BOARD OF DIRECTORS AGENDA

Friday, April 24, 2009 9 a.m. to 12 noon

SANDAG Board Room 401 B Street, 7th Floor

San Diego

Board Members

Lori Holt Pfeiler, Chair Mayor, Escondido

Jerome Stocks, First Vice Chair Councilmember, Encinitas

Jack Dale, Second Vice Chair Councilmember, Santee

Matt Hall Councilmember, Carlsbad

Cheryl Cox Mayor, Chula Vista

Carrie Downey Councilmember, Coronado

Crystal Crawford Mayor, Del Mar

Mark Lewis Mayor, El Cajon

Jim Janney Mayor, Imperial Beach

Art Madrid Mayor, La Mesa

Mary Teresa Sessom Mayor, Lemon Grove

Ron Morrison Mayor, National City

Jim Wood Mayor, Oceanside

Mickey Cafagna Mayor, Poway

Jerry Sanders Mayor, San Diego

Ben Hueso Council President, San Diego

Jim Desmond Mayor, San Marcos

Lesa Heebner Councilmember, Solana Beach

Judy Ritter Councilmember, Vista

Dianne Jacob Chairwoman, County of San Diego

Pam Slater-Price Vice Chairwoman, County of San Diego

Advisory Members

Victor Carrillo, Supervisor Imperial County

Will Kempton, Director California Department of Transportation

Harry Mathis, Chairman Metropolitan Transit System

Hon. Bob Campbell, Chair North County Transit District

CAPT Steve Wirsching, USN, CEC, Southwest Division Naval Facilities Engineering Command U.S. Department of Defense

Laurie Black, Commissioner San Diego Unified Port District

Mark Muir, Commissioner San Diego County Water Authority

Robert Smith, Chair Southern California Tribal Chairmen’s Association

Remedios Gómez-Arnau Consul General of Mexico

Gary L. Gallegos Executive Director, SANDAG

AGENDA HIGHLIGHTS

• FY 2010 TRANSIT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM

• FIRST READING OF NEW REGIONAL

COMPREHENSIVE FARE ORDINANCE AND RELATED FINDINGS

• TRANSIT IMPEDIMENTS STUDY

PLEASE TURN OFF CELL PHONES DURING THE MEETING

YOU CAN LISTEN TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING BY VISITING OUR WEB SITE AT WWW.SANDAG.ORG

MISSION STATEMENT The 18 cities and county government are SANDAG serving as the forum for regional decision-making.

SANDAG builds consensus, makes strategic plans, obtains and allocates resources, plans, engineers,

and builds public transit, and provides information on a broad range of topics pertinent to the

region's quality of life.

San Diego Association of Governments ⋅ 401 B Street, Suite 800, San Diego, CA 92101-4231

(619) 699-1900 ⋅ Fax (619) 699-1905 ⋅ www.sandag.org

Welcome to SANDAG. Members of the public may speak to the Board of Directors on any item at the time the Board is considering the item. Please complete a Speaker’s Slip, which is located in the rear of the room, and then present the slip to the Clerk of the Board seated at the front table. Also, members of the public are invited to address the Board on any issue under the agenda item entitled Public Comments/Communications/Member Comments. Speakers are limited to three minutes. The Board of Directors may take action on any item appearing on the agenda. This agenda and related staff reports can be accessed at www.sandag.org under Meetings on the SANDAG Web site. Public comments regarding the agenda can be forwarded to SANDAG via the e-mail comment form also available on the Web site. E-mail comments should be received no later than 12 noon, two working days prior to the Board of Directors meeting. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), SANDAG will accommodate persons who require assistance in order to participate in SANDAG meetings. If such assistance is required, please contact SANDAG at (619) 699-1900 at least 72 hours in advance of the meeting. To request this document or related reports in an alternative format, please call (619) 699-1900, (619) 699-1904 (TTY), or fax (619) 699-1905.

SANDAG offices are accessible by public transit. Phone 511 or see 511sd.com for route information.

Rev0109092

BOARD OF DIRECTORS AGENDA Friday, April 24, 2009

ITEM # RECOMMENDATION

3

+1. APPROVAL OF MARCH 27, 2009, MEETING MINUTES APPROVE

2. PUBLIC COMMENTS/COMMUNICATIONS/MEMBER COMMENTS Members of the public shall have the opportunity to address the Board on any

issue within the jurisdiction of SANDAG. Anyone desiring to speak shall reserve time by completing a “Request to Speak” form and giving it to the Clerk of the Board prior to speaking. Public speakers should notify the Clerk of the Board if they have a handout for distribution to Board members. Speakers are limited to three minutes. Board members also may provide information and announcements under this agenda item.

+3. ACTIONS FROM POLICY ADVISORY COMMITTEES APPROVE

This item summarizes the actions taken by the Borders Committee on March 27,

the Transportation and Regional Planning Committees on April 3, the Executive Committee on April 10, and the Transportation Committee on April 17, 2009.

CONSENT ITEMS (4 through 8)

+4. REQUEST FROM THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS TO BECOME AN ADVISORY MEMBER OF THE BORDERS COMMITTEE (Hector Vanegas)

APPROVE

The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) expressed interest

in becoming an advisory member of the Borders Committee, which provides oversight for planning activities that impact the borders of the San Diego region, including Orange, Riverside, and Imperial Counties, among others. The Board of Directors is asked to approve the SCAG request to become an advisory member of the Borders Committee.

+5. FY 2009 BUDGET AND OVERALL WORK PROGRAM AMENDMENT:

CALIFORNIA REGIONAL BLUEPRINT PLANNING GRANT (Coleen Clementson)

APPROVE

SANDAG was recently awarded a $400,000 grant from the California Regional

Blueprint Planning Program. The grant funding will be used to support SANDAG regional planning efforts. The Board of Directors is asked to approve an amendment to the FY 2009 Budget and Overall Work Program to accept the grant funding. Action by the Board would adjust the current Blueprint Planning Grant Program Work Element and provide the required local match.

4

+6. LONG-RANGE REGIONAL PLANS AND FORECASTS: A WORK PLAN TO COMPLY WITH SENATE BILL 375 (Coleen Clementson)

INFORMATION

The passage of Senate Bill 375 (Steinberg, 2008) and provisions included in the

2008 Settlement Agreement for the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) Environmental Impact Report significantly change how we will prepare the next RTP and Regional Housing Needs Assessment. Both also set the stage for a future update of the Regional Comprehensive Plan. SANDAG staff has responded to these new requirements in the draft FY 2010 Budget and Overall Work Program. The purpose of this informational report is to provide an overview of the proposed work plan and its key elements.

+7. REPORT SUMMARIZING DELEGATED ACTIONS TAKEN BY EXECUTIVE

DIRECTOR (Renée Wasmund) INFORMATION

In accordance with SANDAG Board Policy Nos. 003 (Investment Policy), 017

(Delegation of Authority), and 024 (Procurement and Contracting-Construction), this report summarizes certain delegated actions taken by the Executive Director since the last Board meeting.

+8. REPORTS ON MEETINGS AND EVENTS ATTENDED ON BEHALF OF

SANDAG (Kim Kawada) INFORMATION

Board members will provide brief reports orally or in writing on external

meetings and events attended on behalf of SANDAG since the last Board of Directors meeting.

REPORTS (9 through 14)

+9. FY 2010 TRANSIT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (Kim York)* APPROVE The Metropolitan Transit System and the North County Transit District have

developed their FY 2010 Capital Improvement Programs (CIP), which form the basis for the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 5307 Urbanized Area formula fund grant, the FTA Section 5309 Rail Modernization formula fund grant, and the 2008 Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) amendment for CIP projects. The Board of Directors is asked to approve: the FY 2010 CIPs for the San Diego region (MTS and NCTD), including the transfer of funds from MTS to SANDAG for regional planning; the submittal of FTA Sections 5307 and 5309 applications for the San Diego region (SANDAG, MTS, and NCTD); and Resolution No. 2009-21, adopting Amendment No. 11 to the 2008 RTIP (Attachment 9).

+10. FIRST READING OF NEW REGIONAL COMPREHENSIVE FARE

ORDINANCE AND RELATED FINDINGS (Dan Levy) HOLD FIRST READING AND ADOPT FINDINGS

Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) has declared a fiscal emergency and has taken action to reduce expenditures due to funding cutbacks from the State of California and falling sales tax revenue. The MTS Board has approved a strategy that includes $4.7 million in savings from service reductions and $2.2 million from addition revenue resulting from increases to Regional and Premium Pass

5

prices, elimination of the downtown Trolley Zone, and discontinuing Community and Local Circulation special fares. Staff has prepared a proposed new Regional Comprehensive Fare Ordinance that is intended to be easier to read and understand than the current version. Substantive changes also are proposed to the Fare Ordinance to reflect the proposed fare increases and the various changes needed to accommodate the implementation of the Compass Card. The Board of Directors is asked to hold the first reading of the revised Regional Comprehensive Fare Ordinance that includes the proposed fare increases and to adopt findings related to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act and the California Environmental Quality Act. This item was not ready at the time of mailout and will be sent out under separate cover when completed.

+11. TRANSIT IMPEDIMENTS STUDY (Dave Schumacher)

A. Transit Impediments Study – Staff will deliver the Transit Impediments Study final

report in accordance with the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan Environmental Impact Report Settlement Agreement. This report summarizes both financial and ridership impediments to maintaining long-term transit service levels throughout the San Diego region. The report includes potential alternatives based on overcoming the identified impediments, increasing and maintaining service levels, and increasing and maintaining funding for transit operational expenses. The Board of Directors is asked to (1) accept the Transit Impediments Study for public distribution, and (2) refer the Study to the Transportation Committee for further review of the alternatives identified in the report. It is anticipated that the Board will consider the alternatives that could be implemented at an upcoming meeting in May or June 2009. This item was not ready at the time of mailout and will be sent out under separate cover when completed.

ACCEPT

B. Evaluation of Possible Short-Term Funding Alternatives – Staff will provide a

presentation of possible short-term alternatives that could provide “bridge funding” for public transit operations.

DISCUSSION

+12. HIGH PRIORITY PROJECTS FOR THE NEXT FEDERAL SURFACE

TRANSPORTATION AUTHORIZATION (Victoria Stackwick)* APPROVE

The U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Transportation and

Infrastructure has begun its work on the next surface transportation authorization to replace SAFETEA-LU, which expires on September 30, 2009. On April 2, the Committee notified House members that a small percentage of the bill would be available for member-designated High Priority Projects (HPP), which must be submitted within a very tight timeframe. The Board of Directors is asked to approve the list of regional High Priority Projects for the next federal surface transportation authorization, for submittal to our Congressional delegation.

13. COMPASS CARD UPDATE (James Dreisbach-Towle) INFORMATION

Staff will provide the Board of Directors with an update on recent Compass Card

project activities and the status of the planned public launch.

6

14. FINANCIAL MARKET STATUS (Renée Wasmund and Marney Cox)* INFORMATION This monthly briefing is designed to keep the Board of Directors informed about

the latest developments in the financial markets, the economy, and revenue forecasts, and the strategies we are exploring and implementing to minimize possible impacts to SANDAG.

15. UPCOMING MEETINGS INFORMATION

The next Board Policy meeting is scheduled for Friday, May 8, 2009, at 10 a.m.

The next Board Business meeting of the Board of Directors is scheduled for Friday, May 22, 2009, at 9 a.m.

16. ADJOURNMENT

+ next to an agenda item indicates an attachment * next to an agenda item indicates a San Diego Regional Transportation Commission item

BOARD OF DIRECTORS AGENDA ITEM NO. 09-04-1

APRIL 24, 2009 ACTION REQUESTED – APPROVE

BOARD OF DIRECTORS DISCUSSION AND ACTIONS

MARCH 27, 2009

Chair Lori Holt Pfeiler (Escondido) called the meeting of the SANDAG Board of Directors to order at 9:00 a.m. The attendance sheet for the meeting is attached.

1. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES (APPROVE) Action: Upon a motion by Mayor Mark Lewis (El Cajon) and a second by Mayor Jim Wood (Oceanside), the SANDAG Board of Directors approved the minutes from the February 13 and February 27, 2009, meetings.

2. PUBLIC COMMENTS/COMMUNICATIONS/MEMBER COMMENTS Chuck Lungerhausen, a member of the public, solicited donations for the Multiple Sclerosis (MS) Walk. He thanked Board members for their past support. Mike Bullock, a retired Lockheed Martin Systems Engineer, stated that his interest is the economics of transportation and parking policies. He reviewed the Smart Growth Design Guidelines and suggested several changes, which he provided to SANDAG planning staff. Gerald Walson, a member of the public, said that there is a significant link between land use and transportation as well as development and water availability. He asked how SANDAG is accounting for water to support new development. Chair Pfeiler noted that there were several invited guests for a time certain presentation at 9:15 a.m., so we will suspend Public Comments and pick them back up following Agenda Item No. 3.

3. 2009 DIAMOND AWARDS (INFORMATION) Chair Pfeiler stated that the Diamond Awards honor organizations in our region that go the extra mile to reduce traffic congestion. They make commutes easier for their employees, and they help all of us by cutting down on air pollution and greenhouse gases. Chair Pfeiler pointed out that nominations are open to any business, agency, or other organization that has a commuter benefit program for employees. The winners have successfully promoted alternatives to driving alone by offering everything from alternative work schedules to free transit passes to special parking spots for carpoolers. Diamond Awards are given in five different categories: Program Excellence, Innovation, Marketing,

Ongoing Commitment, and Best New Program. Exemplary individuals also receive a Diamond Award for their outstanding work. Chair Pfeiler thanked the sponsors for the morning reception: VPSI, Inc., Enterprise Rideshare, and Seabreeze Shuttles. Chair Pfeiler proceeded to present the 7th Annual Diamond Awards as follows: for Program Excellence – University of California, San Diego (UCSD); for Innovation – Naval Base San Diego and UCSD; for Marketing – the Unified Port of San Diego and La Costa Glen Carlsbad; for Ongoing Commitment – Naval Base Coronado and EDAW; and for Best New Program – California State University, San Marcos (CSUSM) and the City of Solana Beach. Chair Pfeiler also recognized two individuals who have poured a great deal of effort into commuter programs: Debra Gutzmer, Manager of Facilities Planning and Client Services at SAIC, and Deb Schmidt, Commuter Services Coordinator at CSUSM. Chair Pfeiler awarded Special Mention certificates to five companies that have excellent programs and to whom this year's Diamond Awards judges felt deserved recognition: Goodwill Industries, Hard Rock Hotel, H.G. Fenton and The Art Institute, the Tribal Reservation Transportation Authority, and VPSI, Inc. Chair Pfeiler thanked each of these companies and individuals for all of their efforts.

2. PUBLIC COMMENTS/COMMUNICATIONS/MEMBER COMMENTS (Continued) Stephen Russell, representing Mid-City MOVES, expressed concern about the Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) fiscal emergency, which may result in another round of service cuts and fare increases. Transit support is the ultimate fiscal stimulus as people rely on transit to get to their jobs, shopping, and schools. Before the fare change ordinance hearings, he suggested formation of an emergency task force to discuss creative ways to fund a dynamic transit system including reprogramming TransNet dollars, using federal stimulus dollars, and using Air Pollution Control District (APCD) funds. Adam Gosney, CALPIRG Outreach Director, stated that we need a transportation system that is smart and fundamental. Students support structure changes, not more highways. He urged the Board to support complete streets and bicycle and pedestrian projects as they increase safety and improve travel. Rebecca Bolsa, CALPERS Community Organizer, said that the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) is an opportunity to invest in our infrastructure, our future, and our citizens. She highlighted two important things: thousands in San Diego County are willing to make a financial donation to make something happen, and citizens want more rapid bus lines for better access to the city. Don Stillwell, a member of the public, pointed out that funds are available for construction but cannot be used for operating costs. A 1 percent sales tax would be a less painful way to pay for operating public transit. Transfers should be restored. He challenged the Board to educate the public on the need for a sales tax to fund bus operations. He also requested that bus Route 14 be maintained as currently operated, with an additional stop at the Grantville Trolley Station.

2

Second Vice Chair and Transportation Committee Chair Jack Dale (Santee) stated that the Transportation Committee had quite a discussion regarding residents’ concerns. After that discussion it was decided that the Board and Transportation Committee should hold a joint meeting to discuss options for funding transit operations. The lack of operating funds from the state is a major issue. Mayor Jim Desmond (San Marcos) noted that the region has accepted the Destination Lindbergh Plan, and it is now out for public review. He asked Board members to contact him if they have any questions about this plan.

4. ACTIONS FROM POLICY ADVISORY COMMITTEES (APPROVE) This item summarizes the actions taken by the Borders Committee on February 27, the Regional Planning Committee on March 6, the Executive Committee on March 13, and the Transportation and Public Safety Committees on March 20, 2009. Action: Upon a motion by Mayor Crystal Crawford (Del Mar) and second by Council President Ben Hueso (City of San Diego), the SANDAG Board of Directors approved the actions taken by the Policy Advisory Committees at the meetings noted above. Yes – 18 (weighted vote, 100%). No – 0 (weighted vote, 0%). Abstain – 0 (weighted vote, 0%). Absent – National City.

CONSENT ITEMS (5 through 8)

5. BIKE TO WORK DAY 2009 (APPROVE) On May 15, 2009, SANDAG will sponsor Bike to Work Day. This is a nationally recognized event that occurs at the end of California Bike Commute Week, a statewide effort that promotes biking to work. The purpose of Bike to Work Day is to create public awareness about the benefits and opportunities of bicycling to work rather than driving alone in a car. The Board of Directors is asked to approve Resolution No. 2009-20 in support of Bike to Work Day, which will be held on May 15, 2009, and to encourage member agencies to approve similar proclamations.

6. FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION SECTION 5311 PROGRAM OF PROJECTS REVISION (APPROVE) At its December 19, 2008, meeting the Board of Directors approved the annual Program of Projects (POP) for the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 5311 rural funding program. The North County Transit District (NCTD) has requested to change the use of this funding from capital to operating expenses, thus necessitating a revision to the POP. The Transportation Committee recommends that the Board of Directors approve the revision to the FTA Section 5311 POP as described in the staff report.

3

7. REPORT SUMMARIZING DELEGATED ACTIONS TAKEN BY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (INFORMATION) In accordance with SANDAG Board Policy Nos. 003 (Investment Policy), 017 (Delegation of Authority), and 024 (Procurement and Contracting - Construction), this report summarizes certain delegated actions taken by the Executive Director since the last Board meeting.

8. REPORTS ON MEETINGS AND EVENTS ATTENDED ON BEHALF OF SANDAG (INFORMATION) Board members will provide brief reports orally or in writing on external meetings and events attended on behalf of SANDAG since the last Board of Directors meeting. Action: Upon a motion by Mayor Desmond and a second by Mayor Wood, the SANDAG Board approved Consent Item Nos. 5 through 8, including Resolution No. 2009-20. Yes – 17. No – 0. Abstain – 0. Absent – National City and Santee.

REPORTS (9 though 16)

9. DRAFT FY 2010 BUDGET (INCLUDING THE OVERALL WORK PROGRAM) (APPROVE) First Vice Chair Jerome Stocks (Encinitas) thanked staff for holding the informational meeting on the draft FY 2010 Budget prior to the Board meeting. He introduced Reneé Wasmund, Finance Director, to provide the staff report. Ms. Wasmund reported that SANDAG Bylaws require approval of a draft budget by April 1 each year. Staff took direction from the Board over the last year and used that to develop various emphasis areas. We used a zero-based approach and focused on the Board's priorities with available resources. This approach is important during these economic times. Pages 8-9 of the staff report summarize the content and purpose of each Budget chapter. The Overall Work Program (OWP) is found in Chapters 2 and 3, and the Capital program is in Chapter 9. The OWP totals $56.6 million and contains the work elements for various programs. Also included in the OWP are resources for the oversight of ongoing programs. The larger component is the capital budget, which is $750 million and is mostly comprised of the TransNet Early Action Programs (EAPs). It was decided that member assessments would remain unchanged. We have taken a conservative approach throughout the budget development process. We review vacant positions as they arise during the year. We are not funding several vacant positions and will not fund 19 limited-term positions. We looked at staffing resources and challenged ourselves to use them in creative new ways. For example, Research staff in the Criminal Justice Division was used for ridership surveys rather than hiring outside assistance. We are continuing the ARJIS consolidation, and reducing consultant services. We recommend that three ARJIS positions be changed to regular staff positions, but there are no budget impacts to this action. We also are recommending no change to salary ranges, no merit increases, and no cost of living. We are further recommending that any future employees hired after July 1, 2009, will pay the employee’s share of retirement plan costs. We are continually reviewing the budget for opportunities to streamline and reduce costs. This approach will position us to continue into FY 2010 with a Contingency Reserve of

4

$4.4 million. That exceeds the Board’s policy requirement of 5 percent. On May 8, the Executive Committee is scheduled to review the final draft FY 2010 Budget. The Board is scheduled to act on the Budget at its May 22 meeting. First Vice Chair Stocks noted that staff will again be available before the May 22 Board meeting to answer any questions. Chair Pfeiler noted that there was one request to speak on this item. Stephen Russell stated that he would defer speaking on this item. Mayor Art Madrid (La Mesa) commended staff for addressing an issue that is sensitive to elected officials and that is related to adjustments in employee retirement, benefits, and salaries. He suggested that SANDAG investigate and consider buying its own building. Action: Upon a motion by First Vice Chair Stocks and second by Mayor Mary Sessom (Lemon Grove), the SANDAG Board of Directors approved the Draft FY 2010 Budget (including the Overall Work Program) and authorized distribution of the document to member agencies and other interested parties for review. Yes – 16 (weighted vote, 94%). No – 1 (weighted vote, 6%). Abstain – 0 (weighted vote, 0%). Absent – National City and Santee.

10. ANNUAL TransNet BUDGET AND PLAN OF FINANCE UPDATE (APPROVE) Second Vice Chair and Transportation Committee Chair Dale stated that the TransNet Plan of Finance (POF) is being updated now as part of the annual SANDAG budget process. While revenues are down, so are costs to build our projects, which is a break-even situation. He introduced Muggs Stoll, TransNet Program Manager, to provide the staff report. Mr. Stoll reported that we update the POF at least annually and more often if needed. This update includes adjustments to the SANDAG Capital Improvement Program (CIP). The program status is similar to last year. This update was presented to the Independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee (ITOC) and the Transportation Committee. There are some issues the ITOC mentioned that can affect the POF that we have not included, such as federal stimulus dollars and Proposition 1B (Prop. 1B) funding. This update does not include the stimulus funding, but it does assume Prop. 1B monies. The POF focuses on the EAP and there has been no change to that program in the last year. He showed a graph of the entire TransNet POF funding, which focuses on Major Corridors and the Environmental Mitigation Program (EMP). Project cost updates were reviewed, incorporating recent trends in the Construction Cost Index. There have been unprecedented increases (2004-2007) and unprecedented declines (2007-2008) in construction costs. He showed the historical perspective from 1990-2008 and the construction cost escalation rates from 2008 vs. 2009. He provided a program revenue update and reviewed a comparison of sales tax revenue forecasts from 2008 vs. 2009. Richard Chavez, Principal Engineer, reviewed schedules for eight new projects that have been added to the FY 2010 CIP Budget for the TransNet Major Corridors Program. The projects are related to the newly created Prop. 1B Trade Corridors Improvement Fund (TCIF) program. On April 25, 2008, the Board accepted the Prop. 1B TCIF funding, and created the Goods Movement Program.

5

Mr. Chavez stated that a number of project splits are being proposed to help us better track and monitor the CIP. The recommended budget for this year’s TransNet Major Corridors program totals $5.567 billion, which is a $39 million increase; however, this increase is offset by a $10 million contribution from the state Traffic Congestion Relief Program (TCRP) for the State Route (SR) 94 environmental document necessary for completion of the South Bay Bus Rapid Transit project, and a $30 million fair-share mitigation contribution for the SR 76 project. One issue raised at the last Transportation Committee meeting related to the Mid-Range Transit Plan item that was included in the POF. Staff will return to the Transportation Committee next month with a more detailed report on that project’s purpose and the need for this work. Mr. Stoll provided a 2009 POF updated cash balance chart, which shows a later year for a negative cash flow (2036 vs. 2026). He summarized the update by stating that the maintenance of all EAP project schedules yields similar results to the 2008 POF update. There has been a substantial downturn in revenues that are largely offset by lower construction costs, the update does not account for possible future delays in Prop. 1B bond funds or the receipt of federal economic stimulus monies, and a revised POF assessment is likely in the near future to incorporate any changes in Prop. 1B and/or ARRA funding. Chair Pfeiler noted that there was one request to speak on this item. Theresa Quiroz, a member of the public, stated that the TransNet Extension Ordinance mandated four actions: build freeways, fix streets, create a bus rapid transit (BRT) system, and increase transit for seniors and the disabled. The POF does not fund an increase in transit. She said that building a transit station does not increase transit. The POF completely ignores the mandate to increase transit for seniors and the disabled. This POF needs to be amended and funds allocated for operating public transit. TransNet funds can be used for this purpose. She said that if we continue to ignore our transit operations, that decision will have a negative effect on receiving other federal funds. Council President Ben Hueso (City of San Diego) asked staff to respond to Ms. Quiroz regarding the appropriateness of using TransNet funds for transit operations. Mr. Gallegos referred to the joint meeting that Second Vice Chair Dale highlighted to discuss funding options. The TransNet Extension Ordinance does provide flexibility, but it requires a two-thirds vote, and it is a zero-sum game. You have to take money from one part to place in another part. In the original TransNet Ordinance, one-third of the monies could be used for public transit, and 20 percent of that amount could be used specifically for operations. The SANDAG Board increased that percentage for operations to 40 percent. That equates to 13 percent of the total amount of the Ordinance for transit operations. In the TransNet Extension we increased that share to 16.5 percent. We also tried to learn from the first Ordinance to budget operating dollars for new transit projects. There is dedicated operating money in the TransNet Extension Ordinance for the new BRT and rail transit capital projects through 2048. He reiterated that the SANDAG Board does have flexibility, but the issue is a policy one. We plan to provide a presentation to the Board and Transportation Committee that goes through TransNet to show you where the flexibilities are and the challenges to achieve this goal.

6

Action: Upon a motion by Mayor Desmond and second by Councilmember Carrie Downey (Coronado), the SANDAG Board of Directors approved the budget adjustments and the resulting TransNet Budget and Plan of Finance Update included in this report and its attachments. Yes – 19 (weighted vote, 100%). No – 0 (weighted vote, 0%). Abstain – 0 (weighted vote, 0%). Absent – None.

11. FEDERAL ECONOMIC STIMULUS PROGRAMMING RECOMMENDATIONS (APPROVE) Second Vice Chair Dale stated that the Transportation Committee recommended approval of staff’s recommendation to program ARRA funds that are being distributed through the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). This recommendation provides a significant amount of funds for local streets and roads projects. It also provides funding for high-priority regional projects, including two TransNet EAP projects: SR 76 and Interstate 805 (I-805)/Carroll Canyon Road. One of the main elements of this recommendation is for ARRA funds to be concentrated on a few projects to reduce the administrative burden associated with these funds. Through an exchange of federal stimulus and TransNet funds, the local agencies would see an infusion of about $50 million in new funds for transportation projects. He noted that the State of California also is considering a legislative change in the process of allocating these funds. Gary Gallegos, Executive Director, announced that we just received notification from Will Kempton, Caltrans Director, that the Governor will sign Assembly Bill (AB) 20 from the third extraordinary session. This action will net San Diego about $3 million more in federal stimulus dollars than originally thought. First Vice Chair Stocks referred to a graph that was distributed depicting how the ARRA highway funding piece fits into the entire stimulus package. José Nuncio, Manager of Financial Programming and Project Control, explained existing law for allocation of the stimulus monies, but stated that with the Governor approving AB 20, that will change. Out of $27 billion in FHWA ARRA funds available nationwide, California will get about $257 million. Approximately 30 percent of the funds are distributed by formula to the regions through the Surface Transportation Program (STP), and 70 percent would be available to the state for use at its discretion. Within California, existing state law distributes the 70 percent in ARRA funds to the California Transportation Commission (CTC) for use through the State Highway Operations and Preservation Program (SHOPP) and the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). Before the CTC distributes these funds, it takes monies off the top for the Caltrans SHOPP program. Caltrans was to get $625.7 million for the SHOPP. SANDAG would have gotten $64.4 million in STIP funds and $4.2 million in Transportation Enhancement (TE) monies. In order for the region to use these funds, we have to work with the CTC to program and allocate the STIP funds, which is a time-consuming process in that it takes 6-8 weeks to get onto the CTC agenda. Mr. Nuncio stated that the share of ARRA 30 percent formula funds for the San Diego region would be $62.8 million. Using existing Board policy, 94 percent, or approximately $59 million, would be set aside for TransNet EAP projects and $3.8 million for non-EAP projects. As with the STIP funds, previous Board policy and practice has been to program the remaining 6 percent on other regional projects and programs.

7

Mr. Nuncio said that the State Legislature is considering a one-time exception to the process for the distribution of FHWA economic stimulus funds. The amount the region would receive under the draft law is about $3.4 million greater than the amount under existing law (CTC process), assuming a $625.7 million off-the-top distribution of the SHOPP. The pending language indicates that it is the Legislature’s intent that 40 percent of the funds be considered for distribution to local jurisdictions. This language is flexible in that it allows each region to determine its own distribution of funding among its local jurisdictions. Mr. Nuncio stated that in order to quickly obligate the federal funds, to minimize the number of projects that must meet the extensive management and reporting requirements, and to distribute some of the funds to cities and county as intended in the draft state law, staff recommends a series of one-time exceptions to Board policy: (1) consider setting aside the TE funds for regional TE-eligible projects that are ready to go; (2) in accordance with draft legislation, allow a one-time increase in the non-TransNet EAP funding to 40 percent from the current 6 percent; (3) allow a one-time distribution of the non-TransNet EAP to local jurisdictions, with distributions determined by the TransNet local streets and roads formula; and (4) exchange the federal funds that local jurisdictions would get with TransNet funds – with all TransNet rules applying. He summarized the options under both the existing law and draft law. Staff’s recommendation is to distribute the new funds according to Option 1B, and an exchange of about $49.3 million in TransNet and federal economic stimulus funds for local streets and roads projects. Option 1B would distribute funds approximately as follows: $4.24 million for regional TE-eligible projects, $49.26 million for local jurisdictions, and $73.90 million for TransNet EAP projects. If AB 20 is signed by the Governor, then Option 2B monies would be distributed as follows: $3.94 million for regional TE-eligible projects, $50.74 million for local jurisdictions, and $76.11 million for TransNet EAP projects. Mr. Nuncio noted that Caltrans and FHWA have not yet released the exact regional funding amounts according to the new law, so our estimates may change somewhat. We should receive about $3 million more with Option 2B compared to Option 1B. Mr. Nuncio said that the initial opportunity to act on TransNet funds to local jurisdictions will be at the Transportation Committee meeting on May 1. The item to program the ARRA funds will be brought to the April 3 Transportation Committee meeting for a recommendation, and then to the Board on April 10 for approval. Supervisor Dianne Jacob (County of San Diego) complimented Mr. Gallegos and staff for doing an outstanding job in Sacramento on this legislation. She noted that out of an about $800 billion federal economic stimulus package, it is unfortunate that we will only get a meager $48 billion for transportation infrastructure projects. The County supports the recommendation, particularly the 40 percent to the cities and county and the exchange of federal monies for TransNet. She asked when the county and cities will receive that money. Mr. Gallegos replied that as soon as the SANDAG Board adopts these actions and the law gets passed, we can make the money available for use. Mr. Nuncio stated that April 17 is the date that the Transportation Committee will recommend programming the federal funds for the specific projects.

8

Supervisor Jacob reiterated that action today would allow SANDAG to start the flow of the funds. Mr. Gallegos stated that we are borrowing money for TransNet, so if we have a project and we have that money, we will move the dollars to make it happen. Supervisor Slater-Price (County of San Diego) congratulated Mr. Gallegos, staff, and the Board for working together. Mayor Wood expressed his appreciation for the chart showing the various economic stimulus funding programs, and also thanked Mr. Gallegos and staff for monies to be distributed to the local cities and for SR 76. Mayor Madrid thanked everyone for the allocation of resources, especially for the Grossmont Station Pedestrian Enhancement Project. This project has won a number of awards. He asked for clarification regarding a difference in the amount of money listed for this project. Mr. Nuncio said that the TransNet funds will be offset by formula TE funds that are already allocated for that project. Mayor Madrid stated that following action on this meeting he would like to make a presentation to Mr. Gallegos. Action: Upon a motion by Supervisor Dianne Jacob and second by Supervisor Pam Slater-Price, the SANDAG Board of Directors approved: (1) the distribution of new funds according to Option 1B, shown in more detail in Attachment 3; (2) an exchange of approximately $49.3 million in TransNet and federal economic stimulus funds for local streets and roads projects; (3) programming approximately $105.1 million for State Route 76 (Middle) in federal economic stimulus funds; (4) programming $18.1 million for the I-805/Carroll Canyon Road project in federal economic stimulus funds; and (5) programming approximately $4.2 million in Transportation Enhancement federal economic stimulus funds for the Grossmont Station Pedestrian Enhancement Project, and amending the FY 2009 Budget to reflect this programming change; and (6) due to time constraints, authorize SANDAG to submit a programming package that would substantially reflect the goal of implementing the four exceptions to Board policy discussed in this report for distribution and programming to the extent allowed by the revised legislation, and to report any changes to both the Transportation Committee and to the Board of Directors. Yes – 19 (weighted vote, 100%). No – 0 (weighted vote, 0%). Abstain – 0 (weighted vote, 0%). Absent – None. Mayor Cheryl Cox (Chula Vista) clarified that we voted on Option 2B if AB 20 is approved. Chair Pfeiler agreed that was part of the action taken. Mayor Madrid presented Mr. Gallegos with the formally signed easement agreement that entitles SANDAG, Caltrans, the City of La Mesa, and MTS to construct the two elevators as part of the Grossmont Station Pedestrian Enhancement Project.

9

12. SANDAG PRIORITIES FOR NEXT FEDERAL SURFACE TRANSPORTATION AUTHORIZATION (APPROVE) First Vice Chair Stocks said that this item is related to our goals for the next federal surface transportation legislation. He introduced Victoria Stackwick, Associate Legislative Analyst, to provide the staff report. Ms. Stackwick stated that the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), the multi-year federal surface transportation authorization, is set to expire on September 30, 2009. Various Congressional committees have begun to hold hearings, but at this time it seems unlikely that Congress will pass a new transportation authorization before SAFETEA-LU expires. One of the main issues that must be addressed is how best to fund the next multi-year transportation measure. The Highway Trust Fund, which has been the primary source of funding, continues to face solvency issues, as gas tax revenues based on fuel consumption have continued to decline. The Administration also has stated that at this time it does not support a tax on vehicle miles traveled and/or an increase of the gas tax. So, with no clear source of additional revenues, an extension of the current bill is likely. However, in anticipation of the next federal surface transportation bill, Caltrans and the California Business, Transportation, and Housing (BT&H) Agency developed a set of Consensus Principles for California to use when advocating for the next authorization. These Consensus Principles were developed through a series of open meetings that began in December 2007. Input was provided by statewide metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs), regional transportation planning agencies, cities, counties, the private sector, and other transportation stakeholders. Attachment 2 of the staff report outlines the seven Consensus Principles. The California Consensus Principles were developed to be broad in order to accommodate the state’s diverse transportation needs. In addition to the Consensus Principles, staff recommends approving a second set of SANDAG-specific priorities that reflect the policy and infrastructure needs of the San Diego region. The SANDAG Board began authorization discussions back in September 2008. The Board heard from a panel consisting of Emil Frankel, Peter Peyser, and Steve Heminger. The panel presented an in-depth look at transportation funding, and Board members discussed the challenges and potential opportunities for the San Diego region. Additionally, during the SANDAG Retreat held during the last week of January, Board members participated in two break-out sessions to identify key SANDAG priorities for Authorization. The priority issues identified during these break-out sessions included: supporting local control of funds to have more accountability with the voters; supporting the elimination of transportation “silos” and redundant federal programs, and increasing program funding flexibility; supporting more fiscal discipline/accountability before asking for increased taxes; supporting ways to accelerate project implementation including environmental streamlining, self-certification of federal requirements, and public-private partnerships; and the need to set policy objectives/long-term goals for our transportation investments, and define the right performance-based measures for both highways and transit. Based on these discussions, SANDAG staff developed a set of priorities to use when advocating for the next authorization.

10

Following Board action, staff will distribute both sets of principles to the SANDAG Congressional delegation. Staff also will continue to monitor the authorization process and provide updates to the Executive Committee and Board as appropriate. Ms. Stackwick stated that it is expected that some time this year Congress will solicit projects from state, regional, and local entities. As the federal process unfolds and criteria are announced, staff will bring additional reports to the Board. Mayor Jerry Sanders (City of San Diego) stated that at a meeting with Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood, mayors were advocating that money come to the MPOs. We will be meeting again with Secretary LaHood in six weeks for further discussions. He said that it makes a huge difference to have regionwide principles. The U.S. government is interested in how SANDAG works in this region. Mayor Sessom said she found it interesting that the SANDAG priorities of greenhouse gas (GHG) and federal climate change were put into a category to monitor. She thought these areas should be segregated and highlighted. Ms. Stackwick stated that Senator Boxer was bringing the GHG emission issue before Congress in a separate bill, and not in the authorization. Staff agreed to identify this priority as its own separate item. Mayor Crawford agreed that the issues are important and should be listed separately. She noted that the standards for the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) are not the same, and we have run into issues because of that. This may be a problem with the federal stimulus dollars. Mr. Gallegos agreed to separate those items grouped under “Other” to give each its own line item. Action: Upon a motion by First Vice Chair Stocks and second by Supervisor Slater-Price, the SANDAG Board of Directors approved the California Consensus Principles and proposed SANDAG-specific priorities, as amended, for the next federal surface transportation authorization. Yes –- 15 (weighted vote, 100%). No – 0 (weighted vote, 0%). Abstain – 0 (weighted vote, 0%). Absent – Carlsbad, Coronado, La Mesa, and Solana Beach.

13. TransNet REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION CONGESTION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FEE ADJUSTMENT (INFORMATION/POSSIBLE ACTION) Mr. Stoll reported that the Regional Transportation Congestion Improvement Program (RTCIP), an element of the TransNet Extension Ordinance, requires each city and the County of San Diego to collect an exaction from the private sector for each new housing unit constructed in their jurisdictions. These exactions help ensure that future development contributes its proportional share of the funding needed to pay for the Regional Arterial System (RAS) and related regional transportation facility improvements. All jurisdictions brought programs forward, and these were approved a year ago. He noted that this is not a SANDAG program, but we have responsibility to oversee it. These programs fall under the responsibility of the local jurisdictions under the Mitigation Fee Act.

11

Mr. Stoll said that one requirement is that the contribution amount be increased annually. This report summarizes the evaluation process completed by staff and reports the fee adjustment factor for FY 2010. Based on SANDAG staff’s analysis of construction cost trends over the past year, the fee adjustment would be 2.0 percent, raising the RTCIP exaction from $2,000 to $2,040 for FY 2010. Action: Upon a motion by Mayor Desmond and second by Second Vice Chair Dale, the SANDAG Board of Directors approved an adjustment to the TransNet Regional Transportation Congestion Improvement Program Fee. Yes – 11 (weighted vote, 100%). No - 0 (weighted vote, 0%). Abstain – 0 (weighted vote, 0%). Absent – Carlsbad, Chula Vista, Coronado, Escondido, La Mesa, Santee, Solana Beach, and Vista.

14. FINANCIAL MARKET STATUS (INFORMATION) Renée Wasmund, Finance Director, reminded the Board about a previously proposed interest rate swap transaction for the TransNet program if we could meet the 100 basis points requirement. She reported that we were able to complete that transaction at 107 basis points. That translates into a savings of $5.8 million and will offset our interest cost. Marney Cox, Chief Economist, said that we will continue to monitor the economy to determine whether we need any additional adjustments to the sales tax revenue projections; however, nothing major has happened to change our mind regarding the decision to use a 4 percent decrease for the current fiscal year and an increase of 2 percent in the next fiscal year. First Vice Chair Stocks noted that the swap transaction means that SANDAG will have the lowest cost of debt of any public agency. Mayor Wood congratulated staff on managing this transaction. Action: This item was presented for information only.

15. COMPASS CARD STATUS UPDATE (INFORMATION) James Dreisbach-Towle reported that in the last status report there were two remaining issues—Bus Smart Card Readers and Business Rules for Fare Products. Those have now been resolved and testing is continuing successfully. Staffs at NCTD and MTS are now planning the public deployment of the Compass Card starting with COASTER and Premium Express services. He introduced Colleen Windsor, Communications Director, to describe the public outreach effort. Ms. Windsor said that staff is planning the public outreach beginning on April 3, 2009, with Take One flyers and information bulletins placed on COASTER trains and onboard Premium Express buses. The agencies will begin to sell May monthly passes for these two services on April 20. We will have a comprehensive advertising campaign and one-on-one contact with transit riders with a Compass Ambassador program. Staff also is in the process of working with the two transit agencies and the San Diego Workforce Partnerships to hire youth with federal stimulus dollars to serve as our ambassadors. We will initially have about 30 ambassadors on platforms for COASTER and selected Premium bus stops. We will have more than 300 at the height of the campaign, which will last from three to six months.

12

To continue to provide excellent customer service, we are looking into identifying an exclusive third-party grocery outlet to sell these passes. About 95 percent of monthly passes are purchased at third-party outlets. This would be a cost-neutral program. This partnership also would allow us to reduce the number of outlets, save on staff time and equipment needs, and comply with Title VI requirements for low-income and minority transit users. Chair Pfeiler noted that there was one request to speak on this item. Mr. Bullock said that this is important progress. He wondered how race organizations can count 20,000 people who cross a finish line, but we don’t have a system that counts the number of people who get on a bus or train. He also asked why we are making people prepay the fares rather than just boarding the vehicles. Action: This item was presented for information only.

16. 2010 CENSUS (INFORMATION) Ms. Nampet Panichpant-Michelsen, San Diego Partnership Team for the U.S. Census Bureau, provided a presentation on the 2010 Census. She expressed gratitude for early partnership signers such as San Diego Mayor Jerry Sanders, San Diego Council President Ben Hueso, Chula Vista Mayor Cheryl Cox, and Mr. Gallegos. She stated that each year about $300 billion in federal funds is awarded to states and communities based on census data. Census information helps determine locations for schools, roads, hospitals, child care and senior citizen centers; businesses use census data to locate supermarkets, shopping centers, new housing, and other facilities. The census determines how many seats each state will have in the U.S. House of Representatives as well as the boundaries of legislative districts. Local communities use this data to gauge the financial health of the community and the future of vital social service programs. In addition, this data is used to determine the most need for additional social services, including who receives community development block grants and other grant programs essential to many communities. She said that the 2010 Census questionnaire asks only a few questions of each person and the Census Bureau does not release or share information that identifies individual respondents or their households for 72 years. She distributed a partnership agreement and requested that local agencies sign the partnership agreement and assign a liaison person to be on a Complete Count Committee. This will be critical for accomplishing the task. Census 2010 will provide 150,000 jobs nationwide. The Census Bureau already has hired 850 people and will hire another 1,200 people in the fall. She said if each jurisdiction could provide a testing and training site, that would be appreciated. There are sites opening in Escondido, El Cajon, and one in the South Bay. She introduced her team in San Diego. Council President Hueso welcomed Ms. Panichpant-Michelsen and her team. He emphasized how important it is for an accurate population count. California has an average lower age of residents than other states, and this should qualify us for more federal education monies. Income levels also affect funding programs. The State of California is one of the largest producers of revenue to the federal government.

13

14

Mayor Crawford stated that there are a number of jobs that are available and hoped that Board members have those announcements in their jurisdictions. Action: This item was presented for information only.

17. UPCOMING MEETINGS The next Board Policy meeting is scheduled for Friday, April 10, 2009, at 10 a.m. The next Board Business meeting of the Board of Directors is scheduled for Friday, April 24, 2009, at 9 a.m.

18. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 11:02 a.m.

DGunn/M/DGU

Meeting Adjourned Time: 11:02 a.m. Meeting Start Time: 9:00 a.m. Minimum Time for Attendance Eligibility: 1 hrs./1min. or 10:01 a.m.

15

ATTENDANCE SANDAG BOARD OF DIRECTORS’ MEETING

MARCH 27, 2009

JURISDICTION/ ORGANIZATION

NAME

ATTENDING

City of Carlsbad Matt Hall (Member) Yes

City of Chula Vista Cheryl Cox (Primary) Yes

City of Coronado Carrie Downey (Primary) Yes

City of Del Mar Crystal Crawford (Primary) Yes

City of El Cajon Mark Lewis (Primary) Yes

City of Encinitas Jerome Stocks, 1st Vice Chair (Primary) Yes

City of Escondido Lori Holt Pfeiler, Chair (Primary) Yes

City of Imperial Beach Jim Janney (Primary) Yes

City of La Mesa Art Madrid (Member) Yes

City of Lemon Grove Mary Sessom (Primary) Yes

City of National City Ron Morrison (Member) Yes

City of Oceanside James Wood (Member) Yes

City of Poway Don Higginson (1st Alt.) Yes

City of San Diego – A Jerry Sanders (Primary, Seat A) Yes

City of San Diego - B Ben Hueso (Primary, Seat B) Anthony Young attended 9:00-9:27 a.m.; Ben Hueso attended 9:27 a.m. to 11:02 a.m.

City of San Marcos Jim Desmond (Member) Yes

City of Santee Jack Dale (2nd Vice Chair) Yes

City of Solana Beach Lesa Heebner (Primary) Yes

City of Vista Judy Ritter (Primary) Yes

County of San Diego - A Dianne Jacob (Primary, Seat A) Yes

County of San Diego - B Pam Slater-Price (Primary, Seat B) Yes

Caltrans Pedro Orso-Delgado (1st. Alt.) Yes

MTS Harry Mathis (Member) Yes

NCTD Bob Campbell (Primary) No

Imperial County Victor Carrillo (Member) Yes

US Dept. of Defense CAPT Steve Wirshing (Member) Yes

SD Unified Port District Laurie Black (Member) No

SD County Water Authority Mark Muir (Primary) Yes

Baja California/Mexico Remedios Gómez-Arnau (Member) Yes

Southern California Tribal Chairmen’s Association

Robert H. Smith (Member) No

BOARD OF DIRECTORS AGENDA ITEM NO. 09-04-3APRIL 24, 2009 ACTION REQUESTED – APPROVE

ACTIONS FROM POLICY ADVISORY COMMITTEES

The following actions were taken by the Policy Advisory Committees since the last Board of Directors meeting.

BORDERS COMMITTEE MEETING (March 27, 2009)

The Borders Committee took the following actions or recommended the following approvals:

• Accepted the final San Diego – Imperial County I-8 Corridor Strategic Plan.

TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MEETING (April 3, 2009)

The Transportation Committee took the following actions or recommended the following approvals:

• Directed staff to place an item on a future Transportation Committee agenda regarding safety improvements being evaluated by Caltrans for State Route (SR) 67.

• Approved Amendment No. 7 to the 2008 RTIP revising SR 905 funding, and recommended that the Board of Directors approve Amendment No. 8 to the 2008 RTIP and approve an amendment to the FY 2009 Capital Budget for SANDAG transit capital projects.

• Approved utilization of the existing project evaluation criteria for FY 2010 Transportation Development Act/TransNet Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Neighborhood Safety/Traffic Calming Program and authorized a call for projects.

REGIONAL PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING (April 3, 2009)

The Regional Planning Committee took the following actions or recommended the following approvals:

• Recommended that the Board of Directors adopt the Coastal Regional Sediment Management Plan.

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING (March 13, 2009)

The Executive Committee took the following actions or recommended the following approvals:

• Approved proceeding with action-only minutes for Board and Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) meetings in conjunction with archiving audio meeting recordings on the SANDAG Web site.

2

• Took various actions on pending state legislation, including:

Took support positions on Assembly Bill (AB) 729 (Evans), Public Contracts: Transit Design-Build Contracts, and AB 732 (Jeffries), Transportation Projects: Design Sequencing Contracts.

Postponed taking a position on Assembly Constitutional Amendment (ACA) 9 (Huffman), Local Government Bonds: Special Taxes: Voter Approval, and ACA 15 (Arambula), Local Government Transportation Projects: Special Taxes: Voter Approval, until such time as the member jurisdictions have time to review and take positions on these proposed legislation.

Took an oppose position on SB 406 (DeSaulnier), Land Use: Environmental Quality.

Postponed action on SB 575 (Steinberg), Local Planning: Housing Element, until the May 8 Executive Committee meeting, and directed staff to report back with additional information regarding the status of local 2005-2010 housing elements.

• Approved the draft Board agenda for the April 24, 2009, meeting, as amended.

TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MEETINGS (April 15 and 17, 2009)

The Transportation Committee is scheduled to hold public hearings regarding proposed amendments to the Regional Comprehensive Fare Ordinance to modify the existing transit fare structure. The April 15 public hearing will be held in the North County Transit District service area, and the April 17 public hearing will be held in the Metropolitan Transit System service area.

PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MEETING (April 17, 2009)

This meeting was cancelled.

Staff will update the Board if the actual actions taken by the Transportation Committee on April 15 and 17, 2009, differ from those described in this report.

GARY L. GALLEGOS Executive Director

BOARD OF DIRECTORS AGENDA ITEM NO. 09-04-4APRIL 24, 2009 ACTION REQUESTED – APPROVE

REQUEST FROM THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS TO BECOME AN ADVISORY MEMBER OF THE BORDERS COMMITTEE File Number 3003200

Introduction

The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) has expressed interest in becoming an Advisory Member of the SANDAG Borders Committee, which provides oversight for planning activities that impact the borders of the San Diego region, including Orange, Riverside and Imperial Counties, Mexico, and government-to-government relations with the tribes. The current Advisory Members of the Borders Committee include representatives from Orange County Council of Governments (OCCOG), the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG), the Imperial Valley Association of Governments (IVAG), Mexico (through the Consulate General of Mexico in San Diego), the Southern California Tribal Chairman’s Association (SCTCA), Caltrans, and the San Diego County Water Authority.

Recommendation

The Board of Directors is asked to approve the SCAG request to become an Advisory Member of the Borders Committee.

Discussion

SCAG is the largest council of governments in the United States, functioning as the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for six counties: Los Angeles, Ventura, San Bernardino, Orange, Riverside, and Imperial. These last three counties border the San Diego region.

SANDAG Board Policy No. 004 provides Rules of Procedure for Board of Directors, Policy Advisory Committees and Other Legislative Bodies. Specifically, Section 5 establishes guidelines for additional advisory membership on Board and Policy Advisory Committees. The Board of Directors may determine it is in best interest of SANDAG to supplement the Board with additional members that can provide beneficial advice and information to the Board on matters of interest to the region.

Section 5.2 of the policy states, “In determining whether to supplement the Board with additional regular or temporary advisory members, the Board will first review whether the existing Board and Policy Advisory Committees (PAC) membership structures provide the opportunity for beneficial advice and information to SANDAG on matters of interest to the region.” The Board can consider adding a new regular advisory member to the Board or a PAC if it finds that the additional advisory member would provide beneficial advice and information to the Board or PAC, and that such advice/information cannot be provided by the existing Board and PAC membership structures.

2

Board Policy No. 004 also specifies additional criteria for membership in Section 5.3. Those criteria and an analysis of whether they are met follows:

5.3.1 Agency/group has land use and/or eminent domain authority. SCAG does not have eminent domain authority, but like SANDAG is responsible for consensus building on land use decisions within its jurisdiction.

5.3.2 Agency/group has regional authorities and responsibilities important to the SANDAG

mission. As a designated MPO, SCAG is mandated by the federal government to research and develop plans for transportation, growth management, hazardous waste management, and air quality. Additional mandates for SCAG exist at the state level.

5.3.3 Membership by the agency/group would enhance SANDAG regional decision-making.

SCAG’s membership would contribute to better understanding of regionally significant projects in adjoining counties that require the Borders Committee’s review and comments per its stated responsibilities in Board Policy No. 001. Ultimately, the addition of SCAG would advance SANDAG’s ability to effectively plan between regions.

5.3.4 Agency/group desires representation, submits a written request, and commits to

participation. The letter from SCAG to Chair Lori Holt Pfeiler requesting to join the Borders Committee as an Advisory Member is provided as Attachment 1.

5.3.5 Agency/group is able to agree on the form of representation and who will represent it.

Staff has been informed that SCAG has agreed on a form of representation if SANDAG grants its request.

As the MPO representing the counties of Orange, Riverside, and Imperial Counties, and as the largest Council of Governments (COG) in the United States, the SCAG advisory membership would enhance input from the existing COGs already represented at the Borders Committee by complementing and expanding their vision for the region.

GARY L. GALLEGOS Executive Director

Attachment: 1. SCAG letter to SANDAG dated April 6, 2009

Key Staff Contact: Hector Vanegas, (619) 699-1972, or hva@sandag.org

No Budget Impact

Attachment 1

3

BOARD OF DIRECTORS AGENDA ITEM NO. 09-04-5APRIL 24, 2009 ACTION REQUESTED – APPROVE

FY 2009 BUDGET AND OVERALL WORK PROGRAM File Number 3000206 AMENDMENT: CALIFORNIA REGIONAL BLUEPRINT PLANNING GRANT

Introduction

Since FY 2006, planning grants have been awarded under the California Regional Blueprint Planning Program to Metropolitan Planning Organizations, such as SANDAG, to fund comprehensive regional planning efforts.

