HomeMy WebLinkAboutBOARD STANDING COMMITTEES - 04102023 - TWIC Agenda PktTRANSPORTATION, WATER & INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE
April 10, 2023
9:00 A.M.
Join in person:
District III Office
3361 Walnut Boulevard, Suite 140
Brentwood, CA. 94513
OR
1516 Kamole Street
Honolulu, HI. 96821
Join from PC, Mac, Linux, iOS or Android:
https://cccounty-us.zoom.us/j/82900177922Or
Join by telephone, dial:
USA 214 765 0478 US Toll
USA 888 278 0254 US Toll-free
Conference code: 841892
Supervisor Candace Andersen, Chair
Supervisor Diane Burgis, Vice Chair
Agenda Items:Items may be taken out of order based on the business of the day and preference of the Committee.
1.Introductions
2.Public comment on any item under the jurisdiction of the Committee and not on this agenda (speakers may be
limited to three minutes).
3.REVIEW record of meeting for February 13, 2023 Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee
Meeting. This record was prepared pursuant to the Better Government Ordinance 95-6, Article 25-205(d) of
the Contra Costa County Ordinance Code. Any handouts or printed copies of testimony distributed at the
meeting will be attached to this meeting record. (John Cunningham, Department of Conservation and
Development) (Page 4)
4.CONSIDER report on Local, State, Regional, and Federal Transportation Related Legislative Issues and
take ACTION as appropriate. (John Cunningham, Department of Conservation and Development) (Page 7)
5.ACCEPT an update on budget challenges related to the County's Road Program. PROVIDE staff input on the
development of budget scenarios to maximize the opportunity of federal infrastructure funding while balancing
the County's Road Program budget and goals. (Steve Kowalewski, Public Works Department) (Page 31)
6.The next meeting is currently scheduled for May 8, 2023.
7.Adjourn
The Transportation, Water & Infrastructure Committee (TWIC) will provide reasonable accommodations for persons with
disabilities planning to attend TWIC meetings. Contact the staff person listed below at least 72 hours before the meeting.
Any disclosable public records related to an open session item on a regular meeting agenda and distributed by the County to a
majority of members of the TWIC less than 96 hours prior to that meeting are available for public inspection at the County
Department of Conservation and Development, 30 Muir Road, Martinez during normal business hours.
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 1 of 100
Public comment may be submitted via electronic mail on agenda items at least one full work day prior to the published meeting
time.
For Additional Information Contact:
John Cunningham, Committee Staff
Phone (925) 655-2915, Fax (925) 655-2750
john.cunningham@dcd.cccounty.us
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 2 of 100
Glossary of Acronyms, Abbreviations, and other Terms (in alphabetical order): Contra Costa County has a policy of making
limited use of acronyms, abbreviations, and industry-specific language in meetings of its Board of Supervisors and
Committees. Following is a list of commonly used abbreviations that may appear in presentations and written
materials at meetings of the Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee:
AB Assembly Bill
ABAG Association of Bay Area Governments
ACA Assembly Constitutional Amendment
ADA Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
ALUC Airport Land Use Commission
AOB Area of Benefit
BAAQMD Bay Area Air Quality Management District
BART Bay Area Rapid Transit District
BATA Bay Area Toll Authority
BCDC Bay Conservation & Development Commission
BDCP Bay-Delta Conservation Plan
BGO Better Government Ordinance (Contra Costa County)
BOS Board of Supervisors
CALTRANS California Department of Transportation
CalWIN California Works Information Network
CalWORKS California Work Opportunity and Responsibility
to Kids
CAER Community Awareness Emergency Response
CAO County Administrative Officer or Office
CCTA Contra Costa Transportation Authority
CCWD Contra Costa Water District
CDBG Community Development Block Grant
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CFS Cubic Feet per Second (of water)
CPI Consumer Price Index
CSA County Service Area
CSAC California State Association of Counties
CTC California Transportation Commission
DCC Delta Counties Coalition
DCD Contra Costa County Dept. of Conservation & Development
DPC Delta Protection Commission
DSC Delta Stewardship Council
DWR California Department of Water Resources
EBMUD East Bay Municipal Utility District
EIR Environmental Impact Report (a state requirement)
EIS Environmental Impact Statement (a federal requirement)
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
FAA Federal Aviation Administration
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FTE Full Time Equivalent
FY Fiscal Year
GHAD Geologic Hazard Abatement District
GIS Geographic Information System
HBRR Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation
HOT High-Occupancy/Toll
HOV High-Occupancy-Vehicle
HSD Contra Costa County Health Services Department
HUD United States Department of Housing and Urban
Development
IPM Integrated Pest Management
ISO Industrial Safety Ordinance
JPA/JEPA Joint (Exercise of) Powers Authority or Agreement
Lamorinda Lafayette-Moraga-Orinda Area
LAFCo Local Agency Formation Commission
LCC League of California Cities
LTMS Long-Term Management Strategy
MAC Municipal Advisory Council
MAF Million Acre Feet (of water)
MBE Minority Business Enterprise
MOA Memorandum of Agreement
MOE Maintenance of Effort
MOU Memorandum of Understanding
MTC Metropolitan Transportation Commission
NACo National Association of Counties
NEPA National Environmental Protection Act
OES-EOC Office of Emergency Services-Emergency
Operations Center
PDA Priority Development Area
PWD Contra Costa County Public Works Department
RCRC Regional Council of Rural Counties
RDA Redevelopment Agency or Area
RFI Request For Information
RFP Request For Proposals
RFQ Request For Qualifications
SB Senate Bill
SBE Small Business Enterprise
SR2S Safe Routes to Schools
STIP State Transportation Improvement Program
SWAT Southwest Area Transportation Committee
TRANSPAC Transportation Partnership & Cooperation (Central)
TRANSPLAN Transportation Planning Committee (East County)
TWIC Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee
USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers
WBE Women-Owned Business Enterprise
WCCTAC West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory
Committee
WETA Water Emergency Transportation Authority
WRDA Water Resources Development Act
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 3 of 100
TRANSPORTATION, WATER & INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE 3.
Meeting Date:04/10/2023
Subject:REVIEW record of meeting for February 13, 2023 Transportation, Water and Infrastructure
Meeting.
Submitted For: TRANSPORTATION, WATER & INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE,
Department:Conservation & Development
Referral No.: N/A
Referral Name: N/A
Presenter: John Cunningham, DCD Contact: John Cunningham (925)655-2915
Referral History:
County Ordinance (Better Government Ordinance 95-6, Article 25-205, [d]) requires that each County Body keep a record of its
meetings. Though the record need not be verbatim, it must accurately reflect the agenda and the decisions made in the meeting.
Referral Update:
Any handouts or printed copies of testimony distributed at the meeting will be attached to this meeting record. Links to the
agenda and minutes will be available at the TWI Committee web page:
http://www.cccounty.us/4327/Transportation-Water-Infrastructure
Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s):
Staff recommends approval of the attached Record of Action for the February 13, 2023 Committee Meeting with any necessary
corrections.
Fiscal Impact (if any):
N/A
Attachments
Minutes - TWIC February 2023
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 4 of 100
D R A F T
TRANSPORTATION, WATER & INFRASTRUCTURE
COMMITTEE
RECORD OF ACTION FOR
February 13, 2023
Supervisor Diane Burgis, Chair
Supervisor Candace Andersen, Vice Chair
Present: Diane Burgis, Chair
Candace Andersen, Vice Chair
1.Introductions
2.Public comment on any item under the jurisdiction of the Committee and not on this agenda
(speakers may be limited to three minutes).
No Public Comment
3.Staff recommends approval of the attached Record of Action for the December 12, 2022, Committee
Meeting with any necessary corrections.
The Committee unanimously APPROVED the meeting record.
4.REVIEW Actions of the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) Relative to Measure X MOU
Funding Obligations and RECOMMEND the Board of Supervisors approve the CCTA Coordinating
Entity program recommendations.
The Committee unanimously APPROVED the staff recommendation.
5.CONSIDER the proposed Caltrans Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant candidate project,
REVISE as appropriate, FORWARD to the full Board of Supervisors for approval, and/or DIRECT staff
as appropriate.
The Committee unanimously APPROVED the staff recommendation.
6.CONSIDER report on Local, Regional, State, and Federal Transportation Related Legislative Issues
and take ACTION as appropriate.
The Committee RECEIVED the report and DIRECTED staff to distribute the letter re: SB 1121,
and to continue support of the accessible transportation legislation. (AB 540-Wicks)
7.DISCUSS recommendations on referrals to the Committee for 2023, REVISE as necessary, and
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 5 of 100
7.DISCUSS recommendations on referrals to the Committee for 2023, REVISE as necessary, and
DIRECT staff to bring the list to the
full Board of Supervisors for approval.
The Committee unanimously APPROVED the staff recommendation with addition of the
Olympic Corridor Trail Connector Study Implementation to the referrals.
8.
The Committee unanimously APPROVED the TWIC Referral Report and DIRECTED staff to
bring the report to the Board of Supervisors.
9.REVIEW and REVISE as appropriate, and ADOPT the 2023 Transportation, Water, and Infrastructure
Committee Calendar.
The Committee unanimously APPROVED the 2023 calendar with the modification of the
December meeting which was moved from the 11th to the 4th.
10.The next meeting is currently scheduled for March 13, 2023.
11.Adjourn
For Additional Information Contact:
John Cunningham, Committee Staff
Phone (925) 674-7833, Fax (925) 674-7250
john.cunningham@dcd.cccounty.us
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 6 of 100
TRANSPORTATION, WATER & INFRASTRUCTURE
COMMITTEE 4.
Meeting Date:04/10/2023
Subject:CONSIDER report: Local, Regional, State, and Federal Transportation Issues: Legislation, Studies,
Miscellaneous Updates, take ACTION as Appropriate
Department:Conservation & Development
Referral No.: 1
Referral Name: REVIEW legislative matters on transportation, water, and infrastructure.
Presenter: John Cunningham, DCD Contact: John Cunningham (925)655-2915
Referral History:
CONSIDER report on Local, State, Regional, and Federal Transportation Related Legislative Issues and take ACTION as
appropriate. (John Cunningham, Department of Conservation and Development)
Referral Update:
In developing transportation related issues and proposals to bring forward for consideration by TWIC, staff receives input from
the Board of Supervisors (BOS), references the County's adopted Legislative Platforms, coordinates with our legislative
advocates, partner agencies and organizations, and consults with the Committee itself.
This report includes four sections, 1: LOCAL , 2: REGIONAL, 3: STATE, and 4: FEDERAL .
1. LOCAL
No Report
2. REGIONAL
No Report.
3. STATE The County's legislative advocate will attend the April meeting, his written report is attached to this item.
Attached for Review/Discussion:
- Legislative Tracking Table
- April Legislative Report
Update: AB 540 Social Service Transportation Improvement Act: coordinated transportation services agencies (Wicks)
• The Board of Supervisors approved taking a "sponsor" position at their April 4th meeting.
• The team working on the bill recommended holding the bill over until January 2024 which Assemblymember Wicks
supported. The move was taken in order to give staff more time to conduct the necessary outreach and research to support bill.
4. FEDERAL No Report
Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s):
CONSIDER report on Local, Regional, State, and Federal Transportation Related Legislative Issues and take ACTION as
appropriate.
Fiscal Impact (if any):
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 7 of 100
There is no fiscal impact.
Attachments
State Legislation Report: March 2023
Legislation Tracking Table
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 8 of 100
Smith, Watts &Hartmann, LLC.
Consulting and Governmental Relations
April 4, 2023
To: Transportation, Water, and Infrastructure Committee (TWIC)
c/o John Cunningham, Committee Staff
From: Mark Watts
Re: March 2023 State Advocacy Report
The following is a report on state legislation, budget matters, and administrative activities of
interest to Contra Costa TWIC.
2023 Legislative, Budget & Administrative Updates
During the month of March, legislative policy committee hearing activity was considerable
with both bill and informational hearings. The Legislature adjourned for its Spring Recess on
Thursday, March 30 and returns to session on Monday, April 10. The remainder of April will
again be busy with policy committee hearings to meet the first legislative deadline of April
28, the date by which fiscal bills must pass their first policy committee hearing if they want
to keep moving in the first year of the new two‐year session.
