213669.10
ORANGE COUNTY
LOCAL
TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
ORDINANCE NO. 3
J
ULY
24, 2006
AMENDED:
November
9 , 201
2 November
25 , 201
3 December 14, 2015
(corrected March 14, 2016)
June 22, 2020
May 24, 2021
Orange County
Local Transportation Authority
550 South Main Street
P.O. Box 14184
Orange, CA 92863
-
1584
Tel: (714) 560
-
6282
213669.10
Measure M2 Amendments
Ordinance Amendment
1. November 25, 2013
•
S
trengthens the eligibility and selection process for TOC members to prevent any person with a financial conflict of interest from serving as a member.
Also
requires currently elected or appointed officers who are applying to serve on the TOC to complete a
n “Intent to Resign” form
.
2. December 14, 2015
(corrected March 14, 2016)
•
Accounts for
additional funding from Project T
allocated to the Fare
Stabilization Program by changing Attachment B language to reflect a
1.47% delegation (rather than 1%) of Project U funding towards Fare Stabilization
.
Corrected amendment language was
presented to
the Board
on March 14, 2016.
3. June
22, 2020
•
T
emporarily change
s
the maintenance of effort requirements for fiscal
year 2019
-
20 and fiscal year 2020
-
21 to assist local jurisdictions through
the
unprecedented period of uncertainty due to the economic impacts of the coronavirus pandemic.
4. May
24, 2021
•
Extends temporary
changes
for maintenance of effort requirements for
fiscal year 2020
-
21 into fiscal year 2021
-
22 to continue assisting local
jurisdictions during the coronavirus pandemic.
Transportation Investment Plan Amendments
1. November 9, 2012
•
Reallocation of Funds within
Freeway Program Between SR
-
91 and I
-
405
2. December 14, 2015
(corrected March 14, 2016)
•
Closeout of Project T and Reallocation of Remaining Funds within Transit Program between Metrolink Service Expansion (Project R) and Fare Stabilization Program (Project
U). Corrected amendment language was
presented to the Board on March 14, 2016.
213669.10
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Ordinance No. 3
Page
Preamble
................................
................................
...............................
1 Section 1.
Title
................................
................................
.........................
1 Section 2.
Summary
................................
................................
................
2 Section 3.
Imposition of Retail Transactions and Use Tax
......................
2 Section
4 .
Purposes
................................
................................
................
2 Section
5 .
Bonding Authority
................................
................................
...
3 Section
6 .
Maintenance of Effort Requirements
................................
......
3 Section
7 .
Administrati
on
................................
................................
.........
4 Section
8 .
Annual Appropriations Limit
................................
....................
5 Section
9 .
Effective and Operative Dates
................................
................
5 Section 1
0 .
Safeguards of Use of Reve
nues
................................
.............
5 Section 11.
Ten
-
Year Comprehensive Program Review
...........................
6 Section 1
2 .
Amendments
................................
................................
..........
7 Section 1
3 .
Request for Election
................................
...............................
7 Section 1
4 .
Effect on
O
rdinance No. 2
................................
......................
8 Section 1
5 .
Severability
................................
................................
.............
9 A
TTACHMENT
A
–
Renewed Measure M
Transportation Investment Plan
................................
...
A
-
1 A
TTACHMENT
B
-
Allocation of
Net
Revenues
Section I.
Definitions
................................
................................
...............
B
-
1 213669.10
Section II.
Requirements
................................
................................
.........
B
-
4 Section III.
Requirements for Eligible Jurisdictions
................................
...
B
-
7 Section I
V
.
Allocation of Net Re
venues; General Provisions
....................
B
-
10 Section
V.
Alloc
ation of Net Revenues; Streets and
Roads Programs/Projects
................................
.......................
B
-
12 Section V
I
.
Allocation of Net Revenues; Transit Programs/
Projects
................................
................................
..................
B
-
1 4
Section V
I
I
.
Allocation of Net Revenues;
Environmental Cleanup
P
rojects
................................
................................
..................
B
-
17 A
TTACHMENT
C
-
T
axpayer Oversight Committee
Section I
.
Purpose and Organization
................................
......................
C
-
1 Section II.
Committee Membership
................................
.........................
C
-
1 Section III.
Appointment of Members
................................
.......................
C
-
2 Section IV.
Duties and Responsibilities
................................
....................
C
-
4 213671.11
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
Ordinance N
o.
3 Renewed Measure M Transportation Ordinance and Investment Plan
PREAMBLE
A.
Pursuant to California Public Utilities Code Section 180050, the Orange County Transportation
Authority
(“Authority
”
)
has been designated as the Orange County
Loca
l Transportation Authority by the Orange County Board of Supervisors.
B.
There has been adopted a countywide
transportation expenditure plan,
referred to as the
Orange County
Transportation Invest
ment Plan, dated
July 24, 2006
,
pursuant to California Publ
ic Utilities Code Section 180206 (“Plan”), which will be administered by the Authority.
C.
The Plan provides for needed countywide
transportation
facility and service
improvements which will be funded, in part, by
a
transaction
s
and use tax of one
-
half
of one
percent (1/2%).
D.
Local Transportation Ordinance Number 2 (“
Ordinance No. 2
”) funds
transportation facility and service improvements through a
transaction
s
and use tax of one
-
half of one percent (1
/2
%) that will be imposed
through
March 31, 2011.
E.
Ordinance
No. 3 (“Ordinance”)
provides for the
continuat
ion of
the
existing
Ordinance No. 2
transactions
and use tax
of
one
-
half of one percent (1/2
%
)
for an
additional period of thirty (30) years
to fund transportation facility and service
improvement
s
.
SECTION 1. TITLE
Th
e
Ordinance shall be known and may be cited as the Renewed Measure M Transportation Ordinance and Investment Plan.
The word “Ordinance,” as used in th
e
Ordinance, shall mean and include Attachment A entitled “ Renewed Measure M
Tran
sportation Investment Plan,” Attachment B entitled “Allocation of
Net
Revenues
,” and
Attachment C entitled “Taxpayer
Oversight Committee,” which Attachments A, B and C are
attached hereto and incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein. 2 213671.11
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
SECTION
2. SUMMARY
Th
e
Ordinance provides for the implementation of the Orange County Transportation Investment Plan, which will result in countywide
transportation improvements
for freeways,
highways, local streets and roads,
bus and rail transit,
transportation
-
related water quality
(“Environmental Cleanup”),
and transit s
ervices
for seniors
and disabled persons
. These
needed improvements will be funded by the continuation of the one -
half of one percent
(1/2%) transaction and use tax for a period of thirty year s. The revenues shall be deposited
in a special fund and used solely for the identified improvements authorized by th
e
Ordinance
.
SECTION 3. IMPOSITION OF RETAIL TRANSACTIONS AND USE TAX Subject
to
approval
by the electors,
the Authority hereby imposes,
in the
incorporated
and unincorporated territories of Orange
County (
“County”),
in accordance
with the provisions of Part 1.6 (commencing with Section 7251) of Division 2 of the California Revenue and Taxation Code and Division 19 (commencing with Section 180000)
of the California Public Utilities Code,
continuance o
f the existing
retail
transactions and
use tax at the rate of one
-
half of one percent (1/2%)
commencing April 1, 2011, for a period
of thirty years. This tax shall be in addition to any other taxes authorized by
law, including
any existing or future state or local sales tax or transactions and use tax.
The
imposition,
administration and collection of the tax shall be in accordance with all applicable statutes, laws, rules and regulations presc
ribed
and adopted by the State Board of Equalization.
SECTION
4 . PURPOSES
All of the gross revenues generated from the
transactions and use tax
plus any
interest or other earnings t
hereon (collectively,
“Revenues”)
,
after
the
deduction
for: (i)
amounts
payable to the State Board of Equalization
for the performance of functions
incidental to the administration and operation of th
e
Ordinance,
(ii)
costs for the
administration of th
e
Ordinance
as provided herein,
(iii)
two percent
(2%)
of the Revenues
annua
lly
allocated
for Environmental Cleanup
and
(iv)
satisfaction of debt service
requirements of all bonds issued pursuant to the Ordinance that are not satisfied out of 3 213671.11
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
separate allocations,
shall be defined as “Net Revenues” and
shall be allocated solely fo
r
the transportation
purposes
described in th
e
Ordinance
.
SECTION
5 . BONDING AUTHORITY
“Pay as you go” financing is the preferred method of financing transportation improvements and operations under the Ordinance. However, the Authority may use bond fin
ancing as an alternative method if the scope of planned expenditures makes “pay as you go” financing unfeasible.
Following
approval
by the electors
of the ballot proposition
authorizing imposition
of the
transactions and use
tax and
authorizing
issuance o
f bonds
payable from the proceeds of the tax, bonds may be issued by the Authority pursuant to Division 19 of the Public Utilities Code
, at
any time before, on, or after
the
imposition
of
taxes, and from time to time, payable from the proceeds of the tax a nd secured by a pledge
of revenues from the proceeds of the tax, in order to
fin
a
nce and refinance improvements
authorized by th
e
Ordinance.
SECTION 6. MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT REQUIREMENTS
It is the intent of the Legislature and the Authority that the Net
R
evenues allocated to
a jurisdiction pursuant to th
e
Ordinance for street and road projects shall be used to supplement existing local
discretionary funds
being used for transportation improvements
.
Each jurisdiction is hereby required to annually maintain as a minimum no less than the
maintenance of effort amount of local discretionary funds required to be expended by the
jurisdiction
for local street and road purposes pu
rsuant to the current
Ordinance No. 2
for
Fiscal Year 2010
-
2011
.
The maintenance of ef
fort level
for each jurisdiction
as determined
through this process shall be
adjusted
effective July 1, 2014 and
every three fiscal years
thereafter in an amount equal to the percentage
change for the Construction Cost Index
compiled by Caltrans for the im
mediately preceding three calendar years
, providing that
a
ny
percentage
increase in the maintenance of effort level based on this adjustment shall not exceed the
percentage increase in the
growth rate in the jurisdiction’s
g
eneral
f
und
revenues over the sa
me time period. The Authority shall not allocate any
Net
Revenues to
any jurisdiction
for
any fiscal year until that jurisdiction has certified to the Authority that it 4 213671.11
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
has included
in its budget for that fiscal year an amount of
local
discretionary fund
s
for
streets and roads purposes at least equal to the
level of its
maintenance of effort
requirement.
An annual independent audit may be conducted by the Authority to verify that the
maintenance of effort requirements are being met by
the jurisdiction
. An
y
Net
R
evenues not allocated pursuant to the maintenance of effort requirement shall be allocat
ed to the remaining eligible jurisdictions according
to the formula described in th
e
Ordinance
.
In order to address the impacts of the novel coronavirus pandemic (commonly
referred to as COVID
-
19), for fiscal year (FY) 2019
-
20, jurisdictions shall comply with all
submittal requirements under the ordinance, including, but not li mited to, those
requirements under Attachment B (III)
-
Requirements for Eligible Jurisd
ictions, but will not
be required to meet the required maintenance of effort (MOE) amount for that particular jurisdiction for the FY 2019
-
20. For FY 2020
-
21 and FY 2021
-
22 , jurisdict
ions shall be
required to comply with all submittal requirements under th e ordinance, in
cluding, but not
limited to, those requirements under Attachment B (III) -
Requirements for Eligible
Jurisdictions, but shall only be required to meet the MOE amount fo r that particular
jurisdiction for the FY at the same proportional share
of streets and
roads
dis
cretionary
expenditures to general fund revenues based upon the proportion of the FY 2020 -
21 MOE
benchmark
to general fund revenues that were reported in their respective Comprehensive Annual Financial Report
for FY 2018
-
19. Jurisdi
ctions are encouraged to use
their best
efforts during FY 2019
-
20 ,
FY 2020
-
21 , and FY
2021
-
22 to meet original MOE levels.
SECTION 7. ADMINISTRATION
The Authority shall allocate Revenues
to fund facilities
,
services
and projects as
specified in th
e
Ordin
ance
, and shall administer th
e
Ordinance
c
onsistent with the authority
cited. Revenues may be expended by the Authority for salaries , wages, benefits, and
overhead
and for those services,
including contractual services, necessary to carry out its res
ponsi
bilities pursuant to Division 19; however
,
in no case shall the Revenues expended
for salaries and benefits of Authority
administrative
staff exceed more than one percent
5 213671.11
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
(1%) of the Reven
ues in any year.
The Authority shall use, to the extent possib
le, e
xisting
state, regional and local transpo
r
tation planning and programming da
ta and e
xpertise, and
may, as the law permits, contract with any public agency or private firm for services nece
ssary to carry out the purposes of the Ordinance. Expenses incu rred
by the Authority
for administrative staff
and for project implementation, including contracting with public agencies and private firms, shall be identified in the annual report prepared pu rsuant to
Section 10, subpart 8, of the Ordinance.
SECTION
8 .
ANNUA
L APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT
Th
e annual approp
r
iations limit es
tablished pursuant to
Article
XIII. B
. of the
California Constitu
tion and Section 180202 of the P
ublic Utilities Code shall be est
ablished
as $
1,123
million
for the 2006
-
07 fiscal year.
The ap
propr
iations limit shall be subject to
adjustm
e
nt as provided by law.
All expenditures of the Revenues are subject to the
a
ppropriations limit of the Authority.
SECTION
9 . EFFECTIVE AND O
PERATIVE DATES
Th
e
Ordinance shall be effective on November 8, 200
6 ,
if
two thirds of the
elector
s
vote on N
ovemb
er 7, 2006,
to
approve the ballot
measure
authorizing the
extension of the
imposition of the
existing
tax.
The
continuance
of the
imposition
of the
existing
tax
authori
z
ed by
Section 3 of th
e
Ordinance shall
be op
erative on April 1, 2011.
SECTION 1
0 .
SAF
EGUARDS OF USE OF REVENUES
The following safeguards are hereby established to ensure strict adherence to the limitation
s
on the use of the Re
venues:
1. A transportation
special revenue
fund
(the “Local Tran
sport
ation
Authority Special Revenue Fund”
)
sha
ll be established to maintain all Revenues.
