metrolink staff to develop future service plans that best meet the needs of the County's residents. • Continue to monitor Metrolink's financial performance to ensure the County's 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. • Build out the La Sierra Station with additional bus bays and parking to allow for more commuter buses and park and ride opportunities. • Explore track rights opportunities. • Expand opportunities with the Commuter Assistance Program's park and ride operations for the designation of specific car/vanpool/buspool parking at commuter rail stations with available capacity. The Perris -South station is a new example of this coordination. • Expand opportunities for interline travel through coordination of schedules with LOSSAN and Amtrak intercity 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 Goals: 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, including the development of the Pedley station cell tower project. • 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 the past the Commission completed the commuter rail feasibility study that examined the viability of extending Metrolink commuter rail service largely within existing rail right of way. The Commission approved the study and recommended advanced study of extensions on the San Jacinto Branch Line (SJBL) to Hemet/San Jacinto and Murrieta/Temecula. The next phase of Alternatives Analysis for these corridors will be pursued in future years. The Commission's strategic assessment was completed in January 2016 and provides a path forward that will require the development of a "next generation" rail feasibility study in the coming year. Significant planning efforts are also underway to explore intercity passenger rail service to the Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Pass corridor. San Jacinto Branch Line The Commission holds title to and manages the 38-mile SJBL (Chart 40) and several adjacent properties, preserved for future passenger rail service. BNSF holds the freight rights in the corridor, providing service to local shippers, and performs maintenance on the line. Chart 40 — San Jacinto Branch Line Perris Valley Line Project The PVL was substantially completed in May 2016, and operations commenced in June 2016. The construction project was a 24-mile extension of the 512-mile of Metrolink commuter rail system. It extended the existing Metrolink 91 Line, which provides service between Riverside and Downtown Los Angeles via Fullerton. There are timed connections to the other routes out of the Riverside Downtown station. The project included the construction of four passenger stations at Riverside —Hunter Park/UCR, Moreno Valley/March Field, Perris - Downtown, and Perris -South; construction of a park -and -ride lot at each of the four new stations, totaling approximately 2,250 parking spaces; and a layover facility at Perris -South for vehicle storage and servicing. The hours of operation are from 4:30 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on weekdays with no scheduled service yet on weekends. The service will have 12 trains a day between Perris -South and Riverside Downtown with connections to IE0C and Riverside Line trains as well. COACHELLA VALLEY- SAN GORGONIO PASS Coachella Valley— San Gorgonio Pass Corridor Rail Service In recent years the Commission has also focused attention on the creation of intercity passenger rail service between the Coachella Valley, the Pass Area, Riverside, and the Los Angeles basin through advocacy efforts with state, federal, and local government entities and negotiation with the freight railroads. The Commission was able to ensure the corridor was prominently featured in the updated 2013 California State Rail Plan. In May 2013 the Caltrans Division of Rail completed the first phase of a planning study and initial alternatives analysis for the rail corridor. This planning study was very supportive of the potential for a viable service, and future studies can expand on this by determining ridership demand and better cost estimates. Caltrans also included an updated project description and analysis of the Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Pass corridor rail service in the latest state rail plan, which was approved by the California State Transportation Agency on September 5, 2013; the next update will take place in 2018. Since its inclusion of the project into the State Rail Plan, the Commission has taken the lead on the planning elements required of the project in order to secure additional funding and project approvals at various state and federal levels. The Commission has finalized a MOU with CVAG for its cooperation on the planning as well as funding through a new TDA bus/rail split for the Coachella Valley. This agreement also included the application of Proposition 18 funds toward the initial phase 1 analysis which includes public outreach, development of the project Purpose and Need Statement and the development of the Preliminary Alternatives Analysis Report. As part of this effort, the Commission secured a letter of agreement with Caltrans for its cooperation and modeling support. In the July 1, 2010 Federal Register notice on High -Speed Intercity Passenger Rail (HSIPR) program, it clearly outlines the planning process needed to be eligible for HSIPR funds. This process identifies the need for a SDP with the following requirements: • Clearly demonstrate the purpose and need; • Analyze alternatives for the proposed passenger rail service; • Identify the alternative that best meets the purpose and need; • Identify the discrete capital projects required; and • Demonstrate the operational and financial feasibility. This past year in partnership with Caltrans, the Commission successfully applied for and was awarded a $2,900,000 FRA grant to complete the corridor study's SDP. This was the only rail corridor in the country that was awarded these planning grant funds. Staff has worked through the multiple agreements needed in order to utilize this funding in coordination with the FRA and Caltrans. The environmental process needed for the NEPA documentation will be led by a highly qualified consulting firm capable of conducting both the SDP and the NEPA documentation in order to expedite project development. This project will be ongoing and is incorporated in the FY 2016/17 budget. The Commission has created an annual SRTP for the Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Pass corridor rail service project. As the result of the studies performed to date by both CVAG and the Commission, it was determined that using state -supported intercity trains presents the best alternative for developing service along the corridor. The 141- mile trip between Los Angeles and the Coachella Valley would cross four counties (Chart 41). Stops and station locations are yet to be determined. Due to the trip length and time of approximately three hours, Amtrak -style service with larger seats and food service would be more appealing to the riders. In addition, the service would operate over UP and BNSF tracks, and, in general, Amtrak has a greater ability to initiate service over freight railroads based on a national agreement. The initial service plan would be for two daily round trips along the corridor. The Preliminary Alternatives Analysis recommended a preferred alignment. Chart 41— Coachella Vallev-San Gorgonio Pass Corridor Rail Service — Proposed Alternative �:5h1tisr1:ss1.litnusnJ[JAI r Fontana Calton legend.- -Yuba II San , all, Remade nnant Aliening Cabazbn Palm Springs , PSP \` Cathedral Cis Ranchos LEGEND -Alternative 1 -Potential Stations Thousand Palms !'9A Si1 'JiSSr_. l� 9e Indio lid® Indio ----- Wells ia(Imma Coachella IhetmTl In an effort to provide earlier rail service to the area, the Commission pursued and was awarded a $1,200,000 MSRC grant for charter passenger rail service for the April 2017 and April 2018 Coachella Music Festivals in Indio. 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 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 I- 15 for analysis. The Commission has entered into a 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 a 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 • The 91/PVL will be operational for the full year in FY 2016/17. • Progress on the development of the Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Pass corridor rail service will continue. Accomplishments • Completed the PVL project. • Completed the Alternatives Analysis for the Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Pass corridor rail SDP. • Successfully awarded an FRA grant for Phase II of the Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Pass corridor rail project and environmental efforts. • Conducted public outreach and alternatives analysis for the Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Pass corridor rail project. • Successfully awarded an MSRC Grant of $1,200,000 for Coachella Music Festival charter train service in April 2017 and April 2018. Major Initiatives During FY 2016/17, the Commission will continue progress on the Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Pass corridor rail project's SDP and environmental work. Additionally, the Commission will develop the "next generation" rail feasibility study to evaluate future growth opportunities for passenger rail service in the County. 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: • Build ridership on the 91/PVL. • Explore passenger rail options and conduct detailed studies on the Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Pass corridor. • Evaluate high speed rail plans and programs and look for opportunities for early investment that benefit existing passenger rail services. • Evaluate future rail needs as part of the "next generation" rail feasibility study. Maintain efforts with local agencies, other southern California counties, and the state and federal governments to expand intercity passenger rail service into the County and the Coachella Valley. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Intermodalism & Accessibility) Continue to monitor the 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 the County. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Intermodalism & Accessibility) Rail Performance/Workload Indicators FY 14/15 Estimated FY 14/15 Actual FY 15/16 Estimated FY 16/17 Projected Average daily ridership on existing commuter lines • Riverside Line 5,193 Information Information Information • IEOC Line 5,101 Not Available Not Available Not Available • 91/PVL 3,169 Farebox recovery ratio • Riverside Line 55.5% Information Information Information • IEOC Line 33.7% Not Available Not Available Not Available • 91/PVL 44.5% 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 improve, as resources allow, mobility options to meet travel needs of seniors, persons with disabilities, and persons of limited means to enhance quality of life through innovative solutions and better coordination of existing services." Chart 42 — Public and Specialized Transit Salaries and Benefits 0% Projects and Operations 82 Expenditures Public and specialized transit uses are budgeted at $134,796,600 for FY 2016/17, as presented in Table 57, and consist primarily of capital 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 $74,810,000; bicycle and pedestrian facilities allocations to cities and the County of $1,801,000; and planning and administration allocations to other agencies of $649,500. STA disbursements of $21,215,000 are for bus capital purposes in Western County, Coachella Valley, and Palo Verde Valley. Transfers out comprise $17,800,000 for rail operations; $2,000,000 for grade separations; $2,550,000 for planning; $1,000,000 for administration; and $165,000 for Coachella Valley rail operations and capital. The LTF and STA transit allocations reflect the use of $15,411,400 and $10,412,400 in fund balances, respectively. Measure A disbursements include $2,800,000 for Western County specialized transit funding of the second year of the 2015 three-year call for projects. The majority of other Measure A disbursements relates to other Measure A public transit programs: $842,000 for Western County Consolidated Transportation Service Agency (CTSA) allocations, $6,050,000 for Coachella Valley public and specialized transit, and $2,490,600 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 57 — Public and Specialized Transit Expenditure Detail FY 14/15 FY 15/16 Actual Revised Budget FY 15/16 FY 16/17 Projected Budget Dollar Change Percent Change Salaries and Benefits Professional Costs Legal Services Audit Services Professional Services - General Total Professional Costs Support Costs Projects and Operations Operating and Capital Disbursements Transfers Out TOTAL Public and Specialized Transit $ 335,600 $ 353,600 $ 353,600 $ 387,500 $ 33,900 10% 5,200 120,000 125,200 9,900 19,000 111,000 160,000 290,000 30,100 500 111,000 140,800 252,300 57,400 1,000 20,000 160,800 181,800 54,200 88,694,100 117,455,800 93,722,000 110,658,100 16,479,100 25,429,100 23,229,100 23,515,000 105,643,900 $ 143,558,600 $ 117,614,400 $ 134,796,600 $ (18,000) (91,000) 800 (108,200) 24,100 (6,797,700) (1,914,100) (8,762,000) -95% -82% 0% -37% 80% -6% -8% -6% Public and Specialized Transit Staffing Summary Position Administrative Assistant Chief Financial Officer Executive Director Management Analyst MultimodaI Services Director Procurement Analyst Senior Administrative Assistant Transit Manager FY 14/15 0.09 0.05 0.02 1.00 0.13 0.02 0.01 1.00 FY 15/16 0.09 0.04 0.00 1.00 0.10 0.00 0.00 1.00 FTE 2.32 2.23 Department Budget Overview Department Description FY 16/17 0.06 0.02 0.00 1.00 0.25 0.00 0.00 1.00 2.33 The Measure A specialized transit program provides a valuable service to the community by serving the needs of residents, mainly seniors and persons with disabilities, whose transportation needs are not met by traditional services. Specialized transit operations are typically administered by social service and nonprofit agencies. The Commission awards Measure A funds for specialized transit through a competitive call for projects. In addition, federal grant funds from Jobs Access Reverse Commute (JARC) and New Freedom were approved by the Commission through the 2013 Universal Call for Projects and were utilized for projects until June 30, 2016. In July 2012, Congress passed the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21) two-year reauthorization bill which authorized federal funding for public transportation programs. This legislation restructured prior funding by consolidating several grant programs, revising project eligibility, and amending funding allocation requirements from discretionary to a formula -based process. Significant changes in MAP-21 included the end of both JARC and New Freedom as distinct programs. JARC-type projects are now eligible activities under the rural (Section 5311) and urban (Section 5307) funding provisions. New Freedom type projects for seniors and people with disabilities are now allowable under the Section 5310 program. Under the new long-term transportation bill, FAST Act, signed into law on December 4, 2015, JARC and New Freedom type projects will continue to be eligible activities that can be supported with the Section 5311 and 5310 funding. Following a competitive call for projects, funding through the consolidated FTA Section 5310 program administered by Caltrans was provided to nonprofit transportation and social service agencies and public operators (under special circumstances) for the purchase of capital equipment as well as operations. Eligible activities include transportation projects for finance planning, capital, and operating costs that support the development and maintenance of transportation services designed to transport welfare recipients and eligible low-income individuals to and from jobs and activities related to their employment. These activities also include transportation projects that facilitate the provision of public transportation services from urbanized areas and rural areas to suburban employment locations including vanpool programs. Additional activities include: • Former New Freedom activities — improvements that exceed the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA); • Public transportation projects to improve access to fixed -route transit; • Public transit projects expressly designed for seniors and people with disabilities, where transit is insufficient, inappropriate or unavailable; and • Alternatives to public transportation that assist seniors and people with disabilities. Eligibility for the above federal funds requires recipients to comply with all federal coordinated planning requirements in accordance with MAP-21 and the new FAST Act provisions. Projects selected for funding 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. In January 2015, the Commission approved 18 large urbanized area projects and four small urbanized projects using federal FY 2012/13 and 2013/14 Section 5310 program funds. A total of $2.6 million was approved for large urban areas and $287,000 was approved for small urban areas. Caltrans released the award recommendations in May 2015, and CTC adopted the final list of funded projects in June 2015. Caltrans is expected to issue a new call for projects soon using the FY 2014/15 and FY 2015/16 available funding. 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, 5311 transit funding resources to public transit programs. New federal funds, 5337 (State of Good Repair grant program), and 5339 (bus and bus facilities) are administered directly by SCAG with the sub -allocation to individual agencies determined by the Commission through the SRTP process. 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 County's operators annually have applied for Proposition 1B funds since FY 2007/08; however, the release of funds is contingent upon available proceeds from bond sales. The 10-year state bond program in the amount of $4 billion deposited in the Public Transportation, Modernization, Improvement and Service Enhancement Account (PTMISEA) and $1 billion deposited in the Transit System Safety, Security and Disaster Response Account (TSSSDRA) has provided significant revenue for major construction and capital transit projects in the county. However, this bond funding will be available only through the end of FY 2016/17. In June 2015, first year of LCTOP funding allocations under the CARB's Cap and Trade Program were awarded to Riverside County transit operators. The Commission coordinated the preparation and submission of transit projects to Caltrans which administers this program to support operating and capital transit projects that reduce carbon emissions and improve mobility with a priority on serving disadvantaged communities. The State Controller's Office appropriated $25 million statewide to the LCTOP in FY 2014/15 and is expected to appropriate $75 million annually beginning FY 2015/16. Riverside County's share of approximately $2.7 million in FY 2015/16 will support the construction of RTA's UCR Mobility Hub, station upgrades for the Commission's new PVL to encourage active transportation, and installation and operation of a solar energy system in Palo Verde Valley. Funds will also be used to increase service frequency on selected bus routes that operate in disadvantaged communities in the Coachella Valley and city of Beaumont. 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 audit firms to perform certain agreed -upon procedures for the Measure A specialized transit funding recipients, some of which also received Section 5310, 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 2016. • Fluctuating LTF and Measure A sales tax revenues will continue to require 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 ongoing specialized transit services resulting from the 2015 3-year Measure A Call for Projects funding allocation process. • Received approval notification of 29 capital projects awarded to ten successful County recipients of funding under the federal FY 2012/13 and FY 2013/14 FTA Section 5310 program. Projects were derived from a locally - developed Coordinated Plan. • Incorporated the FY 2014/15 Proposition 1B PTMISEA account funds with transit capital funding sources following Caltrans' release of program funding covering a three-year period for FY 2014/15 through FY 2016/17. • Approved allocation of FY 2015/16 Proposition 1B TSSSDRA funds for eligible transit safety and security projects identified by transit operators following release of program funding and guidelines by the California Office of Emergency Services. • Completed the 2016 Coordinated Plan Update that reflects new service plans and opportunities resulting from five workshops and one transit needs public hearing held in different areas of the County including unincorporated areas of Mecca and North Shore in eastern Riverside County. • Incorporated FY 2014/15 and FY 2015/16 LCTOP formula funds with transit operating and capital funding sources following the Caltrans release of program funding. • Contracted an outside auditor to conduct the TDA Triennial Performance Audit of the Commission and seven County transit operators covering FY 2012/13 through FY 2014/15. 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 June 2016, 17 programs in Western County completed their first year of specialized transit services under the 2015 Measure A Call for Projects. As identified in the Coordinated Plan, the specialized transit projects approved for funding will require implementation and continuous performance monitoring through June 2018. Department Goals Provide timely information to the public regarding Commission -implemented projects and support public relations activities of Measure A funded programs by grant recipients. (Policy Goal: Communications) Objective: • Produce and distribute public information materials as needed including press releases, flyers, brochures, marketing materials, and newspaper ads. 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 monthly performance reports. • Support the consolidated FTA Section 5310 and 5307 (under MAP-21 and FAST Act) grant processes to improve mobility for seniors, persons with disabilities and individuals of limited means by working with Caltrans, public operators, and social service agencies to ensure a competitive process statewide for the allocation of federal transportation dollars for social service programs. • Provide technical assistance and program support to agencies offering specialized transit programs to ensure the maximum benefit of funding for improved mobility for seniors, persons with disabilities, and individuals of limited means. 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. • Implement recommendations resulting from the TDA-mandated triennial performance audits of the Commission and the seven County bus transit operators. • 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 initiative working with the transit operator partners in providing connecting bus services to the new PVL stations. 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, San Diego, and San Bernardino 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, Riverside Regional Coalition, 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 14/15 Estimated FY 14/15 Actual FY 15/16 Estimated FY 16/17 Projected SRTPs submitted by operators and reviewed 9 9 9 9 SRTP amendments 2 2 2 2 Specialized Transit grants awarded 21 21 17 17 One-way trips provided by Measure A funded projects 135,000 124,350 115,000 117,000 One-way trips provided by JARC & New Freedom funded agencies 230,000 242,100 160,000 50,000 One-way trips reimbursed through the Western County Transportation Reimbursement and Information Project 92,000 89,830 100,000 101,000 Transit tickets provided through the Transportation Access Program 66,000 71,400 65,000 66,000 Clients served through Blindness Support Services 50 70 34 35 Unique persons served through Vetlink 211 Services 2,900 2,545 1,590 1,600 Commuter Assistance Mission Statement: "To actively work to improve the commuter experience by promoting multimodal transportation options through the use of continually advancing technology, employer partnerships, user incentives, and meaningful community engagement." Chart 43 — Commuter Assistance Salaries and Benefits 7% Professional Costs 13% Support Costs 6% Expenditures Commuter Assistance expenditures total $3,579,900, which represents a 7% decrease from last year's budget (Table 58) due to anticipated completion of Inland Empire Commuter (IE Commuter) system enhancements, program management consultant transition, and relief of funding Perris Transit Center security. Salaries and benefits of $273,100 reflect a 20% net decrease due to a change in FTE allocations and a 4% pool for merit -based salary increases. Professional costs of $457,500 have increased 9% over the prior year due to assessment and/or potential implementation of service enhancements such as a new incentive structure. Support costs of $204,400, which include mail and printing services, communications, and other office expenditures, have decreased 2%. Projects and operations expenditures of $2,645,000 consist of park and ride lease payments of $150,000; regional transportation consultant services totaling $2,105,000 to manage and implement the program; and merchant vouchers valued at $390,000. Reimbursements from SANBAG for rideshare services provided by the Commission are included in revenues to offset a portion of these expenditures. Table 58 — Commuter Assistance Uses Detail FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Salaries and Benefits $ 297,500 $ 341,000 $ 341,500 Professional Costs Legal Services 47,700 25,000 25,100 Professional Services- General 321,900 394,000 544,400 Total Professional Costs 369,600 419,000 569,500 Support Costs 300,300 209,300 193,200 Projects and Operations Program Operations 1,924,000 2,718,000 2,633,000 Total Projects and Operations 1,924,000 2,718,000 2,633,000 Transfers Out 159,500 159,500 159,500 TOTAL Commuter Assistance $ 3,050,900 $ 3,846,800 $ 3,896,700 $ 273,100 25,000 432,400 457,400 204,400 2,645,000 2,645,000 $ 3,579,900 Commuter Assistance Staffing Summary Position FY 14/15 FY 15/16 Chief Financial Officer 0.01 0.00 Commuter and Motorist Assistance Manager 0.72 0.59 Deputy Executive Director 0.04 0.03 Management Analyst 0.57 0.55 Multimodal Services Director 0.46 0.55 Procurement Analyst 0.08 0.02 Procurement Manager 0.03 0.03 Senior Administrative Assistant 0.10 0.10 $ (67,900) -20% 0% 38,400 10% 38,400 9% (4,900) -2% (73,000) -3% (73,000) -3% (159,500) -100% $ (266,900) -7% FY 16/17 FTE 2.01 1.87 Department Budget Overview Department Description 0.00 0.90 0.00 0.25 0.20 0.05 0.02 0.05 1.47 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 the 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 an Inland Empire Commuter Assistance Program with regional reach. • 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. Accomplishments • Restructured and transitioned the Commuter Assistance Program management to a new consultant following a competitive procurement in FY 2014/15. The new contract scope consolidates the program administration function and marketing communications element establishing a more cost effective and efficient operation. • Enhanced the IE Commuter rideshare system with new on-line resources and tools for employers to more effectively manage and market their organizations' rideshare programs. • 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 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), Tom's Farms (Corona), Elsinore Naval Military School (Lake Elsinore), Lake Elsinore Outlets (Lake Elsinore), Shepherd of Life (Lake Elsinore), First Church of Christ Scientist (Menifee), United Church of Christ (Menifee), Promise Lutheran Church (Murrieta), Orchard Christian Fellowship (Temecula), and the United Methodist Church (Temecula). 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 the County's 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 2016/17 are described below. Maximize Employer Partnerships: Given that the highest percentage of rideshare arrangements is formed at work sites, voluntary employer participation is critical to address congestion and air quality goals; employers are the conduit to directly influence their employees' personal transportation choices. The ongoing success of the core Western County rideshare program is a testament to the significance of employer partnerships in the program's success. However, the prior economic downturn created a corporate culture of doing more with less. Many Employer Transportation Coordinators (ETCs) feel spread too thin to commit to offering a rideshare program. Delivery of value-added services and tools to make the ETC's job easier will be a critical motivation to continue the partnerships and develop new ones. Expand with New Market Development: As previously stated, the primary go -to -market strategy has been to leverage employer partnerships with larger employers (250+) to cost effectively access commuters or end -user employees. While this channel has historically proven to be efficient over the years, it results in a rather limited base of commuters compared to the potential. Therefore, in addition to maximizing the number of employer partners and maximizing rideshare participation within those employers, a Business to Consumer strategy will be phased in to expand the awareness and consideration of rideshare options. Additionally, an assessment of new incentives and incentive delivery with a focus on increasing transit (bus/rail) specifically will be explored. Support Multimodal Travel: In addition to ridematching, information services, and incentives to facilitate ridesharing, the Commuter Assistance Program also provides park and ride facilities to support ridesharing efforts. The last Caltrans park and ride facility in the 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 the County. A continued focus for FY 2016/17 will be to increase 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/buspool arrangements as well as facilitate transit connections. Department Goals Operate a cost-effective Commuter Assistance Program within the 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: • Leverage Commuter Assistance Program resources to support outreach and transportation demand management objectives of major Commission projects, including but not limited to, the Riverside Express Lanes and PVL. • Continue to enhance the IE Commuter user experience with ongoing improvements in functionality and services offered. • 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. • 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. 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 the bi-county ridematching system with regional reach. • Assess the feasibility of implementing and maintaining a regional National Transit Database vanpool incentive program. Strategically broaden the reach of the program to encourage the use of alternative transportation modes amongst all travelers and continue to grow the core target base of employers and their employees. (Policy Goals: System Efficiencies, Communications) Objectives: • 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 translate individual or worksite rideshare participation into money saved, congestion reduced, and emissions reduced. • Publicize the participation of local employers in the Commuter Assistance Program through various media options. Commuter Assistance Performance/Workload Indicators FY 14/15 Estimated FY 14/15 Actual FY 15/16 Estimated FY 16/17 Projected Number of one-way single occupant vehicle trips reduced as a result of Rideshare Incentives 74,900 65,827 70,000 85,000 Number of Rideshare Plus Rewards Members 6,000 3,723 4,200 5,000 Number of incoming 1-866-RIDESHARE telephone calls 2,600 1,797 1,900 2,300 Number of services provided by Inland Empire Commuter Services to support employer trip reduction efforts at worksites: • Employer's requesting survey services 145 104 125 150 • RideGuides produced 15,500 6,527 18,000 21,000 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 44 — Motorist Assistance Salaries and Benefits 2% Professional Costs _10% Transfers Out 16% Projects and Operations 59% Expenditures Support Costs 13% 1 Motorist Assistance expenditures and uses are budgeted at $6,851,900, an increase of 6% compared to the prior year budget (Table 59) due to increases in FSP expenditures and call box upgrades. Salaries and benefits reflect a net decrease of 23% due to FTE allocations and a 4% pool for merit -based salary increases. Professional costs of $666,900 reflect a decrease of 10% due to reductions in 1E511 operational costs, and support costs of $919,300 decreased $20,800, or 2%, due to implementation of call box hardware upgrades to maintain compatibility with evolving cellular technology and optimization of the call box network. Reimbursement from SANBAG for half of all 1E511 related expenditures is included in revenues. Budgeted expenditures for program operations include $3,432,000 in towing contract costs for the FSP program. Projects and operations costs have increased 11% due to increased FSP service supporting construction activity and anticipated increases in tow operator expenditures. Transfers out represent SAFE matching funds of $714,700 for FSP services and a $394,200 allocation for administrative costs. Table 59 — Motorist Assistance Uses Detail FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 Dollar Percent Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Change Change Salaries and Benefits $ 90,700 $ 168,700 $ 166,900 Professional Costs Legal Services 42,800 31,000 31,000 Professional Services - General 625,700 708,900 707,900 Total Professional Costs 668,500 739,900 738,900 Support Costs 385,400 940,100 934,300 Projects and Operations Program Operations 3,173,400 3,642,500 3,652,500 Transfers Out 1,005,400 985,700 985,700 TOTAL Motorist Assistance $ 5,323,400 $ 6,476,900 $ 6,478,300 $ 130,600 32,500 634,400 666,900 919,300 4,026,200 1,108,900 $ 6,851,900 $ (38,100) -23% 1,500 5% (74,500) -11% (73,000) -10% (20,800) -2% 383,700 11% 123,200 12% $ 375,000 6% Motorist Assistance Staffing Summary Position FY 14/15 FY 15/16 Commuter and Motorist Assistance Manager 0.28 0.40 Management Analyst 0.43 0.40 Multimodal Services Director 0.03 0.05 Procurement Analyst 0.05 0.08 Procurement Manager 0.01 0.10 FTE 0.80 1.03 Department Budget Overview Department Description FY 16/17 0.10 0.69 0.07 0.05 0.01 0.92 As a SAFE, the Commission is responsible for providing a motorist aid system for the County. This system is comprised of three components: 1) the 1E511 traveler information system, 2) FSP, and 3) call boxes. The 1E511 system is a telephone, website, and mobile app-based service that delivers real-time traffic information, including incidents and travel times, bus and rail trip planning, and rideshare information. The FSP program clears debris in freeway lanes 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 and Commission -funded construction projects to help mitigate congestion. The call box system allows motorists to call for assistance in the event of a mechanical breakdown, accident, or other emergency on the freeway. Key Assumptions • 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 FSP 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. • 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. Accomplishments • Provided traveler information service through the 1E511 system to support over 37,000 monthly IE511.org web visits and over 21,000 monthly 1E511 phone calls. • Implemented a service optimization change to five of the nine FSP service areas and increased the overall center -lane miles of freeway covered by nearly seven miles without additional cost. • Achieved the highest benefit -to -cost ratio statewide for FSP in the latest statewide FSP Management Information System Report. • Continued the "cost recovery" program for call box knockdowns in an effort to collect reimbursements from motorists involved in accidents that damage Commission property. • Upgraded the FSP fleet vehicle tracking system from a 2G platform to a 3G platform at a net savings over the next three years. Major Initiatives The Commission, along with its partner, SANBAG, will continue to operate, maintain, and enhance the 1E511 system. This system includes a website interface and an interactive voice response (IVR) telephone system that serves Riverside and San Bernardino counties 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 location, route, and time of travel. Major Motorist Assistance initiatives will also 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 the 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 additional reductions will be made based on call box removals identified in the call box reduction planning assessment. Another call box initiative will be to plan for a seamless service transition requiring call box hardware upgrades in anticipation of cellular technology migrations that will impact the call box network. Lastly, 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. Department Goals Provide efficient delivery of a comprehensive motorist aid system (IE511, FSP, Call Box) and an outstanding level of service to the traveling public. (Policy Goals: Mobility, System Efficiencies, Financial & Administration) Objectives: • 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. • Continue to 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 Commission, Caltrans, and local cities and coordinate the use of temporary construction tow service to mitigate congestion. • Work in coordination with CHP and Caltrans to implement call box reductions identified in the planning assessment. Continue coordination with San Bernardino SAFE to monitor the operation of the call answering center contractor. Enhance access to real-time traveler information. (Policy Goals: System Efficiencies, Communications) Objectives: • Develop access to, or delivery of, more personalized traffic information services specific to a commuter's location, 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. • Continue coordination with Caltrans on expanding traffic detection and feeding that traffic data into the 1E511 system. • Utilize the opportunity at the Caltrans District 8 Traffic Management Center to enhance coordination between CHP and Caltrans on traveler information. • Anticipate, plan, and implement an effective hardware solution to anticipated cellular technology migrations that will affect the call box network. Motorist Assistance Performance/Workload Indicators FY 14/15 Estimated FY 14/15 Actual FY 15/16 Estimated FY 16/17 Projected Number of call boxes 500 549 547 425 Number of call box calls 4,200 3,882 3,880 3,300 Number of vehicle assists 46,500 42,485 46,394 46,500 Number of 1E511 phone calls 288,000 263,757 264,442 250,000 Number of 1E511 web visits 425,000 452,713 518,520 545,000 Toll Operations Mission Statement: "To efficiently operate express lanes with high customer satisfaction to reduce congestion, improve mobility, and manage demand." Chart 45 — Toll Operations Capital Outlay 4% Expenditures Salaries and Benefits 4% Professional Costs 5% Support and Maintenance Costs 41% Toll operations expenses of $6,553,100 represent approximately one-half year of operating expenses for the Riverside 91 Express Lanes following substantial completion of the 91 Project (Table 60). The 91 Project expenditures are included in the Capital Project Development and Delivery Department. Approximately 87% of the expenses are comprised of operations, maintenance, and support costs. Salaries and benefits reflect 1.08 FTEs and represent 4% of total expenses. Professional costs of $307,000, or 5% of expenses, consist of traffic and revenue and financial advisory consultants, general and specialized legal counsel, audit and financial services, and rating agency and TIFIA loan servicing fees. Support and maintenance costs of $2,674,900 include road and systems maintenance, insurance, credit card processing fees, violations enforcement, marketing, lease, travel, and other support costs. Toll services represent a substantial portion of the program operations costs of $3,052,800. Transponder costs of $250,000 are reflected in capital outlay. Table 60 — Toll Operations Uses Detail FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 Actual Revised Budget Projected Budget Dollar Percent Change Change Salaries and Benefits $ $ Professional Costs Legal Services Audit Services Professional Services - General Total Professional Costs Support and Maintenance Costs Projects and Operations Program Operations Capital Outlay TOTAL Toll Operations Toll Operations Staffing Summary Position Chief Financial Officer Deputy Director of Finance Executive Director Toll Financial Analyst Toll Operations Manager Toll Program Director Toll Senior Management Analyst Toll Technology Manager $ 268,400 25,000 19,000 263,000 307,000 2,674,900 3,052,800 250,000 $ 6,553,100 FY 14/15 FY 15/16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FTE 0.00 0.00 Department Budget Overview Department Description $ 268,400 N/A 25,000 N/A 19,000 N/A 263,000 N/A 307,000 N/A 2,674,900 N/A 3,052,800 N/A 250,000 N/A $ 6,553,100 N/A FY 16/17 0.10 0.10 0.03 0.30 0.10 0.20 0.15 0.10 1.08 In December 2006, the Commission adopted the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan which serves as a 10-year capital improvement plan from 2009-2019 for Western County freeways and highways. To address unprecedented population, economic, and travel demand growth in Western County, the Commission desired to provide freeway corridor improvements beyond what traditional funding sources would be able to provide. Alternative funding sources were studied in advance of the adoption of the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan including consideration of tolling as a means to provide more transportation improvements. A toll feasibility study was conducted and it was determined that SR-91 and 1-15 were both feasible corridors to introduce tolling via high occupancy toll lanes (now often referred to as tolled express lanes or, simply, express lanes). The Western Riverside County Delivery Plan detailed ambitious improvements to the SR-91 and 1-15 corridors including the addition of two tolled express lanes in each direction and the ability to operate and maintain these tolled express lanes for a long-term period. The Commission's commitment in 2006 to toll also indicated its future intent to become an operating toll agency and establish the Toll Operations Department. The Commission plans to complete in FY 2016/17 the design and construction of the 91 Project, which includes the extension of the existing 91 Express Lanes into Riverside County (Chart 46). The 91 Project will connect the OCTA 91 Express Lanes with the Riverside Express Lanes using a two-mile long mixing area, which allows vehicles to use either or both sections of the 91 Express Lanes. The Riverside 91 Express Lanes continue approximately eight miles to the 1-15 interchange in Riverside County. A two-lane (one lane in each direction) direct tolled connector approximately 2.8 miles in distance will provide the Riverside 91 Express Lanes with access/egress to 1-15 south. The Commission has the authority to charge tolls on the Riverside 91 Express Lanes for 50 years following the opening of the express lanes, based on a Toll Facility Agreement between the Commission and Caltrans. Chart 46 — 91 Project, including Riverside 91 Express Lanes PIERCE SI Project Office Customer Service Center rv: n�H �r'�irRr,Si A. rri 'N,7716: Jr;i!Tirniii.',:t :A;J"ri FA7ITi i141:5 C:iii:'•::;V"ri • ' r I This milestone for the 91 Project will result in the Commission becoming an operating toll agency responsible for daily operations and maintenance of its portion of the 91 Express Lanes. The Orange County portion of the 91 Express Lanes are owned and operated by OCTA. Under a cooperative agreement entered into in December 2011, the Commission and OCTA agree on use of the same operator (Cofiroute USA, LLC), cost and revenue sharing, toll policies, business rules, interoperability of technology, sharing marketing activities, and OCTA review of design plans and construction activities. Commission staff, as supported by the operator, will operate and maintain the Riverside 91 Express Lanes from the existing Toll Operations Center in Anaheim and Customer Service Center in Corona. Both facilities have been expanded or improved to accommodate the Commission's extension of the 91 Express Lanes; such capital costs related to the 91 Project are included in the Capital Project Development and Delivery Department. The operator's management responsibilities for the Riverside 91 Express Lanes are the same as for the OCTA 91 Express Lanes and will include revenue collection, customer accounts, violation enforcement, violation processing, incident management and response, and first line maintenance of tolling and traffic equipment. While the Commission and OCTA will jointly operate and maintain the 91 Express Lanes, tolls on each of the Riverside 91 Express Lanes and the OCTA 91 Express Lanes will be charged independently. When travelling along SR-91, vehicles will be able to use either or both of such tolled express lanes, or may use the general purpose lanes (which are free of charge). In connection with an agreement among the Commission, OCTA, and a master custodian, tolls related to the Riverside 91 Express Lanes and the Commission's portion of non -toll revenues will be deposited with the Commission's trustee for the 2013 Toll Bonds and TIFIA loan. These revenues will be used to pay for operation and maintenance expenses, debt service related to the 2013 Toll Bonds and TIFIA loan, and fund repair and rehabilitation reserves. The Commission is also currently developing express lanes on 1-15 (Chart 47). Toll Operations staff is supporting this project development effort by providing comprehensive input to procurements, project financing, agency agreements, cost estimates, creation of toll policies and business rules, and other support. The costs for the development of the 1-15 Express Lanes project are included in the Capital Project Development and Delivery Department. The Commission's 1-15 Express Lanes are scheduled to open in 2020, at which time the daily operations and maintenance and related costs will become the responsibility of the Toll Operations Department. Under a toll facility agreement similar to the Riverside 91 Express Lanes, the Commission will have the authority to charge tolls on the 1-15 Express Lanes for a 50-year period. Chart 47 — Proposed 1-15 Express Lanes 1-15 Express Lanes Access Points 60 r • 3 OMR 0 �o u�ahlAkl G Rini NATI 0 WU ALBPOFT [ASP/ALE 2nd St. s 91 Project Express lanes Direct Connector to 1-15 Express Lanes CORONA LEGEND D Express Toll Lane. Ingress IloP Express NI Lane Egress Pi- Express Toll Lane IngresslEgren ialLing Paint Express lane TORZonei Tn1l ion c ! TORZonex TBILZone4 t. A Ontario Ale. SAN DIEGO Sixth 51 NORCO 5 15 A. BARSTOW i V A 9 Ea NATO Ma C8 Cantu 6alleana Ranch Rd. limonite Abe. 7 til: (10\ Hidden waler Parkway t> 11\\\. Nalco Rd. ragnalla Ate_ JURLIPA VALLEY RIVEA51 OE El Cerrito lit welrlcftAi. Toll Operations staff is also working on several important efforts related to tolling. Coordination is occurring with the Transportation Corridor Agencies in Orange County regarding its development of the SR-241/SR-91 express lane connector project which will directly connect the SR-241 toll road with the 91 Express Lanes near the Orange County line. Similarly, coordination is occurring with SANBAG regarding its development of express lanes on the I- 15 corridor near the San Bernardino County line. Staff is actively involved in the California Toll Operators Committee which addresses many statewide toll issues including toll technology to improve the customer experience across the state, create synergy among toll agencies, and comply with national toll technology interoperability standards. Key Assumptions • The Riverside 91 Express Lanes will open in early 2017, and the Commission will commence its role as a toll operator. • The 1-15 Express Lanes will continue to be expedited through the project development process via concurrent work in procurements, agreements, project financing, design, and construction with tolled express lanes to be open by 2020. • General purpose lanes and other non -toll facility improvements will be transferred upon completion to Caltrans who will be responsible for operation and maintenance; tolled express lane facilities, when completed, will be operated and maintained by the Commission for the term agreed to by Caltrans and the Commission. • The Commission and OCTA will jointly operate and maintain the 91 Express Lanes; the Commission will operate and maintain the 1-15 Express Lanes. • Toll revenue budget projections are based on financing assumptions derived from investment grade traffic and revenue studies. • Toll operation costs are based on detailed assumptions and estimates specific to each express lane facility. • The Commission will have a small toll operations staff and contract for the majority of the toll operation services. Accomplishments • Completed a toll operations planning effort focused on future toll operations department staffing, information technology needs, and toll operations best practices. • Established the Toll Operations Department with the hiring of a Toll Operations Manager and Toll Technology Manager. • Developed 91 Express Lanes agreements with Caltrans for express lane roadway maintenance, CHP for enforcement services, and OCTA for toll facility payments. • Participated in the California Toll Operators Committee efforts to establish a statewide plan for transition to the 6C transponder technology and began planning for its eventual implementation on the Commission's express lane facilities. • Worked to ensure success of the 91 Express Lanes toll system deployment including the roadside tolling equipment, necessary software and hardware modifications, and improvements to the existing toll operations and customer service centers. • Developed a marketing and business promotion effort jointly with OCTA in advance of the 91 Express Lanes opening to build brand awareness as well as express lane use and create customer accounts. • Significantly contributed to the 1-15 Express Lanes project development in all areas related to tolling procurements, agreements, project financing, design, and construction. Major Initiatives During FY 2016/17, the Commission will continue building its Toll Operations team with the hiring of a senior management analyst and a senior financial analyst, consistent with the long-range toll operations staffing plan. The Toll Operations team will support the ongoing toll system implementation work and successful opening of the Riverside 91 Express Lanes on time and within budget. Once the Riverside 91 Express Lanes are open, Toll Operations staff will manage the operations of the express lanes in a manner which adheres to the RCTC 91 Express Lanes Toll Policy adopted in June 2012: " Provide a safe, reliable, and predictable commute for 91 Express Lanes customers; " Optimize vehicle throughput at free flow speeds; " Pay debt service and maintain debt service coverage; " Increase average vehicle occupancy; " Balance capacity and demand to serve customers who pay tolls as well as carpoolers with three or more persons who are offered discounted tolls; " Generate sufficient revenue to sustain the financial viability of the Riverside 91 Express Lanes; " Ensure all covenants in the financing documents are met; and " Provide net revenues for Riverside Freeway/SR-91 corridor improvements, as allowable under Senate Bill 1316. Monitoring toll transactions and related toll revenues will be a primary responsibility for Toll Operations, and it will utilize the Riverside County 91 Express Lanes Extension Investment Grade Study prepared by Stantec Consulting Services Inc. (Stantec) in May 2012 and supplement by a supplemental letter in June 2013. While the Commission relied on this study for its projection of gross revenues generated by the 91 Project over the 50-year toll authorization period, the financial model for the 91 Project assumed more conservative toll revenues. Accordingly, for this partial year of initial operations of the Riverside 91 Express Lanes and due to lack of operational history, the Commission's budgeted toll revenues for FY 2016/17 represent conservative revenue estimates for fiscal control purposes. The differences between the toll transaction and revenue estimates approximate 33%, as summarized in Table 61. Table 61 Comparison of Toll Transaction and Revenue Projections Toll Transactionsl Revenuesl Stantec estimate 2,078,300 $ 5,660,600 Financing case estimate 1,400,000 3,798,000 Difference 678,300 $ 1,862,600 Amounts rounded to nearest hundred The development of Toll Operations budgeted expenses also considered the operating cost estimates for the Riverside 91 Express Lanes included in Engineer's Technical Report prepared by Parson Transportation Group, Inc. in June 2013. As the project and construction manager for the 91 Project, Parsons Transportation Group, Inc. analyzed the 91 Project operations which included projections of non -toll revenue and operation and maintenance expenses for the express lanes. The Commission relied on the Engineer's Technical Report in projecting non -toll revenues and operation and maintenance expenses for the purpose of determining projected cash flow and debt service coverage for the 2013 Toll Bonds and TIFIA loan. For the initial year of operations, the Engineer's Technical Report assumed costs of $5,563,300 for a five -month period, whereas the Commission used costs of $6,553,100 for a six-month period in the FY 2016/17 budget. While the budgeted expenses are 18% above the amount in the financing assumptions, the budgeted costs on an annualized basis are 2% lower than the annualized projected costs in the Engineer's Technical Report. In addition to monitoring toll revenues during FY 2016/17, Toll Operations will analyze these operation and maintenance costs during the fiscal year. While the Commission prepares to commence toll operations on the Riverside 91 Express Lanes in FY 2016/17, Toll Operations will also continue to support the procurement of a toll systems provider to implement a toll system and to ultimately operate the 1-15 Express Lanes. Toll planning for the 1-15 Express Lanes will consist of development of toll policies, business rules, future contract requirements, agency agreements, and other elements. Toll Operations will also consider future tolling opportunities by supporting the development of a "next generation" toll feasibility study that will be initiated. The costs for this feasibility study are included in the Capital Project Development and Delivery Department. Cash Flows from Toll Operations As a result of the issuance of the 2013 Toll Bonds, proceeds included amounts for initial operations and maintenance of $3,137,700 and capitalized interest through December 2017. The $3,137,700 will be transferred to an operations and maintenance fund held by the trustee upon substantial completion of the 91 Project and commencement of toll operations. Additional information regarding the 2013 Toll Bonds and TIFIA loan is included in Section 5, Commission Debt. During the initial year of toll operations for the Riverside 91 Express Lanes, the Commission does not anticipate any deposits to the repair and rehabilitation fund nor does it expected any repair and rehabilitation expenditures permitted under the master indenture and TIFIA loan agreement. The financial model for the 91 Project also did not assume such funding or expenditures. The projected cash flows for the Riverside 91 Express Lanes for the year ending June 30, 2017 are presented in Table 62. Table 62 — Riverside 91 Express Lanes Projected Cash Flows FY 2016/17 Cash balance at July 1, 2016 $ Cash flows from operating activities: Sources of operating funds: Toll revenue Other revenue Total sources of operating funds Uses of funds for operations and maintenance: Salaries and benefits Professional costs Support and maintenance costs Projects and operations Capital outlay Total uses of funds for operations and maintenance Net cash provided by operations Cash flows from non -capital financing activities: Cash flows from capital and related financing activities: Proceeds from 2013 Toll Bonds for operations and maintenance Proceeds from 2013 Toll Bonds for capitalized interest Interest paid on 2013 Toll Bonds Net cash provided by capital and related financing activities Cash flows from investing activities: Interest on investments Net cash provided by investing activities 3,798,000 2,345,000 6,143,000 268,400 307,000 2,674,900 3,052,800 250,000 6,553,100 (410,100) 3,137,700 7,119,900 (7,119,900) 3,137,700 6,800 6,800 Net increase in cash 2,734,400 Available cash at June 30, 2017, as projected $ 2,734,400 Department Goals Provide effective communication of project progress and toll operations to the Board members, city councils, County Board of Supervisors, Caltrans, CTC, FHWA, TIFIA, and bondholders. (Policy Goal: Communications, Financial and Administration) Objectives: • Provide timely and effective reporting of toll operation metrics including revenue, transactions, carpool usage, and other performance indicators. • Share certain express lane traffic information with Caltrans and other agencies as requested. • Comply with continuing disclosure requirements to bondholders and TIFIA regarding express lanes development and operations. Focus on timely and effective completion of toll -related capital projects and implementation of needed transportation services. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Goods Movement, Intermodalism & Accessibility) Objectives: • Support the development of the Commission's toll capital projects in all areas of planning, financing, design, and construction. • Provide opportunity for expansion of express bus services to employment centers, as this will contribute to congestion relief on impacted corridors. Support regional transportation solutions in cooperation with toll operators in surrounding counties that are of benefit to Riverside County. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Goods Movement, System Efficiencies) Objectives: • Coordinate with surrounding counties in their development of toll facilities in general and those toll facilities that impact the Commission's toll operations in particular. • Participate in the California Toll Operators Committee to advance regional and statewide tolling initiatives, technology interoperability, and coordination among California toll agencies. Toll Operations Performance/Workload Indicators FY 14/15 Estimated FY 14/15 Actual FY 15/16 Estimated FY 16/17 Projected Toll transactions N/A N/A N/A 1,400,000 Toll revenues N/A N/A N/A $3,798,000 Non -toll revenues N/A N/A N/A $2,345,000 Capital Project Development and Delivery Mission Statement: "To keep the Commission's contract with the voters of the 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 48 — Capital Project Development and Delivery Transfers Out 29%� Debt Service 8% Capital Outlay 0% Expenditures Salaries and Benefits Professional Costs 1% 1% The budgeted expenditures and transfers out total $705,177,500 to cover all of the Commission's major capital projects (Table 63). Salaries and benefits costs represent less than 1% of the budgeted uses and reflect a net decrease of 7% due to the allocation of FTEs and a 4% pool for merit -based salary increases. Professional costs of $10,797,100 are primarily related to general legal costs, specialized legal and financial advisory services related to the toll program, public communications, and property management services. Support costs of $886,600 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 of $7,040,400 are related to program management provided by Bechtel Infrastructure (Bechtel) and permits for highway and rail capital projects. Significant projects included in engineering expenditures of $16,931,200 are the Mid County Parkway and various Western County TUMF regional arterial projects. Construction expenditures of $80,214,000 are primarily related to the 1-215 corridor improvements, 91 Project, Pachappa underpass, various Western County Measure A and TUMF regional arterial projects, Santa Ana River Trail, La Sierra station improvements; PVL, and other rail improvement and rehabilitation projects. Design -build costs of $146,955,600 pertain to the 91 Project and 1-15 Express Lanes project. Right of way expenditures of $84,502,900 on significant projects include the 91 Project, 1-15 Express Lanes, 91/71 interchange improvements, Mid County Parkway, SR-60 truck climbing lanes, various Western County TUMF regional arterial projects, and PVL projects. Funding will also be provided for MSHCP land mitigation. Local turnback payments to jurisdictions and the County for local streets and roads repair, maintenance, and construction amount to $51,358,000, net of an allocation of $825,000 to the 2009 Measure A Western County Regional Arterial special revenue fund related to the ineligibility of the 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 $815,000 are related to a "next generation" toll feasibility study. Operating and capital disbursements of $8,660,000 are related to RTA SR-91 express bus service capital funding and Metrolink station rehabilitation costs. Rail capital purchases for station rehabilitation projects represent 100% of the capital outlay expenditures. Interest payments on outstanding 2009 Bonds, 2010 Bonds, 2013 Sales Tax Bonds, 2013 Toll Bonds, and commercial paper notes are approximately $45,915,800. Principal payments of $8,100,000 are related to the 2009 Bonds. Significant transfers out consist of the following: • $94,049,300 in sales tax and toll revenue bond proceeds to fund the 91 Project; • $31,672,000 in commercial paper notes proceeds to fund the 1-15 Express Lanes project; • $1,784,100 from the TUMF CETAP reserves for two city of Temecula regional arterial projects along 1-15; • $22,656,900 from 2009 Measure A Western County highway fund and Capital Projects fund to the Debt Service fund for sales tax bonds debt service; • $700,100 from TUMF for administrative allocations to the General fund; • $825,000 from 2009 Measure A Western County local streets and roads fund to the 2009 Measure A Western County regional arterial fund for the city of Beaumont's local streets and roads allocation; • $450,000 from 2009 Measure A Western County highway fund to the TUMF regional arterial fund for the SR-79 realignment project; • $11,355,800 from 2009 Measure A Western County rail fund to the general fund for rail station maintenance and operation expenditures; • $7,976,000 from 2009 Measure A Western County rail fund to the 1989 Measure A Western County rail fund for the PVL; • $3,137,700 from Capital Projects fund to the Enterprise fund for operations and maintenance upon substantial completion of the 91 Project; • $2,955,000 from the Debt Service fund to the 2009 Measure A Western County highway and Coachella Valley highway funds of $2,767,000 and $188,000, respectively, for BABs subsidy reimbursements; and • $29,501,900 from 2009 Measure A Western County new corridor fund reserves to the Capital Projects fund for an equity contribution to the 91 Project per the plan of finance. Table 63 - Capital Project Development and Delivery Uses Detail FY 14/15 Actual FY 15/16 FY 15/16 Revised Budget Projected FY 16/17 Budget Dollar Change Percent Change Salaries and Benefits $ 2,752,000 $ Professional Costs Legal Services 4,186,100 Audit Services 36,900 Financial Advisory 80,500 Professional Services - General 1,492,100 Total Professional Costs Support Costs Projects and Operations Program Operations Engineering Construction Design Build Right of Way and Land Local Streets and Roads Regional Arterials Special Studies Operating and Capital Disbursements 4,335,500 $ 4,330,500 5,956,400 46,500 347,000 2,810,200 5,831,200 31,500 274,400 2,420,300 5,795,600 397,700 7,179,500 8,198,600 142,654,000 191,599,200 71,999,800 48,612,900 17,283,300 172,300 553,200 Total Projects and Operations 488,252,800 Capital Outlay 107,800 Debt Service 53,300,100 Transfers Out 214,979,400 TOTAL Capital Project Development and Delivery $ 765,585,400 9,160,100 918,100 14,502,600 19,920,900 156,600,600 284,681,200 104,927,400 50,679,000 30,600,000 80,000 13,000,000 674,991,700 3,573,600 53,919,900 100,694,300 $ 847,593,200 8,557,400 675,400 11,898,100 5,241,500 123,834,100 279,380,700 42,324,100 50,679,000 30,900,000 48,800 5,690,000 549,996,300 600,000 53,671,800 146,812,300 $ 764,643,700 Capital Project Development and Position Administrative Assistant Capital Projects Manager Chief Financial Officer Deputy Director of Finance Deputy Executive Director Executive Director Government Relations Manager Goods Movement Manager Management Analyst Planning and Programming Director Planning and Programming Manager Procurement Analyst Procurement Manager Program Manager Project Delivery Director Public Affairs Manager Right of Way Manager Senior Administrative Assistant Senior Management Analyst Toll Financial Analyst Toll Operations Manager Toll Program Director Toll Project Manager Toll Senior Management Analyst Toll Technology Manager FTE Delivery Staffing Summary FY 14/15 0.35 2.82 0.23 0.03 0.03 0.17 0.01 0.00 1.00 0.10 0.01 0.46 0.63 0.00 0.97 0.84 1.00 0.06 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.97 2.00 0.00 0.00 $ 4,020,500 7,863,700 56,500 349,100 2,527,800 10,797,100 886,600 7,040,400 16,931,200 80,214,000 146,955,600 84,502,900 51,358,000 30,516,600 815,000 8,660,000 426,993,700 1,400,000 54,015,800 207,063,800 $ 705.177.500 FY 15/16 0.35 4.00 0.28 0.00 0.03 0.33 0.02 0.00 1.01 0.10 0.18 0.56 0.54 1.00 0.97 0.70 1.00 0.07 2.01 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 13.68 19.15 $ (315,000) -7% 1,907,300 32% 10,000 22% 2,100 1% (282,400) -10% 1,637,000 18% (31,500) -3% (7,462,200) -51% (2,989,700) -15% (76,386,600) -49% (137,725,600) -48% (20,424,500) -19% 679,000 1% (83,400) 0% 735,000 919% (4,340,000) -33% (247,998,000) -37% (2,173,600) -61% 95,900 0% 106,369,500 106% $ (142,415,700) -17% FY 16/17 0.23 2.70 0.37 0.02 0.11 0.43 0.05 0.05 1.00 0.10 0.01 0.30 0.62 1.00 0.80 0.75 1.00 0.05 1.98 0.40 0.90 0.80 2.00 0.85 0.90 17.42 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, utility relocation, construction, construction management, and design -build. Funding is also provided through Capital Projects for local jurisdiction highway and regional arterial projects based on funding agreements with the Commission. Approximately 73% of the Commission's FY 2016/17 budgeted expenditures originates in this department managed by the Toll Program and Project Delivery 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, truck climbing, 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 and Measure A regional arterial projects. Commuter rail capital improvements include the expansion of commuter rail service in Western County and related station improvement and rehabilitation projects. 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. 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 a MOE requirement. Each jurisdiction's respective allocation is based on population (Western County and Palo Verde Valley) or dwelling units (Coachella Valley) and the amount of sales tax generated. The city of La Quinta had not participated in the Coachella Valley TUMF Program prior to February 2013 when the city adopted the TUMF ordinance and entered into an agreement with CVAG to reimburse CVAG for the shortfall of prior TUMF. Accordingly, the city of La Quinta began to receive 50% of its allocation in late FY 2012/13 until the shortfall is repaid and CVAG the remaining 50%. The city of Beaumont was determined to be in noncompliance with the Western County TUMF program. As a result, Beaumont's Measure A allocation is transferred to the Commission's MARA 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 2016/17 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 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. During FY 2014/15 a comprehensive analysis was performed on existing licenses and encroachments. The Perris Valley Line portion of the SJBL has been completed, resulting in an increase of licenses. Work will continue to identify and, if necessary, enter into new licenses or eliminate encroachments on the SJBL remainder. In certain limited situations, 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 130 properties have been acquired for the SR-91 HOV lanes, Mid County Parkway, SR-79 realignment, SR-74 curve widening, 60/215 East Junction HOV connectors, PVL, 1-215 corridor improvements (central segment), and SR-60 HOV lanes/I-215 to Redlands Boulevard projects. Property acquisition for the 91 Project began in 2010 with all of the 197 required parcels acquired to date; 99 of the parcels have been acquired through eminent domain and approximately 25 parcels are in active litigation. Fee and permanent easement rights were acquired and will be transferred primarily to Caltrans, the County, and the city of Corona upon completion of the project. Upon project completion, all remaining portions of 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. In connection with the federal TIFIA loan for the 91 Project, the Commission is required to establish a $20,000,000 TIFIA debt service reserve by June 2019. The Commission anticipates that proceeds from the sales of excess properties related to the project will be sufficient to fund the reserve. 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 since an update and reprioritization was completed in January 2010. Since 2010, a scope reevaluation was completed on the 1-15 Express Lanes project and the Commission adopted a new scope of work which entails tolled express lanes on the northern 14 miles of 1-15 in the County. The 1-10 truck climbing lanes project was deferred several years and has been replaced with added safety improvements on SR-60. For the strategic projects, preliminary engineering and environmental clearance will be completed for the Mid County Parkway, SR-79 realignment and the SR-60 truck climbing lanes; right of way acquisition for Mid County Parkway will be considered for extraordinary acquisitions on a pay-as-you-go basis. Project costs and anticipated funding for these projects have been updated annually, and a status update has been included in each of the annual Commission workshops since 2011. 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 PVL is the most significant rail capital project, and it was included in the 1989 and 2009 Measure A programs. The PVL is substantially complete and service commenced in June 2016. Other rail capital projects are developed in coordination with SCRRA or are based on a rail station plan that is updated periodically. Station operation costs are included in Rail Operations in section 6.2 of this document. 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 completed in 2013 and central segment scheduled substantially completed fall 2015) 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 Wildlife, and the Department of Parks and Recreation. The actual construction of this enhancement will be done subsequent to the construction on the 91 Project as a separate 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 Western County highway and rail programs. • 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. • Design -build projects are competitively procured using a best value selection process to maximize value to the Commission. • All projects will be built to required federal and state 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 the term agreed to by Caltrans and the Commission. Toll operations costs are included in section 6.3 of this document. • The Commission will develop strategies to implement alternative financing structures including public toll roads. • MARA projects had been selected and programmed in previous years when revenues were at a level that could sustain reasonable cash flow to fund the construction projects selected for this program, and a call for projects that combined available MARA funds with federal revenues was completed and approved in FY 2013/14. • Design and right of way acquisition for the Mid County Parkway will commence in 2016. Accomplishments • Continued implementation of the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan. • Completed construction and right of way support for the SR-91 HOV lanes. • Initiated design and environmental revalidation for the Pachappa underpass project. • Continued to advance the development of the 91 Project in numerous areas: • Completed approximately 74% of construction and maintained a planned 2017 opening of all traffic lanes; • Completed the final design of the Electronic Toll and Traffic Management system for the Riverside 91 Express Lanes and began the facility modifications to the existing Toll Operations Center in Anaheim; and • Completed the second Financial Plan annual update and reaffirmed the Commission's toll revenue bond ratings. • Continued right of way acquisition and securing utility relocation agreements for the 91/71 interchange improvement project. • Completed preliminary engineering and environmental studies work on the 1-15 Express Lanes project, commenced procurements for a design -build contractor and toll services provider, and commenced project financing activities. • Obtained environmental approval of the Mid County Parkway project with issuance of a Record of Decision in fall 2015. • Completed technical studies and recirculation of the environmental document for public review related to the SR-79 realignment project. • Completed construction of the SR-60/I-215 east junction, SR-74 curve widening, and 1-215 Bi-county HOV gap closure projects. • Substantially completed construction for the PVL project and began service in June 2016. • Completed construction on the RDOCC. • Completed preliminary engineering and technical studies and circulated the environmental document for the La Sierra station parking lot expansion project. • Completed environmental clearance and commenced design of the Riverside Downtown Station Pedestrian Improvements 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. • Continued to declare property no longer needed for transportation purposes as surplus and sold several surplus properties. Major Initiatives FY 2016/17 will mark the eighth 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, the construction close-out activities will continue on the SR-91 HOV lanes from Adams Street to 60/91/215 interchange and the PVL rail projects. Various stages of project development work for projects included in the Western County Highway Delivery Plan will continue in FY 2016/17. Detailed descriptions of the capital projects, including local streets and roads funding, that are included in the FY 2016/17 budget follow the Performance/Workload Indicators. Department Goals Build upon and strengthen the partnership with Caltrans toward timely delivery of identified Measure A, 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 the County. • Meet the project milestones identified in 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 Board, 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 PVL project. Work with Caltrans and other agencies toward completion of preliminary engineering and environmental clearance of all projects. (Policy Goal: Mobility) Objective: • Work with Caltrans, the County, and the cities in the 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. Construct the highway projects identified in the budget. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Economic Development, Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Achieve closeout of completed highway construction projects. • Substantially complete construction of the 91 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) Objectives: • Complete closeout activities related to the PVL. • Commence or continue construction of rail station capital improvements and rehabilitation projects. Acquire right of way for rail and highway projects identified in the budget. (Policy Goals: Mobility, Financial & Administration) Objectives: • Acquire right of way for the following projects: Mid County Parkway, 91/71 interchange improvements, Pachappa underpass, and SR-60 truck climbing lanes. • Protect and maintain properties acquired for future projects. " Dispose of Commission -approved excess land in a timely manner and in accordance with applicable regulations. Identify alternative financing strategies in order to fully fund projects identified in the Western Riverside County Delivery Plan. (Policy Goal: Mobility) Objectives: " Commence a "next generation" toll feasibility study to identify potential toll projects. " Continue the assessment and evaluation of available financing strategies, including federal credit assistance. Chart 49 Location of FY 2016/17 Major Capital Projects within Riverside County INSERT MAP HERE 1) SR-79 Environmental work for realignment between Gilman Springs Road and Domenigoni Parkway. 2) SR-91 (A) Construction of the Pachappa underpass (B) Right of way acquisition and utility agreement work for the 91/71 interchange improvements. (C) Construction of toll and mixed flow lanes from the Orange County line to Pierce Street including tolled express lanes connectivity to 1-15 and improvements to the 15/91 interchange. 3) Mid County Parkway Design and right of way related to new corridor from 1-215 to SR-79. 4) Perris Valley Line/PVL Completion of construction and closeout of the Metrolink extension (Riverside -Moreno Valley -Perris) along the SJBL. 5) 1-15 Express Lanes Design -build, toll system, and toll operation procurement development and project financing activities for the addition of tolled express lanes from SR-60 to Cajalco Road in Corona. 6) SR-60 Truck Climbing Lanes Preliminary engineering and environmental document, right of way acquisition, and design for the truck climbing lanes project. 7) Local Streets and Roads Allocation of Measure A revenues to each city and the County to improve, maintain, and repair high priority local streets and roads. Capital Project Development & Delivery Performance/Workload Indicators FY 14/15 Estimated FY 14/15 Actual FY 15/16 Estimated FY 16/17 Projected Preliminary engineering (project reports and environmental documentation) contracts awarded 1 0 0 0 Plans, specifications, and estimate contracts awarded 1 1 1 2 Number of projects with active right of way acquisition 2 2 2 6 Construction, design -build, and toll system awards 1 1 0 5 License agreements managed 180 368 490 301 Appraisal and appraisal reviews completed 40 56 52 195 Capital Projects Summary The following is a summary of the capital projects included in the FY 2016/17 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-60 Truck Climbing Lanes (PO03029) Provide funding and support to begin right of way acquisition for eastbound climbing and westbound descending truck climbing lanes from Gilman Springs Road to west of Jack Rabbit Trail and upgrade existing shoulders to standard widths. Construction of the project is expected to be completed by 2020. The total project cost is estimated at $138 million. FY 2016/17 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 1,700,000 Right of way acquisition/support services $ 240,700 Other project -related costs Costs will be funded with CMAQ, STIP/RIP, State Highway Operation and Protection Program, and 2009 Measure A highway funds. Caltrans is the lead agency for preliminary engineering and construction; the Commission is the lead agency for right of way acquisition. N/A; state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. 60/215 East Junction HOV Lane Connectors (PO03017) Complete project closeout. Preliminary engineering began in 2006. Final design and right of way acquisition were completed in 2010. The total project cost is estimated at $42 million. FY 2016/17 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 22,000 Right of way support services $ 51,900 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. SR-74/1-15 to 7th Street (PO03001) 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 2016/17 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 700,000 Right of way support services $ 77,300 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) Complete project closeout by summer 2016. Preliminary engineering began in 2006 and was completed in 2009. Final design was completed in 2009. Construction began in mid-2010 and was completed in 2013. The total project cost is estimated at $30 million. FY 2016/17 Cost $ 20,000 Construction management $ 4,500 Other project -related costs Measure A Budget Impact Costs will be funded using 1989 Measure A highway funds, TUMF zone contributions, ARRA funds, and a federal earmark. Operating Budget Impact N/A; state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. SR-74 Curve Widening (P003009) Complete project closeout. Construction of the project began in May 2014 and was completed in May 2015. The total estimated project cost is $4.2 million. FY 2016/17 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 337,000 Right of way acquisition/support services $ 28,000 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 (P003003) Complete environmental phase for realignment from Gilman Springs Road to Domenigoni Parkway. The total estimated project cost is $1.2 billion. Initiation of subsequent phases will be dependent upon the availability of funding. FY 2016/17 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 450,000 Preliminary engineering $ 133,500 Other project -related costs Costs have been funded using TUMF regional arterial, 2009 Measure A highway, and federal funds. N/A; state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. 91 Project (P003028) Continue design -build activities for the tolled express and mixed flow lanes project from the Orange County line to Pierce Street, including tolled express lanes connectivity to 1-15 and improvements to the 15/91 interchange. Project development activities began in September 2007 and lanes are expected to be open to traffic in 2017. The 91 Project cost is estimated at $1.4 billion, including financing costs. FY 2016/17 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact 16,471,200 46,931,100 125,955,600 Construction/support services Right of way acquisition/support services Design -build 7,118,500 Other project -related costs Costs will be funded using 2009 Measure A highway and new corridor funds including sales tax revenue bonds, toll revenue bonds, a federal TIFIA loan, STIP and SLPP funds, and 1989 Measure A contribution. 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. Current estimates of annual operating and maintenance costs are $11,200,000. Such costs will be paid from the collection of toll revenues beginning in 2017. Toll operating costs are included in Toll Operations, as discussed in section 6.3. 91/71 Interchange Improvements (P003021) Continue right of way acquisition and utility agreement work for interchange improvements to the 91/71 interchange. Final design began in March 2012. The total estimated project cost is $118 million. FY 2016/17 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 50,000 $ 1,552,000 $ 86,800 Final design Right of way acquisition/support services Other project -related costs Costs for right of way acquisition and utility agreement work are 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) Complete construction and utility relocations in FY 2016/17 and finalize close out during FY 2016/17. Preliminary engineering began in 2001. Construction of the project was completed in spring 2016. The estimated total project cost is $273 million. FY 2016/17 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 15,000 Final design $ 803,000 Construction $ 1,700,000 Right of way acquisition/support services $ 174,400 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 Proposition 1B CMIA funds will be used for construction activities. Caltrans is the lead agency. N/A; state highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. 1-15 Express Lanes (PO03027) Continue design -build, toll system, and toll operation procurement work and project financing activities to add generally two tolled express lanes in each direction from SR-60 to Cajalco Road in Corona. The project will use the design -build method of project delivery. Project development activities began in April 2008, and lanes are expected to be open to traffic in 2020. The estimated total project cost is $561 million, including financing costs. FY 2016/17 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 750,000 Preliminary engineering $ 4,000,000 Right of way support services $ 21,000,000 Design -build $ 7,082,300 Other project -related costs Project development costs and a portion of construction will be funded using 2009 Measure A highway funds. It is anticipated that federal CMAQ and STP funds will be used, toll revenue bonds will be issued, and the Commission will secure a federal TIFIA loan to complete the project financing 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 $13 million. Such costs will be paid from the collection of toll revenues. 1-215 Corridor Improvements/Scott Road to Nuevo Road (Central Segment) (PO03023) Complete construction and begin three-year plant establishment period. Project added one mixed flow lane in each direction. Preliminary engineering began in 2007 and was completed in 2011. Final design began in 2011 and was completed in December 2012; construction began in 2013 and was substantially completed in 2016. The total project cost is estimated at $120 million. FY 2016/17 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 5,300,000 Construction/construction management/support services $ 170,000 Right of way acquisition/support services $ 158,400 Other project -related costs Costs will be funded using CMIA, STIP-RIP, and 2009 Measure A highway funds. N/A; federal highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. Mid County Parkway (P002302 & P612302) Perform activities related to the design and right of way phase for a new corridor from 1-215 to SR-79, which is anticipated to be completed in FY 2019/20. Construction of this new facility will be completed over many years as funding becomes available and is estimated to cost $1.7 to $1.9 billion. FY 2016/17 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 11,000,000 Preliminary engineering/final design $ 19,500,000 Right of way acquisition/support services $ 1,020,100 Other project -related costs 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. Pachappa Underpass (P003038) Perform activities related to the right of way and construction phase. Design and environmental revalidation will be performed by Caltrans. Project will remove the Pachappa shoofly activities and construct the retaining wall, drainage, and trackwork for the permanent Pachappa underpass. The total project cost is estimated at $12 million. FY 2016/17 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 11,070,000 Construction/construction management/support services $ 450,000 Right of way acquisition/support services $ 413,500 Other project -related costs Costs will be funded with CMAQ. N/A; responsibility for highway operations has not been determined. Santa Ana River Trail (P007201 & P007202) Provide support to the District for the Santa Ana River Trail project under a cooperative planning and development agreement. The District is the lead agency for environmental compliance for NEPA and CEQA, and the Commission will be responsible for project oversight and approval, final design, and construction. The District is responsible for 100% of costs. FY 2016/17 Cost $ 490,000 Preliminary engineering/final design $ 3,800,000 Construction/construction support services $ 85,000 Right of way acquisition/support costs $ 213,300 Other project -related costs Measure A Budget Impact None; costs will be funded by the District. Operating Budget Impact N/A; operations are the responsibility of the District. Various Western County Highway Projects (P623999, P629199, P613999, P383999 & P622402) Provide funding and support for the engineering, construction, and right of way activities related to various Western County highway and grade separation projects. FY 2016/17 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 50,500 Right of way support services $ 2,840,500 Other project -related costs Costs will be funded using primarily 2009 Measure A highway funds. N/A; federal highway operations are the responsibility of Caltrans. Various Western County Measure A and TUMF Regional Arterial Projects (P005206, P005205, P005204, P005203, P005201, P005102, P005104, P005105, P005107, P005116, P005119, P005127, P005132, P725000, P665102 & P005200) Provide Western County Measure A and TUMF funding and support for the engineering, right of way, and construction activities related to various Western County Measure A and TUMF regional arterial projects approved by the Commission. Total project costs approved for MARA and TUMF regional arterial projects approximate $143 million. FY 2016/17 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 4,526,200 $ 34,230,100 $ 2,765,300 $ 710,800 Engineering and final design Construction Right of way acquisition Other project -related costs Costs will be funded using TUMF regional arterial and 2009 Measure A 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. MSHCP Land Acquisition in Western County (P002800) Provide funding and support for the acquisition of land as mitigation for the cumulative and indirect impacts associated with construction of future highway projects as required by 2009 Measure A. The annual commitment through December 2019 is $3 million. FY 2016/17 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact Rail Projects $ 3,000,000 Land acquisition Costs will be funded using 2009 Measure A highway funds. N/A; land mitigation operations are the responsibility of RCA. Perris Valley Line and Other Rail Projects (P003800, P003823, P003827, P003829, P003830, P003832 & P003834) Complete construction of 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. Project was substantially completed in May 2016 for a total project cost of $248.3 million, excluding other rail project costs. Revenue service commenced in June 2016. FY 2016/17 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact Engineering support services Construction/construction management/support services $ 1,365,000 Right of way acquisition/support services $ 716,900 Other project -related costs Costs will be funded using FTA, CMAQ, STP, STIP, and 1989 Measure A Western County and 2009 Measure A Western County rail funds as well as proceeds from sales of surplus properties. 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 operating costs for nine stations and the RDOCC approximate $5,200,000 and are included in Rail Operations as discussed in section 6.2. Station operations costs will be funded by the Commission with 2009 Measure A Western County rail funds. $ 20,000 $ 5,942,000 La Sierra Station Improvements (P653826) Improve the multimodal benefits of the station to serve the express bus network being implemented upon completion of the 91 Project and to provide a dedicated park and ride facility for carpools and vanpools along SR- 91. Facility improvements include the addition of 500 parking spaces, five new bus bays, a new street entrance, and dedicated bus stops and passenger loading area. Construction is estimated at $3 million. FY 2016/17 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 55,000 Preliminary engineering/final design $ 2,709,900 Construction/construction management $ 10,000 Right of way support services $ 212,000 Other project -related costs Costs will be funded with FTA Section 5309 funds. Operations of all commuter rail stations are the responsibility of the Commission and are funded using 2009 Measure A Western County rail funds. Riverside Downtown/Pedley Station Improvements (P004023) Provide funding and support for improvements at the Riverside Downtown and Pedley stations to include ticket vending machine relocation, passenger waiting area shelters, ADA improvements, and landscaping. Project will commence in fall 2016 and is expected to be completed by spring 2017. Total project cost is $1.5 million. FY 2016/17 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 65,000 Final design $ 1,417,800 Construction/construction management $ 183,600 Other project -related costs Costs will be funded using federal STP and 2009 Measure A Western County rail funds. Operations will be the responsibility of the Commission and are funded using 2009 Measure A Western County rail funds. Station Rehabilitation and Security (P004011 & P004012) Provide funding and support for station rehabilitation and security at the Riverside Downtown, La Sierra, North Main Corona, West Corona, and Pedley stations. Improvements include lighting, parking lot repavement and restriping, security camera replacements, and deck coating. Construction is expected to begin in FY 2016/17. FY 2016/17 Cost $ 2,000,000 Construction/construction management $ 1,400,000 Property improvements Measure A Budget Impact Costs will be funded using FTA, Proposition 1B TSSSDRA funds, and 2009 Measure A Western County rail funds. Operating Budget Impact Operations will be the responsibility of the Commission and are funded using 2009 Measure A Western County rail funds. Various Western County Rail Projects (P214199, P454199, P654199, P336000, P652402 & P652404) Provide Measure A funding and support for right of way activities related to various rail projects. FY 2016/17 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 250,000 Construction $ 250,000 Right of way support services $ 2,649,600 Other project -related costs Costs will be funded using 2009 Measure A Western County Commuter Rail funds. N/A; these rail projects may be improvements beyond the rail station boundaries that benefit local jurisdictions who are responsible for operations in those areas. Local Streets and Roads Western County Area Distribute local return funding for local streets and roads projects in Western County. FY 2016/17 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 544,000 Banning - Beaumont 156,000 Calimesa 174,000 Canyon Lake 3,837,000 Corona 1,183,000 Eastvale 1,677,000 Hemet 1,874,000 Jurupa Valley 1,205,000 Lake Elsinore 1,528,000 Menifee 3,703,000 Moreno Valley 2,176,000 Murrieta 611,000 Norco 1,446,000 Perris 7,006,000 Riverside 797,000 San Jacinto 2,834,000 Temecula 584,000 Wildomar 5,409,000 Riverside County 825,000 Commission (MARA) 37,569,000 Total Western County (825,000) Less: Beaumont Allocation to MARA $ 36,744,000 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. Coachella Valley Distribute local return funding for local streets and roads projects in Coachella Valley. FY 2016/17 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 1,409,000 Cathedral City 612,000 Coachella 472,000 Desert Hot Springs 267,000 Indian Wells 1,809,000 Indio 1,470,000 La Quinta 2,666,000 Palm Desert 2,006,000 Palm Springs 870,000 Rancho Mirage 1,881,000 Riverside County $ 13,462,000 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. Palo Verde Valley Area Distribute local return funding for local streets and roads projects in Palo Verde Valley. FY 2016/17 Cost Measure A Budget Impact Operating Budget Impact $ 921,000 Blythe 231,000 Riverside County $ 1,152,000 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. 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. The 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 124 years of existence, the County's economy has diversified and prospered. Originally, the 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 the County (Chart 50). Since the 1980's, the County has been one of the fastest growing counties in the State. Chart 50 — Population — Last Ten Years 2,400,000 2,300,000 2, 200,000 2, 100,000 2,000,000 1,900,000 1,800,000 1, 700,000 ■ Source: California Department of Finance The available and affordable housing in the County has attracted many people to the County (Chart 51); however, housing is gradually recovering from a slowdown due to the effect of the subprime mortgages, ensuing credit crisis, and recession. Chart 51— Home Price Advantage $800, 000 $700,000 $600, 000 $500, 000 $400, 000 $300, 000 $200, 000 $100, 000 $- Home Value Advantage Riverside County and Southern California Markets ( February, 2016) ❑ Median Home Values ❑ Riverside County Advantage $334,400 $445,000 110,600 $537,600 $203,200 $610,800 $276,40 $712,600 $378,20 Riverside Los Angeles San Diego Ventura Orange Source: California Association of Realtors County During the growth period, jobs also increased as many firms relocated to the area and moved away from older communities. During the recent economic slowdown, the County's unemployment rate rose to an all-time high; however, the unemployment rate has decreased significantly during the recovery period (Chart 52). Chart 52 — Unemployment Rate (%) — Last Ten Years 16.0% 14.0% 12.0% 10.0% 8.0% 6.0% 4.0% 2.0% 0.0% Source: California Employment Development Department ■ 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. Riverside County's economy is benefitting from employment gains. Population migration to the Inland Empire has occurred due to the area's employment opportunities and a lower cost of living compared to the coastal counties. Although wage growth has been flat and centered on lower and moderate income, improvements in the local labor market with increased economic activity support stable sales tax revenue growth. Statistical Information Retail Sales As a result of demographic changes and growth, retail sales (Chart 53 and Table 643) in the County have shown continued improvements following the recent recession. Chart 53 — Retail Sales (%) - $30 Billion — 2013 Data Other Retail Sales J 5.93% Total all other services & outlets 29.94% Apparel Stores 5.89% General Merchandi 10.97% L Eating & Drinking 9.43 Food Stores 4.73 % Automotive -111111V_ Household & Electronics 24.69% 3.31 % Building Materials 5.11% Table 64 -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 1 Year represents most recent data available by Business Type (in 000's) 20131 1,771,603 3,298,920 1,421,590 2,836,388 996,484 1,535,178 7,421,523 1,781,754 9,002,027 $ 30,065,467 - Last Five Years 2012 1,672,482 $ 3,174,022 1,356,148 2,668,324 930,068 1,364,513 7,009,138 1,841,973 8,079,341 2011 1,505,821 3,051,709 1,304,731 2,473,339 914,888 1,303,073 6,311,272 1,711,453 7,065,212 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 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 $ 28,096,009 $ 25,641,498 $ 23,152,782 $ 22,227,877 The 2014 taxable sales generation by jurisdiction in the County, including ranking compared to 2005, is presented in Table 65. Table 65 -Taxable Sales Generation by Jurisdiction in Riverside County for 20131 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 Indio City of Jurupa Valley City of Perris City of La Quinta City of Cathedral City City of Lake Elsinore City of Eastvale City of Menifee City of Norco City of Rancho Mirage City of Beaumont City of Coachella City of San Jacinto City of Banning City of Blythe City of Desert Hot Springs City of Wildomar 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 (in000is) 4,612,948 3,111,998 2,610,286 1,530,512 1,349,129 1,147,563 985,824 911,841 806,604 806,187 738,592 731,325 714,179 688,483 538,279 474,050 468,781 399,919 352,449 309,858 208,934 175,386 168,254 142,477 122,793 91,160 61,980 16,452 % of Total 15.3% 10.4% 8.7% 5.1% 4.5% 3.8% 3.3% 3.0% 2.7% 2.7% 2.5% 2.4% 2.4% 2.3% 1.8% 1.6% 1.6% 1.3% 1.2% 1.0% 0.7% 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.4% 0.3% 0.2% 0.1% 2013 Rank 2004 Rank 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 9 8 10 9 7 10 11 11 N/A 12 16 13 12 14 8 15 14 16 N/A 17 N/A 18 13 19 15 20 20 21 17 22 21 23 18 24 19 25 22 26 N/A 27 23 28 24 29 25 24,276,243 81.0% 5,789,224 19.0% 1 1 30,065,467 100.0% 586,839,618 Measure A Sales Taxes Measure A is a one-half of one cent transaction and use tax for transportation improvements in the County. The County had an 8.75% sales tax rate including the Measure A rate through June 2011, 7.75% from July 2011 through December 2012, and 8.00% thereafter (Table 66). Table 66 - Direct and Overlapping Sales Tax Rates - Last Five Years Fiscal Year Measure A Direct Rate County of Riverside 2016 0.50% 8.00% 2015 0.50% 8.00% 2014 0.50% 8.00% 2013 0.50% 8.00% 2012 0.50% 7.75% Source: Commission Finance Department and California State Board of Equalization Since the end of the recent economic slowdown, changes have occurred in the economic categories in which the Measure A sales tax was generated (Table 67). General retail and transportation represent the two highest economic categories and approximately 55% of sales taxes generated. Transportation has decreased in recent years due to lower fuel prices offset by increases in new auto purchases. Table 67 - Sales Tax by Economic Category Economic Category 2012/4 2013/4 2014/4 2015/4 % of Total % of Total % of Total % of Total General Retail 29.0% 28.7% 28.4% 28.8% Transportation 27.0% 27.0% 26.6% 25.9% Food Products 16.4% 16.1% 16.6% 17.3% Business to Business 14.7% 14.5% 14.4% 15.1% Construction 10.9% 11.8% 12.0% 10.8% Miscellaneous 2.0% 1.9% 2.0% 2.1% 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 2012 the top six economic segments consisted of service stations, department stores, auto sales -new, restaurants, building materials -wholesale, and miscellaneous retail. Over the next three calendar years, auto sales -new, restaurants, and department stores moved into the top three economic segments. The top six economic segments in 2015 with comparisons to previous years are presented in Table 68. Table 68 - Sales Tax by Economic Segment Top Six Economic Segments (Category) 2012/4 2013/4 2014/4 2015/4 % of Total % of Total % of Total % of Total Auto Sales - New (Transportation) Restaurants (Food Products) Department Stores (General Retail) Service Stations (Transportation) Miscellaneous Retail (Miscellaneous) Building Materials - Wholesale (Construction) 10.0% 10.0% 11.2% 11.9% 6.3% 6.5% 10.7% 9.9% 10.8% 11.1% 6.8% 7.3% 10.9 % 10.4 % 10.4 % 10.3 % 7.0 % 7.5 % 11.7% 11.0% 10.4% 8.5% 7.2% 6.2% Source: MuniServices, LLC 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 and as a percentage of transit fare revenues. TDA funding is allocated primarily to bus and rail transit operators for transit operating and capital needs. Additionally, LTF funding is available for bicycle and pedestrian facilities, planning, and administration and allocated to the Commission and local jurisdictions in the County. Highways: The Commission assists with the planning and funding for highway improvements. Major current projects include: 91 Project, 1-15 Express Lanes project, and Mid County Parkway. State highway maintenance is generally the responsibility of Caltrans; however, the Commission will be responsible for the operations and maintenance of toll facilities during a 50-year term upon commencement of toll operations for each facility. 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/Perris Valley Lines. The Commission owns and maintains nine Metrolink stations and an operations control center located at: ➢ Riverside Downtown operations control center, 4344 Vine Street, Riverside ➢ Perris -South, 1304 Case Road, Perris ➢ Perris -Downtown, 121 South C Street, Perris ➢ Moreno Valley/March Field, 14160 Meridian Parkway, Riverside ➢ Riverside —Hunter Park/UCR, 1101 Marlborough Avenue, Riverside ➢ 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 East Blaine Street, Corona ➢ West Corona station, 155 South Auto Center Drive, Corona Motorist Assistance: The Commission provides emergency call boxes and the 1E511 traveler information system 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. Appendix A — Glossary of Acronyms ADA — Americans with Disabilities Act ARRA* — American Recovery and Reinvestment Act ATP — Active Transportation Program BABs — Build America Bonds Bank of America — Bank of America, N.A. BTMU — The Bank of Tokyo -Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd., acting through its New York Branch Bechtel — Bechtel Infrastructure BNSF — BNSF Railway Board — Board of Commissioners for the Riverside County Transportation Commission CABS — Capitalized Appreciation Bonds CAFR — Comprehensive Annual Financial Report CALCOG — California Association of Councils of Governments CaIPERS — California Public Employees Retirement System Ca!trans — California Department of Transportation CARB — California Air Resources Board 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 District — Riverside County Regional Park and Open Space District DBE — Disadvantaged Business Enterprise DMV — Department of Motor Vehicles EIR — Environmental Impact Report EIS — Environmental Impact Summary ERP — Enterprise Resource Planning ETC — Employer Transportation Coordinators FAST Act — Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act FHWA* — Federal Highway Administration Fitch — Fitch Ratings FRA — Federal Railroad Administration FSP — Freeway Service Patrol FTA* — Federal Transit Administration FTE — Full-time Equivalent FTIP — Federal Transportation Improvement Program FY — Fiscal Year Gann — Gann Initiative approved by California voters in 1979 GASB — Governmental Accounting Standards Board GFOA — Government Finance Officers Association GHG — Greenhouse Gas HOV — High Occupancy Vehicle (Carpool Lane) HSIPR — High Speed Intercity Passenger Rail 1 — Interstate 1E511 — Inland Empire 511 IECommuter — Inland Empire Commuter rideshare system 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 LCTOP — Low Carbon Transit Operations Programs LIBOR — London Interbank Offer Rate Limited Tax Bonds — Indebtedness secured by a specified tax or group of taxes LOS — Level of Service LOSSAN — Los Angeles -San Diego -San Luis Obispo, a rail corridor LTF* — Local Transportation Fund MAP-21 — Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century MARA — 2009 Measure A Regional Arterial funding for Western County MCP — Mid County Parkway 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 MPO — Metropolitan Planning Organization MSHCP — Multi -Species Habitat Conservation Plan MSRC — Mobile Source Air Pollution Reduction Review Committee (AB2766) NEPA — National Environmental Policy Act OA — Obligation Authority OCTA — Orange County Transportation Authority PVL/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 funding category) RCA — Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority RCTC — Riverside County Transportation Commission RDOCC — Riverside Downtown Operations Control Center 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 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 SDP — Service Development Plan 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 STA* — State Transit Assistance Stantec — Stantec Consulting Services Inc. State — State of California State Street Bank — State Street Bank and Trust Company STIP* — State Transportation Improvement Program STP* — Surface Transportation Program SunLine — SunLine Transit Agency TAC — Technical Advisory Committee TAP — Transportation Alternatives Program TCIF* — Trade Corridors Improvement Fund (Proposition 1B funding category) TDA* — Transportation Development Act TIFIA* — Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act TIP — Transportation Improvement Plan TSSSDRA — Transit System Safety, Security and Disaster Response Account (Proposition 1B funding category) TUMF* — Transportation/Traffic Uniform Mitigation Fee (Western County/Coachella Valley) UCR — University of California at Riverside UP — Union Pacific Railroad U.S. DOT — United States Department of Transportation Western County — Western area of Riverside County WRCOG — Western Riverside Council of Governments 91 Express Lanes — Tolled express lanes on SR-91 in Orange County operated by OCTA and in Riverside County by the Commission upon completion of the 91 Project 91 Project — SR-91 corridor improvement project consisting of two tolled express lanes in each direction of SR-91 between the Orange County line and I- 15, the addition of a general purpose lane between SR-71 and 1-15, and other improvements 1989 Measure A* — Original 1/2 cent transportation sales tax measure approved by voters in November 1988 that expired in June 2009 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 Sales Tax Bonds — Sales Tax Revenue Bonds anticipated to be issued in July 2013 2013 Toll Bonds — Toll Revenue Bonds anticipated to be issued in July 2013 * Additional information provided in Funding Definitions. Appendix B - Salary Schedule Effective 7/7/2016 Department/Position Authorized Salary Schedule - FY 2016/17 Range Monthly Monthly Exempt/Non- FTE No. Minimum Maximum Exempt ADMINISTRATION Administrative Assistant 1.0 17 $ 3,869 $ 5,223 NE Clerk of the Board 1.0 45 $ 7,660 $ 10,340 E Deputy Clerk of the Board 1.0 25 $ 4,702 $ 6,348 NE Human Resources Administrator 1.0 45 $ 7,660 $ 10,340 E Records Technician 1.0 17 $ 3,869 $ 5,223 NE Senior Administrative Assistant 1.0 25 $ 4,702 $ 6,348 NE Senior Office Assistant 1.0 13 $ 3,509 $ 4,737 NE Administration Subtotal: 7.0 CAPITAL PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND DELIVERY Capital Projects Manager 4.0 53 $ 9,310 $ 12,569 E Facilities Administrator 1.0 45 $ 7,660 $ 10,340 E Project Delivery Director 1.0 67 $ 13,100 $ 17,686 E Right of Way Manager 1.0 53 $ 9,310 $ 12,569 E Senior Management Analyst 3.0 43 $ 7,295 $ 9,848 E Management Analyst 1.0 35 $ 6,001 $ 8,102 E Toll Operations Manager 1.0 63 $ 11,883 $ 16,041 E Toll Program Director 1.0 71 $ 14,443 $ 19,498 E Toll Project Manager 2.0 65 $ 12,477 $ 16,843 E Toll Technology Manager 1.0 53 $ 9,310 $ 12,569 E Capital Project Development and Delivery Subtotal: 16.0 EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT Deputy Executive Director 1.0 75 $ 15,924 $ 21,497 E Executive Director 1.0 83 $ 19,355 $ 26,130 E Executive Management Subtotal: 2.0 FINANCE Accountant 2.0 33 $ 5,716 $ 7,716 E Accounting Assistant 1.0 17 $ 3,869 $ 5,223 NE Accounting Technician 2.0 25 $ 4,702 $ 6,348 NE Chief Financial Officer 1.0 67 $ 13,100 $ 17,686 E Deputy Director of Finance 1.0 57 $ 10,141 $ 13,691 E Procurement Analyst 1.0 36 $ 6,148 $ 8,300 E Procurement Manager 1.0 53 $ 9,310 $ 12,569 E Senior Financial Analyst 1.0 43 $ 7,295 $ 9,848 E Finance Subtotal: 10.0 ' LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS & COMMUNICATIONS Goods Movement Manager 1.0 51 $ 8,867 $ 11,970 E Government Relations Manager 1.0 51 $ 8,867 $ 11,970 E Public Affairs Manager 1.0 51 $ 8,867 $ 11,970 E Legislative Affairs and Communications Subtotal: 3.0 MULTIMODAL SERVICES Commuter and Motorist Assistance Manager 1.0 51 $ 8,867 $ 11,970 E Multimodal Services Director 1.0 63 $ 11,883 $ 16,041 E Management Analyst 2.0 35 $ 6,001 $ 8,102 E Transit Manager 1.0 51 $ 8,867 $ 11,970 E Multimodal Services Subtotal: 5.0 PLANNING AND PROGRAMMING SERVICES Planning and Programming Director 1.0 63 $ 11,883 $ 16,041 E Planning and Programming Manager 1.0 51 $ 8,867 $ 11,970 E Senior Management Analyst 1.0 43 $ 7,295 $ 9,848 E Management Analyst 1.0 35 $ 6,001 $ 8,102 E Planning and Programming Services Subtotal: 4.0 RAIL MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS Rail Manager 1.0 51 $ 8,867 $ 11,970 E Management Analyst 1.0 35 $ 6,001 $ 8,102 E Rail Maintenance and Operations Subtotal: 2.0 TOTAL AUTHORIZED POSITIONS Administration 7.0 Capital Project Development and Delivery 16.0 Executive Management 2.0 Finance 10.0 Legislative Affairs and Communications 3.0 Multimodal Services 5.0 Planning and Programming Services 4.0 Rail Maintenance and Operations 2.0 Total Authorized Positions 49.0 Appendix C — 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. 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 by the Commission and administered by Caltrans that provide funding for local street and road improvements. Current matching rate is 88.53% federal and 11.47% 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 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. 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 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. 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 (TSSSDRA), STIP supplement, goods movement (TCIF), SLPP funds, and cities and counties. Cap and Trade State legislation in 2006 requires GHG emissions in the State to be reduced. A key element of the GHG reduction program is the Cap and Trade Program in which entities regulated under the program can "trade" or buy and sell a portion of emission allowances issued by the CARB at auctions held during the year. The revenues generated for the State through these auctions are appropriated for infrastructure investments that include low carbon transit operations programs (LCTOP) and road programs, high speed rail projects, and transit and intercity rail projects. 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 life 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. Appendix D — 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. 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 commission's 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 commute 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. Appendix E — 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 Caltrans, 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 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. Economic Resources Measurement Focus A measurement focus that reports on all inflows, outflows, and balances affecting or reflecting the entity's net position. This focus is used for proprietary funds as well as for government -wide financial reporting. 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 68 Statement No. 68, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Pensions, issued by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board to be implemented by the Commission for FY 2014/15. GASB 48 requires reporting the net pension liability of the plan on the accrual accounting -based financial statements and enhancing the notes to the financial statements to provide a more comprehensive picture of the pension obligation and costs. 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 Control Policies and procedures established to provide reasonable assurance that specific government objectives will be achieved. 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 capital assets, and transfers in. Other Financing Uses Amounts classified separately from expenditures to avoid distorting expenditure trends and represent a decrease in current financial resources. Other financing uses generally include transfers out and the amount of refunding bond proceeds deposited with the escrow agent. Overhead Indirect costs that cannot be specifically associated with a given service, program, or department and thus, cannot be clearly associated with a particular functional category. Principal In the context of bonds other than deep -discount debt, the face value or par value of a bond or issue of bonds payable on stated dates of maturity. Program Group activities, operations, or organizational units directed to attaining specific purposes or objectives. Program Budget A budget wherein expenditures are based primarily on the functions or activities of a government rather than to specific items of cost or to specific departments. Purchase Order A document authorizing the delivery of specified merchandise or the rendering of certain services and the making of a charge for them. Refunding Bonds Bonds issued to retire bonds already outstanding. The proceeds of refunding bonds may be used to repay the previously issued debt (current refunding) or to be placed with an escrow agent and invested until used to pay principal and interest on old debt at a future date (advance refunding). Reimbursement Grant A grant for which a potential recipient must first incur qualifying expenditures to be eligible. 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; Local Transportation Fund; Coachella Valley/San Gorgonio Pass; and Other Agency Projects. 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. 6/8/2016 PROPOSED BUDGET FISCAL YEAR 2016/17 ROTC Riverside Conn ly Transom -Ninon Commission Budge AdusentS FY 2016/17 Ending Fund Balance (as reported 5/11/16) Projected FY 2016 Adjustments: Increase in operating transfer in Increase in debt service interest payments Increase in operating transfer out Budget FY 2017 Adjustments: Decrease in sales tax revenues Decrease in local reimbursements Decrease in investment income Decrease in operating transfers in Decrease in program management expenditures Decrease in transit operating and capital disbursements Decrease in local streets and roads expenditures Increase in debt service interest payments Decrease in operating transfers out FY 2016/17 Ending Fund Balance (per final budget 6/8/16) 9,5007p0. (59,004}' (9,5Cp,300) (3)500,000'+ (3,200,000) (2,2,300) 05,000) 316,900' 33,800 1,229,000 (386,000}. 45,000.- $ 531,479 600 ?; 1 6/8/2016 •Revenues • Debt Proceeds •Transfers In 5342,839,800 $128,269,200 5241,687,700 Total Estimated Expend:Ores/Expenses/Uses •Expenditures/Expenses $620,696,300 •Debt Service $ 54,015,800 *Transfers Out $241,687,700 Revenues/Sources under Expenditures/Expen 494,399,800) 2 6/8/2016 Measure A Sales Tax LTF Sales Tax STA Sales Tax Federal reimbursements State reimbursements Local reimbursements TUMF Toll revenues Other revenues Investment income Total Revenues Debt proceeds TIFIA loan proceeds Transfers in Total Revenues/Sources 24 $ 163,092,800 $ 170,000,000 $ 81,332,500 83,000,000 13,484,300 13,372,400 57,614,000 50,595,800 50,623,800 56,130,600 2,277,800 4,084,300 17,400,800 18,053,800 170,000,000 $ 173,000,000 2% 83,000,000 85,000,00#2-_- 2% 13,372,400 10,821,6001 -19% 39,712,800 28,007,igal -45% 61,395,600 8,83Q-All ` -84% 9,199,000 1049k1.9'_- 157% 18,041,000 _1854/UU0' 3% - 3,798000 N/A 2,542,400 787,000 185,000 2,518,000 220% 6,258,200 2,456,300 5,663,000 1,849,000 -25% 394,626,600 398,480,200 400,568,800 342,839,800 -14% 20,000,000 28,000,000 N/A 48,904,100 261,277,900 271,880,700 100,269,200 -62% 232,626,100 136,326,500 181,186,600 241,687,700, 77% $ 676,156,800 $ 796,084,600 $ 873,636,100 $ 712,7$620 -10% 3 6/8/2016 Executive Management Administration legislative Affairs and Communications Finance Debt Service Total Expenditures Transfers Out Total Management Services FY 2014/15 481,200 $ 542,500 $ 1,900,100 1,987,800 926,500 1,516,400 4,350,200 4,966,900 24,900 2015/16 - FY 2016/17 479,100 $ 502,700 1,581,700 1,898,500' 1,290,100 1,451,400, 4,601,700 5,447,9iJ[]__ 7,682,900 9,013,600 7,952,600 9,306,500 2,700 9,007,900 10,000,000 10,004,000 7,685,600 $ 18,021,500 $ 17,952,600 $ 19,306,500 Planning and Programming Services Rail Maintenance and Operations Public and Specialized Transit Commuter Assistance Motorist Assistance Total Expenditures Transfers Out Total Regional Programs 2,419,000 $ 7,157,800 $ 4,460,400 $ 12,037,100 14,122,600 26,188,500 21,309,700 34,097,200 89,164,800 118,129,500 94,385,300 111,281,600 2,891,400 3,687,300 3,737,200 3,579,900 4,318,000 5,491,200 5,492,600 5,743,040, 112,915,800 160,654,300 129,385,200 166,738,80€S'? 17,644,000 26,624,300 24,374,300 24,623,900-! $ 130,559,800 $ 187,278,600 $ 153,759,500 $ 191,362,700i 4 6/8/2016 Sources Toll Revenues Non -Toll Revenues Investment Income Transfers In Total Sources Expenses Salaries and Benefits Professional Costs Support and Maintenance Costs Projects and Operations Capital Outlay Total Expenses Excess Sources over Expenses FY 2014 6 FY 2016 - $ 3,798,000 - 2,345,000. 6,800 - 3,137,70G - 9,287,500 268,400 " 307,000 2,674,900 3,052,800 250;000-' 6,553,100 2,734,400 Capital Project Development & Delivery Expenditures/Uses Salaries and benefits Professional costs Support costs Projects and operations: Program operations Engineering Construction Design build Right of way and land Local streets and roads Regional arterials Other (special studies/operating & capital disbursements) Debt service Total Expenditures Transfers out Total Capital Project Development & Delivery 2,752,000 $ 4,335,500 $ 4,330,500 $ 4,020500 5,795,600 9,160,100 8,557,400 10,797,100 397,700 918,100 675,400 886,600 7,179,500 14,502,600 11,898,100 7,040,400 8,198,600 19,920,900 5,241,500 /6,931,200 142,654,000 156,600,600 123,834,100 80,214.000 191,599,200 284,681,200 279,380,700 146,955,600 71,999,800 104,927,400 42,324,100 84,502,900, 48,612,900 50,679,000 50,679,000 51,358,000 17,283,300 30,600,000 30,900,000 30,516,6,00 833,300 16,653,600 6,338,800 10875,000 53,300,100 53,919,900 53,671,800 54,015,800 550,606,000 746,898,900 617,831,400 498,113,700 214,979,400 100,694,300 146,812,300 207,063,800; $ 765,585,400 $ 847,593,200 $ 764,643,700 $ 705,177,500 5 6/8/2016 Ca p ita Projects open Projects & Operations 61% total streetsand mads12% Regionalarterials 7% 6 6/8/2016 Fur ctiona Uses r\ .,sue owri Personnel Professional Support Projects and operations Capital outlay Debt service Total Expenditures/Expenses Transfers out Total Uses 14i 3( ..._-:-f�r_2s s x� 0-•; 7,365,400 $ 9,499,800 $ 9,491,600 $ 9,500,490 11,848,700 17,037,000 15,438,400 22,053,700 4,022,800 7,269,300 5,494,400 10,053,400 594,167,400 824,881,800 670,380,800 583,172,800 475,400 3,959,000 692,200 1,916,000 53,325,000 53,919,900 53,671,800 54,015,800 671,204,700 916,566,800 755,169,200 680,712,100 232,626,100 136,326,500 181,186,600 241,687,700 $ 903,830,800 $ 1,052,893,300 $ 936,355,800 $ 922,399,800 easu a A strative Costs z . 7 6/8/2016 dripsisOup 49 re %WV* tillawfwin AmpIN looms. itilPowo .414.14 -0•Ngh/R irreffifro wiw".. ant aft, rtlo 41.11 hi*Fir .14m100.1.1r1110111 WIN go fp* 444110 CIF •Iwo **AIN 8 AGENDA ITEM 8A RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 8, 2016 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Michele Cisneros, Deputy Director of Finance THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Appropriations Limit for Fiscal Year 2016/17 BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to adopt Resolution No. 16-013, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Establishing the Annual Appropriations Limit", for Fiscal Year 2016/17. 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 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 population change within Riverside County as the factors in determining the appropriations limit. As required, the adoption of the Commission's FY 2016/17 Appropriations Limit was posted in the Press Enterprise. Attachments: 1) Resolution No. 16-013 2) California Per Capital Income and Population, Riverside County — California Department of Finance Agenda Item 8A 4 ATTACHMENT 1 RESOLUTION NO. 16-013 RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ESTABLISHING THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT WHEREAS, Article XIIIB of the California Constitution places an annual limitation upon appropriations from proceeds of taxes by each local government of the State of California; and WHEREAS, in 1988, pursuant to Article XIIIB, section 4 of the California Constitution, the Riverside County Transportation Commission established its appropriations limit at $75 million for Fiscal Year 1988-1989 under ordinance No. 88-1; and WHEREAS, Section 7910 of the California Government Code implements Article XIIIB of the California Constitution by requiring each local jurisdiction to establish, by resolution, its appropriations limit for each fiscal year and to make the documentation used in determining the appropriations limit available to the public fifteen days prior to adoption of the resolution establishing the appropriations limit; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Senate Constitutional Amendment No. 1 approved by the voters of the State effective June 6, 1990, beginning with fiscal year 1990-1991 and for each fiscal year thereafter, the Commission's Board of Commissioners is required to select either the percentage change in California per capita personal income or the percentage change in the local assessment roll due to the addition of local non-residential construction, and either the population change within the Commission or the population change within Riverside County, as the two factors to be applied in calculating the appropriations limit for each fiscal year; and WHEREAS, this Board wishes to select, as factors in determining the Commission's appropriation limit for Fiscal Year 2016-2017 the percentage change in California per capita personal income and also the population change within Riverside County; and WHEREAS, this Commission has documented its calculations of the Commission's appropriations limit for Fiscal Year 2016-2017 and said calculations have been made available to the public at least fifteen 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: 5 1. For Fiscal Year 2016-2017, 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 Fiscal Year 2016-2017 are hereby established and determined to be $419,316,693. 3. A copy of the documentation used in the determination of the appropriations limit for Fiscal Year 2016-2017 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 45 days of the adoption of this resolution. ADOPTED this 8th day of June, 2016. Scott Matas, Chair Riverside County Transportation Commission ATTEST: Jennifer Harmon, Clerk of the Board Riverside County Transportation Commission 6 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION 2016-2017 APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT 2015-2016 Appropriations Limit $ 392,995,203 2016-2017 adjustment: Change in California per capita personal income = 5.37% Change in Population, Riverside County = 1.26% Per Capita Cost of Living converted to a ratio: 5.37 + 100 = 1.0537 100 Population converted to a ratio: 1.26 + 100 = 1.0126 100 Calculation of factor for FY 2016-2017: 1.0537 x 1.0126 = 1.06697662 $392,995,203 x 1.06697662 = $419,316,693 2016-2017 Appropriations Limit $ 419,316,693 Source: California per capita income — California Department of Finance Population, Riverside County — California Department of Finance 7 ATTACHMENT 2 ets OA T a �I� Z w IIII n o M AL DEPARTMENT OF OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR May 2016 Dear Fiscal Officer: EDMUND G. BROWN JR. • GOVERNOR STATE CAPITOL ■ ROOM 1145 ■ SACRAMENTO CA ■ 9581 4-4998 ■ WWW.DOF.CA.GOV Subject: Price Factor and Population Information Appropriations Limit The California Revenue and Taxation Code, section 2227, requires 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, 2016, in conjunction with a change in the cost of living, or price factor, to calculate their appropriations limit for fiscal year 2016-17. Attachment A 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 2016-17 appropriations limit. Attachment B provides the city and unincorporated county population percentage change. Attachment C provides the population percentage change for counties and their summed incorporated areas. 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. The Revenue and Taxation Code, section 2228 provides additional information regarding the appropriations limit. Article XIII B, section 9(C) of the California Constitution exempts certain special districts from the appropriations limit calculation mandate. The Code and the California Constitution can be accessed at the following website: http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes.xhtml. 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 requirement should be directed to their county, district legal counsel, or 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, 2016. 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. MICHAEL COHEN Director By: AMY COSTA Chief Deputy Director Attachment 8 May 2016 Attachment A A. Price Factor: Article XII I B specifies that local jurisdictions select their cost of living factor to compute their appropriation limit by a vote of their 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 fiscal year 2016-17 appropriation limit is: Per Capita Personal Income Fiscal Year (FY) Percentage change over prior year 2016-17 5.37 B. Following is an example using sample population change and the change in California per capita personal income as growth factors in computing a 2016-17 appropriation limit. 2016-17: Per Capita Cost of Living Change = 5.37 percent Population Change = 0.90 percent Per Capita Cost of Living converted to a ratio: Population converted to a ratio: Calculation of factor for FY 2016-17: 5.37 + 100 = 1.0537 100 0.90 + 100 = 1.0090 100 1.0537 x 1.0090 = 1.0632 9 Fiscal Year 2016-17 Attachment B Annual Percent Change in Population Minus Exclusions* January 1, 2015 to January 1, 2016 and Total Population, January 1, 2016 County Percent Change --- Population Minus Exclusions --- City 2015-2016 1-1-15 1-1-16 Riverside Total Population 1-1-2016 Banning 0.57 30,659 30,834 30,834 Beaumont 3.48 43,601 45,118 45,118 Blythe 0.70 13,937 14,034 19,813 Calimesa 1.86 8,138 8,289 8,289 Canyon Lake 0.69 10,608 10,681 10,681 Cathedral City 0.75 53,810 54,212 54,261 Coachella 0.90 45,001 45,407 45,407 Corona 0.82 163,317 164,659 164,659 Desert Hot Springs 0.88 28,794 29,048 29,048 Eastvale 3.84 60,825 63,162 63,162 Hemet 0.66 79,548 80,070 80,070 Indian Wells 1.42 5,336 5,412 5,412 Indio 1.59 86,683 88,058 88,058 Jurupa Valley 1.32 96,898 98,177 98,177 Lake Elsinore 3.16 58,997 60,861 61,006 La Quinta 1.69 39,311 39,977 39,977 Menifee 1.97 87,286 89,004 89,004 Moreno Valley 0.83 203,696 205,383 205,383 Murrieta 1.08 112,576 113,795 113,795 Norco 0.69 23,919 24,085 26,896 Palm Desert 1.02 48,835 49,335 49,335 Palm Springs 0.97 46,204 46,654 46,654 Perris 1.72 72,476 73,722 73,722 Rancho Mirage 0.84 17,920 18,070 18,070 Riverside 0.95 321,596 324,637 324,696 San Jacinto 1.21 47,087 47,656 47,656 Temecula 1.18 107,794 109,064 109,064 Wildomar 1.18 34,758 35,168 35,168 Unincorporated 1.16 359,889 364,054 364,413 County Total 1.26 2,309,499 2,338,626 2,347,828 "Exclusions include residents on federal military installations and group quarters residents in state mental institutions, state and federal correctional institutions and veteran homes. 10 AGENDA ITEM 8B RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 8, 2016 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Michele Cisneros, Deputy Director of Finance THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Quarterly Financial Statements BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Quarterly Financial Statements for the period ended March 31, 2016. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: During the last nine months of the fiscal year, staff monitored the revenues and expenditures of the Commission. The attached financial statements present the revenues and expenditures for the first nine months of the fiscal year. Period closing accrual adjustments are not included for revenues earned but not billed and expenditures incurred for goods and services received but not yet invoiced, as such adjustments are normally made during the year-end closing activities. The operating statement shows the sales tax revenues for the third quarter at 55 percent of the budget. This is a result of Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 33. GASB 33 requires sales tax revenues to be accrued for the period in which it is collected at the point of sale. The State Board of Equalization (SBOE) collects the Measure A funds and remits these funds to the Commission after the reporting period for the businesses. This creates a two -month lag in the receipt of revenues by the Commission. Accordingly, these financial statements reflect the revenues related to collections for January 2016. On a cash basis, the Measure A and Local Transportation Fund sales tax revenues are 2.46 and 2.82 percent higher, respectively than the same period last fiscal year. State Transit Assistance Fund receipts through the second quarter have been received as of March 2016. Staff will continue to monitor the trends in the sales tax receipts and report to the Commission any necessary adjustments. Federal, state, and local revenues are on a reimbursement basis. The Commission will receive these revenues as eligible project costs are incurred and invoiced to the respective agencies. Significant federal and state reimbursements to date are related to the Perris Valley Line (PVL) and Interstate 215 corridor improvement projects. The negative revenue amounts for local reimbursements reflect the reversal of the FY 2014/15 accrued revenues at the beginning of Agenda Item 8B 11 FY 2015/16 in excess of amounts billed through the third quarter. Staff expects billing these accrued revenues by the fourth quarter. During the FY 2015/16 budget process, the Commission took a conservative approach to estimate the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) revenues of $12 million passed through from the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG). At the January 13 Commission meeting, staff presented the revised FY 2015/16 revenue projections and increased the TUMF revenues to $18 million. The Commission received TUMF revenues through January 2016. The budgeted balance of $53,800 relates to TUMF zone reimbursements from WRCOG for the 74/215 interchange project. Other revenues include property management generated from properties acquired in connection with the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project (91 Project) and various rail properties as well as $3.9 million from the proceeds related to the sale of excess land related to rail properties. The Commission took a conservative approach in estimating investment income for FY 2015/16, as a result of flat interest rate yields on investment balances. Investment income is higher in the third quarter primarily as a result of the investment of sales tax and toll revenue bond proceeds. The expenditure and other financing sources/uses categories are in line overall with the expectations of the budget with the following exceptions. • Salaries and benefits expenditures are under budget due to unused full-time equivalents budget authority; • Professional services expenditures are under budget due to unused budget authority for rail and station development planning, financial advisory management, property management, and various projects' legal services. Staff anticipates using more budget authority by the fourth quarter; • Support costs are under budget due to unused budget authority for the marketing of new rail service, rail safety, 91 Project, and rideshare advertisements; rail operations and station maintenance; and motorist assistance call box upgrades. Staff anticipates using more budget authority by the fourth quarter; • Program operations are under budget due to unused budget authority for 91 Project permit activities, Freeway Service Patrol, Motorist and Commuter Assistance program operations; and rail program management and operations related to the PVL. Staff anticipates using a significant amount of the budget authority by the fourth quarter; • Engineering, construction, design -build, and right of way/land expenditures relate to various capital projects. The status of significant capital projects with budget exceeding $5 million is discussed in the attachment; • Operating and capital disbursements are made as claims are submitted to the Commission by transit operators; Agenda Item 8B 12 " Special studies are under budget due to unused budget authority for strategic assessment and other studies; " Local streets and roads are related to the timing of Measure A sales tax revenues as previously explained. These financial statements reflect expenditures made to the local jurisdictions related to collections through January 2016; " Regional arterial expenditures primarily represent expenditures for highways and regional arterial program administered by the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG). CVAG requests reimbursement from the Commission based on available funds and sufficient budget authority; " Debt service principal payments are made annually on June 1, while interest payments are made semiannually on December 1 and June 1, except for the 2009 Sales Tax Revenue Bonds (variable rate) as those interest payments are monthly; " Capital outlay expenditures are under budget due to unused budget authority for station security improvements and Commission network, hardware, and software improvements; " The Commission entered into a loan agreement with the U.S. Department of Transportation for a $421,054,409 Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) loan to pay eligible 91 Project costs. The loan is a toll revenue bond (TIFIA bond) that is subordinate to the 2013 Toll Bonds. Proceeds of the TIFIA bond may be drawn upon after certain conditions have been met. During the third quarter, the Commission drew down $40.2 million for a cumulative inception to date total in TIFIA loan proceeds of $208.2 million. During construction of the 91 Project and for a period of up to five years following substantial completion, interest is compounded and added to the initial TIFIA loan. TIFIA debt service payments are expected to commence on December 1, 2021, which is approximately five years after substantial completion of the 91 Project, through June 1, 2051; and " The Commission issued $20 million in commercial paper notes during the third quarter for the I-15 Express Lanes project. Attachments: 1) Quarterly Project Status March 2016 2) Quarterly Financial Statements March 2016 Agenda Item 8B 13 ATTACHMENT 1 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION QUARTERLY PROJECT STATUS 3RD QUARTER FOR NINE MONTHS ENDED 3/31/2016 FY 2015/16 BUDGET Project Description 3RD QUARTER EXPENDITURES Project Status 91 Project (Design -Build) The project will connect with Orange County Transportation Authority's tolled express lanes at the Orange County/Riverside County line and continue approximately eight miles to the Interstate (1)- 15/State Route (SR)-91 interchange. The project involves widening pavement on the outside of the existing highway to reposition general purpose lanes and repurposing the existing High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes to accommodate two -tolled express lanes in the median in each direction. The SR-91 CIP also involves constructing one new general purpose lane in each direction from SR-71 to 1-15, ultimately providing two -tolled express lanes and five general purpose lanes in each direction. SR-91 CIP development activities began in September 2007, construction work related to roadway and structures began in July 2014, and the toll lanes are expected to open in January 2017. The total acquisition and construction cost of the SR-91 CIP is estimated at $1.4 billion, including capitalized interest, debt service reserves, and cost of issuance. 1-15 Express Lanes Project The project is currently in the preliminary engineering and environmental phase of work to add up to two -tolled express lanes in each direction from SR-60 to Cajalco Road in Corona. The project will use the design -build method of project delivery. Project development activities began in April 2008, and lanes are expected to open to traffic in 2020. $369,290,600 17,319,200 $193,548,997 6,720,729 The Design -Build contract is on schedule with actual reported progress of 75 percent as of March 31, 2016. The Commission has acquired and delivered all 197 Caltrans Parcel Numbers to the Design -Builder. Construction has begun on all 32 bridges (14 bridges are complete) and 67 walls (of 93, 20 walls are complete), while 86 utility relocations (of 90) are complete. The substantial completion date of January 2017 is unchanged. The under run of the FY 2015/16 budget at third quarter is due to under runs in right of way (ROW), including anticipated goodwill and negotiated settlement costs later in the fiscal year ($31.9 million), the Design -Build contract ($37.6 million), the project and construction management (PCM) contract ($5.5 million), the systems integration and installation contract ($4.8 million), and the Caltrans Cooperative Agreement ($3.1 million). Staff continues to advance the project report and environmental document, which is expected to be completed in FY 2015/16. Various methods of project delivery were analyzed in 2013, and ultimately staff received Commission approval in January 2014 to use the design -build method of project delivery and begin planning for the design -build phase of work. The PCM contract and the traffic and revenue study contract were both approved by the Commission in April 2015. The short list for the toll services provider and design -build contractor were announced in February 2016 and March 2016, respectively. The budget variance at the end of the third quarter is due to under runs in the PCM contract ($3.4 million), the preliminary engineering contract ($1.5 million), interagency support from Caltrans ($0.4 million), and special legal services ($0.3 million). The 2016 CAPEX forecast estimates the total project cost at $486 million, excluding finance costs. 14 FY 2015/16 BUDGET Project Description 3RD QUARTER EXPENDITURES Project Status 1-215 Corridor Improvements/Scott Road to Nuevo Road The project will add one mixed flow lane in each direction. Preliminary engineering began in 2007 and was completed in 2011. Final design began in 2011 and was completed in December 2012; construction began in 2013 and is expected to be completed in 2016. The estimated project cost is $120 million. Mid County Parkway A recirculated project report and environmental document is under development for a new corridor from 1-215 to SR-79. The environmental phase is anticipated to be completed in FY 2014/15. Construction of this new facility will be completed over many years as funding becomes available; the project cost is estimated at $1.3 to $1.6 billion. Perris Valley Line and other rail projects The project is in the construction phase with the extension of commuter rail services to the city of Perris. The project commenced in December 2007 when the Commission received approval from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) to move into project development. Expected completion date is December 2015 for an estimated project cost of $248.3 million. Other rail projects include adding a fourth main track between the Riverside Downtown station to the connector to the San Jacinto Branch Line at Highgrove. 19,598,300 21,192,300 61,112,200 8,288,102 3,950,208 36,127,113 The notice to proceed for construction was issued in December 2012 and construction started in January 2013; construction work is substantially complete with all lanes opened to traffic in October 2015. Late starting aesthetic work alongside the freeway is underway and is approximately 33 percent complete. This work will extend the contract time to fourth quarter of 2016. The budget variance at the end of the third quarter is due to slow submittal of progress payments by the contractor. Staff completed the work on the Environmental Impact Report (EIR)/Environmental Impact Study (EIS). Major milestones have been met and the project's Record Of Decision was published in the Federal register in August 2015. A budget amendment was approved by the Commission in April 2014 to allocate additional funding for the completion of Phase II Final EIR/Supplemental EIS. In April 2015 the Commission approved the EIR. As directed by the Commission during the January 2016 workshop, staff started working on the preparation of the procurement package for plans, specifications, and estimates for the I-215/Placentia Interchange to be ready for advertisement when a resolution of the project's lawsuit is resolved. Staff has also been working with the Federal Highway Administration on approval of the New Connection Report, approval of the Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and purchasing of the required land mitigations. Final design is complete and the FTA awarded the Small Starts Grant Agreement funds. ROW acquisition activities for the station and layover facility at south Perris have been completed. Following the settlement of a lawsuit challenging elements of the California Environmental Quality Act document in July 2013, the construction contract was given full notice to proceed in October 2013 following FTA approval of the Small Starts Grant Agreement. Active construction commenced in January 2014; construction delays have occurred due to various factors. The new expected completion date is July 2016. 15 This list discusses the significant capital projects (i.e., total budgeted costs in excess of $5 million) and related status. Capital project expenditures are generally affected by lags in invoices submitted by contractors and consultants, as well as issues encountered during certain phases of the projects. The capital projects budgets tend to be based on aggressive project schedules. 16 Revenues Sales tax Federal reimbursements State reimbursements Local reimbursements Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Other revenues Investment income Total revenues RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANPORTATION COMMISSION QUARTERLY BUDGET TO ACTUAL 3RD QUARTER FOR NINE MONTHS ENDED 3/31/2016 ATTACHMENT 2 FY 2015/16 3RD QUARTER REMAINING PERCENT BUDGET ACTUAL BALANCE UTILIZATION $ 266,372,400 $ 147,312,713 $ (119,059,687) 50,595,800 4,177,872 (46,417,928) 55,721,600 28,979,590 (26,742,010) 4,636,300 1,639,986 (2,996,314) 18,053,800 10,715,018 (7,338,782) 235,000 4,858,603 4,623,603 2,456,300 4,537,525 2,081,225 398,071,200 55% 8% 52% 35% 59% 2067% 185% 202,221,307 (195,849,893) 51% Expenditures Salaries and benefits 9,514,800 6,271,423 3,243,377 66% Professional and support Professional services 17,023,100 7,688,597 9,334,503 45% Support costs 7,586,000 2,953,937 4,632,063 39% Total Professional and support costs 24,609,100 10,642,534 13,966,566 43% Projects and operations Program operations - general 21,754,800 9,238,589 12,516,211 42% Engineering 20,260,900 2,357,335 17,903,565 12% Construction 159,901,400 53,184,844 106,716,556 33% Design Build 284,681,200 164,530,851 120,150,349 58% Right of way/land 105,090,400 29,507,191 75,583,209 28% Operating and capital disbursements 149,700,800 78,213,364 71,487,436 52% Special studies 1,844,000 471,279 1,372,721 26% Local streets and roads 50,679,000 28,088,755 22,590,245 55% Regional arterials 30,600,000 7,657,341 22,942,659 25% Total projects and operations 824,512,500 373,249,549 451,262,951 45% Debt service Principal 7,800,000 - 7,800,000 N/A Interest 46,119,900 23,990,327 22,129,573 52% Total debt service 53,919,900 23,990,327 29,929,573 44% Capital outlay 3,601,500 530,692 3,070,808 15% Total Expenditures 916,157,800 414,684,525 501,473,275 45% Excess revenues over(under)expenditures (518,086,600) (212,463,218) 519,376,840 41% Other financing sources/(uses) Operating transfer in 136,735,500 69,745,536 (66,989,964) 51 % Operating transfer out (136,735,500) (69,745,536) 66,989,964 51 % TIFIA loan proceeds 261,277,900 159,465,855 (101,812,045) 61% Debt proceeds - 20,000,000 20,000,000 N/A Total financing sources/(uses) 261,277,900 179,465,855 81,812,045 69% Net change in fund balances (256,808,700) (32,997,363) 601,188,885 13% Fund balance July 1, 2015 831,809,600 803,802,444 (28,007,156) 97% Fund balance March 31, 2016 $ 575,000,900 $ 770,805,081 $ 573,181,729 134% 17 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION QUARTERLY BUDGET TO ACTUAL BY FUND 3RD QUARTER FOR NINE MONTHS ENDED 3/31/2016 GENERAL FUND SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS MEASURE A SALES TAX TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT FSP/ WESTERN COACHELLA PALO VERDE LOCAL TRANSPORTATION STATE TRANSIT SAFE COUNTY VALLEY VALLEY FUND ASSISTANCE TRANSPORTATION UNIFORM MITIGATION FEE (TUMF) COACHELLA VALLEY RAIL AGENCY FUND COMMERCIAL SALES TAX TOLL REVENUE PAPER BONDS BONDS DEBT SERVICE COMBINED TOTAL Revenues Sales tax $ 2,100,000 $ - $ 71,149,104 $ 21,028,677 $ 629,405 $ 47,415,756 $ 4,989,771 $ $ $ $ - $ $ $ - $ 147,312,713 Federal reimbursements 2,788,208 - - 1,389,664 4,177,872 State reimbursements 92,748 1,913,889 26,972,953 - 28,979,590 Local reimbursements 129,798 535,442 983,457 (8,711) 1,639,986 Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee - 5,328 10,709,690 - 10,715,018 Other revenues 453,038 412 4,398,153 7,000 - 4,858,603 Investment income 10,662 7,549 335,812 57,197 92,003 108,964 110,516 4,482 527 1,238,124 916,797 142,651 1,512,241 4,537,525 Total revenues 2,786,246 2,457,292 106,633,015 21,085,874 629,405 47,507,759 5,098,735 10,827,206 4,482 (8,184) 1,238,124 916,797 142,651 2,901,905 202,221,307 Expenditures Salaries and benefits 3,821,437 57,669 2,176,825 3,477 149,695 30,562 31,758 6,271,423 Professional and support Professional services 1,120,952 248,694 5,762,350 618 731 92,210 462,137 905 7,688,597 Support costs 2,382,528 157,808 411,938 73 - 645 86 859 2,953,937 Total Professional and support costs 3,503,480 406,502 6,174,288 691 731 92,855 462,223 1,764 10,642,534 Proiects and operations Program operations -general 1,143,735 2,148,779 5,716,580 9,038 216,529 3,928 9,238,589 Engineering 817,803 1,539,532 - 2,357,335 Construction 53,598,774 (413,930) 53,184,844 Design Build 164,530,851 164,530,851 Right of way/land 26,138,279 3,368,912 29,507,191 Operating and capital disbursements 8,708,648 6,861,109 4,723,501 56,313,085 1,607,021 78,213,364 Special studies 425,141 46,138 - - - 471,279 Local streets and roads 20,099,313 7,360,037 629,405 28,088,755 Regional arterials - 7,657,341 7,657,341 Total proiects and operations 10,277,524 2,148,779 277,808,847 19,749,917 629,405 56,313,085 1,607,021 4,711,043 3,928 373,249,549 Debt service Principal Interest Total debt service Capital outlay Total Expenditures Excess revenues over (under) expenditures Other financing sources/(uses) Operating transfer in Operating transfer out TIFIA loan proceeds Debt proceeds Total financing sources/(uses) Net change in fund balances Fund balance July 1, 2015 Fund balance March 31, 2016 23,990,327 23,990,327 23,990,327 23,990,327 62,572 468,120 530,692 17,665,013 2,612,950 286,628,080 19,754,085 629,405 56,313,085 1,607,752 4,953,593 492,785 37,450 23,990,327 414,684,525 (14,878,767) 18,570,471 (155,658) (179,995,065) 1,331,789 571,200 (571,200) 35,420,728 (15,914,503) 159,465,855 (8,805,326) 3,490,983 5,873,613 (488,303) (45,634) 1,238,124 916,797 142,651 (21,088,422) (212,463,218) (18,570,470) (189,439) 189,439 - - 14,993,698 69,745,536 (28,383,582) (4,726,678) (1,389,664) (69,745,536) - 159,465,855 20,000,000 - 20,000,000 18,570,471 178,972,080 (18,570,470) (189,439) 189,439 20,000,000 (28,383,582) (4,726,678) 13,604,034 179,465,855 3,691,704 (155,658) (1,022,985) 1,331,789 - (27,375,796) 3,301,544 5,873,613 (298,864) (45,634) 21,238,124 (27,466,785) (4,584,027) (7,484,388) (32,997,363) 10,182,797 7,988,086 248,871,517 35,713,138 556 112,103,274 60,580,753 61,486,038 4,054,106 500,041 26,830,382 87,921,226 41,370,827 106,199,703 803,802,444 $ 13 874 501 $ 7.832.428 $ 247.848.532 $ 37.044.927 $ 556 $ 84.727.478 $ 63.882.297 $ 67.359.651 $ 3.755.242 $ 454 407 $ 48.068.506 $ 60.454.441 $ 36.786.800 $ 98 715 315 $ 770,805,081 18 AGENDA ITEM 8C RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 8, 2016 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Megan Kavand, Accountant Michele Cisneros, Deputy Director of Finance THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Quarterly Investment Report BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file the Quarterly Investment Report for the quarter ended March 31, 2016. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: For many years and as a result of a low interest rate environment, the Commission's quarterly investment reports reflected investments primarily concentrated in the Riverside County Pooled Investment Fund (RCPIF). Other investments included the state Local Agency Investment Fund and mutual funds. In connection with the issuance of sales tax revenue bonds and toll revenue bonds and the execution of Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) loan for the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project (SR-91 CIP), the Commission anticipated the need to engage an investment manager for the bond proceeds and other required funds. Additionally, the Commission desired to engage an investment manager to provide investment advisory and management services related to the Commission's operating funds. Accordingly, at its May 2013 meeting, the Commission awarded two investment management services agreements to Logan Circle Partners, L.P. (Logan) for SR-91 CIP funds and to Payden & Rygel Investment Management (Payden & Rygel) for Commission operating funds. Logan invested the SR-91 CIP debt proceeds during the first quarter of FY 2013/14 in the Short -Term Actively Managed Program (STAMP). Payden & Rygel was authorized to make specific investments for the Commission's operating funds beginning with the third quarter of FY 2014/15. In June 2015 the Commission funded its FY 2014/15 SR-91 CIP equity contribution of approximately $35 million; the funds were invested by Logan in a separate STAMP account. Agenda Item 8C 19 The quarterly investment report for the third quarter of FY 2015/16 as required by state law and Commission policy reflects the increased investment activities resulting from the SR-91 CIP and available operating cash. The quarterly investment report includes the following information: • Investment Portfolio Report; • STAMP Portfolio by Investment Category; • STAMP Portfolio by Account; • STAMP Portfolio Transaction Report by Account; • STAMP Portfolio Summary of investments by credit rating, industry group, asset class, security type and market sector; • STAMP Portfolio Toll Revenue Project Senior Lien Fund Summary of investments by credit rating, industry group, asset class, security type and market sector; • STAMP Portfolio Toll Revenue Project Sales Tax Revenue Fund Summary of investments by credit rating, industry group, asset class, security type and market sector; • STAMP Portfolio Toll Revenue Series A & Series B Reserve Fund Summary of investments by credit rating, industry group, asset class, security type and market sector; • STAMP Portfolio Toll Revenue Project Capitalized Interest Fund Summary of investments by credit rating, industry group, asset class, security type and market sector; • STAMP Portfolio Sales Tax Revenue Capitalized Interest Fund Summary of investment by credit rating, industry group, asset class, security type and market sector; • STAMP Portfolio Sales Tax Equity Fund Summary of investment by credit rating, industry group, asset class, security type and market sector; • Logan Circle Partners, L.P. Short Duration First Quarter 2016 Review; • Payden & Rygel Operating Portfolio by Investment Category; • Payden & Rygel Operating Portfolio Transaction Report; • Payden & Rygel Operating Portfolio First Quarter 2016 Review; and • County of Riverside Investment Report for the Quarter Ended March 31, 2016. The Commission's investments were in full compliance with the Commission's investment policy adopted on September 10, 2014, and investments securities permitted under the Indenture for the Commission's Sales Tax Revenue Bonds and the Master Indenture for the Commission's Toll Revenue Bonds. Additionally, the Commission has adequate cash flows for the next six months. Attachments: 1) Investment Portfolio Report 2) STAMP Portfolio by Investment Category 3) STAMP Portfolio by Account 4) STAMP Portfolio Transaction Report by Account 5) STAMP Portfolio Summary of Investments 6) STAMP Portfolio Toll Revenue Project Senior Lien Fund Summary of Investments 7) STAMP Portfolio Toll Revenue Project Sales Tax Revenue Fund Summary of Investments Agenda Item 8C 20 8) STAMP Portfolio Toll Revenue Series A & Series B Reserve Fund Summary of Investments 9) STAMP Portfolio Toll Revenue Project Capitalized Interest Fund Summary of Investments 10) STAMP Portfolio Sales Tax Revenue Capitalized Interest Fund Summary of Investments 11) STAMP Portfolio Sales Tax Equity Fund Summary of Investments 12) Payden & Rygel Operating Portfolio by Investment Category 13) Payden & Rygel Operating Portfolio Transaction Report 14) Logan Circle Partners, L.P. Short Duration Quarterly Review 15) Payden & Rygel Operating Portfolio Quarterly Review 16) County of Riverside Investment Report Agenda Item 8C 21 ATTACHMENT 1 Riverside County Transportation Commission Investment Portfolio Report Period Ended: March 31, 2016 RATING COUPON PAR PURCHASE MATURITY YIELD TO PURCHASE MARKET UNREALIZED FAIR VALUE MOODYS/FITCH/S&P RATE VALUE DATE DATE MATURITY COST VALUE GAIN (LOSS) OPERATING FUNDS City National Bank Deposits 30,521,410 A3/BBB+ N/A N/A County Treasurer's Pooled Investment Fund 356,195,445 Aaa-bf/AAAN1 N/A 0.65% Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) 3,644,994 Not Rated N/A N/A Subtotal Operating Funds 390,361,849 FUNDS HELD IN TRUST County Treasurer's Pooled Investment Fund: Local Transportation Fund Subtotal Funds Held in Trusl COMMISSION MANAGED PORTFOLIO US Bank Payden & Rygel Operating First American Government Obligation Fund Subtotal Commission Managed Portfolio STAMP PORTFOLIO for 91 CIP Toll Revenue Project Senior Lien Fund Toll Revenue Project Sales Tax Revenue Fund Series A & Series B Reserve Fund Toll Revenue Project Capitalized Interest Fund Sales Tax Revenue Capitalized Interest Fund Sales Tax Revenue Equity Fund Subtotal STAMP Portfolio TOTAL All Cash and Investment: 84,790,241 Aaa-bf/AAAN1 N/A 84,790,241 50,456,914 30,231,753 Aaa-mf/-/AAAm N/A 80,688,666 36,810,269 21,892,229 19,255,322 15,145,363 48,399,297 33,151,491 174,653,971 $ 730,494,727 $450,000,000 $400,000,000 $350,000,000 $300,000,000 $250,000,000 $200,000,000 $150,000,000 $100,000,000 $50,000,000 53.54% - 8.02% 8.68% - 4.53 % 2.63 % 11.02% 11.58% Nature of Investments ■ STAMP Portfolio for 91 CIP Reserve ■ STAMP Portfolio for 91 CIP Project Fund ■ STAMP Portfolio for 91 CIP Capitalized Interest ■ STAMP Portfolio for 91 CIP Equity ■ Commission Managed Portfolio ■ Trust Funds ■ Operating Funds 0.65 See attached report for details N/A See attached report for details See attached report for details See attached report for details See attached report for details See attached report for details See attached report for details 1.18% Money Market Funds 29.56% Fixed Income 0.50% IAIF 0.02%Cash 4.13% Mutual Funds 64.61%County Pool/Cash 22 ATTACHMENT 2 Riverside Coony ironsporfmion Commission STAMP Portfolio by Investment Category for quarter ended March 31, 2016 Final .1 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 3130A6U88 Agency Federal Home Loan Banks Office of Finance 12/22/2017 01/28/2016 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 3135GOD75 Agency 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 3I33EECD0 Agency Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 06/22/2020 05/06/2015 Federal Farm Credit Banks Consolidated Systemwide E 06/20/2017 06/15/2015 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 3137EADR7 Agency Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 3I37EACA5 Agency Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 3137EADB2 Agency Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 3137EADQ9 Agency 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 31392HWL3 Agency CMG 05/01/2020 05/15/2015 03/27/2019 07/05/2013 O1/13/2022 150,000.00 600,000.00 500,000.00 Base Net Total Next Call Base Market Unrealized 150,487.50 06/22/2016 593,490.00 --- 500,308.15 475,000.00 471,527.75 800,000.00 875,900.00 750,000.00 737,385.50 Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp 05/13/2016 02/29/2016 1,400,000.00 1,400,347.20 Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 02/25/2018 07/12/2013 24,074.11 25,413.23 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 3137AEV77 Agency CMG Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 3137AJMF8 Agency CMG Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp 05/25/2018 07/03/2013 10/25/2021 08/05/2015 251,000.00 258,314.30 30,000.00 31,038.28 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 31392F6C6 Agency CMG Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 12/25/2017 07/09/2013 149,683.04 158,780.96 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 383777Z89 Agency CMG The Government National Mortgage Association Guar: 10/20/2039 07/05/2013 130,966.95 134,972.69 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 3I393EXC8 Agency CMG 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund -]Interest 31393EXC8 Agency CMG Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 09/25/2018 07/24/2013 217,425.95 229,860.00 Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 09/25/2018 07/24/2013 24,158.44 25,540.00 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 313927783 Agency CMG Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 03/25/2018 07/08/2013 17,821.03 18,801.19 150,304.50 606,624.00 499,500.00 478,728.75 20.99 1.450 0.545 12,032.51 1.500 1.231 (686.57) 0.462 0.546 Summarized AAA AAA AAA 6,608.57 1.375 1.177 AAA 865,648.00 24,938.47 3.750 0.958 AAA 786,285.00 42,812.08 2.375 1.498 AAA 1,400,238.00 24,663.93 257,008.94 31,839.30 152,874.28 136,478.04 224,820.61 24,980.07 18,263.53 38.24 0.500 0.354 AAA 80.41 5.000 1.272 AAA 3,053.29 2.699 1.100 AAA 912.50 2.968 1.598 AAA (37.81) 5.000 1.067 AAA 2,090.90 3.500 1.484 AAA 2,062.23 4.500 1.099 AAA 229.14 4.500 1.099 AAA 75.13 5.000 1.088 AAA 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 38376GB33 Agency CMG The Government National Mortgage Association Guar: 10/16/2044 01/23/2015 339,935.62 348,932.11 345,269.21 (3,019.13) 3.500 2.133 AAA 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 3I37A2AZ4 Agency CMG Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 3137AUPE3 Agency CMG Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 3I392BVM5 Agency CMG 05/25/2020 07/01/2015 06/25/2022 07/03/2013 369,519.74 380,663.07 377,375.73 (220.94) 2.757 1.265 AAA 235,000.00 220,358.40 242,609.30 18,286.45 2.396 1.856 AAA Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 02/25/2017 07/11/2013 16,556.74 17,477.71 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 38378BR35 Agency CMG Government National Mortgage Association 11/16/2042 07/10/2015 340,506.32 332,844.93 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 38378CRT6 Agency CMG The Government National Mortgage Association Guan 10/20/2040 05/22/2014 108,783.31 105,043.88 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 3137A7E22 Agency CMG Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 3I37B03 W2 Agency CMG Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp 04/15/2028 07/08/2013 08/25/2017 07/31/2013 171,018.58 177,057.67 36,581.30 36,552.72 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 38376T5Z1 Agency CMG The Government National Mortgage Association Guan O1/16/2039 01/26/2015 148,610.88 155,261.22 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 38377RSZ9 Agency CMG The Government National Mortgage Association Guan 06/16/2039 01/21/2015 55,102.04 58,397.64 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 3136A8G38 Agency CMG Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 08/25/2017 07/02/2015 132,328.75 132,923.20 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 3137A85H7 Agency CMG Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp 3137A1 LC5 Agency CMG Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 3I36A4M89 Agency CMG 12/15/2039 07/13/2015 08/15/2020 08/31/2015 Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae O1/25/2019 07/05/2013 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 38378BX20 Agency CMG Government National Mortgage Association 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 38378B7E3 Agency CMG Government National Mortgage Association 06/16/2051 03/17/2015 05/16/2046 05/22/2015 147,929.61 154,216.62 90,931.43 165,902.45 65,670.71 227,121.73 92,380.65 166,958.78 64,210.01 218,303.02 16,696.81 (29.97) 5.500 0.810 AAA 333,737.06 108,344.91 175,613.85 36,690.68 154,969.94 57,674.75 132,229.50 154,919.29 91,949.86 168,102.32 63,919.27 219,967.39 919.27 1.333 2.173 AAA 3,028.14 2.000 1.877 AAA 2,791.48 3.500 1.100 AAA 145.22 1.426 1.522 AAA 256.72 3.000 1.648 AAA (656.38) 4.500 1.505 AAA (430.31) 1.246 1.380 AAA 525.81 3.500 1.653 AAA (211.95) 2.000 1.060 1,760.30 1.934 1.432 (219.77) 1.240 2.427 1,549.98 1.744 2.324 AAA AAA AAA AAA 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 3133XY2H7 Agency CMG Federal Home Loan Banks Office of Finance 04/20/2017 07/13/2015 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 38377RVK8 Agency CMG The Government National Mortgage Association Guan 04/20/2039 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 3136A7M78 Agency CMG Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 12/25/2019 08/20/2013 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 3I37ASNH3 Agency CMG Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp 09/25/2021 07/03/2013 267,477.02 171,681.52 127,715.19 274,749.05 176,523.47 125,819.42 328,357.39 320,879.56 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 3136A72D3 Agency CMG Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 04/25/2022 07/03/2013 395,000.00 375,250.00 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 3I37ASNH3 Agency CMG Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp 09/25/2021 08/15/2013 328,357.39 319,738.00 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 31392FPP6 Agency CMG Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 11/25/2017 07/15/2013 92,555.12 98,021.66 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 3136A8G38 Agency CMG 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 3136A8G38 Agency CMG Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 08/25/2017 07/08/2013 1,934,520.25 1,905,955.85 Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 08/25/2017 07/08/2013 586,027.31 577,374.25 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 38379C2M7 Agency CMG The Government National Mortgage Association Guan 09/20/2041 07/11/2014 45,480.53 47,558.26 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 31394GH22 Agency CMG Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp 3I37ANLP8 Agency CMG Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp 07/15/2018 07/20/2015 11/25/2016 103,699.93 107,491.47 157,270.11 158,556.71 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 38378B7F0 Agency CMG Government National Mortgage Association 12/16/2042 450,000.00 427,324.22 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 3I37AQT24 Agency CMG Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp O1/25/2019 10/21/2013 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 38376WA62 Agency CMG The Government National Mortgage Association Guar: 10/20/2039 01/21/2015 170,000.00 171,195.31 127,543.32 133,906.32 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 38378TAF7 Agency CMG The Government National Mortgage Association Guan 07/20/2041 07/05/2013 220,241.07 220,274.27 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 31393 V2T7 Agency CMG Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 31393 V2T7 Agency CMG Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 3137AH6B9 Agency CMG Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp 06/15/2018 07/08/2013 06/15/2018 07/08/2013 10/25/2020 08/28/2015 123,990.76 131,139.61 408,232.96 431,770.14 155,602.66 159,006.46 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 38377DPX8 Agency CMG The Government National Mortgage Association Guan 11/20/2036 12/31/2013 15,682.05 16,439.85 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 31395EZP5 Agency CMG Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp O8/15/2019 07/09/2013 73,606.42 77,873.29 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 3I394DVM9 Agency CMG Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 02/25/2034 06/19/2014 141,801.63 149,933.06 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 38378KXW4 Agency MBS The Government National Mortgage Association Guar: 02/16/2037 12/11/2014 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 36225FGM5 Agency MBS Ginnie Mae II O8/20/2041 08/06/2015 193,980.53 193,040.94 108,989.66 112,804.30 272,056.22 179,034.64 128,392.08 328,761.26 (263.84) 2.900 1.299 3,310.40 3.000 1.443 1,595.41 1.520 1.204 AA AAA AAA 5,431.45 1.459 1.292 AAA 407,466.20 26,787.41 2.482 1.927 AAA 328,761.26 94,408.07 6,292.47 1.459 1.292 AAA (117.29) 5.000 1.037 AAA 1,933,069.36 10,093.71 1.246 1.380 AAA 585,587.79 46,972.29 106,467.68 157,392.79 436,162.50 173,519.00 135,232.91 227,570.69 127,834.48 420,888.17 158,174.77 15,757.64 76,089.90 148,016.79 192,515.98 113,009.20 3,057.70 1.246 1.380 AAA (733.26) 1.854 1.187 AAA 302.68 4.500 1.206 AAA (275.25) 1.655 1.I17 AAA 8,296.42 2.273 3.139 AAA 2,994.21 2.I30 1.350 AAA 1,005.88 4.000 1.555 AAA 7,439.93 2.500 1.926 AAA 890.65 4.500 1.021 AAA 2,932.41 4.500 1.021 AAA (266.76) 2.257 1.083 AAA (98.85) 2.500 0.871 AAA 334.29 4.500 1.339 AAA (43.24) 5.000 1.280 AAA (565.71) 1.705 2.144 AAA 294.17 1.875 1.060 AAA 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 31413XVG5 Agency MBS Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 06/01/2019 08/04/2014 200,000.00 218,500.00 208,376.00 (3,911.41) 4.506 2.446 AAA 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 38379KDN5 Agency MBS Government National Mortgage Association 09/16/2055 08/05/2015 192,197.24 187,287.20 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 3136A4M48 Agency MBS Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae O1/25/2022 07/05/2013 341,777.03 342,738.28 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 38378NNA7 Agency MBS The Government National Mortgage Association Guan 05/16/2038 06/26/2015 580,625.68 584,594.80 192,076.16 347,696.61 585,607.44 4,608.99 2.099 2.635 AAA 5,502.42 2.098 1.538 AAA 1,167.83 2.250 2.018 AAA 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 31381PEB0 Agency MBS Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 11/O1/2020 09/26/2014 263,547.18 277,506.95 283,642.66 10,451.70 3.370 1.851 AAA 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 3I37A77U5 Agency MBS Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp 11/25/2017 07/03/2013 325,000.00 351,203.13 336,807.25 2,801.76 3.882 1.507 AAA 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 38378KRS0 Agency MBS The Government National Mortgage Association Guar: 07/16/2043 05/08/2015 450,000.00 434,460.94 447,552.00 12,685.46 2.389 2.650 AAA 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 3I36AEYG6 Agency MBS Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 06/25/2018 07/02/2015 222,148.47 224,925.33 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 38378KWU9 Agency MBS The Government National Mortgage Association Guar: 11/16/2041 05/22/2015 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 36225FLU1 Agency MBS Ginnie Mae II 02/20/2042 08/06/2015 66,141.98 64,483.27 229,806.72 237,634.51 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 38378XP62 Agency MBS The Government National Mortgage Association Guar: 05/16/2055 05/14/2015 457,866.02 463,517.80 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 36225FLA5 Agency MBS Ginnie Mae II 224,116.71 (92.59) 1.825 1.225 AAA 64,344.91 (186.77) 1.400 2.385 AAA 236,870.98 467,929.91 (573.52) 1.750 1.050 AAA 4,582.56 2.500 2.022 AAA O1/20/2042 08/06/2015 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 1.750 1.050 AAA 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 3138EKUP8 Agency MBS Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 03/01/2025 09/21/2015 222,484.78 234,460.72 231,230.66 (2,469.52) 5.000 1.860 AAA 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 3I404WTT3 Agency MBS Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 05/01/2019 12/31/2013 62,807.48 70,014.16 65,162.76 (1,676.10) 4.500 1.228 AAA 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 31417YKF3 Agency MBS Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae O1/O1/2030 07/10/2013 131,783.22 139,031.30 143,297.12 4,253.25 4.500 1.926 AAA 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 3I385XBG1 Agency MBS Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 03/O1/2018 09/13/2013 9,587.59 10,210.79 23 9,775.60 (30.89) 6.000 1.556 AAA Page 2 of 32 Ringside County iron sportnlion Commission STAMP Portfolio by Investment Category for quarter ended March 31, 2016 Source Account Account Security Type Identifier Cateoory Issuer Base Net Total Final Next Call Base Market Unrealized Summarized Maturitv Trade Date Current Face Value Orioinal Cost Date Value Gain/Loss Coupon Yield Credit Ratinc 256350023 256350022 205091001 256350005 256350022 256350023 256350023 256350005 256350023 256350023 205091001 256350023 205091001 205091001 205091001 205091001 205091001 205091001 205091001 205091001 256350023 205091001 205091001 205091001 256350023 256350005 256350005 256350005 256350005 256350005 256350005 256350005 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund -I Interest LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund -I LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund -I LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund -I LC -Project Fund-Toll2 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 31416YXJ2 31402RBG3 31402RBG3 3138LITX7 31385JLF3 38378KSL4 3137B6ZL8 36225EUY6 31418AFW3 3138L33G8 31410GSQ7 38378B6A2 31294LPZ0 36200AFG9 3128MBTH0 36290WH47 3128H4NR6 31402QT68 3128PGLY7 3128GNR59 3128MMAK9 31401MWCI 3128PHVS7 3132FEAK7 3I36AEYG6 47787UAD5 16157IFK5 58768WADI 02582JGG9 58769AAD8 90290KAD7 16157IGJ7 Agency MBS Agency MBS Agency MBS Agency MBS Agency MBS Agency MBS Agency MBS Agency MBS Agency MBS Agency MBS Agency MBS Agency MBS Agency MBS Agency MBS Agency MBS Agency MBS Agency MBS Agency MBS Agency MBS Agency MBS Agency MBS Agency MBS Agency MBS Agency MBS Agency MBS Asset Backed Asset Backed Asset Backed Asset Backed Asset Backed Asset Backed Asset Backed Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae The Government National Mortgage Association Guar Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp Ginnie Mae B Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae Government National Mortgage Association Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp Government National Mortgage Association Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp Government National Mortgage Association Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae John Deere Owner Trust 2015 Chase Issuance Trust Mercedes-Benz Auto Receivables Trust 2013-1 American Express Credit Account Master Trust Mercedes-Benz Auto Lease Trust 2015-B USAA Auto Owner Trust 2014-1 Chase Issuance Trust 08/01 /2026 09/01/2019 09/01/2019 11/01/2017 08/01/2017 12/16/2046 12/25/2019 09/20/2039 06/01/2022 06/01/2020 12/01/2017 11/16/2052 12/01/2016 11/15/2017 03/01/2019 09/15/2018 05/01/2018 10/01/2019 05/01/2017 10/01/2016 09/01/2019 06/01/2018 11/01/2019 12/01/2017 06/25/2018 06/17/2019 08/16/2021 11/15/2019 05/17/2021 07/16/2018 05/15/2019 01/15/2019 07/03/2013 06/18/2015 09/18/2013 01/07/2014 09/17/2015 07/10/2013 11/12/2015 07/05/2013 01/22/2015 07/05/2013 07/09/2013 07/26/2013 07/18/2013 07/16/2013 07/11/2013 07/17/2013 07/05/2013 07/08/2013 07/12/2013 07/16/2013 07/03/2013 11/20/2013 03/23/2016 12/10/2015 06/16/2015 02/26/2016 10/21/2015 06/12/2015 56,999.33 59,680.07 43,303.30 46,449.19 148,091.03 308,173.35 79,153.75 425,000.00 34,206.23 120,848.65 192,057.78 100,000.00 70,288.68 135,221.54 46,086.02 20,068.25 74,316.61 629,668.83 54,873.27 162,836.50 91,846.24 41,850.87 114,971.28 511,385.83 42,360.38 91,579.32 142,510.34 95,000.00 150,000.00 350,000.00 300,000.00 255,000.00 445,000.00 300,000.00 158,834.20 309,569.77 84,496.63 415,829.11 34,889.97 124,285.30 198,359.67 99,875.00 75,472.47 130,958.89 48,721.56 21,385.22 78,775.60 669,023.13 58,131.37 175,914.31 96,782.97 44,335.77 122,228.85 545,265.14 44,637.25 97,045.47 143,634.84 94,951.76 148,359.38 351,066.41 300,468.75 254,990.34 443,991.80 300,414.06 60,401.05 44,648.73 152,692.22 308,167.19 80,687.75 427,953.75 34,665.28 128,435.53 200,836.74 101,838.00 71,777.39 133,202.68 46,427.06 20,417.24 76,737.84 647,035.10 56,661.04 169,695.17 94,838.59 42,168.10 120,732.49 528,967.27 43,740.48 94,562.97 143,772.98 95,077.90 150,694.50 350,367.50 300,480.00 255,119.85 444,795.30 300,513.00 1,324.40 (241.20) (819.63) (844.32) (39592) 11,991.94 79.46 4,227.50 4,236.61 1,963.54 (554.75) 2,322.94 (163.34) (238.00) 73.88 (4,384.91) 245.42 (879.32) 1,440.61 (159.68) 1,349.72 2,928.93 299.63 536.55 760.71 125.86 2,206.99 (281.17) 25.78 128.33 308.86 172.36 3.500 6.000 6.000 1.660 6.000 2.791 2.075 1.875 3.000 2.010 6.000 1.826 6.000 5.500 5.000 4.500 5.000 6.000 5.000 6.000 5.000 4.500 5.000 5.000 1.825 1.320 1.580 1.130 0.856 1.340 0.940 1.150 1.401 1.675 1.675 1.998 1.598 3.046 1.488 1.120 0.828 1.724 2.052 2.686 1.921 2.453 1.305 1.477 0.737 1.559 -1.795 1.847 0.956 0.527 0.158 -0.078 1.225 1.251 1.442 1.176 0.740 1.279 1.216 0.932 AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 58772PAC2 Asset Backed Mercedes-Benz Auto Receivables Trust 2015-1 06/15/2018 08/04/2015 360,851.74 360,894.02 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 16157IGQ1 Asset Backed Chase Issuance Trust 60689LAC9 Asset Backed MMAF EQUIP FIN LLC 2013-A 17305EFN0 Asset Backed Citibank Credit Card Issuance Trust 11/15/2019 10/28/2015 12/11/2017 08/05/2015 02/22/2019 02/26/2016 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 55314MAD8 Asset Backed MMAF Equipment Finance LLC 2011-A 07/15/2017 11/04/2015 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 553I5GAC2 Asset Backed MMAF EQUIP FIN LLC 2015-A 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 161571GM0 Asset Backed Chase Issuance Trust 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 10/16/2019 04/16/2018 11/04/2015 120,000.00 120,510.94 82,137.88 82,176.38 300,000.00 299,976.56 56,888.78 57,022.11 282,000.00 281,080.94 130,000.00 129,903.52 02582JGS3 Asset Backed American Express Credit Account Master Trust 01/15/2020 07/13/2015 500,000.00 500,859.38 55315CAB3 Asset Backed MMAF EQUIP FIN LLC 2014-A 17305EFP5 Asset Backed Citibank Credit Card Issuance Trust 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 62888YAA0 CMO 04/10/2017 01/12/2016 05/09/2018 02/26/2016 NCUA Guaranteed Notes Trust 2011-R1 01/08/2020 07/14/2015 88,053.56 87,933.17 155,000.00 155,000.00 213,200.61 214,233.30 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 74432JD57 CP Prudential Financial, Inc. 04/05/2016 02/22/2016 1,900,000.00 1,898,524.86 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 0255E2DC1 CP American Electric Power Company, Inc. 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 0255E2DC1 CP 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 88513AE57 CP 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 88513AE57 CP 04/12/2016 03/15/2016 2,000,000.00 1,998,864.44 American Electric Power Company, Inc. 04/12/2016 03/15/2016 550,000.00 549,687.72 Thomson Reuters Corporation 05/05/2016 03/07/2016 1,100,000.00 1,098,405.00 Thomson Reuters Corporation 05/05/2016 03/07/2016 1,900,000.00 1,897,245.00 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 78355AD84 CP Ryder System, Inc. 04/08/2016 03/07/2016 2,000,000.00 1,998,702.22 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 65339MD45 CP 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 77434LDB0 CP 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 NextEra Energy Capital Holdings, Inc. 04/04/2016 03/24/2016 250,000.00 249,968.40 Rockwell Collins, Inc. 04/11/2016 03/08/2016 1,100,000.00 1,099,272.78 92780JD73 CP Virginia Electric and Power Company 04/07/2016 03/23/2016 400,000.00 399,897.33 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 57163TDN6 CP Marriott International, Inc. 04/22/2016 03/14/2016 2,000,000.00 1,998,418.34 360,884.21 120,391.20 82,019.60 300,081.00 56,997.43 280,798.68 130,011.70 501,265.00 87,993.68 155,012.40 213,087.61 1,899,886.00 1,999,680.00 549,912.00 1,099,417.00 1,898,993.00 1,999,800.00 249,990.00 1,099,846.00 399,968.00 1,999,400.00 (152.83) 0.706 0.810 AAA (16.55) 1.380 1.178 AAA (189.48) 1.030 1.189 AAA 102.51 1.020 0.986 AAA 30.03 2.100 1.349 AAA (531.36) 1.390 1.660 AAA 20.25 0.752 0.670 AAA 722.04 1.260 1.049 AAA 2.83 0.520 1.078 AAA 12.40 0.641 0.870 AAA (982.00) 0.874 0.930 AAA 23.22 0.000 0.541 AA 126.11 0.000 0.524 AA 34.68 0.000 0.524 AA 352.00 0.000 0.562 AA 608.00 0.000 0.562 AA 83.89 0.000 0.515 AA 3.54 0.000 0.481 AA 59.89 0.000 0.505 AA 12.00 0.000 0.481 AAA 251.66 0.000 0.515 AA 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 07274LDJ3 CP Bayerische Landesbank 04/18/2016 03/21/2016 500,000.00 499,748.75 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 07274LDJ3 CP Bayerische Landesbank 04/18/2016 03/21/2016 1,700,000.00 1,699,145.75 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 20279VD83 CP Commonwealth Edison Company 04/08/2016 03/09/2016 2,000,000.00 1,998,666.66 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 58507ADL4 CP Medtronic Global Holdings S.C.A. 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 42824EDB8 CP 04/20/2016 03/14/2016 2,000,000.00 1,998,499.44 Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company 04/11/2016 03/03/2016 1,200,000.00 1,198,739.00 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 42824EDB8 CP Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company 04/11/2016 03/03/2016 2,000,000.00 1,997,898.34 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 83700ED47 CP 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 07787PD47 CP South Carolina Electric & Gas Company 04/04/2016 03/08/2016 1,500,000.00 1,499,156.25 The Bell Telephone Company of Canada Or Bell Cana, 04/04/2016 03/07/2016 1,200,000.00 1,199,352.00 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 80686DDK7 CP Schlumberger Holdings Corporation 04/19/2016 03/15/2016 2,000,000.00 1,998,488.88 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 25737LDL1 CP Dominion Gas Holdings, LLC 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 60920VDL3 CP Mondelez International, Inc. 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 07787PD54 CP 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund -I Interest 65475LDM1 CP 04/20/2016 03/17/2016 2,000,000.00 1,998,677.78 04/20/2016 03/10/2016 2,000,000.00 1,998,400.00 The Bell Telephone Company of Canada Or Bell Cana, 04/05/2016 03/04/2016 2,000,000.00 1,998,720.00 Nissan Motor Acceptance Corporation 04/21/2016 03/08/2016 600,000.00 599,435.33 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 61979JD61 CP Motiva Enterprises LLC 04/06/2016 03/04/2016 1,900,000.00 1,897,561.67 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 61979JD61 CP Motiva Enterprises LLC 04/06/2016 03/04/2016 1,100,000.00 1,098,588.34 499,880.00 1,699,592.00 1,999,800.00 1,999,460.00 1,199,832.00 1,999,720.00 1,499,940.00 1,199,952.00 1,999,500.00 1,999,460.00 1,999,460.00 1,999,880.00 599,832.00 1,899,867.00 1,099,923.00 38.19 0.000 0.509 AAA 129.86 0.000 0.509 AAA 111.11 0.000 0.515 AA 230.56 0.000 0.512 AA 155.33 0.000 0.505 AA 258.89 0.000 0.505 AA 33.75 0.000 0.481 AA 24.00 0.000 0.481 AA 300.00 0.000 0.501 AAA 198.89 0.000 0.512 AAA 220.00 0.000 0.512 AA 40.00 0.000 0.541 AA 88.67 0.000 0.505 AA 236.44 0.000 0.505 AAA 136.89 0.000 0.505 AAA 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 92780JDJ7 CP Virginia Electric and Power Company 04/18/2016 03/03/2016 1,750,000.00 1,748,390.00 1,749,580.00 175.00 0.000 0.509 AAA 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 92780JDJ7 CP Virginia Electric and Power Company 04/18/2016 03/03/2016 1,200,000.00 1,198,896.00 1,199,712.00 120.00 0.000 0.509 AAA 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 65475LD17 CP Nissan Motor Acceptance Corporation 04/01/2016 02/29/2016 425,000.00 424,724.22 425,000.00 0.00 0.000 0.000 AA 24 Page 3 of 32 Riverside Coany Jronsporrmion Commission STAMP Portfolio by Investment Category for quarter ended March 31, 2016 Source Account Account Identifier Security Type Catelo Issuer Final Next Call Base Market Maturity Trade Date Current Face Value Original Cost Date Value Base Net Total Unrealized Summarized Gain/Loss Coupon Yield Credit Rating 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 44331BDF7 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 05333TDB6 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 04635PD71 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 04635PD71 CP CP CP CP 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 037833AJ9 Corporate 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 00138CAA6 Corporate 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund -I Interest 38144LAB6 Corporate 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Tall 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 553794AA6 Corporate 89153UAE1 Corporate 718172AA7 Corporate 865622CB8 Corporate 084664CG4 Corporate 822582AZ5 Corporate 166754AK7 Corporate 22546QAM9 Corporate 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 05565QCC0 Corporate 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 26442CAD6 Corporate 25I52RVQ3 Corporate 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest I66764AE0 Corporate 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 89352HAP4 Corporate 828807CM7 Corporate 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 89I145TN4 Corporate 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 084664BE0 Corporate 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 0553IFAP8 Corporate 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 48121CYK6 Corporate 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 446438RR6 Corporate 9026IXHJ4 Corporate 74153WCE7 Corporate 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 89236TAY1 Corporate 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 89236TAY1 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 59562VAT4 Corporate Corporate HP Inc. AutoZone, Inc. AstraZeneca PLC AstraZeneca PLC Apple Inc. 04/15/2016 03/24/2016 04/11/2016 03/07/2016 04/07/2016 02/26/2016 04/07/2016 02/26/2016 05/03/2018 06/17/2015 AIG GLOBAL FDG SR SECD MEDRJMTERM NTS 12/15/2017 06/22/2015 The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. MUFG Americas Holdings Corporation Total Capital Canada Ltd. Philip Moms International Inc. Sumitomo Mitsui Trust Bank (U.S.A.) Limited Berkshire Hathaway Finance Corporation Shell International Finance B.V. 09/01/2017 07/03/2013 02/09/2018 01/15/2018 06/10/2015 05/16/2018 06/23/2015 01/18/2019 01/13/2016 03/15/2019 03/08/2016 11/15/2016 06/12/2015 CHEVRON PHILLIPS CHEM CO LLC / CHEVRON 05/01/2018 06/11/2015 Credit Suisse AG BP Capital Markets P.L.C. Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC Deutsche Bank Aktiengesellschaft 05/26/2017 01/08/2016 11/06/2017 07/03/2013 04/15/2018 06/11/2015 02/13/2017 01/25/2016 Chevron Corporation 06/24/2018 06/17/2015 TransCanada PipeLines Limited Simon Property Group, L.P. The Toronto -Dominion Bank Berkshire Hathaway Finance Corporation BB&T Corporation JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association The Huntington National Bank UBS AG Pricoa Global Funding I Toyota Motor Credit Corporation Toyota Motor Credit Corporation Berkshire Hathaway Energy Company 01/12/2018 02/03/2016 02/01/2018 11/03/2015 03/13/2017 05/21/2015 05/15/2018 06/17/2015 06/15/2018 02/12/2016 10/01/2017 07/03/2013 11/06/2018 11/03/2015 03/26/2018 01/12/2016 08/18/2017 06/10/2015 10/24/2018 06/17/2015 10/24/2018 06/17/2015 04/01/2018 10/15/2015 800,000.00 1,200,000.00 1,200,000.00 2,000,000.00 3,000,000.00 300,000.00 300,000.00 350,000.00 300,000.00 250,000.00 250,000.00 120,000.00 300,000.00 300,000.00 255,000.00 300,000.00 116,000.00 15,000.00 300,000.00 150,000.00 140,000.00 1,000,000.00 800,000.00 120,000.00 300,000.00 250,000.00 250,000.00 300,000.00 500,000.00 2,000,000.00 150,000.00 799,656.00 1,199,206.67 1,199,113.33 1,998,522.22 2,960,430.00 300,696.00 322,515.00 799,840.00 1,199,832.00 348,334.50 01/09/2018 300,000.00 277,717.50 250,000.00 119,908.80 300,429.00 299,631.00 254,280.90 292,194.00 127,422.52 14,971.05 301,848.00 05/24/2018 146,716.50 139,552.00 11/01/2017 1,010,240.00 890,632.00 120,003.60 05/15/2018 341,424.00 249,705.00 10/06/2018 249,745.00 299,511.00 505,870.00 2,023,480.00 165,180.00 1,199,904.00 1,999,840.00 3,006,180.00 299,574.00 319,308.00 348,824.00 301,035.00 273,325.00 250,285.00 121,665.60 300,429.00 297,861.00 254,291.10 299,031.00 125,017.84 14,957.70 302,838.00 147,684.00 140,260.40 1,004,190.00 872,184.00 119,953.20 318,498.00 250,410.00 249,605.00 298,788.00 509,020.00 2,036,080.00 161,581.50 107.56 0.000 0.515 58.67 0.000 0.505 44.00 73.33 0.000 0.481 0.000 0.481 35,180.43 1.000 0.900 (909.04) 1.650 1.734 11,168.06 6.250 1.634 103.23 1.625 1.810 1,035.00 1.450 1.254 2,818.26 5.650 1.190 285.00 1.560 1.531 1,755.43 1.700 1.220 239.53 0.900 0.669 (1,870.71) 1.700 2.051 (103.65) 1.125 1.375 1,988.97 1.375 1.580 741.78 5.100 1.227 (18.20) 1.228 1.581 1,472.78 1.718 1.270 724.62 1.411 2.296 628.30 1.500 1.381 (1,244.56) 1.500 1.055 5,481.58 5.400 1.087 (50.21) 1.494 1.512 3,288.49 6.000 1.815 665.43 2.200 2.133 (164.51) 1.330 1.409 (900.69) 1.350 1.647 4,482.93 2.000 1.282 17,931.73 2.000 1.282 (867.54) 5.750 1.802 AA AA AA AA AA A A A AA A A AA AA A A A AA BBB AA A A AAA AA A A A A AA AA AA A 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 928668AF9 Corporate 06050TLY6 Corporate 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 91324PCJ9 Corporate 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 9I324PCJ9 Corporate 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 233851BF0 Corporate 69353RET1 Corporate 02665WBB6 Corporate 863667AK7 Corporate 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 89114QAE8 Corporate 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 037833BR0 Corporate 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 459200GX3 Corporate 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 I740IQAC5 Corporate 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 02580ECC5 Corporate 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 91I59HHD5 Corporate 46623EKD0 Corporate 89837LAA3 Corporate 40428HPQ9 Corporate 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 78008K5V 1 Corporate 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 3814IGRCO Corporate 06050TKX9 Corporate 89I14QBF4 Corporate 002799AX2 Corporate 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 44328MAL8 Corporate 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 3023IGAL6 Corporate 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 30231GAL6 Corporate 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 55279HAH3 Corporate 09062XAB9 Corporate 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 94974BGF1 Corporate 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 94988J5B9 Corporate 49327M2H6 Corporate 94974BFK1 Corporate 037833AM2 Corporate 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 89153VAC3 Corporate 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 532457BK3 Corporate 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 46625HJL5 Corporate 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 90327QCW7 Corporate 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 63307EAB3 Corporate 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 38147MAA3 Corporate 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 53944VAN9 Corporate Volkswagen Group of America Finance, LLC Bank of America, National Association UnitedHealth Group Incorporated UnitedHealth Group Incorporated Daimler Finance North America LLC PNC Realty Investors, Inc. American Honda Finance Corporation Stryker Corporation The Toronto -Dominion Bank Apple Inc. International Business Machines Corporation Citizens Bank, National Association American Express Bank, FSB. U.S. Bancorp JPMorgan Chase & Co. The Trustees of Princeton University HSBC USA Inc. Royal Bank of Canada The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. Bank of America, National Association The Toronto -Dominion Bank Abbey National Treasury Services PLC HSBC Bank PLC Exxon Mobil Corporation Exxon Mobil Corporation Manufacturers and Traders Trust Company Biogen Inc. Wells Fargo & Company Wells Fargo Bank, National Association KeyBank National Association Wells Fargo & Company Apple Inc. Total Capital International Eli Lilly and Company JPMorgan Chase & Co. USAA Capital Corporation National Bank of Canada The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. Lloyds Bank PLC 11/20/2017 06/11/2015 03/26/2018 06/10/2015 01/17/2017 08/03/2015 01/17/2017 08/03/2015 08/01/2017 06/12/2015 11/05/2018 10/29/2015 02/22/2019 02/18/2016 03/08/2019 03/03/2016 10/19/2016 07/08/2013 02/22/2019 02/16/2016 07/22/2016 07/10/2013 12/03/2018 11/30/2015 09/13/2017 07/08/2013 05/15/2017 06/11/2015 03/01/2018 03/01/2019 03/05/2018 08/17/2015 04/19/2016 07/08/2013 01/22/2018 06/10/2015 06/15/2017 01/20/2016 01/22/2019 01/14/2016 03/14/2019 03/07/2016 05/24/2016 03/06/2018 06/10/2015 03/06/2018 06/10/2015 07/25/2017 01/19/2016 03/01/2018 03/03/2016 01/30/2020 06/03/2015 01/22/2018 01/22/2016 06/01/2018 11/06/2015 04/23/2018 05/05/2017 06/10/2015 06/28/2017 07/08/2013 03/01/2018 06/10/2015 05/15/2018 06/03/2015 12/13/2016 07/11/2013 10/19/2016 05/21/2015 07/19/2018 12/02/2015 300,000.00 300,000.00 395,000.00 290,000.00 300,000.00 250,000.00 120,000.00 140,000.00 750,000.00 150,000.00 465,000.00 250,000.00 250,000.00 300,000.00 480,000.00 620,000.00 145,000.00 2,000,000.00 80,000.00 255,000.00 125,000.00 120,000.00 3,625,000.00 580,000.00 420,000.00 250,000.00 55,000.00 1,000,000.00 250,000.00 250,000.00 440,000.00 300,000.00 160,000.00 300,000.00 500,000.00 4,000,000.00 900,000.00 100,000.00 01/22/2019 01/19/2016 200,000.00 300,525.00 298,968.00 395,302.97 290,222.43 299,250.00 249,962.50 10/05/2018 120,000.00 139,837.60 776,452.50 150,000.00 477,936.30 249,675.00 11/03/2018 287,890.00 303,276.00 04/15/2017 479,194.80 02/01/2018 690,247.32 144,315.60 2,099,900.00 81,027.20 252,707.55 125,000.00 119,790.00 3,799,301.25 579,344.60 419,525.40 248,862.50 60,217.85 991,540.00 250,000.00 248,740.00 440,084.80 300,957.00 157,765.60 298,908.00 497,550.00 4,145,440.00 918,414.00 102,578.00 200,000.00 296,850.00 299,640.00 395,335.75 290,246.50 300,822.00 251,282.50 120,340.80 141,495.20 756,375.00 151,330.50 467,013.45 251,412.50 265,457.50 301,575.00 481,915.20 685,961.80 144,659.25 2,001,820.00 81,028.80 253,339.95 125,048.75 121,143.60 3,636,745.00 582,604.20 421,885.80 249,280.00 60,232.15 1,011,680.00 250,740.00 249,957.50 439,934.00 301,137.00 160,630.40 302,316.00 501,025.00 4,042,720.00 906,345.00 102,335.00 199,830.00 AA AA AA AAA AA AA AA AAA AAA AA AA AA AA AA AAA 256350005 LC -Project Fund-To112 46849LSL6 Corporate Jackson National Life Global Funding 25 149,922.00 150,384.00 Page 4 of 32 Riverside Couny Jronsporrniion Commission STAMP Portfolio by Investment Category for quarter ended March 31, 2016 Source Security Type Final r, ■ Base Net Total Next Call Base Market Unrealized Summarized 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 209111ET6 Corporate 30231GAL6 Corporate 063679ZT4 Corporate 0258MODZ9 Corporate Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. Exxon Mobil Corporation Bank of Montreal American Express Credit Corporation 59217GAY5 Corporate Metropolitan Life Global Funding I 80851 QDA9 Corporate The Charles Schwab Corporation 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 78011DAC8 Corporate Royal Bank of Canada 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 822582AC6 Corporate Shell International Finance B.V. 04/01/2018 06/22/2015 03/06/2018 06/11/2015 O1/30/2017 06/12/2015 11/05/2018 10/29/2015 O1/10/2018 06/12/2015 09/01/2017 10/27/2015 09/19/2017 05/21/2015 03/22/2017 07/08/2013 220,000.00 300,000.00 300,000.00 150,000.00 245,828.00 --- 237,859.60 299,583.00 --- 301,347.00 304,620.00 --- 302,331.00 149,986.50 10/05/2018 150,924.00 300,000.00 299,646.00 65,000.00 71,075.55 1,000,000.00 1,001,090.00 400,000.00 449,936.00 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 842434CN0 Corporate Southem California Gas Company 06/15/2018 06/15/2015 250,000.00 249,992.50 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 48121 CYK6 Corporate JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association 10/O1/2017 03/09/2016 250,000.00 265,022.50 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 59217GAZ2 Corporate Metropolitan Life Global Funding I 06/22/2018 11/10/2015 150,000.00 150,199.50 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 6174467V5 Corporate Morgan Stanley 62944BBC7 Non -US Gov N.V. Bank Nederlandse Gemeenten 04/25/2018 02/18/2016 07/14/2017 01/19/2016 70,000.00 70,403.69 275,000.00 274,395.00 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 748148RV7 Non -US Gov Gouvernement de la Province de Quebec 09/04/2018 01/28/2016 125,000.00 124,532.50 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 302154BL2 Non -US Gov The Export -Import Bank of Korea 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 9AMMF05B2 MM Fund 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 9AMMF05B2 MM Fund 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 9AMMF05B2 MM Fund 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 9AMMF05B2 MM Fund 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 9AMMF05B2 MM Fund 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 01/14/2017 02/04/2016 U.S. Bank Money Market Account Fund 03/31/2016 U.S. Bank Money Market Account Fund 03/31/2016 U.S. Bank Money Market Account Fund 03/31/2016 U.S. Bank Money Market Account Fund 03/31/2016 U.S. Bank Money Market Account Fund 03/31/2016 9AMMF05B2 MM Fund U.S. Bank Money Market Account Fund 200,000.00 200,380.00 0.00 39,948.71 0.00 116,204.58 0.00 378,946.68 0.00 2,164,309.60 0.00 5,908,320.88 300,417.00 69,478.50 (922.29) 5.850 1.704 1,642.93 1.305 1.069 (45.01) 1950 1.011 935.71 1.875 1.624 662.79 1.500 1.420 A AAA_ AAA A AA (218.38) 6.375 1.443 A 999,010.00 (1,686.68) 1.200 1.268 AAA 416,332.00 250,150.00 265,415.00 150,996.00 70,425.60 274,485.75 124,672.50 200,324.00 39,948.71 116,204.58 378,946.68 2,164,309.60 5,908,320.88 2,886.67 5.200 0.982 AA 155.65 1.550 1.522 AA 840.92 6.000 1.815 A 823.93 1.875 1.570 AA 41.28 1.899 1.620 A 11.72 0.694 0.849 AAA I10.81 0.865 0.973 AA 2.12 1.374 1.185 AA 0.00 0.000 0.000 NA 0.00 0.000 0.000 NA 0.00 0.000 0.000 NA 0.00 0.000 0.000 NA 0.00 0.000 0.000 NA 03/31/2016 03/29/2016 0.00 501.96 501.96 0.00 0.000 0.000 NA 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 184I26YS3 Muni Clayton County Water Authority 05/01/2017 07/11/2013 770,000.00 755,939.80 777,014.70 11,126.05 1.300 0.456 AA 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 64966H4E7 Muni New York, City of 10/01/2017 07/12/2013 1,170,000.00 1,23 8,222.70 256350005 LC -Project Fund-To112 658I9WAC7 Muni North Carolina Eastern Municipal Power Agency 07/01/2018 160,000.00 160,404.60 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 544587B98 Muni Municipal Improvement Corporation of Los Angeles 11/01/2018 11/04/2015 160,000.00 160,000.00 180848HP1 Muni Clark, County of 20772JL59 Muni Connecticut, State of 07/01/2017 07/06/2015 08/01/2020 03/03/2016 120,000.00 126,764.40 130,000.00 132,577.90 1,213,231.50 18,333.44 3.140 0.660 AA 162,057.60 164,364.80 125,028.00 134,734.60 1,732.05 2.003 1.420 A 4,364.80 2.344 1.267 A 732.31 4.300 0.920 AA 2,193.26 2.500 1.626 AA 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 13063BFU1 Muni 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 Califomia, State of 937308AZ7 Muni WBRP 3.2 WASHINGTON BIOMED RES 03/01/2019 03/01/2016 03/01/2018 09/25/2015 105,000.00 119,037.45 95,000.00 95,000.00 119,183.40 95,783.75 495.71 6.200 1.453 783.75 1 A85 1.049 AA AA 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 235219JS2 Muni 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 235219JS2 Muni 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 49130TRY4 Muni Dallas, City of Dallas, City of Kentucky Housing Corporation 02/15/2017 07/10/2013 02/15/2017 07/10/2013 O1/01/2017 06/17/2015 650,000.00 650,000.00 2,135,000.00 2,135,000.00 275,000.00 274,634.25 656,350.50 2,155,858.95 275,569.25 6,350.50 1.589 0.465 20,858.95 1.589 0.465 749.69 0.937 0.660 AA AA AAA 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 13063A5D2 Muni 91476PPG7 Muni 912828WU0 TIPS 9I2828K33 TIPS Califomia, State of University of Oklahoma Treasury, United States Department of Treasury, United States Department of 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 912828B58 US Gov Treasury, United States Department of 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 912828TG5 US Gov 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 912828M23 US Gov 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 912828SY7 US Gov 04/01/2016 06/29/2015 07/01/2020 11/17/2015 07/15/2024 02/05/2016 04/15/2020 02/08/2016 O1/31/2021 Treasury, United States Department of 07/31/2017 315,000.00 80,000.00 598,632.00 327,521.25 79,544.00 582,391.10 1,011,630.00 1,013,943.22 1,540,000.00 1,573,283.21 725,000.00 720,030.27 Treasury, United States Department of 10/31/2017 12/28/2015 800,000.00 798,262.41 Treasury, United States Department of 05/31/2017 07/05/2013 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 912828UB4 US Gov Treasury, United States Department of 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 912828KQ2 US Gov 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 912828UF5 US Gov 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 9128281CD1 US Gov 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 912828VV9 US Gov 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 912828RX0 US Gov 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 912828UA6 US Gov 256350005 LC -Project Fund-To112 3,900,000.00 3,828,550.78 315,000.00 82,268.80 600,691.29 1,032,833.76 0.00 5.950 0.000 2,691.18 2.349 1.655 18,035.06 0.125 0.083 AA A AAA 18,966.11 0.125 -0.389 AAA 1,605,804.20 35,790.99 2.125 1.212 AAA 723,216.50 799,944.00 2,292.53 0.500 0.685 AAA 1,431.61 0.468 0.480 AAA 3,897,699.00 19,359.01 0.625 0.676 AAA 11/30/2019 06/17/2015 2,500,000.00 2,433,398.44 2,498,925.00 54,087.41 1.000 1.012 AAA Treasury, United States Department of 05/15/2019 1,550,000.00 1,644,994.92 1,507,106.70 23,032.21 3.125 0.885 AAA Treasury, United States Department of 12/31/2019 1,250,000.00 1,231,787.31 1,253,712.50 19,593.69 1.125 1.044 AAA Treasury, United States Department of 02/15/2019 1,935,000.00 2,027,131.64 2,039,083.65 19,202.45 2.750 0.853 AAA Treasury, United States Department of 08/31/2020 235,000.00 241,525.78 Treasury, United States Department of 12/31/2016 09/13/2013 950,000.00 945,212.89 Treasury, United States Department of 11/30/2017 1,465,000.00 1,461,189.26 912828B58 US Gov Treasury, United States Department of O1/31/2021 03/16/2016 425,000.00 436,670.90 244,639.70 952,042.50 1,462,656.00 443,160.25 3,385.80 2.125 1.169 AAA 3,143.62 0.875 0.587 AAA 386.11 0.625 0.722 AAA 6,559.14 2.125 1.212 AAA 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 912828J84 US Gov Treasury, United States Department of 03/31/2020 06/03/2015 3,700,000.00 3,650,945.31 3,740,182.00 81,129.65 1.375 1.097 AAA 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund -I Interest 912828784 US Gov Treasury, United States Department of 03/31/2020 600,000.00 591,146.48 606,516.00 13,955.39 1.375 1.097 AAA 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund -I 9I2828VB3 US Gov 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund -I 912828KQ2 US Gov 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 9I2828UR9 US Gov 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund -I Interest 912828UA6 US Gov 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 912828UA6 US Gov Treasury, United States Department of 05/15/2023 07/05/2013 1,600,000.00 1,487, I25.00 1,622,000.00 106,338.03 1.750 1.545 AAA Treasury, United States Department of 05/15/2019 07/05/2013 500,000.00 539,902.34 534,435.00 12,670.81 3.125 0.885 AAA Treasury, United States Department of 02/28/2018 10/02/2015 Treasury, United States Department of 11/30/2017 07/05/2013 Treasury, United States Department of 11/30/2017 07/05/2013 1,045,000.00 I,046, I58.40 1,250,000.00 1,214,648.44 1,750,000.00 1,700,507.81 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund -I Interest 9I2828K41 US Gov Treasury, United States Department of 04/30/2017 07/30/2015 200,000.00 200,001.77 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 912828RU6 US Gov Treasury, United States Department of 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund -I 9I2828RC6 US Gov 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 912828VK3 US Gov 11/30/2016 07/05/2013 3,500,000.00 3,496,855.47 Treasury, United States Department of 08/15/2021 1I/IO/2015 1,300,000.00 1,313,507.81 Treasury, United States Department of 06/30/2018 1,525,000.00 1,543,510.95 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 9I2828UZ1 US Gov Treasury, United States Department of 1,045,240.35 (683.91) 0.750 0.738 AAA 1,248,000.00 11,612.11 0.625 0.722 AAA 1,747,200.00 16,256.95 0.625 0.722 AAA 199,974.00 3,508,330.00 (27.09) 0.374 0.391 AAA 8,950.97 0.875 0.517 AAA 1,353,976.00 41,309.83 2.125 1.322 AAA 1,545,252.00 5,665.41 1.375 0.778 AAA 04/30/2018 06/03/2015 3,400,000.00 3,360,421.88 3,389,902.00 18,351.58 0.625 0.769 AAA 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 912828UZ1 US Gov Treasury, United States Department of 04/30/2018 07/14/2015 700,000.00 693,656.25 697,921.00 2,658.47 0.625 0.769 AAA 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund -I 9I2828TJ9 US Gov Treasury, United States Department of 08/15/2022 -- 1,120,000.00 1,086,086.92 1,128,624.00 33,211.26 1.625 1.498 AAA 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 64468EAY6 VRDN Labor, New Hampshire Department of 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 64468EAZ3 VRDN Labor, New Hampshire Department of 11/01/2020 11/04/2013 4,190,000.00 4,190,000.00 04/30/2016 4,190,000.00 0.00 0.600 0.600 AA 11/01/2020 07/03/2013 3,200,000.00 3,200,000.00 04/30/2016 3,200,000.00 0.00 0.600 0.600 AA 164,717,306.86 174,359,415.93 174,653,971.52 1,073,570.33 26 Page 5 of 32 ATTACHMENT 3 Riverside Cooly Trompo roriod Commission STAMP Portfolio by Account for quarter ended March 31, 2016 Source Account Account 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest Identifier 3137EADQ9 31392HWL3 31392F6C6 Security Type Category Agency Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp Agency CMO Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae Agency CMO Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae Final Current Face Maturity Trade Date Value 05/13/2016 02/25/2018 12/25/2017 Next Call Base Net Total Summarized Original Cost Date Base Market Value Unrealized Gain/Loss Coupon Yield Credit Rating 02/29/2016 1,400,000.00 1,400,347.20 07/12/2013 24,074.11 25,413.23 07/09/2013 149,683.04 158,780.96 1,400,238.00 24,663.93 152,874.28 38.24 0.500 80.41 5.000 1.272 (37.81) 5.000 1 067 AAA AAA 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 31393EXC8 Agency CMO 31392BVM5 Agency CMO 31392FPP6 Agency CMO 3136A8G38 Agency CMO 31393V2T7 Agency CMO 31402RBG3 Agency MBS 31410GSQ7 Agency MBS 31294LPZA Agency MBS 36200AFG9 Agency MBS 3128MBTH0 Agency MBS 36290WH47 Agency MBS 3128H4NR6 Agency MBS 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 31402QT68 Agency MBS 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 3128PGLY7 Agency MBS 3128GNR59 Agency MBS 31401MWCI Agency MBS Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp Government National Mortgage Association Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp Government National Mortgage Association Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 09/25/2018 07/24/2013 217,425.95 02/25/2017 07/11/2013 11/25/2017 07/15/2013 16,556.74 92,555.12 229,860.00 17,477.71 98,021.66 08/25/2017 07/08/2013 1,934,520.25 1,905,955.85 06/15/2018 07/08/2013 408,232.96 09/01/2019 148,091.03 12/01/2017 07/05/2013 70,288.68 12/01/2016 07/05/2013 46,086.02 11/15/2017 07/09/2013 20,068.25 03/01/2019 07/26/2013 74,316.61 09/15/2018 07/18/2013 629,668.83 05/01/2018 07/16/2013 54,873.27 10/01/2019 07/11/2013 162,836.50 05/01/2017 07/17/2013 10/01/2016 07/05/2013 06/01/2018 07/12/2013 91,846.24 41,850.87 511,385.83 Al 1,110 431,770.14 158,834.20 75,472.47 48,721.56 21,385.22 78,775.60 669,023.13 58,131.37 175,914.31 96,782.97 44,335.77 545,265.14 224,820.61 16,696.81 94,408.07 1,933,069.36 420,888.17 152,692.22 71,777.39 - 46,427.06 20,417.24 76,737.84 647,035.10 56,661.04 169,695.17 94,838.59 42,168.10 528,967.27 511 "All AR 2,062.23 4.500 1.099 (29.97) 5.500 0.810 (117.29) 5.000 1.037 10,093.71 1.246 1.380 2,932.41 4.500 1.021 (819.63) 6.000 1.675 (554.75) 6.000 2.052 (163.34) 6.000 1.921 (238.00) 5.500 2.453 73.88 5.000 1.305 (4,384.91) 4.500 1.477 245.42 5.000 0.737 (879.32) 6.000 1.559 1,440.61 5.000 -1.795 (159.68) 6.000 1.847 2,928.93 4.500 0.527 900 Al 5 non n 150 AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA nnn 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 3132FEAK7 Agency MBS 037833AJ9 Corporate 084664BE0 Corporate 89236TAY1 Corporate 89114QAE8 Corporate 4592000X3 Corporate 78008K5V1 Corporate Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp Apple Inc. Berkshire Hathaway Finance Corporation Toyota Motor Credit Corporation The Toronto -Dominion Bank International Business Machines Corporation Royal Bank of Canada 12/01/2017 07/03/2013 91,579.32 97,045.47 05/03/2018 06/17/2015 3,000,000.00 2,960,430.00 05/15/2018 06/17/2015 800,000.00 890,632.00 10/24/2018 06/17/2015 2,000,000.00 2,023,480.00 10/19/2016 07/08/2013 750,000.00 07/22/2016 07/10/2013 465,000.00 776,452.50 477,936.30 04/19/2016 07/08/2013 2,000,000.00 2,099,900.00 94,562.97 3,006,180.00 - 872,184.00 2,036,080.00 - 756,375.00 467,013.45 - 2,001,820.00 536.55 5.000 -0.078 35,180.43 1.000 0.900 5,481.58 5.400 1.087 17,931.73 2.000 1.282 1,858.48 2.375 0.822 678.33 1.950 0.541 26.41 2.875 1.041 AAA AA AA AA AA AA AA 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 44328MAL8 Corporate HSBC Bank PLC 05/24/2016 3,625,000.00 3,799,301.25 3,636,745.00 2,741.23 3.100 0.887 AA 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 30231GAL6 Corporate 89153VAC3 Corporate Exxon Mobil Corporation Total Capital International 03/06/2018 06/10/2015 580,000.00 06/28/2017 07/08/2013 160,000.00 579,344.60 157,765.60 - - 582,604.20 160,630.40 3,068.42 1.305 1.069 1,347.41 1.550 1.229 AAA AA 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 90327QCW7 Corporate 822582AC6 Corporate 9AMMF05B2 Mel Fund USAA Capital Corporation Shell International Finance B.V. U.S. Bank Money Market Account Fund 184126YS3 Muni Clayton County Water Authority 64966H4E7 Muni 2352191E2 Muni 912828M23 US Gov 912828SY7 US Gov 912828UB4 US Gov 912828J84 US Gov 912828UA6 US Gov 912828RU6 US Gov 912828UZ1 US Gov New York, City of Dallas, City of Treasury, United States Department of Treasury, United States Department of Treasury, United States Department of Treasury, United States Department of Treasury, United States Department of Treasury, United States Department of Treasury, United States Department of 12/13/2016 07/11/2013 4,000,000.00 4,145,444).00 03/22/2017 07/08/2013 400,000.00 03/31/2016 05/01/2017 07/11/2013 0.00 770,000.00 449,936.00 378,946.68 755,939.80 10/01/2017 07/12/2013 1,170,000.00 1,238,222.70 02/15/2017 07/10/2013 2,135,000.00 2,135,000.00 10/31/2017 12/28/2015 800,000.00 798,262.41 05/31/2017 07/05/2013 3,900,000.00 3,828,550.78 11/30/2019 06/17/2015 2,500,000.00 2,433,398.44 03/31/2020 06/03/2015 3,700,000.00 3,650,945.31 11/30/2017 07/05/2013 1,750,000.00 1,700,507.81 11/30/2016 07/05/2013 3,500,000.00 3,496,855.47 04/30/2018 06/03/2015 3,400,000.00 3,360,421.88 - 4,042,720.00 416,332.00 - - 378,946.68 777,014.70 - 1,213,231.50 2,155,858.95 - 799,944.00 3,897,699.00 2,498,925.00 3,740,182.00 1,747,200.00 3,508,330.00 - 3,389,902.00 48399.297.58 12,347.57 2.250 0.724 2,886.67 5.200 0.982 0.00 0.000 0.000 11,126.05 1.300 0.456 18,333.44 3.140 0.660 20,858.95 1,431.61 19,359.01 54,087.41 81,129.65 1.589 0.465 0.468 0.480 0.625 0.676 1.000 1.012 1.375 1.097 16,256.95 0.625 0.722 8,950.97 0.875 0.517 18,351.58 0.625 0.769 AA AA NA AA AA AA AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA AAA 256350001 256350001 256350001 256350001 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 55314MAD8 161571GM0 91324PCJ9 74432JD57 0255E2DC1 Asset Backed Asset Backed Corporate CP CP MMAF Equipment Finance LLC 2011-A Chase Issuance Trust UnitedHealth Group Incorporated Prudential Financial, Inc. American Electric Power Company, Inc. 07/15/2017 04/16/2018 01/17/2017 04/05/2016 04/12/2016 11/04/2015 11/04/2015 08/03/2015 02/22/2016 03/15/2016 56,888.78 130,000.00 290,000.00 1,900,000.00 2,000,000.00 57,022.11 129,903.52 290,222.43 1,898,524.86 1,998,864.44 56,997.43 130,011.70 290,246.50 1,899,886.00 1,999,680.00 30.03 20.25 124.37 23.22 126.11 2.100 0.752 1.070 0.000 0.000 1.349 0.670 0.986 0.541 0.524 AAA AAA A AA AA 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 88513AE57 CP Thomson Reuters Corporation 05/05/2016 03/07/2016 1,900,000.00 1,897,245.00 1,898,993.00 608.00 0.000 0.562 AA 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 78355AD84 CP 77434LDB0 CP 57163TDN6 CP 07274LDJ3 CP Ryder System, Inc. Rockwell Collins, Inc. Marriott International, Inc. Bayerische Landesbank 20279VD83 CP Commonwealth Edison Company 58507ADL4 CP 42824EDB8 CP 83700ED47 CP 80686DDK7 CP 25737LDL1 CP 60920VDL3 CP 07787PD54 CP 61979JD61 CP 9278011/J7 CP 65475LD17 CP 04635PD71 CP 9AMMF05B2 Mel Fund Medtronic Global Holdings S.C.A. Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company South Carolina Electric & Gas Company Schlumberger Holdings Corporation Dominion Gas Holdings, LLC Mendel. International, Inc. The Bell Telephone Company of Canada Or Bell Canada Motive Enterprises LLC Virginia Electric and Power Company Nissan Motor Acceptance Corporation AstraZeneca PLC U.S. Bank Money Market Account Fund 04/08/2016 03/07/2016 2,000,000.00 1,998,702.22 04/11/2016 03/08/2016 1,100,000.00 1,099,272.78 04/22/2016 03/14/2016 2,000,000.00 1,998,418.34 04/18/2016 03/21/2016 1,700,000.00 1,699,145.75 04/08/2016 03/09/2016 2,000,000.00 1,998,666.66 04/20/2016 03/14/2016 2,000,000.00 1,998,499.44 04/11/2016 03/03/2016 2,000,000.00 1,997,898.34 04/04/2016 03/08/2016 1,500,000.00 1,499,156.25 04/19/2016 03/15/2016 2,000,000.00 1,998,488.88 04/20/2016 03/17/2016 2,000,000.00 1,998,677.78 04/20/2016 03/10/2016 2,000,000.00 1,998,400.00 04/05/2016 03/04/2016 2,000,000.00 1,998,720.00 04/06/2016 03/04/2016 1,900,000.00 1,897,561.67 04/18/2016 03/03/2016 1,750,000.00 1,748,390.00 04/01/2016 02/29/2016 425,000.00 424,724.22 04/07/2016 02/26/2016 2,000,000.00 1,998,522.22 03/31/2016 0.00 2,164,309.60 1,999,800.00 1,099,846.00 - 1,999,400.00 1,699,592.00 - 1,999,800.00 1,999,460.00 - 1,999,720.00 1,499,940.00 - 1,999,500.00 1,999,460.00 - 1,999,460.00 1,999,880.00 1,899,867.00 1,749,580.00 425,000.00 - - 1,999,840.00 - 2,164,309.60 36,810,269.23 83.89 0.000 0.515 59.89 0.000 0.505 251.66 0.000 0.515 129.86 0.000 0.509 111.11 0.000 0.515 230.56 0.000 0.512 258.89 0.000 0.505 33.75 0.000 0.481 300.00 0.000 0.501 198.89 0.000 0.512 220.00 0.000 0.512 40.00 0.000 0.541 236.44 0.000 0.505 175.00 0.000 0.509 0.00 0.000 0.000 73.33 0.000 0.481 0.00 0.000 0.000 AA AA AA AAA AA AA AA AA AAA AAA AA AA AAA AAA AA AA NA 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 91324PC19 Corporate 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales T. Revenue Bond 88513AE57 CP 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 42824EDB8 CP 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 07787PD47 CP 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 61979JD61 CP 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 92780JDJ7 CP UnitedHealth Group Incorporated Thomson Reuters Corporation Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company The Bell Telephone Company of Canada Or Bell Canada Motive Enterprises LLC Virginia Electric and Power Compmy 395,302.97 04/11/2016 03/03/2016 1,200,000.00 1,198,739.00 04/18/2016 03/03/2016 1,200,000.00 1,198,896.00 - 395,335.75 1,099,417.00 - 1,199,832.00 1,199,952.00 - 1,099,923.00 1,199,712.00 155.33 0.000 0.505 24.00 0.000 0.481 136.89 0.000 0.505 120.00 0.000 0.509 AA AA AA AAA AAA 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 05333TDB6 CP AutoZone, Inc. 04/11/2016 03/07/2016 1,200,000.00 1,199,206.67 - 1,199,832.00 58.67 0.000 0.505 AA 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales T. Revenue Bond 04635PD7I CP AstraZeneca PLC 1,199,904.00 44.00 0.000 0.481 AA 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales T. Revenue Bond 9AMMFO5B2 MM Fund U.S. Bank Money Market Accomt Fund Labor, New Hampshire Department of 03/31/2016 27 0.00 5,908,320.88 - 5,908,320.88 4,190,000.00 0.00 0.000 0.000 NA 0.00 0.600 0.600 AA Page 6 of 32 Gireiside County Trompo rwion ammisthm STAMP Portfolio by Account for quarter ended March 31, 2016 Source Security Type Final Current Face Next Call Base Net Total Summarized 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 64468EAZ3 VRDN 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fand-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fand-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fand-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fand-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fand-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fand-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fand-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fand-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fand-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fand-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fand-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fand-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fand-Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fand-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 3130A6U88 Agency 3133EECD0 Agency Labor, N Hampshire Department o 11/01/2020 07/03/2013 3,200,000.00 3,200,000.00 04/30/2016 3,200,000.00 0.00 0.600 0.600 21,892,228.63 Federal Home Loan Banks Office of Finance Federal Farm Credit Banks Consolidated Systemwide Bonds 3137A2AZ4 Agency CMG Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp 38378BR35 Agency CMG Govemment National Mortgage Association 3136A8G38 Agency CMG Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 3137A85H7 Agency CMG Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp 3137AILC5 Agency CMG Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp 12/22/2017 01/28/2016 150,000.00 150,487.50 06/22/2016 O6/20/2017 06/15/2015 500,000.00 500,308.15 AA 150,304.50 20.99 1.450 0.545 499,500.00 (686.57) 0.462 0.546 AAA AAA 05/25/2020 07/O1/2015 369,519.74 380,663.07 -- 377,375.73 (220.94) 2.757 1.265 AAA 11/16/2042 07/10/2015 340,506.32 332,844.93 333,737.06 919.27 1.333 2.173 AAA 08/25/2017 07/02/2015 132,328.75 132,923.20 -- 132,229.50 (430.31) 1.246 1.380 AAA 12/15/2039 07/13/2015 147,929.61 154,216.62 -- 154,919.29 525.81 3.500 1.653 AAA 08/15/2020 08/31/2015 90,931.43 92,380.65 -- 91,949.86 (211.95) 2.000 1.060 AAA 3133XY2H7 Agency CMG Federal Home Loan Banks Office of Finance 04/20/2017 07/13/2015 267,477.02 274,749.05 -- 272,056.22 (263.84) 2.900 1.299 AA 31394GH22 Agency CMG Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp 3137ANLP8 Agency CMG Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp 3137AH6B9 Agency CMG Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp 36225FGM5 Agency MBS Ginnie Mae II 07/15/2018 07/20/2015 103,699.93 107,491.47 -- 106,467.68 302.68 4.500 1.206 AAA 11/25/2016 --- 157,270.11 158,556.71 -- 157,392.79 (275.25) 1.655 1.117 AAA 10/25/2020 08/28/2015 155,602.66 159,006.46 -- 158,174.77 (266.76) 2.257 1.083 AAA 08/20/2041 08/06/2015 108,989.66 112,804.30 113,009.20 294.17 1.875 1.060 AAA 38378NNA7 Agency MBS The Government National Mortgage Association Guaranteed REMIC Pass-T 05/16/2038 06/26/2015 580,625.68 584,594.80 -- 585,607.44 1,167.83 2.250 2.018 AAA 3136AEYG6 Agency MBS Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 06/25/2018 07/02/2015 222,148.47 224,925.33 36225FLU1 Agency MBS Ginnie Mae lI 36225FLA5 Agency MBS Ginnie Mae lI 02/20/2042 08/06/2015 229,806.72 237,634.51 224,116.71 236,870.98 (92.59) 1.825 1.225 AAA (573.521_1.750 1.050 AAA O1/20/2042 08/06/2015 0.01 0.01 --- 0.01 0.00 1.750 1.050 AAA 3138EKUP8 Agency MBS Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 03/O1/2025 09/21/2015 222,484.78 234,460.72 -- 231,230.66 (2,469.52) 5.000 1.860 AAA 3138L1TX7 Agency MBS Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 11/01/2017 06/18/2015 308,173.35 309,569.77 36225EUY6 Agency MBS Ginnie Mae II 47787UAD5 Asset Backed John Deere Owner Trust 2015 161571FK5 Asset Backed Chase Issuance Trust 58768 WADI Asset Backed Mercedes-Benz Auto Receivables Trust 2013-1 09/20/2039 09/17/2015 120,848.65 124,285.30 308,167.19 (844.32) 1.660 1.998 AAA 128,435.53 4,227.50 1.875 1.120 AAA O6/17/2019 03/23/2016 95,000.00 94,951.76 -- 95,077.90 125.86 1.320 1.251 AAA 08/16/2021 12/10/2015 150,000.00 148,359.38 -- 150,694.50 2,206.99 1.580 1.442 AAA 11/15/2019 06/16/2015 350,000.00 351,066.41 350,367.50 (281.17) 1.130 1.176 AAA 025821669 Asset Backed American Express Credit Account Master Trust 05/17/2021 02/26/2016 300,000.00 300,468.75 -- 300,480.00 25.78 0.856 0.740 AAA 58769AAD8 Asset Backed Mercedes-Benz Auto Lease Trust 2015-B 90290KAD7 Asset Backed USAA Auto Owner Trust 2014-1 161571677 Asset Backed Chase Issuance Trust 58772PAC2 Asset Backed Mercedes-Benz Auto Receivables Trust 2015-1 1615716Q1 Asset Backed Chase Issuance Trust 60689LAC9 Asset Backed MMAF EQUIP FIN LLC 2013-A 17305EFN0 Asset Backed Citibank Credit Card Issuance Trust 55315GAC2 Asset Backed MMAF EQUIP FIN LLC 2015-A 07/16/2018 10/21/2015 255,000.00 254,990.34 -- 255,119.85 128.33 1.340 1.279 AAA 05/15/2019 06/12/2015 445,000.00 443,991.80 -- 444,795.30 308.86 0.940 1.216 AAA 01/15/2019 --- 300,000.00 300,414.06 -- 300,513.00 172.36 1.150 0.932 AAA 06/15/2018 08/04/2015 360,851.74 360,894.02 11/15/2019 10/28/2015 120,000.00 120,510.94 360,884.21 (152.83) 0.706 0.810 AAA 120,391.20 (16.55) 1.380 1.178 AAA 12/11/2017 08/05/2015 82,137.88 82,176.38 -- 82,019.60 (189.48) 1.030 1.189 AAA 02/22/2019 02/26/2016 300,000.00 299,976.56 - 300,081.00 102.51 1.020 0.986 AAA 10/16/2019 282,000.00 281,080.94 -- 280,798.68 (531.36) 1.390 1.660 AAA 02582/653 Asset Backed American Express Credit Account Master Trust 01/15/2020 07/13/2015 500,000.00 500,859.38 -- 501,265.00 722.04 1.260 1.049 AAA 55315CAB3 Asset Backed MMAF EQUIP FIN LLC 2014-A 17305EFP5 Asset Backed Citibank Credit Card Issuance Trust 62888YAA0 CMG NCUA Guaranteed Notes Trust 2011-RI 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 00138CAA6 Corporate 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fand-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 04/10/2017 01/12/2016 88,053.56 87,933.17 05/09/2018 02/26/2016 155,000.00 155,000.00 87,993.68 155,012.40 2.83 0.520 1.078 AAA 12.40 0.641 0.870 AAA 01/08/2020 07/14/2015 213,200.61 214,233.30 -- 213,087.61 (982.00) 0.874 0.930 AAA AIG GLOBAL FDG SR SECD MEDIUMTERM NTS BOOK ENTRY 1441 12/15/2017 06/22/2015 300,000.00 300,696.00 553794AA6 Corporate MUFG Americas Holdings Corporation 89153UAE1 Corporate Total Capital Canada Ltd. 718172AA7 Corporate Philip Morris International Inc. 299,574.00 (909.04) 1.650 1.734 A 02/09/2018 350,000.00 348,334.50 01/09/2018 348,824.00 103.23 1.625 1.810 A O1/15/2018 06/10/2015 300,000.00 300,000.00 301,035.00 1,035.00 1.450 1.254 AA 05/16/2018 06/23/2015 250,000.00 277,717.50 -- 273,325.00 2,818.26 5.650 1.190 865622CB8 Corporate Sumitomo Mitsui Trust Bank (U.S.A.) Limited 01/18/2019 01/13/2016 250,000.00 250,000.00 250,285.00 285.00 1.560 1.531 A 084664CG4 Corporate Berkshire Hathaway Finance Corporation 03/15/2019 03/08/2016 120,000.00 119,908.80 -- 121,665.60 1,755.43 1.700 1.220 AA 822582AZ5 Corporate Shell International Finance B.V. 11/15/2016 06/12/2015 300,000.00 300,429.00 300,429.00 239.53 0.900 0.669 AA 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 166754AK7 Corporate CHEVRON PHI LLIPS CHEM CO LLC / CHEVRON PHILLIPS CHEM C( 05/O1/2018 06/11/2015 300,000.00 299,631.00 -- 297,861.00 (1,870.7IL__ 1.700 2.051 A 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fand-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fand-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fand-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fand-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fand-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fand-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fand-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fand-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fand-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fand-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fand-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fand-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 22546QAM9 Corporate Credit Suisse AG 26442CAD6 Corporate Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC 25152RVQ3 Corporate Deutsche Bank Aktiengesellschaft 89352HAP4 Corporate TransCanada PipeLines Limited 828807CM7 Corporate Simon Property Group, L.P. 05531FAP8 Corporate BB&T Corporation 446438RR6 Corporate The Huntington National Bank 90261XH74 Corporate UBS AG 74153WCE7 Corporate Pricoa Global Funding I 59562VAT4 Corporate Berkshire Hathaway Energy Company 928668AF9 Corporate Volkswagen Group of America Finance, LLC 06050TLY6 Corporate Bank of America, National Association 233851BF0 Corporate Daimler Finance North America LLC 69353RET1 Corporate PNC Realty Investors, Inc. 02665WBB6 Corporate American Honda Finance Corporation 863667AK7 Corporate Stryker Corporation 037833BR0 Corporate Apple Inc. 17401QAC5 Corporate Citizens Bank, National Association 91159HHD5 Corporate U.S. Bancorp 46623EKD0 Corporate 7PMorgan Chase & Co. 89837LAA3 Corporate The Trustees of Princeton University 40428HPQ9 Corporate HSBC USA Inc. 38141GRC0 Corporate The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. 06050TKX9 Corporate Bank of America, National Association 89114QBF4 Corporate The Toronto -Dominion Bank 002799AX2 Corpomte Abbey National Treasury Services PLC 05/26/2017 01/08/2016 255,000.00 254,280.90 04/15/2018 06/11/2015 116,000.00 127,422.52 02/13/2017 01/25/2016 15,000.00 14,971.05 254,291.10 125,017.84 (103.65) 1.125 1.375 A 741.78 5.100 1.227 AA 14,957.70 (18.20) 1.228 1.581 BBB O1/12/2018 02/03/2016 150,000.00 146,716.50 -- 147,684.00 724.62 1.411 2.296 A 02/01/2018 11/03/2015 140,000.00 139,552.00 11/O1/2017 140,260.40 628.30 1.500 1.381 A 06/15/2018 02/12/2016 120,000.00 120,003.60 05/15/2018 119,953.20 (50.21) 1.494 1.512 11/06/2018 11/03/2015 250,000.00 249,705.00 10/06/2018 250,410.00 665.43 2.200 2.133 A 03/26/2018 01/12/2016 250,000.00 249,745.00 08/18/2017 06/10/2015 300,000.00 299,511.00 249,605.00 298,788.00 (164.51) 1.330 1.409 (900.69) 1.350 1.647 AA 04/01/2018 10/15/2015 150,000.00 165,180.00 -- 161,581.50 (867.54) 5.750 1.802 A 11/20/2017 06/11/2015 300,000.00 300,525.00 296,850.00 (3,506.29) 1.600 2.257 A 03/26/2018 06/10/2015 300,000.00 298,968.00 -- 299,640.00 379.46 1.650 1.712 A 08/01/2017 06/12/2015 300,000.00 299,250.00 300,822.00 1,295.57 1.375 1.167 A 11/05/2018 10/29/2015 250,000.00 249,962.50 10/05/2018 251,282.50 1,314.90 1.800 1.591 A 02/22/2019 02/18/2016 120,000.00 120,000.00 -- 120,340.80 340.80 1.443 1.361 A 03/08/2019 03/03/2016 140,000.00 139,837.60 -- 141,495.20 1,370.53 2.000 1.697 02/22/2019 02/16/2016 150,000.00 150,000.00 151,330.50 1,330.50 1.438 1.147 AA 12/03/2018 11/30/2015 250,000.00 249,675.00 11/03/2018 251,412.50 1,703.01 2.300 2.074 05/15/2017 06/11/2015 300,000.00 303,276.00 04/15/2017 301,575.00 (289.98) 1.650 1.140 A 03/O1/2018 480,000.00 479,194.80 02/01/2018 481,915.20 2,498.41 1.700 1.488 A 03/O1/2019 --- 620,000.00 690,247.32 -- 685,961.80 9,898.28 4.950 1.225 AAA 03/05/2018 08/17/2015 145,000.00 144,315.60 01/22/2018 06/10/2015 80,000.00 81,027.20 144,659.25 81,028.80 180.61 1.700 1.824 309.84 2.375 1.650 A 06/15/2017 01/20/2016 255,000.00 252,707.55 -- 253,339.95 329.45 0.934 1.475 01/22/2019 01/14/2016 125,000.00 125,000.00 125,048.75 48.75 1.461 1.459 AA 03/14/2019 03/07/2016 120,000.00 119,790.00 -- 121,143.60 1,350.28 2.500 2.165 55279HAH3 Corporate Manufacturers and Traders Trust Company 07/25/2017 01/19/2016 250,000.00 248,862.50 -- 249,280.00 272.73 0.919 1.156 A 090623tAB9 Corpomte Biogen Inc. 9498815B9 Corporate Wells Fargo Bank, National Association 49327M2H6 Corpomte KeyBank National Association 94974BFK1 Corporate Wells Fargo & Company 03/01/2018 03/03/2016 55,000.00 60,217.85 -- 60,232.15 183.42 6.875 1.802 01/22/2018 01/22/2016 250,000.00 250,000.00 -- 250,740.00 740.00 1.358 1.212 AA 06/01/2018 11/06/2015 250,000.00 248,740.00 -- 249,957.50 1,029.00 1.700 1.708 A 04/23/2018 440,000.00 440,084.80 439,934.00 (142.58) 1.249 1.272 A 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fand-Toll2 037833AM2 Corporate Apple Inc. 532457BK3 Corporate Eli Lilly and Company 05/05/2017 06/10/2015 300,000.00 300,957.00 -- 301,137.00 580.85 1.050 0.702 AA 03/01/2018 06/10/2015 300,000.00 298,908.00 302,316.00 3,090.74 1.250 0.843 AA 28 Page 7 of 32 Girmside Cooly Ttnnsporrolioa Commission STAMP Portfolio by Account for quarter ended March 31, 2016 Source Security Type Account Account Identifier Category Issuer 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 38147MAA3 Corporate The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 Final Current Face Next Call Base Net Total Summarized Maturity Trade Date Value Original Cost Date Base Market Value Unrealized Gain/Loss Coupon Yield Credit Rating 07/19/2018 12/02/2015 100,000.00 102,578.00 --- 102,335.00 62.30 2.900 1.858 A 53944VAN9 Corporate Lloyds Bank PLC 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 46849LSL6 Corporate Jackson National Life Global Funding 01/22/2019 01/19/2016 200000.00 200000.00 10/15/2018 10/07/2015 150,000.00 149,922.00 199830.00 (1170.00) 1.621 1.663 A 150,384.00 450.28 1.875 1.771 AA 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 209111ET6 Corporate 30231GAL6 Corporate 063679ZT4 Corporate 0258MODZ9 Corporate Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. Exxon Mobil Corporation Bank of Montreal American Express Credit Corporation 59217GAY5 Corporate Metropolitan Life Global Funding I 80851QDA9 Corporate The Charles Schwab Corporation 842434CN0 Corporate Southern California Gas Company 04/01/2018 06/22/2015 220,000.00 03/06/2018 06/11/2015 300,000.00 01/30/2017 06/12/2015 300,000.00 245,828.00 299,583.00 304,620.00 237,859.60 301,347.00 302,331.00 11/05/2018 10/29/2015 150,000.00 149,986.50 10/05/2018 150,924.00 01/10/2018 06/12/2015 300,000.00 299,646.00 300,417.00 (922.29) 5.850 1.704 1,642.93 1.305 1.069 (45.01) 1.950 1.011 935.71 1.875 1.624 A AAA AAA A 662.79 1.500 1.420 AA 09/01/2017 10/27/2015 65,000.00 71,075.55 -- 69,478.50 (218.38) 6.375 1.443 A 06/15/2018 06/15/2015 250,000.00 249,992.50 -- 250,150.00 155.65 1.550 1.522 AA 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 48121CYK6 Corporate JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association 59217GAZ2 Corporate Metropolitan Life Global Funding I 6174467V5 Corporate Morgan Stanley 65339MD45 CP NextEra Energy Capital Holdings, Inc. 10/01/2017 03/09/2016 250,000.00 265,022.50 -- 265,415.00 840.92 6.000 1.815 A 06/22/2018 11/10/2015 150,000.00 150,199.50 -- 150,996.00 823.93 1.875 1.570 AA 04/25/2018 02/18/2016 70,000.00 70,403.69 -- 70,425.60 41.28 1.899 1.620 A 04/04/2016 03/24/2016 250,000.00 249,968.40 -- 249,990.00 3.54 0.000 0.481 AA 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 92780JD73 CP Virginia Electric and Power Company 9AMMF05B2 MM Fund U.S. Bank Money Market Account Fund 04/07/2016 03/23/2016 400,000.00 399,897.33 -- 399,968.00 12.00 0.000 0.481 AAA 03/31/2016 03/29/2016 0.00 501.96 -- 501.96 0.00 0.000 0.000 NA 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 65819WAC7 Muni North Carolina Eastern Municipal Power Agency 07/01/2018 --- 160,000.00 160,404.60 -- 162,057.60 1,732.05 2.003 1.420 A 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 544587B98 Muni Municipal Improvement Corporation of Los Angeles 11/01/2018 11/04/2015 160,000.00 160,000.00 -- 164,364.80 4,364.80 2.344 1.267 A 180848HP1 Muni Clark, County of 20772JL59 Muni Connecticut, State of 07/01/2017 07/06/2015 120,000.00 126,764.40 -- 125,028.00 732.31 4.300 0.920 AA 08/01/2020 03/03/2016 130,000.00 132,577.90 134,734.60 2,193.26 2.500 1.626 AA 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 13063BFU1 Muni California, State of 03/01/2019 03/01/2016 105,000.00 119,037.45 -- 119,183.40 495.71 6.200 1.453 AA 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 937308AZ7 Muni WBRP 3.2 WASHINGTON BIOMED RES 03/01/2018 09/25/2015 95,000.00 95,000.00 49130TRY4 Muni Kentucky Housing Corporation 13063A5D2 Muni California, State of 91476PPG7 Muni University of Oklahoma 62944BBC7 Non -US Gov N.V. Bank Nederlandse Gemeenten 748148RV7 Non -US Gov Gouvemement de la Province de Quebec 302154BL2 Non -US Gov The Export -Import Bank of Korea 912828K33 TIPS Treasury, United States Department of 912828TG5 US Gov Treasury, United States Department of 912828KQ2 US Gov Treasury, United States Department of 9128281CD1 US Gov Treasury, United States Department of 912828UA6 US Gov Treasury, United States Department of 912828B58 US Gov Treasury, United States Department of 912828UR9 US Gov Treasury, United States Department of 912828VK3 US Gov Treasury, United States Department of 95,783.75 783.75 1.485 1.049 AA 01/01/2017 06/17/2015 275,000.00 274,634.25 -- 275,569.25 749.69 0.937 0.660 AAA 04/01/2016 06/29/2015 315,000.00 327,521.25 -- 315,000.00 0.00 5.950 0.000 AA 07/01/2020 11/17/2015 80,000.00 79,544.00 -- 82,268.80 2,691.18 2.349 1.655 A 07/14/2017 01/19/2016 275,000.00 274,395.00 -- 274,485.75 11.72 0.694 0.849 AAA 09/04/2018 01/28/2016 125,000.00 124,532.50 -- 124,672.50 110.81 0.865 0.973 AA 01/14/2017 02/04/2016 200,000.00 200,380.00 -- 200,324.00 2.12 1.374 1.185 AA 04/15/2020 02/08/2016 1,011,630.00 1,013,943.22 -- 1,032,833.76 18,966.11 0.125 -0.389 AAA 07/31/2017 --- 725,000.00 720,030.27 -- 723,216.50 2,292.53 0.500 0.685 AAA 05/15/2019 1,550,000.00 1,644,994.92 - 1,507,106.70 23,032.21 3.125 0.885 AAA 02/15/2019 --- 1,935,000.00 2,027,131.64 -- 2,039,083.65 19,202.45 2.750 0.853 AAA 11/30/2017 1,465,000.00 1,461,189.26 -- 1,462,656.00 386.11 0.625 0.722 AAA 01/31/2021 03/16/2016 425,000.00 436,670.90 443,160.25 6,559.14 2.125 1.212 AAA 02/28/2018 10/02/2015 1,045,000.00 1,046,158.40 -- 1,045,240.35 (683.91) 0.750 0.738 AAA 06/30/2018 1,525,000.00 1,543,510.95 1,545,252.00 33,151,490.71 5,665.41 1.375 0.778 AAA 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 31393EXC8 Agency CMO Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 3136A4M89 Agency CMO Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 3137ASNH3 Agency CMO Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp 09/25/2018 07/24/2013 24,158.44 25,540.00 01/25/2019 07/05/2013 165,902.45 09/25/2021 08/15/2013 328,357.39 166,958.78 319,738.00 24,980.07 168,102.32 328,761.26 229.14 4.500 1.099 AAA 1,760.30 1.934 1.432 6,292.47 1.459 1.292 AAA AAA 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 3136A8G38 Agency CMO 31393V2T7 Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 31402RBG3 Agency MBS Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 31385JLF3 Agency MBS Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 38144LAB6 Corporate The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. 05565QCC0 Corporate BP Capital Markets P.L.C. 166764AE0 Corporate Chevron Corporation 891145TN4 Corporate The Toronto -Dominion Bank 48121CYK6 Corporate JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association 08/25/2017 07/08/2013 Mmxnln c 09/01/2019 586,027.31 n 0nn 7A 577,374.25 I11 1 43,303.30 46,449.19 08/01/2017 09/18/2013 79,153.75 84,496.63 09/01/2017 07/03/2013 300,000.00 322,515.00 11/06/2017 07/03/2013 300,000.00 292,194.00 - - 585,587.79 3,057.70 1.246 1.380 R00 65 d 500 I MI AAA AAA 44,648.73 (241.20) 6.000 1.675 AAA 80,687.75 (395.92) 6.000 1.598 AAA 319,308.00 11,168.06 6.250 1.634 A 299,031.00 1,988.97 1.375 1.580 06/24/2018 06/17/2015 300,000.00 301,848.00 05/24/2018 302,838.00 1,472.78 1.718 1.270 AA 03/13/2017 05/21/2015 1,000,000.00 1,010,240.00 10/01/2017 07/03/2013 300,000.00 341,424.00 1,004,190.00 (1,244.56) 1.500 1.055 AAA 318,498.00 3,288.49 6.000 1.815 A 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 89236TAY1 Corporate 02580ECC5 Corporate 30231GAL6 Corporate 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 94974BGF1 Corporate 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest ,A15009 I P.-Pr I. Dh Fnnd-1 intereat Toyota Motor Credit Corporation American Express Bank, FSB. Exxon Mobil Corporation Wells Fargo & Company 46625H1L5 Corporate JPMorgan Chase & Co. 63307EAB3 Corporate National Bank of Canada 78011DAC8 Corporate Royal Bank of Canada 0255E2DC1 CP American Electric Power Company, Inc. 07274LD73 CP Bayerische Landesbank 65475LDM1 CP Nissan Motor Acceptance Corporation Adll I BDF'1 CP HP I 10/24/2018 06/17/2015 500,000.00 09/13/2017 07/08/2013 250,000.00 03/06/2018 06/10/2015 420,000.00 505,870.00 287,890.00 419,525.40 01/30/2020 06/03/2015 1,000,000.00 991,540.00 05/15/2018 06/03/2015 500,000.00 497,550.00 509,020.00 265,457.50 421,88530 1,011,680.00 501,025.00 4,482.93 2.000 1.282 1,913.20 6.000 1.666 2,221.96 1.305 1.069 18,709.75 2.150 1.833 2,805.79 1.625 1.526 AA A AAA A 10/19/2016 05/21/2015 900,000.00 918,414.00 -- 906,345.00 (929.30) 2.200 0.912 AAA 09/19/2017 05/21/2015 1,000,000.00 1,001,090.00 999,010.00 (1,686.68) 1.200 1.268 AAA 04/12/2016 03/15/2016 550,000.00 549,687.72 -- 549,912.00 34.68 0.000 0.524 AA 04/18/2016 03/21/2016 500,000.00 499,748.75 -- 499,880.00 38.19 0.000 0.509 AAA 04/21/2016 03/08/2016 600,000.00 599,435.33 -- 599,832.00 88.67 0.000 0.505 AA ad/I5f7111A Illnd/7111 (. A00 000 as 700 A,SA, as 700 RA0 as 107 SA, 0 000 a 515 A A 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 9AMMF05B2 MM Fund U.S. Bank Money Market Account Fund 03/31/2016 -- 0.00 116,204.58 -- 116,204.58 0.00 0.000 0.000 NA 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest _ 2352197S2 Muni Dallas, City of 02/15/2017 07/10/2013 _ 650,000.00 650,000.00 -- 656,350.50 6,350.50 1.589 0.465 AA 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 912828RX0 US Gov Treasury, United States Department of 12/31/2016 09/13/2013 950,000.00 945,212.89 -- 952,042.50 3,143.62 0.875 0.587 AAA 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest _ 912828784 US Gov Treasury, United States Department of _ 03/31/2020 _ 600,000.00 591,146.48 --- 606,516.00 13,955.39 1.375 1.097 AAA 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 912828UA6 US Gov Treasury, United States Department of 11/30/2017 07/05/2013 1,250,000.00 1,214,648.44 -- 1,248,000.00 11,612.11 0.625 0.722 AAA 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 912828K41 US Gov Treasury, United States Department of 912828UZ1 US Gov Treasury, United States Department of 04/30/2017 07/30/2015 200,000.00 200,001.77 199,974.00 (27.09) 0.374 0.391 AAA 04/30/2018 07/14/2015 700,000.00 693,656.25 -- 697,921.00 2,658.47 0.625 0.769 AAA 15,145363.28 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 3135GOD75 Agency Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 06/22/2020 05/06/2015 600,000.00 593,490.00 -- 606,624.00 12,032.51 1.500 1.231 AAA 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 3137EADR7 Agency Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp 05/01/2020 05/15/2015 475,000.00 471,527.75 --- 478,728.75 6,608.57 1.375 1.177 AAA 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 3137EACA5 Agency Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp 03/27/2019 07/05/2013 800,000.00 875,900.00 -- 865,648.00 24,938.47 3.750 0.958 AAA 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 _ 3137EADB2 Agency Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp 01/13/2022 - _ 750,000.00 737,385.50 --- 786,285.00 42,812.08 2.375 1.498 AAA 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 3137AEV77 Agency CMO Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp 05/25/2018 07/03/2013 251,000.00 258,314.30 --- 257,008.94 3,053.29 2.699 1.100 AAA 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 3137AJMF8 Agency CMO Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp 10/25/2021 08/05/2015 30,000.00 31,038.28 31,839.30 91230 2.968 1.598 AAA 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 38377JZ89 Agency CMO The Government National Mortgage Association Guaranteed REMIC Pass -I 10/20/2039 07/05/2013 130,966.95 134,972.69 -- 136,478.04 2,090.90 3.500 1.484 AAA 31392J183 Agency CMO Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 03/25/2018 07/08/2013 17,821.03 18,801.19 18,263.53 75.13 5.000 1.088 AAA 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 38376GB33 Agency CMO The Government National Mortgage Association Guaranteed REMIC Pass -I 10/16/2044 01/23/2015 339,935.62 348,932.11 -- 345,269.21 (3,019.13) 3.500 2.133 AAA 3137AUPE3 Agency CMO Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp 06/25/2022 07/03/2013 235,000.00 220,358.40 29 242,609.30 18,286.45 2.396 1.856 AAA Page 8 of 32 Girelside Cooly Trompo win Commission STAMP Portfolio by Account for quarter ended March 31, 2016 Source Account Account Identifier Security Type Category Issuer Final Current Face Maturity Trade Date Value Next Call Base Net Total Summarized Original Cost Date Base Market Value Unrealized Gain/Loss Coupon Yield Credit Rating 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 38378CRT6 CMO The Government National Mortgage Association Guaranteed REMIC Pass-T 10/20/2040 05/22/2014 108,783.31 105,043.88 3137A7E22 Agency CMO Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp 3137B03W2 Alen CMO Federal Home Loan Mort•a•e Co • 04/15/2028 07/08/2013 171,018.58 177,057.67 08/25/2017 07/31/2013 36,581.30 36,552.72 108,344.91 3,028.14 2.000 1.877 AAA 175,613.85 2,791.48 3.500 1.100 AAA 36,690.68 145.22 1.426 1.522 AAA 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 38376T5Z1 Agency CMO The Government National Mortgage Association Guaranteed REMIC Pass-T O1/16/2039 O1/26/2015 148,610.88 155,261.22 154,969.94 256.72 3.000 1.648 AAA 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 38377RSZ9 Agency CMO The Government National Mortgage Association Guaranteed REMIC Pass -I 06/16/2039 01/21/2015 55,102.04 58,397.64 57,674.75 (656.38) 4.500 1.505 AAA 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 38378BX20 Agency CMO Government National Mortgage Association 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 38378B7E3 Agency CMO Government National Mortgage Association 06/ 16/20 51 03 / l 7/2015 65,670.71 64,210.01 05/16/2046 05/22/2015 227,121.73 218,303.02 38377RVK8 Agency CMO The Government National Mortgage Association Guaranteed REMIC Pass-T 04/20/2039 3136A7M18 Agency CMO Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 3137ASNH3 Agency CMO Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp 171,681.52 176,523.47 12/25/2019 08/20/2013 127,715.19 09/25/2021 07/03/2013 328,357.39 125,819.42 320,879.56 63,919.27 219,967.39 (219.77) 1.240 2.427 1,549.98 1.744 2.324 AAA AAA 179,034.64 3,310.40 3.000 1.443 AAA 128,392.08 328,761.26 1,595.41 1.520 1.204 5,431.45 1.459 1.292 AAA AAA 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 essunma II' r R F rl_1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 3136A72D3 Agency CMO 121711l 11a7 Agency rnan Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 04/25/2022 07/03/2013 Thr. (:nvrmmm* 10 fnnaI MnngagP Accnriarinn r ,aranrPM RFMrr Pacc_T norrn0ner 38378B7F0 Agency CMO Government National Mortgage Association 3137AQT24 Agency CMO Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp fort I /9nl A 395,000.00 375,250.00 R 407,466.20 26,787.41 2.482 1.927 I RSA I IR7 AAA AAA 12/16/2042 450,000.00 427,324.22 -- 436,162.50 8,296.42 2.273 3.139 AAA 01/25/2019 10/21/2013 170,000.00 171,195.31 173,519.00 2,994.21 2.130 1.350 AAA 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 38376WA62 Agency CMO The Government National Mortgage Association Guaranteed REMIC Pass -I 10/20/2039 01/21/2015 127,543.32 133,906.32 -- 135,232.91 1,005.88 4.000 1.555 AAA 38378TAF7 Agency CMO The Government National Mortgage Association Guaranteed REMIC Pass-T 07/20/2041 07/05/2013 220,241.07 220,274.27 38377DPX8 Agency CMO The Government National Mortgage Association Guaranteed REMIC Pass -I 11/20/2036 12/31/2013 15,682.05 31395EZP5 Agency CMO Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp O8/15/2019 07/09/2013 73,606.42 16,439.85 77,873.29 227,570.69 7,439.93 2.500 1.926 AAA 15,757.64 76,089.90 (98.85) 2.500 0.871 334.29 4.500 1.339 AAA AAA 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 31394DVM9 Agency CMO Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 02/25/2034 06/19/2014 141,801.63 149,933.06 148,016.79 (43.24) 5.000 1.280 AAA 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 31413XVG5 Agency MBS Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 06/O1/2019 08/04/2014 200,000.00 218,500.00 208,376.00 (3,911.41) 4.506 2.446 AAA 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 38379KDN5 Agency MBS Government National Mortgage Association 09/16/2055 08/05/2015 192,197.24 187,287.20 192,076.16 4,608.99 2.099 2.635 AAA 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 3136A4M48 Agency MBS Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 31381 PEBO Agency MBS Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 3137A71U5 Agency MBS Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp 01/25/2022 07/05/2013 341,777.03 342,738.28 11/01/2020 09/26/2014 263,547.18 277,506.95 347,696.61 5,502.42 2.098 1.538 AAA 283,642.66 10,451.70 3.370 1.851 AAA 11/25/2017 07/03/2013 325,000.00 351,203.13 -- 336,807.25 2,801.76 3.882 1.507 AAA 38378KRS0 Agency MBS The Government National Mortgage Association Guaranteed REMIC Pass-T 07/16/2043 05/08/2015 450,000.00 434,460.94 447,552.00 12,685.46 2.389 2.650 AAA 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 38378KWU9 Agency MBS The Government National Mortgage Association Guaranteed REMIC Pass -I 11/16/2041 05/22/2015 66,141.98 64,483.27 -- 64,344.91 (186.77) 1.400 2.385 AAA 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 38378XP62 Agency MBS The Government National Mortgage Association Guaranteed REMIC Pass-T 05/16/2055 05/14/2015 457,866.02 463,517.80 467,929.91 4,582.56 2.500 2.022 AAA 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 31404WT13 Agency MBS Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 05/O1/2019 12/31/2013 62,807.48 70,014.16 65,162.76 (1,676.10) 4.500 1.228 AAA 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 31417YKF3 Agency MBS Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 31385XBG1 Agency MBS Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 31416YX12 Agency MBS Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae O1/01/2030 07/10/2013 131,783.22 139,031.30 03/01/2018 09/13/2013 9,587.59 10,210.79 08/01/2026 07/03/2013 56,999.33 59,680.07 38378KSIA Agency MBS The Government National Mortgage Association Guaranteed REMIC Pass -I 12/16/2046 3137B6ZL8 Agency MBS Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp 143,297.12 9,775.60 4,253.25 4.500 1.926 (30.89) 6.000 1.556 AAA AAA 60,401.05 1,324.40 3.500 1.401 AAA 425,000.00 415,829.11 -- 427,953.75 11,991.94 2.791 3.046 AAA 12/25/2019 01/07/2014 34,206.23 34,889.97 34,665.28 79.46 2.075 1.488 AAA 31418AFW3 Agency MBS Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 06/O1/2022 07/10/2013 192,057.78 198,359.67 -- 200,836.74 4,236.61 3.000 0.828 AAA 3138L33G8 Agency MBS Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 38378B6A2 Agency MBS Government National Mortgage Association 3128MMAK9 Agency MBS Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp 06/01/2020 11/12/2015 100,000.00 99,875.00 101,838.00 1,963.54 2.010 1.724 AAA 11/16/2052 01/22/2015 135,221.54 130,958.89 -- 133,202.68 2,322.94 1.826 2.686 AAA 09/O1/2019 07/08/2013 114,971.28 122,228.85 120,732.49 1,349.72 5.000 0.956 AAA 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 3136AEYG6 Agency MBS Federal National Mortgage Association Fannie Mae 06/25/2018 11/20/2013 142,510.34 143,634.84 9AMMF05B2 MM Fund U.S. Bank Money Market Account Fund 03/31/2016 0.00 39,948.71 143,772.98 39,948.71 760.71 1.825 1.225 AAA 0.00 0.000 0.000 NA 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 912828WU0 T65 Treasury, United States Department of 9128281358 US Gov Treasury, United States Department of 07/15/2024 02/05/2016 598,632.00 582,391.10 -- 600,691.29 18,035.06 0.125 0.083 AAA O1/31/2021 1,540,000.00 1,573,283.21 1,605,804.20 35,790.99 2.125 1.212 AAA 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 912828UF5 US Gov Treasury, United States Department of 912828V V9 US Gov Treasury, United States Department of 912828VB3 US Gov Treasury, United States Department of 912828KQ2 US Gov Treasury, United States Department of 912828RC6 US Gov Treasury, United States Department of 912828TJ9 US Gov Treasury, United States Department of 12/31/2019 --- 1,250,000.00 1,231,787.31 -- 1,253,712.50 19,593.69 1.125 1.044 AAA 08/31/2020 235,000.00 241,525.78 05/15/2023 07/05/2013 1,600,000.00 1,487,125.00 05/15/2019 07/05/2013 500,000.00 539,902.34 O8/15/2021 11/10/2015 1,300,000.00 1,313,507.81 08/15/2022 1,120,000.00 1,086,086.92 244,639.70 1,622,000.00 3,385.80 2.125 1.169 AAA 106,338.03 1.750 1.545 AAA 534,435.00 12,670.81 3.125 0.885 AAA 1,353,976.00 1,128,624.00 41,309.83 2.125 1.322 AAA 33,211.26 1.625 1.498 AAA 19,255,322.09 30 Page 9 of 32 ATTACHMENT 4 Riverside Gnry ironsponolion (ammission STAMP Portfolio Transaction Report by Account Quarter ended March 31, 2016 Source Account Account Beginning Base Identifier Descri Ben Market Value Base Purchases Base Base Change In Base Maturities Net Total Realized Amortization/A Net Unrealized Ending Base Ending Accrued Base Sales and Redem lions Base Pa downs Gain/Loss ccretion Gain/Loss Market Value Income Balance 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interes 9AMMF05B2 U.S. Bank Money Market Accoun 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 31392HWL3 FN-033D-BC 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interes 31392F6C6 FN-0277C-CB 205091001 LC 2013 A Capitalized Interest 31393EXC8 FN-0388E-TH 83,344.15 29,766.27 189,864.45 267,595.04 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 912828UB4 UNITED STATES TREASURY 2,443,450.00 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 89236TAY1 TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CC 2,011,320.00 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 89114QAE8 TORONTO DOMINION BANK 757,867.50 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 912828UA6 UNITED STATES TREASURY 1,735,510.00 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 31402RBG3 FN 735439 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 31402RBG3 FN 735439 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 31402RBG3 FN 735439 71,854.19 8,011.7 3,250.9 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 44328MAL8 HSBC BANK PLC 1,008,500.00 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 44328MAL8 HSBC BANK PLC 2,647,312.50 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 30231GAL6 EXXON MOBIL CORP 579,077.80 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 3136ACGF2 FN-13M3-AQ2 209,002.52 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 31392FPP6 FN-0274C-PE 119,171.53 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 3136A8G38 FN-12M13A-A2 2,049,637.70 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 31410GSQ7 FN 888927 94,749.23 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 3128MBTH0 FH G13052 89,426.3 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 36290WH47 GN 619551 759,223.02 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 3128H4NR6 FH E96700 66,534.12 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 3128PGLY7 FH 704843 126,360.57 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 912828UZ1 UNITED STATES TREASURY 3,356,310.00 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 822582AC6 SHELL INTERNATIONAL FIN 418,964.00 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 184126YS3 CLAYTON CNTY & CLAYTOT 772,579.50 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 64966H4E7 NEW YORK N Y 1,207,826.10 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 037833A79 APPLE INC 2,975,640.00 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 912828M23 UNITED STATES TREASURY 799,272.00 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 912828SY7 UNITED STATES TREASURY 3,882,801.00 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 0846646E0 BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY FIN 868,328.00 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 31392BVM5 FN-023C-PG 29,889.13 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 912828784 UNITED STATES TREASURY 2,963,070.00 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 912828784 UNITED STATES TREASURY 1,283,997.00 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 459200GX3 INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS 467,780.70 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 78008K5 V 1 ROYAL BANK OF CANADA 2,012,320.00 205091001 LC 2013 A Capitalized Interest 89153 VAC3 TOTAL CAPITAL INTERNATli 160,409.60 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 90327QCW7 USAA CAPITAL CORP 4,047,320.00 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 31294LPZ0 FH E02240 76,236.48 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 3137EADQ9 FREDDIE MAC 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 912828RU6 UNITED STATES TREASURY 3,502,065.00 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 36200AFG9 GN 595167 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 235219752 DALLAS TEX 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 31393V2T7 FH-2627E-GY 205091001 LC 2013 A Capitalized Interest 31402QT68 FN 735073 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 3128GNR59 FH E85908 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 31401MWC1 FN 712643 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 3128PHVS7 FH 706025 205091001 LC-2013 A Capitalized Interest 3132FEAK7 FH Z50010 31.412.36 2,149,475.30 497,911.76 203,909.27 64,483.32 591,105.19 59,537.58 114,576.83 ,698,049.73 ,400,347.20 402 447.20) (4,895.21) (35,615.66) (41,357.51) (107.22) (808.70) (1 057.20) (39.06) (321.98) (400.86) 378,946.68 (60.85) (243.83) 41.14 24,663.93 152,874.28 224,820.6 100.31 623.68 815.35 3,628.95 51,846.05 2,498,925.00 8,401.64 (1,719.03) 26,479.03 2,036,080.00 17,444.44 (2,033.03) 540.53 756,375.00 8,015.63 2,814.75 8,875.25 1,747,200.00 3,675.72 (34,515.54) ,357.06) (591.25) 490.09 135,880.44 658.93 (1,609.09) (61.29) (26.74) 20.04 6,334.64 30.72 (2,661.34) (94.71) (41.43) 23.70 10,477.14 50.81 (4,506.01) (753.99) 1,003,240.00 10,936.11 (10,953.29) (2,854.21) 2,633,505.00 28,707.29 59.06 3,467.34 582,604.20 525.63 (209,161.49) 20.85 80.93 57.20 (23,925.70) (514.73) (117.57) (205.46) 94,408.07 385.65 (115,609.48) 804.05 2,061.50 (3,824.41) 1,933,069.36 2,008.68 (22,201.93) (12,149.96) (109,306.28) (9,458.76) (30,332.16) (731.00) (418.29) (4,013.92) (293.70) (594.05) (429.07) (303.97) (2,038.19) 390.17 71,777.39 351.44 83.75 76,737.84 309.65 3,170.47 647,035.10 2,361.26 (232.00) 111.38 56,661.04 228.64 (399.32) (196.44) 94,838.59 382.69 3,377.81 (3,410.25) 937.84 (4,057.74) 3,411.84 242.52 30,214.19 3,389,902.00 8,932.01 778.25 416,332.00 520.00 3,497.36 777,014.70 4,170.83 9,463.14 1,213,231.50 18,369.00 27,128.16 3,006,180.00 12,333.33 429.48 799,944.00 660.19 4,594.08 10,303.92 3,897,699.00 8,191.60 (7,734.43) 11,590.43 872,184.00 16,320.00 (12,979.14) (158.21) (55.92) 0.94 16,696.81 75.89 (609,257.81) - - 16,078.56 1,766.48 54,406.77 2,426,064.00 90.16 869.84 29,251.16 1,314,118.00 48.84 (1,080.82) (9,067.59) 42.07 313.57 467,013.45 1,737.94 (1,432.41) 2,001,820.00 25,875.00 78.74 160,630.40 640.67 (10,702.30) 6,102.30 4,042,720.00 250.00 (29,215.95) (431.73) (310.53) 148.79 46,427.06 230.43 (10,676.65) (75,223.44) (33,007.90) (21,877.27) (60,614.55) (15,206.67) (19,205.35) (147.44) 38.24 1,400,238.00 2,683.33 231.76 6,033.24 3,508,330.00 10,292.01 (348.18) (108.28) (1,865.42) (1,615.79) (335.06) (1,910.33) (430.90) (575.13) (730.64) (541.90) (286.06) (2,075.62) (175.34) (443.49) 37.98 20,417.24 91.98 6,383.65 2,155,858.95 4,334.88 795.92 951.49 420,888.17 69,695.17 1,530.87 814.18 83.17 42,168.10 209.25 2,462.58 15.82 210.12 528,967.27 43,740.48 94,562.97 47,998,049.64 3,098,396.93 (2,011,705.01) (930,807.03) (819.16) (40,861.73) 287,043.94 48,399,297.58 1,917.70 176.50 381.58 206,892.43 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 9AMMF05B2 U.S. Bank Money Market Accoun 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 744321D57 Prudential Financial, Inc. 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 25737LAK6 Dominion Gas Holdings, LLC 108,271.57 1,999,660.00 64,835,366.95 (62,779,328.92) 1,898,524.86 (2,000,000.00) 1,337.92 590.00 23.22 (250.00) 2,164,309.60 1,899,886.00 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 58507AC84 Medtronic Global Holdings S.C.) 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 23337SAB0 DTE Gas Company 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 0255E2DC1 American Electric Power Compan 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 88513AE57 Thomson Reuters Corporation 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 78355AD84 Ryder System, Inc. 1,999,840.00 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 65475LAU6 Nissan Motor Acceptance Corpor 1,999,460.00 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 2574POBH6 Dominion Resources, Inc. 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 05333TA52 AutoZone, Inc. 999,990.00 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 92780JAL5 Virginia Electric and Power Coml 1,999,640.00 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 77434LDB0 Rockwell Collins, Inc. 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 42824EA88 Hewlett Packard Enterprise Com] 1,999,900.00 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 42824EBS3 Hewlett Packard Enterprise Comp 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 65474VAG6 NMOTR-I3A-A 1,600,000.00 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 20279VD83 Commonwealth Edison Company 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 58507ADL4 Medtronic Global Holdings S.C.) 