Loading...
02 February 10, 1999 CommissionCOMM-COMM-00099 RCTC Meeting February 10, 1999 Page 2 6B. CONSENT CALENDAR - PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE ITEMS. 6B1. PRIORITY RAIL PROJECTS FOR CALIFORNIA STIP AND FEDERAL PROGRAM Page 6 Overview The Plans and Programs Committee and staff recommend that the Commission: 11 endorse the priority project lists developed by Metrolink and the Southern California Intercity Rail Group and actively advocate for STIP funding of the particular rail capital projects listed above; and, 21 endorse Metrolink's federal funding request as listed in Attachment III. 652. CMAQ SET ASIDE FOR LNG LOCOMOTIVE Page 16 Overview The Plans and Programs Committee and staff recommend that the Commission set aside up to $300,000 of CMAQ funds to cover RCTC's share of costs for manufacturing a prototype LNG fueled locomotive. 653. MEASURE A SPECIALIZED TRANSIT ALLOCATION TO FAMILY SERVICE ASSOCIATION OF WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY Page 19 Overview The Plans and Programs Committee and staff recommend that the Commission approve operating support for two vehicles to Family Service Association until such time that the Specialized Transit Analysi§'is complete and recommendations are provided regarding the future service levels for the Jurupa area, and amend the funding agreement with Family Service Association to include additional Measure A Specialized Transit funds of $4,375 per month to support the operating cost of this second vehicle in the Jurupa/Rubidoux area. 654. METROLINK AND RAIL PROGRAM MONTHLY REPORT Page 21 Overview The Plans and Programs Committee and staff recommend that the Commission receive and file the Metrolink and Rail Program Monthly Report. 6C. CONSENT CALENDAR - BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE ITEMS 6C1. FORMATION OF AUDIT SUBCOMMITTEE Page 67 Overview Receive and file, as the Budget and Implementation Committee has appointed Commissioners John Tavaglione, Alex Clifford, Jim Smedley, and Gregory S. Pettis to the Audit Subcommittee of the Budget and Implementation Committee to review Commission audits and to advise on internal controls. RCTC Meeting February 10, 1999 Page 3 6C2. FRIENDS OF JEFFERSON HOUSE Page 69 Overview The Budget and Implementation Committee and staff recommend that the Commission approve the proposed Increase to the Friends of Jefferson House maintenance contract for the Commission's commuter rail stations. 6C3. SELECTION OF INVESTMENT ADVISOR Page 71 Overview Four firms have been selected for the interview process. The Investment Advisor Ad Hoc Committee composed of Commissioners John Hunt and Tom Mullen interviewed the four firms. Based on the Investment Advisory Ad Hoc Committee's proposal, the Budget and Implementation Committee recommend that the Commission select Public Financial Management, Inc., as the Commission's Investment Advisor. 6C4. INVESTMENT REPORT FOR QUARTER ENDING DECEMBER 31, 1998 Page 72 Overview The Budget and Implementation Committee and staff recommend that the Commission receive and file the quarterly investment and cash flow reports as required by state law and Commission policy. 6C5. MONTHLY COST AND SCHEDULE REPORTS Page 81 Overview The Budget and Implementation Committee and staff recommend that the Commission receive and file the monthly cost and schedule report. 6C6. PROGRESS REPORT ON INTERNAL OPERATIONS REVIEW Page 85 Overview The Budget and Implementation Committee and staff recommend that the Commission receive and file the progress report on RCTC's internal operations review. 6C7. LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND ILTF} PROJECTION Page 88 Overview The Budget and Implementation Committee and staff recommend that the Commission approve the apportionments, as noted in the memorandum in the agenda packet, as Annual Local Transportation Fund apportionment for Coachella Valley, Palo Verde Valley, and Western Riverside County. RCTC Meeting February 10, 1999 Page 4 7. 1998 STIP AMENDMENT $15 MILLION EL NINO, REHABILITATION & ARTERIAL PROGRAM Page 90 10 MINUTES Overview The Plans and Programs Committee, Technical Advisory Committee and staff recommend that the Commission eliminate the El Nino storm damage category from the $ 15 million call for projects and approve the list of arterial and rehabilitative projects for STIP funding. 8. 1998 STATE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AMENDMENT Page 95 10 MINUTES Overview The Plans and Programs Committee and staff recommend that the Commission: 1) Program the entire amount of discretionary 1998 STIP amendment funds and the entire Western County formula share of 1998 STIP Amendment funds as listed; 2) Consider any programming recommendations coming from the January 25, 1998 CVAG Executive Committee meeting for the Coachella and Palo Verde Valleys' formula share of 1998 STIP Amendment funds; 2) Should no recommendation be forwarded from CVAG, then staff recommends the Commission reserve the respective Coachella and Palo Verde Valleys' formula shares of 1998 STIP Amendment funds for their future programming recommendations; 4) Combine the $1.007M of 1998 STIP Amendment Planning, Programming & Monitoring funds with the $1.376M of previously programmed 1998 STIP funds to make programming recommendations for these planning funds consistent with the Commission's direction to allocate the funds in accordance with the adopted Intra-County Formula for allocating shares of STIP funds. 9. CONTRACTS/AGREEMENTS FOR CETAP Page 98 10 MINUTES Overview Recommendations for contracts/agreements for CETAP projects will be presented to the Commission for approval. 10. 1998 AUDIT RESULTS Page 100 10 MINUTES Overview Ernst & Young, LLP will make an oral presentation on fiscal year 97/98 fiscal audit. It is recommended that: 1) The Commission receive and file the report and the management letter from the auditors; and 2) Staff provide quarterly reports to the Board on any jurisdictions indicated by the auditors as going concerns (i.e., questionable financial condition). 11. AWARD OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT NO. RO-9932 TO CONSTRUCT A PEDESTRIAN OVERCROSSING STRUCTURE AND SECURITY ENHANCEMENTS AT THE EXISTING LA SIERRA AND WEST CORONA METROLINK COMMUTER RAIL STATIONS Page 132 5 MINUTES Overview At the October 8, 1998 meeting, the Commission directed staff to advertise to receive bids for the construction of a Pedestrian Overcrossing Structure and Security Enhancements at the existing La Sierra and West Corona Commuter Rail Stations. A recommendation will be presented to the Commission at the meeting. RCTC Meeting February 10, 1999 Page 5 12. LOCAL SALES TAX MEASURE RENEWAL OPTIONS Page 134 10 MINUTES Overview The Budget and Implementation Committee recommend pursuit of a reduction in the current vote required for passage of focal transportation sales tax measures. 13. DRAFT WORK PLAN FOR THE STRATEGIC PLAN Page 136 10 MINUTES Overview The Budget and Implementation Committee and staff recommend that the Commission approve the draft work plan for completion of the Commission's comprehensive and countywide Strategic Plan. The Strategic Plan will address all major funding sources including sales tax, state and federal funding, possibility of developer fees and any other viable sources of revenue. 14. REGIONAL AIRPORT EXPANSION ISSUES AND OPTIONS Page 146 15 MINUTES Overview A presentation will be made on the regional airport expansion issues and options. The Plans and Programs Committee and staff recommend that the Commission consider the adoption of Resolution No. 99-01, Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Calling For A Regional Airport Plan for Southern California. 15. ITEMS PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR 16. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AND COMMISSIONERS REPORTS Overview 10 MINUTES This item provides the opportunity for the Executive Director and Commissioners to report on transportation related meetings, conferences/workshops, etc. 17. ADJOURNMENT The next meeting of the Riverside County Transportation Commission is scheduled to be held on Wednesday, March 10, 1999, at 9:00 a.m. at the University of California Chancellor's Conference Room. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES January 13, 1999 1. CALL TO ORDER. Chairman Bob Buster called the meeting of the Riverside County Transportation Commission to order at 9:00 a.m. at the UCR Chancellors Conference Room, 1201 University Avenue, Suite 207, Riverside, California 92507. Self introductions followed of those present followed Isee attached attendance sheet). COMMISSIONERS PRESENT COMMISSIONERS ABSENT Eugene Bourbonnais Bob Buster Percy Byrd John Chlebnik Alex Clifford Frank Hall John Hunt Dick Kelly William Kleindienst• Al Landers Jan Leja • Stan Lisiewicz Tom Mullen Kevin Pape John Pena Gregory Pettis Andrea Puga Robin Reeser Lowe Ron Roberts Doug Sherman Chris Silva Jim Smedley John Tavaglione Jack van Haaster Jim Venable Frank West Don Yokaitis Robert Crain Roy Wilson •Arrived after start of meeting At this time, Commissioner Jim Venable informed the Chair and submitted a letter from Commissioner Roy Wilson indicating that in his absence, Commissioner Venable will vote for him. 2. PUBLIC COMMENTS. There were no comments from the public. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - December 9, 1998. M/S/C Mullen/van Haaster) approve the minutes dated December 9, 1998 as submitted. RCTC Minutes January 13, 1999 Page 2 4. PRESENTATION ON SACRAMENTO ACTIVITIES D.J. Smith, RCTC's Sacramento lobbyist, briefed the Commissioners on changes in Sacramento. This is the first democratic administration on the executive side in sixteen years there is an incredible education orientation taking place. Appointment of the Transportation Committee in the Senate and the Assembly were made. Of all the members of those two committees, 60% of the membership have never served in the legislature or been on the committees previously. Both Policy Committee Chairmen have not chaired the committee before, they were both on Assembly Transit and Senate Transit in past years. He noted that there will be a total of five out of nine seats on the California Transportation Commission that will be appointed by the Governor. Some of the upcoming legislation on transportation include: 1) a Project Delivery Bill to be offered by the Chairman of the Assembly Transportation Committee. Currently, there are $1.6 billion is in the State Highway Account not being utilized. The bill would expedite project delivery and free up highway account cash by instituting a State Highway Account Loan Program, which would allow local agencies with cash flow to borrow funds for up to four years at the STIP escalation rate minus 1 % which will be very attractive and advance shelf and environmental ready projects. Local agencies must have cash flow in order to utilize this as there will be some penalties if local agencies are unable to make payments. In order to qualify, a local agency does not have to be a self-help county, it could be a locality building an interchange with available developer fees, redevelopment or any number of other local sources; 2) to consider extension of local option sales tax. Eighteen counties have local option sales tax and with the exception of Los Angeles County which does not have a sunset division, all of the other counties' measures sunset over the next ten years; 3) the Governor, Senator John Burton talked about developing a Transportation infrastructure Task Force, similar to Governor Deukmejian's 10 year blueprint, called Proposition 111, which doubled the gas tax on transportation improvement program. Unfortunately, well over half of the funding was spent on earthquake retrofit, not transportation improvements. Commissioner Alex Clifford asked what is D.J.'s assessment, the coming year or years relative to the north and south conflict (the Governor appointing San Francisco Mayor Brown's candidate for Caltrans Director). D.J. commented that Mayor Brown's issues are for Transbay Terminal out of downtown San Francisco to Treasure Island and retrofitting the Bay Bridge. To accommodate his issues would cost several hundred million dollars. The statute did not neaotiate a dollar cap on the Bay Bridae retrofit but rather the basic desian of the bridge would be split between the Highway Department and the toll revenues (the tolls doubled as a part of that compromise). Any additional work would need to be paid by toll. Bay Area residents will continue to pay double tolls longer if they add bicycle paths, add a light rail train, etc. In response to Commissioner Jim Smedley's question on the length of loans under the State Highway Loan Program and whether funds are tied in any way to the $1.6 billion, D.J. stated the loan would be no more than four years. D.J. explained that a minimum of $300 million must be kept in the State Highway Account to pay cash flow needs. The total amount limited is one half of a billion dollars. Eric Haley, Executive Director, added that the loans are secured by revenues of the Commission through the State Transportation Improvement Programing process, that is why it's a four year time frame. An RCTC project for the loan program would be the Route 74 project. Local projects would be secured by other sources of revenue, but RCTC is the responsible fiscal body paying back the debt. The Commission need to recognize that what is being committed for the loan program is its future revenues. If a default occurs on the payment, all the outstanding principal and interest plus RCTC Minutes January 13, 1999 Page 3 a penalty of 5% will be assessed against your county on the STIP the next time out. He noted that the proposal was created in the Inland Empire. Eric Haley noted that the Quarterly Reports distributed to the Commission included a number of charts and some data from the Self Help Counties Associations regarding the sales tax issue. The California Transportation Commission has embraced both the sales tax extension issue and loans. • On behalf of the Commission, Chairman Bob Buster thanked D.J. Smith for the presentation on Sacramento activities. 5. ADMINISTRATIVE/FINANCIAL ITEMS 5A1. Election of Officers. At this time, Chairman Buster expressed his gratitude to serve as the Commission's Chairman for the last two years where a number of changes and important issues took place. He iterated that the Commission need to concentrate in transportation efforts in areas that will help the greater number of the residents to have local jobs. There is a need to collect and develop data on the number of our residents job commuting to other counties for jobs. He sees that as one of RCTC's main challenge and priority. Commissioner Tom Mullen stated that the a city commissioner and county commissioner rotate on the Chair and Vice Chair position. He raised a proposal whereby city commissioners elect the city officer and the county commissioners elect the county officer. It was determined by the membership that this be addressed at a later time. M/S/C lRoberts/ReeserLowei to nominate•.pommissioner Jack van Haaster for Chairman. Commissioner Jack van Haaster was elected as Chairman by a vote of 21 ayes, and 4 nays. Four commissioners were not present. Commissioner van Haaster then assumed the Chair. M/S/C (Puga/ReeserLowe) to nominate Tom Mullen as Vice Chairman. Commissioner Mullen was unanimously elected as RCTC's Vice Chairman. 5A2. RCTC Executive Committee Appointment. Eric Haley stated that the Executive Committee is comprised of the Chair, a representative from the Cities of Riverside, Corona and Moreno Valley, a representative from the Cities of Banning, Beaumont, Calimesa, Canyon Lake, Hemet, Lake Elsinore, Murrieta, Norco, Perris, San Jacinto and Temecula, a representative from the Cities of Blythe, Cathedral City, Coachella, Desert Hot Springs, Indian Wells, Indio, La Quinta, Palm Desert, Palm Springs, and Rancho Mirage, andthree representatives from the Board of Supervisors. The Board of Supervisors has appointed Commissioners Tom Mullen, John Tavaglione, and Jim Venable to the Executive Committee. RCTC Minutes January 13, 1999 Page 4 The Commission adjourned for five minutes to allow the groups to select their representatives. The meeting resumed and Chairman van Haaster announced that the Executive Committee is composed of the Chair and Commissioners Alex Clifford; Ron Roberts, Dick Kelly, Tom Mullen, John Tavaglione, and Jim Venable. Chairman van Haaster took the opportunity to thank Commissioner Bob Buster for the wonderful job that he has done as Chair for two years especially his efforts during the transitional year and at a time when there were a number of tough issues that had to be negotiated. 5A3. RCTC Representation and Appointment/Reappointment to Various Agency Boards and Committees. The following appointments were made by the Chair: Southern California Regional Rail Authority (Clifford, Kleindienst, Roberts -Alt, Puga-Alt) High Speed Rail Ad Hoc Task Force (Clifford, Roberts, Puga, Landers, Venable, Bourbonnais, Silva) Southern California Intercity Rail (Clifford, Kleindienst-Alt) Regional Transp Agencies Consortium (Mullen) Riverside Transportation Financing Authority (Mullen, Pape) SCAG Regional Council (Lowe) Mobile Source Review Committee (Kleindienst, West -Alt) SCAG Transportation & Communications Committee (Lowe, Pettis -Alt) Toll Road Ad Hoc Committee (Buster, Clifford, Hall, Kelly, Mullen, Puga, Roberts, Tavaglione) Four Corners Policy Coordination Group (Tavaglione, Smedley, Landers) Investment Advisor Ad Hoc (Mullen, Hunt, Kleindienst) Local Government & Small Business Advisory (Chlebnik) 5A4. Upcoming 1999 Conferences/Workshops. M/S/C (Pettis/Kelly) approve to approve Conference list as amended. 5A5. Call for Projects for El Nino, Rehabilitation and Arterial Improvement Program. Hideo Sugita, Director of Planning and Programming, informed the Commissioners that January 8th at 5:00 p.m. was the deadline for submittal of projects for the $15 million Call for Projects. Eighteen local agencies submitted a total of 44 projects, with a total value of approximately $129 million. The projects will be reviewed this afternoon. 5A6. Executive Director/Commissioners Report. Eric Haley reported on the following: 1) A movement in some corners to delay the State Transportation Improvement Program because of new appointments of Cabinet Secretary and Caltrans Director. The movement in the administration to delay could go beyond sixty to ninety days and bump ,us into next year. He requested Commission approval to strongly advocate a continuance of the regional program so that we can take a look at the $94 million worth of projects, make those decisions and then move forward the $30 million plus for the larger Measure "A" programs. Unless there was objection he would follow that forward. It RCTC Minutes January 13, 1999 Page 5 would override local policies that have already been implemented and the decision making processes that are well on their way. It also helps balloon the cash balance that is a drag on the system; 2) Discussion by Commissioner John Tavaglione and staff with San Bernardino regarding Sierra inter -county corridor - connections east -west between the growing Fontana, Rialto, Ontario area and West Riverside, Glen Avon, Pedley. The study area was defined and includes Sierra Avenue, Pirite and Mulberry, a major thoroughfare in San Bernardino County. SANBAG, with the City of Fontana, has committed to finance half of the study effort which is a year term study completed by June, not to exceed $100,000 will provide the basis for a new corridor decision. No construction funds are committed at this point. He requested direction on whether to move forward as we are at a point where a scope of work could be negotiated. Commissioner Robin Reeser Lowe stated that with regards to the movement to delay the STIP, she and Commissioner Dick Kelly were in Sacramento last week. The cities that were present from the League also voiced concern about the delay. M/S/C (MullenNenable) to authorize Commissioner John Tavaglione and the Executive Director to move forward on the Riverside/San Bernardino intercounty corridor. Eric Haley continued his report and said that RCTC was successful in gaining initial planning money through the PSR (Project Study Report) on the Colton Crossing in the Colton area. This is a flyover that eliminates the service level conflict between BNSF and UP railroads as they go through Colton. This project would also resolve several issues involving rail congestion as well as continuing problems through the City of Riverside and Colton. Additional funds are needed. Under the MetroLink Advocacy Program, $5 million is requested from the State for engineering and design work. Commissioner Buster asked if it would be appropriate,to have a subcommittee to deal with the Colton Crossing issue. M/S/C (Mullen/Buster) to appoint Commissioners Clifford, Mullen, Puga, Leja, and Buster to the Colton CrossingSubcommittee. Eric Haley reported on a meeting of the Ad Hoc Route 91 Toll Road Committee (Commissioners Kelly, Clifford, Puga, van Haaster, Tavaglione, Mullen, Buster) held with OCTA and NewTrak yesterday. Representatives of NewTrak are hoping to acquire the 91 Toll facility. He noted that Jim Guthrie, one of NewT►ak's Directors is present today. RCTC presented its view of the history and dysfunction of the state/CPTC (California Private Transportation Company) and explained its position on the franchise and its inability to make improvements Route 91 for its commuters as follows: 1) status quo acceptance - which gives RCTC no standing in any of the decision making bodies that govern this toll road and waiting 32 years until the franchise ends; 2) re-engage a legislative and legal challenge to the toll facility, which is a long shot and very expensive; 3) purchase the toll road in conjunction with an Orange County agency or agencies through a joint powers authority which will provide control but the downside is considerable liability and is opposed by the Orange County Transportation Authority as they do not want to be in the business of operating a toll road; and, 4) proposal by NewTrak to acquire the franchise. The key issue facing NewTrak is financing but with a non-profit status, they can save between 300-400 basis points in their financing. If that was to happen, they feel there will be some net available revenue, net available revenue gain by the lower financing against the tolls that are paid which could be RCTC Minutes January 13, 1999 Page 6 a substantial amount of funds. NewTrak is requesting RCTC's support for the non-profit status. The proposal is that RCTC draft a letter supporting non-profit status consideration to the IRS indicating that there is a public benefit in moving from the current environment to a non-profit operation of the toll road. By doing so, NewTrak has committed that upon completing the transaction, their first action will be to lift any tolls on the 3 + HOVs which will benefit a number of Riverside County residents. NewTrak will give RCTC advanced notification of any transaction that takes place and this is extremely important because RCTC has no fall back positions. Another important issue is a creation of a capital improvement projects committee which will deal with the disposition of the available revenues. NewTrak proposed that the Committee consist of two commissioners each from RCTC and OCTA, and two NewTrak Directors of which one would be a resident of Riverside County and one in Orange County. The proposal would be to use funds to improve and identify connectors connecting Route 71 with the toll lanes, providing direct connection between the toll lanes and the new eastern corridor, increasing MetroLink service in the corridor. Any recommendation should clearly indicate that we are not endorsing the ultimate deal, but commit in writing that there is a perceived public benefit changing the ownership from what it is today to what it would be and to move forward in the next two weeks to wrap up a description and bring it back to the Commission on how the capital improvement committee would work and define excess revenues. The recommendation from Ad Hoc Committee was to endorse the tax exempt status request, holding open all of the rest of RCTC's options, to publicly acknowledge the offer of the lifting the tolls for 3 + HOVs and the creation of an investment committee. Commissioner Buster stated that these are all verbal promises, nothing in writing, and there are no assurances especially when there are changes in the composition of the group in the future. However, the proposal is much better than with CPTC. There are no information on what is being paid as premium for the toll road, estimate of funds leftover for other projects, etc. In response to Commissioner Lowe's question relating to the financial status of CPTC, Eric Haley said that it is difficult to determine if they are financially hemorrhaging. Payments are being made and they have a significant investment in the facility. It appears that much of this is motivated by a change of business interest in one of the major corporations and that is the pressure to make the deal. There is also a risk that at the current interest rate environment they could refinance their junk bonds at least at a couple hundred basis point less, and if they went out we would simply have nothing. He noted that OCTA, in this particular circumstance, has a common interest with RCTC. They would be the joint beneficiaries of any excess revenues that came out of the process. The profits from this non-profit would go into that Capital Improvement Committee. Their interest is in maximizing the amount of funds. In this case, this is not an OCTA/RCTC conflict in any way. In response to Commissioner Jim Smedley's statement that this is such an important item but it would seem that it deserves to be agendized for a discussion by the Commission rather than as part of the Executive Director's report, Eric Haley indicated that the meeting was held yesterday and was uncertain as to the outcome of the meeting. Commissioner Kevin Pape iterated the need to have additional information from NewTrak as it is difficult to make a determination with having those facts. RCTC Minutes January 13, 1999 Page 7 Commissioner Andrea Puga stated that at the Ad Hoc meeting, there was a lot of hesitation about the perception. Information such as financial reports were not available but it is a good idea, we need to move forward and get started. She was convinced that NewTrak were very honest and straight forward. Commissioner John Chlebnik stated that in an application for tax exempt status, an organization has to submit its bylaws and budget. Steve DeBaun stated that he has reviewed NewTrak's bylaws and, at this point, they are basic. Our approach has been to draft changes to the bylaws which would incorporate the deal points discussed such as free for 3 + HOVs, the excess revenues or profits available for the county projects and the like. A copy of their budget was not provided although he thinks that there is not much associated with it because they do not have the numbers. But that is something we can ask for. Commissioner Percy Byrd asked what are the consequences if RCTC decides that it cannot support the proposal and Eric Haley explained that RCTC do not went to operate it, own it or want any liability from it. We want to improve our current circumstance. It would be good to have an agreement, with the deal points that have been previously discussed. Commissioner John Tavaglione stated that he participated in the meeting and, as Supervisor Buster mentioned , the toll road as it stands today would appear to be a project that has failed. However, there is no proof of that. As it stands today, RCTC and OCTA have no say in what happens on that road. Commuters of both Riverside and Orange Counties are impacted. The proposal is grey, but it does provide RCTC some say in what occurs. if we let this relationship continue, or if there are no relationship between the two counties and CPTC, the problems in both counties will continue to get worse. He sees this as an opportunity and the only option for exploratory purposes at this point. He supports the non- profit status. Commissioner Alex Clifford stated that conceptually the idea of a non-profit taking over the operation is a good concept. He has every bit of confidence of what the NewTrak members had indicated that they intend to fulfill. But that confidence needs to be boosted by in writing. He is not comfortable going forward with a proposal endorsing non-profit status simply because. If RCTC signs a letter agreeing to a non-profit status, and once they obtain non-profit status they are an entity in their own right. They will no longer have to deal with RCTC and there will be nothing in writing to mandate that the deal points. My argument for needing something in writing to feel comfortable going forward is really based on historical perspective. He had every bit of confidence in 1989-91 that Orange County was going to fulfill their promise in providing free flow through this bottleneck. It was a promise that they made to their voters in their measure, that confidence wasn't justified. As we found out later on, Orange County decided their priorities were elsewhere. They decided to resolve that commuter bottleneck issue, by putting a toll road into place. Back in 1991, RCTC was faced with a dilemma whether to file a lawsuit to stop the toll road from taking place or sit on the sideline. On a very narrow vote, it was decided that a lawsuit would have been a long action and probably not prevail. And maybe the best thing to do was to sign a Memorandum of Understanding to try to come to an agreement. RCTC had ail the confidence that CPTC would fulfill the things that they showed in their franchise agreement with Caltrans. They decided to eliminate the intermediate access points which made this a Riverside County toll road. RCTC filed a suit and it lost. He has raised this only to elevate your conscience on the RCTC Minutes January 13, 1999 Page 8 issue of getting the deal points in writing. By just stating the things that we think will benefit Riverside/Orange County. Maybe more importantly what will the CPTC profit be. If the ultimate proposal is to use tax exempt financing and buy out CPTC we are potentially using tax exempt money to provide a profit to CPTC. Once a non-profit status is obtained, they are on their own to decide what that profit will be. RCTC needs to be in a position to say that is unreasonable, what is wrong expenditure of public financing or what is reasonable. Otherwise the proposal potentially endorsed today could come back and haunt us as an endorsement of this transfer proposal. Jim Guthrie, NewTrak Director, stated that for them to get involved was very simple. CPTC has a 35 year contract and debt service with a fairly high interest rate. NewTrak will come in to refinance at 300-500 basis points cheaper. He believes that they have reached their break-even point for the first time in the franchise. By lowering the debt payment, NewTrak has the ability to generate excess funds. They are trying to negotiate something that the do not even know what they are negotiating because they do not have a dollar figure. They have a group of people that are in for the benefit of the corridor rather than for the benefit of a profit. They are trying to figure out what the price would be, what the excess revenue would be and will probably not know until another five or six months. Their projections were made purely on projections - they have apparently been getting closer to meeting those projections. The price will be based on real numbers. NewTrak has two problems, one is the perception that CPTC will walk away with somewhere about $75-$100 million profit. They met with FasTrak and told them that is not going to happen. They are willing to sit down and look at what we feel is reasonable. The other thing that they are finding out the problem between Orange and Riverside Counties and they think this goes a long way to bringing the two bodies together to mutually benefit both counties by supporting their non-profit status. He has had 30 years history of public service and would like to take this and make it into a better situation. Commissioner Dick Kelly stated that he sees this as an opportunity to build a better relationship with the bordering county. He reiterated his concern about the inability to use the Route 91 tollroad without a FasTrak card and should be like the Eastern Corridor tollroad where users could either use a card or pay in cash. He agreed to move ahead and write the letter of support for the non-profit status for NewTrak. Commissioner Will Kleindienst expressed that, at the Commission, most of the work will be done at committee levels. The current Ad Hoc Committee of nine members dealt with this issue yesterday and he has heard the Executive Director's report with the recommendation of that committee. He cautioned the Commissioners that if every issue that comes before this Commission is taken apart, as was done with this issue, and not speak to the recommendation of the committee, RCTC will find itself at a pointwhere it cannot continue. He suggested that the Commission address the Committee's recommendation and any amendment to the recommendation. What is being done now is taking apart the entire issue and if there is not a confidence in its Committee structure at the first meeting, RCTC will find it will move through the process very slowly. The recommendation is quite clear and he appreciated the amendment regarding the bylaws. He suggest that the Commissioners come to closure on this. RCTC Minutes January 13, 1999 Page 9 M/S/C (Puga/Mullen) to authorize the Route 91 Ad Hoc Committee, working with the Executive Director and Legal Counsel, to negotiate on the deaf points and after receiving full assurance, send a letter of support to IRS for a non-profit status for NewTrak. The motion passed with 21 ayes and 6 nays. There were two Commissioners absent. 