2. The County of Orange Auditor
-
Controller
(“Auditor
-
Controller”)
,
in the
capacity as Chair of t
he Taxpayer Oversight Committee
,
shall annually certify whether the
Reve
nues have been spent
in compliance wi
th th
e Ordinance
.
3. Receipt, maintenance and expenditure of Net Revenues shall be distinguishable in each jurisdiction’s accounting records from other funding sources, and
6 213671.11
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
expenditures of Net Revenues shall be d
istin
guishable by
program or
project.
Int
erest
earned on
Net
Revenues
allocated pursuant to th
e
Ordinance shall be expended only for
those purposes for which the
Net
Revenues
were allocate
d.
4. No
Net
Revenues shall be used by a jurisdiction for other t
han
t
ransportation purposes au
thorized by
th
e
O
rdinance. Any jurisdiction which violates this
provision must fully reimburse the Authority for the
Net
Revenues
misspent and shall be
deemed
ineligible to receive
Net
Revenues for a period of five (5) years.
5. A T
axpayer Oversight Committee (
“Comm
ittee
”) shall be established to
provide an enhanced level of accountability for expenditure of Revenues under th e
Ordinance
. The Committee will he
lp to ensure that all voter mandates are carried out as required.
The r
oles and responsibilities of the Comm
ittee
, the selection process for
Committee members and related administrative procedures shall be carried out as describe
d in Attachment
C
.
6. A p
erformance
a
ssessment
shall be conducted
at least
once every
three
years
to
evaluate the efficiency, effectiv
eness
, economy and program results of the
Authority in satisfying the provisions and requirements of the Investment Summary of the Plan, the Plan a
nd the Ordinance.
A copy of the performance a
ssessment
shall be
pr
ovide
d to the Committee.
7. Quarterly sta
tus r
eports regarding the major projects detailed in the
Plan shall be brought before the Authority in public meetings.
8. Annually the Authority
shall publish a report on how all Revenues have
been spent and on p
rogre
ss in implementing projects in the Pl
an, a
nd shall publicly report
on the findings.
SECTION 11. TEN
-
YEAR COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAM REVIEW
At least every ten years t
he Authority shall cond
uct a comprehensive review of all
projects and programs implemented
unde
r the Plan to evaluate the performanc
e of
the
overall program
and
may revise
the Plan to
improve its performance. The review shall
include consideration of changes to local
,
state and
federal transportation plans and
7 213671.11
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
policie
s;
changes in land use
, tr
avel
and growth projections;
changes in pr
oject
cost
estimates and revenue projections; right
-
of
-
way constraints and other project constraints;
level
of public support for the Plan;
and the
progress of the Authority
and jurisdiction
s
in
implementing the Pl
an.
The Authority may amend the Plan ba
se
d on
its comprehensive
review, subject to the requirements of Section 12.
SECTION 1
2 . AMENDMENTS
The Authority may amend
th
e
Ordinance
, including
the Plan,
to provide for the use
of additional federal, state and
local
funds, to account for unexpected rev
enues
, or to take
into consideration unforeseen circumstances.
The Authority
shall notify the board of
supervisors and the city council of each ci
ty in the county and provide them with a copy of
the proposed amend
ments
, and
shall hold a public hearing on
propo
sed amendments prior
to adoption
, which shall require approval by
a
vote of not less than two thirds
of the
Authority Board of Directors.
Ame
ndments shall become effective forty five days after
adoption.
No
amend
ment to the Plan which eliminates a p
rogra
m or project specified on
adopted
unless the Authority Board of Directors adopts a
finding that the transportatio
n purpose of the program or project to be eliminated will be satisf
ied b
y a different program or project.
No
amen
dment to the Plan which changes the
funding categories, programs or projects identified on page 31 of the Plan shall be adopted
unless the ame
ndment to the Plan is first approved
by a
vote of not less than two
thir
ds
of
the Committee.
In addition, an
y pro
posed change in
allocation
s among the four major
funding categories of freeway projects, street and road projects, transit projects and
Enviro
nmental Cleanup projects
identified on page 31 of the Plan
, or any
propo
sed change
of the
Net
Revenues alloca
ted p
ursuant to Section
IV
C 3 of Attachment B
for the Local
Fair Share
Program portion of the Streets and Roads Projects
funding
category, shall
b
e
approved by a simple majority vote of the ele
ctors before going i
nto e
ffect.
SECTION 1
3 . REQUEST FOR ELECT
ION
Pursuant to California Public Utilities Code Section 180201, the Authority hereby requests that the County
of
Orange
Board of Supervisors call
a special election to be
8 213671.11
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
conducted by the County of Orange on Nove
mber
7, 2006, to place the
Ordinance
befor
e
the
electors.
To avoid any misunderstanding or confusion by Orange County electors, the Authority requests that the
Ordinance
be identified as “
Measure M” on the ballot.
The
ballot
language for the
measure shal
l con
tain a summary of the projects and pr
ogram
s in the Plan
and shall read substantially as follows:
“
Measure “M,
”
Orange County Transportation Improvement Plan
Shall the ordinance contin
uing Measure M, Orange County’s half
-
cent sales tax
for
transportat
ion i
mprovements
, f
or an additional 30 yea
rs wi
th
limited bonding au
t
ho
r
ity to
fund the following projects:
*
relieve congestion on the I
-
5, I
-
405, 22, 55, 57 and 91 freeways;
*
fix potho
les and resurface streets;
*
expand Metrolink rail and connect it
to lo
cal communities;
*
provide transit s
ervic
es, at reduced rates, for seniors and disabled persons; *
synchronize traffic lights in every community;
*
reduce air and water pollution, an
d protect local beaches by cleaning up oil runoff
from roadways;
a
nd es
tablish the following taxpayer protec
tions
to ensure the funds are spent as directed
by the voters:
*
require an independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee to
review
yearly audits to
en
sure that voter mandates are met;
*
publish an annual report to th
e tax
payers on how all funds are spent; an
d
*
update the transportation improvement plan every 10 years, with voter approval required for major changes
;
be adopted for the purpose of reli
eving traffic congestion in Orange County?”
S
ECTION 1
4 . EFFECT ON
ORDIN
ANCE NO. 2
Th
e
Ordinance is
not
inten
ded t
o modify, repeal or alter the provisions of Ordinance
No. 2, and shall not be read to super
s
ede Ordinance No. 2. The provisions of th
e
Ordin
ance shall apply solely to the transactions and use tax adopted here in.
If th
e
Ordinance is not approved by t
he el
ectors of the County, the provisions of Ordinance No. 2 9 213671.11
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
and all powers, duties, and actions taken thereunder shall remain in full force and e ffect.
SECTION 1
5 . SEVERABILITY
I
f any section, subsection, part, c
lause
or phrase of th
e
Ordinance is for an
y rea
son
held invalid, unenforceable or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, that holding shall not affect the validity or enfor
ceability of the remaining funds or provisions of
th
e
Ordinance, and
the
Authority declares that it would have
pass
ed each part of th
e
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
RENEWED MEASURE M
RENEWED MEASURE M
Transportation Investment Plan
Transportation Investment Plan
ORANGE COUNTY LOCAL TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
550 South Main Street
P.O. Box 14184
Orange, CA 92863-1584
(714) 560-5066
www
.octa.net
As amended on December 14, 2015
Approved by voters on November 7, 2006
ATTACHMENT A
Table of Contents
Introduction
............................................................................................ 2 Overview
................................................................................................ 3 Freeway Projects
Overview
.................................................................................................................. 5 Orange County Freeway Projects Map
............................................................... 6 I-5
Santa Ana Freeway Interchange Improvements
...........................
7 I-5
Santa Ana/San Diego Freeway Improvements
.............................
8 SR-22
Garden Grove Freeway Access Improvements
.............................
9 SR-55
Costa Mesa Freeway Improvements
...............................................
9 SR-57
Orange Freeway Improvements
.....................................................
10 SR-91
Riverside Freeway Improvements
..................................................
11 I-405
San Diego Freeway Improvements
.................................................
13 I-605
Freeway Access Improvements
........................................................ 15 All
Freeway Service Patrol
..................................................................... 15 Streets & Roads Projects
Overview
................................................................................................................ 16 Orange County Streets and Roads Projects Map
...........................................
17 Regional Capacity Program
............................................................................... 18 Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program
..........................................
19 Local Fair Share Program
................................................................................... 20 Transit Projects
Overview
................................................................................................................ 21 Orange County Transit Projects Map
................................................................ 22 High Frequency Metrolink Service
.................................................................... 23 Transit Extensions to Metrolink
........................................................................... 23 Metrolink Gateways
.............................................................................................. 24 Expand Mobility Choices for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities ............
24 Community Based Transit/Circulators
............................................................... 25 Safe Transit Stops
................................................................................................. 25 Environmental Cleanup
Overview
................................................................................................................ 26 Project Description
............................................................................................... 27 Taxpayer Safeguards and Audits
Overview
................................................................................................................ 28 Description
.............................................................................................................. 29 Measure M Investment Summary
........................................................ 31 1
R
E
N
E
W
E
D
Measure M Promises Fulfilled
On November 6, 1990, Orange County voters
approved Measure M, a half-cent local transportation
sales tax for twenty years. All of the major projects
promised to and approved by the voters are
underway or complete. Funds that go to cities and
the County of Orange to maintain and improve
local street and roads, along with transit fare
reductions for seniors and persons with disabilities,
will continue until Measure M ends in 2011. The
promises made in Measure M have been fulfilled.
Continued Investment Needed
Orange County continues to grow. By the year 2030,
Orange County’s population will increase by 24
percent from 2.9 million in 2000 to 3.6 million in
2030; jobs will increase by 27 percent; and travel
on our roads and highways by 39 percent. Without
continued investment average morning rush hour
speeds on Orange County freeways will fall by
31 percent and on major streets by 32 percent.
Responding to this continued growth and broad
support for investment in Orange County’s
transportation system, the Orange County
Transportation Authority considered the
transportation projects and programs that would be
possible if Measure M were renewed. The Authority ,
together with the 34 cities of Orange County , the
Orange County Board of Supervisors and thousands
of Orange County citizens, participated during the
last eighteen months in developing a Transportation
Investment Plan for consideration by the voters.
A Plan for New Transportation Investments
The Plan that follows is a result of those efforts. It
reflects the varied interests and priorities inherent
in the diverse communities of Orange County . It
includes continued investment to expand and
improve Orange County’s freeway system;
commitment to maintaining and improving the
network of streets and roads in every community;
an expansion of Metrolink rail service through the
core of Orange County with future extensions to
connect with nearby communities and regional
rail systems; more transit service for seniors and
disabled persons; and funds to clean up runoff
from roads that leads to beach closures.
Strong Safeguards
These commitments are underscored by a set of
strong taxpayer safeguards to ensure that promises
made in the Plan are kept. They include an annual
independent audit and report to the taxpayers;
ongoing monitoring and review of spending by
an independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee;
requirement for full public review and update of
the Plan every ten years; voter approval for any
major changes to the Plan; strong penalties for
any misuse of funds and a strict limit of no more
than one percent for administrative expenses.
No Increase in Taxes
The traffic improvements detailed in this plan do
not require an increase in taxes. Renewal of the
existing Measure M one-half cent transportation
sales tax will enable all of the projects and
programs to be implemented. And by using good
planning and sensible financing, projects that
are ready to go could begin as early as 2007.
Renewing Measure M
The projects and programs that follow constitute
the Transportation Investment Plan for the
renewal of the Measure M transportation sales tax
approved by Orange County voters in November
of 1990. These improvements are necessary to
address current and future transportation needs
in Orange County and reflect the best efforts
to achieve consensus among varied interests
and communities throughout the County .
Introduction
2 R
E
N
E
W
E
D
R
E
N
E
W
E
D
The Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment
Plan is a 30-year, $11.8 billion program designed to
reduce traffic congestion, strengthen our economy
and improve our quality of life by upgrading
key freeways, fixing major freeway interchanges,
maintaining streets and roads, synchronizing traffic
signals countywide, building a visionary rail transit
system, and protecting our environment from the oily
street runoff that pollutes Orange County beaches.
The Transportation Investment Plan is focused solely
on improving the transportation system and includes
tough taxpayer safeguards, including a Taxpayer
Oversight Committee, required annual audits,
and regular, public reports on project progress.
The Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment
Plan must be reviewed annually , in public session,
and every ten years a detailed review of the Plan
must take place. If changing circumstances require
the voter-approved plan to be changed, those
changes must be taken to the voters for approval.
Freeways
Relieving congestion on the Riverside/Artesia
Freeway (SR-91) is the centerpiece of the freeway
program, and will include new lanes, new
interchanges, and new bridges. Other major projects
will make substantial improvements on Interstate
5 (I-5) in southern Orange County and the San
Diego Freeway (I-405) in western Orange County .
The notorious Orange Crush
—
the intersection of
the I-5, the Garden Grove Freeway (SR-22) and the
Orange Freeway (SR-57) near Angel Stadium
—
will
be improved and upgraded. Under the Plan, major
traffic chokepoints on almost every Orange County
freeway will be remedied. Improving Orange
County freeways will be the greatest investment
in the Renewed Measure M program: Forty
-
three percent of net revenues, or $4.871 billion,
will be invested in new freeway construction.
Streets and Roads
More than 6,500 lane miles of aging streets and roads
will need repair, rejuvenation and improvement.
City streets and county roads need to be maintained
regularly and potholes have to be filled quickly .
Thirty-two percent of net revenue from the Renewed
Measure M Transportation Investment Plan, or
$3.625 billion, will be devoted to fixing potholes,
improving intersections, synchronizing traffic signals
countywide, and making the existing countywide
network of streets and roads safer and more efficient.
Overview
R
E
N
E
W
E
D
2 3
R
E
N
E
W
E
D
Public Transit
As Orange County continues to grow, building a
visionary rail transportation system that is safe,
clean and convenient, uses and preserves existing
rights-of-way , and, over time, provides high-speed
connections both inside and outside of Orange
County , is a long term goal. T wenty-five percent
of the net revenue from Renewed Measure M, or
$2.83 billion, will be dedicated to transit programs
countywide. About twenty percent, or $2.24 billion,
will be dedicated to creating a new countywide
high capacity transit system anchored on the
existing, successful Metrolink and Amtrak rail line,
and about five percent, or $591 million, will be
used to enhance senior transportation programs
and provide targeted, safe localized bus service.
