Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - October 14, 1987 (95)CITY COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 14,- 1987 12 RESOLUTION ADOPTED APPROVING 1987-88 TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT CLAIM RES. NO. 87-133 Council adopted Resolution No. 87-133 approving the City's 1987/88 Transportation Development Act (TDA) Claim for CC -7(f) Local Transportation Funds (LTF) and State Transit CC -7(n) Assistance (STA), and authorized the City Manager to execute the documents on behalf of the City. The City's 1987/88 TDA Claim requests all of the LTF apportionment, which amounts to $757,896, and the STA, which amounts to $1,491. The STA funds are not a new apportionment but a clean up of previous years' unclaimed apportionment and reprogramming STA money that had been put into streets and roads several years ago and not used. It is estimated that the City will be using approximately $202,129 of the LTF and $1,491 STA money for the Dial -A -Ride system. The City, according to Staff, does not plan to purchase any new equipment this year. TGA funds are used in conjunction with other street funds for the transportation improvement program and maintenance of City streets. This claim includes work in progress projects as well as street projects from the City's CIP which are using the LTF funds. Projects were detailed for the benefit of the Council. Showing these projects in our claim allows us the flexibility to use TDA funds. It does not approve these pro„ects for construction. The pedestrian/bicycle apportionment ($15,467) will be used on the City's sidewalk upgrading program, together with other funds. Since this project improves pedestrian safety, it meets the requirements cf this portion of the claim. a �} w : r r � z; fl y �� {R,K K - 9 CITY OF LODICOUNCIL COMIMUNICATION x PUBUC WORKS C-EPARTMENT TO: City Council FROM: City Manager MEETING DATE: October 14, 1981' AGENDA TITLE: Adopt Resolution Approving 1987/88 Transportation Development Act Claim RECOMMENDED ACTION: That the City Council adopt a resolution approving the City's 1987/88 Transportation Development Act (TDA) Claim for Local Transportation Funds (LTF) and State Transit Assistance (STA), and authorize the City Manager to sign on behalf of the City. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The City s 1987/88 TDA Claim requests all of the LTF apportionment, which amounts to $757,856, and the STA., Y!hich amounts to $1,491. The STA funds are not a new apportionment but a clean up of previous years unclaimed apportionment and reprogramming STA money that had been put into streets and roads several y^ars ago and not used. It is estimated that we will be using approximately $202,125 of the LTE and $1,491 STA money for the Dial -A -Ride system. We do not plan to purchase any new equipment this year. TDA funds are used in conjunction with other street funds for tho transportation improvement program and maintenance of our streets. This claim includes work in progces:� projects as well as street projects from our CIP which are using the LTF funds. Projects are shown on the attached list. Showing these projects in our claim allows us the flexibility to use TDA funds. It does not approve these projects for construction. The pedestrian/bicycle apportionment ($15,467) will be used on the City's sidewalk upgrading program, together with other funds. Since this project improves pedestrian safety, it meets the requirements of this portion of the claim. A complete claim form is of this communication. Jack L. Ronsko' Public Works Director JLR/SB/ma Attachment APPROVED: in the City Manager's file but not included as part erry Glenn Assistant City Manager ager FILE NO. CTEACLM2/TXTW.02M September 29, 1987 PART III - ROAD AND STREET PROJECTS Please ,rovide the reauested information for each project being ident�fi( for transportation Development Act funding. LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND STATE TRANSIT ASSISTANCE FUND STA Cost Project Title and Description Project Limits Total Cost I l 1 I f { I I i I { 1 t l 1 I i 1 I I 4 l ! 