HomeMy Public PortalAbout02 February 27, 2012 Western Riverside County Programs and ProjectsTIME:
DATE:
RECORDS
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE
MEETING AGENDA
1:30 p.m.
Monday, February 27, 201 2
LOCATION: BOARD ROOM
County of Riverside Administrative Center
4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside
~ COMMITTEE MEMBERS ~
Darcy Kuenzi, Chair I Wallace Edgerton, City of Menifee
Adam Rush, Vice Chair I Ike Bootsma, City of Eastvale
Bob Botts I Don Robinson, City of Banning
Karen Spiegel I Eugene Montanez, City of Corona
Frank Johnston I Micheal Goodland, City of Jurupa Valley
Marcelo Co I Richard Stewart, City of Moreno Valley
Berwin Hanna I Kathy Azevedo, City of Norco
Daryl Busch I AI Landers, City of Perris
Andrew Kotyuk I Scott Miller, City of San Jacinto
Ben Benoit I Timothy Walker, City of Wildomar
Bob Buster, County of Riverside, District I
Marion Ashley, County of Riverside, District V
~STAFF~
Anne Mayer, Executive Director
John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director
~ AREAS OF RESPONSIBILITY ~
Air Quality, Capital Projects,
Communications and Outreach Programs,
lntermodal Programs,
Motorist Services, New Corridors,
Regional Agencies/Regional Planning,
Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP),
Specific Transit Projects,
State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP),
Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program, and
Provide Policy Direction on Transportation Programs and Projects
related to Western Riverside County and other
areas as may be prescribed by the Commission.
Comments are welcomed by the Committee. If you wish to provide comments to the Committee,
please complete and submit a Speaker Card to the Clerk of the Board.
Alexandra Rackerby
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Alexandra Rackerby
Thursday, February 23, 2012 8:34AM
Alexandra Rackerby
RCTC Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee-lpad Compatible Users
Good Morning Commissioners,
The Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee agenda for Monday February 27, 2012
is posted on our Website at http:/ /www.rctc.org/downloads/WRC/ipad wrc.pdf Let me know if you have
any questions or concerns.
Thank you.
Respectfully,
Allie Rackerby
Riverside County Transportation Commission
(951) 787-7141
1
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS
COMMITTEE
www.rctc.org
AGENDA*
*Actions may be taken on any item listed on the agenda
1:30 p.m.
Monday, February 2 7, 2012
BOARDROOM
County Administrative Center
4080 Lemon Street, First Floor
Riverside, California
In compliance with the Brown Act and Government Code Section 54957.5, agenda materials
distributed 72 hours prior to the meeting, which are public records relating to open session
agenda items, will be available for inspection by members of the public prior to the meeting at
the Commission office, 4080 Lemon Street, Third Floor, Riverside, CA, and on the
Commission's website, www.rctc.org.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and Government Code Section
54954.2, if you need special assistance to participate in a Committee meeting, please contact
the Clerk of the Board at (951) 787-7141. Notification of at least 48 hours prior to meeting
time will assist staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide
accessibility at the meeting.
1 . CALL TO ORDER
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3. ROLL CALL
4. PUBLIC COMMENTS -Each individual speaker is limited to speak three (3)
continuous minutes or less. The Committee may, either at the direction of the
Chair or by majority vote of the Committee, waive this three minute time
limitation. Depending on the number of items on the Agenda and the number of
speakers, the Chair may, at his/her discretion, reduce the time of each speaker
to two (2) continuous minutes. Also, the Committee may terminate public
comments if such comments become repetitious. In addition, the maximum time
for public comment for any individual item or topic is thirty (30) minutes.
Speakers may not yield their time to others without the consent of the Chair.
Any written documents to be distributed or presented to the Committee shall be
submitted to the Clerk of the Board. This policy applies to Public Comments and
comments on Agenda Items.
Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee
February 27, 201 2
Page 2
Under the Brown Act, the Board should not take action on or discuss matters
raised during public comment portion of the agenda which are not listed on the
agenda. Board members may refer such matters to staff for factual information
or to be placed on the subsequent agenda for consideration.
5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES-NOVEMBER 28, 2011
6. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS (The Committee may add an item to the Agenda after
making a finding that there is a need to take immediate action on the item and
that the item came to the attention of the Committee subsequent to the posting
of the agenda. An action adding an item to the agenda requires 2/3 vote of the
Committee. If there are less than 2/3 of the Committee members present,
adding an item to the agenda requires a unanimous vote. Added items will be
placed for discussion at the end of the agenda.)
7 · FISCAL YEAR 2011/12 TRANSPORTATION UNIFORM MITIGATION FEE (TUMF)
REGIONAL ARTERIAL PROGRAM -PROGRAMMING REQUESTS
Page 1
Overview
This item is for the Committee to:
1) Approve the removal of the Interstate 15/Schleisman Road interchange
project from the TUMF Regional Arterial program and replace it with the
Interstate 15/Limonite Avenue interchange improvement project in the city
of Eastvale, and terminate Agreement No. 06-72-522-00 with the county
of Riverside for the 1-1 5/Schleisman Road interchange;
2) Approve Agreement No. 12-72-059-00 with the city of Moreno Valley to
program $5,665,000 of TUMF Regional Arterial funds for the Moreno
Valley Perris Boulevard (Cactus Avenue to Perris Valley Storm Drain
(PVSD) Lateral "B") construction phase;
3) Authorize the Executive Director to execute the agreement, pursuant to
legal counsel review;
4) Approve the removal of the Ramona Expressway extension project,
Seventh Street to Cedar Street, and replace it with the Ramona
Expressway widening project, Sanderson Avenue to State Street in the
city of San Jacinto, and terminate Agreement No. 06-72-520-00 with the
city of San Jacinto; and
5) Forward to the Commission for final action.
Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee
February 27, 2012
Page 3
8. TIGER IV DISCRETIONARY GRANTS: STATE ROUTE 91 CORRIDOR
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Page 22
Overview
This item is for the Committee to:
1) Direct staff to prepare a Transportation Investment Generating Economic
Recovery (TIGER) grant application and Transportation Infrastructure
Finance and Innovation ACT (TIFIA) letter of interest (LOI) submittal
package to U.S. Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT) for the SR-91
Corridor Improvement Project (SR-91 CIP);
2) Authorize the Executive Director to submit the grant application and TIFIA
LOI;
3) Authorize the Executive Director to submit future TIGER grant applications
and TIFIA LOI for the SR-91 CIP if necessary; and
4) Forward to the Commission for final action.
9. AMENDMENT TO COMMISSION'S FY 2007/08 AND FY 2011/12 RAIL
PROGRAM SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN
Page 25
Overview
This item is for the Committee to:
1) Amend the Commission's Commuter Rail Program FY 2011/12 Short
Range Transit Plan (SRTP) to reflect the allocation of $1 0 million in
Federal Transit Administration (FT A) Section 5309 program funds to the
Commuter Rail State of Good Repair project;
2) Amend the Commission's Commuter Rail Program FY 2007/08 SRTP to
reflect deobligation of $123,131 in Local Transportation Fund (L TF) funds
from the Commission Station Capital Improvement Program; and
3) Forward to the Commission for final action.
Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee
February 27, 2012
Page 4
10. PROPOSITION 18 FISCAL YEAR 2010/11 CALIFORNIA TRANSIT SECURITY
GRANT PROGRAM -CALIFORNIA TRANSIT ASSISTANCE FUND AND
SUPPORTING RESOLUTION
Page 28
Overview
This item is for the Committee to:
1) Adopt Resolution No. 12-008, "Resolution of the Riverside County
Transportation Commission Appointing Individuals to Act on Behalf of the
Commission for the Purpose of Applying and/or Accepting Grants Awarded to
the Commission's Rail Program"; and
2) Forward to the Commission for final action.
11. MASTER AGREEMENT AND PROGRAM SUPPLEMENTS FOR STATE FUNDED
TRANSIT PROJECTS WITH THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
Page 31
Overview
This item is for the Committee to:
1) Adopt Resolution No. 12-007, "Authorization for the Execution of a
Master Agreement and Program Supplements for State-Funded Transit
Projects" with California Department of Transportation (Caltrans);
2) Approve Agreement No. 12-25-060-00 with Caltrans for state-funded
transit projects;
3) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to
execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and
4) Forward to the Commission for final action.
12. ELECTION OF OFFICERS
Page 63
Overview
This item is for the Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee
to conduct an election of officers for 2012 -Chair and Vice Chair.
13. COMMISSIONERS I STAFF REPORT
Overview
This item provides the opportunity for the Commissioners and staff to report on
attended and upcoming meeting/conferences and issues related to Commission
activities.
Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee
February 27, 2012
Page 5
14. ADJOURNMENT AND NEXT MEETING
The next Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee meeting is
scheduled to be held at 1:30 p.m., Monday, March 26, 2012, Board Chambers,
First Floor, County Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside.
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS SIGN-IN SHEET
FEBRUARY 27, 2012
NAME AGENCY E MAIL ADDRESS r«J. h t-::SOh n ~ _JI.Anutt'fo-\.)~ ~ { Oh11s~ 1U(U.,./A11Aflk~ ·
l~A ~ fiJ, ot-lr '6~ IJ~K! --f -~i'\1.)", rJ ,~tJA-._, f M11 t.a ~
~P~/A£ ~~d)/ pf //w#'7IAP !# AAi~
/ / I v /
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS
COMMITTEE
ROLL CALL
FEBRUARY 27, 2012
County of Riverside, District I
county qfr,Riv~'rside~ District v ·
City of Banning
City ~~·,Corqna
City of Eastvale
City of Jurupa V911ey
City of Menifee .
City of Moren9:Valley . ··
City of Norco
City of ·ee,rris .
City of San Jacinto
City(>f Wnd()"ma~/
Present
.... 1!1 ·<~
K ~· •:~·
~. . .. r:tll" ,,.,,'"
D
LJ.·
Absent
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
. .L,J
'"p
D
D
~ , .. ,.(
·•····· ,.,
AGENDA ITEM 5
MINUTES
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS COMMITTEE
Monday, November 28, 2011
MINUTES
1 . CALL TO ORDER
The meeting of the Western Riverside County Programs and Projects
Committee was called to order by Chair Darcy Kuenzi at 1 :30 p.m.,
in the Board Room at the County of Riverside Administrative Center,
4080 Lemon Street, First Floor, Riverside, California, 92501.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
At this time, Commissioner Adam Rush led the Western Riverside County
Programs and Projects Committee in a flag salute.
3. ROLL CALL
Members/ Alternates Present
Ben Benoit
Bob Botts
Daryl Busch
Bob Buster*
Marcelo Co
Berwin Hanna
Frank Johnston
Andrew Kotyuk
Darcy Kuenzi
Adam Rush
Karen Spiegel*
Members Absent
Marion Ashley
*Arrived after the meeting was called to order
4. PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no requests to speak from the public.
RCTC WRC Programs and Projects Committee Minutes
November 28, 2011
Page 2
5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES-AUGUST 22, 2011
M/S/C (Rush/Hanna) to approve the minutes as submitted.
Abstain: Benoit
6. ADDITIONS/REVISIONS
There were no additions or revisions to the agenda.
7. AMENDMENT WITH STV INCORPORATED TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL
ADVANCED PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
SERVICES, FINAL DESIGN, AND PROCUREMENT AND CONSTRUCTION
SUPPORT FOR THE PERRIS VALLEY LINE PROJECT
Cathy Bechtel, Project Development Director, presented a detailed overview
on the scope of the amendment with STV Incorporated to provide additional
advanced preliminary engineering and environmental services, final design,
and procurement and construction support for the Perris Valley Line project.
M/S/C (Kotyuk/Rush) to:
1) Approve Agreement No. 07-33-123-07, Amendment No. 7 to
Agreement 07-33-123-00, with STV Incorporated (STV) for
additional advanced preliminary engineering (APE), final design,
bid support, design support during construction, and additional
support in the development of the federal supplemental
environmental assessment (SEA) and state environmental
impact report (EIR) for the Perris Valley line (PVL) in the amount
of $5,510,668, plus a contingency amount of $1.6 million, for
a total amount not to exceed $7,110,668;
2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to
execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission;
3) Authorize the Executive Director or designee, pursuant to legal
counsel review, to approve the use of the contingency as may
be required for the project; and
4) Forward to the Commission for final action.
At this time, Commissioner Bob Buster arrived at the meeting.
RCTC WRC Programs and Projects Committee Minutes
November 28, 2011
Page 3
8. LOS ANGELES-SAN DIEGO-SAN LUIS OBISPO RAIL CORRIDOR AGENCY
UPDATE
Sheldon Peterson, Rail Manager, presented an overview of the Los Angeles-
San Diego-San Luis Obispo (LOSSAN) Rail Corridor Agency, its current
strategic efforts and governance proposal, and the Commission's membership
status.
In response to Commissioner Buster's request, Sheldon Peterson clarified that
San Bernardino County has not been involved and is aware of the situation.
The challenge is service is not headed east but does impact the Commission's
track rights, connecting service, and how Metrolink relates to it, hence why
the Commission needs to be part of the LOSSAN Rail Corridor Agency as a
voting member.
Anne Mayer, Executive Director, pointed out that if the Commission did not
own the track rights for all passenger rail between Fullerton and Los Angeles,
staff would not be recommending the Commission's involvement. The
Commission's rail track rights are driving the need to be a part of the LOSSAN
Rail Corridor Authority.
In response to Commissioner Andrew Kotyuk, Sheldon Peterson clarified that
no other ex-officio members are trying to obtain voting rights.
In response to Commissioner Rush, Sheldon Peterson clarified that the
Commission is working to obtain a voting member status by this spring.
Voting member agencies pay annual dues at the current rate of $2,000 per
year.
Anne Mayer clarified for Commissioner Rush that the legislation is necessary
in order for the Southern California entities to take control of the corridor and
make decisions.
M/S/C (Kotyuk/Hanna) to:
1 ) Authorize the Chair to execute the Bylaws and the Joint
Exercise of Powers Agreement that allow the Commission to be
included as an ex-officio member in the Los Angeles-San Diego-
San Luis Obispo (LOSSAN) Rail Corridor Agency;
2) Receive an update on the current LOSSAN Strategic Efforts and
Governance proposal;
3) Take a modify position of the proposed governance approach
with the condition that voting rights for the Commission will be
required for both local and legislative support of the effort; and
4) Forward to the Commission for final action.
RCTC WRC Programs and Projects Committee Minutes
November 28, 2011
Page 4
9. AGREEMENT FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF CALL ANSWERING CENTER
SERVICES
Jillian Edmiston, Staff Analyst, presented a brief overview of the details of
the agreement for reimbursement of call answering center services.
M/S/C (Rush/Botts) to:
1) Approve Agreement No. 12-45-033-00 (C-12139) with San
Bernardino Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies to
provide for the reimbursement of call answering center services
related to the operation of call boxes in an amount not to
exceed $190,000;
2) Authorize the Chair, pursuant to legal counsel review, to
execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and
3) Forward to the Commission for final action.
At this time, Commissioner Karen Spiegel arrived at the meeting.
10. LETTER OF INTEREST -STATE ROUTE 91 CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT
Tanya Love, Goods Movement Manager, presented a brief overview of the
details of the letter of interest for the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement
Project.
M/S/C (Hanna/Kotyuk) to:
1) Direct staff to prepare a Transportation Infrastructure Finance
and Innovation ACT (TIFIA) letter of interest (LOI) for credit
assistance to the U.S. Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT)
for the State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project (SR-91
CIP);
2) Authorize the Executive Director to submit the TIFIA LOI; and
3) Forward to the Commission for final action.
11. WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY REGIONAL CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
FUNDING REQUEST
Cathy Bechtel presented the request for funding from the Western Riverside
County Regional Conservation Authority (RCA).
Supervisor Jeff Stone, Chairman of the RCA, stated there are critical
acquisitions necessary to keep the Multi Species Habitat Conversation Plan
(MSHCP) viable and effective. He stated RCA is struggling financially and
-------------------------------------
RCTC WRC Programs and Projects Committee Minutes
November 28, 2011
Page 5
needs to take advantage of purchasing these critical properties while prices
are low. RCA is requesting the Commission allocate $3 million per year for
eight years. This would satisfy the Commission's $24 million commitment
and push the time period from 1 0 years to 1 5 years in which the
Commission would be fully vested in the MSHCP. He stated with the
Commission vested, this will ensure that it will maintain its master take
permit (permit) even if the MSHCP were to stumble or for any reason
become invalidated or legally challenged. He discussed the legislation to
allow for federal funding assistance. He stressed the importance of acquiring
these critical properties because if RCA does not acquire these properties,
the MSHCP will be put in significant jeopardy. He then highlighted the letter
from the U.S. Department of the Interior to Secretary of Transportation Ray
La Hood that was distributed to the Commissioners.
In response to Commissioner Rush's question regarding projects that would
be impacted if the Commission were to accommodate RCA's request,
Anne Mayer stated staff cannot point to any specific project. However, the
Commission has several large projects that are not yet fully funded, which
the Commission plans to move forward. Regional arterials may be a
category where there may be more difficulty meeting commitments for
Measure A and TUMF regional arterial projects. This $24 million
commitment could limit the Commission's flexibility.
Supervisor Stone stated there are significant funding issues within RCA. If
funding is not received, there is always the possibility of the permit coming
into jeopardy. He stated he views this request as an insurance policy for the
Commission so that the Commission's projects between now and 2019 will
not have any environmental stumbling blocks that would delay those projects
for many years. He expressed his belief that it is in the best interest of the
county of Riverside, the Commission, and RCA to fund this request.
