Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - August 17, 1983 (52)t:1 IE CITY OF LODI PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT TO: City Council FROM: City Manager DATE: August i1, 1983 COUNCIL COMMUNICATION SUBJECT: 1983-84 Transportation Development Act Claim RECOMMENDED ACTION: That the City Council adopt a resolution approving the City of Lodi's 1983-84 Transportation Development Act Claim for LocAl Transportation Fund (LT"') and State Transit Assistance (STA) and authorize the City Manager to sign on behalf of the City. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: This year, COG has changed the TDA claim form to Include both the LTF and STA claims in one document. We are claiming all of our STA apportionment, which will be used for our transit system, and all of the LTF apportionment which will be used for streets and roads, as well as approximately $66,000, for.the Dial -a -ride system. This year the transit system will be using an additional $22,000 of the LTF apportion- ment. In past years, only $44,000 of LTF was used for Dial -&-ride. The LTF portion of the claim includes all of the projects which are being considered for construction during the next fiscal year. Those projects are shown on the attached list. This action is not approving projects for construction; it just allows us the flexiUTITty to use TDA funds on the projects if they are included in the City's 1984 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). This year, our pedestrian/bicycle apportionment ($9,918) will be used in conjunction with the Ham Lane Improvement Project, Lodi Avenue to Elm Street. Ham Lane is included as a primary bicycle route in the San Joaquin County Bicycle Plan, and this project meets the Intent of that apportionment. The TDA funds will be used in conjunction with other City funds for the Transportation ImproveWnt Program and maintenance of our streets. Pub is Works Director JLR:SB:dmw Attachment. APPROVED: HENRY A. VES. City Manager '14c�G en n nist nt City Manager FILE NO. +_1.,e..dm•+wrww..- .`.+�+�+t�'amciwasNswiooYwavmm.rae.rravo`rtaen - ; TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT APPORTIONMENTS - I.:.Local Transportation Fund Available Apportionment A. Area Apportionment (83-84) S 476,o64 B. Pedestrian/Bicycle Apportionment x,918 0. Previous Years' Unclaimed Apportionment 5,992 D,. Unexpended Carryover --X196.132 .,Total Available. for 1983-84 Claim $ 10688,106 State Transit Assistance Fund Available Apportionment A. Area Apportionment (83-84) $ 16,943 B, Special Transit Apportionment (83-84) 1,206 C:. Previous Years' Unclaimed Apportionment D. Une'x?ended Carryover 8,282 Total Available for 1983-84 Claim gbt MM g 86.431 TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT APPORTIONMENTS I. Local Transportation Fund Available Apportionment A. Area Apportionment (83-84) S 476,064 B. Pedestrian/Bicycle Apportionment 9.9.18 C. Previous Years' Unclaimed Apportionment 5,992 D. Unexpended Carryover -.1.196.132 Total Available for 19163-64 Claim $ 12688,106 II. State Transit Assistance Fund Available Apportionment A. Area Apportionment (83-84) $ 76,941- B. Special Transit Apportionment (83-84) 1.206 C. Previous Years' Unclaimed Apportionment D. Unexpended Carryover 8,282 Total Available for 1983-84 Claim - 7 - $ 86.431 O] TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT ALLOCATIONS Claim Purpose Ie Public Transportation Article 4 (99260) - Operator Article 8 (99400(c)) - Contractor II. Pedestrian and Bicycle Article 3 (99234) Article 8 (99400(a)) III. Roads and Streets Article 8 (99400(a)) IV. Other Article 8 (99400(b)) iTotal Claimed I. LTF 9,918 1. 612,669 l• A ^3.� '�N . Total Available Apportionment 1__ 1,688 106 Total Claimed _ 1,688,106 Unclaimed Apportionment (1983-84) 0 86,431 1 86.431 *This will automatically be classified as Article 6.5 (99313.3) for purposes of the Act. Pine -School Signal Modification, ' Sacramento Street CG&S, inspection and other miscellaneous related work. RaiirQad Grade Crossingg Approach mprovements (SPR R} Ham Lane $ 6,000 Tokay Street 12,000 Lodi Avenue 14,000 Pine Street 22,000 Elm Street 12,000 Locust Street 16,000 Lockeford Street, 13,000 Lower Sacramento Road Widening Street Maintenance Administration * Work -in -Progress ** Primary Bicycle Route STATE TRANSIT ASSISTANCE FUND Elm Street North (Use A t ona 100,000 ' i 95,000 70,000 52,000 5,000 age it necessary STA Cost PART III - /fleaseprovide ROAD AND STREET PROJECTS the requested