1 I I I { 1 1 I ( i I ! 1 (Use Additional page if Necessary) LTF Cost Project Title and Description Project Limits Total Cost I Hutchins Street Widening ! Rimby to Vine I 260,060 Tokay to Lodi ► 290,000 I Traffic Signal ► Turner Road & Lower Sacramento 60,000 Asphalt Overlay Various Locations 30,000 ( RR Grade Crossing Protection I*Turner• Road ! 8,000 I !*Loma Drive ( 8,000 ! 1*Cherokee Lane 1 9,000 1 1 Cluff Avenue 1 10,000 Turner Road Lower Sacramento Rd. to SPRR 180,000 I*Lower Sacramento Road Engileering ( I 10,000 I*Miscellaneous Traffic Appurten:aces i Various Locations 200 I*Cherokee Ln/Century Blvd. Intersectionl ( 80,000 1*Street Master Plan Upgrade 10,000 I*Cherokee Lane Rideability Iriprovementl ( 7,000 Street Maintenance 1 I 1 107,000 1 ! 1 1 899,213 [,Work 1 11, 00 in progress ! I I (Use Additional Page if Necessary) STATE TRANSIT ASSISTANCE FUND STA Cost Project Title and Description Project Limits Total Cost I l 1 I f { I I i I { 1 t l 1 I i 1 I I 4 l ! 1 I I I { 1 1 I ( i I ! 1 (Use Additional page if Necessary) Ct, i:uu�Cit iOf!'� R ;Rar,.vr SNIDER "aavo, Pro Tempore CM HALL. 221 WEST PINE CTREET D-NVID r,1 MNCHMAN CALL BOX 3006 IAI-AFS W PINKERTON. It LODI, CALIFORNIA 95241-1910 FRED :%t RFID (209) 333-5634 TELECOPIER . (209) 333.6795 October 21, 1987 C rtv-tanaeerr ?t -;(-E Ni RE; (-HE City Clerk RC)N.ALD v STEM: C;r Attorney Mr. Gary Dickson San Joaquin County COG 1860 East Hazelton Avenue Stockton, CA 95205 Dear Mr. Dickson: Enclosed herewith please find two executed copies• of the 1987/88 transportation Development Act Claim and the authorizing Resolution which was approved by the Lodi City Council at its meeting of October 14, 1987. Please return a fully executed copy of the subject claim at your earliest convenience. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to call this office. Very truly yours Alice M. Reimche City Clerk AMR:jj RESOLUTION Iti%: 01-1,33 RESaLUT IQ:� r:PPPU`:'Iva THE CITY'S 1,987-48 TRANSPORTATION DEVELO,PMEN'T ACT CLAIM FCR LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Lodi does hereby approve the City's 1987-88 Transportation Development Act (TDA) Claim for Local Trafisportation 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 authorize the City Manager to execute the subject claim on behalf of the City of Lodi. Dated: October 14, 1987 I hereby certify that Resolution No. 87-133 was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Lodi in a regular meeting held October 14, 1987 by the following vote: Ayes Council Members - Hinchman, Pinkerton, Reid, Snider and Olson (Mayor) Hoes: Council Members - None Absent: Council Members - None Alice M. e the City Clerk 87-133 LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND ro : San Joaquin County Couric i i of Governments 1860 East Hazelton Avenue Stockton,. CA 95205 FROM: Applicant: - City of Lodi Address: Call Box 3006 Lodi CA 95241 (City, zip) Contact Person: Sharon Biaufus -Phone: 333-6700- The 33-6700 The City of Lodi hereby requests, in accordance with Chapter 1400, Statutes 1971 and applicable rules and regulations, that its annual transportation claim be approved in the amount of $ 1,116,809 for fiscal year 1987/88 to be drawn from the Local Transportation Fund. When approved, please transmit this claim to the County Auditor for payment. Approval of the claim and payment by the County 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 certifies 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 6G34 and 1-.0734. APPROVED: