Agenda. Tuesday, July 17, :30AM. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority BUS OPERATIONS SUBCOMMITTEE

Transcription

1 Agenda Tuesday, July 17, :30AM Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority BUS OPERATIONS SUBCOMMITTEE Windsor Conference Room 15th Floor 1. Call to Order 1 minute 2. Approval of May 15, 2007 meeting minutes and approval of special June 5, 2007 meeting minutes 5 minutes 3. Chair s Report 5 minutes 4. Legislative Report 15 minutes 5. JARC/New Freedom Grants 10 minutes 6. Update On Discretionary Grant Applications submitted to the MTA in May 10 minutes 7. New Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) Program Metro Database 10 minutes 8. Fiscal Year 2008 Transit Fund Allocations Board Report 10 minutes Action Dana Lee Action BOS Information Dana Lee Information Raffi Hamparian/Marisa Yeager/ Michael Turner Information/Discussion Gladys Lowe - Metro Information Ray Tellis - FTA Information Nancy Marroquin Discussion/Possible Action Susan Richan/Nalini Ahuja 9. New Business 10. Adjournment

2 Information Items: 90-day Rolling Agenda Board Committee Assignments Pre-SAFETEA-LU % Discretionary Fund Balances Pre-SAFETEA-LU % Fund Balances Pre-SAFETEA-LU TE1% Fund Balances RTAA-CMAQ Fund Balances SAFETEA-LU % Discretionary Fund Balances SAFETEA-LU % Fund Balances SAFETEA-LU TE1% Fund Balances Summary of Invoices FY Document Requirement Status Summary of EZ Pass Invoices FY07 TDA/STA Claim Summary for FY07 Regional Pass Sales BOS Agenda Packages can be accessed online at: Please call MARTHA BUTLER at or ilda Licón at if you have questions regarding the agenda or meeting. The next BOS meeting will be held Tuesday, August 21, 2007 at 9:30 am in the Windsor Conference Room, 15 th Floor of the Gateway Building.

3 Bus Operations Subcommittee Minutes/Action Items May 15, 2007 AGENDA ITEM ACTION/DISCUSSION REQUESTED ACTION TAKEN FOLLOW- UP DATE 1. Call to Order Chair called the meeting to order at 9:35. N/A Dana Lee LEAD 2. Approval of April 17, 2007 minutes Minutes of the April 17, 2007 meeting were approved as submitted. Action N/A BOS 3. Chair s Report TAC held a meeting on May 2, and May 9, 2007, to speak with the modal leads regarding the Call for Projects Rainbow Report. This afternoon, there will be a special BOS/LTSS meeting to review the Rainbow Report with the transit capital modal lead. BOS/LTSS members who submitted projects will have the opportunity to ask any questions regarding the scoring/ranking of projects. Any particular concerns/issues from either BOS or LTSS on the Rainbow Report will be shared with TAC who will represent those interests on the TAC Committee during the appeals process. The appeals process will be held May 21 through May 23, The Transit Capital appeals will be held on Tuesday, May Information N/A Dana Lee Dana also reminded BOS members to check the sign-in sheet to make sure that their contact information is current and if not, to make the appropriate corrections. Dana also announced that Michelle Caldwell would be speaking later on the new fare proposal and that the Fare Hearing is set for May 24, 2007 at 9:30am. The Board will be considering the fare change proposal and voting on any changes deemed necessary that same day. Dana also announced that an EZ Pass meeting will follow that meeting on May 24th. 4. Legislative Report State: Dana announced that the May budget revise came out yesterday. She reminded everyone that the original budget done in January was bad for transit as far as the Information N/A Dana Lee/David Reyno 1 of 6

4 Bus Operations Subcommittee Minutes/Action Items May 15, 2007 AGENDA ITEM ACTION/DISCUSSION REQUESTED ACTION TAKEN FOLLOW- UP DATE spillover funds. The Governor recommended taking the bulk of it to fund some things that are not normally funded out of the public transit account such as funding home to school transportation, which is typically funded by education. This had implications for Prop 98, the guarantee for schools. LEAD One of the changes between the May revise and the January budget is that because gas prices are higher now, there is more spillover money, approximately $210 million. The Governor is basically going to take an additional $200 million and do more home to school transportation, leaving $10 million for transit. By law, all of this should go to public transit but the governor is proposing to divert this. Another difference between the May revise and the January budget is that the Governor has actually appropriated money in his budget for the bond. Any bond money that is going to be allocated for transit has to be appropriated each year. The legislature has to do this as part of their appropriations process. The Governor has also put into his budget some money for port programs and transit security in the May revise. Dana urged everyone to keep up with the CTA. They are providing explanations on the differences and are requesting letters of support and/or opposition. The California Transit Association Legislative Conference will be held next Wednesday. Tuesday is the Transit Funding Summit, where they will discuss the budget and long term funding strategies for transit in California. 5. Metro Fare Changes Michelle Caldwell stated that a letter was sent out to all interested parties explaining the reason for the fare hearing and proposed fare modifications. These fare prices were designed to raise revenues which would allow Metro to solve their structural deficit within five years. In the sixth year, there would be an approximate 38% fare recovery ratio and Metro would no longer need to dip into one time revenues or fund reserves to operate the system. Metro would also be Information N/A Michelle Caldwell 2 of 6

5 Bus Operations Subcommittee Minutes/Action Items May 15, 2007 AGENDA ITEM ACTION/DISCUSSION REQUESTED ACTION TAKEN FOLLOW- UP DATE able to do annual 2.5% CPI fare increases. The CPI amount is based on the UCLA CPI forecast in both the Long Range Plan and in the 10-Year forecast. LEAD The first fare change would become effective July 1, 2007 with an additional change effective 18 months later, on January 1, A third fare change would also be required in FY 12 although is not part of this public hearing process. The reason for not including it in the public hearing is that Metro only knows the amount of revenues at this time and not what the revenues would be in FY 12. There will be 5 fare forums held, one at each service sector, and the public hearing on May 24, 2007 in the Metro Board room. The plan is to have the Metro Board adopt a new fare change that day at the hearing. Any approved fare change will be incorporated into the draft FY 08 budget and presented to the Metro Board in June. 6. Prop A Incentive Mini-Call Update Item pulled. Information Armineh Saint/Jay Fuhrman 7. FY 08 Funding Marks Nalini stated that she is still waiting on the Capital Funding Marks. Depending on when these are received, they will go to the Board in either June or July. If the June deadline is missed then it will go in July. The FY 2008 Transit Fund Allocations handout ( ed to members) was also distributed which incorporated some comments received earlier. These numbers include the 2-year lag for some Operators who have assumed or are assuming some Metro service. Action/Motion Passed Nalini Ahuja Nalini also announced that some operators audited TPM forms have still not been received. If these are not turned in before she goes for final Metro Board approval, the funding amount will be withheld. Once she receives all the audited 3 of 6