This year, SANDAG was awarded its fourth Blueprint Planning grant to provide staff support for continued development of a regional transit and integrated infrastructure funding strategy, and development of transportation/land use scenarios and associated public outreach efforts to support the Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) that is required as part of the development of the next Regional Transportation Plan update. (Attachment 1). Staff requests that the Board of Directors amend the FY 2009 Budget and Overall Work Program to accept the $400,000 grant award. The requested action will adjust the Blueprint Planning Grant Program Work Element to include the additional Blueprint activities and provide the required 20 percent local match of $100,000 using Transportation Development Act (TDA) Planning/Administration funds in future years. The additional funds have been programmed into the FY 2010 Draft Budget. The requirement for additional TDA funds for the remainder of FY 2009 is minimal ($2,000) and can be absorbed within the existing Blueprint Planning Grant Program Work Element budget.

Recommendation

The Board of Directors is asked to approve an amendment to the FY 2009 Budget and Overall Work Program to accept a $400,000 California Regional Blueprint Planning Grant. Action by the Board would adjust the current Blueprint Planning Grant Program Work Element and provide the required local match.

Discussion

The Blueprint Planning Program provides funds for SANDAG to supplement existing funding to implement the RCP. In FY 2006, SANDAG received $409,750 from the California Regional Blueprint Planning Program to use the I-PLACE3S land use scenario planning model, refine the Integrated Regional Infrastructure Strategy (IRIS) of the RCP, and to participate in the Southern California Multi-County Goods Movement Action Plan. In FY 2007, SANDAG was awarded $200,000 to fund transportation elements of the Smart Growth Design Guidelines. In FY 2008, SANDAG received a $160,000 grant to begin initial work on a Smart Growth Parking and Trip Generation Rates study and to complete a study on Joint Transit-Oriented Development in the San Diego region.

2

For FY 2009, the Board is asked to approve the necessary amendments to accept the $400,000 award. Attachment 2 shows the changes in budget, narrative, and tasks to the Blueprint Planning Program Grant Work Element. The revised FY 2009 budget for the Blueprint Planning Program Grant is $864,824, including the new grant award and local match. The $400,000 award and $100,000 local match have been added to FY 2009 ‘Funds Source’ to meet current year encumbrance requirements by Caltrans as the funding agency. The new grant funded work will be conducted in FY 2010 and FY 2011. The total of the Blueprint Planning Program is now $1,465,000.

GARY L. GALLEGOS Executive Director

Attachments: 1. Caltrans Award Letter 2. Blueprint Planning Grant Program Work Element 3000206

Key Staff Contact: Midori Wong, (619) 699-1968, mwon@sandag.org

Funds are budgeted in Work Element #3000206

STATE OF CALIFORNIA-BUSINESS. TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER. GOVEMOT

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATIONOFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR1 120 N STREETP. O. BOX 942873SACRAMENTO, C A 9 427 3 -OOOI

PHONE (9tO 654-5266FAX (916) 6s4-6608TTY 7II

February 9,2009

Flexyour power!Be energt fficient!

RECEIVED

FEB t8 2009

SAI{DAG PLAIfiTIftIG DEPT

Mr. Gary L. GallegosExecutive DirectorSan Diego Association of GovernmentsWells Fargo Plaza401 B Street, Suite 800San Diego, CA 92101

Dear

I am pl'eased to inform you that the grant application submitted by the San Diego Association ofGovemments (SANDAG) has been selected for a grant award from the California RegionalBlueprint Program for Fiscal Year (FY) 2008109. These grants are funded with transportationplanning dollars from the Federal Highway Administration. SANDAG's grant award amount is

$400,000.

In accepting this grant, SANDAG agrees to partner with the State and regional and local entitiesto achieve common goals to improve mobility and quality of life in California by both workingtoward completion of your Regional Blueprint Plan and helping to advance the practice ofregional blueprint planning in California.

My staff will provide more details to help your agency develop its scope of work and amend theRegional Blueprint work element into SANDAG's F'Y 2008/09 Overall Work Program. Please

contact Garth Hopkins, Chiel Office of Regional and Interagency Planning, Division ofTransportation Planning, at (916) 654-8175 if you have any questions regarding the RegionalBlueprint Program.

WIL KEMPTONDirector

" Caltrans improves mobility across CaliJornia"

3

Attachment 1

Mr. Gary L. GallegosFebruary 9,2009Page2

Members of the Legislature - Senate District 29, Assembly Districts 66, and 73-79Garth Hopkins, Chief, Office of Regional and Interagency Planning,

Division of Transportation Planning

" Caltans improves mobility across California"

4

5

MANDATED/COMMITTED: ALL DEDICATED FUNDING: ALL

PROGRAM WORK ELEMENT: 3000206.1 TITLE: BLUEPRINT PLANNING PROGRAM GRANT

FY 2009 BUDGET: $364,824 $864,824 IN FUNDING; $374,825 IN EXPENSES

STRATEGIC GOAL: ENCOURAGE QUALITY OF LIFE IMPROVEMENTS

Funds Source

Prior FY 09 FY 10-13 TOTAL

FTA MPO Planning (5303) $0 $0 $0 $ 0

FTA Transit Planning

(5307)

$0 $0 $0 $ 0

FHWA Metropolitan Planning

$0 $0 $0 $ 0

FHWA CMAQ $0 $0 $0 $ 0

Federal Other $0 $0 $0 $ 0

State Other $477,891 $291,859 $691,859

$0 $769,750

$1,169,750

TDA Planning/Administration

$122,285 $72,965

$172,965

$0 $195,250

$295,250

TOTAL $600,176 $364,824

$864,824

$ 0 $965,000

$1,465,000

Funds Application

Prior FY 09 FY 10-13 TOTAL

Salaries, Benefits, Indirect $424,384 $114,824

$124,824

$0

$240,000

$539,208 $789,208

Other Direct Costs $5,792 $0 $0 $5,792

Contracted Services $170,000 $250,000 250,000

$0

$420,000 $670,000

Materials & Equipment $0 $0 $0 $ 0

Pass through/In-kind Services $0 $0 $0 $ 0

TOTAL $600,176 $364,824

$374,824

$ 0

$490,000

$965,000

$1,465,000

Attachment 2

6

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this work element is to assist in the implementation of key strategic initiatives in the Regional Comprehensive Plan (RCP). Emphasis in FY 2009 will be on focused on staff support for developing a regional transit and integrated infrastructure funding strategy and consultant services for the preparation of transportation elements of the Smart Growth Design Guidelines and trip generation/parking study to update SANDAG’s transportation model. These two efforts fit into SANDAG's larger vision of implementing the RCP.

PREVIOUS ACCOMPLISHMENTS

The California Regional Blueprint Planning Program has provided an opportunity for SANDAG to enhance and advance implementation of RCP strategic initiatives already underway. To support implementation of the Board-adopted Smart Growth Concept Map, first- and second-year grants resulted in the use of an advanced analytical tool called “I-PLACE3S” by local planners to create and compare land use scenarios. Second-year funding also allowed consultant work to begin on the transportation elements of the Smart Growth Urban Design Guidelines, which will provide added guidance to local staffs and community members on how transportation elements can be designed to meet both community and regional needs.

In support of the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan Update, second-year Blueprint Planning Program funding also allowed SANDAG to participate in a Goods Movement Action Plan for Southern California that recommends strategies to address the recent increase in truck traffic on regional highways. Blueprint Planning Program grant funding also supported initial work toward implementing the Integrated Regional Infrastructure Strategy, a strategy to address regional infrastructure needs identified in the RCP. Third-year Blueprint grant funding supported the Smart Growth Trip Generation Study, which examines the extent to which smart growth development results in reduced trip generation rates as compared to traditional development patterns. The outcomes of this study will inform the next update of SANDAG’s transportation model. Funding also supported initial work on a study on Joint Transit-Oriented Development in the San Diego region.

Committee(s): Regional Planning Committee

Working Group(s): Regional Planning Technical Working Group

Project Manager: Andrea GrovesMidori Wong

PRODUCTS, TASKS, AND SCHEDULES

LEVEL OF MANDATE MANDATED COMMITTED EMPHASIS AREA

TASK # % OF EFFORT TASK DESCRIPTION / PRODUCT / SCHEDULE

SGC SMART GROWTH DESIGN

1 30 Task Description: Implement Caltrans Blueprint Planning Program grant focused on staff support for regional infrastructure quality of life funding strategy.transit investments and integrated infrastructure strategy.

Product: Regional infrastructure and quality of life funding transit investments and integrated infrastructure strategy

Completion Date: 2/28/0906/30/09

RCP SMART GROWTH DESIGN

2 20 10 Task Description: Prepare smart growth trip generation/parking study for use in updating the SANDAG traffic generator manual and as input to the Smart Growth Design Guidelines.

Product: Smart growth trip generation rates and parking study

Completion Date: 12/31/2008 06/30/2009

7

LEVEL OF MANDATE MANDATED COMMITTED EMPHASIS AREA

TASK # % OF EFFORT TASK DESCRIPTION / PRODUCT / SCHEDULE

RCP SMART GROWTH DESIGN

3 30 25 Task Description: Prepare study on strategy for transit-oriented joint development in the San Diego region.

Product: Final report

Completion Date: 6/30/2009

RCP SMART GROWTH DESIGN

4 20 10 Task Description: Prepare transportation elements of Smart Growth Design Guidelines.

Product: Final chapters dealing with transportation elements of Smart Growth Design Guidelines

Completion Date: 6/30/2009

5 25 Task Description: Develop scenario planning for transportation, land use, and climate change, and associated public participation program to support development of the Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS).

Product: Data and associated analysis contributing to one or more transportation/land use scenarios to meet regional greenhouse gas reduction targets. Materials and outcomes from public workshops, hearings, and outreach activities.

Completion Date: 6/30/2011

FUTURE ACTIVITIES

SANDAG has thirdfourth-year Blueprint Planning Program grant funding to continue to enhance and advance RCP implementation efforts underway. Specifically, future activities will focus on the areas of infrastructure funding (building upon current infrastructure efforts) and other innovative financing mechanisms to implement the RCP, including public-private partnershipsdevelopment of transportation/land use scenarios to meet regional greenhouse gas reduction targets in support of the Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS). Approved Approved

__________________________________________ __________________________________________ Renee Wasmund Date Diane Eidam Date Director, Finance Chief Deputy Executive Director

PLEASE RETURN SIGNED ORIGINAL AND THE ELECTRONIC “TRACKED CHANGES” VERSION TO

GWEN KRUGER, DOCUMENT PROCESSING, WITH A COPY TO TIM WATSON, FINANCE

RETAIN A COPY FOR YOUR RECORDS. THE PROJECT MANAGER

IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAKING SURE ALL AMENDMENTS ARE COMPLETED

BOARD OF DIRECTORS AGENDA ITEM NO. 09-04-6APRIL 24, 2009 ACTION REQUESTED – INFORMATION

LONG-RANGE REGIONAL PLANS AND FORECASTS: A WORK PLAN TO COMPLY WITH SENATE BILL 375 File Numbers 3000200 & 3000400

Introduction

The passage of Senate Bill (SB) 375 (Steinberg, 2008) and provisions included in the 2008 RTP Settlement Agreement (Settlement Agreement) regarding the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) significantly change how SANDAG will prepare the next Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA). Both also set the stage for a future update of the Regional Comprehensive Plan (RCP). SANDAG staff has responded to these new requirements in the draft FY 2010 Budget and Overall Work Program. The purpose of this informational report is to provide an overview of the proposed work plan and its key elements to the SANDAG Board of Directors. This report was presented to the Regional Planning and Transportation Committees on April 3, 2009.

Discussion

Compliance with SB 375 significantly changes how we will prepare the next RTP and RHNA. Provisions of the law require that:

• the California Air Resources Board (CARB) establish regional greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction targets;

• the Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO) create a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS)—a new element of the RTP—to strive to meet established GHG reduction targets or, if unable to meet the target, it must prepare an Alternative Planning Strategy (APS);

• the MPO conduct extensive outreach and adopt a public participation plan for the SCS;

• the RHNA be synchronized with the RTP process and that the RHNA allocations be consistent with the SCS; and

• more extensive environmental review is conducted to ensure that local jurisdictions can benefit from the California Environmental Quality Act streamlining provisions included in the law.

The RTP Settlement Agreement further requires that SANDAG develop an Urban Core Transit Strategy and complete a study regarding the impediments to public transit as part of the 2050 RTP, scheduled to be adopted in July 2011. Other provisions of the Settlement Agreement have an indirect relationship to the RTP and are not specifically discussed in this report.

The proposed work plan includes several key efforts, which are summarized below. Attached is a generalized work plan timeline.

2050 Regional Growth Forecast

A regional growth forecast is produced every four years to reflect the most current economic, demographic, land use and transportation data, and to keep pace with ongoing regional planning efforts such as the RTP and RCP. The last forecast provided growth projections and estimates to 2030. The upcoming forecast will provide growth projections and estimates to 2050.

Work is already underway to produce the 2050 Regional Growth Forecast, which will be used in the preparation of the 2050 RTP, San Diego County Water Authority’s Urban Water Management Plan, and future RCP update. In October 2008, SANDAG staff initiated the local land use data collection process with the Regional Planning Technical Working Group (TWG) in order to prepare the “existing plans and policies” phase of the forecast. The TWG assists with local land use inputs, including existing land uses, planned land uses, and potential redevelopment and infill areas, all of which are important to the forecasting process and build upon the RCP smart growth principles. SANDAG has received input from all the jurisdictions in the region, and staff is now inputting and verifying the information in coordination with local planning staffs.

The second phase involves preparing alternative growth scenarios that can be applied to forecast years after 2025, beyond the horizon year of local general plans. Around the year 2025, the region also runs out of housing capacity based on current plans and future growth. SANDAG staff has started discussions with the TWG on the range of alternative scenarios to consider. The Regional Planning Committee (RPC) and Board of Directors will be asked to weigh in on the alternative scenarios, which also will be discussed in future public workshops this summer. The draft 2050 Regional Growth Forecast is anticipated in September/October 2009. The Board of Directors will be asked to adopt the 2050 Regional Growth Forecast for planning purposes in early 2010.

In addition to the TWG, SANDAG staff has assembled a peer review group, composed of experts in demography, housing, economics, and other disciplines from state and local agencies, local universities, and the private sector. This group is providing input to SANDAG staff on the regional model structure, data inputs and assumptions, and evaluating the forecast results from a technical perspective.

Urban Core Transit Strategy

The RTP Settlement Agreement calls for SANDAG to develop an Urban Core Transit Strategy that evaluates possible regional transit strategies that maximize peak-period transit mode share in the urban core. The strategy will result in three to four long-range strategic transit network alternatives that will be considered in the development of the 2050 RTP. The transit network alternatives will be structured to significantly increase the attractiveness and use of transit, walking, and biking to make transit time-competitive with the private car and thereby to reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in the greater San Diego region. It is anticipated that SANDAG will release the Request for Proposals for this work in May and select a consultant this summer.

Airport Multimodal Accessibility Plan (AMAP)

SANDAG is working with the San Diego County Regional Airport Authority (Authority) on the development of a Regional Aviation Strategic Plan (RASP) and an Airport Multimodal Accessibility Plan (AMAP). The Authority is lead for the RASP, which will identify workable strategies to improve

2

the performance of the regional airport system. SANDAG is the lead for the AMAP, which will develop a multimodal strategy to improve surface transportation access to airports. The development of the RASP and AMAP will be a coordinated process between the Authority and SANDAG. The overall schedule is designed to allow the RASP and AMAP to be incorporated into the 2050 RTP.

Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) / Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA)

The SCS will be a new element of the RTP, as required by SB 375, to show how regional GHG targets would be achieved through development patterns, infrastructure investments, and/or transportation measures or policies that are determined to be feasible. Additionally, the SCS must be consistent with the RHNA and must address protection of sensitive resource areas, including areas protected under Habitat Conservation Plans (HCPs). If the SCS does not meet regional GHG targets, an APS must be developed, which demonstrates what alternative and additional measures would need to be taken in order for the region to meet its GHG target. The adopted Smart Growth Concept Map, which identifies existing, planned smart growth areas linked to existing and planned public transit, along with the identified habitat planning areas, will serve as a basis for the SCS. Additionally, the results of the Regional Climate Action Plan (RCAP) will provide ideas for additional measures that could reduce GHG emissions. SB 375 changed previous housing element law by aligning regional housing planning with regional transportation planning. As a result of this change, the RHNA is on an eight-year cycle and will be conducted as part of every other RTP process (the RTP is updated every four years). Currently, SB 375 requires the San Diego region to adopt two housing elements within a 2-1/2 year period (June 2010 and January 2013). SANDAG staff is pursuing legislation to merge and clarify the deadlines.

2050 RTP

Federal law requires that an RTP be prepared every four years. In accordance with state and federal guidelines, the 2050 RTP is slated for adoption by the Board of Directors in July 2011. The planning efforts described in this report are key inputs or components for the development of a 2050 RTP that complies with SB 375, requirements of the Settlement Agreement, and air quality conformity. As part of the RTP development, goals and objectives from the 2030 RTP (adopted in 2007) will be revised and updated. The results of related work efforts such as the RCAP, Regional Energy Strategy Update, Regional Bicycle Master Plan, Comprehensive Freight Gateway Forecast, high-speed rail planning, corridor and subregional studies, collaborative projects with Tribal Nations, as well as interregional and binational strategies will be incorporated. Other major tasks include updates to the project evaluation criteria and RTP performance measures, economic analysis of investment strategies, new revenue projections, and updated project cost estimates. Additionally, the 2050 RTP will be subject to any new requirements established in the federal surface transportation reauthorization, which is anticipated to be passed in 2010.

The TWG and a new Regional Planning Stakeholder Working Group (SWG) will play an integral role in the development of the RTP along with the region’s public works directors and traffic engineers, who are represented in the Cities/County Transportation Advisory Committee (CTAC) and San Diego Traffic Engineers Council (SANTEC), respectively. The San Diego Region Conformity Working Group (CWG) will be consulted on the development of the air quality conformity analysis.

3

4

2050 RTP Environmental Impact Report (EIR)

The EIR for the 2050 RTP will require analysis that has not been included in previous RTP EIRs. The RTP environmental analysis will include GHG baseline measurements and projections as well as potential mitigation measures that could reduce emissions. The EIR also will include analysis of the additional work products required by SB 375 and the Settlement Agreement.

In addition, as part of the environmental review process for the RTP, SB 375 includes California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) streamlining provisions as an incentive to encourage certain types of projects that help achieve the GHG reduction target and are consistent with the SCS. Cities and counties that find the CEQA streamlining provisions useful have the opportunity to align their planning decisions with the decisions of the region. It should be noted, however, that the CEQA streamlining provisions are not mandatory and are intended to be a tool that local jurisdictions may use, if desired.

RTP / SCS Public Participation Plan

SANDAG regularly involves the public in regional planning efforts. A public participation plan is being prepared to involve the public in every step along the way to develop the 2050 RTP and set the stage for a future RCP update. The plan will include the establishment of the new (SWG) to provide input on the development of key work elements in the planning process, including the public participation plan. Additionally, there will be a series of public workshops and other means for involving the public and receiving input on the work products and draft 2050 RTP. SANDAG staff is making a special effort to consider alternative methodologies for engaging a wider diversity of citizens in the planning process, taking advantage of existing community networks.

Next Steps

In order to implement the proposed work plan, SANDAG will benefit from substantial work that has already been done toward meeting the requirements of SB 375 and the Settlement Agreement. The adopted Smart Growth Concept Map together with regional habitat planning areas will serve as a basis for the SCS. Additionally, the results of the RCAP will provide new tools toward reducing VMT and GHG emissions. A number of planning efforts that will be incorporated in the 2050 RTP development have been initiated, such as the Interstate 5 South Multimodal Corridor Study, and Freight Gateway Forecast. SANDAG staff will provide a more detailed 2050 RTP work plan to the Regional Planning Committee, Transportation Committee, and Board of Directors in June.

GARY L. GALLEGOS Executive Director Attachment: 1. Draft Long-Range Plans and Forecasts Integrated Work Plan Summary Key Staff Contact: Coleen Clementson, (619) 699-1944, ccl@sandag.org

Attachment 1

- Proposed Long-Range Regional Plans and Forecasts - Integrated Work Plan Overview

5 March 2009

FY 2011

2009 2010 2011

Integrated Work Plan Overview(Getting to an RTP that complies with SB 375)

FY 2009 FY 2010

Major Tasks J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J

2050 REGIONAL GROWTH FORECAST

URBAN CORE TRANSIT STRATEGY

AIRPORT MULTIMODAL ACCESSIBILITY PLAN (AMAP)

2050 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN (RTP)

SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES STRATEGY (SCS)/REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT (RHNA)

2050 RTP ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR)

PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT

5 March 2009

BOARD OF DIRECTORS AGENDA ITEM NO. 09-04-7APRIL 24, 2009 ACTION REQUESTED – INFORMATION

REPORT SUMMARIZING DELEGATED ACTIONS TAKEN BY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR File Number 8000100

Introduction

Board Policy Nos. 003, 017, and 024 require the Executive Director to report certain actions to the Board of Directors on a monthly basis.

Discussion

Board Policy No. 003

Board Policy No. 003, “Investment Policy,” requires the submittal of a monthly report of investment transactions to the Board. Attachment 1 contains the reportable investment transactions for February 2009.

Board Policy No. 017

Board Policy No. 017, “Delegation of Authority,” requires the Executive Director to report to the Board certain actions taken at the next regular meeting.

Section 4.1 of the policy authorizes the Executive Director to enter into agreements not currently incorporated in the budget and make other modifications to the budget in an amount up to $100,000 per transaction so long as the overall budget remains in balance. Attachment 2 contains the reportable actions since the report made at the last meeting.

Section 4.6 of the policy authorizes the Executive Director to provide the final determination to persons or firms filing a protest regarding SANDAG procurement or contracting processes or procedures. There is one reportable action. On February 26, 2009, Swoop Technology submitted a protest in reference to the Vehicle Assistance and Automation (VAA) System Request for Proposal. The SANDAG Contract Administrator appointed a Protest Committee. By letter dated March 11, 2009, the Chief Deputy Executive Director denied the protest in accordance with the recommendation of the Protest Committee. The protestor requested reconsideration of the denial by letter to the Executive Director, dated March 19, 2009, and later amended by letter dated March 26, 2009. By letter dated April 8, 2009, the Executive Director denied the request for reconsideration.

2

Board Policy No. 024

Board Policy No. 024, “Procurement and Contracting-Construction,” requires the Executive Director to report to the Board the granting of (1) Relief from Maintenance and Responsibility and (2) Acceptance of Work for construction contracts. On April 1, 2009, Flatiron West, Inc. was granted partial Relief from Maintenance and Responsibility for the Del Lago and Rancho Bernardo stations portion of the Interstate 15 Bus Rapid Transit project. The Del Lago station was opened to the public on March 16, and the Rancho Bernardo station was opened on March 24.

GARY L. GALLEGOS Executive Director

Attachments: 1. Reportable Investment Transactions for February 2009 2. Budget Amendments and Transfers

Key Staff Contact: Renée Wasmund, (619) 699-1940, rwa@sandag.org

MONTHLY ACTIVITY FOR INVESTMENT SECURITIES TRANSACTIONS FOR FEBRUARY 1 THROUGH FEBRUARY 28, 2009

Transaction Maturity Par Amount YieldDate Date Security Value (Cost) on Cost

MATURED02/25/2009 02/25/2009 FEDERAL NATIONAL MTG ASSN GLOBAL NOTES 25,000,000.00$ 24,987,500.00$ 3.27%

TOTAL MATURED: 25,000,000.00$ 24,987,500.00$ 3.27%

Attachment 1

3

PROJECT NUMBER PROJECT NAME

CURRENT BUDGET (in 000s)

NEW BUDGET (in 000s)

CHANGE (in 000s)

1130000 Capital Project Balancing Account $438.3 $395.4 ($42.8) Transfer to MTS project 11213, SDTC Kearny Mesa Division (KMD) Building,

BUDGET TRANSFERS AND AMENDMENTSMarch 2009

RWA-Delegated Actions-Att 2.xls

Attachment 2

4

BOARD OF DIRECTORS AGENDA ITEM NO. 09-04-8APRIL 24, 2009 ACTION REQUESTED – INFORMATION

REPORTS ON MEETINGS AND EVENTS ATTENDED ON BEHALF OF SANDAG

Since the last Board of Directors meeting, Board members participated in the following meetings and events on behalf of SANDAG. Key topics of discussion also are summarized.

March 17, 2009: Joint SANDAG/Orange County Transportation Authority Meeting Oceanside, CA

• Chair Lori Holt Pfeiler, First Vice Chair Jerome Stocks, Imperial Beach Mayor Jim Janney, Regional Planning Committee Chair, and Imperial Beach Councilmember Patricia McCoy, Borders Committee Chair, attended this meeting on behalf of SANDAG. Discussions were held about consolidating passenger rail service on the LOSSAN (Los Angeles-San Diego-San Luis Obispo) rail corridor in order to increase the quality of customer experience, add more trips, and provide for shorter trip times.

March 18-19, 2009: California Biodiversity Council (CBC) Spring Conference Holtville, CA

• Del Mar Mayor Crystal Crawford attended this CBC meeting, which was focused on California’s Renewable Energy Future. The meeting addressed California’s current energy supply picture and directives for renewable energy development and greenhouse gas reductions. Day One of the meeting was designed to give participants a first hand look at renewable energy generation facilities. The field tour departed from Lindbergh Field in San Diego and ended at Holtville, with stops along the way at the Kumeyaay Wind Farm, the Stirling Energy Solar Site, and a visit to the Salton Sea highlighting restoration efforts and the potential for geothermal development at that location. Day Two of the meeting included ten informative presentations starting with “Renewable Energy 101,” which emphasized California’s challenge of increasing its renewable energy generation from the current 8 percent level to 20 percent by 2010 and to 33 percent by 2020. Participants heard about the Bureau of Land Management’s efforts to process right-of-way applications for renewable energy projects on the millions of acres of federal lands under its jurisdiction. Representatives from the California Energy Commission and Public Utilities Commission spoke about renewable energy project permitting and the process for locating new transmission lines to access renewable energy. Other speakers emphasized the challenges being faced as we attempt to integrate renewable energy into the existing grid and ensuring that renewable projects observe best practices and work within existing environmental constraints.

2

April 1, 2009: Senate Bill 375 Workshop Ontario, CA

• Chair Pfeiler, Second Vice Chair Jack Dale, and Mayor Jim Janney attended this meeting to gain a better understanding of the effect of this state legislation on regional planning for San Diego County.

GARY L. GALLEGOS Executive Director

Attachment 4

BOARD OF DIRECTORS AGENDA ITEM NO. 09-04-9APRIL 24, 2009 ACTION REQUESTED – APPROVE

FY 2010 TRANSIT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM File Number 8000100

Introduction

The Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) and the North County Transit District (NCTD) have developed their Capital Improvement Programs (CIPs) for FY 2010. The CIPs will form the basis for updating the Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP). Based on the CIPs, SANDAG will apply for the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 5307 Urbanized Area formula funds and the Section 5309 Rail Modernization funds for MTS and NCTD capital projects for which SANDAG is the implementing agency in accordance with Senate Bill 1703. These would be the capital projects for planning; design and construction of new infrastructure and facilities; rehabilitation of existing infrastructure and facilities; capital projects involving environmental, engineering, and construction support; and construction right-of-way.

Recommendation

The Board of Directors is asked to approve:

1. the FY 2010 CIPs for the San Diego region (MTS and NCTD), including the transfer of funds from MTS to SANDAG for regional planning;

2. the submittal of FTA Sections 5307 and 5309 applications for the San Diego region (SANDAG, MTS, and NCTD); and

3. Resolution No. 2009-21, adopting Amendment No. 11 to the 2008 RTIP (Attachment 9).

Both MTS and NCTD will continue as grantees for routine capital projects that support the day-to-day business of the operators. Examples of projects for which each operator would apply for their respective federal grant include maintenance and repair projects and procurements, right-of-way and equipment in support of operations, revenue and nonrevenue vehicle procurements, light rail vehicle maintenance, and revenue vehicle parts and components, as well as operating assistance for new rail extensions, preventive maintenance, associated capital maintenance, and some Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) paratransit services.

The MTS Board of Directors approved its CIP on February 19, 2009. The NCTD CIP is scheduled to be approved by the NCTD Board of Directors in June 2009 in conjunction with the approval of its annual Operating Budget. The funding levels used for CIP development were preliminary and based on the anticipated Federal Fiscal Year (FFY) 2009 apportionments and some carryover of the FFY 2008 apportionments. Although the federal budget has passed for FFY 2009, the actual apportionments have not been published. The funding available for the FY 2010 CIP reflects the action taken at the February 27, 2009, SANDAG Board of Directors meeting, which assumes the same funding level as the FY 2009 CIP. Upon receipt of the final FFY 2009 apportionment, any differences in the funding level will be included with the FY 2011 CIP process.

MTS and NCTD undertook very similar project selection processes based on established criteria and involving the active participation of sponsoring agencies and/or departments. The FY 2010 Five-Year Constrained CIPs for MTS and NCTD are attached (Attachments 2 and 5, respectively).

Discussion

FTA Section 5307 and Section 5309 Federal Formula Funds

These FTA formula programs are the primary sources of funding for transit operational and replacement capital projects in the region. The funds can be used generally to provide 80 percent of the cost of capital projects and the cost of preventive maintenance activities (considered to be operating costs). The ratio increases to 83 percent for the “clean-fuel” buses and vehicles meeting ADA requirements.

The Section 5307 Urbanized Area Formula program is a block grant program in which each urbanized area over 50,000 in population receives financial assistance to provide public transit. The formula for determining each metropolitan area’s share of funds is based on an urbanized area’s population, population density, levels of existing fixed guideway service, and levels of existing bus service and ridership. The Section 5307 program is designed to meet routine capital needs for urbanized areas, such as San Diego County. Section 5307 formula funds may not be used for operating assistance, however, preventive maintenance (in essence an operating cost) and some ADA complementary paratransit services are considered capital costs.

The Fixed Guideway Modernization program (also known as Rail Mod) is one of three categories of funding under the Section 5309 Capital Investment Program, which also includes the Bus Capital and Fixed Guideway New Starts programs. These latter two programs are designed to assist in meeting extraordinary capital needs and are awarded generally at the discretion of the United States Congress. Unlike the Section 5309 Bus Capital and Fixed Guideway New Starts programs, the Rail Mod program is apportioned by formula. Section 5309 Rail Mod funds are allocated to rail systems that have been in operation for at least seven years. Eligible projects include the modernization of existing fixed guideway systems, including rolling stock. Both the COASTER and the San Diego Trolley qualify for Section 5309 funds. Like the Section 5307 funds, the Rail Mod funds may be used for preventive maintenance costs as well as for rail capital.

As determined by the methodology approved by the SANDAG Board of Directors on February 23, 2007, the Section 5307 formula funds have been allocated 70 percent for MTS and 30 percent for NCTD after deduction of the off-the-top funds programmed for SANDAG regional planning and the Regional Vanpool Program (both of which are assumed to grow at the same rate as the total FTA formula program). The same formula was used to allocate the Section 5309 Rail Mod funds.

Preventive Maintenance

The FTA defines preventive maintenance as all maintenance costs related to vehicles and nonvehicles. Specifically, it is all the activities, supplies, materials, labor, services, and associated costs required to preserve or extend the functionality and serviceability of the asset in a cost effective manner, up to and including the current state of the art for maintaining such an asset. Both MTS and NCTD are applying for the maximum preventive maintenance allowable under the federal Sections 5307 and 5309 programs in their FY 2010 CIP ($41.5 million for MTS and $30.6 million for NCTD, of which $26.6 million is from the annual federal formula program and $4 million is from the American Recovery & Reinvestment Act (ARRA) program).

2

MTS FY 2010 CIP

Attachment 1 summarizes the five-year MTS capital program. The MTS CIP program assumes $41.5 million for preventive maintenance for each of the next five years, with the remainder being used for projects.

Attachment 2 contains the MTS FY 2010 Five-Year constrained CIP, totaling $93.9 million in FY 2010. This report shows the constrained projects each year, meaning these projects will be funded based on the projected funding levels for each of the next five years. The MTS CIP Budget Development Committee reviewed and prioritized the capital project submittals to ensure that operationally critical projects were funded. The remaining projects were deferred; however, it is recognized that the continued deferral of some projects could have negative impacts on system infrastructure in future years.

Attachment 3 represents the five-year, unconstrained need for the MTS Capital Improvement Program totaling $649.2 million. For FY 2010 the CIP will provide $136.4 million for capital projects and preventive maintenance, which represents 87 percent of the MTS total project needs in FY 2010.

NCTD FY 2009 CIP

Attachment 4 summarizes the five-year NCTD capital program. The NCTD FY 2010 CIP assumes $22 to $26 million of formula funds for preventive maintenance for each of the next five years, with the remainder being used for capital projects (ranging from $8.9 to $11.1 million each year over the five-year period).

Attachment 5 contains the NCTD FY 2010 Five-Year constrained CIP, totaling $8.7 million in FY 2010. NCTD staff prepared and reviewed the NCTD FY 2010 Five-Year Constrained CIP. This report shows the constrained projects each year, meaning these projects will be funded based on the projected funding levels for each of the next five years. As part of the annual CIP development process, NCTD completed a rating and ranking process for all of its capital projects. If funding for the CIP is not sufficient to fully fund the proposed program, projects would be funded on a priority basis, based upon their final ranking. If funding exceeds the estimated levels, priority projects that did not receive all funding requested could receive additional funding.

Attachment 6 represents the five-year, unconstrained need for the NCTD Capital Improvement Program, totaling $95.9 million. The NCTD unfunded capital program includes several major capital projects on the horizon over the next five years, including bus replacements, rail bridge and infrastructure replacements, and station/transit center projects. NCTD’s capital needs for the future far exceed the projected availability of federal formula funds.

Long-Term Capital Needs

MTS and NCTD have significant capital maintenance needs for the aging infrastructure of the transit system. The projected funding necessary to adequately maintain the transit system far exceeds any amount that could be received from the federal formula program. In conjunction with the annual CIP process, the transit operators work with SANDAG to develop a list of unfunded transit capital and rehabilitation projects. The criteria used to evaluate and prioritize the projects were approved by the SANDAG Board of Directors in October 2006. The result is a list of prioritized regional

3

projects that can be used as a basis to actively seek regional funding through the federal and state legislative processes. The FY 2010 regional transit capital and rehabilitation unfunded project list consists of unfunded transit projects in excess of $1 million and is shown in Attachment 8. The President signed into law the ARRA on February 17, 2009. This program will provide $80.8 million in Section 5307 funding and $2.9 million in Section 5309 funding beginning in FY 2009 to address transit infrastructure needs in the San Diego region. Transportation projects in the San Diego region that will be funded under the ARRA program are shown in Attachment 7. At its April 10, 2009 meeting the Board of Directors approved these projects as part of Amendment No. 8 to the 2008 Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP).

Regional Transportation Improvement Program

All CIP projects must be included in the RTIP, the multi-year funding program for major highway, arterial, transit, and nonmotorized projects. The projects included in the FY 2010 CIP are included in Amendment No. 11 to the 2008 RTIP Table 1 (Attachment 10). This list is currently being circulated for public review with comments due by April 16, 2009. Any significant comments received from the public will be presented to the SANDAG Board of Directors at its April 24, 2009, meeting. As of the date of this report, no comments have been received. Also, the Independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee (ITOC) reviewed the transit CIP projects at its April 8, 2009 meeting, focusing its review on the TransNet funded projects within this amendment. The ITOC had no comments. Amendment No. 11 also includes projects which were awarded the FFY 2009 FTA discretionary funding.

Federal regulations require the 2008 RTIP to be a revenue-constrained document with programmed projects based upon available or committed funding and/or reasonable estimates of future funding. Funding assumptions are generally based upon: (1) authorized or appropriated levels of federal and state funding from current legislation; (2) conservative projections of future federal and state funding based upon a continuation of current funding levels; (3) the most current revenue forecasts for the TransNet program; and (4) the planning and programming documents of the local transportation providers.

Tables 2a through 2c (Attachment 11) provide updated program summaries including a comparison from the prior approved version. (Chapter 4 of the Final 2008 RTIP discusses, in detail, the financial capacity analysis of major program areas including discussion of available revenues.) Based upon the analysis, the projects contained within the 2008 RTIP, including Amendment No. 11, are reasonable when considering available funding sources.

Air Quality Analysis

On July 25, 2008, SANDAG found the 2008 RTIP in conformance with the Regional Air Quality Strategy/State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the San Diego region. All of the required regionally significant capacity increasing projects were included in the quantitative emissions analysis conducted for the 2030 San Diego Regional Transportation Plan: Pathways for the Future (2030 RTP) and the 2008 RTIP. The FHWA and the FTA jointly approved the conformity determination for the 2008 RTIP and the conformity redetermination for the 2030 RTP on November 17, 2008.

Projects in RTIP Amendment No. 11 meet the conformity provisions of the Transportation Conformity Rule (40 CFR §93.122(g)). All capacity-increasing projects in Amendment No. 11 were included in the quantitative emissions analysis conducted for the 2030 RTP and 2008 RTIP. All other projects not included in the air quality conformity analysis are either noncapacity increasing or are

4

5

exempt from the requirement to determine conformity according to the Transportation Conformity Rule (40 CFR §93.126). SANDAG followed interagency consultation procedures to determine which projects are exempt. Amendment No. 11 does not interfere with the timely implementation of transportation control measures. The 2008 RTIP, including Amendment No. 11, remains in conformance with the SIP.

GARY L. GALLEGOS Executive Director

Attachments: 1. MTS Capital Improvement Program Summary for FY 2010 to FY 2014 2. MTS FY 2010 Five-Year Constrained CIP 3. MTS FY 2010 Five-Year Unconstrained CIP 4. NCTD Capital Improvement Program Summary for FY 2010 to FY 2014 5. NCTD FY 2010 Five-Year Constrained CIP 6. NCTD FY 2010 Five-Year Unconstrained CIP 7. American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) – San Diego Projects 8. FY 2010 Regional Transit Capital and Rehabilitation Unfunded Projects 9. Resolution No. 2009-21: Approving Amendment No. 11 to the 2008 Regional Transportation Improvement Program 10. Table 1 Amendment No. 11 to the 2008 RTIP 11. Tables 2a-2c Amendment No. 11 to the 2008 RTIP Key Staff Contact: Kimberly York, (619) 699-6902, kyo@sandag.org

FY 10 FY 11 FY 12 FY 13 FY 14 Five Year Total

Federal Formula Program 5307 37,831 39,345 40,918 42,555 44,257 204,907

Local Match for 5307 9,458 9,836 10,230 10,639 11,064 51,227

Federal Formula Program 5307 - Carryover 1,661 0 0 0 0 1,661

Local Match for 5307 - Carryover 415 0 0 0 0 415

Federal Formula Program 5309 Rail Modernization 13,568 14,111 14,676 15,263 15,873 73,491

Local Match for 5309 3,392 3,528 3,669 3,816 3,968 18,373

Federal Formula Program 5309 Rail Modernization - Carryover 1,653 0 0 0 0 1,653

Local Match for 5309 - Carryover 413 0 0 0 0 413

Federal Formula Program 5311F - Carryover 39 0 0 0 0 39

Local Match for 5311F - Carryover 31 0 0 0 0 31

TSGP- FFY08 Rail & Bus 1,500 0 0 0 0 1,500

Security- Proposition 1B New 2,779 0 0 0 0 2,779

Security- Proposition 1B Rail 1,500 0 0 0 0 1,500

Security- Proposition 1B Bus 1,200 0 0 0 0 1,200

Proposition 1B (FFY08) 27,788 0 0 0 0 27,788

Proposition 1B (FFY09) 15,654 0 0 0 0 15,654

Job Access and Reverse Commute (JARC) for HASTOPS 63 0 0 0 0 63

Job Access and Reverse Commute (JARC) Match 16 0 0 0 0 16

Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) for Buses 63 0 0 0 0 63

Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) Match (11.47%) 8 0 0 0 0 8

Transportation Development Act (TDA ) 12,598 12,500 12,500 12,500 12,500 62,598

Project Transfers 1,628 0 0 0 0 1,628

Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) Fuel Credits 2,800 0 0 0 0 2,800

Other Funding Source 327 0 0 0 0 0

Total Federal Funding (including local match) 136,385 79,320 81,993 84,772 87,663 470,133

Preventive Maintenance (41,500) (41,500) (41,500) (41,500) (41,500) (207,500)

SANDAG Planning Projects (923) (959) (998) (1,038) (1,079) (4,997)

Total Funding Available For Capital Projects 93,963 36,860 39,495 42,235 45,084 257,636

Total Project Needs 107,649 128,715 127,041 140,531 145,215 649,151

Total Deficit (13,686) (91,855) (87,546) (98,296) (100,131) (391,515)

% of Funding/Needs 87.3% 28.6% 31.1% 30.1% 31.0% 39.7%

METROPOLITAN TRANSIT SYSTEMCapital Improvement Program Summary

FY 2010 to FY 2014in 000's

6

Attachment 1

Imp

lem

enti

ng

A

gen

cyPR

OJE

CT

NU

MB

ERPR

OJE

CT

FUN

DED

TH

RU

FY

09TO

TAL

BU

DG

ET

FY

10 -

FY

14

FY10

FU

ND

ED

PRO

JEC

TSFY

10 U

NFU

ND

ED

PRO

JEC

TSFY

11

FY 1

2FY

13

FY 1

41

SDTI

1126

6Bl

ue L

ine

Reha

bilit

atio

n0

92,8

2743

,442

00

3,60

023

,416

22,3

692

MTS

Bus

1123

940

Foo

t C

ompr

esse

d N

atur

al G

as (C

NG

) Bus

es (9

7)37

,755

42,5

0015

,000

027

,500

00

03

MTS

Bus

Sout

h Ba

y M

aint

enan

ce F

acili

ty (S

BMF)

- L

and

Acq

uisi

tion

019

,537

12,5

370

07,

000

00

4SD

TI11

4200

0O

verh

ead

Cat

enar

y W

ire R

epla

cem

ent

7,42

25,

000

00

00

2,00

03,

000

5M

TS B

us11

237

East

Cou

nty

Bus

Mai

nten

ance

Fac

ility

(EC

BMF)

5,67

220

,864

3,97

40

6,89

010

,000

00

6M

TSSe

curit

y -

Prop

ositi

on 1

B0

2,77

92,

779

00

00

07

MTS

1118

4C

lose

d C

ircui

t Te

levi

sion

(CC

TV) B

us-

On

Boar

d Se

curit

y Pr

opos

ition

1B

2,18

91,

950

1,95

00

00

00

8SD

TI11

214

SD10

0 H

eatin

g, V

entil

atio

n, a

nd A

ir C

ondi

tioni

ng (H

VA

C)

Uni

t Re

habi

litat

ion/

Retr

ofit

454

6,76

71,

775

01,

248

1,24

81,

248

1,24

8

9M

TS11

166

Clo

sed

Circ

uit

Tele

visi

on (C

CTV

) Ra

il- In

Sta

tion

Secu

rity

Prop

ositi

on 1

B 1,

029

1,50

01,

500

00

00

0

10SD

TI11

251

San

Die

go T

rans

it, In

c. (S

DTI

) - U

2 SD

100

Gea

r Bo

x Re

habi

litat

ion

500

5,50

01,

500

01,

000

1,00

01,

000

1,00

0

11M

TS11

271

Ligh

t Ra

il V

ehic

le (L

RV) O

n Bo

ard

Cam

eras

(loc

al m

atch

on

ly)

1,00

81,

086

1,08

60

00

00

12M

TS B

us10

4850

0So

uth

Bay

Mai

nten

ance

Fac

ility

(SBM

F) S

ite P

repa

ratio

n0

1,00

01,

000

00

00

0

13C

VT

1125

0C

hula

Vis

ta T

rans

it (C

VT)

40

Foot

Com

pres

sed

Nat

ural

G

as (C

NG

) Bus

es2,

460

950

950

00

00

0

14SD

TI11

2930

0Sy

stem

Gra

de C

ross

ing

Repl

acem

ents

780

4,32

290

00

222

1,00

01,

100

1,10

015

SDTI

1142

800

Ove

rhea

d C

onta

ct S

yste

m (O

CS)

Str

ain

Insu

lato

r Re

plac

emen

t1,

186

375

375

00

00

0

16SD

TI11

255

Broa

dway

Wye

Sw

itch

Mac

hine

s10

075

075

00

00

00

17SD

TI11

165

Ligh

t Ra

il V

ehic

le (L

ight

Rai

l Veh

icle

(LRV

)) Bo

dy &

Pai

nt

Reha

bilit

atio

n2,

160

550

550

00

00

0

18M

TS11

200

Mis

cella

neou

s C

apita

l (N

on F

eder

al)

542

2,00

050

00

050

050

050

019

SDTI

San

Die

go T

rans

it, In

c. (S

DTI

) Tic

ket

Ven

ding

Equ

ipm

ent

(TV

M)

01,

369

500

00

869

00

20SD

TI11

167

Ligh

t Ra

il V

ehic

le (L

RV) T

ires

1,62

62,

404

491

00

589

636

687

21SD

TI11

254

SD10

0 Br

ake

Reha

bilit

atio

n12

535

035

00

00

00

22SD

TI11

206

Rail

Prof

ile G

rindi

ng97

31,

400

350

00

350

350

350

23SA

ND

AG

1128

300

H S

tree

t Tr

olle

y &

Bus

Am

eric

ans

with

Dis

abili

ties

Act

(A

DA

) Im

prov

emen

ts11

532

732

70

00

00

24SD

TI11

219

Pilo

t M

otor

Con

trol

Uni

t D

rive

Reha

bilit

atio

n20

01,

136

284

00

284

284

284

25SD

TI11

183

San

Die

go T

rans

it, In

c. (S

DTI

) C

ross

Tie

Pro

cure

men

t0

1,16

028

00

029

029

030

026

SDTI

SD10

0 Tr

actio

n M

otor

Dis

conn

ects

01,

100

275

00

275

275

275

27SA

ND

AG

1128

400

Con

figur

atio

n M

anag

emen

t10

020

020

00

00

00

28M

TS B

usEl

Caj

on T

rans

it C

ente

r0

7070

00

00

029

SDTI

1125

2SD

100

Blow

er M

otor

Con

vers

ion

290

100

100

00

00

030

SAN

DA

G11

2830

0O

ld T

own

Trol

ley

& B

us A

mer

ican

s w

ith D

isab

ilitie

s A

ct

(AD

A) I

mpr

ovem

ents

115

8989

00

00

0

31M

TSH

asto

p M

odul

e fo

r Pl

anni

ng H

astu

s Pr

ogra

m0

7979

00

00

032

MTS

Bus

1049

000

Aut

omat

ic V

ehic

le L

ocat

ion

(AV

L)/M

obile

Dat

a Te

rmin

al

(MD

T) T

echn

olog

y on

370

Bus

es (R

TMS)

16,7

7412

,700

05,

500

03,

000

4,20

00

33SA

ND

AG

1095

600

San

Ysi

dro

Slop

e Re

pair

135

2,08

00

2,08

00

00

034

SDTI

1128

600

Ligh

t Ra

il V

ehic

le (L

RV) C

ar W

ash

100

1,18

50

1,18

50

00

035

SDTI

Subs

tatio

n Re

trof

it M

odifi

catio

ns0

5,20

00

1,00

00

1,20

01,

500

1,50

036

SAN

DA

G11

2810

0M

ainl

ine

Dra

inag

e Im

prov

emen

ts26

064

50

645

00

00

37SD

TI11

186

Cra

ne T

ruck

040

00

400

00

00

38SD

TI11

4280

0C

aten

ary

Cat

ch C

able

Res

tora

tion

390

390

039

00

00

0

MET

RO

POLI

TAN

TR

AN

SIT

SYST

EMFY

201

0FI

VE-

YEA

R F

ISC

ALL

Y C

ON

STR

AIN

ED C

I Pin

'000

's

7

Attachment 2

Imp

lem

enti

ng

A

gen

cyPR

OJE

CT

NU

MB

ERPR

OJE

CT

FUN

DED

TH

RU

FY

09TO

TAL

BU

DG

ET

FY

10 -

FY

14

FY10

FU

ND

ED

PRO

JEC

TSFY

10 U

NFU

ND

ED

PRO

JEC

TSFY

11

FY 1

2FY

13

FY 1

439

SDTI

San

Die

go T

rans

it, In

c. (S

DTI

) V

isua

l Mes

sage

Sig

n (V

MS)

Re

plac

emen

t0

375

037

50

00

0

40SA

ND

AG

Trol

ley

Plat

form

Rep

airs

034

30

343

00

00

41C

VT

Chu

la V

ista

Tra

nsit

(CV

T) B

us S

ecur

ity C

amer

as0

278

027

80

00

042

SDTI

1121

6El

ectr

onic

Con

trol

Circ

uit

U2

Reha

bilit

atio

n23

075

00

250

025

025

00

43SD

TISi

gnal

Sys

tem

Des

ign/

Sch

emat

ic U

pdat

es0

250

025

00

00

044

SDTI

1122

8Sa

n D

iego

Tra

nsit,

Inc.

(SD

TI)

Yar

d Fa

cilit

ies

Build

ing

Repa

ir13

517

50

175

00

00

45M

TSEn

terp

rise

Plan

ning

Sys

tem

015

00

150

00

00

46M

TS B

us11

198

Met

ropo

litan

Tra

nsit

Syst

em (M

TS) B

us F

are

Box

Supp

ort

Equi

pmen

t42

510

00

100

00

00

47SD

TIU

2 Li

ght

Rail

Veh

icle

(LRV

) Int

erio

r Re

habi

litat

ion

030

00

100

010

010

00

48M

TS B

usM

etro

polit

an T

rans

it Sy

stem

(MTS

) Bus

Fle

et W

atch

Dat

a Lo

gger

Inst

alla

tion

095

095

00

00

49M

TS B

usSo

uth

Bay

and

East

Cou

nty

Mai

nten

ance

Fac

ilitie

s (S

BMF/

ECBM

F) H

eavy

Dut

y Li

fts

054

00

750

150

155

160

50SD

TIO

ld T

own

Stat

ion

Build

ing

Repa

irs0

750

750

00

051

MTS

Bus

Met

ropo

litan

Tra

nsit

Syst

em (M

TS) B

us S

ervi

ce T

ruck

s0

705

055

00

650

052

MTS

Bus

1121

2Tr

ansi

t St

ore

Secu

rity

Impr

ovem

ents

6950

050

00

00

53M

TS B

usM

etro

polit

an T

rans

it Sy

stem

(MTS

) Bus

Reg

iona

l Tra

nsit

Info

rmat

ion

Tech

nolo

gy0

450

450

00

0

54M

TS11

258

Dig

ital V

ideo

Rec

orde

r (D

VR)

Rep

lace

men

t24

144

036

036

3636

55M

TS B

usM

etro

polit

an T

rans

it Sy

stem

(MTS

) Bus

Impe

rial A

venu

e D

avis

on (I

AD

) Roo

f &

HV

AC

Rep

airs

035

035

00

00

56SD

TISt

atio

n Li

ghtin

g El

ectr

ical

Usa

ge Im

prov

emen

ts0

125

00

012

50

057

SDTI

Righ

t of

Way

(RO

W) D

rain

age

Impr

ovem

ents

05,

000

00

02,

600

1,20

01,

200

58SD

TISt

atio

n Pa

rkin

g Lo

ts0

600

00

030

030

00

59SD

TIPo

wer

Sw

itch

Repl

acem

ent

027

50

00

275

00

60SD

TISt

reet

Run

ning

Tra

ck R

epla

cem

ent

03,

600

00

01,

200

1,20

01,

200

61SD

TIRi

ght

of W

ay (R

OW

) Fen

ce R

epla

cem

ent

025

00

00

025

00

62SD

TISu

bsta

tion

Isol

atio

n Sw

itche

s0

1,29

50

00

01,

295

063

SDTI

Com

mer

cial

Str

eet

Switc

h Re

mov

al0

200

00

00

020

064

SDTI

Syst

em S

tatio

n Re

pairs

050

00

00

00

500

65SD

TISu

bsta

tion

Build

ing

Impr

ovem

ents

075

00

00

075

66M

TS B

us45

Foo

t C

omm

uter

Bus

es (2

6)0

3,25

40

00

3,25

40

067

MTS

Bus

1141

8A

mer

ican

s w

ith D

isab

ilitie

s A

ct (A

DA

) Bus

es (1

20)

8,52

05,

500

00

00

05,

500

68M

TS B

us11

419

Min

ibus

es (2

6)3,

244

3,60

00

00

00

3,60

0

FIV

E Y

EAR

CIP

- C

ON

STR

AIN

ED97

,106

271,

323

93,9

6213

,686

36,8

6039

,495

42,2

3545

,084

8

Ref

eren

ce

Nu

mb

erIm

ple

men

tin

g

Ag

ency

PRO

JEC

T N

UM

BER

PRO

JEC

TFU

ND

ED T

HR

U

FY09

TOTA

L B

UD

GET

FY10

- F

Y14

FY10

FY 1

1FY

12

FY 1

3FY

14

1M

TS11

200

Mis

cella

neou

s C

apita

l (N

on F

eder

al)

542

2,50

050

050

050

050

050

02

MTS

Has

top

mod

ule

for

Plan

ning

Has

tus

Prog

ram

079

790

00

03

MTS

Secu

rity

Prop

ositi

on 1

B0

2,77

92,

779

00

00

4M

TS11

184

Clo

sed

Circ

uit

Tele

visi

on (C

CTV

) Bus

- O

n Bo

ard

Secu

rity

Prop

ositi

on 1

B 2,

189

1,95

01,

950

00

00

5M

TS11

166

Clo

sed

Circ

uit

Tele

visi

on (C

CTV

) Rai

l- In

Sta

tion

Secu

rity

Prop

ositi

on 1

B 1,

029

1,50

01,

500

00

00

6M

TS11

271

Ligh

t Ra

il V

ehic

le (L

RV) O

n Bo

ard

Cam

eras

(loc

al m

atch

onl

y)1,

008

1,08

61,

086

00

00

7C

VT

1125

0C

hula

Vis

ta T

rans

it (C

VT)

40

Foot

Com

pres

sed

Nat

ural

Gas

(CN

G) B

uses

2,46

095

095

00

00

08

MTS

Bus

1123

940

Foo

t. C

ompr

esse

d N

atur

al G

as (C

NG

) Bus

es (9

7)37

,755

42,5

0015

,000

27,5

000

00

9M

TS B

us11

237

East

Cou

nty

Bus

Mai

nten

ance

Fac

ility

(EC

BMF)

5,67

235

,864

3,97

46,

890

25,0

000

010

MTS

Bus

El C

ajon

Tra

nsit

Cen

ter

070

700

00

011

SAN

DA

G11

2830

0H

Str

eet

Trol

ley

& B

us A

mer

ican

With

Dis

abili

ties

Act

(AD

A) I

mpr

ovem

ents

115

327

327

00

00

12SA

ND

AG

1128

400

Con

figur

atio

n M

anag

emen

t10

020

020

00

00

013

SAN

DA

G11

2830

0O

ld t

own

Trol

ley

& B

us A

mer

ican

With

Dis

abili

ties

Act

(AD

A) I

mpr

ovem

ents

115

8989

00

00

14SD

TI11

4280

0O

verh

ead

Con

tact

Sys

tem

(OC

S) S

trai

n In

sula

tor

Repl

acem

ent

1,18

637

537

50

00

015

SDTI

1118

3Sa

n D

iego

Tra

nsit,

Inc.