San Joaquin County Council of Governments By: PETER D. VERDOORN Title: Executive Director Date: 19 min Applicant: City of Lodi By: Thous A. Peterson Title: City Manager Date: 19 ST -"Ti TRANSIT -ASSISTANCE CLAIM TO: San Joaquin County Council of Governments 1860 East Hazelton Avenue Stockton, CA 95205 FROM: Applicant: City of Lodi Address: Call Box 3006, Lodi, CA 95241 (City, Zip) Contact Person: Sharon Blaufus Phone: 333-6706 This claimant, qualified pursuant to Section x-9203 and 99315 of the Public utilities Code, hereby requests, in accordance with Chapter 1400, Statutes of 1971 as amended, and.applicable rules and regulations, that an allocation be made in the amount of $ 1,491 for fiscal year 1987/88 , 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 Amounts 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 the provisions that such monies will be used only ii accordance with the terms of the approved claim. The claimant certifies that this State Transit Assistance 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 By: PETER D. VERDOORN Title: Executive Director Date: 19-- Applicant: 9 Applicant: City of Lodi By Thomas A. Peterson Title• City Manager Date: 19 TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT APPORTIONMENTS Locai Transnortatlor• Fund Available Apportionment A. Area Apportionment 1987-88 $ 742,42-9 B. Pedestrian/Bicycle Apportionment _ 15,467 C. Previous Years` Unclaimed Apportionment 4,998 D. Unexpended Carryover 353,915 E. Total Available for 1987-88 Claim(s) 1,116,809 F. less any LTF Already Claimed 1987-88 -0- G.- TOTAL AVAILABLE FOR THIS CLAIM $1,116,809 (Also enter on page -8 -IVa, 1st column) - II. State Transit Assistance Fund Available Apportionment A. Area Apportionment 1987-q8 $ 0 B. Special Transit Apportionment 1987-58 0 C. Previous Years' Unclaimed Apportionment 566 D. Unexpended Carryover *925 E. Total Available for 1987-88 Claim(s) F. less any STA Already Claimed 1987-88 G. TOTAL AVAILABLE FOR THIS CLAIM $ (Also enter on page 8 IVa, 2nd column) *To be reprogrammed from Streets a:id Roads to Transit. Eva 1,491 0 1,491 TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT ALLOCAT%vi<S Lla;m Purpose I. LTF II. STAB` 1. Public Transoortation Article 4 (99260) -Operator 202,129 1,49, Article 8 (99400(c)) -Contractor II. Pedestrian and Bicycle N/A Article 3 (99234) _ Article 8 (99400(a)) 15,467 III. Roads and Streets ** Article 8 (99400(a)) 899.213 IV. Other N/A Article 8 (99400(b) or 99400(d)) TOTAL THIS CLAIM a. TOTAL AVAILABLE FOR THIS CLAIM 1,116,809 1,491 b. TOTAL THIS CLAIM 1,116,809 1,491 c. UNCLAIMED APPORTIONMENT -0- -0- 1987-88 (a - b) *This will automatically be classified as Article 6.5 (99313.5) for purposes of the Act. IMPORTANT: Please identify any unexpended carryover included in the amounts being claimed above. **All unexpended carryover is in Streets and Roads —s- PART 1 _ PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION Please Circle either: Article 4 operator or Article 8 contractor F'�NANCTAL INFORMATION 1986-87 198?- 98 I. OPERATING REVENUE Actual or Estimate* Budg,-!t 401 Passenger Fares 40,210* 40,050 402 Special Transit Fares 403 School Bus Service Revenues 404 Freight Tariffs 405 Charter Service Revenues 406 Auxiliary Transportation Revenues 407 Non -Transportation Revenues 408 Taxes Levied Directly by Transit System (Specify) 409 Local Cash Grants & Reimbursements (Specify) Local Transportation Fund (LTF) 193,083 410 Local Special Fare Assistance _ 411 State Cash Grants & Reimbursements (Specify) State Transit Assistance Fund (STA) 20,724** 412 State Special Fare Assistance 413 Federal Cash Grants & Reimbursements (Specify) UMTA Grants 430 Contributed Services 440 (Specify) Interest 220 TOTAL 254.237 IT. CAPITAL REVENUE 464 Federal Capital Grants & Subsidies (Specify) State Capital Grants & Subventions (Specify) State Transit Assistance Funds (STA) Local Capital Provisions (Specify) Local Transportation Fund (LTF) 4,352 Non -Governmental Donations TOTAL 4,352 *Tickets are presold; more tickets are sold than used **Revenue received during 1986/87, actually part of 1985/86 claim -9- 202,129 1,491 _ F. III. OPERATING EXPENSES 986-87 1937=88 Actual r Estimate* Budget ` 501 Labor Operators Salaries/Mages n Other Salaries/Wages 750 502 Fringe Benefits 250 503 services 870 1,000 504 Materials/Supplies Fuels/Lubricants Tires/Tubes Other 0 505 Utilities 506 Casualty/Liability Costs 36,474 37,500 507. Taxes 508 Purchased Transportation Service 197,263 204,120 509 Miscellaneous Expenses 7 2E0 510 Expense Transfers 511 interest Expense 512 Leases and Rentals 513 Depreciation/Amortization Operator Funds Grant Funds TOTAL' 234.614 243 A70 IV. CAPITAL EXPENSES Debt Service Land/Property Acquisition F Vehicles x Construction Other 4,352** TOTAL 4,352 *Please circle either "actual" or "estimate", as appropriate. **Cost of converting two vehicles from diesel to gasoline engines. _ -10- - 4 a OPERATIONAL INFORMATION* Actual / A tual st. FY 1985-86 86-8 i 1. Patronage 1.00 1.00 a. Total Passengers 68,599 d. b. Revenue Passengers 2,745 .50 C. Youth Passengers e. d. Elderly Passengers .50 .50 e. Handicapped Passengers 65,854 2. Vehicle Miles N/A N/A a. Total Vehicle Miles 107,971 g. b. Revenue Vehicle Miles 107,971 3. Revenue Vehicle Hours 9,042 4. Revenue Vehicle Fuel Consumption h. a. Diesel .52 .53 b. Gasoline 8,734 C. Liquid Natural Compressed Gas s } 5. Fare Structure as necessary to alter or complete a. Base 1.00 b. Zone 72,879 4,006 Proposed FY 1987-88 75,600 4,500 68,873 71,100 136,490 140,000 136,490 140,000 11,299 12,000 12,859 13,333 1.00 1.0() C . Youth 1.00 1.00 1.00 4 d. Senior .50 .50 .50 e. Handicapped .50 .50 .50 f . Monthly Pass N/A N/A N/A g. other _ N/A N/A N/A h. Average Fare .52 .53 .53` s } *Attach additional pages as necessary to alter or complete description t *Does not inrlirde County gPrvirP THREE YEAR FISCAI, PLAN t 485-83 X309-40 239£3-91 Operating Expenses $ 278,800 $ 289,900 $ 301,500 Operating Revenues Sources: LTF $ 226,300 $ 235,300 $ 244,700 STA - - - --- - - Federal Fares 52,500 54.6b0 56,840 General Fund Other Total S 278,800 $ 289,900 $ 301,500 Can i to 1 Expenses $ $ 15.000 $ _ CaAital Revenue Sources: LTF $ $ 15,000 $ STA Federal Other Total $ !t $ 15.00Z_ $ 0 i e f -12- FLEET INVENTORY ,Article 4 Operator Only; [l Production[ # ofl Fuell Seat ISnecial Features _ (Make & Modell Year I I [ [ Veh.1 Typel 1 ! Capacity (AC JEP [WC (Other f [ f I [ I Chevrolet I { [ f t I I [ [ ! I [ I [ f [ I Stationwagon 1 1982 { 2 1 gas ( 6 ( X I I I I Chevrolet I Stationwagon I I I I 1 1985 { I f f I I I f I 5 1 gas ( f I I [ ! I I I 6 I X { I [ [ [ f I [ [ [ [ [ l [ I [ ! [ f I ! ! I ! [ [ [ - l l [ I I I [ I ITOTAL I (XxxxxxxxxxX( I IXXXXXI I I I I Vehicles to be Purchased in FY AC = Air Conditioned EP = Environmental Package WC = Wheelchair Lift -13- r• Artic e 4 Operator TDA Pequir-ements i. Fare Patio/Local Support Requirements All Article 4 claimants are required to maintain a specified ratio of fare revenue to operating cost. in addition, SMTD only is required to maintain a ratio of fare revenue plus local support to operating cost of 32%. See 99268.2 - 99268.17 for details and exemptions pertaining to ratios. A. What is this system's required farebox recovery ratio? 