6. TRANSIT/RIDESHARE/BICYCLE 6A 1. Transit Operator Productivity Improvement Program and Short Range Transit Plan Process. M/SIC fMullen/Tavaaiionel to approve the Proposed Transit Operator Productivity improvement Program and Short Transit Plan Process as presented 7. HIGHWAYS/LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS. M/S/C (Mullen/Kleindienstl to award the Design Contract No. Contract No. RO-9957 for the Final PS&E Design of the Route 74 Hiohwav Improvement Proiect. between I-15 and Wasson Canyon Road near the Citv of Lake Elsinore to S.C. Enaineerina for a base amount of $798.391 with a continaencv of uo to $101.609 (1390. for a total not to exceed amount of $900,000 using the RCTC model consultant agreement and reviewed by Legal Counsel. 8. CONSENT CALENDAR - All matters of the Consent Calendar will be approved in a single motion unless a Commission member requests separate action on specific items. M/S/C (Kleindienst/Landers) approve the Consent Calendar. 8A. Consent Calendar - Administrative/Financial Items. 8A1. Clarification of RCTC's Per Diem Requirements and Approval of Ordinance No. 99-01, An Ordinance Amending the Administrative Code for the Riverside County Transportation Commission Relating to Compensation of Members of the Commission. 1) Receive and file Legal Counsel's memorandum clarifying the Commission per diem requirements; and, 2) Approve Ordinance No. 99-01, An Ordinance Amending the Administrative Code for the Riverside County Transportation Commission Relating to Compensation of Members of the Commission. 8A2. CVAG and WRCOG 1998-99 Work Programs Supported with RCTC Local Transportation Planning Funds. Approve the attached FY 1998-99 transportation planning work programs for both CVAG and WRCOG, and approve the allocation of $127,295 of FY 1998-99 Local Transportation Funds to CVAG and $270,000 of FY 1998-99 Local Transportation Funds to WRCOG. RCTC Minutes January 13, 1999 Page 10 8A3. Amendment to FY 1999-2003 Measure "A" Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan for the City of Temecula. Approve the amendment to the FY 1999-2003 Measure "A" Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan for the City of Temecula as submitted. 8A4. Single Signature Authority Report. Receive and file. 8A5. State and Federal Legislative Programs FY 1999-2000 Approve the Final Draft of the FY 1999-2000 State and Federal Legislative Programs. 8A6. Monthly Cost and Schedule Reports. Receive and file. 8A7. Y2K Quarterly Status. Receive and file. 8A8. Deadline Extension for Completion of TDA Audits. Grant Ernst & Young a 90 day extension to complete the TDA and Measure A audits. 8B. Trensit/Rideshare/Bicycle. 8B1. Allocation of Measure A Specialized Transit Funds for Family Service Association of Western Riverside County Allocate an additional S8,750 in Western County Measure A Specialized Transit funds to Family Service Association of Western Riverside County to support the cost of operating a second vehicle in January and February 1999 and amend our funding agreement accordingly. 862. Transportation Specialist, Inc. - Request for Measure A Western County Specialized Transit Capital Matching Funds Approve the request from Transportation Specialist, Inc. that the required 20% match 072,640) be funded from Measure A Specialized Transit funds. 8B3. 1998 California Rideshare Week in the Inland Empire Receive and file. 8C.-Highways/Local Streets and Roads. RCTC Minutes January 13, 1999 Page 11 8C1. Award of Construction Contract No. RO-9928 for a Park and Ride Lot in Moreno Valley near Pigeon Pass/Frederick Street and Route 60 1) Award Contract No. RO-9928, for Construction of the Pigeon Pass Park and Ride Lot, to E.A. Mendoza for the amount of $304,513.00. Staff also recommends that a contingency $20,487.00 be authorized to cover potential change orders encountered during construction for a total contract value not to exceed $325,000.00. 2) Approve an overall budget adjustment of $87,030. to cover the previously approved funds for final design, environmental mitigation and now to include construction for this project. Total cost of the Project will now equal $402,030. The amount allocated and approved in the Fiscal 1999 budget totals $315,000. 8C2. Award of Construction Contract No. RO-9933 for Landscaping Project on State Route 91 from Van Buren to Mary Street Award Contract No. RO-9933, to construct the Route 91 Landscape Project (Van Buren to Mary Street), in the City of Riverside and Riverside County, to Diversified Landscape Co., for the amount of $595,841.00. Staff also recommends that a contingency $29,159.00 be authorized to cover potential change orders encountered during construction for a total contract value not to exceed $625,000.O0. 8D. Rail. 8D1. Rail Program Update. Receive and file. 8E. SAFE 8E1. Amendments to Communications Site Leases between the County of Riverside and the Riverside County Service Authority for Freeways Emergencies (RC SAFE) and Subleases between the RC SAFE and Lodestar Towers California, Inc. 11 Approve the amendments to communication site leases between the County of Riverside and the Riverside County Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies pending legal counsel review, and 2) Approve the amendments to communication site subleases between the Riverside County Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies and Lodestar Towers California, Inc. pending legal counsel review. At this time, Chairman van Haaster reviewed the membership of the Plans and Programs Committee and the Budget and Implementation Committee. M/S/C )Landers/Pena) to endorse the Committee membership as outlined by the Chair. RCTC Minutes January 13, 1999 Page 12 9. CLOSED SESSION 9A. Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation Pursuant to Section 54956.9{b} - 2 Claims 9A1. Schoenhofer vs. Riverside County Transportation Commission No action was taken. Correspondence was not received within six months after the event or occurrence as required by law. 9A2. Request by Caltrans for RCTC to Defend in the Davison vs. Caltrans, et al. That RCTC accept tender of defense. 10. ADJOURNMENT The next meeting of the Riverside County Transportation Commission is scheduled to be held on Wednesday, March 10, 1999, at 9:00 a.m. espectfully submitted, Naty Kt penhaver Clerk of the Board was e460b-c/,E di76/ �' rlos-7-ehe °/L °sPJ-s_5, - bP.4 /. -5,4r (7>‘ 9i/ z-v- 6N- 09z c 6 / "�L� 9�L L 2t0- r2g--0V / z''Lo-nLi -07G I s 67 L - bob 74h-re "S6i.: E"jt 416 / Gpa1_SS� «Q•�� Qjz/1t9�--a� 924c-'- Z "e6 c? 7+ /S— ~ ZZh 9z&7-469 / zhGn--Lz9 I Olp/_TS'� / 41"...C.0+61r.4:411 .vs ref fj 1131111E11N X I/ 3NOHd3'I3,L Q„€2 '-1`1-4111•1Z 1 eiygiO Ay hi_ c7 V -7*p.-i—_te ✓s.gki i 7 0/ hit ,7 r �cyr v °1 (7 ti. •t•v. v J 1. "�k " fr or47Zi A3N39V pagnbar jou sr 2uprAy �11,14r�' �l -irvY"V4) C.1 J4'2. %/ / 7,2, v' "`e)'r`7'yeoir S'�1 9.fu57, sli, y.+/704.717 ]NtEn.27 - (1 - 7,+J N N(f' -4 -77/ �y w,z44-64,w) :1/i1 . f y�� 1,// 4vrr7 MANN NOISSIww00 3H1 30 >Ia310 3H1 01 Qat/O ANOW11S31 V _LimnS CINV 3131d1A100 3SV3-1d 'NOISSIWW00 3141 01 S1N31,110100 301/10ad 01 HSIM noA 31 NI NJIS 3SV31d 'W'V 00:6 666 t 'EL AldVntkPir 'AVOS3NCI3M LOSZ6 aPp�amEI ,LOZ a�mg 'anuany,tiisaaniun 10Z4 16100li 30N31:133N00 SA10113ONVHO 301S83A1EI 'VINa031ZVO 30 AlIS1:13AINf1 NO/SSIWWOO NOIL VLY0dSNWLL AI NnOO 3015113/1 /d RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 13, 1999 SIGN -IN SHEET (Page 2) IF YOU WISH TO PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE COMMISSION, PLEASE COMPLETE AND SUBMIT A TESTIMONY CARD TO THE CLERK OF THE COMMISSION NAME Jc4-ti A 9%r2a c/k NA 4 L A L J O Cj /'/. -rt- o ..s 7\ oarliTs S-4-011 i S;42a-IICE .�� ak Signing is not required AGENCY C ITY 0 Losc Nrri1/4 c /Ty of /41/(E E1Si cbR� C / r4' evr- Ne eco PecRt 15 _ .Lrt.� Dim Sr- nJ .74e i 7 6F / &,7 E Cc/44 Oa /1-ran S. 'Ds TELEPHONE /FAX NUMBER -M-7000 / 777--7)01 lv7Y T/a9 / #$//3 3 cc 6 / 73 S-o1./9D 96/c_ 9.2/ 2- - 2, 3 iy -6 yyo 383 - Hass it.cyl)la'3 — CO f l bS21 Zz' 095-4 l 383 - 6.2 39 /1 313 '81oi RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION NAME �- // 4-/TA �g D i c .L DC I -€: o f1 ti p, �L Y. a PLALV2 C-6 6,A ir...1 tRr 5U5Qin (rMcr it k //Awt M4/672, 711erlsl4- 72Pv,ao Signing is not required UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, RIVERSIDE CHANCELLOR'S CONFERENCE ROOM 1201 University Avenue, Suite 207, Riverside 92507 WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 13, 1999 9:00 A.M. SIGN -IN SHEET AGENCY TELEPHONE /FAX NUMBER 6 e-e--- /4-4-7c_9.0 S-7$7-75's f/ 70 S- 75') 7 5 z c Cc, I-.\--t-yk 5 9C°().- -lb -2,--41`'7/ 9c,) -3f 3 -4 . C , K( C Rc c c_ LITR oP CALF i2.,AN.15 �C�7G / / f i kAwcr3 613 7 — 9 73 / / 97/-00 6/ 3463 i l 3'63 - 7 13�4- 2eT-0, Z� � , S L.' Lie �GteliSt' ÷- SvNc I, v.."" T ALAn, 2-,t 1 / ORLI-0659 I Cgs 100 Sr9-72?-1 3sz/ 709- 72711-3 71.S_' C00-34f 3-1 4 s6/ r762::)- 3 co_WItcs- 7d o- 3(8-3 9fG / no -Xi 051f �0--.571-e9_U / 6Sc) -57I-egg0 i `11 -SC... (17- 6 (7y,.,r l `'1 0 r'L j 34=.41- 771'3 �. L 909'g74-70?6'3 / 741 _ �Z7 / -te n RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 13, 1999 SIGN -IN SHEET (Page 2) NAME n ICK C4/,r61- —72)/G ' J 7) Laced 4:/-2M C.w 7-4 caosA-A1 Soet! LL 1jA`?Na ,l ,t t-ret.. r /"! 0/cz.:2 Lie/ 6-4 Signing is not required AGENCY /2v. mod. C I1,1+..7rEtTt. Va r 1 e C r ? Y 0A it TELEPHONE /FAX NUMBER ref- .74-d I -3/ 5'6 `Po9) 574, I ?e C 9 69 -781-SSGO cic - /-��51 :1),(. #744_ aw44nok f 57-934 iew-c-, 4 O+ th41'.,eA o_, G RTt-N Mt. P.`0` GtT`Z CO cr tiiLL ft�c,cc grin r QC 7c. if 707- 794 / / ii 909-76/- 06 y0 / Co cs Co - g 09 787-792P/ -7p 7- 79 zo 760/-770 - p36a 5'6s/7 9 -7S fr 7g1L/ t,5, s-/ (VH - /). r / RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: February 10, 1999 Riverside County Transportation Commission Executive Committee Eric Haley, Executive Director Proposal to Change the Budget and Implementation Committee Meeting Time from 3:00 P.M. to 2:30 P.M. The Commission's Budget and Implementation Committee meets on the fourth Monday of each month at 3:00 p.m. The Coachella Valley Associated Governments' (CVAG) Executive Board meeting is scheduled on the last Monday of each month at 6:00 p.m. Commissioners who are members of the Budget and Implementation Committee and the CVAG Executive Board do not have sufficient time to travel from Riverside to Palm Desert and arrive on time for the CVAG Executive Board meeting. To remedy the problem, it is recommended that the Budget and Implementation Committee meeting time be scheduled one half hour earlier ( at 2:30 p.m.). By doing so, the Commission's Plans and Programs Committee meeting (that meets on the same day starting at 12 Noon) must be completed by 2:15 p.m. and staff does not see this as a problem. The attached Ordinance No. 99-02 will amend the Administrative Code to reflect the change in the Budget and Implementation Committee meeting time. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDA LION.• That the Commission approve Ordinance No. 99-02, Ordinance of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Amending the Administrative Code. nk (Hi 00O;. ORDINANCE NO. 99-02 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION'S ADMINISTRATIVE CODE WHEREAS, by Ordinance 93-003, the Riverside County Transportation Commission has enacted Administrative Code; and WHEREAS, by Ordinance Nos. 94-001, 94-002, 95-001, 95-002, 98-002, and 99-01, the Riverside County Transportation Commission has amended its Administrative Code; and WHEREAS, the Commission has determined that it is now necessary to amend again its Administrative Code to change the time in which the Budget and Implementation Committee meetings are to be held. NOW, THEREFORE, the Riverside County Transportation Commission hereby ordains as follows: Section 1: Article III, Section H(1)(a) of the Administrative Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 1. The following Committees of the Commission are hereby created: (a) The Budget and Implementation Committee: This Committee shall be composed of fourteen regular members of the Commission selected by the Chair to provide adequate representation from the western and desert areas of the County. Subject to supervision by the Commission, the jurisdiction of the Committee shall be as follows: annual budget development and oversight; countywide strategic plan; legislation; Measure implementation and capital programs; public communications and outreach programs; competitve grant programs; TEA 21 (CMAQ & STP); and other areas as may be prescribed by the Commission. Meetings shall be held at 2:30 p.m. on the fourth Monday of the month at the offices of the Commission, unless otherwise determined by the Committee or the Commission. UUO00 Section 2: This ordinance shall be effective on February 10, 1999. APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 10th day of February, 1999. ATTEST: Naty Kopenhaver, Clerk of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Jack F. van Haaster, Chairman Riverside County Transportation Commission 000003 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: February 10, 1999 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Executive Committee Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Proposal Not to Schedule An RCTC Meeting in August There are a number of local agencies in Riverside County that do not schedule meetings during the month of August. The purpose for RCTC staff recommending going dark in August is threefold: 1) Commissioners who plan on a vacation in August will not miss a Commission meeting; 2) It allows staff to take vacation time; and, 2) It allows staff to catch up on their work. The Commission, by not having a meeting on August 1 1 t, will not schedule a meeting of the Plans/Programs and Budget/Implementation Committees on July 26t. If the Commission approves the proposal, staff will review and adjust their schedule so that agenda items are presented to the appropriate Committee without affecting any of its programs and projects. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission approve the proposal to cancel RCTC's Committee meetings on July 26 and the Commission meeting in August 11. nk UUOOU4 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: TO: February 10, 1999 Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: SUBJECT: Executive Committee Eric Haley, Executive Director Authority for Executive Director to Budget $10,000 for Casual Employees for FY 1998/99 The Commission's Personnel Policies and Procedures, approved December 9, 1998, included a Casual Employee Category. This is to allow the Executive Director to hire casual employees in a variety of job categories to fill short term jobs, to manage periods of heavy workload, to cover transitional periods caused by a position vacancy or to assist in special train events. Casual employees are employees who work in a non -budgeted position on an as needed basis, generally for less than six months (not more than 1039 hours for the year) and who are paid an hourly rate. When hiring a casual employee, the duties of the position, hours worked, rate of pay, and the expected period of employment will be made clear. Benefits eligibility for casuals is limited, as appropriate, to state mandated benefits, such as workers' compensation. A casual employee's employment does not carry with it the guarantee of a full week's work and is not deemed to have continuity of service with RCTC. Casual employees applying for a regular position will be required to go through the recruitment process. I would like to propose that the Commission authorize the Executive Director to budget $10,000 for the remainder of the FY 98-99. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: To authorize the Executive Director to budget $10,000 to hire casual employees to assist with staff workload. nk U0000 uu5 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: TO: February 10, 1999 Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Plans and Programs Committee Susan Cornelison, Rail Program Manager THROUGH: Paul Blackwelder, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: Priority Rail Projects for California STIP and Federal Program Background: With the anticipated amendment, or augmentation, to the 1998 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), the five Metrolink county partners and the seven county agencies which comprise the Intercity Rail Group have studied needs and developed lists of the most critical rail capital projects needed for system growth, reliability and coordination of services. The lists in Attachments I and II reflect the priorities adopted by each of those two governing boards, for inclusion in the State's Interregional Program of rail projects. Staff is recommending that the Commission endorse these priority lists. And, as RCTC has particular interest in three of the projects listed, staff further recommends that the Commission actively advocate for STIP funding of the following: - Track Improvements at Bandini (located in L.A. County; system wide benefit). - Metrolink Rolling Stock (system wide benefit). • - Colton Junction (located in San Bernardino Co.; benefit to Inland Empire Line). The Metrolink Board has also adopted a list of projects for which it will seek federal funding and is asking RCTC's endorsement of this list as well. (See attachment 1111 PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission: 1) Endorse the priority project lists developed by Metrolink and the Southern California Intercity Rail Group and actively advocate for STIP funding of the particular rail capital projects listed above; and 2) Recommend RCTC's endorsement of Metrolink's federal funding request as listed in Attachment III. UUO006 C G CD 11 Tn. Fta171r � M.dr M ECIIRKO IdihNlNlak OWjedo C AMMO t4 a nO KdQ�uinikniMobak ��TNaiad aboinrrov 00^d�onnoNSF. 1T Pgva eM bawd MCA, Fall vn W Fhb irk Y w d0/'ddid T11pv b klvMid 1� Th wild A / it dal TW M Q �� yiQinF MAI` u** Pord MO ATA YH Rni� v F: bed w l use 000 two kndo MYM 4 peddhi FkM xO In ydKwM ��ti„� . MKOW duel M odd'F/� NN In On I/MIE 1M� Erd E wdiM Tio oddNe d 11 0lYr� o F Far ^� edi�• dddWe7 Or0.17011Ho1 yreoa FroavaT) lbws unwed. or he 4of r von 1: n B n11r b iTnFh. Attachment I SCRRA INTERREGION PROJECTS PROPOSED FOR THE 1998 STIP AMENDMENT - REVISED 12/9/93 The first sin seven projects in SCRRA proposed list for funding in the 1998 STIP Amendment total $2.1434 S28.555 million. These are the projects staff recommends for endorsement by the Member Agencies. It should be noted that for all the projects listed below, in some way, benefit accrues net only to the line on which the project is located, but to the entire Metrolink system. Each Metrolink equipment set does not remain on one line, but during each day is cycled through to other lines. Thus, in increasing flexibility and reliability on one line, the project will also benefit all other Metrolink lines. In addition for example, projects located north of Los Angeles, such as a new crossover, will not only benefit Amtrak and Metrolink service north of Los Angeles, but will improve service south of Los Angeles, as a late train north of Los Angeles will not be able to maintain its schedule going south. 1. Three Miles Of?riole Track At Banta' 57.08 million This project is located in the City of Commerce and would build three miles of triple track between Fullerton and Los Angeles Union Station at Bandiai starting at the currently proposed end of BNSF four track main line. It will provide an improvement which is essential if Metrolink and Amtrak are to increase the number of trans running in this corridor. The project total cost is S12 million: a 15% . contribution is assumed from BNSF and a 2S% contribution from Amtrak. The project is located on the LOSSAN Corridor between San Diego and Los Angeles. This corridor is the second busiest in the United States. it is also located on Metrolink's Riverside to Los Angeles via Fullerton Line which is proposed to open FY 2002/03. This section of the corridor is very active: each day there are 21 Amtrak Intercity trains, 22 commuter rail trips and over 41 freight trips. Metrolink ridership on the Orange County Line has grown to over 5,000 daily trips. The corridor is now entirely owned by public agencies accept the 2S-mile section between downtown Los Angeles and Fullerton. This segment of the corridor is owned by the Burlington Northern -Santa Fe Railroad Each Metrolink equipment set does not remain on one line, but duringeach day is cycled through to other lines. Thus, in increasing flexibility and reliability on the Orange County and Riverside to Los Angeles via Fullerton lines, the project will also benefit all other Metrolink lines. The project will also benefit Amuck service not only between San Diego and Los Angeles. but also north of Los Angeles, since a late Amtrak train south of Los Angeles cannot maintain its schedule north of Los Angeles to Santa Barbara or San Luis Obispo. Lastly. the project will benefit BNSF since it will permit better control of freight train movements as they go into and out of the Alameda Corridor which will soon be under construction. 000308 Attachment I 2. Ingie Crossover tretween Vans Nuvuinigsvmq S.75 miIIion This project would provide a single crossover between the Van Nuys Station and CP Raymsr, 2 miles west of the Van Nuys Station on the Ventura Line. This segment is double track, but there is currently only a full length passenger platform on one track and there is nowhere for trails to cross from one track to the other and allow trains to pass near the station. The project will increase flexibility and reliability for commuter, Amtrak Intercity and freight trains using this corridor since Men+oiink dispatchers will be able to move UP freight traffic in and ottt of UP's GEMCO Yard and still maintain a high level of passenger rail traffic. Through this section of the corridor, there are 10 Amtrak Intercity trains, 18 commuter rail trips and over 12 freight trips daily. The project total cost is S 1 million and a 25% contribution from Amtrak is assumed. 3 e Ti V $L6 million This project will provide for new and/or upgraded passenger rail ticket vending machines (TVMs) at Metrolink and Amtrak stations. The project benefits the entire Metrolink system, Amtrak Intercity service and has the potential to benefit other transit providers in the region. These new machines will be able to vend either Metrolink. Amtrak, and Coaster errs, The machines will also have the potential to sell bus tickets. This means that fewer total capital costs for ticketing machines are needed and servicing costs are lowered and mod. The new machines will be able to vend different types of tickets. For example, they will not only vend tickets for a regular one-way, round-trip, 10-trip, or monthly pass for adult, student, handicapped, or off-peak {are, they will also allow someone to bury a ticket for a future dote and several different types of tickets at once. They will vend interline tickets and be able to allocate the money collected to the different operators. For example, a person will be able to buy a single ticker allowing the user to travel from Riverside using Metrolink, then transfer to Amtrak to Santa Barbara, then return home —and do this so that both Metrolink and Armtek get their share of the ticket price. Similarly, commuters could purchase joint Metrolink and Coaster tickets transferring at Oceanside. This makes the entire passenger rail network in Southern California much more useable to many. many more travelers. Finally, the SB 457 study on ways to save operating costs in the Sea Diegan Corridor determined that one of the most productive cost saving measures is to introduce TVMs for intercity Rail passengers, Savings come about by eliminating, over and as worlcead out with the union, time, least the number of hours an agent needs to be is at lesser -used Amtrak stations, or at stations on the Sari D' present. � addition, almost Half of the staticticketto be cBan route are =staffed and the machines would allow Amtrak Purchased at these stations or when stations are closed. 000009 oToonn - quasi a ur iulsm° uoslo, arg yana np 2sossad suts u t say yadusije pup sumo or sl y yuryoflahr `suts4 or ado saw 4in tum4 ;noels nu .i.S E 17sa9 41W a uo djpua an, sun uotiallnd + saAlW so?-apprattig ay1 uo aopuas uoppairp Pad aiwyrjoW Alipua aurl (d111:P a+R tro4Ppdiro puv 4111gmlu asaa cni! IIiM =ra id aril 'MA tyJlsujdR pnv.dSlifg o1 aCIPlaP aawpu /1fM uouomidas spud ay1 aouls' tempo ul vary puao, ammo ay; q gtaai ofni a+9rt fo Amur sn OM 4w/00 ammo a a u yl s� sums arll rnl asp uo a9 o sla ll� ogwpdas :pals a adaa asaaCur pup sap), ovum pinom uonvattfas apaas pus ?unsor, uoiloo srp ignoir: soave am. Om) *woo dump of &whirl pualul ayl vaPt as 9ulloaapy aojosla m4 'su7714 Plabiflort juo jou visual:Ng snows s sasuoaaq" so' apsanlp 8y1 bsazolg W sph►WI= VAT Jrla!N"SV suogrus apisaanrg pus ou/pfaung uaS saul14749111 uasnyaq uogo, to mug utsur da pup ism. asp fo augsata app4Iys Sump, aq1 auundas appf3 peons sacra ni sryl uorjrlur 000`SS uoupluslt S pp1+J aulsra. uoslo,S -g • •• :pawns= sr ittutud way uopagtuuoa °i6SZ it pas aotrrtto I S sr uoa mat iaafosd Jq L -Asp sdnx uptar3 ZI saAo pus alp rrsr sJrnaurov 8 i •sareu krusutr'moon, Ol as SAM 8101:11I10o Jq3;o uozarn snR tgnagl• �Sraltrral lidos bL paw gglq :pp sit &moss= aQ3 ass of ansq tap supra /atoms! Isztuv pus =IMMO* 01 s aides atop =opal A1legautsgns !um situ, 'qdo 09 do Spuds Moat pinoA 3o2(01d opsl9dn aq3 pas qdm ;pp spas ssga?q p+oiis Room ssanossaa utauraandar sqz `qda 0£3o mods 10; Ao11p =Koss= :sauna aq1 •oatn.AS URA o3 siosdurt aznantrto mm poQ3ay uou:nusa= sue, sago pro Jqr;o matuaruar asopq =was mur mat; ft:RIO pus wpm! law= mitt, Taos rsn(sanosso:3 ;o Ulf Maus 8unonusuoo;o swum rip* Isom atu vullos'go ant sputum patI s � pas mo tuoA ars slnauodsoo rya aq3 pus 896 r tst avid ompnoS x6 Aq 1r!ng swa SrPlzolsnel stgl •srsv3rs pus Srazsoa Aaa tgrA pus =Ix= A,au TYat pater us uolld do is =AMOS* saAod atp aaerdar up* =road Nuys au -soots is Ip sanossosa Srgr;o uaurasardat aqi paparg N,LNt LOPE ar m" uMAI lsude0 6646 A.4 Jqr ul 00t1111r S1.1 qaul 09 a3 uuirfr' dJ is lanosstuo apeman 'S 'B assgd in saz 9 03 S pntompps us Stquanbar asa Jm =pro aq3 or sir L PPs mom pus uorscrrrdds ruse mum =unto aq3 Ut paps aq mom =so I asegd aq3 zap p0turturs Tr 31 saspgd onu am grit =CI SRI 21171rtj JNIS sir uorrrna.rim sou uaabar MO MT= ppaontpps so;.peon It AUNT ptrsmap dpisrapp Jo suopaa(osd IttO 1143 ZZ-IZ por anpoutaavr oral JO; Mgparr; harps JAM' am. 'mad VMS loud s TVA pasmtsoa aatt& loos aagfOs A= so; span; Tampa; ur u01111m S£S PRI" "Ai AnnIJS `aus 8661 aq3 III lumuc uba AauP 1"1 °R: � pauplosuoa aq Q.m gsmOsB sue; `IaAamori -mu aArssstdusr as is Ao18 or pant:woa sag dtgsaptl s,1ml0431,5i 1661 Jagulau101+1 m 00V/ Z rJno parr= spq dnlstpu A sp:Strand' 'sup" 511 Pus SaAQotu000l ££}o =Fur=MU Jra?T" V3210S aril nu II!a SI I C 1luaLLITZ llf 1 amid -21001S au111021 VIluzaW lIIuMPPd •b TT0000 .:mosso si 19-1311TV grog aoongimuoo %st a pow rzs zoo Imo: =afosd au. App sdrn tg8rsg Z I sono pay sdsrt Haar =num= g Y 'salon 6tt»uI 3p:or y of a= gram 'ropuroa =R3o uouzas Tit g8nozca "loPfuoa 7q4 2anrt =gut 211294 pay Annual xe tEni •ramaomoo so; aug sgiz go hgnorpar pal Afi4on tea? sgu, .smart saSuassad Aq Pam aCt ffuTPTu =II urn CZ sari= 31MaH mug° rum saqMW raP+od aqt qtu„ SuuTu AIM** 2811o4s PaPPI TRI.1101101Vtis mod PPR Puy 0001 of 000`b am; urn smivaA uo waQmH t: S !pig woo Sow= am pea= prom% ixford spa 00r![lut SL8P 91001 dJ dt KPH lS 311rPFS-0800 Puoixg Y 811rprrnfagj vs amdr>Pmd pit d!I Puir.dSIVg au, ivy; Papadra stir Psi,: vo IMI iSS sr is= Mold mug aql vomoalrp gam -ova uv to asrnswo ow ghouls 1Vssad sip OF Cato svy d!! Pry veri u?P Wier I I 0 0 0 0 •ratunssw /Extuxv tuot; uoungmaoa %g a pas stomp SZS quo: pun =fold atu Mrs" sdta igprsg ZI MAD pas sdpt gat snrtstttuoa S I 'salsa 6l1:3nta1 I faxtu y 0I we malt 'sopvsoa 241;o isouxa s?q1 Omuta 0P!stoa aqs 5a!sg sum 3g2P4 Pas Aluiglul 'satnastuoo 103 purI TR; Ito S ?Il ps pal Lumen sum spu 'satsst m9a2ssed L4 Pam gq Pug lurPls gq; asn of =Fa VW;140I14 ITS ggq:ITmg =mud stp tau„ SuoTs gumbo alums papm frgi %' oqopAss =mod pp paw za*3 0001 at 000`b tutu; van atnsuon aqt tto quggsrier 2trms Isito'J Zap s>o asp Pam from tzefosd spu 0111rul SL8' IS P t{3Ioo'I dJ of Vg4mH 111 aulP!S isao0 Pwtx� Y lug:am ay: nr aux#Mind urns da Pry iSNir asp JayJ pawadia a Jr;no wawa nis "s07 pafold;ma aql 1101pa ►p xrdm $JDa ort: sr! Isn sw asp 'hoop hrrssvd s upw OF "40 MN eta Pup sorJaanp slings rroposed SLIP Amendment List January 8,1999 Page 2 BACKGROUND: The California Transportation Commission (CTC) is in t project evaluation criteria guidelines and process of setting interim Transportation lmprov and establishing a fundestimatefora 3998 State January I4, to adopt this item. din (S �' The CTC is meeting �. As part of your adopted SCIItG FY '99 consultants to begin scope of work, you directed staff and preparation of a capital Subsequent that action, the CTC k programming der for the corridor. .AmeT� �t was the need to developconsidering a 1998 STIP draft capital program is prepared b staff, � SCIItG project � �� � initial Y ,the TAC and LSTS, your cent. The TAC met a number of times to drat a list of A!I member agencies projects for the Board's tndorsem�, rell me r participated and considerable g (attached), staff and TAC believes is areasonable� was � The Amendment funds.reasonablerequest for STIP Si345 identified a minimum of what is ,. projects in the State. B �� � "2.25 % level for intercity rail nature, not regional ( Because rail carriers, such as Metro CTC broadened therefore not ��'� for designated�are 'interregional" in � dcfinitian to ' regional funds), the " 4 C " level. Because of the substantial and in the '98 interregional needs stantial north/south STD, sealed and on a that "4 � � needs for intercity projects and � inter eg real million � level t to be maimained for the STIP Amendment Sacramento and m million Y approved for track and signaln kton should not count again this ,.4 % level. �s between The TAC with the c significant non -state oration of Amtrak, local agencies and railroads funds for many of these preys. Staff identified significant action and should be believes that this . allocates fonds for the STIP A� as well given wit when �,C The Board is � to �� � significant coordination a list for submission to the efforts m corms of agencies , Meru on the CTC to adopt the "4 � *level of g and �-Sffite Stockton project from the level . funding and exclude the $12.3 million and urge the advocacy actions needed to ensure � priority Tbe and fibers Should ffiioe those Attachmentis . UU0013 �tsrr , Rawls ATTACHMENT 2 t 'tir�a trr r., fin t...� - per! t=�.rtl 1 wA. n.rrBt i Lw.if 7 ISp .... F...........7...........,.� f5r� Cam. Aw+r/ am Eia�.re a�..r.o. inammit .gym.... � .� a Crwar, Paw Rees.. . MiniiiiiiiiiiiiiMINIMI raa.y Tows � �MYeir'.t T'..ra�. iiiitiiiiiilliiiiii11111111111111111111iiIMICMIIIIiii 1111011111111111111 up,............�� n ...,. .. p....,551.iiimiliiilhommial11111111111.11111611hiehlid�4 it firwet. - ...................... 5¢r.f.......rrr aw �r.rq w sir 111111111101161 sown a+e el afar,., raes R..dana � aaamwer Few Crest Now 5an Dego F'�'uy fSTw.RSSSSA) ' �+d7-Mp.+Jp �1111111111.111111111111 ...k„.. i.„........____iiiimmmaimemmmei . . i ..11 m . ;tl mavi ix... i . . ... . . . . . . „ . _ _ _ _ii,i...wAiInvC•N.n.F.0eRrE.,..e.,•C ��r.awmu, ^ � mz=130•14 rormon....COMBEEMIW„ mmunimmumunnwarearm~�=r~�` a tSlp c f • •5E fKauu..p41pefaaa.err themern � ram s iMwp.pp S8 'karma= now song •Mfr aw sales a.....n janC 5.nra BMWS and Tsai tang 000014 spun. pia iv" all 'WAN rub p.,r.a. ru, n F,. mamma' w.w pau ing i;1 W.l sa r�wr w vlld p 'uns wl is mem au ow p.p,r'P6 +wv�'�w•.Y 01n.y 01 �1Po ris r4 N�1 �un•ri 1P�yatl . 