information for each project being ideas ti ednsportation Development Act funding. LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND LTF Cost Project Title and Description Pro ect Limits Total—est **4` Ham Lane (R/W construction) Lodi -Elm 165,000 S Hom.Lane Median Century-Kettleman 54,000 * Stockton Street Kettleman-Lodi R/W Acquisition 50,000 Utility Relocation 245,000 Hutchins Street * Vine-Tokay 29,000 * Kettleman-Rimby (C&R/'w) 39,000 i. Tokay-Lod i R/W Acquisition 6,000 Construction 220,000 * Hutchins Street Median Harney -Vineyard 10,000 * Turner Road 1000' W/Cluff-fluff 57,000 Downtown improvement District Downtown Area i Pine -School Signal Modification, ' Sacramento Street CG&S, inspection and other miscellaneous related work. RaiirQad Grade Crossingg Approach mprovements (SPR R} Ham Lane $ 6,000 Tokay Street 12,000 Lodi Avenue 14,000 Pine Street 22,000 Elm Street 12,000 Locust Street 16,000 Lockeford Street, 13,000 Lower Sacramento Road Widening Street Maintenance Administration * Work -in -Progress ** Primary Bicycle Route STATE TRANSIT ASSISTANCE FUND Elm Street North (Use A t ona 100,000 ' i 95,000 70,000 52,000 5,000 age it necessary STA Cost Work -in -progress Primary bicycle route STATE TRANSIT ASSISTANCE FUND Prc $1,622,587 Total $7,040,700 i(Use Addiil—onal Page if Necessary STA Cost Proiect Limits Total Cost 19. (Use Additional Page if Necessary) PART III - ROAD AND STREET /eaprovide PROJECTS �"� the requested information for each project being iden nsportation Development Act funding. LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND LTF Cost Project Title and Description Pro ect Limits Total Cost Miscellaneous Widening $ 50,000 *Miscellaneous Overlay 10 80,000 *Miscellaneous Curb 6 Gutter 71,000 Miscellaneous Subdivision Paving 15,000 Miscellaneous Traffic Appurtenance Upgrade 10,000 Traffic Signals 1 * *Pine and Cherokee (upgrade) ( 90,000 * 'Lockeford and Cherokee (new) ! 110,000 * *Victor and Cherokee (upgrade) I 90,000 - 'Ham and Lockeford (new) 80,000 1: 'Lodi Avenue Signal System Modificatio 10,000 j: Modification Church Street Signal System Mbd c tnn 9 o 10000 * 'Pine and Sacramento 70,000 Other Miscellaneous New Signal 80,000 Railroad Grade Crossing Protection 1 *Turner Road a Mills 14,500 *Loma Drive 8,000 'dalifornia Street 9,200 c 'Cherokee Lane 9.000 'Washington Street 7,000 Calaveras Street Lockeford - 200' S/Murray 30,000 Work -in -progress Primary bicycle route STATE TRANSIT ASSISTANCE FUND Prc $1,622,587 Total $7,040,700 i(Use Addiil—onal Page if Necessary STA Cost Proiect Limits Total Cost 19. (Use Additional Page if Necessary) RESOLUTION NO. 83-89 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE CITY OF LODI'S 1983-1984 TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT CLAIM FOR LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND (LTF) AND STATE TRANSIT ASSISTANCE (STA) RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Lodi does hereby approve the City of Lodi's 1983-84 Transportation Development Act Claim for Local Transportation Fund (LTF) and State Transit Assistance (STA), a copy of which is attached hereto, marked Exhibit A, and thereby made a part hereof. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Lodi does hereby direct the City Manager to execute the subject document on behalf of the City. Dated: August 17, 1983 I hereby certify that Resolution No. 8.3-89 was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Lodi in a regular meeting held August 17, 1983 by the following vote: Ayes: Council Members - Reid, Snider, Murphy, Pinkerton & Olson (Mayor) Noes: Council Members - None Absent: Council Members - None Alice M. Re niche City Clerk LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FU* TO: San Joaquin County Council of Governments 1860 East Hazelton Avenue Stockton, CA 95205 FROM: Applicant:— City of Lodi Address: P.O. Box 320, Lodi, CA 95241 (City, Zip Contact Person: Jack L. Ronsko Phone: 334-5634 The City of Lodi hereby requests, in accordance withChapter 14UU, Statutes 1971 anu applicable rules and regulations, that its annual transportation claim be approved in the amount of $ 491_,974 for fiscal year, 198-54 to be drawn from the lii7cai transportation fund. 1 When approved, please transdtit this claim to the County Auditor for payment. Approval of the claim and payment by the CounLy Auditor to this applicant is subject to such monies being on hand and available for distribution, and to the provisions that such monies will be used only