Major Transportation Planning and Climate Bills Amended
Assembly Transportation Committee Chair Friedman recently amended her Assembly Bills 6
and 7 related to sustainable communities’ strategies and transportation project selection. Both
bills were heard in the Assembly Transportation Committee on Monday, March 27.
AB 6 (Friedman): AB 6 now makes changes to the Air Resources Board’s technical
review process for regional sustainable communities strategies (SCSs), including
requirements that regions 1) give CARB notice of their proposed technical
methodology for calculating greenhouse gas emissions 60 days prior to conducting
public outreach on the SCS, 2) receive CARB approval of the technical methodology,
and 3) submit the SCS or alternative planning strategy to CARB for review and
approval within 120 days of adoption.
The bill also requires project nominations for the Solutions for Congested Corridors
Program to demonstrate how the project would contribute to achieving
greenhouse gas emissions reductions.
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 9 of 100
Smith, Watts &Hartmann, LLC.
Consulting and Governmental Relations
AB 7 (Friedman): AB 7 requires the selection process for specified transportation
projects to include the following criteria: asset management goals (such as bridge
and pavement condition), safety improvements, accelerated project delivery and
environmental review, accessibility for all road users, water quality and greenhouse
gas emissions goals, climate resiliency, adapting to future transportation
technologies (such as electric vehicle charging), reconnecting communities, and
incorporating feedback from disadvantaged and underrepresented communities in
the project development process.
While AB 7 applies to any project funded at least in part by state gasoline and diesel
excise taxes, transportation improvement fee revenues, the Transportation
Development Act’s Local Transportation Fund (LTF), or Proposition 1B (2006).
CalEnviroScreen, tribal communities, Caltrans transportation equity index priority
communities, disadvantaged unincorporated communities, and other priority
populations identified in a regional sustainable communities’ strategy.
Two Key Brown Act Bills Now in Print
AB 557 (Hart): Sponsored by the California Special Districts Association, the League of
California Cities, and the California State Association of Counties, AB 557 would
eliminate the sunset provisions included in AB 361 (R. Rivas, 2021), which authorized
remote meetings during a state‐declared emergency, extend the renewal period from
30 days to 45 days.
AB 817 (Pacheco): Jointly sponsored by the California Association of Recreation and
Park Districts and the League of California Cities, AB 817 would authorize local
boards, commissions, subcommittees, etc. that are not legislative bodies to meet
remotely.
State Budget Outlook: Revenues Continue to Miss Projections
The Department of Finance’s latest monthly finance bulletin delivered more bad news for the
2023‐24 state budget. The information through February 2023 indicates General Fund revenues
were $1.4 billion below projections, including a 25 percent shortfall for the month in combined
personal and corporate tax income revenues. Year‐to‐date state revenues through February are
now $4.7 billion below the Administration’s January budget proposals for all general purpose
revenue sources. The Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) has also updated its revenue estimates
for income and sales and use tax revenues for the year, estimating that they may be about $5
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 10 of 100
Smith, Watts &Hartmann, LLC.
Consulting and Governmental Relations
billion below the Administration’s budget projections. We hope to know more as we get closer
to the release of the May Revision.
Legislature Examines Governor’s Transportation Budget and Federal Infrastructure
Investments
Transportation infrastructure funding was the focus of two hearings in the Legislature in late
March as Assembly Budget No. 3 had its first hearing on the Governor’s 2023‐24 transportation
budget proposals and a joint hearing of the Senate Transportation Committee and Budget and
Fiscal Review Subcommittee No. 5 examined the initial steps California has taken to implement
the federal Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA).
Members expressed numerous concerns with the proposal to eliminate $2 billion in transit
capital funding over multiple years. Climate goals will require significant expansions in the
coverage and frequency of transit service as part of a broader strategy to reduce driving and
invest in transit, biking, and walking.
However, Assemblymembers did not express concerns about the Governor’s proposal to
backfill General Fund cuts to the Active Transportation Program and the Climate Adaptation
Program with State Highway Account funding. Budget Committee Chair Ting joined the
Subcommittee and put the Administration on the hot seat over their actions to solicit grants for
future years of funding beyond what was appropriated in the 2022‐23 budget.
Special Session Update: Governor Pivots on Oil Industry Windfall Profits
Governor Newsom’s new proposal, which was amended into SBX1 2 (Skinner), was passed by
both houses of the Legislature and the Governor signed the measure into law on March 28. The
law, which will go into effect June 26, 2023 will:
Create a new independent watchdog within the California Energy Commission (CEC). The
new commission is charged with monitoring California’s petroleum market on a daily basis
to ensure market participants conduct themselves appropriately. The watchdog will have
authority to subpoena oil companies for data and records to reveal patterns of misconduct
or price manipulation and authority to refer violations of law to the Attorney General for
prosecution.
Authorize the CEC to set a price gouging penalty via a public rulemaking process by
imposing a civil penalty on refiners who charge more than a maximum allowable margin for
the price of gasoline.
Enhance the state’s authority to examine California’s higher than average gas prices and
enforce reporting requirements on the oil industry.
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 11 of 100
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 12 of 100
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 13 of 100
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 14 of 100
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 15 of 100
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 16 of 100
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 17 of 100
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 18 of 100
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 19 of 100
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 20 of 100
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 21 of 100
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 22 of 100
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 23 of 100
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 24 of 100
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 25 of 100
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 26 of 100
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 27 of 100
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 28 of 100
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 29 of 100
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 30 of 100
TRANSPORTATION, WATER & INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE 5.
Meeting Date:04/10/2023
Subject:Update on Public Works Budget Challenges for the Road Program
Submitted For: Brian M. Balbas, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer
Department:Public Works
Referral No.: 2,12
Referral Name: Transportation Grant Applications and Implementation of Complete Streets, Active
Transportation, and Vision Zero
Presenter: Steve Kowalewski Contact: Steve Kowalewski
Referral History:
On February 28, 2023, Public Works staff presented to the Board of Supervisors current budget challenges facing the Public
Works Department in the areas of roads, flood control, and special districts. Public Works staff described some fundamental
challenges with revenue streams that fund critical activities to achieve program goals. Revenue challenges discussed included
temporary impacts from COVID-19 to long standing impacts of Proposition 13 freezing tax rates at zero or very low rates for
several flood control zones in disadvantaged communities. Other challenges discussed included identifying a local match for
grant applications under the federal Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), and the dynamic situation regarding
mounting storm damage to County roads and flood control channels that are adding to the budget challenges. The Board of
Supervisors directed Public Works to continue seeking grant funding for infrastructure projects while the County works to
identify revenue sources to use as the local match. The Board of Supervisors recommended that the issue be referred to the
Transportation Water and Infrastructure Committee for further evaluation and direction.
Referral Update:
The purpose of this presentation is to update the Transportation Water and Infrastructure Committee on the status of budget
challenges facing the Public Works Department. Public Works will include these budget challenges in the Department's budget
hearing presentation scheduled for the Board of Supervisors on April 24-25, 2023. The goal is to address the over programming
of projects while trying to take full advantage of the funding available through the IIJA.
While the focus of this presentation is on the County's Road Program, the fundamental revenue challenges for the Flood
Control and Special Districts programs discussed at the Board of Supervisors meeting remain unchanged. However, the recent,
and ongoing storms have reminded us how important it is to adequately fund routine maintenance and capital improvements to
provide flood protection for the residents of Contra Costa County. Many County flood control facilities, with zero or
inadequate dedicated revenue, are in need of silt removal and other critical maintenance activities. For Special Districts, the
challenge remains that service level expectations do not match funding levels for several Special Districts and there continues
to be a lack of interest to increase revenues.
At the February 28, 2023 Board of Supervisors presentation, Public Works highlighted several items that have contributed to
the budget challenges we are experiencing with the County's road budget. These included the following:
Decreased gas tax revenues from fewer vehicle miles traveled due to COVID-19
Project cost escalation due to inflation and supply chain issues
Impact of 2017 storm damage on road budget
Increased insurance premium
Identifying a local match for approved and pending grant funded projects
Identifying a local match source for new IIJA grant applications
2023 Storm Damage (continues to evolve with preliminary estimates at $8.2 million)
Wildcat Canyon Road Slide (road closed)
San Pablo Dam Road Pavement Settlement
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 31 of 100
Norris Canyon Road Slide
Since the February 28, 2023 Board of Supervisors meeting, there have been several developments related to the County's Road
Program. First, the Public Works Department has received confirmation regarding several pending grant applications
previously presented to the Board of Supervisors for Highway Safety and Improvement Program (HSIP) funds. These projects
will require a local match and are currently not included in the road budget. Of the eight projects submitted, the Public Works
Department received funding for six of the projects. The two projects that did not receive HSIP funding are Camino Diablo
Safety Improvements ($890,460 requested) and Camino Tassajara Street Lighting Improvements ($1,221,840 requested).
Successful HSIP Cycle 11 Project Grants:
In addition to the recently awarded HSIP projects, Caltrans notified the County of additional bridge replacement and
rehabilitation projects added to the federal bridge program making them eligible for federal Highway Bridge Program funds.The
Highway Bridge Program (HBP) is funded with Infrastructure Improvement and Jobs Act funding. In addition to the bridge
projects already in the program, the three new projects include the following:
2nd Avenue Bridge Replacement Project (Pacheco Area) - Local Match Estimate $1,262,000, HBP $7,108,000
Project Title Location of Work Description of Work Project Cost HSIP
Funds
Estimated Local
Match
Countywide
Guardrail
Upgrades -
Phase 2
Various locations on
arterials, collectors,
and local roads
throughout Contra
Costa County.
Replace
sub-standard MBGR
guardrails with
Caltrans standard
MGS guardrails and
end treatments.
$1,493,700 $999,990 $493,710
Appian Way at
Fran Way
Pedestrian
Crosswalk
Enhancements
The intersection of
Appian Way and
Fran Way in
unincorporated El
Sobrante.
Install Rectangular
Rapid Flashing
Beacons (RRFBs),
bulb-outs and a
median refuge
island.
$510,800 $249,840 $260,960
Walnut
Boulevard Bike
Safety
Improvements
Walnut Boulevard
between Marsh
Creek Road and
Vasco Road in
unincorporated
Brentwood.
Install bike lanes by
widening and
restriping the
roadway and install a
centerline rumble
strip.
$1,150,000 $249,415 $900,585
Bryon Highway
Safety
Improvements
Byron Highway
from Clifton Court
Road to Bruns Road.
Add lighting, install
dynamic/variable
speed warning signs,
and install edgeline
rumble strips/stripes.
$1,462,800 $1,316,520 $146,280
Vasco Road
Safety
Improvements
Vasco Road from
Walnut Boulevard to
Camino Diablo.
Install a no-passing
line and centerline
rumble strip/stripe
and improve signal
hardware at
intersections.
$794,500 $715,050 $79,450
Deer Valley
Road Traffic
Safety
Improvements
Deer Valley Road
between Deer Hill
Lane and Marsh
Creek Road in the
unincorporated areas
outside the cities of
Antioch and
Brentwood, in east
Contra Costa County.
Install
dynamic/variable
speed feedback
signs, guardrails, and
curve shoulder
widening.
$1,250,900 $1,125,810 $125,090
TOTALS $4,656,625 $2,006,075
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 32 of 100
Freeman Road (Walnut Creek area) and Briones Valley Road (East County) Bridge Maintenance Projects - Local
Match Estimate $217,000, HBP $723,000
Del Monte Drive Bridge Painting and Poly Overlay (Bridge No. 28C0207) - Local Match Estimate $374,000, HBP
793,000
Although it is great news of the successful grant applications to date, funding the local match while trying to address the road
budget's current negative balance in future fiscal years will be challenging. To address this challenge, Public Works has
developed several scenarios for the Board of Supervisors to consider during the upcoming County budget discussions. Staff
considered the following items when developing the various budget scenarios:
10 fiscal year planning window to capture full project expenditures
Use the most recent revenue projections from CSAC
Multi-year expenditure plans were developed for each newly awarded grant project and added to the 10-year road budget
Increased budget for estimated insurance premiums over the 10-year planning window
Preliminary damage estimate of $3 million from the 2023 storm damage has been added as a placeholder in the budget
(slides and damage continue to evolve from additional rains and saturated soils and is nearing $8.2 million)
The scenarios do not take into account local match requirements for future successful grant applications (Board of
Supervisors has directed Public Works to continue seeking grants from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act)
Preserve funding levels for maintenance operations, pavement maintenance, and surface treatment program to maintain
critical maintenance operations and prevent further deterioration of our pavement condition. The surface treatment
program was the victim of cutbacks from the 2017 storm damage projects.