Additionally, if RCA is successful in gaining a federal loan guarantee, the
Commission can postpone its commitment.
Commissioner Kotyuk asked how many jobs have been created from the
Commission's current and slated projects, if the funding being requested will
provide a safety net for RCA to neutralize the risks to the agency and the
MSHCP, and the timeline for a federal loan guarantee.
Supervisor Stone stated the loan guarantee is a two-year process. Once the
Commission's commitment to the MSHCP is fulfilled, the Commission has a
permit for all of its projects in perpetuity. If the MSHCP WE;!re challenged or
fell apart due to lack of funding, the Commission would still be protected by
the permit since the Commission's commitment was fulfilled. He stated it is
an insurance policy for the next 17 years that projects coming through the
Commission will have satisfied the take obligations.
RCTC WRC Programs and Projects Committee Minutes
November 28, 2011
Page 6
At Commissioner Kotyuk's request, Supervisor Stone provided the worst
case scenario if the Commission does not allocate this funding to RCA,
including losing the permit, the MSHCP would become insolvent, and all
agencies and jurisdictions in the county would need to go through an
individual federal process to obtain project approval.
Anne Mayer stated every $1 billion spent on projects generates
approximately 16,000 jobs. The Commission has approximately $2 billion in
projects by 201 9.
At Supervisor Stone's request, Anne Mayer listed a few projects that have
benefited from the MSHCP and the permit.
Commissioner Bob Botts stated he does not want the Commission to lose
the permit. In discussing this at his city, the feedback was to do what is
best for the Commission. He recalled the prior RCA request for funding with
an understanding that the Commission would fund the remaining contribution
after 2019. He then asked if other funding sources have been sought.
He believes the bottom line is that the Commission will have $24 million less
to spend on highway projects.
Anne Mayer noted that the $24 million is not outside of the Commission's
commitment to the MSHCP. Approximately 37 percent of the Commission's
existing debt is related to these land acquisitions. It would not be financially
prudent for either agency to take out a loan and pay even more interest. She
then explained how staff calculated the $3 million figure.
Commissioner Botts then asked if that calculation took into consideration the
amount the Commission has already contributed and the understanding
about the remaining contribution being made after 2019.
Anne Mayer stated those factors were not considered.
At Chair Kuenzi's request, Cathy Bechtel clarified that if the permit were
pulled, given that the Commission has already fulfilled approximately
75 percent of its commitment, the Commission would receive recognition for
its acquisitions.
Anne Mayer added that Caltrans and the Commission have acquired 8,600
acres of land, which the Commission receives credit for all the acreage
previously acquired.
RCTC WRC Programs and Projects Committee Minutes
November 28, 2011
Page 7
Charles landry, Executive Director of RCA, discussed the federal, state, and
local shares of the MSHCP. He then discussed the process to credit the
Commission for its acquisitions based on types of habitat and deductions for
a project through the environmental process if the permit were to be pulled.
Commissioner Karen Spiegel suggested funding two years and returning to
the Commission for review at that time. She expressed concern for RCA's
financial outlook in eight years, even if the Commission fully funded the
request.
Supervisor Stone reiterated the importance of purchasing the critical
acquisitions for the MSHCP and the benefit to the Commission by fulfilling
its obligation. He stated the most important pieces of this plan have been
acquired, with maybe one or two pieces remaining. After those acquisitions,
RCA can curtail its buying efforts.
In response to Commissioner Botts' question regarding possible assistance
from the county of Riverside and the Western Riverside Council of
Governments (WRCOG), Supervisor Stone stated WRCOG respectfully
declined RCA's request for funding.
Anne Mayer clarified that the Commission's and Caltrans' contributions
cover all transportation improvements regardless of which jurisdiction is the
sponsor of the project.
Chair Kuenzi stated that this committee is charged with making a
recommendation and providing direction to the Commission. She stated she
was not comfortable making an eight-year commitment of $3 million per year
with the today' s uncertainty in delivering transportation projects at the local
level. However, she expressed her willingness to ask the Commission to
consider providing $3 million for two years and revisit at that time, such as
Commission Spiegel suggested. She then asked for Commissioner
comments on making that recommendation to the Commission.
Commissioner Rush agreed with Chair Kuenzi's suggestion. He expressed
his primarily concern about the regional arterial aspect as this conflict does
come into practical consideration.
Commissioner Kotyuk stated if a federal loan guarantee will not be secured
for two years, he believes the Commission is being asked to be the first one
to secure the loan for that property. He asked if it was possible for the
Commission to be the back-up guarantee if the federal loan guarantee is not
secured. This would give RCA time to pursue the federal loan guarantee and
reduces the pressure on the Commission for being the primary source of
funding.
RCTC WRC Programs and Projects Committee Minutes
November 28, 2011
Page 8
Commissioner Spiegel stated this was the direction of her previous
comments. The motion language needs to include the two-year funding
commitment and also be sufficient for the federal loan guarantee because if
the loan does not come through, all agencies and jurisdictions will suffer in
the long run.
Commissioner Botts stated that while he shares everyone's concerns and
comments, he suggested keeping with the Commission's original decision to
fund the remaining contribution after 2019 and revisit this issue in two
years.
Commissioner Daryl Busch motioned to fund RCA's request as submitted.
Chair Kuenzi clarified Commissioner Busch's motion and asked if there was a
second to the motion. No second to the motion was received. She then
asked the Committee if there was another motion to be made.
Commissioner Kotyuk motioned to recommend to the full Commission to
commit to two years of payments with the caveat that if a federal loan
guarantee is not obtained, the Commission will work with RCA to assist in
fulfilling their obligation, and revisit it at that time.
Jennifer Harmon, Clerk of the Board, restated the motion for the Commission
to provide funding for two years at $3 million per year, revisit in two years,
and if no federal loan guarantee, the Commission will work with RCA to
assist in fulfilling their obligation.
M/S/C (Kotyuk/Rush) to:
1 ) Provide Measure A funding to the Western Riverside County
Regional Conservation Authority (RCA) in the amount of
$3 million per year for two years as part of the Commission's
Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) funding
obligation;
2) Revisit the continuation of this funding amount in two years;
3) Work with RCA to assist in fulfilling the MSHCP funding
obligations if a federal loan guarantee program is not in place in
two years; and
4) Forward to the Commission for final action.
RCTC WRC Programs and Projects Committee Minutes
November 28, 2011
Page 9
12. COMMISSIONERS I STAFF REPORT
12A. Anne Mayer announced that there will be no Committee meetings in
December.
13. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business for consideration by the Western Riverside
County Programs and Projects Committee, the meeting was adjourned at
3:03p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Jennifer Harmon
Clerk of the Board
AGENDA ITEM 7
----------------------------------,
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
THROUGH:
SUBJECT:
February 27, 2012
Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee
----11
Shirley Medina, Programming and Planning Manager
Cathy Bechtel, Project Development Director
Fiscal Year 2011/12 Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF)
Regional Arterial Program -Programming Requests
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Committee to:
1) Approve the removal of the Interstate 1 5/Schleisman Road interchange
project from the TUMF Regional Arterial program and replace it with the
Interstate 15/Limonite Avenue interchange improvement project in the city of
Eastvale, and terminate Agreement No. 06-72-522-00 with the county of
Riverside for the 1-1 5/Schleisman Road interchange;
2) Approve Agreement No. 12-72-059-00 with the city of Moreno Valley to
program $5,665,000 of TUMF Regional Arterial funds for the Moreno Valley
Perris Boulevard (Cactus Avenue to Perris Valley Storm Drain (PVSD) Lateral
"B") construction phase;
3) Authorize the Executive Director to execute the agreement, pursuant to legal
counsel review;
4) Approve the removal of the Ramona Expressway extension project, Seventh
Street to Cedar Street, and replace it with the Ramona Expressway widening
project, Sanderson Avenue to State Street in the city of San Jacinto, and
terminate Agreement No. 06-72-520-00 with the city of San Jacinto; and
5) Forward to the Commission for final action.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Over the past few months, staff has been contacted by the cities of Eastvale,
Moreno Valley, and San Jacinto to discuss respective programming requests. Staff
recently met with an ad hoc committee, consisting of public works staff of local
agenc1es with projects in the TUMF Regional Arterial program, to review
FY 2011/12 programming requests. In 2009, the ad hoc committee agreed to
direct all programming requests to construction activities as a means of generating
jobs due to the economic downturn. Staff and the ad hoc committee also agreed
that new projects should not be added to the TUMF Regional Arterial program until
all original projects approved by the Commission in 2004 have been completed.
Agenda Item 7
1
However, because of circumstances occurring during the environmental phase on
two TUMF Regional Arterial projects, staff and the ad hoc committee have
reconsidered this direction due to the unique circumstances described below.
To date, there are 24 project agreements with
$78.7 million of TUMF Regional Arterial funds.
programming in FY 2011/12 is $2.1 million.
local agencies committing
The balance available for
Below summarizes the FY 2011/12 TUMF Regional Arterial programming requests
and recommended actions by the ad hoc committee and staff.
City of Eastvale
Staff recently met with the cities of Eastvale and Jurupa Valley and the county of
Riverside to discuss the status of the 1-1 5/Schleisman Road interchange project.
The county of Riverside is the lead agency for the project approval/environmental
document (PA&ED) phase and the project specification and estimate phases. Given
that this project has experienced challenges at the early stages of its PA&ED phase
(e.g. new interstate highway connection, environmental issues, funding, etc.), the
cities of Eastvale and Jurupa Valley have expressed interest in removing the
1-15/Schleisman Road interchange from the TUMF Regional Arterial program and
replacing it with a higher priority project that is included in the TUMF Nexus Study,
which is the 1-15/Limonite Avenue interchange improvement project.
The 1-15/Limonite Avenue interchange improvement project will not require right of
way and can move to construction in a short timeframe. The cities are also
requesting that, by adding the 1-15/Limonite Avenue interchange project to the
TUMF Regional Arterial program, the construction amount identified in the TUMF
Nexus Study (approximately $15 million) also is carried over to the program. The
request also includes terminating the TUMF agreement between the Commission
and the county of Riverside on the 1-15/Schleisman Road interchange project and
removing it from the TUMF Regional Arterial program. As a result of this action,
the agreement balance of $2 million would revert back to the TUMF Regional
Arterial programming balance. The county of Riverside and city of Eastvale would
be eligible to request programming TUMF Regional Arterial funds for subsequent
phases consistent with the TUMF Nexus Study and programming guidelines (e.g.
when the project is ready for construction). The county of Riverside is also the
lead agency, on behalf of the city of Eastvale, for the 1-15/Limonite Avenue
interchange project, which is currently in the PA&ED phase.
As previously stated, substitutions are not normally allowed in the TUMF Regional
Arterial program. However, this is a unique situation in that two new cities have
recently incorporated and have prioritized transportation projects to address their
most critical needs. The 1-15/Schleisman Road interchange project is not the
Agenda Item 7
2
highest pnonty for these c1t1es and due to the difficulty in delivering the
1-1 5/Schleisman Road interchange project, the ad hoc committee concurred that an
exception should be made to acknowledge the priorities of these two newly
incorporated cities. More importantly, the substitution of the 1-15/Schleisman Road
interchange project with the 1-15/Limonite Avenue interchange project would result
in delivering a regional arterial project in a timely manner. The county of Riverside
transportation staff also supports this substitution and termination of Agreement
No. 06-72-522-00.
City of Moreno Valley
The city of Moreno Valley has two projects ready for construction this fiscal year.
The city has experienced savings in pre-construction phases and is requesting to
reprogram the TUMF balances to the construction phase of its respective project.
The two projects are:
Perris Boulevard -Ironwood Avenue to Manzanita Avenue
(balance is approximately $415,000)
Perris Boulevard -Cactus Avenue to PVSD Lateral "B"
(balance is approximately $1.25 million)
After further discussion with the city, it was determined that there are not
sufficient TUMF funds available to program construction for both projects.
Therefore, the city has requested to fund construction for the Cactus Avenue to
PVSD Lateral "B" segment using the pre-construction balances from both projects
and additional funds available for programming. With the construction estimate at
approximately $5,665,000 this would still leave construction funding short by
approximately $4 million.
In order to close the $4 million funding shortfall, it is recommended that the
FY 2011/12 programming balance of $2.1 million be programmed for the Perris
Boulevard, Cactus Avenue to PVSD Lateral "B", widening project. As previously
mentioned, by rescinding the 1-1 5/Schleisman Road interchange improvement
agreement an additional $2 million will return to the TUMF programming balance
for a total of $4 million that can be programmed to the Perris Boulevard project.
This recommendation is consistent with the committee's direction to prioritize
programming requests for projects ready for construction.
City of San Jacinto
Staff received a request from the city of San Jacinto regarding the need to
substitute a project for the Ramona Expressway, Seventh Street to Cedar Street,
extension project. This project is in the PA&ED phase and has significant
environmental issues that will be difficult and costly to address. The city is
Agenda Item 7
3
proposing to remove the Seventh Street to Cedar Street extension project from the
TUMF Regional Arterial program and replace it with a widening project on Ramona
Expressway from Sanderson Avenue to State Street, which is included in the
TUMF Nexus Study and has TUMF Zone funds programmed through the Western
Riverside Council of Governments. The Sanderson Avenue to State Street project
is scheduled for construction later this year. The city is also requesting that the
Commission reprogram the balance of funds from the Seventh Street to Cedar
Street segment (approx. $1 million) to the Sanderson Avenue to State Street
segment for construction and make the project eligible for an additional $4.5 million
from future revenues.
As previously stated, project substitutions are not normally allowed. The ad hoc
committee realizes the environmental issues with the Ramona Expressway
extension project may be difficult to overcome. Therefore, staff and the ad hoc
committee agreed that an exception should be made so that TUMF Regional
Arterial funds can be used on a project that is moving toward construction.
Accordingly, staff and the ad hoc committee recommend removing the Ramona
Expressway, Seventh Street to Cedar Street, extension project from the TUMF
Regional Arterial program, including termination of Agreement No. 06-72-520-00,
and replacing it with the Sanderson Avenue to State Street Project.
The city of San Jacinto would be eligible to request programming TUMF regional
arterial funds for subsequent phases, including the balance from the Seventh Street
to Cedar Street segment, consistent with the TUMF Nexus Study and programming
guidelines (e.g. when the project is ready for construction).
Future Programming Requests
With the recommended actions, a significant portion of all available FY 2011/12
TUMF funds will be programmed. Staff will report the TUMF FY 2012/13
programming estimate to the ad hoc committee in July and will report future
project programming requests and recommendations in fall 2012.
Financial Information
In Fiscal Year Budget: I Yes I I FY2011/12 Amount: J $1,000,000
N/A Year: FY 2012/13 + $1,100,000
Source of Funds: I TUMF Regional Arterial program Budget Adjustment: j No
N/A
GL!Project Accounting No.: 0051 06 81 301 21 0 7 2 81 30 1
Fiscal Procedures Approved: ~~ j Date: I 02!16/12
Attachment: Draft Agreement No. 12-79-059-00
Agenda Item 7
4
Agreement No. 12-72-059-00
AGREEMENT FOR THE FUNDING OF
TUMF REGIONAL ARTERIAL IMPROVEMENTS
WITH THE CITY OF MOREVO VALLEY
FOR THE PERRIS BOULEY ARD WIDENING
FROM CACTUS AVE TO PVSD LATERAL "B"
PROJECT 5106
1. Parties and Date.
1.1 This Agreement is executed and entered into this_ day of , 2012, by and
between the RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ("RCTC") and the
CITY OF MORENO VALLEY ("City"). RCTC and City are sometimes collectively referred to
herein as the "Parties".
2. Recitals.
2.1 RCTC is a county transportation commission created and existing pursuant to
California Public Utilities Code Sections 130053 and 130053.5.
2.2 On November 5, 2002 the voters of Riverside County approved Measure A
authorizing the collection of a one-half percent (1/2%) retail transactions and use tax to fund
transportation programs and improvements within the County of Riverside, and adopting the
Riverside County Transportation Improvement Plan (the "Plan").
2.3 The Plan requires cities and the County in western Riverside County to participate in
a Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program to be eligible to receive Local Streets
and Roads funds generated by Measure A.
2.4 The Plan further requires that the first $400 million in revenues from TUMF be made
available to RCTC to fund equally the Regional Arterial System and development of New
Transportation Corridors identified through the Community and Environmental Transportation
Acceptability Process (CET AP). To receive TUMF funding, CET AP corridors must also be
designated on the Regional System of Highways and Arterials as established in the October 2002
TUMF Nexus Study, amended in March 2004, and as may be amended in the future.
2.5 The Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) has been selected to
administer the overall TUMF Program pursuant to applicable state laws including Government Code
V:Users\PreprintiTUMF\Moreno Valley, Perris Blvd, Cactus to PVSD Lat ··w Phase 4
5
Sections 66000 et seq. and has entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with RCTC
dated July 10, 2003 regarding the allocation ofthe $400 million in TUMF Regional Funds to be
made available to RCTC for programming.
2.6 RCTC issued to the cities and the County a "Call for Projects" to be funded with
TUMF Regional funds, and in response to the Project Nomination Forms, took action on September
8, 2004 to adopt a five year TUMF Regional Arterial Program which identifies the projects and the
maximum funding commitments awarded for specific phases of work. RCTC's TUMF Regional
Arterial Program may be updated from time to time.