in accordance with the terms of the approved annual financial plan. The claimant gertifies that this• Local Transportation Fund claim and the financial information contained therein, is reasonable and accurate to the best of my knowledge, and that the aforementioned information indicates the eligibility of this claimant for funds for the fiscal year of the application pursuant to CAC Section 6 634 and 6734. APPROVED: San Joaquin County Council of Governments By Title Executive Director Date 19 - 5 - App ant Cj ty of Edd i . B` y Title CIG Manager Date 11.417 191--"- STATE TRANSIT ASSISTAXCE CLAIM TO: San Joaquin County Council of Governments 1860 East Hazelton Avenue Stockton, CA 95205 FROG;: Applicant:_ City of Lodi Address (City, Zip) : P.O. Box 320, Lodi, CA 95241 Contact Person, Phone: ,Jerry Glenn This claimant, qualified pursuant to Section 99203 and 99315 of the Public Utilities Code, hereby requests, in accordance with Chapter 1400, Statutes of 1971 as amende , and applicable rules and regula- tions , that an allocation be made in the amount of $ 78,149 for fiscal year 1983-M to be drawn from the State Transit Assistance trust fund of San Joaquin County for the following purposes and in the following respective amounts: Purposes Dia1�-a-ride Amounts $ 780149 Allocation instruction and payment by the County Auditor to this claimant are subject to such monies being on hand and available for distribution, and to theprovisions that such monies will be used only in accordance with the terms of the approved claim. -The claimant certifies that this Local Transportation Fund Claim and the financial information contained herein, is reasonable and accurate to the best of my knowledge, and that the aforementioned information indicates the eligibility of this claimant for funds for the fiscal year of the application pursuant -to CAC Section 6634 and 6734. APPROVED: San Joaquin County Council of Governments Title tive Director Date ' 19 --6- App ant . Ct'y of W1 By Title city Manager Date 19 TRA ISP(W- ATIOtl DEVELOPMENT ACT APPORTIOn-MENTS Z. Local Transportation Fund Available Apportionment A. Area Apportionment (83-84) 476,064 B. Pedestrian/Bicycle Apportionment 9,918 C. Previous Years' Unclaimed Apportionment 5,992 D. Unexpended Carryover 1-1-96-137 Total Available for 1983-84 Claim 1,688,106 II. State Transit Assistance Fund Available Apportionment A. Area Apportionment (83-84) $ 76;943 _ B. Special Transl.t Apportionment (83-84) 1,206 C. Previous Years' Unclaimed Apportionment -- D. Unexpended Carryover 8,282 Total Available for 1983-84 Claim - 7 - u 0 TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT ALLOCATIONS Claim Purpose I. Public Transportation Article 4 (99260) - Operator Article 8 (99400(c)) - Contractor II. Pedestrian and Bicycle Article 3 (99234) Article 8 (99400(a)) 111. Roads and Streets Article 8 (99400 (a) ) IV, Other Article 8 (99400(b)) Total Claimed I• LTP 9,918 1,612,669 1.68 0 M;_ i i Total Available Apportionment 1,688,106 86,431 Total Claimed Unclaimed Apportionment (1983-84) 1,688,10U a 86,431" -: *This will automatically be classified as Article 6.5 (99313.3) for purposes of the Act. I - 8 - k Please Check One: Article 4 Operator LI" OPERATING REVENUE Orticle 8 Contractor FINANCIAL INFORMATION 1982-83 &)'Actual/fist- imate, I] Passenger Fares 30,518 Special Transit Fares School Bus Service Revenues Freight Tariffs Charter Service Revenues (Woodbridge) 1.892 Auxilliary Transportation Revenues Non -Transportation Revenues interest Taxes Levied Directly by Transit System (Specify) Local Cash Grants and Reimbursements (Specify) Local Transportation Fund (LTF) 44-00Q . Local Special Fare Assistance State Cash Grants and Reimbursements (Specify) State Transit Assist. Fund (STA) 109,465 State Special Fare Assistance Federal Cash Grants & Reimbursements (Specify) UMTA Grants Contributed Services (Specify) TOTAL 185,875 II. CAPITAL REVENUE 464 Federal Capital Grants & Subsidies (Specify) State Capital Grants & Subventions (Specify) State Transit Assist. Funds (STA) Local Capital Provisions (Specify) Local Transportation Fund (LTF) Non -Governmental Donations TOTAL -9- 1983-84 Budget s 30,400 3,850 186,200 THREE YEAR FISCAL PLAN Operating Expenses 1984-85 1985-86 1986-87 $ 186,200 $ -195.510 205,285 Operating Revenues Sources: LTF STA Federal Fares General Fund Other $ 61,950 $ 69,510 88,285 90,000 90,000 79,000 34,250 36,000 38,000 Total $ 186,200 $ 195,510 205,285 Capital Expenses Capital Revenue Sources: LTF STA