Traffic operations, road engineering, advanced engineering, and road information and services budgets have been
reviewed for allocation efficiency
Goal is to prevent loss of secured grants while taking full advantage of infrastructure funding currently available and
keeping a balanced road budget
Considering the items above, Public Works has developed several scenarios, including the base scenario for consideration by
the Board of Supervisors. The scenarios focus on revenue augmentation to address the budget deficit with the exception of
scenario 2 that shifts the Vasco Road Safety Phase II project timeline to FY 30-31. If revenue augmentation falls below the
amounts shown in scenario 5, staff will develop additional scenarios that address the road budget deficit by a combination of
adding the reduced revenue augmentation in and shifting project delivery timelines to future fiscal years and possibly canceling
certain grant funded projects if required delivery timelines can not be met.
Budget Scenarios:
Baseline - includes recently awarded IIJA grant projects, insurance, and updated project cost information1.
Assume $10 million CAO funding to fund the local match of recently awarded ATP and HSIP projects with any
remaining balance funding the local match for bridge projects. In addition, move Vasco Road Safety Phase II project
delivery timeline by two years
2.
Assume $10 million a year for the next 4 years (during the IIJA implementation timeline)3.
Assume $6 million a year to offset Insurance Premium for Road Program4.
Determine funds to "make program whole" on a yearly basis5.
Evaluate budget impact if all local match requirements were funded6.
The following summary shows the budget balance for each scenario over the 10-year planning period. Detailed scenario sheets
are included as an attachment.
Based on the scenarios, Scenario 5 shows the amount of revenue augmentation would be necessary to keep the road program
with a positive balance and fund the existing and recently received grant funded projects. This amount is approximately $6
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 33 of 100
with a positive balance and fund the existing and recently received grant funded projects. This amount is approximately $6
million per year for the next four years. If we wanted to continue to pursue IIJA grants, we would need an estimated $2 million
per year for the local match beyond the $6 million. Therefore, the road program would remain balanced with current projects
moving forward and allow for future grant applications would require $8 million per year for the next 4 years. If less than $8
million is applied, Public Works would work on additional scenarios that would apply a lesser amount and move projects to
future fiscal years where there is more capacity in the road budget.
Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s):
Accept an update on budget challenges related to the County's Road Program, including an update on recent notification of
successful grant applications from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. Provide staff clarification on an amount and
timing of any revenue augmentation that may be approved by the Board of Supervisors as a result of the County's budget
hearing to be used to fund local match requirements for grant funded projects. Provide staff direction on additional proposed
budget scenarios to address the budget deficit and to maximize the opportunity of infrastructure investment from the
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act while balancing Road Program goals.
Fiscal Impact (if any):
If action is not taken, the road program budget will be negative for future fiscal years, grants may be returned, and there would
be lost opportunity costs from not taking advantage of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act funding.
Attachments
HSIP Cycle 11 Grant Summary
Road Program Budget Scenarios
Gas Tax Funded Projects and Programs
Public Infrastructure Budget Challenges BOS Presentation
IIJA Grant Funded Road Projects
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 34 of 100
1 of 3 1/3/2023
Summary of Local HSIP Cycle 11 Projects
Division of Local Assistance
Project Selection Criteria: All proposed projects, except set aside projects, are evaluated based
on the Benefit/Cost Ratios (BCRs). All completed applications are prioritized in descending order
by the BCRs. Projects with the highest BCRs are selected for funding and a cutoff line is
established when the available HSIP funding capacity is reached. All project’s related costs
including support are included in the calculation. No more than 25% of HSIP funds are dedicated
to set aside applications. For cycle 11, 16.7% of HSIP funds are being used for the five funding
Set-asides: Pedestrian Crossing Enhancements, Guardrail Upgrade, Installing Edgelines, Bike
Safety Improvements and the Set-aside for Tribes.
Applications received:
• Number of applications received: 434;
• Number of local agencies who submitted applications: 206;
• Total HSIP funds requested by all applications: $521.1 million.
Applications selected for funding:
Number of applications selected for funding: 282 or 65%;
Number of local agencies with projects selected for funding: 155;
Total HSIP funds for the selected applications: $225.6 million.
Out of the 282 applications selected for funding,
• 162 applications, totaling $187.8 million of HSIP funds, were selected based on their Benefit
Cost Ratios (BCRs). The BCR cutoff for an application to be selected for funding is 18.0. The
average BCR of the selected applications is 35.5;
• 120 applications, totaling $37.7 million of HSIP funds, were selected for funding under the
set-asides for Pedestrian Crossing Enhancements, Guardrail Upgrade, Installing Edgelines,
Bike Safety Improvements and Tribes.
• 216 applications (77%), totaling $193.8 million of HSIP funds (85.9%), are within
Disadvantaged Community (DAC) vicinities (Note: a project is considered within DAC vicinities
if the applicant has DAC’s within its boundaries, though the project locations may not be in a
DAC).
Types of safety projects include but are not limited to:
Safety improvements at signalized and non-signalized intersections:
• new signals: 8;
• Signal hardware improvements: 3,001 intersections;
• Install/upgrade signs at non-signalized intersections: 1,102 intersections;
• Install/upgrade intersection pavement markings: 482 intersections;
• Signal timing improvement: 492 intersections;
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 35 of 100
2 of 3 1/3/2023
• Providing left-turn phases/lanes or other left turn improvements: 91 intersections;
• Install lighting: 185 intersections;
• Install flashing beacons: 436 intersections;
• Installing median island approaches: 64 intersections;
• Friction improvements: 23 intersections;
• Install transverse rumble strips on approaches: 57 intersections;
• Converting signals from pedestal mounting to master arm: 14 intersections;
• Installing emergency vehicle pre-emption systems: 159 intersections; and
• Improving sight distance: 23 intersections.
Pedestrian/bike projects:
• Pedestrian hybrid beacons: 15 intersections;
• Pedestrian countdown signal heads: 933 intersections;
• Leading Pedestrian Interval (LPI) implementation: 1,374 intersections;
• Bike lanes: Class II 20.9 miles, Class IV 6.68 miles, and Separated/buffered bike lanes 7.2 miles;
• New sidewalk: 34.7 miles;
• New pedestrian crossing: 351 locations;
• Upgrade signing and markings for existing crosswalks: 408 intersections;
• Install raised medians/refuge islands: 59 intersections;
• Upgrade existing or install new mid-block pedestrian crossing covering 38.1 miles of roads;
• Other safety enhancements of pedestrian crossings such as installing Rectangular Rapid Flashing
Beacon (RRFB), installing advance stop bar, etc.: 922 locations.
Roadway safety improvements
• Curve/speed warning signing: 671.0 miles;
• Install/upgrade signs with new fluorescent sheeting: 3,040.9 miles;
• High Friction Surface Treatment (HFST) installation: 42.5 miles;
• Rumble strips/stripes: 457.1 miles ;
• Install edge/center lines: 226.6 miles;
• Installed raised medians/median barrier: 9.6 miles;
• Install new guardrail or guardrail upgrades: 71.8 miles;
• Install roadway lighting: 31.5 miles; and
• Install delineators, reflectors and/or object markers: 92.0 miles.
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 36 of 100
3 of 3 1/3/2023
The below table provides a summary of HSIP Cycle 11 Funding Distribution by Caltrans Districts.
HSIP Cycle 11 Funding Distribution
Caltrans
District
Number of
Projects
HSIP Funds
($ million)
1 16 $8.1
2 1 $0.3
3 29 $18.0
4 60 $50.0
5 17 $8.6
6 31 $11.5
7 53 $55.8
8 43 $44.1
9 1 $0.2
10 12 $14.1
11 9 $7.2
12 10 $7.5
Total 282 $225.6
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 37 of 100
Summary of Funding Balance for Scenarios
FY 22-23 FY 23-24 FY 24-25 FY 25-26 FY 26-27 FY 27-28 FY 28-29 FY 29-30 FY 30-31 FY 31-32
CAO Funding ----------
EOFY Balance $12,332,161 ($616,379)($6,386,083)($16,202,308)($24,395,778)($23,752,178)($17,722,178)($10,942,178)($3,412,178)$4,867,822
CAO Funding -$10,000,000 --------
EOFY Balance $12,513,661 $818,119 ($1,049,446)($7,997,513)($4,462,515)($1,408,915)$4,621,085 $11,401,085 $1,021,085 $9,301,085
CAO Funding -$10,000,000 $10,000,000 $10,000,000 $10,000,000 -----
EOFY Balance $12,332,161 $9,383,621 $13,613,917 $13,797,692 $15,604,222 $16,247,822 $22,277,822 $29,057,822 $36,587,822 $44,867,822
CAO Funding $0 $6,000,000 $6,000,000 $6,000,000 $6,000,000 $6,000,000 $6,000,000 $6,000,000 $6,000,000 $6,000,000
EOFY Balance $12,332,161 $5,383,621 $5,613,917 $1,797,692 ($395,778)$6,247,822 $18,277,822 $31,057,822 $44,587,822 $58,867,822
CAO Funding $0 $616,379 $5,800,000 $9,800,000 $8,200,000 -----
EOFY Balance $12,332,161 ($0)$30,296 $14,071 $20,601 $664,201 $6,694,201 $13,474,201 $21,004,201 $29,284,201
CAO Funding $4,977,226 $3,640,228 $3,165,039 $8,665,224 $11,908,470 $3,400,000 ----
EOFY Balance $17,309,387 $8,001,075 $5,396,410 $4,245,409 $7,960,409 $12,004,009 $18,034,009 $24,814,009 $32,344,009 $40,624,009
Scenarios
(1) Baseline
(2) One-time revenue augmentation of $10 million for recently awarded grant-funded projects, delay Vasco Road Safety Project – Phase 2 to FY 30-31
(3) $10 million revenue augmentation per year for the next four years