2. 7 RCTC intends, by this Agreement, to distribute TUMF Regional Funds, subject to the
conditions provided herein, and to participate in the joint development of the Project, as defined
herein.
3. Terms.
3.1 Description of Work. This Agreement is intended to distribute TUMF Regional
Funds to the City for the construction of the Perris Boulevard Widening from Cactus Avenue to the
Perris Valley Storm Drain Lateral "B". The Work, including a timetable and a detailed scope of
work, is more fully described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and, pursuant to Section 3.15 below, is
subject to modification as requested by the City and approved by RCTC. The Work shall be
consistent with one or more ofthe defined RCTC Call for Projects phases detailed herein as follows:
1) PA&ED-Project Approvals & Environmental Document
2) PS&E-Plans, Specifications and Estimates
3) R/W-Right of Way Acquisition and Utility Relocation
4) CONS-Construction
The Work phase(s) funded pursuant to this Agreement shall be consistent with the City's Call for
Projects Nomination Form submitted to the RCTC ("the Project") and as approved by the RCTC on
September 8, 2004. The Project is more fully described in Exhibit "B" attached hereto. It is
understood and agreed that the City shall expend TUMF Regional Funds only as set forth in this
Agreement and only for the Work. To this end, any use of funds provided pursuant to this
Agreement shall be subject to the review and approval of RCTC.
3.2 RCTC Funding Amount. RCTC hereby agrees to distribute to the City, on the terms
and conditions set forth herein, a sum not to exceed Five Million Six Hundred and Sixty Five
Thousand dollars and no cents ($ 5,665,000.00), to be used exclusively for reimbursing the City
for eligible Work expenses as described herein ("Funding Amount"). The City acknowledges and
agrees that the Funding Amount may be less than the actual cost of the Work, and that RCTC shall
not contribute TUMF Regional Funds in excess of the maximum TUMF share for the phase/project
identified in Appendix F of the TUMF Nexus Study.
2
V:Users\PreprintjTUMF\Moreno Valley, Perris Blvd, Cactus to PVSD Lat "B'. Phase 4
6
3.2.1 Eligible Work Costs. The total Work costs ("Total Work Cost") may include
the following items, provided that such items are included in the scope of work attached as Exhibit
·'A": (I) City and/or consultant costs associated with direct Work coordination and support; (2)
funds expended in preparation of preliminary engineering studies; (3) funds expended for preparation
of environmental review documentation for the Work; (4) all costs associated with right-of-way
acquisition, including right-of-way engineering, appraisal, acquisition, legal costs for condemnation
procedures if authorized by the City, and costs of reviewing appraisals and offers for property
acquisition; (5) costs reasonably incurred if condemnation proceeds; (6) costs incurred in the
preparation of plans, specifications, and estimates by City or consultants; (7) City costs associated
with bidding, advertising and awarding of the Work contracts; (8) construction costs, including
change orders to construction contract approved by the City; and (9) construction management, field
inspection and material testing costs.
3.2.1.1 Right-of-Way Acquisition. The Parties acknowledge that in order to
protect the City's ability to deliver the Project in a timely cost effective manner, the City may
purchase parcels of property in advance ofthe completion ofthe Project's final design (PS&E). The
Parties acknowledge that acquired parcels or remnants purchased in advance of final design may not
ultimately be required for the Project. Upon completion of the Project's final design, the City shall
provide RCTC with a detailed list of all parcels purchased by the City for which it received TUMF
Regional Funds pursuant to this Agreement. The City shall identifY any parcels or remnants thereof
which were acquired using TUMF Regional Funds and are not required for construction of the
Project. A preliminary list shall be submitted to the RCTC 30 days before the issuance of bid
documents for construction of the Project and a final list shall be submitted to the RCTC no later
than 30 days following the recording of the Certificated of Completion for the Project.
3.2 .1.2 Valuation and Repayment of Any Property Remnants. Upon receipt
of the City's final Jist, RCTC shall meet with the City for the purpose of identifying any parcel or
reasonably usable remnant of a parcel for which TUMF Regional Funds were expended that may
reasonably be developed for other use by the City and/or sold. The Parties shall confer in good faith
to agree upon the disposition of such parcels and remnant parcels and their fair market value as of a
date agreed to by the parties, but in no event later than the date of completion of the Project. "Fair
Market Value" shall have the definition set forth in Code of Civil Procedure Section 1263.320 and
"remnant" shall have the definition set forth in Code of Civil Procedure Section 1240.410. Nothing
herein shall preclude the City and RCTC from beginning the meetings earlier in the event both
parties agree that the parcel or remnant will not be used for the Project.
3.2.1.3 Reimbursement for Unused Parcels. Following recordation of the
Certificate of Completion for the Project, the City shall be responsible for promptly reimbursing
RCTC for any TUMF Regional Funds which were used to acquire parcels which are completely
unused in the Project. If City funds other than TUMF were used to purchase the Parcel, those local
funds shall be considered in determining the reimbursement amount.
3
V Users\Preprint[TUMF\Moreno Valley, Perris Blvd, Cactus to PVSD Lat "B" Phase 4
7
3.2.1.4 Appeal to Commission. In the event of a disagreement between the
Parties regarding the reimbursement ofTUMF Regional Funds under this section 3.2.1, either party
may appeal, in writing, to the RCTC Board. The RCTC Board's determination regarding excess
right-of-way and value pursuant to this section shall be final.
3.2.2 Ineligible Work Costs. The Total Work Cost shall not include the following
items which shall be borne solely by the City without reimbursement: (I) City administrative costs;
(2) City costs attributed to the preparation of invoices, billings and payments; (3) any City fees
attributed to the processing of the Work; and (4) expenses for items of work not included within the
scope of work in Exhibit "A".
3.2.3 Increases in Work Funding. The Funding Amount may, in RCTC's sole
discretion, be augmented with additional TUMF Regional Funds if the TUMF Nexus Study is
amended to increase the maximum eligible TUMF share for the Work. Any such increase in the
Funding Amount must be approved in writing by RCTC's Executive Director. In no case shall the
amount ofTUMF Regional Funds allocated to the City exceed the then-current maximum eligible
TUMF share for the Work. No such increased funding shall be expended to pay for any Work
already completed. For purposes of this Agreement, the Work or any portion thereof shall be
deemed complete upon its acceptance by RCTC's Executive Director.
3 .2.4 No Funding for Temporary Improvements. Only segments or components of
the Work that are intended to form part of or be integrated into the Work may be funded by TUMF
Regional Funds. No improvement which is temporary in nature, including but not limited to
temporary roads, curbs, or drainage facilities, shall be funded with TUMF Regional Funds except as
needed for staged construction of the Work.
3.3 City's Funding Obligation to Complete the Work. In the event that the TUMF
Regional Funds allocated to the Work represent less than the total cost of the Work, the City shall
provide such additional funds as may be required to complete the Work as described in Exhibit "A".
3.3.1 City's Obligation to Repay TUMF Regional Funds to RCTC. In the event
that: (i) the City, for any reason, determines not to proceed with or complete the Work; or (ii) the
Work is not timely completed, subject to any extension oftime granted by RCTC pursuant to Section
3.15; the City agrees that any TUMF Regional Funds that were distributed to the City for the Work
shall be repaid in full to RCTC. The Parties shall enter into good faith negotiations to establish a
reasonable repayment schedule and repayment mechanism which may include, but is not limited to,
withholding ofMeasure A Local Streets and Roads revenues. The City acknowledges and agrees
that RCTC shall have the right to withhold any Measure A Local Streets and Roads revenues due the
City, in an amount not to exceed the total of the funds distributed to the City, and/or initiate legal
action to compel repayment, if the City fails to repay RCTC within a reasonable time period not to
exceed 180 days from receipt of written notification from RCTC that repayment is required.
4
V:Users\PreprintiTUMF\Moreno Valley, Perris Blvd, Cactus to PVSD Lat "B" Phase 4
8
3.4 Work Responsibilities of the City. The City shall be responsible for the following
aspects of the Work, in compliance with state and federal law provided that such items are included
in the Project scope of work attached as Exhibit "A": (i) development and approval of plans,
specifications and engineer's estimate (PS&E), environmental clearance, right of way acquisition,
and obtaining all permits required by impacted agencies prior to commencement ofthe Work; (ii) all
aspects ofbidding, awarding, and administration of the contracts for the Work; (iii) all construction
management of any construction activities undertaken in connection with the Work, including survey
and material testing; and (iv) development of a budget for the Work prior to award of any contract
for the Work, taking into consideration available funding, including TUMF Regional Funds.
3.5 Term/Notice of Completion. The term of this Agreement shall be from the date first
herein above written until: (i) the date RCTC formally accepts the Work as complete, pursuant to
Section 3.2.3; (ii) termination ofthis Agreement pursuant to Section 3.9; or (iii) the City has fully
satisfied its obligations under this Agreement, (Note: If this Agreement is for Phase I work do not
include the following text) "including full repayment of TUMF Regional Funds to RCTC as
provided herein". All applicable indemnification provisions ofthis Agreement shall remain in effect
following the termination of this Agreement.
3.6 Representatives of the Parties. RCTC's Executive Director, or his or her designee,
shall serve as RCTC's representative and shall have the authority to act on behalf of RCTC for all
purposes under this Agreement. The City hereby designates Ahmad R. Ansari, P.E., Public Works
Director/City Engineer, or his or her designee, as the City's representative to RCTC. The City's
representative shall have the authority to act on behalf of the City for all purposes under this
Agreement and shall coordinate all activities of the Work under the City's responsibility. The City
shall work closely and cooperate fully with RCTC's representative and any other agencies which
may have jurisdiction over or an interest in the Work.
3.7 Expenditure of Funds by City Prior to Execution of Agreement. Nothing in this
Agreement shall be construed to prevent or preclude the City from expending funds on the Work
prior to the execution of the Agreement, or from being reimbursed by RCTC for such expenditures.
However, the City understands and acknowledges that any expenditure of funds on the Work prior to
the execution of the Agreement is made at the City's sole risk, and that some expenditures by the
City may not be eligible for reimbursement under this Agreement.
3.8 Review of Services. The City shall allow RCTC's Representative to inspect or
review the progress of the Work at any reasonable time in order to determine whether the terms of
this Agreement are being met.
3. 9 Termination. This Agreement may be terminated for cause or convenience as further
specified below.
3.9.1 Termination for Convenience.
5
V:Users\PreprintiTUMF\Moreno Valley, Perris Blvd, Cactus to PVSD Lat ··g·· Phase 4
9
3.9.1.1 Notice. Either RCTC or the City may, by written notice to the other
party, terminate this Agreement, in whole or in part, for convenience by giving thirty (30) days'
written notice to the other party of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof.
3.9.1.2 Effect of Termination for Convenience. In the event that the City
terminates this Agreement for convenience, the City shall, within 180 days, repay to RCTC in full all
TUMF Regional Funds provided to the City under this Agreement. In the event that RCTC
terminates this Agreement for convenience, RCTC shall, within 90 days, distribute to the City
TUMF Regional Funds in an amount equal to the aggregate total of all unpaid invoices which have
been received from the City regarding the Work at the time of the notice of termination; provided,
however, that RCTC shall be entitled to exercise its rights under Section 3.1 4.2, including but not
limited to conducting a review of the invoices and requesting additional information. This
Agreement shall term in ate upon receipt by the non-terminating party of the amounts due it under this
Section 3.9.1.2.
3.9.2 Termination for Cause.
3.9.2.1 Notice. Either RCTC or the City may, by written notice to the other
party, terminate this Agreement, in whole or in part, in response to a material breach hereof by the
other party, by giving written notice to the other party of such termination and specifYing the
effective date thereof. The written notice shall provide a 30 day period to cure any alleged breach.
During the 30 day cure period, the Parties shall discuss, in good faith, the manner in which the
breach can be cured.
3.9 .2 .2 Effect of Termination for Cause. In the event that the City terminates
this Agreement in response to RCTC's uncured material breach hereof, RCTC shall, within 90 days,
distribute to the City TUMF Regional Funds in an amount equal to the aggregate total of all unpaid
invoices which have been received from the City regarding the Work at the time of the notice of
termination. In the event that RCTC terminates this Agreement in response to the City's uncured
material breach hereof, the City shall, within 180 days, repay to RCTC in full all TUMF Regional
Funds provided to the City under this Agreement. Notwithstanding termination of this Agreement by
RCTC pursuant to this Section 3.9.2.2, RCTC shall be entitled to exercise its rights under Section
3.14.2, including but not limited to conducting a review of the invoices and requesting additional
information. This Agreement shall terminate upon receipt by the non-terminating party of the
amounts due it under this Section 3.9.2.2.
3.9.3 Cumulative Remedies. The rights and remedies ofthe Parties provided in this
Section are in addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law or under this Agreement.
3.10 Prevailing Wages. The City and any other person or entity hired to perform services
on the Work are alerted to the requirements of California Labor Code Sections 1770 et ~.,which
would require the payment of prevailing wages were the services or any portion thereof determined
to be a public work, as defined therein. The City shall ensure compliance with these prevailing wage
6
V:Users\PreprintiTUMF\Moreno Valley, Perris Blvd, Cactus to PVSD Lat "B .. Phase 4
10
requirements by any person or entity hired to perform the Work. The City shall defend, indemnify,
and hold harmless RCTC, its officers, employees, consultants, and agents from any claim or liability,
including without limitation attorneys, fees, arising from its failure or alleged failure to comply with
California Labor Code Sections 1770 et ~-
3.11 Progress Reports. RCTC may request the City to provide RCTC with progress reports
concerning the status of the Work.
3.12 Indemnification.
3.12.1 City Responsibilities. In addition to the indemnification required under
Section 3.1 0, the City agrees to indemnify and hold harmless RCTC, its officers, agents, consultants,
and employees from any and all claims, demands, costs or liability arising from or connected with all
activities governed by this Agreement including al1 design and construction activities, due to
negligent acts, errors or omissions or willful misconduct of the City or its subcontractors. The City
will reimburse RCTC for any expenditures, including reasonable attorneys' fees, incurred by RCTC,
in defending against claims ultimately determined to be due to negligent acts, errors or omissions or
willful misconduct of the City.
3.12.2 RCTC Responsibilities. RCTC agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the
City, its officers, agents, consultants, and employees from any and all claims, demands, costs or
liability arising from or connected with all activities governed by this Agreement including all design
and construction activities, due to negligent acts, errors or omissions or willful misconduct ofRCTC
or its sub-consultants. RCTC will reimburse the City for any expenditures, including reasonable
attorneys' fees, incurred by the City, in defending against claims ultimately determined to be due to
negligent acts, errors or omissions or willful misconduct ofRCTC.
3.12.3 Effect of Acceptance. The City shall be responsible for the professional
quality, technical accuracy and the coordination of any services provided to complete the Work.
RCTC's review, acceptance or funding of any services performed by the City or any other person or
entity under this agreement shall not be construed to operate as a waiver of any rights RCTC may
hold under this Agreement or of any cause of action arising out of this Agreement. Further, the City
shall be and remain liable to RCTC, in accordance with applicable law, for all damages to RCTC
caused by the City's negligent performance of this Agreement or supervision of any services
provided to complete the Work.
3.13 Insurance. The City shall require, at a minimum, al1 persons or entities hired to
perform the Work to obtain, and require their subcontractors to obtain, insurance of the types and in
the amounts described below and satisfactory to the City and RCTC. Such insurance shall be
maintained throughout the term of this Agreement, or until completion of the Work, whichever
occurs last.
7
V:Users\PreprintiTUMF\Moreno Valley, Perris Blvd, Cactus to PVSD Lat "B'' Phase 4
11
3.13.1 Commercial General Liability Insurance. Occurrence version commercial
general liability insurance or equivalent form with a combined single limit of not less than
$I ,000,000.00 per occurrence. If such insurance contains a general aggregate limit, it shall apply
separately to the Work or be no less than two times the occurrence limit. Such insurance shall:
3.13.1.1 Name RCTC and City, and their respective officials, officers,
employees, agents, and consultants as insured with respect to performance of the services on the
Work and shall contain no special limitations on the scope of coverage or the protection afforded to
these insured;
3.13.1.2 Be primary with respect to any insurance or self insurance
programs covering RCTC and City, and/or their respective officials, officers, employees, agents, and
consultants; and
3.13.1.3 Contain standard separation of insured provisions.
3.13.2 Business Automobile Liability Insurance. Business automobile liability
insurance or equivalent form with a combined single I imit of not less than $1,000,000.00 per
occurrence. Such insurance shall include coverage for owned, hired and non-owned automobiles.
3.13.3 Professional Liability Insurance. Errors and omissions liability insurance with
a limit of not less than $1,000,000.00 Professional liability insurance shall only be required of design
or engineering professionals.
3.13.4 Workers' Compensation Insurance. Workers' compensation insurance with
statutory limits and employers' liability insurance with limits of not less than $1,000,000.00 each
accident.
3.14 Procedures for Distribution ofTUMF Regional Funds to City.
3.14.1 Initial Payment by the City. The City shall be responsible for initial payment
of all the Work costs as they are incurred. Following payment of such Work costs, the City shall
submit invoices to RCTC requesting reimbursement of eligible Work costs. Each invoice shall be
accompanied by detailed contractor invoices, or other demands for payment addressed to the City,
and documents evidencing the City's payment of the invoices or demands for payment. The City
shall submit invoices not more often than monthly and not less often than quarterly.