Federal Other _ Total 0 $ FLEET INVENTORY � :ake & Model Production Year of Veh. Fuel Type Seat Capaci 6 Special Fe tures C X IDP k t er Chevrolet Station Wagon 1982 6 diesel TOTAL XXX?UUCXXXXX 6 XXXXXX 36 6 Vehicles to be Purchased in FY 86-87 Station wagon 1 6 X AC - Air Conditioned EP - Environmental Package WC - Wheel Chair Lift - 13 - Article 4 Operator TDA Requirements R. ;g 1. Fare Ratio Requirement: K' c:. A. For an operator serving a non -urbanized area and providing exclusive service to the elderly and handicapped, the ratio = of fare revenues to operating cost (minus depreciation) must equal at least 10%, or the ratio the operator achieved in _ FY 1978/79, whichever is greater.: B. For an operator serving an urbanized area, the ratio of fare revenues to operating cost (minus depreciation) must equal at least 20%, or the ratio the operator achieved in FY 1978/79, whichever is greater. i. What is this system's required farebox recovery ratio? 10% ii. Does the attached budget demonstrate that the system will meet its required farebox recovery ratio? Yes iii. Has the system utilized its grace year? no iv. Has this system been in non-compliance with its required farebox recovery ratio?_ no if yes, identify the year or years: 2, • Local Support Ratio - Same as above A. For an operator serving a non -urbanized area, and/or pro- viding exclusive service to the elderly and handicapped. the ratio of fare revenue plus local support (local taxes, general fund, etc. 6611.3) to operating cost, (minus de- preciation) must equal at least 10%, or the ratio the operator achieved in FY 1978/79. whichever is greater. B. For an operator serving an urbanized area, the ratio of fare revenues plus local support to operating cost must equal at least 20%, or the ratio the op-rrator achieved in FY 1978/79, whichever is greater. i.. What is this system's required local support ratio? X ii. Does the attached budget demonstrate that the system will meet this required local support ratio? - 14 iii. Has this system utilized its grace year? iv. Has this system been in non-compliance with its required local support ratio? If yes, Identify the year or years: 3. Extension of Service An extension or new service is exempt from the required farebox and local support ratios if: A. The extension of service has been in operation for less than two years at the end of the fiscal year. B. The claimant's operating, cost for the fiscal year, after excluding the operating cost of the extension of service, exceeds its operating cost for the prior fiscal year. C. The claimant submits a report on the extension of service to COG. (For details of the report, see 6633.8(c)). . i..- Is this a new service? ii. Is there an extension of service being claimed? if so. please identify the extension of service: 4. Fifteen Percent Expenditure Increase If any of the line items on the attached budget exceed by more than 15% the expenditure for that same item in the previous year's budget, then an explanation for that increase must be attached. See attached. , 5. Narrative Description Describe any change:. it: service characteristics from the previous fiscal year. Please attach an additional page if necessary. 15 Article 8 Contractor TDA Requirements For contracted transpor.tatibn service providers, the San Joaquin County Council of Governments' Executive Board has waived the farebox and local support ratios as it is en:po::ered to do and established a two-step process: 1. Match Requirement To receive the sane amount of TDA funds (LTF and STA combined) that a service received in the previous year, no more than 90% of the operating funds (minus depreciation) in the budget may be TDA derived. The ten percent or more matching funds may come from any other source available to the community as long as it is not TDA. 2. Operating Cost Per Passenger Objective To receive an amount of TDA funds (LTF and STA cor.ained) in excess of what was claimed the previous fiscal year, the claim- ant must establish a specific service objective for the fiscal year of the claim. This specific objective would be the operating co ger passeneer for the fiscal year of the claim. The objective should be a realistic one based on current and past system performance, but should be low enough -to represent an "improvement" when warranted. The Transportation Planning Policy Committee will adopt the operating cost per passenger figure that a claimant must meet in the fiscal year of the claim. If the system failed to meet is