Back to 04/24/01 Agenda

REPORT TO SHASTA COUNTY RTPA

SUBJECT MEETING
DATE
ITEM
NUMBER
Consider 1999/00 Transportation Development Act (TDA) True-Up Instructions and Amended Claims

04/24/01 4

RECOMMENDATION

It is recommended that the Agency:

1) Approve Resolution 01-06 reflecting revised 1999/00 Transportation Development Act (TDA) allocation instructions; and

2) Approve revised 1999/00 TDA claims as reflected on Exhibit B (attached).

SUMMARY

RTPA Policy 6-3 and TDA regulations provide for a reconciliation of claimants' transit obligations to RABA's actual costs on an annual basis. Revised allocation instructions and claims have been prepared for Agency approval. Exhibit A reflects the revised calculation of transit obligations based upon RABA's actual audited costs. Exhibit B represents the revised schedule of claims.

After funding RABA's true TDA requirement (Actual Operating Expenses plus Capital costs), amounts available for Streets and Roads are adjusted as follows: (brackets indicate a reduction)

City of Redding$248,583 
City of Anderson(68,642)
City of Shasta Lake88,219 
County of Shasta(28,642)

DISCUSSION

In April 2000, the Agency approved the revised TDA claims for 1999/00. That approval was based on RABA's anticipated costs for the year. The actual costs of providing transit are now available in the 1999/00 audited financial statements and RABA's annual report of transactions to the State Controller's office. This revision to the TDA claims is based on RABA's actual costs (operating and capital)of providing transit services. This true up also updates the population changes used in the apportionment and allocation process. Additionally, TDA resources were increased by $217,630. This represents an increase of revenue received for TDA during the 99/00 period.

Exhibit C demonstrates the TDA revenues and costs received by RABA for 1999/00. These changes can be broken down into three components.

1) RABA's actual TDA requirement (total expenses less revenues plus capital costs ) incurred was $3,999,649. This compares with a TDA requirement of $2,432,650 when the original claims were approved. This component resulted in a increase in claimants' collective transit obligation of $1,566,998.

2) The original claims contemplated RABA utilizing $336,381 of FTA Section 5307 funding (operating only). RABA actually received $400,000 of FTA Section 5307 grant revenue for operating and $1,523,131 for capital costs. This results in an increase in the transit obligation assigned exclusively to Redding and Shasta Lake of $1,586,750. The reason that this applies exclusively to these agencies is that FTA Section 5307 is intended for urbanized areas. These revenue sources are credited exclusively to these two entities.

3) RABA has requested funding in the amount of $2,525,475 for capital costs. These costs were not requested when the original claims were approved.

RABA has used the following Funding sources:

State Prop 116 funding$  408,115
5307 Operating and Capital1,581,627
TDA Funds held in Reserve  377,735
TDA Funds required from Agencies  157,998
Total$2,525,475

The specific assets acquired are listed as enclosures in the letter from RABA dated April,18 2001, attached to this staff report.

In Summary, RABA incurred a significant increase of capitalized cost for the 1999/00 fiscal year. These costs were not identified during last years claims process and require a true up of additional funds from the agencies that fund RABA. Additionally, $217,630 of TDA revenues received was greater than estimated and was, therefore, used to reduce the impact on agencies.

ALTERNATIVES

The Agency could modify any of the above proposed revisions recommended by Staff. This is not recommended because this reconciliation has been prepared in accordance with RTPA Policy 6-3 and TDA regulations.

OTHER AGENCY INVOLVEMENT

This reconciliation or "true-up" was developed in cooperation with RABA staff who concur with the staff recommendation.

The staff recommendation and supporting schedules were shared with the staffs of Redding, Shasta County, and Anderson who have indicated their concurrence with the staff recommendation. It was further discussed at the April 10 Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) meeting.

FINANCING

Approval of revised 1999/00 claims will make claims consistent with actual costs and revenues of providing transit service.

The impacts of these adjustments displayed in the Summary will be coordinated with impacts of Agenda Item 5.

______________________________________

Daniel J. Kovacich, Executive Officer

/jmg

Attachments:
Resolution No. 01-06
Exhibits A through D available at RTPA Office
Exhibit A - Calculation of Revised TDA Apportionments and Transit Obligations for 1999/00
Exhibit B - Schedule of Annual Claims/TDA Budget (as revised 4/24/2001)
Exhibit C - Calculation of Impacts on Claimants Transit Obligations.
Exhibit D - RABA Letter dated April 18, 2001