10% B. Does the attached budget demonstrate that this system will meet its required farebox recovery and for SMTD its farebox plus local support ratios? Yes C. Has this system utilized its grace year? No D. Has this system been in non-compliance with its required ratio(s)? No If yes, identify the year or years 2. Extension of Service/New Service N/A An extension of service or new service is exempt from the required farebox and local support ratios if: A. The extension of service or new service was implemented in FY 1985-86 or later (99268.8). B. The clam►ant submits a report on the extension of service to COG. (For details of the report, see 6633.8(c)). Is an extension of service/new service being claimed? If so, please identify: -14- 3. Fifteen Percent Expenditure Increase �.f any of the line items on the attached budget exceed by more than 15% the expenditure for that same item in the 3revious year's budget, then an explanation. for that increase must be attached. Item 502 - Last year, the Assistant City Manager, who administrates the Dial -A -Ride Program, didn't charge any time to the account. This year, he has budgeted $750 to cover his time. 4. Narrative Description Describe any changes in service characteristics from the previous fiscal year. Please attach an additional page if necessary. None SPECIAL NOTES FOR RATIO CALCULATIONS'-= SMTD - Exclude certain costs and fares as specified in 1985-86 {- Compliance Audit Report. Lodi - Exclude County service when calculating fares and t expenses. -15- Article 8 Contractor TDA Reauirements* For contz-aCtea transnor atlon Service nr ovi dens , the San 3oaouln . County Council of Governments' Executive Board has waived the farebox and N\ local support ratios as it is empowered to do and established a\,two-step process. 1. Match Requirement To receive the same amount of TDA funds (LTF and STA combined) thht a service received in the previous year, no more than 90% bf the operating funds (minus depreciation) in the budget- mar 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 TBA funds (LTF and STA combined) in excess of what was c aimed the previous fiscal year, the claimant must estabI sh a specific service objective for the fiscal year of the clam. This specific objective must be the operating cost per passenger 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 COG Executive Board will adopt the operating cost per passenger figure that a claimant mustmeet in the fiscal year of the claim. If the system failed to meet i s operating cost per passenger objective in the fiscal year prior to the claim, then it would only be eligible to file\a claim for the level of TDA funding received in that fiscal ybar. If a system wishes to be eligible for increased TDA 4unding in a future fiscal year, then it should identify an operating cost per passenger objective. i. What was the level of TDA fun ing received in the previous fiscal year for thistsystem (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 f\ds then were received in the previous fiscal year If yes, how much more? *If this claim is for the smaller portion of a unified transit system, do not use pages 16 and 17. Use F. 17a insteak -16- 4. Narrative Description Describe any changes in service characteristics from the previous fiscal year. Please attac�. antadditional page if necessary. IMPORTANT: If this claim is for a unified transit s�,stem (per definition p. 17a), all calculations and numbers on p�}ges 16-17 must include both City and County totals. -17- •s. \;,chat IV o.as last year' Operating Cost per Passenger 7 k What was the actual operating cost per passenger'?... a.\,FY 1986-87 Operating Cost S k b. Total Passengers C. Operating Cost. Per Passenger _ (a`/ b) $ - V. What is\the operating Cost per Passenger Objective for this claim? a _d. Budget d Operating Cost $ e. Estimated Total Passengers f. Operating Cost per Passenger g. FY 19E7-88 gPERATING COST PER _ PASSENGER OB`ECTZVE $ aim \ s u transit ' t stem h. If this cl for a unified t� n i system (see footnotep, has the contributing claimant � been appraised bf the planned systemwide objec- tive set in g. above? < 3. 