(4) $6 million revenue augmentation per year
(5) Revenue augmentation to make annual funding program whole
(6) Revenue augmentation to cover local match for all grant-funded projects
Scenario 6
Scenario 1
Scenario 2
Scenario 3
Scenario 4
Scenario 5
Date Printed: 4/5/2023
File Path: https://cccpublicworks.sharepoint.com/sites/BriefingBook-2023BudgetChallengesBOSPresentation2-28-23/Shared Documents/2023 Budget Challenges BOS Presentation 2-28-23/Road Program Funding/Road Program
Budget Scenarios 04-05 4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 38 of 100
Purpose:
Scenario:(1) Baseline
Gas Tax Revenue
FY 21-22 FY 22-23 FY 23-24 FY 24-25 FY 25-26 FY 26-27 FY 27-28 FY 28-29 FY 29-30 FY 30-31 FY 31-32
$3,100,000
Actual/Estimated Gas Tax Revenue (A)$39,330,193 $43,000,000 $44,000,000 $46,000,000 $48,000,000 $50,000,000 $51,000,000 $52,000,000 $53,000,000 $54,000,000 $55,000,000
CSAC Estimate (January 2022 - for information only)$41,786,086 $46,298,763
Impact of Sand Box Scenarios on Operational Budget (Base Case ) Gas Tax Cashflow
(These funds are subject to change depending on the Sandbox selected)
Public Works - 65 (D)$51,604,005 $44,061,234 $56,948,541 $54,869,704 $57,816,225 $58,193,470 $50,356,400 $45,970,000 $46,220,000 $46,470,000 $46,720,000
FY 22-23 FY 23-24 FY 24-25 FY 25-26 FY 26-27 FY 27-28 FY 28-29 FY 29-30 FY 31-32 FY 31-32
Estimated Gas Tax Revenue (A)$43,000,000 $44,000,000 $49,100,000 $48,000,000 $50,000,000 $51,000,000 $52,000,000 $53,000,000 $54,000,000 $55,000,000
Rollover from previous FY (B)$13,500,000 $12,332,161 ($616,379)($6,386,083)($16,202,308)($24,395,778)($23,752,178)($17,722,178)($10,942,178)($3,412,178)
Less sales revenue from "deadline" equipment in Maintenance $106,605
Total Estimated Gas Tax Revenue (C = A+B)$56,393,395 $56,332,161 $48,483,621 $41,613,917 $33,797,692 $26,604,222 $28,247,822 $35,277,822 $43,057,822 $51,587,822
FUND CONTRIBUTION (NOT APPLIED DIRECTLY TO PROJECT) (D)$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Subtotal (E = C+D)$56,393,395 $56,332,161 $48,483,621 $41,613,917 $33,797,692 $26,604,222 $28,247,822 $35,277,822 $43,057,822 $51,587,822
Gas Tax Road Program Budget (F)$44,061,234 $56,948,541 $54,869,704 $57,816,225 $58,193,470 $50,356,400 $45,970,000 $46,220,000 $46,470,000 $46,720,000
Difference [(E)-(F)]]$12,332,161 ($616,379)($6,386,083)($16,202,308)($24,395,778)($23,752,178)($17,722,178)($10,942,178)($3,412,178)$4,867,822
Note:
Road Program Financial Impact Evaluation
(FY 23-24 to FY 31-32)
(1) Develop scenarios for consideration to evaluate Road Program financial challenges
(2) Research and list unfunded needs
ECCRFFA "gas tax": Remaining funding from SR4BPA T&R and
ECCRFFA State of Good Repair (held in account)
Date Printed: 4/5/2023
File Path: https://cccpublicworks.sharepoint.com/sites/BriefingBook-2023BudgetChallengesBOSPresentation2-28-23/Shared Documents/2023 Budget Challenges BOS Presentation 2-28-23/Road Program Funding/Road Program Budget Scenarios 04-054-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 39 of 100
Purpose:
Scenario:(2) One-time revenue augmentation of $10 million for recently awarded grant-funded projects, delay Vasco Road Safety Project – Phase 2 to FY 30-31
Gas Tax Revenue
FY 21-22 FY 22-23 FY 23-24 FY 24-25 FY 25-26 FY 26-27 FY 27-28 FY 28-29 FY 29-30 FY 30-31 FY 31-32
$3,100,000
Actual/Estimated Gas Tax Revenue (A)$39,330,193 $43,000,000 $44,000,000 $46,000,000 $48,000,000 $50,000,000 $51,000,000 $52,000,000 $53,000,000 $54,000,000 $55,000,000
CSAC Estimate (January 2022 - for information only)$41,786,086 $46,298,763
Impact of Sand Box Scenarios on Operational Budget (Base Case ) Gas Tax Cashflow
(These funds are subject to change depending on the Sandbox selected)
Public Works - 65 (D)$51,604,005 $43,879,734 $55,695,543 $50,967,565 $54,948,067 $46,465,002 $47,946,400 $45,970,000 $46,220,000 $64,380,000 $46,720,000
FY 22-23 FY 23-24 FY 24-25 FY 25-26 FY 26-27 FY 27-28 FY 28-29 FY 29-30 FY 31-32 FY 31-32
Estimated Gas Tax Revenue (A)$43,000,000 $44,000,000 $49,100,000 $48,000,000 $50,000,000 $51,000,000 $52,000,000 $53,000,000 $54,000,000 $55,000,000
Rollover from previous FY (B)$13,500,000 $12,513,661 $818,119 ($1,049,446)($7,997,513)($4,462,515)($1,408,915)$4,621,085 $11,401,085 $1,021,085
Less sales revenue from "deadline" equipment in Maintenance $106,605
Total Estimated Gas Tax Revenue (C = A+B)$56,393,395 $56,513,661 $49,918,119 $46,950,554 $42,002,487 $46,537,485 $50,591,085 $57,621,085 $65,401,085 $56,021,085
FUND CONTRIBUTION (NOT APPLIED DIRECTLY TO PROJECT) (D)$0 $10,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Subtotal (E = C+D)$56,393,395 $56,513,661 $49,918,119 $46,950,554 $42,002,487 $46,537,485 $50,591,085 $57,621,085 $65,401,085 $56,021,085
Gas Tax Road Program Budget (F)$43,879,734 $55,695,543 $50,967,565 $54,948,067 $46,465,002 $47,946,400 $45,970,000 $46,220,000 $64,380,000 $46,720,000
Difference [(E)-(F)]]$12,513,661 $818,119 ($1,049,446)($7,997,513)($4,462,515)($1,408,915)$4,621,085 $11,401,085 $1,021,085 $9,301,085
Note:
Road Program Financial Impact Evaluation
(FY 23-24 to FY 31-32)
(1) Develop scenarios for consideration to evaluate Road Program financial challenges
(2) Research and list unfunded needs
ECCRFFA "gas tax": Remaining funding from SR4BPA T&R and
ECCRFFA State of Good Repair (held in account)
The $10 million fund contribution in FY 23-24 has been allocated to projects in FY 24-25 and FY25-26 reflected on Item F.
Date Printed: 4/5/2023
File Path: https://cccpublicworks.sharepoint.com/sites/BriefingBook-2023BudgetChallengesBOSPresentation2-28-23/Shared Documents/2023 Budget Challenges BOS Presentation 2-28-23/Road Program Funding/Road Program Budget Scenarios 04-054-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 40 of 100
Purpose:
Scenario:(3) $10 million revenue augmentation per year for the next four years
Gas Tax Revenue
FY 21-22 FY 22-23 FY 23-24 FY 24-25 FY 25-26 FY 26-27 FY 27-28 FY 28-29 FY 29-30 FY 30-31 FY 31-32
$3,100,000
Actual/Estimated Gas Tax Revenue (A)$39,330,193 $43,000,000 $44,000,000 $46,000,000 $48,000,000 $50,000,000 $51,000,000 $52,000,000 $53,000,000 $54,000,000 $55,000,000
CSAC Estimate (January 2022 - for information only)$41,786,086 $46,298,763
Impact of Sand Box Scenarios on Operational Budget (Base Case ) Gas Tax Cashflow
(These funds are subject to change depending on the Sandbox selected)
Public Works - 65 (D)$51,604,005 $44,061,234 $56,948,541 $54,869,704 $57,816,225 $58,193,470 $50,356,400 $45,970,000 $46,220,000 $46,470,000 $46,720,000
FY 22-23 FY 23-24 FY 24-25 FY 25-26 FY 26-27 FY 27-28 FY 28-29 FY 29-30 FY 31-32 FY 31-32
Estimated Gas Tax Revenue (A)$43,000,000 $44,000,000 $49,100,000 $48,000,000 $50,000,000 $51,000,000 $52,000,000 $53,000,000 $54,000,000 $55,000,000
Rollover from previous FY (B)$13,500,000 $12,332,161 $9,383,621 $13,613,917 $13,797,692 $15,604,222 $16,247,822 $22,277,822 $29,057,822 $36,587,822
Less sales revenue from "deadline" equipment in Maintenance $106,605
Total Estimated Gas Tax Revenue (C = A+B)$56,393,395 $56,332,161 $58,483,621 $61,613,917 $63,797,692 $66,604,222 $68,247,822 $75,277,822 $83,057,822 $91,587,822
FUND CONTRIBUTION (NOT APPLIED DIRECTLY TO PROJECT) (D)$0 $10,000,000 $10,000,000 $10,000,000 $10,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Subtotal (E = C+D)$56,393,395 $66,332,161 $68,483,621 $71,613,917 $73,797,692 $66,604,222 $68,247,822 $75,277,822 $83,057,822 $91,587,822
Gas Tax Road Program Budget (F)$44,061,234 $56,948,541 $54,869,704 $57,816,225 $58,193,470 $50,356,400 $45,970,000 $46,220,000 $46,470,000 $46,720,000
Difference [(E)-(F)]]$12,332,161 $9,383,621 $13,613,917 $13,797,692 $15,604,222 $16,247,822 $22,277,822 $29,057,822 $36,587,822 $44,867,822
Note:
Road Program Financial Impact Evaluation
(FY 23-24 to FY 31-32)
(1) Develop scenarios for consideration to evaluate Road Program financial challenges
(2) Research and list unfunded needs
ECCRFFA "gas tax": Remaining funding from SR4BPA T&R and
ECCRFFA State of Good Repair (held in account)
Date Printed: 4/5/2023
File Path: https://cccpublicworks.sharepoint.com/sites/BriefingBook-2023BudgetChallengesBOSPresentation2-28-23/Shared Documents/2023 Budget Challenges BOS Presentation 2-28-23/Road Program Funding/Road Program Budget Scenarios 04-054-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 41 of 100
Purpose:
Scenario:(4) $6 million revenue augmentation per year
Gas Tax Revenue
FY 21-22 FY 22-23 FY 23-24 FY 24-25 FY 25-26 FY 26-27 FY 27-28 FY 28-29 FY 29-30 FY 30-31 FY 31-32
$3,100,000
Actual/Estimated Gas Tax Revenue (A)$39,330,193 $43,000,000 $44,000,000 $46,000,000 $48,000,000 $50,000,000 $51,000,000 $52,000,000 $53,000,000 $54,000,000 $55,000,000
CSAC Estimate (January 2022 - for information only)$41,786,086 $46,298,763
Impact of Sand Box Scenarios on Operational Budget (Base Case ) Gas Tax Cashflow
(These funds are subject to change depending on the Sandbox selected)
Public Works - 65 (D)$51,604,005 $44,061,234 $56,948,541 $54,869,704 $57,816,225 $58,193,470 $50,356,400 $45,970,000 $46,220,000 $46,470,000 $46,720,000
FY 22-23 FY 23-24 FY 24-25 FY 25-26 FY 26-27 FY 27-28 FY 28-29 FY 29-30 FY 31-32 FY 31-32
Estimated Gas Tax Revenue (A)$43,000,000 $44,000,000 $49,100,000 $48,000,000 $50,000,000 $51,000,000 $52,000,000 $53,000,000 $54,000,000 $55,000,000
Rollover from previous FY (B)$13,500,000 $12,332,161 $5,383,621 $5,613,917 $1,797,692 ($395,778)$6,247,822 $18,277,822 $31,057,822 $44,587,822
Less sales revenue from "deadline" equipment in Maintenance $106,605
Total Estimated Gas Tax Revenue (C = A+B)$56,393,395 $56,332,161 $54,483,621 $53,613,917 $51,797,692 $50,604,222 $58,247,822 $71,277,822 $85,057,822 $99,587,822
FUND CONTRIBUTION (NOT APPLIED DIRECTLY TO PROJECT) (D)$0 $6,000,000 $6,000,000 $6,000,000 $6,000,000 $6,000,000 $6,000,000 $6,000,000 $6,000,000 $6,000,000
Subtotal (E = C+D)$56,393,395 $62,332,161 $60,483,621 $59,613,917 $57,797,692 $56,604,222 $64,247,822 $77,277,822 $91,057,822 $105,587,822
Gas Tax Road Program Budget (F)$44,061,234 $56,948,541 $54,869,704 $57,816,225 $58,193,470 $50,356,400 $45,970,000 $46,220,000 $46,470,000 $46,720,000
Difference [(E)-(F)]]$12,332,161 $5,383,621 $5,613,917 $1,797,692 ($395,778)$6,247,822 $18,277,822 $31,057,822 $44,587,822 $58,867,822
Note:
Road Program Financial Impact Evaluation
(FY 23-24 to FY 31-32)