6 Bus Operations Subcommittee Minutes/Action Items May 15, 2007 AGENDA ITEM ACTION/DISCUSSION REQUESTED ACTION TAKEN FOLLOW- UP DATE forms, they will be sent to BOS members. LEAD % & TE 1% Allocation A discussion was also held on how the CPI is calculated and why it is so low. Metro was asked why Metro uses a forecast instead of the actual CPI. A motion was put forth as follows: BOS asked Metro staff to re-evaluate how the CPI is calculated and that they take into account actual historical CPI over the last 12 months in making their projections for one year ahead. Motion was seconded and approved with no opposition. The discussion began with each project sponsor discussing his or her specific project. All of the various requests for project funding were reviewed and discussed at some length and initial funding amounts adjusted. There were also several motions introduced. One motion introduced recommended that Metro receive 50% of the % funding with the remaining 50% to be divided amongst the other Munis. However, this motion did not carry. Final allocations, as approved by BOS, were compiled into a spreadsheet and distributed. The final motion passed by BOS is as follows: Action BOS Should the actual % allocation be more than the anticipated amount of $27,173,237, Metro s priority 2 project (Union Division) will be funded up to $2 million dollars. Any excess funds remaining after funding Metro s priority 2 project will be allocated to agencies according to a percentage of funds received, with the exception of Beach Cities. If the anticipated % allocation is less than $27,173,237, then all agency amounts will be reduced by the percentage of funds received with the exception of Metro s priority 1 project. Due to a remaining balance of TE 1% funds, BOS will be considering another round of applications at the June 19 meeting. All applications for TE 1% funds are due to lcornejo@cityofmontebello.com by Tuesday, May 29 at 5pm. 4 of 6

7 Bus Operations Subcommittee Minutes/Action Items May 15, 2007 AGENDA ITEM ACTION/DISCUSSION REQUESTED ACTION TAKEN FOLLOW- UP DATE LEAD The following agencies submitted projects for consideration at the BOS 15% and 1% allocation meeting on 5/15/07: 15% Projects: First Priority Second Priority Redondo Beach CNG Bus Replacement CNG Bus Purchase Culver CityBus CNG Bus Replacement Foothill Transit CNG Bus Replacement Gardena HGEV Bus Replacement LADOT CNG Bus Replacement LBT HGEV Bus Replacement Montebello Gap Funding for 40 HGEV Buses Norwalk Transit HGEV Bus Replacement Santa Monica Alt. Fuel Bus Replacement Metro - Div. 3 Facility Improvements Union Div. Improvements Note: Metro also submitted a third project which was the Division 1,2,3,7,8 & 15 Facility Improvements 1% Projects: First Priority Second Priority Gardena Bus Shelters LBT NLB Mini Transit Center TranSmart Signs Santa Monica Bus Stop & Shelters 9. New Business The issue of securing/strapping wheelchairs on buses came up from Culver City because Santa Monica was contemplating developing a sticker for those who do not want to be strapped in. Santa Monica would place a sticker on the LACTOA card of those that have been inspected by Santa Monica and do not have to be strapped in. Culver City stated that they have a policy that wheelchair patrons are to be strapped in. A BOS member stated that they did not believe that you could insist that they be strapped in if they refuse. It was asked if other operators have a policy in place. It was recommended that ASI be contacted on how to handle this issue. Santa Monica has had to deal with some lawsuits pertaining to this matter Information/Possible Action BOS 5 of 6

8 Bus Operations Subcommittee Minutes/Action Items May 15, 2007 AGENDA ITEM ACTION/DISCUSSION REQUESTED ACTION TAKEN FOLLOW- UP DATE and is currently working with their legal department to address this policy. Also of concern is that the sticker is being placed on the LACTOA card itself, which is a region wide card. It may be best to place the sticker on the wheelchair itself. LEAD Santa Monica also asked if the Prop A Incentive money is still available. Joyce Rooney explained that it was removed from TAC for discussion to extend the period of review. Also, Santa Monica announced that the Jimmy Kimmel Live show will take place on one of their buses and guests will include Paula Abdul as well as some others. 10. Adjournment Meeting adjourned at 1:00 PM 6 of 6

9

10

11

12 Bus Operations Subcommittee Minutes/Action Items June 5, 2007 AGENDA ITEM ACTION/DISCUSSION REQUESTED ACTION TAKEN FOLLOW- UP DATE 1. Call to Order Chair called the meeting to order at 1:35 pm. N/A Dana Lee LEAD 2. Approval of minutes No minutes to approve. This was a special meeting called to discuss the % and TE 1% Funding Marks and Allocations. N/A BOS 3. Chair s Report Dana reported that this special BOS meeting was called to discuss the following items: Information N/A Dana Lee Funding Marks - Review for possible approval for July meeting TE 1% Projects and funding allocation Discretionary % projects and funding allocation Dana also announced that TAC had approved staff s recommendations for the Call for Projects on May 22, They will be forwarded to Metro s Board for approval without any changes. Dana also encouraged BOS Members to attend the TAC and Subcommittee Budget Briefing scheduled for June 6, 2007 at 1:30. The budget is available on the MTA Website. 4. TE 1% & % Project Discussion & Funding Allocations At the May BOS meeting held Tuesday, May 15, 2007, there were only three projects submitted, which BOS approved funding in their entirety. This still left a balance of TE 1% funds. Given this, BOS members were given a second opportunity to submit TE 1% projects. Santa Monica was the only one to submit an additional project by the new deadline. They submitted a project for HV shelters at an estimated cost of $600,000. The total available fund balance was $4.0. A BOS member pointed out that in the worksheet handed out at the beginning of Discussion/Action BOS/Nalini Ahuja 1 of 5