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 619791C21 Motiva Enterprises LLC 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 6821A2C47 Omnicom Capital Inc. 1,699,291.66 1,998,864.44 1,897,245.00 1,998,702.22 1,998,460.00 1,099,272.78 (1,700,000.00) (2,000,000.00) (2,000,000.00) (2,000,000.00) (1,000,000.00) (2,000,000.00) (2,000,000.00) 1,899,047.89 - (1,900,000.00) 1,998,666.66 1,998,499.44 708.34 333.34 689.45 1,140.00 1,013.89 (173.34) 126.11 1,999,680.00 608.00 1,898,993.00 83.89 1,999,800.00 1,155.00 (615.00) 1,540.00 55.56 (45.56) 496.11 (136.11) 513.33 59.89 1,099,846.00 241.11 (141.11) 952.11 (1,600,000.00) 222.02 13.99 (236.01) 1,022.23 730.00 1,998,618.88 - (2,000,000.00) - - 1,381.12 1,999,156.66 - (2,000,000.00) - - 843.34 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 42824EDB8 Hewlett Packard Enterprise Comp - 1,997,898.34 1,562.77 111.11 1,999,800.00 230.56 1,999,460.00 258.89 1,999,720.00 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 00287BA74 AbbVie Inc. 1,799,946.00 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 83700ED47 South Carolina Electric & Gas Cc - 1,499,156.25 31 (1,800,000.00) 180.00 (126.00) 750.00 33.75 1,499,940.00 Page 10 of 32 ��INEM. fro or,ide (Bonry ironsponolion is nrnission STAMP Portfolio Transaction Report by Account Quarter ended March 31, 2016 Source Beginning Base Base Maturities Base Base Change In Net Total Realized Amortization/A Net Unrealized Ending Base I I Ending Accrued 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 3016E2CF8 Exelon Generation Company, LLI - 1,998,300.00 - - (2,000,000.00) - - - - 1,700.00 - - - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 89355PCB2 TransCanada PipeLines Limited - 1,998,500.00 (2,000,000.00) - 1,500.00 - - - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 05634BA65 Bacardi U.S.A., Inc. 1,999,960.00 - - (2,000,000.00) - 141.67 (101.67) - - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 80686DDK7 Schlumberger Holdings Corpomti - 1,998,488.88 - - - - 711.12 300.00 1,999,500.00 - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 27805ACH8 Eaton Corporation - 1,999,000.00 - (2,000,000.00) - - 1,000.00 - - - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 25156KA87 Deutsche Telekom AG 1,999,900.00 - - (2,000,000.00) - - 202.22 (102.22) - - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 60920VDL3 Mondelez International, Inc. - 1,998,400.00 - - - - 840.00 220.00 1,999,460.00 - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 07787PD54 The Bell Telephone Company of I - 1,998,720.00 - - - - 1,120.00 40.00 1,999,880.00 - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 6362P2BA3 National Grid USA - 1,998,753.34 - (2,000,000.00) - - 1,246.66 - - - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 65475LC75 Nissan Motor Acceptance Corpor - 1,149,065.63 - (1,150,000.00) - - 934.37 - - - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 61979JD61 Motive Enterprises LLC - 1,897,561.67 - - - - 2,068.89 236.44 1,899,867.00 - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 58507AB93 Medtronic Global Holdings S.C./ - 1,998,952.78 - (2,000,000.00) - - 1,047.22 - M- - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 91058TAK2 United Healthcare Corporation 1,999,660.00 - - (2,000,000.00) - - 680.00 (340.00) - - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 57163TB40 Marriott International, Inc. - 1,998,786.66 - (2,000,000.00) - - 1,213.34 - - - - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 92780JDJ7 Virginia Electric and Power Comm - 1,748,390.00 - - - - 1,015.00 175.00 1,749,580.00 - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 65475LD17 Nissan Motor Acceptance Corpor - 424,724.22 - - - - 275.78 - 425,000.00 - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 28103AAF1 Edison International 1,999,740.00 - - (2,000,000.00) - - 458.89 (198.89) - - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 61979JA72 Motive Enterprises LLC 1,999,940.00 - - (2,000,000.00) - - 166.67 (106.67)- - - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 61979JB89 Motive Enterprises LLC - 1,998,916.66 - (2,000,000.00) - - 1,083.34 - - - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 05634BCG1 Bacardi U.S.A., Inc. - 1,998,911.12 - (2,000,000.00) - - 1,088.88 - - - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 04635PD71 AstraZeneca PLC - 1,998,522.22 - - - - 1,244.45 73.33 1,999,840.00 - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 3016E2B85 Exelon Generation Company, LLI - 1,998,631.12 - (2,000,000.00) - - 1,368.88 - - - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 68268TC73 ONEOK Partners, L.P. - 1,998,553.88 - (2,000,000.00) - - 1,446.12 - - - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 02581RAM5 American Express Credit Corpora 1,999,620.00 - - (2,000,000.00) - - 555.56 (175.56) - - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 91058TCJ3 United Healthcare Corporation - 1,797,854.00 - (1,800,000.00) - - 2,146.00 - - - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 25737LC32 Dominion Gas Holdings, LLC - 1,798,488.00 - (1,800,000.00) - - 1,512.00 - - - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 91324PCJ9 UNITEDHEALTH GROUP INC 290,194.30 - - - - - (38.19) 90.39 290,246.50 628.98 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 90213PC48 Tyco International Finance S.A. - 1,996,938.88 - (2,000,000.00) - - 3,061.12 - - - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 74432JBN0 Prudential Financial, Inc. - 1,998,313.33 - (2,000,000.00) - - 1,686.67 - - - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 88513AAE2 Thomson Reuters Corporation 1,999,780.00 - - (2,000,000.00) - - 433.33 (213.33) - - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 27886LB87 Ecolab Inc. 1,999,040.00 - - (2,000,000.00) - - 1,118.89 (158.89) - - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 27805ABG1 Eaton Corporation - 1,998,911.12 - (2,000,000.00) - - 1,088.88 - - - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 57163TDN6 Marriott International, Inc. - 1,998,418.34 - - - - 730.00 251.66 1,999,400.00 - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 58507AAB9 Medtronic Global Holdings S.C./ 1,999,840.00 - - (2,000,000.00) - - 294.44 (134.44) - - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 07274LDJ3 Bayerische Landesbank - 1,699,145.75 - - - - 316.39 129.86 1,699,592.00 - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 05634BBH0 Bacardi U.S.A., Inc. - 1,998,715.56 - (2,000,000.00) - - 1,284.44 - - - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 85572ACE4 Starwood Hotels & Resorts Work - 1,998,890.00 - (2,000,000.00) - - 1,110.00 - - - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 28103AB94 Edison International - 1,999,183.34 - (2,000,000.00) - - 816.66 - - - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 85572ABC9 Starwood Hotels & Resorts Work - 1,999,004.44 - (2,000,000.00) - - 995.56 - - - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 85572AAD8 Stanwood Hotels & Resorts Work 1,999,800.00 - - (2,000,000.00) - - 266.67 (66.67) - - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 57163TCE7 Marriott International, Inc. - 1,998,742.78 - (2,000,000.00) - - 1,257.22 - - - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 43357LCN0 Hitachi Capital America Corp. - 1,898,786.11 - (1,900,000.00) - - 1,213.89 - - - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 91302CAC1 United Technologies Corporation 1,299,883.00 - - (1,300,000.00) - - 278.05 (161.05) - - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 55314MAD8 MMAFEF-IIA-A4 129,177.12 - - - (71,985.50) (130.30) (66.70) 2.82 56,997.43 53.10 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 1248C2C87 CBS Corporation - 1,599,365.33 - (1,600,000.00) - - 634.67 - - - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 05333TC92 AutoZone, Inc. - 1,998,872.22 - (2,000,000.00) - - 1,127.78 - - - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 44890MBN1 Hyundai Capital America - 1,998,050.00 - (2,000,000.00) - - 1,950.00 - - - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 25737LDL1 Dominion Gas Holdings, LLC - 1,998,677.78 - - - - 583.33 198.89 1,999,460.00 - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 161571GM0 CHAIT 2014-A4 A4 129,942.80 - - - - - 55.58 13.32 130,011.70 209.10 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 07787PBV9 The Bell Telephone Company of I - 1,499,040.00 - (1,500,000.00) - - 960.00 - - - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 78355ABC7 Ryder System, Inc. - 1,499,150.00 - (1,500,000.00) - - 850.00 - - - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 41282JAB7 Harley-Davidson Financial Servic 1,999,840.00 - - (2,000,000.00) - - 288.89 (128.89) - - 256350001 LC -Project Fund-2 Senior Lien 63946DAC0 NBCUniversal Enterprise, Inc. 1,999,820.00 - - (2,000,000.00) - - 427.78 (247.78) - - 40,352,844.79 159,792,497.19 (62,779,328.92) (98,950,000.00) (1,671,985.50) 91.72 66,742.00 (592.04) 36,810,269.23 891.18 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 9AMMF0562 U.S. Bank Money Market Accoun 116,480.61 31,621,599.50 (25,829,759.23) - - - - - 5,908,320.88 - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 88513AE57 Thomson Reuters Corporation - 1,098,405.00 - - - - 660.00 _ 352.00 1,099,417.00 - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 2574POBH6 Dominion Resources, Inc. - 1,598,836.45 - (1,600,000.00) - - 1,163.55 - - - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 05333TA52 AutoZone, Inc. 1,599,984.00 - - (1,600,000.00) - - 88.89 (72.89) - - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 65475LAU6 Nissan Motor Acceptance Corpor 699,811.00 - - (700,000.00) - - 404.25 (215.25) - - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond CCYUSD Cash (0.01) - _ - - - - - - (0.01) - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 42824EA88 Hewlett Packard Enterprise Coml 1,799,910.00 - - (1,800,000.00) - - 217.00 (127.00) - - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 42824E653 Hewlett Packard Enterprise Comf - 1,499,248.34 - (1,500,000.00) - - 751.66 - - - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 65474VAG6 NMOTR-I3A-A 1,400,000.00 - - - (1,400,000.00) 194.27 12.24 (206.51) - - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 42824EDB8 Hewlett Packard Enterprise Comf - 1,198,739.00 - - - - 937.67 155.33 1,199,832.00 - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 00287BA74 AbbVie Inc. 649,980.50 - - (650,000.00) - - 65.00 (45.50) - - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 64468EAZ3 NEW HAMPSHIRE ST BUSINE 3,200,000.00 - - - - - - - 3,200,000.00 1,112.00 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 07787PD47 The Bell Telephone Company of I - 1,199,352.00 - - - - 576.00 24.00 1,199,952.00 - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 05634BA65 Bacardi U.S.A., Inc. 1,799,964.00 - - (1,800,000.00) - - 127.50 (91.50) - - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 27805ACH8 Eaton Corporation - 399,800.00 - (400,000.00) - - 200.00 - - - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 6362P2BA3 National Grid USA - 1,499,065.01 - (1,500,000.00) - - 934.99 - - - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 61979JD61 Motive Enterprises LLC - 1,098,588.34 - - - - 1,197.77 136.89 1,099,923.00 - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 91058TAK2 United Healthcare Corporation 1,599,728.00 - - (1,600,000.00) - - 543.99 (271.99) - - 32 Page 11 of 32 ��INEMi fro Bride Cooly ironsponolion Omission STAMP Portfolio Transaction Report by Account Quarter ended March 31, 2016 Source Beginning Base Base Maturities Base Base Change In Net Total Realized Amortization/A Net Unrealized Ending Base I Ending Accrued 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 57163TB40 Marriott International, Inc. - 1,599,168.00 - - (1,600,000.00) - - - - - 832.00 - - 1,199,712.00 - - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 92780JDJ7 Virginia Electric and Power Comm - 1,198,896.00 - 696.00 120.00 - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 28103AAF1 Edison International 1,599,792.00 - - (1,600,000.00) - 435.56 (227.56) - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 61979JA72 Motiva Enterprises LLC 1,799,946.00 - - (1,800,000.00) - - 150.00 (96.00) - - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 6197911389 Motiva Enterprises LLC - 1,599,200.00 - (1,600,000.00) - - 800.00 - - - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 05634BCG1 Bacardi U.S.A., Inc. - 1,399,237.78 - (1,400,000.00) - - 762.22 - - - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 04635PD71 AstraZeneca PLC - 1,199,113.33 - - - - 746.67 44.00 1,199,904.00 - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 61979JC39 Motiva Enterprises LLC - 1,399,329.16 - (1,400,000.00) - - 670.84 - - - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 65475LCM2 Nissan Motor Acceptance Corpor - 1,399,237.78 - (1,400,000.00) - - 762.22 - - - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 68268TC73 ONEOK Partners, L.P. - 1,398,987.72 - (1,400,000.00) - - 1,012.28 - - - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 6362P2CM6 National Grid USA - 1,299,393.33 - (1,300,000.00) - - 606.67 - - - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 02581RAM5 American Express Credit Corpora 949,819.50 - - (950,000.00) - - 263.89 (83.39) - - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 25737LC32 Dominion Gas Holdings, LLC - 1,498,740.00 - (1,500,000.00) - - 1,260.00 - - - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 91324PCJ9 UNITEDHEALTH GROUP INC 395,264.65 - - - - - (52.02) 123.12 395,335.75 856.72 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 85572ABS4 Starwood Hotels & Resorts Wort - 1,449,240.77 - (1,450,000.00) - - 759.23 - - - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 88513AAE2 Thomson Reuters Corporation 1,799,802.00 - - (1,800,000.00) - - 370.50 (172.50) - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 90213PC48 Tyco International Finance S.A. - 1,298,181.81 - (1,300,000.00) - - 1,818.19 - -- - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 65475LBJ0 Nissan Motor Acceptance Corpor - 999,280.56 - (1,000,000.00) - - 719.44 - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 27886LB87 Ecolab Inc. 1,499,280.00 - - (1,500,000.00) - - 839.17 (119.17) - - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 58507AAB9 Medtronic Global Holdings S.C./ 1,499,880.00 - - (1,500,000.00) - - 220.83 (100.83) - - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 05634BBH0 Bacardi U.S.A., Inc. - 1,599,123.55 - (1,600,000.00) - - 876.45 - - - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 85572AAD8 Starwood Hotels & Resorts Work 1,799,820.00 - - (1,800,000.00) - - 240.00 (60.00) - - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 43357LCN0 Hitachi Capital America Corp. - 1,299,169.44 - (1,300,000.00) - - 830.56 - - - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 07588LA81 Becton, Dickinson and Company 1,249,937.50 - - (1,250,000.00) - - 121.53 (59.03) - - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 64468EAY6 NEW HAMPSHIRE ST BUSINF 4,190,000.00 - - - - - - - 4,190,000.00 1,456.03 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 3016E2BA0 Exelon Generation Company, LLI - 1,598,942.22 - (1,600,000.00) - - 1,057.78 - - - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 1248C2C87 CBS Corporation - 1,399,444.66 - (1,400,000.00) - - 555.34 - - - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 44890MBN1 Hyundai Capital America - 1,498,537.50 - (1,500,000.00) - - 1,462.50 - - - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 25737LAM2 Dominion Gas Holdings, LLC 1,799,658.00 - - (1,800,000.00) - - 560.00 (218.00) - - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 41282JAB7 Harley-Davidson Financial Servic 1,599,872.00 - - (1,600,000.00) - - 231.11 (103.11) - - 256350004 LC-PF-2 Sales Tax Revenue Bond 05333TDB6 AutoZone, Inc. - 1,199,206.67 - - - - 566.66 58.67 1,199,832.00 - 33,048,929.75 67,546,063.92 (25,829,759.23) (51,500,000.00) (1,400,000.00) 194.27 28,056.13 (1,256.22) 21,892,228.62 3,424.74 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 9AMMF05B2 U.S. Bank Money Market Amour 88,697.68 9,512,345.48 (9,600,541.20) - - - - - 501.96 - 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 161571FK5 CHAIT 2012-A4 A4 147,729.00 - - - - - 108.37 2,857.13 150,694.50 105.33 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 00138CAA6 AIG GLOBAL FUNDING 298,491.00 - - - - - (69.49) 1,152.49 299,574.00 1,457.50 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 912828TG5 UNITED STATES TREASURY 694,694.00 - - - - - 748.16 2,835.84 698,278.00 586.54 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 912828TG5 UNITED STATES TREASURY 545,831.00 - (523,495.12) - - (306.12) 106.57 2,802.17 24,938.50 20.95 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 36225FGM5 G2 082903 118,821.16 - - - (5,811.18) (199.97) (37.56) 236.75 113,009.20 170.30 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 89153UAE1 TOTAL CAPITAL CANADA Ll 298,146.00 - - - - - - 2,889.00 301,035.00 918.33 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 718172AA7 PHILIP MORRIS INIERNATIO 272,757.50 - - - - - (2,366.35) 2,933.85 273,325.00 5,296.88 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 _ 865622CB8 SUMITOMO MITSUI BANKINI - 250,000.00 - - - - - 285.00 250,285.00 790.63 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 3133EFHX8 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BAP - 349,447.00 (348,947.89) - - (541.18) 42.07 - - - 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 3h34G6FY4 FEDERAL HOME LOAN MOW - 500,030.00 - (500,000.00) - (27.60) (2.40) - - - 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 01854VBK1 Alliancebemstein Holding L.P. - 449,959.75 - (450,000.00) - - 40.25 - - - 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 22546QAM9 CREDIT SUISSE AG (NEW YO - 254,280.90 - - - - 113.85 (103.65) 254,291.10 278.81 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 26442CAD6 DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS: 124,328.80 - - - - - (990.80) 1,679.84 125,017.84 2,727.93 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 9h2828KQ2 UNITED STATES TREASURY 221,541.60 - - - - - (876.32) 3,797.42 224,462.70 2,487.98 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 912828KQ2 UNITED STATES TREASURY 738,472.00 - - - - - (2,946.26) 12,683.26 748,209.00 8,293.27 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 912828KQ2 UNITED STATES TREASURY 632,976.00 - (106,375.00) - - 960.14 (2,070.47) 8,944.32 534,435.00 5,923.76 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 43357LA51 Hitachi Capital America Corp. 474,995.25 - - (475,000.00) - - 58.58 (53.83) - - 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 02582JGG9 AXCMT-132-A - 300,468.75 - - - - (14.53) 25.78 300,480.00 121.30 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 3130A6U88 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BAN1 - 150,487.50 - - - - (203.99) 20.99 150,304.50 598.13 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 38378NNA7 GN-13194-AB 586,598.23 - - - (4,591.45) (30.42) (49.96) 3,681.04 585,607.44 1,088.67 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 828807CM7 SIMON PROPERTY GROUP LI 138,853.40 - - - - - 49.53 1,357.47 140,260.40 350.00 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 912828KD1 UNITED STATES TREASURY 416,796.00 - (422,703.12) - - 2,977.16 (699.87) 3,629.84 - - 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 9128281(D1 UNITED STATES TREASURY - 731,773.44 - - - - (325.64) 6,205.20 737,653.00 2,432.69 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 912828KDh UNITED STATES TREASURY 833,592.00 - (185,240.24) - - 2,043.75 (2,681.45) 10,904.68 658,618.75 2,172.05 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 9128281(D1 UNITED STATES TREASURY 323,016.90 - - - - - (1,111.57) 4,769.57 326,674.90 1,077.34 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 912828KD1 UNITED STATES TREASURY 312,597.00 - - - - - (1,046.11) 4,586.11 316,137.00 1,042.58 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 084664CD1 BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY FIN 299,316.00 - (299,490.00) - - (634.71) (11.57) 820.29 - - 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 58769AAD8 MBALT-I5B-A3 253,816.80 - - - - - 0.72 1,302.33 255,119.85 151.87 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 74153WCE7 PRICOA GLOBAL FUNDING I 297,981.00 - - - - - 55.36 751.64 298,788.00 483.75 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 _ 59562VAT4 MIDAMERICAN ENERGY HO- 162,049.50 - - - - - (1,515.35) _ 1,047.35 161,581.50 4,312.50 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 90290KAD7 USAOT-141-A4 443,242.25 - - - - - 154.61 1,398.44 444,795.30 185.91 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 38378BR35 GN-12142-AB 333,199.56 - - - (2,422.11) 55.05 76.80 2,827.76 333,737.06 378.25 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 928668AF9 VOLKSWAGEN GROUP OF Al 291,282.00 - - - - - (53.74) 5,621.74 296,850.00 1,746.67 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 36225FLU1 G2083038 250,273.31 - - - (13,986.56) (467.92) (75.73) 1,127.87 236,870.98 335.13 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 912828M23 UNITED STATES TREASURY 424,613.25 - (424,298.78) - - 77.15 22.94 (414.57) - - 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 037833BR0 APPLE INC - 150,000.00 - - - - - 1,330.50 151,330.50 227.72 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 3138EKUP8 FN AL3289 266,994.68 - - - (33,320.96) (1,723.43) (553.09) (166.55) 231,230.66 927.02 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 9278011391 Virginia Electric and Power Com1 - 349,934.76 - (350,000.00) - - 65.24 - - - 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 92780JD73 Virginia Electric and Power Comb - 399,897.33 - - - - 58.67 12.00 399,968.00 - 33 Page 12 of 32 lirBrside Cooly ironsponolion (omission STAMP Portfolio Transaction Report by Account Quarter ended March 31, 2016 Source Account Account Beginning Base Identifier Descri tion Market Value Base Purchases Base Base Change In Base Maturities Net Total Realized Amortization/A Net Unrealized Ending Base Ending Accrued Base Sales and Redem tions Base Pa downs Gain/Loss ccretion Gain/Loss Market Value Income Balance 256350005 LC -Pr ject Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-To112 256350005 LC -Pr jest Fund-To112 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 912828UR9 UNITED STATES TREASURY 912828UR9 UNITED STATES TREASURY 912828UR9 UNITED STATES TREASURY 40428HPQ9 HSBC USA INC 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 3137A85H7 FH-3820E-GJ 256350005 LC -Project Fund-ToB 2 38141GRC0 GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP IN 256350005 LC -Pr jest Fund-To112 06050TKX9 BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. 256350005 LC -Project Fund-To112 3137A1LC5 FH-3710E-AB 256350005 LC -Pr jest Fund-To112 89114QBF4 TORONTO-DOMINION BANK 256350005 LC -Project Fund-To112 002799AX2 ABBEY NATIONAL TREASUR 256350005 LC -Pr jest Fund-To112 20772JL59 CONNECTICUT ST 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 161571GQ1 CHAIT 2014-A7 A7 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 55279HAH3 MANUFACTURERS AND TRA 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 94988J5B9 WELLS FARGO BANK NA 256350005 LC -Pr jest Fund-To112 912828K33 UNITED STATES TREASURY 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 912828K33 UNITED STATES TREASURY 256350005 LC -Pr ject Fund-To112 17305EFN0 CCCIT-14A2-A2 560,186.20 560,186.20 411,464.20 44,190.90 66,669.85 80,691.20 01,632.30 9,656.80 256350005 LC -Project Fund-ToB 2 002799AM6 ABBEY NATIONAL TREASUR 298,761.00 256350005 LC -Pr jest Fund-To112 14912L6Q9 CATERPILLAR FINANCIAL SI 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 94974BFK1 WELLS FARGO & CO 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 94974BFK1 WELLS FARGO & CO 299,817.00 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 3137ANLP8 FH-K501-A2 71,892.54 256350005 LC -Project Fund-To112 3137ANLP8 FH-K501-A2 95,856.72 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 55315GAC2 MMAFEF-I5A-A3 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 55315GAC2 MMAFEF-I5A-A3 245,142.56 256350005 LC -Project Fund-To112 38377LN38 GN-10130A-LG 0.01 256350005 LC -Pr ject Fund -Toll 2 46849LSL6 JACKSON NATIONAL LIFE Gl 148,942.50 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 02582JGS3 AXCMT-142-A 498,985.00 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 59217GAY5 METLIFE GLOBAL FUNDING 298,425.00 (85 166.02) (415,810.54) 252,707.55 125,000.00 119,790.00 132,577.90 248,862.50 250,000.00 507,385.58 507,207.64 299,976.56 81.04 423.29 (61.20) (62.52) (21.53) 66.01 5,004.95 5,071.69 3,944.59 402.34 565,129.95 480,110.40 44,659.25 368.48 313.04 78.03 (12,596.89) (526.52) 225.75 I,147.10 154,919.29 431.46 (97.45) 435.05 81.028.80 364.17 302.95 329.45 253,339.95 112.45 (9,579.18) (137.9 (102.27) 136.92 91,949.86 151.55 48.75 125,048.75 355.18 3.32 1,350.28 21,143.60 141.67 (36.56) 2,193.26 134,734.60 541.67 (62.21) 796.61 120,391.20 73.60 44.77 272.73 249,280.00 427.40 740.00 250,740.00 594.17 (365.70) 9,397.00 516,416.88 291.95 (359.87) 9,569.12 516,416.88 291.95 93 102.51 300,081.00 331.50 (299,580.00) - - (891.89) (87.92) 1,798.81 255,000.00 (255,900.15) 140,030.80 34,794.92 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 55315CAB3 MMAFEF-I4A-A2 - 179,040.04 256350005 LC -Pr jest Fund-To112 3137AH6B9 FH-K015-A1 167,381.90 256350005 LC -Project Fund-To112 17305EFP5 CCCIT-14A3-A3 - 155,000.00 900.15 (2.62) (49.18) 139,979.00 325.33 (5.60) 143.60 299,955.00 697.14 (4,367.61) (19.07) (131.16) 79.36 67,454.05 92.96 (5,823.49) (26.06) (178.29) 109.86 89,938.73 123.94 (0.01) 0.49 55.49 34,850.90 20.27 93.72 711.50 245,947.78 143.05 (0.00) 6.31 (111.78) 0.00 1,435.19 2,391.78 50,384.00 1,296.88 501,265.00 280.00 34.11 1,957.89 300,417.00 1,012.50 (91,231.60) 103.16 79.25 2.83 87,993.68 29.25 (9,797.75) (188.94) (251.54) 1,031.10 158,174.77 292.66 12.40 155,012.40 63.43 256350005 LC -Pr ject Fund -Toll 2 46625E1E8 JPMORGAN CHASE & CO 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 912828RX0 UNITED STATES TREASURY 256350005 LC -Pr jest Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-ToB 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 912828RX0 UNITED STATES TREASURY 1,000,630.00 842434CN0 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GA 249,102.50 46623E1Z3 1PMORGAN CHASE & CO 91476PPG7 UNIVERSITY OKLA REVS 79,522.40 65,069.55 (65,071.50) - - 5.25 (3.30) (1,001,984.38) 254.69 (254.26) 1,353.95 0.63 1,046.87 250,150.00 1,140.97 64,998.05 (64966.20) - - (31.93) 0.08 23.57 2,722.83 82,268.80 469.80 256350005 LC -Project Fund-To112 863667AK7 STRYKER CORP - 139,837.60 - - - - 2.87 - 141,495.20 155.56 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 62944BBC7 BANK NEDERLANDSE GEME - 274,395.00 256350005 LC -Pr jest Fund-To112 47787UAD5 JDOT-15-A3 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Pr jest Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Pr jest Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Pr jest Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Pr jest Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Pr jest Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Pr jest Fund -Toll 2 58768WAD1 MBART-131-A4 349,695.50 553794AA6 MUFG AMERICAS HOLDING', 297,378.00 94,951.76 553794AA6 MUFG AMERICAS HOLDING', - 49,618.50 084664CG4 BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY FIN - 119,908.80 822582AZ5 SHELL INTERNATIONAL FIN 299,235.00 748148RV7 QUEBEC, PROVINCE OF - 124,532.50 912828UZ1 UNITED STATES TREASURY 296,145.00 912828UZ1 UNITED STATES TREASURY 1,628,797.50 66754A1C7 CHEVRON PHILLIPS CHEMIC 296,259.00 25152RVQ3 DEUTSCHE BANK AG(LOND - 14,971.05 65339MD45 NextEra Energy Capital Holdings - 249,968.40 89352HAP4 TRANSCANADA PIPELINES L - 146,716.50 302154BL2 EXPORT IMPORT BANK OF K - 200,380.00 912828UA6 UNITED STATES TREASURY 793,376.00 912828UA6 UNITED STATES TREASURY 168.592.40 912828UA6 UNITED STATES TREASURY 119,006.40 ( 79.03 11.72 274,485.75 413.27 0.28 125.86 95,077.90 55.73 (159.72) 19.11 7.59 831.72 350,367.50 175.78 1,494.89 205.91 298,992.00 704.17 49,832.00 117.36 .37 1,755.43 121,665.60 90.67 (76.05) 1,270.05 300,429.00 1,020.00 29.19 110.81 124,672.50 84.08 (298,406.25) - - 834.20 91.12 1,335.94 634 560.54) ,805.39 302.13 3,655.52 31.54 1,570.46 297,861.00 2,125.00 4.85 (18.20) 14,957.70 23.03 8.06 3.54 249,990.00 242.88 724.62 147,684.00 470.37 (58.12) 2.12 200,324.00 595.23 82.85 5,261.15 798,720.00 1,680.33 83.04 1,052.56 169,728.00 357.07 60.57 741.03 119,808.00 252.05 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 912828UA6 UNITED STATES TREASURY 371,895.00 - - - - - 178.60 2,326.40 374,400.00 787.65 256350005 LC -Pr ject Fund-To112 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 256350005 LC -Pr jest Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Pr jest Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Pr jest Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Pr jest Fund -Toll 2 05531FAP8 BB&T CORP 3137A2AZ4 FH-K009-A1 408,279.65 3136AEYG6 FN-13M9-AQ2 223,236.62 65819WAC7 NORTH CAROLINA EASTN M 35,121.80 65819WAC7 NORTH CAROLINA EASTN M 125,435.00 446438RR6 HUNTINGTON NATIONAL BP 249.310.00 120,003.60 90261XHJ4 UBS AG (STAMFORD BRANC - 249,745.00 912828B58 UNITED STATES TREASURY - 436,670.90 544587B98 LOS ANGELES CALIF MUN I6 161,545.60 06050TLY6 BANK OF AMERICA NA 297,744.00 233851BF0 DAIMLER FINANCE NORTH t 297,288.00 80848HP1 CLARK CNTY NEV 124,546.80 41283LAB1 HARLEY-DAVIDSON FINANC 253,330.00 (0.19) (50.21) 119,953.20 84.65 (30,864.34) (713.16) (894.22) 1,567.80 377,375.73 848.97 (967.68) (9.71) (264.22) 2,121.69 224,116.71 337.8 (35.54) 363.84 35,450.10 175.26 I,172.50 126,607.50 625.94 24.49 1075.51 250,410.00 2,215.28 24.51 (164.51) 249,605.00 27.71 (69.79) 6,559.14 443,160.25 1,513.48 2,819.20 164,364.80 1,375.15 91.13 1,804.87 299,640.00 68.75 87.39 3,446.61 300,822.00 687.50 (851.96) 1,333.16 125,028.00 1,290.00 (253,450.00) - - (219.62) (837.11) I,176.74 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 69353RET1 PNC BANK NA 249,360.00 02665WBB6 AMERICAN HONDA FINANCI - 120,000.00 34 3.10 I919.40 251,282.50 1.850.00 340.80 20,340.80 182.81 Page 13 of 32 ��INEMi girerside Caunry ironsponolion Cam ission STAMP Portfolio Transaction Report by Account Quarter ended March 31, 2016 Source Beginning Base Base Maturities Base Base Change In Net Total Realized Amortization/A Net Unrealized Ending Base Ending Accrued 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 3133EECD0 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BAP 498,815.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - (6,906.57) - - - - (38.15) 723.15 499,500.00 77.02 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 36225FLA5 G2 083020 147,560.01 (140,615.70) (1,029.82) (35.85) 1,027.93 0.01 - 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 17401QAC5 CITIZENS BANK NA 249,705.00 - - 26.16 1,681.34 251,412.50 1,884.72 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 91159HHD5 US BANCORP 300,906.00 - - (446.23) 1,115.23 301,575.00 1,870.00 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 46623EKD0 JPMORGAN CHASE & CO 179,127.00 - - 12.83 1,578.37 180,718.20 255.00 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 46623EKD0 JPMORGAN CHASE & CO 298,545.00 - - - - - 62.33 2,589.67 301,197.00 425.00 256350005 LC -Project Fund-To112 89837LAA3 PRINCETON UNIVERSITY 191,693.25 - - - - - (1,272.61) 3,197.61 193,618.25 721.88 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 89837LAA3 PRINCETON UNIVERSITY 487,448.55 - - - - - (3,382.74) 8,277.74 492,343.55 1,835.63 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 3136A8G38 FN-12M13A-A2 140,203.23 - - - (7,908.14) (24.87) (91.92) 51.20 132,229.50 137.40 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 912828VV9 UNITED STATES TREASURY 162,580.80 - (166,913.28) - - 4,121.36 (55.04) 266.16 - - 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 912828VV9 UNITED STATES TREASURY 635,081.25 - (644,921.88) - - 3,015.01 (174.04) 6,999.66 - - 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 912828VV9 UNITED STATES TREASURY 330,242.25 - (340,716.80) - - 10,000.16 (137.78) 612.16 - - 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 161571GJ7 CHAIT 2014-AI Al - 200,312.50 - - - - (53.63) 83.13 200,342.00 102.22 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 161571GJ7 CHAIT 2014-AI Al - 100,101.56 - - - - (19.78) 89.22 100,171.00 51.11 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 16677ABG9 Chevron Phillips Chemical Comp - 599,964.67 - (600,000.00) - - 35.33 - - - 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 58772PAC2 MBART-151-A2B 389,703.60 - - - (29,148.26) (74.13) (915.11) 1,318.11 360,884.21 120.34 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 25737LC32 Dominion Gas Holdings, LLC - 399,898.89 - (400,000.00) - - 101.11 - - - 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 3138L1TX7 FN AM1465 311,416.71 - - - (1,727.94) (5.41) (179.60) (1,336.58) 308,167.19 426.31 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 3133XY2H7 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANI 289,033.86 - - - (16,142.54) (320.19) (1,018.11) 503.21 272,056.22 237.01 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 13063BFU1 CALIFORNIA ST ECONOMIC - 119,037.45 - - - - (349.76) 495.71 119,183.40 542.50 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 61979JAN7 Motiva Enterprises LLC - 499,888.47 - (500,000.00) - - 111.53 - - - 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 09062XAB9 BIOGEN IDEC INC - 60,217.85 - - - - (169.12) 183.42 60,232.15 315.10 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 49327M2H6 KEYBANK NA 248,250.00 - - - - - 120.86 1,586.64 249,957.50 1,416.67 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 36225EUY6 G2 082398 136,908.95 - - - (8,175.62) (228.22) (37.51) (32.07) 128,435.53 188.83 256350005 LC -Project Fund-To112 60689LAC9 MMAFEF-I3A-A3 113,771.47 - - - (31,741.78) (13.95) (5.08) 8.94 82,019.60 51.70 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 90261XHH8 UBS AG (STAMFORD BRANC 249,582.50 - (250,362.50) - - 875.25 8.79 (104.05) - - 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 037833AM2 APPLE INC 300,177.00 - - - - - (126.40) 1,086.40 301,137.00 1,268.75 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 31394GH22 FH-2649G-KA 126,689.18 - - - (19,298.08) (493.25) (304.42) (125.74) 106,467.68 388.87 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 937308AZ7 WBRP 3.2 WASHINGTON BIO 94,468.00 - - - - - - 1,315.75 95,783.75 117.56 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 532457BK3 ELI LILLY AND CO 299,262.00 - - - - - 99.19 2,954.81 302,316.00 312.50 256350005 LC -Project Fund-ToR 2 38147MAA3 GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP IN 101,955.00 - - - - - (240.71) 620.71 102,335.00 580.00 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 53944VAN9 LLOYDS BANK PLC - 200,000.00 - - - - - (170.00) 199,830.00 630.51 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 209111ET6 CONSOLIDATED EDISON CO 237,883.80 - - - - - (2,291.59) 2,267.39 237,859.60 6,435.00 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 48246TCG2 Kfw - 299,936.67 - (300,000.00) - - 63.33 - - - 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 30231GAL6 EXXON MOBIL CORP 299,523.00 - - - - - 37.64 1,786.36 301,347.00 271.88 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 063679ZT4 BANK OF MONTREAL 302,367.00 - - - - - (710.24) 674.24 302,331.00 991.25 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 0258MODZ9 AMERICAN EXPRESS CREDE 149,604.00 - - - - - 1.10 1,318.90 150,924.00 1,140.63 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 912828VK3 UNITED STATES TREASURY 130,512.20 - - - - - (187.09) 1,401.29 131,726.40 451.79 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 912828VK3 UNITED STATES TREASURY 130,512.20 - - - - - (188.02) 1,402.22 131,726.40 451.79 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 912828VK3 UNITED STATES TREASURY 180,709.20 - - - - - (184.72) 1,865.92 182,390.40 625.55 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 912828VK3 UNITED STATES TREASURY 130,512.20 - - - - - (189.87) 1,404.07 131,726.40 451.79 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 912828VK3 UNITED STATES TREASURY 301,182.00 - - - - - (270.68) 3,072.68 303,984.00 1,042.58 256350005 LC -Project Fund-ToR 2 912828VK3 UNITED STATES TREASURY 55,216.70 - - - - - (48.36) 562.06 55,730.40 191.14 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 912828VK3 UNITED STATES TREASURY 301,182.00 - - - - - (268.70) 3,070.70 303,984.00 1,042.58 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 912828VK3 UNITED STATES TREASURY 301,182.00 - - - - - (268.70) 3,070.70 303,984.00 1,042.58 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 80851QDA9 CHARLES SCHWAB CORPOR 69,982.25 - - - - - (814.75) 311.00 69,478.50 345.31 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 62888YAA0 NCUAGN-11R1-NTS 223,817.58 - - - (9,727.49) (41.27) (58.51) (902.69) 213,087.61 124.15 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 48121CYK6 JPMORGAN CHASE BANK N/ - 265,022.50 - - - - (448.42) 840.92 265,415.00 7,500.00 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 49130TRY4 KENTUCKY HSG CORP HSG 1 273,957.75 - - - - - 59.94 1,551.56 275,569.25 644.19 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 17275RAZ5 CISCO SYSTEMS INC - 120,000.00 (120,344.40) - - 344.40 - - - - 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 91324PCF7 UMTEDHEALTH GROUP INC 299,118.00 - (300,042.00) - - (351.84) (32.46) 1,308.30 - - 256350005 LC -Project Fund-Toll2 13063A5D2 CALIFORNIA ST ECONOMIC 319,419.45 - - - - - (4,232.96) (186.49) 315,000.00 9,371.25 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 59217GAZ2 METROPOLITAN LIFE GLOB/ 149,995.50 - - - - - (18.85) 1,019.35 150,996.00 773.44 256350005 LC -Project Fund -Toll 2 6174467V5 MORGAN STANLEY - 70,403.69 - - - - (19.37) 41.28 70,425.60 247.35 33,076,219.36 22,012,549.86 (18,249,903.49) (3,575,000.00) (356,137.22) 19,597.50 (37,441.42) 259,951.39 33,151,490.71 125,137.71 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 9AMMF05B2 U.S. Bank Money Market Amour 25,491.30 4,686,946.43 (4,596,233.15) - - - - - 116,204.58 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 38144LAB6 GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP IN 321,282.00 - - - - - (1,380.98) (593.02) 319,308.00 1,562.50 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 0255E2DC1 American Electric Power Compan - 549,687.72 - - - - 189.60 34.68 549,912.00 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 38143USC6 GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP IN 601,524.00 - - (600,000.00) - - (1,109.89) (414.11) - - 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 31393EXC8 FN-0388E-TH 29,732.78 - - - (4,595.28) (117.47) (44.54) 4.57 24,980.07 90.59 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 05565QCC0 BP CAPITAL MARKETS PLC 298,239.00 - - - - - 454.67 337.33 299,031.00 1,661.46 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 166764AE0 CHEVRON CORP 298,467.00 - - - - - (155.47) 4,526.47 302,838.00 1,388.72 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund -I Interest 912828RX0 UNITED STATES TREASURY 950,598.50 - - - - - - (2,066.75) - - 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 912828RX0 UNITED STATES TREASURY - - - - - - 367.12 3,143.62 952,042.50 2,100.96 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 89236TAY1 TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CC 502,830.00 - - - - - (429.76) 6,619.76 509,020.00 4,361.11 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 912828UA6 UNITED STATES TREASURY 1,239,650.00 - - - - - 2,010.53 6,339.47 1,248,000.00 2,625.51 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 31402RBG3 FN 735439 4,077.21 - - - (818.87) (29.14) (12.75) 7.29 3,223.74 15.63 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 31402RBG3 FN 735439 52,392.09 - - - (10,522.53) (413.72) (180.25) 149.41 41,425.00 200.88 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 78355AAS3 Ryder System, Inc. 124,968.75 - - (125,000.00) - - 52.09 (20.84) - - 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 30231GAL6 EXXON MOBIL CORP 419,332.20 - - - - - 42.77 2,510.83 421,885.80 380.63 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 912828K41 UNITED STATES TREASURY 199,824.00 - - - - - (0.25) 150.25 199,974.00 133.19 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 31385JLF3 FN 545826 107,348.15 - - - (25,713.25) (727.57) (503.96) 284.38 80,687.75 395.77 35 Page 14 of 32 Riverside Gnry Tronsp IMIlion (omission STAMP Portfolio Transaction Report by Account Quarter ended March 31, 2016 Source Account Account Identifier Descri tion Beginning Base Market Value Base Purchases Base Sales Base Base Change In Base Maturities Net Total Realized Amortization/A Net Unrealized Ending Base and Redem tions Base Pa downs Gain/Loss ccretion Gain/Loss Market Value Ending Accrued Income Balance 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 94974BGF1 WELLS FARGO & CO 991,240.00 436.50 20,003.50 1,011,680.00 3,643.06 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 3136A8G38 FN-12M13A-A2 256350022 256350022 256350022 256350022 256350022 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 61979JBV8 46625HJL5 63307EAB3 65475LDM1 912828UZ1 25737LC81 Motiva Enterprises LLC IPMORGAN CHASE & CO NATIONAL BANK OF CANAB Nissan Motor Acceptance Corpor UNITED STATES TREASURY Dominion Gas Holdings, LLC 620,900.02 496,290.00 907,947.00 691,005.00 724,332:40 599,435.33 599,664.00 (725,000.00) (35,021.76) (600,000.00) 243.57 624.49 667.60 (1,158.54) 585,587:79 608.49 205.52 (3,282.54) 308.00 563.01 336.00 4,529.48 1,680.54 88.67 6,352.99 501,025.00 906,345.00 599,832.00 697,921.00 3,069.44 8,910.00 1,838.94 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 02581RAM5 American Express Credit Corpora 891145TN4 TORONTO DOMINION BANK 724,862.25 1,001,610.00 (725,000.00) 201.39 (63.64) (1,420.69) 4,000.69 1,004,190.00 750.00 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 48121CYK6 JPMORGAN CHASE BANK Ni 320,748.00 (2,458.24) 208.24 318,498.00 9,000.00 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 66807MCQ8 NorthWestem Corporation 912828J84 UNITED STATES TREASURY 543,229.50 774,612.50 (775,000.00) 387.50 411.96 12,331.54 555,973.00 20.66 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 912828784 UNITED STATES TREASURY 395,076.00 (355,400.39) 9,435.06 141.53 1,290.80 50,543.00 1.88 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 02580ECC5 AMERICAN EXPRESS BANK I 267,785.00 (2,286.71) (40.79) 265,457.50 750.00 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 07274LDJ3 Bayerische Landesbank 44890MCB6 Hyundai Capital America 233851AT1 DABBLER FINANCE NORTH[ 500,020.00 499,748.75 499,339.45 (500,000.00) (500,000.00) 93.06 660.55 22.10 38.19 (42.10) 499,880.00 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 3136A4M89 FN-12M3B-2A1 172,439.26 (5,098.69) (14.63) (56.61) 832.99 168,102.32 267.38 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 43357LCN0 Hitachi Capital America Corp. 3137ASNH3 FH-K019-A1 371,397.51 574,603.25 (575,000.00) (49,086.79) 897.04 396.75 217.03 5,336.47 328,761.26 399.23 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 78355ABN3 Ryder System, Inc. 235219JS2 DALLAS TEX 654,407.00 199,902.50 (200,000.00) 97.50 1,943.50 656,350.50 1,319.75 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 31393V2T7 FH-2627E-GY 151,228.50 (22,847.28) (566.57) (221.92) 241.74 127,834.48 464.97 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 78011DAC8 ROYAL BANK OF CANADA 995,270.00 (117.45) 3,857.45 999,010.00 400.00 256350022 LC -Sr Lien Ob Fund-1 Interest 44331BDF7 HP Inc. 799,656.00 76.44 107.56 799,840.00 14,981,212.02 10,507,928.33 (4,951,633.54) (5,325,000.00) (153,704.45) 8,706.55 (4,698.30) 82,552.66 15,145,363.28 46,360.76 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 9AMMF05B2 U.S. Bank Money Market Accoun 108,223.49 1,539,032.89 (1,607,307.67) 39,948.71 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 912828B58 UNITED STATES TREASURY 912828B58 UNITED STATES TREASURY 507,385.00 50.878.91 (530.89) (38.96) 14,510.89 1.296.55 521,365.00 52.136.50 1,780.56 178.06 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 912828B58 UNITED STATES TREASURY 912828B58 UNITED STATES TREASURY 912828B58 UNITED STATES TREASURY 3137AJMF8 FH-K016-A2 3135GOD75 FEDERAL NATIONAL MORT( 116,698.55 147,141.65 740,782.10 30,964.50 592,530.00 (102.54) (168.43) (636.11) (43.78) 306.86 3,317.94 4,222.63 21,046.91 918.58 13,787.14 119,913.95 151,195.85 761,192.90 31,839.30 606,624.00 409.53 516.36 2,599.62 74.19 2,475.00 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 38376GB33 GN-116-BA 3137A7JU5 FH-K701-A2 912828VV9 UNITED STATES TREASURY 912828VV9 UNITED STATES TREASURY 38378KRS0 GN-1378-AG 350,217.44 337,450.75 86,371.05 434,178.00 154,945.31 (5,187.80) (128.84) (135.67) (1,610.60) (80.03) (179.57) 116.92 504.08 967.10 2,195.68 1,387.26 13,257.08 345,269.21 336,807.25 88,486.70 156,153.00 447,552.00 991.48 1,051.38 157.07 277.17 895.72 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 38378KWU9 GN-1396-A 3138EJ6V5 FNAL2683 3137B03W2 FH-K502-A2 912828VB3 UNITED STATES TREASURY 3137EADB2 FREDDIE MAC 67,870.79 123,508.79 42,650.11 1,948,520.00 557,639.50 (117,823.14) (410,375.00) (4,253.91) (6,181.59) (6,043.67) 104.53 1,292.99 5.65 31,821.86 15.58 (73.82) (1.68) 3,002.34 578.99 607.91 (723.23) 80.26 49,030.80 18,390.51 64,344.91 36,690.68 1,622,000.00 576,609.00 77.17 43.47 10,615.38 2,830.21 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 3137EADB2 FREDDIE MAC 38378B7E3 GN-1333-AC 38377RVK8 GN-10166F-GP 38377RVK8 GN-10166F-GP 912828WU0 UNITED STATES TREASURY 3136A7MJ8 FN-12M8-AQ2 38378KSL4 GN-1374-AL 220,066.30 116,211.67 69,727.00 131,643.18 193,528.00 208,082.00 582,847.10 (1,359.55) (5,435.07) (3,261.04) (3,565.65) 52.39 (99.31) (111.44) 27.43 (14.46) 70.47 (89.96) (77.90) (190.87) 109.02 26.61 1,608.46 1,137.77 1,309.32 861.37 18,035.06 178.11 7,835.39 209,676.00 219,967.39 111,896.65 67,137.99 600,691.29 128,392.08 201,390.00 1,029.17 330.08 268.25 160.95 158.29 161.82 465.09 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 38378KSI4 GN-1374-AL 217,719.00 1.59 8,843.16 226,563.75 523.23 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 3136A72D3 FN-12M9-A2 396,019.10 521.12 10,925.98 407,466.20 816.99 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 38378B6A2 GN-1312A-AB 131,843.64 (720.75) 23.26 34.03 2,022.51 133,202.68 205.76 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 3137AQT24 FH-K708-A2 171,433.10 (73.57) 2,159.47 173,519.00 301.75 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 38376WA62 GN-1015C-PD 912828RC6 UNITED STATES TREASURY 3128MMAK9 FH G18009 38377DPX8 GN-IO10lE-NC 31395E71'5 FH-2835G-MD 3136AEYG6 FN-13M9-AQ2 31394DVM9 FN-0543D-PB 3137AEV77 FH-K703-A2 383781IXW4 GN-13105-A 9I2828M23 UNITED STATES TREASURY 38377JZ89 GN-10117A-GK 314I3XVG5 FN 958815 38379KDN5 GN-1529-AD 3136A4M48 FN-12M3A-IAI 148,353.10 1,922,496.00 133,117.97 23,250.61 88,429.32 143,208.40 161,578.43 256,456.74 193,402.50 146,287.33 208,616.00 188,323.59 356,546.48 599,777.23 (624,140.63) (599,830.04) (13,378.95) (11,735.33) (7,441.38) (12 019.52) (620.76) (12,964.03) (1,856.22) (10,595.04) (753.30) (869.98) 18,144.90 (484.23) (5.13) (359.16) (2.41) (575.03) 8.66 48.87 (296.88) 18.72 (1,646.38) (650.90) (442.24) 133.76 (100.55) (76.27) (142.79) (408.70) 9.39 3.94 (269.90) (951.43) 70.98 2,775.12 38,126.63 276.33 (180.21) 139.81 1,264.02 120.21 960.90 951.64 1,352.52 711.43 4,416.17 135,232.91 1,353,976.00 120,732.49 15,757.64 76,089.90 143,772.98 148,016.79 257,008.94 192,515.98 136,478.04 208,376.00 192,076.16 425.14 3,491.07 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 912828UF5 UNITED STATES TREASURY 171,678.50 256350023 LC -Sr Llen Reserve hund-1 93,196.90 1,963.20 95,282.15 36 Page 15 of 32 ��INEMi Riverside (Boni.? ironsponolion 0mmission STAMP Portfolio Transaction Report by Account Quarter ended March 31, 2016 Source Beginning Base Base Maturities Base Base Change In Net Total Realized Amortization/A Net Unrealized Ending Base Ending Accrued 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 912828UF5 UNITED STATES TREASURY 225,634.60 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - (82.52) 101.77 4,946.73 230,683.10 653.98 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 912828UF5 UNITED STATES TREASURY 735,765.00 686.05 15,776.45 752,227.50 2,132.55 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 313927783 FN-0317D-HC 22,328.13 - (3,892.59) (24.10) (65.38) 18,263.53 74.25 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 31381PEB0 FN466430 277,013.02 - (1,083.76) (42.07) (668.22) 8,423.68 283,642.66 764.80 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 3137AUPE3 FH-K021-A2 233,691.05 - - - 377.87 8,540.38 242,609.30 469.22 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 38378CRT6 GN-1213E-EG 112,877.21 - (5,760.51) 189.68 121.05 917.49 108,344.91 181.31 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 38378XP62 GN-14166-PL 461,054.76 - (4,487.96) (54.09) (63.26) 11,480.46 467,929.91 953.89 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 3137A7E22 FH-3804A-DA 195,951.34 - - (19,673.47) (232.07) (290.18) (141.77) 175,613.85 498.80 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 38376T5Z1 GN-104A-PD 160,725.07 - - (7,272.45) (303.06) (135.33) 1,955.71 154,969.94 371.53 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 38377RSZ9 GN-10162D-PQ 64,921.03 - - (7,103.11) (434.40) (180.95) 472.18 57,674.75 206.63 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 3137EADR7 FREDDIE MAC 467,670.75 - - - - - 170.50 10,887.50 478,728.75 2,721.35 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 3137EACA5 FREDDIE MAC 856,528.00 - - - - - (3,291.00) 12,411.00 865,648.00 333.33 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 912828KQ2 UNITED STATES TREASURY 527,480.00 - - - - - (1,694.66) 8,649.66 534,435.00 5,923.76 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 31404WTT3 FN 780962 73,582.16 - - - (7,883.42) (535.41) (369.16) 368.59 65,162.76 235.53 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 38378BX20 GN-12132-AB 67,770.00 - - - (4,665.88) 109.86 15.29 690.00 63,919.27 67.87 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 31417YKF3 FN MA0293 150,266.01 - - - (7,348.11) (403.57) (0.73) 783.52 143,297.12 494.19 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 31385XBG1 FN 555439 12,832.74 - - - (2,950.63) (78.64) (57.59) 29.72 9,775.60 47.94 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 31416YXJ2 FN AB3380 62,937.96 - - - (2,930.18) (111.14) (91.69) 596.10 60,401.05 166.25 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 3137ASNH3 FH-K019-Al 371,397.51 - - - (49,086.79) 767.05 192.56 5,490.92 328,761.26 399.23 256350023 LC -Se Lien Reserve Fund-1 3137B6ZL8 FH-K714-Al 45,951.44 - - - (11,335.78) (139.12) (43.17) 231.92 34,665.28 59.15 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 31418AFW3 FN MA1080 213,736.30 - - - (15,107.26) (379.13) (339.34) 2,926.17 200,836.74 480.14 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 38379C2M7 GN-1496E-WA 49,411.42 - - - (2,225.86) (112.42) (53.44) (47.40) 46,972.29 70.27 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 3138L33G8 FN AM3498 99,572.00 - - - - - (0.47) 2,266.47 101,838.00 173.08 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 38378B7F0 GN-1333-B 188,412.00 - - - - - 44.63 5,393.37 193,850.00 378.83 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 38378B7F0 GN-1333-B 235,515.00 - - - - - 127.32 6,670.18 242,312.50 473.54 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 38378TAF7 GN-1371A-GA 231,985.20 - - - (7,666.86) 3.46 (12.19) 3,261.07 227,570.69 458.84 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 912828T79 UNITED STATES TREASURY 482,139.90 - - - - - 874.25 15,797.35 498,811.50 1,016.52 256350023 LC -Sr Lien Reserve Fund-1 912828T.19 UNITED STATES TREASURY - 624,731.45 - - - - 2.92 5,078.13 629,812.50 1,283.48 18,702,414.17 3,760,294.89 (3,359,476.48) - (280,329.13) 46,763.15 (8,133.35) 393,788.84 19,255,322.09 59,695.11 188 159 669.74 266 717 731.12 (117 181 806.67) (159 350 000.00) (4,792,963.33) 74,534.03 3,663.33 1,021,488.57 174 653 971.52 442,401.93 37 Page 16 of 32 `iMm Riverside Cm ry Trelnporlmion Commissioa STAMP Portfolio Summary of Investments for quarter ended March 31, 2016 ATTACHMENT 5 Credit Rating sa ago uue Asset Class Cala 4a414Y-1 w.r+nr w.w.1 err. N n6x4 �>♦ 'Fiwd.rt ern. 44029.1 *Negative cash reflects securities in transit at month end Industry Group 6.44114-kr11x, .04401 Rw res 15..r5=1 or..rne.e rwn s... t.-14asi osetrr rer1x1 ss.r.a.. 464e,04 ew.lsrs6exF u6 rem. 1{6a111. rF ai c1 Security Type POW n:+nw Market Sector Cimre warm. c..n ravltxl • 4 12.0662411 4.214 - ..446.e. B. 14.1 _ - -ISG26+x7 1.141.4 L11-.%7 a60•5404I1,02,16 6e4e.*e...r.411164x1 1111M imm— Riyersidiiiide County iranspaimion Commission ATTACHMENT 6 STAMP Portfolio Toll Revenue Project Senior Lien Fund Summary of Investments for quarter ended March 31, 2016 39 `NENE` Riverside Couniy ironsporioiion Commission ATTACHMENT 7 STAMP Portfolio Toll Revenue Project Sales Tax Revenue Fund Summary of Investments for quarter ended March 31, 2016 a OM 000 a 000 0O0 r WO 000 W 000 >ahh A0. - tip. Industry Group am.. st_tlutt,S1 B.arla ISAITSil s.n �. [aae,y Pnormac.wka4 [586%] T.Iec unr atrarr• rsiatcF cash Izz.saaxl US w•a�w�. i99 %bi••.� Municipal Iss."Fsi} 40 NM mom Riverside County Uunsporloiion Commission ATTACHMENT 8 STAMP Portfolio Series A & Series B Reserve Fund Summary of Investments for quarter ended March 31, 2016 zs DX DX zn oan oon c u wo COO a ono oix A 5 COD OOV Credit Rating Industry Group cash to .1.7.14 rsea,c Apr, I. •[�ra +ss I. FH WI Gvl,atr-/ .0,mm..m..WU. — f -- ScrewrmisaJss, r$m1) M..,ap• Hoc/ad n.. 2%I. - cw. iosarci 4: r..... (4.1,6 of 41 1111 `� Riverside County Uansporloiion Commission ATTACHMENT 9 STAMP Portfolio Toll Revenue Project Capitalized Interest Fund Summary of Investments for quarter ended March 31, 2016 42 `INNEN` Riverside Couniy ironspormiion Commission ATTACHMENT 10 STAMP Portfolio Sales Tax Revenue Capitalized Interest Fund Summary of Investments for quarter ended March 31, 2016 43 ��INNEN�� Riverside County iranspaiolion [ommission STAMP Portfolio Sales Tax Equity Fund Summary of Investments for quarter ended March 31, 2016 ATTACHMENT 11 Credit Rating u DX CO0 z6 EMI 000 S 15 WO COO F. 10 CPO- A 5 a0a CPO 1111111 i . . �% Asset Class Money Y Marken . run COAPS4 Cann lu p]Tx} ' 1900� a.Kuw.r 1.00,036,1 *Negative cash reflects securities in transit at month end Industry Group ou.P [z+ esa��c, la ABS tsir��l u5 11uniel6a. la-" TS��xY r5 aeEv Chnne" rstli. Foun sl`. tn.. Card 1B3 15.aaYY.1 L69]6tlra.Y YRS [lal��(0-1165Y1 uu Mc;.i 1e.6T RI 1T��r i.7394.1 Inalrmar C0*M1 - 6.6a6%} Garet 6a01re m.ae 2567 a6asnq. 4.4.24 a1d - 6an1a1S6.14,1 " ca.mn.rn 110.16,1 FinyKial In 6'/]KI 44 RCTC ATTACHMENT 12 Ilr tie amide {Aunty Tr,ntia,Comminion Payden & Rygel Operating Portfolio by Investment Category for Quarter ended March 31, 2016 Account Number: 001050990415 Name: RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANS COMM CUSIP Security Type Cate l or Issuer Next Call Base Market Unrealized Final Maturi Trade Date Date Orb inal Cost Value Gain/Loss Accrued Credit Income Cou on Yield Ratin 037833AG5 Credit APPLE INC 0.59708% 5/03/18 05/03/2018 05/03/2013 250,524.21 249,552.50 -971.71 240.49 0.870 0.598 037833BB5 Credit APPLE INC 0.900% 5/12/17 05/12/2017 05/13/2015 119,917.20 120,186.00 268.80 414.00 0.900 0.898 1.291 1.673 1.341 AA+ 037833BN9 Credit APPLE INC 1.300% 2/23/18 02/23/2018 02/23/2016 29,987.10 30,232.80 245.70 41.17 1.300 AA+ 03783313Q2 Credit APPLE INC 1.700% 2/22/19 02/22/2019 02/23/2016 39,993.20 40,597.60 604.40 71.78 1.700 AA+ 05581RAD8 Asset -Backed BMW VEHICLE LEASE 1.340% 1/22/19 01/22/2019 02/17/2016 599,929.50 599,190.00 -739.50 245.67 1.340 N/A 06406HCK3 Credit BANK OF NY MTN 0.90191% 3/06/18 03/06/2018 03/06/2013 750,933.34 750,142.50 -790.84 488.54 1.080 0.902 A 084664CD1 Credit BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY 0.93133% 1/12/18 01/12/2018 01/15/2015 250,463.96 249,987.50 -476.46 344.25 0.920 0.932 AA 084670BH0 Credit BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY 1.550% 2/09/18 02/09/2018 02/11/2013 503,013.99 504,655.00 1,641.01 1,119.44 1.550 1.534 AA 13063CFD7 Taxable Muni CALIFORNIA ST 1.250% 11/01/16 11/01/2016 11/05/2013 351,450.46 351,641.50 191.04 1,822.92 1.250 1.245 AA- 161571GS7 Asset -Backed CHASE ISSUANCE TRU 0.78141% 2/18/20 02/18/2020 03/13/2015 750,065.66 750,517.50 451.84 246.93 0.760 0.781 AAA 166764AK6 Credit CHEVRON CORP 0.54341% 11/15/17 11/15/2017 11/18/2014 250,100.85 248,822.50 -1,278.35 166.04 0.790 0.546 AA- 166764AV2 Credit CHEVRON CORP 1.365% 3/02/18 03/02/2018 03/03/2015 499,970.00 501,780.00 1,810.00 549.79 1.370 1.358 AA- 17275RAU6 Credit CISCO SYSTEMS INC 1.650% 6/15/18 06/15/2018 06/17/2015 399,932.00 405,636.00 5,704.00 1,943.33 1.650 1.626 AA- 191216BR0 Credit COCA COLA CO THE 0.875% 10/27/17 10/27/2017 10/27/2015 35,984.16 36,063.36 79.20 134.75 0.880 0.873 AA- 19416QDU1 Credit COLGATE PALM MTN 2.625% 5/01/17 05/01/2017 05/04/2011 516,441.89 515,216.15 -1,225.74 5,523.44 2.630 2.575 AA- 263901AE0 Credit DUKE ENERGY INDIAN 0.97759% 7/11/16 07/11/2016 07/11/2013 750,386.08 750,225.00 -161.08 1,611.42 0.970 0.977 A 30231GAL6 Credit EXXON MOBIL 1.305% 3/06/18 03/06/2018 03/06/2015 460,000.00 462,065.40 2,065.40 416.88 1.310 1.297 AAA 30231GAP7 Credit EXXON MOBIL 1.708% 3/01/19 03/01/2019 03/03/2016 40,000.00 40,527.60 527.60 53.14 1.710 1.687 AAA 30231GAU6 Credit EXXON MOBIL 1.439% 3/01/18 03/01/2018 03/03/2016 40,000.00 40,285.60 285.60 44.77 1.440 1.428 AAA 3130A5EP0 Agencies F H L B 0.625% 5/30/17 05/30/2017 05/15/2015 999,170.00 999,370.00 200.00 2,100.69 0.630 0.625 AA+ 3130A62S5 Agencies F H L B 0.750% 8/28/17 08/28/2017 07/24/2015 1,027,692.80 1,030,453.20 2,760.40 708.13 0.750 0.750 AA+ 3130A6LZ8 Agencies F H L B DEB 0.625% 10/26/17 10/26/2017 10/09/2015 748,372.50 748,530.00 157.50 2,018.23 0.630 0.626 AA+ 3130A7CX1 Agencies F H L B 0.875% 3/19/18 03/19/2018 02/18/2016 519,838.80 520,884.00 1,045.20 151.67 0.880 0.874 AA+ 3133EEWS5 Agencies F F C B DEB 0.4805% 1/02/18 01/02/2018 04/02/2015 699,961.01 698,523.00 -1,438.01 271.25 0.480 0.482 AA+ 3134G72P5 Agencies F H L M C 1.200% 10/29/18 10/29/2018 10/29/2015 04/29/2016 500,000.00 500,055.00 55.00 2,533.33 1.200 1.201 AA+ 3134G8L98 Agencies F H L M C M T N 1.050% 2/26/18 02/26/2018 02/26/2016 05/26/2016 500,000.00 500,070.00 70.00 510.42 1.050 1.050 AA+ 3134G8NT2 Agencies F H L M C 1.125% 3/16/18 03/16/2018 03/16/2016 06/16/2016 559,972.00 560,459.20 487.20 262.50 1.130 1.125 AA+ 3135G0E58 Agencies FNMA DEB 1.125% 10/19/18 10/19/2018 09/01/2015 529,141.40 533,694.10 4,552.70 2,683.13 1.130 1.119 AA+ 3135G0J53 Agencies FNMA DEB 1.000% 2/26/19 02/26/2019 02/23/2016 498,820.00 501,105.00 2,285.00 486.11 1.000 0.999 AA+ 3136AMTM1 Mortgage -Backed F N M A GTD REMIC 0.3845% 9/25/18 09/25/2018 03/01/2015 464,485.95 462,565.40 -1,920.55 55.50 0.610 0.665 N/A 3137BLVY1 Mortgage -Backed F H L M C MLTCL MTG 1.639% 10/25/19 10/25/2019 11/01/2015 190,307.01 191,603.98 1,296.97 260.58 1.640 1.633 N/A 3137EADV8 Agencies F H L M C 0.750% 7/14/17 07/14/2017 05/29/2015 799,376.00 800,288.00 912.00 1,283.33 0.750 0.750 AA+ 3137EADX4 Agencies F H L M C 1.000% 12/15/17 12/15/2017 12/11/2015 819,155.40 823,214.40 4,059.00 2,505.56 1.000 0.997 AA+ 3137EADZ9 Agencies F H L MC M T N 1.125% 4/15/19 04/15/2019 03/21/2016 289,904.30 291,139.70 1,235.40 90.63 1.130 1.120 AA+ 31680GAB2 Asset -Backed FIFTH THIRD AUTO TRU 1.020% 5/15/18 05/15/2018 11/05/2015 159,995.63 159,969.60 -26.03 72.53 1.020 1.020 N/A 31846V203 Cash FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y 157,651.74 157,651.74 0.00 1.08 0.006 36159LCN4 Asset -Backed GE DEALER FLOORPLA 0.8232% 10/20/19 10/20/2019 10/21/2014 750,391.50 745,275.00 -5,116.50 205.80 0.880 0.827 N/A 36962G2G8 Credit GEN ELEC CAP CRP MTN 5.400% 2/15/17 02/15/2017 02/13/2007 108,560.35 108,126.72 -433.63 717.60 5.400 5.204 AA+ 36962G3H5 Credit GEN ELEC CAP CRP MTN 5.625% 9/15/17 09/15/2017 09/24/2007 532,531.80 533,915.00 1,383.20 1,250.00 5.630 5.284 AA+ 43814NAC9 Asset -Backed HONDA AUTO 1.570% 12/18/19 12/18/2019 02/25/2016 199,971.58 199,846.00 -125.58 113.39 1.570 1.569 AAA 47787UAB9 Asset -Backed JOHN DEERE OWNER 0.870% 2/15/18 02/15/2018 03/11/2015 344,680.68 344,565.01 -115.67 133.29 0.870 0.870 N/A 47787VAC5 Asset -Backed JOHN DEERE OWNER 0.920% 4/16/18 04/16/2018 04/09/2014 534,366.27 534,277.24 -89.03 218.56 0.920 0.920 N/A 478160BR4 Credit JOHNSON JOHNSON 1.125% 3/01/19 03/01/2019 03/01/2016 89,989.20 90,242.10 252.90 84.38 1.130 1.120 AAA 48125LRD6 Credit JP MORGAN CHASE MTN 0.902% 6/14/17 06/14/2017 06/19/2015 750,000.00 750,112.50 112.50 338.25 1.030 0.902 A+ 54473ERP1 Taxable Muni LOS ANGELES CNTY CA 1.507% 12/01/17 12/01/2017 09/02/2015 25,000.00 25,228.00 228.00 125.58 1.510 1.493 AA 54473ERQ9 Taxable Muni LOS ANGELES CNTY CA 2.036% 12/01/18 12/01/2018 09/02/2015 50,000.00 50,507.00 507.00 339.33 2.040 2.016 AA 58933YAH8 Credit MERCK CO INC 0.7241% 5/18/18 05/18/2018 05/20/2013 751,987.00 751,920.00 -67.00 648.67 0.980 0.722 AA 594918BF0 Credit MICROSOFT CORP 1.300% 11/03/18 11/03/2018 11/03/2015 249,750.00 252,430.00 2,680.00 1,336.11 1.300 1.287 AAA 6055806E1 Taxable Muni MISSISSIPPI ST SER D 3.381% 11/01/18 11/01/2018 11/10/2010 105,247.27 106,372.00 1,124.73 1,408.75 3.380 3.181 AA 650119AD2 Taxable Muni NEW YORK UNIVERSITY 0.898% 7/01/17 07/01/2017 04/16/2015 200,000.00 199,910.00 -90.00 449.00 0.900 0.898 AA- 650119AE0 Taxable Muni NEW YORK UNIVERSITY 1.315% 7/01/18 07/01/2018 04/16/2015 120,000.00 120,152.40 152.40 394.50 1.320 1.313 AA- 702282ND2 Taxable Muni PASADENA CA UNIF 1.861% 11/01/18 11/01/2018 03/20/2014 251,693.09 255,665.00 3,971.91 1,938.54 1.860 1.820 A+ 717081DD2 Credit PFIZER INC 0.900% 1/15/17 01/15/2017 06/03/2013 500,781.14 500,175.00 -606.14 950.00 0.900 0.899 AA 717081DP5 Credit PFIZER INC 0.46539% 5/15/17 05/15/2017 05/15/2014 250,010.86 249,240.00 -770.86 148.66 0.770 0.466 AA 89237CAD3 Asset -Backed TOYOTA AUTO RECEIV 1.270% 5/15/19 05/15/2019 06/17/2015 A r 499,972.95 500,865.00 892.05 282.22 1.270 1.267 AAA `T J RCTC iiIIIIIIII� � itiewside 1r,atia,Cornminion Payden & Rygel Operating Portfolio by Investment Category for Quarter ended March 31, 2016 Account Number: 001050990415 Name: RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANS COMM CUSIP Security Type Cate. on, Issuer Next Call Base Market Unrealized Final Maturity Trade Date Date Ori.inal Cost Value Gain/Loss Accrued Income Cou on Yield Credit Ratin ouzitivkuo Asset -backed I UYU I H HU I U I.LOU% 3/ Ib/ZU 1.13/l13/ZUZU U3/UZ/ZUI13 l`J`J,`J2HS.bb ZUU,UOZ.UU U3.34 CU I.3U I.ZOU 1.Z4`J HH/i 90331HMD2 Credit US BANK NA MTN 0.5519% 1/30/17 01/30/2017 01/30/2014 12/30/2016 250,101.65 250,110.00 8.35 237.62 0.850 0.552 AA- 90331HMO3 Credit US BANK NA MTN 1.350% 1/26/18 01/26/2018 01/27/2015 12/26/2017 500,663.93 501,235.00 571.07 1,218.75 1.350 1.345 AA- 912828D98 Treasuries U S TREASURY NT 1.000% 9/15/17 09/15/2017 09/15/2014 2,483,788.53 2,490,664.00 6,875.47 1,145.65 1.000 0.996 N/A 912828G20 Treasuries U S TREASURY NT 0.875% 11/15/17 11/15/2017 11/15/2014 813,058.01 817,037.50 3,979.49 2,703.61 0.880 0.873 N/A 912828G46 Treasuries U S TREASURY NT 0.500% 11/30/16 11/30/2016 12/01/2014 399,531.25 399,984.00 452.75 672.13 0.500 0.500 N/A 912828H37 Treasuries U S TREASURY NT 0.875% 1/15/18 01/15/2018 01/15/2015 2,005,797.27 2,020,118.10 14,320.83 3,729.69 0.880 0.873 N/A 912828H78 Treasuries U S TREASURY NT 0.500% 1/31/17 01/31/2017 02/02/2015 2,146,934.56 2,148,409.00 -247.25 1,801.51 0.500 0.500 N/A 912828H94 Treasuries U S TREASURY NT 1.000% 2/15/18 02/15/2018 02/17/2015 1,635,350.87 1,637,709.90 2,158.28 2,059.89 1.000 0.995 N/A 912828K25 Treasuries U S TREASURY NT 0.750% 4/15/18 04/15/2018 04/15/2015 1,241,556.92 1,249,562.50 8,005.58 4,328.89 0.750 0.750 N/A 912828L40 Treasuries U S TREASURY NT 1.000% 9/15/18 09/15/2018 09/15/2015 1,423,670.63 1,426,773.40 3,262.69 655.98 1.000 0.996 N/A 912828M72 Treasuries U S TREASURY NT 0.875% 11/30/17 11/30/2017 11/30/2015 1,759,262.56 1,764,329.60 5,067.04 5,175.41 0.880 0.873 N/A 912828N55 Treasuries U S TREASURY NT 1.000% 12/31/17 12/31/2017 12/31/2015 1,313,546.44 1,321,325.15 7,778.71 3,323.63 1.000 0.995 N/A 912828SS0 Treasuries U S TREASURY NT 0.875% 4/30/17 04/30/2017 04/30/2012 2,744,150.45 2,743,514.06 -636.39 10,066.37 0.880 0.872 N/A 912828TS9 Treasuries U S TREASURY NT 0.625% 9/30/17 09/30/2017 10/01/2012 2,499,152.40 2,495,776.29 -3,376.11 42.67 0.630 0.626 N/A 912828TW0 Treasuries U S TREASURY NT 0.750% 10/31/17 10/31/2017 10/31/2012 19,977.34 20,007.00 29.66 63.05 0.750 0.749 N/A 912828UA6 Treasuries U S TREASURY NT 0.625% 11/30/17 11/30/2017 11/30/2012 2,023,823.43 2,036,736.00 12,912.57 4,284.84 0.630 0.626 N/A 912828UR9 Treasuries U S TREASURY NT 0.750% 2/28/18 02/28/2018 02/28/2013 1,616,986.19 1,617,371.91 385.72 1,054.57 0.750 0.750 N/A 912828WT3 Treasuries U S TREASURY NT 0.875% 7/15/17 07/15/2017 07/15/2014 1,002,497.71 1,002,420.00 -77.71 1,850.96 0.880 0.872 N/A 91412GWU5 Taxable Muni UNIV CALIFORNIA CA 1.418% 5/15/18 05/15/2018 03/25/2015 250,000.00 253,077.50 3,077.50 1,339.22 1.420 1.405 AA 91412GWV3 Taxable Muni UNIV OF CA 2.003% 5/15/19 05/15/2019 03/25/2015 250,000.00 255,947.50 5,947.50 1,891.72 2.000 1.958 AA 92867VAB6 Asset -Backed VOLKSWAGEN AUTO 0.870% 6/20/17 06/20/2017 03/05/2015 142,160.70 142,003.35 -157.33 37.83 0.870 0.872 N/A 94974BFK1 Credit WELLS FARGO MTN 0.9464% 4/23/18 04/23/2018 04/23/2013 502,064.93 499,925.00 -2,139.93 906.97 1.250 0.947 A 94974BFW5 Credit WELLS FARGO COM MTN 1.150% 6/02/17 06/02/2017 06/03/2014 500,330.41 500,540.00 209.59 1,900.69 1.150 1.149 A 977100AU0 Taxable Muni WISCONSIN ST 5.050% 5/01/18 05/01/2018 04/01/2008 217,112.09 216,530.00 -582.09 4,208.33 5.050 4.671 AA 50,359,378.76 50,456,913.56 95,772.30 97,457.42 46 RCTC ATTACHMENT 13 I` Rirervde town-1r.sportolion Commission Payden & Rygel Operating Portfolio Transaction Report Quarter ended March 31, 2016 Account Number: 001050990415 Transaction Settlement Date Trade Date Date Name: RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANS COMM CUSIP Description Units Miscellaneous Price Commissions SEC Fees Fees Federal Tax Cost Net Cash Amount Amount Short Term Long Term Gain/Loss Gain/Loss Amount Amount INTEREST EARNED ON F F C B DEB 0.283% 1/02/18 $1 PV ON 01/04/2016 3133EEWS5 700000.0000 SHARES DUE 1/2/2016 - - - - - 170.59 - - - - - - 01/04/2016 INTEREST EARNED ON FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y UNIT ON 31846V203 0.0000 SHARES DUE 12/31/2015 INTEREST FROM 12/1/15 TO 12/31/15 - - - - - 2.68 01/11/2016 AMORTIZED PREMIUM ON DUKE ENERGY INDIAN 0.68448 % 7/11/16 263901AE0 CURRENT YEAR AMORTIZATION - - - - - - (21.19) - - 01/11/2016 INTEREST EARNED ON DUKE ENERGY INDIAN 0.68448% 7/11/16 $1 PV 263901AE0 ON 750000.0000 SHARES DUE 1/11/2016 - - - - - 1,283.40 - - 01/12/2016 AMORTIZED PREMIUM ON BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY 0.6275% 1/12/18 084664CD1 CURRENT YEAR AMORTIZATION - - _ - - - "T" - (6.79) - - 01/12/2016 INTEREST EARNED ON BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY 0.6275% 1/12/18 $1 084664CD1 PV ON 250000.0000 SHARES DUE 1/12/2016 - - - - - 392.18 - - - 01/12/2016 INTEREST EARNED ON NEW YORK UNIVERSITY 0.898% 7/01/17 $1 PV 650119AD2 ON 200000.0000 SHARES DUE 1/1/2016 - - - - - 1,272.17 - - - 01/14/2016 INTEREST EARNED ON F H L M C 0.750% 7/14/17 $1 PV ON 3137EADV8 800000.0000 SHARES DUE 1/14/2016 - - - - - 3,750.00 - - - 01/14/2016 INTEREST EARNED ON NEW YORK UNIVERSITY 1.315% 7/01/18 $1 PV 650119AE0 ON 120000.0000 SHARES DUE 1/1/2016 - - - - - 1,117.75 - - - 01/15/2016 AMORTIZED PREMIUM ON CHASE ISSUANCE TRU 0.67218% 2/18/20 161571GS7 CURRENT YEAR AMORTIZATION - - - - - - (7.73) - - 01/15/2016 INTEREST EARNED ON CHASE ISSUANCE TRU 0.67218% 2/18/20 $1 PV ON 420.1100 SHARES DUE 1/15/2016 $0.00056/PV ON 750,000.00 PV 161571GS7 DUE 1/15/16 - - - - - 420.11 - - - 01/15/2016 INTEREST EARNED ON FIFTH THIRD AUTO TRU 1.020 % 5/15/18 $1 PV ON 136.0000 SHARES DUE 1/15/2016 $0.00085/PV ON 160,000.00 PV 31680GAB2 DUE 1/15/16 - - - - - 136.00 - - - 01/15/2016 INTEREST EARNED ON JOHN DEERE OWNER 0.870 % 2/15/18 $1 PV ON 329.1100 SHARES DUE 1/15/2016 $0.00073/PV ON 453,939.46 PV 47787UAB9 DUE 1/15/16 - - - 01/15/2016 INTEREST EARNED ON JOHN DEERE OWNER 0.920% 4/16/18 $1 PV ON 543.8100 SHARES DUE 1/15/2016 $0.00077/PV ON 709,320.43 PV 47787VAC5 DUE 1/15/16 - - - - - 543.81 - - - 01/15/2016 INTEREST EARNED ON PFIZER INC 0.900% 1/15/17 $1 PV ON 717081DD2 500000.0000 SHARES DUE 1/15/2016 - - - - - 2,250.00 01/15/2016 AMORTIZED PREMIUM ON PFIZER INC 0.900% 1/15/17 CURRENT 717081DD2 YEAR AMORTIZATION - - - - - - 29.45 - - 01/15/2016 INTEREST EARNED ON TOYOTA AUTO RECEIV 1.270% 5/15/19 $1 PV ON 529.1700 SHARES DUE 1/15/2016 $0.00106/PV ON 500,000.00 PV 89237CAD3 DUE 1/15/16 - - - - - 52• 01/15/2016 INTEREST EARNED ON U S TREASURY NT 0.875% 1/15/18 $1 PV ON 912828H37 2015000.0000 SHARES DUE 1/15/2016 - - - - - 8,815.63 - - - 01/15/2016 AMORTIZED PREMIUM ON U S TREASURY NT 0.875% 7/15/17 912828WT3 CURRENT YEAR AMORTIZATION - - - (62.46) - - 01/15/2016 INTEREST EARNED ON U S TREASURY NT 0.875% 7/15/17 $1 PV ON 912828WT3 1000000.0000 SHARES DUE 1/15/2016 - - - - - 4,375.00 - - - 01/20/2016 AMORTIZED PREMIUM ON GE DEALER FLOORPLA 0.8521% 10/20/19 36159LCN4 CURRENT YEAR AMORTIZATION - - (9.28) - - - - - 01/20/2016 INTEREST EARNED ON GE DEALER FLOORPLA 0.8521% 10/20/19 $1 36159LCN4 PV ON 750000.0000 SHARES DUE 1/20/2016 - - - - - 532.56 01/20/2016 INTEREST EARNED ON VOLKSWAGEN AUTO 0.870 % 6/20/17 $1 PV ON 133.9400 SHARES DUE 1/20/2016 $0.00073/PV ON 184,747.55 PV 92867VAB6 DUE 1/20/16 - - - - - 133.94 - - - 01/25/2016 INTEREST EARNED ON FNMA GTD REMIC 0.3845 % 9/25/18 $1 PV ON 164.2200 SHARES DUE 1/25/2016 $0.00035/PV ON 466,000.79 PV 3136AMTM1 DUE 1/25/16 - - - - - 164.22 01/25/2016 INTEREST EARNED ON F H L M C MLTCL MTG 1.639% 10/25/19 $1 PV ON 264.5900 SHARES DUE 1/25/2016 $0.00137/PV ON 193,718.17 PV 3137BLVY1 DUE 1/25/16 - - - - - 264.59 01/25/2016 AMORTIZED PREMIUM ON WELLS FARGO MTN 0.9464% 4/23/18 94974BFK1 CURRENT YEAR - - ON - - - - - - 01/25/2016 WELLS INTEREST EARNED ON WELLS FARGO MTN 0.9464 % 4/23/18 $1 PV EARNED 94974BFK1 ON 500000.0000 SHARES DUE 1/23/2016 - - - - - 1,235.58 - - 01/26/2016 TRUST FEES COLLECTED CHARGED FOR PERIOD 12/01/2015 THRU 12/31/2015 COLLECTED BY DISBURSEMENT 521.62 01/26/2016 AMORTIZED PREMIUM ON US BANK NA MTN 1.350% 1/26/18 90331HMQ3 CURRENT YEAR AMORTIZATION (21.44) 01/26/2016 INTEREST EARNED ON US BANK NA MTN 1.350% 1/26/18 $1 PV ON 90331HMQ3 500000.0000 SHARES DUE 1/26/2016 3,375.00 (8.25) 01/29/2016 AMORTIZED PREMIUM ON US BANK NA MTN 0.5519% 1/30/17 90331HMD2 CURRENT YEAR AMORTIZATION 47 Page 26 of 32 ROTC I` Riverside town- ir.sporhdion Commission Payden & Rygel Operating Portfolio Transaction Report Quarter ended March 31, 2016 Account Number: 001050990415 Transaction Settlement Date Trade Date Date Name: RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANS COMM CUSIP Description Units Miscellaneous Price Commissions SEC Fees Fees Federal Tax Cost Net Cash Amount Amount Short Term Long Term Gain/Loss Gain/Loss Amount Amount 01/29/2016 INTEREST EARNED ON US BANK NA MTN 0.5519% 1/30/17 $1 PV ON 90331HMD2 250000.0000 SHARES DUE 1/29/2016 348.77 02/01/2016 13063BN73 AMORTIZED PREMIUM ON CALIFORNIA ST VAR 1.050% 2/01/16 CURRENT YEAR AMORTIZATION - - - - - - (282.28) - - 02/01/2016 13063BN73 INTEREST EARNED ON CALIFORNIA ST VAR 1.050% 2/01/16 $1 PV ON 500000.0000 SHARES DUE 2/1/2016 - - - - - 2,625.00 - - - 02/01/2016 31846V203 INTEREST EARNED ON FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y UNIT ON 0.0000 SHARES DUE 1/31/2016INTEREST FROM 1/1/16 TO 1/31/16 - - - - - 0.93 - - - 02/01/2016 912828H78 INTEREST EARNED ON U S TREASURY NT 0.500% 1/31/17 $1 PV ON 2150000.0000 SHARES DUE 1/31/2016 - - - - - 5,375.00 - - - 02/02/2016 INTEREST EARNED ON F F C B DEB 0.4675% 1/02/18 $1 PV ON 3133EEWS5 700000.0000 SHARES DUE 2/2/2016 - - - - - 281.80 = - - - 02/03/2016 AMORTIZED PREMIUM ON APPLE INC 0.59708% 5/03/18 037833AG5 CURRENT YEAR AMORTIZATION - - - - - - (20.64) - - 02/03/2016 037833AG5 INTEREST EARNED ON APPLE INC 0.59708% 5/03/18 $1 PV ON 250000.0000 SHARES DUE 2/3/2016 - - - - - 373.18 - - - 02/04/2016 62888UAB6 INTEREST EARNED ON NCUA GUARANTEED 0.602% 11/05/20 $1 PV ON 93.4200 SHARES DUE 2/4/2016 $0.00053/PV ON 139,412.02 PV DUE 2/4/16 - - - - - 93.42 - - - 02/09/2016 084670BH0 AMORTIZED PREMIUM ON BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY 1.550% 2/09/18 CURRENT YEAR AMORTIZATION - - - (155.00) - - 02/09/2016 084670BH0 INTEREST EARNED ON BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY 1.550% 2/09/18 $1 PV ON 500000.0000 SHARES DUE 2/9/2016 - - - 3,875.00 02/16/2016 161571GS7 AMORTIZED PREMIUM ON CHASE ISSUANCE TRU 0.7952% 2/18/20 CURRENT YEAR AMORTIZATION (14.42) 02/16/2016 161571GS7 INTEREST EARNED ON CHASE ISSUANCE TRU 0.7952% 2/18/20 $1 PV ON 497.0000 SHARES DUE 2/15/2016 $0.00066/PV ON 750,000.00 PV DUE 2/15/16 - - - 497.00 106 02/16/2016 31680GAB2 INTEREST EARNED ON FIFTH THIRD AUTO TRU 1.020% 5/15/18 $1 PV ON 136.0000 SHARES DUE 2/15/2016 $0.00085/PV ON 160,000.00 PV DUE 2/15/16 - - - - - 136.00 02/16/2016 36962G2G8 AMORTIZED PREMIUM ON GEN ELEC CAP CRP MTN 5.400% 2/15/17 CURRENT YEAR AMORTIZATION - - - - - - 552.93 02/16/2016 36962G2G8 INTEREST EARNED ON GEN ELEC CAP CRP MTN 5.400% 2/15/17 $1 PV ON 104000.0000 SHARES DUE 2/15/2016 - - - - - 2,808.00 - - - 02/16/2016 47787UAB9 INTEREST EARNED ON JOHN DEERE OWNER 0.870% 2/15/18 $1 PV ON 302.1900 SHARES DUE 2/15/2016 $0.00073/PV ON 416,813.27 PV DUE 2/15/16 - - - - - 302.19 02/16/2016 47787VAC5 INTEREST EARNED ON JOHN DEERE OWNER 0.920 % 4/16/18 $1 PVlir ON 498.2000 SHARES DUE 2/15/2016 $0.00077/PV ON 649,825.04 PV DUE 2/15/16 - - - - - 498.20 - - - 02/16/2016 717081DP5 AMORTIZED PREMIUM ON PFIZER INC 0.46539% 5/15/17 CURRENT YEAR AMORTIZATION - - - - - - (1.01) - - 02/16/2016 717081DP5 INTEREST EARNED ON PFIZER INC 0.46539% 5/15/17 $1 PV ON 250000.0000 SHARES DUE 2/15/2016 - - - - - 326.86 - - - 02/16/2016 89237CAD3 INTEREST EARNED ON TOYOTA AUTO RECEIV 1.270% 5/15/19 $1 PV ON 529.1700 SHARES DUE 2/15/2016 $0.00106/PV ON 500,000.00 PV DUE 2/15/16 - - - - - 529.17 - - - 02/16/2016 912828H94 AMORTIZED PREMIUM ON U S TREASURY NT 1.000% 2/15/18 CURRENT YEAR AMORTIZATION (655.11) 02/16/2016 912828H94 INTEREST EARNED ON U S TREASURY NT 1.000% 2/15/18 $1 PV ON 3260000.0000 SHARES DUE 2/15/2016 16,300.00 339.63 - - 1,387.86 (6.98) 113.01 02/17/2016 166764AK6 AMORTIZED PREMIUM ON CHEVRON CORP 0.45355% 11/15/17 CURRENT YEAR AMORTIZATION 02/17/2016 166764AK6 INTEREST EARNED ON CHEVRON CORP 0.45355% 11/15/17 $1 PV ON 250000.0000 SHARES DUE 2/17/2016 02/19/2016 58933YAH8 AMORTIZED PREMIUM ON MERCK CO INC 0.7241 % 5/18/18 CURRENT YEAR AMORTIZATION - - 02/19/2016 58933YAH8 INTEREST EARNED ON MERCK CO INC 0.7241 % 5/18/18 $1 PV ON 750000.0000 SHARES DUE 2/18/2016 - - 02/22/2016 36159LCN4 AMORTIZED PREMIUM ON GE DEALER FLOORPLA 0.8521 % 10/20/19 CURRENT YEAR AMORTIZATION - - - (14.77) 02/22/2016 36159LCN4 INTEREST EARNED ON GE DEALER FLOORPLA 0.8521% 10/20/19 $1 PV ON 750000.0000 SHARES DUE 2/20/2016 - - - - - 602.25 - - - lir 92867VAB6 INTEREST EARNED ON VOLKSWAGEN AUTO 0.870% 6/20/17 $1 PV ON 124.7500 SHARES DUE 2/20/2016 $0.00073/PV ON 172,061.82 PV DUE 2/20/16 - - - - 02/22/2016 02/23/2016 20772JZR6 AMORTIZED PREMIUM ON CONNECTICUT ST SER 3.000% 3/15/17 CURRENT YEAR AMORTIZATION (1,531.99) 02/23/2016 912828L40 AMORTIZED PREMIUM ON U S TREASURY NT 1.000% 9/15/18 CURRENT YEAR AMORTIZATION (206.56) 48 Page 27 of 32 ROTC I` Riverside town- ir.sporhdion Commission Payden & Rygel Operating Portfolio Transaction Report Quarter ended March 31, 2016 Account Number: 001050990415 Transaction Settlement Date Trade Date Date Name: RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANS COMM CUSIP Description Units Miscellaneous Price Commissions SEC Fees Fees Federal Tax Cost Net Cash Amount Amount Short Term Long Term Gain/Loss Gain/Loss Amount Amount TRUST FEES COLLECTED CHARGED FOR PERIOD 01/01/2016 THRU 02/25/2016 01/31/2016 COLLECTED BY DISBURSEMENT - - - - - (523.87 - - - 02/25/2016 INTEREST EARNED ON F N M A GTD REMIC 0.3845% 9/25/18 $1 PV ON 245.4000 SHARES DUE 2/25/2016 $0.00053/PV ON 465,572.71 PV 3136AMTM1 DUE 2/25/16 - - - - - 245.40 - - - 02/25/2016 INTEREST EARNED ON F H L M C MLTCL MTG 1.639% 10/25/19 $1 PV ON 263.3400 SHARES DUE 2/25/2016 $0.00137/PV ON 192,803.27 PV 3137BLVY1 DUE 2/25/16 - - - - - 263.34 - - - 02/26/2016 INTEREST EARNED ON F N M A 1.000% 2/26/19 $1 PV ON 3135G0J53 500000.0000 SHARES DUE 2/26/2016 - - - - - 41.67 - - - 02/29/2016 INTEREST EARNED ON F H L B 0.750% 8/28/17 $1 PV ON 3130A62S5 1030000.0000 SHARES DUE 2/28/2016 - - - - 3,862.50 - - - 02/29/2016 AMORTIZED PREMIUM ON U S TREASURY NT 1.000% 2/15/18 912828H94 CURRENT YEAR AMORTIZATION - - - - (210.55) - - 03/01/2016 INTEREST EARNED ON FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y UNIT ON 31846V203 0.0000 SHARES DUE 2/29/2016 INTEREST FROM 2/1/16 TO 2/29/16 - - - - - 3.97 - - - 03/02/2016 INTEREST EARNED ON CHEVRON CORP 1.365% 3/02/18 $1 PV ON 166764AV2 500000.0000 SHARES DUE 3/2/2016 - - - - - 3,412.50 - - - 03/02/2016 INTEREST EARNED ON F F C B DEB 0.465% 1/02/18 $1 PV ON 3133EEWS5 700000.0000 SHARES DUE 3/2/2016 - - - - - 262.21 - - - 03/03/2016 AMORTIZED PREMIUM ON APPLE INC 0.450% 5/03/16 CURRENT 037833AH3 YEAR AMORTIZATION - - - - - - (31.98) - - 03/03/2016 ACCREDITED DISCOUNT ON TORONTO DOMINION C D 0.740% 5/17/16 89113EX84 MARKET DISCOUNT - - - - - - 0.01 - - 03/03/2016 FED BASIS OF U S TREASURY NT 1.000% 9/15/18 ADJUSTED BY - 912828L40 451.17 FIXED FEDRL TX CST FROM $502363.56 TO $501912.39 - - - - - - (451.17) - - 03/03/2016 FED BASIS OF U S TREASURY NT 1.000% 9/15/18 ADJUSTED BY 912828L40 451.17 FIXED FEDRL TX CST FROM $501134.49 TO $501585.66 - - - - - - 451.17 - - 03/03/2016 AMORTIZED PREMIUM ON WAL MART STORES INC 0.600% 4/11/16 931142DE0 CURRENT YEAR AMORTIZATION - - - - - - (96.45) - - 03/07/2016 AMORTIZED PREMIUM ON BANK OF NY MTN 0.90191 % 3/06/18 06406HCK3 CURRENT YEAR AMORTIZATION - - - - - - (82.10) - - 03/07/2016 INTEREST EARNED ON BANK OF NY MTN 0.90191 % 3/06/18 $1 PV 06406HCK3 ON 750000.0000 SHARES DUE 3/6/2016 - - - - - 1,691.08 - - - 03/07/2016 INTEREST EARNED ON EXXON MOBIL 1.305% 3/06/18 $1 PV ON 30231GAL6 460000.0000 SHARES DUE 3/6/2016 - - - - - 3,001.50 - - - 03/14/2016 INTEREST EARNED ON JP MORGAN CHASE MTN 0.902% 6/14/17 $1 48125LRD6 PV ON 750000.0000 SHARES DUE 3/14/2016 - - - - - 1,710.04 03/15/2016 AMORTIZED PREMIUM ON CHASE ISSUANCE TRU 0.6972% 2/18/20 161571GS7 CURRENT YEAR AMORTIZATION - - - - - - 11.54 - - INTEREST EARNED ON CHASE ISSUANCE TRU 0.62/1 0 $t PV - - ON 435.7500 SHARES DUE 3/15/2016 $0.00058/PV ONN 750,00000.00 PV 161571GS7 DUE 3/15/16 - - - - - 03/15/2016 INTEREST EARNED ON FIFTH THIRD AUTO TRU 1.020% 5/15/18 $1 PV ON 136.0000 SHARES DUE 3/15/2016 $0.00085/PV ON 160,000.00 PV 31680GAB2 DUE 3/15/16 - - - - - 136.00 - - - 03/15/2016 AMORTIZED PREMIUM ON GEN ELEC CAP CRP MTN 5.625% 9/15/17 36962G3H5 CURRENT YEAR AMORTIZATION - - - - - - (4,400.13) - - 03/15/2016 INTEREST EARNED ON GEN ELEC CAP CRP MTN 5.625% 9/15/17 $1 PV 36962G3H5 ON 500000.0000 SHARES DUE 3/15/2016 - - - - - 14,062.50 - - - 03/15/2016 INTEREST EARNED ON JOHN DEERE OWNER 0.870% 2/15/18 $1 PV ON 269.0800 SHARES DUE 3/15/2016 $0.00073/PV ON 371,139.32 PV 47787UAB9 DUE 3/15/16 - - - - - 269.08 - - - 03/15/2016 INTEREST EARNED ON JOHN DEERE OWNER 0.920% 4/16/18 $1 PV ON 441.3300 SHARES DUE 3/15/2016 $0.00077/PV ON 575,653.38 PV 47787VAC5 DUE 3/15/16 - - - - - 441.33 - - - 03/15/2016 INTEREST EARNED ON TOYOTA AUTO RECEIV 1.270% 5/15/19 $1 PV ON 529.1700 SHARES DUE 3/15/2016 $0.00106/PV ON 500,000.00 PV 89237CAD3 DUE 3/15/16 - - - - - 529.17 . - - 03/15/2016 AMORTIZED PREMIUM ON U S TREASURY NT 1.000% 9/15/17 912828D98 CURRENT YEAR AMORTIZATION - - - - - 502.87 03/15/2016 INTEREST EARNED ON U S TREASURY NT 1.000% 9/15/17 $1 PV ON 912828D98 2480000.0000 SHARES DUE 3/15/2016 - - - - - 12,400.00 - 03/15/2016 AMORTIZED PREMIUM ON U S TREASURY NT 1.000% 9/15/18 912828L40 CURRENT YEAR AMORTIZATION - - - - - - (58.06) - - 03/15/2016 INTEREST EARNED ON U S TREASURY NT 1.000% 9/15/18 $1 PV ON 912828L40 1420000.0000 SHARES DUE 3/15/2016 - - - - - 7,100.00 - - - 03/18/2016 INTEREST EARNED ON HONDA AUTO 1.570% 12/18/19 $1 PV ON 155.8900 SHARES DUE 3/18/2016 $0.00078/PV ON 200,000.00 PV DUE 43814NAC9 3/18/16 - - - - - 155.89 - - - 49 Page 28 of 32 ROTC I` Rirer,ide town- ir.sportolion Commission Payden & Rygel Operating Portfolio Transaction Report Quarter ended March 31, 2016 Account Number: 001050990415 Transaction Settlement Date Trade Date Date Name: RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANS COMM CUSIP Description Units Miscellaneous Price Commissions SEC Fees Fees Net Cash Amount Amount Short Term Long Term Federal Tax Cost Gain/Loss Gain/Loss Amount Amount INTEREST EARNED ON BMW VEHICLE LEASE 1.340% 1/22/19 $1 PV 03/21/2016 05581RAD8 n,n=o wC JILL"LV IV,DV.VV,LI II- V\J,. VVV,VVV.VV I-V DUE 3/20/16 - - - - - 759.33 - - - - - - - - - 03/21/2016 3130A7CX1 INTEREST EARNED ON F H L B 0.875% 3/19/18 $1 PV ON 520000.0000 SHARES DUE 3/19/2016 - - - - - 391.81 - 03/21/2016 36159LCN4 AMORTIZED PREMIUM ON GE DEALER FLOORPLA 0.8232% 10/20/19 CURRENT YEAR AMORTIZATION - - - - - - (13.50) 03/21/2016 36159LCN4 INTEREST EARNED ON GE DEALER FLOORPLA 0.8232% 10/20/19 $1 PV ON 750000.0000 SHARES DUE 3/20/2016 - - - - _ - 514.50 03/21/2016 92867VAB6 INTEREST EARNED ON VOLKSWAGEN AUTO 0.870% 6/20/17 $1 PV ON 112.6700 SHARES DUE 3/20/2016 $0.00073/PV ON 155,405.18 PV DUE 3/20/16 - - - - - 112.67 - 03/23/2016 62888UAB6 INTEREST EARNED ON NCUA GUARANTEED 0.602% 11/05/20 $1 PV ON 93.4200 SHARES DUE 2/4/2016 - - - - - (93.42) - - - 03/25/2016 TRUST FEES COLLECTED CHARGED FOR PERIOD 02/01/2016 THRU 02/29/2016 COLLECTED BY DISBURSEMENT - - - - - (524.28) - - - 03/25/2016 3136AMTM1 INTEREST EARNED ON F N M A GTD REMIC 0.3845% 9/25/18 $1 PV ON 238.1200 SHARES DUE 3/25/2016 $0.00051/PV ON 465,142.40 PV DUE 3/25/16 - - - - - 238.12 - - - 03/25/2016 3137BLVY1 INTEREST EARNED ON F H L M C MLTCL MTG 1.639% 10/25/19 $1 PV ON 262.0800 SHARES DUE 3/25/2016 $0.00137/PV ON 191,884.61 PV DUE 3/25/16 - - - - - - 262.08 - - - 03/31/2016 912828TS9 AMORTIZED PREMIUM ON U S TREASURY NT 0.625% 9/30/17 CURRENT YEAR AMORTIZATION - - - - - (21.83) - - 03/31/2016 912828TS9 ACCREDITED DISCOUNT ON U S TREASURY NT 0.625% 9/30/17 CURRENT YEAR ACQ. PREMIUM OID - - - - - - (133.60) - - 03/31/2016 912828TS9 ACCREDITED DISCOUNT ON U S TREASURY NT 0.625% 9/30/17 CURRENT YEAR OID - - - - - - 133.60 - - 03/31/2016 912828TS9 INTEREST EARNED ON U S TREASURY NT 0.625% 9/30/17 $1 PV ON 2499000.0000 SHARES DUE 3/31/2016 - - - - - 7,809.38 - - - 01/04/2016 01/04/2016 01/04/2016 31846V203 PURCHASED UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y 1,857.5900 1.000000 - - - (1,857.59) 1,857.59 - - 01/05/2016 01/05/2016 01/05/2016 31846V203 PURCHASED UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT °BUG FUND CL Y 2.6800 1.000000 - - - (2.68) 2.68 - - 01/11/2016 01/11/2016 01/11/2016 31846V203 PURCHASED UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y 1,283.4000 1.000000 - - - (1,283.40) 1,283.40 - - 01/12/2016 01/12/2016 01/12/2016 31846V203 PURCHASED UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y 374.1700 1.000000 - - - (374.17) 374.17 - - 01/13/2016 01/13/2016 01/13/2016 31846V203 PURCHASED UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y 392.1800 1.000000 - - - (392.18) 392.18 - - 01/14/2016 01/14/2016 01/14/2016 31846V203 PURCHASED UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y 328.7500 1.000000 - - - (328.75) 328.75 - - 01/14/2016 01/14/2016 01/14/2016 31846V203 PURCHASED UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y 3,750.0000 1.000000 - - - (3,750.00) 3,750.00 - - 01/15/2016 01/15/2016 01/15/2016 31846V203 PURCHASED UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y 114,020.4100 1.000000 - - - (114,020.41) 114,020.41 - - 01/15/2016 01/15/2016 01/15/2016 47787UAB9 PAID DOWN PAR VALUE OF JOHN DEERE OWNER 0.870% 2/15/18 (37,126.1900) - - - - 37,126.19 (37,123.80) 2.39 - 01/15/2016 01/15/2016 01/15/2016 47787VAC5 PAID DOWN PAR VALUE OF JOHN DEERE OWNER 0.920% 4/16/18 (59,495.3900) - - - - 59,495.39 (59,479.12) 16.27 - 01/20/2016 01/20/2016 01/20/2016 31846V203 PURCHASED UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y 12,819.6700 1.000000 - - - (12,819.67) 12,819.67 - - 01/20/2016 01/20/2016 01/20/2016 31846V203 PURCHASED UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y 532.5600 1.000000 - - - (532.56) 532.56 - - 01/20/2016 01/20/2016 01/20/2016 92867VAB6 PAID DOWN PAR VALUE OF VOLKSWAGEN AUTO 0.870% 6/20/17 (12,685.7300) - - - - 12,685.73 (12,673.24) 12.49 - 01/25/2016 01/25/2016 01/25/2016 3136AMTM1 PAID DOWN PAR VALUE OF F N M A GTD REMIC 0.3845% 9/25/18 (428.0800) 51,110.449822 - - - 428.08 (427.97) 0.11 - 01/25/2016 01/25/2016 01/25/2016 3137BLVY1 PAID DOWN PAR VALUE OF F H L M C MLTCL MTG 1.639% 10/25/19 (914.9000) 23,914.483944 - - - 914.90 (912.61) 2.29 - 01/25/2016 01/25/2016 01/25/2016 31846V203 PURCHASED UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y 3,007.3700 1.000000 - - - (3,007.37) 3,007.37 - - 01/26/2016 01/26/2016 01/26/2016 31846V203 PURCHASED UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y 2,853.3800 1.000000 - - - (2,853.38) 2,853.38 - - 01/29/2016 01/29/2016 01/29/2016 31846V203 PURCHASED UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y 348.7700 1.000000 - - - (348.77) 348.77 - - 01/29/2016 01/29/2016 01/29/2016 31846V203 PURCHASED UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y 130,085.3100 1.000000 - - - (130,085.31) 130,085.31 01/29/2016 01/29/2016 459200HZ7 RECEIVED ACCRUED INTEREST ON SALE OF IBM CORP 1.125% 2/06/18 - - - - - 702.81 - 01/29/2016 01/26/2016 01/29/2016 459200HZ7 SOLD PAR VALUE OF IBM CORP 1.125% 2/06/18 /BNP PARIBAS SECURITIES BOND/130,000 PAR VALUE AT 99.525 % (130,000.0000 0.995250 - - - 129,382.50 129,402.00 19.50 - 02/02/201 01/29/2016 62888UAB6 PAID ACCRUED INTEREST ON PURCHASE OF NCUA GUARANTEED 0.602% 11/05/20 - 72.66 - 02/02/2016 01/26/2016 01/29/2016 62888UAB6 PURCHASED PAR VALUE OF NCUA GUARANTEED 0.602% 11/05/20 /BARCLAYS CAPITAL INC. FIXED IN/139,412.02 PAR VALUE AT 99.6875 % 139,412.0200 0.996875 138,976.36 138,976.36 03/23/2016 01/29/2016 62888UAB6 RECEIVED ACCRUED INTEREST ON SALE OF NCUA GUARANTEED 0.602% 11/05/20 - - - 72.66 - - 03/23/2016 01/26/2016 01/29/2016 62888UAB6 SOLD PAR VALUE OF NCUA GUARANTEED 0.602% 11/05/20 /BARCLAYS CAPITAL INC. FIXED IN/OPP ENTRY REVS OF BUY 2/2/2016 ZY127 TR19924-25 (139,412.0200) 0.996875 - - - 138,976.36 (138,976.36) - - 02/01/2016 02/01/2016 02/01/2016 13063BN73 MATURED PAR VALUE OF CALIFORNIA ST VAR 1.050% 2/01/16 500,000 PAR VALUE AT 100 % (500,000.0000) 1.000000 - - - 500,000.00 (500,000.00) - - 02/01/2016 02/01/2016 02/01/2016 31846V203 PURCHASED UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y 638,146.7400 1.000000 - - - (638,146.74) 638,146.74 - - 02/01/2016 02/01/2016 459200HZ7 RECEIVED ACCRUED INTEREST ON SALE OF IBM CORP 1.125% 2/06/18 - - - - - 710.94 - - 02/01/2016 01/27/2016 02/01/2016 459200HZ7 i SOLD PAR VALUE OF IBM CORP 1.125% 2/06/18 /CREDIT SUISSE SECURITIES (USA)/130,000 PAR VALUE AT 99.566 % (130,000/440(1) 0.995660 - - - 129,435.80 (129,402.00) 33.80 - Page 29 of 32 ROTC I` Rirervde town- trssportotion Commission Payden & Rygel Operating Portfolio Transaction Report Quarter ended March 31, 2016 Account Number: 001050990415 Transaction Settlement Name: RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANS COMM Miscellaneous • Short Term Long Term Federal Tax Cost Gain/Loss Gain/Loss 02/02/2016 02/02/2016 02/02/2016 31846V203 PURCHASED UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y 282.7300 1.000000 - - - (282.73) 282.73 - - 02/02/2016 02/02/2016 02/02/2016 31846V203 SOLD UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y (139,049.0200) 1.000000 - - - 139,049.02 (139,049.02) - - 02/03/2016 02/03/2016 02/03/2016 31846V203 PURCHASED UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y 373.1800 1.000000 - - - (373.18) 373.18 - - 02/04/2016 02/04/2016 02/04/2016 31846V203 PURCHASED UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y 1,933.4100 1.000000 - - - (1,933.41) 1,933.41 - - 02/04/2016 02/04/2016 02/04/2016 62888UAB6 PAID DOWN PAR VALUE OF NCUA GUARANTEED 0.602% 11/05/20 (1,839.9900) 1,413.051158 - - - 1,839.99 (1,834.24) 5.75 - 03/23/2016 02/04/2016 02/04/2016 62888UAB6 PAID DOWN -RV PAR VALUE OF NCUA GUARANTEED 0.602% 11/05/20 1,839.9900 1,413.051158 - - - (1,839.99) 1,834.24 (5.75) - 02/09/2016 02/09/2016 02/09/2016 31846V203 PURCHASED UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y 3,875.0000 1.000000 - - - (3,875.00) 3,875.00 - - 02/12/2016 02/12/2016 17305EFN0 RECEIVED ACCRUED INTEREST ON SALE OF CITIBANK CREDIT CARD 1.020% 2/22/19 - - - - - 3,371.67 - - - 02/12/2016 02/09/2016 11 02/12/2016 17305EFN0 SOLD PAR VALUE OF CITIBANK CREDIT CARD 1.020% 2/22/19 /CITIGROUP GLOBAL MARKETS INC./XOTC 700,000 PAR VALUE AT 100.046875 % (700,000.0000) 1.000469 - - - 700,328.13 (698,523.44) 1,804.69 - 02/12/2016 02/12/2016 02/12/2016 31846V203 PURCHASED UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y 703,699.8000 1.000000 - - - (703,699.80) 703,699.80 - - 02/16/2016 02/16/2016 02/16/2016 31846V203 PURCHASED UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y 141,243.0300 1.000000 - - - (141,243.03) 141,243.03 - - 02/16/2016 02/15/2016 02/16/2016 47787UAB9 PAID DOWN PAR VALUE OF JOHN DEERE OWNER 0.870% 2/15/18 (45,673.9500) - - - - 45,673.95 (45,671.01) 2.94 - 02/16/2016 02/15/2016 02/16/2016 47787VAC5 PAID DOWN PAR VALUE OF JOHN DEERE OWNER 0.920% 4/16/18 (74,171.6600) - - - - 74,171.66 (74,151.38) 20.28 - 02/17/2016 02/09/2016 02/17/2016 05581RAD8 PURCHASED PAR VALUE OF BMW VEHICLE LEASE 1.340% 1/22/19 /MLPFS INC/FIXED INCOME/600,000 PAR VALUE AT 99.98825 % 600,000.0000 0.999883 - - - (599,929.50) 599,929.50 - - 02/17/2016 02/17/2016 02/17/2016 31846V203 SOLD UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y (599,929.5000) 1.000000 - - - 599,929.50 (599,929.50) - - 02/18/2016 02/17/2016 02/18/2016 3130A7CX1 PURCHASED PAR VALUE OF F H L B 0.875% 3/19/18 /BARCLAYS CAPITAL INC. FIXED IN/520,000 PAR VALUE AT 99.969 % 520,000.0000 0.999690 - - - (519,838.80) 519,838.80 - - 02/18/2016 02/18/2016 02/18/2016 31846V203 SOLD UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y (519,499.1700) 1.000000 - - - 519,499.17 (519,499.17) - - 02/19/2016 02/19/2016 02/19/2016 31846V203 PURCHASED UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y 1,387.8600 1.000000 - - - (1,387.86) 1,387.86 - - 02/22/2016 02/22/2016 02/22/2016 31846V203 PURCHASED UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y 16,781.3900 1.000000 - - - (16,781.39) 16,781.39 - - 02/22/2016 02/22/2016 02/22/2016 31846V203 PURCHASED UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y 602.2500 1.000000 - - - (602.25) 602.25 - - 02/22/2016 02/20/2016 02/22/2016 92867VAB6 PAID DOWN PAR VALUE OF VOLKSWAGEN AUTO 0.870% 6/20/17 (16,656.6400) - - - - 16,656.64 (16,640.25) 16.39 - 02/23/2016 02/16/2016 02/23/2016 037833BN9 PURCHASED PAR VALUE OF APPLE INC 1.300% 2/23/18 /GOLDMAN, SACHS & CO./30,000 PAR VALUE AT 99.957 % 30,000.0000 0.999570 - - - (29,987.10) 29,987.10 - - 02/23/2016 02/16/2016 02/23/2016 037833BQ2 PURCHASED PAR VALUE OF APPLE INC 1.700% 2/22/19 /GOLDMAN, SACHS & CO./40,000 PAR VALUE AT 99.983 % 40,000.0000 0.999830 - - - (39,993.20) 39,993.20 - - 02/23/2016 02/23/2016 20772JZR6 RECEIVED ACCRUED INTEREST ON SALE OF CONNECTICUT ST SER 3.000% 3/15/17 - - - - - 5,925.00 - - - 02/23/2016 02/18/2016 02/23/2016 20772JZR6 SOLD PAR VALUE OF CONNECTICUT ST SER 3.000% 3/15/17 /NATIONAL FINANCIAL SERVICES CO/450,000 PAR VALUE AT 102.67 % (450,000.0000) 1.026700 - - - 462,015.00 (461,309.58) 705.42 - 02/23/2016 02/19/2016 02/23/2016 3135G0J53 PURCHASED PAR VALUE OF F N M A 1.000% 2/26/19 /J.P. MORGAN SECURITIES LLC/500,000 PAR VALUE AT 99.764 % 500,000.0000 0.997640 - - - (498,820.00) 498,820.00 - - 02/23/2016 02/23/2016 02/23/2016 31846V203 SOLD UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y (527,223.7800) 1.000000 - - - 527,223.78 (527,223.78) - - 02/23/2016 02/23/2016 02/23/2016 31846V203 PURCHASED UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y 467,940.0000 1.000000 - - - (467,940.00) 467,940.00 - - 02/23/2016 02/23/2016 912828L40 RECEIVED ACCRUED INTEREST ON SALE OF U S TREASURY NT 1.000% 9/15/18 l - - - - - 2,211.54 - - - 02/23/2016 02/19/2016 02/23/2016 912828L40 SOLD PAR VALUE OF U S TREASURY NT 1.000% 9/15/18 /BARCLAYS CAPITAL INC. FIXED IN/500,000 PAR VALUE AT 100.382478 % 500,000.0000 1.003825 - - - 501,912.39 501,912.39 - - 02/23/2016 02/23/2016 912828SS0 PAID ACCRUED INTEREST ON PURCHASE OF U S TREASURY NT 0.875% 4/30/17 - - - AWL - - 02/23/2016 02/18/2016 02/23/2016 912828SS0 PURCHASED PAR VALUE OF U S TREASURY NT 0.875% 4/30/17 /CITIGROUP GLOBAL MARKETS INC./460,000 PAR VALUE AT 100.27734348 % 460,000.0000 1.002773 - - - (461,275.78) 461,275.78 - - 02/24/2016 02/24/2016 02/24/2016 31846V203 PURCHASED UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y 15,078.4500 1.000000 - - - (15,078.45) 15,078.45 - - 02/24/2016 02/24/2016 912828G20 RECEIVED ACCRUED INTEREST ON SALE OF U S TREASURY NT 0.875% 11/15/17 - - - - - 1,978.73 - - - 02/24/2016 02/22/2016 02/24/2016 912828G20 SOLD PAR VALUE OF U S TREASURY NT 0.875% 11/15/17 /BMO CAPITAL MARKETS CORP./815,000 PAR VALUE AT 100.171875 % (815,000.0000) 1.001719 - - - 816,400.78 (813,058.01) 3,342.77 - 02/24/2016 02/24/2016 912828M72 PAID ACCRUED INTEREST ON PURCHASE OF U S TREASURY NT 0.875% 11/30/17 - - - - - (1,644.81) - - - 02/24/2016 02/22/2016 02/24/2016 912828M72 PURCHASED PAR VALUE OF U S TREASURY NT 0.875% 11/30/17 /BMO CAPITAL MARKETS CORP/BONDS/800,000 PAR VALUE AT 100.20703125 % 800,000.0000 1.002070 - - - (801,656.25) 801,656.25 - - 02/25/2016 02/25/2016 02/25/2016 3136AMTM1 PAID DOWN PAR VALUE OF F N M A GTD REMIC 0.3845% 9/25/18 (430.3100) 50,845.579605 - - - 430.31 (430.20) 0.11 - 02/25/2016 02/25/2016 02/25/2016 3137BLVY1 PAID DOWN PAR VALUE OF F H L M C MLTCL MTG 1.639% 10/25/19 (918.6600) 23,816.603923 - - - 918.66 (916.36) 2.30 - 02/25/2016 02/25/2016 02/25/2016 31846V203 PURCHASED UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y 200,112.0300 1.000000 - - - (200,112.03) 200,112.03 - - 02/25/2016 02/25/2016 02/25/2016 31846V203 SOLD UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y (198,637.7400) 1.000000 - - - 198,637.74 (198,637.74) - - 02/25/2016 02/16/2016 02/25/2016 43814NAC9 PURCHASED PAR VALUE OF HONDA AUTO 1.570% 12/18/19 /J.P. MORGAN SECURITIES LLC/200,000 PAR VALUE AT 99.98579 % 200,000.0000 0.999858 - - - (199,971.58) 199,971.58 - - 02/25/2016 02/25/2016 912828G46 RECEIVED ACCRUED INTEREST ON SALE OF U S TREASURY NT 0.500% 11/30/16 - - - - - 237.70 - - - 51 Page 30 of 32 ROTC I` Rirervde town- ir.spartolion Comaicvon Payden & Rygel Operating Portfolio Transaction Report Quarter ended March 31, 2016 Account Number: 001050990415 Transaction Settlement Date Trade Date Date Name: RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANS COMM CUSIP Description Units Miscellaneous Price Commissions SEC Fees Fees Net Cash Amount Amount Short Term Long Term Federal Tax Cost Gain/Loss Gain/Loss Amount Amount SOLD PAR VALUE OF U S TREASURY NT 0.500% 11/30/16 /RBS 199 874 33 108 71 �4/4.,r4V,o 02/26/2016 �4/4Yr4,,,o 02/05/2016 „4/4J/L„Io 02/26/2016 o14o40%2,J 3134G8L98 t4w,wo.ww/ PURCHASED PAR VALUE OF F H L M C M T N 1.050 % 2/26/18 /WELLS FARGO SECURITIES, LLC/500,000 PAR VALUE AT 100 % 500,000.0000 �.JUJJr4 1.000000 - - - - - - (500,000.00) t,00,r w.oL/ 500,000.00 - - - - - - - 02/26/2016 02/26/2016 02/26/2016 31846V203 SOLD UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y (499,958.3300) 1.000000 - - - 499,958.33 (499,958.33) 02/29/2016 02/29/2016 02/29/2016 31846V203 PURCHASED UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y 200,061.1300 1.000000 - - - (200,061.13) 200,061.13 02/29/2016 02/29/2016 02/29/2016 31846V203 PURCHASED UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y 25,016.5200 1.000000 - - 25,016.52 25,016.52 - 02/29/2016 02/29/2016 912828G46 RECEIVED ACCRUED INTEREST ON SALE OF U S TREASURY NT 0.500% 11/30/16 ' - - 248.63 - - 02/29/2016 02/26/2016 02/29/2016 912828G46 SOLD PAR VALUE OF U S TREASURY NT 0.500% 11/30/16 /CITIGROUP GLOBAL MARKETS INC./XOTC 200,000 PAR VALUE AT 99.90625 % 200,000.0000) 0.999063 - - - 199,812.50 199,765.63 46.87 - 02/29/2016 02/29/2016 912828H94 RECEIVED ACCRUED INTEREST ON SALE OF U S TREASURY NT 1.000% 2/15/18 - - 626.92 02/29/2016 02/23/2016 02/29/2016 912828H94 SOLD PAR VALUE OF U S TREASURY NT 1.000% 2/15/18 /BMO CAPITAL MARKETS CORP./1,630,000 PAR VALUE AT 100.460938 % (1,630,000.0000) 1.004609 - - - 1,637,513.29 1,635,150.13 2,363.16 02/29/2016 02/23/2016 02/29/2016 912828UR9 PURCHASED PAR VALUE OF U S TREASURY NT 0.750 % 2/28/18 /BMO CAPITAL MARKETS CORP/BONDS/1,617,000 PAR VALUE AT 99.99914595 % 1,617,000.0000 0.999991 - - - (1,616,986.19) 1,616,986.19 03/01/2016 03/01/2016 03/01/2016 31846V203 SOLD UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y (89,989.2000) 1.000000 - - - 89,989.20 (89,989.20 03/01/2016 02/25/2016 03/01/2016 478160BR4 PURCHASED PAR VALUE OF JOHNSON JOHNSON 1.125 % 3/01/19 /J.P. MORGAN SECURITIES LLC/90,000 PAR VALUE AT 99.988 % 90,000.0000 0.999880 - - - (89,989.20) 89,989.20 - 03/02/2016 03/02/2016 03/02/2016 31846V203 SOLD UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y (196,309.9800) 1.000000 - - - 196,309.98 (196,309.98) - - 03/02/2016 02/23/2016 03/02/2016 89237KAD5 PURCHASED PAR VALUE OF TOYOTA AUTO 1.250 % 3/16/20 /MLPFS INC/FIXED INCOME/200,000 PAR VALUE AT 99.99433 % 200,000.0000 0.999943 - - - (199,988.66) 199,988.66 - 03/03/2016 03/03/2016 037833AH3 RECEIVED ACCRUED INTEREST ON SALE OF APPLE INC 0.450 5/03/16 - - - - - 750.00 - - - 03/03/2016 03/02/2016 03/03/2016 037833AH3 SOLD PAR VALUE OF APPLE INC 0.450% 5/03/16 /GOLDMAN, SACHS & CO./XOTC 500,000 PAR VALUE AT 99.993 % (500,000.0000) 0.999930 - - - 499,965.00 (500,030.63) - (65.63) 03/03/2016 02/29/2016 03/03/2016 30231GAP7 PURCHASED PAR VALUE OF EXXON MOBIL 1.708 % 3/01/19 /MLPFS INC/FIXED INCOME/40,000 PAR VALUE AT 100 % 40,000.0000 1.000000 - - - (40,000.00) 40,000.00 - - 03/03/2016 02/29/2016 03/03/2016 30231GAU6 PURCHASED PAR VALUE OF EXXON MOBIL 1.439% 3/01/18 /CITIGROUP GLOBAL MARKETS INC./40,000 PAR VALUE AT 100 % ... 40,000.0000 1.000000 - - - (40,000.00) 40,000.00 - - 03/03/2016 03/03/2016 03/03/2016 31846V203 PURCHASED UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y 236,140.2400 1.000000 - - - (236,140.24) 236,140.24 - - 03/03/2016 03/03/2016 03/03/2016 31846V203 SOLD UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y JME_ (11,708.5100) 1.000000 - - - 11,708.51 (11,708.51) - - 03/03/2016 03/03/2016 89113EX84 RECEIVED ACCRUED INTEREST ON SALE OF TORONTO DOMINION C D 0.740 % 5/17/16 - - - - - 781.11 - - - 03/03/2016 03/02/2016 03/03/2016 89113EX84 SOLD PAR VALUE OF TORONTO DOMINION C D 0.740% 5/17/16 /BONY/TORONTO DOMINION SECURITI/500,000 PAR VALUE AT 100.028935 % (500,000.0000) 1.000289 - - - 500,144.68 (499,999.98) 144.70 - 03/03/2016 03/03/2016 912828L40 PAID ACCRUED INTEREST ON PURCHASE OF U S TREASURY NT 1.000% 9/15/18 - - - - - (4,717.03) - - - 03/03/2016 03/01/2016 03/03/2016 912828L40 PURCHASED PAR VALUE OF U S TREASURY NT 1.000% 9/15/18 /BARCLAYS CAPITAL INC. FIXED IN/1,010,000 PAR VALUE AT 100.22689703 % 1,010,000.0000 1.002269 - - - (1,012,291.66) 1,012,291.66 - - 03/03/2016 03/03/2016 931142DE0 RECEIVED ACCRUED INTEREST ON SALE OF WAL MART STORES INC 0.600% 4/11/16 - - - - - 754.97 - - - 03/03/2016 03/02/2016 03/03/2016 931142DE0 SOLD PAR VALUE OF WAL MART STORES INC 0.600% 4/11/16 /GOLDMAN, SACHS & CO./XOTC 319,000 PAR VALUE AT 100.014 % (319,000.0000) 1.000140 - - - 319,044.66 (319,059.00) (14.34) - 03/07/2016 03/07/2016 03/07/2016 31846V203 PURCHASED UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y 4,692.5800 1.000000 - - - (4,692.58) 4,692.58 - - 03/08/2016 03/08/2016 03/08/2016 31846V203 PURCHASED UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y 1,513.8700 1.000000 - - - (1,513.87) 1,513.87 - - 03/14/2016 03/14/2016 03/14/2016 31846V203 PURCHASED UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y 1,710.0400 1.000000 - - - (1,710.04) 1,710.04 - - 03/15/2016 03/15/2016 03/15/2016 31846V203 PURCHASED UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y 26,705.5100 1.000000 - - - (26,705.51) 26,705.51 - - 03/15/2016 03/15/2016 03/15/2016 31846V203 PURCHASED UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y 76,245.7000 1.000000 - - - (76,245.70) 76,245.70 - - 03/15/2016 03/15/2016 03/15/2016 47787UAB9 PAID DOWN PAR VALUE OF JOHN DEERE OWNER 0.870 % 2/15/18 (26,436.4300) 3.711734 - - - 26,436.43 (26,434.73) - 1.70 03/15/2016 03/15/2016 03/15/2016 47787VAC5 PAID DOWN PAR VALUE OF JOHN DEERE OWNER 0.920% 4/16/18 (41,140.9500) - - - - 41,140.95 (41,129.70) - 11.25 03/18/2016 03/18/2016 03/18/2016 31846V203 PURCHASED UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y 155.8900 1.000000 - - - (155.89) 155.89 - - 03/21/2016 03/21/2016 3134G8NT2 PAID ACCRUED INTEREST ON PURCHASE OF F H L M C 1.125 3/16/18 - - - - - (87.50) - - - 03/21/2016 03/17/2016 03/21/2016 3134G8NT2 PURCHASED PAR VALUE OF F H L M C 1.125 % 3/16/18 /NOMURA SECURITIES/FIX INCOME/560,000 PAR VALUE AT 99.995 % 560,000.0000 0.999950 - - - (559,972.00) 559,972.00 - - 03/21/2016 03/18/2016 03/21/2016 3137EADZ9 PURCHASED PAR VALUE OF F H L M C M T N 1.125% 4/15/19 /MORGAN STANLEY & CO. LLC/290,000 PAR VALUE AT 99.967 % 290,000.0000 0.999670 - - - (289,904.30) 289,904.30 03/21/2016 03/21/2016 03/21/2016 31846V203 PURCHASED UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y 12,593.8800 1.000000 - - (12,593.88) 12,593.88 i 03/21/2016 03/21/2016 03/21/2016 31846V203 SOLD UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y (347,163.8300) 1.000000 - - - 347,163.83 (347,163.83) 03/21/2016 03/21/2016 912828G46 RECEIVED ACCRUED INTEREST ON SALE OF U S TREASURY NT 0.500% 11/30/16 �- 765.03 03/21/2016 03/18/2016 03/21/2016 912828G46 SOLD PAR VALUE OF U S TREASURY NT 0.500 % 11/30/16 /BARCLAYS CAPITAL INC. FIXED IN/500,000 PAR VALUE AT 99.949218 % (500,000.0000) 0.999492 - 499,746.09 (499,414.06) 332.03 03/21/2016 03/20/2016 03/21/2016 92867VAB6 PAID DOWN PAR VALUE OF VOLKSWAGEN AUTO 0.870% 6/20/17 (13,1044940) - 13,104.42 (13,091.52) JL Page 31 of 32 ROTC MEM RireNde (own- ir.spartolion Comai sion Payden & Rygel Operating Portfolio Transaction Report Quarter ended March 31, 2016 Account Number: 001050990415 Name: RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANS COMM Transaction Settlement Date Trade Date Date CUSIP Description Units Short Term Long Term Miscellaneous Federal Tax Cost Gain/Loss Gain/Loss Price Commissions SEC Fees Fees Net Cash Amount Amount Amount Amount 03/23/2016 03/23/2016 03/23/2016 31846V203 PURCHASED UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y 135,601.7400 1.000000 03/25/2016 03/25/2016 03/25/2016 3136AMTM1 PAID DOWN PAR VALUE OF FNMA GTD REMIC 0.3845% 9/25/18 03/25/2016 03/25/2016 03/25/2016 3137BLVY1 PAID DOWN PAR VALUE OF F H L M C MLTCL MTG 1.639 % 10/25/19 03/28/2016 03/28/2016 03/28/2016 31846V203 PURCHASED UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y (537.3800) (1,099.1000) 1,032.094441 1,612.4000 1.000000 RECEIVED ACCRUED INTEREST ON SALE OF COCA COLA CO THE 03/29/2016 03/29/2016 191216BR0 0.875% 10/27/17 SOLD PAR VALUE OF COCA COLA CO THE 0.875 % 10/27/17 /HSBC 03/29/2016 03/23/2016 03/29/2016 191216BR0 SECURITIES, INC./20,000 PAR VALUE AT 99.998 % (20,000.0000) 0.999980 03/29/2016 03/29/2016 03/29/2016 31846V203 PURCHASED UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y 34.3400 1.000000 PAID ACCRUED INTEREST ON PURCHASE OF U S TREASURY NT 03/29/2016 03/29/2016 912828TW0 0.750% 10/31/17 PURCHASED PAR VALUE OF U S TREASURY NT 0.750 % 10/31/17 03/29/2016 03/23/2016 03/29/2016 912828TW0 /CITIGROUP GLOBAL MARKETS INC./20,000 PAR VALUE AT 99.8867 % 20,000.0000 0.998867 03/31/2016 03/31/2016 03/31/2016 31846V203 PURCHASED UNITS OF FIRST AMER GOVT OBLIG FUND CL Y 7,809.3800 1.000000 Total (135,601.74) 537.38 1,099.10 135,601.74 (537.24) (1,096.34) (1,612.40) 1,612.40 73.89 0.14 2.76 19,999.60 (19,991.20) 8.40 (34.34) 34.34 (61.81) (19,977.34) 19,977.34 (7,809.38) 7,809.38 137,414.75 8,935.04 (39.64) 53 Page 32 of 32 ATTACHMENT 14 LOGAN CIRCLE P A.R. T NE R S Riverside County Transportation Commission SHORT DURATION FIXED INCOME First Quarter 2016 Client Review Logan Circle Partners, L.P. ■ 25 Deforest Avenue Summit, NJ 07901 ■ 908-376-0550 54 MARKET REVIEW Outlook and Current Themes ➢ GDP - Moderating retail sales and personal consumption expenditures along with a drawdown in inventories lowers first-quarter growth. Stabilization of markets coupled with improving wages sets stage for a pickup in consumer spending going forward. Risks to our 2% growth expectation are skewed to the downside and include election year and geopolitical uncertainty which could weigh on consumer and business confidence. ➢ Consumer - Improvement in real personal income and average hourly earnings, combined with pass -through benefits of lower energy prices, reflected in higher savings rate. Rebound in consumer confidence needed in order to drive transmission from savings to spending. Sustained pace of student and auto loan debt growth represents a long-term demographic concern. ➢ Business - Persistent sluggish global growth hampers ability to grow revenues and earnings across many industrial sub -sectors (e.g. fourth-quarter 2015 U.S. corporate profits fell 7.8% qoq). Pressure on credit metrics intensifies as operating costs impact margins and continued share buybacks weaken balance sheets. Although financials continue to build capital and improve balance sheets, the strength and stability of earnings are negatively impacted by less diverse business models and reduced net interest margins due to prevailing low rate environment. Employment - Recent pace of monthly job gains remains healthy. Increase in labor force participation rate bears watching as a sustained uptick would signal further strength. Difference between U6 (highlighting the underemployed) and the headline unemployment rate has narrowed, indicating reduced slack in the labor markets. Average hourly earnings growth has firmed, paced by select service sector jobs. • Housing - A lack of inventory in the lower priced segment of the market limits the growth of overall home sales. Annual home price appreciation will remain in the mid -single digit range. Demographics —driven propensity to rent persists while moderate income growth reduces the ability of existing homeowners to trade up. Mortgage credit availability increasing as bank and non -bank lenders relax standards and continue to offer more financing options. ➢ Inflation - Core PCE moves closer to the Federal Reserve's long-term 2% target as rents, healthcare insurance and medical costs rise. Near -term, higher levels of headline inflation will be supported by tighter labor market and stabilization of energy prices. Growing trend towards minimum wage legislation lends support to further inflationary pressure. ➢ International - Uncertainty over the outcome of "Brexit" referendum raises concerns regarding both the UK economy and the long-term viability of the European Union. Stabilization of commodity and financial markets have diminished the need for Chinese government intervention. Interest rates will remain at historically low levels for foreseeable future. Ineffectiveness of central bank stimulus programs, including negative interest rates, underscores the limits of monetary policy in fostering economic growth and countering deflationary forces. ➢ Monetary and Fiscal Policy - Federal Reserve's articulated focus on global and financial market developments as a basis for their dovish stance conflicts with previously outlined domestic drivers of policy (inflation, labor) which, given current readings, would suggest a near -term rate increase. Central bank guidance and actions show mixed results in achieving unstated goal of driving currencies lower. ECB and BOJ intensify focus on QE tools in an effort to boost credit growth. The views pre,%nted above are Logan Qrde's and are subject to change over time. There can be no assurance that the views expressed above will prove accurate and should not be relied upon as a reliable indicator of future events Lo GAIN] C I RC LE 55 I' AR TN F. R S 1 PORTFOLIO REVIEW — Construction Funds Portfolio Characteristics Asset Allocation As of December 31, 2015 Actual Portfolio Yield to Maturity 0.49% Duration 0.04 Years Average Quality (Moodys) Al As of March 31, 2016 Actual Portfolio Yield to Maturity 0.66% Duration 0.03 Years Average Quality (Nbodys) Al ABS 4% Municipal 10% Municipal 13% Corporate 1% Portfolio Performancel 1Q2016 Since Inception (Annualized) Total Construction Fund (Gross of Fees) 0.17% 0.46% Total Construction Fund (Net of Fees) 0.15% 0.38% Citigroup 3-Month Treasury Bill 0.05% 0.05% Past Perfonmance is not indicative of future results. Performance returns for periods greater than one year -are annualized. The performance benchmark shown for the Fdverside County Construction Find is the atigroup 3-IVbnth Treasury Bill, which tracks the retum of one three-month Treasury bill until maturity. LOGANCIRCLE 56 P A R TN ERS 2 PORTFOLIO REVIEW — Equity Contribution Portfolio Characteristics Asset Allocation As of December 31, 2015 Actual Portfolio Yield to Maturity 1.44% Duration 1.95 Years Average Quality (Moodys) Aa1 RMBS 6% Agency 2% Municipal 4% CMBS RMBS 7% As of March 31, 2016 Actual Portfolio Agency 5° ° Yield to Maturity 1.17% Duration 1.62 Years Average Quality (Moodys) Aa2 4% Municipal 4% 2% Portfolio Performance' 1Q 2016 Since Inception (7/1/2015) Equity Contribution Fund (Gross of Fees) 1.15% 1.36% Equity Contribution Fund (Net of Fees) 1.13% 1.28% BofA ML U.S. Treasury Index 1-3 Year 0.90% 0.77% Past Performance is not indicatiye of future results. Performance retums for periods greater than one year are annualized. The performance benchmark shown for the Ryerside County Construction Fiend is the Ea nk of America Manill Lynda 1-3 Year U.S. Treasury Index, which is a broad -based index consisting of US Treasury securities with an outstanding par greater than or equal to $250 Trillion and a maturity range from one to threeyearx reflecting total return. LOGANCIRCLE 57 P A R TN ERS 3 PORTFOLIO REVIEW — Capitalized Interest Funds Portfolio Characteristics Asset Allocation Municipal As of December 31, 2015 Actual Portfolio 8% Yield to Maturity 1.23% Duration 1.70 Years Average Quality (Moody's) Aa1 As of March 31, 2016 Actual Portfolio Yield to Maturity 0.90% Duration 1.41 Years Average Quality (Moodys) Aa1 Municipal 7% 1% Portfolio Performance' 1 Q 2016 Since Inception (Annualized) Total Capitalized Interest Fund (Gross of Fees) 0.95% 1.34% Total Capitalized Interest Fund (Net of Fees) 0.93% 1.24% BofA NL U.S. Treasury Index 1-3 Year 0.90% 0.88% Fast Performance ance is not indicative of future results Performance returns for periods greater than one year are annualized. The performance benchmark shown for the Faverside County Capitalized Interest Fund is the Bank ofArnerica Lynch 1-3 Year US Treasury Index, which is a broad -based index consisting of US Treasury securities with an outstanding par greater than or equal to $250 trillion and a maturity range from one to three years reflecting total return. LOGANCIRCLE 58 P A R TN ERS 4 PORTFOLIO REVIEW — Debt Reserve Fund Portfolio Characteristics As of December 31, 2015 Actual Portfolio Yield to Maturity 2.03% Duration 4.24 Years Average Quality (Moodys) Aaa As of March 31, 2016 Actual Portfolio Yield to Maturity 1.50% Duration 4.11 Years Average Quality (Moodys) Aaa Asset Allocation CP 1% CP 1% Portfolio Performance' 1Q2016 Since Inception (Annualized) Total Debt Service Fund (Gross of Fees) 2.87% 3.30% Total Debt Service Fund (Net of Fees) 2.85% 3.20% BofA ML U.S. Treasury Index 3-7 Year 2.89% 2.80% Fast Performance is not indicative of future results Performance retums for periods greater than one year are annualized. The performance benchmark shown for the F3verside County Capitalized Inter Fund is the Bank of America Nbrrill Lynch US TtPaa,ry 3-7 Year, which is a broacl-based index consisting of US Treasury securities with an outstanding par greater or equal to $25 trillion and a maturity range from three to seven years, indusive, teflecting total retum. LOGANCIRCLE 59 P A R TN ERS 5 PORTFOLIO REVIEW Portfolio Market Value Portfolio Market Value (7/3/2013) Net Outflows Market Value Change in (3/31/2016) Market Value Construction (Sales Tax) $332,687,595 S312,986,315 $21,894,692 +$2,193,412 Construction (Toll Revenue) $122,120,571 ,857,642 $36,808,002 +$545,073 Total Construction Funds $454,808,167 $398,843,957 $58,702,694 +$2,738,485 Portfolio Market Value (6/10/2015) Net Outflows Market Value Change in (3/31/2016) Market Value Equity Contribution $32,793,399 $0 $33,272,763 +$479,364 Portfolio Market Value (7/3/2013) Net Outflows Market Value Change in (3/31/2016) Market Value Capitalized Interest (Sales Tax) $103,683,353 7,965,793 S48,597,878 +$2,880,318 Capitalized Interest (Toll Revenue) S31,416,498 $17,166,960 $15,190,179 +$940,641 Total Capitalized Interest Funds $135,099,851 $75,132,753 $63,788,057 +$3,820,959 Portfolio Market Value (7/3/2013) Net Outflows Market Value Change in (3/31/2016) Market Value Debt Service Deserve Fund $17,667,869 $0 $19,315,017 +$1,647,148 L OGANCIRCLE 60 P A R TN E R 5 DISCLAIMERS In general. This disclaimer applies to this document and the verbal or written comments of any person presenting it. This document, taken together with any such verbal or written comments, is referred to herein as the "Presentation." Logan Circle Partners, L.P., a Fortress Investment Group LLC company, is referred to herein as "Logan Circle". No offer to purchase or sell securities. This Presentation is being provided to you at your specific request. This Presentation does not constitute an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy any security and may not be relied upon in connection with the purchase or sale of any security. Projections. Projections contained in this Presentation are based on a variety of estimates and assumptions by Logan Circle, including, among others, estimates of future operating results, the value of assets and market conditions at the time of disposition, and the timing and manner of disposition or other realization events. These estimates and assumptions are inherently uncertain and are subject to numerous business, industry, market, regulatory, competitive and financial risks that are outside of Logan Circle's control. There can be no assurance that the assumptions made in connection with the projections will prove accurate, and actual results may differ materially, including the possibility that an investor may lose some or all of its invested capital. The inclusion of the projections herein should not be regarded as an indication that Logan Circle or any of its affiliates considers the projections to be a reliable prediction of future events and the projections should not be relied upon as such. Neither Logan Circle nor any of its affiliates or representatives has made or makes any representation to any person regarding the projections and none of them intends to update or otherwise revise the projections to reflect circumstances existing after the date when made or to reflect the occurrence of future events, if any or all of the assumptions underlying the projections are later shown to be in error. For purposes of this paragraph, the term "projections" includes "targeted returns". Past performance. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future results and should not be relied upon as the basis for making an investment decision. The information presented is only available for institutional client use and is presented for use only as a one-on-one presentation. No reliance, no update and use of information. You may not rely on this Presentation as the basis upon which to make an investment decision. To the extent that you rely on this Presentation in connection with any investment decision, you do so at your own risk. This Presentation is being provided in summary fashion and does not purport to be complete. The information in the Presentation is provided to you as of the dates indicated and Logan Circle does not intend to update the information after its distribution, even in the event that the information becomes materially inaccurate. Certain information contained in this Presentation, includes performance and characteristics of Logan Circle's strategies and any represented benchmarks, which may derive from calculations or figures that have been provided by independent third parties, or have been prepared internally and have not been audited or verified. Use of different methods for preparing, calculating or presenting information may lead to different results for the information presented, compared to publicly quoted information, and such differences may be material. Knowledge and experience. You acknowledge that you are knowledgeable and experienced with respect to the financial, tax and business aspects of this Presentation and that you will conduct your own independent financial, business, regulatory, accounting, legal and tax investigations with respect to the accuracy, completeness and suitability of this Presentation should you choose to use or rely on this Presentation, at your own risk, for any purpose. Risk of loss. An investment in the strategy will be highly speculative and there can be no assurance that the strategy's investment objectives will be achieved. Investors must be prepared to bear the risk of a total loss of their investment. Distribution of this Presentation. Logan Circle expressly prohibits any reproduction, in hard -copy, electronic or any other form, or any redistribution to any third party of this Presentation without the prior written consent of Logan Circle. This Presentation is not intended for distribution to, or use by, any person or entity in any jurisdiction or country where such distribution or use is contrary to local law or regulation. No tax, legal or accounting advice. This Presentation is not intended to provide, and should not be relied upon for (and you shall not construe it as) accounting, legal, regulatory, financial or tax advice or investment recommendations. Any statements of U.S. federal tax consequences contained in this Presentation were not intended to be used and cannot be used to avoid penalties under the U.S. Internal Revenue Code or to promote, market or recommend to another party any tax -related matters addressed herein. Confidentiality. By accepting receipt or reading any portion of this Presentation, you agree that you will treat the Presentation confidentially. This reminder should not be read to limit, in any way, the terms of any confidentiality agreement you or your organization may have in place with Logan Circle. LOGANCIRCLE 61 P AR TN F. R S 7 ATTACHMENT 15 Payden&Rygel QUARTERLY PORTFOLIO REVIEW Riverside County Transportation Commission 1st Quarter 2016 PAYDEN.COM LOS ANGELES 1 BOSTON 1 LONDON 1 PARIS 62 LETTER FROM THE CEO April 2016 Dear Client, During the first quarter, investors weathered a squall in the credit and equity markets and awaited clues on the path of U.S. interest rates in 2016. Unfortunately, the Federal Reserve was not definitive about the timing of future rate increases, but focused on weaker global economic growth, deflation risk, and financial market volatility during the quarter. We would like to articulate our stance and how we have managed your portfolio in this environment. First, in terms of US economic data, we remain upbeat. With 632,000 jobs added during the first quarter and the unemployment rate now at 5%, wage growth is finally picking up. As a result of the strong job market, people who left the workforce are returning and finding employment. As far as inflation is concerned, core measures, which exclude volatile energy prices, are in the area of 2% year -over -year. Low inflation, yes. Deflation, no. Second, fears of a recession sparked by the decline in oil prices sent equity prices swooning and credit spreads wider in the first half of Q1. We think one of the most important roles of an investment manager is to stay calm when presented with market volatility —especially if the market moves contrary to our longer term views. We did not flinch, and given our fundamental view on the economy, we remain constructive on areas of the credit and equity markets unduly punished by fears of a recession. In the bond market, the 1/4 of a percent increase of the US federal funds rate in December had no impact on long term interest rates. While we anticipate one or two increases in short-term interest rates during the remainder of 2016, we do not foresee significant increases in longer term rates in the year ahead. Non -energy corporate balance sheets continue to be decently healthy and, in general, earnings expectations are favorable. What can derail this outlook? The geo-political situation is unpredictable. However, it is not practical to make investment decisions based on unpredictable events. As the history of the firm has shown, our emphasis on liquidity, diversification, and taking action when necessary has served us well. My very best wishes for the coming months. Joan A. Payden President & CEO 63 2812 ABJ AOC Riverside County Transportation Commission Portfolio Review and Market Update -1st Quarter 2016 PORTFOLIO CHARACTERISTICS (As of 3/31/2016) Portfolio Market Value Weighted Average Credit Quality Weighted Average Duration Weighted Average Yield to Maturity $50.5 million AA+ 1.4 years 0.8% SECTOR ALLOCATION MI 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% • ey ay ��a co 6 dz) e G �e 0a P o'\' ,co P DURATION DISTRIBUTION 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 0-1 1-2 Years 2-3 PORTFOLIO RETURNS - Periods Ending 3/31/2016 RCTC Operating Portfolio Bank of America Merrill Lynch 1-3 Treasury Periods over one year annualized Since 1st Trailing Inception Quarter 1 Yr (3/1/15) 0.71 % 0.88% 1.00% 0.90% 0.92% 1.06% pPayden & Rygel • 333 South Grand Avenue • Los Angelwealifornia goo7i • (213) 625-igoo • www.payden.com Portfolio Review and Market Update -1st Quarter 2016 MARKET THEMES The first quarter of 2016 was extremely volatile, although the ending total return does not convey the turbulent ride. The first six weeks of the year highlighted worries over the fragile state of the global economy. Continued focus on a "hard landing" in China and falling commodity prices gave investors much to fret over. Government bonds rallied as investors sought protection from volatility, while credit spreads widened — a lot — and equities fell. In mid -February, however, stronger economic data out of the US and further action out of the European Central Bank and the Bank of Japan gave investors new hope. As oil prices stabilized and began to rise, earlier trends reversed. The quarter ended with government bonds selling off, credit spreads tightening, and equity markets rallying. ■ The portfolio holds a diversified mix of credit sectors for income generation. ■ Corporate bond yield premiums remain attractive, and we expect to maintain our exposure through the purchase of bonds in the new issue market. ■ We maintain our allocation to high -quality asset -backed and mortgage -backed securities (ABS/MBS) with short duration profiles for their yield and diversification benefits. ■ Interest rates declined over the quarter, with the two year Treasury yield dropping 33 basis points from 1.05% to 0.72%. The US Treasury yield curve flattened, and the yield differential between two- and three-year maturities now stands at 13 basis points. ■ The portfolio had positive returns from the rally in Treasury yields but modestly underperformed the index. ■ Longer -maturity corporate holdings contributed positively due to their higher income and price appreciation from a flattening of the yield curve. ■ Credit yield premiums were volatile but ended the quarter unchanged. The overweight to credit added to performance as did individual security selection within corporates. ■ High -quality ABS spreads held steady and contributed positively to performance, benefiting from higher income returns. ■ There was minimal impact from MBS this quarter as spreads were volatile but ended the period only slightly wider, offsetting the return from yield. pPayden & Rygel • 333 South Grand Avenue • Los Angel€65California goo71 • (213) 625-igoo • www.payden.com MARKET PERSPECTIVE Negative Interest Rate Policy (NIRP): In Theory and In Practice In the first quarter of 2016, the Bank of Japan (BoJ) joined the Swiss National Bank, the Swedish Riksbank, the Danish Nationalbank, and the European Central Bank (ECB) as members of the NIRP brigade —the elite club of central banks with negative interest rate policies (see chart below). While NIRP grabbed headlines during the quarter, it remains to be seen whether such policy initiatives will boost economic activity. NIRP in theory and NIRP in practice are two very different things. In theory, NIRP is supposed to boost aggregate spending in two ways —imposing a cost to save and weakening the domestic currency. First, negative interest rates impose a cost on those who wish not to spend money. In Japan and the euro area, banks with deposits at the central bank are "taxed" a negative interest rate for holding reserves. However, the impact of these negative rates has been limited as household depositors (i.e. the "real economy") still receive positive yields. The second way NIRP supposedly stimulates spending is by weakening the currency, thereby making exporters' products cheaper versus global competitors. Just as traditional interest rate policy suggests lower interest rates weaken a domestic currency, negative interest rates theoretically have a more exaggerated effect on exchange rates. Unfortunately, for both the BofJ and the ECB, the yen and the euro have strengthened versus the dollar since their respective banks joined the NIRP brigade. The jury is still out on NIRP's effectiveness in practice, but the first quarter of 2016 left investors wondering: are central banks out of ammunition? Welcome to the NIRP Zone: Five Global Central Bank Policy Rates Are Below the Zero Lower Bound 4.0% 3.5% 3.0% 2.5% 1.0% Denmark: One -Week Certificate of Deposit 0.5% 0.0% - 0.5% J LiSweden: One -week Debt Certificates ECB: Overnight Deposit•Facility Switzerland: Overnight Sight Deposit Japan* r - 1.0% 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Source: Bank for International Settlements, Bloomberg *On January 29, 2016 the BoJ put in place a three tiered structure of rates, with one policy rate negative at -0.10 66 OVER 30 YEARS OF INSPIRING CONFIDENCE WITH AN UNWAVERING COMMITMENT TO OUR CLIENTS' NEEDS. LOS ANGELES I BOSTON 1 LONDON I PARIS PAYDEN.COM US DOMICILED MUTUAL FUNDS CASH BALANCE Payden/Kravitz Cash Balance Plan Fund EQUITY Equity Income Fund GLOBAL FIXED INCOME Emerging Markets Bond Fund Emerging Markets Corporate Bond Fund Emerging Markets Local Bond Fund Global Fixed Income Fund Global Low Duration Fund TAX-EXEMPT FIXED INCOME California Municipal Income Fund DUBLIN DOMICILED UCITS FUNDS US FIXED INCOME Absolute Return Bond Fund Cash Reserves Money Market Fund Core Bond Fund Corporate Bond Fund Floating Rate Fund GNMA Fund High Income Fund Limited Maturity Fund Low Duration Fund Strategic Income Fund US Government Fund EQUITY World Equity Fund FIXED INCOME Absolute Return Bond Fund Global Emerging Markets Bond Fund Global Emerging Markets Corporate Bond Fund Global Government Bond Index Fund Global High Yield Bond Fund Global Inflation -Linked Bond Fund Global Bond Fund Global Short Bond Fund Sterling Corporate Bond Fund — Investment Grade US Core Bond Fund USD Low Duration Credit Fund LIQUIDITY FUNDS Euro Liquidity Fund Sterling Reserve Fund US Dollar Liquidity Fund For more information about Payden & Rygel, contact us at a location listed below. Payden&Rygel LOS ANGELES 333 South Grand Avenue Los Angeles, California 90071 213 625-1900 BOSTON 265 Franklin Street Boston, Massachusetts 02110 617 807-1990 LONDON 1 Bartholmew Lane London EC2N 2AX United Kingdom + 44 (0) 20-7621-3000 PARIS Representative Office 54, 56 Avenue Noche 75008 Paris, France + 33-607-604-441 67 March County of Riverside h.J16 Treasurer's Pooled Investment Fund "Thud" A big thud marked the sound of the iceberg as it struck the hull of the Titanic, similar it seems to that resonating through our (global) economy, continuing with the first quarter of the year as indicators at this juncture point to a tough remainder for 2016. For three years running now, economists have read the tea leaves and forecasted 2% + Financial distress in Europe continues, being U.S. GDP growth, only to back track and in- caused in part by deterioration of the balance creasingly revise estimates lower. Both 2014 sheets of its banks, several of which have loss - and 2015 had very similar starts and very weak es in the billions of euros. Furthermore, recent overall GDP numbers. This seems to be be- issues with ongoing terrorism, the endless refu- coming the norm and is hard to make a compel- gee crisis, and, the looming danger of the Grexit ling argument of the effects of weather and oth- (Greece), Brexit (Britain) and Dexit (Denmark) er esoteric excuses on overall GDP. Moreover, largely due to the aforementioned problems has actual growth has fallen by 50% from the Europe in real tight spot. The rest of the global 1990's, so it seems as if we simply remain in a economy, along with China and Japan in partic- low growth trend for the foreseeable future. ular, are slowing significantly and in a real eco- nomic conundrum. It turns out that other areas of the U.S. econ- omy are having a tough time as well; retail sales The FED, holding the view that "global devel- unexpectedly declined in March by -0.3% vs. a opments have increased risk," ended the March forecast of 0.1 %. Total business sales have 16th FOMC meeting as expected without any fallen again, and the inventory to sales ratio has change in monetary policy. This global econom- hit the highest level since the Great Recession. is weakness adds to market skepticism about Industrial Production figures have dropped year the number of additional FED hikes this year, over year for seven months in a row, without prolonging the pain to those such as institutional being in a recession. and retail fixed income investors alike seeking higher yields and interest income. ATTACHMENT 16 creased 0.3% in March and durable goods or- ders were down 0.4%, the worst since 2008. Consumer confidence continued to abate, mark- ing its fourth consecutive monthly decline with the April report and concerns have risen about the resilience of consumer spending in the months ahead. The decline in factory output has driven a 1.6% reduction in vehicle production which had been a bright spot in the economy, minus the subprime financing. Manufacturing output de - Don Kent Treasurer -Tax Collector Capital Markets Team Don Kent Treasurer -Tax Collector Jon Christensen Asst. Treasurer -Tax Collector Giovane Pizano Investment Manager Isela Licea Asst. Investment Manager Investment Objectives The primary objective of the treasurer shall be to safeguard the principal of the funds under the treasurer's control, meet the liquidity needs of the depositor, and achieve a return on the funds under his or her control. COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE TREASURER'S POOLED INVESTMENT FUND IS CURRENTLY RATED: Aaa-bf BY MOODY'S INVESTOR'S SERVICE AND AAA/V1 BY FITCH RATINGS Month End Ma. Value ($)* Month End Book Value ($) Paper Gain or Loss ($) Paper Gain Boo. or Loss (%) Yield 1 March February January December November October 6,319,190,571.12 6,294,402,626.91 6,691,824,574.61 7,023,488,956.44 5,931,356,029.51 5,880,386,136.39 6,312,840,233.99 6,289,381,725.26 6,687,643,005.32 7,028,915,490.64 5,933,521,428.90 5,878,933,080.22 6,350,337.13 5,020,901.65 4,181,569.29 (5,426,534.20) (2,165,399.39) 1,453,056.17 0.10 0.65 1.07 1.04 0.08 0.66 1.15 1.12 0.06 0.62 1.10 1.08 (0.08) 0.55 1.03 1.00 (0.04) 0.50 1.03 1.01 0.02 0.46 0.98 0.95 The Treasurer's Pooled Inve158ient Fund is comprised of the County, Schools, Special Districts, and other Discretionary Depositors. Current Market Data Economic Indicators Release Date Indicator Consensus Actual 03/04/2016 Non -Farm Payrolls M/M change: Counts the number of paid employees working part-time or full-time in the nation's business and government establishments. 195,000 242,000 03/04/2016 Employment Situation: Measures the number of unemployed as a percentage of the labor 4.9% 4.9% 03/24/2016 Durable Goods Orders - M/M change: Reflects the new orders placed with domestic manufacturers for immediate and future delivery of factory hard goods. -3.0% -2.8% 03/25/2016 Real Gross Domestic Product - Q/Q change: The broadest measure of aggregate economic activity and encompasses every sector of the economy. GDP is the country's most comprehensive economic scorecard. 0.9% 0.9% 03/29/2016 Consumer Confidence: Measures consumer attitudes on present economic conditions and 94.0 96.2 expectations of future conditions. 03/ 03/2016 Factory Orders M/M change: Represents the dollar level of new orders for both durable and 2.1 % 1.6% nondurable goods. 03/16/2016 Consumer Price Index - M/M change: The Consumer Price Index is a measure of the average -0.2% -0.2% price level of a fixed basket of goods and services purchased by consumers. 03/16/2016 CPI Ex Food and Energy - M/M change: CPI Ex Food and Energy excludes food and energy. 0.2% 0.3% Stock Indices Value Change Dow Jones (DJIA) $ 17,685.09 $ 1,168.59 S&P 500 Index $ 2,059.74 $ 127.51 Increase to 0.25% Fed Funds Target Rate Funds Rate: 0-0.25 % Fed Move Probability for FOMC Dates: 04/27/2016 06/15/2016 NASDAQ (NDX) $ 4,869.84 $ 311.89 Commodities Value Change Nymex Crude $ 38.34 $ 4.59 Gold (USD/OZ) 2.0 % 1.7% Increase to 0.50% 98.0 % 82.6 % Increase to 0.75 % 0.0 % 15.7% Increase to 1 % 0.0 % 0.0 % $ 1,232.71 $ (6.03) FOMC US Treasury Curve (M/M) Meeting Schedule Release Risk Assessment 27-Jan .25 - 0.5 % Growth 16-Mar .25 - 0.5 % Growth g37 hh • Ca'eJR oona 2-50 7.06 1.50 1_00 0.56 0-00 • ns us irmv,r na:.6os Gr+m or -WV. • I75 413 irwaRY •crircc G+.a 02114/16 s • 161 3M 6611 IV 2V 37 }Y 67 77 611 - 101. 157 Tenor Lurra id "J •125 Q3E31/16 :I 1.1I25 D2/29/16 21 I25 (03/31/16-02/24/10 31.1 0 Si:_ rA 776 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE TREASURER -TAX COLLECTOR69 TIMMI 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 four 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 below. AAA Rated Prime Institutional Money -Market Funds Fund Symbol 7 DAymy.i.eld Fidelity Prime Institutional MMF Federated Prime Obligations Fund Wells Fargo Advantage Heritage JP Morgan Fidelity Gov Fund Wells Fargo Gov Fund Federated Gov Fund 1.00% ;Pool Yield �TIMMI FIPXX POIXX 0.43 % 0.39 % WFJXX 0.44% CJ PXX 0.42 % FRGXX 0.27% WFFXX 0.24% GOFXX 0.46% 0.50% 0.40% ° 0.42/0 0 0.44% 0.44% 0.5()% 0.43% 0.46% 0.50% V 0.08% 0.09% 0.08% 0.09% 0.10% 0.11% 0.12% 0.12% 0.14% 0.55% 0.25% 0.62% 0.23% 0.66% 0.31% 0.32% 0.65% 0.35% Mar-15 May-15 Cash Flows Jul-15 Sep-15 Nov-15 Jan-16 Mar-16 Required Actual Available to Monthly Monthly Matured Investments Invest > 1 Month Receipts Disbursements Difference Investments B Maturing Year 04/2016 04/2016 1,611.36 970.00 641.36 05/2016 712.44 1,350.00 (637.56) 234.61 875.97 779.00 238.41 680.53 06/2016 1,150.00 1,550.00 (400.00) 161.59 646.00 07/2016 1,100.00 1,050.00 50.00 50.00 499.30 08/2016 720.00 950.00 (230.00) 180.00 441.00 09/2016 850.00 1,050.00 (200.00) 200.00 413.26 10/2016 1,040.00 1,175.00 (135.00) 135.00 375.00 11/2016 1,200.00 960.00 240.00 240.00 191.34 12/2016 2,110.00 1,030.00 1,080.00 01 / 2017 1,020.00 1,650.00 (630.00) 02/2017 810.00 1,200.00 (390.00) 03/2017 0.00 1,320.00 79.37 690.00 299.00 300.00 165.00 300.00 30.00 TOTALS 12,323.80 12,935.00 (611.20) 676.59 4,248.99 4,598.80 5,636.25 10.72% 72.85% 89.28% * All values reported in millions ($). The Pooled Investment Fund cash flow requirements are based upon a 12 month historical cash flow model. Based upon projected COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE TREASURER -TAX COLLECTORN 3 Asset Allocation Assets (000's) MMKT CALTRUST FND DDA/PASSBK LOCAL AGCY OBLIG US TREAS BILLS 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 ZERO CPNS MUNI BONDS COMM PAPER Scheduled Par Scheduled Book Scheduled Market 490,000.001 54,000.00 165,000.00 335.00 50,000.00 825,000.00 315,000.00 886,751.00 428,717.00 341,279.00 702,783.00 382,539.72 483,500.00 536,506.00 120,000.00 108,850.00 53,800.00 180,165.00 195,000.00 490,000.00 54,000.00 165,000.00 335.00 49,862.24 824,916.44 313,875.32 886,833.22 427,447.45 341,315.31 700,550.69 382,558.09 481,814.93 536,608.47 119,483.36 108,850.00 53,738.96 181,336.32 194,314.44 Mkt/ Sch Book Yield WAL (Yr) Mat (Yr) 490,000.001 54,000.00 165,000.00 335.00 49,941.50 827,162.20 314,344.95 887,265.30 428,173.46 341,311.43 701,838.76 382,753.96 482,693.05 536,053.31 119,735.20 108,948.47 53,744.84 181,336.32 194,552.83 100.00% I 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.16% 100.27% 100.15% 100.05% 100.17% 100.00% 100.18% 100.05% 100.18% 99.90% 100.21 % 100.09%1 100.01 % 100.00% 100.12% 0.42% 0.68 % 1 0.29 % 1.16 % 0.37% 0.68 % 0.43 % 1.18% 0.40 % 1.07% 0.46 % 0.77% 0.41 % 0.52% 0.55 % 0.68 % 0.49 % 0.72% 0.68 % .003I .003 .003 4.211 .384 1.101 .476 .990 .326 .578 .343 .542 .403 1.124 .490 1.137 .198 1.045 .368 .003 .003 .003 4.211 .384 1.101 .476 2.824 .326 2.835 .343 1.232 .403 1.162 .490 1.551 .198 1.045 .368 Totals (000's): 6,319,225.72 6,312,840.23 6,319,190.57 100.10% 0.65% .632 1.064 1,000.000.00 500,000.00 0.00 111111 ni T f N pr F h Z D am wn 0 z V h Q V Y. D m f 2 1r D z V Q f Z D le S 2: Scheduled Bonk Market f ct W t a. d f O V SCHEDULED PAR % - MMKT -8% CALTRUST FMD - 1% i Ln IY ALPASS8KAC.Cy Cat BLiCa - Wh - US TREAS BILLS - 1% im US TREAS BONDS - 13% O FHLMC DISC NOTES - S9h p FHLMC BONDS - 14% p FNMA DISC NOTES - 7% - FNMA BONDS- - FHLBDISC NOTES -11% FHLB BONDS -6% a FFCB DISC NOTES-!94 p FFCB BONDS-BiH ® FMAC DISC NOTES -2% o FARMER MAC - 2aifo mi MUNI ZERO CPNS-T9h - MUNI BONDS -3% - COMM PAPER - 34h COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE TREASURER -TAX COL- 71 Maturity Distribution M. Scheduled Par (000's 1-2 Yr 2-3 Yr >3 Yr Totals (000's) MMKT 490,000.00 CALTRUST FND 54,000.00 DDA/PASSBK 165,000.00 LOCAL AGCY OBLIG - US TREAS BILLS - 335.00 50,000.00 490,000.00 54,000.00 165,000.00 335.00 50,000.00 US TREAS BONDS 300,000.00 190,000.00 190,000.00 70,000.00 75,000.00 825,000.00 FHLMC DISC NOTES 25,000.00 290,000.00 315,000.00 FHLMC BONDS 115,366.00 124,625.00 50,000.00 174,400.00 422,360.00 886,751.00 FNMA DISC NOTES FNMA BONDS FHLB DISC NOTES FHLB BONDS FFCB DISC NOTES FFCB BONDS FMAC DISC NOTES MUNI ZERO CPNS FARMER MAC MUNI BONDS COMM PAPER - 163,000.00 265,717.00 109,604.00 25,000.00 240,000.00 437,783.00 - 105,000.00 110,070.00 57,000.00 426,500.00 10,000.00 131,296.00 169,000.00 10,000.00 25,000.00 15,000.00 30,800.00 12,070.00 52,000.00 110,000.00 50,000.00 23,000.00 98,960.00 118,000.00 428,717.00 60,000.00 171,675.00 341,279.00 702,783.00 65,000.00 72,469.72 30,000.00 382,539.72 483,500.00 125,900.00 50,310.00 50,000.00 536,506.00 120,000.00 8,850.00 10,000.00 25,000.00 108,850.00 53,800.00 29,600.00 34,535.00 5,000.00 180,165.00 - 195,000.00 12.33% 19.73% 40.72% 12.33% 32.05% 72.77% 469,350.00 471,714.72 779,370A b,d1Y,LL7./L 7.43% 7.46% 12.33% 80.20% 87.67% 100.00% tpooAas 0.1 Mo-, ��r►i _x IMP ►�� 1-2 Yr 2-3Y D3Yr - 3 Mos 3-12 Mot, YEAR IN MATURITY F� MMKT - Scheduled Par IBBi GILT RUST FND- Schedu4d Par DOA/ PASSIM{ - Scheduled Par LOGIL AGO' OBL IG - Scheduled Par - US TREAS&ILLS-Scheduled Par US TREAS BONDS • Scheduled Par FFILMC DISC NOTES • Scheduled Par rr ENING BONDS -Scheduled Par FNMA DISC NOTES -Scheduled Par FNMA BONDS -Scheduled Par FHLB oISC NOTES -Scheduled Par FHL8 BONDS -Scheduled Par FFCB DISC NOTES • Scheduled Par BBBB� FFCB BONDS -Scheduled Par hhhhhhhhhh■ FMAC DISC NOTES -Scheduled Pal a� FARMER MAC -Scheduled Per Bill MUNI ZERO CPNS-Scheduled Per MUNI BONDS -Scheduled Par hhhhhhhhh� COMM PAPER -Scheduled Par COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE TREASURER -TAX COLLECTO,2 5 Credit Quality Moody (000's) Market MKT/Book Aaa 5,521,460.72 5,515,167.16 5,520,922.91 100.10 % 0.66 % Aa1 18,750.00 18,865.90 18,865.90 100.00 % 0.84 % Aa2 115,870.00 115,725.40 115,762.60 100.03 % 0.49 % Aa3 268,960.00 269,413.42 269,620.49 100.08% 0.72% NR 394,185.00 393,668.36 394,018.67 100.09% 0.48% totals (000's): MOODY'S S & P BOOK °o BOOK °o • • MAN-17% Eika n El1M1.0% -MR•Pv Mik2.296 AA4-996 AAA -39Y AAA+-70% M101•196 INIA11-3% I I i AAA 566,500.00 566,495.00 566,500.50 100.00 % 0.47% AA+ 4,973,710.72 4,967,538.06 4,973,288.32 100.12 % 0.69 % AA 163,870.00 164,643.17 164,680.37 100.02 % 0.65 % AA- 220,960.00 220,495,.65 220,702.72 100.09% 0.65 % NR 394,185.00 393,668.36 394,018.67 100.09% 0.48% COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE TREASURER -TAX COLLECTOR. L t'L 2I0.10ffTIOJ XVI-2I32IfISVINI aGISRIHARI 30 kthlf10J UST I0£1 00'0061 1,851' 89£1 00.00£ 5L51 5551 00'0Ob'ZI- 1,85'b I8£'b 00'0Ob'8 1,85T bL£'b 00'0Ob'8 1,85T 61,£1 00'009'61 LZ8' 618' OI'0£Z'£ LZ8618' 00'0001- LZZ'Z I8I7 00'000'98L LZZ'Z Z8iZ 00'009'5I Obl'Z 9607 051£5'9I 8Il' Kt 00'009'5I- 8Ll' 8Ii' 05'096'017- 8LL' Kt 8960Z'6- 8LL' 8Ii' 00'05Z'LZ- 9SL' 95L' 00'5£Z1- 8LL' 8Ii' 00'0051i- ISL' SVC 00'05Z'LOl 8LL' 8II' 00'05Z15- 685' 08S' SL'SZL'Z- 685' 085' 00'00Z'ZI 00'006100'0i 00061,0'00T 00'000'000'0T 00'000'000'0i 0081 0081 OZOZ/bI/OL fl91AI£aNIAS JNI11-13 LOZLOb£I£ 00'00£'000'0I 000£00'00I 00'000'000'0i 00'000'000'0i 0091 0091 OZOZ/6Z/OL fl91A1£3NzAS JNI11-13 £LALOb£I£ 00'009'L86% 0009L8'66 00'000'000'0i 00'000'000'0i OSZ' OSC LLOZ/LZ/OL fl91A193NzAZ JLV11-13 HALOb£I£ 00'001,'800'0I 0001'80'00T 00'000'000'0T 00'000'000'0i 0051 0051 OZOZ/6Z/OL fl91A1£3NzA5 JLV1H3 ££fILOb£I£ 00'001,'800'0I 0001'80'00T 00'000'000'0i 00'000'000'0i OSS'L 0551 OZOZ/6Z/Ol fl91A1£3NzA5 JLV1H3 06fILOb£I£ 00'009'6I0'OZ 000860'001 00'000'000'0Z 00'000'000'0Z OSCI OSCi OZOZ/6Z/OI fl91A1£DNaA5 JNI'IH3 £ZNLOb£I£ 00'05£'£8611 000688'66 06'611'08611 00'000'000'5L Z65' 005' LIOZ/LZ/IO IASL JNI'IH3 OfIQV3L£L£ 00'05Z'ZL61Z 000688'66 00'05V£L61Z 00'000'000'5Z OLS' 005' LIOZ/LZ/I0 1151 JNI'IH3 OfIQV3L£L£ 00'0SL'6LI'SZ 0006IL'OOI 00'0SL'£661Z 00'000'000'5Z 6SVI OSZ'L 8I0Z/ZZ/90 39N193N=A£ JNI11-13 01A199Ob£I£ 00.00VZ00'SL 000910'00T 00'008'98611 00'000'000'5L 0£Z'L 00Z-I 8I0Z/ZZ/90 3=ASIDN=A£ JNI11-13 I3VLOb£I£ 051£1,159'L 0006'10'00T 00'0061£9'Z 00'000'055'Z 89VI OOZ'L 8LOZ/iZ/SO fl9NI£DN=A£ JNI11-13 £11M9Ob£I£ 00'00L'L00'OL OOOLIO'OOI 00'00£'LIO'Ol 00'000'000'0i 0££' 005' 9I0Z/£1/90 JAI JN111-13 60QV3L£I£ 6l'Zb91i£'LZ OOOLIO'OOI 69709'Z5£'LZ 00'000'LO£'LZ Stiff 005' 9I0Z/£1/50 JAI JNII1-13 60QV3L£I£ £0'0£0'090'9 OOOLIO'OOI If6£Z'690'9 00'000'650'9 Stiff 005' 9I0Z/£I/50 JAI JNII1-13 60QV3L£I£ 00'05Z100'SZ °OOLI0'00i 00'0051£0'5Z 00'000'000'5Z 58£' 005' 910Z/£I/SO JAI JN111-13 60QV3L£I£ 00'056'005'6 000010'00T 00'58i'Z05% 00'000'005'6 08£' 00V 9LOZ/LZ/50 JAI JN17Hd bd215017£I£ 00'SZL'ZOS'Zl OOOLLO'OOL 00'5Z9'9L5'Zl 00'000'005'Zl 08£' 005' 9LOZ/£1/50 JAI JN111-13 60QV3L£I£ 00'05Z'L0l'5Z 0006ZVOOI 00'000'000'5Z 00'000'000'5Z OSZ' OSC 9I0Z/0£/ZI 3aAIDNIAZ JNI1Hd 6VMSOb£I£ 00'05Z100'SZ OOOLLO'OOL 00'005'550'5Z 00'000'000'5Z OS£' 005' 9LOZ/£L/50 JAI JN111-13 60QV3L£I£ 05'ZL5'9Z91 000b£0'00L 5Z10£'6Z91 00'000'5Z91 009' 5Z9' 9LOZ/LO/LI 'AP JN111-13 055£017£I£ 00.00V£00'0L 000b£0'00I 00'00Z166% 00'000'000'0i LB9' 5Z9' 9LOZ/LO/LL IAP JN11H3 OSS£Ob£I£ SQNOR JNflH3 00'0S6$17£11£ 8bOZ6L'66 8V8I£'SL8'£I£ 00'000'000'SI£ 8Zb' L9L' £9L' IL'L9£ LI 00'OSZ '£06'bZ 000£19'66 69 898'S88 bZ 00'000'000 SZ ZZS' OZS' LIOZ SO l0 3ION JSIQ JNI1H3 L3VL6££I£ £S5' OSS' 8519£'91 00'05Z'L£61,Z 0006bC66 Zb'588'0Z61Z 00'000'000'5Z 99V 59V 910Z/61/01 3ION JSIQ JN11H3 5£196££I£ L£I' 9£i' Ll'6ZL117 00'05Z1661Z 000596'66 £90Z5'9661Z 00'000'000'5Z II5' 0I5' 9I0Z/OZ/50 3ION JSIQ JN11H3 bflX96££I£ £S5' OSS' 98'6Z8'£9 00'05Z'L£61Z 0006E'66 bL'OZb'£L81Z 00'000'000'5Z 8L5' SLS 910Z/61/01 3ION JSIQ JN11H3 5£196££I£ 06V 88V 00'SZL'S£ 00'000'81,61Z 000Z6C66 00'5L8'ZI61Z 00'000'000'5Z Lib' OW 910Z/9Z/60 3ION JSIQ JNIIH3 8b1-196££I£ 5SV £5V I9'£Zb'S£ 00'000'Z561Z 000808'66 6£9L5'9I61Z 00'000'000'5Z Lib' OW 910Z/£I/60 3ION JSIQ JNIIH3 £L396££I£ 9£17' ££V ££'80L'L£ 00'0001561Z 000918'66 L916V9I61Z 00'000'000'5Z LZb' OZV 910Z/90/60 3ION JSIQ JNIIH3 Z8396££1£ 985' b85' 00'005'££ 00'005'££61Z 0006£L'66 00'000'0061Z 00'000'000'5Z ZOV 00V 9I0Z/L£/OI 3ION JSIQ JNIIH3 SLN196££I£ OL5' L9S' ££'£85'££ 00'05Z'5£61Z 000IE'66 L9'9991061Z 00'000'000'5Z ZOV 00V 9I0Z/SZ/OI 3ION JSIQ JNIIH3 Z6196££1£ £LS' OLS 00'019'££ 00'000'5£61Z 0000E'66 00'06£1061Z 00'000'000'5Z ZOV 00V 910Z/9Z/01 3ION JSIQ JNIIH3 9ZN196££1£ ON' 60£' 8L'LZ518Z 00'000'ZL61Z 000888'66 ZZZLb'£1,61Z 00'000'000'5Z 9ZZ' 5ZZ' 9I0Z/ZZ/L0 3ION JSIQ JNIIH3 SSZ96££I£ 61V Lib' ££'£££'95 00'05L'L561Z 0001£8'66 L99Lb1061Z 00'000'000'5Z Z6£' 06£' 910Z/1£/80 3ION JSIQ JNIIH3 SZ396££I£ LIZ' 9bZ' ZVS£5'££ 001/W8861T 000£Z6'66 851161561i 00'000'000'5I 9££' 5££' 910Z/6Z/90 3ION JSIQ JNIIH3 b.LA96££I£ S3ION JSIQ J1111113 M S801 ZO'SSL'S6Z'Z 00'00Z'Z9I'LZS SSOZ9Z'00I 86141,916118 00'000'000'SZS Z89' 5I6'I 9651 05'L£6'ZZL 00'05L'500'5Z 000£Z0'001 05719'Z88/Z 00'000'000'5Z £66' OSZ' 8LOZ/8Z/Z0 QNOfl 7,21115V32II'S'f1 621I18Z8ZL6 6L8' 898' 00'5Z51- 00'009100'0T 0009[0'00T 00'5ZL'£00'0I 00'000'000'0i 1765' 5Z9 LLOZ/SI/ZO QNOfl A2IfISV32LL'S'f1 bLfl8Z8Z16 985'£ 55V£ 696ZVZOb 00'05L'0£b'SZ 000£ZCLOL L£'OZ£18Z0'SZ 00'000'000'5Z OLVI 0051 610Z/1£/0i QNOfl A2If1SV32LL'S'f] Z938Z8ZI6 L9I'£ 690.£ bb'868'9££ 00'05Z'Lbb'5Z 00068LIOT 9515£'0LL'SZ 00'000'000'5Z OL£'I 0051 6LOZ/L£/50 QNOfl A2If1SV32LL'S'f] 01M8Z8ZI6 6L8' L98' 5Z95I'6£ 00'000100'5Z 0009[0'00T 5C£b8196'n 00'000'000'5Z ZBC 5Z9' LLOZ/SI/ZO QNOfl A2If1SV32LL'S'f] bLfl8Z8Z16 b££'£ LZZ'£ 6I'Ll915£ 00'000'ZP5'5Z 00088LZOi L878£'Z6l'SZ 00'000'000'5Z 60V1 5Z91 6LOZ/L£/L0 QNOfl A2If1SV32LL'S'f1 9MM8Z8ZI6 8991 9b91 Z9068'98 00'005'190'5Z 0009K'OOL S£'6091L6'n 00'000'000'5Z 9Z6' SLS' LLOZ/0£/LI QNOfl A2If1SV32LL'S'f1 ZLNI8Z8ZI6 56f1 L9L1 Z9Obi'OZL 00'005'£90'5Z OOOISZ'OOi S£'65£'£b6'n 00'000'000'5Z Z86' SLS' 8LOZ/SI/I0 QNOfl A2If1SV32LL SII L£H8Z8Z16 6L8' 899 L£'b8VSZ 00'000100'5Z 0009E0'00T £95L5'8L6'n 00'000'000'5Z 569' 5Z9' LLOZ/SI/ZO QNOfl A2IfISV32LL'S'f] bLfl8Z8Z16 L9I'Z 0£I7 05'L£61LL 00'05Z'Lii'SZ 00069V001 05'Zl£'5b6'n 00'000'000'5Z 880'I 0001 8LOZ/L£/50 QNOfl A2IRSV32LL'S'f] L3A8Z8Z16 899'1 0591 I8'L05'50L 00'000'096'n 00001,8'66 6LZ6b158'n 00'000'000'5Z 516' 5Z9' LLOZ/0£/LI QNOfl A2IRSV32LL'S'f] 9VfI8Z8ZI6 56f b8L' 5Z906'Z 00'05Z'0£0'5Z OOOIZI'OOL SC£b£'LZO'SZ 00'000'000'5Z 559 OSZ' LLOZ/SI/I0 QNOfl A2IRSV32LL'S'f] I6V8Z8Z16 8£81 II81 959L6'LZL 00'005190'5Z 00085VOOL IIV£Z5'9£6'n 00'000'000'5Z 066' SLS' 8LOZ/L£/I0 QNOfl A2IRSV32LL'S'f] LIfISZSZi6 £ZLZ 9807 LWILZ'06 00'05£'0L0'5L 00069V001 £L'SLO'08611 00'000'000'5L £501 0001 8LOZ/SI/50 QNOO. A2IfISB3ul'S'f] £VXSZSZL6 £ZLZ Z807 90115'88 00'05£'0L0'5l 00069V001 b6'5£818611 00'000'000'5L 6b01 0001 8LOZ/SI/50 QNOO A2IfISV32LL'S'f1 £VXSZSZL6 66C1 89C1 Z95L91b 00'00L'8£0'5L 000ISZ'OOi 8£19V96611 00'000'000'5L 989 SLS' 8LOZ/SI/l0 QNOB A2IfISV32LL'S'f1 L£HSZSZL6 6L81 6b81 5Z1££'6Z 00'00£'Lb0'0I 000£LVOOL SL'896'LLO'OL 00'000'000'0i OZ6' 0001 8LOZ/SI/Z0 QNOfl A2If1SV32LL'S'f1 b6HSZSZi6 I051 06VI 00'058'S 00'00L'L86% 000IL8'66 00'05Z186% 00'000'000'0i £ZL' 5Z9' LIOZ/0£/60 (NOG A2If15V32LL'S'f1 6SISZSZL6 Zb57 b6bZ 00'5Z0'68 00.00V£Z0'5l 000951'00L 00'5L£1£6'bi 00'000'000'5L SZO1 SLS' 8IOZ/SI/OI QNOfl A2IRSV32LL'S'f1 1818Z8ZL6 56L' SSC £l'£5V59- 00'05Z'0£0'5Z 000IZITOL £L'£OL'560'5Z 00'000'000'5Z ££V OSL' LIOZ/SI/l0 (NOG A2IRSV32LL'S'f1 L6VSZSZL6 6L8' 898' 5C£6£'5- 00'00Z'£00'OZ 000910'001 5L'£65'800'0Z 00'000'000'0Z 965' 5Z9' LIOZ/SI/ZO QNOR A2ll1SVH2H 'S'Il I'Lfl8Z8Z16 SL£' bL£' 00'0ZS'Z£- 00'008'LLO'OZ 000680'001 00'0Z£'050'0Z 00:000'000'0Z IS£' 5Z9' 910Z/51/80 QNOR A2ll1SVH2H'S'Il 82IA8Z8Z16 80Z' 80Z' 69'6ZCZZ- 00'05Z1IO'SZ 0005t0'001 69'6LI17£0'5Z 00:000'000'5Z 1,9£' 005' 910Z/51/90 QNOR A2ll1SVH2H'S'Il ZOA8Z8Z16 £ZL' £ZL' 05795'9 00'05L'8661Z 000566'66 05LSI'Z66$Z 00:000'000'5Z ISZ' 05Z' 9I0Z/5I/50 QNOR A2ll1SVH2H'S'Il IJA8Z8Z16 6i Z' 6bZ' 091Z9'61- 00'050'L00'SI 000L170.00I 081L99Z0'SI 00'000'000'51 Sb£' 005' 910Z/0£/90 QNOR A2ll1SVH2H'S'Il 60M8Z8Z16 £ZL' £Zl' L£'6091 00'05L'8661Z 000566'66 £90bi1661Z 00'000'000'5Z £LZ' OSZ' 9I0Z/SI/50 QNOG A2IRSV32LL'S'f1 IDASZSZi6 80Z' 80Z' 69155'8£- 00'05Z1i0'SZ 00000'00T 691'08'6b0'SZ 00'000'000'5Z LZ£' 005' 9I0Z/51/90 (NOG A2If15V32LL'S'f1 ZOASZSZL6 £ZL' £Zl' L£'b£V05 00'005'L66'6b 000566'66 £959Z'Lb6'6b 00'000'000'05 6Z£' OSZ' 9I0Z/SI/50 (NOR A2IRSV32LL'S'f1 IDASZSZI6 £ZL' £Zl' SC£b£'LS 00'05L'8661Z 000566'66 5Z90b11761Z 00'000'000'5Z Sib' OSZ' 9I0Z/51/50 (NOR A2IRSFr32LL'S'f1 IDASZSZI6 £ZI' £Zl' 00'5L£11 00'05L'8661Z 000566'66 00'5L£1861Z 00'000'000'5Z Z6Z' OSZ' 9I0Z/51/50 QNOO. A2If15V32LL'S'f1 IDASZSZI6 S£S' 6Z8' L9Z£I1L- 00'05L'550'5Z 000£ZZ'OOL L8788'6Zl'5Z 00'000'000'5Z Lb9' SLS' LIOZ/l£/l0 (NOG A2If15V32LL'S'f1 5358Z8ZI6 £ZI' £Zl' i£'OLO'LZ 00'05L'8661Z 000566'66 696L91L61Z 00'000'000'5Z PZ£' OSZ' 9IOZ/SI/50 (NOG A2If15V32LL'S'f1 IDASZSZi6 £ZI' £Zl' 959L6'0£ 00'05L'8661Z 000566'66 bb'£LL'L961Z 00'000'000'5Z S££' OSZ' 9IOZ/SI/50 (NOG A2If15V32LL'S'f1 IDASZSZi6 £ZI' £Zl' 959L6'0£ 00'05L'8661Z 000566'66 bb'£LL'L961Z 00'000'000'5Z S££' 05Z' 9IOZ/SI/50 (NOG A2If15V32LL'S'f1 IDASZSZi6 £ZI1 Zell bb'519'LL- 00'005'650'5Z 0008£VOOL bb'Sbi'LLO'SZ 00'000'000'5Z ZSL' SLR' LIOZ/SI/SO (NOG A2If15V32LL'S'f1 6HMSZSZL6 £ZL' £Zl' L£'OLO'LZ 00'05L'8661Z 000566'66 696L91L61Z 00'000'000'5Z PZ£' 05Z' 9IOZ/SI/50 (NOG A2If15V32LL'S'f1 IDASZSZi6 6bZ'I 6£Z1 00'5Z8'Z£ 00'00L100'5 000b60'001 00'5L81L61 00'000'000'5 Z£6' OSL' LIOZ/0£/90 QNOR A2IRSV32LL'S'f1 9/IIK ZI6 SQNOfl SVHN.L SR £IMMEr ZS£' 8S169Z'6L 00'00S'Ib6'66 000£88'66 Zb'S£Z'Z98'66 00'000 000 OS 69£' ZO£' 90£' ££•£££'Oh 00.00S'6L61Z 000816'66 L9.991'6£61Z 00'000'000'5Z 99£' S9£ 910Z LZ/LO 11I8 A2If1SV321.L S fl £M096LZ16 0917. 8Sb" SZ.I£6'8£ 00.000'Z961Z 0008178'66 SC890'£Z61Z 00'000'000'5Z EC £L£' 910Z/S1/60 11ISI Aunsvala'S'R Z3H96LZI6 S11Ifl Stl3NI SR iIZ'b IZOZ 00'0 00'000'S££ 000000'00T 00'000'S££ 00'000'S££ SSI1 SSI'I ILZ'b LZO'Z 00'0 00'000'5££ 000000'00i 00.000'5££ 00.000'5££ 55I'L 5SL I OZOZ/5I/90 3SROHI2If10J ISIQ SR OV1 MHO AJOV 1V301 £00' £00' 00'0 00'000'000'0T 000000'00T 00'000'000'S9i 00'000'000'S9I 06r 06Z' £00' £00' 00'0 00'000'000'S9I 000000'00i 00'000'000'S9I 00'000'000'S9I 06Z' 06Z. 9I0Z/I0/b0 HIV2I Q3OVNVNI flR HSVJ xflSStld/tlQQ £00' £00' 00'0 00'000'0001S 000000'00f 00'000'0001S £00' £00' 00'0 00'000'0001S 000000'00i £00' £00 £00' £00' £00' £00' £00' £00' £00' £00 £00' £00' £00' £00' £00' £00' 00'0 00.0 00'0 00'0 00'0 00'0 00'0 00'0 00'000'000'00 00.000'000'S 00'000'000'5 00'000'000'5Z 00'000'000'0Z 00'000'000'SIZ 00'000'000'5U 00'000'000'SOI 00100'0001S 589' £89' 000000'00T 000000'00i 000000'00i 000000'00T 000000'00i 000000'00T 000000'00T 000000'00T 00'000b00'17S 00'000'00nS S89' S89' 9LOZ/IO/b0 INHIL.LHS ISR2111VJ 2II1J 00'000'000'06b 00.000'000'S 00'000'000'5 00'000'000'5Z 00'000'000'0Z 00'000'000'SIZ 00'000'000'5U 00'000'000'SOI 00'000'000'06b 00.000'000'S 00'000'000'5 00'000'000'5Z 00'000'000'0Z 00'000'000'SIZ 00'000'000'5U 00'000'000'50i £bZ' 8ZZ' 59Z' ETV 6£V LZb' I£V OZV £bZ 8ZZ' 59Z' CIF 6£V LZb' I£V QN3 ISR2II1tlJ 910Z MAO AOO Q3IV2I3Q3d XX300 9I0Z/I0/b0 AOO OO2IV3 S11HM XX33M 9I0Z/I0/b0 AOO AIIIHQI3 XXO2I3 9IOZ/IO/b0 HNII2Id NVO2IONI dI XXdLJ 9LOZ/LO/b0 3NII2Id Q3IVII3Q3d XXIOd 9LOZ/LO/b0 31AII2Id AII13QI3 XXdI3 9IOZ/LO/b0 HOVII2IHH ISfINI1VJ XXI3M Ixlala 0Nfli 100.1 I.P.r.3 61p.W1,11 uoyem(1 ssol/upp oy smai Pa13,P0IN PazlleamR an1eA � Jd a91,A PIMA! a, ,1%% Moog re3 .Glnyelnl uodnop apa uoydpasaQ d I S'7: ) oI Pladi i/1.4.1)1 aunnon ono;vod Pug Immix Month End Portfolio Holdings Maturity Yield To Par Book CUSIP Description Date Coupon Maturity Value. Value Market Market Unrealized Modified Years To Price Value Gain/Loss Duration Maturity 3134G7ZB0 FHLMC 5YrNc3MoB 10/15/2020 1.750 1.750 3134G7Z20 FHLMC 3YrNc3MoB 10/29/2018 1.250 1.250 3134G7V73 FHLMC 5YrNc3MoB 10/29/2020 1.600 1.600 3137EADU0 FHLMC 1.25Yr O1/27/2017 .500 .453 3134G72T7 FHLMC 3YrNc6MoB 10/29/2018 1.050 1.050 3134G72T7 FHLMC 3YrNc6MoB 10/29/2018 1.050 1.050 3134G73L3 FHLMC 2YrNc6MoE 11/16/2017 .750 .750 3134G7S77 FHLMC 5YrNc6MoB 10/29/2020 1.125 1.125 3134G7417 FHLMC 5YrNc3MoB 11/25/2020 1.600 1.600 3134G84E6 FHLMC 5YrNc3MoB 11/23/2020 1.500 1.500 3134G8DK2 FHLMC 3.5YrNc1YrE 06/17/2019 1.500 1.500 3134G8DD8 FHLMC 2.5YrNc6MoE 06/22/2018 1.250 1.250 3134G8EA3 FHLMC 3.5YrNc6MoE 06/28/2019 1.550 1.550 3137EADX4 FHLMC 2Yr 12/15/2017 1.000 1.051 3134G8EL9 FHLMC 3.25YrNc6MoE 03/29/2019 1.410 1.410 3134G8FH7 FHLMC 4YrNC6MoB 12/30/2019 1.500 1.500 3134G8F20 FHLMC 5YrNc3MoB O1/29/2021 2.000 2.000 3134G8FD6 FHLMC 5YrNc6MoB O1/28/2021 1.750 1.750 3134G8GU7 FHLMC 4YrNc6MoB O1/29/2020 1.500 1.500 3134G8GX1 FHLMC 5YrNc3MoB 02/19/2021 1.900 1.900 3134G8GX1 FHLMC 5YrNc3MoB 02/19/2021 1.900 1.900 3134G8HJ1 FHLMC 5YrNc3MoB O1/29/2021 1.625 1.625 3134G8HH5 FHLMC 5YrNc6MoB O1/29/2021 1.500 1.500 3134G8J26 FHLMC 3YrNc6MoB 02/19/2019 1.000 1.000 3134G8JW0 FHLMC 3.5YrNc3MoB 08/12/2019 1.500 1.500 3134G8JQ3 FHLMC 4YrNc3MoB 02/26/2020 1.625 1.625 3134G8K99 FHLMC 3.75YrNc6MoB 11/25/2019 1.500 1.500 3134G8LG2 FHLMC 13MoNc6MoE 03/09/2017 .750 .750 3134G8LG2 FHLMC 13MoNc6MoE 03/09/2017 .750 .750 3134G8LU1 FHLMC 5YrNc3MoB 02/26/2021 1.500 1.500 3134G8L49 FHLMC 1.5YrNc3Mob 08/25/2017 .800 .800 3134G8KU2 FHLMC 5YrNc6MoB 02/26/2021 1.250 1.250 3134G8L31 FHLMC 5YrNc6MoB 02/26/2021 1.250 1.250 3134G8LX5 FHLMC 3.5YrNc3MoB 11/15/2019 1.490 1.490 3134G8L64 FHLMC 2.5YrNc1YrE O8/24/2018 1.000 1.000 3134G8N70 FHLMC 5YrNc3MoB 03/30/2021 1.600 1.600 3134G8N62 FHLMC 3.75YrNc3MoB 11/26/2019 1.470 1.500 3134G8QE2 FHLMC 3YrNc1YrE 03/29/2019 1.300 1.300 3134G8QB8 FHLMC 3YrNc1YrE 03/29/2019 1.270 1.270 3134G8PW3 FHLMC 4YrNc3MoB 03/30/2020 1.350 1.350 3134G8QQ5 FHLMC 5YrNc6MoB 03/30/2021 1.500 1.500 3136G3FV2 FHLMC 5YrNc6MoB 03/30/2021 1.500 1.500 3134G8S75 FHLMC 5YrNc3MoB 03/30/2021 1.750 1.750 3130A7H40 FHLMC 2.75YrNc3MoB 12/28/2018 1.250 1.250 3134G8V97 FHLMC 2.25YrNc6MoB 06/29/2018 1.125 ..125 9,000,000.00 25,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 25,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 14,160,000.00 5,000,000.00 25,000,000.00 25,000,000.00 25,000,000.00 20,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 25,000,000.00 16,200,000.00 15,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 20,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 12,500,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 20,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 9,000,000.00 4,000,000.00 8,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 10,500,000.00 5,850,000.00 886,751,000.00 9,000,000.00 25,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 25,015,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 14,160,000.00 5,000,000.00 25,000,000.00 25,000,000.00 25,000,000.00 19,979,400.00 15,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 25,000,000.00 16,200,000.00 15,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 20,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 12,500,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 20,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 4,994,550.00 9,000,000.00 4,000,000.00 8,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 10,500,000.00 5,850,000.00 886,833,223.55 100.046000 100.027000 100.003000 99.889000 100.012000 100.012000 99.972000 100.009000 100.000000 100.000000 100.101000 100.000000 100.124000 100.392000 100.120000 100.113000 100.080000 100.120000 100.160000 100.106000 100.106000 100.028000 100.049000 100.055000 100.023000 100.019000 100.063000 99.935000 99.935000 99.848000 100.012000 100.000000 100.039000 99.430000 99.974000 100.031000 100.015000 100.257000 100.147000 100.000000 100.059000 100.000000 100.039000 100.012000 100.011000 100.057999 9,004,140.00 25,006,750.00 15,000,450.00 24,972,250.00 5,000,600.00 10,001,200.00 14,995,800.00 15,001,350.00 14,160,000.00 5,000,000.00 25,025,250.00 25,000,000.00 25,031,000.00 20,078,400.00 15,018,000.00 15,016,950.00 15,012,000.00 25,030,000.00 16,225,920.00 15,015,900.00 5,005,300.00 20,005,600.00 10,004,900.00 12,506,875.00 5,001,150.00 5,000,950.00 5,003,150.00 9,993,500.00 9,993,500.00 19,969,600.00 5,000,600.00 10,000,000.00 10,003,900.00 9,943,000.00 4,998,700.00 15,004,650.00 5,000,750.00 9,023,130.00 4,005,880.00 8,000,000.00 10,005,900.00 15,000,000.00 15,005,850.00 10,501,260.00 5,850,643.50 887,265,302.72 4,140.00 6,750.00 450.00 -42,750.00 600.00 1,200.00 - 4,200.00 1,350.00 0.00 0.00 25,250.00 0.00 31,000.00 99,000.00 18,000.00 16,950.00 12,000.00 30,000.00 25,920.00 15,900.00 5,300.00 5,600.00 4,900.00 6,875.00 1,150.00 950.00 3,150.00 - 6,500.00 - 6,500.00 „30,400.00 600.00 0.00 3,900.00 -57,000.00 -1,300.00 4,650.00 6,200.00 23,130.00 5,880.00 0.00 5,900.00 0.00 5,850.00 1,260.00 643.50 432,079.17 4.310 2.516 4.368 .819 2.542 2.542 1.608 4.429 4.440 4.447 3.111 2.181 3.159 1.690 2.922 3.620 4.565 4.594 3.697 4.633 4.633 4.613 4.629 2.832 3.262 3.761 3.534 .934 .934 4.703 1.388 4.736 4.736 3.507 2.361 4.787 3.581 2.927 2.929 3.881 4.800 4.800 4.768 2.705 2.204 2.722 4.545 2.581 4.584 .827 2.581 2.581 1.630 4.584 4.658 4.652 3.214 2.227 3.244 1.710 2.995 3.751 4.836 4.833 3.833 4.893 4.893 4.836 4.836 2.890 3.367 3.910 3.655 .940 .940 4.912 1.403 4.912 4.912 3.627 2.400 5.000 3.658 2.995 2.995 4.000 5.000 5.000 5.000 2.745 2.247 2A FNMA DISC NOTES 313588YB5 FNMA DISC NOTE 06/13/2016 .340 .341 25,000,000.00 24,926,333.33 99.937000 24,984,250.00 57,916.67 .202 .203 313588YB5 FNMA DISC NOTE 06/13/2016 .370 .371 15,000,000.00 14,952,670.83 99.937000 14,990,550.00 37,879.17 .202 .203 313588YB5 FNMA DISC NOTE 06/13/2016 .370 .371 25,000,000.00 24,921,118.06 99.937000 24,984,250.00 63,131.94 .202 .203 313588C29 FNMA DISC NOTE 08/15/2016 .400 .402 25,000,000.00 24,905,000.00 99.849000 24,962,250.00 57,250.00 .374 .375 313588C29 FNMA DISC NOTE O8/15/2016 .400 .401 25,000,000.00 24,907,500.00 99.849000 24,962,250.00 54,750.00 .374 .375 313588C45 FNMA DISC NOTE O8/17/2016 .270 .271 25,000,000.00 24,940,937.50 99.847000 24,961,750.00 20,812.50 .380 .381 313588ZN8 FNMA DISC NOTE 07/18/2016 .250 .250 25,000,000.00 24,950,520.83 99.892000 24,973,000.00 22,479.17 .298 .299 313588G90 FNMA DISC NOTE 09/23/2016 .300 .301 25,000,000.00 24,927,083.33 99.796000 24,949,000.00 21,916.67 .480 .482 313588C52 FNMA DISC NOTE O8/18/2016 .280 .281 25,000,000.00 24,939,916.67 99.846000 24,961,500.00 21,583.33 .382 .384 313588ZN8 FNMA DISC NOTE 07/18/2016 .265 .266 15,500,000.00 15,469,307.85 99.892000 15,483,260.00 13,952.15 .298 .299 313588ZS7 FNMA DISC NOTE 07/22/2016 .250 .250 25,000,000.00 24,953,645.83 99.888000 24,972,000.00 18,354.17 .309 .310 313588XG5 FNMA DISC NOTE O5/25/2016 .460 .461 25,000,000.00 24,944,736.11 99.961000 24,990,250.00 45,513.89 .150 .151 313588K38 FNMA DISC NOTE 10/11/2016 .660 .664 25,000,000.00 24,862,500.00 99.759000 24,939,750.00 77,250.00 .528 .532 313588K46 FNMA DISC NOTE 10/12/2016 .640 .643 25,000,000.00 24,871,555.56 99.758000 24,939,500.00 67,944.44 .530 .534 313588M28 FNMA DISC NOTE 10/26/2016 .610 .613 25,217,000.00 25,088,386.30 99.740000 25,151,435.80 63,049.50 .569 .573 313588XG5 FNMA DISC NOTE O5/25/2016 .390 .391 25,000,000.00 24,962,354.17 99.961000 24,990,250.00 27,895.83 .150 .151 313588YL3 FNMA DISC NOTE 06/22/2016 .500 .501 10,000,000.00 9,976,944.44 99.929000 9,992,900.00 15,955.56 .226 .227 313588XG5 FNMA DISC NOTE 05/25/2016 .380 .381 25,000,000.00 24,964,638.89 99.961000 24,990,250.00 25,611.11 .150 .151 313588XE0 FNMA DISC NOTE O5 23 2016 .380 1..381 13,000,000.00 12,982,298.33 99.962000 12,995,060.00 12,761.67 .145 .145 .397 428,717,000.00 = 427,447,448.03 99.873216 428,173,455.80 726,007.77 FNMA BONDS 3136G14F3 FNMA 3.5YrNc6MoB 12/27/2016 .680 .665 12,000,000.00 12,006,600.00 100.092000 12,011,040.00 4,440.00 .735 .742 3136G1LT4 FNMA 3.5YrNc1YrB 11/28/2016 .500 .512 10,000,000.00 9,996,000.00 100.038000 10,003,800.00 7,800.00 .655 .663 3136G1LT4 FNMA 3.5YrNc1YrB 11/28/2016 .500 1.009 752,000.00 739,216.00 100.038000 752,285.76 13,069.76 .654 .663 3135GOXP3 FNMA 1Yr 07/05/2016 .375 .405 25,000,000.00 24,991,750.00 99.974000 24,993,500.00 1,750.00 .262 .263 3133EESQ4 FNMA 1.25Yr 09/06/2016 .520 .479 20,255,000.00 20,265,390.82 99.993000 20,253,582.15-11,808.67 .434 .436 3135GOYE7 FNMA 1.25Yr 08/26/2016 .625 .477 25,000,000.00 25,044,750.00 100.065000 25,016,250.00-28,500.00 .404 .405 3135GOXP3 FNMA 10.5Mo 07/05/2016 .375 .375 16,597,000.00 16,597,000.00 99.974000 16,592,684.78-4,315.22 .262 .263 3136G2N94 FNMA 5YrNc6MoB 10/15/2020 1.500 1.500 10,550,000.00 10,550,000.00 100.027000 10,552,848.50 2,848.50 4.342 4.545 3136G2PM3 FNMA 5YrNc6MoB 10/29/2020 1.500 1.500 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 100.005000 10,000,500.00 500.00 4.381 4.584 3136G2QT7 FNMA 5YrNc6MoB 10/29/2020 1.500 1.500 15,855,000.00 15,855,000.00 100.017000 15,857,695.35 2,695.35 4.381 4.584 3136G2SX6 FNMA 3YrNc1YrE 11/28/2018 1.200 1.200 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.000000 5,000,000.00 0.00 2.598 2.663 3136G2SX6 FNMA 3YrNc1YrE 11/28/2018 1.200 1.200 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.000000 5,000,000.00 0.00 2.598 2.663 3136G2SX6 FNMA 3YrNc1YrE 11/28/2018 1.200 1.200 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.000000 5,000,000.00 0.00 2.598 2.663 3136G2TY3 FNMA 3YrNc6MoE 11/27/2018 1.250 1.250 15,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 100.065000 15,009,750.00 9,750.00 2.593 2.660 3136G2V61 FNMA 5YrNc6MoB 12/10/2020 1.800 1.800 15,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 100.000000 15,000,000.00 0.00 4.456 4.699 3135G0H30 FNMA 3YrNc5MoE 11/23/2018 1.450 1.451 10,000,000.00 9,999,600.00 99.996000 9,999,600.00 0.00 2.572 2.649 3136G2WL7 FNMA 4YrNc6MoB 04/29/2020 1.500 1.500 15,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 100.058000 15,008,700.00 8,700.00 3.917 4.082 3136G2W45 FNMA 5YrNc6MoB O1/29/2021 1.500 1.500 8,770,000.00 8,770,000.00 100.068000 8,775,963.60 5,963.60 4.629 4.836 3136G2X44 FNMA 5YrNc6MoB 02/19/2021 1.500 1.500 6,500,000.00 6,500,000.00 100.092000 6,505,980.00 5,980.00 4.684 4.893 3136G2XR3 FNMA 4YrNc6MoB 02/19/2020 1.350 1.350 15,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 100.000000 15,000,000.00 0.00 3.765 3.890 3136G2Y18 FNMA 5YrNc6MoB 02/26/2021 1.125 1.125 15,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 99.859000 14,978,850.00-21,150.00 4.752 4.912 3136G2ZB6 FNMA 4YrNC6MoB 03/09/2020 1.000 1.000 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 99.984000 9,998,400.00-1,600.00 3.851 3.942 3136G3BX2 FNMA 4YrNc6MoB 03/09/2020 1.300 1.300 15,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 100.000000 15,000,000.00 0.00 3.825 3.942 3136G3EH4 FNMA 4YrNc6MoB 03/30/2020 1.250 1.250 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 100.000000 10,000,000.00 0.00 3.890 4.000 3136G3EE1 FNMA 3YrNc6MoB 03/29/2019 1.000 1.000 20,000,000.00 20,000,000.00 100.000000 20,000,000.00 0.00 2.943 2.995 3136G3DV4 FNMA 5YrNc6MoB 03/30/2021 1.375 1.375 15,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 100.000000 15,000,000.00 0.00 4.816 5.000 3136G3EM3 FNMA 3.75YrNc6MoB 12/30/2019 1.510 1.510 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.000000 5,000,000.00 0.00 3.632 3.751 3136G3EM3 FNMA 3.75YrNc6MoB 12/30 2019 1.510 1.510 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.000000 5,000,000.00 0.00 3.632 3.751 �� 341,279,000.00 341,315,306.82 100.009503 _241,311,430.14 -3,876.68 2.739 2.835 FHLB DISC NOTES 313384XQ7 FHLB DISC NOTE 06/02/2016 .300 .301 25,000,000.00 24,923,958.33 99.953500 24,988,375.00 64,416.67 .172 .173 313384XR5 FHLB DISC NOTE 06/03/2016 .310 .311 25,000,000.00 24,921,423.61 99.952750 24,988,187.50 66,763.89 .175 .175 75 COUNTY OF RIVERISIDE TREASURER -TAX COLLECTOR 8 6 9L 1I0.10HTIOJ XVI-2I32If1SVINI HQISRIHARI 30 kthlflOD £EZ' Z£Z' OOTOSZ11 OOTOSL'600'SZ 0006E0'OOT 00'OOS'S661Z 00'000'000'SZ 99£' OS£' 9IOZ/VZ/90 JASZ1 flJ33 04J33£EIE £EZ' Z£Z' 00'08Z'8 00'089100'ZI 0006E0'OOT 00'00E966'a 00'000'000'ZI 9L£' OS£' 9TOZAVZ/90 JASZ1flJ33 04J33£EIE SSO'L 8401. 00'004'8I- 00'009'186'6 000918'66 00'000'000'0i 00'000'000'0i 009' 009' LIOZ/IZ/40 JAZ flJ33 WIZ33£EIE £EZ' Z£Z' 00'OOS'EI OOTOSL'600'SZ 0006£0'OOI 00'0SZ'9661Z 00'000'000'SZ £9£' OS£' 9LOZ/VZ/90 SHION flJ33 04J3H£EIE £94' Z9V 00'004'4- 00'009'S66% 00095'6'66 00'000'000'0i 00'000'000'0i OS4' NV 910Z/9I/60 JASZ'I flJ33 6flZHH£EIE Ur OK' OOTOSL'S- 00'0E1661Z OOOLL6'66 00'000'000'SZ 00'000'000'SZ 00S' 00S' 9I0Z/LZ/90 JASZ'I flJ33 £flAH3££IE SII' 8II' ZS'980'9- 4V IZL'L6Z'ZI 000110'OOT 96L08'£0£'ZI 00'000'96M OS£' 00V 9I0Z/£I/S0 JAI flJ33 WISOH£EIE SIT 8II' 00'0 00'000'000'0i 000000'OOT 00'000'000'0i 00'000'000'0i SL£' SL£' 9I0Z/EL/S0 JIJADNJx£flJdd 66dJH£EIE 6ZS'E 605E 00'0991L- 00'006'SZ6'6 000657'66 00'09S'L66% 00.000'000'0T 6IS' ZIS' 6I0Z/OI/OI ALS flJdd OOXOH£EIE 6ZS'E OIS£ 00'0SZ'S8i- 00'0SL1181Z 000657'66 00'000'000'SZ 00'000'000'SZ ZIS' ZIS' 6I0Z/OI/OI ALS aDdd OOXOH£EIE 6ZS'E OIS£ 00'OSL'LIL- 00'0S8'8881T 000657'66 00'000'000'ST 00'000'000'ST ZIS' ZIS' 6I0Z/OI/OI 'AS flJ33 OOXOH£EIE SSO' SSO' 00'005'S 00'005'000'OT OOOS001OOI 00'000'S66'6 00'000'000'0T £801 ZOS' 9I0Z/OZ/40 ALS aDdd SAHxi£EIE SONOTT flJdd OV'IZI'8L8 VI'640'£69'Z8V ZOI££8'66 VLLZ6$I8'I8V 00'000'OOS'£84 OIV ZELLZL' 00'099'LZ 00'09Z'Z06'9Z 0008E9'66 00'0091L8'9Z 00'000'000'LZ EST KS' 9IOZ £Z ZI HION JSIQ gall 0411ZI££I£ Z£I' at 00'080'0L 00'0Z6'S66'LI 000996'66 00'OV8'S86'LI 00'000'000'ZI 09£' 09E' 910Z/81/SO HION JSIQ gall 6ZMZI££I£ SVS' WS' L9'91£'9£ 00'0S9'Z9611 OOO1SL66 ££'£££'9Z611 00'000'000'SI CO' OS9' 9IOZ/LI/OI HION JSIQ gall 06NZI£EIE SW" WS' 8L'LZS'09 00'0SL'L£6$Z OOO1SL66 ZZTZZ'LLSIZ 00'000'000'SZ CO' OS9' 9I0Z/LI/OI HION JSIQ U11 06NZI£EIE SW" WS' £E'£E61Z 00'OOL'SL6'6 OOO1SL66 L9'991'0S6'6 00'000'000'0T CO' OS9' 9IOZ/LI/OI HION JSIQ flJ33 06NZI£EIE 9Z£' SZE' L91VS'Z4 00'OOS'OL6$Z OOOZ88'66 ££'8S6'LZ61Z 00'000'000'a I6£' 06£' 9I0Z/8Z/L0 HION JSIQ flJ33 6AZZi£EIE GCS' 4£S' 41'69S'84 00'000'6£6$Z 0009SL66 950£4'068$Z 00'000'000'a Z94' OW 9I0Z/£I/OI HION JSIQ flJ33 8SNZI£EIE 99Z' S9Z' £8'SZZ'IL 00'098'06E6 000'06'66 LIVS9'6LV'6 00'000'OOS% IOC' 00£' 910Z/90/LO HION JSIQ flJ33 IVZZI£EIE S£4' L£4' SLLLL'6Z 00'0SL'ES6$Z 000918'66 ZZ7L6'£Z6$Z 00'000'000'a I4£' OV£' 9I0Z/L0/60 HION JSIQ flJ33 L63ZI£EIE 6Z£' 8ZE' £E'SS6'0£ 0010SVOL61Z OOO188'66 L916Z'6£6$Z 00'000'000'SZ ITC' OI£' 910Z/6Z/a HION JSIQ flJ33 9ZZZI£EIE £Z£' ZZE' 90'£4Z'I£ 00'0SL'OL61Z OOOE88'66 46'90S'6£6$Z 00'000'000'SZ ITC' OI£' 9TOZ/LZ/L0 HION JSIQ flJ33 LXZZI£EIE £Z£' ZZE' 90'£4Z'I£ 00'0SL'OL61Z OOOE88'66 46'90S'6£6$Z 00'000'000'SZ ITC' OI£' 9TOZ/LZ/L0 1LON JSIQ flJ33 LXZZI£EIE ZS4' KV 00'SLS'0£ 00'0SZ'ZS61Z 000608'66 00'SL£'IZ61Z 00'000'000'SZ I4£' OK' 9I0Z/ZI/60 HION JSIQ C033 Z93ZI£EIE VW ZIT' LI4S£1£ OOTOSV8S61Z OOOE68'66 £8'S68'9Z61Z 00'000'000'SZ IE£' 0a' 9LOZ/6Z/80 HION JSIQ flJ33 08QZL£EIE SS4' EST' 00'000'ZL 00'000106'R 000808'66 00'000'Z£8'64 00.000'000'0S I9£' 09£' 9LOZ/£L/60 HION JSIQ£033 OL3ZI£EIE ZZ4' OZV L9'9I4'99 00'OOS'SS61Z OOOZZ8'66 £E'£80'6881Z 00'000'000'SZ Z44' OW 910Z/10/60 HION JSIQ flJ33 0£HZI££L£ ZZ4' OZV 8LLZO'L9 00'OOS'SS6'4Z OOOZZ8'66 ZZZLE8881Z 00'000'000'SZ Z44' 0W 910Z/10/60 ZION JSIQ flJ33 OEHZI£EIE 981' SST' 6674£'09 88'6ZI'006'£Z OOOZ46'66 68'98L'6£8'£Z 00'000$L6'£Z I8£' OS£' 910Z/L0/90 ZION JSIQ flJ33 LAXZI££I£ WI' EST' 00'SLL'9£ OOTOSV'L661I OOOE46'66 00'SL9$S61I 00'000'000'SI IL£' OL£' 910Z/90/90 ZION JSIQ flJdd 6LXZT£EIE SIC' 9IE' 90'8L9'0L 00'0SZILEK OOOS88'66 46IE9'0061Z 00'000'000'a ZT4' OW 9LOZ/SZ/L0 HION JSIOflJdd SAZZI££I£ SIC' 9IE' OS14S'ZV 00'OSL'Z861I OOOS88'66 OS i0V046'4I 00'000'000'SI ZT4' OW 9I0Z/SZ/L0 HION JSIQ flJdd SAZZI££I£ 681' 88T' 8Z'£60'SI 9Z'604'Z80'9 OOO146'66 86'SI£'L90'9 00'000'980'9 I9£' 09£' 9I0Z/80/90 HION JSIOflJdd SMXZI££I£ SHION JSIQ flJ33 = 6L198'S6I LL'LS6'£SL'Z8£ V00950'OOI 8£'Z60'85S'Z8£ 80'0ZL'6£S'Z8£ 84L1 4ZLI 00'0 00'S8Z'8661 OOLS96'66 00'SSZ'8661 00'000'000'S OZO T 000'I LLOZ 6Z ZL CPIAI£JNJxSLI fl11-13 8 OLVO£I£ 964T OSVT 00'0 00'000'000'SI 000000'OOT 00'000'000'SI 00'000'000'SI SZI1 SZII 810Z/8Z/60 Ho41I9JDIJxS7 9.11-13 ZOOLVO£I£ 964Z TSVT 00'OS6'8 00'OS6'800'S 0006LL'OOI 00'000'000'S 00'000'000'S 00.11 OOil 810Z/8Z/60 HJAPNJxST fl'I1-13 LSHLVO£I£ 84I1 LEVI 00'OSL'OI 00'000'LSO'SZ 0008ZZ'OOL 00'OSZ'91,0'SZ 00'000'000'SZ SZL SL8' LLOZ/4Z/S0 JxSi fl'IH3 VNNLVO£I£ S88' £L8' 00'OSLZI- 00'OSZ'Z861Z 0006Z6'66 00'000'000'SZ 00'000'000'E OZL OZL LLOZ/LI/ZO floIAI£JNJxi fl'1H3 OMILVO£I£ 6L0'E SL67 00'008'LI 00'008'LIO'OT 0008LIOOI 00'000'000'0T 00'000'000'0T OSS'T OSSL 610Z/6Z/40 flo1AI9JNJASZ'£ fl1H3 OMZ9V0£I£ ISLE 66ST 00'008'OI 00'008'0.10'0T 00080.1'OOi 00'000'000'0T 00'000'000'OT OSLT OSLT 610Z/OE/ZI floIAI9JNJx49.11-13 TIA9V0£I£ 0001' 498.E 00'009'ZI 00'009'ZIO'OT 0009ZT'OOI 00'000'000'0T 00'000'000'0T OSS'T OSST OZOZ/0£/£0 fl0IAI90NJTS fl1H3 8flX9V0£I£ SVLZ 9997 00'OOTZI 00'OOTZIO'OL OOOLZIOOI 00'000'000'0T 00'000'000'0T °OTT OOST SIOZ/SZ/ZI fl0IAI90NJx£ fl1H3 LIIM9V0£I£ SVLZ £L9Z 00'0S£'64 00'OS£'61,0'SI 0006Z£'OOL 00'000'000'SI 00'000'000'SI 09ff1 09ff1 SLOZ/SZ/ZI HJApNJx£fl'IH3 46M9V0£I£ LOL' 869' OE'L6L'S£ 091Z8'S6£'SI 000891'OOT OE'4Z9'09E'SI 00'000'OLVSI IL8' OSL' 9LOZ/VL/ZI JAI £11H3 £SA9VOEI£ IL91 £491 00'0 00'000'000'0i 000000'OOT 00'000'000'0i 00'000'000'0i OZO1 OZO'L LLOZ/I0/ZL JAZ fl11-13 S6A9V0£I£ SS9' L49' 00'0SL$ 00'0SL100'SZ 0006.10'OOT 00'000'000'a 00'000'000'a OSS' OSS' 9IOZ/SZ/li fl9IAI£JNJAI 9.11-13 VL2I9V0£I£ VW ZVV' 00'009'£- 00'OOL'000'0I OOOL00'OOL 00'00E100'0i 00'000'000'0i 69V OIS' 910Z/60/60 HoVVLDNJxi 9.11-13 8139.9V0£I£ 8S97 88S'Z 00.008'9£ 00'009'££0'OI 0009££'OOL 00'008'966'6 00'000'000'0i OL£'L 00£1 8LOZ/9Z/li HJAIJNJASZ'£ fl1143 9OL9V0£I£ OT61 9L81 00'09E9 00'0SL'900'SI OOOL40'OOT 00'000'000'SI 00'000'000'SI OOIL 00.11 SLOZ/9Z/Z0 ITAPNALSZ fl1143 SH99V0£I£ 9Z£' SZE' 00'89Z1 001£Z'ZOL'6 000£ZO'OOL 00'£96Z69% 00'000'OOL% 96£' SL£' 9I0Z/8Z/L0 JAI fl1143 81179VOEI£ 99Z1 ISZ1 00'0001 00'000100'0T 000040'OOT 00'000'000'0i 00'000'000'0i OI6 O16' LLOZ/90/L0 HJAPNJxZ fl1143 0£IAISVO£I£ 61Z 64Z' 00'0SL'SI 00'000100'a 0001'00'OOT 00'0SZ'S861Z 00'000'000'SZ SL£' OZ£' 9I0Z/0£/90 JAI fl'I1-13 SQOSVOEIE VIZ' EIZ' 00'OSZ'I 00'OSZ'I00'SZ 000900'OOT 00'000'000'SZ 00'000'000'SZ OS£' OS£' 9IOZ/LI/90 JAI fl11-13 LZITEVOEIE VIZ' EIZ' 00'OSZ'I 00'OSZ'I00'SZ OOOS00'OOI 00'000'000'a 00'000'000'a OS£' OS£' 9I0Z/LI/90 JAI fl11-13 LO3SVOEIE VIZ' EIZ' 00'0SV- 00'OSS'66611 OOOL66'66 00'000'000'SI 00'000'000'SI 00V 00V 9LOZ/LL/90 HaWLDNJxi fl1H3 4M3SVOEIE £60' E60' OOTOSS'S 00'OOI'Z00'SI 000110'OOT OOTOSZ'9661I 00'000'000'Si SZE' 00£' 9I0Z/VO/S0 JAI fl11-13 6HVSVOEIE £EZ UT 00'006'Z' OOTOSL'6661Z 000666'66 00'0S9'Z00'SZ 00'000'000'SZ 99£' SL£' 9I0Z/VZ/90 JASZL fl11-13 62I4£8£EIE ZZZT SLIT IS'OSI'6- LS'69S'OIL'£ OOOVSL'66 80'OZL'6LL'£ 80'0ZL'6LL'£ OSZT OSZI 8LOZ/OZ/90 CloWPNJAS fl11-13 ZdH£8£EIE 6TZ'Z 48T7 00'0 00'000'OOS1 000000'OOT 00'000'OOS1 00'000'OOS'L 0001 0001 810Z/61/90 flaW£31\11xS fl11-13 VdJ£8£EIE 6TZ'Z 48T7 00'0 00.000'0SL 000000'OOT 00.000'0SL 00.000'0SL 0001 0001 810Z/61/90 floWC3NJAS fl11-13 VdJ£8£EIE 6TZ'Z 48T7 00'0 00.000'0SL 000000'OOT 00.000'0SL 00.000'0SL 0001 0001 8I0Z/61/90 floWC3NJxS fl11-13 VdJ£8££I£ 6TZT 48TT 00'0 00.000'0SL 000000'OOT 00.000'0SL 00.000'0SL 0001 0001 8I0Z/61/90 floW9NJxS fl11-13 VdJ£8££I£ SVIZ KIT 00'006'L- 00'OOI'Z66% OOO1Z6'66 00'000'000'0i 00'000'000'0T OSL' OSL' 8I0Z/EZ/S0 floIAI£JNJxS fl11-13 IyQ££8££I£ SQNOfl fl1H3 £4£' ISL ISL 6L0 L9L' SZ8' 6TV 578' Z9£' LZZ' WI' 64Z' LEI' 84I' LEI' OLS' ZZZ' ££Z' SZZ' ZZZ' 6SS' SST' 99Z' £9Z' 06Z' ZSZ' SL£' 99Z' 9£4' 06Z 84£ SLL SLL 6L0' Z9L' 618' LIV OZ8' 09E' 9ZZ' ESL' 84Z' 9£L' L4L' 9£L' 90S' IZZ' L£Z' 6ZZ' IZZ' SST ZSV S9Z' Z9Z' 68Z' Ia. 4L£' S9Z' ££4' 68Z' 94£' £0'990188Z1 00'SLL'OZ 00'SLL'OZ VS'OLL'S ££'£48'S 00'049'£Z I6L6L'OZ 6£10L'£Z LL'600'9Z 00'OO1,'£Z L9'990'£Z 00'000'SV ££'££4'IL 00'SZL'Z£ L9'999'£S 68'8£9'ZL 00'OOS'8S 8LLZ0'Z9 L9'£Z4'L9 ZZZ601S IL'98S'Z9 £8'OZO'SS IL'IL9'S£ LI409'S£ £8'SW9£ IT/4'0'9£ 9S'089'9Z 00'0SZ'6S 6£1SV'89 9S'08S'9Z 68'£LO'69 06'SSL'8£8'LOL 00'006'0%1T 00'006'04611 8L'LZS'S661Z 00'0I6'ZL6'9 00'0461Z6'LI ZZ'ZZL'9S61Z 00'OSL'S681Z 90'££0'696'ZZ 00'OOL'L86'6I 00'OOE066'61 00'SL£'6L61Z 19'808'L66'9 00'SO6'£66'LI L9'£LL'Z66$Z ZZ'ZL4'£46$Z 00'000'9861Z 00'OSZ$86$Z OS'ZI8186$Z 00'000'9861Z Z9'OIS'IZL'4Z £8'OZO'ES61Z 00'000'8L61Z LL'6ZZ'8L61Z OSLE6'SL6'4Z £8'SW6L61Z 9S'SSO'S961Z 00'000'8L61Z 68'£IO'SS61Z 00'SL£'066% 00'SZ9'L961Z ZV9S98'66 000909'66 000909'66 LILZ86'66 000£19'66 000885'66 6889ZS'66 000£8S'66 I9E598'66 OOS9£6'66 OOS0S6'66 OOSLL6'66 V69896'66 6£L996'66 V69896'66 688£LL'66 00001'6'66 OOOL£6'66 OSZ6£6'66 00001'6'66 688ISL'66 £80ZL8'66 OOOZL6'66 LI6ZL6'66 OSLE06'66 £8S9I6'66 ZZZ098'66 OOOZI6'66 9SOOZ8'66 OSLE06'66 OOSOL8'66 L8'689'0WOOL 00'SZL'OZ611 00'SZL'OZ611 1'6'9SL'6861Z L9'990196'9 00'OOE106'LT IC VZS'9E6'4Z I9'840'ZL8$Z 6S'£ZO'£V6'ZZ 00'00E196'6I ££'££0'L96'6I 00'SL£'4£61Z 8Z'SL£'986'9 00'08L'I96'LI 1,6'90S'8£61Z ££'££8'OLSIZ 00'OOS'9Z61Z ZZ'ZZZ'ZZ6$Z 68'88£'£761Z 8L706'0£61Z L6£Z6'8S91Z 00'000'9681Z 68'88£'Z461Z 00'SZ9'Z461Z L916L'6£61Z ZZZ60'E461Z 00'SL£'8£61Z 00'0SL'8I61Z OSZ9S'9881Z 111,6L'E96% I1119'8681Z 00'000'£8L'ZOL 00'000'000'SI 00'000'000'SI 00'000'000'SZ 00'000'000'L 00'000'000'8T 00'000'000'SZ 00'000'000'SZ 00'000'000'£Z 00'000'000'0Z 00'000'000'0Z 00'000'000'SZ 00'000'000'L 00'000'000'8I 00'000'000'SZ 00'000'000'SZ 00'000'000'a 00'000'000'SZ 00'000'000'a 00'000'000'a 00'000'£8LIZ 00'000'000'SZ 00'000'000'SZ 00'000'000'a 00'000'000'SZ 00'000'000'SZ 00'000'000'a 00'000'000'SZ 00'000'000'a 00'000'000'0i 00'000'000'a £E9' CET S6Z' £09' £09' 905' £55 I64' LZ4 I£4' WS' I64' IZ5 NS £Z9. Z4S' Z9S' Z9S' LOS" L95" Z84 LV£ L4£. L4£" L4£. L6Z. L6£" ZS4' LSE' Z04 0£9' LIOZ OI/LO H.LON JSIQ ff1H3 0£9' LIOZ/01.4O HION JSIQ fl'IH3 S6Z' 910Z/6Z/VO 1LON JSIQ fl'IHl 009' LIOZ/SO/IO 1LON JSIQ fl'IHl 009' LIOZ/9Z/I0 ZION JSIQ fl11-13 SOS' 910Z/L£/80 ZION JSIQ fl11-13 OS'S' LIOZ/9Z/LO 1LON JSIQ fl'IH3 06V 9I0Z/01/80 1LON JSIQ fl11-13 OZV 910Z/ZZ/90 HION JSIQ fl'I1-13 0£V 910Z/90/90 HION JSIQ fl'IH3 OK' 910Z/OE/90 HION JSIQ fl'IH3 06V 9IOZ/OZ/S0 1LON JSIQ fl'IH3 OZS' 9I0Z/4Z/SO 1LON JSIQ fl11-13 OSS' 9I0Z/OZ/S0 1LON JSIQ fl1I-I3 OZ9' 9I0Z/£0/0I 1LON JSIQ 9.11-13 OK' 9I0Z/OZ/90 1LON JSIQ fl11-13 09S' 9I0Z/4Z/90 1LON JSIQ fl11-13 09S' 9LOZ/IZ/90 HION JSIQ fl11-13 00S' 9LOZ/OZ/90 HION JSIQ fl11-13 8SS' 9TOZ/IZ/OI HION JSIQ fl11-13 NV 910Z/£1/60 HION JSIQ fl11-13 OK' 910Z/90/LO HION JSIQ fl11-13 OW 9TOZ/SO/L0 HION JSIQ fl11-13 OK' 9LOZ/SL/L0 1LON JSIQ fl11-13 OV8' 9LOZ/IO/L0 HION JSIQ fl11-13 06Z' 9LOZ/SL/80 HION JSIQ fl11-13 06£' 910Z/90/LO HION JSIQ fl11-13 OS4' 910Z/90/60 HION JSIQ fl11-13 08£' 9LOZ/SL/L0 HION JSIQ 111H3 Oa 9LOZ/S0/80 HION JSIQ fl11-13 DIVSS££T£ DIV58££I£ SHM4s££I£ THVL6££I£ TalSB£EI£ IZH48££L£ TalSB£EI£ LSfl48££I£ L1A48££I£ 8nX48££I£ LIIA48££I£ OflX48££I£ I3X4s££I£ OflX48££L£ 4£f4s££L£ zA4s££L£ ENx48££L£ 6>Ix4s££I£ ZA48E£I£ 95148££I£ 6L348££I£ OVZ48££I£ 9ZA48££I£ 8>IZ48££I£ SAA48££I£ EZJVS££I£ OVZ48££L£ 88H48££I£ 8NZ4s££I£ ZSV48££I£ ,y1.n4eysi uopemQ ssoiMeO oy sma x pal; poyA1 pazpeamn anleA , Jd anIPA aa'[reIAI 4J 41% loog Awnleyni uodnop ava uopdnosaa dISfIJ oI MIA .GI.m1eyV sBulployl opo}Vod pug wow Month End Portfolio Holdings Maturity Yield To Par Book CUSIP Descripfion Date Coupon Maturity Value Value Market Market Unrealized Modified Years To Price Value Gain/Loss Duration Maturity 3133EEJ43 3133EEN89 3133EDNS7 3133EE3Y4 3133EE4G2 3133EE4G2 3133EE4G2 3133EE4G2 3133EE6A3 3133EE6A3 3133EE6A3 3133EFHH3 3133EFEM5 3133EEN48 3133EFJK4 3133EFKR7 3133EFLN5 3133EFLM7 FFCB 2Yr FFCB 1Yr FFCB 1Yr FFCB 1.5Yr FFCB 1Yr FFCB 1Yr FFCB 1Yr FFCB 1Yr FFCB 1.5Yr FFCB 1.5Yr FFCB 1.5Yr FFCB 3YrNc3MoA FFCB 2Yr FFCB 2Yr FFCB 1.25Yr FFCB 1.5 Yr FFCB 1Yr FFCB 1.5Yr 3133EFNK9 FFCB 2Yr 05/08/2017 05/26/2016 06/20/2016 01/13/2017 08/11/2016 08/11/2016 08/11/2016 08/11/2016 02/06/2017 02/06/2017 02/06/2017 10/15/2018 09/25/2017 05/22/2017 01/13/2017 04/21/2017 11/28/2016 03/27/2017 02/09/2018 650 .300 .450 .500 .400 .400 .400 .400 .590 .590 .590 1.110 .900 .625 .430 .500 .450 .520 .521 .680 .300 .396 .500 .400 .400 .400 .400 .590 .590 .635 1.110 .650 .547 .449 .533 .450 .520 .521 15,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 7,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 25,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 25,250,000.00 15,650,000.00 24,000,000.00 25,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 14,991,000.00 15,000,000.00 7,003,780.00 10,000,000.00 25,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 14,989,950.00 5,000,000.00 25,371,578.75 15,669,343.40 23,994,480.00 24,987,765.25 15,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 100.064000 99.997000 100.045000 100.134000 100.019000 100.019000 100.019000 100.019000 99.964000 99.964000 99.964000 100.001000 100.319000 99.975000 99.994000 99.758000 99.892000 99.817000 15,000,000.00 99.843000 15,009,600.00 14,999,550.00 7,003,150.00 10,013,400.00 25,004,750.00 15,002,850.00 15,002,850.00 10,001,900.00 9,996,400.00 9,996,400.00 14,994,600.00 5,000,050.00 25,330,547.50 15,646,087.50 23,998,560.00 24,939,500.00 14,983,800.00 9,981,700.00 14,976,450.00 18,600.00 450.00 -630.00 13,400.00 4,750.00 2,850.00 2,850.00 1,900.00 -3,600.00 -3,600.00 4,650.00 50.00 41,031.25 -23,255.90 4,080.00 48,265.25 -16,200.00 -18,300.00 -23,550.00 1.094 .153 .221 .780 .363 .363 .363 .363 .843 .843 .843 2.484 1.472 1.134 .781 1.049 .656 .985 1.850 1.104 .153 .222 .789 .364 .364 .364 .364 .855 .855 .855 2.542 1.488 1.142 .789 1.058 .663 .989 1.863 3133EFNK9 FFCB 2Yr 02/09/2018 .521 .521 20,000,000.00 20,000,000.00 99.843000 19,968,600.00-31,400.00 1.850 1.863 3133EFQ19 FFCB 3Yr 11/23/2018 .552 .529 10,000,000.00 10,006,056.38 99.685000 9,968,500.00-37,556.38 2.631 2.649 3133EFE52 FFCB 3Yr 02/25/2019 .703 .703 15,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 100.001000 15,000,150.00 150.00 2.869 2.907 3133EFE52 FFCB 3Yr 02/25/2019 .703 .703 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.001000 5,000,050.00 50.00 2.869 2.907 3133EFM61 FFCB 2.5Yr 09/17/2018 .661 .661 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 100.000000 5,000,000.00 0.00 2.441 2.466 3133EFV38 FFCB 3YrNc1YrA 03 29 2019 1.250 1.250 10,310,000.00 10,310,000.00 100.005000 10,310,515.50 515.50 2.930 2.995 .523 536,506,000.00 536,608,471.74 99.915623 536,053,311.94-555,159.80 Illigirar FMAC DISC NOTES 31315KD49 FAMCA DISC NOTE 08/25/2016 .345 .346 40,000,000.00 39,882,316.67 99.838000 39,935,200.00 52,883.33 .401 .403 31315KK90 FAMCA DISC NOTE 10/17/2016 .720 .725 10,000,000.00 9,937,400.00 99.751000 9,975,100.00 37,700.00 .544 .548 31315KJ35 FAMCA DISC NOTE 10/03/2016 .700 .704 15,000,000.00 14,918,625.00 99.769000 14,965,350.00 46,725.00 .506 .510 31315KJ35 FAMCA DISC NOTE 10/03/2016 .700 .704 25,000,000.00 24,864,375.00 99.769000 24,942,250.00 77,875.00 .506 .510 31315KWB2 FAMCA DISC NOTE 04/26/2016 .290 .290 10,000,000.00 9,996,616.67 99.985000 9,998,500.00 1,883.33 .071 .071 31315LAT5 FAMCA DISC NOTE 01 18 2017 .680 .684 20,000,000.00 19 884 022.22 99.594000 19 918,800.00 34,777.78 .797 .803 120,000,000.00 119,483,355.56 99.779333 119,735,200.00 251,844.44 A86 FARMER MAC 31315P2K4 FAMCA 3Yr 09/05/2017 1.120 1.120 313151'133 FAMCA 1Yr 05/24/2016 .400 .400 3132X0AY7 FAMCA 1Yr 07/07/2016 .410 .410 3132X0CB5 FAMCA 5YrNc3MoB 10/05/2020 1.700 1.700 3132X0CY5 FAMCA 1Yr 02/23/2017 .500 .500 3132X0ED9 FAMCA 3Yr 03/19/2019 .693 .693 3132X0EV9 FAMCA 3Yr 07/26/2019 .759 .759 .680 MUNI ZERO CPNS 91411SEH9 UC REGENTS 91411SGF1 UC REGENTS 8,850,000.00 15,000,000.00 25,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 25,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 108,850,000.00 8,850,000.00 15,000,000.00 25,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 25,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 15,000,000.00 108,850,000.00 05/17/2016 .430 .430 30,800,000.00 30,777,926.67 07 15 2016 .570 .571 23 000 000.00 22,961,034.17 53,738,960.84 MUNI BONDS 546415L73 LOUISIANA STATE 05/15/2016 .540 .540 20772JL34 CONNECTICUT ST 08/01/2018 2.250 1.398 20772JK92 CONNECTICUT ST 08/01/2016 2.000 .600 93974DSZ2 WASHINGTON STATE 08/01/2017 .830 .830 882723A33 TEXAS ST 10/01/2019 1.497 1.497 882723ZZ5 TEXAS ST 10/01/2017 .723 .723 13063CXT2 CALIFORNIA STATE 11/01/2016 .500 .401 13063CFD7 CALIFORNIA STATE 11/01/2016 1.250 .642 13063CFD7 CALIFORNIA STATE 11/01/2016 1.250 .642 677522HV9 OHIO STATE 05/01/2017 1.250 .741 677522HW7 OHIO STATE 05/01/2018 1.250 .940 12,070,000.00 25,000,000.00 23,000,000.00 12,885,000.00 5,000,000.00 7,500,000.00 55,960,000.00 15,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 9,215,000.00 9,535,000.00 180,165,000.00 12,070,000.00 25,613,250.00 23,304,520.00 12,885,000.00 5,000,000.00 7,500,000.00 56,014,840.80 15,062,100.00 5,020,700.00 9,268,354.85 9,597,549.60 181,336,315.25 100.594000 100.036000 100.037000 100.012000 100.127000 99.995000 99.992000 100.090463 8,902,569.00 15,005,400.00 25,009,250.00 10,001,200.00 25,031,750.00 9,999,500.00 14,998,800.00 108,948,469.00 52,569.00 1.412 1.433 5,400.00 .148 .148 9,250.00 .268 .268 1,200.00 4.289 4.518 31,750.00 .891 .901 -500.00 2.937 2.967 -1,200.00 3.269 3.321 98,469.00 M 99.945056 30,783,077.11 5,150.44 99.833750 22,961,762.50 728.33 .289 .290 53,744,839.61 100.000000 102.453000 101.324000 100.000000 100.000000 100.000000 100.098000 100.414000 100.414000 100.579000 100.656000 100.650135 12,070,000.00 25,613,250.00 23,304,520.00 12,885,000.00 5,000,000.00 7,500,000.00 56,014,840.80 15,062,100.00 5,020,700.00 9,268,354.85 9,597,549.60 181,336,315.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .128 .123 2.265 .336 1.323 3.379 1.487 581 578 .578 1.070 2.043 .129 .123 2.337 .337 1.337 3.504 1.504 .589 .589 .589 1.085 2.085 COMM PAPER 89233GD86 TOYOTA MOTOR CORP 04/08/2016 .570 .571 25,000,000.00 24,952,500.00 99.992222 24,998,055.56 45,555.56 .022 .022 64105GEC4 NESTLE 05/12/2016 .450 .451 30,000,000.00 29,953,125.00 99.954444 29,986,333.33 33,208.33 .114 .115 89233GLM6 TOYOTA MOTOR CORP 11/21/2016 .910 .916 50,000,000.00 49,660,013.89 99.525500 49,762,750.00 102,736.11 .638 .644 89233G74 TOYOTA MOTOR CORP 09/27/2016 .783 .783 48,000,000.00 47,810,720.00 99.721556 47,866,346.67 55,626.67 .489 .493 64105GH31 NESTLE 08/03/2016 .520 .521 20,000,000.00 19,963,311.11 99.807111 19,961,422.22-1,888.89 .340 .342 89233GFQ4 TOYOTA MOTOR CORP 06/24/2016 .480 .481 22,000,000.00 21,974,773.33 99.899667 21,977,926.67 3,153.34 .232 .233 195,000,000.00 194,314,443.33 99.770684 194,552,834.45 238,391..12 .365 .368 6,319,225,720.08 6,312,840,233.99 99.999444 6,319,190,571.12 6,350,337.13 1.038 1.065 Grand Total .664 .651 6,319,225,720.08 6,312,840,233.99 99.999444 6,319,190,571.12 6,350,337.13 1.038 77 COUNTY OF RIVERISIDE TREASURER -TAX COLLECTOR 10 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 Califor- nia 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 (MUNI) U.S. TREASURIES LOCAL AGENCY OBLIGATIONS (LAO) FEDERAL AGENCIES COMMERCIAL PAPER (CP) CERTIFICATE & TIME DEPOSITS (NCD & TCD) REPURCHASE AGREEMENTS (REPO) REVERSE REPOS MEDIUM TERM NOTES (MTNO) CALTRUST SHORT TERM FUND MONEY MARKET MUTUAL FUNDS (MMF) LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FUND (LAIF) CASH/DEPOSIT ACCOUNT GOVERNMENT CODE Maximum Authorized S&P/ Maturity % Limit Moody's NO LIMIT J ILL114J 1Vt1 5 YEARS NO LIMIT NA 5 YEARS NO LIMIT NA 5 YEARS NO LIMIT AAA 270 DAYS 40% A1/P1 5 YEARS 30% NA 1 YEARS NO LIMIT NA 92 DAYS 20% NA 5 YEARS 30% A NA NA NA 60 DAYS (1) 20% AAA/Aaa (2) NA NA NA NA NA NA COUNTY INVESTMENT POLICY Maximum Maturity Authorized % Limit S&P/ Moody's 0 J 11LL114J 1J /o 100 % !i!i-/ r1Q0/ CIC1- 5 YEARS NA 3 YEARS 2.5% INVESTMENT GRADE 5 YEARS 100 % NA 270 DAYS 40% A1/P1/F1 1 YEAR 25% Combined A1/P1/F1 45 DAYS 40% max, 25% in term repo over 7 days A1/P1/F1 60 DAYS 10% NA 3 YEARS 20% AA/Aa2/AA DAILY LIQUIDITY 1.0% NA DAILY LIQUIDITY 20% AAA by 2 Of 3 RATINGS AGC. DAILY LIQUIDITY Max $50 million NA NA NA NA I Mutual Funds maturity may be interpreted as weighted average maturity not exceeding 60 days. 2 Or must have an investment advisor with not less than 5 years experience and with assets under management of $500,000,000. Actual 3.72% 6: i 000 0 :. # to 111111011111111FAIWThrlfer...- 1111111111Pliji THIS COMPLETES THE REPORT REQUIREMENTS OF CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE 53646 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE TREASURER -TAX COLLECTOI�8 13 AGENDA ITEM 8D RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 8, 2016 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Michele Cisneros, Deputy Director of Finance 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, 2015 (4Q 2015). BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At its December 2007 meeting, the Commission awarded an agreement with MuniServices, LLC (MuniServices) for quarterly sales tax reporting services plus additional fees contingent on additional sales tax revenue generated from the transactions and use tax (sales tax) audit services. As part of the recurring contracts process, the Commission approved a five-year extension through June 30, 2018. The services performed under this agreement pertain to only the Measure A sales tax revenues. Since the commencement of these services, MuniServices submitted an audit update, which reported findings generated and submitted to the State Board of Equalization (SBOE) for review and determination of errors in sales tax reporting related to 495 businesses. Through 3Q 2015, the SBOE approved corrections for 360 of these accounts for a total sales tax recovery of $6,249,182. Updated amounts for 4Q 2015 will be provided once received from MuniServices. If the SBOE concurs with the error(s) for the remaining claims, the Commission will receive additional revenues; however, the magnitude of the value of the remaining findings was not available. It is important to note that while the recoveries of additional revenues will be tangible, it will not be sufficient to alter the overall trend of sales tax revenues. Additionally, MuniServices provided the Commission with the quarterly sales tax summary report for 4Q 2015. Most of the 4Q 2015 Measure A sales tax revenues were received in the first quarter of calendar year 2016, during January 2016 through March 2016, due to a lag in the sales tax calendar. The summary section of the 4Q 2015 report is attached and includes an overview of California's economic outlook, local results, historical cash collections analysis by quarter, top 25 sales/use tax contributions, historical sales tax amounts, annual sales tax by business category, five-year economic trend for significant business category (general retail), and final results. Agenda Item 8D 79 Taxable transactions for the top 25 tax contributors in Riverside County generated 23.4 percent of taxable sales for the benchmark year ended 4Q 2015, slightly lower than the 23.7 percent for the benchmark year ended 4Q 2014. The top 100 tax contributors generated 38.6 percent of taxable sales for the benchmark year ended 4Q 2015, compared to the 39.8 percent for the benchmark year ended 4Q 2014. Interestingly, the 2 percent growth in taxable sales for the benchmark year ended 4Q 2015 was not driven by the top 100 tax contributors, who experienced a 0.9 percent decrease, but by all other tax contributors, who had a 3.8 percent increase. In the Economic Category Analysis below, three of the six categories (general retail, food products, transportation, and construction) experienced new highs in the 4Q 2015 benchmark year compared to the prior eight benchmark year quarters. Business to business was below the 4Q 2014 benchmark year by 5.4 percent due to completion of renewable energy developments in Riverside County. Miscellaneous was higher than the 4Q 2014 benchmark year by 7.5 percent. ECONOMIC CATEGORY ANALYSIS %of Total / %Change RCTC California Riverside Countywide San Bernardino Countywide Inland Empire South Coast S.F. Bay Area Sacramento Valley Central Valley North Coast Central Coast General Retail 28.8 / 3.4 28.4/3.1 28.4/3.3 25.0/5.8 26.6/4.5 29.2/3.0 26.8/2.2 27.7/3.8 30.8/3.4 28.2/3.2 31.5/1.7 Food Products 17.3 / 6.3 20.3/5.6 19.5/5.9 14.8/6.1 17.1/6.0 21.4/5.4 21.7/6.3 16.9/5.6 16.4/4.6 18.4/3.2 31.0/3.4 Transportation 25.9 / 0.4 24.2/0.2 27.5/0.8 28.1/3.2 27.8/2.0 23.9/-0.2 21.1/-0.3 28.1/2.5 26.3/-0.5 30.2/-0.8 20.9/-2.3 Construction 10.8 / 5.4 9.5/8.0 12.9/-1.4 10.7/33.5 11.8/12.5 8.3/6.1 9.5/8.1 11.3/9.2 12.1/8.1 13.6/11.5 9.3/3.8 Business to Business 15.0 / -5.4 16.5/-1.2 10.7/3.4 20.2/2.1 15.6/2.5 16.1/-3.7 19.7/2.3 14.4/7.3 13.0/-9.5 8.6/-3.0 6.2/20.5 Miscellaneous 2.1 / 7.5 1.2/2.7 1.0/9.6 1.2/2.7 1.1/4.6 1.1/6.9 1.2/-3.7 1.6/-1.2 1.4/2.7 1.0/-5.1 1.0/-6.5 Total 100.0 / 2.0 100.0/2.6 100.0/2.6 100.0/6.6 100.0/4.6 100.0/1.8 100.0/3.0 100.0/4.7 100.0/1.2 100.0/2.4 100.0/2.4 General Retail: Apparel Stores, Department Stores, urniture/Appliances, Drug Stores, Recreation Products, Florist/Nursery, and Misc. Retail Food Products: Restaurants, Food Markets, Liquor Stores, and Food Processing Equipment Construction: Building Materials Retail and Building Materials Wholesale Transportation: Auto Parts/Repair, Auto Sales - New, Auto Sales - Used, Service Stations, and Misc. Vehicle Sales Business to Business: Office Equip., Electronic Equip., Business Services, Energy Sales, Chemical Products, Heavy Industry, Light Industry, and Leasing Miscellaneous: Health & Government, Miscellaneous Other, and Closed Account Adjustments An analysis of sales tax performance by quarter through 4Q 2015 is attached and illustrates fairly consistent cycles for sales tax performance for most of the economic categories since the economic recession in 2009. For 8 of the top 10 segments (auto sales -new, restaurants, department stores, miscellaneous retail, building materials -wholesale, apparel stores, food markets, and building materials -retail) during the past eight benchmark year quarters, sales tax receipts reached a new high point. The 8 segments represent 61.9 percent of the total sales tax receipts. Service stations and light industry, 2 of the top 10 segments representing 8.5 and 4.9 percent, respectively, of the total sales tax receipts, decreased to a new low point in the past two-year period during the 4Q 2015. This was due to lower fuel prices and completion of renewable energy developments in Riverside County. These top 10 segments represent 75.3 percent of the total sales tax receipts. For the other 19 segments representing 24.7 percent of the total sales tax receipts, 9 segments representing 12.2 percent of the total sales tax receipts reached new high points in the past two years during 4Q 2015. Agenda Item 8D 80 In the Economic Segment Analysis below, auto sales -new, restaurants, and departments stores represent the three largest segments for Riverside County, or 33.1 percent of total sales tax receipts. This is the thirteenth consecutive quarter since 3Q 2008 that department stores and auto sales -new have been in the top three economic segments. Growth seen in previous quarters for the service stations segment has been declining continuously from the high in the last four years due to lower fuel prices, and this segment reached a new low point in 4Q 2015. Restaurants replaced service stations in the top three economic segments beginning in 4Q 2014 and resulted from continued steady growth in restaurant prices with no decline in restaurant use. RCTC California Riverside Countywide ECONOMIC San Bernardino Countywide SEGMENT ANALYSIS Inland Empire South Coast S.F. Bay Area Sacramento Valley Central Valley North Coast Central Coast Largest Segment Auto Sales- New Restaurants Auto Sales- New Department Stores Restaurants Service Stations Restaurants Restaurants Department Stores Service Stations Restaurants %ofTotal /%Change 11.7 / 10.5 14.3/7.1 12.4/11.2 10.5/6.4 11.1/7.6 26.5/-7.1 15.4/7.4 15.6/6.7 13.7/1.8 11.4/-14.4 22.3/3.3 2nd Largest Segment Restaurants Auto Sales - New Restaurants Service Stations Auto Sales - New Restaurants Auto Sales - New Auto Sales - New Auto Sales - New Auto Sales - New Misc. Retail %ofTotal /%Change 11.0 / 7.2 11.1/8.8 12.4/7.4 9.9/-12.6 11.0/11.7 13.0/5.0 10.8/8.8 11.3/7.6 10.8/10.4 11.2/13.1 10.5/9.7 3rd Largest Segment Department Stores Department Stores Department Stores Restaurants Department Stores Food Markets Department Stores Department Stores Restaurants Department Stores Department Stores %ofTotal /%Change 10.4/2.2 9.6/1.0 10.8/-0.7 9.9/7.9 10.7/2.8 8.4/-0.7 8.0/-0.4 9.4/0.9 10.5/7.4 11.1/1.7 8.7/-1.7 During the review of the 4Q 2015 detailed report with MuniServices, information regarding sales tax comparison by city and change by economic segments (two highest gains and two highest losses) from 4Q 2015 to 4Q 2014 was provided. Staff continues to monitor monthly sales tax receipts and other available economic data to determine the need for any adjustment to the revenue projections. Staff will utilize the forecast scenarios included with the complete report and receipt trends in assessing such projections. Attachments: 1) Sales Tax Digest Summary 4Q 2015 2) Sales Tax Performance Analysis by Quarter 3) Quarterly Sales Tax Change Comparison by City for 4Q 2015 to 4Q 2014 Agenda Item 8D 81 Riverside County Transportation Commission Sales Tax Digest Summary Collections through March 2016 Sales through December 2015 (2015Q4) ATTACHMENT 1 CALIFORNIA'S ECONOMIC OUTLOOK California sales tax receipts increased by 3.5% over the same quarter from the previous year, with Northern California reporting a 4.2% increase compared to 2.9% for Southern California. Receipts for the RCTC changed by 2.7% over the same periods. How are fuel prices affecting Sales Tax Revenues? The average price for regular unleaded gasoline in California has tumbled by 50% from the peak of $ 4.66 per gallon in October of 2012 to a low of $ 2.29 per gallon in February of 2016. The current $ 2.60 per gallon price is expected to reach a peak for 2016 of $ 3.40 by May. Despite the increases, the 2016 California annual average price is forecasted to end up between 5 and 10 percent lower than it was in 2015. (CA Department of Finance, GasBuddy) Will the positive trend in statewide employment and personal income continue? U.S. gains in employment have averaged 228,000 over the past 3 months. (CA Bureau of Labor Statistics) In California the current forecast is for continued steady gains in employment through 2017. Total employment growth is expected to be 2.1% for 2016 and 1.4% for 2017. Real personal income growth is forecasted to be 3.4% for 2016 and 3.2% for 2017. (UCLA Anderson) 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 4Q2015 Receipts Net 4Q2014 Receipts Actual Percentage Change $44,603,855 0 0 44,603,855 .00 (496,230) 44,107, 625 42,965,073 2.7% Business Activity Performance Analysis Local Collections Less: Payments for Prior Periods Preliminary 4Q2015 Collections Projected 4Q2015 Late Payments Projected 4Q2015 Final Results Actual 4Q2014 Results Projected Percentage Change $44,603,855 (1,737,297) 42,866,558 1,028,770 43,895,328 43,397,538 1.1% www.MuniServices.com (8%4 800-8181 Page 1 Riverside County Transportation Commission HISTORICAL CASH COLLECTIONS ANALYSIS BY QUARTER $50,000 $45,000 $40,000 $35,000 $30,000 $25,000 $20,000 $15,000 $10,000 $5,000 $0 (in thousands of $) 3Q 2013 4Q 2013 $520 $510 I $500 $490 $480 $470 $460 $450 $440 $430 $420 $410 1Q2014 2Q2014 3Q2014 4Q2014 1Q2015 2Q2015 3Q2015 4Q2015 Net Receipts —tk—SBOE Admin Fees Due Admin Fees 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 January 2015 to December 2015. The Top 25 Sales/Use Tax contributors generate 23.3% of RCTC's total AMAZON.COM ARCO AM/PM MINI MARTS BEST BUY STORES CHEVRON SERVICE STATIONS CIRCLE K FOOD STORES COACH CONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL DSTRS. COSTCO WHOLESALE DEPT OF MOTOR VEHICLES EXXON SERVICE STATIONS FOOD 4 LESS HOME DEPOT 10HNSON MACHINERY COMPANY sales and use tax revenue. KOHL'S DEPARTMENT STORES LOWE'S HOME CENTERS MACY'S DEPARTMENT STORE PARADISE CHEVROLET CADILLAC RALPH'S GROCERY COMPANY ROSS STORES SAM'S CLUB SEARS ROEBUCK & COMPANY STATER BROS MARKETS TARGET STORES USA SERVICE STATIONS WAL MART STORES www.MuniServices.com (800) 800-8181 83 Page 2 Riverside County Transportation Commission HISTORICAL SALES TAX AMOUNTS The following chart shows the sales tax level from sales through December 2015, the highs, and the lows for each segment over the last two years. (in thousands of $) ■4Q2015 *High . L ow $25,000 $20,000 - $15,000 $10,000 � $5,000 AO Al IIli d S $0 4 tis s 05 � ♦e S N.% �� wti�e.' �, <‘0�4' o�1%wt�S¢o 5 �% S 10�O'' e- b �..' 5 eOi.,w, ANNUAL SALES TAX BY BUSINESS CATEGORY (in thousands of $) 4Q2015 3Q2015 2Q2015 1Q2015 4Q2014 3Q2014 2 Q 2 014 1Q2014 4 Q 2 0 13 3 Q 2 0 1 3 2 42,885 17,941 24,802 3441113 1 47,369 28,263 41 42,836 17,752 25,171 3483 46,951 27,833 1 42,608 17,537 25,539 3I340 46,640 27,357 I 42,579 17,323 25,979 3,300 I 46,099 26,919 I 42,717 17430 26,211 3�23u milk45,400 26,655 42,586 16,580 25,555 138 44,711 26,151 42,068 15,214 25,418 3,140 44,002 25,697 41,460 15,720 25,344 3,027 754 L 25,196 40,980 15,218 24,897 2,F99 40,382 14,989 3 $0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000 $100,000 $120,000 $140,000 $160,000 $180,000 =General R etail =Food Products MT ransportation =C onstruction =B usiness To Business =M iscellan eons www.MuniServices.com (800) 800-8181 84 Page 3 Riverside County Transportation Commission FIVE-YEAR ECONOMIC TREND: General Retail (in thousands of $) $16,000 $14,000 - $12,000 $10,000 $8,000 - $6,000 $4,000 $2,000 - J - - $0 O N N N N M on m M C 71. y R ,,, , N N O O O O O O O O O O O O O SOS OS O O O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a FINAL RESULTS: July -September 2015 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 2014 Sales MUNISERVICES' ON -GOING AUDIT RESULTS This Quarter $336,086 Total to Date $6,385,784 $40,077,762 ($-496,230) ($1,810,969) $1,392,769 $40,155,791 UP BY 2.7% www.MuniServices.com (800) 800-8181 85 Page 4 RCTC 1/2%: Sales Tax Performance Analysis by Quarter ATTACHMENT 2 TOTAL TOTAL $50,000,000 - $45,000,000 - $40, 000, 000 $35, 000, 000 $30, 000, 000 $25, 000, 000 $20, 000, 000 $15,000,000 - $10, 000, 000 $5, 000, 000 $0 d 0 0 N Q1 r c1 8 N m N M crT—i N m.71- 8 N m� 7A N m cr c1 U U c1 0' Ci U c1 Ci Ci CI CI U 0'0 CI U Ci ,--I %-I ci ri N N N N M M M M .71- cr •71- •71- 1-n 1-n u1 V1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Q2 Economic CATEGORY TOTAL $16,000,000 2015Q4 QoQ %A QoQ $A YoY %A YoY $A $43,894,915 1.1% $497,766 2.0% $3,176,028 $14, 000, 000 'GENERAL RETAIL 2015Q4 QoQ %A QoQ $A YoY %A YoY $A 14 224 107 2.2% $308,093 3.4% $1,578,040 $12, 000, 000 ° of 2015Q4 Total: 32.4% FOOD PRODUCTS $10,000,000 2015Q4 QoQ %A QoQ $A YoY %A YoY $A $7,231,101 5.0% $341,593 6.3% $1,685,913 % of Total: 16.5% $8, 000, 000 'TRANSPORTATION $10,351,339 0 2015Q4 QoQ %A QoQ $A YoY %A YoY $A $6,000,000 .5% $48,289 0.4% $167,917 % of Total: 23.6% $4,000,000 CONSTRUCTION $2 000 000 °� of Total $0 2015Q4 QoQ %A QoQ $A YoY %A YoY $A $4,527,686 4.1% $178,841 5.4% $911,124 ° 10.3% 'BUSINESS TO BUSINESS 2015Q4 QoQ %A QoQ $A YoY %A YoY $A $6,665,412 -5.3%-$369,528 -5.4%-$1,409,458 % of Total: 15.2% QoQ = 15Q4 / 14Q4 YoY = YE 15Q4 / YE 14Q4 86 ATTACHMENT 3 INLAND EMPIRE: Quarterly Comparison of 2014Q4 and 2015Q4 ( October thru December Sales ) cc aw ce m a`) aa) m m Oct - Dec Oct - Dec u 2015 2014 (201504) (201404) % Chg Gain Gain Decline Decline L.A. MTA OCTA SANDAG Transnet BART VTA 2000 Measure A VTA 1976 Sales Tax RCTC Sacramento Transit Santa Clara VTA BART San Joaquin C.O.G. S.M.A.R.T. RIVERSIDE COUNTY BANNING BEAUMONT BLYTHE CORONA LAKE ELSINORE HEMET INDIO PERRIS SAN JACINTO RIVERSIDE COACHELLA PALM SPRINGS DESERT HOT SPRINGS NORCO INDIAN WELLS RANCHO MIRAGE PALM DESERT CATHEDRAL CITY LA QUINTA MORENO VALLEY TEMECULA CANYON LAKE CALIMESA MURRIETA WILDOMAR MENIFEE EASTVALE JURUPA VALLEY RIVERSIDE COUNTY 1.7% 2.4% 1.2 % 1.2 % 2.4% 2.3% 2.2% 4.1% 2.6% 8.1% 3.4% 4.4% 4.4% 4.4% 3.4% 4.8% 4.8% 5.0% 5.4% 5.4% 2.1% 4.4% 1.3% -0.9% 1.7% 2.4% -4.1% -4.1% 0.5% 5.4% -3.7% 2.1% 2.1% 7.9% 5.7% 2.4% 9.8% -0.2% 0.5% 4.1% 8.1% -1.4% 18.5% 13.7% -5.2% 2.3% -4.2% 1.6% 6.2% 6.0% -5.3% 2.3% 7.0% 3.4% 1.6% -3.1% -4.6% 7.6% 3.4% 10.7% 11.1 % -1.1% -10.2% -10.5 % -9.2 % -14.0% 398,190,278 78,111,917 71,761,173 64,140,642 54,867,577 54,865,693 43,894,915 394,227,542 76,441,721 70,947,877 62,430,986 53,423,074 53,425,061 43,397,148 1.0% 2.2% 1.1% 2.7% 2.7% 2.7% 1.1% 28,586,769 27,381,555 13,708,387 13, 352,481 13,520,875 12,829,813 9,399,660 9,056,856 4.4% 2.7% 5.4% 3.8% -9.1% -1.5% -3.9% -5.8% 18.1% -10.3% 431,029 445,826 -3.3% 3.8% 9.2% 0.5% 5.9% 29.4% 5.5% 1,089,272 1,013,783 7.4% 1.9% 5.3% 3.6% -1.6% -9.6% -56.4% 396,310 392,437 1.0% 2.5% 6.3% 0.2% 16.1% -10.8% -22.4% 8,711,589 8,390,334 3.8% 10.9% 0.4% 6.8% 7.9% 1.5% -43.8% 2,101,971 1,963,424 7.1% 25.0% 26.2% 50.6% 7.0% 18.0% 40.8% 2,547,315 1,924,067 32.4% -0.2% 0.8% 1.7% -0.8% -0.5% -30.9% 2,316,455 2,308,849 0.3% 18.2% 6.6% -13.1% -6.9% 2.3% -36.0% 1,916,382 2,042,223 -6.2% 5.7% 34.5% 0.4% 42.3% 9.3% -30.7% 621,335 547,197 13.5% 1.3% 5.3% 3.6% 5.9% 7.0% -16.7% 13,876,755 13,381,525 3.7% 4.4% 4.1% -11.5% -9.5% 39.0% -21.3% 781,186 809,867 -3.5% 0.8% 4.7% -4.7% -1.7% -18.0% -5.9% 2,644,379 2,693,551 -1.8% 3.4% 1.1% -11.6% -58.5% 8.9% -8.6% 313,088 335,585 -6.7% 1.5% 5.2% 6.7% 23.3% -2.4% -6.9% 1,386,906 1,315,035 5.5% -20.7% -2.0%-100.0% -96.6% 55.6% 13.5% 218,198 227,693 -4.2% 6.7% -5.6% 4.8% -9.5% 30.3% 1.0% 1,143,376 1,131,636 1.0% -2.7% -1.9% -2.1% 1.0% -16.0% 246.8% 4,618,547 4,645,326 -0.6% -5.8% 3.2% -0.1% 0.7% 21.9% 46.1% 1,984,323 1,957,279 1.4% 4.3% 4.0% -11.5% -12.9% -13.4% -5.8% 2,010,165 2,022,445 -0.6% 6.4% 12.2% -1.8% 15.1% 11.9% -10.5% 4,153,011 3,899,921 6.5% 7.1% 6.4% 12.7% 7.2% 10.7% 5.6% 8,174,951 7,508,652 8.9% -43.9% 5.6% 1.8% 59.0% 199.5% -42.5% 50,476 45,521 10.9% 0.1% 4.4% -2.2% -40.8% -9.8% 11.0% 158,368 157,650 0.5% 6.2% 5.8% 1.4% 8.6% -11.7% 21.2% 3,366,419 3,269,207 3.0% -28.8% 19.1% -8.2% -2.9% 7.7% 3.0% 345,301 343,117 0.6% 8.2% 7.2% 4.7% 60.9% 12.7% -20.7% 1,539,956 1,384,207 11.3% 5.1% 11.6% -6.1% 16.8% 42.0% -66.4% 1,828,265 1,594,068 14.7% 5.3% 4.8% -5.8% 5.4% 9.6% -3.7% 2,235,516 2,151,096 3.9% -3.8% 0.7% -8.8% -42.8% -5.3% 65.8% 6,691,771 7,856,396 -14.8% Restaurants Restaurants Auto Sales - New Auto Sales - New Office Equipment Office Equipment Auto Sales - New Auto Sales - New Office Equipment BIdg.Matls-Whsle BIdg.Matls-Whsle Auto Sales - New Miscellaneous Retail Restaurants BIdg.Matls-Whsle Restaurants Restaurants Department Stores Restaurants Electronic Equipment Auto Sales - New Auto Sales - New Service Stations Service Stations Service Stations Service Stations Business Services Business Services Service Stations Service Stations Service Stations Service Stations Service Stations Energy Sales Office Equipment Office Equipment Recreation Products Service Stations Service Stations Light Industry Business Services Auto Parts/Repair Closed Acct-Adjustmt Light Industry Auto Sales - New Light Industry Auto Sales - New BIdg.Matls-Whsle Miscellaneous Retail Auto Sales - New BIdg.Matls-Whsle Department Stores Food Markets Auto Sales - New Heavy Industry Restaurants Department Stores Auto Sales - New Light Industry Miscellaneous Retail Miscellaneous Other Auto Sales - New Miscellaneous Retail Food Markets Auto Sales - New Heavy Industry Restaurants Restaurants Food Markets BIdg.Matls-Retail Electronic Equipment Miscellaneous Retail Apparel Stores Auto Sales - Used Misc. Vehicle Sales Light Industry Auto Sales - New Auto Sales - New Department Stores Auto Sales - New Restaurants Department Stores Restaurants Department Stores Auto Sales - New Miscellaneous Retail BIdg.Matls-Whsle Food Markets Leasing BIdg.Matls-Whsle Leasing Restaurants Furniture/Appliance Miscellaneous Retail Leasing Department Stores Auto Sales - New Restaurants Restaurants BIdg.Matls-Whsle Furniture/Appliance Miscellaneous Other Department Stores Service Stations Heavy Industry Office Equipment Service Stations Service Stations Light Industry Miscellaneous Other Auto Parts/Repair Department Stores Service Stations Service Stations Service Stations Service Stations Restaurants Furniture/Appliance Apparel Stores Service Stations BIdg.Matls-Retail Service Stations Service Stations Recreation Products Service Stations Service Stations Service Stations Miscellaneous Other Service Stations Department Stores BIdg.Matls-Whsle Service Stations Energy Sales Energy Sales Service Stations Light Industry Office Equipment BIdg.Matls-Retail Service Stations Drug Stores Service Stations BIdg.Matls-Whsle Energy Sales BIdg.Matls-Whsle Office Equipment Miscellaneous Retail Food Markets Food Markets Furniture/Appliance Auto Sales - New Leasing Department Stores Miscellaneous Retail Miscellaneous Retail Leasing Miscellaneous Retail Misc. Vehicle Sales Miscellaneous Other Service Stations Miscellaneous Retail Non -Confidential 87 MuniServices AGENDA ITEM 8E RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 8, 2016 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee David Thomas, Toll Project Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Ratify Expenditures for Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program and Other State Furnished Materials for the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Ratify the scope of state furnished materials (SFM) defined in the design -build cooperative Agreement No. 12-31-070-00, as amended, between the Commission and Caltrans for the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project (SR-91 CIP) to include Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program (COZEEP) and other SFM in the amount of $4.3 million, plus a contingency amount of $400,000, for a total amount not to exceed $4.7 million; and 2) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve the use of the contingency amount as may be required for the project. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At its July 14, 2010 meeting, the Commission adopted Resolution No. 10-026 as part of the authorization for issuance of toll revenue bonds to finance the SR-91 CIP costs related to the design -build phase. The agenda item also included approval of the form of the agreement and authorized the Executive Director to approve and execute the agreement as well as any amendments to the agreement. The agreement was executed on July 25, 2012. The agreement included terms for the Commission to pay Caltrans for SFM, which at the time contemplated primarily signal control items estimated at a cost of $79,902. Amendment No. 3 to the agreement, approved and executed by the Executive Director in February 2014, amended the original agreement to broaden the definition of SFM to include COZEEP. An estimate of the costs for COZEEP services was not required in the amendment. Through this amendment, Caltrans agreed to allow the Commission to utilize its statewide COZEEP contract, which eliminated the need for a separate agreement between the Commission and California Highway Patrol for COZEEP services. Agenda Item 8E 88 The current estimate of total SFM is $4.7 million, which includes $223,000 for various signal control items, $4,077,000 for COZEEP services, and a contingency of $400,000. The original estimate for signal control items was based on the scope and unit prices known in 2012 at the time the agreement was executed and has been updated to reflect the design -builder's final design and current unit prices. It should also be noted the design -builder for the SR-91 CIP is responsible for reimbursing the Commission for all COZEEP costs; therefore, all COZEEP costs are passed through to the design -builder. The SFM costs are included in the SR-91 CIP budget of $1,407,000,000. Staff recommends Commission ratification of the expanded scope of SFM and the related total cost of $4.7 million, which includes a $400,000 contingency. Financial Information Yes FY 2015/16 $3,151,000 In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2016/17 Amount: $1,549,000 Source of Funds: Sales Tax and Toll Bond Proceeds Budget Adjustment: No No 003028 81602 00072 0000 262 3181601 (Signal Controllers) $243,000 GL/Project 003028 81304 00104 0000 262 3181301 (COZEEP) $4,457,000 Accounting No.: 003028 81304 00104 0000 262 3181301 (COZEEP reimbursements) ($4,457,000) Fiscal Procedures Date: 05/12/2016 Approved: Attachment: SFM Cost Estimate Breakdown Agenda Item 8E 89 Attachment A - SFM Cost Estimate Breakdown FY16 FY17 TOTAL COZEEP $2,966,000 $1,111,000 $4,077,000 Signal Control Items: Model 332L Cabinets $19,300 $19,300 Model 334L Cabinets $26,200 $26,200 Model 2070 ATCs $16,100 $16,100 Model 2070 Communication Cards $1,000 $1,000 Model 170 Controllers $24,300 $24,300 Model 200 Switch Packs $2,400 $2,400 Model 210 Monitors $2,300 $2,300 Model 222 Vehicle Detectors $18,000 $18,000 Model 242 Isolators $1,400 $1,400 Model 420 Output Files $6,000 $6,000 External BBS Cabinets $6,200 $6,200 Battery Backup Systems $8,300 $8,300 Modem Harnesses $400 $400 Model 334LX Cabinets $53,100 $53,100 Model 342LX Cabinets $18,000 $18,000 Model 2070 Modems for FO $15,600 $15,600 Model 2070 Modems for GPS $2,800 $2,800 Model 204 Flasher Units $300 $300 Padlocks $1,300 $1,300 Contingency $400,000 $400,000 $3,151,000 $1,549,000 $4,700,000 90 AGENDA ITEM 8F RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 8, 2016 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Jennifer Crosson, Toll Operations Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Riverside 91 Express Lanes Ordinance for Enforcement of Toll Violations WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve the introduction of and introduce Ordinance No. 16-001, "An Ordinance of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Establishing Ordinance No. 16-001 Relating to the Administration of Tolls and the Enforcement of Toll Violations for the Riverside 91 Express Lanes"; and 2) Approve the toll evasion penalties for a violation of Ordinance No. 16-001 in the amounts identified in Schedule A of Ordinance No. 16-001. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Commission will operate the Riverside 91 Express Lanes (a toll highway) and will require users to have a transponder associated with a valid FasTralem account in order to pay a toll. California Vehicle Code (CVC) 23302, et seq., establishes that it is unlawful for a person to evade payment of a toll, including failure to have a transponder, on a toll highway and provides that such acts are subject to civil penalties. CVC 40250, et seq., provides for the enforcement of civil penalties for violations of CVC 23302.5 and any ordinance enacted by local authorities pursuant to civil administrative procedures set for in Article 4 of Chapter 1 of Division 17 of the Code. In order to process toll violations and enforce penalties, the Commission must adopt an ordinance establishing the administrative procedures and penalties to ensure compliance with statute and fairness of the treatment of violators. The enforcement of toll evasion violations is critical to the protection of revenue collection on the Riverside 91 Express Lanes. The proposed ordinance establishes administrative procedures for the issuance of toll evasion violation notices, the processing of contested violations, the escalation of delinquent violations to allowable collection methods, and the termination of the process in accordance with the statutes. Agenda Item 8F 91 The ordinance also establishes the initial penalty schedule for the Riverside 91 Express Lanes, as set forth in Schedule A of the proposed ordinance. The proposed penalty structure is within the limits of CVC 40258 and is equal to those imposed by the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) on the existing Orange County 91 Express Lanes. The three -party agreement with OCTA; Cofiroute USA, LLC as the operator; and the Commission contemplates the Commission will adopt the same violation processes and toll evasion penalty schedule as OCTA. The goal of the toll evasion penalty structure is two -fold: discourage persons from failing to pay a toll at the time of travel and to recover tolls lost to violations and the cost to recover such tolls. The Riverside 91 Express Lanes financial plan contemplates a toll evasion program, as outlined in the ordinance, will be in place utilized to collect tolls and penalties from customers who fail to pay their toll at the time of travel. The proposed ordinance provides for the Commission's Executive Director to amend the penalty amount from time to time provided that any amended penalty amounts do not exceed the amounts set forth in the CVC. Any amendments to the penalties shall be posted on the 91 Express Lanes and Commission websites 90 days in advance of the enactment. Adoption of Ordinance No. 16-001 for enforcement of toll violations for the Riverside 91 Express Lanes will allow the Commission to process toll evasion violations for motorists who use the Riverside 91 Express Lanes but fail to pay the toll at the time of travel. The establishment of a toll enforcement program is critical to the protection of toll revenue and ensures compliance with statute and fairness of the treatment of violators. Failure to adopt the ordinance for enforcement of toll violations for the 91 Express Lanes could have a negative fiscal impact, as the Commission would not be able to recover its costs in enforcing toll violations. Attachment: Ordinance No. 16-001 for Enforcement of Toll Violations for the Riverside 91 Express Lanes Agenda Item 8F 92 ORDINANCE NO. 16-001 AN ORDINANCE OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ESTABLISHING ORDINANCE NO. 16-001 RELATING TO THE ADMINISTRATION OF TOLLS AND THE ENFORCEMENT OF TOLL VIOLATIONS FOR THE RIVERSIDE 91 EXPRESS LANES WHEREAS, Section 130244 (c) of the Public Utilities Code authorizes the Riverside County Transportation Commission to collect tolls on the Riverside County portion of State Highway Route 91; and WHEREAS, Section 23302.5 of the California Vehicle Code ("Code") provides that it is unlawful for a person to evade or attempt to evade the payment of tolls or other charges on any vehicular crossing or toll highway, and provides that such acts are subject to civil penalties; and WHEREAS, Section 40250, et seq., of Chapter 1 of Division 17 of the Code provides for enforcement of civil penalties for violation of Code Section 23302.5 and any ordinance enacted by local authorities pursuant to civil administrative procedures set forth in Article 4 of Chapter 1 of Division 17 of the Code; and WHEREAS, the Riverside County portion of the State Highway Route 91 toll facility ("91 Express Lanes"), which is owned, maintained and operated by the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Commission") constitutes a "toll highway" for the purposes of section 23302.5 of the Code; and WHEREAS, the Commission deems it necessary to establish penalties for passing through the Commission portion of the 91 Express Lanes toll facility without payment of the proper toll, pursuant to section 23302.5 and 40250, et. seq., of the Code and to establish the procedures for issuing of violation notices and enforcement of penalties, consistent with sections 40250, et seq., of the Code. NOW, THEREFORE, THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE COMMISSION DOES HEREBY ORDAIN THAT ORDINANCE NO. 16-001 RELATING TO THE ADMINISTRATION OF TOLLS AND THE ENFORCEMENT OF TOLL POLICIES FOR THE COMMISSION IS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Definitions The following terms shall have the meanings as set forth below: a) "Code" shall mean the California Vehicle Code. b) "Commission" shall mean the Riverside County Transportation Commission. c) "91 Express Lanes" shall mean the toll facility on State Route 91 east of the Orange/Riverside County line and extending east to McKinley Street in the City of Corona and south onto Interstate 15. d) "Department" shall mean the California Department of Motor Vehicles or other state's department of motor vehicles. 93 e) "Due Date" shall mean the date specified in the Notice of Toll Evasion Violation or the Notice of Delinquent Toll Evasion Violation, as applicable, by which payment of the Penalty or affidavit of non -liability or written explanation of the contest must be received by the Processing Agency, which date shall provide no less than the minimum time required by the relevant Code section for such receipt. f) "Motorists" shall mean and include the Registered Owner, rentee, lessee and driver of a Vehicle. g) "Notice of Delinquent Toll Evasion Violation" shall mean the written notice provided to the Registered Owner of a Vehicle when the payment of the Penalty or completion of an affidavit of non -liability or written explanation of contest has not been returned by the due date. h) "Notice of Toll Evasion Violation" shall mean the written notice provided to the Registered Owner of a Vehicle which has committed a Violation. i) "Processing Agency" shall mean the entity under contract with the Commission, which may be a private vendor or another public agency, as provided in Code Section 40252, for the processing of the Notice of Toll Evasion and Notice of Delinquent Toll Evasions. 1) "Registered Owner" shall mean a person registered by the Department as the owner of a Vehicle or a person registered as the owner of the Vehicle by the appropriate agency or authority of another state, the District of Columbia, or a territory or possession of the United States. k) "Repeat Violator" shall mean any Registered Owner for whom more than five violations have been issued within the preceding 12-month period. I) "Toll" shall mean the monetary charges established by the Commission for use of the 91 Express Lanes. m) "Toll Enforcement Officer" shall mean any member of the California Highway Patrol or any employee or contractor of Commission whose duties include the enforcement of the payment of tolls. n) "Toll Evasion Penalty" or "Penalty" shall mean, but is not limited to, any late payment penalty, administrative fee, fine, assessment, and costs of collection as provided by law. o) "Transponder" shall mean a FasTrak electronic device issued by any toll operator that meets the specifications of California Code of Regulations Title 21 and is used to pay Toll(s) electronically. p) "Vehicle" shall mean any vehicle as defined in California Vehicle Code Section 670. q) "Violation" shall mean the commission of any activity proscribed in Section 2(a) hereof. 94 Section 2. Payment of Proper Toll a) All Vehicles travelling on the 91 Express Lanes shall have a Transponder located in or on the Vehicle in a location so as to be visible for the purpose of enforcement at all times when the Vehicle is located on the 91 Express Lanes, unless otherwise permitted by the operating policies of the Commission, as proscribed by Code Section 23302 (a)(2). b) The Transponder shall be associated with an account with a balance sufficient to pay the Toll amount as proscribed by Code Section 23302 (a)(1). c) Vehicles qualifying for a 3+ carpool discount shall pass through the designated 3+ carpool lane to receive any available carpool discount. d) Vehicles using the designated carpool lane without the qualifying number of vehicle occupants will be subject to citation by the California Highway Patrol and the payment of the full price Toll charge. Section 3. Liability for Failure to Pay Toll a) No person shall cause a Vehicle to pass through or attempt to pass through the 91 Express Lanes without payment of the proper Toll for the Vehicle. b) Except as provided herein, the Registered Owner(s), driver, rentee or lessee of a Vehicle which is the subject of any Violation shall be jointly and severally liable for the Penalties imposed under this ordinance, unless the Registered Owner can show that the Vehicle was used without the express or implied consent of the Registered Owner. Anyone who pays any Penalty pursuant to this Ordinance shall have the right to recover the same from the driver, rentee or lessee. c) The driver, rentee or lessee of a Vehicle who is not the owner of the Vehicle may contest the Notice of Toll Evasion Violation in accordance with this Ordinance. d) Any Motorists assessed a Penalty for a Violation shall be deemed to be charged with a non- criminal, civil violation, pursuant to Section 23302.5 subdivision (a) of the Code. Section 4. Penalties and Processing of Violation(s) a) The Penalties for a Violation of this Ordinance shall be the amounts set forth in the Schedule of Penalties, attached hereto as Schedule A and incorporated by reference herein. The Schedule of Penalties, as proscribed under Schedule A, may be amended from time to time by the Commission's Executive Director provided they do not exceed the amounts set forth in Code Section 40258(a). Any amendments to the Penalties shall be posted on the 91 Express Lanes and Commission website 90 days in advance of enactment. b) If a Vehicle is found by automated devices, by visual observation, or otherwise, to have evaded Tolls on the 91 Express Lanes, the Commission or the Processing Agency shall, within 21 days of the Violation, deliver by first-class mail a Notice of Toll Evasion Violation to the Registered Owner at the address as shown on the record of the Department. If accurate information concerning the identity and address of the Registered Owner is not available to the Processing Agency within 21 days of the Violation, the Processing Agency shall have an additional 45 calendar days to obtain such information and forward the Notice of Toll Evasion. Where the 95 Registered Owner is a Repeat Violator, the Processing Agency shall forward the Notice of Toll Evasion Violation within 90 calendar days of the Violation. c) The Processing Agency shall use its best efforts to obtain accurate information concerning the identity and address of the Registered Owner for the purpose of forwarding a Notice of Toll Evasion Violation. d) Toll evasion Penalties shall be collected as civil penalties. Section 5. Notice of Toll Evasion Violation a) The Notice of Toll Evasion Violation shall contain (1) the date, approximate time and location of the alleged violation, (2) the section of the Code allegedly violated, (3) the Vehicle license plate number, and if practicable, the make and registration expiration date of the Vehicle (4) the Penalty due for the Violation, (5) the procedure to follow for payment of the amount due, including the address of the person authorized to receive payments (6) a statement in bold that payments may be sent through the mail (7) the Due Date for payment, contesting the Notice or submission of the affidavit of non -liability and (8) a clear and concise explanation of the procedures for contesting the violation and appealing an adverse decision pursuant to Code section 40255 and 40256. b) The Notice of Toll Evasion Violation shall contain, or be accompanied with, an affidavit of non - liability and information of what constitutes non -liability, information as to the effect of executing the affidavit, and instructions for returning the affidavit to the issuing agency, as further specified below. Section 6. Basis for Non -Liability; Return of Affidavit of Non -Liability a) If the affidavit of non -liability is returned to the Processing Agency by the Due Date set forth in the Notice of Toll Evasion Violation together with proof that the driver at the time of the Violation did not possess express or implied consent to drive the Vehicle evidenced by a stolen vehicle police report, and if the Processing Agency is satisfied that the Registered Owner is not responsible for the Violation, the Processing Agency shall terminate proceedings against the originally served Registered Owner and proceed against the unauthorized driver at the time of the Violation. b) If the affidavit of non -liability is returned to the Processing Agency by the Due Date set forth in the Notice of Toll Evasion Violation with proof that the Registered Owner given the Notice of Toll Evasion Violation has made a bona fide sale or transfer of the Vehicle and has delivered possession thereof to the purchaser prior to the date of the alleged Violation and either (1) has complied with section 5602 of the Code, or (2) the Processing Agency is satisfied with evidence establishing that the transfer of ownership and possession of the Vehicle occurred prior to the date of the alleged Violation, and has obtained verification from the Department of either of the foregoing, then the Processing Agency shall terminate proceedings against the originally served Registered Owner and proceed against the new owner of the Vehicle. 96 c) If the affidavit of non -liability is returned to the Processing Agency by the Due Date on the Notice of Toll Evasion Violation together with proof of an executed written rental agreement or lease between a bona fide renting or leasing company and its customer that identifies the rentee or lessee and provides the driver's license number, name and address of the rentee or lessee, the Processing Agency shall serve or mail to the rentee or lessee identified in the affidavit of non -liability a Notice of Toll Evasion Violation. Section 7. Dismissal of Notice of Toll Evasion Violation a) If, after a copy of a Notice of Toll Evasion Violation has been sent to the Motorist, the Processing Agency determines that due to failure of proof of apparent Violation the Notice of Toll Evasion Violation should be dismissed, the Processing Agency shall cancel the Notice of Toll Evasion Violation, and the Motorist shall be notified by first-class mail. b) Under no circumstances shall a personal relationship with any law enforcement officer, public official, law enforcement agency, processing agency or toll operations agency or entity be ground for dismissal of the Violation. c) If non -liability has been established pursuant to an affidavit of non -liability as detailed in Section 6 of this Ordinance, proceedings against the party found not liable shall terminate, unless otherwise specified in Section 6 above. d) If the description of the Vehicle in the Notice of Toll Evasion Violation does not match the corresponding information on the registration card for that Vehicle, the Processing Agency may, on written request of the Motorists, cancel the Notice of Toll Evasion Violation without the necessity of appearance by that person. e) If the full amount of the Penalty is received by the person authorized to receive it by the Due Date, and there is no contest as to that Violation, proceedings under this Ordinance shall terminate. Section 8. Notice of Delinquent Toll Evasion Violation; Failure to Pay Penalties a) If payment of the Penalty is not received by the Processing Agency by the Due Date on the Notice of Toll Evasion Violation, and proceedings hereunder have not otherwise been terminated, the Processing Agency shall deliver by first-class mail to the Registered Owner a Notice of Delinquent Toll Evasion Violation. b) The Processing Agency shall provide to the Registered Owner, upon request, a photo -static copy of the original Notice of Toll Evasion Violation Notice or an electronically produced facsimile of the original Notice of the Toll Evasion Violation within 15 days of a request. The Commission may charge a fee sufficient to recover the actual cost of providing the copy, not to exceed two dollars ($2). Until the Processing Agency complies with the request for a copy of the original Notice of Toll Evasion Violation, the Processing Agency may not proceed to collection of the Penalty due. c) The Notice of Delinquent Toll Evasion Violation shall contain information required to be contained in the original Notice of Toll Evasion Violation and additionally, shall contain a notice to the Registered Owner that, unless the Registered Owner pays the Penalty, contests the 97 Violation pursuant to the procedure set forth in the Notice of Delinquent Toll Evasion Violation, or completes and returns to the Processing Agency an affidavit of non -liability, as provided with the Notice of Delinquent Toll Evasion Violation, within the Due Date set forth in the Notice of Delinquent Toll Evasion Violation: (1) the Penalty shall be considered a debt due and owing to the Commission, (2) the renewal of the Vehicle registration shall be contingent upon compliance with the Notice of Delinquent Toll Evasion Violation at the Commission's election and (3) the Commission may seek recovery of the debt in any lawful manner, as provided for in section 13 below. d) The Notice of Delinquent Toll Evasion Violation shall contain, or be accompanied with, an affidavit of non -liability and information of what constitutes non -liability, information as to the effect of executing the affidavit, and instructions for returning the affidavit to the Processing Agency. Non -liability may be established pursuant to an affidavit of non -liability returned to the Processing Agency by the Due Date set forth in the Notice of Delinquent Toll Evasion Violation, on any basis set forth in Section 6 of this Ordinance. e) If a rentee or lessee identified by a bona fide renting or leasing company in the affidavit of non - liability, in accordance with the requirements in Section 6(c) above, is forwarded the Notice of Delinquent Toll Evasion Violation, and the rentee or lessee does not pay the Penalty, contest the Violation pursuant to the procedure set forth in the Notice of Delinquent Toll Evasion Violation, or complete and return to the Processing Agency an affidavit of non -liability, as provided with the Notice of Delinquent Toll Evasion Violation, within the Due Date set forth in the Notice of Delinquent Toll Evasion Violation, the Penalty shall be considered a debt due and owing the Commission and the Commission may seek recovery in any lawful manner, as provided for in section 13 below. Section 9. Payment After Notice of Delinquent Toll Evasion Violation a) Unless paragraph (b) below applies, if a Motorist who was mailed a Notice of Delinquent Toll Evasion Violation pursuant to section 8, or any other person who presents the Notice of Toll Evasion Violation or Notice of Delinquent Toll Evasion Violation, deposits the Penalty due with a person authorized to receive it, then the Processing Agency shall terminate all proceedings where the amount deposited satisfies the amount due. If the Registered Owner, by appearance or by mail, makes payment to the Processing Agency by the Due Date set forth in the Notice of Delinquent Toll Evasion Violation, the Penalty shall consist of the amount of the Penalty set forth in the notice, without any additional administrative fees or charges. b) If the Notice of Delinquent Toll Evasion Violation has been filed with the Department pursuant to subdivision (a) of Code section 40267 or a civil judgment has been entered pursuant to Code section 40267(b) and payment of the Penalty together with the administrative fee of the Department and the administrative service fee of the Processing Agency for costs of service and any applicable assessment is received, the Processing Agency shall immediately transmit the payment information to the Department in the manner prescribed by the Department, and terminate proceeding on the Notice of Delinquent Toll Evasion Violation. 98 Section 10. Contest of Notice of Toll Evasion Violation or Notice of Delinquent Toll Evasion Violation a) A person may contest a Notice of Toll Evasion Violation or Notice of Delinquent Toll Evasion Violation by the Due Date set forth in the applicable notice. b) The Processing Agency shall establish and implement a fair and impartial investigation process to investigate the circumstance of the notice with respect to the contestant's written explanation of reasons for contesting a Violation. The Processing Agency shall investigate with its own records and staff the circumstances of the notice with respect to the contestant's written explanation of reasons for contesting the Violation. If based upon the results of that investigation, the Processing Agency is satisfied that the Violation did not occur or that the Registered Owner was not responsible for the Violation, the Processing Agency shall cancel the Notice of Toll Evasion Violation or Notice of Delinquent Toll Evasion Violation and make an adequate record of the reasons for cancelling the notice. The Processing Agency shall mail the results of the investigation to the person who contested the Notice of Toll Evasion Violation or the Notice of Delinquent Toll Evasion Violation. c) A person who contests a Notice of Toll Evasion Violation or Notice of Delinquent Toll Evasion Violation and is not satisfied with the results of the investigation may, within 15 days of the mailing of the results of the investigation, deposit the amount determined pursuant to paragraph (d) below, and request an administrative review. An administrative review shall be held within 90 calendar days following the receipt of the request for an administrative review accompanied by the required deposit amount. The person requesting the administrative review may request one continuance, not to exceed 21 calendar days. The person requesting the administrative review shall indicate to the Processing Agency his or her election for a review by mail or personal conference. d) The deposit for requesting an administrative review shall be as follows: 1) Except as provided herein, an individual seeking an administrative review shall deposit the full amount of the Penalty due at the time of the request. 2) For Violations arising out of the same set of operative facts and belonging to the same Registered Owner, the maximum amount of the Penalty to be deposited shall be a) two hundred fifty dollars ($250) or b) two hundred fifty dollars ($250) plus ten (10) percent of Penalty above one thousand dollars ($1,000), whichever is greater. 3) Individuals unable to pay the required deposit may apply for a hardship exception. e) If the person requesting an administrative review is a minor, that person shall be permitted to appear at an administrative review or admit responsibility for a Violation without the necessity of the appointment of a guardian. The Processing Agency may proceed against that person in the same manner as if that person were an adult. f) As evidence of the Violation, the Processing Agency shall produce the Notice of Toll Evasion Violation or a copy thereof, information received from the Department identifying the Registered Owner of the Vehicle, and a statement under penalty of perjury from the person authorized to issue a notice of Violation that the Tolls or other charges and any applicable fee were not paid in accordance with the Commission's policies. This documentation in proper form shall be prima facie evidence of the Violation. 99 Section 11. Hearing Officers; Administrative Reviews a) The Commission's Executive Director shall designate a hearing officer or reviewer to conduct administrative reviews. The hearing officer shall demonstrate the qualifications, training and objectivity necessary to perform fair and impartial reviews. The hearing officer's employment, performance evaluation, compensation and benefits shall not be directly or indirectly linked to the outcome of reviews or the revenue generated by such reviews. b) Reviews shall be conducted in accordance with the written procedures established by the Processing Agency, which shall ensure fair and impartial review of contested Toll evasion Violations. The hearing officer's final decision may be delivered personally or by first-class mail. c) If a notice of appeal to the California Superior Court is not filed within the period set forth in section 12, the decision of the hearing officer shall be deemed final. Section 12. Appeal to Superior Court A person who requests an administrative review and is not satisfied with the results of the review, may within 20 days after the mailing of the administrative review final decision, seek review by filing an appeal to the California Superior Court. The matter shall be heard de novo, except that the contents of the Processing Agency's file in the case on appeal shall be received in evidence. For the purpose of computing the 20-day period, Section 1013 of the Code of Civil Procedure shall be applicable. The Processing Agency shall admit into evidence as prima facie evidence of the facts stated therein, a copy of the Notice of Toll Evasion Violation and/or Delinquent Toll Evasion Violation. A copy of the notice of appeal shall be served in person or by first-class mail upon the Processing Agency by the contestant. The fee for filing the notice of appeal shall be the amount specified in Section 40256 of the Code. If the appellant prevails this fee, together with any deposit of the Penalty made by the contestant, shall be promptly refunded by the Processing Agency in accordance with the judgment of the court. Section 13. Collection of Unpaid Penalties If payment is not received within the time periods set forth herein, and no contest has been timely filed, or has been resolved in favor of Commission, Commission and the Processing Agency are authorized to proceed under one or more of the following options for the collection of unpaid Penalties: a) Transmit an itemization of unpaid Penalties to the Department for collection with the registration of the Vehicle. Commission shall pay the fees assessed by the Department associated with the recording of the Notice of Delinquent Toll Evasion Violation and may charge the amount of the fee to the Motorist. b) If more than four hundred dollars ($400) in unpaid Penalties have been accrued by any person or Registered Owner, Commission may file proof of that fact with the Superior Court with the same effect as a civil judgment. Execution may be levied and other measures may be taken for the collection of the judgment as are authorized for the collection of any unpaid civil judgment entered against a defendant in an action on a debt. The court may assess costs against a judgment debtor to be paid upon satisfaction of the judgment. The Processing Agency shall mail a notice by first-class mail to the person or Registered Owner indicating that a judgment shall be 100 entered for the unpaid Penalties, fees and costs and that after 30 days from the date of the mailing of the notice, the judgment shall have the same effect as an entry of judgment against a judgment debtor. The person or Registered Owner shall also be notified at that time that execution may be levied against his or her assets, liens may be placed against his or her property, his or her wages may be garnished, and other steps may be taken to satisfy the judgment amount. The notice shall include all information required by Code section 40267. The filing fee and any costs of the collection shall be added to the judgment amount. c) If the Processing Agency has determined that registration of the Vehicle has not been renewed for 60 days beyond the renewal date, and the Penalty has not been collected by the Department pursuant to section 4770 of the Code, file proof of unpaid Penalties with the court with the same effect as a civil judgment as provided above, except that if the amount of the unpaid Penalty is not more than four hundred dollars ($400), the filling fee shall be collectible by the court from the debtor. d) Contract with a collection agency to collect the Penalty amounts. e) Submit a request to the California State Controller for an offset of unpaid Penalty amounts owing by a Motorist against any amount owing the person or entity by a claim for a refund from the Franchise Tax Board under Personal Income Tax Law or the Bank and Corporation Law or from winnings in the California State Lottery, as authorized by California Government Code section 12419.10. Commission shall provide a notice of intent to request an offset by first-class mail to the Motorist 30 days prior to the request date, or within such time as required by law. f) Pursue such other remedies and enforcement procedures that are authorized under laws of the State of California. Section 14. Termination of Proceedings The Commission and/or the Processing Agency shall terminate proceedings on the Notice of Delinquent Toll Evasion Violation: a) Upon receipt of collected Penalties and administrative fees remitted by the Department under Section 4772 for that Notice of Delinquent Toll Evasion Violation. b) If the Notice of Delinquent Toll Evasion Violation was returned to the Processing Agency pursuant to section 4774 and five years have elapsed since the date of the Violation. c) The Processing Agency received information, which it verified, that the Penalty has been paid to the Department pursuant to Section 4772. d) If the Registered Owner of the Vehicle provides proof to the Processing Agency that he or she was not the registered owner on the date of the toll evasion violation. Section 15. Confidentiality Any information obtained through the use of automated devices during the enforcement of Violations hereunder shall not be used for any purpose other than to identify and obtain the mailing address 101 information of the Toll evasion violator in order to facilitate the serving of Notices of Toll Evasion Violations and Notices of Delinquent Toll Evasion Violations. Section 16. Other Notices Nothing herein shall prohibit the Commission or the Processing Agency from establishing informal methods of notifying Motorists of Violations and from collecting Tolls and Penalties for Violations through such means. Section 17. Implementation The Executive Director of the Commission is hereby authorized and directed to develop procedures, forms, documents and directives which may be necessary to implement the terms of this Ordinance and may delegate his/her duties and obligation under this Ordinance to the Toll Program Director. Section 18. Severability If any term, covenant or condition of this Ordinance shall be held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid or unenforceable, then the remainder of this Ordinance shall not be affected and each remaining provision shall be valid and enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by law unless any of the stated purposes of this Ordinance would be defeated. APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 8th day of June, 2016. ATTEST: Jennifer Harmon, Clerk of the Board Riverside County Transportation Commission Scott Matas, Chair Riverside County Transportation Commission 102 Schedule "A" Schedule of Penalties Stage Penalty Initial Penalty Assessed with Notice of Toll Evasion Violation (NTEV) $25.00 Added Penalty Assessed with Notice of Delinquent Toll Evasion Violation (NDTEV) $30.00 Total Penalty Assessed with NDTEV (Initial NTEV Penalty + NDTEV Added Penalty) $55.00 Added Penalty Assessed upon Assignment to Collection Agency $25.00 Total Penalty Assessed upon Assignment to Collection Agency (Total NDTEV Penalty + Added Penalty on Assignment to Collections) $80.00 Collection Demand Notices*: First violation in one year $20.00 Second violation in one year $70.00 Third and additional violations in one year $120.00/violation * Collection demand notice penalties are in addition to the total Penalty assessed upon assignment to the collection agency. 103 AGENDA ITEM 8G RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 8, 2016 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Lisa DaSilva, Toll Project Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Section 214 Funding Agreement with the Army Corps of Engineers for Interstate 15 Express Lanes Project WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 16-31-096-00 between Riverside County Transportation Commission and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Los Angeles District, for Section 214 funding agreement in the amount of $15,000, plus a contingency amount of $45,000, for a total amount not to exceed $60,000; 2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve the use of the contingency amount as may be required for the project. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Interstate 15 Express Lanes Project proposes to design and construct one to two express lanes mostly in the undeveloped median from Cajalco Road in the city of Corona to the State Route 60 interchange in the cities of Eastvale and Jurupa Valley. There are 11 bridges within the Project limits that need to be widened to accommodate the express lanes. DISCUSSION: Within the project, the Santa Ana River Bridge, which is a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) facility, needs to be widened. Since it is a USACE facility, all modifications to the bridge that affect the Santa Ana River must be reviewed and approved by USACE and a Section 408 permit must be issued prior to the start of construction on the bridge. The permit review process is very lengthy and can be expedited by a memorandum of agreement between Commission and USACE Los Angeles District, Section 214 funding agreement. Expediting USACE's permit review process via the Section 214 funding agreement helps mitigate the schedule risk to obtain the Section 408 permit from USACE. Agenda Item 8G 104 Agreement No. 16-31-096-00 with the USACE is the vehicle by which the Commission will pay for expedited permit evaluation -related services for a Section 408 permit. The $15,000 base amount included in this funding agreement is the estimated minimal USACE cost for expedited permit evaluation -related services. Depending on the complexity of the Section 408 permit submittal, the permit evaluation -related services may increase up to $60,000, resulting in the need for a $45,000 contingency for this agreement. Staff recommends the Commission approve Agreement No 16-31-096-00 with the USACE Los Angeles District for a Section 214 funding agreement in an amount not to exceed of $60,000. Further, staff recommends to authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission and authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve the use of the contingency amount as may be required for the project. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Yes Year: FY 2015/16 FY 2016/17 Amount: $5,000 $55,000 Source of Funds: 2009 Measure A Western County Highway funds/Proceeds from Commercial Paper, TIFIA Loan, and Toll Revenue Bonds Budget Adjustment: No No GLA No.: 003027 81020 262 31 81002 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \l/f.€444;AJA Date: 05/12/2016 Attachment: Agreement No. 16-31-096-00 with U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Los Angeles District Agenda Item 8G 105 MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AND U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS LOS ANGELES DISTRICT THIS MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT ("MOU') is entered into as of this first day of [month] [day], 2016, between the Riverside County Transportation Commission (hereinafter "Commission") and the Los Angeles District of the United States Army Corps of Engineers (hereinafter "Corps"), collectively referred to as "the Parties." RECITALS WHEREAS, the Corps has jurisdiction over requests to alter or modify completed federal flood risk management facilities; and WHEREAS, Section 214 of the Federal Water Resources Development Act of 2000, Public Law 106-541 ("WRDA 2000"), as amended by Public Law 111-120, provides as follows: (a) IN GENERAL. - The Secretary [of the Army], after public notice, may accept and expend funds contributed by non -Federal public entities to expedite the evaluation of permits under the jurisdiction of the Department of the Army. (b) EFFECT ON PERMITTING. - In carrying out this section, the Secretary shall ensure that the use of funds accepted under subsection (a) will not impact impartial decision - making with respect to permits, either substantively or procedurally. WHEREAS, the authority provided under section 214 of the WRDA 2000 is presently in effect until December 31, 2016; and WHEREAS, the Secretary of the Army has delegated the responsibility of carrying out Section 214 of the WRDA 2000 to the Chief of Engineers and his delegated representatives; and WHEREAS, the Chief of Engineers, by memorandum dated June 18, 2010, authorized the District and Division Engineers of the Corps to accept and expend funds contributed by non - Federal public entities subject to certain limitations; and WHEREAS, the Corps has indicated it is not able, without additional resources, to expedite the evaluation of Commission; and WHEREAS, the Commission believes it is in the best interests of the taxpayers of the County of Riverside to provide funds to the Corps pursuant to this MOA to streamline and expedite Corps environmental review under section 14 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. § 408) (hereinafter "Section 408") for Commission -designated priority projects as more fully described in Article ILD. of this MOA; and Memorandum of Agreement 1 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Riverside County Transportation Commission 106 WHEREAS, this MOA is intended to: (1) enable the Parties to fully consider, address, and protect environmental resources, including but not limited to impacts to existing and completed Corps' flood risk management systems or facilities, early in the development of proposed actions; (2) avoid conflicts late in project development through close coordination during early planning and development stages; (3) provide sufficient information to the Corps for timely analysis of project effects and to assist the Commission in developing appropriate mitigation measures; (4) maximize the effective use of limited Corps resources by focusing attention on projects that would have most effect on completed federal flood risk management facilities; (5) provide a mechanism for expediting project coordination when necessary; and (6) provide procedures for resolving disputes in this resource partnering effort. NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties agree as follows: AGREEMENT Article I. - PURPOSE AND AUTHORITIES A. This MOA is entered into by the Parties for the purpose of establishing a mutual framework governing the respective responsibilities of the Parties for the acceptance and expenditure of funds contributed by the Commission to provide expedited permit evaluation - related services for the Commission -designated priority projects under the jurisdiction of the Corps. This MOA is not intended as the exclusive means of obtaining review of projects proposed by the Commission. This MOA is a vehicle by which the Commission will obtain expedited permit evaluation -related services, outside of the ordinary Corps review process. B. Commission enters into this MOA pursuant to its authority under section 130221 of the California Public Utilities Code. The Corps enters into this MOA pursuant to its authority under section 214 of the WRDA 2000, as amended. C. This MOA is specific to Section 408 permit application review only. A separate agreement will be required between the Commission and the Corps to expedite environmental technical assistance, coordination services, review, and concurrence of documentation prepared to comply with Section 404 of the Clean Water Act of 1972 (as amended). Article II. - SCOPE OF WORK A. Commission will provide funds to the Corps to expedite permit evaluation related services for Commission -designated priority projects under the jurisdiction of the Corps. B. The Corps' operations and maintenance expenses are funded as a Congressionally appropriated line item in the annual Federal budget. Funds received from the Commission will be added to the Corps' Operations budget in accordance with the provisions of section 214 of WRDA 2000. The Corps will provide staffing resources dedicated to expediting permit evaluation related services, as described in Article II.D., below, for Commission -designated priority projects and/or other programmatic efforts to support efficient decision -making related to Commission's Section 408 permitting needs. Memorandum of Agreement 2 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Riverside County Transportation Commission 107 C. The Corps will establish a separate internal financial account to track receipt and expenditure of the funds associated with its review of permit applications submitted by the Commission. Corps' personnel will charge their time and expenses against the account when they perform work to either expedite Section 408 permit evaluation related requests designated by the Commission as a priority or undertake other programmatic efforts to support efficient decision -making related to the Commission's permitting needs. Corps personnel will focus on the work as prioritized by Commission, and if no or few projects are designated by Commission as a priority, Corps personnel will then work on other programmatic efforts for Commission. D. Funds contributed by the Commission hereunder will be expended by the Corps to defray the costs of its staff (including salary, associated benefits, overhead and travel expenses) and other costs in order to expedite the evaluation of priority permit applications designated by Commission. The Corps may expend Commission funds to perform select duties, including but not limited to technical analyses and writing, Agency Technical Review, real estate evaluation, risk analysis, copying or other clerical/support tasks, acquisition of data, site visits, training, travel, coordination activities, additional personnel (including support/clerical staff), contracting for technical services (e.g., structural risk evaluation, geotechnical analysis, hydraulic and hydrological engineering review), environmental documentation preparation and review; any other permit evaluation related responsibilities that may be mutually agreed upon; and meeting coordination for the purpose of augmenting resources available to the Corps for expediting priority projects and activities designated by Commission. E. The Corps will not expend Commission's funds for costs associated with the review of the Corps' work undertaken by supervisors or other persons or elements of the Corps in the decision -making chain of command. However, if a supervisor is performing staff work and not supervisory oversight, funds may be used. F. If the funds provided by Commission are expended and not replenished, any remaining priority permit applications will be handled like those of any permit applicant. Article III. - INTERAGENCY COMMUNICATIONS To provide for consistent and effective communication between the Parties, each party will appoint a Principal Representative to serve as its central point of contact on matters relating to this MOA. Additional representatives may also be appointed to serve as points of contact on specific actions or issues. Each party will issue a letter to the other designating the Principal Representative for each party within fifteen (15) days of MOA execution. The Principal Representative for each party may be changed upon written notification to the other party. Article IV. - RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE PARTIES A. Commission will provide adequate resources, to fund existing or additional Corps personnel for the purpose of timely review of designated priority projects and other identified activities. To facilitate the Corps' reviews and activities, Commission will: 1. Provide adequate information regarding projects, scheduling requirements, and other specific activities to initiate permit evaluation. Information required for the Corps to Memorandum of Agreement 3 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Riverside County Transportation Commission 108 deem a permit application complete thereby allowing initiation of the permit review process can be found in applicable Section 408 guidance, including but not limited to the Memorandum for Subordinate Commands, Policy and Procedural Guidance for the Processing Requests to Alter US Army Corps of Engineers Civil Works Projects Pursuant to 33 USC 408, dated September 30, 2015, and the Memorandum for Major Subordinate Commands, Clarification Guidance on the Policy and Procedural Guidance for the Approval of Modification and Alteration of Corps of Engineer Projects, dated November 17, 2008, copies of which have been provided to Commission. Upon request, Commission shall provide supplemental information necessary to complete the permit application. Additional information required to complete the permit evaluation process may exceed what is needed to initiate the process. On a case -by -case basis, if requested by the Corps, Commission shall provide such additional information so as to ensure the Corps can effectively accomplish the required review. 2. In consultation with the Corps, schedule the Corps' involvement in the priority projects identified by Commission. The project(s) designated as a priority by Commission are listed in Appendix A to this MOA. The list may be changed by Commission's Principal Representative without requiring an amendment to this MOA. Such changes shall be submitted to the Corps' Principal Representative in writing and will be effective upon receipt thereof. 3. To the best of its ability, ensure the participation of all essential personnel during the permit evaluation process. 4. Work closely with the Corps to adjust priorities and schedules in order to optimize available Corps staff resources. If overlaps or conflicts occur among priority projects, then Commission will work with the Corps to identify procedures to handle such overlaps or resolve the conflicts. B. The Corps shall assign qualified personnel to evaluate the Commission's priority permit applications and prioritized associated tasks within projected funding levels provided under this MOA. The Corps shall use the funds provided to defray the costs of salaries and associated benefits and to reimburse travel expenses in order to: 1. Expedite review of Commission's priority projects in accordance with the purpose, terms, and conditions of this MOA or any amendments thereto. The Corps shall not redirect resources from, or otherwise postpone, other non -priority projects submitted by Commission through the standard Corps review process. 2. Following any pre -application meetings and/or discussions to clarify the scope of anticipated permit application review processes, provide Commission with an estimated schedule to complete the permit evaluation process for each application submitted. Commission shall be able to comment on these schedules and adjust their priorities per Appendix A, or provide additional resources per Article V. E, below. 3. Consult on a monthly basis with Commission regarding an adjustment of priorities or establishment of relative priorities if the current and/or projected workload of Memorandum of Agreement 4 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Riverside County Transportation Commission 109 priority projects and activities exceeds the Corps' ability to provide the services specified herein or negotiate additional funding in accordance with Article V.E, below. 4. Provide Commission a brief quarterly summary report of progress made under this MOA, or in accordance with the alternative schedule as agreed by the Parties to this MOA. Progress will be itemized for each permit application review completed during the quarter for each permit application pending at the end of the quarter. This report will describe achievements, including any improvements the Corps has documented in coordinating and improving the efficiency of the environmental reviews, and will summarize expenditures to date. The report also will identify any recommendations for improving consultation and coordination among the Parties to this MOA. The fourth quarter report shall include a summary of the annual progress made under this MOA. All reports shall not exceed five (5) pages. 5. Meet with Commission as needed to discuss progress under this MOA. 6. Prior to expiration of the MOA, hold a final meeting with the Commission's Principal Representative to review a summary of permit streamlining and other activities under this MOA, as well as provide recommendations for future coordination between the Parties. Article V. - FUNDING A. and B. are RESERVED and subject to negotiation. C. Within 30 days of execution of this MOU, Commission shall pay the anticipated costs expected to be incurred through December 31,2019, at the level specified in the Corps' Cost Proposal. Maximum payable under this MOA shall not exceed $15,000. Expediting of permit evaluation related activities as specified in this MOA will be undertaken by the Corps only after funds have been transferred to the Corps. Prior to the start of each funding period, Commission shall send a check, or provide by electronic fund transfer, the amount specified in paragraph C of this Article, payable to: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District Finance and Accounting Officer P.O. Box 532711 Los Angeles, CA 90053-2325 Attn: Stephen Vaughn E. The Corps will provide the Commission a written notice when 80% of the funding has been expended. If the Corps' actual costs for providing the agreed upon level of service will exceed the amount of funds available, Commission will either initiate an amendment to this MOA to increase the funding amount, or agree to a reduced level of service. If Commission opts to increase the funding level, the Corps will expeditiously process the amendment and use the Corps' best efforts to ensure that there is no interruption to the Corps work on Commission's priority projects. Memorandum of Agreement 5 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Riverside County Transportation Commission 110 F. Additional payments by Commission to the Corps, in an amount and schedule mutually agreed to by the Parties, may be made when priority projects are added to Appendix A. G. The Corps will carry over any unexpended funds from year to year, or will refund such unobligated funds if this MOA is terminated or expires. H. Commission may elect to extend the services of the Corps beyond December 31, 2019, subject to 1) additional funding being provided by Commission and 2) written amendment to this MOA. Article VI. - APPLICABLE LAWS The applicable statutes, regulations, policies, directives, and procedures of the United States will govern this MOA and all documents and actions pursuant to it. Unless otherwise required by law, all expediting of permit applications undertaken by the Corps will be governed by Corps regulations, policies and procedures. Article VII.- DISPUTE RESOLUTION In the event of a dispute, the Parties agree to use their best efforts to resolve the dispute in an informal fashion through consultation and communication, or other forms of non -binding alternative dispute resolution mutually acceptable to the Parties. The Parties agree that, in the event such measures fail to resolve the dispute, they shall refer the dispute for resolution to an appropriate forum in accordance with Federal law. Article VIII. - PUBLIC INFORMATION Justification and explanation of Commission's programs or projects before other agencies, departments and offices will not be the responsibility of the Corps. The Corps may provide, upon request from Commission, any assistance necessary to support justification or explanations of activities conducted under this MOA. In general, the Corps is responsible only for public information regarding Corps regulatory activities. Commission will give the Corps, as appropriate, advance notice before making formal, official statements regarding activities funded under this MOA. Article IX — AMENDMENT, MODIFICATION, AND TERMINATION A. This MOA may be modified or amended only by written, mutual agreement of the Parties. B. Either party reserves the right to terminate its participation in this MOA without cause upon thirty (30) days' written notice to the other parties. In the event of termination, Commission will continue to be responsible for all costs incurred by the Corps in performing expedited environmental permit review services up to the time of notice and for the costs of closing out or transferring any ongoing contracts in support of the provision of services by the Corps under this MOA. Memorandum of Agreement 6 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Riverside County Transportation Commission 111 C. Within ninety (90) calendar days of termination of the MOA, or the expiration of the MOA, the Corps shall provide Commission with a final statement of expenditures. Within sixty (60) calendar days after submittal of the Corps' final statement of expenditures, the Corps shall directly remit to Commission the unexpended balance of the advance payment, if any. Funds may be provided to Commission either by check or electronic funds transfer. Article X. - MISCELLANEOUS A. This MOA will not affect any pre-existing or independent relationships or obligations between Parties. B. The Corps' participation in this MOA does not imply endorsement of Commission projects nor does it diminish, modify, or otherwise affect Corps statutory or regulatory authorities. C. Under the provisions of section 214 of the WRDA 2000 as extended, no funds may be accepted or expended by the Corps pursuant to this MOA after December 31, 2019. D. If any provision of this MOA is determined to be invalid or unenforceable, the remaining provisions will remain in force and unaffected to the fullest extent permitted by law and regulation. E. This MOA, including any documents incorporated by reference or attachments thereto, constitute the entire agreement between the Parties. All prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations and statements, oral or written, are merged herein and shall be of no further force or effect. Article XI. - EFFECTIVE DATE AND DURATION This MOA will be effective on the date of signature by the last Party. This MOA shall remain in force until whichever of these events occurs first: 1) December 31, 2019; or 2) the MOA is terminated pursuant to Article IX.B. [REMAINDER LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK] Memorandum of Agreement 7 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Riverside County Transportation Commission 112 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this MOA is executed by Commission acting by and through its authorized officer and by the Los Angeles District of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers through its authorized officer. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION By: Date: Anne Mayer Executive Director, RCTC APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: James Donich General Counsel U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, LOS ANGELES DISTRICT By: Date: Name Chief, Asset Management Division Memorandum of Agreement 8 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Riverside County Transportation Commission 113 Appendix A: Commission's Priority Projects (Dated: April 15, 2016) The list of Commission's Priority Projects under this MOA includes the following proposed projects: 1. Interstate 15 Express Lanes Project The project proposes to construct tolled express lanes on a portion of Interstate 15 (I-15) within Riverside County to improve existing and future traffic operations and mainline travel times, expand travel choice, increase travel time reliability, and expand the tolled express lane network. The project would construct one to two tolled express lanes between post miles (PM) 36.8 and 51.4 in Riverside County, a distance of 14.6 miles. Based on preliminary engineering, this area constitutes the extent of planned lane improvements and is identified as the project limits. The lane improvements are located within Riverside County, California and run through the cities of Corona, Norco, Eastvale, and Jurupa Valley and portions of unincorporated Riverside County. The 408 facility that would be affected by the project is the Santa Ana River. The project requires the closing of the gap between the 2 bridges to allow for a median area for express lanes to be implemented. Memorandum of Agreement 9 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Riverside County Transportation Commission 114 AGENDA ITEM 8H RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 8, 2016 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Lisa DaSilva, Toll Project Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Agreement with Nossaman LLP for On -Call Strategic Partnership Advisor Services WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 06-66-028-13, Amendment No. 10 to Agreement No. 06-66-028-00, with Nossaman LLP (Nossaman) for the on -call strategic partnership advisor services by extending the contract term to December 31, 2020, and augmenting the agreement in the amount of $5.7 million, plus a contingency amount of $300,000, for an additional amount of $6 million, and a total amount not to exceed $14,352,935; 2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and 3) Authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve the use of the contingency amount as may be required for the project. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In February 2006, following a competitive procurement process, the Commission approved an agreement with Nossaman for the purpose of providing strategic partnership advisor services for innovative project financing and evaluation of potential toll road corridors in Riverside County, specifically the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project (SR-91 CIP) and Interstate 15 Express Lanes project. Nossaman has been integral in negotiating, preparing, and executing various agreements related to the SR-91 CIP with the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA), Cofiroute USA LLC, California Transportation Commission, and Caltrans. With the support of Nossaman, the SR-91 CIP developed letters of interest, prepared the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) application, and completed the TIFIA loan agreement negotiations including its terms and conditions. Nossaman was also essential in assisting the project and construction management team in the development and execution of the various design -build Agenda Item 8H 115 procurement documents such as the request for qualifications prequalification, risk allocation workshops, design -build contract, contract industry review process, and proposal evaluations, selection, and negotiations. Nossaman has also been engaged in the 1-15 Express Lanes Project since 2006, in the areas of toll feasibility, method of project delivery, and tolling authority; however, approximately 67 percent of the $8,352,935 authorized agreement amount, as summarized below, is related to the SR-91 CIP. Commission Authorized Amount Original Authorization $ 150,000 $ Amendments No. 11 No. 2 No. 3 No. 42 No. 53 No. 6 No. 7 No. 84 No. 95 75,000 (50, 000) 150,000 250,000 800,000 2,083,035 1,878,900 2,400,000 Commission Authorized Contingency Commission Authorized Total - $ 150,000 376,000 240,000 75,000 (50, 000) 150,000 250,000 800,000 2,083,035 2,254,900 2,640,000 Nossaman Contract $ 150,000 75,000 (50, 000) 150,000 250,000 800,000 2,083,035 1,878,900 2,776,000 Subtotal 7,736,935 No. 10 (proposed) 6 5,700,000 Totals $ 13,436,935 $ 916,000 616,000 300,000 8,352,935 6, 000, 000 $ 14,352,935 8,112, 935 5, 700,000 $ 13,812,935 1 Includes time extension to February9, 2008 z Includes time extension to February9, 2012 3 Provides for services to SANBAG at no cost to the Commission 4Includes time extension to February9, 2014 5Includes time extension to March 9, 2018 6Includes time extension to December31, 2020 DISCUSSION: In summer 2015, the 1-15 Express Lanes project team began developing its procurement strategies, which resulted in two independent and competitively bid procurements. The first procurement includes the toll services provider who will provide design, implementation, and a minimum of five years of operations/maintenance of the tolling system. The second procurement, design -build contract, will include the design and construction of the express lanes. Agenda Item 8H 116 This two -procurement approach differed from the SR-91 CIP in two areas. First, for the SR-91 CIP staff negotiated sole -source contracts for design, implementation, and operations/maintenance with the existing toll operator to achieve economies of scale and consistency with OCTA and therefore did not conduct a competitive procurement. Secondly, the 1-15 Express Lanes project lead procurement responsibility is being performed by Nossaman rather than the project and construction management team. Amendment No. 10 to Agreement No. 06-66-028-00 includes the scope, cost, and assumed duration to complete these procurement and contract administration services by Nossaman for the 1-15 Express Lanes project. Staff developed and negotiated with Nossaman the following scope of services, as further described in Exhibit A to the attachment, related to the procurement phase of the 1-15 Express Lanes project at a cost of $4.5 million: • Assist with agreements and negotiations with Ca!trans, Federal Highway Administration, and other agency stakeholders; • Lead in drafting procurement documents; • Lead in responding to proposer questions; • Lead the selection, negotiations, and award process; and • Lead with analysis, response and defense to any bid, proposal, or award protests. For the contract administration phase of the 1-15 Express Lanes project, staff developed and negotiated with Nossaman the following scope of services, as further described in Exhibit A to the attachment, at a cost of $1.2 million: • Develop and administer contract administration training workshops for the Commission and technical advisory staff; • Assist with contract interpretation, analysis, and administration during the design and construction phase; and • Assist with change order and claims management. Amendment No. 10 with Nossaman in the amount of $5.7 million plus a contingency amount of $300,000, for an additional amount of $6 million for strategic partnership advisor services related to the 1-15 Express Lanes project is attached. The agreement also extends the term to December 31, 2020, or the anticipated completion of development and construction of the 1-15 Express Lanes project. This approach is consistent with the SR-91 CIP and provides continuity of legal/procurement counsel through the contract administration phase. The schedule for the next phases of the 1-15 Express Lanes project is as follows: Award Toll Services Provider Contract Early 2017 Award Design -Build Contract Spring 2017 Financial Close Summer 2017 Start of Construction Spring 2018 1-15 Express Lanes open to traffic 2020 Agenda Item 8H 117 Staff recommends the Commission approve Agreement No. 06-66-028-13, Amendment No. 10 to Agreement No. 06-66-028-00, with Nossaman for the on -call strategic partnership advisor services by extending the contract term to December 31, 2020, and augmenting the agreement in the amount of $5.7 million, plus a contingency of $300,000, for an additional amount of $6 million, and a total authorized contract value of $14,352,935. Further, staff recommends the Commission authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission and authorize the Executive Director or designee to approve the use of the contingency amount as may be required for the project Financial Information Yes FY 2015/16 $500,000 In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2016/17 Amount: $3,500,000 N/A FY 2017/18+ $2,000,000 2009 Measure A Western County Highway No Source of Funds: funds/Proceeds from Commercial Paper, Budget Adjustment: Yes TIFIA Loan, and Toll Revenue Bonds N/A GLA No.: 003027 65102 262 31 65102 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \IltauteA Date: 05/13/2016 Attachment: Agreement No. 06-66-028-13 with Nossaman LLP Agenda Item 8H 118 Agreement No. 06-66-028-13 AMENDMENT NO. 10 TO AGREEMENT FOR STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP ADVISOR SERVICES WITH NOSSAMAN LLP 1 PARTIES AND DATE This Amendment No. 10 to the Agreement for Strategic Partnership Advisor Services is made and entered into as of this day of , 2016, by and between the RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ("Commission") and NOSSAMAN LLP, a ("Consultant"). 