operating cost per passenger objective in the fiscal year prior to the claim, then it would only be eligible to file a cliam for the level of TDA fundin received in that fiscal year. If a system wishes to be eligible for increased TDA funding in a future fiscal year, then it should identify an operating cost per passenger objective. i. What was the level of TDA funding received in the previous fiscal year for this system (LTF and STA) $ ii. Does the attached budget information demonstrate At least a 10% match of non -TDA funds? iii. Is this claim requesting more TDA funds then were received in the previous fiscal year? If yes, how much more? $ iv. What was last year's Operating Cost per Passenger Objective? What was the actual Operating Cost per assenger? - 16 - OperoWng Cost (minus depreciat-i) $ Total Passengers Operating Cost per Passenger v. What is the Operating Cost per Passer.€er Objective for this claim? 0 Budgeted Operating Cost (minus depreciation) $ Estimated Total Passengers Operating Cost per Passenger 3. Fifteen Percent Expenditure Increase If any of the lire items on -.the attached budget exceed by more than 15% the expenditure for that same item in the previous year's budget, then an explanation for that increase must be attached. 4. Narrative Description Describe any changes in service characteristics from the Previous fiscal year. Please attach an additional page if necessary. J - 17 - •,•rRT II - PEDESTRIAN AND �ECYCLE PROJECTS Proiect Limits UF Cost 'Or-ATAAt_; PART III - ROAD AND STREET t'YC:JJECTS lease provide the requested information for each project being identified for Transportation Development Act funding. LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND Project Title and Description ** Ham Lane (R/W construction) HamLane Lane Median * Stockton Street R/W Acquisition Utility Relocation Hutchins Street * Hutchins Street Median * Turner Road Downtown improvement District Pine -School Signal Modification, Sacramento Street CGSS, in.pection and other miscellaneous related work. { Railroad Grade Crossing Approach improvements (SPR R} Ham Lane $ 60000 Tokay Street 12,000 Lodi Avenue 14,000 Pine Street 22,000 Elm Street 12,000 Locust Street 16,000 Lockeford Street 13,000 Lowen Sacramento Road Widening Street Maintenance Administration * Work -in -Progress ** Primary Bicycle Route STATE TRANSIT ASSISTANCE FUND Elm Street North (Usemit onal^Wage 100', 000 95,000 10,000 52,000 5,000 cessaryi STA Cost 19—(Use Additional Page if Necessary) LTF CosL _ Project Limits Total Co—st Lodi -Elm $ 165,000 Century-Kettleman 54,000 Kettleman-Lodi 50,000 { 245,000 * Vine-Tokay 129,000 * Kettleman-Rimby (CSR/W) +55,000 Tokay-Lodi ! R/W Acquisition 6,000 Construction ± 220,000 Harney -Vineyard 10,000 1000' W/Cluff-Cluff S7,000 Downtown Area Elm Street North (Usemit onal^Wage 100', 000 95,000 10,000 52,000 5,000 cessaryi STA Cost 19—(Use Additional Page if Necessary) w PART IV --OTHER PURPO' 3 There is the possibility that a claimant may wish to expend TDA funds for purposes allowed within the Act, but not covered by the three previous parts. For instance, TDA funds may be claimed to subsidize Amtrak service in a community. To complete this section, please identify the project-, the__��urpo_se of the project. the estimated cost, and the fund—from whimsey 3s -ming claimed. It is a visa a to communicate with COG staff before completing this section. ., - 20 - .r � PART III- ROAD AND STREET PnvJECTS lease provide the requested information for for Transportation Development Act funding. LOCAL TRS'' 'ORTATION FUND ;Project Title and Description t Miscellaneous Widening --Miscellaneous Overlay *Miscellaneous Curb 6 Gutter Miscellaneous Subdivision Paving Miscellaneous Traffic Appurtenance Upgr Traffic Signals �* *Pine and Cherokee (upgrade) * "Lockeford and Cherokee (new) !* *Victor and Cherokee (upgrade) 1 "Ham and Lockeford (new) I "Lodi Avenue Signal System Modificati ` '*Church Street Signal System Modifica i *Pine and Sacramento Other Miscellaneous New Signal Railroad Grade Crossing Protection 'Turner Road a Mills °4oma Drive *611fornia Street 'Cherokee Lane *Washington Street Calaveras Street Curb, Gutter 6 Paving Post Office * Work -in -progress ** Primary bicycle route STATE TRANSIT ASSISTANCE FUND Project Title and Description each project being identified LTF Cost Project Limits Total Cost $ 50,000 80,000 71,000 15,000 10,000 1 90,000 19,1 ..(Use Additional Page if Necessary) 110,000 90,000 80.000 10,000 ion 10,000 70,000 80,000 14,.500 8,000. 