(1) Develop scenarios for consideration to evaluate Road Program financial challenges
(2) Research and list unfunded needs
ECCRFFA "gas tax": Remaining funding from SR4BPA T&R and
ECCRFFA State of Good Repair (held in account)
Date Printed: 4/5/2023
File Path: https://cccpublicworks.sharepoint.com/sites/BriefingBook-2023BudgetChallengesBOSPresentation2-28-23/Shared Documents/2023 Budget Challenges BOS Presentation 2-28-23/Road Program Funding/Road Program Budget Scenarios 04-054-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 42 of 100
Purpose:
Scenario:(5) Revenue augmentation to make annual funding program whole
Gas Tax Revenue
FY 21-22 FY 22-23 FY 23-24 FY 24-25 FY 25-26 FY 26-27 FY 27-28 FY 28-29 FY 29-30 FY 30-31 FY 31-32
$3,100,000
Actual/Estimated Gas Tax Revenue (A)$39,330,193 $43,000,000 $44,000,000 $46,000,000 $48,000,000 $50,000,000 $51,000,000 $52,000,000 $53,000,000 $54,000,000 $55,000,000
CSAC Estimate (January 2022 - for information only)$41,786,086 $46,298,763
Impact of Sand Box Scenarios on Operational Budget (Base Case ) Gas Tax Cashflow
(These funds are subject to change depending on the Sandbox selected)
Public Works - 65 (D)$51,604,005 $44,061,234 $56,948,541 $54,869,704 $57,816,225 $58,193,470 $50,356,400 $45,970,000 $46,220,000 $46,470,000 $46,720,000
FY 22-23 FY 23-24 FY 24-25 FY 25-26 FY 26-27 FY 27-28 FY 28-29 FY 29-30 FY 31-32 FY 31-32
Estimated Gas Tax Revenue (A)$43,000,000 $44,000,000 $49,100,000 $48,000,000 $50,000,000 $51,000,000 $52,000,000 $53,000,000 $54,000,000 $55,000,000
Rollover from previous FY (B)$13,500,000 $12,332,161 ($0)$30,296 $14,071 $20,601 $664,201 $6,694,201 $13,474,201 $21,004,201
Less sales revenue from "deadline" equipment in Maintenance $106,605
Total Estimated Gas Tax Revenue (C = A+B)$56,393,395 $56,332,161 $49,100,000 $48,030,296 $50,014,071 $51,020,601 $52,664,201 $59,694,201 $67,474,201 $76,004,201
FUND CONTRIBUTION (NOT APPLIED DIRECTLY TO PROJECT) (D)$0 $616,379 $5,800,000 $9,800,000 $8,200,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Subtotal (E = C+D)$56,393,395 $56,948,540 $54,900,000 $57,830,296 $58,214,071 $51,020,601 $52,664,201 $59,694,201 $67,474,201 $76,004,201
Gas Tax Road Program Budget (F)$44,061,234 $56,948,541 $54,869,704 $57,816,225 $58,193,470 $50,356,400 $45,970,000 $46,220,000 $46,470,000 $46,720,000
Difference [(E)-(F)]]$12,332,161 ($0)$30,296 $14,071 $20,601 $664,201 $6,694,201 $13,474,201 $21,004,201 $29,284,201
Note:
Road Program Financial Impact Evaluation
(FY 23-24 to FY 31-32)
(1) Develop scenarios for consideration to evaluate Road Program financial challenges
(2) Research and list unfunded needs
ECCRFFA "gas tax": Remaining funding from SR4BPA T&R and
ECCRFFA State of Good Repair (held in account)
Date Printed: 4/5/2023
File Path: https://cccpublicworks.sharepoint.com/sites/BriefingBook-2023BudgetChallengesBOSPresentation2-28-23/Shared Documents/2023 Budget Challenges BOS Presentation 2-28-23/Road Program Funding/Road Program Budget Scenarios 04-054-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 43 of 100
Purpose:
Scenario:(6) Revenue augmentation to cover local match for all grant-funded projects
Gas Tax Revenue
FY 21-22 FY 22-23 FY 23-24 FY 24-25 FY 25-26 FY 26-27 FY 27-28 FY 28-29 FY 29-30 FY 30-31 FY 31-32
$3,100,000
Actual/Estimated Gas Tax Revenue (A)$39,330,193 $43,000,000 $44,000,000 $46,000,000 $48,000,000 $50,000,000 $51,000,000 $52,000,000 $53,000,000 $54,000,000 $55,000,000
CSAC Estimate (January 2022 - for information only)$41,786,086 $46,298,763
Impact of Sand Box Scenarios on Operational Budget (Base Case ) Gas Tax Cashflow
(These funds are subject to change depending on the Sandbox selected)
Public Works - 65 (D)$51,604,005 $44,061,234 $56,948,541 $54,869,704 $57,816,225 $58,193,470 $50,356,400 $45,970,000 $46,220,000 $46,470,000 $46,720,000
FY 22-23 FY 23-24 FY 24-25 FY 25-26 FY 26-27 FY 27-28 FY 28-29 FY 29-30 FY 31-32 FY 31-32
Estimated Gas Tax Revenue (A)$43,000,000 $44,000,000 $49,100,000 $48,000,000 $50,000,000 $51,000,000 $52,000,000 $53,000,000 $54,000,000 $55,000,000
Rollover from previous FY (B)$13,500,000 $17,309,387 $8,001,075 $5,396,410 $4,245,409 $7,960,409 $12,004,009 $18,034,009 $24,814,009 $32,344,009
Less sales revenue from "deadline" equipment in Maintenance $106,605
Total Estimated Gas Tax Revenue (C = A+B)$56,393,395 $61,309,387 $57,101,075 $53,396,410 $54,245,409 $58,960,409 $64,004,009 $71,034,009 $78,814,009 $87,344,009
FUND CONTRIBUTION (NOT APPLIED DIRECTLY TO PROJECT) (D)$4,977,226 $3,640,228 $3,165,039 $8,665,224 $11,908,470 $3,400,000 $0 $0 $0 $0
Subtotal (E = C+D)$61,370,621 $64,949,615 $60,266,114 $62,061,634 $66,153,879 $62,360,409 $64,004,009 $71,034,009 $78,814,009 $87,344,009
Gas Tax Road Program Budget (F)$44,061,234 $56,948,541 $54,869,704 $57,816,225 $58,193,470 $50,356,400 $45,970,000 $46,220,000 $46,470,000 $46,720,000
Difference [(E)-(F)]]$17,309,387 $8,001,075 $5,396,410 $4,245,409 $7,960,409 $12,004,009 $18,034,009 $24,814,009 $32,344,009 $40,624,009
Note:
Road Program Financial Impact Evaluation
(FY 23-24 to FY 31-32)
(1) Develop scenarios for consideration to evaluate Road Program financial challenges
(2) Research and list unfunded needs
ECCRFFA "gas tax": Remaining funding from SR4BPA T&R and
ECCRFFA State of Good Repair (held in account)
Date Printed: 4/5/2023
File Path: https://cccpublicworks.sharepoint.com/sites/BriefingBook-2023BudgetChallengesBOSPresentation2-28-23/Shared Documents/2023 Budget Challenges BOS Presentation 2-28-23/Road Program Funding/Road Program Budget Scenarios 04-054-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 44 of 100
Gas Tax‐Funded Projects (FY 22‐23 – FY 31‐32)This spreadsheet displays all capital projects utilizing gas tax.Date Created: 4/4/2023FY of Construction Escalation FactorNo.ProjectTotal of Source Gas Tax (c)Total of Source Gas Tax (c) Total of Source Gas Tax (c)Total of Source Gas Tax (c) Total of Source Gas Tax (c) Total of Source Gas Tax (c) Total of Source Gas Tax (c) Total of Source Gas Tax (c) Total of Source Gas Tax (c) Total of Source Gas Tax (c)Total of Source Gas Tax (c)1 Public Works ‐ 65649,046,119$ 507,625,573$ 65,408,176$ 44,061,234$ 83,465,369$ 56,948,541$ 74,570,671$ 54,869,704$ 89,923,033$ 57,816,225$ 66,020,470$ 58,193,470$ 75,928,400$ 50,356,400$ 48,345,000$ 45,970,000$ 48,595,000$ 46,220,000$ 48,270,000$ 46,470,000$ 48,520,000$ 46,720,000$ 2 Road and Transportation ‐ 60000649,046,119$ 507,625,573$ 65,408,176$ 44,061,234$ 83,465,369$ 56,948,541$ 74,570,671$ 54,869,704$ 89,923,033$ 57,816,225$ 66,020,470$ 58,193,470$ 75,928,400$ 50,356,400$ 48,345,000$ 45,970,000$ 48,595,000$ 46,220,000$ 48,270,000$ 46,470,000$ 48,520,000$ 46,720,000$ 3 General Road Maintenance ‐ 60100156,288,585$ 154,105,467$ 14,625,462$ 13,998,344$ 18,863,123$ 17,307,123$ 15,350,000$ 15,350,000$ 15,350,000$ 15,350,000$ 15,350,000$ 15,350,000$ 15,350,000$ 15,350,000$ 15,350,000$ 15,350,000$ 15,350,000$ 15,350,000$ 15,350,000$ 15,350,000$ 15,350,000$ 15,350,000$ 174 Pavement Maintenance ‐ 60200153,457,000$ 135,282,000$ 8,249,000$ 6,174,000$ 19,008,000$ 17,308,000$ 14,900,000$ 13,100,000$ 15,150,000$ 13,350,000$ 15,400,000$ 13,600,000$ 15,650,000$ 13,850,000$ 15,900,000$ 14,100,000$ 16,150,000$ 14,350,000$ 16,400,000$ 14,600,000$ 16,650,000$ 14,850,000$ 245 Road Capital Improvements ‐ 60400177,582,931$ 88,676,355$ 26,392,701$ 10,524,036$ 27,379,056$ 9,332,860$ 22,435,671$ 13,143,416$ 38,673,033$ 16,037,574$ 21,875,470$ 16,473,470$ 25,627,000$ 7,965,000$ 3,800,000$ 3,800,000$ 3,800,000$ 3,800,000$ 3,800,000$ 3,800,000$ 3,800,000$ 3,800,000$ 246 FEDERAL & STATE PROJECTS ON LOCAL ROADS (p) ‐ 6041080,008,629$ 18,470,373$ 13,730,804$ 2,474,669$ 17,263,586$ 2,371,940$ 7,719,448$ 1,578,151$ 17,840,791$ 8,155,613$ 2,392,000$ 490,000$ 21,062,000$ 3,400,000$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 265Marsh Creek Road Bridge Replacement (Bridge No. 28C143 & 28C145) ‐ 6R408315,860,000$ 3,257,000$ 3,787,000$ 2,907,000$ 10,800,000$ 350,000$ 1,273,000$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 266Marsh Drive Bridge Replacement (Bridge No. 28C0442) ‐ 6R41196,449,110$ (1,338,111)$ 6,449,110$ (1,338,111)$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 271Second Avenue Bridge over Grayson Ck ‐ Prepare Assessment Report and HBP Application ‐ 6U40615,000$ 5,000$ 5,000$ 5,000$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 282Bridge Preventative Maintenance Project ‐ 6R4091600,194$ 90,152$ 79,194$ 52,192$ 521,000$ 37,960$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 283Kirker Pass Road Safety Project ‐ 6R40841,500$ 1,500$ 1,500$ 1,500$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 284Crocket Area Guardrail Upgrade ‐ 6R41055,000$ 5,000$ 5,000$ 5,000$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 285Treat Boulevard Corridor Improvements ‐ 6R40893,147,921$ 965,563$ 190,000$ ‐$ 234,358$ ‐$ 28,000$ ‐$ 2,695,563$ 965,563$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 286Pleasant Hill Road Bridge Rehabilitation ‐ 6R40861,237,239$ 501,068$ 675,239$ 250,534$ 562,000$ 250,534$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 287Second Avenue Bridge Replacement (Bridge No. 28C0383)8,370,000$ 1,262,000$ ‐$ ‐$ 200,000$ 40,000$ 550,000$ 110,000$ 620,000$ 112,000$ 400,000$ 100,000$ 6,600,000$ 900,000$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 289Freeman Road and Briones Valley Road Bridge Maintenance Project940,000$ 217,000$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 100,000$ 47,000$ 240,000$ 80,000$ 600,000$ 90,000$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 292Del Monte Drive Bridge Painting and Poly Overlay (Bridge No. 28C0207)1,167,000$ 374,000$ ‐$ ‐$ 150,000$ 93,000$ 301,000$ 135,000$ 716,000$ 146,000$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 293Franklin Canyon Road Safety Improvements ‐ 6R4156766,943$ 204,543$ 93,743$ 33,743$ 58,000$ 3,000$ 615,200$ 167,800$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 294Briones Area Guardrail Upgrades ‐ 6R41581,810,456$ 818,374$ 383,718$ 383,718$ 1,426,738$ 434,656$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 295North Bailey Road Active Transportation Corridor ‐ 6R405411,231,388$ 4,489,388$ 532,388$ 2,593$ 495,000$ ‐$ 3,226,290$ 269,143$ 6,977,710$ 4,217,652$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 296San Pablo Dam Road and Bailey Road Signal Hardware Upgrades ‐ 