13 Bus Operations Subcommittee Minutes/Action Items June 5, 2007 AGENDA ITEM ACTION/DISCUSSION REQUESTED ACTION TAKEN FOLLOW- UP DATE the meeting, there was a Metro project listed and asked if that project had been submitted for consideration the first time around. The BOS Chair clarified that the recommendations included in the handout were Metro staff s recommendations and not necessarily those all approved by BOS. During the meeting, Metro informed BOS that they actually had two TE 1% projects to submit though they had missed both deadlines but were prepared to present them at this meeting. The group was reminded that BOS is responsible for the process of approving project funding allocations, but its recommendations were not provided as part of the most recent set of funding marks. Rather, Metro staff presented its own recommendation of 15% and 1% allocations in the funding marks. Although BOS recommendations were not necessarily included, it would be appreciated if on the front page, Metro could refer to the recommendations as preliminary. Some BOS members also expressed that there should be some mention of BOS actual recommendations and how BOS actually voted to recommend allocating these funds. LEAD Metro presented and described the two TE 1% projects for consideration. Their first funding request was in the amount of $600,000 for a Solar Powered, Enhanced Bus Stop Lighting Project. Their second request was for $2,000,000 for a new prototype Metro Connections Passenger Terminal. The BOS agreed to first fund any projects which met the two submittal deadlines, which now included SMBBB s HV shelter project for $600,000. This brought the total amount of projects to be funded to $2.4 M, leaving a balance of $1.6 M. After much discussion, Metro was asked if they would be comfortable with this amount given that it did not cover the entire cost for the two projects. Metro agreed to accept this amount. The following motion was then approved: That the fourth agency to receive TE 1% funding be Metro with the remaining 2 of 5

14 Bus Operations Subcommittee Minutes/Action Items June 5, 2007 AGENDA ITEM ACTION/DISCUSSION REQUESTED ACTION TAKEN FOLLOW- UP DATE balance of $1.6M for their various TE 1% projects. The Motion was seconded and approved (Yes - 13, No - 0, Abstained - 1). (See spreadsheet attached). Nalini Ahuja also went over the funding marks handout that she had sent to BOS, which showed Metro Staff s recommendation for 15% and 1% project allocations. This was compared to the original BOS recommendations. She also reviewed each of the proposed reductions that were made for each of the projects. She reported that the project funding amounts were not much different from what BOS had approved. Bob Hildebrand also reminded the group of the motion presented at the May 15, 2007 BOS meeting in which BOS had approved funding Metro s first priority project but not just giving them 50%. Nalini reminded the group that BOS only makes recommendations. Metro staff makes the final recommendations to their Board. However, they would like the two sets of recommendations to line up with each other. After a little further discussion, the following motion was presented and seconded: LEAD Accept Metro staff s draft % allocation. The motion was approved (Yes - 11, No - 1, Abstained - 2). 6. Funding Marks Nalini referenced the data that she had ed the group a week prior to meeting. Evidently some operators still had not submitted audited TPM forms. Metro staff was asked about which audited TPM forms had not been received yet. Metro could not recall off hand. Metro staff was also asked about Redondo Beach being split into two entries under included operators. Staff indicated that this was done since Redondo Beach is no longer a dial-a-ride only. Metro staff was then asked who had made that call. Metro staff believed that they had come to BOS but the BOS members there could not recall this ever being addressed. Discussion on this subject will 3 of 5

15 Bus Operations Subcommittee Minutes/Action Items June 5, 2007 AGENDA ITEM ACTION/DISCUSSION REQUESTED ACTION TAKEN FOLLOW- UP DATE be placed on the agenda at a future BOS meeting. The BOS was going to ask Teresa Price to come to a meeting to discuss it since her alternate at the meeting had no history on it. The following Motion was presented and approved: Approve the funding marks with the Capital. It was seconded: Yes 13, No 1, Abstained 0. Motion approved. LEAD Foothill Transit expressed some concern over approving the funding marks when Redondo Beach had been split into two entries under included operators and not all TPMs were audited yet. Funding Marks will go to the Metro Board in July for approval. 9. New Business The regular June BOS will be cancelled. The next regular BOS meeting will be held July 17, Discussion/Possible Action BOS Dana reported that Long Beach Transit is currently going through their FTA audit and one of the issues coming up right now has to do with Medicare or your half fare and whether you separate out the ability to use the Medicare card, Disabled or Senior. She stated that the way LBT does it is that they have Senior/Disabled and you can use a Medicare card to get the half fares on their passes. They are telling LBT that they need to make some changes to their website and their schedule guide. Another agency stated that the Federal law requires that the ability to use a Medicare card be listed separately. It does not make you a Senior or Disabled. The use of the card has to be listed as its own separate category. It must be identified separately as qualifying for a reduced fare. Also, Dana stated that LBT also had to provide quite a bit of SCAG information as well on the public participation plan. She didn t know if everyone had already received some of this information from SCAG. Dana may make up a package for 4 of 5

16 Bus Operations Subcommittee Minutes/Action Items June 5, 2007 AGENDA ITEM ACTION/DISCUSSION REQUESTED ACTION TAKEN FOLLOW- UP DATE everyone so that everyone has this information. The FTA seemed to be fine with what LBT provided them and other agencies will most likely get these same kinds of questions. LEAD 10. Adjournment Meeting adjourned at: 2:45 pm 5 of 5

17 Attachment H (page 2 of 3) FY 2008 Section % Capital Discretionary Fund Agency Project Description Final Allocation % of Available Funds Beach Cities Transit CNG Bus Replacement $ 640,000 2% Culver City Bus CNG Bus Replacement $ 920,869 3% Foothill Transit CNG Bus Replacement $ 1,701,461 5% Gardena HGEV Replacement Project $ 2,386,943 7% LADOT CNG Bus Replacement $ 3,002,559 9% Long Beach Transit HGEV Replacement Project $ 1,701,461 5% Metro Various Division Facility Improvements; Union Division $ 16,469,583 50% Montebello Bus Lines Gap funding for 40 HGEV $ 794,112 2% Norwalk Transit Systems HGEV Replacement Project $ 1,813,339 6% Santa Monica BBB Alternative Fuel Bus Replacement $ 3,508,838 11% Totals $ 32,939,165 $ 32,939, % Total Available $ 32,939,165 $ 32,939,165 Difference $ - $ - 6/26/2007

18 Attachment H (Page 3 of 3) FY 2008 Section % Transit Enhancement Act (TEA) Fund REQUEST PROJECT DESCRIPTION REQUEST ALLOCATED AGENCY PROJECT DESCRIPTION Ranking 1 AMOUNT Ranking 2 AMOUNT AMOUNT Gardena Bus Shelters $160,000 $160,000 Long Beach Transit Mini Transit Center $280,000 Transmart Signs $200,000 $480,000 Santa Monica BBB Bus Stop & Shelters $1,200,000 Bus HV Shelters $600,000 $1,800,000 Metro Solar Powered Bus Stop Lighting Metro Connections Passenger $600,000 Terminal $1,024,336 $1,624,336 SUBTOTAL $2,240,000 $1,824,336 $4,064,336 TOTAL REQUEST AMOUNT $4,064,336 TE 1% FUNDS $4,064,336 6/26/2007