(SD

TI) C

ross

Tie

Pro

cure

men

t0

1,44

028

028

029

029

030

016

SDTI

San

Die

go T

rans

it, In

c. (S

DTI

) Tic

ket

Ven

ding

Equ

ipm

ent

(TV

M)

01,

869

500

500

869

00

17SD

TI11

214

SD10

0 H

eatin

g, V

entil

atio

n an

d A

ir C

ondi

tioni

ng (H

VA

C) U

nit

Reha

bilit

atio

n/Re

trof

it45

46,

767

1,77

51,

248

1,24

81,

248

1,24

818

SDTI

1125

1Sa

n D

iego

Tra

nsit,

Inc.

(SD

TI) -

U2

SD10

0 G

ear

Box

Reha

bilit

atio

n50

05,

500

1,50

01,

000

1,00

01,

000

1,00

019

SDTI

1116

5Li

ght

Rail

Veh

icle

(LRV

) Bod

y &

Pai

nt R

ehab

ilita

tion

2,16

01,

100

550

550

00

020

SDTI

1116

7Li

ght

Rail

Veh

icle

(LRV

) Tire

s1,

626

2,94

949

154

658

963

668

721

SDTI

1125

4SD

100

Brak

e Re

habi

litat

ion

125

350

350

00

00

22SD

TI11

219

Pilo

t M

otor

Con

trol

Uni

t D

rive

Reha

bilit

atio

n20

01,

420

284

284

284

284

284

23SD

TI11

252

SD10

0 Bl

ower

Mot

or C

onve

rsio

n29

010

010

00

00

024

SDTI

SD10

0 Tr

actio

n M

otor

Dis

conn

ects

01,

375

275

275

275

275

275

25SD

TI11

266

Blue

Lin

e Re

habi

litat

ion

039

9,65

443

,442

48,0

0064

,000

121,

712

122,

500

26SD

TI11

4200

0O

verh

ead

Cat

enar

y W

ire R

epla

cem

ent

7,42

212

,000

04,

000

3,00

02,

000

3,00

027

SDTI

1129

300

Syst

em G

rade

Cro

ssin

g Re

plac

emen

ts78

05,

000

900

900

1,00

01,

100

1,10

028

SDTI

1125

5Br

oadw

ay W

ye S

witc

h M

achi

nes

100

750

750

00

00

29SD

TI11

206

Rail

Prof

ile G

rindi

ng97

31,

750

350

350

350

350

350

30C

VT

Chu

la V

ista

Tra

nsit

(CV

T) B

us S

ecur

ity C

amer

as0

278

278

00

00

31M

TSEn

terp

rise

Plan

ning

Sys

tem

015

015

00

00

032

MTS

1125

8D

igita

l Vid

eo R

ecor

der

(DV

R) R

epla

cem

ent

2418

036

3636

3636

33M

TS B

us10

4900

0A

utom

atic

Veh

icle

Loc

atio

n (A

VL)

/Mob

ile D

ata

Term

inal

(MD

T) T

echn

olog

y on

370

Bus

es (R

TMS)

16,7

7412

,700

5,50

00

3,00

04,

200

034

MTS

Bus

1119

8M

etro

polit

an T

rans

it Sy

stem

(MTS

) Bus

Far

e bo

x Su

ppor

t Eq

uipm

ent

425

100

100

00

00

35M

TS B

usSo

uth

Bay

and

East

Cou

nty

Mai

nten

ance

Fac

ilitie

s (S

BMF/

ECBM

F) H

eavy

Dut

y Li

fts

068

575

145

150

155

160

36M

TS B

usM

etro

polit

an T

rans

it Sy

stem

(MTS

) Bus

Fle

et w

atch

Dat

a Lo

gger

Inst

alla

tion

095

950

00

037

MTS

Bus

Met

ropo

litan

Tra

nsit

Syst

em (M

TS) B

us R

egio

nal T

rans

it IT

045

450

00

038

MTS

Bus

Met

ropo

litan

Tra

nsit

Syst

em (M

TS) B

us S

ervi

ce T

ruck

s0

975

5527

00

650

039

MTS

Bus

Met

ropo

litan

Tra

nsit

Syst

em (M

TS) B

us Im

peria

l Ave

nue

Div

isio

n (IA

D) R

oof

& H

VA

C R

epai

rs0

950

3591

50

00

40M

TS B

usSo

uth

Bay

Mai

nten

ance

Fac

ility

(SBM

F) -

Lan

d A

cqui

sitio

n0

45,0

0012

,537

25,4

637,

000

00

41M

TS B

us10

4850

0So

uth

Bay

Mai

nten

ance

Fac

ility

(SBM

F) S

ite P

rep

01,

000

1,00

00

00

042

MTS

Bus

1121

2Tr

ansi

t St

ore

Secu

rity

Impr

ovem

ents

6950

500

00

043

SAN

DA

G10

9560

0Sa

n Y

sidr

o Sl

ope

135

2,08

02,

080

00

00

44SA

ND

AG

Trol

ley

Plat

form

Rep

airs

034

334

30

00

045

SAN

DA

G11

2810

0M

ainl

ine

Dra

inag

e Im

prov

emen

ts26

064

564

50

00

046

SDTI

1128

600

Ligh

t Ra

il V

ehic

le (L

RV) C

ar W

ash

100

1,18

51,

185

00

00

47SD

TI11

186

Cra

ne T

ruck

040

040

00

00

048

SDTI

1122

8Sa

n D

iego

Tra

nsit,

Inc.

(SD

TI) Y

ard

Faci

litie

s Bu

ildin

g Re

pair

135

175

175

00

00

49SD

TIO

ld T

own

Stat

ion

Build

ing

Repa

irs0

7575

00

00

50SD

TI11

216

Elec

tron

ic C

ontr

ol C

ircui

t U

2 Re

habi

litat

ion

230

1,00

025

025

025

025

00

51SD

TIU

2 Li

ght

Rail

Veh

icle

(LRV

) Int

erio

r Re

habi

litat

ion

040

010

010

010

010

00

52SD

TISu

bsta

tion

Retr

ofit

Mod

ifica

tions

06,

200

1,00

01,

000

1,20

01,

500

1,50

053

SDTI

Sign

al S

yste

m D

esig

n/ S

chem

atic

Upd

ates

050

025

025

00

00

54SD

TISa

n D

iego

Tra

nsit,

Inc.

(SD

TI) V

isua

l Mes

sage

Sig

n (V

MS)

Rep

lace

men

t0

750

375

375

00

055

SDTI

1142

800

Cat

enar

y C

atch

Cab

le R

esto

ratio

n39

039

039

00

00

056

SDTI

Tran

sfor

mer

Rew

indi

ng0

200

020

00

00

57SD

TIFa

shio

n V

alle

y St

atio

n Im

prov

emen

ts0

400

040

00

00

MET

RO

POLI

TAN

TR

AN

SIT

SYST

EMFY

201

0FI

VE-

YEA

R F

ISC

ALL

Y U

NC

ON

STR

AIN

ED C

IPin

'000

's

9

Attachment 3

Ref

eren

ce

Nu

mb

erIm

ple

men

tin

g

Ag

ency

PRO

JEC

T N

UM

BER

PRO

JEC

TFU

ND

ED T

HR

U

FY09

TOTA

L B

UD

GET

FY10

- F

Y14

FY10

FY 1

1FY

12

FY 1

3FY

14

MET

RO

POLI

TAN

TR

AN

SIT

SYST

EMFY

201

0FI

VE-

YEA

R F

ISC

ALL

Y U

NC

ON

STR

AIN

ED C

IPin

'000

's

58SD

TISt

atio

n Li

ghtin

g El

ectr

ical

Usa

ge Im

prov

emen

ts0

250

012

512

50

059

SDTI

Righ

t of

Way

(RO

W) D

rain

age

Impr

ovem

ents

05,

000

00

2,60

01,

200

1,20

060

SDTI

Stat

ion

Park

ing

Lots

060

00

030

030

00

61SD

TIPo

wer

Sw

itch

Repl

acem

ent

027

50

027

50

062

SDTI

Stre

et R

unni

ng T

rack

Rep

lace

men

t0

3,60

00

01,

200

1,20

01,

200

63SD

TIRi

ght

of W

ay (R

OW

) Fen

ce R

epla

cem

ent

025

00

00

250

064

SDTI

Subs

tatio

n Is

olat

ion

Switc

hes

01,

295

00

01,

295

065

SDTI

Com

mer

cial

Str

eet

Switc

h re

mov

al0

200

00

00

200

66SD

TISy

stem

Sta

tion

Repa

irs0

500

00

00

500

67SD

TISu

bsta

tion

Build

ing

Impr

ovem

ents

075

00

00

7568

MTS

Bus

Aut

omat

ic V

ehic

le L

ocat

ion

(AV

L)/M

obile

Dat

a Te

rmin

al (M

DT)

Tec

hnol

ogy

- A

DA

Par

atra

nsit

Buse

s0

1,86

30

1,86

30

00

69M

TS B

usM

idsi

ze B

uses

(14)

04,

500

04,

500

00

070

MTS

Bus

45 F

oot

Com

mut

er B

uses

(26)

05,

400

00

5,40

00

071

MTS

Bus

1141

8A

mer

ican

With

Dis

abili

ties

Act

(AD

A) B

uses

(120

)8,

520

12,5

000

07,

000

05,

500

72M

TS B

us11

419

Min

ibus

es (2

6)3,

244

3,60

00

00

03,

600

FIV

E Y

EAR

CIP

- U

NC

ON

STR

AIN

ED97

,106

649,

151

107,

649

128,

715

127,

041

140,

531

145,

215

10

FY 10 FY 11 FY 12 FY 13 FY 14Five Year

Total

Federal Formula Program 5307 $16,213 $16,847 $17,521 $18,222 $18,951 $87,754

Local Match for 5307 4,053 4,212 4,380 4,556 4,738 21,939

Federal Formula Program 5307 - Carryover 2,217 0 0 0 0 2,217

Local Match for 5307 - Carryover 554 0 0 0 0 554

Federal Formula Program 5309 Rail Modernization $5,815 6,048 6,290 6,541 6,803 31,497

Local Match for 5309 1,454 1,512 1,573 1,635 1,701 7,875

Federal Formula Program 5309 Rail Modernization - Carryover 1,892 0 0 0 0 1,892

Local Match for 5309 - Carryover 473 0 0 0 0 473

Section 5311 (Including Local Match) 395 438 460 483 507 2,283

Proposition 1B - TSGP 860 0 0 0 0 860

Homeland Security Grant 848 0 0 0 0 848

Section 5309 Earmark: San Luis Rey Transit Center - E2008-BUSP-0692 245 0 0 0 0 245

Local Match for Section 5309 Earmark: San Luis Rey Transit Center Earmark 61

Other - Local Match Adjustment on ADA 2,225 1,961 2,100 2,175 2,250 10,711

Total Federal Funding (including local match) $37,305 $31,018 $32,324 $33,612 $34,950 $169,209

Preventive Maintenance/Planning/ADA Paratransit (26,600) (21,961) (22,725) (22,988) (23,625) (117,899)

Associated Capital Maintenance (ACM) (187) (187) (187) (187) (187) (935)

Total Funding Available For Capital Projects $10,518 $8,870 $9,412 $10,437 $11,138 $50,375

Total Project Needs 15,573 21,116 22,801 18,101 18,343 95,934

Total Deficit ($5,055) ($12,246) ($13,389) ($7,664) ($7,205) ($45,559)

% of Funding/Needs 67.5% 42.0% 41.3% 57.7% 60.7% 52.5%

North County Transit DistrictCapital Improvement Program Summary

FY 2010 to FY 2014

11

Attachment 4

Impl

emen

ting

Age

ncy

PRO

JEC

T N

UM

BER

PRO

JEC

TFU

ND

ED T

HR

U

FY09

TOTA

L B

UD

GET

FY10

- FY

14

FY10

FU

ND

ED

PRO

JEC

TSFY

11

FY 1

2FY

13

FY 1

41

NC

TD11

0001

Com

pres

sed

Nat

ural

Gas

(CN

G) B

us R

epla

cem

ents

812,

564

2,56

40

00

02

NC

TD21

0001

Am

eric

ans

with

Dis

abili

ties

Act

(AD

A)

Van

Rep

lace

men

ts0

494

494

00

00

3N

CTD

5081

47H

omel

and

Sec

urity

- FY

08 o

rigin

al0

755

755

00

00

4N

CTD

5081

48H

omel

and

Sec

urity

- FY

08 re

com

pete

094

940

00

05

NC

TD50

9150

Pro

posi

tion

1B T

SG

P0

860

860

00

00

6N

CTD

6100

07D

ispa

tch

Cen

tral

ized

Tra

in C

ontr

ol (C

TC) S

yste

m R

epla

cem

ent

with

Pos

itive

Tra

in

Con

trol

(PTC

)0

250

250

00

00

7N

CTD

1100

04S

edan

s0

184

184

00

00

8N

CTD

1100

10S

ervi

ce T

ruck

s0

109

109

00

00

9N

CTD

5100

02M

aint

enan

ce o

f Way

(MO

W) T

ruck

s0

113

113

00

00

10N

CTD

1100

15S

ecur

ity S

urve

illan

ce S

yste

m

020

020

00

00

011

NC

TD51

0404

Voi

ce O

ver

Inte

rnet

Pro

toco

l (V

OIP

) Pha

se 2

015

515

50

00

012

NC

TD51

0402

Net

wor

k C

ore

Failo

ver

010

010

00

00

013

NC

TD11

0045

Info

rmat

ion

Tech

nolo

gy D

isas

ter

Reco

very

Pla

n0

100

100

00

00

14N

CTD

1100

13P

erso

nal C

ompu

ter (

PC

) Rep

lace

men

ts &

Upg

rade

s0

2525

00

00

15N

CTD

1100

32In

form

atio

n Te

chno

logy

Enh

ance

men

ts24

2525

00

00

16N

CTD

1100

33Re

port

writ

ing

Soft

war

e fo

r JD

E0

6868

00

00

17N

CTD

1100

21M

isce

llane

ous

Sm

all B

uild

ing

Pro

ject

s0

7575

00

00

18N

CTD

1110

25M

isce

llane

ous

Faci

lity

Mai

nten

ance

Equ

ipm

ent

050

500

00

019

NC

TD11

1006

Mis

cella

neou

s S

hop

Tool

s0

2020

00

00

20N

CTD

4101

01Fa

rebo

x R

elat

ed M

isce

llane

ous

Equ

ipm

ent

091

910

00

021

NC

TD11

0104

Wes

t D

ivis

ion

Floo

ring

Repl

acem

ent

035

350

00

022

NC

TD11

0102

Tran

sit C

ente

r Upg

rade

s0

200

200

00

00

23N

CTD

5106

01Tr

ack

Stru

ctur

e R

ehab

ilita

tion

254

246

246

00

00

24N

CTD

5102

01A

t-Gra

de C

ross

ing

Rep

lace

men

ts96

254

254

00

00

25N

CTD

5103

01Tu

rnou

t Ren

ewal

Pro

gram

050

050

00

00

026

NC

TD51

0004

Rig

ht o

f Way

(RO

W) S

igna

ge S

afet

y E

nhan

cem

ents

042

420

00

027

NC

TD50

9501

Pos

itive

Tra

in C

ontro

l (P

TC) S

tudy

& P

lann

ing

357

570

00

028

NC

TD51

0102

Brid

ge R

epla

cem

ent -

Br 2

46.1

, 246

.9, 2

47.1

E/D

070

070

00

00

029

NC

TD10

6054

San

Lui

s R

ey T

rans

it C

ente

r0

306

306

00

00

30N

CTD

1110

01C

ompr

esse

d N

atur

al G

as (C

NG

) Bus

Rep

lace

men

ts0

4,05

00

4,05

00

00

31N

CTD

2110

01A

mer

ican

s w

ith D

isab

ilitie

s A

ct (A

DA

) V

an R

epla

cem

ents

050

90

509

00

032

NC

TD11

1101

Und

ergr

ound

Sto

rage

Tan

k R

epla

cem

ent

065

00

650

00

033

NC

TD11

1301

CO

BO

L A

pplic

atio

ns In

tegr

atio

n0

650

065

00

00

34N

CTD

6114

03O

racl

e JD

E U

pgra

de0

610

061

00

00

35N

CTD

1110

35C

oast

er E

mer

genc

y C

all B

ox P

roje

ct0

211

021

10

00

36N

CTD

7110

02M

aint

enan

ce o

f Way

(MO

W) B

oom

Tru

ck -

Spr

inte

r0

193

019

30

00

37N

CTD

5110

01M

aint

enan

ce o

f Way

(MO

W) H

R B

oom

Tru

ck S

DN

R20

019

30

193

00

038

NC

TD11

1013

Per

sona

l Com

pute

r (P

C) R

epla

cem

ents

& U

pgra

des

010

00

100

00

039

NC

TD41

1033

Net

wor

k U

pgra

des

010

00

100

00

040

NC

TD11

1021

Mis

cella

neou

s S

mal

l Bui

ldin

g P

roje

cts

075

075

00

041

NC

TD11

1104

Hea

ting,

Ven

tilat

ion

and

Air

Con

ditio

ning

(HV

AC

) Rep

lace

men

t0

650

650

00

42N

CTD

5110

41Tr

ack

Geo

met

ry E

quip

men

t0

600

600

00

43N

CTD

5110

02M

aint

enan

ce o

f Way

(MO

W) P

icku

p Tr

uck

SD

NR

105

055

055

00

044

NC

TD11

1025

Mis

cella

neou

s Fa

cilit

y M

aint

enan

ce E

quip

men

t0

500

500

00

45N

CTD

1110

06M

isce

llane

ous

Sho

p To

ols

025

025

00

046

NC

TD11

1102

Tran

sit C

ente

r Upg

rade

s0

200

020

00

00

47N

CTD

5113

01Tu

rnou

t Ren

ewal

Pro

gram

025

00

250

00

048

NC

TD51

1501

Cro

sstie

Ren

ewal

Pro

gram

025

00

250

00

049

NC

TD51

1601

Trac

k S

truct

ure

Reh

abili

tatio

n0

200

020

00

00

50N

CTD

5114

01R

ail R

epla

cem

ent P

rogr

am0

200

020

00

00

51N

CTD

5112

01A

t-Gra

de C

ross

ing

Rep

lace

men

ts0

250

025

00

00

52N

CTD

6110

06S

prin

ter R

epla

cem

ent H

orns

055

055

00

053

NC

TD51

1021

Brid

ge R

epla

cem

ent -

Br 2

48.7

, 248

.5, 2

47.7

E/D

080

00

800

00

054

NC

TD51

1020

Brid

ge R

epai

r (he

avy)

240

.40

200

020

00

00

55N

CTD

1120

01C

ompr

esse

d N

atur

al G

as (C

NG

) Bus

Rep

lace

men

ts0

3,78

00

03,

780

00

NO

RTH

CO

UN

TY T

RA

NSI

T D

ISTR

ICT

FY 2

010

FIV

E-Y

EAR

FIS

CA

LLY

CO

NST

RA

INED

CIP

in '0

00's

12

Attachment 5

Impl

emen

ting

Age

ncy

PRO

JEC

T N

UM

BER

PRO

JEC

TFU

ND

ED T

HR

U

FY09

TOTA

L B

UD

GET

FY10

- FY

14

FY10

FU

ND

ED

PRO

JEC

TSFY

11

FY 1

2FY

13

FY 1

4

NO

RTH

CO

UN

TY T

RA

NSI

T D

ISTR

ICT

FY 2

010

FIV

E-Y

EAR

FIS

CA

LLY

CO

NST

RA

INED

CIP

in '0

00's

56N

CTD

2120

01A

mer

ican

s w

ith D

isab

ilitie

s A

ct (A

DA

) V

an R

epla

cem

ents

051

00

051

00

057

NC

TD11

2002

Driv

er S

eats

025

00

250

058

NC

TD11

2013

Mis

cella

neou

s S

mal

l Bui

ldin

g P

roje

cts

075

00

750

059

NC

TD11

2020

Mis

cella

neou

s Fa

cilit

y M

aint

enan

ce E

quip

men

t0

500

050

00

60N

CTD

1120

27W

est D

ivis

ion

Roo

f Rep

lace

men

t0

230

00

230

00

61N

CTD

1121

04H

eatin

g, V

entil

atio

n an

d A

ir C

ondi

tioni

ng (H

VA

C) R

epla

cem

ent

030

00

300

062

NC

TD51

2003

Mai

nten

ance

of W

ay (M

OW

) Sig

nal P

icku

p Tr

uck

SD

NR

870

640

064

00

63N

CTD

4120

33N

etw

ork

Upg

rade

s0

100

00

100

00

64N

CTD

1120

13P

erso

nal C

ompu

ter (

PC

) Rep

lace

men

ts &

Upg

rade

s0

100

00

100

00

65N

CTD

1120

15S

ecur

ity S

urve

illan

ce S

yste

m M

ES

H0

200

00

200

00

66N

CTD

1120

06M

isce

llane

ous

Flee

t Sho

p To

ols

020

00

200

067

NC

TD11

2005

Ser

vice

Tru

cks

012

00

012

00

068

NC

TD11

2004

Sed

ans

019

20

019

20

069

NC

TD11

2102

Tran

sit C

ente

r Upg

rade

s0

200

00

200

00

70N

CTD

5124

01R

ail R

epla

cem

ent P

rogr

am0

205

00

205

00

71N

CTD

5126

01Tr

ack

Stru

ctur

e R

ehab

ilita

tion

010

00

010

00

072

NC

TD51

2101

Brid

ge R

epla

cem

ent -

Br 2

46.1

Con

stru

ctio

n0

4,00

00

04,

000

00

73N

CTD

1130

01C

ompr

esse

d N

atur

al G

as (C

NG

) Bus

Rep

lace

men

ts0

4,86

70

00

4,86

70

74N

CTD

2130

01A

mer

ican

s w

ith D

isab

ilitie

s A

ct (A

DA

) V

an R

epla

cem

ents

048

30

00

483

075

NC

TD11

3006

Mis

cella

neou

s Fl

eet S

hop

Tool

s0

200

00

200

76N

CTD

1130

20M

isce

llane

ous

Faci

lity

Mai

nten

ance

Equ

ipm

ent

050

00

050

077

NC

TD11

3021

Mis

cella

neou

s S

mal

l Bui

ldin

g P

roje

cts

050

00

050

078

NC

TD11

3035

Sys

tem

s S

ecur

ity E

nhan

cem

ent

020

00

00

200

079

NC

TD51

3001

Mai

nten

ance

of W

ay (M

OW

) Sig

nal P

icku

p Tr

uck

SD

NR

410

660

00

660

80N

CTD

6130

01S

prin

ter S

uppo

rt V

ehic

les

for C

ontra

ctor

032

00

032

081

NC

TD11

3013

Per

sona

l Com

pute

r (P

C) R

epla

cem

ents

& U

pgra

des

032

00

032

082

NC

TD11

3102

Tran

sit C

ente

r Upg

rade

s0

200

00

020

00

83N

CTD

5131

01B

ridge

Rep

lace

men

t - B

r 246

.1 C

onst

ruct

ion

04,

000

00

04,

000

084

NC

TD11

4001

Com

pres

sed

Nat

ural

Gas

(CN

G) B

us R

epla

cem

ents

02,

763

00

00

2,76

385

NC

TD21

4001

Am

eric

ans

with

Dis

abili

ties

Act

(AD

A)

Van

Rep

lace

men

ts0

507

00

00

507

86N

CTD

1140

02D

river

Sea

ts0

250

00

025

87N

CTD

1140

20M

isce

llane

ous

Faci

lity

Mai

nten

ance

Equ

ipm

ent

045

00

00

4588

NC

TD11

4021

Mis

cella

neou

s S

mal

l Bui

ldin

g P

roje

cts

025

00

00

2589

NC

TD11

4027

Eas

t Div

isio

n R

oof R

epla

cem

ent

045

00

00

4590

NC

TD11

4006

Mis

cella

neou

s Fl

eet S

hop

Tool

s0

200

00

020

91N

CTD

1140

05S

ervi

ce T

ruck

s0

130

00

00

130

92N

CTD

4140

33N

etw

ork

Upg

rade

s0

150

00

015

93N

CTD

1140

13P

erso

nal C

ompu

ter (

PC

) Rep

lace

men

ts &

Upg

rade

s0

250

00

025

94N

CTD

1140

35M

obile

Inci

dent

Com

man

d U

nit E

quip

men

t0

200

00

00

200

95N

CTD

1141

02Tr

ansi

t Cen

ter U

pgra

des

020

00

00

020

096

NC

TD51

4101

Brid

ge R

epla

cem

ent -

Br 2

46.1

Con

stru

ctio

n0

6,00

00

00

06,

000

FIVE

YEA

R C

IP -

CO

NST

RA

INED

458

48,6

748,

672

10,0

0110

,001

10,0

0010

,000

13

Ref

eren

ce

Nu

mb

erIm

ple

men

tin

g

Ag

ency

PRO

JEC

T N

UM

BER

PRO

JEC

TFU

ND

ED T

HR

U

FY09

TOTA

L B

UD

GET

FY10

- F

Y14

FY10

FY 1

1FY

12

FY 1

3FY

14

1N

CTD

2100

01A

mer

ican

s w

ith D

isab

ilitie

s A

ct (A

DA

) Van

Rep

lace

men

ts0

2,65

449

450

958

752

454

02

NC

TD11

0001

Com

pres

sed

Nat

ural

Gas

(CN

G) B

us R

epla

cem

ents

8130

,658

2,64

56,

750

7,08

77,

088

7,08

83

NC

TD11

0002

Driv

er S

eats

3080

300

250

254

NC

TD50

8147

Hom

elan

d S

ecur

ity -

FY08

orig

inal

075

575

50

00

05

NC

TD50

8148

Hom

elan

d S

ecur

ity -

FY08

reco

mpe

te0

9494

00

00

6N

CTD

5091

50P

ropo

sitio

n 1B

TS

GP

086

086

00

00

07

NC

TD11

0015

Sec

urity

Sur

veill

ance

Sys

tem

0

1,25

025

025

025

025

025

08

NC

TD11

1035

Coa

ster

Em

erge

ncy

Cal

l Box

Pro

ject

021

40

214

00

09

NC

TD11

0101

Com

pres

sed

Nat

ural

Gas

(CN

G) F

uelin

g S

tatio

n (in

clud

es p

lann

ing)

02,

535

2,53

50

00

010

NC

TD11

1101

Und

ergr

ound

Sto

rage

Tan

k R

epla

cem

ent

065

00

650

00

011

NC

TD11

0007

Mis

cella

neou

s S

mal

l Bui

ldin

g P

roje

cts

037

575

7575

7575

12N

CTD

1100

08M

isce

llane

ous

Faci

lity

Mai

nten

ance

Equ

ipm

ent

025

050

5050

5050

13N

CTD

1100

06M

isce

llane

ous

Flee

t Sho

p To

ols

010

520

2520

2020

14N

CTD

4101

01Fa

rebo

x R

elat

ed M

isce

llane

ous

Equ

ipm

ent

029

191

00

020

015

NC

TD51

0404

Voi

ce O

ver

Inte

rnet

Pro

toco

l (V

OIP

) Pha

se 2

015

515

50

00

016

NC

TD51

0402

Net

wor

k C

ore

Failo

ver

018

518

50

00

017

NC

TD41

0033

Net

wor

k U

pgra

des

275

1,02

527

525

010

020

020

018

NC

TD11

0045

Info

rmat

ion

Tech

nolo

gy D

isas

ter

Reco

very

Pla

n0

320

320

00

00

19N

CTD

1100

13P

erso

nal C

ompu

ter (

PC

) Rep

lace

men

ts &

Upg

rade

s0

392

9210

010

050

5020

NC

TD11

0032

Info

rmat

ion

Tech

nolo

gy E

nhan

cem

ents

2480

020

010

00

500

021

NC

TD11

0033

Repo

rt W

ritin

g So

ftw

are

for

JDE

068

680

00

022

NC

TD41

0201

Coa

ster

MES

H S

ecur

ity N

etw

ork

Con

sole

013

013

00

00

023

NC

TD11

0301

CO

BO

L A

pplic

atio

ns In

tegr

atio

n0

1,30

565

565

00

00

24N

CTD

6104

03O

racl

e JD

E U

pgra

de0

1,22

061

061

00

00

25N

CTD

5110

41Tr

ack

Geo

met

ry E

quip

men

t0

600

600

00

26N

CTD

6100

07D

ispa

tch

Cen

tral

ized

Tra

in C

ontr

ol (C

TC) S

yste

m R

epla

cem

ent

with

Pos

itive

Tra

in C

ontr

ol (P

TC)

010

,500

500

5,00

05,

000

00

27N

CTD

5104

01El

ectr

onic

Acc

ess

Con

trol

Sys

tem

021

021

00

00

028

NC

TD11

2027

Wes

t Div

isio

n R

oof R

epla

cem

ent

028

00

023

00

5029

NC

TD11

2104

Hea

ting,

Ven

tilat

ion,

and

Air

Con

ditio

ning

(HV

AC

) Rep

lace

men

t0

265

065

300

170

30N

CTD

1101

04W

est

Div

isio

n Fl

oorin

g Re

plac

men

t0

3535

00

00

31N

CTD

5120

02M

aint

enan

ce o

f Way

(MO

W) H

R B

oom

Tru

ck S

DN

R10

10

201

00

201

00

32N

CTD

5120

03M

aint

enan

ce o

f Way

(MO

W) S

igna

lman

's T

ruck

SD

NR

87/4

1/40

/86/

100

032

80

064

264

033

NC

TD51

0002

Mai

nten

ance

of W

ay (M

OW

) P

icku

p Tr

uck

SD

NR

103

058

580

00

034

NC

TD51

0003

Mai

nten

ance

of W

ay (M

OW

) S

igna

lman

's T

ruck

SD

NR

104

055

550

00

035

NC

TD51

1002

Mai

nten

ance

of W

ay (M

OW

) P

icku

p Tr

uck

SD

NR

105

055

055

00

036

NC

TD51

1001

Mai

nten

ance

of W

ay (M

OW

) H

R B

oom

Tru

ck S

DN

R20

019

30

193

00

037

NC

TD71

1002

Mai

nten

ance

of W

ay (M

OW

) B

oom

Tru

ck S

prin

ter

019

30

193

00

038

NC

TD71

1003

Mai

nten

ance

of W

ay (M

OW

) G

ang

Truc

k S

prin

ter

019

20

192

00

039

NC

TD61

3001

Spr

inte

r Sup

port

Veh

icle

s fo

r Con

tract

or0

100

00

050

5040

NC

TD11

0010

Serv

ice

Truc

ks0

359

109

012

00

130

41N

CTD

1100

04Se

dans

050

118

40

192

012

542

NC

TD51

0005

Sher

iff a

nd S

ecur

ity V

ehic

les

080

800

00

043

NC

TD11

4035

Mob

ile In

cide

nt C

omm

and

Uni

t Equ

ipm

ent

020

00

00

020

044

NC

TD11

0102

Tran

sit C

ente

r Upg

rade

s0

1,27

522

525

025

025

030

045

NC

TD51

0201

At-G

rade

Cro

ssin

g96

1,75

035

035

035

035

035

046

NC

TD51

0301

Turn

out R

enew

al P

rogr

am0

2,70

050

055

055

055

055

047

NC

TD51

0401

Rai

l Rep

lace

men

t Pro

gram

01,

600

040

040

040

040

048

NC

TD51

0501

Cro

sstie

Ren

ewal

Pro

gram

500

4,05

081

081

081

081

081

049

NC

TD51

0601

Trac

k S

truct

ure

Reh

abili

tatio

n25

43,

650

710

710

810

710

710

50N

CTD

5100

04R

ight

of W

ay (R

OW

) Sig

nage

Saf

ety

Enh

ance

men

ts0

4242

00

00

51N

CTD

6100

06S

prin

ter R

epla

cem

ent H

orns

5010

550

550

00

52N

CTD

5095

01P

ositi

ve T

rain

Con

trol (

PTC

) Stu

dy &

Pla

nnin

g3

6060

00

00

53N

CTD

6130

02D

iese

l Mul

tiple

Uni

t (D

MU

) Upg

rade

s0

600

00

600

54N

CTD

6130

07A

utom

ated

Pas

seng

er C

ount

er (A

PC

) for

Spr

inte

r0

400

00

040

00

55N

CTD

5101

02B

ridge

Rep

lace

men

t - B

r 246

.1, 2

46.9

, 247

.1 E

/D0

2,20

070

01,

000

500

00

56N

CTD

5110

20B

ridge

Rep

lace

men

t - B

r 240

.4 C

onst

r rep

air

01,

000

01,

000

00

057

NC

TD51

2101

Brid

ge R

epla

cem

ent -

Br 2

46.1

Con

str

016

,500

00

5,00

05,

500

6,00

058

SA

ND

AG

1060

54S

an L

uis

Rey

Tra

nsit

Cen

ter

030

630

60

00

0

FIV

E Y

EAR

CIP

- U

NC

ON

STR

AIN

ED1,

313

95,9

3415

,573

21,1

1622

,801

18,1

0118

,343

NO

RTH

CO

UN

TY T

RA

NSI

T D

ISTR

ICT

FY 2

010

FIV

E-Y

EAR

FIS

CA

LLY

UN

CO

NST

RA

INED

CIP

in '0

00's

14

Attachment 6

Imp

lem

enti

ng

A

gen

cyPR

OJE

CT

NU

MB

ERPR

OJE

CT

A

MO

UN

T

1SA

ND

AG

1142

000

Syst

em C

onta

ct W

ire12

,000

2SA

ND

AG

1210

001

Blue

Lin

e U

pgra

de44

,560

3SA

ND

AG

1143

500

Railr

oad

Brid

ge 2

07.6

Nor

th A

ppro

ach

Tres

tle R

epla

cem

ent

12,0

004

SAN

DA

G11

4360

0Sa

n Lu

is R

ey T

rans

it C

ente

r1,

500

5N

CTD

Pr

even

tive

Mai

nten

ance

4,

000

6N

CTD

Te

chno

logy

Enh

ance

men

ts a

nd R

epla

cem

ents

2,99

47

NC

TD

Tran

sit

Enha

ncem

ents

245

8N

CTD

Ri

ght

of W

ay In

fras

truc

ture

Rep

lace

men

ts3,

500

TOTA

L A

RR

A -

SEC

TIO

N 5

307

80,7

99

9N

CTD

Te

chno

logy

Enh

ance

men

ts a

nd R

epla

cem

ents

862

10SA

ND

AG

1210

001

Blue

Lin

e U

pgra

de2,

011

TOTA

L A

RR

A -

SEC

TIO

N 5

309

2,87

3

11N

CTD

A

DA

Veh

icle

Rep

lace

men

ts57

812

MTS

AD

A V

ehic

le R

epla

cem

ents

402

TOTA

L A

RR

A -

SEC

TIO

N 5

311

980

13SA

ND

AG

1049

700

Gro

ssm

ont

Pede

stria

n Br

idge

4,00

2TO

TAL

AR

RA

- F

HW

A T

E4,

002

14SA

ND

AG

1141

600

Sant

a M

arga

rita

Brid

ge/D

oubl

e Tr

ack

16,2

06TO

TAL

AR

RA

- IN

TER

CIT

Y R

AIL

16,2

06

SAN

DIE

GO

AM

ERIC

AN

REC

OV

ERY

AN

D R

EIN

VES

TMEN

T A

CT

(AR

RA

)in

'000

's

15

Attachment 7

Reference Number

Project Number PROJECT TOTAL POINTS

FUNDED THRU FY09

TOTAL BUDGET

FY10 - FY14

1 11189 Articulated Buses (12) 95 0 9,600 2 610007 Dispatch Central Train Control (CTC) System Replacement with Positive Train Control (PTC) 86 0 10,5003 512101 Bridge Replacement - Br 246.1 Construction 85 0 16,5004 511020 Bridge Replacement - Br 240.4 Construction Repair 85 0 1,0005 510102 Bridge Replacement - Br 246.1, 246.9, 247.1 E/D 85 0 1,5006 Mid Size Buses (14) 83 0 4,5007 Substation Retrofit Modifications 75 0 6,2008 Street Running Track Replacement 75 0 3,6009 510501 Crosstie Renewal Program 75 0 4,050

10 510601 Track Structure Rehabilitation 75 0 3,40011 510301 Turnout Renewal Program 75 0 2,20012 510401 Rail Replacement Program 75 0 1,60013 510201 At-Grade Crossing 75 0 1,49614 1049000 Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL)/Mobile Data Terminal (MDT) Technology on 370 Buses (RTMS) 73 16,774 12,70015 1115700 Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) Fueling Station Replacement IAD/KMD/SBMF (Ariel Compressor) 71 0 2,535

16 1048500 South Bay Maintenance Facility (SBMF) Site Preparation 69 0 2,000 17 210001 American With Disabilities Act (ADA) Van Replacements 69 0 2,16018 110001 Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) Bus Replacements 68 0 28,09419 Trolley System Communications & American With Disabilities Act (ADA) Messaging 67 0 35,440 20 11418 American With Disabilities Act (ADA) Buses (120) 66 8,520 12,50021 1049600 East County Site Preparation 66 0 2,000 22 1095600 San Ysidro Slope Repair 64 135 2,08023 Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL)/Mobile Data Terminal (MDT) Technology ADA Paratransit Buses 64 0 1,86324 11266 Blue Line Light Rail Vehicle (LRV) Procurement 61 0 356,212 25 11419 Minibuses (26) 60 3,244 3,60026 MTS Parking Lot Improvements (Paving & Security) 59 0 5,000 27 1142800 Overhead Contact System (OCS) Insulator Replacement 55 0 12,000 28 Right of Way (ROW) Drainage Improvements 54 0 5,00029 11216 Electronic Control Circuit U2 Rehabilitation 52 230 1,00030 1128600 Light Rail Vehicle (LRV) Car Wash 48 100 1,18531 1048500 South Bay Bus Maintenance Facility Upgrade - Phase 2 45 0 32,463 32 Major Trolley Station Reconstruction - Euclid Avenue 45 0 5,063 33 45 Foot Commuter Buses (26) 42 0 5,40034 Commercial Street Track Improvement - 13th to 19th Streets 37 0 4,219 35 110301 COBOL Applications Integration 37 0 1,30536 1142100 Trolley Power Substation Replacement 36 0 17,719 37 1049800 Fiber Optic- Blue Line Replacement (3-6M) 35 0 6,000 38 Major Trolley Station Reconstruction - 32nd & Commercial Streets 34 0 3,375 39 Substation Isolation Switches 34 0 1,29540 110102 Transit Center Upgrades 34 0 1,07541 Rio Vista Platform Settlement 30 0 3,375 42 Orange to Blue Line Connection 29 0 30,000 43 Major Trolley Station Reconstruction - 47th Street 23 0 5,063 44 610403 Oracle JDE Upgrade 18 0 1,220

SAN DIEGO REGIONAL UNFUNDED TRANSIT CAPITAL AND REHABILITATION PROJECTSFY 2010in '000's

16

Attachment 8

401 B Street, Suite 800 San Diego, CA 92101 Phone (619) 699-1900 • Fax (619) 699-1905 www.sandag.org

RESOLUTION NO. 2009-21

APPROVING AMENDMENT NO. 11 TO THE 2008 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM

WHEREAS, on July 25, 2008, SANDAG adopted the 2008 Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) and found the 2008 RTIP in conformance with the 1998 Regional Air Quality Strategy (RAQS) and the applicable State Implementation Plans (SIPs); and

WHEREAS, on November 17, 2008, the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) determined the 2008 RTIP and 2030 San Diego Regional Transportation Plan: Pathways for the Future (2030 RTP) conform to the applicable SIPs in accordance with the provisions of 40 CFR Parts 51 and 93; and

WHEREAS, the annual transit Capital Improvement Program (CIP) has been developed and is included in the 2008 RTIP as shown in Table 1 (Attachment 10); and

WHEREAS, the amendment is consistent with the metropolitan transportation planning regulations per 23 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 450; and

WHEREAS, the amendment is consistent with the 2030 RTP which conforms to the 2003 and 2006 SIPs and to the emissions budgets from the Eight-Hour Ozone Attainment Plan for San Diego County, which were found adequate for transportation conformity purposes by the U.S. EPA in 2008; and

WHEREAS, the regionally significant capacity increasing projects have been incorporated into the quantitative air quality emissions analysis and conformity findings conducted for the 2030 RTP and the 2008 RTIP; and

WHEREAS, Amendment No. 11 to the 2008 RTIP continues to provide for timely implementation of transportation control measures contained in the adopted RAQS/SIP for air quality and a quantitative emissions analysis demonstrates that the implementation of the RTIP projects and programs meet all the federally required emissions budget targets; and

WHEREAS, projects in Amendment No. 11 satisfy the transportation conformity provisions of 40 CFR 93.122(g) and all applicable transportation planning requirements per 23 CFR Part 450; and

WHEREAS, all other projects in Amendment No. 11 are either noncapacity increasing or exempt from the requirements to determine conformity; and

WHEREAS, the 2008 RTIP Amendment No. 11 is a fiscally constrained document as shown in Tables 2a through 2c (Attachment 11); and

Attachment 9

17

RESOLUTION NO. 2009-21 Page 2

WHEREAS, the amendment is consistent with the Public Participation Policy adopted by the SANDAG Board; and

NOW THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Directors does hereby approve Amendment No. 11 to the 2008 RTIP; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that SANDAG finds the 2008 RTIP, including Amendment No. 11, is consistent with the 2030 RTP, is in conformance with the applicable SIPs and 1998 RAQS for the San Diego region, is consistent with SANDAG Intergovernmental Review Procedures, and is consistent with SANDAG Public Participation Policy, as amended.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 24th day of April 2009.

ATTEST: ________________________________________

CHAIRPERSON SECRETARY

MEMBER AGENCIES: Cities of Carlsbad, Chula Vista, Coronado, Del Mar, El Cajon, Encinitas, Escondido, Imperial Beach, La Mesa, Lemon Grove, National City, Oceanside, Poway, San Diego, San Marcos, Santee, Solana Beach, Vista, and County of San Diego.

ADVISORY MEMBERS: California Department of Transportation, Metropolitan Transit System, North County Transit District, Imperial County, U.S. Department of Defense, San Diego Unified Port District, San Diego County Water Authority,

Southern California Tribal Chairmen’s Association, and Mexico.

18

Table 1

San Diego Region (in $000s)

2008 Regional Transportation Improvement Program

Amendment No. 11

MPO ID:TITLE:

NCTD01Bus Associated Capital Maintenance

North County Transit District

Capacity Status: NCI 08-11RTIP #:Mass Transit - Rehabilitation of transit vehiclesExempt Category:

NCTD service area - bus tire leaseDESCRIPTION:

CHANGE REASON: Increase funding

EST TOTAL COST: $1,690

CONRWPEPRIORTOTAL 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5307 $1,350 $600 $150 $150 $150 $150 $150 $1,350

Local Funds $340 $150 $38 $38 $38 $38 $38 $340

TOTAL $1,690 $750 $188 $188 $188 $188 $188 $1,690

PE RW CONPRIORTOTAL

PROJECT PRIOR TO AMENDMENT

08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5307 $1,200 $600 $150 $150 $150 $150 $1,200

Local Funds $302 $150 $38 $38 $38 $38 $302

$1,502 $750 $188 $188 $188 $188 $1,502 TOTAL

MPO ID:TITLE:

NCTD03ADA Paratransit Services

Capacity Status: NCI 08-11RTIP #:Mass Transit - Transit operating assistanceExempt Category:

NCTD service area - operating cost associated with providing ADA/paratransit servicesDESCRIPTION:

CHANGE REASON: Increase funding

EST TOTAL COST: $31,342

CONRWPEPRIORTOTAL 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5307 $10,774 $3,074 $1,100 $1,500 $1,600 $1,700 $1,800 $10,774

Local Funds $17,961 $9,071 $1,771 $1,597 $1,751 $1,841 $1,930 $17,961

TransNet - ADA $1,496 $279 $289 $299 $309 $320 $1,496

TransNet - Transit (S&D) $1,111 $1,111 $1,111

TOTAL $31,342 $13,256 $3,150 $3,386 $3,650 $3,850 $4,050 $31,342

PE RW CONPRIORTOTAL

PROJECT PRIOR TO AMENDMENT

08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5307 $6,014 $3,074 $720 $730 $740 $750 $6,014

Local Funds $19,866 $9,071 $2,365 $2,582 $2,844 $3,004 $19,866

TransNet - ADA $1,228 $286 $298 $314 $330 $1,228

TransNet - Transit (S&D) $1,111 $1,111 $1,111

$28,219 $13,256 $3,371 $3,610 $3,898 $4,084 $28,219 TOTAL

1Page Tuesday, April 7, 2009

19

Attachment 10

San Diego Region (in $000s)

2008 Regional Transportation Improvement Program

Amendment No. 11

MPO ID:TITLE:

NCTD06Bus/Rail Support Equipment & Facility

North County Transit District

Capacity Status: NCI 08-11RTIP #:

Mass Transit - Purchase of office, shop and

operating equipment for existing facilities

Exempt Category:

NCTD service area - facility and support equipment for fixed route and rail services including radio

equipment, buildings and structures, shop and garage equipment, computer hardware & software,

furnitures and fixtures, and service vehicles

DESCRIPTION:

CHANGE REASON: Increase funding

EST TOTAL COST: $20,422

CONRWPEPRIORTOTAL 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5307 $11,470 $6,046 $1,287 $2,429 $944 $360 $404 $11,470

FTA Funds - AR-5307 $3,500 $3,500 $3,500

Local Funds $3,744 $2,398 $312 $607 $236 $90 $101 $3,744

State Bond - STA $860 $860 $860

Transit Security (TSGP) $848 $848 $848

TOTAL $20,422 $8,444 $6,807 $3,036 $1,180 $450 $505 $20,422

PE RW CONPRIORTOTAL

PROJECT PRIOR TO AMENDMENT

08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5307 $11,066 $6,046 $1,287 $2,429 $944 $360 $11,066

FTA Funds - AR-5307 $3,500 $3,500 $3,500

Local Funds $3,643 $2,398 $312 $607 $236 $90 $3,643

State Bond - STA $860 $860 $860

Transit Security (TSGP) $848 $848 $848

$19,917 $8,444 $6,807 $3,036 $1,180 $450 $19,917 TOTAL

MPO ID:TITLE:

NCTD16BOceanside to Escondido Rail Operations

Capacity Status: NCI 08-11RTIP #:Mass Transit - Transit operating assistanceExempt Category:

For Sprinter service - start-up operating cost; debt service payments on $34 million COP's after

construction is completed

DESCRIPTION:

CHANGE REASON: Increase funding

EST TOTAL COST: $29,512

CONRWPEPRIORTOTAL 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

CMAQ $16,000 $6,000 $4,000 $6,000 $16,000

Local Funds $3,750 $1,250 $1,000 $1,500 $3,750

TransNet - TSI $9,762 $1,506 $1,238 $2,338 $2,323 $2,357 $9,762

TOTAL $29,512 $7,250 $6,506 $8,738 $2,338 $2,323 $2,357 $29,512

PE RW CONPRIORTOTAL

PROJECT PRIOR TO AMENDMENT

08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

CMAQ $16,000 $6,000 $4,000 $6,000 $16,000

Local Funds $4,000 $1,250 $1,250 $1,500 $4,000

TransNet - TSI $7,261 $1,300 $1,300 $2,338 $2,323 $7,261

$27,261 $7,250 $6,550 $8,800 $2,338 $2,323 $27,261 TOTAL

2Page Tuesday, April 7, 2009

20

San Diego Region (in $000s)

2008 Regional Transportation Improvement Program

Amendment No. 11

MPO ID:TITLE:

NCTD20Rail Vehicles & Related Equipment

North County Transit District

Capacity Status: NCI 08-11RTIP #:

Mass Transit - Purchase new buses and rail cars

to replace existing vehicles or minor expansions

of fleet

Exempt Category:

NCTD service area - locomotive purchase/overhaul, revenue vehicles, misc. support equipment including

vehicles, spare components and signal equipment upgrade/replacement

DESCRIPTION:

CHANGE REASON: Reduce funding

EST TOTAL COST: $4,681

CONRWPEPRIORTOTAL 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5307 $2,214 $2,125 $45 $44 $2,214

FTA 5309 (FG) $476 $476 $476

Local Funds $862 $840 $11 $11 $862

STIP-IIP PTA $1,000 $1,000 $500 $500

TCRP $129 $129 $129

TOTAL $4,681 $4,570 $56 $55 $500 $4,181

PE RW CONPRIORTOTAL

PROJECT PRIOR TO AMENDMENT

08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5307 $2,125 $2,125 $2,125

FTA 5309 (FG) $676 $476 $200 $676

Local Funds $890 $840 $50 $890

STIP-IIP PTA $1,000 $1,000 $500 $500

TCRP $129 $129 $129

$4,820 $4,570 $250 $500 $4,320 TOTAL

MPO ID:TITLE:

NCTD29Planning

Capacity Status: NCI 08-11RTIP #:Other - Non construction related activitiesExempt Category:

NCTD Service area - local short range and other transit planning studiesDESCRIPTION:

CHANGE REASON: Increase funding

EST TOTAL COST: $1,875

CONRWPEPRIORTOTAL 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5307 $1,500 $500 $300 $300 $200 $100 $100 $1,500

Local Funds $375 $125 $75 $75 $50 $25 $25 $375

TOTAL $1,875 $625 $375 $375 $250 $125 $125 $1,875

PE RW CONPRIORTOTAL

PROJECT PRIOR TO AMENDMENT

08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5307 $900 $500 $100 $100 $100 $100 $900

Local Funds $225 $125 $25 $25 $25 $25 $225

$1,125 $625 $125 $125 $125 $125 $1,125 TOTAL

3Page Tuesday, April 7, 2009

21

San Diego Region (in $000s)

2008 Regional Transportation Improvement Program

Amendment No. 11

MPO ID:TITLE:

NCTD34Expanded Transit Service

North County Transit District

Capacity Status: NCI 08-11RTIP #:Mass Transit - Transit operating assistanceExempt Category:

NCTD service area - operating support for existing fixed route and rail transit service, including intercity

bus and rural services

DESCRIPTION:

CHANGE REASON: Increase funding

EST TOTAL COST: $177,217

CONRWPEPRIORTOTAL 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5311 $369 $369 $369

FTA 5317 - NF $481 $481 $481

Local Funds $129,475 $22,550 $24,422 $26,430 $27,543 $28,530 $129,475

TransNet - SS $200 $200 $200

TransNet - TSI $46,692 $9,022 $9,658 $8,939 $9,349 $9,724 $46,692

TOTAL $177,217 $32,622 $34,080 $35,369 $36,892 $38,254 $177,217

PE RW CONPRIORTOTAL

PROJECT PRIOR TO AMENDMENT

08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5316 - JARC $156 $156 $156

FTA 5317 - NF $44 $44 $44

Local Funds $799 $201 $186 $199 $213 $799

TransNet - TSI $39,036 $9,478 $9,952 $9,488 $10,118 $39,036

$40,035 $9,879 $10,138 $9,687 $10,331 $40,035 TOTAL

MPO ID:TITLE:

NCTD36Solana Beach Intermodal Transit Station

Capacity Status: CI 08-11RTIP #:DELAYED

Solana Beach train station - construct parking structure, part of mixed-use transit oriented developmentDESCRIPTION:

CHANGE REASON: Delay project

EST TOTAL COST: $9,175

CONRWPEPRIORTOTAL 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5309 (Bus) $2,534 $2,534 $649 $1,885

Local Funds $641 $641 $163 $478

STIP-IIP PTA $6,000 $6,000 $6,000

TOTAL $9,175 $9,175 $812 $8,363

PE RW CONPRIORTOTAL

PROJECT PRIOR TO AMENDMENT

08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5309 (Bus) $2,873 $2,534 $339 $649 $2,224

Local Funds $726 $641 $85 $163 $563

STIP-IIP PTA $6,000 $6,000 $6,000

$9,599 $9,175 $424 $812 $8,787 TOTAL

4Page Tuesday, April 7, 2009

22

San Diego Region (in $000s)