3.14.2 Review and Reimbursement by RCTC. Upon receipt of an invoice from the
City, RCTC may request additional documentation or explanation of the Work costs for which
reimbursement is sought. Undisputed amounts shall be paid by RCTC to the City within thirty (30)
days. In the event that RCTC disputes the eligibility of the City for reimbursement of all or a portion
of an invoiced amount, the Parties shall meet and confer in an attempt to resolve the dispute. If the
meet and confer process is unsuccessful in resolving the dispute, the City may appeal RCTC's
8
V:Users\PreprintiTUMF\Moreno Valley, Perris Blvd, Cactus to PVSD Lat ''B" Phase 4
12
decision as to the eligibility of one or more invoices to RCTC's Executive Director. The City may
appeal the decision of the Executive Director to the full RCTC Board, the decision of which shall be
final. Additional details concerning the procedure for the City's submittal of invoices to RCTC and
RCTC's consideration and payment of submitted invoices are set forth in Exhibit "C", attached
hereto.
3.14.3 Funding Amount/Adjustment. If a post Work audit or review indicates that
RCTC has provided reimbursement to the City in an amount in excess of the maximum eligible
TUMF share of the Work, as determined by the TUMF Nexus Study, or has provided reimbursement
of ineligible Work costs, the City shall reimburse RCTC for the excess or ineligible payments within
30 days of notification by RCTC.
3.15 Work Amendments. Changes to the characteristics of the Work, including the
deadline for Work completion, and any responsibilities of the City or RCTC may be requested in
writing by the City and are subject to the approval ofRCTC's Representative, which approval will
not be unreasonably withheld, provided that extensions of time for completion of the Work shall be
approved in the sole discretion of RCTC's Representative. Nothing in this Agreement shall be
construed to require or allow completion ofthe Work without full compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.; "CEQA") and the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 ( 42 USC 4231 et seq.), but the necessity of compliance
with CEQA and NEPA shall not justifY, excuse, or permit a delay in completion ofthe Work.
3.16 Conflict of Interest. For the term of this Agreement, no member, officer or employee
of the City or RCTC, during the term of his or her service with the City or RCTC, as the case may
be, shall have any direct interest in this Agreement, or obtain any present or anticipated material
benefit arising therefrom.
3.17 Limited Scope of Duties. RCTC's and the City's duties and obligations under this
Agreement are limited to those described herein. RCTC has no obligation with respect to the safety
of any Work performed at a job site. In addition, RCTC shall not be liable for any action of City or
its contractors relating to the condemnation of property undertaken by City or construction related to
the Work.
3.18 Books and Records. Each party shall maintain complete, accurate, and clearly
identifiable records with respect to costs incurred for the Work under this Agreement. They shall
make available for examination by the other party, its authorized agents, officers or employees any
and all ledgers and books of account, invoices, vouchers, canceled checks, and other records or
documents evidencing or related to the expenditures and disbursements charged to the other party
pursuant to this disbursements charged to the other party pursuant to this Agreement. Further, each
party shall furnish to the other party, its agents or employees such other evidence or information as
they may require with respect to any such expense or disbursement charged by them. All such
information shall be retained by the Parties for at least three (3) years following termination of this
9
V:Users\PreprintiTUMF\Moreno Valley, Perris Blvd, Cactus to PVSD Lat "B" Phase 4
13
Agreement, and they shall have access to such information during the three-year period for the
purposes of examination or audit.
3.19 Equal Opportunity Employment. The Parties represent that they are equal opportunity
employers and they shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant of reemployment
because of race, religion, color, national origin, ancestry, sex or age. Such non-discrimination shall
include, but not be limited to, all activities related to initial employment, upgrading, demotion,
transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising, layoff or termination.
3.20 Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed with the laws of
the State of California.
3.21 Attorneys' Fees. If either party commences an action against the other party arising
out of or in connection with this Agreement, the prevailing party in such litigation shall be entitled to
have and recover from the losing party reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of suit.
3.22 Time of Essence. Time is of the essence for each and every provision of this
Agreement.
3.23 Headings. Article and Section Headings, paragraph captions or marginal headings
contained in this Agreement are for convenience only and shall have no effect in the construction or
interpretation of any provision herein.
3.24 Notification. All notices hereunder and communications regarding interpretation of
the terms of the Agreement or changes thereto shall be provided by the mailing thereofby registered
or certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid and addressed as follows:
City of Moreno Valley
Capital Projects Division
P.O. Box 88005
Moreno Valley, CA 92552-0805
ATTN: Ahmad R Ansari, P .E.
Public Works Director/ City Engineer
RCTC
Riverside County Transportation Commission
4080 Lemon, 3rd Floor
Mailing address: P.O. Box 12008
Riverside, CA 92501
ATTN: Executive Director
Any notice so given shall be considered served on the other party three (3) days after deposit
in the U.S. mail, first class postage prepaid, return receipt requested, and addressed to the party at its
10
V:Users\PreprintiTUMF\Moreno Valley, Perris Blvd, Cactus to PVSD Lat "B'' Phase 4
14
applicable address. Actual notice shall be deemed adequate notice on the date actual notice occurred
regardless of the method of service.
3.25 Conflicting Provisions. In the event that provisions of any attached appendices or
exhibits conflict in any way with the provisions set forth in this Agreement, the language, terms and
conditions contained in this Agreement shall control the actions and obligations of the Parties and
the interpretation of the Parties' understanding concerning the performance ofthe Services.
3.26 Contract Amendment. In the event that the Parties determine that the provisions of
this Agreement should be altered, the Parties may execute a contract amendment to add any
provision to this Agreement, or delete or amend any provision of this Agreement. All such contract
amendments must be in the form of a written instrument signed by the original signatories to this
Agreement, or their successors or designees.
3.27 Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the
Parties relating to the subject matter hereof and supersedes any previous agreements or
understandings.
3.28 Validity of Agreement. The invalidity in whole or in part of any provision of this
Agreement shall not void or affect the validity of any other provision of this Agreement.
3.29 Independent Contractors. Any person or entities retained by the City or any contractor
shall be retained on an independent contractor basis and shall not be employees of RCTC. Any
personnel performing services on the Work shall at all times be under the exclusive direction and
control of the City or contractor, whichever is applicable. The City or contractor shall pay all wages,
salaries and other amounts due such personnel in connection with their performance of services on
the Work and as required by law. The City or consultant shall be responsible for all reports and
obligations respecting such personnel, including, but not limited to: social security taxes, income tax
withholding, unemployment insurance and workers' compensation insurance.
[Signatures on following page]
11
V Users\PreprintiTUMF\Moreno Valley, Perris Blvd, Cactus to PVSD Lat "B" Phase 4
15
SIGNATURE PAGE
TO
AGREEMENT FOR THE FUNDING OF
TUMF REGIONAL ARTERIAL IMPROVEMENTS
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
By:
John J Benoit
Chairman
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Best, Best & Krieger
Counsel to the Riverside County
Transportation Commission
12
V:Users\PreprintiTUMF\Moreno Valley, Perris Blvd, Cactus to PVSD Lat "B" Phase 4
16
(Name of local jurisdiction)
By:
Henry Garcia
City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Robert L. Hansen
City Attorney
EXHIBIT "A"
SCOPE OF WORK,
FUNDING AND TIMET ABLE
SCOPE OF WORK: Detail the Phase(s) of Work to be performed under this Agreement.
(Note: Detail the full Project description on Exhibit B.) Provide specific information regarding
the Work to be performed, identify the reaches of the work and include a general location map
and site map, if applicable. For guidance in developing this Exhibit, please refer to Exhibit A-1.
FUNDING: Identity TUMF, local, state and/or federal funding for each Phase of Work. Delete
those Phase which are not part of this Agreement.
PHASE TUMF LOCAL TOTAL
CONSTRUCTION $5,665,000 $0 $5,665,000
TOTAL $5,665,000 $0 $5,665,000
TIMETABLE: Provide at a minimum the beginning and ending dates for each phase ofwork
including major milestones within a phase.
Expected start date: July 201 2
Estimated Completion date: April 2013
V: V:Users\PreprintiTUMF\Moreno Valley,Perris Blvd, Cactus to PVSD Lat "B'' Phase 4
17
EXHIBIT "A-1"
GUIDANCE for COMPLETION OF EXHIBIT A
The following list of items generally identified as eligible or ineligible for TUMF Regional
Funding reimbursement are consistent with those used to develop the costs for improvements in
the first NEXUS Study prepared by WRCOG.
In general, all improvements, with the exception of sidewalks, must be with in the curbs of the
roadway and extend no further than the curb returns at intersections. In addition, all
improvements on or connecting to interstate and state route facilities shall be consistent with
Caltrans Highway Design Manual standards.
Items which are typically considered eligible include:
• Asphalt concrete pavement, up to 16' per lane, to accomplish a 12' travel lane and
ancillary treatment and appropriate base materials
• Concrete curb and gutter and associated drainage -paved roadway shoulders and
swale may be used as a substitute
• Class II Bike Lanes
• Paved and painted 14' median, may be used as a dual left turn lanes
• Traffic signals at intersections with state highways and major arterials which are
also on the TUMF Network
• Pavement striping and roadway signing as required.
Items which are not typically considered eligible include:
• Portland Cement pavement or other aesthetic pavement types (except at
intersections)
• Major rehabilitation or overlay of existing pavement in adjacent roadway lanes
• Raised Medians
• Parking Lanes
• Landscaping
• Lighting
• Class I Bike Lanes
V:Users\PreprintiTUMF\Moreno Valley,Perris Blvd, Cactus to PVSD Lat "B" Phase 4
18
"
E X H I B I T " B "
" P R O J E C T " D E S C R I P T I O N , F U N D I N G A N D M I L E S T O N E S
P R O J E C T D E S C R I P T I O N : P A & E D , P S & E a n d R / W h a v e b e e n c o m p l e t e d . T h i s
a g r e e m e n t i s f o r t h e o n l y f o r c o n s t r u c t i o n p h a s e t o w i d e n P e r r i s B o u l e v a r d f r o m C a c t u s
A v e n u e t o P e r r i s V a l l e y S t o r m D r a i n L a t e r a l " B " .
F U N D I N G : I d e n t i f y T U M F , l o c a l , s t a t e a n d / o r f e d e r a l f u n d i n g f o r e a c h P h a s e o f W o r k .
P H A S E T U M F L O C A L T O T A L
C O N S T R U C T I O N $ 5 , 6 6 5 , 0 0 0 $ 0 $ 5 , 6 6 5 , 0 0 0
T O T A L $ 5 , 6 6 5 , 0 0 0 $ 5 , 6 6 5 , 0 0 0 $ 5 , 6 6 5 , 0 0 0
M I L E S T O N E S - p r o v i d e a l i s t o f p h a s e s a n d m i l e s t o n e s f o r c o m p l e t i o n o f t h e i m p r o v e m e n t s
a n d e s t i m a t e d d a t e s w h e n e a c h i s e x p e c t e d t o b e a c c o m p l i s h e d .
C o n s t r u c t i o n S t a r t D a t e : J u l y 2 0 1 2
E s t i m a t e d C o m p l e t i o n d a t e : A p r i l 2 0 1 3
V : U s e r s \ P r e p r i n t i T U M F \ M o r e n o V a l l e y , P e r r i s B l v d , C a c t u s t o P V S D L a t " B " P h a s e 4
1 9
EXHIBIT "C"
PROCEDURES FOR SUBMITTAL, CONSIDERATION AND PAYMENT OF INVOICES
1. RCTC recommends that the City incorporate Exhibit "C-1" into its contracts with any
subcontractors to establish a standard method for preparation of invoices by contractors to
the City and ultimately to RCTC for reimbursement of City contractor costs.
2. Each month the City shall submit an invoice for eligible Work costs incurred during the
preceding month. The original invoice shall be submitted to RCTC's Executive Director
with a copy to RCTC's Project Coordinator. Each invoice shall be accompanied by a cover
letter in a format substantially similar to that of Exhibit "C-2".
3. Each invoice shall include documentation from each contractor used by the City for the
Work, listing labor costs, subcontractor costs, and other expenses. Each invoice shall also
include a monthly progress report and spreadsheets showing the hours or amounts expended
by each contractor or consultant for the month and for the entire Work to date. Samples of
acceptable task level documentation and progress reports are attached as Exhibits "C-4" and
"C-5". All documentation from the City's contractors should be accompanied by a cover
letter in a format substantially similar to that of Exhibit "C-3".
4. If the City is seeking reimbursement for direct expenses incurred by City staff for eligible
Work costs, the City shall detail the same level of information for its labor and any expenses
in the same level of detail as required of contractors pursuant to Exhibit "C" and its
attachments.
5. Charges for each task and milestone listed in Exhibit "A" shall be listed separately in the
InVOICe.
6. Each invoice shall include a certification signed by the City Representative or his or her
designee which reads as follows:
"I hereby certify that the hours and salary rates submitted for reimbursement in this invoice
are the actual hours and rates worked and paid to the consultants or contractors listed.
Signed ______________ _
Title ----------------
Date ----------------
Invoice No. ---------------
V:Users\PreprintjTUMF\Moreno Valley,Perris Blvd. Cactus to PVSD Lat "8'' Phase 4
20
7. RCTC will pay the City within 30 days after receipt by the Commission of an invoice. If
RCTC disputes any portion of an invoice, payment for that portion will be withheld, without
interest, pending resolution of the dispute, but the uncontested balance will be paid.
8. The final payment under this Agreement will be made only after: (i) the City has obtained a
Release and Certificate of Final Payment from each contractor or consultant used on
the Work; (ii) the City has executed a Release and Certificate of Final Payment; and (iii) the
City has provided copies of each such Release to RCTC.
V:Users\PreprintiTUMF\Moreno Valley,Perris Blvd, Cactus to PVSD La! ''B'' Phase 4
21
AGENDA ITEM 8
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE: February 27, 2012
TO: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee
FROM: Tanya Love, Goods Movement Manager
Michael Blomquist, Toll Program Director
THROUGH: John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director
SUBJECT: TIGER IV Discretionary Grants: State Route 91 Corridor
Improvement Project
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Committee to:
1) Direct staff to prepare a Transportation Investment Generating Economic
Recovery (TIGER) grant application and Transportation Infrastructure Finance
and Innovation ACT (TIFIA) letter of interest (LOI) submittal package to U.S.
Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT) for the SR-91 Corridor
Improvement Project (SR-91 CIP);
2) Authorize the Executive Director to submit the grant application and TIFIA
LOI;
3) Authorize the Executive Director to submit future TIGER grant applications
and TIFIA LOI for the SR-91 CIP if necessary; and
4) Forward to Commission for final action.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Grant and LOI Activities
In December 2011, the SR-91 CIP project received a $20 million TIGER grant. The
TIGER grant will pay for the U.S. DOT TIFIA subsidy payment that is needed to
provide a future TIFIA loan for a portion of needed financing for the $1 .3 billion
freeway widening between Interstate 1 5 and the Orange County line. In an
attempt to bridge the remaining funding gap, the Commission directed staff to see
additional funding through the FY 2011/12 TIFIA process. That TIFIA funding
request was submitted to U.S. DOT in December 2011; it is anticipated that
invitations to submit a TIFIA loan application will be made in March or April of
2012.
The extension of the 91 Express Lanes and freeway widening of the general
purpose lanes continues to require significant funding that is anticipated to come
from the sale of toll revenue bonds and Measure A funds. To supplement this
Agenda Item 8
22
funding, staff is seeking an additional loan through the federal TIFIA program and is
requesting Commission approval to submit the SR-91 CIP for FY 2011/12 TIGER
Discretionary Grant and TIFIA LOI consideration. While staff is hopeful that the
SR-91 CIP project will receive additional grant funding as a result of the December
2011 TIFIA submittal, the Commission should continue to be proactive in
submitting a grant and/or LOI for every grant cycle until the funding for the SR-91
CIP is complete. On January 31, the U.S. DOT announced an additional grant
cycle and identified March 1 9, as the last date to submit a grant application and
LOI. Staff is again seeking approval to submit a grant and LOI for the SR-91 CIP
project.
SR-91 CIP Project Details
The SR-91 CIP extends the 91 Express Lanes into Riverside County, adds a new
lane in each direction of the SR-91, rebuilds seven interchanges, makes needed
street and access improvements in the city of Corona and constructs a number of
auxiliary lanes at key locations to ease access on and off the freeway especially
between the SR-91 and 1-1 5.
FY 2012 TIGER Grant/LOI Details
The FY 2011/12 Appropriations Act appropriated $500 million for national
infrastructure investments. Funding for the TIGER Discretionary Grants program
will be allocated on a competitive basis by U.S. DOT. The process will be highly
competitive with no more than $125 million awarded to projects in a single state.
This year's grant process allows for up to $175 million of the $500 million to be
used to pay the subsidy and administrative costs of TIFIA, a federal credit
assistance program. The notice of funding availability was released by U.S. DOT
on January 31. While the guidelines allow almost any kind of eligible applicants
(state and local governments, tribal governments, transit and port authorities, etc.,)
and the project eligibility list covers a broad range of project types and modes, it is
clear in the guidelines that U.S. DOT officials are looking to award funds for
projects that will have a significant impact on the nation, a metropolitan area, or a
region. Additionally, U.S. DOT will consider the extent that projects are ready to
proceed with obligation of grant funds when evaluating applications.