6R41391,436,597$ 344,790$ 220,107$ 15,000$ 1,216,490$ 329,790$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 298Pacifica Avenue Safe Routes to School4,842,000$ 940,000$ 20,000$ 20,000$ 270,000$ 85,000$ 250,000$ 70,000$ 505,000$ 345,000$ 177,000$ 20,000$ 3,620,000$ 400,000$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 299Vasco Road Safety Improvements1,188,500$ 473,450$ ‐$ ‐$ 140,000$ 85,000$ 125,050$ 59,000$ 923,450$ 329,450$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 300Deer Valley Road Traffic Safety Improvements1,865,900$ 740,090$ ‐$ ‐$ 239,000$ 123,500$ 268,908$ 123,708$ 1,357,992$ 492,882$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 301Countywide Guardrail Upgrades ‐ Phase 22,212,996$ 1,213,006$ 56,500$ 56,500$ 223,500$ 223,500$ 246,500$ 246,500$ 1,686,496$ 686,506$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 302Byron Highway Safety Improvements2,023,080$ 706,560$ 71,500$ 50,000$ 186,500$ 100,000$ 234,500$ 121,000$ 1,530,580$ 435,560$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 303San Pablo Avenue Complete Street/Bay Trail Gap Closure13,717,000$ 3,200,000$ 30,000$ 30,000$ 541,000$ 216,000$ 601,000$ 276,000$ 728,000$ 378,000$ 1,575,000$ 290,000$ 10,242,000$ 2,010,000$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 306 SPECIAL DESIGNATED PRJS (p) ‐ 6041528,100,696$ 12,433,996$ 163,525$ 90,525$ 1,003,701$ 410,001$ 515,000$ 515,000$ 11,500,000$ ‐$ 14,918,470$ 11,418,470$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 309Vasco Road Safety ‐ Phase 2 ‐ 6R425527,433,996$ 12,433,996$ 90,525$ 90,525$ 410,001$ 410,001$ 515,000$ 515,000$ 11,500,000$ ‐$ 14,918,470$ 11,418,470$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 316 MEASURE "C/J" PROJECTS (p) ‐ 604204,440,194$ 525,292$ 3,150,194$ 442,292$ 1,290,000$ 83,000$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 317Danville Blvd/Orchard Ct Complete Streets Improvements ‐ 6R41284,440,194$ 525,292$ 3,150,194$ 442,292$ 1,290,000$ 83,000$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 319 LOCALLY FUNDED PROJECTS (p) ‐ 6044063,508,411$ 55,721,695$ 8,998,178$ 7,166,550$ 7,606,769$ 6,252,919$ 13,986,223$ 10,835,265$ 9,117,242$ 7,666,961$ 4,300,000$ 4,300,000$ 4,300,000$ 4,300,000$ 3,800,000$ 3,800,000$ 3,800,000$ 3,800,000$ 3,800,000$ 3,800,000$ 3,800,000$ 3,800,000$ 320Bailey Road/SR 4 Interchange Improvements ‐ 6R41215,000$ (395,000)$ 5,000$ (395,000)$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 326VARIOUS OVERLAYS ‐ 6U421010,000,000$ 10,000,000$ 1,000,000$ 1,000,000$ 1,000,000$ 1,000,000$ 1,000,000$ 1,000,000$ 1,000,000$ 1,000,000$ 1,000,000$ 1,000,000$ 1,000,000$ 1,000,000$ 1,000,000$ 1,000,000$ 1,000,000$ 1,000,000$ 1,000,000$ 1,000,000$ 1,000,000$ 1,000,000$ 327VARIOUS RECONSTRUCTIONS ‐ 6U421910,000,000$ 10,000,000$ 1,500,000$ 1,500,000$ 1,500,000$ 1,500,000$ 1,500,000$ 1,500,000$ 1,500,000$ 1,500,000$ 1,000,000$ 1,000,000$ 1,000,000$ 1,000,000$ 500,000$ 500,000$ 500,000$ 500,000$ 500,000$ 500,000$ 500,000$ 500,000$ 332Norris Canyon Road Safety Improvements ‐ 6U40294,395,000$ 3,435,665$ 521,000$ ‐$ 4,000$ ‐$ 1,204,000$ 769,665$ 2,666,000$ 2,666,000$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 339Alhambra Valley Road Realignment ‐ 6U4095442$ 442$ 442$ 442$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 344Countywide Curb Ramp Project‐ 6U400123,000,000$ 23,000,000$ 2,300,000$ 2,300,000$ 2,300,000$ 2,300,000$ 2,300,000$ 2,300,000$ 2,300,000$ 2,300,000$ 2,300,000$ 2,300,000$ 2,300,000$ 2,300,000$ 2,300,000$ 2,300,000$ 2,300,000$ 2,300,000$ 2,300,000$ 2,300,000$ 2,300,000$ 2,300,000$ 345Bel Air Trail Crossing Project ‐ 6R40561,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 349Walnut Boulevard Shoulder Widening ‐ 6R4118745,460$ (229,770)$ 54,360$ (229,770)$ 691,100$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 3532022 Trash Capture Device Installation ‐ 6U416785,000$ 23,934$ 85,000$ 23,934$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 356San Pablo Dam Road Improvement ‐ 6P101660,000$ 60,000$ 30,000$ 30,000$ 30,000$ 30,000$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 357Rodeo Pedestrian Enhancement Project ‐ 6R41481,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 360Mayhew Way and Cherry Lane Trail Crossing Enhancement ‐ 6R4137249,560$ 249,560$ 249,560$ 249,560$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 361Alves Lane Trail Crossing ‐ 6R4116177,400$ 177,400$ 177,400$ 177,400$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 362Westminster and Kenyon Avenue Accessibility Project ‐ 6R4133600,919$ 600,919$ 84,000$ 84,000$ 516,919$ 516,919$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 3642021 Curb Ramp Project ‐ 6U40004,048$ 4,048$ 2,048$ 2,048$ 2,000$ 2,000$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 365Bixler Rd and Regatta Dr Intersection Improvements ‐ 6R4030322,941$ 230,000$ 17,941$ ‐$ 86,000$ 42,000$ 219,000$ 188,000$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 3672022 Countywide Curb Ramp Project ‐ 40992,098,936$ 1,998,936$ 2,096,936$ 1,996,936$ 2,000$ 2,000$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 368Morgan Territory Road Bridges 5.0 & 5.2 Replacement ‐ 6U41605,790,001$ 5,790,001$ 400,000$ 400,000$ 850,000$ 850,000$ 4,540,000$ 4,540,000$ 1$ 1$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 369Tara Hills Curb Ramps on Shawn Drive ‐ 6R4079420,850$ 347,600$ 20,000$ ‐$ 53,250$ ‐$ 347,600$ 347,600$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 371Livorna Road Shoulder Widening ‐ 6R4141200,000$ 100,000$ 17,000$ ‐$ 53,000$ ‐$ 130,000$ 100,000$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 372Appian Way at Fran Way Crosswalk Enhancements675,800$ 325,960$ 85,000$ 25,000$ 50,000$ 10,000$ 97,020$ 90,000$ 443,780$ 200,960$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 378 SMALL SFTY & OPER IMPROVE (p) ‐ 604901,525,000$ 1,525,000$ 350,000$ 350,000$ 215,000$ 215,000$ 215,000$ 215,000$ 215,000$ 215,000$ 265,000$ 265,000$ 265,000$ 265,000$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 379TRAF BETTS NEW SIGNS ‐ 6U4202900,000$ 900,000$ 150,000$ 150,000$ 150,000$ 150,000$ 150,000$ 150,000$ 150,000$ 150,000$ 150,000$ 150,000$ 150,000$ 150,000$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 380TRAF BETTS NEW STRIPING ‐ 6U4203300,000$ 300,000$ 50,000$ 50,000$ 50,000$ 50,000$ 50,000$ 50,000$ 50,000$ 50,000$ 50,000$ 50,000$ 50,000$ 50,000$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 381SM SFTY/OPER PRJS CO‐WIDE ‐ 6U4206150,000$ 150,000$ 50,000$ 50,000$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 50,000$ 50,000$ 50,000$ 50,000$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 382SIGNAL MODIFICATIONS ‐ 6U4822175,000$ 175,000$ 100,000$ 100,000$ 15,000$ 15,000$ 15,000$ 15,000$ 15,000$ 15,000$ 15,000$ 15,000$ 15,000$ 15,000$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 385 Traffic Program ‐ 605007,998,000$ 7,998,000$ 799,000$ 799,000$ 799,000$ 799,000$ 800,000$ 800,000$ 800,000$ 800,000$ 800,000$ 800,000$ 800,000$ 800,000$ 800,000$ 800,000$ 800,000$ 800,000$ 800,000$ 800,000$ 800,000$ 800,000$ 404 Road Engineering ‐ 6060083,379,225$ 73,244,225$ 8,024,680$ 7,449,680$ 7,988,145$ 7,413,145$ 7,985,000$ 7,410,000$ 7,825,000$ 7,250,000$ 7,825,000$ 7,250,000$ 13,781,400$ 7,671,400$ 7,775,000$ 7,200,000$ 7,775,000$ 7,200,000$ 7,200,000$ 7,200,000$ 7,200,000$ 7,200,000$ 445 Advance Engineering ‐ 6070018,340,030$ 18,340,030$ 1,890,015$ 1,890,015$ 1,890,015$ 1,890,015$ 1,820,000$ 1,820,000$ 1,820,000$ 1,820,000$ 1,820,000$ 1,820,000$ 1,820,000$ 1,820,000$ 1,820,000$ 1,820,000$ 1,820,000$ 1,820,000$ 1,820,000$ 1,820,000$ 1,820,000$ 1,820,000$ 465 Road Information and Services ‐ 6080052,000,348$ 29,979,496$ 5,427,318$ 3,226,159$ 7,538,030$ 2,898,398$ 11,280,000$ 3,246,288$ 10,305,000$ 3,208,651$ 2,950,000$ 2,900,000$ 2,900,000$ 2,900,000$ 2,900,000$ 2,900,000$ 2,900,000$ 2,900,000$ 2,900,000$ 2,900,000$ 2,900,000$ 2,900,000$ Total (A):$649,046,119$507,625,573 $65,408,176 $44,061,234 $83,465,369 $56,948,541 $74,570,671 $54,869,704 $89,923,033 $57,816,225 $66,020,470 $58,193,470 $75,928,400 $50,356,400 $48,345,000 $45,970,000 $48,595,000 $46,220,000$48,270,000 $46,470,000 $48,520,000 $46,720,000Estimated Gas Tax Revenue (B1):Rollover (B2):$13,393,395$12,332,161($616,379)($6,386,083)($16,202,308)($24,395,778)($23,752,178)($17,722,178)($10,942,178)($3,412,178)Difference [(C) = (ΣB) ‐ (A)]:$12,332,161($616,379) ($6,386,083) ($16,202,308) ($24,395,778) ($23,752,178) ($17,722,178) ($10,942,178) ($3,412,178)$3,867,822$52,000,000$53,000,000$54,000,000$54,000,000$43,000,000$44,000,000$49,100,000$48,000,000$50,000,000$51,000,000FY 26‐27FY 27‐28FY 28‐29FY 29‐30FY 30‐31FY 31‐32FY 22‐23 through FY 31‐32FY 22‐23FY 23‐24FY 24‐25FY 25‐26Date Printed: 4/4/2023File Path: \\PW‐DATA\grpdata\transeng\Employee Folders\JValeros\Transportation\TM1\2023 Budget Analysis 2023‐03‐284-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 45 of 100
Public Infrastructure
Budget Challenges
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
FEBRUARY 28, 2023
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 46 of 100
Agenda
Introduction
Purpose of Presentation
Overview of Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA)
◦Funding Opportunities –Flood Control, Special Districts, Roads, Airports, Energy, Sustainability
Structural Budget Challenges
◦County Roads Program
◦Flood Control Program
◦Special Districts –Parks, Landscape and Lighting, Community Facilities
Next Steps
2
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 47 of 100
Introduction & Purpose
Public Works is responsible for several County public infrastructure programs that involve
operations, maintenance, and capital improvements
◦County Roads Program
◦Flood Control Program
◦Special Districts Program
◦Airports
◦County Buildings
Focus of today’s presentation on
Public Infrastructure Budget
Challenges will involve these programs
3
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 48 of 100
Infrastructure
Improvement
& Jobs Act
2021
4
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 49 of 100
o On November 15, 2021, President
Biden signed the IIJA
o The Act provides $973 billion over five
years from FY 2022 through FY 2026
o Historic investment in the nation’s core
infrastructure priorities –including
roads and bridges, rail, transit, ports,
airports, water systems, and
broadband.