2008 Regional Transportation Improvement Program

Amendment No. 11

MPO ID:TITLE:

NCTD40Rail Station Improvements

North County Transit District

Capacity Status: NCI 08-11RTIP #:

Mass Transit - Reconstruction or renovation of

transit structures

Exempt Category:DELAYED

NCTD service area - Coaster & Sprinter station improvements including platform extension; Convention

Center/Padres stadium design information display panel

DESCRIPTION:

CHANGE REASON: Delay project

EST TOTAL COST: $1,660

CONRWPEPRIORTOTAL 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5307 $343 $343 $343

Local Funds $87 $87 $87

TransNet - MC $1,230 $1,230 $1,230

TOTAL $1,660 $1,660 $1,660

STIP-TransNet swap*

PE RW CONPRIORTOTAL

PROJECT PRIOR TO AMENDMENT

08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5307 $663 $343 $320 $663

Local Funds $167 $87 $80 $167

TransNet - MC $1,230 $1,230 $1,230

$2,060 $1,660 $400 $2,060 TOTAL

5Page Tuesday, April 7, 2009

23

San Diego Region (in $000s)

2008 Regional Transportation Improvement Program

Amendment No. 11

MPO ID:TITLE:

SAN40Metropolitan Planning

San Diego Association of Governments

Capacity Status: NCI 08-11RTIP #:Other - Non construction related activitiesExempt Category:

Countywide - ongoing regional transportation planning including the regional vanpool program and survey

and inventory of bridges

DESCRIPTION:

CHANGE REASON: Increase funding

EST TOTAL COST: $25,880

CONRWPEPRIORTOTAL 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5307 $21,122 $3,290 $3,470 $3,383 $3,517 $3,658 $3,804 $21,122

FTA 5316 - JARC $160 $160 $160

FTA 5317 - NF $78 $78 $78

Local Funds $4,520 $928 $846 $880 $915 $951 $4,520

TOTAL $25,880 $3,290 $4,636 $4,229 $4,397 $4,573 $4,755 $25,880

PE RW CONPRIORTOTAL

PROJECT PRIOR TO AMENDMENT

08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5307 $17,357 $3,290 $3,312 $3,444 $3,582 $3,729 $17,357

FTA 5316 - JARC $169 $169 $169

FTA 5317 - NF $80 $80 $80

Local Funds $4,364 $1,675 $861 $896 $932 $4,364

$21,970 $3,290 $5,236 $4,305 $4,478 $4,661 $21,970 TOTAL

MPO ID:TITLE:

SAN41Replace Santa Margarita Bridge

Capacity Status: NCI 08-11RTIP #:

Mass Transit - Reconstruction or renovation of

transit structures

Exempt Category:

From Stuart Mesa to Fallbrook Passing Track - Near Oceanside - within the boundaries of Pendleton

USMC Base at the Santa Margarita River - replace bridge and construct double track to Stuart Mesa and

Fallbrook passing tracks

DESCRIPTION:

CHANGE REASON: Carry over from 06-16, Add new funding source

PPNO: 2006 EST TOTAL COST: $42,700

CONRWPEPRIORTOTAL 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

ARRA - STIP IIP $16,206 $16,206 $16,206

STIP-IIP PTA $987 $987 $987

STIP-IIP STP $2,213 $2,213 $2,213

STIP-IIP State Cash $287 $287 $287

TCRP $23,007 $23,007 $23,007

TOTAL $42,700 $26,494 $16,206 $3,487 $39,213

6Page Tuesday, April 7, 2009

24

San Diego Region (in $000s)

2008 Regional Transportation Improvement Program

Amendment No. 11

MPO ID:TITLE:

SAN52East County Bus Maintenance Facility

San Diego Association of Governments

Capacity Status: NCI 08-11RTIP #:

Mass Transit - Const of new bus or rail

storage/maint facilities excluded in 23 CFR part

771

Exempt Category:

In El Cajon - construction of new bus facility to provide capacity for operation and maintenance for 100-150

vehicles

DESCRIPTION:

CHANGE REASON: Carry over from 06-16

EST TOTAL COST: $17,440

CONRWPEPRIORTOTAL 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

CMAQ $50 $50 $50

FTA 5307 $5,595 $5,595 $4,910 $685

FTA 5309 (Bus) $3,807 $3,145 $662 $3,807

FTA 5311 $200 $200 $200

Local Funds $2,303 $2,137 $166 $1,628 $675

STA $500 $500 $500

TOTAL $12,455 $11,627 $828 $6,538 $5,917

MPO ID:TITLE:

SAN55Bus & Fixed Guideway Support Equipment

and Facilities 114-00 / 124-00

Capacity Status: NCI 08-11RTIP #:

Mass Transit - Purchase of office, shop and

operating equipment for existing facilities

Exempt Category:

MTS service area - provide for support equipment and facilities work related to bus and rail operations

such as roof renovations, shop equipment, LRV car wash replacement, building repairs, IT infrastructure,

servers, and storage, non-revenue vehicles, and safety and security equipment

DESCRIPTION:

CHANGE REASON: Increase funding

EST TOTAL COST: $3,832

CONRWPEPRIORTOTAL 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5307 $3,066 $480 $960 $333 $333 $480 $480 $3,066

Local Funds $766 $120 $240 $83 $83 $120 $120 $766

TOTAL $3,832 $600 $1,200 $416 $416 $600 $600 $3,832

PE RW CONPRIORTOTAL

PROJECT PRIOR TO AMENDMENT

08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5307 $2,400 $480 $480 $480 $480 $480 $2,400

Local Funds $600 $120 $120 $120 $120 $120 $600

$3,000 $600 $600 $600 $600 $600 $3,000 TOTAL

7Page Tuesday, April 7, 2009

25

San Diego Region (in $000s)

2008 Regional Transportation Improvement Program

Amendment No. 11

MPO ID:TITLE:

SAN56Signal and Communication Equipment (Bus

and Fixed Guideway)

San Diego Association of Governments

Capacity Status: NCI 08-11RTIP #:

Mass Transit - Construction or renovation of

power, signal, and communications systems

Exempt Category:

Countywide - provide for signal and communication for bus and fixed guideway operations including, but

not limited to, signal cases, train location, train control, and radios

DESCRIPTION:

CHANGE REASON: Carry over from 06-16

EST TOTAL COST: $750

CONRWPEPRIORTOTAL 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5307 $524 $204 $160 $160 $524

FTA 5309 (FG) $76 $76 $76

Local Funds $150 $70 $40 $40 $150

TOTAL $750 $350 $200 $200 $750

MPO ID:TITLE:

SAN57Fixed Guideway Transitways/Lines 122-00

Capacity Status: NCI 08-11RTIP #:

Mass Transit - Track rehabilitation in existing

right of way

Exempt Category:

MTS service area - provide for work on transitways and transit lines including but not limited to, drainage

work, tie replacement, grade crossing improvements, switches, rail straightening and grinding

DESCRIPTION:

CHANGE REASON: Reduce funding

EST TOTAL COST: $1,713

CONRWPEPRIORTOTAL 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5307 $1,070 $350 $720 $1,070

FTA 5309 (FG) $300 $100 $100 $100 $300

Local Funds $343 $113 $180 $25 $25 $343

TOTAL $1,713 $563 $900 $125 $125 $1,713

PE RW CONPRIORTOTAL

PROJECT PRIOR TO AMENDMENT

08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5307 $1,750 $350 $350 $350 $350 $350 $1,750

FTA 5309 (FG) $500 $100 $100 $100 $100 $100 $500

Local Funds $565 $113 $113 $113 $113 $113 $565

$2,815 $563 $563 $563 $563 $563 $2,815 TOTAL

8Page Tuesday, April 7, 2009

26

San Diego Region (in $000s)

2008 Regional Transportation Improvement Program

Amendment No. 11

MPO ID:TITLE:

SAN63Bus and Fixed Guideway Stations Stops and

Terminals 113-00 / 123-00

San Diego Association of Governments

Capacity Status: NCI 08-11RTIP #:

Mass Transit - Construction of small passenger

shelters and information kiosks

Exempt Category:

MTS service area - provide for station stops and terminals including construction, rehabilitation,

equipment, and support items (station platform)

DESCRIPTION:

CHANGE REASON: Reduce funding

SANDAG ID: 1095400 EST TOTAL COST: $516

CONRWPEPRIORTOTAL 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5307 $333 $333 $333

FTA 5309 (FG) $80 $80 $80

Local Funds $103 $20 $83 $103

TOTAL $516 $100 $416 $516

PE RW CONPRIORTOTAL

PROJECT PRIOR TO AMENDMENT

08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5309 (FG) $80 $80 $80

Local Funds $20 $20 $20

TransNet - Transit $1,399 $1,399 $1,399

$1,499 $100 $1,399 $1,499 TOTAL

MPO ID:TITLE:

SAN67Blue Line Vehicles

Capacity Status: NCI 08-11RTIP #:

Mass Transit - Purchase new buses and rail cars

to replace existing vehicles or minor expansions

of fleet

Exempt Category:

Along Blue Line service - low-floor vehicle procurement and existing light rail vehicle rehabilitation for the

San Diego Trolley system sufficient to run low floor service on the Blue Line

DESCRIPTION:

CHANGE REASON: Increase funding

SANDAG ID: 1210002 EST TOTAL COST: $240,168

CONRWPEPRIORTOTAL 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

Local Funds $75,039 $8 $760 $7,273 $30,013 $36,985 $2,464 $72,575

TransNet - MC $75,557 $518 $8 $760 $7,273 $30,013 $36,985 $2,982 $72,575

TOTAL $150,596 $518 $16 $1,520 $14,546 $60,026 $73,970 $5,446 $145,150

Project completion outside of programming cycle*

PE RW CONPRIORTOTAL

PROJECT PRIOR TO AMENDMENT

08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

Local Funds $73,106 $43 $1,024 $1,472 $6,078 $29,110 $35,379 $1,067 $72,039

TransNet - MC $73,576 $513 $1,024 $1,472 $6,078 $29,110 $35,379 $1,537 $72,039

$146,682 $556 $2,048 $2,944 $12,156 $58,220 $70,758 $2,604 $144,078 TOTAL

9Page Tuesday, April 7, 2009

27

San Diego Region (in $000s)

2008 Regional Transportation Improvement Program

Amendment No. 11

MPO ID:TITLE:

SAN76Orange Line Upgrade

San Diego Association of Governments

Capacity Status: NCI 08-11RTIP #:

Mass Transit - Track rehabilitation in existing

right of way

Exempt Category:

Along Orange Line Trolley - design and construction for Trolley wayside and trackway modifications

including stations to support new low-floor vehicle operations

DESCRIPTION:

CHANGE REASON: Reduce funding

SANDAG ID: 1220001 EST TOTAL COST: $57,756

CONRWPEPRIORTOTAL 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

Local Funds $10,179 $23 $352 $767 $5,886 $3,151 $4,233 $5,946

TransNet - MC $16,747 $23 $352 $767 $5,886 $9,719 $4,233 $12,514

TOTAL $26,926 $46 $704 $1,534 $11,772 $12,870 $8,466 $18,460

Project completion outside of programming cycle*

PE RW CONPRIORTOTAL

PROJECT PRIOR TO AMENDMENT

08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

TransNet - MC $37,033 $66 $1,132 $3,846 $8,921 $12,112 $10,956 $8,562 $28,471

$37,033 $66 $1,132 $3,846 $8,921 $12,112 $10,956 $8,562 $28,471 TOTAL

MPO ID:TITLE:

SAN78Mid-City Rapid Bus

Capacity Status: CI 08-11RTIP #:

From downtown San Diego to San Diego State University via Park and El Cajon Boulevards - development

of a Rapid Bus route

DESCRIPTION:

SANDAG ID: 1240001 EST TOTAL COST: $44,526

CONRWPEPRIORTOTAL 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5307 $320 $320 $320

FTA 5309 (NS) $20,119 $619 $19,500 $619 $19,500

TransNet - MC $21,578 $4,875 $428 $16,275 $686 $20,892

TransNet - Transit $309 $309 $309

TOTAL $42,326 $1,248 $24,375 $428 $16,275 $1,934 $40,392

Total cost assumes receipt of New Starts funding*

PE RW CONPRIORTOTAL

PROJECT PRIOR TO AMENDMENT

08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5307 $320 $320 $320

FTA 5309 (NS) $252 $252 $252

TransNet - MC $21,995 $51 $1,560 $3,381 $17,003 $1,611 $20,384

TransNet - Transit $309 $309 $309

$22,876 $932 $1,560 $3,381 $17,003 $2,492 $20,384 TOTAL

10Page Tuesday, April 7, 2009

28

San Diego Region (in $000s)

2008 Regional Transportation Improvement Program

Amendment No. 11

MPO ID:TITLE:

MTS23ATransNet Expanded Service Subsidy

San Diego Metropolitan Transit System

Capacity Status: NCI 08-11RTIP #:Mass Transit - Transit operating assistanceExempt Category:

MTS service area - operating support for existing service including rural bus service linking communities in

the rural portions of San Diego county to shopping and medical centers in the San Diego urban areas.

Service is regularly scheduled and includes published timetables and maps.

DESCRIPTION:

CHANGE REASON: Increase funding

EST TOTAL COST: $109,767

CONRWPEPRIORTOTAL 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5311 $500 $500 $500

TransNet - TSI $109,267 $20,782 $21,307 $21,843 $22,389 $22,946 $109,267

TOTAL $109,767 $21,282 $21,307 $21,843 $22,389 $22,946 $109,767

PE RW CONPRIORTOTAL

PROJECT PRIOR TO AMENDMENT

08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5311 $243 $243 $243

TransNet - TSI $109,267 $20,782 $21,307 $21,843 $22,389 $22,946 $109,267

$109,510 $21,025 $21,307 $21,843 $22,389 $22,946 $109,510 TOTAL

MPO ID:TITLE:

MTS28Bus & Rail Rolling Stock purchases

Capacity Status: NCI 08-11RTIP #:

Mass Transit - Purchase new buses and rail cars

to replace existing vehicles or minor expansions

of fleet

Exempt Category:

MTS service area - The purchase replacement buses (9 mid-size CNG, 141 ADA small, 11 medium, 130

40-foot CNG, 26 high capacity); procurement of LRV tires, rehabilitation, or retrofit of LRV mechanical and

LRV electrical components

DESCRIPTION:

CHANGE REASON: Increase funding

EST TOTAL COST: $183,963

CONRWPEPRIORTOTAL 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5307 $113,869 $30,792 $4,040 $17,291 $19,399 $20,034 $22,313 $113,869

FTA 5307_TR $63 $63 $63

FTA 5309 (Bus) $475 $475 $475

FTA 5309 (FG) $4,133 $4,133 $4,133

FTA Funds - AR-5311 $402 $402 $402

State Bond - STA $43,442 $27,788 $15,654 $43,442

TDA $21,579 $576 $1,244 $4,323 $4,850 $5,008 $5,578 $21,579

TOTAL $183,963 $63,289 $21,878 $21,614 $24,249 $25,042 $27,891 $183,963

PE RW CONPRIORTOTAL

PROJECT PRIOR TO AMENDMENT

08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5307 $91,556 $30,792 $4,040 $17,291 $19,399 $20,034 $91,556

FTA 5307_TR $63 $63 $63

FTA 5309 (Bus) $475 $475 $475

FTA 5309 (FG) $5,377 $4,133 $1,244 $5,377

FTA Funds - AR-5311 $402 $402 $402

State Bond - STA $43,442 $27,788 $15,654 $43,442

TDA $14,757 $576 $4,323 $4,850 $5,008 $14,757

$156,072 $63,289 $21,878 $21,614 $24,249 $25,042 $156,072 TOTAL

11Page Tuesday, April 7, 2009

29

San Diego Region (in $000s)

2008 Regional Transportation Improvement Program

Amendment No. 11

MPO ID:TITLE:

MTS29Bus and Fixed Guideways Station Stops and

Terminals

San Diego Metropolitan Transit System

Capacity Status: NCI 08-11RTIP #:

Mass Transit - Reconstruction or renovation of

transit structures

Exempt Category:

Blue Line station in Chula Vista - ADA Bus stop improvement at the transit station; security

improvements to rail and bus stations and vehicles

DESCRIPTION:

CHANGE REASON: Reduce funding

EST TOTAL COST: $1,680

CONRWPEPRIORTOTAL 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5309 (FG) $144 $144 $144

Local Funds $36 $36 $36

State Bond - STA $1,500 $1,500 $1,500

TOTAL $1,680 $180 $1,500 $1,680

PE RW CONPRIORTOTAL

PROJECT PRIOR TO AMENDMENT

08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5307 $400 $100 $100 $100 $100 $400

FTA 5309 (FG) $1,749 $144 $405 $400 $400 $400 $1,749

Local Funds $411 $36 $125 $125 $125 $411

TDA $125 $125 $125

$2,685 $180 $630 $625 $625 $625 $2,685 TOTAL

12Page Tuesday, April 7, 2009

30

San Diego Region (in $000s)

2008 Regional Transportation Improvement Program

Amendment No. 11

MPO ID:TITLE:

MTS30Bus/Rail Support Equipment and Facilities

San Diego Metropolitan Transit System

Capacity Status: NCI 08-11RTIP #:

Mass Transit - Purchase of office, shop and

operating equipment for existing facilities

Exempt Category:

MTS facilities - bus video cameras, bus/rail facility and station security improvements, office/computer

equipment, rail traction motors, rail rehabilitation, other misc capital equipment for transit maintenance;

design, procure, and install fare collection system for all operators in the County; and expand facilities

DESCRIPTION:

CHANGE REASON: Increase funding

EST TOTAL COST: $56,452

CONRWPEPRIORTOTAL 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5307 $27,462 $11,604 $14,258 $400 $400 $400 $400 $27,462

FTA 5309 (Bus) $778 $778 $778

FTA 5309 (FG) $2,810 $2,810 $2,810

FTA 5311 $39 $39 $39

FTA 5316 - JARC $63 $63 $63

Local Funds $5,267 $5,116 $151 $5,267

STA $3,074 $3,074 $3,074

State Bond - STA $5,479 $5,479 $5,479

TDA $4,256 $699 $3,157 $100 $100 $100 $100 $4,256

TransNet - Transit $7,224 $7,224 $7,224

TOTAL $56,452 $31,305 $17,668 $5,979 $500 $500 $500 $56,452

PE RW CONPRIORTOTAL

PROJECT PRIOR TO AMENDMENT

08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5307 $27,604 $11,604 $4,000 $4,000 $4,000 $4,000 $27,604

FTA 5309 (Bus) $1,179 $1,179 $1,179

FTA 5309 (FG) $7,690 $2,810 $590 $1,086 $1,602 $1,602 $7,690

Local Funds $5,116 $5,116 $5,116

STA $3,074 $3,074 $3,074

TDA $5,919 $699 $1,148 $1,272 $1,400 $1,400 $5,919

TransNet - Transit $7,224 $7,224 $7,224

Transit Security (TSGP) $1,200 $1,200 $1,200

$59,006 $31,706 $6,938 $6,358 $7,002 $7,002 $59,006 TOTAL

13Page Tuesday, April 7, 2009

31

San Diego Region (in $000s)

2008 Regional Transportation Improvement Program

Amendment No. 11

MPO ID:TITLE:

MTS31Rail Electrification and Power

San Diego Metropolitan Transit System

Capacity Status: NCI 08-11RTIP #:

Mass Transit - Track rehabilitation in existing

right of way

Exempt Category:

Along Blue Line ROW - Blue Line tie replacement, rail profile grindingDESCRIPTION:

CHANGE REASON: Reduce funding

EST TOTAL COST: $819

CONRWPEPRIORTOTAL 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5307 $280 $280 $280

STA $469 $469 $469

TDA $70 $70 $70

TOTAL $819 $469 $350 $819

PE RW CONPRIORTOTAL

PROJECT PRIOR TO AMENDMENT

08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5309 (FG) $1,920 $480 $480 $480 $480 $1,920

STA $469 $469 $469

TDA $480 $120 $120 $120 $120 $480

$2,869 $469 $600 $600 $600 $600 $2,869 TOTAL

MPO ID:TITLE:

MTS32ABus & Rail Preventive Maintenance

Capacity Status: NCI 08-11RTIP #:Mass Transit - Transit operating assistanceExempt Category:

MTS service area - maintenance of federally funded equipment, rolling stock and facilities for bus and rail

systems

DESCRIPTION:

CHANGE REASON: Increase funding

EST TOTAL COST: $264,340

CONRWPEPRIORTOTAL 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5307 $122,670 $29,274 $16,819 $19,089 $18,524 $19,787 $19,177 $122,670

FTA 5309 (FG) $87,844 $16,400 $15,221 $14,111 $14,676 $13,413 $14,023 $87,844

Local Funds $6,548 $6,548 $6,548

TDA $47,278 $5,778 $8,300 $8,300 $8,300 $8,300 $8,300 $47,278

TOTAL $264,340 $58,000 $40,340 $41,500 $41,500 $41,500 $41,500 $264,340

PE RW CONPRIORTOTAL

PROJECT PRIOR TO AMENDMENT

08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5307 $89,274 $29,274 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $89,274

FTA 5309 (FG) $49,200 $16,400 $8,200 $8,200 $8,200 $8,200 $49,200

Local Funds $6,548 $6,548 $6,548

TDA $28,978 $5,778 $5,800 $5,800 $5,800 $5,800 $28,978

$174,000 $58,000 $29,000 $29,000 $29,000 $29,000 $174,000 TOTAL

14Page Tuesday, April 7, 2009

32

San Diego Region (in $000s)

2008 Regional Transportation Improvement Program

Amendment No. 11

MPO ID:TITLE:

MTS34Bus Signal and Communications Equipments

San Diego Metropolitan Transit System

Capacity Status: NCI 08-11RTIP #:

Mass Transit - Reconstruction or renovation of

transit structures

Exempt Category:DELAYED

MTS service area - Rehabilitation of light rail vehicles (LRV), electronic control circuit (U2), LRV HVAC

retrofit, rehabilitate traction motor phase II and pilot motor control unit drive, LRV tires; design and

implement new ITS to replace failing radio/CAD and scheduling system

DESCRIPTION:

CHANGE REASON: Delay project

EST TOTAL COST: $4,104

CONRWPEPRIORTOTAL 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5307 $3,115 $3,115 $3,115

FTA 5309 (FG) $120 $120 $120

Local Funds $765 $765 $765

STA $60 $60 $60

TDA $44 $44 $44

TOTAL $4,104 $4,104 $4,104

PE RW CONPRIORTOTAL

PROJECT PRIOR TO AMENDMENT

08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5307 $7,915 $3,115 $1,200 $1,200 $1,200 $1,200 $7,915

FTA 5309 (FG) $120 $120 $120

Local Funds $765 $765 $765

STA $60 $60 $60

TDA $1,244 $44 $300 $300 $300 $300 $1,244

$10,104 $4,104 $1,500 $1,500 $1,500 $1,500 $10,104 TOTAL

MPO ID:TITLE:

MTS35Fixed Guideway Transitways/Lines

Capacity Status: NCI 08-11RTIP #:

Mass Transit - Track rehabilitation in existing

right of way

Exempt Category:

MTS service area - rail infrastructure including Blue Line tie replacement, Taylor Street grade crossing

improvements, switch indicator standardization and rail file grinding

DESCRIPTION:

CHANGE REASON: Increase funding

EST TOTAL COST: $20,696

CONRWPEPRIORTOTAL 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5307 $3,060 $1,044 $504 $504 $504 $504 $3,060

FTA 5309 (FG) $946 $946 $946

Local Funds $2,921 $121 $2,800 $2,921

STA $34 $34 $34

TDA $13,735 $116 $13,115 $126 $126 $126 $126 $13,735

TOTAL $20,696 $1,217 $16,959 $630 $630 $630 $630 $20,696

PE RW CONPRIORTOTAL

PROJECT PRIOR TO AMENDMENT

08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5309 (FG) $2,546 $946 $400 $400 $400 $400 $2,546

Local Funds $121 $121 $121

STA $34 $34 $34

TDA $516 $116 $100 $100 $100 $100 $516

$3,217 $1,217 $500 $500 $500 $500 $3,217 TOTAL

15Page Tuesday, April 7, 2009

33

San Diego Region (in $000s)

2008 Regional Transportation Improvement Program

Amendment No. 11

MPO ID:TITLE:

MTS42Job Access Reverse Commute funded Transit

Operating Assistance

San Diego Metropolitan Transit System

Capacity Status: NCI 08-11RTIP #:Mass Transit - Transit operating assistanceExempt Category:

Route 905 (San Ysidro to Otay Mesa), Route 960 (UTC-Euclid Stattion) and Route 30 (Weekend Service)

- transit operating assistance to fund an unmet need identified in previous Welfare to Work Transit Study

and SD Regional Welfare to work transportation plan to mitigate transit service deficiencies; new service

will be added for these routes including AM peak northbound trip for Route 960 and expanding the current

service in the other two routes; purchase HASTOPS - a module that works with HASTUS software that

allows automatic production of bus stop posters and distribute them in a more efficient and effective

manner

DESCRIPTION:

CHANGE REASON: Increase funding

EST TOTAL COST: $7,249

CONRWPEPRIORTOTAL 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5316 - JARC $3,648 $2,290 $1,358 $3,648

Local Funds $3,447 $2,290 $1,157 $3,447

TDA $154 $154 $154

TOTAL $7,249 $4,580 $2,669 $7,249

PE RW CONPRIORTOTAL

PROJECT PRIOR TO AMENDMENT

08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5316 - JARC $3,494 $2,290 $1,204 $3,494

Local Funds $3,447 $2,290 $1,157 $3,447

$6,941 $4,580 $2,361 $6,941 TOTAL

16Page Tuesday, April 7, 2009

34

San Diego Region (in $000s)

2008 Regional Transportation Improvement Program

Amendment No. 11

MPO ID:TITLE:

V09Bridge & Infrastructure Program.

Various Agencies

Capacity Status: NCI 08-11RTIP #:Safety - Railroad/highway crossingExempt Category:

Along coastal ROW from Orange County Line to downtown station at Santa Fe Depot and along inland

ROW from Oceanside Transit Center (Oceanside, CA) to Escondido Transit Center (Escondido, CA). -

bridges & other infrastructure improvements along rail ROW; FTA ARRA funds will be used by SANDAG

to replace the Trestle Bridge 207.6, all other projects will be implemented by NCTD

DESCRIPTION:

CHANGE REASON: Increase funding

EST TOTAL COST: $51,285

CONRWPEPRIORTOTAL 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5307 $10,040 $2,840 $800 $3,200 $1,400 $1,800 $640 $9,400

FTA 5309 (FG) $21,367 $16,007 $560 $1,800 $3,000 $3,120 $18,247

FTA Funds - AR-5307 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000

Local Funds $7,878 $4,738 $140 $200 $800 $800 $1,200 $940 $6,938

TOTAL $51,285 $23,585 $12,700 $1,000 $4,000 $4,000 $6,000 $4,700 $46,585

PE RW CONPRIORTOTAL

PROJECT PRIOR TO AMENDMENT

08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

FTA 5307 $8,240 $2,840 $800 $3,200 $1,400 $640 $7,600

FTA 5309 (FG) $18,367 $16,007 $560 $1,800 $3,120 $15,247

FTA Funds - AR-5307 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000

Local Funds $6,678 $4,738 $140 $200 $800 $800 $940 $5,738

$45,285 $23,585 $12,700 $1,000 $4,000 $4,000 $4,700 $40,585 TOTAL

17Page Tuesday, April 7, 2009

35

RTIPFunding Acronym

AC = Advanced Construction

ARRA = American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (Federal Stimulus Program)

BIA = Bureau of Indian Affairs

BIP = Border Infrastructure Program (Federal under SAFETEA-LU)

BTA = Bicycle Transportation Account (State)

CBI = Corridors and Borders Infrastructure Program (Federal under TEA-21)

CMAQ = Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (Federal formula)

CMIA = Corrdior Mobility Improvement Account (Prop. 1B state bond)

DEMO = High Priority Demonstration Program under TEA-21 (Federal discretionary)

DEMO-Sec 115 = High Priority Demonstration Program under FY 2004 Appropriations

DEMO-Sec 117/STP =Surface Transportation Program under FHWA Administrative Program (congressionally directed appropriations)

FSP = Freeway Service Patrol (State legislation)

HBRR = Highway Bridge Repair and Rehabilitation under TEA-21 (Federal)

HBP = Highway Bridge Program under SAFETEA-LU (Federal)

HES = Hazard Elimination System (Federal administered by Caltrans)

HPP = High Priority Demonstration Program under SAFETEA-LU (Federal discretionary)

HRCSA = Highway-Railroad Crossing Safety Account (Prop. 1B state bond)

HSIP = Highway Safety Improvement Program (State administered by Caltrans)

IBRC = Innovative Bridge Research & Construction (Federal)

IM = Interstate Maintenance Discretionary (Federal)

IRR = Indian Reservation Roads program (Federal)

ITS = Intelligent Transportation System (Federal)

NCPD = National Corridor Planning & Development (Federal - same as CBI)

NHS = National Highway System

PLH = Public Lands Highway (Federal)

PTA = Public Transportation Account (State)

PTMISE = Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement, and Service Enhancement (Prop. 1B state bond)

RSTP = Regional Surface Transportation Program (Federal)

RTP = Recreational Trails Program (Federal)

SHOPP = State Highway Operation & Protection Program (for Caltrans use only)

SRTS = Safe Routes to School (Federal program administered by Caltrans)

STIP-IIP = State Transportation Improvement Program - Interregional Program (State)

STIP-RIP = State Transportation Improvement Program - Regional Improvement Program (State)

TCIF = Trade Corridor Improvement Fund (Prop. 1B state bond)

TCRP = Traffic Congestion Relief Program (State)

TCSP = Transportation & Community & System Preservation (Federal)

TSGP = Transit Security Grant Program (Prop. 1B state bond)

TLSP = Traffic Light Synchronization Program (Prop. 1B state bond)

TSM = Transportation Systems Management (State)

TDA = Transportation Development Act (State)

TDA-B = Transportation Development Act-Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities (State)

TEA/TE = Transportation Enhancement Activities Program (Federal)

36

RTIPFunding Acronym

TransNet -ADA = Prop. A Local Transportation Sales Tax - compliance with federal Americans with Disabilities Act (Local)

TransNet -B = Prop. A Local Transportation Sales Tax - Bike (Local)

TransNet -BNSP = Prop. A Local Transportation Sales Tax extension - Bicycle and Neighborhood Safety Program (Local)

TransNet -Border = Prop. A Local Transportation Sales Tax extension - Border, part of Major Corridor (Local)

TransNet -BRT/Ops = Prop. A Local Transportation Sales Tax extension- Bus Rapid Transit/New Service (Local)

TransNet -H = Prop. A Local Transportation Sales Tax - Highway (Local)

TransNet-78 = Prop. A Local Transportation Sales Tax - SR 78 (Local)

TransNet -L = Prop. A Local Transportation Sales Tax - Local Streets & Roads (Local)

TransNet -T = Prop. A Local Transportation Sales Tax - Transit (Local)

TransNet -MC = Prop. A Extension Local Transportation Sales Tax extension - Major Corridors (Local)

TransNet -REMP = Prop. A Extension Local Transportation Sales Tax extension - Regional Environmental Mitigation (Local)

TransNet -S&D = Prop. A Local Transportation Sales Tax - Senior/Disabled (Local)

TransNet -SS = Prop A Extension Local Transportation Sales Tax extension - Senior Services (Local)

TransNet-TSI = Prop. A Extension Local Transportation Sales Tax extension - Transit System Improvements (Local)

TransNet -LSI = Prop. A Extension Local Transportation Sales Tax extension - Local System Improvements (Local)

Section 5307 = Federal Transit Administration Urbanized Area Formula Program

Section 5309 (Bus) = Federal Transit Administration Discretionary Program

Section 5309 (NS) = Federal Transit Administration Discretionary - New Starts Program (Discretionary)

Section 5309 (FG) = Federal Transit Administration Fixed Guideway Modernization (Formula program)

Section 5311 = Federal Transit Administration Rural Program (Formula and Discretionary)

Section 5310 = Federal Transit Administration Elderly & Disabled Program (Discretionary allocated by CTC)

Section 5316 (JARC) = Federal Transit Administration Jobs Access Reverse Commute (Discretionary)

Section 5317 (NF) = Federal Transit Administration New Freedom

Updated 3/11/09

37

CURRENTPrevious Current Previous Current Previous Current Previous Current TOTAL

Sales Tax $578,953 $593,944 $427,397 $424,126 $412,104 $405,951 $434,239 $429,594 $1,853,615 -- City $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 -- County $569,155 $565,574 $413,070 $408,864 $396,993 $390,034 $418,712 $413,387 $1,777,859 -- Other (Transportation Development Act) $9,798 $28,370 $14,327 $15,262 $15,111 $15,917 $15,527 $16,207 $75,756 Other Local Funds $173,215 $195,973 $292,144 $314,796 $219,730 $246,603 $200,615 $233,464 $990,836 -- City General Funds $171,290 $194,048 $291,613 $314,265 $218,656 $245,529 $200,515 $233,364 $987,206 -- Street Taxes and Developer Fees $1,925 $1,925 $531 $531 $1,074 $1,074 $100 $100 $3,630 -- Other (registration fees (AB434) and Prop 42) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Local Total $752,168 $789,917 $719,541 $738,922 $631,834 $652,554 $634,854 $663,058 $2,844,451State Highway Operations and Protection Program (SHOPP) $48,295 $48,295 $55,789 $55,789 $124,490 $124,490 $92,868 $92,868 $321,442

SHOPP (Including Augmentation) $48,295 $48,295 $30,593 $30,593 $124,490 $124,490 $92,868 $92,868 $296,246SHOPP Prior $0 $0 $25,196 $25,196 $0 $0 $0 $0 $25,196

State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) $13,783 $13,783 $7,323 $7,323 $58,326 $58,326 $35,247 $35,247 $114,679STIP (Including Augmentation) $8,783 $8,783 $7,323 $7,323 $58,326 $58,326 $35,247 $35,247 $109,679STIP Prior $5,000 $5,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,000Proposition 1B $30,560 $30,560 $60,115 $60,115 $12,860 $12,860 $99,877 $99,877 $203,412GARVEE Bonds $21,835 $21,835 $21,835 $21,835 $21,835 $21,835 $21,835 $21,835 $87,340Traffic Congestion Relief Program $8,850 $8,850 $10,002 $10,002 $6,000 $6,000 $0 $0 $24,852State Transit Assistance (STA) (e.g., population/revenue based, Prop 42)

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Other (FSP, Prop 116, R&I) $3,400 $3,400 $2,895 $2,895 $2,895 $2,895 $2,895 $2,895 $12,085State Total $126,723 $126,723 $157,959 $157,959 $226,406 $226,406 $252,722 $252,722 $763,810

Bus and Bus Related Grants (5309c) $1,715 $2,039 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,039Clean Fuel Formula Program (5308) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Elderly & Persons with Disabilities Formula Program (5310) $874 $874 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $874Fixed Guideway Modernization (5309a) $19,383 $22,929 $20,546 $20,546 $21,368 $21,368 $22,223 $22,223 $87,066Intercity Bus (5311f) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Job Access and Reverse Commute Program (5316) $2,065 $2,065 $1,687 $1,687 $1,754 $1,754 $1,825 $1,825 $7,331New and Small Starts (Capital Investment Grants) (5309b) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0New Freedom (SAFETEA-LU) $1,708 $1,708 $827 $827 $868 $868 $865 $865 $4,268Nonurbanized Area Formula Program (5311) $626 $1,257 $651 $651 $677 $677 $704 $704 $3,289Public Transportation on Indian Reservation (5311c) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Transit in the Parks (5320) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Urbanized Area Formula Program (5307) $56,511 $60,655 $59,902 $59,902 $62,298 $62,298 $64,790 $64,790 $247,645CMAQ/5307 Transfer $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0ARRA - FTA 5307 $80,799 $80,799 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $80,799ARRA - FTA 5309 $2,873 $2,873 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,873ARRA - FTA 5311 $980 $980 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $980Other (TSGP) $2,111 $911 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $911

Federal Transit Total $169,645 $177,090 $83,613 $83,613 $86,965 $86,965 $90,407 $90,407 $438,075Federal Highway Non-Discretionary

Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) $31,352 $31,352 $30,702 $30,702 $31,254 $31,254 $31,817 $31,817 $125,125Surface Transportation Program (Regional) $33,765 $33,765 $32,147 $32,147 $32,726 $32,726 $33,316 $33,316 $131,954Highway Bridge Program (HBP) $0 $0 $10,060 $10,060 $27 $27 $20,003 $20,003 $30,090Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) $1,807 $1,807 $943 $943 $3,137 $3,137 $0 $0 $5,887Railway (Section 130) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Safe Routes to School (SRTS) (SAFETEA-LU) $2,057 $2,057 $1,515 $1,515 $2,354 $2,354 $522 $522 $6,448Safe Routes to School (SR2S) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Transportation Improvements (TI) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Federal Lands Highway $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0ARRA - SHOPP $16,800 $16,800 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $16,800ARRA - STIP $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0ARRA - Highway Maintenance (HM) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0ARRA - TE $4,002 $4,002 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,002ARRA - RSTP $127,430 $127,430 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $127,430ARRA - Federal Lands Highway $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Other (RITA) $200 $200 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $200

Subtotal $217,413 $217,413 $75,367 $75,367 $69,498 $69,498 $85,658 $85,658 $447,936 Federal Highway Discretionary Programs

Bridge Discretionary Program $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Corridor Infrastructure Improvement Program (SAFETEA-LU Sec. 1302)

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Coordinated Border Infrastructure (SAFETEA-LU Sec.1303) $13,901 $13,901 $0 $0 $600 $600 $0 $0 $14,501Ferry Boat Discretionary $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0High Priority Projects (HPP) $35,376 $35,376 $5,950 $5,950 $9,240 $9,240 $0 $0 $50,566High Risk Rural Road (HRRR) $0 $0 $130 $130 $0 $0 $0 $0 $130National Scenic Byways Program $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Projects of National/Regional Significance (SAFETEA-LU Sec. 1301)

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Public Lands Highway Discretionary $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Recreational Trails $175 $175 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $175Economic Stimulus (ECREC) $490 $490 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $490Transportation and Community and System Preservation Program $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Other (ITS, IM, Sec 112/117, value pricing, STP) $10,264 $10,264 $429 $429 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,693

Subtotal $60,206 $60,206 $6,509 $6,509 $9,840 $9,840 $0 $0 $76,555 Federal Highway Total $277,619 $277,619 $81,876 $81,876 $79,338 $79,338 $85,658 $85,658 $524,491FEDERAL TOTAL $447,264 $454,709 $165,489 $165,489 $166,303 $166,303 $176,065 $176,065 $962,566

$1,326,155 $1,371,349 $1,042,989 $1,062,370 $1,024,543 $1,045,263 $1,063,641 $1,091,845 $4,570,827

Table 2a2008 Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP)

San Diego Region - Amendment No. 11 (in $000s)

2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12REVENUE SOURCES

FED

ERA

L H

IGH

WA

Y

REVENUE TOTAL

LOC

AL

STA

TEFE

DER

AL

TRA

NSI

T

38

Attachment 11

CURRENTPrevious Current Previous Current Previous Current Previous Current TOTAL

Local Total $752,168 $789,917 $719,541 $738,922 $533,821 $553,977 $542,726 $570,140 $2,652,956

State Highway Operations and Protection Program (SHOPP) $48,295 $48,295 $55,789 $55,789 $124,490 $124,490 $92,868 $92,868 $321,442SHOPP (Including Augmentation) $48,295 $48,295 $30,593 $30,593 $124,490 $124,490 $92,868 $92,868 $296,246SHOPP Prior $0 $0 $25,196 $25,196 $0 $0 $0 $0 $25,196

State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) $13,783 $13,783 $7,323 $7,323 $58,326 $58,326 $35,247 $35,247 $114,679STIP (Including Augmentation) $8,783 $8,783 $7,323 $7,323 $58,326 $58,326 $35,247 $35,247 $109,679STIP Prior $5,000 $5,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,000Proposition 1B $30,560 $30,560 $60,115 $60,115 $12,860 $12,860 $99,877 $99,877 $203,412GARVEE Bonds $21,835 $21,835 $21,835 $21,835 $21,835 $21,835 $21,835 $21,835 $87,340Traffic Congestion Relief Program $8,850 $8,850 $10,002 $10,002 $6,000 $6,000 $0 $0 $24,852State Transit Assistance (STA) (e.g., population/revenue based, Prop 42)

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Other (FSP, Prop 116, R&I) $3,400 $3,400 $2,895 $2,895 $2,895 $2,895 $2,895 $2,895 $12,085State Total $126,723 $126,723 $157,959 $157,959 $226,406 $226,406 $252,722 $252,722 $763,810

Bus and Bus Related Grants (5309c) $1,715 $2,039 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,039Clean Fuel Formula Program (5308) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Elderly & Persons with Disabilities Formula Program (5310) $874 $874 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $874Fixed Guideway Modernization (5309a) $19,079 $22,881 $16,866 $20,111 $17,482 $20,976 $19,482 $21,813 $85,781Intercity Bus (5311f) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Job Access and Reverse Commute Program (5316) $1,529 $1,581 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,581New and Small Starts (Capital Investment Grants) (5309b) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0New Freedom (SAFETEA-LU) $1,199 $1,635 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,635Nonurbanized Area Formula Program (5311) $592 $1,257 $388 $388 $407 $407 $428 $428 $2,480Public Transportation on Indian Reservation (5311c) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Transit in the Parks (5320) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Urbanized Area Formula Program (5307) $45,221 $58,969 $59,574 $59,882 $62,048 $61,735 $62,472 $63,393 $243,979CMAQ/5307 Transfer $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0ARRA - FTA 5307 $80,799 $80,799 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $80,799ARRA - FTA 5309 $2,873 $2,873 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,873ARRA - FTA 5311 $980 $980 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $980Other (TSGP) $2,111 $911 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $911

Federal Transit Total $156,972 $174,799 $76,828 $80,381 $79,937 $83,118 $82,382 $85,634 $423,932Federal Highway Non-Discretionary

Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) $31,352 $31,352 $30,702 $30,702 $31,254 $31,254 $6,000 $6,000 $99,308Surface Transportation Program (Regional) $33,765 $33,765 $31,697 $31,697 $450 $450 $3,335 $3,335 $69,247Highway Bridge Program (HBP) $0 $0 $10,060 $10,060 $27 $27 $20,003 $20,003 $30,090Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) $1,807 $1,807 $943 $943 $3,137 $3,137 $0 $0 $5,887Railway (Section 130) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Safe Routes to School (SRTS) (SAFETEA-LU) $2,057 $2,057 $1,515 $1,515 $2,354 $2,354 $522 $522 $6,448Safe Routes to School (SR2S) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Transportation Improvements (TI) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Federal Lands Highway $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0ARRA - SHOPP $13,100 $13,100 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $13,100ARRA - STIP $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0ARRA - Highway Maintenance (HM) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0ARRA - TE $4,002 $4,002 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,002ARRA - RSTP $127,430 $127,430 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $127,430ARRA - Federal Lands Highway $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Other (RITA) $200 $200 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $200

Subtotal $213,713 $213,713 $74,917 $74,917 $37,222 $37,222 $29,860 $29,860 $355,712 Federal Highway Discretionary Programs

Bridge Discretionary Program $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Corridor Infrastructure Improvement Program (SAFETEA-LU Sec. 1302)

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Coordinated Border Infrastructure (SAFETEA-LU Sec.1303) $13,901 $13,901 $0 $0 $600 $600 $0 $0 $14,501Ferry Boat Discretionary $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0High Priority Projects (HPP) $35,376 $35,376 $5,950 $5,950 $9,240 $9,240 $0 $0 $50,566High Risk Rural Road (HRRR) $0 $0 $130 $130 $0 $0 $0 $0 $130National Scenic Byways Program $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Projects of National/Regional Significance (SAFETEA-LU Sec. 1301) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Public Lands Highway Discretionary $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Recreational Trails $175 $175 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $175Economic Stimulus (ECREC) $490 $490 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $490Transportation and Community and System Preservation Program $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Other (ITS, IM, Sec 112/117, value pricing, STP) $10,264 $10,264 $429 $429 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,693

Subtotal $60,206 $60,206 $6,509 $6,509 $9,840 $9,840 $0 $0 $76,555 Federal Highway Total $273,919 $273,919 $81,426 $81,426 $47,062 $47,062 $29,860 $29,860 $432,267FEDERAL TOTAL $430,892 $448,719 $158,254 $161,807 $126,999 $130,180 $112,242 $115,494 $856,200

$1,309,783 $1,365,359 $1,035,754 $1,058,688 $887,226 $910,563 $907,690 $938,356 $4,272,966

Table 2b2008 Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP)

San Diego Region - Amendment No. 11 (in $000s)

2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12PROGRAMMED

FED

ERA

L H

IGH

WA

Y

PROGRAMMED TOTAL

LOC

AL

STA

TEFE

DER

AL

TRA

NSI

T

39

CURRENTPrevious Current Previous Current Previous Current Previous Current TOTAL

Local Total $0 $0 $0 $0 $98,013 $98,577 $92,128 $92,918 $191,495

State Highway Operations and Protection Program (SHOPP) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0SHOPP (Including Augmentation) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0SHOPP Prior $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0STIP (Including Augmentation) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0STIP Prior $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Proposition 1B $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0GARVEE Bonds $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Traffic Congestion Relief Program $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0State Transit Assistance (STA) (e.g., population/revenue based, Prop 42)

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Other (FSP, Prop 116, R&I) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0State Total $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Bus and Bus Related Grants (5309c) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Clean Fuel Formula Program (5308) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Elderly & Persons with Disabilities Formula Program (5310) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Fixed Guideway Modernization (5309a) $304 $48 $3,680 $435 $3,886 $392 $2,741 $410 $1,285Intercity Bus (5311f) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Job Access and Reverse Commute Program (5316) $536 $484 $1,687 $1,687 $1,754 $1,754 $1,825 $1,825 $5,750New and Small Starts (Capital Investment Grants) (5309b) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0New Freedom (SAFETEA-LU) $509 $73 $827 $827 $868 $868 $865 $865 $2,633Nonurbanized Area Formula Program (5311) $34 $0 $263 $263 $270 $270 $276 $276 $809Public Transportation on Indian Reservation (5311c) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Transit in the Parks (5320) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Urbanized Area Formula Program (5307) $11,290 $1,686 $328 $20 $250 $563 $2,318 $1,397 $3,666CMAQ/5307 Transfer $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0ARRA - FTA 5307 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0ARRA - FTA 5309 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0ARRA - FTA 5311 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Other (TSGP) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Federal Transit Total $12,673 $2,291 $6,785 $3,232 $7,028 $3,847 $8,025 $4,773 $14,143Federal Highway Non-Discretionary

Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) ($0) ($0) $0 $0 $0 $0 $25,817 $25,817 $25,817Surface Transportation Program (Regional) ($0) ($0) $450 $450 $32,276 $32,276 $29,981 $29,981 $62,707Highway Bridge Program (HBP) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Railway (Section 130) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Safe Routes to School (SRTS) (SAFETEA-LU) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Safe Routes to School (SR2S) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Transportation Improvements (TI) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Federal Lands Highway $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0ARRA - SHOPP $3,700 $3,700 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,700ARRA - STIP $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0ARRA - Highway Maintenance (HM) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0ARRA - TE $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0ARRA - RSTP $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0ARRA - Federal Lands Highway $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Other (RITA) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Subtotal $3,700 $3,700 $450 $450 $32,276 $32,276 $55,798 $55,798 $92,224 Federal Highway Discretionary Programs

Bridge Discretionary Program $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Corridor Infrastructure Improvement Program (SAFETEA-LU Sec. 1302) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Coordinated Border Infrastructure (SAFETEA-LU Sec.1303) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Ferry Boat Discretionary $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0High Priority Projects (HPP) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0High Risk Rural Road (HRRR) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0National Scenic Byways Program $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Projects of National/Regional Significance (SAFETEA-LU Sec. 1301) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Public Lands Highway Discretionary $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Recreational Trails $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Economic Stimulus (ECREC) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Transportation and Community and System Preservation Program $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Other (ITS, IM, Sec 112/117, value pricing, STP) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Subtotal $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Federal Highway Total $3,700 $3,700 $450 $450 $32,276 $32,276 $55,798 $55,798 $92,224FEDERAL TOTAL $16,373 $5,991 $7,235 $3,682 $39,304 $36,123 $63,823 $60,571 $106,367

$16,373 $5,991 $7,235 $3,682 $137,317 $134,700 $155,951 $153,489 $297,862

FED

ERA

L H

IGH

WA

Y

PROGRAMMED TOTAL

LOC

AL

STA

TEFE

DER

AL

TRA

NSI

TTable 2c

2008 Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP)San Diego Region - Amendment No. 11 (in $000s)

2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12REVENUE VS. PROGRAMMED

40

BOARD OF DIRECTORS AGENDA ITEM NO. 09-04-10APRIL 24, 2009 ACTION REQUESTED – HOLD FIRST READING

AND ADOPT FINDINGS

FIRST READING OF NEW REGIONAL COMPREHENSIVE FARE ORDINANCE AND RELATED FINDINGS File Number 3002300

Introduction

The Board of Directors is asked to conduct the first reading of a new Regional Comprehensive Fare Ordinance (Fare Ordinance) that implements fare increases requested by the Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) as well as new language that clarifies, simplifies and better codifies the fare rules for the region. The proposed new Fare Ordinance does not include any fare increases to the products that are purchased by the public beyond those requested by MTS and addressed in two public hearings held by the Transportation Committee on April 15, 2009, and April 17, 2009. A summary of the comments received at the time the agenda was sent out is provided in Attachment 1 and will be updated, as needed, at the April 24, 2009, Board meeting. The proposed changes in the language of the Fare Ordinance have been discussed with and approved by the staffs of both MTS and the North County Transit District (NCTD).

Recommendation

The Board of Directors is asked to hold first reading of a new Regional Comprehensive Fare Ordinance that would implement fare increases requested by MTS and other clarifying changes. The Board of Directors also is asked to:

1. approve the Resolution No 2009-22, which makes a finding that the proposed changes qualify for an exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act; and

2. make the finding that the proposed fare increases will not cause a disparate impact under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act.

MTS has declared a fiscal emergency and has taken action to reduce expenditures due to funding cutbacks from the State of California and falling sales tax revenue. The MTS Board of Directors also asked its staff to consider fare increases as a means of reducing the amount of transit service that would have to be eliminated to create a balanced budget. The MTS Board has approved a strategy that includes $4.7 million in savings from service reductions and $2.2 million from additional revenue resulting from increases to Regional and Premium Pass prices, elimination of the downtown Trolley Zone, and discontinuing Community and Local Circulation special fares (Attachment 2). These changes would need to be implemented via amendments to the Fare Ordinance with an effective date of July 1, 2009, in order for MTS to achieve a balanced FY 2010 budget. About $50,000 of additional revenue will accrue to NCTD through revenue sharing as a result of these changes.

The proposed fare changes being discussed were posted in English and Spanish on all MTS and NCTD services in advance of the two public hearings. In addition, advertisements were placed in English and Spanish language newspapers.

Discussion

In addition to conducting the first reading of the proposed new Fare Ordinance, the Board of Directors is asked to make a finding that that the proposed fare changes in the Fare Ordinance qualify for an exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act as provided in Attachment 3, Resolution No. 2009-22. A Title VI Assessment of the proposed changes and alternatives is included in Attachment 4. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act requires that potential adverse impacts from the proposed changes on minority and low-income populations be identified and addressed. The Title VI Assessment concludes that the proposed fare changes will not cause a disparate impact on minority or low-income populations. Therefore, the Board also is asked to adopt a finding consistent with the conclusions in the Assessment.

The proposed new Regional Comprehensive Fare Ordinance is included as Attachment 5. The differences between the proposed new Fare Ordinance and the current Fare Ordinance are not tracked due to extensive modifications to the organization and terminology. Review of the tracked changes would have been much more confusing and difficult than reviewing a clean version of the proposed new Fare Ordinance. The majority of the new language is not summarized in this report since it simply clarifies, simplifies, or better codifies the existing fare rules. Each of the proposed fare changes, however, are substantive in nature and are therefore discussed below.

Changes Requested by MTS

• Regional Pass. The Regional Pass currently is priced at $68. The Title VI Assessment concludes that an increase to $72 would not create a disproportionate impact for minority and low-income populations. Senior/Disabled/Medicare passes would increase from $17 to $18, and Youth passes would increase from $34 to $36. The 14-Day Pass would sell for $43 when it becomes available on the Compass Card. The Title VI Assessment also concludes that these increases would not create a disproportionate impact for minority and low income populations. MTS estimates these changes will raise an additional $1.9 million annually.

• Premium Express Pass. The Premium Express Pass currently is priced at $90 per month, and MTS has requested this pass be raised to $100 per month. The cost of this price is substantially below the cost of passes offered by peer systems for similar services in California. The Senior/Disabled/Medicare Premium Express Pass would increase from $22.50 to $25, and the Youth Pass would increase from $45 to $50. The Title VI Assessment concludes that these increases would not create a disproportionate impact for minority and low-income populations. MTS estimates these changes will raise about $40,000 annually.

• Downtown Trolley Zone. Currently, adult (regular fare) passengers may ride between any two Trolley stations from 12th and Imperial to County Center for $1.25 each way. Passengers with Senior/Disabled/Medicare identification may ride for $0.60. All other trips on the Trolley network have a regular fare of $2.50 and a Senior/Disabled/Medicare fare of $1.25, with Day Passes available for all passengers at a price of $5.00.