19

20

21

22

23

24 CITY OF MARIPOSA BEACH 1563 Ocean Boulevard. Suite #456 Mariposa Beach, CA (878) SAMPLE Mr. Frank Flores Executive Officer Programming & Policy Analysis One Gateway Plaza, MS # Los Angeles, CA Attention: Ms. Avital Shavit Subject: TIP Program Coordinator/Project Manager Verification Letter The City of Mariposa Beach requests that Metro grant us access to the ProgramMetro database. I designate Richard Smith, as our TIP Program Coordinator, who will to be responsible for maintaining the ProgramMetro database for the City of Mariposa Beach. Mr. Smith will review all database submissions to certify quality and accuracy. I also designate Karen Richards and Barry Allan as our Project Managers to be granted readedit rights to the ProgramMetro database. Thank You TIP Program Coordinator Richard Smith Phone# smithr@mariposabeach.net Fax# The Project Managers are able to attend workshops on the following dates: August 29, 2007 September 12, 2007 September 18, 2007 Project Manager Karen Richards Phone# richardsk@ mariposabeach.net Fax# Project Manager Barry Allan Phone# allanb@ mariposabeach.net Fax# (Signature) City Manager/Public Works Director/Other Date

25 PLANNING AND PROGRAMMING COMMITTEE JULY 18, 2007 FINANCE AND BUDGET COMMITTEE JULY 18, 2007 SUBJECT: FISCAL YEAR 2008 TRANSIT FUND ALLOCATIONS ACTION: APPROVE FISCAL YEAR 2008 TRANSIT FUND ALLOCATIONS AND ADOPT RESOLUTION FOR TDA AND STA TRANSIT FUNDS RECOMMENDATIONS A. Approve methodologies and assumptions, including all changes and adjustments, used for the fiscal year (FY) 2008 Transit Fund Allocations, as determined by staff in accordance with federal, state and local requirements, as well as our policies and guidelines and prior Board actions, and as identified in Attachments A through I. B. Approve $1.26 billion in FY 2008 Transit Fund Allocations, as shown in Attachments A through H, for Los Angeles County jurisdictions, transit operators, and Metro Operations. These allocations include the following: 1. $607.7 million in Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 4, TDA interest, State Transportation Assistance (STA), STA Interest and Proposition A 40% Discretionary fund allocations, as shown in Attachment A, which also includes $2.2 million in funding to six (6) operators in accordance with the two-year lag policy adopted by the Board of Directors; 2. $32.1 million in Proposition C 40% Discretionary fund allocations for the Bus Service Improvement Program (BSIP), the Transit Service Expansion (TSE) Program, the Base Service Restructuring Program and the Foothill Transit Mitigation Program, as shown in Attachment B; 3. $17.9 million in Proposition C 40% Discretionary fund allocations for the Municipal Operator Service Improvement Program (MOSIP), as shown in Attachment C; 4. $33.0 million in Proposition C 5% Security fund allocations, as shown in Attachment D;

26 5. $14.1 million in Proposition A Incentive Program fund allocations, as shown in Attachment E; 6. $20.4 million in TDA Article 8 fund allocations as shown in Attachment F; 7. $309.0 million in Proposition A and Proposition C Local Return and TDA Article 3 fund allocations, as shown in Attachment G; and 8. $224.5 million in Federal Transit Act Section 5307 Urban Formula capital fund allocations, as shown in Attachment H, including an exchange of Santa Monica s allocation of $8,120,918 of Section 5307 funds with an equal amount of Proposition C 40% Discretionary funds. C. Adopt a resolution (Attachment J) designating TDA and STA fund allocation compliance to the terms and conditions of the allocation. D. Authorize the Chief Executive Officer to negotiate and execute all necessary agreements for funding approved. E. Amend the FY08 Budget in the amount of $193,000 and add 1.0 FTE for the Countywide Planning and Development department to provide additional support for management, administration and oversight of funding furnished by the FY 2008 Transit Fund Allocations and other for Board-approved, local programming activities. ISSUE Each year, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) allocates transit operating and capital funding consisting of federal, state and local revenues to Los Angeles County jurisdictions, transit operators, and Metro Operations for programs, projects and services. The Board of Directors needs to approve allocations for FY 2008 before funds may be disbursed. POLICY IMPLICATIONS Metro, as the Regional Transportation Planning Entity for Los Angeles County, is responsible for planning, programming and allocating transportation funding to Los Angeles County jurisdictions, transit operators, and Metro Operations. Once the Board of Directors approves funding allocations, Los Angeles County programs, projects and services may be implemented, operated and continued with funding made available for disbursement immediately thereafter. Fiscal Year 2008 Transit Fund Allocations Page 2

27 OPTIONS No alternatives were considered as federal, state and local requirements, as well as our policies and guidelines and prior Board actions, require us to allocate funding annually to Los Angeles County jurisdictions, transit operators, and Metro Operations for programs, projects and services. Allocation methodologies and assumptions comply with federal, state and local requirements, as well as our policies and guidelines and prior Board actions. FINANCIAL IMPACT We recommend that the Board of Directors approve a total of $1.26 billion in federal, state and local transportation funding. The FY 2008 Transit Fund Allocations are based on revenue estimates developed for the Board adopted FY 2008 Budget. The additional FTE will be funded from Proposition A, Proposition C and TDA Administration funds. BACKGROUND The recommended FY 2008 Transit Fund Allocations were developed according to federal, state and local requirements, as well as our policies and guidelines and prior Board actions. We have reviewed the recommended allocations with Los Angeles County jurisdictions, transit operators, and Metro Operations through the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), the Bus Operators Subcommittee (BOS) and the Local Transit Systems Subcommittee (LTSS). We also have reviewed the methodologies and assumptions used for the recommended allocations with the TAC, the BOS and the LTSS. The TAC, the BOS and the LTSS all formally adopted the recommended allocations in May and June At their June 15, 2007 meeting, the BOS adopted the final version of the funding marks. The additional 1.0 FTE that we are requesting as part of the recommendations is needed to provide additional support for management, administration and oversight of funding furnished by the FY 2008 Transit Fund Allocations. The additional FTE also will be used to address additional management, administration and oversight needed for an expanded Immediate Needs Program; the $14 million, Proposition A Incentive Program Mini Call to the Cities; and the implementation of the Two-Year Lag policy. NEXT STEPS After the Board of Directors approves the recommended allocations and adopts the resolution, we will work with Los Angeles County jurisdictions, transit operators, and Metro Operations to ensure the proper disbursement of funds. Fiscal Year 2008 Transit Fund Allocations Page 3