9,200 9,000 7.000. Lockeford - 200' S/Murray 30.000 School a Walnut 31,000 Total $1,622,587 700 (Use Addltlona1 age if Necessary3 STA Cost Project Limits Total Cost 19,1 ..(Use Additional Page if Necessary) E E SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS PROPOSED BUDGETS FISCAL YEAR 1983-84 FUNCTION The San Joaquin County Council of Governments, a voluntary asso- ciation of general parpose governments, was organized in 1968 with the purpose of providing a mechanism whereby areawide Pro- blems (countywide) could be resolved. Within the Joint Powers Agreement, under which the COG was formed, and subsequent federal legislation, its basic Functions include the following: • Provide review of federally assisted grant proposals • Develop regional plans and policies for urban growth and development Facilitate agreements among governmental units for specific projects • Ensure maximum economy in governmental operations through cooperation and the pooling of common resources • Provide a forum for discussion and study of areawide problems of mutual concern • Identify and plan for the solution of areawide problems Official designations which the COG has received include the Areawide Planning Agency by HUD, the Comprehensive Regional Trans- portation Planning Agency by the Federal Highway Administration, the Metropolitan Clearinghouse by the Federal Office of Management and Budget, and Airport Land Use Commission by the local govern- ments within the County and the State of California. y ORGANIZATION In order to carry out its varied functions, the COG has always maintained two s ecific divisions in the organization. These include (i) (COG Comprehensive Regional Planning, and (2) Trans- portation Planning. Separate budgets were maintained for the two sections because of the sources of funding and the different requirements of the funding agencies. The COG's Regional Planning Budget was contained in one account within the County General Fund (01-25801). However, due to the numerous grants received for Transportation Planning purposes and the audit requirements incumbent upon them, the Transportation budget was separated from the General Fund in 1976 and a seperate Transportation Fund (02S) was created. With COG being established as a separate entity, it is now combining both budgets into one. The Council of Governments' staff consists of nine full time employees; an Executive Director, a Transportation Planner, two Planner II's, two Planner I's, a Clerk Steno II, a Clerk Steno I and an Account Technician II. One Planner II, two Planner I's, the Account Technician II and the Clerk Steno I, all of whom worked in the Transportation Division division, are contract em- ployees and would be terminated at such time as the level of federal funding could no longer justify their continued employment. With an exceptionally heavy workload, as a result of new mandates by Federal and State governments, the COG contracts with or shares some of the work elements with either consultants, Cal- trans, or the County. ADMINISTRATIVE AND COMPREHENSIVE REGIONAL PLANNING The COG's Comprehensive Regional Planning division was responsi- ble for all plans and programs other than transportation. They also shared the intergovernmental coordination, public informa- tion, technical assistance, and grant review functions with the Transportaiion division. One of the principle objectives of the COG is to assure the San Joaquin County regions continued eligibility for receiving federal financial assistance. During the 1983/84 fiscal year, the Regional Planning Division will be continuing the Clearinghouse Activities and operation of the Airport Land Use Commission. Funding for the Airport Land Use Commission activities, as mandated by State law, calls for the County to cover such costs. TRANSPORTATION PLANNING The transportation planning being carried out, in conjunction with local, state and federal governments, is directed toward the preparation of the Countywide Transportation Plan and other documents required by federal and state regulations. The planning process is a cooperative process and COG staff is assisted by the staffs and representatives of local governments, special transportation agencies, the California Department of Transpor- tation, and by local elected and appointed officials and members of the community. Elements of the Plan include a Road and Street Plan, a Public Transit Plan, Aviation System Plan, a Bicycle (non - motorized) Plan, and