The Downtown Trolley Zone fare originally was created to promote ridership in downtown San Diego. MTS has determined that this promotional fare is not financially feasible during the current fiscal emergency. MTS estimates eliminating the Downtown Trolley Zone will generate about $180,000 annually. The Title VI Assessment concludes that eliminating the downtown zone would not create a disproportionate impact for minority and low-income populations.

2

• Community Bus Cash Fare. The regular Community and Local Circulator cash fare in the region is currently $1, and $0.50 for Senior/Disabled/Medicare passengers. This fare is charged on Route 851 (Spring Valley), Routes 871/872 (El Cajon), and Route 904 (Coronado). These routes are operated with small buses that generally cost less per mile to operate than the standard large urban transit coach; however, since these buses carry fewer passengers, the cost per seat mile is similar or exceeds the per seat mile cost of the larger buses. Eliminating this special fare category will improve the cost recovery of these routes and make cash fares for these types of routes consistent throughout the MTS service area. The Title VI Assessment concludes that eliminating the Community and Local Circulator fare would not create a disproportionate impact for minority and low-income populations. MTS estimates this change will increase revenues by about $72,000 annually.

• Create a 14-Day Premium Pass. Prior to 2008, the Fare Ordinance contained a provision to permit the sale of half-month Regional Monthly Passes at half price from the Transit Store. In 2008, the Fare Ordinance was amended to change from a Half Monthly Pass to a 14-Day Pass, priced at 60 percent of a 30-Day or Calendar Month Pass. As preparations were being made to convert the Premium Express Pass to the Compass Card, it was found that the Transit Store also was selling Half Monthly Passes for the Premium Express Pass. Based on the current demand for the paper Premium Half Monthly Pass, it was determined that there would be market for a 14-Day Premium Express Pass as a replacement product for the paper Premium Express Half Monthly Pass. The 14-Day Premium Express Pass is proposed to be priced at 60 percent of the Premium Express 30-Day and Calendar Month Pass (the same percentage is used for the Regional 14-Day Pass). This new product will be revenue neutral as it replaces an existing pass that will no longer be available. The Title VI Assessment concludes that there are no disproportionate impacts on minority and low-income populations.

Changes Associated with Compass Card

• Default Stored Value Fare. Cash-paying customers constitute about 20 percent of all passengers. It is anticipated that initially only about 10 percent of the cash-paying customers, or two percent of the total ridership, may convert to stored value.

MTS and NCTD requested that SANDAG make the default fare with stored value a Day Pass to reduce the likelihood of fare evasion. This means that the first time a passenger with stored value taps a validator, it will result in the purchase of a $5 Regional Day Pass. If a passenger wishes to ride only one or two times that day, he or she must inform the driver before they tap that they wish to pay a single fare. The driver will then select the appropriate fare on the control unit, and tell the passenger to tap. On the Trolley and SPRINTER, a passenger who wishes to buy a single-trip ticket must go to a Ticket Vending Machine, and purchase a paper ticket using the stored value on their Compass Card.

Similar rules and procedures would apply to the COASTER if the SANDAG Board of Directors approves creation of the Region Plus Day Pass (discussed below). This enhancement also would eliminate the need for COASTER passengers paying with stored value to tap on alighting. This addition to the Fare Ordinance does not involve any fare change and therefore no Title VI Assessment is necessary.

3

Additional Modifications

The introduction of the Compass Card provides an opportunity for new fare products and choices that simplify the fare system and provide new options for customers. These changes do not increase or change fares, rather they simply take advantage of available technology to improve the fare system.

• Region Plus Day Pass. Currently there is no Day Pass available for passengers using the COASTER and connecting to other bus or rail services. COASTER passengers receive a free transfer in one direction, but must purchase separate fares for each service in the reverse direction. The result is that most connecting passengers actually pay more in one direction than the return trip. The new Region Plus Day Pass would price this trip at $14, but also allow passengers to make additional trips on any service on the same day. The introduction of this product also would permit passengers beginning their trip on the Trolley, SPRINTER, or any bus to purchase a single Day Pass product for most regional destinations. This is a new product, and there are no Title VI impacts as the existing underlying fares are unchanged. The Regional Fare Structure and Revenue Sharing Study determined that this change would be revenue neutral.

The implementation of the Region Plus Day Pass will mean that the same rules would apply on the COASTER as all other bus and rail services. The default fare when using stored value would be the purchase of a Day Pass. The Region Plus Day Pass is expected to eliminate the confusing fare procedures that currently exist for the COASTER, and also eliminate the need for acceptance of single trip COASTER tickets as transfers to MTS buses and trolleys.

This Day Pass also would replace the Premium Express Day Pass, which now sells for $11 (an increase of $3). The Title VI Assessment concludes that there would be no disproportionate impacts on minority and low-income populations for this change.

• Regional Pass to Premium Pass Supplement. Passengers holding Regional Monthly Passes currently are not permitted to pay a supplemental cash fare in order to ride a Premium Express route. This situation does not arise frequently; however, it does occasionally lead to disputes with drivers, delays in service, and produces an insignificant amount of revenue. In contrast, Regional Monthly Pass holders are permitted to use their passes to receive a $2 discount on the cash fare for the COASTER. In the interest of developing a unified set of business rules for the Compass Card, staff believes that a similar option should be available to Regional Monthly Pass holders wishing to ride the Premium Express. This would be a new fare choice and therefore does not require a Title VI analysis.

• Juror Day Passes. In 2007, provisions were inserted into the Fare Ordinance to deal with the issuance and sale of Day Passes by SANDAG to courts in San Diego. The wording was inserted in anticipation of the renewal of the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between SANDAG, the courts, MTS, NCTD, and the Air Pollution Control District. The agreement with the courts will expire on June 30, 2009, and all parties are in the process of negotiating a new MOA. It is recommended that the language in the Fare Ordinance be amended to reflect the future use of the Compass Card as well as the potential for an increase in the cost of the fare products to the courts (the courts purchase Juror Day Passes and distribute them free to jury patrons). Juror Day Passes currently are provided free of charge to prospective and actual jurors by the Superior Court, and no change is anticipated for that part of the program by the court. This change does not require a Title VI Assessment because the passengers do not pay for the Juror Day Passes.

4

5

Implementation Costs

As the proposed Fare Ordinance changes primarily deal with price adjustments to existing products, there are no anticipated third-party cost impacts since Compass Card program staff can perform the work. The modification of the Downtown Trolley Zone also will be facilitated through a price adjustment to match other Trolley trips. The addition of the new fare products and associated business rules should not present an additional cost impact as vendor support will be provided under the annual maintenance contract with Cubic Transportation Systems.

Next Steps

The second reading of the Fare Ordinance is scheduled for the Board of Directors meeting on May 8, 2009. The Fare Ordinance changes would go into effect on July 1, 2009.

GARY L. GALLEGOS Executive Director

Attachments: 1. Public Comments from Hearings on Proposed Fare Changes 2. March 25, 2009, Letter from MTS Regarding SANDAG Comprehensive Fare Policy 3. Resolution No. 2009-22, Findings in Support of a Notice of Exemption under CEQA 4. Title VI Assessment 5. Regional Comprehensive Fare Ordinance

Key Staff Contact: Dan Levy, (619) 699-6942, dle@sandag.org

Comments Received by Mail, E-Mail, or Voice Mail on Proposed Fare Increases

No. Date Form Name/Agency Contact Info Comment

1 03/24/2009 Email Bob Hobson rhobson@cox.net I am writing about the change in trolley fares for senior citizens and the disabled. I am not opposed to the increase. It is probably necessary to cover increases in costs. What upsets me is that SANDAG has eliminated the ability of seniors to purchase a round trip trolley ticket. This is a great inconvenience, especially when my wife and I go to Petco Park, Qualcomm Stadium, Cox Arena or other entertainment venues. Having to purchase a ticket in the middle of an exiting crowd is not easy for seniors or the disabled. This change in policy also doesn't make financial sense for MTS. Round trip tickets ensure that people actually purchase tickets rather than find themselves short of money for a return trip ticket and thereby being forces to "steal" a ride without a ticket.Please review this policy change and see if it can be changed to again allow seniors and the disabled to purchase round trip trolley tickets.

2 03/25/2009 Comment Form Don Hoffhine- Cardinal Health

6361 Camto Luisito, San Diego,CA 92111 (858) 617-2757

dchoff@msn.com

When service cuts are propsed/enacted extra empshasis needs to be placed on insuring excellent connections at key transit centers to minimize the added travel times caused by the cuts. Without this extra effort ridership will drop far more.

3 03/25/2009 Comment Form Nicholas W. Reed hicksair@san.rr,com To MTS: Suggest re-wording of stored value default fares. Also suggest a way to have a flat fare after certain number of rides. Also like idea of dispensing "paper" compass cards on buses for short-term use

4 03/25/2009 Comment Form Anonymous N/A I feel strange writing this, but I want to register my support for the new fares. Nobody wants to pay more, but it's better than even more service cuts. I also like the idea of the $14 day pass being applicable to the Coaster. Simpler is good! Making the day pass the default fare for Compass makes sense too.

5 04/01/2009 Voicemail Mark Grostesvenia (619) 269-1639 Comments that the fare prices for senior citizens should remain the same because many are low-income senior citzens on Medi-Cal and other services. Also, being that they are of retiring age and being supported by their families, they should be left alone and consider taking funding from other sources. He also comments on Welfare-to-work program bus passes and asks about contracting MTS services to get passes for Cal-Work recipients

6 04/01/2009 Voicemail Enrique (858)568-2481 Customer comments that the fare increase impacts low-income individuals' ability to afford the services

7 04/03/2009 Voicemail David Bowen (619)549-7123 Customer comments that the fare increase does not help reduce greenhouse gas emissions and reverts people back to driving. It also discourages those relying on transit from continuing to use it.

8 04/04/2009 Email Olympia Gomez Olympia.Gomez@sharp.com I just want to say, I think it is aggregious that the City of San Diego is placing the burden of California's budget cuts in transportation on the most empoverished demographic of our city. The people who ride the bus are, in large part, of the lower working class who cannot afford private transportation, or cannot afford fuel for their private transportation with the drastic rise in gas prices over the past few years. Ultimately, MTS riders are performing a service to our community and to the planet by not driving, and as a reward for their earth friendliness, they are going to be charged more? This makes absolutely no sense. What about the disabled passengers? Those with epilepsy or other conditions that make riding the bus an absolute necessity? How can the city be so blatantly inconsiderate? What about the revenue to be lost in the passengers who can no longer afford higher bus fares? If anything, the city should be discussing LOWERING fares, to encourage more people to leave their cars behind, do the planet a favor, and ride the bus to work even if it is inconvenient since since what used to be a 5 minute drive to work is now an hour and a half eco-trek across town. It seems a very unfair proposal,and I certainly hope the city will reconsider it's position on the matter.Thank you for your time,-Olympia Gomez

Attachment 1

6

Comments Received by Mail, E-Mail, or Voice Mail on Proposed Fare Increases

No. Date Form Name/Agency Contact Info Comment

9 04/04/2009 Email Abby Carpenter carpentergreer@yahoo.com To Whom it May Concern:

I urge you to reconsider imposing a $2.00 supplement on the express bus routes. It will make the fares on these routes just too expensive! I am a full-time temp. Job assignments take me all across the county, and very few firms are willing to pay for parking. As such, I rely on the bus routes to get me where I need to go. Already, the cost of riding the bus has grown to the point where, for each new job, I must calculate the cost of riding the bus to see if the job will be worth it. Even with the current fare structure, I have had to turn down a couple of jobs because I could not make enough to get to and from work. I am especially reliant on the express routes, because when you have to be at work at a certain time, you are not able to make a lot of transfers.

In short, adding this supplemental fare to the express bus routes would make them just too expensive for me and others who rely on them for work. I urge you to consider other ways to make up for the budget shortfall. Working San Diegans like myself just can't afford it.

10 04/04/2009 Email Gregory Greer greer.g@att.net Dear Madam or Sir:I urge you to not add the $2.00 supplemental fare to the Express Bus routes. It will make these bus routes too expensive for the workers, like me, who ride them. A lot of my co-workers can't afford cars, and (especially in this economy) we can't find new jobs where we make enough to buy them. We work hard at the jobs we have, and we do the best with what money we make. We need the bus system to get us where we want to go. Already, bus fares feel very expensive. It's difficult to have to walk a mile and a half, make several transfers, and pay the fares on top of it all. Like I said, we are working San Deigans. We're struggling to get by as is. We're the people who can least afford the fare increases. g gg g g y p pPlease don't pass them on to us! The $2.00 supplement will break us.

11 04/04/2009 Voicemail Elyse Monsieur (619)450-7214 Customer comments that the fare increase is not the solution. She suggests considering alternatives like service changes. Her main conern is the price of the $15 senior pass which she feels should remain the same

12 04/05/2009 Email William Steele w-steele@cox.net I understand the need to raise the fares due to the lose of funding from the state but when is MTS going to start inforcing their bus schedules? I can not count the number of times when I have seen either 2 or 3 route #2 buses parked at 30th and Adams Ave or 2 or 3 route #7 buses in line at 30th and University Ave. I do not mind paying a little more for good service but to pay more and get BAD service is totally unacceptable. Do you expect people to pay more for bue fare and then wait 30 or more minutes for a bus that is supposed to be running every 12 to 15 minutes? If any other business were to provide this bad of service, it would not lost long, so, how much longer is the ridership expected to stand for the service that MTS is now provding? Please respond to my e-mail. BTW, I am a senior AND handicapped. I don't have much choice but to use MTS and I beleive they know this abut could care less. Thank you.William Steele

13 04/05/2009 Email Cathy Wood cathy@daneweb.com My fare is subsidized by the Department of Veterans so an increase will likely not come directly out of my pocket. However, I feel that since the price of gas has stabilized, there must be other possibilities (besides yet another fare hike) for balancing your budget. This definitely affects the budget allowed by Congress for the VA and, therefore, the pool of money remaining for salaries within the VA. This is getting a bit ridiculous on top of a significant hike and switch to the day pass concept in January. Make sure you have streamlined your internal processes before asking US for money!Cathy Wood

14 04/05/2009 Mail Anonymous N/A I just read through North County Times (Sunday April 5, 2009) front page exclusive about SANDAG and I'm sure I have no comments for these public hearings and I won’t be attending.

7

Comments Received by Mail, E-Mail, or Voice Mail on Proposed Fare Increases

No. Date Form Name/Agency Contact Info Comment

15 04/06/2009 Email Rommel Rodriguez rr6288@yahoo.com To Whom it may concern; Instead of fare increase the Top Management should take a pay cut, nowadays everyone is suffering why can't you do the same thing in your end. Is there a website where we can find how much the Top & Middle management of MTS is making every year?Hopefully SANDAG & MTS will open their books to the public so we can help to pin-point what can be eliminated in order to keep the fare on it's current price.Remember when OIL Price went down the fare did not go down, the main reason why we had a fare increase last year is because according to your company the price of oil surge but after it went down...Did you do anything at all?Regards,Rommel

16 04/06/2009 Mail Steve Rodriguez 3510 Hacienda Dr. Oceanside, CA 92054

On January 22, Matthew Tucker, the new Executive Director of NCTD said, "We will be assessing our current operations to determine how to better deliver vital transportation services to all of our customers." I do not see anything better. I ride the bus about twice a week. I cannot ride the BREEZE bus to the Carlsbad Library because NCTD discontinued a bus going from Carlsbad Village Station to the Carlsbad Library. If prices keep going up, it's going to take longer put money in[to the fare boxes]To me, the whole NCTD need an overhaul. I am still waiting to see some kind improvement in the whole NCTD.

17 04/06/2009 Voicemail Mrs. Elkins (619) 442-1674 Customer comments on why, after being $15 million dollars behind , the maintenance and products had not been kept up for years prior to this deficit. She asks for an explanation to the consumers and consideration by the operators regarding quality assurance of product and services, especially for disabled passengersdisabled passengers

18 04/07/2009 Email Opher Banarie opher@yahoo.com Hello - This is very strange. How is it that, while the private sector is forced to cut back and become more efficient, the only course SANDAG sees consists of fare increases and/or service cut-backs? Why do we the taxpayers never hear about cuts in employees, benefits, pay and perks from the public sector? How about having a fewer number of pencil pushers? Fewer conferences? Fewer lunch meetings?Let me ask you something: Would you expect to be paid for offering no services? Would you expect to be paid if no one rode any of your routes? Well, that is the direction you are going if you continue to raise rates and cut service...so you better NOT expect to be paid!Find a way to make things affordable and efficient. That means take care of your own house first, before reaching into our pockets.I've written about this in my blog, too: http://opherbanarie.blogspot.com/2009/03/san-diegos-metropolitan-transit-system.htmlI hope you folks begin to see the light. Otherwise, you will see the dark.

19 04/08/2009 Email Karen Grant karen.grant@sdaihc.com SANDAG: I am a senior citizen and use the metro transit system on a daily basis. I can appreciate that MTS is wanting to do another fare increase but certainly do not support it. Please keep in mind that the majority of the working class are not getting pay increases to accommodate all the fare increases that seem to be happening all around us.Please do not raise the fares for seniors. I would dare say that most of us are on tight and fixed budgets and are barely eeking out a living as it is.

20 04/08/2009 Email Heather Maffioli hmaffioli@san.rr.com With the current economic situation I understand that revenue increases are important to every government agency, but an increase on those dependent on public transportation seems to be counterintuitive. Those who rely on the bus system to reach their places of employment can least afford this type of extra expense. Why not consider raising the fares on those riding the trolley to and from Petco for Padre games or those using the trolley for Comic-con. Make riding the express trolleys to these events more expensive and you will be taxing those who can afford the ticket to a game or pass to a large event. They will still use the service because parking down town is such a hassle.

21 04/08/2009 Voicemail Alonda Moreno N/A Opposes the proposed July increase, especially the regional passes from $68-$72

8

Comments Received by Mail, E-Mail, or Voice Mail on Proposed Fare Increases

No. Date Form Name/Agency Contact Info Comment

22 04/08/2009 Voicemail Susan Reynaud N/A Customer comments on the rumor that MTS is eliminating route 854, which she uses regularly for her daily activities (commute from home, shopping, etc.)

23 04/09/2009 Voicemail Brenda Moreno (858) 273-0492 Customer comments that the fare increases are unjust, citing recent incidences of tardiness in running times. She comments that there is a lack of coordination and service.

24 04/11/2009 Voicemail Anonymous N/A Customer comments that he agrees with most of the proposed July changes, but feels that the Coaster and premium bus services should remain unchanged.

25 04/12/2009 Email Bill Gribble bgriblet@cox.net Comment #1:I ride Bus #7 4 out of 5 days a week. I believe that you can help close the budget deficit by ensuring that buses run on time. It is routine to see 2, sometime 3 bus 7’s running bumper to bumper or 2-3 minutes apart. After this you could wait up to 45 minutes for another bus 7 to come along.Comment #2:Right now you have 4 buses running from Park Blvd toward El Cajon. My suggestion would be to eliminate bus 7a and 7b. As it is right now, if you want to go to El Cajon, you have to wait for a bus 7 or take 7a or 7b and have to transfer. The second change should be that bus 10 stop at Park and University. It only make a few stops past Park Blvd and it just adds another bus going the same direction.When meeting please take the above suggestion into your decision making process. Thank you

26 04/13/2009 Email Y. Matteii isuetoo@yahoo.com Hello, I am a habitual bus rider since I do not own a car now. I like the service provided by MTS and appreciate your friendly bus drivers. I just now found out about your hearing for the proposed fare i Th f i d j t l t 't th ? It h b h d t b bl tincreases. The fares were increased just last year weren't they? It has become harder to be able to pay for a monthly bus fare for those of us in the low/middle income tax brackets. I do not agree with your proposed increases in fares, as they are expensive as it is. I think San Diego has one of the most, if not the most expensive urban fares of any city in the USA. Granted $5.00 a day takes you all over, but a lot of people really do not need to transfer to various points. I liked it when you offered the limited time transfers for $2.25 or $2.50 and you could transfer out within like 2 hrs. We riders want to keep using your buses but if you keep increasing the fares, I will have to commute with a co worker or find alternatives. Please do not make it harder for those of us that can't afford to buy a car, so we have no alternative but to take buses, especially when most of us are low income or students.

27 04/13/2009 Voicemail Peter (619) 281-3972 Customer comments in opposition of fare changes. He feels that having the riders flip the bill is an unfair response to lack of state funding from Sacramento. He asks for decent transit service in Ramona. He notes that there are very limited weekday services (currently a rural route running only on Thurs and Fri, and four North County bus services) and no weekend services in this area.

28 04/13/2009 Email Tabitha Greenwell tabatha75@gmail.com To Whom This May Concern, I write this letter as a concerned rider. I've been using the transit system here in San Diego since 2000 and every year the rates have gone up; and not just slightly but substantially. This recent proposed change is even more alarming given the fact that a) the rate was just raised 4 months ago and b) it's slated to go up again at the beginning of 2010. I realize that the state may have cut funds to your budget however with the economic times the way they are are it seems you would want to make public transportation as accessible as possible. I feel if these fare changes are put into place it will no longer be affordable for many of your current riders, the backbone of your company. With ridership at an all time high, a rate increase just doesn't make sense. San Diego already places second (in the state) on the list for riders paying the most in fees which begs the question if communities like San Francisco and Los Angeles can make it work for less than why can't we? Raising rates is not the answer.Thank you.

29 04/14/2009 Voicemail Sergio N/A Customer comments on the the fact that the July proposed increases will be the second in a year. He feels that any loss in revenue can be recuperated through Compass Card revenue.

9

Comments Received by Mail, E-Mail, or Voice Mail on Proposed Fare Increases

No. Date Form Name/Agency Contact Info Comment

30 04/14/2009 Email Tim Scott tims45@aol.com To whom it may concern: Short version: I ride MTS and NCTD routes every weekday morning and afternoon, so I buy the monthly pass every month. Obviously, I'm not happy with the suggestion that it should be raised from $64 to $68 in January, and now again to $72 in July. That's something like 12% in 7 months, or 20% per year. In addition to other tax and service raises, this is very unfortunate.I understand that you have lost some state funding, and that rider fares are only a portion of your operating budget, but this sends one more bad message about the attraction of using mass transit.Long version of my use of regional mass transit:A year ago, my wife and I decided to only have one car, since I could commute to work relatively easily. Our noble thought was to take one car and it emissions off the road during rush hour. Our practical thought was to save money. Originally, I rode the Trolley to Old Town and then a Coaster train to Sorrento Valley. The Transfer from Transit ticket was annoying to have to buy twice a day, but overall it was economical in time and cost. Then the shuttle service which is required to get from the Sorrento Valley platform to anywhere stopped being free. The $40 per month fee for the shuttle made it uneconomical to use that route anymore. ($64 per month for the transit pass + $40 for the shuttle fee.)I learned that the NCTD 101 bus stopped fairly near my work, and would accept the regional transit pass. So I started taking that, even though it involves an extra transfer.(The NCTD Breeze route has serious reliability problems but I guess that's not your department's concern.) On the plus side, the Trolley is extremely reliable, and the MTS route I ride (150) has been as well. The only complaint I had (excessively crowded vehicles on 150S in afternoons) has been addressed by running double-length buses on alternate runs.L k if I h l iLet me know if I can help in some way.Tim ScottSan Diego

31 04/15/2009 Email Frances Mercer francis.mercer@sdcourt.ca.gov

These comments are for the public hearings regarding the proposed fare changes.While I realize this economic crunch impacts all people and agencies, I would like to offer some comments/suggestions regarding the trolley service; being a trolley rider for the past 18 years.If the fares are to be increased, we need to have better service on the trolley, which includes:--more announcements when the trolley is late. I have been told announcements must be made if it is more than 15 minutes late, but that does not always happen.--not delaying the East-bound rush hour orange line when there are Padre games.--not terminating the East-bound rush hour orange line at El Cajon Blvd. when the trolley is a little late. It impacts a lot more people than you think, and causes a great hassle. (rescheduling of appointments, childcare issues, etc.) We come to depend on the schedule of the trolley so we can make other arrangements.--having more uniformed officers on the trolley cars during rush hours and not having them stand on the platforms texting or making personal phone calls. I am not allowed to use my cell phone during work, and neither should they. If the trolley is to be marketed to the public as an alternative to driving, you must offer reliable service and visible protection. I appreciate your attention to these matters.Frances Mercer619-258-0332

10

Comments Received by Mail, E-Mail, or Voice Mail on Proposed Fare Increases

No. Date Form Name/Agency Contact Info Comment

32 39918 Email David Rice daverice.dr@gmail.com Hi, Please allow me to preface this letter by identifying myself as an infrequent user yet ardent supporter of public transit in our county. The purpose of my writing is to express concern about the budget shortfalls and proposed methods of addressing them, namely fee hikes and reduced services. I don't feel fee hikes are appropriate, as they have the potential to reduce discretionary travel by those with access to private vehicles, but more importantly because they place an added burden upon the lowest income individuals who rely on our transit system due to their inability to afford to own and mantain a car of their own. At times in my life these people have included family members and friends, who could find themselves stranded if the route serving their job was cut off and I was at work with the only car in the household. In expanding on the topic of service reduction, may I point out that the inaccessibility of mass transit due to the grotesque amount of time required to travel to a destination already indicates we're contending for the title of transit laughingstock of the metropolitan world? If anything, we need to drastically expand service, offering more routes and, particularly, increased service frequency along major transit corridors. I know that of the discretionary transit consumers such as myself, many would like to rely less on their cars and more on rail and buses, but we're simply unable to due to the inavailablity of service to the locations or at the times we need. Trolleys run at intervals of 15-30 minutes, whereas regions with successful light rail operations run a train through every 5 minutes or so. I highly suggest a taxpayer-funded junket to Boston, New York, or Washington D.C. to check it out. According to the MTS website, the "fastest" trip from my home in OB to my job in Clairemont would take 1 hour 21 minutes, not including 10-15 minutes to walk a bit less than a mile. It would cost me $4.75 to get to work, another $4.75 to get home, based on the regular fare. Of course, I could've bought a one-day pass for $5.00. But that's still about twice the $2.50 gallon of gas that my car will burn running the 30 mile round trip, and compared to a 20 minute one-way trip, it's taking 2 - 2 1/2 h f d h ld b l i di l d diffi l fi d i i hhours out of my day that could be spent sleeping, spending already difficult-to-find time with my partner and daughter, or otherwise just being lazy. While one could imagine the necessity of making some sacrifice for the common good and the environment, adding 12+ hours to the workweek (and subtracting the same amount of time from their family life) isn't a way to convince anyone to voluntarily abandon the single-occupant automobile. Again, better service is the way to attract greater ridership. If you build it, hopefully they will come. If not, I guarantee attracting patrons that have any conceivable method of avoiding the use of your service is going to be difficult, to say it politely. One more thing to say in favor of mass transit - DUI prevention. Even though service is sketchy at best and doesn't run nearly late enough, I'll bet tens of thousands of intoxicated patrons board trolleys every year instead of getting behind the wheel (probably half of them leaving Chargers or Padres games). I'm not entirely familiar with the proposed cuts, but I hope they don't include reduced late-night hours. With such a paltry off-hours schedule of one train every 30 minutes, I would like to think we could keep them running virtually round-the-clock, minus a few hours for track maintenance. Thanks for your time in reading this, and please know any sarcasm perceived was intentional, and any evil comments were intended in a joking manner. The best way to reach me if anyone wants to follow up is e-mail.Cheers,Dave Rice / 4931 Coronado Ave. / San Diego, CA 92107 / (619) 889-7003

33 04/15/2009 Voicemail Janet Belunez (619) 282-5390 Customer feels that the increase for the senior/disabled bus passes is reasonable. She would rather have a mild increase in fares than a cut in services.

34 04/15/2009 Mail Hope Manley Customer states that a drug store cashier for 18 years receives a Disabled bus pass "cause she got the doctor to sign off her as disabled." Customer states that "you all gotta revamp that Disabled Racket and you're dumb." Customer states she would support fare increases when action is taken to reduce the abuse of Disabled Passes.

11

Attachment 2

12

13

401 B Street, Suite 800 San Diego, CA 92101 Phone (619) 699-1900 • Fax (619) 699-1905 www.sandag.org

RESOLUTION NO. 2009-22

Attachment 3

FINDINGS IN SUPPORT OF NOTICE OF EXEMPTION UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT RELATING TO FARE INCREASES INCORPORATED INTO

A NEW REGIONAL COMPREHENSIVE FARE ORDINANCE WHEREAS, a new Regional Comprehensive Fare Ordinance incorporating fare increases are necessary to increase revenue to bridge recently identified funding shortfalls facing the Metropolitan Transit System (MTS); and WHEREAS, SANDAG’s Transportation Committee has been authorized in Board Policy No. 001 to conduct hearings regarding fare setting, the Transportation Committee has held such public hearings regarding the proposed fare changes, and the Board of Directors may approve a new Regional Comprehensive Fare Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the SANDAG Board of Directors wishes to render written findings in support of the determination that a project that falls within a category exempt by administrative regulation under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) does not require further agency evaluation of environmental impacts; and WHEREAS, establishment of fares and fare increases are exempt from CEQA pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21080, subd. (b)(8); and California Code of Regulations Title 14, § 15273, subd. (a); and WHEREAS, if SANDAG does not quickly take action to increase fares on behalf of the transit operators, the operators will be forced to cut additional services in order to balance their budgets and meet the funding shortfalls. It has been made clear that the revenues obtained from the fare increase will be used for operations purposes rather than for capital improvements; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that SANDAG makes the following findings: MTS has an urgent need to increase fares in order to fill a revenue gap created by the combined effects of the FY 2009 State Budget, and lower than expected sales tax revenues. The fare increases need to be implemented to meet the operating expenses of the transit operators. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 24th of April 2009.

________________________________________ ATTEST: ________________________________________

CHAIRPERSON SECRETARY

MEMBER AGENCIES: Cities of Carlsbad, Chula Vista, Coronado, Del Mar, El Cajon, Encinitas, Escondido, Imperial Beach, La Mesa, Lemon Grove, National City, Oceanside, Poway, San Diego, San Marcos, Santee, Solana Beach, Vista, and County of San Diego.

ADVISORY MEMBERS: California Department of Transportation, Metropolitan Transit System, North County Transit District, Imperial County, U.S. Department of Defense, San Diego Unified Port District, San Diego County Water Authority,

Southern California Tribal Chairmen’s Association, and Mexico.

14

401 B Street, Suite 800 • San Diego, CA 92101-4231 • (619) 699-1900

TITLE VI FARE PROPOSAL EVALUATION FOR THE SAN DIEGO REGION

April 2008

Attachment 4

ii

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS*

Introduction.................................................................................................................................5 Background and Responsibility...............................................................................................................5 Title VI Requirements...............................................................................................................................5

Executive order 13166 General Requirements and Guidelines ...............................................7 Limited English Proficiency......................................................................................................................7

Executive order 12898 Program Specific Requirements and Guidelines for Recipients Serving Large Urbanized Areas ..................................................................................................9

Methodology for Fare Analysis ...............................................................................................................9 Data Collection.......................................................................................................................................10 Description of the Fare Ordinance Amendments ................................................................................11

Title VI Impact Assessment ......................................................................................................16 Single Ride Fare Analysis .......................................................................................................................16 Day Pass Analysis ....................................................................................................................................16 Monthly Pass Alternative Analysis ........................................................................................................16 Service Change Analysis.........................................................................................................................17

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 Language Spoken at Home and the Ability to Speak English† ..................................................8 Table 2 Total LIM Population by Census Tract in the San Diego Region.................................................9 Table 3 Total LIM Population by Ridership Surveys in the San Diego Region.......................................10 Table 4 Existing Fare Structure .................................................................................................................13 Table 5 July 2009 Single Ride and Day Pass Evaluation ..........................................................................14 Table 6 January 2009 Monthly Pass Alternatives ....................................................................................15 Table 7 Monthly Pass Alternative Evaluation ..........................................................................................18

* Chapter order intentional to reflect the corresponding chapters outlined in the May 13, 2007, Federal Transit Administration (FTA)

Circular (FTA C 4702.1A).

5

INTRODUCTION

This Federal Civil Rights Title VI analysis has been prepared to evaluate a new Regional Comprehensive Fare Ordinance scheduled for implementation in July 2009 (“2009 Fare Ordinance”). The 2009 Fare Ordinance would be approved by the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) and implemented by the Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) and the North County Transit District (NCTD). The analysis assesses how the proposal will affect different transit rider populations and determines if any of the proposed fare changes will result in disproportionately negative impacts and adverse effects on low-income and minority (LIM) populations within the San Diego region.

Background and Responsibility

With the approval of Senate Bill (SB) 1703 in 2003, the planning and programming functions of MTS and NCTD were consolidated under SANDAG. Contained within these functions is the responsibility for developing a Regional Fare Policy, including setting fares for transit services in the region through a Comprehensive Fare Ordinance. The MTS and NCTD Board of Directors have requested a fare increase to partially mitigate a revenue shortfall caused by reduced tax revenue, increased fuel costs, and reduced subsidies from the State. The current Regional Comprehensive Fare Ordinance was drafted after SB 1703 went into effect by merging the provisions of MTS’s and NCTD’s fare ordinances into one region-wide fare ordinance. The current Regional Comprehensive Fare Ordinance contains inconsistent terminology, confusing formatting, and redundancies due to its provisions coming from the two different transit agencies. The 2009 Fare Ordinance was drafted from scratch in order to improve upon its format and ease of use. Many of the differences between the current Regional Comprehensive Fare Ordinance and the proposed 2009 Fare Ordinance are not substantive. The Title VI analysis in this report focuses only on proposed substantive changes.

Title VI Requirements

Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000d) states that: “No person in the United States shall, on the grounds of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.” The scope of Title VI was expanded by the Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1987 (P.L. 100-209) to include all of a recipient’s and contractor’s programs or activities whether federally assisted or not.

The February 11, 1994, Executive Order 12898, “Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations” added low-income populations to minority populations and required that disproportionately adverse impacts be identified and addressed. The Federal guidelines (May 13, 2007, FTA C 4702.1A) defines disproportionate impacts as those that “will be suffered by minority population and/or low-income population and are appreciably more severe or greater in magnitude than the adverse effect that will be suffered by the non-minority population and/or non-low-income population.” Environmental justice applies to all programs, policies, and activities being evaluated and is consistent with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Executive Order 12898 also requires public involvement and mandates that transportation agencies ensure there is no exclusion from participation, no denial of benefits, and no discrimination in the services that they provide to LIM populations.

6

The August 11, 2000, Executive Order 13166, “Improving Access to Services for Persons with Limited English Proficiency” introduced the requirement to provide “meaningful access to Limited English Proficient (LEP) persons” (Chapter IV, Part 4). Executive Order 13166 requires Federal agencies to examine the services they provide, identify any need for services to those with Limited English Proficiency (LEP), and develop and implement a system to provide those services so that LEP persons can have meaningful access to them. To fulfill this requirement, FTA recipients must take responsible steps to ensure meaningful access to the benefits, services, information, and other important portions of their programs and activities for individuals who are LEP.

This Title VI assessment was prepared by SANDAG.

7

EXECUTIVE ORDER 13166 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS AND GUIDELINES

Limited English Proficiency

Limited English Proficiency (LEP) is a term used to describe individuals who are not proficient in the English language. Executive Order 13166 “Improving Access to Services for Persons With Limited English Proficiency (August 2000),” is directed at implementing the protections afforded by Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and related regulations. Accordingly, it prohibits recipients of Federal financial assistance from discriminating based on national origin by failing to provide meaningful access to service for individuals who are LEP. These protections require that LEP persons be provided with an equal opportunity to benefit from or have access to services that are normally provided in English.

SANDAG defines LEP persons as those individuals who do not speak English as their primary language and who have limited ability to read, write, speak, or understand English. These non-English speaking persons in San Diego County have been identified based on data obtained from the Census 2000, which included response categories such as “Language Spoken at Home and the Ability to Speak English.” Those who responded to the Census by stating that they speak English “not well” or “not at all” are considered to be LEP individuals.

To ensure meaningful access to LEP persons, SANDAG certifies compliance with the United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) “Policy Guidance Concerning Recipients' Responsibilities to Limited English Proficient (LEP) Persons.” The policy guidance includes a “Safe Harbor” provision where the USDOT considers the written translation of vital documents in languages other than English (for eligible LEP language groups consisting of 5 percent or more of the population) to be strong evidence of compliance with the recipient’s written-translation obligations under Title VI.

In the San Diego Region, SANDAG strives to ensure that LEP services are provided for languages that meet or exceed this 5 percent threshold. Written translations are provided for each eligible LEP language group that constitutes 5 percent or more of the population likely to be served by public transit. This 5 percent trigger serves as the benchmark for continued translations of languages over time. Written language services consist of the written-translation of the following vital documents: (1) All fare-related signs in bus, trolley, and train stations; and, (2) Notices of public hearings regarding SANDAG’s proposed transportation plans, projects, or changes, reductions, denial, or termination of services or benefits.

Table 1 highlights the Census data for “Language Spoken at Home and the Ability to Speak English” in the MTS and NCTD service areas, as well as for the region as a whole. Based on the Census 2000 data, Spanish is the only language in the San Diego Region that meets or exceeds the 5 percent LEP trigger in the combined categories of English spoken “not well” or “not at all.” Within the MTS service area, the total population who speak English “not well” or “not at all” is 5 percent, within the NCTD service area the total population who speak English “not well” or “not at all” is 7 percent and in the entire San Diego Region, the total population who speak English “not well” or “not at all” is 6 percent. Accordingly, vital documents related to changes in the 2009 Fare Ordinance proposed for implementation in July 2009 were provided in Spanish to meet the requirements of Executive Order 13166.

8

Table 1 Language Spoken at Home and the Ability to Speak English†

(Population age 5 and older)

† Based on Census 2000 data

Total Percent Total Percent Total Percent

English Speak English Only 1,234,316 65% 518,328 71% 1,752,644 67%

410,137 22% 161,441 22% 571,578 22%

Speak English “well” 314,871 17% 108,904 15% 423,775 16%

Speak English “not well” or “not at all” 95,266 5% 52,537 7% 147,803 6%

163,249 9% 22,182 3% 185,431 7%

Speak English “well” 134,730 7% 19,138 3% 153,868 6%

Speak English “not well” or “not at all” 28,519 2% 3,044 0% 31,563 1%

81,899 4% 23,660 3% 105,559 4%

Speak English “well” 72,574 4% 22,036 3% 94,610 4%

Speak English “not well” or “not at all” 9,235 0% 1,624 0% 10,859 0%

Spanish

Asian/Pacific Island

Other

Prominent Household Language

Ability to Speak English

MTS NCTD Regional Total

9

EXECUTIVE ORDER 12898 PROGRAM SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS AND GUIDELINES FOR RECIPIENTS SERVING LARGE URBANIZED AREAS

Methodology for Fare Analysis

In order to comply with Executive Order 12898, which mandates the inclusion of “minority and low-income populations (LIM)” in the analysis of environmental justice, SANDAG first defined the LIM populations in the San Diego region by transit district service area; and for the region as a whole. LIM populations were defined by Census Tract and a LIM Census Tract was identified as any Census Tract where the total percentage of the LIM population was greater than the LIM percentage for the service area as a whole. Based upon the Census data, SANDAG determined the LIM averages to be 51 percent in the Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) service area, 40 percent in the North County Transit District (NCTD) service area, and 49 percent regionwide (shown in Table 2). A complete table of LIM populations by Census Tract in the San Diego region can be found in Appendix A of this document.

Table 2 Total LIM Population by Census Tract in the San Diego Region

To conduct this Title VI assessment for proposed changes to the current fare structure, information generated from the SANDAG 2002-2003 Onboard Ridership Survey was analyzed to understand the region’s transit ridership in relation to fare usage patterns and LIM populations. Using the information from ridership surveys allows for a more thorough evaluation while simultaneously indicating whether LIM riders are more likely to use the mode of service, payment type, or payment media that would be subject to the proposed fare adjustments.

In order to provide a reasonable comparison, SANDAG utilized the ridership survey LIM average to assess Title VI disproportionate impacts, instead of using the LIM averages by Census Tract included in Table 2. Since those who use public transit will bear the impacts of the fare changes, the ridership survey was used rather than the Census total which is primarily composed of non-riders. By using the data derived from the ridership surveys, staff was able to create a regional ridership profile that better defines the proportion of LIM and Non-LIM populations who use public transit in the region. In the MTS service area, 77 percent of riders are considered to be LIM, while 65 percent of NCTD riders are LIM. The regionwide average is 73 percent. Table 3 provides the overview of LIM populations based on ridership as described above.

# %

MTS 2,017,725 1,045,141 51%

NCTD 796,108 332,995 40%

Regional Total 2,813,833 1,378,136 49%

Service Area Total PopulationTotal LIM

10

Table 3 Total LIM Population by Ridership Surveys in the San Diego Region

† Based on Valid Surveys

In order to provide the Title VI evaluation, a complete analysis of transit modes and fare payment type/media was conducted using the data derived from the onboard survey. Specific route types (i.e. community, downtown trolley, etc.) as well as specific pass types (i.e. adult monthly, premium express, etc.) were categorized based on method of payment (cash or pass) and ridership status (LIM vs. Non-LIM). In general, Title VI disproportionate impacts would be likely when fare increases occur on routes (or groups of routes) that support a larger than average percentage of LIM riders greater than non-LIM riders. A copy of the SANDAG Onboard Transit Survey instrument is included in Appendix B of this document.

Data Collection

To collect the information for the Onboard Passenger Survey, surveyors rode onboard buses, Trolleys, and the COASTER, offering survey forms to passengers as they boarded the vehicle. Surveys were self-administered; however, the surveyors were available for questions. When passengers completed the questionnaires, they were collected and tracked by route, date, trip time, and direction. The data then was coded, entered, and analyzed. MTS routes and NCTD routes had a slightly different survey form (see Appendix B). While slightly different, the survey questions were worded so that the forms could be combined in the analysis. An average of 314 completed questionnaires per route were collected and efforts were made to survey in both directions and during all time-periods (A.M. Peak, Midday, P.M. Peak, and Other).

LIM riders were those individuals who stated on the survey that they considered themselves anything other than white (non-Hispanic) and/or they indicated that their household income was below $30,000. The $30,000 threshold was determined through an application of average household size combined with the federal poverty guidelines. Ridership surveys from the NCTD area were used to determine the average household size (4.00 persons per household), while household data from the MTS service area was unavailable. However, Census data for both service areas exhibited similarities which made the application of NCTD household size to the region logical. Since the federal poverty threshold in 2002 was set at $27,588 for a family of four2 (when the survey was performed), any respondent who stated that their household income was “Under $10,000,” between $10,000 and $19,999, and between “$20,000 and $29,999,” were considered “low-income” for the purposes of this evaluation.

From the survey responses given, the data then was analyzed by transit mode (bus and trolley) and payment type (cash, pass, transfers) to determine the absolute number and percentage of LIM riders that could be impacted from any of the proposed fare alternatives. 2 The poverty threshold is based on 150% of the poverty level from federal SAFETEA-LU (Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient

Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users) guidance. The baseline ridership (Table 3) was set at 100 percent of the poverty level to provide the most conservative analysis.

# %

MTS 21,073 16,319 77%

NCTD 10,556 6,849 65%

Regional Total 31,629 23,168 73%

Service Area Total Surveys†Total LIM

11

While every attempt was made to evaluate each component of the proposed fare changes from the survey data, analysis of a few minor categories was limited or needed to be adjusted based on the limitations of the available data. Specifically, a thorough evaluation of Senior, Disabled and Medicare (SDM) riders (monthly pass holders and cash riders) was not available since the data enabled only the identification of seniors within this category3. Youth monthly pass changes (available to youth ages six through 18) were not evaluated since the survey did not include individuals under 13 years old. Since the evaluation of these specific riders could not be done, a conservative approach was taken and these two groups were assumed to be Low-Income and Minority (LIM) for the purposes of this analysis.

Description of the Fare Ordinance Amendments

The following amendments to the Fare Ordinance were evaluated by SANDAG to determine if the fare changes would have disproportionately adverse effects on LIM populations in the San Diego region. This includes changes to July 2009 cash fares, regional pass fares, and other discounted fares. Table 4 provides an overview of the existing fare structure (cash and pass), while Tables 5 details the proposed changes to cash fares and day passes that would take place in July 2009 if the 2009 Fare Ordinance is adopted. Table 6 includes an evaluation of several different monthly pass pricing alternatives as 2009 Fare Ordinance options.

Demonstrated Need for Fare Increase/Alternatives Evaluation

For several years, both MTS and NCTD have been forced to address operating deficits caused by reduced sales tax revenues and State Transit Assistance (STA) funding. The state’s recent decision to completely eliminate its obligation to fund transit operations, coupled with even lower sales tax revenues caused by the economic downturn, have created a significant budget deficits for both agencies. The MTS Board of Directors adopted a strategy to reduce the deficit that included a number of initiatives designed to increase revenues and reduce costs. Careful analysis by MTS based on extensive research and modeling contributed to finding a fair approach to solving this recurring revenue shortfall, and various alternatives were analyzed and deliberated (including the alternative of no fare increase but with a higher level of service cuts). The ultimate MTS balanced budget strategy included $4.7 million in service cuts as well as the fare changes included in this report4. SANDAG has relied on this MTS report as documentation of the need for the fare increases and for the alternatives evaluation.

Absent state or federal appropriations, and due to the recent elimination of California State Transit Assistance (STA) funds, MTS believes fare increases for MTS services are a business necessity to meet budget needs for fiscal year 2010 and future fiscal years. Operations deficits will occur at MTS if proposed fare amendments are not adopted. In the event that the proposed fare increases are not implemented, MTS would be have to implement the alternative of higher levels of service cuts to bridge the budget gap. For NCTD, the fare increases would have a smaller, but positive impact as well towards alleviating its budget shortfall caused by elimination of STA funding.

3 Ridership surveys were not available for disabled riders. As a result, Census 2000 crosstab data was used, which confirmed that the disabled population of San Diego County was more likely to be low income than the general population. 4 MTS strategy adopted at its March 12, 2009 Board of Directors meeting (http://www.sdmts.com/MTS/documents/Board3-12-09.pdf).

12

Cash Fares

Cash fares evaluated for Title VI purposes include changes to MTS Shuttle fares (regular and SDM) and Trolley Downtown Zone (Regular and SDM). None of the proposed fare changes were found to trigger any LIM disproportionate impacts.

Pass Fares

The current regional pass fares are $68.00 for a regular regional pass, $90.00 for a regular premium express pass, $17.00 for a regional SDM pass, $34.00 for a Regional Youth pass, $59.00 for an NCTD BREEZE/SPRINTER Regular Monthly pass, $144.00 to $182.00 for a COASTER Regular Monthly pass, $11.00 for a Premium Express day pass, and $5.00 for a Regular Regional Day Pass. There are currently no Regional SDM Day passes, COASTER Day Passes or 14-day passes of any kind other than the half-month Regional pass, which can be purchased on the 15th day of each month.

Proposed Day Pass changes include the initiation of a Regional SDM Day Pass and a new Region Plus Day Pass. As proposed, the later would be valid for both COASTER and Premium Express use. While this does not change the round trip pricing offered on the COASTER or Premium Express services, it does offer a less expensive alternative for individuals currently using those services and transferring to other services to complete their trip.

Several alternatives were evaluated regarding price increases on the Regional Monthly Pass (Regular, Youth and SDM) and MTS Premium Express Pass (Regular, Youth and SDM); along with the institution of a rolling 14 consecutive day Regular-Regional pass.5 Since the regular pass is tied to the SDM and Youth Passes (25% of the regular price for SDM and 50% for Youth), both categories would experience similar increases as a percentage of the regular pass price.

5 The 14-Day Pass represents a new fare type, and was therefore not included in this analysis. However, the percentage price increase and LIM/Non LIM population status of the pass are similar to that of the monthly pass which is evaluated in depth in this report.

13

Table 4 Existing Fare Structure

Single Ride Fare† Day Pass Half Month Pass‡ 30-Day Calendar Month Pass Service

Category Service Regular/

Youth Senior/

Disabled Adult/ Youth

Senior/ Disabled

Adult Senior/ Disabled

Adult† Senior/ Disabled

Youth

MTS Bus (Local/Urban) $2.25 $1.10 $5.00 N/A N/A N/A $68.00 $17.00 $34.00 Local

BREEZE $2.00 $1.00 $5.00 N/A N/A N/A $59.00 $17.00 $34.00

Trolley $2.50 $1.25 $5.00 N/A N/A N/A $68.00 $17.00 $34.00

SPRINTER $2.00 $1.00 $5.00 N/A N/A N/A $59.00 $17.00 $34.00

Corridor

MTS Express $2.50 $1.25 $5.00 N/A N/A N/A $68.00 $17.00 $34.00

MTS Premium Express $5.00 $2.50 $11.00 N/A NA N/A $90.00 $22.50 $45.00 Regional

COASTER§ $5.00-6.50 $2.50-3.25 N/A N/A N/A N/A $144-182 $38.50 $77.00

MTS (2 zones) $5.00-10.00

$2.50-5.00 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Rural

NCTD $2.00 $1.00 N/A N/A N/A N/A $59.00 $17.00 $34.00

MTS Shuttle $1.00 $0.50 $5.00 N/A N/A N/A $68.00 $17.00 $34.00

MTS Downtown $1.25 $0.60 $5.00 N/A N/A N/A $68.00 $17.00 $34.00

Community

SVCC COASTER Connector

$1.00 $0.50 $5.00 N/A N/A N/A $40.00 $10.00 $20.00

MTS Access Urban $4.50 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

NCTD LIFT $4.00 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Paratransit

MTS Access Suburban $4.50 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

indicates change from previous year † No transfers between vehicles or services; separate fare (or pass) required for each boarding.

‡ Regional half-month pass currently good for the last half-month only, but new 14-Day Pass will be available throughout month

§ COASTER – 4 zones

14

Table 5 July 2009 Single Ride and Day Pass Evaluation

Single Ride Fare† Day Pass Service

Category Service

Adult/ Youth Senior/ Disabled Adult/ Youth Senior/ Disabled

MTS Bus (Local/Urban) $2.25 $1.10 $5.00 $2.50 Local

BREEZE $2.00 $1.00 $5.00 $2.50

Trolley $2.50 $1.25 $5.00 N/A

SPRINTER $2.00 $1.00 $5.00 N/A

Corridor

MTS Express $2.50 $1.25 $5.00 N/A

MTS Premium Express $5.00 $2.50 $14.00 N/A Regional

COASTER§ $5.00-6.50 $2.50-3.25 $14.00 N/A

MTS (2 zones) $5.00-10.00 $2.50-5.00 N/A N/A Rural

NCTD $2.00 $1.00 N/A N/A

MTS Shuttle $2.25 $1.10 $5.00 $2.50

MTS Downtown (Eliminated) $2.50 $1.25 $5.00 $2.50

Community

SVCC COASTER Connector $1.00 $0.50 $5.00 $2.50

MTS Access Urban $4.50 N/A N/A N/A NCTD LIFT $4.00 N/A N/A N/A

Paratransit

MTS Access Suburban $4.50 N/A N/A N/A indicates change from existing fare structure

†No transfers between vehicles or services; separate fare (or pass) required for each boarding. § COASTER -- 4 zones (same as current structure)

15

Table 6 January 2009 Monthly Pass Alternatives

Alternative Pass Type Regional Monthly

Pass* Premium Monthly Pass

Adult $68.00 $120.00 Senior/ Disabled $17.00 $30.00 Alternative 1

Youth $34.00 $60.00 Adult $70.00 $95.00

Senior/ Disabled $17.50 $23.75 Alternative 2 Youth $35.00 $47.50 Adult $72.00 $100.00

Senior/ Disabled $18.00 $25.00 Alternative 3 Youth $36.00 $50.00 Adult $84.00 $120.00

Senior/ Disabled $21.00 $30.00 Alternative 4 Youth $42.00 $60.00

indicates change from existing fare structure

*Will be available on a 30 day calendar month and 30-Day Pass basis

16

TITLE VI IMPACT ASSESSMENT

There were no potential prohibited Title VI issues or disproportionate impacts discovered through the analysis of the single ride or day pass fare increases. Additionally, there were no Title VI disproportionate impacts resulting from any of the four monthly pass alternatives. The following discussion describes the analysis process used to arrive at this conclusion.

Single Ride Fare Analysis

The single ride fare analysis involved the evaluation of two adult fare increases which also included a Senior Disabled Medicare (SDM) fare component at roughly half of the full adult fare. From the survey data the analysis of those affected by the adult fare for either of the two fare increases were not determined to be Low Income and Minority (LIM). Assuming that the SDM fare category is LIM as previously discussed in the data collection segment, and the increases are roughly fixed at 50% of the adult fare, the SDM fare increase would not represent a disproportionate impact.

• Trolley Downtown Zone Adult Fare (Non-LIM): $1.25 to $2.50

• Trolley Downtown Zone SDM Fare (LIM): $0.60 to $1.25

Title VI Findings: No Disproportionate Impacts

• MTS Adult Shuttle (Non-LIM): $1.00 to $2.25

• MTS SDM Shuttle (LIM): $0.50 to $1.10

Title VI Findings: No Disproportionate Impacts

Day Pass Analysis

The day pass analysis concluded that none of the affected population sub-groups would be impacted since the day passes changes include only the creation of new passes while all existing one way or round trip fares remain the same. Since this is a new fare product, there is no price increase. All of the current fare products and pricing are unchanged. Therefore, no analysis is required.

