The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutResolutions - No. 89-47RESOLUTION NO. 89-47 A RESOLUTION OF THE LODI CITY COUNCIL APPROVING THE CITY OF LODI'S AMENDED 1988-89 TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT CLAIM FOR LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND WHEREAS, the purpose of this amended Transportation Development Act (TDA) claim is to provide for a wheelchair accessible vehicle and certain related costs, as well as to provide funding for certain underbudgeted expenditures involving vehicles already purchased this year; and WHEREAS, the amended claim increases the City's claim by $40,000, $5,305 of which is for underbudgeted items heretofore purchased, and $34,695 is for a wheelchair -equipped vehicle and associated costs; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Lodi does hereby approve the City's amended 1988-89 Transportation Development Act (TDA) claim for Local Transportation Fund (LTF), 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: April 19, 1989 I hereby certify that Resolution No. 89-47 was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Lodi in a regular meeting held April 19, 1989 by the following vote: Ayes: Council Members - Hinchman, Olson, Reid, Pinkerton and Snider (Mayor) Noes: Council Members - None Absent: Council Members - None Alice M. Reimche City Clerk 89-47 T IT 7)3- :A Al LOCAL 7R ':SPOFTATTON FT,.i';D 'I'0: San Joarnlin Countv Council of Governments 1360 East Hazelton Avenue Stockton, CA 95205 FROM: Applicant: City of Lodi Add =sus -Hal l ,221 W. Pine Street, Lodi , CA 96240 (City, zip) Contact Person- Jerry L. Glenn Phone: 209/333-6700 Assistant City .anager The CITY OF LODI hereby requests, in accordance with Chapter 1400, Statuues 1971 and applicable rules and regulations, that its annual transportation claim be approved in the amount of $ 1,073,603 for fiscal year 1988-89 to be ,awn from the Local Transportation Fund. When approved, please trans. -nit this claim to the County Auditor 'or pa)i=ent. Approval of the claim and payment by the County Auditcr 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 6634 and 6734. APPROVED: San ,;oaauir. County Council of Governments LY: PETER D. VERDOORIN Title: Executive Director Date: 19 -5- Apalica at : C i ty of L Signed". a� Name: Thomas A. Peterson, Fi=le- City 'anager s.pr4l 19 Date: IM, LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND TO: San Joaquin County Council of Governments 1860 East Hazelton Avenue Stockton, CA 95205 FROM: Applicant: City of Lodi AddrCeS.y •Hal 1 ,221 W. Pine Street, Lodi, CA 95240 (City, Zip) Contact Person:- Jerry L. Glenn Phone • 209/333-6700 Assistant City Manager 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 $ 1,078,603 for fiscal year 1988-89 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 6634 and 6734. APPROVED: San Joaquin County Council of Governments By: PETER D. VERDOORN Title: Executive Director Date: 19 Applicant: City of L Signec. I a. Name: Thomas A. Peterson -5- Title: City Manager Date: Apr i 1 19 19 89 TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT APPORTIONMENTS I. Local Transportation Fund Available Apportionment A. Area Apportionment 1988-89 $ 840,758 B. Pedestrian/Bicycle Apportionment 17,515 C. Previous Years' Unclaimed Apportionment 45,000 D. Unexpended Carryover* . 175,330 E. Total Available for 1988-89 Claim(s) 1,078,603 F. less any LTF Already Claimed 1988-89 -0- G. TOTAL AVAILABLE FOR THIS CLAIM $ 1,078,603 (Also enter on page 8 IVa, 1st column) II. State Transit Assistance Fund Available Apportionment A. Area Apportionment 1988-89 $ B. Special Transit Apportionment 1988-89 C. Previous Years' Unclaimed Apportionment 6,950 D. Unexpended Carryover -0- E. Total Available for 1988-89 Claim(s) 6,950 F. less any STA Already Claimed 1988-89 G. TOTAL AVAILABLE FOR THIS CLAIM $ 6,950 (Also enter on page 8 IVa, 2nd column) * Estimate only. TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT ALLOCATIONS Claim Purpose I. LTF II. STA* I. Public Transportation Article 4 (99260) -Operator Article 8 (99400(c)) -Contractor 266,460 6,950 II. Pedestrian and Bicycle Article 3 (99234) Article 8 (99400(a)) 22,345 III. Roads and Streets Article 8 (99400 (a) ) 789,798 IV. Other Article 8 (99400(b) or 99400(d)) TOTAL THIS CLAIM 1,078,603 N/A N/A 6,950 a. TOTAL AVAILABLE FOR THIS CLAIM 1,078,603 6,950 1,078,603 6,950 b. TOTAL THIS CLAIM C. UNCLAIMED APPORTIONMENT -0- -0- 1988-89 (a - b) *This will automatically be classified as Article 6.5 (99313.3) for purposes of the Act. IMPOP.TANT: Please identify any unexpended carryover included in the amounts being claimed above. The estimated carry-overs a=•e: Streets and Roads 175,330 Pedestrian & Bicycle 4,830 -8- -9- PART I - PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION Please Circle either: Article 4 operator or Article 8 contractor FINANCIAL INFOP_M_ATION 1987-88 1988-89 I. OPERATING REVENUE Actual or Estimate* Budget 41,265 401 Passenger Fares 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) 201,460 410 Local Special Fare Assistance 411 State Cash Grants & Reimbursements (Specify) State Transit Assistance Fund (STA) 6,950 412 State Special Fare Assistance 413 Federal Cash Grants & Reimbursements (Specify) UMTA Grants 430 Contributed Services 440 (Specify) TOTAL 249,675 II. 