Environmental Cleanup
Every day , more than 70 million gallons of oily
pollution, litter, and dirty contaminants wash off
streets, roads, and freeways and pour onto Orange
County waterways and beaches. When it rains, the
transportation-generated beach and ocean pollution
increases tenfold. Under the plan, two percent
of the gross Renewed Measure M Transportation
Investment Plan, or $237 million, will be dedicated
to protecting Orange County beaches from this
transportation-generated pollution (sometimes called
“urban runoff”) while improving ocean water quality .
Taxpayer Safeguards and Audits
When new transportation dollars are approved,
they should go for transportation and transportation
purposes alone. No bait-and-switch. No using
transportation dollars for other purposes. The
original Measure M went solely for transportation
purposes. The Renewed Measure M must be just
as airtight. One percent of the gross Measure M
program, or $118.6 million over 30 years, will
pay for annual, independent audits, taxpayer
safeguards, an independent Taxpayer Oversight
Committee assigned to watchdog government
spending, and a full, public disclosure of all Renewed
Measure M expenditures. A detailed review of the
program must be conducted every ten years and,
if needed, major changes in the investment plan
must be brought before Orange County voters for
approval. Taxpayers will receive an annual report
detailing the Renewed Measure M expenditures.
Additionally , as required by law, an estimated one
and a half percent of the sales taxes generated, or
$178 million over 30 years, must be paid to the
California State Board of Equalization for collecting
the one-half cent sales tax that funds the Renewed
Measure M Transportation Investment Plan.
In this pamphlet, every specific project, program,
and safeguard included in the Renewed Measure
M Transportation Investment Plan is explained.
Similar details will be provided to every Orange
County voter if the measure is placed on the ballot.
R
E
N
E
W
E
D
4 R
E
N
E
W
E
D
Every day , traffic backs up somewhere on the
Orange County freeway system. And, every day ,
freeway traffic seems to get a little worse.
In the past decade, Orange County has made major
strides in re-building our aging freeway system.
But there is still an enormous amount of work
that needs to be done to make the freeway system
work well. You see the need for improvement every
time you drive on an Orange County freeway .
Forty-three percent of net revenues from the
Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment Plan
is dedicated to improving Orange County freeways,
the largest portion of the 30-year transportation plan.
SR-91 is the Centerpiece
Making the troubled Riverside/Artesia Freeway
(SR-91) work again is the centerpiece of the
Renewed Measure M Freeway program. The fix
on the SR-91 will require new lanes, new bridges,
new overpasses, and, in the Santa Ana Canyon
portion of the freeway , a diversion of drivers to the
Foothill Corridor (SR-241) so the rest of the Orange
County freeway system can work more effectively .
And there’s more to the freeway program than the
fix of SR-91
—
much more. More than $1 billion
is earmarked for Interstate 5 in South County .
More than $800 million is slated to upgrade the
San Diego Freeway (I-405) between Irvine and
the Los Angeles County line. Another significant
investment is planned on the congested Costa
Mesa Freeway (SR-55). And needed projects
designed to relieve traffic chokepoints are planned
for almost every Orange County freeway .
To make any freeway system work, bottlenecks at
interchanges also have to be fixed. The notorious
Orange Crush Interchange
—
where the Santa Ana
Freeway (I-5) meets the Orange Freeway (SR-57) and
the Garden Grove Freeway (SR-22) in a traffic tangle
near Angel Stadium
—
is in need of a major face lift.
And the intersection of Interstate 5 and the Costa
Mesa Freeway (SR-55) is also slated for major repair.
Pays Big Dividends
Local investment in freeways also pays big dividends
in the search for other needed freeway dollars.
Because of state and federal matching rules, Orange
County’s local investment in freeway projects acts
as a magnet for state and federal transportation
dollars
—
pulling more freeway construction
dollars into the county and allowing more traffic
-
reducing freeway projects to be built sooner.
Innovative Environmental Mitigation
A minimum of $243.5 million will be available,
subject to a Master Agreement, to provide for
comprehensive, rather than piecemeal, mitigation of
the environmental impacts of freeway improvements.
Using a proactive, innovative approach, the
Master Agreement negotiated between the Orange
County Local Transportation Authority and
state and federal resource agencies will provide
higher-value environmental benefits such as
habitat protection, wildlife corridors and resource
preservation in exchange for streamlined project
approvals for the freeway program as a whole.
Freeway projects will also be planned, designed
and constructed with consideration for their
aesthetic, historic and environmental impacts
on nearby properties and communities using
such elements as parkway style designs, locally
native landscaping, sound reduction and aesthetic
treatments that complement the surroundings.
Freeway Projects Overview
R
E
N
E
W
E
D
4 5
A
B
C
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
Orange County Freeway Projects
Santa Ana Freeway (I-5)
page 7
Santa Ana Freeway/San Diego Freeway (I-5)
page 8
Santa Ana Freeway/San Diego Freeway (I-5)
page 8
Garden Grove Freeway (SR-22)
page 9
Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55)
page 9
Orange Freeway (SR-57)
page 10
Riverside Freeway (SR-91)
page 11
Riverside Freeway (SR-91)
page 12
San Diego Freeway (I-405)
page 13-14
Freeway Access Improvements (I-605)
page 15
(not mapped)
Freeway Service Patrol
(not mapped)
page 15
A
B
D
C
E
F
N
G
M
K
L
J
H
I
C
6 E
M
D
Freeway Projects
Santa Ana Freeway (I-5)
Interchange Improvements
A
B
R
E
N
E
W
E
D
6 7
Project
Santa Ana Freeway (I-5) Improvements
between Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55)
and “Orange Crush” Area (SR-57)
Description:
Reduce freeway congestion through improvements
at the SR-55/I-5 interchange area between the Fourth
Street and Newport Boulevard ramps on I-5, and
between Fourth Street and Edinger Avenue on
SR-55. Also, add capacity on I-5 between SR-55 and
SR-57 to relieve congestion at the “Orange Crush”.
The project will generally be constructed within the
existing right-of-way . Specific improvements will be
subject to approved plans developed in cooperation
with local jurisdictions and affected communities.
The project will increase freeway capacity and reduce
congestion. The current daily traffic volume on this
segment of the I-5 between SR-55 and SR-57 is about
389,000. The demand is expected to grow by more
than 19 percent by 2030, bringing the daily usage to
464,000 vehicles per day . Regional plans also include
additional improvements on I-5 from the “Orange
Crush” to SR-91 using federal and state funds.
Cost:
The estimated cost to improve this
section of the I-5 is $470.0 million.
Project
Santa Ana Freeway (I-5) Improvements from the
Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55) to El Toro “Y” Area
Description:
Build new lanes and improve the interchanges
in the area between SR-55 and the SR-133 (near
the El Toro “Y”). This segment of I-5 is the major
route serving activity areas in the cities of Irvine,
T ustin, Santa Ana and north Orange County . The
project will also make improvements at local
interchanges, such as Jamboree Road. The project
will generally be constructed within the existing
right-of-way . Specific improvements will be subject
to approved plans developed in cooperation with
local jurisdictions and affected communities.
The project will increase freeway capacity and
reduce congestion. The current traffic volume
on this segment of I-5 is about 356,000 vehicles
per day and is expected to increase by nearly 24
percent, bringing it up to 440,000 vehicles per
day . In addition to the projects described above,
regional plans include additional improvements
to this freeway at local interchanges, such as
Culver Drive, using federal and state funds.
Cost:
The estimated cost to improve this
section of I-5 is $300.2 million.
Project
San Diego Freeway (I-5) Improvements
South of the El Toro “Y”
Description:
Add new lanes to I-5 from the vicinity of the El Toro
Interchange in Lake Forest to the vicinity of SR-73
in Mission Viejo. Also add new lanes on I-5 between
Coast Highway and Avenida Pico interchanges to
reduce freeway congestion in San Clemente. The
project will also make major improvements at local
interchanges as listed in Project D. The project
will generally be constructed within the existing
right-of-way . Specific improvements will be subject
to approved plans developed in cooperation with
local jurisdictions and affected communities.
The project will increase freeway capacity and
reduce congestion. Current traffic volume on I-5
near the El Toro “Y” is about 342,000 vehicles per
day . This volume will increase in the future by 35
percent, bringing it up to 460,000 vehicles per
day . Regional plans also include construction of a
new freeway access point between Crown Valley
Parkway and Avery Parkway as well as new off ramps
at Stonehill Drive using federal and state funds.
Cost:
The estimated cost to improve these
segments of I-5 is $627.0 million.
Project
Santa Ana Freeway / San Diego Freeway (I-5)
Local Interchange Upgrades
Description:
Update and improve key I-5 interchanges such
as Avenida Pico, Ortega Highway , Avery Parkway ,
La Paz Road, El Toro Road, and others to relieve
street congestion around older interchanges and
on ramps. Specific improvements will be subject
to approved plans developed in cooperation with
local jurisdictions and affected communities.
In addition to the project described above,
regional plans also include improvements to
the local interchanges at Camino Capistrano,
Oso Parkway , Alicia Parkway and Barranca
Parkway using federal and state funds.
Cost:
The estimated cost for the I-5 local
interchange upgrades is $258.0 million.
Mission
Viejo
Laguna
Niguel
San Juan
Capistrano
Dana Point
San Clemente
Mission
Viejo
Laguna
Niguel
San Juan
Capistrano
Dana Point
San Clemente
Santa Ana Freeway/San Diego Freeway (I-5)
C
Freeway Projects
D
R
E
N
E
W
E
D
8 Project
Garden Grove Freeway (SR-22)
Access Improvements
Description:
Construct interchange improvements at Euclid
Street, Brookhurst Street and Harbor Boulevard
to reduce freeway and street congestion near these
interchanges. Specific improvements will be subject
to approved plans developed in cooperation with
local jurisdictions and affected communities.
Regional plans also include the construction of
new freeway-to-freeway carpool ramps to the
SR-22/I-405 interchange, and improvements to
the local interchange at Magnolia Avenue using
federal and state funds.
Cost:
The estimated cost to improve the
SR-22 interchanges is $120.0 million.
Project
Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55) Improvements
Description:
Add new lanes to SR-55 between Garden Grove
Freeway (SR-22) and the San Diego Freeway
(I-405), generally within existing right-of-way ,
including merging lanes between interchanges to
smooth traffic flow. This project also provides for
freeway operational improvements for the portion
of SR-55 between SR-91 and SR-22. The project
will generally be constructed within the existing
right-of-way . Specific improvements will be subject
to approved plans developed in cooperation with
local jurisdictions and affected communities.
The project will increase freeway capacity and reduce
congestion. This freeway carries about 295,000
vehicles on a daily basis. This volume is expected
to increase by nearly 13 percent, bringing it up to
332,000 vehicles per day in the future. In addition
to the projects described above, regional plans also
include a new street overcrossing and carpool ramps
at Alton Avenue using federal and state funds.
Cost:
The estimated cost for these SR-55
improvements is $366.0 million.
Garden Grove Freeway (SR-22)
Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55)
Garden Grove
Stanton
Westminster
Santa Ana
Tustin
Orange
Anaheim
Buena Park
Fullerton
Costa
Mesa
Irvine
Westminster
Fountain Valley
Huntington Beach
Garden Grove
Los Alamitos
Seal Beach
Cypress
Stanton
Freeway Projects
E
F
8 9
Project
Orange Freeway (SR-57) Improvements
Description:
Build a new northbound lane between Orangewood
Avenue and Lambert Road. Other projects include
improvements to the Lambert interchange and
the addition of a northbound truck climbing
lane between Lambert and Tonner Canyon
Road. The improvements will be designed and
coordinated specifically to reduce congestion at
SR-57/SR-91 interchange. These improvements
will be made generally within existing right-of
-
way . Specific improvements will be subject to
approved plans developed in cooperation with
local jurisdictions and affected communities.
The project will increase freeway capacity and reduce
congestion. The daily traffic volume on this freeway
is about 315,000 vehicles. By 2030, this volume will
increase by 15 percent, bringing it up to 363,000
vehicles per day . In addition to the project described above, regional plans include new carpool ramps
at Cerritos Avenue using federal and state funds.
Cost:
The estimated cost to implement
SR-57 improvements is $258.7 million.
Orange Freeway (SR-57)
Freeway Projects
G
R
E
N
E
W
E
D
10 Project
Riverside Freeway (SR-91) Improvements
from the Santa Ana Freeway (I-5) to
the Orange Freeway (SR-57)
Description:
Add capacity in the westbound direction and provide
operational improvements at on and off ramps to
the SR-91 between I-5 and the Orange Freeway
(SR-57), generally within existing right-of-way , to
smooth traffic flow and relieve the SR-57/SR-91
interchange. Specific improvements will be subject
to approved plans developed in cooperation with
local jurisdictions and affected communities.
The current daily freeway volume along this
segment of SR-91 is about 256,000. By 2030,
this volume is expected to increase by nearly 13
percent, bringing it up to 289,900 vehicles per day .
Cost:
The estimated cost for improvements in this
segment of SR-91 is $140.0 million.
Project
Riverside Freeway (SR-91) Improvements
from Orange Freeway (SR-57) to the Costa
Mesa Freeway (SR-55) Interchange Area
Description:
Improve the SR-91/SR-55 to SR-91/SR-57
interchange complex, including nearby local
interchanges such as T ustin Avenue and Lakeview,
as well as adding freeway capacity between
SR-55 and SR-57. The project will generally
be constructed within the existing right-of
-
way . Specific improvements will be subject to
approved plans developed in cooperation with
local jurisdictions and affected communities.
Current freeway volume on this segment
of the SR-91 is about 245,000 vehicles per
day . This vehicular demand is expected to
increase by 22 percent, bringing it up to
300,000 vehicles per day in the future.