• Coaster and Premium Express Day Pass: N/A to $14.00

Title VI Findings: No Disproportionate Impacts

Monthly Pass Alternative Analysis

Four alternatives were evaluated in order to give the decision-making body flexibility in the consideration of monthly pass prices increases proposed for use in order to balance the transit agencies’ budgets. The alternatives include price increases for the Regional Monthly Pass price

17

ranging from 0% to 24%, while the Premium Monthly Pass price alternatives include an increase in price ranging between 6% and 33%. The Regional Monthly Pass population subgroups are LIM while the Premium Monthly Pass subgroups are Non LIM.†† Since each of the alternatives included a higher Premium Monthly Pass increase (as a percent of the base price) over the Regional Monthly Pass percentage increase, no Title VI disproportionate impacts were generated. Table 7 includes the detailed statistical data used in this analysis.

• Regional Monthly Pass (Regular/Senior Disabled/Youth): $68/$17/$34 to No Change (Alternative 1), $70/$17.50/$35 (Alternative 2), $72/$18/$36 (Alternative 3), and $84/$21/$42 (Alternative 4)

Title VI Findings: No Disproportionate Impacts

• Premium Monthly Pass (Regular/Senior Disabled/Youth): $90/$22.50/$45 to $120/$30/$60 (Alternative 1), $95/$23.75/$47.50 (Alternative 2), $100/$25/$50 (Alternative 3), and $120/$30/$60 (Alternative 4)

Title VI Findings: No Disproportionate Impacts

Service Change Analysis

Given that no disproportionate impacts were found from any of the proposed fare changes or fare change alternatives, the transit agencies have not proposed any additional service cuts beyond those approved by MTS in March 2009.

†† As discussed earlier, the evaluation of Youth Monthly Passes was not available given the survey instrument limitations.

18

Table 7 Monthly Pass Alternative Evaluation

Alternatives Pass Type Existing

Fares

Regional Monthly

Pass Alternatives

% Price Change

from Existing

LIM or NonLIM

Premium Monthly

Pass Alternatives

% Price Change

from Existing

LIM or Non LIM

Disproportionate LIM Impact?

Adult $68.00 $68.00 LIM $120.00 Non LIM No

Senior/ Disabled $17.00 $17.00 LIM $30.00 LIM No Alternative 1

Youth $34.00 $34.00

0.00%

NA $60.00

33.33%

NA NA Adult $68.00 $70.00 LIM $95.00 Non LIM No

Senior/ Disabled $17.00 $17.50 LIM $23.75 LIM No Alternative 2 Youth $34.00 $35.00

2.94% NA $47.50

5.56% NA NA

Adult $68.00 $72.00 LIM $100.00 Non LIM No Senior/ Disabled $17.00 $18.00 LIM $25.00 LIM No Alternative 3

Youth $34.00 $36.00 5.88%

NA $50.00 11.11%

NA NA Adult $68.00 $84.00 LIM $120.00 Non LIM No

Senior/ Disabled $17.00 $21.00 LIM $30.00 LIM No Alternative 4 Youth $34.00 $42.00

23.53% NA $60.00

33.33% NA NA

indicates change from existing fare structure

SAN DIEGO ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS COMPREHENSIVE FARE ORDINANCE

An Ordinance Establishing a Regional

Fare Pricing Schedule & Revenue Allocation Formula

The San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) ordains as follows:

SECTION 1: FINDINGS

This Ordinance is adopted to implement a Comprehensive Fare Ordinance setting forth a fare structure for all public transit service providers in San Diego County.

SECTION 2: REGIONAL TRANSIT SERVICE DEFINITIONS

2.1 ACCESS: the complementary ADA service operated by MTS in Zone 1.

2.2 ADA: Americans with Disabilities Act, as defined in Title 49, Part 37, of the United States Code.

2.3 ADA Complementary Paratransit Service: Specialized curb-to-curb transportation services provided to persons who qualify as eligible for such services under the guidelines of the ADA.

2.4 BREEZE: NCTD fixed-route bus service brand name.

2.5 Bus: Rubber-tired transit vehicles operated by MTS and NCTD.

2.6 Bus Rapid Transit: A form of premium rapid transit service operated wholly or partly on exclusive bus lanes, guideways, or managed lanes.

2.7 Cash Fare: Term used to describe fares purchased with United States currency.

2.8 Child: Any person five years of age or under.

2.9 COASTER: The brand name of the commuter rail service operated by NCTD in the coastal corridor from Oceanside to San Diego.

2.10 College Student: Any person currently enrolled as a student in a participating accredited San Diego area post-secondary school with a valid picture identification issued by the school.

2.11 Companion: In relation to the ADA complementary paratransit service, a companion is someone who accompanies an ADA passenger on board a Paratransit vehicle, but is not a personal care attendant as specified in the passenger’s ADA certification application.

2.12 Compass Card: - The Compass Card is an electronic fare medium based on contactless smart card technology. The Compass Card may hold either transit products or cash for use on

Attachment 5

2

regional transit services. Transit products may include but are not limited to Monthly Passes, student semester passes, multi-Day Passes, and stored value.

The Compass Card utilizes wireless technology to interface with validator devices on buses, rail platforms and ticket vending machines (TVMS). Passengers must tap their Compass Card on a validator in order to utilize transportation services.

2.13 Day Pass: a fare medium that allows a passenger to ride one Service Day.

2.14 Discount: A reduction in the price of a fare or fare product as a result of the passenger holding a special identification card, or an existing fare product.

2.15 LIFT: The complementary ADA service operated by NCTD.

2.16 Limited Use Compass Card: A Compass Card printed on a disposable material. Limited Use Compass Cards have a limited lifetime and may not accept all fare products available for loading onto a plastic Compass Card.

2.17 Medicare Recipient: Any person to whom the Federal Government has issued a Medicare identification card, regardless of age.

2.18 MetroLink: The Commuter rail service operated by the Southern California Regional Rail Authority.

2.19 Monthly Pass: This term refers to either the Calendar Month Pass or the 30-Day Pass.

2.20 MTS: The Metropolitan Transit System which operates services in all areas of San Diego County outside the jurisdiction of NCTD. MTS operates MTS Bus, Rural Bus, MTS Express, MTS Premium Express MTS Trolley service and ADA Access Service.

2.21 MTS Suburban Paratransit: The complementary ADA service operated by MTS in suburban areas (ADA Zones 2, 3, and 4).

2.22 NCTD: North County Transit District operating services in Northern San Diego County. NCTD services include the BREEZE, COASTER, SPRINTER and LIFT.

2.23 OCTA: Orange County Transportation Authority.

2.24 Person with Disability: Any person with a permanent or temporary mental or physical disability as defined by the ADA. In order to qualify for a disabled fare a passenger for regular (non-ADA paratransit) transit must be in possession of a transit identification card or a valid Compass Card with a picture identifying the person as a person with a qualifying disability. In order to qualify for ADA Paratransit service the person with a disability must be ADA certified.

2.25 Personal Care Attendant: In relation to the ADA complementary paratransit service, a personal care attendant is a person who is designated by the ADA eligible passenger to aid in their mobility who is not charged a fare to ride on the ADA complementary paratransit vehicle when accompanying the ADA eligible passenger. The person may be a friend, family

3

member, or paid employee. The need for and use of a personal care attendant must be indicated at the time of eligibility certification.

2.26 Platform Validator: A validator located in a standalone device on a rail platform. Platform validators must be tapped before boarding a rail vehicle unless a new Compass Card product is loaded and validated at a TVM.

2.27 Regional Fare System: The Regional Fare System is governed by SANDAG Board Policy Nos. 018 and 029, this Ordinance, MTS and NCTD transit operations ordinances and policies, and any other fare agreements including agreements entered into by SANDAG with transit operators.

2.28 Regular Fare: Applies to all persons age six and older except persons eligible for S/D/M or Youth fares.

2.29 S/D/M: Acronym that stands for Senior, Disabled and Medicare passengers.

2.30 Senior: Any person who meets the age requirement for transit fares provided in the TransNet Ordinance Section 4, Paragraph (c)(3) is eligible to pay the discounted Senior Cash Fare or purchase a Senior pass.

2.31 Service Day: 4:00 a.m. until 3:59 a.m. on the subsequent day.

2.32 Sorrento Valley COASTER Connection (SVCC): A peak period only Community Shuttle service operated by MTS between the Sorrento Valley COASTER Station, and nearby employment centers.

2.33 SPRINTER: The brand name of the Oceanside to Escondido rail service operated by NCTD with Diesel Multiple Units (DMUs) in a light rail mode.

2.34 Station: A light rail, bus rapid transit or commuter rail passenger stop.

2.35 Stored Value: cash value that can be debited to purchase fare products or pay a Cash Fare on a Compass Card.

2.36 Supplement: A charge paid on a one time basis to permit the use of a fare product for a transit ride that requires a more expensive fare. Payment of a supplement does not change the original fare product.

2.37 Sworn Peace Officers: San Diego County, state, and federal sworn peace officers.

2.38 Tap: The act of touching a Compass Card on a validator.

2.39 Transit Service Types:

2.39.1 Local – Fixed-route bus service on local or arterial roads serving neighborhood destinations and feeding transit centers. Includes BREEZE and MTS Bus. Also includes routes operating extensively on arterials with transit priority features and limited stops (Rapid Services).

4

2.39.2 Corridor – A frequent transit service with limited stops including, but not limited to, major transit centers, residential centers and activity centers that has more than six stops outside Centre City. Corridor services Include MTS Trolley and express buses generally traveling less than 50 percent of the one-way trip miles on freeways. Corridor services travel at least 12 miles per hour, with an average passenger trip length of approximately 10 miles or under.

2.39.3 Premium Express – Includes bus service with stops only at major transit centers, residential centers and activity centers; generally traveling 50 percent or more of the one-way trip miles on freeways; averaging at least 20 miles per hour, with an average passenger trip length of over 10 miles; and using commuter coaches. The future will include BRT operating at least 10 one-way route miles on a network of managed lanes or routes with transit priority measures.

2.39.4 Commuter Rail – The commuter rail service operated in the coastal corridor from Oceanside to San Diego by NCTD under the brand COASTER.

2.39.5 Rural – A rural bus service providing limited daily or weekly service linking rural areas to a multimodal transit center or major shopping center and designated by the MTS or NCTD Board of Directors as having a special one or two zone fare. Service is generally provided in rural areas with one-way vehicle trip lengths ranging from 15 to 80 miles.

2.40 Transfer: The action of a passenger leaving one bus, train, or other transit vehicle and within a brief time, without a stopover, boarding a subsequent bus, train, or other transit vehicle to complete his or her trip.

2.41 Transfer Slip: A document that may be issued by a driver to enable a passenger to board another transit vehicle free of charge or for a reduced amount. Transfer slips are not issued for travel entirely within San Diego County solely on the fixed-route system. Transfer slips may be issued for transfers between ADA services and fixed-route services and between fixed-route services and other systems outside San Diego County.

2.42 TransNet: The TransNet Ordinance is a SANDAG ordinance passed by voters in 2004 that provides for a ½ cent transactions and use tax collected in San Diego County and used for transportation-related projects.

2.43 Trolley: Light rail transit service operated by MTS.

2.44 TVM: Ticket Vending Machine used for the sale of single and multi-trip fare products.

2.45 Upgrade: An additional fare required to enhance the value of a transit pass to travel on a transit service with a higher fare. Upon payment of an upgrade the original fare instrument is converted to the new, more expensive product and the original product is no longer available.

2.46 Validator: A device for tapping a Compass Card in order to validate the fare product. Validators may be standalone devices, located on bus fareboxes, or part of a TVM. Validators located in TVMs may not be used as platform validators.

5

2.47 Youth: A person as defined in the TransNet Ordinance Section 4(C)(3).

2.48 Zone: For ADA purposes a zone is defined as:

Zone 1 Central San Diego Zone 2 Mid-County: Poway, Rancho Bernardo, Rancho Peñasquitos, Carmel Mountain

Ranch, and Sabre Springs Zone 3 East County: La Mesa, El Cajon, Santee, Lakeside, Lemon Grove, Spring Valley, and

parts of Alpine Zone 4 South Bay: Chula Vista, Coronado, National City, Imperial Beach, Palm City, Nestor,

Otay Mesa, and San Ysidro Zone 5 NCTD Service area

For the COASTER, the fare zones are set forth in Table 3. The fares zones applicable to Rural Fares are set forth in Section 3.4 of this Ordinance.

SECTION 3: SINGLE TRIP, SINGLE DAY & MULTI-DAY FARES

3.1 Fare Product Limitations

3.1.1 SPRINTER/BREEZE fare products may only be used on the SPRINTER and BREEZE.

3.1.2 Regional fare products may not be used on COASTER, ADA, Premium Express and Rural bus services without paying an Upgrade or Supplement.

3.1.3 Premium fare products may be used on Local, Corridor, Premium, and single zone Rural services. Regional fare products may be used with the Supplements indicated in Table 1.

3.1.4 COASTER and Region Plus fare products may be used on all transit services operated by MTS and NCTD but require Supplements for two zone rural services. Discounts are available to holders of Premium and Regional fare products using the COASTER as shown in Table 1.

3.1.5 Sorrento Valley COASTER Connection fare products are only valid on the Sorrento Valley COASTER Connection.

3.2 Fares and Pass Products

Tables 1 and 2 list transit fares available to the general public. The tables show the fare for each type of service by passenger category, and which passes are accepted on specific services. The notes below the tables show the amount of any Supplement or Discount that may be required or available.

6

Table 1 Pass Prices, Acceptance and Required Supplements or Discounts

Pass Type & Price Acceptance - Supplements – Discounts

Pass

Day Pass Price

S/D/M Day Pass Price

Monthly/ 30-Day Pass Price

14-Day Pass Price

S/D/M Monthly

Pass Price

Youth Monthly

BREEZE SPRINTER

Trolley MTS Bus Premium COASTER

1 Zone Rural

2 Zone Rural

Sorrento Valley

Coaster Connection

(SVCC) Sorrento Valley n/a $40.00 n/a $10.00 $20.00 No No No No No No Yes

BREEZE/SPRINTER SPRINTER/BREEZE $2.25 $59.001 n/a n/a n/a Yes No No *1 No No No

Regional

$5.00

n/a $72.00 $43.00 $18.00 $36.00 Yes Yes *4 *1 *2 *3 Yes

Premium n/a $100.00 $60.00 $25.00 $50.00 Yes Yes Yes *12 Yes *2 Yes

COASTER 1 Zone n/a $144.00 n/a

Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes *2 No2

COASTER 2 Zone n/a $154.00 n/a

Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes *2 No2

COASTER 3 Zone n/a $170.00 n/a

Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes *2 No2

COASTER 4 Zone

$14.00

n/a $182.00 n/a

$45.50 $91.00

Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes *2 No2 1. Monthly only 2. Region Plus Pass Accepted

Table 2 Single Boarding Fares by Service, Acceptance, Required Supplements & Discounts

Service Single Boarding Fare

Passes Accepted

Regular

Senior Disabled & Medicare

Regional

Premium SVCC

COASTER/ Region Plus

BREEZE SPRINTER

Sorrento Valley Coaster Connection $1.00 $0.50 Yes Yes Yes No/Yes No MTS Bus $2.25 $1.10 Yes Yes No Yes/Yes No MTS Trolley $2.50 $1.25 Yes Yes No Yes/Yes No MTS Express $2.50 $1.25 Yes Yes No Yes/Yes No MTS Premium $5.00 $2.50 No Yes No Yes/Yes No Rural Bus 1 Zones $5.00 $2.50 *2 Yes No Yes/Yes No Rural 2 Zones $10.00 $5.00 *3 *2 No *2 No BREEZE $2.00 $1.00 Yes Yes No Yes/Yes Yes SPRINTER $2.00 $1.00 Yes Yes No Yes/Yes Yes COASTER 1 Zone $5.00 $2.50 *1 *1 No Yes/Yes No COASTER 2 Zone $5.50 $2.75 *1 *1 No Yes/Yes No COASTER 3 Zone $6.00 $3.00 *1 *1 No Yes/Yes No COASTER 4 Zone $6.50 $3.25 *1 *1 No Yes/Yes No

Special Notes For Tables 1 and 2.

Single Boarding Supplementary Fare or Discount from Single Trip Fares *1 $2.00 Discount for Regular & Youth; $1.00 Discount for Senior/Disabled/Medicare. *2 $4.00 Supplement for Regular & Youth; $2.00 Supplement for Senior/Disabled/Medicare. *3 $8.00 Supplement for Regular & Youth; $4.00 Supplement for Senior/ Disabled/Medicare. *4 $2.00 Supplement for Regular & Youth; $1.00 Supplement for Senior/Disabled/Medicare

7

3.3 COASTER Zones

The COASTER Fares are based on four zones. The number of zones between stations is shown in Table 3. Passengers must purchase a single trip or return trip ticket or pass based on the number of zones between their origin and destination.

Table 3 COASTER Stations and Zones

To From Oceanside

Carlsbad Village

Carlsbad Poinsettia Encinitas

Solana Beach

Sorrento Valley

Old Town

Santa Fe Depot

Oceanside 1 2 2 2 3 4 4 Carlsbad Village 1 2 2 2 3 4 4 Carlsbad Poinsettia 2 2 1 1 2 3 3 Encinitas 2 2 1 1 2 3 3 Solana Beach 2 2 1 1 2 3 4 Sorrento Valley 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 Old Town 4 4 3 3 3 2 1 Santa Fe Depot 4 4 3 3 3 2 1

One-way tickets and passes are valid only for travel between the number of zones or the stations listed on the ticket or pass.

3.4 Rural Bus Service Zones

Zone 1 of the rural areas is west of the line that runs due south from a point 14 miles east of I-15 on the San Diego – Orange County line through the mid point of Palomar Mountain State Park and then to Ramona (Ramona Station), Alpine (Tavern Rd. and Alpine Blvd.), and Tecate border crossing (Tecate Road and Thing Road). Zone 2 of the rural area is east of this line.

3.5 Senior/Disabled/Medicare

The single trip Cash Fare for persons eligible for S/D/M fares shall be 50 percent of the single trip regular fare, rounded down to the nearest $0.05.

3.6 Children

NCTD and MTS may each determine how many children five years old and under may ride free on all bus, light rail and commuter rail services when traveling with a paying passenger.

3.7 NCTD Reduced Fare Identification Card on BREEZE & SPRINTER

Passengers holding a valid NCTD issued Paratransit Reduced Fare Identification Card may ride BREEZE, or SPRINTER services without payment of any fare. A personal care attendant may also ride free accompanying the passenger with a Reduced Fare Identification Card if the requirement for a personal care attendant is noted on the NCTD Paratransit Reduced Fare Identification Card.

8

3.8 Regional Day Pass

3.8.1 All Day Passes shall be valid for travel on the specified services from the time of issue for the number of consecutives days indicated on the Day Pass or Compass Card product. The Day Pass is valid for travel until the end of the Service Day. The prices for all 1-Day, 14-Day, Monthly, and 30-Day Passes are shown in Table 1.

3.8.2 Regional Day Passes will also be available for two, three and four days from the Transit Store, North County Customer Service Centers and select TVMs at the prices shown in Table 4.

Table 4 2, 3, and 4 Day Pass Prices

Day Pass Price 2 Day Regular: $9.00

3 Day Regular $12.00

4 Day Regular $15.00

3.8.3 The price of 14-Day Passes shall be 60 percent of the cost of Monthly Passes rounded

to the nearest dollar. 3.9 Region Plus Day Pass

A Region Plus Day Pass is valid on all services except for LIFT, ACCESS and MTS Suburban Paratransit. Upgrade required for travel on Rural zone 2. The price of a Region Plus Day Pass is $14.00.

3.10 Classroom Day Tripper

Classroom Day Trippers are valid for travel between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m. and after 6 p.m., Monday to Friday and may be issued to school and youth groups (up to 18 years of age) on an advance sales basis only. Each group shall consist of a minimum of 15 people. One chaperone per every five students may ride at the Regional Classroom Day Tripper price.

Valid on Price

MTS Bus, SPRINTER, BREEZE, Premium Express $1.50 COASTER only $3.00

COASTER plus any of the following: MTS Bus, MTS Trolley, Premium Express, SPRINTER, BREEZE $4.50

A maximum of 135 students and adults per group are permitted to ride a single scheduled COASTER train. Advance confirmation of the availability of space is required at the time of purchase for all COASTER Classroom Day Trippers.

3.11 SPRINTER/BREEZE Social Services Agency Day Pass

The SPRINTER/BREEZE Social Service Agency Day Pass is a one-day NCTD Day Pass, sold in packs of ten priced at $45.00, which is validated by social service agencies by identifying the day, month, and year. It is sold only to qualified social service agencies who agree to dispense the Day Pass according to NCTD requirements. The Social Service Agency Day Pass

9

has a unique serial number code, and the customer may not return or exchange a Social Service Agency Day Pass. Valid for unlimited travel on SPRINTER/BREEZE for day punched.

3.12 Juror Day Pass

Any state or federal court in San Diego County may purchase Juror Passes after signing an agreement with SANDAG. Juror Passes are not valid for use on any special service with a higher fare (e.g. Stadium Bus Service) or ADA complementary paratransit service.

A Regional Juror Day Pass is valid for travel on all NCTD and MTS services except, Premium, COASTER or Rural services. A Region Plus Juror Day Pass is valid for travel on all NCTD and MTS services except 2-Zone Designated Rural services.

The price for Regional Juror Day Passes sold to the courts shall be based on the price of the Regional Day Pass and included in the agreement with the court. The price for Region Plus Juror Day Passes sold to the courts shall be based on the price of the Region Plus Day Pass and included in the agreement with the court.

3.13 Advance Purchase Group Day Pass Sales

Groups wishing to purchase a minimum of 100 Regional Day Passes shall be entitled to obtain passes at the rates shown in Table 5 when the passes are purchased at least 21 days in advance. Groups purchasing 1,000 or more Day Passes shall be entitled to discounts as shown in Table 6. Additional discounts require the approval of the SANDAG Transportation Committee or SANDAG Board of Directors.

Table 5 Prices for Advance Purchase Group Day Passes

Days Regiona

l One Day $4.50 Two Day $8.00 Three Day $11.00 Four Day $14.00 Five Day $16.00 Six Day $18.00 Seven Day $20.00

Table 6 Additional Discount for Bulk Purchase of Advance Purchase Group Day Passes

Passes Purchased Discount 1,000-1,999 5% 2,000-2,999 10% 3,000 - 3,999 15% 4,000 or more 20%

10

3.14 Monthly Passes

All Calendar Month Passes shall be valid until the end of the Service Day on the last day of the calendar month. All 30-Day Passes shall be valid for 30 consecutive days commencing on the first day the pass is validated.

3.15 Upgrades

Effective January 1, 2010, a Regional Day Pass residing on a Compass Card may be upgraded to a Region Plus Day Pass upon payment of the difference between the original price paid and the new pass price. This upgrade is only available on Compass Cards with a sufficient stored value balance and occurs automatically when a Compass Card with a valid Regional Day Pass is tapped prior to boarding a service requiring a Region Plus Day Pass. An upgrade does not extend the period of validity of the pass and is not available for paper Day Passes.

SECTION 4: MULTI RIDE TICKETS & TOKENS

4.1 Round Trip Tickets

Any transit operator may, at its option sell round trip tickets at two times the price of a single trip ticket for any fare category or service. Outbound and return trips must be taken on the same service day and are valid roundtrip from the point of origin to the destination.

4.2 Multi-Trip Ticket Packs

Any transit operator may, at their option, bundle multiple single trip tickets for any service they operate, and sell the tickets for the full face value of the tickets or with a discount of up to ten percent.

4.3 Tokens

If tokens are made available they shall be sold for $2.25 each, in multiples of 20 ($45.00) or 40 ($90.00), and shall entitle the person holding the universal token to up to a $2.25 cash fare value trip on any MTS bus or Trolley service except ADA paratransit services. Some services may require a cash upgrade in conjunction with the Regional Universal Token.

Tokens will not be accepted for payment of any COASTER, SPRINTER, Access, LIFT or Premium Express single trip fare. Multiple tokens may be used to pay fares or purchase passes with a value of more than one local bus trip, but change will not be given.

SECTION 5: STORED VALUE COMPASS CARDS

5.1 Card Acquisition and Registration SANDAG, the administrator of the Compass Card Program, may require a nonrefundable fee

for passengers wishing to acquire a Compass Card. The fee shall not exceed $5.00.

Compass Card users may elect to register their card. If registered, users will be entitled to one free replacement if the card is lost or stolen. Additionally, registered users of the Compass Card are entitled to balance protection. Registered users will be reimbursed the value of their cash or transit product at the time the card is reported lost or stolen.

11

Reimbursement will be provided on a new Compass Card. An unregistered user shall have no right to reimbursement or refund of a Compass Card balance even if the card is lost or stolen. Registered Compass Cards are not transferable.

Compass Card users may opt not to participate in the registration program, but shall be required to pay the above-mentioned fee and will not receive the benefits of registration. Whether or not a user pays a fee or participates in the registration program, the Compass Card shall be the property of SANDAG and may be revoked and/or confiscated by SANDAG, MTS, or NCTD.

5.2 Validating a Compass Card

Compass Card users who have a transit fare product or stored value loaded on their card must validate their card each time they board a bus or train. Passengers who fail to tap and validate their Compass Card as required may be deemed to not be in possession of a valid fare consistent with the ordinances and policies of MTS and NCTD.

5.3 Inspection and Use of Compass Cards

Users of the Compass Card must produce the Compass Card for inspection by authorized SANDAG, MTS, or NCTD personnel or their designated agents. The Compass Card is intended as a fare payment device on MTS, NCTD or any transportation service that is part of the San Diego Regional Fare System. Any nonauthorized use of the card is strictly forbidden.

5.4 Refunds of Stored Value and Transit Products

Refunds will not be issued for transit pass products loaded onto a Compass Card. Refunds of stored value remaining on voluntarily surrendered cards and confiscated cards will be available for registered Compass Cards only. Registered Compass Card holders seeking a refund must complete an application form available from the Transit Store or NCTD Customer Service, and follow the submission instructions on the application. Refunds will only be issued up to the maximum value of any receipts that show cash being loaded onto the subject Compass Card. All refunds are subject to a processing and waiting period of up to 90 days. SANDAG may refuse any improper request for refund, or may make a partial refund. SANDAG and the transit operators may deduct a processing fee of not more than ten percent on any refund. Refunds will be issued as a credit on the same card as the original purchase if made by credit card. Original payments made by cash, check or debit card will be refunded by check.

5.5 Photographs of Cardholders

A photograph of a registered card holder may be printed onto a Compass Card if requested by the registered user. NCTD, MTS and SANDAG may charge up to a $8.00 fee for placement of a photograph on the Compass Card. Compass Cards bearing a photograph may only be used by the person whose photograph appears on the card.

5.6 Stored Value

The stored value feature of a Compass Card may be loaded with cash value. A Compass Card with stored value may not be used to purchase an additional or replacement Compass Card.

12

A Compass Card with stored value may not be used to purchase fare products or stored value to be loaded onto a different Compass Card.

5.7 Default Fare for Stored Value

All card holders boarding any bus or rail vehicle and paying their fare with stored value on a Compass Card will have the applicable Day Pass cost deducted from the Compass Card when a farebox or platform validator is tapped. Passengers boarding a bus must advise the driver before tapping if they wish to pay a single trip fare or purchase a product other than the default Day Pass. Passengers boarding a service at any station or stop equipped with platform validators and TVMs must use the TVM if the passenger prefers to purchase a paper single trip ticket or a product other than the default Day Pass for the service they will be boarding.

SECTION 6: POST SECONDARY MONTHLY, QUARTER, AND SEMSTER PASS

6.1 Post Secondary Calendar Month & Semester Regional Passes

MTS and NCTD shall each have the exclusive right to sign agreements with educational institutions within their own district boundaries. MTS and NCTD may establish their own policies, terms or eligibility rules regarding the sale of the passes in the sales agreements, however the prices to the education institutions must conform to this Ordinance.

6.2 Discounted Calendar Monthly Post Secondary Regional Pass

The price of a Calendar Month Pass for post secondary institutions shall be 80 percent of the price of a Regional 30-Day Pass. The discounted pass shall be valid for unlimited travel during a calendar month period until the end of the Service Day on the 30th day. All Regional Pass discounts, supplements and upgrade rules apply to the Monthly Post Secondary Pass.

6.3 Discounted Post Secondary Regional Quarter/Semester Pass

The price of the quarter/semester pass for post secondary educational institutions shall be based on 65 percent of the price of a Local & Corridor Monthly Pass, divided by 30 and multiplied by the number of days in the quarter or semester. The period of validity of a Post Secondary Regional Quarter/Semester Pass shall not be less than 90 days.

The discounted pass shall be valid for unlimited travel during a semester until the end of the Service Day. All Regional Pass discounts, supplements and upgrade rules apply to the Post Secondary Regional Quarter/Semester Pass.

6.4 SPRINTER/BREEZE Only Post Secondary Pass

The SPRINTER/BREEZE Monthly Pass may be sold to post secondary educational institutions with a discount of $10.00 per month.

6.5 Ecopass Group Sales Pass Program

This program is for businesses or groups who purchase Regional and Premium passes and who are willing to purchase sufficient passes to provide a full year of transportation for 25 employees or members at a discounted rate and execute a participation agreement.

13

The pass price discount would be based on the pre-purchase of a specified number of passes for a 12-month period. Only one three-month trial program is permitted per employer or group interested in testing the program. Advance payment is required for both the trial program and permanent program annual passes. Participants may purchase additional monthly passes as provided in the participation agreement at a discounted rate. The price of the employer or group sales pass program shall be set according to the number of annual regular adult passes purchased as defined in the participation agreement. All passes purchased in excess of limits in the participation agreement will be sold at retail rates.

SECTION 7: TRANSFERS WITH OTHER TRANSIT OPERATORS

7.1 MetroLink Trip Tickets and Monthly Passes

MetroLink Trip Tickets and Monthly Passes are valid as full boarding fare on NCTD buses and the SPRINTER on all routes directly serving the Oceanside Transit Center. MetroLink tickets and passes are not valid for transferring between NCTD routes or between NCTD and MTS. MetroLink tickets are not valid for transfers to the COASTER. The rules governing the acceptance of the MetroLink tickets and passes are as follows:

7.1.1 MetroLink Monthly Pass: This pass must have the correct current month, year, and list Oceanside as a valid city in order to be valid.

7.1.2 MetroLink Ten-Ride Ticket: This ticket has a validation printing area for each of ten (10) rides on METROLINK. In order to be valid to board an NCTD bus at Oceanside, the current date must appear in one of the boxes numbered 1 - 10.

7.1.3 MetroLink Round-Trip Ticket: This ticket must be imprinted with the current date and is valid until the time shown on that date on the BREEZE or the SPRINTER at Oceanside Transit Center.

7.1.4 MetroLink One-Way Ticket: This ticket must be imprinted with the current date and is valid until the time shown on that date, to board the BREEZE or the SPRINTER departing the Oceanside Transit Center.

7.2 NCTD and Orange County Transit Authority (OCTA) Transfers

The following transfer agreement is in effect with OCTA between its Route 1 and Route 191 and BREEZE Route 395:

7.2.1 BREEZE Route 395 to OCTA Route 1 or Route 191: The passenger will pay the appropriate NCTD single Cash Fare (or Day Pass fare) and be issued an interagency transfer onboard the 395. This transfer or Day Pass will be accepted by OCTA drivers as full fare for one boarding. In addition, NCTD BREEZE Passes and Regional Passes will be accepted by OCTA as full fare for one boarding on its system.

7.2.2 OCTA Route 1 or Route 191 to BREEZE Route 395: An OCTA passenger may transfer from an OCTA bus to NCTD Route 395 by displaying a valid OCTA Day Pass, or a valid OCTA Monthly Pass. No further fare supplement will be required. The

14

OCTA Day Pass or Monthly Pass is good for one boarding only on NCTD service. Therefore, the OCTA Day Pass or OCTA Monthly Pass is valid only on Route 395 in San Clemente, as this is the only route that connects with OCTA. Passengers continuing on other routes in Oceanside will need to pay a single Cash Fare or purchase an NCTD Day Pass.

7.3 Rail 2 Rail

Rail 2 Rail program is subject to annual renewal with the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak). When an agreement is in effect persons holding valid Amtrak tickets may ride any COASTER train between Oceanside, Solana Beach and Santa Fe Depot within the origin and destination listed on their Amtrak ticket or pass. Passengers can determine if an agreement is in place by contacting NCTD.

SECTION 8: PARTICIPATION IN THE REGIONAL FARE SYSTEM

The requirements for participation in the Regional Fare System by transportation providers shall be as follows:

8.1 Transit operators participating in the Regional Fare System must operate fixed-route transit service with fixed, published schedules.

8.2 Transit Operators must serve an area not currently served by an existing publicly subsidized fixed-route bus operator.

8.3 New transit operators will be incorporated into the Compass Card system to the extent feasible and practical as determined by SANDAG.

8.4 Any transit provider selling or receiving SANDAG fare media shall have a secure handling procedure for all fare media. All tickets, passes and transfers shall be handled as cash-value media, with appropriate security provided for acceptance, inspection, storage, distribution, and disposal.

SECTION 9: SPECIAL FARES

9.1 Sworn Peace Officers

MTS and NCTD transit operators will allow all San Diego County, state, and federal sworn peace officers, in uniform or in civilian clothes, to ride on scheduled bus and train routes without charge. Officers must show identification when requested by MTS or NCTD. This privilege does not apply to special events for off-duty officers.

9.2 Temporary, Promotional, & Experimental Fares

MTS and NCTD shall have the ability to set temporary, promotional and experimental fares. Temporary, promotional and experimental fares are defined as fares implemented for no more than twelve months for seasonal events or for marketing purposes. These fares, because of their short term/temporary nature, are not included in this Ordinance.

15

SECTION 10: S/D/M & YOUTH COMPASS CARDS ELIGIBILTY & REQUIREMENTS

10.1 Eligibility

In order to be eligible to purchase discounted S/D/M Passes, passengers must present an S/D/M or person with disabilities Compass Card with integral photo identification or one of the valid identification cards listed in Sections 10.2 through 10.3.

10.2 Seniors

Seniors must provide a valid Medicare card, state-issued driver’s license, government-issued photo identification, or an S/D/M Compass Card with integral photo identification when paying a Cash Fare, purchasing a Senior Pass, or boarding a transit vehicle with a Senior Pass.

10.3 Persons with Disabilities & Medicare

10.3.1 Cash Fares All persons with a valid MTS identification card, Medicare Card, NCTD disabled

identification card, State of California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) disabled identi-fication card, or DMV placard identification card shall be permitted to pay the S/D/M single cash fare.

10.3.2 Compass Cards In order to receive a reduced fare Compass Card, a person with a disability must present for

approval their completed application form and show a government issued photo identification card and original versions of at least one of the following (photocopies will not be accepted) at the time of submitting the application:

10.3.2.1 State of California Department of Motor Vehicles disabled identification card,

(the white receipt from the DMV) 10.3.2.2 State of California Department of Motor Vehicles placard identification card 10.3.2.3 ADA Paratransit Identification Card 10.3.2.4 Certification on the application form by a Doctor or a qualified heath care

professional or a statement from a physician or rehabilitation center (on original letterhead or prescription notepad with an original signature. In addition to the nature of the disability, the statement should identify whether it is permanent or temporary in nature

10.3.2.5 Individualized Education Program from school for disabled students 10.3.2.6 Current year Supplemental Security Income. (S.S.I.) or Social Security

Administration (S.S.A.), or Social Security Disability Insurance (S.S.D.I.). award letter

10.3.2.7 Letter from the Epilepsy Foundation 10.3.2.8 Letter from the San Diego Center for the Blind 10.3.2.9 Letter from the San Diego Regional Center 10.3.2.10 Unexpired MTS or NCTD disabled identification card

16

10.4 Youth

Youth must provide on request valid school, college, or government-issued photo identification to establish eligibility for a Youth discount when boarding a transit vehicle with a Youth pass.

SECTION 11: ADA Paratransit

11.1 Fares The Cash Fare for ADA Paratransit per ride for ADA Certified passengers for one complete

trip, origin to destination regardless of any need to transfer between ADA transit operators or zones shall be double the local fixed-route fare of the typical fixed-route service linking the origin and destination based on a determination by MTS or NCTD. Such determination must be made by calculating the regular fixed-route fare including transfers for a trip of similar length, at a similar time of day, on the transit operators fixed-route system. All ADA prepaid fare media will only be good on the system for which it was created. ADA prepaid fare media may not be loaded onto a Compass Card.

11.2 ADA Transfers There is no charge to transfer from any ADA service to any Local, Corridor or Regional bus or rail service. A transfer slip or proof of fare payment will be issued by the driver of an MTS ADA Paratransit service to allow ADA passengers to transfer to regular transit services. Passengers transferring from LIFT to SPRINTER or BREEZE will not require any transfer slip or proof of payment. Passengers transferring from any fixed-route service must pay a Supplement if the fare paid on the fixed-route service is less than the fare on the ADA Paratransit service they are boarding. The Supplement required will be the applicable ADA Paratransit Fare less the amount of any fare paid on the fixed-route service. Passengers transferring from fixed-route to ADA will only receive a transfer credit if the fare paid on the fixed-route service is a fare for which a paper transfer or proof of payment is issued. This includes single and return trip rail tickets, or Regional or Region Plus day passes. If a single trip Cash Fare is deposited into a fixed-route farebox without a proof of payment the ADA passenger will be required to pay the full fare when boarding a subsequent ADA vehicle as receipts are not issued for single trip Cash Fares deposited into the farebox. One personal care attendant may ride free with each ADA passenger riding an ADA Paratransit or transit vehicle if requirement is identified on ADA certification.

SECTION 12: REGIONAL TICKET AND PASS ADMINISTRATION

12.1 Policy Manual

SANDAG shall prepare and maintain a Policy and Procedures Manual that identifies the roles, responsibilities and procedures that will be used to manage the printing, sales, revenue allocation and revenue collection for all pre-paid transit fare media. The Policy and

17

Procedures Manual shall be reviewed and updated not less than once each year. The Manual shall cover the administration of printing, sales, boarding counts, revenue collection, and revenue allocation for fare products, including tickets, passes and tokens. The Manual does not apply to ADA transit operators.

12.2 SANDAG Responsibilities

SANDAG manages transit fares for the San Diego region. Pursuant to Board Policy No. 009 SANDAG complies with state and federal laws and regulations including the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI) and other federal and state discrimination laws. SANDAG’s Third Party Complaint Procedures are available at www.sandag.org/legal and should be utilized in the event a person believes this Ordinance is being applied in a discriminatory manner. SANDAG is forbidden from operating transit services by state law. The transit operators are responsible for transit operations. Persons who believe they have been subjected to discrimination by a transit operator should contact the transit operator directly for assistance.

SANDAG shall:

12.2.1 Ensure that each transit operator submits monthly counts by category for all fare products subject to regional revenue distribution.

12.2.2 Distribute monthly the proportion of revenues from all regional fare media in accordance with Exhibit 1.

12.2.3 Prepare a yearly summary of passes, tokens, and ticket riders (by transit operator).

12.2.4 Fund and administer the design and printing of all regional passes, tokens, and tickets. The design of which shall be subject to approval by the transit operators.

12.2.5 Fund the regional prepaid fare program encompassing the distribution and sales reconciliation of all fare products subject to regional revenue distribution.

12.2.6 Prepare monthly summaries of TransNet local transportation sales tax subsidies for S/D/M and Youth Passes, or any other local jurisdiction subsidy by the end of the month.

12.2.7 Prepare monthly summaries of regional fare products that include all ticket revenue distribution, including subsidies, and shall submit a copy of these data, SANDAG summary counts, and allocation percentages to each transit operator.

12.2.8 Keep a separate fund for all pass and ticket sales revenue received.

12.2.9 Distribute monthly, within ten working days from the first of the month, to each transit operator its portion of regional fare products in accordance with Exhibit 1.

12.2.10 Bill local jurisdictions monthly for any subsidy payments that may result from a reduced price Monthly Pass program established by that jurisdiction and apportion such revenue to the appropriate transit operators.

18

12.3 Vendor Commissions

SANDAG may at its discretion enter into commercial agreements for the sale of transit fare products by third parties and such agreement may allow the vendor to earn a commission on the sale of products. The commission paid to any vendor may not exceed an aggregate of five percent of total product sales.

SECTION 13: TRANSIT OPERATOR RESPONSIBILITIES

13.1 Each transit operator shall determine pass riders by category and a daily record shall be maintained and kept on file for a one-year period. Such records shall be made available to SANDAG at its request.

13.2 Each transit operator shall prepare a monthly summary of pass riders by category and route, where applicable, using the formula in Exhibit 1.

13.3 Each transit operator shall permit SANDAG to be the decision maker in case of questions regarding pass counts, and SANDAG shall justify its decision to the transit operator(s) in writing.

19

SECTION 14: EFFECTIVE DATE OF ORDINANCE OR AMENDMENTS

This Ordinance shall go into effect on July 1, 2009. Notwithstanding Board Policy No. 004, all amendments shall go into effect not less than fifteen days after the second reading and approval of the Board of Directors unless approved in accordance with Board Policy No. 004 as an urgency measure.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 24th of April 2009.

________________________________________ ATTEST: ________________________________________ CHAIRPERSON SECRETARY

Member Agencies: Cities of Carlsbad, Chula Vista, Coronado, Del Mar, El Cajon, Encinitas, Escondido, Imperial Beach, La Mesa, Lemon Grove,

National City, Oceanside, Poway, San Diego, San Marcos, Santee, Solana Beach, Vista, and County of San Diego. ADVISORY MEMBERS: California Department of Transportation, Metropolitan Transit System, North County Transit District, Imperial County,

U.S. Department of Defense, San Diego Unified Port District, San Diego County Water Authority, Southern California Tribal Chairmen’s Association, and Mexico.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

I, Clerk of the Board of SANDAG, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of an Ordinance adopted by the SANDAG Board of Directors on April 24, 2009, at the time and by the vote stated above, which said Ordinance is on file in the office of SANDAG.

DATED: ______________________________, 2009

_________________________________________

Clerk of the Board

20

Exhibit 1

REVENUE SHARING AGREEMENTS

21

REGIONAL MONTHLY PASS REVENUE ALLOCATION FORMULA

PROCEDURE DESCRIPTION This formula shall be applied to all Regional Monthly Passes sold. The Premium Express passes are not part of the formula except that five percent of the total revenue from the Premium Express Passes is retained for the region and combined with the Regional Monthly Pass revenue. (The five percent rate represents the transfer rate on the Premium Express routes that accept the Premium Express passes. MTS keeps all the remaining Premium Express Pass revenue.) The base pass revenue is then allocated to each transit operator that accepts the Regional Monthly Pass based on the revenue the transit operator’s percentage of Regional Monthly Pass boardings for all adult passes.

PASS REVENUE ALLOCATION PROCEDURES Step 1 1a. The total number of Regional Monthly Adult passes sold x current price + five percent of

Premium Express Adult Monthly pass revenue = Monthly Pass base revenue. 1b. The total number of Regional Monthly Pass riders on all routes operated by transit operator

“x” / the total number of Regional Monthly Pass riders on all routes operated by all transit operators = proportion of Regional Monthly Pass base revenue allocated to transit operator “x.”

1c. 1a x 1b = Current Price of Regional Monthly Pass base pass revenue allocated to transit

operator “x.” Step 2 2a. All Premium Express Monthly Pass revenue (minus the five percent included in the current

Regional Monthly Pass base) is allocated to MTS. Step 3 3. Any interest accrued by SANDAG as a result of the holding of Regional Monthly Pass

revenues before allocation to the transit operators shall be paid to the operators.

22

REGULAR AND PREMIUM REGIONAL DAY PASS REVENUE ALLOCATION FORMULA

PROCEDURE DESCRIPTION FOR REGIONAL DAY PASS

I. Applicability This fare revenue allocation formula is applicable only to Regional Day Passes used by passengers that cross the boundary between the MTS and NCTD service areas. Regional Day Passes are passes that may be used on regular MTS and NCTD bus services (not Rural or Premium services), the SPRINTER and the Trolley. When conducting the revenue allocation formula calculations SANDAG shall treat multiple day Regional Day Passes in the same manner as a single day Regional Day Pass. Each transit operator shall retain 100 percent of revenue earned from the sale of day passes used exclusively on services within their own service area. II. Regional Day Passes 1. At least once every year SANDAG shall conduct a survey of Regional Day Pass use on bus

routes that cross the transit service area boundary between MTS and NCTD. The survey shall be conducted during the school year. Each transit operator shall retain 100 percent of the revenue earned from the sale of Regional Day Passes within their service area onboard buses and at ticket vending machines unless the following conditions occur as determined by the SANDAG survey:

a. The number of Regional Day Passes purchased in the NCTD service area and used on

MTS services exceeds by more than ten percent the number of Regional Day Passes sold in the MTS service area and used on NCTD services; or

b. The number of Regional Day Passes purchased in the MTS service area and used on

NCTD services exceeds by more than ten percent the number of Regional Day Passes sold in the NCTD service area and used on MTS services; and

c. If the ten percent margin is exceeded and there is a difference of more than 25

passes per weekday between the number of passes sold on each system, the revenue from the number of passes in the imbalance shall be shared equally between the two transit operators. The number of day passes used annually shall be calculated by SANDAG based on the ratio of Regional Day Passes to other fares and applied to the annual ridership of the services that cross the boundary between the MTS and NCTD transit service areas. If the ten percent margin is exceeded and there is a difference of less than 25 passes, then no revenue sharing shall be required.

d. Any interest accrued by SANDAG as a result of the holding of Regional Day Pass

revenues before allocation to the transit operators shall be paid to the operators.

23

PROCEDURE DESCRIPTION FOR REGIONAL PREMIUM DAY PASS

The total number of Premium Day Passes issued by MTS and NCTD shall be collected and verified. Each boarding on a MTS bus or NCTD bus with a Premium Day Pass shall be recorded and the total number of boardings shall be reported to SANDAG. A monthly survey of Trolley riders and a quarterly survey of SPRINTER riders shall be conducted using the statistical procedures developed by SANDAG. From this survey the monthly or quarterly number of Premium Day Pass passengers shall be determined. The NCTD percentage share of Day Pass revenue shall be calculated by dividing the number of NCTD Premium Day Pass boardings by the total (MTS + NCTD) number of boardings each reporting period. The MTS percentage share of Day Pass revenue shall be calculated by dividing the number of MTS Premium Day Pass boardings by the total (MTS + NCTD) number of boardings each reporting period. The total revenue from the distribution of all Premium Day Passes shall be determined by adding the revenue received from one day Premium Day Passes. The revenue allocation for MTS shall be the total revenue times the percentage of Premium Day Pass Boardings on MTS. The revenue allocation for NCTD shall be the total revenue times the percentage of Premium Day Pass Boardings on NCTD. Any interest accrued by SANDAG as a result of the holding of Premium Day Pass revenues before allocation to the transit operators shall be paid to the operators.

24

SENIOR/DISABLED/MEDICARE AND YOUTH PASS REVENUE ALLOCATION FORMULA

1. The total number of pass riders (by category) on all routes operated by transit operator “x,” divided by the total number of pass riders (by category) on all routes operated by all transit operators equals the proportion of pass revenue (by category) allocated to transit operator “x.”

2. Any interest accrued by SANDAG as a result of the holding of Senior/Disabled/Medicare and

Youth Pass revenues before allocation to the transit operators shall be paid to the operators.

25

JUROR PASS REVENUE SHARING

Revenues from the sale of Juror Passes shall be shared as provided in the Memorandum of Understanding for the Juror Pass Program among the courts, the transit operators, SANDAG, and sponsors. Any interest accrued by SANDAG as a result of the holding of Juror Pass revenues before allocation to the transit operators shall be paid to the operators.

26

TOKEN PROGRAM

TOKEN REVENUE ALLOCATION 1. The monthly token boardings for all participating transit operators will be calculated by the

actual tokens sold. 2. All tokens received will be reported to SANDAG monthly. 3. All token sales revenue will be remitted to SANDAG. 4. Transit operators shall sort tokens from other currency and deliver them in a sealed envelope

to SANDAG on a monthly basis for reimbursement. The envelope should be marked on the outside with the transit operator name and the number of tokens enclosed. SANDAG will reimburse the transit operator for each token submitted based on the calculated value of each token at the time of sale using a first in-first out methodology. SANDAG will reimburse transit operators following submittal of tokens in the monthly distribution report.

5. Any interest accrued by SANDAG as a result of the holding of Token revenues before

allocation to the transit operators shall be paid to the operators.

27

COASTER REVENUE SHARING AGREEMENT Five percent of net COASTER Revenue, including single tickets, round-trip tickets, and Monthly Passes shall be allocated by NCTD to MTS. NCTD shall advise SANDAG of the total COASTER net revenue and pay 5 percent to SANDAG. Direct payments to participating agencies (i.e., Trolley for special event coordination) shall be deducted from the 5 percent net revenue submitted to SANDAG. Based on the data provided by NCTD, SANDAG shall forward the 5 percent share to MTS once each year in the year end distribution (June). MTS shall have the responsibility for allocating the revenue to the transit operators within the MTS organization. SANDAG will direct the funds based on the MTS allocation. SANDAG will conduct a survey at least every three years of COASTER transfers patterns. MTS may elect to the use the survey of transfer patterns to determine how the COASTER revenue is allocated among transit operators. Any interest accrued by SANDAG as a result of the holding of COASTER revenues before allocation to the transit operators shall be paid to the operators.

BOARD OF DIRECTORS AGENDA ITEM NO. 09-04-11AAPRIL 24, 2009 ACTION REQUESTED – ACCEPT

TRANSIT IMPEDIMENTS STUDY File Number 4000101

Introduction

In November 2007, the Board of Directors certified the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) and approved the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). Shortly thereafter, SANDAG and several interested parties entered into a settlement agreement which identified studies to be completed by SANDAG in preparation for the 2050 RTP (Settlement Agreement). The study regarding impediments to public transit is one element of the settlement agreement.

Discussion

As stipulated in the Settlement Agreement, the study includes: (1) all known and reasonably foreseeable financial impediments to maintaining long-term transit service levels throughout San Diego County; (2) all known and reasonably foreseeable impediments to maintaining long-term public transit ridership throughout San Diego County, and (3) all known and reasonably foreseeable recurring sources (i.e., not one-time sources) that provide, or can provide, funding to cover for operational expenses for public transit throughout San Diego County. The discussion of each transit impediment included in the report should be considered as alternatives that SANDAG could implement in order to increase and maintain service levels or increase and maintain funding for operational expenses to the fullest extent possible. The Settlement Agreement calls for the Board to consider implementation of the alternatives in the study within 60 days after it is distributed to the public.

GARY L. GALLEGOS Executive Director

Attachment: 1. Transit Impediments Study Key Staff Contacts: Dave Schumacher, (619) 699-6906; dsc@sandag.org José Nuncio, (619) 699-1908; jnu@sandag.org

Recommendation

The Board of Directors is asked to (1) accept the Transit Impediments Study for public distribution, and (2) refer the Study to the Transportation Committee for review of the alternatives identified in the report. In accordance with the Settlement Agreement, the Board will consider the alternatives that could be implemented within 60 days of the issuance of the Study.

File Number 4000101

401 B Street, Suite 800 • San Diego, CA 92101-4231 • (619) 699-1900

TRANSIT IMPEDIMENTS STUDY

April 2009

Attachment 1

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section 1: Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 5 

Transit Impediments Study Contents ............................................................................... 5 

Processing Requirements and Study Review ................................................................... 5 

Identification of Transit Funding Needs .......................................................................... 5 

Section 2: Known Financial Impediments ......................................................................................... 7 

TransNet ........................................................................................................................... 10 

State Transit Assistance ................................................................................................... 11 

Transportation Development Act ................................................................................... 12 

Federal Transit Administration Section 5307 Urbanized Area Formula Program ............................................................................................................. 13 

Federal Transit Administration 5309 Fixed Guideway Modernization ........................ 14 

Federal Transit Administration Section 5310 Formula Funds for Service to Elderly Individuals and Individuals with Disabilities .............................. 15 

Federal Transit Administration Section 5311 Non-Urbanized Area Formula Funds .................................................................................................................. 16 

Federal Transit Administration Section 5311(f) Intercity Bus Program ........................ 16 

Federal Transit Administration Section 5316 Jobs Access and Reverse Commute Program ............................................................................................ 17 

Federal Transit Administration Section 5317 New Freedom Program ......................... 17 

Section 3: Impediments to Maintaining Long-Term Ridership ...................................................... 19 

Metropolitan Transit Development Board TransitWorks Study ................................... 19 

2008 Public Opinion Survey ............................................................................................ 20 

SANDAG Coordinated Plan ............................................................................................. 22 

Regional Travel Model .................................................................................................... 23 

Technology Enhancements ............................................................................................. 24 

Section 4: Financial Impediments – Reallocation of Existing Funding Sources – TransNet Extension Ordinance ....................................................................................... 26 

Section 5: Financial Impediments – Possible New Funding Sources .............................................. 28 

Benefit Assessment Districts ............................................................................................ 29 

Parking Assessment Districts ........................................................................................... 29 

Development Impact Fees for Transit ............................................................................ 29 

Tax Increment Financing Along Transportation Corridors ........................................... 29 

Real Estate Transfer Taxes ............................................................................................... 30 

Property Taxes .................................................................................................................. 30 

iv

Vehicle License Fees ......................................................................................................... 30 

Commuter Benefits Ordinance ....................................................................................... 30 

Transit Payroll Tax for Employers ................................................................................... 31 

Parking Structure User Fees at Premium/Rapid Bus and/or Rail Stations .................... 31 

Rental Car Fees ................................................................................................................. 31 

Station Naming Rights..................................................................................................... 32 

Section 6: Other Potential Future Federal/State Funding Opportunities ..................................... 33

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 Factors Influencing Existing Riders – By Transit Service Type ............................................. 21

Table 2 Factors Influencing Interest in Future Riders – By Transit Service Type ............................. 22

5

SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION

In November 2007, the SANDAG Board of Directors certified the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) and approved the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). Shortly thereafter, SANDAG and several interested parties entered into a settlement agreement that identified studies to be completed by SANDAG in preparation for the 2050 RTP.