28 ATTACHMENTS A. FY 2008 Los Angeles County Funding Estimates, FY 2008 Bus Transit Funding Percentage Shares, FY 2008 Included and Eligible Operators Estimated Funding Levels B. FY 2008 Summary of Transit Subsidies C. FY 2008 Proposition C 40% Discretionary Municipal Operator Transit Service Improvement Program D. FY 2008 Transit Security Funding Allocations E. FY 2008 Proposition A 40% Discretionary Incentive Program F. FY 2008 TDA Article 8 Apportionments G. FY 2008 Allocations of Proposition A and Proposition C Local Return and TDA Article 3 H. FY 2008 Capital Allocation Procedure, FY 2008 Projects 15% Discretionary and 1% TEA, Section 5307 Allocations I. Summary of Methodologies and Assumptions Used for the FY 2008 Transit Fund Allocations J. Resolution for TDA and STA Fund Allocations Additional attachments for information only: K. Summary of TDA Article 4 Capital Reserve Balances L. Summary of STA Capital Reserve Balances M. Summary of Municipal Operator Service Improvement Program Reserves Prepared by: Carlos Vendiola / Susan Richan, Local Programming Nalini Ahuja, Director, Local Programming Fiscal Year 2008 Transit Fund Allocations Page 4

29 Carol Inge Chief Planning Officer Countywide Planning and Development Roger Snoble Chief Executive Officer Fiscal Year 2008 Transit Fund Allocations Page 5

30 LOS ANGELES COUNTY FUNDING ESTIMATES FISCAL YEAR 2008 Attachment A (Page 1 of 5) FUNDING PROGRAM FY2008 TDA Estimated Gross Receipts 352,373,251 carryover 23,894,863 (=) Net Revenues 376,268,114 TDA Planning 3,762,681 Administration 2,237,319 Article 3 Pedestrian & Bikewa 2.00% 7,405,362 Article 4 Bus Transit 92.50% 342,498,005 Bus Transit carryover - Interest on Article 4 1,000,000 Subtotal: 343,498,005 Article 8 Transit/S & H 5.50% 20,364,746 PROPOSITION A PROPOSITION C STA Estimated Gross Receipts 694,193,439 carryover 49,635,206 ` (=) Net Revenues 743,828,645 Administration 5% 37,191,432 Local Return 25% 176,659,303 Rail Development 35% 247,323,024 Discretionary 40% Transit 95% of 40% 268,522,141 - Prop A capped at CPI 195,747,270 - Prop A growth over CPI 72,774,871 Incentive 5% of 40% 14,132,744 Estimated Gross Receipts 694,281,371 carryover 49,704,152 (=) Net Revenues 743,985,523 Administration 1.5% 11,159,783 Rail/Bus Security 5% 36,641,287 Commuter Rail 10% 73,282,574 Local Return 20% 146,565,148 Freeways/Highways 25% 183,206,435 Discretionary 40% 293,130,296 Estimated Gross Receipts 57,057,901 Reserves/carryover 21,458,414 (=) Net Revenues 78,516,315 Bus Operators PUC Rev Base Share 31,629,927 carryover 12,760,092 Interest 1,170,243 Subtotal: 45,560,262 Rail PUC Population Share 25,427,974 carryover 8,698,322 Interest 517,792 Subtotal: 34,644,088 Total Funds Available 1,945,286,632 NOTE: Proposition A, Proposition C and TDA /STA Tax Revenues are based on assumptions prepared by Metro's Budget Office. The revenue estimates include FY 2006 carryover/deficit. 6/26/2007

31 Metro FY08 INCLUDED & ELIGIBLE OPERATORS ESTIMATED FUNDING LEVELS Attachment A (Page 2 of 5) STA Proposition A Proposition A Two Year Total TDA & STA TDA Article 4 Rev Base Share Discretionary Discretionary Lag Mitigation Formula % Shares plus interest plus interest % Shares [1] [4] Funds Included Operators Arcadia % $ 335,291 $ 44, % 191, ,833 Claremont % 112,243 14, % 63, ,095 Commerce [2] % 259,539 34, % 147, ,865 Culver City % 4,717, , % 2,797, ,855 8,141,053 Foothill % 21,651,596 2,871, % 12,338,473-36,861,854 Gardena % 4,971, , % 2,832,936-8,463,549 La Mirada % 163,761 21, % 93, ,804 Long Beach % 21,559,820 2,859, % 12,500, ,690 36,920,294 Montebello % 7,186, , % 4,095,275 12,234,854 Metro Bus Ops % 257,989,846 34,218, % 144,961,336 (2,057,881) 437,169,969 Norwalk % 2,554, , % 1,667, ,372 4,560,877 Redondo Beach DR % 26,761 3, % 15,250 45,561 Redondo Beach MB % 267,610 35, % 701, ,770 1,004,377 Santa Monica % 16,339,848 2,167, % 10,285, ,194 28,792,793 Torrance % 5,361, , % 3,055,262-9,127,759 Sub-Total 343,498,005 45,560, ,747, ,805,537 Transfer of Growth over inflation: [5] Sub-Total 195,747, ,805,537 Eligible Operators - Formula Equivalent Funds Antelope Valley % - 713, % 3,067,108-3,780,979 [3] Santa Clarita % - 661, % 2,843,538-3,505,373 [3] City of LA DOT % 5,999, , % 3,588, ,036 10,383,860 [3] Foothill - BSCP % 2,830, , % 1,612,890-4,818,595 [3] Sub-Total 8,830,199 2,546,909 11,111, ,036 22,488,807 Total FAP $ 352,328,205 $ 48,107,171 $ 206,858,968 $ 169, ,294,344 FUNDING SOURCE Prop. A - Discretionary (95% of 40%) capped at CPI $ - $ - $ 195,747, ,747,270 Prop. A - Discretionary - available growth over CPI ,774,871 72,774,871 Transfer of Growth over inflation: - - [5] - [5] 72,774,871 Total Prop. A - Discretionary (95% of 40%) ,522, ,522,141 Proposition A - growth over cpi allocation ,488,807 TDA - Article ,498,005 STA - PUC ,560,262 Total Funds Allocated $ 352,328,205 $ 48,107,171 $ 268,522, ,294,344 [1] FY08 Prop. A Discretionary funds, (95% of 40%) allocated to Included Operators have been capped at 2.45% CPI for FAP allocation. [2] To compensate for Commerce having zero passenger revenue, Metro multiplies each of Commerce's funding estimates by two. (Source of additional funds is Prop. A Discretionary). [3] Funding source is Prop A Discretionary (95% of 40%) above CPI of 2.45% [4] Two Year Lag - Mitigation 6/26/2007