Cost:
The estimated cost for these improvements
to the SR-91 is $416.5 million.
Riverside Freeway (SR-91)
Santa Ana
Tustin
Orange
Anaheim
Buena Park
Fullerton
Costa Mesa
Westminster
Fountain Valley
Huntington Beach
Garden Grove
Los Alamitos
Seal Beach
Cypress
Stanton
Placentia
Villa
Park
Anaheim
Freeway Projects
H
I
R
E
N
E
W
E
D
10 11
Project
Riverside Freeway (SR-91) Improvements
from Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55) to
the Orange/ Riverside County Line
Description:
This project adds capacity on SR-91 beginning at
SR-55 and extending to I-15 in Riverside County .
The first priority will be to improve the segment
of SR-91 east of SR-241. The goal is to provide
up to four new lanes of capacity between SR-241
and Riverside County Line by making best use
of available freeway property , adding reversible
lanes, building elevated sections and improving
connections to SR-241. These projects would be
constructed in conjunction with similar coordinated
improvements in Riverside County extending to
I-15 and provide a continuous set of improvements
between SR-241 and I-15. The portion of
improvements in Riverside County will be paid for
from other sources. Specific improvements will be
subject to approved plans developed in cooperation
with local jurisdictions and affected communities.
This project also includes improvements to the
segment of SR-91 between SR-241 and SR-55.
The concept is to generally add one new lane in
each direction and improve the interchanges.
Today , this freeway carries about 314,000 vehicles
every day . This volume is expected to increase by 36
percent, bringing it up to 426,000 vehicles by 2030.
Cost:
The estimated cost for these improvements
to the SR-91 is $352.0 million.
Placentia
Yorba Linda
Villa
Park
Anaheim
Riverside Freeway (SR-91)
J
Freeway Projects
R
E
N
E
W
E
D
12 Project cost estimate amended on November 9, 2012.
Project
San Diego Freeway (I-405) Improvements
between the I-605 Freeway in Los Alamitos
area and Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55)
Description:
Add new lanes to the San Diego Freeway between
I-605 and SR-55, generally within the existing right
-
of-way . The project will make best use of available
freeway property , update interchanges and widen
all local overcrossings according to city and regional
master plans. The improvements will be coordinated
with other planned I-405 improvements in the
I-405/SR-22/I-605 interchange area to the north
and I-405/SR-73 improvements to the south. The
improvements will adhere to recommendations of
the Interstate 405 Major Investment Study
(as adopted by the Orange County Transportation
Authority Board of Directors on October 14,
2005) and will be developed in cooperation with
local jurisdictions and affected communities.
Today , I-405 carries about 430,000 vehicles daily .
The volume is expected to increase by nearly 23
percent, bringing it up to 528,000 vehicles daily
by 2030. The project will increase freeway capacity
and reduce congestion. Near-term regional plans
also include the improvements to the I-405/SR-73
interchange as well as a new carpool interchange
at Bear Street using federal and state funds.
Cost:
The estimated cost for these improvements
to the I-405 is $1,072.8 million.
San Diego Freeway (I-405)
Santa Ana
Tustin
Orange
Anaheim
Buena Park
Fullerton
Costa Mesa
Westminster
Fountain Valley
Huntington Beach
Garden Grove
Los Alamitos
Seal Beach
Cypress
Stanton
Freeway Projects
K
R
E
N
E
W
E
D
12 13
Project cost estimate amended on November 9, 2012.
Project
San Diego Freeway (I-405) Improvements
between Costa Mesa Freeway
(SR-55) and Santa Ana Freeway (I-5)
Description:
Add new lanes to the freeway from SR-55 to the
I-5. The project will also improve chokepoints
at interchanges and add merging lanes near on/
off ramps such as Lake Forest Drive, Irvine Center
Drive and SR-133 to improve the overall freeway
operations in the I-405/I-5 El Toro “Y” area. The
projects will generally be constructed within the
existing right-of-way . Specific improvements will be
subject to approved plans developed in cooperation
with local jurisdictions and affected communities.
This segment of the freeway carries 354,000
vehicles a day . This number will increase by
nearly 13 percent, bringing it up to 401,000
vehicles per day by 2030. The project will increase
freeway capacity and reduce congestion. In
addition to the projects described above, regional
plans include a new carpool interchange at Von
Karman Avenue using federal and state funds.
Cost:
The estimated cost for these improvements
to the I-405 is $319.7 million.
San Diego Freeway (I-405)
Freeway Projects
L
R
E
N
E
W
E
D
14 Project
I-605 Freeway Access Improvements
Description:
Improve freeway access and arterial connection
to I-605 serving the communities of Los Alamitos
and Cypress. The project will be coordinated with
other planned improvements along SR-22 and
I-405. Specific improvements will be subject to
approved plans developed in cooperation with
local jurisdictions and affected communities.
Regional plans also include the addition of new
freeway-to-freeway carpool ramps to the I-405/
I-605 interchange using federal and state funds.
This improvement will connect to interchange
improvements at I-405 and SR-22 as well as
new freeway lanes between I-405 and I-605.
Cost:
The estimated cost to make these I-605 interchange
improvements is $20.0 million.
Project
Freeway Service Patrol
Description:
The Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) provides
competitively bid, privately contracted tow
truck service for motorists with disabled vehicles
on the freeway system. This service helps
stranded motorists and quickly clears disabled
vehicles out of the freeway lanes to minimize
congestion caused by vehicles blocking traffic
and passing motorists rubbernecking.
Currently Freeway Service Patrol is available on
Orange County freeways Monday through Friday
during peak commuting hours. This project
would assure that this basic level of service
could be continued through 2041. As demand
and congestion levels increase, this project
would also permit service hours to be extended
throughout the day and into the weekend.
Cost:
The estimated cost to support the Freeway
Service Patrol Program for thirty years
beyond 2011 is $150.0 million.
I-605 Freeway Access Improvements
Freeway Service Patrol
Freeways Projects
M
N
R
E
N
E
W
E
D
14 15
R
E
N
E
W
E
D
Orange County has more than 6,500 lane miles
of aging streets and roads, many of which are in
need of repair, rejuvenation and improvement.
Intersections need to be widened, traffic lights
need to be synchronized, and potholes need to
be filled. And, in many cases, to make Orange
County’s transportation system work smoothly , we
need to add additional lanes to existing streets.
Thirty-two percent of net revenues from the
Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment
Plan is dedicated to maintaining streets,
fixing potholes, improving intersections and
widening city streets and county roads.
Making the System Work
Making the existing system of streets and roads
work better
—
by identifying spot intersection
improvements, filling potholes, repaving worn
-
out streets
—
is the basis of making a countywide
transportation system work. That basis has to be the
first priority . But to operate a successful, countywide system of streets and roads, we need more:
street widenings and traffic signals synchronized
countywide. And there’s more. Pedestrian safety
near local schools needs to be improved. Traffic flow
must be smoothed. Street repairs must be made
sooner. And, perhaps most importantly , cities and the
county must work together
—
collaboratively
—
to
find simple, low-cost traffic solutions.
Renewed Measure M provides financial incentives
for traffic improvements that cross city and
county lines, providing a seamless, county
-
wide transportation system that’s friendly to
regional commuters and fair to local residents.
Better Cooperation
To place a higher priority on cooperative,
collaborative regional decision-making, Renewed
Measure M creates incentives that encourage traffic
lights to be coordinated across jurisdictional lines,
major street improvements to be better coordinated
on a regional basis, and street repair programs to be
a high priority countywide. To receive Measure M
funding, cities and the county have to cooperate.
The Streets and Roads program in Renewed
Measure M involves shared responsibilities
—
local
cities and the county set their local priorities
within a competitive, regional framework that
rewards cooperation, honors best practices, and
encourages government agencies to work together.
Streets and Roads
Projects Overview
R
E
N
E
W
E
D
16 Signal
Synchronization
Network
Orange County Streets and Roads Projects
Regional Capacity Program
page 18
(not mapped)
Nearly 1,000 miles of new lanes
Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program
page 19
(see grid above)
Over 750 miles of roadway
Over 2,000 coordinated signals
Local Fair Share Program
page 20
(not mapped)
Street maintenance and improvements
O
P
Q
16 17
Streets and Roads Projects
O
Project
Regional Capacity Program
Description:
This program, in combination with local matching
funds, provides a funding source to complete the
Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways
(MPAH). The program also provides for intersection
improvements and other projects to help improve
street operations and reduce congestion. The
program allocates funds through a competitive
process and targets projects that help traffic the most by considering factors such as degree of congestion
relief, cost effectiveness, project readiness, etc.
Local jurisdictions must provide a dollar-for-dollar
match to qualify for funding, but can be rewarded
with lower match requirements if they give
priority to other key objectives, such as better road
maintenance and regional signal synchronization.
Roughly 1,000 miles of new street lanes remain
to be completed, mostly in the form of widening
existing streets to their ultimate planned width.
Completion of the system will result in a more
even traffic flow and efficient system.
Another element of this program is funding for
construction of railroad over or underpass grade
separations where high volume streets are impacted
by freight trains along the Burlington Northern
Santa Fe railroad in northern Orange County .
Cost:
The estimated cost for these street
improvement projects is $1,132.8 million.
Regional Capacity Program
R
E
N
E
W
E
D
18 R
E
N
E
W
E
D
Project
Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program
Description:
This program targets over 2,000 signalized
intersections across the County for coordinated
operation. The goal is to improve the flow
of traffic by developing and implementing
regional signal coordination programs
that cross jurisdictional boundaries.
Most traffic signal synchronization programs today
are limited to segments of roads or individual cities
and agencies. For example, signals at intersections
of freeways with arterial streets are controlled
by Caltrans, while nearby signals at local street
intersections are under the control of cities. This
results in the street system operating at less than
maximum efficiency . When completed, this project
can increase the capacity of the street grid and
reduce the delay by over six million hours annually .
To ensure that this program is successful, cities, the
County of Orange and Caltrans will be required
to work together and prepare a common traffic
signal synchronization plan and the necessary
governance and legal arrangements before receiving
funds. In addition, cities will be required to
provide 20 percent of the costs. Once in place,
the program will provide funding for ongoing
maintenance and operation of the synchronization
plan. Local jurisdictions will be required to
publicly report on the performance of their signal
synchronization efforts at least every three years.
Signal equipment to give emergency vehicles
priority at intersections will be an eligible expense
for projects implemented as part of this program.
Cost:
The estimated cost of developing and maintaining
a regional traffic signal synchronization program
for Orange County is $453.1 million.
Streets and Roads Projects
P
Regional Traffic Signal
Synchronization Program
18 19
Streets and Roads Projects
Q
Project
Local Fair Share Program
Description:
This element of the program will provide flexible
funding to help cities and the County of Orange keep
up with the rising cost of repairing the aging street
system. In addition, cities can use these funds for
other local transportation needs such as residential
street projects, traffic and pedestrian safety near
schools, signal priority for emergency vehicles, etc.
This program is intended to augment, rather than
replace, existing transportation expenditures
and therefore cities must meet the following
requirements to receive the funds.
1. Continue to invest General Fund monies
(or other local discretionary monies) for
transportation and annually increase this
commitment to keep pace with inflation.
2. Agree to use Measure M funds for
transportation purposes only , subject
to full repayment and a loss of funding
eligibility for five years for any misuse.
3. Agree to separate accounting for Measure
M funds and annual reporting on
actual Measure M expenditures.
4. Develop and maintain a Pavement
Management Program to ensure timely
street maintenance and submit regular
public reports on the condition of streets.
5. Annually submit a six-year Capital Improvement
Program and commit to spend Measure
M funds within three years of receipt.
6. Agree to assess traffic impacts of new
development and require that new
development pay a fair share of any
necessary transportation improvements.
7. Agree to plan, build and operate major
streets consistent with the countywide
Master Plan of Arterial Highways to ensure
efficient traffic flow across city boundaries.
8. Participate in Traffic Forums with neighboring
jurisdictions to facilitate the implementation and
maintenance of traffic signal synchronization
programs and projects. This requires cities to
balance local traffic policies with neighboring
cities
—
for selected streets
—
to promote
more efficient traffic circulation overall.
9. Agree to consider land use planning
strategies that are transit-friendly ,
support alternative transportation modes
including bike and pedestrian access and
reduce reliance on the automobile.
The funds under this program are distributed to
cities and the County of Orange by formula once
the cities have fulfilled the above requirements. The
formula will account for population, street mileage
and amount of sales tax collected in each jurisdiction.
Cost:
The estimated cost for this program for
thirty years is $2,039.1 million.
Local Fair Share Program
R
E
N
E
W
E
D
20 R
E
N
E
W
E
D
R
E
N
E
W
E
D
Transit Overview
Building streets, roads and freeways helps fix
today’s traffic problems. Building a visionary transit
system that is safe, clean and convenient focuses
on Orange County’s transportation future.
T wenty-five percent of net revenues from the
Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment
Plan is allocated towards building and improving
rail and bus transportation in Orange County .
Approximately twenty percent of the Renewed
Measure M funds is allocated to developing a creative
countywide transit program and five percent of
the revenues will be used to enhance programs for
senior citizens and for targeted, localized bus service.
All transit expenditures must be consistent with
the safeguards and audit provisions of the Plan.
A New Transit Vision
The key element of the Renewed Measure M transit
program is improving the 100-year old Santa Fe
rail line, known today as the Los Angeles/San
Diego (LOSSAN) rail corridor, through the heart
of the county . Then, by using this well-established,
operational commuter rail system as a platform for
future growth, existing rail stations will be developed into regional transportation hubs that can serve as
regional transportation gateways or the centerpiece
of local transportation services. A series of new, well -
coordinated, flexible transportation systems, each
one customized to the unique transportation vision
the station serves, will be developed. Creativity
and good financial sense will be encouraged.
Partnerships will be promoted. Transportation
solutions for each transportation hub can range
from monorails to local mini-bus systems to new
technologies. Fresh thinking will be rewarded.
The new, localized transit programs will bring
competition to local transportation planning,
creating a marketplace of transportation ideas where
the best ideas emerge and compete for funding. The
plan is to encourage civic entrepreneurship and
stimulate private involvement and investment.