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) 65,000 Non -Governmental Donations 65,000 TOTAL -9- III. OPERATING EXPENSES 501 Labor Operators Salaries/Wages Other Salaries/Wages 502 Fringe Benefits 503 Services 504 Materials/Supplies Fuels/Lubricants Tires/Tubes Other 505 Utilities 506 Casualty/Liability Costs 507 Taxes 508 Purchased Transportation Service 509 Miscellaneous Expenses 510' Expense Transfers 511 Interest Expense 512 Leases and Rentals 513 Depreciation/Amortization Operator Funds •Grant Funds TOTAL IV. CAPITAL EXPENSES Debt service Land/Property Acquisition Vehicles Construction Other Radios TOTAL 1987-88 1988-89 Actual or Estimate* Budget 249,675 62,000 3,000 65,0V *Please circle either "actual" or "estimate", as appropriate. - -10- OPERATIONAL INFO. TION Actual Actual/Est. Proposed FY 1986-87 FY 1987-88 FY 1968-89 1. Patronage a. Total Passengers b. Revenue Passengers C. Youth Passengers d. Elderly Passengers e. Handicapped Passengers 2. Vehicle Miles a. Total Vehicle Miles b. Revenue Vehicle Miles 3. Revenue Vehicle Hours 4. Revenue Vehicle Fuel Consumption a. Diesel b. Gasoline C. Liquid Natural Compressed Gas 5. Fare Structure a. Base b. Zone C. Youth d. Senior e. Handicapped f. Monthly Pass g. Other h. Average Fare *Attach additional pages as necessary to alter or complete description -11- . Operating Expenses Operating Revenues Sources: LTF STA Federal Fares General Fund - Other Total Capital Expenses Capital Revenue Sources: LTF STA Federal Other Total THREE YEAR FISCAL PLAN 1989-90 1990-91 1991-92 $ $ S F1 S $ $ S $ $ S F1 S -12- $ S $ -12- FLEET INVENTORY (Transit Vehicle Owners Only) i -lake & Model Production Year n of Veh. Fuel Type Seat (Special Capacity Features AC EP WC Other Chevrolet 1985 5 gas 6 'tation Wago Dodge Mini -Vans* 1988* 2 gas 9 TOTAL xxxxxXXXXXX XXXXXI Vehicles to be Purchased in FY 88-89 Mini -Van 1 gas X X AC = Air Conditioned EP = Environmental Package WC = Wheelchair Lift * Purchased in -lieu of mini van or bus. —13— Article 4 Operator TDA Requirements 1. Fare Ratio/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? B. Does the attached budget demonstrate that this system will meet its required farebox recovery and for SMTD its farebox plus local support ratios? C. Has this system utilized its grace year? D. Has this system been in non-compliance with its required . ratio(s)? If yes, identify the year or years 2. Extension of Service/New Service An extension df 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 dlaimant 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 attach required report. -14- 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 given below. Attach an extra page if necessary. 4. Narrative Description Describe any changes in service characteristics from the previous fiscal year. Please attach an additional page if necessary. Original claim include funds to purchase one mini -van or bus with a wheelchair lift. It was subsequently determined two mini -vans could be purchased which would reduce wait times. COG has determined we have an unmet transit need - a wheelchair equipped van. The City if desireous of purchasing this equipment now. SPECIAL NOTES FOR RATIO CALCULATIONS S'L4TD - Exclude certain costs and fares as sr-2cified in 1986-87 Conpliance Audit Report. Lodi - Exclude County service when calculating fares and expenses. -15- Article 8 Contractor TDA Recuirements For contracted transportation service providers, the San Joaquin County Council of Governments' Executive Board has waived the farebox and local support ratios as it is empowered to do by 99405(c). The COG Board has established a two-step process. 