2. RECITALS 2.1 The Commission and the Consultant have entered into an agreement dated April 10, 2006 for the purpose of providing Strategic Partnership Advisor Services (as amended, the "Master Agreement"). The not to exceed amount of the Master Agreement is set at One Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($150,000). 2.2 The Commission and the Consultant have entered into an Amendment No. 1 to the Master Agreement, dated July 27, 2006, for the purpose of increasing the not to exceed amount of the Master Agreement by Seventy - Five Thousand Dollars ($75,000). 2.3 The Commission and the Consultant have entered into an Amendment No. 2 to the Master Agreement, dated October 26, 2006, for the purpose of reducing the not to exceed amount of the Master Agreement by Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000). 2.4 The Commission and the Consultant have entered into an Amendment No. 3 to the Master Agreement, dated April 9, 2007, for the purpose of increasing the not to exceed amount of the Master Agreement by One Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($150,000). 2.5 The Commission and the Consultant have entered into an Amendment No. 4 to the Master Agreement, dated February 8, 2008, for the purpose 1 17336.00000\ 1514236.2 119 of incorporating additional services into the Scope of Services of the Master Agreement, modifying the Consultant's hourly billing rates, extending the term and increasing the not to exceed amount of the Master Agreement by Two Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($250,000). 2.6 The Commission and the Consultant have entered into an Amendment No. 5 to the Master Agreement, dated July 16, 2008, for the purpose of making consulting services available to the San Bernardino Associated Governments through the Master Agreement. 2.7 The Commission and the Consultant have entered into an Amendment No. 6 to the Master Agreement, dated January 27, 2010 and Amended and Restated Amendment No. 6 to the Master Agreement, dated March 10, 2010, for the purpose of increasing the total not to exceed amount of the Master Agreement by Eight Hundred Thousand Dollars ($800,000) and to modify the Consultant's hourly billing rates. 2.8 The Commission and the Consultant have entered into an Amendment No. 7 to the Master Agreement, dated December 21, 2010, for the purpose of increasing the total not to exceed amount of the Master Agreement by Two Million Eighty -Three Thousand Thirty -Five Dollars ($2,083,035). 2.9 The Commission and the Consultant have entered into an Amendment No. 8 to the Master Agreement, dated February 9, 2012, for the purpose of increasing the total not to exceed amount of the Master Agreement by One Million Eight Hundred Seventy -Eight Thousand Nine Hundred Dollars ($1,878,900), and extending the term (the "Third Extended Term") to end February 9, 2014, unless earlier terminated as provided in the Master Agreement. 2.10 By letter dated May 22, 2013 ("Contingency Release Letter"), the Commission authorized the release the Board allocated contingency funds in the sum of Three Hundred Seventy Six Thousand Dollars ($376,000) to cover Extra Work, as that term is defined in the Master Agreement. 2.11 The Commission and the Consultant have entered into an Amendment No. 9 to the Master Agreement, dated August 26, 2013, to identify the Contingency Release letter within the formal amendments to the Master Agreement, increasing the total not to exceed amount of the Master Agreement by Eight Million One Hundred Twelve Thousand Hundred Nine 17336.00000\1514236.2 2 120 Thirty -Five Dollars ($8,112,935), and extending the term (the "Fourth Extended Term") to end March 9, 2018, unless earlier terminated as provided in the Master Agreement. 2.12 The parties now desire to amend the Master Agreement in order to extend the term of the Master Agreement, and provide additional compensation for the continued provision of Strategic Partnership Advisor Services. 3. TERMS 3.1 The term of the Master Agreement shall be extended for an additional term (the "Fifth Extended Term") beginning March 9, 2018 and ending on December 31, 2020, unless earlier terminated as provided in the Master Agreement. 3.2 The maximum compensation for Services performed pursuant to this Amendment shall be Five Million Seven Hundred Thousand Dollars ($5,700,000), as further set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. 3.3 The total not -to -exceed amount of the Master Agreement, as amended by this Amendment No. 10, shall be increased from Eight Million One Hundred Twelve Thousand Nine Hundred Thirty -Five Dollars ($8,112,935) to Thirteen Million Eight Hundred Twelve Thousand Nine Hundred Thirty - Five Dollars ($13,812,935). 3.4 The recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated into this Amendment No. 10 by reference as though fully set forth herein. 3.5 Except as amended by this Amendment, all provisions of the Master Agreement, as amended by Amendment No. 1 through No. 9, including without limitation the indemnity and insurance provisions, shall remain in full force and effect and shall govern the actions of the parties under this Amendment. 17336.00000\1514236.2 [Signatures on following page] 3 121 SIGNATURE PAGE TO AGREEMENT NO. 06-66-028-13 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment on the date first herein above written. RIVERSIDE COUNTY NOSSAMAN LLP TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION By: By: Scott Matas, Chair Signature Name Title APPROVED AS TO FORM: Attest: By: By: Best Best & Krieger LLP Counsel to the Riverside County Transportation Commission Its: Secretary * A corporation requires the signatures of two corporate officers. One signature shall be that of the chairman of board, the president or any vice president and the second signature (on the attest line) shall be that of the secretary, any assistant secretary, the chief financial officer or any assistant treasurer of such corporation. If the above persons are not the intended signators, evidence of signature authority shall be provided to the Commission. 17336.00000\1514236.2 4 122 EXHIBIT "A" COMPENSATION [attached behind this page] Exhibit C 17336.00000\1514236.2 SCOPE OF SERVICES In support for the design -build procurement of the 1-15 HOT Lanes Design -Build Project ("Project"), NOSSAMAN LLP ("Nossaman") will provide the following services: PROCUREMENT PHASE • Participate in weekly team calls • Participation in procurement strategies discussion (e.g., including toll services as part of the DB procurement, on its own, or part of a separate toll services procurement. When does it make sense to bring them on, etc.) • Assistance with agreements and negotiations with Caltrans, FHWA and other agency stakeholders, including the design -build coop agreement, toll facilities agreement • Lead in drafting of RFQs • Lead with proposer Q&A re: RFQs and RFQ document revisions (addenda) • Lead with drafting of RFQ Evaluation Manuals • Assist with training of the Commission personnel and consultant personnel on RFQ evaluation process and procedures • Participate and lead with oversight of RFQ evaluations • Lead in drafting of RFPs (Instructions to Proposers) • Lead in drafting of Design -Build Contract documents • Lead in drafting of Toll Services Contract documents • Review and comment on drafts of the Technical Provisions drafted by the Commission and/or technical advisor • Coordinate with and among co -consultants, including technical advisor • Lead industry review process, including proposer workshops, one on one meetings, proposer Q&A and document revisions • Participate in post-RFP issuance procurement processes, including proposer workshops, one on one meetings, alternative technical concept (ATC) review and approval process, review and response to proposer Q&A and document revisions (addenda) • Lead with drafting of RFP Evaluation Manuals • Lead with training of the Commission personnel and consultant personnel on RFP evaluation processes and procedures • Participate and lead with oversight of RFP evaluations • Lead with analysis, response and defense to any bid or proposal protests • Lead negotiations with apparent best value Proposers and Design -Build Contract and Toll Services Contract finalization • Assist with Design -Build Contract and Toll Services Contract award and execution process • Assistance with preparation of materials for presentations, briefings and other materials to Commission board and committees and senior staff and other stakeholders, as needed • Assist Commission with any applications under SEP-14 or SEP-15 (as well as other similar, related or new programs authorized under FAST or any future reauthorizations) • Assist Commission with any applications under TIFIA (or any replacement program) and negotiation of any TIFIA documents • Assist Commission with any toll revenue bonds in coordination with Commission's financial advisor and other counsel (issuer's counsel, bond counsel, etc.) 124 " Assist Commission with financial close process " Coordinate with and among co -consultants, including technical advisor and financial advisors " Other Project -related tasks directed by the Commission to implement the procurement and Project CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION PHASE " Develop and administer Contract administration training workshops for the Commission and technical advisor staff " Assist with issuance of notice to proceed(s) " Participate in regularly scheduled contract administration calls " Assist with Design -Build Contract and Toll Services Contract interpretation, analysis and administration issues " Assist with change order, claims management strategy " Review, analyze and respond to design -build contractor and toll services provider change order requests " Review, analyze and research the Commission/design-builder change order requests " Assist in drafting of, review and negotiation of change orders " Assist with prosecution of any Design -Build Contract and Toll Services Contract disputes " Coordinate with and among co -consultants, including technical advisor and financial advisors " Other Project -related tasks directed by the Commission to implement the procurement and Project BUDGET ESTIMATE " Total budget for Procurement Phase for Design -Build Contract and Toll Services Contract: $4.5 million (including expenses) " Total budget for Contract Administration Phase /Construction for Design -Build Contract and Toll Services Contract: $1.2 million (including expenses) PRELIMINARY ASSUMPTIONS " RFQ shall be based on prior Nossaman precedent for shortlisting RFQs " Design -Build Contract and RFP will use SR-91 design -build documents as precedent and only moderate to medium changes will be required for Project " Technical provisions will use SR-91 technical provisions as precedent and only moderate to medium changes will be required for Project " Procurement period of 15-18 months from issuance of Toll Services Procurement RFQ to award/notice to proceed " Shortlist following RFQs of no more than 4 proposers " TIFIA process and documentation shall be generally consistent with SR-91 " Suitable technical advisor and the Commission personnel properly performing their respective scopes of work " Although part of scope, budget estimate excludes legal fees relating to the following items (budget amendment to contract would be required): o SOQ or Proposal protests or other procurement challenges 125 o Contract Administration o A Best and Final Offer (BAFO) • BB&K will provide services in its role as Commission's general counsel in the same manner as with the SR-91 project • Insurance issues will be addressed by the Commission or a third party insurance advisor contracted to the Commission or the technical advisor • Budget estimate is an estimate and not a guaranty or a cap on fees and expenses. • Rates shall increase annually in the manner consistent with past practice • Estimates of budget allocations across phases are estimates and shall not be caps on fees and expenses for the respective phases • Fees and expenses may vary across phases from estimated numbers, but remain subject to the overall budget authorization 126 AGENDA ITEM 81 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 8, 2016 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Jennifer Crosson, Toll Operations Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Resolution No. 16-011 Regarding the Interstate 15 Express Lanes Toll Policy Goals and Toll Policies WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to adopt Resolution No. 16-011, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Regarding Interstate 15 Express Lanes Toll Policy Goals and Toll Policies". BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The establishment of toll policy goals and toll policies are necessary to support planning the 1-15 Express Lanes design, project financing activities, and procurement of a toll services provider and design -build contractor, and guide future operations. The toll policy goals provide a foundation for the development of the detailed toll policies and will help to guide future decisions related to the operation of the 1-15 Express Lanes. Staff, with consultant support, created toll policy goals and toll policies based on requirements of the Commission's 1-15 tolling authority, legislative requirements, national express lane experience, and specific factors related to the 1-15 Express Lanes project. Staff then presented the proposed toll policy goals and toll policies through a series of three Interstate 15 Corridor Improvement Project Ad Hoc Committee meetings to receive input and questions from Committee members. The attached report provides final recommendations by staff of six toll policy goals and 24 toll policies based on the input of the ad hoc committee. The report provides a table that summarizes each toll policy and the toll policy goal it supports. Following the summary table is a detailed description of each policy, background information, and an assessment that supports the recommended policy. The recommended toll policy goals and toll policies are summarized below. Agenda Item 81 127 Toll Policy Goals 1. Provide Express Lane customers with a safe, reliable, and congestion free trip. 2. Deliver exceptional, consistent, and responsive customer service. 3. Enact toll policies that balance commute choice and lane availability for all customers. 4. Provide the infrastructure and an incentive for ridesharing and increased transit use as an alternative to driving alone. 5. Generate sufficient revenue to meet express lane financial obligations to pay current and long-term costs. 6. Use surplus revenues for transportation improvements exclusively within the 1-15 corridor. These toll policy goals seek to balance the Commission's commitment to improving mobility while providing exceptional customer service and meeting financial obligations. Toll Policies Twenty-four toll policies have been developed as the framework for deploying and operating the 1-15 Express Lanes. These toll policies will help achieve the toll policy goals. # Policy Topic Area Policy Recommendation Toll Policy Goal(s) Met 1 Toll Pricing Objectives Optimize person throughput in the corridor while meeting debt obligations. 1 3 4 5 2 Toll Pricing Objectives Establish toll pricing to routinely achieve free -flow speeds of 60-65 mph, always exceeding the 45 mph federal minimum requirement. 1 3 Hours of Operation Charge tolls 24 hours a day, seven days a week. 3,5 4 Carpool Occupancy Requirement Define carpools as vehicles occupied by 3 or more persons. 3,4 5 Toll Interoperability Adopt the national interoperability standard for automated toll collection systems when adopted by the toll industry. 2 6 Toll Interoperability Adopt the new state interoperability standard for automated toll collection systems when adopted by the California Toll Operators Committee. 2 Agenda Item 81 128 Policy Topic Area Policy Recommendation Toll Policy Goal(s) Met 7 Project Development Costs Fund project development costs by current and future Measure A sales tax, toll revenue, and state and federal grants. 3,5 $ Operations and Maintenance Costs Fund operations, maintenance, and toll enforcement costs by toll revenue. 2,5 9 Project Repayment Repay Measure A sales tax bonds and toll revenue bonds with future Measure A and toll revenue, respectively. 5 10 Use of Revenue Use surplus revenue to fund increase 1-15 corridor transportation investments. 2,3,6 11 Enforcement Enforce 1-15 Express Lanes toll violations through agreement with the California Highway Patrol and any future state or federal toll violation laws. 1,2 12 Operations and Maintenance Responsibilities Maintain Express Lanes and toll systems as a responsibility of RCTC. 1,2 13 Operations and Maintenance Responsibilities Perform customer service patrol and incident management as a responsibility of RCTC in cooperation with Caltrans and other jurisdictions. 1,2 14 Operations and Maintenance Responsibilities Provide customer service and the account relationships as a responsibility of RCTC. 2,5 15 Signage Provide toll signage meeting the latest California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices Standards. 1,2 16 Express Bus Integration Encourage express bus use through toll policies and Express Lane Operations. 3 4 6 17 Design — Facility Ingress and Egress Design the roadway and ingress and egress locations meeting Caltrans design standards where feasible and practical. 1,2 18 Design — Number of Lanes Construct and operate two Express Lanes in each direction where possible. 1 2 5 19 Toll Pricing Method Use Dynamic Pricing to determine the toll price. 1,3,5 20 Toll Exemptions and Discounts Provide toll discounts according to legislation and for operations and maintenance vehicles. 1,2 21 Toll Payment Method Require all vehicles to have a transponder at time of travel. 1,2,4 Agenda Item 81 129 # Policy Topic Area Policy Recommendation Toll Policy Goal(s) Met 22 Mobile Interface Implement Mobile Web for FasTrakT`" customers, but defer the Mobile Toll Payment Application. 1,2,3 23 High Occupancy Vehicle Declaration Options Identify HOV3+ carpool customers via a switchable transponder. 1,2,4 24 Express Lane Operations Facility Locate the call center, customer service center and traffic management center and administration in close proximity to the Express Lanes. 2 Implementation of Goals and Policies Adoption of the toll policy goals and toll policies will allow staff to continue planning and developing the 1-15 Express Lanes with a focus on meeting the proposed goals and ensuring adherence to the related policies. Additionally, adoption of the toll policy goals and toll policies supports the project's traffic and revenue study and project financing activities currently underway. There is no fiscal impact related to the toll policy goals and toll policies. Attachment: Resolution No. 16-011 Regarding 1-15 Toll Policy Goals and Toll Policies Agenda Item 81 130 RESOLUTION NO. 16-011 RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION REGARDING THE INTERSTATE 15 EXPRESS LANES TOLL POLICY GOALS AND TOLL POLICIES WHEREAS, the Riverside County Transportation Commission (the Commission) will soon embark on construction and system development for the 1-15 Express Lanes; WHEREAS, the Commission has received legislative and regulatory approval to build and operate a toll facility along Interstate15; WHEREAS, a significant portion of the project includes the addition of two tolled Express Lanes from Cajalco Road to State Route 60; WHEREAS, the project requires significant financing to complete the design -build construction and toll system installation; WHEREAS, toll revenue will be the source of debt service repayment for toll revenue bonds and a federal Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act loan; WHEREAS, the success of the project requires clear and measurable toll policy goals; WHEREAS, the success of the project requires defined and workable toll policies; and WHEREAS, the Commission currently retains the authority to add, delete, or otherwise modify its policies and procedures. NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Riverside County Transportation Commission as follows; Section 1. The Riverside County Transportation Commission hereby adopts the 1-15 Express Lanes Toll Policy attached as Exhibit A. The details of the policy shall be approved by the Commission during its actions on June 8tn APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 8th day of June, 2016. Scott Matas, Chair Riverside County Transportation Commission ATTEST: Jennifer Harmon Clerk of the Board 131 EXPDESS LANES 1-15 [XPRESS LARS PROJECT 133 1-15 Express Lanes Project Toll Policy Report EXPRESS IVIES Table of Contents Introduction 1 Toll Policy Goals 2 Toll Policy Summary 4 Toll Policy Descriptions 6 1— 2. Toll Pricing Objectives 6 3. Hours of Operation 7 4. Carpool Occupancy Requirement 8 5 — 6. Toll Interoperability 10 7. Project Development Costs 12 8. Operations and Maintenance Costs 14 9. Project Repayment 16 10. Use of Revenue 17 11. Enforcement 18 12 — 14. Operations and Maintenance Responsibilities 20 15. Signage 22 16. Express Bus Integration 23 17. Design — Facility Ingress and Egress 25 18. Design — Number of Lanes 27 19. Toll Pricing Method 28 20. Toll Exemptions and Discounts 30 21. Toll Payment Method 33 22. Mobile Interface 35 23. High Occupancy Vehicle Declaration Options 36 24. Express Lane Operations Facility 38 1-15 Express Lanes Project 134 135 1-15 Express Lanes Project Toll Policy Report EXPRESS LIMES Introduction This report provides a description of the toll policies that form the basis for the Concept of Operations, which serves as the framework for the ultimate design of the 1-15 Express Lanes Project. These toll policies will also be used as key assumptions for the 1-15 Express Lanes Traffic and Revenue Study prepared separately. The 1-15 Express Lanes Project will generally include two tolled express lanes in each direction on Interstate 15 (1-15) in Riverside County between Cajalco Road in Corona and the State Route 60 (SR-60) interchange, a distance of approximately 15 miles. The Project is being developed by the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) in partnership with the California Department of Transportation (Ca!trans) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). The Express Lanes are intended to improve current and projected future congestion by adding capacity that can be managed and operated in a manner consistent with the policies described in this document. RCTC developed a set of toll policy goals that provided a foundation for the development of the policies described in this document. These goals are described in the next section, followed by a table summarizing each of the toll policies and how each policy achieves the stated goals. 1-15 Express Lanes Project 1 136 137 1-15 Express Lanes Project Toll Policy Report EXPIIESS LIMES Toll Policy Goals Description: In partnership with federal, state, regional, and local agencies, RCTC develops and oversees transportation plans, policies, funding programs, and both short-term and long-range solutions that address the county's increasing mobility, accessibility, and environmental needs. The establishment of Express Lanes on 1-15 within the County has the potential to assist Riverside County in meeting many of its mobility, air quality, and funding challenges. Vital to this effort are toll policies which fulfill RCTC's goals and objectives for transportation system performance and revenue sustainability. EXPRESS LANES RCTC's toll policy goals and objectives are guidelines for developing specific policies and business rules that inform the toll collection aspects of the design and operation of the 1-15 Express Lanes. Given the corridor's adjacency to the SR-91 corridor, and the more recent effort by RCTC in setting policies and goals for Express Lanes in that corridor, the toll policy goals for 1-15 are similar to those developed by RCTC for the Riverside 91 Express Lanes to provide for regional consistency. Background: RCTC, in cooperation with the Caltrans, is proposing a project to improve traffic flow and reduce congestion on a portion of 1-15. The project proposes to construct two tolled Express Lanes generally in each direction between the I-15/Cajalco Road interchange and the I-15/SR-60 interchange. All proposed improvements are anticipated to be constructed within existing Caltrans right of way, with the majority of the improvements occurring within the existing 1-15 median. According to the 1-15 Tolled Express Lane Corridor Improvement Program Draft Forecast Traffic Volume Development Report, the primary purpose of the project is to address current and future (2040) travel demand and improve traffic operations on the 1-15 corridor, which has been identified as a corridor that needs capacity improvements to address existing and projected capacity deficiencies from the accelerated growth and development that has taken place in communities along the 1-15 corridor and is expected to continue. As a result of the on -going accelerated growth and development, the 1-15 corridor will experience increased congestion, longer commute times, increased energy consumption, air pollution, higher accident rates and the degradation of the freeway mainline, local interchanges, and the adjacent local arterials. The operational breakdown of these facilities is expected to have significant adverse impacts on the economic vitality of the region and the transport of goods and services along this corridor. 1-15 Express Lanes Project 2 138 1-15 Express Lanes Project Toll Policy Report EXPRESS LIMES Recommendation: RCTC staff recommends the following goals for the 1-15 Express Lanes: 1. Provide Express Lane customers with a safe, reliable, and congestion free trip. 2. Deliver exceptional, consistent, and responsive customer service. 3. Enact toll policies that balance commute choice and lane availability for all customers. 4. Provide the infrastructure and an incentive for ridesharing and increased transit use as an alternative to driving alone. 5. Generate sufficient revenue to meet Express Lane financial obligations to pay current and long- term costs. 6. Use surplus revenues for transportation improvements exclusively within the Interstate 15 corridor. 1-15 Express Lanes Project 3 139 1-15 Express Lanes Project Toll Policy Report EXPIIESS LIMES Toll Policy Summary # Toll Policy Goal(s) Met Page Policy Topic Area Policy Recommendation 1 Toll Pricing Objectives Optimize person throughput in the corridor while meeting debt obligations. 1,3,4,5 6 2 Toll Pricing Objectives Establish toll pricing to routinely achieve free -flow speeds of 60-65 mph, always exceeding the 45 mph federal minimum requirement. 1 6 3 Hours of Operation Charge tolls 24 hours a day, seven days a week. 3,5 7 4 Carpool Occupancy Requirement Define carpools as vehicles occupied by 3 or more persons. 3,4 8 5 Toll lnteroperability Adopt the national interoperability standard for automated toll collection systems when adopted by the toll industry. 2 10 6 Toll lnteroperability Adopt the new state interoperability standard for automated toll collection systems when adopted by the California Toll Operators Committee. 2 10 7 Project Development Costs Fund project development costs by current and future Measure A sales tax, toll revenue, and state and federal grants. 3,5 12 8 Operations and Maintenance Costs Fund operations, maintenance, and toll enforcement costs by toll revenue. 2,5 14 9 Project Repayment Repay Measure A sales tax bonds and toll revenue bonds with future Measure A and toll revenue, respectively. 5 16 10 Use of Revenue Use surplus revenue to fund Interstate 15 corridor transportation investments. 2,3,6 17 11 Enforcement Enforce I-15 Express Lanes toll violations through agreement with the California Highway Patrol and any future state or federal toll violation laws. 1,2 18 12 Operations and Maintenance Responsibilities Maintain Express Lanes and toll systems as a responsibility of RCTC. 1,2 20 1-15 Express Lanes Project 140 4 1-15 Express Lanes Project Toll Policy Report EXPIIESS LIMES Policy Topic Area Policy Recommendation Toll Policy Goal(s) Met Page 13 Operations and Maintenance Responsibilities Perform customer service patrol and incident management as a responsibility of RCTC in cooperation with Caltrans and other jurisdictions. 1,2 20 14 Operations and Maintenance Responsibilities Provide customer service and the account relationships as a responsibility of RCTC. 2,5 20 15 Signage Provide toll signage meeting the latest California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices Standards. 1,2 22 16 Express Bus Integration Encourage express bus use through toll policies and Express Lane operations. 3,4,6 23 17 Design — Facility Ingress and Egress Design the roadway and ingress and egress locations meeting Caltrans design standards where feasible and practical. 1,2 25 18 Design — Number of Lanes Construct and operate two Express Lanes in each direction where possible. 1,2,5 27 19 Toll Pricing Method Use Dynamic Pricing to determine the toll price. 1,3,5 28 20 Toll Exemptions and Discounts Provide toll discounts according to legislation and for operations and maintenance vehicles. 1,2 30 21 Toll Payment Method Require all vehicles to have a transponder at time of travel. 1,2,4 33 22 Mobile Interface Implement Mobile Web for FasTrak® customers, but defer the Mobile Toll Payment Application. 1,2,3 35 23 High Occupancy Vehicle Declaration Options Identify HOV3+ carpool customers via a switchable transponder. 1,2,4 36 24 Express Lane Operations Facility Locate the call center, customer service center and traffic management center and administration in close proximity to the Express Lanes. 2 38 1-15 Express Lanes Project 141 5 1-15 Express Lanes Project Toll Policy Report EXPRESS LIMES 1— 2. Toll Pricing Objectives Description: Express lane pricing serves as a tool to regulate demand and preserve optimal operating conditions. A primary goal of express lanes is to maintain priority access for high occupancy vehicles (HOVs), buses and vanpools to achieve high person throughput. In addition, federal requirements specify minimum operating conditions for HOV and express lanes and prescribe the use of pricing as a means of meeting those requirements. Express lane pricing also generates revenue that can be used to support project development, operating and maintenance costs, and other improvements. Recommendation: 1. Optimize person throughput in the corridor while meeting debt obligations. 2. Establish toll pricing to routinely achieve free flow speeds of 60-65 mph, always exceeding the 45 mph federal minimum requirement Background: A common goal of express lane projects around the country is to optimize the performance of the lanes using pricing. The performance of express lanes can be measured in a number of ways, including person throughput. And although not often stated as a primary goal of express lanes, revenue generation is another measure of performance. Optimizing person throughput in express lanes is achieved by maintaining priority service for HOVs, buses and vanpools by offering toll discounts and ensuring that the express lanes maintain free -flow conditions for these vehicles. Federal requirements define a degraded HOV or express lane facility as one that does not meet a minimum average operating speed of 45 mph for 90 percent of the time over a 180-day monitoring period during weekday peak hours. The requirements specify varying the toll charged to vehicles to bring a degraded facility into compliance. As described in Section 19, dynamic pricing will be used to manage demand in the Express Lanes. The pricing algorithm used to calculate the toll rates can be calibrated to ensure that free -flow speeds of 60-65 mph are routinely achieved in the Express Lanes. Additionally, tolls can be set to ensure that the project generates revenue that will be used to service debt obligations. Assessment: Optimizing person throughput is a common goal of express lane projects and is achieved by using pricing as a mechanism to maintain priority access for vehicles carrying multiple occupants. Pricing will also be used to ensure that the federal minimum operating requirements are met and that the Express Lanes generate revenue necessary to service debt obligations. 1-15 Express Lanes Project 6 142 1-15 Express Lanes Project Toll Policy Report EXPRESS LIMES 3. Hours of Operation Description: Express lane hours of operation define when toll collection will occur. Toll collection can occur during traditionally defined peak periods or extended peak periods (part time), or can occur 24 hours a day, 7 days a week (full-time). Under part-time operations, all passenger vehicles would be allowed to access the Express Lanes during off-peak hours. Under full-time operations, a minimum toll rate would be charged during off-peak hours. Recommendation: Charge tolls 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Background: Express lanes hours of operation generally fall into one of the following categories: 1. Part-time operations — Toll collection occurs during defined periods of the day. When toll collection is not in effect, the express lanes are open to all vehicles. Toll collection can occur during defined morning and evening peak periods (e.g., 5am-9am and 3pm-7pm) or during extended daytime hours (e.g., 5am-7pm). 2. Full time operations — Toll collection is in effect 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. During non - peak times, the toll rate is often set to a minimum rate. All HOV lanes in the Southern California region operate full time, with the exception of SR-14 between Santa Clarita and Palmdale and SR-60 from Day Street to Redlands Boulevard. This is because Southern California freeways experience sustained hours of congestion, with relatively short off-peak hours. Under such conditions, part-time HOV operation would not be viable. Similar to the region's HOV facilities, all current and planned express lane facilities within the SCAG region are operating or will be operating with full-time tolling. The 91 Express Lanes in Orange County and the extension into Riverside County operate 24/7, and the 1-15 Express Lanes project planned in San Bernardino County has also adopted a 24/7 policy. Having consistent policy helps enforcement and may contribute to a better understanding and reliance on the express lanes network whenever congestion occurs. Assessment: Full-time tolling on the 1-15 Express Lanes is recommended to maximize efficient operation of the Express Lanes and general purpose lanes, and to be consistent with adjoining express lane facilities on the SR 91 and the planned 1-15 Express Lanes in San Bernardino County. 1-15 Express Lanes Project 7 143 1-15 Express Lanes Project Toll Policy Report EXPIIESS LIMES 4. Carpool Occupancy Requirement Description: The HOV occupancy definition establishes the minimum occupancy requirements for discounted and/or free travel within express lanes. This is important because there will be different traffic and revenue results if carpools are defined as two or more persons per vehicle (HOV-2+) or three or more persons per vehicle (HOV-3+). Recommendation: Define carpools as vehicles occupied by 3 or more persons. Background: Under Federal requirement (23 USC § 166), HOV and express lanes facilities must maintain a minimum speed of 45 mph. Caltrans has the responsibility of maintaining operations for the state's HOV lanes, which includes the authority to make operational changes (including occupancy) provided they are compliant with federal and state regulations. Multiple sections of California law pertain to HOV policies on express lanes. The specific legislative authorization given to each facility in the state typically provides that particular entity the authority to set rates and HOV policies on the respective facilities. RCTC's application for the 1-15 Express Lanes Project approved by the California Transportation Commission (CTC) states that vehicles with three or more occupants will be allowed entry into the Express Lanes at no cost initially. The Application acknowledges that it may be necessary to charge for HOV-3+ in the future as demand for the Express Lanes increases. 0 HOV-3+ OR rvioRE PERSONS PER VEHICLE According to the 2013 CA HOV Lane Degradation Report published by Caltrans, many HOV facilities in the Southern California region are currently experiencing various degrees of performance degradation with a HOV-2+ minimum occupancy requirement. As the region's express lanes network expands, and demand increases, the need to increase the minimum occupancy requirement becomes more apparent. Currently, there are three existing and four planned (excluding this Project) express lane facilities in southern California. The current practices for carpool occupancy policy are summarized as follows: Existing Facilities • Metro 1-10 ExpressLanes — HOV-3+ toll -free during peak periods; HOV-2+ toll -free all other times • Metro 1-110 ExpressLanes — HOV-2+ toll -free 1-15 Express Lanes Project 144 8 1-15 Express Lanes Project Toll Policy Report EXPRESS LIMES • OCTA 91 Express Lanes — HOV-3+ toll -free, with the exception of eastbound PM peak period operating with discount toll rates for HOV-3+ Planned Facilities • OCTA 405 Express Lanes —Pending results of the Traffic and Revenue Study • SANBAG 1-10 Express Lanes — HOV-3+ toll -free • SANBAG 1-15 Express Lanes — HOV-3+ toll -free • Riverside 91 Express Lanes — HOV-3+ toll -free, with the exception of eastbound PM peak period operating with discount toll rates for HOV-3+ Assessment: HOV-3+ is recommended as the minimum occupancy requirement for discounted travel for the 1-15 Express Lanes. This is consistent with policy recommendations in the SCAG Regional Express Lanes Concept of Operations and the adjoining SR-91 in Orange/Riverside Counties and future 1-15 Express Lanes in San Bernardino County. 1-15 Express Lanes Project 9 145 1-15 Express Lanes Project Toll Policy Report EXPIIESS LIMES 5 — 6. Toll Interoperability Description: Toll interoperability refers to the ability for customers to use multiple toll facilities with a single toll account. Currently, there are various tolling protocols used across the United States to communicate between the in -vehicle toll transponders and roadside toll readers and only a few of the systems allow a customer to use the same toll transponder at other facilities across state lines. There are national and state initiatives to adopt new interoperability standards. Recommendation: 5. Adopt the national interoperability standard for automated toll collection systems when adopted by the toll industry. 6. Adopt the new state interoperability standard for automated toll collection systems when adopted by the California Toll Operators Committee. Background: The protocol for the exchange of transponder information for toll facilities in California is specified by Title 21 of the California Code of Regulations. The transponders used by California toll agencies are commonly referred to as Title 21 transponders. These transponders are branded as FasTrak® and can be used on any of the California toll facilities. California is the only state currently using the Title 21 transponders. Switchable Title 21 4930111111111111111111 WSDOT 6C Sticker 4 Legacy Title 21 In 2012, the federal government passed Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century, MAP-21, calling for a national toll interoperability by 2016. The International Bridge, Tunnel, and Turnpike, Authority (IBTTA) is the worldwide association representing toll facility owners and operators and the businesses that that serve them. IBTTA has formed an Interoperability Committee that is working to advance the goal of achieving national interoperability by 2016. They are in the process of selecting the transponder protocols that will undergo further testing and analysis. The Title 21 transponders are not being considered for the national standard. Concurrent with the efforts of IBTTA, the California Toll Operators Committee (CTOC), which was formed to facilitate interoperability within California, has developed a Transition Plan to replace the legacy California protocol (referred to as "Title 21") with a newer and less expensive protocol (referred to as 1-15 Express Lanes Project 10 146 1-15 Express Lanes Project Toll Policy Report EXPRESS LIMES "6C"). This plan proposes that all toll facilities in the state be able to recognize the 6C protocol by 2018 with full transition by 2020. The 6C protocol is also one of the final protocols being evaluated for the national standard and CTOC is represented in the discussions regarding national interoperability. Assessment: The 1-15 Express Lanes will be consistent with the interoperability standards currently being assessed at the national and state levels. In doing so, 1-15 Express Lanes customers will only have to establish a single toll account to travel on all toll facilities in the state and, depending on the outcome of the national interoperability discussions, may be able to use their account to travel on toll facilities across the country. 1-15 Express Lanes Project 11 147 1-15 Express Lanes Project Toll Policy Report EXPIIESS LIMES 7. Project Development Costs Description: The 1-15 Express Lanes will require funding for project capital costs, necessary for the final design, construction, and initial deployment of the Express Lanes. Capital costs include all items necessary to build new lanes or retrofit existing lanes in order to provide an Express Lane facility, including infrastructure construction, toll collection implementation, and equipment. The funds for capital costs may come from a number of sources, including Riverside County "Measure A" sales tax revenue or state and federal grants. In addition, bonds could be issued or a federal loan obtained for capital costs that are leveraged based on these dedicated tax revenue sources and/or toll revenues from the actual Express Lane facility. EXPRESS LODES Recommendation: Fund project development costs by current and future Measure A sales tax, toll revenue, and state and federal grants. Background: Riverside County Measure A Sales Tax Measure A is a Riverside County half -cent sales tax dedicated to transportation. Voters approved the Measure A program in 1988, which has raised over $1 billion for major highway and local road projects throughout Riverside County. Voters extended Measure A in 2002, ensuring that the program will continue to fund transportation improvements through 2039. Federal Funding In addition to local funding through Measure A, there are multiple federal programs facilitated through the FHWA that could potentially be used to fund the I-15 Express Lanes. These programs are intended to award funds to projects that upgrade facilities in order to reduce congestion or improve safety. These sources could include, but are not limited to, the Surface Transportation Program, the Highway Safety Improvement Program, Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality funds, or a loan awarded through the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA). 1-15 Express Lanes Project 12 148 1-15 Express Lanes Project Toll Policy Report EXPIIESS LIMES State Funding California state funding could potentially be available through the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). The CTC administers the STIP, which awards funds to eligible highway projects programmed by county transportation agencies. Bonds Many express lane projects throughout the country require some level of financing or debt. A limited tax obligation bond is issued by a government entity which is secured by a pledge of a specific tax revenue and can be used to fund certain capital improvements. However, the ability of a priced managed lane to collect toll revenue creates a dedicated funding source, which could be used to issue and repay a bond. These toll revenue bonds are the most popular to be issued by toll facilities. The authorizing statute for the 1-15 Express Lanes (Streets & Highways Code Section 149.8) permits RCTC to issue bonds to finance the project. Assessment: Financing a project through the issuance of bonds or other means, allows for projects to offer the public more immediate benefits of transportation infrastructure, while spreading the costs of that infrastructure over the life of a project. In this way, the additional interest cost paid by the agency is outweighed by the mobility and economic benefits of having the project available more quickly. Capital costs for the 1-15 Express Lanes are to be funded through current and future Riverside County Measure A sales tax revenues and project toll revenues through bond and TIFIA loan financing. Specifically, the recommendation is that sales tax revenue bonds may be issued by RCTC and repaid through Measure A sales tax revenues, while toll revenue bonds may also be issued and a TIFIA loan executed with repayment ensured through toll revenues collected by the 1-15 Express Lane facility. In addition, it is recommended that additional State and Federal discretionary grant opportunities are sought to supplement project funding. RCTC's project plan of finance is currently being developed as part of project financing activities and will be brought for Board approval in the future. 1-15 Express Lanes Project 13 149 1-15 Express Lanes Project Toll Policy Report El[ MUS LIMES 8. Operations and Maintenance Costs Description: The 1-15 Express Lanes will require funding for ongoing operation and maintenance costs associated with the project. Toll collection and dedication to enhanced traveler benefits make express lanes unique when compared to other highway projects, and often require greater resources and funding for the operation and maintenance of these services. The cost of express lane operations includes toll collection, standard operations, enhanced enforcement, incident response services, and toll system and facility maintenance. Operation and maintenance activities require a dedicated funding source in order to be viable, which could include local, state, or federal revenues, in addition to actual toll project. revenues collected as part of the Recommendation: Fund operations, maintenance, and toll enforcement costs by toll revenue. Background: As with all transportation infrastructure, a dependable and dedicated source of funding is necessary for operations and maintenance. This is especially true for express lanes, where enhanced services can be necessary to offer reliable travel time savings to toll paying customers. Express lanes are also unique in that the revenue collected from tolls is able to be used as a dedicated source of operation and maintenance funding. The following are general express lanes operations and maintenance costs: Toll Collection Costs Toll collection costs include all costs associated with processing tolls payments, including the labor and materials required to manage customer accounts, perform license plate image reviews, process toll violations and provide general customer service. In addition, the cost of distributing and managing transponder inventory is included. Standard Operation Costs Standard operation includes costs associated with labor and equipment necessary to manage express lane operations, including personnel to monitor traffic and toll operations, generate reports, public outreach, management and oversight, etc. 1-15 Express Lanes Project 14 150 1-15 Express Lanes Project Toll Policy Report EXPRESS LIMES Enhanced Enforcement In order to manage express lanes demand, it is important that the vehicles using express lanes are either paying the posted toll or meeting the HOV requirement. A thorough enforcement program including the presence of the California Highway Patrol (CHP) is necessary to maintain motorist compliance. Incident Response Services In order to offer a dependable travel time savings, it is important that incident response resources be available to remove any disabled vehicles or objects which may prevent free -flow conditions. Toll System and Facility Maintenance Maintenance costs associated with express lanes include the inspection, upkeep, and replacement of the facility itself and items necessary for toll operation including roadside toll collection equipment and infrastructure, communications infrastructure, and all other hardware and software elements. Assessment: It is recommended that operation and maintenance costs for the 1-15 Express Lanes be funded through toll revenue. Under this assumption, the resources and services necessary for Express Lanes operations will be funded from the project itself. Funding operations through project revenue will require that Express Lane tolls are set at a rate that ensures mobility and travel time benefits to customers, while also generating sufficient revenue to effectively operate the Express Lanes and meet debt obligations. 1-15 Express Lanes Project 15 151 1-15 Express Lanes Project Toll Policy Report EXPIIESS LIMES 9. Project Repayment Description: As described in Section 7, sales tax and toll revenue bonds are anticipated to be issued by RCTC and a federal TIFIA loan executed to finance the 1-15 Express Lanes development costs. Sales tax revenue bonds are to be backed by future Measure A tax revenues and toll revenue bonds are to be backed by future revenues generated by the Express Lanes. Therefore, funds for the repayment of these bonds will be obtained through revenues to be generated by the Measure A sales tax and operation of the Express Lanes. Recommendation: Repay Measure A sales tax bonds and toll revenue bonds with future Measure A and toll revenue, respectively. Background: The authorizing statute for the 1-15 Express Lanes (Streets & Highways Code Section 149.8) permits RCTC to issue bonds to finance the project. It is RCTC's intent to issue bonds backed by both Measure A sales tax revenues and future toll revenues and to repay the bonds using these revenue sources. Assessment: Consistent with the obligations of issuing bonds, RCTC will repay bonds using revenues generated by Measure A sales taxes and Express Lane tolls. 1-15 Express Lanes Project 16 152 153 1-15 Express Lanes Project Toll Policy Report EXPIiESS LIMES 10. Use of Revenue Description: Express lanes charge tolls and generate toll revenue as a normal function of operation. The 1-15 Express Lanes will require an expenditure plan for all revenue, outlining what activities or functions will be funded from collected toll payments. As stated in Section 9, it is recommended that toll revenues should be used toward repayment of bond debt issued on behalf of the project and also to fund facility operations, maintenance, and enforcement. However, net excess revenue may remain after payments toward operation and maintenance costs and debt service obligations. There are multiple projects and programs which could be funded through the net excess toll revenue from the I-15 Express Lanes. Recommendation: Use surplus revenue to fund Interstate 15 corridor transportation investments. Background: The goal of most express lane facilities is to generate enough revenue to cover basic operations and maintenance, meet debt obligations (if applicable), as well as to fund replacement and upkeep to the extent that adequate revenue is available. Other facilities dedicate portions of net excess revenue to fund enhanced transit operations within the express lane facility, such as 1-15 in San Diego and 1-95 in South Florida. Statutes for the Metro 1-110 and 1-10 ExpressLanes in Los Angeles County state that toll revenue must first cover the costs incurred in connection with implementation/operation of the program. Metro reinvests surplus toll revenue into the corridor through a grant program. In addition, the 91 Express Lanes in Orange County have adopted the policy of directing net excess revenues to capital improvements within the SR-91 corridor. The authorizing statute for the 1-15 Express Lanes (Streets & Highways Code Section 149.8) permits excess toll revenues to be used for the following purposes: (A) To enhance transit service designed to reduce traffic congestion on 1-15 or to expand travel options along 1-15. Eligible expenses include transit operating costs, acquisition of transit vehicles and transit capital improvements. (B) To make operational or capacity improvements designed to reduce congestion or improve the flow of traffic on 1-15. Eligible expenses include any phase of project delivery to make capital improvements to onramps, connector roads, roadways, bridges, or other structures on I-15. Assessment: The toll revenue collected as part of the 1-15 Express Lanes operations will be used primarily to fund operation, maintenance, and enforcement costs of the facility, as well as to meet debt obligations for any revenue bonds issued as part of the project. Any remaining net excess revenue will be used to fund transportation improvements within the I-15 Express Lanes corridor consistent with authorizing statute. 1-15 Express Lanes Project 17 154 1-15 Express Lanes Project Toll Policy Report EXPIIESS LIMES 11. Enforcement Description: Express lanes require effective enforcement policies and programs to operate successfully. Enforcement of vehicle occupancy requirements and toll payment is critical to protecting eligible vehicles' travel time savings and safety. Visible and effective enforcement promotes fairness and maintains the integrity of the facility to help gain acceptance among users and nonusers. Recommendation: Enforce 1-15 Express Lane toll violations through agreement with the California Highway Patrol and any future state or federal toll violation laws. Background: Adequate and effective enforcement policies and incident management are integral elements to express lanes operations to ensure that the facilities are operating at the intended level of performance. Enforcement of vehicle occupancy and/or toll payment requirements is critical to protecting eligible users' travel -time savings and safety. Visible and effective enforcement promotes fairness and maintains the integrity of the facility to help gain acceptance among users and non -users. The enforcement concept for many express lane facilities around the country involves a combination of manual and automated enforcement strategies. Manual enforcement requires CHP officers to be present during the peak hours to serve as a visual deterrent and to monitor vehicles to ensure they are complying with express lane operating policies. Observation areas are provided at strategic locations for officers to park and monitor beacons that illuminate when a vehicle passes through with a switchable transponder (see Section 23 of this report) set to a high -occupancy setting. Beacon lights provide a visual cue for officers to visually inspect the vehicle to verify whether it meets the occupancy requirement. The beacons can also be used to indicate when no transponder or an invalid transponder was detected and can be strategically placed to support stationary enforcement as well as enforcement by officers driving the corridor. CHP will also be relied upon to enforce all other moving violations, including illegal crossing of the express lanes buffer and the requirement for vehicles to have properly mounted license plates. In addition to manual enforcement, License Plate Recognition (LPR) cameras will be located at toll points to capture the license plates of vehicles for which no transponder was detected. If the license plate is 1-15 Express Lanes Project 155 18 1-15 Express Lanes Project Toll Policy Report EXPRESS LIMES able to be matched to an account, then the toll amount will be deducted from the account. Otherwise, the license plate information is sent to the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to determine the address of the registered owner for issuance of a toll violation. In the Southern California region, HOV and express lanes enforcements are generally conducted by the CHP in conjunction with automatic tolling systems. The four operating express lane facilities in Southern California, Metro 1-10 ExpressLanes, Metro 1-110 ExpressLanes, OCTA 91 Express Lanes, and SANDAG's I- 15 Express Lanes are all under contract with CHP to conduct violation enforcement. These facilities also employ beacon lights and CHP observation areas where possible. Assessment: Given national experience, including experience with the four express lanes operated in Southern California, manual enforcement is a proven component of successful express lane operations. The presence of CHP vehicles instills confidence to customers and serves as a deterrent for those that may violate. RCTC will establish an agreement with CHP officers to enforce the 1-15 Express Lanes and provide CHP the necessary tools such as enforcement beacon lights and access to transponder information to effectively enforce. In addition, LPR cameras will be used to enforce the requirement for vehicles to carry a transponder. 1-15 Express Lanes Project 19 156 157 1-15 Express Lanes Project Toll Policy Report El[ MUS LIMES 12 —14. Operations and Maintenance Responsibilities Description: Express lanes operations and maintenance responsibilities can be managed in a number of ways. These responsibilities include the maintenance of all equipment associated with the toll system, providing oversight of operations and incident management, and providing customer service to manage customer accounts. Each of these responsibilities is integral to the overall performance and operation of the express lanes. Express lane implementing agencies can use agency staff, contract staff or share responsibilities with other agencies. Recommendations: 12. Maintain Express Lanes and toll systems as a responsibility of RCTC. 13. Perform customer service patrol and incident management as a responsibility of RCTC in cooperation with Caltrans and other jurisdictions. 14. Provide customer service and the account relationships as a responsibility of RCTC. Background: Express lane operation and maintenance functions require dedicated resources to maintain hardware and software, monitor performance and manage customer accounts. These functions are described in more detail below. Toll Systems Maintenance The maintenance of toll systems includes the inspection, upkeep, and replacement of the items necessary for toll operations and the supporting infrastructure. Roadside toll collection equipment, communication network components, servers and workstations are all elements of a working toll system that require routine maintenance. Most express lane operating agencies enter into contracts with toll service providers to not only design and construct the toll systems, but also to operate and maintain them for some period of time. The toll system providers are required to develop maintenance tracking systems that keep track of the maintenance requirements for all elements of the toll system. These systems send alerts when there is an equipment malfunction, track maintenance response times, and keep track of equipment inventory. Performance Monitoring and Incident Management An important component of express lane operations is the ability to monitor traffic performance in real- time to ensure that the express lanes are maintaining optimum conditions. This is accomplished using roadside vehicle detection equipment and closed-circuit television cameras that send real time information to a facility where operators can monitor. Operators have the ability to override the toll system (e.g., display a message such as "HOV ONLY") when conditions warrant and to coordinate with 1-15 Express Lanes Project 20 158 1-15 Express Lanes Project Toll Policy Report EXPRESS LIMES Caltrans, CHP and other jurisdictions as needed. In addition, operators have the ability to dispatch tow trucks to clear incidents. Some express lane operators choose to co -locate their express lane monitoring functions within a regional monitoring center and others choose to establish a dedicated monitoring facility. An example of a regional monitoring center is the Inland Empire Transportation Management Center (IETMC), which serves as an intermodal traffic management facility for San Bernardino and Riverside Counties and is staffed by both Caltrans and CHP personnel. The IETMC opened to service in 2011 and is located in the City of Fontana at the interchange of the 1-15 and 1-210. Customer Service Inland Empire Transportation Customer service includes all of the functions related to account management, payment processing, transponder distribution, violation processing and providing general customer support. Some of these support activities, often referred to as "back office" activities, can take place at offsite facilities. Examples of activities that can be performed offsite include call taking and license plate image review. However, the location(s) of some customer service functions are ideally located in close proximity to the express lanes, including walk-in customer service, customer call center and transponder distribution. Assessment: Express lane operating agencies typically procure a contractor to carry out customer service responsibilities due to the amount of specialized systems and labor required. RCTC will contract with a toll services provider to design, implement, operate and maintain all aspects of the 1-15 Express Lanes toll system. The RCTC Operations Center (see Section 24) will serve as the hub of all customer, maintenance, and operating activities. 1-15 Express Lanes Project 21 159 1-15 Express Lanes Project Toll Policy Report EXPIIESS LIMES 15. Signage Description: The California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (California MUTCD) provides uniform standards and specifications for all traffic signage in California. The most recent version of the California MUTCD, published in 2014, includes signing guidelines and requirements for express lane facilities. These requirements are intended to standardize the way that express lanes throughout the state are signed to make it easier for the traveling public to understand express lane operating requirements. Recommendation: Provide toll signage meeting the latest California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices standards. Background: The general signing requirements for all new highway projects, including express lanes, must comply with the 2014 California MUTCD. The California MUTCD includes requirements for different types of express lane configurations and operating requirements. Of particular relevance to the 1-15 Express Lanes, are those signs that depict a restricted access facility where all vehicles in the express lanes are required to have a FasTrak® account. Example Pricing Sign Express lane signs included in the California MUTCD generally fall into the following categories: • Overhead -mounted signs designating the start and end of the express lanes as well as intermediate access points. • Overhead -mounted pricing signs that display the toll amount to given downstream locations. In accordance with the guidance in the MUTCD, pricing signs display the current toll to no more than two downstream destinations. Changeable message elements will be used to indicate the toll rate to travel to the destination shown. These signs will also specify the HOV occupancy requirement and that a FasTrak® account is required for vehicles to use the facility. • Median mounted and overhead signs that display the carpool occupancy requirement, the FasTrak® account requirement and hours of operation. Assessment: The 1-15 Express Lanes signage will conform to the standards in the California MUTCD. The design and implementation of the signage will be the result of several sign workshops and plan reviews that will include Caltrans and the FHWA. 1-15 Express Lanes Project 22 160 1-15 Express Lanes Project Toll Policy Report El[ MUS LIMES 16. Express Bus Integration Description: Transit is an important component in express lanes. If managed through variable pricing to maintain a minimum level of service, express lanes create efficient and reliable transit corridors compared to previously congested freeways. Of the existing HOV and express lanes facilities in the southern California region, most are already served by express bus services. Operating express bus service on express lanes offers several key benefits: • Shortens Travel Times • Improves Travel Time Reliability • Lowers Operating Costs • Increases Person Throughput • Encourages Carpooling and Transit Use • Addresses Equity Concerns • Builds Public Support Recommendations: Encourage express bus use through toll policies and Express Lane operations. Background: Currently, the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) provides eight express bus services throughout Riverside County, with one route (CommuterLink Express 206) providing service along 1-15 between Temecula and Corona. The CommuterLink Express — Route 206 (Temecula-Murrieta-Lake Elsinore- North Main Corona Metrolink Station) runs daily during weekdays on approximately 30-minute headways, and the general fare costs $3.00 each way (free with valid Metrolink Pass). Route 206 provides connections for commuters travelling from Riverside County to other RTA CommuterLink Express services regions via the North Main Corona Metrolink station. Nicholas ventrone/The transit Coalition In anticipation of the 91 Express Lanes extension in Riverside County, the RTA already has two new Rapid Link express bus routes programmed for deployment in 2017. These two routes, RapidLink 200 and 205, will provide connections between Riverside and Anaheim as well as Temecula and Anaheim via the 91 Express Lanes. The proposed 1-15 Express Lanes will provide the opportunity for further expansion of express bus services along the corridor. Similar to express bus benefits, the 1-15 Express Lanes can provide opportunities for enhancing and promoting carpoolinevanpooling by commuters. Currently, there are eight Ca!trans Park and Ride lots along the 1-15 corridor within Riverside County. Of the eight existing lots, three are located within the I- 15 Express Lanes Project corridor: 1-15 Express Lanes Project 161 23 1-15 Express Lanes Project Toll Policy Report EXPIIESS LIMES • Canyon Community Church Park And Ride (1504 Taber Street, Corona) — 75 spaces • Norco @ 6th Street Park And Ride (3945 Old Hamner Road, Norco) —100 spaces • Mira Loma Park and Ride (12105 Limonite Avenue, Mira Loma) — 76 spaces Specialized Transit Services It should be noted that not only will the fixed route bus service discussed benefit from the 1-15 Express Lanes, but also the Specialized Transportation Program funded by RCTC via Measure A funding along with federal funding from the Job Access Reverse Commute (JARC) and New Freedom (NF) programs. These specialized transit services (Dial -A -Ride paratransit) will most likely use the 1-15 Express Lanes. In addition, a handful of non-profit and special criteria providers that operate specialized transportation will also benefit from using the 1-15 Express Lanes. Physical and Policy Considerations Many of the physical design considerations for integrating bus service are similar to express lanes and HOV lanes, which have well -established design criteria. Besides the physical design, each express lane project has a unique set of policies in place that influences how well transit is integrated in a particular corridor. Establishing a set of policies that improves transit service and capacity is also often essential in building public support for often controversial toll lane projects and helps to neutralize the perception that Express Lanes are "Lexus Lanes" that primarily benefit those with higher incomes. Assessment: Encouraging transit and offering benefits for express bus service is a key component of the 1-15 Express Lanes project. Coordination with RTA will take place during the design of the Express Lanes to ensure that transit needs are taken into consideration. 1-15 Express Lanes Project 24 162 1-15 Express Lanes Project Toll Policy Report EXPIIESS LIMES 17. Design — Facility Ingress and Egress Description: This policy is related to the design of access locations, where vehicles can enter and exit the 1-15 Express Lanes. Regulating access is one of the fundamental tools to manage traffic flow in the express lanes, and therefore, it is important to select the access points and design treatment early in the planning phase along with the separation type to help minimize weaving conditions. Recommendation: Design the roadway and ingress and egress locations meeting Caltrans design standards where feasible and practical. Background: Access treatments for express lane facilities fall into the following three categories: Grade -separated direct access drop ramps Grade -separated drop ramps provide access to and from the express lanes using dedicated grade direct access ramps. These types of ramps generally provide access from adjacent freeways/arterials and park and ride facilities for express bus operations, and are desirable where sufficient right-of-way and high traffic volumes in both the express lanes and general purpose lanes warrant the need for such exclusive access. An example of a grade -separated drop ramp is the SR-91 eastbound direct connector to the southbound 1-15 and vice versa being constructed as part of RCTC's SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project. At -grade limited access At -grade limited access provides access to and from the express lanes at designated locations, typically through at -grade access openings that serve as ingress, egress or combined ingress and egress. Physical barriers or painted striping separates the express lanes from the adjacent general purpose lanes between access locations. Three different approaches for providing at -grade limited access include: • Weave zones — provides combined ingress and egress by short breaks to the physical barriers or striping at designated locations. • Weave lanes — similar to weave zones, except movement is facilitated by a change lane, which isolates the weaving from both the express lanes and the general purpose lanes, thereby minimizing the potential for unstable flow. At -grade limited access configuration on LA Metro ExpressLanes • Merge lanes — provide dedicated and separated ingress and egress (acceleration and deceleration) lanes. The merge lanes allow drivers the opportunity to adjust their speeds to 1-15 Express Lanes Project 163 25 1-15 Express Lanes Project Toll Policy Report EXPRESS LIMES match the lane they are merging into. This design treatment further reduces the potential for unstable flow, as conflicts are avoided in the access lane. Continuous access Continuous access allows vehicles to enter and exit the express lanes for the entire stretch without any specific ingress/egress treatments. The striping that separates the express lanes from the general purpose lanes are generally skip striped. Assessment: A limited access configuration is recommended for the 1-15 Express Lanes because it can reduce toll evasion, ensure greater access control, and is consistent with the access configuration of existing Southern California HOV and express lanes. Further, a limited access configuration is less complicated to design and has a far lower construction cost than direct access ramps and does not require as much toll equipment as may be required for continuous access. Vehicles will be able to access the express lanes at intermediate access points that provide access to local exits and interchanges. Between these points, access will be restricted to prevent weaving and improve overall mobility. A map of proposed access locations is accessible at http://i15project.info/express_lanes_access.php. 1-15 Express Lanes Project 26 164 1-15 Express Lanes Project Toll Policy Report EXPIIESS LIMES 18. Design — Number of Lanes Description: The number of express lanes to be implemented for a particular project is dependent upon several variables, including traffic congestion, occupancy requirements and availability of existing right of way. The Project Approval Document for the 1-15 Express Lanes generally includes a two lane configuration in each direction based on traffic and engineering analysis. This configuration is intended to add capacity, improve operations and fits within existing right of way. Recommendation: Construct and operate two Express Lanes in each direction where possible. Background: A number of criteria must be considered when evaluating the capacity needs of an express lanes project. These include existing and projected traffic congestion, toll discount policies, and the cost and availability of right of way. Some express lane projects simply convert an existing HOV lane to an express lane, others convert an existing lane and construct an additional lane (e.g., LA Metro 1-10 ExpressLanes), and others construct an entirely new lane or lanes (e.g., 1-680SB Express Lane in the Bay Area). There are currently no existing HOV lanes within the 1-15 project limits. The preliminary engineering performed as part of the project identified a need for a two lane configuration in each direction to serve future traffic demand. This configuration fits within the existing right of way and helps to ensure that the facility will be able to sustain a high level of service. ® Cm EXPRESS LANES ENTRANCE 1/2 MILE Two lane configuration on LA Metro 1-10 ExpressLanes Assessment: The recommendation for a two lane configuration in each direction where possible is consistent with the project schematics and serves projected traffic demand while fitting within existing right of way. 1-15 Express Lanes Project 27 165 1-15 Express Lanes Project Toll Policy Report EXPIIESS LIMES 19. Toll Pricing Method Description: Express lanes use pricing to manage the number of toll paying customers using the facility. Managing the number of users allows the express lanes to meet performance goals such as those described in Section 1 and Section 2. Variable pricing is to be used to manage traffic, whereby the cost to use the express lanes is directly related to the level of demand for the express lanes. As demand increases, raising the tolls will help manage demand in order to maintain federal performance requirements. Conversely, the price decreases as demand decreases to incentivize more vehicles to utilize the available capacity. Two variable pricing methods are currently in use on facilities across the country: time -of -day pricing and dynamic pricing. Recommendation: Use Dynamic Pricing to determine the toll price. Background: Time -of -Day Pricing Time -of -day pricing employs a fixed toll rate schedule with different toll rates by travel direction, time of day and day of the week. Time -of -day pricing is actively used on the 91 Express Lanes and on express lanes in Denver and Houston. Time -of -day pricing is effective when traffic patterns remain relatively consistent over time. For instance, if congestion reaches the same level at the same time every Monday, then a static price that is capable of maintaining the desired level of traffic volume can be used for that time period. 91 Express Lames T.L. $.51,1 "pi Fias77RAKOnly--No Cash With time -of -day pricing, tolls vary according to a fixed schedule, with different prices charged based on direction of travel, day of the week, and hour of the day. The toll rates are determined based on historical travel conditions in the corridor, and vary according to demand and congestion. The performance of express lane facilities using time -of -day pricing requires evaluation on a regular basis to ensure that free flow conditions are being maintained in the express lanes. If travel conditions on the express lanes deteriorate over time, the rates should be increased. Similarly, rates can also be lowered when the express lanes are found to have excess capacity that is not being used effectively. On the 91 Express Lanes, performance is monitored daily and evaluated every three months. 1-15 Express Lanes Project 166 28 1-15 Express Lanes Project Toll Policy Report EXPRESS LIMES Dynamic Pricing Dynamic pricing employs toll rates that vary in real time based on actual travel conditions detected in the corridor. Dynamic pricing is actively used on most California express lanes, including 1-10 and 1-110 (Los Angeles), 1-15 (San Diego), 1-680 (Alameda County), and 1-880 / SR-237 (San Jose). Dynamic pricing is effective on facilities that have a high level of variability in congestion throughout each day and from day to day. For instance, if a facility does not have a peak period that is consistent from one day to the next or has a high rate of incidents that impact traffic, dynamic pricing allows for the adjustment of the price to match the actual real-time traffic conditions. a. Se 0.75 1•-- Dynamic pricing provides a real-time monitoring and response capability for express lane operations. Dynamic pricing requires capital investment for both the algorithm and the traffic detection system and also requires ongoing monitoring and maintenance of the pricing algorithm and traffic detection system. Like the time -of -day pricing, dynamic pricing requires variable message signs to communicate price to customers. Assessment: In order to be responsive to real-time traffic conditions that may vary from day to day, it is recommended that the 1-15 Express Lanes use dynamic pricing. Despite the higher capital costs of deployment as compared to time -of -day pricing, dynamic pricing will be valuable to manage traffic and ensure the facility provides reliable travel at all times. The ability to readily adjust pricing and manage demand through dynamic pricing will allow for flexibility, particular in the critical area of overlap with the 91 Express Lanes that use time -of -day pricing. 1-15 Express Lanes Project 29 167 1-15 Express Lanes Project Toll Policy Report EXPIIESS LIMES 20. Toll Exemptions and Discounts Description: Toll discounts and exemptions are required by legislation, law and by agreement with project partners. Discounts have an impact on revenue, operations, customer service center systems and enforcement. It is important to establish toll discounts or exemptions at an early stage to allow for the evaluation of operational impacts and for inclusion in system design. Recommendation: Provide toll discounts according to legislation and for operations and maintenance vehicles. Background: A review of project agreements and legislation suggested that the following vehicle types require evaluation for toll discounts. Transit One of the primary goals of express lane facilities is to offer enhanced transit service. California Vehicle Code defines qualifying mass transit, paratransit and vanpool vehicles, including those that are publically or privately funded. These vehicles will be allowed to travel toll -free in the 1-15 Express Lanes at all times. With the passage of the Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act (the FAST Act) on December 4, 2015, U.S. Code was amended to enable privately -owned buses servicing the public to utilize toll facilities under the same rates, terms and conditions as other public transportation vehicles. RCTC will establish agreements with operators to facilitate toll -free travel at all times. High -Occupancy Vehicles The application for the 1-15 Express Lanes project approved by the CTC and the Federal Agreement between RCTC, FHWA and Caltrans provide direction with regard to the tolling of HOVs. In both instances, HOVs are defined as vehicles with three or more occupants (HOV-3+). The authorizing statute for the Express Lanes (Streets & Highways Code Section 149.8) also specifies free travel for HOV-3+ vehicles initially upon opening. There is no mechanism to regulate the demand of HOV-3+ vehicles when there is a 100% toll discount. As the HOV-3+ volume becomes an increasingly larger percentage of the total 1-15 Express Lanes traffic, it will become increasingly difficult for the dynamic pricing algorithm to effectively manage demand and preserve free flow operations in the 1-15 Express Lanes. Therefore, it is recommended that the speeds in the 1-15 Express Lanes be monitored to determine when the lanes are being degraded. If the average speed in the Express Lanes drops to 60 mph three or more times in a thirty day period after three months of operation, the HOV-3+ discount will be reduced to 50%. The 100% discount will be in place 1-15 Express Lanes Project 30 168 1-15 Express Lanes Project Toll Policy Report El[ MUS LIMES for at least the first three months of operation to allow for customers to adjust to the new facility and to incentivize use of the 1-15 Express Lanes by carpoolers. Motorcycles California Vehicle Code 21655.5(b) provides for free passage on preferential lanes for motorcycles. Motorcycle toll transactions will be processed either through a transponder or by reading their license plate. Zero Emission Vehicles (ZEVs) Legislation (AB 1721), enacted as California Vehicle Code Section 5205.5, allows motorists driving ZEVs displaying a DMV-issued Clean Air Vehicle decal to travel in express lanes with a toll -free or reduced rate toll. The statute does not mandate the rate of reduction. The existing legislation is set to expire January 1, 2019 ahead of the 1-15 Express Lanes planned opening. Similar to the treatment of HOV-3+ vehicles, the toll discount for ZEVs will be reduced to 50% if average speeds drop below 60 mph more than three times in a thirty day period after three months of operation. Emergency Vehicles ACCESS OK Sample CALIFORNIA CLEAN AIR VEHICLE Sample White and Green Clean Air Vehicle Decals for HOV Lane Use State of California/Dept. of Motor Vehicles California Vehicle Code 23301.5 provides for toll exemption for specifically identifiable emergency vehicles being driven while responding to or returning from an urgent or emergency call, engaged in an urgent or emergency response, or engaging in a fire station coverage assignment directly related to an emergency response. The common method of processing these tolls is through a "non -revenue" account where the transaction is processed by the back office and posted to the account in order to provide a method of monitoring usage. RCTC will establish agreements with the local emergency providers that will outline the specific rules for these non -revenue accounts. Maintenance and Operation Vehicles In order to facilitate access to express lanes for the purposes of performing various maintenance tasks or performing operational checks and testing, it is common for tolling authorities to grant toll - exemption for vehicles being driven for these maintenance purposes. The common method of processing these tolls is through a "non -revenue" account where the transaction is processed by the back office and posted to the account in order to provide a method of monitoring usage. Assessment: In general, vehicles that are eligible to utilize HOV lanes in accordance with applicable federal or state law will be allowed discounted access to the 1-15 Express Lanes. This includes buses (public transit and privately operated tour buses), vanpools, motorcycles, HOV 3+ vehicles, ZEVs, emergency vehicles, law 1-15 Express Lanes Project 31 169 1-15 Express Lanes Project Toll Policy Report MIIE5S LIMES enforcement vehicles, and operation and maintenance vehicles. The following discount policies are recommended for each of these vehicle types: • In-service public transit vehicles, private buses, vanpools, and motorcycles will be 100% discounted (toll free) at all times. • All HOV-3+ and zero -emission vehicles (ZEVs) will be 100% discounted (toll free) for the first three months of operation. The discount will be reduced to 50% if the average speed in the Express Lanes drops below 60 mph three or more times in a thirty day period after three months of operation. • Emergency, law enforcement and Express Lanes maintenance vehicles will be 100% discounted (toll free) at all times. 1-15 Express Lanes Project 32 170 1-15 Express Lanes Project Toll Policy Report EXPIiESS LIMES 21. Toll Payment Method Description: Electronic toll collection systems use automatic vehicle identification (AVI) technology to toll vehicles. These AVI systems use in -vehicle transponders and/or LPR cameras to identify vehicles for toll payment. Some facilities require that all vehicles have a transponder as the primary means of toll collection and use LPR cameras as a backup to capture vehicles that don't have a transponder or that have a transponder that fails to be detected. Other facilities allow vehicles to travel without a transponder and use LPR cameras as the primary means of toll collection; this system is known as pay by plate tolling. License -plate tolling equipment Craig F. Walker/The Denver Post Recommendation: Require all vehicles to have a transponder at time of travel. Background: Transponder -Based Toll Collection Electronic toll collection using transponders is a proven technology with high accuracy. The cost associated with the systems needed to process transponder transactions is lower than systems which allow for toll payment by license plate. In addition, as California transitions from the legacy battery - operated transponders to the new, less expensive 6C transponders, the cost for a transponder based toll collection system will decrease even further making transponder based toll collection a far more efficient method of collecting tolls. Most toll facilities that rely on transponders for toll collection also include LPR cameras to capture vehicles without a transponder to minimize revenue leakage. The license plate images are used to associate the transaction with a toll account when a transponder is not read or to look up the registered owner's address for collection of the toll through a toll violation process. As described in Section 23, HOVs are able to use switchable transponders to indicate their vehicle occupancy status and receive the appropriate toll discount. Pay by Plate Pay by plate utilizes LPR cameras and Optical Character Recognition technology to identify a vehicle's license plate number. The automatically generated plate number is independently verified and validated by toll operators in the customer service center, thereby increasing operational costs per toll transaction. This technology is currently being used on Transportation Corridor Agencies (TCA) toll facilities in Orange County, on all toll facilities in the Denver Metro Area (including express lanes), all Dallas / Ft. Worth area toll facilities (including express lanes), Loop 375 express lanes in El Paso, and on 1-15 Express Lanes Project 33 171 1-15 Express Lanes Project Toll Policy Report EXPRESS LIMES the SR-520 and 1-405 express lanes in the Seattle area. The license plate numbers are collected and the name and addresses of the registered users are requested from the state DMV, from which bills for all the tolls incurred during a specific period are aggregated and sent out to collect payment. Pay by plate tolling not only requires more processing costs, but it results in more revenue loss due to unidentifiable plates and registered owners and lengthens the amount of time to collect toll revenue. In a pay by plate scenario, HOVs are required to register their license plate in advance of making a trip so the toll system can apply the appropriate toll discount. Assessment: Because toll payment by transponder is a proven, accurate solution with a lower transaction cost as compared to pay by plate, it is recommended that RCTC open the 1-15 Express Lanes with a requirement that all vehicles have a transponder. Opening with a transponder requirement will encourage motorists to open an account and obtain a transponder. LPR cameras will be used to enforce this requirement and identify vehicles that don't carry a transponder. This policy also allows HOVs to declare their status using a switchable transponder as described in Section 23. 1-15 Express Lanes Project 34 172 1-15 Express Lanes Project Toll Policy Report EXPIIESS LIMES 22. Mobile Interface Description: Easy access to express lanes information is important to gain customer understanding and compliance. Most toll facilities across the country maintain a website where users can find information about the toll policies and access account information and many of these websites are accessible in a mobile format. In addition, some facilities provide mobile applications that allow users to review recent toll activity and pay tolls without a transponder. Recommendation: Implement Mobile Web for FasTrak° customers, but defer the Mobile Toll Payment Application. Background: Toll facilities across the country provide different mobile interfaces for customers as described below. Mobile Website Many websites currently include desktop and mobile versions. The mobile versions are intended to be viewed from a mobile device such as a smartphone or tablet and typically include the same functionality as the desktop site. A mobile website for express lanes could allow customers to access general express lane information (operating policies, requirements for use, etc.) and to access account information. Mobile Toll Payment Application Depending upon business rules, some toll facilities allow users to user mobile devices to pay tolls without the use of a transponder. For example, the TCA facilities in Southern California allow users to pay tolls from a mobile application within five days before or after a trip is made. Transportation Corridor Agency Mobile Application Interface Assessment: RCTC will require all users to carry a transponder (see Section 21), which is inconsistent with the idea of allowing users to pay tolls using a mobile application. Therefore, a Mobile Payment Application will not be deployed. However, users will have access to a mobile website to access Express Lanes information and to make changes or payments to their account. 1-15 Express Lanes Project 35 173 1-15 Express Lanes Project Toll Policy Report EXPIIESS LIMES 23. High Occupancy Vehicle Declaration Options Description: The primary function of HOV declaration is two -fold: 1) provide a mechanism to easily separate toll payers from those eligible to receive toll discounts, and 2) enable the efficient and effective enforcement of occupancy violations. Two methods of occupancy declaration were considered: the use of self -declaration lanes and switchable transponders. Recommendation: Identify HOV-3+ carpool customers via a switchable transponder. Background: There are different ways that express lanes can require toll -paying and toll -free vehicles to use the express lanes. In Southern California, the carpool declaration options generally fall under the "declaration lane" method (as used by the OCTA 91 Express Lanes and the Riverside 91 Express Lanes currently under construction), and the switchable transponder method (as deployed on the I-110 and I- 10 ExpressLanes in Los Angeles County). Self -Declaration Lanes Many first generation express lanes involved conversion of pre-existing, barrier -separated HOV lanes with adequate right-of-way for positive separation between toll payers and carpoolers. Known as the "declaration lane" option, this was the mechanism designed and implemented on SR-91 in Orange County, the first express lanes facility which opened in 1995. It will also be utilized on the 91 Express Lanes that are under construction in Riverside County. Declaration lane solutions require eligible carpools to diverge from the main travel lanes to a separated lane at toll zones. These vehicles NOV a soy a Single occupancy vehicles (SOV) lane tolling zone with separate declaration lane are charged an appropriate discounted or zero -value toll, FHWA Office of Operation/Proposed 1 95 and (if present) occupancy is validated by enforcement Managed Lanes personnel via visual scan. Vehicles without a transponder are considered violators — the same as if they traveled through the main toll lanes without a transponder. Switchable Transponders 1-15 Express Lanes Project 36 174 1-15 Express Lanes Project Toll Policy Report El[ MUS LIMES This method provides a technological method for declaring carpool status on the express lanes through a "switchable" transponder, as implemented on I- 10 and 1-110 in Los Angeles. Switchable transponders allow the customer to self -declare their occupancy status on the transponder itself. The Los Angeles transponder transmits multiple identifications (IDs), in order to associate the correct toll for a vehicle based upon its occupancy status. These IDs can be associated with a single occupancy vehicle, HOV-2, and HOV-3+ setting directly on the transponder. For compliant HOVs, the user declares the vehicle's status on the transponder (e.g., sliding the switch to "HOV2" or "HOV3+"), and the appropriate toll rate would be collected. If the same vehicle is being operated without the required occupancy, it would be required to declare appropriately on the transponder and the correct toll would be collected. If no transponder is present (or if it is malfunctioning), LPR (mounted on gantries or median poles) would be used to collect full toll payment from the user (regardless of occupancy status). Example Switchable Transponder Assessment: It is recommended that the 1-15 Express Lanes use switchable transponders for declaring occupancy. Switchable transponders have been successfully deployed on other toll facilities in the state and nationally. Also, as compared to declaration lanes, switchable transponders are more inexpensive to deploy and do not require drivers to make weaving maneuvers while in the Express Lanes, which may improve operational efficiency. With the enforcement strategy described in Section 11, CHP will have the tools necessary to enforce the proper use of the switchable transponder so that violation rates can be kept to a minimum. 1-15 Express Lanes Project 37 175 1-15 Express Lanes Project Toll Policy Report EXPIIESS LIMES 24. Express Lane Operations Facility Description: The 1-15 Express Lanes will require a facility to house various components of the operations, including a walk-in customer service center, customer call center, back office operations, image processing, finance and administration, system administration and maintenance and traffic management center. RCTC will provide the facility and the toll systems provider will supply the equipment, systems and staff to perform the services. Recommendation: Locate the call center, customer service center and traffic management center and administration in close proximity to the Express Lanes. Background: As described in Sections 12-14, RCTC will have the responsibility for 1-15 Express Lanes maintenance, traffic management and customer service functions. These functions would ideally be located in a single facility to centralize 1-15 Express Lanes operations and create synergies associated with co -located services. Four toll agencies operate in Southern California and each of them has a facility or facilities which house the toll operations functions. Toll programs across the nation have experimented with remote staff working from a contractor owned or sub -contracted facility. While this model has been successful for some, it has the potential to degrade service, complicate supervisory functions and prohibit the synergy gained from co -location of services. The 91 Express Lanes toll operations staff is being provided under a joint agreement with OCTA. The 91 Express Lanes call center and walk in staff are located at a leased facility near SR-91 and McKinley Street in the city of Corona. The other toll operation services are located in a leased facility near SR-91 and Weir Canyon Road in the city of Anaheim. RCTC's agreement with OCTA to share toll operation services expires in June of 2021. RCTC is currently procuring a toll operator for the 1-15 Express Lanes which will require a facility to house and RCTC toll operations staff, equipment and walk-in customer service location. the toll operator 1-15 Express Lanes Project 38 176 gZ 1-15 Express Lanes Project Toll Policy Report EXPRESS LIMES Assessment: 1-15 Express Lanes operations and maintenance are the responsibility of RCTC. To ensure that the goals for the 1-15 Express Lanes are met, RCTC will be best served by co -locating the required services in a facility in close proximity to the 1-15 Express Lanes. The 91 Express Lanes have set the precedent for local operations and customer service. Therefore, it is recommended that the customer service, traffic management and other administrative functions be located in the local area adjacent to the 1-15 corridor, with a specific site to be determined. This facility will be referred to as the RCTC Operations Center, or ROC. 1-15 Express Lanes Project 39 177 AGENDA ITEM 8J RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 8, 2016 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Michael Blomquist, Toll Program Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Interstate 15 Express Lanes Investment Grade Traffic and Revenue Study WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to adopt the Interstate 15 Express Lanes Investment Grade Traffic and Revenue Study. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Project Overview In December 2006, the Commission adopted the 2009 Measure A Western Riverside County Highway 10-Year Delivery Plan (10-Year Delivery Plan) to advance development of high priority projects in the renewed Measure A program. The 10-Year Delivery Plan calls for the development of tolled express lane corridors within State Route 91 and 1-15. The 1-15 Express Lanes project will reduce congestion within the 1-15 corridor and provide travel options for carpoolers and toll payers. The project extends approximately 15 miles from Cajalco Road in Corona to SR-60 just south of the San Bernardino County line. The project typically features two tolled express lanes in each direction. Traffic and Revenue Study An integral part of determining the financial feasibility of a tolling project is the Traffic and Revenue Study. The Commission, through its traffic and revenue consultant, has conducted several of these studies for the 1-15 Express Lanes since the adoption of the 10-Year Delivery Plan to help guide the project development work and to support project decisions. As the project developed its scope, cost, and schedule from its early stages to its more defined current stage, the Traffic and Revenue Study was updated to reflect current project data as well as regional data that influence the Traffic and Revenue Study results. The proposed toll policies for the 1-15 Express Lanes were used in conjunction with socio- economic trends, traffic volume and speed data, traveler origin -destination information, and Agenda Item 8J 178 land use planning to estimate future regional traffic growth. From this comprehensive traffic model, appropriate toll rates and annual toll revenue for the 50-year period of operation are estimated. Project Financing Typically the last Traffic and Revenue Study update is performed during the final stages of the project's development. As such, the Traffic and Revenue Study is attached to this agenda report, and staff is seeking Commission adoption to support upcoming project financing activities. These project financing activities include updating the project's plan of finance, submission of a loan application for a federal Transportation Investment Finance Innovation Act (TIFIA) loan, potential sale of Measure A bonds, sale of toll revenue bonds, and other financing activities. The annual toll revenue generated from the Traffic and Revenue serves as a critical input to the 1-15 Express Lanes financial model. This annual toll revenue plus many other factors are used to help determine the amount of Measure A sales tax, toll revenue bonds, and TIFIA loan funds required to finance the project. This Traffic and Revenue Study is prepared to support the Commission in obtaining investment -grade bond ratings in the future. There is no direct fiscal impact related to the adoption of the Investment Grade Traffic and Revenue study. Attachment: 1-15 Express Lanes Investment Grade Traffic and Revenue Study, dated May 11, 2016 (Posted on Commission Website) Agenda Item 81 179 ATTACHMENT 1 1-15 Express Lanes Investment Grade Traffic and Revenue Study 5 Stantec Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission May 11, 2016 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Table of Contents Executive Summary 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 1.1 PURPOSE AND FOCUS OF THE STUDY 1.1 1.2 THE CONSULTANT TEAM 1.1 1.3 OVERVIEW OF THE REPORT 1.1 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND SETTING 2.2 2.1 THE I-15 EXPRESS LANES PROJECT AND SETTING 2.2 3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS 3.5 3.1 OVERVIEW OF TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM 3.5 3.1.1 Other Major Roadways 3.6 3.1.2 Public Transportation 3.7 3.2 DATA COLLECTION PROGRAM 3.10 3.2.1 Screenline Traffic Volumes 3.11 3.2.2 Mainline Traffic Counts 3.14 3.2.3 Ramp Counts 3.16 3.2.4 Arterial Traffic Counts 3.17 3.3 1-15 CORRIDOR TRAFFIC DATA 3.18 3.3.1 1-15 Travel Speeds 3.19 3.3.2 Mainline Traffic by Hour 3.26 3.3.3 Ramp Volumes 3.29 3.3.4 Mainline Traffic - Demand Adjusted and Balanced Traffic by Hour 3.31 3.3.5 Heavy Vehicle Composition 3.33 3.3.6 Seasonality of Traffic 3.35 3.3.7 Balanced Traffic Network 3.35 3.3.8 1-15 Mainline Traffic by Day of Week 3.39 3.3.9 Origin -Destination Patterns on I-15 3.42 3.3.10 SR 91 Travel Speeds and Traffic Counts 3.52 3.3.1 1 Orange County SR 91 Express Lanes 3.61 4.0 SOCIOECONOMIC VARIABLES AND LAND USE 4.64 4.1 SUMMARY CONCLUSIONS 4.64 4.1.1 Study Area Employment Summary 4.65 4.1.2 Study Area Household Summary 4.70 4.2 FORECAST METHODOLOGY 4.72 4.3 HISTORICAL DATA AND TRENDS IN THE STUDY AREA 4.77 4.3.1 Historical Study Area Employment Trends 4.77 4.3.2 Historical Study Area Household Trends 4.82 4.4 EMPLOYMENT FORECASTS 4.85 4.4.1 Comparative Third Party Forecasts: Long -Term 4.86 Cli Stantec 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY 4.4.2 Study Area Employment Forecast 4.87 4.5 HOUSEHOLD FORECAST 4.89 4.5.1 Study Area Comparative Forecasts 4.89 4.5.2 Study Area Household Forecasts 4.91 4.5.3 Study Area Median Household Income Forecasts 4.93 4.6 KEY DEVELOPMENTS IN THE STUDY AREA 4.94 4.6.1 1-15 Corridor - North of SR-91 4.95 4.6.2 1-15 Corridor - South of SR-91 4.98 4.6.3 Orange County Focus Areas 4.100 5.0 MODEL DEVELOPMENT AND CALIBRATION 5.104 5.1 TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL 5.104 5.1.1 Model Structure and Development 5.104 5.1.2 Model Calibration 5.1 1 1 5.1.3 Preparation of Highway Networks 5.124 5.2 MARKET SHARE MODEL 5.127 5.2.1 Model Structure and Development - Market Share Model 5.127 5.3 MICRO -SIMULATION MODEL 5.130 5.3.1 Micro -simulation Model Development and Calibration 5.130 6.0 TRAFFIC AND REVENUE FORECAST 6.140 6.1 FORECAST METHODOLOGY 6.140 6.2 FORECAST ASSUMPTIONS 6.140 6.2.1 1-15 Express Lanes Configuration 6.140 6.2.2 Regional Network Improvements 6.143 6.2.3 Toll Policy and Pricing 6.145 6.3 REGIONAL TRAFFIC FORECASTS 6.148 6.3.1 Screenline Traffic Growth 6.149 6.3.2 1-15 Global Traffic Growth 6.149 6.4 1-15 EXPRESS LANES FORECAST 6.152 6.4.1 Annual Traffic and Revenue Forecast 6.152 6.4.2 Weekday Traffic and Revenue Forecasts 6.157 6.4.3 Impact of Network Improvements in 2027, 2030, and 2035 6.183 6.4.4 1-15 Express Lanes Operations 6.198 LIST OF TABLES Table 3-1: Metrolink Average Weekday Ridership and Boardings 3.10 Table 3-2: Traffic on North -South Screenlines 3.13 Table 3-3: Traffic on East-West Screenlines 3.14 Table 3-4: 1-15 NB Travel Speeds 3.25 Table 3-5 : 1-15 SB Travel Speeds 3.25 Table 3-6: Average Weekday Northbound Ramp Volumes 3.30 Table 3-7: Average Weekday Southbound Ramp Volumes 3.31 Table 3-8: 1-15 Seasonality Factors for Average Weekdays (Tuesday -Thursday) 3.35 Table 3-9: Origin -Destination Matrix, I-15 NB AM 3.50 Cli Stantec 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Table 3-10: Origin -Destination Matrix, I-15 NB PM 3.50 Table 3-1 1: Origin -Destination Matrix, I-15 SB AM 3.51 Table 3-12: Origin -Destination Matrix, I-15 SB PM 3.51 Table 3-13: Westbound SR 91 Travel Speeds, I-15 to west of SR 55 - 6-10 AM 3.54 Table 3-14: Eastbound SR 91 Travel Speeds, west of SR 55 to I-15 - 6-10 AM 3.56 Table 3-15: Eastbound SR 91 Travel Speeds, west of SR 55 to I-15 - 3-7 PM 3.58 Table 3-16: Westbound SR 91 Travel Speeds, I-15 to SR 55 - 3-7 PM 3.60 Table 3-17: SR 91 Express Lanes - FY 2015 Traffic and Revenue 3.62 Table 4-1: Base Case Study Area Employment and Household Forecast (thousands) 4.65 Table 4-2: Jobs per Household by County 4.71 Table 4-3: RivTAM Forecast Variable Methodology 4.76 Table 4-4: SANDAG Forecast Variable Methodology 4.77 Table 4-5: Total Employment Growth by County, 1995 to 2015 4.78 Table 4-6: Inland Empire Job Growth/Loss by Sector, 2007 to 2010 4.80 Table 4-7: Inland Empire Employment Growth/Loss by Sector 2010-2014 4.81 Table 4-8: Growth of Total Residential Building Permits in the Study Area 4.83 Table 4-9: Annual Building Permits Issued in the Study Area, 2007 to 2015f 4.84 Table 4-10: Comparisons of Long -Term Employment Projections (thousands) 4.87 Table 4-11: Base Case Employment Forecast by County (thousands) 4.88 Table 4-12: Comparison of Long -Term Household Projections (thousands) 4.90 Table 4-13: Historical Study Area Median Home Prices 4.91 Table 4-14: Base Case Household Forecast by County (thousands) 4.92 Table 4-15: Base Case Median Household Income Forecast (2015 Dollars) 4.93 Table 5-1: AM Peak Period Calibration Results -Speed (mph) 5.112 Table 5-2: Midday Period Calibration Results - Speed (mph) 5.113 Table 5-3: PM Peak Period Calibration Results - Speed (mph) 5.114 Table 5-4: Night Period Calibration Results -Speed (mph) 5.115 Table 5-5: Calibration Results at Screenlines 5.117 Table 5-6: Calibration Results - Northbound 1-15 Daily Corridor Volume 5.118 Table 5-7: Calibration Results - Southbound 1-15 Daily Corridor Volume 5.118 Table 5-8: Calibration Results - Northbound 1-15 AM, Midday, PM, and Night Volumes 5.119 Table 5-9: Calibration Results - Southbound 1-15 AM, Midday, PM, and Night Volumes 5.120 Table 5-10: Key Network Changes (2015) 5.124 Table 5-1 1: Key Network Changes: 2016-2025 5.125 Table 5-12: Key Network Changes: 2026-2035 5.126 Table 5-13: Number of Lanes, Existing Conditions on I-15 5.132 Table 5-14: Origin -Destination Matrix, I-15 NB AM 5.133 Table 5-15: Origin -Destination Matrix, I-15 NB PM 5.133 Table 5-16: Origin -Destination Matrix, I-15 SB AM 5.133 Table 5-17: Origin -Destination Matrix, I-15 SB PM 5.134 Table 5-18: Micro -Simulation model Northbound AM Spot Speeds 5.135 Table 5-19: Northbound 1-15- Actual vs. Model Volume - AM Peak Period 5.135 Cli Stantec 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Table 5-20: Micro -Simulation model Southbound AM Spot Speeds 5.136 Table 5-21: Southbound 1-15- Actual vs. Model Volume - AM Peak Period 5.136 Table 5-22: Micro -Simulation model Northbound PM Spot Speeds 5.138 Table 5-23: Northbound 1-15- Actual vs. Model Volume - PM Peak Period 5.138 Table 5-24: Micro -Simulation model Southbound PM Spot Speeds 5.139 Table 5-25: Southbound 1-15- Actual vs. Model Volume - PM Peak Period 5.139 Table 6-1: Number of Lanes and Segment Distance 6.143 Table 6-2: 1-15 Express Lanes Pricing Policy 6.146 Table 6-3: 1-15 Corridor Regional and Sub -Region Trip Growth 6.148 Table 6-4: Regional Economic Growth by County 6.148 Table 6-5: 1-15 ELP Base Case Traffic and Revenue Forecast (2015$'s) 6.153 Table 6-6: Typical Weekday, Friday, and Weekend T&R Comparison 6.155 Table 6-7: Express Lane Traffic and Revenue Annualization Factors 6.155 Table 6-8: Ramp -Up of Traffic and Revenue 6.156 Table 6-9: Weekday Revenue, Transactions, and Average Toll - 2025 6.158 Table 6-10: Weekday Revenue, Express Traffic, and Full Tolls by Segment - 2025 6.161 Table 6-1 1: 1-15 Global & Express Traffic, GP Speed, & Tolls Charged - 2025, 7 to 8 AM 6.163 Table 6-12: 1-15 Global and Express Traffic, GP Speed, and Tolls Charge - 2025, 5 to 6 PM 6.164 Table 6-13: Weekday Revenue, Transactions, and Average Toll - 2035 6.172 Table 6-14: Weekday Revenue, Traffic, and Full Tolls by Segment - 2035 6.174 Table 6-15: 1-15 Global & Express Traffic, GP Speed, and Tolls Charged - 2035, 7 to 8 AM 6.176 Table 6-16: 1-15 Global & Express Traffic, GP Speed, and Tolls Charged - 2035, 5 to 6 PM 6.177 Table 6-17: Average Weekday Transactions and Revenue, Impact of 2027 Project6.185 Table 6-18: Average Weekday Transactions and Revenue, Impact of 2030 Project6.188 Table 6-19: Average Weekday Transactions and Revenue, Impact of 2035 Projects 6.194 Table 6-20: HOV Share Change 6.196 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2-1: 1-15 ELP Corridor 2.2 Figure 2-2: 1-15 Express Lanes Access Points and Number of Lanes 2.4 Figure 3-1: 1-15 T&R Model Corridor Subarea 3.6 Figure 3-2: Metrolink Route Map 3.9 Figure 3-3: Screenline Map 3.12 Figure 3-4: Mainline Count Locations 3.15 Figure 3-5: Ramp Count Locations 3.17 Figure 3-6: Arterial Count Locations 3.18 Figure 3-7: 1-15 NB AM Travel Time Run 3.20 Figure 3-8: 1-15 SB AM Travel Time Run 3.21 Figure 3-9: 1-15 SB PM Travel Time Run 3.23 Figure 3-10: 1-15 NB PM Travel Time Run 3.24 �i Stantec 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Figure 3-1 1: 1-15 NB Weekday Traffic Profiles - South of Cajalco Road 3.26 Figure 3-12: 1-15 SB Weekday Traffic Profiles - South of Cajalco Road 3.27 Figure 3-13: 1-15 NB Weekday Traffic Profile - Limonite Avenue to Sixth Street 3.28 Figure 3-14: 1-15 SB Weekday Traffic Profile - Limonite Avenue to Sixth Street 3.29 Figure 3-15: Weekday Hourly Traffic Profile - South of Cajalco Road 3.32 Figure 3-16: Hourly Traffic Profile - Limonite Avenue to Cantu-Galleano Ranch Road 3.33 Figure 3-17: 1-15 Weekday Vehicle Composition - South of Cajalco Road 3.34 Figure 3-18: 1-15 Vehicle Composition - South of Limonite Avenue 3.34 Figure 3-19: 1-15 Daily Traffic Stick Diagram 3.36 Figure 3-20: 1-15 Stick Diagram - 7 to 8 AM Travel Demand 3.37 Figure 3-21: 1-15 Stick Diagram - 5 to 6 PM Travel Demand 3.38 Figure 3-22: 1-15 NB Volumes by Day of Week - South of Cajalco Road 3.40 Figure 3-23: 1-15 SB Volumes by Day of Week - South of Cajalco Road 3.40 Figure 3-24: 1-15 NB Volumes by Day of Week - South of Limonite Avenue 3.41 Figure 3-25: 1-15 SB Volumes by Day of Week - South of Limonite Avenue 3.41 Figure 3-26: Origin -Destination Data Collection Program 3.43 Figure 3-27: Origins and Destinations to/from south of Cajalco Road 3.45 Figure 3-28: Origins and Destinations to/from SR 91 west 3.47 Figure 3-29: Origins and Destinations to/from north of Cantu-Galleano Ranch Road 3.49 Figure 3-30: Westbound SR 91 GP Lane Travel Time Run - AM Peak 3.53 Figure 3-31: Eastbound SR 91 GP Lane Travel Time Run - AM Peak 3.55 Figure 3-32: SR 91 Eastbound GP Lanes, Travel Time Run - PM Peak 3.57 Figure 3-33: SR 91 Westbound GP Lanes, Travel Time Run - PM Peak 3.59 Figure 3-34: SR 91 Global Traffic by Hour - Riverside -Orange County Line 3.61 Figure 3-35: Eastbound 91 Express Lanes Traffic and Tolls - Average Tuesday - Thursday 3.62 Figure 3-36: Westbound 91 Express Lanes Traffic and Tolls - Average Tuesday - Thursday 3.63 Figure 3-37: SR 91 Global & Express Traffic by Hour - Riverside -Orange County Line3.63 Figure 4-1: Historical and Forecast Study Area Employment Gains and Total Employment 4.66 Figure 4-2: Historical and Base Case Study Area Employment Forecasts 4.67 Figure 4-3: Historical and Forecast Study Area Household Gains and Forecast 4.71 Figure 4-4: Historical and Base Case Household Forecasts 4.72 Figure 4-5: Map of the Study Area 4.73 Figure 4-6: Illustration of the WSP I Parsons Brinckerhoff Land Use Forecast Model Methodology 4.75 Figure 4-7: Inland Empire Job Growth/Loss by Sector, 2007 to 2010 4.79 Figure 4-8: Inland Empire Employment Growth/Loss by Sector 2010-2014 4.81 Figure 4-9: Study Area Residential Building Permit Issuance, 2005 to 2015 4.85 Figure 4-10: Map of Focus Areas north of SR-91 4.96 Figure 4-1 1: Map of Focus Areas South of SR-91 4.99 Figure 4-12: Map of Orange County Focus Areas 4.101 ® Stantec 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Figure 5-1: Model Structure with Toll Diversion Assignment Model 5.105 Figure 5-2: Sub -Area Model Boundary 5.108 Figure 5-3: Corridor Level Model Boundary 5.109 Figure 5-4: Screenline Locations 5.116 Figure 5-5: 1-15 OD Patterns Calibration, Peak Direction, South of Cajalco Road 5.121 Figure 5-6: 1-15 OD Patterns Calibration, Peak Direction, SR 91 West of 1-15 5.122 Figure 5-7: 1-15 OD Patterns Calibration, Peak Direction, North of Cantu Galleano 5.123 Figure 5-8: SR 91 Westbound Global and Express Traffic 5.128 Figure 5-9: SR 91 Westbound Express Lanes Tolls Charged 5.128 Figure 5-10: SR 91 Westbound Express Market Share Curves - Full Toll Traffic 5.129 Figure 5-1 1: Existing Conditions Micro -Simulation Model Extents 5.131 Figure 6-1: 1-15 Express Lanes Access Points and Number of Lanes 6.142 Figure 6-2: OCTA SR 91 Express Lanes Toll Schedule - July 1, 2015 (FY 2016) 6.147 Figure 6-3: Weekday Traffic - North -South Screenlines 6.149 Figure 6-4: 1-15 Northbound Global Traffic 6.151 Figure 6-5: 1-15 Southbound Global Traffic 6.151 Figure 6-6: HOV-3+ Share of All Express Traffic - 2025 6.159 Figure 6-7: 1-15 ELP Northbound, between Limonite Avenue and 6th Street 2025 6.165 Figure 6-8: 1-15 ELP Northbound, south of Magnolia Avenue - 2025 6.166 Figure 6-9: 1-15 ELP Southbound, between Limonite Avenue and 6th Street - 2025 6.167 Figure 6-10: 1-15 ELP Southbound, south of Magnolia Avenue - 2025 6.168 Figure 6-1 1: Travel Demand Model vs. Market Share Model Capture Rate, 2025 SB 1-15 ELP, Cantu Galleano Ranch Rd to Hidden Valley Parkway 6.170 Figure 6-12: HOV-3+ Share of All Express Traffic - 2035 6.173 Figure 6-13: 1-15 ELP Northbound, between Limonite Avenue and 6th Street - 2035 6.178 Figure 6-14: 1-15 ELP Northbound, south of Magnolia Avenue - 2035 6.179 Figure 6-15: 1-15 ELP Southbound, between Limonite Avenue and 6th Street - 20356.180 Figure 6-16: 1-15 ELP Southbound, south of Magnolia Avenue - 2035 6.181 Figure 6-17: Travel Demand Model vs. Market Share Model Capture Rate, 2035 SB 1-15 ELP, Cantu Galleano Ranch Rd to Hidden Valley Parkway 6.182 Figure 6-18: 1-15 Northbound Global Traffic, Impact of 1-15 South Express Lanes 6.184 Figure 6-19: 1-15 Southbound Global Traffic, Impact of 1-15 South Express Lanes 6.184 Figure 6-20: Impact of 1-15 South EL on I-15 ELP Revenue 6.186 Figure 6-21: Northbound Global Traffic, Impact of Widening Temescal Canyon Road 6.187 Figure 6-22: Southbound Global Traffic, Impact of Widening Temescal Canyon Road 6.187 Figure 6-23 Impact of Temescal Canyon Road on I-15 ELP Revenue 6.189 Figure 6-24: 2026 to 2035 Improvements 6.191 Figure 6-25: Northbound Global Traffic, Impact of 2035 Improvements 6.192 Figure 6-26: Southbound Global Traffic, Impact of 2035 Improvements 6.193 Figure 6-27 Impact of 2035 Improvements on I-15 ELP Revenue 6.195 Figure 6-28: Existing Carpool Lanes in Southern California 6.197 Figure 6-29: Simulation Model of SR 91 / 1-15 Interchange - PM Peak Hour 6.199 Cli Stantec 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Figure 6-30: Simulation Model of 1-15 at the Magnolia Ave Interchange - PM Peak Hour 6.200 Figure 6-31: Simulation Model of 1-15 at the Ontario Ave Interchange - PM Peak Hour 6.201 Figure 6-32: Simulation Model of 1-15 at the El Cerrito Rd Interchange - PM Peak Hour 6.202 Figure 6-33: Simulation Model of 1-15 at the Cajalco Rd Interchange - PM Peak Hour 6.203 5 Stantec 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Executive Summary EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ES.1 Introduction Stantec Consulting Services Inc. ("Stantec") was retained by the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) to conduct a toll traffic and revenue study of the proposed 1-15 Express Lanes Project (1-15 ELP) in Riverside County, California. This study includes forecasts of likely toll traffic and revenue for fiscal years 2021 through 2070 (the "Forecast Period"). Stantec had the overall lead for the Traffic and Revenue Investment Grade Study and was responsible for project management and coordination, data collection, calibrating and validating the T&R forecasting models, and ultimately forecasting traffic and gross toll revenues. WSP 1 Parsons Brinckerhoff Inc. ("PB") provided the socioeconomic and land use review of employment, population, and household projections used in the T&R model. The T&R forecasting process involved an extensive traffic data collection plan, the development and calibration of a T&R forecasting model including the regional RivTAM travel demand model, and the development of future year socio-economic forecasts. ES.2 Project Description The 1-15 Express Lanes Project (ELP) would build generally four express lanes in the median of the 1-15 freeway in Riverside County between Cajalco Road to the south and SR 60 to the north, a length of nearly 15 miles. Figure ES-1 highlights in red the location of the proposed 1-15 ELP. The section of 1-15 where the proposed 1-15 ELP would be built is used by commuters traveling between the generally residential areas in Riverside County and the employment centers in Orange and Los Angeles Counties. The 1-15 freeway is a critical link to and from the SR 91, SR 60, and 1-10 freeways. The relatively high cost of living in Orange County has caused many people with jobs there to seek lower cost housing options in places such as the Inland Empire. This relationship between coastal and inland communities results in strong traffic demand along linkages between the two areas, such as SR 91 and the proposed 1-15 ELP. The Inland Empire is poised to experience the strongest percentage employment and household growth in the Study Area over the Forecast Period and the 1-15 ELP is well located to benefit from this growth. The 1-15 ELP would be an all -electronic dynamically priced facility. Motorists wanting to use the lanes would be required to mount a toll transponder (FasTrak) in their vehicle. The price of the lanes would change throughout the day in reaction to usage of the facility. As demand increases, the price would also increase. The facility is priced to ensure free -flow, but is neither revenue maximizing nor throughput maximizing. HOV-3+ and zero emission vehicles (ZEV's) with ® Stantec ES-1 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Executive Summary the appropriate clean air vehicle sticker and a switchable transponder would receive a 50 percent discount. Figure ES-1: 1-15 ELP Corridor ES.3 Existing Traffic Conditions Average weekday traffic on 1-15 is between 140,000 and 190,000 vehicles per day on its 6 to 8 lanes. In addition to commuter traffic, it is a road that is used by recreational traffic as well as truck traffic. The roadway is chronically congested, with the worst delays observed on northbound 1-15 in the morning, and southbound 1-15 in the evening. Regional forecasts of population, households, and employment suggest that demand for the 1-15 freeway would continue to rise. The 1-15 ELP would serve as a means to accommodate projected traffic growth, and offer a reliable trip to travelers in this corridor. Motorists using the 1-15 corridor in Riverside County between Cajalco Road and SR 60 experience recurring and extensive delays during the morning and evening peak hours. The generally three -lane per direction freeway gets heavily congested in the northbound direction during the morning, both south of El Cerrito Road, and north of SR 91, and is heavily congested in the southbound direction south of SR 91. During the AM, it is typical for drivers to experience stop ® Stantec ES-2 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Executive Summary and go conditions between SR 91 and SR 60 for a period of two hours. Some segments of 1-15 operate at travel speeds below 20 mph. South of SR 91, the 1-15 segments south of El Cerrito Road are congested with delays lasting for nearly three hours. The worst delays exist on the northbound 1-15 approach to Cajalco Road, which marks the southern terminus of the 1-15 ELP. The most intense delays occur on southbound 1-15 during the PM peak period, when motorists experience recurring stop -and -go congestion between SR 91 and Cajalco Road, and travel speeds can also drop below 20 mph. This condition regularly persists for several hours during the PM peak period, starting as early as 3 PM and often not resolved until past 7 PM. ES.4 Socioeconomic Variables and Land Use Employment in the Study Area, which consists of Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardino counties, is forecast to grow by 1.4 million jobs from 7.2 to 8.6 million during the Forecast Period, a compound annual growth rate of 0.9 percent. Households in the Study Area will grow by 1.3 million over the Forecast Period from 5.8 to 7.0 million, a 1.0% compound annual growth rate. Housing growth will closely track job growth region -wide, although housing production will vary by market due to differing levels of developable land availability and housing affordability by submarket. For example, the Inland Empire' is poised to grow at a more rapid pace as compared to Orange and Los Angeles Counties due to higher levels of available land and lower housing prices relative to Orange County and other coastal areas. Table ES-1 presents a summary of the Base Case Study Area employment and household forecasts. Table ES-1: Base Case Study Area Employment and Household Forecast (thousands) Employment 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Total Employment Period Incremental Growth Average Annual Growth CAGR [1] 7,231 7,830 8,040 8,313 8,650 2015-20 2020-25 2025-30 2030-35 2015-35 599 210 273 337 1,419 120 42 55 67 71 1.61% 0.53% 0.67% 0.80% 0.90% Households 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Total Households Period Incremental Growth Average Annual Growth CAGR 5,764 6,186 6,478 6,750 7,032 2015-20 2020-25 2025-30 2030-35 2015-35 422 292 273 281 1,268 84 58 55 56 63.40 1.42% 0.93% 0.83% 0.82% 1.00% [1] Compound Annual Growth Rate ' For the purposes of this analysis, the "Inland Empire" is defined as Riverside and San Bernardino Counties. Stantec ES-3 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Executive Summary ES.5 Model Development and Calibration The T&R forecasting process relied primarily on the traffic forecasts produced by Stantec's travel demand model but supported by a market -share model, and VISSIM micro -simulation model. Stantec's travel demand model starts with the Riverside County Traffic Analysis Model (RivTAM) and the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) models, and adapts them for use in forecasting I-15 Express Lane Project traffic and revenue. Stantec's market share model is developed from the revealed preference of existing Orange County SR 91 Express Lanes users. Toll traffic capture rates were developed, correlating with corridor congestion and toll rates. Finally, a micro -simulation model, developed in VISSIM, was used to model the likely operations of the 1-15 corridor including the 1-15 Express Lanes. The various models were calibrated and validated, and adapted to predict future traffic and revenue. ES.6 Traffic and Revenue Forecast The 1-15 ELP is forecast to generate $9.58 million (2015 $'s) during its first 12 months of operations (fiscal year 2021 starting July 1, 2020). The forecast shown in Table ES-2 assumes the toll policy and pricing as described in Section 6.2.3 of this report. The facility would be all -electronic and dynamically priced while offering HOV-3+ carpools and ZEV's with a transponder a 50 percent discount. Tolls are set to vary with demand for the express lanes; as traffic rises, tolls also rise. The forecast also assumes the facility is ramping up over a two-year period and therefore experiences rapid traffic, toll, and revenue growth. By the third year, ramp -up is expected to be complete and the 1-15 ELP would generate $20.45 million (2015 $'s). The underlying rate of toll traffic growth between the opening year and 2035 is 4 percent per year. Toll rate growth, which would rise along with increases in toll traffic, would range from 4 to 5 percent per year. Revenue growth between opening year and 2035 would range from 8 to 9 percent per year, respectively. This steady pace of growth is interrupted in years 2027, 2030, and 2035 when various regional roadway improvements are assumed to be completed. Revenue in year 2027 would increase by almost 23 percent to $34.7 million, and by 12 percent in 2028 to $39.0 million largely due to the assumed completion of the 1-15 South Express Lanes. The 1-15 South Express Lanes are expected to divert more traffic to the 1-15 corridor, would improve the operations at the southern terminus near Cajalco Road, and would increase the amount of HOV-3+ vehicles using the 1-15 ELP. The combination of these three factors makes the 1-15 ELP more attractive and increases the facility's traffic and revenue potential. By 2030, the widening of the parallel arterial Temescal Canyon Road between El Cerrito Road and Indian Truck Trail alleviates some of the 1-15 congestion and results in a 13 percent revenue drop to $36.7 million. Revenue resumes a growth trend of 9 percent per year until 2035, when a series of arterial widenings and an assumed change in regional HOV policy requiring HOV-3+ carpools rather than HOV-2+ induce a 33 percent revenue drop to $35.4 million in 2035. After 2035, the forecasts assume a slower rate of revenue growth of 1.9 percent per year until 2050. The slower rate of revenue growth is due to the assumption of a global traffic growth rate of only 0.5 percent per year between 2035 and 2050. Between 2050 and 2069, the T&R forecast assumes a nominal growth rate of 1 percent per year. ® Stantec ES-4 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Executive Summary Table ES-2: 1-15 Express Lanes, Base Case Traffic and Revenue (2015$'s) Forecast Fiscal Year Calendar Year Starting Full Toll Txns (excl HOV) y/y % Change Toll Txns (incl HOV) y/y % Change HOT Transactions y/y % Change HOV Only y/y % Change % HOV Revenue, 2015$'s y/y % Change Average Toll / Transaction y/y % Change 2021 2020 20,828,000 - 26,432,000 - 26,432,000 - 5,604,000 - 21% $9,580,000 - $0.36 - 2022 2021 26,271,000 26% 33,344,000 26% 33,344,000 26% 7,073,000 26% 21% $15,097,000 58% $0.45 25% 2023 2022 32,102,000 22% 40,752,000 22% 40,752,000 22% 8,650,000 22% 21% $20,446,000 35% $0.50 11% 2024 2023 33,344,000 4% 42,335,000 4% 42,335,000 4% 8,991,000 4% 21% $22,152,000 8% $0.52 4% 2025 2024 34,636,000 4% 43,981,000 4% 43,981,000 4% 9,345,000 4% 21% $24,001,000 8% $0.55 4% 2026 2025 35,977,000 4% 45,690,000 4% 45,690,000 4% 9,713,000 4% 21% $26,004,000 8% $0.57 4% 2027 2026 37,369,000 4% 47,465,000 4% 47,465,000 4% 10,096,000 4% 21% $28,175,000 8% $0.59 4% 2028 2027 38,616,000 3% 50,711,000 7% 50,711,000 7% 12,095,000 20% 24% $34,753,000 23% $0.69 15% 2029 2028 40,049,000 4% 53,121,000 5% 53,121,000 5% 13,072,000 8% 25% $39,032,000 12% $0.73 7% 2030 2029 41,600,000 4% 55,187,000 4% 55,187,000 4% 13,587,000 4% 25% $42,290,000 8% $0.77 4% 2031 2030 41,304,000 -1% 54,782,000 -1% 54,782,000 -1% 13,478,000 -1% 25% $36,745,000 -13% $0.67 -12% 2032 2031 43,110,000 4% 57,186,000 4% 57,186,000 4% 14,076,000 4% 25% $40,196,000 9% $0.70 5% 2033 2032 44,995,000 4% 59,696,000 4% 59,696,000 4% 14,701,000 4% 25% $43,971,000 9% $0.74 5% 2034 2033 46,961,000 4% 62,316,000 4% 62,316,000 4% 15,355,000 4% 25% $48,100,000 9% $0.77 5% 2035 2034 49,013,000 4% 65,050,000 4% 65,050,000 4% 16,037,000 4% 25% $52,618,000 9% $0.81 5% 2036 2035 45,476,000 -7% 55,763,000 -14% 55,763,000 -14% 10,287,000 -36% 18% $35,415,000 -33% $0.64 -21% 2037 2036 45,914,000 1.0% 56,304,000 1.0% 56,304,000 1.0% 10,390,000 1.0% 18% $36,074,000 1.9% $0.64 0.9% 2038 2037 46,356,000 1.0% 56,850,000 1.0% 56,850,000 1.0% 10,494,000 1.0% 18% $36,745,000 1.9% $0.65 0.9% 2039 2038 46,803,000 1.0% 57,402,000 1.0% 57,402,000 1.0% 10,599,000 1.0% 18% $37,429,000 1.9% $0.65 0.9% 2040 2039 47,254,000 1.0% 57,959,000 1.0% 57,959,000 1.0% 10,705,000 1.0% 18% $38,125,000 1.9% $0.66 0.9% 2041 2040 47,709,000 1.0% 58,521,000 1.0% 58,521,000 1.0% 10,812,000 1.0% 18% $38,835,000 1.9% $0.66 0.9% 2042 2041 48,168,000 1.0% 59,088,000 1.0% 59,088,000 1.0% 10,920,000 1.0% 18% $39,558,000 1.9% $0.67 0.9% 2043 2042 48,632,000 1.0% 59,661,000 1.0% 59,661,000 1.0% 11,029,000 1.0% 18% $40,294,000 1.9% $0.68 0.9% 2044 2043 49,100,000 1.0% 60,240,000 1.0% 60,240,000 1.0% 11,140,000 1.0% 18% $41,044,000 1.9% $0.68 0.9% 2045 2044 49,573,000 1.0% 60,824,000 1.0% 60,824,000 1.0% 11,251,000 1.0% 18% $41,808,000 1.9% $0.69 0.9% 2046 2045 50,051,000 1.0% 61,414,000 1.0% 61,414,000 1.0% 11,363,000 1.0% 19% $42,586,000 1.9% $0.69 0.9% 2047 2046 50,533,000 1.0% 62,010,000 1.0% 62,010,000 1.0% 11,477,000 1.0% 19% $43,378,000 1.9% $0.70 0.9% 2048 2047 51,019,000 1.0% 62,611,000 1.0% 62,611,000 1.0% 11,592,000 1.0% 19% $44,186,000 1.9% $0.71 0.9% 2049 2048 51,510,000 1.0% 63,218,000 1.0% 63,218,000 1.0% 11,708,000 1.0% 19% $45,008,000 1.9% $0.71 0.9% 2050 2049 52,006,000 1.0% 63,831,000 1.0% 63,831,000 1.0% 11,825,000 1.0% 19% $45,846,000 1.9% $0.72 0.9% 2051 2050 52,507,000 1.0% 64,450,000 1.0% 64,450,000 1.0% 11,943,000 1.0% 19% $46,699,000 1.9% $0.72 0.9% 2052 2051 52,770,000 0.5% 64,773,000 0.5% 64,773,000 0.5% 12,003,000 0.5% 19% $47,167,000 1.0% $0.73 0.5% 2053 2052 53,034,000 0.5% 65,097,000 0.5% 65,097,000 0.5% 12,063,000 0.5% 19% $47,640,000 1.0% $0.73 0.5% 2054 2053 53,299,000 0.5% 65,422,000 0.5% 65,422,000 0.5% 12,123,000 0.5% 19% $48,117,000 1.0% $0.74 0.5% 2055 2054 53,565,000 0.5% 65,749,000 0.5% 65,749,000 0.5% 12,184,000 0.5% 19% $48,600,000 1.0% $0.74 0.5% 2056 2055 53,833,000 0.5% 66,078,000 0.5% 66,078,000 0.5% 12,245,000 0.5% 19% $49,087,000 1.0% $0.74 0.5% 2057 2056 54,102,000 0.5% 66,409,000 0.5% 66,409,000 0.5% 12,307,000 0.5% 19% $49,579,000 1.0% $0.75 0.5% 2058 2057 54,373,000 0.5% 66,741,000 0.5% 66,741,000 0.5% 12,368,000 0.5% 19% $50,076,000 $50,578,000 _ 1.0% 1.0% $0.75 $0.75 ' 0.5% 0.5% 2059 2058 54,644,000 0.5% 67,074,000 0.5% 67,074,000 0.5% 12,430,000 0.5% 19% 2060 2059 54,918,000 0.5% 67,410,000 0.5% 67,410,000 0.5% 12,492,000 0.5% 19% $51,085,000 1.0% $0.76 0.5% 2061 2060 55,192,000 0.5% 67,746,000 0.5% 67,746,000 0.5% 12,554,000 0.5% 19% $51,597,000 1.0% $0.76 0.5% 2062 2061 55,468,000 0.5% 68,085,000 0.5% 68,085,000 0.5% 12,617,000 0.5% 19% $52,114,000 1.0% $0.77 0.5% 2063 2062 55,745,000 0.5% 68,425,000 0.5% 68,425,000 0.5% 12,680,000 0.5% 19% $52,637,000 1.0% $0.77 0.5% 2064 2063 56,025,000 0.5% 68,768,000 0.5% 68,768,000 0.5% 12,743,000 0.5% 19% $53,165,000 1.0% $0.77 0.5% 2065 2064 56,305,000 0.5% 69,112,000 0.5% 69,112,000 0.5% 12,807,000 0.5% 19% $53,698,000 1.0% $0.78 0.5% 2066 2065 56,586,000 0.5% 69,457,000 0.5% 69,457,000 0.5% 12,871,000 0.5% 19% $54,236,000 1.0% $0.78 0.5% 2067 2066 56,869,000 0.5% 69,805,000 0.5% 69,805,000 0.5% 12,936,000 0.5% 19% $54,780,000 1.0% $0.78 0.5% 2068 2067 57,154,000 0.5% 70,154,000 0.5% 70,154,000 0.5% 13,000,000 0.5% 19% $55,329,000 1.0% $0.79 0.5% 2069 2068 57,439,000 0.5% 70,505,000 0.5% 70,505,000 0.5% 13,066,000 0.5% 19% $55,884,000 1.0% $0.79 0.5% 2070 2069 57,726,000 0.5% 70,857,000 0.5% 70,857,000 0.5% 13,131,000 0.5% 19% $56,444,000 1.0% $0.80 0.5% * Transactions are defined as volume recorded in each Express Lane segment. Each time a vehicle passes through a segment, they are recorded as a transaction. A full-length trip is recorded as 7 transactions. ® Stantec ES-5 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Introduction .0 INTRODUCTION Stantec Consulting Services Inc. ("Stantec") was retained by the Riverside County Transportation Commission (ROTC) to conduct a toll traffic and revenue study of the proposed 1-15 Express Lanes Project (1-15 ELP) in Riverside County, California. This study includes forecasts of likely toll traffic and revenue for fiscal years 2021 through 2070. 1.1 PURPOSE AND FOCUS OF THE STUDY The primary focus of this study was to complete an investment grade traffic and revenue forecast for the proposed 1-15 ELP. Our efforts included traffic data collection, the development and calibration of T&R forecasting models, and independent socioeconomic forecasts. 1.2 THE CONSULTANT TEAM Stantec had the overall lead for the Traffic and Revenue Investment Grade Study and was responsible for project management and coordination, data collection, calibrating and validating the T&R forecasting models, and ultimately forecasting traffic and gross toll revenues. WSP 1 Parsons Brinckerhoff Inc. ("PB") provided the socioeconomic and land use review of employment, population, and household projections used in the T&R model. 1.3 OVERVIEW OF THE REPORT The following is a brief description of the contents of each chapter: • Chapter 2: Project Description and Setting - describes the 1-15 Express Lanes Project's setting and purpose. • Chapter 3: Existing Traffic Conditions - summarizes the traffic data collected throughout the study area including traffic volumes, travel speeds, and OD patterns. • Chapter 4: Socio-Economic Variables and Land Use - describes the assessment of the regional area's economy and the study area forecast of future year occupied households, population, and employment. • Chapter 5: Model Development and Calibration - explains the modeling methodology used to forecast 1-15 ELP traffic and revenue. This includes a discussion of the regional travel demand modeling, market share modeling, and micro -simulation models. • Chapter 6: Traffic and Revenue Forecast -presents the methodology and T&R forecasts. Stantec 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Project Description and Setting PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND SETTING 2.1 THE 1-15 EXPRESS LANES PROJECT AND SETTING The 1-15 Express Lanes Project (ELP) would build generally four express lanes in the median of the 1-15 freeway in Riverside County, California between Cajalco Road to the south and SR 60 to the north, a length of nearly 15 miles. The section of 1-15 where the proposed 1-15 ELP would be built is used by commuters traveling between the generally residential areas in Riverside County and the employment centers in Orange and Los Angeles Counties. The 1-15 freeway is a critical link to and from the SR 91, SR 60, and 1-10 freeways. Figure 2-1: 1-15 ELP Corridor Los Angeles County Las Ve 1 m San Bernardino County Orange County 1-15 Corridor — co San Diego Average weekday traffic on 1-15 is between 140,000 and 190,000 vehicles per day on its 6 to 8 lanes. In addition to commuter traffic, it is a road that is used by recreational traffic as well as truck traffic. The roadway is chronically congested, with the worst delays observed on northbound 1-15 in the morning, and southbound 1-15 in the evening. Regional forecasts of population, households, and employment suggest that demand for the 1-15 freeway would ® Stantec 2.2 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Project Description and Setting continue to rise. The 1-15 ELP would serve as a means to accommodate projected traffic growth, and offer a reliable trip to travelers in this corridor. The 1-15 ELP would be available to two -axle vehicles with a transponder; trucks with multiple axles would be prohibited. The facility would be all -electronic and dynamically priced. Tolls would be set based on the level of congestion in the corridor. As demand for the 1-15 ELP rises, tolls would increase accordingly. HOV-3+ carpools and zero emission vehicles (ZEV's) with a switchable transponder would be charged a toll that is discounted by 50 percent. Upon its expected opening on July 1, 2020, access between the 1-15 ELP and the adjacent general purpose lanes would be permitted via a series of mixing areas listed below, and depicted in Figure 2-2: 1) Northern Terminus south of SR 60 - NB egress to GP lanes and SB Ingress from GP Lanes 2) Between Limonite Avenue and 6th Street - Both ingress and egress, to and from Limonite Avenue to the north and 6th Street to the south. 3) Between 6th Street and 2nd Street - Both ingress and egress, to and from 6th Street to the north and 2nd Street to the south. 4) Between Hidden Valley Parkway and SR 91 - SB egress and NB ingress only, to and from SR 91 and Magnolia Avenue to the south. 5) SR 91 Express Direct Connector to/ from 1-15 Express Lanes south of SR 91 - NB Egress and SB Ingress to / from the SR 91 Express Lanes extension in Riverside County. 6) Between Magnolia Avenue and Ontario Avenue - Both ingress and egress, to and from Magnolia Avenue to the north and Ontario Avenue to the south. 7) Between El Cerrito Road and Cajalco Road - SB egress to Cajalco Road and NB ingress from Cajalco Road. 8) Southern Terminus at Cajalco Road - SB egress to GP lanes south of Cajalco Road and NB ingress from GP lanes south of Cajalco Road. In addition to the opening year access noted above, by 2035 a direct connector ramp is expected to be built connecting the RCTC 91 Express Lanes to with the 1-15 Express Lanes to the north. While the 1-15 ELP generally has two -lanes per direction, three sections of the 1-15 ELP would be one -lane per direction. These single lane sections are located at the southern end of the corridor, the northern end of the corridor, and in the middle in the vicinity of the SR 91 / 1-15 interchange between Hidden Valley Parkway and the Magnolia Avenue -Ontario Avenue mixing area. ® Stantec 2.3 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Project Description and Setting Figure 2-2: 1-15 Express Lanes Access Points and Number of Lanes h Ingress only Egress Only ,A Ingress and 'Egress Stantec Cantu-Galleano Ranch Rd Limonite Ave E Ontario Ave El Cerrito Rd Northern Terminus Cajialco Rd! Southern Terminus Dos Lagos Dr 2.4 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions 3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS Average weekday traffic on 1-15 is between 140,000 and 190,000 vehicles per day on its 6 to 8 lanes. In addition to commuter traffic, it is a road that is used by recreational traffic as well as truck traffic. The roadway is chronically congested, with the worst delays observed on northbound 1-15 in the morning, and southbound 1-15 in the evening. Regional forecasts of population, households, and employment suggest that demand for the 1-15 freeway would continue to rise. The 1-15 ELP would serve as a means to accommodate projected traffic growth, and offer a reliable trip to travelers in this corridor. Motorists using the 1-15 corridor in Riverside County between Cajalco Road and SR 60 experience recurring and extensive delays during the morning and evening peak hours. The generally three -lane per direction freeway gets heavily congested in the northbound direction during the morning, both south of El Cerrito Road, and north of SR 91, and is heavily congested in the southbound direction south of SR 91. During the AM, it is typical for drivers to experience stop and go conditions between SR 91 and SR 60 for a period of two hours. Some segments of 1-15 operate at travel speeds below 20 mph. South of SR 91, the 1-15 segments south of El Cerrito Road are congested with delays lasting for nearly three hours. The worst delays exist on the northbound 1-15 approach to Cajalco Road, which marks the southern terminus of the 1-15 ELP. The most intense delays occur on southbound 1-15 during the PM peak period, when motorists experience recurring stop -and -go congestion between SR 91 and Cajalco Road, and travel speeds can also drop below 20 mph. This condition regularly persists for several hours during the PM peak period, starting as early as 3 PM and often not resolved until past 7 PM. 3.1 OVERVIEW OF TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM 1-15 in Riverside County is a heavily traveled freeway that experiences extensive and recurring congestion in both the morning and evening. This chapter discusses existing traffic conditions in and around the 1-15 Express Lanes Project (ELP) corridor. 1-15 is a principal connection between the residential communities in Riverside and San Bernardino Counties, with the employment centers in Orange and Los Angeles Counties. In addition it is a major route for traffic traveling between San Diego to the south, and points north including Las Vegas. The "1-15 ELP corridor" is defined as extending from SR 60 in the north to Cajalco Road in northwestern Riverside County. North of the corridor, 1-15 traverses San Bernardino County and merges with 1-215 before entering Cajon Pass en route to Las Vegas, Salt Lake City, and the Canadian border in Montana. South of the corridor, 1-15 runs through Temescal Valley and Lake Elsinore before merging with 1-215. South of the merge, 1-15 enters San Diego County, where it becomes SR 15 following its intersection with 1-8. Given the I-15's regional significance, the 1-15 T&R model's focus area (the "Corridor Subarea") is broader, and as shown in Figure 3-1 includes Orange County, Los Angeles County, and San Bernardino County in addition to Riverside County. ® Stantec 3.5 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions Figure 3-1: 1-15 T&R Model Corridor Subarea 3.1.1 Other Major Roadways Other major roadways in the Corridor Subarea include SR 91, SR 60, SR 71, 1-10, and 1-215. SR 91 is an east -west freeway that extends from its interchange with 1-215 in Downtown Riverside to 1-1 10 in Los Angeles. It divides the 1-15 corridor into two parts, with many vehicles that use 1-15 also using SR 91. As the only direct freeway link between Orange County and Riverside County, SR 91 is heavily traveled and heavily congested, with nearly 300,000 vehicles per day on its 12 lanes traversing the county line. In 1995, the SR 91 Express Lanes were built between SR-55 and the Orange/Riverside county line to relieve this congestion. The first express lanes in the United States, these lanes provide travel time savings to high occupancy vehicles (HOVs) and toll - paying low occupancy vehicles. The rest of the SR 91 has HOV lanes (2 occupants or more allowed) for nearly its entire length. The Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) is currently extending the existing 91 Express Lanes from the Orange/Riverside County line to 1-15 by converting the existing HOV lane (HOV-2+) to an express lane. Eastbound express lane users would be able to continue eastbound on SR 91 past the I-15 interchange, or take a direct connector to the proposed southbound 1-15 Express Lanes. 5 Stantec 3.6 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions SR 60 is an east -west freeway that extends from 1-10 in Beaumont in the east to 1-10 in Downtown Los Angeles in the west. Its intersection with 1-15 is the northern terminus of the 1-15 Express Lanes Project (1-15 ELP). HOV lanes are present along the entire length of SR 60. 1-10 is an east -west freeway that spans the southern United States from Jacksonville, FL in the east to Santa Monica, CA in the west. The I-10's interchange with 1-15 is over three miles north of the project corridor. West of the study area on 1-10, the Metro Express Lanes are available for buses, HOVs, and toll -paying vehicles from 1-605 to 1-5. Additionally, 1-10 has HOV lanes (HOV-2+ carpools) from SR 71 to I-15. SR 71 is a southeast -northwest roadway that extends from SR 91 in the south to 1-10 and SR-57 in the north along the east side of Chino Hills. SR 71 is a limited -access highway with the exception of two signalized T-intersections in Pomona. HOV lanes are present on SR 71 between Euclid Avenue and SR 60. Given its southeast -northwest alignment, SR 71 is a shorter alternative in distance than 1-15 for drivers coming from Lake Elsinore and going to Los Angeles County via SR 60 or I-10. 1-215 is a north -south freeway that splits from 1-15 in Murrieta to the south and merges with 1-15 north of San Bernardino. Between these endpoints, 1-215 is a shorter alternative than 1-15 by over five miles. However, for travel between the 1-15/1-215 interchange and the SR 60/1-15 interchange, 1-15 is shorter by approximately 3 miles. HOV lanes are available on the section of I- 215/SR 60 south of SR 91 as well as from SR 91 through the I-10 interchange. 3.1.2 Public Transportation The Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) provides public transportation within Riverside County. The RTA's route 206 traverses the 1-15 project corridor from its southern extent to Magnolia Avenue, connecting Temecula, Murrieta, and Lake Elsinore with the Corona Transit Center in downtown Corona. Ten northbound and eleven southbound bus trips service this route on weekdays. The RTA's route 3 runs parallel to the 1-15 corridor, traversing Main Street and Hamner Avenue from Bellegrave Avenue (north of Limonite Avenue) to Tenth Street (northwest of Magnolia Avenue). 29 northbound and 28 southbound bus trips service this route on weekdays, while 13 round -trips service this route on weekends. Metrolink provides regional rail service for the Southern California region. The three lines that serve the study area are the 91 Line, the Inland Empire -Orange County Line and the Riverside Line. As shown in Figure 3-2 the Inland Empire -Orange County (IE-OC) Line extends southwestward from San Bernardino to Orange County via the Santa Ana Canyon, with two stations in both Riverside and Corona. The line's closest station to the 1-15 corridor is the North Main Corona Station, at the intersection of North Main Street and Grand Boulevard. In Orange County, the line serves stations in Anaheim, Orange, Santa Ana, Tustin, Irvine, Laguna Niguel, San Juan Capistrano, and San Clemente. South of San Clemente, the Inland Empire -Orange County Line terminates at the Oceanside Transit Center in San Diego County. The line offers eight roundtrip trains on weekdays and two per day on weekends. ® Stantec 3.7 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions The 91 Line originates in Downtown Riverside and follows the same alignment as the Inland Empire -Orange County Line through Corona and the Santa Ana Canyon. On the west side of the canyon, the line serves stations in Fullerton, Buena Park, and Norwalk before terminating at Union Station in Los Angeles. The line offers four westbound trains and five eastbound trains on weekdays and two roundtrip trains per day on weekends. From its origin in Downtown Riverside, the Riverside Line extends northwest through Jurupa Valley to Ontario, where it is closest to the 1-15 corridor. From Ontario, the line continues west to Union Station in Los Angeles, with stations in Pomona, Industry, and Montebello along the way. Six round-trip trains serve the line on weekdays. Cli Stantec 3.8 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions Figure 3-2: Metrolink Route Map Pt — Map :eilite 51 O - drN&� Pas 1a - a �rw•_ Los A rant Lo riig Bea ch Catalina tsiarrci ' Essential I Fish Habitat... o gle Wrighwwoo-r.) NPt Sari A. A.111 orb, nardir 74 i' Lake'Elinore • N ewpo rt Morrie Tel Dana San Map data ,ZZU1 it Googie. !NEG. Term„ of Elsa . Repor a rr :heck or unc floc k the boxes below to select or deselect lines. ▪ Antelope Valley r Inland Empire- Orange County ▪ Orange County ▪ Rivers ide ▪ SaD Bernardino ' �.�entura r91Line Source: www.metrolinktrains.com Stantec 3.9 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions Ridership on the three lines is generally light compared to travel along the SR 91, with average weekday ridership of as low as 2,515 riders per weekday on the SR 91 Line in FY 2015, to a high of 4,822 on the Riverside Line. By comparison, weekday traffic crossing the Riverside -Orange County Line via SR 91 averages over 140,000 vehicles per day in each direction. 1-15 weekday traffic ranges from 70,000 to 95,000 vehicles per day in each direction. Boardings at the four stations along SR 91 in the study area (West Corona, North Main Corona, Riverside -La Sierra, and Riverside -Downtown) range from a low of 391 per weekday at the West Corona station to 1,129 per weekday at the Riverside -Downtown station. These statistics, shown in Table 3-1, further highlight the relatively low usage of Metrolink compared to the volume of freeway traffic. Table 3-1: Metrolink Average Weekday Ridership and Boardings Metrolink Line Average Weekday Ridership, FY 2015 Inland Empire -Orange County Line 4,775 SR 91 Line 2,515 Riverside Line 4,822 Metrolink Station Average Weekday Boardings, FY 2016 Q1 West Corona 391 North Main Corona 984 Riverside -La Sierra 708 Riverside -Downtown 1,129 Source: Metrolink 3.2 DATA COLLECTION PROGRAM Traffic data in the 1-15 corridor and study area were collected over a span of three weeks in June 2015. The data collected include traffic volumes, speeds, travel times, and origin -destination patterns. Supplemental traffic data collected in September 2015 were also incorporated. The focus of the count program was to record typical weekday traffic along the I- 15 as well as critical parallel routes and feeder routes. Weekend traffic were also recorded at select locations along 1-15. In addition to the freeway mainlines, traffic along all ramps along 1-15 between and including Cajalco Road to the south and SR 60 to the north were counted. Traffic volumes on critical arterials, such as Main Street located west of 1-15 between SR 91 and SR 60, were recorded for several weekdays. Origin -destination patterns along the 1-15 were recorded for a span of two weeks to gain an understanding of the most popular trip pairs and trip lengths. Lastly, travel speeds along 1-15, SR 91, and various arterials were collected via a combination of travel time runs and publicly available sources. Traffic volume data came from several sources, including Stantec's independent count program, which included redundant counts at various locations along I-15, and third party sources. These third party sources include the Caltrans Freeway Performance Measurement System (PeMS) for various mainline and ramp locations along I-15 and elsewhere in the study area. PeMS is a database that collects and archives traffic volumes and speeds from Caltrans' loop detectors located on California's freeways and ramps. ® Stantec 3.10 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions The PeMS database has numerous continuous traffic counts along 1-15 in Riverside County. PeMS data for 1-15 were downloaded from January 2014 through June 2015. These data were used as a secondary data source, and to analyze the seasonality of traffic on 1-15 and the region. Hourly traffic volume data were also provided by the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) for the SR 91 Express Lanes as well as by the Transportation Corridor Agencies (TCA) for the San Joaquin Hills, Foothill, and Eastern Toll Roads in Orange County. 3.2.1 Screenline Traffic Volumes Ten screenlines were identified to establish model calibration benchmarks. The screenlines measure traffic traveling north and south, or east and west across several parallel roadways. A critical element of travel demand model calibration is to ensure the model is assigning an appropriate amount of traffic north -south and east -west, and that the screenline traffic is appropriately distributed amongst each of the roadways included in the screenline. The screenline analysis also provides insight into how the 1-15 corridor's traffic compares against other parallel roadways and how they relate to intersecting east -west roadways. Five screenlines were drawn across north -south roadways (numbered 1 to 5), and five screenlines were drawn across east -west roadways (lettered A to E). Figure 3-3 shows the location of the ten screenlines. All five north -south screenlines include 1-15. Both Screenline 3 and 4 intersect 1-15 between SR 91 and SR 60. Screenlines 1 and 2 compare north -south traffic volumes north of the project corridor from SR 57 to 1-215 including arterial roadways. Screenline 5 compares northwest -southeast traffic volumes from 1-15 to I-10. The five east -west screenlines do not include 1-15, but instead measure traffic on roadways that are regionally significant, and can be considered feeders of 1-15. Screenlines A and B compare east -west traffic volumes on the west and east side of 1-15, respectively. Screenline C compares north -south volumes on SR 55, SR 57, and SR 241 in Orange County. Screenline D compares east - west traffic volumes through the Santa Ana Mountains. Screenline E compares east -west traffic on SR 91 in Corona to arterial alternatives. Screenline traffic data were largely collected via the project's independent count program, the PeMS database, the Transportation Corridor Agencies (TCA), and the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). 5 Stantec 3.11 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions Figure 3-3: Screenline Map Air Los Angeles County CID 1-15 Corridor Screenlines Orange County San Bernardino County Riverside County Traffic volumes from the north -south screenlines (numbers 1 to 5) show that the region's north -south freeways represent the largest share of traffic although arterials capture a significant share of traffic. Table 3-2 lists traffic volumes by roadway at each screenline. 1-15 accounts for a ® Stantec 3.12 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions substantial share of each of the screenline's traffic. The share ranges from 32 percent at Screenline 1, north of the I-10, to as high as 58 percent at Screenline 4, north of SR 91. Table 3-2: Traffic on North -South Screenlines DESCRIPTION SEG_TYPE SOURCE Daily Volume 1 NORTH OF 1-10 Volume % of Total SR-57 GP - Covina and Via Verde Freeway PeMs PeMS Stantec 195,927 180,451 181,642 558,020 35% 32% 33% 100% 1-15 - Foothill and 4th St Freeway 1-215 GP - 1-10 and Orange Show Rd Freeway 2 NORTH OF SR-60 Volume % of Total _ SR-57 GP - Temple Ave and Sunset Crossing Rd Freeway PeMs PeMs Stantec Stantec Stantec 154,356 41,601 34,087 200,705 162,117 592,866 26% 7% 6% 34% 27% 100% SR-71-Between Old Pomona Rd and Rio Ranch Rd Freeway SR-83 - SR-60 and Philadelphia St Arterial 1-15 - SR-60 and E Jurupa St Freeway 1-215 GP & HOV - SR-60 and Columbia Ave Freeway 3 SOUTH OF SR-60 Volume % of Total SR-71 GP&HOV - Pine Ave and Central Ave SR-83 - Pine Ave and Bickmore Ave Archibald Rd - 65th St and Limonite Ave Hamner Ave - Oakdale and Limonite Ave 1-15 - 6th St and Limonite Ave Van Buren Blvd - Limonite and Jurupa Rd Freeway Arterial Arterial Arterial Freeway Arterial Stantec Stantec Stantec Stantec Stantec Stantec 74,964 16,074 19,411 23,907 152,236 19,313 305,906 25% 5% 6% 8% 50% 6% 100% 4 NORTH OF SR-91 Volume % of Total SR-71 GP - N of SR-91 N Main St - River Rd and Parkridge Ave 1-15 - SR-91 and Hidden Valley Pkwy Freeway Arterial Freeway Stantec Stantec Stantec 78,438 35,619 157,380 271,437 29% 13% 58% 100% 5 SOUTH-EAST OF SR-91 Volume % of Total 1-15 - Weirick and Cajalco Freeway Stantec Stantec Stantec Stantec Stantec PeMs 147,643 9,370 55,081 39,579 259,298 180,255 691,224 21% 1% 8% 6% 38% 26% 100% Temescal Cyn - Old Butterfield Stage and Cajalco Rd Arterial Van Buren Blvd - Mockinbird Cyn and Victoria Ave Arterial Central Ave - Nottingham Rd and Hawarden Dr Arterial 1-215 GP&HOV - SR-91 and Blaine St Freeway 1-10 GP - at Mountain View Ave Freeway Traffic volumes from the east -west screenlines (letters A to E) are comprised almost entirely of the region's east -west freeways, namely I-10, SR 60, and SR 91. Both SR 91 and SR 60 are especially meaningful to the I-15. SR 91 would directly connect with the I-15 ELP, while SR 60 is the project's northern boundary. Table 3-3 shows traffic by roadway for each of the east -west screenlines. ® Stantec 3.13 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions Table 3-3: Traffic on East-West Screenlines WEST OF 1-15 Volume % of Total 1-10 GP - N Milliken Ave and N Haven Ave Freeway Stantec 244,992 34% ASR-60 GP&HOV - Hamner and S Haven Ave Freeway Stantec 246,695 34% SR-91 GP&HOV - 1-15 and S Main St Freeway Stantec 225,398 31% 717,085 100% EAST OF 1-15 Volume % of Total 1-10 GP - 1-15 and E Etiwanda Ave Freeway Stantec 201,023 34% BSR-60 GP&HOV - East of 1-15 Freeway PeMs 180,832 31% SR-91 GP&HOV - 1-15 and McKinley Ave Freeway Stantec 209,996 35% 591,851 100% Through SR-55 and SR-57 Volume % of Total SR-57 GP&HOV - Lincoln and Taft Ave Freeway PeMs 259,548 48% CSR-55 GP&HOV - Lincoln and Katella Ave Freeway PeMs 220,637 41% FETC - Windy Ridge Toll Plaza Freeway TCA 56,155 10% 536,340 100% Through Santa Ana Mountains Volume % of Total SR-60 GP&HOV - Phillips Ranch off & Diamond Bar Freeway Stantec 238,638 44% DSR-91 GP&XL - West of OC/RC County line Freeway Stantec, oCTP 286,538 53% SR-74 - South of Tenaja Truck Trail Freeway Stantec 13,653 3% 538,828 100% Downtown Corona Volume % of Total Railroad St - N Grant and N Sherman Ave Arterial Stantec 11,330 3% GP&HOV - Lincoln and Maple St Freeway Stantec 245,681 75% ESR-91 W 6th St - S Sherman and S Lincoln Ave Arterial Stantec 34,336 10% W Ontario Ave - S Lincoln Ave and Oak Ave Arterial Stantec 37,776 11% 329,124 100% *Note, % of total may not total 100% due to rounding 3.2.2 Mainline Traffic Counts Mainline traffic volumes along 1-15 are depicted in Figure 3-4 and were recorded at locations between: • Cajalco Road and Dos Lagos Drive (northbound and southbound) • Hidden Valley Parkway and SR 91 (northbound only) • Second Street and Hidden Valley Parkway (southbound only) • Limonite Avenue and Sixth Street (northbound and southbound) • SR 60 and Cantu-Galleano Ranch Road (northbound and southbound) ® Stantec 3.14 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions Additional mainline counts were collected on freeways in the study area. The locations of these counts are listed below and shown in Figure 3-4. • 1-10 between North Haven Avenue and North Milliken Avenue • 1-10 between 1-15 and North Etiwanda Street • SR 60 between North Haven Avenue and North Milliken Avenue • SR 60 between SR 91 and 3rd Street • 1-215 between SR 60 and Columbia Avenue • 1-215 between 1-10 and West Orange Show Road • SR 71 between Pine Avenue and Soquel Canyon Parkway • SR 91 between 1-15 and McKinley Avenue • SR 91 at the border of Orange County and Riverside County Additional mainline count data was provided by the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) for its SR 91 Express Lanes and by the Transportation Corridor Agencies (TCA) for the Windy Ridge Toll Plaza on SR-241. Additionally, as part of a concurrent study, traffic data were collected in September 2015 on SR 91 at the border of Orange County and Riverside County. non,. Pomona s RPM le P StyAe Ontario Figure 3-4: Mainline Count Locations Momcla• I to:arn r,. h ▪ •� t J r �: Lua+uno Honau Mr a.pon . -13-.- " Coruna 7 Prt4sn14 ... ��4 `a ......�.. lepM 4. ..w 6..1, w. (•r i 5 l. � .o URtlene 4, �aew 4� N. O. • tree: flxSeWe R4 Gallop uy�p Rivers tiif •OsroK GMorcw L Fag 6y S, WooOce<s, u.rne4 W1� Cwnn-e Legend ® Wavetronix Video & Wavetronix + Other Source Traffic data were collected with a variety of technologies including Wavetronix and video. Other sources include OCTA and TCA. Stantec 3.15 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions 3.2.3 Ramp Counts Traffic volumes on all 1-15 ramps between and including Cajalco Road and SR 60 were recorded as part of the count program. This includes all local on/off ramps and direct connectors to SR 91 and SR 60. The locations of ramp counts are shown in Figure 3-5, and listed below: • SR 60 • Cantu-Galleano Ranch Road • Limonite Avenue • Sixth Street • Second Street • Hidden Valley Parkway • SR 91 • Magnolia Avenue • Ontario Avenue • El Cerrito Road • Cajalco Road Traffic volumes on several SR 91 on and off ramps were also recorded. The ramps at Serfas Club Drive and Green River Road were surveyed, and their data included as part of the modeling effort. Also, as part of a concurrent study, ramp volumes were collected on SR 91 intersections with South Weir Canyon Road, Gypsum Canyon Road, and SR 241. Stantec 3.16 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions Figure 3-5: Ramp Count Locations Legend • 1-15 Count Program • Other Source Local on/off ramps were surveyed using pneumatic tube counters, while direct connectors were surveyed using Wavetronix counters. 3.2.4 Arterial Traffic Counts Traffic along numerous regionally and locally significant arterial roadways were recorded. The 1-15 corridor has several parallel local roadways that are signalized roadways which operate at lower performance levels than the 1-15 and other freeways, but still offer meaningful alternatives to travel along 1-15 and SR 91. Understanding the balance of traffic between 1-15 versus area arterials is an important part of the model calibration and forecasting process. Arterial count locations are listed below and depicted in Figure 3-6: • South Euclid Avenue between Philadelphia Street and SR 60 • South Euclid Avenue between Bickmore Avenue and Pine Avenue • Archibald Avenue between Limonite Avenue and 65th Street • West Ontario Avenue between Oak Avenue and South Lincoln Avenue • West Sixth Street between South Sherman Avenue and South Lincoln Avenue • Railroad Street between North Lincoln Avenue and North Smith Avenue • River Road between Cota Street and North Main Street • North Main Street between River Road and Parkridge Avenue • Hamner Avenue between Sixth Street and Citrus Street • Hamner Avenue between Limonite Avenue and Oakdale Street 5 Stantec 3.17 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Figure 3-6: Arterial Count Locations Existing Conditions • Temescal Canyon Road South of Cajalco Road • Van Buren Boulevard between Victoria Avenue and Cleveland Avenue • Van Buren Boulevard between Limonite Avenue and 56th Street • Central Avenue between Victoria Avenue and Nottingham Road • SR-74 (Ortega Highway) in the Santa Ana Mountains. ' MonIdea _ 3I r a I . Ontano R-.... r".. Chino Ch. .A. t aA Glum ..om, s— Li Corona »' Nwra Gardens, Traffic on arterials were recorded using pneumatic tube counters. 3.3 1-15 CORRIDOR TRAFFIC DATA The 1-15 ELP corridor extends from Cajalco Road in the south to SR 60 in the north. From the count program mainline results, Stantec identified the corridor's day -of -week variation, directional split, and vehicle composition. The count program also indicated the most popular on and off ramps in the corridor. Stantec applied seasonality factors to the count program's ramp and mainline results to convert June counts to average annual weekday volumes. These ramp and mainline volumes were combined to create a balanced network for the corridor. The results of an origin -destination survey further established travel patterns in the corridor. Stantec performed travel time runs in the corridor to understand its congestion patterns. Stantec 3.18 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions 3.3.1 1-15 Travel Speeds Motorists using the I-15 corridor in Riverside County between Cajalco Road and SR 60 experience recurring and extensive delays during the morning and evening peak hours. The generally three -lane per direction freeway gets heavily congested in the northbound direction during the morning, both south of El Cerrito Road, and north of SR 91, and is heavily congested in the southbound direction south of SR 91. During the AM, it is typical for drivers to experience stop and go conditions between SR 91 and SR 60 for a period of two hours. Some segments of 1-15 operate at travel speeds below 20 mph. South of SR 91, the 1-15 segments south of El Cerrito Road are congested with delays lasting for nearly three hours. The worst delays exist on the northbound 1-15 approach to Cajalco Road, which marks the southern terminus of the 1-15 ELP. The most intense delays occur on southbound 1-15 during the PM peak period, when motorists experience recurring stop -and -go congestion between SR 91 and Cajalco Road, and travel speeds can also drop below 20 mph. This condition regularly persists for several hours during the PM peak period, starting as early as 3 PM and often not resolved until past 7 PM. Stantec's observations of corridor travel speeds included over 80 travel time runs in the 1-15 corridor, concurrent with the June 2015 count program. These travel time runs entail drivers travelling on 1-15 with GPS recorders in the vehicle. Figure 3-7 and Figure 3-8 show the instantaneous speeds of representative travel time runs during the AM period on 1-15 NB and 1-15 SB, respectively. The following is a detailed discussion of Stantec's review of corridor congestion. AM Peak Period Travel Speeds Northbound speeds south of Cajalco Road are mostly below 35 mph due to the bottleneck caused by heavy on -ramp traffic from Cajalco Road. Between Cajalco Road and SR 91, northbound speeds are generally free -flow, with lower on ramp volumes. A fourth lane is available on northbound 1-15 north of Ontario Avenue. This capacity added by this lane results in improved travel speeds. North of SR 91, northbound vehicles slow down at the Second Street interchange, where the number of lanes drops from four to three. Speeds are generally below 35 mph for the next 4 to 5 miles. Delays are attributable to high travel demand, including over 1,000 vehicles entering the northbound 1-15 from the Limonite Avenue on -ramp during the AM peak hour. Drivers then experience free -flow speeds through Cantu-Galleano Ranch Road. North of Cantu-Galleano Ranch Road, speeds drop below 20 mph due to a choke point north of the corridor. Southbound traffic operates with less delay than the northbound 1-15 but still has congestion sections between SR 60 and Second Street. South of Second Street, a lane is added to the corridor which provides the capacity needed for drivers to experience free -flow conditions south of Second Street through the end of the corridor at Cajalco Road. ® Stantec 3.19 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions Figure 3-7: 1-15 NB AM Travel Time Run SR 60 i SR 41 1� E Jurupa St L• ,•• I I Travel Time Run: 1-15 NB Date: Tue 06/02/ 15 Start Time: 7:21 AILS End Time: T50 AM F' Cantu -Galleon° Ranch Rd i Limonite Ave Sixth St Second St Hidden Valley Pkvdy >tilMagnaEa Ave r Ath E Ontario Ave El Cerrito Rd r f 0 1 2 3 4 5 Miles I I I I SR c SR 91 SPEED MPH ▪ 0- 30 30 - 45 45-55 55-65 • > 65 Source: Stantec floating car travel time runs. Stantec 3.20 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions Figure 3-8: 1-15 SB AM Travel Time Run SR 60 SR 9] E Jurupa St i!ll 1 Travel Time Ruin: 1-15 SB Date: Thu 06/04/15 Start Time: 8:07 AM End Time: 8:27 AM Cantu - GaMean° Ranch Rd Ln #— Limonite Ave —11- Sixth St --r-- Second St s r Hidden Valley Pkwy IXMagnolia Ave 1 r i ti � E Ontario Ave El Cerrito Rd Cajalco Rd Lti-e-, Weirick Rd I 1 2 3 4 5 Miles i l i l i l i l i l SR 60 Sit 91 SPEED Speed 0-30 30-45 45 - 55 55-65 65 Source: Stantec floating car travel time runs. Stantec 3.21 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions PM Peak Period Travel Speeds The heaviest delay on southbound 1-15 occurs during the PM peak period. Delays are regularly observed between SR 60 and Limonite Avenue, and between SR 91 and Cajalco Road. The worst delays are present on the section between SR 91 and El Cerrito Road, where congestion is present for a period of more than four hours. Figure 3-9 and Figure 3-10 show the speeds of representative travel time runs during the PM period on 1-15 SB and 1-15 NB, respectively. Southbound speeds are below 35 mph and often below 20 mph from SR 60 through Cantu- Galleano Ranch Road. South of Limonite Avenue, southbound speeds are above 50 mph until the SR 91 interchange. South of SR 91, drivers experience heavy congestion for the 4 miles between SR 91 and El Cerrito Road. The trip between SR 91 and El Cerrito Road averages approximately 20 miles per hour. Congestion is caused by heavy demand, over 6,000 vehicles per hour approaching 1-15 south of El Cerrito Road. While four GP lanes are available between SR 91 and El Cerrito Road, the fourth lane exits to El Cerrito Road, leaving only three GP lanes for the remaining traffic. This lane drop along with heavy travel demand results in stop and go traffic over a period of several hours during the PM peak period. Vehicles in the queue are often at a standstill and rarely travel above 35 mph. South of the El Cerrito lane drop, speeds through the south end of the corridor are generally free -flow. Northbound speeds through the corridor are generally 50 mph or higher with the exception of the area around Second Street and between Sixth Street and Limonite Avenue. Cli Stantec 3.22 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions Figure 3-9: 1-15 SB PM Travel Time Run SR 60 1 SR 91 E Jurupa St Travel Time Run: 1-15 S8 Date: Wed 06/03/15 Star[ Time: 4:38 PM End Time: 5:1 1 PM Cantu - Galleano Ranch Rd --+— Limonite Ave _1— Sixth St re S —.F Second St Hidden Valley Pkwy Stt kist Magnolia .Ave Cr, a 'ikE Ontario Ave .- El Cerrito Rd Cajalco Rd a }� V Weirick Rd 0 1 2 3 4 5 Miles I I I SR 60 SR 91 SPEED Speed • 0-30 30-45 45- 55 55 - 65 • > 65 Source: Stantec floating car travel time runs. Stantec 3.23 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions Figure 3-10: 1-15 NB PM Travel Time Run SR 60 E Jurupa St Travel Time Run: 1-15 NB Date: Wed 06/03/15 Start Time: 513 PM End Time: 5:33 P/V1 Cantu-Galleano Ranch Rd i Limonite Ave M .--Sixth St Second St Hidden Valley Pkwy SR91 \__ AE Mgnolia Ave Ontario Ave El Cerrito Rd Cajalao Rd Weirick Rd 0 1 2 3 4 5 Miles I I I i I SR 60 SPEED Speed • a- 30 30 - 45 45 - 55 55 - 65 ▪ } 65 Source: Stantec floating car travel time runs. Stantec 3.24 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions To identify the average speed along a segment of the corridor, the length of the segment is divided by the recorded travel time. Table 3-4 and Table 3-5 show the aggregated average speeds by segment for 1-15 northbound and southbound, respectively. In the northbound direction, average speeds are lowest during the AM peak period, specifically between Dos Lagos Drive and Cajalco Road from 7:00-8:30 AM and between Hidden Valley Parkway and Limonite Avenue from 6:30-8:00 AM. During the PM period, northbound average segment speeds drop below 50 mph from Hidden Valley Parkway to Limonite Avenue between 3:30-6:30 PM. Table 3-4: 1-15 NB Travel Speeds Segment 9 Dist. (mil Q O ,moo e Q n O e Q O ^ Q I ro I Om I 1 Q O aM0 m Q P 40 Q O rn Q o O a o_ O M co o_ V m o_ O V a o_ N v o_ O h Ln o_ 'o in a O 1a so o_ o Cantu-Galleano Ranch Road to SR-60 0.68 68 64 41 64 1 54 • 73 64 62 45 76 68 5: 76 Avenue to Cantu Galleon° Ranch Road1.74 69 38 1 ,_________39 40 i 48 61 70 64 67 61 68 68 62 66Ir. 69 _Limonite Sixth Street to Limonite Avenue 2.69 67 35 34 1 4 41 61 70 65 58 46 46 49 52 46 36 69 Second street to sixth street 1.91 75 38 30 66 75 67 70 69 60 47 50 40 42 45 69 Hidden Valley Parkway }o Second Street 0.79 79 71 67 68 79 67 70 47 72 35 52 60 74 SR-91 EB on rampto Hidden Valley Parkway 1.11 77 54 68 57 1 74 74 68 72 67 57 71 69 72 69 72 75 74 SR-91 overpass to SR-91 EBonramp 0.51 74 77 67 72 71 67 71 68 69 75 71 66 77 77 SR-91 off ramp to SR-91 overpass 0.47 65 i 76 67 i 70 70 i 62 73 68 70 75 65 65 77 70 Magnolia Avenue fo SR-91 off ramp 0.49 • 63 j 68 63 i 56 57 1 56 66 __50 54 64 63 57 73 _60 North OntarioAvenue toMagnoiiaAvenue 1.59 • 67 66 65 61 66 I 66 64 56 63 64 70 64 54— 67 El Cerrito Road to North Ontario Avenue 0.92 • 65 l 66 ; 72 I 67 65 1 67 68 65 72 70 72 70 69 Cajalco Road to a Cerrito Road 1.05 S0 53 53 50 49 i 57 65 62 52 70 64 68 54 68 Dos Lagos Drive to Cajalco Road 1.12 : 37 20 i 21 25 37 I 69 63 64 56 68 67 1 61 68 in Speeds (mph) 30-451 45-551 55-65 >65 In the southbound direction, average segment speeds are generally above 55 mph during the AM peak period, with the exception of the section between SR 60 and Sixth Street from 7:30-8:00 AM. During the PM peak period, average speeds below 45 mph occur in three segments from 3:30-6:00 PM. Additionally, the bottleneck caused by the lane drop at El Cerrito Road results in average speeds below 30 mph for the entire peak period. Table 3-5 : 1-15 SB Travel Speeds Segment Dist (mil Q O d Q n d Q O Q O O^ Q O co Q P coM 1 Q O P Q O rn n_ O c5 a v O a 1 O I v o_ N co d O h n_ -O O o_ O b o_ n co SR-60to Cantu-GaueanoRanch Road_ 120'''.69 _ 1 79 2.69 1.9a 72 'Tr' 72 1 66 bb 55 69 I 66 ' 65 46 43 a 53 j 57 71 a 67 1 60 1 70 70 67 1 69 74 71 70 73 63 60 48 49 72 66 67 31 38 46 7 69 70 1 46 I 57 3 1 65 I 63 42 54 72 64 7 67 40 46 52 68 66 65 63 : 37 : 63 • 62 ' 72 73 66 59 59 71 66 65 64 72 72 70 72 73 74 Can tu-Galleano Ranch Road to Limonite Avenue Limoni}e Avenue }o Sixth Stree}_ Sixth street to second street Second Street to Hidden Valley Parkway 0.76 70 6 SR-91wB exit to SR-91overpass SR-91 overpass to SR-91 EB on ramp 0.24 62 6 6 Cajalco Road to Dos Lagos Drive Speeds (mph) 30-45 145-55 155-65 >65 Stantec 3.25 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions -5.2 Mainline Traffic by Hour Northbound 1-15 traffic south of SR 91 is heaviest during the morning peak hours with demand ramping up quickly as early as 5 AM. Figure 3-11 shows traffic volumes on northbound 1-15 by hour and day of week south of Cajalco Road. In the northbound direction, there is a distinct AM peak period with a maximum hourly volume of over 5,000 vehicles between 6 and 7 AM. This volume represents 6.8 percent of the average weekday volume. However, the traffic drop recorded during the 7 to 8 AM and 8 to 9 AM hours indicates that 1-15 is traffic flow is constricted during that time due to downstream bottlenecks. Travel speeds recorded during the 7 to 8 AM and 8 to 9 AM hours show the segment between Dos Lagos Road and Cajalco Road operating at just over 20 mph between 7 and 8 AM and improving to just under 30 mph between 8 and 9 AM. The data indicate that while traffic counts are low in this area between 7 and 9 AM, travel demand is still high. During the rest of the day, demand declines before increasing over 4,000 vehicles per hour during the early evening rush hours, and then rapidly declining throughout the rest of the evening and early morning hours. The data demonstrate little variation between traffic on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, or Thursday, but Friday travel demand is more broadly distributed. On Fridays, demand is higher than it is on the other weekdays by late morning and continues to be elevated through midnight. This pattern of higher late day demand on Friday may be indicative of recreational traffic destined for points north, including Las Vegas. Figure 3-11: 1-15 NB Weekday Traffic Profiles - South of Cajalco Road 6,000 5,000 N u t a, E 3,000 7 0 u a 4,000 2,000 1,000 0 Tue-Thu Speed (mph) — Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Tue-Thu a v N 1 a i i a i co i K i i Q • Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O CV N c+') V C Cc; e 6 Q0_ 0_ 0_ pooO O O CV N Hour Beginning O O O O O O O O O ch V C Cd 6 Stantec 3.26 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions In the southbound direction south of SR 91, peak volumes occur between 3 and 7 PM. During that time, the maximum average hourly Tuesday to Thursday volume is almost 5,500 vehicles and occurs during the 4 to 5 PM hour, as illustrated in Figure 3-12. This volume represents 7.1 percent of the 24-hour weekday volume. Travel speeds in this segment range from 45 to 51 mph during the PM peak period, but speeds upstream, as shown in Table 3-5, are low and indicative of constrained throughput south of Cajalco Road. Southbound traffic is elevated during all four hours of the 3 to 7 PM peak period, as well as the 2 to 3 PM hour preceding the peak period. Traffic volumes during other times of day, including the AM peak period are far lower than levels seen during the PM. Figure 3-12: 1-15 SB Weekday Traffic Profiles - South of Cajalco Road 6,000 5,000 w s 4,000 w E 3,000 0 u • 2,000 2 1,000 0 Tue-Thu Speed (mph) Mon Tue -Wed — —Thu — Fri Tue-Thu i i (-) i I 0 i V i V i \1 Q • Q Q Q Q Q • Q Q Q Q Q Qci- a o o o o o o o o o o o o 0 0 o 0 0 o 0 0 o o op 0 0 0 0 CV N ch V • i r C)ci e 6 - N Hour Beginning 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o c. N M V C • n Oc; U O 1-15 traffic volumes north of SR 91 are more evenly distributed between the AM and PM peak periods than they are south of SR 91. This is indicative of how I-15 serves as a connection to SR 91 to the south, and SR 60 and 1-10 to the north. All three of these east -west freeways are principal connections to and from employment centers toward the west in Orange County and Los Angeles. I-15 is a major route to and from these freeways. In the northbound direction, traffic peaks during both the AM and PM peak period with a maximum average hourly volume of nearly 4,700 from 6 to 7 AM, which represents 6.4 percent of the 24-hour weekday volume. Traffic peaks again between 5 and 6 PM at nearly 4,700 vehicles. Figure 3-13 shows the hourly traffic volumes by day of week between Limonite Avenue and Sixth Street on northbound 1-15. Between 7 and 8 AM, travel speeds drop to 31 mph. The low travel Stantec 3.27 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions speed along with low traffic volume indicates that downstream congestion limits the amount of traffic that can be processed at this location. Travel demand during the 7 to 8 AM hour is likely greater than the roadway is able to process during this time of day. During the PM peak period, travel speeds range from 47 to 51 mph, which indicate that demand is not being constrained by any downstream bottlenecks. Figure 3-13: 1-15 NB Weekday Traffic Profile - Limonite Avenue to Sixth Street 6,000 5,000 m 4,000 E > 3,000 u a ~ 2,000 1,000 0 Tue-Thu Speed (mph) Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Tue-Thu v i i a v i i v a v v Q • Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q CL o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 0 o o 0 o 0 o o o o 0 0 Hour Beginning 2 2 2 2 i i, 2 o o o o - o o o o o o o 0 o o 0 o 0 o o o o 0 N W O In the southbound direction, 1-15 traffic north of SR 91 also peaks during both the AM and PM peak periods but is heavier during the PM peak period. The AM peak period traffic profile is concentrated from 7 to 9 AM while the PM profile is distributed across the entire 3 to 7 PM peak period. As shown in Figure 3-14 the maximum average hourly volume in the AM period is about 4,800 recorded from 7 to 8 AM, while the maximum hourly volume in the PM period is around 4,650 but occurs every hour from 3 to 6 PM. AM peak travel speeds ranging from 59 to 68 mph along with little delay upstream or downstream indicate that traffic counts at this location and time of day are representative of demand. During the PM peak period, travel speed data show congestion at this location as well as congestion upstream in the vicinity of Cantu Galleano Ranch Road. This data along with the traffic counts presented indicate that PM peak period travel demand is higher than indicated by traffic counts. Stantec 3.28 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions Figure 3-14: 1-15 SB Weekday Traffic Profile - Limonite Avenue to Sixth Street 6,000 5,000 a, 4,000 E 7 j 3,000 u 2,000 1,000 0 Tue-Thu Speed (mph) - —Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Tue-Thu 0, i Q (M CO i co fM i V i P. h O Q • Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 9 0 0 0 9 9 0 0 9 N N M V Cc)�o CO a O 0 O N 0 9. Hour Beginning 3.3.3 Ramp Volumes Ramp volumes were collected along the entire 1-15 corridor to identify the most heavily used ramps and to create balanced networks. Table 3-6 shows the average weekday daily, AM, and PM ramp volumes on 1-15 northbound. The most popular on -ramps in the AM period are the on -ramps at Limonite Avenue and Cajalco Road. The volumes on these ramps during the morning are high enough to cause delay on the freeway. During the PM period, the highest on - ramp volumes are the ramps from East Ontario Avenue, Limonite Avenue, and Hidden Valley Parkway. The most utilized off -ramps during the AM period are Hidden Valley Parkway, East Ontario Avenue, and Magnolia Avenue. In the PM period, the most utilized off -ramp is Limonite Avenue. Stantec 3.29 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions Table 3-6: Average Weekday Northbound Ramp Volumes Cross -Street Ramp Daily 6-10 AM 3-7 PM Cantu-Galleano Ranch Road On 7,633 1,925 1,874 Off 2,412 661 424 Limonite Avenue On 14,442 3,682 3,092 Off 12,556 1,934 3,852 Sixth Street On 9,979 2,071 2,559 Off 10,550 1,778 2,690 Second Street On 6,184 1,036 2,032 Off 9,290 2,335 2,298 Hidden Valley Parkway On 11,146 2,286 3,172 Off 12,605 3,161 2,612 SR-91 EB On 22,470 5,182 5,052 W B On 20,388 4,518 4,649 Off 56,434 11,586 12,794 Magnolia Avenue SB On 6,240 956 1,246 NB On 13,438 2,777 3,034 Off 10,419 2,920 2,196 East Ontario Avenue On 13,748 3,201 3,304 Off 10,155 2,998 2,043 El Cerrito Road On 5,289 1,698 1,004 Off 4,541 1,074 1,148 Cajalco Road On 13,318 3,530 2,767 Off 4,520 757 1,308 Ramp Totals On 144,276 32,863 33,785 Off 133,481 29,205 31,365 Table 3-7 shows the average weekday daily, AM, and PM ramp volumes on 1-15 southbound. The most popular on -ramps during the AM period other than the on -ramps from SR 91 are the ramps from Limonite Avenue and Sixth Street. In the PM period, the most popular on -ramps are from Limonite Avenue, Second Street, and East Ontario Avenue. The most popular off -ramps in the AM period aside from the off -ramps to SR 91 are Hidden Valley Parkway and Magnolia Avenue. In the PM period, the most utilized off -ramps are Magnolia Avenue and Hidden Valley Parkway. Cli Stantec 3.30 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions Table 3-7: Average Weekday Southbound Ramp Volumes Cross -Street Ramp Daily 6-10 AM 3-7 PM Cantu-Galleano Ranch Road Off 7,926 1,567 2,238 EB On 1,822 253 573 W B On 1,513 239 699 Limonite Avenue Off 12,685 2,360 2,999 On 12,310 2,824 3,048 Sixth Street Off 10,242 2,347 2,985 On 10,210 2,448 2,358 Second Street Off 6,754 2,055 1,405 On 10,209 1,802 3,105 Hidden Valley Parkway Off 13,368 3,978 3,144 On 9,951 1,632 2,430 SR-91 WB Off 18,473 3,356 4,740 EB Off 18,292 4,257 3,942 EB On 27,804 5,372 6,947 W B On 26,241 5,654 6,362 Magnolia Avenue Off 21,483 4,778 5,193 On 9,345 1,594 2,506 East Ontario Avenue Off 12,625 3,027 2,878 On 11,219 1,594 3,376 El Cerrito Road Off 5,233 827 1,621 On 6,621 988 2,837 Cajalco Road Off 11,589 2,052 2,948 On 5,563 672 2,147 Ramp Totals On 132,808 25,073 36,389 Off 138,669 30,604 34,093 3.3.4 Mainline Traffic - Demand Adjusted and Balanced Traffic by Hour During periods of significant congestion, traffic counts reflect traffic throughput and not demand. Adjustments need to be made to identify the travel demand for the corridor. These adjustments utilize speed and congestion information collected as part of the study, as well as mainline and ramp traffic counts. Hourly traffic count data were adjusted to reflect demand and to balance with upstream and downstream ramp and mainline counts. These balanced and adjusted counts were used to calibrate the forecasting models. The adjusted data generally show higher volumes than counted during the most congested times of day along sections of 1-15, namely the northbound 1-15 between 2nd Street and SR 60 in the morning and the southbound 1-15 between SR 91 and Cajalco Road during the evening. The demand adjusted and balanced hourly traffic distribution for northbound and southbound 1-15 between Dos Lagos Road and Cajalco Road is shown in Figure 3-15. Northbound, counts were taken to represent demand because this traffic count measures the demand approaching the northbound 1-15 ELP. Peak hour traffic in the morning is maintained at approximately 5,000 Stantec 3.31 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions vehicles per hour between 6 and 7 AM and declines from 7 to 8 AM due to congestion. Southbound, traffic counts are adjusted upward between 3 and 6 PM and downward between 6 and 8 PM to reflect congestion and the demand over capacity condition that exists south of Cajalco Road. From 3 to 6 PM, demand is estimated at approximately 6,000 vehicles per hour, which exceeds the counted volumes of approximately 5,500 vehicles per hour. The data were adjusted by pivoting from upstream mainline count locations and balancing traffic based on ramp counts, and adjusting based on observations of congestion. Figure 3-15: Weekday Hourly Traffic Profile - South of Cajalco Road 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 1 3,000 I I 2,000 1,000 01111 — — — — 2 i i 2 2 i 2 2 i i 2 2 2 2 2 2 i 2 2 i 2 2 2 2 Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q 0- 0- eL eL eL 0- eL eL a- a- a a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 op o 0 o o o o o o o o 0 9.0 0 0 9 9 0 0 9. 9 9. Ni- - Ni c'') V � n CO 6 O - N - N (h V � R 66 0- 6 - NB ■SB Demand adjusted and balanced hourly traffic north of SR 91 between Limonite Avenue and Cantu Galleano Ranch Road is presented in Figure 3-16. AM peak hour demand exceeds 5,500 vehicles per hour between the 6 to 7 AM and 7 to 8 AM hours. Southbound, demand exceeds 5,000 vehicles per hour during the 5 to 6 PM peak hour. Stantec 3.32 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions Figure 3-16: Hourly Traffic Profile - Limonite Avenue to Cantu-Galleano Ranch Road 7,000 6,000 5,000 [i . 4,000 3,000 P — 2,000 ' 1,000 — — — I — — — --- — 01lid ..__„_ — — Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q a 0- 0- 0- a 0- 0- 0- a 0- 0- 0- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 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 N — N ch V c �6 I< 66 N O — N N k:6 V � �o I< 06 0, O - NB ■ SB 3.3.5 Heavy Vehicle Composition Traffic data collected by Stantec in June 2015 show that approximately 10 percent of vehicles on the 1-15 corridor both north and south of SR 91 are either medium or heavy trucks. Truck share is lowest during the AM peak period in the northbound direction (7 to 9 percent trucks) and the PM peak period in the southbound direction (6 percent trucks) largely because the volume of passenger cars increases greatly during those periods and directions. Figure 3-17 shows the vehicle composition by direction on 1-15 south of Cajalco Road during a typical weekday. The traffic recording equipment (Wavetronix radar units) catalogue vehicles by 3 length classes: 1) less than 22 feet, 2) 22 to 40 feet, and 3) greater than 40 feet. In general, vehicles less than 22 feet long can be regarded as passenger vehicles including motorcycles, sedans, SUVs, and pick- up trucks. Vehicles between 22 and 40 feet in length are generally single unit trucks and small buses (referred to as medium trucks). Vehicles greater than 40 feet long are tractor trailer trucks (referred to as heavy trucks). Vehicles less than 22 feet (referred to as passenger vehicles) make up the majority of traffic at all times of day. In both directions, passenger vehicles are at their highest levels during peak travel periods. Figure 3-18 shows the vehicle composition by direction on 1-15 south of Limonite Avenue during a typical weekday. Stantec 3.33 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Figure 3-17: 1-15 Weekday Vehicle Composition - South of Cajalco Road Southbound Less than 22' 22'-40' (Passenger Cars) (Medium Truck) Vehicle Length Daily Greater than 40' (Heavy Truck) 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 90% Northbound AT, Less than 22' (Passenger Cars) 22'-40' (Medium Truck) Vehicle Length ■ Daily Greater than 40' (Heavy Truck) Figure 3-18: 1-15 Vehicle Composition - South of Limonite Avenue 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 91% Less than 22' (Passenger Cars) Southbound 22'-40' (Medium Truck) Vehicle Length Daily Greater than 40' (Heavy Truck) 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 91% Less than 22' (Passenger Cars) Northbound 22'-40' (Medium Truck) Vehicle Length ■ Daily Greater than 40' (Heavy Truck) 5 Stantec 3.34 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions 3.3.6 Seasonality of Traffic The bulk of traffic data were collected in June 2015 and were adjusted to reflect an average weekday for the entire year before being used to benchmark model results. A set of "seasonality factors" were developed from Stantec's review of traffic throughout a 12-month period. Table 3-8 shows the seasonality factors used to convert 1-15 traffic volumes measured in June 2015 into equivalent annual traffic volumes. These factors are based on PeMS traffic count data on 1-15 in the project area. The AM and PM peak period factors are close to 1.00, indicating that peak period traffic on 1-15 in June varies little compared to the average annual traffic. The nighttime peak period factors are below 0.95, indicating that there is over 5 percent more nighttime traffic on 1-15 in June than during the rest of the year. Table 3-8: 1-15 Seasonality Factors for Average Weekdays (Tuesday -Thursday) Time Period Southbound Traffic Northbound Traffic AM Peak Period 0.99 0.98 Midday Period 0.96 0.96 PM Peak Period 1.01 1.00 Night Period 0.93 0.94 3.3.7 Balanced Traffic Network Using these seasonality factors, as well as the ramp volumes and the mainline volumes from the count program, Stantec created balanced networks for the 1-15 corridor. Figure 3-19, Figure 3-20, and Figure 3-21 show the balanced network for the entire day, 7 to 8 AM hour, and the 5 to 6 PM hour. Cli Stantec 3.35 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions Figure 3-19: 1-15 Daily Traffic Stick Diagram (I- NORTH 18.687rf 4 Lanes 20,1 143,0]9 3a.s71 .- I illip J jfjj 4.. � u`�' a .,. J; C G S r ,� F25 2 412 $+1 Lanes 3Lanes 14,442 2o1a 83,013 } 77,742 l ,n R N 3Lanes g972 � 07 O 3Lanes 40 0 76,477 dlr' I. ZK 4Lanes �9=- 79,584 �146 a 1. • 1 �75,905 97,68 ----- 3+1 Lanes 5797 1 ��-�25,023 81,297'z.., ;76517 3 1 Lanes 79•2 1 1 a h W -J �.•xs ''-- 76,706 12 1,513 3Lanes k _ri2slo 76,33] lo,2ds 3Lanes _ m 4 �_ 2 io is 76,248 67-y----.- 3Lanes m 4 W 3 `ia,sos 79,754 y•. 4Lanes 13,368 M S � i NORTH glib 20. 4 Lanes _ 81,043 22,47a } I I i�V i Q D `' 58.434 4 Lanes 6,244 44,618 . J' n G a ?' E 3.43R 4 Lanes 3 Lanes 0.419 13,748_ t 14,15` SSA= • 85.358�v , 81,764 r 5 pd R S 3 Lanes -z4,541 13,318_ 81,016 3 Lanea 4527 72,217 � J 76,337 --, 3+1 Lanes 18.473 1 -• - 25431- 92,857 21.483 274Lanes �4 { 18,242 2t --9345 80,724 12, 1 ]21g 79,314 523�3 '__ 4Lanes 3+1 Lanes fii . 321 80,702 74,676 3Lanes 3Lanes 11,�A 5,553 Y ifw.= ® Stantec 3.36 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions Figure 3-20: 1-15 Stick Diagram - 7 to 8 AM Travel Demand — NORTH 1,476177 4Lanes 1,433,- 6,913 1.302 � -- -- _� 4 z. ;a J } S' z 2 S .� S.J 4+1 Lanes 37 _ 3Lanes 1096 ....- -- 6,485 619 ti 5,642 -..`" E = 22p % L] . A54 3Lanes 46.2 426 3Lanes 273 .- 5,061 w �..-- 4,965 ` �- J ISy p ? d50 4Lones -.. 5,337 a R � T_�" -_` 3+1 Lanes 3550� - ;.' 1,755 5,331 .. [ ',246 3+1 Lanes ti 412 z_J 70 1 h �.; W J 2xs ,- S,U63 594 ' 73 3Lanes . r ''342 5,311 743 3Lanes _ 2 r 5,247 5&5 553 3Lanes 1 m 4 3 5,231 -� ':535 l 4Lanes 1.1d3`� M S i �: 4� NORTH 1.241 dLanes 5,695 1•�. I I 'g i a 11\ 1 g;q 4 Lanes r 223 , 6,006 . o J' ngill a P 13 Y' s 4 Lanes 3 Lanes 3F3 97 769 700 5 : 7 6 3 �- 5,534 rry 5 6 3 Lanes 44-3 1234 r 5,277 J 3 Lanes 141 �. 4,1$4 4,491 -_,� 341 Lanes 1.432 J `.- �.683 f 4,7181.062 71.317 4Lanes m { i, 41I J J -0S4 4,144 >9s adz 3,612 i� 4Lanes 3+1 Lanes J i 3,678 3,366 3Lanes 494 3Lanes 177 �, �: W , Jll1. L015 117. 920) ® Stantec 3.37 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions Figure 3-21: 1-15 Stick Diagram - 5 to 6 PM Travel Demand 4-- NORTH 487 4Lanes 1.080.' 1. 0 6,175 _ _ Y I 1 Ia y s. IIG 11 2 Ci I. r �101 '1. 4+1 Lanes �i 3Lanes 719 `y 5,087 434 4,754 _ .. N t ? it 2p0 N § 114 ' 44 -.-.1,016 3Lanes 667 i 6B7 3Lanes 523 - 5,052 x `` k: �_ 5,071 .-- s g Lanes 5,797 8 6 r 6 647 1. 6,255"� 3+1 Lanes 3, 4 ss;a 5,574 -. 1 dj75 3>1 Lanes $g 172 ky + }^_ -_• — 5,376 785 '- 226 3Lanes G6 N m ta w J_ i `7i4 5,365 783 — 3Lanes 2 61? 5,394 37d z- 3Lanes m 4 4 3 a 5,b79 ~� $Lanes 874 A, S i NORTH i 1 ?as . d Lanes 5,036 101 I I 'N QO 1 4 _ 3, 237 4 Lanes 5,737 ;1 J' n d g `6 '02 r ka 4 Lanes 3Lanes ¢ 4:649 .03 f 4 4,237 L�—' $ d 8 4 6 3Lanes 1 4,348 704 3Lanes — 324 3,972 gig 5,386 l =-� 3+1 Lanes 1,1� S v ` 1.429 6,54] 1. asg 1.749 4Lanes 4 4Iiif y 5,760 751 6 5,885 dLanes 341 Lanes A 1 6,312 6,165 3Lanes 780 3Lanes 634 41,10920) ® Stantec 3.38 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions 3.3.8 1-15 Mainline Traffic by Day of Week The 1-15 is a route that serves both recreational and commuter traffic. Las Vegas is located 230 miles to the northeast, the Lake Elsinore recreational area is located 20 miles to the south, and San Diego is located 90 miles to the south. The data show that traffic on the 1-15 corridor is typically higher on Fridays than traffic on an average Tuesday to Thursday. South of SR 91, Friday traffic was observed to be approximately 4 percent higher than the average Tuesday to Thursday, while north of SR 91, Friday traffic was observed to be 2.7 percent higher northbound and 1.2 percent higher southbound than traffic on an average Tuesday to Thursday. Nearly all of the traffic increase observed over the 24-hour period is concentrated during the off-peak periods. Both north and south of SR 91, midday and night period traffic on Fridays exceed that of the Tuesday to Thursday average while AM and PM peak period traffic on Fridays are similar. Figure 3-22 and Figure 3-23 compare period volumes south of Cajalco Road for Tuesday - Thursday to Friday, Saturday, and Sunday on 1-15 northbound and southbound, respectively. Figure 3-24 and Figure 3-25 compare period volumes south of Limonite Avenue for Tuesday - Thursday to Friday, Saturday, and Sunday on 1-15 northbound and southbound, respectively. 1-15 traffic south of SR 91 on Saturdays is greater than traffic observed on both the average of Tuesday to Thursday as well as Friday. South of SR 91 Saturday traffic is almost 5 percent higher than traffic on the average Tuesday to Thursday, and about half a percent higher than recorded on Fridays. Saturday traffic is more evenly distributed throughout the midday, PM, and night periods; however, Saturday AM traffic is far lower than weekday AM traffic. Saturday traffic north of SR 91 is lower than traffic on both the average Tuesday to Thursday by 10 percent. On Sundays, daily traffic both north and south of SR 91 is lower than it is during the rest of the week. South of SR 91, northbound traffic is 10 percent lower than the average Tuesday to Thursday while southbound traffic is 18 percent lower. North of SR 91 Sunday northbound traffic is 24 percent lower than the average Tuesday to Thursday, while southbound traffic is 20 percent lower. 5 Stantec 3.39 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions Figure 3-22: 1-15 NB Volumes by Day of Week - South of Cajalco Road 90,000 80,000 N 70,000 E 60,000 • 50,000 U 40,000 :lig 30,000 � 20,000 10,000 0 Total 6-10 AM 10 AM-3 PM 3-7 PM 7 PM-6 AM Tue-Thu Fri Sat Sun Figure 3-23: 1-15 SB Volumes by Day of Week - South of Cajalco Road 90,000 80,000 N 70,000 m60,000 O 50,000 V 40,000 :Ig 30,000 it 20,000 10,000 0 Total 6-10 AM 10 AM-3 PM 3-7 PM 7 PM-6 AM ■ Tues-Th ■ Fri ■ Sat -Sun 5 Stantec 3.40 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions Figure 3-24: 1-15 NB Volumes by Day of Week - South of Limonite Avenue 80,000 70,000 CD60,000 D 50,000 O > 40,000 4= 30,000 6172 20,000 10,000 0 Total 6-10 AM 10 AM-3 PM 3-7 PM 7 PM-6 AM Tues-Th Fri ■ Sat ■ Sun Figure 3-25: 1-15 SB Volumes by Day of Week - South of Limonite Avenue 80,000 70,000 a) 60,000 n 50,000 O > 40,000 4= 30,000 13 20,000 10,000 0 Total 6-10 AM 10 AM-3 PM 3-7 PM 7 PM-6 AM ■ Tues-Th ■ Fri ■ Sat ■ Sun 5 Stantec 3.41 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions 3.3.9 Origin -Destination Patterns on 1-15 Origin -destination (OD) data on 1-15 trips show that a minority of trips traverse the 1-15 ELP corridor end to end (ie., Cajalco Road to/from SR 60) but instead generally are short trips between 6 and 7 miles on average, although their ultimate destination (place of business, home, etc.) may be further away. This section discusses the origins and destinations of 1-15 trips, with a focus on trips to/from 1-15 south of Cajalco Road, trips to/from SR 91 west of 1-15, and trips to/from SR 60 and 1-15 north of SR 60. OD Count Program The origin -destination survey was conducted during the first half of June 2015, from June 1 to June 12, 2015. Bluetooth sensors were deployed along various locations as depicted in Figure 3-26, and listed below: • SR 60 west of 1-15 • SR 60 east of 1-15 • 1-15 between SR 60 and Cantu Galleano Ranch Rd • 1-15 between Limonite Avenue and 6th Street • 1-15 between Hidden Valley Parkway and SR 91 • SR 91 west of 1-15 • SR 91 east of 1-15 • 1-15 between SR 91 and Magnolia Avenue • 1-15 between Dos Lagos Drive and Cajalco Road The sensors sample the 1-15 corridor OD patterns by recording the number of vehicles passing through the 1-15, SR 91, or SR 60 that are equipped with Bluetooth enabled devices (smartphones, Bluetooth enabled cars, etc). These sample data are then expanded based on mainline and ramp traffic counts to estimate an origin -destination volume matrix for the 1-15 corridor. Stantec 3.42 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions Figure 3-26: Origin -Destination Data Collection Program Ontario Stantec • Cantu -Galleon() Ranch Rd Limonite Ave 1 1. i ' 1 I: A ' -.."' . - T .. , i_2:--41 - 7- Ccjoico Rd Dos _agos 3.43 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions OD Patterns - Trips to/from 1-15 South Origin -destination data show that relatively few trips traverse the full 15 miles of the 1-15 ELP corridor. Traffic generally uses the corridor in two halves with the SR 91 serving as a major origin and destination for traffic. Northbound 1-15 AM peak period origin -destination patterns are of interest because traffic, and potential 1-15 ELP usage, would be greatest in this direction and time of day. Eighteen percent of northbound trips originating from 1-15 south of Cajalco Road during the AM peak period were destined for SR 60 or points north along 1-15. Twenty-seven percent of those trips exited to SR 91 with 20 of the 27 percent (or three-quarters) destined for SR 91 westbound. The greatest share of trips, 41 percent, exited 1-15 south of SR 91. These vehicles exited to Cajalco Road, El Cerrito Road, Ontario Avenue, or Magnolia Avenue. It is likely that a substantial share of these vehicles exiting are using the local roadways southwest of the I-15/SR 91 interchange as an alternative route to traveling on the heavily congested westbound SR 91 during the morning. Figure 3-27 illustrates OD patterns for trips observed on the northbound 1-15 during the AM peak period starting south of Cajalco Road and the southbound 1-15 during the PM peak period destined for points south of Cajalco Road. Trips destined for southbound 1-15 south of Cajalco Road during the PM peak period can generally be interpreted as the return trip for NB AM peak trips. PM peak period "return trip" OD data show patterns that are comparable to NB AM patterns. Only 13 percent of trips traverse the full corridor, while 27 percent come from SR 91, and 48 percent from the Magnolia Avenue, Ontario Avenue, El Cerrito Road, or Cajalco Road. ® Stantec 3.44 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions Figure 3-27: Origins and Destinations to/from south of Cajalco Road SB PM 13%' Ontario Eastvale r 20% Corona Cantu-Galleano Ranch Rd Limonite Ave Sixth St Norco Second St Hidden Valley Pkwy 48 7% Magnolia Ave E 121t] Riverside Ontario Ave El Cerrito Rd Cajalco Rd 22,163k iao%,_. Dos Lagos Dr NB AM O nta rio Eastvale 2p% Corona i 18% Cantu-Galleano Ranch Rd Limonite Ave Sixth St Norco Second St Hidden ValleyRiverside Pkwy Magnolia Ave 41 * E Ontario Ave -NNNEI Cerrito Rd f F Cajalco Rd 18,411 100%_' Dos Lagos Dr *OD percentages may not sum to 100% due to rounding. Stantec 3.45 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions OD Patterns - Trips to/from SR 91 West Traffic destined for the heavily congested westbound SR 91 in the morning via 1-15 mostly originates from points south of SR 91. Thirty-seven percent of trips going from northbound 1-15 to westbound SR 91 come from 1-15 south of Cajalco Road. Cajalco Road, El Cerrito Road, Ontario Avenue, and Magnolia Avenue collectively account for 29 percent of the origins. Southbound 1-15 traffic north of SR 91 account for 34 percent of trips destined for WB SR 91 with just over half coming from SR 60 or points north along 1-15. The lower share of WB SR 91 traffic coming from southbound 1-15 is indicative of the availability of SR 60 to the north as an alternative for travel into Los Angeles, and to lesser extent, for travel into Orange County. Figure 3-28 illustrates OD patterns for trips coming from 1-15 and destined for WB SR 91 during the AM peak period and for trips coming from SR 91 EB and destined for 1-15 during the PM peak period. During the PM peak period, EB SR 91 is heavily traveled, largely by commuters returning home from employment centers to the west. Trips from EB SR 91 to 1-15 are more heavily distributed to 1-15 south of SR 91 than they are to north of SR 91. Twenty percent of these trips are destined for the local exits at Magnolia Avenue, Ontario Avenue, El Cerrito Road, or Cajalco Road, while 37 percent continue south on 1-15 past Cajalco Road. Trips destined for northbound 1-15 are split 22 percent to the local exits at Hidden Valley Parkway, 2nd Street, 6th Street, Limonite Avenue, or Cantu Galleano Ranch Road and 20 percent to SR 60 or points along 1-15 north of SR 60. Cli Stantec 3.46 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions Figure 3-28: Origins and Destinations to/from SR 91 west SB PM i 21% ��g Cantu-Galleano Ranch Rd Limonite Ave Second St Hidden Valley Pkwy 37 kDos Lagos Dr NB AM - 18%O Cantu-Galleano Ranch Rd Ontario Limonite Ave Eastyale Sixth St Norco Second St Hidden Valley Pkwy 10,025 100% Corona Magnolia Ave Cajalco Rd - N. Dos Lagos Dr *OD percentages may not sum to 100% due to rounding. Stantec 3.47 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions OD Patterns - Trips to/from 1-15 North of Cantu Galleano Ranch Road Trips destined for 1-15 north of Cantu Galleano Ranch Road (SR 60 or 1-15 north of SR 60) largely originate from the local entrance ramps at Hidden Valley Parkway, 2nd Street, 6th Street, Limonite Avenue, or Cantu Galleano Ranch Road. As shown in Figure 3-29, 47 percent of trips destined for the northern end of the 1-15 corridor originate from these local entrance ramps north of SR 91. Only 15 percent of those trips came from the southern end of the corridor south of Cajalco Road while another 13 percent come from the local entrance ramps between Cajalco Road and SR 91. SR 91 accounts for 25 percent of trips, with approximately two-thirds from EB SR 91. During the PM, trips on 1-15 southbound north of Cantu Galleano Ranch Road are largely destined for the local exit ramps north of SR 91. As shown in Figure 3-29, 56 percent of vehicles on southbound 1-15 starting north of Cantu Galleano Ranch Road exit to either Limonite Avenue, 6th Street, 2nd Street, or Hidden Valley Parkway. This pattern is consistent with the AM peak period outbound share of 47 percent. Only 14 percent traverse the entire 15-mile corridor between SR 6o and Cajalco Road and a similar percentage exit to the local ramps south of SR 91. Seventeen percent are destined for SR 91 with about 12 of the 17 percent heading westbound and 5 of the 17 percent heading eastbound. ® Stantec 3.48 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions Figure 3-29: Origins and Destinations to/from north of Cantu-Galleano Ranch Road 20,642. SB PM 1 00% Onto rio Eastvale I 1 I —L2% Corona Cantu-Galleano Ranch Rd Limonite Ave 56%� Sixth St Norco Second J St 1I Hidden Valley Riverside Pkwy L 13* Magnolia Ave E Ontario Ave El Cerrito Rd Cajalco Rd 14411,Dos Lagos Dr 22,163 NB AM 1 as Onto rio Eastvale Corona Cantu-Galleano Ranch Rd Limonite Ave Sixth St Norco ` Second St Hidden Valley Riverside • Pkwy Magnolia Ave Cajalco Rd 115% N. Dos Lagos Dr *OD percentages may not sum to 100% due to rounding. Origin -destination percentages for all OD's provide further detail on individual movements. This data for both northbound and southbound 1-15 during the AM and PM peak periods are presented in Table 3-9 to Table 3-12. Stantec 3.49 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions Table 3-9: Origin -Destination Matrix, 1-15 NB AM DESTINATION ORIGIN North of SR-60 SR-60 WB SR-60 EB Cantu- Galleano Ranch Rd Limonite Ave Sixth St Second St Hidden Valley Pkwy SR-91 WB SR-91 EB Magnolia Ave Ontario Ave El Cerrito Rd Cajalco Rd Tottil 100% Cantu- Galleano Ranch Rd 66% 26% 8% Limonite Ave 66% 26% 8% 1% 100% Sixth St 65% 12% 7% 4% 12% lik, 100% Second St 65% 12% 7% 4% 12% 1% i 100% Hidden Valley Pkwy 64% 12% 6% 4% 11% 2% 1% 100% SR-91 EB 37% 14% 17% 3% 9% 8% 8% 4% 100% SR-91 WB 10% 19% 13% 2% 7% 19% 18% 10% 100% Magnolia Ave 16% 6% 2% 1% 3% 2% 4% 9% 24% 33% 100% Ontario Ave 15% 6% 2% 1% 3% 2% 4% 9% 24% 33% 1% 100% El Cerrito Rd 16% 6% 2% 1% 3% 1% 4% 9% 23% 32% 2% 1% 100% Cajalco Rd 15% 5% 2% 1% 3% 1% 4% 9% 22% 31% 3% 2% 1% 100% South of Cajalco Rd 9% 6% 3% 0% 1% 1% 3% 8% 20% 7% 15% 16% 6% 4% 100% Table 3-10: Origin -Destination Matrix, 1-15 NB PM 7 DESTINATION ORIGIN North of SR-60 SR-60 WB SR-60 EB Cantu- Galleano Ranch Rd Limonite Ave Sixth St Second St Hidden Valley Pkwy SR-91 WB SR-91 EB Magnolia Ave Ontario Ave El Cerrito Rd Cajalco Rd Total Cantu- Galleano Ranch Rd 70% 16% 14% 100% Limonite Ave 69% 16% 14% 1% 100% Sixth St 55% 11% 11% 2% 21% 100% Second St 54% 11% 11% 2% 21% 1% 100% Hidden Valley Pkwy 52% 10% 10% 2% 20% 3% 2% 100% SR-91 EB 28% 8% 12% 1% 12% 16% 13% 9% 100% SR-91 WB 8% 14% 6% 1% 8% 27% 21% 15% 100% Magnolia Ave 19% 5% 6% 1% 9% 1% 1% 3% 21% 34% 100% Ontario Ave 19% 5% 5% 1% 9% 1% 1% 3% 21% 34% 2% 100% El Cerrito Rd 18% 5% 5% 1% 8% 1% 1% 3% 20% 33% 3% 2% 100% Cajalco Rd 17% 5% 5% 1% 8% 1% 1% 3% 19% 31% 4% 3% 1% 111.1. 100% South of Cajalco Rd 4% 3% 1% 0% 1% 2% 3% 7% 32% 5% 13% 12% 7% 8% 100% Stantec 3.50 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions Table 3-11: Origin -Destination Matrix, 1-15 SB AM DESTINATION ORIGIN Cantu- Galleano Ranch Rd Limonite Ave Sixthjil Second St Hidden Valley Pkwy SR-91 WB SR-91 EB Magnolia Ave Ontario Ave El Cerrito Rd Cajalco Rd South of Cajalco Rd Total North of SR 60 5% 9% 17% 14% 23% 7% 4% 7% 4% 1% 3% 5% 100% SR-60 EB 7% 9% 10% 8% 13% 11 % 14% 1% 1% 0% 0% 25% 100% SR-60 WB 14% 20% 8% 7% 11 % 13% 8% 2% 1% 0% 1% 16% 100% Galleano Ranch Rd 1% 2% 4% 18% 17% 18% 8% 5% 1% 3% 22% 100% Limonite Ave 1% 3% 19% 17% 18% 9% 5% 1% 3% 22% 100% Sixth St 1% 10% 15% 36% 11 % 7% 2% 4% 13% 100% Second St 1% 17% 40% 13% 8% 2% 5% 14% 100% Hidden Valley Pkwy 17% 41% 13% 8% 2% 5% 15% 100% SR-91 EB 23% 14% 4% 9% 50% 100% SR-91 WB 33% 21 % 5% 13% 27% 100% Magnolia Ave 2% 3% 7% 88% 100% Ontario Ave 2% 4% 95% 100% El Cerrito Rd 2% 98% 100% Cajalco Rd 100% 100% Table 3-12: Origin -Destination Matrix, 1-15 SB PM DESTINATION ORIGIN Cantu- Galleano Ranch Rd Limonite Ave Sixth St Second St Hidden Valley Pkwy SR-91 WB SR-91 EB Magnolia Ave Ontario Ave El Cerrito Rd Cajalco Rd South of Cajalco Rd Total North of SR-60 5% 9% 14% 6% 13% 13% 4% 8% 5% 3% 5% 16% 100% SR-60 EB 18% 21 % 9% 4% 8% 9% 9% 2% 1% 1% 1% 18% 100% SR-60 WB 18% 20% 15% 6% 13% 13% 5% 1% 1% 0% 1% 7% 100% Galleano Ranch Rd 1% 6% 5% 10% 26% 19% 5% 3% 1% 3% 22% 100% Limonite Ave 3% 5% 10% 27% 20% 5% 3% 1% 3% 22% 100% Sixth St 3% 8% 12% 24% 13% 7% 4% 7% 21% 100% Second St 1% 13% 26% 15% 8% 4% 8% 24% 100% Hidden Valley Pkwy 13% 27% 15% 8% 5% 8% 24% 100% SR-91 EB 15% 8% 4% 8% 65% 100% SR-91 WB 31 % 17% 9% 17% 26% 100% Magnolia Ave 1% 2% 2% 96% 100% Ontario Ave 0% 2% 98% 100% El Cerrito Rd 0% 100% 100% Cajalco Rd 100% 100% Stantec 3.51 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions 3.3.10 SR 91 Travel Speeds and Traffic Counts SR 91 in Riverside and Orange County is a major feeder route for 1-15 traffic. A substantial share of traffic originating from or destined to 1-15 south of SR 91 is either destined for or came from SR 91. Regionally, SR 91 is one of three east -west freeways that connect Riverside County with Orange County and Los Angeles County. SR 91 is the most direct and highest capacity route for traffic starting from 1-15 to the south destined for Orange County. The only alternative is SR 74, an arterial that winds through the Santa Ana mountains. SR 74 is not considered a significant competitor to SR 91. In Riverside County between the Riverside -Orange County Line and 1-15, the SR 91 generally has four general purpose (GP) lanes in each direction and one HOV-2+ carpool lane in each direction. The RCTC is currently upgrading the SR 91 corridor between the County Line and 1-15 to have five GP lanes in each direction and two Express Lanes in each direction. East of 1-15, one GP lane is dropped at McKinley Street (one interchange east of 1-15) leaving three GP lanes. In Orange County, SR 91 has generally 5 GP lanes per direction and two parallel Express Lanes (the "OCTA 91 Express Lanes"). Travel on SR 91 is generally heaviest in the morning in the westbound direction and during the evening in the eastbound direction. This section discusses general traffic conditions on SR 91 in Riverside and Orange County. AM Peak Period Travel on SR 91 The westbound SR 91 general purpose lanes in Riverside County are heavily congested during the AM peak period. Congestion exists between the Riverside -Orange County Line located between Green River Road and SR 241 and 1-15. It is common for queues on westbound SR 91 to extend past the 1-15 interchange. West of the Riverside -Orange County Line, additional GP and Express Lane capacity result in improved travel conditions. Delays still exist approaching the SR 55 / SR 91 interchange. Stantec conducted floating car travel time surveys as part of the data collection program and the results show that the approximately 18-mile trip between 1-15 to N. Kraemer Blvd west of SR 55 can require 45 minutes, representing delays of over 30 minutes. The vast majority of the delay is concentrated on SR 91 in Riverside County. Westbound SR 91 traffic peaks early during the morning as shown in Table 3-13. Travel speeds on the SR 91 in Riverside and Orange County are already very low during the 6 to 7 AM hour. Spot observations of traffic from 5 to 6 AM also indicate the roadway is congested. By the 8 to 9 AM hour, operations improve and delays are largely dissipated by 10 AM. ® Stantec 3.52 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions Figure 3-30: Westbound SR 91 GP Lane Travel Time Run - AM Peak ravel Time Run: SR 91 WB cite: Wed 06/03/15 tart Time: 6:42 AM nd Time: 7:27 AM SF 57 SR 90 Lakeview Ave N Tustin Ave .I N Kraemer Blvd SF 7 SR 55 SR 142 Imperial Hwy SR 71 SR 83 IIS SR 71 S Maple St N Main St Green River Rd Gypsum Canyon Rd •-• SR 91 Yarha Linda Blvd SR 241 0 1 3 4 5 Miles 11 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 Serfas Club Dr N Lincoln Ave SPEED MPH • 0-30 30 - 45 45 - 55 55 - 05 65 Source: Stantec travel time run Stantec 3.53 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions Table 3-13: Westbound SR 91 Travel Speeds, 1-15 to west of SR 55 - 6-10 AM WB 91 Segment Dist. o E o E o o, o (mi) o; Diverge from I-15 SB to W B Entrance from I-15 SB W B Entrance from I-15 SB to W B Entrance from I-15 NB 0.50 0.20 6 4 43 40 Diverge from I-15 NB to W B Entrance from I-15 NB 1.00 W B Entrance from I-15 NB to W B Entrance from Main St W B Entrance from Main St to W B Entrance from W Grand 0.80 0.35 0.61 1.05 6 7 56 9 11 45 63 12 13 24 60 14 16 35 61 W B Entrance from W Grand to W B Entrance from S LincoIt W B Entrance from S Lincoln to W B Entrance from Maple W B Entrance from Maple to W B Entrance from Serfas Clut 0.78 35 33 18 25 65 W B Entrance from Serfas Club to W B Entrance from SR-71 1.66 W B Entrance from SR-71 to W B Exit to Green River 0.65 19 57 W B Exit to Green River to W B Entrance from Green River 0.46 18 40 35 34 W B Entrance from Green River to Overpass at Coal Cony( 1.67 34 45 58 Overpass at Coal Canyon to W B Exit to SR-241 1.02 64 63 I 66 72 W B Exit to S R-241 to W B Entrance from Gypsum Canyon 0.77 66 70 1 70 73 W B Entrance from Gypsum Canyon to W B Entrance from S W B Entrance from S R-241 to W B Entrance from Yorba Lind 0.77 1.23 74 68 74 1 72 69 1 72 71 71 W B Entrance from Yorba Linda to W B Entrance from Impe 2.97 68 71 69 70 W B Entrance from Imperial to W B Entrance from Lakeviev W B Entrance from Lakeview to W B Exit to S R-55 1.33 0.40 r 33 47 38 30 54 67 56 W B Exit to S R-55 to W B Entrance from S R-55 0.61 Source: Stantec travel time runs. June and September2015 The eastbound SR 91 GP lanes operate at or near free -flow speed during the morning. The reverse trip from N. Kraemer Blvd to 1-15 takes 18 minutes or averages about 60 miles per hour. Travel demand in this direction is relatively light, showing far fewer motorists are reverse commuting from Orange and Los Angeles Counties into Riverside County. This free -flow condition was observed throughout the 6 to 10 AM observation period as shown in Table 3-14. Stantec 3.54 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions Figure 3-31: Eastbound SR 91 GP Lane Travel Time Run - AM Peak �Travei Time Run: SR 91 EB Date: Thu 06/04/15 'Start Time: 8:03 AM =nd Time: 6:21 AM SR 57 SR 90 Lakeview Ave N Tustin Ave 1 NN Kraemer SF, 57 SR 55 SR i42 SR 71 Green River Rd Gypsum Canyon Rd --�% SR 91 1 _ Yuba Linda Blvd SR 241 6 2 3 4 5 Mifes l i i I i I i I i I SR 83 Sit 71 S Maple SI 1-15 N Mdn St Serfas Club Gr N Lincoln Ave SPEED Speed • 0-30 30 - 45 45 - 55 55 65 65 Source: Stantec travel time run Stantec 3.55 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions Table 3-14: Eastbound SR 91 Travel Speeds, west of SR 55 to 1-15 - 6-10 AM Eastbound 91 Segment Dist. (MO ,c) 0 ,� o co E o o, EB Entrance from Kreamer Blvd to EB Entrance from Tustin Ave 0.70 63 57 63 61 63 63 EB Entrance from Tustin Ave to EB Exit to SR-55 0.46 63 EB Exit to SR-55 to EB Entrance from SR-55 0.42 59 56 59 59 EB Entrance from SR-55 to EB Entrance from Lakeview 1.05 71 71 69 68 EB Entrance from Lakeview to EB Entrance from Imperial 1.40 70 69 67 66 EB Entrance from Imperial to EB Entrance from Yorba Linda 2.96 69 69 69 69 EB Entrance from Yorba Linda to EB Exit to SR-241 0.60 72 72 71 72 EB Exit to S R-241 to EB Entrance from Gypsum Canyon 1.34 69 69 70 70 EB Entrance from Gypsum Canyon to EB Entrance from SR-241 0.21 79 73 69 72 EB Entrance from SR-241 to Overpass at Coal Canyon 1.08 70 68 68 68 Overpass at Coal Canyon to EB Exit to Green River 1.76 73 70 70 73 EB Exit to Green River to EB Entrance from Green River 0.43 75 71 67 65 EB Entrance from Green River to EB Entrance from SR-71 1.41 74 66 69 72 EB Entrance from SR-71 to EB Entrance from Serfas Club 1.21 70 66 65 66 64 66 EB Entrance from Serfas Club to EB Entrance from Maple 0.54 75 63 EB Entrance from Maple to EB Entrance from S Lincoln 1.24 72 66 65 63 EB Entrance from S Lincoln to EB Exit to W . Grand 0.16 62 35 EB Exit to W . Grand to EB Entrance from Main St 0.82 60 55 44 52 EB Entrance from Main St to Exit to I-15 0.44 57 62 Exit to I-15 to Diverge in 1-15 Ramp 0.19 58 56 52 48 Source: Stantec travel time runs. June and September 2015 Stantec 3.56 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions PM Peak Period Travel on SR 91 During the PM peak period, motorists experience slow speeds traveling eastbound on the SR 91 GP lanes in both Orange and Riverside Counties. A travel time run starting at just past 3 PM at N. Kraemer Blvd ended just past 1-15 over one hour later. This approximately 18-mile trip took 66 minutes, averaging 16 miles per hour. Queues in Orange County regularly extend well past the Weir Canyon Road / Yorba Linda Blvd interchange. The delay is attributable to heavy demand entering SR 91 EB from SR 241 and Gypsum Canyon Road, as well as queues that are spilling back from Riverside County downstream. In Orange County, the SR 91 Express Lanes operate largely without delay and regularly process over 3,000 vehicles per hour during the PM peak. Continuing eastbound into Riverside County, the number of lanes drops from 5 GP and 2 Express Lanes to 4 GP lanes and 1 HOV lane east of Serfas Club Drive. This lane drop results in congestion and queuing. Past Serfas Club Drive, congestion continues as the lanes approach McKinley Street (east of 1-15, but not shown on the travel time run map), where the corridor reduces from four to three GP lanes. Figure 3-32: SR 91 Eastbound GP Lanes, Travel Time Run - PM Peak `travel Time Run: SR 91 EB Date: Thu 06/04/15 Start Time:3:12 PM End Time: 4:18 PM SR 57 SR 94 Lakeview Ave N Tustin Ave I Blvd SR 55 SR 142 . '`_ Imperial Hwy SR 71 SR 83 SR 71 Gypsum Canyon Rd u + '�� Serfas Club Dr N Lincoln Ave SR 91 Yorba Linda Blvd 0 I SR 241 1-1 5 S Maple St N Main St Green River ;ow.. ^►, 3 4 5 Miles r 1 1 1 r 1 SPEED Speed • 0-30 30 - 45 45 - 55 55 - 65 65 Source: Stantec travel time run CIO Stantec 3.57 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions Heavy delays are observed on the EB 91 GP lanes throughout the 3 to 7 PM period between Imperial Highway in Orange County and past 1-15 in Riverside County. Delays have been observed on a spot basis starting at 2 PM and dissipating by 8 PM. Table 3-15 shows speeds by segment recorded via travel time runs between 3 and 7 PM. Table 3-15: Eastbound SR 91 Travel Speeds, west of SR 55 to 1-15 - 3-7 PM Eastbound 91 Segment Dist. (mi) Q h Q v Q Ln Q o EB Entrance from Kreamer Blvd to EB Entrance from Tustin Ave 0.70 57 44 46 55 25 41 55 EB Entrance from Tustin Ave to EB Exit to SR-55 0.46 53 EB Exit to SR-55 to EB Entrance from SR-55 0.42 61 EB Entrance from SR-55 to EB Entrance from Lakeview 1.05 71 67 70 69 EB Entrance from Lakeview to EB Entrance from Imperial 1.40 69 71 71 68 EB Entrance from Imperial to EB Entrance from Yorba Linda 2.96 23 7 24 6 24 6 36 WPM 4 --- EB Entrance from Yorba Linda to EB Exit to SR-241 -- 0.60 EB Exit to S R-241 to EB Entrance from Gypsum Canyon 1.34 11 12 8 16 EB Entrance from Gypsum Canyon to EB Entrance from SR-241 0.21 11 11 12 11 EB Entrance from SR-241 to Overpass at Coal Canyon 1.08 26 24 22 27 Overpass at Coal Canyon to EB Exit to Green River 1.76 22 22 25 111111 EB Exit to Green River to EB Entrance from Green River 0.43 22 32 22 21 EB Entrance from Green River to EB Entrance from SR-71 1.41 17 20 22 24 EB Entrance from SR-71 to EB Entrance from Serfas Club 1.21 25 29 26 I; 30 I EB Entrance from Serfas Club to EB Entrance from Maple 0.54 33 EB Entrance from Maple to EB Entrance from S Lincoln 1.24 27 27 29 EB Entrance from S Lincoln to EB Exit to W . Grand 0.16 28 30 31 28 EB Exit to W . Grand to EB Entrance from Main St EB Entrance from Main St to Exit to I-15 0.82 0.44 30 45 1 1 28 Exit to I-15 to Diverge in 1-15 Ramp 0.19 Source: Stantec travel time runs. June and September2015 Stantec 3.58 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions Westbound SR 91 during the PM peak operates largely without delay in Riverside County but some delay is observed in Orange County approaching the SR 55 / SR 91 interchange. As shown in Figure 3-33, the 18-mile trip from 1-15 to N. Kraemer Blvd west of SR 55 starting at 5:04 PM concluded 21 minutes later at 5:25 PM, averaging 51 miles per hour. Figure 3-33: SR 91 Westbound GP Lanes, Travel Time Run - PM Peak Travel Time Run: SR 41 W B Date: Thu 06/04/15 Start Time: 5:04 PM End Time: 5:25 PM SR 57 SR 90 Lakeview Ave N Tustin Ave i Imperial Hwy N Kraeme. BP.a SF 5= SR 142 SR 55 SR 71 SR 83 SR 71 S Maple Si Green River Rd - Gypsum Canyon Rd / Serfas Club Dr N Lincoln Ave SR 241 0 1 2 3 4 5 Miles I i I i I i 1 i I i I 1-15 N Main St SPEED Speed • 0-3D 30-45 45 - 55 55 - 65 65 Source: Stantec travel time run Across the 3 to 7 PM period, westbound SR 91 in Riverside County largely operates without delay while westbound SR 91 between Lakeview Avenue and SR 55 is congested between 3 and 6 PM. Table 3-16 shows travel speed observations between 3 and 7 PM on the westbound SR 91 GP lanes. Stantec 3.59 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions Table 3-1 b: Westbound SR 91 Travel Speeds, 1-15 to SR 55 - 3-7 PM WB 91 Segment Dist. (mi) Q 1- co Q v Q ,r, Q ,b Diverge from I-15 SB to W B Entrance from I-15 SB 0.50 48 R 53 51 53 W B Entrance from I-15 SB to W B Entrance from I-15 NB 0.20 60 60 I 46 51 Diverge from I-15 NB to W B Entrance from I-15 NB 1.00 58 55 55 54 1 W B Entrance from I-15 NB to W B Entrance from Main St 0.80 63 61 I 59 63 W B Entrance from Main St to W B Entrance from W Grand 0.35 62 62 I 64 67 W B Entrance from W Grand to W B Entrance from S Lincol 0.61 61 I--- 53 -{ 64 69 + W B Entrance from S Lincoln to W B Entrance from Maple 1.05 65 64 64 69 W B Entrance from Maple to W B Entrance from Serfas Clut 0.78 67 64 I 66 71 W B Entrance from Serfas Club to W B Entrance from SR-71 1.66 65 65 t I 69 70 W B Entrance from SR-71 to W B Exit to Green River 0.65 67 64 t I 68 67 W B Exit to Green River to W B Entrance from Green River 0.46 67 68 t 69 70 W B Entrance from Green River to Overpass at Coal Cany< 1.67 58 66 t 66 72 Overpass at Coal Canyon to W B Exit to SR-241 1.02 68 69 70 77 W B Exit to S R-241 to W B Entrance from Gypsum Canyon 0.77 60 72 66 73 W B Entrance from Gypsum Canyon to W B Entrance from S 0.77 74 70 67 74 W B Entrance from S R-241 to W B Entrance from Yorba Lind 1.23 71 74 65 72 W B Entrance from Yorba Linda to W B Entrance from Impe 2.97 59 63 j 68 69 W B Entrance from Imperial to W B Entrance from Lakeviev 1.33 39 26 30 67 W B Entrance from Lakeview to W B Exit to SR-55 0.40 34 32 59 W B Exit to SR-55 to W B Entrance from SR-55 0.61 53 ' 53 1 51 r 50� Source: Stantec travel time runs. June and September2015 3.3.10.1 Traffic Count at the Riverside/Orange County Line Traffic counts on SR 91 recorded at the Riverside -Orange County Line, presented in Figure 3-34, demonstrate a multi -hour AM and PM peak period where demand maintains approximately 11,000 vehicles per hour. Westbound, 5 GP lanes and 1 HOV lane, widening to 2 Express Lanes are available. Eastbound, 5 GP lanes and 2 Express lanes are available to process traffic. The RCTC 91 EL initial phase project will widen this regional chokepoint by adding a 5th GP lane in each direction in Riverside County and 2 EL's per direction. Stantec 3.60 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions Figure 3-34: SR 91 Global Traffic by Hour — Riverside -Orange County Line 12,000 1 1,000 10,000 9,000 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 —0—Westbound SR 91 ♦Eastbound 91 Q • Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N 6,5 V Crj O 00 O: O 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N (7 C i< CO O O a_ 0 0 3.3.11 Orange County SR 91 Express Lanes Usage statistics on the SR 91 Express Lanes provide insight into motorists' response to express lanes. The OCTA 91 Express Lanes extend for 10 miles from SR 55 in the west to the Riverside - Orange County Line in the east. There are two lanes per direction paralleling 5 GP lanes per direction. As shown in Table 3-17, an average of almost 36,000 vehicles per day use the 91 Express Lanes in either direction with about 28,000 of the vehicles (77 percent) paying a full toll. The remaining 23 percent are HOV-3+ carpools that are generally free, but are charged a 50 percent discounted toll between 4 and 6 PM in the eastbound direction. Gross potential toll revenue in fiscal year 2015 was $39.3 million with over 60 percent attributable to the eastbound express lanes. The average daily toll was $4.33 for travel on the eastbound lanes (full toll traffic only, excluding HOV) and $3.22 for travel on the westbound lanes. Stantec 3.61 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions Table 3-17: SR 91 Express Lanes - FY 2015 Traffic and Revenue FY 2015 Statistics Full Facility Eastbound Westbound Gross Revenue (Annual, millions $) $39.3 $24.6 $14.7 Average Daily Traffic 35,900 19,300 16,600 Average Daily Full Toll Traffic 27,600 15,100 12,500 Average Toll (Full Toll Traffic Only) $3.82 $4.33 $3.22 Usage on the Express Lanes is highest westbound during the morning and eastbound during the evening. Westbound express lane usage regularly peaks at 2,000 vehicles per hour in the morning at a current high toll of $4.70 while eastbound express lane usage regularly peaks at over 3,000 vehicles per hour in the evening at a current high toll of $10.15 charged on Fridays from 3 to 4 PM. Tolls charged from Monday to Thursday from 4 to 5 PM range from a low of $4.85 on Monday to a high of $9.80 on Thursday. Figure 3-35 shows eastbound SR 91 Express Lanes weekday (Tuesday to Thursday average) traffic by hour and tolls charged. Figure 3-36 shows westbound SR 91 Express Lanes weekday traffic by hour and tolls charged. Usage of the Express Lanes generally increases and decreases in conjunction with global traffic, as shown in Figure 3-37. Figure 3-35: Eastbound 91 Express Lanes Traffic and Tolls - Average Tuesday -Thursday 3,200 2,800 2,400 2,000 1,600 1,200 800 400 0 Q 0 0 N Q 0 0 Q 0 0 N Q 0 0 Q 0 0 Q 0 0 Q 0 0 EB Toll (Avg Tue-Thu) DEB EL Volume Q 0 0 Q 0 0 66 Q 0 0 0, Q 0 0 Q 0_ 0 0 0_ 0 0 N 0_ 0 0 0_ 0 0 v o_ 0 0 Cri 0_ 0 0 �o 0_ 0 0 0_ 0 0 66 0_ 0 0 C 0 0 0 $16.00 $14.00 $12.00 $10.00 $8.00 $6.00 $4.00 $2.00 $0.00 Stantec 3.62 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Existing Conditions Figure 3-36: Westbound 91 Express Lanes Traffic and Tolls - Average Tuesday -Thursday 3,200 2,800 2,400 2,000 1,600 1,200 800 400 i IWB Toll (Avg Tue-Thu) —09--WB EL Volume 0 �. Q 0 0 N Q • Q • Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q 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 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o N cM 4 L'r> 66 a o N N c6 4 L:ri a0 U O $16.00 $14.00 $12.00 $10.00 $8.00 $6.00 $4.00 $2.00 $0.00 Figure 3-37: SR 91 Global & Express Traffic by Hour - Riverside -Orange County Line 12,000 —•-Westbound SR 91 —■—Eastbound 91 EL Volume EL Volume —e— WB —8— EB 11,000 - 10,000 9,000 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 " i 2,000 G _ - � _ ` ' o 1,000 � IS i 0 Q o 0 CVN Q o 0 -, Q o 0 _ Q o 0 M Q o 0 V Q o 0 Vi Q o 0 �O Q o 0 K Q o 0 W Q o 0 6: Q o 0 o Q o 0 - a 0 o N CI- 0 0 - d 0 o N a 0 o M a 0 o V a 0 0 Co a 0 o a 0 0 n a 0 o OO d 0 o � -� a a 0 0 o 0 O - Stantec 3.63 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Socioeconomic Variables and Land Use 4.0 SOCIOECONOMIC VARIABLES AND LAND USE This section contains detailed forecasts and supporting commentary on socioeconomic trends in the four counties constituting the Study Area between 2015 and 2035 (the "Forecast Period"). The Study Area consists of Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardino counties. Imperial, San Diego, and Ventura counties are also part of the modeled area but are not considered significant with regard to the proposed 1-15 Express Lanes or the Riverside County highway network in general and the adopted forecasts from SCAG and SANDAG were therefore only validated at a cursory level for these counties. The forecast data developed by WSP I Parsons Brinckerhoff for use in traffic modeling on the RCTC's roads are referred to throughout this section as the "Base Case" forecasts. Sensitivity scenarios are covered in another section of the traffic and revenue report. 4.1 SUMMARY CONCLUSIONS Employment' in the Study Area is forecast to grow by 1.4 million jobs from 7.2 to 8.6 million during the Forecast Period, a compound annual growth rate of 0.9%. Households2 in the Study Area will grow by 1.3 million over the Forecast Period from 5.8 to 7.0 million, a 1.0% compound annual growth rate. Housing growth will closely track job growth region -wide, although housing production will vary by market due to differing levels of developable land availability and housing affordability by submarket. For example, the Inland Empire3 is poised to grow at a more rapid pace as compared to Orange and Los Angeles Counties due to higher levels of available land and lower housing prices relative to Orange County and other coastal areas. The relatively high cost of living in Orange County has caused many people with jobs there to seek lower cost housing options in places such as the Inland Empire. This relationship between coastal and inland communities results in strong traffic demand along linkages between the two areas, such as SR 91 and the proposed 1-15 Express Lanes. The Inland Empire is poised to experience the strongest percentage employment and household growth in the Study Area over the Forecast Period and the 1-15 Express Lanes are well located to benefit from this growth. Table 4-1 presents a summary of the Base Case Study Area employment and household forecasts. ' "Employment," unless otherwise stated, refers to a comprehensive measure of non -farm, at -place wage and salary jobs plus government and agricultural workers. 2 "Households," unless otherwise stated, refers to occupied dwelling units. 3 For the purposes of this analysis, the "Inland Empire" is defined as Riverside and San Bernardino Counties. Stantec 4.64 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Socioeconomic Variables and Land Use Table 4-1: Base Case Study Area Employment and Household Forecast (thousands) Employment 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Total Employment Period Incremental Growth Average Annual Growth CAGR [1] 7,231 2015-20 599 120 1.61% 7,830 2020-25 210 42 0.53% 8,040 2025-30 273 55 0.67% 8,313 2030-35 337 67 0.80% 8,650 2015-35 1,419 71 0.90% Households 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Total Households Period Incremental Growth Average Annual Growth CAGR [1] Compound Annual Growth Rate 5,764 2015-20 422 84 1.42% 6,186 2020-25 292 58 0.93% 4.1.1 Study Area Employment Summary 6,478 2025-30 273 55 0.83% 6,750 2030-35 281 56 0.82% 7,032 2015-35 1,268 63.40 1.00% The California Economic Development Department (EDD) reports that the Study Area added approximately 73,000 non -farm jobs annually (on average) between 1995 and 20154, a compound annual growth rate of 1.1%. Between 2007 and 2009, the Study Area lost approximately 640,000 jobs, equating to 9.1% of its total job base, bringing the total number of jobs down to approximately 6.4 million, a level not seen since the 1999 to 2000 period. Recovery from the Great Recession began very slowly in 2011 and the general consensus at that time was that growth would continue at a slow pace over many years. Since that time, however, the Study Area economy sustained four consecutive years of steady, stronger than expected growth, with annual employment increases of 2.6% in 2012, 3.2% in 2013, 2.8% in 2014, and 2.7% in 2015, resulting in an average of 189,000 jobs per year. As a result, the area has fully recovered the employment losses stemming from the Great Recession and has surpassed the previous peak in employment in 2007. Figure 4-1 shows historical and forecast employment changes in the Study Area as well as the overall level of Study Area employment at the end of each period. 4 California Employment Development Department Labor Market Information Division Stantec 4.65 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Socioeconomic Variables and Land Use Figure 4-1: Historical and Forecast Study Area Employment Gains and Total Employment 500, 000 - 400., 000 - 300, 000 m °7 200, 000 (.7 10Q 000 v a a E (100,000) - LU } (200,000) - 0 } (300,000) - (400,000) - (500,000) - Employment Change - Fore cast — history a --I N M al 6 4i En 6 al a -I r rl 7 ti N 61 ff 61 �1 61 61 rl rl rl 1993-1994 1994-1995 1995-1996 1996-1997 1997-1998 c1 d rI 6Y O O c1 O O ay N N 00 e 1 61 O 61 ❑ O rl r N 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 2005-200G 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009.2010 2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 CO 61 C. rl r N O O O N N N n W 67 ri C1 C1 CD O N N N - 9, 000,000 8, 000,000 7, 000 000 6, 000,000 5, 000,0X 4,000,000 3, 040,040 2, 000,00C 1, 000,000 Total Year End Employment (Line) The Base Case forecast includes an average of 71,000 new jobs per year added to the Study Area between 2015 and 2035. This growth is due in part to the stronger than expected rebound from the Great Recession, which is forecast to continue in the short term. There are certain issues related to the cost of operating businesses in California that may hamper growth, but the highly educated workforce, industrial diversity, large established international trade industry, and population growth of the various urban cores within the Study Area will support job growth in the long term. Figure 4-2 shows historical Study Area employment and the Base Case employment forecast. The black line is the linear trend line of the historical data series from 1990 to 2015. The figure shows that the past four years of consistently strong growth have caused total employment to surpass the historical trend line as of 2015. The Base Case forecast is expected to continue to accelerate past the historical trend line in the near term and flatten out over the longer term. Stantec 4.66 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Socioeconomic Variables and Land Use Total Employment 10,000,000 9,000,000 - 8,000,000 - 7,000,000 6,000,000 5,000,000 4,000,000 3,000,000 2,000,000 - 1,000,000 - Figure 4-2: Historical and Base Case Study Area Employment Forecasts -Forecast —History Linear (History) tic> sizu ti I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I Despite four years of strong growth, due to the dramatic losses that took place during the Great Recession, it was not until 2015 that total employment reached and surpassed pre -recession levels in the Study Area. Economic indicators suggest continued expansion in the near term, with annual employment growth between 2015 and 2018 forecast to continue in the 1.8% to 2.5% range, barring any major economic shocks. This extended period of growth, combining the full recovery period from 2011 to 2015 with continued near -term momentum, causes the Base Case forecast to surpass the historical linear trend line. Near -term employment growth will be shaped by a number of factors, including: (i) The historically low price of oil, which represents a double-edged sword in terms of economic impacts. On one hand, low oil prices are hurting the oil -producing sectors of the economy. Businesses in this sector are experiencing declining revenue and profits and increased credit risk, and as a result, its employment base will contract and capital investments will be halted. The state is ranked third in the U.S. in crude oil production behind Texas and North Dakota, and half of the state's downstream activities, such as refinery operations, are located in the Study Area. On the other hand, these low prices represent a benefit for consumers and will positively impact consumer expenditures, a critical component of the economy. Likewise, certain businesses benefiting from resulting energy costs savings may be better positioned to make capital investments during this period. The positive consumer and business impacts will take time to filter through the economy while the negative impacts will be felt more immediately. Stantec 4.67 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Socioeconomic Variables and Land Use (ii) Construction activity has increased in recent years, although the sector has not fully recovered the job losses between 2008 and 2010. Based on the unprecedented housing boom leading up to the Great Recession, the sector's employment levels at that time were arguably unsustainable to begin with, suggesting current levels may be rightsized. Construction is typically one of the leading growth sectors in economic recovery periods due to demand that is pent-up during recessions. Historically high vacancy rates in residential and non-residential properties have mostly been absorbed during the recovery and markets (prices and inventories) have stabilized. The Inland Empire was hit particularly hard by foreclosures but the amount of distressed mortgages has declined to normal levels and new construction activity has ramped up again in recent years. (iii) The general trend of businesses doing more with less will continue into the future. This includes sharing work space, reducing square footage per employee requirements, and working from home, investments in computer technology and automation to reduce the number of workers, and outsourcing to reduce overhead and increase profits. Certain sectors, such as manufacturing, will continue to face employment headwinds due to these trends, and office users are requiring lower amounts of space per employee relative to historical standards. Non-residential development in the Inland Empire continues to be led by industrial users seeking cheap land and strong access. While business relocation to the Inland Empire is a positive in general, these uses tend to require far fewer employees per square foot, limiting the job -generating impact of these moves. (iv) Ongoing drought conditions in the region have not yet had a major impact on the economy but remain a concern. While these conditions have had a direct impact on agricultural production, they may indirectly affect other sectors such as residential construction, depending on the extent to which conservation efforts by local jurisdictions result in actions such as water tap moratoria. (v) The U.S. economy has grown despite weak global economic conditions, particularly in China. A strong dollar coupled with weakening conditions in Asia have served to reduce U.S. exports. These weaker global market conditions have contributed to the decline in the price of oil cited above. The U.S. economy has so far proven resilient to these ongoing conditions but could be negatively impacted if something like a financial crisis in China takes place. Issues with European economies will impact the U.S. as a whole but changes in Asian economies may impact California more directly and significantly. Mexico is also a major trade partner that directly impacts the Study Area. Mexican economic growth has been steady in recent years although it has fallen short of estimates. Due to its geographic location, the state's trade activities with Mexico rely more heavily on rail and trucks, which impact the Study Area's highway network. The recovery from the Great Recession began slowly in 2011 but gained momentum in the following years, with four years of healthy levels of expansion. In December 2015, the Fed raised short-term borrowing rates for the first time in ten years. Citing job growth trends and healthy unemployment levels, this move signals confidence in the U.S. economy's near -term Stantec 4.68 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Socioeconomic Variables and Land Use fundamentals and a departure from the monetary policy geared towards stemming the losses from the Great Recession. Most economists remain bullish on near term economic conditions with a few of the caveats cited above. In the longer -term, the Study Area forecast reflects several fundamental characteristics of Southern California that have impacted growth in the past. (I) The diverse mix of employment in the Study Area, including high tech manufacturing (electronics, medical devices, defense equipment, etc.), leisure and hospitality jobs, retail jobs, medical services jobs to assist the aging population, and educational services jobs to fuel future innovation and economic growth. (ii) Continued migration of certain manufacturing sector components, such as distribution, which is migrating within the Study Area to less expensive operating environments such as the Inland Empire, and others (mainly less advanced manufacturing processes) that could continue moving off shore. (iii) Continued strong growth in Los Angeles County employment. The County's growth in the most recent recovery is a significant departure from historical trends and suggests a structural shift in the role of Los Angeles County employment in the Study Area. The county has averaged over 100,000 new jobs over the past 4 years, representing 54% of Study Area job growth over the period. In previous expansionary periods, Los Angeles County's share of Study Area growth was 39% (1993 to 2001) and 30% (2002 to 2007). (iv) Continued housing / jobs imbalance in certain key parts of the Study Area, including Orange County, where the build -out of remaining vacant land is arguably within the forecast horizon (2035). Even under current plans where far more land will be dedicated for residential development than commercial, long commute times will be the norm for many Orange County workers seeking less expensive residential options outside the county. (v) The trend towards infill development in established areas may provide a counterbalancing effect to the issues noted above in (iv). Our previous analyses in the region identified underutilized coastal areas as candidates for redevelopment. In the past, these were generally considered longer -term opportunities most likely to take place near the end of the Forecast Period. However, research and field observations suggest that this trend is accelerating and will impact employment and household development patterns sooner rather than later. This is consistent with national trends showing stronger employment growth in urban cores versus suburban areas, which is a departure from the past half century or more of metropolitan growth patterns. It remains to be seen if these trends reflect a short-term, cyclical pattern driven by factors such as demographic shifts, including lifestyle preferences of the growing Millennial age group, or a permanent, structural shift that will continue to channel employment and housing demand towards urban cores in the longer term. Cli Stantec 4.69 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Socioeconomic Variables and Land Use (vi) California has developed a reputation as a challenging location to operate a business, and some businesses have relocated to more business -friendly states such as Arizona, Nevada, Texas, and Utah. Despite this reputation, during the recovery from the Great Recession, the state had one of the strongest rebounds relative to other states and the U.S. as a whole. This trend suggests that the fundamentals of the California economy remain strong despite perceptions of an unfriendly business environment. Within the Study Area, the most significant long-term employment growth is expected in the Inland Empire where Riverside and San Bernardino counties' combined employment is expected to grow at an average annual rate of 1.1 % over the Forecast Period. Inland Empire job growth will result from two broad trends; (i) The need for nearby "population serving" jobs to serve large numbers of new residents, and (ii) The high cost of doing business in established Orange and Los Angeles county locations, especially for companies with large land demands such as certain types of manufacturing and distribution. Transportation- and trade -related jobs have for years accounted for much of the job growth in the Inland Empire as many distribution facilities serving Ontario International Airport and the ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles are located there. This industry will continue to be a significant contributor to Inland Empire job growth though labor issues and changes to international shipping routes, specifically those related to the Panama Canal expansion (scheduled for completion in 2016) will temper growth in the long term. The Canal expansion will allow super-Panamax ships from Asia to directly access ports on the East Coast of the United States, potentially decreasing ship traffic to West Coast ports. After steep declines in passenger traffic from 2007 to 2013, control of Ontario International Airport is in the process of being transferred from Los Angeles World Airports (LAWA) to the newly formed Ontario International Airport Authority (OIAA). Although some of the recent passenger decline is due in part to weak economic conditions, many argue that the airport was a lower priority for LAWA, and that local control will improve conditions and serve as an economic catalyst for the area. 4.1.2 Study Area Household Summary The Base Case forecast assumes that in the near term, the ongoing strength of the economy will fuel continued household formation, making up for lower levels that took place from 2004 through 2014. As a result of this pent-up demand, growth during the continued expansion from 2015 to 2020 period is expected to be higher than the historical trend, driven by a strong rebound in the Inland Empire. Figure 4-3 shows historical and forecast household gains in the Study Area. ® Stantec 4.70 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Socioeconomic Variables and Land Use Figure 4-3: Historical and Forecast Study Area Household Gains and Forecast 200, 000 18Q, 000 16Q 000 m - 140, 000 c 120,000 o ▪ • 100, 000 m 0 80,000 0 60,000 r 40,000 20,000 Household Change Fore cast -history 1111 rig N'M .4 .4 W.111 M10�,O1.1.11ituallitil rI NM7r.A4DNDOCnO�NMY),DM1.11 WO.I .. C, a1 al a1 M M al M a1 M O O O O O O O O O O r-I rl ri rl rl a --I r-I N a a aiaiaia5 MMMd00 0000000 000000 00000 ri ri .-i ri ri ri ri ri ri N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N G .;1 L6 IR W 61 O ri N m 4 .7 O N W 61 . 4 .j5 ko R co dl 61 al m m m m m m m m O O O O O O O O O O ry ry ri rl rl ri ri ri ri ri at at a7 61 a5 61 6i 61 m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ri .-I ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 8,000,000 7,000,000 6,000,000 5,000,000 4,000,400 3, 00D 000 2,000,000 1,000,000 Total Year End Households (Line) Overall, household formations reflect a higher number of employed persons per household in Orange, San Diego, and Los Angeles counties due to the higher proportion of dual income earning households and the daily in -migration of workers from surrounding counties. Table 4-2 shows historical and forecast jobs per household by county in the Study Area. As seen in the table, the average employment per household fell sharply between 2005 and 2010, reflecting the effect of the recession on employment in the Study Area. Employment per household is expected to return to the historical average over the Forecast Period. Table 4-2: Jobs per Household by County Jobs/HH 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Los Angeles Orange San Bernardino Riverside L40 L43 0.89 0.79 L25 L34 aw am 1.32 1.49 1.03 0.92 LH L55 1.10 0.97 1.20 L38 1.00 am 1.29 L48 1.02 0.91 1.32 L51 1.02 0.87 1.31 L49 1.01 0.81 L31 L50 1.00 0.77 LB 1.51 1.00 0.73 Study Area Average 1.30 1.19 1.28 1.27 1.16 1.25 1.26 1.24 1.23 1.22 Figure 4-4 shows the historical trend of household growth in the Study Area compared to the Base Case forecast. As seen in the figure, it is expected that household growth in the region will move beyond the historical trendline. This is due to an initial level of higher growth in the region between 2015 and 2020 resulting from a variety of factors. These include increased household formation resulting from continued economic growth, as adult children leave their parents' homes or leave roommates due to stronger financial situations, growth driven by the Millennial age group, as well as positive net in -migration driven by local employment opportunities. ® Stantec 4.71 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Socioeconomic Variables and Land Use Total Households 8,000,000 7,000,000 6,000,000 5,000,00G 4-,000,00a 3,000,000 2, a06,0 a0 1,G00,0G0 - Figure 4-4: Historical and Base Case Household Forecasts 4" NY ^6- Forecast —History Linear (History) a`' na N. �� 'La ti9 �� tia ?" rLa In the long-term, the western portions of the Inland Empire will achieve the strongest percentage household growth, where price points are lower than most Orange and Los Angeles county markets and reasonable commutes to Orange and Los Angeles job centers remain possible, especially given current and planned expansion of tolled express lane options on SR 91 which links Inland Empire communities to the Foothill/Eastern toll road and central Orange County employment centers. A significant component of residential growth in coastal areas (especially Los Angeles County and northern portions of Orange County) will be through redevelopment of older obsolete industrial properties and denser, multifamily infill projects. Recent permitting activity suggests that this is a growing trend. In 2015, 80% of Los Angeles County permits and 65% of Orange County permits were for multifamily units, compared to 24% and 28% for Riverside and San Bernardino Counties, respectively. 4.2 FORECAST METHODOLOGY Forecasts were developed using both the Riverside County Transportation Analysis Model (RivTAM), as well as the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) traffic model. The combination of these two models includes the Study Area, San Diego, Ventura, and Imperial Counties, which, as noted earlier, are not expected to impact Riverside County highway traffic in a material way. The Study Area forecast discussed above is the aggregation of 5,211 Stantec 4.72 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Socioeconomic Variables and Land Use individual traffic analysis zone (TAZ) forecasts5. As such the disaggregated TAZ forecasts can be aggregated by county, city or Focus Area to aid in the analysis. The term "Focus Areas" refers to aggregations of TAZs assembled by WSP I Parsons Brinckerhoff that represent major projects or development areas that received additional attention in the modeling process due to their expected impact on the RCTC's traffic. Figure 4-5 is a map of the Study Area, showing the core of the four counties relative to the 1-15 Express Lanes. Figure 4-5: Map of the Study Area 1-I5 Express Lanes The 1-15 Express Lanes are located in Riverside County, within close proximity to San Bernardino County and with access to Orange and Los Angeles counties. The forecast provides the socioeconomic inputs for 2,243 TAZs in Los Angeles County, 666 TAZs in Orange County, 1,900 TAZs in Riverside County, 402 TAZs in San Bernardino County. The specific analytical steps taken to complete the Base Case Forecasts were: Reviewed Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) demographic forecasts including Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), San Diego Association of 5 Traffic analysis zones are geographical areas, subsets of Census Tracts, established based on traffic levels and generally bound by roadways. Stantec 4.73 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Socioeconomic Variables and Land Use Governments (SANDAG), and other regional local planning agency forecasts to understand how each of those agencies expect growth to occur. Incorporated the Base Case Forecasts into the RivTAM / SANDAG TAZ structure for use by Stantec and performed standard tests to ensure that socioeconomic model outputs flowed seamlessly into the traffic model. Reviewed economic reports and forecasts from the Los Angeles Economic Development Corporation (LAEDC), UCLA Anderson School, Chapman University, California State University (Fullerton), California Department of Finance, Woods & Poole, Moody's Analytics, and other third party data sources to understand current national, state, and local trends in the critical trip production and attraction variables of households and at -place employment. Established 2015 values for the 53 socioeconomic data model parameters at the TAZ level for use by Stantec in calibrating the traffic model. This process was also performed for the 39 variables in the SANDAG model. • Conducted interviews with local land owners, developers, real estate brokers, planning agencies and associations, and real estate development advisors. This interview program guided the land use team in uncovering issues that would impact future development in the Study Area, and confirmed focus area development potential. • Conducted field investigations of critical Focus Areas to update information on potential development capacity, entitlements, inventories, and constraints to development. These investigations supported adjustments to TAZ level allocations of new jobs and households. ■ Developed Study Area, county and Focus Area employment and household growth rates for the Forecast Period based on a review of historical trends from the California EDD, national and regional forecasts, economic reports, and first-hand information gathered through the interview process. ■ Identified candidate areas for redevelopment and infill development at higher densities and allocated development activity accordingly in various forecast years. ■ Using information generated through the preceding steps, prepared a Base Case forecast for the required variables (mainly households, jobs, and variations thereof) at the Study Area, county, Focus Area, and TAZ levels. Figure 4-6 presents an overview of the WSP I Parsons Brinckerhoff land use model. ® Stantec 4.74 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Socioeconomic Variables and Land Use Figure 4-6: Illustration of the WSP I Parsons Brinckerhoff Land Use Forecast Model Methodology MPO TAZ -Level Socioeconomic Data •SCAG - RTP 2012 Data •SANDAG - SR13 Regional /County Level Adjustments • Establishment / verification of 2015 base control totals for households and employment by county • Analysis of third -party national, regional, and local forecasts for Study Area to establish future growth estimates • Interview program with planners and other parties • `Focus Area' adjustments for planned developments not yet captured in MPO forecasts TAZ Level Socioeconomic Forecast • 53 variables in RivTAM model format, and 39 variables in SANDAG format • Primary inputs are Study Area employment and households The Base Case Forecast assumes no major additions to the highway system in the area, aside from the proposed 1-15 Express Lanes. As stated above, the Base Case has been developed using the RivTAM/TransCAD model structure and provides inputs to the traffic model for all 53 socioeconomic parameters. For San Diego County, the Base Case was developed using the SANDAG model structure. Some forecast parameters are directly related to, and were therefore derived from, the primary forecast parameters (total at -place employment and households) while others were adopted from the MPO base data. Table 4-3 and Table 4-4 below present each variable and the methodology used to determine its ultimate value for the RivTAM and SANDAG models respectively. ® Stantec 4.75 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Socioeconomic Variables and Land Use Table 4-3: RivTAM Forecast Variable Methodology Population Variables (7) Forecast Methodology Total Population = Residential population + group quarter population + institutional population Group Quarter Population = Values adopted from MPO data Institutional Population = Values adopted from MPO data Residential Population = Base Case households * household size Population by Age (4 Categories) = Total population *% by age category adopted from MPO data Household Variables (18) Forecast Methodology Total Number of Households = Base Case Household Forecast Households by Household Size (5 Categories) = Base Case Households * share of households by category adopted from MPO data Households by Age of Household Head (4 Categories) = Base Case Households * share of households by category adopted from MPO data Households by Number of = Base Case Households * share of households by category Workers (4 Categories) adopted from MPO data Households by Household = Base Case Households * share of households by category Income (4 Variables) adopted from MPO data School Enrollment (2) Forecast Methodology K-12 School Enrollment = % of population ages 5-17 enrolled in K-12 adopted from MPO data * new age 5-17 population College /University Enrollment = % of population ages 18-24 enrolled in college adopted from MPO data new age 18-24 population Household Income (5) Forecast Methodology Median Household Income = Real median household income growth as validated by third party forecasts Median Household Income by = Population growth * share of population adopted from Income Categories (4 MPO data Categories) Workers (4) Forecast Methodology Total Workers = Total workers adopted from MPO data and adjusted to conform with long-term employment forecast trends Workers by Earnings = Total workers * share of workers in each earnings category (3 Categories) adopted from MPO data Employment Variables (17) Forecast Methodology Total Employment = Base Case Employment Forecast Employment by Industry (13 Categories) = Base Case Employment * share of employment by industry adopted from MPO data Employment by Wage (3 Categories) = Base Case Employment * share of employment by category adopted from MPO data 4 Stantec 4.76 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Socioeconomic Variables and Land Use Table 4-4: SANDAG Forecast Variable Methodology Population Variables (4) Forecast Methodology Total Population = Household population + civilian group quarters population + military group quarters population Civilian Group Quarter Population = Values adopted from MPO data Military Group Quarter Population = Values adopted from MPO data Household Population = Total households * household size adopted from MPO forecast Household Variables (18) Forecast Methodology Total Number of Households = Base Case Household Forecast Housing Units by Type / Total (4 Categories) = Base Case Household Forecast * share of units by category adopted from MPO data Households by Type (Single Family, Multi Family, Mobile) Family (3 Categories) = Base Case Household Forecast * share of units by category adopted from MPO data Households by Income (10 Categories) = Base Case Household Forecast * share of units by category adopted from MPO data Employment Variables (17) Forecast Methodology Total Employment = Sum of nonfarm employment, military employment, farm employment, and self employed Nonfarm Employment (13) = Base Case Employment Forecast * share of employment by industry adopted from MPO data Other Employment (3 Categories) = Forecast of farm, military, and self employed * TAZ share of total County employment 4.3 HISTORICAL DATA AND TRENDS IN THE STUDY AREA 4.3.1 Historical Study Area Employment Trends Employment in the Study Area grew from 5.8 million in 1995 to 7.2 million in 2015, corresponding to an average of 73,000 new jobs per year and a compound annual growth rate of 1.1%6. This period takes into account several economic cycles including the Great Recession and the ongoing recovery that followed. Some portions of the Study Area, specifically Los Angeles 6 Source: California EDD LMI �i Stantec 4.77 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Socioeconomic Variables and Land Use County and parts of Orange County, are more mature job markets that have experienced relatively slower growth rates over the long term; but overall, the Study Area has exhibited resiliency in post recessionary periods, with the redevelopment of obsolete properties in mature areas and steady growth in emerging submarkets. Table 4-5 shows that job growth by county varied significantly by period with strong percentage growth in the Inland Empire counties from 1995 to 2005 and the high level of absolute job growth in Los Angeles County from 2010 to 2015. Table 4-5: Total Employment Growth by County, 1995 to 2015 County 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 Los Angeles 3,789,000 4,123,200 4,119,900 3,890,000 4,321,000 Period 1995-00 2000-05 2005-10 2010-15 1995-15 Incremental Growth 334,200 (3,300) (229,900) 431,000 532,000 Average Annual Growth 66,840 (660) (45,980) 86,200 26,600 CAGR 1.70% -0.02% -1.14% 2.12% 0.66% Orange 1,161,200 1,393,000 1,496,700 1,366,700 1,542,900 Period 1995-00 2000-05 2005-10 2010-15 1995-15 Incremental Growth 231,800 103,700 (130,000) 176,200 381,700 Average Annual Growth 46,360 20,740 (26,000) 35,240 19,085 CAGR 3.71% 1.45% -1.80% 2.45% 1.43% San Bernardino 446,600 541,700 650,300 611,100 679,400 Period 1995-00 2000-05 2005-10 2010-15 1995-15 Incremental Growth 95,100 108,600 (39,200) 68,300 232,800 Average Annual Growth 19,020 21,720 (7,840) 13,660 11,640 CAGR 3.94% 3.72% -1.24% 2.14% 2.12% Riverside 342,400 453,300 585,900 533,600 654,100 Period 1995-00 2000-05 2005-10 2010-15 1995-15 Incremental Growth 110,900 132,600 (52,300) 120,500 311,700 Average Annual Growth 22,180 26,520 (10,460) 24,100 15,585 CAGR 5.77% 5.27% -1.85% 4.16% 3.29% Study Area 5,739,200 6,511,200 6,852,800 6,401,400 7,197,400 Period 1995-00 2000-05 2005-10 2010-15 1995-15 Incremental Growth 772,000 341,600 (451,400) 796,000 1,458,200 Average Annual Growth 154,400 68,320 (90,280) 159,200 72,910 CAGR 2.56% 1.03% -1.35% 2.37% 1.14% Job growth in the Inland Empire has been relatively healthy for the past 20 years, and relative to other parts of the Study Area, it has a very different employment composition stemming from fundamental characteristics of its specific stage of the socioeconomic lifecycle. While Los Angeles County and Orange County represent maturing job centers, the Inland Empire is a large, fast-growing formerly agricultural area that is now a center for industrial and distribution businesses. From the mid-1990s to the mid-2000s, it was one of the fastest growing metropolitan areas in the country. ® Stantec 4.78 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Socioeconomic Variables and Land Use Sector specific trends reflect these distinct characteristics. Leading up to the Great Recession, the Inland Empire was undergoing an unprecedented housing boom, which led to strong but unsustainable growth in the construction sector. The Inland Empire experienced dramatic declines in housing market conditions, leading to significant job losses in the construction sector, as shown in Figure 4-7. -47 % Figure 4-7: Inland Empire Job Growth/Loss by Sector, 2007 to 2010 -28% -4% l= -7% - -23% W. 4% 8% Educational and Health Services Government Transportation, Warehousing & Util. Other Services Leisure and Hospitality Total Farm Information Retail Trade Wholesale Trade Professional and Business Services Financial Activities Mining and Logging Manufacturing Construction -50% -40% -30% -20% -10% 0% 10% 20% Stantec 4.79 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Socioeconomic Variables and Land Use Table 4-6: Inland Empire Job Growth/Loss by Sector, 2007 to 2010 Jobs Growth by Industry 2007 2008 2009 2010 2007-10 2007-10 Growth Growth Educational and Health Services Government Transportation, Warehousingand Utilities Other Services Leisure and Hospitality Farm Information Retail Trade WholesaleTrade Professional and Business Services Financial Activities Mining and Logging Manufacturing Construction 142,200 149,300 155,000 154,100 225,300 231,000 235,200 234,300 69,500 70,200 66,800 66,600 41,200 40,800 37,300 38,200 132,600 131,000 123,800 122,800 16,400 15,900 14,900 15,000 15,400 14,800 14,100 14,000 175,600 168,600 156,200 155,500 56,900 54,200 49,000 48,700 145,500 138,300 125,300 123,600 49,800 46,100 42,500 41,000 1,300 1,200 1,100 1,000 118,500 106,900 88,800 85,200 112,500 90,700 68,000 59,700 11,900 9,000 (2,900) (3,000) (9,800) (1,400) (1,400) (20,100) (8,200) (21,900) (8,800) (300) (33,300) (52,800) 8.4% 4.0% -4.2% -7.3% - 7.4% -8.5% - 9.1% -11.4% -14.4% - 15.1% -17.7% -23.1% - 28.1% -46.9% Total 1,302,700 1,259,000 1,178,000 1,159,700 (143,000) -11.0% Source: California Employment Development Department / Labor Market Information Division; Annual Averages The Educational and Health Services and Government sectors are typically the least sensitive to economic cycles and were the only two sectors to experience positive growth from 2007 to 2010. Every other sector declined during the period. The Transportation, Warehousing, and Utilities is a key component of the Inland Empire's economy and the sector showed the smallest decline over the period. From 2010 to 2014, consistent with regional, state, and national trends, the Inland Empire gradually recovered from the losses of the Great Recession. While total employment rebounded, Figure 4-8 shows that the recovery was stronger in certain sectors than others. ® Stantec 4.80 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Socioeconomic Variables and Land Use Figure 4-8: Inland Empire Employment Growth/Loss by Sector 2010-2014 -20.0% 40.7% Transportation, Warehousing and Util. j 37.7% Construction 28.5% Wholesale Trade _ 28.2% Educational and Health Services _ 23.5% Leisure and Hospitality 20.9% Professional and Business Services _ 20.0% Mining and Logging 14.4% Other Services 10.0% Manufacturing 9.1% Retail Trade 8.5% Financial Activities Government Farm Information -30.0% -20.0% -10.0% 0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0 % 5010% Table 4-7: Inland Empire Employment Growth/Loss by Sector 2010-2014 Jobs Growth by Industry 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2010-15 2010-15 Growth Growth % Transportation, Warehousing and Utilities 66,600 68,800 73,900 79,400 87,300 93,700 27,100 40.7% Construction 59,700 59,100 62,600 70,000 77,000 82,200 22,500 37.7% Wholesale Trade 48,700 49,200 52,200 56,400 59,000 62,600 13,900 28.5% Educational and Health Services 154,100 157,600 167,200 184,500 193,600 197,500 43,400 28.2% Leisure and Hospitality 122,800 124,000 129,400 135,900 144,300 151,700 28,900 23.5% Professional and Business Services 123,600 126,000 127,500 132,400 137,800 149,400 25,800 20.9% Miningand Logging 1,000 1,000 1,200 1,200 1,300 1,200 200 20.0% Other Services 38,200 39,100 40,100 41,100 43,200 43,700 5,500 14.4% Manufacturing 85,200 85,100 86,700 87,300 90,200 93,700 8,500 10.0% Retail Trade 155,500 158,500 162,400 164,800 168,700 169,600 14,100 9.1% Financial Activities 41,000 39,900 40,900 42,200 42,700 44,500 3,500 8.5% Government 234,300 227,500 224,600 225,200 228,800 232,700 (1,600) -0.7% Farm 15,000 14,900 15,000 14,500 14,300 14,200 (800) -5.3% Information 14,000 12,200 11,700 11,500 11,200 11,200 (2,800) -20.0% Total 1,159,700 1,162,900 1,195,400 1,246,400 1,299,400 1,347,900 188,200 16.2 % Source: California Employment Development Department/ Labor Market Information Division; Annual Averages The rebound from 2010 was driven by two of the Inland Empire's key industries: logistics and construction. The Inland Empire has a competitive advantage with respect to logistics, with large amounts of affordable land with strong access to the ports and interstate network as a whole, that are key site criteria for distribution users. These sites are also attractive for e-commerce and Stantec 4.81 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Socioeconomic Variables and Land Use consumer goods businesses seeking distribution hubs. Amazon recently opened fulfillment centers in Moreno Valley and Redlands, and industrial development activity continues to drive commercial real estate in the region. In 2015, the Inland Empire had the highest amount of industrial construction and net absorption since 2000 and it is considered one of the strongest industrial markets in the nation. Net absorption has been higher than 20 million square feet in each of the last three years in the face of a total of almost 50 million square feet of new construction over the same period. The residential construction sector has improved but was decimated during the Great Recession and is only slowly coming back with the ramp -up of residential development activity. Other improving sectors include health care and professional services, comprised primarily of population serving businesses that are growing in line with household growth in the area. 4.3.2 Historical Study Area Household Trends Historical residential building permit data from 1996 to 2015 is shown in Table 4-8. During this period, the Study Area averaged approximately 45,000 residential units per year with 46% of these permit issuances occurring in the Inland Empire counties, 35% in Los Angeles County, and the remaining 19% taking place in Orange County. Residential permit issuance grew significantly each year between 1995 and 2004, even during the early 2000s when the short tech bubble -related recession occurred. Permit issuance in the Study Area peaked in 2004 at 87,000. During this year, over half (59%) of the building permits issued were in Riverside and San Bernardino counties. The surge in housing production between 2002 and 2006, especially in Riverside and San Bernardino counties, was in large part attributable to favorable lending terms, most simply reflected in mortgage rates. After peaking in 1981, the average annual 30-year mortgage rate trended downward until reaching a 30-year low in 2003 at under 5.5%. This borrowing environment made homes more affordable despite robust annual price increases during the late 1990s through the mid-2000s. 5 Stantec 4.82 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Socioeconomic Variables and Land Use Table 4-8: Growth of Total Residential Building Permits in the Study Area Year Los Angeles Orange Riverside San Bernardino Total Y.O.Y. Change 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015* 7,731 9,829 11,226 14,060 16,968 18,294 16,454 20,903 26,529 23,948 25,202 19,244 11,810 5,138 7,260 9,895 11,365 14,776 17,659 23,527 10,173 12,261 9,704 12,239 12,520 8,611 11,796 9,248 9,256 7,143 8,303 7,372 3,235 2,143 3,134 4,352 6,082 10,422 9,291 10,879 7,540 9,747 12,527 14,154 15,025 19,012 22,255 30,353 33,446 34,373 24,765 12,334 5,763 4,072 4,547 3,264 4,052 5,924 6,761 5,607 4,822 5,448 6,127 6,767 6,471 8,405 10,219 11,899 18,017 16,635 13,324 7,752 3,183 2,263 1,789 1,472 1,897 3,424 3,405 4,000 30,266 37,285 39,584 47,220 50,984 54,322 60,724 72,403 87,248 82,099 71,594 46,702 23,991 13,616 16,730 18,983 23,396 34,546 37,116 44,013 23.2% 6.2 19.3 8.0 6.5 11.8% 19.2 20.5 -5.9 - 12.8 - 34.8 - 48.6 - 43.2 22.9% 13.5 23.2% 47.7 7.4 18.6 Total 311,818 168,164 275,521 137,319 892,822 *Annualized based on eleven months of available data Source: U.S. Census Bureau Annual permit issuance began to decline significantly in 2007 and reached a low in 2009 of 13,600 issuances. Activity has increased significantly since then, reaching 44,000 in 2015, which is significantly higher than the 2009 low but still far below the 2004 peak. The increase in activity has been driven primarily by permits in Orange County and Los Angeles County. Geographically, trends in single and multifamily product types reflect the relative levels of maturity of each county with more mature areas that are fully developed and space -constrained limited to higher density development. The long-term split between single-family detached and multifamily units built between 1995 and 2015 in the Study Area was approximately 67%/33% respectively. Single-family detached homes represented approximately 87% of the homes built in Riverside and San Bernardino counties, an area rich with undeveloped land. Orange County, which is running out of vacant land for development, falls between Los Angeles and the Inland Empire counties with approximately 65% of new homes built as detached units. Table 4-9 presents actual annual residential building permit data between 2007 and 2015. Cli Stantec 4.83 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Socioeconomic Variables and Land Use Table 4-9: Annual Building Permits Issued in the Study Area, 2007 to 2015f County 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015* Los Angeles Single Family 7,102 3,249 2,268 2,384 2,275 2,675 3,839 4,586 4,744 Multi -Family 12,142 8,561 2,870 4,876 7,620 8,690 10,937 13,073 18,782 Total 19,244 11,810 5,138 7,260 9,895 11,365 14,776 17,659 23,527 Orange Single Family 2,279 1,330 1,341 1,624 1,822 2,271 3,670 3,714 3,833 Multi -Family 5,093 1,905 802 1,510 2,530 3,811 6,752 5,577 7,045 Total 7,372 3,235 2,143 3,134 4,352 6,082 10,422 9,291 10,879 Riverside Single Family 9,717 3,820 3,406 4,027 2,275 3,107 4,432 5,074 4,279 Multi -Family 2,617 1,943 666 520 989 945 1,492 1,687 1,329 Total 12,334 5,763 4,072 4,547 3,264 4,052 5,924 6,761 5,607 San Bernardino Single Family 6,302 1,976 1,481 1,260 1,103 1,381 2,040 2,148 2,890 Multi -Family 1,450 1,207 782 529 369 516 1,384 1,257 1,111 Total 7,752 3,183 2,263 1,789 1,472 1,897 3,424 3,405 4,000 Study Area SingleFamiIy 25,400 10,375 8,496 9,295 7,475 9,434 13,981 15,522 15,746 Multi -Family 21,302 13,616 5,120 7,435 11,508 13,962 20,565 21,594 28,267 Total 46,702 23,991 13,616 16,730 18,983 23,396 34,546 37,116 44,013 *Annualized based on eleven months of available data The increase in activity in recent years has been driven by increased multifamily development in Orange County and Los Angeles County. In 2015, these counties reached highs of 65% and 80% multifamily share of total permits. This has resulted in a departure from historical trends in which the majority of permit issuances were for single-family detached units, as shown in Figure 4-9. Cli Stantec 4.84 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Socioeconomic Variables and Land Use Building Permits Issued Figure 4-9: Study Area Residential Building Permit Issuance, 2005 to 2015 70,000 - 50,000 - 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 —Single Family —Multi-Family 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 The boom and resulting bust in for -sale housing has created demand for new rental apartments in many regions throughout the country. Household preferences are gradually shifting from owner to renter for numerous reasons. After the period of declining price trends during the Great Recession, homeownership is no longer perceived as a risk -free investment. Furthermore, the transaction costs of buying and selling limits mobility by limiting a worker's pool of job opportunities. Lastly, numerous households found themselves in homes they eventually could not afford. This segment is gradually shifting back to the rental demand pool. Supply conditions are favorable for new rental development as well. During the housing boom, a higher proportion of for -sale units were developed and rental apartments were delivered at a far lower rate compared to historical trends. Now, as demand preferences are shifting back from owner to renter, the relatively low level of new rental construction over the past decade is resulting in tight rental markets throughout the country and spurring ongoing development activity. 