Transit Investment Criteria
The guiding principles for all transit investments
are value, safety , convenience and reliability . Each
local transit vision will be evaluated against clear
criteria, such as congestion relief, cost-effectiveness, readiness, connectivity , and a sound operating plan.
In terms of bus services, more specialized transit
services, including improved van services and
reduced fares for senior citizens and people with
disabilities, will be provided. Safety at key bus stops will be improved. And a network of community
-
based, mini-bus services will be developed in
areas outside of the central county rail corridor.
20 21
Pacific Electric right-of-way
Laguna Niguel
Mission Viejo Station
San Juan Capistrano
Station
San Clemente Station
Irvine Transportation
Center
Tustin Station
Santa Ana Depot
Orange Station
Anaheim Canyon Station
Anaheim Station
Buena Park Station
Fullerton Station
Orange County Transit Projects
High Frequency Metrolink Service
( = existing rail line/stations)
page 23
Transit Extensions to Metrolink
page 23
Metrolink Gateways
(not mapped)
page 24
Expand Mobility Choices for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities (countywide; not mapped)
page 24
Community Based Transit/Circulators
(countywide; not mapped)
page 25
Safe Transit Stops
(countywide; not mapped)
page 25
W
V
U
T
S
R
22 Transit Projects
Project
High Frequency Metrolink Service
Description:
This project will increase rail services within the
county and provide frequent Metrolink service north
of Fullerton to Los Angeles. The project will provide
for track improvements, more trains, and other
related needs to accommodate the expanded service.
This project is designed to build on the successes
of Metrolink and complement service expansion
made possible by the current Measure M. The
service will include upgraded stations and
added parking capacity; safety improvements
and quiet zones along the tracks; and frequent
shuttle service and other means, to move
arriving passengers to nearby destinations.
The project also includes funding for
improving grade crossings and constructing
over or underpasses at high volume arterial
streets that cross the Metrolink tracks.
Cost:
The estimated cost of capital and
operations is $1,129.8 million.
Project
Transit Extensions to Metrolink
Description:
Frequent service in the Metrolink corridor provides
a high capacity transit system linking communities
within the central core of Orange County . This
project will establish a competitive program for local
jurisdictions to broaden the reach of the rail system
to other activity centers and communities. Proposals
for extensions must be developed and supported
by local jurisdictions and will be evaluated against
well-defined and well-known criteria as follows:
•
Traffic congestion relief
•
Project readiness, with priority given
to projects that can be implemented
within the first five years of the Plan
•
Local funding commitments and
the availability of right-of-way
•
Proven ability to attract other financial
partners, both public and private
•
Cost-effectiveness
•
Proximity to jobs and population centers
•
Regional as well as local benefits
•
Ease and simplicity of connections
•
Compatible, approved land uses
•
Safe and modern technology
•
A sound, long-term operating plan
This project shall not be used to fund transit
routes that are not directly connected to or that
would be redundant to the core rail service on
the Metrolink corridor. The emphasis shall be
on expanding access to the core rail system and
on establishing connections to communities and
major activity centers that are not immediately
adjacent to the Metrolink corridor. It is intended
that multiple transit projects be funded through
High Frequency Metrolink Service
Transit Extensions to Metrolink
R
S
R
E
N
E
W
E
D
22 23
Project R cost estimate amended on December 14, 2015.
a competitive process and no single project may
be awarded all of the funds under this program.
These connections may include a variety of
transit technologies such as conventional bus,
bus rapid transit or high capacity rail transit
systems as long as they can be fully integrated
and provide seamless transition for the users.
Cost:
The estimated cost to implement this program
over thirty years is $1,000.0 million.
Project
Convert Metrolink Station(s) to Regional
Gateways that Connect Orange County
with High-Speed Rail Systems
Description:
This program will provide the local improvements
that are necessary to connect planned
future high-speed rail systems to stations
on the Orange County Metrolink route.
The State of California is currently planning a
high-speed rail system linking northern and
southern California. One line is planned to
terminate in Orange County . In addition, several
magnetic levitation (MAGLEV) systems that
would connect Orange County to Los Angeles
and San Bernardino Counties, including a link
from Anaheim to Ontario airport, are also being
planned or proposed by other agencies.
Cost:
The estimated Measure M share of the cost for these
regional centers and connections is $57.9 million.
Project
Expand Mobility Choices for Seniors
and Persons with Disabilities
Description:
This project will provide services and programs
to meet the growing transportation needs of
seniors and persons with disabilities as follows:
•
One and forty-seven hundredths percent
(1.47%) of net revenues will stabilize
fares and provide fare discounts for
bus services, specialized ACCESS
services and future rail services
•
One percent of net revenues will be
available to continue and expand local
community van service for seniors through
the existing Senior Mobility Program
•
One percent will supplement existing
countywide senior non-emergency
medical transportation services
Over the next 30 years, the population age 65
and over is projected to increase by 93 percent.
Demand for transit and specialized transportation
services for seniors and persons with disabilities
is expected to increase proportionately .
Cost:
The estimated cost to provide these programs
over 30 years is $392.8 million.
Transit Projects
T
Metrolink Gateways
Expand Mobility Choices for Seniors
and Persons with Disabilities
U
R
E
N
E
W
E
D
24 Project T and U cost estimates amended on December 14, 2015.
R
E
N
E
W
E
D
Transit Projects
V
Community Based Transit/Circulators
Safe Transit Stops
W
Project
Community Based Transit/Circulators
Description:
This project will establish a competitive program
for local jurisdictions to develop local bus transit
services such as community based circulators,
shuttles and bus trolleys that complement regional
bus and rail services, and meet needs in areas not
adequately served by regional transit. Projects will
need to meet performance criteria for ridership,
connection to bus and rail services, and financial
viability to be considered for funding. All projects
must be competitively bid, and they cannot
duplicate or compete with existing transit services.
Cost:
The estimated cost of this project is $226.5 million.
Project
Safe Transit Stops
Description:
This project provides for passenger amenities at
100 busiest transit stops across the County . The
stops will be designed to ease transfer between
bus lines and provide passenger amenities
such as improved shelters, lighting, current
information on bus and train timetables and arrival
times, and transit ticket vending machines.
Cost:
The estimated cost of this project is $25.0 million.
24 25
Every day , more than 70 million gallons of oily
pollution, litter, and dirty contamination washes
off streets, roads and freeways and pours onto
Orange County waterways and beaches. When
it rains, the transportation-generated pollution
increases tenfold, contributing to the increasing
number of beach closures and environmental
hazards along the Orange County coast.
Prior to allocation of funds for freeway , street and
transit projects, two percent of gross revenues
from the Renewed Measure M Transportation
Investment Plan is set aside to protect Orange
County beaches from transportation-generated
pollution (sometimes called “urban runoff”)
and improving ocean water quality .
Countywide Competitive Program
Measure M Environmental Cleanup funds will
be used on a countywide, competitive basis
to meet federal Clean Water Act standards for
controlling transportation-generated pollution by
funding nationally recognized Best Management
Practices, such as catch basins with state-of
-
the-art biofiltration systems; or special roadside
landscaping systems called bioswales that filter
oil runoff from streets, roads and freeways.
The environmental cleanup program is designed to
supplement, not supplant, existing transportation
-
related water quality programs. This clean-up
program must improve, and not replace, existing
pollution reduction efforts by cities, the county ,
and special districts. Funds will be awarded
to the highest priority programs that improve
water quality , keep our beaches and streets clean,
and reduce transportation-generated pollution
along Orange County’s scenic coastline.
Environmental
Cleanup Overview
R
E
N
E
W
E
D
26 X
Project
Environmental Cleanup
Description:
Implement street and highway related water
quality improvement programs and projects that
will assist Orange County cities, the County
of Orange and special districts to meet federal
Clean Water Act standards for urban runoff.
The Environmental Cleanup monies may be used for
water quality improvements related to both existing
and new transportation infrastructure, including
capital and operations improvements such as:
•
Catch basin screens, filters and inserts
•
Roadside bioswales and biofiltration channels
•
Wetlands protection and restoration
•
Continuous Deflective Separation (CDS) units
•
Maintenance of catch basins and bioswales
•
Other street-related “Best Management Practices”
for capturing and treating urban runoff
This program is intended to augment, not replace
existing transportation related water quality
expenditures and to emphasize high-impact
capital improvements over local operations and
maintenance costs. In addition, all new freeway ,
street and transit capital projects will include water
quality mitigation as part of project scope and cost.
The Environmental Cleanup program is
subject to the following requirements:
•
Development of a comprehensive countywide
capital improvement program for transportation
related water quality improvements
•
A competitive grant process to award funds to
the highest priority , most cost-effective projects
•
A matching requirement to leverage
other federal, state and local funds
for water quality improvements
•
A maintenance of effort requirement to
ensure that funds augment, not replace
existing water quality programs
•
Annual reporting on actual expenditures and an
assessment of the water quality benefits provided
•
A strict limit on administrative costs
and a requirement to spend funds
within three years of receipt
•
Penalties for misuse of any of the
Environmental Cleanup funds
Cost:
The estimated cost for the Environmental Cleanup
program is $237.2 million. In addition it is
estimated that new freeway , road and transit projects
funded by the Renewed Measure M Transportation
Investment Plan will include more than $165
million for mitigating water quality impacts.
R
E
N
E
W
E
D
26 27
Environmental Cleanup
R
E
N
E
W
E
D
When new transportation dollars are approved,
they should go for transportation and transportation
alone. No bait-and-switch. No using transportation
dollars for other purposes. The original
Measure M went solely for transportation. The
Renewed Measure M will be just as airtight.
And there will be no hidden costs in the program.
Prior to allocation of funds for freeway , street and
transit projects, one percent of gross revenues from
the Renewed Measure M Transportation Investment
Plans is set aside for audits, safeguards, and taxpayer protection. By state law, one and one half percent of
the gross sales taxes generated by Measure M must be
paid to the California State Board of Equalization for
collecting the countywide one-half percent sales tax
that funds the Transportation Investment Program.
Special Trust Fund
To guarantee transportation dollars are used for
transportation purposes, all funds must be kept in
a special trust fund. An independent, outside audit
of this fund will protect against cheaters who try to
use the transportation funds for purposes other than
specified transportation uses. A severe punishment
will disqualify any agency that cheats from
receiving Measure M funds for a five-year period.
The annual audits, and annual reports detailing
project progress, will be sent to Orange County
taxpayers every year and will be reviewed in
public session by a special Taxpayer Oversight
Committee that can raise fiscal issues, ask
tough questions, and must independently
certify , on an annual basis, that transportation
dollars have been spent strictly according to
the Renewed Measure M Investment Plan.
Back to the Voters
Of course, over the next 30 years, things will change.
Minor adjustments can be made by a 2/3 vote of the
Taxpayer Oversight Committee and a 2/3 vote of
the Orange County Local Transportation Authority
Board of Directors. Major changes must be taken
back to voters for authorization. And, every ten
years, and more frequently if necessary , the Orange
County Local Transportation Authority must
conduct a thorough examination of the Renewed
Measure M Investment Plan and determine if
major changes should be submitted to the voters.
There are other important taxpayer safeguards,
all designed to insure the integrity of the voter
-
authorized plans. But each is focused on one
goal: guaranteeing that new transportation
dollars are devoted to solving Orange County’s
traffic problems and that no transportation
dollars are diverted to anything else.
Taxpayer Safeguards
and Audits Overview
R
E
N
E
W
E
D
28 Taxpayer Safeguards and Audits
Description:
Implement and maintain strict taxpayer
safeguards to ensure that the Renewed Measure
M Transportation Investment Plan is delivered
as promised. Restrict administrative costs to
one percent (1%) of total tax revenues and state
collection of the tax as prescribed in state law
[currently one-and-one-half (1.5%) percent].
Administration of the Transportation Investment
Plan and all spending is subject to the following
specific safeguards and requirements:
Oversight
•
All spending is subject to an
annual independent audit
•
Spending decisions must be annually
reviewed and certified by an independent
Taxpayer Oversight Committee
•
An annual report on spending and
progress in implementing the Plan
must be submitted to taxpayers
Integrity of the Plan
•
No changes to the Plan can be made
without review and approval by 2/3 vote
of the Taxpayer Oversight Committee
•
Major changes to the Plan such as deleting
a project or shifting projects among major
spending categories (Freeways, Streets &
Roads, Transit, Environmental Cleanup)
must be ratified by a majority of voters
•
The Plan must be subject at least every ten
years to public review and assessment of
progress in delivery , public support and
changed circumstances. Any significant
proposed changes to the Plan must be approved
by the Taxpayer Oversight Committee
and ratified by a majority of voters.
Fund Accounting
•
All tax revenues and interest earned must be
deposited and maintained in a separate trust
fund. Local jurisdictions that receive allocations
must also maintain them in a separate fund.
•
All entities receiving tax funds must
report annually on expenditures and
progress in implementing projects
•
At any time, at its discretion, the Taxpayer
Oversight Committee may conduct independent
reviews or audits of the spending of tax funds
•
The elected Auditor/Controller of Orange
County must annually certify that spending
is in accordance with the Plan
Spending Requirements
•
Local jurisdictions receiving funds must
abide by specific eligibility and spending
requirements detailed in the Streets & Roads and
Environmental Cleanup components of the Plan
•
Funds must be used only for transportation
purposes described in the Plan. The penalty
for misspending is full repayment and loss of
funding eligibility for a period of five years.
•
No funds may be used to replace
private developer funding committed
to any project or improvement
•
Funds shall augment, not replace existing funds
•
Every effort shall be made to maximize matching
state and federal transportation dollars
R
E
N
E
W
E
D
28 29
Taxpayer Safeguards and Audits
R
E
N
E
W
E
D
Taxpayer Oversight Committee
•
The committee shall consist of eleven
members
—
two members from each of the five
Board of Supervisor’s districts, who shall not be
elected or appointed officials
—
along with the
elected Auditor/Controller of Orange County
•
Members shall be recruited and screened for
expertise and experience by the Orange County
Grand Jurors Association. Members shall be
selected from the qualified pool by lottery .