6a1Pat auaakod q Paao N al Noun MMa ww pad WNW,,. Allu ulellNigiAw w Y+lnu w I sal is w N+r9 w � glal li sal is �a It 11Pu idodir„ a 'Palod LN +a1 MNaaar cuts awyai Cil l p sPaq �+al Pa aa►p IoIW "P4P/ aP, w N�diS p1aPq u �ultl 010110f atlhi s s woosat d s SUMS Wing &WI1a1 alaas0ar pa/oday 1011.11111Affirm1113111 MRSIOadailliltat u•S 11 tl ps(ud *MVaUI •Noimu•s ems lai IS) bl kl ILA lil apraer wooing Ao Pgaantsy 11aa1ay mon 6rrc1 ��®�� --_ teas/ —�- yawww.�soaa.l ___® 1111 _ arPtll a:2 11:==111111111111111111111:4 aocl �� _1111111111111111111 —��� •Ni .4 ada�ala oalc � � � oo it :2 WitA4 eMla s Par;O ec•a �____ Dolt � .,,*6,.Nk+w4tlawec.pa,oa� �_�__®�== oc"ct 06':l 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111=== A'a"0=hs+=LM1e01 nn=====is m��__ �_� con Neirjra.= � _ mg. 06'tl � WINK *MN MA p nuoywd n..........1. m_cra� ssa_oont at�a19 awa>1 __ ft1 -_© 00911 osc6:1 IN aaWr _ aaawlas'gMa6 pwt _ otil ftl awPolHowas 111" 11111% _�� 00ft © "'mu" wg CM:===311 g t C��...© NM �M� � w __��__=- it ii 0o n t auaal..oMiy A1n.ao sun a4Pa�waY w, 1111111 _ 1111111111111111111111 Or aolti © 00 00'11 t Alm* aPuuO uqu,ni q aa1P4S ua� Vl 1314 ouNiN y Q91a�ai ®®00SXt appwsatA, PuwA urynA gpabaglwo,®V Pa.p.i 6i Ad(1111anb•V Puluad patNoyinv Palson6pl Iso - — _ MunA owl ,Pond 84s4 It Val • Pana Pad 4,0 Palma gall (SuollllWt) 11661 '1 laquwa3a0 NOLLVZINON1nV 133(Oad ONV ONIONnd lVa3Q34 ap3 S1S3n03a dO sniV►s ulina I laolV I1VVN' onNHodnVO Na3H1neS a 4aMaV Pasodaud sT00 (1 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: TO: February 10, 1999 Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: THROUGH: SUBJECT: Plans and Programs Committee Susan Cornelison, Rail Program Manager Paul Blackwelder, Deputy Executive Director CMAQ Set Aside for LNG Locomotive i For several years RCTC, along with the other Metrolink counties, has helped fund the research and development of a Liquified Natural Gas fueled locomotive engine. This effort, known as "GasRail USA," has also been supported by a number of other sources, including the California Air Resources Board. The research resulted in successful test firings last year, with the next step being the manufacture of a prototype locomotive to be deployed on Metrolink routes for demonstration service. The necessary resources had been committed to complete the project, but last fall the Congressional appropriation process moved $1 million from this effort to another rail project. Metrolink counties must make up the funding shortfall or lose this opportunity to build a clean -fuel locomotive. The logical source of funding is the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) program, available in each county. Some of the other counties have already begun their CMAQ call for projects and are submitting the locomotive construction for funding. RCTC's adopted commuter rail Short Range Transit Plan calls for the eventual retrofit or replacement of Metrolink diesel locomotives to LNG over the next several years, utilizing federal Section 5307 rail capital funds. A successful demonstration is necessary before that effort can begin. So that the development and manufacturing process can proceed on schedule, staff is asking that the Commission commit to an advance set -aside of CMAQ funds for RCTC's share, in an amount not -to -exceed $300,000. 000016' If approved, will be included in FY 2000 Budget PLANS & PROGRAMS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission set aside up to $300,000 of CMAQ funds to cover RCTC's share of costs for manufacturing a prototype LNG -fueled locomotive. U00017 RTOonn Wrote) f Mona) s (000'oa) s S wrote s (Oons0 S foamy 1.) s (000'9Lt•) s (DOo'£>Z) s (oo9'LEz) s Wows') s ooa'o>!. s 009'999'Z S (o00'EVZ) s (00S'tEV s o0s'a.Ld s 96/6 ZL '°YJ 11r*da0Sda31 lenfo a14s ellld ONI*'uorsuslx3 spJCS said ��'a 99L•966S IRS uaLl spun) IeueRIPPs aP!nad o1 us!Pati eta sa sucpsudoudds Imam, san!a0a1 OVONYS 11 (d) >ienA '�aneNwH 'aPwtaiels ua! w �IAw �aW !0ZS ous PPe of 010s!! a+e sauy au!aua II! SZS a» unAcud mud sap u! *aq num lam= spun j (£) Ip!U�AaL aLq :! - Mel'a!u�uy UeS u pa;e0o1 UO1sisnuop aul Jol wellnsuo0 leforiG'1f� auge»do auo!s 011and ayL a;pepe 01 ysis Puymusasaa lsan dxs o - spat (Z} JC mu ; s to asn 6u!pnput plea:0ed uau(1 tuoq suoynq}quo0 purer p�pu! oss!y (L) aalouaaV ageue111 anus all11111 * allund lelu+Nod 010a (►) OYBNYS (0Y1013) =alwd ial PO 013A sPafaki Jpl Qe0 Y1111 IlsitnlaS Why 03 sassnoS Isguatod 100041 EsP01000 of PsPaaN (66 sunry tew a1Qs11nAy) MOWS wail Wale at =TM (E) (L 66 *IMAM aageyema wei6yd;usiO sua!ss!ura sass!° gay° (Pauanuo7 an901.0150010 AP10 a111.0anY) 99LZ av 6661 Ammer to sa Y130 uroy uognaeguo° (6619 Omuta a14s11ene0;sauna Buganda yaa°S (pafwd o; 211fi s4> lou sisao Urs V100) uogngUluo° P+ug•u1 1/130 Nigh) buaauguo° Sogud a>atdwo° of sasuadx3 luau ate! wo° o� papaaN u!pun� g a66t Annus(' l0 se y1°0 wen uo!Lng!gu03 wale L!anaap elgq!sow Wang aumad0 damps unto:laaAs° su!Ou3 alaldwo° as Sasuadz3 MuO tnauw01ane0 11140113 susauna° at papaaN ou!pun•Y 009'999'Z S 000'039 I! OOS'6tS 000'SL s 000'009 S 000'009 S 000'09 000"9LE S 000T9 o0S'ZLL s 009'99 000'ZZE S 000'9Z 000'91s S 000.9I 00S1th s 000'99 000'60L S 000'69 009'69L S 000'091. sno° Ksei 1001 yaaOS (z)Jowl Ilion S1N3Y13a11103a ON;ON114 TYN01110Qy S 000'9991 S SlYi01 000'SL $ saowas puq-ul vio0 S 000'0> s uoasgsuoura0 anuanaa S 0001,9Z S 6uasai angocu000l S 000,9 S uorsianuo° S 000'96Z S assuand Iuawarno3 S 000'6Z* S 6uuaautbu3 is°-zny S 009'999 S 6uuaautbu3 angow000n S 000'0!► S Atmce+nO audu3 S 009'6E S wawaolanaa Lua!sueSl WW1 pus sans/mumps (L) Seel ON11931 ONY NO1Sa3AN00 3171d1800 01 S1S00 031MUM 103rObld NOISM3AN00 SAL IOW0701 obn ViNIIOtilavd A.U1sOwnY 11V11 W14010311 VINt10d11V0 Na3HJ.170S Y 1N3➢1H3Y1.11 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: February 10, 1999 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Plans and Programs Committee Cathy Bechtel, Program Manager THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Measure A Specialized Transit Allocation to Family Service Association of Western Riverside County Specialized transit service levels in the Jurupa area were reviewed by the Commission earlier this year. Both the Riverside Transit Agency and Family Service Association of Western Riverside County have been operating in the area for a number of years serving seniors and persons with disabilities. In July 1998, the Riverside Transit Agency expanded their service level with the operation of an additional van in the Jurupa/Rubidoux area. When the Commission was making its allocations of Measure A Specialized Transit operating funds for FY 1999 and FY 2000, it questioned whether Family Services needed to receive its previous level of funding support in light of the expanded service levels to be provided by RTA. Commission actions have approved funding for two vehicles through the end of February 1999, with this dropping to support the operation of one van for the balance of FY99 and all of FY 2000. The Commission required that both RTA and Family Services submit ridership and cost information to assist staff in the determination of appropriate service and funding levels for the balance of the programming term. Earlier Commission action also directed that a detailed review of all specialized transit in the Western Riverside County be conducted to determine the effectiveness of our current Measure A program and to provide input to the Commission on whether current service levels were appropriate or whether service duplication was occurring. The Commission has secured a consultant with considerable experience in specialized transit programs to conduct this Specialized Transit Analysis. The consultants are in the process of doing a thorough field review of all the non-profit transit providers receiving Measure A funds, including Family Service Association. Additionally, an on- board survey will be conducted on all the dial -a -rides in early February, including the RTA Jurupa Dial -A -Ride and Family Service, to obtain rider feedback on the efficiency and effectiveness of the services. A community survey will also be conducted during the same timeframe to receive input on unmet needs of non -users. Due to the careful analysis that is underway by our consultants it appears that it would be premature to make changes to the service level of Family Service 0000 9 Association at this time. The results of the surveys will be compiled by the end of February, with the completion of the full study ready for Commission consideration in March/April. Staff is recommending that a status quo service level be continued for Family Service Association until the results of the full analysis are complete. The cost to support the operation of the second vehicle is $4,375 per month. Sufficient funds are available in the Specialized Transit budget to cover this cost. Project Cost Source of Funds Included in Fiscal Year Budget Financial Assessment $4,375 per month Western County Measure A Specialized Transit Funds Y :> • • "•[A Year Included in Program Budget Approved Allocation Budget Adjustment Required Financial Impact Not Applicable Y Year Programmed Year of Allocation PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission: 99 99 11 Approve operating support for two vehicles to Family Service Association until such time that the Specialized Transit Analysis is complete and recommendations are provided regarding the future service levels for the Jurupa area, and 2} Amend the funding agreement with Family Service Association to include additional Measure A Specialized Transit funds of $4,375 per month to support the operating cost of a second vehicle in the Jurupa/Rubidoux area. F:luserslp►eprint11999WebruarylPlan_Pro W urupa. wpd Uuu0 0 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMM/SS/ON DATE: TO: February 10, 1999 Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Plans and Programs Committee Susan Cornelison, Rail Program Manager THROUGH: SUBJECT: Paul Blackwelder, Deputy Executive Director Metrolink & Rail Program Monthly Report Attached for Commission review are Metrolink operating reports for December and the first two weeks of January, departmental reports, selected news accounts, and the most recent High Speed Rail update. Among items of particular note is the appointment of David Solow (former Deputy Executive Director and acting Executive Director) to the position of Executive Director of the Southern California Regional Rail Authority (Metrolink). This action occurred, by unanimous vote of the Board, at Metrolink's special board meeting on Friday, January 8. PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission accept this item as receive and file. 0u0021 METROLINK PERFORMANCE SUMMARIES December 1998 II( 1II METROLINK 30,000 27,000 - 24,000 - 21,000 - 18,000 -- 15,000 - 12,000 Grand Opening 9,000 6,000 3,000 0 RN Line Open METROLINK AVERAGE WEEKDAY PASSENGER TRIPS - INCEPTION TO DATE Earthquake OCO Line Open e IEJOC Line Open ti , ONDJF M A M J J A S O N D J F M A LJ J l A 5 O N O J F M A M J J A S O N DJ+F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M 92 03 0e 95 96 97 f l A SON D J M M J JASOND 99 28,000 26,981 METROLINK AVERAGE WEEKDAY PASSENGER TRIPS 26,713 26,258 26,642 26,514 26,000 24,879 \ 5,590 25,546 25,626 ..... .' .:` 25,207 24,000 - 22,000 — 20,000 18,000 — 16,000 — 14,000 Dec-97 Jan-98 Feb-98 Mar-98 Apr-98 May-98 Jun-98 Jul-98 Aug-98 Sep-98 [I=Holiday Adj—♦—Unadj Avg` 3 26,304 \ Oct-98 27,362 25,947 Nov-98 Dec-98 fr> 0LLL • 8121PWF AZ 143 %l ZlZ %4 %0 0 %9£ % 00 %0 0 %9 L I %9 %I le %D %Z %I Y. L 0 IZe Ise OZ %Z I %L I %4I sOp1 A14W°W 1° % sONl I°°Ws NBO 8ntl :Bg lagwaoaa - adki imps 16 30o sn gg oaa elitist* % %9- %Z- %LL- (%ZL I%L- 1%Z I%9- I%Z- 1%0 186 noN sn 96 300 a6uey* % %5- %L %E %0 %L %I.- %E- %Z- %L %L %Z- %L %9- 61,6`9Z £9£'LZ VOE'9Z 9Z9'9Z 9V9'SZ LS 99 -- 8S9'L £6117 - — £L8'E OSE EVE SZL'L LE6`£ ZZ9`£ 9600a 1.99'l 8149 8E8'E- -- 62'9 LLO'V SL9'E 96A0N ZS 09L' L SEO'S 0 80 £ SOP C99'L OL6'E UV £ 86 LSO LS LW.' l 06L'17 LSL'E L8E E19'L E69'E V EZEZ £ 86 daS 86 W L9 91L1.'I. 9L9 V V179'£ SOP 9S9`L SZ6'E LZE'E LOZT9Z 06919Z SV 119'1 OOL`V till 'E LOP LZV'L Z9L'E LZV'E 961nf Et, OZZI. LL9'V OV6'E 09£ £SS'L Vl8'£ Z9V'E 96 unf VIL9'8Z 196'9Z ZV9'9Z 99Z'9Z £LL'9l 6V 99L' I. S99'V V£0 V SVE 906'L 866'E I. LL'E 86 kiW SV Z99'1. £S6'V 490'V 9LE 991-'9 13.0'V 069£ 8fi�d VP 1.99' I. 900'9 9LCV 9EE 9Z9'L 096'E 909'£ 86 Jen £V Ll9'I- LL6'0 EEZ'V L9E 9Z0'8 LZ9'E LEV'£ 96gaj 9V E09 I. £ZO'S 6L0`V 66E 91.0'9 EZL'V SZV'E 86 Uef 6/9117Z ZV 8£V l 99417 906'E LZ£ LK'L 9L9'E SLI•'£ L6 oaa ow JoPd sn a6ueya % W31SJlS lVlpl t/l llln�ln!21 30 ld�3 lul munoa a6ue�p eRsiami swell rug:muse luegme l ueg Aeuen edoialuy Aiunoa einluan <= 3Zf102i O31snrav AV0110H - MOaN1M H1NOW N331LIIH1 SdINI 2130N3SSVd A` C13133M 39VN3AN liNnota3W Avg Daily Passenger Trips 2100 1800 1500 1200 900 600 300 0 Inland Empire/Orange County Line Average Daily Passenger Trips - Holiday Adjusted Dec 97 Jan98 /-7/ /7 // // // 1,757 1,60 1,682 Feb Mar 0 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% / / Apr 1,768 1,720 1,671 1,716 May Jun Jul Aug Sep 1,760 Oct i 1,861 Nov Inland Empire/Orange County Line % of Peak -Direction Trains Arriving Within 5-Minutes of Scheduled Time i Dec 97 Jan98 Feb Mar Apr c: %123r5wlboard198121 E 0C. WK4 May Jun 5 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Dec Avg Daily riders 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 San Bernardino Line Saturday Service Average Daily Passenger Trips Dec 97 Jan98 Feb (AMe�ew Includes EnTtanly FiY Riders Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct i Nov 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% San Bernardino Line Saturday Service % of Trains Arriving Within 5-Minutes of Scheduled Time Dec 97 Jan98 Feb Mar Anr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov c:1123r5$ -d19812SATAWK4 Dec 3000 2500 2000 T 'F3 1500 vi 1000 a Q 500 0 Antelope Valley Line Saturday Service Average Daily Passenger Trips Dec97 Jan98 Feb Mar Apr May Jun (- Jr service 2/i4-i9ti Jul Aug Sep Oct a 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% cA123r5vAboard19812SAT. WK4 [Antelope Valley Line Saturday Service % of Trains Arriving Within 5-Minutes of Scheduled Time Jun 7 60.0% i 76.9% 93.6% Nov Dec 93.8% % 7 81.3% Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Peak -Period, Peak -Direction Trains Only (Latest 13 Months) METROLINK SCHEDULE ADHERENCE I Mar 98 Apr 98 May 90 Jun 98 % Arriving with 0-min delay ea % Arriving within 5-min c:1123r5m .d\Peak-OTP.wk4 f METROLINK SCHEDULE ADHERENCE All Weekday Trains (Latest 13 Months) i 8'% i 89% /.. Dec 97 Jan 98 Feb 98 Mar 98 Apr 98 May 98 Jun 98 Jul 98 Aug 98 Sep 98 Oct 98 Nov 98 Dec 98 -i % Arriving Within 5-Minutes of Scheduled Time I c:1123r5wlboardlOT-13mo.wk4 OM OW 2 %!i .16 P9P10 N1 1414 N! 49196.190 6.114 NO 4 P6P4o4 Nu rr 6464 Pulo wv 1+09969199 N Rod M 9141-oo PP. Area 10 P•44194+ ue 946e Palwuu901 6Agap 9196689u Jog 'paw vary WIN 6649414Po ON It 'Rat Vwi4!61 I P.MDordW3 Xft Xfi IXit %99 Nook! 00 61.061 Nl! X96 %.6 Mane ••/.9t •/.16 'AU X66 %bi X66 I avid PPod 11t+d 'Poi! *INS I WON lAV 1 61NON N3A eL 380 awll pynpelpS to 14$16115 i up961A bulAllly slyul poNed lfead %69 %99 %69 %06 %99 %Le %99 %06 %06 %06 %Z6 %99 %96 906 t u s1111V %69 %69 7099 %LB %Z6 %L9 %06 %£9 70Z6 %OS %L9 %06 %06 %06 %[6 %99 %£6 70Z6 70E6 %99 7006 7096 %96 %46 %S6 In0 ul %OS %EL %OS . %69 %99 %99 %L9 °JAL %Z9 %E9 %Z9 %ZB %LB %S9 %69 %6L %E9 %09 %Z6 %E9 %96 %96 %a %L9 %S6 %£6 %E6 %96 96 %4 %L6 %L6 0/006 %SO %69 %E6 %46 %L6 96/oN %Se %E6 %06 %49 %Z6 %S6 %96 %96 %l6 %[6 %SG %S6 %LL %£6 96 PO %69 %09 %99 %Z6 %C6 %46 %06 %L9 %Z9 %L6 %96 %46 %46 %99 %E6 %LL %SO 96 deg %0L %9L %69 314'6 %S9 %99 %46 %46 %06 %Z6 %SL %46 %9L 906 96 &IV %ZS %ZS %99 %£6 %6L %19 %ZL %96 %S6 %LB %06 %99 %E6 %SL %06 061nf 91,-07%E9 %69 9[0S9 %96 %[6 %6L %O9 %E6 %96 %Z6 %C6 %ZS %06 %99 %06 88 unr %06 %Se %69 %L6 %L6 %66 %EL %e9 %96 %96 7006 %Z6 %S6 %96 %96 7096 %Se %L6 %£9 %06 96 Aen %S6 %Z9 %99 %46 %69 50,6 %[L %09 %L6 %S6 %Z6 %96 %[6� %CB %LB %96 %6L %06 961dV %99 %96 %06 %09 %Z6 %99 VA %S9 %99 %6L %96 %69 %l6 %S9 %L9 7046 %I6 %L6 961eii %LB %69 %46 %Z6 70S9 "/006 %16 906 7049 %Se %£6 %e6 969a4 %06 %COL %06 9126 %96 %96 %L6 %L6 %96 %96 %L6 %66 96uef %1.6 7099 %E6 746 %Z6 %Z6 %99 %99 %96 %96 %06 %46 %96 7096 %L6 %96 L6 3a0 1V101 W31SAS WWI ln0 ul V1/111AMI ON OS 00/dwPU3 M In0 ul Alunoo e6uelo MO ul apslanla In0 ul suing mueglne Ln0 ul oulpennag ues 1n0 ul AelleA adoleluV In0 ul Nuno3 elnluejl C3 auma SNINOW CL 1S31V1 awil painpayag;o swum g umm Summit" sufeJ1 AepleaM;o a6elueoued AaVWWflg 30N3H3HOV 3111031-109 Mil0H13W CAUSES OF METROLINK DELAYS December 1998 CAUSE: Signals/Detectors Slow Orders/MOW Track/Switch Dispatching Mechanical Freight Train Amtrak Train Metrolink Meet/rum Vandalism Passenger(s) SCRRA Hold Policy Other TOTAL 0.1236w1Eoard19B 12CAUSMVX4 PRIMARY CAUSE OF TRAIN DELAYS GREATER THAN 5 MINUTES EN AVL SNB w BUR R!V OC INUOC R/F/L 1 0 1 0 5 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 2 1 10 2 4 14 1 1 O 2 2 0 9 15 12 10 1 4 3 1 4 2 1 2 3 1 1 0 3 12 14 1 6 1 0 4 1 7 1 1 O 5 24 0 1 10 2 2 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 1 0 1 1 3 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 7 12 20 5 18 3 4 _ _ _3 20 27 70 92 49 69 39 22 11 TOTAL % of TOT 13 3 35 50 18 35 21 44 8 7 2 72 308 4% 1% 11% 16% 6% 11% 7% 14% 3% 2% 1% 23% 100% Saturday SNB 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 3 Saturday AVL 1 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 6. G C� O ca: W FREQUENCY OF TRAIN DELAYS BY DURATION December 1998 MINUTES LATE: VEN AVL SNB BUR RIV OC_ IE/OC ----- RIVIFULI_ -- ----- TOTAL % of TOT NO DELAY 348 367 429 356 153 305 136 35 2129 76.9% 1 MIN - 5 MIN 26 45 73 28 62 44 44 9 331 12.0% 6 MIN - 10 MIN 9 14 36 8 14 34 17 9 141 5 1% 11 MIN - 20 MIN 6 9 20 1 17 22 15 7 97 3.5% 21 MIN - 30 MIN 1 1 6 1 4 2 4 1 20 0.7% GREATER THAN 30 MIN 4 3 8 2 14 11 3 5 50 1.8% ANNULLED 2 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 4 0.1% TOTAL TRAINS OPTD 394 439 572 __ 264 418 _ 219 66 2768 100% TRAINS _______ 111 113 31 639 DELAYED >O min 46 72 143 40 83 23.1% TRAINS 12 49 69 39 DELAYED > 5 min 20 27 70 22 308 11.1% This summary excludes Saturday Service. amarc se 12FREO.WK4 t'd- PERCENT OF DELAYS BY DURATION (ALL WEEKDAY TRAINS) December 1998 (76.9%) 0 min delay % Trains Arriving within 5-Minutes = 88.9% I �3 (2.5%) > 20 min late (3.5%) 11-20 min delay (5.1%) 6-10 min delay (6.2%) 3-5 min delay (5.7%) 1-2 min delay METROLINK PERFORMANCE SUMMARIES January 1 - 19, 1999 II11METROLINK 30,000 27,000 — 24,000 — 21,000 — 18,000 — 15,000 — 12,000 — OnpOOp^„9 9,000 6,000 - 3,000 ONO 1 METROLINK AVERAGE WEEKDAY PASSENGER TRIPS - INCEPTION TO DATE Earthquake OCO t.la OM Ali • ,I :I i i I i� i i J FMAIAJJASONDJFIAAIAJJ ASONOJJ F M A•M rJ J A S O N 0 J FJOC Una Opp r 92 93 RN Lath Oprr 94 95 96 , FMAIAJJASONDJF MARIJASONDJ 7 91 96 • 1 l' Pia Mlle ,O Di 1 99 METROL1NK AVERAGE WEEKDAY PASSENGER TRIPS 25,546 25,626 Jan-98 Feb-98 Mar-98 Apr-98 May-98 Jun-98 Aug-98 Sep-98 Oct-98 Nov-98 PEWHolidayftd1 ♦ Unadj Avg 11 Dec-98 Jan 1-19 ROUTE => Jan 98 Feb 98 Mar 98 Apr 98 May 98 Jun 98 Jul 98 Aug 98 Sep 98 Oct 98 Nov 98 Dec 98 Jan 99 Ventura County 3,425 3,431 3,608 3,690 3,711 3,462 3,427 3,327 3,324 3,429 3,615 3,622 3,712 METROLINK AVERAGE WEEKDAY PASSENGER TRIPS THIRTEEN MONTH WINDOW - HOLIDAY ADJUSTED Antelope Valley 4,123 3,627 3,960 4,041 3,998 3,814 3,762 3,925 3,893 3,970 4,011 3,931 4,240 San Bernardino 8,016 8,028 7,828 8,188 7,945 7,553 7,427 7,656 7,673 7,853 8,219 7,725 7,984 Burbank Tums 399 361 336 318 345 380 401 405 381 405 343 350 345 Riverside 4,079 4,233 4,178 4,061 4,034 3,940 3,774 3,644 3,751 3,800 3,838 3,813 3,958 Orange County 5,023 4,917 5,008 4,953 4,665 4,677 4,700 4,816 4,790 5,035 5,418 4,793 5,423 In! Emp/ OC 1,603 1,617 1,681 1,682 1,768 1,720 1,671 1,716 1,757 1,760 1,861 1,658 1,889 Riv/Full/ to 46 43 44 48 49 43 45 57 57 52 58 57 54 TOTAL SYSTEM 26,713 26,258 26,642 26,981 26,514 25,590 25,207 25,546 25,626 26,304 27,363 25,949 27,605 isi% Change an 99 vs Dec 98 1 C C. C School January B9: V Ca.) I % Change 1 an 99 vs Jan 98 2%1 8%1 8%1 3%1 3%1 4%1_ 13%1 14%1 -5%1 6%1 -3% 1 8%1 18%1 17% 1 3%, 00 c:1123r5wlboardladr-mo.wk4 4 gio Change vs Prior Mo 7% -2% 1% 1% -2% -3% -1% 1% 0% 3% 4% -5% 6% For Interns] Use Only A.M. PEAK -PERIOD (PEAK DIRECTION) BOARDINGS & ALIGHTINGS For Quarter Ending December 9$ VENTURA COUNTY Oxnard Camarillo Moorpark Simi Valley Chatsworth Northridge Van Nuys Burbank Airport Burbank Glendale LAUS (estimate) SUB -TOTAL +L 7 �_!: 'r ., -i+� a -Ns' ��• If 4`;IuiF ._ ifl•1_.r •��`^.,t•: J.:�111'1.5 -�,}• •- December 99 December 9e December 9e December 99 September 99 September 96 August 98 August98 August ea January 118 skt.": 4Ri cifri."!% 75 0 6.12% 0.00% 60 1 4.94% 0.11% 224 1 18.38% 0.08% 296 2 24.22% 0.19% 134 22 11.00% 1.63% 109 10 8.93% 0.85% 176 35 14.42% 2.89% 21 37 1.69% 3.03% 96 136 7.89% 11.17% 29 90 2.40% 7.37% 0 885 0.00% 72.47% 1,221 1,221 100.00% 100.00% SANTA CLARITA Lancaster Ncrernaw98 209 0 15.16% 0.00% Vincent November 9e 279 1 20.29% • Princessa o.1 a% December 99 176 4 12.78% 0.31 % Santa Clarita December 9e 341 21 24.77% 1.50% Sylmar/SF December 96 225 52 16.32% 3.75% Burbank August 9e 101 268 7.34% 19.49% Glendale January 9e 46 135 3.34% LAUS (estimate) 9.81% 0 895 0.00% 65.04% SUB -TOTAL 1,377 1.377 100.00% 100.00% SAN BERNARDINO San Bernardino September 99 315 0 10.20% 0.00% Rialto December 9e 312 0 10.09% 0.00% Fontana December 98 290 0 9.37% Rancho Cucamonga drys 0. 382 4 12.35% 0.12% 12% Upland September91 343 5 11.10% 0.16% Montclair September 9e 281 12 9.09% 0.38% Claremont September 99 226 17 Pomona 7.31% 0,$6% September 9e 214 21 6.91 % 0.68% Covina September 96 388 76 12.56% Baldwin Park 2.4796 er 9e 254 67 8.23% 2.63% El Monte December 99 64 225 2.71 % Cal State L.A. December 7.28% er96 2 310 0.08% 10.04% LAUS (estimate) SUB -TOTAL 0 2'� 0.00%75.49% 3,091 3,091 100.00% 100.0096 Pepe 1 �I11.0039 oto0nn L Said AuO su!LU QORi3d-31V3d 30;ut001n0j'slunoo aopess¢quiy uopen :302I110S 040'01 060'01 %00'00L 9600.001 9Z9 9Z9 %ZO"SL %OM) 4ZL 0 asA.gwgp0 %gS"6Z %Zs"0 44Z 4 aesquwo.o %lL'L£ %LS"0 LIE 9 sew %90'LL %Zia 1.4L OZ 06.01o06160s %Lan %6I'4£ S Z9Z ae+.awwrr %On %9919Z 0 L£Z are AlquilMON %40'0 %9Z'9Z 0 LIZ 06+0aw.o00 %00"0 %SE'L 0 L9 06rm0.1d6s %00'00L %00'001. Z90'Z Z90'Z %SZ"LS %00'0 Z69'J, 0 %LL"Z %4Z'0 44 S %Z4'4 %LS"6 Z6 961 964E'Z %ZL"OZ 64 6Ly %99'Z %1L"9 SS OK %SS'L %SL'6 ZE EOZ %9L'Z %901 St 691. 96162 %ZS-61 L9 904 %940 %49'£L OL 49Z %01"0 %Ll'£ Z 99 %00'0 %9Z"9 0 ZLl %WOO L %00.00L 44►' L 444' I %063.9 %OTC 9ZZ• 1 0 %£6-ZL %6£'L L91 OZ %SL"Z %L4"L4 L£ 669 %Z0'0 %0£"ZZ 0 ZZE %00"0 %9£" L L 0 491. %OM] %94'£Z 0 6E£ %00'001 %cum OZI. OZL %ao'0 %6L-L9 0 POL %Li-9C %06 £ 44 g YoSC.LS %l6'I 69 LI %SITS %00'0 L 0 r.6 Agou0 06..gw.o.0 660 mamma are agamoq are agw.a.p teAMn•d es 6bv are.wawasa are .111wMa.° sd SUM O.swuo.p 06 A09a+."0 aeu.qu+.C.o e6.4.nu.r ea ;snarly a6wary - a ° /o � ,•- Q° a/.$' '�.g$ � • TO10.L Ztr.Lot-sns amel eoy InuOS aguslp uoXus, oaagsuy sumo;sat& Eio!S a'1-aMs12n!If ummun+oa-appanrl ompseu13E1 Des 31IIdIN[3 aNy7NI Te.LOI-HnS (aleulpsa) Sny7 aalau tuo0 idS a3 anr2S/xIenuoN uouaun,d uaayeuy aguei0 guy E es autnsl ouegs0a0 ugly ueS *I m o ugs awsueaap �[ LNn00 30Ny2i0 lli.L01-snS (aleiBpsa) sny7 opgamow kusnpul °pinup Amad apptanni 3QISZI3AI2I 1V.LO.L1311S (mesa) Sfly'I arepuaro lugging uodny xueging 3LNVStiIIg S6 Jagmaaaa 2mpu3.1ai.luna god SDNIIHOFTV SJN1(111VOg (NOLLO3IFIQ 311f3d) QOIRiad-MVad 'W'd Au0 „n Imam1 Jog Avg Daily Passenger Trips 2100 1800 1500 1200 900 600 300 0 Inland Empire/Orange County Line Average Daily Passenger Trips - Holiday Adjusted 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% t:. 0% l' Inland Empire/Orange County Line % of Peak -Direction Trains Arriving Within 5-Minutes of Scheduled Time f 93.2% J 81:6% �9.6% 88 9% Jan98 Feb Mar Apr c:1123r oard199011E0C.VYK4 89.3% Avg Daily riders 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 Jan98 Feb �iLTi o�uiry�a e1�n � / San Bernardino Line Saturday Service Average Daily Passenger Trips Apr May Jun Jul Aug 1 Oct Nov l Dec Jan 1-19 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% /.., 96.9% 75.0% +,4 4` San Bernardino Line Saturday Service % of Trains Arriving Within 5-Minutes of Scheduled Time .7 / 9% / / // // /�/ 90.6% 90.0% 84.4% ,67.9% 97.5% , 90.9% 80.0% Jan98 Feb c:1123r5w1board19901 SAT. WK4 Mar Apr May Jun Jul 8 Nov Dec Jan 1-19 Avg Daily riders 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 Antelope Valley Line Saturday Service Average Daily Passenger Trips Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug All lorries ryKiad 2/141911 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% Antelope Valley Line Saturday Service To of Trains Arriving Within 5-Minutes of Scheduled Time / / // 100.09i /95. / //, / 90.0% 86.7% r> 93.6% 93.8% / / 62 5% / 70.0% gamy 76.9% / 60.0% / 1en0/1 CeA - Mar c:1123r' lard19901SAT-WK4 May un Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov 81.3% I45.5% -�I i Dec Jan 1-19 01 nvedioleadpneocnmsi£Z N:o 61 1 uep 86 3a0 :O6 I 86 "oN 86 re0 ww-s a pm Bwnwy 96 Aelap up-0 Lim Bwnund %, o I 86 das B6 Boy ea or 86 unr 66 Aew ea xlv I (static% £ l lselel) AIuO sups uoyaa knead '130uadlead 33N3233HCIV 311103HOS_HNI10211.31A1 86 nw 66 d8i 86 uer 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% 71/ 9?!r7 METROLINK SCHEDULE ADHERENCE All Weekday Trains (Latest 13 Months) 9 h7 Jan 98 Feb 98 Mar 98 Apr 98 May 98 9A/ Jun 98 Jul 98 i Aug 98 Sep 98 Ocl 98 Nov 98 Dec 98 o % Arriving Within 5-Minutes of Scheduled Time I c:1123r5. 3rd10T-13mo.wk4 11 9lir/• / Jan 1-19 moo WC1-lov mrovez117 %16 164%16 %16 .0 %0 XII %[I e pl 1Pgrp pl IP566 1o1 f YLM�96!a 1 •nou 30144o314 7Np1I1tlIq 6 611-uo 6114 P6P56214 l.M661f CZ)w w� ,6,61451661 P Mod K NM-Uo era AN' cm mamma 6r NINO WNMAIUNI "NOP 6OA661611016P6W IN N ONOI 6Iu6y66NIO ON %66 %66 I %66 %16 _1%16 %cm x —l6 110 64565 �a ao —:wa ae wn1 ana `� .rba eMs %DS %16 VW 616 %OM I wW1 PoP6 emu NSA 41-i tier emu to • 00111W 9 u1U11M WM, nryul PoPed 4119d %S6 %69- %69 %08 X99 %L8 -- X99 %06 %06 %OS — %Z6 %BB %96 %S6 %68 %89 96L8 %Z6 %LB %06 %E9 %Z6 %69 %LB %06 %06 %O6 %16 %9B %66 %Z6 %E6 %98 %06 %96 - %96 %66 %99 %69 euluil9y In0 ul W101 1161319AS 1V101 %£B %SL %69 %EL %OS X69 %99 K99 %L9 XSL %0L %9L %ZS %ZS %OL %E9 %06 %S6 %SB %ZS %96 %S6 - %O6 %08 %06 %OOl in0 ul YVVINMi1 %CB %08 %ZB %E9 %ZB %Z9 %S9 %E6 %68 %0B %BB %Z6 %£6 %99 %6B %SO %69 %16 %99 106 %Z6 %88 %19 %69 %96 %S6 %19 %SO %69 %6L X06 %69 %66 %06 %6B %66 %£6 %6L %96 %16 %L6 X66 %96 %L6 %£9 %09 %66 %00 L %96 %96 %Z6 %E9 %Z6 %S6 %L9 %Z9 %S9 %9B %19 %ZL %6L %09 %EL %69 %66 %Z6 oN 000103 puelul %69 %66 %99 %S9 %99 %6L %BB X69 In0 - ul Auno3 Oulu° %LL X09 %lB %SS %SB %06 %06 %Z6 XL6 XL6 X96 %96 %LB %96 Xti6 Xt6 %86 %S6 %E6 X96 %96 %96 %L6 %S6 %ZS %96 %16 %E6 %96 %96 %Z6 %06 %9B %L9 %O6 %SO %16 %16 %66 %1.6 %O6 %Z6 %LB %06 %Z6 %E6 %06 %Z6 %S6 %96 %1.6 %66 %66 %66 61-1 uer %96 %E6 %69 KE6 %B9 %S6 %B9 %E6 %£6 %96 %66 %LS %LL %ES 96 3e0 XSL %66 %99 %£6 %Z6 %06 %96 %96 %S6 %LB %LB %96 %LB %b6 %LL %S9 %9L %SO %9L %06 %99 %06 %E9 %06 %6L %06 %16 %L6 96 AeN 96 Po 96 aeS 96 611V 96 Our 96 unr 96 Len 96 utlV . " 96 Art %16 %S6 %L6 %Ls 1n0 ul eplsleyy In0 ul suunl llusging MO ul ougueweg veg %6B %SB %96 %96 In0 ur ARIBA edWeiint SHAMS CL 1S311f1 OULU palnPa439 )o salnum g LINIM BumuV suleJi Aermaem Jo aBewaaied A11VWnnS 30N3H3HOV 311103H0S HN1101l13n %E6 %Pe %L6 %66 96 qej 1110 ul HunoO.eunPwA 96 ueP FREQUENCY OF TRAIN DELAYS BY DURATION January 1 -19, 1999 MINUTES LATE: NO DELAY 1 MIN - 5 MIN 8 MIN - 10 MIN 11 MIN - 20 MIN 21 MIN - 30 MIN GREATER THAN 30 MIN ANNULLED TOTAL TRAINS OPTD TRAINS DELAYED >0 min TRAINS DELAYED > 5 min VEN AVL SNB BUR RIV OC IE/OC RIVIFUL 200 197 234 205 110 190 82 21 1 14 35 50 10 29 28 16 g 2 6 18 1 3 6 19 3 0 2 6 0 1 4 1 q 0 0 2 0 1 0 2 p 0 p 2 0 0 0 0 p 0 p p 0 0 0 0 p 216 240 312 216 144 228 120 36 16 43 78 11 34 38 38 15 2 This summary excludes Saturday Service. SwWwid19i01FREQ.WK/ 8 28 1 5 10 22 7 TOTAL 1239 190 58 18 5 2 0 1512 273 83 % of TOT 81.9% 12.6% 3.8% 1.2% 0.3% 0.1 % 0.0% 100% 18.1% 5.5% CAUSES OF METROLINK DELAYS January 1 -19, 1999 PRIMARY CAUSE OF TRAIN DELAYS GREATER THAN 5 MINUTE` g CAUSE: VEN AVL SNB BUR RIV OC INL/OC R/F/L Signals/Detectors 0 0 3 0 2 0 0 0 Slow Orders/MOW 0 0 1 0 0 p 0 0 Track/Switch 1 0 2 0 o ° 2 1 Dispatching 0 0 0 0 Mechanical 0 0 6 0 1 8 13 5 0 0 Freight Train 0 1 0 3 0 0 0 2 Amtrak Train 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 3 Metrolink Meet/Tum p 0 0 ii andalism 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 Passenger(s) 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 SCRRA Hold Policy 0 0 0 0 Other 0 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 TOTAL - 0 0 ---- 1 0 C• G 00 c11a9otcAUs.1mu 28 10 22 TOTAL % of TO 6% 1% 7% 33% 11% 7% 6% 13% 5% 2% 0% 7% 100% Satorda SNB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 4 0: 1 PERCENT OF DELAYS BY DURATION (ALL WEEKDAY TRAINS) January 1 - 19, 1999 (81.9%) 0 min delay i % Trains Arriving within 5-Minutes = 94.5% 1 i (1.P,41; 20 mmndZy (3.8%) 6-10 min delay (6.4%) 3-5 min delay (6.2%) 1-2 min delay 1L1/11VIr f ROLINK SOUTHERN CALffORNI REGIONAL RAIL AUTHe JANUARY I I, 1998 TO: MEMBERS, AL - - DIRECTORS FROM: DAVID SOLOW SUBJECT: WEEKLY PROGRESS: WEEK OF JANUARY 4 - 9 OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT +K..ue Ai enea�~ Les navies Cewav MetieveLa+n ieer.ponazwi nagraiamy Orange Cowry iearapcnaoon weeeortr Romanic Cosines- IranspeeLna, Cori n a.= San Ile nnernano waramard Comnvham Beare Counry trstiPonaew„ Corrnrmm. Fa Mao Menikra c 5aurheen Caisionma wakamem o/ Corm, enn. San Dow wawa.ea, or Canenanenea Slaw o[ C:aiilenna. MetroIink started out the year with a good week the operatiom�y. Sta$'is visiting the Burlington Northern/Santa Fe in Ft. Wow to address thedela ys Orange County trains and the Riverside via Fullerton being by the Inland Empire - San Bernardino 'ne: Tuesday, the second afternoon train from Los due to mechanical problems. The Angeles was terminated at Rancho Cucamonga arrived into San Bernardino l � minutes late. Due weretransferred to the third a{t�flon second to the lastequipment turns, this delaywhich minutes late, and that six from San Boo to Los d to the Peak period �€zl� which departed San in Bernardino 84 train, which departed Los Angeles 34 minutes ]ate. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Signal Engineer Clayton Tinkham Retires More than 60 friends, farnil his honor on friends, January y, and working p�� of Clayton T' Clayton was one -of , the pioneers the Casa Santa Fe ban ° Santa a anon. in etroliak, banquet room at the Sartre ,� station. Railway and Safctrans Systems, �mB the fruits of full carers at the Santa Fe Railway y ems, Inc. to our signal en and technical expertise 13meermg group. In addition to his equally experience known as one of the finer Pent, and future railwaywide the allyprivilege to gentlemen and nicest signaling, Clayton r know. He pleas to alternate PC°Plc many of us have ever had in his native Wisconsin. between his. Fullerton homy and the " summer place 700 S. Flower Street 26th Floor Las Angeles CA 90017 Tel (2I31 452.0200 Fax (213) 452.0423 www.Metrelirktniets.eoM 000050 Weekly Progress: Week of January 4 - 9 January 11, 1999 Page 2 More Rail at Ravenna The "Rail Gang" of the C.A. Rasmussen has continued to replace rail between Vincent and Via Princessa. Because they were unable to come to agreement with their union, they have had to continue work on Saturdays, with bus service substituting for trains between Princessa for the middle of the day, ester and Via Ribbon -Rail Train The new rail for siding extensions and improvements was unloaded over the weekend. This work train utilized our twoJanuary $ r 0 purchased from the n°� jOOQmoti� 882 and 883, which were group which had planned to operate the "Marlboro train. As they are not yet set up for p�m Express"Express" promotional they are not painted red and ger �� this was a good workout for them. No white, and the surgeon general's warning has been taken off. 000051 gti''nMETROLINK, 044546 SOLTHERN CALIFORNIA REGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITY JANUARY 19. 1998 iitublVto r•,'dN 2 2 1999 TO: MEMBERS, ALTERNATES AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS FROM: DAVID SOLOW r)4 SUBJECT: WEEKLY PROGRESS: WEEK OF JANUARY 11 - 16 Special Board Meeting on Friday, January., 22' Member Agennetr Lr� incr:t.