32 FY 2008 BUS TRANSIT FUNDING PERCENTAGE SHARES Attachment A (Page 3 of 5) Vehicle Sum Service Miles Passenger Base 50% VSM + FAP Shares FAP Share Proposition A (VSM) Revenue Fare Fare Units 50% VSM 50% Fare Units 50% Fare Units (No DAR Cap) (with DAR cap) Base Share TDA ARTICLE 4, STA, and PROPOSITION A Included Operators Arcadia 277,861 72, , ,931 36, , % % % Claremont 81,600 44, ,840 40,800 17,920 58, % % % Commerce 271, , , % % % Culver City 1,381,405 2,666, ,554, ,703 1,777,451 2,468, % % % Foothill 9,805,000 12,849, ,849,000 4,902,500 6,424,500 11,327, % % % Gardena 1,486,600 1,857, ,714, ,300 1,857,400 2,600, % % % La Mirada 126,019 45, ,324 63,010 22,662 85, % % % Long Beach 7,178,511 13,841, ,379,463 3,589,256 7,689,732 11,278, % % % Montebello 2,358,000 4,645, ,161,111 1,179,000 2,580,556 3,759, % % % Norwalk 1,034, , ,638, , ,198 1,336, % % % Redondo Beach DR 23,000 5, ,000 11,500 2,500 14, % % % Redondo Beach MB 159, , ,000 79,500 60, , % % % Santa Monica 4,630,600 9,349, ,465,733 2,315,300 6,232,867 8,548, % % % Metro Bus Ops * 85,966, ,960, ,968,000 42,983,000 91,984, ,967, % % % Torrance 1,877,200 1,866, ,732, ,600 1,866,200 2,804, % % % 116,657, ,743, ,700, % % % PROPOSITION A GROWTH OVER CPI AND/OR PROPOSITION A INCENTIVE FUNDS % Eligible Operators Antelope Valley 2,555,173 3,458, ,358,015 1,277,587 1,679,007 2,956,594 N/A % % Santa Clarita 2,725,186 2,756, ,756,972 1,362,593 1,378,486 2,741,079 N/A % % Foothill - BSCP 1,281,546 1,853, ,853, , ,918 1,567,691 N/A % % LADOT 3,012,635 3,221, ,579,220 1,506,318 1,789,610 3,295,928 N/A % % 9,574,540 11,548,043 10,561,291 *Metro statistics exclude BSIP service+consent decree services funded from Proposition C 40% funds. Municipal Operators statistics exclude BSIP, TSE,Base Restructuring and MOSIP services funded from Proposition C 40% funds. TDA % cap for DAR operators = 0.25% for Arcadia, Claremont, La Mirada, and Redondo Beach DR 6/26/2007

33 FY 2008 BUS TRANSIT FUNDING PERCENTAGE SHARES Adjusted to eliminate the two year lag for operators adding service Attachment A (page 4 of 5) Vehicle Sum Service Miles Passenger Base 50% VSM + FAP Shares FAP Share Proposition A (VSM) Revenue Fare Fare Units 50% VSM 50% Fare Units 50% Fare Units (No DAR Cap) (with DAR cap) Base Share TDA ARTICLE 4, STA, and PROPOSITION A Included Operators Arcadia 277,861 72, , ,931 36, , % % % Claremont 81,600 44, ,840 40,800 17,920 58, % % % Commerce 271, , , % % % Culver City 1,457,756 2,708, ,588, ,878 1,794,479 2,523, % % % Foothill 9,805,000 12,849, ,849,000 4,902,500 6,424,500 11,327, % % % Gardena 1,486,600 1,857, ,714, ,300 1,857,400 2,600, % % % La Mirada 126,019 45, ,324 63,010 22,662 85, % % % Long Beach 7,288,916 13,923, ,444,815 3,644,458 7,722,408 11,366, % % % Montebello 2,358,000 4,645, ,161,111 1,179,000 2,580,556 3,759, % % % Norwalk 1,142,386 1,064, ,703, , ,854 1,423, % % % Redondo Beach DR 23,000 5, ,000 11,500 2,500 14, % % % Redondo Beach MB 445, , , , , , % % % Santa Monica 5,030,807 9,847, ,864,438 2,515,404 6,432,219 8,947, % % % Metro Bus Ops * 85,966, ,960, ,968,000 42,983,000 91,984, ,967, % % % Torrance 1,877,200 1,866, ,732, ,600 1,866,200 2,804, % % % 117,637, ,534, ,585, % % % PROPOSITION A GROWTH OVER CPI AND/OR PROPOSITION A INCENTIVE FUNDS Eligible Operators Antelope Valley 2,555,173 3,458, ,358,015 1,277,587 1,679,007 2,956,594 N/A % % Santa Clarita 2,725,186 2,756, ,756,972 1,362,593 1,378,486 2,741,079 N/A % % Foothill - BSCP 1,281,546 1,853, ,853, , ,918 1,567,691 N/A % % LADOT 3,061,744 3,301, ,643,553 1,530,872 1,821,777 3,352,649 N/A % % *Metro statistics exclude BSIP service+consent decree services funded from Proposition C 40% funds. Municipal Operators statistics exclude BSIP, TSE,Base Restructuring and MOSIP services funded from Proposition C 40% funds. TDA % cap for DAR operators = 0.25% for Arcadia, Claremont, La Mirada, and Redondo Beach Service Data Added: Vehicle Service Miles Passenger Revenue Fare Units Annual Boardings Redondo Beach (Yr 2) 184, , , ,667 Culver City (Yr 2) 76,351 42,570 34,056 72,918 Long Beach (Yr 1) 110,405 81,690 65, ,000 Norwalk (Yr 1) 107,728 81,640 65, ,842 Redondo Beach (Ln# 124Yr 1) 102, , , ,000 LADOT (Yr 1) 49,109 80,416 64, ,817 Santa Monica (YR1) 400, , , ,125 Total 1,029,899 1,068, ,583 1,830,369 6/26/2007