•
The committee shall be provided with
sufficient resources to conduct independent
reviews and audits of spending and
implementation of the Plan
Collecting the Tax
•
The State Board of Equalization shall be paid
one-and-one-half (1.5) percent of gross revenues
each fiscal year for its services in collecting
sales tax revenue as prescribed in Section 7273
of the State’s Revenue and Taxation Code
Cost:
The estimated cost for Safeguards and Audits
over thirty years is $296.6 million.
30 Taxpayer Safeguards and Audits
R
E
N
E
W
E
D
I-5
Santa Ana Freeway Interchange Improvements
$470.0
I-5
Santa Ana/San Diego Freeway Improvements
1,185.2
SR-22
Garden Grove Freeway Access Improvements
120.0
SR-55
Costa Mesa Freeway Improvements
366.0
SR-57
Orange Freeway Improvements
258.7
SR-91
Riverside Freeway Improvements
908.7*
I-405
San Diego Freeway Improvements
1,392.5*
I-605
Freeway Access Improvements
20.0 All
Freeway Service Patrol
150.0
Regional Capacity Program
$1,132.8
Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program
453.1
Local Fair Share Program
2,039.1
High Frequency Metrolink Service
$1,129.8*
Transit Extensions to Metrolink
1,000.0
Metrolink Gateways
57.9*
Expand Mobility Choices for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities 392.8*
Community Based Transit/Circulators
226.5
Safe Transit Stops
25.0 Clean Up Highway and Street Runoff that Pollutes Beaches $237.2
Collect Sales Taxes (State charges required by law)
$178.0
Oversight and Annual Audits
118.6
Measure M
Investment Summary
Streets & Roads Projects
(in millions)
$3,625.0
Environmental Cleanup
(in millions)
$237.2
Transit Projects
(in millions)
$2,832.0
Taxpayer Safeguards and Audits
(in millions)
$296.6
A
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
X
S
T
U
V
W
Total
(2005 dollars in millions)
$11,861.9
2005 estimates
in millions
Freeway Projects
(in millions)
$4,871.1
COSTS
PROJECTS
LOCATION
R
B
C
D
30 31
*Asterisk notes project estimates that have been amended since 2006.
214007.11
B
-
1 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 ATT
ACHMENT B
ALLOCATION
OF
NET
REVENUES
I.
DEFINITIONS.
For purposes of th
e
Ordinance
the following words shall mean as stated.
A.
“
Capital Improvement
Program”:
a multi
-
year
-
year funding plan to
implement
capital
transportation projects and/or progr
ams, including but not limited to
capacity, safety, operations, maintenance, and rehabilitation projects.
B.
“Circulation Element”:
an element of an Eligible Jurisdiction’s General
Plan depicting planned roadways and related policies
,
including consiste
ncy with the
MPAH.
C
.
“Congestion Management Program”:
a program
established in 1990
(California Government Code 65089),
f
or effective use of transportation funds to alleviate
traffic congestion and related impacts through a balanced transportation and land use
planning process.
D
.
“E
ligible Jurisdiction
”
:
a city in
Orange County or
t
he County
of
Orange
,
which satisfies the
requirements of Section II
I
A
.
E
.
“Encumbrance”
:
the execution of a contract or other action to be
funded by Net Revenues.
F
.
“Environmental Cleanup”:
street, highway, freeway and transit related
water quality improvement programs and projects as described in the Plan.
G
.
“Environmental Cleanup Revenues
”
:
Two percent (2%) of the
Revenues
allocated annually
plus interest and
other earnings on the allocated revenues,
which shall be maintained in a separate account.
H
.
“Expenditure Report”:
a detailed financial report to account for receipt
,
interest earned and
use of Measure M and other funds consistent with requirements of the
Ordinance.
I
.
“Freeway Project”
:
the planning, design, construction, improvement,
214007.11
B
-
2 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 operation or maintenance necessary for, incidental to, or convenient for a state or interstate freeway.
J
“Local Fair Share Program”:
a formula
-
based allocation to
Eligible
Jurisdictions for Street and Road Projects
as described in the Plan
.
K.
“Local Traffic Signal Synchronization Plan”:
identification of traffic
signal synchronization
street routes and
traffic
signals within a jurisdiction.
L
.
“Master Plan of
Arterial Highways
(MPAH)
”:
a
countywide
transportation plan
administered by the
Authority
defining
the ultimate number of through
lanes for arterial streets
,
and
designating
the
traffic
signal synchronization
street
routes
in
Orange County.
M
.
“Net Rev
enues”:
The remaining Revenues after the deduction for: (i)
amounts payable to the State Board of Equalization for the performance of functions incidental to the administration and operation of the Ordinance, (ii) costs for the administration of the Ordi
nance
,
(iii) two percent (2%)
of the Revenues annually allocated
for Environmental Cleanup
,
and (iv) satisfaction of debt service requirements of all bonds issued pursuant to the Ordinance that are
not
satisfied out of separate allocations
.
N
.
“Pavement
Management P
lan
”:
a
plan
to manage the preservation,
rehabilitation, and maintenance of paved road
s
by analyzing pavement life cycles,
assess
ing
overall system performance and costs, and determin
ing
alternative strategies
and costs necessary to
improve pa
ved roads
.
O
.
“Permit Streamlining”
: commitments by state and federal agencies to
reduce project delays associated with permitting of freeway projects
through development
of a comprehensive conservation strategy early in the planning process and the per mitting
of multiple projects with a single comprehensive conservation strategy.
P
.
“Programmatic Mitigation”
:
permanent protection of areas of high
ecological value,
and
associated
restoration,
management
and
monitoring, to
comprehensively compensate fo
r numerous, smaller impacts associated with individual
transportation projects. Continued function of existing mitigation features, such as wildlife 214007.11
B
-
3 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 passages, is not included.
Q.
“Project Final Report”:
certification of completion of a project funded
w
ith Net Revenues, description of work performed, and accounting of Net Revenues expended and interest earned on Net Revenues
allocated for the project
.
R
.
“Regional Capacity Program”:
capital improvement project
s
to
increase roadway capacity and
improve
roadway
operation as described in the Plan.
S
.
“Regional Traffic Signal
Synchronization
Program”:
competitive capital
and operations funding for the coordination of traffic signals across jurisdictional boundaries as
included
in the Traffic Signal Sync
hronization Master Plan
and as described in the Plan.
T
.
“Revenues”:
All gross revenues generated from the transactions and
use tax of one
-
half of one percent (1/2%) plus any interest or other earnings thereon.
U
.
“State Board of Equalization”:
agen
cy of the State of
California
responsible for the administration of sales
and use
taxes.
V
.
“
Street and Road Project
”
: t
he
planning,
design,
construction,
improvement, operation or maintenance necessary for, incidental to, or convenient for a
street or
r
o
ad, or f
or any transportation purpose,
including
,
but not
limited to, purposes
auth
orized
by Article XIX of the California Constitution
.
W
.
“Traffic Forums”:
a group of Eligible Jurisdictions working together to
facilitate the planning of traffic sign
al synchronization among the respective jurisdictions
.
X
.
“
Traffic
Signal Synchronization Master Plan”:
an element of the
MPAH to promote smooth traffic flow through synchronization of traffic signals along designated street
routes in the County
.
Y
.
“
Transit
”
:
the transportation of passengers by bus, rail, fixed guideway or
other
vehicle.
Z
.
“Transit Project
”
: t
he
planning, design, construction, improvement,
equipment, operation or maintenance necessary for, or incidental to, or convenient for tra
nsit facilities or transit services.
AA
.
“Watershed Management Areas”:
areas to be established by the
214007.11
B
-
4 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 County of Orange
, in cooperation with local jurisdictions, or by another public entity with appropriate legal authority,
for the management of water ru
n
-
off
related to existing or new
transportation projects.
II.
REQUIREMENTS
.
The Authority may allocate Net Revenues to the State of California, an Eligible Jurisdiction
,
or the Authority for any project, program or purpose as authorized by the
Ordinanc
e
,
and the
allocation of
Net
Revenues by the Authority shall be subject to the
following requirements:
A.
Fr
eeway
Projects
1. The Authority shall make every effort to
maximize state and
federal funding
for Freeway Projects.
No
Net
Revenues shall be a
lloca
ted in any year to
any Freeway
Project if the Authority has made findings at a public meeting that the state
or
the federal government
has reduced any all
ocations of state funds
or federal funds
to the
Authority
as the result of the addition of any
Ne
t
Revenues.
2. All
Freeway Projects
funded with
Net
Revenues, including
project development and overall project management, shall be a joint responsibility of Caltrans, the Authority, and the affected jurisdiction(s). All major approval actions ,
includ
ing the project concept, the project location, and any subsequent change in project scope shall be jointly agreed upon by Caltrans, the Authority, and the project sponsors, and where appropriate, by the Federal Highway Administration and/or the California Transportation Commission.
3 .
Prior to
the allocation of
Net
Revenues for a Freeway Project,
the Authority shall obtain written assurances from the appropriate state agency that after
the
Freeway
Project is constructed to at least minimum acceptable sta te standards, the
state shall be
responsible for the maintenance and operation of such
Freeway
Project.
4. Freeway Projects
will be built largely within existing rights of
way using the latest highway design and safety requirements. However, to the gre atest
extent possible within the available budget,
Freeway P
rojects shall be implemented using
214007.11
B
-
5 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 Context Sensitive Design, as described in the nationally recognized Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Princ
i
ples of Context Sensitive Design
Standards.
Free
way
Projects will be p
l
a
nned, designed and constru
cted using a flexible community
-
responsive
and coll
aborative approach to balance aesthetic, historic and environmental values with transportation safety, mobility, maintenance and performance goals. Contex t Sensitive
Design features include
:
parkway
-
style designs; environmentally friendly, locally native landscaping; sound reduction; improved wildlife passage and aesthetic treatments, design s
and themes that are in harmony with the surrounding communities.
5. At least five percent
(5%)
of the
Net Revenues allocated for
Freeway Projects
shall
fund
P
rogrammatic
M
itigation
for
Freeway P
rojects. These funds
shall be derived by pooling funds from the mi
tigation budgets of individual F
reeway
Projects
, and shal
l only be allocated subject to the following:
a.
Development of a Master Environmental Mitigation and
Resource
Protection Plan and Agreement (Master Agreement)
between the Authority and
state and federal resource agencies
that
includes
:
(i)
c
ommitments
by the Authority to provide for
programmatic environmental mitigation of the
F
reeway
P
rojects,
(ii)
c
ommitments by state and federal resource
agencies to reduce project delays associated with permitting and streamline the permit
process for Freeway P
rojects,
(iii)
a
n accounting process for mitigation obligations
and credits that will document net environmental benefit from regional, programmatic mitigation in exchange for net benefit in the delivery of transportation improvements through streamli
ned and
timely approvals and permitting, and
(iv)
a
description of the specific mitigation actions and
expenditures to be undertaken and a phasing, implementation and maintenance plan. (v)
appointment by the Authority of a Mitigation and
Resource
Protection
Program
Oversight
Committee
(“Environmental
Oversight
214007.11
B
-
6 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 Committee”) to make recommendations
to the Authority
on the allocation of the Net
Revenues
for programmatic mitigation
,
and to monitor implementation of the Master
Agreement. The Environmen
tal Oversight Committee shall consist of no more than twelve members and be comprised of representatives of the Authority, Caltrans, state and federal resource agencies, non
-
governmental environmental organizations, the public and the Taxpayers Oversight C
ommittee.
b.
A
Master Agreement shall be developed as soon as
practicable following the approval of the ballot proposition by the electors.
It is the intent of
the Authority and state and federal resource agencies to develop a Master Agreement prior t
o the implementation of Freeway Projects.
c
.
Expenditures
of Net Revenues
made subject to a Master
Agreement shall be considered a Freeway Project and may be funded from the proceeds of bonds issued subject to Section 5 of
the
Ordinance.
B.
Transit
Projects
1. The Authority shall make every effort to maximize state and federal funding for Transit Projects. No Net Revenues shall be allocated in any year for any Transit Project if the Authority has made findings at a public meeting that the state or
the federal government has reduced any allocations of state funds or federal funds to the Authority as the result of the addition of any Revenues.
2. Prior to the allocation of Net Revenues for a Transit Project, the Authority shall obtain
a
written
agreement
from the appropriate
jurisdiction
that the Transit
Project will be constructed, operated and maintained to minimum standards acceptable to the Authority.
C.
Street and Road Projects
Prior to the allocation of
Net
Revenues for any Street
and
Road
Project, the Authority, in cooperation with affected agencies, shall determine the entity(ies) to be responsible for the maintenance and operation thereof. ///
214007.11
B
-
7 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 III.
REQUIREMENTS FOR ELIGIBLE JURISDICTIONS.
A.
In
order to be eligible to re
ceive
Net
R
evenues, a
jurisdiction s
hall
satisfy
and continue to satisfy
the following requirements.
1. Congestion
Management Program.
Comply with the conditions
and requirements of the O
range County
Congestion Management Program (CMP)
pursuant to the
provisions
of Government Code Section 65089
.
2. Mitigation Fee Program. Assess traffic impacts
of new
development and require
new development to pay a fair share of necessary transportation improvements attributable to the new development.
3 .
Circulation
Eleme
nt
. Adopt a
nd maintain a
Cir
cu
lation
Element
of the jurisdiction’s General Plan consistent with the MPAH. 4 .
Capital Improvement Program. Adopt
and update biennially
a
six
-
year Capital Improvement Program (CIP).
The CIP
shall include all
capital
tran
sportation projects, includ
ing projects funded by
Net
Revenues, and
shall include
transportation projects required to demonstrate compliance with signal synchronization and pavement management requirements.
5 .
Traffic Forums.
Participate in
T
raffic
F
orum
s to
facilitate the
planning
of traffic
signal synchronization
program
s
and projects
.
Eligible
J
urisdictions
and
Caltrans,
in
participation with
the
County of Orange and the
Orange County Division of League of
Cities, will establish the boundaries for
T
r
affic
F
orums.