- Cowl!, N!rrmroirtar Ttan,n`ra:, RI%t'hi,1i lr;;rrr. Trartrnp`nan,r. 1,rtur.1 E. QFhcro ltetrthers San Drc `A,s_ti.3nor or Go%emme^so- : tarp .a Cabs•-. :a As we discussed briefly at the Board Meeting on Friday, we will have a Special Board Meeting. at 9:00 a.m. on January 22" in the SCRRA Board Room on the 25* floor. We will also have a Planning & Finance Committee with a single significant action item related to the contract with David Turch & Associates. The latter Committee meeting will occur between items on the Special Board meeting agenda, but after 9:30 a.m. to accommodate an introduction of Congressional staffers visiting our Metrolink System and a scheduled "13c" workshop with special counsel. Recent Incidents Saturday January 16, at approximately 3:30 p.m., Metrolink train 295 (the third southbound train from Lancaster to Los Angeles) struck a pickup truck stopped on the tracks at the San Fernando Road highway -rail grade crossing in Newhall. Witnesses reported seeing the driver stop his truck on the tracks as the gates lowered and not moving while the train approached. The engineer sounded the horn and applied maximum possible braking but was unable to stop the train in time. The vehicle was struck and spun around the side of the train damaging the engine and two passenger cars. The vehicle also struck and uprooted the foundation of the crossing arm mechanism, toppling the crossing mechanism mast. The 83 year old driver died that evening at a local hospital. The damage to the train prevented it from leaving the scene under its own poorer. There were no reported injuries to passengers or crew. SCRRA, Amtrak and MetroIink Sheriff's Deputies responded to the scene. Bus transportation was provided to passengers on train 295. The damaged train was pulled to the Central Maintenance Facility for repairs. Monday, at approximately, 9:20 a.m., Amtrak train 773 (southbound train from Los Angeles to San Diego) struck a pedestrian walking on the tracks in the San Clemente. The pedestrian was reported walking on the tracks wearing headphones as the train approached. The individual was 700 S. Flower Street 26th Floor Los Angeles CA 90017 TeI 12131 452.0200 Fax 21] U L1.0 52 f 1 Z.r4_s www.metralrnktrainL.:Jm Weekly Progress: Week of January 11 - 16 January 19, 1999 Page 2 struck and died at the scene. Due to the inaccessibility of the accident scene. SCRR4 Hy -rail vehicles were used to reach the site and remove the body. This accident was mistakenly reported as a Metrolink involved fatality in this morning's Los Angeles Times. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Bus Substitution for Saturday Lancaster Trains for Rail Installation This phase of the C-3022 contract will conclude next Saturday, however additional bus service will be used to replace train service later in the winter and spring. These future substitutions will be required for replacement of wood ties with concrete on sharp curves and for installation of track switches. Generally, the quality of the substitute bus service depends upon highway conditions (we have encountered weekend Caltrans work on Highway 14 that slowed the bus traffic) and coordination at stations. To improve coordination, ambassadors have been assigned to stations and an additional supervisor has been assigned to the dispatcher's office for the days when bus service is substituted. OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT Overall, this was an excellent week for operations. All regular trains arrived at the final terminal within 20 minutes of schedule. Staff continues to work with the Burlington Northern / Santa Fe to resolve on -time performance issues on the Inland Empire Orange County trains. A revised San Bernardino line schedule will be implemented on February 1, to improve the operation of the midday San Bernardino trains. At the same time, the schedules for the Riverside via Fullerton morning trains will be revised to improve the connections with the last Riverside and inland Empire peak trains. Antelope Valley Line: On Saturday, the afternoon train from Lancaster was terminated at Santa Clarita due to a grade crossing incident mentioned previously. UUG053 FROM: " •eiMETROLINK. SOLTHERN CALIFORNIA REGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITY JANUARY 25, 1998 TO: MEMBERS, ALTERNATES AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS DAVID SOLOW 044905 f•,`'s6.0 SUBJECT: WEEKLY PROGRESS: WEEK OF JANUARY 18 - 23 OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT cies. Owen Iran-ct+r,.r;,. ...•urn r r an •rorranmm ?iou nrdr Cnunn Iran-rortancn Ccmrn,..,,•- min li.•mar.::n.• A.`..i.11c.: Go.cr-tnarnt. 1rnr;rrt C�wr.n Trarr.roilan,+r. E. phlno %lemhrn: t•outhern C tcrorrut Ac:,*n.tn.m oa G.n emna rt. San Diopo A,-ccono, of Gm errmments Slaw or Ctlukirru= Ridership was only 48% of normal on Monday, January 18 due to the Martin Luther King's Birthday Holiday. On Saturday, the Union Pacific moved the dispatching of the Riverside Line from Omaha to Colton. This is a long awaited, welcome move and will assist us in monitoring the service. Antelope Valley Line: The week's major incident was the closure of the Antelope Valley Line on Wednesday afternoon, due to a construction accident near the tracks. This was the incident where the worker was stuck in a trench for over eight hours. The railroad was closed from approximately 4:00 p.m. to 11: 40 p.m. All service was canceled and 17 buses were called to transport passengers. A great job by the Transportation Coordinators at CCF for creating a massive bus bridge without notice. The train sets were combined and deadheaded to Lancaster for Thursday morning service. The fourth peak -period train Thursday morning was delayed 59 itrinutes between Sylmar/San Fernando and Burbank, due to a bicyclist striking the train. The person was transported to a local hospital. This delay cascaded to the fifth peak -period train, which was delayed 43 minutes, and the second morning train to Via Princessa, which was delayed 61 minutes. San Bernardino Line: The first train from Los Angeles to San Bernardino on Wednesday morning, departed 28 minutes late due to a cascade delay from the first Riverside peak -period train, which was delayed 24 minutes at Riverside due to Union Pacific freight interference. Inland Em ire - Oran a County Line: The second, third and fourth trains from Orange County to San Bernardino on Thursda afternoon were delayed between 21 minutes and 35 minutes at the Colton crossin y located between Riverside and San Bernardino.) The delay was due to a Burlington N �s e Santa Fe track problem in the area. . Northern/ U2. vJ [ 700 S. Flower Street 26th Floor Los Angeles CA 90017 Tel [2131 452.0200 Fax 2..131 452.0425 www.metrnlinktrains..um .! . Weekly Progress: Week of January 18 - 23 January 25, 1999, • Page 2 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Rail A' Coming As part of the capital maintenance of the system, we grind the running surface of the rail on an annual basis. This controls the wear pattern of the rail and wheels, and reduces the likelihood of forming surface defects in the rail. This service is performed under contract by Pandrol-Jackson using a large unit that resembles a small freight train. It will pass over all Iines beginning next Monday, February 1, beginning on the San Bernardino Line, then doing the Ventura, Valley, River, and Orange County lines, in that order. The work will be done at night to avoid train interference and will take about seven working days. The noise will be comparable to that of a slow freight train and it will make sparks as the grinding wheels bear against the rail. We have begun a process of notifying all of the communities along the line to expect this activity. Brighton Siding New Rail Last weekend the supplementary maintenance contractor installed half of the new rail in this siding, located in Burbank. Next weekend the rest of the rail will be installed. Following some surfacing work, we will increase the speed in the siding, which is used by several Santa Clarita trains each day. Newhall Siding Grading for this siding is complete enough that construction of the track will begin late this week. New Rail in Saugus Canyon, Santa Clarita The contractor is completing rail installation north of Via Princessa, and will soon begin work closer to Santa Clarity This work will require substitution of bus service for the mid -day Lancaster trains, numbers 205/212. Ventura Line Speed Adjustments Following the capital maintenance work, speeds will be increased at several locations between Chatsworth and Moorpark, by 5 to 10 MPH, effective February 1. �u0JS5 tl rrancisco Oaxica,Mctrolink cim (213) 452-02S5 tnciaent Report 0448200 i�:i�l METROLWIG January 21, 1999 Southern California Regional Rail Authority 700 South Flower Street, 26th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90017-4101 MEMORANDUM TO: BOARD MEMBERS AND ALTERNATES FROM: EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Z.S. FAX TRANSMITTAL SUBJ: ANTELOPE VALLEY TRAIN DELAYS AND TRESPASSER INCIDENT Yesterday, at approximately 3:30 p.m, a Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (DWP) con- tractor employee and two DWP employees fell into a 30 foot deep trench adjacent to Metrolink tracks in Pacoima. They were standing near the edge of the trench when it collapsed The contrac- tor employee was burled nearly completely while the DWP employees were able to escape quickly with the help of other workers at the site. Due to the proximity of the trench to the tracks, Los ngeles City Fire Department officials closed the Antelope Valley Line tracks to minimize vibration am passing trains. The tracks were closed until the worker was removed from the trench at 11:41 p.m. Five northbound, peak hour Antelope Valley Line trains were terminated at Burbank and one train was annulled. 17 buses were used to transport passengers around the rescue site. This morning, at approximately 8:05 a.m., a cyclist struck the side of Antelope Valley Line Metrolink tram 206 (the fourth sorthbound train from Lancaster). The incident took place at the Van Nuys Boulevard crossing in Pacoima. The cyclist was transported to a local hospital for treatment. There were no reported injuries to passengers or crew. SCRRA, Amtrak and Metrolink Sheriff's Deputies responded to the scene. Train 206 was delayed about I hour and following train 208 was delayed 30 minutes. North- bound train 203 was also delayed 60 minutes. cc: TAC Members SCRRA Directors SCRRA Staff 000056 rai:r u. Read Message las attachmeot g - prey j Next IEEEMessage - Download From: "Hidalgo, Peter" <HEDALGOP@scrra net>Add to Address Book To: Subject: METROLINK'S ON -TIME RATE MAKES GAINS Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 07:56:53 -0800 METROLINK eNEWS !_Choose Foider - Help Back to inbox Published Tuesday, January 26, 1999 Inland Valley Daily Bulletin METROLINK'S ON -TIME RATE MAKES GAINS By Michael Cicchese, Daily Bulletin Metrolink's "the squeaky wheel gets the grease" strategy in dealing with freight trains clogging up rail lines has paid off, the commuter rail system's executive director said Monday. But where there has been a significant improvement on the Riverside -to -Los Angeles line, there are still some westbound trains that arrive late half the time. "In general, the Riverside line is better than it was five to eight months ago," said Executive Director David Solow. "We are trying to use as many trains as efficiently as we can during peak periods. The trains coming in to Los Angeles come in on the Union Pacific (Railroad} line and then go out the (Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway) line." It's those empty trains going from Los Angeles to Riverside on the BNSF line where the delays occur, causing a domino effect on the later morning trains. Train 409 out of Riverside bears the brunt of those return trip delays. Scheduled to leave Riverside at 8:28 a.m., with an 8:48 a.m. stop at the east Ontario station, it runs late more than half the time due to other trains on the line, Metrolink officials said. "We're throwing a lot of trains at them and they have 'a•lot of freight traffic," Solow said. "We are working with BNSF and trying to make some adjustments." Those adjustments will likely come in the way of schedule changes to allow for more turnaround time. Solow described that as a temporary fix. "The bigger issue is adding more track and other capital improvements like signals and switches," Solow said. The delays on the 8:28 a.m. train from Riverside to Los Angeles are the only ones marring the dramatically improved on -time rate. In July, commuter trains on the Riverside line were arriving on schedule only 66.5 percent of the time. That caused Metrolink officials to request help from the U.S. Surface Transportation Board in August. Union Pacific has since responded with better trafficking of freight trains, helping Metrolink's on -time rating on the Riverside line to move up to 87.5 percent. "It was quite a service issue," said John Bromley, spokesman for Union Pacific. "We acquired more locomotives and hired a lot more people to handle the capacity. When we got all those big ticket items behind us we had a smoother running railroad." In an effort to ensure things continue to operate smoothly, Union Pacific recently moved out rail dispatchers from its center in Omaha, Neb., to Colton. "This is all part of a bigger decentralization issue," Bromley said. "We've found it's sometimes better to have a local dispatching center 'titter•py?Pyt=Tym&bmr—Inbox&message=6749 1552692_9952_743_1806 0&sort=da 1 _ /27/99 than to operate everything out of one central location." Copyright C1998 Daily Bulletin All rights reserved. Message - Download as attachment Copyright C 1997-99 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved. -Prey EChoose Folder - Back to Trash Ou0058 .../wmailLetter.pyWyt=Tym&YY-19240&box=Trash&message=5397 1544653 453_770 2850 1 /27/99 i 4 ,y jM i ,7;:17.7Z•, t ..iji„ INTERCITY HIGH-SPEED CDMPLE 1 ES FINAL REPORT 'CaliftWriia Intercity High -Speed Rail -� Commission completed its investigation of the feasibility of high-speed rail (HSR) for California at the end of 1996, when it submitted its Final Summary Report to the Governor and the Legislature. The Commission determined that HSR is techni- cally, environmentally, and economically feasible once constructed and would be operationally self-sufficient. Furthermore, the Commission determined that HSR would positively impact the State's economy, enhance California's competitiveness in a global market, and receive widespread support from the people of California. The Commission recommended a statewide HSR network 676 miles long. Serving over 90 percent of the state's population, the system would link Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles and San Diego. The system would be electrified, double -tracked, completely grade -separated, with operating speeds exceeding 200 mph. The construction of the HSR network would be a public works program on the scale of the State Water Project or the creation of the state's freeway system. Now that the feasibility of HSR has been determined, California must secure financing to implement the system, The Commissions financial projections showed that farebox and other revenue would not be sufficient to finance the HSR systems � . `' ft. I. �:. Ada .rp rrr construction costs. A voter -approved public funding source would be needed to provide a stable base for project construction. Although the projected operating surpluses are not large enough to achieve a system financed by private sources, private partners are expected to contribute to the financing structure, and the Commission recommended a design -build or design -build -operate contracting relationship with private sector entities. Implementing the HSR networic in California is the responsibility of the California High -Speed Rail Authority (Authority) created by Senate Bill 1420 (Kopp/Costa) in 1996, and signed by Governor Pete Wilson in September 1996. THE CALIFORNIA H1GH-SPEED RAIL AUTHORITY BEGINS WORK The Authority's mandate is to direct the develop- ment and implementation of intercity high -Speed train service that is fully coordinated with other modes of transportation and public transportation services. The Authority is required to prepare a plan for the construction and operation of a high-speed train network for the state capable of achieving operating speeds of at least 200 mph that is consistent with, and continuing the work of, 000059 www.cahlgi speedrall ca gov -e ONAOT AMIE CONTINUED MOM FRONT , a the Intercity High -Speed Rail Commission.4-The . Authority is also responsible for preparing a financial ,,_ _- plan to fund the construction of the system.'r~ - The Autho ' has �Y all the powers necessary to oversee-"' the construction and operation of a statewide HSR network. Initially, these powers include:. -- - ■ Conducting engineering and environmental studies ■ Evaluating attematives a Establishing criteria to award a ::7-;_;" to design, build and/or operate parts or!. all of the system - ■ Preparing a detailed financial plan and placing it on the ballot at the November"- general election in 2000 -- • _ Once funding for the HSR network is sued, the Authority would gain additional powers to: ■ Enter into contracts with private or public entities for the design, construction and operation of high-speed trains • ■ Acquire rights -of -way through purchase or eminent domain ■ Issue debt, secured by pledges of State funds, federal grants, or project revenues ■ Enter into cooperative or joint development agreements with local governments or private entities ■ Set fares and schedule for the system ■ Relocate highways and utilities L An extensive outreach program will focus on informing the public about HSR's costs and benefits. i_ .�� 1�4i1r, t PROGRESSING TOWARD HIGH-SPEED RAIL IMPLEMENTATION A Detailed Financing Plan: A detailed study of the financing, institutional and procurement issues, as well. as economic impacts of a statewide HSR network, Although the feasibility of HSR in California has been Public pubeadr An extensive Outreach Ian determined, a significant amount of work remains to focused on� the- lac about HSR and its •, be done prior to bringing the issue before the voters:='' coirts and benefits. The program also seeks the - The Authority has retained several -'��. ' e.9 y and- Participation of the public in developing the' teams to prepare a 'business plan' to be completed business pl by the end of 1999. A draft Ibusiness plan inOarporating find. rugs from each . of these studies will be completed by late 1999, and " • the final business plan wit be submitted to ▪ Governor and the L.egislatuni Findings from —the consulfing abides will be presented at the Authorily„,w.••� t Y . additional technical studies of the Los Angeles to San _ " Diego corridor. The Authority also has more than $500,000 in remaining- Proposition 116 funds at its dis= pose'. The resources to fund the preparation of the business plan come from three sources. The Authority has an appropriation in the current fiscal year of $3 romp'.• In addition, the Federal Railroad Administration has awarded a $100,000 grant to the Authority f� _ � 7,yy �. In progressing toward the business plan, the Authority has undertaken the following efforts: A Comprehensive Statewide Ralf plat:: This plan will help determine how HSR will integrate with conventional intercity rail services. It will define what conventional service improvements are needed and which should receive priority, • Updating Ridership Forecasts; The base year data for the Commission's "investment grade. ridership and revenue forecasts will be six years old in the year 2000. The Authority's financial plan will require forecasts that reflect and use the most recent economic and demographic data and forecasts available. Furthermore, additional forecasts will be run to answer remaining questions regarding route, operations, and policy issues. Additional Corridor Evaluation Further alignment investigations and evaluations are necessary in several areas, and unit costs and other assumptions must be reviewed and updated. Uuo®s1 HIGH-SPEED RAIL AUTHORITY MEETING SCHEDULE January 20 Sacramerrtp February 17 Los Angeles March .17 San Jose - April 21 San Diego May 19 San Francisco'. June 16 Los Angeles July 21 San Francisco. , 4 August 18 eta Ana-_ September 15 Fresno -� October 20 Los Angeles• • r. - . I November 17 San Josh. December 15 Riverside ri ' • www.cahighspeedrariLcal.gov :1.y u) wry. L1p111601C a) e101,Ylduu u 310e MIXONVow i■■g Ittellavini CEZ /lee Ilr•mot• • Eft WIlie 1la asmitivIRI MMI�M sMIM47 31-11.1. t1..1.NOD • 1!!!■i AVIs■3 rst Will*P RIN4l Plinolld sumo +s am ii ■p w qer m to avid sum n0 AIM Mom PI PiM i1N11 na6-ea-waipaadsy6lye3-4,,,.aa *roues anJJOigw! gJ eta Aq Peoddmo s Beu!w girounomA Ol iJieosA Pe•dS-46N AgbePct aRqul 041 'ssaaeMU Pus 41R1H •4l wog io Jequlew • sem osier peystors Jyy .sssm LE JCi Pled 104 uo!usod a 'eowwuJoo uoupuodoutui eleueS slw0;1RO s47 03 weensuoo Jo!ues sour PoLgooyy Ntl '10=41up en!lnoexe so A*ioyUtV *41 151J1u1Or 01 J134d eJe10e4112 mAsmoel:g Ismssu•W IP4eW a38 u spuog ecu uoliorinsuo0 '2.0681 AweP wJe IIeJ peptJni 40!4m '00e37-Nuuioo IAA. Puts gp 1 uolyModoid s41 t0 81140-00 se ponies 013111 U0111 delcr •JW 1111.8411e3 1.11 smut meant *4l io sue 13 ealsnJr seen pue sues( s t. 404 Je8eueus seeuiend s r ponies *4 sJe4M Venn pecan 043 u1 u0f40 iaR30417U O iseaml *ill •£ mocri sJ*etAeua Bullsiedp io Jogtuew a sl owe el-; mown pue esuetuv W Mweu. 8a uosJed0 io uun lsuooew41 etul eio iu*plseseJa Qom in eueB sl UO3tsldalS -J1ni Alquiessy ma to JeJleedS 844 AO Peluaddy q■uinisi•d) uessid s■ (meta Tu. mtd Pus outp•mmeg ues 8unies 'Sel3u luo udoiseptelap ta!3B2nJ■BJO luawdopntsp sssulsnq a '•0ul 'uomsb, Puelul io moos w 8ulpuno; e el oleo OH 1.1018831.Nuio0 Aemial3tH e1e3S awl 'Josseoep -8.1d 831 pue uo!esAuw00 uolintodsutsui elwomeo essi uo Pewi•g My OH '11*481103; oggnd pue Satsnud seBeuew pue wimp .oclOpnarp wOlwm 'Au13d1.000 BulPlme pue A1leetl pmuoelsumo dti •u pummel 'JW oppAA Sled Jou.ano0 Aq PelulOd Iwsuas■ use) weueri •e wenn% 'JeBauetu AU* iuell !sse etµ se genies a4 amine 'OBolp Liss ;o Aso Sul puts seeseuy sol 10 AtunoO pue A410 cal Jos peJlam sets ogle 831410 -Jly 'Jeeuleue IN!o peuesmesu AUBdu1 8uuoeuHo!hd Jos ruesinsu0o ledlouud JelmoA uses Josly381NdJ0uwwo Aq pewloddy :(•■•IO umg) Juis•odd'4•r dua Mrs Hi9ir'•SPaad Rail Authority O. Box 162771 •swaJ8old eouaug oggnd po uoge oar• pule u6isep ■ out to s*�.Jaais zaao!� Jyy 'uoucuodloo luewdo ne -uatJOoip tee '-our 'dn0i Bw is Poi `J sirs pa Luis B io lu*P!se qua AutsdtJloO tssotl e'! lap 'f"3 io uus Bu!aftleq rue -Mewl OW to 1u0p!se+d eoln s zeuou JW 'Agaves JeHeadS 991 Ag Peluloddy gpieus.mqug) z•lou Ysoa .spocLiM so pJeog sehobuy soi Gus Iwo UOteettuuseo uogauodsueu. reuJOslleo 641 u0 ■ 'Se1B� 0818 uw>StYe -Jyy 'Jedoisemp sense [WSJ v 0osey 011lotsd ewers pue seJosts Aeld IeQ so Jeuped IwDUO• M! ueescis •JW 'uoei! t aced JOwlan05 Aq peu!oddv quote■Ytr airy) umaals •a Auer ■ •uoeBJns Ie718oloJneu peglueo AMC! C! a sl seas %la •msooso4 of seuigoeus pue ABolou -woes leo!eune peousApe Seseel WOK" 'seowSs Iemosou peons ueouswv Jo JON* autnowri p•M0 pue Jepuno; s! mug Jp tieu uJUJo0 ssou eleuss si.wommo au1 Aq petuw0dy goesiou■ai usy) sessa y 1sauJa is ■ -sesilwwo0 pecuheu ■ AWno0 ouselj e41 so Amp sl Ogle aH 'sesudlalua 183131311133 pue s1-10111thiJ8u00 1888Je1 01311eA 184030 OW 30 WO Jew*J YB!ls849 A*Ile/1 JO; Jote4S1U1wpe SSBuisnq 047 & e1.41enaJ0 UW 'uosiNet lased JouJenop Aq peshoddy s(eusehA) ais4* •eiil '•uliewaJp •d wimps ■ 'uoissuuwoo heel peals-40,H Alto-101u! 04110 Jegwew a slam isle aFl '081•100100u1 "00 g suJaelS Je69 is 'Buplueq 1ueW3senu 'veuanetlo anin puit J017e18) a seen Aano!naid 81A •uuy lUewlsenui alenud ■ ts AueCIWOO pue wnequeuuei Jo Jegwew Bu6euew a S1 wnaqusuuei 'JW -uosim elect Jo4JenoD Aq petuioddv quemetry sot) limo •Wnsq 1 '9 1e•4o1W :sae aa•gwew e41 'Algwessy o43 10 Jequede NR Aq wig Pus 'N331wwo0 saint! ytsu•• • a Aq P••gedds ens vouJSA00 otµ Aq paiu!oddr ■ awl{-eJ*gWW eulY 30 gtsasu00 AMJO41ndr 041 ************5-DIGIT 92501 Susan Cornelison Riverside CTA 3550 University Ave Ste 100 Riverside CA 92501-3329 ■ Bulk Rate U.S. Postage PAIO Permit No. 2394 Sacramento. Ca Ya�c i O: - Read Message yMUM jas attachment gf- Next Message - Download From: "Hidalgo, Peter" <HIDALGOP@scrra.net>Add to Address gook To: Subject:BULLET TRAINS' U.S. FUTURE IN DOUBT Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 08:37:17 -0800 METROLINK eNEWS Published Tuesday, January 26, 1999 Associated Press Help Back to Inbox J- Choose Folder - ! BULLET TRAINS' U.S. FUTURE IN DOUBT By GLEN JOHNSON Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP) - Florida had what seemed to be a visionary plan to reduce airport crowding and traffic congestion: Build a 200-mph train that would whisk tourists and the like between Orlando, Tampa and Miami. But the state's new governor, Jeb Bush, killed the project nine days after taking office. The move cast doubt not only on the future of high-speed rail in Florida, but also in the rest of the country. On the same day, the General Accounting Office told Congress that most of the 10 other high-speed corridors under development in the United States "have not determined their funding sources" - a sto listen warning for high speed. P. look and The 10 include the Gulf Coast, the Texas Triangle, Midwest corridors between Chicago, Detroit, St. Louis and Minneapolis, plus similar tracks through California, the Southeast, upstate New York and the Pacific Northwest. The auditors concluded: "These systems may be an effective alternative in corridors where travel is increasing and it is difficult to expand highway and airport capacity. "However, high-speed rail systems are costly, and thus ridership levels may not be high enough in the United States for systems to cover their costs." An exception is in the Northeast Corridor, where Amtrak will begin operating 150-mph trains between Boston, New York and Washington in October. Amtrak expects its high-speed trains to help revive the financially strapped national railroad, as well as provide momentum for the proposed systems. "High-speed rail is not just a metropolitan solution; it is a solution also for my part of the country," John Robert Smith, mayor of Meridian, Miss., and a member of Amtrak's board of directors, said last year. High-speed trains are typically defined as those capable of traveling more than 125 mph. They achieve those speeds either with special tracks and locomotives or through technology allowing trains to tilt into existing curves. Japan, France and Germany, three nations with long rail histories, have taken the lead in developing such systems. When France opened its first TGV line between Paris and Lyon in the late 1980s, the internal French airline, Air Inter, had to cut back on its service because the 180-mph TGV was faster. Last June, when a 175-mph InterCity Express train crashed near Eschede, Germany. killing 101 people, it' was a blow to the national psyche. The trains were viewed as a symbol of German innovation and over their .../wmailLetter.py?Pyt=Tyzn&YY=786&box=Inbox&messag�7826_1557138 10401 725 49171/27/99 000063 — _ rage : o: 10-year history had become an integral part of the country's travel network. The Florida project was to have mirrored such foreign innovation. The late Gov. Lawton Chiles signed a deal in 1996 with Florida Overland eXpress, a private consortium. It planned to run French -designed trains on new tracks that would cross existing obstacles with underpasses and overpasses, instead of traditional grade crossings. The project carried a price tag of up to $8 billion. Bush questioned the projected ridership and whether the routes might lead to unwelcome development around the Everglades. His biggest concern, though, was money. The state had already committed to $28 million to the project. "There are better alternatives for $70 million per year compounded at 9 percent," the newly elected governor said. Anne Chettle, spokeswoman for the Washington -based High Speed Ground Transportation Association, said Bush's decision shows why if high-speed rail is to spread across the United States, it will have to be done in increments. Typically, that means straightening track curves, rebuilding existing stations and buying trains with higher top speeds - exactly what Amtrak is doing in the Northeast Corridor. "That seems to set lawmakers at ease, because it is not the big chunk of money they so often see advertised. It may not be the wisest use of money and actually lead to higher costs, but it seems to be the most palatable," Chettle said. The Transportation Department is encouraging the approach by designating routes as "high-speed rail corridors," making them eligible for special development money. Transportation Secretary Rodney Slater is traveling to the Midwest this week to make such a designation for the line between Chicago and Indianapolis. Amtrak currently makes one run a day between the cities. Despite the GAO's dire assessment, rail advocates believe high-speed trains can flourish in the United States, given the right approach. "What we're trying to do here is not really all or nothing," said Amtrak spokesman John Wolf. "If you use an incremental approach and build on existing rights of way in partnership with states and private businesses and freight railroads, we believe it will work." Copyright 1999 Associated Press. All rights reserved. MNMessage - Download 1as attachmeoc d - Next Copyright ®1997-99 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved. I- Choose Folder - Back to Inbox 0IDU664 •../wmailLetter.py?Pyt=Tym&YY=78b&box=inbox&meS5agt7826 1557138_10401_725 4917 1/27/99 rase , o: - Read Message 1111.11111 Message - Download `as attachment if- Next From: "Hidalgo, Peter" <H1DALGOP@scrra.net>Add to Address Book To: Subject: STATUS OF HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECTS Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 08:42:28 -0800 METROLINK eNEWS Published Monday, January 25, 1999 Associated Press Helm Back to Inbox Choose Folder - STATUS OF HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECTS By The Associated Press A look at 10 high-speed rail corridors in various stages of discussion, planning or construction in the United States: CALIFORNIA: The corridor covers 676 miles and links Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles and San Diego. Cost estimates range from $21 billion for standard high speed to $29 billion for magnetic levitation trains. The California Intercity High -Speed Rail Commission is studying the proposal and trying to obtain financing: A statewide vote is expected by 2000. CHICAGO-DETROIT: The corridor covers 279 miles and links Ann Arbor, Mich., and Kalamazoo, Mich., with Detroit and Chicago. The estimated cost is $800 million for an incremental approach to rebuilding stations and improving signals along the line. Amtrak and the Michigan Department of Transportation hope to begin service on part of the corridor this year and along the full route by 2006. CHICAGO-MILWAUKEE-MINNEAPOLIS: The corridor covers 418 miles and links Chicago, Milwaukee and Minneapolis, and possibly Madison, Wisc., and Wisconsin Dells. Incremental improvements are planned. The estimated cost for the stretch between Chicago and Milwaukee is $471 million. There is no firm price tag for the overall project. Wisconsin is working with a nine -state coalition to find funding. CHICAGO-ST. LOUIS: The corridor covers 282 miles and links Springfield and Bloomington -Normal, Ill., to Chicago and St. Louis. The estimated cost is $350 million. Engineers are working on incremental improvements, including developing a net to prevent accidents at railroad crossings and a new system to control trains. Once completed, Illinois would seek a private -sector partner. The states hope to begin service in 2003. GULF COAST: The corridor covers 719 miles from Houston through New Orleans to Birmingham, Ala. Incremental improvements are planned, but currently there is no estimated cost. A ridership and feasibility study is underway. Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama are working together to obtain funding. NORTHEAST: The corridor runs 457 miles between Boston, New York and Washington. There has been a $4 billion improvement project underway, electrifying the track between New Haven, Conn., and Boston, and buying 20 new trains capable of traveling at 150 mph. The improvements are scheduled to debut 01)0065 /wmailLetter.py?PyrTym&yy_25981&boxu.Inbox&messages8138_1562782 10590 724 391/27/99 rakze _ oz _ in October. PACIFIC -NORTHWEST: The corridor covers 466 miles and links Portland and Seattle with Eugene, Ore., and Vancouver, B.C. The estimated cost is $1.865 billion. The project would entail a series of incremental improvements to push train speeds up to 125 mph. No timetable yet for starting the service. SOUTHEAST: The corridor covers 390 miles between Washington and Charlotte, N.C. The work would involve a series of incremental changes such as straightening curves to push existing rail speeds up to 110 mph. There is no cost estimate, although Virginia said it would cost $350 million to add a second track to the corridor. There is no starting date for' the 110 mph service. TEXAS TRIANGLE: The corridor runs in a 436-mile triangle between Dallas, Houston and San Antonio. The estimated cost is $4 billion. In 1989, the state awarded a franchise to build the line, but the franchise was terminated in 1994. While the project is now dormant, the state Transportation Department has been talking with private investors and rail companies about making incremental improvements along the corridor. UPSTATE NEW YORK: The corridor covers 431 miles and links Rochester, Syracuse and Albany, N.Y., with New York and Buffalo. The estimated cost is $315 million, much of which is for improving the condition and technology of the existing rail lines. The work should be completed by 2004. SOURCE: General Accounting Office Copyright 1999 Associated Press. All rights reserved. 