U.S. DOT Application Process
Final grant applications and LOis are due no later than March 19, 2012. Projects
that are eligible for TIGER discretionary grants include capital investments in:
1) Highway or bridge projects;
2) Public transportation projects;
3) Passenger and freight rail projects; and
4) Marine port infrastructure investments.
Agenda Item 8
23
U.S. DOT established a pre-application screening process based on the following
threshold requirements:
1 ) Project is an eligible project;
2) NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act) is completed or has been initiated;
3) Project is included in the relevant state, metropolitan, and local planning
documents, if applicable;
4) Project is able to obligate funds by September 30, 2013 (Note: U.S. DOT
prefers June 30, 2013); and
5) For urbanized areas, a 20% local match must be identified and committed;
there is no match requirement for rural areas.
Projects can increase their competitiveness by demonstrating significant
non-federal contributions in excess of the required local match. Additionally, U.S.
DOT will give priority to projects for which federal funding is required to complete
an overall financing package; projects can increase their competitiveness by
demonstrating significant non-federal contributions.
Key Dates for 2012 Grant and LOI Cycle
1) January 31, 2012 -U.S. DOT releases notice of funding availability;
2) February 20, 2012 -Pre-application due; and
3) March 19, 2012 -Grant application and LOI due.
24
Transportation Investment Generating
Economic Recovery (TIGER)
and
Transportation Infrastructure Finance
and Innovation Act (TIFIA)
State Route 91 Corridor
Improvement Project
February 27, 2012
Extends the 91 Express Lanes into Riverside
County
• Adds a new lane in each direction
• Rebuilds seven interchanges
• Makes needed street and access improvements in
the city of Corona
• Constructs a number of auxiliary lanes at key
locations to ease access on and off freeway
------------------------
2/29/2012
t:o.a::lo>.UNGP.:{X)ll:.'.H
f'.)\W \"tJ<;JJ~NI;;!'cA.<.. f'VfU'I~·~ ,._ V"'~· (Hrt..:>Vt.Af'O..:.~ (I\CJ1 ONf-(.li(Pt
I"J<(~"O!IM•;<X: t;~)IW'tV ;.l;~t: ra M~i
i"flQI'I'(i~~Of~()!J'Tt:'ijt
"00 CM: ( (> «"Ni:~ !'>Uii'.t"0:$1; .-CNf! :·q 4-0XJl.j.O\RY ~ TWU (l'l f<tLtJ:O t::XJ>RIC~~ tA!1UI.
t:"O:.:Il cmr.:,:;nt.\N l'r-1'.:>111! OMJ-m:: .:.:OV"lf'i H~<t: .f')!-'6
1
-Sale of toll revenue
bonds
-Measure A funds
-Supplemental funding
through the federal
TIFIA loan program
U.S. DOT established a pre-application screening process:
• Project is an eligible project
)>Highway or bridge
J> Public transportation
J> Passenger and freight rail projects
)>Marine port infrastructure investments
• NEPA is completed or has been initiated
• Project included in the relevant state, metropolitan, and
local planning documents
• Project is able to obligate funds by 9/30/2013
• For urbanized areas, a 20% local match is required
2/29/2012
• $500 million appropriated
• Highly competitive grant process
• $125 million-maximum award per state
• Up to $175 million for TIFIA
• Notice of Funding Availability released 1/31/12
• Grants due 3/19/12
49 day submittal cycle -start to finish
1. Direct staff to prepare a TIGER grant application and
TIFIALOI;
2. Authorize the Executive Director to submit the 2012
TIGER and lDI applications;
3. Authorize the Executive Director to submit future
TIGER and TIFIALOI applications for the SR-91 CIP;
and
4. Forward to the Commission for final action
2
AGENDA ITEM 9
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE: February 2 7, 201 2
TO: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee
FROM: Henry Nickel, Staff Analyst
Sheldon Peterson, Rail Manager
THROUGH: Robert Yates, Multimodal Services Director
SUBJECT: Amendment to Commission's FY 2007/08 and FY 2011/12 Rail
Program Short Range Transit Plan
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Committee to:
1) Amend the Commission's Commuter Rail Program FY 2011112 Short Range
Transit Plan (SRTP) to reflect the allocation of $10 million in Federal Transit
Administration (FTA) Section 5309 program funds to the Commuter Rail
State of Good Repair project;
2) Amend the Commission's Commuter Rail Program FY 2007/08 SRTP to
reflect deobligation of $123,131 in Local Transportation Fund (L TF) funds
from the Commission Station Capital Improvement Program; and
3) Forward to the Commission for final action.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The SRTPs include plans for the Commission's Regional Commuter Rail Program
and provide detailed information about existing services and facilities, financial
forecasts and plans, as well as planned and proposed improvements to be
implemented. The Commission oversees transit service in Riverside County
primarily through the approval of SRTPs that detail the operating and capital costs
planned for transit services. Each operator adopts such a plan and then provides
data to the Commission on performance. As SRTPs are based upon estimates of
future projects, it is necessary to subsequently amend this document upon
completion or changes to specified projects and circumstances. The Rail Program
is thus requesting amendments to its FY 2007/08 and FY 2011/12 Commuter Rail
SRTPs in order to:
• Use federal and state grant funds to preserve local funds;
• Protect lapsing grant funds; and
• Cleanup unused funds through deobligation.
Agenda Item 9
25
FY 2011/12 SRTP Proposed Amendment
The Commission maintains a total of $10 million in prior year unobligated federal
Section 5309 funds. The Rail Program is now requesting amendment of the
Commuter Rail Program's FY 2011/12 SRTP and allocation of these funds to the
Commission Commuter Rail State of Good Repair project. The project will facilitate
rehabilitation of Commission Commuter Rail assets and facilities in coordination
with the Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA). This is a multi-year
project that will commit funds to systematic improvement of facilities and
equipment. This project will include the components of SCRRA's Five-Year Capital
and Fleet Plan that calls for the rehabilitation of track, signals, communication,
mechanical and layover facilities, and rolling stock (both locomotives and passenger
rail cars). In addition, the grant will provide for the Commission's local efforts to
improve, expand, and rehabilitate station parking and facilities. As required, the
grant will also provide for additional funding for the development of the positive
train control network and associated communications throughout Southern
California. Due to timing of the federal grant process, it is not likely that any of the
funds will be spent in FY 2011 /12; therefore future budgets will include planned
spending and related reimbursements.
Funding SRTP Year From To Amount
FTA 5309 FY2011/12 Prior Year Unobligated Commuter Rail State of $10,000,000 Funds Good Repair Project
FY 2007/08 SRTP Proposed Amendment
The approved FY 2007/08 SRTP included allocation of $500,000 in L TF funds for
the Station Capital Improvement Program. This project has concluded with a
balance of $123,131 remaining. The Rail Program is requesting approval to
deobligate this L TF balance to be used elsewhere by the Rail Program at a future
date. As the funds are not budgeted in the current fiscal year, a budget adjustment
is not required.
Funding SRTP Year From To Amount
LTF FY 2007/08 Station Capital Deobligation for future use $123,131 Improvement Program
Agenda Item 9
26
Financial Information
In Fiscal Year Budget: I No !Years: I FY 2012/13 !Amount: I $10,000,000
Source of Funds: I FT A I Budget Adjustment: I N/A
GLA No.: J254199 414 41404 0000 103 25 41401
Fiscal Procedures Approved: I~~ I Date: I 02/14/12
Agenda Item 9
27
AGENDA ITEM 1 0
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE: February 27, 2012
TO: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee
FROM: Henry Nickel, Staff Analyst
Sheldon Peterson, Rail Manager
THROUGH: Robert Yates, Multimodal Services Director
Proposition 18 Fiscal Year 2010/11 California Transit Security
SUBJECT: Grant Program -California Transit Assistance Fund and Supporting
Resolution
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Committee to:
1) Adopt Resolution No. 12-008, "Resolution of the Riverside County
Transportation Commission Appointing Individuals to Act on Behalf of the
Commission for the Purpose of Applying and/or Accepting Grants Awarded
to the Commission's Rail Program"; and
2) Forward to the Commission for final action.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality, and Port Security Bond Act of
2006, approved by the voters as Proposition 1 B in November 2006, includes a
funding program in the amount of $1 billion to be deposited in the Transit System
Safety, Security, and Disaster Response Account. Funds are allocated by the state
controller directly to the Commission's Rail Program. These funds are to be
expended within three years after receipt of funds. The FY 2010/11 appropriation
includes $60 million statewide (subject to available bond funding) for the California
Transit Security Grant Program -California Transit Assistance Fund (CTSGP-
CT AF). These funds are designated to be used for transit capital projects that
provide increased protection against a security or safety threat.
The CTSGP-CTAF is administered by the California Emergency Management
Agency (Cal EMA). Cal EMA requires a resolution appointing individuals to act on
behalf of the Commission's Rail Program. This resolution is needed in order to
successfully complete the grant submittal process. Resolution No. 12-008 is to
appoint the Rail Manager to act on behalf of the Commission for the purpose of
applying for and/or accepting grants awarded to the Commission's Rail Program.
This item has no direct financial impact.
Agenda Item 1 0
28
Attachments: Resolution No. 12-008 Approval and Authorization for Commuter
Rail Program Appointees
Agenda Item 1 0
29
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO. 12-008
RESOLUTION OF THE
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION APPOINTING
INDIVIDUALS TO ACT ON BEHALF OF THE COMMISSION FOR THE
PURPOSE OF APPLYING AND/OR ACCEPTING GRANTS AWARDED TO THE
COMMISSION'S RAIL PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the California Emergency Management Agency requires a
resolution regarding appointing individuals to act on behalf of the Riverside
County Transportation Commission's Commuter Rail Program related to the
FY 2010/11 Proposition 1 B-6361-0002 California Transit Assistance
Security Grant Program Funds -Commuter Rail Program.
NOW, THEREFORE IT BE RESOLVED, that the Riverside County
Transportation Commission hereby finds that the Rail Manager is hereby
authorized to execute for and on behalf of the Riverside County
Transportation Commission, a public entity established under the laws of the
State of California, any actions necessary for the purpose of obtaining FY
2010/11 Proposition 1 B California Transit Security Grant Program-California
Transit Assistance Fund (CTSGP-CTAF) Grant Funds provided by the
California Emergency Management Agency.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 14th day of March, 2012.
John J. Benoit, Chair
Riverside County Transportation Commission
ATTEST:
Jennifer Harmon, Clerk of the Board
Riverside County Transportation Commission
30
------------
AGENDA ITEM 11
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE: February 27, 2012
TO: Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee
FROM: Sheldon Peterson, Rail Manager
THROUGH: Robert Yates, Multimodal Services Director
SUBJECT: Master Agreement and Program Supplements for State Funded Transit
Projects with the California Department of Transportation
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Committee to:
1) Adopt Resolution No. 12-007, "Authorization for the Execution of a Master
Agreement and Program Supplements for State-Funded Transit Projects"
with California Department of Transportation (Caltrans);
2) Approve Agreement No. 12-25-060-00 with Caltrans for state-funded transit
projects;
3) Authorize the Executive Director, pursuant to legal counsel review, to
execute the agreement on behalf of the Commission; and
4) Forward to the Commission for final action.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Back in 2001, the Commission entered into the original master agreement for state
funded transit projects with the Caltrans. This agreement allows the Commission
the opportunity to use state transit funds for commuter rail and transit projects.
The term of the original agreement was 10 years, which expired in December
2011.
Staff has been coordinating with Caltrans to establish a new 1 0-year agreement
that will be valid from January 1, 2012, to January 1, 2022. Caltrans provided
draft language for the resolution and an updated master agreement. In order to
comply with its requirements, staff modified the attached Resolution 12-007,
"Authorization to Execute a Master Agreement and Program Supplements for State-
Funded Transit Projects" and seeks Commission approval for this resolution. This
along with approval of the master agreement will allow the Commission to continue
to use state transit funds. The next major project requiring state transit funds will
be the Perris Valley Line that will be requesting state funds for construction in the
near future. This master agreement is required in order to receive funding.
Agenda Item 11
31
Attachments:
1) Resolution 12-007, "Authorization to Execute a Master Agreement and
Program Supplements for State-Funded Transit Projects"
2) Draft Master Agreement for State-Funded Transit Projects
Agenda Item 11
32
---------------------------~-
RESOLUTION NO. 12-007
AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTION OF A MASTER AGREEMENT AND
PROGRAM SUPPLEMENTS FOR STATE-FUNDED TRANSIT PROJECTS
WHEREAS, the Riverside County Transportation Commission may receive state
funding from the California Department of Transportation (Department) now or
sometime in the future for transit projects; and
WHEREAS, substantial revisions were made to the programming and funding
process for the transportation projects programmed in the State Transportation
Improvement Program, by Chapter 622 (SB 45) of the Statutes of 1997; and
WHEREAS, the statutes related to state-funded transit projects require a local or
regional implementing agency to execute an agreement with the Department before
it can be reimbursed for project expenditures; and
WHEREAS, the Department utilizes Master Agreements for State-Funded Transit
Projects, along with associated Program Supplements, for the purpose of
administering and reimbursing state transit funds to local agencies; and
WHEREAS, the Riverside County Transportation Commission wishes to delegate
authorization to execute these agreements and any amendments thereto to the
Executive Director.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the Riverside
County Transportation Commission that the fund recipient agrees to comply with
all conditions and requirements set forth in this agreement and applicable statutes,
regulations and guidelines for all state-funded transit projects.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Executive Director be
authorized to execute the Master Agreement and all Program Supplements for
State-Funded Transit Projects and any Amendments thereto with the California
Department of Transportation.
Rev. 07 19 06
33
ADOPTED this 14 day of March, 2012.
John J. Benoit, Chair
Riverside County Transportation Commission
ATTEST:
Jennifer Harmon, Clerk of the Board
Riverside County Transportation Commission
Rev. 07 19 06
34
Master Agreement
State Funded Transit Projects
California Department of Transportation
DIVISION OF MASS TRANSPORTATION
1120 N STREET, ROOM 3300
P. 0. BOX 942874, MS-39
SACRAMENTO, CA 94274-0001
PHONE (916) 657-3876
35
ATTACHMENT 2
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF MASS TRANSPORTATION
TABLE OF CONTENTS
FUNDING SOURCES COVERED BY THIS AGREEMENT as identified in each Program
Supplement I
ARTICLE I-PROJECT ADMINISTRATION I
Section 1. Program Supplement 1
A. General I
B. Project Overrun 3
C. Scope of Work 4
D. Program Supplement Amendments 4
Section 2. Allowable Costs and Payments 4
A. Allowable Costs and Progress Payment Vouchers 4
B. Advance Payments (TCR Projects Only) 5
C. Expedited Payments (Excludes TCR Projects) 6
D. Advance Expenditure of Local Funds 6
E. Travel Reimbursement 6
F. Final Invoice 7
ARTICLE II-GENERAL PROVISIONS 7
Section 1. Funding 7
A. Local Match Funds 7
B. Funding Contingencies 8
C. Funds Movement 8
Section 2. Audits and Reports 8
A. Cost Principles 8
B. Record Retention 9
C. Quarterly Review I 0
Section 3. Special Requirements 10
A. California Transportation Commission (CTC) Resolutions I 0
B. Recipient Resolution 11
C. Termination 11
D. Third Party Contracting 12
E. Change in Terms/ Amendments 13
F. Project Ownership 13
G. Disputes 15
H. Hold Hannless and Indemnification 15
I. Labor Code Compliance 16
J. Non-Discrimination 16
K. State Fire Marshal Building Standards 17
L. Americans with Disabilities Act 17
M. Access for Persons with Disabilities 17
N. Disabled Veterans Program Requirements 17
0. Environmental Process 18
37
ARTICLE III-SPECIAL PROVISIONS _______________ 18
Section 1. Bond Provisions _______________________ 18
A. General Bond Provisions 18
Section 2. TCRP PROJECTS ______________________ 20
Section 3. PROJECT MANAGEMENT 21
Attachment I--CTC Resolution G-91-2 22
Attachment II --Recipient Agency Board Resolution 24
38
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF MASS TRANSPORTATION
MASTER AGREEMENT
STATE FUNDED TRANSIT PROJECTS
Effective Date of this Agreement: Month Date, Year
Termination Date of this Agreement: Month Date, Year
Recipient: Recipient Name
APPLICABLE FUNDING SOURCES COVERED BY THIS AGREEMENT WILL BE
IDENTIFIED IN EACH SPECIFIC PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT
ADOPTING THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT
+ General Fund
+ State Highway Account
+ Public Transportation Account
+ Transportation Investment Fund
+ Traffic Congestion Relief Fund (TCR), GC 14556.40
+ Clean Air and Transportation Improvement Act of 1990 (PROP. 116) Bond Fund
+ Other State Funding Sources
This AGREEMENT, entered into effective as of the date set forth above, is between the
signatory public entity identified hereinabove, hereinafter referred to as RECIPIENT, and the
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, acting by and through its Department of Transportation, hereinafter
referred to as STATE.
ARTICLE I -PROJECT ADMINISTRATION
Section 1. Program Supplement
A. General
(1) This AGREEMENT shall have no force and effect with respect to any PROJECT
unless and until a separate PROJECT specific "PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT-STATE
FUNDED TRANSIT PROJECT(S)," hereinafter referred to as "PROGRAM
SUPPLEMENT," adopting all of the terms and conditions of this AGREEMENT has
been fully executed by both STATE and RECIPIENT.