4.4 EMPLOYMENT FORECASTS This section provides detailed information on the Base Case Forecasts developed as inputs to the RivTAM model for the 1-15 Express Lanes traffic and revenue forecasting effort. As outlined in the methodology section above, WSP 1 Parsons Brinckerhoff uses third -party forecasts to assist in developing its long-term forecasts at the county level. A presentation of these forecasts is ® Stantec 4.85 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Socioeconomic Variables and Land Use provided first, along with commentary on current economic trends and expectations that resulted in the Base Case forecast. While household and population counts are somewhat standard across forecasting platforms, most of the forecasts reviewed have varying "definitions" of employment that are not directly comparable. As such, we offer the following terminology to help clarify the dialogue that follows: • Wage & Salary: A widely used definition of employment used by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) which reports payroll employment counts based on insurance claims. • Proprietors: Persons who own businesses but are paid by distributions from business revenue, and are not part of the payroll. • Self Employed: Persons who are contract employees operate businesses as individuals or partners and are therefore not part of company payrolls. May be some overlap with Proprietors. Because of the differences in employment definitions and when the individual forecasts were developed, compound annual growth rates (CAGR) are displayed in the data tables to better capture each forecast's spirit. 4.4.1 Comparative Third Party Forecasts: Long -Term California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Caltrans provides long-term forecasts for various socioeconomic variables. The primary data gathering source for employment is the California EDD Labor Market Information WI), and for households and population, the California Department of Finance Demographic Research Unit. The Caltrans employment estimate for the Study Area totals 7.2 million jobs in 2015 and forecasts employment to increase to 8.7 million jobs by 2035, a 1.0% compound annual growth rate. The forecast predicts the strongest growth to occur between 2015 and 2020 at 1.4% annual growth, followed by a low of 0.8% between 2020 and 2025. Moody's Analytics Moody's Analytics provides independent economic and demographic projections through 2045. Moody's gathers data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), and forecasts total non -farm employment. The same BLS Current Employment Statistics ("CES") program is used as a base for Moody's forecasts, as well as the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) produced by the BLS. The Moody's employment forecast for the Study Area reports 7.2 million jobs in 2015 and forecasts employment to increase to 8.6 million jobs by 2035, a 0.9% compound annual growth rate. The forecast predicts the strongest growth to occur between 2015 and 2020 at 1.6% followed by periods of lower growth ranging from 0.5% to 0.8%. Woods & Poole Economics Woods & Poole provides comprehensive economic and demographic projections through 2050. Woods & Poole's employment forecast is unique from the others analyzed because it includes employment categories not captured in other sources, ® Stantec 4.86 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Socioeconomic Variables and Land Use such as self-employed workers (those with IRS Form 1099-MISC income). As a result of self-employed worker inclusion in the Woods & Poole forecast, this source has a much higher forecast of employment than other sources. Table 4-10 shows each of the employment forecasts described above along with the Base Case Forecast for the Study Area. In addition to the long- term forecasts, data from the California EDD, both annual and monthly through 20157, along with third party forecasts, were used to establish 2015 base year employment numbers for each county. Table 4-10: Comparisons of Long -Term Employment Projections (thousands) Employment 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Ca I tra ns Moody's Woods & Poole Base Case 7,203 7,705 8,006 8,348 8,696 7,194 7,798 8,006 8,278 8,613 10,064 10,858 11,656 12,436 13,191 7,231 7,830 8,040 8,313 8,650 Incremental Growth 2015-20 2020-25 2025-30 2030-35 2015-35 Ca I tra ns Moody's Woods & Poole Base Case 502 604 795 599 301 208 797 210 342 272 780 273 348 1,493 335 1,419 755 3,127 337 1,419 Average Annual Growth 2015-20 2020-25 2025-30 2030-35 2015-35 Ca I tra ns Moody's Woods & Poole Base Case 100 121 159 120 60 42 159 42 68 54 156 55 70 67 151 67 75 71 156 71 CAGR 2015-20 2020-25 2025-30 2030-35 2015-35 Ca I tra ns Moody's Woods & Poole Base Case 1.36% 1.63% 1.53% 1.61% 0.77% 0.53% 1.43% 0.5 3 % 0.84% 0.67% 1.30% 0.67% 0.82% 0.80% 1.19% 0.80% 0.95% 0.90% 1.36% 0.90% Note: Moody's reflects total nonfarm employment; all others includefarm employment 4.4.2 Study Area Employment Forecast Total employment growth in the Study Area between 2015 and 2035 is projected to be 1.4 million jobs or an average of approximately 71,000 jobs per year (0.9% CAGR). Table 4-11 breaks this growth down by county. With an average annual rate of 1.3%, Riverside County is expected to see the strongest percentage growth, adding 10,000 jobs per year on average between 2015 and 2035. Initial analysis of employment took place prior to available year-end data for 2015 Stantec 4.87 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Socioeconomic Variables and Land Use Table 4-11: Base Case Employment Forecast by County (thousands) Employment 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Los Angeles Orange Riverside San Bernardino Study Area 4,333 4,671 4,773 4,912 5,091 1,547 1,686 1,738 1,804 1,886 668 739 776 820 868 682 734 752 776 805 7,231 7,830 8,040 8,313 8,650 Incremental Growth 2015-20 2020-25 2025-30 2030-35 2015-35 Los Angeles Orange Riverside San Bernardino Study Area 338 139 70 52 599 102 52 38 19 210 139 66 44 24 273 179 758 81 339 48 200 29 122 337 1,419 Average Annual Growth 2015-20 2020-25 2025-30 2030-35 2015-35 Los Angeles Orange Riverside San Bernardino Study Area 68 28 14 10 120 20 10 8 4 42 28 13 9 5 55 36 16 10 6 67 38 17 10 6 71 CAGR 2015-20 2020-25 2025-30 2030-35 2015-35 Los Angeles Orange Riverside San Bernardino Study Area 1.51% 1.74% 2.02% 1.47% 1.61 % 0.43% 0.61% 1.00% 0.50% 0.53 % 0.58% 0.75% 1.11% 0.62% 0.67 % 0.72% 0.89% 1.15% 0.73% 0.80 % 0.81% 0.99% 1.32% 0.83% 0.90 % The Inland Empire will experience the highest growth in jobs with a compound annual growth rate of 1.1% over the 20-year period for San Bernardino and Riverside counties combined. The Inland Empire counties are expected to add approximately 16,100 new jobs annually between 2015 and 2035. This is 5,000 fewer jobs annually than the average annual growth experienced between 2000 and 2015. Between 2000 and 2015, the Inland Empire counties experienced employment growth of approximately 21,100 jobs per year. Riverside County employment growth is forecast to outpace that of San Bernardino County, which is consistent with historical trends (shown in Table 4-5). From 2010 to 2015, Riverside County showed the strongest rebound from the recession, with compound annual employment growth of 4.2% compared to 2.4% in San Bernardino County. Los Angeles County will add approximately 38,000 jobs per year, though it will grow at the slowest rate of the four counties in the Study Area at 0.8% annually. Between 2000 and 2015, Los Angeles County job growth was cyclical and averaged just 16,000 jobs on an annual average basis. However, from 2012 to 2015, the county averaged over 100,000 jobs per year. With more diversity in its job base and major investments in transportation infrastructure, specifically transit, positive but moderate job growth is expected in the future. ® Stantec 4.88 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Socioeconomic Variables and Land Use The shortage of developable land in Los Angeles County will limit the rate of job growth there, though it will continue to have the largest employment base in the region due to the established industries and national headquarters, airport and port facilities, location relative to the coast, and diverse housing stock. Developers will continue to seek out underutilized sites to redevelop into higher density properties, both residential and commercial. Transit -oriented development around the rapidly developing transit system is still a relatively new trend in Los Angeles that will house a significant percentage of new development. Still, some Los Angeles County residents are expected to migrate east to Riverside or San Bernardino counties seeking lower costs of living. The strongest growth industries in Los Angeles are expected to be educational and professional services, as well as arts and entertainment. Orange County will see most of its long-term job growth in the same three categories as Los Angeles County but the fourth largest industry will be Finance, Investment, and Real Estate services (FIRE). Redevelopment of older residential and industrial properties in Orange County will be geared towards new higher density residential space and reuse of industrial buildings as hybrid spaces for light manufacturing and office. Higher density office space will be developed in the medium and long-term, though there is a notable movement towards shared office space and working from home which will temper the demand for office space in Orange County and other parts of the Study Area. With relatively low real estate costs, lower wages, access to a growing international airport (Ontario), and available land for both commercial expansion and workforce housing options, certain types of businesses have blossomed in the Inland Empire or relocated there from more expensive coastal locations. Warehousing, manufacturing and distribution facilities have led Inland Empire job growth in the past decade as the ports in Los Angeles County created demand for major distribution facilities that could not be located near the ports due to high land costs. Because of the growth of population expected in the long-term, a more balanced mix of population serving (retail) employment is expected, though primary job growth will continue to be focused in the distribution, manufacturing, construction, and transportation sectors. 4.5 HOUSEHOLD FORECAST 4.5.1 Study Area Comparative Forecasts As in the employment forecast section, information on third -party forecasts examined by WSP Parsons Brinckerhoff to help guide its long-term county -level forecasts is presented first, followed by details of the Base Case Forecast. The same three third -party forecasts, Woods & Poole, Moody's Analytics, and Caltrans, which were surveyed for employment, were also surveyed for household forecasting purposes. Table 4-12 compares the growth rates from each source with the Base Case Forecast from 2015 to 2035. ® Stantec 4.89 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Socioeconomic Variables and Land Use Table 4-12: Comparison of Long -Term Household Projections (thousands) Households 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Caltrans 5,627 5,855 6,060 6,237 6,421 Moody's 5,764 6,186 6,478 6,750 7,032 Woods & Poole 5,964 6,270 6,521 6,725 6,889 Base Case 5,764 6,186 6,478 6,751 7,032 Incremental Growth 2015-20 2020-25 2025-30 2030-35 2015-35 Ca I tra ns Moody's Woods & Poole Base Case 228 422 306 422 206 292 251 292 177 273 204 273 184 281 164 281 794 1,268 924 1,268 Average Annual Growth 2015-20 2020-25 2025-30 2030-35 2015-35 Ca I tra ns Moody's Woods & Poole Base Case 46 84 61 84 41 58 50 58 35 55 41 55 37 56 33 56 40 63 46 63 CAGR 2015-20 2020-25 2025-30 2030-35 2015-35 Ca I tra ns Moody's Woods & Poole Base Case 0.80% 1.42% 1.00% 1.42% 0.69% 0.93% 0.79% 0.93% 0.58% 0.83% 0.62% 0.83% 0.58% 0.8 2 % 0.48% 0.82% 0.66% 1.00% 0.72% 1.00% The forecasts reflect differing long-term annual growth rates over the Forecast Period, ranging from 0.7% (Caltrans) to 1.0% (Moody's) with significant variation between five-year periods as well. For instance, the Moody's view is one of strong early growth followed by declines in growth longer term that are still generally higher than the other forecasts. Both Caltrans and Woods & Poole forecast strong household growth in 2015-2020 relative to later periods, but both show lower overall growth rates than Moody's. The base case reflects rates in line with the Moody's forecast, based on the assertion that continued strong employment will result in increased/pent up household formation in the near term, and longer -term forecasts that are closer to the long-term historical household growth rate in the Study Area (1.3%). The previous recession was caused in large part by the overbuilding of residential real estate and speculative lending practices that together resulted in large inventories of empty new and resold homes. As is typical with economic models, when inventories build and demand declines, prices fall, as reflected in the Study Area from 2007 to 2011. Although all counties were hit by the recession, the most substantial percentage declines were realized in the Inland Empire from 2007 to 2009, as shown in Table 4-13. ® Stantec 4.90 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Socioeconomic Variables and Land Use Table 4-13: Historical Study Area Median Home Prices Median Home Price Oct-07 Oct-08 Oct-09 Oct-10 Oct-11 Oct-12 Oct-13 Oct-14 Oct-15 Los Angeles Orange Riverside San Bernardino $518,300 $699,012 $361,872 $284, 848 $336,764 $497,642 $221,870 $171,807 $308, 280 $526, 842 $186,257 $131,578 $333, 970 $519,140 $205,150 $140,360 $307,970 $484,390 $195,760 $132,210 $364,810 $558,680 $230,730 $148,480 $447,130 $660, 080 $296,640 $191,330 $477,600 $692, 390 $321, 750 $208, 080 $509,570 $704,370 $334,660 $231,330 Growth Rate 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015 2005-2015 Los Angeles Orange Riverside San Bernardino -35% -29% -39% -40% -8% 6% -16% -23% 8% -1 10% 7% -8% -7% -5% -6% 18% 15% 18% 12% 23% 18% 29% 29% 7% 5% 8% 9% 7% 2% 4% 11% 0% 0% -1 % -3% These losses were followed by strong price increases in each county from 2011 to 2013 as the economy rebounded and the inventory of unsold homes and distressed mortgages unwound fully. Continued gains in 2014 and 2015 have led to prices in Los Angeles and Orange Counties on par with the beginning of the time period analyzed in 2007 although Inland Empire pricing has not yet fully rebounded. Many families in the Study Area have been, and will continue to be, priced out of the Orange County market and are expected to seek more affordable living arrangements in other places such as the Inland Empire. This trend is expected to continue, particularly now that Orange County prices have increased to pre -recession levels. 4.5.2 Study Area Household Forecasts Table 4-14 presents the Base Case Forecast of households. The Study Area is expected to add close to 1.3 million new households between 2015 and 2035, a compound annual rate of 1.0% over the Forecast Period. 5 Stantec 4.91 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Socioeconomic Variables and Land Use Table 4-14: Base Case Household Forecast by County (thousands) Households 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Los Angeles Orange San Bernardino Riverside Study Area 3,340 3,524 3,634 3,731 1,039 1,112 1,159 1,202 641 707 758 807 743 843 927 1,010 5,764 6,186 6,478 6,751 3,831 1,246 858 1,096 7,032 Incremental Growth 2015-20 2020-25 2025-30 2030-35 2015-35 Los Angeles Orange San Bernardino Riverside Study Area 184 73 66 99 422 109 47 51 84 292 98 43 49 83 273 100 491 44 207 51 217 86 352 281 1,268 Average Annual Growth 2015-20 2020-25 2025-30 2030-35 2015-35 Los Angeles Orange San Bernardino Riverside Study Area 37 15 13 20 84 22 9 10 17 58 20 9 10 17 55 20 9 10 17 56 25 10 11 18 63 CAGR 2015-20 2020-25 2025-30 2030-35 2015-35 Los Angeles Orange San Bernardino Riverside Study Area 1.08% 1.36% 1.98% 2.54% 1.42% 0.61% 0.84% 1.40% 1.92% 0.93 % 0.53% 0.74% 1.26% 1.73% 0.83 % 0.5 3 % 0.72% 1.23% 1.65% 0.82 % 0.69% 0.91% 1.47% 1.96% 1.00% About 45% of the new dwelling units forecast to be built in the Study Area will be located in the Inland Empire. These 569,000 new households represent over 1.6 million people. Workers not employed in San Bernardino or Riverside counties will face heavy traffic while commuting to job centers outside the Inland Empire, choosing to commute in exchange for less expensive housing. Local development experts suggest that 1.5 to 2 hours is the maximum that commuters will regularly drive each way to get to work. This limits the area in the Inland Empire that can reasonably serve the Orange County job markets to the western portions in the vicinity of Corona, Chino Hills, Ontario, and Riverside, depending on the use of tolled lanes, due to heavy congestion during rush hour. Faced with this tradeoff, many Orange County workers, especially those with higher incomes, will continue to seek housing options in Orange County, despite the higher cost. There is significant near -term residential growth along the 1-15 corridor in large master -planned communities such as Ontario Ranch and the Preserve, which are discussed in the Focus Area section below. The number of households within Orange County will grow at a compound annual rate of 0.9% during the Forecast Period. Because of the historic imbalance between residential and non-residential property development in Orange County, home prices have been driven up, as discussed above. This trend, coupled with the shortage of developable land in Orange County, ® Stantec 4.92 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Socioeconomic Variables and Land Use will cause developers to continue to build more multifamily structures and smaller detached units in jurisdictions less opposed to density. In south Orange County, which is comprised of more recently developed master -planned communities, covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC&Rs) mandated by homeowners' associations (HOAs) will hinder the potential for dense, infill development. Following this continuum, Los Angeles County, the most developed of the four Study Area counties, should see the vast majority of dwelling units forecast to be built there between 2015 and 2035 in high density multifamily structures, generally at infill and redevelopment sites. 4.5.3 Study Area Median Household Income Forecasts For the purposes of this analysis, the median household income forecast reflects SCAG's forecast data, adjusted by certain factors. Incomes for the Study Area counties were based off of SCAG's forecast data by TAZ, factoring in 3rd-party estimates for median incomes at the county level, as well as the Consumer Price Index (CPI). SCAG's income data are expressed in 1999 dollars. As such, WSP I Parsons Brinckerhoff inflated these to 2015 dollars using the regional CPI and made additional adjustments factoring in estimates from the Census and other third -party data providers for actual 2015 incomes. These adjustments were then applied to the TAZ-level median household income forecast data from SCAG to arrive at projections for median household income expressed in 2015 dollars over the Forecast Period. Incomes for input into the Stantec model were forecast by TAZ, but a weighted average by county is presented in Table 4-15. Table 4-15: Base Case Median Household Income Forecast (2015 Dollars) Median Household Income 2015 2025 2035 Los Angeles Orange San Bernardino Riverside $59,318 $78,839 $54,311 $60,266 $59,298 $59,312 $78,371 $82,332 $54,241 $54,138 $60,225 $60,248 CAGR 2015-25 2025-35 2015-2035 Los Angeles Orange San Bernardino Riverside 0.00 -0.06 - 0.01 - 0.01 0.00 0.49 -0.02 0.00 0.00 0.22 -0.02 0.00 The table shows that, with the exception of Orange County, SCAG's adjusted median household income growth in 2015 dollars is expected to remain relatively flat over the Forecast Period. This is consistent with long-term national trends. The Federal Reserve reports that nationally, the median household income in real dollar terms peaked in 1999 and has gradually declined since that time, to 7% below this peak as of 2014. Although the real median income has been flat in recent years, high -income households have historically experienced stronger growth in real Stantec 4.93 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Socioeconomic Variables and Land Use income. SCAG's forecast suggests this pattern will continue, with Orange County benefiting from larger concentrations of higher income households. 4.6 KEY DEVELOPMENTS IN THE STUDY AREA A critical element of the WSP I Parsons Brinckerhoff forecasting effort is to develop small area forecasts for groups of TAZs containing developments that will most directly impact traffic on the proposed 1-15 Express Lanes. This is done by reviewing specific plans and interviewing planning staff and developers of properties to collect the most recent data available on how and when projects will evolve. Guidance from previous land use work performed by WSP I Parsons Brinckerhoff was combined with information acquired through current interviews and project plans to adjust TAZ-level job and household counts relative to those programmed in the base data. Jobs and households were adjusted upward or downward in many of the TAZs representing major projects such as the Preserve and Ontario Ranch in San Bernardino County, areas of growth along 1-15 to the south in Lake Elsinore, Murrieta, and Temecula, and numerous large-scale developments throughout Orange County. WSP I Parsons Brinckerhoff conducted field research in Riverside, San Bernardino, and Orange counties. Using these data, Focus Areas, representing projects, groups of projects or potential redevelopment areas were identified, though the data obtained for each Focus Area varied significantly. In some cases, data were complete and up to date while in other cases data were scarce. To further categorize the review process, the following five examples are offered to characterize the materials that were produced from our field research. • Actual Specific Plans - In some cases actual development plans (quantities and types of development) by project area or TAZ were provided by developers along with expected timing of construction. This was the goal of each interview but few projects had this level of data available. • Partial or Dated Plans - For many of the projects surveyed, especially residential projects that had to some degree been put on hold due to the previous market downturn, current plans were not available. Rather, estimates of build -out and locations were the best data available and some reliance on multiple sources and professional judgment was required. • Professional Judgment - In some cases, no current development plans were available for parcels that, because of their location and eligibility for development, were expected to be developed in the more distant future. In these cases, the MPO forecasts for the underlying TAZs were considered and in some instances modified based on professional judgment alone. • MPO Forecast Adoption - As with most of the TAZs in the Study Area, WSP ! Parsons Brinckerhoff adopted the development allocations of some Focus Areas. In many cases, ® Stantec 4.94 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Socioeconomic Variables and Land Use the development plans matched the data obtained in the field. However, there were instances where projects were planned or proposed but because limited information was available, no confirmation of the MPO's accuracy could be obtained. If the forecasts for these areas appeared reasonable, they were not adjusted. • Redevelopment Areas - In the long-term, certain areas that currently contain older, lower density industrial or commercial space are expected to be redeveloped as the owners of that land move their remaining operations to lower cost locations. These areas are anticipated to accommodate growth in jobs and households, after the remaining vacant and developable land is absorbed. Development scenarios were calculated for these areas based on professional judgment and allocated in the later years of the forecasts accordingly to help avoid development being allocated where there was clearly no capacity. Assumptions for redevelopment participation, current FAR, future FAR, and development mix were applied to yield a reasonable estimate of additional jobs and households that could develop, and were generally programmed between 2025 and 2035. Considering the levels of development review outlined above, details of certain Focus Areas are presented in the following sections. These project descriptions present the most probable project outcomes given the available data and WSP 1 Parsons Brinckerhoff's understanding of development economics in the Study Area. While some of the Focus Area projects are ongoing, many were put on hold during the Great Recession and are anticipated to start in the near term (2015-2020). In many cases, overall development quantities have not changed, though the phasing of the projects and specific products built will be dictated by evolving market conditions. Focus Areas discussed in the following sections are divided into three groups: Inland Empire areas north of SR-91, south of SR-91, and major Orange County developments. Although there are numerous development plans located throughout San Bernardino and Riverside Counties, areas within close proximity to 1-15 were prioritized and analyzed in greater detail given their increased impact on traffic patterns and demand for the 1-15 Express Lanes. 4.6.1 1-15 Corridor- North of SR-91 There are numerous large-scale projects planned, proposed, or under construction in the areas of San Bernardino and Riverside Counties near 1-15 north of SR-91 that will have a significant impact on the project. Given the location of the planned 1-15 express lanes, projects located in cities such as Chino, Ontario, Fontana, and Rancho Cucamonga were researched further for more detailed information on timing and scale. Much of this area is established and built out, but significantly large development and redevelopment opportunities do still exist. These opportunities are more likely to capture demand in the near term of the forecast period due to their regional orientation, within close proximity to large job concentrations in Los Angeles and Orange Counties. Historical patterns suggest many homebuyers with jobs in these counties consider Inland Empire locations due to affordability and as such, those areas offering the shortest commutes to job concentrations in the west have a competitive advantage. Other ® Stantec 4.95 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Socioeconomic Variables and Land Use cities researched, including Norco, Jurupa Valley, and Riverside, have development activity and plans that were confirmed to be captured in SCAG's forecast. Figure 4-10: Map of Focus Areas north of SR-91 • -.�--.-4-00111i1 I-wyeja! 1. Arboretum - There are two large, undeveloped areas in Fontana just south of the San Gabriel Mountains with plans that will impact traffic on the 1-15 during the Forecast Period. Located adjacent to 1-15 in the northwestern boundary of the city, the Arboretum specific plan allows for over 3,500 residential units. The 530-acre area will also include some civic uses, including two schools and numerous park space. The Lewis Group owns this property and also has plans for office and retail nearby. 2. Westgate - Just south of the Arboretum is the Westgate specific plan. This 960-acre defined area is owned by Unitex Management Corporation, which is currently marketing build -to -suit industrial space at the site. The specific plan allows for as many as 5,000 residential units and a mix of commercial uses. There is no current indication of timing on either of these projects although the pending completion of the Duncan Canyon Road / 1-15 interchange will improve access to the area and could help accelerate these developments. Stantec 4.96 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Socioeconomic Variables and Land Use 3. Empire Lakes Redevelopment - Located on the site of an existing golf course in Rancho Cucamonga near the intersection of 1-15 and 1-10, preliminary plans call for redevelopment of the site into 2,500 to 4,000 multifamily units. Redevelopment plans are not yet approved although city officials are confident that progress will be made in the near term and recent environmental review documents anticipate construction as soon as 2016 with completion in 2024. Based on interviews and research with knowledgeable stakeholders, WSP I Parsons Brinckerhoff's forecast assumes the majority of 2,500 units will be delivered by 2025. 4. Ontario Airport Area - The area north of the Ontario Airport is slated for heavy development during the Forecast Period. At full buildout, the Ontario Airport Metro Center plans call for approximately 8,900 residential units and 2.7 million square feet of office and retail development in six defined redevelopment areas. This area has exceptional access due to its proximity to the airport and 1-10 highway access to Los Angeles and Orange counties. WSP I Parsons Brinckerhoff's forecast assumes full buildout will not take place by the end of the Forecast Period, although the pace of redevelopment may be accelerated if the recent airport transaction results in operational improvements and in enplanement growth. 5. Eastvale Commercial - The City of Eastvale is situated along the border of San Bernardino County and is adjacent to the planned 1-15 express lanes. The city's border extends in a panhandle to the north, bounded by Ontario Ranch to the west and 1-15 to the east. In this area, plans for approximately 200 acres of undeveloped land include up to 3.7 million square feet of commercial uses. Plans include a mix of medical uses, hospitality, office, and light industrial space, with the first phase of 2 million square feet of industrial under construction. Although the mix of uses is still being refined, an estimated 4,000 new employees will work in this small area located adjacent to 1-15. 6. Ontario Ranch - Located in Ontario along the Riverside County border, Ontario Ranch (formerly known as New Model Colony) is an 8,200-acre area poised for significant residential and commercial development throughout the Forecast Period. As of July 2015, there were nine specific plans approved in the area, totaling 2,900 acres, 10,800 residential units, and 2.2 million square feet of commercial development. One of these specific plans, Edenglen, began delivering homes in 2007 prior to stalling during the Great Recession. The sections of Ontario Ranch with defined plans are oriented towards the eastern side of defined area, closer to the planned express lanes, while the western side remains undefined at this stage. Given Ontario Ranch's proximity to the proposed improvements, this area is poised to have a dramatic impact on future traffic. Estimates of total future buildout include up to 46,000 total new residential units, of which 24,000 are anticipated to be in place by the end of the Forecast Period (2035). This pace is lower than SCAG's forecast but is consistent with current development patterns. By 2035, commercial development is estimated to result in approximately 18,000 jobs as well. 7. College Park - College Park is an existing development located centrally in the City of Chino, directly north of the penitentiary. There are currently approximately 1,500 households with 200 units under construction and another 500 planned. Full buildout of the 2,200 total units is expected to take place by 2020. College Park includes a small ® Stantec 4.97 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Socioeconomic Variables and Land Use commercial component but is a primarily residentially driven development. College Park and the Preserve have combined to generate the vast majority of residential permitting activity in the city of Chino in recent years. Although not part of the College Park development, the Majestic Chino Gateway is an industrial development located to the southeast within the same TAZ. The project consists of 3.1 million square feet of industrial warehouse space and an additional 40,000 square feet of retail use. The project broke ground in 2014 and Wal-Mart has preleased 1.4 million square feet for an online fulfillment center. 8. The Preserve - The Preserve is a partially developed master -planned community south of the Chino Airport and north of Pine Avenue in the City of Chino. Given its geographic orientation in the southwest corner of the county, this development is in an attractive location relative to Orange County access, though may be too far west to significantly impact the 1-15 Express Lanes. The remaining portion of the project includes an additional 9,900 households by 2035 and non-residential space to house a total of 6,200 employees. A significant portion of new units in the near term include Homecoming at the Preserve, an 800-unit luxury apartment community, the first phases of which began lease up in 2014. 4.6.2 1-15 Corridor - South of SR-91 Much of this area along 1-15, particularly to the south, is somewhat constrained by mountain ranges and other geographic barriers. However, there is significant development activity in the southern portion of the 1-15 corridor, including in Temecula and Lake Elsinore, not entirely captured by SCAG's baseline forecast. These areas tend to offer new construction housing with more affordable price positioning relative to northern locations. Although they are oriented further to the south and relatively distant from the planned improvements to 1-15, the area is rapidly growing and affordability will fuel continued growth that will impact traffic on the planned express lanes from commuters traveling to some of the larger job concentrations in Ontario near the 1-10 and through Corona and Riverside along the SR-91. In addition to affordability, cities to the south such as Temecula also benefit from access to the San Diego region. Closer to the planned express lanes, developments in cities such as Corona and unincorporated areas of Riverside County were also included as focus areas and incorporated into the socioeconomic forecast. Stantec 4.98 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Socioeconomic Variables and Land Use Figure 4-11: Map of Focus Areas South of SR-91 9. Arantine Hills - While most of the City of Corona is built to capacity, there are a few parcels along 1-15, south of SR-91 that remain for infill development. Many of these sites had been slated for development in the past decade but plans were abandoned at the outset of the Great Recession. Arantine Hills is a 276-acre planned community located adjacent to 1-15 at Cajalco Road, the southern terminus of the 1-15 Express Lanes project. Previous plans called for 1,600 new residential units and 750,000 square feet of office and retail development. However, recent plan revisions based on public feedback have scaled back the commercial component to a small-scale retail space. 10. Terramor - Terramor is a proposed master -planned community situated on a 900-acre property in an unincorporated area of Riverside County. Located adjacent to 1-15 on the east and north of Temescal Canyon Road, Terramor is within close proximity to the proposed 1-15 Express Lanes. Plans call for a low -density development, with 1,400 single-family detached residential units and no significant commercial component. The ® Stantec 4.99 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Socioeconomic Variables and Land Use specific plan for the project has been approved and plan amendments and tentative tract maps are currently in process. 11. North Lake Elsinore - Further south down 1-15, the city of Lake Elsinore has numerous residential developments planned, proposed, and under construction, including 20 specific plans under review. Many of these projects are oriented on the north/northwest side of the city. Based on research of these projects and discussions with the city, WSP Parsons Brinckerhoff consolidated some of these projects into the North Lake Elsinore focus area and have incorporated these plans into the forecast accordingly. It is estimated that approximately 2,000 residential units will be delivered in this area between 2015 and 2025, and an additional 2,500 units built by 2035. 12. East Lake - Also located in the city of Lake Elsinore, the East Lake specific plan encompasses an area immediately adjacent to the lake. The plan calls for over 7,500 new residential units in a variety of formats. Lake Elsinore has been one of the fastest growing cities in California, due in part to successfully positioning the 3,300-acre lake as a hub for extreme sporting activities. However, recent drought issues are jeopardizing the viability of the lake, and the city has had to purchase reclaimed / recycled water from various locations to maintain adequate depths. 13. Murrieta - The City of Murrieta has several specific plans, including two large developments totaling 1,700 units combined. The Vineyards is an area located in the foothills west of 1-15 that has the area to accommodate over 1,000 residential units which are expected to be delivered later in the Forecast Period. Murrieta Hills has plans for 750 units although it has been delayed due to archeological issues. There are several other smaller, infill projects located throughout the city as well. The city is also branding itself as a regional healthcare hub, with Loma Linda University adjacent to 1-215 and an 800,000 square foot Kaiser Permanente facility planned nearby. 14. Jefferson Redevelopment - The city of Temecula has several developments planned, proposed, and under construction. Two significant projects include the Jefferson Specific Plan and Altair. The Jefferson Specific Plan would be a redevelopment of currently lower density older/established commercial uses situated within close proximity to 1-15. The plan calls for rezoning and densification with a significant increase in higher -density residential uses, which will displace some of the older, lower -density commercial land uses. The rezoning allows for 3,700 new residential units at buildout. However, the redevelopment would result in a reduction in commercial space from 3.8 million square feet today down to 1.9 million in the future. 15. Altair - Altair is a specific plan currently under review, which includes 1,500 residential units comprised of a mix of attached and detached product. The 270-acre project is located within close proximity of 1-15 near the terminus of SR-79 in the foothills of the Santa Rosa Mountains. Preliminary plans indicate a small retail component but the project is primarily residentially driven. 4.6.3 grange County Focus Areas There is significant development activity in Orange County that will impact traffic on the 1-15 Express Lanes. Many of these large-scale developments are concentrated in the cities of Irvine ® Stantec 4.100 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Socioeconomic Variables and Land Use and Tustin. Although these developments are located slightly further away from the project, 1-15 connects to SR 91 which provides access to these areas via SR 241, branching off further to SR 261 and SR 133. These areas represent some of the last large-scale development opportunities in Orange County as well as some of the largest ongoing redevelopments in Southern California. Figure 4-12 highlights the focus areas discussed further in this section. Figure 4-12: Map of Orange County Focus Areas The following key real estate projects are located southeast of the Improvement Project in Orange County: 16. Tustin Legacy - Tustin Legacy, formally Marine Corps Air Station Tustin, is a 1,600-acre planned community located just west of where SR-261 terminates. Since 2006, various phases have been completed including four neighborhoods totaling 2,105 units and The District shopping center. Amalfi Apartments and Anton Legacy Apartments were completed in 2015, adding over 750 more homes. Standard Pacific Homes will finish 375 more units in Greenwood Park by the end of 2017, and two more neighborhoods, including one TOD neighborhood, are planned. Non-residential developments include approximately 1.6 million square feet of office space known as Cornerstone I and Cornerstone II, 305,000 square feet of educational and supporting commercial space in the Advanced Technology & Education Park (ATEP) campus, and 248,000 square feet total of neighborhood commercial and Hoag acute care and skilled nursing facility. Ultimate build -out of the project is estimated at 20+ years and will total over 6,800 residential units with non-residential space housing over 13,000 employees. Stantec 4.101 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Socioeconomic Variables and Land Use 17. Great Park - Great Park, referred to in previous reports as Heritage Fields at El Toro, is the redevelopment of former Marine Corps Air Station El Toro, located near SR 133. Great Park is a 688-acre redevelopment being delivered through a public -private partnership between the City of Irvine and developer FivePoint Communities. Residential sales began in 2013 and approximately 700 homes have been sold. Total buildout of Great Park will include 9,500 total residential units. Commercial development plans include about 4.9 million square feet of retail, office, and R&D space, 2 million of which will be dedicated to 8 buildings for an Avago (previously Broadcom) Campus, the first phase of which is under construction now. In addition to the land controlled by FivePoint Communities, Orange County owns 100 acres of land on the south end of Great Park. The county plans to build 2,000 residential units in 2019, 220,000 square feet of retail and entertainment by 2024, and 1.9 million square feet of office thereafter. The County also owns a parcel of land east of Great Park called Alton West. Plans include 970 units of multifamily housing at an average of 30 units per acre. Implementation of this project may be in phases starting in 2016. 18. Portola Springs - Located immediately adjacent to the Great Park on the northeast, Portola Springs is an ongoing master -planned community developed by the Irvine Company in an area referred to by the City of Irvine as Planning Area 6. As of 2015, there were over 2,200 existing units. Full buildout is anticipated by 2030 and will consist of a total of 5,200 units. The project is almost exclusively residential, with minimal commercial uses planned. At buildout, 40% of the residential units will consist of single-family detached product, with the remainder comprised of a mix of for -sale condominiums and apartments. 19. Orchard Hills - Orchard Hills, referred to as TIC Planning Area 1 in previous reports, land is located in the City of Irvine, east of the intersection of Portola Parkway and SR 261, just north of Portola Springs. It is planned for a total build -out of 4,100 residential units, with the majority of development taking place by 2025. As of the 3rd quarter 2015, 500 units had been built, 650 were under construction, and applications had been submitted by the Irvine Company for an additional 1,000 units. 20. Cypress Village / Stonegate - To the east of where SR 261 and 1-5 intersect, a collection of large Irvine Company projects has been under development, including Woodbury, Cypress Village, and Stonegate. Some of these communities are approaching buildout, with Woodbury's last unit sold in 2014. It is anticipated that residential development in this area will be primarily built out by 2020, with 2,800 new units delivered between 2015 and 2020. Commercial development is anticipated to house thousands of new employees, although the non-residential portion is expected to be delivered at a slower pace than the residential units, with development continuing through 2035. 21. Quail Hill Commercial - Quail Hill is adjacent to 1-405 on the south, bounded by Sand Canyon Avenue to the west and SR 133 to the east. The Irvine Company completed the residential components of this project in 2007, however, planned commercial development will include an additional 1.1 million square feet of commercial space by 2035. Given its adjacency to 1-405, it is considered a strong location to attract a large single user / corporate headquarters, although there are no development plans at this time. ® Stantec 4.102 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Socioeconomic Variables and Land Use 22. The Irvine Company Spectrum 5 - The Irvine Company has several projects planned for the area southwest of the interchange between 1-405 and 1-5, collectively known as Spectrum 5. This area, which was mostly vacant or used for agricultural and recreational purposes, has excellent highway exposure and is intended for a mix of higher -density residential and commercial development. The majority of new residential development is planned for rental apartment units. 1,750 apartment units have been completed as part of the first phase of multifamily construction in the area, known as Los Olivos Apartment Village. The second phase will consist of an additional 1,950 apartment units to be completed by 2025. These large-scale residential developments will result in total buildout of approximately 4,500 units by 2025. Non-residential buildout is anticipated for completion by 2030 and is likely to house approximately 3,000 additional employees in the area. 23. The Irvine Company Spectrum 2 and 3 Redevelopment - These areas are located on the south side of the former El Toro Marine Base within close proximity to the 1-405 and 1-5 interchange. These two areas contain some underutilized industrial land uses and represent longer term candidates for redevelopment / infill development. The area has the potential to house additional non-residential space amounting to approximately 1.6 million square feet by 2035. 24. TIC Irvine Center - The triangular area formed by 1-405, SR 133, and 1-5 has several sizable vacant parcels that are planned for commercial building by various parties, most notably the Irvine Company. There is currently a regional mall, a collection of office buildings, and a large quantity of rental residential development. An additional 1,350 apartment units are anticipated to be developed by 2020. In addition to this area, undeveloped areas west of SR 133, between 1-5 and 1-405 have been planned by the Irvine Company to house over 30,000 new employees by 2035. Total non-residential build -out is expected to be approximately 9 million square feet of office and light industrial space with some retail space. Over a million square feet is under construction or recently approved. One 20-story office tower is under construction and slated for completion in early 2016 while a second 20-story office building and 205-room hotel were recently approved. ® Stantec 4.103 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Model Development and Calibration S.0 MODEL DEVELOPMENT AND CALIBRATION The T&R forecasting process relied primarily on the traffic forecasts produced by Stantec's travel demand model but supported by a market -share model, and VISSIM micro -simulation model. Stantec's travel demand model starts with the Riverside County Traffic Analysis Model (RivTAM) and the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) models, and adapts them for use in forecasting I-15 Express Lane Project traffic and revenue. Stantec's market share model is developed from the revealed preference of existing Orange County SR 91 Express Lanes users. Toll traffic capture rates were developed, correlating with corridor congestion and toll rates. Finally, a micro -simulation model, developed in VISSIM, was used to model the likely operations of the 1-15 corridor including the 1-15 Express Lanes. The various models were calibrated and validated, and adapted to predict future traffic and revenue. 5.1 TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL The objective of the travel demand modeling task was to develop a combination of forecasting tools to estimate future demand for the 1-15 Express Lanes. This approach seeks to utilize existing regional travel demand models and integrate their estimates of future travel demand with a customized toll diversion model that is responsive to the likely range of tolling schemes and policy options. Using any single model platform precludes accurate representation of the route choice behavior of drivers utilizing the north/south alternatives between Riverside/Orange counties and San Diego because trips are already tied to a choice via external stations. To model this important behavior, an integrated model was developed which combines two modeling platforms into a single unified model platform. The modeled region includes the areas covered by the Riverside County Traffic Analysis Model (RivTAM) and the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) models. The RivTAM model includes the counties of Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino and Ventura. Within Riverside County the model was enhanced to provide for a more detailed zone structure. The routines developed provide a permanent tool that enables the efficient merging of the RivTAM and SANDAG models and forecasting of demand in Southern California. 5. 1.1 Model structure and uevelopment Model development for the 1-15 Express Lanes project involved a three -tiered approach. The first tier focused on integrating the networks and trip tables from the two regional planning models. The integrated model contains slightly more than 10,000 Transportation Analysis Zones (TAZs). The second tier created subarea networks and trip tables which were extracted from the integrated model. The resulting subarea model is approximately 5,000 TAZs. The third tier model represented the 1-15 Express Lanes study corridor. This 1,000 TAZ model is used to estimate demand. Figure 5-1 provides an overview of the integrated model structure. ® Stantec 5.104 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Model Development and Calibration Figure 5-1: Model Structure with Toll Diversion Assignment Model Socioeconomic Inp R Popu ation Households Employment Income 4 Transportation System Highway Network Transit Network RIVTAM & SANDA Models Tolling Assumptions Value of Time Payment Method Share Corridor Constraint Revenue Assumptions'' Annualization Ramp -Up Forecast Refinements Traffic Demand by Trip Purpose by Vehicle Type by Time of Day Sta ntec Toll Diversion Model Transactions & Revenue Forecast The modeling process begins with the RivTAM and SANDAG modeling platforms. The two models run in the TransCAD software package and are based on the conventional four -step approach to travel demand forecasting. Socioeconomic data, presented in Chapter 4, are one of the key inputs to the travel demand model. These data are used in the trip generation and trip distribution steps of the four -step model. Trip generation uses variables such as households and employment to estimate the number of daily person trips by purpose expected to be made to and from each TAZ. Trip productions are based on household characteristics stratified by size, age, workers and income. Trip attractions are based on the level of employment in a zone. Employment is stratified by industry and wages. In trip distribution, the model estimates where trips produced in generation will be distributed based on the attractions within a zone (e.g., work, school, shopping, etc.) and the distance to other zones. A zone with a large number of attractions, like a large shopping mall, will receive more trips than one with a strip shopping center. The models then split the trips among available modes of transportation, and finally assign trips to the highway network. The process is then repeated (with each iteration utilizing estimated speeds from the previous iteration) until the difference in speeds between subsequent assignments is negligible. This outcome is generally referred to as a state of network equilibrium. In both the RivTAM and SANDAG models, this "speed feedback loop" is executed five times so that input speeds for trip distribution are in reasonable agreement with the highway speeds output from traffic assignment. Applying the speed feedback loops provides increased Stantec 5.105 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Model Development and Calibration confidence in the resulting distribution of trips at the regional level. These models are used primarily to predict demand on a regional level and are not directly focused on forecasting toll road demand. Trip purpose is important for accurately modeling tolled facilities, as different trip purposes exhibit different values of time and therefore different levels of toll road usage. While each of the two regional models carries trip purpose through the mode choice step, the time -of -day and highway assignment steps do not retain trip purpose stratification. For this reason, person trip tables from the mode choice step of the final speed feedback iteration are intercepted and saved by peak/off-peak, trip purpose, and vehicle type (drive alone, shared ride, truck). 5.1.1.1 Conversion to Cube Voyager The trip tables extracted from the two regional models are converted to the Cube Voyager format to facilitate application of the integrated model process. The person trips by peak/off-peak were converted to vehicle trips by time period. The original time -of -day factors for the RivTAM model were developed based on a household survey completed by the Southern California Association of Government (SCAG) in 2000/2001. Stantec was able to obtain results from SCAG's more recent 2011 Household Travel Survey and used these data to develop new time -of -day factors by trip purpose. Another change Stantec implemented as part of the integrated model development was the time period definitions. Based on observed data Stantec determined the AM and PM periods were actually longer than assumed in either of the regional models. The AM was expanded to include the LOAM hour and the PM was extended to include the 7PM hour. The midday and night trip tables were adjusted accordingly. At the corridor level Stantec divided the two peak periods into one hour slices in order to more accurately replicate demand. There are four one -hour time periods for the AM and four one -hour time periods for the PM. Highway networks were also converted to CUBE Voyager format. To facilitate joining the networks to form an integrated network, many network attribute definitions, including those for facility type, speed, and volume delay functions had to be mapped to a common definition. Because the RivTAM model provides coverage of the project corridor, Stantec adopted the RivTAM definitions wherever possible. Area type is a key variable in the model process. The SANDAG model does not explicitly define area type. Stantec developed an approach, based on population and employment density, to compute and append area type to the SANDAG networks. This same approach was used to update the area type for the RivTAM networks. In both instances population and employment data were based on updated land use developed for the project. ® Stantec 5.106 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Model Development and Calibration 5.1.1.2 Model Integration The model integration includes joining both the networks and trip tables from the two regional models along their common border to create a single network and set trip tables. This produced a model with slightly more than 10,000 TAZs. The common border of the two models consists of two major north -south freeways, I-5 and 1-15, and four arterials, De Luz Road, Sandia Creek Drive, Pala Temecula Road and SR 79. Trips traversing this common border can consider all border locations when making route choice decisions rather than being tied to a specific external station. Joining the trip tables requires a set of control total traffic volumes stratified by direction, time period, trip purpose and vehicle type at each external station along the common border of the two models. To develop these control totals external station volumes from the two models were analyzed along with data from other sources. 5.1.1.3 Sub -Area Model A large portion of each of the models can be removed without impacting travel within and around the study area. To accomplish this, a procedure which cuts the network and trip tables along a predetermined border is applied. The resulting subarea model retained all trips within and crossing this border. The procedure consists of a simplified highway assignment model which tracks all trips crossing the predetermined border and produces networks and trip tables with the same granularity as the full regional models, but containing only the highway network and trips within the subarea. Figure 5-2 depicts the extent of the subarea defined for this project. The area shaded in gray represents the model boundaries. In the RivTAM model, the subarea is bounded by the Pacific Ocean and 1-605 to the west, SR 210 to the north, 1-215 and areas to the east, and the border with San Diego to the south. In the SANDAG model, the subarea is bounded by the Pacific Ocean to the west, the Orange and Riverside county borders to the north and 1-15 to the east. The southern boundary of the subarea is approximately 5 miles south of SR 78 and includes the cities of Oceanside, Escondido and Carlsbad. Combined, the two subareas encompass approximately 5,000 TAZs and cover a geographical area well beyond the limits of the study area. The major regional roadways contained in the subarea capture the significant movements that are of interest in evaluating the I-15 Express Lanes. In Riverside County travel on 1-15, 1-215, SR 71, SR 74 and SR 91 is modeled and in San Diego County travel on 1-5, 1-215 and SR 78 is modeled. ® Stantec 5.107 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Model Development and Calibration Figure 5-2: Sub -Area Model Boundary Los Angeles County limm 5,000 Zone Subarea L San Bernardino County Riverside Canty San Diego County Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA4 5.1.1.4 Corridor Level Model As previously mentioned, the 1,000 TAZ corridor model was developed as a tool to help forecast demand within the proposed 1-15 Express Lanes corridor. In addition to incorporating all the calibration adjustments from the subarea level model, the corridor level model used a routine that automatically scales the capacity based on the mainline and merging/diverging conditions for the 1-15 corridor. The area shaded in gray in Figure 5-3 shows the boundaries of the corridor model. The boundaries of corridor level model are solely within the RivTAM model. It parallels SR 57 on the west, 1-10 on the north, and intersects SR 60 and 1-15 on the east. The southern Stantec 5.108 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Model Development and Calibration boundary of the corridor model cuts through the Santa Ana Mountains between Riverside and Orange counties. Figure 5-3: Corridor Level Model Boundary 1,000 Zone Subarea San Bernardino County Sources-Esrr USGS, NOAA 5.1.1.5 Toll Diversion Highway Assignment The toll diversion model requires several key assumptions related to travelers' preferences regarding toll choice. These assumptions include travelers' willingness to pay as defined by their value of time, preferences for the method of payment via transponder (FasTrak) or video billing, and the level of toll rates. Stantec 5.109 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Model Development and Calibration The toll diversion model is based on a process utilizing a logic -based route choice model embedded within an equilibrium traffic assignment routine. The process iteratively calculates the percentage of tolled trips for a given origin -destination interchange and can be stratified as necessary. A similar approach has been applied successfully by Stantec on numerous projects in the southern California region. The structure of the toll diversion model is defined as follows: Toll Share = 1 / (1 + eu) Toll Share = Probability of selecting a toll road e = Base of natural logarithm (In) U = "Utility of Tolled Route" = a * (TimeTR-TimeFR) + R * Cost + CTR + CETC TimeTR = Tolled route travel time (min) TimeFR = Non -tolled route travel time (min) Cost = Toll (dollars) a = Time Coefficient R = Cost Coefficient CTR = Constant for toll road bias CETC = Constant for ETC bias The toll diversion model applies separate values of time for each trip purpose and commercial vehicle type. The model is stratified to accommodate four auto trip purposes: Home -Based Work (HBW), Home -Based Other (HBO), Non Home -Based Work (NHBW) and Non Home -Based Other (NHBO). Light truck trips are included with auto trips. Truck trips are stratified into 2 vehicle types: medium trucks and heavy trucks. As part of multiple studies over the past ten years, Stantec has developed and refined toll diversion coefficients in the southern California region based on regional income data and revealed preference data on the existing toll roads in the Southern California region. For auto trip purposes, the values of time range from $1 1.44 to $22.68 per hour, with the higher values assigned to work -related trips and the lower values used for non -work trips. The weighted average value of time for all auto trip purposes is $17.09 expressed in 2013 dollar terms. This is approximately 60 percent of the wage rate for median household income. During the model application, the zonal income from the home zone (TAZ) is used to adjust the underlying values of time, as prior studies have shown that the value of time increases as household income increases. To accommodate HOV policies and toll payment types, each of the four auto trip purposes is further stratified into drive alone and shared ride trips, and all trip purposes are stratified by two toll payment methods: electronic toll collection (ETC) and video billing. Stratification by toll payment type is applied during highway assignment and is dynamically altered for each origin -destination pair as the availability of different payment methods is determined. The development of toll rates for the various time periods and horizon years also requires specific processing techniques within the toll diversion model. For each time period and direction of travel, the toll rates for the 1-15 express lanes were established via iterative model runs. ® Stantec 5.110 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Model Development and Calibration 1 .z Model Calibration A significant component of the model calibration effort is the collection, analysis and summarization of data representing existing conditions. These data are used to compare against assignments from the model. For modeling express lane facilities, the model needs to replicate not only traffic volumes but also the speeds within the corridor and the origin -destination patterns between the entry and exit ramps. This calibration approach is critical as the express lane tolling schemes are a function of the location of and level of congestion in the corridor and the limited number of access points into the express lanes tend to restrict the number of trips that are eligible to use the facility. The calibration process focuses initially on replicating travel speeds along the corridor and then focuses on replicating the assigned volumes and individual origin -destination patterns. Calibration is performed on the integrated model highway assignment process. The first level of calibration was performed using the 10,000 TAZ integrated model. The objective of this calibration was to reasonably replicate speeds and flows for the region as a whole. The subarea calibration effort included adjusting free flow speeds and capacities and parameters of the volume delay function. To minimize the differences between observed traffic counts at selected locations and the estimated volumes produced by the model, adjustments were made to zone -to -zone trip movements. This differential was aggregated and then applied as an absolute correction factor in each horizon year. In addition, there were adjustments made to the HOV2 and HOV3 shares. These adjustments were based on HOV lane data on various corridors within the region, including SR 91 historical data. In addition to incorporating all the calibration adjustments from the subarea level model, the 1-15 corridor level model further sliced the AM Period and PM Period into 4 single AM hours and 4 single PM hours. Adjustments were made in order to match the hourly observed traffic counts within the 1-15 corridor. Another primary effort at the corridor level was calibrating a routine that automatically scales the capacity based on the mainline and merging/diverging conditions for 1-15 corridor. All these adjustments were applied to each horizon year's corridor level model. 5.1.2.1 Speed Calibration The initial focus of the calibration effort was to adjust the assignment procedures to ensure that estimated speeds in both the peak and off-peak periods were adequately replicating the observed speed data collected for the project. The assumed free flow speeds were adjusted as necessary to replicate the off-peak speeds which reflect generally uncongested conditions. Peak speeds were adjusted in an iterative process to ensure that estimated congested speeds replicated the observed values and that the overall traffic assigned to the roadways replicated the observed volumes on a daily basis. As the 1-15 express lane facility will primarily compete with adjacent general purpose lanes, it is critical to adequately estimate speed within the individual sections of the corridor in order to correctly estimate the potential toll diversion. ® Stantec 5.111 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Model Development and Calibration Equilibrium assignment relies on a volume -delay function to determine congested speeds based on roadway characteristics and the number of vehicles utilizing a segment. A version of the Akcelik function identical to that used in the RivTAM model was implemented. The volume delay function was further refined during calibration. Table 5-1 shows the comparison of the observed and estimated speeds on 1-15 by direction for the AM peak period. The peak directional flow in the AM period is northbound and as shown in the table, there are sections of 1-15 that experience more congestion during this period/direction. In contrast, there is little congestion in the southbound direction during the AM peak. Table 5-1: AM Peak Period Calibration Results - Speed (mph) AM Peak Period (6AM - 10AM) Distance (miles) Observed Estimated NB Entrance fr. Weirick Rd to NB Cajalco On 1.1 41 53 NB Cajalco On to NB El Cerrito On 1.0 55 37 NB El Cerrito On to NB Ontario On 1.0 67 43 NB Ontario On to NB Magnolia On 1.6 66 57 NB Magnolia On to NB Exit to SR-91 0.3 61 64 NB Exit to SR-91 to SB SR-91 Overpass 0.8 68 67 1-15 NB SB SR-91 Overpass to NB Entrance fr. SR-91 EB NB Entrance fr. SR-91 EB to NB Hidden Valley On 0.2 1.2 71 67 66 65 NB Hidden Valley On to NB 2nd Street On 0.8 47 47 NB 2nd Street On to NB 6th Street On 2.0 55 63 NB 6th Street On to NB Limonite On 2.6 48 51 NB Limonite On to NB Cantu-Gallean On 1.5 53 48 NB Cantu-Gallean On to NB Exit to SR-60 0.4 61 67 NB Exit to SR-60 to NB Entrance from SR-60 1.5 42 63 NB Entrance from SR-60 to NB E. Jurupa Exit 0.9 40 55 AM Peak Period (6AM - 10AM) Distance (miles) Observed Estimated E. Jurupa On Ramp to SR-60 Off Ramp 0.8 51 56 SR-60 Off Ramp to SR-60 On Ramp 1.1 67 67 SR-60 On Ramp to Cantu-Galleano On Ramp 1.3 63 65 Cantu-Galleano On Ramp to Limonite On Ramp 1.8 64 59 Limonite On Ramp to 6th St On Ramp 2.7 64 60 6th St On Ramp to 2nd Street On Ramp 1.9 64 64 1-15 SB 2nd Street On Ramp to Hidden Valley Pkwy On Ramp Hidden Valley Pkwy On Ramp to Exit to SR-91 0.8 0.7 70 64 68 68 Exit to SR-91 to SR-91 Overpass 0.7 67 68 SR-91 Overpass to Entrance from SR-91 EB 0.2 64 67 Entrance from SR-91 EB to Magnolia On Ramp 1.0 64 67 Magnolia On Ramp to Ontario On Ramp 1.6 66 68 Ontario On Ramp to El Cerrito On Ramp 0.8 69 67 El Cerrito On Ramp to Cajalco On Ramp 0.8 68 67 Cajalco On Ramp to Exit to Weirick Rd. 0.8 65 67 ® Stantec 5.112 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Model Development and Calibration The comparison of midday travel speeds is shown in Table 5-2. There are no segments in either direction that experience congestion. The toll diversion model provides estimated speeds that are generally slower than the observed speeds, but overall the model provides a reasonable estimate of free flow speeds that are typical for the midday period. Table 5-2: Midday Period Calibration Results - Speed (mph) Midday (LOAM - 3PM) Distance (miles) Observed Estimated NB Entrance fr. Weirick Rd to NB Cajalco On 1.1 68 62 NB Cajalco On to NB El Cerrito On 1.0 68 60 NB El Cerrito On to NB Ontario On 1.0 67 64 NB Ontario On to NB Magnolia On 1.6 60 65 NB Magnolia On to NB Exit to SR-91 0.3 58 62 NB Exit to SR-91 to SB SR-91 Overpass 0.8 65 67 1-15 NB SB SR-91 Overpass to NB Entrance fr. SR-91 EB NB Entrance fr. SR-91 EB to NB Hidden Valley On 0.2 1.2 73 71 66 65 NB Hidden Valley On to NB 2nd Street On 0.8 73 63 NB 2nd Street On to NB 6th Street On 2.0 71 64 NB 6th Street On to NB Limonite On 2.6 68 63 NB Limonite On to NB Cantu-Gallean On 1.5 67 61 NB Cantu-Gallean On to NB Exit to SR-60 0.4 68 67 NB Exit to SR-60 to NB Entrance from SR-60 1.5 64 66 NB Entrance from SR-60 to NB E. Jurupa Exit 0.9 60 59 Distance (miles) Midday (LOAM Observed - 3PM) Estimated E. Jurupa On Ramp to SR-60 Off Ramp 0.8 56 57 SR-60 Off Ramp to SR-60 On Ramp 1.1 74 67 SR-60 On Ramp to Cantu-Galleano On Ramp 1.3 73 63 Cantu-Galleano On Ramp to Limonite On Ramp 1.8 70 60 Limonite On Ramp to 6th St On Ramp 2.7 69 60 6th St On Ramp to 2nd Street On Ramp 1.9 69 60 1-15 SB 2nd Street On Ramp to Hidden Valley Pkwy On Ramp Hidden Valley Pkwy On Ramp to Exit to SR-91 0.8 0.7 73 67 66 64 Exit to SR-91 to SR-91 Overpass 0.7 67 66 SR-91 Overpass to Entrance from SR-91 EB 0.2 62 61 Entrance from SR-91 EB to Magnolia On Ramp 1.0 67 64 Magnolia On Ramp to Ontario On Ramp 1.6 69 65 Ontario On Ramp to El Cerrito On Ramp 0.8 70 62 El Cerrito On Ramp to Cajalco On Ramp 0.8 72 62 Cajalco On Ramp to Exit to Weirick Rd. 0.8 61 62 Table 5-3 shows the comparison of the observed and estimated speeds on 1-15 by direction for the PM peak period. The observed data indicate that peak directional flow in the PM peak is souhbound and congested conditions occur at SR 60 in the north and continues to the 6th Street on -ramp. As traffic approaches the interchange with SR 91, congestion occurs and extends to Weirick Road. There is minimal congestion in the northbound direction. Stantec 5.113 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Model Development and Calibration Table 5-3: PM Peak Period Calibration Results - Speed (mph) PM Peak Period (3PM - 7PM) Distance (miles) Observed Estimated NB Entrance fr. Weirick Rd to NB Cajalco On 1.1 64 64 NB Cajalco On to NB El Cerrito On 1.0 62 62 NB El Cerrito On to NB Ontario On 1.0 69 58 NB Ontario On to NB Magnolia On 1.6 62 62 NB Magnolia On to NB Exit to SR-91 0.3 60 62 NB Exit to SR-91 to SB SR-91 Overpass 0.8 70 67 -15 NB SB S NBEn� Entrance fr.r. SR 91 EB toto NB ntrance fr. SR-91 EB NB Hidden Valley On 0.2 11.2 72 71 66 66 NB Hidden Valley On to NB 2nd Street On 0.8 59 59 NB 2nd Street On to NB 6th Street On 2.0 52 61 NB 6th Street On to NB Limonite On 2.6 49 61 NB Limonite On to NB Cantu-Gallean On 1.5 66 61 NB Cantu-Gallean On to NB Exit to SR-60 0.4 63 68 NB Exit to SR-60 to NB Entrance from SR-60 1.5 40 67 NB Entrance from SR-60 to NB E. Jurupa Exit 0.9 31 61 PM Peak Period (3PM - 7PM) Distance (miles) Observed Estimated E. Jurupa On Ramp to SR-60 Off Ramp 0.8 43 53 SR-60 Off Ramp to SR-60 On Ramp 1.1 37 66 SR-60 On Ramp to Cantu-Galleano On Ramp 1.3 37 62 Cantu-Galleano On Ramp to Limonite On Ramp 1.8 41 49 Limonite On Ramp to 6th St On Ramp 2.7 51 53 6th St On Ramp to 2nd Street On Ramp 1.9 59 62 1 -15 SB 2nd Street On Ramp to Hidden Valley Pkwy On Ramp Hidden Valley Pkwy On Ramp to Exit to SR-91 0.8 0.7 69 68 66 66 Exit to SR-91 to SR-91 Overpass 0.7 67 65 SR-91 Overpass to Entrance from SR-91 EB 0.2 63 55 Entrance from SR-91 EB to Magnolia On Ramp 1.0 34 58 Magnolia On Ramp to Ontario On Ramp 1.6 20 41 Ontario On Ramp to El Cerrito On Ramp 0.8 24 32 El Cerrito On Ramp to Cajalco On Ramp 0.8 42 37 Cajalco On Ramp to Exit to Weirick Rd. 0.8 48 31 Table 5-4 shows the comparison of the observed and estimated speeds on 1-15 by direction for the evening hours into the early morning. As in the midday period there are no segments in either direction that experience congestion. The toll diversion model provides estimated speeds that are very close to the observed speeds. The model provides a reasonable estimate of free flow speeds that are typical for the night period. The overall calibration of travel speeds indicates that the toll diversion model provides a reasonably good replication of observed travel speeds by direction in each time period and is deemed acceptable for the purposes of estimating toll diversion for this project. Stantec 5.114 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Model Development and Calibration Table 5-4: Night Period Calibration Results - Speed (mph) Nighttime (7PM - 6AM) Distance (miles) Observed Estimated NB Entrance fr. Weirick Rd to NB Cajalco On 1.1 68 66 NB Cajalco On to NB El Cerrito On 1.0 68 66 NB El Cerrito On to NB Ontario On 1.0 67 68 NB Ontario On to NB Magnolia On 1.6 60 68 NB Magnolia On to NB Exit to SR-91 0.3 58 67 NB Exit to SR-91 to SB SR-91 Overpass 0.8 65 69 1-15 NB SB SR-91 Overpass to NB Entrance fr. SR-91 EB NB Entrance fr. SR-91 EB to NB Hidden Valley On 0.2 1.2 73 71 67 68 NB Hidden Valley On to NB 2nd Street On 0.8 73 68 NB 2nd Street On to NB 6th Street On 2.0 71 68 NB 6th Street On to NB Limonite On 2.6 68 68 NB Limonite On to NB Cantu-Gallean On 1.5 67 68 NB Cantu-Gallean On to NB Exit to SR-60 0.4 68 69 NB Exit to SR-60 to NB Entrance from SR-60 1.5 64 69 NB Entrance from SR-60 to NB E. Jurupa Exit 0.9 60 66 Nighltime (7PM - 6AM) Distance (miles) Observed Estimated E. Jurupa On Ramp to SR-60 Off Ramp 0.8 56 65 SR-60 Off Ramp to SR-60 On Ramp 1.1 74 68 SR-60 On Ramp to Cantu-Galleano On Ramp 1.3 73 68 Cantu-Galleano On Ramp to Limonite On Ramp 1.8 70 68 Limonite On Ramp to 6th St On Ramp 2.7 69 68 6th St On Ramp to 2nd Street On Ramp 1.9 69 68 1-15 SB 2nd Street On Ramp to Hidden Valley Pkwy On Ramp Hidden Valley Pkwy On Ramp to Exit to SR-91 0.8 0.7 73 67 69 69 Exit to SR-91 to SR-91 Overpass 0.7 67 69 SR-91 Overpass to Entrance from SR-91 EB 0.2 62 67 Entrance from SR-91 EB to Magnolia On Ramp 1.0 67 67 Magnolia On Ramp to Ontario On Ramp 1.6 69 67 Ontario On Ramp to El Cerrito On Ramp 0.8 70 66 El Cerrito On Ramp to Cajalco On Ramp 0.8 72 67 Cajalco On Ramp to Exit to Weirick Rd. 0.8 61 68 5.1.2.2 Screenline Calibration Screenline calibration was performed to ensure that the aggregate demand replicated the observed traffic. As part of this calibration, an in-house routine was applied to minimize variation between estimated and observed demand across each of the screenlines. The adjustment provides a matrix of 'base year' trip changes (either increases or reductions) that is then retained for application in each of the horizon years. Since these trips are stored as a matrix, these additional trips are not tied to specific roadways and can be diverted to different routes in exactly the same manner as the trips estimated directly by the model. As a result of the screenline calibration, for origin -destination zonal pairs where trip changes were provided by the adjustment routine, the net change in trips was less than one percent. Note that since the magnitude of the additional trips is held constant for all future years, their contribution to the overall assignment results are further minimized in each successive horizon year as the underlying ® Stantec 5.115 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Model Development and Calibration model trip tables continue to increase due to growth in the region's population and employment. Early calibration results revealed the model tended to overestimate the number of trips using HOV lanes. To bring aggregate HOV lane volume/count ratios closer to acceptable levels (+/- 10 percent of counts), a half minute time penalty was applied to represent the additional impedance associated with weaving in and out of the HOV lanes. A series of screenlines were developed that include 1-15 and roadways within and around the project corridor. Figure 5-4 shows the locations of the screenlines. The screenline calibration results are shown in Table 5-5. Screenlines 1 through 5 include counts along 1-15. The total estimated traffic for each of these screenlines is within reasonable and acceptable tolerance of the total counts. Figure 5-4: Screenline Locations Los Angeles County Ors Son Bernardino County Q 0 0 o� v Orange County 1-15 Corridor — Screenlines -- 10, Riverside County ® Stantec 5.116 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Model Development and Calibration Table 5-5: Calibration Results at Screenlines DESCRIPTION Daily Volume Observed Estimated Obs-Est % Diff Screenline 1 - NORTH OF 1-10 Northbound Total Southbound Total 93,035 87,415 95,118 94,952 2,083 7,537 2% 9% Screenline 2 - NORTH OF SR-60 Northbound Total Southbound Total 322,049 313,870 321,555 308,177 (494) (5,693) 0% -2% Screenline 3 - SOUTH OF SR-60 Northbound Total Southbound Total 162,304 162,208 170,597 169,061 8,293 6,853 5% 4% Screenline 4 - NORTH OF SR-91 Northbound Total Southbound Total 141,650 129,787 133,738 132,452 (7,912) 2,665 -6% 2% Screenline 5 - SOUTH-EAST OF SR-91 Northbound/Westbound Total Southbound/Eastbound Total 258,925 252,055 266,641 261,733 7,715 9,678 3% 4% Screenline A - WEST OF 1-15 Westbound Total Eastbound Total 355,131 359,946 361,463 356,765 6,333 (3,181) 2% -1% Screenline B - EAST OF 1-15 Westbound Total Eastbound Total 289,810 302,041 318,556 313,211 28,746 11,171 10% 4% Screenline C - Through SR-55 and SR-57 Northbound Total Southbound Total 267,310 269,031 269,440 268,766 2,131 (265) 1% 0% Screenline D - Through Santa Ana Mountains Westbound Total Eastbound Total 272,900 265,700 278,878 275,393 5,978 9,693 2% 4% Screenline F - Downtown Corona Westbound Total Eastbound Total 165,207 163,917 172,245 166,920 7,039 3,003 4% 2% Cli Stantec 5.117 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Model Development and Calibration 5.1.2.3 1-15 Corridor Volume Calibration On a daily basis in the northbound direction the model generally overestimates traffic compared to actual volumes. A similar comparison exists in the southbound direction; however, the differences are not as pronounced. The percent root mean square error (%RMSE) statistic is used to measure model validity. On a daily basis in both directions the %RMSE is 3 percent. The replication of traffic within the corridor is excellent. Table 5-6 to Table 5-9 compare the actual volumes and model estimates for each segment within the 1-15 corridor. Daily volume comparisons are presented by direction, as well as by time of day. Table 5-6: Calibration Results - Northbound 1-15 Daily Corridor Volume Segment Daily Volume Observed Estimated Obs-Est % Diff I-15 - S R-60 and E Jurupa St 103,019 96,670 (6,349) -6% I-15 - Cantu-Galleano Ranch Rd and S R-60 83,013 83,885 872 1% I-15 - Limonite and Cantu Galleanu Rd 77,792 78,830 1,038 1% I-15 - 6th St and Limonite Ave 75,905 79,221 3,316 4% I-15 - 2nd St and 6th St 76,477 78,266 1,789 2% I-15 - Hidden Valley Pkwy and 2nd St 79,584 80,435 852 1% I-15 - S R-91 and Hidden Valley Pkwy 81,043 79,575 (1,468) -2% I-15 - Magnolia Ave and SR-91 94,618 96,639 2,021 2% I-15 - Ontario Ave and Magnolia Ave 85,358 84,745 (613) -1% I-15 - El Cerrito and Ontario 81,764 82,683 919 1% I-15 - Cajalco and El Cerrito 81,016 81,316 300 0% -15 - W eirick and Cajalco 72,217 76,945 4,728 7% Root Mean Square Error (%RMSE) 3% Table 5-7: Calibration Results - Southbound 1-15 Daily Corridor Volume Segment Daily Volume Observed Estimated Obs-Est % Diff I-15 - SR-60 and E Jurupa St 97,686 101,751 4,065 4% I-15 - Cantu-Galleano Ranch Rd and S R-60 81,297 85,417 4,120 5% I-15 - Limonite and Cantu Galleano Rd 76,706 79,427 2,721 4% I-15 - 6th St and Limonite Ave 76,331 77,710 1,379 2% I-15 - 2nd St and 6th St 76,298 78,606 2,307 3% I-15 - Hidden Valley Pkwy and 2nd St 79,754 80,220 466 1% I-15 - S R-91 and Hidden Valley Pkwy 76,337 76,996 659 1 I-15 - Magnolia Ave and SR-91 93,617 92,570 (1,047) -1% I-15 - Ontario Ave and Magnolia Ave 81,480 83,714 2,234 3% I-15 - El Cerrito and Ontario 80,074 80,226 152 0% I-15 - Cajalco and El Cerrito 81,462 81,677 215 0% I-15 - W eirick and Cajalco 75,436 75,233 (203) 0% Root Mean Square Error (%RMSE) 3% ® Stantec 5.1 18 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Model Development and Calibration The peak direction on 1-15 in the morning is northbound. At the southern end of the project corridor the model overestimates traffic by 6 percent. At the northern end the model underestimates traffic by 6 percent. Between these segments the model generally overestimates traffic between 2 and 4 percent. The % RMSE for the AM period is 4 percent, which is an excellent replication of existing traffic. Table 5-8: Calibration Results - Northbound 1-15 AM, Midday, PM, and Night Volumes Segment AM Period MD Period Observed Estimated Obs-Est % Diff Observed Estimated Obs-Est % Diff -15 -SR-60 and EJurupa St 24,701 23,101 (1,601) -6% 27,226 25,920 (1,306) -5% -15 - Cantu-Galleano Ranch Rd and SR-60 21,552 22,010 457 2% 21,700 22,398 698 3% -15 - Limonite and Cantu Galleanu Rd 20,289 20,640 351 2% 20,314 21,090 776 4% -15- 6th Stand Limonite Ave 18,540 19,339 799 4% 20,137 21,642 1,505 7% -15 - 2nd St and 6th St 18,247 18,946 699 4% 20,377 20,873 496 2% -15 - Hidden Valley Pkwy and 2nd St 19,547 19,468 (79) 0% 21,756 22,319 563 3% -15-SR-91 and Hidden Valley Pkwy 20,422 19,208 (1,214) -6% 21,868 21,673 (194) -1% -15 - Magnolia Ave and SR-91 22,308 22,214 (94) 0% 26,344 26,348 4 0% -15- Ontario Ave and Magnolia Ave 21,496 22,233 737 3% 23,560 22,147 (1,413) -6% -15 - El Cerrito and Ontario 21,292 20,935 (357) -2% 22,059 22,354 295 1% -15-Cajalcoand ElCerrito 20,668 20,382 (286) -1% 21,827 21,695 (133) -1% 1-15-Weirickand Cajalco 17,895 18,995 1,100 6% 19,434 20,990 1,556 8% % Root Mean Square Error (%RMSE) 4% Segment PM Period NT Period Observed Estimated Obs-Est % Diff Observed Estimated Obs-Est % Diff -15 -SR-60 and E Jurupa St 23,796 21,477 (2,319) -10% 27,295 26,172 (1,124) -4% -15 - Cantu-Galleano Ranch Rd and SR-60 19,457 19,187 (271) -1% 20,303 20,290 (13) 0% -15 - Limonite and Cantu Galleanu Rd 18,007 18,004 (3) 0% 19,181 19,095 (86) 0% -15 - 6th St and Limonite Ave 18,767 19,010 243 1% 18,461 19,230 769 4% -15 - 2nd St and 6th St 18,898 19,267 369 2% 18,955 19,179 224 1% -15 - Hidden Valley Pkwy and 2nd St 19,164 19,007 (157) -1% 19,117 19,642 524 3% -15-SR-91 and Hidden Valley Pkwy 18,604 18,485 (119) -1% 20,148 20,208 60 0% -15- Magnolia Ave and SR-91 21,698 23,569 1,871 9% 24,268 24,509 241 1% -15- Ontario Ave and Magnolia Ave 18,277 19,416 1,139 6% 22,026 20,949 (1,076) -5% -15 - El Cerrito and Ontario 17,016 17,878 862 5% 21,397 21,516 120 1% -15-Cajalcoand ElCerrito 17,159 17,927 768 4% 21,361 21,312 (49) 0% -15-Weirickand Cajalco 15,700 16,849 1,149 7% 19,188 20,111 923 5% % Root Mean Square Error (%RMSE) 6% 3% The peak direction on 1-15 in the PM is in the southbound direction. Between 6th Street and El Cerrito the model underestimates traffic, however not by a significant amount. The %RMSE for the PM period is 4 percent, which is excellent. The % RMSE for the AM and midday is 5 percent and the night is 4 percent. Stantec 5.119 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Model Development and Calibration Table 5-9: Calibration Results - Southbound 1-15 AM, Midday, PM, and Night Volumes Segment AM Period MD Period Observed Estimated Obs-Est % Diff Observed Estimated Obs-Est % Diff 1-15 -SR-60 and E Jurupa St 20,974 23,066 2,092 10% 25,907 26,204 297 1% 1-15 -Cantu-Galleano Ranch Rd and SR-60 18,333 19,604 1,271 7% 21,817 23,538 1,721 8% I-15 - Limonite and Cantu Galleano Rd 17,258 18,292 1,034 6% 20,964 22,603 1,638 8% 1-15 - 6th St and Limonite Ave 17,722 18,328 606 3% 21,032 22,489 1,457 7% I-15 - 2nd St and 6th St 17,824 18,243 419 2% 21,215 23,203 1,988 9% 1-15 - Hidden Valley Pkwy and 2nd St 17,571 17,910 339 2% 22,775 23,577 803 4% 1-15 -SR-91 and Hidden Valley Pkwy 15,225 15,595 370 2% 22,957 23,162 205 1% I-15- Magnolia Ave and SR-91 18,638 19,899 1,261 7% 26,587 25,959 (629) -2% I-15 - Ontario Ave and Magnolia Ave 15,455 15,602 147 1% 23,648 25,049 1,401 6% I-15 - El Cerrito and Ontario 14,021 14,214 193 1% 23,301 24,113 812 3% 1-15-Cajalco and El Cerrito 14,181 14,691 509 4% 23,547 23,296 (251) -1% 1-15 - W eirick and Cajalco 12,802 13,121 319 2% 20,927 20,841 (86) 0% % Root Mean Square Error (%RMSE) , 5% 7 ' Segment PM Period NT Period Observed Estimated Obs-Est % Diff Observed Estimated Obs-Est % Diff -15 -SR-60 and E Jurupa St 23,616 24,306 689 3% 27,188 28,175 987 4% -15 -Cantu-Galleano Ranch Rd and SR-60 20,835 21,315 480 2% 20,312 20,959 647 3% -15 - Limonite and Cantu Galleano Rd 19,869 19,834 (35) 0% 18,615 18,698 83 0% -15 - 6th St and Limonite Ave 19,918 19,334 (584) -3% 17,659 17,559 (100) -1% -15 - 2nd St and 6th St 19,291 18,472 (819) -4% 17,969 18,688 719 4% -15 - Hidden Valley Pkwy and 2nd St 20,991 20,457 (534) -3% 18,417 18,275 (142) -1% -15 -SR-91 and Hidden Valley Pkwy 20,277 19,789 (488) -2% 17,877 18,450 572 3% -15- Magnolia Ave and SR-91 24,904 22,998 (1,907) -8% 23,487 23,715 227 1% -15- Ontario Ave and Magnolia Ave 22,218 21,313 (905) -4% 20,159 21,750 1,591 8% -15-ElCerrito and Ontario 22,716 21,081 (1,636) -7% 20,035 20,819 784 4% -15 -Cajalco and El Cerrito 23,932 23,246 (686) -3% 19,802 20,444 642 3% -15 - W eirick and Cajalco 23,130 23,060 (71) 0% 18,577 18,212 (365) -2% % Root Mean Square Error (%RMSE) 4% _ 5.1.2.4 Origin -Destination Pattern Calibration The final element of the calibration was replication of the specific origin -destination patterns for vehicles traversing the corridor by direction for each of the peak periods. The origin and destination patterns represent traffic entering and exiting at the ends of the corridor and the individual entry and exit ramps between the general purpose lanes from three different locations. Figure 5-5 presents the calibration results for trips on 1-15 south of Cajalco Road. Figure 5-6 represents trips on 1-15 to/from SR-91 west. Stantec 5.120 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Model Development and Calibration Figure 5-7 shows the results of the patterns on 1-15 north of Cantu-Galleano Ranch Road. As a measure of overall correlation, simple R-squared values between the sampled observed and estimated trip movements were generated for each time period and direction. These R-squared values are 0.98, 0.94, 0.98, and 0.97 for AM southbound, AM northbound, PM southbound, and PM northbound traffic, respectively. Since the R-squared values are close to one, there is a significant degree of correlation between the observed and estimated origin -destination patterns. Figure 5-5: 1-15 OD Patterns Calibration, Peak Direction, South of Cajalco Road Ontario Eastvale SB PM Cantu-Galleano r Ranch Rd Limonite Ave 0: 12% E: 12% Sixth St Norco Second St d r Hidden Valley Riverside.,,------. Pkwy 0:20% E: 217 Corona 0:48% E: 49% Legend Enlenng Observed (0) and Estimated (E) Percentages Exiling Observed (O] and Estimated (E) Percentages 0:9% E: 9% O: 9% E: 9% Stantec 0:7% E: 57 Magnolia ' Ave E Ontario Ave El Cerrito Rd Cajalco Rd 0: 100% Dos Lagos Dr NB AM r11n� 1 .rVA irjK ' ■aFp: E: 17% • �" a` Cantu-Galleano � r-Ranch Rd Ontario Eastvale �.- Limonite Ave Second Sf ,y r Hidden Valley , Pkwy 10: 7 201 E: 8% E:-22% Corona 0: 41 % E Ontario Ave E: 42% El Cerrito Rd �Cajalco Rd 0:100% E: 100% Dos Lagos Dr 5.121 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Model Development and Calibration Figure 5-6: 1-15 OD Patterns Calibration, Peak Direction, SR 91 West of 1-15 T lf:• EB PM O: 21 %, Cantu-Galleano J r Ranch Rd —I r-- Limonite Ave Eastvale O: 2 E: 16 �j — Sixth St Norco —� — Second ' St 4, r Hidden Valley Riverside Pkwy 0: 10C)7 E: 1007 Corona Magnolia Ave O: 20"• 1 E Ontario Ave E: 17% Legend Entering Observed {Oj and Estimated (E) Percentages Exl ing observed (o} and Estimated (E) Percentages 0:97 E: 9% 0:9% E: 9% El Cerrito Rd ;�Cajalco Rd 0: 37% E: 42%- :Dos Lagos Dr Ontario • Eastvale O: 1005 E: 1005 Corona WB AM Cantu-Galleano r Ranch Rd -� _- Limonite Ave Sixth St Norco —( — Second St r Hidden Valley Pkwy 0: 297 Magnolia ' Ave 0:16% E: 13% Riverside E Ontario Ave El Cerrito Rd Cajole° Rd 0:377 E: 37% Dos Lagos Dr Stantec 5.122 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Model Development and Calibration Figure 5-7: 1-15 OD Patterns Calibration, Peak Direction, North of Cantu Galleano - SB PM Cantu-Gallean — r Ranch Rd — � r-- Limonite Ave Eastvale O: 56% E: 5$%� — Sixth St Norco —� — Second St r Hidden Valley Pkwy f 0: 12 E: 13 Corona 0: 13% E: 13% Legend Entering Observed {Oj and Estimated E] Percentages Exiting Observed (OJ and Estimated (E] Percentages 0:9% E: 9% 0:9% E: 9%. 0: E: 2% Magnolia Ave Riversider'� . E Ontario Ave El Cerrito Rd Cajalco Rd A.� O: 14 E: 13 Dos Lagos Dr Ontario Eastvale NB AM 0:100 E: 100 Cantu-Galleano r Ranch Rd i-- Limonite Ave Sixth St Norco —� -- Second St �r Hidden Valley Riverside Pkwy 0:9% E: 9% Dos Lagos Dr ® Stantec 5.123 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Model Development and Calibration 5.1.3 Preparation of Highway Networks Regional networks for both the RivTAM and SANDAG model platforms were developed for 2015, 2025 and 2035. Each set of networks was reviewed for accuracy and proper connectivity. Refinements to the highway networks were the result of discussions with representatives from RCTC, OCTA, and TCA. Projects contained in the adopted 2012 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), produced by the Southern California Association of Governments, formed the basis for many of the updates to the RivTAM roadway networks. Projects contained in the 2050 Regional Transportation Plan, prepared by the San Diego Council of Governments, was the primary source of highway improvements for the SANDAG networks. 5.1.3.1 Base Year Network Changes The base year for model calibration/validation is 2015. The base year networks pivoted off of existing 2012 roadway networks previously prepared by Stantec as part of their work for the Transportation Corridor Agencies in 2014. Table 5-10 shows the relevant network changes made to the RivTAM base year network. Table 5-10: Key Network Changes (2015) Roadway RTP ID Descri • tion and Year County 1-215 French Valley Parkway Green River Road 200614 0121D RIV050555 713 Add 1 HOV lane in each direction from Spruce Street to Orange Show Road. Widen from 6 to 8 lanes and add auxiliary lanes from SR- 60/SR-91 /1-215 junction to SR-60/I-215. Add HOV direct connectors from I-215/SR-60 to SR-60. Add 1 mixed flow lane and an HOV lane in each direction from 1-10 to SR-210. San Bernardino Riverside Riverside San Bernardino 20620 Widen to 6 mixed flow lanes and 2 HOV lanes from Los Angeles County Line to SR-215 and add direct connector between SR-210 and 1-215. San Bernardino 120336 Add an eastbound lane from the SR-91 /SR-241 interchange to the SR-91 /SR-71 interchange. RIV010212 Add 1 HOV lane / dir from Adams St to SR 60/1-215 to Central Ave off. Extend 5th WB lane from SR 60/1-215 to 14th St off. Add auxiliary lanes from Madison St to Central Ave. ORA030601 Add 1 lane in each direction from SR-91 /SR-55 interchange to the SR-91 /SR-241 interchange. Orange/Riverside Riverside Orange 991202 Construct French Valley Parkway interchange and a 2-lane roadway from 1-15 to Jefferson Avenue. Riverside RIV01 1237 Widen Green River Road from SR-91 on/off ramps to Palisades Drive. Riverside 5.1.3.2 Future Year Network Changes (2025/2035) The two forecast years selected for the project are 2025 and 2035. The 1-15 Express Lanes are assumed to be open by 2020. Tolled direct connectors between SR 241 and the express lanes on SR 91 are assumed to be open by 2019. The existing HOV lanes on SR 91 in Riverside County line will be converted to express lanes by 2018. The extent of this improvement will be from the Stantec 5.124 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Model Development and Calibration county line to 1-15. Table 5-1 1 presents the significant network improvements expected to occur between 2016 and 2025. Table 5-11: Key Network Changes: 2016-2025 Roadway RTP ID Description County 1-15 1-10 1-215 SR-60 SR-91 Cajalco Road Foothill Parkway Limonite Avenue RIV071267 30M0701- RIV071250 4122006 1-15 Express Lanes from Cajalco Road to SR-60. Add 1 HOV lane in Riverside each direction from SR-74 to JCT I-15/1-215. Construct 1 tolled express lane direct connector from NB I-15 to WB Riverside SR-91 and from EB SR-91 to SB I-15. Add 2 tolled express lanes in each direction from SR-60 to SR-210. San Bernardino 4122004 I-10 Express Lanes from San Antonio Avenue to Ford Street. an Bernardino 4M0803 Add 1 lane in each direction from SR-60/SR-91 /1-215 junction and San Bernardino Orange Show Road. 4M07008 Widen auxiliary lanes in each direction from Ramona Avenue interchange to SB I-15 direct connector. Widen SB I-15 to WB SR-60 and EB SR-60 to NB/SB I-15 direct connectors from 1 to 2 lanes. San Bernardino RIV010212 Add 1 HOV lane in each direction from Adams Street to SR-60/I- Riverside 215. Extend 4fh WB lane from SR-60/I-215 to Central Avenue off. Extend 5fh WB lane from SR-60/I-215 to 14th Street off. Add auxiliary lanes from Madison Street to Central Avenue. 30M0701- Convert existing HOV lane in each direction to tolled express lanes. Riverside RIV071250 Add 1 tolled express lane in each direction from Orange County Line to I-15. Add one lane in each direction from SR-71 to 1-15. Add auxiliary lanes in various locations from SR-241 to Pierce Street. Construct a collector -distributor system from Main Street to 1-15. RIV070308 Reconstruct EB SR-91 to NB SR-71 direct connector and Green River Riverside Road EB on ramp. 2M0736 Add 1 lane in each direction from SR-55 to SR-57. Orange 2M0737 Add 1 WB lane from SR-241 SB off to Gypsum Canyon Road. Orange ORAL 1 1207 Construct tolled express lane direct connectors from NB SR-241 to Orange EB SR-91 and from WB SR-91 to SB SR-241 RIV010208 Widen Cajalco Road from Temescal Canyon Road to Bedford Riverside Canyon Road. RIV010209 Construct a 4 lane roadway between Lincoln Avenue and Paseo Riverside Grande. RIV011233 Widen Limonite Avenue from Hamner Avenue to Wineville Avenue. Riverside A southern extension of the I-15 Express Lanes, from Cajalco Road to US-74, is expected to open by 2027. Temescal Canyon Road, which runs parallel to the 1-15 Express Lanes, will be reconstructed and widened between 2030 and 2035. Table 5-12 presents the significant network improvements expected to occur between 2026 and 2035. Stantec 5.125 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Model Development and Calibration Table 5-12: Key Network Changes: 2026-2035 County 1-15 SR-91 Archibald Avenue Euclid Avenue Schleisman Road Temescal Canyon Road RIV071267 1-15 Express Lanes from Cajalco Road to US-74. Riverside 1M1001 Add 1 HOV lane and 1 mixed flow lane in each direction from Mission Boulevard to Rio Rancho. LAOB951 Add 1 HOV lane and 1 mixed flow lane in each direction from I-10 to SR-60. 3M01 MA09 Add 1 lane in each direction from SR-91 to San Bernardino County Line. Los Angeles Los Angeles 'Riverside RIV071250B Add 1 lane in each direction from SR-241 to SR-71 and from I- 15 to Pierce Street. Construct 1 tolled express lane direct connector from EB SR-91 to NB I-15 and from SB I-15 to WB SR- 91. Riverside 3A01 WT124 Widen from San Bernardino County Line to River Road. Riverside 4120106 Widen from Merrill Avenue to Kimball Avenue. 4A04036 Widen from Pine Avenue to SR-71. 4A04201 Widen from Riverside Drive to Merrill Avenue. Riverside Riverside Riverside RIV050532 Construct new interchange at I-15. Add northbound and southbound auxiliary lanes between Schleisman Road and Limonite Avenue. Riverside Stantec 3M0728 3A04WT197 3A04WT 198 Reconstruct/widen Temescal Canyon interchange at 1-15. Widen from El Cerrito Road to Indian Truck Trail. Widen from Indian Truck Trail to over Temescal Wash. Riverside Riverside Riverside 5.126 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Model Development and Calibration 5.2 MARKET SHARE MODEL Stantec has adapted its managed lane market share model to separately predict 1-15 ELP usage. The adapted market share model was used to provide an alternative view of traffic and revenue and its results were used to post -process some travel demand model results and to develop traffic and revenue annualization factors, ramp -up factors, and to understand the traffic and revenue impacts of dynamic pricing. 5.2.1 Model Structure and Development - Market Share Model 5.2.1.1 Market Share Curves The market share curves are built from a compilation of traffic, speed, and income data collected in 2015. Stantec collected general purpose lane (GP) traffic volume and 91 Express Lane volume by hour (provided by OCTA) in June and September 2015, and SR 91 Express Lanes hourly traffic and toll data obtained from the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). GP lane data were collected in June and September 2015 via Stantec's data collection program and supplemented with additional data from the PeMS database. These data were used to assess the relationship between corridor demand, congestion, and express lane usage. Capture rates on westbound SR 91 formed the basis for the toll market share curves. Data from SR 91 between Lakeview Avenue and SR 55 were used to derive market share capture rates for full -toll traffic (excluding HOV-3+ free). This location is regularly the most congested section of westbound SR 91 and has the most direct correlation with toll traffic usage. Figure 5-8 shows global, GP, and express traffic by hour in this section and Figure 5-9 shows the tolls charged. The resulting market share curves are shown in Figure 5-10. The curves were derived based on data collected during the count program, as well as additional counts collected from the PeMS database. Cli Stantec 5.127 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Model Development and Calibration Hourly Traffic 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 Figure 5-8: SR 91 Westbound Global and Express Traffic t SR 91 GP —a— 91 EL Traffic - -A- • FT Traffic Global • .♦ 2 2 22 2 2 Q • Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q CL 0_ a a CL 0_ a a CL CL 0_ a 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 0 o o o o o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N — N ch V C6 � W N O - N CV (M V r66 U O Hour Beginning Figure 5-9: SR 91 Westbound Express Lanes Tolls Charged SR 91 EL Toll Charged $10.00 $9.00 $8.00 $7.00 $6.00 $5.00 $4.00 $3.00 $2.00 $1.00 $0.00 i 2 2 2 2 i i i i i i i i i 2 2 2 2 2 Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q 0- 0- a a a a a a a a o o o o o o o o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N — N ri V � n W O� o — N N ri V c �O I< � 6 O Hour Beginning Stantec 5.128 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Model Development and Calibration Figure 5-10: SR 91 Westbound Express Market Share Curves - Full Toll Traffic Full Toll Market Share IT N 0 L Increasing Low toll i __ __ / /righ Toll _____ __,/ Corridor Congestion Global V/C 5.2.1.2 Model Implementation The SR 91 market share curves were adapted to reflect the lane configuration of 1-15 ELP project. Curves were developed for 3 GP / 2 Express lane, 3 GP / 1 Express Lane, 4 GP / 2 Express Lane, and 4 GP / 1 Express Lane configurations. The market share model was setup to model traffic on typical weekdays and weekends on a segment -by -segment basis by 15-minute period. Inputs used by the model include: • Global traffic forecast by the travel demand model by period • Traffic demand profile (15-minute distribution) • Ratio of Friday, Saturday, and Sunday traffic versus typical weekday traffic. • Length of Express Lane segments • Capacity of the GP Lanes (1850 vphpl and Express Lanes (1900 vphpl) Market share model forecasts were not used directly for the T&R forecast, but were used to benchmark travel demand model outputs and to post process results as needed. Market share model forecasts of Friday and weekend traffic were used to develop weekday traffic and revenue annualization factors, dynamic tolling adjustment factors, and to estimate traffic and revenue ramp -up during the opening years. Stantec 5.129 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Model Development and Calibration 5.3 MICRO -SIMULATION MODEL Stantec created a micro -simulation model to assess the future operations for the proposed Riverside County 1-15 Express Lanes (1-15 ELP). Micro -simulation is a traffic modeling procedure that produces a highly detailed traffic simulation. Vehicles are individually loaded onto the highway network and their impact on traffic operations are simulated on a second by second basis. This section presents the overall modeling methodology, existing conditions model development and calibration, and development of the future conditions model. PTV's VISSIM version 7 software was used to model the proposed 1-15 ELP. The simulation was built to model the future year 2025 and a worst case 2035 condition excluding arterial improvements and the 1-15 North DC's (2035 projects). An existing conditions model was created and calibrated in an effort to prove the model's ability to accurately replicate existing conditions traffic during the 3 to 7 PM period. Highway network geometry was obtained from aerial photography available from internet maps and photographs supplied by Google and Microsoft's Bing.com and survey data. Origin and destination matrices were built from traffic count and OD data collected from the data collection program discussed in the Existing Conditions chapter. The model was calibrated against traffic count and travel time data collected during June 2015. A future conditions model was created by modifying the existing conditions model's geometry based on information from drawings provided by the Project design team as well as knowledge of projects scheduled in the RTP. Future traffic volumes were developed based on travel demand model forecasts. Operations were evaluated using model predicted spot speeds, travel time, and throughput. 5.3.1 Micro -simulation Model Development and Calibration The purpose of the existing conditions model is to create a model that can be expected to reliably depict future year conditions. This is accomplished by modeling the existing condition as surveyed in June 2015 using traffic count data, a set of origin -destination volumes, network characteristics, and driver behaviors to replicate observed conditions. An AM peak period and a PM peak period model were developed. The AM peak period model simulates traffic between 6 and 10 AM and includes a one -hour seed reflecting 5 to 6 AM used to pre -fill the network with traffic prior to the start of the 6 AM analysis hour. The PM peak period model simulates traffic between 3 and 7 PM and also includes a one -hour seed reflecting 2 to 3 PM. 5.3.1.1 Roadway Network Assumptions The extents of the model include 1-15 north of SR 60 and south of Cajalco Road. In addition to the I-15, SR 91 between Tustin Avenue and Pierce Street are also included. While the focus of the simulation effort is 1-15, a substantial length of SR 91 is included because it is a major origin and ® Stantec 5.130 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Model Development and Calibration destination for 1-15 traffic and its future Express Lanes extension would connect directly with 1-15. Figure 5-1 1 highlights the area covered by the micro -simulation. The existing conditions model replicates the 1-15 highway network as of June 2015. This includes 3 GP lanes per direction north of 2nd Street, south of El Cerrito Road, and through the SR 91 interchange, and generally 4 lanes per direction between SR 91 and 2nd Street, and between SR 91 and El Cerrito Road. Figure 5-11: Existing Conditions Micro -Simulation Model Extents Imond Bar ya"z F V � Ra:re.,rns9 xd Chino Hills lorba Linda Yo,b,ti,,,doo.n Y. r6, Atwood E o Ylus Riverside l)r Chino Ave ?: dkin0 E Chien Nifls Stare Park wen Conywn{ [cetr �o- Re4iwmf Jack Editen Ave K6nbaPAve r E Rive,ide �r g Mira Loma Eastva Comm " E�,I,S E Rive rside Ce Merrill Ave 4 tre PVe. Sterna Peak r' Mission 61vc B. GI a� Mira Loma Irrrcnite Ave Pedl Herren Wiley WAdlr✓ Ar o- Home Gardens El Cerrito V� Weisel Source; Bing maps Stantec 5.131 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Model Development and Calibration Table 5-13: Number of Lanes, Existing Conditions on 1-15 Segment SB GP NB GP North of SR 60 4 4 Through SR 60 3 3 SR 60 to Cantu Galleano Ranch Road 4 5 Through Cantu Galleano 3 3 Cantu Galleano Ranch Road to Limonite Avenue 3 3 Through Limonite Avenue 3 3 Limonite Avenue to 6th Street 3 3 Through 6th Street 3 3 6th Street to 2nd Street 3 3 Through 2nd Street 3 3 2nd Street to Hidden Valley Pkwy 4 4 Through Hidden Valley Pkwy 4 4 Hidden Valley Pkwy to SR 91 4 4 Through SR 91 3 3 SR 91 to Magnolia Avenue 5 4 Through Magnolia Avenue 4 3 Magnolia Avenue to Ontario Ave 4 4 Through Ontario Ave 4 3 Ontario Ave to El Cerrito Road 4 3 Through El Cerrito road 3 3 El Cerrito Road to Cajalco Road 3 3 Through Cajalco Road 3 3 South of Cajalco Road 3 3 5.3.1.2 Input Volumes Traffic volumes are input to the micro -simulation model as origin -destination pairs. A matrix of OD pairs were developed by balancing hourly ramp entry and exit demand volumes and mainline demand volumes against OD patterns collected via the OD survey. Input and target volumes may differ from those used for travel demand model calibration because the micro -simulation attempts to replicate traffic operations observed over a span of several days rather than averages for the entire year. The resulting 1-15 OD demand volumes for the AM peak period and PM peak period for the 1-15 corridor are shown in Table 5-14 through Table 5-17. OD pairs were then expanded to encompass traffic using SR 91 between and including Tustin Avenue and McKinley Street. These expanded OD matrices were used to model the AM and PM peak periods. ® Stantec 5.132 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Model Development and Calibration Table 5-14: Origin -Destination Matrix, 1-15 NB AM DESTINATION 411 Total ORIGIN North of SR-60 SR-60 WB SR-60 EB Cantu- Galleano Ranch Rd Limonite Ave Sixth St Second St Hidden Valley Pkwy SR-91 WB SR-91 EB Magnolia Ave Ontario Ave El Cerrito Rd Cajalco Rd Cantu-Galleano Ranch Rd 1,274 499 15011, 1,923 Limonite Ave 2,420 941 280 40 3,680 Sixth St 1,357 253 137 77 249 2,072 Second St 677 124 68 38 122 8 1,037 Hidden Valley Pkwy 1,452 268 146 83 255 49 31, 2,284 SR-91 EB 1,942 702 901 141 444 424 401 227 5,183 SR-91 WB 470 838 586 107 337 876 833 472 4,520 Magnolia Ave 592 214 76 40 118 58 149 344 903 1,237 3,731 Ontario Ave 494 180 65 33 100 50 127 292 774 1,051 35 3,200 El Cerrito Rd 263 95 35 17 52 25 67 156 387 542 37 19 1,696 Cajalco Rd 518 190 69 35 105 52 133 309 790 1,094 115 79 37 3,526 South of Cajalco Rd 1,651 1,074 542 51 151 237 594 1,358 3,563 1,252 2,730 2,898 1,034 758 17,894 Total 13,109 5,378 3,053 661 1,934 1,780 2,335 3,158 6,418 5,176 2,917 2,996 1,072 758 50,746 Table 5-15: Origin -Destination Matrix, 1-15 NB PM DESTINATION ORIGIN North of SR-60 SR-60 WB SR-60 EB Cantu- Galleano Ranch Rd Limonite Ave Sixth St Second St Hidden Valley Pkwy SR-91 WB Magnolia SR-91 EB Ave Ontario Ave El Cerrito Rd Cajalco Rd Total Cantu-Galleano Ranch Rd 1,308 299 268 1,874 Limonite Ave 2,136 488 437 30 3,092 Sixth St 1,403 278 275 56 547 2,559 Second St 1,102 218 216 44 430 21 2,032 Hidden Valley Pkwy 1,657 329 324 66 648 97 506 3,172 SR-91 EB 1,432 404 606 63 623 832 640 451 5,052 SR-91 WB_ 360 634 289 38 376 1,274 987 691 4,649 Magnolia Ave 1,079 280 310 50 485 55 74 173 1,204 1,909 5,617 Ontario Ave 624 162 179 29 281 32 42 101 697 1,108 50� 3,304 El Cerrito Rd 182 48 52 8 83 9 12 30 205 328 30 16 1,004 Cajalco Rd 480 125 138 22 218 25 33 78 539 859 122 85 41 2,767 South of Cajalco Rd 686 493 157 16 160 345 460 1,088 5,091 855 1,994 1,942 1,107 1,308 15,701 Total 12,448 3,757 3,253 424 3,852 2,690 2,298 2,612 7,736 5,058 2,196 2,043 1,148 1,308 50,822 Table 5-16: Origin -Destination Matrix, 1-15 SB AM DESTINATION .= ORIGIN Cantu- Galleano Ranch Rd Limonite Ave Sixth St Second St Hidden Valley Pkwy SR-91 WB SR-91 EB Magnoli a Ave Ontario Ave El Cerrito Rd Cajalco Rd South of Cajalco Rd Total North of SR 60 393 727 1,377 1,146 1,853 565 313 529 324 81 200 435 7,942 SR-60 Ell 268 378 410 330 540 459 572 34 22 5 13 1,026 4,057 SR-60 WB 903 1,250 511 428 689 792 486 123 75 19 46 987 6,309 Cantu-Galleano Ranch Rd 11111 4 12 22 91 82 86 42 26 6 16 107 493 Limonite Ave 34 96 536 484 514 245 151 37 96 630 2,823 Sixth St 29 242 375 890 278 168 41 107 318 2,449 Second St 19 316 729 226 139 34 89 254 1,805 Hidden Valley Pkwy 1.1 281 665 211 127 30 83 238 1,634 SR-91 EB 1,230 769 189 485 2,701 5,375 SR-91 WB 1,866 1,197 302 735 1,554 5,654 Magnolia Ave 30 54 108 1,403 1,594 Ontario Ave ' 28 57 1,510 1,595 El Cerrito Rd 18 968 986 Cajalco Rd 673 673 Total 1,564 2,360 2,344 2,050 3,970 3,353 4,254 4,784 3,026 826 2,055 12,804 43,390 Stantec 5.133 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Model Development and Calibration Table 5-17: Origin -Destination Matrix, 1-15 SB PM DESTINATION ORIGIN Cantu- Galleano Ranch Rd Limonite Ave Sixth St Second St Hidden Valley Pkwy SR-91 WB SR-91 EB Magnoli a Ave Ontario Ave El Cerrito Rd Cajalco Rd South of Cajalco Rd Total North of SR-60 509 1,057 1,628 646 1,431 1,465 410 953 524 287 521 1,818 11,248 SR-60 EB 757 853 363 144 318 381 375 73 40 22 40 731 4,097 SR-60 WB 972 1,076 822 326 719 717 282 76 42 23 42 394 5,489 Cantu-Galleano Ranch Rd 14 77 65 128 330 236 60 33 18 33 279 1,272 Limonite Ave 95 160 316 836 606 147 81 44 81 682 3,048 Sixth St 64 188 281 565 316 174 95 173 502 2,358 Second St 44 406 813 461 253 139 252 738 3,105 Hidden Valley Pkwy 324 654 364 200 109 199 579 2,430 SR-91 EB 1,019 559 307 555 4,508 6,947 SR-91 WB 1,725 950 519 942 1,465 5,602 Magnolia Ave 22 43 43 2,399 2,506 Ontario Ave 14 58 3,304 3,376 El Cerrito Rd 12 2,824 2,837 Cajalco Rd 2,147 2,147 Total 2,238 2,999 2,985 1,405 3,144 4,740 3,942 5,193 2,878 1,621 2,948 22,371 56,463 5.3.1.3 Calibration Procedure and Results The AM and PM period micro -simulation models were calibrated to observed traffic throughput, queues, and speeds. The process involved iteratively assessing and adjusting various model parameters, including lane change distances, headways, desired speed distribution, and lane change aggressiveness. Overall, the micro -simulation model did a good job of replicating existing congestion and capacity. The resulting travel speeds, presented as spot speeds, and comparison of traffic demand, counts, and model volume at two key locations are shown in Table 5-18 through Table 5-25. AM Peak Period Model The model is able to replicate the congestion that occurs on northbound 1-15 during the AM peak period, with queues between Limonite Avenue and just past 2nd Street. Actual queues were observed to be slightly longer, extending as far back as Hidden Valley Parkway. Congestion south of Cajalco Road is present in observed data, but the segment is located south of the project. Replicating northbound travel speeds south of Cajalco was not considered critical for this effort. Traffic volumes were assessed at the segment between Dos Lagos and Cajalco Road and between 6th Street and Limonite Avenue. The model does a generally good job of matching traffic counts. South of Cajalco Road, the model processes all of the traffic counted at this location within a margin of error of no more than 2 percent. Between 6th Street and Limonite Avenue, the model is within 2 percent of the peak period total. During the 8 to 9 AM hour, however, the model simulates throughput 13 percent greater than counted. During this hour, downstream congestion is clearing, and demand that was unmet in prior hours is being serviced. It is likely that the traffic count at this location and time of day were somewhat affected by congestion and were low. The total demand across the four-hour period is assumed to be higher than the count by approximately 300 vehicles. This 13 percent differential between count and model in the 8 to 9 AM hour is attributable to this 300 vehicle difference. In the southbound direction, the model shows 1-15 generally operating at or near free -flow, as observed in existing conditions. ® Stantec 5.134 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Model Development and Calibration Table 5-18: Micro -Simulation model Northbound AM Spot Speeds From To o ul O O 2 a O MO N ; a ul Q O 2 a O O u) Zi o ul n O � a O P. h n o ul � O n o O O ul n a N O O 2 a O M al tlD a ul Q O m o O O ul X a N W. O a a O M ul a o LO OO O a 0 O 7 On - EB SR-60 Off-Jurupa 55 54 55 55 51 55 56 54 54 58 57 58 55 59 58 60 On - W B SR-60 On - EB SR-60 62 61 62 61 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 63 63 63 Off - W B SR-60 On - W B SR-60 61 60 61 61 60 62 61 61 62 62 62 61 60 63 62 63 Off - EB SR-60 Off - W B SR-60 44 41 35 41 42 33 29 42 46 45 36 29 22 54 45 56 On - Cantu- Galleano Ranch Off - EB SR-60 61 61 61 61 61 62 61 61 62 61 61 61 62 62 62 62 Off - Cantu- Galleano Ranch On - Cantu- Galleano Ranch 59 59 58 60 60 58 59 59 59 60 58 58 59 58 59 61 On - Limonite Off - Cantu - Galleano Ranch 57 56 57 57 58 56 57 56 56 55 57 56 57 61 59 60 Off - Limonite On - Limonite 20 60 20 41 21 27 26 . 27 ' 20 24 19 21 28 62 30 19 23 20 51 33 22 33 22 33 36 55 62 61 60 61 62 62 On - Sixth Off - Limonite Off - Sixth On - Sixth 60 59 59 59 30 59 18 57 18 34 ® 37 61 61 62 62 62 On - Second Off - Sixth 59 56 57 58 �'f1 58 59 60 60 62 61 Off - Second On - Second 56 56 58 57 59 56 57 31 60 61 61 60 61 61 On - Hidden Valley Off - Second 62 61 61 62 61 61 61 62 63 63 63 62 63 63 Off - Hidden Valley On - Hidden Valley 63 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 64 63 63 64 63 63 64 63 On - EB SR-91 Off - Hidden Valley 61 61 60 61 61 60 60 60 62 62 62 62 62 62 63 62 On - W B SR-91 On - EB SR-91 60 58 60 61 59 60 61 61 62 62 62 62 62 62 63 62 Off - SR-91 On - W B SR-91 63 61 63 63 62 62 62 62 63 63 63 63 63 63 64 63 On - W B Magnolia Off - SR-91 60 60 59 60 59 57 57 58 59 61 57 57 58 59 57 59 On - EB Magnolia On - WB Magnolia 59 59 58 59 58 57 57 58 60 60 59 58 59 59 59 59 Off - Magnolia On - EB Magnolia 59 60 60 61 59 59 59 60 60 61 60 60 60 60 61 59 On - Ontario Off - Magnolia 58 59 58 59 58 57 58 59 60 60 59 59 60 58 60 59 Off - Ontario On - Ontario 63 62 62 63 62 62 62 62 62 63 62 63 62 62 63 62 On - El Cerrito Off - Ontario 55 54 51 55 45 45 48 47 55 57 53 56 54 57 56 58 Off - El Cerrito On - El Cerrito 57 57 54 58 38 28 46 44 58 58 57 57 56 59 59 59 On - Cajalco Off - El Cerrito 55 56 54 56 55 56 57 57 57 59 55 57 57 59 58 58 Off - Cajalco On - Cajalco 51 58 56 32 47 61 60 59 60 62 61 61 60 61 61 62 On - Dos Lagos Off - Cajalco 59 59 59 58 60 61 60 61 61 60 61 60 59 60 60 60 Table 5-19: Northbound 1-15- Actual vs. Model Volume - AM Peak Period NB, Limonite to 6th St Hour Demand Count Model Difference from Count %Difference from Count 6 to 7 AM 5,158 5,154 4,881 -273 -5% 7 to 8 AM 5,115 4,779 4,597 -182 -4% 8 to 9 AM 4,334 4,506 5,109 603 13% 9 to 10 AM 4,302 4,155 4,410 255 6% Total 18,909 18,594 18,997 403 2% NB, s/o Caja co Hour Demand Count Model Difference from Count %Difference from Count 6 to 7 AM 5,096 5,096 5,080 -16 0% 7 to 8 AM 4,268 4,268 4,342 74 2% 8 to 9 AM 4,432 4,432 4,459 27 1 % 9 to 10 AM 4,441 4,441 4,547 106 2% Total 18,237 18,237 18,428 191 1% Stantec 5.135 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Model Development and Calibration Table 5-20: Micro -Simulation model Southbound AM Spot Speeds From To L. o O .00 a o u, .o o . . 6 ... o o P. ut v a .n n 6 on o o n N n 0 n 6 n 0 eo N n 0 . ao O COo o o m a, ao a i 6 CO a o a � o �n 6 oo. o o a N o. o �n a 6 a a 0 o o a On-Jurupa Off - SR-60 59 58 57 60 58 59 45 54 59 61 61 59 61 61 61 61 Off - SR-60 On - EB SR-60 65 64 65 64 64 64 64 64 65 64 64 64 64 65 65 65 On - EB SR-60 On - WB SR-60 63 63 63 63 58 56 58 59 62 62 60 61 63 63 63 64 On - WB SR-60 Off - Cantu-Galleano Ranch 64 63 63 63 62 61 62 62 63 63 63 63 63 64 64 64 Off - Cantu-Galleano Ranch On - WB Cantu-Galleano Ranch 62 62 62 62 55 59 58 59 62 61 60 60 62 63 63 63 On - WB Cantu- Galleano Ranch On - EB Cantu-Galleano Ranch 62 63 63 63 58 60 60 61 62 62 61 62 62 64 64 64 On - EB Cantu- Galleano Ranch Off - Limonite 62 61 62 61 57 58 59 58 60 61 60 60 61 63 62 62 Off - Limonite On - Limonite 62 64 63 62 62 61 61 60 61 62 62 62 62 63 63 64 On - Limonite Off - Sixth 62 63 62 62 61 60 60 59 61 61 61 61 62 62 63 63 Off - Sixth On - Sixth 62 63 62 62 62 60 61 60 62 62 63 62 61 62 64 63 On - Sixth Off - Second 60 61 60 59 58 56 56 56 55 59 59 58 59 61 61 61 Off - Second On - Second 62 62 62 62 62 60 60 61 61 62 63 62 62 62 62 63 On - Second Off- Hidden Valley 64 64 63 63 63 62 62 62 63 63 64 63 63 64 64 64 Off - Hidden Valley On - Hidden Valley 64 64 64 64 64 63 63 63 64 64 64 64 64 63 65 64 On - Hidden Valley Off - WB SR-91 64 64 64 63 62 62 60 60 60 63 64 63 63 62 63 63 Off - WB SR-91 Off - EB SR-91 62 62 62 62 60 61 59 61 60 61 63 61 61 63 62 61 Off - EB SR-91 On - EB SR-91 64 64 64 64 64 65 64 64 65 64 65 64 64 64 65 64 On - EB SR-91 On - WB SR-91 63 62 63 63 64 64 64 63 63 63 64 63 63 62 63 63 On - WB SR-91 Off - Magnolia 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 62 62 63 63 62 62 62 62 62 Off - Magnolia On - Magnolia 65 64 64 65 64 64 65 64 65 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 On - Magnolia Off - Ontario 64 64 65 65 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 63 64 64 64 Off - Ontario On - Ontario 65 64 65 65 64 63 65 64 64 65 64 64 64 63 64 64 On - Ontario Off - El Cerrito 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 63 64 63 64 63 62 63 63 Off - El Cerrito On - El Cerrito 64 64 64 64 64 63 64 64 63 64 63 63 62 63 63 63 On - El Cerrito Off - Cajalco 63 63 63 64 63 63 62 62 63 63 62 62 61 62 63 62 Off - Cajalco On - Cajalco 63 64 64 64 63 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 63 64 64 63 On - Cajalco Off - Dos Lagos 63 63 64 64 63 63 63 64 62 64 63 63 63 63 63 62 Table 5-21: Southbound 1-15- Actual vs. Model Volume - AM Peak Period SB, Limonite to 6th St Hour Demand Count Model Difference from Count %Difference from Count 6 to 7 AM 4,399 4,253 4,223 -30 -1% 7 to 8 AM 5,446 5,446 5,323 -123 -2% 8 to 9 AM 4,639 4,835 4,760 -75 -2% 9 to 10 AM 3,661 3,549 3,842 293 8% Total 18,145 18,083 18,148 65 0% SB, s/ Cajalco AL_ Hour Demand Count Model Difference from Count %Difference from Count 6 to 7 AM 3,067 3,030 2,990 -40 -1% 7 to 8 AM 3,452 3,436 3,385 -51 -1% 8 to 9 AM 3,359 3,393 3,213 -180 -5% 9 to 10 AM 3,225 3,353 3,439 86 3% Total 13,103 13,212 13,027 -185 -1% Stantec 5.136 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Model Development and Calibration PM Peak Period Model The PM model is able to replicate the stop and go conditions observed on southbound 1-15 south of SR 91, but predicts operations slightly better than observed in both directions north of SR 91. These improved conditions, however, are consistent with observed lower traffic counts in these sections during the PM peak period. Northbound 1-15 during the PM is generally simulated with speeds at or near free flow. This is consistent with observations of 1-15 south of SR 91. North of SR 91, observations show some delay between 2nd Street and Limonite Avenue. Speeds were observed to range from 36 to 70 mph, whereas the simulation predicts speeds of 57 to 62 mph, as shown in Table 5-22. Modeled speeds at or near free -flow are consistent with observed demand and traffic counts that are lower than observed during the AM peak period. As shown in Table 5-23, the model is able to match the observed traffic counted within a range of -1 to +7 percent between Limonite and 6th Street. Southbound 1-15 during the PM is consistently congested with queues regularly extending between SR 91 and El Cerrito Road. Travel demand is well above capacity. The simulation model is able to replicate the heavy congestion and queuing that exists on southbound 1-15 during the PM peak. Modeled speeds, shown in Table 5-24, indicate congestion beginning by 3:15 PM and continuing through the 7 PM hour, consistent with observations. Queues extend to the SR 91 overpass, also consistent with actual conditions. Modeled throughput south of Cajalco Road is within a margin of error of -4 percent to +1 percent of traffic counts. North of SR 91, delays were observed north of Limonite Avenue, but the model operates largely without delay in this area during the PM peak. Input volumes just under 5,100 vehicles to 5,400 vehicles per hour from 3 to 6 PM are slightly lower than levels needed to trigger congestion. Demand and traffic counts are matched within a margin of error of -3 to -1 percent. ® Stantec 5.137 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Model Development and Calibration Table 5-22: Micro -Simulation model Northbound PM Spot Speeds From TO a of M O O .." a O 2 L. M a N M O el M a pOp Q of el. el a of Q O O Q O. toy Q h Q O. QN Q O elO el01 a O 2 N a of of O a O N Y1 N G. toO N O r0 N O. d N el N a vt O .G a O 2 . u a of d O Ml C. O O^ YI Q ..G On - EB SR-60 Off-Jurupa 59 57 55 56 57 58 59 59 59 58 60 58 59 60 61 61 On - WB SR-60 On - EB SR-60 63 62 63 62 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 64 64 64 Off - WB SR-60 On - WB SR-60 62 61 63 61 62 62 62 62 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 64 Off - EB SR-60 Off - WB SR-60 54 52 53 50 56 52 55 56 57 54 57 56 58 59 55 59 On - Cantu- Galleano Ranch Off -EBSR-60 61 61 62 61 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 63 63 63 Off - Cantu- Galleano Ranch On - Cantu- Galleano Ranch 60 60 59 59 59 59 61 60 59 60 60 60 61 61 62 61 On - Limonite Off - Cantu - Galleano Ranch 60 59 60 57 60 60 60 60 60 59 61 59 61 61 61 62 Off - Limonite On - Limonite 62 62 62 61 61 63 62 61 61 61 62 62 62 62 64 63 On - Sixth Off - Limonite 59 58 58 58 58 59 59 59 59 57 59 58 59 60 61 61 Off - Sixth On - Sixth 62 61 61 60 60 62 61 62 61 62 61 61 61 62 62 63 On - Second Off - Sixth 59 59 59 58 59 59 60 58 58 59 60 59 62 61 61 62 Off -Second On - Second 61 61 60 61 59 61 60 60 58 60 61 61 62 62 61 63 On - Hidden Valley Off - Second 62 63 62 63 62 62 63 63 62 63 63 63 63 64 63 64 Off - Hidden Valley On - Hidden Valley 63 64 63 63 64 64 63 63 63 63 64 63 64 64 64 64 On - EB SR-91 Off - Hidden Valley 62 63 62 62 62 63 63 62 62 63 63 63 63 64 62 63 On - WB SR-91 On - EB SR-91 62 62 62 63 62 63 63 62 62 62 62 63 62 63 63 64 Off - SR-91 On - WB SR-91 63 64 63 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 63 64 63 64 64 64 On - WB Magnolia Off -SR-91 55 55 54 53 55 54 55 57 57 58 58 57 59 61 60 61 On - EB Magnolia On - WB Magnolia 58 56 58 59 58 58 58 59 59 59 59 56 60 62 61 61 Off - Magnolia On - EB Magnolia 60 61 59 62 61 60 61 61 61 61 61 61 62 63 62 62 On - Ontario Off - Magnolia 58 58 60 59 61 60 61 60 60 61 60 61 62 62 62 62 Off - Ontario On - Ontario 62 63 63 63 62 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 On - El Cerrito Off - Ontario 58 59 59 60 58 59 61 60 60 60 60 59 61 61 61 61 Off - El Cerrito On - El Cerrito 59 59 60 60 58 60 60 60 60 61 61 60 61 62 62 61 On - Cajalco Off - El Cerrito 59 60 59 60 58 59 59 60 59 60 61 59 61 62 61 61 Off - Cajalco On - Cajalco 61 62 62 63 61 62 61 62 63 63 62 62 63 63 63 63 On - Dos Lagos Off - Cajalco 60 60 61 62 61 61 60 61 62 61 61 61 63 63 62 62 Table 5-23: Northbound 1-15- Actual vs. Model Volume - PM Peak Period NB, Limonite to 6th St Hour Demand Count Model Difference from Count % Difference from Count 3 to 4 PM 4,813 4,585 4,885 300 7% 4 to 5 PM 4,750 4,746 4,828 82 2% 5 to 6 PM 4,918 4,950 4,717 -233 -5% 6 to 7 PM 3,744 3,934 3,903 -31 -1% Total 18,225 18,215 18,333 118 1% NB, s/o Cajalco Hour Demand Count Model Difference from Count % Difference from Count 3 to 4 PM 4,207 4,207 4,370 163 4% 4 to 5 PM 4,001 4,001 4,202 201 5% 5 to 6 PM 3,826 3,826 4,004 178 5% 6 to 7 PM 3,088 3,088 3,242 154 5% Total 15,122 15,122 15,818 696 5% Stantec 5.138 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Model Development and Calibration Table 5-24: Micro -Simulation model Southbound PM Spot Speeds From To o. h M a O M h t+I o. h M O 2 a O V U1 A a h C O Q a O V In a a h 4 O O a O 2 ul Q a h N O h n O h h N a N N O 2 a O 2 V1 2 a h ; O 2 a O d h .7) a N 3 O .".) n O ^O h 3 On-Jurupa Off-SR-60 60 60 59 61 58 59 55 58 59 60 60 59 61 61 61 60 Off - SR-60 On - EB SR-60 64 64 64 64 63 64 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 65 64 64 On - EB SR-60 On - WB SR-60 59 57 55 59 56 55 57 56 57 57 53 57 58 59 58 59 On - WB SR-60 Off - Cantu - Galleano Ranch 63 61 62 62 61 62 61 62 62 62 61 61 62 63 63 63 Off - Cantu- Galleano Ranch On - WB Cantu- Galleano Ranch 61 59 60 58 59 59 57 60 58 60 57 58 60 62 62 62 On - WB Cantu- Galleano Ranch On - EB Cantu- Galleano Ranch 61 60 62 61 60 61 60 61 61 61 60 61 61 63 63 63 On - EB Cantu- Galleano Ranch Off - Limonite 59 59 59 59 58 58 58 59 59 58 57 57 60 61 61 62 Off - Limonite On - Limonite 62 61 62 62 62 61 62 61 62 61 61 61 62 63 63 63 On - Limonite Off - Sixth 58 58 57 59 59 58 58 58 59 59 54 57 61 62 62 62 Off - Sixth On - Sixth 61 62 61 62 61 62 61 61 62 60 60 62 61 62 63 63 On - Sixth Off - Second 58 58 57 59 58 58 58 60 57 56 58 57 59 61 61 61 Off - Second On - Second 60 61 60 61 61 61 60 60 60 60 60 59 61 62 62 63 On - Second Off - Hidden Valley 63 62 62 62 62 63 63 62 63 63 63 62 63 64 64 64 Off - Hidden Valley On - Hidden Valley 63 63 62 62 62 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 62 64 64 63 On - Hidden Valley Off - WB SR-91 61 60 58 60 60 61 60 60 60 60 59 60 61 62 63 63 Off - WB SR-91 Off - EB SR-91 61 60 60 61 61 59 62 61 61 62 26 25 56 62 62 62 Off - EB SR-91 On - EB SR-91 63 63 62 63 63 63 63 63 63 56 15 16 36 64 65 65 On - EB SR-91 On - WB SR-91 63 63 62 62 63 62 62 63 63 15 14 37 64 64 On - WB SR-91 Off - Magnolia 62 62 61 62 62 62 62 61 4 14 16 60 63 Off - Magnolia On - Magnolia 63 63 63 63 64 63 64 41 3 1-15 33 64 On - Magnolia Off - Ontario 62 61 61 62 38 15 6 1 Off -Ontario On -Ontario 63 63 53 21 25 52 14 23 28 55 14 21 25 54 41— 22 58 19 22 56 12 19 22 54 13 20 24 52 Mii. 22 52 20 55 13 20 23 54 1 _. 25 54 _ ._. 26 52 25 56 24 54 On - Ontario Off - El Cerrito 58 36 28 53 Off - El Cerrito On - El Cerrito On - El Cerrito Off - Cajalco 56 55 Off - Cajalco On - Cajalco 61 60 58 60 61 62 60 61 61 60 61 60 61 61 62 61 On - Cajalco Off - Dos Lagos 58 60 57 58 59 59 58 59 59 59 59 59 59 59 60 61 Table 5-25: Southbound 1-15- Actual vs. Model Volume - PM Peak Period SB, Limonite to 6th St Hour Demand Count Model Difference from Count %Difference from Count 3 to 4 PM 5,176 5,140 5,079 -61 -1 % 4 to 5 PM 5,155 5,212 5,069 -143 -3% 5 to 6 PM 5,355 5,352 5,320 -32 -1 % 6 to 7 PM 4,195 4,296 4,185 -1 1 1 -3% Total 19,881 20,000 19,653 -347 -2% SB, s/o Cajalco = i a Hour Demand Count Model Difference from Count %Difference from Count 3 to 4 PM 6,130 5,397 5,467 70 1 % 4 to 5 PM 6,264 5,503 5,402 -101 -2% 5 to 6 PM 6,340 5,762 5,546 -216 -4% 6 to 7 PM 4,355 5,405 5,209 -196 -4% Total 23,090 22,067 21,624 -443 -2% Stantec 5.139 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast 6.0 TRAFFIC AND REVENUE FORECAST 6.1 FORECAST METHODOLOGY The 1-15 Express Lanes Project (1-15 ELP) annual traffic and revenue was forecast based on the travel demand model's forecast of weekday traffic, post processed, and then annualized based on factors from Stantec's market share model. In all cases, "revenue" is defined as gross potential revenue, and does not include any deduction for non -toll payment due to violators. The 2025 and 2035 model years were the principal years modeled. Intermediate scenarios were developed that tested the impact of adding the 1-15 South Express Lanes south of Cajalco Road and widening area arterials. These intermediate analyses quantified the impact of these network changes on traffic and revenue in 2027, 2030, and 2035 and to establish underlying growth rates for traffic and revenue between 2025 and 2035. Peak hour traffic conditions were simulated using the micro -simulation model to ensure that the travel demand model forecasts of weekday traffic were operationally feasible. This chapter discusses the principal assumptions underlying the traffic and revenue forecast, presents traffic forecasts at a regional level, and detailed forecasts of 1-15 corridor traffic. 6.2 FORECAST ASSUMPTIONS 6.2.1 1-15 Express Lanes Configuration The 1-15 ELP was modeled as generally a two-lane per direction limited access facility in the median of the 1-15 freeway. The 1-15 ELP is approximately 14.3 miles long in the northbound direction and 14.7 miles in the southbound direction. While the 1-15 ELP generally has two -lanes per direction, three sections of the 1-15 ELP would be one -lane per direction. These single lane sections are located at the southern end of the corridor, the northern end of the corridor, and in the middle in the vicinity of the SR 91 / 1-15 interchange between Hidden Valley Parkway and the Magnolia Avenue -Ontario Avenue mixing area. Upon opening, the 1-15 ELP would permit access at nine locations: 9) Northern Terminus south of SR 60 - NB egress to GP lanes and SB Ingress from GP Lanes 10) Between Limonite Avenue and 6th Street - Both ingress and egress, to and from Limonite Avenue to the north and 6th Street to the south. 1 1) Between 6th Street and 2nd Street - Both ingress and egress, to and from 6th Street to the north and 2nd Street to the south. 12) Between Hidden Valley Parkway and SR 91 - SB egress and NB ingress only, to and from SR 91 and Magnolia Avenue to the south. 13) (by 2035) SR 91 Express Direct Connector to / from 1-15 Express Lanes, north of SR 91 - Direct connection from SB 1-15 ELP to WB SR 91 EL and from EB SR 91 EL to NB 1-15 ELP. This is a future connection assumed to be built in 2035. Stantec 6.140 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast 14) SR 91 Express Direct Connector to/ from 1-15 Express Lanes south of SR 91 - NB Egress and SB Ingress to / from the SR 91 Express Lanes. 15) Between Magnolia Avenue and Ontario Avenue - Both ingress and egress, to and from Magnolia Avenue to the north and Ontario Avenue to the south. 16) Between El Cerrito Road and Cajalco Road - SB egress to Cajalco Road and NB ingress from Cajalco Road. 17) Southern Terminus at Cajalco Road - SB egress to GP lanes south of Cajalco Road and NB ingress from GP lanes south of Cajalco Road. Figure 6-1 illustrates the 1-15 ELP access points and number of lanes. ® Stantec 6.141 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast Table 6-1 shows the 1-15 ELP's number of lanes by segment, and the segment length. Figure 6-1: 1-15 Express Lanes Access Points and Number of Lanes Inpres Only A Eget,: On�Y AN,ing,ess and ® Stantec Cantu -Galleon° Ranch Rd Limonite Ave Second Str z Hidden Valley per, E Ontario Ave Northern Terminus El Cerrito Rd Cajolcc Rd Dos Lagos Dr Southern Terminus 6.142 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast Table 6-1: Number of Lanes and Segment Distance Southbound EL From To # Lanes Miles Northern Terminus Cantu Galleano Ranch Rd 1 1.0 Cantu Galleano Ranch Rd s/o Limonite 2 3.0 s/o Limonite s/o 6th St 2 3.0 s/o 6th St Hidden Valley Pkwy 2 2.1 Hidden Valley Pkwy s/o Magnolia 1 2.8 s/o Magnolia El Cerrito Rd 2 1.8 El Cerrito Rd Cajalco Rd 1 1.0 SB Total - 14.7 Northbound EL From To # Lanes Miles Cantu Galleano Ranch Rd Northern Terminus 1 0.7 s/o Limonite Cantu Galleano Ranch Rd 2 2.5 s/o 6th St s/o Limonite 2 2.7 Hidden Valley Pkwy s/o 6th St 2 2.1 s/o Magnolia Hidden Valley Pkwy 1 3.1 El Cerrito Rd s/o Magnolia 2 1.9 Southern Terminus El Cerrito Rd 1 1.4 NB Total - 14.3 The 1-15 Express Lanes directly connect with the Riverside County SR 91 Express Lanes Extension with the two projects overlapping for a length of approximately 1.25 miles. The 1-15 Express Lanes traffic and revenue forecast excludes transactions and revenue for vehicles on the segment starting or ending south of Magnolia Avenue and going to or from the SR 91 Express Lanes to the west. Any revenue generated from that segment of roadway is considered to be attributable to the SR 91 Express Lanes project and not the 1-15 Express Lanes. The 1-15 Express Lanes do generate revenue from vehicles that travel on the single -lane section between the access point south of Magnolia and the access point at Hidden Valley Parkway. In 2035, a ramp connecting the SR 91 Express Lanes to the west with the 1-15 Express Lanes north of SR 91 is expected to be constructed. While the 1-15 ELP traffic and revenue forecast does not assume any surcharge from the 1-15 North Direct Connector (NDC), the forecast does include revenue from those vehicles staying in the 1-15 ELP north of the Hidden Valley Parkway access point. 6.2.2 Kegional NerworK Improvemems The 1-15 ELP T&R forecast assumes regional roadway improvements detailed in SCAG's LRTP. These improvements include, but are not limited to, the completion of the SR 91 Express Lanes in Riverside County, express lanes in San Bernardino County, an extension of the 1-15 ELP to the south in Riverside County, the widening of various local arterials, a change in regional HOV policy, the addition of the Schleisman Road interchange at 1-15, and the addition of the 1-15 ELP / SR 91 Express Lanes north direct connector. Stantec 6.143 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast SR 91 Express Lanes Extension in Riverside County, Initial and Ultimate Projects The 1-15 ELP T&R forecast assumes the completion of the Initial Phase of the RCTC SR 91 Express Lanes by 2017, and the Ultimate CIP by 2035. The Initial Phase is currently under construction and when completed would run along the median of SR 91, extending from the Riverside -Orange County Line to the west and the 1-15 interchange to the east. They would directly connect with the 1-15 Express Lanes south of SR 91. The RCTC SR 91 EL project would build a single lane section which would extend from the SR 91 / 1-15 interchange to the Magnolia -Ontario Avenue mixing area further south. This single lane would be built by the RCTC SR 91 Express Lanes (EL) project. Vehicles that use only the section of the 1-15 ELP built by the SR 91 would not generate revenue for the 1-15 ELP. For example, if a vehicle enters the northbound 1-15 ELP from the Magnolia -Ontario mixing area and exits to the westbound RCTC SR 91 Express Lanes, no revenue would be generated for the 1-15 ELP project. By 2035, the SR 91 Express Lanes in Riverside County would be connected with the 1-15 ELP north of SR 91 via a tolled direct connector, i.e., the "1-15 North DC". This connector would allow vehicles traveling to and from the SR 91 Express Lanes to the west to directly connect with the 1-15 Express Lanes north of SR 91 and egress at the 2nd Street-6th Street mixing area. The 1-15 ELP would not generate any revenue from the north DC itself, but would include revenue from those vehicles using the dual lane section between Hidden Valley Parkway and the 2nd Street-6th Street mixing area. This connector would be constructed as part of the SR 91 Express Lanes "Ultimate CIP", which would further extend the 91 Express Lanes to the east past 1-15 to approximately McKinley Street. Express Lanes in San Bernardino County Express Lanes are assumed open for operation along 1-10 and 1-15 in San Bernardino County by 2024, four years after the 1-15 ELP are open. The 1-15 San Bernardino Express Lanes would serve as an extension of the RCTC 1-15 ELP. 1-10 Express Lanes would span 40 miles and are located approximately 5 miles north of the I-15 ELP northern terminus. 1-15 South Express Lanes in Riverside County By 2027, the RCTC is expected to construct 14 miles of additional express lanes along 1-15 starting from the 1-15 ELP southern terminus, extending to SR 74. ® Stantec 6.144 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast Arterial Widenings in Riverside County Various arterials in Riverside County would be widened by 2025, 2030, and 2035. These widenings would include Temescal Canyon Road, located south of El Cerrito Road, and Archibald Street, Euclid Street, SR 71, and Hamner Avenue north of SR 91. Carpool Policy Change By 2035, the regional carpool policy is assumed to change from allowing carpools with 2 or more occupants to use HOV lanes to requiring 3 or more occupants. This policy would impact all Southern California HOV facilities and would be a regional policy change. The change is in reaction to expectations for continued operations degradation on HOV-2+ carpool lanes in Southern California. Schleisman Road Interchange with 1-15 By 2035, a new interchange along 1-15 would be constructed at Schleisman Road, which is located between the existing Limonite Avenue and 6th Street interchanges. The interchange would allow access to and from 1-15 to the north and south. 6.2.3 Toll Policy and Pricing 1-15 Express Lanes Toll Policy The 1-15 Express Lanes are modeled assuming tolls are charged all day (24 hours, 7 days a week) via dynamic pricing. The T&R forecast assumes distance- and congestion -based tolling. Longer trips will be charged more than shorter trips and tolls increase and decrease as I-15 Express Lanes demand increases and decreases. Vehicles with three or more occupants are permitted to use the 1-15 Express Lanes at a 50 percent discount. While the project would also discount tolls for zero emission vehicles that have a California Clean Pass decal ("white sticker") and a switchable transponder by 50 percent, these vehicles are assumed to account for a negligible share of potential traffic and therefore are not separately modeled. Express buses, police, and emergency vehicles will be permitted to use the Express Lanes free of charge, but these vehicles are also not separately modeled because they are a minimal share of traffic. The following is a list of tolling assumptions: 1) Tolls are set to maintain free -flow on the express lanes which will exceed the federal minimum of 45 mph. 2) Tolls based on segment with variable pricing based on level of congestion in the corridor, time of the day, and also indexed to inflation. 3) Variable pricing toll policy in accordance with express lane demand ranges presented in Table 6-2. 4) Same toll structure for all vehicles with the exception of HOV-3+ vehicles. 5) Transponder required for all vehicles. License plate based video tolling is not an option. 6) HOV-3+ vehicles with switchable transponders charged 50 percent of the full toll amount. Cli Stantec 6.145 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast 7) Discount for zero emission vehicles (ZEV) with a switchable transponder and Clean Pass decal ("white sticker"). 8) No toll discount for low emission vehicles (LEV), disabled plates, disabled veteran plates, or motorcycles. 9) Express buses, police, and emergency vehicles use the express lanes for free. For T&R modeling purposes, the 1-15 Express Lanes prices are set using a tiered pricing structure tied to demand and distance traveled. As demand rises, tolls also increase. Table 6-2 shows how tolls are assumed to increase as express lane demand increases. Toll to traffic relationships were developed based on observations of Orange County SR 91 Express Lanes traffic and tolls. If express lane demand in a two-lane section is projected to be less than 500 vehicles per hour, tolls would be set at 15 cents per mile. If projected demand rises to between 1500 and 2000 vehicles per hour, tolls would be set at 42.5 cents per mile. In single lane sections, tolls would increase at lower volume thresholds, as shown. To maintain free -flow speeds in the express lanes, tolls are also set such that express traffic does not exceed threshold volumes of 3,200 vehicles per hour in two-lane sections and 1,500 vehicles per hour in single -lane sections. If express traffic demand rises above the threshold volumes, tolls would be increased to levels which push express traffic volume below the threshold levels. The assumed pricing policy evaluates express lane traffic on an hour by hour basis, but in practice, the 1-15 ELP will permit tolls to change in smaller time intervals. Table 6-2: 1-15 Express Lanes Pricing Policy Express Traffic Demand Range (vph) if Two Express Lanes Express Traffic Demand Range (vph) if One Express Lane Toll Per Mile (2015 $'s) Less than 500 Less than 250 $0.150 500 1000 250 500 $0.225 1000 1500 500 750 $0.325 1500 2000 750 1000 $0.425 2000 2250 1000 1100 $0.500 2250 2500 1100 1175 $0.550 2500 2750 1175 1250 $0.600 2750 3000 1250 1325 $0.675 3000 3200 1325 1500 $0.750 3200 and above 1500 and above Increase tolls until traffic falls below volume threshold The toll rates per mile assumed for the 1-15 ELP are comparable to rates charged on the OCTA's 91 Express Lanes. As shown in Figure 6-2, the lowest toll charged on the existing lanes is $1.50 or 15 cents per mile of travel. During the AM peak period, tolls in the more heavily traveled westbound direction are as high as $5.20, or 52 cents per mile. Tolls are at their highest levels on Cli Stantec 6.146 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast the eastbound 91 Express Lanes during the PM peak period, where they range from $5.05 (50.5 cents per mile) on Monday from 3 to 4 PM to as high as $10.15 ($1.015 cents per mile) on Friday from 3 to 4 PM. Figure 6-2: OCTA SR 91 Express Lanes Toll Schedule -July 1, 2015 (FY 2016) 1:00 am 2a0R am 300 am 4:00 am slovarrr 6.00 am 700 am 0-00 am 900am UteiQ am 1 "00 gm NOW 1:00pm 2:00pen 3100pm 4.'00 purr 5-00 pm 6:00 pen 7ADpm 6'00pm .9-per 20:00,om 11.-0Opm Sun To!! Schedule Eastbound Elloch wrJuly 1, K 15 9p-5`x1n Riverelae Co.tilm f<1 Ttt W T11 F Sat 11.50 31.50 $250 $1-50 51.58 SLR $1.56 $1.58 $1.50 Sfie $1.50 11.58 11_50 52.38 31.50 $2311 $1.85 52.36 SIBS 52.36 520 $? U SZE $7 36 $3.45 1236 $3.45 $3.311 $1_d5 $AT8 $2.55 55.0 5235 $4.85 $2.35 $4.0 Z35 55.05 $2.95 $3.55 12.95 $2.38 12,40 Um 31.50 .5 t.50 51.50 $1.53 51.50 Si.50 $J 58 31.50 5158 1150 32.33 52.311 32.30 $2,18 1236 3230 Via S138 $4, 70 $310 $6.15 $5.55 5361 $3-55 52.36 $238 St50 $1.50 $1.50 $1.50 51.50 $1.50 $250 51.58 $250 51.50 $1.50 $1.50 31.50 $1_50 $2.30 52.30 52.30 $2.3.8 $2.38 $2.38 $2.30 37.30 1.230 52.30 52.38 52.38 52.30 5230 13.30 $3.55 54.70 $4.55 54.0 $4.75 $7.40 $9.80 51F 98 59.05 13.80 54.40 13,55 55_ 15 5230 5118 $2.30 Sz 30 S1.50 51.50 $1.50 31.50 51.511 $1.53 $1_50 51.33 51.58 51.50 57.30 52,311 5238 52-30 52_30 $2.30 $2, 55 35.53 $3,70 ps 13 $1.50 51.50 $1.50 31.50 rr.sa $1.50 51.58 $1.58 12.38 $.2,30 $1.95 $2, 95 $3.45 53.45 $3.45 $3.45 59.95 $3.45 $5.40 $3.45 55.35 $2, 95 $5.65 !AN $5,15 0.38 1130 $238 5138 51.50 51.58 $1.50 Exare-a s 11-snea MIdnlght 100 am 2:00 am 3:00 am 4a-00 am 5-00 am 6.100 aaa 7:00 am 6:00am kW am MOO am 11:00 am Moan 1:00 pin 2-00 pm 00pm 4:00pem 5-00pm 8:00pm 7:00 pm 4200pm 9:00pm ro-00 pm 11.00pm Tell Schedule Westbound EttlGIIYY Ally 1, 2916 RIYNskir Co. Line la S&G6 Sun 1d 7u W T1a F Sal $1.51! $1.58 31.58 0.5s $1,58 $1,58 $1.59 51.58 $1, 95 $r.9s Si.95 52.95 $1, 95 $3.35 P.35 $3,35 53.50 $3.50 5358 $2.95 $2, 95 $1.95 f 1_54 51.58 51.50 51.50 SI.59 S 1_50 52,50 54.50 $4. 70 5520 34_ 10 53.20 $2.39 52.30 $2,20 $2_30 52.30 $230 5230 $2_30 $1.39 $1.30 sue. 51_50 �r.5a $ I.50 f 1.58 51.511 $1.58 $1.53 54.56 $4, TO 53.29 $3.20 $1.34 $1.30 $2.39 52_30 $2.38 32.19 52.30 52_311 52.39 $1_58 $1.53 $r.su $1.58 51.50 $1.58 $1,50 $1.59 $1.50 $1.56 $1,50 5F-50 51,58 $2.80 5286 Km 54.50 54.78 $4. ]11 no $5.20 54,20 14_ 73 $3.70 5178 $2.30 3F.33 5238 12,30 $2-30 $730 52,30 5230 52.30 5730 52117 5230 52.30 $2.33 12_30 $2.38 $2_30 am 1-s6 $1,so pm 51,50 $1.58 51.38 51.58 $1.50 51.58 $1.50 51.50 31.58 5r_50 P.54 $2.B0 $4.2� 54,58 S,i05 54,58 $2 N $Z36 30 5?-30 52 30 36 12,95 S2.95 32.95 $345 f2.39 $1.59 11.58 S1.50 31.50 $1.56 $1.56 $1,50 Pie $I,SQ Sr, 58 $1.50 ANS 52.30 $2.95 $2.55 S3.3,i $3.35 $3,35 $3.35 $3.35 $3.50 $3.50 $2.95 $2, 36 $1,59 31.58 31,56 SF 58 Source: Orange County Transportation Authority, http://91expresslanes.com/schedules.asp Regional Toll Roads The modeled region incorporates numerous toll facilities, including the existing OCTA SR 91 Express Lanes and the Transportation Corridor Agencies (TCA) Toll Roads. Forecasts assume the presence of several new managed lane facilities, including the San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG) 1-10 and 1-15 Express Lanes, the Riverside County Transportation Commission's (RCTC) SR 91 Express Lanes Extension, and the RCTC 1-15 South Express Lanes Extension. Future tolls assumed for these facilities were developed from various sources, including traffic and revenue studies completed by Stantec for the OCTA, the TCA, and RCTC, and publicly available T&R studies of the proposed San Bernardino 1-10 and 1-15 Express Lanes completed for SANBAG by others. Stantec 6.147 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast 6.3 REGIONAL TRAFFIC FORECASTS 1-15 ELP traffic and revenue forecasts are generated based a travel demand model that accounts for regional employment, households, and population, as well as traffic on freeways, arterials, and local roads throughout that region. A critical element of the 1-15 ELP forecast is to produce a reasonable forecast of regional traffic growth. Regional traffic, expressed as trips, is forecast to grow by 1.1 percent per year between the existing 2015 condition through 2025 and then slow to 0.8 percent between 2025 and 2035. The sub -region which focuses on the 1-15 corridor and immediately adjacent areas would grow at a rate of 1.5 percent per year between 2015 and 2025. The faster rate of growth is reflective of local socioeconomic variables including expectations for more rapid household and population growth, and is also reflective of the expectation for more capacity improvements in the sub -region including the 1-15 ELP. Table 6-3 lists all trips and home based work trips for the 2015, 2025, and 2035 model years. Table 6-3: 1-15 Corridor Regional and Sub -Region Trip Growth Trip Type 2015 2025 2035 2015-25 2025-35 Regional Trip Growth 24,340,000 27,140,000 29,320,000 1.1% 0.8% Sub -Region Trip Growth 8,210,000 9,540,000 10,290,000 1.5% 0.8% This rate of trip growth is consistent with the regional economic growth forecast shown in Table 6-4. Riverside County households and population are forecast to grow by over 2 percent per year between 2015 and 2025 and by over 1.6 percent per year between 2025 and 2035. The neighboring Orange and San Bernardino County growth rates are slower, as is the entire six county region's growth (including Los Angeles, Imperial, and Ventura). These slower rates of growth temper the total trip growth, resulting in the trip growth rates shown in Table 6-3. Table 6-4: Regional Economic Growth by County Orange County 2015 2025 2035 2015-25 CAGR% 2025-35 CAGR% Employment 1,550,000 1,740,000 1,890,000 1.2% 0.8% Households 1,040,000 1,160,000 1,250,000 1.1% 0.8% Population 3,200,000 3,570,000 3,760,000 1.1% 0.5% Riverside County 2015 2025 2035 2015-25 CAGR% 2025-35 CAGR% Employment 670,000 780,000 870,000 1.5% 1.1% Households 740,000 930,000 1,100,000 2.3% 1.7% Population 2,340,000 2,840,000 3,320,000 2.0% 1.6% San Bernardino 2015 2025 2035 2015-25 CAGR% 2025-35 CAGR% Employment 680,000 750,000 800,000 1.0% 0.6% Households 640,000 760,000 860,000 1.7% 1.2% Population 2,100,000 2,440,000 2,760,000 1.5% 1.2% Region 2015 2025 2035 2015-25 CAGR% 2025-35 CAGR% Employment 7,620,000 8,490,000 9,130,000 1.1% 0.7% Households 6,080,000 6,830,000 7,410,000 1.2% 0.8% Population 18,690,000 20,720,000 22,360,000 1.0% 0.8% ® Stantec 6.148 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast ,.3.1 Screenline Traffic Growth North -south screenline traffic is expected to grow at reasonable rates between 2015 and 2025 and 2025 to 2035. North -south screenline traffic has the most direct impact on 1-15 ELP traffic. Between 2015 and 2025, traffic crossing the four north -south screenlines would grow at a rate ranging from 1.3 percent per year to 2.4 percent per year. The presence of new capacity in the form of express lanes on 1-15, both the 1-15 ELP project in Riverside County as well as the 1-15 Express Lanes in San Bernardino County, support continued traffic growth in this congested corridor. By 2035, growth would be somewhat slower than in the prior 10 years. Growth would range from 0.6 percent per year (south of SR 91) to 1.6 percent per year (north of SR 60). Figure 6-3: Weekday Traffic - North -South Screenlines 900,000 800,000 700,000 m 600,000 0 u 500,000 a 400,000 -o Y iD 300,000 - 3 200,000 - 100,000 - North of SR 60 I South of SR 60 North of SR 91 NB & SB Volume • CAGR % (2015 to 25, 2025 to 35) South of SR 91 - 9.0% 8.0% 7.0% 6.0% 5.0% 4.0% 3.0% 2.0% - 1.0% 0.0% 6.3.2 '-15 Global Traffic Growth The existing 1-15 corridor operates at or above capacity in many sections yet traffic demand is expected to continue growing as households, population, and employment continue growing. Without additional capacity, additional traffic demand would result in continued degrading of traffic conditions. Figure 6-4 and Figure 6-5 demonstrate how existing 2015, forecasted global traffic (total of GP and Express) for 2025, and forecasted global traffic for 2035 compare against current capacity on a daily basis. By 2025, the 1-15 ELP corridor's global demand is expected to grow by over 20,000 vehicles per day per direction south of SR 91; exceeding the level that can be adequately serviced by the existing GP lanes. If traffic continued to grow without new Stantec 6.149 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast capacity, the corridor would become increasingly congested with the most intense delays experienced on the 1-15 northbound in the morning and southbound in the evening. The addition of Express Lanes in 2020 provides capacity for traffic to continue growing. Global traffic growth on 1-15 is expected to be somewhat higher than screenline traffic growth. Global traffic is expected to grow at a rate of 1.5 percent per year to as high as 3.0 percent per year. The addition of new capacity in the form of Express Lanes in the 1-15 corridor would divert traffic from local parallel routes and freeways into the corridor. Between 2025 and 2035, traffic growth would slow to a rate of approximately 0.2 percent per year to as high as 1.9 percent per year. The additional capacity created by the construction of the 1-15 Express Lanes explains why growth of 1-15 traffic is higher than screenline growth between 2015 and 2025 and also explains why growth slows between 2025 and 2035. Cli Stantec 6.150 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast Figure 6-4: 1-15 Northbound Global Traffic �2015 Model - GP Cap 150,000 120,000 - U - 90,000 - v v ✓ 60,000 - 3 30,000 - 0 • O �i 2025 Growth u 2035 Growth • 2015-25 Growth (CAGR) o 2025-35 Growth (CAGR) • Sabo oe o�<\° GO��J o• �°G oS\ \� SG �� 5� S` sc` bar SG • O • O • O • O O • O O • d (§, 4 ,4 �r 0\°A \ q� e coo AO \oo b �ry� �� ,c3 O�- \G° Gaya �aS J0�° da° O� �� o o ' °s •`aa°c qt\' 0��0 �G G°�a°S�a 5.0% 4.0% Growth Rate (CAGR) Figure 6-5: 1-15 Southbound Global Traffic Weekday Traffic 2015 Model - GP Cap 150,000 120,000 - 90,000 - 60,000 - 30,000 - O 2025 Growth o 2035 Growth • 2015-25 Growth (CAGR) 0 2025-35 Growth (CAGR) O o�\` •\° o� � a4 A q� ��° \o° co, b G �.(k-so 6(< °ASS ° OK' �G° FasoGo Sao S� K�� 5° 5� b=r aa° �0° q,\� 0��0 �� \o o ° 0- 5.0% 4.0% - 3.0% - 2.0% - 1.0% 0.0% Growth Rate (CAGR) Stantec 6.151 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast 6.4 1-15 EXPRESS LANES FORECAST L " ' Annual Traffic and Revenue Forecast The 1-15 ELP is forecast to generate $9.58 million (2015 $'s) during its first 12 months of operations (fiscal year 2021 starting July 1, 2020). The forecast shown in Table 6-5 assumes the facility is ramping up over a two-year period and therefore experiences rapid traffic, toll, and revenue growth. By the third year, ramp -up is expected to be complete and the I-15 ELP would generate $20.45 million (2015 $'s). The underlying rate of toll traffic growth between the opening year and 2035 is 4 percent per year. This toll traffic growth rate is supported by 1-15 global traffic growth in the range of 1 to 2 percent per year. For express lanes in general, express lane traffic increases at a rate several times above the growth of global traffic. 1-15 ELP traffic growing at approximately 4 percent per year while global traffic grows 1 to 2 percent per year is reasonable and expected. Toll rate growth, which would rise along with increases in toll traffic, would range from 4 to 5 percent per year. Revenue growth between opening year and 2035 would range from 8 to 9 percent per year, respectively. This steady pace of growth is interrupted in years 2027, 2030, and 2035 when various regional roadway improvements are assumed to be completed. Revenue in year 2027 would increase by almost 23 percent to $34.7 million, and by 12 percent in 2028 to $39.0 million largely due to the assumed completion of the 1-15 South Express Lanes. The 1-15 South Express Lanes are expected to divert more traffic to the 1-15 corridor, would improve the operations at the southern terminus near Cajalco Road, and would increase the amount of HOV-3+ vehicles using the 1-15 ELP. The combination of these three factors makes the 1-15 ELP more attractive and increases the facility's traffic and revenue potential. By 2030, the widening of the parallel arterial Temescal Canyon Road between El Cerrito Road and Indian Truck Trail alleviates some of the 1-15 congestion and results in a 13 percent revenue drop to $36.7 million. Revenue resumes a growth trend of 9 percent per year until 2035, when a series of arterial widenings and an assumed change in regional HOV policy requiring HOV-3+ carpools rather than HOV-2+ induce a 33 percent revenue drop to $35.4 million in 2035. After 2035, the forecasts assume a slower rate of revenue growth of 1.9 percent per year until 2050. The slower rate of revenue growth is due to the assumption of a global traffic growth rate of only 0.5 percent per year between 2035 and 2050. Between 2050 and 2069, the T&R forecast assumes a nominal growth rate of 1 percent per year. Cli Stantec 6.152 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast Table 6-5: 1-15 ELP Base Case Traffic and Revenue Forecast (20155's) Fiscal Year Calendar Year Starling Full Toll Txns (excl HOV) y/y % Change Toll Txns (incl HOV) y/y % Change HOT Transactions y/y % Change HOV Only y/y % Change % HOV Revenue, y/y % 2015$'s Change Average Toll / Transaction y/y % Change 2021 2020 20,828,000 - 26,432,000 - 26,432,000 - 5,604,000 - 21% $9,580,000 - $0.36 - 2022 2021 26,271,000 26% 33,344,000 26% 33,344,000 26% 7,073,000 26% 21% $15,097,000 58% $0.45 25% 2023 2022 32,102,000 22% 40,752,000 22% 40,752,000 22% 8,650,000 22% 21% $20,446,000 35% $0.50 11% 2024 2023 33,344,000 4% 42,335,000 4% 42,335,000 4% 8,991,000 4% 21% $22,152,000 8% $0.52 4% 2025 2024 34,636,000 4% 43,981,000 4% 43,981,000 4% 9,345,000 4% 21% $24,001,000 8% $0.55 4% 2026 2025 35,977,000 4% 45,690,000 4% 45,690,000 4% 9,713,000 4% 21% $26,004,000 8% $0.57 4% 2027 2026 37,369,000 4% 47,465,000 4% 47,465,000 4% 10,096,000 4% 21% $28,175,000 8% $0.59 4% 2028 2027 38,616,000 3% 50,711,000 7% 50,711,000 7% 12,095,000 20% 24% $34,753,000 23% $0.69 15% 2029 2028 40,049,000 4% 53,121,000 5% 53,121,000 5% 13,072,000 8% 25% $39,032,000 12% $0.73 7% 2030 2029 41,600,000 4% 55,187,000 4% 55,187,000 4% 13,587,000 4% 25% $42,290,000 8% $0.77 4% 2031 2030 41,304,000 -1% 54,782,000 -1% 54,782,000 -1% 13,478,000 -1% 25% $36,745,000 -13% $0.67 -12% 2032 2031 43,110,000 4% 57, 186,000 4% 57, 186,000 4% 14,076,000 4% 25% $40,196,000 9% $0.70 5% 2033 2032 44,995,000 4% 59,696,000 4% 59,696,000 4% 14,701,000 4% 25% $43,971,000 9% $0.74 5% 2034 2033 46,961,000 4% 62,316,000 4% 62,316,000 4% 15,355,000 4% 25% $48,100,000 9% $0.77 5% 2035 2034 49,013,000 4% 65,050,000 4% 65,050,000 4% 16,037,000 4% 25% $52,618,000 9% $0.81 5% 2036 2035 45,476,000 -7% 55,763,000 -14% 55,763,000 -14% 10,287,000 -36% 18% $35,415,000 -33% $0.64 -21% 2037 2036 45,914,000 1.0% 56,304,000 1.0% 56,304,000 1.0% 10,390,000 1.0% 18% $36,074,000 1.9% $0.64 0.9% 2038 2037 46,356,000 1.0% 56,850,000 1.0% 56,850,000 1.0% 10,494,000 1.0% 18% $36,745,000 1.9% $0.65 0.9% 2039 2038 46,803,000 1.0% 57,402,000 1.0% 57,402,000 1.0% 10,599,000 1.0% 18% $37,429,000 1.9% $0.65 0.9% 2040 2039 47,254,000 1.0% 57,959,000 1.0% 57,959,000 1.0% 10,705,000 1.0% 18% $38,125,000 1.9% $0.66 0.9% 2041 2040 47,709,000 1.0% 58,521,000 1.0% 58,521,000 1.0% 10,812,000 1.0% 18% $38,835,000 1.9% $0.66 0.9% 2042 2041 48,168,000 1.0% 59,088,000 1.0% 59,088,000 1.0% 10,920,000 1.0% 18% $39,558,000 1.9% $0.67 0.9% 2043 2042 48,632,000 1.0% 59,661,000 1.0% 59,661,000 1.0% 11,029,000 1.0% 18% $40,294,000 1.9% $0.68 0.9% 2044 2043 49,100,000 1.0% 60,240,000 1.0% 60,240,000 1.0% 11,140,000 1.0% 18% $41,044,000 1.9% $0.68 0.9% 2045 2044 49,573,000 1.0% 60,824,000 1.0% 60,824,000 1.0% 11,251,000 1.0% 18% $41,808,000 1.9% $0.69 0.9% 2046 2045 50,051,000 1.0% 61,414,000 1.0% 61,414,000 1.0% 11,363,000 1.0% 19% $42,586,000 ' 1.9% $0.69 0.9% 2047 2046 50,533,000 1.0% 62,010,000 1.0% 62,010,000 1.0% 11,477,000 1.0% 19% $43,378,000 1.9% $0.70 0.9% 2048 2047 51,019,000 1.0% 62,611,000 1.0% 62,611,000 1.0% 11,592,000 1.0% 19% $44,186,000 1.9% $0.71 0.9% 2049 2048 51,510,000 1.0% 63,218,000 1.0% 63,218,000 1.0% 11,708,000 1.0% 19% $45,008,000 1.9% $0.71 0.9% 2050 2049 52,006,000 1.0% 63,831,000 1.0% 63,831,000 1.0% 11,825,000 1.0% 19% $45,846,000 1.9% $0.72 0.9% 2051 2050 52,507,000 1.0% 64,450,000 1.0% 64,450,000 1.0% 11,943,000 1.0% 19% $46,699,000 1.9% $0.72 0.9% 2052 2051 52,770,000 0.5% 64,773,000 0.5% 64,773,000 0.5% 12,003,000 0.5% 19% $47,167,000 1.0% $0.73 0.5% 2053 2052 53,034,000 0.5% 65,097,000 0.5% 65,097,000 0.5% 12,063,000 0.5% 19% $47,640,000 1.0% $0.73 0.5% 2054 2053 53,299,000 0.5% 65,422,000 0.5% 65,422,000 0.5% 12,123,000 0.5% 19% $48,117,000 7.0% $0.74 0.5% 2055 2054 53,565,000 0.5% 65,749,000 0.5% 65,749,000 0.5% 12,184,000 0.5% 19% $48,600,000 1.0% $0.74 0.5% 2056 2055 53,833,000 0.5% 66,078,000 0.5% 66,078,000 0.5% 12,245,000 0.5% 19% $49,087,000 1.0% $0.74 0.5% 2057 2056 54,102,000 0.5% 66,409,000 0.5% 66,409,000 0.5% 12,307,000 0.5% 19% $49,579,000 1.0% $0.75 0.5% 2058 2057 54,373,000 0.5% 66,741,000 0.5% 66,741,000 0.5% 12,368,000 0.5% 19% $50,076,000 1.0% $0.75 0.5% 2059 2058 54,644,000 0.5% 67,074,000 0.5% 67,074,000 0.5% 12,430,000 0.5% 19% $50,578,000 1.0% $0.75 0.5% 2060 2059 54,918,000 0.5% 67,410,000 0.5% 67,410,000 0.5% 12,492,000 0.5% 19% $51,085,000 1.0% $0.76 0.5% 2061 2060 55,192,000 0.5% 67,746,000 0.5% 67,746,000 0.5% 12,554,000 0.5% 19% $51,597,000 1.0% $0.76 0.5% 2062 2061 55,468,000 0.5% 0.5% 68,085,000 68,425,000 0.5% 0.5% 68,085,000 68,425,000 0.5% 0.5% 12,617,000 12,680,000 0.5% 0.5% 19% 19% $52,114,000 $52,637,000 1.0% 1.0% $0.77 $0.77 0.5% 0.5% 2063 2062 55,745,000 2064 2063 56,025,000 0.5% 68,768,000 0.5% 68,768,000 0.5% 12,743,000 0.5% 19% $53,165,000 1.0% $0.77 0.5% 2065 2064 56,305,000 0.5% 69,112,000 0.5% 69,112,000 0.5% 12,807,000 0.5% 19% $53,698,000 1.0% $0.78 0.5% 2066 2065 56,586,000 0.5% 69,457,000 0.5% 69,457,000 0.5% 12,871,000 0.5% 19% $54,236,000 1.0% $0.78 0.5% 2067 2066 56,869,000 0.5% 69,805,000 0.5% 69,805,000 0.5% 12,936,000 0.5% 19% $54,780,000 1.0% $0.78 0.5% 2068 2067 57,154,000 0.5% 70,154,000 0.5% 70,154,000 0.5% 13,000,000 0.5% 19% $55,329,000 1.0% $0.79 0.5% 2069 2068 57,439,000 0.5% 70,505,000 0.5% 70,505,000 0.5% 13,066,000 0.5% 19% $55,884,000 1.0% $0.79 0.5% 2070 2069 57,726,000 0.5% 70,857,000 0.5% 70,857,000 0.5% 13,131,000 0.5% 19% $56,444,000 1.0% $0.80 0.5% * Transactions are defined as volume recorded in each Express Lane segment. Each time a vehicle passes through a segment they are recorded as a transaction. A full-length trip is recorded as 7 transactions. ® Stantec 6.153 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast 6.4.1.1 Annualization of Traffic and Revenue and Ramp -Up Annualization Factors Weekday traffic and revenue forecasts were annualized to reflect a full year, including travel on Fridays, Saturdays, and Sundays by multiplying toll traffic by 310 and toll revenue by 292. Express traffic annualization greater than the revenue annualization indicates that Fridays and weekends are on average tolled at lower levels than weekday traffic. The travel demand model is calibrated for a typical weekday, representing the conditions on a Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday. Conditions on a Friday are somewhat different, due to many workers having a different schedule compared to the other days of the week, and travelers going on weekend trips. Observed data show traffic on Fridays to be approximately 4 percent higher than on Monday -Thursday with the biggest growth coming during the midday and overnight hours. Saturdays had approximately 2 percent fewer vehicles compared to a typical weekday and Sundays had approximately 18 percent fewer vehicles. Using Stantec's market share model, which predicts managed lane usage based on the observed usage on the 91 Express Lanes in Orange County, California, traffic and revenue estimates were constructed for these non -typical days. Fridays are expected to have slightly more toll transactions. Because much of the traffic differential is during off peak hours when congestion is lighter, Friday revenues were generally lower than typical weekday levels. Observed data on Saturdays and Sundays on SR 91 shows a smaller proportion of corridor drivers use the managed lane compared to similar congestion conditions on a weekday. Additionally, weekend traffic does not have an intense morning peak when high usage and revenues can occur. Therefore, Saturdays and Sundays are predicted to have much fewer toll transactions and substantially less revenue than a typical weekday. The expected Friday, Saturday and Sunday toll transactions and resulting revenues are shown for the 2025 model year in Figure 1 below. This process of estimating non -typical days (weekends and Fridays) effectively yields traffic and revenue annualization factors. The resulting annualization factors of 310 for toll traffic and 292 for toll revenue are shown in Table 6-7. Cli Stantec 6.154 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast Table 6-6: Typical Weekday, Friday, and Weekend T&R Comparison 120% O -o 100% a; > L CO ii Q E ' 80% o s u H G1 j. M CO C 13 60% OJ C > O � i. c -0 7u 40% f6 a u >, LP m ~ 20% it 0% Mon-Thurs Friday Saturday ■ Toll Transactions ■ Revenue Sunday Table 6-7: Express Lane Traffic and Revenue Annualization Factors Forecast Year Express Traffic Annualization Revenue Annualization 2025 (Market share model) 310 293 2035 (Market share Model) 311 290 T&R Forecast Factors (all years) 310 292 5 Stantec 6.155 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast Ramp Up Traffic and revenue in the first two years of operations are assumed to experience ramp -up. Toll traffic ramp -up is assumed to be 70 percent of full traffic levels in year 1, 85 percent in year 2, and fully ramped up in year 3. Revenue is assumed to be 55 percent of full revenue levels in year 1, 80 percent in year 2, and fully ramped up by year 3. The model used to forecast future trips and assign them to specific routes assumes that the impact of the project will happen instantaneously. Travelers are assumed to immediately learn about the new lanes, shift trips from other routes into the corridor, and decide to use the tolled lanes in the corridor. Since in reality these events occur over time, a factor is applied to reduce traffic in the first few years of operation. These factors allow for a period while new maps are published showing the road, travelers purchase a transponder, signage is installed in the area directing drivers to the road, and travelers become familiar using express lanes, among other factors. Stantec considered the experience on previous express lane projects to estimate a reduction in express lane traffic of 30 percent in the opening year and 15 percent in the following year. Due to reduced traffic in the express lanes, tolls are expected to be lower. In 2020, when express lane traffic is reduced by 30 percent, peak period toll rates drop by about 25 to 30 percent as high tolls are much less necessary to keep the express lane free flowing. Off peak tolls drop slightly. In the second year of operation, with about 15 percent less traffic in the express lanes, peak hour tolls are projected to be lower by about 15 to 20 percent. The resulting ramp up factors for traffic and revenue are shown in Table 6-8 below. Table 6-8: Ramp -Up of Traffic and Revenue Year Ramp -Up Factor Toll Transactions Revenue 2020 70% 55% 2021 85% 80% 2022 100% 100% ® Stantec 6.156 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast Weekday Traffic and Revenue Forecasrs Weekday traffic and revenue were the focus of the T&R forecasts as they account for approximately 85 percent of annual traffic and revenue. The following section presents detailed weekday traffic and revenue results for the 1-15 ELP in years 2025 and 2035. 6.4.2.1 2025 Model Year In 2025, the 1-15 ELP would generate $26 million (2015 $'s) during the year and average $89,000 per weekday. Approximately 80 percent of the 1-15 Express Lanes weekday revenue is generated during the 6 to 10 AM and 3 to 7 PM peak travel periods. These periods experience the greatest amount of congestion in the free general purposes lanes and therefore see the greatest amount of demand for the express lanes, leading to high toll rates. Table 6-9 displays revenue, transactions, and tolls by direction and time of day. During the 2025 year, average weekday tolls during the AM and PM peak period are approximately twice as high as average midday (10 AM to 3 PM) levels (78 cents per transaction during the AM, 70 cents during the PM, and 37 cents during the midday), and are more than three times as high as the average overnight period (7 PM to 6 AM) toll levels (21 cents during the night period). AM and PM peak period transactions (for purposes of the T&R defined as vehicle passes through a segment - a full length trip records 7 toll transactions) account for 68 percent of a typical day's transactions. Midday transactions account for approximately 24 percent of daily transactions, while the overnight period accounts for 8 percent of transactions. HOV Share of Express Traffic, 2025 HOV-3+ vehicles receive a 50 percent discount on the full toll rate and represent approximately 21 percent of daily express transactions in 2025. As shown in Figure 6-6, the share is lowest during the more heavily traveled AM and PM peak periods and highest during the midday (10 AM to 3 PM) and the night (7 PM to 6 AM). Stantec 6.157 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast Table 6-9: Weekday Revenue, Transactions, and Average Toll - 2025 Revenue Direction 6-10 AM 10 AM-3 PM 3-7 PM 7 PM-6 AM Total Northbound Southbound $25,500 $10,800 $6,500 $6,800 $12,800 $24,100 $1,200 $1,300 $46,000 $43,000 Total $36,300 $13,300 $36,900 $2,500 $89,000 % of Day Dist 6-10 AM 10 AM-3 PM 3-7 PM 7 PM-6 AM Total Northbound Southbound 55% 25% 14% 16% 28% 56% 3% 3% 100% 100% Total 41% 15% 41% 3% 100% Express Transactions (Full Toll and HOV) Direction 6-10 AM 10 AM-3 PM 3-7 PM 7 PM-6 AM Total Northbound Southbound 29,600 17,100 18,300 17,800 23,200 29,800 5,400 6,400 76,500 71,100 Total 46,700 36,100 53,000 11,800 147,600 of Day Dist 6-10 AM 10 AM-3 PM 3-7 PM 7 PM-6 AM Total Northbound Southbound 39% 24% 24% 25% 30% 42% 7% 9% 100% 100% Total 32% 24% 36% 8% 100% HOV Transactions Direction 6-10 AM 10 AM-3 PM 3-7 PM 7 PM-6 AM Total Northbound Southbound 3,600 2,300 6,300 5,900 4,500 3,300 2,400 3,000 16,800 14,500 Total 5,900 12,200 7,800 5,400 31,300 % of all EL Traffic 6-10 AM 10 AM-3 PM 3-7 PM 7 PM-6 AM Total Northbound Southbound 12% 13% 34% 33% 19% 11% 44% 47% 22% 20% Total 13% 34% 15% 46% 21% Average Toll per Transaction Direction 6-10 AM 10 AM-3 PM 3-7 PM 7 PM-6 AM Total Northbound $0.86 $0.36 $0.55 $0.22 $0.60 Southbound $0.63 $0.38 $0.81 $0.20 $0.60 Total $0.78 $0.37 $0.70 $0.21 $0.60 * Transactions are defined as toll gantry readings. Each time a vehicle passes through a gantry they are recorded as a transaction. A full-length trip is recorded as 7 transactions. Cli Stantec 6.158 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast 50% - 45% - 40% - 35% - 30% - 25% - 20% - 15% - 10% - 5% - 0% Figure 6-6: HOV-3+ Share of All Express Traffic - 2025 13% 12% 6-10 AM 33% 34% 19% 11% 47% 44% 10 AM-3 PM 3-7 PM ■ Southbound ■ Northbound 22% 20% 7 PM-6 AM Total The two southernmost 1-15 ELP sections account for 2.7 miles of the total 14.5 miles (19 percent) while accounting for 42 percent of project toll revenue. The combined segments between the access point south of Magnolia Avenue and the southern terminus account for 33 percent of southbound revenue and 50 percent of northbound revenue. These two sections see the greatest corridor congestion, and therefore the greatest express lane demand and highest tolls. 5 Stantec 6.159 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast Table 6-10 shows that on a typical weekday, over 13,000 vehicles would use the southbound express lanes between the Magnolia -Ontario access point and El Cerrito Road. These vehicles would pay, on average, a toll of 60 cents, or 33 cents per mile traveled. Just over 11,000 vehicles would continue south into the single -lane section between El Cerrito Road and the southern terminus at Cajalco Road. These vehicles would pay an average rate of 77 cents, or 66 cents per mile for the additional segment. Users in this southernmost single lane section cannot exit before traveling in the section immediately to the north, and therefore would pay a total toll of $1.37, or 50 cents per mile. The El Cerrito to Cajalco Road segment's higher toll rate on a per mile basis is indicative of high demand, but also limited express lane capacity - only a single express lane is available in the section between El Cerrito Road and Cajalco Road versus a dual lane section immediately to the north. The 1-15 ELP northbound lanes between Cajalco Road and the Magnolia -Ontario access point would see greater revenue, demand, and tolls than predicted on the southbound facility. Over 12,700 vehicles per day would use the southernmost segment of the northbound I- 15 ELP. These vehicles would use both the single lane and dual lane section immediately to the north. The full toll for these two segments would average $1.70, or 62 cents per mile. The dual lane section between El Cerrito Road and the Magnolia -Ontario access point is expected to have typical weekday usage of almost 18,000 vehicles per day, which represents an additional 5,000 vehicles entering the 1-15 ELP northbound lanes at the El Cerrito Road access point. The full toll for this segment alone would average 78 cents, or 44 cents per mile. The section of the 1-15 ELP between Hidden Valley Parkway and the Magnolia -Ontario access point generates the least amount of revenue, accounting for fewer than 5 percent of the total project revenue. This single lane section sees less travel demand than the other sections, getting just over 3,000 vehicles per day southbound and about 4,000 vehicles per day northbound. This behavior is indicative of corridor trip patterns. Most trips do not travel end to end in the 1-15 ELP corridor, but instead the SR 91 and SR 60 are both major sources and sinks of traffic. North of SR 91, revenue in the 3 dual lane sections between Cantu Galleano Ranch Road and the Hidden Valley Parkway access point ranges from 11 to 23 percent of project revenues. Average weekday traffic ranges from over 10,000 vehicles per day to over 12,000 vehicles per day. Average daily per mile tolls (full toll) are between 21 cents per mile (NB between Cantu Galleano and the Limonite-6th Street access) and 32 cents per mile (SB, also between Cantu Galleano Ranch Road and the Limonite-6th Street access point). ® Stantec 6.160 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast Table 6-10: Weekday Revenue, Express Traffic, and Full Tolls by Segment - 2025 Weekday Revenue, 2025 Northern Limit Southern Limit SB Length NB Length SB NB Total Length SB %, NB % SR 60 Cantu Galleano 1.01 0.66 $2,217 $1,787 $4,003 6% 5% 4% Cantu Galleano s/o Limonite Access 3.02 2.50 $9,735 $5,970 $15,705 19% 23% 13% s/o Limonite Access s/o 6th Street Access 2.97 2.73 $9,970 $8,318 $18,288 20% 23% 18% s/o 6th Street Access Hidden Valley Parkway Access 2.11 2.08 $5,773 $5,226 $10,999 14% 13% 11 % Hidden Valley Parkway Access s/o Magnolia Access 2.83 3.08 $1,749 $2,798 $4,547 20% 4% 6% s/o Magnolia Access El Cerrito Road 1.77 1.86 $6,766 $12,224 $18,989 13% 16% 27% El Cerrito Road Cajalco Road 0.96 1.39 $6,823 $9,701 $16,524 8% 16% 21% Total 14.7 14.3 $43,032 $46,024 $89,056 100% 100% 100% Weekday Express Traffic, 2025 Northern Limit Southern Limit SB Length NB Length SB Volume NB Volume Total Length SB % NB % SR 60 Cantu Galleano 1.01 0.66 7,763 8,806 16,569 6% 11% 12% Cantu Galleano s/o Limonite Access 3.02 2.50 12,133 10,545 22,678 19% 17% 14% s/o Limonite Access s/o 6th Street Access 2.97 2.73 12,505 11,499 24,004 20% 18% 15% s/o 6th Street Access Hidden Valley Parkway Access 2.11 208 11,159 10,680 21,839 14% 16% 14% Hidden Valley Parkway Access s/o Magnolia Access 283 3.08 3,030 4,146 7,176 20% 4% 5% s/o Magnolia Access El Cerrito Road 1.77 1.86 13,382 17,949 31,331 13% 19% 24% El Cerrito Road Cajalco Road 0.96 1.39 11,070 12,719 23,789 8% 16% 17% Total 14.7 14.3 71,042 76,344 147,386 100% 100% 100% Average Weekday Tolls*, 2025 Northern Limit Southern Limit SB Length NB Length Average Full Toll Average Full Toll per Mile SB NB Total SB NB Total SR 60 Cantu Galleano 0.84 1.01 $0.33 $0.23 $0.28 $0.39 $0.23 $0.31 Cantu Galleano s/o Limonite Access 2.76 3.02 $0.88 $0.64 $0.77 $0.32 $0.21 $0.27 s/o Limonite Access s/o 6th Street Access 2.85 2.97 $0.87 $0.82 $0.85 $0.31 $0.27 $0.29 s/o 6th Street Access Hidden Valley Parkway Access 2.10 2.11 $0.56 $0.55 $0.56 $0.27 $0.26 $0.27 Hidden Valley Parkway Access s/o Magnolia Access 2.95 2.83 $0.71 $0.83 $0.78 $0.24 $0.30 $0.27 s/o Magnolia Access El Cerrito Road 1.81 1.77 $0.60 $0.78 $0.71 $0.33 $0.44 $0.39 El Cerrito Road Cajalco Road 1.17 0.96 $0.77 $0.92 $0.85 $0.66 $0.96 $0.81 Total 14.5 14.7 $4.73 $4.78 $4.80 $0.33 $0.33 $0.33 *Full Toll Revenue divided by Full Toll Traffic. Toll statistics above exclude HOV-3+ traffic and revenue. Stantec 6.161 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast 6.4.2.2 Period by Period Results for 2025 AM Peak Hour Results During the 7 to 8 AM peak hour in 2025, 1-15 ELP corridor global travel demand, congestion, and express lane demand is greatest in the northbound direction between Cajalco Road and SR 91. As shown in Table 6-1 1, express lane traffic reaches a high of nearly 2,900 vehicles per hour between El Cerrito Road and the Magnolia -Ontario mixing area. Travel speeds in this two-mile section slow to 24 mph in the GP lanes while the Express Lanes operate at or near free -flow speeds. Approximately half of the express traffic in this dual lane section originated from the single lane section between Cajalco Road and El Cerrito Road to the south, where the GP lanes are also expected to be congested. The toll for the just over 3-mile trip between the southern terminus at Cajalco Road to the Magnolia -Ontario mixing area would be about $3.30. North of SR 91, GP lane speeds are improved, ranging from 34 to 59 mph, comparable to existing levels. Express traffic ranges from a low of just over 750 vehicles per hour through the SR 91 interchange to a high of nearly 1,700 vehicles between the 6th_2nd Street mixing area and the Limonite Ave-6th Street mixing area. These volumes north of SR 91 translate to a capture rate ranging from 14 percent to 27 percent of northbound global traffic. The cost to travel the northbound express lanes north of SR 91 would average just over $4.00, resulting in a total end to end toll of nearly $7.50 for the 14-mile trip. The southbound 1-15 ELP corridor has less global demand, GP congestion, and express lane demand than the northbound direction during the morning. The southbound 1-15 ELP has the greatest demand north of SR 91, ranging from just over 900 vehicles between SR 60 and Cantu Galleano Ranch Road to a high of just over 1,400 vehicles per hour between the Limonite Ave- 6th Street mixing area and the 6th Street-2nd Street mixing area. Table 6-1 1 displays AM peak hour traffic, speeds, and tolls in the 1-15 ELP corridor. Traffic drops off sharply south of SR 91, which indicates that southbound 1-15 traffic north of SR 91 is largely exiting at SR 91 and that there is little GP lane congestion south of SR 91. The express lane capture rate north of SR 91 ranges from 13 to 22 percent. The average toll for the nearly 15-mile full length 1-15 SB EL trip is expected to average just over $4.00. The toll for travel on the northern section between SR 60 and Hidden Valley Parkway would be $3.15, accounting for about 75 percent of the cost, while the lightly traveled section south of SR 91 would cost under $1.00. ® Stantec 6.162 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast Table 6-11: 1-15 Global & Express Traffic, GP Speed, & Tolls Charged - 2025, 7 to 8 AM SOUTHBOUND, 7-8 AM NORTHBOUND, 7-8 AM SB Segment # Lns (EL) Dist (mi) Global Traffic EL Traffic % Capture GP Speed Toll Charge NB Segment # Lns (EL) Dist (mi) Global Traffic EL Traffic % Capture GP Speed Toll Charge SR 60 to Cantu Galleano 1 1.01 6,932 920 13% 62 $0.47 Cantu Galleano to SR 60 1 0.66 7,278 1,009 14% 58 $0.31 Cantu Galleano to Limonite-6th St mixing area 2 3.02 6,421 1,407 22% 56 $1.00 Limonite-6th St mixing area to Cantu Galleano 2 2.50 6,617 1,448 22% 46 $0.84 Limonite-6th St mixing area to 6th-2nd St mixing area 2 2.97 6,421 1,412 22% 54 $0.98 6th-2nd St mixing area to Limonite- 6th St mixing area 2 2.73 6,239 1,682 27% 34 $1.18 6th-2nd St mixing area to Hidden Valley Pkwy 2 2.11 6,278 1,078 17% 60 $0.70 Hidden Valley Parkway to 6th- 2nd St mixing area 2 2.08 5,994 1,008 17% 59 $0.67 Hidden Valley Pkwy to Magnolia- Ontario mixing area 1 2.83 5,285 169 3% 66 $0.45 Magnolia -Ontario mixing area to Hidden Valley Pkwy 1 3.08 4,604 757 16% 41 $1.13 Magnolia - Ontario mixing area to El Cerrito Rd 2 1.77 4,469 359 8% 67 $0.27 El Cerrito Rd to Magnolia -Ontario Mixing Area 2 1.86 8,263 2,878 35% 24 $1.28 El Cerrito Rd to Cajalco Rd 1 0.96 4,256 317 7% 67 $0.22 Cajalco Rd to El Cerrito Rd 1 1.39 8,510 1,399 16% 21 $2.03 Southbound Avg / Total 14.7 5,723 809 14% 61 $4.09 Northbound Avg / Total 14.3 6,786 1,454 21% 35 $7.45 ® Stantec 6.163 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast PM Peak Hour Results During the 2025 5 to 6 PM peak hour, 1-15 ELP traffic and tolls are highest in the southbound direction with the greatest usage south of SR 91. As shown in Table 6-12, the express lanes offer the greatest travel time advantage south of SR 91 where the GP lanes operate at less than 20 mph between the Magnolia -Ontario mixing area and Cajalco Road. Express lane traffic in the dual lane section between Magnolia Avenue and El Cerrito Road is nearly 2,000 vehicles per hour with over 1,300 vehicles continuing into the single lane section between El Cerrito Road and the southern terminus at Cajalco Road. The toll to use the nearly 3 miles of express lanes south of Magnolia Avenue would be approximately $3.25. To the north, the GP lanes operate between 25 and 53 mph and express lane traffic ranges from a low of over 550 vehicles per hour through SR 91 to a high of just under 1,450 vehicles between the Limonite Ave-6th St mixing area and the 6th Street-2nd Street mixing area. The toll for the full length trip from SR 60 to Cajalco Road is expected to average about $7.30 during the 5 to 6 PM hour. Usage of the northbound express lanes during the PM peak hour is less than usage on the southbound lanes. Northbound express traffic ranges from just over 360 vehicles per hour to over 1,430 vehicles per hour north of SR 91. The northbound GP lanes operate at higher speeds than in the southbound direction, with speeds ranging from 32 to 64 mph. The full length toll is just over $4.00, consistent with expectations for modest GP lane congestion and express lane usage. Table 6-12: 1-15 Global and Express Traffic, GP Speed, and Tolls Charge - 2025, 5 to 6 PM SOUTHBOU ND, 5-6 PM NORTHBOUND, 5-6 PM SB Segment # Lns (EL) Dist (mi) Global Traffic EL Traffic % Capture GP Speed Toll Charge NB Segment # Lns (EL) Dist (mi) Global Traffic EL Traffic % Capture GP Speed Toll Charge SR 60 to Cantu Galleano 1 1.01 6,932 821 12% 25 $0.44 Cantu Galleano to SR 60 1 0.66 6,278 853 14% 64 $0.30 Cantu Galleano to Limonite-6th St mixing area 2 3.02 6,556 1,406 21% 45 $1.00 Limonite-6th St mixing area to Cantu Galleano 2 2.50 5,602 964 17% 59 $0.59 Limonite-6th St mixing area to 6th-2nd St mixing area 2 2.97 6,555 1,439 22% 53 $0.98 6th-2nd St mixing area to Limonite- 6th St mixing area 2 2.73 5,771 1,146 20% 63 $0.91 6th-2nd St mixing area to Hidden Valley Pkwy 2 2.11 6,263 1,249 20% 60 $0.70 Hidden Valley Parkway to 6th- 2nd St mixing area 2 2.08 5,796 1,434 25% 32 $0.70 Hidden Valley Pkwy to Magnolia- Ontario mixing area 1 2.83 5,999 566 9% 34 $0.94 Magnolia -Ontario mixing area to Hidden Hidden Valley Pkwy 3.08 3,935 361 9% 55 $0.72 Magnolia - Ontario mixing area to El Cerrito Rd 2 1.77 7,650 1,990 26% 15 $0.95 El Cerrito Rd to Magnolia -Ontario Mixing Area 2 1.86 5,467 882 16% 64 $0.46 El Cerrito Rd to Cajalco Rd 1 0.96 7,698 1,339 17% 19 $2.29 Cajalco Rd to El Cerrito Rd 1 1.39 5,527 661 12% 63 $0.47 southbound Avg / Total 14.7 6,808 1,259 18% 31 $7,29 Northbound Avg / Total 14.3 5,482 900 16% 55 $4.14 ® Stantec 6.164 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast North of SR 91, northbound 1-15 ELP usage in 2025 is concentrated in two hours of the AM peak period, between 6 and 8 AM, and three hours of the PM peak period, between 3 and 6 PM. Figure 6-7 illustrates that during these 5 hours of the day, express traffic ranges from 1,100 to 1,700 vehicles per hour across two lanes. During other times of the day, including 2 hours during the AM peak period and 1 hour of the PM peak period, usage is well under 1,000 vehicles per hour. The full toll for travel in this 3-mile segment range from $0.42 during the night period to $1.18 during the 7 to 8 AM hour. Figure 6-7: 1-15 ELP Northbound, between Limonite Avenue and 6th Street - 2025 3,500 T 3,000 2,500 u E 2,000 0 T 0 1,500 x 1,000 500 t I • I ■ 6-7 AM 7-8 AM 8-9 AM 9-10 AM 10 AM-3 3-4 PM 4-5 PM 5-6 PM 6-7 PM 7 PM-6 AM PM avg Time of Day average 6-7 AM 7-8 AM 8-9 AM 9-10 AM 10 AM-3 PM avg 3-4 PM 4-5 PM 5-6 PM 6-7 PM 7 PM-6 AM average s/o 6th St to s/o Limonite (3 miles) HOT Traffic 1,298 1,682 773 513 488 1,275 1,176 1,146 426 70 Full Toll $0.91 $1.18 $0.66 $0.57 $0.56 $0.92 $0.92 $0.91 $0.43 $0.42 GP Speed 44 34 59 61 62 61 63 63 65 67 Stantec 6.165 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast South of SR 91, northbound 1-15 ELP traffic in 2025 is concentrated during the morning hours and declines throughout the rest of the day. Figure 6-8 shows that 1-15 ELP traffic volumes in the dual lane segment between El Cerrito Road and the Ontario -Magnolia Avenue mixing area are at or above 1,500 vehicles per hour during all four hours of the AM peak period. PM peak period volumes do not exceed 1,000 vehicles per hour across the 4-hour peak. From 6 to 8 AM, approximately half of the dual lane segment's traffic also used the single lane segment between Cajalco Road and El Cerrito Road. During the remainder of the AM peak period, midday, PM, and night periods well over half of vehicles in the dual lane segment between El Cerrito Road and the Ontario -Magnolia Avenue mixing area also traveled in the upstream single lane segment. The full toll (no discount) for travel in the dual lane segment ranges from $0.28 to $1.28 during the 7 to 8 AM peak hour for the 1.9-mile trip. Vehicles using both the single and dual lane segments between Cajalco Road and the Ontario -Magnolia mixing area pay a toll ranging from $0.50 to $3.32 from 7 to 8 AM for the 3.3-mile trip. 3,500 3,000 2,500 U 0 2,000 T oo 1,500 x 1,000 500 Figure 6-8: 1-15 ELP Northbound, south of Magnolia Avenue - 2025 6-7 AM 7-8 AM 8-9 AM 9-10 AM 10 AM-3 PM 3-4 PM 4-5 PM 5-6 PM 6-7 PM 7 PM-6 AM avg Time of Day s/o Magnolia -El Cerrito . El Cerrito-Cajalco average 6-7 AM 7-8 AM 8-9 AM 9-10 AM 10 AM-3 PM avg 3-4 PM 4-5 PM 5-6 PM 6-7 PM 7 PM-6 AM average El Cerrito to Ontario -Magnolia mixing area (1.9 miles) HOT Traffic 2,399 2,878 1,851 1,478 868 1,220 1,184 882 584 103 Full Toll $1.06 $1.28 $0.85 $0.75 $0.44 $0.61 $0.61 $0.46 $0.43 $0.28 GP Speed 24 24 35 34 63 53 55 64 66 67 Cajalco to Magnolia -Ontario mixing area (3.3 miles) HOT Traffic 1,320 1,399 1,317 1,185 732 793 809 661 502 98 Full Toll $ 2.60 $3.32 $1.84 $1.62 $0.91 $1.21 $1.22 $0.93 $0.89 $0.50 GP Speed 24 22 31 29 60 55 54 63 66 66 Stantec 6.166 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast North of SR 91, southbound 1-15 ELP usage in 2025 peaks during both the AM and PM peak periods. Figure 6-9 illustrates that between 6 and 9 AM, 1-15 ELP traffic is near or above 1,000 vehicles per hour and from 3 to 6 PM, traffic is nearly 1,500 vehicles per hour. During other times of day, including the 9 to 10 AM hour and the 6 to 7 PM hour, usage is well under 1,000 vehicles per hour. Full toll for travel in this 3-mile segment range from $0.46 during the night period to $0.98 during the 7 to 8 AM hour. Figure 6-9: 1-15 ELP Southbound, between Limonite Avenue and 6th Street - 2025 3,500 3,000 2,500 U E 2,000 O A '0 1,500 x 1,000 500 6-7 AM 7-8 AM 8-9 AM 9-10 AM 10 AM-3 PM 3-4 PM 4-5 PM 5-6 PM 6-7 PM 7 PM-6 AM avg Time of Day average 6-7 AM 7-8 AM 8-9 AM 9-10 AM 10 AM-3 PM avg 3-4 PM 4-5 PM 5-6 PM 6-7 PM 7 PM-6 AM average s/o Limonite to s/o 6th St (3 miles) HOT Traffic 1,050 1,412 975 763 568 1,340 1,427 1,439 680 185 Full Toll $0.98 $0.98 $0.98 $0.68 $0.68 $0.98 $0.98 $0.98 $0.68 $0.46 GP Speed 61 54 60 64 58 57 57 53 64 68 Stantec 6.167 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast South of SR 91, southbound 1-15 ELP traffic in 2025 peaks from 3 to 7 PM but experiences minimal usage during the rest of the day. Figure 6-10 shows that 1-15 ELP traffic volumes in the dual lane segment between the Magnolia -Ontario Avenue mixing area are between 1,500 and 2,000 vehicles per hour from 3 to 6 PM and nearly 1,000 vehicles from 6 to 7 PM. Most of the vehicles using the dual lane segment continue through the single lane segment between El Cerrito Road and Cajalco Road. During the rest of the day, usage of these two segments of the 1-15 ELP is significantly lower than PM peak period usage. During the AM peak period and night period, traffic is less than 500 vehicles per hour, while usage during the midday averages less than 750 vehicles per hour. The full toll (no discount) for travel in the dual lane segment ranges from $0.27 to $0.95 during the 5 to 6 PM peak hour for the 1.9-mile trip. Vehicles using both the single and dual lane segments between Cajalco Road and the Ontario -Magnolia mixing area pay a toll ranging from $0.42 to $3.24 from 5 to 6 PM for the 2.7-mile trip. 3,500 3,000 2,500 u 0 2,000 T '0 1,500 x 1,000 500 Figure 6-10: 1-15 ELP Southbound, south of Magnolia Avenue - 2025 6-7 AM 7-8 AM 8-9 AM 9-10 AM 10 AM-3 PM 3-4 PM 4-5 PM 5-6 PM 6-7 PM 7 PM-6 AM avg Time of Day s/o Magnolia -El Cerrito ■ El Cerrito -Ca alco average 6-7 AM 7-8 AM 8-9 AM 9-10 AM 10 AM-3 PM avg 3-4 PM 4-5 PM 5-6 PM 6-7 PM 7 PM-6 AM average Magnolia -Ontario mixing area to El Cerrito (1.8 miles) HOT Traffic 234 359 278 216 708 1,737 2,065 1,990 928 185 Full Toll $0.27 $0.27 $0.27 $0.27 $0.41 $0.76 $0.77 $0.95 $0.41 $0.27 GP Speed 68 67 67 67 63 52 64 15 65 64 Magnolia -Ontario Mixing Area to Cajalco (2.7 miles) HOT Traffic 212 317 254 198 641 1,356 1,420 1,339 825 177 Full Toll $0.46 $0.50 $0.46 $0.43 $0.73 $1.45 $1.90 $3.24 $0.82 $0.42 GP Speed 67 67 67 67 62 49 58 17 63 64 Stantec 6.168 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast 6.4.2.3 Post Processing of Hourly Model Results - 2025 Raw model results were post processed to account for expectations of higher congestion levels in some sections of the 1-15 SB ELP than were predicted by the travel demand model and expectations for the positive impact of dynamic pricing on project revenue. Full toll traffic for I-15 SB ELP sections between Cantu Galleano Ranch Road and Hidden Valley Parkway were post processed upward in the 2025 model year by 450 vehicles per hour for all hours of the AM and PM peak periods. Stantec's market share model analysis revealed that the travel demand model expects less congestion in these sections in the 2025 year than are expected by Stantec's market share model. A comparison of travel demand model forecasts against market share model forecasts, shown in Figure 6-1 1, shows that the travel demand model's market share was approximately 5 percent lower than expected by Stantec's market share model. The principal source of the deviation is travel demand model's expectation for lower congestion levels, while the market share model is believed to more accurately depict congestion in those three segments and times of day. The upward adjustment was approximated as 450 vehicles per hour for each hour of the AM and PM peak periods. Midday and night period volumes were not post processed upward because the raw travel demand model results were deemed to be reasonable, albeit conservative. All results presented herein are post -processed. ® Stantec 6.169 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast Figure 6-11: Travel Demand Model vs. Market Share Model Capture Rate, 2025 SB 1-15 ELP, Cantu Galleano Ranch Rd to Hidden Valley Parkway 35% u w w m it 30% O x = 25% co 0 3 - 20% LL N L fa 15% a▪ ) Y L i$ 10% a) ca J a 5% L Q. uX W 0% 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00 Global v/c • Initial EL Market Share A MSM EL Market Share Lower price Higher Price Curve The 1-15 ELP would be operated as a dynamically priced facility and as a result would warrant an increase to revenue relative to a static variable priced facility. Market share model analysis of dynamic pricing reveals that revenue would be higher by approximately 2 percent while toll traffic would be higher by approximately 0.25 percent and tolls would be higher by 1.75 percent. Travel demand model results assume a static variable priced facility, so the traffic, toll, and revenue forecasts were post processed upward to reflect the assumption for dynamic pricing. 6.4.2.4 2035 Model Year The AM and PM peak periods continue to account for the vast majority of revenue in 2035. Table 6-13 shows that the AM peak period (6 to 10 AM) would account for 42 percent of weekday revenue, the PM peak period (3 to 7 PM) would account for 37 percent, the midday period (10 AM to 3 PM) would account for 17 percent, and the night period (7 PM to 6 AM) would account for 4 percent. Stantec 6.170 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast Northbound 1-15 ELP revenue is highest during the AM peak period, which accounts for 59 percent of the total day's revenue on the northbound lanes, while the PM peak period accounts for 20 percent. The NB 1-15 ELP generates a large share of its weekday revenue during the AM peak period because of expectations for continued high corridor travel demand and delay in the GP lanes. The existing 1-15 northbound corridor is the most congested during the morning peak period, experiencing total travel times of 21 minutes for a 12 minute free -flow trip (Cajalco Road to SR 60). Similar conditions are expected in 2035. NB AM express traffic would represent 38 percent of weekday totals, while NB AM tolls would be approximately 2.5 times midday levels and over 4.5 times night levels. Southbound 1-15 ELP revenue is highest during the PM peak period, which accounts for 55 percent of the total day's revenue, while the AM peak period accounts for 23 percent. The SB 1-15 ELP generates a large share of its weekday revenue during the PM peak period because the southbound 1-15 is expected to be heavily congested during the PM peak period, similar to today. The existing 1-15 southbound corridor is the most congested during the evening peak period, seeing total travel times of 27 minutes for a trip that would take only 12 minutes if there were no delays (SR 60 to Cajalco Road ), and similar conditions are expected for the 2035 year. SB PM express traffic would represent 38 percent of weekday totals, while SB PM tolls would be approximately 2.25 times midday levels, and about 4.5 times night levels. ® Stantec 6.171 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast Table 6-13: Weekday Revenue, Transactions, and Average Toll - 2035 Revenue Direction AM MD PM NT Total Northbound Southbound $36,800 $13,800 $10,400 $10,200 $12,700 $32,500 $2,200 $2,700 $62,100 $59,200 Total $50,600 $20,600 $45,200 $4,900 $121,300 % of Day Dist AM MD PM NT Total Northbound Southbound 59% 23% 17% 17% 20% 55% 4% 5% 100% 100% Total 42% 17% 37% 4% 100% Express Transactions (Full Toll and HOV) Direction AM MD PM NT Total Northbound Southbound 34,600 19,600 24,400 23,600 22,600 33,400 9,600 12,100 91,200 88,700 Total 54,200 48,000 56,000 21,700 179,900 % of Day Dist AM MD PM NT Total Northbound Southbound 38% 22% 27% 27% 25% 38% 11% 14% 100% 100% Total 30% 27% 31% 12% 100% HOV Transactions Direction AM MD PM NT Total Northbound Southbound 3,400 1,400 6,400 5,200 3,400 3,500 4,200 5,600 17,400 15,700 Total 4,800 11,600 6,900 9,800 33,100 % of all EL Traffic 6-10 AM 10 AM-3 PM 3-7 PM 7 PM-6 AM Total Northbound Southbound 10% 7% 26% 22% 15% 10% 44% 46% 19% 18% Total 9% 24% 12% 45% 18% Average Toll per Transaction Direction AM MD PM NT Total Northbound $1.06 $0.43 $0.56 $0.23 $0.68 Southbound $0.70 $0.43 $0.97 $0.22 $0.67 Total $0.93 $0.43 $0.81 $0.23 $0.67 *Transactions are defined as toll gantry readings. Each time a vehicle passes through a gantry they are recorded as a transaction. A full-length trip is recorded as 7 transactions. HOV Share of Express Traffic, 2035 HOV-3+ vehicles receive a 50 percent discount on the full toll rate and represent approximately 18 percent of daily express transactions in 2035. As shown in Figure 6-12, HOV-3+ share is lowest during the more heavily traveled AM and PM peak periods, ranging from 7 to 15 percent, and highest during the midday (10 AM to 3 PM) and the night (7 PM to 6 AM). The higher HOV shares correspond to periods when corridor congestion is low and the express lanes do not offer as ® Stantec 6.172 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast great a time advantage over the general purpose lanes. The higher HOV share is supported by the lower toll rates offered to HOV-3+ vehicles. Figure 6-12: HOV-3+ Share of All Express Traffic - 2035 10 AM-3 PM 3-7 PM Southbound ■ Northbound 1 1 Traffic and Revenue by Segment - 2035 The two southernmost sections, between the Magnolia -Ontario access point and Cajalco Road account for 33 percent of southbound revenue and 52 percent of northbound revenue, which is comparable to 2025 levels. Over 15,500 vehicles per day would use the southbound dual lane section between the Magnolia -Ontario access point and El Cerrito Road. The full toll for this section would be $0.64, or 36 cents per mile. Over 13,000 vehicles, or almost 85 percent, would continue through to the southern terminus and would require an additional toll of $1.18, or $1.24 per mile to travel that section. The combined full toll for the trip between the Magnolia -Ontario access point and Cajalco Road would be $1.82, or 67 cents per mile. Table 6-14 shows year 2035 weekday revenue, traffic, and tolls by direction. Northbound, over 14,000 vehicles per day would originate from the southern terminus at Cajalco Road and continue through to the Magnolia -Ontario access point. The average weekday toll for these vehicles would be $2.21, or 68 cents per mile. At the El Cerrito Road access point (ingress only), approximately 6,500 vehicles per day would enter the 1-15 ELP northbound lanes, resulting in a total daily traffic level of over 20,700 vehicles. Much of this traffic exit the Express Lanes and are destined for points along SR 91 east or west of 1-15, resulting in a decline in traffic in the single lane section between the Magnolia -Ontario access point and Hidden Valley Parkway to just Stantec 6.173 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast under 5,000 vehicles per day. 1-15 ELP traffic increases at the Hidden Valley Parkway access point (ingress only) to nearly 15,000 vehicles per day and gradually declines to over 12,500 vehicles per day north of Limonite Avenue. Eighty percent of the express lane vehicles traveling between Limonite Avenue and Cantu Galleano Ranch Road would continue through to the northern terminus and rejoin the 1-15 general purpose lanes north of SR 60. Table 6-14: Weekday Revenue, Traffic, and Full Tolls by Segment - 2035 Weekday Revenue, 2035 Northern Limit Southern Limit SB Length NB Length SB NB Total Length SB % NB % SR 60 Cantu Galleano 1.01 0.66 $4,249 $2,008 $6,256 6% 7% 3% Cantu Galleano s/o Limonite Access 3.02 2.50 $12,037 $7,339 $19,377 19% 20% 12% s/o Limonite Access s/o bth Street Access 2.97 2.73 $12,166 $8,729 $20,895 20% 21% 14% s/o bth Street Access Hidden Valley Parkway Access 2.11 2.08 $7,630 $7,974 $15,604 14% 13% 13% Hidden Valley Parkway Access s/o Magnolia Access 2.83 3.08 $3,569 $3,665 $7,234 20% 6% 6% s/o Magnolia Access El Cerrito Road 1.77 1.86 $8,033 $20,714 $28,747 13% 14% 33% El Cerrito Road Cajalco Road 0.96 1.39 $11,483 $11,687 $23,170 8% 19% 19% Total 14.7 14.3 $59,167 $62,116 $121,283 100% 100% 100% Weekday Express Traffic, 2035 Northern Limit Southern Limit SB Length NB Length SB Volume NB Volume Total Length SB % NB % SR 60 Cantu Galleano 1.01 0.66 11,053 9,932 20,985 6% 12% 11% Cantu Galleano s/o Limonite Access 3.02 2.50 14,562 12,629 27,191 19% 16% 14% s/o Limonite Access s/o bth Street Access 2.97 2.73 15,223 13,654 28,877 20% 17% 15% s/o bth Street Access Hidden Valley Parkway Access 2.11 2.08 14,554 14,952 29,506 14% 16% 16% Hidden Valley Parkway Access s/o Magnolia Access 2.83 3.08 4,793 4,940 9,733 20% 5% 5% s/o Magnolia Access El Cerrito Road 1.77 1.86 15,598 20,720 36,318 13% 18% 23% El Cerrito Road Cajalco Road 0.96 1.39 13,051 14,221 27,272 8% 15% 16% Total 14.7 14.3 88,834 91,048 179,882 100% 100% 100% Average Weekday Tolls*, 2035 Northern Limit Southern Limit SB Length NB Length Average Full Toll Average Full Toll per Mile SB NB Total SB NB Total SR 60 Cantu Galleano 1.01 0.66 $0.41 $0.22 $0.32 $0.40 $0.33 $0.36 Cantu Galleano s/o Limonite Access 3.02 2.50 $0.88 $0.64 $0.77 $0.29 $0.26 $0.27 s/o Limonite Access s/o bth Street Access 2.97 2.73 $0.85 $0.70 $0.78 $0.29 $0.26 $0.27 s/o bth Street Access Hidden Valley Parkway Access 2.11 2.08 $0.56 $0.58 $0.57 $0.27 $0.28 $0.27 Hidden Valley Parkway Access s/o Magnolia Access 2.83 3.08 $0.90 $0.95 $0.92 $0.32 $0.31 $0.31 s/o Magnolia Access El Cerrito Road 1.77 1.86 $0.64 $1.18 $0.96 $0.36 $0.64 $0.50 El Cerrito Road Cajalco Road 0.96 1.39 $1.18 $1.03 $1.10 $1.24 $0.74 $0.99 Total 14.7 14.3 $5.42 $5.29 $5.42 $0.37 $0.37 $0.37 *Full Toll Revenue divided by Full Toll Traffic. Toll statistics above exclude HOV-3+ traffic and revenue. CIO Stantec 6.174 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast 6.4.2.5 Period by Period Results for 2035 AM Peak Hour Results During the 7 to 8 AM peak hour in 2035, 1-15 ELP corridor global travel demand, congestion, and express lane demand is greatest in the northbound direction between Cajalco Road and SR 91. As shown in Table 6-15, 1-15 ELP northbound traffic reaches a high of over 3,000 vehicles per hour between El Cerrito Road and the Magnolia -Ontario mixing area. Travel speeds in this two-mile section slow to 14 mph in the GP lanes, while the Express Lanes operate at or near free -flow speeds. Approximately half of the express traffic in this dual lane section originates from the single lane section between Cajalco Road and El Cerrito Road to the south, where the GP lanes are also expected to be congested, running at 23 mph. The toll for the just over 3-mile trip between the southern terminus at Cajalco Road to the Magnolia -Ontario mixing area would be about $4.60. North of SR 91, GP lane speeds are improved, ranging from 30 to 54 mph, somewhat lower than 2025 levels. 1-15 ELP usage north of SR 91 ranges from just over 800 vehicles per hour through the SR 91 interchange to over 1,400 vehicles between the 6'n_2na Street mixing area and the Limonite Ave-6th Street mixing area. These volumes north of SR 91 translate to a capture rate ranging from 11 to 21 percent of northbound global traffic. The cost to travel the northbound express lanes north of SR 91 would average just under $4.00, resulting in a total end to end toll of nearly $8.50 for the 14-mile trip. The southbound 1-15 ELP corridor operates with traffic levels comparable to those expected in the northbound direction. During the morning, the southbound 1-15 ELP has the greatest demand north of SR 91, ranging from just over 1,000 vehicles between 6th Street and Hidden Valley Parkway to just over 1,500 vehicles per hour between the Limonite Ave-6th Street mixing area and the 6th Street-2nd Street mixing area. Very little express traffic is expected on the southbound 1-15 ELP single lane section passing through the SR 91 interchange. The low volume in this single lane section is indicative of the expectation that a large share of traffic north of SR 91 would be destined for or coming from SR 91 rather than 1-15 south of SR 91. Table 6-15 displays AM peak hour traffic, speeds, and tolls in the 1-15 ELP corridor. Traffic drops off sharply south of SR 91, which indicates that southbound 1-15 traffic north of SR 91 is largely exiting at SR 91, and that there is little GP lane congestion south of SR 91. The express lane capture rate north of SR 91 ranges from 16 to 25 percent of southbound global traffic. The average toll for the nearly 15-mile full length 1-15 SB EL trip is expected to average just over $4.50. The toll for travel on the northern section between SR 60 and Hidden Valley Parkway would be about $3.65, accounting for about 80 percent of the full length cost, while the lightly traveled section south of SR 91 would cost less than $1.00. ® Stantec 6.175 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast Table 6-15: 1-15 Global & Express Traffic, GP Speed, and Tolls Charged - 2035, 7 to 8 AM SOUTHBOUND, 7-8 AM NORTHBOUND, 7-8 AM SB Segment # Lns (EL) Dist (mi) Global Traffic EL Traffic % Capture GP Speed Toll Charge NB Segment # Lns (EL) Dist (mi) Global Traffic EL Traffic % Capture GP Speed Toll Charge SR 60 to Cantu Galleano 1 1.01 6,570 1,275 19% 49 $0.69 Cantu Galleano to SR 60 1 0.66 7,226 791 11% 52 $0.27 Cantu Galleano to Limonite-6th St mixing area 2 3.02 6,940 1,531 22% 62 $1.31 Limonite-6th St mixing area to Cantu Galleano 2 2.50 7,100 1,249 18% 49 $0.78 Limonite-6th St mixing area to 6th- 2nd St mixing area 2 2.97 6,940 1,377 20% 55 $0.98 6th-2nd St mixing area to Limonite- 6th St mixing area 2 2.73 7,426 1,268 17% 54 $0.91 6th-2nd St mixing area to Hidden Valley Pkwy 2 2.11 6,719 1,083 16% 60 $0.66 Hidden Valley Parkway to 6th- 2nd St mixing area 2 2.08 6,638 1,412 21% 40 $0.74 Hidden Valley Pkwy to Magnolia- Ontario mixing area 1 2.83 4,874 129 3% 67 $0.43 Magnolia -Ontario mixing area to Hidden Valley Pkwy 1 3.08 5,327 818 15% 30 $1.19 Magnolia -Ontario mixing area to El Cerrito Rd 2 1.77 4,627 321 7% 66 $0.27 El Cerrito Rd to Magnolia -Ontario Mixing Area 2 1.86 8,313 3,012 36% 14 $2.54 El Cerrito Rd to Cajalco Rd 1 0.96 4,712 321 7% 65 $0.20 Cajalco Rd to El Cerrito Rd 1 1.39 8,350 1,519 18% 23 $2.03 Southbovnd Avg / Total 14.7 5,912 862 15% 60 $4.55 Northbound Avg / Total 14.3 7,197 1,438 20% 31 $8.48 ® Stantec 6.176 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast PM Peak Hour Results During the 2035 5 to 6 PM peak hour, 1-15 ELP traffic and tolls are highest in the southbound direction with peak usage south of SR 91. As shown in Table 6-16, the express lanes offer the greatest travel time advantage south of SR 91 where the GP lane speeds would be between 19 and 28 mph. Express lane traffic in the dual lane section between Magnolia Avenue and El Cerrito Road would be nearly 2,300 vehicles per hour with over 1,400 vehicles continuing into the single lane section between El Cerrito Road and the southern terminus at Cajalco Road. The toll to use the nearly 3 miles of express lanes south of Magnolia Avenue would be approximately $3.75. To the north, the GP lanes operate between 28 and 61 mph and express lane traffic ranges from over 900 vehicles per hour between SR 60 and Cantu Galleano Ranch Road to just under 1,450 vehicles between the Limonite Ave-6th St mixing area and the 6th Street-2nd Street mixing area. The toll for the full length trip from SR 60 to Cajalco Road is expected to average about $8.50 during the 5 to 6 PM hour. Usage of the northbound express lanes during the PM peak hour is less than usage on the southbound lanes. Northbound express traffic ranges from just under 250 vehicles per hour to over 1,500 vehicles per hour north of SR 91. The northbound GP lanes operate at higher speeds than in the southbound direction with speeds ranging from 33 to 65 mph. The full length toll is just over $4.00, consistent with expectations for modest GP lane congestion and express lane usage. Table 6-16: 1-15 Global & Express Traffic, GP Speed, and Tolls Charged - 2035, 5 to 6 PM SOUTHBOUND, 5-6 PM NORTHBOUND, 5-6 PM SB Segment # Lns (EL) Dist (mi) Global Traffic EL Traffic % Capture GP Speed Toll Charge NB Segment # Lns (EL) Dist (mi) Global Traffic EL Traffic % Capture GP Speed Toll Charge SR 60 to Cantu Galleano 1 1.01 6,676 926 14% 28 $0.46 Cantu Galleano to SR 60 1 0.66 6,504 863 13% 65 $0.30 Cantu Galleano to Limonite-6th St mixing area 2 3.02 6,999 1,420 20% 49 $1.00 Limonite-6th St mixing area to Cantu Galleano 2 2.50 5,945 1,040 17% 57 $0.78 Limonite-6th St mixing area to 6th- 2nd St mixing area 2 2.97 6,999 1,457 21% 50 $1.28 6th-2nd St mixing area to Limonite- 6th St mixing area 2 2.73 6,676 1,234 18% 61 $0.85 6th-2nd St mixing area to Hidden Valley Pkwy 2 2.11 6,645 1,368 21% 61 $0.73 Hidden Valley Parkway to 6th- 2nd St mixing area 2 2.08 5,921 1,513 26% 33 $0.79 Hidden Valley Pkwy to Magnolia- Ontario mixing area 1 2,83 5,837 819 14% 19 $1.24 Magnolia -Ontario mixing area to Hidden Valley Pkwy 1 3.08 4,024 246 6% 62 $0.56 Magnolia -Ontario mixing area to El Cerrito Rd 2 1.77 8,245 2,277 28% 28 $0.95 El Cerrito Rd to Magnolia -Ontario Mixing Area 2 1.86 5,861 731 12% 63 $0.41 El Cerrito Rd to Cajalco Rd 1 0.96 7,744 1,423 18% 23 $2.80 Cajalco Rd to El Cerrito Rd 1 1.39 5,746 564 10% 61 $0.43 southbound Avg / Total 14.7 7,021 1,384 20% 32 $8.46 Northbound Avg / Total 14.3 5,811 884 15% 55 $4.12 North of SR 91, northbound 1-15 ELP usage is concentrated in three hours of the 2035 AM peak period, between 6 and 9 AM, and three hours of the PM peak period, between 3 and 6 PM. ® Stantec 6.177 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast Figure 6-13 illustrates that during these 5 hours of the day, express traffic ranges from nearly 1,000 vehicles per hour to 1,300 vehicles per hour across two lanes. During other times of the day, including 1 hour of the AM peak period and 1 hour of the PM peak period, usage is well under 1,000 vehicles per hour. The full tolls for travel in this 3-mile segment range from $0.42 during the night period to $0.91 during the 7 to 8 AM hour. Figure 6-13: 1-15 ELP Northbound, between Limonite Avenue and 6f" Street - 2035 3,500 3,000 2,500 u E 2,000 0 '0 1,500 x 1,000 500 6-7 AM 7-8 AM 8-9 AM 9-10 AM 10 AM-3 3-4 PM 4-5 PM 5-6 PM 6-7 PM 7 PM-6 AM PM avg Time of Day average 6-7 AM 7-8 AM 8-9 AM 9-10 AM 10 AM-3 PM avg 3-4 PM 4-5 PM 5-6 PM 6-7 PM 7 PM-6 AM average s/o 6th St to s/o Limonite (3 miles) HOT Traffic 1,126 1,268 953 721 746 1,186 1,170 1,234 726 140 Full Toll $0.85 $0.91 $0.63 $0.57 $0.57 $0.85 $0.85 $0.85 $0.57 $0.42 GP Speed 55 54 59 60 59 61 61 61 63 66 Northbound 1-15 ELP traffic between Cajalco Road and the Ontario -Magnolia Avenue mixing area is projected to be at their operational maximum volume levels during the 2035 AM peak period in response to expectations for heavy congestion on the adjacent GP lanes and would require toll increases to maintain free -flow. As shown in Figure 6-14, between 6 and 8 AM, express traffic in both the dual lane section between El Cerrito Road and the Ontario -Magnolia mixing area and the single lane section between Cajalco Road and El Cerrito Road would be at their operational maximum volumes of 3,200 vehicles per hour and 1,500 vehicles per hour, respectively. From 8 to 10 AM, express lane usage in the dual section remains elevated at over 2,000 vehicles per hour and near the operational threshold of 1,500 vehicles per hour in the single lane section. During the remainder of the day, traffic is at or below 1,000 vehicles per hour. Full tolls for travel in the 1.9-mile section between El Cerrito Road and the Ontario -Magnolia mixing area ranges from $0.28 to $2.54 during the 7 to 8 AM hour. Tolls for the 3.3-mile trip Stantec 6.178 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast between Cajalco Road and the Ontario -Magnolia mixing area would range from $0.50 to $4.58 from 7 to 8 AM. 3,500 3,000 2,500 u 0 2,000 2 T 0 1,500 x 1,000 500 Figure 6-14: 1-15 ELP Northbound, south of Magnolia Avenue - 2035 6-7 AM 7-8 AM 8-9 AM 9-10 AM 10 AM-3 PM 3-4 PM 4-5 PM 5-6 PM 6-7 PM 7 PM-6 AM avg Time of Day s/o Magnolia -El Cerrito ■ El Cerrito-Cajalco average 6-7 AM 7-8 AM 8-9 AM 9-10 AM 10 AM-3 PM avg 3-4 PM 4-5 PM 5-6 PM 6-7 PM 7 PM-6 AM average El Cerrito to Ontario -Magnolia mixing area (1.9 miles) HOT Traffic 3,053 3,012 2,661 2,242 999 903 870 731 523 157 Full Toll $1.66 $2.54 $1.10 $0.91 $0.53 $0.43 $0.45 $0.41 $0.39 $0.28 GP Speed 35 14 14 14 58 62 61 63 65 62 Cajalco to Ontario -Magnolia mixing area (3.3 miles) HOT Traffic 1,461 1,519 1,304 1,450 883 689 719 564 450 150 Full Toll $3.69 $4.58 $2.27 $1.72 $1.11 $0.92 $0.98 $0.83 $0.74 $0.50 GP Speed 37 17 19 20 57 61 59 62 64 57 North of SR 91, southbound 1-15 ELP usage peaks during both the AM and PM peak periods. Figure 6-15 illustrates that between 6 and 10 AM, 1-15 ELP traffic is near or above 1,000 vehicles per hour and from 3 to 6 PM, traffic is nearly 1,500 vehicles per hour. During other times of day, including the 6 to 7 PM hour, usage is well under 1,000 vehicles per hour. Full toll for travel in this 3-mile segment range from $0.46 during the night period to $1.28 during the 5 to 6 PM hour. Stantec 6.179 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast Figure 6-15: 1-15 ELP Southbound, between Limonite Avenue and 6f" Street - 2035 3,500 3,000 2,500 u E 2,000 a T oo 1,500 x 1,000 500 6-7 AM 7-8 AM 8-9 AM 9-10 AM 10 AM-3 3-4 PM 4-5 PM 5-6 PM 6-7 PM 7 PM-6 AM PM avg Time of Day average 6-7 AM 7-8 AM 8-9 AM 9-10 AM 10 AM-3 PM avg 3-4 PM 4-5 PM 5-6 PM 6-7 PM 7 PM-6 AM average s/o Limonite to s/o 6th St (3 miles) HOT Traffic 1,110 1,377 1,111 951 855 1,407 1,441 1,457 813 316 Full Toll $0.98 $0.98 $0.98 $0.68 $0.65 $0.98 $0.98 $1.28 $0.68 $0.46 GP Speed 59 55 59 63 58 52 51 50 61 67 South of SR 91, southbound 1-15 ELP traffic in 2035 peaks from 3 to 7 PM but experiences minimal usage during the rest of the day. Figure 6-16 shows that 1-15 ELP traffic volumes in the dual lane segment between the Magnolia -Ontario Avenue mixing area exceed 2,000 vehicles per hour from 3 to 6 PM and over 1,100 vehicles from 6 to 7 PM. Most of the vehicles using the dual lane segment continue through the single lane segment between El Cerrito Road and Cajalco Road. Traffic in the single lane section between El Cerrito Road and Cajalco Road would be at or above the maximum operational volume of 1,500 vehicles per hour from 3 to 6 PM if tolls were not increased to the levels presented in Figure 6-16. During the rest of the day, usage of these two segments of the 1-15 ELP is significantly lower than PM peak period usage. During the AM peak period and night period, traffic is less than 500 vehicles per hour, while usage during the midday averages less than 700 vehicles per hour. The full toll (no discount) for travel in the dual lane segment ranges from $0.27 to $0.95 during the 5 to 6 PM peak hour for the 1.9-mile trip. Vehicles using both the single and dual lane segments between Cajalco Road and the Ontario - Magnolia mixing area pay a toll ranging from $0.44 to $3.74 from 5 to 6 PM for the 2.7-mile trip. Stantec 6.180 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast Figure 6-16: 1-15 ELP Southbound, south of Magnolia Avenue - 2035 3,500 3,000 2,500 u a 2,000 T 0 1,500 S 1,000 500 NE M ME 6-7 AM 7-8 AM 8-9 AM 9-10 AM '10 AM-3 PM 3-4 PM 4-5 PM 5-6 PM 6-7 PM 7 PM-6 AM avg Time of Day s/o Magnolia -El Cerrito ■ El Cerrito-Cajalco average 6-7 AM 7-8 AM 8-9 AM 9-10 AM 10 AM-3 PM avg 3-4 PM 4-5 PM 5-6 PM 6-7 PM 7 PM-6 AM average Magnolia -Ontario mixing area to El Cerrito (1.8 miles) HOT Traffic 234 321 277 197 683 2,039 2,189 2,277 1,174 316 Full Toll $0.27 $0.27 $0.27 $0.27 $0.37 $0.80 $0.89 $0.95 $0.55 $0.27 GP Speed 67 66 66 67 61 38 34 28 60 35 Magnolia -Ontario mixing area to Cajalco (2.7 miles) HOT Traffic 234 321 277 197 677 1,356 1,261 1,423 1,121 316 Full Toll $0.45 $0.48 $0.48 $0.44 $0.72 $2.84 $3.33 $3.74 $1.09 $0.44 GP Speed 67 66 66 66 59 35 29 26 59 28 6.4.2.6 Post Processing of Hourly Model Results - 2035 Travel demand model forecasts of express lane traffic were post processed based on market share model analysis of 1-15 traffic. Express traffic on the southbound 1-15 ELP for the two dual lane segments between Cantu Galleano Ranch Road and the 6th Street-2nd Street mixing area in the 2035 model year was post processed upward by 200 vehicles per hour for all four AM and PM peak period hours based on market share model analysis. This adjustment is smaller than the adjustment made for the 2025 model year and for one fewer segment (does not adjust Hidden Valley Parkway to the 6th Street-2nd Street mixing area). A comparison of travel demand model forecasts against market share model forecasts shown in Figure 6-17 shows that the travel demand model's market share was one to four percent lower than expected by Stantec's market share model. The principal source of the deviation is travel demand model's expectation for lower congestion levels while the market share model is believed to more accurately depict congestion in those three segments and times of day. The upward adjustment was ® Stantec 6.181 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast approximated as 200 vehicles per hour for each hour of the AM and PM peak periods. Midday and night period volumes were not post processed upward because the raw travel demand model results were deemed to be reasonable, albeit conservative. All results presented herein are post -processed. Figure 6-17: Travel Demand Model vs. Market Share Model Capture Rate, 2035 SB 1-15 ELP, Cantu Galleano Ranch Rd to Hidden Valley Parkway 35% u m 12 3• 0% > O x c 2• 5% co 0 1- 20% u. I' L ca N 15% a▪ ) Y L g 1• 0% a) C c6 J H N 5% a a x W • A• • 8 i 0% 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00 Global v/c • Initial EL Market Share A MSM EL Market Share 5 Stantec Lower price Higher Price Curve 6.182 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast 6.4.3 Impact of Network Improvements in 2027, 2030, and 2035 Various roadway improvements that would impact the 1-15 ELP traffic and revenue are anticipated to be completed in 2027, 2030, and 2035. The 1-15 South Express Lanes scheduled for 2027 are expected to increase travel demand and revenue for the 1-15 ELP, while the widening of Temescal Canyon Road in 2030 and the various improvements scheduled for 2035 are expected to decrease 1-15 ELP demand and revenue. The traffic and revenue impact of these projects was assessed by developing three intermediate model scenarios: 1) 2025 socioeconomics assuming the 2025 network plus 1-15 South EL's. The network condition can be viewed as approximating a 2027 network. 2) 2035 socioeconomics assuming the 2025 network plus 1-15 South EL's. The network condition can be viewed as approximating a 2027 network. Both 2025 and 2035 socioeconomics were run under a 2027 network to control for the impacts of economic growth only, rather than network changes. 3) 2035 socioeconomics assuming the 2025 network, 1-15 South EL's, and the Temescal Canyon Road widening. The network condition can be viewed as approximately a 2030 network. 6.4.3.1 Impact of Network Improvements in 2027 The addition of Express Lanes on 1-15 south of the current 1-15 ELP project in 2027 is expected to increase traffic demand for the 1-15 ELP corridor and increase 1-15 ELP traffic and revenue. In 2027, the RCTC is expected to build approximately 15 miles of express lanes on 1-15 between Cajalco Road and SR 74 (referred to as the 1-15 South EL), effectively extending the 1-15 ELP south. The greatest impact is expected between Dos Lagos Road and Cajalco Road, which is the northernmost segment of the 1-15 South Express Lanes extension, and is immediately south of the 1-15 ELP. Figure 6-18 and Figure 6-19 show northbound and southbound global traffic on 1-15 in the 2025 forecast year along with the percentage change in traffic if the 1-15 South EL's are included. Compared to traffic forecasts assuming 2025 land use but without the 1-15 South EL's, traffic between Dos Lagos and Cajalco Road would increase by over 3.2 percent northbound and by 1.4 percent southbound. A smaller but positive impact is expected between Cajalco Road and El Cerrito Road (+0.9 percent northbound, +1.1 percent southbound) and somewhat less even further north between El Cerrito Road and SR 60 (generally +0.5 percent northbound, +0.3 percent southbound). The increase in global traffic is expected to result in greater 1-15 ELP usage. Stantec 6.183 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast Figure 6-18: 1-15 Northbound Global Traffic, Impact of 1-15 South Express Lanes 150,000 140,000 130,000 120,000 u 110,000 c 100,000 -M 90,000 a 80,000 -d 70,000 -i 60,000 a) 50,000 3 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 �2025 f%Impact 74.5% 21r 4.0% - 3.5% - 3.0% - 2.5% - 2.0% - 1.5% - 1.0% - 0.5% 0.0% �b� Q�,,J \o O. �c; ac;� o�o�• o i o4> �Q��o <.\o 000 5 . •�G via \\oS� "b �`1' \o� o°3 e \G) GQ\ Ga) oc o< �5•D �a5 JQ\a aao Oc `\ , o c°`� °5 �\� o�� r \' \Q Go \Q' \,- SGr\� b� \aaa q OK � Ga Oo5 L- 7.5% 7.0% 6.5% 6.0% 5.5% 5.0% Figure 6-19: 1-15 Southbound Global Traffic, Impact of 1-15 South Express Lanes 150,000 140,000 130,000 120,000 u 110,000 v 100,000 � 90,000 ✓ 80,000 -8 70,000 v 60,000 a) 50,000 3 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 �2025 f%Impact Q�\J � o a� �r 4 a`'` \oa q\ > j\o _�o \co �05 b G ��o •r��aS� asb S\�� . O o-A b., 0 \Ga 0 S\.O 5� �,�J c'o • 5\ bar aao �Q� q�� o�•�a `\ 0 0 0 xe Go �o� a SG`C aS� Z'� aao S� �oa,� Os( �Ga� cf. . rc •Z 7.5% 7.0% 6.5% 6.0% 5.5% 5.0% 4.5% 4.0% 3.5% 3.0% 2.5% 2.0% 1.5% 1.0% 0.5% 0.0% Analysis of the 1-15 South EL improvement indicates that weekday express traffic would increase by 3.7 percent while weekday revenue would increase by 18 percent versus a condition where Stantec 6.184 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast the 1-15 South EL's are not built. Weekday express transactions and revenue with and without the 1-15 South EL's are shown in Table 6-17. Table 6-17: Average Weekday Transactions and Revenue, Impact of 2027 Project Socioeconomics Network Average Weekday EL Transactions Average Weekday Revenue (2015 $'s) 2025 2025 147,400 $89,100 2025 2025 with 1-15 South EL's Difference vs. 2025 152,800 3.7% $105,100 18.0% The vast majority of the revenue increase is reflected in the southern two sections between Magnolia Avenue and El Cerrito Road. As shown in Figure 6-20, of the total 18 percent revenue increase, 85 percent of the revenue increase is concentrated in the single lane section between El Cerrito Road and Cajalco Road and 13 percent of the increase is in the adjacent dual lane section between the Magnolia -Ontario Avenue mixing area and El Cerrito Road. The revenue gains can be attributed to higher express lane demand, a 20 percent increase in HOV-3+ traffic, and resulting higher tolls charged in the single lane section. Usage of the single lane section between El Cerrito Road and Cajalco Road in 2025 exceeds 1,300 vehicles per hour in three of four AM peak period hours and three of four PM peak period hours. By increasing demand slightly, express lane demand in the single lane sections increases above threshold levels of 1,500 vehicles per hour and requires toll increases to keep Express Lane speeds above near or at free - flow levels. ® Stantec 6.185 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast $35,000 $30,000 $25,000 $20,000 $15,000 $10,000 $5,000 $0 Figure 6-20: Impact of 1-15 South EL on 1-15 ELP Revenue ecPo °�\fie b�rS� Jo\\e' (DO �o • 0 o S� bO Go G�\\od�° S\o�\� ° b�rS ��e�' °�ac)� ��G S S\ O 2025 2025 w/ I-15 South EL Scenario SR 60-Cantu Galleano Cantu Galleano- s/o Limonite s/o Limonite- s/o 6th St s/o 6th St- Hidden Valley Hidden Valley-s/o Magnolia s/o Magnolia -El Cerrito El Cerrito - Cajalco Total 2025 $4, 003 $15, 705 $18, 288 $10, 999 $4, 547 $18, 989 $16, 524 $89, 056 2025 w/ 1-15 South EL $4,072 $15,544 $18,044 $11,318 $4,899 $21,043 $30,176 $105,095 Change $69 -$161 -$244 $319 $351 $2,053 $13,652 $16,039 %of Change 0% -1% -2% 2% 2% 13% 85% 100% 6.4.3.2 The impact of Widening Temescal Canyon Road, 2030 Project In 2030, global traffic on 1-15 is expected to drop in response to the planned widening of Temescal Canyon Road between El Cerrito Road and Indian Truck Trail from two to four lanes. The widening would span approximately 8 miles and double the arterial's capacity. Temescal Canyon Road is parallel to I-15 and its improvement is expected to divert traffic away from the 1-15 GP and Express Lanes. The change is most noticeable between Ontario Avenue and Dos Lagos Road, which would see a traffic decline of approximately 3 percent. Figure 6-21 and Figure 6-22 show northbound and southbound global traffic and the percentage impact when Temescal Canyon Road is widened. On an absolute volume basis, the northbound 1-15 between Dos Lagos Road and El Cerrito Road would lose approximately 4,000 vehicles per day while the southbound 1-15 would lose about 3,500 vehicles per day. Given these sections of 1-15 directly parallel Temescal Canyon Road, the amount of traffic that is expected to be lost to Temescal Canyon Road is reasonable. North of Ontario Avenue, the impact on global traffic is less prominent. Northbound, traffic north of Ontario Avenue is lower by approximately 0.5 percent. Southbound, traffic to the north oscillates between slightly lower (-0.2 percent south of SR 60) to ® Stantec 6.186 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast slightly higher (+0.1 percent in the vicinity of 6th Street). Traffic increases to the north are small, and can be interpreted as in the range of model noise. Figure 6-21: Northbound Global Traffic, Impact of Widening Temescal Canyon Road 150,000 140,000 130,000 120,000 • 110,000 v 100,000 2 90,000 c 80,000 -a 70,000 60,000 m 50,000 3 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 2035X27net 50pct_I4 t% Impact of 2030 Improvements 1♦ -0.4% T 0.5% _w i 0.3% 0.0% �L T T T T Y 3.0 Ob J Qt� S, q1 4o ,\o i60Z o0� a\G o r SG5b,a•`�'& • a�G o yoo, 10 o��QGQ�\Q �`�,o5� ,c, ao q Oe 005 Sa 4.5% 4.0% 3.5% 3.0% 2.5% 2.0% 1.5% 1.0% 0.5% 0.0% - 0.5% - 1.0% - 1.5% - 2.0% - 2.5% - 3.0% - 3.5% 4.0% Figure 6-22: Southbound Global Traffic, Impact of Widening Temescal Canyon Road 150,000 140,000 130,000 - 120,000 110,000 u 100,000 0 90,000 O - 80,000 - _0.2 -0 70,000 v 60,000 - 3 50,000 - 40,000 30,000 20,000 - 10,000 - 0 2035X27net 50pct_I4 -E-% Impact of 2030 Improvements 4.5% - 4.0% ;- aml_ - 3.5% 3.0% -- 2.5% - 2.0% - - 1.0% - 0.5% 0.0% - -0.5% - 1.5% 2.57 - -2.0% - 2.5% -3.0% 1.5% - -3.5% 4.0% c; \�o�cANa �UO otk�\o o�600 G‹s ots ro5 o\� °t\Q ale %e o,Gc>05,' �'s) So b�r �e.0 \o �e a o�ScpaqOG°•&. aa�G \��0 Stantec 6.187 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast The widening of Temescal Canyon Road, expected in 2030, is expected to reduce weekday express traffic by 2 percent and reduce weekday revenue by 16 percent. Table 6-18 shows how the improvements expected in year 2030 are expected to impact the 1-15 ELP traffic and revenue. The 16 percent decline is almost entirely attributable to traffic and revenue declines in the two southerly express lane segments. As shown in Figure 6-23, two-thirds of the revenue decline is seen in the single lane section between El Cerrito Road and Cajalco Road. The Temescal Canyon Road widening's northern limit is at El Cerrito Road, so it would be reasonable to expect the largest demand reduction in this section. Express traffic in the single lane section is at or above threshold levels during all four AM peak period and all four PM peak period hours without the Temescal Canyon Road widening. If Temescal Canyon Road were widened, the reduction in 1-15 global traffic results in lower Express Lane demand and a substantial reduction in tolls. Table 6-18: Average Weekday Transactions and Revenue, Impact of 2030 Project Socioeconomics Network Average Weekday EL Transactions Average Weekday Revenue (2015 $'s) 2035 2027: 2025 with 1-15 South EL's 223,800 $234,300 2035 2030: 2025 w/ I-15 South EL's and Widened Temescal Canyon Rd Change, Widen Temescal Canyon Road 219,000 -2% $197,100 -16% ® Stantec 6.188 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast $80,000 $70,000 $60,000 $50,000 $40,000 Figure 6-23 Impact of Temescal Canyon Road on 1-15 ELP Revenue $30,000 $20,000 $10,000 $0 \oo \o �o ra\\a ,o \oo a�o �bo �o�6 o o (0 G al 0��G x� ao so.\o � oSeaS\ o •k Gopc o�xv �o o S %° ove�bQ5\°br a o�5 Sao 5\ \s) 6e � �aa�G 2035x27 , 2035x30 Scenario SR 60-Cantu Galleano Cantu Galleano- s/o Limonite s/o Limonite- s/o bth St s/o 6th St - Hidden Valley Hidden Valley-s/o Magnolia s/o Magnolia -El Cerrito El Cerrito- Cajalco Total 2035 w/ 2025 Net & 1-15 South EL $9, 467 $26, 715 $35, 694 $17,177 $67, 980 $66,106 $234, 301 Add Temescal Canyon Rd $9, 338 $26, 623 $35, 257 $16,610 $10, 756 $57,312 $41, 224 $197,120 Change -$129 -$93 -$438 -$567 -$405 -$10, 668 -$24,882 -$37,181 % of Change 0% 0% 1% 2% 1% 29% 67% 100% 6.4.3.3 Impact of Network Improvements in 2035 By 2035 1-15 ELP corridor traffic would decline by 5 to 10 percent because of a variety of improvements including parallel arterial widenings, an expected change in HOV policy, and the addition of a direct connector ramp between the 1-15 ELP north of SR 91 and the SR 91 Express Lanes ("1-15 North DC"). The improvements are listed below and illustrated in Figure 6-24. o The widening of Archibald Avenue, between Limonite Avenue and 2nd Street o The widening of Temescal Canyon Road south of Indian Truck Trail o The widening of SR 71 and upgrading to an expressway south of SR 60 o The widening of Van Buren Blvd south of SR 91 o The addition of the Schleisman Road / 1-15 interchange Stantec 6.189 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast o A change in HOV lane policy requiring 3 passengers per vehicle rather than 2 passengers. o Opening of the SR 91 West-1-15 North express lanes direct connector ("North DC"). o Opening of Mid -County Parkway in Perris These capacity improvements generally divert traffic away from the 1-15 ELP corridor and would reduce GP lane congestion and 1-15 ELP usage. Figure 6-25 and Figure 6-26 demonstrate how northbound and southbound global traffic would change when the improvements scheduled for 2035 are constructed. Northbound traffic would decline by about 7 percent south of SR 91, or minus approximately 9,000 vehicles per day, and decline by about 5 percent north of SR 91, or minus approximately 5,000 vehicles per day. Unlike most 1-15 ELP sections, traffic on the 1-15 between Limonite Avenue and Schleisman Road would increase by 4.7 percent in the northbound direction and decrease by 2.2 percent in the southbound direction. The differential behavior is caused by the opening of the Schleisman Road interchange with 1-15 in 2035, which would draw more traffic to 1-15. The regional shift in HOV policy causes a diversion of HOV-3+ traffic away from the 1-15 ELP corridor to other freeway corridors, including the 1-215. Vehicles shift to these other facilities in response to improved travel conditions on regional carpool lanes. With a HOV-2+ carpool policy, usage of carpool lanes is high and results in areas of congestion. By requiring a HOV-3+ carpool policy, however, the carpool lanes become less utilized, less congested, and more attractive to HOV-3+ vehicles previously using the I-15 ELP corridor. Cli Stantec 6.190 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast Figure 6-24: 2026 to 2035 Improvements 5 Stantec 6.191 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast Figure 6-25: Northbound Global Traffic, Impact of 2035 Improvements 150,000 140,000 130,000 120,000 110,000 100,000 v v 90,000 80,000 a Y 70,000 a� 3 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 2035X30net 50pct_FINAL t% Impact of 2035 Improvements 4.7% -6.3% -7.7% 6.0% - 4.0% - 2.0% - 0.0% - -2.0% - -4.0% - -6.0% -8.0% - -10.0% 12.0% bO �a�r cD �� ho Go •k-�a�6. a `' o or�`oS�Gf�o �aa O G\J �;r\c.•� •4\ •. vS�S • a`aO°Go°oa. SGr�z bar �• aao q` Oc GQ� O°S Northbound 1-15 Cantu -SR 60 Limonite- Cantu Schliesman- Limonite 6th St- Schliesman 2nd St - 6th St Hidden Valley-2nd St 91-Hidden Valley Ontario-91 Ontario- Magnolia El Cerrito- Ontario Cajalco-El Cerrito Dos Lagos - Cajalco 2035 w/o Improvements 117,116 107,686 107,360 107,358 105,814 108,572 105,183 134,899 126,277 125,784 124,792 117,685 Traffic Change w/ Improvements (5,475) (5,160) 5,015 (3,883) (4,336) (5,305) (10,925) (9,512) (10,615) (7,668) (7,851) (9,005) ® Stantec 6.192 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast Figure 6-26: Southbound Global Traffic, Impact of 2035 Improvements llllllllllllllll� 2035X30net 50pct_FINAL t% Impact of 2035 Improvements 150,000 140,000 130,000 120,000 110,000 100,000 a 90,000 >, 80,000 0 Y 70,000 cu 60,000 3 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 �� dOoG� deb � �Ga� b °S c.; � eA ac3�"��0° crdd ��o b°�5\ o S�` oo rL 0.0% - 2.0% - 4.0% - 6.0% - 8.0% - 10.0% -12.0% - 14.0% 16.0% Southbound 1-15 Cantu -SR 60 Limonite- Cantu Schliesman- Limonite 6th St- Schliesman 2nd St - 6th St Hidden Valley-2nd St 91-Hidden Valley Ontario-91 Ontario- Magnolia El Cerrito- Ontario Cajalco-EI Cerrito Dos Lagos- Cajalco 2035 w/o Improvements 117,531 108,557 110,639 110,640 109,102 108,280 100,168 130,191 121,794 117,487 114,332 102,866 Traffic Change w/ Improvements (12,822) (9,901) (2,447) (8,612) (7,917) (8,737) (14,768) (10,564) (6,608) (6,841) (5,849) (4,434) ® Stantec 6.193 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast Roadway improvements expected to be completed by 2035 are expected to reduce I-15 ELP transactions by 18 percent and reduce revenue by 38 percent, as shown in Table 6-19. Revenue drops in 1-15 ELP sections both north and south of SR 91, as shown in Figure 6-27. Approximately 60 percent of the revenue loss is attributable to declines in the two segments between the Magnolia -Ontario mixing area and the southern terminus at Cajalco Road, while another 29 percent of the revenue decline is attributable to the two dual lane sections between Cantu Galleano Ranch Road and the 6th Street-2nd Street mixing area. Unlike the addition of the I-15 South EL's and widening of Temescal Canyon Road, I-15 ELP sections north of SR 91 see revenue loss because arterials north of SR 91 would see capacity improvements. Table 6-19: Average Weekday Transactions and Revenue, Impact of 2035 Projects Socioeconomics Network Average Weekday EL Transactions Average Weekday Revenue (2015 $'s) 2030: (2025 w/ I-15 South EL's 2035 and Widened Temescal 219,000 $197,100 Canyon Rd) 2035 (widen various arterials, Schleisman interchange, North 2035 Connector, Mid County 179,900 $121,300 Parkway) Change, Various Roadway Improvements -18% -38% ® Stantec 6.194 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast Figure 6-27 Impact of 2035 Improvements on 1-15 ELP Revenue $70,000 $60,000 $50,000 $40,000 $30,000 $20,000 $10,000 $0 oa�o oc o bar o\off �`°\\a o• o a\oo o �� ° a°� �G Gp\ 0 o 5 0 �` � o c,,J oS\ „``0 �\aa s,° o%, °� b Ga �oa� ��° r aOzA CO (G J Se a�`J�a S\° 50 b • aao� Sao G •2 ■ 2035x30 ■ 2035 Scenario SR 60-Cantu Galleano Cantu Galleano- s/o Limonite s/o Limonite- s/o 6th St s/o 6th St- Hidden Valley Hidden Valley-s/o Magnolia s/o Magnolia -El Cerrito El Cerrito - Cajalco Total 2035 w/ 2035 Network w/ Temescal Widening Only $9,338 $26,623 $35,257 $16,610 $10,756 $57,312 $41,224 $197,120 Add 2035 Network Improvemen is $6,256 $19,377 $20,895 $15,604 $7,234 $28,747 $23,170 $121,283 Change -$3,082 -$7,246 -$14,362 -$1,006 -$3,522 -$28,565 -$18,055 -$75,838 %of Change 4% 10% 19% 1% 5% 38% 24% 100% In 2035, HOV-3+ as a share of 1-15 ELP traffic is expected to decline from 25 to 18 percent, partly due to an assumed regional HOV policy change from HOV-2+ carpool lanes to HOV-3+ carpool lanes. Table 6-20 shows how HOV share on the 1-15 ELP's changes with the addition of roadway improvements. In 2025, 21 percent of 1-15 ELP traffic would be HOV-3+ and this would increase to 25 percent when the 1-15 South EL's (assumed as a HOV-3+ free facility) would be constructed. By 2035, the share would drop to 18 percent of all express traffic. Currently, Southern California HOV facilities, illustrated in Figure 6-28, generally have a HOV-2+ requirement. Usage in many facilities is high because of the relative ease of forming HOV-2+ carpools as opposed to HOV-3+. The result of this policy has been heavy utilization and oftentimes results in HOV lanes that operate with delays rather than free -flow. This regional change to HOV-3+ is expected by 2035 Stantec 6.195 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast and would be a mechanism to address the region's carpool lane congestion. The change would draw HOV-3+ carpools away from 1-15 to other freeways including SR 60 and 1-215. HOV- 3+ vehicles would shift away from the 1-15 corridor rather than to it because other carpool lanes are expected to change from heavily traveled and congested HOV-2+ carpool lanes to a more lightly traveled HOV-3+ condition. Table 6-20: HOV Share Change Socioeconomics Network Average Weekday EL Transactions Average Weekday HOV Transactions HOV Share 2025 2025 147,400 31,300 21 2025 2027: 2025 with 1-15 South EL's 152,800 37,600 25% 2035 2027: 2025 with 1-15 South EL's 223,800 55,300 25% 2035 2030: 2025 w/ I-15 South EL's and Widened Temescal Canyon Rd 219,000 54,000 25% 2035 2035: Widen Arterials 179,900 33,200 18% Cli Stantec 6.196 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast Figure 6-28: Existing Carpool Lanes in Southern California VENTURA _ xERN A;Y ita Legend HOWExpress Lanes Status O Direct ConnectorlRamp •H«» Express Lane - ExistinglUnder Construction "44. + Express Lane - Planned HOV Lane - Existing HOV Lane - Planned Toll Road Uncanstructed State Highway County Boundary Urban Area California department of Transportation Division of Traffic Operations December2012 LOS ANGELES i z,p= i xc Cbg. D 5 10 20 oMiles 216 II y = ;rip. RANGE A 11 SAN BERNARDINO \c._ ----..,„„) ____,,,_ Alt,, p. :.! -r 11 15 5 r� RIVERSIDE V SANDIEGO 141 • • ti -w 1 Stantec 6.197 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast A d d 1-15 Express 1 ones Onercitinns Stantec developed a micro -simulation model of the future worst case condition to test 1-15 Express Lanes operations. The model simulated traffic on 1-15 between SR 60 and south of Dos Lagos, but also simulated SR 91 between SR 55 and Pierce Street assuming 2035 trips and a 2027 network. Results show that the express lanes operate at or above 50 miles per hour, although there are pockets of delay caused by high GP lane congestion. On average travel speeds do not degrade below 50 mph with express lane demands of 2,800 vehicles per hour between the Magnolia -Ontario Avenue mixing area and El Cerrito Road, and can operate with volumes as high as 1,650 vehicles per hour between El Cerrito Road and Cajalco Road. While the model shows the Express Lanes functioning without significant queuing, mixing areas where the Express lanes merge into heavily congested GP lanes, such as the El Cerrito Road southbound ELP lane drop need to be monitored, and tolls adjusted to maintain operations. Similarly, operations at the southbound 1-15 ELP southern terminus at Cajalco Road can be impacted by GP lane congestion. By constructing the 1-15 South EL in 2027, the potential for GP lane congestion at the southern terminus to cause queuing in the SB ELP is reduced. In this scenario where the I-15 South EL's are built, it is assumed that the single EL can continue through unimpeded by GP traffic. Express traffic would continue into a dedicated lane which leads into the I-15 South EL's. Figure 6-29 displays a view of the SR 91 / 1-15 interchange looking northeast as simulated in the micro -simulation model. The model shows that the 1-15 SB general purpose lanes as well as the SR 91 EB to southbound direct connector ramp is heavily congested, while the SR 91 EB to 1-15 SB ELP direct connector ramp and the 1-15 SB ELP mainline are operating at or near free -flow speeds. The express lanes mainline south of the SR 91 interchange at or above 60 mph. Figure 6-30 shows that the 1-15 GP lanes further south at the Magnolia Avenue overpass continue to be heavily congested while the Express Lanes continue to operate at or near free -flow speeds. Figure 6-31 shows that the 1-15 GP lanes at the Ontario Avenue overpass (segment between the Magnolia -Ontario mixing area and El Cerrito Road) continue to be heavily congested while the express lanes continue to operate at or near free -flow speeds. In this section and time of day, the simulation model is running with volumes of approximately 2,600 vehicles per hour while the express lanes average running at 51 mph. Within the hour, the express lanes achieve flow rates of nearly 3,200 vehicles per hour. Speeds are somewhat slower in this section due to downstream congestion caused by the Express Lanes merging back into GP lane congestion at El Cerrito Road, shown in Figure 6-32. While some delay is present for the full segment, it is important to note that most of the delay is experienced by vehicles exiting into the GP lanes. Vehicles continuing through on the southbound 1-15 ELP to the southern terminus at Cajalco Road continue past El Cerrito Road without delay. The southernmost single lane section of the southbound 1-15 ELP operates with volumes over 1,550 vehicles per hour between 5 and 6 PM and speeds average 52 miles per hour. Vehicles merging back into the congested GP lanes would experience some delay, but travel without delay for most of the section between El Cerrito Road and Cajalco Road. Figure 6-33 illustrates conditions at the Cajalco Road overpass. ® Stantec 6.198 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast Figure 6-29: Simulation Model of SR 91 / 1-15 Interchange - PM Peak Hour 5 Stantec 6.199 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast Figure 6-30: Simulation Model of 1-15 at the Magnolia Ave Interchange - PM Peak Hour 5 Stantec 6.200 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast Figure 6-31: Simulation Model of 1-15 at the Ontario Ave Interchange - PM Peak Hour 5 Stantec 6.201 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast Figure 6-32: Simulation Model of 1-15 at the El Cerrito Rd Interchange - PM Peak Hour 5 Stantec 6.202 1-15 EXPRESS LANES INVESTMENT GRADE TRAFFIC AND REVENUE STUDY Traffic and Revenue Forecast Figure 6-33: Simulation Model of 1-15 at the Cajalco Rd Interchange - PM Peak Hour Stantec 6.203 AGENDA ITEM 8K RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 8, 2016 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Lorelle Moe -Luna, Senior Management Analyst Shirley Medina, Planning and Programming Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Resolution No. 16-010 Regarding the 2016 Title VI Program Report Update, Including the Public Participation Plan and Language Assistance Plan BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to adopt Resolution No. 16-010, "Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Regarding the 2016 Title VI Program Report Update, Including the Public Participation Plan and Language Assistance Plan", in compliance with Federal Transit Administration (FTA) requirements. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and its amendments protect persons in the United States from being excluded from participation in, denied the benefits of, or subjected to discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance. In March 2015, the Commission approved the Title VI Program, including its Public Participation Plan and Language Assistance Plan in accordance with the requirements set forth in FTA Circular 4702.1B, Title VI Requirements and Guidelines for Federal Transit Administration Recipients. The report is required to be updated at least every three years. FTA revised the Commission's triennial due date and the current report will expire in July 2016. The proposed submittal covers activities from August 2013 until present. Revisions in this update are minor and include the omission of activities before August 2013, the addition of activities since the March 2015 report such as public outreach efforts, and formatting changes. Upon Commission approval of the Title VI Program, staff will submit the report to FTA for concurrence and approval of the report by the Regional Civil Rights Office is anticipated within 30 days. Agenda Item 8K 180 There is no financial impact to the Commission budget with the adoption of this program. Upon adoption of the Title VI Program, any expenses incurred to implement Title VI Program will be part of the Rail Operations annual budget. Attachments: 1) Resolution No. 16-010 2) Title VI Program Report (Posted on Commission Website) Agenda Item 8K 181 RESOLUTION 16-010 RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION REGARDING THE 2016 TITLE VI PROGRAM REPORT UPDATE, INCLUDING PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN AND LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PLAN WHEREAS, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 states, no person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance; and WHEREAS, as a recipient of Federal Transportation Administration (FTA) funds, the Commission is required to adhere to all provisions established in Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act; and WHEREAS, RCTC is committed to a policy of nondiscrimination in the conduct of its business, including its Title VI responsibilities, and to the delivery of equitable and accessible transportation services; and WHEREAS, RCTC is required to update the Title IV Program every three years; and NOW, THEREFORE, the Riverside County Transportation Commission does hereby resolve as follows: Section 1. Section 2. The Title VI Program Report previously adopted on March 11, 2015, is hereby replaced in its entirety by the 2016 Title Program Report, set forth in Attachment 1, attached hereto and incorporated herein. The Riverside County Transportation Commission hereby approves and adopts the 2016 Title VI Program Report, including Public Participation Plan and Language Assistance Plan, as revised to be effective immediately. APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 8th day of June, 2016. ATTEST: Jennifer Harmon Clerk of the Board Scott Matas, Chair Riverside County Transportation Commission 182 ATTACHMENT 2 TITLE VI PROGRAM REPORT J U N E 2016 Prepared for the Federal Transit Administration in accordance with FTA Circular 4702.1 B MIN mom Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor Riverside, CA 92501 If information is needed in another language, please contact (951) 787-7141 for free translation services. Si se neceisita este document en Espanol, Ilame al 951-787-7141 para servicios de traduccion gratuitos. Table of Contents Introduction and Purpose 1 Background of RCTC 2 Title VI Notice to the Public 3 Title VI Complaint Procedures and Complaint Form 4 List of Transit -Related Title VI Investigations, Complaints, or Lawsuits 5 Public Participation Plan 5 Language Assistance Plan 5 Membership of Non -Elected Committees and Councils 6 Subrecipient Compliance 7 Title VI Equity Analysis for Determining the Site or Location of Facilities 8 Approval of the Title VI Program 8 Appendices Appendix A: Title VI Policy, Procedures, and Complaint Form (English and Spanish) Appendix B: Public Participation Plan Appendix C: Language Assistance Plan Appendix D: Documentation of Governing Body Approval Introduction and Purpose Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects persons in the United States from being excluded from participation in, denied the benefits of, or subjected to discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance. The Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC or Commission) is committed to ensuring that its services are delivered and implemented in accordance with Title VI and other non-discriminatory regulations from the state and federal levels. As a state recipient, RCTC complies with the guidelines set forth by the State of California's (State) Department of Transportation (Caltrans). Caltrans requires local agencies to adopt a non-discriminatory notice, grievance procedures, complaint form, and a Coordinator of the program. These were approved by the Commission on October 10, 2012 for implementing Title VI and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). RCTC is also a recipient under the federal Department of Transportation (DOT). Under the DOT, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) requirements for implementing Title VI include the adoption of a Title VI Program report pursuant to FTA Circular 4702.1B, Title VI Requirements and Guidelines for Federal Transit Administration Recipients. The purpose of this report is to certify RCTC's compliance with FTA Circular 4702.1B every three years. As stated in Chapter II, page 1 of the Circular, RCTC will ensure that Title VI compliance is carried out in all of its programs and services, whether federally -funded or not, "Title VI covers all of the operations of covered entities without regard to whether specific portions of the covered program or activity are federally funded... In other words, a recipient may engage in activities not described in the Circular, such as ridesharing program, roadway incident response program, or other programs not funded by FTA, and those programs must also be administered in a nondiscriminatory manner." The Circular has general requirements for all recipients and additional guidelines for Fixed Route Transit Providers, States, and Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs). As the Regional Transportation Planning Agency (RTPA) and County Transportation Commission (CTC), the following general requirements and guidelines apply: 1) Title VI Notice to the Public 2) Title VI Complaint Procedures 3) Title VI Complaint Form 4) List of transit -related Title VI investigations, complaints, or lawsuits 5) Public Participation Plan 1 2016 TITLE VI PROGRAM REPORT 6) Language Assistance Plan 7) A table depicting the membership on non -elected committees broken down by race 8) Monitoring procedures for Subrecipients 9) Title VI equity analysis for the site and location of facilities 10) Documentation that the governing board has reviewed and approved the Title VI Program The following sections of this report document how the Commission is in compliance with each requirement. Background of RCTC The Commission was established in 1976 by the State to oversee the funding and coordination of all public transportation services within Riverside 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. As the designated RTPA and CTC, its responsibilities include setting policies, establishing priorities, coordinating activities among the County's various transit operators and local jurisdictions. The public is most familiar with RCTC for its capital projects and motorist aid services. The various regional capital projects that RCTC is involved in throughout the County include the following: ✓ State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project ✓ State Route 91 High Occupancy Vehicle Project ✓ Mid -County Parkway ✓ Realignment of State Route 79 ✓ Expansion of Metrolink from Riverside to Perris ✓ State Route 60 Truck Climbing Lanes ✓ Interstate 15 Corridor Improvement Project ✓ State Route 91/71 Interchange Project ✓ Interstate 10/ State Route 60 Interchange The Commission also 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 that assist motorists with disabled vehicles on the main highways of the County during peak rush hour traffic periods; and Rideshare programs such as Inland Empire 511 (IE511), a traveler information system. 2 2016 TITLE VI PROGRAM REPORT These programs and projects are funded with various local, state, and federal sources. Local funding sources consist of Measure A, the countywide sales tax; Debt proceeds, derived from issuing bonds; and Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees (TUMF), derived from developer impact fees. State funding sources for projects are derived from the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). RCTC also receives apportionments of federal Surface Transportation Program (STP) and Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) funds from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA); and FTA Sections 5307, 5309, 5337 formula funds. Additionally, the Commission was also awarded an FTA Small Starts grant for the Perris Valley Line. The Commission is unique in that it is not a transit provider like many other CTCs, however, does receive FTA formula funds (under the Rail Program) for transfer and expenditure for the Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA or Metrolink). Regardless of funding source, RCTC is committed to ensuring that its projects and services are delivered and implemented in a non-discriminatory manner. Title VI Notice to the Public Recipients must notify beneficiaries of protections under Title VI by posting a notice in public locations that confirms that the recipient complies with Title VI and provides instructions on how to file a Title VI complaint to RCTC and directly to the FTA. The following notice is available on RCTC's website, RCTC owned Metrolink stations, and at the front desk of RCTC's offices at 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor, Riverside, CA 92501. RCTC operates its programs and services without regard to race, color, and national origin in accordance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. Any person who believes she or he has been aggrieved by any unlawful discriminatory practice under Title VI may file a complaint with RCTC. For more information on RCTC's Title VI program, and the procedures to file a complaint, contact (951) 787-7141; email standifo@rctc.org; or visit our administrative office at 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor, Riverside, CA 92501. For more information, you may also visit our website at www.rctc.orq for additional information and to download a complaint form under "About Us". 3 2016 TITLE VI PROGRAM REPORT A complainant may file a complaint directly with the Federal Transit Administration by filing a complaint with the Office of Civil Rights, Attention: Title VI Program Coordinator, East Building, 5th Floor — TCR, 1200 New Jersey Avenue., SE, Washington, DC 20590. If information is needed in another language, contact (951) 787-7141. The notice is considered a vital document and is available in Spanish, consistent with DOT limited -English proficient (LEP) guidance and RCTC's Language Assistance Plan (LAP). The Spanish translation is also posted where English versions are located. See Appendix A for a complete English and Spanish version the Commission's Title VI Policy, Procedures, and Complaint form. Title VI Complaint Procedures and Complaint Form Requirements stipulate that recipients develop procedures for investigating and tracking Title VI complaints filed against them and make their procedures for filing a complaint available to members of the public. Recipients must also develop a Title VI complaint form and make this form available. RCTC's Complaint Procedures and Complaint Form are provided in Appendix A. Similar to the Non -Discrimination policy requirements of Caltrans, the Deputy Executive Director, John Standiford, has been identified as the Civil Rights Liaison and will be the primary contact for addressing Title VI complaints. The procedures explain that any person, or group of persons, who believes that they have been subjected to discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin may file a complaint to RCTC, or directly to FTA. RCTC will render a decision within 15 days upon follow-up with the complainant. The Circular also requires that the recipient explicitly state that a complainant has the opportunity to submit a complaint directly to FTA and must provide the contact information for submitting a complaint. These documents are available on RCTC's website and at the front desk of RCTC's offices at 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor, Riverside, CA 92501. In addition to the public notice, the complaint procedures and form are considered vital documents and as such are available in Spanish, consistent with the DOT LEP Guidance and RCTC's LAP. 4 2016 TITLE VI PROGRAM REPORT List of Transit -Related Title VI Investigations, Complaints, or Lawsuits FTA requires that files of investigations, complaints, or lawsuits that pertain to allegations of discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in transit -related activities and programs be maintained for three years and a list of cases be held for five years. RCTC has not received any transit -related Title VI complaints, nor has it been involved in any transit -related Title VI investigations or lawsuits. Public Participation Plan Recipients are required to promote inclusive public participation and seek out and consider the needs and input of the general public, including interested parties and those traditionally underserved by existing transportation systems, such as minority and LEP persons. The Public Participation Plan is the established process or plan that describes the proactive strategies, procedures, and desired outcomes of a recipient's public participation activities. RCTC developed its Public Participation Plan by considering the demographic analysis of the population(s) affected, the type of plan, program, and/or service under consideration, and the resources available to the Commission. The Public Participation Plan is provided as Appendix B. Language Assistance Plan Recipients are required to take reasonable steps to ensure meaningful access to benefits, services, information, and other important portions of its programs or activities for LEP populations. FTA Circular 47O2.1B details the components of the Language Assistance Plan, including the Four Factor Analysis, which provides a careful analysis of LEP persons that the recipient may encounter to determine the specific language services that are appropriate to provide. 5 2016 TITLE VI PROGRAM REPORT RCTC undertook the Four Factor Analysis and developed appropriate language assistance planning based on the results. The Commission then developed a Language Assistance Plan to assist it in effectively implementing the requirements and communicating with LEP individuals. The Language Assistance Plan is provided as Appendix C. Membership of Non -Elected Committees and Councils Recipients that have transit -related, non -elected planning boards, advisory councils or committees, or similar bodies, in which the membership is selected by the recipient, must provide a table depicting the racial breakdown of the membership of those committees, and a description of efforts made to encourage the participation of minorities on such committees or councils. RCTC has one transit -related committee that is applicable to this requirement, the Citizens Advisory Committee/Social Services Transportation Advisory Committee (CAC/SSTAC). Section 99238 of the State Transportation Development Act (TDA) regulations requires the Commission to have a CAC/SSTAC as part of the oversight process in administering the TDA funds. The TDA allows stipulates the membership of this body: 1) One representative of a potential transit user 60 years of age and older; 2) One representative of a potential transit user who is disabled; 3) Two representatives of the social service providers for seniors; 4) Two representatives of the social service providers for the disabled, including one representative of a social service transportation provider, if one exists; 5) One representative of a social service provider for persons of limited means; and 6) Two representatives of a Consolidated Transportation Service Agency(s) designated as such pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 15975 of the Government Code, including one representative from an operator, if one exists. The CAC/SSTAC serves the Commission by participating in the transit needs hearing and reviewing the Short Range Transit Plans developed by public transit operators as part of the Commission's annual budget development process. Most importantly, the CAC/SSTAC provides a dialogue between citizen appointee representatives and the public transit and specialized transit programs of Riverside County around matters of mutual concern and provides the Commission with invaluable community feedback. 