111. Message - Download as auachm�t - Next Copyright ®1997-99 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved. fChoose Folder - Back to lnbox 000066 "'/vvmailLetter•py?Pyt=Tym&YY=25981&box=lnbox&message-8138_1562782 10590 724_39 1/27/99 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: February 10, 1999 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: SUBJECT: Budget and Implementation Committee Dean Martin, Chief Financial Officer Formation of Audit Subcommittee Background: The most important responsibility that public officials carry is the stewardship of public funds. For that reason, strong internal controls should be a vital objective of government managers and public officials. Annual audits by an independent firm are a critical element of internal controls. Public officials should have a keen interest in wanting to ensure that appropriate controls exist and are followed. The annual audit provides an independent and objective evaluation of financial results , internal controls, and policies and procedures. Commissioners then have a fair, objective, and reliable assessment of the agency's performance. Increasingly, as one of the internal control measures, jurisdictions are creating audit committees composed of policy makers. The audit committee serves two functions: 1 y to advise the governing board on matters pertaining to agency audits; and, 2} to advise on issues involving the internal control structure. Staff is recommending that an Audit Subcommittee be established for the Commission. The Audit Subcommittee would meet twice a year and as needed. The first meeting would be to discuss with the auditors the annual scope and other audit areas of concern. The second meeting would be to receive the results of the annual audit, including auditor required communications, management letter comments, and the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report with the auditor's analysis of those results. Additionally, the result of the audits of funding recipients would also be considered. Other meetings could be held if requested by the auditors, staff, or the Subcommittee itself. Once every five years the Subcommittee would also be charged with selecting the Commission's independent auditors. While the Audit Subcommittee would undoubtably include some members with a financial background (e.g., CPA's, bankers, financial planners), membership should not be limited to financial types. Others with varied expertise(e.g., attorneys) would broaden the skill level and usefulness of the committee. The Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada(GFOA) recommends in their publication, U00067 "Audit Management Guidebook", that in "selecting members to serve on an audit committee, governing bodies should seek not just accounting and auditing skills, but whatever other skills appear needed in the government's particular situation". The GFOA also recommends that audit committees should be limited in size. It should be large enough to accommodate a good range of expertise to enhance its role as advisors to the full Board, but small enough to be able to operate efficiently and effectively. Evidently, a number of governments have found five members to be a number that will accomplish those two goals. An audit committee could either be established as a subcommittee of the Budget and Implementation Committee, or a standing committee of the Commission. The Budget and Implementation Committee chose to have the audit committee serve as a subcommittee. Commissioner Jim Venable, Chair of the Budget and Implementation Committee then appointed Commissioners John Hunt (also appointed Subcommittee Chair), John Tavaligone, Alex Clifford, Jim Smedley, a d G egory Audit Pettis to the Audit Subcommittee. i Project Cost Financial Assessment Source of Funds Included in Fiscal Year Budget Included in Program Budget Approved Allocation Budget Adjustment Required Financial Impact Not Applicable X :•: Year Programmed Year of Allocation Year BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file. OU036$ RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: February 10, 1999 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Dean Martin, Chief Financial Officer Claudia Chase, Property Agent THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Friends of Jefferson House Contract In September 1993, the Riverside County Transportation Commission and the Friends of Jefferson House entered into an agreement for maintenance services at the Riverside Downtown Station and the Pedley Station. In October 1995, this agreement was amended to include the La Sierra Station, the West Corona Station and the additional parking lot at the Riverside Downtown Station. In January 1999, with the completion of the expansion at the Riverside Downtown Station, which includes two elevators, two stair cases, a pedestrian bridge, a second platform, a restroom facility and a security building, Friends of Jefferson has requested an additional $1,056.00 for their services. Due to a mandated increase in minimum wage, Friends of Jefferson House is also requesting an increase in their current agreement. The proposed amendment will add an additional $945.00 to the current contract. Friends of Jefferson House has provided the personnel, supervision, supplies and equipment necessary to assure the rail stations are always clean and safe. Friends of Jefferson House has always demonstrated a genuine interest in the quality of their performance, as well as an ability to be prompt to respond to emergencies that have occurred at the stations. Therefore, with the expansion at the Riverside Downtown Station and the increase to the current contract, the proposed adjustment will be from $4,155.00 per month to $6,156.00 per month for maintenance services. The total contract value will be $61,899.00 thru June 30,1999. 000069 Financial Assessment Project Cost 12,006. Source of Funds Included in Fiscal Year Budget Local Transportation Funds (rail operations) N Year Included in Program Budget N/A Year Programmed N/A Approved Allocation N/A Year of Allocation N/A Budget Adjustment Required Y Financial Impact Not Applicable BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission approve the requested increase to the Friends of Jefferson House maintenance contract. 000070 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: February 10, 1999 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Dean Martin, Chief Financial Officer SUBJECT: Selection of Investment Advisor Background: An Ad Hoc Committee met the morning of January 25th to review the shortlisted investment advisory RFP's and interview the four firms that were selected. The four short listed firms were: • Chandler • Financial Services Associates(FSAJ • Public Financial Management(PFM) • Voyageur Management Although all four firms were imminently qualified and provided excellent oral presentations, the Ad Hoc Committee recommended to the Budget and Implementation Committee that the Commission select Public Financial Management(PFM) as the investment advisor for RCTC. Budget and Implementation Committee and Staff Recommendation: That the Commission select Public Financial Management (PFM) as the investment Advisors for RCTC. Financial Assessment Project Cost not to exceed $50,000 Source of funds '. Administration }'� ,.. �• :., �r.:,.r.:d,d� :,.a •', v p :,y.',Y\ vg1:.:i::4f'�-*..O{`.)i•. k....''h C OL''. : �'' ...: • ,•:?;a3:,., �,. , y � 4�:,�. o�..:�fl.<:.ti:•.drr.�:�:R,$a..,,.;:5�..,.;.,•�e:,,r:;;•;:...,t�..,,,..$.,:{-:: '''.0 .} ?x �s:2� � : �-.,}: N :.'S4"{i. ::i'l�G i...'k,.., ,t• ..,,.,,::.`6..-, •ub: 4'"{: ":•{. '?r.,,,,,..�.�y.:.u.,:.' •••, .• ;..::: f, �'^+Fn', .v iti >?:F i *..O' L...;: 4' 'y > . y.:z ¢; .., : �:i;;�a. �r !`-"•!:3:�Z:•,8.'.�:.''s.E'� . C'2,r�s>h°,.'?.'7;,..'E'xi,':.. o� A$o�.. ktu.«: '. a:� �,,a:o:,:.�sr��i.-0A'. s • . ',,'�4, d; ,^n Year ;�' Included in Fiscal Year Budget Included in Program Budget Year Programmed Approved Allocation Year of Allocation Budget Adjustment Required Y Financial impact Not Applicable 0 u 0 0 i1 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: February 10, 1999 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Dean Martin, Chief Financial Officer SUBJECT: Investment Report for Quarter Ending December 31, 1998 Attached are the quarterly investment and cash flow reports as required by state law and Commission policy. The County's Investment Report for the month ending December 31, 1998 is also attached for your review. BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file. UUUui2 Riversidi ity Transportation Commission Investment Portfolio Report Period Ending December 31, 1998 Cash with County Treasurer Bank of America Operating Pooled Bond Project Funds Reserved Funds Held Funds Funds Funds For Debt in Trust Operating Account $9,361,795.41 Imprest Account $8,682 67 Special Events Account $2,854.37 Total Bank of America Operating $9,373,332.45 Total S26,511,748.55 $9,726,703.26 $36,238,449.81 $9,373,332.45 Milestone Funds $0.00 $8,214,662.16 $8,214,662.16 First American Treasury $5,160,696.17 $14,608,094.16 $4,416,285.16 $24,185,075.49 U.S. Treasury Notes $2,924,000.00 $2,924,000.00 MBIA Investment Agreement S13.002,612.00 $13,002,612.00 Financial Investors Trust(F11) 59,017,439.43 $9,017,439,43 Union Bank: Fed Nat'l Mtge Assoc $i 987 500 00 Fed Home Ln Banks 51,997,500.00 $2,480,000.00 52,480,000.00 Highmark Money Market (US Treasury Ob Fund) $339,210.79 Fed Natl Mtg Assn Medium Term 5339,210.79 $1,904,531.26 tom. $9,373,332.45 $40,345,896.77 $5,160,696.17 $38,749,368.32 614,142,988.42 $107,772,282.13 �j W G • Cash with County Treasurer: A copy of the Investment Portfolio Report for the County of Riverside Treasury prepared by Wayne Watts, County Treasurer is attached for review. (Note: Local transportation funds represent the funds held in trust). The County's annualized investment return for the quarter was 5.33%. Bank of America Day to day operating funds of the Commission are held in an interest bearing demand deposit account with Bank of America. Funds are wire transferred from the County as needed, but no less than monthly. First American Treasury Money market account provided by US Bank used to hold funds in transition between the Commission's various bond funds and to accumulate monies for the payment of semi-annual and annual debt service. Interest earnings averaged approximately 4.3233 /o for the quarter. Financial Investors Trust U.S. Treasury Money market Fund Triple AAA rated(by Standard & Poors and Moody's) money market fund provided by Financial Guarantee Insurance Corporation. The fund invests in short term U.S. guaranteed obligations. The rate of interest on the fund varies daily, but the effective 7-day yield for week ending December 31, 1998 was 4.60%. Milestone Treasury Obligation Fund Money market account provided by Milestone Capital which invests in treasury obligations. The fund is rated AAA by both Moody's and Standard & Poors, and is reviewed weekly by both rating agencies. Rate of return for week ending December 31, 1998 was 4.86%. MBIA Investment Agreement: The Commission's debt reserve funds for the 1993 Series A Sales Tax Revenue Bonds are held by MBIA, a AAA rated(by both Standard & Poors and Moodys) bond insurance company. The investment agreement earns 6.87% and matures January 1, 2000, and pays an interest rate of 6.87%. Collateralization and downgrade provisions are consistent with AMBAC. Union Bank: Provides custodial services for the Commission by holding in safekeeping the following securities: U.S. Govt. Agency Obligations (Federal National Mortgage Association Note: Purchased December 8, 1997 priced to yield 5.97%. Note matures December 7, 1999. Federal Home Loan Bank Note: Purchased September 16,1997 and priced to yield 6.01%. Note matures September 16, 1999 Federal Nati Mtg Assn Medium Term: Purchased March 9, 1998 and priced to yield 5.95%. Note matures March 9, 2001. Highmark Money Market US Treasury Obligations Fund: Money market fund held by Union Bank, securities custodian. Fund yielded 4.28% for week ended December 31, 1998. Statement of Compliance All of the above i vestments and any investment decisions made for the quarter ending December 31, 1998 were in full compliance with the Commission's inve t policy as adopted on November 12, 1998. Signed by Chief Financial Officer COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE Treasurer's Pooled Investment Fund California Government Code & Treasurer's Investment Policy Compliance Analysis and Investment Report December 31, 1998 PAUL McDONNELL TREASURER/TAX COLLECTOR KENNETH C. KIRIN INVESTMENT OFFICER (909) 955 - 3967 Month -End Book Value Month -End Market Value* Paper Gain or (Loss) Percent of Paper Gain or Loss Yield Based Upon Book Value Weighted Average Maturity (Days) • Market value dots not include accrued interest. JULY 1,242,110,962 1,241,395,403 4715,559 -0.06% 5.49% 279 PORTFOLIO STATISTICS AUGUST 1,281,105,883 1,281,479,382 S373,498 0.03% 5.49% 234 SEPTEMBER 1,298,283,895 1,300,031,416 S1,747,521 0.13% 5.51 % 236 OCTOBER 1,227,364,535 1,228,618,106 S1,253,571 0.10% 5.38% 257 NOVEMBER 1,244,582.397 1,244.946,663 S364.266 0.03% 5.29% 291 DECEMBER 1,732,997,164 1,731780.486 4216.678 -0.01 % 5.32% 230 ' THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY POOLED ]INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO IS RATED AA.A/MR1 BY MOODY'S INVESTOR SERVICE AND AA.A/V-1+ BY FITCH INVESTOR SERVICES - ti r y I � i RCTC 3560 UNIVERSITY AVENUE SUITE 100 RIVERSIDE, CA. 92501 U00076 fititO 1171„11 ,111161111 11t►I11„111=:i111r1► 11114111111l1„l COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE Pooled Investment Fund — Portfolio Characteristics MaM rity Assets Days or Less 1,090,141,883.60 30 - 90 Days 154,976,922.61 90 Days - 1 Year 52,069,220.00 1 - 2 Years 135,057,000.00 2 - 3 Years 300,535,460.00 Over 3 Years Total: $1,732,780,486.21 uality U.S. Treasury Federal Agency AAA A-1 and/or P-I AA A N/R Total: Assets 70,006,200.00 1,003,906,791.76 141,000,000.00 • 507,867,494.45 10,000,000.00 " $1,732,780,486.21 Sector Assets U.S. Treasury 70,006,200.00 Federal Agency 1,003,906,791.76 Cash Equiv. & MMF's 141,000,000.00 Commercial Paper 449,816,436.68 :dim Term Notes .,ankers Acceptances 58,051,057.77 Certificates of Deposit 10,000,000.00 Local Agency Bonds Total: $1,732,780,486.21 •Includes Repos •• Collateralized Time Deppae Sector Commensal Paper 25.98% Cash Equiv. & MMFs 8.14% Bankers Certificates of Acceptances Deposit U.S. Treasury 3.35°% : °% 4.04% Federal Agency 57.94% RIVERSIDE PORTFOLIO SIMULATION Interest Rate Stress Analysis Interest rate stress analysis is used to show the effect on market value, given a dramatic change in interest rates. The table to the right shows the change in market value for both an instantaneous change in rates (takes place in one day) and a change in rates that takes place over six months. interest rates are assumed to move up or down 300 basis points (bp) in 50 by increments. Next to the change in market value is the gaiMoss column for each scenario. The gain or loss is calculated by subtracting acquisition cost from market value. There are other factors, but the major difference in the two scenarios is interest eamed. If the change takes place over six months there is an additional six months interest income, plus interest on cash flows assumed to be reinvested at 5.29%. In addition, the portfolio would be ^ix months shorter. Yield Acquisition Change Cost ONO $1,732,997 -300 $1,732,997 -250 $1,732,997 -200 $1,732,997 -150 $1,732,997 -100 $1,732,997 40 $1,732,8517 0 $1,732,997 50 $1,732,997 100 $1,732,997 150 $1,732,997 200 $1,732,997 250 $1,732,997 300 Interest Rate Changes Take Place: Instantaneous Over Six Months Market Value Gain/Loss Market Value Gain/Loss $1,742,433 $9,436 $1,757,108 $24,109 $1,740,904 $7,907 $1,758,654 $25,657 $1,739,374 $6,377 $1,760,187 $27,190 $1,737,845 $4,848 $1,761,711 $28,714 $1,736,332 $3,335 $1,763,289 $30,292 $1,734,761 $1,764 $1,764,795 $31,798 $1,732,780 4217 $1,788,125 533,128 $1,729,977 -$3,020 $1,766,041 $33,044 $1,726,442 -$8,555 $1,765,258 $32,261 $1,722,319 -$10,678 $1,764,241 $31,244 $1,717,938 415,059 $1,782,901 $29,904 $1,713,586 -$19,411 $1,761,857 $28,680 $1,709,281 423,718 $1,760,448 $27,451 This analysis demonstrates that sharp moves of interest razes either up or down by 3% will not have a significant effect on this portfolio. 000377 840000 S JOSIA p V a u a w 1 s a n u l p a 1 a I s l S a 1l of NON - oospuedd ues - seieBuy sod OL I6-6ZZ (0I0 'DM •S110§1AQV MIMES aAlfl3 -mg •saaualos maulaSsugyl PIII&D Pug asggasaa u laquryq Slagwoolg Sulpnlaul saalnos lgapCptuo pug Sulaud snodaumu uodn papal angq a>n `podw stap;o uogorodald atp u! tuaSlllp uaaq angy am Onolpld logod anuoudsw wow slap galm auuggdwoa w sum pun3 mouusanuI palood s,At.unop alp pua apuow sitp;o sd •sioslnladns 3o preog Ammo aq1 pug aantunuoD 104 N) waupsanul sAiunoO alp oa pawasaad pare Minium paaay a.E sl /Canal spa •apoO luau ILIOAO J opus:glop aq1 ugap 1uaSuws wow st Aoilod wauusanul l0 luau:mins mammary Munro aqy ADI1Od SatiamasvaliL CINV Are'I ai v is RUAA aDAINTIMAIOD 000'000'005$I0 sisswo amw AVM WOO sum pm 1au■mdm swan 5 asgl sot roa gum /006pV 7maanwul us sway 1mw /O • (!I 'uW 06 Summon >ou /OM= alanas pwg8uw, n pp otham ag Am •Uiumw Mond MURK , 16'11 se Amu= of sdep Alums laded paanmwo3 %Am, 1 E polar wa nap Nlaaw alanwa poayl am /11WPJ! %OE , %00'001 pup Ieacwuna auo Am ypm palsawm al Saw riwlao CIO JO VAE unp aww ON . %00 0 X811 XO SNV3A E 161I1 ON V!N SONfld 1N3NCLS3MII AON30V TdO01 (Sri) 6Z491 %00 0 V!N V/N 1Pi ISS1-V s IDIGD3S•VV %OZ SINSA S AZII1f103S HOGOLIIII -SSW MVOZZTOW 04109E5 %85 0 111w °%Z. N63A I min oN Mak S (SI.ISOd30 3INVE0 SIIS0d30 03NflO3S 1011109g %6Z0 VVV 1003051S/%51 31tl103PEPG ,erd/VVV %0Z ,SAVG 06 SOW13 T/CLL11W (1/109E5 %00'0 21V/V1i ww5LS! XL savaa z V YAE sW3A s S3-LON W1131 03W (0109Es too 0 V/N xsw %01 SAVO Z6 %OZ SAVO Z6 S03321 3PIELA311 (11109E5 %S8 L V/N xow %0I SAVO L 1116111 ON 11V3A 1 SOd3il (9109ES %000 IV/+V mu%0 111/3A1 %OE relV3A5 S11SOd30 aWLL o alvoid1L113O tg1109E5 %%sz Id/1V %SI 6110%51 SAVO IE/06 id/IV -40£la%SI SAVO 081 133dVd'WINOJ f81109E5 %5E'£ 1d/1V %OE SAVQ 081 ,%0o SAVO OLZ 30NVHOX3 10 SI11g W109E5 %46'LS V!N %SC soV3AE 16,117 ON SiiVH,l5 MON30V'IVN303d Ia1109E5 %00 0 fiH 66vailV pemllm painquoO Limn ON S AM 5 1830 AON30V 9VO01 VINN0ST7VO (0109E5 Xv0-P V/N 1010058PAS8 S IV3A E IIPTI ON SIN3A s ANf1SV3111 S'fl 00109E5 %00'0 ztlro unuOSIS/%Sl SNV3AG _ MASI ON SNVSAS SONOS AOV W301 Ia)109E5 ,,, ogaywd 3Kr REM N12081y 3,w0003.1/dNS 1131i'1 7413111FI 3P3r5 aprsnwly 7:111183Zl %. V mom MIES aA T.:01mmtl UM NI At,l.,rJ faimraJz➢1 IMO IeJ 11013V ^a!iod monsasul Apwo'3morrommooD SIN1314LIS3Ata uezeoelav xonod LtalVIS3ANII A.LNIIOJ w 3OOJ.IJd3L1iARI3A00 VIN1103I1VO 33NVIldINO3 County of Riverside PROJECTION OF FUTURE CASH FLOW The Pooled Investment Fund cash flow requirements are based upon a 12 month historical cash flow model. The Treasurer states that based upon projected cash receipts and maturing investments there are sufficient funds to meet future cash flow disbursement requirements over the next 12 months. MONTH MONTHLY MONTHLY REQUIRED ACTUAL INV. AVAIL. TO RECEIPTS DISBMNTS DIFFERENCE MAT. INVEST BALANCE MATURITIES INVEST >I Y L 1/01 83.1 01/99 278.9 661.8 (382.9) 299.8 1.110.1 02/99 337.1 296.1 41.0 41.0 94.0 03/99 378.3 349.1 29.2 70.2 40.9 04/99 628.3 382.6 245.7 315.9 22.0 05/99 259.1 657.2 (398.1) 82.2 - 06/99 299.9 436.6 (136.7) 136.7 10.0 07/99 246.2 322.3 (76.1) 76.1 10.0 08/99 356.7 311.5 45.2 - 45.2 9/99 284.6 298.4 (13.8) - 31.4 10/99 324.5 361.7 (37.2) 5.8 - 10.0 11/99 337.5 336.2 1.3 1.3 12/99 693.0 388.3 304.7 306.0 Totals: 4,424.1 4,801.8 (377.7) 600.6 1.297.0 1,131.4 34.68% 74.88% 65.32% Gross Yield Trends .: yield history represents gross yields; administrative costs have not been deducted. Actual earnings on your fund balance will be credited by the Auditor -Controller based upon County Treasurer calculations. Portfolio yield always lags current trends in short-term interest rates. Yields fluctuate with changing markets and past performance is not an indication of future results. PORTFOLIO 90 DAY MONTH YIELD T-BILL Jan-98 5.52 5.16 Feb-98 5.49 5.20 Mar-98 5.50 5.14 Apr-98 5.47 5.06 May-98 5.49 5.11 Jun-98 5.50 5.10 Jul-98 5.49 5.07 Aug-98 5.49 5.02 Sep-98 5.51 4.72 Oct-98 5.38 4.01 Nov-98 5.29 4.50 Dec-98 5.32 4.49 6.50 6.00 5.50 Gross Yield Trends ■ 5.00 4.50 4.00 3.50 - JarF66 FeDi! Wr{! Apf.W Mer66 Jun46 Jul-6e Swell Od-i! 074.66 [NM'S PORTFOLIO YIELD El DAY T-BILL 000079 2ae..s9 12:08 PM 000060 Projected Statement of Cash Flows Jan. 1999 thru Jun. 1999 ]AN FEB MAR APR BEGINNING CASH BALANCE 350,330,085 MAv �� 548,393,656 $48,097,121 546,392,098 543,959,279 542,992,850 CASH RECEIPTS: Saks Tax Revenue Interest Income Other Revenue Total Cash Receipts TOTAL AVAILABLE CASH CASH DISBURSEMENTS: 54,850,800 S6,467,700 $6,600,000 $4,500,000 56,000,000 68'� 68,600 511,100 68600 S6511,,100 ��� 511,100 1,178,545 2,082,372 102,000 $6,097,945 906,250 1,126,250 2,695,250 58,618,672 $7,213,100 $5,474,850 57,194,850 $9,606,350 S56,428,030 $57,012,328 $55,310.221 851,866,948 S51,154,129 $32,599,200 Other Expenditures0ndudes G h A) 365,000 365,000 365,000 Highway Projects 1,249,1100 1,574,000 1,507,000 365,000 365,000 365,000 FSPA SAFE 149,000 1,058,000 757,000 722,000 120,00D 120,000 120,000 Rah Projects 208 000 120,000 120,000 319,000 347,000 402,000 Special Transportation Projects 168,000 15,000 5648,000 Streets & Roads 1,793,535 6,000 1�'� 15,000 5.000 8,000 2,391,367 2,440,284 1,663,830 Transit Projects 147,000 147,000 2,218,440 2,386,336 }47,000 147,000 147,000 Regional Arterial (CV) 1,161,400 1,161,400 1,161,400 1,161,400 181,400 Commuter Assistance Projects 130,000 1,130,000 1,/30,900 130,000 130,000 130,000 Property Management $8,000 $8,000 S8,000 SB 000 18.000 130, 000 f8 000 TOTAL CASH DISBURSEMENTS $5,349,935 S6,230,767 $6,233,684 $5,223,230 S5,476,840 S5,675,736 NET CASH AVAILABLE $51,076,095 $50,781,561 $49,076,537 $46,643,718 S43,677,289 $46,923,464 Line Advences Sp SO Bond Proceeds S0 SO TO SO SO $0 SO SO Interest Expense $0 SO a SO $O Debt Rep ayment yment (S2684.4391 (S2.684.4391 (S2684.4391 (S2664.439) (S2684.4391 f0 TO NET CASH FROM FINANCBVG ($2,684,439) ($2,684,439) (82,684,439) (S2,684,439 (S2,604,439) (T2,684,439 ENDING CASH BALANCE $48,393,656 $48,097,121 S46,392,098 $43,959,279 $42,992,850 S44,239 025 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: February 10, 1999 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee - William Hughes, Measure A Project Manager Louis Martin, Project Controls Manager SUBJECT: Monthly Cost and Schedule Reports The attached material depicts the current costs and schedule status of contracts reported by routes, commitments, and cooperative agreements executed by the Commission. For each contract and agreement, the report lists the authorized value approved by the Commission, percentage of contract amount expended to date, and the project expenditures by route with status for the month ending December 31, 1998. Detailed supporting material for all schedules, contracts and cooperative agreements is available from Bechtel staff. BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission receive and file. Attachments OU081 RCTC MEASURE "A" HIGHWAYIR...._ PROJECTS BUDGET REPORT BY ROUTE COMMISSION CONTRACTURAL PROJECT AUTHORIZED COMMITMENTS DESCRIPTION ALLOCATION _ TO DATE ROUTE 80 PROJECTS Park 're Rkle Lot Final Design (R09738) $39,697 $39,697 Park'n' Ride Lot Construction (R09928) $325,000 $304,513 SUBTOTAL ROUTE BD $384,887 $344,210 ROUTE 79 PROJECTS Engineering/Erwiron./RO W (R09111,9301,9302, 9303,9337,9735, 9329,9737) Project Is Complete. Performing project close- out tasks and consultant performing on -going environmental Inspections. SUBTOTAL ROUTE 78 ROUTE 111PROJECTS (R09219, 9227,9234,9523,9525,9530,9537,9538) 91335,9743,9849-9851,9857 OuRTOTAL ROUTE 111 ROUTE 91 PROJECTS Soundest!' design and construction (R09101, 9337,9827,9847,9933) Van Buren Bivd. Frwy Hook Ramp (R09535) SUBTOTAL ROUTE 91 1-215 PROJECTS Preliminary EngrWEnviron. (R09008, 9018) SUBTOTAL I-216 39,698,360 $9,698,360 38,888,3011. $9,616,360 % COMMITTED EXPENDITURE FOR % EXPENDITURES AGAINST AUTH. MONTH ENDED EXPENDITURES TO -DATE AGAINST ALLOCATION December 31, 1998 TO DATE CONTITMNTS TO DATE 100.0% 93.7% 94.4% 100.0% $15,933,909 $15,933,909 100.0% i.16,939,909 VIS,9y3,900 10809i $3,429,888 $3,331,802 97.1% 92,300,000 $2,300,000 100.096 P 36,728,988 36,631,102 98.3% $8,728,504 $5,878,173 87.4% $8,726,604 $5,878,131 87.4% Page 1 of 3 $700 > 8G $39,560 339,460 $9,639,848 =8,819,848 $8,816,804 38,010,804 $1,988,798 $1,229,442 $3,211,240 $5,697,757 $6,897,767 99.7% 11.6% 99.4% 98.4% 54.1 % 04:1% 59.7% 53.5% 67.1% 98.9% G RCTC MEASURE "A" HIGHWAY PROJECTS BUDGET REPORT BY ROUTE O COMMISSION Q AUTHORIZED ALLOCATION 00 W PROJECT DESCRIPTION INTERCHANGE IMPROV. PROGRAM Yuma IC Final Design (PS&E) (R09428) Yuma IC Landscaping (R09926) SUBTOTAL INTERCHANGE PROJECT & CONSTR. MGMT SERV. (R09800, 9900) SUBTOTAL BECHTEL PROGRAM PLAN & SERVICES Special Study (ITS Plan - R09727) SUBTOTAL PRooNAM PLAN A SVCS. PARK-N-tIDEANCENT. PROGRAM (R0 9740-9742) 9859 (9901-9915) (9813) SUBTOTAL PARK-N.RIDE COMMUTER RAIL Sludiea/Englneering (RO 9420,9731,9832,9833,9844,9854) Station/Site Acq/OP Costs/Maint. Costs (RO 0000, 9920, 9838, 9843,9845) SUBTOTAL cOMMUTER RAIL TOTALS s CONTRACTURAL %COMMITTED EXPENDITURE FOR COMMITMENTS AGAINST AUTH. MONT H ENDED TO DATE ALLOCATION December 31,199E $1,364,508 $1,364,508 $350,000 E304,0o0 $1,714,soe s1,e66,sin $1,800,000 51,458,588 4000,00e s1,468,6de $450,000 $450,000 s480,o0e $450,ow 100.0% 88.996 97.31E 91.0% 100.016 100.9% $3,075,200 $3,075,200 100.0% 03,076,200 $3,075,200 100.0% $1,548,860 $1,546,860 100.0% $9,207,502 o,764,9d2 $50,045,408 $8,226,000 $8,772,660 $5007,090 Page 2 of 3 89.3% 9o.i% 99.2% $0 $0 ao $117,152 0117.162 80 $117,662 % EXPENDITURES EXPENDITURES TO -DATE AGAINST TO DATE COMMTMNTS TO DATE $1,362,954 $1,382,004 $413,396 $413,390 $347,499 ss47,499 $2,293,685 $2,293,606 $1,440,788 $5,978,041 87,418,s47 S39,045468 99.9% 0.0% 81.7% 28.4% 28.4% 77.2% 77.2% 74.6% 74.0% 93.1 % 72.7% 70.011 t2.1,% RCTC MEASURE "A" HIGHWAY/LOCAL STREETS 8 ROADS PROJECTS BUDGET REPORT BY PROJECT PROJECT DESCRIPTION CITY OF CANYON LAKE Railroad Canyon Rd Improvements (R09422) SUBTOTAL CANYON LAKE LOAN CITY OF CORONA Smith, Maple 8, Lincoln Interchanges 8 Storm drainage structure SUBTOTAL CITY of CoBONA CITY OF PERRIS Local sheets 8 road Improvements CITY OF SAN JACINTO Local streets d road Improvements CITY OF TEMECULA Local streets 8 road Improvements (1) CITY OF NORCO Yuma VC 8 Local streets and road Imprints TOTALS EXPENDITURE FOR APPROVED MONTH ENDED COMMITMENT December 31, 1998 TOTAL MEASURE "A" ADVANCES OUTSTANDING LOAN BALANCE S1,600,000 S1,6o0,8D0 $5,212,623 $6,212,023 St,936,419 $1,324,500 $5,094,027 $2,139,067 317,306,636 NOTE: (1) Loan against interchange improvement programs. All values are for total Project/Contract and not related to fiscal year budgets. SO $1,600,0o0 $1,6Y0,0e0 $5,212,623 Sli;212,A23 $1,936,419 $1,324,500 $5,094,027 $2,139,067 S11,3°6.030 $1,366,227 f1;366,221 $4,177,023 $1,749,486 $1,196,625 S4,602,220 $1,932,549 $16,0240-to OUTSTANDING CCIMaTMENT % LOAN BALANCE TO -DATE AGAINST APPROVED COMMIT. Page 3 of 3 85.4% 86.0 80.1 % 80.1% 90.3% 90.3% 90.3% 90,3% Status a of 12/21,08 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: February 10, 1999 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee - Dean Martin, Chief Financial Officer THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Progress Report on Internal Operations Review Commission staff performed a review of internal operations in a number of functional areas of the Commission. The results of that review were communicated to the Commission at the November 1998 meeting. Staff agreed to provide the Commission with regular status reports on the progress for those items noted as needing additional attention. The first report was due back in 90 days. Attached is a matrix that documents the principal problem items, required action step(s), expected deliverable, and comments on progress to date. BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file. UUUU85 Riverside County TI tortation Commission Internal Operations Review Progress Report -January 1999 POLICIES AND PROCEDURES PI Complete up-to-date policies and procedures manual Update and revise RCTC general policies and procedures P2 I Current Program and Funding Guide Update and revise RCTC program and funding policies PMl PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT Revised policies and procedures by June 30, /mental committee of staff with auditor 1999 assistance has been appointed by Executive Director Revised Program & Funding Guide by April Deputy Executive Director will lead effort 30, 1999 assisted by selected program staff More comprehensive Personnel Polices and Procedures manual Design and adopt new personnel el policies and procedures PM2 No formal managemari or staff training Program Develop a more structured approach to management and stafftraining RCTC Personnel Polices and Procedures Full report to the Commission including hours of training, subject areas and positions covered. PM3 Classification study has not been performed for the RCTC. Retain consultant to perform a classification study (authorized by the Commission in June 1998) Position Classification Study Adopted by Carrmrission 12/9/98. Effort led by newly created position of Director of Regional Issues and Communications and Director of Administrative Services To be initiated prior to March 1, 1999. FINANCE/TREASURY FUNCTIONS FI Passive investment strategy Issue RFP for investment Advisor Appointment of Investment Advisor F2 RCTC does not have a formal Audit Committee Establishment ofan Audit Committee F3 Fixed asset accountability reeds to be strengthened a) Compete inventory of fixed assets b) Establish capitalization threshold of S1,000 Audit Committee consisting of three to five members. May require revision to By -Laws Complete and thorough Fixed Asset Listing Capitalization policy of$1,000 CONTRACTING FUNCTION Scheduled for the February 10, 1999 Commission meeting Scheduled for the February 10, 1999 Commission meeting. Process underway to inventory all computers and existing list for other items being reviewed and revised. Capitalization policy change will come forward to the March commission meeting. CI RCTC does not have formal procurement policy or procedures Memorialize existing policies for contract procurement and design new policies for general procurement function. Procurement Polices and PrcaodurCS Manual UU0086 Chief Financial Officer assigned responsibility to complete by June 30, 1999. No feedback between evaluations to assist in individual goal achievement C' L� cr Feat session actually held January 20, 1999. Quarterly financial reports being Provided to all department heads. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: February 10, 1999 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: , Budget and Implementation Committee Dean Martin, Chief Financial Officer SUBJECT: Local Transportation Fund (LTF) Projection The Local Transportation fund consists of revenues generated from a quarter cent of the statewide sales tax. These sales tax revenues are principally used to fund transit requirements within the County. The Transportation Development Act, legislation which created LTF, requires the County Auditor Controller to annually estimate the amount of revenues expected to be generated from the sales tax. That revenue estimate then becomes the basis for geographic apportionment and claimant allocation. While the County is the taxing authority and maintains custodial responsibility over the LTF revenues, the Commission by statute is charged with administration of the LTF funding process. The practice has therefore been for Commission staff to actually develop the revenue estimate. That estimate is then submitted to the County Auditor Controller for concurrence. Once the Commission and the County have agreed on a revenue amount, staff prepares the statutorily required apportionment. Apportionment is the process which assigns revenues to the three major geographic areas(as defined by TDA law) within the County - Coachella Valley, Palo Verde Valley, and Western Riverside County. Those revenues are divided between the three areas based on their respective populations. The area apportionments occur after off -the -top allocations for administration (distributed to the County, the Commission, and SCAG), set asides for planning activities (3%), and reservations for bicycle and pedestrian projects (2%). Attached is the 1999/2000 LTF apportionment based on a revenue estimate of $35,500,000. The County has reviewed the estimate and concurs with it. The estimate was based on revenues to date projected to the end of the year, and then inflated by 5.8%, the lower of two estimates furnished by local economists (the higher estimate was six percent). BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission approve the attached apportionment for Coachella Valley, Palo Verde Valley, and Western Riverside County. UUG088 LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND RIVERSIDE COUNTY 1999/00 APPORTIONMENTS Estimated Carryover (Unapportioned) Est Receipts 33,842,091 TOTAL $35,500,000 $39,342.091 Auditor CTC Admin. S12,0Q0 CTC Planning (3%) 5375.004 SCAG Planning 51,180,263 BALANCE $94,700 5B 821 (2%) 537,680,128 BALANCE AVAILABLE $753,603 $36,926,526 POPULATION APPORTIONMENT % of Total Western 77.764796 Coachella Valley $28,715,811 20.3903616 $7,531,772 Palo Verde Valley 1 838696 $678,942 1 336,926,526 NOTES: Estimate for Planning Purposes, subject to change ANNUAL UUOOS9 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: February 10, 1999 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Plans and Programs Committee Hideo Sugita, Director of Planning and Programming THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: 1998 STIP Amendment $15 Million El Nino, Rehabilitation & Arterial Program At the December 9, 1998 meeting, the Commission approved issuing a call for projects for $15 million of 1998 STIP Amendment funds for storm damage, rehabilitation and arterial improvements. Staff issued a request for projects (RFP) to the Cities and County of Riverside on December 14, 1998. The deadline for project submittal(s) was at 5:00 p.m. on January 8, 1999. A total of 17 agencies met the deadline and submitted 44 projects for the rehabilitation and arterial improvements categories requesting a total of $93,029,813 in STIP funding. Three (3) agencies submitted El Nino projects requesting $2,246,882 in STIP funding. The total amount requested equaled $95,276,695. Staff and the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) met on January 13 following the Commission meeting to evaluate projects. The work to be accomplished was to reduce $95,276,695 of project requests into $15,000,000 of available funding. The first area of discussion was to address the "off the top" funding for the El Nino storm damage projects. The discussion surrounded the fact that in many cases there is a window of time which can extend upwards of 20 months whereby the storm damage projects could be funded by Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) or the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). Therefore, if the Commission funded these projects and FEMA or FHWA came up with funding to support them in the future, the funded projects would technically be ineligible for reimbursement. This situation would create an awkward situation. for the Commission because the Commission has a long standing policy to maximize the receipt of federal and state funds. The only other option staff and TAC could consider is to reserve an amount of the $15 million to address the submitted and qualified unfunded storm damage after the federal funding window closed. Staff and TAC determined that it would be best to recommend the Commission eliminate the El Nino category from the call for projects 1 .j 1 At because there were more than enough projects to consider for rehabilitation and arterial improvements. Setting aside a reserve of funds would not support the California Transportation Commission and Caltran's efforts to spend down the State Highway Account balance nor would it put these funds to work as soon as possible. It is the recommendation of staff and the TAC that the Plans and Programs Committee recommend the Commission eliminate the El Nino storm damage category of the $15 million call for projects. 17 agencies submitted 44 projects for rehabilitation and arterial projects for a total request of $93,029,813. Staff and the TAC determined that a reasonable way to narrow the evaluation of project requests was to allow each agency to identify their highest priority project. With the Commission structure in mind, each agency, with the exception of the County of Riverside identified their highest priority project. The County was allowed to identify the highest priority project per supervisorial district, or 5 projects. This narrowed the field to 20 projects requesting $42,480,288 of STIP funding. Staff and the TAC applied 7 of the 8 Commission approved criteria assigning a low, medium and high point structure (1,2 or 3 points per criteria) and evaluated each of the 20 projects. The maximum points a project could receive was 21. The 8' criteria "Geographic Balance" was withheld until after the projects were evaluated, scored and placed in rank order. The priority list, by evaluation score, left two obvious omissions from the distribution of projects namely the Pass Area and the City of Riverside. Even though it was not necessary, because their project ranked well into the funding area, the City of Hemet staff offered to seek $400,000 of local funds to support their arterial widening and rehabilitation project on State Street with the knowledge that this could allow the funding line to be lowered resulting in an additional funded project. This contribution has since been confirmed and will be in writing the week of January 18' Given the Commission's discussions prior to establishing the intra county formula, the list when viewed in terms of the Discretionary funds showed almost $2 million of discretionary funds going to the Coachella Valley area ($1,994,457 of $3,630,000 of available discretionary funding). The project which was viewed as being funded with discretionary funds was the rehabilitation and widening of Washington Street which was the highest ranked project and is a joint submittal by the Cities of La Quinta, Indian Wells and Palm Desert along with the County as lead agency for the project. As a result of discussion between staff and the TAC on how to reach geographic balance , it is recommended that STIP funding for the Washington Street project be reduced by $1,000,000. The reduction of the Washington Street project and the increased local contribution of $400,000 from the City of Hemet makes it possible to Af. establish a reasonable geographic balance for the distribution of the funds by; • funding the highest scored Pass Area project (rehabilitation of Highland Springs Avenue - $446,320), and • funding the City of Riverside's project (rehabilitation of Magnolia Avenue - $600,000), and • the recommendation is consistent with the adopted Intra-county Formula by identifying the Palo Verde Valley Area formula share of funds ($156,906). PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE, STAFF AND TAC RECOMMENDATIONS: 1 j That the Commission eliminate the El Nino storm damage category from the $15 million call for projects. 2} That the Commission approve the attached list of arterial and rehabilitation projects for STIP funding recognizing that the two actions listed below make it possible to establish a reasonable level of geographic equity by funding the Pass Area project which received the highest score in the evaluation process; funds the City of Riverside's project, and establishes a reserve of formula STIP funds for the Palo Verde Valley Area, consistent with the adopted Intra-County Formula for allocating STIP Regional Improvement Program funds: • The City of Hemet has increased its local share for the State Street arterial widening and rehabilitation project by $400,000. • The Washington Street widening and rehabilitation project STIP request is reduced by $1,000,000. F:luserslpreprint119991FebruarylPlan_Pro1STIPS 15.wpd FY 1999 Call for Projects for El Nino Unfunded storm Damage, Rehabilitation and Arterial Improvements Projects: Amount Available $15,000,000 In STIP/RIP Score Agency Project Desc. Total Project STIP Red LoCa1 Match Type Matd1 Disc $124.2%1 $3,630,000 W.C. 172.23%1 $3,212,551 C.Y. @9.39%1 $3,000,343 P.Y. 11.39%1 8136.006 16 County/KIM/La Rehab L widening of Washington St from SR 111 to Country Club Driv S5,061,000 $3,495,000 $1,566,000 County, CVAG L CRY 5 53,495,000 14 Hemet Arterial Widening L Rehab on State St b/w Chambers L DOmenlgonl P 51,662,000 51,262,000 5400,000 Local $ $1,262,000 �- - m m 14 Springs Rd from Morton to Day St. $1,290,000 S1,125030 5165,000 Meas. A 51,125,000 Moreno Valley Rehab Box Rehab Ramona Expressway b/w 1-215 L Ryder $800,000 $650,000 S150,000 Meas. A 5650,000 $650,000 -- $500A00 _ -- San Jacinto Rehab Sanderson Ave text of Hwy from Ramona to Esplanade $750,000 5550,000 0,000 Meas- 74 County Rehab RBche Cz CxnyOn Rd from S.B. County Line CD RBCne Vista Drive $4,570,000 $3,930,000 $64Sfi40,000 Meas A/State 5 53,930,000 13 Corona Rehab Pavement on North Main St L. River Road $1,719,770 51,335,757 $384,013 Meas. A/Gas Tax -- $1,335,757 5816,000 ® Paim Springs Rehab Palm Cyn Drive from Ramon to Alejo $500,000 5217,106 Meas. A. 13 Temecula Rehab Jefferso VFront St from no. city limits to Rancho Ca RdMInch $1,100,000 $816,000 $284,000 Meas. A 12 Banning/Beaum Rehab Highland Springs from Sun Lakes to Brookside 5557,900 $446,320 5111,580 Local SLR $446,320 ® Riverside Rehab Magnolla Ave. b/w La Sierra L Van Buren 5721,000 S600,000 $121,000 Local 5 S600,003MI SUBTOTAL RECOMMENDED = $1 � $3,se5,DDo NIM =--TOTAL -►�L+.� L1.L11w1 1:1 ® ®� ®irmim Lake E County Rehab Main St f rom I-15 to Lakeshore Drive S600,600 �M�E Meas. A/Gas Tax 5527,500 -- -- Rehab Jeffersot Avenue from Corning to Murneta Hot Springs Road 54,348,204 52,000,000 lE13 � 1 Meas. A/Gas Tax/Local Mit 52,000,000 Rehab L construction of Newport Rd - Menlfee Rd to Winchester Rd 1 S12,399,000 512,399,000 1.11M1E1- $12,399,000 Rehab/Widening of Valley Way/Armstrong Rd - SR60 to Sierra Avenue 53.431,61g S3,201,619 5230,000 Eton Dev Agency $3,201,619 12 11 grommummi 10 Beaumont Cathedral City Rehab Sixth St. b/w I-10 L SR 60 5558,092 5558,092 SO $558,092 -_ $721,000 Rehab Ca►aico Road from La Sierra to Kirkpatrick Rd 54,285,0o0 53,840,000 5445,000 Meas. A $3,840.000 Rehab streets on Cove Assessment DlstOct Area 53,605,000 $721,000 S2,884,000 Meas. A/GaS Tax/Assess 10 Norco Rehab Hamner Ave from 3rd St to Hamner bridge L no brldgeworld 5592,000 5592,00o SO In -kind 5592,000 $2,531,000 _ Rehab Indio BMtl from Jefferson to Hwy 111 $2,531,000 S2,531,000 $0 MIndio _-TOTAL MN _int 1.111M1=211 ---=- MEM. Na=1 341,080,21M $10,219,003 MM. Storm Damage on Rincon b/w Corydon and Smith 'MC= $449,119 Storm Drain in 1 south of Baum L Alessandro intersection 'DSR fort mom S10QW0 -- V Total Storm Related Protects $2,196,91! 2,196,919 $2,1le,l1! Assumptions: -No funds are allocated for storm dam rge requests. -The joint County, Palm Desert, Indian Valls and La Oulnta project will Include a total of $1.566 M in local funds. -The City of Hemet will provide S400,0( 0 In local matching funds. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: February 10, 1999 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Plans and Programs Committee Hideo Sugita, Director of Planning and Programming THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: , 1998 State Transportation Improvement Program Amendment At the December 9, 1998 meeting the Commission approved the following Intra-County Formula allocation of new programming capacity for the 1998 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). INTRA-COUNTY FORMULA APPLICATION 1998 STIP AMENDMENT ($'s in millions) STIP/RIP Funds Available $50.333 2% Planning Funds ($1.007) Regional Rideshare $(1.220) Discretionary STIP 24.20% ($11.642) Subtotal STIP $36.464 El Nino, Rehab & Arterials ($15.000) Formula STIP $ 21.464 Western County 72.23% $15.503 Coachella Valley 26.39% $5.665 Palo Verde Valley 1.38% $0.296 Distribution of El Nino, Rehab & Arterial Funds: Discretionary 24.20% $3.630 _ Western County 72.23% $8.213 Coachella Valley 26.39% $3.000 _ Palo Verde Valley 1.38% ' $0.157 This item will provide recommendations for the allocation the discretionary STIP funds $1 1.642 million; the formula STIP shares which are; Western County = $15.503 million; Coachella Valley = $5.665 milliion; and the Palo Verde Valley = $.0296 million. It is staff's recommendation that the full amount of discretionary STIP funds and the Western County formula share be allocated to the following Measure A projects in the following amounts: Route 91 - Mary Street to Th Street $ 1.0M for Environmental 00I) 095 $10.0M for PS& E Project Subtotal = $11.0M Route 79 Newport Road to Keller Road Project Subtotal Route 91 Phase 11 Sound Walls & Auxiliary lanes Total Western County The Western County formula share ($15.503M) ($11.642M) is $27.145M. $ 0.5M for Environmental $ 1.5M for PS&E $ 2.5M for R/W and Utilities $ 8.3M, for Construction $12.8M $ 3.345M Construction $27.145M plus the STIP discretionary share The Western County funding recommendation will lead to the full delivery of the Newport to Keller Measure A project by 2003-04, complete the needed refinement for the environmental, preliminary studies and engineering for the Route 91 widening project from Mary Street to Seventh Street, and will complete the Route 91 Phase 11 soundwall project, required mitigation for the Route 91 HOV lanes previously constructed, and add auxiliary lanes between interchanges to improve traffic flow. At this time, CVAG has not taken formal action to make a recommendation on the Coachella Valley or Palo Verde Valley STIP formula shares. CVAG may take action on all or a portion of their formula shares the evening of January 25, 1999 at their regularly scheduled Executive Committee meeting. Staff recommends, due to the deadlines established by the California Transportation Co,'rimission for the 1998 STIP Amendment that any recommendation(s) coming forth from the CVAG Executive Committee meeting be forwarded directly to the Commission's February 10 meeting agenda. if no recommendation is forwarded from the CVAG Executive Committee, staff recommends reserving the Coachella and Palo Verde Valleys' formula share of 1998 STIP Amendment funds for their use at a later date. With respect to the $1.007M of Planning, Programming and Monitoring (PP&M) funds, staff recommends the Commission to reserve the funds for a combined programming recommendation including previously programmed PP&M funds of $1:376M which is in the 1999-00 year of the STIP. The reason for this recommendation is to make programming recommendations for these planning Commission's direction to allocate the funds inaccordance with the adt wd the hue - County Formula for allocating shares of STIP funds. (Commission action October 14, 19981 000096 This will provide a short window of time to align the PP&M funds with RCTC and CVAG because the CTC is not meeting in April. In order to amend the STIP by the CTC's June 9t and 10t meeting staff estimates that the Commission will have to adopt recommendations on the PP&M program at our March 10, 1999 meeting. In order to meet this schedule Commission staff and CVAG staff will have to get this program recommendation in order as soon as possible. PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: 1) That the Commission program the entire amount of discretionary 1998 STIP amendment funds and the entire Western County formula share of 1998 STIP Amendment funds to the following Measure A projects in the following amounts: Route 91 - Mary Street to 7t' Street $ 1.0M for Environmental $10.0M for PS&E Project Subtotal = $11.0M Route 79 - Newport Road to Keller Road Project Subtotal $ 0.5M for Environmental $ 1.5M for PS&E $ 2.5M for R/W and Utilities $ 8.3M for Construction $12.8M Route 91 Phase II Sound Walls & Auxiliary lanes $ 3.345M Construction Total Western County= $27.145M 2) That the Commission consider any programming recommendations coming from the January 25, 1998 CVAG Executive Committee meeting for the Coachella and Palo Verde Valleys' formula share of 1998 STIP Amendment funds. 3) Should no recommendation be forwarded from CVAG, then staff recommends the Commission reserve the respective Coachella and Palo Verde Valleys' formula shares of 1998 STIP Amendment funds for their future programming recommendations. 4) That the Commission combine the $1.007M of 1998 STIP Amendment Planning, Programming & Monitoring funds with the $1.376M of previously programmed 1998 STIP funds to make programming recommendations for these planning funds consistent with the Commission's direction to allocate the funds in accordance with the adopted Intra-County Formula for allocating shares of STIP funds. (Commission action October 14, 1998) UUG097 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: February 10, 1999 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Plans and Programs Committee Hideo Sugita, Director of Planning and Programming THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Contracts/Agreements for CETAP The CETAP project requires the Commission execute a contract/agreement with the Southern California Association of Governments {SCAG} in order to facilitate the flow of SCAG planning funds to the Commission to support the CETAP project. Staff estimates approximately $350,000 to $400,000 of SCAG planning funds will be available to support the CETAP project on an annual basis for a period of three years. The Commission previously approved $1.5 million of SB 45 State Transportation Improvement Program Planning, Programming & Monitoring funds to support the CETAP project. Additionally, the CETAP project will include all work associated with updating the County General Plan's Circulation Element. County staff has agreed to pay the Commission for all costs associated with updating the County's Circulation Element. There is a very constrained time line for reviewing consultant proposals, interviewing and developing a recommendation for consultant(s) selection and executing a contract with the selected consultant(s). The current time line has the County of Riverside making a consultant selection on February 16, 1999. Due to the Commission's meeting schedule, as well as the consultant selection schedule, staff proposes that the Commission make every effort to expedite the selection and contract for the recommended CETAP consultant. The current schedule is to review proposals and short list consultants for interviews by January 28, 1999. If the schedule is maintained, consultant interviews will be conducted on February 3, 1999. The selection process may allow staff to bring recommendations forward to the Commission at the February 10, 1999 meeting. Due to the unusually aggressive time frame for reviewing proposals, interviewing and selecting consultant(s) to conduct the CETAP project, which will include the development of both a Western County Multi -Species Habitat Conservation Plan and an update of the County's General Plan, staff recommends the following: U00398 PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: 1 ) That the Commission authorize the Chairman to execute a contract/agreement with the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) to facilitate the flow of SCAG planning funds to support the Commission's CETAP planning project, subject to Legal Counsel review, and 2} That the Commission authorize the Chairman to execute a contract/agreement with the County of Riverside which secures the County's obligation to pay up front or reimburse RCTC in a timely fashion for work performed by the selected CETAP consultant to develop and complete the update to the County of Riverside's General Plan Circulation Element, subject to Legal Counsel review and subject to the amount of funds previously allocated by the Commission to support the CETAP planning project, and 3} Additionally, it is recommended that the Commission provide for the possible selection of a recommended CETAP consultant and authorization for staff to negotiate a contract with the selected CETAP consultant (if a selection is made) and authorize the Chairman to execute a contract with the selected CETAP consultant subject to the level of previously allocated funds, including SCAG planning funds and County funds, subject to Legal Counsel review. FAuaerelpreprint119991FebruaryTian_Pro10ETAPSEL.wpd UU0399 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: February 10, 1999 TO: Riverside County. Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Dean Martin, Chief Financial Officer SUBJECT: 1998 Audit Results Ernst & Young LEY, the Commission's independent auditors made an oral presentation to the Budget and Implementation Committee on January 25. The Report covered the results of the Commission's and the Measure A and TDA funding recipients' audits. Attached is a copy of the report based on the oral presentation. BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: 1. Receive and file the report and the management letter from the auditors. 2. Staff provide quarterly reports to the Board on any jurisdictions indicated by the auditors as going concerns (i.e., questionable financial condition). U001.00 B ERNST & YOUNG LLP .January 25, 1999 Budget and Implementation Committee Riverside County Transportation Commission ■ Suite 200 3403 Tenth Street P.O. Box 1270, 92502 Riverside, C4 92501 ■ Phone: 909 276 7200 Fax: 909 787 8184 Dear Members of the Budget and Implementation Committee: We are pleased to present the results of our audit of the general purpose financial statements of the Riverside County Transportation Commission (the Commission) and the audits of the financial statements of Transportation Development Act (TDA) claimants and Measure A recipients. This report to the Budget and Implementation Committee summarizes our audit results, the scope of our engagement, the reports issued and various analyses and observations related to the Commission and the TDA claimants and Measure A recipients as well as compliance with laws and regulations. This document also reviews communications required by our professional standards. as well as current accounting issues that will affect the Commission. The completion of this year's audits was accomplished through the effective support and the assistance of the Commission's finance and administrative personnel. As always, we strive to continuously improve the quality of our audit services. This meeting is a forum for you to provide feedback on ways we can continue to meet and exceed your expectations. This report is intended solely for the use of the Budget and 'implementation Committee and Commission management and should not be used for any other purpose. We appreciate this opportunity to meet with you. If you have any Questions or comments, please call Sally Anderson at (909) 276-7221 or Theresia Trevino at (909) 276-7263. Very truly yours, :tot.)‘42.t euentup Ernst &Young LLP is a member of Ernst &Young International, Ltd. 1 U0UI0� TABLE OF CONTENTS Focus: Fiscal 1998 Audit Results Summary of What We Agreed to Do 4 Business Risk Assessment Update 6 Required Communications 8 Comments on the 1998 Commission Financial Statements 11 Comments on the 1998 TDA Claimants and Measure A Recipients Financial Statements 13 Article 3 Schedule 15 Article 4 Schedule 16 Article 8 Schedule 1 Measure A Allocations — Comparison of 1998 to 1997 18 Measure A Schedule 19 Measure A Specialized Transit Schedule 21 Focus: Value Results The Value Scorecard 23 Value Ideas — Suggestions for Improvement — Riverside County Transportation Commission 25 Looking Ahead to Next Year Team Continuity 27 GASB Issues and Pronouncements 28 Fiscal 1999 Audit Planning 29 Appendix Audit Process 31 01)0102 2 FRNST&YOUNG LLP Riverside County Transportation Commission Focus: 1998 Audit Results UU0103 3 ERNST&YOUNG LLP SUMMARY OF WHAT WE AGREED TO DO Riverside County Transportation Commission Our Approach As previously discussed with management, our audit plan represents an approach responsive to the • assessment of risk for the Commission. Specifically, we designed our audit to issue reports and letters on the following: • General Purpose Financial Statements of the Riverside County Transportation Commission • Financial Statements on the Local Transponation Fund • Internal control over financial reporting and compliance • Management letter Areas of Audit Emphasis The principal areas of audit emphasis were as follows: • Evaluation of the Commission's investment policies and internal control over cash and investments • Evaluation of the Commission's accounting for debt, including issuance of debt, and debt covenant compliance • Evaluation of the Commission's accounting for project expenditures • Evaluation of TDA and Measure A expenditures Analytical review and inquiry into the nature of various account balances • Evaluation of litigation, claims and assessments • Review of compliance with the provisions of Measure A, including level of administrative salaries and benefits • Review of compliance with the provisions of TDA • Evaluation of the Commission's internal control • Implementation of GASB Statement No. 31 on investments • Implementation of GASB Statement No. 27 on pension plans UUU104 4 ERNST & YOUNG LLP TDA Claimants and Measure A Recipients Our Approach We designed our audits to issue reports and letters on the following: • Transit and Transportation Financial Statements of TDA claimants and Measure A recipients • Internal control over financial reporting and compliance • Management letter Areas of Audit Emphasis The principal areas of audit emphasis were as follows: • Evaluation of TDA and Measure A expenditures • Evaluation of Measure A expenditures in relation to approved Measure A five-year capital improvement plans • Evaluation of deferred revenues and capital grants equity, as applicable • Analytical review and inquiry into the nature of various account balances • Analytical review of actual results and comparison to budgeted amounts • Review of compliance with the provisions of TDA and Measure A There were no changes to our planned approach or audit areas of emphasis. 000105 5 ERNST & YOUNG LL P BUSINESS RISK ASSESSMENT UPDATE As changing demographics, regulations and other factors continually transform the operating environment, the Comrrnssion faces a steady stream of new business risks. Business risks have audit implications and drive our choice of audit procedures and emphasis. Understanding Internal/External Factors ^' Business Implication Audit Implication-`_."`,: INDUSTRY ISSUES Funding Sources The Commission. TDA claimants and Measure A recipients rely heavily on various funding sources including federal, state and local monies. There continues to be a possibility of a decrease in funding, primarily at the federal and state level. However, under SB45, the Commission has direct responsi- bility relating to the regional choice allocation of State Transportation Improvement Plan (STIP) dollars. The Commission must continually assess project funding availability and monitor sales tax growth. Debt financing of future projects is limited. Two-thirds voter majority is required to extend Measure A beyond 2009. Expenditure/expense funding for cities/agencies is often dependent on other federal, state and local monies. Assess budgeting controls and review project expenditures for allowability under transportation plans and grant awards. BUSINESS ISSUE Restructuring Cash Management Technology Year 2000 The Commission continues to evolve and will expand its Board as of January 1999. The Commission is responsible for making investment decisions for its cash and investments. The Commission operates in an environment that requires the Commission to continue to assess the security and adequacy of information systems. As the Year 2000 approaches, the Commission is faced with ensuring that the information systems are compliant with Year 2000 issues. Restructuring presents the Commis- sion with operating challenges. The Commission must balance its safety, liquidity, and yield investment objectives and ensure that investments are made in accordance with state laws and Commission policies. Maintain operations during disasters. Prevent unauthorized use of system and related data. The Commission cannot function without operational information systems. Be aware of whether vendors, fiscal agents and others will be Year 2000 compliant. Impact on financial statement disclosures. Compliance with investment ob- jectives. state laws and policies. Determine disclosures in financial statements are appropriate. Adequacy of access and pro- gramming controls on EDP con- trols and related effect on nature and extent of audit testing. Review Commission's plan for Year 2000 issues to ensure management has properly addressed the issues and proper financial statement disclosures are made. 000106 6 111ERNST & YOUNG LL P Understanding Internal/External Factors Business Implication TECHNICAL ISSUES Property Held for Development Debt GASB Statement No. 31 GASB Statement No. 27 The Commission has property purchased tin right-of-way acqui- sition, of which a portion may not be used for project construction. The Commission, the Riverside Transit Agency and the SunI_ine Transit Agency maintain various types of debt. Issuance of GASH Statement No. 31 required a change to fair value accounting and reporting for invest- ments. Issuance of GASB Statement No. 27 established standards for state and local governmental employer pen- sion measurement, recognition and presentation. Fraud Consideration SAS clarifies auditor responsi-bilities (SAS 82) filr detecting fraud. Identification of strategy for excess property is necessary to maximize the Commission's investment. Evaluate financial feasibility scenarios. Commission requires understanding of and adherence to deht covenants and operating ability to service debt. Arbitrage calculations are required. Fair value provides a new perspective on financial position and condition. Recognition of unrealized gains or losses may impact financial decisions. Annual pension cost to he recorded may differ from pension expenditures, and net pension obligations will he recorded as general long-term debt. Management should be aware of the risk factors related to the Commission in order to he able to address them. Adequate disclosure in the financial statements. Compliance with debt covenants and proper accounting and reporting. Ascertain proper accounting and reporting for investments and related unrealized gains and losses. Ascertain proper accounting and reponing during implementation. Auditors must document their assessment of the risk and their response to the risk factors. 000107 7 Lij ERNST & YOUNG LLP REQUIRED COMMUNICATIONS Professional standards require the auditor to communicate to the audit committee or an equivalent group to ensure that it is provided with additional information regarding the scope and results of the audit that may assist the group in overseeing management's financial reporting and disclosure process. Summarized below are these required communications related to our financial statement audits: Area Comments Auditors' Responsibilities under Generally Accepted Auditing Standards (GAAS) The general purpose financial statements are the responsibility of management. Our audits were designed in accordance with GAAS and Government Auditing Standards' (GAS), which provide for reasonable, rather than absolute, assurance that the general purpose financial statements are free of material misstatement. We have a responsibility to opine on whether the general purpose financial statements are fairly stated in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. As a part of our audit, we obtain a sufficient understanding of internal control to plan our audits and to determine the nature, timing and extent of testing to he performed. We have issued an unqualified opinion on the Commission's general purpose financial statements for the year ended June 30, 1998. We have issued or anticipate issuing unqualified opinions on the financial statements of the TEA claimants and Measure A recipients, except for the City of Beaumont, which received a qualified opinion for a going concern uncertainty; the City of Perris, which may receive a qualified opinion for a going concern uncertainty: and the cities of Blythe. Indio and Perris, the County of Riverside and the Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency, which received qualified opinions as a result of a scope limitation resulting from insufficient audit evidence to support the disclosures with respect to the Year 2000 Issue. Management did not place any restrictions on the scope of our audits. Significant Accounting Policies Initial selection of and changes in significant accounting policies or their application and new accounting and reporting standards implemented during the year must be reported. UU310� The significant accounting policies used by the Commission are described in Note 1 to the general purpose financial statements. There were no changes in significant accounting policies or new accounting or reporting standards, except for the following: • GASB 31 requires fair value reporting for investments. The Commission's accounting policy for investments is included in Note I. The effect of the change in accounting for investments on fund balance at July I. 1997 was not maierial. • GASH 27 established standards for employer pension measurement, accounting and disclosure. The Commission's participation in PERS is disclosed in Note 12. The pension liability was $0 both before and at the transition. 