(2) RECIPIENT agrees to complete each defined PROJECT, or the identified PROJECT
Phase/Component thereof, described in the PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT adopting all of
the terms and conditions of this AGREEMENT.
39
(3) A financial commitment of actual PROJECT funds will only occur in each detailed and
separate PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT. No funds are obligated by the prior execution of
this AGREEMENT alone.
(4) RECIPIENT further agrees, as a condition to the release and payment of the funds
encumbered for the PROJECT described in each PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT, to
comply with the terms and conditions of this AGREEMENT and all the agreed-upon
Special Covenants and Conditions attached to or made a part of the PROGRAM
SUPPLEMENT identifying and defining the nature of that specific PROJECT.
(5) The PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT shall include: a detailed Scope of Work conforming
to the included Project Description, a Project Schedule, an Overall Funding Plan, and a
Project Financial Plan as required by the applicable Program Guidelines.
a. The Scope of Work shall include a detailed description of the PROJECT and will
itemize the major tasks and their estimated costs.
b. The Project Schedule shall include major tasks and/or milestones and their
associated beginning and ending dates and duration.
c. The Overall Funding Plan shall itemize the various PROJECT Components, the
committed funding program(s) or source(s), and the matching funds to be provided
by RECIPIENT and/or other funding sources, if any [these Components include
Environmental and Permits; Plans, Specifications and Estimates (PS&E); Right-of-
Way (ROW); and Construction (including transit vehicle acquisition)].
d. The Project Financial Plan shall identify estimated expenditures for each PROJECT
Component by funding source.
(6) Adoption and execution of the PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT by RECIPIENT and
STATE, incorporating the terms and conditions of this AGREEMENT into the
PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT as though fully set forth therein, shall be sufficient to bind
RECIPIENT to these terms and conditions when performing the PROJECT. Unless
otherwise expressly delegated to a third-party in a resolution by RECIPIENT's
governing body, which delegation must be expressly assented to and concurred in by
STATE, the PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT shall be managed by RECIPIENT.
(7) The estimated cost and scope of each PROJECT will be as described in the applicable
PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT. STATE funding participation for each PROJECT is
limited to those amounts actually encumbered by STATE as evidenced in that
applicable PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT. A contract awarded by RECIPIENT for
PROJECT work in an amount in excess of said approved estimate or the PROGRAM
SUPPLEMENT funding limit may exceed any said PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT cost
estimate and the limits of STATE's participation provided:
a. RECIPIENT provides the necessary additional funding, or
b. A cost increase in STATE's share of PROJECT funding is first requested by
RECIPIENT (before the cost overrun occurs) and that increase is approved by
40
STATE in the form of an Allocation Letter comprising the encumbrance document
for that increased STATE funding level.
(8) State programmed fund amounts may be increased to cover PROJECT cost increases
only if:
a. Such funds are available;
b. STATE concurs with that proposed increase; and
c. STATE issues an approved Allocation Letter, Fund Shift Letter, or a Time
Extension Letter with additional funding as stated in an executed amendment to that
PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT.
(9) When additional State programmed funds are not available, RECIPIENT agrees that
reimbursements of invoiced PROJECT costs paid to RECIPIENT will be limited to,
and shall not exceed, the amounts already approved in the PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT
containing the STATE approved encumbrance documents and that any increases in
PROJECT costs above that STATE supported funding level must be defrayed by
RECIPIENT with non-State funds.
(1 0) For each approved PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT, RECIPIENT agrees to contribute at
least the statutorily or other required local contribution of appropriate matching funds
(other than State funds) if any matching funds are specified within the PROGRAM
SUPPLEMENT, or any attachment thereto, toward the actual cost of the PROJECT or
the amount, if any, specified in an executed SB 2800 (Streets and Highways Code
section 164.53) Agreement for local match fund credit, whichever is greater.
RECIPIENT shall contribute not less than the required match amount toward the cost of
the PROJECT in accordance with a schedule of payments as shown in a Project
Financial Plan prepared by RECIPIENT as part of a PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT.
(11) Upon the stated expiration date of this AGREEMENT, any PROGRAM
SUPPLEMENTS executed under this AGREEMENT for a PROJECT with work yet to
be completed pursuant to the approved Project Schedule shall be deemed to extend the
term of this AGREEMENT only to conform to the specific PROJECT termination or
completion date contemplated by the applicable PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT to allow
that uncompleted PROJECT to be administered under the extended terms and conditions
of this AGREEMENT.
B. Project Overrun
( 1) If RECIPIENT and STATE determine, at any time during the performance of a
PROJECT, that the PROJECT budget may be exceeded, RECIPIENT shall take the
following steps:
a. Notify the designated STATE representative of the nature and projected extent of
the overrun and, within a reasonable period thereafter, identify and quantify
41
potential cost savings or other measures which RECIPIENT will institute to bring
the Project Budget into balance; and
b. Schedule the projected overrun for discussion at the next Quarterly Review
meeting; and
c. Identify the source of additional RECIPIENT or other third party funds that can be
made available to complete PROJECT.
C. Scope of Work
(1) RECIPIENT shall be responsible for complete performance of the work described in
the approved PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT for the PROJECT related to the commitment
of encumbered funds. All work shall be accomplished in accordance with the
applicable provisions of the Public Utilities Code, the Streets and Highways Code, the
Government Code, and other applicable statutes and regulations.
(2) RECIPIENT acknowledges and agrees that RECIPIENT is the sole control and
manager of each PROJECT and its subsequent employment, operation, repair and
maintenance for the benefit of the public. RECIPIENT shall be solely responsible for
complying with the funding and use restrictions established by (a) the statutes from
which these funds are derived, (b) the California Transportation Commission (CTC),
(c) the State Treasurer, (d) the Internal Revenue Service, (e) the applicable PROGRAM
SUPPLEMENT, and (f) this AGREEMENT.
D. Program Supplement Amendments
PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT amendments will be required whenever there are CTC-approved
changes to the cost, scope of work, or delivery schedule of a PROJECT from those specified in
the original PROJECT Application and the original PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT. Those
changes shall be mutually binding upon the Parties only following the execution of a
PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT amendment.
Section 2. Allowable Costs and Payments
A. Allowable Costs and Progress Payment Vouchers
(1) Not more frequently than once a month, but at least quarterly, RECIPIENT will
prepare and submit to STATE (directed to the attention of the appropriate State District
Transit Representative) signed Progress Payment Vouchers for actual PROJECT costs
incurred and paid for by RECIPIENT consistent with the Scope of Work document in
the PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT and STATE shall pay those uncontested allowable
costs once the voucher is approved. If no costs were incurred during any given quarter,
RECIPIENT is exempt from submitting a signed Progress Payment Voucher; but is
still required to present a progress report at each Quarterly Review.
42
(2) STATE shall not be required to reimburse more funds, cumulatively, per quarter of any
fiscal year greater than the sums identified and included in the PROJECT Financial
Plan. However, accelerated reimbursement of PROJECT funds in excess of the
amounts indicated in the Project Financial Plan, cumulatively by fiscal year, may be
allowed at the sole discretion of STATE if such funds are available for encumbrance to
fulfill that need.
(3) Each such voucher will report the total of PROJECT expenditures from all sources
(including those of RECIPIENT and third parties) and will specify the percent of State
reimbursement requested and the fund source. The voucher should also summarize
State money requested by PROJECT component (environmental and permits, plans
specifications, and estimates (PS&E); right of way; construction; rolling stock; or--if
bond funded--private activity usage) and phase, and shall be accompanied by a report
describing the overall work status and progress on PROJECT tasks. If applicable, the
first voucher shall also be accompanied by a report describing any tasks specified in the
PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT which were accomplished prior to the Effective Date of
this AGREEMENT or the PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT with costs to be credited
toward any required local contribution described in Article II, Section 1 of this
Agreement (but only if expended pursuant to any applicable prior executed Agreement
for Local Match Fund Credit between RECIPIENT and STATE).
(4) An Indirect Cost Rate Proposal and/or Central Service Cost Allocation plan and related
documentation approved under cognizant agency regulations are to be provided to
STATE (Cal trans Audits & Investigations) annually for their review, and approval and
filing prior to ADMINISTERING AGENCY seeking reimbursement of indirect costs
incurred within each fiscal year being claimed for reimbursement.
B. Advance Payments (TCR Projects Only)
( 1) Advance reimbursements or payments by STATE are not allowed except in the case of
TCR funded Projects, and only then when expressly authorized by the CTC.
(2) In order to receive a CTC approved TCR payment advance, RECIPIENT must provide
duplicate signed invoices to STATE requesting payment of that authorized advance.
(3) For TCR Projects approved for advanced payment allocation by the CTC, said advance
payment shall be deposited by RECIPIENT in an interest bearing account held by
institutions with long-term credit ratings of "AA'' or better from at least two nationally
recognized credit rating agencies, or in instruments issued by and secured by the full
faith and credit of the U.S. Government or by an agency of the U.S. Government. No
TCR interest earnings may be spent on the PROJECT. Interest earned shall be recorded
and documented from the time the TCR funds are first deposited in RECIPIENT's
account until all the approved TCR advance funds have been expended or returned to
STATE together with all accrued interest. Interest earned shall be reported to
STATE's Project Coordinator on an annual basis and upon the final PROJECT
43
payment when interest earnings, overpayments, and unexpended advanced TCR funds
shall be returned to STATE no later than thirty (30) days after PROJECT completion
or termination of the PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT, whichever is first in time.
(4) Advanced funds are to be expended only as indicated in the approved TCR Application.
RECIPIENT must be able to document the expenditures/disbursement of funds
advanced to only pay for actual allowable PROJECT costs incurred.
(5) Except as expressly allowed hereinbelow, non-TCR funds and TCR project funds not
authorized for advance payment can only be released by STATE as reimbursement of
actual allowable PROJECT costs already incurred and paid for by RECIPIENT no
earlier than the effective date of this AGREEMENT and not incurred beyond the
AGREEMENT/PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT Termination Date.
(6) Where advance payments are authorized in a PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT,
RECIPIENT must report and document the expenditure/disbursement of funds
advanced to pay for actual eligible PROJECT costs incurred, at least quarterly, using a
Progress Payment Voucher to be approved by STATE's District Project Administrator.
C. Expedited Payments
Should RECIPIENT have a valid Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for "Expedited
Payment" on file with STATE's Accounting Service Center, RECIPIENT will, not more
frequently than as authorized by that MOU, prepare and submit to STATE an Expedited
Payment Invoice for reimbursements that are consistent with that MOU, this AGREEMENT, and
the applicable PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT. Expedited Payments are subject to policies
established in the Caltrans Accounting Manual. One time payments and final payments eligible
for expedited pay pursuant to this Section will have ten percent (1 0%) of each invoice amount
withheld until PROJECT completion and STATE has evaluated RECIPIENT's performance
and made a determination that all requirements assumed under this AGREEMENT and the
relevant PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT have been satisfactorily fulfilled by RECIPIENT.
D. Advance Expenditure of Local Funds
Government Code section 14529.17 (AB 872) allows public agencies to expend their own funds
on certain programmed projects prior to the CTC' s allocation of funds, and, upon receipt of CTC
approval, to then seek reimbursement for those allowable prior expenditures following execution
of a PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT wherein STATE acknowledges and accepts those statutorily
authorized prior expenditures as a credit towards a required RECIPIENT match, (if any) or as
eligible PROJECT expenditures for reimbursement.
E. Travel Reimbursement
Payments to RECIPIENT for PROJECT related travel and subsistence expenses of
RECIPIENT forces and its subcontractors claimed for reimbursement or applied as local match
credit shall not exceed rates authorized to be paid rank and file State employees under current
44
-----------------------------------------------~
State Department of Personnel Administration (DPA) rules. If the rates invoiced by
RECIPIENT are in excess of those authorized DPA rates, then RECIPIENT is responsible for
the cost difference, and any overpayments inadvertently paid by STATE shall be reimbursed to
STATE by RECIPIENT on demand.
F. Finallnvoice
The PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT Termination Date refers to the last date for RECIPIENT to
incur valid PROJECT costs or credits and is the date that the PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT
expires. RECIPIENT has one hundred and eighty (180) days after that Termination Date to
make already incurred final allowable payments to PROJECT contractors or vendors, prepare the
PROJECT Closeout Report, and submit the final invoice to STATE for reimbursement of
allowable PROJECT costs before those remaining State funds are unencumbered and those funds
are reverted as no longer available to pay any PROJECT costs. RECIPIENT expressly waives
any right to allowable reimbursements from STATE pursuant to this AGREEMENT for costs
incurred after that termination date and for costs invoiced to RECIPIENT for payment after that
one hundred and eightieth (1801h) day following the PROJECT Termination Date.
ARTICLE II-GENERAL PROVISIONS
Section 1. Funding
A. Local Match Funds
Subparagraphs "(1) and (2)" within this Section l.A. apply only to those PROJECTS where the
PROJECT funding is programmed to require a local match. (See individual Program Guidelines
for specific funding requirements).
(1) Except where specifically allowed by the applicable PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT,
reimbursement of and credits for local matching funds will be made or allowed only for
work performed after the Effective Date of a PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT and prior to the
Termination Date unless permitted as local match PROJECT expenditures made prior to
the effective date of the PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT pursuant to Government Code section
14529.17 or by an executed SB 2800 Agreement for Local Match Fund Credit.
(2) RECIPIENT agrees to contribute at least the statutorily or other required local
contribution of matching funds (other than State or federal funds), if any is specified within
the PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT or any attachment thereto, toward the actual cost of the
PROJECT or the amount, if any, specified in any executed SB 2800 (Streets and Highways
Code Section 164.53) Agreement for local match fund credit, whichever is greater.
RECIPIENT shall contribute not less than its required match amount toward the
PROJECT cost in accordance with a schedule of payments as shown in the Project
Financial Plan prepared by RECIPIENT and approved by STATE as pmt of a
PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT.
45
B. Funding Contingencies
Delivery by STATE of all funds encumbered to reimburse allowable PROJECT costs pursuant
to this AGREEMENT is contingent upon prior budget action by the Legislature, fund allocation
by the CTC or the United States Department of Transportation, and submittal by RECIPIENT
and approval by STATE of all PROJECT documentation, including, without limitation, that
required by Government Code section 14085. In the event of the imposition of additional
conditions, delays, or a cancellation or reduction in funding, as approved by the Legislature, the
CTC or the United States Department of Transportation, RECIPIENT shall be excused from
meeting the time and expenditure constraints set forth in the Project Financial Plan and the
Project Schedule to the extent of such delay, cancellation or reduction and the PROGRAM
SUPPLEMENT will be amended to reflect the resultant necessary changes in PROJECT
funding, scope, or scheduling.
C. Funds Movement
RECIPIENT shall not make any proposed changes in any of the four PROJECT expenditure
Components (Environmental and Permits, PS&E, Right-of-Way and Construction (including
major equipment acquisitions) without prior written STATE approval. STATE will also
determine whether those proposed changes are significant enough to warrant CTC review.
Specific rules and guidelines regarding this process may be detailed in the applicable CTC
Resolutions, including, but not limited to, numbers G-06-04 and G-06-20 or their successors.
Section 2. Audits and Reports
A. Cost Principles
(1) RECIPIENT agrees to comply with Title 2 Code of Federal Regulations 225 (2 CFR
225) Cost Principles for State and Local Government, and 49 CFR, Part 18, Uniform
Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and
Local Governments.
(2) RECIPIENT agrees, and will assure that its contractors and subcontractors will be
obligated to agree, that (a) Contract Cost Principles and Procedures, 48 CFR, Federal
Acquisition Regulations System, Chapter 1, Part 31, et seq., shall be used to determine
the allowability of individual Project cost items and (b) those parties shall comply with
Federal administrative procedures in accordance with 49 CFR, Part 18, Uniform
Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and
Local Governments. Every sub-recipient receiving PROJECT funds as a contractor or
sub-contractor under this AGREEMENT shall comply with Federal administrative
procedures in accordance with 49 CFR, Part 18, Uniform Administrative Requirements
for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments.
(3) Any PROJECT costs for which RECIPIENT has received payment or credit that are
determined by subsequent audit to be unallowable under 2 CFR 225, Chapter 1, Part 31
or 49 CFR, Part 18, are subject to repayment by RECIPIENT to STATE. Should
46
RECIPIENT fail to reimburse moneys due STATE within thirty (30) days of demand,
or within such other period as may be agreed in writing between the Parties hereto,
STATE is authorized to intercept and withhold future payments due RECIPIENT
from STATE or any third-party source, including but not limited to, the State
Treasurer, the State Controller and the CTC.
B. Record Retention
(I) RECIPIENT agrees, and will assure that its contractors and subcontractors shall
establish and maintain an accounting system and records that properly accumulate and
segregate incurred PROJECT costs and matching funds by line item for the PROJECT.
The accounting system of RECIPIENT, its contractors and all subcontractors shall
conform to Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), enable the
determination of incurred costs at interim points of completion, and provide support for
reimbursement payment vouchers or invoices. All accounting records and other
supporting papers of RECIPIENT, its contractors and subcontractors connected with
PROJECT performance under this AGREEMENT and each PROGRAM
SUPPLEMENT shall be maintained for a minimum of three (3) years from the date of
final payment to RECIPIENT under a PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT and shall be held
open to inspection, copying, and audit by representatives of STATE, the California
State Auditor, and auditors representing the federal government. Copies thereof will be
furnished by RECIPIENT, its contractors, and subcontractors upon receipt of any
request made by STATE or its agents. In conducting an audit of the costs and match
credits claimed under this AGREEMENT, STATE will rely to the maximum extent
possible on any prior audit of RECIPIENT pursuant to the provisions of federal and
State law. In the absence of such an audit, any acceptable audit work performed by
RECIPIENT's external and internal auditors may be relied upon and used by STATE
when planning and conducting additional audits.