6 2016 TITLE VI PROGRAM REPORT Appointments are for an initial one-year term and some will be extended in the future to ensure continuity of service for the Committee. The adopted bylaws for the CAC/SSTAC state that membership can consist of up to fifteen members appointed by the Commission, in the manner provided by the Commission in accordance with Section 99238. In the 2013 process of appointing new members to a restructured CAC/SSTAC, opportunity for application was broadly noticed in media, on the RCTC website, and in various outreach settings, including asking Commissioners for input and conducting individualized outreach to social service providers. Several dozen applications were received and, in vetting these for potential appointment to the CAC, care was taken to address the diversity, including racial and ethnic representation, called for in the SSTAC guidelines. A breakdown of the current nine members' race and ethnicity follows. There is additional racial and ethnic diversity among the transit agency representatives who also participate, but not appointed members of the CAC/SSTAC. Citizens Advisory Committee/Social Services Transportation Advisory Council Race Caucasian Latino African American Asian American Native American CAC/SSTAC 60% 30% 10% Subrecipient Compliance If a recipient is a primary recipient, which means any FTA recipient that extends federal financial assistance to a subrecipient, then it is required to ensure that subrecipients are complying with Title VI, including the submittal of a subrecipient's Title VI documents. RCTC has a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA), better known as Metrolink, which enables them to request FTA reimbursement through RCTC. However, since Metrolink is also a direct recipient of FTA funds and submits a Title VI report directly, RCTC is not required to monitor its Title VI procedures, as stipulated in Chapter III, page 11 of the Circular, "When a subrecipient is also a direct recipient of FTA funds, that is, applies for funds directly from FTA in addition to receiving funds from a primary recipient, the subrecipient/direct recipient reports directly to FTA and the primary recipient/designated recipient is not responsible for monitoring compliance of that subrecipient." 7 2016 TITLE VI PROGRAM REPORT Title VI Equity Analysis for Determining the Site or Location of Facilities This requirement stipulates that recipients should complete a Title VI equity analysis during the planning stage with regard to where a project is located or sited to ensure the location is selected without regard to race, color, or national origin. The equity analysis must include: • Outreach to persons potentially impacted by the siting of facilities. • Comparison of the equity impacts of various siting alternatives, and the analysis must occur before the selection of the preferred site. The purpose of completing a Title VI analysis during the project development stage is to determine if a project will have disparate impacts on the basis of race, color, or national origin. If such impacts exist then the project may move forward with the proposed location if there is substantial legitimate justification for locating the project there, and there are no alternative locations that would have a less adverse impact on members of a group protected under Title VI. For purposes of this requirement, the Circular states that "facilities" does not include bus shelters, as they are transit amenities and are covered under the additional requirements for fixed route transit operators, nor does it include transit stations, power substations, etc., as those are evaluated during project development and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process. Facilities included in this provision include, but are not limited to, storage facilities, maintenance facilities, operations centers, etc. There have not been any projects in the last three years requiring an equity analysis. Approval of the Title VI Program All recipients are required to provide documentation such as meeting minutes, resolution, or other appropriate documentation showing that the governing body reviewed and approved the Title VI Program prior to submission to FTA. RCTC's Title VI Program was reviewed and approved by the Budget and Implementation Committee on May 23, 2016 and forwarded to the full Commission for approval on June 8, 8 2016 TITLE VI PROGRAM REPORT 2016. Appendix D includes a copy of the meeting minutes and staff report for evidence of approval. 9 2016 TITLE VI PROGRAM REPORT This page left intentionally blank. APPENDIX A: TITLE VI POLICY NOTICE, COMPLAINT PROCEDURES, AND COMPLAINT FORM (ENGLISH AND SPANISH) This page left intentionally blank. Title VI Program — Appendix A r `o Pierside [ounlp hnsperlNrn (cnmauion RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION TITLE VI NOTICE, COMPLAINT PROCEDURES, AND COMPLAINT FORM Revised June 2016 In accordance with the requirements of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Circular 4702.1 B, the Riverside County Transportation Commission (Commission) is required to notify beneficiaries of protection under Title VI, develop complaint procedures, and develop a complaint form. These documents are considered vital and are translated into languages other than English, as needed and consistent with the Department of Transportation's (DOT) Limited English Proficiency (LEP) Guidance and the Commission's Language Assistance Plan (LAP). I. POLICY AND NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC It is the policy of the Commission to not discriminate or exclude individuals on the basis of race, color, or national origin in admission to its programs, services, or activities, in access to them, in treatment of, or in any aspect of operations. The following notice shall be posted on the Commission's website, main reception area, and relevant publication materials: RCTC operates its programs and services without regard to race, color, and national origin in accordance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. Any person who believes she or he has been aggrieved by any unlawful discriminatory practice under Title VI may file a complaint with RCTC. For more information on RCTC's Title VI program, and the procedures to file a complaint, contact (951) 787-7141; email standifo@rctc.or_q; or visit our administrative office at 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor, Riverside, CA 92501. For more information, you may also visit our website at www.rctc.org for additional information and to download a complaint form under 'About Us" A complainant may file a complaint directly with the Federal Transit Administration by filing a complaint with the Office of Civil Rights, Attention: Title VI Program Coordinator, East Building, 5rn Floor — TCR, 1200 New Jersey Avenue., SE, Washington, DC 20590. Page 1 of 5 Title VI Program — Appendix A Nil INNER Pierside foully ironspcdulicn Commission If information is needed in another language, contact (951) 787- 7141. II. PROCEDURES FOR FILING, INVESTIGATING, AND TRACKING COMPLAINTS Any person, group of individuals, or entity that believes it has been subjected to discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin may file a complaint with directly or by a representative to the Commission or to the DOT FTA. Submission of Complaint to RCTC To file a complaint with RCTC, the complainant may contact the main reception at (951) 787-7141 to request a copy of the complaint form and procedures, or visit the website at www.rctc.orq to download the complaint form and procedures. When possible, the complainant should complete the complaint form, or in writing provide information about the alleged discrimination containing the following: • Name of Complainant; • Address of Complainant; • Phone number of Complainant; • Date of incident; • Location of incident; and • Description of incident In cases where the complainant is unable or incapable of providing a written statement, the complainant may be interviewed or the complaint form may also be provided in alternative means such as audio or Braille. The complaint should be submitted as soon as possible but no later than 180 calendar days after the alleged violation to the Deputy Executive Director by email at standifo@rctc.org, postal mail, or in person at the following: Riverside County Transportation Commission John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director 4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor P. O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 If the information provided is insufficient to conduct an investigation or render a decision, RCTC may request additional information from the complainant. Failure of the complainant to submit additional information within the designated time frame may be considered good cause to administratively close the case on the basis of lack of investigative merit. Page 2 of 5 Title VI Program — Appendix A Within 15 calendar days after receipt of the complaint, RCTC's Deputy Executive Director, or designee, will request a meeting to discuss the alleged incident with the complainant. Within 15 calendar days of the discussion, RCTC will respond in writing, and where appropriate, in a format accessible to the complainant. The response will explain the position of RCTC and offer options for resolution of the complaint. If the complainant is not satisfied with the decision by the Deputy Executive Director, or designee, an appeal may be filed within 15 calendar days after receipt of the response, to RCTC's Executive Director. Within 15 calendar days after receipt of the appeal, the Executive Director, or designee, will request a meeting to discuss the alleged incident with the complainant. Within 15 calendar days after the meeting, the Executive Director or designee will respond in writing, and, where appropriate, in a format accessible to the complainant, with a final decision of the complaint. Submission of Complaint to FTA The complainant has the right to submit a complaint directly to the FTA, however, is encouraged to initially file with RCTC. As described in FTA Circular 4702.1 B, Chapter IX, to file with the FTA, the complaint must submitted no later than 180 days after the date of alleged discrimination at the address below, unless the time for filing is extended by FTA. Federal Transit Administration Office of Civil Rights Title VI Program Coordinator East Building, 5th Floor — TCR 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590 Once a complaint has been accepted by FTA for investigation, FTA will notify RCTC that it is the subject of a Title VI complaint and ask RCTC to respond in writing to the complainant's allegations. If the complainant agrees to release the complaint to RCTC, FTA will provide the agency with the complaint, which may have personal information redacted at the request of the complainant. If the complainant does not agree to release the complaint to RCTC, FTA may choose to close the complaint. FTA will make a prompt investigation whenever a compliance review, report, complaint, or any other information indicates a possible failure to comply with DOT's Title VI regulations. The investigation will include, where appropriate, a review of the pertinent practices and policies of the recipient, the circumstances under which the possible noncompliance with DDT's Title VI regulations Page 3 of 5 Title VI Program — Appendix A Nil INNER Pierside foully ironspcdulicn Commission occurred, and other factors relevant to a determination as to whether the recipient has failed to comply with DOT's Title VI regulations. After FTA has concluded the investigation, FTA's Office of Civil Rights will transmit to the complainant and RCTC one of the following letters based on its findings: a. A letter of finding indicating FTA did not find a violation of DOT's Title VI regulations. This letter will include an explanation of why FTA did not find a violation. If applicable, the letter may include a list of procedural violations or concerns, which will put RCTC on notice that certain practices are questionable and that without corrective steps, a future violation finding is possible. b. A letter of finding indicating RCTC is in violation of DOT's Title VI regulations. The letter will include each violation referenced to the applicable regulation, a brief description of proposed remedies, notice of the time limit on coming into compliance, the consequences of failure to achieve voluntary compliance, and an offer of assistance to RCTC in devising a remedial plan for compliance, if appropriate. FTA will administratively close Title VI complaints before a resolution is reached where (1) the complainant decides to withdraw the case; (2) the complainant is not responsive to FTA's requests for information or to sign a consent release form; (3) FTA has conducted or plans to conduct a related compliance review of the agency against which the complaint is lodged; (4) litigation has been filed raising similar allegations involved in the complaint; (5) the complaint was not filed within 180 days of the alleged discrimination; (6) the complaint does not indicate a possible violation of 49 CFR part 21; (7) the complaint is so weak, insubstantial, or lacking in detail that FTA determines it is without merit, or so replete with incoherent or unreadable statements that it, as a whole, cannot be considered to be grounded in fact; (8) the complaint has been investigated by another agency and the resolution of the complaint meets DOT regulatory standards; (9) the complaint allegations are foreclosed by previous decisions of the Federal courts, the Secretary, DOT policy determinations, or the U.S. DOT's Office of Civil Rights; (10) FTA obtains credible information that the allegations raised by the complaint have been resolved; (11) the complaint is a continuation of a pattern of previously filed complaints involving the same or similar allegations against the same recipient or other recipients that have been found factually or legally insubstantial by FTA; (12) the same complaint allegations have been filed with another Federal, state, or local agency, and FTA anticipates that the recipient will provide the complainant with a comparable resolution process under comparable legal standards; or (13) the death of the complainant or injured party makes it impossible to investigate the allegations fully. Page 4 of 5 Title VI Program — Appendix A Tracking of Complaints As required by FTA, all written complaints received by RCTC's Deputy Executive Director, or designee, appeals to the Executive Director, or designee, and responses from these two offices will be retained by RCTC for three years. In addition, a summary list of complaints will be tracked for five years as required. III. COMPLAINT FORM See Attachment A. Page 5 of 5 Title VI Program — Appendix A rOEMs� Nrside foully ironspcdulicn Commission ATTACHMENT A: TITLE VI DISCRIMINATION COMPLAINT FORM Revised June 2016 The Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) is committed to ensuring that no person is excluded from participating in or denied the benefits of its services on the basis of race, color, or national origin as provided by Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended. Complaints must be filed within 180 days from the date of the alleged discrimination. The following information is necessary to assist RCTC in processing your complaint. If you require any assistance in completing this form, please contact the Civil Rights Officer, John Standiford, by calling (951) 787-7141. When completed, submit the original signed form or letter in person or by mail to: John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor P. O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 1. Contact Information: Complainant's Name: Address: City,State and Zip Code: Telephone: FOR QUESTIONS OR ASSISTANCE IN OTHER ACCESSIBLE FORMATS SUCH AS LARGE PRINT, TDD, AUDIO, OR OTHER PLEASE CALL: (951) 787-7141 (home/work) (cell) What are the most convenient days and times for RCTC to contact you about this complaint? 2. Are you filing this complaint on your own behalf? Yes: If you answered yes, please go to question #3. If you answered no, please explain why you have filed for a third party: No: If you answered no, please confirm that you have obtained the permission of the aggrieved party if you are filing on behalf of a third party. Yes: No: Complaint Form Page 1 of 3 3. Basis of discriminatory action(s): Check (✓) all categories below that apply to the act(s) of discrimination. a. Race b. Color c. National Origin 4. Date and place of alleged discriminatory action(s): Include the earliest date of discrimination and the most recent date of discrimination: Date: Date: Location: Location: 5. How were you discriminated against? Describe the nature of the action, decision, or conditions of the alleged discrimination. Explain as clearly as possible what happened and why you believe your protected status was a factor in the discrimination. Include how other persons were treated differently from you. (Attach additional page(s) if necessary). 6. Names of individuals responsible for the discriminatory action(s): Complaint Form Page 2 of 3 7. Names of individuals (witnesses, fellow employees, supervisors, or others) whom we may contact for additional information to support or clarify your complains: Name Address Telephone No. 8. Has this complaint been filed with any other Federal, State, or local investigative agency? No ❑ Yes ❑ If "yes," please provide the following information: Agency: Contact Person: Address: Telephone No.: Date Filed: 9. Please provide any additional information that you believe would assist in the investigation: You may attach any written materials or other information that you think is relevant to your complaint. Please sign and date this form: Signature of Complainant Date Complaint Form Page 3 of 3 1.11 IMENe� Cnyrsi(0 CnuMy iswn ndiun Commission Title VI Program — Appendix A REQUISITOS DEL TITULO VI RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Revisado Junio de 2016 De acuerdo con los requisitos del Titulo VI de la Ley de Derechos Civiles de 1964 y del Circular 4702.1 B de la Administracion Federal de Transito (FTA por sus siglas en ingles), la Comision de Transporte del Condado de Riverside (la Comision) tiene que notificar a los beneficiarios sobre la proteccion conforme al Titulo VI, elaborar los procedimientos para las quejas, asi como crear un formulario de quejas. Estos documentos se consideran vitales y estan traducidos a otros idiomas distintos del ingles, segun sea necesario y en conformidad con la Directiva del Departamento de Transporte (DOT por sus siglas en ingles) sobre el Domini° Limitado del Ingles (LEP por sus siglas en ingles) y con el Plan de Asistencia de Idioma de la Comision (LAP por sus siglas en ingles). I. POLITICA Y AVISO AL PUBLIC° Es una politica de la Comision de no discriminar o excluir a los individuos sobre la base de raza, color u origen nacional en la admision a sus programas, servicios o actividades, en el acceso a ellos, en el tratamiento o en cualquier aspecto de las operaciones. La siguiente notificacion se publicara en la pagina web de la Comision, se pondra en el area principal de la recepcion y en los relevantes materiales publicados: La RCTC opera sus programas y servicios sin distincion de raza, color y origen nacional, en conformidad con el Titulo VI de la Ley de Derechos Civiles. Cualquier persona que cree que el o ella ha sido agraviada por cualquier practica discriminatoria ilegal bajo el Titulo VI, puede presenter una queja a la RCTC. Para obtener mas informacion sobre el programa de Titulo VI de RCTC, y sobre los procedimientos para presentar una queja, Ilame al (951) 787-7141; por correo electronico standifo@rctc.org; o visite nuestra oficina administrativa en 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor, Riverside, CA 92501. Para obtener mas informacion, Usted puede tambien visitar nuestro sitio web en www.rctc.org para obtener mas informacion y para descargar un formulario de queja en "About Us". El demandante puede presentar una queja directamente a la Administracion Federal de Transporte presentando la queja a la Oficina de Derechos Civiles, Atencion: Federal Transit Administration, Office of Civil Rights, Title VI Program Coordinator, East Building, 5th Floor - TCR, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE, Washington, DC 20590. Si se necesita la informacion en otro idioma, Ilame al (951) 787- 7141. Pag. 1 de 8 Title VI Program — Appendix A INN brrersifi0 (oumyisonspertofgn Common II. PROCEDIMIENTOS PARA LA PRESENTACION, INVESTIGACION Y SEGUIMIENTO DE LAS QUEJAS Cualquier persona, grupo de individuos, o entidad que cree que ha sido objeto de discriminacion por motivos de raza, color u origen nacional, puede presentar una queja directamente o por medio de un representante con la Comision o con el DOT de la FTA. Presentacion de Queja a la RCTC Para presentar una queja con la RCTC, el demandante puede ponerse en contact° con la recepcion principal al (951) 787-7141 para solicitar una copia del formulario de queja y los procedimientos, o visitar el sitio web en www.rctc.org para descargar el formulario de queja y los procedimientos. Cuando sea posible, el demandante debe Ilenar el formulario de queja, o proporcionar por escrito la informacion acerca de la supuesta discriminacion que incluye to siguiente: • Nombre del demandante; • Domicilio del demandante; • Numero de telefono del demandante; • Fecha del incidente; • Locacion del incidente; y • Descripcion del incidente En los casos cuando el demandante no puede o es incapaz de proporcionar una declaracion escrita, el demandante puede ser entrevistado o ademas se le puede proporcionar un formulario de queja en medios alternativos, tales como el audio o Braille. La queja debe ser presentada to mas pronto posible, pero no mas tarde de 180 dias calendarios despues de haber ocurrido la supuesta violacion, al Subdirector Ejecutivo por correo electronico a standifo@rctc.org, por correo postal, o en persona en la siguiente direccion: Riverside County Transportation Commission John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director 4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor P. O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 Si la informacion proporcionada es insuficiente para Ilevar a cabo una investigacion o tomar una decision, la RCTC podra solicitar al demandante una informacion adicional. Al fallar el demandante a presentar la informacion adicional en el plazo senalado se puede considerar que existe una buena Pag. 2 de 8 r11NEB� irrnerside [vuMy icons dvibn EsmrrRsion Title VI Program — Appendix A causa para cerrar administrativamente el caso por falta de un merito investigativo. Dentro de los 15 dias calendarios despues de recibir una queja, el Subdirector Ejecutivo de la RCTC, o una persona designada, solicitars una entrevista con el demandante para discutir el supuesto incidente. Dentro de los 15 dias calendarios despues de la discusion, la RCTC responders por escrito, y cuando sea apropiado, en otro formato accesible al demandante. La respuesta explicars la posicion de la RCTC y ofrecers las opciones para la resolucion de la queja. Si el demandante no ests satisfecho con la decision del Subdirector Ejecutivo, o de su designado, puede ser presentada una apelacion dentro de los 15 dias calendarios despues de recibir la respuesta, al Director Ejecutivo de la RCTC. Dentro de los 15 dias calendarios despues de recibir la apelacion, el Director Ejecutivo, o su designado, solicitarsn una entrevista con el demandante para discutir el supuesto incidente. Dentro de los 15 dias calendarios despues de la entrevista, el Director Ejecutivo o persona designada responders por escrito y, cuando sea apropiado, en otro formato accesible al demandante, proveyendo una decision final de la queja. Presentacion de Queja a la FTA El demandante tiene derecho de presentar su queja directamente a la FTA, sin embargo, se recomienda a presentarla inicialmente con la RCTC. Como se describe en el Circular 4702.1 B de la FTA, Capitulo IX, para presentar una queja a la FTA tiene que presentarla dentro de 180 dias despues de la fecha de la supuesta discriminacion, a menos que el plazo de presentarla este extendido por la FTA, a la direccion siguiente. Federal Transit Administration Office of Civil Rights Title VI Program Coordinator East Building, 5th Floor - TCR 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590 Una vez aceptada la queja por la FTA para la investigacion, la FTA notificars a la RCTC que esta es objeto de una queja bajo el Titulo VI y pedirs a la RCTC a responder por escrito a las alegaciones del demandante. Si el demandante se pone de acuerdo de pasar la queja a la RCTC, la FTA proporcionars a la agencia la queja, en la cual la informacion personal puede ser redactada a peticion del demandante. Si el demandante no ests Pag. 3 de 8 r11NEB� irrnerside [vuMy icons dvibn EsmrrRsion Title VI Program — Appendix A de acuerdo de pasar la queja a la RCTC, la FTA puede optar por cerrar la queja. La FTA Ilevare a cabo una investigacion inmediata siempre que una revision de cumplimiento, informe, queja, o cualquier otra informacion indique un posible incumplimiento de las regulaciones del Titulo VI del DOT. La investigacion incluira, cuando sea apropiado, una revision de las pertinentes practicas y politicas del recipiente, las circunstancias bajo las cuales ha ocurrido el posible incumplimiento de las regulaciones del Titulo VI del DOT, y otros factores pertinentes a una determinacion en cuanto a si el recipiente no ha cumplido con las regulaciones del Titulo VI del DOT. Al concluir la FTA su investigacion, la Oficina de Derechos Civiles de la FTA mandare al demandante y a la RCTC una de las siguientes cartas basadas en sus conclusiones: a. Una carta sobre las conclusiones indicando que la FTA no ha encontrado ninguna violacion de las regulaciones del Titulo VI del DOT. Esta carta incluira una explicacion de por que la FTA no ha encontrado ninguna violacion. Cuando sea apropiado, la carta puede incluir una lista de violaciones o problemas de procedimiento que notifique a la RCTC de que ciertas practicas son cuestionables y que, sin medidas correctivas, es posible encontrar una violacion en el futuro. b. Una carta sobre las conclusiones indicando que la RCTC este en violacion de las regulaciones del Titulo VI del DOT. La carta incluira cada violacion referente a la regulacion aplicable, una breve descripcion de las soluciones propuestas, una notificacion sobre el plazo para Ilegar al cumplimiento, las consecuencias por falta de lograr un cumplimiento voluntario, y una oferta de asistencia a la RCTC en la elaboracion del plan de medidas para el cumplimiento, cuando sea apropiado. La FTA va a cerrar administrativamente los casos de quejas de Titulo VI antes de resolverlos cuando (1) el demandante decida a retirar el caso; (2) el demandante no responde a las solicitudes de la FTA para proveer la informacion o para firmar un formulario de consentimiento; (3) la FTA ha Ilevado a cabo o planea de Ilevar a cabo una revision aneloga de cumplimiento de la agencia contra la cual se ha presentado la queja; (4) ha sido presentado un litigio con las acusaciones similares a las de la queja; (5) la queja no fue presentada dentro de los 180 dias de la supuesta discriminacion; (6) la queja no indica ninguna posible violacion de la parte 21 del titulo 49 del CFR (Codigo de Violaciones Federales por sus siglas en ingles); (7) la queja es tan debil, insustancial, o carece de detalles que la FTA determine que esta carece de merit°, o, puesto que la queja este Ilena de las declaraciones incoherentes o ilegibles, en su totalidad, no se puede considerarla ser basada en los hechos; (8) la queja ha sido investigada por Pag. 4 de 8 iMil Mon� Cnyrsi(0(nuMy Tionv ddivn[ommissiou Title VI Program — Appendix A otra agencia y la resolucion de la queja cumple con las normas regulatorias del DOT; (9) las alegaciones de la queja son excluidos por las anteriores decisiones de las Cortes Federales, del Secretario, por las resoluciones de politica del DOT o de la Oficina de Derechos Civiles del DOT de los EE.UU.; (10) la FTA recibe una informacion creible de que las alegaciones planteados por la queja han sido resueltas; (11) la queja es una continuacion de un patron de las quejas presentadas anteriormente que implican las mismas o similares alegaciones contra el mismo recipiente u otros recipientes y la FTA ya determino estas quejas ser insustanciales de hecho o legalmente; (12) las mismas alegaciones en la queja se han presentado con otra agencia Federal, estatal o local, y la FTA anticipa que el recipiente proporcione al demandante un proceso de resolucion comparable bajo las normas legales comparables; o (13) la muerte de la parte demandante o lesionada hace imposible investigar las alegaciones completamente. Seguimiento de las Quejas Segun se requiere por la FTA, todas las quejas recibidas por escrito por el Subdirector Ejecutivo de la RCTC, o por un designado, todas las apelaciones al Director Ejecutivo, o designado, asi como las respuestas de estas dos oficinas seran retenidas por la RCTC durante tres anos. Ademas, se Ilevara a cabo un seguimiento de lista resumen de las quejas durante cinco anos, como sea necesario. II. FORMULARIO DE QUEJA Vea el Anexo A. Pag. 5 de 8 Title VI Program — Appendix A Min ii MEN Riverside Courey froosperiotioi {cmmissioa AN EXO A: FORMULARIO DE QUEJAS DE TITULO VI SOBRE LA DISCRIMINACION La Comision de Transporte del Condado de Riverside (RCTC) se ha comprometido a garantizar que ninguna persona sea excluida de la participacion o que a nadie se le denieguen los beneficios de sus servicios sobre la base de raza, color u origen nacional segun esta previsto en el Titulo VI de la Ley Derechos Civiles de 1964, en su version modificada. Las quejas deben ser presentadds dentro de los 180 dias a partir de la fecha de la supuesta discriminacion. La siguiente informacion es necesaria para ayudar a la RCTC para el tramite de su queja. Si necesita alguna ayuda para Ilenar este formulario, por favor comuniquese con el Oficial de Derechos Civiles, John Standiford, Ilamando al (951) 787-7141. Al Ilenar el formulario, someta el original firmado o la carta en persona o por correo a: John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor P. O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 1. Informacion de Contacto: Nombre del Demandante: Domicilio: Ciudad,Estado y Codigo Postal: Telefono: PARA LAS PREGUNTAS O ASISTENCIA EN OTROS FORMATOS ACCESIBLES COMO LOS DE LETRA GRANDE, TDD, AUDIO U OTRA POR FAVOR LLAME: (951) 787-7141 (casa/trabajo) (celular) LCuales son los dias y las horas mas convenientes para que la RCTC se comunique con Usted acerca de su queja? 2. 2. ,Esta Ud. presentando esta queja en su propio nombre? Si: Si contesto "Si", favor de pasar a la cuestion N°3. Si contesto "No", favor de explicar por que Ud. esta presentandola por un tercero: No: Si contesto "No", por favor confirme que Ud. ha obtenido un permiso de la parte perjudicada en caso de que Ud. esta presentando en nombre de un tercero. Si: No: Pag. 6 de 8 Title VI Program — Appendix A 3. Bases de la accion(es) discriminatoria(s): Marque (✓) aba o todas las categorias que aplican al hecho (s) de la discriminacion. a. Raza b. Color c. Origen Nacional 4. Fecha y lugar de la (s) accion (es) discriminatoria (s) presunta (s): Incluya la fecha mas temprana de la discriminacion y la fecha mas reciente de la discriminacion: Fecha: Lugar: Fecha: Lugar: 5. i,Como ha sido discriminado Usted? Describa la naturaleza de la accion, decision, o las condiciones de la presunta discriminacion. Explique to mas claramente posible que ha sucedido y porque Usted cree que su estado protegido fue un factor en su discriminacion. Incluya como otras personas fueron tratados de la forma distinta de la de Usted. (Si necesite, adjunte pagina (s) adcional (es). 6. Nombres de los individuos responsables por la (s) accion (es) discriminatoria (s): Pag. 7 de 8 Title VI Program — Appendix A 7. Nombres de los individuos (testigos, empleados compaheros, supervisores, u otros) a quienes les podamos contactar para una informacion adicional para apoyar o clarificar sus quejas: Nombre Direccion No. De Telefono 8. e:,Ha sido presentada esta queja con cualquier otra agencia de investigacion Federal, Estatal o local? No ❑ Si ❑ Si "si," favor de proveer la informacion siguiente: Agencia: Persona de Contacto: Direccion: N° de Telefono.: Fecha de presentacion: 9. Favor de proveer cualquier otra informacion adicional que Usted cree pueda asistir en la investigacion: Ud. puede adjuntar cualquier material escrito o cualquier otra informacion que Usted piensa que es relevante para su queja. Favor de firmar y fechar este formulario: Firma del demandante Fecha Pag. 8 de 8 APPENDIX B: PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN This page left intentionally blank. Title VI Program — Appendix B Public Participation Plan J U N E 2016 Prepared for the Federal Transit Administration in accordance with Circular 4702.1B Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor Riverside, CA 92501 If information is needed in another language, please contact (951) 787-7141 for free translation services. Si se neceisita este document en Espanol, Ilame al 951-787-7141 para servicios de traducci6n gratuitos. Title VI Program — Appendix B Table of Contents I. Introduction 1 Background of RCTC 1 Purposes of this Plan 1 Desired Outcomes 2 Federal and State Requirements 2 Public Participation Background 3 II. Riverside County Demographics 4 Minority Individuals 4 LEP Individuals 5 RCTC's Stakeholders 8 III. Public Participation Strategies and Tools 9 Public Participation Goals and Strategies 9 Project Specific Public Participation 11 Updating the Public Participation Plan 11 IV. Summary of Public Participation Activities 12 Transit -Related Public Participation 12 Capital-RelatedPublic Participation 14 RCTC's Website 14 V. Contact information 15 VI. Attachments 16 Demographic Maps of Minority Populations in Riverside County 16 Title VI Program — Appendix B I. Introduction Background of RCTC The Commission was established in 1976 by the State of California (State) to oversee the funding and coordination of all public transportation services within Riverside 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. It is the designated Regional Transportation Planning Agency (RTPA) and County Transportation Commission (CTC). Its responsibilities include setting policies, establishing priorities, coordinating activities among the County's various transit operators and local jurisdictions. RCTC's capital projects, motorist aid services and transit -related programs and projects are funded with various local, state, and federal sources. Local funding sources consist of the Measure A, the countywide sales tax; Debt proceeds, derived from issuing bonds; and Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees (TUMF), derived from developer impact fees. State funding sources for projects are derived from the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). RCTC also receives apportionments of federal Surface Transportation Program (STP) and Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) funds from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA); and FTA Small Starts and Sections 5307, 5309, 5337 formula funds. The Commission is unique in that it is not a transit provider like many other CTCs, however, does receive FTA formula funds (under the Rail Program) for transfer and expenditure for the Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA or Metrolink). Regardless of funding source, RCTC is committed to ensuring that its projects and services are delivered and implemented in a non-discriminatory manner. Purpose of this Plan This Public Participation Plan (Plan) is intended to satisfy Title VI requirements as expressed in FTA Circular 4702.1B. Recipients are required to promote inclusive public participation and seek out and consider the needs and input of the general public, including interested parties and those traditionally underserved by existing transportation systems, such as minority and limited -English Proficient (LEP) persons. The Public Participation Plan is the established process or plan that describes the proactive strategies, procedures, and desired outcomes of a recipient's public participation activities. This Plan will provide direction for the Commission's public processes by allowing public input for the planning process and for RCTC's programs, projects, and activities to all members of Riverside County, including citizens, organizations, and public agencies. Finally, it will develop specific strategies inclusive of low-income, minority, LEP populations, and underrepresented individuals. 1 PUBLIC PARTICPATION PLAN Title VI Program — Appendix B RCTC developed this Plan by considering the demographic analysis of the population(s) affected, the type of plan, program, and/or service under consideration, and the resources available to the Commission. Desired Outcomes This Plan details RCTC's public participation goals, as well as strategies that will be implemented to assist meeting these goals. From these efforts, the Commission anticipates the following outcomes: • Increased access to early, meaningful, and continual engagement in the transportation planning process for all individuals in Riverside County. • Implementation of proactive strategies to bring enhanced awareness and increased access for minority individuals, LEP individuals, low-income individuals and additional underrepresented and underserved individuals. • Participation and representation from a diverse range or perspectives. Federal and State Requirements Title VI and Federal Authority Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects persons in the United States from being excluded from participation in, denied the benefits of, or subjected to discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance. Under the DOT, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) requirements for implementing Title VI include the adoption of a Title VI Program report, including a Public Participation Plan, pursuant to FTA Circular 4702.1B, Title VI Requirements and Guidelines for Federal Transit Administration Recipients. Public Hearing Requirements Public hearing requirements may vary by project or program. The Commission may conduct a public hearing for a variety of reasons such as approval of the Program of Projects under the Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP); to discuss and present the proposed location; or significant changes to right of way and major design features, social and environmental effects of a proposed project that is funded with state and federal funds. Capital projects, for instance, will comply with Caltrans' Project Development Procedures Manual, Chapter 11 Public Hearing requirements; whereas, FTIP projects would follow the public participation requirements stipulated under the existing transportation legislation, MAP 21. 2 PUBLIC PARTICPATION PLAN Title VI Program — Appendix B Public Participation Background RCTC's traditionally seeks public involvement for both capital projects and transit -related projects. The public is most familiar with RCTC for its capital projects. The various regional capital projects that RCTC is involved in throughout the County include the following: ✓ State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project ✓ State Route 91 High Occupancy Vehicle Project ✓ Mid -County Parkway ✓ Realignment of State Route 79 ✓ Expansion of Metrolink from Riverside to Perris ✓ State Route 60 Truck Climbing Lanes ✓ Interstate 15 Corridor Improvement Project ✓ State Route 91/71 Interchange Project ✓ Interstate 10/ State Route 60 Interchange A specialized outreach plan is designed for each project and may include community meetings, open houses, charrettes, and formal public hearings. Transit -related projects that involve public participation may include: • The Coordination Plan Process • The Citizen Advisory Committee, RCTC Social Services Transportation Advisory Committee • The Annual Transit Needs Hearing • The FTIP Program of Projects • 211 • Park and Ride • Rideshare 3 PUBLIC PARTICPATION PLAN Title VI Program — Appendix B II. Riverside County Demographics Riverside County is the fourth largest county in California by area and population, and is diverse in geographies and populations. According to the 2010 Census, Riverside County covers 7,208 square miles with a population of 2,189,641. Many of the populations important to this Plan —minority, underrepresented, low-income individuals — were described in detail in the 2012 Update to the Public Transit — Human Services Transportation Coordination Plan for Riverside County. The Coordination Plan targets disabled, senior, and low-income populations and lent considerable time to documenting the changes over time within these groups. The following summary findings are of relevance as RCTC considers its approach to public participation. • The overall County population experienced a 40 percent increase between 2000 and 2012. • The adult population ages 18 - 64 increased by more than 45 percent, adding 400,000 individuals. Adults in these age groups represent almost 60 percent of the county's total population numbering almost 1.3 million persons. • Low - income adults are the fastest growing group in Riverside County, increasing by 46 percent since the 2000 Census, adding almost 52,000 individuals and representing 7.6 percent of the current population. • Adults with disabilities total almost nine percent of the adult population and five percent of then County's total population at 110,000 persons. • The older adult population ages 65 or older has increased by nearly 30 percent, adding 58,000 persons. This represents 11.7% percent of the total population and almost 253,000 persons. • Youngest seniors, ages 65 to 74 are the largest senior group representing 54 percent of all seniors. • Oldest seniors, ages 85 and older, are the fastest growing group, increasing at a rate of almost 50 percent. • The 2010 ACS estimates indicate that seniors are reporting some form of disability are almost one - third of all seniors; as a group, represent more than four percent of the Riverside County's total population. Most frequently reported, among older persons with disabilities are those seniors who have difficulty walking and living independently. Minority Individuals RCTC conducted demographic analysis of minority populations in the aggregate to understand where these communities are located throughout the County. This analysis was done at the Census Tract and Block Group levels using 2013 American Community Survey 5-year estimates, the most reliable and current Census source providing minority information at the Census Tract and Block Group levels. FTA Title VI guidance defines minority person as an individual of any of the following groups: American 4 PUBLIC PARTICPATION PLAN Title VI Program — Appendix B Indian and Alaska Native, Asian, Black or African American, Hispanic or Latino, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islanders. Demographic maps are provided in Attachment A, based upon minority population count tabulations developed for each Riverside County census tract. These were derived by subtracting the Caucasian population from each tract to arrive at the non -white, minority population counts. A summary of findings is provided below. • In Western Riverside County, there are pockets of minority populations throughout the region. The largest concentrations of minority populations, between 59.2 to 84.3% of the population at the Census block group level, are found along the western border of the County near Norco and Rubidoux; near Moreno Valley; east of Banning; and in the south portion of the region, near Murrieta. • In East Riverside County, most of the region has a minority population of 34.3% to 45.6% of the total population at the block group level. A more concentrated minority population is located on the North Shore of the Salton Sea. • Coachella Valley is also home to many minority persons, with the largest concentrations of minority persons located north of Cabazon, north of Cathedral City and Thousand Palms and south of Thermal. In these pockets, minority persons make up 59.2 to 84.3% of the block group population of these areas. LEP Individuals As documented in RCTC's Language Assistance Plan (LAP), Riverside County is home to many LEP populations, several of which meet the Department of Justice's Safe Harbor Provision. The Safe Harbor provision stipulates that written translation of vital documents for each eligible LEP language are to be provided if the group constitute 5% or 1,000 person, whichever is less, of the total population of persons eligible to be served or likely to be affected or encountered, then such action will be considered strong evidence of compliance with the recipient's written translation obligation. RCTC's Language Assistance Plan details how RCTC will provide language assistance to these populations. This information is included here to further detail the diverse populations that comprise Riverside County. Table 1 below provides information from the 2013 American Community Survey 5-year Estimates, the most reliable and current Census source for accessing LEP information. There are a total of 38 LEP groups in Riverside County numbering 324,583 individuals or 15.7% of Riverside County's total population. The largest group of LEP individuals is Spanish speakers, who number 271,452 individuals and comprise 13.13% of the County's total population. LEP groups with over 1,000 persons are highlighted in blue in Table 1 and include individuals that speak Cambodian, Chinese, Indic languages, 5 PUBLIC PARTICPATION PLAN Title VI Program — Appendix B Japanese, Korean, Mon-Khmer (Cambodian), Pacific Islander languages, Persian, Spanish, Tagalog, Thai, and Vietnamese. Besides Spanish, none of these LEP populations comprise 5% of the County's total population. A thorough analysis of LEP populations in the County was conducted to develop RCTC's Language Assistance Plan, consistent with FTA guidance. This analysis found that Spanish-speaking LEPs are the LEP population most frequently contacting RCTC and accessing RCTC's programs and services. 6 PUBLIC PARTICPATION PLAN Title VI Program - Appendix B Table 1, Riverside County LEP Populations B16001: LANGUAGE SPOKEN AT HOME BY ABILITY TO SPEAK ENGLISH FOR THE POPULATION 5 YEARS AND OVER 2009-2013 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Riverside County, California Estimate % or Total Population Margin of Error Total Population 2,067,363 100.00% ..... Total LEP Population 324,583 15, 70% ..... Spanish or Spanish Creole: Speak English less than "very well" 271,452 13.13% +1-4,071 French (incl. Patois, Cajun): Speak English less than "very well" 958 0.05% +1-222 French Creole: Speak English less than "very well' 65 0.00% +1-77 Italian: Speak English less than "very well" 465 0.02% +1-175 Portuguese or Portuguese Creole: Speak English less than "very well" 470 0.02% +1-207 German: Speak English less than "very well" 840 0.04% +1-190 Yiddish: Speak English less than "very well' 17 0.00% +1-24 Other West Germanic languages: Speak English less than "very well" 290 0.01% +1-119 Scandinavian languages: Speak English less than "very well" 71 0.00% +1-55 Greek: English less than "very well' 143 0.01% +1-77 Russian: Speak English less than "very well" 687 0.03% +1-251 Polish: Speak English less than "very well' 464 0.02% +1-252 Serbo-Croatian: Speak English less than "very well" 196 0.01% +1-101 Other Slavic languages: Speak English less than "very well" 87 0.00% +1-70 Armenian: Speak English less than "very well' 163 0.01% +1-104 Persian: Speak English less than "very well" 1,566 0.08% +1-352 Gujarati: Speak English less than "very well' 735 0.04% +1-314 Hindi: Speak English less than "very well" 759 0.04% +1-242 Urdu: Speak English less than "very well' 837 0.04% +1-270 Other Indic languages: Speak English less than "very well" 2,112 0.10% +1-738 Other Indo-European languages: Speak English less 996 0.05% +1-287 than "very well" Chinese: Speak English less than "very well' 8,042 0.39% +1-895 Japanese: Speak English less than "very well" 1,274 0.06% +1-356 Korean: Speak English less than "very well' 5,631 0.27% +1-699 Mon-Khmer, Cambodian: Speak English less than "very well" 1,553 0.08% +1-389 Hmong: Speak English less than "very well" 545 0.03% +1-250 Thai: Speak English less than "very well" 1,345 0.07% +1-455 Laotian: Speak English less than "very well" 772 0.04% +1-273 Vietnamese: Speak English less than "very well" 6,237 0.30% +1-950 Other Asian languages: Speak English less than "very 382 0.02% +1-214 well" Tagalog: Speak English less than "very well' 9,388 0.45% +1-815 Other Pacific Island languages: Speak English less than "very well" 2,094 0.10% +1-528 Navajo: Speak English less than "very well" 8 0.00% +1-15 Other Native North American languages: Speak English less than "very well' 26 0.00% +1-28 Hungarian: Speak English less than "very well' 174 0.01% +1-67 Arabic: Speak English less than "very well" 2,816 0.14% +1-542 Hebrew: Speak English less than "very well" 169 0.01% +1-241 African language: Speak English less than "very well" 508 0.02% +1-226 Other and unspecified languages: Speak English less than "very well" 246 0.01% +1-162 7 PUBLIC PARTICPATION PLAN Title VI Program — Appendix B RCTC's Stakeholders Stakeholders are individuals, groups, organizations or agencies that may be directly or indirectly affected by a plan, recommendations of that plan, or a project. RCTC seeks to engage all stakeholders through its public participation efforts, particularly those who may be adversely affected or who may be denied benefit of a plan's recommendation(s). Stakeholders include: • General public, minority individuals, low-income individuals, LEP persons, persons with disabilities, and older adults; • University and college students, including those at: Brandman University, Riverside California Southern Law School, California State University, San Bernardino, Palm Desert Campus, California State University, San Marcos, Temecula Satellite Campus, La Sierra University, Mayfield College, Mt. San Jacinto College, Palo Verde College, Riverside Community College, Santa Barbara Business College, University of California, Riverside, and University of Phoenix; • High school students throughout Riverside County; • Non-profit organizations including Blindness Support Services, Care Connexus, Care -a -Van, CASA, Friends of Moreno Valley, Inland AIDS Project, Operation SafeHouse, among others; • Public agencies including city governments and health and human services throughout Riverside County; • Public transit operators: Corona Cruiser, City of Riverside Special Services, Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency, Riverside Transit Agency, SunLine Transit Agency, Pass Transit; and • Private organizations and businesses. 8 PUBLIC PARTICPATION PLAN Title VI Program — Appendix B III. Public Participation Strategies and Tools Public Participation Goals and Strategies This section details RCTC public participation goals and strategies for achieving each goal. Goal 1: Provide all interested parties and agencies reasonable opportunities for involvement in the transportation planning process. Strategies • Provide adequate public notice of public participation opportunities and activities and time for public review of regionally significant plans and documents. • Utilize all channels of outreach for promoting public participation opportunities including RCTC's website, the Citizen Advisory Council/ Social Services Transportation Advisory Council (CAC/SSTAC), Southern California Associated Governments (SCAG), transit providers, and social media. • Evaluate plans, programs, and projects to determine the most appropriate and effective tools and strategies for public and agency involvement and outreach. • Provide opportunities to comment on draft planning documents to affected agencies and parties. • Make transportation planning documents available for viewing on the RCTC website and at key locations throughout the county, as appropriate. • During the transportation planning process, RCTC shall conduct open public meetings in accordance with the Brown Act (CGC Sec.54950 et seq). Goal 2: Ensure accessibility to the transportation planning process and information for all members of the community; ensure that a wide range of perspectives will be heard so that planning outcomes reflect the needs of the region's diverse communities. Strategies • Develop information materials that are easily understood and translated for appropriate audiences and make them accessible at meetings and on RCTC's website. • Make notices and announcements attractive and eye-catching. • Plan workshops and/or public hearings at convenient venues and times across the region; ensure venues are accessible to the public. • When appropriate provide information on regionally significant plans and projects to the local media for distribution and promotion. • Maintain the RCTC website with current transportation planning activities, including reports, 9 PUBLIC PARTICPATION PLAN Title VI Program — Appendix B plans, agendas and minutes for RCTC Commission meetings. • When appropriate, present information about specific plans and projects at public forums, such as City Council and Board of Supervisors meetings for increased public and governmental awareness. • When identifying locations for community outreach activities, prioritize locations that are accessible by public transit. • Make every effort to accommodate requests for accessibility opportunities, including physical accessibility to public meetings as well as accessibility to information in LEP languages and alternative formats. • Encourage early involvement in the transportation planning process by providing timely notification and access to information • Utilize citizen and/or agency advisory groups as a means of providing input to the transportation planning process. • Identify key individuals, organizations, and community organizations that may be interested in or affected by a plan or program; include this list in any mail or email distribution. • Collaborate with Riverside County Transit Providers to facilitate and promote public participation opportunities. • Maintain the Riverside County Transportation Network, a list of key stakeholders updated on an annual basis, through a mail survey and e-survey. The 661 agencies and organizations on the Network include non -profits, human and social services, private transportation companies, public agencies, specialized transit providers. Goal 3: Engage and increase opportunities for participation for those traditionally underrepresented and or underserved, including low-income, minority, persons with disabilities, and Limited English Proficiency populations Strategies • Make commenting on plans convenient and accessible to the public and stakeholders; enable comments to be made at public meetings and workshops, via email or online commenting forms or by telephone. • Offer vital information, such as notices and announcements, in alternative languages as appropriate and feasible. When considering translation and interpretation needs, the RCTC Language Assistance Plan will be consulted for strategies and procedures. Translated information shall be made available on the RCTC or project -specific website, at public meetings and workshops and at key locations across the county as appropriate and feasible. • Translated notices, announcements, and other vital information should be posted on Riverside County transit operators' buses and at transfer centers, as is possible. • When appropriate, utilize alternative media outlets that may target minority, LEP, or underserved segments of the community. • Continue expanding the contact list with agencies, organizations and stakeholders that work 10 PUBLIC PARTICPATION PLAN Title VI Program — Appendix B with LEP communities. Project Specific Public Participation The project team, including Project Manager and public relations staff is responsible for developing an appropriate public participation plan or public outreach plan that describes the strategies that will be used to communicate key information to agencies, organizations, elected officials, residents, business operators, commuters, emergency responders and other project stakeholders. Outreach activities will be integrated with the technical work program to provide information and incorporate ideas and feedback. The input that is received will facilitate fully informed decisions by RCTC Commissioners at key decision points. These plans will be specifically tailored to the individual project and the communities are interested in and may be affected by the project and will comply with Title VI and other relevant guidance Title VI requirements, including strategies for engaging LEP individuals, will be documented in all bid - related materials. Updating the Public Participation Plan RCTC's public participation goals and strategies will be reviewed as necessary and results will be considered in preparation of the three year Title VI Program adoption. Based on the effectiveness of strategies and the potential changes to Riverside County's demographics and outreach resources, strategies may be modified and new strategies may be added to enhance the public participation process. The following indicators may be used in reviewing and determining the effectiveness of these goals and strategies. • Number of newspaper ads, public notices • Number of press releases, public service announcements, and news articles • Number of public meetings and workshops • Number and demographics of participants at public meetings and workshops • Number of hits to the RCTC website and project -specific websites • Number of comments received during the public comment period for projects and programs • Number of requests for translated materials • Number and content of materials translation • Revisions to plans or projects based on public and agency input; how comments influenced the planning process 11 PUBLIC PARTICPATION PLAN Title VI Program — Appendix B IV. Summary of Public Participation Activities FTA Title VI guidance requires a summary of outreach efforts made since the last Title VI Program submission. The following is a summary of transit -related and capital project -related public outreach during this submittal period.. Transit -Related Public Participation Annual Public Hearing on Transit Needs is Riverside County As required by Section 99238.5 of the California Public Utilities Code, RCTC holds an annual public hearing to solicit input from transit dependent and transit disadvantaged persons. The 2016 hearing was promoted through newspaper notices throughout Riverside County and flyers and half -sheet seat drop flyers were distributed on buses, in both English and Spanish. Written and Oral comments provided at the hearing are used by RCTC and the County's transit operators in identifying transit needs in preparation of transportation plans and programs, including the Regional Transportation Plan and Short Range Transit Plans. The comments are also shared with transit and paratransit operators as they relate to operating issues and needs. Additionally, comments are shared with other agencies that provide transportation services to transit dependent populations, including the Coordinated Transportation Services Agencies and the County Office on Aging. The 2016's public hearing was held on January 26, 2016 at the RCTC offices. There were 15 comments received. Coordination Plan 2016 Outreach During the Coordination Planning process five workshops were held in February 2016 in the various areas of Riverside County: • Blythe for the Palo Verde Valley • Palm Desert for the Coachella Valley • Hemet for Western Riverside • Lake Elsinore Southwestern Riverside County • Beaumont for the Pass Area The workshop included inviting comment regarding transportation needs from transit users and potential transit users, agency staff working with the target populations, and the general public. The workshops were promoted through flyer, in both English and Spanish. Flyers were posted in buses across many of the County's transit routes. RCTC posted the workshop flyers on the RCTC home webpage and the Citizens Advisory Committee members distributed the flyers throughout the County. They were also distributed through an email blast to the Riverside County Transportation Network which 12 PUBLIC PARTICPATION PLAN Title VI Program — Appendix B includes non profits, human and social services, private transportation companies, public agencies, and specialized transit providers. North Shore/Mecca Salton Sea Project Development Workshops As part of the 2016 Coordination Plan Process, RCTC also held a workshop for the residents of the North Shore/Mecca community of the Salton Sea to discuss unmet transit needs and develop responsive solutions. The North Shore/Mecca area is an isolated, rural, and agricultural region in Riverside County. Many residents are agricultural workers and need to travel long distances to work in the fields throughout the area. Other families depend on jobs in the hospitality sector on the west side of the Coachella Valley and many of their children attend the College of the Desert Campus located in Palm Desert. For some, the daily commute can be 36 miles each way. Simultaneous translation was provided at the meeting to allow RCTC staff and the predominately Spanish-speaking community members to interact. Past meetings have resulted in the implementation of a volunteer driver reimbursement program and weekday and weekend connecting service to the area. Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) / Social Services Transportation Advisory Council (SSTAC) RCTC recently revamped the Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) appointing 10 members in September 2014. The CAC serves as RCTC's Social Services Transportation Advisory Council (SSTAC) assisting the Commission in complying with Transportation Development Act (TDA) Section 99238. The TDA provides direction for administering both Local Transportation Fund and State Transit Assistance funds for bus and commuter rail services. This funding promotes transportation service improvements and enhancements that support the mobility of older adults, persons with disabilities, and persons of limited means. Additionally, the role of CAC/SSTAC members is to establish an effective communication exchange among Riverside County's public transit operators, its specialized transportation providers, and representatives of its transit dependent population regarding matters of mutual concern. Riverside County Transportation Network The Riverside County Transportation Network is a list of key stakeholders and includes 857 agencies and organizations. These entities are non -profits, human and social services, private transportation companies, public agencies, specialized transit providers that work with a diverse range of clients throughout Riverside County. The Network is updated on an annual basis, through a mail survey and online e-survey. Transit -Related information, notices, announcements —particularly public participation opportunities —are sent to this Network via emails and physical mail, when those addresses exist. 13 PUBLIC PARTICPATION PLAN Title VI Program — Appendix B Capital -Related Public Participation RCTC has a robust public participation and outreach component for its major highway and rail capital projects. Many of these efforts focus on transparency to the public allowing the public to engage in projects via meetings, help line, project websites, and through various social media platforms. Project -specific Public Outreach Plans that either were developed or are currently utilized are: • 91 Project — Construction of Tolled Express Lanes and Highway expansion • Perris Valley Line — Metrolink Extension • 1-215 Central Project — Highway widening • Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Pass Corridor Rail Service • 1-15 Express Lanes Project — Construction of Tolled Express Lanes Websites have been developed for many capital projects. Project websites contains or will contain bilingual information on construction alerts, project fact sheets and other critical information on the following: • 91 Project • Perris Valley Line • 1-215 Central Project • 1-15 Express Lanes Project The active capital project also produces bilingual collateral material in English and Spanish and holds community meetings with bi-lingual staff in attendance. To date, staff has not encountered any other languages spoken that there has been a need to translate to. RCTC's Website RCTC's website is kept up-to-date with current information and notices for all projects and activities. Website information is provided on all printed materials. The Commission also maintains an active Twitter and Facebook account to enhance its public outreach. This account posts on road closures, project updates, and public participation activities, among other notices. 14 PUBLIC PARTICPATION PLAN Title VI Program — Appendix B V. Contact information RCTC will post the Public Participation Plan on its website at www.rctc.org. The Plan may be translated in any language for free upon request. Any questions or comments regarding this Plan should be directed to: Riverside County Transportation Commission John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director 4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor P. O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 Phone: (951) 787-7141 Email: standifo@rctc.org 15 PUBLIC PARTICPATION PLAN Title VI Program — Appendix B VI. Attachments Demographic Maps of Minority Populations in Riverside County 16 PUBLIC PARTICPATION PLAN Title VI Program — Appendix B Figure 1: Western Riverside County Minority Population Ontario Silveradc Modjeska Western Riverside County: Minority Population TIFFSunny slope • Highg rove r► �I Mira 11 Pedley �� Loma � f ` R R .d f�� l Rivers ) e Arlianxa Pachapl •-. La Sierra Prenda LEI Cerrito\ �M M Minority Population 0.0% -12.0 % 12.1% - 23.4% 23.5%-34.2% 71 34-3% - 45_6% 11111. 45-7% - 59-1°a - 59.1% - 84-3% May San Juan Hot Springs. I� i ) .� San r. r..Fr« • Clemente f `ti. D3i3 Source. 2013Am ericarr Com orunily Survey, i : 'ensue Blocks, 5year estcn aces, B02001 %_ 'riS 04-2015 N'. ..ccdcrest Edg mcnt Yucaipa 1 El Casco Cherry Valley Highland Springs Su' Fnead Y-_ Banning lr—r1_—.. Beaumont 7 Valley jr l r Lakeview Fluevo Maly •.�� ie Lake. El sirT �f2 ' ;4117 Lakeland Village ..Vildomar De Lux Eden Hot Springs Juniper Springs Murri eta • Murri- Hat Sp r l Homeland Gilman Hof �` Springs IN. Springs 1\ 1 Soho -Pa Hot San Jacinto Winchester Temecula Hem ei�� '-East Hemet Sage Radec Va I I e Vista PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN Title VI Program — Appendix B Figure 2: East Riverside County Minority Population East Riverside County: Minority Population Rice r_._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._..,,_.•._._._._._._._._._._._._• �Sert 13.0% - 12.0% 34.3% - 45.6% 12.1%-23.4% -45.7%-59.1°I° 23.5% - 34.2% - 59.2% - 84. 3% PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN Paymastar Landing i i f i i Title VI Program — Appendix B Figure 3: Coachella Valley Minority Population Coachella Valley, Riverside County: Minority Population Pine 'Weed Fern Valley Idyllwild-Pine Cave Mountain Center • Thcmas Mountain C ahuilla� Data Source: 20/3 Arrt erican Con urlroir•: Survey G= .pus Vocks, 5yesr _,,`.• s!, rn200" Gif f, 01-2015 Palm Springs Palms La Gluinta Valerie fl.... .1++w•1••. Minority Population 0.0°% - 12.0 °% 12-1 % - 23- 4% 23-5°% - 34-2% . 34.3% - 45.6 % - 45-7°% - 59-1 % - 59.2% - 84.3°% Salron Sea PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN This page left intentionally blank. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN Title VI Program — Appendix B APPENDIX C: LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PLAN This page left intentionally blank. Title VI Program — Appendix C language Assistance Plan J U N E 2016 Prepared for the Federal Transit Administration in accordance with Circular 4702.1 B MIN mom Riverside County Transportation Commission 4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor Riverside, CA 92501 If information is needed in another language, please contact (951) 787-7141 for free translation services. Si se neceisita este document en Espanol, Ilame al 951-787-7141 para servicios de traduccion gratuitos. Title VI Program — Appendix C Table of Contents I. Introduction 1 Background of RCTC 1 Purposes of this Plan 2 Title VI and Federal Authority 2 Language Assistance Goals 2 II. Four Factor Analysis 4 Factor One: The number or proportion of LEP persons eligible to be served or likely to be encountered 4 Factor Two: The frequency with which LEP persons come into contact with the program 6 Factor Three: The nature and importance of the program, activity, or service to people's lives 6 Factor Four: The resources available to the recipient for LEP outreach 7 Discussion of Results 8 III. Implementation Plan 9 Language Service Provision 9 Staff Training 10 IV. Monitoring, Evaluating, and Updating the LAP 11 V. Contact information 12 LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PLAN Title VI Program — Appendix C I. Introduction Background of RCTC The Commission was established in 1976 by the State of California (State) to oversee the funding and coordination of all public transportation services within Riverside 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. It is the designated Regional Transportation Planning Agency (RTPA) and County Transportation Commission (CTC). Its responsibilities include setting policies, establishing priorities, coordinating activities among the County's various transit operators and local jurisdictions. The public is most familiar with RCTC for its capital projects and motorist aid services. The various regional capital projects that RCTC is involved in throughout the County include the following: ✓ State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project ✓ State Route 91 High Occupancy Vehicle Project ✓ Mid -County Parkway ✓ Widening of Interstate 1-215 ✓ Expansion of Metrolink from Riverside to Perris ✓ State Route 60 Truck Climbing Lanes ✓ Interstate 15 Corridor Improvement Project ✓ State Route 91/71 Interchange Project ✓ State Route Truck Climbing Lanes ✓ Interstate 10/ State Route 60 Interchange The Commission also 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 that assists motorists with disabled vehicles on the main highways of the County during peak rush hour traffic periods; and Rideshare Programs such as Inland Empire 511 (1E511), a traveler information system. RCTC's capital projects, motorist aid services and transit -related programs and projects are funded with various local, state, and federal sources. Local funding sources consist of Measure A, the countywide sales tax; Debt proceeds, derived from issuing bonds; and Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees (TUMF), derived from developer impact fees. State funding sources for projects are derived from the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). RCTC also receives apportionments of federal Surface Transportation Program (STP) and Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) funds from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA); and FTA Small Starts and Sections 5307, 5309, 5337 formula funds. The Commission is unique in that it is not a transit provider like many other CTCs, however, does 1 LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PLAN Title VI Program — Appendix C receive FTA formula funds (under the Rail Program) for transfer and expenditure for the Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA or Metrolink). Regardless of funding source, RCTC is committed to ensuring that its projects and services are delivered and implemented in a non-discriminatory manner. Purpose of this Plan The Language Assistance Plan (LAP) is intended to satisfy FTA Title VI requirements related to limited - English Proficient (LEP) individuals. FTA Circular 4702.1B states that "recipients shall take reasonable steps to ensure meaningful access to benefits, services, information, and other important portions of their programs and activities for individuals who are limited -English proficient (LEP)." LEP persons refers to persons for whom English is not their primary language and who have a limited ability to read, write, speak, or understand English. It includes people who reported to the U.S. Census that they speak English less than very well, not well, or not at all. The LAP details the process by which RCTC will provide access to LEP individuals and the larger community. RCTC utilized the U.S. Department of Transportation's (DOT) LEP Guidance Handbook and performed a Four Factor Analysis to develop this LAP. Title VI and Federal Authority Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects persons in the United States from being excluded from participation in, denied the benefits of, or subjected to discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance. Under the DOT, FTA's requirements for implementing Title VI include the adoption of a Title VI Program report pursuant to FTA Circular 4702.1B, Title VI Requirements and Guidelines for Federal Transit Administration Recipients. As a recipient of FTA Funds, RCTC has developed its own Language Assistance Plan in compliance with FTA Circular 4702.1B and through consultation with the FTA's Office of Civil Rights' LEP Guidance Handbook: The FTA's Office of Civil Rights' Implementing the Department of Transportation's Policy Guidance Concerning Recipients' Responsibilities to Limited English Proficient (LEP) Persons: A Handbook for Public Transportation Providers (April 13, 2007). Language Assistance Goals The following goals will guide RCTC in ensuring that projects and services are delivered and implemented in a non-discriminatory manner: 1. Ensure meaningful access to all individuals regardless of race, color, national origin, and language of origin through outreach to LEP populations, translation of vital documents into LEP languages, and provision of additional language assistance services, as required; 2 LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PLAN Title VI Program — Appendix C 2. Monitor changing LEP population demographics as necessary to ensure RCTC provides appropriate language assistance services; 3. Update this Language Assistance Plan as necessary to ensure the effectiveness of strategies for providing language assistance. 3 LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PLAN Title VI Program — Appendix C II. Four Factor Analysis Recipients are required to take reasonable steps to ensure meaningful access to benefits, services, information, and other important portions of its programs or activities for persons who are limited - English proficient (LEP). FTA Circular 4702.1B details the components of the LAP, including the Four Factor Analysis, which provides a careful analysis of LEP individuals the recipient may encounter to determine the specific language services that are appropriate to provide. The Four Factor Analysis balances the following factors: • Factor One: The Number and proportions of LEP persons in the jurisdiction; • Factor Two: How often LEP persons come into contact with RCTC services; • Factor Three: How important RCTC's services are to LEP persons lives; • Factor Four: The resources available to RCTC for LEP outreach that can reasonably be provided. The results of the four -factor analysis are used to determine the target LEP populations and the best methods of engaging with the public. RCTC undertook the Four Factor Analysis in order to develop an appropriate and effective Language Assistance Plan Factor One: The number or proportion of LEP persons eligible to be served or likely to be encountered RCTC's service area incorporates all of Riverside County, which has a total population of 2,067,363 individuals according to American Community Survey (ACS) 2013 5-year estimates. ACS Census data was used for this analysis as it provides the most current and reliable information about LEP individuals. The Department of Justice's Safe Harbor Provision, which was accepted by the FTA, stipulates that written translation of vital documents for each eligible LEP language group that constitutes 5% or 1,000 persons, whichever is less, of the total population of persons eligible to be served or likely to be affected or encountered, shall be considered strong evidence of compliance with the recipient's written translation obligation. Table 1 below provides information from the 2013 American Community Survey 5-year Estimates demonstrating the 38 LEP populations in Riverside County. The largest group of LEP individuals is Spanish -speakers, who comprise 13% of the County's population and number 271,452 individuals. Although, no other LEP group reaches 5% of the population, 11 additional LEP groups have over 1,000 persons, which include: Arabic, Cambodian, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Other Indic languages, Other Pacific Island languages, Persian, Spanish, Tagalog, Thai, and Vietnamese. 4 LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PLAN Title VI Program - Appendix C Table 1, Riverside County LEP Populations B16001: LANGUAGE SPOKEN AT HOME BY ABILITY TO SPEAK ENGLISH FOR THE POPULATION 5 YEARS AND OVER 2009.2013 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Riverside County, California Estimate % or Total Population Margin of Error Total: 2,067,363 100.00% Spanish or Spanish Creole: Speak English less than "very well" 271,452 13.13% +I-4,071 French (incl. Patois, Cajun): Speak English less than "very well" 958 0.05% +I-222 French Creole: Speak English less than "very well" 65 0.00% +I-77 Italian: Speak English less than "very well" 465 0.02% +1-175 Portuguese or Portuguese Creole: Speak English less than "very well" 470 0.02% +I-207 German: Speak English less than "very well" 840 0.04% +l-190 Yiddish: Speak English less than "very well" 17 0.00% +/-24 Other West Germanic languages: Speak English less than "very well" 290 0.01% +I-119 Scandinavian languages: Speak English less than "very well" 71 0.00% +I-55 Greek: English less than "very well" 143 0.01 % +I-77 Russian: Speak English less than "very well" 687 0.03% +I-251 Polish: Speak English less than "very well" 464 0.02% +I-252 Serbo-Croatian: Speak English less than "very well" 196 0.01 % +I-101 Other Slavic languages: Speak English less than "very well" 87 0.00°/0 +I-70 Armenian: Speak English less than "very well" 163 0.01 % +I-104 Persian: Speak English less than "very well" 1,566 0.08% +I--352 Gujarati: Speak English less than "very well" 735 0.04% +I-314 Hindi: Speak English less than "very well" 759 0.04% +/-242 Urdu: Speak English less than "very well" 837 0.04% +I-270 Other Indic languages: Speak English less than "very well" 2,112 0.10% +I-738 Other Indo-European languages: Speak English less 996 0.05% +I-287 than "very well" Chinese: Speak English less than "very well" 8,042 0.39% +I-895 Japanese: Speak English less than "very well" 1,274 0.06% +/-356 Korean: Speak English less than "very well" 5,631 0.27% +I-699 Mon-Khmer, Cambodian_ Speak English less than "very well" 1.553 0.08% +I-389 Hmong; Speak English less than "very well" 545 0.03% +I-250 Thai: Speak English less than "very well" 1,345 0.07% +I-455 Laotian: Speak English less than "very well" 772 0.04% +I-273 Vietnamese: Speak English less than "very well" 6,237 0.30% +I-950 Other Asian languages- Speak English less than "very 382 0.02% +1-214 well" Tagalog: Speak English less than "very well" 9,388 0.45% +1-815 Other Pacific island languages: Speak English less than "very well" 2,094 0.10% +I-528 Navajo: Speak English less than "very well" 8 0.00% +1-15 Other Native North American languages: Speak English less than "very well" 26 0.00% +I-28 Hungarian: Speak English less than "very well" 174 0.01 % +l-67 Arabic: Speak English less than "very weft" 2,816 0.14% +I-542 Hebrew: Speak English less than "very well" 169 0.01 % +I-241 African language: Speak English less than "very well" 508 0.02% +I-226 Other and unspecified languages: Speak English less than "very well" 246 0.01 % +1-162 5 LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PLAN Title VI Program — Appendix C As all individuals residing in the county may be commuters, transit riders, and pedestrians, the total population is eligible to be served by the Commission's services. The following section addresses which LEP persons the Commission is likely to encounter based on the past frequency of contact. Factor Two: The frequency with which LEP persons come into contact with the program To identify and analyze the frequency with which LEP persons come into contact with these programs, a survey was distributed to staff who regularly and is more likely to interact with members of the public. The units that were surveyed include the Clerk of the Board, Public Relations, Front Reception, Capital Projects, and Commuter Assistance. The survey asked staff members about their past experience with LEP individuals, including how frequently they interacted with LEP persons, what languages the LEP individuals spoke, how successfully they communicated and what information LEP persons were seeking. Most respondents noted very rare to no interaction with LEP individuals in the last year, with the exception of the Front Receptionist who encounters Spanish inquiries on a daily basis. The most common requests are for information on other County services in the building, RCTC project -specific construction information, and information for Metrolink services (not under the purview of the Commission). Staff members have been able to communicate with LEP individuals through assistance from bilingual staff members, translators, and through hand gestures and drawings. In conclusion, Factor Two identified that RCTC does not frequently come into contact with LEP individuals regarding its services and programs, but of those that are received, most are likely to speak Spanish. Factor Three: The nature and importance of the program, activity, or service to people's lives RCTC is a state -mandated countywide agency tasked with the funding and coordination of all public transportation services within Riverside County, which includes 28 cities, 7,208 square miles, and 2,189,641 individuals, according to the 2010 US Census the Commission's mission is to assume a leadership role in improving mobility in the County. 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). The Commission provides motorist aid services designed to expedite traffic flow. The Commission is also legally responsible for allocating Transportation Development Act (TDA) funds, the major source of funds for transit in the County. 6 LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PLAN Title VI Program — Appendix C 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. RCTC's investments are being made to ensure and improve the quality of life of Riverside County's residents. Transportation interacts with a variety of human needs including a safe environment that includes better air quality, a reduction in water runoff, reducing the levels of greenhouse gases, and supporting transportation alternatives that promote better health through walking or bicycling. By taking a more holistic approach, the importance of transportation actually grows larger and is valued as a vital necessity. Factor Four: The resources available to the recipient for LEP outreach RCTC has numerous resources available to ensure it provides meaningful access to LEP individuals. These include existing community partners and utilization of its own resources. These resources are detailed below: • RCTC contracts with Language Line Solutions to provide simultaneous translation for LEP individuals. • Bilingual employees provide written and oral translations. • "I Speak" language identification cards are used at the front desk and at public meetings. • Language assistance information is provided on agendas and meeting notices. • Public notices are translated into LEP languages and distributed by various newspapers. • RCTC may utilize a public outreach firm that can provide language assistance as needed. • Riverside Transportation Network: This database ensures agencies and organizations that work with LEP individuals are provided the Commissions information and notices to distribute to their clients. • CAC/SSTAC- Many members of the CAC/SSTAC represent underrepresented and minority groups and are a useful resource for outreach to LEP individuals. • Riverside County Transit Operators: RCTC may partner with transit operators to post vital information on buses and at transfer locations. • SCAG's LEP Plan, Public Participation Plan, and existing translated resources can provide materials for LEP outreach and communication • RCTC translates Title VI vital documents and project -specific vital information into Spanish. • RCTC's website provides outreach and is equipped with a Google translator. • RCTC's Twitter is a useful outreach resource for some segments of the population. 7 LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PLAN Title VI Program — Appendix C Discussion of Results Census data analyzed in Factor One was consistent with the experience of RCTC staff members analyzed in Factor Two to determine that Spanish-speaking LEP individuals are the largest and most frequent LEP group that accesses RCTC's services and programs. As these individuals comprise 13% of Riverside County's population, it will be important for the Commission to continue providing vital documents in Spanish. Additional LEP groups are very small populations (less than 1% of the population), not yet identified (Other Indic Languages, for example), and do not frequently access the Commissions services or programs, documents will be translated as requested or as is appropriate for a specific project. Details of language assistance services are provided in the following Implementation Plan. 8 LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PLAN Title VI Program — Appendix C III. Implementation Plan Language Service Provision RCTC will provide the following language assistance measures to ensure LEP individuals have full access to the Commissions services, programs, and activities: Callers and Visitors • Front desk staff have "I Speak" language identification cards available to assist LEP individuals. • Several employees are bilingual and can help callers or visitors that speak Spanish RCTC contracts with Language Line Solutions, a language service provider, to provide simultaneous translation as needed. Language Line can be accessed by any staff member for translation services by calling 888-808-9008. The staff member can then put an LEP individual in touch with a translator for correspondence. Translation of Vital Documents FTA Circular 4702.1B defines vital documents as, "documents that provide access to essential services." The Commission will use this definition when assessing what documents should be translated. Title VI Documents are vital documents. The Title VI notice to the public, complaint form, and procedures are available in English and Spanish, the LEP language the RCTC is most likely to encounter. Vital documents are available on RCTC's website and at the front desk. Information about the availability of free language assistance is available on posted notices and agendas in Spanish. Spanish -Language Translation: RCTC already provides project notices and announcements and vital documents in Spanish and will continue to do so, as the Spanish-speaking LEP population represents a significant portion of Riverside County's populations. Documents that will be translated include: notices and announcements about public meetings and forums and pubic participation opportunities, key information distributed at project meetings, and any vital project -specific meetings. Other LEP Language Translations: The additional LEP languages represent very small communities and vital information will be translated as requested and as appropriate, with decisions made on a project -by -project basis. For example, if a project takes place in a community with a large LEP population, key information for that project will be translated into that LEP language. Oral interpretation: Oral interpretation will be provided at public meetings as requested and appropriate. Decisions will be made on a project -by -project basis. Notices of public meetings and forums include information about how to request oral interpretation. 9 LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PLAN Title VI Program — Appendix C Outreach/Notice of Availability of Language Assistance RCTC's Title VI Notice to the Public publicizes its language assistance services. Additionally, other notices may include the statement, "If information is needed in another language, please contact (951) 787-7141 for free translation services." Staff Training Outreach and front desk staff are trained in assisting LEP individuals, including identifying language and using the language service provider interpretation system. Training is provided for new employees and reoccurs as necessary. LEP training includes: • A summary of RCTC's language assistance requirements DOT LEP Guidance; • A summary of the Commission's language assistance plan; including responding to LEP persons • Results of RCTC's Four Factor Analysis, including a summary of the LEP individuals in Riverside County and the frequency of contact between the LEP population and the Commission' • A description of the Commission's non-discrimination policies and practices. 10 LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PLAN Title VI Program — Appendix C IV. Monitoring, Evaluating, and Updating the LAP A thorough review of the LAP will be undertaken every three years, or as necessary as guidelines are revised or as compliance reviews warrant. At that time, the LEP population will be reassessed to ensure all significant LEP languages are included in RCTC's language assistance efforts. The following reoccurring reporting and evaluation measures will be used to update the Language Assistance Plan: 1. RCTC will regularly assess the effectiveness of how the Commission communicates with LEP individuals by working with community stakeholders, such as the CAC/SSTAC, the Riverside Transit Network, County transit operators, non-profit agencies, among others. 2. Commission staff will track its language assistance efforts, including: • Tracking front desk staff interaction with LEP persons • Internal surveys of staff who are likely to engage with the public • Number of downloaded documents in other languages • Reports and updates from the language service provider • Requests for translation and interpretation 11 LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PLAN Title VI Program — Appendix C V. Contact information RCTC will post the LAP on its website at www.rctc.org. The LAP may be translated in any language for free upon request. Any questions or comments regarding the LAP should be directed to: Riverside County Transportation Commission John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director 4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor P. O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 Phone: (951) 787-7141 Email: standifo@rctc.org 12 LANGUAGE ASSISTANCE PLAN APPENDIX D: DOCUMENTATION OF GOVERNING BODY REVIEW AND APPROVAL This page left intentionally blank. AGENDA ITEM 8L RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 8, 2016 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Technical Advisory Committee Shirley Medina, Planning and Programming Director THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Clinton Keith Road Extension — Multi Funding Call for Projects Utilization of Project Savings for Phase III BUGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE, TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE, AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve the request by the county of Riverside (County) to utilize $2,717,000 in project savings from the Clinton Keith Road Extension Phase II project (Phase II) for the Clinton Keith Road Extension Phase III project (Phase III); 2) Approve Agreement No. 14-72-099-01, Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 14-72-099-00 with the County to reprogram $2,717,000 from Phase II to Phase III and reduce 2009 Measure A Western County Regional Arterial (MARA) funding by $214,047; and 3) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: On January 8, 2014, the Commission approved the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) funding recommendations for the Multi -Funding Call for Projects (Call for Projects). The County was awarded $16.5 million of MARA Funds for Phase II. The approved funding for Phase II was for constructing a half -width (three lanes) section of Clinton Keith from Whitewood Road to Trois Valley Street (1.7 miles easterly), and striping from Trois Valley Street to Leon Road full width of six lanes including a traffic signal at Trois Valley Street. The County received favorable bids for Phase II, and, on November 10, 2015, the Board of Supervisors awarded the contract to Sukut Construction for Alternate Bid Schedule 2 consisting of a four -lane facility between Whitewood Road and Leon Road at a cost of $32,461,610. Based on the agreements with the local agencies for the call for projects, in the event the bids come in lower than originally anticipated, the cost savings shall be applied proportionately to each funding source: Agenda Item 8L 183 JANUARY 8, 2014 APPROVAL % AWARDED CONTRACT $32,461,610 % DIFFERENCE MARA: $16,500,000 41.8% MARA: $13,568,953 41.8% <$2,931,047> LOCAL: $22,978,000 58.2% LOCAL: $18,892,657 58.2% <$4,085,343> TOTAL:$39,478,000 TOTAL:$32,461,610 <$7,016,390> The project savings to MARA funds for Phase II is $2,931,047. The County proposes to utilize $2,717,000 of the project savings for Phase III, providing the full six lane facility between Whitewood Road and Leon Road (adding two lanes) at an anticipated cost of $6.5 million. The County will be responsible for the remaining $3,783,000 using the same funding split. The start of construction for Phase III is October 2017 and completion by January 2018. As a result of Commission approval of staff's recommendation to reprogram the $2,717,000 from Phase II to Phase III, net project savings to be returned to MARA are $214,047. Approval of the County proposal to utilize the project savings for Phase III will result in public benefits by providing a continuous six -lane facility between Interstate 215 and Leon Road, including reducing congestion on other major arterials and/or mainline. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: N/A Year: FY 2017/18 Amount: $2,717,000 Source of Funds: 2009 Measure A Western County Regional Arterial Fund Budget Adjustment: N/A GL/Project Accounting No.: 005203 81301 0000 0000 266 72 81301 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \)//644034,Date: 05/13/2016 Attachment: Letter from County of Riverside Dated March 8, 2016 Agenda Item 8L 184 Juan C. Perez, P.E., 1:E. Director of Transportation and Land Management March 8, 2016 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE TRANSPORTATION AND LAND MANAGEMENT AGENCY Transportation Department Ms. Anne Mayer RCTC 4080 Lemon Street 3nd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 Patricia Romo, P.E. Assistant Director of Transportation RE: Clinton Keith Road Extension Project — 2013 Multi -Funding Cali for Project Funding Dear Anne: The Clinton Keith extension project is a new six lane arterial from Antelope Road to State Route 79 within unincorporated Riverside County and the City of Mun-ieta. Due to limited funding, the project is being constructed in phases as funding becomes available. Phase 1 between Antelope Road and Whitewood Road was completed in 2013. Phase 2 is the addition of four lanes between Whitewood Road and Leon Road. On September 23, 2013, the Riverside County Transportation Department and the City of Murrieta, submitted a joint application in the 2013 Multi -Funding Call for Projects, for the Clinton Keith Road Extension Project Phase 2 and on January 8, 2014 the RCTC board allocated $16,500,000 in Measure A Regional Arterial funds for the Clinton Keith Phase 2 widening project. This allocation of funds represented 41.8% of the estimated cost of construction with a funding split as follows: MARA Funds $16,500,000 Local Funds $22,978,000 Total estimated construction $39,478,000 41.8% 58.2% On November 10, 2015 the County Board of Supervisors awarded a construction contract to Smut Construction for the Clinton Keith Road Extension Project Phase 2. The actual costs for the project will be as follows: MARA $13,568,953 41.8% Local Funds $18,892,657 58.2% Total construction costs $32,461,610 4080 Lemon Street, 8th Floor • Riverside, CA 92501 (951) 955-6740 P.O. Box 1090 • Riverside, CA 92502-1090 • FAX (951) 955-3198 185 Ms. Anne Mayer Page 2 March 8, 2016 The low bid resulted in MARA savings of $2,931,047. The County would like to request that the MARA savings be used towards the next phase of the Clinton Keith project which would provide for the full six lane facility between Whitewood Road and Leon Road. It is anticipated that construction for this next phase of work would take approximately 4 months and could begin in October 2017 and be completed by January 2018. Clinton Keith Road would not be open to traffic until all improvements of the six - lane roadway are built. This would reduce costs for traffic control and temporary striping and would be seamless to the public. It is estimated that this work would cost $6.5M. The funding for construction is estimated to be as follows: MARA $2,717,000 41.8% Local Funds $3,783,000 58.2% Total estimated construction $6,500,000 This approach would allow for the full 6-lanes of Clinton Keith to be constructed and provide the public with a continuous 6-lane facility between 1-215 and Leon Road. We appreciate your consideration of this request. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at (951) 955-6747. Sincerely, Patricia Romo, PE Assistant Director of Transportation cc: Shirley Medina Juan Perez Mojahed Salama 4080 Lemon Street, 8th Floor • Riverside, CA 92501 • (951) 955-6740 P.O. Box 1090 • Riverside, CA 92502-1090 • FAX (951) 955-3198 186 AGENDA ITEM 8M RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 8, 2016 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Mark Lancaster, Right of Way Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Surplus of Real Property BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Declare as surplus the eight real properties, comprised of 10 Assessor's Parcel Numbers (APN), adjacent to State Route 74, as described in this agenda item and attached maps; 2) Authorize the Executive Director to notify public agencies and contiguous land owners for seven of the properties, pursuant to Government Code 54220 et.seq, that the properties are available for purchase; and 3) If no response is received from public agencies and contiguous land owners, authorize the Executive Director to offer the surplus property for sale to the public. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Staff has been working with the county of Riverside and Caltrans for years on the disposition of street vacations, relinquishments, and excess land related to the SR-74 project. The SR-74 project, a 1989 Measure A Western County highway project, widened SR-74 between Wasson Canyon Road in the city of Lake Elsinore and 7t" Street in the city of Perris and was completed in 2006. On September 11, 2013, the Commission declared 16 parcels, totaling 16.87 acres, along the SR-74 as excess. An additional 8 parcels, totaling 5.438 acres, have been identified, and staff's review determined it would be in the Commission's best interest to declare these parcels as surplus and offer them for sale rather than to continue to pay maintenance costs. Process After being declared excess, staff will follow the Commission's adopted Right of Way Policies and Procedures Manual, state laws, and any applicable funding requirements to dispose of the property. Staff will prioritize the order of sale based on market conditions. Pursuant to the Government Code 54220 et.seq., and Commission policy, letters will be prepared notifying the appropriate public agencies of the Commission's decision to declare the property surplus. If interested, the public agency(s) shall notify the Commission in writing of its Agenda Item 8M 187 intent to purchase or lease the land within 60 days after receipt of the Commission's notification of intent to sell the land. If no public agency expresses interest in the parcel, the parcel will then be offered for sale to the public. One parcel, APN 345-060-054 (327 square feet), has an area less than 5,000 square feet and is considered to be exempt surplus land pursuant to Government Code 54220 et.seq. The contiguous land owner will be notified of the sale first to determine if they would like to purchase the property. If not, it will no longer be considered exempt surplus land and will follow the above process. An appraisal will be completed in order to determine the current fair market value of the surplus property. The surplus property will be advertised for sale, utilizing the Commission's website, newspapers, and online publications as well as signage on the property. An invitation for bids will be added to "Available Property" on the Commission's website and a defined submittal date will be provided. Staff will review the offers received based on the following criteria: 1) Price; and 2) Terms and conditions of sale. All applicants will be required to complete the Commission's Conflict of Interest form. Staff will return to the Commission for approval before entering into a purchase and sale agreement for any of the properties. Staff requests the Commission declare the following parcels as surplus property and authorize the Executive Director to offer the surplus property for sale to the public. APN Ownership Type Vacant/ Improved Square Feet 342-071-021 Fee Vacant 12,632 345-060-054 Fee Vacant 327 347-110-089 Fee Vacant 73,616 349-060-043 Fee Vacant 16,553 349-090-007 Fee Vacant 113,256 349-342-030/349-342-031 Fee Vacant 6,533 349-342-032/349-342-033 Fee Vacant 6,534 CPN-13609* Fee Vacant 7,405 *Commission staff is working with the County Assessor's Office on the issuance of an APN for this property. Agenda Item 8M 188 Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: No Year: FY FY 2017/17 /18+ Amount: Undetermined Source of Funds: Property sale proceeds Budget Adjustment: No N/A GL/Project Accounting No.: 003001000 222 3142003 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \1414,141.44� Date: 05/10/2016 Attachment: Maps Depicting the Property to be Declared Surplus Agenda Item 8M 189 SR-74 Excess Land Property Description: This parcel is located in unincorporated Riverside County, along SR-74. Parcel on corner of Ellis Ave. and SR-74. Location Unincorporated Riverside County APN 342-071-021 CPN 13877 Zoning R-R Sq. Ft. 12,632 Epic Land Solutions, Inc. 4, 190 SR-74 Excess Land Property Description: This parcel is located in unincorporated Riverside County, along SR-74. Parcel located southwest of Pearls Path. Location Unincorporated Riverside County APN CPN Zoning Sq. Ft. 345-060-054 13694 R-R 327 Epic Land Solutions, Inc. el 191 SR-74 Excess Land Property Description: This parcel is located in the City of Lake Elsinore, along SR-74. Parcel located across from Wasson Canyon Rd. Location (City) Lake Elsinore APN 347-110-089 CPN 13557 Zoning R1 Acreage 1.69 Epic Land Solutions, Inc. 192 SR-74 Excess Land Property Description: This parcel is located in unincorporated Riverside County, along SR-74. Parcel located across from Wasson Canyon Rd. Location Unincorporated Riverside County APN 349-060-043 CPN 13579 Zoning R-R Sq. Ft. 16,553 Epic Land Solutions, Inc. 193 SR-74 Excess Land Property Description: This parcel is located in unincorporated Riverside County, along SR-74. Parcel located across from Wasson Canyon Rd. Location Unincorporated Riverside County APN 349-090-007 CPN 13598 Zoning R-A-2 Acreage 2.60 Epic land Solutions, Inc. , 194 SR-74 Excess Land Property Description: These parcels are located in unincorporated Riverside County, along SR-74. Parcels located south of Mazie Ave. Location Unincorporated Riverside County APN 349-342-030 & 031 CPN 13634 & 13633 Zoning R-R Sq. Ft. 6,533 Epic Land Solutions, Inc. i 195 SR-74 Excess Land Property Description: These parcels are located in unincorporated Riverside County, along SR-74. Parcels located north of Greenwald Ave. Location Unincorporated Riverside County APN 349-342-032 & 033 CPN 13630 & 13629 Zoning R-R Sq. Ft. 6,534 Epic Land Solutions, Inc. , 196 SR-74 Excess Land • 3 W' ' F . n 3 _ Y .Tr + . r i Property Description: This parcel is located in unincorporated Riverside County, along SR-74. Parcel located on corner of SR-74 and Beryl St. Location Unincorporated Riverside County APN CPN 13609 Zoning Sq. Ft. 7,405 Epic Land Solutions, Inc. 197 AGENDA ITEM 8N RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 8, 2016 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Josefina Clemente, Transit Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Fiscal Years 2016/17 — 2018/19 Short Range Transit Plans BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to approve the Fiscal Years 2016/17 — 2018/19 Short Range Transit Plans (SRTPs) for the cities of Banning, Beaumont, Corona, and Riverside; Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency (PVVTA); Riverside Transit Agency (RTA); SunLine Transit Agency (SunLine); and the Commission's Western Riverside County Rail Program and Coachella Valley Rail Program. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Under state law, the Commission is tasked with the responsibility to identify, analyze, and recommend potential productivity improvements to ensure federal, state, and local funds allocated to transit operators provide services needed by county residents and are used in an efficient and effective manner. Through the SRTP planning process, the Commission and transit agencies analyze current transportation services, identify transit needs of the community, and determine the ability to meet those needs in a three-year time frame. The Riverside County (County) FYs 2016/17 — 2018/19 SRTPs cover the three apportionment areas of the County and are comprised of plans for the municipal operators, RTA, SunLine, PVVTA, and the Commission's Commuter Rail Program in Western County and Coachella Valley. The SRTPs serve as the County's blueprint for continued operation and future development of transit services, operations, and infrastructure. The SRTP process also requires the transit operators to address recommendations made by regular performance audits. The recommendations that impact service and operations are then included in subsequent SRTP documents. To meet the growing demand for transit services, the operators are focusing on implementing new routes, improving frequency, and refining schedules to develop a stronger intercity and regional network. Express bus route and CommuterLink route extensions to the Perris Valley Line (PVL) trains, which operate along the 91 Line, are planned for implementation this fiscal year. Procurement of needed vehicles is ongoing for both expansion and replacement of aging buses. To ensure service quality and reliability, other capital facilities such as transit centers, Agenda Item 8N 198 bus shelters, additional slow fill stations, and compressed natural gas (CNG) fueling dispensers are planned for construction and installation. A sizable portion of each agency's capital plan also includes safety and security equipment such as video surveillance upgrades at Commission - owned stations, security lighting, upgraded camera system, enhanced illuminated bus stop devices, and automated external defibrillators safety response equipment, which help ensure safety of the region's transportation system. In addition, necessary access and mobility improvements are also being implemented to better serve the County's lower -income, elderly, and disabled populations. While the SRTPs include projected financial needs, the actual allocation of funds will occur via the public hearing to be conducted 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 2016/17 include: • Analyze and adjust times, as necessary, for Routes 1 and 6 to meet demand presented by the ridership growth at the Mt. San Jacinto Pass Campus; • Purchase and implement the use of a software system to improve Dial -A -Ride scheduling and dispatching; • Install auto display and enunciator equipment for fixed route fleet and purchase equipment for a camera system to enable wireless download of footage from vehicles; and • Develop an advertisement program in conjunction with the Banning Chamber of Commerce to increase revenue. 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 2016/17 include: • Increase service by providing an additional bus on Commuter Route 120 for the regional connection to San Bernardino County; • Implement Calimesa Route 136 to provide transit service to City Hall, shopping centers, and connection to Route 120; • Eliminate Sunday service on Route 3/4 and evaluate current Saturday service to increase productivity; • Implement new Express Route 702, which will provide service to Casino Morongo with minimal stops in Banning; and Agenda Item 8N 199 " Maintain and improve global positioning system tracking system and Google Transit to assist riders with route and vehicle information. 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 2016/17 include: " Adjust the Corona Cruiser bus schedule to reflect actual trip times resulting from increased traffic flow impacted by the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project construction activities; " Procure, test, and accept delivery of Dial -A -Ride replacement buses; " Commence replacement of advertising passenger shelters; and " Work with the Corona's contract transportation operator to improve operations, bus maintenance, and cleanliness and maintenance of bus stops. City of Riverside Special Services Riverside Special Services 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 2016/17 include: " Procure eight paratransit vehicles for replacement using State Transit Assistance, Federal Transit Administration Section 5307, and Proposition 1B capital funds; " Purchase and implement an electronic fare collection system; " Install an electronic access system for the transit administrative offices, obtain a new electronic key box, and replace the automatic gate opener for the minibus yard; and " Conduct a comprehensive operations analysis to identify potential areas of improving the current transit system. Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency The PVVTA provides fixed route service and a transportation reimbursement program for individuals who cannot ride the public bus system. The fixed route service can deviate up to three-quarters of a mile away from the actual fixed route. Service is provided within the city of Blythe (Blythe) and surrounding unincorporated county areas in the Palo Verde Valley. Planned services for FY 2016/17 include: " Implement minor routing changes for Blue Route 1, Gold Route 2, Green Route 4; eliminate one PM trip from the state prisons to Blythe on Red Route 3 and improve frequency on Silver Route 5; Agenda Item 8N 200 " Continue operation of XTend-A-Ride service, a demand -response service that addresses requests for special transit service that may not be available on the fixed -route system; " Improve mobility to the Coachella Valley by participating in a human services and transportation coordination project to be undertaken jointly with the Commission; and " Continue to monitor the CNG fueling station for efficiency. Riverside Transit Agency RTA provides local, intercity, and regional transportation services. As the consolidated transportation service agency (CTSA) for Western County, RTA is responsible for coordinating transit services throughout the service area and providing driver training and grant application assistance to operators in Western County. Planned services for FY 2016/17 include: " Streamline downtown Riverside bus operations together with the closure of the existing downtown bus terminal; " Implement the new SR-91 CommuterLink service on the 91 Express Lanes; " Implement Sunday service on Thanksgiving, Christmas, and New Year's Day; " Expand current Route 30 to link Perris with the May Ranch development; and " Purchase 43 replacement vehicles for contracted fixed route and Dial -A -Ride services, associated transit improvements, and critical maintenance and administrative support equipment. SunLine Transit Agency SunLine is the CTSA for the 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 15 fixed routes and demand response Dial -A -Ride services known as SunDial. Planned services for FY 2016/17 include: " Adjust schedule and terminus location for Lines 14 and 30; realign Lines 24, 32, 53, 90, 91, 95, and 111, and revise frequencies for Lines 24, 32, 70, 80, and 81; " Implement new Line 92 as a community -based bus service in the city of Coachella to replace current Line 90; " Study high capacity/bus rapid transit options in Coachella Valley; " Introduce a transportation demand management program for vanpool programs for private and public sector workers; and " Maintain collaborative efforts with local jurisdictions in the implementation of ongoing bus stop improvements and enhancements, including the procurement of bus shelters and site upgrades for Americans with Disabilities Act compliance. Agenda Item 8N 201 Commission's Rail Program Western County Commuter Rail The Southern California Regional Rail Authority operates seven commuter rail lines with 52 locomotives and 150 commuter rail cars. Three routes — the Riverside Line to Los Angeles, the Inland Empire to Orange County Line, and the 91/PVL Line from Perris to Los Angeles via Fullerton Line — directly serve Western County with connecting service available to destinations on the other four Metrolink lines. Planned services for FY 2016/17 include: • Complete construction of the PVL extension; • Implement positive train control and start up operations for the PVL segment of the 91 Line extension, all of which will result in major cost increases; and • Anticipate no fare increase for FY 2016/17. Coachella Valley — San Gorgonio Pass Rail Corridor Service The proposed 200-mile long rail corridor service in Coachella Valley will run from Los Angeles to Indio through the four Southern California counties of Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino to provide a convenient scheduled link to the communities in the fast-growing Coachella Valley and Banning Pass areas. The Commission will lead the planning efforts for the service development plan of the corridor service in coordination with the Coachella Valley Association of Governments. Financial support will come primarily from state and federal grant funds that are deposited and maintained in the Coachella Valley rail fund. Planning efforts for FY 2016/17 include: • Prepare the environmental documentation for the project; • Develop a final service development plan; and • Continue to keep the public engaged by encouraging feedback about service routes, stations, ridership, and other elements through the project website and social media. Attachments: FYs 2016/17 — 2018/19 Operator SRTPs (Posted on Commission Website) 1) City of Banning 2) City of Beaumont 3) City of Corona 4) City of Riverside 5) Coachella Valley Rail Program 6) PVVTA 7) RTA 8) SunLine 9) Western Riverside Rail Program Agenda Item 8N 202 PASSTRANSIT Short Range Transit Plan FY 2016/17 - 2018/19 FINAL Short Range Transit Plan city of BANNING California TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 System Overview 1.1 Description of service area and system map 3 1.2 Population Profile and Demographic Projections 4 1.3 Existing Service and Route Performance 6 1.4 Current and Proposed Fare Structure 6 1.5 Revenue Fleet 7 1.6 Existing Facility/Planned Facilities 7 1.7 Existing Coordination between Transit Agencies 8 2 Existing Services and Route Performance 2.1 Fixed Route Services 9 2.2 Dial -a -Ride Service 12 2.3 Key Performance Indicators 13 2.4 Productivity Improvement Efforts 14 2.5 Major Trip Generators and Projected Growth 14 2.6 Equipment, Passenger Amenities and Facility Needs 15 3 Planned Service Changes and Implementation 3.1 Recent Service Changes 3.2 Recommended Local & Express Routes 3.3 Marketing Plans and Promotions 3.4 Budget Impact on Proposed Changes 15 16 16 17 4 Financial and Capital Plans 4.1 Operating and Capital Budget Narrative 17 4.2 Funding Plans to Support Operating and Capital Program 17 4.3 Regulatory and Compliance Requirements 17 • ADA, DBE, EEO, Title VI • TDA Triennial Audit, FTA Triennial Audit, NTD • Alternative Fueled Vehicles Short Range Transit Plan c;tv of BANNING California 5 Tables 1. Table 1 - Fleet Inventory a. Motor Bus (DO/PT) b. Demand Response (DO/PT) 2. Table 2 - SRTP Service Summary a. All Routes b. Non -Excluded Routes c. Excluded Routes d. Fixed Route e. DAR 3. Table 3 - SRTP Route Statistics Table 3A - Individual Route 4. Table 4 - Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2016/17 Table 4A - Capital Project Justification 5. Table 5.1 - Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2017/18 Table 5.1A - Capital Project Justification Table 5.2 - Summary of Funds Requested in FY 2018/19 Table 5.2A - Capital Project Justification 6. FY 2010 - 2012 TDA Triennial Performance Audit Recommendations 7. Table 7 - Performance Target Report 2016/17 8. Table 8 - Performance Report 2017/18 9. Table 9 - Highlights of FY 2016/17 Short Range Transit Plan Table 9A - Operating and Financial Data Table 9B - Fare Revenue Calculation Short Range Transit Plan City of BANNING California 1 System Overview 1.1 — Description of Service Area The Banning Transit system serves several areas, including the commercial and residential areas of Banning and Cabazon, as well as the commercial areas of the Morongo Indian Reservation and limited commercial areas of Beaumont. The cities of Banning and Beaumont operate under a shared brand identity, "Pass Transit." Pass Transit offers seamless transit by coordinating transportation services that cover approximately 40 square miles in the pass area with routes connecting to regional services. Within the service area, population is mixed with areas of both high and low densities. The current routes have been planned by taking advantage of this knowledge, allowing the system to operate more efficiently. Service Area Map BEAC.MO:IT 8I.1:MG food-4.1ms Starer s &h 5t Irdon 5 dn❑I L rt Community 4 ' Rrmoy Cuter k tr Rcae:S: +7 L R Ntrastson's Shopping Center Vilkkan Cowman Pant Correa cm to Routes 2 i 5 E 5 120 210/ 220 31 35 Route Route 5 Route 6 Yemna d MSlC Banns Pass Campus High School City Nail a Poke per County Courthouse mith Correctional facility C RAZOti' Omer Mills Casino Outlet Mall liorongo Magro ume"► dS Cullman Communrty E II (bate' OS n U❑ res .mac 6-Parara Short Range Transit Plan City of BANNING California 1.2 — Population Profile and Area Deomgraphics Riverside County covers 7,208 square miles with a population of over 2.2 million people in 2010, per the U.S. Census. The population density for Riverside County is 303.8 people per square mile, largely due to the vast desert areas that are not populated. The city of Banning covers 23 square miles with a population of 30,241 people in 2014, per the U.S. Census. The population density for Banning is 1,300 per square mile. The population of the service area covered by Banning Transit has grown by approximately 29% over the last ten years. The racial makeup of the city is as follows: Population Ethnicity ■ Hispanic/Latino ■ White/Caucasian 111 African American ■ Asian ■ Arnerican Indian SI Other The six percentages add to more than 100 percent because individuals may report more than one race The average age of the population is the following: • 55+ Years • 40-54 Years • 20-39 Years • Under 19 Years 36.6 15.5 22.1 25.8 The average age of the population is 45.1 years old. 5 Short Range Transit Plan City of BANNING California Rider Demographics In 2013, a survey was conducted showing the demographics of the Pass Transit riders. The information gathered helped create a visual indication of the use of the system. The racial makeup of the ridership is as follows: Rider Ethnicity ■ White/Caucasian ■ Hispanic ■ African American ■ Other ■ Native American ■ Asian Furthermore, 86% of respondents stated that they used the system's fixed routes at least three times a week. 59% of the ridership used the bus service for local trips within the Banning/Beaumont/Cabazon area, and 49% use the transit to travel outside of Pass Transit's service area. For 91 % of ridership, the bus system is their only means of transportation. An unspecified amount of respondents stated that the transit service is readily available in their area, with a majority of riders living within a two -block radius of a bus stop. A majority of the users of the system share the commonality of being either underemployed or unemployed, with 88% of riders reporting an annual household income of $20,000 or less and 81 % of respondents reporting a family of two or more. 87% of those completing the survey report English as their primary language while 13% speak Spanish. 6 Short Range Transit Plan City of BANNING California 1.3 - Existing Service and Route Performance The Banning Transit System currently has three fixed route services which serve the main streets and neighborhood areas of Banning, the residential and business areas of Cabazon, and the main business and shopping area of Beaumont. Banning's fixed route buses are accessible to people with disabilities; each bus has a wheelchair lift or ramp along with two wheelchair securement locations. Banning offers individualized travel training to assist new passengers in learning how to ride these buses. Banning Paratransit is an origin -to -destination shared ride transportation service for seniors age 60 and older and persons who are, due to their functional limitation(s), unable to use accessible fixed route bus service. Passengers must be certified eligible per guidelines established by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). 1.4 - Current and Proposed Fare Structure The Pass Transit system has adopted a mutual service fare to make traveling more accessible to those who utilize the system. The chart below has a detailed breakdown of the current fares for available services: Fare Categories Fixed Route Base Day Pass 10-Trip 10-Ticket Monthly Fare Punch Book Pass Pass General Youth (grades K-12) Senior (60+) Disabled Military Veterans Child (46" fall or under. Must be accompanied by full fare paying passenger.) Zone Fare (Cabazon Residential Area) Deviations (Routes 3 & 4) Active Military GOPass (During school session only) $1.15 $3.00 N/A $10.35 $36.00 $1.00 $3.00 $10.00 N/A $25.00 $.65 $1.80 N/A $5.85 $21.50 $.65 $1.80 N/A $5.85 $21.50 $.65 $1.80 N/A $5.85 $21.50 $.25 N/A N/A N/A N/A $.25 $.25 $.25 $.25 N/A $.25 $.25 $.25 $.25 $.25 FREE N/A N/A N/A N/A FREE N/A N/A N/A N/A Short Range Transit Plan City of BANNING California Dial -A -Ride Fares Fare Categories Base Fare 10-Ride Punch Card One -Way I $2.00 $18.00 Companion I $3.00 N/A PCA (w/ I.D.)* FREE FREE No Show I $2.00 N/A *Personal Care Attendant must show proper ID each time they board. 1.5 — Revenue Fleet Banning Transit System operates seven fixed route vehicles all of which are powered by compressed natural gas (CNG). The vehicles are equipped with racks for two bicycles and are in compliance with the ADA with mobility device lifts and two tie -down stations per bus. The transit system also has five vehicles that which are classified as Dial -A -Ride (two in revenue service and one as a spare). One of the two remaining is utilized as an alternate for the fixed -route if needed, and the other is scheduled to be taken out of service and scheduled for auction. All are in compliance with the ADA, with mobility device lifts and tie -down stations for four mobility devices. Banning Pass Transit also has four support vehicles which are used for driver relief or administrative errands. Two replacement buses for the fixed routes have been ordered which will be delivered at the end of June 2015. A 32' El Dorado National EZ Rider II has been ordered and is scheduled to be delivered August 2016. See the City of Banning Fleet Inventory Table 1 for individual vehicle characteristics. 1.6 — Existing Facility/Planned Facilities 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 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. 8 Short Range Transit Plan BANNING California Banning Pass Transit Office Hours Monday — Thursday: 7:30am 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. There are currently no plans to expand Banning Pass Transit System facilities. 1.7 — Existing Coordination between Transit Agencies Currently, the cities of Banning and Beaumont operate under a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) which allows for each respective agency to cross jurisdictional boundary lines, allowing simplified travel for passengers throughout the Pass area. In addition, an MOU is held with the Morongo Band of Mission Indians allowing stops on their property. The ability to provide a stop at Casino Morongo allows passengers to make connections with Sunline Commuter Link 220, providing service from Palm Desert to Riverside. Also, services are also coordinated with Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) by providing timed stops that meet with routes that provide travel to and from the areas of Hemet and Moreno Valley. Riders also have the opportunity to connect with the Amtrak Thruway Bus Service at Casino Morongo. Short Range Transit Plan City of BANNING California 2 Existing Service and Route Performance 2.1 — Fixed Route Service The Banning Transit System currently has three fixed route services which serve downtown and neighborhood areas of Banning, both the residential and business areas of Cabazon, and the main commercial area of Beaumont. Route 1 — Beaumont/Banning/Cabazon Pass Transit Route 1 is among the most used route in the system, operating primarily along Ramsey Street and 6th Street and serving the commercial areas of Cabazon and Casino Morongo. Ridership on Route 1 accounts for approximately 60% of the total use of the system. While the longest in distance, this route operates on one -hour headway from Beaumont to Casino Morongo. The major stops on this line include Albertsons, Wal-Mart, Banning City Hall, Mid -County Justice Center, San Gorgonio Memorial Hospital, Casino Morongo and the Desert Hills Outlets in Cabazon. PASSTRANSIT BANNING G cnnoxcan m Rokc ®®1111®1:1 ®Z®®in Legend I Map not to scale Connection Paint G sca uW ipr.f. to Roses EI© ®E1 Seminole C-1R-1ZON The second loop of Route 1 also runs on an hour headway departing from Casino Morongo and servicing the Cabazon Community Center and the residential areas of Cabazon. Two buses are operated on this route which allows for hourly service to the two respective areas. 10 Short Range Transit Plan city of BANNING California Route 5 — Northern Banning Route 5 accounts for 25 percent of Pass Transit use, providing service to the areas that lie north of the 1-10 Freeway in the City of Banning. Major stops on this route are the Mid - County Justice Center, Banning City Hall, the Banning Community Center, Library, Medical Facilities, San Gorgonio Memorial Hospital and the commercial area of Beaumont. Route s Addlilia6N PASSTRANSIT Con e:Ixo to Route San Gorgon Hospill BEAUMONT x ^.anne=G nn o Route MEE Cl®■ Eith St ■ Ern St 1st St a Wilson St C Sun lakes Village m BANNING Legend I Map not to scale Cannectian Paint Indian School Lane Wilson St Nicolet St Connerbon to Routim INN ® uo ®®I Ramsey St • • Nicolet St 11 Short Range Transit Plan city of BANNING California Route 6 — Southern Banning Accounting for 15% of Pass Transit use, Route 6 provides service to the southern area of Banning. Major stops on this route are the Mid -County Justice Center, Banning City Hall, the Mt. San Jacinto Pass Campus, Banning High School, Smith Correctional Facility, Medical Facilities, San Gorgonio Memorial Hospital and the commercial area of Beaumont. Route 6 PASSTRANSIT BE1+U_M1i011'T m Sth St 111 Wilson St c- r„ BANNING Legend I Map not to scale Connection Paint 6St O. m Ramsey St Sun 1-nk Vil4 ge oRa h MSFC Pass Camp"._ ■ Lincoln St Westward Ave Williams St + m Q 0 c 0 `o c� + � m y 8amiag ■ Wesley St High School Hathaway St Short Range Transit Plan City of BANNING California Banning Pass Transit fixed route service hours are as follows: Days Route Hours Monday — Friday Route 1 Monday - Friday Route 5 Monday - Friday Route 6 4:30 A.M. — 10:45 P.M. 5:30 A.M. — 6:30 P.M. 6:00 A.M. — 6:00 P.M. Saturday & Sunday Route 1 Saturday & Sunday Routes 5 & 6 8:00 A.M. — 6:00 P.M. 8:00 A.M. — 5:00 P.M. Banning Pass Transit offers limited service hours, 9:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M., on the following holidays: Martin Luther King Day, President's Day, Labor Day, Veterans Day, and the day after Thanksgiving. Banning Pass Transit offers no service on the following holidays: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Thanksgiving Day, and Christmas Day. All aforementioned fixed routes are consistently monitored and will be modified as needed to better serve unmet transit needs. 2.2 — Dial -A -Ride Service Pass Transit Dial -A -Ride is a service offered to seniors, aged 60 and older, persons with disabilities and passengers eligible under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Limited service hours are available for non-ADA passengers. This category of passenger is also required to fill out a certification application to determine eligibility. If these terms are met, the applicant will receive a card certifying their eligibility to ride. Pass Transit Dial -A -Ride is a service offered within the city limits of Banning and Beaumont as well as within a % mile boundary of Routes 1 and 2 service areas (including Cabazon). The primary uses for the Dial -A -Ride system are transportation to medical appointments, workshop programs for persons with disabilities, shopping areas, employment. Dial -a - Ride services also provide connections to the Riverside Transit Agency and Pass Transit Fixed Routes. 13 Short Range Transit Plan City of BANNING California Hours for the Dial -A -Ride program are as follows: Days Hours Seniors (age 60 & older) & Persons without ADA Certification Monday - Friday Saturday & Sunday 8:00 A.M. — 3:00 P.M. No Service Persons with ADA Certification Monday - Friday Saturday & Sunday 7:00 A.M. — 7:00 P.M. Limited service when three or more persons request service. 2.3 — Key Performance Indicators The Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) 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. The following table on the next page shows the operating performance indicators adopted in the PIP and this plan's projections for the coming year. Banning Transit System / FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 Audited Actual Projected Planned Pass Transit (Based on 3rd Quarter Performance Statistics Actuals) Unlinked Passenger Trips 156,052 144,978 134,637 186,209 Operating Cost per Revenue $92.31 $77.75 $70.00 $78.17 Hours Farebox Recovery Ratio 11.32% 11.27% 13.22% 11.56% Subsidy per Passenger $8.19 $9.45 $7.22 $7.99 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $3.22 $3.70 $3.56 $2.24 Subsidy per Revenue Hour $81.86 $68.99 $59.69 $69.13 Subsidy per Revenue Mile $3.57 $2.82 $1.60 $4.61 Passengers per Revenue Mile 0.44 0.30 0.24 0.58 Short Range Transit Plan City of BANNING California The FY 2015/16 projections are based on operating data through March 2016 and projected through June, 2016. Since these are only estimates, the performance indicators are subject to change. For Fiscal Year 2016/17, the Banning Transit System expects to be in compliance with at least 4 of the 7 performance targets. Additional details on key indicators for demand responsive and fixed route services are shown in Table 2. The Banning Transit System does not receive any federal funding and is not required to report to the National Transit Database. 2.4 — Productivity Improvement Efforts In order to meet performance standards, routes are continually monitored and analyzed to insure that the service being provided runs as efficiently as possible. Banning Pass Transit completed a Comprehensive Operations Analysis (COA) with Transportation Management & Design, Inc. in May of 2014, resulting in route changes for the entire system. While the addition of the Cabazon Circulator route has been met with great success, the recommended changes to Routes 5 and 6 caused a significant decrease in ridership and as a result, the routes were realigned to provide better service to residents of the City of Banning. Implementation of the realigned routes began in August 2015 and ridership has shown marked improvement on both routes. Banning Pass Transit has experienced a decrease in farebox revenue with the additional service of the Beaumont Route 2. While the additional bus allows for 30 minute service from Walmart in Beaumont to Casino Morongo, the growth in ridership that was projected for the route has not been realized. Thus, Banning has requested that beginning January 1, 2017 Beaumont reduce their trips through Banning by 50%. 2.5 — Major Trip Generators and Projected Growth over the next two years Major passenger trip destinations that the Banning Pass Transit services are the Sunlakes Plaza Shopping Center, the 2nd Street Marketplace in Beaumont, the Walmart Supercenter in Beaumont, the Banning Justice Center, San Gorgonio Pass Hospital, Beaver and Loma Linda Medical Plazas, the Cabazon Outlet Stores, Desert Hills Premium Outlets and Casino Morongo and the Mt. San Jacinto College Pass Campus. There is a high demand for service to these destinations whether for employment, necessities or pleasure. Short Range Transit Plan City of BANNING California 2.6 — Equipment, Passenger Amenities and Facility Needs Passenger amenities include 170 sign posted bus stops, 15 bus shelters with solar lighting and information panels and trash receptacles, 8 benches, and 15 trash cans. All fixed route and Dial -A -Ride vehicles are equipped with security cameras and recording equipment. Two new fixed route buses were placed into service July, 2015. Grant funds have been received for two additional 33' passenger coaches, one of which has been ordered and will be delivered September 2016. This year funds are being requested for the replacement of a hydraulic lift at the fleet maintenance shop. 3 Planned Service Changes and Implementation 3.1 — Recent Service Changes As mentioned previously, there were service changes made in July of 2014; those changes were based upon recommendations that were made as a result of the COA. The changes that were made have not had the anticipated results, and thus, route changes have been made to improve service and increase ridership. The most significant change will be the realignment of Banning Route 1, which will no longer travel into Beaumont beyond the Walmart Shopping Center. Thirty minute service will still be available from Walmart to Casino Morongo; however, the additional hour of service that is currently spent in the City of Beaumont will be spent operating on the Cabazon Circulator Route. The changes that were made resulted in reduced headway times and expanded service hours at the MSJC Pass Campus. Classes at the college campus end at 9:OOp.m., and service at the college continues to 9:30p.m., allowing students who rely on the bus to attend evening classes and make connections to RTA service for regional travel. Beginning in January 2017, Beaumont Pass Transit will no longer operate 30-minute service from the Walmart Shopping Center to Casino Morongo via downtown Banning every hour as their service through Banning's main corridor will be reduced to one bus every hour. Banning will continue to operate Route 1 on its current schedule. This change is necessary due to oversaturation of service in Banning's service area. While service has been increased over the past two years, Banning Pass Ridership and farebox revenue both declined. Major growth projected for the downtown area which will generate a significant increase in ridership has not yet occurred, i.e. County Courthouse being fully Short Range Transit Plan City of BANNING California operational, retail and office space being built and a substantial amount of county offices relocating to the area. 3.2 — Recommend Local and Express Routes There are no additional local or express routes scheduled for this planning year. 3.3 — Marketing Plans and Promotions 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 by delivery to the library, Chamber of Commerce, San Gorgonio Memorial Hospital, Mt. San Jacinto Pass Campus, local hotels and other businesses. 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. Participation in the MSJC GO -PASS Program to encourage ridership of college students. 4. Articles in local papers highlighting new transportation routes. 5. Coordinate Travel Training through RTA. 6. Offer "Rider Appreciation Day" to raise awareness of benefits of public transportation. The City of Banning's website at www.ci.banning.ca.us provides basic Pass Transit route and schedule information, as well as links to route information for neighboring agencies. Customers can submit comments, complaints, concerns and suggestions through the city website. Banning Pass Transit strives to operate service in a manner that will maximize system productivity, efficiency, as well as the use of subsidies. • Develop an ongoing planning process with key agencies and organizations within the region. • Ensure that services are operated in a manner to maximize safety, to the riders, the public and the operators. • Develop a core group of services that connect key activity points and commit to providing service along those corridors. 17 Short Range Transit Plan 1;0 of BANNING California • Continually review all services to evaluate the efficiency and needs of the transit system. 3.4 — Budget Impact on Proposed Changes The proposed changes will have a positive impact on the budget as the result will be an increase in ridership and farebox revenue. 4 FINANCIAL AND CAPITAL PLANS 4.1 — Operating and Capital Budget For FY 16/17, operating funds needed to operate the Banning Pass Transit System are $1,682,001 for the Fixed Route and DAR. The operating funds consist of $ 1,487,101 local transportation funds (LTF). The projected farebox revenue for FY 16/17 is $194,400. Additional funding in the amount of $500 will come from interest income. Staff will continue to complete previously funded Capital projects in FY 16/17 and will continue to operate service in a manner that will maximize system productivity and efficiency. 4.2 — Funding Plans to Support Proposed Operating and Capital Program Capital projects are funded through STA funds, Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account Program and Proposition 1 B Security grants for Banning Pass Transit. Operating costs will be fully funded through LTF funds, farebox revenue and interest. 4.3 — Regulatory and Compliance Requirements The City of Banning submitted an Americans with Disabilities Act Paratransit Plan to the FTA on January 26, 1992. Pass Transit fixed route buses are equipped with ADA compliant mobility device lifts and are accessible to persons with disabilities. A procedure is in place to provide service to a customer in a mobility device should a fixed route bus lift fail. Banning Pass Transit Dial -A -Ride services provide ADA complementary paratransit service for the fixed route services operated by Banning Transit System. Beaumont Transit System offers the same service through its Pass Transit Dial -a -Ride operation. The system uses a self -certification process with professional verification. Banning Transit System staff processes ADA certifications for Pass Transit operations. Short Range Transit Plan city of BANNING California Title VI Banning Transit System/Pass Transit 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) Pass Transit fixed -route buses are CNG powered. Pass Transit Dial -A -Ride vehicles (which are less than 33,000 lbs. GVW and 15-passenger capacity), administrative and driver relief vehicles are gasoline -powered. Future vehicle purchases will be in compliance with the RCTC and South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD) policies regarding alternative fuel transit vehicles. The CNG Fueling Station at the City of Banning Corporation Yard provides expanded CNG capacity and fast fueling capability. With increased capacity and redundant compressor units, having adequate and reliable CNG pumping capacity will not be an issue in the foreseeable future. 19 Short Range Transit Plan city of BANNING California CED 4nrsic lory 4mpvlmm Lnorrn Bus (Motorbus) / Directly Operated Table 1 - Fleet Inventory FY 2016/17 Short Range Transit Plan City of Banning Lift and Fuel Year Mfg. Model Seating Ramp Vehicle Type Built Cade Code Capacity Equipped Length Code # of Active Vehicles FY 2015/16 # of Contingency Vehicles FY 2015/16 AVE rage Lifetime Life to Date Miles Per Active Life to Date Vehicle Miles Vehicle As Of Vehicle Miles through Year -To -Date Prior Year End March (e.g., March) FY 2014/15 FY 2015/16 FY 2015/16 2015 EDN Aei°Elite 30 2 32 CN 2 0 46,143 23,071 2001 EDN Transman( 33 I 35 CN 1 0 495,992 501,473 501,473 2004 EDN Trauma -It 33 2 35 CN 2 0 800,603 835,811 417,905 2010 EDN XHF 31 2 34 CN 2 0 406,639 473,632 236,816 Totals: C3120 NM so= M1wnL Isn 6mp:lam{Rumen 127 7 7 Demand Response J Directly Operated 0 1,703,234 1,857,059 265,294 Table 1 - Fleet Inventory fY2D16/17Snarl- Range Transit Wan 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. Mode Seating Ramp Vehicle Type FY Vehicles Prior Year End March (e.g., March) Built Code Code Capacity Equipped Length Cade 2015/16 FY 2015116 FY 2014/15 FY 2015/16 FY 2015116 2010 EBC Aeratech 16 1 25 GA 1 0 71,449 84,124 84,124 2010 EBC EDN 16 1 25 GA 1 0 73,543 84,674 84,674 2003 EDN Am:tech 12 1 25 GA 1 0 288,071 296,085 296,085 2013 GLV Univeisal 18 1 26 CN 1 0 13,974 26,687 26,687 2008 = Ford 14 1 26 GA 1 0 135,050 164,184 164,184 Totals: 76 5 5 0 582,087 655,754 131,151 INIs� GMi � 1.vepri7MMtamrmr. Table 2 -- City of Banning -- SRTP Sernice Summary FY 2016/17 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2013i 19 Audrte." Ff 2014.:15 Audite{', FY 2015.1i Plan FY 2015I16 3rrl Qtr Actual FY 2016;17 Plan Fieet Characteristics Peak -Haar peek Financial Data Total Operating Expenses 41441,337 $1,543r847 $1,741,139 4939,063 $1,682,Ci,1 TotalPaasenger Fare Revenue $163,258 $173,976 $196„427 $122,049 $194,900 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) 44273,579 $1,369,872 $1,544,712 $817,014 $1,487,101 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Pali Trip; 155,052 144,978 251,250 100,978 186,209 Passenger Riles 397,16E 370,448 640,395 258,729 664,716 Teal Actual Vehicle Revenue Flows (a) 15,615,. 19,355,4 21,157.0 15,457.5 21,512.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b), 358,093,E 486,376.9 331,197.0 575,387.3 322,817.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 365,85E,-I 499,406.7 342,637.0 582,318,5 364,775.0 Perfomance Characteristics Operating Cask per Revenue hour $92,31 $77,75 582,30 $60.75 $78.19 Farebox Recovery Ratio 11.32% 11.27%r 11.28% 13.00% 11.58% Subsidy per Passenger $8.19 $9.45 56,15 $8,09 $7.99 Subsidy per Passenger Made $3.22 $3,70 $2,41 0.16 $2.24 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $81.85 $68,99 $73,01 $52.36 09.13 5ubcidy per Revenue Nile (b) $3.57 $2.82 $4.66 $1.42 $4.61 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 10,0 7.3 11.9 6.5 3.7 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.44 0.30 0.76 0.18 0.58 ueid a2uej �aouS CO _2 = C� �; (a) Frain Hours fa' Rail Modes, (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes, 11.15�i !wit Eon). hiqutuin tm= Table 1-- City of Banning -- SRTP Service Summary FY Mai 17 Short Range Transit Plan Nan -Excluded Routes FY 2013j14 Anditetl FY2014I15 Aticlited FY 2015f16 Plan FY 2D15:16 3rti Qtr Act' ial FY 2016'17 Plan, Fleet Characteristics Peak -Haut- Fleet . Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $1,355,276 .p4362,600 $1,741,139 $939,06s $1,682,001 Total PazengerFare Revenue $159,389 $147,508 $196,427 $122,049 $194,990 Net Dpeiating Expenses (Subsidies) $1,195,887 $1,215,092 $1,544,712 $817,014 $1,487,101 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger TO 151,436 119,715 251,250 100,978 186,209 Passenger Miles 3E5,721 307,795 640,395 258,729 664,716 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hon (a) 14,093.5 15,657.4 21,157.0 15,457.5 21,512.0 Total Actual Vehicle Rerenue Miles (b) 335,975.7 428,441.5 331,197.0 575,387.3 322,317.0 Total Actual Vehicle Mlles 3'2.5:1.1 438,229,3 342,437.7 582,318,5 364,775.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost perReevenue Haul $96.16 $.87.03 02.30 $60.75 :':,:? Farebax Recovery Ratio 11.76% 10.83% 11.28% 13.00% 11.58% Subsidy per Passenger $7.90 $10.15 $6.15 $8.09 $7.99 Subsidy per Pamenger Mile $3.10 $3.95 $2 41 $3.16 $2.24 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $84.85 $77.61 373.01 $52.86 $69,13 Subsidy per Revenue Nile (b) $3.56 $2.84 $4.66 $1.42 44.61 Passenger per Revenue Hare (a) 10,7 7.6 11.9 6.5 8.7 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.45 0.28 0.76 0.18 0.58 ueid a2uej �aouS (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Cat Miles for Rail Mode L7 n 5 � yy� W Short Range Transit Plan PoW Eleb .101. EAR1.123 (q) '%1)01+4 Ilea .ro} ainoH uleal (e) WO 0'9 L9'3 L8'90 Lvzt £T'9S %09'1,T LT'a4 T70 O'E i=c3 ICKS zr3 T6'LT$ 9 nil:, FL'95$ (q) am muanaa aad ia6uamed (2) moH anuanaa aad Atuassed (q) am aruanaa � hpsgn5 (e) .inoq i anuanm gad hpisgns al[W aa6uassed lad /paps Jarwassseiad hp!sgns ci4ri A+o�t! l:Ed .inoµ anuaaaa _lad �J buRiadD sAgsuaPeJED MuPuu0j10d b'LLT'T9 6'ZE5'LS 0'a5T'i, 7s9i9 £V5? £'LE£'£Z T'9TTW 5'SZS`T 96b'TI 9T9'1, RUW aplgan ler[PV l2131 0) mold anuwou apwA lerIPb' Poi (e) ainoH anu0. 1 al;tyah leer's+ IR/01 sam.ia6uas ed SCkli .06(A05Ed FVIun sagserePERIO buguadp 4EL$SI$ L91,'93 LteTSI$ 7_69'194 NElt$ 095'99$ (r..apsgns) smu.xliq 6ugeaad4 ]aN anuamd aRj JabtrasGed poi sa uaclk3 fitggiado Ia1 eke❑ ieuueuij 0.9zb naH-mod spnsPa;)eaeq) WU ueld LT09T131Al IenPYlib Rif 91/SINAO kreld 9TISTOzki Fgpnq 5T.?tiir .kA Fg!piiq tTiElt,?.'.A sarcpj papripx3 Lipid iisupll afiueN 1111115 LINTOZ Ai heuiumg a-WA-1W &Zl5` -- thijuueg Jo Z a19�'1 rrunq '� am. mill Short Range Transit Plan �poW Ilea .loi saliW (9) 193014 Ilea .Poi rick (e) 0n T'6 59'6S L0'03 £Z'Z5 ZL'3 965£'IT 50'63 00 5'9 6Z'T$ SZ'66$ LO'£$ T 9'L$ %907T Z5'95$ bB'0 S'ZI 06'6$ SZ173 Z£'Zt OS' SE %LS-II 96'E:jL 0E 0 £'L OLZ$ BS'99$ L9.3 OT La %SZ'TT £0'53 WO Z'OT 16'1 90'Ze$ iz3 { nt 969L'0T L6'T6: (q) am anuaAmj ad JOEHIWsed+ (2).moH anus d ad Jaoua ed (9) am antiara}{ Jad Aplsgn5 (e) mg anuara}} aad Apis ins, al!w 2,1 Aad!p!sqn5 la6uassea Sad Apisgn5 om 3au xagaie9 inal{ anuatia}i.lad Tscr3 Mend° sNis.lappaeyn aptienL ojlad O'£ZS'ET£ O'LZIAEIZ O'LZI'6T 996'T09 699'£LT S'L00'655 £'TSB'£SS 0'179i4T 6£0'ZEZ 1795'£6 O'SBE'T6Z O'ZZ9'178Z O'ZILVT 00S'0O9 00Z'ObZ L'L66'596 6'L99'951, 0'£61-4FT 406'S££ ivbZ'S£T t'ZL: 6EE 2M3L'£EE S'IOb'bT ETS119€ TO6'961 I!w a1 A IPA 1P1 (q) 9!W anuaraa aRyae, IRrg3y 1P1 {e) smoH anuaraa ap!yaL. IPrr-Id 101 gam Aguassed 9dgi1 d p.1)N!lun Konswpeaeu Guguado L6T'06£'T$ OOL'ILT$ baTTS'T$ 96£'ZTL$ OLT'SOT$ 994'LI8$ LSL'E6£'T$ LZ,'Z2T4 b9e9LS'T$ LEE'T€Z'T$ 9E149ST4 £Lb'L8£'T$ 6TL'TST/$ SH'ZT T$ 395'17Z£`T$ (sapping) 6upeiadq TaM anii.mnas a>E4.Jafxsmed 1W1 saslsd 7 54213.4:101o1 eica rotiFUij b fr 4.3;71 111:11-1-fgd I151a a1.7e lep laal3 two LIj9TO? Ai lelapv AZ pa€ 9TjSTOZ.ki veld 9Tl5TOZ Ai Fgpnq STl1-T07id P V 11v 1TI£TO? A9 smolt !iv sled 41suell liags LT /9TOT JL� �U cuum aNAJes & YS' -- RV -dummy -- z a14�1 .1.M.or}1.0471adr1 4.1.au1 176.1x>t -MMI inn MN Short Range Transit Plan 's4PRIA Lod Mkt (q) '93014 Ve'd )04 sinoE{ u!e.rl (e) 970 £'S LZ'iA. 65'19$ 17£'Z$ SLIT'S %E9'£i ZE'ILS 1,£'0 S'L LL'0$ TL'9I $ Z9'OS 6Z'Z$ %ET'OS TS'EES EE'0 1Y L9'b$ 69' TOTS S6'E$ eTtO WfT SZ TT$ LET S'L D6'£$ 95'6L$ L67$ 89'0TS %T6'LT ZE'961 (g) am anuanab .ad raFwas;ed (e) .moH anuanab .lad e36ua (q) als'1 aruaw.ad-+ad LP!99n5 (e) moil anuanad aad Appgns al!yi.ra6ua vedaad Ap!sgn5 wed.ed Appgr5 oi:t tl kia+c>ad gale/ .iro8 anuana}t .1,3d EADD Su4aiado sonsuapeaegj aoueuuoled O'ZSZ'IS O'06£'17£ O'SSEt O3t'Z9 O55'7T O'ITS'E? O'90S1Z S'ET6 069'9Z bib'L O`606`E€ O'6E9`6Z 1,'Z96'T Z170'SE b£L'6 .';3_'9: 0'60£'YZ S'LTZ'T 9S9t£ IL0'6 s'gI!W alDI4Pn ler4nd Rai (q) mpw anuaraa al4LK lei Ili (e)sinaH anuanaa alnyah IEr43.9' Iol I!3v Jaruassed sdIil.Gfm.?' Qd ppm o!IsiaapeaegD 6ugeaadp 606'96T$ OOZ'EZ$ 170T'0LT$ £09'9I5 999'9I5 T6e£E'S SESTETS Ob8'LT$ SLE'951$ 090'96$ ?IVOZS ZLZ'LTTS (saiplsgns)x3 6uRatadO 4aN anuanag aseA laferassej Ill s s1Bd 7 Suneracb Iol Era! lepue1113 b u>aH so15iaape-1e43 WEI HP Id iii9T07 AI rap,/ AZ F.IF 9T ST47 .,0 1121d 9T/Si0Z A9 P 4!Priv ST/ti0? ,u Pa9!Pnv tiff To? A9 Sa�114a IIV Tleld TistiP11 a61ieli 110115 LT1OTOT Aieu iinS a rfua5 &LYS -- b1da-6uruues -- r a19 1 Inra; LI11111Mx.-. +aat 9 -,EMMED■..1 IIIIIII Short Range Transit Plan Apow Ilea .iog saim fre} (q) • III .ro} smoH ule.kl (e) 9£1 £'S LZiPS 6S'I98 b£'Z"$ IL' IIt %EWE! Z£'ILS f:',) S'L 9817$ OE'SOI$ Z6'£$ TT'bI $ 9fl ont 6Z7ZIS bZ'C 9'17 FZ'£t O£'£9$ SL'£$ 99'£t$ %E47'9 LI'69$ EE'0 I`L L9'17$ 69'tOT$ 36'ES £Z'i7I$ 9' WTI SCtiTT$ LET S`L 136'3 95'6L$ L67.$ 99'01$ °%Ii7IT Z£'96$ (q) alivi;nuanaa aadJa6uased (e) .moH anuanaa ad Ja6u.med 01) a14.! anua1<91.Jad 41sgn5 (e) anoH anuarLai.kad Apisgn5 am Aa6uassed ad Amos .la6uasseE aad Apisgn5 oriel' kanooaa ociaIe= .InoH anua+ad gad �.soj bugeJadp sp fis aappaelp aoueiulOjiad [RSV'S O'66n7E O'SSE`i 09L'Z9 OES'St O'IT£'£Z 0'90S'IZ 5'ET6 069'9Z bTb'L 07SeI5 O'9LS'96 0'98£'Z Sa'6£ C :".71: 0'6017'EE 0'629'6Z 6'Z9E'T ati0'SE bEi'6 0'929'9Z O'6007Z S'LTZ'T 959`ZE I O'6 solE aIDRRA lei jai (q) apt anuanaa;PIRA ler4rd 1EIDI (e) srnoH anuaraa apHaA lef4pv Ioi sal! !.guassed sdiiligu pa)fugu(} sol15ua1)emn bipPAadO 745'91,1$ OrEZ$ 70VC1LI$ 21-9'64I$ Od9IS L66'IZI$ SL6`45T$ 06017I$ 5L6'1:9T; 5E5'2E7,` 0ls'tT? 5'r'9=. 098'96$ 7.11-TZ$ '_ _-: Mpisgns) msuadx3 6upelad0 4a1.4 andaE4Jafwassed poi d7bo4ead0poi Ma lenuE U -b �aHd 5] 115u aPe le1]) laa] j !HEW LT/9TOZ.LA lellpv AZ RE 9i15T42Al Uld 9T'ST0' A9 ,Da11pilp ST;ti(1' h.9 pG4!1}Ikb tT'ETDZ AA sain0a IIV lied iisueal aGl.iea l•lOyS LIMIOZ Ai thilituns alp re/Sdi !S -- YVO-6ufuuag -- Z afgel unowr uxepulec.0 kunl u�q �...1 Short Range Transit Plan 850 L'8 1515 E1'64S YrES 66'LS %85IS n'dS 1r5S 6r6L5 9a101 aapunld a]waS 9E1 150 E9'o 011 C5 pfi tr'6 9'8 CFO OCK [VIA bB'bS 6514S 9f'iL5 69'015 9519S YCZ3 iFt5 O ES irti3 9ri5 Wit 50•8S WET %i9'OS %14TS 4�ES'IS SMS 71'8S Ttr'85 Ol'6S 5514 OL'65 OSS Li. 55 iC1LS 69'fi15 6r4L5 E9 BLS hepllaw sha011V sA4011V 5{pc dV0 NV9 9•NVA S-NVO [•NVA aBNaad aim 'ad 454 moon aIIW la6uassed i!ley laauassed /1,4anuaaay muilanuaeay ioaduassed saahassrd mans intli57y 145tl4554d lid 161115ge$ AaiMird lid 150] rid 1503 a4d150) iad Ap6sgn5 +ad dpsgn5 ad Aplsgns xviaJ151 6wleladp fimleaado adAl he0 *may 610 41.1l aauewAO4Aad sainog IIV Lii9TOL Ad -- 51100010 PIMPS' MAY dllfS - £ a19e1 turab'T$ oos'{c$ Torz891S o'Soet,9S VLT9'ZZE o'009'EZ PZTS'TZ 9Telr99 6OZ'9ET 9 9,10-1. apeaud anuuaS bo6'9bTs trZL'EES trgIITES 666'SELS oonz5 EEs'trE5 99s'9trs Eoo'965 boTILTS trZ9'EZES trZE'TSES 6tr6'TE9S O'ZSZ`TS O'E95'L6 O'096'ZL O'O99'EST O'o6E'bE 0796'8 O'S9tr'99 9'999'ZST O'o98'Z UHT'S [MO, O'OZL'ET E'SEE'Z E'9TVI7 E'TEtr'tr O'96S'OT Hen OTNTZT 96o'tr1T 9TeS9E OSS'ZT OLV9tr 99L'Ttr 6Ztr'Tfi hep iaam shed IIV shed IIV sAeO IIV y1r0-NV9 9-NV9 5-NV9 T-NV9 AplsgnS anuauay lso] sapW sapW laN aa6uased &Reaad° legal anuaaay smgl leial sanoN saIIW slablased samah anuanay aa6ua5sed Veal adh Amu ; a3nnH quatua13 Elea ppm IIV LI/9i0Z Ai i -- 6uluueg Jo Alit onsgeis apod dills - £ a19e1 �ym�r.doogeywl�pixn Short Range Transit Plan city of BANNING California TABLE 3A — Individual Route Statistics Fixed Route Description Area/Service Site Route 1 Service from Beaumont to Cabazon via downtown Banning Walmart Shopping Center, Albertsons, San Gorgonio Memorial Hospital, Downtown Banning, Banning Justice Center, Casino Morongo, Desert Hills Outlet, Cabazon Community Center and residential areas of Cabazon Route 2 Residential areas of Northern Banning to Walmart Shopping Center in Beaumont Banning City Hall, Fox Cineplex, the Banning Library, Banning Community Center, Banning Justice Center, Post Office, San Gorgonio Memorial Hospital, shopping areas and restaurants at Highland Springs Route 6 Residential areas of Southern Banning, Hathaway and Williams Street to Walmart Shopping Center in Beaumont via downtown Banning Mt San Jacinto College Pass Campus, Banning High School, Smith Correctional Facility, Banning Justice Center, shopping areas and restaurants at Highland Springs Dial -A -Ride Description Area/Service Site City -Wide Demand response/reservation based service for seniors and disabled All areas of Banning and limited areas in Beaumont Short Range Transit Plan 0S'0 C'9 1911 E1'645 H't6 66'15 °%65II EO'a5 irss 611/5 Spiel HapcAOHd ZW6125 KU FS LZ1.3 6519S ICZ3 ICUs %E9'EZ 5FOS WA ZFICS Aeppm VirCI-NV9 KO $'6 0t'65 ri(5 tE'Z5 WO %!9'01 tIV 001 HIL5 sAaQIM 9,Nr9 E9'0 F6 L914 99'OLS 6L'ZS 66'LS 9414'T7 WIN 6Z'55 6Z'6Ls sAeaptl S-NV9 99'9 9'a E9'b5 KOS 14'Z5 S6'PS %MI OIV C.'$S E9'Ei4S SAMIIV I•N,0 die aAWaad mom Jed aIIW mGH arW 4a6uassed aHee Hafivassed MNDRuWO/ siMili55ed SN6temed anuanq inuinay ,i6uisied gad ApsEln5 ad ISO) 14d Da) 'ad Aplsgns Had ApEsgnS Had ApsgpS xngaHe3 hue NA° HIGH animal.] lad 356) 6wieaadp adAl Atm • ainob saoiealpu� aaueuuoWad (I NTIK AI Z -- hluueg jo ogsye1S alnvd dllIS - E Mel 6.0,GE9 wmi*Ixi lm p.p.9 �=MIOM TOT'C8l/TS OO6'b6T$ TO0'Z891 IT5/679D' O•Li8'ZZE O.009'EZ O'ZIS'iZ 916.99 6OZ'98T 9 sHeiol Hapusad acIrua5 606'91,3 0DVEZS 601'OLTE O'ZSZ'TS 0.06E-6E O'o98'Z O'SSE'Z 05eZ9 055'7 Z AEP 9aM Tda-NV9 trZL'£63 0O6'bE5 trn'eas O'E95'L8 0796'69 O'95I'S O'9II$ OIA7 OLb'Ob T SAeQIN 9-NV9 {,,ZVDT El 0DrD s 6ZE'TSES 0'096'ZL 0'596'99 01,99$ O'TE6'6 06916TT 09L'T6 T sha IN 5-NV9 61,6'5E6 000`96$ 61,6'TESS O'HEVEST 0'000'ZST O'OZL'0T IT085'0T Die59E 6Z6'T6 Z ska IN T-NV9 AP159n5 iaN anaaeaa lso) Ha6uassed 6uquad0 sal!W 51W smoH smut{ sal!W 1e401 animas lei°1 anaAaa Ha6u455ed 5ua61145Sed sap!! at, 3I nd adAi Aep # ala°a 5a�noa IIY LT19TOi AJ T 6upueg}a 43 512/45.4e.15 N1108 dilig - £ a19e1 sluawa13 Elea *vow}mymdmaq dmn} appNq �MEM� City of Banning FY 2016/17 Summary of Funds Requested Short Range Transit Plan Table 4 - Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2016/17 Project Description Capital Project Number 04 Total Amount of Funds LTF STA Prop 1 B (PTMISEA) Prop 1 B Security Measure Fare Box Other(Z) FY 16/17 Operating Assistance $1,682,001 $1,487,101 $194,400 $500 Subtotal: Operating $1,682,001 $1,487,101 $0 $0 $0 $0 $194,400 $500 Heavy Duty Hydraulic Litt Trans 0fffceBuilding 5ecurityProject 17-01 17-02 $44,591 $5,409 $19,199 Subtotal: Capital $69,199 $0 $44,591 $5,409 $19,199 $0 $0 , $0 Total: Operating & Capital $1,151,200 $1,481,101 $4-4.591 $5,409 $19,199 $0 $144,440 $600 Note: Other (2) is from Interest Income 11.58739Y.. ueid a2uej �aouS Short Range Transit Plan city of BANNING California Table 4A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER (If existing project in FTIP, indicate FTIP ID number): SRTP Project No: 17-01 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME: Heavy -Duty Hydraulic Lift PROJECT DESCRIPTION: (For Bus Purchase projects, indicate fuel type) The replacement of heavy duty hydraulic lift at the city's fleet maintenance shop. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: A new hydraulic lift is necessary to accommodate the new busses that have been added to the fleet. PROJECT SCHEDULE (if existing project in FTIP, indicate original start date and new completion date): Specs drawn: July 2016 Order: September 2016 Delivery and Installation: November 2016 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): STA Funds of $44,591.00 and Prop 1 B FY 08/09 Residual of $5,409.00 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE INCLUDING PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED (INCLUDE FTA GRANT #, FTIP ID # AND RCTC'S SRTP CAPITAL GRANT #) FTA Grant # FTIP ID # RCTC/SRTP Project # Description Unexpended balance (as of 6/30/16) Short Range Transit Plan city of BANNING California Table 4A— Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER (If existing project in FTIP, indicate FTIP ID number): SRTP Project No: 17-02 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME: Transit Office Building Security Project PROJECT DESCRIPTION: (For Bus Purchase projects, indicate fuel type) This project will provide much needed security equipment at the administrative offices of the Transit Department. Interior and exterior security cameras and an access control system within the building. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: The security equipment will reduce the vandalism of city problem and enhance the safety of the staff that deal with the general public and conduct cash transactions on a daily basis. PROJECT SCHEDULE (if existing project in FTIP, indicate original start date and new completion date): Specs drawn: July 2016 Order: August 2016 Delivery and Installation: September 2016 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement and Service Enhancement Account (PTMISEA) FY 09/10 Residual PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE INCLUDING PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED (INCLUDE FTA GRANT #, FTIP ID # AND RCTC'S SRTP CAPITAL GRANT #) FTA Grant # FTIP ID # RCTC/SRTP Project # Description Unexpended balance (as of 6/30/16) City of Banning FY 2017/18 Summary of Funds Requested Short Ramie Transit Plan Table 5.1 - Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2017/18 Project Description Capital Project Number (1) Total Amount of Funds LTF STA Prop 1B (PTMISEA) Prop 1B Security Measure A Fare Box Other's FY18 Operating Assistance $1,810,070 $1,610,720 $201,000 $500 Subtotal: Operating $1,810,070 $1,610,720 $0 $0 $0 $0 $201,000 $500 Subtotal: Capital $o $o $o $o $o $o $o $0 Total; Operating & Capital $1,810,070 $1,610,720 $0 $0 $0 $0 $201.000 $500 Note Other (2) is from Interest Income 11.13217% ueid a2uej �aouS City of Banning FY 2018119 Summary of Funds Requested Short Range Transit Plan Table 5.2 . Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2018119 Project Description Capital Project Number (1) Total Amount of Funds LTF STA Prop 1B (PTMISEA) Prop 1B Security Measure A Fare Box Ocher'^' FY19 Operating Assistance $1,874,093 $1,670,745 $203,658 $500 Subtotal: Operating $1,874,093 $1,670,745 $0 $0 $0 $0 $203,658 $500 Subtotal: Capital $o $o $o $o $o $o $o $o Total: Operating & Capital $1,874,093 $1,670,745 $0 $0 $0 $0 $203,658 $500 Nate: Other (2) is from Interest Income 10.89370% ueid a2uej �aouS 34 Short Range Transit Plan City of BANNING California TABLE 6 — PROGRESS TO IMPLEMENT TRIENNIAL PERFORMANCE AUDIT Audit Recommendations (Covering FY 2009/10 — FY 2011/12) Action(s) Taken And Results 1. Consider purchasing dispatching and scheduling software program City IT staff will begin reviewing software programs for dispatching and scheduling June 2016. Purchase and implementation will be completed by September 2016. 2. Provide cross -training opportunities for City Transit Administrative Staff The Transit Department has been reorganized to allow for cross training of the dispatch and operations. In addition, a Transit Analyst position has been developed and will allow for succession planning at the management level. 3. Update Local Bus Schedules to show connectivity with Other Transit Services New Bus Schedules have been designed and show connecting bus services and transfer points to and from Banning Transit with other transit providers. 4. Provide Weblink from Banning Transit to Beaumont Transit A Weblink to Beaumont Transit is now available on Banning Transit's website. :S}uatuula}aap!noad d)W-aS Short Range Transit Plan Aim' tins axlewaoyad A-11niPili aad sroaa.auj 2xreuu4.1.1a¢ lunuogansi0 L }fl ana 4 is""f aamr is°h :Blom 0121 aalr! o1.5I1 SI'. Z£'O =k pue 6Z'0 ={ 9L'0 alive anuanaa .iad sta5uassed •E Alelq;gW 05'9 66'f => pue L9'4 ={ 06'TI .1110H anua+taa 121dEci '9 kaaiEl um- 1.41Del Zb'I5 e52$ => pu2 06'I$ =< 9914 afiPi Jad +gyp-Is9ft5 'c Oiel qa211 9e75$ eL'i9$ => Pie 4b'96$ =< TOTA ► 01-1 .0C1 ARisgn5 't AEI 432W 9I' ES tr5'£$ => pue Z9'Z$ =< Tvz$ 114 -guass°d tad A9:s9n9 'E A1e1 p;94 am b0'6$ => pue s9'9g =< S79$ ia6umed add dp.agn5 'Z aab.lel �W Stet 90'£9$ =.) 0£7:Rfi and 9M-1:314a$J 1Dd 4,903 61.19ald0 'T :/aeliagaAso A1e1 g4,3014 1%00'£I I %0Tirf =< I %2Z11 I 042}1 luawmad xagaiP/ •i nUoiepuew smevui aDITI11.10ped ZiLlief$ maalig 542.al4laN LZV96i$ anuarad aiejaa6uassudleaal 6£ili7/j $ mipthe 5ugeaadp Re' O'L£9tK MN 'PIRA ProiN IA1 n6VIEE =;I!W anaraMd oP!4ah 1ProPV 12101 O'LSVIZ Evirq-I dili apply IruYb' IO1 56£bb9 Riri vd OSZ'I5Z Ad.ebtns;ed pququn paeaa.to)5 apueuiaoped aaec of aeap, aapentj pad tibiloayi ale(' oi. ARA 9T/STOT hi 10file19TISTOT hU LIN 9T/STOZ •id 54tlatua13 eiec Cwluue i ja AID nom' weld &DJed VOL'S 9TISTOT M .podag soCuei aaueutiapad Japmoid aa►tia, -- E awl � � ;pm ELD 4a6�el ARtnikl LOIN AA NI W ueld CTMR tJ DL; 6uuedmooP 1R uunlo7 paeoatao; ueld a a {� Ci n 5 CO Short Range Transit Plan 1a6.121 ueya aa4aa p6..1ei ueyi aa44aa 4a6.1ei 4914 04 6I1e-J API4eal,l W.RAJ 1,36aeL ma aa4iaa 49Euei 4aa14 04 51!EA 49621VaW )AE14a31,1 045R TZ'O => Pm ST'0 =< EVL => PE £5'S =< 8£'TS => PliE ZO'T$ =< 6FIS$ => p-P2 SO'SE'$ =< Lni => p'Je LZ'Z$ =< SB'L$ => pve US$ =< %O'DI =< auN auaN ZO'£S$ => 95'0 OLT T914 069$ i:Z'Z$ 66'd 968511 £0'6$ TZ'S$ 6T'81$ 8r0 OS'9 Zi..' 3 97Z5$ 9T'£$ 60'8$ %DM 0.E'6$ E9'3 SL'09$ On On 187$ 661'95 OL'£$ S6'6$ %Eli 59'03 LT'£$ SL'LL$ al!NI 4nua5a1:1 .iad S gU mod! and .1.9d ss0u ;IN DrumS -tad APR'S anoH anllakalla rj Opign5 al!411;6u,L Pd-+ad 4!sqn; iatu,w3ed.iad Opp; owd liano).121 KoaEa aa6uissed .1,3d J E9ptD apw anuala8.1gd 4s0J 542.13d0 Kok anuaaad aad tc9aP:10 auaN TOT'L9t4$ 17T0'LTBS Za'69£'3 Ap!S Cc9ela0 auoN 00663 6tA'ZZT$ 9L6'£L3 anivo6 peinmd auaN T00'01$ E90'6£6S LEGTH'T$ gIsca MP-la:1D an14 O'SLL'49E S'8T£'ZSS L'9017'66fr P19' Pi auaN auaN O'LT8'ZZ£ 0'009'£Z E'19£'SL5 9'ST9'9T 6'9LEVi, 9'Z£S'TZ RN anumad SanaH poi auat4 RIVE S'LSVST FESAT sanOH anknad Kohl 9TL'f.99 6/18R SWOL£ .I!sl .i.abiJassed atioN 60Z'98T 8f6'001 8L6'1/2T 5`5ud wa-of-aeaA lefPti (e) pepaao)5 auuemaolladueld aGae I 1LIf9TOZh� �ie�d LTf9TOZhd �a eif a b P€ aea o u h� P 3 saae7i u awe4uaa a I P I d 9I/5T01 Ad STftrTO/ M firiurrieg Jo /Jo , dpplo.rd .93.M ra, podeb apueuuaopad din -- 8 algal - C OTOZ sib 14.-ej �IMB 37 Short Range Transit Plan City of BANNING California The City of Banning HIGHLIGHTS OF 2016/17 SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN ■ As necessary, adjust times of Routes 1 and 6 to meet the demand presented by the growth of the Mt. San Jacinto Pass Campus ■ Purchase additional equipment for camera system to enable wireless download of footage from Fixed -Route and Dial -a -Ride vehicles ■ Purchase and implement use of a software system for scheduling and dispatching Dial -a - Ride to improve productivity ■ Purchase and install auto display and enunciator equipment in fixed route fleet ■ 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 offers an ease of use to Pass Area residents, while still maintaining the best service possible within our service area ■ Increase revenue through the development of advertisement program in conjunction with the Banning Chamber of Commerce Table 9A — Operating and Financial Data BANNING TRANSIT SYSTEM/PASS TRANSIT FY 2012/13 Audited FY 2013/14 Audited FY 2014/15 Audited FY 2015/16 Estimate (Based on 3rd Quarter Actuals) FY 2016/17 Planned System -wide Ridership 147,747 156,052 144,978 134,637 186,209 Operating Cost Per Revenue Hours $81.02 $92.31 $77.75 $60.75 $78.19 38 Short Range Transit Plan c;tv of BANNING California Table 9B - Fare Revenue Calculation (consistent with Commission Farebox Recovery Policy) Revenue Sources included in Fare box Calculation Actual Amount from FY 2014/15 Audit FY 15/16 (Estimate) FY 16/17 (Plan) 1. Passenger Fares 153,212 159,412 194,400 2. Interest 500 500 3. General Fund Supplement 4. Measure A 5. Advertising Revenue 6. Gain on Sale of Capital Assets 7. CNG Revenue 8. Lease/ Other Revenue 9. Federal Excise Tax Refund 20,976 10. Investment Income 11. CalPers CERBT 12. Fare Revenues from Exempt Routes 13. Other Revenues TOTAL REVENUE 173,976 159,912 194,900 for Farebox Calculation (1-13) TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES 1,543,847 1,253,000 1,682,001 for Farebox Calculation FAREBOX RECOVERY RATIO 11.27% 12.8% 11.58% PASSTRANSIT City of Beaumont SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN FY 2016/17 - FY 2018/19 1 FINAL TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1 - SYSTEM OVERVIEW 3 DESCRIPTION OF SERVICE AREA 3 POPULATION PROFILE AND DEMOGRAPHIC PROJECTIONS 3 RIDERSHIP DEMOGRAPHICS 4 FIXED ROUTE TRANSIT SERVICES 5 PARATRANSIT SERVICES 6 REGIONAL EXPRESS BUS SERVICE 6 FARE STRUCTURE 6 FLEET CHARACTERISTICS 8 FACILITY $ CHAPTER 2 - EXISTING SERVICE AND ROUTE PERFORMANCE S FIXED ROUTE SERVICE $ COMMUTER SERVICE 9 DIAL -A -RIDE SERVICE 9 KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS 9 MAJOR TRIP GENERATORS AND PROJECTED GROWTH 10 EQUIPMENT, PASSENGER AMENITIES AND FACILITY NEEDS 11 CHAPTER 3 - PLANNED SERVICE CHANGES AND IMPLEMENTATION 11 RECENT SERVICE CHANGES 11 RECOMMENDED SERVICE CHANGES 11 MARKETING PLANS AND PROMOTIONS 12 BUDGET IMPACT ON PROPOSED CHANGES 13 CHAPTER 4 - FINANCIAL AND CAPITAL PLANS 13 OPERATING AND CAPITAL BUDGET 13 FUNDING PLANS TO SUPPORT PROPOSED OPERATING AND CAPITAL PROGRAM 14 REGULATORY AND COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS 14 2 CHAPTER 1 -- SYSTEM OVERVIEW Pass Transit is made up of two independent transit agencies consisting of city of Banning (Banning Municipal Transit System) and city of Beaumont (Beaumont Municipal Transit Agency). Both agencies work cooperatively and cohesively to bring coordinated service to the Pass Area. Pass Transit's service area includes cities of Banning, Beaumont, Calitnesa, the unincorporated areas of Cabazon and Cherry Valley, and the commercial area of the Morongo Band of Mission Indians Reservation. Service area is approximately 40 square miles and 'includes fixed route and Dial -A -Ride services. Transfers across jurisdictional boundary lines have been alleviated with a Memorandum of Understanding allowing each city's services to cross jurisdictional boundary lines. Agencies work together to have an identical fare structure for the convenience of passengers. The purpose of this Short Range Transit Plan, is to focus specifically on Beaumont's Municipal Transit System. Description of 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 Casino Morongo, Desert Hills Premium Outlets, Lowe's Distribution Center, Beaumont Unified School District, Riverside County Courthouse, San Gorgonio Memorial Hospital, Loma Linda University Highland Springs Medical Plaza, and 2na Street Marketplace which includes the WalMart Supercenter, and several manufacturing companies. Medical facilities include San Gorgonio Memorial Hospital, Beaver Medical Group, Lorna Linda Medical Offices, Rancho Paseo Medical Group, and several dialysis centers in the area. Beaumont Transit serves six elementary schools, two middle schools, one high school, one alternative high school, one adult education school, one private school, and two charter schools. Residential areas consist of downtown region of Beaumont, many tract communities, several mobile home parks, and three gated communities, two of which are senior communities. Besides providing service to grocery stores, shopping, medical appointments and school, Beaumont Transit provides transportation to several food distribution centers, soup kitchens, group homes, churches, shopping centers, and medical facilities. Commuter transportation to regional services outside service area includes the San Bernardino Metrolink and the VA Hospital located in Loma Linda. As a service to the community, a free shuttle service runs during the annual Cherry Festival to all passengers including seniors, those with disabilities, and low income patrons to promote transit service while also easing traffic and parking congestion. Population Profile and Demographic Projections The latest available statistics from the California Department of Finance show residential population within Beaumont had a 3.5 percent increase from January 2015 (43,601) to January 2016 (45,118), 3 making it the second fastest growing city in Riverside County just behind Eastvale and the 11th fastest growing cite in California as of January 2016. With 500 building permits scheduled for release this year, Beaumont continues to grow. The 2010 census indicated that the Beaumont community is ethnically diverse with a makeup of: Caucasian (66%), Hispanic (38%), Black (6%), Asian and Pacific Islander (7%), and all other races (16%). Senior citizens (age 65 and older) make up 13 percent 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 at 30 percent. The 2012 estimated census showed the median household income within Beaumont was $67,758, which is above the national average of $53,046. It was estimated the average home price in 2013 was $226,000 noting a high percentage of two -income families and a much higher median household income than reported at the 2010 census. Normally, this would translate to less of a need for transit services; however, with the absence of school -provided transportation for the middle schools and high schools, there has been a substantial increase in the need for transit services for especially for youth passengers. Ridership Demographics Ridership surveys conducted in 2013 show the average passenger to be 21 years of age and more than '/a of all passengers are female (56%). Veteran's of Armed Forces make up 2% of total passengers. Survey results show 72% of passengers are under the age of 18, 18% are between the ages of 19 and 50, and 10% are passengers over 50 years of age. Employment data show that 19% are employed either full or part time. 56% are K-12 students, 5% are college students, retirees 5% and 19% are unemployed or homemakers. Beaumont Transit continues to see a large increase in youth passengers as District Transportation continues to downscale. Ridership Employment Status 60% 50% 40% 30%, 20% - - 10% Excluding youth passenger data, demographic evaluation of general passengers found 74% to have an annual income of $25,000 or less. 4 Ridership Household Income (Excluding youth passenger data) 35.00% 30.00% 25.00% 20.00% 15,00% 10,00% 5.00% 0.00% h00 �cP �0? �45 �0? �0� yet Groh �00 Qoo 40o QQO ono O°t �0 4\ �'c�, �,L4,, �,4', bhp, ��00 58% of the general passengers surveyed said they do not currently have a driver's license. 55% state they are transit dependent (do not have an operating vehicle). 33% state they are discretionary riders (they do own a vehicle) but ride the bus because driving is too expensive. The ethnic distribution of passengers showed that the majority of passengers are Latino/Hispanic (35%) and White/Caucasian (27%), Ridershi Ethnici ■ Latino/Hispanic ■ White/Caucasian ! Black/African American ■ Multiple ■ Other Fixed Route Transit Services Beaumont Transit currently operates nine fixed routes in the Pass Area. Operating hours are as follows: Monday — Friday 6:30 a.m. to 7:50 p.m. Saturday and Sunday 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. 5 Limited service (8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.) is provided on Martin Luther Ding, Jr.'s Birthday, Presidents' Day, Columbus Day, Veterans Day, and the day after Thanksgiving. No service is provided on New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Fixed Route system transports passengers to various destinations including shopping, errands, work, and appointments. Trends indicate peak hours are in the early morning and late afternoon, when youth passengers ride more frequently. Paratransit Services Also known as Dial -A -Ride, this service is for seniors over the age of 65 and individuals certified under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Service hours for the Dial -A -Ride service are: Senior without ADA certification Monday through Friday 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Saturday 8:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.in. Persons with ADA certification (with 24-hour registration) Monday through Friday 6:30 a.m. to 7:15 p.m. Saturday and Sunday 8:00 a.m.. to 5:45 p.m. Beaumont Transit system provides residents of Beaumont and Cherry Valley with Dial -A -Ride service around Beaumont, Cherry Valley and into/from Banning. Limited service (8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.) is provided on Martin Luther King, Jr.'s Birthday, President's Day, Columbus Day, Veterans Day, and the day after Thanksgiving. No service is provided on New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day, and Christmas Day. Seniors and ADA passengers primarily use this service for shopping, errands and medically necessary appointments, such as to dialysis centers. Regional Express Bus Service Beaumont Transit introduced the Commuter link 120 in 2013 to provide transportation from the Pass Area, with stops in Calimesa, to San Bernardino Metrolink and the VA Hospital in Loma Linda. This commuter service has grown from FY 2014 to FY 2015 by 45%. Projected growth of in FY 2016 will continue to show an increase of approximately 30%. Besides the Route 120 which connects passengers with San Bernardino Metrolink, Pass Area passengers have the ability to connect with other areas at the Walmart Transportation Hub. RTA Lines 31 connects passengers with Hemet. Route 35 connects passengers with Moreno Valley. Additionally, passengers are able to connect to Riverside Metrolink Station with Sunline's Commuter Link 220. Fare Structure The current fixed route fare is $1.15 per one-way trip for general passengers. Youth passengers pay $1.00 for a one-way trip. Seniors, persons with disabilities and military veterans is $.65 for a fixed route fare for one-way trip. Active military personnel and GoPass holders ride all routes free of charge. Passengers under 46" in height pay $.25. 6 Commuter Route 120 fare is $3.00 fare for general passengers and `GoPass' users for a one way trip. The fare for youth, seniors, disabled, military veterans and children under 46" tall is $2.00. Active military personnel are free. Ten -ride ticket books are offered for $10.35 each for general passengers and seniors and persons with disabilities can purchase a 10-ride book for $5.85. Ten -ride punch cards are also available to youth passengers for $10.00, Dial -A -Ride passengers for $18.00 and Commuter Route 120 passengers for $27.00. Day passes are available for filed route at $3.00 each. Seniors and persons with disabilities can purchase the same for $1.80. Monthly passes are $36.00 for general passengers, $30.00 for youth, and $21.50 for seniors, persons with disabilities and military veterans. All jurors summoned to service at Banning Courthouse are able to ride all Beaumont Transit Fixed Routes directly to and from the courthouse via Route 1 or 2. Dial -A -Ride Fare categories FARES i Huse Fare Have exact Drivers sonnet IOfade Plinth Card fare ready when bus arrives. make change. NO REFUNDS Dial -A -Ride Is a transportation service for ADA, disabled and active adults over 65 years of age. Reservations are required One -Way $2.00 $18.00 at Yeast 24-hours in advance and may he made by calling Companion $3.00 N/A (951)769-853Z. FREE "If PCA(val.D.)•• FREE No Show $2,00 N/A you plan to use a PCA (Personal Care Attendant) free fare, you must show proper ID each time you board the bus. Child (46- tdi or under) $3.00 N/A FIXED ROWE COMMUTERI.IMH FareCidegoNes Bait FARES% FARES Fart I Day Pass Have Drivers NO REFUNDS ;th7rtpper Punch PIM exact fare cannot make 10-Arket Bock ready when change. hiomhlypass bus arrives. Commuter Link Sue Fare Commuter LIrrM Punch Pass General $1.15 $3.00 N/A $10.35 $36.00 $3.D0 $27.00 Youth (gr.de. 1. tal $1.00 $3.00 $10.00 N/A $30-00 $2.00 $I800 Child'•• $.25 N/A N/A N/A N/A $2.00 $18.00 Sentorr6nr)•• $&5 $1.80 N/A $5.85 $21.50 $2.00 $18.00 Disabled "• $.65 $1.$0 N/A $5,85 $21.50 $2.00 $18.00 Active Military** FREE N/A N/A N/A N/A FREE FREE Military Veterans•• $.65 $1.80 N/A $5.85 $21.50 $2.00 $18.00 GoPass'• rOl"nild, b,4en WA FREE N/A N/A N/A N/A $3,00 $27-00 Jury Duty"•• FREE N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Zone/Deviations Flk.t - c} $25 $.25 $.25 $_25 $25 N/A N/A Transfer Ticket lathEun , rircu!err $.25 $.25 $.25 $,25 N/A N/A N/A **If you plan to use a senior, disabled, military or GoPass discounted fare, you must show proper ID each time you board the bus. You must akso show proper IO to purchase discounted passes/dcitets. ** Military Veterans - Beaumont issued photo ID cards are available for Military Veteran passengers. To receive a Veterans ID card, individuals must present a DD219 at the Beaumont Civic Center to receive you valid identifialiion card. Please call (951) 769-8520 for more information or ask your bus driver. **" Child - 46" tali or under. Must be accompanied by a full -fare paying passenger. *'* *Jury Duty - All jurors summoned to serve in Banning courthouses are able to ride for free on all Beaumont Transit fixed route buses, directly to and from the court house via Route 1 or 2, by showing their current and valid juror summons badge to the bus driver. 7 Fleet Characteristics Beaumont Transit operates nine fixed routes, one commuter link, and 3 Dial -A -Ride. There are eighteen buses in our fleet. Seven of the vehicles are Compressed Natural Gas (CNG)-powered, ten are gasoline powered, and one is diesel fueled. All are equipped with bicycle racks and ADA compliant with wheelchair lifts and tie -down stations. Four of the buses have audio announcement systems for the visually impaired. The CNG buses were being fueled at a fueling station located at the Beaumont Unified School District's transportation yard located on Cougar Way. However, due to remodeling and repairs, buses have been rerouted to the city of Banning corporate yard for fueling. These two fueling stations are currently the only CNG stations in the Pass Area. CNG fueling has become burdensome on day-to-day operations. Beaumont Transit is actively exploring options for installing a CNG station and has secured grant money to begin the project. Beaumont has ordered two buses and expected to be delivered in the coming months. Both will be CNG fueled and will be used for expansion and new service planned in this coming fiscal year. These buses are funded by Proposition 1B PTMISEA capital award. Transit is currently in the process of securing bids on a proposal to outfit all buses with updated and state of the art video surveillance system. The new system will have wireless offload of video as the fleet returns back to the yard at the end of the day. This will aide in reducing potential liability. Facility Administrative services for the Transit Department are located in the Civic Center campus along side of City Hall. Dispatch, bus yard and administrative assistance are all housed in Building D. Walk-in customers who need assistance, including purchase of passes or route planning assistance, are assisted at City Hall, the Community Center and the Police Department. Transit phone calls including Dial -A -Ride appointments and general inquiries including route information and trip planning are taken at the Transit Department. CHAPTER 2 - EXISTING SERVICE AND ROUTE PERFORMANCE Overall system wide ridership for FY 2015 was 222,752 passengers. This was a record high for Beaumont Pass Transit and a 3 percent increase from FY 2014. Current trends however, show that ridership of 214,993 will decrease by 3% in FY 2016. This number is based on the first three quarters of FY 2016 and projected to the last quarter. Fixed Route Service Beaumont Pass Transit System operates nine fixed routes which are discussed below. Route 2-1 & 2-2 -Beaumont to Cabazon Route 2 operates on a two hour headway circulating from Beaumont to Cabazon with another bus circulating from Cabazon to Beaumont. Since there are two buses on this route, a bus goes by each bus stop once an hour. These two routes together currently makes up 36.93 percent of total fixed route ridership with an average monthly passenger trip count of 6710. Route 3 - Beaumont High School to Walmart via Sundance 8 Route 3 currently makes up 15.54 percent of total fixed route ridership with an average monthly passenger trip count of 2824. This route operates on one -hour headway and serves the residential areas of Beaumont, north of the Interstate 10 freeway. An additional bus has been added to accommodate for passenger increase during peak times in the morning and late afternoon. Route 4 - Downtown to Walmart Route 4 currently makes up 13.58 percent of total fixed route ridership with an average monthly passenger trip count of 2468. 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 I-10. Route 7-1, 7-2 & 7-3 - Tournament Hills/Fairway Carryon to Beaumont High School Route 7 currently makes up 16.56 percent of total fixed route ridership with an average monthly passenger trip count of 3009. These 3 routes together were added specifically for the peak times to accomodate youth passengers. This route operates on half-hour headway between the hours of 6:30 a.m. and 8:00 a.m. and again between the hours of 3:00 p.m. and 5:30 p.m. This route has coordinating time points for passenger transfers with Routes 2, 3, and 9. Route 9 - Seneca Springs to Beaumont High School Route 9 currently makes up 5.3 percent of total fixed route ridership with an average monthly passenger trip count of 966. This route was added for the peak hours and service area of youth passengers. This route operates on half-hour headway between the hours of 6:30 a.m, and 8:00 a.m. and again between the hours of 3:00 p.m. and 4:00 p.m. This route has coordinating time points for passenger transfers with Routes 3, and 9. Route 3/4 -- Weekend service from Cherry Valley to Walrnart via Pennsylvania Ave Route 3/4 is a route which runs on Saturday and Sunday and currently makes up 2 percent of total fixed route ridership with an average monthly passenger trip count of 365. This route operates on one hour headway and connects passengers from the Cherry Valley area to Walmart shopping center by way of Pennsylvania Ave. Commuter Service Route 120 Route 120 currently makes up 4.95 percent of total fixed route ridership with an average monthly passenger trip count of 900. A continued increase is anticipated in passenger trips in the coming year. This route operates on one hour and forty five minute headway as a Commuter Link between the Pass Area and the San Bernardino Metrolink, with stops in Calimesa and the Loma Linda VA Hospital. It rums between the hours of 5:35 a.m. and 7:25 p.m. Time points were created to coincide with the Metrolink trains and transfers with RTA and OmniTrans. Dial-A-Ride_Service Dial -A -Ride currently averages 923 passenger trips per month and operates on a reservation system. Passengers are asked to call at least 24-hours in advance to schedule a pick-up. DAR passengers make up 5.08°4) of our systemwide ridership. Key Performance Indicators The Riverside County Transportation Commission adopted a Productivity Improvement Plan (PIP) for the transit 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 9 quarterly to the Commission. Table 8 shows the operating performance indicators adopted in the PIP and this plan's projections for FY 2016/17. Productivity Improvement Effort4 Beaumont Transit continues to use Double Map, which is a GPS locating system. This system allows for all passengers to access real-time bus locations through their smart phones, tablets, and home computers. 'This has been beneficial for our Passengers since they are able to track the bus and see where it is to help plan their trip. Additionally, a QR code has also been added to all route maps. Once the QR code is scanned, it takes users to route information located on City's website. This allows for quick access to all route information. Route maps are posted at all bus stops/shelters and on the web. Beaumont Transit works closely with Trillium, support company for the input of information for Google Transit. Since Google Transit is an important way people learn to get around, the relationship built to keep information up to date is invaluable to transit seekers. In a continued effort to increase connectivity, productivity, and reliability, Beaumont Transit will be conducting an analysis of the system in the coming FY. Surveys will be distributed, staff will be engaging passengers, other agencies will be contacted, and routes will be reconfigured so passengers can arrive at their destination when they need to get there. Major Trip Generators and Projected Growth Since more than half of our passengers are youth passengers (grades K-12), major trip generators include students from high school and middle schools. Additionally, the commercial areas along Beaumont Avenue, 6th Street, 2nd Street Marketplace, Oak Valley shopping center, Social Services facilities, Casino Morongo, Outlet Mall, Ramsey Street and Highland Springs Avenue are also major trip generators. City of Beaumont continues to experience population growth. 500 new homes building permits will be issued in 2016. The new developments will bring an increased need on Transit Operations especially as it relates to youth passengers. Transportation services by the School District have been eliminated for most students, which in turn makes our youth passengers continue to grow. All routes that specifically accommodate youth passengers are at or exceeding capacity. Tripper buses have been added to routes, where necessary, to accommodate the overflow of passengers. A second bus has been added to Routes 3 and a third bus to Route 7. 56% of total passengers are youth passengers, with moderate growth expected next year. As part of a planned analysis of all routes, changes will be designed and implemented to increase ridership. Staff will continue to monitor these developments closely and plan route changes. Commuter Link Route 120 has grown substantially in the past few years. It is expected to continue to grow as the Veteran's Affairs Hospital expands to a second location in Loma Linda. Route schedules will be updated to accommodate the change in train schedule and connection tithes with other routes and agencies. 10 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. Eleven revenue vehicles are equipped with seatbelts. Most bus stops in commercial areas are equipped with benches and shelters. 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. Beaumont Transit is requesting STA funds for FY 16/17 for some much needed improvements to facilities to assist with operation efficiency. The first project will be the upgrade of the bus yard by securing a portion of the existing parking lot for the parking of buses. Wrought iron fence with security gates and cameras will be installed for the secure parking of all transit vehicles/buses at one location. Second, the transit maintenance facility is in need of improvements to the dilapidated asphalt/concrete where mechanics do their repairs. It is necessary to remove old asphalt/concrete and repave the area. Lastly, mechanics need a bus lift to assist them with maintaining the fleet; particularly with the addition of three 40 foot buses to the fleet. Currently, mechanics crawl under buses to diagnose and repair. CHAPTER 3 - PLANNED SERVICE CHANGES AND IMPLEMENTATION Recent Service Changes In FY 13/16, a third Dial -A -Ride vehicle was added to the schedule to accommodate the growing demand for paratransit service. Recommended Service Changes The coming fiscal year will bring changes to the route structure of Beaumont Pass Transit. The following are preliminary changes in service to take effect at the beginning of FY 17. First is the expansion of the current Commuter Route 120. Second, will be the addition of Route 136 which will service the City of Calimesa. Third, will be the elimination of Route 7-3. Finally, Route 3/4 on Sunday will be eliminated. Midyear of FY 17, Beaumont Transit will be evaluating the elirmr. cation or reconfiguration of Route 3/4. additionally, Routes 2-1 & 2-2 will change at the request of Banning Transit. The change will include creating an express route from Beaumont to Cabazon with limited stops in Banning. Expansion of Route 120 Commuter Route 120 has experienced significant growth over the past few years and is expected to continue to grow in the next fiscal year. To accommodate passenger connectivity to the Metrolink Station in San Bernardino and the addition of a new Veterans Affairs facility in Loma Linda, an additional bus will be added to the Route 120. The additional Route 120 will include an additional bus at peals times to include the morning, afternoon and evening. It will take a counter -clockwise approach to the existing clockwise approach wherein they will both travel from Beaumont to Calimesa with a stop at VA then continue to ll Metrolink. Route 120-1 will stop at Metrolink and then continue to the VA medical facilities in Loma Linda. Route 136 At the request of City of Calimesa and RTA, Beaumont Transit will be providing service to the City of Calimesa. This route is designed with an one hour headway with an alternate route at anticipated peak times of the morning and afternoon primarily for youth passengers. The route also takes into consideration transfer points and times for connectivity with Omnitrans as well as with Pass Transit's Route 120. Dial -A -Ride service will be provided to ADA certified passengers only. Express Route 702 At the request of Banning Transit, Beaumont will be withdrawing one of its Route 2 buses from traveling within Banning city limits. It will be looked into further and implemented by January 2017. Preliminary thoughts will be of transforming the Route 2-2 to Express Route 702 traveling from Beaumont to Cabazon with minimal stops in Banning and have a 30-45 minute headway. The Route 2-1 will stay in Beaumont entirely making its trunk route and meeting with the Express Route. Reconfiguring Route 2 into an Express, will also require a change in fare structure. More studies and surveys will need to be done before this is implemented. The reworking of the Route 2 will allow for more service to the residents of Beaumont specifically and getting passengers to shopping centers and work quicker via an express route. Elimination of Route 3/4 Beaumont Transit's poorest performing Route is the 3/4. With only 2% of the total passengers, and 365 passengers a month, this Weekend Route has experienced no growth over the past 2 years and will be phased out. Sunday service will be eliminated at the beginning of FY 17 and Saturday service will be evaluated for continuation or reroute midyear FY 17. Marketing Plans and Promotions Beaumont Transit will continue to reach out to the community by participating in fairs, festivals and market nights that are in the area. We will also continue to meet with staff, students and parents during school orientation to educate them on their transit options in the Pass Area. We continue to participate in Rider Appreciation Day in conjunction with Pass Area T-Now. GPS locaters on all buses are accessible through a mobile app called DoubleMap, which is available to the public. A website has also been set up at Beaumont.doublemap.com for users to access through their web browsers. DoubleMap shows real -tune information and GPS coordinates of all routes in service. Additionally, users can access route maps and time points to assist in locating routes and service available. QR codes have also been placed on all route maps and can be scanned from any bus stop. This takes you directly to the route maps to allow riders to quickly access timetables and route information. The City of Beaumont website, www.BeaumontCares.com, provides Pass Transit route schedule and fare information. Additionally, a link to Google Transit is on the web page. Through Google Transit, passengers can plan not only their trip on Pass Transit but connect with other agencies to reach a destination. 12 We have also engaged customers with the ability to submit comments, complaints, concerns, and suggestions through the city website or at AskBeautsiont.org. On this portal, requests for route information, bus stop requests, time change, etc. can be directly asked and delivered to staff for follow-up. Beaumont Transit participates in regional veteran committees to promote veteran transportation services from the Pass area to the Loma Linda VA hospital and has information booths at annual Veteran's Expo. The following marketing efforts will be undertaken to promote ridership growth: 1. Continue outreach programs to schools and at community events. 2. Reach out to the senior community and senior center to offer transit training for those who may be wary about riding. 3. Offer a training class on how to read transit maps and connect with other agencies for a destination. 4. Continue in the Mt. San Jacinto Community College GO -PASS Program to encourage ridership of college students. 5. Enclose flyers with transit information and training classes in city utility bills. b. Meetings will continue with representatives from the local veteran advocate agencies and March Air Reserve Base to increase active and retired military ridership. Budget Impact on Proposed Changes The new Route 136 in City of Calimesa will require the hiring of 2 additional bus drivers which will affect the budget noticeably. Additionally, two more buses and more fuel will affect expenses. Lastly-, there is approximately 15 deadhead miles to the beginning of revenue service; this will affect productivity. The expansion of the Route 120 into a 2"s bus at peak times will also require the hiring of an additional bus driver, another bus, and more fuel. All will be additional expenses in Beaumont's budget. The reworking of Route 2 into an express route will not affect expenses. The express route may even help expenses in that it will be a quicker bus with fewer stops, which will mean less fuel potentially. Drivers will remain the same and new staff will not need to be hired. However, revenue will be affected. Fares will need to be adopted to accommodate the trip from Beaumont to Cabazon on an Express Route. The elimination of Route 3/4 on Sundays will have little to no effect on revenues since this is the worst performing Route in the system. It will be surveyed and elimination of the route will be considered for midyear FY 17. Its elimination will be beneficial for reducing expenses. CHAPTER 4 - FINANCIAL AND CAPITAL PLANS Operating and Capital Budget Beaumont Pass Transit is requesting $2,244,688 in LTF funding for FY 2017, a 9 percent increase over current fiscal year funding. Increased service hours, increased route service over an extended area including the expansion of Route 120 and the new Route 136 in Calimesa make it necessary for 13 the increased funding. These two projects will require three full -tithe drivers to be hired. The services will also require increased fuel and maintenance costs for the three additional buses to be placed on route. Grants have been applied for with Low Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP) to help operations for the expansion project of the Route 120 in the amount of $63,619. Capital improvement projects in the amount of $734,008 are listed in Table 4. These are needed to accommodate Beaumont's growing transit system. First, buses are necessary for the expansion of the system and 2 buses will be purchased. Second, with the growing fleet and recent purchase of 3- 40 foot buses, the bus yard is no longer able to accommodate the overnight storage of all buses in one location. An improvement to the bus yard is a project that will be completed in the coming year and consists of securing the parking lot to accommodate the fleet. Third, the maintenance facility needs improvement. The mechanic work area has broken and lifting concrete and asphalt has become a safety issue. A capital improvement project will be the repaving of the facility. Lastly, mechanics require a bus lift to work on the buses. They currently crawl under the buses to diagnose and repair. Funding Plans to Support Proposed Operating and Capital Program Capital projects are funded through STA funds and Proposition 1B grants. Operating costs are funded through LTF and LCTOP. Regulatory and Compliance Requirements The American with Disabilities Act of 1990 The Dial -A -Ride service provides ADA paratransit service. The system uses a self -certification process with professional verification. Pass Area Transit works with RTA to certify 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 (ROTC Policy) The Pass Transit System operates seven CNG buses and ten gasoline -powered. Future vehicle purchases, like all current purchases, will be in compliance with the RCTC and SCAQMD policies regarding alternative fuel transit vehicles. CNG fueling stations have been historically available in both Banning and Beaumont. However, recent events have led to the shutdown of Beaumont Unified School District pumps for repairs. Additionally, the District is considering eliminating public use of the facility which will require Beaumont Transit to join everyone else in the Pass Area at city of Banning's fueling station. It has become a critical subject in Beaumont to secure other means for CNG fueling. State Transit Assistance (STA) Compliance At this time, Beaumont does not utilise STA funding for operating expenses. As such, compliance with the Public Utilities Commission requirement is not applicable. 14 1` ■MM - tiando {mxf lroapxleim {anrresicn Bus (Motorbus) / Directly Operated Table 1 - Fleet Inventory FY201 6/17Short Range Transit Plan City of Beaumont Year Mfg. Built Code Model Code Seating Capacity Lift and Ramp Vehicle Equipped Length Fuel Type Code # of Active Vehides FY 201S/16 # of Contingency Vehicles FY 2015/16 Life to Date Vehide Miles Prior Year End FY 2014/15 Life to Date Vehicle Miles through March FY 2015/16 Average Lifetime Miles Per Active Vehide As Of Year -To -Date (e.g., March) FY 2015/16 2000 2000 2010 2008 2009 2015 2011 2011 2011 2011 2015 2015 2001 2009 2009 2010 BBB CSRE BBB CSRE CMD GMC 5500 EBC EBC EBC XHF EDN EDN EDN EDN EDN EDN EDN EDN EDN XHF EDN XHF GCC GMC C-5500 STR STR 30 30 28 14 14 43 30 30 30 30 43 43 14 28 28 30 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 32 32 32 40 33 33 33 33 40 40 24 32 32 32 DF DF CN GA GA CN GA GA GA CN CN CN GA CN CN GA 1 0 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 344,891 303,443 117,362 217,706 225,329 105,650 114,810 90,506 67,894 304,470 104,039 109,770 132,573 351,111 305,477 130,008 227,246 228,908 4,476 132,205 141,836 115,208 83,273 102 201 304,470 118,807 124,008 154,348 351,111 130,008 227,246 228,908 4,476 132,205 141,836 115,208 83,273 102 201 304,470 118,807 124,008 154,348 Totals: TransTrack Manager"" 5l11m% 465 16 15 1 2,238,443 2,421,684 161,446 Page 1 of 1.11. Mina� iirtrs1 Unity IrrnpAdim {ilnr skn Demand Response / Directly Operated Table 1 - Fleet Inventory FY 2016/17 Short Range Transit Plan City of Beaumont Year Mfg. Built Code Model Code Seating Capacity Lift and Ramp Vehicle Equipped Length Fuel Type Code # of Active Vehides FY 2015/16 # of Contingency Vehicles FY 2015/16 Life to Date Vehide Miles Prior Year End FY 2014/15 Life to Date Vehicle Miles through March FY 2015/16 Average Lifetime Miles Per Active Vehicle As Of Year -To -Date (e.g., March) FY 2015/16 2010 2010 2010 FRD FRD FRD Ford E450 Ford E-450 Ford E-450 16 16 16 1 1 1 24 24 24 GA GA GA 1 1 1 0 0 0 178,957 155,469 167,721 213,312 191,370 194,387 213,312 191,370 194,387 Totals: 7ransTrack Manager'' 5/11/2016 48 3 3 0 502,147 599,069 199,690 Page 2 of Ms "ma listrsdt but! lru-sp idim CamTMskn Table 2 -- City of Beaumont -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2016/17 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2013/14 Audited FY 2014/15 Audited FY 2015/16 Plan FY 2015/16 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2016/17 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 14 ... 16 Financial Data Total Operating INpenses $1,862,023 $2,034,290 $2,266,001 $1,473,458 $2,549,939 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $217,529 $238,020 $226,600 $170,849 $241,632 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $1,644,493 $1,796 271 $2,039,401 1 302 559 $ , $2,308,307 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 215,398 222,752 227,618 164,053 242,400 Passenger Miles 428,521 444,478 666,374 784,029 1,823,281 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 22,479.8 21,929.7 23,682.0 17,574.2 29,186.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 393,720.0 385,704.0 396,716.0 299,347.0 526,757.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 421,095.0 411,803.0 426,158.0 317,319.G 561,577.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $82.83 $92.76 $95.68 $83.84 $87.37 Farebox Recovery Ratio 11.68% 11.70% 9.99% 11.60% 9.47% Subsidy per Passenger $7.63 $8.06 $8.96 $7.94 $9.52 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $3.84 $4.04 $3.06 $1.66 $1.27 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $73.15 $81.91 $86.12 $74.12 $79.09 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $4.18 $4,66 $5.14 $4.35 $4.38 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 9.6 10.2 9.6 9.3 8.3 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.55 0.58 0.57 0,55 0.46 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrackManager"" 5/11/2016 Page 1 of RCTC Iffi immo �- i�ttid� ltr,rr lrvapsldim Cormrisirn Table 2 -- City of Beaumont -- SRTP Service Summary PT 2016/17 Short Range Transit Plan Non -Excluded Roues FY 2013/14 Audited FY 2014/15 Audited FY 2015/16 Plan FY 2015/16 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2016/17 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 6 3 Financial Data , Total Operating Expenses $1,531,124 $1,503,763 $565,484 $1,429,862 $190,100 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $210,834 $157,188 $56,548 $168,871 $26,000 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $1,320,240 $1,346,574 $508,936 $1,260,991 $164,100 Operating Characteristics r Unlinked Passenger Trips 210,857 145,378 74,948 160,767 48,600 Passenger Miles 419,893 297,468 202,410 768,256 241,785 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 20,098.2 14,681.7 7,835.0 16,843.5 3,474.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 305,687.0 270,877.0 98,870.0 289,837.0 46,493.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 328,739.0 290,610.0 106,349,0 307,278.0 51,493.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $76.18 $102.42 $72.17 $84.89 $54.72 Farebox Recovery Ratio 13.77% 10.45% 9.99% 11.81% 13.67% Subsidy per Passenger $6,26 $9.26 $6.79 $7.64 $3.38 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $3.14 $4.53 $2.51 $1.64 $0.68 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $65.69 $91.72 $64.96 $74.87 $47.24 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $4.32 $4.97 $5.15 $4.35 $3.53 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 10.5 9.9 4.6 9.5 14.0 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.69 0.54 0.76 0.55 1.05 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TraasTradr Manager'"' vii12016 Page 1 oft Mini IMMO - iiar:iir [nary I-5spxlr€im (nm�r�kn Table 2 --- City of Beaumont -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2016/17 Short Range Transit Plan Excluded Routes FY 2013/14 Audited FY 2014/15 Audited FY 2015/16 Plan FY 2015/16 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2016/17 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 8 13 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $330,899 $530,528 $1,700,517 $43,597 $2,359,839 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $6,696 $80,831 $170,052 $2,028 $215,632 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $324,203 $449,696 $1,530,465 $41,569 $2,144,207 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 4,541 77,374 152,620 3,286 193,800 Passenger Miles 8,628 147,011 463,964 15,773 1,581,496 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 2,381.6 7,248.0 15,847.0 730,7 25,712.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 88,033.0 114,827.0 297,846.0 9,510.0 480,264.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 92,356.0 121,193.0 319,809.0 10,041.0 510,084.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $138.94 $73.20 $107.31 $59.66 $91.78 Farebox Recovery Ratio 2.02% 15.24% 9.99% 4.650/0 9.130/0 Subsidy per Passenger $71.39 $5.81 $10.03 $12.65 $11.06 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $37.58 $3.06 $3.30 $2,64 $1.36 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $136.13 $62.04 $96.58 $56.89 $83.39 Subsidy per Revenue Mlle (b) $3.68 $3.92 $5.14 $4.37 $4.46 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 1.9 10.7 9.6 4.5 7.5 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.05 0.67 0.51 0.35 0.40 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Mlles for Rall Modes. Trans7rracak Manager"" 5/11/2016 Page 1 oft rINIMEN� (Dirty (-mpTMitn Cmnr:dgn Table 2 -- Beaumont -BUS -- SRTP Service summary FY 2016/17 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes 1 FY 2013/14 Audited FY 2014/15 Audited FY 2015/16 Plan FY 2015/16 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2016/17 Plan M Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 11 13 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $1,339,462 $1,540,724 $1,953,096 $1,196,329 $2,182,939 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $196,407 $207,924 $195,310 $152,145 $216,632 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $1,143,055 $1,332,800 $1,757,786 $1,044,185 $1,966,307 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 198,499 204,112 205,176 155,698 236,400 Passenger Miles 377,148 387,813 623,734 747,350 1,781,141 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 19,386.9 18,664.7 19,119.0 14,882.6 26,186.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 357,422.0 336,591.0 341,515.0 265,366.0 487,757.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 376,253,0 358,909.0 367,311.0 280,571.0 519,577,0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $69.09 $82.55 $102,15 $80.38 $83.36 Farebox Recovery Ratio 14.66% 13.500/D 10.000/0 12.72% 9.92% Subsidy per Passenger $5.76 $6.53 $8.57 $6.71 $8.32 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $3.03 $3.44 $2.82 $1.40 $1.10 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $58.96 $71.41 $91.94 $70.16 $75,09 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $3.24 $3.96 $5.15 $3.93 $4.03 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 10.2 10.9 10.7 10.5 9,0 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.56 0.61 0.60 0.59 0.48 i (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes, (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrackManager"" sn poie Page 1 of I MB Mims ..._� Ivae7 Lmpsldlas (arrrri:skn Table 2 -- Beaumont-DAR -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2016/17 Short Range Transit Plan A11 Routes FY 2013/14 Audited FY 2014/15 Audited FY 2015/16 Plan FY 2015/16 3rd (Mr Actual FY 2016/17 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 3 3 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $522,560 $493,566 $312,905 $277,129 $367,000 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $21,122 $30,096 $31,290 $1$,754 $25,000 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $501,439 $463,470 $281,615 $258,375 $342,000 Operating Characteristics f Unlinked Passenger Trips 16,899 18,640 22,442 8,355 6,000 Passenger Miles 51,373 56,666 42,640 36,678 42,140 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 3,092.9 3,265.0 4,5630 2,691.6 3,000.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 41,298.0 49,113.0 55,201.0 33,981.0 39,000.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 44,842.0 52,894.0 58,847.0 36,7413.0 42,000.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $168.96 $151.17 $68.57 $102.96 $122,33 Farebox Recovery Ratio 4.04% 6.10% 9.99% 6.770/0 6.81% Subsidy per Passenger $29.67 $24.86 $12, 55 $30,92 $57.00 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $9.76 $8.18 $6,60 $7.04 $8.12 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $162.13 $141.95 $61,72 $95.99 $114.00 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $12.14 $9.44 $5.10 $7.60 $8.77 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 5.5 5.7 4.9 3.1 2.0 Passenger per Revenue Miie (b) 0.41 0.38 0.41 0.25 0.15 a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. 7ransTrack Manager'"' 5/iu2oi6 Page 1 oft Beaumont Transit FY 2016/2017- FY 2018/2019 Short Range Transit Plan Table 2A Excluded Routes Route # Mode (FR/DR) Service Type (DO/CO) Route Description Date of Implementation Exemption End Date 2 FR DO Beaumont to Cabazon Trunk Route July 2014 June 2017 3/4 FR DO Walmart shopping center, BHS, Sports Park, Cherry Valley July 2014 June 2017 4 FR DO Walmart shopping center, hospital, 6a' St, Beaumont Ave, Pennsylvania Ave, Three Rings Ranch July 2014 June 2017 7 FR DO Oak Valley Parkway, Palmer, Cherry Valley, Brookside, Beaumont Ave, Stetson July 2014 June 2017 120 FR CO Commuterlink from Beaumont to San Bernardino with stops in Calirnesa and Loma Linda July 2015 June 2018 120-2 FR CO Commuterlink from Beaumont to San Bernardino Metrolink with stops in Calimesa and Loma Linda July 2016 June 2019 136 FR DO City of Calimesa City Hall to Fremont via County Line Rd to Stater Bros via Ave L and Calirnesa Blvd July 2016 June 2019 702 FR DO Express Route from Beaumont Walmart to Cabazon with minimal stops in Banning January 2017 June 2019 Note: Excluded routes are new routes or new service extensions that are eligible for exemption from the farebox recovery requirements. zr� r DOad 9IOzInIs ...waBeueN JFelsue{L LOE'90E'Z$ ZE9'ibZt 6E6'665'Z$ 0'LLS'T9S O'L5L'925 0799`Z£ 0'98T'6Z TSZ'EZ8'T OOb'Z6Z 91 sieyallaptwad D31nJDS 000`Z4£$ 000'SZ$ O00`L9E$ 0'000'Zb 0'000'6E 0'005'£ 0.000T 017VZ1, 000'9 £ sAe0 iN lAV0-V39 001'03 000'S# 001'51$ 0'918'9 O'£TO'S 0'065 0149E 59Z'91, 00T'TT T sAea IN 6-V39 000'092# 000'0Z$ 000'OZZ$ 0'000'0E O'LVL'92 0'00Z4Z 0'000'Z 06C01,1 000'1Z T sAeq IN ZOL-V39 000'ZL$ 000'91# 000'9B$ O'L55'9Z 0'910'61 0'0091 O'Z96 0121E2 000'1,f Z EAR() IN L-V3B 0Z6'ZZZ$ 000'SZ# 0Z6'L6Z$ O ata, 0198'Zb O'ZZE'E 0'£9T'E bi6'ObZ 009'ZE T 5Aep WV 4-V9B 00B'BZ$ 00Z'T$ 000'0Et 0'00L'9 OT*E'9 O'0Z5 O'L8b Zfre9 00Z'Z T sAeO IN b1E-V39 000'45T$ 000'TZt 000'SLT$ 07/91+ 0'081711, 0"OSb'E O'OTT'E 005'E6T 005'LE Z sdeq IN £-V39 890'LbEt Z£6'ZSt 000'00b$ TOMB 0'005`98 ff000'9 WOW'S 000'69b 000'0/ Z sAeq pV Z-V39 0651,91$ 005`0T$ 000'SLT$ 0'00T'£E 0'000'n 0.006'Z O'009'Z 000'LZ 000'6 T Shea IIV 9ET-V39 6T6'TOZ$ 000'OE$ 616'TEZ$ O'Obb'9TT 0'000'LTT 0"00T'1, CHIVE 000'OT 000's T SAe01IV Z-OZT-V39 000'595$ 000'S£$ 000'009$ 0'000'OZT O'000'LTT 0'005$ 0'00Z$ 00C£T17 000'07 T SAEO IIV OZT-V30 APIs9n9 enuanaa 1P:13 lad Je6uessed 6uneJadp '+DIIW !MIN anuanaa smell mum SDtIW ielal enuanea +ebuassed sie6uassed S'aP14eA }lewd eel&Aea #evtDa slaawal3 (flea ravioli Iltl LTI9TOZ A3 Z -- vuowneaa ;o ILIA, sue! .4145 &Jima. d1UIS - £ WW1 .ra�o� m!aWdm4.iasa7 3ratit ��Min Z/n Z Geed 91,0Z1ii/5 ..,1-6eue/Y..paiisuea 96'0 E'9 9£14 60'6C$ LZ'T$ ZS'6$ %Cb"6 ZS'OI$ 68'6$ LE'L9$ $1=1o1-aPirad®1^uaS ST"0 0'Z 119$ 00'4TT$ ZT'9$ 00'LS$ %19'9 L1'19$ 11,'6$ EE'ZZT$ sAea IM 8tla-V39 'In S'OE TO'Z$ SCLZ$ TZ'O$ T6'0$ %TT'EE 9E'1$ TO'E$ IWT4$ shea IPd 6-V39 EEO S'OT 96'9$ 00'00T$ Zb'T$ ZS'6$ %60'6 84'OT$ 59'L$ 00'OTT$ sAPa IM ZOL-V39 ZET E'SE E9TES 491,L$ I£'0$ ZE'Z$ %9I'9I 65'Z$ b4"b$ 9b'16$ s/ea Iry L.139 9E0 COT 0Z'S$ EVOL$ Efi'0$ b9'9$ %EOM 09'L$ WO SEWS sAea IIV 4-V39 SE'0 S'b wieS 4T'65$ TZ'b$ 60'ET$ %001, WET* EL'b$ 0919$ shea me 1.1E-V39 06'0 T'ZI TCE$ ZS'64$ MOM IT"b# %OOZT L914 ZZ'4$ LZ'95$ she0Iff E-V39 ITO 5'ZT IO'b$ 8619$ bC0$ 9614 %£Z'ET TL'S$ Z9"4$ EVTL$ she0IW ZA011 6E'0 S"E 5T'L$ LZ'EO 60'9$ 0Z'9T$ %00'9 1,4'61$ 191$ TE79$ sAe0 IV 9ET-V39 40'0 VT EL'I$ LS'175$ 61"0Z$ 9E'04$ hE6ZT 9E'94$ 861$ 9979$ $Ae0IIV Z-OZT-1139 ZIT E'E E9'b# ZS'bET$ LE-3 9E'0b$ %ES'S 99'Z6$ EVES 99714$ stied IIV OZT-V39 0E114 +ad saa6uassed mo“ and %Mfg may a11H sa5uassed opt% Ja6uasaed GBH anuanab mot.' enuaeall adfa Aea # aynoy va6uassed anuanag anuaeay 1a6uassed iad APls9ns Aianw01j lad 7soa .+ad 1503 Add 1503 sad APIsgnS +ad APPs ins gad APIs9ns xagaued 6upesado 6upeiado sloaealPuT 2011euunjsad sa3nob Iltl LTI9TOZ Ad Z--;uouuneag /n kmo. sVsgelS a711021 &MS - £ Nero . � ��ar•��a Iwo] ipin4 Beaumont Transit FY 2016/2017- FY 2018/2019 Short Range Transit Plan Table 3A Individual Route Descriptions and Areas Serviced Route Route Description Area/Sites Serviced 2 Downtown Beaumont to Walmart shopping center west to Beaumont then east to Cabazon via On Street/Ramsey 2nd Street Marketplace shopping center and transfer to RTA, San Gorgonio hospital, Beaumont Civic Center, banks, downtown Beaumont. Stater Bros, Walgreen, Orchard Park Apartments, Sports park, shopping, restaurants, Mt View Middle School, Beaver Medical Group, DPSS, Banning City Hall, Desert Hills and Cabazon Outlet Mall and Casino Morongo 3 Walmart shopping center then north through Sundance community to Beaumont High School with immediate return via same route 21a Street Marketplace shopping center, transfer to RTA, San Gorgonio hospital, Sundance elementary, Sundance Community, Orchard Park Apartments, Mt. View and San Gorgonio middle schools, Sports Park, Cherry Valley and Beaumont High School 4 Walmart shopping center then north to hospital, west via 6th street then north on Palm Ave to Sports Park 2nd Street Marketplace shopping center and transfer to RTA, San Gorgonio hospital, Beaumont Civic Center, banks, downtown Beaumont, library, Stater Bros, Walgreen, Orchard Park Apartments, Sports park, shopping, restaurants, Mt View and San Gorgonio Middle schools and various apartment complexes 7 Oak Valley Parkway, Palmer, Cherry Valley Blvd, Brookside, Champions, Desert Lawn Beaumont Ave, Cougar Way, Oak Valley Parkway Fairway Canyon, Tournament Hills, Beaumont High, Mt View and San Gorgonio Middle Schools, Oak Valley Greens, Oak Valley Shopping Center, Stetson and Cherry Valley. 9 Seneca Springs, north on Pennsylvania Ave to Palm Ave and continuing north on Beaumont Ave Walmart and 2nd Street Marketplace, Seneca Springs community, Four Seasons Active retirement community, Loma Linda Medical Center, Mt View and San Gorgonio Middle Schools, Beaumont High School 3/4 Cherry Valley Blvd, Beaumont Beaumont High School, Sports Park, Ave, Brookside, Cherry Ave, Pennsylvania, 8th St, Xenia, 6th St, Highland Springs, San Gomognio Hospital, Walmart Cougar, Vineland, Nancy. Weekend Service only Chatigny Center, Noble Creek Apts, San Gorgonio, 2nd Street Marketplace, Orchard Park Apts, Cherry Valley Market, Cherry Valley Mobile Home Park 120 Walmart to San Bernardino Metrolink, Loma Linda VA Hospital and Calimesa Commuter link with direct service from Walmart to San Bernardino Metrolink Loma Linda VA and Calimesa 120-2 Walmart to San Bernardino Metrolink, Loma Linda VA Hospital and Calimesa Commuter link with direct service during peak times from Walmart to San Bernardino Metrolink Loma Linda VA and Calimesa 136 Calimesa City Hall eastbound via County Line Road, ri Street, Ave L, 2nd Street, California, Bryant to Fremont, Westbound to Stater Bros via Ave L and Calimesa Blvd Calimesa City Hall, many mobile home parks and residential areas, Fremont Charter Academy, commercial center including Stater Bros and Walgreens, multiple connections with Omnitrans and Pass Transit Route 120 702 Express Route from Beaumont Walmart to Cabazon with minimal stops in Banning Beaumont Walmart, Social Services offices, Banning Courthouse, Cabazon Outlet Malls and Casino Morongo DAR City Wide 3 DAR vehicles servicing Cherry Valley, Beaumont and expansion to City of Calimesa City of Beaumont FY 2016/17 Summary of Funds Requested Short Range Transit Plan Table 4 - Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2016/17 5111116 revised Project Description Capital Project Number (i i Total Amount of Funds LTF STA Prop 1B (PTMISEA) Prop 1B Security LCTOP Fare Box Other'' Operating Expenses 2,311,320 2,080,188 231,132 New Route 136 175,00D 164,500 10,500 Route 120 Expansion (LCTOP FY15116) 63,619 63,619 0 Subtotal: Operating 2,549,939 2,244,688 0 0 0 83,619 241,632 Bus Yard Parking Lot w/ security gates FY 17-01 200,000 200,000 Mobile Bus Lift, Jacks Stands & Tads FY 17-02 85,000 85,000 1 Type E & 1 Type C Bus wl Cameras for expansion FY 17-03 350,000 356,000 Shop Building Maintenance FY 17-04 75,000 75,000 Prop 1B Security FY 15116• Transit Fleet Security Camera upgrade FY 17-05 18,734 18,734 Prop 1B PTMISEA FY 08109-Service Enhancement/Expansion Route 120 Fy 17-06 5,274 5,274 Subtotal- Capital $ 734,008' $ - $ 710,000 $ 5,274 $ 48,734 $ - $ - ` $ - Total: Operating & Capital ! $ 3,283,947 $ 2,244,688 $ 710,000 $ 5,274 $ 18,734 $ 63,619 $ 241,632 $ - Revised 5111/2016 Summary of FY 2015/17 Funds Requested,xls Table 4A- Capital Proi ect Justification PROJECT NUMBER (If existing project in FTIP, indicate FTIP ID Number): SRTP Project No: 2017-01 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME: Bus Yard Parking Lot w/ Security Gates PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The project will include the development of the north parking lot of Pass Transit Administrative Offices along Magnolia Avenue. The location is already paved with 2 exits and driveway approaches. This project will entail the installation of wrought iron fencing along Magnolia Ave and 7`h Street with the installation of 2 automatic security gates for the 2 exits identified. It will be necessary to extend electric to the gates as well as for the installation of security cameras. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: City of Beaumont Pass Transit currently parks its vehicles in 2 separate locations at the Administrative Offices location, 550 E 6' Street, and the Maintenance Facility at 550 California Ave. Although most of our fleet is parked at Administrative Offices, some of the fleet is parked at Maintenance Facility because there is not enough space to safely park 20 buses in one location. It has become necessary to develop the parking lot on the north side of Transit Administrative Offices for the parking and security of the fleet. PROJECT SCHEDULE: Start Date August 2016 Com_pletion Date May 2017 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): Fund Type Fiscal Year Amount STA 16-17 $200,000 Total $200,000 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE INCLUDING PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED (INCLUDE FTA GRANT#, FTIP ID# AND RCTC'S SRTP CAPITAL GRANT #) FTA Grant # FTIP ID # RCTC/SRTP Project # Description Unexpended Balance (as of 6/30/16) NIA N/A NIA N/A N/A Table 4A- Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER (If existing project in FTIP, indicate FTIP ID Number): SRTP Project No: 2017-02 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME: Mobile Bus Lift, Jack Stands & Tools PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The project is for the purchase of key and instrumental tools required for the diagnosis and maintenance of Beaumont's fleet. Tools necessary include a mobile bus lift, jack stands, tire balancer, a/c charging unit, creepers, welder, impact gun, metric wrenches and drill set essential to the diagnosis and repair of the fleet. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: Beaumont Pass Transit has grown this year alone with the delivery of 3 new 40 foot buses to add to the fleet. Mechanics currently are scooting under buses to observe a mechanical problem, often times while the bus is hot. The bus lift and jack stands will bring the bus up, and the mechanics out from underneath them, for their repair. Additionally, mechanics are in need of key equipment to successfully complete routine maintenance such as a welder and tire balancer. Should mechanics need access to these types of equipment, they have to go to a neighboring mechanic shop for its use. PROJECT SCHEDULE: Start Date Completion Date August 2016 March 2017 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REOUESTED): Fund Type Fiscal Year Amount STA 16-17 $85,000 Total $85,000 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE INCLUDING PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED (INCLUDE FTA GRANT#, FTIP ID# AND RCTC'S SRTP CAPITAL GRANT #) FTA Grant # FTIP ID # RCTC/SRTP Project # Description Unexpended Balance (as of 6/30/16) NIA NIA NIA NIA NIA Table 4A- Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER (If existing project in FTIP, indicate FTIP ID Number): SRTP Project No: 2017-03 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME: 1 Type E & 1 Type C Bus w/ Cameras PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a procurement plan of funding for 2 buses for expansion. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: Beaumont Pass Transit continues to increase service and connectivity to the Pass Area with expansions into Calimesa as well as a 2nd bus on the Commuter Route 120. Beaumont intends to use these buses to help with the expansion. PROJECT SCHEDULE: Start Date Completion Date September 2016 September 2017 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): Fund Type Fiscal Year Amount STA 16-17 $350,000 Total $350,000 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE INCLUDING PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED (INCLUDE FTA GRANT#, FTIP ID# AND RCTC'S SRTP CAPITAL GRANT #) FTA Grant # FTIP ID # RCTC/SRTP Project # Description Unexpended Balance (as of 6/30/16) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Table 4A- Capital Proiect Justification PROJECT NUMBER (If existing project in FTIP, indicate FTIP ID Number): SRTP Project No: 2017-04 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME: Shop Building Maintenance PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The project will include the removal of old, broken and uneven concrete and asphalt of the yard and the repaving of it, The project will also entail fixing key things in the building including the heating, water heater, and swamp coolers. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: Beaumont Pass Transit has grown from 2 mechanics historically to 4 in the past couple of years to keep up with our growing fleet. The old building that mechanics work out of is dilapidated and is in need of key repairs such as heating and cooling. Additionally, the pavement throughout the site is broken and uneven in most parts and is a tripping hazard as the broken pieces are dislodged from where they should be. PROJECT SCHEDULE: Start Date Completion Date August 2016 March 2017 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): Fund Type Fiscal Year Amount STA 16-17 $75,000 Total $75,000 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE INCLUDING PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED (INCLUDE FTA GRANT#, FTIP ID# AND RCTC'S SRTP CAPITAL GRANT #) FTA Grant # FTIP ID # RCTCISRTP Project # Description Unexpended Balance (as of 6/30/16) NIA NIA 12113 Building Improvements 13,939.24 N/A NIA 13/14 Building D Improvements 75,000.00 Table 4A- Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER (If existing proiect in FTIP, indicate FTIP ID Number): SRTP Project No: 2017-05 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME: Security Camera Upgrade (Proposition 1B Security FY 15/16) PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Upgrade of on board security cameras PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: Existing security cameras are unreliable because storage chips must be manually removed from the bus every 3 days. System does not give a warning when it is not recording. New system will be automatic upload with better quality video PROJECT SCHEDULE: Start Date Completion Date September 2016 September 2017 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): Fund Type Fiscal Year Amount Prop 1B 15/16 18,734 Total $18,734 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE INCLUDING PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED (INCLUDE FTA GRANT#, FTIP ID# AND RCTC'S SRTP CAPITAL GRANT #) FTA Grant # FTIP ID # RCTC/SRTP Project # Description Unexpended Balance (as of 6/30/16) N/A NIA 15-2 2 Security Camera Systems for the above 36,000 14-4 Upgrade Panasonic in - car video system 33,867.98 Table 4A- Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER (If existing project in FTIP, indicate FTIP ID Number): SRTP Project No: 2017-06 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME: Enhancement/Expansion of Route 120 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Expansion of Commuter Link 120 into San Bernardino Metrolink and Loma Linda VA PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: Commuter Link Route 120 has grown over the past year but has nearly a 2 hour headway. This additional route will help at peak time to connect Pass Area passengers with neighboring agencies. PROJECT SCHEDULE: Start Date Completion Date July 2016 June 2019 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): Fund Type Fiscal Year Amount LCTOP (Operating) 15/16 63,619 PTMISEA (Capital) 08/09 5,274 Total $68,893 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE INCLUDING PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED (INCLUDE FTA GRANT#, FTIP ID# AND RCTC'S SRTP CAPITAL GRANT #) FTA Grant # FTIP ID # RCTC/SRTP Project # Description Unexpended Balance (as of 6/30/16) NIA NIA NIA NIA NIA Table 5.1 - Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2017/18 Project Description Operating Expenses New Route 136 Subtotal: Operating Maintenance Building Improvements CNG Station Phase 2 1 Type E Bus Replacement wlcameras Subtotal: Capital Total: Operating & Capital f Capital Project Number (1) FY 18-01 FY 18-02 FY 18-03 Total Amount of Funds $ 2,357,547 $ 178,500 $ 2,536,047 $ 150,000 $ 300,000 $ 200,000 $ 650,000 $ 3,186,047 City of Beaumont FY 2017/18 Summary of Funds Requested Short Range Transit Plan LTF $ 2,121,792 $ 167,790 $ 2,289,582 $ 2,289,582 STA $ $ 150,000 $ 300,000 200,aaa 5 650,000 $ 650,000 Prop 1B (PTMISEA) $ $ Prop 1B Security $ $ a LCTQP Revised 4/12/16 Fare Box $ 235,755 $ 10,710 $ 246,465 $ $ 246,465 $ Other t" Revised 5/11/2016 Summary of FY 2017/18 Funds Requested.xis Table 5.1- Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER (If existing project in FTIP, indicate FTIP ID Number): SRTP Project No: 2018-01 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME: Maintenance Building Improvements PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Rehab and remodel of Transit's Maintenance Facility located at 550 California Ave. This will include the reinforcement of masonry building and rehabilitation of garage to enable the buses to be garaged or under a awning while being repaired. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: Beaumont Pass Transit's Maintenance Facility is a very old structure made up of a combination of a portion of brick and mortar office, metal garage and wood carports. None of the areas have large enough bays to work on a bus under cover. Mechanics work on the fleet in the elements, under no shade structure because they simply do not fit in the bays. This project would allow for the upgrade of the structures to allow for an updated appearance but more importantly, a beginning to a means of moving repairs under a structure when possible. PROJECT SCHEDULE: Start Date Completion Date August 2017 March 2018 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REOUESTED): Fund Type Fiscal Year Amount STA 17-18 $150,000 Total $150,000 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE INCLUDING PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED (INCLUDE FTA GRANT#, FTIP ID# AND RCTC'S SRTP CAPITAL GRANT #) FTA Grant # FTIP ID # RCTC/SRTP Project # Description Unexpended Balance (as of 6/30/16) N/A NIA N/A N/A N/A Table 5.1- Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER (If existing project in FTIP, indicate FTIP ID Number): SRTP Project No: 20I8-02 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME: CNG Station Phase 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: CNG refueling station project to bring a CNG station to Beaumont area off of the I-10 where public transit, as well as other vehicles, could easily fuel from a predetermined site. Location will be at City owned property located on 4th Street, which is along the Railroad tracks parallel to the I-10 freeway with easy on & off ramps. Gas Company has a main pressure line in the area. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: Project will be underway and this will cover the final stages of the project which would include opening of the station and implementation of maintenance contract. PROJECT SCHEDULE: Start Date Completion Date August 2017 March 2019 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): Fund Type Fiscal Year Amount STA 17-18 $3 00,000 Total $300,000 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE INCLUDING PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED (INCLUDE FTA GRANT#, FTIP ID# AND RCTC'S SRTP CAPITAL GRANT #) FTA Grant # FTIP ID # RCTC/SRTP Project # Description Unexpended Balance (as of 6/30/16) NIA NIA 14-1 CNG Station Improvements 100,000 15-3 CNG Station Improvements 300,000 16-1 CNG Station Improvements 300,000 Table 5.1- Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER (If existing project in FTIP, indicate FTIP ID Number): SRTP Project No: 2018-03 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME: 1 Type E Bus for Replacement w/ Camera System PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Procurement of 1 Type E bus for the expansion of new routes and replacement of existing buses. New bus will be CNG fueled. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: Beaumont is in the process of expanding our service in our City as well as into other cities in the pass area to maximize connectivity of passengers. We have several vehicles reaching retirement, one of which is a diesel bus and many gas buses. This new CNG bus will help in the goal of operating only CNG buses. PROJECT SCHEDULE: Start Date Completion Date August 2017 March 2018 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): Fund Type Fiscal Year Amount STA 17-18 $200,000 Total $200,000 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE INCLUDING PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED (INCLUDE FTA GRANT#, FTIP ID# AND RCTC'S SRTP CAPITAL GRANT #) FTA Grant # FTIP ID # RCTC/SRTP Project # Description Unexpended Balance (as of 6/30/16) N/A N/A N/A N/A NIA City of Beaumont FY 2018/19 Summary of Funds Requested Short Range Transit Plan Table 5.2 - Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2018/19 Revised 4/12/16 Project Description Capital Project Number it Total Amount of Funds LTF STA Prop 1 B {PTMISEA)' Prop 16 Security LCTOP Fare Box Other "' Operating Expenses Route 136 $ 2,404,698 $ 182,070 $ 2,164,228 $ 171,146 $ 240,470 $ 10,924 Subtotal: Operating $ 2,586,768 $ 2,335,374 $ - $ $ - $ - $ 251,394 $ - 1 Type 7 Bus for Replacement w! Cameras Wheelchair Van 8 Cameras FY 19-01 FY 19-02 $ 500,000 $ 85,000 $ 500,000 $ 85,000 Subtotal: Capital $ 585,000-$ - $ 585,000 $ - I$ - $ - $ _ $ - Total: Operating & Capital 1 $ 3,171,768 $ 2,335,374 $ 585,000 _ $ _ - i $ - $ - $ 251,394 $ - Revised 5/11/2016 Summary of FY 2018/19 Funds Requested,xls Table 5.2- Capital Pruiect Justification PROJECT NUMBER (If existing_project in FTIP, indicate FTIP ID Number): SRTP Project No: 2019-01 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME: 1 Type 7 Bus for Replacement w/ Cameras PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Procurement of 1 Type 7 bus for replacement. Bus will be CNG fueled. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: Larger bus to the fleet to facilitate growing service and connectivity to our surrounding area and to retire smaller gas -fueled buses. Bus does not come equipped with camera security equipment. Cameras will be added after bus is delivered. PROJECT SCHEDULE: Start Date Completion Date September 2018 September 2019 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): Fund Type Fiscal Year Amount STA 18-19 $ 500,000 Total $500,000 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE INCLUDING PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED (INCLUDE FTA GRANT#, FTIP ID# AND RCTC'S SRTP CAPITAL GRANT #) FTA Grant # FTIP ID # RCTC/SRTP Project # Description Unexpended Balance (as of 6/30/16) NIA NIA NIA NIA NIA Table 5.2- Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER (1f existing proiect in FTIP, indicate FTIP ID Number): SRTP Project No: 2019-02 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME: Wheelchair Van and Cameras PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Procurement of gas van with wheelchair ramp. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: A wheelchair van will serve multiple purposes including a vehicle for Road Supervisor who will be responsible for customer service related to Dial A Ride service as well as Fixed route. This vehicle is essential for customer service aspect of our ADA passengers. This vehicle could transport a wheelchair passenger when necessary while still being on the road for the required position. PROJECT SCHEDULE: Start Date Completion Date September 2019 December 2019 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): Fund Type Fiscal Year Amount STA 18-19 $ 85,000 Total $85,000 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE INCLUDING PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED (INCLUDE FTA GRANT#, FTIP ID# AND RCTC'S SRTP CAPITAL GRANT #) FTA Grant # FTIP ID # RCTC/SRTP Project # Description Unexpended Balance (as of 6/30/16) NIA NIA NIA NIA NIA Beaumont Transit FY 2016/2017- FY 2018/2019 Short Range Transit Plan Table 6- Progress to Implement Triennial Performance Audit Audit Recommendations (Covering FY 2009/10-2011/12) Action(s) Taken and Results (1) Ensure the timely completion and submittal of the annual State Controller Transit Operators Financial Transaction Reports. Beaumont is adamantly working on finances and audits of the City. With the addition of trained staff, procedures are being implemented to prevent delays in completion of these very important documents. (1) Beaumont Finance Departfnent is processing the State audit which leads to the issuance of the Performance Audit for FY 15. iiltrsJr foxy hmpzldim (nmri sKn Table 7 -- Service Provider Performance Targets Report FY 2015/16 Short Range Transit Plan Review City of Beaumont Data Elements Unlinked Passenger Trips Passenger Miles Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours Total Actuaf Vehicle Revenue Miles Total Actual Vehicle Miles Total Operating Expenses Total Passenger Fare Revenue Net Operating Expenses Performance Indicators FY 2015/16 Plan 227,618 666,374 , 23,682.0 396,716.0 426,158.0 $2,266,001 $226,600 $2,039,401 FY 2015/16 Target FY 2015/16 Year to Date Through 3rd Quarter Year to Date Performance Scorecard Mandato : 1. Farebox Recovery Ratio 9.99% > 10.00°/u 11.60% Meets Target Discretion . 1. Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour 2. Subsidy Per Passenger 3. Subsidy Per Passenger Mile 4, Subsidy Per Hour 5. Subsidy Per Mile 6. Passengers Per Revenue Hour 7. Passengers Per Revenue Mile $95.68 $8.96 $3.06 $86.12 $5.14 9.60 0.57 <_ $95.74 >_ $7.18 and <_ $9.72 >_ $3.59 and <_ $4.85 >_ $71.53 and <_ $96,77 >_ $4.17 and <_ $5.65 >= 8.50 and <= 11.50 >= 0.49 and <= 0,67 $83.84 $7.94 $1.66 $74,12 $4.35 9.30 0.55 Meets Target Meets Target Better Than Target Meets Target Meets Target Meets Target Meets Target Note: must meet at least 4 out of 7 biscretionary Performance Indicators Productivity Performance Summary: Service Provider Comments: I TransTraek Manager"" 5/12/2016 Page I of1 Ir � - 11411 'drCarrerilftpxleimCnms,zirn FY 2016/17 - Table 8 -- SRTP Performance Report Service Provider: City of Beaumont All Routes Performance Indicators FY 2014/15 End of Year Actual FY 2015/16 3rd Quarter Year -to -Date FY 2016/17 Plan FY 2016/17' Target Plan Performance Scorecard (a) Passengers 222,752 164,053 247,400 None Passenger Miles 444,478 784,029 1,823,281 None Revenue Hours 21,929.7 17,574.2 29,186.0 None Total Hours 24,138.7 19,619.7 32,682.0 None Revenue Miles 385,704.0 299,347.0 526,757.0 None Total Mlles 411,803.0 317,319.0 561,577.0 None Operating Costs $2,034,290 $1,473,458 $2,549,939 None Passenger Revenue $238,020 $170,899 $241,632 None Operating Subsidy $1,796,271 $1,302,559 $2,308,307 None Operating Costs Per Revenue Hour $92.76 $83.84 $87,37 <= $84.67 Fails to Meet Target Operating Cast Per Revenue Mile $5.27 $4.92 $4.84 None Operating Costs Per Passenger $9.13 $8.98 $10.52 None Farebox Recovery Ratio 11.70% 11.60% 9.47% >= 10.0% Fails to Meet Target Subsidy Per Passenger $8.06 $7.94 $9.52 >= $6.75 and <= $9.13 Fails to Meet Target Subsidy Per Passenger Mile $4,04 $1.66 $1.27 >= $1.41 and <= $1.91 Better Than Target Subsidy Per Revenue Hour $81.91 $74,12 $79.119 >= $63.00 and <= $85.24 Meets Target Subsidy Per Revenue Mile $4.66 $4.35 $4.38 >= $3.70 and <= $5.00 Meets Target Passengers Per Revenue Hour 10.20 9.30 8.30 >= 7.91 and <= 10.70 Meets Target Passengers Per Revenue Mile 0.58 0.55 0.46 >= 0.47 and <= 0.63 Fails to Meet Target a) The Plan Performance Scorecard column is the result of comparing the FY 2016/17 Plan to the FY 2016/17 Primary Target. TYansTi ack Manager"' 5/11/2016 Page 1 of Beaumont Transit FY 2016/2017- FY 2018/2019 Short Range Transit Plan Table 9 Highlights of SRTP • Increase commuter service connections to San Bernardino Metrolink Station, connecting with OmniTrans and serving Loma Linda Veteran's Affairs, while stopping in Calimesa to increase connectivity by adding a 2°a bus to the popular Commuter Route 120. • Add Route 136 which is the Calimesa Route connecting residents of Calimesa to City Hall and shopping center including Stater Bros and W algreen's. • Scale back expenses by eliminating Sunday Route 3/4 and evaluating Saturday Route 3/4 to increase productivity. • Rework Route 2 to provide only one bus traveling through City of Banning at Banning's request. One of the Route 2 buses, there are currently two, will become Express Route 702 which will connect passengers from Walmart to Casino Morongo with minimal stops in the City of Banning. • Expand outreach efforts to senior citizen organizations, schools and major employers • Maintain and improve GPS tracking system and Google Transit to assist riders in knowing where their desired route is located. Table 9A-0 eratin and Capital Data Operating and Financial Date ._..FY 12/13 Audited FY l 3/14 Audited FY 14115 Pending Audit FY 15/16 Estimated FY 16/17 Planned Systemwide Ridership 209,299 215,398 222,752 218,737 242,400 Operating Costs per Revenue Hour $81.25 $82.83 $92.76 $83.84 $87.37 Table 9B- Fare Revenue Calculation (Consistent with Commission Recovery Policy) Revenue Source included in Farebox Calculation FY 14/15 Pending Audit FY 15/16 (Through 3Q Estimate) FY 16/17 (Estimate) 1. Passenger Fares 238,020 227,865 241,632 2. Interest 3, General Fund Supplement 4. Measure A 5. Advertising Revenue 6. Gain on Sale of Capital Assets 7. CNG Revenue 8. Lease/Other Revenue 9, Federal Excise Tax Refund 10. Investment Income 11. CalPers CERBT 12. Fare Revenue from Exempt Routes 13. Other Revenues TOTAL REVENUE For Farebox Calculation (1- 13) 238,020 170,899 241,632 TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES For Farebox Calculation 2,034,290 1,473,458 2,549,939 Farebox Recovery Ratio 11.7% 11.6% 9.47% PHONE NUMBER INDEX CUSTOMER INFORMATION (951) 769-8530 Information about Beaumont bus routes, schedules, fares, lost/found and comments. Hours: Mon-Thurs 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. ; Fri 8:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m. Additional customer service and information (951) 769-8520 Hours: Mon-Thurs 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. ; Fri 8:00 a.m. - 12:00 p.m. T Where's fire bus? 5cfn KNOWwhen to ywniald SH • • 111 S /*vR Store ■ REAL-TIME BUS TRACKING beaumont.dou blemap.co m DIAL -A -RIDE SERVICE (951) 769-8532 OTHER DIAL -A -RIDE SERVICES Banning Dial -A -Ride (951) 922-3252 Care -A -Van (Hemet, San Jacinto) (951) 791-3572 Corona Dial -A -Ride (951) 734-7220 MoVan (Moreno Valley) (951) 358-9202 Norco Senior Bus (951) 270-5647 RTA Dial -A -Ride (800) 795-7887 OTHER FIXED ROUTE SERVICES Amtrak (Nationwide Rail Passenger Service) (800) 872-7245 Banning Transit (951) 922-3243 Coaster (Rail service in San Diego County) (619) 233-3004 Corona Cruiser (Corona bus service) (951) 734-9418 Greyhound (Nationwide service) (800) 231-2222 Metrolink (Rail Passenger Service) (800) 371-5465 QCTA (Service throughout Orange County) (800) 636-7433 Qmnitrans (Service in Western San Bernardino County) (800) 966-6428 RTA (Service in Riverside County) (951) 565-5002 Sunline Transit (Palm Springs and Coachella Valley) (760) 343-3456 Super Shuttle (Service to Airports) (909) 467-9600 ROUTE Z Info: (951) 769-85 39 Beaumont.doublemap.eom Cougar Way Transfer to 3 Routes 3 4 9 i Cougar Way Aoi Oak Valle n A a' C O m V A 0®� 6th Street 4 Wal-Mart Transfer Station Transfer to Routes 120 3 4 1 5 RTA 31/35 RTA 210 SUN 220 6 Scan QR Code below for all route information San Gorgonio Hospital 11© 1111 0� Transfer to Routes Sth St 111 7 0 Q r., V A Qf a) c BO a) E E O 0 4 A Ct. t 2nd St Marketplace = 1� 1st Street San Gorgonio Legend I Map not to scale Time and/or Transfer Point Transfer Point Other Transit Provider McDonald's Transfer to Routes Riverside Count Court Transfer to Route i i eL 1115 Ramsey St 2 �t i Seminole Casino Morengo Transfer to Routes 220 Rt. 1 Amtrak N November 12, 2015 Weekdays I Eastbound to Casino Morongo Monday —Friday , O ate+-+ Q ul a1 7 Q 01 C_ in �[n O Lea 2 L Ol J m C 0 C cn L (n O � V> O p) R ) t�D (.7 O D � m 0 U D Um �.. ro En � V ® 0 0 ® ® 0 0 6:30 6:40 6:50 6:54 7:03 7:20 7:30 AM 7:30 7:45 7:50 7:54 8:03 8:20 8:30 8:30 8:45 8:50 8:54 9:03 9:20 9:30 9:30 9:45 9:50 9:54 10:03 10:20 10:30 10:30 10:45 10:50 10:54 11:03 11:20 11:30 11: 30 11:45 11: 5 0 11:54 12:03 12:20 12:30 12 : 30 12 :45 12 :50 12 : 54 1:03 1:20 1: 30 1:30 1:45 1:50 1:54 2:03 2:20 2:30 2:30 2:45 2:50 2:54 3:03 3:20 3:30 PM 3:30 3:45 3:50 3:54 4:03 4:20 4:30 4:30 4:45 4:50 4:54 5:03 5:20 5:30 5:30 5:45 5:50 5:54 6:03 6:20 6:30 6:26 6:34 6:44 6:46 6:50 —.— —. 7:26 7:34 7:44 7:46 7:50 Weekends I Eastbound to Casino Morongo, Saturday and Sunday A.M. times are in PLAIN, P.M. times are in BOLD 1 Times are approximate O U° D -, � T.,= � � p m rlo � � � C 0 CO U � �, VF O � O E AM ® 0 ® ® ® 0 0 8:00 8:15 8:20 —.— 8:33 8:50 9:00 9:00 9:15 9:20 .— 9:33 9:50 10:00 10:00 10:15 10:20 —.— 10:33 10:50 11:00 11:00 11:15 11:20 —.— 11:33 11:50 12:00 PM 12:00 12:15 12:20 —.— 12:33 12:50 1:00 1:00 1:15 1:20 —.— 1:33 1:50 2:00 2:00 2:15 2:20 —.— 2:33 2:50 3:00 3:00 3:15 3:20 —.— 3:33 3:50 4:00 4:00 4:15 4:20 4:33 4:50 5:00 5:00 5:15 5:20 5:33 5:50 6:00 ROUTE Z Info: (951) 709-85 30 Beaumont.doublemap.eom Cougar Way Transfer to Routes EIII Cougar Way ♦oiN Wal-Mart Transfer Station Transfer to Routes 120 3 San Gorgonio Hospital 0� Transfer to Routes i Sth_St cu CO rvv A N .E 6th Street 4 x it � . , v► �► .= Aa F '0 2nd St Marketplace ro RTA 31/35 RTA 210 SUN 220 Scan qR Cade below for all route information -110 .0 A 1st Street San Gorgonio Legend I Map not to scale CI ■ Time and/or Transfer Point Transfer Point Other Transit Provider Riverside County Court Transfer to Route i Ramsey St IP 4 McDonald's Transfer to Routes ■ Seminole Casino Morongo Transfer to Routes 220 Rt. 1 Amtrak November 12, 2015 Weekdays I Westbound to Cougar way Monday —Friday A.M. times are in PLAIN, P.M. times are in BOLD 1 Times are approximate c m .N 2 °n °c' oo �c S� m o U rz s N � V- --o o oU� c �, p o_ 0 O c1 N . -' a� o= c U m U m.•? u a � O i5 c �� U a) AM d 0 0 ® ® 0 0 6:30 6:41 6:58 —.— 7:11 7:16 7:30 7:30 7:41 7:58 —.— 8:11 8:16 8:30 8:30 8:41 8:58 —.— 9:11 9:16 9:30 9:30 9:41 9:58 —.— 10:11 10:16 10:30 10:30 10:41 10:58 —. 11:11 11:16 11:30 11:30 11:41 11:58 —.— 12:11 12:16 12:30 PM 12:30 12:41 12:58 —.— 1:11 1:16 _ 1:30 1:30 1:41 1:58 —.— 2:11 2:16 2:30 2:30 2:41 2:58 —.— 3:11 3:16 3:30 3:30 3:41 3:58 —.— 4:11 4:16 4:30 4:30 4:41 4:58 —.— 5:11 5:16 5:30 5:30 5:41 5:58 —. 6:11 6:16 6:26 6:30 6:41 6:58 —.— 7:11 7:16 7:26 Weekends! Westbound to Cougar Way Saturday and Sunday A.M. times are in PLAIN, P.M. times are in BOLD 1 Times are approximate o of ,� Q v G c1 =O ,c m (� L CO O U 10 (� J 1 'Q 0 U o a7 r0^ Q V _o _ CO C G' � U .; U © a. Q i'a g U co AM PM ® 0 0 CO 0 131 0 9:00 9:11 9:28 —.— 9:41 9:46 10:00 11:00 11:11 11:28 —.— 11:41 11:46 12:00 1:00 1:11 1:28 —.— 1:41 1:46 2:00 3:00 3:11 3:28 —.— 3:41 3:46 4:00 5:00 5:11 5:28 —. 5:41 5:46 6:00 Info: (95 1) 769-85 30 ROUTE 3 Beaumont.doublemap.com Vineland Ave Beaumont High School Transfer to Routes Beaumont Cougar Way Transfer to Routes Scan QR Code below for all route information Orchard Park Transfer 4 J to Routes Noble Creek Apartments Transfer to Routes Stater Bros./Food 4 Less Transfer to 1 5 2 Routes Wal-Mart Transfer Station Transfer to Routes 120 2 3 RTA 31/35 RTA 210 SUN 220 m m Legend I Map not to scale • Time and/or Transfer Point Transfer Point Other Transit Provider 2nd St a, 0 V 1st St hland Springs Ave San Gorgonio Hospital Transfer to Routes ©© N November 12, 2015 Weekdays I Southbound to Wal-Mart 3 via Cougar Way and Sundanae A.M. times are in PLAIN, P.M. times are in BOLD I Times are approximate cri V' a.,UV) m , as ; �.¢ ; �2 ar) '.., m c06 a v> > t L~ .va+_, m p V,U v �Y ro av .g—Q Xz -tz ro is � A M P M ® 0 0 0 0 6:24 6:28 6:31 6:33 6:40 7:24 7:28 7:31 7:33 7:40 8:24 8:28 8:31 8:33 8:40 9:24 9:28 9:31 9:33 9:40 10:24 10:28 10:31 10:33 10:40 11:24 11:28 11:31 11:33 11:40 12:24 12:28 12:31 12:33 , 12:40 1:24 1:28 1:31 1:33 1:40 2:24 2:28 2:31 2:33 2:40 3:24 3:28 3:31 3:33 3:40 4:24 4:28 4:31 4:33 4:40 5:24 5:28 5:31 5:33 5:40 Weekdays I Northbound to Cherry Valley 3 via Sundanee and Beaumont High School A.M. times are in PLAIN, P.M. times are in BOLD I Times are approximate '''' O 0 To E ' (..9 O �= cn rn � 2� L U v U�(a as Y L vi Q =tv V O L , m c V +o ' m A M P M ® Q ® 0 0 6:40 6:52 6:58 7:02 7:06 7:40 7:52 7:58 8:02 8:06 8:40 8:52 8:58 9:02 9:06 9:40 9:52 9:58 10:02 10:06 10:40 10:52 10:58 11:02 11:06 11:40 11:52 11:58 12:02 12:06 12:40 12:52 12:58 1:02 1:06 1:40 1:52 1:58 2:02 2:06 2:40 2:52 2:58 3:02 3:06 3:40 3:52 3:58 4:02 4:06 4:40 4:52 4:58 5:02 5:06 5:40 5:52 5:58 6:02 ROUTE 3/4 Info: (95 f) 769-8530 Beaumont.doublemap.eom Vineland Ave 7 Q� CherValley Blvd ra Orchard Park Apts. I Transfer to I 2 Route Scan QR Code below for all route Information a cv 0 1= 0 o to m Brookside Ave Cougar Way Oak Valley Pkwy Pennsylvania Ave 8th St Wal-Mart Transfer Station Tra nsfer to Routes 2 120 1 5 6 RTA 31/35 RTA SUN 210 220 Legend I Map not to scale ® Time and/or Transfer Point Transfer Point Other Transit Provider San Gorgonio Hospital Transfer to Routes N November 12, 2015 Weekends I Southbound to Wal-Mart 3 4 Saturday and Sunday only A.M. times are in ruAIN, r,M. times are in buLu i i imes are approxima L Q.i a) 2 Q f0 c � >" Q) > Q ro La L i O aiQ �UQ '=c11 ro O _C v72 in } j + V Y ro T-+ L 00 f4 �� 0 p 0- U N-C ki C6 g nj a) coy U u c 0° cc a CO 0 0 0 4i) A M 8:00 8:04 8:08 8:12 8:20 9:00 9:04 9:08 9:12 9:20 10:00 10:04 10:08 10:12 10:20 11:00 11:04 11:08 11:12 11:20 12:00 12:04 12:08 12:12 12:20 P M 1:00 1:04 1:08 1:12 1:20 2:00 2:04 2:08 2:12 2:20 3:00 3:04 3:08 3:12 3:20 4:00 4:04 4:08 4:12 4:20 e Weekends I Northbound to Cherry Valley 3 4 Saturday and Sunday only A.M. times are in PLAIN, P.M. times are in BOLD 1 Times are approximate Y o. Q >- T fa N Ol p vs ---M 'c (4�a d _ ro = C (i)a� a-,o E c o ro c o cn 1 i3 � ro rQ o s g o 0 ds o o R to c U Ua¢ `u 2 a @I °° ® 0 0 O O 0 A M 8:20 8:35 8:39 8:43 8:47 9:00 9:20 9:35 9:39 9:43 9:47 10:00 10: 20 10: 35 10:39 10:43 10:47 11: 00 11: 20 11:35 11: 39 11: 43 11:47 12:00 12:20 12:35 12:39 12:43 12:47 1:00 1:20 1:35 1:39 1:43 1:47 2:00 P M 2:20 2:35 2:39 2:43 2:47 3:00 3:20 3:35 3:39 3:43 3:47 4:00 4:20 4:35 4:39 4:43 4:47 5:00 ROUTE 314 OFFERS WEEKEND SERVICE ONLY. NO DEVIATIONS ON ROUTE 3/4 PLEASE NOTE: he syln . 99 indicates no service at tha time Info: (931) 769-85 30 ROUTE 4 Beaumon#.doublemap.eom Cherry (alley Blvd ra ra zj Brookside Ave o O 'k Oak Vallexotarkway .pdR'4s p4h Ra .a U �o 3 1-10 Scan QR Code below for all route information 10th Street 0 E m m Cougar Way/Orchard Park Transfer to Routes 2 3 7 9 Brookside Ave i i kite a3 Q a Cougar Way Beaumont Civic Center ITransfer to Route m a C C U] a CO 6th St Wal-Mart Transfer Station Transfer to Routes 120 RTA 31 RTA 35 3 RTA 210 SUN 220 Legend I Map not to scale aTime and/or Transfer Point Transfer Point O Alt. Time /Transfer Point Alternate Morning Route Other Transit Provider San Gorgonio Hospital Transfer to Routes ©© 8th 5t !! Wilson 1st St N November 12, 2015 4 Weekdays 1 Downtown Beaumont via Three Rings_ Ranch and Wal-Mart • H.NI. times are in P..Ami, P.M. times are rn buLu 1 I Imes are approximate -E n3CD Qu , d a V _ v) CI, 1_ Q�Y V f' as a'� O ? O +o U co as c lA i c Q L Ip Q A M P M ID 0 0 CI 0 0 —.— —.— —.— —. 7:25 7:35 7:35 7:50 8:01 8:15 8:25 8:35 8:35 8:50 9:01 9:15 9:25 9:35 9:35 9:50 10:01 10:15 10:25 10:35 10:35 10:50 11:01 11:15 11:25 11:35 11:35 11:50 12:01 12:15 12:25 12:35 12:35 12:50 1:01 1:15 1:25 1:35 1:35 1:50 2:01 2:15 2:25 2:35 2:35 2:50 3:01 3:25 3:35 3:45 3:45 3:50 4:01 4:15 4:25 4:35 4:35 4:50 5:01 5:15 5:25 5:35 5:35 5:50 6:01 6:15 6:25 6:35 6:35 6:50 7:01 7:15 7:25 7:35 4 Rama-te Morning Rowe A.M. times are in PLAIN, P.M. times are in BOLD 1 Times are approximate V `! Id v c c> fd cQn 2 u V i C di §� mU a] m C1 co _ �' 2 C t� ~ = C O E U � as m as , Q C" ou E R O N U co cZ C C �' > fn N co a) d 0 0 CO 400 A M 6:30 6:48 6:52 7:09 7:13 7:25 ROUTE 4 OFFERS WEEKDAY SERVICE ONLY. FOR WEEKEND SERVICE, PLEASE SEE ROUTE 3/4 COMBO MAP PLEASE NOTE: The symbol 6699 indicates no service ice at that time ROUTE Info: (95 I ) 769-05 30 Beaumont.doublemap.com Beaumont Nigh School Transfer 3 to Routes l 9 a Cherry Valley Blvd i; Monte Scan QR Code below for all route information Legend I Map not to scale Time and/or Transfer Point Transfer Point Cougar Way Transfer to Routes 2 3 9 a 0 ra d , 00 `, 4ar Wav , , E a_ a September 29, 2015 Tournament Hills and Fairway Canyon 7 also serving Stater''s and Rite -Aid shopping A.M. times are in PLAIN, P.M. times are in BOLD 1 Times are approximate AM 0 6:35 6:40 0 6:42 6:47 cz5 O QCC� E L d 6:48 6:53 0 6:53 6:58 urTiir4TrZ5M 1 ro En Q 6:58 7:03 a Q% c) To co V " U m a 7:00 7:08 Q 0 U 0 7:05 7:18 0 7:10 7:23 7:15 7:25 7:22 7:27 7:28 7:33 7:33 7:38 7:38 7:43 7:45 7:53 7:50 7:58 PM 3:20 3:25 3:45 4:00 3:30 3:35 3:55 4:10 3:35 3:40 4:00 4:15 3:40 3:45 4:05 4:20 3:45 3:50 4:10 4:25 3:05 3:10 3:20 3:30 3:50 3:15 3:20 3:40 3:55 The symbol 6‘°—9' indicates no service at to time kouVE 7 OFtERS WEEKd VINIT SCHOOL IS IN SESSION ONLY 9 Plemorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Columbus Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. REAL-TIME BUS TRACKING beaumont.doublemap.com ROUTE 9 Info: (951) 769-85 34 Beaumont.doublemap.eom ro m z Vineland Cher , Vauey Blvd Beaumont High School Transfer I 3 I 7 to Routes Scan QR Code below for all route information 0 0 E m Cougar Way/orchard Park Transfer +' t0 Routes i 3 4 7 Ca •a way 0 a E Pennsylvania Ave Sth Street I Transfer to rl Routes 12th St h .J11 c Legend I Map not to scale Time and/or Transfer Point Transfer Point Alternate Route w September 29, 2015 poi �i ✓ O ..� z �O o l so y p o� H C ap " d �V A3; ma c 3 vi toi A ii 0 Iv RI ib =C � 2 H O to • ui W IN rs pi 0 le • �i �a a) r� .X 0 o_ ❑.. ct3 n3 N loouaS 116!H Iuowneag Pn19 AalleA ithauj 0 o � i I� any luowneag @AeM ie6noj ®Lug CoN. 2 4S 1118 c�7 any elueniAsuuad Qa1.' C° A: any Aow3 @ 4s ls-IH 1� I I. f .. I filed s6upds eoauas ® � CO m n AeM alunnoig @ Aemyed elluezuew ® LA 6 o n 2 a erry alley to Seneca Sprin .--f:711117717TiL• Oi ro 'X 0 a} ro CD H any tiow3 45 4s-lId 0 I I m Ai 4 4 *led s6uuds eDauaS 0 m rn M M o 4 AeM a!UMW a © Aenoped ewezueN 0 o . N Kf IS 4 4s 4p.8 @ any elueniAsuuad ® L.r, � it, M ih rri any auowneag @ AeM ae6nop Cla o A: o Ai o rn loops Om Tuowneag Pnl9 AapeA Alla113 0 o 1: c t'n i. 2 2 a a 41 a s et Y i a � .111 to 'o C to ;;fir �i a Commuter Link 1 Zo Weekday Schedule Info: (95 I) 769-85 30 Beaumont.doublemapieom Legend I Map not to scale • Time and/or Transfer Point Transfer Point IA Non -timed Stop Loma Linda VA Hospital Transfer to/from Routes RTA 14 Omni 2 Omni 202 Omni 325 Benton St 2 .r11131- Scan QR Code beio4v for al! route information Beaumont Wal-Mart Transfer to/ from Routes ©©m um RTA 31 RTA 35 RTA 210 SUN 220 1 i a Y lG L 4.1 110 r� N W. 2nd Street I.215 rr� • San Bernardino MetroLink Station Transfer to/ from Routes Omni 1 VVTA 15 MARTA Big Bear MARTA Rim Metrolink way County Line Road 7 to to h ■ M rtiewood Drive noiia Ave Beaumont Civic Center/ Wells Fargo Transfer to/from Routes a- L 4.4 Hi • hiand S • rin • s Ave Rim) December 8, 2015 120 Westbound I San Bernardino Metrolink S3.00 General Fare each way A.M. times are in PLAIN, P.M. times are in BOLD I Times are approximate Beaumont Wal-Mart Beaumont Civic Center Calimesa Blvd. @ Stater Bros. San Bernardino Metrolink Station Loma Linda Veteran's Hospital AM PM CO 0 0 0 0 5:35 5:40 —.— 6:20 6:40 7:10 7:15 7:25 7:50 8:15 8:50 8:55 9:05 9:30 9:55 12:00 12:05 12:15 12:55 1:15 2:00 2:05 2:15 2:55 3:15 4:00 4:05 4:15 4:55 5:15 6:00 6:05 6:15 6:55 izo Eastbound I Beaumont Wal-Ma S3.00 General Fare each way A.M. times are in PLAIN, P.M. times are in BOLD 1 Times are approximate San Bernardino Metrolink Station Loma Linda Veteran's Hospital Calimesa Blvd. @ Carl's Jr. 6th St @ Wells Fargo Beaumont Wal-Mart AM PM 0 0 CO 4 CO 6:20 6:40 —.— 7:05 7:10 7:50 8:15 8:30 8:40 8:45 9:30 9:55 10:10 10:20 10:25 12:55 1:15 1:30 1:40 1:45 2:55 3:15 3:30 3:40 3:45 4:55 5:15 5:30 5:40 5:45 6:55 —. .— 7:20 7:25 PLEASE MOTE: The sy bol "••-:•-•" indicates no service at that time Commuter Link 1 20 Saturday Schedule Info: (951) 769-55 30 Beaumont.doublemap.eom Legend I Map not to scale iTime and/or Transfer Point 11 Transfer Point ■ Non -timed Stop Loma Linda VA Hospital Transfer to/from Routes RTA 14 Omni 2 Omni 202 Omni 325 Benton St 2714111- 0 t: Scan QR Code below for all route information Beaumont Wal-Mart Transfer to/ from Routes o■m■■ ■ RTA 31 RTA 35 RTA 210 SUN 220 V F. +.0 CO L R L t N a� d C N 111 San Bernardino MetroLink Station Transfer to/ from Routes Omni 1 MARTA Big Bear VVTA 15 MARTA Rim Metrolink Way County Line Road • M rtiewood Drive CO eo at Beaumont Civic Center/ Wells Fargo Transfer to/from Routes Hi•hiand Sriin•sAve N December 8, 2015 ' 2. Westbound! SATURDAY 113,00 General Fare each way A.M. times are in PLAIN, P.M. times are in BOLD 1 Times are approximate Beaumont Wal-Mart Beaumont Civic Center Calimesa Blvd. @ Stater Bros. San Bernardino Metrolink Station Loma Linda Veteran's Hospital A M PM 4 0 ® 0 0 7:05 7:10 7: 25 7:50 8:15 8:55 9:00 9:15 9:40 10:05 2:55 3:00 3:15 3:50 4:15 5:05 5:10 5:25 5:55 6:20 A.M. times are in PLAIN, P.M. times are in BOLD I Times are approximate San Bernardino Metrolink Station Loma Linda Veteran's Hospital Calimesa Blvd. @ Carl's Jr. 6th St @ Wells Fargo Beaumont Wal-Mart A M PM O 0 0 0 0 7:50 8:15 8:35 8:45 8:50 9:40 10:05 10:25 10:35 10:40 3:50 4:15 4:30 4:40 4:45 5:55 6:20 6:35 6:45 6:50 Where's the bus? , KNOINwhen to 'rl; SH REAL-TIME BUS TRACKING beaumont.doublema p.com F Info: (951) 769-85 30 ROUTE I 36 Beaumont.doublernap.com © County Line Rd Transfer with Omni Trans 308 309 w a cn 3 a rt n °' ° o� Cu er -. T x- a ��ro Ave K v m VIli Transfer Pass Transit Route 120 Scan QR Code be- ILI © Myrtlewood Dr saola" r Ave n u e L ;S auowaJJ City of Corona Short Range Transit Plan FY 201 7-201 9 /M �P T Rq 0 44- N 0 U C E CITY" Established May 4, 1886 or o naTrar . 5` 41 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 8 1.5 Revenue Fleet 8 1.6 Existing Facility/Planned Facilities 9 1.7 Existing Coordination between Transit Agencies 9 Chapter 2 — Existing Service and Route Performance 2.1 Fixed Route Service — Route by Route Analysis 9 2.2 Dial -A -Ride Service — System Performance 11 2.3 Key Performance Indicators 11 2.4 Productivity Improvement Efforts 13 2.5 Major Trip Generators and Projected Growth 14 2.6 Equipment, Passenger Amenities and Facility Needs 14 Chapter 3 — Planned Service Changes and Implementation 3.1 Recent Service Changes 14 3.2 Recommended Local & Express Route 15 3.3 Marketing Plans and Promotions 16 3.4 Budget Impact and Proposed Changes 16 Chapter 4 — Financial and Capital Plans 4.1 Operating and Capital Budget 16 4.2 Funding Plans to Support Proposed Operating and Capital Program 17 4.3 Regulatory and Compliance Requirements 18 Table 1 — Fleet Inventory 20 Table 2 — Service Summary 22 Table 3 — Route Statistics 25 Table 3A — Individual Route Descriptions and Area Served 27 Table 4 — Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2016/17 28 Table 5.1 — Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2017/18 31 Table 5.2 — Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2018/19 33 Table 6 — Progress Implementing Triennial Performance Audit Recommendations 35 Table 7 — Service Provider Performance Targets FY 2015/16 36 Table 8 — Performance Report FY 2016/17 37 Table 9 — City of Corona Transit Service Highlights FY 2016/17 38 Table 9A — Operating and Financial Data 38 Table 9B — Fare Revenue Calculation 39 Chapter 1 — System Overview 1.0 Introduction The Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) sets the objectives and strategies for fiscal year (FY) 2016/17 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 2016/17 — 2018/19). 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). The complementary paratransit Dial -A - Ride service area extends beyond city limits to ensure compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) % mile corridor from a Corona Cruiser fixed route. Door-to-door service is available upon request for Dial -A -Ride riders certified under the ADA. 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 .S.9 91.0Z I!adb� 31VOS 0110N cIVIN 3140373M 3?:111 S3)119 42f 300V-15001V .01-153111 r V1033W3101 SONISSOa03H1 3Olii0 ulrus loaaa 3NONO 11 olror3I emO sum —a. O Q 10.1303NON ) 0 i A31 AN30. 301%13Ala O1 7 MiNd ooruars a a la NOSlN3131 a Oa tlOS 010 0 13 71NlOOd ® 2131N3311SNV21 VNOaO NOLLVIS NNIlOa13W VN02100 NIVW NINON 03210N Ol n 331 a 5x 'IQ�yI aaa 3 do a SNO51a351V 0S.Aari. 1S N0E1113 a31N30 11SNV211 VN02100 l ANVNall 3S 210 1Ni3s ANU1d 11114100A 1S 3A110 3tI a31N30 NOI1V1111atlH3a 1VN010321 100H3S VN02100 H 1tl11dSOF1 100HOS 1-101H 31tl103112131Nl d 301a S NaVd Nabd Les 3N113f118 213S10210 VN02100WEI 32111 0321213S111210 VN02100 SCIOV1 SOO 01301A213S Avaan1VS NNIlOa13W 301dd0130d 11VH A110 :SNOIlVN11S3a Wort clOd CIN3931 3AV 0I21b1N0 0 soae a31tl1S NOWOd NOLLtl1S 7,72 MI tlNOtlOO 1S3M 1S OV02111V11 32111 0321 213S111210 VN02100El 213SIf121a `dN02103 N A1N000 30NVa0 01 dim vf3ti ' 301Ah/3S 1l3S117110 b'NOWO 668166 1O Ain Tn N .S.0 91.0Z IPdV 3019tl3NN Ol 1a61e1 . sauei oisseia Noimsunl8 . (nWa) saloN0A blow to luawvedaa . (aQa) 0601100 ooloN . saopuaS IePoS g 3iIgnd to luau131edaa . oo1oN ua salHales solund/slued °Moles ooloN S1NIOd 31n131VS 133L13 1.119 00210X MO 3031100 OOtlON H31N30 ASNVIL VNOH00 l Auvuen 3S HOIN3S 321 M31N30 V NOUVL1MVH3H 1VN0103H 100HOS 100HOS VNOMOO HON 31V103W2131N1 H 1V1WSOH pi d VON V NLVd 5211 t-t NHVd 111J MNI102113W 301ddO 1SOd 11VH ALO :SNOIlb'N11S30 21b�fldOd V321V 331A213S 30121-V-1V10 VN02103 301S1n0 210OI212103 311W 4IE 3N11 3nle 213SIn213 VN02103kin 3N11 0311 213ma° VN02103 3N110321213SIIM3 VN02103 SOCV1 SOO 01331A213S AV021nivs 331A213S d0 SV321V A1N1103 A21VON1109 VN02103 dO A113 . SNO11V301 3111131VS 03110N k 3931103 03210N Ol 30121-V-1V10 ON13031 34121 b/ IVIU VN02103 drmi d3�zrdy_30111 M3S 3Cl/_1 / Y,CI b' aw° 6636110H1 O 1/\ J T.� 1.2 Population Profile and Demographic Projections The CCTS serves a diverse population of 157,395 city residents. The city encompasses 39 square miles. That diversity is reflected in the table below. City Population and Diversity Demographic Population Est. Percent Race Hispanic Total population 157,395 100.0% One race 150,839 95.8% Two or more races 6,556 4.2% One race 150,839 95.8% White 112,094 71.2% Black or African American 7,902 5.0% American Indian and Alaska Native 883 0.6% Asian 17,296 11.0% Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 1,346 0.9% Some other race 11,318 7.2% Two or more races 6,556 4.2% White and Black or African American 724 0.5% White and American Indian and Alaska Native 512 0.3% White and Asian 1,820 1.2% Black or African American and American Indian and Alaska Native 72 0.0% or Latino and Race Total population 157,935 100.0% Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 66,407 42.0% Mexican 58,223 36.9% Puerto Rican 778 0.5% Cuban 985 0.6% Other Hispanic or Latino 6,421 4.1% Not Hispanic or Latino 90,988 57.6% White alone 60,392 38.2% Black or African American along 7,620 4.8% American Indian and Alaska Native alone 329 0.2% Asian alone 17,051 10.8% Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone 1,309 0.8% Some other race alone 301 0.2% Two or more races 3,986 2.5% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010-2014 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimate 4 The table below lists passenger characteristics for Dial -A -Ride and Cruiser service. Passenger characteristic estimates are based on derived data compiled over the first nine months of FY 2015/16. Passenger Characteristics Dial -A -Ride Corona Cruiser Seniors / Persons with Disabilities 84.7% General Public 35.5% General Public 10.8% Seniors / Persons with Disabilities 29.1% Metrolink Transfers 2.7% Students 27.1% Personal Care Attendants 1.4% RTA Transfers 5.1% Children 0.5% Children 2.6% Metrolink Transfers 0.6% 1.3 Fixed Route Transit Services and Paratransit Service FY 2013/14 was a record setting year with the highest number of passenger trips recorded in both fixed route and Dial -A -Ride service. System -wide passenger trips in FY 2013/14 totaled 238,597. Total passengers trips dipped slightly in FY 2014/15 to 234,318 or a 1.8 percent decrease over the previous year's record setting performance. Using passenger trips from the first nine months of FY 2015/16 as a basis for estimating annual totals, passenger trips will decrease by as much as 5.9 percent to 220,474 total passenger trips. While it is difficult to pinpoint with certainty the cause of declining passenger trips, increased congestion due to construction projects throughout most of the CCTS' service area is a factor in challenging buses to remain on schedule. When buses are less reliable, passengers will find a better alternative. Adding to the challenges to reliability was Corona's aging bus fleet. CCTS experienced in-service breakdowns and longer duration repairs as buses aged. Similar to the impact of increasing congestion, buses breaking down in service make using CCTS bus service less reliable, and, again, passengers will find reliable alternatives to using the service. CCTS staff is cautiously optimistic that the decrease in passenger trips will bottom -out by June 2016 and begin to slowly improve throughout FY 2016/17. A system wide 2.1 percent increase in passenger trips — to 225,045, or 4,571 more passenger trips in FY 2016/17 than FY 2015/16 - is based on these factors: • In February 2016, new buses were put into Corona Cruiser service. CCTS now has a properly sized, dedicated fleet of seven new buses. Four of seven buses are in service Monday -Saturday which leaves three spare buses to accommodate routine inspections and preventative maintenance. • A new fixed route schedule by August 2016. CCTS staff is surveying each Blue Line and Red Line trip to derive an average time each trip actually requires. In addition to reflecting actual trip times, the new schedule will adjust the amount of recovery time built into the schedule. Recovery time is the time between the end of a trip and the start of the next trip and works to compensate for unanticipated delays. Adequate recovery time also helps to ensure drivers have time for restroom breaks when the need arise. 5 " The Corona Public Library and Corona Senior Center are two major trip generators along the Blue Line and Red Line, with fixed route buses serving both sites 53 times each weekday and 30 times on Saturday. Buses used Belle Avenue to travel between these venues. A portion of Belle Avenue has been closed to accommodate the expansion of the Corona Regional Medical Center (CRMC). The CRMC has agreed to increase the turning radius at four intersections that will allow buses to drive around the closure and resume service to the Library and Senior Center. Buses were routed to Main Street and Sixth Street in November 2015 at the start of construction. The necessary improvements and new loop around the CRMC is scheduled to be available in July 2016. The nine - month re-route of buses has been particularly difficult on seniors traveling to the Senior Center. The walk between Main Street bus stops and Senior Center can be a challenge for many seniors, with some finding alternatives to riding the bus. CCTS staff is hopeful that seniors will resume using the bus for trips to the Senior Center as well as students using the bus for trips to the Library. " The benefits from the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project will be coming on line soon and should have the designed impact of improving traffic flow and reducing congestion. Approximately one-third of infrastructure improvements will be opened by summer 2016, another one-third should be opened by fall 2016 and the final third of improvements should open throughout calendar 2017. The reduction in construction - related lane reductions, street closures, and freeway on -ramp and off -ramp closures and opening/re-opening of these facilities should improve traffic flow and reduce travel times. 