Transit Impediments Study Contents

The study regarding impediments to public transit is one element of the 2030 RTP Settlement Agreement (“Settlement Agreement”). The purpose of the study is to identify and analyze:

i. All known and reasonably foreseeable financial impediments to maintaining long-term transit service levels throughout San Diego County

ii. All known and reasonably foreseeable impediments to maintaining long-term public transit ridership throughout San Diego County

iii. All known and reasonably foreseeable recurring sources (i.e., not one-time sources) that provide, or can provide, funding to cover funding for operational expenses for public transit throughout San Diego County

Each of these topics is addressed in the report. The study describes both the financial and ridership factors that inhibit greater use of public transit, and includes alternatives that will be considered by the SANDAG Board of Directors after receiving public input. Alternatives were developed through the analysis of both existing and potential funding sources, while ridership alternatives were developed around opportunities stemming from recent survey data and planning activities associated with the SANDAG Coordinated Plan 2008–2012.

Processing Requirements and Study Review

This report was completed and posted on the SANDAG Web site within 12 months after the execution of the Settlement Agreement, signed by all parties on April 30, 2008. Per the Settlement Agreement, the SANDAG Board of Directors shall consider implementation of the alternatives at a public meeting to be held not more than 60 days after issuance of this report.

Identification of Transit Funding Needs

The determination of transit funding needs for operations and maintenance is an important first step in evaluating the financial impediments to maintaining long-term transit service levels in San Diego County. Significant changes have been made to the region’s transit systems in recent years that have resulted in improved system cost-effectiveness and service levels in the urban core areas that have strong transit-supportive land uses. However, these improvements also have added costs. The 2030 RTP calls for a major investment of $7 billion for the region’s existing transit system,

6

representing 42 percent of the $17 billion in funds dedicated to transit projects and services in the 2030 RTP. Much of this increase would be invested in existing bus and rail services in key travel corridors in order to provide 15-minute or better all-day service and to provide ongoing transit capital maintenance and rehabilitation needs.

Although funds are set aside for ongoing transit operations and maintenance, there is not enough money to meet the growing need. The region’s voters have approved TransNet, a sales tax measure devoted to transportation, which includes funds for maintenance and operations of the existing transit system, however, these funds alone cannot keep pace with demand. Furthermore, state funds normally used for transit operations and maintenance such as the State Transit Assistance (STA) program recently have been diverted to fund other state programs.

7

SECTION 2: KNOWN FINANCIAL IMPEDIMENTS

The lack of adequate dedicated and predictable sources of revenue for operations and maintenance is not the only major obstacle to expanding transit ridership; in recent years it has become a significant problem with each annual budget just to maintain existing transit operations. Among the dozens of local, state, and federal programs that target funding for various aspects of transportation, most are set aside for capital, many for only highway capital and operations, and only a few provide funding for transit operations. Compounding this problem are the increased costs and declining revenue now facing the transit agencies.

Background

A general overview is provided here of the relationship between transit costs and revenues, while a detailed description of federal, state, and local recurring funding sources is included in the following discussion. The graph in Exhibit 1 below tracks transit fixed-route operating costs (including administration and overhead) for the San Diego region from FY 1998 through FY 2007 and compares those costs to the Transportation Development Act Funds (TDA) and TransNet transit operations funds received in the region during the same period.

Exhibit 1

Transit Operating Revenues VS Costs and Service Provided

050

100150200250300

98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07Fiscal Year

Mill

ions

($)

Total Operating Costs TDA RevenuesTransNet Revenues for Operations

8

This exhibit shows that these two sales tax-based revenue sources have failed to keep pace with the costs of transit operations, and largely as a result of external factors (such as fuel and insurance) costs continued to climb even as the service provided, in terms of revenue miles, remained almost unchanged. According to the Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) and North County Transit District (NCTD) TDA Article 4.0 claims, the cost of operating fixed-route services, including administrative costs, grew by nearly $107 million during the ten-year period from $153.7 million in FY 1998 to $260.4 million in FY 2007. Over this same time period, TDA, the largest single subsidy source for transit operations grew by approximately $59 million, or approximately 89 percent. In June 2003, the SANDAG Board of Directors amended the TransNet Ordinance to increase the allowable share of TransNet transit funds for operations from 20 percent to 40 percent. Exhibit 1 shows the increase in available TransNet funds for operations beginning in FY 2004. During this time period and due in part to the TransNet Ordinance amendment, the TransNet revenues available for operations grew from about $9.6 million in 1998 to about $32.6 million in 2007. However, an annual gap of $16 million remained in the transit operating budgets to be filled by other revenue sources, including fares and diversion of capital funds.

Exhibit 2 shows the cost components of fixed-route operations. The transit agencies have attempted to control costs, but due to external events the agencies have limited control over many cost categories. As would be expected, labor is by far the largest component of those costs, accounting for approximately 48 percent of the operational costs. While it is a significant component of the costs, the relative proportion has decreased from 1998, when it accounted for more than 58 percent of the cost. On the other hand, components such as fuel and other energy, purchased transportation, and liability have increased from approximately 42 percent to 52 percent of the total.

Exhibit 2

Regional Fixed Route Cost Components FY 1998-2007

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

140.0

98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07

Fiscal Year

Mill

ions

($)

Labor Fuel/Utilities Purchased Transportation Other

9

The graphic in Exhibit 3 shows the relative make up of the revenues used for funding the two transit agencies’ operations over the same 10-year period.

Exhibit 3

In the early years depicted in this graphic, in excess of 45 percent of the costs of operations were paid through the farebox, among the highest in the transit industry. As costs increased over time, the regional farebox recovery ratio could not be sustained, falling to 35 percent in FY 2007. This situation was one of the main reasons MTS conducted a Comprehensive Operations Analysis (COA) in order to gain more riders and cut non-performing services. NCTD is preparing to undertake a similar operations analysis. In addition, MTS has consolidated transit operators and contracts, which has achieved considerable cost savings. As a result of these efforts, the MTS average farebox recovery increased to 42 percent as of December 2008.

For the most part TDA grew as a percentage of the total budget through FY 2001, but started declining in FY 2002. It became necessary for the transit agencies to assemble funding plans that included, most notably, diverting an increasing amount of federal funds normally used for capital replacement to operations. In 1998 the transit agencies used approximately $12 million (36%) of their $33 million combined federal formula apportionments for operations. In 2007 the transit agencies reported using nearly $37 million in federal funds for operations. Their combined apportionment totaled $63 million, meaning that 52 percent of these federal apportionments were used for operations. This resulted in the deferral of capital replacement. (It should be noted that the federal funds identified above as used for operations could have included minor amounts of discretionary funds from the federal Department of Homeland Security or from the Federal Transit Administration Jobs Access and Reverse Commute programs, which make the total federal contribution in FY 2007 slightly greater than referenced here.)

Regional Fixed Route Operating Revenues FY98-FY07

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%

45.0%

50.0%

FY98 FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07

Fares TDA TransNet STA Federal Other

10

Exhibit 2 does not fully show how complicated the funding picture is for transit agencies. Year to year, the transit boards come up with new combinations of revenues and constantly monitor system productivity to balance their budgets. More recently, FY 2008 sales tax revenues actually have declined due to the economic downturn. TransNet receipts declined by 1.4 percent and TDA went down 1.42 percent. FY 2009 appears to be even more challenging as TransNet revenues are projected to decline 4 percent for the year, and TDA apportionments have been reduced 4.96 percent. These declines are coming in a period of serious economic decline for most segments of the economy throughout the country, and so transit is experiencing effects similar to other industries.

MTS and NCTD have both taken proactive steps during the FY 1998–FY 2007 period to enhance productivity. NCTD completed its “Fast Forward” effort that looked at the system in place and revamped it to provide greater quality and more cost-effective service. More recently, MTS undertook its COA with an eye on the same goals. Both of these agencies believed that they had achieved systems that could be sustained with known revenues at that time. The recent trends described above continue to raise the concern of potentially deferring capital replacement needs in the future, which could affect operating costs as the agencies deal with more equipment and vehicle needs.

Recurring Funding Sources

The analysis of recurring funding sources includes all known and reasonably foreseeable sources that provide or can provide funding to cover operational expenses for public transit throughout San Diego County. This includes local, state, and federal sources of recurring funding:

• TransNet

• State Transit Assistance (STA)

• Transportation Development Act (TDA)

• FTA Section 5307 Urban Area Formula Funds

• FTA Section 5309 Fixed Guideway Modernization

• FTA Section 5310 Elderly Individuals and Individuals with Disabilities

• FTA Section 5311 Non-Urbanized Area Formula Funds

• FTA Section 5316 Jobs Access and Reverse Commute (JARC)

• FTA Section 5317 New Freedom

TransNet

Since 1988, TransNet, the half-cent sales tax for local transportation projects, has been instrumental in expanding the transportation system, reducing traffic congestion, and advancing critical transit projects. In November 2004, 67 percent of the county’s voters approved a 40-year extension of TransNet, which is expected to generate an additional $14 billion for public transit, highway, and local street and road improvements.

11

After off-the-top deduction of commitments for certain oversight, administration, and bicycle/pedestrian programs, 16.5 percent of the annual TransNet revenues are to be used for transit purposes, either capital or operating, with 94.25 percent of the 16.5 percent allocated by population to the transit operators. Also, 2.5 percent of the 16.5 percent goes to the transit agencies to aid in complying with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and 3.25 percent of the 16.5 percent is reserved for a competitive program to provide transportation services for seniors.

In addition, 8.1 percent of annual TransNet revenues (after off-the-top deductions) are set aside for operating costs of specific new services developed with capital investment from the TransNet Major Corridors program.

Increases in the annual apportionments to the transit agencies are subject to limitations on cost increases in cost per revenue vehicle hour and revenue vehicle mile as compared to the Consumer Price Index for San Diego County. The 8.1 percent is limited to the new services specifically identified in the TransNet Expenditure Plan.

Issues That Impede the Use of These Funds to Sustain Operations

The 2004 TransNet Extension measure attempts to help resolve the problem with finding monies to operate expanded transit service. The difficulty lies in projecting the costs over a 40-year period. It is necessary that growth of the TransNet sales tax keep up with inflation to ensure that the new service is operated through the end of the measure. Moreover, since many of the new services are still being developed, the funds will be spent on an as-needed basis, leading to unspent balances until the new services go into operation.

State Transit Assistance

In February 2009, the State Transit Assistance (STA) program (Senate Bill [SB] 620, as amended) was suspended through FY 2013 by the state. Previously, this program was the only ongoing source of state funding for day-to-day transit operations. For MTS and NCTD, this means the elimination of more than$20 million in funding for transit operations in the most recent budget year. In the past, the STA program was derived from the Public Transportation Account (PTA) and provided a source of operating and capital funding for transit operators. The PTA was funded primarily from sales tax on gasoline and diesel.

Beginning with FY 2008–2009, SB 717 (Chapter 733, Statutes of 2007) continuously authorized the transfers of sales tax revenue derived from the sale of motor vehicle fuels to the Transportation Investment Fund (TIF) to be distributed as follows: 20 percent to the Public Transportation Account, 40 percent to the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) and 40 percent to cities and counties for road maintenance and construction. This codified the Proposition 42 funding formula into law.

Within STA, 25 percent is allocated for transit capital (also part of the STIP) projects, 37.5 percent is allocated to regional transit entities according to a population formula, and the remaining 37.5 percent is allocated to regional entities to be allocated in turn to individual operators proportionately based on a revenue formula. STA funds may be used for operations provided that the transit agency’s costs do not increase at a greater rate than the Consumer Price Index (with exceptions for extraordinary costs such as fuel and liability insurance).

12

The State Controller is required to issue estimates of STA funds to be allocated to each regional entity by January 10 of each year. As the successor agency to the Metropolitan Transit Development Board, MTS retained its predecessor’s status within the TDA as a transportation planning agency and therefore receives its allocation directly from the State without SANDAG approval. However, holding no such legislative designation, NCTD receives its population and revenue formula-based share through SANDAG.

Issues That Impede the Use of These Funds to Sustain Operations

It is unclear whether or not this funding source will reemerge in the future. While it has been completely eliminated for the time being, this funding source was very susceptible to raids by the Legislature and the Governor in the past. Proposition 42 (2002) and Proposition 1A (2008) were both voter-approved initiatives which placed limitations on using these funds to supplement the state general fund. However, neither measure addressed what has been called the Spillover Account, which in simple terms, is the amount of sales tax that is attributable to spikes in fuel prices over and above increases in the prices of other commodities. Beginning with the FY 2008 budget year, the Governor’s budget included the cost of home school transportation and the debt service on previously sold transportation revenue bonds as “mass transportation” costs, and the courts have upheld this interpretation.

Transportation Development Act

The Mills-Alquist-Deddeh Act (SB 325) was enacted by the California Legislature to improve existing public transportation services and encourage regional transportation coordination. Known as the Transportation Development Act of 1971, this law provides funding to be allocated to transit and non-transit related purposes that comply with regional transportation plans. The TDA provides two funding sources including the STA described previously and the Local Transportation Fund (LTF), which is derived from a quarter cent of the general sales tax collected statewide. The State Board of Equalization, based on sales tax collected in each county, returns the general sales tax revenues to each county’s LTF.

TDA comprises the largest source of subsidy for the San Diego region’s transit operators. TDA funds may be used for a wide variety of transportation programs, including planning and program activities, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, community transit services, public transportation, and bus and rail projects. Providing certain conditions are met, counties with a population under 500,000 also may use the LTF for local streets and roads, construction, and maintenance.

Issues That Impede the Use of These Funds to Sustain Operations

TDA funds are sales-tax based and their growth relies totally on the growth of the economy. Short-term projections of sales tax receipts rely on different, more immediate factors than the trend-based long-term revenue projections. SANDAG recently developed a new financial model to better predict short-term sales tax receipts, as these revenues often are subject to fluctuations dependent on short-term economic conditions. Projecting new growth to expand service and increase ridership based on the existing tax would be too unreliable. In order to meet new needs, an increased tax rate would be likely required.

13

Federal Transit Administration Section 5307 Urbanized Area Formula Program

The Urbanized Area Formula Program makes federal resources available to urbanized areas for transit capital and operating assistance in small urbanized areas and for transportation-related planning. An urbanized area is an incorporated area with a population of 50,000 or more that is designated as such by the Bureau of the Census.

For medium and large urbanized areas such as San Diego County, the Section 5307 program does not provide assistance for operating costs such as operator salaries and overhead, but based on the need to maintain federally funded assets, this program enables transit agencies to use their Section 5307 apportionments to pay the cost of maintaining those assets. The provision, called Preventive Maintenance, allows the transit operators to recover up to 80 percent of their total maintenance costs from this source. This provision is applicable to all modes; however, use of these funds for this purpose is likely to be at the expense of funding ongoing capital needs, such as bus and other equipment replacements.

Two other special provisions under Section 5307 may be employed to direct these capital funds toward operations: the Capital Cost of Contracting and ADA Services provisions. Capital Costs of Contracting allows the transit agencies to use the Section 5307 funds to pay a portion of costs of operating contracts based on the amount of capital being provided by the contractor. The proportions vary based on the type of contract and whether the contractor provides vehicles. The transit agencies may pay up to 80 percent of the ADA operating contracts with Section 5307 funds instead of using those funds for ongoing capital needs.

Congress authorizes a multiyear federal surface transportation measure approximately every six years along with the other surface transportation programs under the Department of Transportation. The most recent authorization entitled, Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) authorized federal programs for FY 2005 through FY 2009. Based on annual levels established in the authorizing legislation, Congress then appropriates funds for FTA programs.

Urbanized Area Formula Program funds appropriated by Congress then are apportioned annually by FTA. Funds apportioned by FTA under the Urbanized Area Formula Program remain available to the recipient for four fiscal years—the year of the apportionment plus three additional years.

SANDAG is the designated recipient of the 5307 funds and apportions these funds to the transit agencies after a small portion, currently about $2.5 million, is set aside for SANDAG planning purposes. SANDAG policy has been to allocate 70 percent of the remaining funds to MTS and 30 percent to the NCTD.

Issues That Impede the Use of These Funds to Sustain Operations

As previously noted, these funds may only be used for Preventive Maintenance and certain operating contracts; however, this is not the limiting factor with regard to their use to offset operational needs. Both agencies could likely use all or nearly all of their respective apportionments toward operations through Preventive Maintenance, Capital Cost of Contracting, and ADA Services provisions. The agencies, while using substantial amounts of the Section 5307 funds for this purpose, have found it necessary to reserve certain amounts to pay the cost of ongoing capital replacement needs. Therefore, the primary obstacle is that these funds are insufficient for their needs.

14

Also, there is an inherent aspect in the federal formula under Section 5307 that exacerbates the problems of increased costs and reduced passenger revenue miles. The Section 5307 funds are distributed based in part on service provided (passenger revenue miles). The transit agencies annually prepare operating statistics for the National Transit Database. Some of those statistics then are used in the formula for apportionment. The statistics from one year will affect the distribution of funding two years later. As the transit agencies have to cut service to accommodate decline in other funds, their relative share of the national program also could be cut. In recent years, when the region’s agencies have seen cuts in service, the overall federal apportionment has been increased sufficiently to mask the impact these service cuts. Conversely, increases in service in one year can increase the regional share two years later.

Cost-effectiveness as in cost per revenue mile is another part of the formula that could have a negative impact. As costs rise in San Diego disproportionately with other areas in the country, the cost per revenue mile rises and the regional share also is impacted.

Another obstacle to the use of these federal funds for operations/increasing ridership is that the federal funds come with certain restrictions that could affect the costs for which they are used. Very specific bidding and procurement requirements are applied to operations-type contracts. As previously noted, however, the San Diego transit agencies have not let those requirements deter them from using the federal funds for Preventive Maintenance. Preventive Maintenance is limited to just maintenance and not other direct operating costs such as driver salaries, support, and administration.

Regardless, choosing between operations or capital presents a dilemma—more dollars for operating purposes means less for capital. In order to overcome the greatest obstacle, Congress would have to increase the amount authorized for this program. Currently, SAFETEA-LU is set to expire on September 30, 2009, and Congress is expected to begin work on a new authorization in the coming year. Of course, our Congressional leaders also face the obstacle of too little funding as the Federal Highway Trust Fund that includes the Mass Transit Account is virtually depleted of revenues. This is because the federal gas tax that goes into the Trust Fund has not been increased since 1997. The cost of maintaining existing infrastructure has outstripped the growth in revenues. The advent of more fuel-efficient vehicles, while perhaps falling short of the goal, has nonetheless exacerbated the problem with the Trust Fund insufficiency. Congress will be reviewing its options for enhancing or replacing the gas tax as a dedicated funding source for surface transportation programs with the next authorization.

Federal Transit Administration 5309 Fixed Guideway Modernization

This federal formula program is available to fixed guideway agencies with systems in operation for at least seven years. The term “fixed guideway” refers to any transit service that uses exclusive or controlled rights-of-way or rails, entirely or in part. The term includes heavy rail, commuter rail, light rail, trolleybus, aerial tramway, inclined plane, cable car, automated guideway transit, ferryboats, that portion of motor bus service operated on exclusive or controlled rights-of-way, and high-occupancy-vehicle (HOV) lanes. Called 5309 Rail Mod, these program funds must be used only for fixed guideway projects including Preventive Maintenance. These funds require a non-federal match of 20 percent to the federal 80 percent contribution.

15

Like Section 5307 funds, Fixed Guideway Modernization funds are authorized under SAFETEA-LU and are appropriated annually by Congress. FTA apportions these funds to the regions based on a complicated tiered formula using factors of revenue miles and route miles, and SANDAG apportions these funds directly to MTS (70%) and NCTD (30%).

Issues That Impede the Use of These Funds to Sustain Operations

The obstacles identified with the 5309 Rail Mod funds are almost identical to those related to Section 5307 funds:

• Cuts in service could result in reduced share of the total available at the national level.

• Preventive Maintenance is limited to just maintenance and not other direct operating costs, such as operator salaries, support, and administration.

• Congressional action would be needed to change the use of these funds for other operating costs, but historically, Congress has not favored operating assistance for large urbanized areas.

• Any funds used for Preventive Maintenance would not be available for capital replacement.

• The Rail Mod Program is funded from the Mass Transit Account of the Federal Highway Trust, which is approaching insolvency.

In addition, the application of these funds is more limited. While Section 5307 funds are available for any transit mode, Rail Mod funds only may be used for “fixed-guideway” systems.

Federal Transit Administration Section 5310 Formula Funds for Service to Elderly Individuals and Individuals with Disabilities

The goal of the Section 5310 program is to improve mobility for elderly individuals and individuals with disabilities throughout the country. These funds are included in this discussion as a potential source of operating revenues. The states are the direct recipients of these funds and the state implementing agencies, usually the transportation departments, determine how the funds may be used: capital and/or operations. The State of California has to date used these funds solely for capital, but that decision may be changed.

The states receive these funds on a formula basis, and the State of California through the actions of Caltrans and the California Transportation Commission (CTC) distributes them on a competitive basis.

The primary recipients of these funds are non-profit agencies that provide transportation for elderly individuals and the developmentally challenged; however, public transit agencies may apply if they can show that no nonprofits are readily available to provide service for which the capital funds are requested. In the past, nonprofit agencies have contracted with MTS and NCTD to provide required ADA services. These agencies successfully applied to the state for the purchase of vehicles using the Section 5310 funding. This then has helped hold down the cost of the contract service. Projects for new ADA services have competed well statewide.

16

Issues That Impede the Use of These Funds to Sustain Operations

The targeting of these funds to nonprofit agencies is the biggest obstacle for using these funds for public transit operations. The transit agencies cannot be certain, when they procure an operator for ADA services, that the nonprofit agency is the most qualified or most cost-effective choice. Like most FTA programs that are run through the state, this program provides a very small amount of funding, which if used for operations would bring with it the federal procurement and operating requirements. Moreover, like the other federal programs, the Section 5310 program is subject to reauthorization. There are some questions whether these smaller targeted programs will continue under a new authorization measure.

Federal Transit Administration Section 5311 Non-Urbanized Area Formula Funds

FTA apportions these funds for non-urbanized areas to the states according to a statutory formula based on each state's population in rural and small urban areas (under 50,000 population). In California, Caltrans apportions the Section 5311 funds to counties on a rural population basis. SANDAG in turn also apportions the regional funds to MTS and NCTD based on their relative rural populations according to the most recent decennial census. NCTD receives 59 percent of the funding and MTS receives 41 percent. These funds may be used for operations requiring a dollar-for-dollar match. They may be used for capital at an 80/20 federal to non-federal ratio.

Issues That Impede the Use of These Funds to Sustain Operations

These funds, like the Section 5310 program, make up a very small percentage of the transit budgets. However, their availability has enabled the agencies to provide some rural services that might not otherwise be possible. The funds cannot be used for urban or suburban transit services, so elimination of rural services also would mean the loss of this funding source. Like the other FTA programs, the Section 5311 program is subject to the next authorization measure, and like the other programs, it is unknown if and in what form the program would continue.

Federal Transit Administration Section 5311(f) Intercity Bus Program

A subsidiary program under the Section 5311 program, the Section 5311(f) program was created to help provide an intercity bus transportation system designed to address the intercity bus transportation needs of the entire state by providing financial assistance for operating, capital, and/or planning grants that support three national objectives:

• To support the connection between non-urbanized areas and the larger regional or national system of intercity bus service;

• To support services to meet the intercity travel needs of residents in non-urbanized areas; and

• To support the infrastructure of the intercity bus network through planning and marketing assistance and capital investment in facilities.

This program, while discretionary, is included in this list of recurring sources because the region’s two transit agencies have been somewhat successful in obtaining these funds to support rural operations and capital needs.

17

Federal Transit Administration Section 5316 Jobs Access and Reverse Commute Program

The goal of the Job Access and Reverse Commute program (JARC) is to improve access to transportation services to employment and employment-related activities for welfare recipients and eligible low-income individuals and to transport residents of urbanized areas and non-urbanized areas to suburban employment opportunities.

This program provides financial assistance for transportation services planned, designed, and carried out to meet the transportation needs of eligible low-income individuals and of reverse commuters regardless of income. The program requires coordination of federally-assisted programs and services in order to make the most efficient use of federal resources. The formula for JARC funds is based on the number of eligible low-income and welfare recipients in urbanized and rural areas. The region may use up to 10 percent of the JARC funds for planning, administration, and technical assistance.

JARC funding is allocated by formula to states for areas with populations below 200,000 persons, and to designated recipients for areas with populations of 200,000 persons and above. SANDAG serves as the designated recipient for the San Diego region. SANDAG apportions these funds through a competitive basis. Any projects must be included in the 2008–2012 Coordinated Plan, which serves as the federally mandated locally-developed transit and human service transportation plan.

To broaden the applicability of this program, the sources for matching funds are expanded. While most FTA programs must be matched with non-federal funds, the JARC funds may be matched with other federal funds as long as that match does not come from other Department of Transportation sources. This encourages coordination with other programs such as those funded by the Department of Health and Human Services.

The JARC funds may be used for operating at a 50 percent share or for capital at an 80 percent JARC share. While social service agencies are eligible for these funds, MTS and NCTD have been the largest recipients in the region and have used them principally for operations.

Issues That Impede the Use of These Funds to Sustain Operations

Like all of the other FTA sources, there are significant limits on the use of these funds. It remains to be seen if specialized federal programs will remain in the next authorization.

Federal Transit Administration Section 5317 New Freedom Program

The New Freedom Program is authorized in SAFETEA-LU to support new public transportation services and public transportation alternatives beyond those required by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990. Specific eligible projects include:

• Increases or enhancements related to geographic coverage, service quality, and/or service times that impact availability of transportation services for individuals with disabilities as a result of the New Freedom projects implemented in the current reporting year;

• Additions or changes to environmental infrastructure (e.g., transportation facilities, sidewalks, etc.), technology, and vehicles that impact availability of transportation services as a result of the New Freedom projects implemented in the current reporting year; and

18

• Actual or estimated number of rides (as measured by one-way trips) provided for individuals with disabilities as a result of the New Freedom projects implemented in the current reporting year.

SANDAG, as the designated recipient of these funds, distributes them on a competitive basis. MTS and NCTD may receive these grants, but nonprofit agencies also may compete and receive their funding as subrecipients of SANDAG or the transit agencies. New Freedom Program service is defined as any service or activity that was not operational on August 10, 2005, and did not have an identified funding source as of August 10, 2005, as evidenced by inclusion in the Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) or the STIP. In other words, if not for the New Freedom Program, these projects would not have consideration for funding, and proposed service enhancements would not be available for individuals with disabilities.

Issues That Impede the Use of These Funds to Sustain Operations

These funds have been targeted at expanding a very specialized service. The funds are clearly targeted at increased ridership in a small segment of the population, but they are not available for expanding general purpose transit ridership.

Summary of Recurring Funding Sources

In summary, there are very few funding options for transit operations. Legislators and funding agencies have shown a desire to fund capital improvements, leaving the cost of operations to the local entities. Moreover, the few sources available come with restrictions and/or are targeted toward addressing the needs of certain populations. Only TDA and portions of TransNet transit operating revenues have meaningful flexibility to allow the transit operators to apply them as needed.

SANDAG has worked to inform state and federal legislators of the importance of identifying resources to fund existing and expanded transit ridership. Board members and executive management joined coalitions of regional agencies, our transit agencies, and the California Transit Association to fight the elimination of STA funds. Board members and executive management have testified in Congressional hearings and outreach sessions as to the importance of public transit to the region; however, this effort cannot be achieved without a public consensus on the priority for transit funding.

In addition, when the voters approved the TransNet Extension in 2004, they approved a provision that required that SANDAG pursue an additional sales tax measure to fund long-term habitat conservation plans in the San Diego region. Originally required to be on the ballot by 2008, the SANDAG Board of Directors approved an amendment to the TransNet Extension Ordinance to extend the deadline two years from 2008 to 2010. The Board also directed staff to explore other “quality of life” areas in need of additional funding, including shoreline preservation, water quality improvements, and public transit improvements. As part of the current FY 2009 work program and proposed FY 2010 work program, SANDAG is continuing to evaluate the timing and viability of a new funding measure, including the need to find a reliable funding source for public transit.

19

SECTION 3: IMPEDIMENTS TO MAINTAINING LONG-TERM RIDERSHIP

The discussion in this section focuses on understanding the impediments to maintaining long-term ridership, both in terms of factors affecting systems development (design elements of new transit services and facilities) and those affecting systems management (the efficiency and effectiveness of the existing transit system).

Discussion

Three major efforts conducted in recent years are discussed below that highlight impediments affecting transit ridership:

• MTDB TransitWorks market research study done in 2000

• SANDAG Transit Public Opinion Survey conducted in 2008

• SANDAG 2008–2012 Coordinated Plan

In addition, two other SANDAG efforts involving an update to the regional transportation model and development of new transit technologies in the region are highlighted.

Metropolitan Transit Development Board TransitWorks Study

In 2000, the San Diego Metropolitan Transit Development Board (MTDB, now known as MTS) undertook a market research approach for its TransitWorks1 Long-Range Strategy. At the core of the MTDB long-range strategic plan effort was the belief that San Diego’s transit system should deliver services that individual travelers desire. Market segmentation was seen as a powerful tool to understand and respond to the needs of transit customers.

The market research identified the attitudinal factors that influence a person’s decision on modal choice—that is, their decision whether to drive or use transit. Two of these factors—sensitivity to one’s personal travel experience and one’s need for flexibility and speed—proved to be the key components in segmenting the San Diego market into six discrete groups of travelers. The results produced useful insights into traveler’s sensitivity to certain variables based on which group they belonged to. The highlights (organized by transit attribute) include:

• In-Vehicle Travel Time – This measure was found to be an important factor in the decision on whether to use transit, although riders making a commute trip were found to be more sensitive to this variable than the riders making a non-commute trip. Therefore, long in-vehicle travel times, when compared to a similar auto trip, are seen as a significant ridership impediment for commuters.

1 The complete study can be found at http://www.sandag.org/uploads/publicationid/publicationid_1430_9421.pdf.

20

• Wait Time for Transit – Similar to in-vehicle travel time, the wait time for transit was found to be a strong disincentive for commute trips. However, it was no more burdensome than in-vehicle travel time on average non-commute trips.

• Walk Time – Walk time reflects the walk times to and from a transit stop. The study found the sensitivity to transit walk times was similar to the sensitivity for walk times between an auto parking location and the work destination.

• Time Spent Searching for Parking – The study found that respondents on a commute trip also were found to be more sensitive to time spent searching for parking than respondents on a non-commute trip.

• Transfer Penalty – A transit rider’s sensitivity to transferring between transit routes is significantly higher than in-vehicle travel time, suggesting that minimizing the transfers and/or transfer wait time can have a strong impact on ridership.

• Cost of Travel – Cost was not seen as a significant variable in the study and sensitivity to fares was not particularly strong within any of the market segments studied. Additionally, the two segments of travelers with the highest average income were those also willing to pay for a higher quality of service if in-vehicle travel times and wait and walk times are competitive with a similar auto trip.

• Seat Availability – Seat availability was found to have a minor impact on the attractiveness of transit.

• Automobile Ownership – The lack of auto ownership was found to be a significant indicator of higher transit use as would be expected. However, access to an auto was not, in and of itself, a deterrent to transit use. Rather, the decision on whether to use transit is dependent upon the effect from the other factors discussed above as well.

The TransitWorks study process also highlighted the critical role that land use plays in determining transit ridership. Areas with transit-supportive land uses enhance passenger access to transit stations and make transit a more convenient option. Lower density auto-oriented land uses, on the other hand, make it difficult to provide transit in a convenient and cost-effective manner.

Overall, the TransitWorks process showed that the transit market is not one-dimensional in nature, but rather that the different rider types respond differently to the various factors discussed above. Through a solid understanding of the types of riders that may use a particular bus, Trolley, or COASTER service and careful attention to the service design, the ability of that service to attract and retain riders can be enhanced.

2008 Public Opinion Survey

The 2008 Public Opinion Survey2 undertaken by SANDAG was aimed at better understanding travel preferences of both existing and potential transit riders. The results of the study discuss the factors that influence the likelihood of riding transit, including the degree to which these factors can influence both current ridership and interest in riding in the future (providing a greater level of

2 The complete report and appendices can be found at http://www.sandag.org/uploads/publicationid/publicationid_1428_9419.pdf

(study) and http://www.sandag.org/uploads/publicationid/publicationid_1429_9420.pdf (appendices).

21

detail than the previous TransitWorks analysis). These factors also were designed to take into account the specific transit service types in the region including COASTER, Trolley, and bus.

The study identified nine factors that were seen as the most important transit impediments influencing existing ridership and 11 factors influencing someone’s interest in future ridership. While the factors are not ranked and the survey does not assess how difficult the factors are to change, the study does quantify how changing someone’s perceptions of these factors can increase their likelihood to ride transit. For example, it might be easier and less costly to invest in a marketing campaign that persuades potential riders that the Trolley is less stressful than the car than to make operational changes that build more stations so people have more access. While the study identifies important factors, transit experts (planning, operations, and marketing) need to assess the factors in practical terms as well.

Table 1 Factors Influencing Existing Riders – By Transit Service Type

Bus Predictors

• Ability to travel to desired locations

• Feeling safe

• Having service available when needed

Trolley Predictors

• Attended special events in the past

• Ability to travel to desired locations

• Having service available when needed

• Reducing stress

• Ability to get to destination on time

• Having flexibility to travel when needed

• Avoiding traffic

COASTER Predictors

• Ability to travel to desired locations

• Attended special events in the past

• Avoiding traffic

The same analysis was undertaken to determine the important variables in a person’s interest in riding transit in the future. Under this scenario, 11 variables were seen as the most important factors impeding future transit use as shown in the following table.

22

Table 2 Factors Influencing Interest in Future Riders – By Transit Service Type

Bus Predictors

• Avoiding traffic

• Feeling safe

• Having clean and comfortable vehicles

Trolley Predictors

• Feeling comfortable with someone else driving

• Considers themselves an environmentalist

• Ability to access multiple destinations

• Ability to get to destination on time

• Avoiding traffic

• Feeling safe

• Having clean and comfortable vehicles

• Reducing stress

COASTER Predictors

• Ability to travel to desired locations

• Feeling safe

• Attended special events in the past

• Considers themselves an environmentalist

• Avoiding traffic

SANDAG Coordinated Plan

The 2008–2012 Coordinated Plan includes a detailed evaluation of transit and social service operational deficiencies in the region.3 Two important components regarding ridership impediments are included in the report: operational deficiencies based on transit service statistics (Chapter 4), and service gaps and deficiencies based on a geographic analysis of access to transit (Chapter 7).

The evaluation of transit data stems from the regional performance evaluation program included in the 2008–2012 Coordinated Plan. This program provides a tool to annually assess the overall health of the regional public transit system. Detailed demographic data were collected to assess the transportation needs of multiple groups and the corresponding transit and social service transportation network to meet their daily needs. Additionally, specific demographic sub-groups were evaluated (including low-income persons, seniors, and disabled individuals) since these groups have a greater likelihood of being transit dependent.

3 The complete report and appendices can be found at www.sandag.org/coordinatedplan.

23

To date, the 2008–2012 Coordinated Plan has been utilized to fund several projects proposed to fill the transportation gaps discussed in the plan based on the following identified deficiencies:

• Lack of transit or social service transportation in various areas or neighborhoods of San Diego County (based on empirical mapping techniques)

• Lack of transit or social service transportation in various areas or neighborhoods of San Diego County with associated threshold densities (based on empirical mapping techniques)

• Absence of a centralized ride scheduling and dispatching center

• Lack of service to the rural areas

• Limited coordination among transit and social service agencies

• Minimal weekday or weekend service

• Lack of low-cost non-emergency medical transportation

This Plan is updated on an annual basis to monitor changing passenger needs, evolving demographics, and changes in transit service levels. The Plan provides an important tool in monitoring the performance of the existing system and indicating areas of improvement that could improve system efficiency both in terms of the rider convenience and cost effectiveness.

Regional Travel Model

The degree to which the market research and travel behavior survey results discussed above can be incorporated into the SANDAG regional travel demand model can help improve the transit ridership forecasts used in long-range planning studies and plans. SANDAG modeling staff currently is moving towards the next generation of a forecasting model involving an Activity-Based Model approach that will be able to use data from the TransitWorks and Public Opinion Survey to develop a more sophisticated set of variables in forecasting transit ridership, including:

• Perception of the various rail and bus transit modes

• Use of transit for different travel purposes

• Socioeconomic characteristics, such as car ownership, income, household size, worker status, age, gender, and education

• Travel Time

• Transit Fares

• Transit Access to Desired Locations

In the context of planning decisions, the new model also is expected to be capable of better answering policy questions such as: how to optimize the use of congestion pricing; how to optimize use of Managed Lanes; and how to evaluate benefits of transit-oriented development. In addition to being used for travel forecasts for development of the RTP and transportation corridor studies,

24

the model will be used for transportation modeling requests made to the SANDAG Service Bureau by cities, counties, other governmental bodies, and private sector clients across the region.

Technology Enhancements

There is a strong role that technology can play in improving transit operations and rider information. SANDAG completed deployment of the Regional Transit Management System (RTMS) in 2006 which provides the countywide infrastructure needed to track vehicles and deliver customer information. The RTMS is a sophisticated communications system that uses satellites to provide transit system performance, vehicle diagnostics, and life/safety emergency information.

In addition, in the last two months, SANDAG completed installation of the first set of digital message signs at several transit centers in the region as part of a longer-term plan to provide real-time transit information to passengers. The signs use cell phone technology to communicate to the RTMS network and convey real-time information about the arrival/departure status of buses serving a particular stop. This information is based on schedule deviation and the bus’ current location. In the future, SANDAG will explore solutions that enhance the bus arrival prediction to include delays from traffic impacts.

Other technology enhancements include development of transit priority treatments to reduce delays for transit buses, including signal priority measures that can extend green lights if a bus is behind schedule, queue jump lanes, and dedicated transit lanes on both local arterials and freeways. These measures can both reduce transit travel times and improve schedule reliability.

Conclusions on Impediments to Maintaining Long-Term Ridership

The discussion above indicates that maintaining long-term ridership for public transit is more complex than simply adding more resources for the regional transit system. Rather, improvements to transit can involve both systems development (how to best allocate new resources to transit) and systems management (how to better manage the existing system in order to maximize its efficiency and effectiveness). Focusing efforts in both arenas are needed to improve the attractiveness of transit to both existing and potential riders.

Systems development improvements involve the use of a variety tools to better design future rail, bus rapid transit/rapid bus, and local bus services. The TransitWorks research and the Public Opinion Survey note the importance in better understanding the transit travel markets that will be served by new services, and designing those services with the specific attributes that will attract those market segments. Those attributes range from service frequency and travel time to the vehicle and station amenities. Improvements being made to the SANDAG regional travel model will assist in this effort by incorporating many of these market research elements to better forecast potential ridership.

Systems management improvements entail the use of various tools to explore ways, on an ongoing basis, for improving the effectiveness of existing resources devoted to public transit. The technology improvements discussed above offer the potential to improve the performance of the existing system and passenger convenience with investment in relatively low-capital cost improvements. Information from the 2008–2012 Coordinated Plan helps identify existing needs that, if overcome, would improve the quality of the system for current riders and lead to increased attractiveness to potential riders. The market research and public opinion survey also provide valuable information that can be used to better tailor existing transit market outreach efforts to reach those market segments that could be attracted to transit.

25

Finally, it should be recognized that public transit is only one component of a multimodal approach to transportation solutions that are geared toward giving people better choices. We have all seen what happened to use of public transit when fuel prices went up – we now understand better the variety of ways that we pay to drive our automobiles (e.g., vehicle license fee, insurance, maintenance costs, etc.) Behavioral economics needs to be part of this discussion in order to make the overall transportation system function efficiently.

26

SECTION 4: FINANCIAL IMPEDIMENTS – REALLOCATION OF EXISTING FUNDING SOURCES – TransNet EXTENSION ORDINANCE

In addition to the impediments detailed in Section 3, this section discusses funds that are not typically applied to transit but may be applied depending on their guidelines or bylaws. One such resource is the TransNet Extension Ordinance and the various programs and funding streams associated with it. This section evaluates the flexibility of TransNet funds to cover transit operations expenses where reallocated dollars could be reprogrammed to help maintain existing transit services in TransNet project corridors as an interim step until budgets return to prior FY 2008 levels.

Background

Excluding administrative expenses, oversight, and funds for the bicycle/pedestrian/neighborhood safety program (approximately 3%), the TransNet Extension Ordinance includes a set-aside dollar amount comprising 8.1 percent of revenues collected to operate new transit services developed by the TransNet Major Corridors program. These new services are identified in the TransNet Extension Ordinance and include the Mid-Coast Corridor transit project, the Super Loop, and Interstate 15 Bus Rapid Transit (I-15 BRT), among others.

At this time, the region is conducting an analysis to compare the updated cost estimates to operate all new services identified in the TransNet Extension Ordinance with the anticipated revenues from TransNet and to provide a reassessment of the program’s financial ability to operate these new services. If these funds were to be designated to fund existing transit operations, it would put the budget capacity in jeopardy to fund the new transit project operations as envisioned in the program approved by the voters. This also would also impact the potential for federal Full Funding Grant Agreements as evidence of adequate operations funds is a requirement for competition. Any proposal to redirect funding from the 8.1 percent program to transit operations for the existing network would require an amendment to the TransNet Extension Ordinance with two-thirds approval from the SANDAG Board of Directors, acting in its role as the San Diego County Regional Transportation Commission.

It should be noted that changes to the scope of work of the TransNet program, including the elimination, addition, or substitution of capital projects also requires an amendment to the TransNet Extension Ordinance. This amendment also would require approval by a minimum of two-thirds of the SANDAG Board of Directors. It should be noted that the elimination of the Mid-Coast Corridor transit project from the program would require a vote by the people, because it was a remaining project from the original TransNet measure.

At this time, the region has embarked on the development of several new transit services: I-15 BRT, South Bay BRT, Mid-City Rapid Bus, the Super Loop, and the Mid-Coast Corridor project. Another option the SANDAG Board of Directors has is to delay the implementation of these projects and shift the capital funds to operations. While delaying implementation of a project does not require an amendment to the TransNet Extension Ordinance, diversion of capital funds to operations would require an amendment. And, as with the discussion above, the amendment would require a two-thirds of the board to approve the change (and in the case of the Mid-Coast Corridor transit

27

project, a vote of the people). All major transit capital projects are included within the Major Corridors element of the program.

Beyond shifting existing TransNet transit operating or capital dollars, other potential reallocated sources involve highway, local streets and roads, bicycle/pedestrian/neighborhood safety, and Environmental Mitigation Program (EMP) funds. All of these sources would require a two-thirds vote of the SANDAG Board of Directors, with the exception of the EMP, which would require a vote of the people. These sources are described in more detail below:

Highway Funds

There are few strictly highway program projects in the TransNet Extension Ordinance. Most “highway” projects include elements that provide benefits to transit operations. An example is the I-15 Managed Lanes, which includes Direct Access Ramps to I-15 BRT stations. Nonetheless, if the SANDAG Board of Directors were to eliminate or down-scope a capital project, the requirement would be similar as that for a transit capital project, with a required two-thirds approval from the SANDAG Board of Directors to amend the TransNet Extension Ordinance. The Major Corridors program currently receives 38 percent of the revenues collected. All major highway capital projects are included within the Major Corridors element of the program. It should be noted that, like the Mid-Coast Corridor transit project, completion of the eastern ends of State Route (SR) 52 and SR 76 could not be eliminated without a vote of the people.

Local Streets and Roads Program

One part of the TransNet program that could be used for transit operations without an Ordinance change is the Local Streets and Roads program. However, it has not been the practice of the 18 cities and the County of San Diego to apply any of their 29.1 percent of the funds from TransNet to transit operations. Eligible activities include, in addition to street, road, and transportation facility improvements, operating support for local shuttle and circulator routes and other services. Therefore, a shift of these funds to transit operations would not require an amendment to the TransNet Extension Ordinance.4

Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Neighborhood Safety Funds

The Bicycle, Pedestrian & Neighborhood Safety Program receives an off-the-top 2 percent allocation of the TransNet revenues collected. A change in the amount received by this program would require a two-thirds approval by the SANDAG Board of Directors through an amendment to the TransNet Extension Ordinance.

Environmental Mitigation Program

The Environmental Mitigation Program (EMP) included in the TransNet Extension Ordinance provides funding for mitigation needs of the Major Corridors program as well as local street and road projects. The 6.2 percent of the funds collected through TransNet are set-aside for the large scale acquisition and management of critical habitat areas and to create a reliable approach for funding mitigation required for future transportation projects. Amendments to the TransNet Extension Ordinance regarding this program would require a vote of the people.

4 Any jurisdiction could decide to spend their funds on transit operations without a TransNet amendment. However, a change in the

formula dictating how the 29.1 percent funds are shared amongst the cities would require a TransNet amendment.

28

SECTION 5: FINANCIAL IMPEDIMENTS – POSSIBLE NEW FUNDING SOURCES

Beyond the reallocation of TransNet, several other funding sources were evaluated based on the feasibility of these sources to fund transit operations. These sources would potentially offer new revenue and not allocate existing revenue away from existing programmed projects, as is the case with reallocating TransNet dollars.

Quality of Life Funding Initiative

The creation of a Quality of Life funding measure is a potential option to increase available dollars for transit operations. A challenge to implementing this initiative as a tax would be that, contrary to the last approval where it merely was extending an existing tax, this measure would be new tax. Additionally, the current economic crisis may constrain the opportunity to advance an additional measure. Therefore, before the region embarks on asking the voters for an increase, careful assessment of priority issues for the voters should be made.

Among the priorities being evaluated is funding for dedicated transit operations, funding for additional transportation capital improvements, and funding for other quality of life areas, such as open space, habitat acquisition, water quality improvement projects, sand replenishment at local beaches, and others. An increase, however, would provide the region with the greatest amount of flexibility and stability as the revenues would be controlled regionally. A new sales tax also would create a new source of revenue to supplement existing sources. It also should be noted that a Quality of Life measure could be implemented through exercising one or several of the alternatives offered below.

Increased Transit Fares

Increasing transit fares is one way to increase revenue for transit operations. Since 2007, SANDAG periodically has increased fares upon request by the transit agencies. In addition, SANDAG has developed a Regional Comprehensive Fare Study with the original goal of achieving a single, simplified, equitable structure for both operators. With the current financial constraints facing MTS and NCTD, this goal has been amended also to include how best to maximize transit revenues.

At the same time, it is recognized that there are clear limitations on raising fares, and there are market forces that need to be carefully considered. It should be emphasized that fare increases are not easily accomplished, and that modification to fare policy will not by itself change the dynamics of the situation facing public transit in this region. The Comprehensive Fare Study will be brought to the SANDAG Board of Directors in spring 2009.

Potential Local and Regional Public Transit Revenue Sources

Other solutions to finding new sources of money also were evaluated based on their potential application as regional funding measures. These include the creation of assessment districts, levying fees, or taxes, which have been pursued by other regions or in other jurisdictions at the local level. Consideration of these possible solutions and alternatives generates a number of policy questions;

29

the answers to some of which may require changes in state and/or federal law. These solutions offer ancillary funding streams or could potentially replace the need for a sales tax initiative.

The process to implement the local revenue mechanisms would be dictated to a large extent by the purpose and administration of the funds. As required by Proposition 218, any tax that is collected for a special purpose (e.g., for transportation infrastructure or transit services), as the proposals in this report would be, is defined as a “special tax” subject to the two-thirds voter supermajority approval. Funding mechanisms based on real property that are structured as “fees” to pay for specific improvements or services could be implemented as a simple local city or county regulation. If a portion of these fees exceeds the reasonable cost of these improvements or services, however, then the “fee” would actually be a “tax” subject to a two-thirds voter supermajority approval.

Other Alternative Funding Mechanisms

A number of other alternative funding mechanisms were evaluated and are highlighted below.

Benefit Assessment Districts

Benefit Assessment Districts allow a public agency to construct and maintain improvements, such as traffic signals, parks, and others. Project costs are assessed within the boundaries of the designated benefit area of the county or city. Benefit Assessment Districts have several advantages: they tie financing of specific projects to beneficiaries; they allow different levels of infrastructure and services to vary with different demands for these public goods; and they allow an area that wants better infrastructure the ability to fund desired improvements itself. However, there are certain disadvantages. These include potential fragmentation of infrastructure and services, varying between those areas that want to pay for the improvements, and those that do not.

Parking Assessment Districts

Parking Assessment Districts would allow the region to assess fees on certain parking spaces within defined areas. A surcharge or fee on parking spaces through Parking Assessment Districts in congested areas, such as downtown San Diego or other major employment centers, would help raise additional revenue and reduce traffic congestion.

Development Impact Fees for Transit

Development Impact Fees (DIF) are fees collected by local agencies to grant development permits that are tied to certain infrastructure improvements. The DIF also could be a vehicle to fund regional transportation mitigation projects. An analysis of these options must include recognition that DIFs may be opposed by the development community, as additional fees would increase their cost of doing business. Public agencies also may find it hard to bond against projected DIF revenue, since the revenues materialize only once the development is implemented. Additionally, a nexus study would be required to justify the fees and their relationship between the cost of the transit services provided and the area served.

Tax Increment Financing Along Transportation Corridors

Tax Increment Financing (TIF), in contrast to DIFs, is made up of two components. The first is base revenues, which are the property taxes collected based on existing assessed property values. The

30

second component is the tax increment, which represents the new revenues in excess of the base revenues that are generated based on the higher assessed value of the new development. TIFs can only be imposed by cities and the County, but may be opposed by local agencies as they limit the amount of revenues that are collected in an area positively impacted by the construction of infrastructure, in this case transportation improvements. A mitigating action in the creation of TIFs is that the local agencies could keep the tax increment upon completion of payment of the financing of the transportation infrastructure.

Real Estate Transfer Taxes

Real Estate Transfer Taxes (RETT), also referred as deed recordation taxes, are imposed on the sale or transfer of real property. The fees usually are based on or measured by the consideration paid for or the fair market value of the real estate. Thirty-five states already use RETTs to generate revenue. Some of the uses in other jurisdictions in California and Oregon for revenues derived from RETTs include: affordable housing programs, open space, parkland acquisition and maintenance, and transportation infrastructure. In California, RETTs may be imposed only at the local level by cities and counties. The level of revenues generated depends on the rate, though in the San Diego region the high level of real estate valuations also would influence the amount of revenues. California law allows up to a maximum of $0.55 per $500 of the value of the property being conveyed. There may be some opposition to the imposition of these RETTs precisely because property owner tax bills may be considered high due to these higher property values. RETTs already are collected in San Diego County, and an increase would likely require a two-third supermajority voter approval to take the tax level above existing statutory levels.

Property Taxes

Property taxes on land and building values are generally the principal source of revenue for local governments. Portions of local property taxes are authorized widely for use by special districts and authorities, including transit agencies and school districts. Unlike RETTs, property taxes can provide an annual versus one-time funding source for public transit. Traditionally, support for public transportation has been derived from sources other than property tax to avoid competition with other basic public services such as health, education, police, and fire protection. However, with existing sources of transit funding being reduced or eliminated, property tax assessments for transit could provide a valuable tool to reduce the gap between operating costs and revenues.

Vehicle License Fees

Another potential funding source is increased revenues through an increase in annual Vehicle Registration Fees. Assembly Bill (AB) 2766 (Richmond, 1990) allows air districts to set a fee of up to $4 for the registration of vehicles within their jurisdictions. The San Diego Air Pollution Control District (APCD) currently levies a fee of $2 under AB 2766. Other existing legislation, AB 923 (Firebaugh, 2004), allows the APCD to charge an additional $2 for a total of up to $6. The first $4 of these funds typically is used for projects and programs that reduce emissions, including transit services (the Sorrento Valley COASTER Connection services were funded, in part, by the APCD through FY 2008). The additional $2 cannot be spent on transit projects and is limited to Carl Moyer projects, agricultural sources, lower emission school buses, accelerated vehicle retirement, and repair programs.

31

Section 44225 of the California Health and Safety Code states that a district may increase the fee by having the APCD governing board approve a resolution approving the fee increase and outlining a corresponding program for expenditure. Section 44325 of the Code provides that, "a district may use these funds to enter into, and implement, agreements with agencies which directly provide carpool, vanpool, or other ridesharing or transit services to provide these services.” The County Board of Supervisors sits as the APCD governing board for San Diego County.

Commuter Benefits Ordinance

San Francisco currently has an ordinance, which requires businesses with 20 or more workers to offer a commuter benefits program that allows employees to use pre-tax dollars for their commute expenses. Employers benefit from lower payroll taxes. This type of ordinance has the potential to have a direct ridership benefit for the transit agencies while encouraging mode shift in current non-riders. However, this type of program still requires that transit agencies subsidize trips made by pass holders.

Transit Payroll Tax for Employers

A transit payroll tax involves a tax imposed directly on the employer based on its gross payroll regardless of whether the employees use transit or not. The Portland, Oregon payroll tax is levied by the Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District (TriMet) and the Lane County Mass Transit District (LTD). A payroll tax in San Diego potentially could generate more revenue than a commuter benefits ordinance since it could be developed to meet existing budget gaps. While the above example of a commuter benefits ordinance has the advantage of encouraging public transit ridership, this type of payroll surcharge has the potential to cover unsubsidized gaps in operating costs and revenues. SANDAG does not currently have the authority to levy transit payroll taxes.