1. Match Requirement To receive the same amount of TDA funds (LT: and STA com- bined) that a service received in the previous year, no more than 900 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 claim- ant besides TDA. 2. Operating Cost Per Passenger Objective To receive an amount of TDA funds (LTF and STA combined) in excess of what was claimed the previous fiscal year, the claimant must establish an oneratlnQ cost per nassenaer objective 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 systemwide operating cost per passenger objective for the fiscal year of the claim. If the system failed to meet its operating cost per passenger objective in the fiscal year prior'to the claim, then the claimant would only be eligible to file a claim for the level of -TDA funding received in that fiscal year. In the case of a unified transit system, each claimant would be limited to last year's level of TDA funding. If a system wishes to be eligible for increased TDA funding in a future fiscal year, then the claimant should identify an operating cost per pas- senger objective. i. What was the level of TDA funding received in previous fiscal year for this system by this ant (LTF plus STA)? $ the claim - Does the attached budget information demonstrate at least a loo match of non -TDA funds? Is this claim requesting more TDA funds than were received for this system by this claimant in the previous fiscal year? If yes, did the system meet its operating cost per passenger objective .(from Part iv. next page)? -16- iv. What was last year's Operating Cost per Passenger Objective? What was the actual operating cost per passenger.... a. FY 1987-88 Operating Cost $ b. Total Passengers C. Operating Cost Per Passenger (a / b) $ V. What is the Operating Cost per Passenger objective for this claim? d. Budgeted. Operating Cost $ e. Estimated Total Passengers f. Operating Cost per Passenger (d / e) $ g. FY 1988-89 OPERATING COST PER PASSENGER OBJECTIVE $ h. If this claim is for a unified transit system (see footnote), has the contributing claimant been appraised of 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. 4. Narrative Description Describe any changes in service characteristics from the previous fiscal year. Please attach an additional page if necessary. !MPOP,TANT: If this claim is for a unified transit system (per definition p. 17a), all calculations and numbers on (2)iv. and (2)v. must include both City and County totals. Also, contribut- ing claimants to unified transit systems should not use this page: use page 17a instead. -17- M ARTICLE 8 CONTRACTOR TDA REQUIREMENTS (CONTRIBUTING CLAIMANTS) I. In the case of a "unified transit system," this page is to be used by the "contributing claimant" rather than page 17. A "unified transit system" is defined as one which has the same fare structure .throughout the service area, but whose TDA expenses are claimed separately by two different TDA claim- ants. Additionally, to qualify as a unified transit system, all system TDA funding must be claimed under Article 8(c) (both claimants). "Contributing claimant" is defined as the claimant contributing a minority of the unified transit sys- tem's TDA funds. The claimant furnishing the majority of TDA funds is defined as the "primary claimant." Currently, the following local transit services qualify- as unified transit systems: FY 1968-89 Unified Transit Svstems This Paae Used bv: Tracy Trans County Tracy Taxi County Escalon Public Transit System County II. 1. Name of unified transit system 2. Systemwide operating cost per passenger objective for FY 1988-89 identified in primary claimant's adopted transit claim (from that claim, page 17, (2) v.g.) I 3. Date of primary claimant's adopted transit claim (or anticipated future date, if not yet adopted) !P0PTa r.NiT The ^cerating cost per passenger objective identified in 3. above -willJhe applied uniformly to the total of City and County TDA funds used by the unified transit system, to determine eligibil- :tY 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 LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND LTF Cost STATE TRANSIT ASSISTANCE FUND STA Cost -1H- PART III - ROAD AND STREET PROJECTS Please provide the requested infor-mation for each project being identified for Transportation Development Act funding. LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND Hutchins Street Widening Sidewalk Upgrading Asphalt Overlay RR Grade Crossing Protection Miscellaneous Traffic Appurtenances Church Street Widening R/W Lockeford Street Widening/Reconstr. EIR/Preliminary Engineering Street Maintenance Traffic Signals Miscellaneous illidening Stockton Street - Harney Lane *�',ork in progress STATE TRANSIT ASSISTANCE FUND *Tokay to Lodi *Rimby to Vine Various Locations Various Locations *Turner Road *Cluff Avenue *Cherokee Lane Various Locations Century to Kettleman Church to Cherokee Victor & Cluff LocL-eford & Stockton Lower Sacramento Rd. 5 Lodi Various Locations :area along Maggio Industrial Park LTF Cost $350,000 75,000 32,500 200,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 10,000 45,000 60,000 122,000 90,000 90,000 90,000 50,000 30,000 789,798 LTF 1,249,500 Total (Use Additional Page if Necessary) STA Cost (Use Additional page if Necessary) -19- PART 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. -20-