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 and The Shops at Dos Lagos on Saturdays. The Cruiser schedule is: Blue Line Red Line Monday Friday 6:42 a.m. 7:09 p.m. 6:50 a.m. 7:05 p.m. Saturday 8:52 a.m. 3:50 p.m. 9:00 a.m. 5:09 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. Passenger trips on the Cruiser totaled 168,303 in FY 2014/15. Using the number of passenger trips recorded during the first nine months of FY 2015/16 as a basis for estimating year-end totals, passenger trips are projected to decline by 6.0 percent or 10,054 trips compared to the previous year. Based on improving conditions as outline in the previous section, CCTS staff is cautiously projecting a 2.1 percent increase in year -over -year passenger trips for FY 2016/17. The Cruiser serves 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 trains serving Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino counties. Trains are accessible via a pedestrian bridge to the 6 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/North Main Metrolink Station. The CCTS and RTA have a reciprocal agreement that allows valid pass -holders a no cost, one way transfer between the Cruiser and RTA buses at bus stops served by both Cruiser and RTA buses. Transfers between bus systems are an effective way to promote public transit as a low cost, eco-friendly and stress -free alternative to automobile trips. 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. Passengers certified under the ADA receive priority service. Voicemail message reservations are accepted for ADA clients on Sundays and Holidays for next day service. The Dial -A -Ride schedule is: Non-ADA Complementary ADA Complementary Paratransit Paratransit Monday — Friday 6:42 a.m. — 6:00 p.m. 6:42 a.m. — 7:09 p.m. Saturday 8:52 a.m. — 5:09 p.m. 8:52 a.m. — 5:09 p.m. Sunday no service 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. Passenger trips taken on Dial -A -Ride in FY 2014/15 totaled 66,015. Using data collected from the first nine months of FY 2015/16 as a basis for estimating year-end totals, passenger trips may decrease by 5.7 percent or 3,790 trips as compared to FY 2014/15. Based on improving conditions as outline in section 1.3 above, CCTS staff is cautiously projecting a 1.9 percent (or 1,205 more trips) increase in year -over -year passenger trips for a total of 63,430 passenger trips for FY 2016/17. 1.4 Current Fare Structure and Proposed Fare Structure The current fare structure appears below. Fare Structure Fare Type Fare Price Corona Cruiser Cash - General Public $1.50 Cash - Seniors / Persons with Disabilities / Medicare Card Holders $0.70 Cash - Children (46" tall or under) $0.25 Day Pass - General Public $4.00 Day Pass - Seniors / Persons with Disabilities / Medicare Card Holders $2.00 15-day Pass - General Public $17.50 15-day Pass - Seniors / Persons with Disabilities / Medicare Card Holders $8.05 15-day Pass - Students $12.25 31-day Pass - General Public $35.00 31-day Pass - Seniors / Persons with Disabilities / Medicare Card Holders $16.10 31-day Pass - Students $24.50 Dial -A -Ride General Public $4.00 Seniors / Persons with Disabilities / Medicare Card Holders $2.50 Children $0.50 Note: 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 by 30 percent for Cruiser riders but enables the CCTS to recover an adequate fare. 1.5 Revenue Fleet The CCTS active fleet consists of 20 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 13 buses made up of: • Ten 2012 ElDorado National Aerotech 240s; • One 2007 ElDorado National Aerotech 220; and 8 " Two 2008 Starcraft Allstar buses. The Fixed Route fleet consists of seven buses made up of: " Seven 2015 ElDorado National EZ Rider II heavy-duty/low-floor buses are used in dedicated Cruiser service. EZ Rider II buses are powered with CNG and were placed into Cruiser service in February 2016. 1.6 Existing Facility/Planned Facilities The CCTS operates from a newer facility at 735 Public Safety 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 the vendor at an off -site garage. 1.7 Existing Coordination between Transit Agencies CCTS staff and Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) planning and operations staff work together to coordinate bus stop location/re-location, bus routing, layover areas/facilities, and transfer points where Cruiser and RTA passengers possessing valid day- and multi -day passes can ride with a free, one-way transfer between systems. 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. Using data gathered during July 2015-March 2016 as a basis for estimating passenger trips for FY 2015/16, it is estimated that the number of passenger trips will decline by 6.0 percent or 10,054 trips compared to the previous fiscal year. Based on improving conditions as outlined in section 1.3 above, CCTS staff is cautiously projecting a 2.1 percent (or 3,366 more trips) increase in year - over -year passenger trips for a total of 161,614 passenger trips for FY 2016/17. 9 Passenger Trips 180,000 160,000 140,000 12 0, 000 100,000 80,000 60,000 40,000 20,000 Carona Cruiser Passenger Trips I ti°�°'ti°ti°ti ti� FA F- F- �-1 Cruiser FY 2015/16 year-end estimate is based on data collected from July 2015-March 2016. " FY 2016/17 projections are based on a 2.1 percent increase over estimated FY 2015/16 year-end totals. Passenger trips on the Blue Line are expected to decrease by 5.5 percent or 4,759 trips in FY 2015/16 when compared to the previous year. Passenger trips on the Red Line are estimated to decline 6.5 percent or 5,295 when compared to the same period. Passenger Trips Carona Cruiser Passenger Trips by Route 100,000 90,000 80,000 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 (-k �� 1 F, �� -k'b '12 - Blue Line - Red Line FY 2015/16 year-end estimate is based on data collected from July 2015-March 2016. ** FY 2016/17 projections are based on a 2.1 percent increase over estimated FY 2015/16 year-end totals. 10 2.2 Dial -A -Ride Service — System Performance Dial -A -Ride provided 66,015 passenger trips in FY 2014/15. Based on demand during the period of July 2015 to March 2016, passenger trips may decline by 5.7 percent in FY 2015/16. This decline in demand equates to 3,790 fewer trips for the year. CCTS staff is optimistic that the decrease in passenger trips will bottom -out by June 2016 and begin to slowly improve throughout FY 2016/17. As such, passenger trips are projected to grow by 1.9 percent to 63,430 or a year - over -year gain of 1,205 trips in FY 2016/17. Passenger Trips 80,000 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 Dial -A -Ride Passenger Trips I ti 3 � \ti�� oV��t•\ <'\y� ,�� o�o�oyoy'yotibo�e <�1' <°' F,l' ((Al' <Z,Fy53 �DAR FY 2015/16 year-end estimate is based on data collected from July 2015-March 2016. " FY 2016/17 projections are based on a 1.9 percent increase over estimated FY 2015/16 year-end totals. Senior citizens and people with disabilities represent 84.7 percent of total Dial -A -Ride passengers. General public and Metrolink riders make up 13.5 percent of riders. Due to higher fares ($4.00 instead of $2.50 for Senior/Disabled riders) general public and Metrolink riders contribute 20.3 percent of passenger 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, RCTC reviews and approves the Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) and allocates local, state and federal funding. RCTC developed and monitors eight performance indicators that measure productivity — these indicators and year-to-date performance are listed in the table below. By statute, transit operators serving urban areas must recover a minimum of 20.0% of operating cost through fare revenue. Fare revenue includes passenger fares, interest on investments, advertising revenue, local contributions and the proceeds from the sale of surplus vehicles. A farebox recovery ratio below 20.0% endangers the receipt of state funding. The farebox recovery ratio is a mandatory performance indicator. 11 Performance Indicators Combining Corona Cruiser fixed route and Dial -A -Ride Performance Performance Indicators FY 2015/16 Target FY 2015/16 3rd Qtr. Performance Year -to -Date Performance Scorecard Mandatory: 1. Farebox recovery ratio >_ 20.0% 16.9% Fails to Meet Target Discretionary 1. Operating cost per revenue hour <_ $69.98 $68.04 Meets Target 2. Subsidy per passenger >_ $6.32 and <_ $8.54 $8.25 Meets Target 3. Subsidy per passenger mile >_ $1.49 and <_ $2.01 $1.94 Meets Target 4. Subsidy per revenue hour >_ $46.84 and <_ $63.37 $56.56 Meets Target 5. Subsidy per revenue mile >_ $3.72 and <_ $5.04 $4.58 Meets Target 6. Passenger per revenue hour >_ 6.29 and <_ 8.51 6.90 Meets Target 7. Passengers per revenue mile >_ 0.50 and <_ 0.68 0.56 Meets Target Note: Data from RCTC TransTrack Table 7 for the period July 2015-March 2016. Through the third quarter of this fiscal year (July 2015-March 2016), CCTS lags behind the mandatory farebox recovery ratio but has met all seven discretionary performance indicators. CCTS has recorded a farebox recovery of 16.9 percent. A farebox recovery ratio in this range is anticipated at this point in the fiscal year. At the close of each fiscal year, the City contributes a sufficient amount of funding to bridge the gap between fare revenue received throughout the year and the amount required to meet the 20 percent farebox recover ratio. The contribution of funds is made only after all revenues and expenses are finalized following the close of the fiscal year. The size of the contribution varies each year depending on the final amount of revenues and expenses; however, the City's year-end contribution has always ensured CCTS meets the mandatory 20 percent farebox recovery ratio. Table 7, Service Provider Performance Targets Report, appearing later in this plan, shows greater detail on FY 2015/16 performance targets and actual performance by indicator. Table 8, SRTP Performance Report, also appearing later in this plan, lists performance targets set by RCTC for FY 2016/17. Table 8 indicates CCTS meets the mandatory farebox recovery ratio and six of seven discretionary targets. The target set by RCTC for operating costs per revenue hour is $68.71 (slightly less than the target set for FY 2015/16 at $69.98 per hour). The target for operating costs per revenue hour for FY 2016/17 is calculated using operating costs accumulated during the first nine months of the current fiscal year (July 2015-March 2016 in this case) and adjusted by the Consumer Price Index (CPI). Currently, CIP is 0.99 percent. Operating costs recorded in the City's general ledger are approximately $35,000 less this fiscal year (July 2015-March 2016) than during the same period last year (July 2014-March 2015) - this difference is largely due to the timing of paying invoices. 12 Cost increases for employee benefits such as retirement and medical cost, for example, increase faster than the bench mark Consumer Price Index (CPI) of 0.99%. Also contributing to the increase in cost per hour is increase cost to maintain low -floor buses. As noted earlier in Section 1.5, the CCTS put into service seven low -floor buses in February 2016. These are heavy duty, 12-year assets. To properly maintain these buses and ensure a full 12-year service life, additional maintenance costs are incurred. To ensure City -owned transit buses are well maintained the CCTS intends on procuring maintenance oversight inspection services from a private sector vendor. Monitoring and verifying that buses are properly, and timely, maintained maximizes vehicle service life, minimizes costly and prolonged major repairs, and ensures buses operate in a safe manner. However, this effort does increase operating costs. The CCTS continues to contract with a private sector vendor to operate transit service to ensure a lower cost alternative than a city -operated service. 2.4 Productivity Improvement Efforts Productivity as measured by the number of passengers per revenue hour and revenue mile showed year -over -year improvement between FY 2011/12 to FY 2013/14 on the Corona Cruiser. Productivity slightly declined in FY 2014/15 and dropped again in the current year. Productivity for Dial -A -Ride remained relatively static between FY 2011/12 and FY 2013/14 but show similar declines in productivity for FY 2014/15 and FY 2015/16. Along with all other vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians, Corona Cruiser and Dial -A -Ride buses are impacted by increased traffic congestion resulting from construction work on, and adjacent to, the SR-91 Corridor Improvement Project and other construction projects on -going throughout Corona. Freeway lane reductions and ramp closures, local street and lane closures, detours, and the movement of heavy equipment all increase congestion and impact traffic flow which slows buses. Slower speeds result in longer duration trips which impact productivity. Adding to the challenges to reliability was Corona's aging bus fleet. CCTS experienced in-service breakdowns and longer duration repairs as buses aged. Similar to the impact of increasing congestion, buses breaking down in service make using CCTS bus service less reliable - motivating passengers to find more reliable alternatives to using the service. As related previously in this plan, CCTS staff is optimistic that the decline in productivity, as well as the decrease in passenger trips, will bottom -out by June 2016 and begin to slowly improve throughout FY 2016/17 as construction projects move to completion while, simultaneously, commuters and community, begin to reap the benefits from these traffic flow improvements. See productivity measures in the table below. Mode Productivity Measure FY FY FY FY FY 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 15/16* Passengers per revenue hour 10.80 11.60 11.70 11.50 10.60 Corona Cruiser Passengers per revenue mile 0.92 0.98 0.99 0.97 0.90 Passengers per revenue hour 4.20 4.00 4.20 3.90 3.60 Dial -A -Ride Passengers per revenue mile 0.30 0.29 0.31 0.29 0.28 *FY 2015/16 performance is measured covering the period July 2015 through March 2016. 13 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 Crossings shopping area on Cajalco Road and Temescal Canyon, medical facilities along Magnolia Avenue, regional transit facilities off Main Street, the Corona Public Library, Senior Center and civic center. El Cerrito Middle School and Centennial High are also major trip generators. Cruiser patrons use the service for work, shopping trips, making stops at pharmacies and grocery stores, and accessing restaurants and movie theaters. Over the past three years, students have made up an increasing share of Corona Cruiser passengers. Many Dial -A -Ride passengers use the service to get to work and care centers, doctor visits and Corona's two Metrolink Stations. 2.6 Equipment, Passenger Amenities, and Facility Needs The CCTS upgraded 16 bus stop locations in FY 2015/16. Improvements consisted of the following: • Installed three passengers shelters; • Refurbished and relocated a passenger shelter; • Installed thirteen bus benches; and • Installed 1,132 square feet of concrete bus stop pads. A new bus stop was added on the Corona Cruiser Red Line to serve the Citrus Village shopping center on East Ontario Avenue and Rimpau Avenue. The CCTS plans to continue upgrading bus stop accessibility and passenger amenities in FY 2016/17; planned improvements are as follows: • Replace existing passenger shelters that display advertising with new shelters. The design of new shelters will be based on the existing design but re -worked to include two panels for advertising; and, • Replace older blue fiberglass bus benches with metal benches. CCTS staff anticipates completing this work in July 2018. Chapter 3 — Planned Service Changes and Implementation 3.1 Recent Service Changes Minor service changes were implemented in FY 2015/16 as outlined below: • Blue Line o September 2015 - Both westbound and eastbound Blue Line trips served the Corona Community Villas at a bus stop located on an access road between the Corona Community Villas and Vista Cove Care Center. Blue Line buses would enter the access road from Main Street, make a loop between these facilities and re-enter Main Street to resume the route. Since the bus stop was not visible from Main Street, bus drivers were required to make the loop each trip taking 1-2 minutes per trip (translating to 24-48 minutes per weekday). The stop was moved to a location on Main Street. A rehabilitated passenger shelter and bench was installed at the relocated stop. o February 2016 - Both westbound and eastbound Blue Line trips served a bus stop at the Vintage Terrace Senior Apartments on Fullerton Avenue. In April 14 2015, CCTS staff brought an ElDorado EZ Rider bus, the same bus we now use in Corona Cruiser service, to Vintage Terrace to determine if the bus could safely serve the bus stop. As demonstrated on that day and subsequent days, the bus cannot safely make the U-turn without backing up. With the amount of pedestrian, golf cart, and vehicular traffic in and around the front entrance, manager's office, and clubhouse, backing up to make a three-point turn is not safe - especially given the fact that buses stopped there 24 times each weekday. Vintage Terrace management agreed that backing up to make a three-point turn was not safe and agreed to advocate for enlarging the turnaround area with the property owner. In June 2015, Vintage Terrace management informed CCTS that while valuing the service provided by the Corona Cruiser, the property owner would not be enlarging the turnaround area. CCTS staff approached Vintage Terrace management again in November 2015 requesting re- consideration of enlarging the turnaround area. In December, the property owner re -confirmed their decision to forego making such improvements. As a consequence, Corona Cruiser service to Vintage Terrace Senior Apartments and Centennial High/Football Field bus stop was discontinued on February 8, 2016, when new buses went into service. Blue Line buses now forego the turn onto southbound Fullerton Avenue and remain on Magnolia Avenue, servicing bus stops on three corners of this intersection. • Red Line o February 2016 — Both westbound and eastbound Red Line trips served a bus stop near the front entrance to the Walmart on Ontario Avenue and California Avenue. A continuing safety concern was buses making on unprotected left turn out of the parking lot and onto California Avenue. Heavy northbound and southbound traffic along California Avenue and vehicles entering and exiting the parking lot opposite from Walmart made for a continuing safety concern. In April 2015, CCTS staff brought a bus to the proposed bus stop location near the garden center entrance and met with the store manager to explain the challenge with the existing stop location and reasoning behind proposing a new stop. After consideration, Walmart expressed concern with mixing buses and delivery trucks at the garden center area and declined the request for a bus stop at this location. With the introduction of new buses in February 2016, the bus stop was relocated from the entrance of Walmart to a location adjacent to the Radio Shack on California Avenue. The bus stop is accessible from a raised sidewalk that traverses the parking lot. A new bus stop was installed to serve the Citrus Village shopping area along the Red Line's adjusted route as it makes a loop using California Avenue -Taber Street-Rimpau Avenue -Ontario Avenue. 3.2 Recommended Local & Express Route Modifications CCTS staff is proposing the following service enhancements in FY 2016/17: • New weekday and Saturday schedule — To be an effective and useful transportation option, buses need to consistently operate according to the published schedule. Bus passengers need to be able to rely on the bus to pick them up on schedule and deliver them to their destination on schedule. An unreliable transit system will lose riders. Passenger trips peaked for the Corona Cruiser and Dial -A -Ride in FY 2013/14 and have declined since. Increased traffic congestion from a growing local and regional population, delays related to a myriad of construction projects, operational challenges, and a slow response by CCTS to adjust published schedules to address these challenges has contributed to declining passenger trips. 15 CCTS staff is measuring individual trip times in an effort to devise a schedule that reflects actual trip times and is assembling a new schedule. CCTS staff anticipates having the new schedule in place in July 2016. A new, reliable schedule, combined with new buses, the completion of constructions projects, and upgrades in passenger amenities should go a long way in gaining back passengers that may have left the system for more reliable transportation alternatives. 3.3 Marketing Plans and Promotion Marketing strategies include: • Bus Shelter Program — the CCTS is planning on replacing existing advertising shelters at 20-25 bus stops. Shelters provide bus patrons with relief from the sun during hot days and protection from rain during inclement weather. These shelters will feature two -panels for advertising, bench, an area for a person with a mobility device/wheelchair, and solar - powered security lighting. These new shelters will act as a destination for bus passengers and as an ambassador as to how public transit can beautify a neighborhood and itself function as marketing tool inviting motorist to try public transit. • Poetry and Art on the Bus Program — in cooperation with Centennial High and Corona High, CCTS conducted its eighth successful poetry and art 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 artwork to ponder during their time on the bus. 3.4 Budget Impact and Proposed Changes While progress has been made, recovery from the "Great Recession" has been slow. The CCTS relies on a contribution from the City's general fund to meet the mandatory farebox recovery ratio (mandate to recover 20 percent of operating costs through fare revenue). However, the City's general fund continues to reflect a sluggish regional economy. As such, the CCTS is stretching funding to increase some Corona Cruiser trip times and longer duration Dial -A -Ride trips to better reflect actual trip times. 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 $2.47 million for FY 2016/17, representing 5.3 percent increase ($124,615) over the current year budget. Year -over -year increases in operating costs are largely driven by increases in administrative and contracted service costs. These increases are partially offset by decreases in materials and fuel costs. Increases in retirement and health insurance costs are large contributors to the increase in administrative salary and benefit costs (7.3%). Increases in contracted services (8.7%) is largely driven by: • Year -over -year increases in the cost per hour of bus service; and the • Increased cost of operating more service in FY 2016/17. These increases are partially offset by decreases in the cost of marketing materials, printing costs, and small equipment/maintenance costs (-11.4%) and a budgeted decrease in fuel costs (- 16 12.4%), with the decrease in fuel costs largely due to overestimating the cost of fuel budgeted in FY 2015/16. Please see Budget by Category and Mode as shown below: Budget by Category and Mode Category Mode FY 2015/16 SRTP FY 2016/17 Plan Variance $ % Salaries & Benefits Dial -A -Ride Fixed Route Subtotal 173,722 185,781 12,059 6.9% 212,195 228,245 16,050 7.6% 385,917 414,026 28,109 7.3% Materials, Marketing and Utilities Dial -A -Ride 30,936 28,215 (2,721) -8.8% Fixed Route 32,699 28,175 (4,524) -13.8% Fuel Subtotal 63,635 56,390 (7,245) -11.4% Dial -A -Ride 145,800 119,000 (26,800) -18.4% Fixed Route 143,100 134,000 (9,100) -6.4% Subtotal 288,900 253,000 (35,900) -12.4% Contracted Services Dial -A -Ride 901,460 983,701 82,241 9.1% Fixed Route 709,190 766,600 57,410 8.1% Total Subtotal 1,610,650 1,750,301 139,651 8.7% Dial -A -Ride 1,251,918 1,316,697 64,779 5.2% Fixed Route 1,097,184 1,157,020 59,836 5.5% Subtotal $2,349,102 $2,473,717 $124,615 5.3% 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 will use State Transit Assistance, Proposition 1 B/Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement & Service Enhancement Program and Proposition 1 B/California Transit Security Grant Program funding to cover proposed capital purchases in FY 2016/17. 17 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 card holders 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 % of a mile corridor from each side of a fixed route. The CCTS operates a general population Dial -A -Ride that extends beyond the % mile corridor to the city limits, into the 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). 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 may be 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). A companion is charged $2.50 per trip as well. Title VI In compliance with 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. The following notification to passengers of their right to file a complaint is included on the City of Corona website, service brochures, and posted on -board CCTS buses. No person shall, on the grounds of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination under any program or 18 activity of the City of Corona Transit Service (CCTS). The Public Works Director is the CCTS Title VI Compliance Officer. For more information, or to file a Title VI Civil Rights compliant contact the Corona Public Works Department by telephone at (951) 736-2266, by email at publwks@ci.corona.ca.us, or by visiting the Public Works Department at 400 S. Vicentia Avenue, Suite 210, Corona, CA 92882. The CCTS Title VI program is in the process of being revised and updated and will need City Council approval prior to submission to the Federal Transit Administration. Title VI programs are in effect for a three-year period. The CCTS has not received any Title VI complaints. Transportation Development Act Triennial Audit The CCTS underwent a Transportation Development Act (TDA) Triennial Performance Audit document review in September 2015 and site visit in October 2015 covering fiscal years 2012/13 through 2014/15. The triennial performance audits are administered and coordinated by RCTC; a draft or final audit is not yet available for review. Federal Transit Administration Triennial Review A Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Triennial Review field review for the period of 2011-2013 was completed in July 2014. The FTA recommended corrective action in the following areas: • Maintenance Plan — create a maintenance plan that establishes goals and objectives and describes a system of periodic inspections for FTA funded vehicles and facilities; • Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) — monitor limits or capacity constraints when providing ADA complementary paratransit service; document oversight of Riverside Transit Agency's (RTA) certification and eligibility activities for Corona residents, and ensure that any No -Show policy only suspends riders who have established a true pattern or practice of missing scheduled trips and only imposes suspensions for a reasonable period of time; and • Procurement — augmenting policies and procedures to ensure Buy America and Brooks Acts requirements are included in purchasing procedures. 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. The submission date for Report Year 2015 was October 30, 2015. CCTS staff provided responses and clarification to NTD reviewers following the initial review. The annual NTD report for 2015 was closed out in February 2016. 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. While gasoline is a recognized alternative fuel for demand response/Dial-A-Ride buses, the CCTS integrated CNG-powered Dial -A -Ride buses with funding through the federal government's American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) program. The CCTS currently runs a mixed fleet of nine gasoline -powered buses and four CNG-powered buses. In February 2016, CCTS Corona Cruiser (fixed route) service is operating using seven new CNG-powered low floor, heavy duty buses. 19 42:2° llllllr EM= [vuit71-Enpzinirn6nvmsirn Bus (Motorbus) / Purchased Transportation Table 1 - Fleet Inventory FY 2016/17 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 2015/16 FY 2015/16 Life to Date Vehicle Miles Prior Year End FY 2014/15 Life to Date Vehicle Miles through March FY 2015/16 Average Lifetime Miles Per Active Vehicle As Of Year -To -Date (e.g., March) FY 2015/16 2015 EDN EZ RiderII 30 7 32 CN 7 0 14,980 2,140 Totals: 30 7 7 0 14,980 2,140 TransTrack Manager'"' 5/5/2016 Page 1 of I 42:2° [vuit71-Enpzinirn6nvmsirn Demand Response / Purchased Transportation Table 1 - Fleet Inventory FY 2016/17 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 2015/16 # of Contingency Vehicles FY 2015/16 Life to Date Vehicle Miles Prior Year End FY 2014/15 Life to Date Vehicle Miles through March FY 2015/16 Average Lifetime Miles Per Active Vehicle As Of Year -To -Date (e.g., March) FY 2015/16 2007 2012 2012 2007 EDN EDN EDN STR AeroTech AEROTECH AEROTECH Sta rl ite 16 20 20 18 1 6 4 2 24 26 26 25 GA GA CN GA 1 6 4 2 0 0 0 0 237,855 659,463 387,105 243,009 237,855 109,910 96,776 121,504 Totals: 74 13 13 0 1,527,432 117,495 TransTrack Manager'"' 5/5/2016 Page 1 of I 43.0 �EM= iiNr.1(curry 1- sprinirn6nvmsirn Table 2 -- City of Corona -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2016/17 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2013/14 Audited FY 2014/15 Audited FY 2015/16 Plan FY 2015/16 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2016/17 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 15 14 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $2,042,898 $2,170,801 $2,349,102 $1,618,821 $2,473,717 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $409,812 $436,366 $469,821 $273,046 $494,744 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $1,633,086 $1,734,435 $1,879,281 $1,345,774 $1,978,973 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 238,597 234,318 238,365 163,160 225,044 Passenger Miles 1,016,818 996,852 1,013,976 694,177 957,430 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 30,810.7 31,666.8 33,000.0 23,792.7 34,270.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 395,068.0 399,117.0 413,922.0 293,864.0 422,596.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 441,761.0 450,861.0 466,675.0 330,509.0 474,963.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $66.30 $68.55 $71.18 $68.04 $72.18 Farebox Recovery Ratio 20.06% 20.10% 20.00% 16.87% 20.00% Subsidy per Passenger $6.84 $7.40 $7.88 $8.25 $8.79 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $1.61 $1.74 $1.85 $1.94 $2.07 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $53.00 $54.77 $56.95 $56.56 $57.75 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $4.13 $4.35 $4.54 $4.58 $4.68 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 7.7 7.4 7.2 6.9 6.6 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.60 0.59 0.58 0.56 0.53 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager'"' 5/1/2016 Page 1 of I 43.0 �EM= iiNr.1(curry 1- sprinirn6nvmsirn Table 2 -- Corona -BUS -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2016/17 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2013/14 Audited FY 2014/15 Audited FY 2015/16 Plan FY 2015/16 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2016/17 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 6 5 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $892,738 $991,395 $1,097,184 $750,265 $1,157,020 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $179,780 $199,488 $219,437 $135,453 $231,404 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $712,958 $791,906 $877,747 $614,813 $925,616 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 169,745 168,303 171,296 117,146 161,614 Passenger Miles 670,493 664,797 676,619 462,727 638,378 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 14,516.3 14,671.4 16,000.0 11,024.8 16,482.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 171,390.0 172,786.0 188,533.0 129,479.0 193,581.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 185,716.0 189,065.0 206,114.0 142,471.0 212,995.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $61.50 $67.57 $68.57 $68.05 $70.20 Farebox Recovery Ratio 20.14% 20.12% 20.00% 18.05% 20.00% Subsidy per Passenger $4.20 $4.71 $5.12 $5.25 $5.73 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $1.06 $1.19 $1.30 $1.33 $1.45 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $49.11 $53.98 $54.86 $55.77 $56.16 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $4.16 $4.58 $4.66 $4.75 $4.78 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 11.7 11.5 10.7 10.6 9.8 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.99 0.97 0.91 0.90 0.83 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager'"' 5/1/2016 Page 1 of I 43.0 �EM= [viit/l-msprinirn6nvmsirn Table 2 -- Corona-DAR -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2016/17 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2013/14 Audited FY 2014/15 Audited FY 2015/16 Plan FY 2015/16 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2016/17 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 9 9 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $1,150,160 $1,179,406 $1,251,918 $868,555 $1,316,697 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $230,032 $236,878 $250,384 $137,594 $263,340 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $920,128 $942,529 $1,001,534 $730,962 $1,053,357 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 68,852 66,015 67,069 46,014 63,430 Passenger Miles 346,326 332,055 337,357 231,450 319,052 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 16,294.4 16,995.4 17,000.0 12,767.9 17,788.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 223,678.0 226,331.0 225,389.0 164,385.0 229,015.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 256,045.0 261,796.0 260,561.0 188,038.0 261,968.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $70.59 $69.40 $73.64 $68.03 $74.02 Farebox Recovery Ratio 20.00% 20.08% 20.00% 15.84% 20.00% Subsidy per Passenger $13.36 $14.28 $14.93 $15.89 $16.61 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $2.66 $2.84 $2.97 $3.16 $3.30 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $56.47 $55.46 $58.91 $57.25 $59.22 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $4.11 $4.16 $4.44 $4.45 $4.60 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 4.2 3.9 3.9 3.6 3.6 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.31 0.29 0.30 0.28 0.28 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager'"' 5/1/2016 Page 1 of I 42:2° �EM= iiym-Al [curt 1-Enpzinirn6mmsim Data Elements Table 3 - SRTP Route Statistics City of Corona -- 3 FY 2016/17 All Routes Peak Route # Day Type Vehicles Passengers Passenger Revenue Total Revenue Total Operating Passenger Net Miles Hours Hours Miles Miles Cost Revenue Subsidy COR-BLUE COR-DAR COR-RED All Days All Days All Days 3 9 2 83,290 63,430 78,324 328,997 319,052 309,381 8,116.0 17,788.0 8,366.0 8,524.0 20,480.0 8,862.0 96,098.0 229,015.0 97,483.0 103,188.0 261,968.0 109,807.0 $569,725 $1,316,697 $587,295 $113,945 $263,340 $117,459 $455,780 $1,053,357 $469,836 Service Provider Totals 14 225,044 957,430 34,270.0 37,866.0 422,596.0 474,963.0 $2,473,717 $494,744 $1,978,973 TransTrack Manager'"' 5/1/2016 Page 1 of 2 42:2° �EM= iiym-Al l-oapzinim{ammsim Performance Indicators Table 3 - SRTP Route Statistics City of Corona -- 3 FY 2016/17 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 COR-BLUE COR-DAR COR-RED All Days All Days All Days $70.20 $74.02 $70.20 $5.93 $5.75 $6.02 $6.84 $20.76 $7.50 20.00% 20.00% 20.00% $5.47 $16.61 $6.00 $1.39 $3.30 $1.52 $56.16 $59.22 $56.16 $4.74 $4.60 $4.82 10.3 3.6 9.4 0.87 0.28 0.80 Service Provider Totals $72.18 $5.85 $10.99 20.00% $8.79 $2.07 $57.75 $4.68 6.6 0.53 TransTrack Manager'"' 5/1/2016 Page 2 of 2 Table 3A — Individual Route Descriptions and Area Serviced Mode Route Description Area / Sites Service Corona Cruiser 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, Corona Library, Corona Transit Center/North Main Corona Metrolink Station, Fender museum, north Main Street shopping area and restaurants Red Line Dial -A -Ride 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, Walmart, California Avenue Post Office, Centennial High, Corona Transit Center/North Main Corona Metrolink Station (selected AM & PM trip), Corona Library, Senior Center, Civic Center, Corona High and on west Sixth Street near Smith Avenue (service is extended to the Shops at Dos Lagos on Saturdays) 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 Norco College 27 Table 4 - Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2016/17 City of Corona Project Description Capital Project No. Total Amount of Funds LTF STA Prop 1B Security CTSGP Prop 1B Capital PTMISEA FY 08/09 Residual AQMD AB 2766 Subvention Funds Fare Box* Other ** FY 17 - Operating Revenues 2,473,717 1,978,973 - - - 353,574 141,170 Subtotal: Operating $2,473,717 $1,978,973 - - - - $353,574 $141,170 Replacement Dial -A -Ride buses - 4 Passenger shelter fabrication, site improvement, and installation FY 17-01 FY 17-02 332,021 600,000 - - 320,871 520,871 - 79,129 11,150 - - - - - - Subtotal: Capital $932,021 - $841,742 $79,129 $11,150 - - - Total: Operating & Capital $3,405,738 $1,978,973 $841,742 $79,129 $11,150 - $353,574 $141,170 * Includes AB 2766 congestion and emission reduction funds to incentivize Cruiser multi -day passes ($12,252) ** Operating - Other revenues include bus shelter advertising ($9,900), City contribution ($121,270), and local contribution ($10,000). FY 2016/17 SRTP Table 4A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER: SRTP Project No: FY 17-01 FTIP No: not applicable PROJECT NAME: Replacement Type C Buses PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Purchase four replacement cutaway buses for Dial -A -Ride service. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: CCTS placed into service ten Type C buses in 2012. These buses have a service life of five years or a minimum of 150,000 miles, whichever comes first. The useful life of four of these buses will be reached 2017. PROJECT SCHEDULE: Start Date Completion Date January 2017 November 2017 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): Funding has been requested through the State Transit Assistance grant program and Proposition 1 B Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account (PTMISEA) state bond program with concurrence from the Riverside County Transportation Commission. Fund Type Fiscal Year Amount State Transit Assistance FY 2016/17 $320,871 Prop 1B PTMISEA FY 2009/10 residual funds $11,150 Total $332,021 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE INCLUDING PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED FTA Grant No. FTIP ID No. RCTC/SRTP Project No. Description Unexpended Balance (as of 6/30/16) CA-04-0237 RIV091210 12-01 Two replacement Type C buses $260,000 Not applicable Not applicable 15-03 Two Type E buses $300,000 Not applicable Not applicable 16-01 Six replacement Type C buses $522,723 29 FY 2016/17 SRTP Table 4A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER: SRTP Project No: 17-02 FTIP No: not applicable PROJECT NAME: Passenger shelter fabrication, site improvement, and installation. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The CCTS is proposing to replace aging passenger shelters currently installed at bus stops along Corona Cruiser Red and Blue Lines as well as some bus stops along Riverside Transit Agency routes 1 and 3. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: Bus stop shelters provide patrons with shelter during inclement weather and shaded respite from the sun. Shelters also provide lighting for convenience and enhanced passenger safety. Approximately 20 passenger shelters are installed along the Corona Cruiser Red and Blue Lines and Riverside Transit Agency routes 1 and 3 that need replacement. These shelters feature two advertising panels. The City of Corona contracts with a private sector vendor to sell advertising space, clean, and repair these shelters. PROJECT SCHEDULE: Start Date Completion Date January 2017 July 2018 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): CCTS is requesting State Transit Assistance grant funds through the Riverside County Transportation Commission and Proposition 1 B California Transit Security Grant Program (CTSGP) grant funding through the Governor's Office of Emergency Services with concurrence from Riverside County Transportation Commission. Fund Type Fiscal Year Amount State Transit Assistance FY 2016/17 $520,871 Prop 1 B CTSGP FY 2014/15 $39,555 Prop 1 B CTSGP FY 2015/16 $39,574 Total $600,000 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE INCLUDING PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED FTA Grant No. FTIP ID No. RCTC/SRTP Project No. Description Unexpended Balance (as of 6/30/16) Not applicable FY 2014/15 Bus stop improvements $75,000 30 Table 5.1- Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2017/18 City of Corona Project Description Capital Project No. Total Amount of Funds LTF STA Prop 1B Security CTSGP Prop 1B Capital PTMISEA AQMD AB 2766 Subvention Funds Fare Box* Other ** Operating Revenues 2,523,919 2,058,132 I 388,931 76,856 Subtotal: Operating $2,523,919 $2,058,132 - - $388,931 $76,856 Bus Stop Improvement / ADA Accessibility FY 18-01 150,000 150,000 Subtotal: Capital $150,000 - $150,000 - - - - Total: Operating & Capital $2,673,919 $2,058,132 $150,000 - - - $388,931 $76,856 * Includes AB 2766 congestion and emission reduction funds to incentivize Cruiser multi -day passes. ** Operating - Other revenues include bus shelter advertising, City contribution, and local contribution. FY 2017/18 SRTP Table 5.1A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER: SRTP Project No: 18-01 FTIP No: not applicable PROJECT NAME: Bus Stop Improvement/ADA Accessibility PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The Corona Cruiser serves 185 bus stops along two routes — the Red and Blue Lines. This project will provide funding to improve ADA accessibility, maintain bus stop furniture and equipment in a proper and safe manner and provide funding to place additional stops as demand warrants. This project is a multi-year/on-going activity. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: Either installing new accessible bus stops or upgrading existing stops to improve accessibility and/or removing barriers to accessibility ensures all bus patrons have equal access to Corona Cruiser service. Project funding will enable the City to maintain benches, signs, kiosks and shelters in proper and safe condition. PROJECT SCHEDULE: Start Date Completion Date January 2018 December 2018 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): CCTS is requesting State Transit Assistance (STA) capital funds from Riverside County Transportation Commission. Fund Type Fiscal Year Amount State Transit Assistance FY 2017/18 $150,000 Total $150,000 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE INCLUDING PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED FTA Grant No. FTIP ID No. RCTC/SRTP Project No. Description Unexpended Balance (as of 6/30/17) Not applicable 32 Table 5.2 - Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2018/19 City of Corona Project Description Capital Project No. Total Amount of Funds LTF STA Prop 1B Security CTSGP Prop 1B Capital PTMISEA AQMD AB 2766 Subvention Funds Fare Box* Other ** Operating Revenues 2,624,876 2,140,457 404,489 79,930 Subtotal: Operating $2,624,876 $2,140,457 - - - - $404,489 $79,930 Compressed natural gas (CNG) fueling facility upgrade FY 19 1 800,000 400,000 400,000 Subtotal: Capital $800,000 - $400,000 - - $400,000 - - Total: Operating & Capital $3,424,876 $2,140,457 $400,000 - - $400,000 $404,489 $79,930 * Includes AB 2766 congestion and emission reduction funds to incentivize Cruiser multi -day passes. ** Operating - Other revenues include bus shelter advertising, City contribution, and local contribution. FY 2018/19 SRTP Table 5.2A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER: SRTP Project No: 19-01 FTIP No: not applicable PROJECT NAME: Compressed natural gas (CNG) fueling facility upgrade. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Upgrade the CNG compressor(s) and increase fuel storage. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: All CCTS CNG-powered buses are fueled at the City's Corporation Yard. This project would enhance the current CNG compressors and increase the storage of CNG gas. PROJECT SCHEDULE: Start Date Completion Date January 2019 July 2020 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): CCTS is requesting State Transit Assistance (STA) capital funds from Riverside County Transportation Commission. Special funding through the South Coast Air Quality District (AQMD) to reduce mobile source emission will contribute to this project. Fund Type Fiscal Year Amount State Transit Assistance FY 2018/19 $400,000 AQMD AB 2766 Subvention Funds FY 2017/18 and FY 2018/19 $400,000 Total $800,000 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE INCLUDING PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED FTA Grant No. FTIP ID No. RCTC/SRTP Project No. Description Unexpended Balance (as of 6/30/18) Not applicable 34 Table 6 — Progress Implementing Transportation Development Act (TDA) Triennial Performance Audit Recommendations* Audit Recommendations Action / Remedy A No -Show occurs when a passenger is not present at the time and location for a scheduled Dial -A -Ride trip. No -Shows average 8 percent of total scheduled Dial - A -Ride trips. No -Shows affect the timeliness and efficiency of service delivery in the areas of service hours and on -time performance. It is recommended that the City implement a series of measures consisting of written notification, education Enforce the No -Show Policy and awareness, and eventual potential suspensions for repeat violators. It is advised that the City and the contract operator take the necessary steps to formalize the No -Show policy and include the policy in transit brochures and on the website. CCTS staff anticipates rolling out a No -Show policy and procedure in 2017. In efforts to improve community access including to bus stops and shelters, the City of Corona has embarked on improvements to bikeways and walkways around the City. The City has utilized STA and ARRA funds to fund these improvements. Another potential source of funding that the City might consider Consider Utilization of SB 821 LTF would be to propose related projects for SB-821 LTF Article 3 funds through Article 3 Funds Toward Transit RCTC. RCTC solicits applications for funds through a Call for Projects that are Accessibility Improvements scored according to specific criteria and may be used for the construction of bicycle and pedestrian facilities. There are adopted policies by RCTC for this program including local match commitments and timely use of the funds. The CCTS will look to other funding sources for bicycle and pedestrian improvements near bus stops on an on -going basis. 'Recommendations from the FY 2010-FY 2012 Transportation Development Act (TDA) Triennial Performance Audit. The FY 2013-FY 2015 audit report is not complete as of this report. 35 42:2° .1.0 EM= frurr71-uapzinirn6nvmsirn Table 7 -- Service Provider Performance Targets Report FY 2015/16 Short Range Transit Plan Review City of Corona Data Elements FY 2015/16 Plan FY 2015/16 Target FY 2015/16 Year to Date Through 3rd Quarter Year to Date Performance Scorecard Unlinked Passenger Trips 238,365 Passenger Miles 1,013,976 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours 33,000.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles 413,922.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 466,675.0 Total Operating Expenses $2,349,102 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $469,821 Net Operating Expenses $1,879,281 Performance Indicators Mandatory: 1. Farebox Recovery Ratio I 20.00% I >= 20.00% I 16.87% I Fails to Meet Target Discretionary: 1. Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour $71.18 <= $69.98 $68.04 Meets Target 2. Subsidy Per Passenger $7.88 >= $6.32 and <= $8.54 $8.25 Meets Target 3. Subsidy Per Passenger Mile $1.85 >= $1.49 and <= $2.01 $1.94 Meets Target 4. Subsidy Per Hour $56.95 >= $46.84 and <= $63.37 $56.56 Meets Target 5. Subsidy Per Mile $4.54 >= $3.72 and <= $5.04 $4.58 Meets Target 6. Passengers Per Revenue Hour 7.20 >= 6.29 and <= 8.51 6.90 Meets Target 7. Passengers Per Revenue Mile 0.58 >= 0.50 and <= 0.68 0.56 Meets Target Note: Must meet at least 4 out of 7 Discretionary Performance Indicators IProductivity Performance Summary: Service Provider Comments: A farebox recovery ratio in this range is anticipated at this point in the fiscal year. At the close of each fiscal year, the City contributes a sufficient amount of funding to bridge the gap between fare revenue received throughout the year and the amount required to meet the 20 percent farebox recover ratio. TransTrack Manager'"' 5/5/2016 Page 1 of I m lim-All (curtrlinpzinim{amiissirn FY 2016/17 - Table 8 -- SRTP Performance Report Service Provider; City of Corona All Routes Performance Indicators FY 2014/15 End of Year Actual FY 2015/16 3rd Quarter Year -to -Date FY 2016/17 Plan FY 2016/17 Target Plan Performance Scorecard (a) Passengers 234,318 163,160 225,044 None Passenger Miles 996,852 694,177 957,430 None Revenue Hours 31,666.8 23,792.7 34,270.0 None Total Hours 34,982.0 26,329.7 37,866.0 None Revenue Miles 399,117.0 293,864.0 422,596.0 None Total Miles 450,861.0 330,509.0 474,963.0 None Operating Costs $2,170,801 $1,618,821 $2,473,717 None Passenger Revenue $436,366 $273,046 $494,744 None Operating Subsidy $1,734,435 $1,345,774 $1,978,973 None Operating Costs Per Revenue Hour $68.55 $68.04 $72.18 <= $68.71 Fails to Meet Target Operating Cost Per Revenue Mile $5.44 $5.51 $5.85 None Operating Costs Per Passenger $9.26 $9.92 $10.99 None Farebox Recovery Ratio 20.10% 16.870/0 20.000/0 >= 20.0% Meets Target Subsidy Per Passenger $7.40 $8.25 $8.79 >= $7.01 and <= $9.49 Meets Target Subsidy Per Passenger Mile $1.74 $1.94 $2.07 >= $1.65 and <= $2.23 Meets Target Subsidy Per Revenue Hour $54.77 $56.56 $57.75 >= $48.08 and <= $65.04 Meets Target Subsidy Per Revenue Mile $4.35 $4.58 $4.68 >= $3.89 and <= $5.27 Meets Target Passengers Per Revenue Hour 7.40 6.90 6.60 >= 5.87 and <= 7.94 Meets Target Passengers Per Revenue Mile 0.59 0.56 0.53 >= 0.48 and <= 0.64 Meets Target a) The Plan Performance Scorecard column is the result of comparing the FY 2016/17 Plan to the FY 2016/17 Primary Target. TransTrack Manager"' 5/1/2016 Page 1 of 1 Table 9 — CCTS Highlights FY 2016/17 Operations • Implement a new schedule: o Adjust Corona Cruiser bus schedule to reflect actual trip times. • Work with the City's contract transportation operator to improve: o Operations of Corona Cruiser and Dial -A -Ride service; o Bus maintenance; o Cleanliness and maintenance of bus stops; and o Monitoring and verifying contractor performance. • Implement a vehicle maintenance and inspection services program. Capital Projects • Procure, test, and accept delivery of Dial -A -Ride replacement buses. • Commence replacement of advertising passenger shelters. Table 9A — Operating and Financial Data Performance Measure FY 2011/12 FY 2012/13 FY 2013/14 FY 2014/15 FY 2015/16 Est. FY 2016/17 Planned System -wide Passenger Trips 215,068 228,689 238,597 234,318 220,474 225,044 Cost per Service Hour $67.02 $67.41 $66.30 $68.55 $68.04 $72.18 38 Table 9B — Farebox Revenue Calculation (Consistent with Riverside County Transportation Commission Farebox Recovery Policy) Farebox Recovery Ratio Revenues FY 2013/14 FY 2014/15 FY 2015/16 Est. FY 2016/17 plan Passenger Fares $370,007 $372,165 $335,731 $341,322 Interest Income $4,361 $4,214 $0 $0 General Fund Contribution $5,000 $32,500 $73,365 $121,270 Measure A $0 $0 $0 $0 Passenger Shelter Advertising Revenue $14,473 $10,426 $9,901 $9,900 Gain on Sale of Capital Assets $1,465 $0 $0 $0 CNG Revenues $0 $0 $0 $0 Lease / Other Revenue $0 $0 $0 $0 Federal Excise Tax Refund $0 $0 $0 $0 Investment Income $0 $0 $0 $0 CalPers CERBT $0 $0 $0 $0 Fare Revenues from Exempt Routes $0 $0 $0 $0 Other Revenues $14,506 $17,061 $22,000 $22,252 Total Farebox Revenues $409,812 $436,366 $440,996 $494,744 Total Operating Expense $2,042,898 $2,170,801 $2,204,985 $2,473,717 Farebox Recovery Ratio 20.06% 20.10% 20.00% 20.00% 39 FY 2016/17-FY 2017/18 SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN City of Riverside Special Transportation Services CITY OF fUEIZSIDE ity aJArts &Innovation TABLE OF CONTENTS I. System Overview 1 1.1 Service Area 1 1.2 Population Profile 2 1.3 Paratransit Services 2 1.4 Current Fare Structure 3 1.5 Revenue Fleet 3 1.6 Existing Facility/Planned Facilities 3 II. Existing Service and Route Performance 4 2.1 Dial -A -Ride Services -System Performance 4 2.2 Key Performances Indicators 5 2.3 Productivity Improvement Efforts 5 2.4 Major Trip Generators 6 III. Planned Service Changes and Implementation 7 3.1 Recent Service Changes 7 3.2 Recommended Modifications to Paratransit Services 8 3.3 Marketing Plans and Promotion 8 3.4 Budget Impact on Proposed Changes 9 IV. Financial and Capital Plans 9 4.1 Operating and Capital Budget 9 4.2 Funding Plans to Support Operating and Capital Program 10 4.3 Regulatory and Compliance Requirements 10 1 Tables 12 Table 1— Fleet Inventory 12 Table 2 — City of Riverside SRTP Service Summary 13 Table 3 — SRTP Route Statistics 14 Table 4 — Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2016/17 16 Table 4A — Capital Projects Justification 17 Table 5.1— Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2017/18 23 Table 5.1A — Capital Justification of 5.1 24 Table 5.2 — Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2018/19 25 Table 5.2A— Capital Justification of 5.2 26 Table 6 — Progress to Implement TDA Triennial Performance Audit 27 Table 7 — Service Provider FY 2015/16 Performance Target Report 29 Table 8 — FY 2016/17 SRTP Performance Report 30 Table 9 — Highlights of 2016/17 — 2018/19 Short Range Transit Plan 31 Table 9A — Operating and Financial Data for Previous Four Years 32 Table 98 — Fare Revenue Calculation 33 2 I. SYSTEM OVERVIEW 1.1 Service Area Special Transportation (ST) is a division within the Community Services branch of the City of Riverside's Parks, Recreation and Community Services Department that has been offering transportation services to seniors and disabled residents in the Riverside community since 1975. This paratransit transportation service is provided within the 81.54 square mile incorporated city limits of the City of Riverside, shown below in Figure 1. Figure 1 Orrsae CPA*. {vont La Sierra Acre' La Siena ,S•e uth RA,4110 .004.14. r r orthside Downtown _1 L icy Hunter rrr—�- Indusirlal- 1 � Park �-� `_- Affiltilk . 1; *IP111` University i Fn ' Eastaide ' r'i Victoria r Casa BlancaSHawardan Hills &Lur.,hrrn. 5}9.he.r.d r.m rnre San.Er,nraura Co,env i *wi4rrn Spfierror FiRrivice Canyon Crest Sycamore Canyon Park Alessandro dro Heights Orangecrest; Syca ma re Ca nyon Business Park! canyon Springs Mal* rrwr Mrch JON Po pm,* area v 1 1.2 Population Profile The American Community Survey (ACS) data is a source of demographic information which is part of the 2010 Decennial Census Program. The ACS is a nationwide survey designed to provide communities with reliable and timely demographic, social, economic and housing data every year. Because the ACS is conducted annually, it serves as an interim source of up- to-date demographic data through the decade, until the next Census is conducted. According to the 2010-2014 ACS Survey 5-year estimates, the population of the City of Riverside is 313,041 residents. The senior population within the City of Riverside (those 60 years of age and over) accounts for approximately 19% of the population. Riverside is slightly below the national average of seniors age 60 and over which is 19.5%, however, due to the Baby Boomer generation aging into their sixties, the senior population will continue to rise rapidly. 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 of age and older) and persons with disabilities (disabilities require a physician documentation). Special Transportation operates 362 days per year, only suspending service on Thanksgiving Day, Christmas Day and New Year's Day. Operating hours for ST are Monday through Friday, from 8:00 a.m. - 5:30 p.m. and on weekends and holidays from 9:00 a.m. —4:00 p.m. In order to reserve a ride, passengers must call ST's reservation telephone number, during the business hours of 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 9:00 a.m. - 3:00 p.m. on weekends and holidays. An answering machine is available before and after business hours for cancellations. A new service has been added this year that will be very convenient to ST riders and reduce the workload on ST driver/schedulers. ST will be implementing a new module in the scheduling software that will automatically call riders to remind them of their scheduled trip 2 and also when the driver arrives at their pick-up location. There will be several touch-tone options for the patrons to accept ride or cancel the ride. 1.4 Current Fare Structure and Proposed Fare Structure The ST fare structure for a one-way trip is $2.00 per passenger. Clients may pay their fare in cash at boarding time or with pre -purchased tickets. Ticket booklets can also be purchased in advance which contain 20 single trip tickets. Tickets can be purchased for $2.00 for a one- way ride; a ticket booklet may be purchased for $40.00 and contains 20 rides. Special Transit will be moving forward with a fare increase proposal that, if approved, will go into effect on January 1, 2017. Currently, staff is researching the amount the fare will increase and the implementation schedule of the new fare structure. 1.5 Revenue Fleet Special Transportation has been operating with a fleet of 35 paratransit compressed natural gas (CNG), alternative fuel, Type III vehicles. Nine vehicles that reached their life capacity in fiscal year 2013/14 were replaced and eight vehicles that have reached their life capacity will be replaced in FY 2015/16. Special Transportation also owns one paratransit van equipped to hold six passengers and one wheelchair. A Honda Civic is used by administrative staff in supervising routes and responding to accidents. These vehicles are not assigned to routes but are used as backups for special services. Special Transportation is looking to purchase two additional replacement vehicles, one equipped to hold six passengers and one wheelchair and another passenger vehicle in FY 2016/17. These will replace the existing van and passenger car that have reached their useful life expectancy. 1.6 Existing Facility/Planned Facilities Special Transportation Offices are located at 8095 Lincoln Avenue within the City of Riverside Corporation Yard. Included in the facilities are an administration building consisting of administrative offices, a dispatch center, restrooms and a break room. Special Transportation's facilities also include a parking lot for the transit buses with each space 3 equipped with a CNG slow fill station, and a CNG Maintenance Bay for maintenance and repair of the fleet. The facility includes five maintenance bays, an administrative office, and multiple storage compartments for vehicle parts and equipment. The facility is outfitted with state of the art safety equipment and machinery to maintain the CNG fueled vehicles. Special Transportation has been awarded Proposition 1B Security, Federal Transportation Administration and Prop 1B Public Transportation Modernization, Improvements, and Service Enhancement Account (PTMISEA) funds to expand and modernize its administration building. However, Federal funds will not be used for this project and staff is working with the FTA to move funds to another line item in the grant application. The project went out to bid in fall 2014 and closed on January 21, 2015. The lowest responsible bidder was Dalke and Sons, who began construction late May; construction was completed on January 21, 2016. The renovation includes a re -design of the interior floor plan, resulting in more efficient and modern work spaces for dispatchers, four private offices, a state-of-the-art break room, upgraded restrooms, a conference room and a locker area for staff. Other improvements include, HVAC upgrades and re-routes, exterior paint and roofing. II. EXISTING SERVICES AND ROUTE PERFORMANCE 2.1 Dial -A -Ride Service -System Performance ST served approximately 190,000 passengers during the 2015/16 fiscal year. Ridership is projected to increase to approximately 199,000 in FY2016/17, representing a 4% increase from the previous fiscal year and 10% from the 2012/13 fiscal year. ST averages between 600-700 riders per day and has seen an increase in ridership during the last two fiscal years. The increase is due to the ever increasing senior population, word of mouth and ongoing advertisement in places such as Riverside's senior centers and through the City of Riverside's Activity Guide publication. 4 2.2 Key Performance Indicators During fiscal year 2015/16, Special Transportation met its mandatory farebox recovery ratio target and met six of the seven discretionary performance indicators, as shown in Figure 2. Figure 2 Performance Indicators Performance Scorecard Mandatory: 1. Farebox Recovery Ratio Meets Target Discretionary: 1. Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour Fails to Meet 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 ST strives to operate an efficient 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 effectively utilize staff and maintain on -time pick-ups. Staff invited RouteMatch to provide training on optimization so that routes are designed effectively and free up some dispatcher time that is much needed for other tasks. Also, a dispatcher was assigned to analyze routes every day in order to fill next and same day requests and to ensure driver overtime costs are kept to a minimum. In the 2015/16 fiscal year, ST has added additional part time drivers and has fully phased out the three-quarter time benefited drivers who were all converted to full-time last year. ST has 5 also implemented a new notification module within our RouteMatch System that will notify our customers via automated telephone call reminding them of a pending reservation the day before the scheduled pickup and will give them the option to confirm or cancel the reservation over the phone. The system will also call the customer one hour prior to the scheduled pick up time to remind them that a pickup time is coming up and to be ready. ST has identified and would like to implement an electronic fare collection system that would allow customers to use a smartcard type media to pay for their fare when boarding. This system would allow ST to go cashless and utilize current technology to provide our customers with scheduling and payment options. ST will also be recruiting for a new Lead Schedulers position to help coordinate the operational functions of our dispatch operations. 2.4 Major Trip Generators and Projected Growth Over Next Two Years Several factors will lead to growth of ST operations over the next two years. As previously mentioned, the Baby Boomer generation, the largest generation in the last century, is aging into the realm of senior citizens. This element alone makes growth virtually unavoidable. The seniors, age 60+ makes up approximately 19% of the total population of the City of Riverside. Currently, 56% of the residents 45 or older are under the age of 60, as shown in Figure 3, leading staff to anticipate a higher demand for Special Transportation services in the very near future. Another factor that will increase ridership is the fact that this division now falls under the auspices of the Community Services branch of the City of Riverside Parks, Recreation, and Community Service Department. This branch is also responsible for senior programs and two senior centers, as well as the Friendly Stars program for developmentally disabled adults. This relationship and the connection among staff in these three areas make it possible to connect resources and advertise by word of mouth to their program participants. Influencing ridership and growth will be the re- design of the buses' exterior. The new look will bring more attention to the program and breathe life into the buses. Along with the new bus design ST will have already implemented new driver uniforms and new marketing materials. Major trip generators for the ST operations include the many workshops ST transport clients to and from and the Friendly Stars program on most Friday evenings. During the week, a few primary 6 locations ST frequents daily are workshops for mentally and physically disabled passengers that teach them to live independently. These passengers look forward to attending their workshops (work/school) to attain a sense of independence. Special Transportation transports over 160 passengers per day to workshops, along with weekly transportation to Friendly Stars, which include holiday and unique programming. Figure 3 65-74 17% PERCENTAGE OF RESIDENTS OVER 45 IN THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE 75-84 85+ 4% , 0% 55-59 16% US Census Bureau, ACS DEMOGRAPHIC AND HOUSING ESTIMATES III. PLANNED SERVICE CHANGES AND IMPLEMENTATION 3.1 Recent Service Changes ST implemented a service change in March 2015. Additional buses were needed for morning roll out in order to accommodate some changes to the workshop locations. For years, the clients have been transported to one location; the service provider then transported the clients to their work location. In March, the service provider asked that the clients be transported directly to their work locations. This accommodation was challenging due to staffing levels and trying to 7 maintain appropriate staffing for the afternoon run. Working with RTA for guidance and assistance when needed, made this transition possible. 3.2 Recommended Modifications to Paratransit Services Additional runs were scheduled from 7:00 a.m. — 9:30 a.m., and 1:30 p.m. — 4:30 p.m. to accommodate peak service hours in FY 12/13. Additional part time staffing was also added to cover the runs. Ridership demand hit a plateau during FY 13/14, but has since begun to rise starting in FY 14/15. We anticipate steady ridership increases and will be proactive by adding more staff. No modification to the present routes is needed. 3.3 Marketing Plans and Promotion In FY 2016/17, there will be a concerted effort to create a marketing plan for Special Transportation. The Parks, Recreation and Community Services Department has a marketing team who will lend guidance and assistance in creating new brand, logo, brochures, and posters. As mentioned, the buses will have a drastic new look and it's a perfect time to re -brand the program. ST has continued with its advertisements on the back of the minibuses including the cost of the fare and telephone number for reservations. ST developed a poster (designed by a driver) and distributed to senior centers and other agencies. ST regularly prints out flyers and brochures to distribute to the city's community centers and senior centers and also includes ads in other city publications such as the Activity Guide and Senior Guide. The Activity Guide is published three times per year, is mailed to over 55,000 residents and is available online at the city's website. Special Transportation also advertised in the 2016 Mariachi Festival Program, an event whose attendees consist of a large proportion of seniors. 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. For 2016/17, ST will increase it outreach efforts by presenting at various city wide events such as Senior Day to help promote the services and answer any questions residents may have. We will also increase presence at senior living facilities resident meetings within the city and the various ADA workshops that take place in Riverside. ST 8 will also be launching a new website for the Special Transportation Services Program which will give the residents of Riverside all of the information needed to sign up and use our services. 3.4 Budget Impact on Proposed Changes The largest budget impact to the program this year has been the City's increase in allocated expenditures for services rendered to ST. These services include administrative oversight, procurement, human resources, payroll, etc. Increase in the cost of benefits and the costs for preventative maintenance has contributed to higher expenditures. The operational expense of running the program has increase over the past 10 years. Additional buses and increases in maintenance costs have contributed to the increase in operational expense. Although ST has been able to maintain its farebox recovery ratio above the minimum 10%, the growing operational expense has forced the program to seek a rate increase from its current rate of $2.00 per ride to the proposed rate of $3.00 per ride. This 16/17 proposed increase should allow the program to maintain a greater than 10%fare box recovery ratio. For fiscal year 15/16, ST expects to maintain a farebox recovery ratio of 10.70%. IV. FINANCIAL AND CAPITAL PLANS 4.1 Operating and Capital Budget Special Transportation relies on Local Transportation Funds (LTF) to support its operating budget including 20% of the preventative maintenance funds needed for the fleet. The remaining 80% comes from federal section 5307 funds. ST's overall budget for the 2016/17 fiscal year has increased by less than 13.3% in comparison to the 2015/16 fiscal year as shown in Figure A. ST is requesting an additional $465,219 in LTF funds for FY 2016/17 to cover increasing operating expenses. 9 Figure A Budget Item FY 2015/16 SRTP FY 2016/17 Plan Variance Amount in Dollars Variance Percentage Salaries & Benefits $2,259,215 $2,706,466 $447,251 19.8% Materials & Supplies $39,900 $40,698 $798 2.0% Fuel $225,000 $232,661 $7,661 3.4% Maintenance $500,000 $500,000 $0 0.0% Contract Services $94,256 $96,141 $1,885 2.0% Non -Personnel Costs $381,229 $388,853 $7,624 2.0% Total $3,499,600 $3,964,819 $465,219 13.3% *Figure A does not include $400,000 for preventative maintenance. Special Transportation is continuing to partially fund a contracted security guard for the 2016/17 fiscal year in order to continue the security of the parking lot and CNG Vehicle Maintenance facilities. Personnel costs, in the form of driver staff hours and related benefits, have risen due to the conversion of the three-quarter time drivers and the increase into PERS and medical benefits. ST is requesting a total of $151,163 ($33,813, $55,100, $45,000, $8,250, $9,000) in STA capital allocation for the upcoming fiscal year 2016/17 to serve as match funds for the federal section 5307 and 5339 funds. 4.2 Funding Plans to Support Proposed Operating and Capital Program ST will continue to take advantage of available grant opportunities such as the California Department of Transportation Proposition 16 Public Transportation Modernization, Improvements, and Service Enhancement Account (PTMISEA), in order to support its capital programs. Special Transportation will receive Proposition 16 Security Funds to cover the section's safety and security needs. FTA 5307 funds will be used for the preventative maintenance of the fleet and FTA section 5339 funds will fund the purchase of 8 replacement vehicles in combination with previously allocated STA funds. 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, 10 trainings, and conferences which are frequently offered free of charge to transit operators. ST complies with FTA reporting requirements such as the submission of monthly and annual National Transit Database (NTD) reports. ST recently underwent an FTA Triennial Review April 8 — 9, 2015. In 2012, Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) completed its FY 2010-2012 Triennial Performance Audit for ST which had several recommendations: complete and implement the no-show policy, reprogram unused grant funds awarded to ST and meet goal of 100% preventive maintenance schedule adherence. ST has completed the no-show policy and is working on some modifications due to information learned at an FTA training staff attended. ST has reprogrammed federal and state grants, along with beginning several project implementations. Lastly, ST has reached a goal of 100% PMI. The dedicated maintenance facility has assisted with increasing the efficiency of PMI completions. The city had its most recent TDA Triennial Performance audit on October 7, 2016. There were no violations noted in the California Highway Patrol (CHP) safety compliance terminal inspection in the areas of maintenance, driver records or driver hours of services during this year's CHP inspection that took place mid -January. ST received a "satisfactory" rating in all areas. In compliance with RCTC requirements, ST purchases solely alternative fuel vehicles for its revenue rolling stock fleet. 11 MEI� limr.i[oftrly koarmuitm:arvmsvi Demand Response j Directly Operated Table 1 - Fleet Inventory F1'2016/17 Short Range Transit Nan City of Riverside 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 Pi Vehicles Prior Year End March (e.g., March) Built Cade Code Capacity Equipped Length Code 2015/1-0 FY 2015/16 FY 2014/15 FY 2015/16 FY 2015/16 2008 CMD BU 7 2 15 GA 1 2010 FRD BU 16 20 25 CN 10 2011 FRD BLi 16 8 25 CN 4 2008 GLV BLi 16 10 25 CN 5 2013 GLV BU 16 14 25 CN 7 2014 GLV BO 16 18 25 CN 9 32,850 1,407,466 531,128 1,266,832 327,915 135,793 34,290 1,533,515 5 93, 883 799,498 471,536 355,251 34,290 153,351 148,470 159,899 67,362 39,472 Totals: 87 72 36 0 3,701,984 3,787,973 105,221 RCTC IIIIM tM 1imis irfo~y Table 2 -- City of Riverside -- SRTPServke Summary FY 2016/17 Short Range Transit Plan Ail Ratites FV 2012 14 AL: Jite.J FY 2014;15 Audited FY 20151'16 Plan FY 2015f16 3rd Qkr Actual FY 2016j17 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet -: 23 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses 53,436,714 53,749,766 53.499,600 $2,610,245 54,364,919 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $382.963 $384,631 $383.000 5279,228 1439,923 Net 4 yerating Expenses {Subsidies} 53,1353.751 53,365./37 53.116,6[03 12.331,017 53,924,996 Operating Characteristics Unlnked Passenger Trips 182.878 175,276 /913,003 /24,996 199,400 Passenger Miles 1.136%692 1.1316,601 1,06%692 924,970 1,369,150 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 49,631.5 47,163.2 53,230.3 36,067.0 51,955.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (6) 639.382.6 660,5135.0 7133,682.0 493,691.0 775,000.E Total Actual Vehicle Miles -3:._7.,. --- _-3,0 789,105.0 553.981.0 345,452.E Performance Characteristics e operating Cost per Revenue HOu' 566.97 17.9.51 $6.5.7_ 572.37 584.01 Farebax Recovery Ratio 11.14% 10.26% 10.94% 10.70% 16.07% Subsidy per Passenger 116.70 $19.20 $16.43 518.6E $19.72 Subsidy per Passenger Mile 12.W 13.31 12.94 52.52 $2.67 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $61.29 $71.35 $58.55 554.63 $75,55 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (h) 54.43 *5.09 54A3 :4.7: $5.06 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 3.7 3.7 3.6 = 3 3.8 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 3 27 0.27 0.27 0.2 0.26 (a) Train Hours for Rail Too les. (h) Car Miles far Rail Modes ROTC kamdr Imp/ I.aaorlm turxm Data Elements Table .3 - .SRTP Route Statistics City of Riverside -- 4 FY 2016/17 dfl Roues Peak Route a* Day Type 3tiides Passengers Passenger Revenue Total Revenue Total Operating Passenger Net Fides Flows Hours Files Mies Cost Revenue Subsidy FfS-DUt NI6yrc 199,000 1,369,SG 51,955.0 66,657.0 775,900.0 045,42.0 44.364014 $439,8�'��' /3,924,996 Service ProviderToials 159,000 1,369,150 51,955.0 60,057.0 775,000.0 045,4'2.0 14364,619 $439,023 13,924,956 min kwndc[wryI.rmrni4m ai Performance Indicators Table 3 - SRTP Route Statistics City of Riverside -- 4 FY 2016/17 All Routes Route# OayType Operating Operating Fare6ax Subsidy Per Subsidy Per Subsdy Per Cast Per Cost Per Cast Per Recovery Sbsidy Per Passenger Revenue Revenue Passengers Passengers Revenue Hour Revenue Mile Passenger Ratio Passage Mile Hour MiJe Per Hour Per Mik FE-D R AJI lys 5t4oi 15,63 $21.93 140746 119.72 $2 S7 $75.55 $5.06 18 426 Seruice Provider Totals 18 111 15,63 $21.93 110746 119.72 $2.S7 $75.55 ISM 3.8 426 City of Riverside FY 201,511? Short Range Ti'i',il Tobte 4 - Summary of Funds Requested for 2016/17 Project Description Capital Project Number (1) Total Amount of Funds LTF STA FY08/09 STA Carryover Prop 1 B (PTMISEA) Prop 1 B Security Section 5339 Section 5307 - Riv- San. Bndo Fare Box Other Local Transportation Funds Operating Assistance $3,964,819 $3,524,996 $439,823 I Capitalized Preventative Maintenance $400,000 $80,000 $320,000 Subtotal: Operating $4,364,1319 $3,604,996 $320,000 $439,823 Security/Safely Equipmer11(Prop 1BFY15/161 FY17-01 $48,476 $48,476 Vehicle Replacement(5339 FY158 FY16) FY 17-02 $225,419 $33,813 $,191,606 Electronic Fare Collection FY 17-03 $275,500 $55,100 $220,400 Upgrade Radio Equipment FY 17-04 $45,000 $45,000 Vehicle Replacement (1 Van) Sec 5307 FY 17-06 $55,000 $8,250 $46,750 . -1- -- P.6•ia rrar.t - - .. - atl. Fe4 diry Fr^_SHr FY 17-06 $45,000 $9,000 $36,000 Subtotal Capital $694,395 $0 $151,163 S0 $48.476 $191,606 $303.150 50 $0 Total: Operating 8 Capital $5,059,214 $3,604,996 $151,163 $0 $48,476 $191,606 $623.150 $439,823 $0 Table 4A- Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER (If existing project in FTIP, indicate FTIP ID Number): SRTP Project No: 2017-01 PROJECT NAME: Security and Safety Improvements (2015/16) PROJECT DESCRIPTION: FTIP No: City of Riverside, Special Transportation would like to purchase an electronic access system for all of the exterior and interior doors within the newly renovated Special Transportation Administrative Building. Additionally, funds will be used to purchase an electronic key box to secure and provide access to bus keys as well as upgrade the current transportation gate controller that opens and closes the security gate for Transportation's corporate yard. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: The installation of an electronically controlled access system comprehensive will protect the transit office and its staff from unauthorized access during normal business hours as well as asset protection after hours. The system will also allow us to track who comes in and out of the transportation facility as well as grant and limit access to specific individuals. The inclusion of an electronic key box will properly secure all vehicle keys and will also provide a means to log and track which keys are logged out and to who the key is currently issued to. This system will ensure that only authorized personnel will be able to access bus keys. PROJECT SCHEDULE: Start Date Completion Date August 2016 May 2017 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): Fund Type Fiscal Year Amount STA 16-17 $48,476 Total $48,476 17 Table 4A- Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER (If existing project in FTIP, indicate FTIP ID Number): SRTP Project No: 2017-02 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME: Vehicle Replacement PROJECT DESCRIPTION: To replace eight vehicles that have accrued 150,000 miles. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: Special Transportation replaces vehicles that have reached 5 Years or 150,000 miles, in accordance with Federal Transit Administration (FTA) guidelines. PROJECT SCHEDULE: Start Date Completion Date August 2016 May 2017 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): Fund Type Fiscal Year Amount Sec 5339 16-17 $191,606 STA 16-17 $33,813 Total $225,419 18 Table 4A- Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER (If existing project in FTIP, indicate FTIP ID Number): SRTP Project No: 2017-03 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME: Electronic Fare Collection PROJECT DESCRIPTION: To implement an electronic fare collection system that would facilitate a cashless method of fare payment. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: Special Transportation would like to implement a cashless fare collection system for all 35 Minibuses. This system would allow our customers the ability to pay for their fares using a reloadable smart card or by using their smart phone. Customer or their caregivers would have the ability to add more funds to their account either online or at any one of the specified places throughout the city. This method of payment would also assist the bus driver by not having to be responsible for cash during their route. PROJECT SCHEDULE: Start Date Completion Date August 2016 May 2017 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): Fund Type Fiscal Year Amount STA 16-17 $55,100 Sec 5307 16-17 $220,400 Total $275,500 19 Table 4A- Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER (If existing project in FTIP, indicate FTIP ID Number): SRTP Project No: 2017-04 PROJECT NAME: Upgrade Radio Equipment PROJECT DESCRIPTION: FTIP No: To improve dispatching operations and add an additional radio channel to the single channel system we currently employ. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: To improve the current transit dispatch operations, noise cancelling headsets as well as changes to the functionality of our current radio system. Additionally, an extra repeater will be added to create a second radio channel for our drivers to use while transporting passengers. A second channel will create better efficiencies in our transit operations. PROJECT SCHEDULE: Start Date Completion Date August 2016 May 2017 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): Fund Type Fiscal Year Amount STA 16-17 $45,000 Total $45,000 20 Table 4A- Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER (If existing project in FTIP, indicate FTIP ID Number): SRTP Project No: 2017-05 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME: ADA Reserve Van Replacement PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The ADA reserve van will have reached its useful life expectancy and will need to be replaced. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: Special Transportation replaces vehicles that have reached their useful life expectancy, in accordance with Federal Transit Administration (FTA) guidelines. The existing paratransit passenger van is used as a backup vehicle or used to transport special ADA customers. PROJECT SCHEDULE: Start Date Completion Date August 2016 May 2017 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): Fund Type Fiscal Year Amount STA 16-17 $8,250 Sec 5307 16-17 $46,750 Total $55,000 21 Table 4A- Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER (If existing project in FTIP, indicate FTIP ID Number): SRTP Project No: 2017-06 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME: Admin Vehicle Replacement PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Supervisor vehicle has reached its useful life expectancy and will need to be replaced. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: Special Transportation replaces vehicles that have reached 5 Years or 150,000 miles, in accordance with Federal Transit Administration (FTA) guidelines. PROJECT SCHEDULE: Start Date Completion Date August 2016 May 2017 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): Fund Type Fiscal Year Amount Sec 5307 16-17 $36,000 STA 16-17 $9,000 Total $45,000 22 CINC,I Riverside FY V016/ I Y SIIVO R-n1Ue ➢u1-1,41 Plan Table 5.1 - Summary of Funds Requested for2017/18 Project Description i Capital Project Number (1) Total Amount of Funds LTF STA FY08/09 STA Carryover Prop 1 B (PTMISEA) Prop 1 B Security section 5339 Section 5307 - Riv- San. Bndo Fare Box Other Local Transportation Funds Operating Assistance $4,163,060 $3,628,237 $534,823 Capitalized Preventative Maintenance $400,000 $80,000 $320,000 Subtotal: Operating $4,563,060 $3,708,237 $320,000 $534,823 8 Bus Purchoses FY 18-01 $920,494 $138,074 $782,420 Transit Facility Expansion FY 18-02 $400,000 $80,000 $320,000 Subtotal Capital $1,320,494 $0 $218,074 $0 $0 $0 $1,102,420 $0 $0 Total: Operating 8 Capital $5,883,554 $3,708,237 $218,074 $0 $0 $0 $1,422,420 $534,823 $0 Table 5.1A- Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER (If existing project in FTIP, indicate FTIP ID Number): SRTP Project No: 2018-01 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME: Vehicle Replacement (8 Buses) PROJECT DESCRIPTION: To replace 8 Buses that have reached 150,000 miles or more. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: Special Transportation replaces vehicles that have reached 5 Years or 150,000 miles, in accordance with Federal Transit Administration (FTA) guidelines. PROJECT SCHEDULE: Start Date Completion Date August 2017 May 2018 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): Fund Type Fiscal Year Amount STA 17-18 $138,074 Sec 5307 17-18 $782,420 Total $920,494 24 Cily of RIveasidg FY 2016/17 :TVrt Rdnge Ifonsit Pion Table 5.2 - Summary of Funds Requested for2018/19 Project Description Capital Project Number jt) Total Amount of Funds LTF STA FY08/09 STA Carryover Prop 1 B {PTMISEA) Prop 1 B Security Section $339 Section 5307 - Riv- San. Bndo Fare Bon Other Local Transportation Funds Operating Assistance $4,371,213 $3,825,693 $545,519 Capitalized Preventative Maintenance $530,030 $100,000 $400,o00 Subtotal: Operating $4,871,213 $3,925,693 $400,000 $545,519 8 Bus Purchases Fr I9-01 $920,494 $1 5,074 $782,420 Subtotal Capital $920,494 $0 $138,074 $0 $0 $0 $782,420 $0 $0 Total: Operating 8 Capital $5,791,707 $3,925,693 $138,074 $0 $0 $0 $1,182,420 $545,519 $0 Table 5.2A- Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER (If existing project in FTIP, indicate FTIP ID Number): SRTP Project No: 2019-01 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME: Vehicle Replacement (8 Buses) PROJECT DESCRIPTION: To replace 8 Buses that have reached 150,000 miles or more. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: Special Transportation replaces vehicles that have reached 5 Years or 150,000 miles, in accordance with Federal Transit Administration (FTA) guidelines. PROJECT SCHEDULE: Start Date Completion Date August 2018 May 2019 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): Fund Type Fiscal Year Amount STA 18-19 $138,074 Sec 5307 18-19 $782,420 Total $920,494 26 TABLE 6- PROGRESS TO IMPLEMENT TDA TRIENNIAL PERFORMANCE AUDIT Recent Audit Recommendation (Covering FY 2010-2012) Action (s) Taken and Results to Date 1. Need to complete and implement Special Transportation has completed the no - the no-show policy. show policy and is modifying based on The City is continuing to update and finalize feedback received at an FTA training staff its No -Show policy, According to ST, No- attended. Shows comprise 5 percent of total ridership as the number of trips has continued to increase. The rate is above general industry norms. In Progress 2. Reprogram Unused Grant Funds Special Transportation has reprogrammed Awarded to Special Transportation Services. federal and state grants, along with The City of Riverside has been successful in beginning several project implementations securing a variety of grants to support its and the purchase of buses. Staff is working Special Transportation Services from state with FTA to complete line item budget and federal sources. FTA grants generally revisions in order to utilize all remaining expire 3 years after they are awarded. As of funds and close out outstanding grants. As of February 2013, the total grant funding March 2015, two open grants remain. amounted to $8,693,209 with $2,874,200 expended to date and $4,497,510 remaining plus $809,375 in State Proposition 18 funding not yet awarded. In Progress 27 3. Meet Goal of 100% Preventive Maintenance Schedule Adherence. With completion of a new maintenance shop dedicated to Riverside Special Transportation, there should be improved adherence to preventive maintenance inspections (PMI). Meeting timely PMIs are critical to the reliability and useful life of the vehicles. RT should ensure that the PMI schedules for the growing fleet are developed to ensure timely vehicle inspection of all vehicles and full bus pull outs. Special Transportation has reached a goal of 100% PMI. The dedicated maintenance facility has assisted with increased the efficiency of PMI completions. Completed 28 �� 11.ri1 [or]t' irtselmsItlim iaom.vi Table 7 -- Service Prodder Performance Targets Report FY 2015 f 16 Short Range Transit Plan Review City of Riverside Data Elements FY 2015/ 16 Plan FY 2015/16 Target FY 2615/16 Year to Date Through 3rd Quarter Year to Date Performance Scorecard Unlinked Passenger Trips 190,000 Passenger Miles 1,0613,692 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours 53,2313.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Mies 703,682.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 789,105.0 Total Operating Expenses $3,499,606 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $383,000 Het Operating Expenses $3,116,600 Performance Indicators Mandatory: I. Farebox Recovery Ratio I 10,94% I 7= 10.00% I 10,70% 'Meets Target Discretionary: 1. Opeating Cost Per Revenue Hour $65,79 [= $71,02 $72.37 Fail& to Meet Target 2. Subsidy Per Passenger $16.40 7= $14,24 and [= $19.26 $18.65 Meets Target 3. Subsidy Per Passenger Mile $2.94 7= $2.46 and [= $3.32 $252 Meets Target 4. Subsidy Per Hour $58.55 7= $52.83 and [= $71.47 $64.63 Meets Target 5. Subsidy Per Mie $4.43 7= $3.78 and [= $5.12 $4.72 Meets Target 6. Passengers Per Revenue Hour 3.60 7= 3.15 and [= 9.26 3.50 Meetr Target 7. Passengers Per Revenue Mile 0.27 ).= 0.23 and r= 0.31 0.25 Meets Target Note: Must meet �t least 4 out of 7 DkQ tionary Performance indicators Productivity Performance Summary: Service Provider Comments: TransTrack Manager ". sl1312016 Page t of I 42D IMIIN ... u,mk :or. Fsfmkr.fmoWrm FY 2016/17 - Table 8 -- SRTP Performance Report Service Provider: City of Riverside All Rotates Perfonnance Indicators FY 2014/15 End of Year Actual FY 2O15/16 3rd Quarter Year -to -Date FY 2O16j17 Plan FY 20/6/17 Target Plan Performance 5c.orecard (a) Passengers 175,276 124,996 199,000 None Passenger Miles L016,601 924,970 1,369,150 None Revenue Hours 47,163.2 36,067.0 51,955.0 None Total Hours 64,896.0 48,664.0 68,857.0 None Revenue Miles 660,585A 493,691.0 775,000.0 None Total Miles 747,175.0 553,981.0 845,452.0 None Operating Cost $3,719,766 $2,610,245 $4,364,819 None Passenger Revenue $384,631 $279,228 $439,823 None Operating Subsidy $3,365,137 1:7.311,617 $3,924,996 None Operating Costa Per Revenue Hour $79.51 $72.37 $84.01 <_ $73.09 Fails tb Meet Target Operating Cost Per Revenue Mile $5.68 $5.29 $5,63 None $21.39 $20.88 $21.93 None Operating Costs Per Pmx,eaye. Fareloox Recovery Ratio 10.26% 10.70% 10.07% ]= 10.0% Meet; Target Subsidy Per Passenger $19.20 $18.65 $19.72 >_ $15.85 and <_ $21.45 Meets Target S d :ly Per Passenger Mire $3.31 $2.52 $2.87 •._ $2.14 and <_ $2.90 Meet; Target Subsidy Per Revenue Hour $71.35 $64.63 $75,55 ._ $54,94 and <_ $74.32 Fairs ba Meet Target Subsidy Per Revenue Mile $5.09 $4.72 $5.06 •>_ $4.01 and <_ $5.43 Meek Target Passengers Per Revenue Hour 3.70 3.50 3.80 s= 2.98 and <= 4.03 Meet Target Passengers Per Revenue Mile 0.27 0.25 0.26 >= 0.21 and <= 0.29 Meets Target a] The Plan Performance Scorecard column is the result of aortpa ing the Fr 2016j17 Plan to- the FY 2{016/17 Primary Target. TiansTrack Manager ^' ViEU2or6 Page 2 of 2 Table 9 - HIGHLIGHTS OF 2016/17-2018/19 SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN Proposition 1B Security Grants: To enhance safety and security, ST h a s applied for $48,476 to install a n electronic access system for all of the doors within the Transit Administrative Offices. This system will ensure that the facility is secure and administration can manage and monitor who is accessing the facility. Along with the access control a new electronic key box will manage and secure all 35-minibus keys. The grant will also fund the replacement of an automatic gate opener for the minibus yard. Capital Projects: • Vehicle Procurement and Delivery — ST will be replacing eight, 16 passenger, paratransit vehicles with grant funds received through the Federal Transit Administration, STA and Proposition 18 capital grant. The administration vehicle and back up disable van will also be replaced. Vehicles will be delivered by the end of the calendar year. The number of buses depends on the final cost of each minibus. • Electronic Fare Collection System — ST will purchasing and implementing an electronic fare collection system that will allow customers to pay their fare by using a smart media type card or by using the smartphone. The system will allow ST to move away from a cash operation, which will help in eliminating the need for cash handling by drivers and office staff. • Comprehensive Transportation Study — In an effort to improve our continued service to the resident of the City of Riverside, ST will be conducting a comprehensive study to look at our operations, staffing, and overall program. This study will identify strengths and potential areas of improvement so that the program can continue to grow and serve the public. 31 Performance Target Report — ST meets the mandatory farebox recovery ratio target and has met the 5 of the 7 discretionary performance indicators in the FY 2016/17 (shown in Table 9 below.) Transit operators are required to meet at least four of the seven discretionary performance indicators. Table 9 Mandatory: 1. Farebox Recovery Ratio Meets Target Discretionary: 1. Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour Fails to Meet 2. Subsidy Per Passenger Meets Target 3. Subsidy Per Passenger Mile Meets Target 4. Subsidy Per Revenue Hour Fails to Meets 5. Subsidy Per Revenue Mile Meets Target 6. Passengers Per Revenue Hour Meets Target 7. Passengers Per Revenue Mile Meets Target Note: Must meet at least 4 out of 7 Discretionary Performance Indictors Operating and Financial Data for the past four years and for the 2016/17 Fiscal Year are shown below. Table 9A Operating & Financial Data FY2012/13 FY2013/14 FY2014/15 FY 2015/16 (Projected) FY 2016/17 (Planned) System Wide Ridership $172,725 $182,878 $175,276 190,000 199,000 Operating Cost per Revenue Hours $63.53 $68.97 $79.51 $65.74 $84.01 32 Farebox revenue is the only course of revenue for Special Transportation. Figure 9B below reflects the farebox revue and the operating costs since FY 2012/13. Table 9B Fare Revenue Calculation (consistent with Commission Farebox Recovery Policy) Revenue Sources FY2012/13 FY2013/14 FY2014/15 FY 2015/16 (Estimate) FY 2016/17 (Plan) Passenger Fares $374,768 $382,963 $384,631 $374,768 $ 439,823 Total Revenue $374,768 $382,963 $384,631 $374,768 $439,823 Total Operating Expenses $3,169,702 $3,436,714 $3,749,768 $2,716,600 $4,364,819 Farebox Recovery Ratio 12.21% 11.14% 10.26% 13.80% 10.07% 33 Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Pass Rail Short Range Transit Plan FY 2016/17 - 2018/19 COACHELLA VALLEY- SAN GORGONIO PASS TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1 - BACKGROUND 4 1.1 CVAG MOU and TDA Funding 4 1.2 SRTP Amendments 5 1.3 Service Development Plan 5 1.4 Annual Project Update and FRA Grant Status 6 CHAPTER 2 - PROJECT OVERVIEW 7 2.1 Population Profile and Demographic Projections 7 2.2 Fixed Route Services 7 2.3 Scope 8 2.4 Objective 8 2.5 Project Location 8 2.6 Project Coordination 10 2.7 Project Schedule and Deliverables 11 CHAPTER 3 - DESCRIPTION OF WORK 12 3.1 Detailed Project Work Plan and Outreach Plan 12 CHAPTER 4 - PRELIMINARY SERVICE PLANNING AND ALTERNATIVES PHASE 1 13 4.1 Alternatives Analysis 13 4.2 Preliminary Service Development Planning Methodology 13 CHAPTER 5 - ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION PHASE 2 16 5.1 NEPA/CEQA Scoping and Outreach 16 5.2 Environmental Document & Section 4(f) Analysis 17 CHAPTER 6 - SERVICE DEVELOPMENT PLAN DEVELOPMENT 19 CHAPTER 7 - PROJECT MANAGEMENT 21 TABLE 4 - SUMMARY OF FUNDS REQUESTED 22 TABLE 5 - SUMMARY OF FUTURE FUNDS REQUESTED 25 TABLE 9 - SRTP HIGHLIGHTS 28 2 GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS BNSF BNSF Railway CEQ Council of Environmental Quality CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CETAP Community & Environmental Acceptability Process CMAQ Congestion Mitigation & Air Quality Funds CVAG Coachella Valley Association of Governments DEIS Draft Environmental Impact Statement EA Environmental Assessment EIR Environmental Impact Report EIS Environmental Impact Statement EOM Extra -Ordinary Maintenance FEIS Final Environmental Impact Statement FRA Federal Railroad Administration FTA Federal Transit Administration HSIPR High -Speed Intercity Passenger Rail IEOC Inland Empire -Orange County Line LACMTA Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority LAUS Los Angeles Union Station LOSSAN Los Angeles/San Diego/San Luis Obispo Rail Corridor Agency LTF Local Transportation Funds MOW Maintenance -of -Way NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NOA Notice of Availability NOI Notice of Intent NTD National Transit Database OCTA Orange County Transportation Authority PA&ED Project Approval and Environmental Document PRCIP Passenger Rail Corridor Investment Plan PTC Positive Train Control PTMISEA Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account PVL Perris Valley Line RCTC Riverside County Transportation Commission ROD Record of Decision RTA Riverside Transit Agency RTIP Regional Transportation Improvement Program SANBAG San Bernardino Associated Governments SB Senate Bill SCAG Southern California Association of Governments SCRRA Southern California Regional Rail Authority SDP Service Development Plan SRTP Short Range Transit Plan STA State Transit Assistance Funds STIP State Transportation Improvement Program STP Surface Transportation Program Funds TVM Ticket Vending Machine UPRR Union Pacific Railroad VCTC Ventura County Transportation Commission 3 CHAPTER 1 — BACKGROUND Providing passenger rail service to the Coachella Valley has been a long- standing priority for more than two decades. The first studies for such a service were completed in the early 1990's. Additional studies have been performed over time with one of the more recent efforts completed in April 2010. This study was completed through coordination by CVAG, the Commission, and Schiermeyer Consulting Services and adopted by the CVAG Executive Committee on October 25, 2010. On November 10, 2010 the Commission reaffirmed its formal support for implementation and expansion of intercity Amtrak rail service to the Coachella Valley and directed staff to coordinate with CVAG and local communities to advocate for the service. To follow up on that effort the Commission adopted a formal Resolution No. 11-001 in support of Amtrak's plan to run the Sunset Limited daily through the Coachella Valley. In May 2013 the state of California Division of Rail (Caltrans) completed the first phase of a planning study and initial alternatives analysis for the rail corridor. This planning study was very supportive of the potential for a viable service. Future studies will expand on such analyses by determining ridership demand and better cost estimates. Caltrans also included an updated project description and analysis of the Coachella Valley service in the latest state rail plan, approved on September 5, 2013 by the State Transportation Agency. The next update will take place in 2017. 1.1 CVAG MOU and TDA Funding At its September 30, 2013 meeting, the CVAG Executive Committee approved a MOU between the Commission and CVAG to establish a funding split of Coachella Valley TDA funds. All of these TDA funds are currently allocated to SunLine Transit Agency (SunLine), and the intent is to allocate 10 percent of the STA discretionary portion of the TDA funds, using a phased -in approach, in order to support a Coachella Valley Rail program. The intent of the MOU is to allow the Commission to set aside those STA funds into a Coachella Valley Rail fund to be used only for capital costs to improve stations, staff support, as well as funding for technical studies. This funding split is to be phased in as follows: FY 2014/15 5 percent of the STA portion of the TDA funds FY 2015/16 7 percent of the STA portion of the TDA funds FY 2016/17 and thereafter 10 percent of the STA portion of the TDA funds 4 TDA funds are utilized on a wide variety of transportation programs throughout the state including Riverside County. These activities include planning and programming activities, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, community transit services, public transportation, and transit projects. Historically TDA funds have not been set aside for passenger rail. However, technical work will continue on development of the Los Angeles to Coachella Valley corridor in the state rail plan. This work will demonstrate the Coachella Valley's commitment toward implementing a robust rail program and thereby serve as a lever to unlock federal and state sources of funding and other support for necessary environmental work, as well as future operations funding. SunLine is the only designated public transit operator in the Coachella Valley currently authorized by the state to receive these funds. SunLine has been involved in the development of this plan and is working in partnership with the Commission and CVAG in order to promote close coordination of bus and rail needs so that both programs operate successfully. The MOU with CVAG will support a Coachella Valley Rail fund. These funds would be internally maintained at the Commission in a separate account while expenditures would be authorized by CVAG's Executive Committee. This would be similar to current arrangements for the Coachella Valley Highway and Regional Arterial program where the Commission acts as a fiscal agent pursuant to Measure A, but actual expenditures are authorized by CVAG. CVAG Executive Committee decisions regarding the Coachella Valley Rail fund would only impact passenger rail projects within the Coachella Valley. The Coachella Valley Rail fund would initially be used to improve stations with projects that have independent utility, provide funding for technical studies, and limited project management staff support. 1.2 SRTP Amendments The Commission's SRTP includes goals for the Commission's Regional Commuter Rail program and provides detailed information about existing services and facilities, financial forecasts and plans, as well as planned and proposed improvements to be implemented. The Commission oversees transit service in Riverside County primarily through the approval of SRTPs that detail the operating and capital costs planned for transit services. Each operator adopts such a plan and then provides data to the Commission on performance. As SRTPs are based upon estimates of future projects, it is necessary to subsequently amend these documents upon completion or changes to specified projects and circumstances. The Commuter Rail program thus amended its FY 2013/14 Commuter Rail SRTP to use state grant funds and preserve local funds. These funds will be transferred into the Coachella Valley Rail fund for qualified expenditures. 1.3 Service Development Plan The true success of this effort will be to develop comprehensive and convincing planning documents that will allow Coachella Valley rail to compete for limited state and 5 federal rail funds. The project purpose and need will have to be compelling and the ridership potential thoroughly demonstrated. The Federal Rail Administration staff already made it very clear that several rail alignments and alternatives must be studied and compared in order for the project to be viable. The July 1, 2010 Federal Register notice on High -Speed Intercity Passenger Rail (HSIPR) program outlines the planning process needed to obtain funding. This process identifies the need for a service development plan (SDP) with the following requirements: • Clearly demonstrate the purpose and need; • Analyze alternatives for the proposed passenger rail service; • Identify the alternative that best meets the purpose and need; • Identify the discrete capital projects required; and • Demonstrate the operational and financial feasibility. Both Caltrans and FRA have been working to either develop or approve such SDP's for corridors throughout the country and offered some very helpful suggestions on how to conduct the planning effort. The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) environmental assessment or an environmental impact statement may be completed either after or in parallel to the SDP process. The intent is for Commission staff to initiate a Request for Proposal to hire a highly qualified consulting firm capable of conducting both the SDP and the NEPA documentation to expedite project development. 1.4 Annual Project Update and FRA Grant Status As the project has progressed there have been many significant accomplishments including the award of a $2.9M FRA Planning Grant announced on April 16, 2015. This grant will allow the project to seamlessly continue from Phase 1 to Phase 2. As described below the project has many elements to complete for the overall Service Development Plan. As of the end of FY16 the following has been completed: • Initial Project Outreach and Scoping • Public Open House Meetings • Stakeholder TAC Meetings • Market Analysis • Purpose and Need Document • Alternatives Analysis • Phase 2 scoping and planning • FRA Grant Development In addition, RCTC is pursuing the concept of specific Coachella and Stagecoach event passenger service. We are coordinating with MSRC for funding and LOSSAN/Amtrak to operate the service. There are also significant partnership efforts with the event promoter and event transit services. 6 CHAPTER 2 — PROJECT OVERVIEW The proposed Coachella Valley —San Gorgonio Rail Corridor (Corridor) runs from Los Angeles to Indio through four Southern California counties: Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardino. The Corridor refers to the approximately 141-mile long rail corridor between Los Angeles Union Station (LAUS) and the city of Indio. The Corridor consists of two segments: the western 59-mile long segment between LAUS and Riverside/Colton, and the eastern approximately 82-mile segment between Riverside/Colton and Indio. 2.1 Population Profile and Demographic Projections The proposed intercity passenger rail service would provide a conveniently scheduled link to the greater metropolitan areas of Southern California for the communities in the fast-growing Coachella Valley and Banning Pass areas. It will also provide Los Angeles and Orange County residents' access to the world class Coachella Valley visitor destinations and festivals. In addition, it will provide lifeline access on routes not serviced by other means to key destinations such as the Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Loma Linda. 2.2 Fixed Route Services On July 1, 2010, the FRA published its Interim Program Guidance for the High -Speed Intercity Passenger Rail Program in the Federal Register Volume 75 No. 126 Notices. The Caltrans was selected through this competitive grant program for planning funds to conduct the State Rail Plan, which includes the proposed service that is the subject of this scope. As part of its planning processes, Caltrans conducted the Coachella Valley Intercity Rail Corridor Planning Study, which examined the viability of the provision of intercity passenger rail service between Los Angeles and Indio and recommended the preparation of a SDP to determine the range of, and ultimately, select a preferred service option for the corridor. The Commission is leading the planning efforts for the SDP and environmental documents, utilizing a combination of state and local funds. A large portion of the funding is from the State Proposition 1 B Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account Program (PTMISEA). Due to the complexity of service development programs, extensive pre -construction preparation is required, including service planning, environmental review, and conceptual engineering efforts. The first phase of this process, known as the Planning Phase, is the development of the Passenger Rail Corridor Investment Plan (PRCIP). The PRCIP provides information in support of a future decision whether to fund and implement a major investment in a passenger rail corridor. It consists of two components: 1) an environmental document and analysis of the proposed rail service, which in the case of the Corridor will either be an environmental assessment (EA) or a 7 Tier 1 environmental impact statement (EIS) to satisfy both the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements, and 2) a SDP. Together, the environmental document and SDP complete the PRCIP, which would provide information to support a potential future FRA decision whether to fund and implement a major investment in the Corridor. For the purposes of this scope of work, the term "Project" means the completion of the SDP and environmental work activities exclusively for initial planning of the Corridor. Also for the purposes of this scope of work, the term "Corridor Program" means final design, environmental clearance, and construction work activities required to implement service along the corridor. 2.3 Scope This scope of work is divided into four major tasks and several subtasks, described in detail below. Task 1 includes early planning. Task 2 includes preliminary service planning and the preparation of other technical information to identify and develop an alternatives analysis. Both Tasks 1 and 2 have now been completed. The data gathered during this phase will be used to perform Task 3, the development of the Environmental Documentation, and Task 4 the refinement and finalization of the SDP. Tasks may overlap and require close coordination and will be conducted through an iterative analytical process. Task orders 3 & 4 have been issued to the consultant team with specific budget and oversight requirements. 2.4 Objective The objective of the Project is to complete a PRCIP in compliance with FRA's Procedures, the Council of Environmental Quality's NEPA implementing regulation, and this SDP. For the purposes of this scope of work, the Project is the completion of the SDP work activities and the environmental documentation to support NEPA/CEQA clearance for program level design and operations necessary for the service. The environmental documentation will be an optional contract item that will proceed via a task order based on results of prior tasks. 2.5 Project Location The Banning Pass -Coachella Valley Rail Corridor consists of two segments: the western 59-mile long segment between LAUS and Riverside/Colton, and the eastern approximately 140-mile segment between Riverside/Colton and Indio. It is anticipated that alternate routes between Los Angeles and the Riverside/Colton area be analyzed. This would include possible routes along the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway (BNSF) San Bernardino Subdivision, the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) Alhambra or Los Angeles Subdivision and the Metrolink San Gabriel Subdivision. To ensure that planning considers the interrelationships of the broader regional rail network, the following segment(s) and/or services beyond the Banning Pass -Coachella Valley Rail 8 Corridor shall be considered to the degree necessary to fully inform the service development planning process and service environmental work for the Corridor: 1. Amtrak Sunset Limited (Los Angeles to New Orleans via Phoenix); 2. Amtrak Southwest Chief (Los Angeles to Chicago via Riverside); 3. Amtrak Pacific Sur liner Trains (San Diego to San Luis Obispo); 4. Commuter Rail Operations Metrolink (Serving Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Ventura Counties); 5. Future daily intercity service between Los Angeles and Phoenix via Coachella Valley; 6. Local and regional bus connections; and 7. High Speed Rail future plans. ! 9� Ani,11 s.A1 EA J,lrr 1ms Angeles Station I& Les Angelo- .S is I 3 ii ]i),1 fsJ\J,inr-- raw Iawr San ara \ x.mnlnt Montcleir ., rnardino tlikmarrolii Loma Linda! l Maraata Pom'pna F Rodlands �� ` \,,,,xr ��ON7 tan realandb % raea r� amOntano ,,,, / aandb.. r ii;1ilS'Ll 5�i119k?A:r5 • (aliae;a Chehy Valley Riverside Pass Araa Placentia larta &aJmonr rannlny Cah,mn xoreaµ Fullerton ��"aa_ - x - HaDowntown m�ert Hot Springs. `� Morena t? ca,on, __..racer Palm Springss . Anaheim Orange ---- SrJ;}y srms. ;ll l ifaL� 59.liff u rh LEGEND dI� - SCAM San Gabriel Sub ,-r-Union Pacific RR Alhambra Sub �- BNSF Railway San Bernardino Sub -Union Pacific RA Yuma Sub ,✓-Union Pacific RR Los Angeles Sub CATCHMENT AREAS • - Existing Station Areas O- Potential Station Areas J rr . r• naeaha 'MAI Indio Indian Inds aAk ld Qulnta fatthNla Thermal Mean Not all potential stations will be needed; construction and alignment alternatives will be determined in the future. 9 2.6 Project Coordination The Contractor shall perform all tasks required for the Project through a coordinated process, which will involve affected railroad owners, operators, and funding partners, including: • Major Partners: Divisions within Caltrans, including Rail, Planning, Mass Transportation, and Transportation Systems Information; and Caltrans District 8 • Project Partner: FRA • Railroad Owners: UPRR, BNSF, Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Orange County Transportation Authority, and San Bernardino Associated of Governments • Regional Transportation Planning Agencies: Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG), Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) • Regulatory Agencies: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Regional Water Quality Control Board, Bureau of Land Management (potentially), • Intercity Rail Agency: LOSSAN Joint Powers Authority • Intercity Rail Operator: Amtrak • Commuter Rail Operator: Metrolink 10 2.7 Project Schedule and Deliverables The period of performance for all work will be estimated by the Contractor and approved by the Commission with key milestones identified. The anticipated deliverables associated with this scope are as follows: Deliverables Task 1: Detailed Work Plan, Budget, and Outreach Plan ■ Detailed Project Work Plan (with budget) and Outreach Plan (Complete) Task 2: Preliminary Service Planning and Alternatives ■ Purpose and Need Statement (Complete) ■ Technical Memo on Criteria and Methodology (Complete) ■ Alternatives Analysis Report (In Progress) ■ Conceptual Engineering (In Progress) Task 3: Environmental Documentation ■ Draft NOI ■ Agency and Stakeholder Involvement Plan ■ Final Purpose and Need Statement ■ Scoping Report ■ Impact Analysis Methodology ■ Annotated Environmental Document Outline ■ Administrative Draft Environmental Document ■ Draft Environmental Document and Draft NOA ■ Administrative Final Environmental Document ■ Final Environmental Document and Draft NOA ■ Draft ROD Task 4: Service Development Plan ■ Technical Memo on SDP Outline and Methodology ■ Draft SDP ■ Final SDP 11 CHAPTER 3 — DESCRIPTION OF WORK A detailed outreach plan with stakeholder coordination shall be prepared and submitted for approval. There is significant interest in this project from many diverse agencies, politicians, stakeholders, communities, and the like and accordingly, the proposed outreach plan shall be one that will accommodate the public interest as well as the feedback necessary to the overall planning process. This task includes both development and implementation of the early alternatives planning outreach and should be designed to integrate with the outreach and public notification required by the eventual environmental process. 3.1 Detailed Project Work Plan and Outreach Plan For this initial task, the Contractor will prepare a detailed Project work plan. The work plan will describe the activities and steps necessary to complete this statement of work. The work plan shall also include information about the project management approach, including team organization, team decision -making, roles and responsibilities. In addition, the work plan will include the Project schedule and a detailed Project budget. The work plan will be reviewed and approved by the Commission. The Contractor shall provide an outreach team that can develop and manage a project website to share information with the ability to provide electronic surveys for project feedback. Other aspects of social media outreach should also be explored. In addition, the Contractor will facilitate efforts to initiate project support letters and resolutions from a broad range of stakeholders. The Contractor will facilitate regular technical advisory committee meetings at multiple locations along the corridor to provide updates and gain feedback on the project. The Contractor shall also maintain a database of interested parties and provide written fact sheets, newsletters and updates as needed. Deliverables: • Detailed Project work plan, including Project budget and Project schedule, for Commission review and approval; and • Detailed stakeholder coordination and outreach plan shall be provided for Commission review and approval. 12 CHAPTER 4 — PRELIMINARY SERVICE PLANNING AND ALTERNATIVES PHASE 1 The fundamental starting point of any transportation planning effort is the identification of the purpose and need for an improvement to the transportation system service in the market. The first requirement for the identification of purpose and need shall be for the Contractor to bring resources to bear to identify pure/latent demand in the Coachella Valley for rail service. The Contractor shall provide the Commission with a general assessment on the Coachella Valley market and its ability to support potential rail service. Based on the initial indication of pure/latent demand, Contractor shall then proceed with the identification of alternatives for the Corridor Program. The Contractor will identify routing alternatives for the Corridor Program and also include no -build and bus only alternatives. From this list, the Contractor will conduct a feasibility analysis to identify the most reasonable and feasible alternatives for inclusion in an eventual environmental document and SDP. The results of corridor strategic plans, business plans, corridor assessments, and environmental analysis provide input to the identification of alternatives. The Contractor will prepare a brief technical memo outlining the universe of alternatives including routes, stations, service plans, frequencies, operating philosophies, and proposed approach for the alternatives analysis to the Commission for review and approval, including identification of criteria and the methodology for preliminary service development planning. 4.1 Alternatives Analysis The alternatives analysis criteria will address how alternatives will be determined to be reasonable and feasible in order to be carried forward into further analysis. The criteria will consider: • The purpose and need for the action; • Technical feasibility (physical route characteristics, potential constraints, capacity - constrained existing facilities or infrastructure, safety); • Economic feasibility (market potential and/or ridership, capital and operating costs); and • Major environmental concerns. 4.2 Preliminary Service Development Planning Methodology The Contractor will conduct an analysis and prepare an Alternatives Analysis Report for Commission review and approval. The alternatives analysis will include preliminary service planning elements such as: • Ridership forecasts and travel demand for this effort will be provided by Caltrans through the Intercity Rail Ridership Model. Service plans with each route and station alternatives need to be provided as input to the model. The Contractor will 13 be responsible for coordinating data with Ca!trans and evaluating and incorporating the results into the analysis. Additional factors such as travel time, service frequency, and price sensitivity will be included in the analysis. • Preliminary operating plans for each alternative developed through the use of railroad operation simulations, incorporating equipment options and both current and planned commuter and freight operations in the Corridor, which in turn reflect variables such as travel demand and rolling stock configuration. Operating plans will include both scenarios based on existing conditions and scenarios based on increased speeds, reliability, and frequencies. These service scenarios will form the basis for the environmental analysis. A description of the potential infrastructure improvements for each alternative. • Capital costs estimates for each alternative, including unit cost and quantities relating to comparable core track structures, stations, parking facilities, land acquisition, maintenance facilities, and any new facilities or upgrades required for operational control and management; a percentage allowance for contingencies; and any additional ongoing capital costs related to the alternative. • Operating and maintenance costs will be based upon an analysis of historic Amtrak operating and maintenance costs for the similar routes and projections related to the specific proposed service. This should include details necessary to discern differences in alternatives, costs for maintenance of way, maintenance of equipment, train movement, passenger traffic, and services such as marketing, reservations/information, station, and on -board services, general/administrative expenses, and cost -sharing arrangements with infrastructure owners and rail operators. • Potential phased implementation scenarios for the alternatives that can result in service improvements that have independent utility and reflect constructability considerations. • The outreach plan needs to be implemented early on in this initial phase to engage stakeholders and involved agencies to ensure that all potential alternatives and stations are identified and reviewed. After Commission approval of the alternatives analysis criteria and preliminary service development planning methodology, the Contractor will develop conceptual engineering to a level sufficient to identify necessary infrastructure improvements and determine the cost estimates for each potential route alternative. This is anticipated to be the "standard" 30 percent plans for general elements and additional engineering up to 65 percent plans at locations that may warrant additional detail. Conceptual engineering will include developing design criteria, track work concepts, structural concepts, roadway crossing recommendations, layover and storage/maintenance facility requirements, unit cost data, and conceptual plans. The Contractor will coordinate with the Commission and railroad owners and operators on this task. The conceptual engineering designs will form a basis for the footprint of the environmental analysis. 14 Deliverables: • Purpose and Need Statement for Commission review and approval; • Technical memo on proposed alternatives analysis criteria and preliminary service development planning methodology for Commission review and approval; • Alternatives Analysis Report for Commission review and approval; • Conceptual engineering for alternatives for Commission review and acceptance; and • Outreach plan development. Results from Alternatives Analysis with alignment planned for Phase 2. P Los Angeles Union Station Loma Linda/Redlands SAH GOPEDH19 PASS P2r55 A rea Fdiin Spiiiy LEGEND - Alternative 1 CATCHHIEHTAREAS • - Existing Station Areas • Potential Station Areas J.� 15 CHAPTER 5 — ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION PHASE 2 Upon Commission approval of the Alternatives Analysis Report the Commission has decided to proceed with the next steps of environmental documentation. The Contractor will need to provide a specific recommendation as to the type and scope of the environmental documentation needed to go forward based on the project understanding at the time, either an EA or a complete final EIS. The recommendation should consider the various alternatives for implementing the proposed passenger rail service, the conceptual engineering for construction projects necessary to implement those service alternatives, and the potential environmental impacts that may be associated with those projects at a general level of detail appropriate for the Corridor Program. This effort should meet both NEPA and CEQA requirements. Extensive coordination with the regulating agencies that will be reviewing and certifying these documents must be incorporated in all aspects of this task. This includes working with the FRA in scoping, reviews, publishing notices of intent (NOI), etc. It should be made clear this task shall be priced separately from the other tasks and will only be implemented upon approval by the Commission. For the development of the cost estimate in the proposal, it will be helpful to assume the exercise will require a full Tier 1 EIS. The approach can be modified. 5.1 NEPA/CEQA Scoping and Outreach In coordination with the Commission, the Contractor will conduct the scoping process to initiate the Environmental Documents, which will include: • Identification of the Corridor study area; • Development of a NOI to prepare an EIS; • Development of the Agency and Stakeholder Involvement Plan; • Holding scoping meetings with the public, stakeholders, and other agencies; • Finalization of the Purpose and Need Statement; • Preparation of a scoping report; and • Coordination with FRA and other approving authorities. A draft NOI will need to be prepared to initiate the scoping process. As part of scoping, the Purpose and Need Statement and the set of proposed alternatives detailed in the 16 Alternatives Analysis Report will be refined through input from the public, government agencies, and other stakeholders. The Contractor, in coordination with the Commission, will develop the final Purpose and Need Statement for the Corridor Program and refine the set of proposed alternatives to be considered for further analysis in the environmental documents. To concurrently comply with CEQA requirements the scope of work needs to include preparation of a notice of preparation, draft and final environmental impact report (EIR), notice of completion, CEQA findings, statement of overriding considerations (if necessary), State Clearinghouse process, and related requirements. The Contractor will prepare and implement, in coordination with the Commission, the Agency and Stakeholder Involvement Plan. The plan will outline the public and agency involvement program and will identify key contacts within agencies, public officials, affected Native American Tribes, and other key stakeholder groups and the public. The plan will also identify key contacts with civic and business groups, relevant interest groups, present and potential riders/users, and private service providers/shippers. The plan will identify how involvement activities will be linked to key milestones in the planning and environmental analytic process, including public hearings on the draft EIS. This process will include all the elements to fulfill FRA's Section 106 responsibilities including tribal coordination. The Contractor will submit the Draft Public Involvement Plan for the Commission review. The final plan will be revised based on received comments and resubmitted to the Commission for approval. In addition, the Contractor will initiate the scoping process, in cooperation with the Commission, and will invite participation from federal, state, and local agencies, Native American tribes, other interested parties, and the public, as identified in the Agency and Stakeholder Involvement Plan. The Contractor will record the process and provide a summary of comments, responses, and conclusions in a scoping report for the Commission review and approval. Deliverables: • Draft NOI; • Agency and Stakeholder Involvement Plan for the Commission review and acceptance; • Final Purpose and Need Statement for the Commission review and approval; • Scoping report for Commission review and acceptance; and • Continued FRA coordination, review and approvals as necessary. 5.2 Environmental Document & Section 4(f) Analysis The Contractor will prepare environmental document and focus on the likely environmental effects for the entire corridor relating to the type of service being proposed for the identified range of reasonable alternatives. The analysis of impacts will be based upon the conceptual engineering. The Contractor will prepare the 17 environmental document as per NEPA, and comply with CEQA requirements. The Contractor will propose a methodology for impact analysis to the Commission for review and approval prior to commencing the work. The Contractor will include impacts at a general level of detail for the Corridor associated with: • Route alternatives; • Cities and stations served; • Train service levels and frequency; • Train technology; • Train operating speeds; • Ridership projections; and • Major infrastructure components. Studies to be conducted as part of the NEPA evaluation process for the Corridor Program may include the following (A final list will be determined in conjunction with the Commission in the work plan and estimated budget) • Air quality • Water quality • Noise and vibration • Solid waste disposal • Ecological systems • Impacts on wetlands areas • Impacts on endangered species or wildlife • Flood hazards and floodplain management • Coastal zone management • Use of energy resources • Use of other natural resources, such as water, minerals, or timber • Aesthetic and design quality impacts • Possible barriers to the elderly and handicapped • Land use, existing and planned • Environmental Justice • Public health • Public safety, including any impacts due to hazardous materials • Recreational opportunities • Socioeconomic • Historic, archeological, architectural, and cultural • Transportation • Potential impacts to Section 4(f)- protected properties • Construction period impacts The Contractor, in conjunction with Commission, will also identify strategies to avoid, minimize, or mitigate identified impacts. This will include coordination with appropriate resource agencies throughout the NEPA/CEQA process to manage any impacts identified during the development of the environmental document. Specific mitigation strategies will be developed and included in the environmental document as necessary by resource area, based on the following approaches: • Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action; • Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation; • Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment; • Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action; and 18 " Compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources or environments. This task will also include preparation of the environmental document. The Contractor will prepare an annotated outline of the proposed document for Commission review and approval. The Contractor will then prepare an administrative draft for Commission and FRA review and approval. Modifications to the administrative draft requested by Commission will be incorporated to produce a draft for circulation. The Contractor will prepare and submit to Commission a draft notice of availability (NOA) for the draft document. The Contractor will also distribute the draft document to agencies and stakeholders, as outlined in the Agency and Stakeholder Involvement Plan. In addition, the Contractor will coordinate with FRA and other respective agencies to publish the NOI, DEIS, NOA, FEIS, and ROD in the Federal Register as required. The Contractor, in close coordination with Commission and FRA, will respond to comments from the draft document and prepare the final document. The Contractor will prepare an administrative final document for FRA review and approval. Modifications to the administrative final document requested by FRA will be incorporated to produce a final document for circulation. The Contractor will prepare and submit to FRA a draft NOA. The Contractor will also distribute the final document to agencies and stakeholders, as outlined in the Agency and Stakeholder Involvement Plan. Additionally, the Contractor, in coordination with FRA, will identify the next steps required in the environmental process, including identifying the necessary Tier-2 project -level NEPA documents required. The commitments agreed upon by the agencies throughout the NEPA process will be included in the draft ROD, which the Contractor will submit to FRA for review and consideration. A constant line of communication between the Contractor and Commission will be maintained throughout the entire NEPA process. Deliverables: " Impact analysis methodology for FRA review and acceptance; " Annotated EIS outline for FRA review and acceptance; " Administrative draft document for FRA review and comment; " Draft document and draft NOA for FRA review and approval; " Administrative final document for FRA review and comment; " Final document and draft NOA for FRA review and approval; and " Draft ROD 18 CHAPTER 6 — SERVICE DEVELOPMENT PLAN DEVELOPMENT The Contractor will produce a SDP for the final selected alternative in close coordination with the Commission and FRA. The SDP will lay out the overall scope and approach for the proposed service by clearly demonstrating the purpose and need for new rail service; analyzing alternatives for the proposed new service and identifying the alternative that would best address the identified purpose and need; demonstrating the operational and financial feasibility of the alternative proposed to be pursued; and describing how the implementation of the SDP will be divided into discrete phases. Specifically, the Contractor will include within the SDP: • Purpose and need, including a description of the transportation challenges and opportunities faced in the markets to be served by the proposed service; • Service rationale to demonstrate how the proposed service can cost-effectively address transportation and other needs, based on current and forecasted travel demand and capacity condition; • Planning methodology used in developing the SDP; • Identification of alternatives, including rail improvements, improvements to other modes including bus, and a no -build alternative; • Operations modeling, including railroad operation simulations, equipment and crew scheduling analyses, and terminal, yard, and support operations, which in turn reflect such variables as travel demand and rolling stock configuration. If the proposed service shares facilities with rail freight, commuter rail, or other intercity passenger rail services, the existing and future characteristics of those services will be included; • Station access and analysis to address the location of the stations to be served by the proposed service, how these stations will accommodate the proposed service, how passengers will access the stations, and how the stations will be integrated with connections to other modes of transportation; • Demand and revenue forecasts, including the methods, assumptions, and outputs for travel demand forecasts, and the expected revenue from the service, including ridership/revenue forecasts that specify the number of passengers and boardings/disembarking at stations; • Financial performance and projections for each phase of service, including operating costs and revenues, capital replacement costs, and other institutional arrangements affecting the system finances. The SDP will address the methods, assumptions and outputs for operating expenses for the train service including maintenance of way, maintenance of equipment, transportation (train movement), passenger traffic and services such as marketing, reservations/information, station, and on -board services, general/administrative expenses, cost -sharing arrangements, and access fees; • Capital programming at a level sufficient to identify necessary infrastructure improvements and to determine the cost estimates. This would include equipment, 19 infrastructure improvements, facilities, and other investments required for each discrete phase of service implementation; • Cost -benefit analysis of the Project, which shall include such factors as the Project's estimated ridership and anticipated user and public benefits, relative to the proposed investment, and consideration of enhanced mobility, environmental, and economic benefits (both for the specific Project proposal and in terms of the costs and benefits generated by the specific Project within a network context); and • Additional benefits should be analyzed such as job creation and retention, "green" environmental outcomes, potential energy savings, and effects on community livability. The Contractor will prepare a technical memo that includes the proposed annotated outline for the Corridor Program SDP and details the proposed methodology for analyzing the required SDP components. Contractor will submit the technical memo to the Commission for review and approval. Upon approval, the Contractor will develop a draft SDP for Commission review and approval utilizing the agreed upon outline and methodology. The Contractor will incorporate the Commission comments into the final SDP for the Corridor Program. Deliverables: • Technical memo on SDP Outline and Methodology for FRA review and acceptance; • Draft SDP for FRA review and approval; and • Final SDP. 20 CHAPTER 7 — PROJECT MANAGEMENT The Contractor is responsible for facilitating the coordination of all activities among the Commission, relevant host railroads, and FRA for implementation of the Project. Upon award of the Project, the Commission will monitor and evaluate the Project's progress through the administration of regular progress meetings scheduled throughout the Project's duration. Good program management and quality assurance practices must be implemented on the project. As part of the Project's administration, the Contractor will: • Hold regularly scheduled Project meetings with Commission; • Maintain the Administrative Record for the Project, to be submitted to FRA upon Project completion. A Project master file will contain copies of reports, correspondence, and other documents and will be compiled and recorded in the Administrative Record; • Perform periodic Project status reviews and meetings with relevant stakeholders at various locations within the Project area including the Coachella Valley; • Comply with Commission Project reporting requirements, including: a. Status of Project by task breakdown and percent complete; b. Changes and reason for change in Project's scope, schedule and/or budget; c. Description of unanticipated problems and any resolution since the immediately preceding progress report; d. Summary of work scheduled for the next progress period; and e. Updated Project schedule. 21 ROTC Commuter Rail FY 261E117 Summary of Funds Requested Snore Range Transit Flan Table 4 - Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2016/17 Project [Description Capital Project Number' Total Funds Total Funds woo CarrYdVBr LTF FRA Grant Prop 16 (PTMISEA) sTA Other CV Ralf Planning a Stet OD Oeve opmrnl r r . CV Ceneral Rail Management FY 1'-1 FY 17 2 2,90110013 159.395 - - - 2.900400 0 159.396 Subtotal: Capital 3,059,395 SO SO 32,900,000 SO $159,395 SO Tatar Operating& Capital 93,059,395 SO SO 52,900,000 SO S159,395 SO {I1 Ma rig funds far the Ffj,g Gent Will mama 5'an pnpr year and Future year LTF and sTA altonations Revised 5125/2416 Summary di FY 2 i on7 Funds R equested,x Is 031S3f103U SaNru 30 Auvituuf1S -17 318V1 Table 4A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER: FY 17 - 1 PROJECT NAME: CV Rail Planning and Station Development PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This Project will provide the following: Provide funding for the Phase 2 of the Service Development plan and Environmental Documentation. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: This project is funded by an FRA grant and local matching funds for the Coachella Valley Rail Corridor study. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): FRA Grant $2,900,000 Total $2,900,000 23 Table 4A — Capital Project Justification (Cont) PROJECT NUMBER: FY 17 - 2 PROJECT NAME: CV General Rail Management PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This Project will provide the following: Cover the PA&ED or Environmental Documentation that is separate from the SDP along with portions of the SDP. It will also cover additional planning and local match needed for the FRA Grant as we move forward. It will also cover any incidental RCTC agency costs related to the project salaries, etc. that are not eligible to be reimbursed through the Prop 1 B or FRA grant. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: This project is funded by local funds subject to the Coachella Valley rail split to fund the environmental study. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): STA (Coachella Valley Rail Split) $159,395 Total $159,395 24 RCTC Coachella Valley . San Gorgonio Pass Rail FY all Gil- 7 Summary ni FtlrtrA Re('LrwMa Shan mange Transit Pier! Table 5.1 - Summary of Fir nds Requested for FY 2017/18 Project Description .^_a�.tal :'m;aor Nuiv5l:er'rr Total Furls Total Furrd3 v"dcam/over - LT STA T rcrorcr In Oi-et L V Gene. al Frail m:a r.agernenl tit 190,aki - - 190,000_ Suotoiar Capitol 190.0t10 - - 190,000 vial: 9perabny & Capita; f 190.900 - 19Q,03l - Table 5.2 - Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2018/19 Project Description Cantal -'ra.P,=t i'lu'nLw'rr Total Funds Total Funds Olk C�OM/Over LTF STA Transfer In Other tL V General Ra ll Ma eanement • 1�; 1SOON' - 190,000 .�1titotal: Capital Si 90.000 ;Ci sir soP.oar S0 _ Si1 Total- operating a Capital 5190,01:10 So S0 SS9dr000_ In Se Revrsed at1t1241B Summary or fY �07Gr1 f ulTIS RedUested xis 031S31103N SaNf13 321ninA 30 Auvmuf1S - S 31814(1 Table 5.1A— Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER: FY 18 - 1 PROJECT NAME: CV General Rail Management PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This Project will provide the following: Cover the PA&ED or Environmental Documentation that is separate from the SDP along with portions of the SDP. It will also cover additional planning and local match needed for the FRA Grant as we move forward. It will also cover any incidental RCTC agency costs related to the project salaries, etc. that are not eligible to be reimbursed through the Prop 1 B or FRA grant. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: This project is funded by local funds subject to the Coachella Valley rail split to fund the environmental study. This project will not include Proposition 1 B PTMISEA funding. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): STA (Coachella Valley Rail Split) $190,000 Total $190,000 26 Table 5.2A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER: FY 19 - 1 PROJECT NAME: CV General Rail Management PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This Project will provide the following: Cover the PA&ED or Environmental Documentation that is separate from the SDP along with portions of the SDP. It will also cover additional planning and local match needed for the FRA Grant as we move forward. It will also cover any incidental RCTC agency costs related to the project salaries, etc. that are not eligible to be reimbursed through the Prop 1 B or FRA grant. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: This project is funded by local funds subject to the Coachella Valley rail split to fund the environmental study. This project will not include Proposition 1 B PTMISEA funding. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): STA (Coachella Valley Rail Split) $190,000 Total $190,000 27 TABLE 9 — SRTP HIGHLIGHTS Specific highlights of the FY 2016/17 Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Pass Rail plan include: RCTC has completed Phase 1 of this effort which included: • Initial Project Outreach and Scoping • Public Open House Meetings • Stakeholder TAC Meetings • Market Analysis • Purpose and Need Document • Alternatives Analysis • Phase 2 scoping and planning • FRA Grant Development RCTC is continuing to work on the Phase 2 of the Federal Railroad Administration process which is expected to be completed in Fall 2018. Some of the elements underway are: o Environmental Documentation, and o Final Service Development Plan As part of this process, RCTC has formed a Technical Advisory Committee comprised of regional stakeholders and an Ad Hoc Committee of its Commission members. Public meetings were held throughout the year and RCTC is continuing to keep the public engaged by encouraging feedback about service routes, stations, ridership and other elements through the project website and social media. 28 PALO VERDE VALLEY TRANSIT AGENCY BLYTHE, CALIFORNIA SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN FISCAL YEAR 2016/17 - 2018/19 FINAL 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 Facilities 8 Coordination 9 Chapter 2 — Services & Performance Blue Route 1 Blythe City Circulator 11 Gold Route 2 Palo Verde College Crosstown 12 Red Route 3 CA Prisons Express 13 Green Route 4 Rural Rider 14 Silver Route 5 Saturday Service 15 Desert Road TRIP 16 PVVTA X-Tend-A-Ride 17 Performance 18 Growth and Planning 19 Passenger Amenities and Equipment Needs 20 Chapter 3 — Service Changes Route Changes and Modifications Marketing Plans and Promotions Chapter 4 — Finances & Capital Plans 22 23 Operating Budget 25 Capital Budget 25 Regulatory and Compliance Requirements 25 Data Tables (Start) 26 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. In 2016 the City of Blythe celebrates 100 years of incorporation. PVVTA is a marketing partner within the City Centennial Committee. B U S DEPOT Demographics The valley's population is approximately 20,000 residents. Population growth in the valley is increasing at an average of about one percent per year but this trend is slowing over the last two years. The valley is agriculturally diverse providing many outdoor jobs and direct support to the local community. Major employers include the Ironwood State Prison and Chuckawalla Valley State Prison. Service Profile The Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency (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 five 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 % of a mile away from the actual mapped routes. Hours of operation for the Fixed Route system are Monday through Friday from 5:00 am to 6:45 pm, and 8:00 am to 1:00 pm on Saturdays and limited holidays. The Transportation Reimbursement and Information Project 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 (Desert RoadTRIP) that has been in place since 1995. 4 dew walsfig aauunapeob insea 3AIN V1i31A1H I 1 j�1aVd NVHAf1b 311N3A1/ 917T SVN1DN3 Vsto -- 113(S ❑i'd3118 AWANOSEIOH 1•9aa45 u4L ❑1IVNHV9 AVMSO1SNVH3 z AVMNOS90H E iiNd ti x 311N3AV WIZ 311N3AV 444 d5A3 d5 • ■ ■ SNOSIUd tl� itrtrg 3ai� xvg3 A3ldla AVMNOS80H s3inaa ]( 01 iTtf 11:1VIADI V! CO 3931103 3al13A 01Vd az-1 _ J 31VOS 0110N woo•epnd Fare Schedule PVVTA's fare structure is sensitive to the local economy while attempting to maintain the mandated 10 percent Farebox Recovery Ratio. The schedule includes full fare and discounted ride tickets. PVVTA's fare schedule has been in place, with no increase since July 1, 2010. In fiscal year 2016/17, staff will analyze the farebox recovery ratio and fare structure at mid -year to determine if a fare change is necessary. If so, staff will propose to the Board of Directors a change to the fare structure. Prior to any proposed fare changes, PVVTA would hold a public hearing in order to receive public input on any change to the Fare Schedule. PVVTA Fare & Pass Schedule Fixed Route Cash Fare — Routes 1, 2, 4, 5 General Public (ages 5-59 years old) Seniors (ages 60 years or older) Persons with Disabilities (with ADA Card) Children ages 5 and under* (first boarding with full fare adult) Children ages 5 and under* (second & third boarding with full fare adult) * 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. $ 1.65 $ 0.80 $ 0.80 Free $ 0.80 Arizona Zone Fare for travel to and from Ehrenberg, Arizona General Public, Seniors, & Persons with Disabilities $ 5.00 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 Summer Youth Pass 10-Ride Punch Pass 10-Ride Punch Pass 20-Ride Punch Pass General Public 31-Day 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) (Routes 1, 2, 3 Local, 4 & 5) (Ehrenberg, Arizona) (Route 3 Express) (Route 3 Express) (Route 3 Express) Other Cash Fare — X-Tend-A-Ride General Public, Seniors, & Persons with Disabilities $ 3.30 $ 0.80 $ 0.80 $ 6.40 $ 16.50 $ 8.00 $ 43.00 $ 28.00 $ 28.00 $ 40.00 $ 50.00 $ 33.00 $ 66.00 $120.00 $ 5.00 6 Fleet and Maintenance PVVTA operates vehicles using Compressed Natural Gas (CNG), gasoline and diesel. The fleet consists of eight active transit vehicles and five active support vehicles. Most of the vehicles are interchangeable between routes. When vehicles are retired, they are declared surplus property and sold by way of auction. PVVTA adheres to all Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and California Highway Patrol (CHP) mandated Preventive Maintenance Inspection criteria and is very proactive in maintenance efforts. In the past, vehicle maintenance was provided under contract with the City of Blythe Central Garage. Transportation Concepts now provides vehicle maintenance and will continue to do so through the remainder of the contract period. Emergency Reserve Fleet As PVVTA adds new vehicles into service, older units are rotated into an emergency contingency fleet that would be implemented only as needed for emergency and public safety use. With extreme heat conditions and remote location in the Palo Verde Valley, a reserve fleet would better prepare the community in times of power outages where these vehicles would be used to transport affected residents to cooling centers within the area. For other emergency events such as floods or the breakdown of larger passenger buses on Interstate 10, this fleet would be able to assist with a large movement of passengers to safety, freeing up local law enforcement to better deal with the situation at hand. 7 Facilities PVVTA finished construction on the new Operations Center in December 2014. The new facility which is adjacent to the Main Street Park N Ride (PNR) allows users the comfort of a "one stop" shop for all their transportation needs. The new operations center houses all PVVTA assets and centrally locates all operations personnel in the same building. In the years to come, PVVTA will look to developing the site around the operations center to meet the need for a maintenance center, bus wash and covered solar parking at the PNR. A solar project using State Low Carbon Transit Operations Program is an ongoing community improvement and beautification endeavor. This project would include solar panels to offset energy usage and installation of an EV charging station for use at the Park N Ride. Funds have been requested and PVVTA is looking towards partnerships to maximize the benefit of this project. 8 The Blythe CNG Station has proven to be a great resource to local and regional fuel needs for Compressed Natural Gas. Since the station opened in 2014, a steady increase in the number of vehicles especially commercial fleets has been seen monthly. Currently, PVVTA staff is working on expanding the station to accommodate the ever growing demand for CNG along the Interstate 10 corridor. PVVTA has seen vehicles use the station from travelers as far away as Canada who use this strategic route due to the reliability in CNG fuel availability. Expansion of the station will take time and would not hinder the operation of bus services. The hope is to partner with other fuel providers to cover the cost of the expansion. Coordination PVVTA actively coordinates service with Quartzsite Transit (QTS) who operates the Camel Express providing one fixed route in the PVVTA Service Area. QTS provides service from Quartzsite Arizona three times a week and connects with the PVVTA system at the Kmart Transfer Center. QTS and PVVTA meet on occasion to address any operational issues and to provide joint training exercises to staff. These exercises include emergency training, operations and administration support development. PVVTA is part of the Western Arizona Council of Government's Transportation Coordinated Council which has a goal of coordinating 10 regional providers within Arizona towards seamless service. PVVTA operates one deviated fixed route in Ehrenberg, Arizona which is one mile east of the California / Arizona border on the 1-10. The route takes riders into Blythe for transfer to other PVVTA routes. 9 Chapter 2 — Services & Performance 10 Blue Route 1— Deviated Fixed Route City of Blythe Circulator Blue Route 1 serves the growing community of Blythe providing riders access to many civic, educational and county sponsored public social service offices within the City of Blythe. Destinations on Blue Route 1 include: Blythe City Hall, Big Kmart, All Star Cinemas, Albertsons, Rite Aid, Palo Verde Hospital, Palo Verde Unified School District schools, Employment Development Department, Department of Motor Vehicles, Post Office, Blythe Central Garage and Public Works Department, California Highway Patrol, Senior Nutrition Program, Palo Verde Valley District Library, and various other shopping locations within the community. The route can deviate for passengers up to % of mile with a 30-minute advance reservation or upon boarding. Connections to all other deviated fixed routes can be made at various locations within Blythe and at two major transfer points, K-Mart Transfer Center and Social Security (SSA) Transfer Center. Blue Route 1 operates deviated service in a clockwise loop type of route providing a 60-minute frequency with one bus, five days a week. Blue Route 1 operates from 6:25 am to 5:40 pm Monday through Friday. Services are not provided on the following days: Weekends and all Agency observed holidays. RECOMMENDATIONS: 2017 No proposed changes this fiscal year; staff will continue to monitor service. 2018 Implement an opposite bus on the same route in 30-minute headways during peak hours. 2019 No proposed changes this fiscal year; staff will continue to monitor service. ..al10th Ave ENCINAS me 11 Gold Route 2 — Deviated Fixed Route Palo Verde College Crosstown Gold Route 2 provides riders access between the city of Blythe and Palo Verde College. This feeder route provides connections to many civic, educational, and county sponsored public social service offices, Blythe City Hall, All Star Cinemas, Big Kmart, Albertsons, Rite Aid, Palo Verde Hospital, Colorado River Fair, Employment Development Department, Blythe Recreation Center, Palo Verde Valley District Library, Palo Verde College main campus, and various other shopping locations within the community. The route can deviate for passengers up to % of mile with a 30-minute advance reservation or upon boarding. Connections to all other deviated fixed routes can be made at various locations within Blythe and at two major transfer points, K-Mart Transfer Center and other major trip generators. Gold Route 2 operates on a two-way route providing a 60-minute frequency with one bus, five days a week. Gold Route 2 operates from 6:45 am to 6:40 pm Monday through Friday. Services are not provided on: weekends and all Agency -observed holidays. This route does not operate when the college is not in session. RECOMMENDATIONS: 2017 Add tripper service along Chanslorway twice daily; staff will continue to monitor service. 2018 Possibly expand route service and schedule depending on availability of funds. 2019 No proposed changes this fiscal year; staff will continue to monitor service. PV College 6th Ave Chanslorway c Barnard v c +� KMART 1 `o nnurphy ;i Hobsonway D PA 7th INTAKE 12 Red Route 3 — Deviated Fixed Route CA Prisons Express The Red Route 3 provides premium commuter service between Blythe and Chuckawalla Valley & Ironwood State Prisons, Monday through Friday with three AM and three PM trips. This route serves four Park-N-Ride lots, travels down Hobsonway to Mesa Drive, then travels via Interstate 10 to the prisons. The Red Route 3 operates from 5:15 am to 7:30 am and again from 2:00 pm to 5:00 pm, Monday through Friday. Services are not provided on the following days: Weekends and all Agency or State observed holidays. Connections to all other deviated fixed routes can be made at various locations within Blythe and at two major transfer points, K-Mart Transfer Center and Social Security (SSA) Transfer Center. Special fares are charged on this route. All passengers pay $3.30 one way. There are 10 and 20 ride GoPasses available, as well as a $120.00, 31-Day GoPass which gives unlimited rides on all Desert Roadrunner buses for the month. RECOMMENDATIONS: 2017 Eliminate (1) PM roundtrip trip due to low ridership; staff will continue to monitor service. 2018 No proposed changes this fiscal year; staff will continue to monitor service. 2019 No proposed changes this fiscal year; staff will continue to monitor service. PNR MESA SR-78 KMART 2 mim I-10 Hobsonway JFA PRISONS 13 Green Route 4 — Deviated Fixed Route Rural Rider The Green Route 4 provides deviated fixed route service between Blythe, Ripley, Mesa Verde, and Ehrenberg, Arizona. This route serves four Park-N-Ride lots, travels down Hobsonway to State Route 78, then travels South to Ripley, West to Mesa Verde via Interstate 10 and services Ehrenberg, Arizona. The Green Route 4 operates three round trips 6:30 am to 6:55 pm Monday through Friday. Services are not provided on: weekends and all Agency or State observed holidays. Connections to all other deviated fixed routes can be made at various locations within Blythe and at two major transfer points, K-Mart Transfer Center and other major trip generators. RECOMMENDATIONS: 2017 No proposed changes; continue to monitor service. 2018 No proposed changes; continue to monitor service. 2019 Expand evening service if feasible. MESA SR-78 40' RIPLEY KMART Hobsonway 7th EHRENBERG --,.. 4 RIVIERA 14 Silver Route 5 — Deviated Fixed Route Saturday Service The Silver Route 5 provides system -wide deviated fixed route service within the city of Blythe, Ripley, Mesa Verde, and selected trips to Ehrenberg, Arizona. This route serves all major trip -generating areas within the system on 90-minute headways. The Silver Route 5 operates 8:00 am to 12:45 pm Saturday and Agency observed holiday operating days. Services are not provided on: Monday through Friday and all Agency -observed non -operating holidays. RECOMMENDATIONS: 2017 Reduce service hours to mid -day trips providing only 4 hours of service daily. Realignment of routing and schedule to address shopping needs. 2018 No proposed changes; continue to monitor service. 2019 No proposed changes; continue to monitor service. MESA Om K-MART 7th EHRENBERG SR78 Hobsonway RIPLEY♦ 15 Desert Road TRIP Trip Reimbursement PVVTA's Desert RoadTRIP program currently provides reimbursement to individuals who do not have access to local transportation. Desert RoadTRIP will be marketed and promoted in conjunction with Independent Living Partnership to seniors (age 60 years or older), persons with disabilities and truly needy persons who live outside the service area, such as Lost Lake, resort communities along U.S. Highway 95, and Desert Center. Desert RoadTRIP participants can travel up to 460 miles a month, including using Greyhound (690 miles for a family).This equals $147.20 per month ($220.80 for a family per month). In Fiscal Year 2014/15, the TRIP program provided 25 valley residents with mileage reimbursement support for 567 one-way trips and 69,596 miles of escort assisted transportation to distant medical services for a total service cost of $16,063. This breaks down to a one-way trip cost of $28.33 per trip and a .23 cents per mile subsidy. Due to a budget shortage in FY14/15, the Independent Living Partnership supplemented the TRIP funding in the amount of $1,180 in order to keep the program running through the end of the fiscal year. In FY15/16, the budget for the TRIP program was increased accordingly to support the number of passengers. The fare for the Desert RoadTrip service is currently at $5 per one-way trip or $10 per round trip. The TRIP program is currently meeting the required farebox requirement, therefore, no need for increasing the fares in FY16/17. Staff will continue to analyze the program to insure that the farebox requirement is being met. Volunteer drivers will continue to be recruited in order to guarantee Desert RoadTRIP users have escort transportation. PVVTA is also a partner in the Volunteer Driver Corps program. Desert RoadTRIP is available 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. RECOMMENDATIONS: 2017 No proposed changes this fiscal year; staff will continue to monitor service. 2018 No proposed changes this fiscal year; staff will continue to monitor service. 2019 No proposed changes this fiscal year; staff will continue to monitor service. 16 PVVTA X-Tend-A-Ride Community -Based Service Link PVVTA X-Tend-A-Ride is a demand responsive service to address special areas in time where community events require general public transit service that may not be available on the fixed route system. Events in the evening, on no service days, and beyond fixed route hours would be the primary focus of this new service. X-Tend-A-Ride will provide curb -to -curb service with an exclusive fare targeted to meet farebox performance requirements. During a pre -planned community event, riders would be directed to fixed route service during regular operating hours. X-Tend-A-Ride would be available to provide service beyond regular operating hours. Similar trail service has been utilized for Sober Driver needs, added service to the local fair, and special community events needing public awareness. PVVTA X-Tend-A-Ride will not operate in place of fixed route services. RECOMMENDATIONS: 2017 No proposed changes this fiscal year; staff will continue to monitor service. 2018 No proposed changes this fiscal year; staff will continue to monitor service. 2019 No proposed changes this fiscal year; staff will continue to monitor service. 17 Performance Over the last three fiscal years, PVVTA realigned routes system -wide. From those changes, several enhancements and very few issues have developed. Services are now timed and revolve around a central hub location at the K-Mart Transfer Center making travel system -wide seamless and easy for most transit dependent riders. Issues have risen from extended routing to outlying areas where trips are very unproductive in ridership. Along with the enhancements, an addition of tripper service to the Palo Verde College has spurt new growth from student riders using the bus service to attend classes during the school day. Timing routes to meet class schedule and college sessions limit unproductive service and has become reliable to the point that students pick transit over other ride alternatives. Over the holiday month of December, ridership systematically increases due to additional service placed on the fixed routes for holiday decoration viewing and services to community events over the season. Tethering services to community events along the routes has grown over the years and is now steady and predictable. Planning is made to limit services to the times and periods where transit can attract the most ridership. Green Route 4, continues to grow and shows a positive performance trend. Key trip generators and demographics of the areas served by Route 4 show many riders traveling from affordable housing to shopping and work opportunities. Currently, service on this route is increasing due to the stabilization of service and schedule. Staff as always continues to monitor and promote services in the unincorporated areas of Riverside County. 18 For the Silver Route 5, service will once again be reduced by one hour daily to better mirror ridership trends on the route. The plan is to continue to operate Saturday service mindful of the performance and adherence to the farebox recovery ratio. Growth and Planning PVVTA continues to look towards partnerships with local businesses within the service area to expand passenger amenities and incentive programs for riders. PVVTA through local and regional permitting review, implemented several proposed improvements to the system including rerouting of services to new trip generators, addition of new bus stop amenities, and anticipated demand to new trip generating anchors in East Blythe spawning future planning for services along the Colorado River corridor. This growth of major shopping and eating areas in the east end of the service area was predicted and planned but has not come to fruition. Since the economic downturn, planning for services has slowed down but PVVTA is ready and has plans to address such growth. Another area of interest continues to be the solar projects just west and south of the Palo Verde Valley. Transportation is a major key in balancing traffic flow and intrusion on several desert areas. With a minor increase of short -time workers and more permanent jobs once the solar fields are built, public transit will need to bridge the gap between the Palo Verde Valley, Desert Center, Chiriaco Summit, and the Coachella Valley. PVVTA hopes that sometime soon, Sunline and RCTC will look to partner to meet this growing need. Community support for a specialized shuttle service to the Coachella Valley is increasing. RCTC has provided planning resources to scope the need and pursue coordinated efforts to address this need. PVVTA and local stakeholders are actively meeting and working with AMMA Transit Planning (consultants of RCTC) to plan and find funding for such a project. Bridging the over 100 19 mile gap in service between Blythe and the Coachella Valley would provide much needed access to lifeline services such as medical, civic and job related travel. With the commitment from RCTC, PVVTA will continue the efforts to lead local stakeholders toward a possible demonstration service in this fiscal year. Passenger Amenities PVVTA has implemented and will continue to develop more user friendly and ADA compliant bus stop and transfer areas. PVVTA has added Simmie Seats at stops that may not allow for a full size bench. The remote surveillance project is up and running providing dispatch and the public with real-time information on traffic and passenger safety at several bus stops. Surveillance is used to better plan and keep safe passengers boarding at key locations. Use of the system for traffic management is used to reroute vehicles to reduce late buses and keeping the service on -time. Plans are in the works to beautify and modernize several bus stops and the Main Street Park-N-Ride. 20 Chapter 3 — Service Changes 21 Route Changes and Modifications PVVTA Blue Route 1 will continue to run the existing route with no changes in routing. PVVTA Gold Route 2 will continue to run the existing route with minor changes in routing. PVVTA Red Route 3 will eliminate one PM trip from the CA State Prisons to Blythe to improve productivity. PVVTA Green Route 4 will continue to run the existing route with minor changes in routing. PVVTA Silver Route 5 will change routing and schedule to stay on Hobsonway and service major shopping centers with a better frequency. PVVTA will continue to operate XTend-A-Ride service which is a demand responsive service that addresses special areas in time where community require general public transit service that may not be available on the fixed route system. 22 Promotions The following marketing efforts will be utilized to promote ridership growth in FY 2016/17. 1. Continuation of the marketing program, which includes brochures, flyers, advertisements in local newspapers, community transit fairs, participation in community events, and promotional materials. 2. Continuation of public outreach program, which includes meetings with schools, employers, senior service programs, persons with disabilities programs, social service agencies, the general public, city departments, and other organizations that benefit from public transportation in the Palo Verde Valley. 3. Continuing the Mobility Training program to teach the public about public transportation, including those with disabilities. 4. Continue to offer information on Rideshare programs available to residents and visitors of the Palo Verde Valley. 5. Continue to foster new partnerships with La Paz County, Palo Verde College Association of Student Governments, and new businesses coming to the city through the Shop, Save and Get Home Free Program. 23 Chapter 4 — Financial & Capital Plans Operating Budget The proposed Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency's operating budget for fiscal year 2016/17 is $1,010,582 which is an increase of 2.3 percent over last year's operating budget. The increase is minimal and primarily due to annual operating and maintenance costs. The Agency's budget includes only those expenses for the day-to-day operations of the Transit Agency. Expenses are closely monitored to assure the Agency continues to operate within its budget and is compliant with the mandatory 10 percent farebox recovery ratio. Capital Budget The Agency's capital budget for FY 2016/17 is $164,487 which includes Prop 1B Homeland Security Funds for the Surveillance Infrastructure Maintenance Project, Automated External Defibrillators (AED) Safety Response Project and Prop 1B residual FY 08/09 funds which will be used for the Operations Facility Improvement Project. Also included in capital is STA funding for the purchase and replacement of a fixed route bus and bulk purchase of tires, filters, etc. The Agency also applied for The California Low Carbon Transit Operation Program grant funds, which will be used toward the Operations Facility Solar Project. Regulatory and Compliance Requirements PVVTA adheres to all regulatory and compliance requirements as mandated by the Riverside County Transportation Commission and/or other regulatory agencies, as it pertains to ADA, DBE, EEO, etc. A TDA Triennial Performance Audit was performed for the period of July 1, 2009, through June 30, 2012, in which there were only three recommendations for improvements made by the auditor. Pursuant to the audit performed, the recommendations were: 1.) Exempt both Fare Revenue and Operating Cost from New Services in the Fiscal Audit. 2.) Develop a Succession Plan for the Finance Director position. 3.) Include Year -to -Date and Prior Year -to -Date Performance Data in the Quarterly Operations Data Report. PVVTA has already addressed all three recommendations outlined in the Triennial Audit. A TDA Triennial Performance Audit for the period of July 1, 2012 through June 30, 2015 is currently in process and should be completed no later than June 30, 2016. 25 X Jo T aged OS T'bTZ 86VETL'T ZE T'SL5'T b 8 Z1 pLZ :sleiol 9TCZI9:IE we JageueW Jpe-usle4,1 LSZ'Z LET '7 069'66 08T'E9 LLT'6L 09£'bTT LSZ'59T TVS'SOZ LZ6'88T (SZ`Z a 06076 OSVER LLT'6L 09£'V T T ZSZ`VOZ LSL'S9 T V90'b1 Z 955'85E TZS`68T TSL'08T 56E'8L bb T'EL 8TZ`99 £EO'b6 bL 0'89 T 9LSIZE T 6ZWETZ 9SS'85E T T T Na NO VD VD ND ND NO NO VD HD �d Ja 9Z 9Z 8T 8T 9Z 9Z 9Z 81 8T 81 8Z ZZ ZZZ ZZZ CftH aa� ❑N� ❑:Id ❑d ❑2i9 Gad Nal 60OZ 6OOZ 9TOZ 9TOZ ETOZ ETOZ ETU ETU TxOZ OTOZ £OOZ ZOOZ 9T15TOZ Ad {y)aeW '•6•a] a;ea-ol-a eaA 10 sV ala!4aA annad Jed sal!W aumain abeaanV 9TISTOZ Ad 4oJeW y &wain sal!W ala!yaA WO a; ND ST/tiTOZ Ad put aeaA an!ad sand alalNaA WO 01 OM 9TISTOZ Ad 9T/STOZ sal3NaA Ad Aaua6uguo0 sala!yaA �o # apop adAZ land inBuai alalyap padd!nbi AmaedeD dwell &was pue tin ap00 apOD 1I!n8 !avow 'NW .teaA uonepodsueal paseyaand / (sngaoloW) sng Aaue6d msueal AapeA apaaA pled ueld ijsuea,L ague21 PoyS ITI9TOZ AJ OjilaAgjaajj - a19e1 ec!ry 4w) owl/Az.' :aro7, ap uq, ■m. NM rr, MEM iher.+St .or,-, I :^:p:*Icum;smrr;�crt Table 2 -- Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2016/17 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2013/14 Audited FY 2014/15 Audited FY 2015/16 Plan FY 2015/16 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2016/17 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 6 6 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $469,112 $900,928 $988,075 $716,421 $1,010,582 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $64,116 $140,287 $135,650 $90,372 $128,110 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $404,996 $760,640 $852,425 $626,049 $882,472 Characteristics .Operating Unlinked Passenger Trips 44,432 49,673 50,004 34,775 48,299 Passenger Miles 622,048 695,422 700,056 486,850 676,180 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 8,817.0 8,734.0 8,828.0 6,304.0 8,755.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 176,421.0 171,288.0 172,767.0 123,798.0 171,942.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 223,061.0 212,295.0 213,034.0 154,21.9.0 214,193.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $53.21 $103.15 $111.93 $113.65 $115.43 Farebox Recovery Ratio 13.67% 15.57% 13.72% 12.61% 12.67% Subsidy per Passenger $9.12 $15.31 $17.05 $18.00 $18.27 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $0.65 $1.09 $1.22 $1.29 $1.31 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $45.93 $87.09 $96.56 $99.31 $100.80 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $2.30 $4.44 $4.93 $5.06 $5.13 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 5.0 5,7 5.7 5.5 5.5 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.25 0.29 0.29 0.28 D.28 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles For Rail Modes, TransTrack Manager" 4l lsrzoi6 Page 1 of S r IMMB� CllrLdi �orrf lT!lporlointim= l Table 2 -- PVVTA-BUS -- SRTP Service Summary FY 20 16/ 17 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2O13/14 Audited FY 2014/is Audited FY 2015/16 Plan FY 2015/16 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2016/17 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 6 6 Financial data 1 Total Operating Expenses $458,913 $887,163 $971,025 $704,109 $993,532 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $62,616 $138,367 $131,150 $88,822 $123,510 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $396,297 $748,796 $839,875 $615,287 $870,022 [Operating Characteristics . Unlinked Passenger Trips 44,432 49,673 50,004 34,775 48,299 Passenger Miles 622,048 695,422 700,056 486,850 676,18D Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 8,817.0 8,734.0 8,828.0 6,304.0 8,755.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 176,421.0 171,288.0 172,767.0 123,798.0 171,942.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 223,061.0 212,295.0 213,034.0 154,219.0 214,193.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cast per Revenue Hour $52,05 $101.58 $109.99 $111.69 $113.48 Farebox Recovery Ratio 13.64°/0 15.60% 13.50% 12.61°/0 12.43% Subsidy per Passenger $8.92 $15.07 $16.80 $17.69 $18,01 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $0.64 $1.08 $1.20 $1.26 $1.29 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $44.95 $85.73 $95.14 $97.60 $99.37 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (h) $2.25 $4.37 $4.86 $4.97 $5,06 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 5.0 5.7 5.7 5.5 5.5 Passenger per Revenue Mile {b} 0.25 0.29 0.29 0.28 0.28 {a} Train Hours for Rail Modes. {b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. i•} CO TransTrack Manager'' 4/1131201G Page 1 a£1 lr OEM .I::P.'. r Table 2 -- Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2016/17 Short Range Transit Plan Excluded Routes FY 2013/14 Audited FY 2014/15 Audited FY 2015/16 Plan FY 2015/16 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2016/17 Plan `Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 3 'Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $129,159 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $16,058 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $113,101 Characteristics I❑perating unlinked Passenger Trips 9,764 Passenger Mires 136,694 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 2,772,0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 54,338.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 93,258.0 Performance Characteristics _ Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $46,59 Farebox Recovery Ratio 12.43% Subsidy per Passenger $11.58 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $0.83 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $40.80 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $2.08 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 3.5 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.18 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. N Lo TransTrackManager"' ananvis Pagel of S WON MOM Table 2 -- Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2016/ 17 Short Range Transit Plan Non -Excluded (Routes FY 2013/14 Audited FY 2014/15 Audited FY 2015/16 Plan FY 2015/16 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2016/17 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 6 3 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $469,112 $900,928 $988,075 $716,421 $881,423 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $64,116 $140,287 $135,650 $90,372 $112,052 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $404,996 $760,640 $852,425 $626,049 $769,371 Operating Characteristics , Unlinked Passenger Trips 44,432 49,673 50,004 34,775 38,535 Passenger Miles 622,048 695,422 700,056 486,850 539,486 Total Actual Vehice Revenue Hours (a) 8,817.0 8,734.0 8,828.0 6,304.0 5,983.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Mlles (b) 176,421.0 171,288.0 172,767.0 123,798.0 117,604.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 223,061.0 212,295.0 213,034.0 154,219.0 120,935.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $53.21 $103.15 $111.93 $113.65 $147.32 Farebox Recovery Ratio 13.67% 15.57% 13.72% 12.61% 12.7/% Subsidy per Passenger $9.12 $15.31 $17.05 $18.00 $19.97 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $0.65 $1.09 $1.22 $1.29 $1.43 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $45.93 $87.09 $96.56 $99.31 $128.59 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $2.30 $4.94 $4.93 $5.06 $6.54 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 5.0 5.7 5.7 5.5 6.4 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0,25 0.29 0.29 0.28 _ 0.33 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. uu a TransTra ck Manager"" a/ia/2016 Page x of z PALO V ERDE VALLEY TRANSIT AGENCY FY 2016/17 - 2018/19 SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PEAN Table 2A - Excluded Routes Route At Mode (FR/DR) Service Type (DO/CO) Route Description Elate of Implementation Exemption End Date Red Route 3 FR CO Provides peak hour express route service to and from the CA State Prison facilities. 7/1/2016 6/30/2019 Silver Route S FR CO Provides system -wide deviated fixed route service within the City of Blythe, Ripley, Mesa Verde & requested trips to Ehrenberg, Arizona. Limited saturciay service only. 7/1/2016 6/30/2019 Note: Excluded routes are new routes or new service extensions that are eligible for exemption from the farehox recovery requirements. 31 Leo I abed CN m 9tozisth azaffeuw ,�]C1�8et8J1 ZLb'Z88s OIVMS MS'0I0`i$ O'Efit'bTZ O'Z66'ICI in ;Wu o"s5L'$ O9I'9L9 662'8b 9 slew' ap!nom aauuas OSb'Zi3 009't4 OSO'CIS AepaiaaM LINO-'d1Md 6bL'TZ$ 680'£5 9E9'KS 0'5ZI'8 017LS'L O YIi, O'SLE L69'Zt 106 I AePzinS 5-V1Md 17Ot'6£T$ I9L'6Is 596'85I$ 0'905'8E 0'980'a 0-L09'i OBOb`T EEO' TOT LR'L T AepiaaM b-tl1Md ZSE`I65 696'ZTS TZetAII$ 0TE£I'58 01,9L'Sb 0-06£'£ O'L6£7 C66'£21 C58`8 Z Aepram E-VIAAd 955`LIES I80'S6S 6£9'Z9E$ 0"TZVEt. O'8I5'I6 o'SL8'i O'Lb8`I 98Z'OZZ SEL'SI T Aemaw Z.H1Md 6ST`GOES OI9'Zb$ 69L'ZIO 0'909`9E 0'00Z`8E O'SLL'Z 013ZL'Z L9I'8IZ £8S'SI I Au paw 1-tl1Md Rplsgns anuanad IsoD sal!W sal!W iaN Ja8uassed ad0 !viol an meal! sinoK sin oH sal}{a le701 anuanaZ} Ja6uassed siafivassed saPI4aA dead sdlti Aza # agnoa sluau+al3 pied saanoli IIV CTIQioz g -- ILauaby 3lsueay Asil eft apaap oled SWIS:i4e45 001021 dillS - E a19e1 , ,I.:..., ■mo Imo NMI imam Table 3 - SRTP Route Statistics Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency -- 5 FY 2016/17 All Routes Performance Indicators Operating Operating Fare box Subsidy Per Subsidy Per Subsidy Per Cost Per Cost Per Cost Per Recovery Subsidy Per Passenger Revenue Revenue Passengers Passengers Route # flay Type Revenue Hour Revenue Mile Passenger Ratio Passenger Mile Hour Mile Per Hour Per Mile PVVTA-I Weekday $125.65 S8.97 $22.60 12.43% $19.26 51-38 $110.03 57.66 5-7 0,41 PVVTA-2 Weekday $196.34 58.73 $23.05 12.43% 520.18 $t.44 $171.93 $7,65 8.5 0.38 PWTA-3 Weekday $43.52 52.23 $11,78 12.43% $10.31 $0.74 536.11 $1.95 3.7 0.19 PWT'A-I Weekday $112.90 s4.20 $22.03 12.43% 519.29 $I.38 $96.67 53.67 5.1 0.19 PRNTA-5 Saturday 566.23 $3.28 $27.38 12.43% 523.98 51.71 556.00 S2.137 2,4 0.12 PVYTA-DAR Weekday 26.97% Service Provider Totals $115.43 $5.68 520.92 12.67% 618.27 $1.31 $100.66 55.13 5.5 0.26 TransTranF Manager"" 4ns0x6 w w Page 2(4.2 TABLE 3-A INDIVIDUAL ROUTE DESCRIPTIONS LINE ROUTE DESCRIPTION AREAS/SITES SERVICED FIXED ROUTE: Blue Route 1 Gold Route 2 7 Red Route 3 Green Route 4 (Silver Route 5 Provides riders access to many civic locations within the City of Blythe. Blue Route 1 operates deviated service in a clockwise loop type of route providing a 60 minute frequency with one bus five days a week. Blue Route 1 operates from 6:25 am to 5:40 pm Monday through Friday. Provides riders access between the City of Blythe & Palo Verde College. Gold Route 2 operates on a two way route providing a 60 minute frequency with one bus, five days a week, Gold Route 2 operates from 6:45 am to 6:40 pm Monday through Friday. Provides premium commuter service between City of Blythe and the California State Prisons. Red Route 3 serves four Park-N-Ride lots, travels down Hobsonway to Mesa Drive then travels via I-10 to the prisons. This route operates Monday through Friday from 5:15 am to 5:00 pm. Green Route 4 provides deviated fixed route service between Blythe, Ripley, Mesa Verde and Ehrenberg Arizona. This route operates three (3) round trips from 6:30 am to 6:55 pm, Monday through Friday. The Silver Route 5 provides system -wide deviated fixed route service within the City of Blythe, Ripley, Mesa Verde and selected trips to Ehrenberg, Arizona. This route serves all major trip generating areas within the system on 90-Minute headways. Operates from 8:00 am to 12:45 pm. Destinations on Blue Route 1 include: City Hall, Big K-Mart, Palo Verde Hospital, Employment Development Department, Palo Verde Unified School District, California Highway Patrol, ❑MV, Albertsons, Rite -Aid, Senior Nutrition Program, etc. Destinations on Gold Route 2 include: Blythe City Hall, Big K-Mart, Albertsons, Colorado River Fair, Blythe Recreation Center, Palo Verde Hospital, Palo Verde Valley District Library, Employment Development Department, etc. This route serves four Park-N-Ride lots, travels down Hobsonway to Mesa Drive, then travels to the State Prisons, via Interstate 10. Connections to all other deviated fixed routes can be made at various locations within Blythe at two major transfer points. This route will service four Park-N-Ride lots, travels down Hobsonway to SR78 then South to Ripley and West to Mesa Verde via I-10. Connections to all other deviated fixed routes can be made at various locations within Blythe at two major transfer points. This route will service the City of Blythe, Ripley, Mesa Verde and selected trips to Ehrenberg, Arizona and will operate on Saturdays and in service holidays only. Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency Short Range Transit Plan Fiscal Year 2016/17 PALO VERDE VALLEY TRANSIT AGENCY FY 2016/17 SUMMARY OF FUNDS REQUESTED SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN Table 4 - Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2016/17 Project Description Capita! Project Number ItP Total Amount of Funds �5 LTF STA Prop 1t3 Capital PTMISEA Prop le Homeland Security Low Carbon Transit Operations Program Fare Box Otheri27 Operating Assistance 1,010,582 $ 882,472 $ 95,725 $ 32,385 Subtotal: Operating $ 1,010,582^$ 882,472 $ - $ $ $ $ 95,725 $ 32,385 Replacement of Fixed Route Bus (Gas) FY17-1 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 Surveillance Infrastructure Maint. Project (FY 15/16 FY17-2 11,000 $ 11,000 Prop 1 B Security) Automated External Defibriliators (AED) Safety FY17-3 6,621 6,821 Response Project (FY 15116 Prob 1 B Security) Bulk Transit Bus Tires, Filters, etc, FY17-4 15,000 15,000 Operations Facility Solar Project (LCTOP) FY17.5 25,345 $ 25,345 Operations Facility Improvement Project (PTMISEA FY17.6 6,321 $ 6,321 Residual Funds FY2008/09) Subtotal: Capital s 164,487 S - .. $ 115,000 $ 6,321 $ 17,821 �$ 25,345 S 5 Total: Operating 8 Capital $ 1,175,089 $ 882,472 $ 115,000 $ 8,321 $ 17,821 $ 25,345 $ 96,726 r $ 32,386 (1 ) Number should tie to Table 4A - Capital Project Justification (2) Please identify source of "Other' funds. Other Funds Include: CNG Fuel Sales T.R.I.P. Revenue RTAP Grant Special Services Misc. RevenuesAnterest w cn $ 22,000 b 2,100 $ 2,500 S 5, 660 S 125 32,385 Revised 5/17/2016 Summary of FY 2018117 Funds Requested. xis FY 2015117 SRTP Table 4A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER (If existing project in FT1P, Indicate FTIP ID number): SRTP Project No: FY 17-1 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME: Replacement of 1 Fixed haute Bus (Gas) PROJECT DESCRIPTION {For bus purchase projects, indicate fuel type} Purchase and replace one (1) gas fixed route bus, 18 passengers/2 wheelchairs. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION The Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency has several buses that have either met their useful life or are very close and need to be replaced in order to continue to provide reliable fixed route service to the community. Therefore PVVTA is looking to purchase and replace one gas (1) bus with seating capacity of 18 passenger/2 wheelchairs_ PROJECT SCHEDULE (If existing project in FTIP, indicate original start date and new completion date): Start Date Completion Date 7/01/2016 6/30/2017 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED]; Fund Type Fiscal Year Amount STA FY 2016/17 $100,000 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — INCLUDING PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED (INCLUDE FTA GRANT #, FTIP ID # AND RCTC'S SRTP CAPITAL GRANT #) FTA Grant # FTIP ID # RCTCISRTP Project # Description Unexpended Balance (as of 6/30/16) FY16-1 Replacement Bus $59,640 36 FY 2016/17 SRTP Table 4A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER (If existing project in FTIP, Indicate FTIP ID number): SRTP Project No: FY17-2 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME: Surveillance Infrastructure Maintenance Project PROJECT DESCRIPTION (For bus purchase projects, indicate fuel type) Purchase with PROP IB Security funding, supportive surveillance and IT equipment for ongoing longevity of the current PVVTA Surveillance System. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION This project would consist of purchasing and updating equipment which would provide the ability to rotate aging equipment to a minimal duty cycle providing greater reliability. Initiating a progressive maintenance program that rotates critical parts of the surveillance and IT infrastructure prolongs the useful life, reliability and overall readiness of the security systems that may be subject to partial failure during the time of emergency if maintenance is not performed and systems are not enhanced. PROJECT SCHEDULE (ffexisting project in FTIP, indicate original start date and new completion date): Start Date Completion Date 7/01 /2016 6/3o12017 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): Fund Type Fiscal Year Amount Prop 1B HS FY 2016/17 S11,000 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SUMMAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — INCLUDING PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED (INCLUDE FTA GRANT #, FTIP ID # AND ROTC' S SRTP CAPITAL GRANT #] FTA Grant # FTIP ID # RCTCISRTP Project # - Description Unexpended Balance (as of 6/30/16) $14,513 FY 16-2 Sur. Inf, Maint. Proj, 37 FY 2016/17 SRTP Table 4A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER (If existing project in FTIP, Indicate FTIP ID number); SRTP Project No: FY 17-3 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME: Automated External Defibrillators (AED) Safety Response Project PROJECT DESCRIPTION (For bus purchase projects, indicate fuel type) Purchase with PROP 1B Security funding, supportive medical Automated External Defibrillators (AED) response equipment and training for use within the transit system. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PVYTA, as part of the ongoing joint public safety training and response campaign with the City of Blythe emergency service agencies, would strategically deploy AED's to be available for use in times of medical emergencies and natural disaster occurrences. Transit riders that include both elderly and disabled clients with special medical needs and availability of an AED equipment would increase the level of first response in normal operation and enhance the response capability during a possible disaster event. Adding AED's would broaden the response capability of the emergency operations units as well as add more trained public safety operators. PROJECT SCHEDULE (If existing project in FTIP, indicate original start date and new completion date)_ Start Date Completion Date 7/01/2016 6/30/2017 PROJECT FUNDING 'SOURCES (REOUESTED): Fund Type Fiscal Year Amount Prop 1B HS FY 2016/17 $6,821 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — INCLUDING PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED (INCLUDE FTA GRANT #, FTIP ID if AND RCTC'S SRTP CAPITAL GRANT #} FTA Grant # FTIP ID # RCTCISRTP Project # Description Unexpended Balance (as of 6/30/16) 38 FY 2016/17 SRTP Table 4A — Capital Proiect Justification PROJECT NUMBER (If existing project in FTIP, indicate FTIP ID number): SRTP Project No:_FY17-4 FM' No: PROJECT NAME: Bulk Tires, Filters, etc. PROJECT DESCRIPTION (For bus purchase projects, indicate fuel type) Purchase in bull: transit bus tires, filters, coolants, etc. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Bus tires, filters, oil, coolants, etc. will be purchased in bulk for the year. This will allow quicker repair of the buses with the supplies already on hand. In addition, it will allow the buses to be put back in service much quicker, PROJECT SCHEDULE (If existing project in FTIP, indicate original start date and new completion date): Start Date Completion Date 7/01 /2016 6/30/2017 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): Fund Type Fiscal Year Amount STA FY 2016/17 $15,000 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — INCLUDING PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED (INCLUDE FTA GRANT #. FTIP ID # AND RCTC'S SRTP CAPITAL GRANT #) FTA Grant # FTIP ID # RCTCISRTP Project # Description Unexpended Balance (as of 6/3 0/ 16) I 39 FY 2016117 SRTP Table 4A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER (If existing project in FTIP, Indicate FTIP ID number): SRTP Project No:_FY17-5 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME: Operations Facility Solar Project PROJECT DESCRIPTION (For bus purchase projects, indicate fuel type) Purchase and installation of an integrated solar energy collection system with infrastructure and public use of an electric vehicle EV charging station. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION This project would consist of procurement, installation and operation of an integrated solar energy collection system (panels) with infrastructure and public use of an electric vehicle (EV) charging station at the PVVTA Operation Center/Park-N-Ride Lot located at 415 N. Main Street. Installation of a solar panel array would reduce the overall electricity cost by 35% making available an EV station that would provide access to about 50% of the EV traffic within the Palo Verde Valley. With the integration of solar and charging station, ridership may increase by 10% yearly over the life of the project. PROTECT SCHEDULE (If existing project in FTIP, indicate original start date and new completion date): Start Date Completion Date 7/01 /2016 6/30/2017 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): Fund Type Fiscal Year Amount LCTOP Funds FY 2015/16 S25,345 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — INCLUDING PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED (INCLUDE FTA GRANT #, FTIP ID # AND RCTC'S SRTP CAPITAL GRANT #) FTA Grant # FTIP ID # RCTCISRTP Project # Description Unexpended Balance (as of 613 W 16) FY16-6 Oper. Fac. Solar $3,935 40 FY 2016/17 SRTP Table 4A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER (If existing project in FTIP, Indicate FTIP ID number): SRTP Project No: FY17-6 FTIP No' PROJECT NAME: Operations Facility Improvement Project PROJECT DESCRIPTION (For bus purchase projects, indicate fuel type) Improve public access areas in and around Operations Facility. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION This project will consist of improving the public access areas in and around the Operations Facility at 415 N. Main Street. Improvements will consist of enhanced ADA access, electrical/lighting, IT integration and climate protection. PROJECT SCHEDULE (If existing project in FTIP, indicate original start date and new completion. date): Start Date Completion Date 7/01/2016 6/30/2017 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): Fund Type Fiscal Year Amount PTMISEA Residual Funds (FY 2008/09) FY 2015I16 $6,321 L PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE— INCLUDING PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NO'T YET ORDERED (INCLUDE FTA GRANT #, FTIP ID # AND RCTC'S SRTP CAPITAL GRANT #) FTA Grant # FTIP ID # RCTCISRTP Project # Description Unexpended Balance (as of 6/30/16) 41 PALL VERDE VALLEY TRANSIT AGENCY FY 2017/18 SUMMARY OF FUNDS REQUESTED SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN Table 5.1 - Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2017118 ,Project Description Capital Project Number 0) Total Amount of Funds LTF STA Prop 115 Capital PTMISEA Prop 18 Homeland Security Low Carbon Transit Operations Program Fare Box Other i2j :Operating Assistance FY18 $ 1,040,909 $ 908,946 $ - $ 98,597 $ 33,357 Subtotal: Operating $ 1,040,900 $ 908,946 $ - $ $ - $ - $ 98,597 $ 33,357 Replacement of Fixed Route Bus (CNG) FY 18-1 $ 160,000 $ 160,000 Sulk Vehicle Tires/Filters FY 18-2 15,000 15,000 Shop Maintenance Equipment FY18-a 20,000 20,000 Subtotal: Capital $ 195,000a 95,D00 $ - $ 195,000 $ - _$ - $ - $ - $ - Total: Operating & Capital 1 $ 1,235,900'$ 908,946 $ 195,000 $ - $ $ - $ 98,597 $ 33,357 (1) Number should tie to Table 5.1 A - Capital Project Justification (2) Please identify source of "Other" funds. Other Funds Include: CNG Fuel Sales T.R.I.P. Revenue RTAP Grant Special Services Misc. Revenues/h4erest $ 22,660 $ 2,163 $ 2,575 $ 5,830 $ 129 33,357 Revised 5/17/2016 Summary of Funds Requested FY 2017/18.xis FY_2017/18 SRTP Table 5.1A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER (If existing project in FTIP, Indicate FTIP ID number): SRTP Project No:_FY18-1 FTIP No; PROJECT NAME: New CNG Fixed Route Bus Replacement PROJECT DESCRIPTION (For bus purchase projects, indicate fuel type) Purchase and replace one (1) CNG fixed route bus with seating capacity of 16 passengers/2 wheelchair. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION The Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency has a couple of CNG buses that will be meeting their useful life or will be very close and will need to be replaced in order to continue to provide reliable fixed route service to the community. Therefore PWTA will be requesting funds to purchase and replace one (1) CNG bus with seating capacity of 16 passengers/2 wheelchair. PROJECT SCHEDULE (If existing project in FTIP, indicate original start date and new completion date): Start Date Completion Date 7/01 /2017 6/30/2018 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): Fund Type Fiscal Year Amount STA FY 2017/ 18 $160,000 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE INCLUDING PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED (INCLUDE FTA GRANT #, FTIP ID # AND RCTC'S SRTP CAPITAL GRANT #) FTA Crrant # FTIP ID # RCTC/SRTP Project # Description Unexpended Balance (as of 6/30/17) 43 FY 2017/18 SRTP Table 5.1A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER (If existing project in FTIP, Indicate FTIP ID number): SRTP Project No: _1 8-2 FTIP No' PROJECT NAME: Bulk Vehicle Tires, Filters, etc. PROJECT DESCRIPTION (For bus purchase projects, indicate fuel type) Purchase in bulk transit bus tires, filters, coolants, etc PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Bus tires, filters, oil, coolants, etc. will be purchased in bulk for the year. This will allow quicker repair of the buses with the supplies already on hand. Plus it will allow the buses to be put back in service much quicker. PROJECT SCHEDULE (If existing project in FTIP, indicate original start date and new completion date). Start Date Completion Date 7/01/2017 613012018 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): Fund Type Fiscal Year Amount STA FY 2017/1 S $15,000 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — INCLUDING PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED (INCLUDE FTA GRANT #, FTIP ID # AND RCTC'S SRTP CAPITAL GRANT #) FTA Grant # FTIP ID # RCTCISRTP Project # Description Unexpended Balance (as of 6/30/17) 44 FY 2017/18 SRTP Table 5.1A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER (If existing project in FTIP, Indicate FTIP ID number): SRTP Project No:_18-3 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME: Shop Maintenance Equipment PROJECT DESCRIPTION (For bus purchase projects, indicate fuel type) Purchase shop maintenance equipment needed in repairing and maintaining the transit buses. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Some of the equipment currently being utilized in the shop to repair and maintain the transit buses will be getting close to exhausting their useful life and will need to be replaced. If not replaced, it could become a safety hazard. PROJECT SCHEDULE Of existing project in FTIP, indicate original start date and new completion date}: Start Date Completion Date 7/01 /2017 6/30/2018 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): Fund Type Fiscal Year Amount STA FY 2017/ 18 $20,000 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — INCLUDING PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED (INCLUDE FTA GRANT #Z FTIP ID # AND ROTC' S SRTP CAPITAL GRANT #) FTA Grant # FTIP ID # RCTCISRTP Project # Description Unexpended Balance (as of 6/30/17) 45 PALO VERDE VALLEY TRANSIT AGENCY FY 2018119 SUMMARY OF FUNDS REQUESTED SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN Table 5.2 -Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2018/19 Project Description Capital Project Number 0) Total Amount of Funds LTF STA Prop 1B Capital PTMiSEA Prop 1 B Homeland Security Law Carbon Transit Operations Program Fare Box Other (2) 'Operating AssistanoeF1'19 $ 1,066,923 $ 931,670 $ - $ $ - $ S 101,062 $ 34,191� Subtotal: Operating $ 1,066,923 $ 931,670 $ - $ - 5 S $ 101,062 $ 34,191 Bulk Transit Bus Tires, Filters, etc. FY 19-1 S 15,000 $ 15,000 Replacement of Fixed Route Bus (CNG) FY 19-2 160,000 160,000 Bus Stop Amenities FY 193 10,000 10,000 Subtotal: Capital 5 185,000 $ - $ 185,000 $ - $ - $ - $ s Total: Operating & Capital —$ 1,251,923 $ 931,67D $ 185,000 $ - s - $ - $ 101,062 $ 34,191 (1) Number should tie to Table 5.1 A - Capital Project Justification (2) Reese identify source of "Other" funds. Other Funds Include: CNG Fuel Sales TRIP. Revenue RTAP Grant Special Services MiscReveriuesiinterest A $ 23,227 $ 2,217 S 2,639 5 5,976 S 132 34,191 Revised 5/17/2016 Summary of Funds Requested FY 2018/19.xis FY 2018/19 SRTP Table 5.2A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER (If existing project in FTIP, Indicate FTIP ID number): SRTP Project No:_19-1 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME: Bulk Vehicle Tires, Filters, etc. PROJECT DESCRIPTION (For bus purchase projects, indicate fuel type) Purchase in bulk transit bus tires, filters, coolants, etc PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Bus tires, filters, oil, coolants, etc. will be purchased in bulk for the year. This will allow quicker repair of the buses with the supplies already on hand. Plus it will allow the buses to be put back in service much quicker. PROJECT SCHEDULE (If existing project in FTIP, indicate original start date and new completion date): Start Date Completion Date 7/01/2018 6/30/2019 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): Fund Type Fiscal Year Amount STA FY 2018/19 $15,000 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE -- INCLUDING PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED (INCLUDE FTA GRANT #, FTIP ID # AND RCTC'S SRTP CAPITAL GRANT #) FTA Grant # FTIP ID # RCTCISRTP Project #k Description Unexpended Balance (as of 6130118) 47 FY 2018/19 SRTP Table 5.2A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER (If existing project in FTIP, Indicate FTIP ID number): SRTP Project No:_FY19-2 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME: New CNG Fixed Route Bus Replacement PROJECT DESCRIPTION (For bus purchase projects, indicate fuel type) Purchase and replace one (1) CNG fixed route bus with seating capacity of 16 passengers/2 wheelchair, PROJECT JUSTIFICATION The Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency has a CNG bus that will be meeting its useful life or will be very close and will need to be replaced in Order to continue to provide reliable fixed route service to the community. Therefore PVVTA will be requesting funds to purchase and replace one (1) CNG bus with seating capacity of 16 passengers/2 wheelchair, PROJECT SCHEDULE (If existing project in FTIP, indicate original start date and new completion date): Start Date Completion Date 7/01 /2018 6/30/2019 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): Fund Type Fiscal Year Amount STA FY 2018/19 $160,000 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — INCLUDING PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED (INCLUDE FTA GRANT #, FTIP ID # AND RCTC'S SRTP CAPITAL GRANT 14) FTA Grant # FTIP 1D # RCTCISRTP Project # Description Unexpended Balance (as of 6/30/18) 48 FY 2018/19 SRTP Table 5.2A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER (If existing project in FTIP, Indicate FTIP ID number): SRTP Project No: 19-3 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME: Bus Stop Amenities PROJECT DESCRIPTION (For bus purchase projects, indicate fuel type) Purchase bus shelters and or benches to be placed at bus stops where needed throughout the Palo Verde Valley. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION The Agency would like to purchase and place bus shelters and benches at several of our bus stop locations that currently do not have any amenities. These amenities will provide passenger comfort while waiting for the transit bus. PROJECT SCHEDULE (If existing project in FTIP, indicate original start date and new completion date): Start Date Completion Date 7/01 /2018 b130/2019 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): Fund Type Fiscal Year Amount STA FY 2018/19 $10,000 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE — INCLUDING PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED (INCLUDE FTA GRANT #, FT1P ID # AND RCTC'S SRTP CAPITAL GRANT #) FTA Grant # FTIP ID # RCTCISRTP Project # Description Unexpended Balance (as of 6/30/18) 49 TABLE 6—PROGRESS TO IMPLEMENT TRIENNIAL PERFORMANCE AUDIT Prior Audit Recommendation (Covering FY 2010 — FY 2012) Exempt both Fare Revenue and Operating Cost from New Services in the Fiscal Audit. Action(s) Taken And Results (1 ) Staff is now aware that Fare Revenue must also be exempted from new services in the Fiscal Audit. This recommendation was applied to the FY 2012/13 Audit and will be applied in the future when there are exempt routes. Develop a Succession Plan for the Finance Manager position. The Board approved a revision to the Joint Powers Authority to assign the financial duties through the General Manager as seen fit and necessary. Include Year -to -Date and Prior Year -to -Date Performance Data in the Quartcrl) Operations Data Report. Staff has revised the Quarterly Operations Report to include Year -to -Date and Prior Year - to -Date Performance Data. (1 ) If no action taken, provide schedule for implementation or explanation of why the recommendation is no longer relevant. 50 Min UMW Table 7 -- Service Provider Performance Targets Report FY 2015/16 Short Range Transit Plan Review Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency Data Elements FY 2015/16 Plan FY 2015/16 Target FY 2015/16 Year to Date Through 3rd Quarter Year to Date Performance Scorecard Unlinked Passenger Trips 50,004 Passenger Miles 700,056 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours 8,828.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles 172,767.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 213,034.0 Total operating Expenses $988,075 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $135,650 Net Operating Expenses $852,425 Performance Indicators Mandatory: 1. Farebox Recovery Ratio I 13.72%I a= 10.00% 1 12.61%Meets Target Discretionary 1. Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour $111.93 <= $102.44 $113.65 Fails to Meet Target 2. Subsidy Per Passenger $17.05 a= $12.14 and <= $16.42 $16.00 Fails to Meet Target 3. Subsidy Per Passenger Mile $1.22 a= $0.87 and <= $1.17 $1.29 Fails to Meet Target 4. Subsidy Per Hour $96.56 a= $72.47 and <= $98.05 $99.31 Fails to Meet Target 5. Subsidy Per Mile $4.93 >= $3.71 and ¢= $5.01 $5.06 Fails to Meet Target 6. Passengers Per Revenue Hour 5.70 >= 5.10 and <= 6.90 5.50 Meets Target 7. Passengers Per Revenue Mile 0.29 >= 0.26 and <- 0.36 0.28 Meets Target Note: hlust meet at feast 4 out of 7 Discretionary Performance Indicators IProductivity Performance Summary: Meets 1 mandatory; meets only 2 out of 7 discretionary indicators Service Provider Comments: TransTiack-Manager'" 4/18(2016 Page I of I UMW OEM ON=Mm_ q..i f e: iarp�lnimirrr+x;�n FY 2016/17 - Table 8 -- 5RTP Performance Report Service Provider: Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency All Routes Performance Indicators FY 2014/ Z5 End of Year Actual FY zoo S11s 3rd Quarter Year -to -Date FY 2016/17 Plan FY 2016/17 Target Plan Performance Scorecard (a) Passengers 49,673 ' 34,775 48,299 None Passenger Miles 695,422 486,850 676,180 None Revenue Hours 8,734.0 6,304.0 8,755.0 None Total Heirs 10,859.0 7,208.0 10,0/1.0 None Revenue Miles 171,288.0 123,798.0 171,942.0 None Total Miles 212,295.0 154,219.0 214,193.0 None Operating Costs $900,928 $716,421 $1,010,582 None Passenger Revenue $140,287 $90,372 $128,110 Nome Operating Subsidy $760,640 $626,049 $882,472 None Operating Costs Per Revenue Hour $103.15 $113.65 $115.43 ¢= $114.78 Fails to Meet Target Operating Cost Per Revenue Mile $5.26 $5.79 $5.88 None Operating Costs Per Passenger $18.14 $20.60 $20.92 None Farebox Recovery Ratio 15.57% 12.61% 12.67% >= 10.0ok Meets Target Subsidy Per Passenger $15.31 $18.00 $18.27 >_ $15.30 and ¢_ $20,70 Meets Target Subsidy Per Passenger Mile $1.09 $1.29 $1.31 >= $1.10 and [_ $1.48 Meets Target Subsidy Per Revenue Hour $87.09 $99.31 $100.80 >= $84.41 and ¢_ $114.21 Meets Target Subsidy oer Revenue Mile $4.44 $5.06 $5.13 >_ $4,30 and [_ $5.82 Meets Target Passengers Per Revenue Hour 5.70 5,50 5.50 >= 4.68 and ¢= 6.33 Meets Target Passengers Per Revenue Nile 0.29 0.28 0.28 >= 0.24 and <= 0.32 Meets Target a} The Plan Performance Scorecard column is the result of comparing the FY 201.6/17 Plan to the FY 2016/17 Primary Target, N Tranarrack Manager"' r{��g+7M11C Page Y of 1 TABLE 9 — HIGHLIGHTS OF SRTP PRESENTATION ■ Transit service continues to be provided by contract with Transportation Concepts and will continue through June 30, 2017, with an option to extend the agreement five (5) additional one year periods_ ■ PVVTA will maintain current fare structure for services provided for FY 2016/17 and will only look at implementing an increase should meeting the farebox be in jeopardy, ■ PVVTA's CNG Station has been in operation for a couple of years now and the demand for CNG fuel increased tremendously during the first year of operation but has declined in the second year due to the drop in fuel prices. PVVTA will continue to monitor the CNG Station for efficiency. ■ PVVTA Blue Route 1 will continue to run the existing route with minor changes in routing. ■ PVVTA Gold Route 2 will continue to run the existing route with minor changes in routing. ■ PVVTA Red Route 3 will eliminate one PM trip from the CA State Prisons to Blythe to improve productivity. ■ PVVTA Green Route 4 will continue to run the existing route with minor changes in routing. ■ PVVTA Silver Route 5 will change routing and schedule to stay on Hobsonway and service major shopping centers at a better frequency. ■ PVVTA will continue to operate XTend-A-Ride service which is a demand responsive service that addresses special areas in time where community require general public transit service that may not be available on the fixed route system. ■ The Agency will continue to place passenger amenities (e.g. benches, shelters) at strategic locations that promote new ridership through target marketing and partnerships. ■ The Agency will participate in local efforts to improve mobility to the Coachella Valley as a result of the current Human Services and Transportation Coordination project overseen by ROTC. ■ Agency management will continue to focus on system productivity, mindful of TDA and ROTC Performance Improvement Plan requirements relative to the Farebox Recovery Ratio. Operating and Financial Data FY12-13 FY13-14 FY14-15 FY15-16 Projected FY16-17 Planned System -wide Ridership 41,745 44,432 49,673 48,299 48,299 Cost Per Revenue Hour $93.13 $94.16 $103.15 $113, 70 115.43 Productivity Performance Summary: The proposed PVVTA FY16/17 SRTP, meets one of one mandatory indicator and meets 6 of 7 discretionary indicators. 53 Table 99 - Fare Revenue Calculation (consistent with Commission Farebox Recovery Policy) Revenue Sources included in Farebox Calculation Actual Amount from FY 2034/15 Audit FY 15/16 (Estimate) FY 16/17 (Plan) 1. Passenger Fares 96,037 92,984 97,825 2, Interest 31 95 75 3. General Fund Supplement - 4. Measure A - 5. Advertising Revenue 6,870 - 6. Gain an Sale of Capital Assets - - 7. CNG Revenue 34,268 19,990 22,000 8. Lease/ Other Revenue - - 9. Federal Excise lax Refund - 10. Investment Income - - 11. CalPers CERBT - - 12. Fare Revenues from Exempt Routes - 13. Other Revenues 3,072 11,239 8,210 TOTAL REVENUE 140,278 124,208 128,110 for Farebox Calculation (1-13) TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES 900,928 955,644 1,010,582 for Farebox Calculation FAREBOX RECOVERY RATIO 15.57% 13.01% 12.68% 54 SHORT RANGE_ TRANSIT PLAN 0 FY17- '19 r FINAL Riverside Transit Agency Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 Hl e..w. Tr•nde per, Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4 CHAPTER 1: SYSTEM OVERVIEW 10 1.1 JURISDICTION 10 1.2 POPULATION PROFILE AND DEMOGRAPHIC PROJECTIONS 11 Population Profile — Rider Characteristics 11 Demographic Projections 12 1.3 FIXED ROUTE AND PARATRANSIT SERVICES 13 Fixed Route Services 14 Paratransit Services 14 1.4 CURRENT FARE STRUCTURE 15 Cooperative Fare and Subsidy Programs 16 1.5 REVENUE FLEET 17 1.6 EXISTING AND PLANNED FACILITIES 18 Existing Facilities 18 Planned Facilities 18 1.7 EXISTING COORDINATION BETWEEN TRANSIT AGENCIES 19 Regional Coordination 19 Interregional Coordination and Transfer Agreements 20 CHAPTER 2: ROUTE PERFORMANCE AND EXISTING SERVICE 21 2.1 KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS 21 Service Standards and Warrants 21 Productivity vs. Coverage Target 22 Warrants for New Service 23 Annual State of Public Transit Report 23 2.2 EXISTING FIXED ROUTE AND DIAL -A -RIDE SERVICE 23 2.3 PRODUCTIVITY IMPROVEMENT EFFORTS 23 2.4 TRIP GENERATORS AND PROJECTED GROWTH MARKETS 24 2.5 PASSENGER TRANSIT FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT AND PASSENGER AMENITIES 24 Passenger Transit Facilities 25 Equipment and Passenger Amenities 31 CHAPTER 3: RECENT AND PLANNED SERVICE CHANGES 34 3.1 RECENT SERVICE CHANGES 34 3.2 PLANNED SERVICE CHANGES 35 3.3 MODIFICATIONS TO PARATRANSIT SERVICE 36 3.4 MARKETING PLANS AND PROMOTION 36 3.5 BUDGET IMPACT ON PROPOSED CHANGES 38 CHAPTER 4: FINANCIAL AND CAPITAL PLANS 39 4.1 OPERATING AND CAPITAL BUDGET 39 4.2 FUNDING SOURCES FOR OPERATING AND CAPITAL PROGRAMS 42 4.3 TUMF NEXUS STUDY 43 4.4 REGULATORY AND COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS 44 1 Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 fiiuerskle Transit Agnncy Comparative Statistics Table 1 Table 2 Table 2A Table 3 Table 3A Table 4 Table 4A Table 5.1 Table 5.1A Table 5.2 Table 5.2A Table 6 Table 7 Table 8 Table 9A Table 9B Appendix A Tables Fleet Inventory 1) Motor Bus / Directly Operated 2) Motor Bus / Purchased Transportation 3) Commuter Bus / Directly Operated 4) Demand Response / Purchased Transportation SRTP Service Summary 1) Routes: All Routes (System -wide Totals) 2) Routes: Non -Excluded Routes 3) Routes: Excluded Routes 4) Program: Directly Operated Fixed -Routes 5) Program: Contracted Operated Fixed -Routes 6) Program: Dial -A -Ride 7) Program: Taxi Excluded Routes SRTP Route Statistics FY16/17 Individual Route Descriptions Summary of Funds Requested for FY16/17 Capital Project Justification for FY16/17 Summary of Funds Requested for FY17/18 Capital Project Justification for FY17/18 Summary of Funds Requested for FY18/19 Capital Project Justification for FY18/19 FY 2016 FTA Triennial Review — Summary of Findings Service Provider Performance Targets Report FY16/17 SRTP Performance Report Highlights of SRTP/Operating and Financial Data Farebox Recovery Ratio RTA System Map and Fixed -Route Maps 2 Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 Glossary of Acronyms 5304 Discretionary grants for statewide and nonmetropolitan transportation planning 5307 Formula grants for urbanized areas 5309 Discretionary grants for fixed guideway capital investments 5310 Discretionary grants for enhanced mobility of seniors and individuals with disabilities 5311 Formula grants for rural areas 5316 Job Access and Reverse Commute Program 5317 New Freedom Program 5339 Formula grants for bus and bus facilities ADA Americans with Disabilities Act A&E Architectural and Engineering AHSC Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities Program ATIS Advanced Traveler Information System BRT Bus Rapid Transit CMAQ Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program CNG Compressed Natural Gas COA Comprehensive Operational Analysis CPUC California Public Utilities Code CTSA Consolidated Transportation Services Agency CTSGP-CTAF California Transit Security Grant Program California Transit Assistance Fund DAR Dial -A -Ride paratransit services DBE Disadvantaged Business Enterprise EEO Equal Employment Opportunity FTA Federal Transit Administration FTIP Federal Transportation Improvement Program FY Fiscal Year GASB Government Accounting Standards Board GGRF Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund HSR California High -Speed Rail ITS Intelligent Transportation System JARC Job Access and Reverse Commute Program, also known as FTA Section 5316 LCTOP Low Carbon Transit Operations Program LEP Limited English Proficiency LTF Local Transportation Fund MJPA March Joint Powers Authority MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization MSJC Mount San Jacinto College NF New Freedom Program, also known as FTA Section 5317 OCTA Orange County Transportation Authority OPEB Other Post -Employment Benefits OPEB ARC Other Post -Employment Benefits —Annual Required Contribution PEPRA Public Employees' Pension Reform Act of 2012 PTMISEA Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account PVL Perris Valley Line RCC Riverside City College RCTC Riverside County Transportation Commission RTA Riverside Transit Agency RTPA Regional Transportation Planning Agency SCAG Southern California Association of Governments SGR State of Good Repair SR State Route SRTP Short Range Transit Plan STA State Transit Assistance TCM Transportation Control Measure TDA Transportation Development Act TIRCP Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program T-NOW Transportation NOW TSP Transit Signal Priority TTS Timed Transfer System TUMF Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee UCR University of California, Riverside U-PASS University Pass U.S.C. United States Code UZA Urbanized Area as defined by the U.S. Census Bureau WRCOG Western Riverside Council of Governments Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 NiuersIde Transit Agnem-i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP), updated annually, covers fiscal years 2017 to 2019. The plan provides a description of Riverside Transit Agency's (RTA) services, regional transit needs and a look ahead at RTA's proposed service plans and capital projects. The plan will ultimately require approval by the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) as mandated by California Public Utilities Code (CPUC) §130303. Approval by RCTC allows the plan's operating and capital projects to be programmed in the Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP). Approval also supports RTA's claim for Local Transportation Funds (LTF), State Transit Assistance funds (STA), County Measure A funds and the submittal of grants to the Federal Transit Administration under 49 U.S.C. § 5304, 5307, 5310, 5311, 5339 and the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) Program. Similarly, RCTC administers Transportation Development Act (TDA) funds and, with the approval of the SRTP, will issue allocation and disbursement instructions for Local Transportation Funds (LTF) and State Transit Assistance (STA) funds to the county auditor/controller. RCTC also administers County Measure A funds and will process payments to RTA consistent with the SRTP. Furthermore, the SRTP also lists projects eligible for Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) funds administered by the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG). Upon completion of the TUMF Nexus Study by WRCOG in conformity with the Mitigation Fee Act, all eligible projects will be added to the TUMF Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) based on funding availability. The completion of the Nexus Study and preparation of the updated TIP is slated for fall of 2016. The State of California also offers several new funding programs which focus on reducing greenhouse gas emissions. These Cap and Trade programs are funded by annual auction proceeds from the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF). The Low Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP) is administered by Caltrans and funds capital and operating expenses. In previous years, RTA was awarded LCTOP funds to help construct an on -street layover facility in downtown Riverside and to provide increased bus services to connect with the 91/Perris Valley Line rail service. This year, RTA applied for LCTOP funds to help construct a Mobility Hub at University of California, Riverside. The other applicable Cap and Trade programs that are offered by the State of California are the Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program (TIRCP) and the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities Program (AHSC). Lastly, the SRTP allows RTA to develop business strategies and funding mechanisms to bring to fruition planned services, programs and capital improvement projects that fall beyond the lifespan of the SRTP and are included in RTA's Ten -Year Transit Network Plan, which is designed to meet the future transit needs of western Riverside County. 4 Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 NiuersIde Transit Agoacy Operating Plan: For nearly 40 years, RTA and the region's transit network have evolved from a suburban transit system to a complex multimodal network of high -demand timed connections between buses, trains, paratransit services and non -motorized modes of transit. The demand for public transportation for high school and college students has also increased. Although RTA has enjoyed record -breaking ridership over the past few years, there is a reduction during the current fiscal year due to factors such as record low gas prices and increased auto sales. The resulting growth in personal automobile trips also impacts performance of the highway and road network. Collectively, these elements combined with major construction projects can negatively impact on -time performance of transit services resulting in costly remedies. RTA is challenged with expanding services to emerging new communities and neighborhoods, and maintaining on -time performance as running times grow longer and less predictable due to increased congestion, major road construction projects and area growth. Being proactive and adaptable to change will ensure RTA's ability to meet future mobility needs. In an effort to plan for those future mobility needs, RTA completed a Comprehensive Operational Analysis (COA) study in 2014. The study reviewed RTA's entire transit network structure and performance to provide a comprehensive understanding of market conditions and service expectations. The findings led to the development of a phased set of service recommendations designed to build upon market opportunities and performance strengths, ridership growth and improve both overall passenger experience and financial sustainability. The recommendations were based on analysis of existing and future market conditions, service performance and feedback from RTA Board Members, passengers and key stakeholders. The end product of the COA, the Ten -Year Transit Network Plan, was approved by the Board of Directors in January 2015 and was used as a guide in preparing the SRTP. The primary recommendations of the Ten -Year Transit Network Plan are to streamline routes, improve frequencies, enhance connections, improve bus stop amenities and adhere to bus stop spacing and service design standards to enhance RTA's future services. Furthermore, the Ten - Year Transit Network Plan recommends enhanced service on popular routes to increase ridership and generate increased fare revenue. The plan also recommends maintaining appropriate transit service in lower potential ridership areas. The recommendations are designed to create a transit system that remains attractive to existing and potential new riders while maintaining the delicate balance between efficiency and effectiveness while staying within fiscal restraints. Within this framework, the SRTP lays out a program of projects to accomplish the goals established in the Ten -Year Transit Network Plan. 5 Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 NiuersIde Transit Agnem-i The first round of recommendations from the Ten -Year Transit Network Plan were implemented in FY15 and focused on improvements to the frequency, span and connectivity of the highest -performing services. In FY16, the plan focused on providing increased bus services feeding the new 91/Perris Valley Line (PVL) Metrolink service between Riverside and south Perris. This new rail line provides four new intermodal stations: Hunter Park, March Field/Moreno Valley, Downtown Perris and south Perris. The PVL feeder plan includes additional trips on ten existing transit routes and weekday service on two new routes and is slated to begin service in June 2016. Other proposals implemented in FY16 included frequency and connectivity improvements, the streamlining of routes, addressing capacity constraints and expanding RTA's span of service. Specifically, several service recommendations were implemented in the southern portion of the RTA service area (Lake Elsinore, Wildomar, Murrieta and Temecula) to improve service frequencies, spans and connectivity. Lastly, in an effort to provide service to those who live in rural areas that have no access to public transportation, RTA implemented a new project called Dial -a -Ride Plus, Riverside Transit Agency Lifeline Service. The two-year pilot project expands the Dial -a -Ride coverage by an additional two miles around the RTA fixed -route network. The service provides wheelchair accessible taxi service to seniors 65 and over and to persons with disabilities for lifeline services such as doctor's appointments, dialysis and chemotherapy treatments and trips to the pharmacy, to the grocery store for food, or to the senior center for hot meals. Moving forward, service plans for the next three years and beyond will continue to be shaped by the transit plan's proposed strategies and recommendations. For planning and programming purposes the SRTP covers a rolling three-year span with a focus on FY17. The table below summarizes fixed route service changes suggested for FY17: Metric FY16 (Budget) FY17 (Budget) Difference Difference Total Hours 603,568 631,989 28,421 4.71 Total Miles 9,044,125 9,445,016 400,891 4.43 Total Fixed Route Ridership 9,873,872 8,972,443 -901,429 -9.13% The FY17 service plan includes the following service changes effective January 2017: • New CommuterLink express service on the Highway 91 in conjunction with the opening of the toll lanes. • A full year of Perris Valley Line feeder bus service. • The Downtown Riverside Operating Plan will streamline operations and facilitate the closure of the downtown bus station and provision of a new layover facility at Vine Street opposite of the Riverside Downtown Metrolink Station. 6 Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 NiuersIde Transit Agnem-i Because of the large investment in Perris Valley Line feeder bus service and new Highway 91 express service, it is only possible to sustainably implement two other service improvements in FY17. Effective September 2016: • Revised service for May Ranch area in northeast Perris to connect to new Orange Vista High School and the retail area of Perris. • Implement Sunday service on the remaining three no service days: Thanksgiving, Christmas and New Year's Day. Looking ahead to FY18, new RapidLink Gold Line limited -stop, peak -period weekday service between Corona Transit Center and UCR via Magnolia and University avenues is planned for launch in September 2017. Construction of a new mobility hub at UCR will also be completed in FY18. COA service improvements that will be considered for implementation in the period FY18 and FY19 (subject to sufficient funding levels): • Splitting Route 27 into two separate routes: 27 (Perris — Galleria) and 28 (Perris — Hemet) with improved weekday frequency and more direct service between Hemet and Perris. • Extending Route 61 from Sun City to Perris, replacing the current Route 27. Route 61 will also gain Sunday service. • Merging of routes 16 and 19 between UCR, Moreno Valley and Perris. Fifteen -minute service frequency will be provided on weekdays. The new Route 16 will interface with Route 1 at UCR Mobility Hub instead of traveling to downtown Riverside. • Increasing weekday service frequency on Route 40 from the current 100-110 minutes to every 60 minutes and serving Mt. San Jacinto College's Menifee campus. • Providing trial Saturday service on local routes 35 (Banning/Beaumont — Moreno Valley) and 40 (Lake Elsinore — Menifee), the only RTA local routes that lack weekend service. • Providing trial Sunday service on Route 42 (Hemet -San Jacinto-Soboba Casino) due to its relatively high ridership on Saturdays. • Extending Route 79 from Hemet Valley Mall to Mt. San Jacinto College's San Jacinto campus and coordinating routes 74 and 79 schedules between Winchester, Hemet and San Jacinto to provide 30-minute frequency service. This change also restructures Route 24 at Temecula into a loop route. • Providing an earlier weekday afternoon northbound trip on Route 217 between Escondido and Temecula. In FY18, the Agency will focus on fine tuning the 91/Perris Valley Line bus services and Highway 91 express service, while implementing the new RapidLink Gold Line, new Route 16 and other COA initiatives listed above that were not possible to fund in FY17. There will also be a review of other emerging needs and opportunities for further COA initiatives to be implemented within the expected fiscal conditions for the coming years. 7 Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 fiiuerskle Transit Agoncy Capital Improvement Program: The development of transit infrastructure (bus stops, mobility hubs and operations/maintenance facilities) is essential to the safe, comfortable and efficient operation of transit services. In spite of the 13c/PEPRA hold on federal grants, the Agency managed to complete the following projects in FY16 through a combination of funds already approved and local funds: • Route 3 Stop Enhancements Project in Corona/Norco to accommodate 40-foot buses. • New 91/Perris Valley Line Route 26 Stops Project. • Moreno Valley Mall Transit Center Landing Platform Expansion Project. • Sanderson at Wentworth Stops Installation Project for staff access to Hemet Division. • Lake Elsinore Park and Ride Stop Enhancement Project. • Main Street at Garner Stop Installation Project for Ability Counts company relocation. FY17 will see significant capital improvements in the following facilities: • Implementation of the Downtown Riverside Operating Plan with improved transit amenities in place of the existing Riverside Downtown Terminal. The closure of the terminal and the transition to decentralized stops is scheduled to take place in January of 2017. • New RapidLink Gold Line bus stops will be completed in time for commencement of service in September of 2017. • In partnership with UC Riverside, a conceptual plan has been developed to build an on - campus transit hub, called the UCR Mobility Hub, at the gateway to the campus. This project will improve operating efficiency and is essential to support the operation of RapidLink, Route 1, the upcoming new Route 52 and other service enhancements planned for future years. • In partnership with the City of Temecula and the Promenade Mall, staff completed conceptual plans to expand the bus stop at the mall to support the planned expansion of service. Architectural and engineering work will begin in 2017 and construction is slated to start in 2018 and be completed before the end of 2019. • The conceptual planning work for the Mount San Jacinto College Mobility Hub in San Jacinto is slated for 2017. The architectural and engineering and construction schedule will be based on the adopted conceptual plan of the facility. FY17 will also see the delivery of 23 new 40-foot buses for the implementation of new Highway 91 CommuterLink routes and RapidLink Gold Line. Smaller buses will also be delivered to support the planned expansion of contracted fixed -route services for the 91/Perris Valley Line and other improvements. 8 Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 NiuersIde Transit Agnem-i With the completion of the Bus Stops Strategic Policy in June of 2015, RTA launched the annual bus stop improvement initiative. Based on the implementation plan commencing in FY17, bus stops will be improved throughout the service area with upgraded accessibility, enhanced safety and amenities such as shelters, benches and trash receptacles. RTA's First and Last Mile Mobility Plan study began in FY16. The objective of this project is to establish a plan that identifies cost-effective improvements to solve first -mile and last -mile barriers for commuters who could potentially take transit but whose origin or destination cannot be conveniently accessed from the nearest transit facility due to distance, terrain, or real or perceived safety issues. This study will examine the experience of transit customers accessing transit stops from their trip origins and destinations. A set of four templates will be developed to improve the customer experience in the first -mile, last -mile environment. This project will be completed in FY17. RTA staff is preparing to develop a new centralized Operations, Maintenance and Administration Facility. During the first phase of this undertaking, staff will assess future operating, maintenance and support infrastructure needs to accommodate expansion services as well as emerging vehicle, energy and fuel technologies and strategies. Following this assessment, staff will develop a comprehensive facilities master plan to advance RTA beyond the current 10-year (2025) planning horizon. At capacity already, RTA is unable to operate in the long-term with existing operating and maintenance facilities. Without a comprehensive facilities master plan, RTA will be unable to efficiently implement future service improvements, make major investments in new technologies and support infrastructure, and aggressively compete for discretionary grant funding sources. Total RTA revenues for FY17 are budgeted at $87.3 million which includes $76.0 million in operating expenses and $11.3 million for capital improvements. The Operating Budget increase of $6.9 million, or 10 percent over FY16, is due to service expansion; established rates for purchased transportation; and increased insurance costs. The Capital Budget is decreasing $17.4 million, or 61 percent, from FY16 mid -year budget amendment due to not programming Proposition 1B funds and reduced revenue vehicle funding in FY17. 9 Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 Illuersrae Transit f CHAPTER 1: SYSTEM OVERVIEW 1.1 JURISDICTION RTA's jurisdiction is among the largest in the nation for a transit system, encompassing approximately 2,500 square miles of western Riverside County. Included in the boundaries are eighteen (18) incorporated cities including Banning, Beaumont, Calimesa, Canyon Lake, Corona, Eastvale, Hemet, Jurupa Valley, Lake Elsinore, Menifee, Moreno Valley, Murrieta, Norco, Perris, Riverside, San Jacinto, Temecula and Wildomar and unincorporated areas of Riverside County Supervisorial Districts 1, 2, 3 and 5. Unlike other agencies of similar size, RTA is unique in that it provides service in both urban and rural areas. Urbanized and rural areas are defined by the United States Census Bureau (US Census), which is based on population size and revised every 10 years. The urbanized areas (UZA) in the jurisdiction are Riverside -San Bernardino, Hemet and Murrieta-Temecula-Menifee. Portions of RTA routes also connect to Los Angeles -Long Beach -Anaheim and San Diego UZAs, providing interregional mobility options to RTA customers. Based on data from the 2010 US Census, over 90 percent of RTA's services are located in urbanized areas. The map below illustrates RTA's jurisdictional boundaries and highlights the portions of the region considered urbanized. Ina hattrcrar� ey Pomona Ontario nut to Chino and Bar Chino Hills Los Sena, _s d timid Idcentia a Park 1ge North Tustin la Tustin 261 ,w Gland Terrace jGlen Avon Rubidoux 63 Eastvaie urupy Riverside Valle Norco Moreno Valley YLILZ ;: Catirr.ese . Lake Corona Home Gardens Woodcresl Perris State Lake Recreation El Cerrito Mathews es Area Lakeview 133 oothill Ranch Rancho Santa Lake Forest Margarita Mission Viejo Laguna Hills 2, Laguna Niguel Laguna Beach San Juan Capistrano Dana Point San Clemente Sanhago Peak Cherry Valley Morongo I.ti Nuevo Perris San Jacinto 5obobe Lu Homeland Hemet vane Vista East Hemet Sun Cay Lake Elsinore Canyon Lake t_IevOancl N al Forest s �lh W.laamar s a FAxy p � �y V Murrieta 74 d 2 Temecula Winchester Clumond Volley to;e San J. Wddr h!1 Sar Stet Idylh 10 Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 fiiue.skle Transit Ig.ncy 1.2 POPULATION PROFILE AND DEMOGRAPHIC PROJECTIONS RTA is challenged by the changing demographics in various communities and continues to be proactive by planning routes that are customer -oriented, viable, efficient and cost-effective. By studying the characteristics of riders, a better understanding is gained to more appropriately plan for and meet the needs of the transit market. Rider characteristics, along with demographic and population changes, are used to shape and strategize how resources will be allocated in future years. Population Profile — Rider Characteristics Bus passenger characteristics were collected from on -board surveys conducted in spring 2013 as part of the COA study. A demographic summary of weekday RTA riders offered the following characteristics: SUMMARY OF RIDER CHARACTERISTICS1 Average Age (Years) 33 Bus Fare Categories General Passes2 Disabled/Senior Youth Medicare 57% 22% 15% 5% 1% Employed Yes No 70% 30% Average Travel Time (Minutes) 52 Primary Language English Spanish Other 95% 5% <1% How Long Using RTA Services First Time Less Than 6 Months 6 Months-2 Years 2 Years-5 Years More Than 5 Years 5% 16% 29% 22% 28% Median Household Income Under $7,500 28% $7,500-$14,999 19% $15,000-$24,999 16% $25,000-$34,999 12% $35,000-$49,999 10% $50,000-$74,999 8% Over $75,000 6% Automobile Ownership Yes No 67% 33% Gender Female Male 52% 48% Highest Level Of Education Less Than High School 16% High School Diploma Some College Associate's Degree Bachelor's Degree Some Graduate School Graduate Degree 28% 34% 8% 6% 3% 4% Veteran Yes No 4% 96% Frequency Of Using RTA Buses First Time Less Than Once A Month Less Than Once A Week 1-2 Days Per Week 3-4 Days Per Week 5 Days Per Week 6-7 Days Per Week 3% 4% 4% 14% 25% 26% 23% Customer Destinations School Work Shopping/Errands Social/Recreational Other Medical/Social Services 37% 27% 11% 10% 9% 6% Ethnicity Latino/Hispanic White/Caucasian Black/African American Mixed Asian/Pacific Islander Other American Indian 37% 22% 20% 10% 5% 3% 2% Source: RTA COA Study (2013-2014) 1 Totals may not add to 100% due to rounding. z Go -Pass, U-Pass and CityPass. 11 Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 fiiuerskle Transit Agoncy Demographic Projections Demographic projections directly correlate to the allocation of future transit services. Demographic data such as population, employment, urban density, income levels, age distributions and development patterns are the primary variables that shape public transit in a community. Growth projections for the region are compiled by SCAG, County of Riverside and WRCOG in collaboration with local jurisdictions. At the local level, jurisdictions have the ability to plan and revise land use and transportation characteristics to target a desired level of intensity for employment, housing and commercial areas. On a regional scale, population and employment density in the RTA service area is generally focused into centers, concentrated hubs of residents and jobs. The region's most populated area spans from Corona to Riverside and Moreno Valley, which encompasses more than one- third of the two million residents and 750,000 jobs in western Riverside County3. Communities such as these have more diverse land uses, making public transit a more viable option for travel. The majority of the jurisdictions in western Riverside County, however, consist of lower density, single types of land uses. Communities outside of the larger network centers are primarily suburban -residential. Employment -to -population ratios are lower in communities with a high concentration of single family residential units, requiring residents to rely heavily on private automobiles to complete daily trips. A market assessment, including a demographic analysis was conducted with the COA and identified the following trends: • By 2035, the population in western Riverside County is projected to reach 2.7 million people, an increase of 28 percent from the 2020 projected baseline. The highest rates of growth are expected to occur in areas that are currently suburban developments, though a comparable volume of growth will occur in the more densely populated, transit -supportive, urban communities. • Employment in the RTA service area is expected to grow by 34 percent compared to the 2020 projected baseline. The 250,000 new jobs will bring the 2035 employment total to over one million. Similar to population, the rate of employment growth will be highest in the suburban markets. • The northwest sub -area (Corona, Eastvale, Home Gardens, Jurupa Valley, Norco and Riverside) has the highest concentrations of population and employment in the RTA service area. However, outside of a few communities, future changes in density within the sub -area will remain moderate. Downtown Riverside is projected as an area of concentrated growth that can foster more opportunities for transit. The suburban communities in the city of Eastvale and along the Bellegrave Avenue corridor will be sites of larger population growth while employment increases are projected in Corona and Norco along Hamner Avenue. The core of the sub -area will still be downtown 3 SCAG RTP 2012-2035 Growth Forecast. 12 Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 NiuersIde T.wl[ Agoacy Riverside and the Magnolia Avenue -University Avenue corridor. Other residential communities in the northern portion of the sub -area will remain automobile -oriented communities because of the lack of mixed -use density. • In the Moreno Valley/Perris sub -area (Mead Valley, March Air Reserve Base, Moreno Valley and Perris), growth will primarily occur outside of the existing core and in the outlying communities. Moreno Beach Drive and the areas south of the Lake Perris Reservoir will experience significant growth in population density. Most of the new employment is concentrated near the Riverside County Regional Medical Center. Serving the new residential areas would present a challenge for effective transit due to their distance from major corridors. Residential development will still be the dominant land use in the sub -area. Moreno Valley will remain a dense, residential community. Most of the population and employment density in Perris will remain focused around Perris Boulevard. • The Hemet/San Jacinto/Pass sub -area (Banning, Beaumont, Calimesa, Hemet and San Jacinto) is expected to undergo the highest rates of growth in the system. The increases are concentrated in the Beaumont and San Jacinto jurisdictions. The majority of the population growth in Beaumont will take place in the rural and suburban areas between Pennsylvania Avenue and Highland Springs Avenue. In San Jacinto, residential density will increase east of the State Street corridor. The sub -area employment growth is minimal and limited to a few key corridors, specifically along Sixth Street/Ramsey Street, Florida Avenue and State Street. Hemet will maintain transit -supportive densities and land uses in 2035. The Florida Avenue corridor is positioned to be the key corridor in the sub -area due to high levels of employment density. Although the rate of overall growth in the sub -area is significant, the future success of transit will largely depend on how the new development patterns interact with the existing ones to promote sustainable growth. • In the southwest sub -area (Canyon Lake, French Valley, Lake Elsinore, Menifee, Murrieta, Temecula, Wildomar and Winchester), the key change will be the large concentration of employment growth in Murrieta along the 1-15 and 1-215 freeways. The change in density is particularly intense east of the 1-15 and will occur on currently undeveloped parcels. The only significant changes in population density occur in Winchester and Lake Elsinore, areas outside of the sub -area core. By 2035, Temecula and Murrieta are projected to have the highest density in the sub -area. More trip generators should be expected where higher population and employment densities are proposed. 1.3 FIXED ROUTE AND PARATRANSIT SERVICES As of July 1, 2016, RTA will operate thirty-six (36) regional, local, rural and trolley service routes and eight (8) CommuterLink express routes. Routes in higher density urban areas with greater peak ridership are usually operated with larger vehicles, while routes in suburban and rural 13 Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 NiuersIde Transit Agnem-i areas with lower ridership are usually operated with smaller- to medium-sized vehicles. Refer to Table 3A for a complete listing of both directly operated and contract operated routes. Fixed Route Services The service recommendations of the recently completed COA classified all RTA fixed -route services under five service tiers. Each tier serves a different role in the network and has different expectations for service performance and frequencies. Frequent Key Corridor: Frequent key corridor routes form the core spine of the network and provide "lifestyle" transit options for riders. They have the highest ridership and performance in the system and the highest service frequencies (30 minute or better) to accommodate this high ridership. These routes have the potential to support Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) services in the future. The corridors identified in this tier are RapidLink Gold Line along the Route 1 corridor between UCR and Corona primarily along University and Magnolia avenues (implementation September 2017) and a future RapidLink Blue Line between UCR and Perris Metrolink Station though Riverside, Moreno Valley and Perris. Supporting Local: Supporting local routes constitute the majority of the route network, providing connections to key employment centers, activity centers and transfer hubs. They offer "lifeline" service for those dependent on transit while also providing connections to lifestyle services. Frequencies will vary depending on the market support for transit, but will be at least hourly. Regional Connectors: Regional connectors are longer distance routes that connect multiple urban centers separated by geographic gaps in density. These routes tend to have lower performance due to their longer distances and lower densities in the areas between the urban centers they connect. Frequencies are generally hourly. As their name suggests, these routes provide network connectivity between dispersed activity centers and between high- and low - density areas across the RTA service area. Community Feeders: Community feeders are shorter distance routes (including special trolley services) that connect key destinations within a community. They connect residents with local shopping centers, educational facilities, medical facilities or transit stations. CommuterLink: CommuterLink routes are long-distance, peak -hour express services that provide both inter- and intra-county connections. They connect commuters directly with major employment centers or indirectly through connections at major multi -modal bus and rail hubs. Paratransit Services RTA offers demand response paratransit services known as "Dial -A -Ride" (DAR) to seniors (age 65 and above) and persons with disabilities. DAR is an origin -to -destination advanced 14 Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 fiiue.sIde T.wl[ Air.ncy reservation transportation service that travels to areas within three-quarters of a mile of an RTA fixed route, excluding express services. These areas are referred to as the "Dial -A -Ride service area" and trips must begin and end in the service area. If the trip starts or ends outside the service area, passengers must find a safe place within the service area to be picked up and dropped off to be eligible for service. DAR service is provided at times equivalent to local fixed route bus service in the area. RTA has two types of DAR service: Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Priority DAR Service: RTA gives priority service to individuals who are certified under ADA law. Persons who are ADA certified are eligible for trips throughout the RTA service area that are within three-quarters of a mile of a fixed route bus service, excluding express routes and during the hours of fixed route bus service operation. Senior/Disabled DAR Service: Seniors age 65 and above and persons with disabilities are eligible for local DAR service within a single city and within three-quarters of a mile during the hours of fixed route bus service operation, excluding express service. Transportation is provided only within the city in which the trip begins. In an effort to provide service to those who live in more rural areas that have no access to public transportation, in July 2015 RTA began a new pilot project, Dial -a -Ride Plus, Riverside Transit Agency Lifeline Service. The project, a two-year pilot program approved under the RCTC Measure A Call for Projects, extends the DAR service boundary by an additional two miles. Primary funding for the two-year period are Local Transit Funds (LTF), but 10 percent is provided from Measure A to ensure the program is farebox compliant. The program provides wheelchair accessible taxi service to seniors aged 65 and over and to persons with disabilities for lifeline services such as doctor's appointments, dialysis and chemotherapy treatments, trips to the pharmacy, to the grocery store for food, or to the senior center to access hot meal service. The program began providing trips July 1, 2015 and will continue beyond the two-year pilot only if revenues generated by passenger fares achieve farebox compliance without the use of Measure A funds by the end of the pilot period. If successful, additional funding may be sought from Federal 5310 program funds. 1.4 CURRENT FARE STRUCTURE The most recent change to the fare structure was in July 2013 when the Board of Directors approved a revision to include the addition of discounted fares for veterans and active duty military, police and fire personnel as shown in the table below. Other fare categories were established in June 2009 after the last fare study which was completed in March 2009. A review of the current fare structure is anticipated over the next two years. 15 Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 - FY19 fiiuerskle Transit Agnncy FIXED ROUTE FARES Fare Categories General Youth (grades 1-12)** Senior/Disabled** Medicare Card Holder Veteran** Child (46" tall or under) Base Fares Day Pass* $1.50 $4.00 $1.50 $4.00 $0.70 $2.00 $0.70 $2.00 $0.70 $2.00 $0.25 N/A 7-Day Pass* 30-Day Pass* $16.00 $50.00 $16.00 $35.00 $16.00 $23.00 $16.00 $23.00 $16.00 $23.00 N/A N/A COMMUTERLINK FARES COMMUTERLINK + LOCAL Fare Categories General Youth (grades 1-12)** Senior/Disabled** Medicare Card Holder Veteran** Child (46" tall or under) Base Fares Day Pass $3.00 $7.00 $3.00 $7.00 $2.00 $5.00 $2.00 $5.00 $2.00 $5.00 $2.00 N/A 30-Day Pass $75.00 $75.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 N/A DIAL -A -RIDE FARES I Not accepted on fixed route buses Fare Categories Base Fares Senior/Disabled $3.00 Medicare Card Holder $3.00 Child (46" tall or under) $0.50 10-Ticket Books $30.00 $30.00 N/A *Accepted as base fare. CommuterLink trips require an additional $1.30 (Senior/Disabled/Medicare/Veteran) or $1.50 (General/Youth) per trip. **Proper identification is required at time of boarding. In addition to these fare categories, RTA also has U-Pass, Go -Pass and CityPass programs. Cardholders of these programs get unlimited rides on any fixed route, including CommuterLink, in the RTA network at no cost. Active duty military, police and fire personnel in uniform with valid identification are also eligible for complimentary rides on RTA fixed routes. Cooperative Fare and Subsidy Programs RTA makes every effort to create partnerships that will improve service for customers by developing fare programs that promote the use of public transit. In FY17, the following cooperative fare and subsidy programs will continue: • California Baptist University - U-Pass Program • City of Riverside - CityPass for Employees • City of Temecula - Route 55 Temecula Trolley • County of Riverside - Route 50 Jury Trolley • La Sierra University - U-Pass Program • Moreno Valley College - Go -Pass Program • Mount San Jacinto College - Go -Pass Program 16 Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 NiuersIde T.wl[ Agnem-i • Riverside City College — Go -Pass Program • University of California, Riverside (UCR) — U-Pass Program, Route 51 Crest Cruiser College and university programs allow students with a valid identification card from these campuses to receive unlimited access to any of RTA's fixed routes. These programs are funded by the institution or students. The City of Riverside subsidizes the CityPass fare program for its employees to ride the bus for free and serves as a pass outlet (Riverside Go Transit) for its residents by discounting 20 percent to 30 percent off on 7-day and 30-day passes, respectively. Other subsidized transit services include the trolley and circulator routes which are funded by UCR or local jurisdictions. 1.5 REVENUE FLEET As of March 2016, RTA has a total active fixed -route fleet size of 200 buses. The bus types consist of 122 CNG-powered 40-foot buses currently used for directly operated fixed routes and 78 medium-sized buses for contracted fixed routes. RTA also has an additional 98 vehicles for operation of paratransit services, for a total of 298 revenue service vehicles. Refer to Table 1 for a detailed inventory of the RTA fleet. Note that Table 1 shows all fleet vehicles active during FY16, and includes buses that are no longer in service. The CNG heavy duty buses used on directly operated routes generally cover more densely populated areas such as Riverside, Corona, Moreno Valley and Perris while the medium-sized buses are typically used as local and express vehicles on contract operated fixed routes in less densely populated communities. In FY17 through FY18, with the implementation of RapidLink Gold Line and new SR-91 CommuterLink Routes, the directly operated fixed route fleet will grow to 145. Once WRCOG adopts the 2015 Nexus Study, RTA will have approximately $11 million to spend on new vehicles. The contracted fixed -route fleet of medium-sized buses is anticipated to grow by five additional buses in FY17, as a result of extra fleet needed for PVL service expansion. These needs will be met by a contingency fleet retained after the delivery of 36 new replacement medium buses in FY16. A further batch of new medium buses is expected to be delivered by the end of FY17, allowing the replacement of the contingency fleet. The trolley fleet will also be reduced to five buses. 17 Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 fiiue.sIde T.wl[ Ig.ncy 1.6 EXISTING AND PLANNED FACILITIES Existing Facilities RTA's primary facility is located in the City of Riverside and houses the administration, operations and maintenance departments with approximately 353 active employees on site. RTA's secondary facility, located in Hemet, opened in June 2000. It now has approximately 86 administration, operations and maintenance employees assigned to the division. The Hemet facility houses our Customer Information Center, is utilized for routes in the southern portion of the service area and maintains a portion of the CNG vehicle fleet. In FY17, RTA's contracted fixed -route service will continue to be provided by Empire Transportation, who operates from a facility in Perris. DAR service is currently provided by TransDev (formerly Veolia Transit) and is also based out of Perris. Both contractors are responsible for housing, operating and maintaining RTA vehicles. The DAR facility in Perris also houses the DAR reservation call center. RTA offers taxi overflow through Network Paratransit. Planned Facilities According to the California Department of Finance, Riverside County's population will grow by more than 14 percent by 2025. As a result, RTA will need to expand future transit service for the additional 340,000 people expected to live in the County. RTA's current operations and maintenance facility in Riverside is at capacity, and the outdated layout of the facility in Riverside results in a long and difficult maintenance process with vehicles having to drive in a loop on Third Street just to be serviced and washed. This facility cannot accommodate additional vehicles, consequently prohibiting the Agency's ability to expand transit service efficiently. Similarly, the Hemet facility has limited space left for expansion, and in order to support RTA's service expansion plans identified in the Ten -Year Transit Network, additional maintenance infrastructure would be needed. The Hemet Facility also poses locational challenges and results in increased deadhead miles. The new operations, maintenance and administration facility will allow RTA to implement the service goals identified in the Ten -Year Transit Network Plan, reduce costly deadhead miles, increase operating efficiency, and allow the agency to accommodate ridership growth in western Riverside County. Moreover, RTA will use this new facility to implement new and emerging technologies such as electric/hybrid vehicles, solar power generation, etc. These new technologies will provide environmental benefits and promote sustainable business practices that will benefit the region and support the state's goals of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. RTA will complete a site selection study and produce a master plan document for the new facility during FY18 and FY19. Site selection will evaluate a variety of locational factors, such as lot size, distance to fixed route service areas, comparison of reduced nonrevenue miles and operating cost, accessibility for Disadvantaged Communities, and Title VI compliance. The site 18 Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 fiiuerskle Trani[ Ig.ncy selected will decrease deadhead hours/miles thus increase productivity and efficiency. The first phase of the project, Site Selection and Master Plan, will be completed by the end of FY19. Funding for site selection, land acquisition, and conceptual planning has been programmed and RTA has already secured over $12 million in Proposition 1B PTMISEA funds toward the architectural and engineering, land acquisition and construction phases of this project. RTA will apply for approximately $5 million in FTA 5339 competitive and formula funds during FY17. RTA has also identified funding in the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) 2015 Nexus Study, which is slated for approval in fall 2016. 1.7 EXISTING COORDINATION BETWEEN TRANSIT AGENCIES RTA is one of two designated Consolidated Transportation Services Agencies (CTSA) in Riverside County, the other being SunLine Transit Agency in the Coachella Valley. RTA's role as a CTSA is to assist RCTC in coordinating public transit throughout the approximate 2,500-square-mile service area; support driver training and technical workshops; and assist with preparing grant applications. Regional Coordination In the cities of Corona, Beaumont and Banning, RTA coordinates regional services with the Corona Cruiser and Pass Transit. In FY17, Beaumont Pass Transit is working to implement new transit service in the City of Calimesa, which RTA strongly supports. In the City of Riverside, RTA coordinates with Riverside Special Services, which provides complementary ADA-compliant service to RTA's fixed routes. Additionally, RTA staff periodically meets with social service providers, bus riders and other advocates through forums such as RCTC's Citizens Advisory Committee, RTA's quarterly ADA meetings, Transportation NOW (T-NOW) chapters and surrounding regional transit operators. As the CTSA and a federal grantee, RTA receives FTA funds directly and indirectly and is responsible for the provision and compliance of sub -recipients adhering to federal regulations and policies. RTA has and continues to assist other agencies throughout western Riverside County with applying for federal funds such as the FTA Section 5310 program. The projects funded through the 5310 program improve mobility for seniors and individuals with disabilities by removing barriers to transportation services and expanding the transportation mobility options available. The remaining projects funded through these programs include specialized public transportation initiatives that are targeted to assist low income individuals, seniors and persons with disabilities who require support beyond conventional public transit services to maintain their independence and mobility. 19 Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 NiuersIde Transit Agoacy Interregional Coordination and Transfer Agreements Though most trips are completed within RTA's service area, there is a demand to provide connectivity to areas outside of RTA's jurisdiction. As such, RTA has collaborated with other transit agencies on agreements for funding splits and/or jurisdictional overlap, in order to further interregional connectivity via public transportation. As a result of these collaborations, RTA has transfer agreements with the following agencies: Metrolink, Omnitrans, Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA), Corona Cruiser, SunLine and Pass Transit. Metrolink tickets and passes are accepted on RTA fixed routes that serve Metrolink stations during the period from one hour before to one hour after Metrolink's service hours and are valid on the day of travel. Fare media from Omnitrans and Pass Transit are accepted at transfer locations at the equivalent base fare rate, excluding CommuterLink service, on the day of travel. Corona Cruiser fare media are accepted at transfer locations and adjacent stops. OCTA fare media is accepted for base fare on CommuterLink Route 216 at transfer locations in Orange County as well as La Sierra Metrolink between RTA Route 15 and OCTA Route 794. This arrangement will be expanded to include new RTA SR-91 CommuterLink services. Current and retired employees as well as dependents of Omnitrans and OCTA are eligible to ride any local fixed route or CommuterLink in the RTA service area. In FY17, RTA will continue to collaborate with these agencies to provide options for enhanced interregional connectivity via transfer and funding agreements, and jurisdictional overlap. 20 Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 NiuersIde T.wl[ Airmem-y CHAPTER 2: ROUTE PERFORMANCE AND EXISTING SERVICE 2.1 KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS RTA evaluates and plans for its services using the RTA Board -adopted Service Standards and Warrants metrics and those set by RCTC's Annual State of Public Transit Report, which are both updated annually. Service Standards and Warrants The Service Standards and Warrants guidelines are design standards that set the requirements for a minimum level of service that respects service quality characteristics such as route structure, service area coverage, operating hours and on -time performance. There are several factors that are typically considered when objectively measuring service performance. These factors, used in conjunction with the Annual State of Public Transit Report, help determine whether service is cost effective. SUMMARY OF SERVICE STANDARDS AND WARRANTS Population Density Density is determined by the number of people housed per square mile or the number of employees per square mile. RTA aims to serve at least 85 percent of all residences, places of work, high schools, colleges and shopping centers with access to bus service. Route Classifications RTA service can be classified into five fixed route tiers — frequent key corridor, supporting local, regional connector, community feeder and CommuterLink. Complementary to the fixed route service is Dial -A -Ride. See Table 3A for the route classification of each route. Span of Service The span of service or the hours of operation refers to the start and end time of a route. The span of service will vary based on the demand in the community and the classification of the route. Bus Stop Spacing Depending on the population density, bus stop spacing in urban areas usually averages about 1,500 ft. (.28 miles) to 2,500 ft. (.47 miles). As service approaches more suburban and rural areas, bus stop spacing may be limited to locations with accessible curb and gutters and sidewalks suitable for ADA compliance. The new bus stop spacing standards allows spacing of 0.25 to 0.33 miles for support local, regional and community feeder routes; 0.25 to 0.5 miles for frequent key corridor local service; and 0.5 mile stop spacing for RapidLink service. On -Time Performance RTA requires that no bus shall leave a time point early and should arrive at a time point no later than six minutes after the scheduled arrival time. This limit is appropriate for RTA's service area due to the average distance traveled by each route and the combined rural and urban areas. 21 Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 fiiue.sIde Transit Agoncy Headways (Frequency) Headways are the timed intervals between each scheduled trip within a fixed route bus (e.g., the bus runs every 30 minutes). Headways range anywhere from every 15 minutes to every 120 minutes depending on the density and are aimed at operating in 15 minute increments for frequent key corridors supporting local and regional connector tiers. Community feeders and CommuterLink routes may vary depending on demand. Transfer Wait Time Transfer Wait Time refers to the amount of time a passenger has to wait when transferring from one mode of transportation to the next, whether it is bus or rail. In more urbanized areas such as downtown Riverside, average transfer wait times should not be longer than approximately 20 minutes. In smaller urbanized and even in rural areas, the average transfer wait time can reach up to 30 to 45 minutes depending on the frequencies of the routes in the area. Load Factor Depending on the bus, the maximum number of passengers should not (Maximum Vehicle exceed 150 percent of the seating capacity or the legal weight limit of the Loads) bus. Dial -A -Ride vehicles should not exceed 100 percent of the seated capacity. Source: RTA's Service Standards and Warrants (2012), Bus Stop Strategic Plan (2015) Productivity vs. Coverage Target To help improve effectiveness and efficiency, RTA sets a target for the productivity level of service to operate. In order to meet productivity requirements, while continuing to provide coverage to areas that would not be served if performance were the only factor, RTA has adopted standards requiring 60 percent of their fixed -route service to perform up to productivity standards while the remaining 40 percent of fixed routes operate to maintain coverage. This means that service that exceeds performance standards enable a minimal level of operations in areas of need that do not meet performance standards. Given RTA's diverse and widespread service area, there are places that are being served based on the need to provide coverage. The 60/40 split establishes a benchmark for productive service to meet mandatory farebox recovery. However, it also allows for new service to be implemented following Transportation Development Act (TDA) guidelines for exemption based on performance standards within the year the service was implemented and the following two fiscal years. This objective also enables RTA to maintain highly productive service and still meet the requirements of Title VI. It is the policy of RTA to ensure compliance with Title VI so that no person shall be excluded from participation in, denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination on the basis of race, color or national origin under any transit program or activity. 