Parking Structure User Fees at Premium/Rapid Bus and/or Rail Stations

Parking structures and other facilities located at premium, rapid bus, and rail stations often are filled to capacity. A potential revenue source would be to establish user fees at these facilities. Care must be exercised to develop a fee structure that does not discourage use of the bus or rail service to the point that it significantly reduces ridership. User fees also can help manage the use of this limited resource – parking space availability.

Rental Car Fees

Rental car fees, more commonly found in rental agreements that originate at airports, are levied in jurisdictions across the United States. While these fees are sometimes used to pay for facilities directly associated with the airport (parking structures or new terminals, for example) some jurisdictions levy these fees to pay for facilities that are not associated with airport improvements, such as stadium expansions or renovations. An option is to establish rental car fees that provide funding for transit system operations as mitigation for their contribution to congestion on the local street and highway network. These rental car fees could be extended to rental car agreements originating at locations other than airports. SANDAG does not have the authority to impose rental car fees.

32

Station Naming Rights

Advertising can provide a source of income with minimal associated overhead costs. Revenues from advertising typically flow directly or indirectly to the operating agencies from single or multiyear advertising contracts. Advertising revenue opportunities can include both electronic and print formats, with print ads opportunities on both buses and at transit stations. Revenue from advertising is typically modest, from 0.1 percent to about 3.0 percent of operating revenue. A targeted advertising strategy focused on station naming rights for new transit services, such as the planned BRT/Rapid Bus stations for example, could present the opportunity to help subsidize operations or maintenance costs at these stations. Any new transit advertising strategy would need to be consistent the SANDAG Board Policy No. 034 on Advertising.

33

SECTION 6: OTHER POTENTIAL FUTURE FEDERAL/STATE FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES

Beyond possible new regional and local funding sources covered in the previous section, this chapter evaluates potential future opportunities to develop new federal or state funding sources. These include possible changes or new programs in the next federal authorization measure, leveraging of new climate change legislation, public/private partnership opportunities, and transit/social service transportation coordination.

Next Federal Surface Transportation Authorization Measure

SAFETEA-LU is set to expire on September 30, 2009, setting the stage for a new transportation authorization. As in previous authorizations, a step increase in the amount of funding is anticipated. However, it should be noted that federal transit formula funds cannot be used directly for operations of transit services. In order for the new authorization to offer meaningful operations assistance to transit agencies, a dedicated revenue source for transit operations through a set-aside or a revised revenue-collection method that benefits transit operations would need to be included. Increased funds to rehabilitate existing infrastructure would also need to be identified to mitigate the transit agencies’ difficult choice to defer preventive maintenance and rehabilitation in favor of operations (preventative maintenance). More money under the existing mechanisms would provide additional funds for capital projects, but additional flexibility in the use of the funds also would be beneficial.

Assembly Bill 32 Scoping Plan – Cap and Trade Options

California is working closely with other states and Canadian provinces in the Western Climate Initiative (WCI) to design a regional cap-and-trade program that can deliver reductions of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions throughout the region. The California Air Resources Board (CARB) is expected to develop a cap-and-trade program for California that will link with the programs in the other WCI Partner Jurisdictions to create a regional cap-and-trade program. SANDAG will coordinate with CARB to ensure that transit is made eligible to receive credits/allocations through such a program.

Transit Operations and Protection Plan

For state highways, California has a State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP), which sets aside state transportation funds for the ongoing maintenance of the state’s highway system. By state law, these expenditures are given priority over new construction and are funded “off the top” of the State Highway Account before any funding for new construction projects is allocated. A similar program, a local Transit Operation and Protection Program (TOPP), potentially could be created for transit (no such program currently exists).

34

In order to pursue any of these alternative funding sources, SANDAG would need to commit to the following actions:

• Work with the California Transit Association (CTA), the American Public Transit Association (APTA), and other advocacy groups to ensure that transit operations and maintenance are no longer diverted to other programs and that fund levels are increased over time

• Determine the feasibility of a TOPP to increase the priority for transit operations and maintenance funds

• Based on this feasibility analysis, one option may be to develop a local funding source, in conjunction with MTS and NCTD, as part of the potential Quality of Life initiative that will create a TOPP. Another option would be to work with other transit agencies, regional transportation planning agencies, and other Metropolitan Planning Organizations to create a statewide TOPP.

• Continue to work closely with MTS and NCTD to improve transit cost-effectiveness while increasing service along key corridors.

These four options represent “off-the-top” funding alternatives that can help ensure that adequate transit operating funds are identified, prioritized, and programmed into the annual budget process.

System Coordination and Public/Private Partnerships

Beginning with a mandate included in SAFETEA-LU, SANDAG now incorporates overall system coordination in the Coordinated Plan. This entails the evaluation of transportation provided by both public transit and social service transportation providers. With the evaluation of social service transportation now part of the overall planning framework, opportunities have begun to arise regarding potential opportunities for social service and public transit coordination. These opportunities have the potential to reduce costs through use of the most appropriate vehicle to fit the service need and through the pooling of maintenance and insurance. Additionally, the Consolidated Transportation Services Agency (CTSA) for the San Diego region, Full Access and Coordinated Transportation (FACT), has successfully received funding under SAFETEA-LU to develop a coordinated approach to regional mobility management. SANDAG manages the CTSA contract and has committed to update the 2008–2012 Coordinated Plan to take full advantage of regional investments in transportation coordination.

Under the 2008–2012 Coordinated Plan, opportunities also may exist for public/private partnerships within the transit system. One potential example of this is first- and last-mile services that provide access to job sites from regional rail and BRT services. Options should be explored where the nonprofit social service or private sector could make use of existing and under-utilized resources (e.g. existing employer shuttles) to provide first- and last-mile service. Care would need to be exercised so that partnerships would not lead to reduced transit ridership due to service and/or fare changes outside regional control.

BOARD OF DIRECTORS AGENDA ITEM NO. 09-04-11BAPRIL 24, 2009 ACTION REQUESTED – DISCUSSION

EVALUATION OF POSSIBLE SHORT-TERM FUNDING ALTERNATIVES File Number 1110200

Introduction

The SANDAG Board of Directors and Transportation Committee held a joint meeting on April 10, 2009, to discuss the status of transit operations funding in the San Diego region. At that meeting, Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) and North County Transit District (NCTD) staffs provided an overview of their agency operating budgets. SANDAG staff summarized federal and state transportation funding sources, and provided a primer on the TransNet local sales tax measure and an overview of the Transit Impediments Study. A number of public speakers also testified at the meeting. At the conclusion of the meeting, the Board of Directors postponed any action on the item, and directed staff to report back at a later date with an evaluation of additional funding options for transit operations.

Among other items, the Transit Impediments Study (Board Agenda Item No. 11A) provides a summary of all known and reasonably foreseeable recurring sources that provide, or can provide, funding to cover operational expenses for public transit in the San Diego region. Many of these possible sources of recurring revenue are longer-term proposals that would take time to fully develop.

The intent of this report is to summarize possible short-term alternatives that could provide “bridge funding” for public transit operations. In addition to the possible options identified by staff and discussed in more detail below, another option could be to take no action. The MTS and NCTD FY 2010 transit operating budgets are under development and have not yet been formally approved by the respective transit boards. The SANDAG Board of Directors could consider forwarding any short-term funding option that it considers appropriate, to the MTS and NCTD Boards for further evaluation within the context of the transit agency budget development process.

Discussion

TransNet Local Street and Road Funding

One possible short-term funding alternative for transit operations is the use of funds from the TransNet Local Street and Road Program, which are distributed to the 18 cities and County of San Diego using a formula based on population and maintained miles of roadway. Local jurisdictions could elect to use these funds for transit operations support without any change to the TransNet Ordinance. The relevant provision is found in Section 2(C)(1) of the TransNet Extension Ordinance and Expenditure Plan:

2

“At least 70% of the revenues provided for local street and road purposes should be used to fund direct expenditures for construction of new or expanded facilities, major rehabilitation and reconstruction of roadways, traffic signal coordination and related traffic operations improvements, transportation-related community infrastructure improvements to support smart growth development, capital improvements needed to facilitate transit services and facilities, and operating support for local shuttle and circulator routes and other services.” [bold font added]

In addition, as part of its March 27, 2009, action on the federal American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funding, the Board of Directors approved an exchange of ARRA stimulus funds with local TransNet funds. This action resulted in a one-time $51 million augmentation of Local Street and Road funds, which is on top of the annual TransNet allocations. Table 1 below shows the estimated shares each local jurisdiction would receive from both the one-time ARRA augmentation, and the estimated normal allocation of TransNet Local Street and Road funds for FY 2010. The result is approximately 75 percent more funds than a typical year for use by each of the local agencies in FY 2010.

Table 1. TransNet Local Streets and Roads Funding ARRA Augmentation and Proposed FY 2010 Annual Allocation (in $1,000s)

Jurisdiction

ARRA Augmentation

Proposed FY 2010

Carlsbad $1,767 $2,332

Chula Vista $3,360 $4,451

Coronado $390 $502

Del Mar $149 $181

El Cajon $1,517 $2,001

Encinitas $1,091 $1,434

Escondido $2,220 $2,935

Imperial Beach $476 $616

La Mesa $991 $1,301

Lemon Grove $466 $603

National City $924 $1,212

Oceanside $2,896 $3,834

Poway $997 $1,309

San Diego $20,168 $26,798

San Marcos $1,314 $1,731

Santee $918 $1,204

Solana Beach $301 $383

Vista $1,457 $1,921

County of San Diego $9,569 $12,706

Total Funding $50,972 $67,456

Blue and Orange Line TransNet-ARRA Exchange of Funds

Another potential option is to exchange some of the funds that MTS has pledged for the Blue and Orange Line TransNet Early Action Program (EAP) project. The scope of this project is to retrofit and upgrade all Blue and Orange line stations for low-floor vehicles as well as to acquire the low-floor

3

vehicles needed on this line. In addition, there is the need to rehabilitate many elements of these lines, including sections of track and catenary wire. The total cost of this combined project is estimated to be approximately $434 million (in 2008 dollars).

This project is expected to be funded with a variety of funding sources. Table 2 below shows the potential and proposed dollar amounts by funding source. The potential funding available for the project is expected to be about $514 million. However, the actual timing and availability of some of these funding sources are uncertain (see discussion below). Therefore, the proposed funding available is estimated to be approximately $456 million. This difference provides potential opportunities to address other transit funding needs, including transit operations.

Table 2. Potential Funding and Proposed Budget for Blue & Orange Line Upgrades1

Source Potential Amount ($000s)

Proposed Budget ($000s)

Comments

TransNet Major

Corridors

221,647 221,647 Funds mostly from bond proceeds, which are not

eligible for operations; additional funding from

sales tax receipts

MTS’s Proposition 1B

PTMISEA*

164,000 164,000 Subject to annual state budget process; currently

only approximately $27.7 million has been made

available by the state. Funding not eligible for

operations.

MTS’s ARRA Federal

Economic Stimulus

45,468 45,468 Funding not eligible for operations.

MTS’s FTA Section

5307

25,000 25,000 Available over a five-year period. Funding not

eligible for operations.

Prop. 1A High Speed

Rail (estimate only)

57,855 0 Funding not yet available. This is only a

preliminary estimate of the region’s possible

share of these state bond funds. Actual amount

will be dependent on future state guidelines for

the distribution of light rail transit (LRT)

modernization element. Funding not eligible for

operations.

Total 513,970 456,115

*Public Transportation Modernization, Improvement and Service Enhancement Account

The reason why more funds appear to be available than proposed to be budgeted is that a number of additional funding sources either have become recently available or may become available in coming months. Up until just a few months ago, the project was funded only with TransNet and MTS’s Prop. 1B PTMISEA funds. In December 2008, the California Transportation Commission (CTC)

1 Grade separations are not currently included in the upgrade project.

4

began the process to develop options to distribute funding from the Prop. 1A High Speed Rail bond measure and developed a potential funding distribution scenario.

MTS’s FTA funding available through ARRA also provides additional capital funding, all of which MTS has identified for projects along the Blue and Orange line corridors. Lastly, in discussions with MTS to develop ideas to fund the rehabilitation components of the Blue and Orange lines, MTS staff has suggested the potential use of $25 million over five years from its Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 5307 formula funds for this purpose.

It is important to note the risks and limitations associated with some of these funds. In particular, of the $164 million in MTS’s Prop. 1B PTMISEA funds, only approximately $27.7 million has been made available by the state. An additional $15 million has been appropriated by the Legislature, but due to the state’s continuing budget crisis, these funds have not yet been released. It is not known at this time when the Legislature will appropriate the remainder of the Prop. 1B funds.

Regarding the Prop. 1A program, CTC has not taken further action regarding the distribution of funds since its initial discussion in December 2008. It is anticipated that CTC will resume the process once the state’s ability to issue bonds has been stabilized and the Legislature appropriates the funds. Of all the funding sources available for this project, the Prop. 1A funds involve the highest level of uncertainty and are not proposed to be budgeted at this time. This funding source is therefore excluded from the proposed budget sources for this project.

Exchange of Funds Option

An exchange of MTS’s ARRA funds for TransNet would be similar to the recent action approved by the Board to exchange TransNet funds for ARRA stimulus funds to the 18 cities and the County. The proposed budget for the project totals about $456 million, and the estimated project cost (in 2008 dollars) is approximately $434 million; this yields approximately $22 million that are not required at this time. Given the significant amount of additional funds that have recently been made available for the Blue and Orange Line Upgrade project, a potential option to bridge the transit operating budget shortfalls is to consider an exchange of funds. The TransNet Ordinance allows for such exchanges to occur. Section 7 of the TransNet Ordinance states the following:

“A. The Commission, or agencies receiving funds by annual or multi-year agreement, may exchange or loan funds provided that the percentage of funds allocated for each purpose as provided in Section 4 is maintained over the duration of the measure and reviewed as part of each 10-year comprehensive program review as described in Section 17. All proposed exchanges, including agreements between agencies to exchange or loan funds, must include detailed fund repayment provisions, including appropriate interest earnings such that the Commission suffers no loss of funds as a result of the exchange or loan. All exchanges must be approved by the Commission and shall be consistent with any and all rules approved by the Commission relating thereto.

B. The Commission may exchange revenues for federal, state, or other local funds allocated or granted to any public agency or outside the area of jurisdiction of the Commission to maximize effectiveness in the use of revenues. Such federal, state, or local funds shall be distributed in the same manner as the revenues from the measure.”

5

It should be noted that, due to language included in the bond-issuance covenants, none of the TransNet funds available through bond proceeds are eligible for redirection to fund transit operations. Only TransNet funds that are collected through direct sales tax receipts are eligible for this exchange.

While this amount of TransNet Major Corridors funding could be made available to help bridge the transit operating shortfalls, two issues should be noted. First, in order to complete the entire TransNet Major Corridors program of projects, matching funds are needed to supplement the TransNet funds over the life of the program. While this exchange is an allowable action by the Board, the redirection of funds away from the Major Corridors program will increase the challenge to secure additional funds to complete the program. Second, while approving an exchange of funds to bridge the operating budget shortfalls at this time could provide short-term relief, it does not help solve the structural fiscal challenges that the transit agencies are facing.

GARY L. GALLEGOS Executive Director

Key Staff Contacts: Charles "Muggs" Stoll, (619) 699-6945, mst@sandag.org José A. Nuncio, (619) 699-1908, jnu@sandag.org

BOARD OF DIRECTORS AGENDA ITEM NO. 09-04-12APRIL 24, 2009 ACTION REQUESTED – APPROVE

HIGH PRIORITY PROJECTS FOR THE NEXT FEDERAL SURFACE TRANSPORTATION AUTHORIZATION File Number 7000900

Introduction

On August 10, 2005, the President signed into law SAFETEA-LU, the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (Public Law 109-59). The measure provides $244 billion in guaranteed funding over five years (FY 2005–FY 2009) for highways, highway safety, and public transportation. It is the current federal law that establishes the authority to appropriate general revenues and to spend trust fund monies for highways and transit.

Recommendation

The Board of Directors is asked to approve the list of regional High Priority Projects for the next federal surface transportation authorization, for submittal to our Congressional delegation (Attachment 2).

The U.S. House of Representatives Transportation and Infrastructure (T&I) Committee Chairman Jim Oberstar (D-MN) has indicated his intent to introduce a draft six-year surface transportation authorization bill before the Memorial Day recess, with the hope of passing an approximately $500 billion bill out of committee in June. However, without a clear source of additional revenues to fully fund the next multi-year measure, it is unlikely that Congress will pass a new transportation authorization before SAFETEA-LU expires on September 30, 2009. A minimum one-year extension is expected.

In anticipation of releasing a draft House bill in late May, on April 2, 2009, the T&I Committee notified House members that a small percentage of the bill would be available for member-designated High Priority Projects (HPP), which must be submitted within a very tight timeframe (Attachment 1). Members of Congress must submit their HPP proposals to the T&I Committee between April 27 and May 8, 2009. To meet these deadlines, Congressional members have asked regional agencies such as SANDAG to submit HPP proposals as soon as April 20, 2009.

Discussion

Earmarked projects have been included in previous surface transportation authorization measures. As with prior measures, the T&I Committee expects a small percentage of the next authorization will be available for High Priority Projects. According to Committee staff, the next multi-year measure is expected to range between $300 billion and $500 billion, and discretionary funding (available for HPPs) would be about one percent of the total bill, or $3 billion to $5 billion. As a rule of thumb, the San Diego region typically receives approximately one percent of available federal transportation funding, making the expected range of HPP funding $30 million to $50 million (not

including New Starts/Small Starts proposals). A six-year measure would likely extend through FY 2015.

HPP funding can be requested for highway, bridge, public transit, New Starts/Small Starts, passenger rail, freight rail, and intermodal freight improvements, and other projects. The T&I Committee will focus on performance and accountability throughout the HPP submission and selection process. To ensure that projects selected result in tangible transportation benefits, the following requirements apply:

• Projects must meet all statutory requirements, including meeting federal program eligibility requirements, and project eligibility will be verified by the U.S. Department of Transportation;

• Sponsors must identify the source of at least 80 percent of funding for a project phase or segment (the intent of this provision is to increase the likelihood that construction of the project will be underway during the term of the authorization);

• To ensure projects have significant state or local support, at least one letter of support for the project from a state department of transportation (i.e., Caltrans) or governmental agency is required, and the designated agency must specify the process by which there will be opportunity provided for public comments; and

• Specific provisions for transparency and accountability apply, including financial certifications that Members of Congress must sign; these certifications and project requests also must be made available on Member Web sites.

As with the annual federal transportation appropriations process, SANDAG staff has been working with Caltrans, Metropolitan Transit System (MTS), and North County Transit District (NCTD) staffs to identify regional highway and transit project priorities that best meet the established requirements. The list of recommended regional projects is included in Attachment 2. In general, these proposals come from the TransNet Early Action Program, MTS and NCTD Capital Improvement Programs, or other established Board priorities (e.g., Destination Lindbergh), and they are included in the Regional Transportation Plan. Given the very tight timeframes established by the T&I Committee for project submittals, a formal process to solicit local projects was not practicable. However, staff has included in the regional list several local roadway and interchange projects and other local priorities. These local project priorities were submitted based on input received from the staffs of the 18 cities and the County of San Diego. Some of these projects either have received prior federal appropriations through Congress and/or federal formula funding through previous SANDAG competitive solicitations, while others would be entirely new to the federal process.

Next Steps

Following Board approval of the list of HPP proposals, staff will coordinate with the San Diego Congressional offices on the submittal of the T&I Committee project request forms. In the future, relevant committees in the U.S. Senate are expected to conduct a similar process of identifying key projects for the next authorization, although no specific timetable has been announced. Staff will continue to monitor ongoing Congressional discussions and relevant legislation and provide updates to the Executive Committee and Board of Directors, as appropriate.

2

3

It is important to note that these HPP requests supplement the SANDAG-specific priorities adopted by the Board at its March 27, 2009, meeting (Attachment 3). SANDAG will continue to work with the San Diego Congressional delegation and the key House and Senate Committees to advocate for these priorities, which include requests for increased overall funding and also call for increased federal attention and specific funding for goods movement, public transit, border-related, and nonmotorized programs.

GARY L. GALLEGOS Executive Director Attachments: 1. House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee letter to Members dated

April 2, 2009 2. List of Recommended High Priority Projects 3. SANDAG Proposed Priorities for Next Federal Surface Transportation

Authorization Key Staff Contact: Victoria Stackwick, (619) 699-6926; vst@sandag.org

4

Attachment 1

5

6

7

Metropolitan Transit System (MTS)

Blue Line Station Improvements Transit $20 million

MTS East County Bus Maintenance Facility Transit $10 millionSANDAG LOSSAN Corridor Improvements Transit $20 millionMTS Low Floor Vehicles Transit $30 millionNorth County Transit District (NCTD)

Positive Train Control Transit $60 million

MTS/NCTD Regional Bus Replacements Transit $10 millionMTS Regional Transportation Management System Transit $8.3 millionSANDAG/Chula Vista South Bay Bus Rapid Transit/Intermodal Transit Center Otay

Mesa—Right-of-Way, Final Design, and ConstructionTransit $38 million

MTS South Bay Bus Maintenance Facility Transit $10 millionNCTD SPRINTER Expansion (Double Tracking and Grade

Separations)Transit $20 million

NCTD Rail Station Improvements Transit $2.5 million SANDAG Transit First Priority Measures Transit $3 million

SANDAG Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project New Starts $580 million

SANDAG/City of San Diego Airport Intermodal Transportation Center Highway $65 million SANDAG/Port of San Diego 32nd Avenue Ground Access Improvement Highway $20 millionSANDAG/Port of San Diego 10th Avenue Access to Port of San Diego Highway $12 million LOCAL - Escondido Bear Valley Parkway Highway $0.7 million LOCAL - City of San Diego C Street Corridor Highway $40 millionLOCAL - Del Mar Camino Del Mar Bike Bridge Highway $1.5 million LOCAL - Escondido Citracado Parkway Highway $0.25 million LOCAL - Oceanside College Boulevard Raising Highway $7 millionLOCAL - La Mesa Downtown Village Streetscape Improvements Highway $2 million LOCAL - Imperial Beach Eco Bikeway Project Highway $2 million LOCAL Encinitas Encinitas Grade Separated Pedestrian Crossing Highway $19 million LOCAL - Solana Beach Highway 101 Revitalization Highway $15 million SANDAG/Caltrans Interstate 5 Highway $20 millionLOCAL - City of San Diego Interstate 5/Genesee Avenue Interchange Highway $65.7 million SANDAG Interstate 5 South-Grade Separations at E and H Streets Highway $10 million*SANDAG Interstate 15, Mid-City Improvements and Transit Stations and

ParkingHighway $20 million

SANDAG/Caltrans Interstate 805 North Segment Highway $20 millionSANDAG/Caltrans Interstate 805 South Segment Highway $20 millionLOCAL - City of San Diego Interstate 805/Palm Avenue - Phase 3 Highway $53 million LOCAL - Chula Vista Interstate 805/Main Street Interchange Highway $10 million*LOCAL - Oceanside Melrose Extension Highway $10 millionLOCAL - Escondido/San Marcos Nordahl Bridge Replacement Highway $5 millionLOCAL - City of San Diego Old Otay Mesa Road Highway $2.9 million COUNTY Otay Mesa Road - State Route 25 to East (Alta) Highway $10 million*LOCAL - National City Plaza Boulevard Widening Highway $20 millionCOUNTY South Santa Fe Avenue Road Widening Highway $54.4 millionSANDAG/Caltrans State Route 11 Highway $47 million COUNTY State Route 67/Bradley Avenue Interchange Highway $25.8 millionSANDAG/Caltrans State Route 67 Widening Highway $10 million*LOCAL - Coronado State Route 75/State Route 282 Highway $20 millionSANDAG/Caltrans State Route 76 East (Mission to Interstate 15) Highway $10 million*SANDAG/Caltrans State Route 78 Widening Highway $10 million*SANDAG/Caltrans State Route 94/State Route 125 Interchange Highway $10 million*SANDAG/Caltrans State Route 94/Interstate 5 Highway $10 million*LOCAL - Lemon Grove State Route 125/Troy Street Interchange Highway $10 millionCity of San Diego State Route 163/Friars Road Interchange Highway $116 millionSANDAG/Caltrans State Route 905/Interstate 805 Interchange Highway $10 million*LOCAL - Del Mar Streetscape Improvements from 15th Street to 8th Street on

Highway 101Highway $3 million

LOCAL - City of San Diego University Avenue Mobility Plan Highway $4.8 millionLOCAL - Del Mar Via de la Valle and Camino Del Mar Intersection

Improvements Highway $0.5 million

LOCAL - Vista West Vista Way Highway $4.5 millionLOCAL - San Marcos Woodland Parkway/Barham Drive Interchange Improvements Highway $20 million

* Updated information will be provided.

List of Recommended High Priority ProjectsAttachment 2

8

PROPOSED PRIORITIES FOR NEXT FEDERAL SURFACE TRANSPORTATION AUTHORIZATION

Funding Levels

• Support federal program investment levels that would help fund the $57 billion SANDAG 2030 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) (Current Revenue Constrained RTP is $41 billion)

Goods Movement

• Work with California and San Diego regional partners, as well as national partners like the Coalition for America’s Gateways and Trade Corridors, to develop a national freight trust fund

• Ensure goods movement funding proposals provide support for international land ports of entry and address the needs of freight rail and small ports of entry, such as the Tenth Avenue and National City Marine Terminals

Transit

Investment

• Ensure capital investment programs provide sufficient levels to maintain existing rail and transit infrastructure, including commuter rail and light rail improvements and rail bridge replacement and rehabilitation

• Support federal funding for operating existing transit systems, both rail and bus services

• Support funding for intercity rail needs in Los Angeles-San Diego Rail Corridor Agency (LOSSAN), coastal corridor (Pacific Surfliner is second busiest intercity rail corridor after Northeast corridor)

• Pursue full funding grant agreement for Mid-Coast Corridor Project and funding to advance other transit projects included in the TransNet Early Action Program (e.g., Interstate 15 [I-15] and South Bay Bus Rapid Transit projects and Mid-City Rapid Bus)

• Support program flexibility to fund grade separation and grade crossing improvements along existing rail corridors

• Support continuation of federal programs that address the transportation needs for people with disabilities, and commuting needs for individuals with limited means (e.g., New Freedom and Job Access and Reverse Commute [JARC] programs)

Reforms

• Support streamlining New/Small Starts processes, and ensure light rail transit (LRT) and bus rapid transit (BRT) are given equal consideration

• Ensure high-occupancy toll (HOT) lanes continue to be counted as fixed guideway miles for the purpose of transit formula program apportionments

Attachment 3

9

Approved by SANDAG Board on 3/27/09

• In urbanized counties like San Diego, consolidate urban and rural transit formula programs, and allow metropolitan planning organizations the ability to allocate the funds consistent with approved plans

Process Improvements

Environmental

• Support the continuation of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) delegation authority to states

• Support changes to enable comprehensive state environmental processes like the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to fulfill federal environmental NEPA requirements

• Establish an environmental risk assessment process that allows low risk projects to advance to design and construction ahead of formal technical analysis

Data Collection

• Support funding for data collection and training to improve transportation modeling and planning processes used to support the RTP

Climate Change

• Monitor federal climate change and greenhouse gas reduction proposals for their effects on transportation planning and funding processes

Non-Motorized Transportation

• Support Rails-to-Trails Conservancy’s 2010 Campaign for Active Transportation which would provide 40 cities nationwide with $50 million each to fund non-motorized projects and programs

Tribal Transportation Planning

• Support funding for tribal transportation planning and Indian reservation road programs

10

Long Range Regional Plans and Forecasts:

Long Range Regional Plans and Forecasts:

April 24, 2009

A Work Plan to Comply with SB 375A Work Plan to Comply with SB 375

2

Presentation OverviewPresentation Overview

•• SB 375 ProvisionsSB 375 Provisions

•• 2008 Settlement Agreement 2008 Settlement Agreement requirements requirements

•• Key Long Range Planning EffortsKey Long Range Planning Efforts•• 2050 Regional Growth Forecast2050 Regional Growth Forecast

•• 2050 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP)2050 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP)

•• Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA)Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA)

•• Questions and DiscussionQuestions and Discussion

3

SB 375SB 375Key Provisions:Key Provisions:

•• Regional targets for greenhouse gas (GHG) Regional targets for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions be established emissions be established

•• Regional planning agencies create Regional planning agencies create Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS)Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS)

•• If GHG targets are not met, an Alternative If GHG targets are not met, an Alternative Planning Strategy (APS) be preparedPlanning Strategy (APS) be prepared

•• RHNA and RTP processes be synchronizedRHNA and RTP processes be synchronized

•• Enhanced public involvementEnhanced public involvement

•• Expanded environmental analysisExpanded environmental analysis

4

2008 Settlement Agreement 2008 Settlement Agreement Requires:Requires:

•• An impediments to transit study be An impediments to transit study be completedcompleted

•• Urban Core Transit Strategy be Urban Core Transit Strategy be developed developed

•• Other provisions with an indirect Other provisions with an indirect relationship to the RTPrelationship to the RTP

5

2050 Regional Growth Forecast2050 Regional Growth Forecast

•• Produced every four years for use in regional Produced every four years for use in regional and local planning effortsand local planning efforts

•• 2050 horizon year2050 horizon year

•• Extensive local involvementExtensive local involvement•• Draft existing plans forecastDraft existing plans forecast-- Summer 2009Summer 2009•• Draft alternative scenarios forecastDraft alternative scenarios forecast-- Fall 2009 Fall 2009

•• Final 2050 Forecast early 2010Final 2050 Forecast early 2010

6

2050 RTP2050 RTP•• 2050 Horizon Year2050 Horizon Year

•• New RequirementsNew Requirements•• SB 375 SB 375

•• Settlement Agreement Settlement Agreement

•• Unknown new federal transportation bill Unknown new federal transportation bill requirements requirements

•• New InputsNew Inputs•• Airport AccessAirport Access

•• Transit StrategyTransit Strategy

•• Regional Bike PlanRegional Bike Plan

•• High Speed RailHigh Speed Rail

•• July 2011 AdoptionJuly 2011 Adoption

••Climate Climate Action Action PlanPlan••SubregioSubregionalnalStudiesStudies••

a1

7

Urban Core Transit StrategyUrban Core Transit Strategy•• Meet 2008 Settlement Agreement termsMeet 2008 Settlement Agreement terms

•• Significantly increase transit use, walking Significantly increase transit use, walking and biking in the urban core and biking in the urban core

•• Increase transit mode share in the urban Increase transit mode share in the urban corecore

•• Evaluate transitEvaluate transit’’s role in reducing GHG s role in reducing GHG emissions and meeting SB 375 requirementsemissions and meeting SB 375 requirements

8

Sustainable Communities StrategySustainable Communities Strategy•• Required by SB 375Required by SB 375

•• New element of the RTPNew element of the RTP

•• Must show how GHG targets would be achieved Must show how GHG targets would be achieved through land use plans, infrastructure and through land use plans, infrastructure and transportation measurestransportation measures

•• Must address sensitive resource protectionMust address sensitive resource protection

•• Must be consistent with RHNAMust be consistent with RHNA

•• If GHG targets are not met, an APS must be If GHG targets are not met, an APS must be preparedprepared a2

Smart Growth Concept MapSmart Growth Concept Map

9

10

RTP Environmental Impact ReportRTP Environmental Impact Report

•• New RequirementsNew Requirements•• GHG baseline measurements and GHG baseline measurements and

projectionsprojections•• Potential mitigation measures to Potential mitigation measures to

reduce emissionsreduce emissions•• Greater analysis of Environmental Greater analysis of Environmental

Justice issuesJustice issues

11

Public Participation PlanPublic Participation Plan

•• Public Participation Plan required for Public Participation Plan required for every step in the planning processevery step in the planning process

•• Establish Regional Planning Stakeholder Establish Regional Planning Stakeholder Working Group (SWG)Working Group (SWG)

•• Expanded effort to implement alternative Expanded effort to implement alternative methods involve underrepresented methods involve underrepresented groups in the planning processgroups in the planning process

a3

12

Timeline OverviewLong Range Regional Plans and ForecastsTimeline OverviewLong Range Regional Plans and Forecasts

•• Public Outreach StrategyPublic Outreach Strategy

•• 2050 Growth Forecast2050 Growth Forecast

•• Urban Core Transit Urban Core Transit StrategyStrategy

•• GHG Target GHG Target

•• Final SCS/RHNAFinal SCS/RHNA

•• Final Final RTP/EIRRTP/EIR

Sept 2009Sept 2009

Feb 2010 Feb 2010

July 2010July 2010

July 2010July 2010

July 2011July 2011

July 2011July 2011

Long Range Regional Plans and Forecasts:

Long Range Regional Plans and Forecasts:

April 24, 2009

A Work Plan to Comply with SB 375A Work Plan to Comply with SB 375

San Diego Association of Governments

TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE

May 1, 2009 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 1BAction Requested: APPROVE

TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND ACTIONS SPECIAL MEETING OF APRIL 15, 2009

The meeting of the Transportation Committee was called to order by Chair Jack Dale (East County) at 10:00 a.m. See the attached attendance sheet for Transportation Committee member attendance. 1. PUBLIC COMMENTS/COMMUNICATIONS/MEMBER COMMENTS There were no public comments. 2. PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO REGIONAL COMPREHENSIVE

FARE ORDINANCE TO MODIFY EXISTING TRANSIT FARE STRUCTURE (HOLD PUBLIC HEARING) Dan Levy, Senior Regional Planner presented the item. Paul Jablonski, Chief Executive Officer, MTS provided comments for the item. Lorraine Leighton, a member of the public spoke in opposition to fare increases and service cuts. 3. UPCOMING MEETINGS

The next meeting of the Transportation Committee is scheduled for Friday, April 17, 2009, at 9 a.m. at SANDAG.

4. ADJOURNMENT

Chair Dale adjourned the meeting at 10:18 a.m.

Attachment: Attendance Sheet

DRAFT

This Item Relates to Agenda Item #10 Board of Directors, April 24, 2009

2

CONFIRMED ATTENDANCE SANDAG TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MEETING

APRIL 15, 2009

GEOGRAPHICAL AREA/

ORGANIZATION

JURISDICTION NAME MEMBER/

ALTERNATE ATTENDING

City of Carlsbad Matt Hall (Vice

Chair)

Member Yes North County Coastal

City of Del Mar Carl Hilliard Alternate No

City of San Marcos Jim Desmond Member Yes North County Inland

City of Vista Judy Ritter Alternate Yes

City of Santee Jack Dale (Chair) Member Yes East County

City of La Mesa Art Madrid Alternate No

City of Coronado Carrie Downey Member Yes South County

City of Imperial Beach Jim King Alternate Yes

---- Anthony Young Member No

---- Todd Gloria Alternate No

City of San Diego

---- Marti Emerald Alternate No

---- Ron Roberts Member Yes

---- Greg Cox Alternate No

County of San Diego

---- Bill Horn/Slater-

Price

Alternate No

MTS Harry Mathis Member Yes Metropolitan Transit System

MTS Jerry Rindone Alternate No

NCTD Bob Campbell Member No

NCTD Dave Roberts Alternate Yes

North County Transit District

NCTD Jerome Stocks Alternate No

Charlene Zettel Member No San Diego County Regional Airport Authority

Tom Smisek Alternate Yes

---- Pedro Orso-

Delgado

Member No ADVISORY/LIAISON Caltrans

___ Bill Figge Alternate Yes

Albert Phoenix Member No SCTCA _____

Francine Kupsch Alternate No

04/22/2009 4:41 PM

San Diego Association of Governments

TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE

May 1, 2009 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 1CAction Requested: APPROVE

TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND ACTIONS MEETING OF APRIL 17, 2009

The meeting of the Transportation Committee was called to order by Chair Jack Dale (East County) at 9:03 a.m. See the attached attendance sheet for Transportation Committee member attendance. 1. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES

Action: Upon a motion by Mayor Jim Desmond (North County Inland) and a second by Councilmember Matt Hall (North County Coastal), the Transportation Committee approved the minutes from the April 3, 2009, meeting.

2. PUBLIC COMMENTS/COMMUNICATIONS/MEMBER COMMENTS Steve Barbone, a member of the public, commented that the way to increase the percentage of the population that uses public transit is to make it more attractive by lowering fare prices and increasing services.

REPORTS (3)

3. PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO REGIONAL COMPREHENSIVE FARE ORDINANCE TO MODIFY EXISTING TRANSIT FARE STRUCTURE (HOLD PUBLIC HEARING) Dan Levy, Senior Planner, presented the staff report. Chair Dale opened the public hearing at 9:08 a.m. McGinn Morgan, a member of the public, spoke on behalf of people with disabilities, indicating that public transportation is very important to their independence. Rich Morgan, a member of the public, complimented the Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) for the service it provides to disabled people to give them the opportunity to be independent. Theresa Quiroz, a member of the public, stated that SANDAG must make public transportation more competitive with the automobile. She mentioned that several state laws will require a reduction in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and the best way to reduce those emissions is to increase public transit. She encouraged the Committee to wait for the Transit Impediment Study results before making a decision on service cuts/fare increases.

DRAFT

This Item Relates to Agenda Item #10 Board of Directors, April 24, 2009

2

Vicki Piazza, a member of the public, expressed concern for the proposed fare increases at the levels proposed. Lorraine Leighton, a member of the public, asked that the $1.00 fare for circulator buses not be increased. She commented her observation of a 12-year-old child using a Juror fare to ride public transit, and bus drivers in East County giving out $5 day passes to their friends. She suggested that MTS look into these issues. Donald Diestel, a member of the public, said that if transit service isn't reliable and economical people will not use it. He thought the Senior pass is a great deal. He asked the Committee to consider the economic impact of the proposed fare increase, and to respond to transit service demand. Karen Mulhern, a member of the public, said that to help reduce the carbon footprint Committee members should take public transit to show that they care. Disabled people have to pay $4 for public transit. We need our buses properly maintained. It's great that we can change from the trolley to the COASTER. Linda Flournoy, a member of the public, expressed support for comments made by previous speakers regarding increased transit reliability and services. The more service you provide the higher ridership you will obtain. She would like to see double tracking of the COASTER. She asked if the 14-day or 30-day passes means a time period or the number of rides. Paul Jablonski, MTS Executive Director, responded that those passes relate to time periods. Ms. Flournoy also strongly recommended a pass be based on the number of uses. Gary Gallegos, SANDAG Executive Director, replied you can do that by having stored value on a Compass Card. Chair Dale closed the public hearing at 10:01 a.m.

4. UPCOMING MEETINGS The next meeting of the Transportation Committee is scheduled for Friday, May 1, 2009, at 9 a.m.

5. ADJOURNMENT Chair Dale adjourned the meeting at 10:04 a.m.

Attachment: Attendance Sheet

3

CONFIRMED ATTENDANCE SANDAG TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MEETING

APRIL 17, 2009

GEOGRAPHICAL AREA/

ORGANIZATION

JURISDICTION NAME MEMBER/

ALTERNATE ATTENDING

City of Carlsbad Matt Hall (Vice Chair) Member Yes North County Coastal

City of Del Mar Carl Hilliard Alternate No

City of San Marcos Jim Desmond Member Yes North County Inland

City of Vista Judy Ritter Alternate Yes

City of Santee Jack Dale (Chair) Member Yes East County

City of La Mesa Art Madrid Alternate Yes

City of Coronado Carrie Downey Member Yes South County

City of Imperial Beach Jim King Alternate Yes

---- Anthony Young Member Yes

---- Todd Gloria Alternate Yes

City of San Diego

---- Marti Emerald Alternate No

---- Ron Roberts Member Yes

---- Greg Cox Alternate No

County of San Diego

---- Bill Horn/Slater-Price Alternate No

MTS Harry Mathis Member Yes Metropolitan Transit System

MTS Jerry Rindone Alternate No

NCTD Bob Campbell Member Yes

NCTD Dave Roberts Alternate No

North County Transit District

NCTD Jerome Stocks Alternate No

Charlene Zettel Member Yes San Diego County Regional

Airport Authority Tom Smisek Alternate Yes

---- Pedro Orso-Delgado Member Yes ADVISORY/LIAISON Caltrans

___ Bill Figge Alternate Yes

Albert Phoenix Member Yes SCTCA _____

Francine Kupsch Alternate No

First Reading of New Fare Ordinance & Related Findings

Board of Directors

April 24

Introduction• Board asked to conduct first reading of new Fare

Ordinance:

▫ New Ordinance provides for fare increases as requested by MTS

▫ New Ordinance clarifies, simplifies, and better codifies the fare rules for the region

Public Hearings• Public Hearings on the proposed fare increases

and other significant changes were held by Transportation Committee

• Meeting minutes and other comments attached to report

▫ Total of 11 speakers

▫ 31 Comments received by voice mail, e-mail or regular mail

Other Findings• Board is asked to find that fare changes qualify

for an exemption under CEQA

▫ Resolution for approval attached to agenda item

• Board is asked to find that the fare increases will not cause a disparate impact under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act

▫ Report attached to agenda item

Background• MTS Board has declared a fiscal emergency due

to state cutbacks and falling sales tax revenues –a loss of $11 million▫ Fare increase is one of several strategies to

mitigate impacts on service

▫ $2.2 million in additional fare revenue

• Opportunity to make fare adjustments to take advantage of Compass Card and resolve current fare anomalies and simplify fare ordinance

5

MTS Request - Regional Pass Proposal• MTS has requested an increase in Regional Pass

prices ▫ Regular $68 to $72▫ Senior/Disabled/Medicare $17 to $18▫ Youth $34 to $36▫ Regular 14-Day from $41 to $43▫ Affects about 60,000 monthly pass purchasers

• MTS estimates $1.9 million in additional revenue for FY 2010

• No disproportionate impacts on minority and low income populations

6

MTS Request - Premium Pass Prices

• MTS has requested an increase in Premium Pass prices▫ Regular Pass $90 to $100▫ Senior/Disabled/Medicare $22.50 to $25.00▫ Youth $45 to $50▫ Affects about 1,500 monthly pass purchasers

• Recommend creation of Regular Premium 14-Day Pass at 60% of full pass price

• Generates about $39,000 in new revenue• No disproportionate impacts on minority and

low income populations

7

MTS Request - Downtown Trolley Zone

• MTS has requested eliminating the downtown Trolley zone ▫ Regular cash fare $1.25 to $2.50

▫ Senior/Disabled/Medicare $0.60 to $1.25

▫ Impacts about 140,000 annual passenger trips

• Increases revenue by about $181,000• Flat fare on entire system• No disproportionate impacts on minority and

low income populations

8

MTS Request - Local Circulator Fare

• MTS has requested that the Local Circulator fare of $1.00 be eliminated ▫ Affects routes 851, 871, 872 and 904

▫ Affects about 45,000 annual passenger trips

▫ Will help preserve these services by raising their cost recovery

• Increases revenue by about $72,000 per year• Unified local fare of $2.25 on all MTS circulator

and local services• No disproportionate impacts on minority and

low income populations

9

Default Stored Value Fare• Stored value anticipated to initially be less than 1%

of all passengers

• Sets fare to be $5 or $14 on first tap for stored value

• Single trip passengers must either tell driver or purchase ticket at TVM

• Eliminates need to tap off for COASTER cash fare passengers

• Ensures that same rules apply system-wide for all modes

• No disproportionate impacts on minority and low income populations

10

Region Plus Day Pass• Create new $14 day pass valid on all services

except 2 zone rural• Simplifies use of Compass Card on COASTER • Replaces Premium Day Pass• Priced to be revenue neutral for region• Eliminates COASTER cash fare anomaly that

return trips with a transfer are more costly than first half of trip

• No disproportionate impacts on minority and low income populations

11

Regional Pass on Premium Bus• Current ordinance does not allow Regional Pass

holders to pay upgrade and ride Premium buses• Proposal is to allow single trip upgrades for cash

supplement of $2.00• Reduces disputes, improves customer relations• Similar rules already allow Regional Pass

holders to ride COASTER with cash supplement• No disproportionate impacts on minority and

low income populations

12

Juror Fare• Current agreement with Courts expires June 30

• Proposal to change wording in Fare Ordinance to accommodate a new agreement

• No disproportionate impacts on minority and low income populations

13

Next Steps• Second reading of Ordinance at Board of

Directors on May 8, 2009

• New Ordinance takes effect July 1, 2009

14

Recommendations• The Board is asked to hold first reading of a new

Regional Comprehensive Fare Ordinance. The Board is also asked to:

▫ 1. Approve the Resolution No 2009-22, which makes a finding that the proposed changes qualify for an exemption under the CEQA; and

▫ 2. Make the finding that the proposed fare increases will not cause a disparate impact under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act.

First Reading of New Fare Ordinance & Related Findings

Board of Directors

April 24

Board of Directors April 24, 2009

Possible Short-Term Funding Alternatives Options

No Action – MTS and NCTD move forward with proposed budgets

TransNet Local Street and Road Funding

Blue and Orange Line TransNet-ARRA Exchange of Funds

Could only provide one-time “bridging” funds

2

TransNet Local Street and Road FundingEstimated FY 2010 TransNet Local Street and Road Funds for Region = $67.5 million

One-time Allocation of additional TransNet funds due to ARRA Federal Stimulus Funds = $51.0 million

TransNet Extension Ordinance Allows Jurisdictions Flexibility in Spending the Funds for Transit Operations:

“ At least 70% of the revenues provided for local street and road purposes should be used to fund direct expenditures for construction of new or expanded facilities, major rehabilitation and reconstruction of roadways, traffic signal coordination and related traffic operations improvements, transportation-related community infrastructure improvements to support smart growth development, capital improvements needed to facilitate transit services and facilities, and operating support for local shuttle and circulator routes and other services.”

3

“ At least 70% of the revenues provided for local street and

road purposes should be used to fund direct expenditures

for construction of new or expanded facilities, major

rehabilitation and reconstruction of roadways, traffic signal

coordination and related traffic operations improvements,

transportation-related community infrastructure

improvements to support smart growth development,

capital improvements needed to facilitate transit services

and facilities, and operating support for local shuttle and

circulator routes and other services.”

Blue and Orange Line TransNet-ARRA Exchange of Funds

Similar to exchange of ARRA highway funds with TransNet funds to local jurisdictions

Project estimated cost = $434 million

Currently programmed funds = $456 million

More than needed due to recent inflow of ARRA federal stimulus funds

Potential to exchange $22 million TransNet funds from Blue/Orange Line budget to transit operations

Lost opportunity for matching funds to the Major Corridor Program

4

Next Steps After discussion of Short-Term Options – Refer appropriate options to MTS & NCTD Boards

Bring back MTS/NCTD recommendations to Transportation Committee and Board of Directors

5

Board of Directors April 24, 2009

(Projects are grouped and listed in alphabetical order)

Agency Project ProgramRequest

($millions)MTS Blue Line Station Improvements Transit $20.0MTS East County Bus Maintenance Facility Transit $10.0SANDAG LOSSAN Corridor Improvements Transit $148.0MTS Low Floor Vehicles Transit $30.0NCTD Positive Train Control Transit $60.0NCTD Rail Station Improvements Transit $2.5MTS/NCTD Regional Bus Replacements Transit $10.0MTS Regional Transportation Management System Transit $9.3SANDAG/Chula Vista South Bay BRT & Intermodal Transit Center at Otay Mesa Transit $45.1MTS South Bay Bus Maintenance Facility Transit $10.0

NCTD SPRINTER Expansion - Double Tracking and Grade Separations Transit $20.0

SANDAG Transit First Priority Measures Transit $3.0

SANDAG Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project New Starts $580.0

SANDAG/City of San Diego Airport Intermodal Transportation CenterHighway/

Transit$140.0

SANDAG/Port of San Diego 10th Avenue Access to Port of San Diego Highway $6.1SANDAG/Port of San Diego 28th Avenue Access to Port of San Diego Highway $6.4SANDAG/Port of San Diego 32nd Avenue Ground Access Improvement Highway $15.5Local - Escondido Bear Valley Parkway Highway $0.7Local - City of San Diego C Street Corridor Highway $40.0Local - Del Mar Camino Del Mar Bike Bridge Highway $1.5Local - Escondido Citracado Parkway Highway $0.3Local - Oceanside College Boulevard Raising Highway $7.0Local - La Mesa Downtown Village Streetscape Improvements Highway $2.0Local - Imperial Beach Eco Bikeway Project Highway $2.0Local - Encinitas Encinitas Grade Separated Pedestrian Crossing Highway $19.0Local - Solana Beach Highway 101 Revitalization Highway $15.0

SANDAG Interstate 15 BRT - Sabre Springs BRT Parking Structure, and Mid-City Transit Stations & Bus Lanes

Highway $60.0

SANDAG/Caltrans Interstate 15 HOV Lanes (State Route 163 to Friars Road) Highway $11.2SANDAG/Caltrans Interstate 5 Corridor Highway $355.4SANDAG Interstate 5 South - Grade Separations at E and H Streets Highway $54.4Local - Encinitas Interstate 5/Encinitas Boulevard Interchange Highway $0.7Local - City of San Diego Interstate 5/Genesee Avenue Interchange Highway $65.7SANDAG/Caltrans Interstate 805 North Segment Highway $191.9SANDAG/Caltrans Interstate 805 South Segment (State Route 94 to Palomar) Highway $104.0Local - Chula Vista Interstate 805/Main Street Interchange Highway $0.8Local - City of San Diego Interstate 805/Palm Avenue - Phase 3 Highway $53.0Local - Oceanside Melrose Extension Highway $10.0Local - Escondido/San Marcos Nordahl Bridge Replacement Highway $27.0Local - City of San Diego Old Otay Mesa Road Highway $2.9Local - County of San Diego Otay Mesa Road - State Route 25 to East (Alta) Highway $10.0Local - National City Plaza Boulevard Widening Highway $20.0Local - County of San Diego Rancho Santa Fe Roundabouts Highway $6.0Local - County of San Diego South Santa Fe Avenue Road Widening Highway $54.4SANDAG/Caltrans State Route 11 Highway $117.6Local - Lemon Grove State Route 125/Troy Street Interchange Highway $13.6

Caltrans/City of San Diego State Route 15 Bikeway (Camino Del Rio South to Adams Avenue)

Highway $10.0

City of San Diego State Route 163/Friars Road Interchange Highway $116.0SANDAG/Caltrans State Route 52 Widening Highway $60.0

List of Recommended High Priority Projects

This Item Relates to Agenda Item #12 Board of Directors April 24, 2009

Agency Project ProgramRequest

($millions)

SANDAG/Caltrans State Route 67 - Environmental Highway $16.8Local - County of San Diego State Route 67/Bradley Avenue Interchange Highway $25.8Local - Coronado State Route 75/State Route 282 Highway $20.0SANDAG/Caltrans State Route 76 East (Mission to Interstate 15) Highway $67.0SANDAG/Caltrans State Route 78 Corridor Study (Interstate 5 to Interstate 15) Highway $4.8SANDAG/Caltrans State Route 78 Widening Highway $11.2SANDAG/Caltrans State Route 905/Interstate 805 Interchange Highway $12.6

SANDAG/Caltrans State Route 94 HOV Lanes & Connectors (Interstate 805 to Interstate 5)

Highway $50.0

SANDAG/Caltrans State Route 94/State Route 125 Interchange Highway $13.0

Local - Del Mar Streetscape Improvements (15th Street to 8th Street on Highway 101)

Highway $3.0

Local - City of San Diego University Avenue Mobility Plan Highway $4.8

Local - Del Mar Via de la Valle and Camino Del Mar Intersection Improvements Highway $0.5

SANDAG/Other Agencies West Coast Corridor Coalition Highway $0.8Local - Vista West Vista Way Highway $4.5Local - San Marcos Woodland Parkway/Barham Drive Interchange Improvements Highway $20.0

MTS: Metropolitan Transit System

NCTD: North County Transit District

HOV: High Occupancy Vehicle

BRT: Bus Rapid Transit

2

Deal points for exclusive grocery store partnership to sell the Compass Cards:

• Two-year deal – May 1, 2009, through May 1, 2011

• VONS to become exclusive grocery store outlet and provide trained staff to help customers purchase fare products

• Does not require SANDAG to pay any commissions or customers to pay any extra fees

• Allows for other third party outlets as needed to comply with Title VI requirements

• VONS to pay $800,000 in exchange for co-branding advertising with Compass Card

This Item Related to Agenda Item #13Board of Directors April 24, 2009

Debt Program UpdateDebt Program Update

AprilApril 20092009

1

SANDAG Debt StructureSANDAG Debt Structure

$100 million commercial paper program; Citigroup

– Dexia Liquidity

$600 million swaps:– Goldman Sachs

– Merrill Lynch

– Bank of America

$600 million of variable rate debt:– Goldman Sachs and Barclays (replacing Lehman)

• JP Morgan Liquidity

– DeLaRosa (replacing UBS) and JP Morgan

• Dexia Liquidity

J. P. MorganJ. P. Morgan

2

SANDAG Variable RateSANDAG Variable RateProgram PerformanceProgram Performance

SANDAG Variable Rate Compared toSecurities Industries and Financial Market Association

(SIFMA)and London Interbank Offering Rate (LIBOR)

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

3/27/2008

4/27/2008

5/27/2008

6/27/2008

7/27/2008

8/27/2008

9/27/2008

10/27/2008

11/27/2008

12/27/2008

1/27/2009

2/27/2009

3/27/2009

Week

Interest Rate

SANDAG Average Variable Rate Paid SIFMA 65% LIBOR

SANDAG Variable RateSANDAG Variable RateProgram PerformanceProgram Performance

SANDAG Total Cost Compared to Fixed Rate

0.000

2.000

4.000

6.000

8.000

10.000

3/27 4/27 5/27 6/27 7/27 8/27 9/27 10/27 11/27 12/27 1/27 2/27 3/27

Week

Interest Rate

SANDAG Total Cost Revenue Bond Index

Debt Program UpdateDebt Program Update

April 2009April 2009