34 Attachment A Page 5 of 5 Elimination of Two-Year Lag - FY2008 B C D E F TOTAL Formula Funds TOTAL Formula Funds DIFFERENCE STEP1 PROPOSED TOTALS Before 2-Year Lag After 2-Year Lag Included Operators: Arcadia $ 570, ,034 (2,799) - 570,833 Claremont $ 191, ,158 (937) - 191,095 Commerce $ 441, ,699 (2,167) - 441,865 Culver City $ 8,032,198 8,171, , ,855 8,141,053 Foothill $ 36,861,854 36,681,099 (180,755) - 36,861,854 Gardena $ 8,463,549 8,422,048 (41,502) - 8,463,549 La Mirada $ 278, ,437 (1,367) - 278,804 Long Beach $ 36,705,604 36,810, , ,690 36,920,294 Montebello $ 12,234,854 12,174,859 (59,995) - 12,234,854 Metro Bus Ops. $ 439,227, ,074,057 (2,153,793) (2,057,881) 437,169,969 Norwalk $ 4,349,505 4,608, , ,372 4,560,877 Redondo Beach DR $ 45,561 45,337 (223) - 45,561 Redondo Beach MB $ 455,607 1,283, , ,770 1,004,377 Santa Monica $ 27,818,599 28,975,777 1,157, ,194 28,792,793 Torrance $ 9,127,759 9,083,000 (44,759) 9,127,759 Sub-Total 584,805, ,805, ,805,537 - Eligible Operators: - Antelope Valley $ 3,780,979 3,762,193 (18,786) - 3,780,979 Santa Clarita $ 3,505,373 3,487,956 (17,417) - 3,505,373 City of LA DOT $ 10,214,824 10,338, , ,043 10,383,867 Foothill - BSCP $ 4,818,595 4,805,589 (13,006) - 4,818,595 Sub-Total 22,319,771 22,394,725 74, ,043 22,488,814 Total FAP 607,125, ,200,263 74, , ,294,351 1) Funding to eliminate the 2-year lag is calculated in accordance with the 2-Year-Lag Funding Procedure dated 06/13/2006 approved by the Board July ) Funding for services that started last year are carried over in the current year. 6/26/2007

35 FY 2008 Summary of Transit Subsidies Attachment B Bus System Local Improvement TOTAL Bus Federal and Federal and Formula Formula Zero-fare Foothill Transit Discretionary Plan Security State FAP State FAP Allocation Equivalent Compensation Transit Service Base Overcrowding OPERATING Enhancement Subtotal Subtotal Procedure Funds [1] [2] Mitigation Expansion Restructuring Relief Prop A TDA Article 4 STA Prop A 40% Discretionary Prop A/C ALL Plus Interest Plus Interest Discretionary Above CPI Disc. Prop C 40% Prop C 40% Prop C 40% Prop C 40% SOURCES Prop C 5% INCLUDED OPERATORS Arcadia $ 335,291 $ 44,472 $ 191,070 $ - $ - $ 10,024 $ - $ - $ 17, ,721 $ 7,225 Claremont 112,243 14,888 63, $ 3, ,451 $ 2,899 Commerce 259,539 34, , ,865 $ 7, ,454-1,095,944 $ 37,812 Culver City 4,717, ,762 2,797, $ 141, , ,715 8,616,890 $ 318,381 Foothill 21,651,596 2,871,785 12,338, $ - 272,764 1,636, ,062 39,533,509 $ 816,058 Gardena 4,971, ,367 2,832, $ 148, , ,763 9,322,394 $ 263,693 La Mirada 163,761 21,721 93, $ 4, ,700 $ 2,972 Long Beach 21,559,820 2,859,612 12,500, $ 644,578 1,870, ,040 40,110,057 $ 1,514,140 Montebello 7,186, ,177 4,095, $ 214, , ,189 13,561,600 $ 566,774 Norwalk 2,554, ,856 1,667, $ 76, ,104 4,683,362 $ 140,430 Redondo Beach DR 26,761 3,549 15, $ ,273 49,633 $ 278 Redondo Beach MB 267,610 35, ,272 - $ 8, ,012,378 $ 8,514 Santa Monica 16,339,848 2,167,255 10,285, $ 488, ,104 29,934,413 $ 1,222,184 Torrance 5,361, ,113 3,055, $ 160, , , ,192 10,742,616 $ 255,936 Subtotal Included 85,508,159 11,341,475 50,785, ,865 1,909,133 3,569,694 3,369,102 2,814, ,739,669 5,157,297 ELIGIBLE OPERATORS [1] [A+B+C] = D A B C D Antelope Valley - 713,871 3,067,108 3,780,979 - $ 17, ,856-39,200 4,146,958 $ 178,304 Santa Clarita - 661,835 2,843,538 3,505,373 - $ 16, ,541-41,931 3,725,460 $ 202,632 City of Los Angeles 5,999, ,803 3,588,162 10,383,860 - $ 170,616 2,218, ,907 12,896,282 $ 574,239 Foothill BSCP 2,830, ,401 1,612,890 4,818, ,818,595 Subtotal Eligible 8,830,199 2,546,909 11,111,698 22,488, ,155 2,689, ,038 25,587, ,175 OTHER City of Lynwood Trolley 176, , Metro Bus Ops. 257,989,846 34,218, ,961,336 - $ 7,713,177-9,467, ,350,289 $ 26,864,686 T O T A L $ 343,498,005 $ 45,560,262 $ 195,747,270 $ 22,488,807 $ 441,865 $ 9,827,465 $ 6,435,782 $ 3,369,102 $ 12,485,487 $ 639,854,045 $ 32,977,158 [1] These funds are allocated by formula for Foothill BSCP service, LADOT Service and to Eligible Operators in lieu of Section 9, TDA, STA and Prop A 40%Discretionary funds. Fund sources are prop A growth over inflation. [2] Allocated as part of FAP to Commerce as compensation for having zero passenger revenues. 6/26/2007

36 Attachment C FY 2008 Proposition C 40%-Muncipal operator transit service improvement program Percentage MOSIP FUNDS % Shares Share Prop C Arcadia % % 57,352 Claremont % % 19,199 Commerce % % 44,394 Culver City % % 806,997 Foothill % % 3,703,521 Gardena % % 850,335 La Mirada % % 28,011 Long Beach % % 3,687,822 Montebello % % 1,229,239 Norwalk % % 436,996 Redondo Beach DR % % 4,577 Redondo Beach MB % % 45,775 Santa Monica % % 2,794,942 Torrance % % 917,069 Antelope Valley % % 920,624 Santa Clarita % % 853,517 City of Los Angeles % % 1,026,286 Foothill BSCP % % 484,126 Total Funds Allocated 30.48% % 17,910,784 Note: allocation based on the operators FAP share of funds. 6/26/2007