(2) For the purpose of determining compliance with Title 21, California Code of
Regulations, Section 2500 et seq., when applicable, and other matters connected with
the performance of RECIPIENT's contracts with third parties pursuant to Government
Code section 8546.7, RECIPIENT, RECIPIENT's contractors and subcontractors and
STATE shall each maintain and make available for inspection all books, documents,
papers, accounting records, and other evidence pertaining to the performance of such
contracts, including, but not limited to, the costs of administering those various
contracts. All of the above referenced parties shall make such AGREEMENT and
PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT materials available at their respective offices at all
reasonable times during the entire PROJECT period and for three (3) years from the
date of final payment to RECIPIENT under any PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT.
STATE, the California State Auditor, or any duly authorized representative of STATE
or the United States Department of Transportation, shall each have access to any books,
records, and documents that are pertinent to a PROJECT for audits, examinations,
excerpts, and transactions, and RECIPIENT shall furnish copies thereof if requested.
47
(3) RECIPIENT, its contractors and subcontractors will permit access to all records of
employment, employment advertisements, employment application forms, and other
pertinent data and records by the State Fair Employment Practices and Housing
Commission, or any other agency of the State of California designated by STATE, for
the purpose of any investigation to ascertain compliance with this AGREEMENT.
C. Quarterly Review
( 1) Subject to the discretion of STATE, RECIPIENT and STATE agree to conduct, on a
quarterly basis, on-site reviews of all aspects of the progress of each PROJECT.
RECIPIENT agrees, during each quarterly progress review, to inform STATE
regarding:
a. Whether the PROJECT is proceeding on schedule and within budget;
b. Any requested changes to the Project Description, Scope of Work, Project
Schedule, Overall Funding Plan, or Project Financial Plan contained in a
PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT;
c. Major construction accomplishments during the quarter;
d. Any actual or anticipated problems which could lead to delays in schedule,
increased costs or other difficulties;
e. The status of the PROJECT budget; and
f. The status of critical elements of PROJECT.
(2) Quarterly reviews of RECIPIENT progress will include consideration of whether
reported implementation activities are within the scope of the PROJECT PROGRAM
SUPPLEMENT and in compliance with State laws, regulations, and administrative
requirements.
Section 3. Special Requirements
A. California Transportation Commission (CTC) Resolutions
(1) RECIPIENT shall adhere to applicable CTC policies on "Timely Use of Funds" as
stated in Resolution G-06-04, adopted April 26, 2006, addressing the expenditure and
reimbursement of TCR funds; and Resolution G-09-11, adopted October 14, 2009, to
provide guidance for the use of Proposition 116 and STIP funds. These resolutions,
and/or successor resolutions in place at the time a PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT is
executed, shall be applicable to all Prop 116, STIP and TCR funds, respectively.
(2) RECIPIENT shall be bound to the terms and conditions of this AGREEMENT; the
PROJECT application contained in the PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT (as applicable);
and CTC Resolutions G-06-04, G-09-11 and/or their respective successors in place at
the time the PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT is signed (as applicable) and all restrictions,
rights, duties and obligations established therein on behalf of STATE and CTC shall
accrue to the benefit of the CTC and shall thereafter be subject to any necessary
48
---------------------------------------
enforcement action by CTC or STATE. All terms and conditions stated in the
aforesaid CTC Resolutions and CTC-approved Guidelines in place at the time the
PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT is signed (if applicable) shall also be considered to be
binding provisions of this AGREEMENT.
(3) RECIPIENT shall conform to any and all permit and mitigation duties associated with
PROJECT as well as all environmental obligations established in CTC Resolution G-
91-2 and/or its successors in place at the time a PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT is signed,
as applicable, at the expense of RECIPIENT and/or the responsible party and without
any further financial contributions or obligations on the part of STATE unless a
separate PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT expressly provides funding for the specific
purpose of hazardous materials remediation.
B. RECIPIENT Resolution
(1) RECIPIENT has executed this AGREEMENT pursuant to the authorizing
RECIPIENT resolution, attached as Attachment II to this AGREEMENT, which
empowers RECIPIENT to enter into this AGREEMENT and which may also
empower RECIPIENT to enter into all subsequent PROGRAM SUPPLEMENTS
adopting the provisions of this AGREEMENT.
(2) If RECIPIENT or STATE determines that a separate Resolution is needed for each
PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT, RECIPIENT will provide information as to who the
authorized designee is to act on behalf of the RECIPIENT to bind RECIPIENT with
regard to the terms and conditions of any said PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT or
amendment and will provide a copy of that additional Resolution to STATE with the
PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT or any amendment to that document.
C. Termination
(1) STATE reserves the right to terminate funding for any PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT
upon written notice to RECIPIENT in the event that RECIPIENT fails to proceed
with PROJECT work in accordance with the PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT, the bonding
requirements, if applicable, or otherwise violates the conditions of this AGREEMENT
and/or the PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT or the funding allocation such that substantial
performance is significantly endangered.
(2) No such termination shall become effective if, within thirty (30) days after receipt of a
Notice of Termination, RECIPIENT either cures the default involved or, if not
reasonably susceptible of cure within said thirty (30)-day period, RECIPIENT
proceeds thereafter to complete the cure in a manner and time line acceptable to
STATE. Any such termination shall be accomplished by delivery to RECIPIENT of a
Notice of Termination, which notice shall become effective not less than thirty (30)
days after receipt, specifying the reason for the termination, the extent to which funding
of work under this AGREEMENT is terminated and the date upon which such
termination becomes effective, if beyond thirty (30) days after receipt. During the
49
period before the effective termination date, RECIPIENT and STATE shall meet to
attempt to resolve any dispute.
(3) Following a fund encumbrance made pursuant to a PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT, if
RECIPIENT fails to expend TCR/GENERAL FUND monies by June 30 of any
applicable Fiscal Year that those funds would revert, those funds will be deemed
withdrawn and will no longer be available to reimburse PROJECT work unless those
funds are specifically made available beyond the end of that Fiscal Year through re-
appropriation or other equivalent action of the Legislature and written notice of that
action is provided to RECIPIENT by STATE.
(4) In the event STATE terminates a PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT for convenience and not
for a default on the part of RECIPIENT as is contemplated in C (I) and (2) above of
this Section 3, RECIPIENT shall be reimbursed its authorized costs up to STATE's
proportionate and maximum share of allowable PROJECT costs incurred to the date of
RECIPIENT's receipt of that notice of termination, including any unavoidable costs
reasonably and necessarily incurred up to and following that termination date by
RECIPIENT to effect such termination following receipt of that termination notice.
D. Third Party Contracting
(1) RECIPIENT shall not award a construction contract over $10,000 or other contracts
over $25,000 [excluding professional service contracts of the type which are required to
be procured in accordance with Government Code Sections 4525 (d), (e) and (f)] on the
basis of a noncompetitive negotiation for work to be performed under this
AGREEMENT without the prior written approval of STATE. Contracts awarded by
RECIPIENT, if intended as local match credit, must meet the requirements set forth in
this AGREEMENT regarding local match funds.
(2) Any subcontract entered into by RECIPIENT as a result of this AGREEMENT shall
contain the provisions of ARTICLE II-GENERAL PROVISIONS, Section 2. Audits
and Reports and shall mandate that travel and per diem reimbursements and third-party
contract reimbursements to subcontractors will be allowable as PROJECT costs only
after those costs are incurred and paid for by the subcontractors.
(3) To be eligible for local match credit, RECIPIENT must ensure that local match funds
used for the PROJECT meet the General Provisions requirements outlined in this
ARTICLE II in the same manner as required of all other PROJECT expenditures.
(4) In addition to the above, the preaward requirements of third party
contractor/consultants with local transit agencies should be consistent with Local
Program Procedures (LPP-00-05).
50
E. Change in Funds and Terms/Amendments
This AGREEMENT and the resultant PROGRAM SUPPLEMENTS may be modified, altered,
or revised only with the joint written consent of RECIPIENT and STATE.
F. Project Ownership
(1) Unless expressly provided to the contrary in a PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT, subject to
the terms and provisions of this AGREEMENT, RECIPIENT, or a designated
subrecipient acceptable to STATE, as applicable, shall be the sole owner of all
improvements and property included in the PROJECT constructed, installed or acquired
by RECIPIENT or subrecipient with funding provided to RECIPIENT under this
AGREEMENT. RECIPIENT, or subrecipient, as applicable, is obligated to continue
operation and maintenance of the physical aspects of the PROJECT dedicated to the
public transportation purposes for which PROJECT was initially approved unless
RECIPIENT, or subrecipient, as applicable, ceases ownership of such PROJECT
property; ceases to utilize the PROJECT property for the intended public transportation
purposes; or sells or transfers title to or control over PROJECT and STATE is refunded
the Credits due STATE as provided in paragraph ( 4) herein below.
(2) Should State bond funds be encumbered to fund any part of a PROJECT under this
AGREEMENT, then, at STATE's option, before RECIPIENT will be permitted to
make any proposed change in use, RECIPIENT shall be required to first obtain a
determination by Bond Counsel acceptable to the State Treasurer's Office and STATE
that a change in the operation, proportion, or scope of PROJECT as originally proposed
by RECIPIENT will not adversely affect the tax exempt status of those bonds.
(3) PROJECT right-of-way, PROJECT facilities constructed or reconstructed on a
PROJECT site and/or PROJECT property (including vehicles and vessels) purchased
by RECIPIENT (excluding temporary construction easements and excess property
whose proportionate resale proceeds are distributed pursuant to this AGREEMENT)
shall remain permanently dedicated to the described public transit use in the same
proportion and scope, and to the same extent as mandated in the PROGRAM
SUPPLEMENT and related Bond Fund Certification documents, if applicable, unless
STATE agrees otherwise in writing. Vehicles acquired as part of PROJECT,
including, but not limited to, buses, vans, rail passenger equipment and ferry vessels,
shall be dedicated to that public transportation use for their full economic life cycle,
which, for the purpose of this AGREEMENT, will be determined in accordance with
standard national transit practices and applicable rules and guidelines, including any
extensions of that life cycle achievable by reconstruction, rehabilitation or
enhancements.
(4) (a) Except as otherwise set forth in this Section 4, STATE, or any other STATE-
assignee public body acting on behalf of the CTC, shall be entitled to a refund or
credit (collectively the Credit), at STATE's sole option, equivalent to the
proportionate PROJECT funding participation received by RECIPIENT from
51
STATE if RECIPIENT, or a sub-recipient, as applicable, (i) ceases to utilize
PROJECT for the original intended public transportation purposes or (ii) sells or
transfers title to or control over PROJECT. If federal funds (meaning only those
federal funds received directly by RECIPIENT and not federal funds derived
through or from the State) have contributed to the PROJECT, RECIPIENT shall
notify both STATE and the original federal source of those funds of the disposition
of the PROJECT assets or the intended use of those sale or transfer receipts.
(b) STATE shall also be entitled to an acquisition Credit for any future purchase or
condemnation of all or portions of PROJECT by STATE or a designated
representative or agent of STATE.
(c) The Credit due STATE will be determined by the ratio of STATE's funding when
measured against the RECIPIENT's funding participation (the Ratio). For
purposes of this Section 4, the State's funding participation includes federal funds
derived through or from STATE. That Ratio is to be applied to the then present fair
market value of PROJECT property acquired or constructed as provided in (d) and
(e) below.
(d) For Mass Transit vehicles, this Credit [to be deducted from the then remaining
equipment value] shall be equivalent to the percentage of the full extendable vehicle
economic life cycle remaining, multiplied by the Ratio of funds provided for that
equipment acquisition. For real property, this same funding Ratio shall be applied
to the then present fair market value, as determined by STATE, of the PROJECT
property acquired or improved under this AGREEMENT.
(e) Such Credit due STATE as a refund shall not be required if RECIPIENT dedicates
the proceeds of such sale or transfer exclusively to a new or replacement STATE
approved public transit purpose, which replacement facility or vehicles will then
also be subject to the identical use restrictions for that new public purpose and the
Credit ratio due STATE should that replacement project or those replacement
vehicles cease to be used for that intended described pre-approved public transit
purpose.
( l) In determining the present fair market value of property for purposes of
calculating STATE's Credit under this AGREEMENT, any real property
portions of a PROJECT site contributed by RECIPIENT shall not be included.
In determining STATE's proportionate funding participation, STATE's
contributions to third patties (other than RECIPIENT) shall be included if
those contributions are incorporated into the PROJECT.
(2) Once STATE has received the Credit as provided for above because
RECIPIENT, or a sub-recipient, as applicable, has (a) ceased to utilize the
PROJECT for the described intended public transportation purpose(s) for which
STATE funding was provided and STATE has not consented to that cessation
of services or (b) sold or transferred title to or control over PROJECT to another
52
G. Disputes
party (absent STATE approval for the continued transit operation of the
PROJECT by that successor party under an assignment of RECIPIENT's
duties and obligations), neither RECIPIENT, subrecipient, nor any party to
whom RECIPIENT or subrecipient, as applicable, has transferred said title or
control shall have any further obligation under this AGREEMENT to continue
operation of PROJECT and/or PROJECT facilities for those described public
transportation purposes, but may then use PROJECT and/or any of its facilities
for any lawful purpose.
(3) To the extent that RECIPIENT operates and maintains Intermodal Transfer
Stations as any integral part of PROJECT, RECIPIENT shall maintain each
station and all its appmtenances, including, but not limited to, restroom
facilities, in good condition and repair in accordance with high standards of
cleanliness (Public Utilities Code section 99317 .8). Upon request of STATE,
RECIPIENT shall also authorize State-funded bus services to use those
stations and appurtenances without any charge to STATE or the bus operator.
This permitted use will include the placement of signs and informational
material designed to alert the public to the availability of the State-funded bus
service (for the purpose of this paragraph, "State-funded bus service" means any
bus service funded pursuant to Public Utilities Code section 99316).
(4) Special conditions apply to any proposed sale or transfer or change of use as
respects PROJECT property, facilities or equipment acquired with tax free State
bond funds and RECIPIENT shall conform to those restrictions as set forth
herein and in said bonds.
STATE and RECIPIENT shall deal in good faith and attempt to resolve potential disputes
informally. If the dispute persists, RECIPIENT shall submit to the STATE's District Contract
Manager or designee a written demand for a decision regarding the disposition of any dispute
arising under this agreement. The District Contract Manager shall make a written decision
regarding the dispute and will provide it to the fund RECIPIENT. The fund RECIPIENT
shall have an opportunity to challenge the District Contract Manager's determination but must
make that challenge in writing within ten (1 0) working days to the Mass Transportation Program
Manager or his/her designee. [If the fund RECIPIENT challenge is not made within the ten (1 0)
day period, the District Contract Manager's decision shall become the final decision of the
STATE.] STATE and RECIPIENT shall submit written, factual information and supporting
data in support their respective positions. The decision of the Mass Transportation Program
Manager or his/her designee shall be final, conclusive and binding regarding the dispute, unless
RECIPIENT commences an action in court of competent jurisdiction to contest the decision in
accordance with Division 3.6 of the California Government Code.
H. Hold Harmless and Indemnification
53
( 1) Neither STATE nor any officer or employee thereof shall be responsible for any
damage or liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by
RECIPIENT, its agents and contractors under or in connection with any work,
authority, or jurisdiction delegated to RECIPIENT under this AGREEMENT or any
PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT or as respects environmental clean up obligations or
duties of RECIPIENT relative to PROJECT. It is also understood and agreed that,
RECIPIENT shall fully defend, indemnify and hold the CTC and STATE and their
officers and employees harmless from any liability imposed for injury and damages or
environmental obligations or duties arising or created by reason of anything done or
imposed by operation of law or assumed by, or omitted to be done by RECIPIENT
under or in connection with any work, authority, or jurisdiction delegated to
RECIPIENT under this AGREEMENT and all PROGRAM SUPPLEMENTS.
(2) RECIPIENT shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless STATE, the CTC and the
State Treasurer relative to any misuse by RECIPIENT of State funds, PROJECT
property, PROJECT generated income or other fiscal acts or omissions of
RECIPIENT.
I. Labor Code Compliance
RECIPIENT shall include in all subcontracts awarded using PROJECT funds, when applicable,
a clause that requires each subcontractor to comply with California Labor Code requirements
that all workers employed on public works aspects of any project (as defined in California Labor
Code § § 1720-1815) be paid not less than the general prevailing wage rates predetermined by the
Department of Industrial Relations as effective the date of Contract award by the RECIPIENT.
J. Non-Discrimination
(1) In the performance of work under this AGREEMENT, RECIPIENT, its contractor(s)
and all subcontractors, shall not unlawfully discriminate, harass or allow harassment
against any employee or applicant for employment because of sex, race, color, ancestry,
religious creed, national origin, physical disability (including HIV and AIDS), mental
disability, medical condition (cancer), age, marital status, family and medical care
leave, pregnancy leave, and disability leave. RECIPIENT, its contractor(s) and all
subcontractors shall ensure that the evaluation and treatment of their employees and
applicants for employment are free from such discrimination and harassment.