The following will be considered
when establishing boundaries:
a.
Regional traffic routes and traffic patterns;
b.
Inter
-
jurisdictional coordination efforts; and
c.
Total number of T
raffic
F
orums.
6. Local Traffic Signal Synchronization Pl
an. Adopt and maintain a
Local Traffic Signal Synchronization Plan which shall identify traffic signal synchronization street routes and
traffic
signals; include a three
-
year plan showing costs, available funding
214007.11
B
-
8 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 and phasing of capital, operations and
ma
i
ntenance of the street routes and
traffic
signals;
and inc
l
ude information on how the street routes and
traffic
signals may be synchronized
with traffic signals on the street routes in adjoining jurisdictions. The Local Traffic Signal Synchronization Plan
shall be consistent with the Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan.
7 .
Pavement Management Plan. A
dopt a
nd update biennially a
Pavement Management Plan
, and issue
,
using
a
common format
approved by the
Authority, a
report every two years regarding t
he
status of
road
pavement conditions and
implementation of
the Pavement Management Plan.
a.
Authority, in consultation with the
Eligible J
urisdictions,
shall define a countywide
management method
to inventory, analyze and evaluate road
pavement conditions
, and a
common
method to measure improvement of road pavement
conditions
.
b.
The
Pavement Management Plan shall be based on
:
either
the Authori
ty’s countywide pavement
management method
or a
comparable
management method
approved by the Authority
,
and
the A
uthority’s method to measure
improvement of road pavement conditions.
c.
The Pavement Management Plan shall include:
(i)
Current status of pavement on
roads
;
(ii)
A
six
-
year plan for
road
maintenance and
rehabilitation, inc
luding projects and funding;
(iii
)
The projected
road
pavement conditions
resulting
from
the main
tenance and rehabilitation plan; and
(iv)
Alternative strategies and costs necessary to
improve road pavement conditions.
8 .
Expenditure Report.
Adopt
an annual Expenditure Report to
account
for
Net
Revenues,
d
eveloper/
t
raffic
i
mpact
f
ees, and funds expended by the
Eligible J
urisdiction
which satisfy the Maintenance of Effort requirements
.
The Expenditure
214007.11
B
-
9 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 Report shall
be submitted by
the end of
six (6) months following the end of the
jurisdic
tion’s
fiscal year
and
include the following:
a.
All
Net Revenue
fund balances
and interest earned
.
b.
E
xpenditures
identified by type (i.e., capital, operations,
administration, etc.),
and program or project
.
9 .
Project Final Report. Provide Authority
with a
Project Final
Report
with
in
six months following completion of a project funded with Net Revenues. 10 .
Time Limits f
or Use of
Net
Revenues.
a.
Agree that Net Revenues for Regional Capacity Program
projects and Regional Traffic Signal Synch
ronization Program projects shall be expended
or encumbered no later than the end of the fiscal year for which the Net Revenues are programmed
. A request for extension of the encumbrance deadline for no more than twenty
-
four months may be submitted to the
Authority no less than ninety days prior to the
deadline. The Authority may approve one or more requests for extension of the encumbrance deadline.
b.
Agree that Net Revenues allocated for any program or
project, other than a Regional Capacity Program
project or a Regional Traffic Signal
Synchronization Program project, shall be expended or encumbered within three years of receipt. The Authority may grant an extension to the three -
year limit, but extensions shall
not be granted beyond a total of five
years from the date of the initial funding allocation.
c.
In the event the time limits for use of
N
et Revenues are
not satisfied then any retained Net Revenues that were allocated to an Eligible Jurisdiction and interest earned thereon shall be returned
to the Authority and these Net Revenues and
interest earned thereon shall be available for allocation to any project within the same source program.
1 1
.
Maintenance of Effort.
Annual certification that
the Maintenance
of Effort
requirements of Section 6
of
the
Ordinance
have been satisfied
.
12 .
No
Supplanting
of
Funds. Agree t
hat
Net
Revenues shall not be
214007.11
B
-
10 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 used to supplant
developer funding which has been or will be committed for any transportation project
.
1 3
.
Consider, as part of
the Eligible Jurisdicti
on’s
General Plan, land
use planning strategies that accommodate transit and non -
motorized transportation.
B
.
Determination of Non
-
Eligibility
A determination of non
-
eligibility
of a jurisdiction
shall be made only
after a hearing has been conducted and
a determination has been
made
by the Authority’s
Board of Directors that the
jurisdiction
is not an Eligible Jurisdiction as provided
hereinabove.
IV
.
ALLOCATION OF
NET
REVENUES
; GENERAL PROVISIONS
.
A.
Subject to the provisions of the Ordinance
, includ
ing
Section II above,
use of the
Revenues shall be
a
s follows:
1. First, the Authority shall pay the State Board of Equalization for the services and functions
;
2. Second, the Authority shall pay the administration expenses of the Authority
;
3. T
hird, the Authority shall satisfy the annual allocation requirement of two percent
(2%)
of Revenues for Envir
o
nmental Cleanup
; and
4. Fourth, the Authority shall satisfy the debt service requirements of all bonds issued pursuant to the Ordinance that
ar
e
not satisfied out of separate
allocations.
B.
After providing for the
use of Revenues
described in Section A above,
and subject to the a
veraging provisions of Section
D
below
, the Authority shall allocate the
Net
Revenues as follows:
1. Forty
-
three
percent (
43%
)
for
Freeway Projects;
2. Thirty
-
two percent (
32%
)
for
Street and Road Projects; and
3. Twenty
-
five percent (
25%
)
for
Transit Projects.
C.
The
allocation of
thirty
-
two percent (
32%
)
of
the
Net Revenues
for
214007.11
B
-
11 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 Street and Road Projects
purs
uant to Section B
2 above shall be made as follows
:
1. Ten percent (
10%
)
of the Net Revenues shall be allocated
for
Regional Capacity Program projects;
2. Four percent (
4%
)
of the Net Revenues shall be allocated
for
Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization
Program
projects
; and
3. Eighteen percent (
18%
)
of the Net Revenues shall be allocated
for Local
Fair Share
Program projects.
D
.
In any given year, except for the allocations
for Local
Fair Share
Program projects
,
the Authority may allocate Net Revenues on
a different percentage basis
than required by Sections B and C above in order to meet short -
term needs and to
maximize efforts to capture state, federal, or private transportation dollars, provided the percentage allocations set forth in Sections B and C
above shall be achieved during the
duration
of the Ordinance.
E
.
The Authority shall
allocate
Net Revenues for programs
and projects
as necessary to meet contractual
,
program
or project
obligations, and the Authority may
withhold
allocations
until needed
to meet contractual
,
program
or project
obligations, except
that Net Revenues allocated for
the
Local
Fair Share
Program pursuant to Section
C above
shall be paid to Eligible Jurisdictions within sixty days of receipt by the Authority.
F
.
The Authority
may exchange Net Revenues from a Plan funding
category for federal, state or other local funds allocated to any public agency within or outside the area of jurisdiction to maximize the effectiveness of the Plan .
The Authority and
the exchanging public age
ncy must use the exchanged funds for the same program or project authorized for the use of the funds prior to the exchange.
Such federal, state or
local funds
received by the Authority
shall be allocated
by the Authority
to the same
Plan
funding category
that was the source of the exchanged Net Revenues, provided, however, in no event shall an exchange reduce the Net Revenues allocated for Programmatic Mitigation of Freeway Projects
.
G
.
If additional funds become available for a specific project or pro gr
am
214007.11
B
-
12 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 described in the Plan, the Authority may allocate the Net Revenues replaced by the receipt of those additional funds, in the following order of priority: first, to Plan projects and programs which provide congestion relief in the geographic region whic h received the
additional funds; second, to other projects and programs within the affected geographic region which may be placed in the Plan through an amendment to the Ordinance; and third, to all other Plan projects
and programs
.
H.
Upon review and ac
ceptance of the
Project Final Report
, the Authority
shall
allocate
the balance of
Net Revenues
for the project
, less the interest earned on the
Net Revenues allocated for the project
.
V.
ALLOCATION
OF
NET
REVENUES;
STREETS AND ROADS
PROGRAMS/
PROJECTS
A
.
Regional Capacity Program.
1. Matching Funds
.
An Eligible Jurisdiction
shall contribute local
matching funds equal to
fifty percent (
50%
)
of the project
or program
cost. This local match
requirement may be reduced as follows:
a.
A local match reducti
on of
ten percent (
10%
)
of the
eligible
cost
if
the Eligible J
urisdiction
implement
s
, maint
ains
and operat
es
in conformance
with
the
Traffic Signal Synchronization
Master
Plan
.
b.
A local match reduction of
ten percent (
10%
)
of the
eligible
cost
if
the Eli
gible J
urisdiction
either:
(i)
h
as measurable improvement of paved road
conditions during the previous
reporting period
as determined pursuant to the
Authority’s
method
of
measuring improvement of road pavement conditions, or
(ii)
has road pavement condi
tions during the previous
reporting period which are within the highest
twenty percent of the scale
for road pavement
conditions as determined pursuant to the Authority’s method of measuring improvement of road pavement conditions
.
c.
A local match reduct
ion of
five percent (
5%
)
of the
214007.11
B
-
13 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 eligible
cost
if
the Eligible J
urisdiction does not
use any Net Revenues as part of the funds
for the local match.
2 .
Allocations
shall be determined pursuant to a countywide
competitive procedure adopted by the Authority.
Eligible Jurisdictions shall be consulted by
t
he Authority
in establishing
criteria for determining priority for allocations.
B
.
Regional
Traffic Signal Synchronization
Program
.
1. Traffic Signal Synchronization Master Plan
.
The Authority shall a
dopt and maintain a Traffic Signal
Synchronization
Master
Plan, which shall be a part of the Master Plan of Arterial Highways.
The Traffic Signal Synchronization
Master
Plan shall include traffic signal synchronization
street
routes and
traffic
signals
wi
thin and across jurisdictional boundaries
,
and the means
of implementing,
operating and maintaining the programs and projects
, including necessary
governance and legal arrangements
.
2. Allocations.
a.
Allocations shall be determined pursuant to a countyw
ide
competitive procedure adopted by the Authority.
Eligible Jurisdictions shall be consulted by
the Authority in establishing criteria for
determining priority for allocations.
b.
The
Authority shall give priority to
programs and projects
which include t
wo or more jurisdictions
.
c.
The Authority shall encourage
the
State to participate in
the
Regional Traffic
Signal Synchronization Program and Authority shall give priority to use of transportation funds as match for
the
State’s discretionary funds
used fo
r
implementing
the
Regional Traffic
Signal Synchronization Program.
3. An Eligible Jurisdiction shall contribute matching local funds equal to twenty percent
(20%)
of the project or program cost. The requirement for
matching local funds may be satisfied
all or in part with
in
-
kind services provided by the
Eligible Jurisdiction for the program or project, including salaries and benefits for employees of the Eligible Jurisdiction who
perform
work on the project or programs.
214007.11
B
-
14 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 4
.
A
n Eligible Jurisdiction sh
all issue a report once every three
years regarding the status and performance of its traffic signal synchronization activities.
5. Not less than once every three years a
n Eligible Jurisdiction
shall review and
revise
,
as may be necessary
,
the timing of
traffic signals included as part
of the Traffic Signal Synchronization
Master
Plan.
6. An
Eligible
Jurisdiction
withdrawing
from
a
signal
synchronization project shall be required to return Net Revenues allocated for the project.
C.
Local
Fair
Share Pro
gram
.
The allocation of
eighteen percent (
18%
)
of the Net Revenues for
Local
Fair Share
Program projects
shall be
made
t
o
Eligible Jurisdiction
s
in amounts
determined as follows:
1. Fifty percent (
50%
)
divided between
Eligible Jurisdiction
s
based
on
the ratio of each Eligible Jurisdiction’s population for the immediately preceding calendar
year to the total County population (including incorporated and unincorporated areas ) for
the
immediately preceding calendar year, both as determined by the State
Department of
Finance;
2. Twenty
-
five percent (
25%
)
divided between
E
ligible Jurisdiction
s
based on the ratio of each Eligible Jurisdiction’s existing Master Plan of Arterial Highways (“MPAH”)
centerline
miles to the total e
xisting MPAH
centerline
miles
within the County as
determ
ined annually by the Authority;
and
3 .
Twenty
-
five percent (
25%
)
divided between
Eligible Jurisdiction
s
based on the ratio of each Eligible Jurisdiction’s total taxable sales to the
total taxable sales
of the C
o
unty
for the i
mmediately preceding calendar year as determined by
the State
Board of Equalization.
V
I
.
ALLOCATION OF NET REVENUES; TRANSIT PROGRAMS/PROJECTS
.
A
.
Transit Extensions to Metrolink.
1. The Authority may provide technical assistance, transportation plann
ing and engineering resources for an Eligible Jurisdiction to assist in designing Transit 214007.11
B
-
15 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 Extensions to Metrolink
projects
to
provide effective and user
-
friendly
connection
s
to
Metrolink services
and bus transit systems
.
2. To be eligible to receive Net
Revenues for Transit Extension to
Metrolink projects, an Eligible Jurisdiction must execute a written agreement with the Authority regarding the respective
roles and
responsibilities pertaining to construction,
ownership, operation and maintenance of the
T
ransit Extension to Metrolink project
.
3. Allocations of Net Revenues shall be determined pursuant to a countywide competitive procedure adopted by the Authority. This procedure shall include an evaluation process and methodology applied equally to all candidate Transit Extension
to Metrolink projects. Eligible Jurisdictions shall be consulted by the Authority in the development of the evaluation process and methodology.
B
.
Metrolink Gateways.
1. The Authority may provide technical assistance, tr
ansportation
planning and engineering resources for
an
Eligible Jurisdiction to assist in designing
Regional Transit Gateway facilities
to
provide for effective and user
-
friendly connections
to
the Metrolink system and other transit services.
2. To be el
igible to receive Net Revenues for Regional Gateway
projects, an Eligible Jurisdiction must execute a written agreement with the Authority regarding the respective roles and responsibilities pertaining to construction, ownership, operation and maintenance
of the Regional Gateway facility.