Commodity Movement Plan. Other activities include the planning for mobile source emissions of air quality, the prepration of the Transportation Systems Management Element, a•Transportation Improvement Program, an Action Plan for the coordination of social service transportation services and Energy Planning. COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS LINE ITEM BUDGET AND JUSTIFICATION The following are the salaries and fringe benefits for the COG staff for the 1983/84 FY and include any step increases that the staff are entitled to. All fringe benefits are programmed at the rate anticipated by the County for the coming year, The 1982/83 figures are the total dollars of both COG and Transportation bud- gets so a comparison can be made with this year's single budget. LINE BUDGETED REQUESTED ITER DESCRIPTION 1982/83 1983/84 101 SALARIES - REGULAR $100,156 $105,216 Includes four full-time positions: An Executive Director, a Transportation Planner at Step B, a Planner II at D Step, and a Clerk Steno II at Step D. 131 SALARIES - EXTRA HELP $ 5,000 $ 7,000 This is to secure student help during the summer months of the year in undertaking the annual traffic counts. This will save considerable monies in not having to use - COG staff at considerably higher salaries 141 SALARIES - CONTRACTUAL $ 72,373 $ 969716 This category includes all full-time con- tractual positions. The calculated salaries allow for promotions and normal step increases. The following provides a breakdown of classpifications: 1 Planner II (12 months) 2 Planner I's - (12 months each) 1 Account Technican II r 1 Clerk Steno I 189 UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION 191 RETIREMENT 193 OASDI 194 LIFE INSURANCE 195 HEALTH INSURANCE 196 DENTAL INSURANCE $ 4S,S25 $ 439062 TOTAL SALARIES AND BENEFITS $214,992 $251,994 202 203 LJ DESCRIPTION OFFICE EXPENSE - GENERAL The expenses in this category include all regular office sullies essential to the operationof_Transportation Planning Agency. One of the major costs included in this line item is printing, including the printing of our Annual Report and other reports prepared during the year. OFFICE EXPENSE - POSTAGE BUDGETED REQUESTED 1982/83 1983/84 $ 4,300 $ 3,950 One of the functions of the Transportation Planning Section of COG is to promote intergovernmental cooperation and coordi- nation. This necessitates a considerable amount of information dissemination through the mails, a major portion of which are referrals of federal transportation grant requests, planning documents and revidw materials for the COG hoard and other committees, as well as numerous mail surveys as a part of its on-going citizen partici- pation program: SUBSCRIPTIONS AND PERIODICALS $ 2,150 ` $ 21100 This budget item is used to purchase technical documents published by the Federal Department of Transportation and other agencies. It is impossible to lint specific publications at this time due to uncertainties as to what publications will actually be available. Transportation ' Planning does subscribe to a number of periodicals which are as follows: i Transit Journal $18.00 etro 8.00 ass ----Transit ls.00 icyc a orum 8.00 Together, these documents and other periodi- cals provide the current technical library support that is helpful in the preparation of transportation reports, plans, and in keeping abreast of the state of the art. $ 100 $ 100 LINE BUDGETED REQUi-.STED ITEM DESCRIPTION 1982/83 1983/84 206 COWUNICATIONS $ 2 ,800 S 2,668 Communications, specifically the telephone, play an important part in carrying out the coordination of COG's Transportation Planning functions with local, State and Federal agencies. Efforts have been made to hold long distance calls to a minimum. The County's new computerized system should 'yelp reduce costs somewhat. Total communication cost is estimated by the County. 211 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE $ 180 $ 1S0 This line item reflects the cost of the contractual maintenance service as secured by the County for two electric typewriters at $32,00 each and two ten -key- cca-rcu a ors at $27.00. --- 214 RENTS AND LEASES - EQUIPMENT $ 2,650 $ 2,925 The cost incurred within this line item ----- reflect COG's photocopying costs. Considerable reliance upon a reproduction machine is essential to carrying out our varied respon- sibilities. This figure barely covers the cost of the basic machine rerital charges plus copies. 