RECIPIENT, its contractor(s) and all subcontractors shall comply with the provisions
of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (Government Code section 12900 et seq.),
and the applicable regulations promulgated thereunder (California Code of Regulations,
Title 2, section 7285 et seq.). The applicable regulations of the Fair Employment and
Housing Commission implementing Government Code section 12990 (a-f), set forth in
Chapter 5 of Division 4 of Title 2 of the California Code of Regulations, are
incorporated into this AGREEMENT by reference and made a part hereof as if set forth
in full. Each of RECIPIENT's contractors and all subcontractors shall give written
notice of their obligations under this clause to labor organizations with which they have
a collective bargaining or other agreements, as appropriate.
54
(2) Should federal funds be constituted as part of PROJECT funding or compensation
received by RECIPIENT under a separate Contract during the performance of this
AGREEMENT, RECIPIENT shall comply with this AGREEMENT and with all
federal mandated contract provisions as set fmth in that applicable federal funding
agreement.
(3) RECIPIENT shall include the non-discrimination and compliance provisions of this
clause in all contracts and subcontracts to perform work under this AGREEMENT.
K. State Fire Marshal Building Standards Code
The State Fire Marshal adopts building standards for fire safety and panic prevention. Such
regulations pertain to fire protection design and construction, means of egress and adequacy of
exits, installation of fire alarms, and fire extinguishment systems for any State-owned or State-
occupied buildings per section 13108 of the Health and Safety Code. When applicable,
RECIPIENT shall request that the State Fire Marshal review PROJECT PS&E to ensure
PROJECT consistency with State fire protection standards.
L. Americans with Disabilities Act
By signing this Master Agreement, RECIPIENT assures STATE that RECIPIENT shall
comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, which prohibits discrimination
on the basis of disability, as well as all applicable regulations and guidelines issued pursuant to
the ADA (42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.).
M. Access for Persons with Disabilities
Disabled access review by the Department of General Services (Division of the State Architect)
is required for all publicly funded construction of buildings, structures, sidewalks, curbs and
related facilities. RECIPIENT will award no construction contract unless RECIPIENT's plans
and specifications for such facilities conform to the provisions of sections 4450 and 4454 of the
California Government Code, if applicable. Further requirements and guidance are provided in
Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations.
N. Disabled Veterans Program Requirements
(I) Should Military and Veterans Code sections 999 et seq. be applicable to RECIPIENT,
RECIPIENT will meet, or make good faith efforts to meet, the 3% Disabled Veterans
Business Enterprises goals (or RECIPIENT's applicable higher goals) in the award of
every contract for PROJECT work to be performed under these this AGREEMENT.
(2) RECIPIENT shall have the sole duty and authority under this AGREEMENT and each
PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT to determine whether these referenced code sections are
applicable to RECIPIENT and, if so, whether good faith efforts asserted by those
contractors of RECIPIENT were sufficient as outlined in Military and Veterans Code
sections 999 et seq.
55
0. Environmental Process
Completion of the PROJECT environmental process ("clearance") by RECIPIENT (and/or
STATE if it affects a State facility within the meaning of the applicable statutes) is required
prior to requesting PROJECT funds for right-of-way purchase or construction. No State agency
may request funds nor shall any State agency, board or commission authorize expenditures of
funds for any PROJECT effmt, except for feasibility or planning studies, which may have a
significant effect on the environment unless such a request is accompanied with all appropriate
documentation of compliance with or exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) (including, if as appropriate, an environmental impact report, negative declaration, or
notice of exemption) under California Public Resources Code section 21 080(b) (1 0), (11 ), and
(12) provides an exemption for a passenger rail project that institutes or increases passenger or
commuter services on rail or highway rights-of-way already in use.
ARTICLE III-SPECIAL PROVISIONS
Section 1. Bond Provisions (Applicable only to State Bond Funding encumbered
against a specific Program Supplement).
A. General Bond Provisions
(1) If RECIPIENT enters into a management contract with a private party (including
AMTRAK) for operation of rail, ferry or other transportation services in connection
with PROJECT, RECIPIENT will obtain prior approval from Bond Counsel
acceptable to STATE that the terms of that management contract meet the
requirements of Internal Revenue Service Revenue Procedure 97-13 (as supplemented
or amended) or any successor thereto (dealing generally with guidelines for when
management contracts may be deemed not to create a "private use" of bond-financed
property) or are otherwise acceptable. RECIPIENT must also be prepared to certify,
upon request of STATE, that the revenues which RECIPIENT (or its manager) will
receive directly from the operation of transportation services in connection with
PROJECT (but not including any subsidy of the transportation operation from taxes or
other outside fund sources) are, for any fiscal year, less than the ordinary and necessary
expenses directly attributable to the operation and maintenance of the transportation
system (excluding any overhead or administrative costs of RECIPIENT).
(2) Except as provided in this Article III, A (1 ), STATE and RECIPIENT agree that any
costs of PROJECT acquired or constructed by RECIPIENT allocable to portions of
PROJECT which are subject to any property interests held by a non-governmental
person(s) in connection with business activities, such as easements, leases, or fee
interests, not generally enjoyed by the public (hereinafter referred to as "Non-
Governmentally Used Property" or "NUP") shall require the prior approval of STATE
and the State Treasurer, as applicable. If RECIPIENT receives any revenues or profits
56
from any NUP activities allowed pursuant to this Article (whether approved at this time
or hereafter approved by STATE), RECIPIENT agrees that such revenues or profits
shall be used exclusively for the public transportation services for which PROJECT
was initially approved, either for capital improvements or operating costs. If
RECIPIENT does not so dedicate those revenues or profits, a proportionate share shall
(unless disapproved by Bond Counsel) be paid to STATE equivalent to the Ratio of
STATE's percentage of participation in PROJECT.
(3) Notwithstanding the foregoing, RECIPIENT may be authorized to receive an
allocation of bond proceeds for NUP activity, in an amount not to exceed the amount
specified in the PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT, if RECIPIENT submits a certified bond
certification questionnaire to the STATE, and both the STATE and the State Treasurer
approve the private activities contained therein.
(4) RECIPIENT shall not loan any portion of bond proceeds funding PROJECT to any
private (including nonprofit) person or business. For this purpose, a "loan" includes
any arrangement that is the economic equivalent of a loan, regardless of how it is
named.
(5) Delivery by STATE of any bond funds is contingent on the sale of bonds by the State
Treasurer. STATE shall not be held liable for any resulting damage or penalty to
RECIPIENT in the event bond sales are delayed, canceled, or downsized or other
AGREEMENT funds are restricted, limited or otherwise conditioned by acts of
Congress, the Internal Revenue Service, the United States Department of
Transportation, the Legislature, or the CTC.
(6) RECIPIENT shall, for the purposes of any State bond funded right of way acquisition
which will become a permanent part of PROJECT (such acquisitions exclude
temporary construction easements, property allocated to matching funds, and excess
property purchased with State funds whose resale proceeds are returned or credited to
STATE), maintain ownership of such PROJECT property for a minimum of twenty
years or until the bonds have matured, whichever occurs first, before transferring or
selling such property (subject to all refunds or Credits due STATE as provided
hereinabove).
(7) Where RECIPIENT's PROJECT includes a commuter rail PROJECT within the
meaning of Proposition 116, RECIPIENT shall coordinate and share with other public
transit operators any rail rights-of-way, common maintenance services and station
facilities used for intercity and commuter rail. Intercity and commuter rail services
shall be coordinated with each other, with other providers and with freight traffic to
provide integrated rail passenger and freight services with minimal conflict.
(8) RECIPIENT agrees that all passenger vehicles, rail, and water borne ferry equipment,
and all facilities acquired or constructed with Proposition 116 bond funds shall be
accessible to persons with physical disabilities, including wheelchair users, at all stops,
stations and terminals, whether or not staffed.
57
(9) NUP shall, for accounting and bookkeeping purposes, first be allocated to funding
sources other than the State bond funds. For purposes of making such allocations, the
costs attributable to NUP involving a sale, easement, lease or similar arrangement shall
be determined on the basis of a fair allocation of value, which may include
determinations based upon square meters/feet of the area encumbered by the NUP lease
or easement relative to the total area acquired or constructed if all such area is of
approximately equal value.
(1 0) NUP will include, but is not limited to, property which is sold (including sales of air
and subsurface rights), and property subject to easements, leases or similar rights. A
rail right of way will not be treated as NUP solely as a result of a Freight Use Easement
retained by the seller of the right of way to RECIPIENT, provided that the sales
agreement appropriately excludes the Freight Use Easement from the property or rights
being acquired. Further, notwithstanding anything in this Article III to the contrary,
RECIPIENT may allocate grant funds to the cost of any NUP if (a) neither
RECIPIENT nor any other governmental entity will receive, directly or indirectly, any
payments from or on behalf of the non-governmental user of the NUP, or (b) the
payment from such user does not exceed the operation and maintenance costs fairly
attributable or allocable to the non-governmental use of the NUP.
(11) RECIPIENT shall request, in writing, STATE's advance approval if PROJECT funds
are to be allocated to any NUP except "incidental use" property described below. If
property, the costs of which have previously been allocated to PROJECT funds, is to
become NUP before the State bond funds are fully paid or redeemed, then
RECIPIENT may allocate the costs of such property to another funding source as
provided or obtain STATE's approval that the allocation of the costs of such property
to the bond funds may remain. It is anticipated that STATE's approval will be granted
if, taking into account the existing and expected uses of the proceeds of the State bonds,
STATE determines that the continued tax -exempt status of the State bonds will not be
adversely affected and that the use of the property is consistent with PROJECT and its
described purpose.
(12) For purposes of these fund source allocations, RECIPIENT does not have to consider
NUP as including those "incidental uses" of PROJECT (for example, advertising
billboards, vending machines, telephones, etc.) which meet the applicable requirements
of federal tax regulations (IRS Notice 87-69 or any successor thereto). In general, such
Notice requires that the incidental use not be physically separated from the rest of
PROJECT and not comprise, in the aggregate, more than 2-1/2% of the total costs of
PROJECT.
Section 2. TCRP PROJECTS
The TRAFFIC CONGESTION RELIEF (TCR) ACT OF 2000 (the "ACT"), was added (in
Chapter 4.5, commencing with section 14556) to part 5.3 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the
Government Code by AB 2928 and SB 406, as amended by SB 1662 and AB 1705. As directed
58
by the ACT and the CTC established Guidelines (as set out in CTC Resolution G-06-04), and as
those Guidelines may be amended prior to the execution of a future PROGRAM
SUPPLEMENT, said Guidelines shall apply to each TCRP funded PROJECT. By this reference,
those Guidelines are made an express part of this AGREEMENT and shall apply to each TCRP
funded PROJECT. RECIPIENT will cause its specific TCRP mandated Resolution to be
attached as part of any TCRP funded PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT as a condition precedent to
the acceptance of TCR ACT funds for that PROJECT.
Section 3. PROJECT MANAGEMENT
(1) STATE's PROJECT administrator for this AGREEMENT shall be the chief of the State
Transit Grants Branch of the Division of Mass Transportation. RECIPIENT's General
Manager, Executive Director or a Designee as named in writing to STATE following
execution ofthis AGREEMENT shall be the administrator acting for RECIPIENT.
(2) PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT administrators for STATE shall be the applicable District
Division Chief for Planning and for RECIPIENT, the designee named in the applicable
PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this AGREEMENT by their duly
authorized officers.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF MASS TRANSPORTATION
BY: __________________________ ___
TERRY FARRIS, Chief
State Transit Grants Branch
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND PROCEDURE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
BY:
TODD VAN SANTEN
Attorney
59
RECIPIENT NAME
BY: __________________________ __
EXECUTIVE NAME
Title
ATTACHMENT I
CTC RESOLUTION G-91-2
Passed by the CTC on February 21, 1991
CALIFORNIA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
RESOLUTION G-91-2
Commission Policy Resolution for Hazardous Waste Identification
and Cleanup for Rail Right-of-Way
WHEREAS, the Commission has programmed funding for rail right-of-way acquisition in the 1990 State
Transportation Improvement Program and may allocate funds for rail right-of-way acquisition from the
Clean Air and Transportation Improvement Act; and
WHEREAS, hazardous wastes, based upon federal and state statutes and regulations, include but are not
limited to such categories as heavy metals, (e.g., lead), inorganic (e.g., excessive mineral levels) and
organic compounds (e.g., petroleum products), and can occur on a property's surface and subsurface; and
WHEREAS, rail properties often have hazardous wastes exceeding State of California and federal
hazardous waste standards; and
WHEREAS, such properties contaminated with hazardous wastes require mitigation prior to using them
for rail purposes; and
WHEREAS, hazardous wastes discovered on rail property may significantly impact property value,
project scheduling and future liability for the grant applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Commission must be assured that acquisition of rail properties have been fully reviewed
by the grant applicant, and if warranted, the grant applicant has tested for hazardous wastes; and
WHEREAS, if hazardous wastes exist, the Commission must be assured that the hazardous wastes
identified has either been cleaned up, or financial responsibility for the cleanup has been determined prior
to title transfer to the grant applicant, or easement has been secured in lieu of purchasing the property, and
the subsurface rights and liability for hazardous wastes remain with the property seller; and
WHEREAS, hazardous wastes identified subsequent to title transfer to the grant applicant will be cleaned
up by the seller or a mechanism to recover clean-up-costs is established and executed as a condition prior
to title transfer; and
WHEREAS, full due diligence is necessary in discovering hazardous waste and is an essential element in
acquiring rail right-of-way properties by the grant applicant; and
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that acquisition of all rail right-of-way properties will be fully
investigated by the grant applicant to determine the absence/presence of hazardous wastes. Investigations
shall be conducted in accordance to the standards and practices of the local, state and/or federal regulatory
agencies having jurisdiction and by personnel adequately trained in hazardous waste investigation; and
60
-2-
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that all properties, discovered with hazardous wastes, which exceed the
federal/state standards, will be cleaned up to the satisfaction of the responsible local, state and/or federal
regulatory agency. The appropriate regulatory agency shall certify to grant applicant that the cleanup has
been completed; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the grant applicant will certify by formal resolution to the
Commission that all reasonable steps have been completed to assure full due diligence in the discovery of
hazardous waste has been achieved during the acquisition of rail right-of-way and the state is held
harmless from cleanup liability or damages, both present and future; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the grant applicant will certify by formal resolution that it will not
seek further state funding, for cleanup, damages, or liability cost associated with hazardous wastes on or
below acquired property's surface; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the grant applicant will certify to the Commission:
• that all rail right-of-way acquisition properties have been investigated and have been found clean;
• or that the cleanup of discovered hazardous waste has been completed prior to acquisition of the
property;
• or that the grant applicant has obtained permanent easement and the subsurface rights and liability
and full responsibility to pay for and remove such hazardous waste remains with the seller in
conformance with applicable State and Federal law;
• or if hazardous wastes are known to exist prior to acquisition and if the applicant determines that time
is of the essence for acquisition, then and in that event, an enforceable agreement will be entered into
requiring the responsible party(ies) to clean all hazardous wastes by a date certain, with the option of
funds sufficient for the clean-up costs deposited in escrow by the seller.
In the event of failure to clean up by the date determined, the recipient of the grant will make full
restitution to the STATE for its participation. This resolve does not preclude the recipient from requesting
re-allocation not to exceed the refunded amount after the hazardous waste(s) have been fully removed from
the subject site; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the grant applicant will certify to the Commission that the seller from
whom properties have been acquired retain liability for any hazardous waste investigation and/or cleanup,
and damages discovered subsequent to the transfer of title; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the Commission declares all future liability resulting from hazardous
wastes remain with the seller or the grant applicant, not the state, and the grant applicant has been
indemnified by the seller for any costs resulting from failure to eliminate hazardous wastes; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, no state funds will be made available for any future costs associated with
cleanup; damages, or liability costs associated with hazardous wastes on or below the acquired property's
surface.
61
ATTACHMENT II
{INSERT AGENCY BOARD l~ESOLUTION)
See Sample at
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hg/MassTrans/state grants.html
under Transit Forms
62
AGENDA ITEM 12
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
DATE: February 27, 2012
TO:
FROM:
Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee
Jennifer Harmon, Office and Board Services Manager
THROUGH: John Standiford, Deputy Executive Director
SUBJECT: Election of Officers
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
This item is for the Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee to
conduct an election of officers for 2012 -Chair and Vice Chair.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The election of officers for the full Commission and its Committees are held on an
annual basis. Commissioners Darcy Kuenzi and Adam Rush were elected as the
Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee's officers in March
2011. Once the election has been conducted, the new Chair and Vice Chair will
immediately assume the positions.
Past Chairs of the Western Riverside County Programs and Projects Committee are
as follows:
2011 -Darcy Kuenzi, City of Menifee
2010 -Karen Spiegel, City of Corona
Past Chairs of the Plans and Programs Committee are as follows:
2009 -Bob Botts, City of Banning
2008 -Frank West, City of Moreno Valley
2007 -Patrick Mullany, City of Indian Wells
2006 -Daryl Busch, City of Perris
2005 -Michael H. Wilson, City of Indio
2004 -Frank Hall, City of Norco
2003 -Dick Kelly, City of Palm Desert
2002 -Daryl Busch, City of Perris
2001 -Percy L. Byrd, City of Indian Wells
2000 -Robin Lowe, City of Hemet
Agenda Item 1 2
63