8 =l ERNST & YOUNG LCP Comments Management Judgments and Accounting Estimates The preparation of financial statements requires the use There are no areas requiring significant judgments or of accounting estimates. Cenain estimates are accounting estimates in the 1998 general purpose particularly sensitive due to their "significance to the financial statements. statements and the possibility that future events may . diller significantly from management's expectations. Significant Audit Adjustments No audit adjustments were recorded for the Commission. Various audit adjustments were recorded by the TDA claimants and Measure A recipients. Oilier Information in Documents Containing Audited Fiuunrial Statements The Commission's 1996 audited general purpose financial statements were used in connection with the $48 million sales tax bonds financing. We were not requested to provide a consent for the inclusion of our audit report. Disagreements with Nlanagement on Financial None Accounting and Reporting Matters Major Issues Discussed %vith Management None Prior to Retention Consultation oilh Other Accountants None Serious Difficulties Encountered in None Performing the Audit Nlaterial Errors, Fraud and illegal None identified and management represented there were Acts none. Significant Disclosures Not Rude None Single Audit Findings The Single Audit of the Commission is in the process of being performed. " 000109 9 111 ERNST & YOUNG UP Comments Most Recent Ernst & Young LLP Peer Review Results GAS requires the independent auditor to communicate KPMG Peat Marwick LLP recently completed the 1998 ih,.• most recoil' peer review results to its governmental peer review of Emst & Young. The peer review results tliint�. are contained in an unqualified Pert RevieN• Report. . which indicates that the quality control policies and procedures for E&Y's accounting and auditing practice are being complied with in such a manner as to provide the firm with reasonable assurance of conforming with professional standards. r%lanagemen t Advisory Services Ernst & Young was engaged to perform agreed -upon procedures related to the sales tax titrecast during 1998 and is providing assistance related to the development of an indirect cost allocation plan during fiscal 1999. The fees approximate $35.O00 and $50.000, respectively. 000110 ,� lfl Eil ERNST& YOUNG LLP COMMENTS ON THE 1998 COMMISSION FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Condensed Balance Sheet • The decrease in cash and investments was due to highway and regional arterial expenditures paid from special revenue funds offset by a 9% increase in sales tax revenues. • Receivables increased in 1998 due primarily to an increase in loan receivables. • Restricted assets increased due to the proceeds of the 1997 bond issuance for local projects which are recorded in the Agency Fund. • Accounts payable and other liabilities increased in 1998 due to amounts being held for cities for local projects included in the 1997 bond issuance. Assets and other debits: Cash and investments Receivables Other assets Restricted assets Property, plant and equipment Other debits Total assets and other debits Liabilities, fund equity, and other credits: Accounts payable and other liabilities Long-term debt Fund equity and other credits: Investment in general fixed assets Retained earnings Reserved fund balance Unreserved fund balance Total fund equity and other credits Total liabilities, fund equity and other credits Totals (Memorandum Only) 1998 Totals (Memorandum Only) 1997 $ 56.437,971 25,859,371 1,048,724 44,936,211 104,614,564 247.444, 090 $480,340,931 .$ 66.089,891 20.834,064 1,071,079 38,267,637 98,147,591 245,831,962 $470,242,224 $ 18.007,744 247,444,090 104,614,564 16,413 95,941,626 14,316,494 $ 15,784,836 245,831,962 98,147,591 11,721 97,294,661 13,171,453 214,889,097 $480,340, 931 208,625,426 $470, 242,224 �00111 11.6 1 El ERNST&YOUNG LLP Condensed Operations for Five Years • Sales tax revenues have increased consistently since the early 1990's recession. Reimbursement revenues fluctuate as federal and state funding sources relate to eligible projects. The increase reflects an increase in available federal and state funding. • Other sources reflects an increase primarily due to proceeds from bond issuances in 1998 and 1996. • Program expenditures during the past three fiscal years represent increased regional arterial program activity. • The increase in debt service in 1998 is primarily due to the payment of commercial paper in the amount of $44,000,000 from the 1997 bond proceeds. • Other uses primarily represent operating transfers to cover debt service for the 1991, 1993, 1996 and 1997 bonds as well as refunding of debt in 1996. • Ending fund balance has decreased 25% since 1994 due to significant program expenditures, of which a significant portion of Measure A highway/regionaI arteriallcommuter rail projects have been funded from bond proceeds. The Commission's capacity to issue additional debt is limited. Revenues and other sources: Saies tax Reimbursements Interest Other Subtotal Other sources Total revenues and other sources Expenditures and other uses: Administrative Program Debt service Intergovernmental distributions Capital outlay Subtotal Other uses Total expenditures and other uses Net (decrease) Beginning fund balance Ending fund balance U00112 1998 $ 99,596.564 9,754,287 5,471,073 6,190,293 121,012,217 96,146,074 217,158,291 2,813,814 104,875,560 74,344,388 309,000 306,660 182,649,422 34,716,863 217,366,285 (207,994) 110,466,114 $110,258,120 1997 $ 91,393,623 5,514,049 6,869,873 5.896.496 109,674,041 26,316,886 135,990,927 2,677,290 105,374.197 25,208,531 305,095 53,677 133,618,790 26,316,886 159,935,676 (23,944,749) 134.410,863 $110,466,114 1996 $ 88,208,264 8,114,912 7,740,317 5,274,781 109,338,274 106.882,232 216,220,506 2,732,131 106,225,072 25,327,762 367,936 144,537 134,797,438 • 92,254,390 227,051,828 (10.831,322) 145,242,185 $134,410,863 1995 $ 79,733,751 12,947,846 8,220,527 4,666.051 105,568,175 41,862.035 147,430,210 2,723,025 94,808,303 23,379,723 377,927 177,527 121,466,505 26,862,035 148,328,540 (898,330) 146,140,515 $145,242,185 1994 $ 75,988,389 17,502,554 5,152,481 3,646,794 102,290,218 45,678.660 147,968,878 2,919,130 128,693,373 21,860,166 395,000 1,176,549 155,044,218 30,678,660 185,722,878 (37,754,000) 183,894,515 $146,140,515 12 =� ERNST & YOUNG LL P COMMENTS ON THE 1998 TDA CLAIMANTS AND MEASURE A RECIPIENTS FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Balance Sheet Items The following agency had a cash overdraft in the transit fund at June 30, 1998: • Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency - $11,150 The Commission is owed $8,371 from the City of Banning for excess -FDA and STA capital allocations received in a prior year. The following have a fund balance representing at least three years of unspent monies: • City of Riverside Article 8 monies of $257,515, representing allocations since 1991. • County of Riverside Article 8 monies of $352,408, representing allocations since 1994. • City of Beaumont Measure A monies of S753,599, representing allocations since 1994. • City of Blythe Measure A monies of $2,703,866, representing allocations since 1995. • City of Indio Measure A monies of $2,924,640, representing allocations since 1994. - • City of Riverside Measure A monies of $15,574,608, representing allocations since 1996. Income; Statement Items For your information, the following cities/agencies allocate indirect costs and other overhead allocations to TDA or Measure A funds: • The City of Banning allocates interfund costs, such as administration, personnel, attorney costs, insurance, fleet maintenance, financial and computer costs to the Article 4 Transit fund. • The City of Beaumont allocates administrative overhead costs to both the Article 4 and Measure A funds. • Family Services Association allocates overhead based on a percentage of total expenses. • Inland AIDS Project allocates overhead based on actual duties performed for the Measures A fund. • Transportation Specialists allocates overhead costs based on vehicle service hours, which agree to the Measure A match requirements. • Volunteer Center of Riverside County allocates salaries based on the percentage of full-time equivalents for the program. 000113 13 ERNST & YOUNG LLP Compliance Findings In 1997 the City of Blythe was not in conformance with the Measure A requirement to maintain its continuous commitment of local discretionary expenditures for streets and roads. During 1998. the City's Annual Street Reports for the years ended June 30, 1997 and 1996 were amended and filed with the State Controller's Office to properly classify discretionary expenditures for those years. As a result. in 1998 the City is in conformance with the Measure A requirement to maintain its continuous commitment of local discretionary expenditures for streets and roads. The City of Beaumont did not submit and receive approval of the Measure A five-vear expenditure plan for the year ended June 30, 1998. Therefore, the current year Measure A expenditures of $33,806 are considered to be questioned costs. The City intends to submit the 1998 Measure A five-year expenditure plan to the Commission. Until the 1998 five-year expenditure plan is approved, the City's 1998 Measure A allocation of $168,981 is being withheld by the Conunission. The City of Moreno Valley had approximately $325,000 of Measure A expenditures that were not on the approved five-year expenditure plan. They were identified as questioned costs. The City intends to request that the submitted plan be revised to include these expenditures. The City of Riverside had approximately $18,000 of Measure A expenditures that were not on the approved five-year expenditurepian. They were identified as questioned costs. The City intends to request that the submitted plan be revised to include these expenditures. Ca,h FluvkConcerns The City of Beaumont's General Fund has a cash balance deficit of approximately $1.600,000, and the City, as a whole, has a total cash balance of approximately $471,000, including $253,784 and $761,418 in the Transit Fund and Transportation Funds, respectively, at June 30, 1998. This raises substantial doubt about the City's ability to continue as a going concern and repay the Transit and Transportation Funds for cash borrowed, which could affect the planned operations of both the Transit and Transportation Funds. The City of Lake Elsinore has continued to experience City-wide financial pressures regarding the debt incurred related to the baseball stadium. There has been significant press coverage relating to the City's financial matters. The City of Perris has experienced an unusually high rate of turnover of City personnel. Various open items include the City's difficulty to reconcile timely cash at June 30, 1998. The City received a going concern opinion from the City auditors for the year ended June 30, 1997. We anticipate issuing a going concern opinion for the fiscal 1998 year. UU011 14 El ERNST & YOUNG LLP Total expenditures 1I1,931 146,645 Excess of expenditures over revenues 99.1118 48,400 120.963 71,381 99,703 79,531 (29,951) (64,269) (11,818) (3,226) (95,963) (64,078) Sea )234 As of : 1 / 18/99 Article 3 Schedule Year ended June 30, 1998 Revenues Intergovernmental allocations: Article 3 Interest income S 80,274 S 82,376 S 88,000 S 44,000 S 25,000 S 7,303 S 98,992 S 79,531 1,706 Other revenue - - 1,174 _ - 711 Total revenues 81,980 82,376 88,000 - 45,174 25,000 7,303 99,703 79,531 Operating transfers in 25,000 64,269 Excess of expenditures and operating transfers out 11,818 3,226 95,963 48545 _ over revenues and operating transfers in (4,951) ISSUED ISSUED ISSUED ISSUED ISSUED ISSUED ISSUED ISSUED City of City of City of City of City of City of City of City of Banning Beaumont Hemet Indio Iw Quints Moreno Valley Riverside Temecula Fund balances at July 1, 1997 28,165 _ Fund balances at lune 30, 199$ S 23,214 S - $ _ S _ - 22,836 - S - $ 7,303 S - $ (b) (b) Deferred revenues at June 30, 1998 $ S $ S - $ S - S 14,543 S Source: 1998 Financial Statements (a) Projects not completed in current year, carryover to next fiscal year. (b) Fund balance related to operating transfer. (15,533) (a) 15 J ERNST& YOUNG LLP d77 91sli'OA ISMI r 91 8ZL'6101 S 9ZZ'SEZ'S E98180'1 059101 S98'SEE $ 9LS'ZI9'Z S90'9LE OUM SPZ'Z6Z S 811'61 8l 1'61 S — S SE9'159 $ 6LZ'90L (449`4S) BIS'61l'Z 04Z'SISt Z91'OSI S 4L9'E9 $ 6£6.651 $ I£ZEl s 919ZE 4L9'E9 9E9'6E1 805'9 945'L11 S S E0E'OZ $ EZL'9 S S - s — S as4 Z 018'Z (ZSE) SU 01 6E4'IEI I9L'641 1 E0'9Z 9EE'E6 (ELZ`LZ8'1) (488'698'Z) (S8L'01) (6E1%MI) (19C641) (1E0'9Z) (889'E6) 9Z8'118'L 68S'Z8E'SI 956'911 16[1E1'1 LE8'IL4 ZE4'814 OZL'IZ4 - 8LS'9LZ 6S L84'£Z 68C6 - - SZZ'Zll 944180E I . - 469'L 15S'EI 8E0'Z lOS'LZS`1 ISV6EL - 00eZZ 0001E - S80'4Z OOC40E - 695'6£ ZSE - - OL- S'6ZE E01'496I - 090'6 - - O£S'Z48% 116'E691I 988'911 SL4'LEO'1 ZOO`EZ4 1881,00 L6S'S6E (660'60'6) (EL4'Z5Z'81) °Veal) (0Erf9Z`1) (86S'IZ9) (E94'444) (804'SIS) ZZI'618'11 948`ZSCIZ 9S6'ZSI ZOL'OSE'1 EE8'669 566'LOS IOL'919 16Z`44L'6 L18'9L8'81 ILI`Z41 E9Z'6IZ'1 ZLO'OSS 496`184 f10'EZS lEVI,L0`Z 6Z0'9L0'E 58L'01 6E4'IEI 19e641 lf0'9Z 889'f6 EZO'081'Z $ EL£'OOL'E $ SIZ'SZ S ZL4'L8 S 5EZ`8L $ ZfS'E9 $ f6Z'101 S nauasy Aauauy 'pursy mussy auEJuns apiwA!a 0RASSI GRASSI &HMV WM/ Lal[eA ap'aA o'rd .t�vlla ap!ssaA!g Jo LNa seas' euo'o3 Jo 413 Jo Ina io Ana 'uou neag au!surg 01RASSI GRASSI GRASSI 8661 `OE punt' PaPua seaA alnPailoS 6 a139-sV slum2WIS Pnouguid 8661 :aasnoS 8661 'OE sun f 1e anuana' PauaJap pn01 pn!daD l m nad0 8661 'Of aunf le anuanai PauaJoa 8661 'OE aunf le 080111382 pau!elag L661 ' 1 AInf le s8u!uiea Pau1ela8 s8uwea pumas m (asnasaap) assasau! laN sPunJ 'oast lq pannbos k adasd Jo uogs!aasdaa :s8unusa papa's' of sa mp saw, ceol 1aN canuanas 8umuadawu Fro anaanal MVO =MU! lsaso'ul 1!suals Paz!lepads V =maY1 Mini &Mao& VJ.S pad 8u!'esodo puapa3 punt uopuuodsuesl !wao7 :slued 4seD :sanuanas 8upuadouoN ssol 8u!l usk) sasuadxa 8u9a'ado pnoy sasuadxa 8upssado saw uoRszpsope uo!'e!aa'daa :sasuadxa 8ullusadp sanuanas 8u!'asado ploy C,7 r-1 r-I 66/81/1 : Jo sV t� 09Z66 uo!laas d Il ONnOAvisNmj (e) 80415E $ 5I5'L5Z $ 189'881 S OLO'ZE1 — Z69'EZ 4Z4'81 4Z- £'LL I 616'01 40Z051 — Z5E'6 Z4Z'L4 L94'6 L68'ZI 190'9 $ IZ8`ZI $ 18- 9'881 $ 804'Z5£ $ SIS'LSZ $ 189'881 S 110'504 4694L4Z (£09'Z5) 1Z8'6 189'881 (£0975) IZ8'6 189'881 699'85 000'E — 190'9 IZ8'ZI 189'881 190'9 [MI 694'1 S — $ ZIZ'L81 $ apluanld Jo eCpsnoa aPlu*Ard J° x1[J awala Jo Lola J �V2IQ aanSSl 0311ISSI LI sluwmalt% I1qauaul3 8661 :aaroS sale apJap oled all sal suoneaopa g apprser amcos of sammuoa ay1 ClH Jo 11!3 (a) 8661 'OE aun f PaPua rad a1nPa9aS 8 alatliy sleloy 1661. Z661 £661 6661 5661 9661 L661 8661 :panpaaJ Jew t Aci aauela9 Puna 8661 '0£ aun f Is sample(' Puna L66I '1 4Inf 1e saouelaq pun, sarllpuadxa (Japun) MAO saamos 8u!aueug Jaylo pug sanuanal Jo Vamp:pp) ssaaxg T talsuaq %Toad° :swarms Su!muaug Jamo sammuadxw (Japan) Jaw sanuanal Jo Vau p:pp) ssaaxg samppuadxa leloy sanuanaJ lam autoau! imp pus 1sasalul 008 ala!uv :suoRmo11e IsluaunuanoBJalul :sanuana2l 66/9I/I ,just/ (13)0046; �aS N •—1 r—I O d777Nf10ATISN83r 81 S 000 slaooloonS IB!°us°!d 8661 :aamGS pu[g anuanaz lam& atll o< papna a & nal mou are nafazd a luegama a p ro3 matuaada &upon} atp pampas kienowid tlaplm suo9o3011e V oulsgoIN 'Arilo!prOaaV paleo!aual SIM a3arunPIIP'CVO 11W4 luauaa12e 21lPon3 aouaAPV (P) dyIf1L u 8mledta ued lou sap(a w3 suopeaope V Ms2oYH 3° naR-u[ sluasudaz moo= 8661 voI9o1!see lop azam sloaualels letaueag 8661 JVAD (a) .8661 `0£ f is anoanai Pana;ap se XPO aql dq Paprooaz uaaq seq PIM mid anq!paadxa Isaii"ang 8661 all Jo lenordde Pao oo!ss!u9ns aql So!Poad s! 186'89IS 3o oonaaolls V aznsegAl 8661 Ilosg a9 t uald aln!Pogdxa =A -mg v aznsaaYY 5661 91B30 lsnordde as uodn 8661 Isosg frump AITO oxP of pasmgs!p sem mane `noneaope d amsozIA1 5661 ot0 sluasaidaz anuanaz 8661 (1) "ZZ 'oN SSYJ Suldope /4!0 asp of anp 's7vamams letaueug y =amyl a p Ito sammmaz a p of aatfie lou p!m swop pue snaf Isasg angoadsar aql Stump omssmzuoo an ,S4 alma suonpa lls laaIIu meat] °ged3o Alto azg zo3 sanuat m21 SLL SZL I $ 555 OZS ZZ S Off 94Z 4Z S Sl0`LZI 6Lb'ZZ 565'E69 SO£'18Z Z9S`8Z 8I l'4£ LSS`EL Z£6'b£I 68b'I4 (865'510 4E0'964 085`EZI 901'Ib S£VZS Ib4'9 9L0'09 (845'950 9L8'ILl 85Z`8£ Z6Z`9 9ZZ'95 (668`61) 449'8Z (almanac asoaiaul SZS'6L8 51 V5I £ 98Z`889`4 8E6`641`4 bLVE6£ 855'084 Z80`LS6 4£L`Z6I'I EE9'b6£ 865'5Ib OWL6 LZS`I I61 SZS'LEb 598`055 E40`9I [ 468'558 E09`9Z0' I OZO`I9L`I £S8`60L 4£PL6 LSZ`4L5 OL6'9SI S 106`LSE 04S`900' 1 469`L££ 18818e5 Ur I £4'4 9£1`ZZ4 9L9`4l S 6E9'0£0`i 999`12E`I (e) ZZI'9£4 — (P) P5e£6S (P) LOl'SEO'Z IE9` 0 001'£09 484`ZZI OL6`S16 550`0L9 (°) 968`ZE6`1 I I 1 `84L 9ZrE0l £84'0£9 140'LEI (1) S 545'98£ S L66I 8661 V a mseaLll V unman 8661 'OE MIf PoPoo lli2.L gamy elnaauayJo X!o °Moef on 3o 40 aP!szan!21Jo Sz000D aP!slo4!21Jo Al!D aSenyq Nam( AID (s) 1:13f1SSI .Ldb'2EQ J.3b'2IQ 12311SSI Q3f1SSI suzad30 AID Li/21Q Q3f1SSI 11:s2Q wIsd3o fo!D aansSI oamN3o sa!o Q3f18SI aSuegazalal — elo!ImYttio APO Q3IISSI anoanog Is!oodS — glomorQ30 /410 Q3nSSI dapeA oaaroisuo Alm Q3fISSI auvdS utlsd3o 63!D Q3f1SSI Q3nSSI Pin:H3° if4D canssI OV210 V/N eooz003o 41Q aanssI A?o pup:sleop dl!o crams' Muni 30 Alto Q3ns% QtnxIHJo Alto amass' MINSI 8amaeg30 AID Q3fISSI azou!s13 *WU° canssI o!Pul Jo kz!D spats tnI!Pu130 L66I of 866I 3o uosgedwoo — suoulloopb y amsenti luouneaH3o?J 66/81/1 3° sV dllJNflOA 1S MUD 61 t'.1 00.006/5 PP0411!1 8661 :amOS Ca ZOI ELL 1 0691Z61 f 161'IS f "160"611 I f - 1 00'MT f ZSCOE9'1 S 1SOL S S99 EMT f 66s ESL f E65'6ES f w.pqUN PPlot M - 1 I • - - - _ - - 960189 - - - - %CFCS BOP 41E ►661 - IZS9L9 - - - _ _ 9661 611Z69 6181 661 LK'69Z S6Y'169 - 606'ELL - - Yf1'SE9 - ILY'C69 LSLS6't61 61L'OEI L661 SSS'fOS f L5S'6SL S I61.1$ f Lt 1'SL6. 1 - S S110'540Z t 8915E00'1 S ISS9L 1 L6111,1 f 169161 f ►LC606 S 1661 :payaaot anuaru Pp110 Ana A 64unP9 p.m ZOI ELL f 069"YZ61 1 III IS S 16054CI 1- S SIOWL 1 LSL6E9I f KM. S 99/'EOLZ 1 66S"ESL S E656ES S ZOO"99L 990"I6LZ IYI IS 61C9111 - _ 6S6I66 ISS 9L - 66S"E5L--E6S6Ei - - 9L6'19S - - E6- L919 - 99- I'E0L'Z - - LtZlE91 0- 011 S ►L- S'EEI t- S 968 f- S E01911 1- S- - S- S- - S- f ZOCELL f 0699Z6Z t 1I1'IS f 160'd►L'I i- f SIO"S601 f ZSC65911 f I5S91 S 991"EOLZ f OOSTSL f f6S'6ES f O9T19E LPL IEG Z 1E916 4111.Pa - 9569ZEE 06011E 1 19S 19 991 ZSLZ 69L'665 L96 Olt Litt% EiStE6E (OUZO 915'E8l - (ILt'ItL'0 Z9VIZE 066'/1 (OOE't►) SE8'851 IE1'OZ1 ...POP.) Pool mom pto9 po n taptn Vows:owl gaalud aanyypitp6d4 nJ pap18!soa su0prudodda Iuptnntoa nJ PalntB!oa soa!uuda dda 9umunrm ay mown span d 01)92do nJ panoom somaxitmatn o01 paknafl :=Isom P011P symodum3 1661 'OE KW 14160.010 Pnd 1661 '11Pf 14 aa019 Pmd aaaa *OamaJ a410 p.m anu!padtra (upon) nm aaana dgatnug ntpo pun ansa.at Jo (lagopsjap) aaaag _ _ - - - - - OWN sonro •uy aaatl1MOD Pool - _ - _ - - - - - (am) manor flopmel moo - - - - 6618.061 sops wog id (am) mans Anaunpl moo LEI'606 E6Ct6f (06LZP) 98SYIL - (ILVIICI) MIZE 06691 (OOEYN S£1'SSI KIWI aampadto(nput) nw saran! P (i!xlap) n II!'I6 69L"19E IOL't9I 109161- - 6ZZ'ILI'E 90L'SL9 ►11 LZZ L6/681 901'EE DMZ — son0puamn pool - DP-CSZ - - - _ _ 16.4161 - SSCL►L - - _ Pd10t4N _ _ - - - :amun ma 11r86 19L'19E IOZ'191 109'161 - - _ - �OaO� P!o1. mi0� E66'69CE 90CSL9 II CLZZ L6Y611L 9015EE E/- C611Z aattuotuiam p1 tnryaganJ moi9'aphiH SSS'EOS LSS'►SL IU'SLI L1119L6 - ESC6SSY 898100'1 /01ZK L61'I/L 119161 ►LC606 armors pool - OECU - - _ _ SOPI i6SL - _ _ atlom nob 116'►L LZZ'EZI LZbZ Lli'6S - ILY'6EZ &NIL !ICI /ILbll OLVSS M- at �a aunwt. mom _on 60066:40.q - _ 61G951 E90'LLI - - - - - - anam - d mote mop.'wog wauvamgmpli - - - - - - - aloud& ppouarwaf nqp wag ouyo an9m!alI - - - - _ ►9Z'99Z _ 99F'tLl - - Itoaougmm 01d16 1E9'lLY f 001'E09 f /S►YZI $ OL6'S16 S - t 968YLel $ 11191/ f 9ZVE01 S E- /69E9 t ILO'LEl t S►- S91E S nwutaugtno man V aaloSy dris :iUopoom Ppauu0a0leasq oxligf WP1I a0a16 IasoaH OVA) a J +41a ann0q maga Jttt�laaq ...mum :anualtali 'Sal P410 1141011 P41J P4iJ I110404143 P41a P410 P41J Jo41J P 413 P41J P41J ®[ISSI mILSSI aBf = 0211ISSI 9'IEIYWAV MIMI .m(ISS[ 02111SS1 mf1SSI EE3fISM ®(ISSI 1014 /661 bE DUD( Papa mx ainpogos V a.maaayy moilaeaqunat V91S9 6691/1 J0 N dll 9NOOAS' I SN113 � OZ rert6E6S 'IL POP OIS'►6Z'I LS9'ISE9 119YLSY1 E19'I IL LZEZ6E6S EII mar E91'911'SI 166ES1 SIY199'EI ZIL►E9'1 IIL'61C9 L SEI"1►1'S f 6PMel S SE111►1'S S 66- 1'06'1 t SEPI/S"S S 661'LOCI i6£OIPZ 661 LOSI t I►S'IEY£ t - S 6SE99Z9 S 109'PLSSI f 669"LEL f KEI917 S 1LI'%CI f SLCESS'S ZI 1'600'S - - - SS- I'616 ILE'06Z'S - - - 66E6ZZY S ►OS'963'S t. SII'SLZ'S f 669'LEL f KE'1911 f IL 1'9561 1 111.PSCE f 6SE'99Z'9 S 109"ILS tl S 669'LEL f 61E"191Z 671918E LIEZLS 6EE191Z 166'ES1 - 6SE'99L'9 - - S - f ZLI'EPEI f IZE'It t - S LUXE $ E19'SSZ S LZIZISS f t LZS'IOE L E- I9$SZ S 169'ESZ•E f 9SP'SLZY S I[1956'1 $ SLL"ESS'S - LIYI►EE S9- Z'S6C1 999'959'1 $ ZE- 6'LSZ S ZL- 9'S2 S LES'SOE f EI9'S1Z S LLIZIS"S t IOt Z6Z k10 ILI f 9E1'91 f 0- 091,S1 9LS SP6'P S IS- S'99S S LZE76EIS S SEt'1 YES $ 6111061 S 6SE-99Z9 S 109'/LSSI f 669'La S 6EE1911 f 1L19SGl S fu"EIS S LZS"toy $ £19"Su f LLIZISS ; EZtZ►I-St tISLLZZ 6111PL IOL KO"S !1STES'll 0102E11 ►161EL t9L 1t91 6139111 IESZ6Z SZL'ODI PSI ;UV 66E61611 LIF39SE 01►•S91'1 1SrZ 1Z'I SZO'6ECE (ISCP6£) SZ✓6ZYI EOYLOE 9S6'99L 61611 WHEYS l E66'9Z1 ►11'60Y11 LZ041,60'S 3IEE0S9 LZO"P61/E 96E9t6'1 000'00C1 000100E I LSCSEI'1 16E9 OM 96C9Z6'1 SIL'611'S (0IC6ZSI) (065'6E1) IfIYILI SZO'6EL'E (11E460 (LESVOS) SOP'LOE 9S6'99L /LE9161E OS66L9 9E9E06 fOr1009 EIZ'E00'K 610'10111 ILO S9 Kea LIS910Y SZ OIL 'I 61111E9 OL 1'6L 1 99S'6E► OE9'►6E OSC66Z SLL9LS'EL ►EZ IZIZ stu LOL E9CSIE 6S6'0011 ESE'►E�'i-E683ES 1 IES-ES euY1 O- SCI,99 ESCIES4 E609ES'I 6109Ll IIEOWI PLO 6IZL EOCU - ILO1Z1 SOS'10►9 9E11'56ZY LISVOS 69S1 SLL'LSS'L KS'16Z'I IO►bLI 6L6Y6S LLI'9ZC1 ItCKEE - - 000.00Z - 000'UOZ 616'SI Call E►6'9ZS 61L ►9Z-1 146•►SZ Sti'6Z L- ZS19 6ZZ'CL 9L- 0'SS SL9'66Z 06L'S6L %LSS( SLOE - 6ZLY IL'1 _ - 1S all 9 - ISS SZ - SrZYISZ 69E999 ►OL'oss'S 111' I IE ZI- S'ESI f 111'ISCS Ill'SLZ'S PZL9Z SL6'ZIL 9LOPL f EK"I£P'► SOZ RIP SISYZZ SOLI I► S6W6SP S60109 9L- CEZ SE- E'S 60f"EIP PA 9S 9191E1 PPE graawt 41. °PIPIT s sPPo+ll! 814=+111 mum P.M dbPdS wasp saanW PRPPIJw P 41) P 41J P 400oJ P 41J swarm P 413 Mien r,Pa P 41J P 41J PAID P41J P41J SPL 9SSZ 1/c9ssY 169'ESO'E 9E191 S0L'89E 99- S'6E/ ►1- 9'IrZ tot'SEOY S MPA raoow P 41J clam Linn i3ymQ (1311551 4Ef1SS1 .E3VY(t (©11551 0LSI1SS9 L13fISSI InfISSE 013f1567 3661 'OE aunt PPP mx stOPIPS V R-RIPPaW 36Qta 1e1S le! !d 1661 ARRIOS oaapq PPS Pol 6661 S661 9661 L661 1661 Tama= sarataults6,1P ml.Iq PIMPS Pkd =PP9 PPIJ P1oi axiom pun) Pa1su•!Lapark 9ro.umu+41 swafodanSSAUPP nJ 541341IIICI suo!leudosdd. 133nursi bnl poIsdhsad an!qudndde tpmulloa sal Pauonm slaslol 1 a1J!asda nl P'aaam s aiq°'uw mai pumas :sasuaPq pay Jo s9aaodulop 1661 •OE PPI M ...PR Pad L661 •1 LIOI P PoPIq pu1,S waikepum i Jaw Pia saaq!POdn (aWi) ass smarm ttuumuzi aim Pr san aLas Jo (husivP) sans (sawn) moos futatoug alwp Ppl (aw) COMM fuusug sxpo *paid salau wog spassoLd (taw) warms %pun ] moo suu!p!ndYa (opus) AMC-sarasasP (E*o!aJsP) ssa:rs arwlplladta Poi PdPI !+d :snow Rao 66.36616ado! mous puodIam alwolumspts u>narosuoJ - :muiptads3 wmw>t Ppi aluowal awlp Nvmoa tun auoan Isamu/ 1166P6mxt oaa rufod Ploys PPS.. umy 633.P. gwpa ppm& Ppawlnsol osllu Ling eMouoeapuaay syaaaanqupas yam >v D7diS runuawrqunm ddi'IS yW :s++o!1aoIP Psaus utofwN1 sanw.aa p 66191.1 Jo PI -" � d ll 0N110AV1SNN3 It wvPPawn lewy wtnhpx PeE'q+Kalan 4lle+eduuay pa7>°n tin wwaaa0n IJoFal+lalan W>'F+Iwan UUO°J e1a11°ItedS ewlet+mwuy aani(wnla NIP* laa aplcwpf (°ad AVM UaaoJ gal tiaaladS t° aapeJ SWUM pus SIM outlaw a IM tIgauy a»luapA tloleeS �°l 9at7 pUqutotpaaNd U+aWMJ° nA-V-++eJ lutputdtpul awwa'd otflePoltV °t digwuind wows Lga to ,tea ISVlia 1-1V110 CLiaSS1 1:18f1SSI aanssl aarlssl 1661 'OE we f papa saA tpro as Jos um/ pameuads v *mown (GZL'l) 0961E 900'11 YS6'6[ pV7YtaMS 1^ueu3 t661 =meS - S Z11'St S 192'St S 1Z61E S - S S - S E90'EI S 2L91Z S Z2Z'ES ESZ`EL L96'61 - - iE9'91 it9'6Y t661 'OC aMf le pact WN L661 '1 Lluf W well pN - 096'IE 900'ZI 11611 - (196'0' (010'OZ) pace pa y a keno 11ICE9 - sare9°a MIRO paw taluto Jowl - Amara S2L1 - _ appm Ill =IWO 10 YD9Rmeet riAns Mugu °Plan PPelPtlul :anu...1 WgladmnN (ZSE'L9) 010'06 mod=yeqtzdo(-ppm)J110 0Z9'Ee ZS6191 - Z66191. 692 GE1 Z9079 Zllaaai & ua& Jo (Lauaogap) elgaxg9fMZGL[ aawan Illvepado R+°a S6111 Z161161 900'11 906131 6921E1 1:90i9 000`9Z - El - Z11 ZIZ - _ 000'OSZ 1SZ'SEI 4^"""IlagpixdoRl°y - - 461'10 wile - - _ 000`I =Mit 00 °e9"411.4 °aJ � wen NN - - - - - _ cr m motto mom! - SZO'E - puauand.Saually - - _ _ 9LL'61 - - - - - _ _ - 'a-4u= minion Zf I'66 - MSS � - - - S66'f 6/1'YI NUOgIlltwYO°+a410 _ _ nam=quWam MUM= aal l S6111 S 001161 S 006'0i S 006'LYI 1 LS01E1 S Z9- 0'Z9 S 000'9Z S 000'SZI f - OOf [I1 f Pew »oo11( W'ar'�1' '0 J V aarhtl :U1O9eJo0a lelottounnallnui :aaauanat fupuad0 66/131./t :40..Y Riverside County `transportation Commission Focus: 1998 Value Results 000122 22 ERNST & YOUNG LLP THE VALUE SCORECARD In addition to providing you with the results of our audits, this meeting provides a forum to refine your expectations regarding our services going forward. We include below some recent examples of value-added assistance provided to the Commission and seek your input as to additional value we can bring to the Commission. Issue Description of Assistance Value Knowledge Transfer GFOA Certificate Accounting Assistance Public Sector Training Provide assistance in preparation of the general purpose financial statements for suhmission to obtain the GFOA Cenificate. Review significant and/or unusual accounting transactions for proper accounting and reporting. Provide annual technical update sessions for financial personnel. The Commission has received the GFOA Certificate on financial reporting excellence annually since the 1993 CAFR. External resource to ensure that transactions are recorded and reported properly. Management prepared to comply with future accounting and reporting developments. Project Assistance Commuter Assistance Program Arbitrage and Verification Calculations indirect Cost Allocation Plan Update of Measure A Sales Tax Forecast Analysis of Measure A Perform agreed -upon procedures relating to the financial records and internal control over inventory and recipient eligibility. Perform arhitrage calculations required by law and refunding verification calculations required for debt financings. Providing assistance related to the development of an indirect cost allocation plan. Perform agreed -upon procedures related to projection of Measure A sales lax revenues. including assistance in developing an econometric model. Prepared and presented to civic/community leaders and restructured Commission a summary analysis of Measure A original revenue and project costs expectations compared to current status. Contractor compliance with Commuter Assistance Incentive Programs and adequate internal control over inventory. Independent analysis and calculations. Specialized industry resource with information on indirect cost plans. Current revenue projection to determine ability of Measure A revenues to fund required Measure A projects. Independent presentations of Measure A analysis based on E&Y's historical involvement with Measure A since inception. 000123 23 FS ERNST & YOUNG LLP Issue Descripdon of Assistance Value Issuance of Bonds Provide report on debt service coverage ratio for Compliance with bond indentures projected maximum annual debt service. commercial paper agreements. CPTC's Assessment of Performed agreed -upon procedures with joint HOV3+ Tolls Caltrans/OCTA/RCTC project team to determine CPTC's ahility to assess 50% tolls on HOV3+. Resource Reference Periodically, management requests our assistance in identifying candidates for accounting and management positions and in participating in the interview process. Addilionally, management requested our assistance in reviewing investment advisory proposals. and Leverage audit needs with G&Y's knowledge from prior tollroad financial projections assistance. Access to fine contacts and resources. Independent participation in the interview and proposal processes. Proactive Ideas Provide suggestions relating to possible Suggestions are included on the following improvements in operations. page. 00012,1 24 ERNST t& YOUNG LLP VALUE IDEAS - SUGGESTIONS FOR INIPROVEMENT Riverside County Transportation Commission • Continue implementation activities to be Year 2000 compliant. • Revise Measure A five-year expenditure plan requirements to include description of specific projects rather than general street improvement projects. • Ensure that the disbursement schedules for the TDA Local Transportation, Measure A and Specialized Transit funds are properly prepared to reflect the actual amounts disbursed to each city/agency during the Fiscal year. • Ensure that Specialized Measure A Transit grants are approved with a June 30 grant completion date. 00012); 25 =� ERNST&YOUNG LLP Riverside County Transportation _ Commission INV INN 000126 Looking Ahead to Next Year 26 =l ERNST & YOUNG LI P TEAM CONTINUITY From listening to management and the marketplace, we know that great value is placed on having a superior service team distinguished by relevant credentials and continuity of service. There continues to be a high level of continuity among the members of the team. Their enthusiasm and commitment to the Commission ensure responsive, innovative and forward looking service focused on its business issues. The value of the audit arises from and depends heavily on the integrated teaming of management and E&Y. Throughout the year, the E&Y audit team. is in constant communication with management to facilitate efficiency and continuous improvements in our audit efforts for the Commission. Sarah Anderson, Coordinating Partner • Partner in charge of our Southern California Public Sector practice Over 25 years of experience 11 years serving the Commission Jim Williams, independent Partner • National Director Public Sector Services, Governmental Accounting and Reporting Over 34 years of experience Over 6 years serving the Commission Theresia Trevino, Audit Senior Manager • Known for her experience in Governmental Accounting and Reporting Over 15 years of experience 11 years serving the Commission Cynthia Morningstar, Audit Manager • 9 years of experience specializing in public sector transportation 9 years serving the Commission Julia Cox, Audit Manager • 8 years of experience 8 years serving the Commission, primarily on audits of TDA claimants and Measure A recipients Other Specialists as Needed • As we have in the past, we continue to draw upon key industry specialists in such areas as economics, indirect cost plans, and arbitrage to provide the technical resources needed to bring value to the engagements. Ernst & Young continues to serve you with a multi -disciplinary team of professionals who offer both Public Sector industry expertise and a long history of involvement with the Commission. Many of the team members "grew up" on this engagement. Their enthusiasm and commitment to the Commission ensure responsive, innovative and forward looking services focused on its business issues. 000127 27 ERNST & YOUNG LLP GASB ISSUES AND PRONOUNCEMENTS GASB Technical Bulletin 98-1 -- Disclosures About Year 2000 Issues • Effective for financial statements on which the auditors • Requires disclosure on significant amount of resources 2000 issue as it relates to the Commission, and implementation GASB Financial Reporting Model Project • Management discussion and analysis • Entity -wide perspective for overall view • Fund perspective for fund type/major fund information • Capitalization of infrastructure 000 28 ' report is dated after October 31, 1998 committed for Year 2000 compliance, Year stages of completion of the Year 2000 28 Ei ERNST & YOUNG UP FISCAL 1999 AUDIT PLANNING Planning for the audits will be developed in cooperation with management. As a balanced effort, it will give full recognition to the existing internal control, as well as a thorough assessment of the business and control risks. Risk responsive, it will address both your and management's expectations and provide for the best utilization of external audit resources. We will continue to meet with management throughout the year to review current developments and challenge the continuing adequacy of the plan. Any significant changes to the plan will be promptly communicated to you as they occur. Major items that should be considered for early involvement include: Timing of year-end audit procedures based on schedules and completing the draft of the financial Assistance provided by Commission's Program audits. closing the general ledger, preparing all audit statements, including all footnote disclosures. Manager in connection with TDA/Measure A Consideration of city/agency intent to select own auditors for TDA claimant and Measure A recipient audits. Coordinate with Commission staff to determine adequacy of work performed, compliance programs and reporting requirements, and extent of reviews to be performed. 