Infrastructure Improvement & Jobs Act (IIJA)
Infrastructure Category
Funding
Amount
(billions)
Surface Transportation (Highways, Transit, Rail)$639
FAST ACT Reauthorization (up from $305B)$477
IIJA Act Stimulus (supplemental spending)$157
Electric & Low Emissions School Buses $5
Airports $25
Ports and Waterways $17
Water Infrastructure $91
Broadband $65
Power Infrastructure $65
Resilience, Western Water Storage and
Environmental Remediation
$71
Transportation Total $681
Other Infrastructure Total $292
Total $973
5
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 50 of 100
Infrastructure Improvement & Jobs Act (IIJA)
Challenges
Discretionary Programs -Most new funding is fromdiscretionaryprograms.Even formula programs arediscretionaryprogramsforlocalagencies.Noguaranteeofreceivingfunding.Requires asubstantial amount of staff time and money topreparesuccessfulapplications
Federal Local Match -Local Match requirements forfederalgrants.Currently we have zero capacity inourroadbudgettoprovidealocalmatchforthenext4yearsunlesswereprioritizecurrentprojectse.g. –San Pablo Avenue Complete Streets andPacificaAvenueCompleteStreets
Staffing -Staffing resources limited.Retirements,attrition,and recruitment difficulties have limitedourprojectdeliverystaff.
Opportunities
Strategy -Should we apply for as much funding aspossibleorshouldweprioritizeafewhighvalueprojects and focus our limited resources on achievingourmission?What is our Strategic Goal?
Regional Projects -Regional cooperation to implementregionally significant transportation improvements.Partner with CCTA on regionally significant projects
Bridges -Accelerate County bridge replacement andrehabilitation.Bridge replacement efforts wererecently stalled due to a lack of funding for bridges.Bike and Pedestrian facilities are encouraged on newand replacement structures
6
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 51 of 100
County
Road
Program
BUDGET CHALLENGES
7
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 52 of 100
Senate Bill 1 (SB1) –Signed by the Governor in November 2016
◦Addressed a large portion of the road maintenance backlog in California…but not all.1 2021 California
Statewide Local Streets and Roads Needs Assessment Report shows a $64 Billion shortfall (2020 dollars)over the
next 10 years
◦SB1 was phased in from 2017 to 2020
◦SB1 incorporated adjustments for inflation to maintain its buying power into the future
Road Program revenues looked promising to address road maintenance backlogs for pavements, bridges,
road safety devices, traffic signals, road drainage, in addition to addressing safety concerns, and multi-
modal needs. The California State Association of Counties provided counties a 10-year SB1 revenue
estimate from which Public Works staff began programming multi-year project expenditures based on
these estimates.
Road Program revenue outlook looked promising…
…until an unfortunate series of events…
County Road Program Budget Challenges
1 See Local Streets and Roads Needs Assessment for maintenance backlog at www.savecaliforniastreets.org
8
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 53 of 100
Rocky start to SB1
◦Effort to rescind the new revenues from SB1 which resulted in a hesitant construction industry response to expanding
construction capacity
◦The lack of construction capacity had an unintended consequence; bid prices for street and bridge maintenance and
repairs were as much as 23% higher than in 2018
◦2017 Storm Damage –several County roads were damaged by the 2017 storm events such as Alhambra Valley Road,
Bear Creek Road, Morgan Territory Road, and Happy Valley Road. In 2023, we are now just completing the final
restoration work with a final cost of $20.4 million. FEMA and CalOES only reimbursed 51% of the expenditures. Local
share was $10.7 million. This was a large dollar impact on the road budget that impacted several fiscal years
◦Public Works staff adjusted project delivery timelines and fiscal year expenditures to address the increased
construction bids, manage cash flow, and fund the storm damage projects
Unfortunate Series of Events -Roads
9
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 54 of 100
…in March 2020, just as SB1 was fully phased in, the COVID Pandemic Hit…
Gas tax revenues saw an immediate decline as pandemic and quarantine protocols impacted
commute and other travel patterns
Revenue estimates provided by CSAC in 2017 were revised $15.9 million lower for FY 20/21 and
FY 21/22 combined (see table next slide)
To address the revenue drop, Public Works depleted the funding reserves and delayed non-grant
funded projects
The County’s Pavement Surface Treatment Program (preventative maintenance), 100% funded
with gas tax, took the largest impact including canceling the program for a fiscal year
Grant funded projects were saved to maintain the leveraged funds
Unfortunate Series of Events -Roads
10
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 55 of 100
Unfortunate Series of Events -Roads
Gas Tax –Highway Users Tax Account (HUTA) & Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account (RMRA)
11
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 56 of 100
As revenues were decreasing due to the pandemic…Project Costs
were increasing due to several other factors…
◦Supply chain issues impact material costs and road project delivery timelines increasing overall project costs (cement, steel, etc.)
◦Contracting Community Capacity
◦Construction Costs: Using the Construction Cost Index for the Bay Area, construction costs have increased by 30%from 2017 to 2022
Example: 2022 Countywide Surface Treatment Project
◦Engineer’s Estimate: $6,193,735
◦Low Bid: $7,450,866
◦Only two bidders
◦Bids were allowed to expire. Project did not move forward. Work reprogrammed to future fiscal years. Deferred maintenance.
◦Sites included: Contra Costa Centre ($2,186,484) and Bay Point ($4,007,251)
Unfortunate Series of Events -Roads
Project
Costs
Gas
Tax
12
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 57 of 100
Unfortunate Series of
Events -Roads
Some Federal and State grant delivery timelines were adjusted
to account for pandemic related revenue impacts while other
grant programs retained expenditure timelines
Public Works continued to work with our Finance Division to
manage road program cash flow and to evaluate and delay
projects to help balance the road budget without risking already
secured grants and the surface treatment program
Again, we were able to mitigate the impacts of the unfortunate
series of events for the immediate fiscal years, but future years
have a growing negative budget balance
13
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 58 of 100
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act Funding (IIJA)
An opportunity filled with challenges
IIJA Local Match Requirement | Capital Funds –not maintenance | Increases Operations Budget
Road budget constrained from lower revenues, cost inflation, and unexpected storm damage
Without other funding to cover local match, Public Works challenged on how best to submitgrant
applications while maintaining our mission and goals
Recent Active Transportation Program Projects -IIJA (Awarded Funding is $14,419,000)
•San Pablo Avenue Complete Streets/Bay Trail Gap Closure ($10,517,000)
•Pacifica Avenue Safe Routes to School ($3,902,000)
•~$2.5M local match needed (currently not in budget)
•$2.5 Local Match → $14,419,000 Grant Awarded (leveraging gas tax)
14
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 59 of 100
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act Funding (IIJA)
An opportunity filled with challenges
•Pending Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) Projects -IIJA (Potential Awarded Funding is
$6,768,925)
o Countywide Guardrail Upgrades -Phase 2 ($999,990)
o Appian Way at Fran Way Pedestrian Crosswalk Enhancements ($246,840)
o Walnut Boulevard Bike Safety Improvements ($249,415)
o Camino Diablo Safety Improvements ($890,460)
o Camino Tassajara Street Lighting Improvements ($1,221,840)
o Byron Highway Safety Improvements ($1,316,520)
o Vasco Road Safety Improvements ($715,050)
o Deer Valley Road Traffic Safety Improvements ($1,125,810)
o ~$3M local match needed if all awarded
o $3 million → Potential Grant Award $6,768,925 (leveraging gas tax)
Funding notification pending
15
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 60 of 100
…another road budget challenge started presenting itself FY 20-21…
•Liability insurance increased dramatically since Fiscal Year 19-20
•Insurance premium now at 14%of SB1 Gas Tax Revenues
•$32.1 million over 5 years
•Opportunity Cost
Unfortunate Series of Events -Roads
◄PANDEMIC ►
Current Fiscal
Year
FY 14-15 FY 15-16 FY 16-17 FY 17-18 FY 18-19 FY 19-20 FY 20-21 FY 21-22 FY 22-23 FY 23-24 FY 24-25
Liability Insurance $1,873,674 $1,040,130 $692,596 $964,202 $871,989 $1,302,380 $2,683,171 $5,858,826 $6,424,490 $7,000,000 $7,000,000
General Fund MOE 576,396 576,396 576,396 576,396 576,396 576,396 576,396 576,396 576,396 576,396 576,396
Road Fund 1,297,278 463,734 116,200 387,806 295,593 725,984 2,106,775 5,282,430 5,848,094 6,423,604 6,423,604
% of Road Fund Annual
Revenue
5%2%1%2%1%2%6%13%14%15%14%
16
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 61 of 100
Leveraging Gas Tax –Opportunity Cost
What is the opportunity cost to the road program with the required $6.5 million contribution to the insurance pool?
Example: For projects recently awarded grants and pending grant applications
Recent Active Transportation Program Projects (Awarded
Funding is $14,419,000)
•San Pablo Avenue Complete Streets/Bay Trail Gap
Closure ($10,517,000)
•Pacifica Avenue Safe Routes to School ($3,902,000)
•~$2.5M local match needed
Pending Highway Safety Improvement Program Projects (Potential Awarded
Funding is $6,768,925)
•Countywide Guardrail Upgrades -Phase 2 ($999,990)
•Appian Way at Fran Way Pedestrian Crosswalk Enhancements
($246,840)
•Walnut Boulevard Bike Safety Improvements ($249,415)
•Camino Diablo Safety Improvements ($890,460)
•Camino Tassajara Street Lighting Improvements ($1,221,840)
•Byron Highway Safety Improvements ($1,316,520)
•Vasco Road Safety Improvements ($715,050)
•Deer Valley Road Traffic Safety Improvements ($1,125,810)
•~$3M local match needed if all awarded
Local Match -$5.5 million
Grant Funding -$21,187,925
Total Value of Improvements -$26,687,925
17
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 62 of 100
Delay Project Expenditures | Avoid new obligations | Seek Alternative Revenue | Protect Maintenance and Safety Funding
•Address $15 million negative road budget balance for FY 22/23 through 29/30
•Avoid new obligations
◦No new grant applications unless non-gas tax revenue identified for local match (IIJA Dilemma)
•Seek Alternative Discretionary Funding
•Balance Operations/Maintenance budget with Capital Improvements budget
•Protect Surface Treatment Program, Bridge Projects, and grant funded Safety Projects
•Manage risk
Addressing Budget Shortfall -Roads
Applied for the following IIJA
and non-IIJA grants last year:
•1 RAISE application
•1 SS4A application
•8 HSIP applications
•3 TDA applications*
•6 ATP applications
•3 OBAG applications
*Not IIJA
18
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 63 of 100
Road Budget Challenges
There are many projects,unfunded needs and activities that have not been included
in the current budget.
These include:
•San Pablo Dam Road Retaining Wall and Pavement Rehabilitation ($15 million)
•Pavement Rehabilitation on Walnut Avenue ($1.5 million)
•New Stormwater Permit Requirements (MRP 3.0)(amount unknown)
•Kirker Pass Southbound Truck Lane design ($2 million)
•Local match for recently awarded ATP grants ($2.5 million).