217 TRANSPORTATION AND TRAVEL $ 3,900 $ 31200 Trips 7outside of the County are primarily for training and/or special educational purposes which enable staff to conduct their duties in a more knowledgeable fashion. Changes in the transportation planning pro- fession occur frequently and rapidly, and the opportunity to attend conferences, workshops, and training courses will greatly assist staff in providing technical assistance to local governments as well as providing direction to the preparation and implementation of transpor- tation plans. Some typical travel needs for the year include: . 1 workshop sponsored by the Institute of Transportation Studies - $200 . 1 Training Course sponsored by Federal DOT - $300 LINE ITEM 0 DESCRIPTION 1 Annual IPG meeting (2 persons) - $80o BUDGETED REQUESTED 1982/83 1983/84 4 workshops or technical seminars sponsored by Caltrans (usually in San Francisco or Sacramento) - $300 10 unscheduled meetings with state agencies in Sacramento - $300 l national conference or business meeting of significant importance - $1,500 10 meetings of the Regional Transportation Planning Agencies which meet in Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Sacramento 218 MOTOR POOL $ 3 ,300 $ 2,850 This line itme reflects costs to be incurred by the Transportation Planning Section of COG in using motor pool vehicles for trips within and outside the County as well as the estimated cost for maintenance and operation of the vehicle assigned to the COG Director 220 PROFESSIONAL AND SPECIAL SERVICES $ 62,046 $ 599000 Funds included in this line item are used chiefly to carry out contractual work or specific items in the COG Overall Work Program. These work tasks are contracted to the County Planning Department ($7,000), the Stoc ton eo-pTf tan Transit ($12,000), and ($1S,000) to the SVate for audits. Financial and compliance audits are required to be performed annually. Additionally, some $20,000 will be used for con- tractual planning to help move the Crosstown Freeway project along to an earlier completion. Some $5,0.00 is also being programmed to acquire a special census information package. 220- ALLOCATED SERVICE 0200 DEPARTMENT COSTS $ 201,018 $ 14 9845 This figure represents the cost allocation plan estimated by the County as the estimated charges for services to be rendered during the fiscal year. At the end of the year they calculate the precise charge and make an adjustment or roll for- ward on the following year's billing. Under the new organizational arrangement we will pay directly for all such services. The exact amount is unclear at this time, so tie have continued to program the anticipated Service Department costs. LINE BUDGETED Ri?QW:STED ITEM DESCRIPTION 1982-83 1983-84 223 PUBLICATIONS AND LEGAL ,NOTICES $ 300 $ 325 In the course of the year, it is necessary to advertise public hearings for the purpose of adopting various plans and plan elements. The funds requested are an estimate of such a need. 232 INSURANCE - WORKER'S COMPENSATION 975 $ 324 This figure is based on estimates 1)r0pare(I by the County. 236 INSURANCE - CASUALTY $ 34 $ 71 TOTAL SERVICES AND SUPPLIES $101,908 $ 87,564 451 FIXED ASSE'T'S $ -0- $ 12,258 This line item includes the purchase of a small computer system and ancillary equip- ment for better management practices (financial records, program) and to esta- blish a computer-based data file to provide quick response to the transportation problems of COW s member governments. A system within COG could be used immediately for word pro- cessing and improved TDA management as well as overall fiscal management. It could also be used for the collection of transportation data that would enable staff to provide quick respopse to the member governments on trans- portation -related issues, trip generation, air quality, and special studies. There is also a need for additional file jstorage capacity and a four drawer legal size file cabinet is included to meet that need. TOTAL FIXED ASSETS— --- $_ _.: 0- - , $ _12 258 TOTAL. SALARIES AND EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $214,992 $ 251 9994 TOTAL SERVICES AND SUPPLIES $101 1908 $ 87 ,5ti4 TOTAL FIXED ASSE'T'S j -0- $ 12,258 $316,900 $351,816 BUDGETED REQUESTED DESCRIPTION 1982/83 1983/84 ANTICIPATED REVENUES FAA PL Funds UNITA State Subventions 1982/83 Planning Contributions 1981/82 Planning Contribution Carryover TDA Administration San Joaquin County $ - $ 10,t;CtU s9 , s00 1 27 , 500 41 , 800 24,000 9,900 24,250 108,466 98,000 45,015 30,000 39,000 39,000 - 6,000 $303 ,781 $3S8,750