00012E' 29 al ERNrST&YOUNfG LLP gar Riverside County Transportation Commission Appendix Audit Process A Year in the Life of an Ernst & Young Client Co -Develop Expectations Drivers Undersianding Internal/External - factors Methodology Team Foxes Risk messnents Event Dnven Core Portfolio of Procedures A process focused on continuous improvement and exceeding client expectations. INIF 000130 • Meeiv nt@nt s mtieRel East s Young d' Quality Vallee Scorecard Client Satisfaction J ERNST & YOUNG L LI' 30 ERNST&YOUNG CLP AUDIT PROCESS Co -Develop Expectations In setting mutual expectations, we agree on: 1) understanding the Commission's needs; 2) providing useful deliverables; and 3) measuring the value of our relationship. This meeting with the Budget and Implementation Committee allows us to validate and extend this agreement. Drib ers Audit risk is influenced by business risk. Our audit begins with understanding factors which could affect the. Commission, TDA claimants and Measure recipients' business conditions and risks, including stakeholder needs, industry trends, evolving standards, competitive strategy and market developments. Business Risk Assessment We monitor key issues and changes in the business environment to continuously update the Commission, TDA claimants and Measure A recipients' business risks profile. Through a formal assessment of business risk, we customize our audit procedures to those areas that signal vulnerability and risk. 1lethodology With a firm grasp of current and emerging business risks, we establish a "portfolio" of audit procedures. These include: core compliance procedures, analysis of processes that manage and control business risk, and procedures necessitated by events that occur throughout the year. The mix and emphasis evolves as the business evolves. Tea m We work to leverage the resources that exist within the Commission's Finance and Accounting Department. This teaming enables us to eliminate unnecessary duplication, increase audit quality and increase the cost-effectiveness of our relationship. Focus Our primary deliverables are assurance as described in our opinion on the Commission's general purpose financial statements and TDA claimants and Measure A recipients financial statements. Respecting the talents of management, and the sophistication of the Commission's processes and controls, we have the right team looking at the right things. Our results are objective and efficient, and provide a real-time view of the business. Client Satisfaction We monitor our success in meeting the Commission's needs and expectations through our client satisfaction improvement process. Value Scorecard The goal of a traditional audit is to render opinions on the Commission's general purpose financial statements and TDA claimants and Measure A recipients financial statements. Our goal is to deliver on all of your expectations and to be measured against these expectations. Beyond the attest objective, we expect to be evaluated on: 1) providing early waming alerts regarding financial information and controls; and 2) providing meaningful business insight that helps the Commission succeed. 0001431 31 PI ERNST & YOUNG LLP Amended Item #11 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: February 10, 1999 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Bill Hughes, Bechtel Project Manager Karl Sauer, Bechtel Resident Engineer THROUGH: Paul Blackwelder, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: Construction Contract No. RO-9932 for Construction of a Pedestrian Overcrossing Structure and Security Enhancements at the Existing La Sierra and West Corona Metrolink Commuter Rail At the September 9, 1998 Commission meeting, the Commission authorized staff to re -program CMAQ funds, that had been allocated to the San Jacinto Branch Line, to the Riverside La Sierra and West Corona Metrolink Commuter Rail Stations. The re - programed CMAQ funds are to be utilized to construct a Pedestrian Overcrossing Structure and Security Enhancements at each station. This project is the next step in providing for public safety within the rail program and is required to be in place prior to the BN&SF installing the third main line track in the areas of the stations. The estimated construction cost and contingencies, and the available funding for the project are as follows: Riverside La Sierra $1, 200,000 West Corona $1,300,000 Contingency (13%) $ 325,000 Total Estimated Construction Cost $2,825,000 CMAQ funds available $2,500,000 11.47% Local Match $ 325,000 Total funding available for project $2,825,000 At the October 8, 1998 meeting, the Commission directed staff to advertise to receive bids for the Construction of a Pedestrian Overcrossing Structure and Security Enhancements at the existing La Sierra and West Corona Commuter Rail Stations. The Notice Requesting Bids was advertised on December 21, 1998. Initially, the bids were required to be submitted by January 21, 1999. At the request of the majority of the bid plan holders, an Addendum to the bid documents was issued to extend the bid period an additional two (2) weeks, to February 4, 1999. The additional bid time was intended to give the prospective bidders the time that they felt they needed to assure a competitive bid for the project. Staff concurred with the request. When the bids were opened on February 4, 1999, only one bid was submitted for the project, from Mallcraft, Inc., for $3,311,000.00. There were fourteen (14) plan holders who purchased bid documents for the project; but, only Mallcraft, actually bid on the project. The Engineer's Estimate for the project is approximately $2,500,000.00. The bid received from Mallcraft was reviewed by staff and Legal Counsel and found to be responsive but the bid amount tendered is in excess of what staff believes is a competitive bid for the project. The Mallcraft bid is $81 1,000 (32%) over the Engineer's Estimate. Because of the limited response of the bids received, one from Mallcraft, and the high cost associated with the one bid received, staff is recommending that the one bid received from Mallcraft be rejected and that the project be re -packaged and re - advertised. The project, as currently defined in the bid package, includes both the La Sierra and West Corona Pedestrian Over Crossings. When the project is re -advertised, Staff recommends that prospective bidders be allowed the opportunity to bid on either one or both of the pedestrian over crossings. From conversations we have had with several of the bidders on the plan holders list, we have concluded that by splitting up the bid, smaller sized companies, with smaller bonding capacity, will be able to bid on the project. Staff believes that this approach should result in a lower more cost competitive bid than the one currently received from Mallcraft. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission approve the following: 1. That the single bid received from Mallcraft, that exceeded the Engineer's estimate by 32%, be rejected. 2. That the project to construct a pedestrian over crossing and security system at both the La Sierra and West Corona Metrolink stations be re -advertised for a period of twenty days. 3. That the project be re -packaged so that prospective bidders be allowed to bid on construction of the pedestrian over crossing and electronic security systems at either one or both of the stations. RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: February 10, 1999 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee Bill Hughes, Bechtel Project Manager Karl Sauer, Bechtel Resident Engineer THROUGH: Paul Blackwelder, Deputy Executive Director SUBJECT: Award of Construction Contract No. RO-9932 to Construct a Pedestrian Overcrossing Structure and Security Enhancements at the Existing La Sierra and West Corona Metrolink Commuter Rail Stations. At the September 9, 1998 Commission meeting, the Commission authorized staff to re -program CMAQ funds, that had been allocated to the San Jacinto Branch Line, to the Riverside La Sierra and West Corona Metrolink Commuter Rail Stations. The re - programed CMAQ funds are to be utilized to construct a Pedestrian Overcrossing Structure and Security Enhancements at each station. This project is the next step in providing for public safety within the rail program. The estimated construction cost and contingencies, and the available funding for the project are as follows: Riverside La Sierra $1,200,000 West Corona S 1, 300,000 Contingency (13%) $ 325,000 Total Estimated Construction Cost $2,825,000 CMAQ funds available $2,500,000 11.47% Local Match $ 325,000 Total funding available for project $2,825,000 At the October 8, 1998 meeting, the Commission directed staff to advertise to receive bids for the Construction of a Pedestrian Overcrossing Structure and Security Enhancements at the existing La Sierra and West Corona Commuter Rail Stations. The Notice Requesting Bids was advertised on December 21, 1998. Initially, the bids were required to be submitted by January 21, 1999. But, at the request of the majority of the bid plan holders, an Addendum to the bid documents was issued which extended the bid period an additional two (2) weeks, to February 4, 1999. The additional bid time will give the prospective bidders the time that they feel they need to assure a competitive bid for the project. Staff concurred with the request. 000132 BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: When the bids are received, on February 4, 1999, they will be distributed to the evaluation panel, consisting of staff members and Legal Counsel, and reviewed for compliance to the bid documents. Based on the review by staff and Legal Counsel, the evaluation panel will recommend the lowest responsive bidder to the Commission for award of Contract No. RO-9932, for Construction of a Pedestrian Overcrossing Structure and Security Enhancements at the existing La Sierra and West Corona Commuter Rail Stations. { U0133 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: February 10, 1999 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee David Shepherd, Director of Intergovernmental and Legislative Affairs THROUGH: Eric Haley, Executive Director SUBJECT: Local Sales Tax Measure Renewal Options Beginning in early 1998, the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) expressed interest in renewing the current half -cent transportation sales tax measure, Measure A. In response, RCTC staff raised the issue of the difficulty in attaining a two-thirds majority to support passage of local sales tax measures. This difficulty presents a clear dilemma for the seventeen self-help counties in the state as well as those counties lacking a dedicated local source of revenue to support necessary transportation investments. The Self -Help Counties Coalition, under the leadership of SANBAG Executive Director, Norm King (Moderator), and RCTC Executive Director, Eric Haley (Vice - Moderator), began discussing options for addressing the two-thirds dilemma. From this discussion and a series of legal reviews, six options seem to be available. Each have their own unique legal and political merits or demerits. 1. Legislation to amend the Constitution to change the two-thirds vote requirement for local transportation sales and use tax to majority vote. To be placed on the ballot, a constitutional amendment requires a two-thirds vote of the Legislature. The proposition would need to be approved by a majority vote of the state-wide electorate. 2. Adoption of a state tax - 50% ratification by the statewide electorate of a state transportation sales and use tax collected in each county, contingent upon local ratification of an expenditure plan by a majority of the cities representing a majority of the county population and a majority of the county Board of Supervisors. This would require 50% approval by the Legislature to be placed on the ballot. 3. A statewide tax (similar to #2 above) - 50% statewide vote required followed by a two-thirds ratification of the cities and County Supervisors. This would require 50% approval by the Legislature to be placed on the ballot. 4. A bill requiring two-thirds vote by the Legislature to impose a state transportation sales and use tax subject to ratification by a majority vote of 000134 the county electorate; 5. State constitutional amendment to reverse the two-thirds, and within the county 50% requirement, i.e. special taxes require 50% and general taxes require two-thirds; 6. A+B-One measure, requiring 50% which outlays the expenditure plan, the other, requiring 50% ratification of the half -cent to pay for the plan, both appearing simultaneously on the local county ballot. (No new legislation needed) Options 1-5 have not undergone any legal tests to date. However, each has been researched by legal counsel representing RCTC, SANBAG, the San Diego Associated Governments (SANDAG), and Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). As each option appears legally feasible, their political acceptance by the Legislature is currently uncertain. Senator John Burton recently announced his intention to reduce the two-thirds requirement for local transportation sales tax measures. This past November, Marin, and Sonoma County each had "A + B" measures on their respective ballots. While the expenditure plans for each county passed overwhelmingly (Marin - 63%, Sonoma, 72%), the '/z ratification for each county failed (Marin - 43%, Sonoma, 47%). At the same time, Monterey and San Benito each placed a local transportation sales tax measure requiring two-thirds passage. Each achieved over 50% support but failed to receive the required two-thirds for ratification. Representatives from the Self -Help Counties Coalition, Senator Burton's office, Norm King, Eric Haley, Steve DeBaun, Legal Counsel for RCTC and D.J. Smith, RCTC and SANBAG's Sacramento Advocate, recently met to discuss the options and how to proceed. Senator Burton will present a series of legal questions, relating to options 1-5 above to the Attorney General and Legislative Counsel for a confidential legal opinion. Subsequent to receiving the legal opinion, key legislators will be approached, and a meeting will be scheduled with the anti -tax organization to assess the political ramifications. From these meetings, and additional research, staff will bring forward a specific recommendation to support. BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission support pursuit of a reduction in the current vote requirement for passage of local transportation sales tax measures from two-thirds to 50% Currently, too many legal and political variables exist to specifically select one of several options. 000135 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: February 10, 1999 TO: Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: Budget and Implementation Committee' Dean Martin, Chief Financial Officer SUBJECT: Draft Work Plan for the Strategic Plan One of the most ambitious projects for the Commission for the 1999 calendar year will be the development and completion of a comprehensive and countywide Strategic Plan. The Strategic Plan will address all major funding sources including sales tax, state and federal funding, possibility of developer fees and any other viable sources of revenue. Projects of regional significance will be identified, prioritized and sequenced. Although many of the major projects will be for highways, rail, regional arterials and new corridors, it is staff's intent that the Strategic Plan will address specialized transportation programs, transit issues, clean air and air quality projects, funding for local rehabilitation and maintenance, and commuter assistance and outreach programs. Staff and the Commission's financial advisors will be prepared to provide an oral presentation that will lay out a suggested approach and time schedule for completion. Staff anticipates completing Phase I of the plan by June 30, 1999 for presentation at the July meeting. Phase II will run on a parallel track with Phase I, and is anticipated to be completed by December 31, 1999. BUDGET AND IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: 1. Adopt the draft work plan for completion of the Commission's comprehensive and countywide Strategic Plan. 000136 DRAFT RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION STRATEGIC PLAN UPDATE OVERVIEW, PROPOSED OUTLINE, WORKPLAN AND SCHEDULE OVERVIEW To initiate the process of developing and adopting the Commission's Strategic Plan. The Strategic Plan serves as the Commission's policy document to implement Countywide transportation solutions. The Strategic Plan Update will be a collaborative process with participation from policy makers, staff, as well as community and business leaders. The Strategic Plan will incorporate two phases. Phase I will address near -term strategy and Phase 2 will address the Commission's long-term strategy. Goals of the Phase Strategic Plan Update include the following: • Summarize Program Objectives • Evaluate Historical, Current, and Projected Program Results • Identify of Key Programmatic and Financial Policy Issues • Update Project Prioritization, Sequencing, and Benchmarking • Identify Potential Program Constraints • Evaluate Funding and Expenditure Alternatives • Summarize Policy Alternatives Under Multiple Scenarios • Identify Policy Alternatives and Recommendations • Provide On -Going Program Evaluation and Benchmarking The proposed Outline, Workplan, and Schedule follow. Prepared by Charles A. Bed Securities and &Tea Capital Markets Q00137 DRAFT RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION STRATEGIC PLAN UPDATE OVERVIEW, PROPOSED OUTLINE, WORKPLAN AND SCHEDULE OUTLINE The proposed outline for the Strategic Plan Update is as follows: • Executive Summary • Overview • Update on Revised Commission Organization and Committee Structure • Key Policy Issues • Summary of Alternatives and Recommendations • Summary of Measure A Program • Demand Driven • Return to Source • Proposed Allocation Progress Status Report Summary • Project • Region (Western Riverside, Coachella Valley, Palo Verde Valley) • Source • Comparison vs. Plan Prepared by Charles A. Bel Securities and Boyers Capital Markets 000133 • Sources of Funds • Sales tax • Overview and Roles of Participants • Forecast Methodology and Factors • Historical forecasts • Actual receipts • Current forecast • Reauthorization discussion • State funding • Overview and Roles of Participants • Funding factors and constraints • Historical • SB45 • State Transportation Improvement Program • Surface Transportation Program • Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality • State -Local Transportation Partnership Program • State Highway Operations and Protection Program • Caltrans Maintenance Funds • Proposed Legislation • Federal Funding • TEA-21 and FTA 5309 • Other Sources • Local Transportation Fund • Developer Fees • Congestion Pricing • Toll Road Revenues • Rights of Way (including fiber optics) • State Infrastructure Bank • Real Estate/Transit Oriented Developnnent/Parking • Freight • Advertising • Regional Gras Tax Prepared by Charles A. Bea Securities and & yea Capital Markets 000139 • Uses of Funds • Overview • Project Prioritization , Sequencing and Approval • Mandated Programs • Rights of Way and Construction • State routes and interstate highways • New corridors • Commuter rail • Capital • Operating • Other rail • Regional arterials • Local Streets and Roads • Interchanges • Rehabilitation and maintenance • Transit operations • Service expansion • Capital replacement • Air Quality/Clean Fuels • Special Programs • Commuter education and outreach Prepared by Charfes A. Bad' Securities and Boyea Capita! Markets 006140 • Financing Strategy • Policy Goals • Integration with other Commission Documents (Budget , etc.) • Overview of Participant and Roles • history and Summary of Financings • Transaction • Ratings • Coverage • Cost of Capital • Projections • Investment Policy • Summary Cash Flow Model • Key Policy Issues • Recommendations • Implementation Plan • Addenda (including Project detail and Cash Flow Sensitivity Models) r Prepared by Charles A. Bei Securities and Hayes Capita! Markets 000141 • Financing Strategy • Policy Goals • Integration with other Commission Documents (Budget , etc.) • Overview of Participant and Roles • History and Summary of Financings • Transactions • Ratings • Coverage • Cost of Capital • Projections • Investment Policy • Summary Cash Flow Model • Key Policy Issues • Recommendations • Implementation Plan • Addenda (including Project detail and Cash Flow Sensitivity Models) Prepared by Charles A. Be! Securities and Boyea Capital Markets 000141 DRAFT RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION STRATEGIC PLAN UPDATE REVISED PROPOSED WORKPLAN TASK I ACTION STEPS ] RESPONSIBLE PARTIES 6. REVIEW AND ANALYZE SALES TAX FUNDING Review of forecast methodology, actual vs. projections, and revised longterm forecast. 6.1 Meet with E&Y to discuss forecast methodology E&Y, FA 6.2 Update regional economic forecast for sales tax irripact Musing 6.3 Develop and adopt 20 year sales tax projections E&Y. Hosing. Staff, Commission 6.4 Review sales tax extension alternatives Staff, FA 6. UPDATE STATE 6 FEDERAL FUND NG PLAN Determine eligibility factors and constraints and applicability to RCTC programs. 6.1 Meet with programming staff to determine state and federal funding source availability FA, Staff 6.2 Summarize state and federal funding program guidelines and requirements Staff, FA 6.3 Review proposed legislation Staff. FA 6.4 Develop projections for state and federal funding levels Staff 7. REVIEW ALTERNATIVE FUNDING SOURCES Review of developer fee, congestion pricing, toll road, and transit oriented development funding alternatives. 7.1 Analyze developer fee including review of existing model CountyIWRCOG, Staff, knpacted Cities 7.2 Review and discuss private development options including Staff, FA 7.3 Analyze toll road options Staff, FA 7.4 Discuss other potential sources Staff, FA 6. DEVELOP UPDATED EXPENDITURE Review project selection methodology PLAN and project alternatives. 8.1 Review criteria for project selection, prioritization, sequencing, and Staff, FA 8.2 Analyze alternative methodologies for project selection, prioritization, Staff, FA 8.3 Summarize program needs and Staff, FA 8.4 Present preliminary project Staff 8.6 Update protect selection alternatives Staff, FA 8.6 Preliminary review of project Commission, Staff, FA 8.7 Present preliminary project alternatives to COGS and Public Commission, Staff, FA BA Adopt final expendkure plan, prioritization, and sequencing of projects Commission Prepared by Charles A. BM Sacurftias and Boyea Capital Markets (►00143 DRAFT RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION STRATEGIC PLAN UPDATE REVISED PROPOSED WORKPLAN TASK ACTION STEPS I RESPONSIBLE PARTIES 9. DEVELOP INTERACTNE ANALYTIC Analyze impact of funding/expenditure CASHFLOW MODEL alternatives under multiple scenarios. 9.1 Determine appropriate input line items FA, Staff 9.2 Deternine key variables FA, Staff 9.3 Develop and present draft cashflow model FA 9.4 Revise cashflow model FA 9.5 Analyze multiple scenarios including various growth, sequencing, funding level, interest rate, inflation, and sales tax extension alternatives FA, Staff 9.8 Summarize cashflow model FA, Staff 10. UPDATE FINANCIAL POLICY Summarize and update debt and investment policy. 10.1 Review debt history FA 102 Summarize and update debt policy Staff, FA 10.3 Summarize and update investment Staff, FA 11. FINALIZE STRATEGIC PLAN UPDATE DOCUMENT Incorporate input to develop policy goals, recommendations and implementation plan for updated Strategic Plan. 11.1 Draft Phase 1 Strategic Plan Update Staff, FA 112 Present Phase 1 Strategic Plan Staff, FA 11.3 Revise Phase 1 Strategic Plan Staff, FA 11A Finalize Phase 1 Strategic Plan Staff, FA 11.5 Adopt Phase 1 Strategic Plan Update Commission 11.8 Present Phase 2 Strategic Plan Staff, FA . 11.7 Revise Phase 2 Strategic Plan Staff, FA 11.8 Finalize Phase 2 Strategic Plan Staff, FA 11.9 Adopt Phase 2 Strategic Plan Update Commission Prepared by Charles A. Be! Securities end Boyea Capital Markets 000144 DRAFT RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION STRATEGIC PLAN UPDATE REVISED PROPOSED SUMMARY TIME SCHEDULE Activity/Month 1999 1 1 3 I ti A T 9 9 10 11 12 Project Management x x x x x x x x x x x x Data Collection and Review x x x x x x x Draft Outline, Workplan A Schedule x Revise Outline, Workplan S Schedule x Budget Workshop x Assemble Strategic Plan Team x Update Outline, Workplan 3 Schedule x Meet with Program managers x x x x x x Present Plan Overview 8 Schedule x Update Project Status x x x x x Update Sales Tax Forecast x x x x x x Preliminary StatelFederal Funding Plan x x x x x Update State/Federal Funding Plan x it x Review Alternative Funding Sources x x Review Project Expenditure Plan x x x x Update Project Expenditure Plan x x x x Cashftow Model Development x x x x x x x x x x x Update Financial Policy x x x x Draft Phase 1 Strategic Plan x x Present Phase 1 Strategic Plan x x Draft Phase 2 Strategic Plan x x Present Phase 2 Strategic Plan x x Prepared by Charles A, Be/ Securities and Boyee Capital Markets 000145 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DATE: TO: February 10,1999 Riverside County Transportation Commission FROM: SUBJECT: Plans and Programs Committee Marilyn Williams, Director of Regional Issues and Communications Regional Airport Expansion Issues and Options The 1998 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) developed by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) provides a long-range, coordinated approach to transportation improvements in the six -county SCAG region from 1998 to 2020. It identifies specific performance measures necessary to meet mobility, air quality and other regional goals. Among the various strategies addressed is aviation, highlighting the fact that the capacity of the existing airport system (100 million annual passengers) is projected to experience a shortfall of one-third by 2020. The SCAG Aviation Committee has been the focal point for regional discussion regarding airport expansion options and impacts. Aviation action steps defined in the RTP include the following: • Support expansion of capacity at major existing and potential regional airports to handle anticipated increases in both passenger and freight volume. • Mitigate effects of expanding existing airports and adding military air bases so that community impacts are minimized. • Maximize air passenger and air cargo utilization of outlying airports in less populated areas. • Create a task force to include elected officials from the Regional Council, airport operators and the airlines to further examine aviation issues. At the time the RTP was adopted in April 1998, it was noted that both LAX and El Torro airports were in the process of developing master plans and had not completed capacity modeling analysis. As a result, passenger allocation numbers for the facilities were unconstrained. The RTP further noted that "...substantial growth constraints on these two facilities through 2020 would result in redistribution of air passenger demand to other airports in the regional system...". Today, the LAX Master Plan revision anticipates expanding its passenger activity from a current 60 million to 98 million passengers per year and its cargo activity from a current 1.7 million to 4.2 million tons per year. These projections reflect unconstrained growth which carry significant economic and environmental impacts 0()0146 not just to the surrounding communities of LAX but to the SCAG six county region given the number of subregional airports such as March Air Force Base and their potential ability to minimize the impacts of centralizing airport expansion. In response to the proposed unconstrained expansion of LAX, a coalition of South Bay cities was formed to broaden understanding of the wide-ranging impacts associated with the proposed LAX Master Plan and build a regional coalition of interests to ensure that the RTP action steps are fully met. The coalition is seeking region wide support of its goals through adoption of a resolution calling for the development of a Regional Airport Plan for Southern California. The coalition is represented by Denny Zane of Gladstein and Associates who will be present at the Commission meeting to discuss the issues related to airport expansion and the coalition's resolution. PLANS AND PROGRAMS COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission consider adoption of a Resolution No. 99-01, Resolution of the Riverside County Transportation Commission Calling For a Regional Airport Plan For Southern California. 00014 7 Pt. Mugu Southern California Regional Airports Population Growth Rates Highest>80% by 2020 Lowest < 20 % by 2020 : PiI LOS AiiNGELES AND YVICINITY LILM 1. GOUSIIA George Atli' . 4i vuisnop ONV S3139N11V 50.1 ..y jr!.t( • 41,:k Hi v. aA.1000 OldedYNI.,_413 HVS. : out sq .A.of > 1111OZOZ ,C4 %08< 'saliva! saigH tnAtoa9 maimictimug spodire intio!2am u!tuoiliej tuatimos .41 'Am 1,1 RESOLUTION NO. 99-01 RESOLUTION OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION CALLING FOR A REGIONAL AIRPORT PLAN FOR SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA WHEREAS, the Los Angeles Department of Airports has initiated a revision of the Master Plan for the Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) which anticipates expanding its passenger activity from a current 60 million passengers per year to an expected 98 million passengers per year and its cargo activity from its current 1.7 million tons per year to an expected 4.2 million tons per year; and, WHEREAS, expanding its passenger and cargo activity as proposal will greatly increase the number of flights and nearly double ground traffic going to and from LAX; and, WHEREAS, communities in the vicinity of LAX which already experience enormous adverse environmental impacts from operations of the airport can expect greatly increased noise and air pollution from overhead aircraft, greatly increased congestion and air pollution from ground traffic, especially from dramatic increases in the activity of diesel trucks around the airport; and, WHEREAS, airport officials estimate LAX improvements will cost as much as $12 billion, not including the costs of transportation improvemetns required to facilitate access to LAX which will paid for by regionaJ.taxpayers; and, WHEREAS, there are many other commercial airports in Southern California; some with significant histories as commercial airports, some recently converted to commercial or joint military and commercial airports; and, WHEREAS, several of these airports are located in areas of Southern California expected to experience the greatest growth in population and employment over the next twenty years, while LAX is near the communities expected to experience the least growth in the same period; and, WHEREAS, developing airport capacity near high growth communities rather than concentrating airport development at LAX may be an environmental superior, lower -cost and more equitable strategy for serving future growth in air commerce in Southern California; and, 000150 WHEREAS, the development of these regional airport resources will help spread jobs and economic development opportunities more equitable throughout the region, and reduce the public health and environmental burden on communities near LAX. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT, the Riverside County Transportation Commission calls upon the communities of Southern California, including the City of Los Angeles, the Counties of Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, and Ventura; the State of California; and our Congressional Representatives to join together in developing the Regional Airport Plan for Southern California that constrains LAX to operate within the capacity of its existing facilities and develops the capacity of the many other commercial airports in Southern California to serve the expanding air commerce marketplace. ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 10t day of February, 1999. Councilman Jack F. van Haaster, Chairman Riverside County Transportation Commission ATTEST: Naty Kopenhaver, Clerk of the Riverside County Transportation Commission UUUi5l