3. Allocations
of Net Revenues shall be determined pursuant to a
countywide competitive procedure adopted by the Authority. This procedure shall include an evaluation process and methodology applied equally to all candi date Regional Gateway
projects. Eligible Jurisdictions shall be consulted by the Authority in the development of the evaluation process and methodology.
C
.
Mobility Choices for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities.
1. An Eligible Jurisdiction may cont
ract with another entity to
perform all or part of a
Mobility Choices for Seniors and Persons with Disabilities project.
214007.11
B
-
16 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 2.
A senior is a person age sixty years or older.
3. Allocations.
a.
One percent
(1%)
of the Net Revenues shall be allocated
to
the County to augment existing senior non
-
emergency
medical transp
ortation services
fund
ed with Tobacco Settlement funds as of the effective date of the Ordinance. The County shall continue to fund these services in an annual amount equal to the same p
ercentage of the total annual Tobacco Settlement funds received by the County. The Net Revenues shall be annually allocated
to the County in an amount
no less than
the Tobacco
Settlement funds annually expended by
the County
for these services
and no great
er than
one percent of net revenues plus any accrued interest
.
b.
One percent (1%)
of the Net Revenues shall be allocated
to continue and expand the existing Senior Mobility Program provided by the Authority
.
The allocations shall be determined purs
uant to
criteria and requirements for the Senior
Mobility Program adopted by the Authority.
c.
One and fo
rty
-
seven hundredths percent (1.47%)
of the
Net Revenues shall be allocated to
partially fund
bus and ACCESS
fares for seniors and
persons
with dis
abilities
in an amount equal to the
percentage of
partial funding
of fares
for
seniors and
p
ersons
with disabilities
as of the effective date of the Ordinance
, and
to
partially fund
train and other transit service
fare
s for seniors and persons
with disabil
ities
in
amounts as determined by the Authority.
d.
In the event any Net Revenues to be allocated for seniors and persons
with disabilities
pursuant to the requirements of
subsections a, b and c above
re
m
a
in after the requirements are satisfied then
the remaining Net Revenues shall be
allocated for other transit programs or projects for seniors and persons with disabilities
as
determined by the Authority
.
D
.
Community Based Transit/Circulators.
1. The Authority may provide technical assistance, t
ransportation
planning, procurement and operations resources for an Eligible Jurisdiction to assist in 214007.11
B
-
17 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 designing Community Based Transit/Circulators projects to
provide effective and user
-
friendly transit connections to
countywide
bus transit and Metrolink
services.
2. To be eligible to receive Net Revenues for Community Based Transit/Circulators projects, an Eligible Jurisdiction must execute a written agreement with the Authority
regarding the respective
roles and responsibilities pertaining to constru
ction,
ownership, operation and maintenance of the
Community Based Transit/Circulators project.
3 .
Allocations
of Net Revenues
shall be determined pursuant to a
countywide competitive procedure adopted by the Authority. This procedure shall include an e
valuation process and methodology applied equally to all candidate Community Based Transit/Circulator projects. Eligible Jurisdictions shall be consulted by the Authority
in the
development of the evaluation process
and methodology
.
4. An Eligible Jurisd
iction may contract with another entity
to
perform all or part of a Community Based Transit/Circulators project .
V
I
I
.
ALLOCATION
OF
NET
REVENUES;
ENVIRONMENTAL
CLEANUP
PROGRAMS/
PROJECTS.
A.
An Eligible Jurisdiction may contract with any other public ent ity to
perform all or any part of an Environmental Cleanup project.
B.
Allocation Committee.
1. The Allocation Committee shall not include any elected public officer and shall include the following t
welve
(1
2 ) voting members:
(i)
one (1) represent
ative of the County of Orange;
(ii)
five (5) representatives of cities, subject to the
requirement for one (1) representative for the cities in each supervisorial district; (iii)
one (1) representative of the California Department of
Transportation
;
(iv)
two (2) representatives of water or wastewater public
entities;
(v)
one (1) representative of the development industry;
214007.11
B
-
18 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 (vi)
one (1) representative of the scientific or academic
community;
(vii)
one
(
1 )
representative
of
private
or
n
on
-
profit
organizations involved in environmental and water quality protection/enforcement matters; In addition, one (1) representative of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board and one (1) representative of the San Diego Regional Water Qual ity
Control Board shall be non
-
voting members of the Allocation Committee.
2. The Allocation Committee shall recommend to the Authority for adoption by the Authority the following:
a
.
A competitive grant process for the allocation of
Environmental
Cleanup
Revenues, including the highest priority to capital improvement projects included in a Watershed Management Area. The process shall give priority to cost
-
effective projects and programs that offer opportunities to leverage other funds for maximum
benefit.
b
.
A
process
requiring
that
Environmental
Cleanup
Revenues allocated for projects and programs shall supplement and not supplant funding from other sources for transportation related water quality projects and programs. c
.
Allocation of
Environmental Cleanup
Revenues for
proposed projects and programs.
d
.
An annual reporting procedure and a method to assess
the water quality benefits provided by completed projects and programs.
C
-
1 507779.8
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
1 3
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 WOODRUFF, SPRADLIN
& SMART
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
ORANGE
ATTACHMENT C
TAXPAYER OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE
I.
PURPOSE AND ORGANIZATION
. A Taxpayer Oversight Committee
(“Committee”) is hereby established for the purpose of overseeing compliance with the Ordinance as specified in Section IV hereof. The Committee shall be organized and
convened before any Revenues are collected or spent pursuant to the Ordinance.
II.
COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP
. The Committee shall be governed by eleven
members (“Member”). The composition of the Committee membership shall be subject to the fo
llowing provisions.
A.
Geographic Balance
.
The membership of the Committee shall be
geographically balanced at all times as follows:
1. There shall be two Members appointed from each of the County’s supervisorial districts (individually, “District”); and
2. The Auditor
-
Controller shall be a Member and chairman
(“Chair”)
of the Committee.
B.
Member Term
.
Each Member, except the Auditor
-
Controller and
as provided in Section III B 2 below, shall be appointed for a term of three years; provided, however, th
at any Member appointed to replace a Member who has resigned or been removed shall serve only the balance of such Member’s unexpired term, and no person shall serve as a Member for a period in excess of six consecutive years.
C.
Resignation
.
Any Member may
, at any time, resign from the
Committee upon written notice delivered to the Auditor
-
Controller. Acceptance of any
public office, the filing of an intent to seek public office, including a filing under California Government Code Section 85200, or change
of residence to outside the District shall
constitute a Member’s automatic resignation.
D.
Removal
.
Any Member who has three consecutive unexcused
absences from meetings of the Committee shall be removed as a Member. An absence C
-
2 507779.8
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
WOODRUFF, SPRADLIN
& SMART
A
TTORNEYS AT LAW
ORANGE
from a Committee meeting s
hall be considered unexcused unless, prior to or after such absence (i) the Member submits to each of the other Members a written request to excuse such absence, which request shall state the reason for such absence and any special circumstances existing w
ith respect to such absence; and (ii) a majority of the other Members agree to excuse such absence.
E.
Reappointment
.
Any for
mer Member may be reappointed
.
III.
APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS
.
A.
Membership Recommendation Panel
.
1. The Authority shall contrac
t with the Orange County Grand
Jurors’ Association for the formation of a committee membership recommendation panel (“Panel”) to perform the duties set forth in this subsection III A. If the Orange County Grand Jurors’ Association refuses or fails to act
in such capacity, the Authority shall contract with
another independent organization selected by the Authority for the formation of the Panel.
2. The Panel shall have five members who shall screen and recommend potential candidates for Committee membersh
ip.
3. The Panel shall solicit, collect and review applications from potential candidates for membership on the Committee. No currently elected or appointed officer of any public entity
(“Public Officer”)
will be eligible to serve as a Member, except th
e
Auditor
-
Controller
, and a Public Officer
shall complete an Intent to Resign form, which shall
be provided as part of the application and submitted as part of the initial application process. Failure to submit an Intent to Resign form will deem such Publ ic Officer ineligible
for consideration to serve as a
M
ember. In addition, a person who has a financial conflict of interest with regard to the allocation of Revenues will be deemed ineligible for consideration to serve as a Member.
A Member shall reside
within the District the Member
is appointed to represent. Subject to the foregoing restrictions, the Panel shall evaluate each potential candidate on the basis of the following criteria:
a.
Commitment and ability to participate in Committee
meetings;
C
-
3 507779.8
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
WOODRUFF, SPRADLIN
& SMART
A
TTORNEYS AT LAW
ORANGE
b.
Demonstrated interest and history of participation in
community activities, with special emphasis on transportation -
related activities; and
c.
Lack of conflicts of interest with respect to the allocation of Revenues.
4. For initial membership on
the Committee, the Panel shall
recommend to the Authority at least five candidates from each of the two Districts that are represented by one member on the Ordinance No. 2, Citizens Oversight Committee (“COC”) as of the date the Authority appoints the init
ial Members. Thereafter, the Panel
shall recommend to the Authority at least five candidates for filing each vacancy on the Committee.
B.
Initial Members
.
1. The COC members, as of the date the Authority appoints the initial Members of the Committee, sh
all be appointed as initial Members of the Committee.
These Members shall each serve until each of their respective terms as a member of the COC expires.
2. Two additional initial Members shall be appointed. The Authority shall place the names of the
candidates recommended by the Panel on equally
-
sized cards which shall be deposited randomly in a container. In public session, the Chairman of the Authority will draw a sufficient number of names from said container to allocate Committee membership in ac
cordance with the membership requirements and
restrictions set forth in Section II hereof. The first person whose name is drawn shall be appointed to serve a term of three years. Thereafter, the person whose name is drawn who is not from the same Distric
t as the first person whose name is drawn shall be
appointed to serve a term of two years.
C.
Member Vacancy
.
A member vacancy, however caused, shall be
filled by the Authority. A Member shall be appointed on or about July 1 to replace a Member whose ter
m has expired. A Member may be appointed at any time as necessary to replace a Member who has resigned or been removed. The Authority shall place the C
-
4 507779.8
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
WOODRUFF, SPRADLIN
& SMART
A
TTORNEYS AT LAW
ORANGE
names of the candidates recommended by the Panel for the appointment on equally -
sized
cards which shall
be deposited randomly in a container. In a public session, the Chairman of the Authority will draw one name from said container for each vacancy on the Committee. The person whose name is so drawn shall be appointed by the Authority to fill the vacancy.
IV.
DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
.
The Committee is hereby charged
with the following duties and responsibilities:
A.
The initial Members shall convene to adopt such procedural rules and regulations as are necessary to govern the conduct of Committee meeti ngs, including, but
not limited to, those governing the calling, noticing and location of Committee meetings, as well as Committee quorum requirements and voting procedures. The Committee may select its own officers, including, but not limited to, a Commi ttee co
-
chair who will be the
primary spokesperson for the Committee.
B.
The Committee shall approve, by a vote of not less than two thirds of all Committee members, any amendment to the Plan proposed by the Authority which changes the funding categories,
programs or projects identified on page 31 of the Plan.
C.
The Committee shall receive and review the following documents submitted by each Eligible Jurisdiction:
1. Congestion Management Program;
2. Mitigation Fee Program;
3. Expenditure Report;
4. Lo
cal Traffic Signal Synchronization Plan; and
5. Pavement Management Plan.
D.
The Committee shall
review yearly audits and
hold an annual public
hearing to determine whether the Authority is proceeding in accordance with the Plan.
The
Chair shall annually
certify whether the Revenues have been spent in compliance with the Plan.
In addition, the Committee may issue reports, from time to time, on the progress of the transportation projects described in the Plan.
C
-
5 507779.8
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
WOODRUFF, SPRADLIN
& SMART
A
TTORNEYS AT LAW
ORANGE
E
.
The Committee shall receive and review th
e
performance assessment
conducted by the Authority at least once every three years to review the performance of the Authority in carrying out the purposes of the Ordinance.
F
.
Except as otherwise provided by the Ordinance, the Committee may contract, th
rough the Authority, for independent analysis or examination of issues within the Committee’s purview or for other assistance as it determines to be necessary.
G
.
The Committee may submit a written request to the Authority to explain any perceived deviati
ons from the Plan. The Authority’s Chair must respond to such request, in writing, within sixty days after receipt of the same.
Measure M2 Amendments
Staff Reports
September 24, 2012
Measure M2 Transportation Investment Plan Amendment
November 9, 2012
Public Hearing on Amendment of the Measure M Freeway
Category: State Route 91 (Project J), Interstate 405 (Project K) October 11, 2013
Proposal to amend Orange County Local Transportation Authority Ordinance No. 3
(Attachment C)
to Modify Taxpayer Oversight
Committee Membership Eligibility
November 25
, 201
3 Public Hearing to amend Orange County Local Transportation Auth
ority Ordinance No. 3
(Attachment C)
to Modify Taxpayer
Oversight Committee Membership Eligibility
October 26, 2015
Proposed Amendment to the Measure M2 Transportation
Investment Plan
(and Ordinance No. 3)
December 14
, 201
5 Public Hearing to Amend Orange County Local Transportation Authority Ordinance No. 3 and
Renewed
Measure M
Transportation
Investment Plan for the Transit Program
March 14, 2016
Renewed Measure M Local Transportation Authority Ordinance No. 3 and
Transportation Investment Plan Amendment Update
(
c
orrected
s
cri
ven
er error)
May 11, 2020
Proposed Amendment to the Orange County Local Transportation Authority
Measure M2 Ordinance No. 3
June 22, 2020
Public Hearing to Amend the Measure M2
Orange County Local
Transportation Authority Ordinance No.
3 (
temporar
y
change
to
the
maintenance of effort
requirement
due to economic impacts of
coronavirus
pandemic)
April 12, 2021
Proposed Amendment to the Orange County Local
Transportation
Authority Ordinance No. 3
May 24, 2021
Public Hearing to Amend the Measure M2 Orange County Local Transportation Authority Ordinance No. 3
(
temporar
y
change
to
the maintenance of effort
requirement due to economic impacts of
coronavirus pandemic)