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. e 4. Narrative Description Describe any changes in service characteristics from the previous fiscal year. Please attac�. antadditional page if necessary. IMPORTANT: If this claim is for a unified transit s�,stem (per definition p. 17a), all calculations and numbers on p�}ges 16-17 must include both City and County totals. -17- r'+RTICLE 8 CONTRACTOR TDA REQUIREMENTS (CONTRIBUTING CLAIMANTS) in the C35e of a "Unified transit system," this page iS td be used b,r the "contributing claimant" rather than pages 16 and 17.\\ A "unified transit system" is defined as orae which has the`,,same fare structure throughout the service area, but whose TDA expenses are claimed separately by two different TDA claimants. Additionally, to qualify as a unified tran- sit system all system TDA funding must be claimed under Article 8( ) (both claimants). "Contributing claimant" is defined as tie claimant contributing a minority of the uni- fied transit system's TDA funds. The claimant furnishing the majority f TDA funds is defined as the "primary claim- ant." Currently, the following local services qualify as unified transit systems: FY 1987-88 Unified ransit Systems This Page Used by: Tracy Trans County Tracy Taxi County Escalon Public Transit System County In addition, the City of Manteca will use this page as a contributing claimant For the SCAT service, if Manteca con- tributes TDA funds to SCAT x FY 1987-88. II. 1. Name of unified transit system 2. Date of primary claimant's adopted transit claim (from that claim, page 5, lower left corner) 3. Systemwide operating cost per passenger objective iden- tified in primary claimant's adopted transit claim (from that claim, page 17 v.g.) IMPORTANT: The operating cost per passenger objective identif:`�d in 3. above will be applied uniformly to the total of City aAid County TDA funds used by the unified transit system, to determin eligibil- ity for increased TDA funding as explained on page 16 Separate calculations will not be done for City and County. -17a- PART II - PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE PROJECTS LCCAL, Ti:yiiSrGRTAI'ION FUtvD ro_ject Title and Description Sidewalk Upgrading STATE TRANSIT ASSISTANCE FUND Protect Limits Varies LTF Cost Total Cost 15,467 5 ;000 -18- r.om MROT^.CTC PART ZII - KVAU ti1VL :1RLLt rsty .ru Please provide the reauested information for each proiject being identifi( .or Transportation Development Act funding. LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND Project Title and Description ! Hutchins Street Widening I Traffic Signal Asphalt Overlay LTF Cost Proiect Limits Total Cost Rimby to Vine I 260,0e0 Tokay to Lodi 290,000 Turner Road & Lower Sacramentq 60,000 Various Locations 30,000 1 RR Grade Crossing Protection I*Turner• Road 1 8,000 { (*Loma Drive I 8,000 I I*Cherokee Lane { 9,000 { I Cluff Avenue I 10,000 *Turner Road I Lower Sacramento Rd. to SPRR f 180,000 I*Lower Szcramento Road Engineering I ► 10,000 I*Miscellaieous Traffic Appurtenances 4 Various Locations 200 1*.herokee Ln/Century Blvd. Intersection[ 1 80,000 1* Street Master Plan Upgrade 10,000 I*Cherokee Lane Rideability Improvement[ I 71000 *Street Maintenance t 1 I I*Work in progress STATE TRANSIT ASSISTANCE FUND [ 107,000 1 { [ 899,213 11,00—,200 fUse Additional Page if Necessary) STA Cost Project Title and Descri tion Project Limits Total Cost ! I I { I I I I I I I t t l I I l 1 i { I I I { f i f 1 I i ( i j l ! i I ! (Use Additional page if Necessary) u. PARI IV .- OTHER PURPOSES It is possible 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 purpose of the project, the estimated cost, and the fund from which money is being claimed. It is advisable to communicate with COG staff before completing this section.