22 Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 fiiue.sIde T.wl[ Agoacy Warrants for New Service The Service Standards and Warrants are also used as a guide for the implementation of new service. New service is exempt from meeting the required criteria for up to two years plus the year of commencement. New service is evaluated during this initial period using the Service Standards and Warrants and the Annual State of Public Transit Report. The objective is to give a route time to perform up to standards, or it may be discontinued. Annual State of Public Transit Report RCTC's Annual State of Public Transit Report is based on audited information of operators after the end of the preceding fiscal year. 2.2 EXISTING FIXED ROUTE AND DIAL -A -RIDE SERVICE In FY16, RTA budgeted 795,421 revenue hours for the operation of 12.7 million revenue miles system -wide. Total revenue hours budgeted was 603,568 for fixed routes and 191,853 for DAR and taxi service. Total revenue miles included 9 million for fixed routes and 3.7 million for DAR and taxi. Passenger growth had exceeded projections in recent years due to significant increases in pass programs, customer satisfaction, rising gasoline prices, a high unemployment rate and an improving economy. These factors, as well as other service efficiencies made in prior years, helped to increase ridership and passengers per hour. However, the second half of FY15 and the first half of FY16 saw decreases in passenger activity virtually system -wide. While service improvements made to select routes in January 2015 have shown positive returns, the rapid growth seen in previous years is unlikely to continue. Service improvements, including the addition of new CommuterLink routes, are projected to help increase ridership for FY17 and establish a foundation for sustained ridership long-term. 2.3 PRODUCTIVITY IMPROVEMENT EFFORTS Improving productivity is a priority in which performance measures, particularly farebox recovery and passengers per hour, are monitored regularly. These two measurements are key factors in evaluating underperforming service. Performance evaluation directs staff to research and analyze unproductive routes more closely to determine whether segments or trips can be eliminated or altered due to low ridership. This process is used and has proven to be beneficial because it streamlines services, reduces expenses and has the least impact on customers. RTA has the opportunity to implement service changes three times per year in the winter, spring 23 Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 fiiue.skle Trani[ Ig.ncy and fall to accommodate travel patterns and modify schedules as necessary to improve service performance. 2.4 TRIP GENERATORS AND PROJECTED GROWTH MARKETS While RTA services are expanding among the public in general, students and CommuterLink users are market segments with the greatest potential for continued growth. Customer surveys conducted during the COA indicated that approximately 47 percent of current riders are students; about 12 percent identified as youth (K-12) and 35 percent identified as college students. The CommuterLink, or express bus market, has seen significant increases over the last six years. Growth in the student market is attributable to pass programs with local colleges and universities, outreach to schools and reduced school district funding. At the secondary level, most passengers who utilize RTA services are high school students. RTA makes every effort to reach out to districts and school sites to compile and maintain a database on bell schedules and attendance boundaries for routing and scheduling purposes. At the college level, RTA continues to develop and build relationships with college and university officials to improve transportation for their students through pass programs and enhanced services that meet the needs of students, such as later evening trips. Major initiatives were implemented in January 2015 to extend service span on routes serving community colleges until 10 p.m. on weeknights. The CommuterLink market is monitored closely to target major trip generators such as train stations, colleges and universities, and other connecting regional services. The amenities on CommuterLink routes such as the high -back upholstered seating, free Wi-Fi and charging stations are added values to the service that attract and retain customers. To expand on this market base, RTA continually monitors capacity on express routes to foster growth by adding larger vehicles or additional trips. 2.5 PASSENGER TRANSIT FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT AND PASSENGER AMENITIES In addition to improvements to service frequency and expanded service, the Ten -Year Transit Network Plan recommends the creation of a Timed Transfer System (TTS) and improving support infrastructure such as bus stops and transfer hubs to meet the growing demand for transit services in the most efficient manner. 24 Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 fiiuerskle Traml[ Agency As the transit provider for one of the fastest -growing counties in California, RTA continues to face the challenge of serving a rapidly growing, low -density suburban environment with limited resources. That's why it is neither feasible nor cost-effective to run direct service from every trip origin to every destination. The only system that can possibly meet this demand at this point, with existing resources, is a system that enables timed transfer connections from one service or mode to another. Therefore, strategically located transfer hubs are essential to making a Timed Transfer System work at its optimum. Routes with various destinations often converge at transfer hubs. These key hubs provide transfers between multiple bus routes or modes of transportation. Some of these hubs also provide coach operators with access to restroom facilities. This section identifies numerous capital projects that would enhance customer experience and improve service operations needed to fully implement the Ten -Year Transit Network Plan. Passenger Transit Facilities Transit facilities are more than just a place to make bus connections. They can be community - centered, multi -modal facilities where bus and rail customers share a selection of mobility choices. These modes of travel can include single -occupancy vehicles, carpools, vanpools, bicycles, pedestrian walkways, local and commuter express buses, light rail and regional rail networks. Transit hubs are generally owned by various public agencies and are well -situated for the advancement of public -private investment partnerships leading to transit -oriented commercial and residential development. The following is a summary of the existing transit facilities in the RTA service area: Perris Station Transit Center: Completed in January 2010, this transit center is located in the City of Perris at C Street and 4th Street (State Route 74) and has eight bus bays served by seven RTA routes. The facility will ultimately handle multi -modal transfers between Metrolink; RTA local, regional and express routes; and park -and -ride patrons in the southwest region. _111.11111110111111111111111 _ _ - -' ,...-MVIMI 1k, Corona Transit Center: This transit center was opened in September 2010 and is located off Grand Boulevard and North Main Street and includes eight bus bays and a pedestrian bridge to trains at the North Main Corona Metrolink Station. 25 Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 NiuersIde Transit Agnem-i Galleria at Tyler Bus Stop Improvements: The demand for enhanced connections and improved bus stop amenities prompted RTA to improve the stops at the Galleria Mall at Tyler, which serves nine routes and more than 3,000 daily boardings and alightings. Completed in October 2014 and nearly doubling in size, the transit facility now includes six bus bays with new passenger shelters equipped with solar lighting. The facility also includes real-time arrival and departure information and customer amenities that comply with Americans with Disabilities (ADA) design standards. Reinforced concrete bus pads were installed to protect the roadway and increase the useful life of this facility. These improvements can accommodate new service such as RapidLink and support existing connections between routes. Moreno Valley Mall Transfer Station: Similar to the Galleria at Tyler, the transfer station at Moreno Valley Mall is integral toward establishing transfers within RTA's network. Completed in March 2015, the station, which serves seven bus routes, has tripled in size to include six upgraded bus bays with pedestrian amenities that comply with ADA design standards. New transit shelters with solar lighting, information kiosks, benches and trash receptacles were installed. Concrete bus pads were also installed to preserve the roadway and increase the useful life of the stop. On average, more than 1,500 boardings and alightings occur at this station every day. Transit Enhancements: A number of smaller capital projects were completed during the last fiscal year. • The Route 3 Stop Enhancement Project enhanced two stops to accommodate increased ridership and the operation of new 40ft buses in the Corona and Norco area; • The Route 26 Stop Installation Project installed four new bus stops in Riverside's Canyon Springs area for this new route serving the Metrolink's Perris Valley Line; • The Moreno Valley Mall Transit Center Landing Platform Expansion Project expanded the size of the boarding/alighting area to better serve passengers utilizing mobility devices; • The Sanderson and Wentworth Stops Installation Project installed two new stops to accommodate increases in ridership in this area of Hemet and provide access for RTA staff to the Hemet division; • The Lake Elsinore Park and Ride Stop Enhancement Project added a new transit shelter and amenities at the Park and Ride boarding/alighting area to accommodate the growth in ridership at that facility; • The Main Street at Garner Stop Installation Project installed a new stop to accommodate new business development in the north Riverside area, allowing RTA to continue to serve disabled riders traveling to/from work at the relocated Ability Counts Company. The following is a summary of the planned transit facilities and enhancements in the RTA service area: 26 Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 NiuersIde Transit Agnem-i Bus Stops Improvement Program Implementation: The Bus Stop Improvement Program was approved by RTA's Board of Directors in June 2015. This program uses a two -tiered approach to the allocation of new bus stop amenities within the allocated funding of an annual Bus Stop Improvement Program. The two tiers focus on ridership and geographic equity respectively, providing a more balanced distribution of improvements across the service area compared to a methodology purely focused on ridership (which is biased towards more urbanized areas). Tier 1 is prioritized based on the ridership per stop across all RTA bus stops. This tier covers 50 percent of bus stops receiving improvements as part of the program and ensures the network's busiest bus stops receive some priority. Tier 2 is prioritized on an equitable allocation based on each jurisdiction's population and ridership. This approach to allocation of amenities will cover the remaining 50 percent of bus stops receiving improvements as part of the program and will ensure a balance between need and geographic equity. In conjunction with the tiers, there are also a number of other criteria such as a limit per jurisdiction, ADA compliance, available space and limited stop ridership threshold. To implement this plan, RTA will start by rolling out current bench and trash receptacle inventory to qualified stops. During this time, procurement of shelters will also occur. Once shelters have been received, RTA plans to roll out the shelters in adherence with the program. Due to maintenance costs associated with the additional shelters, this schedule will be dependent on available operating funds. Downtown Riverside Operating Plan: This project is based on a plan to modernize service in downtown Riverside. The operating plan was developed in conjunction with the Comprehensive Operational Analysis (COA), which provides RTA with a blueprint for fixed -route operational and capital enhancements for the next ten years. A key recommendation from the COA is to improve the provision of transit service in downtown Riverside by creating an on - street grid system. The operating plan will improve passenger transfers, consolidate routes to enhance service delivery and boost productivity, and reduce the number of buses traveling to downtown thereby improving traffic circulation. The architectural and engineering phase for this project was completed in December 2015 and construction will begin in July 2016. This project will be completed in time for the January 2017 service change for the new downtown Riverside bus stops with implementation of RapidLink service following in September 2017. RapidLink Gold Line (Corona to UCR Corridor) and RapidLink Blue Line (UCR to Perris Corridor): The Agency has identified the corridor between UCR and Corona primarily along University and Market/Magnolia Avenues as a candidate for limited -stop bus service, dubbed RapidLink. More than 9,000 customers use bus services along this corridor on weekdays. Route 1 alone has more than 7,500 daily boardings, accounting for almost 25 percent of RTA's entire weekday ridership. The UCR and Perris Metrolink Station corridor through Moreno Valley/Perris Boulevard has also been identified as a second candidate for RapidLink service due to its high ridership. 27 Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 NiuersIde Transit Airmem-y RTA has completed Architectural and Engineering (A&E) for construction of the Corona-UCR Corridor and the conceptual design of the UCR-Perris Corridor is in progress. Construction and implementation of the Corona-UCR Corridor is slated for September 2017. The UCR-Perris Corridor will begin final design and construction once funding is secured. University of California, Riverside Mobility Hub: Riverside County is the fastest growing county in the State of California with a projected population increase from 2,308,441 to 2,478,059 by 2020, a 7.3 percent increase, according to the California Department of Finance. Currently, 21 percent of UCR's population ride RTA buses and UCR is one of the busiest transit destinations in the Agency's transit network, with over 1,785 boardings and alightings reported on an average weekday. The planned service improvements, the popular U-Pass Program, parking price increases, increased congestion and resulting environmental and sustainability challenges are projected to contribute toward positive ridership gains in the future. The current on street bus stops at UCR located on Canyon Crest Drive are utilized by routes 1, 16, 51 and 204. This location will also be utilized by planned service improvements such as Route 52 (which will begin operating with the launch of PVL rail service), RapidLink Gold Line (which commences in September 2017) and CommuterLink Route 216 (which is the planned extension from Orange County). This stop currently does not have the space, bus shelters or other amenities essential to effectively accommodate these current and planned service changes. The proposed UCR Mobility Hub has an efficient bus turnaround that will allow more direct routing, eliminating excess travel on local streets currently needed to turn the buses around. The estimated annual operating and capital cost savings and operational efficiencies that can be gained by implementing the proposed UCR Mobility Hub is about $600,000 per year and two buses. In turn, these cost efficiencies and buses will be reallocated to assist in implementing increased service as recommended in the Ten -Year Transit Network Plan. The proposed UCR Mobility Hub will have capacity for six buses and be utilized by current and proposed routes (1, 16, 51, 52, 204, 216, RapidLink Gold Line and Blue Line). The project will also include the following amenities: bus shelters, benches, trash receptacles, security features, drought tolerant landscaping, connectivity to UCR's bicycle amenities and better integration with existing City of Riverside bike lanes and trails. This project is an ongoing partnership between UCR and RTA with an estimated construction start date in September 2016. Promenade Mall Mobility Hub: RTA initially planned to develop a Twin Cities Transit Center Project in the Temecula/Murrieta area. The Agency went through a very lengthy site selection and conceptual planning process jointly with both cities and identified a site located at 27199 Jefferson Avenue in the City of Temecula. However, the project experienced extended delays due to an intersecting project with the Riverside County Flood Control District and US Army Corp of Engineers and the funds were sitting idle with no plan for development. Additionally, the commuter rail and the proposed high-speed rail station site selection studies undertaken by Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) and the California High -Speed Rail Authority will determine the optimal location for an intermodal transportation center in this 28 Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 NiuersIde Transit Agnem-i area. Consequently, to make the infrastructure improvements necessary to implement transit service enhancements recommended in the 10-Year Transit Plan, the Agency undertook the task of developing an alternative site within the City of Temecula. Both RTA and the city worked together to identify a new project site located 1.2 miles away at The Promenade. The Promenade is a 1.1 million -square -foot shopping mall located in Temecula, California. Since the Promenade's inception in 1999, visitors have been shopping at over a 100 plus retail establishments, dining at several restaurants, touring dozens of farmers markets and viewing new releases at the movie complex. The Promenade is quickly becoming the epicenter for shopping, dining and entertainment in the City of Temecula. It is essential for RTA to expand its public transit infrastructure in order to accommodate the growing demand in service from the ever increasing number of people traveling to and from the Promenade. The Promenade currently has a single bus stop that serves six RTA bus routes (55, 79, 202, 206, 208 and 217). In partnership, staffs from RTA, the Promenade and the City of Temecula completed the conceptual plan that outlines design recommendations for the proposed expansion of the Promenade's current single bus stop. RTA will construct a Mobility Hub at Promenade Mall which will serve the immediate needs that were planned to be met by the Twin Cities project. With the recent removal of the Transportation Control Measure (TCM) from the FTIP for the Twin Cities Transit Center project, RTA will request to utilize those federal funds that have been tied up to advance the Promenade Mall Mobility Hub project. The Conceptual Plan for the Promenade Mall has been approved by the Board and the project is expected to initiate procurement for Architectural and Engineering in the summer of 2017. Construction of this project will be scheduled once funding is secured. Mount San Jacinto College Mobility Hub: Founded in 1963, Mount San Jacinto College (MSJC) is part of the California Higher Education System, one of the largest systems of higher education in the nation. MSJC has a student population of over 5,000 and is predicted to more than double to 10,600 by 2020. In order to accommodate growth in ridership, RTA will begin working with MSJC to identify what opportunities exist to enhance the service delivery at the campus location. In addition, the Hemet -San Jacinto region is recognized in RTA's Ten -Year Transit Network Plan as one of the fastest growing regions in the RTA service area. In an effort to improve service delivery in the region, RTA is examining opportunities to improve major destinations and stops to help facilitate passenger connections. Currently, RTA provides both local and commuter fixed -route service to the college campus. RTA routes 31, 32, 74, 212 and 217 all serve MSJC and provide an opportunity for people living throughout western Riverside County to travel to and from the campus. Moreover, there is a strong incentive for students to use transit as MSJC is a member of the Go -Pass Program which allows students to take unlimited rides on fixed -route service which is paid through student fees. The Go -Pass program has been successful in generating an average of 25,000 boardings per month at MSJC campus locations. 29 Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 NiuersIde Transit Agnem-i In order to accommodate a growth in ridership, RTA will have to improve the MSJC stop. The existing location only allows for only two buses to stop at a time for passenger drop-off and pick-up. The site has two bus shelters with passenger amenities that provide some level for comfort for those waiting for a bus and protection from inclement weather. RTA is planning to expand the facility to allow additional buses to stop at this location. The mobility hub will also include additional shelters, security features and improved pedestrian access that is consistent with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) 2010 Standards for Accessibility Design guidelines. Such improvements will allow RTA to accommodate future ridership growth as the college and the surrounding areas continue to grow in the upcoming years. As transit ridership grows, the MSJC Mobility Hub will become a focal point of transit services in the Hemet -San Jacinto area. Long-term plans indicate that passenger rail service may extend out to this area which will necessitate the need for an improved transfer interface with bus and rail. Until these long range projects are complete, the MSJC Mobility Hub will function as one of the key location in the Hemet -San Jacinto for passengers to transfer between buses. Riverside Mobility Hub at Vine Street: A key component of RTA's Ten -Year Transit Network Plan is the Downtown Riverside Operating Plan, which due to capacity constraints recommends shifting operations from the Riverside Downtown Terminal to a 2.4 acre parcel located on Vine Street, which lies adjacent to the Riverside Downtown Metrolink Station and the public park - and -ride lot. The City of Riverside's City Council and RTA's Board of Directors approved the Downtown Riverside Operating Plan in January 2015. The City of Riverside's General Plan 2025 also identified Vine Street as one of the preferred locations within downtown Riverside for a new mobility hub due to its proximity to major employment centers, county and city government centers, University of California, Riverside (UCR), Riverside Community College, the convention center, multiple entertainment venues and urban housing complexes. In the immediate term, RTA plans to construct an interim on -street layover facility at Vine Street to accommodate the buses operating throughout downtown Riverside. The City of Riverside is in the process of transferring property ownership of the 2.4 acre parcel located on Vine Street to RTA. Once funding is secured and the land is transferred, RTA will construct the Riverside Mobility Hub at Vine Street which will be an off-street facility to support connectivity between Riverside Transit Agency, SunLine Transit Agency, Omnitrans Public Transit, Metrolink and bicycle/pedestrian networks. The Riverside Mobility Hub at Vine Street will be designed and developed with emerging technologies, renewable energy sources and mobility solutions in mind. RTA has just recently applied for the Caltrans Transit Planning for Sustainable Communities grant program, which if awarded, will fund the Conceptual Plan for the Riverside Mobility Hub at Vine Street. As soon as the 2.4 acre parcel is transferred to RTA and the Conceptual Plan is completed, funding will be identified and construction of the Riverside Mobility Hub at Vine Street will commence. 30 Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 NiuersIde Transit Agnem-i First and Last Mile Mobility Plan: In 2014, RTA was awarded Federal Section 5304 funds to develop a First and Last Mile Mobility Plan. In alignment with federal transportation goals, the objective of this project is to establish a plan that identifies cost-effective improvements to solve first and last mile barriers for commuters who could potentially take transit, but whose origin or destination cannot be conveniently accessed from the nearest transit facility due to distance, terrain, or real or perceived safety issues. RTA has secured a contractor and this study is currently underway. The estimated completion date is June 2017. This study will run concurrently with the Western Riverside Council of Governments' (WRCOG) Active Transportation study and RTA is working closely with WRCOG staff on coordinating the two plans. The end result will include recommended projects, cost estimates, suggested funding sources and an outreach summary. La Sierra Metrolink Station Bus Stops: The Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) is expanding the parking area at the La Sierra Metrolink facility. As part of this expansion, RCTC is including six bus bays with passenger amenities that will support RTA's goal of implementing timed transfer connections and intermodal connectivity between rail and bus. Perris Valley Line Metrolink Stations: RTA will also utilize multi -modal stations being developed by RCTC along the proposed Perris Valley Line. PVL stations are Hunter Park Station, Moreno Valley -March Station, Downtown Perris and South Perris Station. Equipment and Passenger Amenities Intelligent Transportation System (ITS): The ITS network brings functionalities that improve the operational workflow, both internally and externally. Sophisticated Automatic Vehicle Locator programs allow the bus Dispatch Center to track the location of every equipped bus for schedule adherence and passenger loads. This feature greatly enhances schedule performance and monitoring of ridership patterns. RTA is currently in the middle of a replacement and expansion of its ITS system. Installation of the new system began in December 2015 and should be complete by October of 2016. This new system will expand ITS technology from the previous 97 buses to approximately 225 buses, allowing for RTA personnel to have real-time visibility and control of all fixed route vehicles. The system provides RTA's Planning and Operations departments with essential historical data, related to on -time performance and passengers' boardings and alightings, which allows them to make informed service modification decisions. For the maintenance department, this system monitors onboard vehicle components and reports performance measures and system faults to key maintenance personnel, reducing the likelihood that a mechanical or electrical issue continues unnoticed, resulting in more reliable vehicles and an improved passenger experience. Additionally, this new system will improve the security of passengers and personnel, providing the Dispatch Center and public safety personnel with the ability to view real-time onboard 31 Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 Hl e..w. Tr•nde per, surveillance video during an emergency event. Finally, with this new ITS system, every fixed - route vehicle will be equipped to provide free Wi-Fi to passengers. Scheduling and Operations Software Project: The completion of the Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) is scheduled for October 2016, and using this software as the platform, RTA plans to begin procurement of the Transit Scheduling and Operations software in 2017. This software will allow RTA to create its own efficient schedules, vehicle blocking, runcuts and rosters without relying on a vendor to provide such services. It would also allow improved operations management by integrating the daily crew and vehicle rostering and other operational functions into one system to improve the efficiency and administration of these processes. Advanced Traveler Information System (ATIS): RTA has also introduced the ATIS technology with digital kiosks, known as SmartStops, which relay real-time arrival information on display at major transfer points. Currently, SmartStops are installed at transit centers and major - centralized transfer locations in the cities of Riverside, Perris, Moreno Valley and Corona. The next phase of the ATIS project will include querying and alerting of bus arrivals via text messaging, which will be completed concurrent with the upgraded ITS program. Mobile application development is also part of this project, which will allow passengers to lookup real- time arrival information for all RTA fixed routes. Transit Signal Priority (TSP): TSP is a tool that allows transit vehicles to travel through controlled intersections faster and more conveniently. Unlike signal pre-emption which is used on emergency vehicles, TSP technology on a bus utilizes a transmitter that allows the traffic signals along major streets to remain in "green" mode for several seconds longer, therefore allowing a late -running bus to advance more quickly along its route to maintain on -time performance. TSP is currently being used on Route 1 along the University Avenue and Magnolia Avenue corridors. RTA is working with the City of Riverside to monitor the impact and performance. 32 Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 fiiuerskle Transit Airmncy Illuminated Bus Stops: In FY17, RTA intends to purchase materials and supplies to expand and upgrade the bus stop system with 50 security -enhancing illuminated bus stop devices which come equipped with down -lighting. These features are push-button activated by the customer and allow drivers to recognize when a person is waiting at a bus stop at night. The down - lighting safety feature and illuminated schedule provides bus scheduling information for easy visibility in a night time environment. Bus Expansion Program: RTA's directly operated fleet as of July 1, 2016 will consist of 122 buses. These 40-foot CNG buses are manufactured by Gillig, Inc. and have state-of-the-art technology that provides enhanced passenger safety, better fuel efficiency and decreased emissions. These vehicles were funded through State Transit Assistance (STA), Proposition 1B and federal appropriations and grants. In FY16, RTA Board of Directors approved the procurement of an additional 23 expansion vehicles; 17 for the new Route 1 Limited (RapidLink) service and six for the SR-91 express bus service to Orange County. Both of these service improvements are due to commence operation in 2017. The contract operated fleet has been upgraded since 2008 with expansion vehicles that could seat up to 28 passengers compared to previous Type II vehicles which seat 12 passengers. In FY16, all Type II vehicles are being retired and five trolley buses are being withdrawn from service. Additional medium sized buses will need to be purchased to replace older buses from the contingency fleet that will be placed into service for PVL service expansion. As for the DAR fleet, the 38 12-passenger Type II vehicles purchased in FY13 will be retained in service as expansion vehicles. As of March 2016, 36 new Aerotech's have been ordered and are going through the acceptance process. 33 Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 NiuersIde T.wl[ Agnem-i CHAPTER 3: RECENT AND PLANNED SERVICE CHANGES 3.1 RECENT SERVICE CHANGES The COA study completed in early 2015 clearly pointed to the need for significant service improvements concentrated on four core themes: 1. Frequency of Service — Ridership and customer survey data strongly pointed to service frequency as the key improvement required for RTA services to be attractive and have the capacity to grow. 2. Connectivity — Surveys also pointed to the need to better coordinate RTA services at key connection points, especially where low frequency services meet. 3. Streamlining — Changes need to focus on routing on major streets and corridors to reduce circuitous routing, duplication of service and to improve travel times and ease of understanding of the transit network. 4. Span of Service — Surveys pointed clearly to the need to accommodate demand for later service in areas near major employment centers, colleges and universities. Notable changes that were implemented in FY15 and FY16 under these core strategies included the following: • Improved service frequencies on weekdays (Routes 1, 3, 15, 19, 20, 29, 49 and 74) and weekends (Routes 15, 16, 19, 22, 27 and 74). • Later weekday service was added on Routes 1, 15, 20, 22 and 27. • Service span was extended weeknights on Routes 3, 20 and 74 to serve evening community colleges classes and jobs. • Route 1 span was also expanded by one hour Saturday evenings to better serve the entertainment market. • Sunday service was added to Route 3. • Streamlined loop Routes 8 (Lake Elsinore, Wildomar) and 23 (Wildomar, Murrieta, Temecula). • New Routes 26 (Orangecrest — Moreno Valley/March Field Metrolink — Moreno Valley Mall) and 52 (Hunter Park Metrolink Station — UCR) and additional trips on Routes 13, 19, 20, 22, 27, 30, 61, 74, 208 and 212 have been budgeted and planned and are ready for implementation with the startup of Perris Valley rail line service. 34 Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 fiiue.sIde T.wl[ Ig.ncy 3.2 PLANNED SERVICE CHANGES Service planning for FY17 through FY19 will primarily focus on developing RTA's high frequency corridor services. The main service changes planned for implementation in FY17 include: • New SR-91 CommuterLink service on the new toll lanes. • A full year of Perris Valley Line feeder bus service. • Expand Route 30 to link Perris with May Ranch developments. • Implement Sunday service on the remaining three no service days: Thanksgiving, Christmas and New Year's Day. An increased demand for Sunday service is expected to support operation of the expanded transit network. • Streamlining of downtown Riverside bus operations together with the closure of the existing downtown bus terminal. These service improvements will be implemented in FY17, contingent upon the necessary financial resources and approval by the Board of Directors. RapidLink Gold Line Corona — Riverside UCR offering service every 15 minutes during peak periods is now planned for implementation in September 2017 as the major new transit service initiative for FY18. Recommended strategies from the COA planned for implementation in FY18 and FY19 (subject to funding availability) are as follows: • Split Route 27 into two separate Routes 27 (Perris — Galleria) and 28 (Perris — Hemet) with significantly improved weekday frequency and more direct route between Hemet and Perris. • Extend Route 61 from Sun City to Perris, replacing Route 27. Route 61 will also gain Sunday service. • Merge Routes 16 and 19 between UCR, Moreno Valley and Perris. 15-minute service will be provided weekdays. The new Route 16 will interface with Route 1 at UCR Mobility Hub instead of travelling to Downtown Riverside. • Improved operating strategy: evaluate transfer reliability/window of all routes and feeders services, identify streamlining opportunities, elimination of routes, the addition of PVL, Corona service changes and VA Hospital service updates. • Trial Saturday service on local Routes 35 (Banning/Beaumont — Moreno Valley) and 40 (Lake Elsinore — Menifee) as well as increase Route 40 service frequency on weekdays and route the service via Mount San Jacinto College. • Trial Sunday service on local Route 42 (Hemet -San Jacinto-Soboba Casino). • Add earlier afternoon northbound Route 217 service between Escondido and Temecula. 35 Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 fiiue.sIde Trani[ Ig.ncy 3.3 MODIFICATIONS TO PARATRANSIT SERVICE The provision of ADA services remains a challenge; it is costly both to RTA and to the passengers who use it. Efforts to mitigate the increasing expenses in DAR service included the launch of a Senior/Disabled Travel Training Program and the establishment of a Medi-Cal Reimbursement Program. The Freedom to Go Senior/Disabled Travel Training Program commenced in fall 2011 and covers all aspects of public transit from training on how to ride the bus, how to use a bus schedule and map, as well as help in overcoming physical and social barriers that may prevent passengers from using a fixed route bus. Participants benefit by developing a greater level of independence and increased mobility; ultimately bringing significant financial savings to both the customer and RTA. In FY15, more than 390 trainees actively participated in travel training. Program participants took more than 81,000 trips on fixed -route buses. Since the program's inception, the program has served more than 1,050 seniors and persons with disabilities, resulting in more than 190,000 trips on fixed -route buses through June 2015. RTA can avoid an estimated $14,000 a year for every five -day -a -week rider who makes the switch from DAR to fixed -route service. During FY15, the program saved RTA over $600,000 and since the program's inception; it has saved over $1.3 million. The Medi-Cal Reimbursement Program was implemented in early 2012 and was developed in cooperation with the State Medi-Cal Program for paratransit trips taken to and from qualifying medical services. This program provides reimbursement of 50 percent of the net expenses associated with these trips and provides access to alternative sources of State and Federal funding for DAR services. Eligible expenses so far under this program are $3 million. 3.4 MARKETING PLANS AND PROMOTION A marketing and communications plan is developed to support the annual goals of RTA, while advancing the mission and vision of the organization. The plan seeks to address the following focus areas: • Increasing ridership • Increasing awareness of RTA services • Enhancing the image of RTA • Educating the public on the benefits of public transportation • Providing excellent customer service • Coordinating media and public relations • Government relations • Assisting with employee communications 36 Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 NiuersIde Transit Airmem-y Addressing these areas is accomplished by executing marketing and communication programs or campaigns targeted at existing and potential riders, commuters, the general public, elected officials, students, the business community, the media, non-profit organizations and employees. These programs and campaigns employ a mix of different media to reach the desired audiences. Marketing efforts aim to build on the existing base of awareness by educating the general public about what transit services are available and how and where to get more information. Service Adjustments: Marketing promotes information regarding service adjustments through a variety of advertising methods to reach customers including rider alerts, press releases, website, brochures distributed throughout the service area, newspaper ads, on -bus information and social media. Customer Information Materials: RTA aims to make the transit system easier to understand and use through enhanced passenger information and signage. Materials are developed for both novice riders and experienced users to read and understand. Informational documents are readily available and designed to attractively promote RTA services to new users, while maintaining interest and engagement from existing riders. Public Speaking Opportunities: Presentations are customized for a variety of market segments. Outreach to business and community leaders is used to educate these groups about the economic benefits that transit provides to the RTA community, while presentations for social service agencies or other gatekeeper organizations are tailored to educate these groups on how transit can enhance personal mobility and how they can help to promote its usage. Presentations also occur at senior centers, colleges and school orientation programs that focus on how those populations can use the bus to accomplish their various tasks. Community Relations: Many of RTA's strategies rely on working through local organizations and businesses to direct very specific promotional messages to constituencies with realistic potential for using RTA's transit services. Community -based marketing and partnerships with local businesses and public agencies of this kind are cost-effective. One way RTA builds upon these relationships is by participating in community events such as expos and parades, which provides the opportunity to attract potential new users and also promote RTA as an active community partner. Website and Social Media: RTA's website is used to publish up-to-date information about Agency services, policies and publications. RTA also utilizes social media, including Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Instagram and iAlerts. Social media is a relatively inexpensive advertising format that allows RTA to provide information quickly and easily to users while raising RTA's profile and brand. Customer Information Center: The Customer Information Center provides phone information to customers seven days a week. As call volumes fluctuate, RTA maintains staffing levels to 37 Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 NiuersIde T.wl[ Airmem-y adequately meet its customers' needs. Various resources like Transtar and Google Transit trip planners, and Transit Master bus tracking, allow customer representatives to quickly and accurately answer all customer inquiries. English- and Spanish-speaking clerks are always available to assist callers. For other language requirements, both written and verbal, RTA uses the service of LanguageLine Solutions which provide interpretation and translation in more than 200 languages. Transportation NOW (T-NOW): T-NOW was formed in 1992 as a grassroots advocacy group comprised of public transit advocates. Members of T-NOW range from elected officials to community activists to everyday transit users who are committed not only to addressing regional transportation issues but meeting the needs of individual communities. There are six T-NOW chapters throughout the service area that include Greater Riverside, Hemet/San Jacinto Area, Northwest, Moreno Valley/Perris, San Gorgonio Pass Area and Southwest. Each chapter meets monthly and sets goals and objectives relevant to their communities. 3.5 BUDGET IMPACT ON PROPOSED CHANGES Planned service changes in FY17 and beyond are contingent upon economic conditions and available revenue. Therefore, should funding be unavailable for planned services and projects, the implementation and service improvements in conjunction with them will be delayed until sufficient revenue is available. Any new service should also adhere to RTA's Sustainable Funding Source Policy that was approved in September 2010. The enactment of the policy provides a framework that assures that funding sources, particularly temporary financial assistance or "seed" money are utilized only on service that has a significant potential to be productive and financially sustainable when funding expires or is depleted. This encourages the use of new or expanded service to demonstrate that it is warranted by meeting productivity standards over an established period of time. 38 Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 fiiue.skle Transit Ig.ncy CHAPTER 4: FINANCIAL AND CAPITAL PLANS RTA's FY17 budget reflects a strategy to fit within current financial constraints. To that end, RTA is planning for a service level that balances forecasted fiscal constraints with the varied profile of the service area. The only service increases planned in FY17 are for the PVL feeders, 91 Express and the addition of three holidays. Staff remains fully committed to exploring all service and financial alternatives necessary to meeting the public transit needs of the citizens who live and work in western Riverside County. Public transportation helps alleviate congestion, ensures mobility, promotes more livable communities, and assists with meeting additional needs that arise as a result of the ADA. 4.1 OPERATING AND CAPITAL BUDGET The total budget for FY17 is $87,282,054, with $75,997,588 projected for operating expenses and $11,284,466 projected for capital projects. Due to the prudence exercised over the past few years and the improving economy, RTA is expecting an overall operating budget increase over FY16. As currently budgeted, total operating expenses for FY17 are $75,997,588 — an increase of $6,917,971 or 10 percent over FY16. It should be noted that RTA is planning for an increase of 6% in revenue service hours. Significant cost drivers are purchased transportation, new service and liability insurance. The FY17 capital budget represents a decrease of $17,380,179 or 61 percent from FY16 mid- year budget levels. The significant decrease in the capital budget request is attributable to not programming Proposition 1B funds and reduced revenue vehicle funding in FY17. Operating Budget Profile: o Operations ■ Maintenance °Planning ■ Administration $49, 952,110 The proposed Operating Budget totals $75,997,588. Operations, at 66%, constitute the largest component of the proposed budget while Maintenance makes up 13% of the total. Thus, combined Operations and Maintenance equate to 79% of the budget. Planning and Administration combined make up the remaining 21% of the budget. While these percentage 39 Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 fiiuerskle Transit Agnncy breakdowns are consistent in proportionality with prior years, a slight increase in administration is due to increased insurance costs. The operating budget contains five (5) major cost elements. The elements are: • Salaries and Benefits (50%), which are made up of wages and fringe benefits including medical, Worker's Compensation, and Other Post -Employment Benefits Annual Required Contribution (OPEB ARC). • Purchased Transportation (36%), which represents the resources required for contracted transportation services for DAR/Taxi Overflow and certain fixed -route services. • Materials and Supplies (4%), made up primarily of operating supplies including tires, parts, fuel, and lubricants for the operation, repair & maintenance of Agency vehicles. • Services (4%) include, but are not limited to, external auditing, legal, marketing, outside maintenance / custodial, armored transport, actuarial services, legislative consulting, and towing. • Other Expenses (6%) include, but are not limited to, insurance, utilities, printing and publications, advertising and promotion, dues and subscriptions, and other miscellaneous expenses. $27,516,161 $5,074,034 $3,120,381 /$2,659,039 Capital Budget Profile: $37,627,973 CISalaries & Benefits ■ Services CIMaterials & Supplies ■ Purchased Transportation ■ Other Expenses The proposed FY17 Capital Budget totals $11,284,466. Capital funding will be used for the purchase of critical items to maintain existing operations and service levels. The Capital Budget is a component of the comprehensive five-year Capital Improvement Plan including equipment and upgrade of agency infrastructure. FY17 Capital Budget profile by project element is shown below: 40 Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 NiuersIde Transit Agnem-i $4,218,969 o Maintenance ■ Revenue Vehicles ■ Facilities ■ Shelters & Stops Notable capital projects included in the proposed FY17 budget include: • Purchase of replacement revenue vehicles • Associated Transit Improvements • Critical maintenance and administrative support equipment • Partial funding for new Operations and Maintenance facility 41 Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 Hl e..w. Tr•nde per, 4.2 FUNDING SOURCES FOR OPERATING AND CAPITAL PROGRAMS Funding for the Operating and Capital Budgets are generated from state, federal and local revenue sources. The chart shown below summarizes the allocation of each revenue source. Total Operating & Capital Revenues $87,282,054 Operating Revenues $75,997,588 Passenger Fares $11,050,000 LTF Operating Assistance $44,449,217 Federal Operating Assistance $15,503,861 FTA Section 5307 $14,500,000 FTA Section 5310 $370,000 FTA Section 5311 $550,261 FTA Section 5304 $83,600 Low Carbon Transit Ops (Cap & Trade) $460,410 Measure A $2,804,000 Bond Proceeds $425,000 Other Local Revenue $1,305,100 Capital Revenues $11,284,466 Federal $9,292,037 FTA Section 5307 $6,130,270 FTA Section 5339 $3,161,767 STA $1,992,429 Bond Proceeds $3,698,701 LTF (re -program to Operating) ($3,698,701) 42 Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 fiiue.skle Transit Ig.ncy 4.3 TUMF NEXUS STUDY As previously mentioned, WRCOG is currently performing a Nexus Study of their TUMF program. Upon adoption of this study, scheduled for fall 2016, RTA will have a comprehensive list of future projects that are eligible for TUMF funding. This document is a planning document, and programming of funds is subject to funding availability and done through the TUMF TIP Administrative Amendment process. Below is the comprehensive list of projects that RTA is submitting for approval as part of the TUMF Nexus Study: PROJECT NAME CATEGORY UNIT COST U S COST TUMF SHARE Riverside Mobility Hub at Vine Street Transit Center 1 $6,000,000 1 $6,000,000 $3,912,000 Moreno Valley Mobility Hub(s) Transit Center 2 $9,000,000 1 $9,000,000 $5,870,000 Jurupa Valley Mobility Hub(s) Transit Center 2 $9,000,000 1 $9,000,000 $5,870,000 Banning Mobility Hub(s) Transit Center 2 $9,000,000 1 $9,000,000 $5,870,000 Lake Elsinore/Canyon Lake Mobility Hub(s) Transit Center 2 $9,000,000 1 $9,000,000 $5,870,000 Transit Enhancements in Temecula/Murrieta Transit Center 2 $9,000,000 1 $9,000,000 $5,870,000 UCR Mobility Hub Transit Center 2 $9,000,000 1 $9,000,000 $5,870,000 MSJC Mobility Hub Transfer Facility $1,000,000 1 $1,000,000 $652,000 Promenade Mall Mobility Hub Transit Center 1 $6,000,000 1 $6,000,000 $3,913,000 Regional Operations and Maintenance Facility 0 & M Facility $50,000,000 1 $50,000,000 $32,600,000 Annual Transit Enhancements Program Bus Stop $40,000 290 $11,600,000 $7,565,000 Central Corridor Rapid Link Implementation BRT Service Capital $60,000 42 $2,520,000 $1,643,000 Vehicle Fleet Medium Buses Vehicle Fleet 1 $155,000 7 $1,085,000 $708,000 Vehicle Fleet Large Buses Vehicle Fleet 2 $585,000 29 $16,965,000 $11,064,000 Comprehensive Operational Analysis Study TOTALS: COA Study $950,000 1 $950,000 $620,000 $150,120,000 $97,897,000 43 Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 fiiue.sIde T.wl[ Ig.ncy 4.4 REGULATORY AND COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS As a recipient of state and federal funding, RTA is required to comply with regulatory policies and procedures that are reviewed and audited regularly. SUMMARY OF REGULATORY AND COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS TDA Triennial Audit: Under the State of California, TDA provides two major sources of funding for public transportation: LTF and STA funds. These funds are for the development and support of public transportation needs that exist in California and are allocated to areas of each county based on population, taxable sales and transit performance. The last TDA Triennial Audit was completed in January 2014. See Table 6 for a summary of the recommendations and actions taken. There is a TDA Triennial Audit currently in progress. FTA Triennial Review: The triennial review is a comprehensive review of compliance with FTA requirements that is conducted of Section 5307 grantees at least every three years. Even though the review is conducted of Section 5307 grantees, it addresses all FTA programs for which the grantee is the direct recipient of funds, including Sections 5304, 5307, 5310, 5311 and 5339. It addresses the grantee's implementation of Federal requirements in 24 areas and its oversight of sub -recipients, operations contractors, or lessees funded by these programs. The last FTA Triennial Review was completed in April 2016. RTA had three findings, all of which were addressed and closed out in May 2016. ADA: The federal ADA Act of 1990 prohibits discrimination and ensures equal opportunity and access for persons with disabilities. Under the ADA Act, public transit operators are required to provide complementary paratransit service to persons who are ADA certified and are within three-quarters of a mile of a local fixed route bus during the hours of bus service operation. RTA remains fully compliant with all Federal ADA regulations and has had no ADA customers denied service on DAR. Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program: The federal DBE Program seeks to ensure nondiscrimination in the award and administration of FTA's Department of Transportation -assisted contracts in the Department's highway, transit and airport financial assistance programs and to create a level playing field on which DBEs can compete fairly for Department of Transportation -assisted contracts. As of March 2010, the U.S. Department of Transportation issued a new rule which established a three- year DBE goal. RTA's DBE Program was last submitted in October 2015 and will remain in effect through September 2018. Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO): The Federal Transit Laws, 49 U.S.C. 5332(b), provide that "no person in the United States shall on the grounds of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, or age be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any project, program or activity funded in whole or in part through financial assistance under this Act." This applies to employment and business opportunities and is considered to be in addition to the provisions of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The EEO Program is submitted to FTA every three years. The last submission was in March 2, 2015. Drug and Alcohol Testing: Per the Code of Federal Regulations (Title 49, Part 40 and 655), RTA established a Drug and Alcohol testing policy in an effort to deter drug and alcohol use in the workplace. The policy establishes the circumstances in which applicants and employees are tested for drugs and alcohol in the workplace and the consequences when they test positive. The purpose of the policy is to prevent accidents, injuries and fatalities resulting from the misuse of alcohol and 44 Short Range Transit Plan • FY17 — FY19 NiuersIde Transit Airmem-y prohibited drugs by employees who perform safety -sensitive functions. The Drug and Alcohol Report is in compliance with FTA and was last updated in February 25, 2016. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964: Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 provides that "no person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance." (42 U.S.C. Section 2000d). RTA's Title VI Program is submitted to the FTA every three years. The last report was submitted in September 2013 and approved. The next submittal will be October 2016. Limited English Proficiency (LEP): FTA issued regulations based on the Executive Order 13166 to all transit operators to establish LEP policies and procedures that ensures that RTA publications are issued in English and any other languages used by a significant number of the general population in the service area as determined by periodic demographic assessments. RTA's LEP policy and plan were revised in June 2013 and submitted with the Title VI Program in September 2013. The next submittal will be October 2016. Public Hearing Policy: U.S. Code Title 49 § 5307 under the Urbanized Area Formula Grant Program requires that transit systems maintain a process to solicit and consider public comments before raising fares or implementing major reductions in service. RTA's Public Hearing Policy for Major Service and Fare Changes was last revised in October 2012. Alternative Fueled Vehicles: Resolution No. 00-018 of RCTC established an emissions standards requirement for the acquisition of urban transit buses with federal, state, or local funds. All full-sized urban public transit buses purchased or leased with federal, state, or local funds granted or programmed by RCTC shall meet the urban bus optional, reduced -emissions standards set by the California Air Resources Board for oxides of nitrogen and non -methane hydrocarbons. RTA remains fully compliant with RCTC Resolution No. 00-0018 for vehicles purchased using federal, state, or local funds. 45 Riverside Transit Agency FY 2016/17 - FY 2018/19 Short Range Transit Plan Summary Comparative Statistics: FY2016 Budget vs. Proposed FY2017 SRTP Unlinked Passengers Revenue Hours Revenue Miles Fare Revenue (1) Operatin Expenses FY2016 I FY2017 FY2016 I FY2017 FY2016 I FY2017 FY2016 I FY2017 FY2016 I FY2017 Direct Operated Routes 1 2,065,484 2,088,976 76,075 76,262 850,812 887,744 $ 1,864,186 $ 1,860,015 $ 7,750,860 $ 8,083,665 1 RL - - - - - $ - $ - 3 121,384 100,844 13,864 16,782 173,225 206,870 $ 117,451 $ 90,064 $ 1,430,671 $ 1,778,604 10 231,727 198,289 14,632 14,909 162,037 172,365 $ 212,888 $ 180,265 $ 1,490,777 $ 1,580,297 11 199,475 154,837 10,261 10,322 118,213 118,694 $ 191,396 $ 149,681 $ 1,045,376 $ 1,094,131 12 304,715 264,319 15,487 16,140 182,745 189,014 $ 273,024 $ 234,451 $ 1,577,566 $ 1,710,885 13 320,697 260,525 15,750 16,792 180,779 198,703 $ 271,951 $ 218,946 $ 1,607,334 $ 1,780,000 14 254,711 238,395 14,608 14,614 187,399 195,206 $ 230,285 $ 212,434 $ 1,487,997 $ 1,549,131 15 558,840 569,183 31,116 31,500 369,345 378,732 $ 499,659 $ 500,881 $ 3,170,131 $ 3,339,036 16 761,380 675,515 28,859 28,504 341,021 331,994 $ 676,029 $ 589,387 $ 2,940,128 $ 3,021,484 18 217,877 166,231 10,748 11,118 134,442 144,955 $ 189,684 $ 141,845 $ 1,094,796 $ 1,178,629 19 678,038 570,730 31,885 31,919 416,513 396,621 $ 666,511 $ 549,100 $ 3,249,066 $ 3,383,430 20 366,724 316,044 25,046 26,026 387,970 406,383 $ 337,789 $ 284,819 $ 2,561,079 $ 2,758,671 21 137,789 119,447 9,840 9,950 144,399 145,014 $ 137,293 $ 119,376 $ 1,002,346 $ 1,054,693 22 463,205 375,934 24,474 24,785 440,403 449,405 $ 447,734 $ 364,995 $ 2,497,879 $ 2,627,298 27 598,033 534,363 36,617 35,713 716,599 690,600 $ 616,691 $ 547,615 $ 3,732,955 $ 3,785,669 29 178,571 161,699 10,349 10,754 164,254 168,635 $ 170,964 $ 152,514 $ 1,054,286 $ 1,139,929 410 62,957 54,898 3,824 3,721 60,529 60,529 $ 61,779 $ 51,186 $ 389,821 $ 394,398 49 268,520 231,975 10,149 10,770 127,710 138,473 $ 257,296 $ 219,681 $ 1,033,879 $ 1,141,642 200 - 15,480 - 2,852 - 65,026 $ - $ 27,554 $ - $ 302,840 202D 1,387 1,730 211 281 6,962 6,416 $ 2,923 $ 3,267 $ 22,582 $ 29,295 204 56,482 53,424 5,932 5,996 135,708 135,708 $ 92,071 $ 93,898 $ 604,702 $ 635,449 205 - 23,220 - 2,025 - 57,685 $ - $ 41,332 $ - $ 215,016 206 74,748 61,700 7,350 6,913 172,241 172,241 $ 202,523 $ 165,634 $ 749,219 $ 732,687 208D 23,503 21,124 2,853 2,871 69,474 69,429 $ 31,568 $ 31,860 $ 290,781 $ 304,242 210D 3,359 3,275 638 630 7,617 7,617 $ 8,515 $ 9,074 $ 65,055 $ 66,732 216 101,397 95,501 8,242 8,244 204,462 205,060 $ 476,330 $ 541,320 $ 839,810 $ 873,807 217D 8,343 8,427 1,135 1,149 30,142 30,142 $ 16,115 $ 17,563 $ 115,701 $ 121,751 Total Directly Operated Routes 8,059,346 7,366,087 409,948 421,540 5,785,001 6,029,259 $ 8,052,654 $ 7,398,756 $ 41,804,796 $ 44,683,412 % Change - FY17 vs. FY16 -8.60% 2.83% 4.22% -8.1 % 6.9% Contracted Fixed Routes 3 37,514 10,646 6,303 5,945 80,839 37,508 $ 42,950 $ 10,798 $ 434,050 $ 477,522 7 127,089 9,977 0 134,908 0 $ 127,661 $ - $ 697,151 $ 8 155,110 226,508 9,948 21,179 141,624 283,899 $ 169,039 $ 244,697 $ 695,209 $ 1,705,772 19C 8,483 6,378 1,043 1,058 15,532 15,795 $ 6,477 $ 4,544 $ 72,785 $ 85,228 23 88,207 95,286 14,128 15,659 185,907 266,029 $ 88,163 $ 93,676 $ 989,323 $ 1,261,178 24 79,334 72,671 10,747 9,834 147,594 132,237 $ 85,109 $ 77,591 $ 751,236 $ 792,024 30 75,265 39,064 9,024 9,379 95,730 102,670 $ 74,648 $ 55,925 $ 632,795 $ 755,423 31 119,627 57,194 11,431 11,404 193,765 194,615 $ 117,940 $ 109,301 $ 799,056 $ 918,522 32 168,987 108,273 10,775 11,070 107,075 107,577 $ 161,805 $ 138,064 $ 753,179 $ 891,568 33 49,062 143,981 4,870 5,024 65,231 65,072 $ 45,505 $ 38,822 $ 340,488 $ 404,672 35 67,560 42,582 7,355 7,355 156,564 156,564 $ 66,013 $ 49,889 $ 514,236 $ 592,415 40 27,254 52,098 3,616 3,616 59,650 59,650 $ 28,857 $ 23,503 $ 252,806 $ 291,240 41C 42,067 23,105 5,796 5,774 106,004 106,854 $ 39,341 $ 32,753 $ 405,064 $ 465,030 42 70,409 35,154 5,610 5,525 82,947 83,272 $ 63,326 $ 55,802 $ 392,209 $ 445,012 50 3,974 63,745 2,352 2,364 15,283 15,360 $ 162,089 $ 180,000 $ 164,480 $ 190,394 51 47,272 2,403 1,812 1,845 19,073 19,422 $ 123,230 $ 148,383 $ 126,883 $ 148,797 55 25,659 33,934 1,144 1,188 14,851 15,422 $ 17,049 $ 19,455 $ 79,539 $ 95,749 61 87,637 60,909 13,827 17,267 216,035 280,850 $ 92,574 $ 84,633 $ 969,108 $ 1,390,735 74 232,319 21,725 15,306 22,467 366,739 375,417 $ 231,004 $ 208,207 $ 1,070,785 $ 1,809,556 79 117,062 83,687 13,695 13,484 235,761 242,933 $ 124,305 $ 122,545 $ 957,444 $ 1,086,031 202 22,089 209,865 5,902 5,653 157,871 152,050 $ 46,971 $ 41,191 $ 412,572 $ 455,081 208 31,697 121,128 7,645 6,944 169,939 166,151 $ 64,859 $ 41,221 $ 536,073 $ 559,296 210 6,819 18,203 676 676 14,906 14,906 $ 18,406 $ 7,881 $ 47,255 $ 54,439 212 42,625 18,995 7,844 7,692 175,275 176,302 $ 76,089 $ 59,408 $ 549,723 $ 619,531 217 26,556 3,200 6,476 6,456 197,684 197,684 $ 51,293 $ 56,656 $ 452,787 $ 519,968 26 (New) 21,432 29,123 4,291 7,805 83,528 98,945 $ 19,503 $ 35,548 $ 305,192 $ 628,639 52 (New) 33,417 26,499 2,026 3,783 18,809 48,573 $ 30,409 $ 55,427 $ 144,121 $ 304,694 Sunline- Riv. Exp. (2) $ - $ - $ 103,700 $ 120,000 794 (2)(3) $ 146,032 $ 150,000 $ 146,032 $ 150,000 Total Contracted Fixed Routes 1,814,527 1,606,357 193,621 210,449 3,259,124 3,415,758 $ 2,320,646 $ 2,145,918 $ 13,795,280 $ 17,218,515 Change - FY17 vs. FY16 -11.47% 8.69% 4.81 % -7.5% 24.8% TOTAL FIXED ROUTES 9,873,872 8,972,444 603,568 631,989 9,044,125 9,445,016 $ 10,373,301 $ 9,544,674 $ 55,600,075 $ 61,901,927 % Change - FY17 vs. FY16 -9.13% 4.71 % 4.43% -8.0% 11.3% 3:05 PM 5/9/2016 Riverside Transit Agency FY 2016/17 - FY 2018/19 Short Range Transit Plan Summary Comparative Statistics: FY2016 Budget vs. Proposed FY2017 SRTP Unlinked Passengers Revenue Hours Revenue Miles Fare Revenue (1) Operatin Expenses FY2016 I FY2017 FY2016 FY2017 FY2016 I FY2017 FY2016 I FY2017 FY2016 I FY2017 Dial -a -ride Routes Banning/Beaumont 1,332 1,399 601 932 14,168 19,572 $ 3,587 $ 4,361 $ 41,870 $ 61,752 Lake Elsinore 17,325 15,646 8,151 8,013 165,695 146,202 $ 63,886 $ 58,233 $ 568,144 $ 530,756 Highgrove 5,402 4,789 2,792 2,939 59,510 56,781 $ 16,510 $ 15,802 $ 194,627 $ 194,661 Hemet & Homeland 84,262 73,151 29,183 28,649 511,946 434,493 $ 309,410 $ 258,135 $ 2,034,131 $ 1,897,624 Jurupa 15,611 21,468 7,738 11,105 146,938 179,018 $ 56,629 $ 75,009 $ 539,361 $ 735,595 Moreno Valley 85,538 89,415 35,422 39,677 612,587 592,107 $ 308,946 $ 315,483 $ 2,469,018 $ 2,628,136 Murdeta 40,010 43,705 20,421 23,208 377,028 373,454 $ 147,037 $ 149,152 $ 1,423,394 $ 1,537,261 Norco 24,755 26,473 9,343 10,446 169,112 166,399 $ 100,921 $ 104,939 $ 651,250 $ 691,915 Perris 39,376 61,167 19,264 25,038 408,230 462,553 $ 142,588 $ 232,465 $ 1,342,717 $ 1,658,479 Riverside 78,860 81,864 36,664 41,405 728,555 717,178 $ 301,955 $ 312,434 $ 2,555,559 $ 2,742,612 Sun City 19,968 19,533 10,087 10,217 196,348 179,131 $ 68,536 $ 63,748 $ 703,060 $ 676,734 Total Dial -a -ride Routes 412,439 438,610 179,666 201,630 3,390,119 3,326,890 $ 1,520,005 $ 1,589,761 $ 12,523,132 $ 13,355,525 % Change-FY17 vs. FY16 6.35% 12.23% -1.87% 4.6% 6.6% Taxi Program Banning/Beaumont 1,045 1,110 411 601 15,887 15,857 $ 4,014 $ 4,350 $ 51,346 $ 51,597 Lake Elsinore 1,577 999 1,018 659 26,596 15,888 $ 6,725 $ 3,639 $ 88,547 $ 51,956 Highgrove 1,200 926 773 493 19,523 11,403 $ 5,096 $ 3,712 $ 65,197 $ 37,384 Hemet & Homeland 2,646 2,955 1,704 1,801 43,764 45,295 $ 8,958 $ 9,685 $ 145,934 $ 147,769 Jurupa 780 874 507 319 10,050 6,548 $ 3,004 $ 3,200 $ 34,415 $ 21,632 Moreno Valley 1,570 1,654 1,013 746 20,117 18,710 $ 5,864 $ 5,910 $ 68,879 $ 61,049 Murrieta 1,784 2,445 1,146 895 27,937 19,042 $ 7,315 $ 7,964 $ 93,613 $ 62,754 Norco 1,889 1,797 1,221 943 29,856 21,444 $ 7,670 $ 6,191 $ 100,016 $ 70,371 Penis 2,294 2,160 1,483 816 29,098 21,044 $ 8,541 $ 6,762 $ 99,764 $ 68,559 Riverside 3,707 3,366 2,394 2,089 50,468 46,311 $ 15,501 $ 12,846 $ 171,648 $ 152,221 Sun City 804 442 519 197 10,877 4,526 $ 2,543 $ 1,306 $ 37,020 $ 14,844 Total Taxi Routes 19,296 18,728 12,187 9,560 284,172 226,069 $ 75,230 $ 65,566 $ 956,380 $ 740,135 % Change-FY17 vs. FY16 -2.94% -21.56% -20.45% -12.8% -22.6% TOTAL DAR and TAXI SERVICE 431,735 457,338 191,853 211,189 3,674,291 3,552,959 $ 1,595,235 $ 1,655,326 $ 13,479,511 $ 14,095,661 % Change - FY17 vs. FY16 5.93% 10.08% -3.30% 3.8% 4.6% GRAND TOTAL 10,305,607 9,429,782 795,421 843,178 12,718,416 12,997,975 $ 11,968,536 $ 11,200,000 $ 69,079,587 $ 75,997,588 % Change - FY17 vs. FY16 -8.50% 6.00% 2.20% -6.4% 10.0% Total Passenger Fare Revenue consists of cash fares, tickets, passes, subsidy agreements and Measure A. It does not include other local revenues. '2) RTA does not report passengers, hours and miles. (') Route 794 Revenues funded with Measure A. 3:05 PM 5/9/2016 ��EME�� fomql-oepirdim{ammsim Bus (Motorbus) / Directly Operated Table 1 - Fleet Inventory FY 2016/17 Short Range Transit Plan Riverside Transit Agency Year Mfg. Built Code Model Code Seating Capacity Lift and Ramp Equipped Vehicle Length Fuel Type Code # of Active Vehicles FY 2015/16 # of Contingency Vehicles FY 2015/16 Life to Date Vehicle Miles Prior Year End FY 2014/15 Life to Date Vehicle Miles through March FY 2015/16 Average Lifetime Miles Per Active Vehicle As Of Year -To -Date (e.g., March) FY 2015/16 2013 2014 2016 2002 GIL GIL GIL NAB G27D102N4 G27D102N4 G27D102N4 40LFW 15 38 38 38 40 81 9 13 13 42 42 42 40 CN CN CN CN 81 0 8,739,537 9 0 253,534 13 0 2 11 10,092,842 11,496,331 611,958 50,855 8,169,815 141,930 67,995 3,912 4,084,908 Totals: 154 116 105 11 19,085,913 20,328,959 193,609 TransTrack Manager"' 4/22/2016 Page 1 of 4 ��EME�� fomql-oepirdim{ammsim Bus (Motorbus) / Purchased Transportation Table 1 - Fleet Inventory FY 2O16/17 Short Range Transit Plan Riverside Transit Agency Year Mfg. Built Code Model Code Seating Capacity Lift and Ramp Equipped Vehicle Length Fuel Type Code # of Active Vehicles FY 2015/16 # of Contingency Vehicles FY 2015/16 Life to Date Vehicle Miles Prior Year End FY 2014/15 Life to Date Vehicle Miles through March FY 2015/16 Average Lifetime Miles Per Active Vehicle As Of Year -To -Date (e.g., March) FY 2015/16 1994 1996 2008 2008 2009 2012 2013 2016 2016 2011 2003 2008 CCI CCI EBC EDN EDN EDN EDN EDN EDN SPC SVM SVM AH28 AH28 Aerotech EnAeroElit EnAeroElit EnAeroElit EnAeroElit EnAeroElit EnAeroElit SN28PLO ClassAmSer ClassAmSer 25 25 12 26 26 28 28 26 26 21 24 26 2 1 9 4 21 10 11 10 24 14 3 2 29 29 24 29 29 33 33 33 33 28 27 29 CN CN GA GA GA CN CN GA GA GA CN CN 2 1 9 4 21 10 11 10 24 14 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,047,973 292,245 3,142,305 1,709,713 7,973,050 1,496,886 1,141,757 3,014,781 909,616 463,936 497,192 301,693 3,550,772 1,903,746 9,097,613 1,894,079 1,523,747 0 20,584 3,659,150 949,592 498,533 248,596 301,693 394,530 475,937 433,220 189,408 138,522 0 858 261,368 316,531 249,267 Totals: 293 111 111 0 21,192,262 23,896,701 215,286 TransTrack Manager"' 4/22/2016 Page 2 of 4 ��EME�� fomql-oepirdim{ammsim Commuter Bus / Directly Operated Table 1 - Fleet Inventory FY 2016/17 Short Range Transit Plan Riverside Transit Agency Year Mfg. Built Code Model Code Seating Capacity Lift and Ramp Equipped Vehicle Length Fuel Type Code # of Active Vehicles FY 2015/16 # of Contingency Vehicles FY 2015/16 Life to Date Vehicle Miles Prior Year End FY 2014/15 Life to Date Vehicle Miles through March FY 2015/16 Average Lifetime Miles Per Active Vehicle As Of Year -To -Date (e.g., March) FY 2015/16 2013 2014 2016 GIL GIL GIL G27D102N4 G27D102N4 G27D102N4 38 38 38 16 2 1 42 42 42 CN CN CN 16 2 1 0 0 0 1,770,841 78,710 2,555 110,678 39,355 2,555 Totals: 114 19 19 0 1,852,106 97,479 TransTrack Manager"' 4/22/2016 Page 3 of 4 ��EME�� fomql-oepirdim{ammsim Demand Response / Purchased Transportation Table 1 - Fleet Inventory FY 2O16/17 Short Range Transit Plan Riverside Transit Agency Year Mfg. Built Code Model Code Seating Capacity Lift and Ramp Equipped Vehicle Length Fuel Type Code # of Active Vehicles FY 2015/16 # of Contingency Vehicles FY 2015/16 Life to Date Vehicle Miles Prior Year End FY 2014/15 Life to Date Vehicle Miles through March FY 2015/16 Average Lifetime Miles Per Active Vehicle As Of Year -To -Date (e.g., March) FY 2015/16 2008 2009 2016 2013 EBC EBC EDN GCC Aerotech Aerotech EnAerotech GCII 12 12 12 12 2 53 36 38 24 24 23 22 GA GA GA GA 2 53 36 38 5 0 0 0 1,659,911 13,568,568 3,864,306 1,819,513 15,029,834 0 5,349,834 909,757 283,582 0 140,785 Totals: 48 129 129 5 19,092,785 22,199,181 172,087 TransTrack Manager"' 4/22/2016 Page 4 of 4 ��EME�� fomql-oepirdim{ammsim Table 2 -- Riverside Transit Agency -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2016/17 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2013/14 Audited FY 2014/15 Audited FY 2015/16 Plan FY 2015/16 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2016/17 Plan Fleet Characteristics . Peak -Hour Fleet 168 175 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $55,837,081 $61,106,741 $69,079,587 $47,345,953 $75,997,588 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $14,823,809 $15,842,039 $15,063,536 $11,691,326 $15,134,100 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $41,013,272 $45,264,702 $54,016,051 $35,654,627 $60,863,488 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 9,568,758 9,651,592 10,305,607 7,030,779 9,429,779 Passenger Miles 66,804,624 90,800,579 73,477,011 50,297,021 67,566,634 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 698,426.9 734,210.5 795,419.0 586,991.6 843,176.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 10,940,823.1 11,565,369.5 12,718,415.0 9,145,921.1 12,997,974.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 13,493,672.5 14,286,918.3 15,481,742.0 11,222,135.8 15,601,396.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $79.95 $83.23 $86.85 $80.66 $90.13 Farebox Recovery Ratio 26.55% 25.93% 21.80% 24.69% 19.91% Subsidy per Passenger $4.29 $4.69 $5.24 $5.07 $6.45 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $0.61 $0.50 $0.74 $0.71 $0.90 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $58.72 $61.65 $67.91 $60.74 $72.18 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $3.75 $3.91 $4.25 $3.90 $4.68 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 13.7 13.1 13.0 12.0 11.2 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.87 0.83 0.81 0.77 0.73 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager'"' 5/9/2016 Page 1 of I ��EME�� fomql-oepirdim{ammsim Table 2 -- Riverside Transit Agency -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2016/17 Short Range Transit Plan Non -Excluded Routes FY 2013/14 Audited FY 2014/15 Audited FY 2015/16 Plan FY 2015/16 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2016/17 Plan Fleet Characteristics . Peak -Hour Fleet 133 154 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $55,742,677 $57,129,793 $61,758,844 $43,375,012 $72,307,907 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $14,725,118 $15,216,532 $14,158,176 $11,157,252 $14,785,827 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $41,017,559 $41,913,261 $47,600,668 $32,217,760 $57,522,080 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 9,568,514 9,105,609 9,481,752 6,576,948 9,164,670 Passenger Miles 66,802,633 85,580,981 66,618,926 46,430,207 64,227,976 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 697,027.2 676,002.6 698,741.0 529,320.2 799,825.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 10,927,530.1 10,622,980.5 11,033,061.0 8,115,473.0 12,213,193.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 13,452,975.5 13,027,107.3 13,379,259.0 9,842,112.0 14,521,300.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $79.97 $84.51 $88.39 $81.94 $90.40 Farebox Recovery Ratio 26.42% 26.64% 22.92% 25.72% 20.44% Subsidy per Passenger $4.29 $4.60 $5.02 $4.90 $6.28 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $0.61 $0.49 $0.71 $0.69 $0.90 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $58.85 $62.00 $68.12 $60.87 $71.92 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $3.75 $3.95 $4.31 $3.97 $4.71 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 13.7 13.5 13.6 12.4 11.5 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.88 0.86 0.86 0.81 0.75 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager'"' 5/9/2016 Page 1 of I ��EME�� fomql-oepirdim{ammsim Table 2 -- Riverside Transit Agency -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2016/17 Short Range Transit Plan Excluded Routes FY 2013/14 Audited FY 2014/15 Audited FY 2015/16 Plan FY 2015/16 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2016/17 Plan Fleet Characteristics . Peak -Hour Fleet 35 21 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $94,404 $3,976,948 $7,320,743 $3,970,941 3,689,681 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $98,691 $625,507 $905,360 $534,074 348,273 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) ($4,287) $3,351,441 $6,415,383 $3,436,867 $3,341,408 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 244 545,983 823,855 453,831 265,109 Passenger Miles 1,991 5,219,597 6,858,085 3,866,814 3,338,658 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 1,399.7 58,207.9 96,678.0 57,671.4 43,351.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 13,293.0 942,389.0 1,685,354.0 1,030,448.2 784,781.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 40,697.0 1,259,811.0 2,102,483.0 1,380,023.7 1,080,096.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $67.45 $68.32 $75.72 $68.85 $85.11 Farebox Recovery Ratio 104.54% 15.73% 12.36% 13.45% 9.43% Subsidy per Passenger ($17.57) $6.14 $7.79 $7.57 $12.60 Subsidy per Passenger Mile ($2.15) $0.64 $0.94 $0.89 $1.00 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) ($3.06) $57.58 $66.36 $59.59 $77.08 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) ($0.32) $3.56 $3.81 $3.34 $4.26 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 0.2 9.4 8.5 7.9 6.1 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.02 0.58 0.49 0.44 0.34 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager'"' 5/9/2016 Page 1 of 1 ��EME�� fomql-oepirdim{ammsim Table 2 -- RTA-BUS -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2016/17 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2013/14 Audited FY 2014/15 Audited FY 2015/16 Plan FY 2015/16 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2016/17 Plan Fleet Characteristics . Peak -Hour Fleet 98 104 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $32,437,603 $36,416,277 $41,908,496 $28,572,604 $44,803,411 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $10,893,475 $11,864,705 $11,147,653 $8,872,196 $11,332,855 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $21,544,128 $24,551,572 $30,760,843 $19,700,408 $33,470,556 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 7,417,199 7,480,111 8,059,346 5,538,737 7,366,085 Passenger Miles 47,766,762 68,891,822 54,052,406 37,560,425 49,546,705 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 328,438.8 362,929.3 409,945.0 302,312.9 421,542.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 4,626,710.5 5,137,180.4 5,785,001.0 4,283,746.5 6,029,261.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 5,346,422.9 5,942,734.9 6,741,401.0 4,942,751.7 6,945,296.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $98.76 $100.34 $102.23 $94.51 $106.28 Farebox Recovery Ratio 33.58% 32.58% 26.59% 31.05% 25.29% Subsidy per Passenger $2.90 $3.28 $3.82 $3.56 $4.54 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $0.45 $0.36 $0.57 $0.52 $0.68 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $65.60 $67.65 $75.04 $65.17 $79.40 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $4.66 $4.78 $5.32 $4.60 $5.55 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 22.6 20.6 19.7 18.3 17.5 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 1.60 1.46 1.39 1.29 1.22 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager'"' 5/2/2016 Page 1 of I ��EME�� fomql-oepirdim{ammsim Table 2 -- RTA Bus (Contract) -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2016/17 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2013/14 Audited FY 2014/15 Audited FY 2015/16 Plan FY 2015/16 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2016/17 Plan Fleet Characteristics . Peak -Hour Fleet 70 71 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $11,457,338 $12,625,538 $13,545,549 $9,484,068 $16,948,516 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $2,349,671 $2,268,402 $2,174,615 $1,488,894 $1,995,918 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $9,107,667 $10,357,136 $11,370,934 $7,995,174 $14,952,598 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 1,744,652 1,753,518 1,814,526 1,173,656 1,606,356 Passenger Miles 14,236,360 16,763,632 14,109,946 8,817,265 12,389,796 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 171,062.8 185,133.1 193,619.0 139,683.1 210,446.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 2,968,567.0 3,163,778.2 3,259,124.0 2,380,216.0 3,415,757.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 4,122,168.0 4,353,176.2 4,262,530.0 3,222,638.0 4,449,229.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $66.98 $68.20 $69.96 $67.90 $80.54 Farebox Recovery Ratio 20.51% 17.97% 16.05% 15.70% 11.77% Subsidy per Passenger $5.22 $5.91 $6.27 $6.81 $9.31 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $0.64 $0.62 $0.81 $0.91 $1.21 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $53.24 $55.94 $58.73 $57.24 $71.05 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $3.07 $3.27 $3.49 $3.36 $4.38 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 10.2 9.5 9.4 8.4 7.6 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.59 0.55 0.56 0.49 0.47 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager'"' 5/2/2016 Page 1 of I ��EME�� fomql-oepirdim{ammsim Table 2 -- RTA-DAR -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2016/17 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2013/14 Audited FY 2014/15 Audited FY 2015/16 Plan FY 2015/16 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2016/17 Plan Fleet Characteristics . Peak -Hour Fleet Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $11,391,192 $11,321,308 $12,523,131 $8,715,522 $13,355,525 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $1,440,592 $1,551,355 $1,520,005 $1,148,606 $1,589,761 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $9,950,600 $9,769,953 $11,003,126 $7,566,916 $11,765,764 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 398,636 406,000 412,439 309,180 438,610 Passenger Miles 4,703,905 4,997,860 5,077,125 3,806,006 5,399,291 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 193,255.7 178,254.3 179,666.0 139,757.5 174,629.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 3,207,681.9 3,063,618.5 3,390,117.0 2,331,709.9 3,326,888.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 3,887,218.0 3,790,214.9 4,193,638.0 2,906,497.9 3,980,803.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $58.94 $63.51 $69.70 $62.36 $76.48 Farebox Recovery Ratio 12.65% 13.70% 12.13% 13.18% 11.90% Subsidy per Passenger $24.96 $24.06 $26.68 $24.47 $26.83 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $2.12 $1.95 $2.17 $1.99 $2.18 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $51.49 $54.81 $61.24 $54.14 $67.38 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $3.10 $3.19 $3.25 $3.25 $3.54 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 2.1 2.3 2.3 2.2 2.5 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.12 0.13 0.12 0.13 0.13 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager'"' 5/9/2016 Page 1 of I ��EME�� fomql-oepirdim{ammsim Table 2 -- RTA Taxi -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2016/17 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2013/14 Audited FY 2014/15 Audited FY 2015/16 Plan FY 2015/16 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2016/17 Plan Fleet Characteristics . Peak -Hour Fleet Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $444,455 $635,257 $956,379 $465,138 $740,136 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $33,576 $48,415 $75,231 $35,598 $65,566 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $410,879 $586,842 $881,148 $429,540 $674,570 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 8,271 11,963 19,296 9,206 18,728 Passenger Miles 97,598 147,265 237,534 113,326 230,842 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 5,669.5 7,893.8 12,189.0 5,238.0 9,559.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 137,863.7 200,792.3 284,173.0 150,248.8 226,068.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 137,863.7 200,792.3 284,173.0 150,248.1 226,068.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $78.39 $80.48 $78.46 $88.80 $77.43 Farebox Recovery Ratio 7.55% 7.62% 7.86% 7.65% 8.85% Subsidy per Passenger $49.68 $49.05 $45.66 $46.66 $36.02 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $4.21 $3.99 $3.71 $3.79 $2.92 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $72.47 $74.34 $72.29 $82.00 $70.57 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $2.98 $2.92 $3.10 $2.86 $2.98 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 1.5 1.5 1.6 1.8 2.0 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.06 0.08 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. TransTrack Manager'"' 5/2/2016 Page 1 of I RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY FY 2016/17 — FY 2018/19 Short Range Transit Plan Table 2A — Excluded Routes Route # Mode (FR/DR) Service Type (DO/CO) Route Description Date of Implementation Exemption End Date 26 FR CO New route. Local circulator serving Moreno Valley/March Field Metrolink Station and Moreno Valley Mall via Van Buren Blvd, Trautwein Rd, Alessandro Blvd, Sycamore Canyon Blvd, and Eucalyptus Ave July 1, 2016 June 30, 2019 30 FR CO Perris local circulator serving the Perris Transit Center, Walmart, and central part of the community July 1, 2016 June 30, 2019 52 FR CO New route. Local circulator serving Hunter Park Metrolink Station and UCR via Iowa Ave, Blaine St, and University Ave July 1, 2016 June 30, 2019 200 FR DO From downtown Riverside to ARTIC via 91 and 57 Fwys with stops at Galleria at Tyler and Corona Metrolink Station. January 8, 2017 June 30, 2019 205 FR DO From the Promenade Mall in Temecula to Village at Orange via 15 and 91 Fwys with stops in Murrieta, the Lake Elsinore Outlet Center, and Corona Metrolink Station. January 8, 2017 June 30, 2019 208 FR CO/DO Serves the Promenade Mall in Temecula to the Riverside Downtown Metrolink Station and downtown area via I-215 with stops in Murrieta, Menifee, Perris, and Moreno Valley July 1, 2016 June 30, 2019 212 FR CO/DO Serves Hemet and San Jacinto to Downtown Riverside with stops at Perris and UCR July 1, 2016 June 30, 2019 Note: Excluded routes are new routes or new service extensions that are eligible for exemption from the farebox recovery requirements. EMI EME� fomql-oepirdim{ammsim Data Elements Table 3 - SRTP Route Statistics Riverside Transit Agency -- 7 FY 2016/17 All Routes Peak Passenger Revenue Total Revenue Total Operating Passenger Net Route # Day Type Vehicles Passengers Miles Hours Hours Miles Miles Cost Revenue Subsidy RTA-0 RTA-1 RTA-10 RTA-11 RTA-12 RTA-13 RTA-14 RTA-15 RTA-16/16E RTA-18 RTA-19 RTA-19C RTA-20 RTA-200 RTA-202 RTA-202D RTA-204D RTA-205 RTA-206D RTA-208 RTA-208D RTA-21 RTA-210 RTA-210D RTA-212 RTA-216 RTA-217 RTA-217D All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days $3,934,100 ($3,934,100) 16 2,088,976 11,248,744 76,262.0 80,421.0 887,744.0 1,013,474.0 $8,083,665 $1,860,015 $6,223,650 4 198,289 1,067,123 14,909.0 15,482.0 172,365.0 181,722.0 $1,580,297 $180,265 $1,400,032 2 154,837 834,362 10,322.0 10,662.0 118,694.0 128,939.0 $1,094,131 $149,680 $944,451 3 264,319 1,422,202 16,140.0 16,705.0 189,014.0 204,065.0 $1,710,885 $234,451 $1,476,434 3 260,525 1,402,219 16,792.0 17,743.0 198,703.0 218,580.0 $1,780,000 $218,946 $1,561,054 3 238,395 1,284,270 14,614.0 15,134.0 195,206.0 207,044.0 $1,549,131 $212,434 $1,336,697 6 569,183 3,065,255 31,500.0 32,548.0 378,732.0 403,791.0 $3,339,036 $500,881 $2,838,155 6 675,515 3,638,682 28,504.0 29,566.0 331,994.0 353,942.0 $3,021,484 $589,387 $2,432,097 2 166,231 894,683 11,118.0 11,538.0 144,955.0 157,571.0 $1,178,629 $141,845 $1,036,784 6 570,730 3,072,889 31,919.0 33,790.0 396,621.0 460,628.0 $3,383,430 $549,100 $2,834,330 1 6,378 42,572 1,058.0 1,291.0 15,795.0 20,362.0 $85,228 $4,544 $80,684 7 316,044 1,702,207 26,026.0 27,954.0 406,383.0 447,805.0 $2,758,671 $284,819 $2,473,852 3 15,480 291,488 2,852.0 3,100.0 65,026.0 67,649.0 $302,840 $27,554 $275,286 3 18,203 429,405 5,653.0 7,167.0 152,050.0 211,745.0 $455,081 $41,191 $413,890 1 1,730 32,570 281.0 419.0 6,416.0 9,470.0 $29,295 $3,267 $26,028 3 53,424 1,005,970 5,996.0 6,279.0 135,708.0 140,319.0 $635,449 $93,898 $541,551 2 23,220 437,233 2,025.0 3,017.0 57,685.0 94,389.0 $215,016 $41,332 $173,684 6 61,700 1,161,814 6,913.0 11,750.0 172,241.0 325,629.0 $732,687 $165,634 $567,053 5 18,995 439,922 6,944.0 9,354.0 166,151.0 261,154.0 $559,296 $41,221 $518,075 2 21,124 397,769 2,871.0 4,117.0 69,429.0 109,343.0 $304,242 $31,859 $272,383 2 119,447 642,925 9,950.0 10,461.0 145,014.0 164,011.0 $1,054,693 $119,376 $935,317 1 3,200 74,113 676.0 1,316.0 14,906.0 43,520.0 $54,439 $7,881 $46,558 0 3,275 61,661 630.0 951.0 7,617.0 15,991.0 $66,732 $9,074 $57,658 4 29,123 674,487 7,692.0 10,599.0 176,302.0 271,331.0 $619,531 $59,408 $560,123 2 95,501 1,948,042 8,244.0 8,819.0 205,060.0 213,156.0 $873,807 $541,320 $332,487 4 26,499 613,727 6,456.0 8,384.0 197,684.0 280,012.0 $519,968 $56,656 $463,312 1 8,427 158,679 1,149.0 1,299.0 30,142.0 33,157.0 $121,751 $17,563 $104,188 TransTrack Manager"' 5/9/2016 Page 1 of 6 EMI EME� IiN � fomql-oepirdim{ammsim Data Elements Table 3 - SRTP Route Statistics Riverside Transit Agency -- 7 FY 2016/17 All Routes Peak Route # Day Type Vehicles Passengers Passenger Revenue Total Revenue Total Operating Passenger Net Miles Hours Hours Miles Miles Cost Revenue Subsidy RTA-22 RTA-23 RTA-24 RTA-26 RTA-27 RTA-29 RTA-3 RTA-30 RTA-31 RTA-32 RTA-33 RTA-35 RTA-3D RTA-40 RTA-41C RTA-41D RTA-42 RTA-49 RTA-50 RTA-51 RTA-52 RTA-55 RTA-61 RTA-74 RTA-79 RTA-794 RTA-8 RTA-Ba/Bea All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days 6 375,934 4,464,354 24,785.0 28,253.0 449,405.0 547,399.0 $2,627,298 $364,995 $2,262,303 6 95,286 653,884 15,659.0 18,193.0 266,029.0 345,960.0 $1,261,178 $93,676 $1,167,502 3 72,671 499,330 9,834.0 11,106.0 132,237.0 192,177.0 $792,024 $77,591 $714,433 2 39,064 273,057 9,379.0 8,224.0 98,945.0 110,993.0 $628,639 $35,548 $593,091 8 534,363 6,353,119 35,713.0 38,919.0 690,600.0 771,069.0 $3,785,669 $547,615 $3,238,054 2 161,699 870,645 10,754.0 11,139.0 168,635.0 178,393.0 $1,139,929 $152,514 $987,415 2 10,646 67,475 5,945.0 6,247.0 37,508.0 51,710.0 $477,522 $10,798 $466,724 2 57,194 398,948 7,805.0 9,511.0 102,670.0 107,804.0 $755,423 $55,924 $699,499 2 108,273 747,102 11,404.0 12,120.0 194,615.0 228,749.0 $918,522 $109,301 $809,221 3 143,981 988,676 11,070.0 12,148.0 107,577.0 151,664.0 $891,568 $138,064 $753,504 1 42,582 297,648 5,024.0 5,531.0 65,072.0 87,945.0 $404,672 $38,822 $365,850 2 52,098 364,165 7,355.0 7,887.0 156,564.0 182,933.0 $592,415 $49,889 $542,526 4 100,844 543,552 16,782.0 18,047.0 206,870.0 240,929.0 $1,778,604 $90,064 $1,688,540 1 23,105 161,507 3,616.0 3,788.0 59,650.0 67,257.0 $291,240 $23,503 $267,737 2 35,154 240,282 5,774.0 6,643.0 106,854.0 144,423.0 $465,030 $32,753 $432,277 2 54,898 295,898 3,721.0 5,045.0 60,529.0 109,595.0 $394,398 $51,186 $343,212 2 63,745 444,482 5,525.0 5,925.0 83,272.0 98,859.0 $445,012 $55,802 $389,210 2 231,975 1,248,350 10,770.0 11,063.0 138,473.0 147,236.0 $1,141,642 $219,681 $921,961 2 2,403 4,398 2,364.0 2,740.0 15,360.0 32,440.0 $190,394 $180,000 $10,394 1 33,934 62,100 1,845.0 1,979.0 19,422.0 25,317.0 $148,797 $148,383 $414 1 60,909 425,754 3,783.0 3,984.0 48,573.0 57,433.0 $304,694 $55,427 $249,267 2 21,725 39,757 1,188.0 1,966.0 15,422.0 50,630.0 $95,749 $19,454 $76,295 5 83,687 584,123 17,267.0 20,092.0 280,850.0 379,218.0 $1,390,735 $84,633 $1,306,102 5 209,865 1,464,526 22,467.0 23,724.0 375,417.0 422,366.0 $1,809,556 $208,207 $1,601,349 4 121,128 845,162 13,484.0 14,725.0 242,933.0 291,249.0 $1,086,031 $122,545 $963,486 $150,000 $150,000 $0 5 226,508 1,553,194 21,179.0 22,896.0 283,899.0 331,978.0 $1,705,772 $244,697 $1,461,075 1,399 17,222 932.0 1,103.0 19,572.0 23,624.0 $61,752 $4,361 $57,391 TransTrack Manager"' 5/9/2016 Page 2 of 6 EMI EME� fomql-oepirdim{ammsim Data Elements Table 3 - SRTP Route Statistics Riverside Transit Agency -- 7 FY 2016/17 All Routes Peak Route # Day Type Vehicles Passengers Passenger Revenue Total Revenue Total Operating Passenger Net Miles Hours Hours Miles Miles Cost Revenue Subsidy RTA-GT DAR All Days 4,789 58,953 2,939.0 3,467.0 56,781.0 68,058.0 $194,661 $15,802 $178,859 RTA-Hemet All Days 73,151 900,489 28,649.0 35,833.0 434,493.0 559,948.0 $1,897,624 $258,135 $1,639,489 RTA-Jurupa All Days 21,468 264,271 11,105.0 14,180.0 179,018.0 221,402.0 $735,595 $75,009 $660,586 RTA-LakeEl All Days 15,646 192,602 8,013.0 10,096.0 146,202.0 23,624.0 $530,756 $58,233 $472,523 RTA-MurDAR All Days 43,705 538,009 23,208.0 28,485.0 373,454.0 478,573.0 $1,537,261 $149,152 $1,388,109 RTA-MV DAR All Days 89,415 1,100,699 39,677.0 49,093.0 592,107.0 733,636.0 $2,628,136 $315,483 $2,312,653 RTA-No/Co All Days 26,473 325,883 10,446.0 12,774.0 166,399.0 205,597.0 $691,915 $104,939 $586,976 RTA-Perris All Days 61,167 752,966 25,038.0 30,358.0 462,553.0 553,690.0 $1,658,479 $232,465 $1,426,014 RTA-RivDAR All Days 81,864 1,007,746 41,405.0 50,597.0 717,178.0 893,001.0 $2,742,612 $312,434 $2,430,178 RTA-Sun Ci All Days 19,533 240,451 10,217.0 12,487.0 179,131.0 219,650.0 $676,734 $63,748 $612,986 RTA-TaxiBB All Days 1,110 13,664 601.0 601.0 15,857.0 15,857.0 $51,597 $4,350 $47,247 RTA-TaxiGT All Days 926 11,399 493.0 493.0 11,403.0 11,403.0 $37,384 $3,712 $33,672 RTA-TaxiHe All Days 2,955 36,376 1,801.0 1,801.0 45,295.0 45,295.0 $147,769 $9,685 $138,084 RTA-TaxiJu All Days 874 10,759 319.0 319.0 6,548.0 6,548.0 $21,632 $3,200 $18,432 RTA-TaxiLE All Days 999 12,298 659.0 659.0 15,888.0 15,888.0 $51,956 $3,639 $48,317 RTA-TaxiMu All Days 2,445 30,398 895.0 895.0 19,042.0 19,042.0 $62,754 $7,964 $54,790 RTA-TaxiMV All Days 1,654 20,361 746.0 746.0 18,710.0 18,710.0 $61,049 $5,910 $55,139 RTA-TaxiNC All Days 1,797 22,121 943.0 943.0 21,444.0 21,444.0 $70,371 $6,191 $64,180 RTA-TaxiPe All Days 2,160 26,590 816.0 816.0 21,044.0 21,044.0 $68,559 $6,762 $61,797 RTA-TaxiRi All Days 3,366 41,435 2,089.0 2,089.0 46,311.0 46,311.0 $152,221 $12,847 $139,374 RTA-TaxiSC All Days 442 5,441 197.0 197.0 4,526.0 4,526.0 $14,844 $1,306 $13,538 SL-220 All Days $120,000 $120,000 Service Provider Totals 175 9,429,779 67,566,634 843,176.0 949,793.0 12,997,974.0 15,601,396.0 $75,997,588 $15,134,100 $60,863,488 TransTrack Manager'"' 5/9/2016 Page 3 of 6 EMI EME� IiN � fomql-oepirdim{ammsim Performance Indicators Table 3 - SRTP Route Statistics Riverside Transit Agency -- 7 FY 2016/17 All Routes Route # Day Type Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour Operating Cost Per 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 RTA-0 RTA-1 RTA-10 RTA-11 RTA-12 RTA-13 RTA-14 RTA-15 RTA-16/16E RTA-18 RTA-19 RTA-19C RTA-20 RTA-200 RTA-202 RTA-202D RTA-204D RTA-205 RTA-206D RTA-208 RTA-208D RTA-21 RTA-210 RTA-210D RTA-212 RTA-216 RTA-217 RTA-217D All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days $106.00 $9.11 $3.87 23.00% $2.98 $0.55 $81.61 $106.00 $9.17 $7.97 11.40% $7.06 $1.31 $93.91 $106.00 $9.22 $7.07 13.68% $6.10 $1.13 $91.50 $106.00 $9.05 $6.47 13.70% $5.59 $1.04 $91.48 $106.00 $8.96 $6.83 12.30% $5.99 $1.11 $92.96 $106.00 $7.94 $6.50 13.71% $5.61 $1.04 $91.47 $106.00 $8.82 $5.87 15.00% $4.99 $0.93 $90.10 $106.00 $9.10 $4.47 19.50% $3.60 $0.67 $85.32 $106.01 $8.13 $7.09 12.03% $6.24 $1.16 $93.25 $106.00 $8.53 $5.93 16.220/0 $4.97 $0.92 $88.80 $80.56 $5.40 $13.36 5.33% $12.65 $1.90 $76.26 $106.00 $6.79 $8.73 10.32% $7.83 $1.45 $95.05 $106.19 $4.66 $19.56 9.09% $17.78 $0.94 $96.52 $80.50 $2.99 $25.00 9.05% $22.74 $0.96 $73.22 $104.25 $4.57 $16.93 11.15% $15.05 $0.80 $92.63 $105.98 $4.68 $11.89 14.77% $10.14 $0.54 $90.32 $106.18 $3.73 $9.26 19.220/0 $7.48 $0.40 $85.77 $105.99 $4.25 $11.87 22.60% $9.19 $0.49 $82.03 $80.54 $3.37 $29.44 7.37% $27.27 $1.18 $74.61 $105.97 $4.38 $14.40 10.470/0 $12.89 $0.68 $94.87 $106.00 $7.27 $8.83 11.31% $7.83 $1.45 $94.00 $80.53 $3.65 $17.01 14.47% $14.55 $0.63 $68.87 $105.92 $8.76 $20.38 13.59% $17.61 $0.94 $91.52 $80.54 $3.51 $21.27 9.58% $19.23 $0.83 $72.82 $105.99 $4.26 $9.15 61.94% $3.48 $0.17 $40.33 $80.54 $2.63 $19.62 10.89% $17.48 $0.75 $71.76 $105.96 $4.04 $14.45 14.420/0 $12.36 $0.66 $90.68 $7.01 $8.12 $7.96 $7.81 $7.86 $6.85 $7.49 $7.33 $7.15 $7.15 $5.11 $6.09 $4.23 $2.72 $4.06 $3.99 $3.01 $3.29 $3.12 $3.92 $6.45 $3.12 $7.57 $3.18 $1.62 $2.34 $3.46 27.4 13.3 15.0 16.4 15.5 16.3 18.1 23.7 15.0 17.9 6.0 12.1 5.4 3.2 6.2 8.9 11.5 8.9 2.7 7.4 12.0 4.7 5.2 3.8 11.6 4.1 7.3 2.35 1.15 1.30 1.40 1.31 1.22 1.50 2.03 1.15 1.44 0.40 0.78 0.24 0.12 0.27 0.39 0.40 0.36 0.11 0.30 0.82 0.21 0.43 0.17 0.47 0.13 0.28 TransTrack Manager"' 5/9/2016 Page 4 of 6 EMI EME� fomql-oepirdim{ammsim Performance Indicators Table 3 - SRTP Route Statistics Riverside Transit Agency -- 7 FY 2016/17 All Routes Route # Day Type Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour Operating Cost Per 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 RTA-22 RTA-23 RTA-24 RTA-26 RTA-27 RTA-29 RTA-3 RTA-30 RTA-31 RTA-32 RTA-33 RTA-35 RTA-3D RTA-40 RTA-41C RTA-41D RTA-42 RTA-49 RTA-50 RTA-51 RTA-52 RTA-55 RTA-61 RTA-74 RTA-79 RTA-794 RTA-8 RTA-Ba/Bea All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days All Days $106.00 $80.54 $80.54 $67.03 $106.00 $106.00 $80.32 $96.79 $80.54 $80.54 $80.55 $80.55 $105.98 $80.54 $80.54 $105.99 $80.55 $106.00 $80.54 $80.65 $80.54 $80.60 $80.54 $80.54 $80.54 $80.54 $66.26 $5.85 $4.74 $5.99 $6.35 $5.48 $6.76 $12.73 $7.36 $4.72 $8.29 $6.22 $3.78 $8.60 $4.88 $4.35 $6.52 $5.34 $8.24 $12.40 $7.66 $6.27 $6.21 $4.95 $4.82 $4.47 $6.01 $3.16 $6.99 $13.24 $10.90 $16.09 $7.08 $7.05 $44.85 $13.21 $8.48 $6.19 $9.50 $11.37 $17.64 $12.61 $13.23 $7.18 $6.98 $4.92 $79.23 $4.38 $5.00 $4.41 $16.62 $8.62 $8.97 $7.53 $44.14 13.8996 7.4296 9.7996 5.6596 14.4696 13.3796 2.2696 7.4096 11.8996 15.4896 9.5996 8.4296 5.0696 8.0696 7.0496 12.9796 12.5396 19.2496 94.5496 99.7296 18.1996 20.3196 6.0896 11.5096 11.2896 100.0096 14.3496 7.0696 $6.02 $12.25 $9.83 $15.18 $6.06 $6.11 $43.84 $12.23 $7.47 $5.23 $8.59 $10.41 $16.74 $11.59 $12.30 $6.25 $6.11 $3.97 $4.33 $0.01 $4.09 $3.51 $15.61 $7.63 $7.95 $6.45 $41.02 $0.51 $1.79 $1.43 $2.17 $0.51 $1.13 $6.92 $1.75 $1.08 $0.76 $1.23 $1.49 $3.11 $1.66 $1.80 $1.16 $0.88 $0.74 $2.36 $0.01 $0.59 $1.92 $2.24 $1.09 $1.14 $0.94 $3.33 $91.28 $74.56 $72.65 $63.24 $90.67 $91.82 $78.51 $89.62 $70.96 $68.07 $72.82 $73.76 $100.62 $74.04 $74.87 $92.24 $70.45 $85.60 $4.40 $0.22 $65.89 $64.22 $75.64 $71.28 $71.45 $68.99 $61.58 $5.03 $4.39 $5.40 $5.99 $4.69 $5.86 $12.44 $6.81 $4.16 $7.00 $5.62 $3.47 $8.16 $4.49 $4.05 $5.67 $4.67 $6.66 $0.68 $0.02 $5.13 $4.95 $4.65 $4.27 $3.97 $5.15 $2.93 15.2 6.1 7.4 4.2 15.0 15.0 1.8 7.3 9.5 13.0 8.5 7.1 6.0 6.4 6.1 14.8 11.5 21.5 1.0 18.4 16.1 18.3 4.8 9.3 9.0 0.84 0.36 0.55 0.39 0.77 0.96 0.28 0.56 0.56 1.34 0.65 0.33 0.49 0.39 0.33 0.91 0.77 1.68 0.16 1.75 1.25 1.41 0.30 0.56 0.50 10.7 0.80 1.5 0.07 TransTrack Manager"' 5/9/2016 Page 5 of 6 EMI EME� fomql-oepirdim{ammsim Performance Indicators Table 3 - SRTP Route Statistics Riverside Transit Agency -- 7 FY 2016/17 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 RTA-GT DAR All Days $66.23 $3.43 $40.65 8.110/0 $37.35 $3.03 $60.86 $3.15 1.6 0.08 RTA-Hemet All Days $66.24 $4.37 $25.94 13.60% $22.41 $1.82 $57.23 $3.77 2.6 0.17 RTA-Jurupa All Days $66.24 $4.11 $34.26 10.19% $30.77 $2.50 $59.49 $3.69 1.9 0.12 RTA-LakeEl All Days $66.24 $3.63 $33.92 10.970/0 $30.20 $2.45 $58.97 $3.23 2.0 0.11 RTA-MurDAR All Days $66.24 $4.12 $35.17 9.70% $31.76 $2.58 $59.81 $3.72 1.9 0.12 RTA-MV DAR All Days $66.24 $4.44 $29.39 12.00% $25.86 $2.10 $58.29 $3.91 2.3 0.15 RTA-N0/C0 All Days $66.24 $4.16 $26.14 15.16% $22.17 $1.80 $56.19 $3.53 2.5 0.16 RTA-Perris All Days $66.24 $3.59 $27.11 14.010/0 $23.31 $1.89 $56.95 $3.08 2.4 0.13 RTA-RivDAR All Days $66.24 $3.82 $33.50 11.39% $29.69 $2.41 $58.69 $3.39 2.0 0.11 RTA-Sun Ci All Days $66.24 $3.78 $34.65 9.41% $31.38 $2.55 $60.00 $3.42 1.9 0.11 RTA-TaxiBB All Days $85.85 $3.25 $46.48 8.43% $42.56 $3.46 $78.61 $2.98 1.8 0.07 RTA-TaxiGT All Days $75.83 $3.28 $40.37 9.92% $36.36 $2.95 $68.30 $2.95 1.9 0.08 RTA-TaxiHe All Days $82.05 $3.26 $50.01 6.55% $46.73 $3.80 $76.67 $3.05 1.6 0.07 RTA-TaxiJu All Days $67.81 $3.30 $24.75 14.79% $21.09 $1.71 $57.78 $2.81 2.7 0.13 RTA-TaxiLE All Days $78.84 $3.27 $52.01 7.00% $48.37 $3.93 $73.32 $3.04 1.5 0.06 RTA-TaxiMu All Days $70.12 $3.30 $25.67 12.69% $22.41 $1.80 $61.22 $2.88 2.7 0.13 RTA-TaxiMV All Days $81.84 $3.26 $36.91 9.68% $33.34 $2.71 $73.91 $2.95 2.2 0.09 RTA-TaxiNC All Days $74.62 $3.28 $39.16 8.79% $35.72 $2.90 $68.06 $2.99 1.9 0.08 RTA-TaxiPe All Days $84.02 $3.26 $31.74 9.86% $28.61 $2.32 $75.73 $2.94 2.6 0.10 RTA-TaxiRi All Days $72.87 $3.29 $45.22 8.43% $41.41 $3.36 $66.72 $3.01 1.6 0.07 RTA-TaxiSC All Days $75.35 $3.28 $33.58 8.79% $30.63 $2.49 $68.72 $2.99 2.2 0.10 SL-220 All Days Service Provider Totals $90.13 $5.85 $8.06 19.910/0 $6.45 $0.90 $72.18 $4.68 11.2 0.73 TransTrack Manager"' 5/9/2016 Page 6 of 6 RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY FY 2016/17 - FY 2018/19 Short Range Transit Plan TABLE 3A: FY 2016/17 INDIVIDUAL ROUTE DESCRIPTIONS Route # I Route Class I Route Description 1 Cities/Communities Served Connections Directly Operated Fixed Routes: 1 Regional From UCR and Downtown Riverside to Galleria at Tyler and Corona primarily via University Ave and Magnolia Ave Riverside, UCR campus area, Arlington, Home Gardens, Corona Metrolink, Corona Cruiser, Omnitrans, SunLine 3' Local 10th St and Belle Ave in Corona via Main St and Hamner Ave to the Corona Transit Center, Norco College, continuing to Eastvale and Jurupa Valley via Limonite Ave, Pats Ranch Rd, and Hamner Ave Riverside, La Sierra, Norco, Corona, Eastvale, Mira Loma Metrolink, Corona Cruiser 10 Local From Big Springs St on Riverside's Northside to Galleria at Tyler primarily via Brockton St, Blaine St, Victoria Ave and Lincoln Ave Riverside, UCR campus area, Casa Blanca, La Sierra, eastside of Riverside Omnitrans, SunLine 11 Local Circulator between Moreno Valley Mall and March Air Reserve Base primarily via Frederick St, Ironwood Ave, Heacock St and JFK Dr Moreno Valley, March Joint Powers Authority SunLine 12 Local From Stephens Ave and Center St on Riverside's Northside, through Downtown, then to Pierce St at Magnolia Ave via Magnolia Ave, California Ave, and Jurupa Ave Riverside, La Sierra, and northside of Riverside Omnitrans, SunLine 13 Local From Spruce Stand Atlanta Ave to Galleria at Tyler in Riverside via MLK Blvd, Magnolia Ave, Central Ave, Arlington Ave, Colorado Ave, and Tyler St Riverside, Hunter Park-Eastside, Arlanza and La Sierra Metrolink', Omnitrans, SunLine 14 Regional From Galleria at Tyler to Downtown Riverside via Indiana Ave and Brockton Ave, then to Loma Linda VA Hospital via 1-215 and I-10 Riverside, Casa Blanca, Highgrove, Colton, Loma Linda Omnitrans, SunLine 15 Local From Downtown Riverside to Galleria at Tyler to Magnolia Ave and Merced St via Magnolia Ave, Arlington Ave, La Sierra Ave, Tyler St, and Indiana Ave Riverside, Arlanza and La Sierra Metrolink, Omnitrans, SunLine, OCTA 16 Local From Moreno Valley Mall to Downtown Riverside via Day St, Sycamore Canyon Blvd, Box Springs Rd, and University Ave Moreno Valley, Riverside, Canyon Crest, Riverside Eastside, UCR campus area Metrolink, Omnitrans, SunLine 18 Local From Moreno Valley College to Moreno Valley Mall and Heacock via Sunnymead Ranch, Cottonwood St and schools along Frederick St, Perris Blvd, Pigeon Pass Rd, and Kitching St Moreno Valley SunLine 19' Regional From Moreno Valley Mall to the Perris Station Transit Center via Penis Blvd and Sunnymead Blvd with service to distribution centers at Indian St and Morgan St, Perris Fairgrounds, and Moreno Valley College Moreno Valley, Perris Metrolink', SunLine 20 Regional From Magnolia Ave and Jurupa Ave in Riverside to Moreno Valley College via Central Ave, Alessandro Blvd, Moreno Beach Dr, and Iris St Riverside, Moreno Valley, Mission Grove 21 Local From Galleria at Tyler in Riverside to Fontana and Country Village in Mira Loma via Van Buren Blvd and Mission Blvd Jurupa, Glen Avon, Pedley, Riverside Omnitrans 22 Regional From the Lake Elsinore Outlet Mall to Downtown Riverside via Hwy 74, Old Elsinore Rd, and Alessandro Blvd Riverside, Woodcrest, Mead Valley, Perris, Meadowbrook, Lake Elsinore Metrolink', Omnitrans, SunLine 27 Regional From Florida Ave and Lincoln Ave in East Hemet to Galleria at Tyler in Riverside via Florida Ave, 215 Fwy, and Van Buren Blvd Riverside, Woodcrest, Perris, Menifee, Hemet, Valle Vista Metrolink' 29 Regional From Downtown Riverside to Hamner Ave and Limonite Ave in Eastvale via Rubidoux Blvd and Limonite Ave EastvaleJurupa ValleyRiverside , , Metrolink, Omnitrans, SunLine 41 ' Regional From the Mead Valley Community Center to Moreno Valley with stops at Moreno Valley College and Riverside County Medical Center Moreno Valley, Perris, Mead Valley 49 Regional From Downtown Riverside to Country Village via Mission Blvd Jurupa Valley, Riverside Omnitrans, SunLine 2004 Express From downtown Riverside to ARTIC via 91 and 57 Fwys with stops at Galleria at Tyler and Corona Metrolink Station. Riverside, Corona, Anaheim Metrolink, OCTA 202' Express From the Murrieta Walmart and Promenade Mall in Temecula to Oceanside Transit Center Murrieta, Temecula, Fallbrook, Oceanside Metrolink, NCTD 204' Express From UCR to Montclair TransCenter via Downtown Riverside, Country Village, and Ontario Mills Mall RiversideJurupa ValleyOntarioMontclair , , , Metrolink, Omnitrans, Foothill Transit, SunLine 205 ° Express From the Promenade Mall in Temecula to Village at Orange via 15 and 91 Fwys with stops in Murrieta, the Lake Elsinore Outlet Center, and Corona Metrolink Station. Temecula, Murrieta, Lake Elsinore, Corona, Orange Metrolink, OCTA 206 Express From the Promenade Mall in Temecula to Corona Metrolink Station via Fwy 15 with stops in Murrieta, the Lake Elsinore Outlet Center, Temescal Canyon, and Dos Lagos Temecula, Murrieta, Lake Elsinore, Corona Metrolink, Corona Cruiser 208' Express From the Promenade Mall in Temecula to the Riverside Downtown Metrolink Station and downtown area via 1-215 with stops in Murrieta, Menifee, Perris, and Moreno Valley Temecula, Murrieta, Menifee, Perris, Riverside, Moreno Valley Metrolink, Omnitrans, SunLine 210' Express From Beaumont to Downtown Riverside with stops in Moreno Valley and the Riverside Downtown Metrolink Station BeaumontMoreno ValleyRiverside , , Metrolink, Pass Transit, Omnitrans, SunLine 212' Express From Hemet and San Jacinto to Downtown Riverside with stops at Pen is and UCR San JacintoHemetPerrisRiverside , , , Metrolink, Omnitrans, SunLine 216 Express From Downtown Riverside to the Village at Orange via 91 Fwy and 55 Fwy with stops at the Galleria at Tyler and Corona Transit Center Riverside, Corona, Orange Metrolink, Omnitrans, OCTA, Corona Cruiser 217' Express From San Jacinto and Hemet to Temecula and Escondido via Winchester Rd (State Hwy 79) and 1-15 Hemet, San Jacinto, Temecula, Escondido NCTD, San Diego MTS ' This route has selected trips that are/will be both directly operated and contract operated. Revised 5/9/2016 Table 3A Individual Route Description RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY FY 2016/17 - FY 2018/19 Short Range Transit Plan TABLE 3A: FY 2016/17 INDIVIDUAL ROUTE DESCRIPTIONS Route # Route Class Route Description Cities/Communities Served Connections 2 Rural areas are those with less than 50,000 in population. This route will serve the Perrris Valley Line Metrolink service commencing in fall 2016. " This route is anticipated to commence in January 2017 with the opening of the 1-15 and SR-91 toll lanes. Revised 5/9/2016 Table 3A Individual Route Description RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY FY 2016/17 - FY 2018/19 Short Range Transit Plan TABLE 3A: FY 2016/17 INDIVIDUAL ROUTE DESCRIPTIONS Route # Route Class Route Description 1 Cities/Communities Served Connections Contracted Fixed Routes: 3' Local 10th St and Belle Ave in Corona via Main St and Hamner Ave to the Corona Transit Center, Norco College, continuing to Eastvale and Jurupa Valley via Limonite Ave, Pats Ranch Rd, and Hamner Ave Corona, Norco, Eastvale, Jurupa Valley Metrolink, Corona Cruiser 7 Local Lake Elsinore local with stops at Lake Elsinore Outlet Center, Downtown Lake Elsinore, Senior Center, Walmart shopping Center, Inland Valley Medical Center in Wildomar Lake Elsinore, Lakeland Village, Sedco Hills, Wildomar 8 Local From Lake Elsinore Outlet Center to Walmart on Railroad Canyon Rd via Grand Ave, Central St and Palomar St in Wildomar, and Canyon Estates Dr Lake Elsinore, Sedco Hills, Wildomar 19' Regional From Perris Station Transit Center to Exceed Facility on Trumble Rd and from the Perris Station Transit Center to Perris Fairgrounds via Perris Blvd Perris 23 Local From Inland Valley Medical Center in Wildomar through Murrieta to County Center Dr in Temecula Wildomar, Murrieta, Temecula 24 Local Temecula local route with stops at County Center Dr, Old Town, Library, Pechanga Resort, and Temecula Valley Hospital Temecula, Pechanga Community 26 Local New route. Local circulator serving Moreno Valley/March Field Metrolink Station and Moreno Valley Mall via Van Buren Blvd, Trautwein Rd, Alessandro Blvd, Sycamore Canyon Blvd, and Eucalyptus Ave Moreno Valley, March Joint Powers Authority, Riverside Metrolink' 30 Local Perris local circulator serving the Perris Transit Center, Walmart, and central part of the community Perris Metrolink' 31 Rural Service from Banning to Hemet Valley Mall via Lamb Canyon, State St, and Mt San Jacinto Community College Banning, Beaumont, Gilman Hot Springs, San Jacinto, Hemet pass Transit 32 Local From Hemet Valley Mall to Mt. San Jacinto College via Downtown San Jacinto and San Jacinto Ave San Jacinto, Hemet 33 Local From Super-Walmart on Sanderson Ave and the Hemet Valley Mall in western Hemet to Standford St and Thomton Ave in east Hemet Hemet, Valle Vista 35 Regional From Banning to Moreno Valley Mall with stops at Walmart on Moreno Beach Dr, senior center, and Riverside County Medical Center Banning, Beaumont, Moreno Valley Pass Transit, SunLine 40 Regional From Walmart in Lake Elsinore to Cherry Hills Blvd in Menifee with stops in Canyon Lake and Quail Valley Menifee, Canyon Lake, Lake Elsinore 41 ' Regional From the Mead Valley Community Center to Moreno Valley with stops at Moreno Valley College and Riverside County Medical Center Moreno Valley, Perris, Mead Valley 42 Local From the Hemet Valley Mall to Soboba Casino in San Jacinto via Kirby St, Cottonwood Ave, Santa Fe Ave, and East Main St Hemet, San Jacinto 50 Trolley Riverside downtown Jury Trolley Service Downtown Riverside, RCC Campus area 51 Trolley Crest Cruiser, a UCR to Canyon Crest circulator via Chicago Ave, Central Ave, and Canyon Crest Dr Riverside, UCR campus area SunLine 52 Local New route. Local circulator serving Hunter Park Metrolink Station and UCR via Iowa Ave, Blaine St, and University Ave Riverside Metrolink' 55 Trolley Temecula Trolley route, connecting Harveston community to schools, shops, and other RTA routes Temecula 61 Regional From Cherry Hills Blvd and Bradley Rd in Menifee to the Promenade Mall area in Temecula with stops at MSJC Menifee campus, Loma Linda University Medical Center - Murrieta, and County Center Dr Temecula, Murrieta, Menifee Metrolink' 74 Regional From San Jacinto and Hemet to Menifee and Perris, serving MSJC San Jacinto campus, Hemet Valley Mall, Winchester, MSJC Menifee campus, and Perris Station Transit Center San Jacinto, Hemet, Winchester, Menifee, Perris Metrolink' 79 Regional From the Hemet Valley Mall to Old Town Temecula via Winchester Rd (State Hwy 79). Also serves County Center Dr, Promenade Mall, and Temecula City Hall Hemet, Winchester, French Valley, Murrieta, Temecula 202' Express From the Murrieta Walmart and Promenade Mall in Temecula to Oceanside Transit Center Murrieta, Temecula, Fallbrook, Oceanside Metrolink, NCTD (Bus, Coaster Rail, Sprinter Rail) 204' Express From UCR to Montclair TransCenter via Downtown Riverside, Country Village, and Ontario Mills Mall RiversideJurupa ValleyOntarioMontclair , , , Metrolink, Omnitrans, Foothill Transit, SunLine 208' Express From the Promenade Mall in Temecula to the Riverside Downtown Metrolink Station and downtown area via 1-215 with stops in Murrieta, Menifee, Perris, and Moreno Valley Temecula, Murrieta, Menifee, Perris, Riverside, Moreno Valley Metrolink, Omnitrans, SunLine 210' Express From Beaumont to Downtown Riverside with stops in Moreno Valley and the Riverside Downtown Metrolink Station Beaumont, Moreno ValleyRiverside , , Metrolink, Pass Transit, Omnitrans, SunLine 212' Express From Hemet and San Jacinto to Downtown Riverside with stops at Perris and UCR San Jacinto, Hemet, Perris, Riverside Metrolink, Omnitrans, SunLine 217' Express From San Jacinto and Hemet to Temecula and Escondido via Winchester Rd (State Hwy 79) and I-15 San Jacinto, Hemet, Temecula, Escondido NCTD, San Diego MTS This route has selected trips hat are/will be both directly operated and contract operated. ' This route will serve the Perrris Valley Line Metrolink service commencing in spring 2016. Revised 5/9/2016 Table 3A Individual Route Description RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY FY 2016/17 - FY 2018/19 Short Range Transit Plan TABLE 3A: FY 2016/17 INDIVIDUAL ROUTE DESCRIPTIONS Route # Route Class Route Description Cities/Communities Served Connections Contracted Paratransit Routes: Banning/Beaumont Origin -to -Destination Banning and Beaumont Lake Elsinore Origin -to -Destination Canyon Lake, Lake Elsinore, Wildomar, Quail Valley Highgrove/Loma Linda Origin -to -Destination Grand Terrace, Highgrove, Loma Linda, Colton Hemet Origin -to -Destination Hemet, Homeland, Romoland, San Jacinto, Valle Vista, Winchester Jurupa Origin -to -Destination Glen Avon, BeMown, Jurupa, Pedley, Rubidoux, Mira Loma (Country Village) Moreno Valley Origin -to -Destination Moreno Valley, March Air Reserve Base Murrieta/Temecula Origin -to -Destination Murrieta, Temecula Corona/Norco Origin -to -Destination Corona, Norco Perris Origin -to -Destination Perris, Mead Valley, Nuevo Riverside Origin -to -Destination Riverside, Canyon Crest, Arnold Heights, Orangecrest, Woodcrest Sun City Origin -to -Destination Sun City, Menifee Revised 5/9/2016 Table 3A Individual Route Description Riverside Transit Agency FY 2016/17 Summary of Funds Requested Short Range Transit Plan Table 4 - Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2016/17 Project Description Capital Project Number Total Amount of Funds LTF STA 1 6 Bond Proceeds Measure A Operating Assistance Section 5307 - Riv-San Bernardino Section 5307 Murrieta/ Temecula/ Menifee Section 5307 - Hemet 6 Section 5307 Carryover 4 Section 5310 Section 5311 5 Section 5339 Bus & Bus Facilities Section 5304 Planning LCTOP Farebox Other Revenue Operating Assistance 40,998,251 36,857,990 1,790,000 1,800,000 550,261 Operating Assistance - CTSA 823,000 823,000 OPEB ARC 2,500,000 2,500,000 RapidLink Operating Assistance 91 Express Service I 425,000 425,000 PVL Feeder Service 2 1,554,550 938,685 460,410 155,455 OCTA 794 150,000 150,000 CommuterLink 212 & 217 (JARC Svc) 892,500 375,000 315,000 60,000 142,500 Extended Fixed Route Service (JARC Svc) 553,500 225,000 225,000 103,500 Travel Training' 370,000 370,000 Capitalized Preventive Maintenance 7,500,000 1,500,000 4,750,000 750,000 500,000 Capital Cost of Contracting 7,625,000 1,525,000 2,700,000 3,000,000 400,000 Lifeline Service (DAR Plus) 129,142 66,142 41,000 22,000 First Mile Last Mile Study 95,000 11,400 83,600 Farebox (Cash, Tix, Passes) 10,626,545 10,626,545 Interest Income 50,000 50,000 Advertising Revenue 18,000 18,000 CNG Sales 125,000 125,000 RINS/LCFS Credits 600,000 600,000 Medi-Cal Reimbursement 900,000 450,000 450,000 Wentworth Lease 62,100 62,100 Subtotal: Operating $75,997,588 $44,449,217 $0 $425,000 $2,804,000 $7,990,000 $3,750,000 $1,800,000 $960,000 $370,000 $550,261 $0 $83,600 $460,410 $11,050,000 $1,305,100 Revenue Vehicles - (10) COFR - Repl FY17-1 1,983,400 297,510 1,685,890 Revenue Vehicles - (33) DAR - Repl FY17-2 3,305,895 495,884 2,810,011 Associated Transit Improvements FY17-3 200,000 40,000 80,000 45,000 35,000 Capital Maintenance Spares FY17-4 1,110,065 222,013 888,052 Capitalized Tire Lease FY17-5 303,249 60,650 242,599 Maintenance/Support Equipment FY17-6 72,888 14,578 58,310 Facility Maintenance FY17-7 266,760 53,352 213,408 Information Systems FY17-8 90,000 18,000 72,000 Central Operations & Maintenance Facility' FY17-9 3,952,209 790,442 3,161,767 Heavy-duty CNG Buses 6 FY15-13 - (3,698,701) 3,698,701 Subtotal: Capital $11,284,466 ($3,698,701) $1,992,429 $3,698,701 $0 $3,991,471 $1,973,489 $165,310 $0 $0 $0 $3,161,767 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total: Operating & Capital $87,282,054 $40,750,516 $1,992,429 $4,123,701 $2,804,000 $11,981,471 $5,723,489 $1,965,310 $960,000 $370,000 $550,261 $3,161,767 $83,600 $460,410 $11,050,000 $1,305,100 1 91 Express service for six months funded with bond proceeds, which is farebox recovery ratio allowable. 2 Low Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP) carryover from FY16 SRTP. 3 5307 estimated carryover from FY16 grant (not yet awarded). 4 5310 funds represent the second year of the CalTrans grant awarded December 2015. 5 Section 5339 Bus and Bus Facilities funding is FY2015 and FY2016 apportionment. 6 Bond proceeds for 91 Express heavy duty buses will supplant previously programmed LTF. LTF offset to be used for operating. 7 Section 5304 Planning grant is carryover from FY16 SRTP. Table 4A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY17-1 PROJECT NAME Replacement Revenue Vehicles for Contract Operations PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase of (10) replacement CNG revenue vehicles for use on contract operated fixed route service. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Replace vehicles used for contract operated fixed route service that have reached the end of their service life per FTA guidelines. PROJECT SCHEDULE Start Date Jan-17 Completion Date Dec-19 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2017 Sec 5307 $ 1,685,890 STA $ 297,510 Total $ 1,983,400 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE INCLUDING PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED (INCLUDE FTA GRANT #, FTIP ID #, AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT #) FTA Grant # FTIP ID # RCTC Grant # Project Description Unexpended Balance (as of 4/18/16) CA-90-Z262 RIV140825 FY15-1 STA (12) COFR Vehicles $1,329,762 FY16-TBD* RIV150604 FY16-2 STA (16) COFR Vehicles $3,228,040 Total $4, 557, 802 " FY16 grant not yet awarded Table 4A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY/7-2 PROJECT NAME Replacement Revenue Vehicles for Demand Response Operations PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase of (33) replacement unleaded revenue vehicles for use on demand response service. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Replace vehicles used for demand response service that have reached the end of their service life per FTA guidelines. PROJECT SCHEDULE Start Date Jan-17 Completion Date Dec-19 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2017 Sec 5307 $ 2,810,011 STA $ 495,884 Total $ 3,305,895 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE INCLUDING PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED (INCLUDE FTA GRANT #, FTIP ID #, AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT #) FTA Grant # FTIP ID # RCTC Grant # Project Description Unexpended Balance (as of 4/18/16) CA-90-Z262 RIV140826 FY15-2 STA (26) DAR vehicles $ 317,601 FY16-TBD* RIV150605 FY16-3 STA (29) DAR vehicles $2,713,820 Total $3, 031, 421 " FY16 grant not yet awarded Table 4A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY/7-3 PROJECT NAME Associated Transit Improvements PROJECT DESCRIPTION Enhancement of the bus stop system such as: installation of bus shelters and benches, kiosks, signage, and lighting to enhance security and safety of the riding public, and enhance access for persons with disabilities. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Enhancement of transit facilities promotes safety and security and encourages residents to use transit due to improved convenience while waiting for bus. PROJECT SCHEDULE Start Date Completion Date Jan-17 Dec-19 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED Funding Source FY 2017 Sec 5307 $ 160,000 STA $ 40,000 Total $ 200,000 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE INCLUDING PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED (INCLUDE FTA GRANT #, FTIP ID #, AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT #) FTA Grant # FTIP ID # RCTC Grant ## Project Description Unexpended Balance (as of 4/18/16) CA-90-Z128 RIV130604 FY14-5 STA Assoc. Transit Improvements $ 195,070 CA-90-Z262 RIV140830 FY15-6 STA Assoc. Transit Improvements $ 150,000 FY16-TBD* RIV140830 FY16-6 STA Assoc. Transit Improvements $1,100,000 Total $1, 445, 070 * FY16 grant not yet awarded. Table 4A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY17-4 PROJECT NAME Capital Maintenance Spares PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase of spare parts for rolling stock under the bus maintenance program. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Purchase of vehicle parts based on projected needs whose individual costs meet the requirement for capital reimbursement. PROJECT SCHEDULE Start Date Completion Date Jan-17 Dec-19 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2017 Sec 5307 $ 888,052 STA $ 222,013 Total $ 1,110, 065 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE INCLUDING PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED (INCLUDE FTA GRANT #, FTIP ID #, AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT #) FTA Grant # FTIP ID # RCTC Grant # Project Description Unexpended Balance (as of 4/18/16) CA-90-Y954 RIV120821 FY12-7 STA Capital Maintenance Spares $1,111,025 CA-90-Z034 RIV120821 FY13-4 STA Capital Maintenance Spares $ 829,971 Total $1,940,996 Table 4A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY/7-5 PROJECT NAME Capitalized Tire Lease PROJECT DESCRIPTION Capital cost of leasing bus tires. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION As part of the Agency's maintenance program, tires are inspected and replaced based on tread wear and air pressure. PROJECT SCHEDULE Start Date Completion Date Jan-17 Dec-18 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2017 Sec 5307 $ 242,599 STA $ 60,650 Total $ 303,249 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE INCLUDING PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED (INCLUDE FTA GRANT #, FTIP ID #, AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT #) FTA Grant # FTIP ID # RCTC Grant # Project Description Unexpended Balance (as of 4/18/16) CA-90-Z262 RI V 140831 FY15-7 STA Capitalized Tire Lease $ 26,712 FY16-TBD* RIV150608 FY16-6 STA Capitalized Tire Lease $ 386,857 Total $ 413,569 " FY16 grant not yet awarded. Table 4A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY17-6 PROJECT NAME Support Equipment PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase of support equipment items including, but not limited to, shop air compressors, scissors lift, mobility devices for training, portable crane, hand jacks, drill breaker and pressure washers. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Miscellaneous maintenance and support equipment and improvements to support ongoing operations. PROJECT SCHEDULE Start Date Completion Date Jan-17 Dec-19 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED Funding Source FY 2017 Sec 5307 $ 58,310 STA $ 14,578 Total $ 72,888 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE INCLUDING PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED (INCLUDE FTA GRANT #, FTIP ID #, AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT #) FTA Grant # FTIP ID # RCTC Grant ## Project Description Unexpended Balance (as of 4/18/16) CA-90-Z262 RIV140832 FY15-8 STA Support Equipment $ 96,600 FY16-TBD* RIV150609 FY16-7 STA Support Equipment $ 217,100 Total $ 313,700 FY16 grant not yet awarded. Table 4A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY/7-7 PROJECT NAME Facility Maintenance PROJECT DESCRIPTION Maintenance of facilities in Riverside, Hemet and Corona. Project may include but is not limited to furniture, flooring, paint, plumbing, electrical, lighting, HVAC, roll up doors, parking lot and concrete. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Facilities require routine maintenance to keep them in optimal condition. PROJECT SCHEDULE Start Date Completion Date Jan-17 Dec-19 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2017 Sec 5307 $ 213,408 STA $ 53,352 Total $ 266,760 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE INCLUDING PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED (INCLUDE FTA GRANT #, FT/P /D #, AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT #) FTA Grant # FTIP ID # RCTC Grant # Project Description Unexpended Balance (as of 4/18/16) CA-90-Z262 RIV140833 FY15-9 STA Facility Maintenance $ 312,958 FY16-TBD* RIV150610 FY16-8 STA Facility Maintenance $1,017,530 Total $1, 330, 488 * FY16 grant not yet awarded. Table 4A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY17-8 PROJECT NAME Information Systems PROJECT DESCRIPTION Project includes but is not limited to the purchase of computers, printers, servers, audio-visual equipment, copiers, software, and mobile data terminals. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Computers and software to improve Agency efficiency and technology. PROJECT SCHEDULE Start Date Completion Date Jan-17 Dec-19 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2017 Sec 5307 $ 72,000 STA $ 18,000 Total $ 90,000 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE INCLUDING PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED (INCLUDE FTA GRANT #, FTIP ID #, AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT #) FTA Grant # FTIP ID # RCTC Grant # Project Description Unexpended Balance (as of 4/18/16) CA-90-Z262 RIV140834 FY15-10 STA Information Systems $ 377,659 FY16-TBD* RIV150611 FY16-9 STA Information Systems $ 329,120 Total $ 706,779 FY16 grant not yet awarded. Table 4A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY/7-9 PROJECT NAME Operations and Maintenance Facility PROJECT DESCRIPTION Planning, design, land acquisition and construction of the new central Operations and Maintenance Facility. First phase of the project includes agency needs assessment. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION The current base in Riverside is at capacity. The agency needs to identify a new location to accommodate growth. FY2015 and FY2016 FTA Section 5339 Bus and Bus Facilities funding from Riverside -San Bernardino, Murrieta-Temecula-Menifee and Los Angeles UZA's will be applied toward this project. Additional funding will be required. PROJECT SCHEDULE Start Date Completion Date Jan-17 Dec-22 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2017 Sec 5339 $ 3,161, 767 STA $ 790,442 Total $ 3,952,209 PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE INCLUDING PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED (INCLUDE FTA GRANT #, FTIP ID #, AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT #) Grant # FTIP ID # RCTC Grant # Project Description Unexpended Balance (as of 4/18/16) Prop 1B PTMISEA FY16-15 Ops & Maint Facility $12, 302, 658 FY16 LTF FY16-15 LTF Ops & Maint Facility $ 460,410 Table 4A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY15-13 - Amendment PROJECT NAME Heavy Duty CNG Buses PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase of (6) expansion heavy duty CNG revenue vehicles to operate the 91 Express service. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Bond proceeds will replace previously programmed LTF to purchase expansion vehicles to operate the new 91 Express service. PROJECT SCHEDULE Start Date Completion Date Jan-17 Dec-19 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2017 Bond Proceeds $ 3,698,701 LTF $ (3,698,701) Total $ - PRIOR YEAR PROJECTS OF A SIMILAR NATURE WITH UNEXPENDED BALANCE INCLUDING PROJECTS APPROVED BUT NOT YET ORDERED (INCLUDE FTA GRANT #, FTIP ID #, AND RCTC'S CAPITAL GRANT #) Grant # FTIP ID # RCTC Grant # Project Description Unexpended Balance (as of 4/18/16) Riverside Transit Agency FY 2017/18 Summary of Funds Requested Short Range Transit Plan Table 5.1 - Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2017/18 Project Description Capital Project Number Total Amount of Funds LTF STA Bond Proceeds Measure A Operating Assistance Section 5307 - Riv-San Bernardino Section 5307 - Temecula/ Murrieta Section 5307 - Hemet/San Jacinto Section 5337 State of Good Repair 1 Section 5339 Bus & Bus Facilities Section 5310 Section 5311 CMAQ Farebox Other Revenue FY 2017/2018 Operating Assistance 46,045,496 40,995,496 2,700,000 1,800,000 550,000 GASB 43/45 ARC 2,500,000 2,500,000 RapidLink Operating Assistance 1,319,608 314,067 989,706 15,835 91 Express Service 876,299 876,299 PVL Feeder Service 1,585,924 1,427,332 158,592 OCTA 794 155,000 155,000 CommuterLink 212 & 217 (JARC) 901,425 378,750 378,750 143,925 Extended Fixed Route Service (JARC) 559,035 227,250 227,250 104,535 Travel Training 450,000 450,000 Capitalized Preventative Maintenance 6,937,500 1,387,500 3,700,000 1,850,000 Capital Cost of Contracting 7,687,500 1,537,500 3,100,000 3,050,000 Lifeline Service (DAR Plus) 300,000 300,000 TAM Plan Development 150,000 30,000 120,000 Farebox (Cash, Tix, Passes) 10,777,113 10,777,113 Interest Income 50,000 50,000 Advertising Revenue 18,000 18,000 CNG Sales 125,000 125,000 RINS/LCFS Credits 600,000 600,000 Medi-Cal Reimbursement 900,000 450,000 450,000 Wentworth Bldg Lease 62,100 62,100 Subtotal: FY17/18 Operating $82,000,000 649,547,895 $0 $876,299 $2,855,000 $7,406,000 $4,900,000 $1,800,000 $0 $0 $450,000 $550,000 $989,706 $11,200,000 $1,305,100 Revenue Vehicles - (11) COFR Repl FY18-1 2,253,020 337,953 1,915,067 Revenue Vehicles - (18) DAR Repl FY18-2 1,818,000 272,700 1,545,300 Revenue Vehicles - (5) DAR - Expansion FY18-3 505,000 75,750 429,250 Non -Revenue Vehicles - (11) Support Vehicles FY18-4 279,720 55,944 223,776 Non -Revenue Vehicles - (2) S&Z Trailers FY18-4 43,200 8,640 34,560 Non -Revenue Vehicles - Electric Car FY18-4 42,660 8,532 34,128 Fare Collection System FY18-5 1,788,480 357,696 1,430,784 Associated Transit Improvements FY18-6 1,000,000 200,000 720,000 47,000 33,000 Capital Maintenance Spares FY18-7 1,086,484 217,297 869,187 Capitalized Tire Lease FY18-8 311,113 62,223 248,890 Maintenance/Support Equipment FY18-9 61,880 12,376 49,504 Facility Maintenance FY18-10 3,001,131 600,226 2,050,905 350,000 Information Systems FY18-11 100,000 20,000 80,000 Ops/Maint Facility FY18-12 20,000,000 400,000 1,600,000 18,000,000 UCR Mobility Hub 2 FY18-13 1,492,532 1,492,532 Ops & Facilities Security Projects FY18-14 911,925 911,925 Subtotal: FY17/18 Capital $34,695,145 $0 $2,629,337 $0 $0 $7,209,719 $793,828 $2,057,804 $0 $1,600,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $20,404,457 Total: Operating & Capital FY17/18 $116,695,145 $49,547,895 $2,629,337 $876,299 $2,855,000 $14,615,719 $5,693,828 $3,857,804 $0 $1,600,000 $450,000 $550,000 $989,706 $11,200,000 $21,709,557 Section 5339 Bus and Bus Facilities funding is estimated FY2016 apportionment. 2 Funding for UCR Mobility Hub is Low Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP). Table 5.1A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY18-1 PROJECT NAME Replacement Revenue Vehicles for Contract Operations PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase of (11) replacement CNG revenue vehicles for use on contract operated fixed route service. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Replace vehicles used for contract operated fixed route service that have reached the end of their service life per FTA guidelines. PROJECT SCHEDULE Start Date Jan-18 Completion Date Dec-20 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2018 Sec 5307 $ 1,915,067 STA $ 337,953 Total $ 2,253,020 Table 5.1A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY18-2 PROJECT NAME Replacement Revenue Vehicles for Demand Response Operations PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase of (18) replacement unleaded revenue vehicles for use on demand response service. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Replace vehicles used for demand response service that have reached the end of their service life per FTA guidelines. PROJECT SCHEDULE Start Date Completion Date Jan-18 Dec-20 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2018 Sec 5307 $ 1,545,300 STA $ 272,700 Total $ 1,818,000 Table 5.1A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY18-3 PROJECT NAME Expansion Revenue Vehicles for Demand Response Operations PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase of (5) expansion unleaded revenue vehicles for use on demand response service. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Expansion of fleet to meet service demands. PROJECT SCHEDULE Start Date Jan-18 Completion Date Dec-20 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTE Funding Source FY 2018 Sec 5307 $ 429,250 STA $ 75,750 Total $ 505,000 Table 5.1A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY18-4 PROJECT NAME Support Vehicles PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase of support vehicles. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Purchase of (11) support vehicles and (2) trailers to replace vehicles that have met their useful life. Purchase of (1) expansion electric vehicle. PROJECT SCHEDULE Start Date Completion Date Jan-18 Dec-20 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2018 Sec 5307 $ 292,464 STA $ 73,116 Total $ 365,580 Table 5.1A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY18-5 PROJECT NAME Fare Collection System PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase of replacement fireboxes for the fixed route fleet. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Upon completion of a system assessment, a new Fare Collection System will be purchased and installed on the fixed route fleet. This funding is required in addition to the FY15 Farebox project request in order to implement upgraded system and equipment technology and replace fireboxes that have been in service since 2002. PROJECT SCHEDULE Start Date Completion Date Jan-18 Dec-20 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2018 Sec 5307 $ 1,430,784 STA $ 357,696 Total $ 1,788,480 Table 5.1A— Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY18-6 PROJECT NAME Associated Transit Improvements PROJECT DESCRIPTION Enhancement of the bus stop system such as: installation of bus shelters and benches, kiosks, signage, and lighting to enhance security and safety of the riding public, and enhance access for persons with disabilities. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Enhancement of transit facilities promotes safety and security and encourages residents to use transit due to improved convenience while waiting for bus. PROJECT SCHEDULE Start Date Jan-18 Completion Date Dec-20 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2018 Sec 5307 $ 800,000 STA $ 200,000 Total $ 1,000,000 Table 5.1A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY18-7 PROJECT NAME Capital Maintenance Spares PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase of spare parts for rolling stock under the bus maintenance program. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Purchase of vehicle parts based on projected needs whose individual costs meet the requirement for capital reimbursement. PROJECT SCHEDULE Start Date Completion Date Jan-18 Dec-20 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2018 Sec 5307 $ 869,187 STA $ 217,297 Total $ 1,086,484 Table 5.1A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY18-8 PROJECT NAME Capitalized Tire Lease PROJECT DESCRIPTION Capital cost of leasing bus tires for FY2018. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION As part of the Agency's maintenance program, tires are inspected and replaced based on tread wear and air pressure. PROJECT SCHEDULE Start Date Completion Date Jan-18 Dec-20 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2018 Sec 5307 $ 248,890 S TA $ 62,223 Total $ 311,113 Table 5.1A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY18-9 PROJECT NAME Support Equipment PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase of maintenance and support equipment. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Miscellaneous maintenance and support equipment and improvements to support ongoing operations. PROJECT SCHEDULE Start Date Completion Date Jan-18 Dec-20 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2018 Sec 5307 $ 49,504 STA $ 12,376 Total $ 61,880 Table 5.1A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY18-10 PROJECT NAME Facility Maintenance PROJECT DESCRIPTION Maintenance of facilities in Riverside, Hemet and Corona. Project may include but is not limited to Hemet underground storage tanks, furniture, flooring, paint, plumbing, electrical, lighting, HVAC, roll up doors, roof repair/replacement, parking lot and concrete. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Facility maintenance and equipment and improvements to promote a safe and clean environment. PROJECT SCHEDULE Start Date Jan-18 Completion Date Dec-20 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2018 Sec 5307 $ 2,400,905 STA $ 600,226 Total $ 3,001,131 Table 5.1A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY18-11 PROJECT NAME Information Systems PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase of information systems hardware and software. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Computers, equipment and software needed to replace old equipment, to improve Agency efficiency and technology. PROJECT SCHEDULE Start Date Completion Date Jan-18 Dec-20 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2018 Sec 5307 $ 80,000 STA $ 20,000 Total $ 100,000 Table 5.1A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY18-12 PROJECT NAME Operations and Maintenance Facility PROJECT DESCRIPTION Planning, design, land acquisition and construction of the new Operations and Maintenance Facility. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION The current base in Riverside is at capacity. The agency needs to identify a new location to accommodate growth. PROJECT SCHEDULE Start Date Completion Date Jan-18 Dec-22 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2018 Fed Section 5339 $ 1,600,000 STA $ 400,000 TBD $ 18, 000, 000 Total $ 20, 000, 000 Table 5.1A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY18-13 PROJECT NAME UCR Mobility HUB PROJECT DESCRIPTION Planning, design, and construction of the University of California, Riverside Mobility Hub. RTA is working with UCR as part of the campus' master plan effort. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION The current on street bus stops at UCR located on Canyon Crest Drive are utilized by Routes 1, 51, and 204 and do not have the space, bus shelters, or other amenities essential to effectively incorporate transit into VCR's Master Plan. The proposed UCR Mobility Hub has an efficient bus turnaround that will allow more direct routing, eliminating excess travel on local streets currently needed to turn the buses around. The funding in this request is from the FY15/16 Low Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP) and has not yet been awarded. PROJECT SCHEDULE Start Date Completion Date Jan-18 Dec-21 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2018 LCTOP FY15/16 $ 1,492,532 Total $ 1,492,532 Table 5.1A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER PROJECT NAME PROJECT DESCRIPTION FY18-14 Operations and Facilities Security Improvements Safety and security purchases for use at Agency facilities and on Agency vehicles. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Projects will improve and maintain the overall agency safety and security. PROJECT SCHEDULE Start Date Completion Date Jan-18 Dec-20 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2018 Prop 18 CTSGP FY15/16 $ 911,925 Total $ 911,925 Riverside Transit Agency FY 2018/19 Summary of Funds Requested Short Range Transit Plan Table 5.2 - Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2018/19 Project Description Capital Project Number Total Amount of Funds LTF STA Bond Proceeds Measure A Operating Assistance Section 5307 - Riv-San Bernardino Section 5307 - Temecula/ Murrieta Section 5307 - Hemet/San Jacinto Section 5337 State of Good Repair Section 5339 Bus & Bus Facilities Section 5310 Section 5311 CMAQ Farebox Other Revenue FY 2018/2019 Operating Assistance 52,992,490 47,842,490 2,800,000 1,800,000 550,000 GASB 43/45 ARC 2,500,000 2,500,000 I RapidLink Operating Assistance 1,358,420 176,595 1,018,815 163,010 91 Express Service - OCTA 794 161,000 161,000 CommuterLink 212 & 217 (JARC) 911,540 383,000 383,000 145,540 Extended Fixed Route Service (JARC) 565,800 230,000 230,000 105,800 Travel Training 475,000 475,000 Capitalized Preventative Maintenance 7,125,000 1,425,000 4,300,000 1,400,000 Capital Cost of Contracting 7,750,000 1,550,000 3,200,000 3,000,000 Lifeline Service (DAR Plus) 320,000 320,000 Farebox (Cash, Tix, Passes) 11,085,650 11,085,650 Interest Income 50,000 50,000 Advertising Revenue 18,000 18,000 CNG Sales 125,000 125,000 RINS/LCFS Credits 600,000 600,000 Medi-Cal Reimbursement 900,000 450,000 450,000 Wentworth Bldg Lease 62,100 62,100 Subtotal: FY18/19 Operating $87,000,000 $54,87705 $0 $0 $2,961,000 $8,113,000 $4,400,000 $1,800,000 $0 $0 $475,000 $550,000 $1,018,815 $11,500,000 $1,305,100 Revenue Vehicles - (27) DAR Repl FY19-1 2,835,000 425,250 2,409,750 Capital Maintenance Spares FY19-2 1,086,484 217,297 869,187 Capitalized Tire Lease FY19-3 325,484 65,097 260,387 Maintenance/Support Equipment FY19-4 100,000 20,000 80,000 Facility Maintenance FY19-5 200,000 40,000 160,000 Information Systems FY19-6 100,000 20,000 80,000 Ops/Maint Facility FY19-7 18,000,000 - 18,000,000 Subtotal: FY18/19 Capital $22,646,968 $0 $787,644 $0 $0 $3,539,324 $0 $320,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $18,000,000 Total: Operating & Capital FY18/19 $109,646,968 $54,877,085 $787,644 $0 $2,961,000 $11,652,324 $4,400,000 $2,120,000 $0 $0 $475,000 $550,000 $1,018,815 $11,500,000 $19,305,100 Table 5.2A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY19-1 PROJECT NAME Replacement Revenue Vehicles for Demand Response Operations PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase of (27) replacement unleaded revenue vehicles for use on demand response service. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Replace vehicles used for demand response service that have reached the end of their service life per FTA guidelines. PROJECT SCHEDULE Start Date Completion Date Jan-19 Dec-21 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2019 Sec 5307 $ 2,409,750 STA $ 425,250 Total $ 2,835,000 Table 5.2A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY19-2 PROJECT NAME Capital Maintenance Spares PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase of spare parts for rolling stock under the bus maintenance program. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Purchase of vehicle parts based on projected needs whose individual costs meet the requirement for capital reimbursement. PROJECT SCHEDULE Start Date Completion Date Jan-19 Dec-21 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2019 Sec 5307 $ 869,187 STA $ 217,297 Total $ 1,086,484 Table 5.2A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY19-3 PROJECT NAME Capitalized Tire Lease PROJECT DESCRIPTION Capital cost of leasing bus tires for FY2019. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION As part of the Agency's maintenance program, tires are inspected and replaced based on tread wear and air pressure. PROJECT SCHEDULE Start Date Completion Date Jan-19 Dec-21 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2019 Sec 5307 $ 260,387 STA $ 65,097 Total $ 325,484 Table 5.2A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY19-4 PROJECT NAME Support Equipment PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase of maintenance and support equipment. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Miscellaneous maintenance and support equipment and improvements to support ongoing operations. PROJECT SCHEDULE Start Date Completion Date Jan-19 Dec-21 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2019 Sec 5307 $ 80,000 STA $ 20,000 Total $ 100,000 Table 5.2A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY19-5 PROJECT NAME Facility Maintenance PROJECT DESCRIPTION Maintenance of facilities in Riverside, Hemet and Corona. Project may include but is not limited to Hemet underground storage tanks, furniture, flooring, paint, plumbing, electrical, lighting, HVAC, roll up doors, roof repair/replacement, parking lot and concrete. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Facility maintenance and equipment and improvements to promote a safe and clean environment. PROJECT SCHEDULE Start Date Jan-19 Completion Date Dec-21 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2019 Sec 5307 $ 160,000 STA $ 40,000 Total $ 200,000 Table 5.2A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY19-6 PROJECT NAME Information Systems PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase of information systems hardware and software. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Computers, equipment and software needed to replace old equipment, to improve Agency efficiency and technology. PROJECT SCHEDULE Start Date Completion Date Jan-19 Dec-21 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2019 Sec 5307 $ 80,000 STA $ 20,000 Total $ 100,000 Table 5.2A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER FY/9-7 PROJECT NAME Operations and Maintenance Facility PROJECT DESCRIPTION Planning, design, land acquisition and construction of the new Operations and Maintenance Facility. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION The current base in Riverside is at capacity. The agency needs to identify a new location to accommodate growth. PROJECT SCHEDULE Start Date Completion Date Jan-19 Dec-22 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED) Funding Source FY 2019 TBD $ 18, 000, 000 Total $ 18, 000, 000 TABLE 6: FY 2016 FTA Triennial Review — Summary of Findings Deficiency Corrective Action Inadequate oversight of subrecipient / third -party contractor / lessees. The grantee must submit approved procedures to the FTA regional office to monitor other entities with responsibility for meeting FTA requirements. The grantee must provide evidence of staff training. Closed: 5/17/2016 Lacking a language assistance plan. The grantee must provide the FTA RCRO with evidence of RTA and contractor staff training as outlined in the LAP as well as evidence that LAP training will be conducted in accordance with RTA's Title VI program in the future. Closed: 5/17/2016 No contract administration system. The grantee must provide the FTA regional office with documentation of an adequate contract administration system. The grantee must submit to the FTA regional office revised contract administration procedures, evidence of board approval and documentation of staff training. Closed: 4/20/2016 FY17-FY19 SRTP ��EME�� fomq1-mspirdim(ammsim Table 7 -- Service Provider Performance Targets Report FY 2015/16 Short Range Transit Plan Review Riverside Transit Agency Data Elements FY 2015/16 Plan FY 2015/16 Target FY 2015/16 Year to Date Through 3rd Quarter Year to Date Performance Scorecard Unlinked Passenger Trips 10,305,607 Passenger Miles 73,477,011 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours 795,419.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles 12,718,415.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 15,481,742.0 Total Operating Expenses $69,079,587 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $15,063,536 Net Operating Expenses $54,016,051 Performance Indicators Mandatory: 1. Farebox Recovery Ratio I 21.80% I >= 17.45% I 24.69% 'Meets Target Discretionary: 1. Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour $86.85 <_ $83.16 $80.66 Meets Target 2. Subsidy Per Passenger $5.24 >_ $3.87 and <_ $5.23 $5.07 Meets Target 3. Subsidy Per Passenger Mile $0.74 >_ $0.41 and <_ $0.55 $0.71 Fails to Meet Target 4. Subsidy Per Hour $67.91 >_ $51.74 and <_ $70.00 $60.74 Meets Target 5. Subsidy Per Mile $4.25 >_ $3.27 and <_ $4.43 $3.90 Meets Target 6. Passengers Per Revenue Hour 13.00 >= 11.39 and <= 15.41 12.00 Meets Target 7. Passengers Per Revenue Mile 0.81 >= 0.72 and <= 0.98 0.77 Meets Target Note: Must meet at least 4 out of 7 Discretionary Performance Indicators Productivity Performance Summary: Service Provider Comments: 1) Met 1 of 1 Mandatory Indicators 2) Met 6 of 7 Discretionary Indicators TransTrack Manager'"' 5/9/2016 Page 1 of I ��MME�� lie s ivm l-oepruim{amRsim FY 2016/17 - Table 8 -- SRTP Performance Report Service Provider; Riverside Transit Agency All Routes Performance Indicators FY 2014/15 End of Year Actual FY 2015/16 3rd Quarter Year -to -Date FY 2016/17 Plan FY 2016/17 Target Plan Performance Scorecard (a) Passengers 9,651,592 7,030,779 9,429,779 None Passenger Miles 90,800,579 50,297,021 67,566,634 None Revenue Hours 734,210.5 586,991.6 843,176.0 None Total Hours 842,900.1 671,044.0 949,793.0 None Revenue Miles 11,565,369.5 9,145,921.1 12,997,974.0 None Total Miles 14,286,918.3 11,222,135.8 15,601,396.0 None Operating Costs $61,106,741 $47,345,953 $75,997,588 None Passenger Revenue $15,842,039 $11,691,326 $15,134,100 None Operating Subsidy $45,264,702 $35,654,627 $60,863,488 None Operating Costs Per Revenue Hour $83.23 $80.66 $90.13 <_ $81.46 Fails to Meet Target Operating Cost Per Revenue Mile $5.28 $5.18 $5.85 None Operating Costs Per Passenger $6.33 $6.73 $8.06 None Farebox Recovery Ratio 25.93% 24.69% 19.91% >= 17.5% Meets Target Subsidy Per Passenger $4.69 $5.07 $6.45 >_ $4.31 and <_ $5.83 Fails to Meet Target Subsidy Per Passenger Mile $0.50 $0.71 $0.90 >_ $0.60 and <_ $0.82 Fails to Meet Target Subsidy Per Revenue Hour $61.65 $60.74 $72.18 >_ $51.63 and <_ $69.85 Fails to Meet Target Subsidy Per Revenue Mile $3.91 $3.90 $4.68 >_ $3.32 and <_ $4.49 Fails to Meet Target Passengers Per Revenue Hour 13.10 12.00 11.20 >= 10.20 and <= 13.80 Meets Target Passengers Per Revenue Mile 0.83 0.77 0.73 >= 0.65 and <= 0.89 Meets Target a) The Plan Performance Scorecard column is the result of comparing the FY 2016/17 Plan to the FY 2016/17 Primary Target. TransTrack Manager'"' 5/9/2016 Page 1 of 1 TABLE 9A — HIGHLIGHTS OF SRTP Operating & Financial Data Systemwide Ridership FY 12/13 9,242,793 FY 13/14 9,568,758 FY 14/15 9,651,592 FY 15/16 Budgeted 10,305,607 FY 16/17 Planned 9,429,782 Operating Costs Per Revenue Hour $79.18 $79.90 $83.23 $86.85 $90.13 Recent Trends: • Record low gas prices and increased auto sales are having a negative impact on ridership growth. • Perris Valley Line (PVL) Metrolink service between Riverside and south Perris started on May 31, 2016. • RTA will add new trips on ten existing transit routes and establish two new routes (26 & 52) to support PVL service. Proposed Service Changes for FY 2017: • The main service changes for FY17 are planned for implementation in January 2017, and include: o Streamlining of downtown Riverside bus operations together with the closure of the existing downtown bus terminal; o New SR-91 CommuterLink service on the toll lanes. o Implement Sunday service on the remaining three no service days: Thanksgiving, Christmas and New Year's Day. Operating Budget ($75,997,588): • Increase of 10% over FY16 budget. Variance analysis by cost element is provided below: o Salaries — 2% decrease due to reduction in Administrative positions to offset service growth and cost increases for purchased transportation and liability insurance. o Purchased Transportation —19% increase due to contracted rates and service growth. o Benefits — 5% increase due to medical insurance costs. o Services — 8% decrease due to reductions in scheduling services, planning studies, and temporary labor. o Materials & Supplies — 3% increase due to CNG fuel and parts usage costs. o Insurance —137% increase due to liability premiums. Capital Budget ($11,284,466): • RTA's 3-Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) is updated to reflect the current economic outlook and service needs with a focus on items which are mandatory to support our current service profile. FY 2017 CIP projects are funded with Federal Sections 5307 and 5339, State Transportation Assistance (STA) and Bond Proceeds. A summary by project element for FY 2017 is shown below: o Revenue Vehicles - $5.3 million for (10) Contracted Fixed Route and (33) DAR vehicles. o Facility - $3.9 million for new Operations and Maintenance Facility (Federal 5339). o Facility Maintenance - $.3 million for operations and facilities maintenance and security projects. o Maintenance - $1.6 million for tire lease, parts and equipment. o Associated Transit Improvements - $.2 million for bus stop enhancements. Table 9B - Fare Revenue Calculation (consistent with Commission Farebox Recovery Policy) Revenue Sources included in Farebox Calculation Actual Amount from FY 2014/15 Audit FY 15/16 Budget FY 16/17 (Plan) 1. Passenger Fares 11,244,623 11,800,104 11,050,000 2.Interest 3. General Fund Supplement 4. Measure A 2,946,303 2,833,432 2,804,000 5. Advertising Revenue 21,133 15,000 18,000 6. Gain on Sale of Capital Assets 12,698 7. CNG Revenue 203,324 185,000 125,000 8. Lease/ Other Revenue 10,000 60,000 62,100 9. Federal Excise Tax Refund 10. Investment Income 54,376 20,000 50,000 11. CalPers CERBT 1,103,265 12. Fare Revenues from Exempt Routes 13. Other Revenues 246,317 150,000 1,025,000 TOTAL REVENUE 15,842,039 15,063,536 15,134,100 for Farebox Calculation (1-13) TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES 61,106,741 69,079,587 75,997,558 for Farebox Calculation FAREBOX RECOVERY RATIO 25.93% 21.81% 19.91%I APPENDIX A: RTA SYSTEM MAP AND FIXED -ROUTE MAPS ONTARIO METROLINK z W COMMERCE < Route 216 toVillage POMONA at Oranae < OCTA 794 to South Coast Metro z 0 BELLEGRAVE 68TH ST Route 204 continues to Montclair Transit Center. LIMONITE EASTVALt N 15 I0 CITRUS s Norco City Hall 4TH Norco Senior Center d LAMPTON Norco College`' 3RD Corona City Han otAND \,/••••"' 6TH ST CORONA LOTH Corona Regional Medical Center © LIMONITE ARLINGTON NORCO • Corona Transit Center HOE 206 21 HIDDEN VALLEY Corona Transit Center. • 6TH ST Corona Cruiser Vintage Terrace Senior Community Canyon Community Church Park and Ride F 7 9G La Sierra University Q 12 JURUPA MARLAY PHILADELPHI Country Village r tl .1 S GRANITE HILLS MISSION BLVD The Pedley Metrolink M I R A L O M A ,_Station 0 METROLINK .0\ \5E ARLINGTON GOULD» County COUNTY Mental FARM ealth Galleria at Tyler Kaiser HospitT HOME GARDENS CAJALCO 20• 6 l • 4/ Dos Lagos •se<<DOS LAGOS TEMESCAL CANYON » Tom's Farms �„&1• ' La Sierra TRONNKMetrolink 'Yij Station 41 9 Riverside Transit Agency T Riverside Downtown Terminal 15 16 22 29 49 204 208 210 212 216 Omnitrans215 Sunline 220 ' O Oowntown�� Terminal ? �� N/IrERS/TY,� riverside mmunity Hospital o o" m JURUPA co x CENTRAL1 view Hospi T Galleria at Tyler ®E1 G►kR CENTfB UNIVERS T Magnolia & Elizabeth =IEEE 1 RIVERSIDE Lake Mathews TEMESCAL CANYON System Map (951) 565-5002 www.RiversideTransit.com =R� Riverside Transit Agency Welcome aboard the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA), your community transportation provider. The RTA operates 44 bus routes to provide you with safe, cost-effective and reliable service in western Riverside County. We hope that this System Map is useful to you in planning your trip. Should you need additional information, please call the Customer Information Center at (951) 565-5002. Route Number Route Path 3:1:1= Commuter Routing ,-ter- Alternate Routing MAP NOT TO SCALE 0 Q Point of Interest Medical Facility Transfer Point Metrolink Station O Interstate 0 State Highway Main Road Water Riverside Trolley Route ROUTE 501ury Trolley Legend I Map not to scale OTransfer Point and Information O Medical Facility O Trolley Stops T Market & 14th =IRE" TEQUESQUITE Eden Lutheran Church Parking Lot • United Methodist Church • 0 m w Y Q 11TH ST. 50 14TH STREET Riverside Community Hospital Calvary Presbyterian E Church Parking Lot (nearest stop 14th & Magnolia) City Hall 10TH ST. O a 0 z RICE TERRACINA RAMONA T 0 1 12TH ST. Hall of Count lusticeAdminist ative Center Riverside County Court House • 14th & Magnolia lio®® Physical Therapy & Sports Clinic 50 41VERS"%r RCC • • Magnolia&Terracina MIEIEN 50 a assar • 51 Post Office © 2016 Riverside Transit Agency. Effective Date: January 10, 2016 ROLL Village Towers Apartments T rversrty4v. m • • T • Un_ ' rsity ae UniversityAv T UCR io El 16 race • s0, T Iowa & Blaine MI 0 d c c v UCR Eil 204 210 Sunline 220 Highlander Shuttle MLK8/vd T Canyon Crest & MLK (Lot 30) i® 208 210 16 RIVERSIDE Chicago & Central ELIE ROUTE 51 Crest Cruiser T University Village& Village Towers Apts Q 14 16 ®® V Hi r hlander Shuttle 51 • • Legend I Map not to scale OTransfer Point and Information OTrolley Stops Centra, O T • 10 Crest Dr MtKRA,, 51 • • °nte Vista 14 Blaine UCR • T CI • T Canyon Crest & Central li® 16 Canyon Crest Towne Centre VAN BUREN < MAS 3RD s WOODCREST CAJALCO e-pOyO9 moQ 4 CENTER qv 14 Loma Linda University Medical Center GRAND TERRACE HIGHGROVE Hunter Park METROLINK Metrolink Station BLAINE G OD O UCR BIG SPRINGS 14 o PROSPECT z O Loma Linda VA 0 BARTONm Hospital Sunline 220 T Moreno Valley Mall m 16 18 26 ® 208 Sunline 220 CANYON CREST MLK High School ALESSANDRO Moreno Valley March Field Metrolink Station • Social , Security METROLINK Office MARCH JPA ORANGETERRACE 0 MARIPOSA MEAD VALLEY 41 z OAKLAND & RIDER Mead Valley Community Center MEADOWBROOK T Lake Elsinore Outlet Center El 8 i® *��°� Outlet Centercoe( Lake Elsinore 6y9y LAKE ELSINORE EUCALYPTUS LOMA LINDA OLD LAKE RD w MANZANITA s IRONWOOD HEMLOCK CENTERPOINT SUNNYMEAD 00 NGATE o — s m COTTONWOOD City Hall CAJALCO Mead Valley Library almart CACTUS c MEYE March ARR SAN JACINTO ELLIS Canyon Lake SAN JACINTO» 5' 7G 0 4TH ST 0 m ALESSANDRO RIDER ST NUEVO cl►'/ of EUCALYPTUS Riverside niversity Medica Center CACTUS Moreno Valley CDlleg PERRIS 0 w s V O m �m « EUCALYPTUS Walmart T RUMC z m Moreno E Valley Community Hospital MORENO VALLEY T Moreno Valley College Lake Perris T Perris Station Transit Center ®® 30 74 i® METROLINK South Perris Metrolink Station CHAMBERS AVE • Cherry Hills & Bradley ® 40 61 7 QUAIL VALLEY Fire Station ANYOI.c LAKE Wildomar Independent And a Assisted_ Living 41o4, Canyon Lake City Hall g- City Hall r'L. Inland Valley -7, Medical Center CLINTON KEITH WILDOMAR Murrieta City Hall 41, & Senior Center Menifee City Hall Rancho Springs edical Center Mt San Jacinto LlIALoma Linda University -Ihir Medical Center TA HOT SPRINGS T County Center Drive EE WINCHESTER THOMPSON TECHNOLOGY TEMECULA Promenade Mall Community Center to Oceanside 11 STAGECOACH PLAZA Sunline 220 continues to Palm Desert SAN JACINTO FRIJITVALE T Hemet Valley Mall EEE FRENCH VALLEY HIGHLAND SPRINGS MAYBERRY THORNTON HEMET T Mt. San Jacinto College Soboba Casino VALLE VISTA THORNTON EAST HEMET Temecula Trolley ROUTE 55 Temecula Trolley T Equity Dr &Ynez Rd MEI 79 61 T County Center 61 79 55 217 • EQUITY DRA 55 • EXtrindeerdicSatay ShOPpapt:PeiCsaetZ/laAtebrbott Western Legend I Map not to scale 0 Transfer Point and Information 0 Trolley Stops cP* RUSTIC GLEN DR The Promenade at Temecula VERLAND DR 629 TEMECULA Temecula Walmart REDHAWK 104 PEPPERCORN pw Great Oak HS to Escondido Transit Center UCR / Riverside Downtown Terminal to . Corona Metrolink Station Information Center (951)565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Routing and timetables subject to change. Rutas designadas y horarios son sujetos a cambios. IO N Also serving: RCC, California Baptist University, Parkview Community Hospital, Galleria at Tyler, Kaiser Hospital, Corona. No service on: New Year's Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. T Rive rs'de Downtown Terminal Riverside Downtown Terminal Boarding Diagram I Page 37 0 10 ®®m ® 16 El 29 49 204 208 210 Omnitrans 215 216 SunLine 220 T Riverside - Downtown Metrolink Station 0 16 208 210 SunLine 220 Amtrak T Brockton Arcade 0 10 14 El RIVERSIDE T Galleria at Tyler 0 10 ®® ®®m 216 Galleriaa Tyler Mall Boarding Diagram I Page 34 T Corona Transit Center 0© 206 216 Corona Cruiser Blue, Re METROLINK West Corona Metrolink Station METRONNK E 1 Auto Center Smith Ave T orona Park - And -Ride Corona City Hal 2 14 Adamsst van sure K-Mart RiversMissiideo :veirdstaBlai Downtown est Terr�lrnal Q nlnn Universi tyAve T 9 Riverside City College 14th St Riverside Community Hospital Central M.S. T Central AveMarry Library ivlew n 8/vd spiral Q • �o�epye c Galleria� 5 at Tyler Buchanan Ave» d Lincoln St» T 3 randgivd 4 T T `l5`)r1fl T . • Kaiser Hospit il a sierra Ave «Indiana Ave • • villegasM.S. Ramona H.S. 8 7 Q c v T s y 10 nth-43 METROLINK Riverside - Downtown Metrolink Station Riverside • Plaza Q 3' 0 Cesar Chavez Community Center University Village 6 0 c v Iwo T UCR at Bannockburn 0® 52 204 T Magnolia & 14th 0®® Arlington Ave adison st Cali fomia Baptist University ChemawaM.S. Sherman Indian H.S. Arlington Library 0 Tyierst 6 50 RTA and Corona Cruiser honor each other's Day and 30-Day passes at shared stops. Legend I Map not to scale O Time and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information cm= Alternate Routing ® Long-term Detour Routing T La Sierra & Magnolia 0®® T Magnolia & McKinley 0 Corona Cruiser Blue McKinley St, • 'CORONA T 6th&Smith 0 T 6th & Main Corona Cruiser Red 1 3 Corona Cruiser Blue, Red Home Gardens Library Routing and timetables subject to change. Rutas designadas y horarios son sujetos a cambios. 3 Swan Lake MHP, Eastvale, Norco, Corona Transit Center to Belle & 10th Information Center (951)565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Also serving: Norco, Norco Senior Center, Norco City Hall, RCC, North Main Plaza, Corona. No service on the following holidays: New Year's Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Bellegrave Ave - 8 58th St T T Limonite & Hamner 29 Harada Heritage Park 6 EASTVALE Eastvale Gateway Vemola Marketplace 65th St 68th St River Heigh S. a+ Eleanor = g Roosevelt R H.S. Citrus St DMV Post Office O DPS .04. City Hall Norco Senior Center S Norco College 4 T North Main Plaza 3rd St Target Corona Cruiser Blue W Grand & 6th 0© a Z O CC O V �v' Corona Senior Center 2 T T 10th St Norco Library 6th St 5th St 3 «Limonite Ave CC L rr 4th St z Lampton Ln 3rd St 2nd St North Main Plaza Corona 0 Transit Center W. Gran Corona Park - And -Ride Corona Mall 1• r 15 T Main &6th Corona Regional Medical Center Ontario Ave NORCO O Legend I Map not to scale O Time and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information ® Weekdays Only RTA and Corona Cruiser honor each other's Day and 30-Day passes at shared stops. • Corona Transit Center D© 206 216 Corona Cruiser Blue, Red 6th St �e T Belle & 10th Corona Cruiser Blue, Red Corona Transit Center Boarding Diagram I Page 33 8 Lake Elsinore, Wildomar Loop Routes Information Center (951) 565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Routing and timetables subject to change. Rutas designadas y horanos son sujetos a cambios. O, N far Lakeside H.S Ortega Hwy `-;1/4- Also serving: Stater Bros, Albertsons, Lake Elsinore Recreation Center. No service on: New Year's Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Lake Elsinore Outlet Center <� s�o r• o� OS S�aQ �\,gl Lakeside Library Baldwin Blvd 1 9 Albertson P 74 T (200 0 Hai od 0 P �P t LAKE ELSINORE Legend I Map not to scale OTime and/or Transfer Point OTransfer Point and Information 'O¢ T Outlet Center 8 206 P, Senior Center counterclockwise loop only weekdays only akeland Village M.S. C �a G Chase Bank 4,,6 Albertson ao��a Loth Mission Trail Librar d This area served clockwise g beforeWalmart, counterclockwise after Walmart Railroad Canyon Rd Walmart 8 T! gaR' Post office a� us\sk 6 David A grown MS aaeSaS� WILDOMAR Seas • Walmart 8 40 Wildomar Independent #nd Assisted Living T Wildomar Independent and Assisted Living io Routing and timetables subject to change. Rotas designadas y horarios son sujetos a cambios. IO N Big Springs & Watkins to Galleria at Tyler Information (enter (951) 565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Also serving: Downtown Riverside, Poly High, Gage Middle School, Notre Dame High, Calif. School for Deaf, Arlington High. No service on: New Year's Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Riverside Downtown Terminal Boarding Diagram I Page 37 T Rivers'de Downtown Terminal E. 10 ®I®I0 I® 16 I® 29 49 204 208 210 Omnitrans 215 216 SunLine 220 T Brockton Arcade T Iowa & Blaine I®I® 10 Riverside Downtown PoxrTerminal Iss10nno T 7 0 Riverside u; County Administrative Center 0 to 0® Legend I Map not to scale O Time and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information clzm Alternate Routing Galleria at Tyler Mall Boarding Diagram I Page 34 T Gal Ieria at Tyler IO 10 I®I® I®I®I® 216 14 0 ro �T RTA 8 F� y AVe Ads aUnivetsity Ave °e g 1AtiOt Riverside City College T 5 6 Riverside Ce Plaza Brockton Arcade Marcy Library 7 Madison St a 7 John North H.S. 9O9 \T Riverside Sports UCR Complex dt�'so. T County Administration Bldg I®I® ~� cA6g5t rn P't arge 4 �e FBDay P� Calif Sch. for Deaf atre Casa Dame Blanca H.S. Library nzc Arlington Jackson StH.5 Van B, Arlington Library 1 T Galle at Tyl d 2 3 10 Poly H.S. o_. 208 210 Riverside STEM Academy SunLine 220 WB Only Gage AL RIVERSIDE Routing and timetables subject to change. Rutas designadas y horados son sujetos a cambios. Moreno Valley Mall/March ARB Information Center (951)565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Also serving: Sunnymead Middle School, Moreno Valley High School. No service on: New Year's Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Moreno Valley Mall Boarding Diagram Page 35 T Moreno Valley Mall m 16 18 SunLine 220 Moreno Valley Mall •\o0\pt Towngate Blvd MORENO VALLEY • Alessandro & Frederick m March ARB CO Hall Ironwood Ave a Counter -clockwise I Clockwise u Kaiser Medical Offices Sunnymead M.S. Eucalyptus Ave Moreno Valley H.S. Cottonwood Ave \ Alessandro Blvd TI Alessandro & Heacock Cactus Ave a a 0 Legend I Map not to scale OTime and/or Transfer Point OTransfer Point and Information CO Hemlock Ave Post Office Sunnymead Blvd T Heacock & Sunnymead m T Cottonwood & Heacock m ORiverside County Superior Court Meyer Dry 1FK Dr Routing and timetables subject to change. Rutas designadas y horarios son sujetos a cambios. Q\e O La Cadena & Stephens to Merced & Magnolia Information Center (951)565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Also serving: Galleria at Tyler, DMY Downtown Terminal, Salvation Army. No service on: New Year's Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. RIVERSIDE Riverside Downtown Terminal Boarding Diagram I Page 37 T Rivers'de Downtown Terminal l0 10 ®®Im ® 16 El EiEl 204 208 210 Omnitrans 215 • Arlington & Streeter T Van Buren & California ®I®I® 4 CASA Riverside County d e Farm Rd La Sierra P° University 0. S1/4- 2W Hale Ave Tye �f 2E 1 County Mental Health • Kaiser Hospital CD r 3 T T Juvenile Hall 29 49 216 SunLine 220 Y Garner Rd v'� CC Alamo St Ruth Lewis Community Center/Reid Park \enter St d Russell St 1 Riverside Downtown g Terminal Fox Theater • County Administration I®I® 10 208 I) 8 Ail a o.. Bldg g c Riverside Hall otlustke 14th St Riverside City College» Jurupa Ave SunLine 220 • Arlington Ave P°e T 0 Salvation Army 210 5 �Q fag Janet Goeske Ctr. ears Hardman Center DMu Riverside Plaza T Galleria at Tyler 1 10 12 13 14 15 21 27 216 G a yler T Merced & Magnolia =MEI 6 «Mission Inn Ave Univ. Ave Riverside County Administrative o Center w E 7 Z F�Id6 0,x f Magnolia & Elizabeth 0®®m® 0 20 Galleria at Tyler Mall Boarding Diagram I Page 34 Legend I Map not to scale OTime and/or Transfer Point OTransfer Point and Information as Alternate Routing 13 Routing and timetables subjectto change. Rutas designadas y hormios son sujetos a cambios. IO N Hunter Park Metrolink Station, Galleria at Tyler - Riverside Information Center (951) 565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Also serving: Galleria at Tyler, DPSS (Tyler office), Riverside Airport, RCC, RTA Headquarters. No service on: New Year's Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Service date to be announced T Hunter Park Metrolink Station T Chicago & University 0® 14 16 Westbound T County Administration Bldg 10 Ell 208 SunLine 220 R'verside Downtown Terminal T Rivers'de Downtown Terminal Riverside Downtown Terminal Boarding Diagram I Page 31 0 10 ®® El16 El El 204 208 210 Omnitrans 215 29 14 49 216 SunLine 220 T 14th & Magnolia RIVERSIDE • Arlington & Monroe 111 15 T Colorado & Van Buren ®® Norte VistaH.S. fSO°e < ,Fv • • • • T Arlington & Tyler T 2 Wells M.S. if aao 210 L, ••• ,SsaS� •. . SS�OJ\JJ r • rn 1� Riverside Community Hospital Central M.S. • 50 Riverside Pt�oe Airport T 0 DPSS A'PLi r •-o° Galleria 4.a°s at Tyler 0 to7.9 Sierra M.S. a� Pie 3 Riversid City Hall r4 To��051. Riverside County Administrative Center Riverside City College Riverside Plaza t METROLINK Hunter Park MetrolinkStatio SQ`.... SPA¢ c° Eastbound John North H.S. Post g. office ry 90 �� T 6 Libra \st Stratton Community Center T Iowa & Spruce ®0 ®® Legend I Map not to scale OTime and/or Transfer Point OTransfer Point and Information ® Alternate Routing Galleria at Tyler Mall Boarding Diagram I Page 34 T Galleria at Tyler En 10 ®®® m 216 14 Routing and timetables subjectto change. Rutas designadas y horarios son sujetos a cambios. O Riverside Downtown Terminal Boarding Diagram I Page 37 Galleria at Tyler to Riverside Downtown Terminal to Loma Linda VA Hospital Information Center (951) 565.5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Also serving: Galleria at Tyler, Riverside Auto Center, Calif. School for the Deaf, Riverside Medical Clinic, ROE. No service on: New Year's Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. RTA does not serve Michigan Ave., Omnitrans Route 325 does. COLTON PX �\�o• (cuter s 5Pe `o�e�v • • • . T Riverside Downtown Terminal 10 10 Mifflin I® 16 I® 204 208 210 Omnitrans 215 T Brockton Arcade 29 I® 49 216 SunLine 220 IO 10 14 I® Galleria at Tyler Mall Boarding Diagram I Page 34 T Galleria at Tyler 0 10 ®®m ®®® 216 Galleria : at Tyler : T 1 r� sr c�P as �c Riverside Downtown Terminal • 4 0 m 1)3 Riverside Community Hospital Riverside Plaza K-Mar R L T Loma Linda VA Hospital 14 6• Omnitrans 2,19, 325, SBX Loma Linda University Qs00 e• '� ll oesd VA 6a�Hospital LOMA L I N D A.••• Loma Linda • V*\v University Hospital • R GRAND TERRACE HIGHGROVE • Michigan & Center 3t00\6'. 5T University \)01etSCyVillage a Chaver Community Center California School Riverse for the Deaf Medic, &ere. Madison St 2 14 Omnitrans 325 T Iowa & Blaine Im 10 T University & Lemon 1 10 14 16 204 208 210 El SunLine 220 RIVERSIDE Legend I Map not to scale OTime and/or Transfer Point OTransfer Point and Information 15 Riverside Downtown Terminal to Merced & Magnolia Information Center (951) 565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Routing and timetables subject to change. Rutas designadas y horarios son sujetos a cambios. IO N Also serving: Hardman Center, Riverside Airport, Metrolink, La Sierra, Cal. Paramedical College. No service on: New Year's Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Fox Theo ro• 0000 Mt T Riverside Downtown Terminal 15 16 22 29 49 204 208 210 212 216 Omnitrans215 SunLine220 Riverside Downtown Terminal Boarding Diagram I Page 37 T 14th & Magnolia 0®® 50 Legend I Map not to scale O Time and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information or• Alternate Routing 5 La Sierra University T Arlington & Van Buren ,6s093N0 P� Loma Vista M.S. La Sierra • Senior Center. 4 LA SIERRA T Norte Vista H.S. .44 f T La Sierra & Hole ®® �d La Sierra -91. H.S. P Ilb La Sierra & Magnolia 0®® p7P�rest„ 1 r D T Riverside Downtown Terminal I Brockton Arcade 0 10 m® e City Hall s \Ais\ aide in inanity Hospital Central M.S. RIVERSIDE G 7 G Riverside o Airport 6 T T K-Mart T Arlington & Monroe Hole Ave �c �a •0e Kaiser Hospital �Q `aP 2 T • 3 T TPf 2. �▪ P c Sears Pi5�o9�0�PVe Galleria at Tyler Q La Sierra Metrolink Station Hillcrest C) H.S. MEIROLINK Arizona M.S. 7 T Marcy Library SJae Riverside City College 9 Riverside Plaza T 8 Arlington go Square 4J • 9,7 • 0s • 4>0./ . �P j2 T Arlington & Streeter ®® Po, Gal feria at Tyler Mall Boarding Diagram I Page 34 T Galleea at Tyler io ®®® m 216 T La Sierra Metrolink Station 111 OCTA 794 76 Riverside Downtown Terminal oreno Valley Mall Information Center (951) 565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Routing and timetables subject to change. Rutas designadas y horarios son sujetos a cambios. O T University & Lemon Ell 10 204 m 208 Also serving: Downtown, UCR, Canyon Crest Towne Center, Canyon Springs Plaza. No service on: New Year's Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. 16 MORENO VALLEY S 210 SunLine 220 UCR Canyon Crest Dr nt F Canyon Springs Plaza 0 D�Q Canyon Crest Towne Center 3 University Village Lemon' Riverside Downtown Fox Theater Terminal 4 Fairmount Blvd T ALL T Cesar Chavez Community Center Vine St Market St Moreno • Valley Mall 4 T Heritage Way Day St Target �o cos Moreno Valley Mall Boarding Diagram I Page 35 T Moreno Valley Mall m 16 18 19 26 208 210 SunLine 220 fip RIVERSIDE Tip UCR at Campus Dr T Riverside - Downtown Metrolink Station nL�«1n METROLINK 16 T Riverside - DowntownMetrolinkStation 0 16 208 210 SunLine 220 Amtrak T Rivers'de Downtown Te minal Legend I Map not to scale iO Time and/or Transfer Point OTransfer Point and Information ® Alternate Routing 0 iD ®® ® 16 El 204 208 210 Omnitrans 215 29 Eill 14 49 216 SunLine 220 Riverside Downtown Terminal Boarding Diagram I Page 31 Routing and timetables subject to change. Rutas designadas y horarios son sujetos a cambios. Sunnymead Ranch to Moreno Valley College Information Center (951)565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Also serving: Moreno Valley Mall/Hometown Buffet, Canyon Springs High School, Sunnymead Ranch, Moreno Valley High School, Vista Del Lago High School, Moreno Valley College. No service on: New Year's Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. T Moreno Valley Mall m 16 18 SunLine 220 Moreno Valley Mall d Town Moreno Valley Mall Boarding Diagram I Page 35 Sunnymead Ranch Pkwy Vista Heights M.S. Canyon Springs H.S. <<CenterpointDr Moreno Valley ate Ave H.S. Cottonwood Ave T Cottonwood & Frederick m 18 ro 60 T Cottonwood & Heacock m 18 Lin NBONIY )) (C MORENO VALLEY Legend I Map not to scale O Time and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information ® Northbound Only Manzanita Ave CO O T Perris & Alessandro Cottonwood Ave • Badger Springs M.S. 18 19 20 Vista w 7 —Del Lago H.S. 1FK Dr = s Gentian Ave Iris Ave » Cahuilla» Vista Verde M.S. Moreno Valley College 19 Routing and timetables subjectto change. Rutas designadas y horarios son sujetos a cambios. Moreno Valley Mall Moreno Valley Mall to Perris Station sit Center - Trumble Rd InformationCenter (951)565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Also serving: March Mountain High School, Moreno Valley College, Perris, Perris High School. No service on: New Year's Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Centerpoint Dr ■ T Moreno Valley Mall m 16 18 SunLine 220 Moreno Valley Mall Boarding Diagram I Page 35 Sunnymead Blvd T Sunnymead & Heacock m March Mountain H.S. MORENO Alessandro Blvd VALLEY T Perris & Ramona Expwy 19 41 T Ross/Lowe's/Starcrest m 19 Legend I Map not to scale OTime and/or Transfer Point OTransfer Point and Information a Alternate Routing Val Ver 11.5. �2 5.ilorgan Sty Ross/Lowe's/ Starcrest Badger Springs m M.S. c rL Perris Valley Spectrum Walmart Orange Ave Perris 10 Theater \OI T Perris & Alessandro 18 19 20 T Moreno Valley College 18 19 20 41 Iris Ave a Krameria Ave Moreno Valley College Penis Fairgrounds A Ramona Expy T Valley Plaza Hospital 19 30 Kindred Hospital Riverside Nuevo Rd a Perris O° H.S. PERRIS Perris City Hall E San Jacinto Ave T Perris Station Transit Center 19 ElE1 30 El 208 Perris Station Transit Center Boarding Diagram I Page 36 V Perris Station Transit Center NETROLINK Jarvis St W 4th St Trumble Rd at Routing and timetables subject to change. Rutas designadas y horarios son sujetos a (whim. Magnolia Center, Metrolink, RUMC, aiser Permanente, MoVal College Information Center (951) 565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com No service on: New Year's Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. f Riverside University Medical Center ®m T Perris & Alessandro T Central & Victoria Victoria Ave Magnolia Ave» a Brockton Ave Poly H.S. Nason St> Moreno Valley School District Moreno . , Valley Library Post Offire Mission Grove Pkwy P�eSSa • Moreno Beach Dr m 0 RUMC Lasselle St Peninsula Ct»O Perris Blvd Indian St a aKaiser Permanente Hospital ao Moreno Valley College m 18 19 20 •. Moreno %Hey College Kitching St A v T Alessandro & Frederick lia 20 Y MORENO Frederick St VALLEY Moreno Valley Service date to be announced CityHallDay St T MVMF Metrolink Station METROLINK =0 Moreno Valley March Field Metrolink Station Mission Grove Plaza Trautwein Rd RIVERSIDE • Magnolia & Elizabeth ®m Mission Grove at Social Security T Mission Grove at Social Security Legend I Map not to scale OTime and/or Transfer Point OTransfer Point and Information ® Alternate routing zi Galleria at Tyler to Country Village Information Center (951)565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransitcom Routing and timetables subjectto change. Rutas designadas y horarios son sujetos a cambios. fa Also serving: Glen Avon Library. No service on: New Year's Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Marlay A ri Philadelphia Ave Country Village 5 T T Mulberry & Marlay Omnitrans 82 �-4= o• RP J J U R U PA San SevaineWy VALLEY FONTANA SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY T Country Village 49 204 RIVERSIDE COUNTY Ben Nevis Blvd Mission Blvd GLEN AVON Glen Avon Library-67 lurupa Valley H.S. Mira Loma Jurupa Rd MS. �•►� Pedley Metrolink ¢ METR_OLINK Station 0 T 4 Limonite Ave T Etiwanda & Limonite Legend I Map not to scale O Time and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information 29 urt«u 3s 3N Riverside County Animal Control Arlington Ave 1I Arlington &Van Buren EMIR RIVERSIDE Galleria at Tyler 10 ® EMIR 216 Galleria atTyle Mall Boarding Diagram I Page 34 14 •2 Walmart Galleria at Tyler d� PEDLEY :rLONG-TERM DETOUR Clay St AT California &Van Buren EMIR • A.5 . • a• T Nk1043\aP�e rT 1 Arlington Library zz Routing and timetables subject to change. Rutas designadas y horarios son sujetos a cambios. Riverside Downtown Terminal Mission In a 110 it n niv. Av r, wc. c Riverside 6; c x City Hall c 3 O Riverside Downtown Terminal to Lake Elsinore Outlet Center Information Center (951) 565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Also serving: Lake Elsinore, Mead Valley, Woodcrest, & Kmart. No service on: New Year's Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. T Riverside Downtown Terminal 9 Post Office 15 16 22 204 208 210 29 49 212 216 Omnitrans215 SunLine220 Riverside Downtown Terminal Boarding Diagram' Page 31 Alessandro Blvd o6*ems%• lP Mission Grove Plaza r dG "P. Social Security �..0‘ Office a Van Buren» 0 Luther c King a H.S. Markham St �u I5 Hill H.S. WOODCREST T Outlet Center Lake .• Elsinore Outlet Cente Nichols Rd '15 7 T Mariposa Ave a� 6 g. Clark & Cajalco 41 T 8 Legend I Map not to scale 0 Time and/or Transfer Point OTransfer Point and Information RIVERSIDE • Mission Grove at Social Security 20 26 T Van Buren&Trautwein ®® a Oleander Ave T MEAD VALLEY LAKE ELSINORE Central Ave 74 Meadowbrook Ave 2 a a m 5 G fas Pk- 1,1 Cajalco Rd Mead Palley Library Rider St 0 d 74 PERRIS • Perris Station Transit Center ETEI ®m 19 208 San Jacinto Ave Ellis Ave 4 4a) 30 74 Penis City Hall • . Senior • Center T Rd ,. 3 4th St METROLINK Perris Station Transit Center Perris Station Transit Center Boarding Diagram I Page 36 23 Routing and timetables subject to change. Rotas designadas y horados son sujetos a cambios. Temecula -Murrieta -Wildomar Information Center (95'0 565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Also serving: Inland Valley Medical Center, Rancho Springs Medical Center, Chaparral High School, County Center Drive. No service on: New Year's Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. S. Pasadena Wildomar Independent 10 i& Assisted Living Catt• � c a • Wildomar Independent & Assisted Living Wildomar City Hall C Inland Valley Medical Center J� c �c 95 9 8 23 yA,O N 9dytttme WILDOMAR 15 Murrieta Valley �a�k\ny HS w •6 ��tekvai , • urneta ds Librar �• Murrieta ?sit, City Hall °O &Senior ,Center ;7 T Walmart 202 206 JO Ka\mta et5t 9 MURRIETA Clinton Keith Rd a oaQ Skrnew Ridge Amanda Apts a Ca1if.0aksRd i7�O' P` ate •\ 9 Murrieta o�Q HotSprings Rd 5 �Walmart P Pts o� 9�P T Equity &Ynez I®Im® 79 T 4 Rancho Springs Medical Center 61 4, County Center ® 24 i® 61 79 O, N • Hancock & Los Alamos Ell 61 Vista Murrie H.S. \O" Post Office Los Alamos Rd 3 0 T Murrieta• K-o,0 Town center P \ems • �J T Los Alamos & Whitewood Legend I Map not to scale O Time and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information ® Alternate Routing 208 �c Grace Mellman Community Libra a 'pa '9'r9a I /Vico/asR Chaparral H.S. Winchester Rd Promenade � Mall A 3 Q TEMECULA 79 2 Rancho Temecula Town Center 24 Routing and timetables subjectto change. Rutas designadas y horarios son sujetos a cambios. County Center to Pechanga Resort/Temecula Valley Hospital Information Center (951) 565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Also serving: County Center Drive, Temecula Schools, Temecula Stage Stop & Old Town. No service on: New Year's Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. � 07 �Qa Grace Mellman C unity L ry w��chesiet Rd . T County Center ® 24 El 61 Palm Plaza 15 79 T Temecula Stage Stop m 79 Temecula Stage Stop 3 4 Old Town 6th Main St 1st T Riverside County Assessor �e C° Promenade -4 Mall oo- Solana Wy Tower Plaza PastOTbce St lay 79 T Equity Dr&YnezRd 121 79 24 MEI 61 Chaparral HS TEMECULA �t Temecula E.S. Town Ctc Target Rancho California Rd Rancho Vista Legend I Map not to scale 0 Time and/or Transfer Point OTransfer Point and Information m Alternate Routing Margarita M.S. Palomr. Temecula Library Temecula Valley Hospital AP r� d9dA� 6 a Oa Rd DePortola 2 Temecula Pkwy 0 ' e001 Walmart Vail Ranch Pkwy Pechanga Resort d �a Os) Birdsall Sorts Park 0' Red Hawk Pkwy «Peppercorn Dr ovot\RI Great Oak H.S. 26 Moreno Valley Metrolink Station to Orange Terrace and Moreno Valley Mall Information Center (951)565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Routing and timetables subject to change. Rutas designadas y horados son sujetos a cambios. O Also serving: Mission Grove Plaza. No service on: New Year's Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. m S 0 e RIVERSIDE Alessandro Blvd Benjamin Franklin Flementary School WOODCREST MORENO VALLEY Ironwood Ave 4.1r1b Walmarf Moreno Town Cir Supercen o`a�\ CamPUS Valley Mall �°�e�.tee Pkwy Eucalyptus Ave METROLINK Moreno Valley Metrolink Station P°Q Routing and timetables subject to change. Rutas designadas y horarios son sujetos a cambios. O , Galleria at Tyler to Hemet Valley Mall and Florida & Lincoln Information Center (951)565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Also serving: Riverside National Cemetery, Perris High, &Valle Vista. No service on: New Year's Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. T Cherry Hills & Bradley m 40 61 m Galleria at Tyler Mall Boarding Diagram I Page 34 T Galleria at Tyler io ®®® m 216 RIVERSIDE California Citrus State Historic Park WOODCREST Wood Rd MLK High T Perris Station Transit Center 19 208 ®m Ein Perris Station Transit Center Boarding Diagram I Page 36 SUN SunLibrary CityC I T Y �Sun•City Blvd im » E3 CT\J 4^ " VaBradley Rda Sherman Rda » F )) Heritage H.S. Target Hemet Valley Mall -o Hemet City Hall' 3 .t n, Per is Station Transit Center GstN 30 74 T 5 7W T 6 Riverside e National g Cemetery m Perris Blvd Perris H.S. ROMOLAND Leon Rd irb St 2s i' T 2NJ' Gilmore St �o Lyon Ave I o' s" Q� %ah` oti« Lincoln Ave «Grant Ave Valle Vista library H o> d¢ R Hemet Valley Mall ®®®® 74 79 ®® HEMET VALLE VISTA T Galleria at Tyler Van Buren Blvd 91 Tyler St 8 Van Buren Drive -In Theater Washington St • Van Buren & Trautwein El El «Trautwein Rd = o�� Orange ie lace Community Center T 9 T Orange Terrace &Van Buren 26 March Field Air Museum PERRIS Legend I Map not to scale O Time and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information m Alternate Routing when school is in session 29 Riverside Downtown Terminal to Hamner & Limonite Information Center (951)565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Routing and timetables subject to change. Rutas designadas y horados son sujetos a cambios. O� T 65th & Pats Ranch T Limonite & Archer Also serving: Belltown, Downtown Rubidoux, Rubidoux Academy, De Anza Plaza. No service on: New Year's Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Hamner Ave Eastvale Gateway nch Rd Marketplace Etiwanda Ave Archer St, lurupa 14 Cinemas DeAnzaPlaza JURUPA VALLEY Legend I Map not to scale OTime and/or Transfer Point OTransfer Point and Information orm Alternate Routing RIVERSIDE Riverside Downtown Terminal Fairmount Fox Park Theater Mark Riverside Downtown Terminal Boarding Diagram I Page 31 T Limonite & Hamner r Etiwanda & Limonite Collins St METROLINK Pedley Rd Pedley Metrolink Station Camino Real pdq Post Office T Riverside Downtown Terminal 15 16 22 29 49 204 208 210 212 216 Omnitrans215 SunLine220 EASTVALE MIRA LOMA PEDLEY Rubidoux N.S. RUBIDOUX T Mission & Rubidoux 30 Perris - Weston & Strohm, Barrett & Orange Information Center (951)565-5002 Web site Routing and timetables subject to change. Rutas designadas y horarios son sujetos a cambios. _o Weston R E; 0 n a San Jacinto Ave Also serving: Perris High School, Civic Center, Post Office, Library. No service on: New Year's Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Ramona Expy Perris Station Transit (enter Boarding Diagram I Page 36 T Perris Station Transit Center I.EIRONNN Perris Station I Transit Center 4th St v Placentia Ave a, mCC Walmart Nuevo Rd Perris Senior Center Perris City Hall EB/WB Library WB 7th St 11th St • Perris Blvd & Case Rd / 11th St Legend Map not to scale O Time and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information T Perris Blvd & Nuevo EB co 4th St 96e EB/WB PERRIS s Ellis Ave Post Office ii a 31 Beaumont/Banning to San Jacinto & Hemet Valley Mall Information Center (951) 565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Routing and timetables subject to change. Rutas designadas y horarios son sujetos a cambios. O, N Also serving: Walmart, Kmart, Riverside County Administration Complex, Mt. San Jacinto Community College. No service on: New Year's Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. BEAUMONT/ BANNING Legend I Map not to scale 4 Time and/or Transfer Point OTransfer Point and Information T Hemet Valley Mall m®®®m m 79 Workforce Hemet • Frina/°4v Valle e Mall' Ven/oAve T H 0 D Hemet Des, Qty Hall Hemet "lath ve a fi Unified h od Arariaq emgke District �a ' Q 2 eciagke a entrat i Maybe?YAve T 3 79 3 Beaumont Ave 9 Po, 4 Walmart ®® PassTransit 210 SunLine 220 St i �o 7 Sun Lakes Blvd. Super Q Walmart dy r �Q C a z� • Soo PassTransit T Mt. San Jacinto College ®®m®® T Mt. San Jacinto College 4044fk h San Jacinto py H.S. a o,o SAN JACINTO od esp/anode"Ve Riverside County Courthouse o c • Buena Vista & Devonshire ®® HEMET 41111 5 :SBiya Sun Lakes Village 32 Routing and timetables subject to change. Rutas designadas y horarios son sujetos a cambios. O Hemet Valley Mall to Mount San Jacinto College Information Center (951)565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Also serving: Hemet Hospital. No service on: New Year's Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. gd-,c7/) a T Esplanade & San Jacinto ®m 74 Y T Hemet Valley Mall ®®®® 74 79 ®® E Sagecrest Dr San Jacinto H.S. Monte San Jacinto �P9�ista M.S. CityHall 7 Main St North d Mountain San Jacinto Main St M.S. Senior Center ¢ 7th St T T Mt. San Jacinto College ®®m®® Mt. San Jacinto College Ramona Expy Devonshire Ave Hemet • Valley Mall/Sears Regal Cinemas Hemet HEMET 0 Hemet Unified School District Mayberry Ave Stetson 0 Menlo Ave Hemet DPSS Valley Medical Center Hemet City Hall Acacia Acacia Ave M.S. Central Thornton Ave p _ EsrlanadeAve 3 Commonwealth Ave Regal San Jacinto Metro 12 Super Warman vans S S A N JACINTO T San Jacinto & Latham ®® Latham Ave Florida Ave Legend I Map not to scale O Time and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information ® Alternate Routing Routing and timetables subject to change. Rutas designadas y horarios son sujetos a cambios. 1® Hemet - Sanderson to East Hemet Information Center (951) 565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Also serving: Hemet Valley Mall, Hemet mobile home parks. No service on weekends or on the following holidays: New Year's Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. • Florida & Stanford ®® T Florida &San Jacinto ®®® *San Jacinto & Oakland San Jacinto St DPSS Buena Vista St» — 0 Simpson Senior Center Lyon Ave State St Kirby St Hemet Valley Sanderson Ave Mall T Hemet Valley Mall 74 79 ®® ro Hemet Valley Medical Center Stanford St TIDartmouth M.S. Dartmouth St Columbia St San Jacinto St EAST HEMET State St Gilbert St a HEMET LL Gilmore St Legend I Map not to scale OTime and/or Transfer Point OTransfer Point and Information •Sorial LL .'Security Office Target 0 S Lyon Ave W Johnston a Sanderson Ave Lyon Ave T Sanderson & Thornton 0 0 Cawston Ave a 0 Super Walmai c 35 Routing and timetables subject to change. Rutas designadas y horarios son sujetos a cambios. /O N Beaumont/Banning to Moreno Valley Mall Information Center (951) 565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Also serving: Walmart, Kmart, City Hall, Riverside University Medical Center. No service on weekends or on the following holidays: New Year's Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Moreno Valley Mall BEAUMONT/ BANNING 4%. °a I s. TBeaumont Walmart o� 9s • Sun Lakes at Village PassTransit PassTransit 210 SunLine 220 s A °�P i`a oP Q� 0 ae 1 T Moreno Valley Mall 11 16 18 19 26 35 208 210 SunLine 220 Super Target Stoneridge 4.x Towne Centre 60 (5, Moreno Valley Mall Boarding Diagram I Page 35 2 T Valley View HS Senior Center 4 r Senior Center 19 35 yo Of Super Walmai 60 Auto Mall Super Walmart S ti 0 9 Ok. S� 5 T VS5 a SpO� Sun Lakes Village T Riverside University Medical Center ®0 20 3 T RUMC MORENO VALLEY Legend I Map not to scale 4 Time and/or Transfer Point OTransfer Point and Information 40 Lake Elsinore to Sun City la Information Center (951) 565-5002 Web site www Riv. Tr. n Routing and timetables subject to change. Rutas designadas y horarios son sujetos a cambios. 4 O Also serving: Lake Elsinore, Quail Valley, Canyon Lake, Sun City. No service on Weekends or on the following holidays: New Year's Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. T Cherry Hills & Bradley El 40 61 7 SUN = CITY v StaterNons Center Quail Valley Fire Station Menifee 0tyHall Bradley Rd Evans Rd v ac Kay Ceniceros c Senior Center 0- Goetz Rd QUAIL VALLEY CC MENIFEE «Murrieta Rd Legend I Map not to scale OTime and/or Transfer Point OTransfer Point and Information Railroad Canyon Rd CANYON Main LAKE Gate C„p, 2 ctyHa, ■ rare° V LAKE ELSINORE e5v„ C,taQ 0 E 0 Walmart 41 Mead Valley Community Center to Moreno Valley College and RUMC Information Center (951) 565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Routing and timetables subject to change. Rutas designadas y horarios son sujetos a cambios. O Also serving: Rancho Verde High School, RCC Mo Val, Val Verde H.S. No service on the following holidays: New Year's Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. MEAD VALLEY Oakwood St Rider St 1 T Mead Valley Community Center • Cajalco & Clark 41 CO c `aka Cajalco Rd. I ' k• Riverside University Medical Center 20 41 MORENO VALLEY Moreno Valley College 18 19 20 41 T Perris & Ramona Expy 19 41 Ross/Lowe's/ Ramona Starcrest Expy Val Verde H.S. diam. StnrrrestQ 9� 2 - T Morgan St • Ross T Ross/Lowe's/Starcrest 19 41 CO • RUMC KR Dr Gentian Ave 7 6 Cactus Ave Vlsto oei Ingo H.S T 3 Iris Ave ti Krameria Ave v Via De Anza Rider St 4 5 Moreno Valley College Rancho Verde H.S. PERRIS Legend I Map not to scale OTime and/or Transfer Point 0 Transfer Point and Information Routing and timetables subject to drange. Rutas designadas y horarios son sujetos a cambios. I ) San Jacinto - Hemet Information Center (951)565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Also serving: San Jacinto, Soboba Springs MHE, Caravana ML, San Jacinto TP, Tradewinds ML, Grandview MHP, Las Casitas MHP, El Rancho MHE, Valley Hi MHP. No service on Sundays or the following holidays: New Year's Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Legend I Map not to scale O Time and/or Transfer Point OTransfer Point and Information S A N so, JACINTO 2E 2W S¢' Ramona Expy 5� '17 Pib P 4 *711% 64, San Jacinto City Hall 4 • • r San Jacinto Community 51/4. Center �tr 'rydfP'ri 1r5� Riverside County A Child Support Services 9iP �04, Soboba Rd Soboba Casino 6 ©soboba Springs Nobile Home Estates T San Jacinto & Esplanade ®m T 74 f Stater Bros P 3 s iiiii,4 S 10 0� Walmart dt0 4, .4iEXCEED PJ¢ 4I c ‘ HEMET /P ,9y'P P Hemet Valley Mall 41) D r 74 T Hemet Valley Mall ®®®® 74 79 Routing and timetables subject to change. Rutas designadas y horarios son sujetos a cambios. \O 0 111 a CC CC Riverside Downtown Terminal to Country Village Information Center (951)565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Also serving: Rubidoux, Jurupa Valley, Glen Avon. No service on: New Year's Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. T Rivers de Downtown Terminal 0 10 ®®m ® 16 El 29 49 204 208 210 Omnitrans 215 216 Sunlme220 Riverside Downtown Terminal Boarding Diagram I Page 37 RUBIDOUX valley wy T Mulberry & Marlay ® 49 afas>la Country Villa T �V 1 e Rd Country Cabemet Drr Village 3 •55� DPSS RIVERSIDE Riverside Downtown Terminal Fox. Entenainmenr Plaz Pie 5 o��(\o @,¢ GIQ�P y� �a 4 T Eddie • Smith ' Louis Senior Robidoux Center Library J� eta *Mission & Rubidoux 29 49 The Cove Qpd JURUPA VALLEY Waterpark 9G. Camino Real Glen Avon Patriot Heritage Park N.S. a o PYtWtest �h 2 COUNTRY VILLAGE PeoveyRd Felsparst GLEN AVON Legend l Map not to scale O Time and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information Routing and timetables subject to Mange. Rutas designadas y horarios son sujetos a cambios. IO N JuryTroIIe Information Center (951) 565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Also serving: Jury Remote Parking to 12th & Main, Riverside County Courthouse. Runs Monday — Thursday Only. No service on the following holidays and court closure days: New Year's Day, MLK Day, Lincoln's Birthday, President's Day, Washington's Birthdays, Cesar Chavez Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Columbus Day, Veterans Day, Thanksgiving Day, Christmas Day. RIVERSIDE T Market &14th 0®® 50 Eden Lutheran Church First United Methodist Church of Riverside m 11th St. Riverside City Hall 10th St. fa T 14th St Riverside Community Hospital Calvary Presbyterian Church Parking Lot (nearest stop 14th & v Magnolia) Terracina Dr Central M.S. Ramona Dr T T n Riverside Family Law Courthouse Riverside County Court House County ,a Administrative V Riverside Center Hall oflustke 12th St T 14th & Magnolia 0®® Riverside Sports Clinic 50 Legend I Map not to scale OTime and/or Transfer Point OTransfer Point and Information O Stop Riverside City College T Magnolia & Terracina 0®® 50 51 Crest Cruiser UCR - Canyon Crest Towne Centre Information Center (951)565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Routing and timetables subject to change. Rmas designadas y horarios son sujetos a cambios. O Andulka Park No service on weekends or the following holidays: New Year's Day, MLK Day, Presidents Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Route operates on UCR academic days only. Will not operate on January 18, February 15 and March 21-25. Riverside County Workforce Center K-Mart Stater Brothers T University Village& Village Towers Apts Om 16 ®® T Rite -Aid Library a .V Citibank Food 4 Less Bank of Amerka Post Office /AA, VassarSt T UCR Lot30 16 210 T A w`e$t T Iowa &Blaine 10 m® Village Towers 1 Apartments University Village 1 Bnivenity\. T UCR at Bannockburn ME®® Eil MB 204 208 SunLine 220 RIVERSIDE Central & Chicago ®® Ce4tralq c Legend I Map not to scale O Time and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information Q Stop 6 2 Riverside Sports Complex Blal4PSf Bannockburn Village Lot Crest Dr • 3 • 0 T 4 4 Ralph's Allie'sHallmark Post Office Rite -Aid 5 M(KB/p Mopte vistaD Via Pueblo n c c 60 46. O� 0 c CS T Canyon Crest & Central T 16 Canyon Crest Towne Centre 52 Hunter Park Metrolink Station to UCR Information Center (951)565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Routing and timetables subject to change. Rutas designadas y horados son sujetos a cambios. O Also serving: University Village Towers, University Plaza Apartments, Riverside Sports Center. No service on: New Year's Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Hunter Park METROLINK Metrolink Station Marlborough Ave n Riverside City College Culinary Academy Spruce St « University Heights Middle School Massachusetts Ave Blaine St n Linden St University Village Towers Regency Theatres University Ave (( Riverside Sports Center University Plaza Apartments v 55 Routing and timetables subject to change. Rutas designadas y horarios son sujetos a cambios. O Promenade Mall - Harveston EVERYONE RIDES REE Also serving: Chaparral High School, Ysabel Barnett Elementary School, Abbott, Promenade Mall, Harveston and County Center. No service on: New Year's Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. TEMECULA awe I' Equity Dr&YnezRd ® 24 in El 79 61 T County Center ® 24 vsenel Qt Barnett �a��e�tioo � a, HARVEST(, Rustic Glen Dr `-§r «Township Rd A HdrtrpstOn CnHsral P� �Ij Equity > (.erte "C 61 79 \west° Grace Mellman Community Library Extended Stay America rQS The Promenade ` at Temecula 'Pct '0' Palm Plaza Shopping Center Costco Ove:°°c Legend I Map not to scale QQ Stop Q Transfer Point and Information Abbot Rest Laboratories Western IN' Rancho Temecula Town Center we Rd I Promenade Mall Parking Structure ® 79 202 206 208 MEI Overland Dr M tot 1 p wy 9d,. - o- 61 South Perris Metrolink Station, Sun City - Menifee - Murrieta - Temecula Information Center (951) 565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Routing and timetables subject to change. Rutas designadas y horarios son sujetos a cambios. Also serving: Sun City Center, Loma Linda Medical Building. No service on Sundays or on the following holidays: New Year's Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. METROnNK Service date to be announced • T South Perris Metrolink Station Im 61 SUN CITY T Cherry Hills & Bradley m 40 61 m T — McCall Blvd '.2 JP 6 5 7 . Sun City Libra rrs ▪ c 70 a a Encanto Dr Menifee City Hall Newport Rd La Piedra Rd Countryside La Piedra RdMarkerplace T MSK Menifee m Legend I Map not to scale O Time and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information an= Alternate Routing 61 Mapleton St» Keller Rd Target Linnel Ln 3 4 MSK Menifee Scott Rd A�� Ne, i a Gladiolus Ave 8 Loma Linda e'Re University Medical Center F linton Keith Rd g W Vista Mu H.S. aka O o0 ,5 MURRIETA®Aks. eS�a T Equity &Ynez 24 61 79 2 T Beta Rancho Springs Medical Center Qua �pS O Domenigoni Pkwy MENIFEE T Los Alamos & Hancock Murrieta Hot Springs Rd GP TEMECULA 61 e 9y d �a Coaaty 't T r Murrieta Hot Springs Rd 3 Temecula Promenade Mall T County Center EIMER 61 79 74 San Jacinto - Hemet - Sun City - Perris Information Center (951) 565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Routing and timetables subject to change. Rutas designadas y horarios son sujetos a cambios. Mt. San Jacinto College 7 T San lariat H. H.S. State St Also serving: Hemet Valley Mall, South Perris Metrolink Station. No service on Sundays or on the following holidays: New Year's Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. San Jacinto Ave a San ° .4JJacinto ek Senior Center Q�F Super Walmar T DPSS SAN JACINTO Mt. San Jacinto College I®111111I®I® T San Jacinto & Esplanade I® 42 m HEMET Lyon Ave a e Westbound A Eastbound only ly Gilmore St d 6 T Legend I Map not to scale O Time and/or Transfer Point OTransfer Point and Information cm= Alternate Routing Service date to be announced T South Perris Metrolink Station 61 74 T hE1ROnNK • a Perris Blvd =o C St Perris Station Transit Center 1 r 2 0 Kirby T Hemet Valley Mall I®I®111111 IZ1 III 79 I®I® ION Hemet Valley Mall T Sanderson & Thornton ®m St Sanderson Ave • «+ Super '• West Valley Weimar T H.S. = Warren Rd WINCHESTERE E 79 v 3 2 T MSK Menifee Winchester Rd ea_ P9 ' oA •L Mt. San Jacinto •3 College/ Menifee MENIFEE Menifee Rd» Menifee Community Menifee Valley Center and Park Medical Center a ., 0 Case «Goetz w PERRIS T 5 Post Office T Simpson & Winchester 74 79 m Sun City Library 3 Murrieta Rd T Perris Station Transit Center 19 208 ®® Perris Station Transit Center Boarding Diagram I Page 36 30 74 Sun City Blvd SUN CITY T Antelope Rd » Bradley Rd 61 74 T 4 Menifee Countryside Marketplace • Cherry Hills & Bradley m 40 61 74 County Center T 79 Hemet -Winchester -Temecula Information Center (951)565-5002 Web site www.RiversideTransit.com Routing and timetables subject to change. Rutas designadas y horarios son sujetos a cambios. O Also serving: Hemet Valley Mall. No service on Sundays or on the following holidays: New Year's Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. T Simpson & Winchester m 79 Pas • Winchester Rd & Simpson Rd Winchester Rd & Pourroy Rd/Whispering Heights WINCHESTER T Equity&Ynez ®m® 79EMI MURRIETA �4 4 n%9yDy, 4 yots0��gta 24 El 61 79 toal °t Chaparral H.S. p� c County c Center Dr < 3 T`?3 Grace Mellman Community Library oles\%` a Rancho California Rd Temecula •• Stage Stop O 6th & Front at N o• 4 79 5 T 8 T Sanderson & Thornton 74 79 OLhce Simpson Rd 7 • Target Super • Walmart' MustangWy Pourro Rd c West Valley H.S. �AlgraveAveu 9,.1"*1 s .52 Briggs Rd. Thompson Rd «Benton Rd Temeku St «MagdasColoradasSt Southwey 74 Devonshire Av Y �9 T Florida Ave Hemet •¢ Valley • Mall HEMET I/ Hemet Valley Mall ®®®® ®® 74 79 FRENCH VALLEY Auld Rd 6 Justice Center French Valley Airport o` oc C� Nicolas Rd Sheriff Station 42 Legend I Map not to scale O Time andiorTransfer Point O Transfer Point and Information T Winchester & Nicolas 79 TEMECULA T Promenade Mall Parking Structure Promenade Mall T 79 202 206 208 217 T Temecula Stage Stop m 79 More Rd toS Routing and timetables subject to change. Rutas designadas y horarios son sujetos a cambios. Murrieta - Temecula - Oceanside Transit Center $ 3 • 0 0 EACNN WAY FREE WITH VALID METROLINK PASS No service on weekends or the following holidays: No service on: New Year's Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. SI Walmart 202 206 MURRIETA O RIVERSIDE COUNTY M r!eta Hot Springs Rd a • 5 Walmart TEMECULA 1i Promenade Mall Parking Structure ® 79 202 206 208 \tits°° SAN DIEGO COUNTY Town Center North -• 76 2A, 2�Y Bffy�y Or P „ ,, oP,Q �°�,s�,r`°a OCEANSIDE Oceanside Transit Center METROLINK 90 • �G a Town Center North 202 T Oceanside Transit Center Coaster NCTD NCTD Gre hound Amtrak California Sprinter/Metrolink e46 4 • Abbn I/ascular Rancho California Rd» T 76 3 0 a a Promenade Mall <at PkWY Park -And -Ride Lot 19 FALLBROOK Legend I Maps not to scale OTime and/or Transfer Point OTransfer Point and Information 0 Stop Route may be deviated due to traffic conditions. zoo Routing and timetables subjectto change. Rutas designadas y horarios son sujetos a cambios. O� Riverside - Montclair Transcenter $3.00 EA H WAY FREE WITH VALID METROLINK PASS No service on weekends or the following holidays: New Year's Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Riverside Downtown Terminal Boarding Diagram I Page 37 T River 'de Downtown Term ina 0 10 ®®m ® 16 El 204 208 210 Omnitrans 215 29 El 49 216 SunLine 220 Downtown Terminal Country Village Park -And -Ride Mission Blvd = a PedleyRd»o Market St «Iowa Ave a RIVERSIDE «Canyon Crest Dr f * UCR at Bannockburn 0®® 7 Montclair Transcenter Foothill Transit Omnitrans 65, 66, 67, 68, 80, 82 MONTCLAIR 0 v 1,100,\sta Aye Montclair Plaza tN METROLINK z Central Ave Montclair Transcenter CC Z z 3 x m 3 0 Z ¢ Milliken Ave ONTARIO Ontario Mills Mall T Ontario Mills Mall Mulberry Ave Southbound Stop NB at Country Village Rd & Country Club Dr. Omnitrans 61 Route may be deviated due to traffic conditions. Legend I Maps not to scale OTime and/or Transfer Point OTransfer Point and Information 0 Stop 206 Temecula - Murrieta - Lake Elsinore - Corona Transit Center Routing and timetables subject to change. Rutas designadas y horarios son sujetos a cambios. $3.00EA H WAY FREE WITH VALID METROLINK PASS No service on weekends or the following holidays: New Year's Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. r9k� METROLINK 6 Corona Transit Center Boarding Diagram I Page 33 T Corona Transit Center 0© 206 216 Corona Cruiser Blue, Red Corona T Transit Center E. Grand Blvd» CORONA ?3� a o „(,alatc0� Dos Lagos «Dos Lagos Dr Temescal Canyon Rd Tom's Farms LAKE ELSINORE Legend I Maps not to scale OTime and/or Transfer Point OTransfer Point and Information 4 5 0 Lake Elsinore Outlet Center ItadetaHot SptingsR MURRIETA s • Walmart 202 i T Outlet Center almart 206 TEMECULA Promenade Mall 8 EEI 206 d srcheStetWS' �d�a • Promenade Mall Parking Structure MEI 55 79 202 206 208 Temecula - Murrieta - Sun City - Perris - Moreno Valley - Downtown Terminal $3.00 EA(H WAY FREE WITH VALID METROLINR PASS Riverside _ Downtown Terminal KR Lot 30 9 T T 8 7 MLK Blvd N Riverside `Downtown Metrolink Station iverside Downtown 1 10 Terminal 12 13 14 15 16 22 29 49 204 208 210 212 216 Omnitrans215 I SunLine 220 P. •' 6s .. RIVERSIDE Also serving: Riverside City Hall and County Administration Building. No service on weekends or the following holidays: New Year's Day,Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Riverside Down own Terminal Boarding Diagram 1 Page 37 CommuterLink Downtown Riverside Routing 'Page 32 Riverside - Downtown Metrolink Station 0 16 208 210 El SunLine 220 Amtrak * Perris Station Transit Center ®® 19 208 O 30 74 0 • 5 — Moreno Valley Mall 91, San Jacinto Ave MENOLINK Perris Station Transit Center T Moreno Valley Mall 0 16 18 19 26 208 210 SunLine 220 Routing and timetables subject to change. Rutas designadas y horarios son sujetosa cambios. MORENO VALLEY Moreno Valley Mall Boarding Diagram' Page 35 PERRIS NB Sun City & McCall El 40 61 74 208 Perris Station Transit (enter Boarding Diagram' Page 36 Legend I Maps not to scale 0 Time and/or Transfer Point OTransfer Point and Information om Alternate Routing B )) McC. I Blvd 5> 3• gm ` Cherry Hills Blvd m MURRIETA T Los Alamos & Whitewood 208 Route may be deviated due to traffic conditions. • Promenade Mall Parking Structure ® 79 202 206 208 MEI TEMECULA SUN CITY MENIFEE Los Alamos Rd & Whitewood Rd eS‘6° Promenade Mall ION Riverside Downtown Terminal SEE FARE GRID BELOW to Palm Desert FOR ROUTE PRICING Also serving: Riverside City Hall, County Admin. Building. No service on weekends or the following holidays: New Year's Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. T Riverside - DowntownMetrolinkStation 0 16 208 210 BEI SunLine 220 Metrolink uCr Amtrak T Fir &Nason ® 210 SunLine 220 T Riverside Downtown Terminal 15 204 16 22 29 49 208 210 212 216 Omnitrans215 SunLine 220 ZONE 1 CABAZON - RIVERSIDE Beaumont Walmart Casino Morongo T Moreno Valley Mall m 16 18 19 26 208 210 SunLine 220 Routing and timetables subjectto change. Rutas designadas y horarios son sujetos a cambios. ZONE 2 THOUSAND PALMS -PALM DESERT SunLine Transit Hub (Varner & Harry Oliver Trail) Palm Desert Mall (Town Center Way & Hahn Rd) Hemet - San Jacinto - Riverside Downtown Metrolink Station - Downtown Terminal $ a.00TH.AY FREE WITH VALID METROLINR PASS Routing and timetables Also serving: Riverside City Hall and Riverside County Administration Building, MSJC. No subject to change. service on weekends or the following holidays: New Year's Day, Thanksgiving Day and Rutasdesignadasyhorarios (hristmasDa son sujetosa cambios. y Riverside Downtown O, Terminal N m RIVERSIDE NIEIROIINK• •� Riverside - Downtown Metrolink Station • Perris Station Transit Center ®® 19 30 74 208 212 • 3 Perris Station Transit Center Perris Station Transit Center Boarding Diagram I Page 36 nv UCR Lot • 30 Riverside Downtown Terminal 15 16 22 29 49 204 208 210 212 216 Omnitrans 215 SunLine 220 Riverside Downtown Terminal Boarding Diagram I Page 37 CommuterLink Downtown Riverside Routing 1 Page 32 Riverside - Downtown Metrolink Station 0 16 208 210 SunLine 220 Amtrak 212 MORENO m VALLEY PERRIS ROUTE MAY BE DEVIATED DUE TO TRAFFIC CONDITIONS Legend I Maps not to scale OTime and/or Transfer Point OTransfer Point and Information 0 Stop 74 Hemet Transit Depot • Mt. San Jacinto College ®® 74 BEI SAN JACINTO • Hemet Valley Mall ®® 74 79 Hemet Valley Nall . ok Oo ©sh �rF . dlp �9kP 42 HEMET Mt San Jacinto College 5� • 1 Heim Ave Meats Ave At Chestn© Ave Riverside Downtown Terminal to Village at Orange $ 3.0 vGEN. FARE EACH WAY FREE WITH VALID METROLINH PASS Q = Stop At Aveella 'T Village at Orange OCTA 24, 42, 46, 50 East Portion of 216 Gal feria at Tyler Mall Boarding Diagram I Page 34 T Galle iaatTyler 0 10 ®®m ®®® < Continued above CORONA Also serving: Riverside, The Galleria at Tyler, Corona, and Village at Orange, Orange County. No service on: New Year's Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Routing and timetables subjectto change. Rutas designadas y horarios son sujetos a cambios. West Portion of 216 Route may be deviated due to traffic conditions. Routing and timetables subject to change. Corona Transit Center Boarding Diagram I Page 33 T Corona Transit Center o© 206 21 Corona Cruiser Blue, Red Riverside Downtown Tenninal Boarding Diagram I Page 37 T Rivers'de Downtown Terminal 0 10 ®®m ® 16 ® 29 49 Omnitrans 215 SunLine 220 ME1ROlINK Corona • Transit 3 • Center Carona Park- And - Ride CORONA Continued below> Riverside Downtown Terminal Legend I Map not to scale OTime and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information O Park -And -Ride a Long-term Detour Routing 217 San Jacinto - Hemet - Temecula - Escondido GEN. FARE e OO EACH WAY Routing and timetables subjectto change. Rutas designadas y horarios son sujetos a cambios. O No service on weekends or the following holidays: New Year's Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. • Mt. San Jacinto College ®® 74 ®® T Hemet Valley Mall ®®®®0 m 79 ®® Legend I Maps not to scale OTime and/or Transfer Point © Transfer Point and Information O Stop ® Alternate Routing MURRIETA T Equity &Ynez ®m® MEI 79 County Center Dr uity Dr . • 55 Promenade Mall (0A Moot _ ©- oAMar9ariita Rd Qa Stetson Ave a Hemet Valley Mall Devonshire Ave Florida Ave Mt. San Jacinto College Esplanade Ave Latha Y INSET MAP AREA Domenigoni Pkwy HEMET Devonshire Ave Hemet Valley — Mall Hemet Transit Depot -a Florida Ave E v+ Latham Ave • Promenade Mall Parking Structure 79 202 206 208 61 ESCONDIDO t TEMECULA ROUTE MAY BE DEVIATED DUE TO TRAFFIC CONDITIONS T Escondido Transit Center NCTD MTS The Spnnte Greyhound Escondido cry Han Escondido Transit Center Ave OCTA 794/ 794A La Sierra Metrolink or Canyon Community Church - South Coast Metro $6.00 WAY Routing and timetables subject to change. Rutas designadas y horarios son sujetos a cambios. ION La Sierra Metrolink Station Route operated by OCTA. Also serving: Canyon Community Church Park and Ride and Hutton Centre. Runs Weekdays only. No service on: New Year's Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. 1 T 91 57 RIVERSIDE La Sierra Metrolink Station El OCTA 794 CORONA 0 czs Main St 91 15 PR Canyon Community Church Park and Ride Legend I Map not to scale O Time and/or Transfer Point O Transfer Point and Information ® 794A connection from Corona ® Park -And -Ride utton Centre SANTA A N A y South Coast Plaza Park And Ride OCTA 51, 55, 57, 76, 86,145,172, 173, 211, 216, 464, 794 South Coast Plaza Park And Ride 3 4 IRVINE COSTA MESA South Coast Metro SrmLine TRANSIT AGENCY SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN FY 2016/17 — FY 2018/19 taiSiltibrk# likt '160 32-505 Harry Oliver Trail Thousand Palms, California 92276 (760) 343-3456 Lauren Skiver CEO/General Manager FINAL SUNLINE TRANSIT AGENCY FY 2016/17 - FY 2018/19 SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN "Today s Transit for Tomorrow's World" Contents PAGE CHAPTER 1 — SYSTEM OVERVIEW 1 1 1 Description of Service Area 2 1.2 Population Profile and Demographic Projection 5 1.3 Fixed Route Transit and Paratransit Services 5 1.4 Current Fare Structure 22 1.5 Revenue Fleet 23 1.6 Existing/Planned Facilities 24 1.7 Existing Coordination between Transit Agencies 24 1.8 Taxi Administration 25 CHAPTER 2 — EXISTING SERVICE AND ROUTE PERFORMANCE 26 2.1 Fixed Route Service — Route by Route Evaluation and Analysis 27 2.2 Paratransit Service — System Performance 28 2.3 Key Performance Indicators 28 2.4 Productivity Improvement Efforts 29 2.5 Service Standards and Warrants 29 2.6 Major Trip Generators & Projected Growth 30 2.7 Equipment, Passenger Amenities and Facility Needs 30 CHAPTER 3 — PLANNED SERVICE CHANGES & IMPLEMENTATION 33 3.1 Recent Service Changes 34 3.2 Recommended Short Term Service Improvements 34 3.3 Longer Term Service Modifications and Adjustments 35 3.4 Marketing and Promotion 37 3.5 Budget Impacts on Proposed Changes 37 CHAPTER 4 — FINANCIAL AND CAPITAL PLANS 38 4.1 Operating and Capital Budget 39 4.2 Funding Plans to Support Proposed Operating and Capital Program 39 4.2.A Operating Budget 39 4.2.B Capital Improvement Program Budget 39 4.3 Regulatory and Compliance Requirements 40 FIGURES Figure 1 SunBus System Map 3 Figure 2 SunLine Transit Agency Service Area 4 Figure 3 SunBus Fare Structure 23 Figure 4 SunDial Fare Structure 23 Figure 5 Analysis of FY 2014/15 Performance Statistics 27 Figure 6 Comparison of Fixed Route Ridership FY 2010/11 to FY 2014/15 28 Figure 7 Comparison of SunDial Ridership FY 2013/14 to FY2014/15 28 Figure 8 Comparison of SunDial Ridership FY 2010/11 to FY 2014/15 28 TABLES Table 1 Fleet Inventory 42 Table 2 Service Summary 45 Table 3 Route Statistics 51 Table 3A Individual Route Description 55 Table 3B FY 2016/17 New/Existing Routes Exemption Sheet 57 Table 4 Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2016/17 59 Table 4A Capital Project Justification for FY 2016/17 61 Table 5.1 Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2017/18 72 Table 5.1. A Capital Project Justification for FY 2017/18 74 Table 5.2 Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2018/19 85 Table 5.2.A Capital Project Justification for FY 2018/19 87 Table 6 Progress to Implement TDA Performance Audit 96 Table 7 Service Provider Performance Targets 98 Table 8 Performance Report 100 Table 9 Highlights of FY 2016/17 Short Range Transit Plan 102 Table 9A Operating and Financial Data 103 Table 9B Farebox Calculation 104 Executive Summary The Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) is a tactical plan for service improvements and capital projects consistent with the mission of SunLine Transit Agency (SunLine), "to provide safe and environmentally conscious public transportation services and alternate fuel solutions to meet the mobility needs of the Coachella Valley." The SRTP is a three-year plan with funding proposed for the first year only. In fiscal years 2016/17 SunLine plans system -wide improvements and realignment of existing transit lines. The plan is based upon past performance, other key performance indicators, and recommendations of a public planning process. Fifteen minute frequencies are planned for Lines 14, 30 and 111 to meet the growing demand on those routes, and to maximize customer convenience, during the upcoming fiscal year. The population of Coachella Valley is expected to double by 2035. Such a dramatic increase will result in a need for expanding public transit. A 2015 survey found that 84 percent of SunBus passengers are dependent on SunLine service, with 73 percent of respondents using the bus three of four times per week. Mission Statement To provide safe and environmentally conscious public transportation services and alternate fuel solutions to meet the mobility needs of the Coachella Valley. SunBus ridership declined in FY 2015/16 as compared with FY 2014/15. SunDial ridership for FY 2014/15 was 153,183. The decline in fixed route riders is attributed to gasoline prices. Nationally, gasoline prices are nearly 50% less than in 2014. Higher gasoline prices typically result in higher usage of public transit systems. Another factor impacting SunBus ridership is California Assembly Bill 60. The new state law allows immigrants living in California to obtain a driver's license. This increase in issuance of driver license among the immigrant population has negatively impacted transit ridership in the Coachella Valley. The planned service improvements are designed to increase performance on SunLine routes. Ridership for FY 2016/17 is expected to maintain system wide at 4.6 million trips annually. Presently, SunLine has 74 fixed route vehicles, 35 ADA paratransit and 51 support vehicles. Capital improvements for FY 2016/17 will include construction of a new Operations and Training facility at the Thousand Palms location. Solar panel installation at the Thousand Palms facility is anticipated to be completed in FY 2016/17. Additionally, a new Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) fueling station in Thousand Palms will begin construction. During FY 2016/17, SunLine will issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) to study options to rehabilitate, or replace, the Indio satellite operations and maintenance facility. Plans also include refurbishing SunLine's hydrogen fueling station in Thousand Palms as well as construction of solar parking canopies at SunLine's administration building. The total FY 2016/17 Operations budget requested is $33.4 million with anticipated farebox revenues of $3.3 million. The total FY 2017/18 Capital budget requested is $19 million. CHAPTER 1 SYSTEM OVERVIEW CHAPTER 1 — SYSTEM OVERVIEW 1.1 Description of Service Area SunLine is a Joint Powers Authority created in 1977 to provide public transit service to its nine member cities and seven unincorporated communities in the Coachella Valley. Member cities are Desert Hot Springs, Palm Springs, Cathedral City, Rancho Mirage, Palm Desert, Indian Wells, La Quinta, Indio, and Coachella, with service also provided to the unincorporated Riverside County communities of Desert Edge, Thousand Palms, Bermuda Dunes, Thermal, Mecca, Oasis and North Shore. SunLine's Board of Directors consists of elected officials from each of the nine member cities and Riverside County, who provide policy direction to the CEO/General Manager and staff. The Board meets ten times per year, and if necessary may meet additional times to address pressing operational and budget requirements. SunLine's service area is 1,120 square miles with transit service offered throughout the urbanized areas and larger unincorporated communities of the Coachella Valley. The Agency's service area is located approximately 120 miles east of downtown Los Angeles and 60 miles east of the Inland Empire cities of Riverside and San Bernardino. The service area is bounded by the San Gorgonio Pass on the west and the Salton Sea on the southeast. The SunLine Service Area is shown in Figure 2. SunLine's local fixed route network (SunBus) consists of 16 routes, including 15 local routes connecting the Valley from Desert Hot Springs and Palm Springs in the northwest to Mecca, Oasis, and North Shore in the southeast, as well as one Commuter Link route operating between Palm Desert and Riverside. Buses operate 363 days a year, with no service provided on Thanksgiving and Christmas. Weekend service is operated on New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, and Labor Day. The span of service extends from 4:32 a.m. to 11:23 p.m. on weekdays and 4:55 a.m. to 10:48 p.m. on weekends. Buses generally operate every 20 to 90 minutes, depending on the route and day of the week. Line 95 to the rural community of North Shore is an exception, making six inbound and outbound trips per day on weekdays with mirroring service on weekends. Line 111 is the major trunk line that extends from Coachella to Palm Springs, with most routes feeding to and from this key route. A system map is shown in Figure 1 and service information on each route is discussed in Section 1.3. SunLine received a final report of the fixed route passenger survey in February 2015. The report overviews the assessment of SunBus passengers, their travel patterns and their views on SunLine transit service. The survey found 84 percent of SunBus passengers are dependent on SunLine's services, with 73 percent of respondents using transit four times a week or more. SunBus passengers are generally low-income, with 76 percent of passengers having annual household incomes below $25,000. Spanish is the primary language spoken in 47 percent of SunBus passengers' homes. SunBus passengers' top three trip purposes are for work (35%), shopping (16%) and school (14%). Many commuter trips within the Coachella Valley are destined for the City of Palm Desert, with 23 percent of all work trips ending there. Data compiled for trip purposes show commuting patterns to Palm Desert are mostly from the Cities of Cathedral City, Indio, La Quinta, and Palm Springs. There are also strong commuting patterns from La Quinta and Coachella to Indio, and from Desert Hot Springs to Palm Springs. Most commute trips in the system occur along Highway 111, with nearly all destinations served directly by Line 111. Line 14 (Desert Hot Springs — Palm Springs) and Line 30 (Cathedral City — Palm Springs) are also key SunLine regional transit lines. With respect to school travel, Palm Desert continues to be a key destination as the location of the main campus of the College of the Desert. A number of school districts in the region do not provide school bus service for high school students; therefore, SunLine serves as the primary means of high school transportation for many area students. 2 FIGURE 1. SUNBUS SYSTEM MAP, 2016 DESERT HOT SPRINGS TWO &INCH PALMS ROSA TOMO BAN RAEAEL N STEVENS Q. BARISTO PALM SPRINGS MISSION IARFS 4" ST RYERSON DESERT orxaN Qu EAGE .15 AURORA 'g VISTA CHINO gC7 y �IJ vpX CATHEDRAL e CITY g 5 DINAH SHOP �' k G£RAL0__FORD 2 m- m sT FRANK SINATRAI RANCHO MfR AGE 111 PALM z DESERT o SurrUne Trawt New' 9260S Hairy Omar Trail COMMUTER LINT( 220 - Palm Desert to Riverside THOUSAND PALMS O Z uW 4 O N %AVER GERALD FORD v INDIAN WELLS AVE 47 RIVERSIDE MORENO VALLEY BEAUMONTT CABA2ON IMWMart See schedule for details of stop locations ZONE Cabaxon to Riverside Y N A INODSAHD PALMS kr K PALM DESERT AlZONE 2-10. Palm Desert Io Thousand Palms a M!ARID CUSTOMER SERVICE SERVICIO AL CLIENTE 800.347.8628 sunline. org TTYTTOD Service Available AveINDIO AI Sun[me TransitAgency &ails System Map Mapa del Sistema ss QUINTA i AVE T7 �� n VOIDLA5S i tf.Y.11143gPI ER Tr8r ter Lines 51. 9491, 90.41, 9S 8111 L NORTH BASIS SHORE Ylrf FTRinTf<1 AVE 70 a COACHELLA AVE IY ADLx; CAURCH AVE SS THERMAL MECCA AVE 66 COD MECCA, AVE 52 5'ST Feri CEr� R ‘+. SHNOORFRTH 3 FIGURE 2. SUNLINE TRANSIT AGENCY SERVICE AREA, 2016 A4unoo feueduij eaS uoJleS �L A-;unoa emsieNa 393 1111 _ : � iii c 41 iew.layl aJad leuotJeN aaal engsor niunos abets ues I saliW s•l 99 9ZE I 0 (%ES) Z 49' 49E = -tape aim vie (%004) 17L8'ZZV = eaiyaoinJag 90VVZ - 81-0' L - 6LZ - 9£ L LLo'L-0£S'1M 9£-oS 6Z9 - OBZ aV - 0 NOI1V-IndOd - eauinp ei epauoeo0 \ �g \�" r — ` A4 °mu! N 6a �42 a S 0u�,41," sai.noN sn8 eununs jo al!W pI£ sapv aopuos aununs jo uo!windod -snsua0 Sf70L07. 9LC1Z_Aar! 'SMSIB AEI 4aa 90b0 Shc3 IA eiwn;lle0 aue1d94a4S E364 ❑VN-uogoalodd 00SZ =lawq ahiui qIE uNim v,00le snsua3 ;e uogelndod paleu4s7 '4, 0q=10-1411q 9I4I InT 15519 snsue0 l0'✓0'0003= uoLmndod Haols snsueo 5.a:F6515p5146W 'e;ep larval haola old LAS ❑L 030'snsua0 g n OLOZ e4e0}e❑ =g ues sa�no� sn8 auiluns Jsaioj JeuoiieN owpieluaa ues Hied absiS oJu_ioer ueS JLV 1.2 Population Profile and Demographic Projection A review of cities with the highest population increase from 2000 through 2010 indicates the City of Coachella grew by 79% followed by the cities of La Quinta, Indio, Desert Hot Springs, Rancho Mirage, and Indian Wells. From 2000 to 2012, the Coachella Valley's population grew from 309,530 to 432,596. That was a gain of 123,066 people or 39.8% including adjustments based upon the 2010 Census, according to the California Department of Finance. Overall, the population in the Coachella Valley continues to grow; the continual growth helped SunLine achieve over 4.8 million total passenger boardings in FY 2014/15. 1.3 Fixed Route Transit and Paratransit Services FIXED ROUTE SERVICE Regional Services — These are highly traveled corridors serving a variety of trip purposes and connect a variety of regional destinations. Regional routes comprise the backbone of the network linking major communities. Examples include Line 111 with a 20-minute headway seven days a week, which travels from Palm Springs to Coachella; Line 14 between Desert Hot Springs and Palm Springs; and Line 30 between Cathedral City and Palm Springs. Lines 14 and 30 operate with 20-minute frequencies on weekdays; however, SunLine has a longer term goal of increasing the frequency of key urban lines to every 15-minutes on weekdays. Local Community -Based Services — Offering all -day circulation as well as connections to regional services, local community -based routes are established to provide benefits for one or more local communities and includes Lines 15, 20, 24, 32, 53, 54, 70, 80, 81, 90, 91, and 95. Local community -based routes have consistent service throughout each day, have frequencies of 60-minutes or better, and have frequent stops for passengers to access as many destinations as possible. A number of these local services are performing strongly both in terms of ridership and productivity (rides per hour of service), and are candidates for increased service levels based on prioritization of all needs and available funding. An exception to the above frequency is the North Shore Line 95 rural service that operates six round trips weekdays and weekends between Indio, Coachella, Mecca, and North Shore. The newly implemented Line 20 provides express service from Desert Hot Springs to Palm Desert. Market -Based Services —Tailored to serve specific market segments at specific times of the day, including supplemental service such as school trippers, market -based routes have flexible routing and schedules that may vary throughout the day and week, and are tailored to specific market targets and defined market needs. Examples are the Commuter Link 220, operating three westbound trips from Palm Desert to Riverside weekday mornings with three return eastbound trips weekday evenings. Information regarding each of SunLine's existing fixed route services, as well as proposed new services and service enhancements, are provided on subsequent pages. 5 LINE 14-DESERT HOT SPRINGS - PALM SPRINGS As a key urban route, Line 14 links the cities of Desert Hot Springs and Palm Springs. This route connects to Lines 15, 20, 24, 30, 32, and 111 and links riders with local shopping centers, schools, the Department of Motor Vehicles, the Employment Development Department, library, senior center and other services within the communities of Desert Hot Springs and Palm Springs. The Line 14 operates with 20-minute frequency during weekday peak periods, 30-minute frequency weekday evenings. Additionally, one morning and one afternoon trip are scheduled to accommodate the volume of school students. Weekend service operates with 40-minute frequency. The service span is 4:52 a.m. to 11:23 p.m. on weekdays and 5:45 a.m. to 10:43 p.m. on weekends. Fifteen minute frequency is planned for this route and to adjust schedule and terminus location at Indian Canyon and Ramon. The implementation of proposed frequency improvments are subject to available funding and Board approval. LINE 14 DESERT HOT SPRINGS MISSION LAKES Lu PIERSON HACIENDA TWO BUNCH PALMS DILLON J a 0 VISTA CHINO J J L1J CY CY LL z U z (I) � ¢ z a z TAHOLIITZ (.1) BARISTO RAMON J CC } Ld Z I— LJ 0 Q PALM SPRINGS N A DON ENGLISH O TIME POINT [m SELECTED TRIPS ONLY 6 LINE 15—DESERT HOT SPRINGS — DESERT EDGE Line 15 serves the community of Desert Hot Springs and Desert Edge, an unincorporated community located southeast of Desert Hot Springs. With easy connections to the Lines 14 and 20. The Line 15 links riders with local shopping centers, a neighborhood community center, schools, and other services provided within the City of Desert Hot Springs. The route operates with 60-minute frequency seven days a week. Service span is 4:54 a.m. to 8:49 p.m. on weekdays and 6:49 a.m. to 7:44 p.m. on weekends. Bi-directional service is being explored on Mountain View and Two Bunch Palms for this route. LINE 15 4'ST PIERSON G J J O U TWO BUNCH PALMS DESERT HOT SPRINGS HACIENDA co c 44' LONG CYN TIME POINT DESERT EDGE X O N DILLON U O J AURORA o 7 LINE 20-DESERT HOT SPRINGS - THOUSAND PALMS - PALM DESERT Introduced in January 2016, Line 20 is SunLine's newest service providing limited stop connections between the City of Desert Hot Springs and the City of Palm Desert. The Line 20 provides the residents of Desert Hot Springs and surrounding communities improved access to resources and employment opportunities concentrated toward the center of the Coachella Valley, including the College of the Desert. Line 20 connects with Lines 14, 15, 32, 53, 54, 111 and the Commuter Link 220 at Westfield Palm Desert Mall. LINE 20 4' ST COco D W Q U NA a DESERT HOT SPRINGS PIERSON TWO BUNCH PALMS DILLON O TIME POINT SpgTcc �O COUNTRY CLUB PALM cr DESERT aU DINAH SHORE FRED WARING HAHN Service operates 144-minute frequency during weekdays providing six round trips. Service span is between 7:00 a.m. and 6:52 p.m. Weekend service is not provided. 8 LINE 24-PALM SPRINGS Line 24 offers service in Palm Springs with connections to Lines 14, 30, and 111. The Line 24 links riders to destinations such as the Desert Regional Hospital, Palm Springs International Airport, Palm Springs City Hall, Desert Highland Community Center, schools, and shopping outlets. The Line 24 operates with 30-minute frequency on weekdays and weekends; one morning and three afternoon supplementary trips accommodate student ridership. Service span is 6:20 a.m. to 8:25 p.m. on weekdays and 6:23 a.m. to 7:44 p.m. on weekends. Line 24 is proposed to extend service to Ramon Road/San Luis Rey retail area in conjunction with a proposed improvement of Line 32 frequency to 40- minutes on weekdays. A route realignment to serve the North Palm Springs at Racquet Club at Palm Canyon and Ramon at San Luis Rey, and adjust schedule and terminus location at Indian Canyon and Ramon are proposed. The realignment will improve access for Palm Springs residents to the public services and retail in this areas. The implementation of the proposal is subject to available funding and Board approval. LINE 24, PROPOSED 0 1� ROSA PARKS A p TEK.E,F ®SELECTE,NIPS o.+r SAN RAFAEL RACQUET CLUB ■-M ■ ■ KARST0 VISTA CHINO PALM SPRINGS RAMON U OINAH SHORE LINE 24, CURRENT SAN RAFAEL RACQUET CLUB STEVENS TACHEVAH A TIME ITCOF PALM SPRINGS O 9 LINE 30-CATHEDRAL CITY - PALM SPRINGS Line 30 is a key urban line providing service between the cities of Cathedral City and Palm Springs. Riding the Line 30 provides customers access to public libraries, city halls, senior centers, schools, shopping centers and various industrial parks. It connects to Lines 14, 24, 32, and 111. Operating with 20-minute frequency during weekday peak periods. The Line 30 also offers three afternoon supplementary trips to accommodate the high volume of student ridership. Frequency is 30-minutes on weekday evenings and 40-minutes on weekends. The service span is 5:19 a.m. to 10:44 p.m. on weekdays and 6:12 a.m. to 9:19 p.m. on weekends. Fifteen minute frequency is planned for this route. The frequency improvements and a route realignment to serve the Palm Springs Airport are proposed and are subject to available funding and Board approval. LINE 30, PROPOSED LINE 30, CURRENT • BARISTO BARISTO PALM SPRINGS N A ;0'IA neir CATHEDRAL CITY TAHOUITZ BARISTO BARISTO RAMON INDIAN CYN PALM SPRINGS N A O *11,1E°0- NT � " w z v 7 J fn W B STD RAMON CATHEDRAL CYN CATHEDRAL CITY DiNAH SHORE CATHEDRAL CITY 10 LINE 32-PALM SPRINGS - CATHEDRAL CITY - THOUSAND PALMS - RANCHO MIRAGE - PALM DESERT Line 32 links the cities of Palm Springs, Cathedral City, and the unincorporated community Thousand Palms, Rancho Mirage and Palm Desert. The route connects with Lines 14, 20, 30, 53, 54, 111, and Commuter Link 220. Riders can effortlessly access schools and various retail centers along Ramon Road in Cathedral City. Routing through the 1-10 Interchange provides access to Costco, Home Depot, and the Regal Cinemas 16 theater complex, as well as service to the Agua Caliente Casino on Ramon Road at Bob Hope Drive. This route also provides service to the Eisenhower Medical Center, College of the Desert, and Westfield Palm Desert Mall. Line 32 operates with 50-minute frequency on weekdays and 60-minute frequency on weekends. Service span is 5:07 a.m. to 10:41 p.m. on weekdays and 6:54 a.m. to 10:48 p.m. on weekends. Weekday frequency improvement to every 40-minutes in coordination with a change to Line 24 mentioned previously is being proposed to meet the capacity demands due to increased ridership. Service frequency improvements and a route realignment to serve the Thousand Palms Transit Hub are proposed. The implementation of proposed changes are subject to available funding and Board approval. LINE 32, CURRENT VISTA CHINO AVE 30 MISSION RAMON CATHEDRAL CITY PALM SPRINGS A 0 T11ER,r, RAMON RANCHO MIRAGE DINAH SHORE THOUSAND �p PALMS to w,l, Vi0 MONTEREY COUNTRY CLUB PALM HAHN DESERT FRED WARING HWY t11 LINE 32, PROPOSED VISTA CHINO 2� 9 AVE 30 MISSION RAMON r a a CATHEDRAL CITY w PALM SPRINGS A O 1,1.1E POINT ® sELVTEO TRIPS oNw RAMON THOUSAND PALMS 0 Sonline's Transit Hub 14 N0 L-1R4zR DINAH SHORE RANCHO MIRAGE x COUNTRY CLUB PALM HAHN DESERT FREE WARING H WY 111 11 LINE 53-PALM DESERT Line 53 provides service within the City of Palm Desert, enabling riders to access the College of the Desert, the McCallum Theater, Palm Desert City Hall, Kaiser Permanente, satellite campuses of California State University San Bernardino, the University of California Riverside, Palm Desert High School, Palm Desert Library, and major shopping centers. Line 53 connects with Lines 20, 32, 54, 111 and Commuter Link 220 at Westfield Palm Desert Mall. Line 53 operates with 60-minute frequency on weekdays and 80-minute frequency on weekends. One supplementary trip is provided on weekday afternoons to accommodate the additional volume of school students. Service span is 6:18 a.m. to 6:46 p.m. on weekdays and 9:05 a.m. to 6:22 p.m. on weekends. A route realignment is proposed to serve North Palm Desert at Walmart, 99 Cent and Sam's Club on Monterey at Dinah Shore. LINE 53, PROPOSED MONTEREY T HWY 111 il,1y \\•s5o,PF GERALD FORD PALM DESERT SAN PABLO 0 ec o a FRANKS NATRA Y O o U HOVLEY FRED WARING N A Q TIME POINT ® SELECTED TRIPS ONLY LINE 53, CURRENT PALM DESERT cc W z V 2 INDIANI WELLS AN 0 TIME POINT 133:1 SELECTS] TRIPS ONLY 12 LINE 54-PALM DESERT - INDIAN WELLS - LA QUINTA - BERMUDA DUNES - INDIO Line 54 operates between Palm Desert and Indio serving the cities of Indian Wells and La Quinta as well as the unincorporated community of Bermuda Dunes via Fred Waring Drive. This route was designed to provide quicker service between Palm Desert and Indio, in addition to serving the length of Fred Waring Drive. Service is provided to the Indio Workforce Development, College of the Desert (Indio and Palm Desert), McCullum Theater, Civic Center along with close proximity to Indian Wells Tennis Gardens. Line 54 connects with Lines 20, 32, 53, 70, 80, 81, 90, 91, 95, 111, and Commuter Link 220 at Westfield Palm Desert Mall. Weekday frequencies are 45-minutes, with service operating between 5:30 a.m. and 7:57 p.m. No weekend service is provided. It is being explored to eliminate the low usage stops along route to provide a more "express" service from Palm Desert to Indio. LINE 54 TOWN CENTER PALM DESERT O TIME POINT FRED WARING O U BERMUDA DUNES INDIAN LA WELLS QUINTA H A JEFFERSON HOOVER INDIO /4/010 N e<LQ O w O 0c z 0 HWY 111 z 0 co U REQUA 13 LINE 70-LA QUINTA - PALM DESERT - BERMUDA DUNES Line 70 offers bus service to the City of La Quinta and the edge of the Cities of Palm Desert, Indian Wells, and the unincorporated community of Bermuda Dunes. Riders are able to access the Indian Wells Tennis Gardens on Washington Street at Fred Waring Drive, City Hall, the La Quinta senior center, schools, and various shopping centers along Adams Street, Avenue 47, and Washington Street. Transfers from the Line 70 to the Line 111 can be made on Highway 111 at Adams Street. Line 70 operates with 45-minute frequency on weekdays and 90-minute frequency on weekends. Extra morning and afternoon trips are added to accommodate students traveling to and from school. Service span is 5:15 a.m. to 8:43 p.m. on weekdays and 5:15 a.m. to 9:28 p.m. on weekends. SunLine proposes increasing service frequency on this route to 40-minutes on weekdays and 60-minutes on weekends. SunLine is also proposing an extension and realignment of the existing service to accommodate passenger requests for service north of the 1-10 freeway are proposed. LINE 70, CURRENT PALM DESERT INDIAN WELLS O TimE aourr COUNTRY CLUB co 2 i o D O Z ce w CC LU m LA QUINTA crio II COVE BERMUDA DUNES LA QUINTA LINE 70, PROPOSED LAS MONTANAS SUN CITY PALM DESERT ELDF$1ECtT4, waocar COUNTRY Gal NARRIS LANE PALM DESERT z c� z s FREE WARING INDIAN WELLS N A SI NALOA z BERMUDA DUNES MILES hwY,,, 6LAGKH FMK AVE 47 z LA QUINTA �a Z AVE 0 TAMPICO LA QUINTA COVE MADRI❑ 14 LINES 80 & 81-INDIO Lines 80 and 81 are loop routes providing transit service to residents of the City of Indio, enabling passengers access to John F. Kennedy Memorial Hospital, Riverside County Fair and National Date Festival, Employment Development Department, East Valley College of the Desert campus, Riverside County social services offices, Department of Motor Vehicles, Martha's Village & Kitchen, Coachella Valley Cultural Museum, the Indio transportation center, community centers, senior centers, library, schools, and a shopping centers. To accommodate commuting students, service to Shadow Hills High School on Jefferson Street at Avenue 39 was implemented. Lines 80 and 81 connect to Lines 54, 90, 91, 95, and 111 at the transfer location on Highway 111 at Flower Street. LINE 80 Both lines operate with 60-minute frequency seven days a week. Service span is 6:00 a.m. to 8:44 p.m. from 5:35 a.m. to 8:23 p.m. Increasing service to 30- minute frequency on weekdays for both routes is proposed. To support the proposed enhancements, SunLine is pursuing Caltrans Low -Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP) grant funding. These changes are subject to available funding and Board approval. LINE 81 15 LINE 90—INDIO — COACHELLA Line 90 serves the Cities of Coachella and Indio allowing passengers to access the Employment Development Department, Coachella City Hall, library, senior center, Boys & Girls Club, local schools, and shopping centers. Connections to Lines 54, 80, 81, 91, 95 and 111 occur at the transfer location on Highway 111 at Flower Street in Indio. Line 90 operates with 35-minute frequency seven days a week. Service span is 4:55 a.m. to 10:11 p.m. on weekdays and 4:55 a.m. to 9:01 p.m. on weekends. In conjunction with the Line 111 extension to Coachella, the Line 91 is planned to be revised to follow the Line 90 alignment between Coachella and Indio. SunLine proposes the implementation of a local circular line within the City of Coachella to best compliment the extended Line 111. These modifications are subject to available funding and Board approval. LINE 90 16 LINE 91-INDIO - COACHELLA - THERMAL - MECCA - OASIS Line 91 links the Cities of Indio and Coachella with the unincorporated communities of Thermal, Mecca, and Oasis. Riders on Line 91 are able to connect to Lines 54, 80, 81, 90, 95 and 111 at the transfer location on Highway 111 and Flower Street in Indio. Passengers have access to employment sites, medical, and shopping facilities. Line 91 also provides direct service to the East Valley Campus of the College of the Desert in Mecca. Line 91 operates with 60-minute frequency on weekdays and weekends. Service span is 4:47 a.m. to 10:17 p.m. on weekdays and 5:38 a.m. to 10:13 p.m. on weekends. SunLine proposes realigning the Line 91 to match the Line 90 alignment between Harrison Street in the City of Coachella and the Indio transfer center. The change will complement service provided by the extended Line 111 from Indio to Coachella along Indio Boulevard, while maintaining frequent service on the Line 90 alignment. These changes are subject to funding availability and Board approval. NOTE: Since February 2014, Line 91 has been operating on a long term detour in Thermal due to construction of the Airport Boulevard overpass over Grapefruit Boulevard and the Union Pacific Yuma Subdivision rail right-of-way. This was scheduled as a two-year project, the anticipated completion date has been rescheduled to be met by mid -year 2016, after which the regular route alignment will be restored in Thermal. LINE 91, CURRENT REQUA INDIO Q� 0 O AVE 50 a S OASIS \ 99 Mountain MSCEEBtatal Y'ST COACHELLA \ AIRPORT BLVD �i�_\ COD MecealThermal AVE 62 5" 5T 4 HOME Library LINE 91, PROPOSED z HWY 111 dx z O U 'AVE 40 U OR CARREON a TIME POINT OASIS e, INDIO O T \ COACHELLA a s AVE 54 \ Mountain Vow Estates AIRPORT BLV❑ COD Mecca/Thermal AVE 62 5' ST HOME Library 17 LINE 95-INDIO - COACHELLA - MECCA - NORTH SHORE Line 95 serves the Cities of Indio and Coachella and the unincorporated communities of Mecca and North Shore. The Line 95 serves the East Valley College of the Desert Campus in Thermal/Mecca. Passengers on Line 95 are able to connect to Lines 54, 80, 81, 90, 91 and 111 at the transfer location on Highway 111 and Flower Street in Indio. Service allows passengers to access employment sites, medical, and shopping facilities. Line 95 operates with 180-minute frequency on weekdays and weekends, providing six round trips. Service span is 4:02 a.m. to 10:02 p.m. NOTE: Since February 2014, Line 95 has been operating on a long term detour in Thermal due to construction of the Airport Boulevard overpass over Grapefruit Boulevard and the Union Pacific Yuma Subdivision rail right-of-way. Construction has been rescheduled to be completed by late 2016. SunLine staff has observed an increase in ridership along this route's detoured alignment and plans to evaluate the benefits of maintaining the detoured alignment upon the completion of construction by mid -year 2016. Service is also proposed to serve Airport Boulevard to the east at Buchannan Road and will commence at the newly established Transit Hub in Coachella on 5' and Vine. LINE 95, CURRENT COACHELLA AIRPORT BLVO THERMAL COG Mecca/Thermal LINE 95, PROPOSED AVE 70 AVE 50 COACHELLA 52 THERMAL WINDLASS, NORTH SHORE AIRPORT BLVD 5� t �rn AN O TIME POINT CID SELECTED TRIPS ONLY AVE 62 z MECCA 5'ST F_ HOME AVE 66 '61 �0 NORTH SHORE 18 LINE 111-PALM SPRINGS - CATHEDRAL CITY - RANCHO MIRAGE - PALM DESERT - INDIAN WELLS - LA QUINTA - INDIO Line 111 provides service along Highway 111 from Palm Springs to Coachella, linking with the Cities of Cathedral City, Rancho Mirage, Palm Desert, Indian Wells, and La Quinta. Line 111 enables riders to travel to destinations along the Highway 111 corridor. The route links passengers with major retail and commercial centers, recreational attractions, museums, educational and medical institutions, municipal services, and county services. Connecting routes include Lines 14, 20, 24, 30, 32, 53, 54, 70, 80, 81, 90, 91, 95 and Commuter Link 220 at Westfield Palm Desert Mall. Line 111 operates with 20-minute frequency during weekday and weekend daytime periods, 30-minute frequency on weekday evenings, and 40-minute frequency on weekend mornings and evenings. Service span is 4:33 a.m. to 10:55 p.m. on weekdays and 5:30 a.m. to 10:39 p.m. on weekends. SunLine is also proposing an extension and realignment of the existing service to accommodate passenger requests for service north of Palm Springs at Palm Canyon and Indian Canyon via Racquet Club, as well as, adjust schedule and terminus location at Indian Canyon and Ramon, and improve westbound route alignment at Hwy 111 and Flower. Fifteen minute frequency is planned for this route. The frequency improvements and a route realignments are proposed and subject to available funding and Board approval. LINE 111, CURRENT VISTA CHINO STEVENS Q BARISTO �2 ac7 PALM SPRINGS N A O NanAT �J CATHEDRAL CATHEDRAL' Cm RANCHO MIRAGE CITY PA DESERT INDIAN WELLS LA QUINTA COACHELLA COACHELLA LINE 111, PROPOSED N A RA VET CLUB z RAMON PALM SPRINGS O VIME POINT epALM CATHEDRA CITY `51) CATHEDRAL CITY RANCHO MIRAGE PAL DESERT INDIAN WELLS LA _ OUINTA COACHELLA COACHELLA 19 COMMUTER LINK 220-PALM DESERT - THOUSAND PALMS - CABAZON - BEAUMONT - MORENO VALLEY - RIVERSIDE In collaboration with the Riverside Transit Agency, SunLine operates the Commuter Link 220 service between the Coachella Valley and Western Riverside County. Three westbound trips and three eastbound trips are operated weekdays. The route is 77 miles long, with two stops in the Coachella Valley, located at Westfield Palm Desert Mall and at the newly constructed Thousand Palms Transit Hub located adjacent to SunLine's facilities along Varner Road in Thousand Palms. There are also stops along Interstate 10 and State Route 60 serving the Casino Morongo, City of Beaumont, and Moreno Valley, as well as the University of California Riverside, Metrolink's Riverside Station, and the Riverside Downtown Terminal. Connections are available to SunLine Lines 20, 32, 53, 54, and 111, Pass Transit in Beaumont and Banning, as well as Metrolink, RTA, and OmniTrans services in Riverside. SunLine also serves a bus stop at Morongo Band of Mission Indians Casino. Service operates from 4:32 a.m. to 9:42 p.m. Weekend service is not provided. COMMUTER LINK 220 Riverside Downtown Terminal Metrolink Station UCR Lot 30 9 8 7 RIVERSIDE ■ MORENO VALLEY FARE ZONE 1 BEAUMONT Wal Mart CASINO MORONGO CABAZON Cauazan to Riverside ■ FARE ZONE 2 THOUSAND PALMS PALM DESERT Patin Desert to Thousand Palms 20 Paratransit Service SunDial SunLine's paratransit service, SunDial, offers curb -to -curb service designed to meet requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and offers next -day complementary demand -response service to Coachella Valley residents who are unable to use SunBus service. All candidates must complete an application, describing in detail the nature of their mental or physical disability that may prevent the individual from using regular fixed route service. Applicants must obtain an approved health care professional's statement and signature verifying the disability. Each applicant is notified in writing of their application status within twenty-one days of the submission date. Riders having the required ADA Certification Identification Card are eligible to use SunDial for their transportation needs, including medical appointments, shopping, and other social activities. SunDial service is available within %-mile of the existing SunBus route network and is available by advanced reservation. Reservations may be made based on the service hours of the fixed routes serving passengers' origins and destinations. The SunDial service is provided with a fleet of 35 vans seven days a week, 363 days a year during the same hours as the fixed route network. No service is provided on Thanksgiving and Christmas. SunTaxi To supplement SunDial services, SunLine continues to explore a subsidized taxi service called SunTaxi. The concept is for the SunTaxi program to use the existing taxi fleet, including ADA accessible vehicles, to operate under contract by one or more qualified regional taxi operators. The taxi operators would be selected in the course of an open bidding process. SunTaxi would increase the ability to provide paratransit services in a cost effective manner to qualified Coachella Valley residents. Taxi Voucher Program In addition to SunDial and SunTaxi paratransit service, SunLine also offers a Taxi Voucher Program providing half price taxi trips for seniors (60+ years) and the disabled. SunLine provides matching funds loaded onto a prepaid taxi fare payment card up to $75 per transaction. The Taxi Voucher program has been funded with a combination of Section 5317 New Freedom and Section 5310 Transportation for Elderly Persons and Persons with Disabilities funding. Consolidated Transportation Services Agency As the designated Consolidated Transportation Services Agency (CTSA), SunLine coordinates public transportation services throughout its service area. Staff participates in meetings with social and human service agencies, consumers, and grassroots advocates through forums such as the RCTC Citizens Advisory Committee/Social Service Transportation Advisory Council (CCAC), SunLine's ACCESS Advisory Committee, San Gorgonio Pass Area - Transportation Now Coalition (T-NOW), and neighboring transit operators. 21 SunLine remains committed to working with the ACCESS Advisory Committee. Staff hosts regular meetings at the Thousand Palms Administrative Office. SunLine applies input from the Committee to improve relationships with the community to address public transportation issues in the Valley. Additionally, staff members are actively involved in the regional transportation planning process through participation on RCTC and county committees. These committees include the CAC/Social Service Transportation Advisory Council, the Technical Advisory Committee, Aging & Disability Resource Connection ADRC of Riverside Long Term Services and Supports (LLTS) Coalition, Desert Valley Builders Association (DVBA), Coachella Valley Economic Partnership (CVEP) and related committees to enhance coordination efforts with SunLine. SunLine will initiate a vanpool program using operating funds from the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) grant program in FY 2016/17. The program will be operated by a qualified third party broker selected under an open bidding process. The designated operator will be responsible for vehicle acquisition (either lease or purchase), vehicle maintenance, program coordination, driver screening, and marketing. The vehicle fleet will consist of approximately 50 to 70 vehicles funded by the grant. Public Participation SunLine actively seeks public input for service changes, fare changes and related agency business. Public notices are published in the local newspapers, social media sites, as well as placed in the buses, bus shelters, and posted on SunLine's website to make information more accessible to the community. Public comments are accepted at monthly Board meetings. SunLine also obtains service observations from members of the ACCESS Advisory Committee, through community outreach activities, and by being active in government and civic affairs. Customer comments are accepted Monday through Friday by the Customer Service Department, and on weekends by leaving a message on the automated voice recording system or with a Dispatcher. Comments are entered into a database and are analyzed regularly allowing staff to respond to trends. 1.4 Current Fare Structure SunBus passengers pay the adult fare unless eligible for discounted fares, which are available only to seniors, the disabled and youth. Children 4 years and under ride free with an adult fare. Fares may be paid using cash or passes. SunLine is exploring partnerships with local colleges throughout the Coachella Valley to provide an affordable transit pass program. There are no plans for a fare increase in FY 2016/17. 22 Figure 3 and Figure 4 illustrate the current fare structure: FIGURE 3. SUNBUS FARE STRUCTURE TYPE OF FARE FIXED ROUTE FARES Transfers Day Pass FARE CATEGORY ADULT YOUTH SENIOR 60+/ (18 YRS - 59 YRS) (5 YRS -17 YRS) DISABLED/MEDICAID $1.00 $.25 $.85 $.25 $3.00 $2.00 10-Ride Pass 31-Day Pass Coachella Valley Employer Pass Commuter Express Single Ride Commuter Express Day Pass $10.00 $8.50 $.50 $.25 $1.50 $5.00 $34.00 $24.00 $24.00 $17.00 $6.00 $4.00 $14.00 $10.00 Commuter Express 30-Day Pass $150.00 $100.00 **Commuter Express fares are for trips between the Coachella Valley and Western Riverside County on the Riverside Commuter Link 220 Service. FIGURE 4. SUNDIAL FARE STRUCTURE TYPE OF FARE (Only for ADA Certified Clients) Cash Fare - Same City Cash Fare - City to City 10-Ride Pass - Same City 10-Ride Pass - City to City SINGLE RIDE $1.50 MULTIPLE RIDES (10-RIDE) $2.00 $15.00 $20.00 1.5 Revenue Fleet SunLine currently has 74 fixed route buses and 35 ADA paratransit vans. Additionally, there are 51 support vehicles including standard passenger cars and trucks as well as facility -specific golf carts and forklifts. All of the fleet are used for various activities to support transit services provided throughout the Coachella Valley. SunLine has existing funds available for bus rehabilitation. New vehicle purchases are included in the SunLine's fleet and facilities plan. SunLine was recently awarded $9.8 million through the Section 5312 Low or No Emission Vehicle Deployment Program in February 2015 to purchase and deploy five new zero -emission hydrogen fuel cell fixed route buses that are anticipated to enter the SunLine fleet in FY 2017/18. Additionally, SunLine 23 is pursuing grant funding for the purchase of 15 hydrogen electric fuel cell buses. SunLine was awarded a grant from CARB for five additional fuel cell electric vehicles (—$6 million) and an additional $6 million for the hydrogen fueling station. 1.6 Existing/Planned Facilities SunLine's main office is located in Thousand Palms. The new facility houses the General Administration, Operations, Maintenance, Human Resources, Finance, Marketing, Customer Service, and Planning Departments. SunLine completed the construction of the permanent new 25,000 square foot Administration Building on its Thousand Palms site which replaced the temporary structures that had housed SunLine administration since 1985. A groundbreaking ceremony was held on January 28, 2015. Installation of new solar panels at the Thousand Palms yard commenced in FY 2014/15, and is anticipated to be completed in FY 2016/17. Work is expected to begin in FY 2016/17 on the construction of a new CNG fueling station in Thousand Palms. Future unfunded phases of the Thousand Palms facility project would see new Maintenance facilities built. During 2016/17, SunLine will issue a RFP to study options to rehabilitate or replace the agency's Indio satellite operating and maintenance facility, which is utilized for fixed route vehicles. The key transfer point for passengers transferring among routes in Indio is located just outside of this facility. SunLine initiated a new Transit Hub, which includes a Park and Ride lot. In close proximity of the Thousand Palms site commuters are able to easily travel from the Coachella Valley to Western Riverside County using the Commuter Link 220. The transit hub also includes a Greyhound stop for longer distance travel outside the Coachella Valley. SunLine is proposing to enhance various transfer locations to `Super Stops', which will include amenities such as seating area, shelters, restrooms, bike racks, ticket vending, schedules, real-time waysigns, etc. SunLine is also planning to construct an innovative Maintenance Bay Training Facility for Zero Emission Buses (ZEB) at the Thousand Palms location. Funding has also been identified for refurbishment of SunLine's hydrogen fueling station in Thousand Palms, as well as, construction of solar parking canopies at SunLine's Administration Building. These projects are anticipated to take place in FY 2016/17. 1.7 Existing Coordination between Transit Agencies In addition to providing transit service throughout the Coachella Valley, SunLine offers transit connections to a number of adjacent transit operators. SunLine and RTA collaborate to pay for the operation of Commuter Link 220 which connects Palm Desert and Thousand Palms with Morongo Band of Mission Indians, Beaumont, Banning, Moreno Valley, and Riverside via Interstate 10 and State Route 60. In addition to providing connections to RTA routes, Commuter Link 220 joins riders to Pass Transit services in Beaumont, the Omnitrans Route 215 from the RTA Downtown Terminal, as well as Metrolink's Riverside and Inland Empire -Orange County Lines. The City of Palm Springs provides a free downtown shuttle known as the Palm Springs Buzz. The shuttle operates as a loop with 15-minute frequency from 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 a.m. on Thursdays through Sundays. The City of Palm Springs and SunLine have an ongoing agreement allowing the shuttle to use SunLine's bus stops along the shuttle's route. SunLine also hosts Morongo Basin Transit Authority (MBTA) Routes 12 and 15 through a cooperative service agreement at its stops in downtown Palm Springs. The collaboration offers connections to Yucca 24 Valley, Landers, Joshua Tree, and Twentynine Palms. Likewise, Amtrak California (operated by Amtrak bus contractors) transport rail passengers traveling between rail hubs at certain Amtrak stations uses SunLine's bus stops in Palm Springs, Palm Desert, and La Quinta, under an additional cooperative service agreement. Amtrak's "Sunset Limited" inter -city train serves the Palm Springs Station on North Indian Canyon Drive. However, with rail service only serving Palm Springs three times a week in each direction, it is impractical for SunLine to offer transit service to the station at this time. Additionally, Greyhound provides pick up and drop off services at the SunLine Thousand Palms Transit Hub located at 72-480 Varner Road. Thousand Palms Transit Hub, Coachella 2016 1.8 Taxi Administration The SunLine Regulatory Administration (SRA), is responsible for establishing and enforcing ethical standards maintained by the Franchising Board. In addition, SRA is charged with licensing and regulating taxicab franchises and drivers in the Coachella Valley, while also ensuring residents and visitors are charged a fair and reasonable price. CHAPTER 2 EXISTING SERVICE & ROUTE PERFORMANCE CHAPTER 2 - EXISTING SERVICE AND ROUTE PERFORMANCE 2.1 Fixed Route Service - Route by Route Evaluation and Analysis Since the last Comprehensive Operational Analysis (COA) Update, SunLine has made minor improvements to all fixed routes, including realigning existing routes and improving frequency to enhance ridership. Service Efficiency and Effectiveness To determine the efficiency and effectiveness of all routes, staff reviewed the performance statistics for FY 2014/15 with data from the transit monitoring software TransTrack below that shows the most and least efficient routes. Factors used include passenger boardings, passengers per revenue hour, cost per passenger, passenger revenue per hour, and the farebox recovery ratio. FIGURE 5. ANALYSIS OF PERFORMANCE STATISTICS, FY 2014/15 14 PASSENGER COUNT 674,732 PASSENGERS�� PER REVENUE HOUR 22.93 Tr COST PER PASSENGER $4.57 PASSENGER REVENUE PER HOUR $26.65 FAREBOX RECOVERY RATIO 25.43% 15 115,342 21.13 $4.96 $24.34 23.23 24 185,154 19.20 $5.46 $22.30 21.29% 30 795,656 28.63 $3.66 $33.33 31.81% 32 294,486 17.51 $5.98 $20.50 19.56% 53 57,341 8.31 $12.62 $9.75 9.30% 54 95,338 14.07 $7.54 $16.97 16.18% 70 217,074 22.06 $4.75 $26.16 24.99% 80 135,461 25.31 $4.14 $29.39 28.05 81 88,846 16.56 $6.33 $19.17 18.30% 90 225,582 19.03 $5.51 $22.39 21.37% 91 229,432 15.26 $6.87 $18.13 17.30% 95 32,499 8.42 $12.45 $10.01 9.54% 111 1,514,790 25.18 $4.16 $29.45 28.11% 220 12,921 5.27 $20.00 $6.07 5.76% SunDial 153,183 2.25 $32.16 $8.41 11.65% 27 FIGURE 6. FIXED ROUTE RIDERSHIP 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 SunLine Fixed - Route Ridership FY 2010/11- FY 2014/15 1r Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun ■ FY 2010/11 ■ FY 2011/12 ■ FY 2012/13 ■ FY 2013/14 ■ FY 2014/15 Paratransit Service - System Performance SunDial's paratransit services continue to be well utilized for client's day to day activities, such as medical appointments, shopping, or work. A total of 153,183 trips were made on SunDial in FY 2014/15 compared to 139,042 trips in FY 2013/14 with a 9.2 percent increase in FY 2014/15. Overall, ridership for the demand response and subscription continues to grow. FIGURE 7. COMPARISON OF SUNDIAL RIDERSHIP SERVICE TYPE FY 2013/14 FY 2014/15 PERCENT CHANGE SunDial 139,042 153,183 9.23% FIGURE 8. COMPARISON OF SUNDIAL RIDERSHIP 14,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 SunDial Ridership FY 2010/11- FY 2014/15 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun ■ FY 2010/11 ■ FY 2011/12 ■ FY 2012/13 ■ FY 2013/14 ■ FY 2014/15 2.3 Key Performance Indicators To ensure adherence to the Productivity Improvement Program (PIP) established by RCTC, SunLine continues to monitor and evaluate routes to guarantee compliance with key performance indicators. The performance indicators are monitored using TransTrack software implemented by RCTC for all Riverside 28 County transit operators. Over the last six years, SunLine has consistently met the compliance requirements for both mandatory and discretionary performance indicators. 2.4 Productivity Improvement Efforts Staff continues to coordinate with local jurisdictions to determine best practices in relation to transit services provided throughout the Coachella Valley. Staff will continue monitoring existing routes applying service warrants to evaluate route performance. In addition to concentrating on modifying and adjusting existing routes, the review of underperforming routes will continue to determine if segment realignment, trip modifications or discontinuation of service should be considered due to low productivity. 2.5 Service Standards and Warrants The factors listed below are considered when analyzing new service proposals and requests, as well as evaluating existing service. Area Coverage While most of the urbanized sections of SunLine's service area are adequately served, there are some areas which are provided with more service than others. When service is proposed, the new line will be evaluated based on its proximity to other lines, and the necessity of its implementation based on area coverage and service productivity standards. Areas that are not currently served, or are underserved, but warrant new or enhanced service will be evaluated to receive new transit service when budget becomes available or through efficiency improvements of the existing transit lines. Growth in the ADA paratransit service area must also be addressed as part of any new service planning. Funding of these types of services must be prioritized along with improvements to existing transit services, based on available funding. Market Area Characteristics Staff also considers the density and demographic characteristics of a given service area as an important determinant for providing transit success. In tying area coverage standards to population and employment densities, SunLine recognizes the need to provide more service within more highly developed areas, and often considers this factor as part of the service development process. Transit -Dependent Populations SunLine considers the effects of service changes on transit -dependent riders during service planning processes. While SunLine's current network serves most transit -dependent populations and their destinations effectively, the agency continues to examine transit dependency when evaluating new service proposals. Special Market Needs Staff often receives requests for new service when existing routes do not adequately address unique market opportunities. Some examples include short routes such as shuttles that may better connect two or more high demand destinations, such as a transit center and an employment center, a senior center and a shopping complex, or student housing and a university campus. They may also provide local circulation between destinations in a single community with the service span and frequency tailored to these unique markets. Recommended Standards of Evaluating New Services Once a route is implemented, performance monitoring begins immediately to determine if the route is reaching its desired potential and performance standards. New service routes not meeting minimum 29 standards are subject to the same remedial actions as existing services requiring evaluation at the one and two year marks, may be truncated or eliminated if line productivity does not improve. 2.6 Major Trip Generators & Projected Growth SunLine continues to evaluate, monitor, and adjust transit service to best meet the travel patterns of Coachella Valley residents and visitors. SunLine has implemented incremental service changes as funding has permitted, with major efforts in FY 2016/17 consisting of the enhancements to Line 24, 30 and 111 in City of Palm Springs, expansion of Line 53 in the City of Palm Desert, expansion of Line 70 to North 1-10 in Bermuda Dunes, enhancements to Lines 80 and 81 in the City of Indio, and enhancements to Lines 90, 91 and 95 in the City of Coachella to improve connectivity to new shopping and grocery destinations. Additional improvements are proposed for the future, as noted in Chapter 3. The agency will continue to ensure transit services are offered where the greatest needs exist. Through SunLine's development review process, staff coordinates with local jurisdictions to develop best practices for ensuring adequate transit considerations are relayed as new developments and construction projects are proposed. The process allows SunLine to provide safe and efficient services at a lower cost. As the Coachella Valley flourishes, SunLine staff will continue to assess travel patterns and transit demands. Additionally, to assist commuting students, SunLine will continue to coordinate public transit schedules with school bell times. 2.7 Equipment, Passenger Amenities and Facility Needs Passenger Amenities and Bus Stop Improvement Program As of January 2016, SunLine serves 640 bus stops, which are cleaned and maintained on a regular basis. Since completion of the 2005 COA and 2009 COA Update, SunLine has made significant improvements to bus stops in the Coachella Valley. Presently, 394 bus stops have shelters. Funding was received in FY 2015/16 to allow 25 new shelters to be placed at active stop locations. In conjunction with the installation of new shelters, bus stops are also improved to meet guidelines set forth by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Additional funding has been requested for continual support of the bus stop improvement program in upcoming years. On -Board Passenger Amenities All SunLine buses have electronic destination signs. The signs indicate the route number, route name, and the destination of the bus. All of the buses have display racks for public announcements, notices and timetables. Passengers are able to request a stop without leaving their seats by activating the stop request that is controlled by a plastic strip located within each passenger's reach. Air conditioning and heating are provided on the buses for passenger comfort. SunLine anticipates the installation of free Wi- Fi on all fixed route buses during FY 2016/17. Bicycle Facilities To provide bicyclists an alternate mode for traveling throughout the Coachella Valley, all of SunLine's fixed route buses have mounted exterior bike racks. The combination of bicycling and riding the bus has increased the range of options for riders who utilize other modes of transportation for their mobility needs. SunLine will continue to work with the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) with the Non -Motorized Transportation Plan update. The plan includes a proposal to install bike racks and/or bike lockers at selected bus stop locations throughout the Coachella Valley. 30 On -Board Security Cameras Cameras and the associated video recording equipment are installed on all Sunline Transit Agency fixed route buses. Video recording provides an invaluable asset when assessing the cause of collisions, investigating reports of improper behavior by Sunline staff and violations of Sunline Transit Agency rider rules by our passengers. Video from on -board cameras has also proven to be beneficial to law enforcement in the investigation of traffic incidents and criminal activity. Additionally, our paratransit vans are equipped with "SmartDrive" video monitoring. SmartDrive video recordings assist in determining the cause of collisions and helps identify Operator driving habits and tendencies. SmartDrive video is used to coach better driving habits and skills to our paratransit Operators. Streaming live video links were added to vehicles in use on Commuter Link 220, with additional funding anticipated to complete implementation across the rest of the fixed route bus fleet arriving in FY 2016/17. Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) All buses are equipped with Automatic Passenger Counters, Automatic Voice Annunciators, Automated Vehicle Locators, and Global Positioning Systems. Staff implemented scheduling software for fixed route planning. SunLine service information has been available in Google Transit for trip planning purposes. Additionally, SunLine offers the interactive SunBus Tracker allowing passengers to receive up-to-date bus information. Wi-Fi is available on Commuter Link 220 buses, and is planned to be expanded to the full fixed route fleet in FY 2016/17. Bus Replacement Program Approximately every three years, SunLine begins the replacement of ADA paratransit vans as they near 150,000 miles. In FY 2016, two replacement and two expansion vehicles were delivered to SunLine. In FY 2016/17, 13 replacement vans and one expansion van are planned for purchase. The fixed route bus fleet will begin to be updated in 2017, as ten 2005 Orion buses become eligible for replacement under FTA guidelines (12-year lifespan or 500,000 miles). Two new Hydrogen Electric Hybrid fuel cell buses were added to the fleet in FY 2014/15, along with an additional fuel cell bus delivered to SunLine from CTTransit in Connecticut, an additional bus is scheduled to be received from CALSTART under the FTA's Fuel Cell Bus Program in 2016. SunLine is also partnering with the California Energy Commission and Hydrogenics, Inc. to demonstrate a new battery dominant fuel cell bus for one year. In addition, SunLine was awarded in FY 2013, Section 5312 funding to expand the hydrogen fleet by five buses; the construction of these buses are set to commence in early 2017. All SunLine vehicles including non - revenue service vehicles are powered with compressed natural gas with the exception of SunLine's hydrogen fuel cell bus fleet. Facility Needs In January 2015, SunLine administration moved into a new building constructed at the Thousand Palms site. Demolition of most of the temporary structures has been completed. An RFP for a planning and feasibility study to determine the best options for the agency's satellite operating and maintenance facility in Indio will be issued in FY 2016/17. The facilities master plan agreement will be executed in early FY 2016/17. Additionally, SunLine will construct new CNG and Hydrogen fueling stations with anticipated completion in FY 2017 and FY 2018 respectively. SunLine will complete its Thousand Palms Administration Building facility project by adding solar panels funded with Proposition 1 B PTMISEA Program. SunLine is also making facility improvements in the Thousand Palms and Indio Maintenance Lounge areas. 31 SunLine has collaborated with the City of Coachella to transform an existing property into a multimodal transit center in central Coachella. The center enhances local transit services and improves transit efficiency and effectiveness in the East Valley which includes the extension of Line 111. Work toward site selection and preliminary facility studies will continue in FY 2016/17. Thousand Palms Solar Panel Project Commissioning Event -� .••••• 32 CHAPTER 3 PLANNED SERVICE CHANGES & IMPLEMENTATION CHAPTER 3 - PLANNED SERVICE CHANGES & IMPLEMENTATION 3.1 Recent Service Changes SunLine currently operates 15 local fixed route transit routes and one Commuter Link route. These routes serve the urbanized area of the Coachella Valley, consisting of SunLine's nine (9) member cities (Cathedral City, Coachella, Desert Hot Springs, Indian Wells, Indio, La Quinta, Palm Desert, Palm Springs, and Rancho Mirage) as well as seven (7) unincorporated communities of Bermuda Dunes, North Shore, Mecca, Oasis, Thermal, Thousand Palms and Desert Edge. In FY 2014/15, SunLine served over 4.8 million passengers system -wide, including 4.7 million boardings recorded on fixed route buses and approximately 153,183 rides by ADA paratransit clients. Service improvements may be considered based on additional review of the performance of the FY 2015/16 service improvements and assessment of available funding and other budget priorities by the Board. 3.2 Recommended Short Term Service Improvements To meet the changing transit demands of the of the Coachella Valley, for FY 2016/17, the agency proposes implementing the service enhancements listed below: • Lines 14 — adjust schedule and terminus location at Indian Canyon and Ramon. • Line 24 - reroute to serve Sunrise between Vista Chino and Racquet Club, discontinue fixed scheduled service to Vista Chino/Caballeros and Racquet Club/Caballeros (linked to Line 111 change below), and provide supplemental service in these areas to accommodate school students. Extend line to Ramon/San Luis Rey retail area and replace terminus loop route at south Palm Springs (Palm Springs Airport) (linked to Line 30 change below). • Line 30 - adjust schedule and terminus location at Indian Canyon and Ramon, as well as, realign to serve the Palm Springs Airport at Tahquitz Cyan and El Cielo. • Line 32 — reroute selective trips to serve the Thousand Palms Transit Hub to connect with Greyhound Bus Lines. • Line 53 - reroute to serve Monterey/Dinah Shore at the Super Walmart, discontinue service to Joslyn Center, Xavier School, and the segment of service on Highway 111 from San Pablo to Cook Street. • Line 70 - increase service frequency to 40-minutes weekdays and 60-minutes on weekends, and extend to North of 1-10. • Lines 80 and 81 — improve frequency from 60-minutes to 30-minutes. The frequency improvements are conditional pending funding for additional resources. • Lines 90, 91 and 95 - Line 91 will serve current Line 90 alignment in Indio. Implement circular service in Coachella. Line 95 will terminate at 5th/Vine to connect with Line 111, and route will be realigned to service Airport Boulevard east of SR 86 via Buchanan at Mecca/Thermal College of the Desert campus. 34 " New Line 92 introduce new Line 92 route to replace existing Line 90, and will operate as a local circular line within the City of Coachella. " Line 111 realign segment of route to Palm Canyon and Indian Canyon via Racquet Club Road (linked to Line 24 change above), as well as, improving westbound route alignment at Hwy 111 and Flower. LINE 92 Planned Service Improvement Based on the Comprehensive Operations Analysis Review in 2015. It was recommended to split the current Line 90 into two services. One line will operate on local streets to connect Indio and Coachella (Line 91), supplementing more frequent service on Line 111. The second line, Line 92 will operate as a circulator in Coachella, connecting community activity centers and local shopping centers. As a result of the new service route, Line 90 will be eliminated. The route will connect with Lines 91, 95 and 111 at key locations. AVE G9 AK N D r k'GM 3.3 Longer Term Service Modifications and Adjustments In light of ongoing challenges with operating funds, staff plans to continue evaluating existing services and developing improvements for funding and approval by the Board of Directors, as set out in Section 3.2. SunLine will also continue to use the key performance indicators and its own set of Service Standards as guidelines to improve service efficiency and effectiveness. An RFP will be issued to examine Bus Rapid Transit and other enhanced transit service opportunities in the Coachella Valley in FY 2016/17. SunLine has also engaged a planning consultant to develop a vision for the future structure of the transit network to further increase its share of trips made in the Coachella Valley, the findings of which will be reflected in future transit plans. In particular, SunLine plans to research further means of improving service to areas currently served, such as opportunities to improve 35 service frequency and reduce travel time, while also researching how to best deliver effective transit service to areas without service at present. These improvements are likely to require significant additional new operating funding and an expanded fleet. Specific areas, as resources become available, where service will be explored in the future include: • Evaluate feasibility of express service from Palm Springs to Coachella using the Highway 111 corridor between eight major cities and job centers within approximately an hour commute, serving only major time -points. • Evaluate feasibility of flex route or "dial -a -ride" zone serving the unincorporated community of Oasis. • Evaluate feasibility of service North of 1-10 at Indian Canyon/Dillon Road in the City of Palm Springs. • Evaluate feasibility of implementing service on Portola Avenue and Highway 74 South of Highway 111 in the City of Palm Desert. • Evaluate feasibility of future connections with Imperial Valley Transit. In the future, SunLine plans to provide 15, 30, or 60-minute service frequency throughout its network on weekdays. This will require practical planning of funding levels and new fleet to sustain both operating costs and the purchase of new fleet/replacement of existing fleet. 36 3.4 Marketing and Promotion SunLine will continue to follow its robust marketing and outreach campaign. Throughout FY 2016/17 the Marketing and Planning teams will join community service events, seminars and conventions to spread the positive impact local transit service has in the Valley environmentally and time wise. Additionally, in preparation for the tourism season, the SunLine team is developing a travel training workshop targeting local concierges; the workshop will provide concierges in-depth guidance in SunLine fixed route transit services including reading schedules, tourist destinations, fare structure, and the SunBus Tracker application. SunLine is developing a Strategic Transit Marketing Plan to provide best possible resources for strengthening and improving mobility needs to sustainable communities in the Coachella Valley. 3.5 Budget Impacts on Proposed Changes Section 3.3, Longer Term Service Modifications and Adjustments, outlines SunLine's longer term plans to introduce service improvements. Existing funded projects are listed in Chapter 1, System Overview. Proposed service improvements without identified funding may be implemented as new funding opportunities become available. 37 CHAPTER 4 FINANCIAL & CAPITAL PLANS CHAPTER 4 - FINANCIAL AND CAPITAL PLANS 4.1 Operating and Capital Budget In FY 2016/17, SunLine plans to have an operating budget of $33,474,111 and a capital project budget of $19,055,873. The operating budget will absorb cost increases in wages and benefits, some new operating and administrative staff positions, as well as costs associated with operating expanded service. SunLine utilizes funding from various sources to operate its fixed route and paratransit services. Revenues include SunLine's bus and shelter advertising, a contribution from Riverside Transit Agency towards the operating costs for the Riverside Commuter Link service, outside fuel sales revenue, taxi voucher sales, emission credits, interest, and funding from two jurisdictions for bus shelter maintenance. 4.2 Funding Plans to Support Proposed Operating and Capital Program For FY 2017/18, funding plans for the proposed operating and capital programs are as follows: Funding sources for the proposed operating budget includes FTA Section 5307 (Urban), 5311 (Rural), 5310 (Elderly and Disabled), Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ), and Low Carbon Operating Program (LCTOP) funds apportioned by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), State Local Transportation Funds (LTF), Local Measure A funding and other revenue for operating assistance. Funding sources for capital projects include funds from FTA Section 5307, 5310, and 5339, as well as State Proposition 1 B: The Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account Program (PTMISEA) and Transit Safety and Security, State Transit Assistance (STA), Air Quality Improvement Program (AQUIP), California Energy Commission (CEC), CMAQ, and California Air Resources Board (CARB). 4.2.A Operating Budget The estimated FY 2016-17 operating budget of $33,474,111 outlined in Table 4, is funded from: • Estimated new LTF funding totaling $18,651,872 • Estimated Measure A funding totaling $5,835,696 • Estimated Section 5307 funding totaling $1,374,632 • Anticipated Low -Carbon Transit Operations grant funding of $539,373 (Lines 80, 81 and 95) • Estimated Section 5310 grant funding for operating assistance of $29,606 • Carryover Section 5310 grant funding for operating assistance of $28,000 • Section 5311(f) grant funding of $300,000 • Estimated Section 5311 grant funding of $341,572 • Carryover Section 5316 JARC grant funding of $13,093 (Commuter Link 220) • Carryover Section 5317 New Freedom grant funding of $57,488 (Commuter Link, Taxi Vouchers) • Estimated CMAQ grant funding of $201,168 (Line 20 & Vanpool Program) 39 " Other revenues in the amount of $2,767,888 from: o $1,300,000 from outside fuel sales o $173,202 in advertising revenues o $59,508 in bus shelter maintenance contract funding o $544,642 in emissions credits o $27,078 SunLine Regulatory Administration (SRA) overhead fees o $500,000 in compressed natural gas (CNG) rebate revenue o $60,333 of interest and other income o $103,125 in Taxi Voucher sales " Estimated passenger farebox recovery in the amount of $3,333,723. 4.2.B Capital Improvement Program Budget The estimated FY 2016-17 capital improvement program is a budget of $19,055,873, including: " Estimated new State Transit Assistance (STA) funds in the amount of $3,533,078 " Estimated new PTMISEA program funds in the amount of $117,802 " Estimated Proposition 1 B Transit Security funds in the amount of $373,551 " Estimated new Section 5307 capital assistance funds in the amount of $4,625,368 " Carryover Section 5339 capital assistance funds in the amount of $942,874 " AQIP grant funding in the amount of $9,463,200 4.3 Regulatory and Compliance Requirements Americans with Disability Act SunLine complies with the guidelines set forth the Americans with Disability Act (ADA) by providing a 100% accessible revenue service fleet for fixed route transit services and ADA paratransit service vans. Supervisor vans are also equipped with wheelchair lifts. As funding becomes available, the agency continues to provide bus stop improvements to ensure accessibility. Staff also coordinates construction projects to include bus stop improvements when the opportunity exists. Disadvantaged Business Enterprise SunLine's most recent Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) program and goal was revised and submitted to FTA in July 2015. The DBE semiannual reports are kept current, with the most recent DBE report submitted in December 2015. The next DBE report will be submitted in June 2016. 40 Equal Employment Opportunity SunLine complies with federal regulations pertaining to employment and submits its Equal Employment Opportunity (EE0)-1 report annually to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) as well as its EEO/Affirmative Action Program every three years to the FTA. The most recent EEO-1 report was submitted to the EEOC and certified in October 2015. The most recent EEO/Affirmative Action Program was revised and submitted to the FTA in FY 2013/14 and has been accepted. Title VI Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects people from discrimination based on race, color, and national origin in programs and activities receiving federal financial assistance. SunLine's Title VI Report was updated in FY 2013/14 for use in the FY 2014/15 to FY 2016/17 period. The report is scheduled for update, submission and approval by November 30, 2016. Transportation Development Act RCTC commissioned Pacific Management Consulting to conduct the Triennial Performance Audit as required by Transportation Development Act (TDA). SunLine is awaiting the findings. Federal Transit Administration Triennial Audit In accordance with regulations, SunLine Transit Agency completed a Federal Transit Administration Triennial Audit site visit in March 2016. The site visit resulted in four (4) findings and two (2) pending items. A draft report is scheduled for April 2016 with the final report due in May 2016. SunLine is diligently working to complete the required corrections before the deadline and ensuring improvements are made to required processes. National Transit Database To keep track of the industry and provide public information and statistics as it continues to grow, FTA's National Transit Database (NTD) records the financial, operating and asset condition of transit systems. Staff has completed NTD Section sampling for FY 2013/14. SunLine is performing parallel sampling using manual samples and Automatic Passenger Counter (APC) data in order to verify and gain approval to use APC data in future reporting. Staff plans on completing validation of the APC data by the close of FY 2016/17. Alternative Fuel Vehicles SunLine conforms to RCTC's Alternative Fuel Policy with all vehicles in the fleet using CNG or hydrogen fuel. The current active fleet consists of 64 40-foot CNG buses, 6 40-foot Hydrogen Fuel Cell buses, 10 32-foot CNG buses, 35 22-foot paratransit buses, and 51 total non -revenue CNG or electric vehicles, including both general support cars and trucks as well as facility - specific golf carts and forklifts. Hydrogen Fuel Station 41 FY2016/17 SRTP TABLE 1 FLEET INVENTORY 6T£'OZE 141S'£OL`£Z 0 bL trL :sle�ol E9T'ZtrE ZZZ'9LE 60£'90tr S8L'Z6 6SL'LTZ EOtr'Ltr VOtr'£TT 889'L 60£'S £trb'Z£T`S ZL9'OD6`L ZLT'9ZT`8 S8L`Z6 £6S'LLT`Z OTZ`ZVT tr0ATT 889`L LT9`OI 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ST TZ OZ T OT £ T T Z ST TZ OZ T OT £ T T Z t7b 6£ 6£ 6£ 6Z L£ L£ S£ S£ ,OVA NOM() ,Otr 3l ,Otr 3l ,0b Al ,ZEPPR Z3 SS3DXV SS3DXV 6>1 6>I I80 V3N V3N VAN NQ3 NO3 NQ3 QA8 QA8 SOOZ 800Z 800Z 800Z 600Z VTOZ ZTOZ STOZ trTDZ 9TISTOZ A3 (113.1PW ' 6•a) a1e0-0f-aem Tfl sV alalyaA aAIPV aad sapW atunain afieaand 9TISTOZ A3 yaaeW yfinaayn soup,' aplyaA ale° oT ain STiVIOZ A3 pu3 aeaA aoiad sal!W aplyaA ale(' 0I all 9TISTOZ AI saplyaA AauafiulTuo3 ;o # 9TISTOZ A3 saplyaA aAIPV Jo # apoD MAI Ian' y46uai apItiaA paddlnl}3 ATpedej dwell 611l1eag pue T�!l apOD PKW apn3 TRnu NH aeaA pa;eaad❑ AnDaai❑ (sngiNovi) sn8 Ama6V Tlsueal atinun5 4.74119d 11SNdN1 £OT'L£I ST9'86Lb b SE 6£ 09 N E301 iE8'8 LES'9£ 08£'0ZI L!r£'T LI 9I/5IOZ Aj (yaiew 1.5.a) alea-of-aeaA JO sy al�iyan ampy Jad sani minor! ! alkuond bZE`SE 6tri'97i £I£`S89`I L05'LZZ`Z ZZE'b0L 9T/SIOZ M y3.aeW yfino.�y� SOM apgm ale° 133 aii3 Si/tiIOZ M pug aeaA _loud sallW aE»yap ale(' of ain 0 0 0 0 tr 9T/5TOZ A3 sa13!PA A3uaGunuo3 ;o # b tri £F 0 9T/5TOZ sal)igap aniPy Jo # HJ ND ND ND N� apao adA1 !Brij ipfivai aE»tEap b b bT ET b Zi Z1 ZI Zi Zi paddiub3 A3E3ede0 dwell Gui1ea5 p1e lin HD3IM131/ 1-1DMIN3V apo3 NC73 NC]3 NCi3 NCB NG] 9T0Z STOZ {TN ZIOZ OIN 'foiW aew. pa;eaadp Aipaija asuodsab pueLuap ADua6y msum aunun5 veld -11sueal a!x►e0 PoilS LT/91-0CA] .[10.7110Allf jaa1g - T amyl 941.19N 11,M111 MIMS FY 2016/175RTP TABLE 2 SERVICE SUMMARY 3unlme TRANSIT ARENC F Table 2 -- SunLine Transit Agency -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2016/17 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes FY 2013/14 Audited FY 2014/15 Audited FY 2015/16 Plan FY 2015/16 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2016/17 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 88 91 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $25,623,354 $27,639,138 $30,794,949 $21,410,726 $33,474,111 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $5,052,151 $6,040,405 $5,607,118 $4,102,422 $6,101,611 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $20,571,203 $21,598,733 $25,187,831 $17,308,304 $27,372,500 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 4,823,320 4,827,837 5,143,610 3,420,278 4,621,406 Passenger Miles 32,259,923 35,101,121 37,677,722 24,953,737 33,942,769 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 271,414.6 284,957.6 295,655.0 225,125.2 312,089.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 3,902,105.2 4,161,846.5 4,367,433.0 3,269,796.4 4,515,761.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 4,329,457.9 4,618,585.5 4,865,023.0 3,612,100.9 4,993,747.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $94.41 $96.99 $104.16 $95.11 $107.26 Farebox Recovery Ratio 19.72% 21.85% 18.20% 19.16% 18.22% Subsidy per Passenger $4.26 $4.47 $4.90 $5.06 $5.92 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $0.64 $0.62 $0.67 $0.69 $0.81 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $75.79 $75.80 $85.19 $76.88 $87.71 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $5.27 $5.19 $5.77 $5.29 $6.06 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 17.8 16.9 17.4 15.2 14.8 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 1.24 1.16 1.18 1.05 1.02 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. &mime TRANSIT ACENCY Table 2 -- SunLine Transit Agency -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2016/17 Short Range Transit Plan Excluded Routes FY 2013/14 Audited FY 2014/15 Audited FY 2015/16 Plan FY 2015/16 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2016/17 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 5 9 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $906,853 $1,373,455 $1,866,924 $947,335 $3,644,124 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $75,726 $168,438 $314,002 $112,096 $626,720 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $831,127 $1,205,016 $1,552,922 $835,239 $3,017,404 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 76,392 140,758 164,490 100,124 325,858 Passenger Miles 504,951 962,785 1,184,330 687,753 2,346,178 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 8,764.9 13,085.7 12,926.0 9,220.8 29,176.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 197,724.3 264,887.0 240,282.0 170,780.7 441,490.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 218,218.6 287,457,2 268,554.0 - 184,357.3 500,553.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $103.46 $104.96 $144.43 $102.74 $124.90 Farebox Recovery Ratio 8.35% 12.26% 16.81% 11.83% 17.19% Subsidy per Passenger $10.88 $8.56 $9.44 $8.34 $9.26 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $1.65 $1.25 $1.31 $1.21 $1.29 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $94.83 $92.09 $120.14 $90.58 $103.42 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $4.20 $4.55 $6.46 $4.89 $6.83 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 8.7 10.8 12.7 10.9 11.2 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.39 0.53 0.68 0.59 0,74 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. Table 2 -- SunLine Transit Agency -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2016/17 Short Range Transit Plan Mon -Excluded Routes 1 nrrrr0r1 11111111.1 FY 2013/14 Audited FY 2014/15 Audited FY 2015/16 Plan FY 2015/16 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2016/17 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 83 82 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $24,716,501 $26,265,683 $28,928,025 $20,463,391 $29,829,987 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $4,976,424 $5,871,966 $5,293,116 $3,990,326 $5,474,890 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $19,740,077 $20,393,717 $23,634,909 $16,473,065 $24,355,097 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 4,746,928 4,687,079 4,979,120 3,320,154 4,295,548 Passenger Miles 31,754,972 34,138,336 36,493,392 24,265,984 31,596,591 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 262,649.8 271,871.9 282,729.0 215,904.3 282,913.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 3,704,380.9 3,896,959.5 4,127,151.0 3,099,015.7 4,074,271.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 4,111,239.3 4,331,128.3 4,596,469.0 3,427,743.6 4,493,194.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $94.10 $96.61 $102.32 $94.78 $105.44 Farebox Recovery Ratio 20.13°/0 22.36% 18.29% 19.50% 18.35% Subsidy per Passenger $4.16 $4.35 $4.75 $4.96 $5.67 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $0.62 $0.60 $0.65 $0.68 $0.77 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $75.16 $75.01 $83.60 $76.30 $86.09 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $5.33 $5.23 $5.73 $5.32 $5.98 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 18.1 17.2 17.6 15.4 15.2 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 1.28 1.20 1.21 1.07 1.05 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. Table 2 -- SunLine-BUS -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2016/17 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes TRANSIT AGENCY FY 2013/14 Audited FY 2014/15 Audited FY 2015/16 Plan FY 2015/16 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2016/17 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 59 62 Financial Data A.,, Total Operating Expenses $21,255,086 $22,712,173 $25,547,893 $17,435,927 $27,700,756 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $4,617,536 $5,466,541 $4,708,713 $3,705,404 $5,113,092 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $16,637,550 $17,245,632 $20,839,180 $13,730,523 $22,587,664 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 4,684,278 4,674,654 4,986,605 3,299,176 4,458,322 Passenger Miles 30,693,464 33,371,743 35,903,563 23,520,428 32,099,919 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 206,142.6 216,740.2 226,060.0 169,622.6 243,105.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 2,869,355.2 3,084,149.9 3,273,379.0 2,412,087.0 3,417,756.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 3,207,438.0 3,496,488.1 3,675,022.0 2,680,944.7 3,804,946.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $103.11 $104.79 $113.01 $102.79 $113.95 Farebox Recovery Ratio 21.72% 24.07% 18.43% 21.25% 18.45% Subsidy per Passenger $3.55 $3.69 $4.18 $4.16 $5.07 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $0.54 $0.52 $0.58 $0.58 $0.70 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $80.71 $79.57 $92.18 $80.95 $92.91 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $5.80 $5.59 $6.37 $5.69 $6.61 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 22.7 21.6 22.1 19.5 18.3 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 1.63 1.52 1.52 1.37 1.30 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. Table 2 -- SunLine-DAR -- SRTP Service Summary FY 2016/17 Short Range Transit Plan All Routes TRANSIT AGENCY FY 2013/14 Audited FY 2014/15 Audited FY 2015/16 Plan FY 2015/16 3rd Qtr Actual FY 2016/17 Plan Fleet Characteristics Peak -Hour Fleet 29 29 Financial Data Total Operating Expenses $4,368,268 $4,926,965 $5,247,056 $3,974,799 $5,773,355 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $434,614 $573,864 $898,405 $397,018 $988,518 Net Operating Expenses (Subsidies) $3,933,653 $4,353.101 $4,348,651 $3,577,781 $4,784,837 Operating Characteristics Unlinked Passenger Trips 139,042 153,183 157,005 121,102 163,084 Passenger Miles 1,566,459 1,729,378 1,774,159 1,433,309 1,842,850 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours (a) 65,272.0 68,217.4 69,595.0 55,502.6 68,984.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles (b) 1,032,750.0 1,077,696.6 1,094,054.0 857,709.4 1,098,005.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 1,122,019.9 1,172,097.4 1,190,001.0 931,156.2 1,188,801.0 Performance Characteristics Operating Cost per Revenue Hour $66.92 $72.22 $75.39 $71.61 $83.69 Farebox Recovery Ratio 9.95% 11.65% 17.12% 9.99% 17.12% Subsidy per Passenger $28.29 $28.42 $27.70 $29.54 $29.34 Subsidy per Passenger Mile $2.51 $2.52 $2.45 $2.50 $2.60 Subsidy per Revenue Hour (a) $60.27 $63.81 $62.49 $64.46 $69.36 Subsidy per Revenue Mile (b) $3.81 $4.04 $3.97 $4.17 $4.36 Passenger per Revenue Hour (a) 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.2 2.4 Passenger per Revenue Mile (b) 0.13 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.15 (a) Train Hours for Rail Modes. (b) Car Miles for Rail Modes. FY 2016/17 SRTP TABLE 3 ROUTE STATISTICS Z6'T 8'6i 90'9$ TUGS$ ITN 76'S$ %22131 te'L$ I6'L$ 97'L01$ WW1 lip!Aa+d aald+ag ST'D 9£ 0 LL'E 95`0 0£'T bZ'I 5C1 £CI fir0 £9'D 85'D 4,81 9Z'I hT'O orD T2'1 TS'I LSI b-Z 8"9 01£ 911 8'91 £'11 T13T 0'ZT 5-ET S'8 5'91 F9Z 971 ob 5'2 £ 6T 2-ZZ 6'1Z 9£'b$ LC9$ T5'9$ 25'9$ 80'9$ b£'9$ 02 9$ 99'9$ 58 5$ T'9$ 6£'9$ 89'9$ LT'L$ 58'9$ Lb'8$ 09 9$ £6'9$ TS'9$ 9£'69$ LT 82I$ £9'£S$ 86'bEI$ ovei$ L9'LS$ 60 b9$ 8£'09$ 08 66$ L8'28$ b6'90T$ £Z'29$ 80'001$ £b'T02$ Ob'Z52$ O£ SOI$ Tb'20T$ 26'05$ 092$ 09 2$ b2'0$ 291$ 59'0$ ICO$ 66 0$ OL'0$ EO T$ WT$ O6'08 £E'0$ eta 6oZ$ 66'TT$ 94.0$ h9'0$ 95'0$ b£'62$ 5C81$ £L'T$ n175 L9,4 O I'5$ 55 E$ 20'5$ Ob'L$ LI-01$ 05'9$ 9E'Z$ 69'S$ O 005$ 52'98$ Sb"5$ 09'4$ ST'4$ %ZT'LT %95"bT %00'02 %90'5T %00'02 %00'OZ %00"02 %96'6T %69"6T %59"6S %52'6T %66'6T %Z6'6T %ITST %66'9T %ECST %5E'9I %E9'6T OVSE$ 5612$ 9T'2$ 9L'ET$ b8'1$ 8£'9$ Eb b5 L2'9$ 42 6$ 99'Z1$ SO'S$ 567$ OT'L$ 99 55$ 96'£0T$ TC9$ TS'5$ OT'S$ 92'5$ Z6 L$ bT'8$ L9'L$ 09'L$ Ea SCL$ scs$ 1E7$ 86'3 16'L$ S£'9$ 56"8$ LO"8$ OZ'oT$ Zl-8$ 6Z"9$ 21'8$ 69'£8$ E0 051$ 60'L9$ L6'85T$ 00'86$ EO'ZL$ 2T 08$ 96'5L$ 65 azI$ £S'£O1$ 56'ZE1$ 6L'LL$ 86'bZl$ EO L£Z$ L0'b0£S 85'621$ b17771$ Zb'£115 0.0 IIV shea IIV sA.o IItl mua IIV seen IIV sAea IIV 0.0 IN sAea IIV shea IIV sAea IIV sAeO IIV sAed IIV sAeO IIV 0.0 IIV sac IIV sAea IItl shea IIV sAea IItl ada-Nn5 ss-Nns z6-Nn5 Te-Nn5 oe-Nn5 18-Nn5 os-Nns oL-Nn5 b5-Nn5 ES-Nn5 ZE-Nn5 DE-Nn5 R-Nns O2Z-NOe oz-Nn5 5T-NOS b[-Nn5 T[[-Nn5 a11111 .ad MINA nod .1111 anoA aplp .15uassed ones +a6uassed aPpy anlleAdd MnoH anuanaa s+a6uassed s+a6uassed anuanaa anuoAaa Ma6uassud Mad Amsgns A+aAomaa Mad 7s03 Mad isoJ Mad 9so� Mad APlsgns +ad APIsgns +ad APIsgnS aogaMed 6une+ad0 6uneMado adAl Reg # ainou samalpuI aauenuoPed sa;noa IItl LTI9TOZ A.3 8 -- ADuaBv lisueal aunung 57.11571e4S elnnil &LYS - E a/9e1 0052L£'L2$ 119101'9$ IT T'bLh'££$ 0YbL'£66'1, at9L'STS'b 0"E60'TEE 0.690'2TE 69L'2b6'E£ 901,1204 15 sle7ol aaplAwd aaPuag L£8'b8414 T8£'999$ T89'62T$ 99L929'Z$ 00£'996$ 8L6'I£S$ 9LL685$ 9S9'00T'T$ 9TL'LL9$ £TO'ELE$ Z£2'95L'I$ b£9'6TL'T$ EL9'9£6$ 0E0'8L9$ 6W-155$ £2T'SLS$ £s£'ZTO'£$ 2tt'b56'S$ STS'886$ 6o9'ETT$ OZb'ZE$ L4L'996$ SLs'9T T$ 566'7E3 bbb'Lbt$ 296'bLZ$ ES£'99I$ D9T'Otrl$ i 56'8Zb$ 906 6Zb$ a50'EEZ$ LT861I$ 9S8'ZTT$ ST9'ZET$ 621'695$ L66'£Lb`T$ SSE'ELL'S$ 686'6a$ TOT'Z9T$ E15'£60'E$ 9L8'Z85$ £C6'b99$ OZZ'L£L$ 8T9'5L£'T$ 690'968$ ELl'ETL$ £81'LZZ'Z$ 2175'6171'2$ 82e59T'T$ Lbe'L6L$ 560'499$ 6£C'LOL$ Z8b'T09'£$ 609'L24'L$ TT08`88T`T O'6E''LOT 0.99222 O'ZZ6`bZb O'E90`08 O'01,£16 O'b9Z'S OS O'£56'B8T O'STZ`9TT O'T96`L6 O'EZ6`50E O'652'Sn TEL9`09T O'T65`60T 06TZ`T6 03,716 O'969'66b 0W`OZ01 0.500'8601 O'0L4'86 0"O26'61 O'TS[`£04 O'599'92 O'599'£8 0761'56 O'92Lb9T 0"99L'STT O'58£'68 OZ29'T92 0'LL€'LSZ 0-£E9'OET 0716'96 0-TOT'S9 O'bOZ'L8 O'9£5'b£b O'6L2'ST6 O L06'EL O'6Eb'S 0"bb5'2 O'E22'02 O'LSO'9 O'066'6 O'LIb'6 0"Lif'6T O'9E9'9 O'LSZ'L O'626'LT O'65E'62 T9LL'DT O'526`E 0 926'2 O'D6L5 OZLT'TE o L02'69 01,86'89 O'661'5 O'BT6'2 O'096`6I O'51,6'5 O'522'6 O'Z07'6 0.622`8T 01.6L`9 O'5T6'9 O'ST8`9T OTE9'LZ 0 65E% O'99£`E O eST'Z O'Z91A O'bib$Z O'586'59 058'Zb8'T Sa'SSZ 000'Ob5 58£'8T9'T 8LT'8TC bi8'05L 60Z'L6T'I 298%45'1 82£'659 b5L'506 066'2661 9E1'552'5 868'58T`T 852'96 k66'sh Z6e651 b06'60L'b bT0'6Z£'01 680`E9T 6E5'S£ 000'52 9a`6Z2 Lbe55 092'60T 8Lz'99T SZk`612 EL516 sseos SEL`9L2 088'62L 90L`b9T b ELE`EI Z 996`9 Z L25'50T E51'b59 5951,Eb'T 51 shea 11V hea IIV ska I1V sA801IV sAea IIV Aea I1V sAea 1 tl sAea IIV 0.0 IIV 0.0 IIV 5Aea 11V sAea IIV sAea IIV sA.0 11V sAea 11V sABO { V -5Aea {IV 0.O 11V uva-Nns 56-Nn5 26-Nn5 16-Nns o6-Nn5 Te-Nns o8-Nns oL-Nns as-Nns E5-11n5 zE-Nns 0E-Nn5 az-Nns ozz-Nns DZ-NO6 ST-Nns bi-NnS TII-Nns Aplsgn5 4.14 anuanaa WI) saP$q sally$ smoH sanoli ..Ilya Ma6ueesed 6urpuado leyol anuawaa WW1 anuawaa Ma6uassed s+a6uassed sap.on Aead adAl Rep # Wl szuaw013 e;ad sa;noa IItl LT/9TOZ A9 g -- Aaua6v mueal aunung 52.14511./e7S aMON dills - E a19e1 4311119d 11SNYi11 911171111S 1,L-0 Z'ST £8'9$ Z4'EOT$ 6Z'T$ 9Z'6$ %6I'LT TVS% SZ'8$ 06'17ZT$ 01e301 aapinwd 2239uas 98'0 bZ'T SL'T bT'0 OI 0 8'9 E-IT T'8T 0'4 6Z LT'9ZT$ C9'LS$ 60'69$ E4'TOZ$ Ob 25Z$ 047$ IL'0$ 66'0$ b0'4$ 66 II$ Sc9T$ OT'5$ SS'E$ OL'05$ 6Z 98$ %95'bI 5600'0Z 5600'0Z %TO'51 %66 91 56'TZ$ 8E'9$ Eb'b$ 99'65$ 96'EOT$ EO'OST$ 90'ZL$ ZT'08$ EO'LEZ$ L0 60£$ etea Iltl se-Nns sAea Iltl is-Nns sAea Iltl 08-Nn5 stea IIH Ozz-Nn5 sARa Iltl Oz-Nns aIIW lad moll Jad anyg moll anal ia6uassed al;ea Ja6uassed aim anuanaa moll anuanaa slaSuassed sla6uassed anuanaa anuanaa Ja6uassed lad Aplsgns AJanooaa lad isoa Jad;5a'a Jad;so) lad Aplsgns lad Aplsgng Jad Aplsgns xogam4 6ui;eJ ado Sulend° adAy Amu # 020011 sloleplpuI aauetumpad sa;noa papnhx3 LT/9TOZ Ai g -- Aaua6q 3puell aununs 52ps ejs d1 NS - f ame1 bOb`LIO'E$ OZL`9Z9$ 4Z-1$14E$ 0-£55`005 0.0617'I44 0-46T`IE 0 941'6Z 64TY94E'Z 8S8'SZE 6 slew". JapinoJd animas TB£`999$ 8L6`T£5$ 9LL`685$ 0£0`8L9$ 6EZ`iSS$ 609`£IT$ 566`Z£T$ Wb`LbT$ LT8`6TT$ 958`Zi1$ 686'6LL$ £L6'499$ OZeLEL$ Lb8'L6L$ 560'499$ O'6£I`LOT 0.01,06 O'b9Z`TOT O'0Lh`86 O'598'ES 0714'56 0165`60I 02'6'86 0.6TZ`T6 0'101'59 O'6£b'S O'061.% O'LTb'6 O'SZ6'£ O'9Z6'Z O'66I'S 0' SZe6 O'Z0e6 O'99E'E O'bez 8L8'SSZ bT8'05L 1,07'L671 88Z'96 b66'56 6ES'SE 08Z'66T 8LZ'99I EL£'EI 88£'9 she° IIV SG-NnS stea IIV T8-Nns step IIV os-Nns stea IIV ozz-NnS ste011C' OZ-Nns- Aplsgns anuanaa }son ;aN 2a6uassed 6uimado 0.1IIW 10301 sallW anuaAaa smolt small 112301 anuaAaa 201114 Ja6uassed sla6uassed salolgaA adAy Aea # ainotl Read slualuoi3 eiled sarnoa papninx3 LT/9TOZ Ai g - Abua6y 3Isue31 aurlun5 sai;slleis alnoal d1alS - £ a/9e1 1341191/ IINNVYI 011111111S SO'T EST 86"5$ 60'98$ LL'O$ L9'S$ %SE'8T 176'9$ Z£"L$ bb'SOT$ slegol iaplAoJd aaweS ST'0 LL £ 95'0 0£'T 6L'0 E9'0 66'0 68'L 9Z'T TZ "T TS T L5'T b"Z 0 TE 9'TT 8'9T 0'ZT S'ET T"6 5'9T b 9Z 9"LT E"6T Z ZZ 61Z 9£"b$ T S-9$ ZS"9$ B0'9$ 89'9$ S8"S$ T4"9$ 6£"9$ 89-9$ LTY$ 09"9$ £6-9$ T S"9$ 9£'69$ £9'ES$ 86'b£T$ 66'8L$ B£' 09$ 08'66$ Le'ZB$ b6'90T$ EZ'L9$ 80'00T$ OE'SOT$ T4•ZOT$ 2506$ 4E"6Z$ £L"T$ 691 T$ L9'4$ ZO'S$ Ob'L$ LT'OT$ OS'9$ 9E'L$ 09'5$ Sb'S$ 09 4$ ST'b$ %ZT'LT %00"0Z %80"ST %COW %95'5T %68'6T %59"6T %SZ"6T %66 6T %Z6'6T %EL"ST %SE'9T %E8'6T Ob' SE$ 9T Z$ 9L'ET$ b8'S$ LZ'9$ bZ'6$ 99'ZT$ 50'B$ 56'Z$ OT'L$ TL"9$ TS"S$ 8T' S$ 9Z"S$ bT 8$ L9"L$ 097$ S£'8$ TE'L$ 86"L$ 5E'8$ 56'8$ ZT"8$ 6Z-8$ ZT"8$ 69'ES$ b0Y9$ L6'8ST$ 00'86$ 96'SL$ 65'bZT$ ET'EOT$ 56Z£T$ 6LLL$ 86'bZT$ 8S'6ZT$ b4 ZZT$ Z4'£TT$ s6ea Iltl 8d0-Nn5 Shea IItl Z6-Nn5 shed IIV T6-Nns sdea IIV O6-Nn5 s6e0 IIV OL-Nn5 sAea utl bs-Nns sAe011V ES-1\1115 sAeO IIV Z£-Nn5 sAea IIV OS-Nn5 gima bZ-runs uea IIV ST-Nns 5Ae0 IIV bT-120S sAeO IIV TIT-Nn5 al!W lad saafivassed meow gad ally) mot/ al!W Jebuassed olgeb ia6uassed al!W anuanab mop anuanab sia6uassed anuanab anuanab iafivassed lad dpmcins Idano3ab aadgsa) ...API) lad }so) gad Aplsgn5 gad Ap!sgng gad Aplsgns xogwej 6unendo 6uneiado adAl Aep # agnob siogea!puI aaueuioyad sagrloa papnpx3-uoN LT/9TOZ A� 8 -- A3uabvmsueal aullung samspe;s aJnoi/ d.UIS - £ a19p1 160SSE'bZ$ 068`blb'S$ Le6'6Z8`67$ 01761'£fib'b O'TLZ'bL0`4 0'958'56Z 0'£T6'Z2Z T65'965'TE 86S`S6Z'4 Z8 slegol iap1e0ad aawas LE8'b8e14 T89'6ZT$ 99e9Z9'Z$ 00E'996$ 959'00T'IS 9TL'LL9$ ET O'ELS$ ZEZ'86L'T$ b£9'6TL'I$ EL9'9E6$ EZY5L5$ ESE'ZIO'E$ ZIT'456'S$ 8TS'ee6$ 55E'£LL'S$ uT08'eet'T O'$00'860'T O'LOb'£L OZ6'Z£$ i0T`L93 0'99eZZ O'OZ6'6T 0665`Z Li7L'994$ ETS'£60'E$ 07Z6'17Z17 0TTI'E01, O'EZZ'OZ SLS'9T1$ 9L8'Z85$ 0E90'08 0'889'9L O'L50`9 Z9617a$ 9T9'SL£'i$ 0'£56'89T TRL'691 O'LT£'6I £SE'e9I$ 690'91,8$ 0SIZ'9IT 0 B8L'SIT 0'8E8'8 091'061$ ELT'0A 01-96'L6 O'S8E'69 Wan I56'BZb$ E8T'LZZ'Z$ O'E26'SOE 07Z918Z 017Z6`LT 806'6Z4$ Zb5`617T`Z$ O'6SZ'S6Z O'LLE'L52 0175£`6Z 4S0'££Z$ 8Z1'69T'T$ 0 EL9'091 TEE9'0£T 0 9LL`6T 5T9'ZEi$ 6EL'LOL$ 016TZ'L6 0 170eL8 0'06L'5 6Ze685$ Z86'109'£$ 0969'6617 09£S17E6 6ZLT'TE L66`£L4'1$ 609'LZb'L$ 0'86Z'OZO'T 0'6LeST6 0'LOTS O'696%9 O'9Tb'Z 0' 094'5T O'866'S O'6ZZ'8T O I6e9 O'ST6'9 0' 5T8'9T 0"EE9'LZ 0 658'6 0 Z96'5 O'6T6'6Z b60'E9T 000'SL 9LL'4ZZ LbL'66 SZb`6IZ £L5`i6 SSE'9S SEL'9LZ 0B8'6ZL 80L'49T LZ5'SOi £ST'659 0'72b'S9 bT 0'6Z£'OT S8S'17£4'T 058'ZT2'T 000'065 58£'8T9'T BLT'8TL L96'6L5'T BZE'659 BeS06 06b'Z66'T 9£T'S5Z'S 868'58T'T L6L'6SL 606'60L'b sAea IIV ava-Nn5 sAea IIV Z6-NGS sAea IIV T6-NnS sAea IIV 06-Nn5 sAea IIV OL-NnS 5Ae0 IIV 4s-Nns sAea IIV £S-Nns sAea lM ZE-Nns sAea IN 0E-1,111S sAea Iry 4Z-NnS $Ae0IIV si-Nn5 sAea IIV 4T-Nn5 sAea IIV ITT-NGS Appgns gaN anuanab 1s03 Ja6uassed Bulaezado legal sallW anuanab &loot/ slalom sal!W legal anuanab Ja6uassed sia6uassed sapalap, dead adAl AEG # swan sguaua13 egec sagnob papnpx3-uoN LT/9TOZ AA g -- ADua6ya!sueal aununs soPs►.Je;S a.Jnv y &WS - £ WW1 4.7N15F 11$Nt/111 011111111,41 FY 2016/175RTP TABLE 3A INDIVIDUAL ROUTE DESCRIPTIONS TABLE 3A - Individual Route Descriptions Line # Route Class Route Description/Cities Served Line 14 Regional Desert Hot Springs and Palm Springs Line 15 Local Desert Hot Springs and the community of Desert Edge Line 20 Market -Based Desert Hot Springs, Rancho Mirage, Palm Desert, and the community of Thousand Palms Line 24 Local Palm Springs Line 30 Regional Palm Springs and Cathedral City Line 32 Local Palm Springs, Cathedral City, Rancho Mirage, Palm Desert, and the community of Thousand Palms Line 53 Local Palm Desert Line 54 Local Palm Desert, Indian Wells, La Quinta, Indio, and the community of Bermuda Dunes Line 70 Local La Quinta, Palm Desert, Indian Wells, and the community of Bermuda Dunes Lines 80/81 Local Indio Line 90 Local Indio and Coachella Line 91 Local Indio, Coachella, and the communities of Thermal, Mecca, and Oasis Line 95 Rural Indio, Coachella, and the communities of Mecca and North Shore Line 111 Regional Coachella, Indio, La Quinta, Indian Wells, Palm Desert, Rancho Mirage, Cathedral City, and Palm Springs Line 220 Market -Based Palm Desert, Thousand Palms, Cabazon (Morongo Casino), Beaumont, Moreno Valley, and Riverside Line # NEW Route Class Route Description/Cities Served Line 92 Local Coachella 56 FY 2016/17 SRTP TABLE 3B NEW/EXISTING ROUTES EXEMPTION FOR FY 2016/17 TABLE 3B - FY 2016/17 New/Existing Routes Exemption Sheet ROUTE # Line 20 MODE Fixed Route SERVICE TYPE Directly Operated ROUTE DESCRIPTION DATE OF IMPLEMENTATION January 2016 ROUTE EXEMPTION END DATE Desert Hot Springs — Palm Desert June 2018 Line 80 Fixed Route Directly Operated Indio January 2017 June 2019 Line 81 Fixed Route Directly Operated Indio January 2017 June 2019 Line 95 Fixed Route Directly Operated Indio, Coachella, Thermal, Mecca, North Shore September 2016 June 2019 Link 220 Commuter Directly Operated Palm Desert, Banning, Beaumont, Moreno Valley, Riverside September 2016 June 2019 58 FY 2016/17 SRTP TABLE 4 SUMMARY OF FUNDS REQUESTED FOR FY 2016/17 486'6ZS'ZSf £L8'990'61.$ lsanbaN Bu!pund IWol Isenbeg 6u!pund lellde0 paMulls3 lelol OOZ'E9V6$ AIM baZ176$ SEES uo!yne5 Z08'Ll I$ VBSIINld !anal 9l/SI AA ISS'ELE$ APnoes pue Aa;eS gl dad LI/9IAA SoPofe,d LL Ad 10 awos snld Joni>A„so 91. Ad 89£'SZ914 lel!de0 LOES L3/9IAA 1,01.00.Id ,anoAueo paleomeun ewos sn!d Ll/9I1.A 8L0'EES'E$ 1e11de0 V1S L3/9IAA P P0(0.Id la6png 6uBe,adO 9L/SLAd uo paseg I{ VPLVEE$ lsenbey 6u!punj &plank) palew11s3 lelol ELE'SES$ dO1O1 ZOLX lue,6 u!we,6ad,ayonoA pcel 01 we,6mdeg 88VLS$ LLES uelloeS BMX lue,6 u! OZZ hull of we,6oKleg E60'El$ 9LES ue!yneg 000'00ES (;)LIES LIeMeg ,anoA„e0 000'8Z$ 909'6Z$ Z£9'PLE'I$ LL/91.AA ,ol stl ZLS'L4£$ 89I'I0Z$ %ZL+9L/SLAA m; stl 969'SE8'S$ enueneg we,6o,d,ayonoA !xel Pelewgse uo paseg SZCEOl$ (££E`09$) ewoou! pue papaw! snoeuemeosm pue'(000'005$) elegag E9L'b99'Z$ ONO'(90'8L0'LZ$) sae; peeLPeno VNS'(Eb'Z49'46S$) Une,o suo!ss!wa'(80$'6S$) oeuene, eoueuelulew,allele sng' (ZOZ'£LI$) anuana, 6uls!l,enpe '(000'00£' L$) sales Ian; en!slno UV. suegoefad uo paseg - d1NS SL@LAA ,o; sV 9l/SIAj uo paseg EZL'EE£'£$ spun;,anoAueo paleoolleun ewos+9l/SLAA uo paseg ZL8'IS9'8I$ la6png 6uge,adO 9WS IAA uo paseg I I1'4L4'£E$ OIES uogoag OLES uogoaS LO£S ue!PoS spun] fiw ed° LLES ue!loeS LI/9IAA Paloafad OVOID LI/9IAA Paloefmd V amsea!N LL/9IAA Peloefmd enueneg dAl LL/9l AA Perefo,d senuenay ,ayl0 LI/9IAA Paloefo,d enueneg xoga,eA LL/9IAA PePefmd jll LI/9IAA Saloefo,d 1e6png leB,el s11e1e0 BuIP.0A Ioefo,d EZL'EEE'E$ 898'L9L'Z$ OOZ'£9V6$ 89I1.0Z$ 88VLS$ £60'£I$ ZLS'143 4L8'Z46$ 000'003 00011Z$ 909'6Z$ ELE' O 000'000'94 969'SE8'S$ ISVEL£$ Z08'LII$ 8L0'EES'E$ ZL81.99181.$ 496'6ZS'ZS$ Iei!deO+e BugeaadO!elol in 0$ OOVE94'6$ 0$ 0$ 0$ 0$ 4L8'Z46$ 0$ 0$ 0$ 0$ 89E'SZ91/ 0$ ISS'ELE$ ZO8'LL1.$ 8L0'££S'£$ 0$ £L8'S$0'6I$ lel!deO K60I4169 000'094$ 000'51. I$ 000'9L9$ OI-L1-1S sng %nog pex!d (0 uo!suedx3 OZE'14E$ OZE'I4E$ 60-Ll-lS (uom1:1J0I-EIAA).13 PO land PPM-1.1.13.13.0H OOZ'E94'6$ 000'0SL'Z$ 00VSIZ'ZI$ 90-L1-1S uoselg ue6o,pAg pue gOA PPgki o!-0oal3 ue6o,34.1 000'Z61.$ 000'814 000'043 LO-LI-10 (AS 4) se1061eA ao!n,ag anueneg uoN luaweoe!day 4L8'Z46$ 9ZVSZ8'1.$ 000'89L'Z$ 90-L I-1S Laseyd lummoe!deg/q!!!oej suogeledO ZO8'Ll1.$ Z08'Ll L$ SO-Ll-1S swauenoxtuiA pej 009'663 OO17'Z9$ 000'ZI£$ b0-LI-1S sloefad(lI) A6olouyoel uogeLuMu! I9S'ELE$ ISS'ELE$ EO-LI-1S sluewaoueyu311sue,l 008'£93 OOe83 000'Z8Z$ ZO-L1-1S ueA 11sue,le,ed (Z) uo!suedx3 896.614$ ZEO'£l l'3 000'££8'I$ 1.0-L1-1S sum lua.u.e!daN(£l) 11sue,le,ed xoga,ed enuena l Jew) dIOV DVINO LLES umes MS uonoeg LLES uopes 6£ES uopoeg (!)LLES OILS uogoeg ,anolu,eO OLES uogoeg d0191 s6uudg w!ed A!O IeVeyleOMPul LOES uo!loeS VamsealN APoOeS 1!sue,l gL dad VSSIINld V1S All spun];o lunoury lelol ,agwnN loafo,d !el!de0 ltllldV3 £ZCE££'E$ 888'L9L'Z$ OS 891'1(0 01WLS$ E60'E I$ ZLVL4£$ O$ 000'00£$ 000'SZ$ 909%Z$ ELE`6£S$ Z£9'bL£'I$ 969`SES'S$ 0$ 0$ 0$ ZL8'I59'8I$ LL VVLVE£$ 6une,adO lelol-qng O8Z'EI$ 4ZS'S01.$ 408'8I1$ we,6oJd !oodueA EL£'6ES$ £LE'6ES$ S6 V I8'08...In $60'EL$ 000'00£$ E0I'LVI$ 96 V094$ OZZ Nu!l ialnwwoO ,888'LHL$ ,EbE'bZ$ LEZ'ZLZ$ OZ au!1 SZVE01.$ 884'LS$ 000'HZ$ 909'6Z$ 884'LS$ LOL'SLZ$ ,ayonoA poi EZL'EEE'E$ E9L'1799'Z$ ZLS'I4£$ Z£9'4L£'I$ 969'SE8'S$ bLb'L LE'HI$ 008'L98'1.E$ eouels!ssV 6ueeledO ONIltlN3dO xogemd enueneg ,ey1O dIOV °VINO LLES uo!loeg 91.£9 uogoe5 ll£S uogoeg 6E£S uogoe5 6)1.1.ES OHS uogoeg ,enokueO DIES uogoeS d0101 s6uud5 puled AID Ie,PegleOMMI LOES uogoeg Vemseen ApnoeS 11sue,1 gL do,d VSSIINld V1S All spund;o lunoury lelol uogduoseO peIo,d 9I0Z/6I/S IA IVNIA ueld psue,l a6ueN 1,oys palsanbaN pund;o Amunung L H9I0Z AA Aoue6V l!sue,l eu!lung 91.0Z'8I'SO EA IVNIA L11910Z AA,o; lsanbeg 6u!pund;o A,euwng - 4 awl 4318V1 A3N19H 11SNb111 aa��r�ns FY 2016/17 SRTP TABLE 4A CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION FOR FY 2016/17 FY 2016/17 SRTP TABLE 4A — CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SRTP Pro'ect No: SL-17-01 RFTIP No: ROJECT NAME Paratransit Replacement Vans (up to 13) ROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase of up to 13 Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) vans to replace existing SunDial paratransit vans that will meet useful life as outlined by federal guidelines. OJECT JUSTIFICATION The purchase of replacement paratransit vans continues SunLine's goal of maintaining a first rate fleet to serve customers. The replacement vehicles will meet the Federal Transit Administration's minimum service -life requirement. Additionally, the failure to replace the vehicles will result in significantly higher maintenance and rehabilitation. PROJECT SCHEDULE July 2017 ROJECT FUNDING •URCES Fund Type STA Fiscal Year 2017 Amount $1,113,032 Section 5307 2017 $719,968 FTA Grant # RCT Grant # Description Unexpended $1,833,000 balance 62 FY 2016/17 SRTP TABLE 4A - CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SRTP Project No: SL-17-02 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME Expansion Paratransit Vans (up to 2) PROJECT DESCRIPTION The purchase of Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) vans to expand the SunDial paratransit vans to meet service demands. PROJECT JUSTIFICATIO The expansion of the fleet will allow SunDial complementary paratransit services to meet the demand for services within the guidelines established by the American's with Disabilities Act. Start Date Completion Date PROJECT SCHEDULE July 2016 June 2018 111. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES Fund Type STA Fiscal Year 2017 Amount $28,200 Section 5307 2017 $253,800 Total $282,000 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance 63 FY 2016/17 SRTP TABLE 4A — CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SRTP Project No: SL-17-03 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME Transit Enhancements PROJECT DESCRIPTION The enhancement of the bus stop system to enhance access for persons with disabilities and the general public through modernization of bus shelters, benches, kiosks, signage and lighting to enhance security and safety of all SunLine customers. The enhancement of transit facilities safety and PROJECT JUSTIFICATION promotes security among people throughout the Coachella Valley. PROJECT SCHEDULE Start Date July 2016 ompletion Date June 2019 ROJECT FUNDING SOURCES Fund Type Prop 1 B, FY15/16 Security Fiscal Year 2017 Amount $373,551 Total $373,551 TA Grant # 1 RCTC Grant # 1 Description Unexpended balance 64 FY 2016/17 SRTP TABLE 4A — CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION SRTP Project No: PROJECT NUMBER SL-17-04 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME Information Technology (IT) Projects ii-- The supports the purchase of a variety of IT equipment, projects PROJECT DESCRIPTION software, and hardware. il' i The IT is critical to the daily function and reliable and efficient transit services. use of equipment PROJECT JUSTIFICATION 1 efficiency in providing safe, Start Date Completion Date July 2016 PROJECT SCHEDULE June 2017 lim lim Fund Type Fiscal Year Amount STA 2017 $62,400 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES Section 5307 2017 $249,600 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Total Unexpended $312,000 balance 65 FY 2016/17 SRTP TABLE 4A — CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER PROJECT NAME * SRTP Project No: j SL-17-05 FTIP No: Facility Improvements PROJECT DESCRIPTION The facility improvement project will allow SunLine to improve existing buildings and property at the Thousand Palms and Indio sites. r 1. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION The projects will allow for continued safety and security of staff and general public. PROJECT SCHEDULE Start Date Completion Date July 2016 June 2018 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES Fund Type Fiscal Year Amount 4PTMISEA, FY08/09 Residual Funds Description 2017 $117,802 Total $117,802 balance FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Unexpended 66 FY 2016/17 SRTP TABLE 4A — CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SRTP Project No: SL-17-06 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME Operations Facility Replacement, Phase 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The operations facility replacement will allow SunLine to project complete demolition, removal and rebuild a functional operations building at the Thousand Palms site. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION The project will improve employee safety and energy efficiency. PROJECT SCHEDULE Start Date Completion Date July 2016 June 2020 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES Fund Type Fiscal Year Amount STA 2017 $1, 825,126 Section 5339, FY15, FY16 2017 $942,874 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Total $2,768,000 Unexpended balance 67 FY 2016/17 SRTP TABLE 4A — CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SRTP Project No: SL-17-07 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME Replacement Non -revenue Service Vehicles (4SV) ROJE T DESCRIPTION The replacement of four compressed natural gas (CNG) supervisor vehicles with electric vehicles to meet FTA useful life guidelines. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION The purchase of four non -revenue service vehicles will ensure SunLine replaces older fleet vehicles to maintain service reliability and reduce maintenance costs. OJECT SCHEDULE Start Date Completion Date July 2016 June 2018 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES Fund Type Fiscal Year Amount STA 2017 $48,000 Section 5307 2017 $192,000 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Total $240,000 Unexpended balance 68 FY 2016/17 SRTP TABLE 4A — CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SRTP Project No: SL-17-08 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME Hydrogen Electric Hybrid FCB and Hydrogen Station ROJE T DESCRIPTION Purchase of five fixed route buses to replace existing CNG bus fleet vehicles that will meet useful life as outlined by federal guidelines. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION The purchase of five CNG fixed route buses will ensure SunLine replaces older fleet vehicles to maintain service reliability and reduce maintenance costs. OJECT SCHEDULE Start Date Completion Date July 2016 June 2018 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES Fund Type Fiscal Year Amount AQIP 2017 $9,463,200 Section 5307 2017 $2,750,000 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Total $12,213,200 Unexpended balance 69 FY 2016/17 SRTP TABLE 4A — CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SRTP Project No: SL-17-09 FTIP No: Expansion Fixed Route Bus Hydrogen Electric Hybrid Fuel Cell PROJECT NAME Bus (F413-LoNo Match) PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase of one low/no emission fixed route bus. The of one fixed route bus to support the service PROJECT JUSTIFICATION purchase frequency improvement plan. PROJECT SCHEDULE Start Dat: July 2016 Completion Date June 2019 PROJECT FUNDING STA Fund Type Fiscal Year 2017 Amo $341,320 SOURCES � Total $341,320 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance 70 FY 2016/17 SRTP TABLE 4A — CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SRTP Project No: SL-17-10 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME Expansion Fixed Route Bus PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase of one low/no emission fixed route bus. The of one fixed route bus to support the service PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT SCHEDULE purchase frequency improvement Start Date July 2016 plan. Completion Date June 2019 and Type ar Am PROJECT FUNDING STA 2017 $115,000 SOURCES Section 5307 2017 $460,000 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Total $575,000 Unexpended balance 71 FY 2016/17 SRTP TABLE 5.1 SUMMARY OF FUNDS REQUESTED FOR 2017/18 Eases+off%Z1 Z04 la6png 60pelado g L!S lAA Uo paseg BbZ'496'$48 ;59 LEZ'b L$ 358045' Lfi 000'ELES 000'9L8'64 000694 ZS $.6£'9ZL 6Z$ 000'005$ L89'6Zb$ OL5'899$ 0$ EL9`86g'9S (as�.Lau! %Z7 Z0.4 , la6Png 8.4c-lad0 ZIA9 CAA Uo Pase9 51, EZTZS (asaa,,u! %Z) ZO'l x1a6899 6u!!¢1ad0 L4l9 IAA uo Pase9 L6£'004'£$ ZZ890£'SL$ 66£'9ZZ6L8 lsanbaa fi 9,LrU 1e191 4sanba16u!pund lellde0 Pale w1I.s3 Ieiol rai 6££5 u94JaS fiwnaaS Pue R;aleg 9L do+d L 4l9 LAA PaPalold 1E10.0 LO£5 L4794Ad PePafad Ie4e0 % S L 4l9LAA PePO.d 4senbey 6ulpunA 6u!e+ad0 pa!ew!1sd 1.391 Z4£5 u94.$ spunA 154,1vuad0 L L£S 00!PaS 8 LlLLAA PaPafald lanofiue0 OVINO 8 LIL LAA PaPafo+d spund 6u4n.lad0 LO£S 1191=1.a9 8 LlLLAA Paloafold V miscall,' 8 LLLLAA Parafold sanuanau s410 8 LlLLAA PaPafoLd anuanaa xdnaleA 8LILLAA PaPafoJd All B0GLAA PaPafold la6Pn9 7��1 $lleaaq 00pUrid 1.9.40.ld L6£Mb'CS SbZ'£Z8'Z$ OL5'2991 552'613'LS 000'0058 0$ L89'6Z4$ 000'9L8'6$ £L9'965'9$ 000`EL£8 00005VZ$ ZZ8'SO£'SL$ 64Z'496'Eb$ 1e11de076411Eiad01E4o1 0$ 0$ OS 559'6l5'LS 0$ 0$ 0$ 000'9L8'6$ OS 000`EL£$ 000'654Z$ 0$ 558'L£Z'bl$ lelidpo l¢lol-qn5 59136'5'4$ O0Z'89L$ 950'888'1.$ OL-81-1S (MN apl4an kg:4m ; o1a7 Jot q1IpeA eJueuawlely! 000'OZ£$ 000'0£$ 000'0068 60-27-1S wa uld!ntd Ria;es 6u!uleil+opuad0 sng 000'005'Z$ 002'LL4$ oo8'Ito '£3 80-8L-1$ ZasE4d1uaulaoplrTa£{ ZlllPeA suo4e1ad0 000'009'b$ 000'054'La 000'054'S$ Lp-B HS WO Sasng 01011 pabd WaWaaelday 000 OZ63 000'0£Z$ 0000544$ 901l•-15 sasna alnob paved (Z) u0lsuedx3 000Z6LS 000''£14 00013bZ$ 50-91-1S 0lai SZ7AS Vsappan poddns onuanab-uoN luawaneldaE 000 On 0000Z$ 000.904$ 1,0984-1S sluawanoldwl M1Ullaed 00009Z$ 0000L$ 000'05ES £0-84-1$ (spafo+d Jl)/Molou4.i 004E uu0;9l 000£LC$ 000'£L£$ Z0-8L-1S sluawaoue4w3. llsuell 000 PZ6$ 000 L£Z$ 000'554' 48 40-24-1S 9041e11114e4aa sng 9100u paxld :<ods.J an9anaa+a410 ..,9k9e00V190 06££5 994.,aS ZLE5 uoPaS 4, 1.CS u940aS 44E5 uopoaS s6u4d$wind A1,01E18a41E0011:u1 90£5 9o1PaS ya+nsesvi *roes lisuall 9 L do+d V1S Ail snokleO 4R1N spunA ;o wow,/ 1e101 s491nN pa1o1d Igllde0 1V11dV3 L6£'001,'£S Sbe EZ8'ZS OL5'899$ 03 000'0058 0$ L99,3Zb$ OS £L9`865'98 OS OS ZZ9'S0E'S LS b6ZSZL0Z$ Binmado inlol-gns 000005$ 05£'£ZZ$ 09S£ZL$ OZZ Null sin wwo0 $05'061,5 805'061$ OZann Z90'8LbS 8E6'49$ 000'069$ wetaki Iooduen L6E'006'ES 5be ZZO'ZS L89'6Z6$ £L9865'98 bESTIZO'513 9£5'ZLZSZ$ aoueryrsy 6ul!esd0 _ 9NIiV213d0 Xccic.A anuanaa ua410 -an9fwe0OVW0 a6££599FaS ZLES 9P1Pa8 0). LIES 9.FaS LL£5 un4JaS .suudS lined 401.8.41e0fo1Pul LO£S 991PeS ValnseaL,1 I(41ma5 psuall 8 4 do+d V13 All spunA !o luno LuV lelol uonduosa0 loaiold 9 L-LeW-L 6 n lVflIA ueld (1911EJ1 algid 31u4S pelsanbaa pund }o Lleulwng B L1Ll0t .Vd Aoua6y Ilsu¢ij eunung 91.LPZ'£ V50 Ln WNIA 9 LIL LOZ Ad +o} Isan6ay - 4 S a18cl I'S 31aVI, 11311.151( 11NNYN1 aui7uns FY 2016/17 SRTP TABLE 5.1.A CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION FOR FY 2017/18 FY 2016/17 SRTP TABLE 5.1A— CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SRTP Project No: FTIP No: SL-18-01 PROJECT NAME Fixed Route Bus Rehabilitation iThe funding request will enable SunLine to rehabilitate fixed route buses that are six years of age and 250,000 miles of PROJECT operation. Buses determined to need mid-life overhaul will include the rebuild of bus engine, transmission system, DESCRIPTION reupholstered seats, body repair, and decal replacement. It is proposed some, if not all, of the work will be completed by an outside contractor(s). The rehabilitation of fixed route buses continues SunLine's PROJECT JUSTIFICATION goal of maintaining a first rate fleet to serve customers. The mid-life rehabilitation will significantly lower maintenance costs. Start Date Completion Date July 2017 June 2019 PROJECT SCHEDULE Fund Type Fiscal Year Amount PROJECT FUNDING STA 2018 $231,000 SOURCES Section 5307 2018 $924,000 Total $1,155,000 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance 75 FY 2016/17 SRTP TABLE 5.1A— CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SRTP Project No: SL-18-02 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME Transit Enhancements PROJECT DESCRIPTION The enhancement of the bus stop system to enhance access for persons with disabilities and the general public through modernization of bus shelters, benches, kiosks, signage and lighting to enhance security and safety of all SunLine customers. The enhancement of transit facilities safety and PROJECT JUSTIFICATION promotes security among transit riders throughout the Coachella Valley. PROJECT SCHEDULE Start Date July 2017 ompletion Date June 2019 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES Fund Type Prop 1 B, FY16/17 Security Fiscal Year 2018 Amount $373,000 Total $373,000 TA Grant # 1 RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance 76 FY 2016/17 SRTP TABLE 5.1A— CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SRTP Project No: SL-18-03 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME Information Technology (IT) Projects The supports the of a of IT PROJECT DESCRIPTION projects purchase variety equipment, software, and hardware. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION The use of IT equipment is critical to the daily function and efficiency in providing safe, reliable and efficient transit services. PROJECT SCHEDULE Start Date July 2017 Completion Date June 2018 Fund Type STA Fiscal Year 2017 Amount $70,000 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES Section 5307 2017 $280,000 Total $350,000 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance 77 FY 2016/17 SRTP TABLE 4A — CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SRTP Project No: SL-18-04 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME Facility Improvements PROJECT DESCRIPTION The facility improvement project will allow SunLine to continue site improvements at the Thousand Palms and Indio sites. The projects will improve employee safety and energy efficiency. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT SCHEDULE Start Date July 2017 Completion Date June 2019 Fund Type STA Fiscal Year 2018 Amount $20,000 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES Section 5307 2018 $80,000 Total $100,000 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance 78 FY 2016/17 SRTP TABLE 5.1A— CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SRTP Project No: SL-18-05 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME Replacement Non -revenue Support Vehicles (2SV, 2Safety) PROJECT DESCRIPTION To meet FTA useful life guidelines, the project will replace a total of four CNG vehicles with two supervisor vehicles and two safety vehicles with low/no emission vehicles. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION The purchase of four non -revenue service vehicles will ensure SunLine replaces older non -revenue vehicles to maintain service reliability and reduce maintenance costs. PROJECT SCHEDULE July 2017 June 2019 PROJECT FUNDING Fund Type STA Fiscal Year 2018 Amount $48,000 SOURCES Section 5307 2017 $192,000 FTA Grant # _ RCTC Grant # li Description Total $240,000 Unexpended balance 79 FY 2016/17 SRTP TABLE 5.1A— CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SRTP Project No: SL-18-06 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME Expansion (2) Fixed Route Bus PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase of two fixed route buses. The purchase of two fixed route buses to support the service expansion and frequency improvement plan. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT SCHEDULE tart Date mpletion Date July 2017 June 2018 Fund Type STA Fiscal Year 2018 Am $230,000 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES Section 5307 2018 $920,000 $1,150,000 NI r• RCT ran Descr► • Unexpended balance 80 FY 2016/17 SRTP TABLE 5.1A— CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION SRTP Project No: SL-18-07 PROJECT NUMBER FTIP No: PROJECT NAME Replacement Fixed Route Buses (10) Purchase of 10 fixed route buses to replace existing buses PROJECT DESCRIPTION that will have met useful life as outlined by federal guidelines. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION The purchase of 10 fixed route buses will ensure SunLine replaces older fleet vehicles to maintain service reliability and reduce maintenance costs. Start Date Completion Date PROJECT SCHEDULE July 2018 June 2020 PROJECT FUNDING Fund Type STA Fiscal Year 2018 Amount $1,150,000 SOURCES Section 5307 2018 $4,600,000 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Total $5,750,000 Unexpended balance 81 FY 2016/17 SRTP TABLE 5.1A— CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION SRTP Project No: SL-18-08 FTIP No: PROJECT NUMBER PROJECT NAME PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT SCHEDULE PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES Operations Facility Replacement, Phase 2 The operations facility replacement project will allow SunLine to complete the rebuild of a functional operations building at the Thousand Palms site. The projects will improve employee safety and energy efficiency. Start Date July 2017 July 2020 Completion Date Fund Type STA Fiscal Year Amount 2018 $640,000 Section 5307 2018 $2,560,000 Total $3,200,000 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance 82 FY 2016/17 SRTP TABLE 5.1A— CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SRTP Project No: SL-18-09 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME Bus Operator Training Safety Equipment • CRIPTION Purchase and installation of bus simulator equipment PROJECT JUSTIFICATION The purchase and installation of bus simulator equipment will continue to support the SunLine mission to provide safe and environmentally conscience public transportation service and alternative fuel solutions to meet the mobility needs of the Coachella Valley. PROJECT SCHEDULE July 2017 June 2018 PROJECT FUNDING nd Type Section 5307 Fiscal Year 2018 Amou $320,000 SOURCES STA 2018 $80,000 = Total $400,000 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance 83 FY 2016/17 SRTP TABLE 5.1A- CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SRTP Project No: SL-18-10 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME Maintenance Facility for Zero Emission Vehicles (ZEV) PROJECT DESCRIPTION Maintenance Bay Training Facility i PROJECT JUSTIFICATION The Maintenance Bay Training Facility will be designed specifically for zero emission buses (ZEB). This facility will serve two purposes: 1) to effectively maintain SunLine's 20 ZEBs and 2) to provide an interactive learning center for ZEB maintenance, known as the SunLine Center of Excellence in Zero Emission Technology (CoEZET). The proposed project includes additional equipment donated by industry to help support maintenance of SunLine's ZEBs and workforce training through CoEZET. PROJECT SCHEDULE July 2017 June 2018 and Type liFiscal Year Amo PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES STA 2018 $168,200 LoNo 5339(c) 2018 $1,519,855 Total $1,688,055 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance 84 evzoi6/i7sRrr TABLE 5.2 SUMMARY OF FUNDS REQUESTED FOR 2018/19 &mime TRANSII AGENCY TABLE 5.2 Table 5.2 - Summary of Funding Request for FY 2018/19 FINAL V1 05,13 2016 SunLine Transit Agency FY 2018/19 Summary of Fund Requested Short Range Transit Plan FINAL V1 17-May-16 Project Description Total Amount of Funds LTF STh. Measure A Section 5307 Indio/Cathedral City Palm Springs Section 5311 CMAQ Carryover Other Revenue Fare box OPERATING Operating Assistance n1,772,536 $15,020,534 $6,598,673 $3,500,000 $429,687 $2,823,245 $3,400,397 Vanpool Program $540,000 $61,938 $478,062 Line 20 $190,508 $190,508 Sub -total Operating S32,503044 $15,082,472 30 $6,598,673 33 500,000 $429,087 $668,570 $2.823,245 $3,400,397 CAPITAL Capital Project Number Total Amount of Funds With Carryover LTF STA Measure A Section 5307 Indio/Cathedral City Palm Springs Section 5311 CMAQ Carryover Other Revenue Faredox Foxed Route Bus Rehabiliation SL-19-01 S1,155,000 $231,000 3924,000 Replacement Paratransit Vans (4) SL-19-02 $520,000 $52,000 3465,000 Facility Improvements SL-19-03 $100,000 $20,000 $50,000 Information Technology (IT Projects) SL-19-04 $350,000 $70,000 $280,000 Expansion (2) Fixed Route Buses SL-19-05 $1,150,000 5230,000 $920,000 Replacement Fixed Route Buses (5) SL-19-06 S2,875,000 $575,000 $2,300,000 Bus Operator Training Safety Equipment SL-19-07 $400,000 $80,000 $320,000 Operations Facility Replacement Phase 3 SL-19-08 S3,200,000 $640,000 $2,560,000 Subtotal Capital $0,750,000 $0 $1,898,000 $0 $7,852,000 $0 $0 $0 $0, Total Operating 8 Capital S42,253044 $15,082,472 $1,898,000 $6,598,673 $11,352,000 $429,687 $668,570 $2823,245 $3,400,397 Project Funding Details Target Budget Projected FY17/15 LTF Projected FY17/YB Farebax Revenue Projected FY17/15 Other Revenues Projected FY17/18 Measure A Projected FY17/18 Section 5307 Operating Funds Projected FY17/15 CMAQ Carryover Projected FY17/1B Section 5311 Operating Funds Total Estimated Operating Funding Request Projected FY16/17 STA Capital Projected FY16/17 5307 Capital Total Estimated Capital Funding Request $32,503,044 $15082,472 S3,400 397 Based an FY16/17 Operating Budget " 1 02 (2% increase) $2,823,245 Based on FY16117 Operating Budget ` 1.02 (2% increase) S6,598,673 $3,500,000 $668,570 $429,687 $32,503,044 Based on FY15/16 Operating Budget ` 1.02 (2% increase) $1,898,000 $7,852,000 $9,750,000 Total Funding Request $42,293.044 2016/17 SRTP TABLE 5.2.A CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION FOR FY 2018/19 FY 2016/17 SRTP TABLE 5.2A— CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SRTP Project No: � SL-19-01 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME Fixed Route Bus Rehabilitation PROJECT DESCRIPTION The funding request will enable SunLine to rehabilitate fixed route buses that are six years of age and 250,000 miles of operation. Buses determined to need mid-life overhaul will include the rebuild of bus engine, transmission system, reupholstered seats, body repair, and decal replacement. It is proposed some, if not all, of the work will be completed by an outside contractor(s). PROJECT JUSTIFICATION The rehabilitation of fixed goal of maintaining a first mid-life rehabilitation will costs. Start Date July 2018 route buses continues SunLine's rate fleet to serve customers. The significantly lower maintenance Completion Date June 2021 PROJECT SCHEDULE PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES Fund Type STA Fiscal Year 2019 Amount $231,000 Section 5307 2019 $924,000 Total $1,155,000 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance 88 FY 2016/17 SRTP TABLE 5.2A— CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SRTP Project No: SL-19-02 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME Paratransit (4) Replacement Vans PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase of two vans to replace existing SunDial paratransit vans that have met useful life as outlined by federal guidelines. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION The purchase of replacement paratransit vans continues SunLine's goal of maintaining a first rate fleet to serve customers. The replacement vehicles will meet the Federal Transit Administration's minimum service -life requirement. Additionally, the failure to replace the vehicles will result in significantly higher maintenance and rehabilitation. Start Date Completion Date PROJECT SCHEDUL July 2018 June 2019 PROJECT FUNDING Fund Type STA Fiscal Year i 2019 $52,000 SOURCES Section 5307 2019 $468,000 Total $520,000 TA Grant # RCTC Grant # 1 Description Unexpended balance 89 FY 2016/17 SRTP TABLE 5.2A— CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SRTP Project No: SL-19-03 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME Facility Improvements PROJECT DESCRIPTION The facility improvement project will allow SunLine to continue site improvements at the Thousand Palms and Indio sites. The projects will improve efficiency. ■ Start Date July 2018 employee safety and energy Completion Date June 2021 PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT SCHEDULE ipi Fund Type STA Fiscal Year 2019 Amount $20,000 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES Section 5307 2019 $80,000 Total $100,000 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance 90 FY 2016/17 SRTP TABLE 5.2A— CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SRTP Project No: SL-19-04 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME Information Technology (IT) Projects The projects supports the purchase of a variety of IT equipment, software, and hardware. PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT JUSTIFICATION The use of IT equipment is critical to the daily function and efficiency in providing safe, reliable and efficient transit services. PROJECT SCHEDULE Start Date July 2018 Completion Date June 2020 Fund Type STA Fiscal Year 2019 Amount $70,000 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES Section 5307 2019 $280,000 Total $350,000 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance 91 FY 2016/17 SRTP TABLE 5.2A— CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION PROJECT NUMBER SRTP Project No: SL-19-05 FTIP No: PROJECT NAME Expansion (2) Fixed Route Bus PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase of two fixed route buses. The of two fixed route buses to support the service ' ROJECT JUSTIFICATION purchase frequency improvement plan. PROJECT SCHEDULE tart Da July 2018 Completion Date June 2020 PROJECT FUNDING Fund Type STA Fiscal Year 2019 511"M $230,000 SOURCES Section 5307 2019 $920,000 Total $1,150,000 - TC - Unexpended balance 92 FY 2016/17 SRTP TABLE 5.2A— CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION SRTP Project No: SL-19-06 PROJECT NUMBER FTIP No: PROJECT NAME Replacement Fixed Route Buses (5) PROJECT DESCRIPTION Purchase of five fixed route buses to replace existing CNG bus fleets that will have met useful life as outlined by federal guidelines. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION The purchase of five (5) fixed route buses will ensure SunLine replaces older fleet vehicles to maintain service reliability and reduce maintenance costs. PROJECT SCHEDULE July 2018 June 2020 PROJECT FUNDING and Type STA Fiscal Year 2019 Amount $575,000 SOURCES Section 5307 2019 $2,300,000 Total $2,875,000 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance 93 FY 2016/17 SRTP TABLE 5.2A— CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION SRTP Project No: SL-19-07 PROJECT NUMBER FTIP No: PROJECT NAME Bus Operator Training Safety Equipment The Bus Operator Training/Safety Equipment project will allow ' OJECT DESCRIPTION SunLine to purchase video surveillance equipment, update facility fencing and security measures, along with adding training modules to the simulator system. The will improve employee and community safety projects PROJECT JUSTIFICATION while supporting SunLine's commitment to service efficiency. July 2018 ' ROJECT SCHEDULE June 2019 0 PROJECT FUNDING and Type STA Fiscal Year 2019 Amount $80,000 SOURCES Section 5307 2019 $320,000 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Total $400,000 Unexpended balance 94 FY 2016/17 SRTP TABLE 5.2A— CAPITAL PROJECT JUSTIFICATION SRTP Project No: SL-19-08 FTIP No: PROJECT NUMBER PROJECT NAME PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT JUSTIFICATION Operations Facility Replacement, Phase 3 PROJECT SCHEDULE PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES The operations facility replacement project will allow SunLine to complete the rebuild of a functional operations building at the Thousand Palms site. 1 The projects will improve employee safety and energy efficiency. Start Date July 2018 July 2020 Completion Date Fund Type STA Section 5307 Fiscal Year Amount 2019 2019 Total $640,000 $2,560,000 $3,200,000 FTA Grant # RCTC Grant # Description Unexpended balance 95 FY 2017/18 TABLE 6 PROGRESS TO IMPLEMENT TDA PEFORMANCE AUDIT AUDITS SunLine successfully completed a Triennial Development Act (TDA) State Triennial Audit for FY 2009/10- 2011/12 in 2013. The TDA Audit was completed by Pacific Management Consultants and did not produce any findings. The TDA Audit for FY 2012/13-14/15 was performed by Michael Baker International. The result of the audit is still in progress. SunLine also successfully completed a Federal Triennial Audit for FY 2010/11-2012/13 in early 2014. There was one finding out of over 20 review areas, regarding the need to advise FTA of the disposal of surplus fleet, and this item has been addressed with FTA. The next Federal Triennial Audit for FY 2013/14-2015/16 is expected in late 2016. TABLE 6 — PROGRESS TO IMPLEMENT TRIENNIAL PERFORMANCE AUDIT DIT RECOMM TION(S) TAKEN AND RESUL 1. Develop desktop procedures ensuring the completion of the annual State Controller Transit Operators Financial Transactions Reports. (High Priority) This recommendation has been addressed. The FY 2012/13 report has been submitted and this process has been added to the task list. 2. Prepare and submit separate State Controller Reports for general public transit and specialized service. (High Priority) SunLine will submit separate reports to the State Controller, demonstrating SunLine's pro -active approach to compliance with State reporting instructions. 3. Monitor rates of vehicle failures and revenue miles between failures. (High Priority) This metric is being closely monitored by SunLine on a monthly basis. 4. Conduct new rider survey. (Medium Priority) SunLine completed a ridership survey of SunBus passengers in November 2014. Final report was completed and reviewed by the Board in March 2015. 5. Provide enforcement of repeated no-show passengers on SunDial. (Medium Priority) SunLine worked with its ACCESS Advisory Committee in 2014 to approve a new no - show policy to help reduce the number of SunDial's repeat no-show passengers. 97 FY 2016/175RTP TABLE 7 SERVICE PROVIDER PERFORMANCE TARGETS SufiImo TRANSIT AGENCY Table T -- Service Provider Performance Targets Report FY 2015/16 Short Range Transit Plan Review SunLine Transit Agency Data Elements FY 2015/16 Plan FY 2015/16 Target FY 2015/16 Year to Date Through 3rd Quarter Year to Date Performance Scorecard Unlinked Passenger Trips 5,143,610 .. Passenger Miles 37,677,722 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Hours 295,655.0 Total Actual Vehicle Revenue Miles 4,367,433.0 Total Actual Vehicle Miles 4,865,023.0 Total Operating Expenses $30,794,949 Total Passenger Fare Revenue $5,607,118 Net Operating Expenses $25,187,831 Performance Indicators Mandatory: 1. Farebox Recovery Ratio I 18.20%I >= 18.20% I 19.16%1 Meets Target Discretionary: 1. Operating Cost Per Revenue Hour $104.16 <= $92.53 $95.11 Fails to Meet Target 2. Subsidy Per Passenger $4.90 >= $3.47 and <= $4.69 $5.06 Fails to Meet Target 3. Subsidy Per Passenger Mile $0.67 >_ $0.48 and <= $0.64 $0.74 Fails to Meet Target 4. Subsidy Per Hour $85.19 >= $59.36 and <= $80.32 $76.88 Meets Target 5. Subsidy Per Mile $5.77 >= $4.06 and <= $5.50 $5.29 Meets Target 6. Passengers Per Revenue Hour 17.40 >= 14.54 and <= 19.67 15.20 Meets Target 7. Passengers Per Revenue Mile 1.18 >= 0.99 and <= 1.35 1.05 Meets Target Note: Must i r eet at least 4 out of 7 Discretionary Performance Indicators Productivity Performance Summary: Service Provider Comments: evzoi6/i7sRrr TABLE 8 PERFORMANCE REPORT !GANSU AGENCY •••••=0.- FY 2016/17 - Table 8 -- SRTP Performance Report Service Provider: SunLine Transit Agency All Routes Performance Indicators FY 2014/15 End of Year Actual FY 2015/16 3rd Quarter Year -to -Date FY 2016/17 plan FY 2016/17 Target Plan Performance Scorecard (a) Passengers 4,827,837 3,420,278 4,621,406 None Passenger Miles 35,101,121 23,520,428 33,942,769 None Revenue Hours 284,957.6 225,125.2 312,089.0 None Total Hours 302,085.2 238,591.4 331,093.0 None Revenue Miles 4,161,846.5 3,269,796.4 4,515,761.0 None Total Miles 4,618,585.5 3,612,100.9 4,993,747.0 None Operating Costs $27,639,138 $21,410,726 $33,474,111 None Passenger Revenue $6,040,405 $4,102,422 $6,101,611 None Operating Subsidy $21,598,733 $17,308,304 $27,372,500 None Operating Costs Per Revenue Hour $96.99 $95.11 $107.26 <_ $96.05 Fails to Meet Target Operating Cost Per Revenue Mile $6.64 $6.55 $7.41 None Operating Costs Per Passenger $5.73 $6.26 $7.24 None Farebox Recovery Ratio 21.85°k 19.16% 18.22% >= 18.2% Fails to Meet Target Subsidy Per Passenger $4.47 $5.06 $5.92 >_ $4.30 and <_ $5.82 Fails to Meet Target Subsidy Per Passenger Mile $0.62 $0.74 $0.81 >_ $0.63 and <_ $0.85 Meets Target Subsidy Per Revenue Hour $75.80 $76.88 $87.71 >_ $65.35 and <_ $88.41 Meets Target 'Subsidy Per Revenue Mile $5.19 $5.29 $6.06 >_ $4.50 and <_ $6.08 Meets Target Passengers Per Revenue Hour 16.90 15.20 14.80 >= 12.92 and <= 17.48 Meets Target Passengers Per Revenue Mile 1.16 1.05 1.02 >= 0.89 and <= 1.21 Meets Target a) The Plan Performance Scorecard column is the result of comparing the FY 2016/17 Plan to the FY 2016/17 Primary Target. FY 2016/17 SRTP TABLE 9 HIGHLIGHTS OF FY 2016/17 SRTP TABLE 9 HIGHLIGHTS OF FY 2016/17 SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN SunLine looks forward to releasing a transit redesign to the citizens of the Coachella Valley. As previously noted, the plan proposes improved frequencies and outlines route realignments allowing for efficient, safe and productive transit service. Highlights include: — Implement new service and service improvements for FY 2016/17— please refer to Section 3.2 — Study of High Capacity/Bus Rapid Transit options in the Coachella Valley — Introduction of Transportation Demand Management Program launching vanpool programs for private and public sector workers — Maintain collaborative efforts with local jurisdictions to ensure on -going bus stop improvements and enhancements, including the procurement of bus shelters and site upgrades for ADA compliance NOTE: All items listed are subject to funding and Board approval, further service improvements may be considered in FY 2016/17, but are not included in the FY 2016/17 budget and SRTP at this time. TABLE 9A. OPERATING AND FINANCIAL DATA Operating & FY 12/13 FY 13/14 FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 2016/17 Financial Data Audited Audited Audited Estimated Planned System -wide Ridership 4,707,796 4,823,320 4,827,837 5,143,610 4,621,406 Operating Cost Per Revenue Hr. $93.64 $94.41 $96.99 $104.16 $107.26 103 TABLE 9B. FAREBOX CALCULATION Table 9B - Farebox Calculation (consistent with Commission Farebox Recovery Policy) Revenue Sources included in Farebox Calculation Actual Amount from FY2014/15 Audit FY 15116 (Estimate) FY 16117 (Plan) 1 Passenger Fares 3,315,351.39 3,202,649.10 3,333,722.91 2 Interest 1,763.06 2,420.01 2,400.00 3 General Fund Supplement - - - 4 Measure A - - - 5 Advertising Revenue 155,256.08 166,008.39 173,202.00 6 Gain on Sale of Fixed Assets - - - 7 CNG Revenue 993,752.00 900,000.00 500,000.00 8 Lease/Other Revenue - - - 9 Federal Excise Tax Refund - - - 10 Investment Income - - - 11 CalPers CERBT - - - 12 Fare Revenues from Exempt Routes - - - 13 Other Revenues 1,574,282.30 1,886,642.16 $2,092,286 Total Revenue for Farebox Calculation 6,040,404.83 6,157,719.66 6,101,610.55 (1-13) Total Operating Expenses for Farebox Calculation 27,639,138.00 28,547,634.79 $33,474,111 Farebox Recovery Ratio 21.85% 21.57% 18.23% 104 Riverside [ouniy Honsporimipn Commission RCTC Rail Short Range Transit Plan FY 2016/17 - 2018/19 FINAL TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1 - SYSTEM OVERVIEW 1 1.1 Description of Service Area 1 1.2 Population Profile and Demographic Projections 1 1.3 Fixed Route Services 2 1.4 Current Fare Structure and Proposed Fare Structure 2 Ticket Types 3 Fare Increase 4 1.5 Revenue Fleet 4 1.6 Existing and Planned Facilities 5 Commuter Rail Station Management 5 CHAPTER 2 - EXISTING SERVICE AND ROUTE PERFORMANCE 7 2.1 Fixed Route Service 7 Riverside Line 7 Inland Empire Orange County (IEOC) Line 8 91/ Perris Valley Line 9 2.2 Key Performance Indicators 10 91/PVL Line 10 IEOC Line 10 Riverside Line 10 2.3 Trip Generators and Projected Growth 11 2.4 Equipment, Passenger Amenities and Facility Needs 12 Implementation of Positive Train Control (PTC) 12 Station Improvements and Construction of New Facilities 13 RCTC Station Maintenance 13 Perris Valley Line Metrolink Extension Project 13 Ticket Vending Machines and Mobile Ticketing Application 14 Rehab/Renovation and or Purchase of Locomotives 14 CHAPTER 3 - SERVICE CHANGES AND REGIONAL PLANNING 15 3.1 Recent Service Changes (Past Year) 15 3.2 Recommended Service Changes and Modifications 15 3.3 Marketing Plans and Promotion 16 3.4 Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Rail Service 16 3.5 LOSSAN Los Angeles — San Diego — San Luis Obispo Rail Corridor Agency 17 CHAPTER 4 - FINANCIAL AND CAPITAL PLANS 19 4.1 Operating and Capital Budget 19 4.2 Funding Plans to Support Operating and Capital Program 19 4.3 Regulatory and Compliance Requirements 19 Americans with Disabilities Act, Title VI 20 TDA Triennial Audit, FTA Triennial Audit, NTD 20 Alternative Fueled Vehicles 20 TABLE 1 - FLEET INVENTORY 21 TABLE 2 - SRTP SERVICE SUMMARY 22 TABLE 4 - FY16/17 SUMMARY OF FUNDS REQUESTED 23 TABLE 5 - FY 17/18 - 18/19 SUMMARY OF FUTURE FUNDS TO BE REQUESTED 27 TABLE 6 - STATE TRIENNIAL AUDIT RECOMMENDATIONS28 TABLE 7 - SRTP TARGET REPORT 29 TABLE 8 - SRTP PERFORMANCE REPORT 30 TABLE 9 - SRTP HIGHLIGHTS 31 GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS BNSF BNSF Railways CETAP Community & Environmental Acceptability Process CMAQ Congestion Mitigation & Air Quality Funds CVAG Coachella Valley Association of Governments EOM Extra -Ordinary Maintenance FRA Federal Railroad Administration FTA Federal Transit Administration IEOC Inland Empire -Orange County Line LACMTA Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority LAUS Los Angeles Union Station LOSSAN Los Angeles — San Diego — San Luis Obispo Rail Corridor Agency LTF Local Transportation Funds MOW Maintenance -of -Way NTD National Transit Database OCTA Orange County Transportation Authority PTC Positive Train Control PVL Perris Valley Line RCTC Riverside County Transportation Commission RTA Riverside Transit Agency RTIP Regional Transportation Improvement Program SANBAG San Bernardino Associated Governments SB Senate Bill SCAG Southern California Association of Governments SCRRA Southern California Regional Rail Authority SJBL San Jacinto Branch Line SR State Route SRTP Short Range Transit Plan STA State Transit Assistance Funds STIP State Transportation Improvement Program STP Surface Transportation Program Funds TVM Ticket Vending Machine UP Union Pacific Railroad VCTC Ventura County Transportation Commission Ir Riverside founry iionsForlo+ion fommission CHAPTER 1 — SYSTEM OVERVIEW 1.1 Description of Service Area Currently, nine of the 57 Metrolink stations are located in Western Riverside County. These nine stations, Riverside -Downtown, Pedley, La Sierra, West Corona, and North Main Corona, South Perris, Downtown Perris, Moreno Valley/March Field and Riverside - Hunter Park/UCR, are owned and maintained by RCTC. The completion of the Perris Valley Line (PVL) added an additional 24 miles of service in Riverside County. Loncgster • rawd.11• METROLINK COMMUTER RAIL SYSTEM Vincent Grade/Acton • Via Princessa • VENTURA SaNaClorito• 1 LOS ANGELES CO- I CO. Newhall • 1 Sylmor/San Fernando• 4c, 1.4. P''''' ♦� A �°��p ,pif c` �` .i (8 • .PcAQ� rTFy�� ` 46 � b � 2�c \c '`p� �P Q°`� ?� ` 4 G�`.ap" � �t�'a`ac° da �•s+::=:17y=.r•��®�s. .act �5°� 1.�c .S° d°�4.r�W d� oe A P `� r°Or--� W �,,0,10,-td ♦f ..<._.........=III i'$" 716/Mena , _ woe � t'. ,''ay 46 �' PACIFIC OCEAN METROUNK ©IIula do Both M•a Antelope Veil, line EV. Slnl'ien Served 6y m•IN InlmdEmpire-Orange County line � N"'llip6 tine. �o� OraneeCwny line ! nek Peek SerAiner ses Idver:ek Line Arlene Re'iVMene Be. MOM Sm Benodna lee + LAX FIyAmry ems w Ventura County lino _.. __ Corner Boa 9l/Peens vdlry 6ne caeewd. Son OW �'.� rehire srel� - Oc" b' Sprinbr Oconnsele adAn melreenktroini.com l MAP H81 f0 SCALE SAN BERNARDINO CO. • _•••tis r! �8 ocff7•� ' Riversidsr ida- Downrown �:=;;S • Anaheim Fob r Canyons RIVERSIDE p o a CO. ORANGE f+�`$- 1 lobe Wayne „ikk CO 1.2 Population Profile and Demographic Projections Airport RA} + `� ® 1f11 n Capistlana WOO it4F- SAN DIEGO r+ CO. s� ,•� + e • Riverside- Hunter Pork/UCR • Moreno Valley/ IMarch Field • Perris - Dewelown • Perris - South Whether traveling to work, school, or one of Southern California's great recreational destinations, Metrolink trains provide a viable alternative to driving alone. Every day, thousands of Southern California residents park their cars and choose Metrolink to commute. The average Metrolink commute from Riverside County is 37 miles. 1 RCTC RAIL SRTP FY 2016/17 — 2018/19 r NENE am- R..rrers.,de County iionsporrorim fommission Metrolink trains are also popular with schools throughout the region both transporting students to classes and for field trips. The Metrolink rider profiles are updated on a regular basis. The following is the latest socio-economic data collected in 2015: Line Riverside Line IEOC Line 91 Line System -wide Gender: Male 43.2% 54.7% 50.5% 50.1 % Female 56.8% 45.3% 49.5% 49.9% Ethnicity: Black 13.0% 8.5% 12.8% 11.8% Hispanic 33.5% 32.8% 26.1 % 29.9% Asian 29.9% 8.6% 20.9% 16.4% Native Hawaiian 1.2% 2.1 % 0.8% 1.8% American Indian 0.3% 0.5% 0.3% 0.8% Caucasian (non -Hispanic) 19.2% 44.0% 34.9% 34.9% Other 2.9% 3.5% 4.2% 4.3% Median Income (2010) $81,417 $74,301 $87,019 $78,033 Full -Time Employed 88.1 % 89.9% 78.5% 74.2% Automobile Available 90.7% 93.6% 87.5% 81.7% 1.3 Fixed Route Services Metrolink regularly operates Monday through Friday. Weekend service operates on a reduced frequency on the IEOC, Orange County and San Bernardino Lines on Saturdays and Sundays with extensions to the Riverside -Downtown Station. IEOC Line Weekend service began July 2006. The 91 Line Weekend Service started on July 5, 2014 with two round trips from Riverside to Los Angeles. Recently, the PVL service has commenced operation providing three round trips spanning from South Perris to Los Angeles and six bounce back trips that will go from Perris to Downtown Riverside. This will provide residents within Riverside County commuter rail service during non -peak service hours for the first time. There is limited service on New Year's Day on the San Bernardino and Antelope Valley Lines. Trains do not normally operate on the following major holidays: Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. 1.4 Current Fare Structure and Proposed Fare Structure Metrolink ticket prices are distance -based and calculated on the shortest driving miles between stations. Each station combination is uniquely priced, based on driving miles from one station to the other. A ride from Downtown Riverside to Los Angeles Union Station is a 59 mile one-way trip; a ride from Downtown Riverside to Irvine is a 40 mile trip. The distance charge is currently capped at 80 miles and this will also be the case with a ride from South Perris to Los Angeles Union Station. Furthermore, RCTC is working with Metrolink to offer promotional fares on the PVL in FY 2017. 2 RCTC RAIL SRTP FY 2016/17 - 2018/19 r NENE am— R..rrers.,de County iionsporrorim fommission This system -wide pricing program offers a fair and equitable pricing policy. Over time, Metrolink customers traveling the same distances will pay the same price, and short trips will cost less than longer trips. Metrolink is responsible for any Title VI issues related to fare structure and pricing. The Metrolink ticket price consists of three elements: a base boarding charge, an additional increment related to the number of miles traveled, and finally a modest increment to permit Metrolink passengers to transfer without requiring an additional fare on selected connecting transit operators and a reduced rate on others. Ticket Types There are five types of regular Metrolink tickets. One Way Tickets One-way tickets are valid for one trip only, defined as continuous travel away from the origin station to the destination station specified on the ticket. One-way trips must be completed within three hours from the time of purchase of ticket. The expiration time and date is displayed on the ticket. Types of One- way Tickets sold: Weekday, Youth, Senior/Disabled, Student, and Military. Round Trip Tickets Round trip tickets are valid for two trips only, from and to the origin station and the destination station marked on the ticket. The first leg of a round trip ticket is valid for three hours from purchase. The return ticket is valid for travel anytime on the same day as the first leg of the trip. Types of round trip tickets sold: Weekday, Adult Weekend, Youth Weekend, Senior/Disabled, and Military. Youth: Child: Student: Senior: Disabled: Military: Discounts Ages 6 to 18 Weekdays -regular fare; Weekends, 25% off one way and round trip tickets Three children, age 5 or under, rides free with an adult using a valid ticket 10% discount on all ticket types with proper ID Age 65 and over with valid photo ID with date of birth; 50% off regular adult fare on one way and round trip tickets, 25% off monthly and 7-day passes With proper ID, 50% off regular adult fare on one way and round trip tickets, 25% off monthly and 7-day passes 10% discount on all fares with valid ID 7-Day Pass Valid for unlimited travel during a consecutive seven-day period between station pairs starting on the day when the pass is purchased. Monthly Pass Monthly Passes are valid for unlimited travel between the origin station and destination station printed on the pass during the calendar month. Types of monthly passes: Adult, Senior/Disabled, and Student (sold only to participating schools through Metrolink's administrative office). 3 RCTC RAIL SRTP FY 2016/17 — 2018/19 rINNEN� Riverside founry iioasporlo+ion fommission $10 Weekend Day Pass Metrolink offers the Weekend Day Pass for only $10 per person. This pass is good for unlimited systemwide travel on either Saturday or Sunday only and expires at 3 A.M. following the date of purchase. The Weekend Day Pass is accepted for free transfers to connecting transit services, except Amtrak. Advance Purchase Ticket You can now also buy One -Way or Round -Trip tickets for a future date, up to 1 year in advance. All you need to do is select the advance purchase option and choose the date you wish to travel and which ticket type you want. There is one difference between a ticket purchased for same -day travel and an Advance Purchase Ticket. The Advance Purchase Ticket will not have an expiration time printed on it but it is still valid and can be used at any time on the day you chose to travel. Promotional PVL Fares For the introduction of the new PVL service, RCTC along with Metrolink will be offering promotional fares in FY2017 to Metrolink riders. $10 Round Trips — Riverside County trips The proposal is to introduce a $10 round trip fare for travel on the 91/PVL Line. This fare would be valid for trips made between South Perris to West Corona during weekdays. Fare Increase Since Metrolink began operations in 1992, fares have varied year to year. The table below shows how fares have changed recently by Fiscal Year: `05 `06 `07 `08 `09 `10 `11 `12 `13 `14 `15 `16 `17 4% 4.50% 5.50% 3.50% 5.50% 3% 6% 0% 7% 5% 0% 0% 0% Historically, these fare increases have been across-the-board with all ticket types incurring the same price increase. In FY2016, over concern that the past fare increases have put pressure on the affordability of the service, it was determined that there would be no fare increase for the year. This concern on fares led to no fare increases proposed in FY2017. 1.5 Revenue Fleet The Metrolink fleet is composed of 51 in-service locomotives and 263 commuter rail cars. All of the new Rotem cars have been incorporated into the fleet. Metrolink is expecting to include 18 new F-125 Tier 4 locomotives into the revenue fleet in FY 2016/2017 in order to start phasing out a portion of the older fleet. The fleet will be equipped to optimize fuel efficiency and incorporates clean technology making them the cleanest diesel locomotives in the nation. The first Tier 4 Locomotive is scheduled to be delivered to Metrolink in October 2016. 4 RCTC RAIL SRTP FY 2016/17 — 2018/19 r NENE am— R..rrers.,de County Tionsporrolim fornmission 1.6 Existing and Planned Facilities In planning for a successful commuter rail program in Western Riverside County, RCTC acquired properties for current and future passenger rail service. Commuter Rail Station Management Unlike the other SCRRA county agencies, the Commission owns and operates nine rail stations serving Riverside County: • Riverside -Downtown • Pedley • Riverside -La Sierra • North Main Corona • West Corona • Riverside -Hunter Park (PVL) • Moreno Valley/ -March Field (PVL) • Downtown Perris; and (PVL) • South Perris (PVL) Station operation and maintenance costs are included in the rail program budget with services coordinated by the Commission's staff. Parking is currently free at the stations. The FY 2016/17 budget for stations operating and maintenance totals $5,346,500 funded by Western Riverside County Rail Local Transportation Funds (LTF), Measure A and vending machine revenues. The average budget including administration and management overhead is $594,055 per station. San Jacinto Branch Line BAN JACINTO BRANCH LINE LANE ELSINORE 5 RCTC RAIL SRTP FY 2016/17 — 2018/19 r NENE am— R..rrers.,de County iionsporrorim fornmission The Measure A program provides for Riverside County's participation in the creation of a regional commuter rail system. Though the primary goal was to provide service from Riverside to Los Angeles and Orange counties, the Measure A map included a possible internal element along the former Santa Fe Railroad's San Jacinto Branch Line (SJBL). The SJBL corridor extends 38.3 miles between Highgrove and Hemet within Riverside County. The alignment roughly follows the Interstate 215 to Perris where it veers east, parallel to State Route 74 to Hemet and San Jacinto. As part of the regional acquisition of Burlington Northern -Santa Fe (BNSF) properties and use rights, RCTC purchased the 38-mile SJBL and adjacent properties in 1993 for $26 million using Western County Rail Measure A and state rail bonds (Prop 108 of 1990). BNSF retained exclusive freight operating rights, serving its customers along the line and maintaining the right-of-way until such time as passenger service is implemented. 6 RCTC RAIL SRTP FY 2016/17 — 2018/19 r NENE Rieers.,de County iivasparrorim fornmissim CHAPTER 2 - EXISTING SERVICE AND ROUTE PERFORMANCE 2.1 Fixed Route Service The SCRRA operates seven commuter rail lines. Three routes, the Riverside, 91/PVL, and Inland Empire -Orange County (IEOC) Lines directly serve Western Riverside County, with connecting service available to destinations on the other four lines. Riverside Line This line extends 59.1 miles between the city of Riverside and the Los Angeles Union Station (LAUS) along the Union Pacific (UP) Railroad alignment. The route roughly follows the Pomona Freeway corridor (SR60) through the cities and communities of Pedley, Mira Loma, Ontario, Pomona, Walnut, Industry, La Puente, Montebello, and Commerce. Existing stations include Riverside -Downtown, Pedley, East Ontario, Downtown -Pomona, Industry, Montebello/Commerce, and LAUS. RCTC, SANBAG, and the LACMTA jointly fund the line. Riverside Line Line Opening: Route miles: Avg Trip Length (miles): Trains Operated/Day: Current Stations Served Riverside -Downtown Pedley East Ontario Downtown -Pomona Industry Montebello/Commerce LA Union Station June1993 59.1 39.3 12 4066 Vine Street 6001 Pedley Road 3330 E Francis St 101 N Main Street 600 S Brea Canyon Rd 2000 Flotilla St 800 N Alameda St Currently, five peak -period round -trips and one off-peak round-trip operate Monday through Friday. The Riverside Transit Agency (RTA), SunLine and Amtrak provide connecting transit service in Riverside County. The scheduled peak -direction trip time between downtown Riverside and LAUS varies between 83 and 88 minutes, including dwell time at intermediate stations. 7 RCTC RAIL SRTP FY 2016/17 — 2018/19 r MEN Riverside [vuniy iionspurro+ivi {ommissipn Inland Empire Orange County (IEOC) Line This line extends 100.1 miles between the city of San Bernardino, in San Bernardino County, and Irvine and San Juan Capistrano, in Orange County, with limited extensions in Oceanside. The alignment roughly follows the Riverside Freeway (SR91) along the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) San Bernardino Subdivision in Riverside and Orange County. This commuter rail service to Orange County provides a transportation alternative in one of the busiest corridors in Southern California. The Line is a jointly funded project of the RCTC, SANBAG, and OCTA. When the service began in October 1995, it was the first suburb -to -suburb commuter rail line in the country. One station in San Bernardino County, four stations within Riverside County, eight stations within Orange County, and one station in San Diego County now serve the line. In July 2012, one peak round-trip was added for a total of five peak -period round -trips, and three off-peak round - trips operating Monday through Friday. IEOC weekend service began on July 15, 2006. This route was modeled after the successful RCTC-chartered Beach Trains. The service has been reduced to one round trip leaving from San Bernardino to Oceanside in the morning and returning in the afternoon on Saturday and Sunday. The trains make all IEOC stops, plus the San Clemente Pier. The current running time between downtown Riverside and Irvine is approximately 68 minutes. RTA, SunLine, Corona Dial -A -Ride, and the Corona Cruiser provide connecting transit service. IEOC Line Line Opening: Route miles: Avg Trip Length (miles): Trains Operated/Day: Current Stations Served: San Bernardino Riverside -Downtown Riverside -La Sierra North Main Corona West Corona Anaheim Canyon Orange Santa Ana Tustin Irvine Laguna Niguel San Juan Capistrano San Clemente San Clemente Pier* Oceanside *Weekends only October 1995 100.1 33.8 14 1204 West 3rd St 4066 Vine Street 10901 Indiana Ave 250 E Blaine St 155 S Auto Center Dr 1039 N Pacificenter Dr 194 N Atchison St 1000 E Santa Ana BI 2975 Edinger Ave 15215 Barranca Pkwy 28200 Forbes Rd 26701 Verdugo St 1850 Avenida Estacion Avenida del Mar 235 S Tremont Ave 8 RCTC RAIL SRTP FY 2016/17 — 2018/19 rINNEN� Riverside founry iioasporlo+ion fommission 91/ Perris Valley Line This route officially began operating peak -period service on May 6, 2002. With the completion of the Perris Valley Line in 2016, the 91 Line will extend the route to 85.6 miles between Riverside and South Perris. The alignment roughly follows the Riverside Freeways (SR215 &SR91) along the BNSF San Bernardino subdivision through Riverside County to Fullerton in Orange County where it continues northwest to downtown Los Angeles. This line will serve existing stations along this line including Riverside -Downtown, Riverside -La Sierra, North Main Corona, West Corona, Fullerton, Buena Park, Norwalk, Commerce, and LAUS. RCTC, OCTA, and the LACMTA jointly fund the Line. In June 2016, service was extended to serve South Perris, Perris Downtown, Moreno Valley -March Fields, and Riverside - Hunter Park/UCR. The service levels on this route are still developing. Currently, there are three AM peak -period trips from Riverside to Los Angeles with four PM peak period returns. There is one AM reverse peak -period trip from Los Angeles to Riverside with one PM reverse peak -period return. This service operates Monday through Friday. On July 5, 2014 weekend service began with two round trips from Riverside to Los Angeles. In 2016 Metrolink extended the 91 Line service to South Perris to provide passengers three weekday round trips from South Perris to Downtown Los Angeles Union Station. There will also be two reverse peak trains between Los Angeles and Riverside Downtown and one trip from Los Angeles to Riverside Downtown. There will be six bounce between South Perris and Riverside Downtown. 91/PVL Line 91 Line Opening: PVL Line Extension Opening: Route miles: Avg Trip Length (miles): Trains Operated/Day: May 2002 2016 85.6 36.6 13 Current Stations Served: South Perris 1304 Case Road Perris -Downtown 121 South C. Street Moreno Valley -March Field 14160 Meridian Parkway Riverside Hunter Park/UCR 1101 Marlborough Ave Riverside -Downtown 4066 Vine St Riverside -La Sierra 10901 Indiana Ave North Main Corona 250 E Blaine St West Corona 155 S Auto Center Dr Fullerton 120 E Santa Fe Ave Buena Park Lakeknoll Dr & Dale St Norwalk 12700 Imperial Highway Commerce 6433 26th St LA Union Station 800 N Alameda St peak back return trains The peak -period running time between South Perris, Downtown Riverside and Los Angeles is approximately 127 minutes. RTA, SunLine, Corona Dial -A -Ride, and the Corona Cruiser provide connecting service in Riverside County. 9 RCTC RAIL SRTP FY 2016/17 — 2018/19 rINNEN� Riverside founry iioasporlo+ion fommission 2.2 Key Performance Indicators RCTC will use the following performance indicators provided by SCRRA to measure the effectiveness of the Riverside, IEOC, and 91 Lines: 91/PVL Line Indicator FY 14/15 AUDITED FY 15/16 Estimated FY 16/17 Projected Unlinked Passenger Trips 920,497 611,863 732,278 Subsidy/Passenger Mile $0.24 $0.66 $ 0.64 Farebox Recovery Ratio 44.50% 24.10% 22.30% Operating Expense/Passenger Mile $0.43 $0.91 $ 0.86 Operating Subsidy/Passenger $8.46 $23.37 $ 23.24 Operating Expense/Train Mile $64.26 $100.49 $ 99.44 Revenue Recovery 45.20% 27.60% 25.60% Passenger Miles per Revenue Car Mile (Assumes 4 car set) 37.53 27.06 27.31 1EOC Line Indicator FY 14/15 AUDITED FY 15/16 Estimated FY 16/17 Projected Unlinked Passenger Trips 1,394,020 1,277,620 1,284,643 Subsidy/Passenger Mile $0.30 $0.40 $ 0.40 Farebox Recovery Ratio 33.70% 30.50% 30.00% Operating Expense/Passenger Mile $0.47 $0.60 $ 0.60 Operating Subsidy/Passenger $12.16 $13.74 $ 14.18 Operating Expense/Train Mile $78.74 $78.15 $ 80.53 Revenue Recovery 35.60% 35.00% 34.50% Passenger Miles per Revenue Car Mile (Assumes 4 car set) 42.12 37.66 34.24 Riverside Line Indicator FY 14/15 AUDITED FY 15/16 Estimated FY 16/17 Projected Unlinked Passenger Trips 1,324,207 1,216,592 1,162,471 Subsidy/Passenger Mile $0.15 $0.24 $ 0.26 Farebox Recovery Ratio 55.50% 44.80% 43.50% Operating Expense/Passenger Mile $0.34 $0.45 $ 0.46 Operating Subsidy/Passenger $5.96 $9.22 $ 9.89 Operating Expense/Train Mile $98.50 $105.26 $ 104.89 Revenue Recovery 57.20% 46.00% 44.40% Passenger Miles per Revenue Car Mile (Assumes 4 car set) 72.83 67.97 60.04 10 RCTC RAIL SRTP FY 2016/17 - 2018/19 r NENE Rleers.,de County iioasparrorim fornmissim 2.3 Trip Generators and Projected Growth Feeder services to stations are vital to the success of commuter rail in Western Riverside County. Coordination and consultation with transit providers and local agencies is an ongoing process. Connecting transit to stations in Western Riverside County is provided by RTA, Sunline, Corona Dial -A -Ride, and the Corona Cruiser. RTA, RCTC, and Metrolink continue to work together to increase awareness of the RTA bus connections at the RCTC Metrolink stations. Ads regularly appear in the RTA Ride Guide promoting free RTA transfers from Metrolink stations. The Ride Guide includes the Metrolink stations in its Route Directory Listing. Also, Metrolink occasionally helps promote the RTA CommuterLink service in materials at the stations. In addition to its fixed routes, RTA developed CommuterLink to address commuter needs. This express service provides transit to and from Riverside Metrolink stations and transit centers during peak commuting periods. The program aims to provide a viable transit alternative for commuters, helping mitigate congestion and pollution. The Corona Cruiser, operated by the City of Corona, provides a fixed route schedule but offers some route deviation with advance reservation. Buses run Monday through Saturday and serve the North Main Corona Station as well as stops throughout Corona. SunLine's commuter express service connects residents of the Coachella Valley with the Pass Area and Western Riverside County. The service addresses the transit service gap between the Coachella Valley and Western Riverside County, providing alternative transportation options to commuting residents of Coachella Valley. For over 10 years, RCTC has actively supported transit connections by establishing agreements with SCRRA and the Riverside County transit providers to provide free transfers for all connecting transit services at Riverside County stations. With the agreement, Metrolink ticket holders can ride both fixed route and Dial -A -Ride services for free as they travel to and from a station in Riverside County. RCTC subsidizes half the fare while Metrolink subsidizes the other half. Feeder buses and transit services are also critically important at the destination end. For the IEOC route, dedicated OCTA shuttle buses meet all peak -period trains at Anaheim Canyon, Orange, Santa Ana, Tustin, and Irvine. Some OCTA buses meet trains at all these stations as well as Laguna Niguel, San Juan Capistrano, and San Clemente. 11 RCTC RAIL SRTP FY 2016/17 — 2018/19 r MEN Riverside [vuniy iionspurro+ivi {ommissipn 2.4 Equipment, Passenger Amenities and Facility Needs Commuters boarding at RCTC Metrolink stations are provided with amenities that assist with their daily travel needs. Vending machines stocked with beverages and snacks are available at each station. Station facilities also include wireless internet access, bike lockers, designated parking for motorcycles and carpools. Furthermore, all stations are staffed 24 hours by contracted security guards with patrol vehicles, closed circuit television, and various safety and security enhancements such as fencing and gates. Amenities are also available onboard the train. All train cars are equipped with restrooms, and some of the newer cars contain hook-ups for laptop computers. Additionally, designated bike cars and quiet cars have been added throughout the system. i Metrolink has developed the website www.metrolinktrains.com. This site provides passengers with enhanced features allowing for greater content functionality. Improvements include regular service updates on the homepage, improved content management functions, enhanced usability and a more consistent look and feel with features expected by our increasingly web savvy passengers. Additionally, passengers can now subscribe through Twitter to obtain service updates and plan their trips using Google Transit. Metrolink also has an extensive social media presence on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, You Tube and related sites. Major needs, which continue to be the focus of RCTC attention for the SRTP FY 2016/17-2018/19, include the following: • Implementation of Positive Train Control (PTC); • Start up of operation on the 91 Line extension into Perris Valley Project; • Start up operations at the newly constructed Riverside Downtown Operations Control Center; • Replacement of Ticket Vending Machines and Start up of Mobile Ticketing Application system wide; and • Rehab/Renovation and or purchases of locomotives. Implementation of Positive Train Control (PTC) PTC has been a major technical undertaking and initial operating elements should be implemented by the end of 2015. PTC will continue to be a priority for Metrolink and RCTC to ensure the safety of the traveling public. The $215 million capital project has been jointly funded by the member agencies and should be implemented prior to the federal deadline of 2015, however the federal deadline was extended. 12 RCTC RAIL SRTP FY 2016/17 - 2018/19 r NENE am— R..rrers.,de County iionsporrorim fornmission Station Improvements and Construction of New Facilities In order to meet the capacity needs of current and future system growth and expansion, the following facilities will be completed or commenced in the upcoming fiscal year: • Construction of a covered passenger waiting and concession area at the Riverside Downtown Metrolink Station; and • Expand and enhance existing security and station surveillance at Metrolink Station operations. • Expand the parking at the La Sierra Metrolink station RCTC Station Maintenance The Commission fully funds and maintains all of the commuter rail stations in Riverside County, which is unique among the Metrolink member agencies. Since Metrolink service began along the Riverside Line in 1993, the Commission has been maintaining the Riverside Downtown and Pedley stations. When the Inland Empire -Orange County Line began in 1995, the La Sierra and West Corona stations were added. Due to increasing demand, the North Main Corona station was added in 2002. Over the years, the stations show their age and require preventative maintenance. The Commission has always taken pride in the commuter rail stations and intends to invest $2 million to preserve the Commission's assets. Anticipated improvements include: • Comprehensive painting of station structures • Resealing of station parking lots • Improved access for disabled patrons • Drought tolerant landscaping upgrades Perris Valley Line Metrolink Extension Project In 2016, RCTC & Metrolink began operating trains along the Perris Valley Line extension. The completion of the project will mark a significant milestone for Riverside County and Metrolink as it is the first expansion of track being added to commuter rail. From 1999 to 2000, funding commitments to the SJBL were sporadic. RCTC successfully implemented the SJBL in the Federal Transportation Efficiency Act for the Twenty -First Century (TEA-21), making it an eligible FTA New Start rail project. In 1998, Congress appropriated $500,000 to the SJBL. These funds have since been drawn down to conduct an Alternatives Analysis, "The San Jacinto Branch Line/1-215 Corridor Study." Through prior action, the Commission has allocated $20 million for the implementation of passenger rail service between Riverside and Perris on the SJBL. In June 2003, the Commission re -adopted the Locally Preferred Alternative as an IOS, the Perris Valley Line (Riverside -Moreno Valley -Perris) Metrolink extension of the 91 Line. 13 RCTC RAIL SRTP FY 2016/17 — 2018/19 rINNEN m Riverside founry iioasporlo+ion fommission The estimated cost to implement the new service is $248 million, for a start up of service by late 2016. Staff has identified the additional federal, state, and local sources needed to fund this project. RCTC received approval from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) in 2012. RCTC completed project development and final design in 2013. RCTC has received the Small Start Grant Agreement (SSGA) from FTA to provide $75 million for the project in 2013. The Commission has received the following grant funds to date in support of the project: Funding Summary Measure A 64,031,738 CMAQ 2,907,000 FTA 5307 16,157,453 FTA 5309 1,960,000 STP 500,000 FTA 5307 10,000,000 CMAQ 4,298,000 CMAQ 36,514,263 FTA 5309 74,999,999 TOTAL 211,368,453 Ticket Vending Machines and Mobile Ticketing Application Metrolink's aging ticketing infrastructure will be getting replaced with new ticket vending machines and provide its customers with enhancements with the addition of the Mobile Ticketing application available to users with smart phones. The replacement and upgrade to the ticketing infrastructure will provide passengers a greater efficiency and ease when using the system. The Ticket Vending Machines will include a sleeker design and user friendly compatibilities. Metrolink has already launched the Mobile Ticketing Application system wide and are working on incorporating transferring compatibilities with Metro's gates to ensure customers continue the effortlessness connectivity to other transit providers. This feature is anticipated to be fully functional in the winter of 2016. Rehab/Renovation and or Purchase of Locomotives Metrolink's aging fleet will also be undergoing a revamp of its locomotive fleet to improve daily operation of the system. Metrolink is expecting to include 18 new F-125 Tier 4 locomotives into the revenue fleet in FY 2016/2017 in order to start phasing out a portion of the older fleet. The fleet will be equipped to optimize fuel efficiency and incorporates clean technology making them the cleanest diesel locomotives in the nation. The first Tier 4 Locomotive is scheduled to be delivered to Metrolink in October 2016. 14 RCTC RAIL SRTP FY 2016/17 — 2018/19 rINNEN m Riverside founry iioasporlo+ion fommission CHAPTER 3 — SERVICE CHANGES AND REGIONAL PLANNING 3.1 Recent Service Changes (Past Year) On April 6 and June 6 2016, Metrolink adjusted the schedules to improved efficiency and on time performance. In 2016, Metrolink extended the 91 Line service to South Perris to provide passengers three weekday round trips from South Perris to Downtown Los Angeles Union Station. There will also be two reverse peak trains between Los Angeles and Riverside Downtown. In addition, a peak return trip will be provided from Los Angeles to Riverside Downtown. There will be six bounce back trains between South Perris and Riverside Downtown. 3.2 Recommended Service Changes and Modifications The RCTC rail program consists of planning, programming, advocacy and implementation elements. This SRTP incorporates a variety of activities which support these elements. The FY 2016/17 Capital and Operating Plan reflects the efficiencies implemented since Metrolink's inception. Proposed service maximizes the use of existing rolling stock to relieve overcrowding. The FY 2016/17 proposed budget is under review by all of the member agencies and concurrence is anticipated by June 2016. Riverside Line Service Level Changes No change. 1E0C Line Service Level Changes No change. 91/PVL Line Service Level Changes No change. OPERATING SERVICE ASSUMPTIONS FOR FY2016/17 Line/Route Weekday Trains Saturday Trains Sunday Trains Riverside 12 Riverside -LA (UP) IEOC 3 San Bernardino - Irvine 2 San Bernardino - Laguna Niguel 2 San Bernardino - San Juan Capistrano 2 San Bernardino - Oceanside 1 Riverside - Irvine 3 Riverside - Laguna Niguel 2 Riverside - Oceanside 2 San Bernardino - Oceanside 2 San Bernardino - Oceanside 91/PVL-FuI-LA 9 Riverside -LA (BNSF) 6 Riverside -Perris 4 Riverside -LA 4 Riverside -LA 15 RCTC RAIL SRTP FY 2016/17 — 2018/19 r NENE Rieers.,de County iivasparrorim fornmissim The Commission's goal in participating in a regional commuter rail system is to provide useful transportation alternatives to its residents. To a large degree, this goal has already been achieved. Each morning, over 3,000 Riverside residents board one of Metrolink trains headed for jobs in Orange and Los Angeles counties. These rail commuters also contribute to a reduction in freeway traffic, removing more than 1.5 lanes of peak hour traffic each morning and each afternoon. Notwithstanding this success, a commuter rail service is unlike most of the projects funded by the Commission. The complete benefits of the project are not fully realized upon completion of construction or initial implementation of service. The commuter rail service must increase frequency as the demand increases over time. This increase in service is constrained by the availability of rail vehicles, capacity on the railroad, and available funding. Currently, not all of the Riverside County routes operate at optimal service levels. Two of the three Metrolink lines do not even offer minimum basic coverage during peak travel times. The IEOC and the 91 Line do not yet provide half- hourly headways and thus, their attractiveness to residents and ultimately their ridership and revenue performance are compromised. 3.3 Marketing Plans and Promotion Metrolink will continue outreach to new residents through direct -mail campaigns to homeowners within the system's sphere of service in Riverside County. Additionally, Metrolink is developing a targeted marketing strategy with all its member agencies. RCTC has budgeted for targeted promotion of service during the summer months as well as building ridership for the 91/PVL Line. 3.4 Coachella Valley -San Gorgonio Rail Service The concept of developing an expanded passenger rail service from Los Angeles to Indio and the Coachella Valley has been discussed for many years. Since FY2015, a separate Short Range Transit Plan was developed for the service. A brief overview is provided in this document. The plan includes new daily round trip Amtrak trains to the Coachella Valley provided through the Amtrak/Caltrans state partnership. RCTC, in conjunction with the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG), Caltrans Division of Rail and the Federal Railroad Administration will begin the first phase of detailed corridor planning with the initiation of the Service Development Plan (SDP). This SDP will be the first major study that will carefully design a viable service plan with appropriate ridership and service modeling plans. The effort along with completion of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the corridor will allow it to compete for future federal funding. RCTC worked closely with Caltrans to initiate the Alternatives Analysis that has been completed and shows promising ridership potential for the new route. RCTC plans to take the lead on the Service Development Plan study and intends to use Prop 1 B funds to help support the project. 16 RCTC RAIL SRTP FY 2016/17 — 2018/19 r MEN Riverside [vuniy hump:0E11 rsi tOn n,55ipry In addition, there is local support for this effort from the CVAG Executive Committee who has directed staff to establish a 90% bus transit/10% passenger rail service funding allocation split for Coachella Valley TDA funds to be phased in over a 3-4 year period. In addition, a MOU will be established between RCTC and CVAG to develop a Coachella Valley Rail Fund that will use both the TDA funds and additional state and local funds to conduct station development studies and provide initial capital funding for station development. It has been determined through numerous studies over the years that the Amtrak intercity option is preferred over a Metrolink commuter option, because of the long trip length and added comfort and amenities on the Amtrak trains and also Amtrak's contractual rights to operate over freight railroads. 3.5 LOSSAN Los Angeles — San Diego — San Luis Obispo Rail Corridor Agency The LOSSAN Rail Corridor Agency is a joint powers authority (JPA) created to oversee the intercity passenger rail service in the travel corridor between San Diego and Los Angeles. This agency has evolved as rail service has been extended to Ventura, Santa Barbara, and San Luis Obispo Counties and now includes all counties along the Pacific Surfliner Corridor from San Diego to San Luis Obispo County. The LOSSAN Rail Corridor Agency is tasked with the following functions: • Plan, recommend programs, promote, and identify funding sources for improvements to passenger rail services and facilities in the LOSSAN corridor; • Negotiate for and accept funds to be expended for the purpose of providing and passenger rail services and activities; • Review and comment on facility, service, and operational plans and programs of the agency or agencies operating sub -corridor commuter rail service in the LOSSAN corridor; • Coordinate facility, service, and operational plans and programs with other organizations providing passenger rail service in the Southern California region; and • Advocate improvements to services and facilities for the corridor before local, regional, state, and federal officials and agencies. improving intercity and commuter The LOSSAN Rail Corridor Agency does not pay for the operation of any of the passenger rail services within the corridor, but it is a means to help coordinate operations and planning. RCTC has been an active ex-officio member since 2011 and in 2014 with a revised Joint Powers Authority MOU, RCTC is now a full voting member. 17 RCTC RAIL SRTP FY 2016/17 - 2018/19 r NENE Rieers.,de County iivasparrorim fornmissim The passage of Senate Bill 1225 signed by Governor Jerry Brown in September 2012 sets the stage for local control. This bill established a process for transferring the administrative responsibilities for the state -supported intercity passenger rail service along the corridor from Caltrans to a locally governed joint powers authority. This local authority would have more control over schedules, operations, fares, marketing, and coordination with other transit operators. Currently, LOSSAN is fully transferred to local control and Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) is effectively fulfilling the role of the managing agency in Southern California. OCTA has taken the lead in coordinating the Interagency Transfer Agreement with Caltrans. These efforts require financial support that is prohibited from coming from Caltrans. RCTC, along with the other member agencies, have contributed to the start up operation efforts and will be actively engaged in the development of rail service in Southern California. 18 RCTC RAIL SRTP FY 2016/17 — 2018/19 rINNEN m Riverside founry iioasporlo+ion fommission CHAPTER 4 — FINANCIAL AND CAPITAL PLANS 4.1 Operating and Capital Budget This SRTP reflects the Commission's commitment to the commuter rail goals in the FY 2016/17 RCTC Budget: • Improve utilization and increase efficiency of commuter rail lines serving Riverside County; • Extend commuter rail service to Moreno Valley and Perris via the San Jacinto Branch Line; and • Maximize opportunities for public use of rail -related investments. Specific highlights of the FY 2016/17 Budget include: • Expansion of 91 Line weekday service to Perris Valley; • Project Completion of the Perris Valley Line (Riverside - Moreno Valley - Perris) Metrolink extension project; • Continuation of the implementation of Positive Train Control in the Metrolink network; • An additional increase in operating subsidy due to PTC costs and 91 Line expansion into Perris Valley. 4.2 Funding Plans to Support Operating and Capital Program With the passage of Measure A in 1988, $100 million was identified and committed to the development and implementation of a commuter rail system to serve Riverside County residents. The Rail Department uses LTF and Measure A funding for operations as well as federal 5307, 5309, 5337, state Proposition 1 B and LCTOP funds for capital. RCTC holds two voting positions on SCRRA's eleven member Board. RCTC staff members serve on the five -county Technical Advisory Committee which negotiates service and funding levels based upon the counties' established priorities. Staff also provides technical assistance, coordination between various SCRRA and RCTC departments, and linkages to local communities. 4.3 Regulatory and Compliance Requirements Public participation regarding service levels is largely garnered through the bi-annual on -board survey. Public hearings are held prior to any service changes. Daily receipt of feedback from the public is sought through Metrolink's 1-800-371-LINK (5465) and website www.metrolinktrains.com. Additionally, RCTC maintains a customer service number (951) 778-1092, provides service updates through Twitter and receives comments through the www.rctc.org website. 19 RCTC RAIL SRTP FY 2016/17 — 2018/19 r NENE am— R..rrers.,de County iionsporrorim fornmission Americans with Disabilities Act, Title VI SCRRA is responsible for the regulatory and compliance requirements governing the use of federal and state funds in accordance with ADA and Title VI. Accordingly, RCTC is responsible for additional compliance requirements as it relates to station facilities. All Metrolink trains and stations are accessible to persons with disabilities. TDA Triennial Audit, FTA Triennial Audit, NTD The RCTC TDA Triennial Audit was completed in September, 2013. The last audit resulted in no findings as pertained to the Rail Program. The FTA Triennial Audit was conducted in 2015 and some minor issues were addressed. NTD is reported annually by both SCRRA and RCTC. Alternative Fueled Vehicles Metrolink uses ultra -low sulfur diesel in its locomotives. It has initiated a procurement for state of the art Tier IV emissions level locomotives that should be placed in service in 2017. 20 RCTC RAIL SRTP FY 2016/17 — 2018/19 rlr� rverside (miry iioasFmto+ion fommission TABLE 1 - FLEET INVENTORY Revenue Vehicle Inventory (A-30) - CR PT 90151 -South California Regional Rail Authority dha: Metrolink (Full Reporter: Opera no) - RY15 Revision 2 (Working Date) View Printable Version of Farm - las of 5113/2016 3: l2 PM GM I +00:00] Fleets To update the mileage or edit all fleet -related information, select all applicable fleet's and choose Update Mileagetsy or 'Edit Fleet{sy at the bottom eJ RVI Total Active Vehicle ID Veh. Veh. Tyne ij 8759 5 9787 I7 8788 - U 8789 Cl : 8790 . 0 8791 15 . 6 8 2 56 Mfc. Model Mk. Mites This Avg Lifetime Status Year Year Mites 16 RL GMC F59PH 1992 6 RL CMC F59PH 1993 8 RL GMC F59PHI : 1995 2 . RL 56 RP 30 30 RP D 8792 . 5 5 : RP . 8793 tD 6794 0 879E 11666 O 11587 D . 35288 O 35289 O 35291 O 44882 O ma83 D 56750 CMC F59PHI 1925 BOM BILEVEL6 1992 BOM BILEVEL6 1993 BOM BILEVEL6 1997 26 28 RP BOM BILEVEL6 2002 4 4 RL GMC F59PHI 2001 1 RL GMC F40 1985 2 2 • RP • BOM BILEVEL6 1994 2 2 RP . BOM BILEVEL6 : 1996 2 2 , RL . MPT MP36 2008 13 13 RL I MPT • MP36 2009 15 WA RP PST Comet 1973 54 54 RP ZZZ BILEVEL6 2010 G0 20 O 56751 O 340404 4 4 1-20 of 20 F H Fleet Totals Vehicles 3 3 60 RP 20 RP 3 RP 3 RL 222 BILEVEL6. 2010 2ZZ BILEVEL612013 222 BILEVEL6 2013 GMC F59 1993 804,175 1,173,941 : Active 301,566 : 1,123.541 j Active 402,087 1,022,742 Active 100,522 1,022,742 Active 2,906,466 1,35'0,265 Active 1,557,035 1,291,154 Active 259,506 1,054,747 Active 1,349,431 769,239 ! Active 201,944: 720.346 Active 50,261 • 619,547 A• ctive 123,802 11,232,051 ; A• ctive 163,802 995.645 Active 100.522 352,428 Active 653,392 . 352,428 ' Active WA WA Active 2,802,664 251,177 Active i. 3,114,071 251,177 Active 1,038,024 149,263 Active 165./04 149,253 : Active 150,783 197,708 Active Active Veh. Active ADA Accessible Veh. Emergency Contingency Veh, Annual MI. 328 313 258 0 16,154,857 21 RCTC RAIL SRTP FY 2016/17 — 2018/19 rlrm Riverside founry iioasporlo+ion fommission TABLE 2-3 — SRTP SERVICE SUMMARY AND ROUTE STATISTICS Data is currently not available from SCRRA at this time. 22 RCTC RAIL SRTP FY 2016/17 — 2018/19 ROTC Commuter ROiI FY 311EJ17 Summary of Funds Requested Short Range Transit Plan Table 4 - Summary of Funds Requested for FY 2016/17 (Current Year Funding Only) Project Description Capita! Project Number` Total Funds LT Prop 1B securtty Prop 18 PTINISEA Measure A LCTOP Other SCRRA °aerating Sijaady , Transit Cain ectiens ROTC Rai 17perafim5' ROTC Station Maintenance and Security' 5 17.975And 5 400.300 5 5.475.300 S 5.346.590 11 RZ ,006 4100SW 5.475.303 6.055,300 5.3443.500 ad notal: Operating $ 29,200,400 5 17. 799,300 5 - S - 5 11,402,300 $ - 5 - FY 2016717 PVL Station Passenger Upgrades :'. FY 17 - 1 5 591.049 591.949 Video Sunialanee System Upgrade tFY 2916417 Prop 16 Sacuulyl- . FY 17 - 2 5 355.75-3. 355.763 Passenger Rail Efficiency Upgrade IFY 2916417 Prop IS Residual!' ' FY 17- 3 5 103.774 100.774 SUbtotrd: Capitol $ 947,586 $ 5 355.763 $ 106,,774 $ $ 391,049 5 - Total: Operating &Capital 5 30-0d&isfi S 17,798,3W $ 355,763 $ 104,774 $ 11,402,300 $ 391,045 S - 1I i Number des 10 Table dA - Capital Projed Jedifcation t21 @aced on IMMA Merrolink 0udg M. LTF 3 Meaeure A Tends 43.1Ine trees General Menagement end Security enste r41 Th1s lolal is for marling Melrolla, Mellon, 151 LCTCP: Approved FY 1511 s L CTUP capital Tends 161 Prop S9 See May: Fpproyed FY 15116 prop Se Seen* lunar 171 Prop 5e PTLi6SEA Approved Prop 10 PTMSEA Residual Capital fund: 66/860Z - L 6/9 L0Z Ad d12:IS IIt2:1 9102:1 Revived 5118120$6 Summery of FY 2016117 Funds Requester] his 031S3f103U SaNru 30 Auvumf1S 114941U -17 31814(1 rlrm Riverside founry iioasporlo+ion fommission Table 4A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER: FY 17 - 1 PROJECT NAME: PVL Station Passenger Upgrades PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This Project will provide the following: Upgrade Perris Valley Line Stations to support active transportation and encourage ridership. Project includes covered benches, bike covers/lockers and energy efficient lighting. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: This project is funded by a Caltrans Low Carbon Transportation Operating Program grant. PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): LCTOP FY15/16 $391,049 Total $391, 049 24 RCTC RAIL SRTP FY 2016/17 — 2018/19 rINNEN m Riverside founry iioasporlo+ion fommission Table 4A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER: FY 17 - 2 PROJECT NAME: Video Surveillance System Upgrade PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This Project will provide the following: Installation and strategic placement of high resolution fixed monitoring cameras coupled with high performance lenses and imaging software capable of detecting activity throughout all Riverside County commuter rail stations and layover facilities. Work will include strategic relocation and upgrades of cameras. The system will also include upgrades to the monitoring and storage capacity of the station security network. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: This project is funded by a California Governor's Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) Transit System Safety, Security, and Disaster Response Account under the California Transit Security Grant Program (CTSGP). PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): Prop 1 B Security FY 15/16 $355, 763 Total $355, 763 25 RCTC RAIL SRTP FY 2016/17 — 2018/19 rINNEN� Riverside founry iioasporlo+ion fommission Table 4A — Capital Project Justification PROJECT NUMBER: FY 17 - 3 PROJECT NAME: Rail Passenger Rail Efficiency Upgrades PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This Project will provide the following: The Riverside County Rail Passenger Rail Efficiency Upgrade Project is a series of projects that aim to improve the customers experience for rail passengers traveling in and out of Riverside County. The customer experience is critical to maintaining and improving the system ridership and maximizing the public investment in transit. This project will include a series of efforts that will help to build and improve the local transportation network. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: This project is funded by a Caltrans Prop 1 B Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement Program (PTMISEA). PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES (REQUESTED): Prop 1 B PTMISEA FY08/09 Remaining funds $100,774 Total $100, 774 26 RCTC RAIL SRTP FY 2016/17 — 2018/19 TABLE 5 - FY 17/18 - 18/19 SUMMARY OF FUTURE FUNDS TO BE REQUESTED sk aalsanisa� spunA BlBI soLlOLhdle,Umums 910D91-19 Pas+Aaa 000'000'45 LO L'ZL9'SS OS Os £ is' 10£'618 cis.' EL6 5L4L6 0''SL$ 1e71de3 g 5 ulleJsdQ :lrlol 'OS ill OS O4 OS OS 0$ Iplids3 !lelnlggg _ r 65 flS Hl AEI 000'000'9$ : 0VEL9`S$ U$ 0$ EL8'WES4 EFS'LOC'EL$ 51.01,L0'0Z$ 0upeJedp :leluygng 000.000'4 ZOt:ZL9'5 - 559'9L0'E 000'00* a5L'928'SL - 559-5L0-£ RODE¢ 8SZ'97.8'61 Z61.'Z19'5 559•SLd•E 000'609 85-Z'9Z85L •ioneas pus neueualuum ucypys 313a zudgeiadO ilea ama suomauury 1,154JeJ1 gesUcd2A-36 ulyeiedp+yy 10150 y aJnsea� {AlunoagJ FiL dod 12hO✓CLIe'�] All All JBAO21fY'_] OJM spun A mei spuhA 1eloi ,emu n>u Perind mdED Ugicipasau pafod SLISLQZ Ai.1a1 Papanaaa spund Jo Ammons - Z S awl 000'000'4 556'969'5 - L £ZZ'89Z'8L £ZZ'89Z'ZZ SI•VVL'1Z I lellde' a Buaeiedp :lain - leilde7:Ini6yg6s ' - 81 AA I 000'000'e 688'905`5 - EZZ'E9Z'8L £inisedZ SLL'54L'2Z 8ullelpd0 : oictnS OW 000'4 _60.91A.S £LD'986'2 OW'004 05:Z08'41. - £10'966'Z 06d 06P 651.'Z88'81 569'906'S £20'996'Z 600.66P 05l•E89'8i -- - lymaag pus eeueualumeg UneRl9 •D17L! suollewdp Usti.a.Loti su6lpauuao llsysll sasuadx35uo1sJQd0 v.slos 191.5. I V 01 nseao (fljlln?9$) 9L dad ]8AOI11B',7 All Ail J8AOR118,] OIAM1 ,;pond IRo1 spun j Ieiol ie4Rlnyy potod eudeo uol;dirosaa parcua, 81.lLLUZ Ad 101 paisanbaa spend Jo AJewwns - L'8 a19e1 ueld psimi a6uea YoUS paieanb0H spun40 Aleunung LL19La AA Ilea laynunaco 213H RCTC RAIL SRTP FY 2016/17 - 2018/19 r MEN Riverside [vuniy iionspurro+ivi {ommissipn TABLE 6 — STATE TRIENNIAL AUDIT RECOMMENDATIONS Recent Audit Recommendation (Covering FY 2009/10 — FY 20011/12) Completion Details No findings N/A 28 RCTC RAIL SRTP FY 2016/17 - 2018/19 rlrm Riverside founry iioasporlo+ion fommission TABLE 7 — SRTP TARGET REPORT Due to significant differences in the type and availability of performance data the Commuter Rail Program no longer reports into the RCTC PIP program. 29 RCTC RAIL SRTP FY 2016/17 — 2018/19 rlrm Riverside founry iioasporlo+ion fommission TABLE 8 — SRTP PERFORMANCE REPORT Due to significant differences in the type and availability of performance data the Commuter Rail Program no longer reports into the RCTC PIP program. 30 RCTC RAIL SRTP FY 2016/17 — 2018/19 r NENE am— R..rrers.,de County iionsporrorim fornmission TABLE 9 — SRTP HIGHLIGHTS Specific highlights of the FY 2016/17 Commuter Rail Plans include: O No fare increase; o Completion of construction of the Perris Valley Line Metrolink extension; O Major cost increase due to implementation of positive train control and start up operation cost for the 91 Line extension (PVL) ; and O Support development of Coachella Valley corridor rail projects. Table 9A — Operating and Financial Data FY 12/13 Audited FY 13/14 Audited FY 14/15 Audited FY 15/16 Estimated FY 16/17 Planned Systemwide* Ridership 3,070,685 3,273,829 3,638,724 3,106,075 3,179,392 Operating Costs per Revenue Hour $2,727 $2,727 $3,009 TBD TBD *Ridership is based on the Riverside, IEOC and 91 Lines only. 31 RCTC RAIL SRTP FY 2016/17 — 2018/19 AGENDA ITEM 80 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 8, 2016 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Jillian Guizado, Management Analyst Brian Cunanan, Commuter and Motorist Assistance Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Funding Agreement with the California Highway Patrol for Freeway Service Patrol Supervision WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 16-45-094-00 with the California Highway Patrol (CHP) to provide supervision and operation of the Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) program in Riverside County in an amount not to exceed $793,181; and 2) Authorize the Chair, or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Riverside County FSP program is operated as a joint venture between the California Department of Transportation (Ca!trans), CHP, and the Commission in its capacity as the Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies (SAFE). The Riverside County SAFE is responsible for administering the program, and the CHP provides daily field supervision to ensure service performance. The CHP has supplemental agreements with various SAFES statewide for overtime and/or additional personnel. Since 2001, the Commission has executed agreements with CHP due to the limited personnel and nature of the FSP program. In addition to field supervision during FSP operating hours (5:30 a.m. to 8:30 a.m. and 2:30 p.m. [12:30 p.m. on Fridays] to 6:30 p.m.), there are services performed between operating hours that support the program, therefore requiring CHP officers to work overtime. Below is a sample of the services performed by FSP CHP officers: In -field Supervisory Services Provided During FSP Operating Hours (not exhaustive): • Provide in -field, on scene, program supervision; • Provide on -the -spot decisions regarding incidents occurring in the field; • Enforce program rules and guidelines through in -field supervision; Agenda Item 80 203 " Conduct all investigations with regard to equipment, personnel, damage, and complaints; " Inspect tow trucks for regulatory compliance; " Serve as a FSP liaison between agencies, such as with other CHP personnel, Ca!trans, cities, counties, etc.; and " Be available to the public for FSP concerns, questions, comments, complaints. Administrative Supervisory Services Provided During Non-FSP Hours (not exhaustive): " Initiate background checks and conduct testing, fingerprinting, and certifications for new FSP drivers; " Prepare training class materials (binders and maps); " Conduct training classes; " Track extra truck time, fines, penalties, and certificates (driver license, DL64, medical cards, and motor carrier permits); " Prepare monthly billing; " Maintain the standard operating procedures manual; " Maintain drop point maps to include changing local regulations; " Monitor the automatic vehicle locator system, tablets, radios, and other electronic FSP equipment; " Maintain required field -ready equipment such as backup tablets, radios, safety vests, and magnetic signs; " Participate in the RFP process for new contractors; " Maintain driver files and records for all FSP drivers; " Track FSP drivers' tenure and performance with regard to driver recognition and awards; and " Attend and occasionally host various FSP-related required meetings and trainings (Technical Advisory Committee and quarterly drivers' meetings). DISCUSSION: At its February 2013 meeting, the Commission approved an agreement with the CHP for overtime supervision and operation of the FSP program in an amount not to exceed $522,515 over a three-year term. At its November 2013 meeting, the Commission approved an amendment to the agreement for an additional amount of $1,107,203, and a total amount not to exceed $1,629,718 in anticipation of the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project (91 Project) commencing in 2014 and requiring construction FSP services. The current agreement expires on June 30, 2016, and staff is seeking approval for a new agreement with CHP for another three-year term. This agreement will initially consist of the following elements: 91 Project construction FSP officer overtime hours, 91 Project construction FSP dispatch overtime hours, general officer overtime hours, and funding for one-half of a full-time equivalent CHP officer position. SANBAG's current agreement with CHP, which includes funding for the other half of a full-time equivalent, has another two fiscal years remaining before it expires. Agenda Item 80 204 Staff coordinated with the CHP to develop an estimate for the incremental CHP time and corresponding costs needed to support general overtime and overtime needed to support construction projects. The agreement provides for a maximum of 5,519 overtime hours for Fiscal Year 2016/17, 1,352 overtime hours for FY 2017/18, and 1,023 overtime hours for FY 2018/19 at a statewide rate determined each fiscal year by CHP headquarters. The current rates are $76.76 per hour for officers and $39.71 per hour for dispatchers. The total amount of the agreement for both regular FSP overtime and construction FSP overtime shall not exceed $793,181. In the event CHP headquarters grants a rate increase, the Commission is required to reimburse the CHP at the new hourly rate, but in no event shall the total amount exceed the maximum contract amount. Below is a breakdown of the estimated hours and costs by fiscal year: FY 2016/17 = $420,544 One half of a full-time officer position ($94,644) 983 hours officer overtime for the regular FSP program ($75,455) 1,898 hours officer overtime for SR-91 CIP construction FSP ($145,690) 2,638 hours dispatch overtime for SR-91 CIP construction FSP ($104,755) FY 2017/18 = $193,704 One half of a full-time officer position ($97,483) 1,003 hours officer overtime for the regular FSP program ($76,990) 145 hours officer overtime for SR-91 CIP construction FSP ($11,130) 204 hours dispatch overtime for SR-91 CIP construction FSP ($8,101) FY 2018/19 = $178,933 One half of a full-time officer position ($100,408) 1,023 hours Officer Overtime for the regular FSP program ($78,525) The funding agreement provides for the reimbursement from the Commission to the CHP of those reasonable overtime expenses necessary to support the FSP program and FSP service supporting the 91 Project. An Inland CHP Lieutenant Commander provides direct supervision of the dedicated FSP officers and reviews and approves their reimbursed overtime expenses. Auditing of these reimbursable expenses is performed both at the local CHP division level and at the state level by the FSP liaison contracts unit. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes N/A Year: FY 2016/17 FY 2017/18+ Amount: $420,544 $372,637 Source of Funds: SAFE Budget Adjustment: No N/A GL/Project Accounting No.: 20145 81016 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \I-414ideivi Date: 05/12/2016 Attachment: Agreement No. 16-45-094-00 Agenda Item 80 205 STATE OF CALIFORNIA STANDARD AGREEMENT STD 213 (Rev 06/03) AGREEMENT NUMBER CHP# 16R061001 RCTC # 16-45-094-00 REGISTRATION NUMBER 1. This Agreement is entered into between the State Agency and the Contractor named below: Department of California Highway Patrol Riverside County Transportation Commission 2. The term of this Agreement is: 07/01/2016 through 06/30/2019 3. The maximum amount of this Agreement is: $793,181.00. (Seven Hundred Ninety -Three Thousand One Hundred Eighty -One Dollars and Zero Cents) 4. The parties agree to comply with the terms and conditions of the following exhibits which are by this reference made a part of the Agreement. Exhibit A — Agreement Between State of California and Riverside County Transportation Exhibit C* — General Terms and Conditions (with exclusion of item #4 "Audit", #5, "Indemnification", #6 "Disputes", #7 "Termination for Cause", #9 "Recycling", #11 "Certification clauses", #13 "Compensation", #15 "Antitrust Claims", #16 "Child Support Compliance", #18 "Priority Hiring Considerations", and #19 "Small Business Participation and DVBE Participation Reporting Requirements.") Signatures appear on page 9 of Exhibit A. 9 pages GTC 610 6/9/10 Items shown with an Asterisk ("), are hereby incorporated by reference and made part of this agreement as if attached hereto. These documents can be viewed at www.dgs.ca.gov/ols/Resources/StandardContractLanguage.aspx IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been executed by the parties hereto. CONTRACTOR CONTRACTOR'S NAME (if other than an individual, state whether a corporation, partnership, etc.) Riverside County Transportation Commission BY (Authorized Signature) See page 9 for signatures DATE SIGNED(Do not type) PRINTED NAME AND TITLE OF PERSON SIGNING See page 9 ADDRESS P.O. Box 1208, Riverside, CA 92502-2208 STATE OF CALIFORNIA AGENCY NAME Department of California Highway Patrol BY (Authorized Signature) See page 9 for signatures DATE SIGNED(Do not type) PRINTED NAME AND TITLE OF PERSON SIGNING P. SLINEY, Assistant Chief, Administrative Services Division ADDRESS California Department of General Services Use Only P.O. Box 942898, Sacramento, CA 94298-0001 206 RCTC Agreement # 16-45-094-00 CHP#16R061001 Exhibit A, Page 1 of 9 AGREEMENT BETWEEN STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL AND RIVERSIDE COUNTY SERVICE AUTHORITY FOR FREEWAY EMERGENCIES FOR FREEWAY SERVICE PATROL THIS AGREEMENT is between the State of California acting by and through Department of California Highway Patrol (hereinafter referred to as CHP) P.O. Box 942898, Sacramento, California 94298-001 and Riverside County Transportation Commission, acting in its capacity as the Riverside County Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies (hereinafter referred to as RCTC) P.O. Box 12008, Riverside, CA 92502-2208. Collectively, CHP and RCTC may be referred to as the "Parties." ARTICLE 1. GENERAL INFORMATION A. This Agreement provides for CHP dispatch services and overtime supervisory assistance in connection with the Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) program in Riverside County. Streets and Highways Code Section 2561, subdivision (c) defines "freeway service patrol" as a "program managed by the Department of the California Highway Patrol, the [California Department of Transportation] and a regional or local entity which provides emergency roadside assistance on a freeway in an urban area." B. Section 2401 of the California Vehicle Code (CVC) states that the Commissioner of CHP shall make adequate provisions for patrol of the highways at all times of the day and night. C. RCTC has the ability to provide local matching funds as required by the State Budget Change Proposal (BCP) for FSPs on freeways within Riverside County, which has qualified the county to participate in the State FSP program. Riverside County FSP 207 RCTC Agreement # 16-45-094-00 CHP#16R061001 Exhibit A, Page 2 of 9 will assist in transportation system management efforts, provide traffic congestions relief, and expedite the removal of freeway impediments, all of which will have the added benefit of improving air quality. ARTICLE 2. TERMS AND CONDITIONS A. Riverside County's FSP program is intended to be funded with revenues derived from Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies (SAFE) and State Budget Change Proposal funds, known as BCP for the day-to-day contractor operation. RCTC is currently only provided 1.5 officers to provide oversight for the program in accordance with funding available for the statewide FSP program. With ongoing additions and turnover of FSP program drivers, the provision of additional driver training and required certification classes by CHP are a necessity in order for RCTC's tow contractors to maintain their contractual obligation of having only certified FSP drivers perform FSP services. With only 1.5 officers, it is difficult to provide classes as well as all other duties the officers are responsible for within regular duty hours. Therefore, it is necessary to fund a half-time officer position and CHP overtime for FSP program oversight assistance, incident investigations, administrative duties, and other field duties as required to maintain operational safety and code compliance. B. Should this Agreement be terminated under paragraph D, RCTC agrees to provide funding to reimburse CHP for those reasonable and allowable costs incurred and associated with the program overtime and administrative duties as defined in this Agreement up to the point of termination. C. The term of this Agreement shall be effective July 1, 2016 through June 30, 2019. D. The CHP and RCTC mutually agree that either party may terminate this Agreement upon sixty (60) days prior written notice to the other party. E. The CHP and RCTC agree that this Agreement may be amended by mutual written consent of both parties hereto. 208 RCTC Agreement # 16-45-094-00 CHP#16R061001 Exhibit A, Page 3 of 9 F. RCTC agrees to reimburse CHP for actual costs incurred for FSP related duties performed by CHP officers ("Officers"), in accordance with the following schedule: i. For Regular FSP Program: 1) Approximately 983 hours of available Officer overtime during fiscal year 2016/2017, reimbursed at an estimated rate of $76.76 per hour for an annual estimated amount of $75,455.00 for FY 2016/2017. 2) Approximately 1,003 hours of available Officer overtime during fiscal year 2017/2018, reimbursed at an estimated rate of $76.76 per hour for an annual estimated amount of $76,990.00 for FY 2017/2018. 3) Approximately 1,023 hours of available Officer overtime during fiscal year 2018/2019, reimbursed at an estimated rate of $76.76 per hour for an annual estimated amount of $78,525.00 for FY 2018/2019. ii. For RC SAFE/ 91 CIP Construction FSP: (1) Approximately 1,898 hours of available Officer overtime during fiscal year 2016/2017, reimbursed at an estimated rate of $76.76 per hours for an annual estimated amount of $145,690.00 for FY 2016/2017. (2) Approximately 2,638 hours of available Dispatcher overtime during fiscal year 2016/2017, reimbursed at an estimated rate of $39.71 per hour for an annual estimated amount of $104,755.00 for FY 2016/2017. (3) Approximately 145 hours of available Officer overtime during fiscal year 2017/2018, reimbursed at an estimated rate of $76.76 per hours for an annual estimated amount of $11130.00 for FY 2017/2018. (4) Approximately 204 hours of available Dispatcher overtime during fiscal year 2017/2018, reimbursed at an estimated rate of $39.71 per hour for an annual estimated amount of $8,101.00 for FY 2017/2018. 209 RCTC Agreement # 16-45-094-00 CHP#16R061001 Exhibit A, Page 4 of 9 RCTC Funding of % CHP Officer: (1) RCTC agrees to reimburse CHP for one-half of a full time Officer position for the remainder of the Agreement term at estimated annual amounts of $94,644.00 for fiscal year 2016/2017, $97,483.00 for fiscal Year 2017/2018 and $100,408.00 for fiscal year 2018/2019. iv. Use of Funds; Total Not to Exceed Contract Value. Amounts Payable to the CHP by RCTC for costs incurred pursuant to this Agreement may be utilized over several fiscal years, and need not be utilized in a single fiscal year by the CHP, so long as the total amount payable under this Agreement is not exceeded. It is understood by both parties that rate increases in salary and benefits are governed by collective bargaining agreements and/or statute and that no advance written notification is necessary prior to implementing the increased rates. In the event CHP is granted a rate increase, RCTC agrees to reimburse CHP at the new hourly rate, but in no event shall the total amount to be reimbursed by RCTC under this Agreement, for any of the services described herein, exceed the maximum contract amount of $793,181.00. Fiscal Year begins July 1 and ends on June 30. G. The CHP shall invoice monthly. RCTC agrees to pay CHP within thirty (30) days after the invoice is received. The CHP and RCTC agree that any notice required under this Agreement shall be delivered or mailed to the persons designated below: To CHP: California Highway Patrol Research and Planning Section P.O. Box 942898 Sacramento, CA 94298-0001 ATTENTION: Lori Gong Statewide FSP Manager (916) 843-3353 To COMMISSION: Riverside County Transportation Commission P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 ATTENTION: Brian Cunanan Program Manager (951) 787-7141 210 RCTC Agreement # 16-45-094-00 CHP#16R061001 Exhibit A, Page 5 of 9 ARTICLE 3. COMMISSION RESPONSIBILITIES A. RCTC shall reimburse CHP for those reasonable overtime expenses necessary to support the Riverside County FSP operations as outlined under Article 2, Terms and Conditions, Paragraph F. B. It is agreed that in the event State FSP funds do not become available to RCTC for this Agreement, RCTC may immediately terminate this Agreement with written notice, but shall pay the CHP from other sources any amounts required to cover CHP's cost to the date of Agreement termination. ARTICLE 4. CHP RESPONSIBILITIES A. The CHP has already assigned and staffed, for the dedicated purpose of operating the Riverside County FSP, one and one half (1.5) full-time officers for the dedicated purpose of assisting with Riverside County FSP operations. If the CHP cannot provide the Agreement's specified staffing level, CHP agrees to notify RCTC within thirty (30) days. B. All personnel providing services shall be State employees under the sole discretion, supervision, and regulation of CHP. Said personnel shall work out of the appropriate CHP facilities as designated by CHP. At no time shall any State employee assigned to the Riverside County FSP program be considered employees, agents, officials, or volunteers of RCTC. ARTICLE 5. CHP OVERTIME CHP overtime duties may include, but not be limited to: A. Investigating complaints from the public regarding a Riverside County FSP contractor or driver. 211 RCTC Agreement # 16-45-094-00 CHP#16R061001 Exhibit A, Page 6 of 9 B. Performing all necessary driver license and background checks on all Riverside County FSP operators. C. Inspecting all Riverside County FSP contractor tow trucks on a periodic basis. D. Performing necessary daily FSP oversight and program management, and providing oversight of the contractors' compliance with statutory and regulatory requirements. E. Providing training to all Riverside County FSP contractors and operators. F. Assisting RCTC with verifying contractor billing. G. Provide representation for Riverside County FSP Technical Committee. ARTICLE 6. INDEMNIFICATION A. To the extent permitted by law, RCTC shall defend, indemnify, and save harmless CHP and all of CHP's appointees, officers, and employees from and against any and all claims, suits, or actions for "injury" (as defined by Government Code section 810.8) caused by the negligent or intentional acts or omissions of RCTC, or RCTC's officers, directors, and employees, arising out of the performance of this Agreement. B. To the extent permitted by law, CHP shall defend, indemnify, and save harmless RCTC and all of RCTC's officers, directors, and employees from and against any and all claims, suits, or actions for "injury" (as defined by Government Code section 810.8) caused by the negligent or intentional acts or omissions of CHP, or CHP's appointees, officers, or employees, arising out of the performance of this Agreement. C. Neither termination of this Agreement nor completion of the acts to be performed under this Agreement shall release any party from its obligation to indemnify as to any claims or cause of action asserted so long as the event(s) upon which such claim or cause of action is predicated shall have occurred subsequent to the effective date of this Agreement and prior to the effective date of Termination or completion. 212 RCTC Agreement # 16-45-094-00 CHP#16R061001 Exhibit A, Page 7 of 9 ARTICLE 7. AUDITS The contracting parties hereto shall be subject to the examination and audit of the State for a period of three (3) years after final payment under the contract. In addition, RCTC and CHP may be subject to the examination and audit by representatives of either party. The examination and audit shall be confined to those matters connected with the performance of the contract including, but not limited to the costs of administering the contract. RCTC and CHP agree to allow the auditor(s) access to such records during normal business hours and to allow interviews of any employees who might reasonably have information related to such records (Gov. Code Sect. 8546.7, Pub. Contract Code Sect. 10115 et seq., CCR Title 2, Section 1896). RCTC and CHP agree to maintain such records for possible audit for a minimum of three (3) years after final payment. ARTICLE 8. DISPUTES Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, any dispute concerning a question of fact arising under this Agreement which is not disposed of by mutual agreement of the parties may be submitted to an independent arbitrator mutually agreed upon by the CHP and RCTC. The arbitrator's decisions shall be non -binding and advisory only, and nothing herein shall preclude either party, at any time, from pursuing any other legally available course of action, including the filing of a lawsuit. Pending a final decision of a dispute hereunder, both parties shall proceed diligently with the performance of their duties under this Agreement, and such continued performance of their duties under this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver of any rights, legal or equitable, of either party relating to the dispute. ARTICLE 9. RESOLUTION RCTC agrees to provide CHP with a resolution, motion, order or ordinance of the governing body, approving execution of agreements with CHP, and identifying the individual who is authorized to sign the Agreement on behalf of RCTC. 213 RCTC Agreement # 16-45-094-00 CHP#16R061001 Exhibit A, Page 8 of 9 ARTICLE 10. OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS A. By and in consideration of the covenants and conditions contained herein, CHP and RCTC do hereby agree as follows: i. This Agreement, and any attachments or documents incorporated herein by inclusion or reference, constitutes the complete and entire Agreement between CHP and RCTC and supersedes any prior representations, understandings, communications, commitments, Agreements or proposals, oral or written. ii. This Agreement shall not become effective until: 1) Duly signed by both parties and approved by the Department of General Services Office of Legal Services, if applicable. 2) RCTC has submitted to CHP a copy of the resolution, policy, order, motion, or ordinance from RCTC approving execution of the Agreement and identifying the individual authorized to sign on behalf of RCTC. This space is intentionally left blank. 214 RCTC Agreement # 16-45-094-00 CHP#16R061001 Exhibit A, Page 9 of 9 This Agreement is entered into by the parties listed below and shall be effective upon approval by the Department of General Services Office of Legal Services, if applicable. By executing this Agreement, the representatives of CHP and RCTC warrant that they have viewed and fully understand all provisions of this Agreement, and are authorized to bind their respective agencies to all terms of the Agreement's provisions. STATE OF CALIFORNIA Department of California Highway Patrol P. SLINEY, Assistant Chief Administrative Services Division RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Scott Matas Chair Date Date APPROVED AS TO FORM: Best, Best & Krieger LLP General Counsel Date 215 AGENDA ITEM 8P RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 8, 2016 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Jillian Guizado, Management Analyst Brian Cunanan, Commuter and Motorist Assistance Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Amendment to Freeway Service Patrol Agreement WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Approve Agreement No. 11-45-053-05, Amendment No. 4 to Agreement No. 11-45-053-00, with Tri-City Towing, Inc. (Tri-City) to provide Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) services on Beat No. 7 for an additional amount of $60,000, and a total amount not to exceed $1,110,000; and 2) Authorize the Chair or Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At its May 2011 meeting, the Commission awarded Agreement No. 11-45-053-00 to Tri-City for operation of two primary tow trucks on Beat No. 2 of the Commission's Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) program in an amount not to exceed $950,000. The agreement awarded was for a three- year term and two one-year options. In addition to exercising the option years, the agreement was also amended in August 2011, to add additional FSP service, on a temporary basis, for Beat No. 8 in the amount of $100,000 and, in August 2015, to change the beat specifications from Beat No. 2 to Beat No. 7. DISCUSSION: The existing agreement with Tri-City for FSP services on Beat No. 7 expires on July 31, 2016. Another existing FSP agreement on a parallel service area, Beat No. 4, is set to expire five months later on January 2, 2017. It is in the Commission's best interest to procure service on multiple FSP beats at one time in order to maximize staff time and outreach to prospective bidders. For those reasons, in recent years staff has worked toward grouping FSP procurements whenever possible. Therefore, in order to release one request for proposals for FSP services on both Beat Nos. 4 and 7, staff recommends amending Agreement No. Agenda Item 8P 216 11-45-053-00 with Tri City to extend the term of the agreement through January 2, 2017, and to add additional compensation in the amount of $60,000, for a total amount not to exceed $1,110, 000. Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2016/17 Amount: $60,000 Source of Funds: State of California, SAFE DMV Fees Budget Adjustment: No GL/Project Accounting No.: 002173 81014 00000 0000 201 45 81014 Fiscal Procedures Approved: �� Date: 05/12/2016 Attachment: Tri-City Agreement No. 11-45-053-05 (Draft) Agenda Item 8P 217 Agreement No. 11-45-053-05 AMENDMENT NO. 4 TO AGREEMENT FOR FREEWAY SERVICE PATROL SERVICES FOR BEAT NO. 7 WITH TRI-CITY TOWING, INC. 1. PARTIES AND DATE This Amendment No. 4 is made and entered into as of this day of , 2016, by and between the RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ("Commission") acting in its capacity as the RIVERSIDE SERVICE AUTHORITY FOR FREEWAY EMERGENCIES ("SAFE'), a public entity, and TRI-CITY TOWING, INC., a California corporation ("Contractor"). 2. RECITALS 2.1 SAFE and the Contractor have entered into an agreement dated June 16, 2011 for the provision of freeway service patrol services for Beat No. 2 within Riverside County on behalf of SAFE (the "Master Agreement"). 2.2 SAFE and the Contractor entered into an Amendment No. 1 to the Master Agreement, dated August 1, 2011, to provide additional freeway service patrol services, on a temporary basis, for Beat No. 8 and provide additional compensation for the added services. 2.3 SAFE and the Contractor entered into an Amendment No. 2 to the Master Agreement, dated May 20, 2014, to extend the term of the Master Agreement. 2.4 SAFE and the Contractor entered into an Amendment No. 3 to the Master Agreement, dated July 6, 2015, to extend the term of the Master Agreement. 2.5 SAFE has issued Contract Change Order No. 1, effective as of August 1, 2015, to change the beat specifications from Beat No. 2 to Beat No. 7("CCO 1). 2.6 SAFE and the Contractor now desire to amend the Master Agreement in order to extend the term of the Master Agreement and provide additional compensation for the continued provision of freeway service patrol services. 3. TERMS 218 3.1 The term of the Master Agreement shall be extended for an additional term of five (5) months ending on January 2, 2017, unless earlier terminated as provided in the Master Agreement. 3.2 The maximum compensation for Services performed pursuant to this Amendment shall be Sixty Thousand ($60,000). Work shall be performed at the rates set forth in the Master Agreement. 3.3 The total not -to -exceed amount of the Master Agreement, as amended by this Amendment No. 4, shall be increased from One Million Fifty Thousand Dollars ($1,050,000) to One Million One Hundred Ten Thousand Dollars ($1,110,000). 3.4 Freeway service patrol services shall be performed and provided pursuant to the Master Agreement, as previously amended. 3.5 Except as amended by this Amendment, all provisions of the Master Agreement, as amended by Amendment No. 1, 2 and 3, including without limitation the indemnity and insurance provisions, shall remain in full force and effect and shall govern the actions of the parties under this Amendment. [Signatures on following page] 2 219 SIGNATURE PAGE TO AGREEMENT NO. 11-45-053-05 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment on the date first herein above written. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ACTING IN ITS CAPACITY AS THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY SERVICE AUTHORITY FOR FREEWAY EMERGENCIES TRI-CITY TOWING, INC., a California corporation By: By: Scott Matas, Chair Signature Name Title APPROVED AS TO FORM: Attest: By: By: Best Best & Krieger LLP Counsel to the Riverside County Transportation Commission * A corporation requires the signatures of two corporate officers. Its: Secretary One signature shall be that of the chairman of board, the president or any vice president and the second signature (on the attest line) shall be that of the secretary, any assistant secretary, the chief financial officer or any assistant treasurer of such corporation. If the above persons are not the intended signators, evidence of signature authority shall be provided to the Commission. 3 220 AGENDA ITEM 8Q RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 8, 2016 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Jillian Guizado, Management Analyst Brian Cunanan, Commuter and Motorist Assistance Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Fiscal Year 2016/17 Measure A Commuter Assistance Buspool Subsidy Funding Continuation Requests WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Authorize payment of $1,645/month maximum subsidy per buspool for the period July 1, 2016 to June 30, 2017, to the existing Riverside, Riverside II, and Mira Loma buspools; and 2) Require subsidy recipients to meet monthly buspool reporting requirements as supporting documentation to receive payments. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: As part of the Measure A Commuter Assistance Program, the Commission provides funding support to buspools used by Riverside County residents for their commutes along the State Route 91 corridor. The Commission adopted the Measure A buspool subsidy in October 1990 and established a monthly subsidy rate of $1,175 or $25/seat/month in support of commuter buspool operations. In July 2004, the Commission set the subsidy rate at $35/seat/month ($1,645/month) to help offset increases to operational costs during the previous 14 years. To provide additional guidance, the Commission also established a minimum buspool ridership policy in June 1995. The policy requires staff to report to the Commission when a buspool's ridership falls to 25 or below and to seek direction regarding the continuation of the buspool's subsidy. DISCUSSION: Like all commuter assistance incentives provided by the Commission to encourage use of alternative modes of transportation, the $35/seat/month subsidy is administered as a user end subsidy. The Commission's subsidy is an important factor that makes buspools an attractive alternative for these commuters with roundtrip commutes in excess of 100 miles. Also, the Agenda Item 8Q 221 Commission's subsidy remains cost-effective compared to the typical public transit subsidy rate of 80 percent. While the monthly cost of each buspool varies according to the number of route miles and the resulting negotiated service price, the Commission's monthly subsidy reflects a subsidy rate of 11 percent. Average Monthly Buspool Fare Per Rider $307 RCTC Subsidy Per Seat $35 Subsidy Rate 11% Unlike some of the other Commission -approved ridesharing incentives that have a limited term, the buspool subsidy is ongoing. To renew its annual subsidy, an existing buspool is required to: • Request in writing, continuation of funding from the Commission for the new fiscal year; • Consistently meet minimum ridership requirements; and • Submit monthly ridership reports throughout the year. The three existing buspools have completed all the requirements for funding as set forth by the Commission, including the submittal of monthly ridership reports and annual funding continuation requests. They have consistently met the minimum ridership level of 25 riders per month and have collectively averaged 27 riders/month/buspool. The traffic and environmental benefits realized in Fiscal Year 2015/16 by offering this subsidy are illustrated below: BUSpOOlS Average Riders/Month Roundtrip Distance Annual Miles Saved Annual One -Way Trips Reduced Mira Loma 29 ^ 120 mi 873,840 14,564 Riverside 27 —144 mi 1,004,256 13,948 Riverside II 25 —200 mi 1,284,800 12,848 Estimated Pounds of Emissions Reduced 29,768 Miles Saved 3,162,896 Trips Reduced 41,360 In reducing the number of vehicles on SR-91 during peak periods, the buspool program saved more than 3.1 million miles and 29,768 pounds of vehicle emissions in FY 2015/16. The buspool subsidy is funded by Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds and a budget of $80,000 is proposed for FY 2016/17. Based on the established monthly $1,645/month per buspool subsidy policy, the funds will support the continuation of the three existing buspools through FY 2016/17. It should be noted that in the interest of exploring Commuter Assistance Program cost efficiencies, staff has started to explore the potential to transition this program into a vanpool incentive. Staff will continue to review this and will report back to the Commission at a later date as more information becomes available. Agenda Item 8Q 222 Financial Information In Fiscal Year Budget: Yes Year: FY 2016/17 Amount: $80,000 Source of Funds: CMAQ Budget Adjustment: No GL/Project Accounting No.: 002109 81030 263 41 81002 Fiscal Procedures Approved: ,Itimiri Date: 05/12/2016 Attachments: 1) Riverside Renewal Request 2) Riverside II Renewal Request 3) Mira Loma Renewal Request Agenda Item 8Q 223 ATTACHMENT 1 CATALINA FUENTES Send correspondences to: Raytheon Company 2000 E. El Segundo Blvd. PO Box 902 Bldg. R1 Rm. 9224 MS. B500 El Segundo, CA 90245-4501 April 29, 2016 Attn.: Brian amanan, Commuter Assistance Manager Riverside County Transportation Commission P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 Dear Mr. Cunanan, In compliance with the requirements of the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC), I am requesting an extension of funding for the period of July 1, 2016 to June 30, 2017 for the "Riverside" to El Segundo Commuter Buspool. I am the buspool coordinator and I coordinate this buspool independently from any employer. The monthly cost to operate this bus pool from Transit Systems Unlimited, Inc. is $285. RCTC provides a $35 monthly subsidy per seat and the remaining $250 is paid for by the riders and their employers. The following is the Riverside to El Segundo Buspool schedule: AM Departure Galleria at Tyler, Riverside 4:10 am. AM Departure AM/PM Mini Market Lot Corner of Lincoln dt Pomona Rd. 4:22 am. AM Arrival Raytheon, El Segundo 5:12 am. PM Departure Raytheon, El Segundo 3:00 p.m. PM Arrival Corona Park & Ride Lot 4:30 p.m. PM Arrival Galleria at Tyler, Riverside 4:45 p.m. Information on this buspool is available with rideshare programs at Raytheon Aerospace Corporation, Boeing and the Los Angeles Air Force base. Employees receive this information through direct mailings, newsletter articles, and electronic messaging from these employers. These employer rideshare programs also share this information with other local employee transportation coordinators. Thank you for your continued support of this successful buspool program. Catalina Fuentes Riverside Buspool Coordinator 224 ATTACHMENT 2 TRACY HUTCHINSON Send correspondences to: Raytheon Company 2000 E. El Segundo Blvd. El Segundo, CA 90245 April 29, 2016 Attn.: Brian Cunanan, Commuter and Motorist Assistance Manager Riverside County Transportation Commission P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 Dear Mr. Cunanan, In compliance with the requirements of the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC), I am requesting an extension of funding for the period of July 1, 2016 to June 30, 2017 for the "Riverside 2" to El Segundo Commuter Buspool. I am the buspool coordinator and I coordinate this buspool independently from any employer. The monthly cost to operate this buspool from Essential Transportation is $350. RCTC provides a $35 monthly subsidy per seat and the remaining $315 is paid for by the riders and their employers. The following is the Riverside to EI Segundo Buspool schedule: AM Departure AM Departure AM Arrival PM Departure PM Arrival PM Arrival Riverside -Downtown Metrolink Station North Main Corona Metrolink Station Raytheon, El Segundo Raytheon, El Segundo North Main Corona Metrolink Station Riverside -Downtown Metrolink Station 4:37 a.m. 5:00 a.m. 6:00 a.m. 4:00 p.m. 5:20 p.m. 5:45 p.m. Information on this buspool is available with rideshare programs at Raytheon, Boeing, Aerospace Corporation, and the Los Angeles Air Force base. Employees receive this information through direct mailings, newsletter articles, and electronic messaging from these employers. These employer rideshare programs also share this information with other local employee transportation coordinators. Thank you for your continued support of this successful buspool program. Sincerely, jtA a y of-CiI u2dat, Tracy Hutchinson Riverside 2 Buspool Coordinator 225 ATTACHMENT 3 HARLAN ALPERT Send correspondences to: Harlan Alpert 5522 Sulphur Drive Mira Loma, CA 91752 May 10, 2016 Attn.: Brian Cunanan, Commuter and Motorist Assistance Manager Riverside County Transportation Commission P.O. Box 12008 Riverside, CA 92502-2208 Dear Mr. Cunanan, In compliance with the requirements of the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC), I am requesting an extension of funding for the period of July 1, 2016 to June 30, 2017 for the "Mira Loma" to El Segundo Commuter Buspool. I am the buspool coordinator and I coordinate this buspool independently from any employer. The monthly cost to operate this buspool from TBD is $.?-s;). RCTC provides a $35 monthly subsidy per seat and the remaining $ l is paid for by the riders and their employers. The following is the Mira Lorna Buspool schedule: AM Departure AM Departure AM Arrival PM Departure PM Arrival PM Arrival Mira Loma. Corona Park & Ride Lot El Segundo El Segundo Corona Park & Ride Lot Mira Loma (Monday --Thursday) (Friday) 4:1.0 a.m. 4:10 a.m. 4:25 a.m. 4:25 a.m. 5:30 a.m. 5:30 a.m. 3:00 p.m. 4:30 p.m. 4:45 p.m. 2:30 p.m. 4:00 pm. 4:15 p.m. Information on this buspool is available with rideshare programs at Raytheon, Boeing, Aerospace Corporation, and the Los Angeles Air Force base. Employees receive this information through direct mailings, newsletter articles, and electronic messaging from these employers. These employer rideshare programs also share this information with other local employee transportation coordinators. Thank you for your continued support of this successful buspool program. Sincerely, Harlan Alpert Mira Loma Buspool Coordinator 226 AGENDA ITEM 9 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 8, 2016 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee Sheldon Peterson, Rail Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: Proposed Metrolink Budget for Fiscal Year 2016/17 WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to: 1) Adopt the Fiscal Year 2016/17 Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) operating and capital budget, which results in a total operating and capital subsidy of $19,233,000 from the Commission; 2) Support an amendment to the FY 2016/17 SCRRA operating and capital budget in an amount not to exceed $6 million for the expansion of the Riverside Downtown Layover Facility and additional track improvements on the corridor; 3) Receive and file a report on the Commission's portion of the FY 2016/17 SCRRA operating and capital budget. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Metrolink is the brand name for the services operated by SCRRA. By virtue of the SCRRA Joint Powers Agreement (JPA), the five member agencies that comprise Metrolink must formally commit to fund their proportionate shares of commuter rail operating and capital costs. Each member agency must approve the budget before adoption of a final budget by the SCRRA Board, no later than June 30, 2016. Service and funding levels are limited by the policy and budget constraints of the member agencies and are negotiated each year. All of the financial information in this staff report is incorporated into the Commission's overall budget; however, in order to comply with the provisions of the JPA, a separate Commission action to adopt the budget is required. The overall amount the Commission will provide to SCRRA is a combination of an operating subsidy of $17,305,000 and a capital expenditure subsidy of $1,928,000, for a total subsidy of $19,233,000. The remainder of this staff report will provide the details that comprise the budget. FY 2015/16 Metrolink Review The following is a review of Metrolink's FY 2015/16 activities: Agenda Item 9 227 " Testing and initiating revenue service on the 91/Perris Valley Line (91/PVL) extension of the 91 Line that connects the Perris valley area and Riverside, extending the Metrolink route by 24 miles; " Additional significant changes in leadership with hiring of a new Deputy Chief Executive Officer, a Chief Financial Officer, and four new Deputy Chief Operating Officers; " Completed the Strategic Plan and Transit Asset Management Plan; " Further developed the positive train control (PTC) program with Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) approved revenue service demonstrations on all of the SCRRA- owned tracks including the Perris Valley Subdivision; " Initiated mobile ticketing with smartphones; " Continued development of the new Tier 4 locomotives program with initial units to be delivered starting in 2016; and " Continued successful Friday night Angel Game and weekend trains. FY 2016/17 Looking Forward Looking ahead to FY 2016/17, Metrolink intends to: " Continue to prioritize safety; " Actively pursue ways to generate ridership on all routes including the 91/PVL; " Replace ticket vending machines; " Continue to improve reliability, on -time performance, and the customer experience by enhancing the rehabilitation program to reduce major failures by retrofitting cars and replacing aging locomotives; " Continue implementing the PTC program systemwide and get final FRA approvals and certifications. Riverside County Service Impact Proposed for FY 2016/17 Three Metrolink commuter rail lines traverse Riverside County the Riverside Line, the IEOC Line, and the 91/PVL Line. While the predecessor 91 Line has been in service for many years, the expanded 91/PVL Line starts operations in June 2016, and will provide greater accessibility to train services for many Riverside County residents who now have train stations closer to where they live. However, going forward this additional service will be a significant financial commitment for the Commission. The new service provides passengers three weekday round trips from South Perris to Union Station in downtown Los Angeles. The two reverse peak trains between Los Angeles and the Riverside Downtown Station will remain. This new service greatly improves service for all Riverside residents and compliments the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project. The service also introduced the first intra county commuter train service by providing six bounce back trains between the South Perris station and the Riverside Downtown station. Efforts to capitalize on this new market include a promotional $10 round trip fare for travel anywhere within Riverside County and free bus connections. The four new stations serving PVL are Agenda Item 9 228 owned and operated by the Commission. The operating and maintenance costs for the nine Commission -owned commuter rail stations, while not included in the SCRRA budget, are included in the Commission's overall budget under the Rail Department and are funded with 2009 Measure A Western Riverside County rail funds beginning in FY 2016/17. Commission's FY 2016/17 Operating Subsidy Obligation Metrolink's overall proposed budget information for the entire system assumes no fare increases and potentially a slight fare reduction with added expenses being passed on directly to the member agencies in the form of higher subsidies. SCRRA is in the process of an agency funding formula analysis that may result in a decrease/increase in the Commission's annual subsidies. The FY 2016/17 SCRRA operating budget is $243,815,000, which is attached. The five county transportation commissions that comprise Metrolink will see their member subsidies increased by a total amount of $15,182,000. All the member agencies have expressed concern about the increases and are struggling to find the necessary funding. The Commission will have the responsibility of providing $17,305,000 for operations and maintenance of way, which represents a $2,750,000 increase or 19 percent over the FY 2015/16 SCRRA budget. This amount includes the full year implementation of the 91/PVL Line extension service, which is approximately $6,185,673 or 35 percent of the Commission's share. Traditionally, the Metrolink subsidy as well as the operations and maintenance costs for the initial five Commission -owned commuter rail stations were entirely funded with state Local Transportation Fund (LTF) revenues allocated for rail operations. However, the FY 2016/17 LTF revenue for rail is projected at $12,465,979, so the difference of $4,839,021 for the Metrolink subsidy will need to come from LTF rail fund reserves. With the anticipated rate of spending, the rail LTF reserves that have been building for many years are estimated to be exhausted within the next four years. As noted previously, commuter rail station operations and maintenance costs will be funded with 2009 Measure A funds due to lack of LTF funds. Commission's FY 2016/17 Capital Contribution In prior years, staff executed multiple grants for Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 5307, 5309, and 5337 funds that provide ongoing funding for SCRRA capital programs over several years. These FTA grant funds will pass through the Commission as the direct recipient and SCRRA as the subrecipient. These funds will be used for various projects including rehabilitation and renovation of rolling stock and track projects, ticket vending machine upgrades, maintenance of way technology, and layover facility improvements. Per SCRRA's annual budget request, the Commission's capital rehabilitation and renovation obligation for FY 2016/17 is $1,784,000, which includes $500,000 for the repayment of Rotem rail cars. In addition, there is a request for $144,000 in new capital projects to complete project Agenda Item 9 229 studies. The Commission's total rehabilitation and new capital subsidy of $1,928,000 uses a portion of the FTA Section 5309 and 5337 grant funds. In addition to the specific SCRRA budget request of $1,928,000, the Commission is pursuing a couple of multi -year capital projects utilizing the FTA Section 5307, 5309, and 5337 grant funds already allocated. These include expansion of the Riverside Layover Facility and additional track improvements on the corridor. It is estimated that these projects will cost $8 million over the next several years and will directly improve rail service within Riverside County. Staff is working with SCRRA to include $6 million of the total cost for these two projects in a future amendment to the FY 2016/17 SCRRA budget. Accordingly, staff recommends that the Commission support an amendment to the FY 2016/17 SCRRA budget in an amount not to exceed $6 million for the expansion of the Riverside Layover Facility and additional track improvements on the corridor. Summary Financial Subsidy Impact to Commission The SCRRA-proposed Commission operating subsidy of $17,305,000, which represents only 7.1 percent of the $243,815,000 SCRRA operating budget, will be funded with LTF funds. The total new capital and rehabilitation project subsidy of $1,928,000 will be funded with FTA grant funds that will pass through the Commission. The Commission's total subsidy of $19,233,000 related to the FY 2016/17 SCRRA budget is significant and reflects a steady increase on a year-to-year basis. Future rail expansion projects in Riverside County will likely require similar funding increases, and SCRRA will continue to face obligations to upgrade its equipment to meet new emissions reduction requirements and safety needs. The Commission's FY 2016/17 budget includes the $19,233,000 SCRRA subsidy as well as the anticipated SCRRA budget amendment of $6 million. Financial Information $17,305,000 (Operations) In Fiscal Year Budget: g Yes Yes Year: FY 2016/17 Amount: $1'928'000 (Capital) $6,000,000 (Capital, as amendment to Yes SCRRA budget) Local Transportation Western No Source of County rail funds (Operations); Budget Adjustment: No Funds: FTA Section 5307, 5309 and 5337 No Grants (Capital) 254199 86101 103 25 86101 $ 17,305,000 GL/Project Accounting No.: 004017 86102 265 33 86102 $ 8,928,000 Fiscal Procedures Approved: \i/u4,4,4 Date: 05/16/2016 Attachment: SCRRA Preliminary FY 2016/17 Budget Agenda Item 9 230 Southern Cal fornia Regional Rail Authority April 29, 2016 TO: Darrell Johnson, Chief Executive Officer, OCTA Darren Kettle, Executive Director, VCTC Anne Mayer, Executive Director, RCTC Phil Washington, Chief Executive Officer, Metro Dr. Raymond Wolfe, Executive Director, SANBAG FROM: Elissa K. Konove, Deputy Chief Executive Officer for Arthur T. Leahy, Chief Executive Officer, SCRRA SUBJECT: SCRRA Preliminary FY2017 Budget The SCRRA Board of Directors acted on April 22, 2016, to authorize the transmittal to our Member Agencies the Preliminary FY 2016-17 (FY17) SCRRA Budget. After Member Agency Boards have acted on the Preliminary Budget, staff will return to the SCRRA Board in June for adoption of the final FY17 Budget. The Preliminary FY17 Budget was presented at a Board budget workshop on February 26, 2016. Following the workshop, meetings were held with individual Member Agencies in March and April. Member Agencies indicated funding constraints for Operating and Capital Rehabilitation expenses. As a result, the Preliminary FY17 Budget amounts for Operating and Capital Rehabilitation have been reduced from the amounts initially presented on February 26. The revised Preliminary FY17 Budget was presented to the Board on April 22, 2016. Budget Priorities for FY17 The Preliminary FY17 Budget reflects priorities consistent with the "back to basics" approach outlined in the Strategic Plan, adopted in March 2016. The budget provides funding in alignment with the Authority's strategic goals and includes the following priorities for the upcoming fiscal year: • Continued emphasis on safe operations, with the full implementation of Positive Train Control (PTC) as the centerpiece of our efforts. • Improved reliability and on -time performance, by putting Tier 4 locomotives into service and providing funding necessary for required equipment maintenance, consistent with the Fleet Management Plan. One Gateway Plaza, Floor 12 Los Angeles, CA 90012 T (213) 452.0200 231 metrolinktrains.com SCRRA Preliminary FY2016-17 Budget Page 2 • Enhanced customer experience, by implementing upgrades to the mobile ticketing application and a modernized ticket vending system. • Increased ridership and regional mobility, with expanded service from Riverside to Perris Valley. • Investment in existing assets to maintain a state of good repair, by funding critical rehabilitation projects and improving processes to accelerate project delivery. • Ongoing workforce development, by training and engaging employees. Overall Summary The Preliminary FY17 Budget includes new budgetary authority of $274.9 million. The proposed budget consists of Operating Budget authority of $243.8 million, an increase of 1.4% over the FY16 Budget. Capital Program authority totals $31.1 million, $29.8 million for Rehabilitation Projects and $1.3 million for New Capital Projects. Carryover of New Capital Projects approved in prior years is $255.1 million, and carryover of Rehabilitation Projects approved in prior years is $37.9 million. Operating Budget Budget Assumptions For the Preliminary FY17 Budget, the assumptions included no increase of current service ridership -based fare revenues and no fare increase. The only changes to Revenue were an additional 4% months of the Perris Valley Line, and a slight decrease for Station to Station discounts. The "Big Five" major vendors (for train operations, track maintenance, signal maintenance, equipment maintenance, and security), which represent approximately 39% of the operating expense budget, were limited to the contracted escalators for current service. Diesel fuel is approximately 10% of the operating budget. The budget reflects an anticipated average price per gallon of $2.75, with a 5% contingency to allow for any unexpected cost increase. The budget for parts for the repair of the aging fleet is $14.0 million, which is consistent with actual costs in prior years. The budget includes a net reduction of two positions. Budgeted increases include a 1.5% Cost of Living Increase, and a Merit Pool equal to 0.5% of Payroll. The Preliminary FY17 Budget includes the three leased locomotives for PTC testing. The portion of the deductible for the 2015 Oxnard incident to be recognized this year is lower by $1.0M to $2.0M. BNSF Locomotives and related expenses are included through October 2016. Operating Revenues Operating revenues include farebox, dispatching, maintenance -of -way revenues, interest, other minor miscellaneous revenues, and are currently estimated to equal $102.2 million, an increase of $0.8 million, or 0.8% compared to the FY16 budget. Fare Revenues, the largest operating revenue of the budget, have increased $0.6 million or 0.7% compared to the FY16 budget to a total of $85.0 million. The FY17 budget reflects no fare increase. This increase is consistent with the current forecast for FY16 actual expense. 232 SCRRA Preliminary FY2016-17 Budget Page 3 Maintenance -of -way revenues from the freight railroads and Amtrak are estimated from existing agreements based on projections of current usage. The Preliminary FY17 Budget estimates an increase of 2.0% from the FY16 budget to a total of $14.6 million. Dispatching Revenues were only minimally different from FY16. Train Operations, Maintenance -of -Way (MOW), Administration, and Insurance The Train Operations component of the budget consists of those costs necessary to provide Metrolink commuter rail services across the six -county service area, including the direct costs of railroad operations, equipment maintenance, required support costs, and other administrative and operating costs. Ordinary MOW expenditures are those costs necessary to perform the inspections and repairs needed to assure the reliable, safe operation of trains and safety of the public. The FY17 budgeted amount for Train Operations is $144.6 million, MOW is $39.6 million, Administration & Services is $36.7 million, Insurance/Claims $16.8 million, and BNSF Lease expenses $6.1 million. Attachment B provides the detail of the Operating Budget components compared to prior years. Attachment C shows the detail of the allocation of the Operating Budget components among the five Member Agencies. The Preliminary FY17 Budget assumes the operation of a total of 2.8 million revenue service miles through the operation of 172 weekday trains and 90 weekend trains. No incremental services were requested for FY17. Overall, the total budgeted expenses have increased by 1.4%. This change is the result of: a) an increase of $9.0M in total Train Operations and Services, driven primarily by increases in parts purchased for rolling stock ($4.3M), an additional 4% months of Perris Valley Service ($1.6M), and increases to Bombardier ($1.1 M), and Other mechanical ($1.8M). b) a decrease in Maintenance of Way of $2.8 million. MOW amounts are limited to estimated prior year expenditures, with an increase of $1.1 million primarily due by contract escalations for Veolia and MASS Electric staff additions. c) an increase in Administration and Services ($3.9M), driven by an increase in the Operations and Admin Salaries and Wages caused by the removal of the vacancy factor included in last year's budget ($0.9M) in combination with a lower percent charge of salaries to projects charged to Capital Projects ($1.2M), FY16 hiring over the mid -point budgeted for salaries and increases ($0.9M), an increase in fringe benefits ($0.5M), a COLA of 1.5% and merit pool of 0.5% for FY17 ($0.4M), increased operational PTC charges no longer covered by Grants ($1.0M) and a reduction of professional service expense (-$1.0M). d) total insurance expense lower by $1.3M, as a result of the $3.0M budgeted to cover Oxnard related costs in FY16 reduced to $2.0M for FY17 (-$1.0M), and an insurance premium reduction (-$0.3M). In total, the FY17 budget increase is $3.3M, or 1.4%, over the FY16 budget. Attachment D presents the elements driving the increases in FY17. 233 SCRRA Preliminary FY2016-17 Budget Page 4 Member Agency Subsidy Member Agency subsidies are required to fund the difference between the total costs of operations and all available revenues. The Preliminary FY17 Budget estimates total Member Agency contributions to equal $141.6 million, an increase of $2.5 million or 1.8% over the FY16 budget. The subsidy increase is the net result of slightly increased farebox revenue, higher routine operating expenses as a result of a full year of the Perris Valley Line, the Shortway and Redlands route additions, lower insurance cost, and the expiration of the BNSF Lease. Attachment E reflects subsidies FY14-FY16 and provides a specific analysis of the FY16 vs. FY17 change in the Member Agency subsidy. Capital Budget Capital Projects are frequently multi -year endeavors. The project balances are referred to as "Carryovers" because their uncompleted balance moves to the following year. Projects authorized in prior years but "carried over" total $37.9 million for Rehabilitation and $255.1 million for New Capital. They are shown in detail on Attachments J and N respectively. The Capital Rehabilitation authorization request for FY17 was identified as necessary for safe and efficient rail operations. These projects total $29.8 million and are represented in summary in Attachment H, and in detail in Attachment I. The information presented in detail at the Board Workshop to Member Agencies included a total Rehabilitation request of $101.1 million. Due to Member Agency funding constraints, this amount was reduced to $29.8 million. Those projects removed from the budget request are displayed on Attachment H-1 by project type as `lined out', on Attachment H-2 by project type as removed, and on Attachment H-3 by subdivision. The total Rehabilitation Program includes: • Track and Structures upgrades totaling $18.9 million: • Locomotive and Rolling Stock upgrades of $1.0 million; • Signal system improvements of $2.8 million; • Fleet and Facility projects of $3.6 million; • Communications and Signage improvements of $3.5 million. As the Rehabilitation Program needs identified exceed the amount of funding currently included in the Preliminary FY17 Budget, SCRRA may return to the Member Agencies and the Board during FY17 to request additional Rehabilitiation funding. SCRRA will continue to work with the Member Agencies to track the status of Rehabilitation projects and any potential request for additional funding will be coordinated with the Member Agencies. Capital Rehabilitation projects shown for FY18 and FY19 cover many other projects critical to the safe operation of the railroad. Over a number of years, a significant backlog of deferred 234 SCRRA Preliminary FY2016-17 Budget Page 5 maintenance has accrued, creating the large numbers shown in the FY18 and FY19 listings. The needed projects are shown on Attachments K through L. The New Capital authorization request for FY17 was identified as necessary for safe and efficient rail operations. The only new project proposed for FY17 totals $1.3 million and is an amount to be used for project study reports and preliminary design on high priority projects. The project is shown on Attachment M. This information was also presented to the TAC members, and at the Board Workshop. New Capital projects that have been identified as candidates for consideration in future years are listed in their totality on Attachment O. A description of possible funding which may apply to these projects is included. Cash flow projections for FY17, FY18, and FY19 are presented in Attachment P. Operating and Capital Budget Projections for FY18 and FY19 Upon approval by the Board, the FY17 Budget will be transmitted to Member Agencies for consideration. FY18 and FY19 projected budgets are included in this report for informational purposes only. Operating Budget projections are outlined in Attachments F and G, and Capital Budget Projections are shown in Attachments L through O. FY18 and FY19 Projected Operating Budgets are based upon possible requested new services in combination with an inflation factor (3%) applied to all other costs. Next Steps May — June: Member Agencies Consider and Approve FY17 Budget June 7 Required Public Posting of FY17 Budget June 24 Request Board Approval of FY17 Budget Thank you for your ongoing support and active participation in the development of the Preliminary FY17 Budget. As in the past, our respective staffs will continue to work together throughout the adoption process to ensure all concerns you may have are addressed in anticipation of adoption of the budget by the SCRRA Board of Directors in June 2016. My staff and I will also be available at your request to attend or present at your Board Meetings considering the budget adoption. If you have any questions, comments or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me directly at (213) 452-0269, or have any member of your staff contact Christine Wilson, Manager, Budget and Financial Analysis at (213) 452-0297. cc: Member Agency CFOs Member Agency TAC Members 235 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITY FISCAL YEAR 2017 PROPOSED BUDGET ATTACHMENT A OPERATING FUNDING ALLOCATION BY MEMBER AGENCY (In 000's) TOTAL FY16- 17 Metro Share OCTA Share RCTC Share SANBAG Share VCTC Share Revenues Gross Farebox $85,002 $41,559 $22,031 $7,789 $11,074 2,549 Dispatching 2,590 1,315 887 6 69 313 Other Operating 12 6 3 1 2 - Maintenance -of -Way 14,642 9,147 2,716 677 1,575 527 Total Revenues FY17 Budget $102,246 $52,027 $25,637 $8,473 $12,720 $3,389 Expenses Train Operations & Services $144,655 $73,087 $33,889 $15,778 $15,723 6,178 Maintenance -of -Way 39,592 20,864 8,125 2,887 5,438 2,278 Administration & Services 36,726 17,592 6,480 5,309 3,710 3,635 Insurance 16,787 8,990 4,062 1,227 1,954 554 BNSF 6,055 3,288 1,266 577 680 244 Total Expense FY17 Budget $243,815 $123,821 $53,822 $25,778 $27,505 $12,889 Total FY17 Subsidy by Member $141,569 $71,794 $28,185 $17,305 $14,785 $9,500 FY 2015-16 Budget $139,055 $71,796 $28,526 $15,015 $14,154 9,564 Over/(Under) Last Year Budget 2,514 (2) (341) 2,290 631 (64) Percent of Change 1.8% ( 0.0%) ( trio) 13.21)/0 4.3% ( 0.7%) SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITY FISCAL YEAR 2016-17 PROPOSED BUDGET Attachment B Comparitive Annual Operating Budget Distribution by Cost Component by Year FY15-16 Budget vs FY16-17 Budget ($000s) FY 14-15 Actual FY 15-16 Budget FY 16-17 Budget Change Operating Revenue Farebox Revenue 83,134 84,446 83,972 (474) -0.6% Metro Fare Reduction Subsidy - - 1,030 1,030 Oa Subtotal -Pro Forma FareBox 83,134 84,446 85,002 556 0.7% Dispatching 2,493 2,663 2,590 (73) (2.8%) Other Revenues 372 - 12 12 100.0% MOW Revenues 13,207 14,348 14,642 294 2.0% Subtotal Operating Revenue 99,206 101,457 102,246 789 0.8% Operating Expenses Operations & Services Train Operations 40,569 43,979 43,942 (37) (0.1%) Equipment Maintenance 32,649 29,352 37,582 8,230 28.0% Fuel 24,454 22,952 22,772 (180) (0.8%) Non -Scheduled Rolling Stock Repairs 1 232 100 (132) (56.9%) Operating Facilities Maintenance 1,120 1,182 1,418 236 20.0% Other Operating Train Services 293 567 496 (71) (12.5%) Rolling Stock Lease 104 640 370 (270) (42.2%) Security - Sheriff 5,136 5,482 5,511 29 0.5% Security - Guards 1,591 2,010 2,001 (9) (0.4%) Supplemental Additional Security 81 690 690 - 0.0% Public Safety Program 177 260 320 60 23.1% Passenger Relations 1,639 1,885 2,069 184 9.8% TVM Maintenance/Revenue Collection 5,984 6,703 7,495 792 11.8% Marketing 949 1,020 1,220 200 19.6% Media & External Communications 234 426 395 (31) (7.3%) Utilities/Leases 2,622 2,677 2,777 100 3.7% Transfers to Other Operators 7,081 7,411 6,577 (834) (11.3%) Amtrak Transfers 800 1,400 1,400 - 0.0% Station Maintenance 1,121 1,464 1,641 177 12.1% Rail Agreements 4,997 4,831 5,377 546 11.3% Subtotal Operations & Services 131,602 135,163 144,153 8,990 6.7% Maintenance -of -Way - MoW - Line Segments 33,043 41,160 38,102 (3,058) (7.4%) MoW - Extraordinary Maintenance 1,235 1,228 1,490 262 21.3% Subtotal Maintenance -of -Way 34,278 42,388 39,592 (2,796) -6.6% Administration & Services - Ops Salaries & Fringe Benefits 11,535 11,586 14,019 2,433 21.0% Ops Non -Labor Expenses 3,651 4,760 5,384 624 13.1% Indirect Administrative Expenses 11,791 13,621 15,507 1,886 13.8% Ops Professional Services 969 2,870 1,816 (1,054) (36.7%) Subtotal Admin & Services 27,946 32,837 36,726 3,889 11.8% Contingency (Non -Train Ops) 14 501 502 1 0.2% Total Operating Expenses 193,840 210,889 220,973 10,084 4.8% Insurance Expense/(Revenue) Liability/Property/Auto Claims / SI Claims Administration PLPD Revenue 12,597 1,884 1,145 (1) 12,880 4,000 1,199 - 12,588 3,000 1,199 - (292) (1,000) - - -2.3% (25.0%) 0.0% Oa Net Insurance Expense 15,625 18,079 16,787 (1,292) -7.1% Total Expense Before BNSF 209,465 228,968 237,760 8,792 3.8% Loss Before BNSF (110,259) (127,511) (135,514) (8,003) -6.3% Member Subsidies Operations 92,252 Insurance 17,678 109,432 18,079 118,727 16,787 9,295 (1,292) 8.5% -7.1% Member Subsidies - Normal Ops 109,930 127,511 135,514 8,003 6.3% Surplus / (Deficit) Before BNSF (329) - - - BNSF LEASED LOCOMOTIVE COSTS Lease cost Inc. ship - 4,275 2,526 (1,749) -40.9% Major Component Parts - 800 - (800) (100.0%) Labor for Maintenance - 2,500 900 (1,600) (64.0%) Additional Fuel - 5,003 1,230 (3,773) (75.4%) Diesel Fuel Offset (7,010) - 7,010 (100.0%) Wheel truing, Software Mods, Brakes - 960 - (960) (100.0%) Temp Facility Mods - 450 - (450) (100.0%) PTC Costs - 4,010 1,399 (2,611) (65.1%) Contingency - 557 - (557) -100.0% Total BNSF Lease Loco Expenses - 11,545 6,055 (5,490) (47.6%) Member Subsidies - BNSF Lease - 11,545 6,055 (5,490) (47.6%) Surplus / (Deficit) - BNSF Lease - - - - Total Expenses 209,465 240,513 243,815 3,302 1.4% Net Loss (110,259) (139,055) (141,569) (2,514) (1.8%) All Member Subsidies 109,930 139,055 141,569 2,514 1.8% Surplus / (Deficit) (329) - - - SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITY FISCAL YEAR 2016-17 PROPOSED BUDGET ATTACHMENT C ($000s) FY17 Annual Operating Budget Distribution by Cost Component By Member Agency Total FY16- 17 Metro OCTA RCTC SANBAG VCTC Operating Revenue Farebox Revenue 83,972 40,529 22,031 7,789 11,074 2,549 Metro Fare Reduction Subsidy 1,030 1,030 - - - - Subtotal -Pro Forma FareBox 85,002 41,559 22,031 7,789 11,074 2,549 Dispatching 2,590 1,315 887 6 69 313 Other Revenues 12 6 3 1 2 - MOW Revenues 14,642 9,147 2,716 677 1,575 527 Subtotal Operating Revenue 102,246 52,027 25,637 8,473 12,720 3,389 Operating Expenses Operations & Services 43,942 23,408 9,813 4,471 4,635 1,615 Train Operations Equipment Maintenance 37,582 18,968 8,802 3,830 4,319 1,663 Fuel 22,772 11,719 5,681 2,271 2,362 739 Non -Scheduled Rolling Stock Repairs 100 54 24 7 12 3 Operating Facilities Maintenance 1,418 759 343 104 165 47 Other Operating Train Services 496 234 86 74 50 52 Rolling Stock Lease 370 176 73 41 53 27 Security - Sheriff 5,511 2,940 1,138 730 581 122 Security - Guards 2,001 945 345 300 200 211 Supplemental Additional Security 690 337 179 63 90 21 Public Safety Program 320 151 55 48 32 34 Passenger Relations 2,069 1,040 524 169 266 70 TVM Maintenance/Revenue Collection 7,495 3,031 1,708 1,213 1,102 441 Marketing 1,220 633 295 93 160 39 Media & External Communications 395 187 68 59 39 42 Utilities/Leases 2,777 1,312 480 416 277 292 Transfers to Other Operators 6,577 3,620 1,526 459 753 219 Amtrak Transfers 1,400 446 885 - - 69 Station Maintenance 1,641 1,009 235 106 215 76 Rail Agreements 5,377 1,881 1,542 1,249 362 343 Subtotal Operations & Services 144,153 72,850 33,802 15,703 15,673 6,125 Maintenance -of -Way MoW - Line Segments 38,102 20,007 7,763 2,871 5,279 2,182 MoW - Extraordinary Maintenance 1,490 857 362 16 159 96 Subtotal Maintenance -of -Way 39,592 20,864 8,125 2,887 5,438 2,278 Administration & Services Ops Salaries & Fringe Benefits 14,019 6,621 2,431 2,096 1,400 1,471 Ops Non -Labor Expenses 5,384 2,789 1,057 617 581 340 Indirect Administrative Expenses 15,507 7,324 2,678 2,324 1,548 1,633 Ops Professional Services 1,816 858 314 272 181 191 Subtotal Admin & Services 36,726 17,592 6,480 5,309 3,710 3,635 Contingency (Non -Train Ops) 502 237 87 75 50 53 Total Operating Expenses 220,973 111,543 48,494 23,974 24,871 12,091 Insurance Expense/(Revenue) Liability/Property/Auto 12,588 6,741 3,046 920 1,466 415 Claims / SI 3,000 1,607 726 219 349 99 Claims Administration 1,199 642 290 88 139 40 PLPD Revenue - - - - - - Net Insurance Expense 16,787 8,990 4,062 1,227 1,954 554 Total Expense Before BNSF 237,760 120,533 52,556 25,201 26,825 12,645 Loss Before BNSF (135,514) (68,506) (26,919) (16,728) (14,105) (9,256) Member Subsidies Operations Insurance 118,727 16,787 59,516 8,990 22,857 4,062 15,501 1,227 12,151 1,954 8,702 554 Member Subsidies - Normal Ops 135,514 68,506 26,919 16,728 14,105 9,256 Surplus / (Deficit) Before BNSF - - ,,� - - - - SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITY FISCAL YEAR 2016-17 PROPOSED BUDGET ATTACHMENT C ($000s) FY17 Annual Operating Budget Distribution by Cost Component By Member Agency Total FY16- 17 Metro OCTA RCTC SANBAG VCTC BNSF LEASED LOCOMOTIVE COSTS Lease cost Inc. ship 2,526 1,371 528 241 284 102 Major Component Parts - - - - - - Labor for Maintenance 900 489 188 86 101 36 Additional Fuel 1,230 668 257 117 138 50 Wheel truing, Software Mods, Brakes - - - - - - Temp Facility Mods - - - - - - PTC Costs 1,399 760 293 133 157 56 Contingency - - - - - - Total BNSF Lease Loco Expenses 6,055 3,288 1,266 577 680 244 Member Subsidies - BNSF Lease 6,055 3,288 1,266 577 680 244 Surplus / (Deficit) - BNSF Lease - - - - - - TOTAL EXPENSE 243,815 123,821 53,822 25,778 27,505 12,889 Net Loss (141,569) (71,794) (28,185) (17,305) (14,785) (9,500) Total Member Subsidies 141,569 71,794 28,185 17,305 14,785 9,500 Surplus / (Deficit) - - - - - - SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITY FISCAL YEAR 2017 PROPOSED BUDGET Attachment D Operational Expense Budget (in 000's) FY 2016 Amended Adopted Budget FY 2017 Preliminary Budget Total Operational Expense Budget Increase $ 240,513 243,815 $ 3,302 1.4% INCREASE DRIVERS: New Initiatives: Remove Effect of BNSF reduction (5,490) (lower than FY16) Without Change to BNSF, increase = $12,661,721 (this is amount analyzed below) Perris Valley- increase to full year 2,568 Redlands -1st - 4 mo, Redlands & Shortway full year 598 Mobile Ticketing 672 Big Five Train Operations 1,262 MOW (including 5 new MASS Positions 1,140 MOW cut (3,870) Other Material Issues Effect of Payroll Vacancy Factor used in FY16 Variance in Pay mid-pt vs hire Change in Salaries charged to Capital Projects Reduction in Consultants Reduction in Insurance/Claims (Oxnard) 4,337 1,430 1,207 1,294 (1,086) (1,292) FY 2017 COLA (1.5%) & Merit Pool (0.5%) 532 Total Operational Expense Budget Increase $ 3,302 1.4% 241 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITY FISCAL YEAR 2017 PROPOSED BUDGET Attachment E Net Local Subsidy by Member Agency (In 000's) Total Net Local Subsidy Metro Share OCTA share RCTC Share SANBAG Share VCTC Share FY14 ACTUAL* $100,003 $54,741 $18,522 $7,685 $11,654 $7,401 FY 15 ACTUAL $110,257 $59,030 $22,251 $9,388 $11,605 $7,983 FY16 BUDGET $139,055 $71,796 $28,526 $15,015 $14,154 $9,564 FY17 BUDGET $141,569 $71,794 $28,185 $17,305 $14,785 $9,500 *Excludes inventory write up YEAR OVER YEAR CHANGE Total Net Local Subsidy Metro Share OCTA share RCTC Share SANBAG Share VCTC Share FY14 vs FY15 $ Increase $10,254 $4,289 $3,729 $1,703 ($49) $582 % Increase 10.3% 7.8% 20.1 % 22.2% -0.4% 7.9% FY15 vs FY16 $ Increase $28,798 $12,766 $6,275 $5,627 $2,549 $1,581 Increase 26.1% 21.6% 28.2% 59.9% 22.0% 19.8% FY16 vs FY17 $ Increase $2,514 ($2) ($341) $2,290 $631 ($64) % Increase 1.8% 0.0% -1.2% 15.3% 4.5% -0.7% Analysis of 16 vs 17 variance: Of the 1.8% - 0.6% Increase in Revenue (Primarily PVL) 3.1 % Material Issues 1.8% Perris Valley increase to full year 0.9% Big Five Train Operations 0.8% Big Five MOW - 2.8% MOW Cut 1.0% Payroll Vacancy Factor used in FY16 0.9% Change in Salaries to Capital Projects 0.9% Payroll Variation Hire to Mid point 0.5% Mobile ticketing 0.4% Redlands(both) & Shortway - 0.8% Ops Prof Services Reduced - 0.9% Reduce insurance (Oxnard incident) - 3.9% BNSF decrease to partial year 0.4% FY17 COLA (1.5%) & Merit Pool (0.5%) 1.8% Of the $2,514 $ (788) _ -31.3% 4,337 2,568 1,262 1,140 (3,870) 1,430 1,294 1,207 672 598 (1,085) (1,292) (5,490) 531 $ 2,514 = 172.5% = 102.1% = 50.2% 45.3% _-153.9% = 56.9% = 51.5% = 48.0% = 26.7% = 23.8% _ -43.2% _ -51.4% _-218.4% = 21.1% 100.0% of the variance of the variance of the variance of the variance of the variance of the variance of the variance of the variance of the variance of the variance of the variance of the variance of the variance of the variance of the variance 242 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITY FISCAL YEAR 2017-18 PROPOSED BUDGET Attachment F ($000s) FY18 Forecasted Operating Budget by Cost Component By Member Agency Total FY17. 18 Metro OCTA RCTC SANBAG VCTC Operating Revenue Farebox Revenue Metro Fare Reduction Subsidy Subtotal -Pro Forma FareBox Dispatching Other Revenues MOW Revenues Subtotal Operating Revenue Operating Expenses Operations & Services Train Operations Equipment Maintenance Fuel Non -Scheduled Rolling Stock Repairs Operating Facilities Maintenance Other Operating Train Services Rolling Stock Lease Security - Sheriff Security - Guards Supplemental Additional Security Public Safety Program Passenger Relations TVM Maintenance/Revenue Collection Marketing Media & External Communications Utilities/Leases Transfers to Other Operators Amtrak Transfers Station Maintenance Rail Agreements Subtotal Operations & Services Maintenance -of -Way MoW - Line Segments MoW - Extraordinary Maintenance Subtotal Maintenance -of -Way Administration & Services Ops Salaries & Fringe Benefits Ops Non -Labor Expenses Indirect Administrative Expenses Ops Professional Services Subtotal Admin & Services Contingency (Non -Train Ops) 86,805 41,203 22,955 8,482 11,602 2,563 1 86,805 2,667 12 15,080 104,564 46,189 39,724 24,298 103 1,460 512 380 5,677 2,060 710 330 2,131 7,720 1,257 408 2,860 6,775 1,442 1,690 6,029 41,203 1,355 6 9,421 51,985 24,101 19,558 12,076 54 768 241 181 3,220 969 337 155 1,063 3,122 647 192 1,346 3,662 459 1,028 1,913 22,955 913 3 2,798 26,669 10,472 9,639 6,135 25 351 88 75 1,269 355 188 57 527 1,759 296 70 492 1,553 911 250 1,789 8,482 6 1 697 9,186 4,788 4,276 2,633 9 127 76 42 412 308 69 49 186 1,249 104 61 427 540 109 1,527 11,602 71 2 1,622 13,297 5,173 4,516 2,693 12 166 53 55 637 212 95 34 280 1,136 168 42 295 796 225 450 2,563 322 542 3,427 1,655 1,735 761 3 48 54 27 139 216 21 35 75 454 42 43 300 224 72 78 350 151,755 39,335 1,533 75,092 20,584 883 36,301 7,798 372 16,992 3,058 16 17,038 5,648 164 6,332 2,247 98 40,868 14,439 5,545 15,972 1,870 21,467 6,795 2,822 7,516 880 8,170 2,495 1,070 2,749 322 3,074 2,151 682 2,386 279 5,812 1,490 625 1,647 193 2,345 1,508 346 1,674 196 37,826 516 18,013 243 6,636 89 5,498 77 3,955 53 3,724 54 Total Operating Expenses 1 230,965 114,815 51,196 1 25,641 26,858 12,455 Insurance Expense/(Revenue) Liability/Property/Auto Claims / SI Claims Administration PLPD Revenue 12,966 3,090 1,235 6,821 1,626 649 3,115 742 297 1,131 270 108 1,473 351 140 426 101 41 Net Insurance Expense 17,291 9,096 4,154 1,509 1,964 568 Total Expenses Total Loss 248,256 123,911 1 (143,692) (71,926) 55,350 27,150 28,822 13,023 (28,681) (17,964) (15,525) (9,596) Member Subsidies Operations Insurance 126,401 17,291 62,830 9,096 24,527 4,154 16,455 1,509 13,561 1,964 9,028 568 Member Subsidies 1 143,692 71,926 28,681 17,964 15,525 9,596 Surplus / (Deficit) 1 - - - -, A -, - - - SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITY FISCAL YEAR 2017-18 PROPOSED BUDGET Attachment G FY19 Forecasted Operating Budget by Cost Component By Member Agency ($OOOs) Total FY18• 19 Metro OCTA RCTC SANBAG VCTC Operating Revenue Farebox Revenue 89,540 42,570 24,024 8,743 11,817 2,386 Metro Fare Reduction Subsidy - - - - - - Subtotal -Pro Forma FareBox 89,540 42,570 24,024 8,743 11,817 I 2,386 Dispatching 2,747 1,395 941 6 73 332 Other Revenues 13 7 3 1 2 - MOW Revenues 15,533 9,704 2,881 718 1,671 559 Subtotal Operating Revenue 107,833 53,676 27,849 9,468 13,563 3,277 Operating Expenses Operations & Services 49,364 25,882 11,423 4,990 5,370 1,699 Train Operations Equipment Maintenance 42,325 20,824 10,291 4,775 4,657 1,778 Fuel 26,223 13,018 6,847 2,761 2,812 785 Non -Scheduled Rolling Stock Repairs 105 55 25 10 12 3 Operating Facilities Maintenance 1,504 782 357 147 169 49 Other Operating Train Services 527 248 91 79 54 55 Rolling Stock Lease 393 186 78 44 57 28 Security - Sheriff 5,847 3,289 1,295 471 650 142 Security- Guards 2,122 999 365 317 219 222 Supplemental Additional Security 732 348 196 71 97 20 Public Safety Program 339 159 58 51 35 36 Passenger Relations 2,195 1,091 556 202 270 76 TVM Maintenance/Revenue Collection 7,951 3,215 1,812 1,286 1,170 468 Marketing 1,294 664 314 115 159 42 Media & External Communications 420 198 72 63 43 44 Utilities/Leases 2,947 1,387 507 440 304 309 Transfers to Other Operators 6,978 3,754 1,620 560 811 233 Amtrak Transfers 1,485 467 945 - - 73 Station Maintenance 1,739 1,064 264 109 224 78 Rail Agreements 6,633 2,187 1,926 1,647 516 357 Subtotal Operations & Services 161,123 79,817 39,042 18,138 17,629 6,497 Maintenance -of -Way MoW - Line Segments 40,516 21,180 8,085 3,125 5,811 2,315 MoW - Extraordinary Maintenance 1,580 909 384 17 169 101 Subtotal Maintenance -of -Way 42,096 22,089 8,469 3,142 5,980 2,416 Administration & Services Ops Salaries & Fringe Benefits 14,873 6,999 2,570 2,216 1,535 1,553 Ops Non -Labor Expenses 5,712 2,901 1,110 702 643 356 Indirect Administrative Expenses 16,451 7,742 2,831 2,458 1,696 1,724 Ops Professional Services 1,926 906 331 288 199 202 Subtotal Admin & Services 38,962 18,548 6,842 5,664 4,073 3,835 Contingency (Non -Train Ops) 533 252 92 80 53 56 Total Operating Expenses 242,714 120,706 54,445 27,024 27,735 12,804 Insurance Expense/(Revenue) Liability/Property/Auto 13,355 6,942 3,170 1,309 1,500 434 Claims / SI 3,182 1,654 756 312 357 103 Claims Administration 1,272 661 302 125 143 41 PLPD Revenue - - - - - - Net Insurance Expense 17,809 9,257 4,228 1,746 2,000 578 244 Total Expenses 260,523 129,963 58,673 28,770 29,735 13,382 Total Loss 152,690 76,287 30,824 19,302 16,172 10,105 Member Subsidies Operations Insurance 134,881 17,809 67,030 9,257 26,596 4,228 17,556 1,746 14,172 2,000 9,527 578 Member Subsidies 152,690 76,287 30,824 19,302 16,172 10,105 Surplus / (Deficit) - - - - - - 245 DRAFT FY 2017 REDUCED REHABILITATION PROJECT PROPOSALS AS PRESENTED AT THE BOARD WORKSHOP 4/28/16 - WITH CHANGES MARKED Metrolink Attachement H-1 "before" with markup Line Asset Type Subdiv Project Type TOTAL LACMTA OCTA RCTC SANBAG VCTC Other 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Structures Structures Structures Structures Structures Structures Structures Structures Structures Structures Structures Structures Structures Structures Valley Valley Valley Ventura -VC Ventura -VC Ventura -LA Ventura -LA Orange Orange Orange San Gabriel San Gabriel River Montalvo-W Bridge rehab 35.75, and dcsign 10 bridges Culvert rehab (design for rplce up to 21 culverts) ROW Grading Bridge rehab 438.89, design 434.12 & 436.96 Culvert rehab MP 436.56 Bridge dcsign 2 bridges 458.71 & 452.1 R9W Grad-ng Bridge rehab Culvert rehab MP 201.4 ROW Grading Culvert rehab (Re-entered in Line 74) ROW Grading ROW Grading Culvert rehab MP 404.65 $4,020,800 $867,860 $100,000 $2,049,600 $490,000 $616,000 $100,000 $0 $385,000 $100,000 $0 $100,000 $50,000 $ 210, 000 $4,020,800 $867,860 $100,000 $616,000 $400 000 $0 $60,000 $23,750 $0 $385,000 $100,000 $9,900 $909,600 $1,140,000 $490,000 $0 $40,000 $5,550 $7,200 $37600 $2407080 1 Sub -Total Structures $9,089,259 $5,788,4101 $494,9001 $5,5501 $47,2001 $1,613,2001 $1,140,000 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Track Track Track Track Track Track Track Track Track Track Ventura -VC Ventura -LA Ventura -LA Valley Valley River* River* San Gabriel San Gabriel Orange Replace rail curve 437.76 (1636') plus 500' tangent Transpose Curve 442.58 (1520'), Curve 442.96 (1368' Replace Tics rated 3 (Poor Cond) and 4 (Failed) Replace rail M1 4.62 (1026'), S 16.85 (263'), 61.20 Replace Ties rated 3 (Poor Cond) and 4 (Failed) REVISE TO WB MT4 Transpose Curvc 143.03 (20211), Lcad 3 MP Replace 5,000 Ties for River EB, 3600 Spread across rl Upgrade aged worn 115/119 lb rail to 136 lb rail MP z Upgrade aged and worn 119 lb rail to 136 lb rail MP 3 Upgrade worn 115 lb rail with 136 lb rail from MP $333,217 $684,372 $1,007,500 $1,817,400 $3,120,000 $1,400, 000 $5,507,256 $3,899,216 $1,500,000 $2,250,000 $6,912,120 $684,372 t4�w nn� inn t4 o1-7 nnn $ 3,120, 000 $1,400, 000 $1,071,864 $943,442 $900,000 $1,350,000 $446,798 $250,47° $393,266 $220,468 $6,912,120 $333,217 $3247911 $162,472 $3,250,701 $286,012 $143,006 $1,913,022 $600,000 $900,000 2 Sub -Total Rail & Ties $27,031,081 $10,894,5781 $7,752,1841 $470,9451 $2,110,956 $638,6951 $5,163,723 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 Track Track Track Track Signals Signals Signals Signals Signals * Reference Engr dept estimates for UPRR share. Ventura -LA Valley San Gabriel River Olive Orange Ventura -VC Ventura -LA Valley Turnouts & special trackwork Turnouts & special trackwork Turnouts & special trackwork Turnouts & special trackwork Sub -Total Turnouts & Trackwork Train control & grade xing signal rehab Train control & grade xing signal rehab Train control rehab Train control rehab Train control & grade xing signal rehab REVISE TO $900,000 $400,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $3,300,000 $450,000 $450,000 $200,000 $200,000 $700,000 $350,000 $900,000 $400,000 $6407000 $475,000 $2,375,0001 $200,000 $700,000 $350,000 $198,000 $111,000 $198,0001 $111,000I $450,000 $450,000 $400,000 $144,000 $72,000 $544,0001 $72,0001 $200,000 $0 124g6 Attachements H thru 0 for Prelim Transmission Memo -REVISED 4-13-16 H-1 THRU H-3 DRAFT FY 2017 REDUCED REHABILITATION PROJECT PROPOSALS AS PRESENTED AT THE BOARD WORKSHOP 4/28/16 - WITH CHANGES MARKED Metrolink Attachement H-1 "before" with markup Line Asset Type Subdiv Project Type TOTAL LACMTA OCTA RCTC SANBAG VCTC Other 37 Signals Pasadena Train $200,000 $200,000 control rehab 38 Signals San Gabriel Train control rehab $400,000 $240,000 $160,000 39 Signals PVL Erade $250,000 $250,000 xing signal rehab 40 Signals East Bank Train control rehab $500,000 $74,100 $30,888 $17,316 $22,464 $11,232 $344,000 41 Signals River Grade xing signal rehab $250,000 $118,750 $49,500 $27,750 $36,000 $18,000 42 Signals Systemwide Train control rehab $75,000 $35,625 $14,850 $8,325 $10,800 $5,400 43 Sub -Total Signals $3,675,000 $1,568,4751 $995,2381 $303,3911 $229,2641 $234,6321 $344,000 44 Comm & PTC Olive Wayside comm & CIS rehab $150,000 $150,000 45 Comm & PTC Orange Wayside comm & CIS rehab $150,000 $150,000 46 Comm & PTC Ventura -VC Wayside comm & CIS rehab $237,500 $237,500 47 Comm & PTC Ventura -LA Wayside & CIS $87,500 $87,500 comm rehab 48 Comm & PTC Valley Wayside comm & CIS rehab $325,000 c32 49 Comm & PTC San Gabriel Wayside & CIS $175,000 $105,000 $70,000 comm rehab 50 Comm & PTC PVL Wayside comm & CIS rehab $125,000 $125,000 51 Comm & PTC East Bank Wayside comm & CIS rehab $123,130 $18,248 $7,606 $4,264 $5,532 $2,766 $84,713 52 Comm & PTC Systemwide On Board PTC $1,100,000 $522,500 $217,800 $122,100 $158,400 $79,200 systcmJ 53 Comm & PTC Systemwide Back office PTC systems $2,598,000 $1,234,050 $514,404 $288,378 $374,112 $187,056 54 Sub -Total Comm & PTC $5,071,130 $2,292,2981 $1,039,8101 $539,7421 $608,0441 $506,5221 $84,713 55 TOTAL Infrastructure $48,166,470 $22,918,760 $10,480,133 $1,430,628 $3,539,464 $3,065,049 $6,732,436 56 Rolling Stock Systemwide Sentinel Rail Car Comprehensive Overhaul $493987040 $7,371,525 $3,072,762 $1,722,609 $2,23477-36 $1,117,368 $24 9-847990 57 Rolling Stock Systemwide Sentinel HVAC Overhaul $975,000 $463,125 $193,050 $108,225 $140,400 $70,200 58 Rolling Stock Systemwide Sentinel LED Lighting Replacement $1,170,000 $555,750 $231,660 $129,870 $168,480 $84,240 59 Rolling Stock Systemwide Rotem Coupler Overhaul $3,500,000 C I 6 $693,000 $388,500 $504,000 $252,000 (44 cars) 60 Sub -Total Rolling Stock $46,145,000 $10,052,9001 $4,190,4721 $2,349,2041 $3,047,6161 $1,523,8081 $24,981,000 61 Facilities Systemwide Material Handling Equipment $405,038 $192,393 $80,197 $44,959 $58,325 $29,163 62 Facilities Systemwide CMF Elevator Modernization $140,185 $66,588 $27,757 $15,561 $20,187 $10,093 63 Facilities Systemwide CMF Drainage Re -direction $1,593,900 $757,103 $315,592 $176,923 $229,522 $114,761 64 Facilities Systemwide EMF Parking & Track Lighting $586,600 $300,253 $125,158 $70,164 $91,024 $0 65 Vehicles Systemwide 3 Hy Rails, 2 MOW, 1 truck $670,475 $318,476 $132,754 $74,423 $96,548 $48,274 gang 66 Sub -Total Facilities & Vehicles $3,396,198 $1,634,8121 $681,4581 $382,0301 $495,6061 $202,2911 $0 67 IT Systemwide Replace $249,700 $118,608 $49 441 $27,717 $35,957 $17,978 switch equipment 68 IT Systemwide Enhance VM Infrastructure $539,000 $256,025 $106,722 $59,829 $77,616 $38,808 69 IT Systemwide Desktop $9 $9 $9 $9 $9 $9 management system) 70 Sub -Total IT $788,700 $374,6331 $156,1631 $87,5461 $113,5731 $56,7861 $0 70.5 Facilties Systemwide LAUPT Platform & Canopy Upgrades $2,700,000 $987,525 $411,642 $230,769 $299,376 $149,688 $621,000 22416 Attachements H thru 0 for Prelim Transmission Memo -REVISED 4-13-16 H-1 THRU H-3 DRAFT FY 2017 REDUCED REHABILITATION PROJECT PROPOSALS AS PRESENTED AT THE BOARD WORKSHOP 4/28/16 - WITH CHANGES MARKED Metrolink Attachement H-1 "before" with markup Line Asset Type Subdiv Project Type TOTAL LACMTA OCTA RCTC SANBAG VCTC Other REVISE TO ONLY 2 PLATFORMS (2 & 3) $1,266,000 $475,000 $198,000 $111,000 $144,000 $72,000 $266,000 71 TOTAL Other Assets $53,029,898 $13,049,870 $5,439,735 $3,049,548 $3,956,171 $1,932,573 $25,602,000 LA Col LA County Portion of FY 2016 San Gabriel Sub projects (Required to match SANBAG funding already approved in FY 2016): $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 Comm San Gabriel Signal San Gabriel Structures San Gabriel Structures San Gabriel Track San Gabriel Track San Gabriel Comm system rehab Signal system rehab Rehab culvert 28.23 ROW grading/ditching Rail grinding Tie rehab, turnout replace, track panels @ Grand, pec Sub -Total LA Portion of FY 2016 $105,000 $594,000 $120,000 $48,000 $119,700 $1,185,600 $2,172,300 $105,000 $594,000 $120,000 $48,000 $119,700 $1,185,600 $2,172,300 $0 79 REHAB PROJECT PROPOSALS GRAND TOTAL 40373687668 $38,1497930 $15,919,868 t^,^ T $7,49-5,635 $4,997,622 $32,3347436 New Totals FUNDING: Notes: 1) "Other" funds in FY 2017 are anticipated from CalTrans UPRR, and Amtrak 2) $43,268 of projected UPRR budget was removed from FY 2016 3) Platform Repair not in original presentation are included here. $29,779,628 $9,991,444 $10,215,192 $1,284,374 $1,664,052 $2,876,831 $3,747,735 3 24.g6 Attachements H thru 0 for Prelim Transmission Memo -REVISED 4-13-16 H-1 THRU H-3 DRAFT FY 2017 REDUCED REHABILITATION PROJECT PROPOSALS AS PRESENTED AT THE BOARD WORKSHOP 4/28/16 - WITH CHANGES Metrolink Attachment H-2 After reductions Line Asset Type Subdiv Project Type TOTAL LACMTA OCTA RCTC SANBAG VCTC Other 2 Structures Valley Culvert rehab (design to replce up to 21 culverts) $867,860 $867,860 4 Structures Ventura -VC Bridge rehab 438.89, design 434.12 & 436.96 $2,049,600 $909,600 $1,140,000 5 Structures Ventura -VC Culvert rehab MP 436.56 $490,000 $490,000 9 Structures Orange Culvert rehab MP 201.4 $385,000 $385,000 10 Structures Orange ROW Grading $100,000 $100,000 15 Sub -Total Structures $3,892,460 $867,860 $485,000 $0 $0 $1,399,600 $1,140,000 16 Track Ventura -VC Replace rail curve 437.76 (1636') plus 500' tangent $333,217 $333,217 20 Track Valley Replace Ties rated 3 (Poor Cond) and 4 (Failed) REVISE TO $1,400,000 $1,400,000 22 Track River* Replace 5,000 Ties for River EB, 3600 Spread across rest o $3,899,216 $943,442 $393,266 $220,468 $286,012 $143,006 $1,913,022 25 Track Orange Upgrade worn 115 lb rail with 136 lb rail from MP 201.1- $6,912,120 $6,912,120 26 Sub -Total Rail & Ties $12,544,553 $2,343,442 $7,305,386 $220,468 $286,012 $476,223 $1,913,022 * Reference Engr dept estimates for UPRR share. 30 Track River Turnouts & special trackwork $1,000,000 $475,000 $198,000 $111,000 $144,000 $72,000 31 Sub -Total Turnouts & Trackwork $1,000,000 $475,000 $198,000 $111,000 $144,000 $72,000 $0 32 Signals Olive Train control & grade xing signal rehab $450,000 $450,000 34 Signals Ventura -VC Train control rehab $200,000 $200,000 36 Signals Valley Train control & grade xing signal rehab REVISE TO $350,000 $350,000 38 Signals San Gabriel Train control rehab $400,000 $240,000 $160,000 40 Signals East Bank Train control rehab $500,000 $74,100 $30,888 $17,316 $22,464 $11,232 $344,000 41 Signals River Grade xing signal rehab $250,000 $118,750 $49,500 $27,750 $36,000 $18,000 42 Signals Systemwide Train control rehab $75,000 $35,625 $14,850 $8,325 $10,800 $5,400 43 Sub -Total Signals $2,225,000 $818,475 $545,238 $53,391 $229,264 $234,632 $344,000 44 Comm & PTC Olive Wayside comm & CIS rehab $150,000 $150,000 45 Comm & PTC Orange Wayside comm & CIS rehab $150,000 $150,000 46 Comm & PTC Ventura -VC Wayside comm & CIS rehab $237,500 $237,500 50 Comm & PTC PVL Wayside comm & CIS rehab $125,000 $125,000 51 Comm & PTC East Bank Wayside comm & CIS rehab $123,130 $18,248 $7,606 $4,264 $5,532 $2,766 $84,713 53 Comm & PTC Systemwide Back office PTC systems $2,598,000 $1,234,050 $514,404 $288,378 $374,112 $187,056 54 Sub -Total Comm & PTC $3,383,630 $1,252,298 $822,010 $417,642 $379,644 $427,322 $84,713 55 TOTAL Infrastructure $23,045,643 $5,757,075 $9,355,635 $802,501 $1,038,920 $2,609,777 $3,481,735 57 Rolling Stock Systemwide Sentinel HVAC Overhaul $975,000 $463,125 $193,050 $108,225 $140,400 $70,200 60 Sub -Total Rolling Stock $975,000 $463,1251 $193,0501 $108,2251 $140,4001 $70,2001 $0 62 Facilities Systemwide CMF Elevator Modernization $140,185 $66,588 $27,757 $15,561 $20,187 $10,093 63 Facilities Systemwide CMF Drainage Re -direction $1,593,900 $757,103 $315,592 $176,923 $229,522 $114,761 42)4§6 Attachements H thru 0 for Prelim Transmission Memo -REVISED 4-13-16 H-1 THRU H-3 DRAFT FY 2017 REDUCED REHABILITATION PROJECT PROPOSALS AS PRESENTED AT THE BOARD WORKSHOP 4/28/16 - WITH CHANGES Metrolink Attachment H-2 After reductions Line Asset Type Subdiv Project Type TOTAL LACMTA OCTA RCTC SANBAG VCTC Other 64 Facilities Systemwide EMF Parking & Track Lighting $586,600 $300,253 $125,158 $70,164 $91,024 $0 66 Sub -Total Facilities & Vehicles $2,320,685 $1,123,944 $468,507 $262,648 $340,732 $124,854 $0 70.5 Facilties Systemwide LAUPT Platform & Canopy Upgrades REVISE TO ONLY 2 PLATFORMS (2 & 3) $1,266,000 $475,000 $198,000 $111,000 $144,000 $72,000 $266,000 71 TOTAL Other Assets $4,561,685 $2,062,069 $859,557 $481,873 $625,132 $267,054 $266,000 LA Coi LA County Portion of FY 2016 San Gabriel Sub projects (Required to match SANBAG funding already approved in FY 2016): 72 Comm San Gabriel Comm system rehab $105,000 $105,000 $0 73 Signal San Gabriel Signal system rehab $594,000 $594,000 $0 74 Structures San Gabriel Rehab culvert 28.23 $120,000 $120,000 $0 75 Structures San Gabriel ROW grading/ditching $48,000 $48,000 $0 76 Track San Gabriel Rail grinding $119,700 $119,700 $0 77 Track San Gabriel Tie rehab, turnout replace, track panels @ Grand, ped xin; $1,185,600 $1,185,600 $0 78 Sub -Total LA Portion of FY 2016 $2,172,300 $2,172,300 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 79 REHAB PROJECT PROPOSALS GRAND TOTAL $29,779,628 $9,991,444 $10,215,192 $1,284,374 $1,664,052 $2,876,831 $3,747,735 FUNDING: Notes: 1) "Other" funds in FY 2017 are anticipated from CalTrans UPRR, and Amtrak 5A86 Attachements H thru 0 for Prelim Transmission Memo -REVISED 4-13-16 H-1 THRU H-3 ATTACHMENT "H-3" FY2016-17 Rehabilitation New Authority Projects - Summary - by Subdivision ($ Thousands) Subdivision Project Type TOTAL LACMTA OCTA RCTC SANBAG VCTC Other Olive Communication & PTC 150 - 150 - - - - Olive Signals 450 - 450 - - - - Orange Communication & PTC 150 - 150 - - - - Orange Structures 485 - 485 - - - - Orange Track 6,912 - 6,912 - - - - Perris Valley Communication & PTC 125 - - 125 - - - San Gabriel Communication & PTC 105 105 - - - - - San Gabriel Signals 994 834 - - 160 - - San Gabriel Structures 168 168 - - - - - San Gabriel Track 1,306 1,306 - - - - - Valley Signals 350 350 - - - - - Valley Structures 868 868 - - - - - Valley Track 1,400 1,400 - - - - - Ventura -VC Communication & PTC 238 - - - - 238 - Ventura -VC Signals 200 - - - - 200 - Ventura -VC Structures 2,540 - - - - 1,400 1,140 Ventura -VC Track 333 - - - - 333 - East Bank Communication & PTC 123 18 8 4 5 3 85 East Bank Signals 500 74 31 17 22 11 344 River Signals 250 119 50 28 36 18 - River Track 4,899 1,418 591 332 430 215 1,913 Systemwide Communication & PTC 2,598 1,234 515 288 374 187 - Systemwide Facilities 3,586 1,599 666 373 485 197 266 Systemwide Rolling Stock 975 463 193 108 141 70 - Systemwide Signals 75 36 15 8 11 5 - CURRENT PROPOSED FY2016-17 REHAB BUDGET 29,779 9,991 10,215 1,284 1,664 2,877 3,748 ROTEM SETTLEMENT AMOUNTS (YEAR 5) - 1,936 (3,773) 500 1,000 337 - TOTAL PROPOSED FY 2016-17 REHAB BUDGET 29,779 11,927 6,442 1,784 2,664 3,214 3,748 PRIOR YEAR CARRYOVERS 37,863 8,148 16,199 2,070 5,069 3,550 2,827 TOTAL FY 16-17 AUTHORITY INCLUDING CARRYOVERS 67,643 20,075 22,641 3,854 7,733 6,764 6,575 251 ATTACHMENT "I" FY2016-17 Rehabilitation New Authority Projects - Detail ($ Thousands) Project Title Subdivision Project Type TOTAL LACMTA OCTA RCTC SANBAG VCTC Other Wayside comm & CIS rehab Olive Communication & PTC 150 - 150 - - - - Train control & grade xing signal rehab Olive Signals 450 - 450 - - - - Wayside comm & CIS rehab Orange Communication & PTC 150 - 150 - - - - Culvert rehab MP 201.4 Orange Structures 385 - 385 - - - - ROW Grading Orange Structures 100 - 100 - - - - Orange Subdivision Rail Rehab Program Orange Track 6,912 - 6,912 - - - - Wayside comm & CIS rehab PVL Communication & PTC 125 - - 125 - - - Comm system rehab San Gabriel Communication 105 105 - - - - - Signal system rehab San Gabriel Signal 594 594 - - - - - Train control rehab San Gabriel Signals 400 240 - - 160 - - Rehab culvert 28.23 San Gabriel Structures 120 120 - - - - - ROW grading/ditching San Gabriel Structures 48 48 - - - - - Rail grinding San Gabriel Track 120 120 - - - - - Tie rehab, turnout replace, track panels @ Grand, ped xing par San Gabriel Track 1,186 1,186 - - - - - Train control & grade xing signal rehab Valley Signals 350 350 - - - - - Culvert rehab (up to 21 pipe culverts) Valley Structures 868 868 - - - - - Replace Ties rated 3 (Poor Cond) and 4 (Failed) Valley Track 1,400 1,400 - - - - - Wayside comm & CIS rehab Ventura -VC Communication & PTC 238 - - - - 238 - Train control rehab Ventura -VC Signals 200 - - - - 200 - Bridge rehab 438.89, design 434.12 & 436.96 Ventura -VC Structures 2,050 - - - - 910 1,140 Culvert rehab MP 436.56 Ventura -VC Structures 490 - - - - 490 - Replace rail curve 437.76 (1636') plus 500' tangent Ventura -VC Track 333 - - - - 333 - Wayside comm & CIS rehab East Bank Communication & PTC 123 18 8 4 5 3 85 Train control rehab East Bank Signals 500 74 31 17 22 11 344 Grade xing signal rehab River Signals 250 119 50 28 36 18 - River Tie Rehabilitation River Track 3,899 943 393 220 286 143 1,913 Turnouts & special trackwork River Track 1,000 475 198 111 144 72 - Back office PTC systems Systemwide Communication & PTC 2,598 1,234 514 288 374 187 - CMF Drainage Re -direction Systemwide Facilities 1,594 757 315 177 230 115 - CMF Elevator Modernization Systemwide Facilities 140 67 28 16 20 10 - EMF Parking & Track Lighting Systemwide Facilities 587 300 125 70 91 - - Stabilizing Canopies and Platforms at LAUS Systemwide Facilities 1,266 475 198 111 144 72 266 Sentinel HVAC Overhaul Systemwide Rolling Stock 975 463 193 108 140 70 - Train control rehab Systemwide Signals 75 36 15 8 11 5 - CURRENT PROPOSED FY2016-17 REHAB BUDGET (INCLUDING AMOUNTS UNALLOCATED IN FY2016) $29,779 $9,991 $10,215 $1,284 $1,664 $2,877 $3,748 ROTEM SETTLEMENT AMOUNTS (YEAR 5) 1 $1,936 -$3,773 $500 $1,000 $337 $0 TOTAL PROPOSED FY 2016-17 REHAB BUDGET 29,779 11,927 6,442 1,784 2,664 3,214 3,748 PRIOR YEAR CARRYOVERS 37,863 8,148 16,199 2,070 5,069 3,550 2,827 TOTAL FY 16-17 AUTHORITY INCLUDING CARRYOVERS 67,643 20,075 22,641 3,854 7,733 6,764 6,575 ATTACHMENT 1" FY2016-17 Rehabilitation Carryover Projects By subdivision and by category ($ Thousands) Subdivision Category Carryover June-16 - End Metro OCTA RCTC SANBAG UPRR\PTMISEA VCTC Communication 75 - 75 - - Signal 175 - 175 - - Track 322 - 322 - - Olive Total 572 572 Communication 225 225 Signal 1,710 - 1,710 Signal & Communication 38 38 Structures 7,328 7,328 Track 3,967 3,967 Orange Total 13,268 13,268 117 117 490 490 Orange & Olive Total 607 607 Signal & Communication Structures Signal & Communication Track 62 62 1 1 Pasadena Total 63 63 Communication 125 125 Signal 790 790 PVL Redlands Total Riverside Total 915 915 300 300 172 - 172 172 - 172 Track Facilities 300 300 Communication 70 Signal 396 Signal & Communication 2,344 Structures 112 Track 2,226 1,406 351 70 396 938 112 1,874 San Gabriel Total 5,148 1,758 - 3,390 Signal & Communication 538 538 Structures 109 109 Track 317 317 Valley Total 964 964 Signal & Communication 892 892 Structures 83 83 Track 17 17 Ventura (LA Co) Total 991 991 Signal 245 - - - 245 Signal & Communication 469 - - - 469 Structures 1,681 - - - 1,681 Track 523 - - - 523 Ventura (Ven Co) Total 2,918 - - - - 2,918 Signal & Communication 756 359 150 84 109 Structures 125 59 25 14 18 Track 1,928 285 119 67 87 1,327 54 9 43 River Total 2,809 704 293 165 213 1,327 107 Equipment 351 173 67 38 49 - 24 Facilities 1,484 707 295 165 214 - 102 IT 1,369 650 271 152 197 - 99 Mechanical 2,338 1,111 463 260 337 - 168 Other 5 4 1 0 0 - 0 Rolling Stock 1,500 - - - 1,500 - Security 500 238 99 56 72 - 36 Signal & Communication 1,354 676 216 121 262 - 79 Track 236 112 47 26 34 - 17 9,137 3,670 1,459 818 1,166 1,500 525 Systemwide Total Grand Total 37,863 8,148 16,199 2,070 5,069 2,827 3,550 ATTACHMENT "K" FY 2017-18 NEW AUTHORITY REHABILITATION PROJECTS PROJECTS BY SUBDIVISION ($Thousands) Subdivision Project Type Proposed Rehabilitation Projects All Facilities Station Signage Rehab All Facilities Customer Information System Replacement at Stations All Communication & PTC SCRRA Positive Train Control Lab Systems Support and Testing All Communication & PTC Backoffice Hardware & Software Replacement (DOC & MOC) All Communication & PTC SCRRA Production Backoffice Systems Upgrades and Testing Support All Signals Rehab AC Units All Signals Rehab Signal Maint Vehicles All Business Systems Vehicle Track Interaction All Track San Gabriel Grade Cross Rehab All Business Systems Systemwide All Communication & PTC PTC Update & Repairs All Business Systems Systemwide Rail Grinding All Vehicles MOW VEHICLE REPLACEMENT PVL Signals Grade Crossing Rehab Olive Signals Rehab Worn or Defective Cables Olive Signals Grade Crossing Rehab Olive Track Olive Sub Cross Rehab Olive Business Systems Wayside Comm Replace Olive Olive Track OLIVE CROSSTIE REHAB Orange Signals C&S Corrosion Mitigation Orange Signals Rehab Worn or Defective Cables Orange Signals Grade Crossing Rehab Orange Track Orange Sub Turnout Replace Orange Track Orange Sub Crossing Replacement Orange Structures Orange Sub Culvert Replace Orange Structures Orange Sub ROW Maint Orange Business Systems Wayside Comm Replace Orange Orange Business Systems Wayside Comm Mitigation Orange Orange Business Systems Wysde Com Replace OrangeOlive Orange Track Orange Track Rehab Pasadena Signals Grade Crossing Rehab Pasadena Signals Pole Line Rehab Pasadena Signals Grade Crossing Rehab River Signals Grade Crossing Rehab River Signals Signal System Rehab River Signals Signal System Rehab River Signals CP Dayton Signal Sys Rehab River Signals Rehab Worn or Defective Cables River Business Systems Wayside Comm Replace River River Business Systems Wayside Comm Mitigation River River Track RIVER TRACK REHAB River Track RIVER CROSSTIE REHAB River Sub - East Bank Track River East Turnout Replacement River Sub - East Bank Facilities REPLACE PUBLIC ADDRESS SYSTEM 255 Subdivision Project Type Proposed Rehabilitation Projects San Gabriel - LA County Signals Grade Crossing Rehab San Gabriel - LA County Signals Rehab Worn or Defective Cables San Gabriel - LA County Signals Rehab Worn or Defective Cables San Gabriel - LA County Structures San Gabriel LA Sub ROW Maint San Gabriel - LA County Track San Gab Track Rehab LA San Gabriel - LA County Track SAN GAB CROSSTIE REHAB San Gabriel - SB County Signals Rehab Worn or Defective Cables San Gabriel - SB County Signals Grade Crossing Rehab San Gabriel - SB County Structures San Gabriel Bridge Replace San Gabriel - SB County Structures San Gabriel SB Sub ROW Maint San Gabriel - SB County Business Systems Wayside Comm Replace San Gab San Gabriel - SB County Track San Gab Track Rehab SB San Jacinto (PVL) Business Systems Wayside Comm Replace PVL San Jacinto (PVL) Business Systems Wayside Comm Mitigation PVL San Jacinto (PVL) Track PERRIS VALLEY TRACK REHAB Valley Track Valley Tie Rehabilitation Valley Signals Grade Crossing Rehab Valley Signals Signal System Rehab Valley Signals Rehab Worn or Defective Cables Valley Track Valley Sub Turnout Replacement Valley Track Valley Sub Cross Replacement Valley Structures Valley Brdge Desgn Constrct Valley Structures Valley Culvert Replace/Abandon Valley Structures Valley Sub Culvert Replace Valley Structures Valley Sub Row Maint Valley Business Systems Wayside Comm Replace Valley Valley Business Systems Wayside Comm Mitigation Valley Valley Business Systems Rehab Update CIS Valley Valley Track Valley Track Rehab Valley Track VALLEY CROSSTIE REHAB Valley Track TUNNEL REHAB Ventura - LA County Signals Grade Crossing Rehab Ventura - LA County Signals Signal System Rehab Ventura - LA County Track Ventura Sub Grade Cross Rehab Ventura - LA County Structures Ventura (LA) Sub ROW Maint Ventura - LA County Business Systems Wayside Comm Replace Ventura - LA Ventura - LA County Business Systems Wayside Mtigation Ventura LA Ventura - LA County Track VENTURA TRACK REHAB LA Ventura - LA County Track VENTURA CROSSTIE REHAB LA Ventura - VC County Signals Grade Crossing Rehab Ventura - VC County Signals Signal System Rehab 256 Subdivision Project Type Proposed Rehabilitation Projects Ventura - VC County Structures Ventura Sub Bridge Replace Ventura - VC County Business Systems Rehab CIS Ventura Ventura - VC County Business Systems Wayside Comm Replace Ventura Ventura - VC County Business Systems Wayside Mtgation Ventura Ven Ventura - VC County Track VENTURA TRACK REHAB VC PROPOSED FY 2017-18 REHAB BUDGET Deferred Rehab from FY17 TOTAL PROPOSED FY 2017-18 REHAB BUDGET 257 TOTAL COST LACMTA OCTA RCTC SANBAG VCTC OTHER $242 $115 $48 $27 $35 $17 $ $1,276 $606 $253 $142 $184 $92 $ $948 $450 $188 $105 $136 $68 $ $1,130 $537 $224 $125 $163 $81 $ $598 $284 $118 $66 $86 $43 $ $237 $113 $47 $26 $34 $17 $ $198 $94 $39 $22 $28 $14 $ $68 $32 $13 $7 $10 $5 $ $1,852 $880 $367 $206 $267 $133 $ $449 $213 $89 $50 $65 $32 $ $1,100 $522 $218 $122 $158 $79 $ $1,091 $518 $216 $121 $157 $79 $ $1,013 $481 $201 $112 $146 $73 $ $250 $ $ $250 $ $ $ $237 $ $237 $ $ $ $ $500 $ $500 $ $ $ $ $4,275 $ $4,275 $ $ $ $ $75 $ $75 $ $ $ $ $475 $ $475 $ $ $ $ $162 $ $162 $ $ $ $ $237 $ $237 $ $ $ $ $1,030 $ $1,030 $ $ $ $ $1,852 $ $1,852 $ $ $ $ $1,781 $ $1,781 $ $ $ $ $1,715 $ $1,715 $ $ $ $ $210 $ $210 $ $ $ $ $75 $ $75 $ $ $ $ $125 $ $125 $ $ $ $ $75 $ $75 $ $ $ $ $1,624 $ $1,624 $ $ $ $ $1,028 $1,028 $ $ $ $ $ $504 $504 $ $ $ $ $ $1,028 $1,028 $ $ $ $ $ $248 $118 $49 $28 $36 $18 $ $1,006 $478 $199 $112 $145 $72 $ $500 $238 $99 $56 $72 $36 $ $1,498 $712 $297 $166 $216 $108 $ $237 $113 $47 $26 $34 $17 $ $100 $48 $20 $11 $14 $7 $ $75 $36 $15 $8 $11 $5 $ $1,160 $551 $230 $129 $167 $84 $ $998 $474 $198 $111 $144 $72 $ $4,703 $2,234 $931 $522 $677 $339 $ $120 $57 $24 $13 $17 $9 $ TOTAL COST LACMTA OCTA RCTC SANBAG VCTC OTHER $1,006 $604 $ $ $403 $ $ $237 $142 $ $ $95 $ $ $237 $142 $ $ $95 $ $ $67 $40 $ $ $27 $ $ $3,050 $1,830 $ $ $1,220 $ $ $1,747 $1,048 $ $ $699 $ $ $237 $142 $ $ $95 $ $ $1,036 $622 $ $ $415 $ $ $1,400 $840 $ $ $560 $ $ $44 $27 $ $ $18 $ $ $100 $60 $ $ $40 $ $ $4,880 $2,928 $ $ $1,952 $ $ $50 $ $ $50 $ $ $ $75 $ $ $75 $ $ $ $4,400 $ $ $4,400 $ $ $ $7,458 $7,458 $ $ $ $ $ $1,028 $1,028 $ $ $ $ $ $1,000 $1,000 $ $ $ $ $ $237 $237 $ $ $ $ $ $1,589 $1,589 $ $ $ $ $ $2,223 $2,223 $ $ $ $ $ $6,370 $6,370 $ $ $ $ $ $420 $420 $ $ $ $ $ $1,820 $1,820 $ $ $ $ $ $224 $224 $ $ $ $ $ $100 $100 $ $ $ $ $ $75 $75 $ $ $ $ $ $150 $150 $ $ $ $ $ $1,855 $1,855 $ $ $ $ $ $3,320 $3,320 $ $ $ $ $ $10,000 $10,000 $ $ $ $ $ $998 $998 $ $ $ $ $ $1,006 $1,006 $ $ $ $ $ $855 $855 $ $ $ $ $ $224 $224 $ $ $ $ $ $50 $50 $ $ $ $ $ $38 $38 $ $ $ $ $ $750 $750 $ $ $ $ $ $1,603 $1,603 $ $ $ $ $ $1,018 $ $ $ $ $1,018 $ $1,006 $ $ $ $ $1,006 $ TOTAL COST LACMTA OCTA RCTC SANBAG VCTC OTHER $3,850 $ $ $ $ $3,850 $ $150 $ $ $ $ $150 $ $50 $ $ $ $ $50 $ $38 $ $ $ $ $38 $ $500 $ $ $ $ $500 $ $106,672 $64,276 $18,576 $7,089 $8,618 $8,112 $ $231,838 $77,784 $79,517 $9,999 $12,955 $22,408 $29,175 $338,509 $142,060 $98,092 $17,088 $21,573 $30,521 $29,175 ATTACHMENT "L" FY 2018-19 NEW AUTHORITY REHABILITATION PROJECTS PROJECTS BY SUBDIVISION ($Thousands) Subdivision Project Type Proposed Rehabilitation Projects TOTAL COST LACMTA OCTA RCTC SANBAG VCTC OTHER All Stations Station Signage Rehab $242 $115 $48 $27 $35 $17 $ All Stations Customer Information System Replacement at Stations $1,276 $606 $253 $142 $184 $92 $ All Backoffice Backoffice Hardware & Software Replacement (DOC & MOC) $1,020 $485 $202 $113 $147 $73 $ All Backoffice SCRRA Production Backoffice Systems Upgrades and Testing Support $547 $260 $108 $61 $79 $39 $ All Labratory Testing SCRRA Positive Train Control Lab Systems Support and Testing $848 $403 $168 $94 $122 $61 $ All Signals Rehab AC Units $237 $113 $47 $26 $34 $17 $ All Signals Rehab Signal Maint Vehicles $198 $94 $39 $22 $28 $14 $ All Track Vehicle Track Interaction $68 $32 $13 $7 $10 $5 $ All Business Systems Systemwide $470 $223 $93 $52 $68 $34 $ All Business Systems Wayside Com Mitigation Valley $75 $36 $15 $8 $11 $5 $ All Business Systems PTC UPDATE & REPAIRS $1,100 $522 $218 $122 $158 $79 $ Olive Signals Rehab Worn or Defective Cables $237 $ $237 $ $ $ $ Olive Grade Crossing Grade Crossing Rehab $500 $ $500 $ $ $ $ Olive Business Systems Wayside Comm Replace Olive $75 $ $75 $ $ $ $ Orange Signals C&S Corrosion Mitigation $162 $ $162 $ $ $ $ Orange Signals Rehab Worn or Defective Cables $237 $ $237 $ $ $ $ Orange Grade Crossing Grade Crossing Rehab $1,030 $ $1,030 $ $ $ $ Orange Business Systems Orange Sub Bridge Replace $9,800 $ $9,800 $ $ $ $ Orange Business Systems Wayside Comm Replace Orange $75 $ $75 $ $ $ $ Orange Business Systems Wayside Comm Mitigation Orange $125 $ $125 $ $ $ $ urange ana Olive Business Systems Wayside Replace OrangeOlive $75 $ $75 $ $ $ $ Pasadena Signals Pole Line Rehab $504 $504 $ $ $ $ $ Pasadena Grade Crossing Grade Crossing Rehab $1,028 $1,028 $ $ $ $ $ Pasadena Business Systems Pasadena Sub Bridge Replace $1,120 $1,120 $ $ $ $ $ Redlands Business Systems Redlands Sub Bridge Replace $1,750 $ $ $ $1,750 $ $ River Signals Rehab Worn or Defective Cables $237 $113 $47 $26 $34 $17 $ River Signals Signal System Rehab $1,006 $478 $199 $112 $145 $72 $ River Signals Signal System Rehab $500 $238 $99 $56 $72 $36 $ River Signals CP Dayton Signal Sys Rehab $1,498 $712 $297 $166 $216 $108 $ River Business Systems River Sub Bridge Replace $28,000 $13,300 $5,544 $3,108 $4,032 $2,016 $ River Business Systems Wayside Comm Replace River $100 $48 $20 $11 $14 $7 $ River Business Systems Wayside Comm Mitigation River $75 $36 $15 $8 $11 $5 $ -raver sup - Last Bank Business Systems River East Turnout Replacement $2,137 $1,015 $423 $237 $308 $154 $ ban (Jamie' - LA County Signals Rehab Worn or Defective Cables $237 $142 $ $ $95 $ $ ban uaariei - LA County Grade Crossing Grade Crossing Rehab $1,006 $604 $ $ $403 $ $ ban uaorlel - LA County Business Systems San Gabriel Grade Cross Reha $2,993 $1,796 $ $ $1,197 $ $ ,an uaoriel - LA County Business Systems San Gabriel LA Bridge Replace $770 $462 $ $ $308 $ $ ban uapriei - SB County Signals Rehab Worn or Defective Cables $237 $142 $ $ $95 $ $ ban uaariei - SB County Grade Crossing Grade Crossing Rehab $1,036 $622 $ $ $415 $ $ ban uaoriel - SB County Business Systems San Gabriel Turnout Replace $2,422 $1,453 $ $ $969 $ $ ban uaoriel - SB County Business Systems Wayside Com Mitigation San Gab $75 $45 $ $ $30 $ $ ban Jacinto (PVL) Business Systems Wayside Comm Replace PVL $50 $ $ $50 $ $ $ ban Jacinto (PVL) Business Systems Wayside Comm Mitigation PVL $75 $ $ $75 $ $ $ SB Shortway Business Systems Wayside Comm Replace San Gab $100 $ $ $ $100 $ $ 261 Valley Ties Valley Tie Rehabilitation $7,458 $7,458 $ $ $ $ $ Valley Signals Rehab Worn or Defective Cables $237 $237 $ $ $ $ $ Valley Grade Crossing Grade Crossing Rehab $1,028 $1,028 $ $ $ $ $ Valley Signals Signal System Rehab $1,000 $1,000 $ $ $ $ $ Valley Business Systems Valley Sub Turnout Replacement $4,909 $4,909 $ $ $ $ $ Valley Business Systems Valley Sub Crossing Rehab $4,447 $4,447 $ $ $ $ $ Valley Business Systems Valley Sub Bridge Replace $15,260 $15,260 $ $ $ $ $ Valley Business Systems Wayside Comm Replace Valley $100 $100 $ $ $ $ $ Valley Business Systems Rehab CIS Valley $150 $150 $ $ $ $ $ ventura - LA County Grade Crossing Grade Crossing Rehab $998 $998 $ $ $ $ $ ventura - LA County Signals Signal System Rehab $1,006 $1,006 $ $ $ $ $ ventura - LA County Business Systems Ventura Sub Grade Cross Rehab $2,850 $2,850 $ $ $ $ $ ventura - LA County Business Systems Ventura LA Sub Bridge Replace $16,520 $16,520 $ $ $ $ $ ventura - LA County Business Systems WAYSIDE COM REPLACE VENTURA $50 $50 $ $ $ $ $ ventura - LA County Business Systems WAYSIDE COM MITIGATION VENTURA $38 $38 $ $ $ $ $ ventura - vc, County Grade Crossing Grade Crossing Rehab $1,018 $ $ $ $ $1,018 $ ventura - vu County Signals Signal System Rehab $1,006 $ $ $ $ $1,006 $ ventura - vc. County Business Systems Ventura Sub Turnout Replace $4,909 $ $ $ $ $4,909 $ ventura - vL County Business Systems Rehab CIS Ventura Ven $150 $ $ $ $ $150 $ ventura - vc, County Business Systems WAYSIDE COM REPLACE VENTURA $50 $ $ $ $ $50 $ ventura - vc. County Business Systems WAYSIDE COM MITIGATION VENTURA $38 $ $ $ $ $38 $ PROPOSED FY 2018-19 REHAB BUDGET DEFERRED REHAB FROM FY17 $128,574 $82,794 $20,164 $4,524 $11,068 $10,024 $ $231,838 $77,784 $79,517 $9,999 $12,955 $22,408 $29,175 TOTAL PROPOSED FY 2018-19 REHAB BUDGET $360,412 $160,578 $99,681 $14,523 $24,022 $32,433 $29,175 262 ATTACHMENT "M" FY2016-17 New Capital New Authority Projects ($ Thousands) Project Description TOTAL BUDGET LACMTA OCTA RCTC SANBAG VCTC OTHER Project Studies $ 1,300 $ 618 $ 257 $ 144 $ 187 $ 94 $ - TOTAL FY 2016-17 AUTHORITY FOR NEW FUNDING $ 1,300 $ 618 $ 257 $ 144 $ 187 $ 94 $ - PRIOR YEAR CARRYOVERS $ 255,128 $ 33,784 $ 8,389 $ 5,940 $ 6,574 $ 3,500 $ 196,943 TOTAL FY 2016-17 AUTHORITY INCLUDING CARRYOVERS $ 256,428 $ 34,402 $ 8,646 $ 6,084 $ 6,761 $ 3,593 $ 196,943 263 ATTACHMENT "N" FY2016-17 New Capital Carryover Projects ($Thousands) Subdivision Category Project Total Carryover LACMTA OCTA RCTC SANBAG VCTC Lease\Other State San Gabriel & Valley Track 860892 15,708 7,000 - - - - - 8,708 San Gabriel Track 860885 345 - - - 245 - 100 - San Gabriel Track 860893 275 275 - - - - - - Valley Structures 414002 9,330 4,656 - - - - - 4,674 Valley Track and Structure 409006 5,009 - - - - - - 5,009 Systemwide IT TBD 30,488 12,985 6,857 4,822 4,024 1,800 - - Systemwide Rolling Stock Various 7,208 4,096 - - 785 - - 2,326 Systemwide Rolling Stock 613001 4,785 - - - - - - 4,785 Systemwide Rolling Stock 613003 10,050 - - - - - - 10,050 Systemwide Rolling Stock 613005 76,956 3,047 812 826 1,140 1,438 244 69,450 Systemwide Rolling Stock 613006 267 - - - - - - 267 Systemwide Rolling Stock 616001 88,162 1,250 521 292 379 190 - 85,530 Systemwide Other TBD 745 475 198 - - 72 - - Systemwide Security TBD 5,800 - - - - - - 5,800 TOTAL 255,128 33,784 8,389 5,940 6,574 3,500 344 196,599 264 ATTACHMENT "O" New Capital Projects Proposed for Future Consideration For Future Consideration - Not Seeking Approval in the FY17 Budget - Funding Not Yet Identified Project Type Subdivision Project Name Total Estimated Cost Candidate Funding Sources - see key below Communications All On -board Wireless Communications Network Phase I $10,164 4 Track Valley Palmdale Passing Siding $11,580 1,2,3,4 Stations Ventura - LA County Chatsworth Station Pedestrian Grade Separation $10,950 4,10, 5 Business Systems All Central Maintenance Facility West Entrance $11,699 1,2,4 Track Valley Second Main Track Between CP Humphreys and CP Lang $17,400 1,2,3,4 Structures Ventura - VC County Arroyo Simi 1st Crossing Scour Protection with Concrete Pile Collar and Debris Removal $1,120 4,7,8 Facilities SB Shortway Eastern Area Maintenance Facility Locomotive and Car Shop, Wheel TruerMachine, storage and S&I Tracks $60,181 1,2,4 Track Valley Brighton Siding Replacement $9,488 1,2,3,4 Structures Valley Verdugo Wash (8.12) Bridge Deck Replacement $1,485 4,7,8 Business Systems All Arroyo Seco (480.82) Bridge Replacement $10,462 4,7,8 PTC Systems All Interoperable Positive Train Control Rung II Non- Vital to Vital System Upgrade $10,500I 4,9 Structures Valley CP Canyon Safe Access $215 4,7,8 Facilities All Purchase Hy -Rail Bucket Truck $198 4 Track San Gabriel - LA County CP Barranca to Lone Hill -Second Main Track - PSR and Environmental Clearance $1,101 1,2,4 Track San Gabriel - SB County CP Rochester to CP Nolan -Second Main Track - PSR and Environmental Clearance $1,101 1,2,4 Track San Gabriel - LA County CP Beech to CP Locust -Second Main Track-PSR and Environmental Clearance $1,690 1,2,4 Track San Gabriel - LA County CP Amar to CP Irvin -Second Main Track-PSR and Environmental Clearance $1,690 1,2,4 Facilities Orange Irvine Maintenance Facility Phase I $50,100 1,2,3,4 Business Systems All Automated Wheel and Brake Inspection $3,082 4 Business Systems All Automatic Passenger Counters $5,000 4,5,10 Communications All On -board Wireless Communications Network Phase II $9,144 Facilities SB Shortway EMF ADDITIONAL UNDERGROUND FUEL STORAGE TANKS $2,627 Rolling Stock All Refurbish 9 passenger cars for expanded service** $6,075 Communications All On -board Wireless Communications Network Phase III $9,144 Rolling Stock All Refurbish 10 passenger cars for expanded service** $6,750I Total $252,944 Notes: **Total cost to refurbish a passenger car is $1.35M/unit; the amount shown is 50% of the total cost as TIRCP grant is anticipated to cover the other 50%. Final allocation formula TBD Funding Keys: 1 Federal Core Capacity 2 State Cap and Trade Transit & Intercity Rail Program 3 High Speed Rail Funding 4 Member Agency 5 State Interregional Rail Transportation Program 7 Federal FASTLANE 8 State Bonds 9 Federal PTC Commuter Rail 10 State Active Transportation Program 266 Attachment P Exhibit 6.7 CAPITAL SUMMARY AND CASH FLOW CAPITAL BUDGET SUMMARY ALL AGENCIES ($ Thousands) FISCAL YEAR 2016/171 2017/18 2018/19 TOTALS REHABILITATION PROJECTS NEW CAPITAL PROJECTS TOTAL $29,780 $338,509 $360,412 $1,300 $ $ $31,080 $338,509 $360,412 $728,701 $1,300 $730,001 1. Excludes prior year budget carryover amounts 2. Assumption for budget will be that the remainder of FY17 originally submitted rehab amount will be divided equally between FY18 and FY19. ($ Thousands) BUDGET FISCAL YEAR 2016/2017 REHABILITATION NEW CAPITAL SUBTOTAL 2017/2018 REHABILITATION NEW CAPITAL SUBTOTAL 2018/2019 REHABILITATION NEW CAPITAL SUBTOTAL TOTALS REHABILITATION NEW CAPITAL TOTAL PROJECTED CASH FLOW BY FISCAL YEAR PROJECT BUDGETS BY FISCAL YEAR 2016/17 $9,968 $10,292 $9,968 $10,292 $31,080 CAPITAL BUDGET SUMMARY CONSOLIDATED CASH FLOW BY FISCAL YEAR 2017/18 $18,010 $649 $18,659 $125,720 $ $125,720 $143,731 $649 $144,380 $338,509 2018/19 $1,786 $327 $2,113 $198,763 $ $198,763 $120,169 $ $120,169 $320,718 $327 $321,045 $360,412 2019/20 $13,903 $13,903 $193,278 $193,278 $207,196 $ $207,196 2020/21 $46,843 $46,843 $46,965 $ $46,965 2021/22 $ $ $ $ $123 $123 $123 $ $123 N/A TOTAL $29,780 $1,300 $31,080 $338,509 $ $338,509 $360,412 $ $360,412 $728,701 $1,300 $730,001 N/A 267 Attachment P Exhibit 6.7 LACMTA- CAPITAL SUMMARY AND CASH FLOW ($ Thousands) FISCAL YEAR 2016/17 ROTEM SETTLEMENT TOTAL 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 TOTALS CAPITAL BUDGET SUMMARY LACMTA REHABILITATION PROJECTS $9,991 $1,936 $11,927 $142,060 $160,578 $314,566 NEW CAPITAL PROJECTS 1. 17/18 AND 18/19 REHAB BUDGETS EXCLUDE ROTEM SETTLEMENT TOTAL $12,545 $142,060 $160,578 $315,183 ($ Thousands) BUDGET FISCAL YEAR 2016/2017 REHABILITATION ROTEM SETTLEMENT NEW CAPITAL SUBTOTAL 2017/2018 REHABILITATION NEW CAPITAL SUBTOTAL 2018/2019 REHABILITATION NEW CAPITAL SUBTOTAL TOTALS REHABILITATION AND ROTEM NEW CAPITAL TOTAL PROJECTED CASH FLOW BY PROJECT BUDGETS BY FISCAL YEAR Note: EXCLUDES ROTEM SETTLEMENT AM 2016/17 $2,704 $648 $154 $3,506 $3,352 $154 $3,506 $12,545 CAPITAL BUDGET SUMMARY LACMTA CASH FLOW BY FISCAL YEAR 2017/18 $6,691 $1,171 $308 $8,170 $56,260 $ $56,260 $64,121 $308 $64,430 $142,060 OUNTS FOR FY 17/18 AND 18/19 2018/19 $581 $116 $155 $852 $81,095 $ $81,095 $55,130 $ $55,130 $136,922 $155 $137,077 $160,578 2019/20 $16 $1 $ $17 $4,665 $ $4,665 $79,658 $ $79,658 $84,340 $ $84,340 N/A 2020/21 $41 $ $41 $25,748 $ $25,748 $25,790 $ $25,790 N/A 2021/22 $41 $41 $ $41 N/A TOTAL $9,991 $1,936 $618 $12,545 $142,060 $ $142,060 $160,578 $ $160,578 $314,566 $618 $315,183 N/A 268 Attachment P Exhibit 6.7 OCTA- CAPITAL SUMMARY AND CASH FLOW CAPITAL BUDGET SUMMARY OCTA ($ Thousands) FISCAL YEAR 2016/17 ROTEM SETTLEMENT LACMTA ROTEM SETTLEMENT RCTC ROTEM SETTLEMENT SANBAG ROTEM SETTLEMENT VCTC TOTAL16/17 2017/18 2018/19 TOTALS REHABILITATION PROJECTS $10, 214 - $1,936 - $500 - $1,000 - $337 $6,441 $98,092 $99,681 $204,214 NEW CAPITAL PROJECTS $257 $257 $ $ $257 1. EXCLUDES ROTEM SETTLEMENT FOR FY 17/18 AND 18/19 TOTAL $6,698 $98,092 $99,681 $204,471 ($ Thousands) BUDGET FISCAL YEAR 2016/17 REHABILITATION ROTEM SETTLEMENT LACMTA ROTEM SETTLEMENT RCTC ROTEM SETTLEMENT SANBAG ROTEM SETTLEMENT VCTC NEW CAPITAL SUBTOTAL 2017/2018 REHABILITATION NEW CAPITAL SUBTOTAL 2018/2019 REHABILITATION NEW CAPITAL SUBTOTAL TOTALS REHABILITATION NET OF ROTEM NEW CAPITAL TOTAL PROJECTED CASH FLOW BY 2016/17 $4,161 - $648 - $167 - $335 - $113 $64 $2,962 $2,898 $64 $2,962 PROJECT BUDGETS BY FISCAL YEAR $6,698 CAPITAL BUDGET SUMMARY OCTA CASH FLOW BY FISCAL YEAR 2017/18 $5,806 -$1,171 -$302 -$605 -$204 $129 $3,653 $34,547 $ $ 34, 547 $38,072 $129 $38,200 Note: EXCLUDES ROTEM SETTLEMENT FOR FY 17/18 AND 18/19 $98,092 2018/19 $247 -$116 - $30 - $60 - $20 $65 $85 $58,734 $ $58,734 $32,729 $ $32,729 $91,484 $65 $91,549 2019/20 -$ 2 $4,769 $ $4,769 $56,745 $ $56,745 $61,512 $ $61,512 2020/21 $ $42 $ $42 $10,164 $ $10,164 $10,206 $ $10,206 $99,681 N/A N/A 2021/22 $42 $ $42 $42 $ $42 N/A TOTAL $10, 214 - $1,936 - $500 - $1,000 - $337 $257 $6,698 $98,092 $ $98,092 $99,681 $ $99,681 $204,214 $257 $204,471 N/A 269 Attachment P Exhibit 6.7 RCTC- CAPITAL SUMMARY AND CASH FLOW CAPITAL BUDGET SUMMARY RCTC ($ Thousands) FISCAL YEAR 2016/17 ROTEM SETTLEMENT TOTAL 16/17 2017/18 2018/19 TOTALS REHABILITATION PROJECTS $1, 284 $500 $1,784 $17,088 $14,523 $33,395 NEW CAPITAL PROJECTS $144 $144 $ $ $144 1. EXCLUDES ROTEM SETTLEMENT FOR FY 17/18 AND 18/19 TOTAL $1,929 $17,088 $14,523 $33,540 ($ Thousands) BUDGET FISCAL YEAR 2016/2017 REHABILITATION ROTEM SETTLEMENT NEW CAPITAL SUBTOTAL 2017/2018 REHABILITATION NEW CAPITAL SUBTOTAL 2018/2019 REHABILITATION NEW CAPITAL SUBTOTAL TOTALS REHABILITATION AND ROTEM NEW CAPITAL TOTAL PROJECTED CASH FLOW BY PROJECT BUDGETS BY FISCAL Note: EXCLUDES ROTEM SETTLEME 2016/17 $468 $167 $36 $672 $636 $36 $672 $1,929 CAPITAL BUDGET SUMMARY RCTC CASH FLOW BY FISCAL YEAR 2017/18 $767 $302 $72 $1,141 $6,542 $6,542 $7,611 $72 $7,683 $17,088 NT FOR FY 17/18 AND 18/19 2018/19 $49 $30 $36 $115 $9,941 $9,941 $4,782 $4,782 $14,802 $36 $14,839 $14,523 2019/20 $ $600 $600 $7,960 $7,960 $8,559 $ $8,559 N/A 2020/21 $5 $5 $1,776 $1,776 $1,781 $ $1,781 N/A 2021/22 $5 $5 $5 $5 N/A TOTAL $1,284 $500 $144 $1,929 $17,088 $17,088 $14,523 $14,523 $33,395 $144 $33,540 N/A 270 Attachment P Exhibit 6.7 SANBAG- CAPITAL SUMMARY AND CASH FLOW CAPITAL BUDGET SUMMARY SANBAG ($ Thousands) FISCAL YEAR 2016/17 ROTEM SETTLEMENT TOTAL 16/17 2017/18 2018/19 TOTALS REHABILITATION PROJECTS NEW CAPITAL PROJECTS TOTAL $1,664 $1,000 $187 $2,851 $21,573 $24,022 $2,664 $21,573 $24,022 $187 $ $ $48,260 $187 $48,447 1. EXCLUDES ROTEM SETTLEMENT FOR FY 17/18 AND 18/19 CAPITAL BUDGET SUMMARY SANBAG CASH FLOW BY FISCAL YEAR ($ Thousands) BUDGET FISCAL YEAR 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 TOTAL 2016/2017 REHABILITATION $526 $1,074 $63 $1,664 ROTEM SETTLEMENT $335 $605 $60 $1 $1,000 NEW CAPITAL $47 $93 $47 $187 SUBTOTAL $908 $1,772 $171 $1 $2,851 2017/2018 REHABILITATION $7,922 $12,867 $777 $7 $21,573 NEW CAPITAL $ SUBTOTAL $7,922 $12,867 $777 $7 $21,573 2018/2019 REHABILITATION $7,598 $12,722 $3,695 $7 $24,022 NEW CAPITAL $ SUBTOTAL $7,598 $12,722 $3,695 $7 $24,022 TOTALS REHABILITATION NET OF ROTEM $861 $9,601 $20,589 $13,499 $3,702 $7 $48,260 NEW CAPITAL $47 $93 $47 $ $ $ $187 TOTAL PROJECTED CASH FLOW BY $908 $9,695 $20,636 $13,499 $3,702 $7 $48,447 PROJECT BUDGETS BY FISCAL YEAR $2,851 $21,573 $24,022 N/A N/A N/A N/A Note: EXCLUDES ROTEM SETTLEMENT FOR FY 17/18 AND 18/19 271 Attachment P Exhibit 6.7 VCTC- CAPITAL SUMMARY AND CASH FLOW CAPITAL BUDGET SUMMARY VCTC SUMMARY ($ Thousands) FISCAL YEAR 2016/17 ROTEM SETTLEMENT TOTAL 16/17 2017/18 2018/19 TOTALS REHABILITATION PROJECTS NEW CAPITAL PROJECTS TOTAL $2,878 $337 $94 $3,309 $30,521 $32,433 $3,216 $30,521 $32,433 $94 $ $ $66,169 $94 $66,263 1. 17/18 AND 18/19 REHAB BUDGETS EXCLUDE ROTEM SETTLEMENT CAPITAL BUDGET SUMMARY VCTC CASH FLOW BY FISCAL YEAR ($ Thousands) BUDGET FISCAL YEAR 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 TOTAL 2016/2017 REHABILITATION $864 $1,537 $478 $2,878 ROTEM SETTLEMENT $113 $204 $20 $ $337 NEW CAPITAL $23 $47 $24 $94 SUBTOTAL $1,000 $1,788 $522 $3,309 2017/2018 REHABILITATION $10,683 $18,482 $1,344 $12 $30,521 NEW CAPITAL $ SUBTOTAL $10,683 $18,482 $1,344 $12 $30,521 2018/2019 REHABILITATION $10,162 $18,549 $3,710 $12 $32,433 NEW CAPITAL $ SUBTOTAL $10,162 $18,549 $3,710 $12 $32,433 TOTALS REHABILITATION AND ROTEM $976 $12,424 $29,142 $19,892 $3,722 $12 $66,170 NEW CAPITAL $23 $47 $24 $ $ $ $94 TOTAL PROJECTED CASH FLOW BY $1,000 $12,471 $29,166 $19,892 $3,722 $12 $66,263 PROJECT BUDGETS BY FISCAL YEAR $3,309 $30,521 $32,433 N/A N/A N/A N/A Note: EXCLUDES ROTEM SETTLEMENT FOR FY 17/18 AND 18/19 272 Attachment P Exhibit 6.7 OTHER- CAPITAL SUMMARY AND CASH FLOW CAPITAL BUDGET SUMMARY OTHER SUMMARY ($ Thousands) FISCAL YEAR 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 TOTALS REHABILITATION $3,748 $29,175 $29,175 $62,097 NEW CAPITAL $ $ $ $ TOTAL $3,748 $29,175 $29,175 $62,097 ($ Thousands) BUDGET FISCAL YEAR 2016/2017 REHABILITATION NEW CAPITAL SUBTOTAL 2017/2018 REHABILITATION NEW CAPITAL SUBTOTAL 2018/2019 REHABILITATION NEW CAPITAL SUBTOTAL TOTALS REHABILITATION NEW CAPITAL TOTAL PROJECTED CASH FLOW BY FISCAL YEAR PROJECT BUDGETS BY FISCAL YEAR 2016/17 $1, 244 $1,244 $1, 244 $ $1, 244 $3,748 CA OTHE P R 2017/18 $2,135 $2,135 $9,766 $9,766 $11,900 $ $11,900 $29,175 ITAL BUDGET SUM CASH FLOW BY FIS M C ARY AL YEAR 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 $368 $368 $17,644 $17,644 $9,766 $9,766 $27,778 $ $27,778 $29,175 $1,750 $1,750 $17,644 $17,644 $19,394 $ $19,394 N/A $15 $15 $1,750 $1,750 $1,765 $ N/A $1,765 2021/22 $15 $15 N/A $15 TOTAL $3,748 $ $3,748 $29,175 $ $29,175 $61,132 $ $61,132 $62,097 $ $62,097 N/A 273 Preliminary Fiscal Year 2016-17 (FY17) SCRRA Budget FY17 Budget Priorities ■ Safe operations ■ Full implementation of positive train control (PTC) ■ Improved reliability and on -time performance ■ Delivery of Tier 4 locomotives and funding for equipment maintenance based on Fleet Management Plan ■ Enhanced customer experience ■ Upgrades to mobile ticketing and modernized ticket vending system ■ Increased ridership and regional mobility ■ Expanded service from Riverside to Perris Valley ■ Investment to maintain state of good repair ■ Funding critical rehabilitation projects ■ Workforce development ■ Training and engaging employees 1 Revenue Allocation by Member Agency ($000s) Total FY 16-17 Metro Share OCTA Share RCTC Share SAN BAG Share VCTC Share Revenues Gross Farebox $ 84,582 $ 41,353 $ 21,922 $ 7,750 $ 11,019 $ 2,537 Dispatching 2,590 1,315 887 6 69 313 Other Operating 12 6 3 1 2 - Maintenance -of -Way 14,641 9,147 2,716 677 1,575 527 Total Revenues $101,825 $ 51,822 $ 25,528 $ 8,434 $ 12,665 $ 3,377 FY 2015-16 Budget $101,457 $ 53,535 $ 24,286 $ 7,655 $ 12,624 $ 3,357 Over/(Under) PriorYr $ 368 $ (1,713) $ 1,242 $ 779 $ 41 $ 20 Percentage Change 0.4% (3.2%) 5.1% 10.2% 0.31)/0 0.6% 2 Increase Drivers for FY 2016-17 Expense Budget ($000) FY2016 Amended Adopted Budget $240,513 FY2017 Preliminary Budget $243,815 Total Operational Expense Budget Increase $3,302 Operations FY17 Budget Remove effect of BNSF reduction ($5,490) Perris Valley increase to full year 2,568 Redlands - 1st - 4 months, Redlands & Shortway full year 598 Mobile Ticketing 672 Biq Five Train Operations 1,262 MOW (including 5 new MASS Positions 1,140 MOW cut (3,870) Other Material Issues 4,337 Effect of payroll vacancy factor used in FY 2016 1,430 Variance in Pay mid -point vs hire 1,207 Change in salaries charged to capital projects 1,294 Reduction in consultants (1,086) Reduction in insurance claims (Oxnard) (1,292) FY2017 COLA (1.5%) & Merit Pool (0.5%) 532 Total $3,302 3 Expense Allocation by Member Agency ($000s) Total FY 16-17 Metro Share OCTA Share RCTC Share SANBAG Share VCTC Share Expenses Train Operations & Services $144,656 $73,087 $33,889 $15,779 $15,723 $6,178 Maintenance -of -Way 39,592 20,864 8,125 2,887 5,439 2,277 Administration & Services 36,726 17,592 6,480 5,309 3,710 3,635 Insurance 16,787 8,990 4,062 1,227 1,954 554 BNSF 6,054 3,287 1,266 577 680 244 Total Expenses Incl. MOW $243,814 $123,820 $53,822 $25,779 $27,506 $12,888 FY 2015-16 Budget as Approv $240,513 $125,331 $52,813 $22,670 $26,778 $12,921 Over/(Under) PriorYr $ 3,302 $ (1,511) $ 1,009 $ 3,109 $ 728 $ (33) Percentage Change 1.4% (1.2%) 1.9% 13.7% 2.7% (0.3%) /1/1/i+h RAICP1 4 Subsidy by Member Agency ($000s) Total FY 16-17 Metro Share OCTA Share RCTC Share SAN BAG Share VCTC Share Revenues $ 101,826 $ 51,822 $ 25,528 $ 8,434 $ 12,665 $ 3,377 Expenses Including MOW 243,815 123,820 53,822 25,779 27,506 12,888 Member Agency FY 2016-17 Subsidy $ 141,989 $ 71,998 $ 28,294 $ 17,345 $ 14,841 $ 9,511 FY 2015-16 Budget As Adopted $ 139,055 $ 71,796 $ 28,526 $ 15,015 $ 14,154 $ 9,564 Over/(Under) PriorYr $ 2,934 $ 202 $ (232) $ 2,330 $ 687 $ (53) Percentage Change 2.1% 0.3% (0.8%) 15.5% 4.9% (0.6%) (With BNSF) 5 FY17 Rehabilitation Budget TOTAL LACMTA OCTA RCTC SANBAG VCTC Other PROPOSED FY 2016-17 REHAB BUDGET 29,779 9,991 10,215 1,284 1,664 2,877 3,748 ROTEM SETTLEMENT AMOUNTS (YEAR 5) - 1,936 (3,773) 500 1,000 337 - FY 2016-17 AUTHORITY FOR NEW FUNDING 29,779 11,927 6,442 1,784 2,664 3,214 3,748 PRIOR YEAR CARRYOVERS 37,863 8,148 16,199 2,070 5,069 3,550 2,827 TOTAL FY 2016-17 AUTHORITY INCLUDING CARRYOVERS 67,643 20,075 22,641 3,854 7,733 6,764 6,575 6 FY17 New Capital Budget ($0005) TOTAL LACMTA OCTA RCTC SANBAG VCTC OTHER Project Studies 1,300 618 257 144 187 94 - FY 2016-17 AUTHORITY FOR NEW FUNDING 1,300 618 257 144 187 94 - PRIOR YEAR CARRYOVERS 255,128 33,784 8,389 5,940 6,574 3,500 196,943 TOTAL FY 2016-17 AUTHORITY INCLUDING CARRYOVERS 256,428 34,402 8,646 6,084 6,761 3,593 196,943 For FY17 the New Capital request is for $1.3 million for project studies. A full listing of New Capital Projects to be considered for future years and potential funding strategies will be included in the Preliminary Budget. 7 Timeline — Next Steps • May -June Member Agencies Consider and Approve FY17 Budget • June 7 Required Public Posting of FY17 Budget • June 24 Request Board Approval of FY17 Budget 8 The Metrolink Mission Statement T Metrolink Mission: To provide safe, efficient, dependable and on -time transportation service that offers outstanding customer experience and enhances quality of life. ►nce on every rid( e operations. AGENDA ITEM 10 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: June 8, 2016 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Aaron Hake, Government Relations Manager THROUGH: Anne Mayer, Executive Director SUBJECT: State Legislative Update BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This item is for the Commission to receive and file an update on state legislation. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: State Update On May 13, Governor Brown unveiled his revised Fiscal Year 2016/17 State Budget, commonly referred to as "the May Revise." The May Revise reflected a decrease in state revenues from the Governor's original budget proposal, which was corroborated by independent Legislative Analyst Office (LAO) estimates. The Governor also proposed no new significant increases in state spending, urging caution in the face of declining revenue and a potential recession within the next two to three fiscal years. The Governor's transportation revenue and reform package remained as an element of his budget proposal. The 1st Extraordinary Session on Transportation is ongoing, although no demonstrable progress has been made towards moving that proposal, or any others, to the Conference Committee, which has been organized to negotiate a final package. Trade corridor funding is a new item addressed in the May Revise. The federal surface transportation authorization bill, the FAST Act that became law in 2015, contains a new freight program, which sends funds by formula to states. In California, this is approximately $109 million in the current fiscal year. The Governor proposes to devote half of these freight formula funds to the Trade Corridor Improvement Fund (TCIF), with the remaining half being reserved for Caltrans-selected projects, primarily for the purpose of matching Caltrans applications to U.S. Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT) for the new discretionary grant program for nationally and regionally significant projects. The Commission maintained the position that all federal freight formula funds should flow through TCIF. The TCIF program administered by the California Transportation Commission (CTC) has successfully invested in freight projects across the state in a manner that is geographically equitable, but also in a manner that ensures Agenda Item 10 274 consensus is reached across diverse stakeholders during the process of selecting projects for funding. Staff understands the need and desire of the state to ensure it has access to some of the new federal freight formula funds to provide matching funds for projects of statewide priority. Yet, staff believes the TCIF program, with guidelines amended by the CTC, can accommodate such statewide projects of significance without creating a rigid set -aside that firewalls 50 percent of available funds. The Governor's budget also includes a $3 billion expenditure plan for cap -and -trade auction revenue (also known as greenhouse gas reduction funds, or GGRF). As this fund source grows, concern from the Commission and other stakeholders in the Inland Empire also grows regarding the geographic equity of GGRF. The Strategic Growth Council (SGC), a state agency, has released a list of projects that are advancing to the next phase of competition for the Affordable Housing Sustainable Communities (AHSC) program, which was created ostensibly to assist in implementing the state's SB 375 mandate on regional governments. However, for the second year in a row, Southern California is dramatically underrepresented in the projects moving forward to seek funding, with zero applications from Riverside County. Many barriers remain to projects in Riverside or San Bernardino Counties competing well for this program. The Commission will continue to engage with the Legislature and Administration to advocate that GGRF return to the taxpayers of the inland region in a fair and equitable manner consistent with the goals of AB 32 and SB 375. Agenda Item 10 275 Legislative Update June 8, 2016 MN mos l,verside cam-, irovxmice ceinnusucr Bill Description Status AB 1780 (Medina) Devotes 25 corridors AB 2014 (Melendez) Increases transparency and provides mechanism for HELD achieving increased funding* to Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) AB 2170 (Frazier) Devotes federal freight funds to Trade Corridor PASS Improvement Fund (TCIF) AB 2742 (Nazarian) Extends sunset of Public -Private Partnership (P3) law HELD *Also: RCTC budget request for increased Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) funding was not entertained by either Senate or Assembly Budget Subcommittees " Governor's Transportation Funding Proposal remains in Budget " New proposal and Trailer Bill language on federal freight funding for California State gets 50 percent Regions get 50 percent through TCIF process Legislative Budget committees reject Trailer Bill language and defer to policy committees Questions? cam, Trenspriows ccauon