37 FY2008 Transit Security Funding Allocations Attachment D Operator Allocation Decisions FY 2006 Unlinked Percent of Total Unlinked Total Funding Direct Allocation Allocation to Operator Passengers Passengers Allocation to Muni Partnership Total Antelope Valley 3,204, % $178, ,304 0 $178,304 Arcadia 129, % $7,225 7, ,225 Claremont 52, % $2,899 2, ,899 Commerce 679, % $37,812 37, ,812 Culver City 5,721, % $318, , ,381 Foothill 14,664, % $816, , ,058 Gardena 4,738, % $263, , ,693 City of Los Angeles 10,319, % $574, , ,239 La Mirada 53, % $2,972 2, ,972 Long Beach 27,209, % $1,514,140 1,514, ,514,140 Montebello 10,185, % $566, , ,774 Metro Bus Ops. 482,761, % $26,864, ,864,686 26,864,686 Norwalk 2,523, % $140, , ,430 Redondo Beach DR 5, % $ Redondo Beach MB 153, % $8,514 8, ,514 Santa Clarita 3,641, % $202, , ,632 Santa Monica 21,962, % $1,222,184 1,222, ,222,184 Torrance 4,599, % $255, , ,936 Metro Subtotal: 482,761, % $26,864, ,864,686 26,864,686 Other Operators Subtotal: 109,841, % 6,112,472 5,538,233 $574,239 6,112,472 Totals: 592,603, % $32,977,158 $5,538,233 $27,438,925 $32,977,158 * Total funding is 90% of Prop C 5%\ $32,977,158 **Metro operations data includes unlinked passengers for bus and rail. Estimated Revenue: $ 36,641,287 6/26/2007

38 Attachment E (Page 1 of 2) FINAL FY 2008 REVENUES Proposition A Disc. Incentive $ 14,132,744 Other REVENUE TOTAL (FY08 EST) $ 14,132,744 EXPENSES - IN ORDER OF PRIORITY SUBREGIONAL PARATRANSIT PROJECTS: 1st Priority - Existing Subregional Paratransit Participants Agoura Hills $ 94,609 Antelope Valley, Elderly & Disabled $ 237,343 Beverly Hills Taxi & Lift Van $ 26,500 Culver City Community Transit and LA County $ 118,209 Gardena, Hawthorne and LA County $ 161,546 Glendale Paratransit and La Canada Flintridge $ 226,154 Huntington Park, Bell, South Gate and LA County $ 162,341 Inglewood Transit and LA County $ 179,407 LA County (Whittier et al) $ 128,170 LA County (Willowbrook) $ 57,143 Los Angeles Taxi & Lift Van, City Ride $ 1,029,242 Los Angeles Dial-a-Ride, City Ride $ 1,251,616 Monrovia D.A.R. and LA County $ 104,777 Palos Verdes PTA D.A.R. $ 26,967 Palos Verdes PTA - PV Transit $ 271,188 Pasadena Community Transit, San Marino and LA County $ 292,030 Pomona Valley TA - E&D (Get About) $ 432,248 Pomona Valley TA General Public (VC) $ 48,205 Redondo Beach Community Transit and Hermosa Beach $ 55,780 Santa Clarita D.A.R. $ 572,692 West Hollywood (DAR) $ 244,118 West Hollywood (Taxi) $ 86,548 Whittier (DAR) $ 209,819 1st Priority SUBTOTAL $ 6,016,649 TRANSITION FUNDING & SERVICE REPLACEMENT PROJECTS: 2nd Priority - Services that receive growth over inflation (if Prop A Disc. cannot fully fund these systems) City of L.A. - Bus Service Continuation Project/DASH/Central City Shuttle $ - Santa Clarita - Local Fixed Route $ - Antelope Valley - Local Fixed Route $ - Foothill - Bus Service Continuation Project $ - 2nd Priority SUBTOTAL $ - APPROVED EXPANDED PARATRANSIT PROGRAMS (EXISTING OR NEW): 3rd Priority - approved existing expanded paratransit; 4th Priority - approved new expanded paratransit services 3rd & 4th Priority SUBTOTAL $ - 6/26/2007

39 Attachment E (Page 2 of 2) VOLUNTARY NTD DATA REPORTING: 5th Priority - locally funded systems which voluntarily report NTD data. Exact fundmark amounts TBD, based upon FY 08 apportionment unit valu City of Alhambra $ 140,362 City of Artesia $ 13,149 City of Baldwin Park $ 219,778 City of Bell Gardens $ 114,581 City of Burbank $ 132,453 City of Carson $ 408,767 City of Cerritos $ 288,580 City of Compton $ 111,653 City of Cudahy $ 41,207 City of Downey $ 190,949 City of El Monte $ 264,143 City of Glendale $ 554,911 City of Huntington Park $ 153,302 City of Los Angeles -- Community DASH $ 2,657,943 City of Lynnwood $ 88,249 City of Malibu $ 32,107 City of Manhattan Beach $ 21,987 City of Maywood $ 34,143 City of Monterey Park $ 181,574 LA County Dept. of Public Works -- East LA $ 80,549 City of Pasadena $ 480,270 City of Pico Rivera $ 73,331 City of Santa fe Springs $ 11,812 City of South Pasadena $ 26,982 City of West Covina $ 245,414 City of West Hollywood $ 50,901 5th Priority SUBTOTAL $ 6,619,095 SUBREGIONAL GRANT PROJECTS: 6th Priority - special demonstration projects Avalon Ferry Subsidy $ 400,000 Avalon Transit Services (Jitney and Dial-a-Ride) $ 250,000 Hollywood Bowl Shuttle Service $ 847,000 6th Priority SUBTOTAL $ 1,497,000 TOTAL - ALL PRIORITIES TOTAL EXPENDITURES $ 14,132,744 FY '08 - TOTAL INCENTIVE PROGRAM REVENUES $ 14,132,744 FY '08 - TOTAL INCENTIVE PROGRAM EXPENSES $ 14,132,744 SHORT FALL/BALANCE $ - NOTES: 1st Priority - funding mark based on FY06 audit, or audited FY06 TPM data. 5th Priority - estimates based on FY06 audited operating data and actual FTA NTD reporting apportionment unit values for FY '08 Funding for 6th priority projects is increased in response to requests by the agencies to keep pace with inflation. 6/26/2007