•Local match for pending HSIP projects ($3 million if all are granted)
•Bridge replacements on Morgan Territory Road escalating (now $7 million)
•2023 Storm Damage ($2.1 million initial estimates)
•Vasco Road Safety Project ($7 million to match $15 million RM3 grant)
•Norris Canyon Road Safety ($3.4 million to match $1.4 million in Measure J funds)
19
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 64 of 100
◦$2.5 million for the local match for the San Pablo Avenue Complete Streets
project and the Pacifica Avenue Safe Routes to School project
◦Up to $3 million for the local match for Highway Safety Improvement grant
projects pending approval
◦$900k for the local match for 3 Transportation Development Act funded
bike/ped projects
◦$2 million for anticipated storm damage projects and surface treatment
projects
◦$7 million for Vasco Road Safety to match $15 million RM3 grant
◦$3.4 million for Norris Canyon to match $1.4 million Measure J funds
20
Discretionary Funding Request
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 65 of 100
Flood
Control
Program
BUDGET CHALLENGES
21
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 66 of 100
Flood Control Program Overview
•Flood control functions in the County are the responsibility of the Flood Control and
Water Conservation District, which is staffed by Public Works since merging in 1972
•The County was divided into 14 major watersheds, called Flood Control Zones
•Infrastructure installed since 1951 includes 29 basins and dams plus 79 miles of
concrete and earthen channels
•Much of the infrastructure was designed and built by the Army Corps of Engineers or
Soil Conservation Service,with low or zero local match, then transferred to the District
for maintenance and operation
•Several federal and state agencies regulate District maintenance and improvement
projects
22
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 67 of 100
District Maintained Facilities
LEGEND
14 major watersheds / flood control zones
79 miles of channels
29 detention basins and dams
23
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 68 of 100
Community Value Protected
█79 miles of channels
█29 detention basins/dams
Flood control facilities protect
residents' lives, property,
businesses, transportation
facilities, and eliminates the
burden of homeowners
purchasing flood insurance
(saving thousands per year)
Approximately $25 Billion
worth of community
infrastructure is protected by
the District's $1.3 Billion of
facilities
24
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 69 of 100
•Property Taxes (Flood Control Zones)
•Special Assessments
•Grants
•Developer Fees (Drainage Area Fees)
•Fees for Service
Flood Control Funding
Flood Control District
functions
are funded through
25
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 70 of 100
Flood Control Funding Challenges
What are the funding challenges?
•Current revenues –Underfunded flood control zones & low development volume in Drainage
Areas
•Barriers to raising revenues and leveraging revenues –Prop 13, Prop 218, local match
requirements, grant focus on capital improvements (necessitating an increase to the
operations budget)
•Increasing environmental regulatory and permitting challenges
•Climate Change –Storm damage, rising sea-levels, droughts
•Increasing maintenance backlog –impact to disadvantaged communities without an adequate
revenue stream
•Inflation and insurance cost –similar for roads and special districts
26
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 71 of 100
Prior to the passage of Proposition 13 in 1978, Zone Boards, which consisted of
representatives from the watersheds, adjusted the tax rates of each Flood Control Zone
annually. When Proposition 13 came around, several of the zone facilities were
constructed, maintenance was up to date, and there was enough money in the funds to
set the tax rate very low or at zero.
Upon passage, Proposition 13 froze those tax rates, in effect shutting off the tax revenue
needed to adequately fund the maintenance of the Zones' flood control facilities.
The State responded by setting up the Special District Augmentation Fund. This fund
provided agencies assistance for many years until the Fund was removed from the State
budget during a State budget crisis.
Today several Zones remain severely underfunded. The District is actively seeking ways
to compensate for lack of funding for maintenance.
Underfunded Flood Control Zones
Flood Control Zone funding (a small percentage of your property taxes) is the primary revenue
source to fund basic maintenance, operations, and capital improvements for the flood control
facilities in the zone.
Pre-Prop 13
Post-Prop 13
Short-Term
Solution
eliminated
27
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 72 of 100
Underfunded Zones
As a result…
•Kellogg, San Pablo, and Pinole Creeks tax rates
were frozen at 0%
•Wildcat,Rodeo, and Rheem Creeks tax rates were frozen very low
•To address the impact, the District is using a revolving fund loan program or backfill from District funds to provide minimal maintenance activities
•Zones have accumulated $4.1 million in debt from the loan program or backfill
28
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 73 of 100
Underfunded Zones
Underfunded
Zones/Areas
Number
Underfunded
Zones/Areas
Description
Annual
Average
Revenue
(property tax)
Annual Average
Expenditures
(“minimum”
maintenance)
Outstanding
Debts
Deferred
Maintenance
2 Kellogg Creek $0 $5,000 $20,000 $300,000
6A San Pablo
Creek $0 $55,000 $280,000 $330,000
7 Wildcat Creek $132,000 $155,000 $830,000 $1,430,000
8A Rodeo Creek $68,000 $80,000 $310,000 $1,425,000
9A Pinole Creek $0 $35,000 $2,220,000 $1,875,000
127 Rheem Creek $23,000 $30,000 $480,000 $440,000
TOTALS $233,000 $360,000 $4,140,000 $5,817,000
Unsustainable business
model that feeds on itself Revolving Fund Loans
and backfill from FCD
29
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 74 of 100
•Developer fees based on impervious surface to "add" capacity to
the system
•Does not address existing deficiencies, routine maintenance, or
replacement costs of existing structures
•Contra Costa moved from a rapidly developing County with large-
scale development projects to smaller infill development projects
reducing incoming Drainage Area funding
Drainage Area Funding
30
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 75 of 100
•Prop 13 froze tax rates in 1978
Tax Measures Challenges
•Prop 218 (super majority, or 2/3rds vote needed to increase a tax or fee) did not include stormwater or flood control as exempt like drinking water, sewer, and trash
•SB 231 redefined stormwater as a utility, but implementing a tax measure for stormwater is subject to legal challenges
•Tax measures are costly to enact and generally unpopular in today's environment
•Unlikely to meet 2/3 approval
•Leverage -Local match requirement for grants (FEMA, Army Corps, EPA, IIJA, etc.)
Barriers to Raising Revenues & Leveraging
31
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 76 of 100
Leveraging Funds –Local Match
Infrastructure Improvement and Jobs Act (IIJA)
IIJA funding for flood control facilities comes through existing programs –FEMA, Army Corps,
and EPA.One new funding program was created for retrofitting culverts and weirs that restrict fish
passage.
•Challenge #1 -Local match can be 35% to 50%, which we do not have.US Army Corps of Engineers projects
being considered include Wildcat Creek Phase 2,Pinole Creek,Rheem Creek,and Rodeo Creek.These projects
would increase level of flood protection to FEMA and Corps standards.
•Challenge #2 -Adding more or enhanced facilities requires that maintenance funding be increased.
•Challenge #3 –IIJA does not provide funding for routine maintenance, which is currently $18.5 million backlog
and growing.
We will continue to pursue all the grants we can and seek local match funding from State.
32
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 77 of 100
Unfunded Mandates & Environmental Permits Cost
The new regional stormwater permit (MRP 3.0) was issued by the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board on July 1, 2022.
•3 more new provisions were added to the previous 22 provisions
•7 of the previous 22 provisions were expanded to include new requirements
•Stricter and costlier restrictions to comply
Environmental Permits Rising Cost
•More requirements to comply adding more cost to construction/maintenance budget
•Additional studies and submittals, lengthier review time for permitting adding to work cost
•Higher costs in permit fees
•Higher costs in mitigation
33
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 78 of 100
Climate Change-Shoreline Communities Impacted
•Sea level rise will impact our
shoreline communities: Richmond,
North Richmond, Pinole, Hercules,
Rodeo, Martinez, Bay Point, Antioch,
Oakley
•Climate change will increase flood
risk everywhere, but areas impacted
first and worst are along shorelines
•Lack of District funding is more
severe in west county shoreline
communities, many of which are
disadvantaged communities
34
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 79 of 100
Climate Change -Storm Damage and Impacts
•Storms / drought cycle
•Heavy storms in 2002, 2005, 2017,
2022
•More intense storms expected with
climate change impacts
•Additional facility damage expected
•Additional resources costs ($2.5 million
estimated damage to FC facilities for
2022 storms)
Facilities during recent 2022 storms
35
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 80 of 100
Maintenance Backlog
•Total maintenance backlog is $18.5 million
•Consists of sediment removal,erosion
repairs,vegetation removal,fence
repairs,maintenance road repairs
•Recent 2022 storms added an estimated
$2.5 million damage to the already $18.5
million backlog for Flood Control facilities
Invasive vegetation and bank erosion
36
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 81 of 100
◦Facilities are approaching their design life and need to be replaced
◦FEMA has delayed their updated maps, giving false assurance to
residents in a flood plain
◦Community awareness of routine and capital replacement maintenance
needs
Capital Replacement -Maintenance
37
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 82 of 100
North Richmond
1982 Floods
prior to Wildcat and
San Pablo Creek
Improvements
38
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 83 of 100
Solutions –Short Term
•FEMA, Corps, EPA, IIJA Grants
•Continue reduced service levels –not sustainable
•Reduce service levels further –result in growing deferred maintenance and infrastructure failure
•Supplemental funding such as General Fund allocation to assist with local match
Although...
◦One-time funding allocations, such as listed above, help reduce flood risk
The fundamental challenge is that...
◦One-time funding allocations are not a reliable revenue stream to be able to plan long-term multi-year
improvements and on-going routine maintenance
◦One-time funding does not address the structural budget issue of underfunded Flood Control Zones, many of
which are in disadvantaged communities
39
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 84 of 100
Solutions –Long Term
•Pursue tax measures to provide local match and maintenance funds
•Support State amendment to Prop 218 to include stormwater
•Support legislation to provide local match funds
•Support legislation to reduce voter threshold to 50% (still significant challenges would remain)
•Partnerships on projects with non-profit organizations to increase grant success
•Mitigation assistance by community groups
•Maintenance assistance by community groups
40
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 85 of 100
What we are doing
•Monitoring funding opportunities –IIJA, FEMA, Corps, EPA, ARPA, Measure X, etc.
•Periodic meetings with funding consultants to review opportunities and set priorities
•Informing community groups and public at every opportunity
•Presentations to legislators during Watershed Day at the Capitol each April
•Working with other agencies to share strategies for permit streamlining
•Participating in regional agency meetings with Regional Water Board to discuss issues
•Partnering with non-profits on projects
•Supporting watershed groups throughout the County
•Presentations to Board of Supervisors
41
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 86 of 100
Special
Districts
BUDGET CHALLENGES
42
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 87 of 100
Special Districts
Background:The Special Districts section of the Contra Costa County Public Works Department is
responsible for:
◦30 zones of a Lighting and Landscaping District (LL-2, also known as Countywide
Landscaping District)
◦13 County Service Areas (CSAs)
◦4 Community Facilities Districts (CFDs)
◦The Iron Horse Corridor
The public facilities managed by Special Districts for these zones, CSAs and CFDs include a diverse
array of items, including trails, community landscapes and parkways, parks, a potable water supply
well, pedestrian bridges, a transit line, and a community centers. These special districts serve
various unincorporated communities in Contra Costa County.
43
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 88 of 100
Overall, Special Districts is not currently funded in a sustainable manner. Financial resources for
Special Districts tend to be very limited, and often do not meet the expectations of the residents
served. These financial issues stem primarily from three fundamental challenges.
1.Many Special Districts assessments or service charges that fund the districts do not
adjust annually to keep up with inflation. The result is that Special District funding
streams have declined significantly in real value over time
2.Some Special Districts have zero or unpredictable funding
3.Some Special Districts have adequate funding for existing facilities, but additional
funding is not available to accumulate for significant capital improvement or
replacement projects
Special Districts
44
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 89 of 100
Special Districts receives funding for operations and maintenance from ad valorem taxes and/or
assessments on property in the specific district (LL-2 zones, CSAs, or CFDs) served
Many Special Districts were formed in the 1970s through the 1990s, and their funding mechanisms have not been updated since they were formed
Staff have found significant resistance to increasing assessments or service charges for the
various districts managed by our department
Special Districts –Challenge 1
45
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 90 of 100
32 Zones in LL-2
Only 8 of 32 zones have annual cost of living adjustments to their assessments in an effort to
keep up with inflation
The 24 remaining zone assessments, which cover over 6900 parcels, do not have an annual cost
of living adjustment, and often have the same assessment they had when they were formed in
late 1970s to mid-1990s
Due to inflation, these zones have been subject to 25 to 40 years of declining assessment value
and subsequent reductions in maintenance
The assessment income from some of these zones has reached the point where Public Works is
unable to mobilize any sort of maintenance beyond an annual weed abatement and trash removal
Landscape and Lighting Districts (LL-2)
46
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 91 of 100
Zone 10 is responsible for walking trails, parks, landscaping, and open spaces within the ViewpointeSubdivision in Bay Point.
This zone contains 119 parcels and includes significant community landscaping areas throughout.
Since its formation in 1993, Zone 10’s funding has held steady at annual assessment of approximately $152/per residential unit. This assessment has not been and cannot be adjusted since formation.
During this time, the San Francisco Bay Area cost of living has gone from an index of 144 in 1993, to 320 in 2022, a 222% increase. Based on these inflationary pressures, the assessment dollars available to Zone 10 now are only worth 45 percent of what they were worth at formation in 1993.
This leaves the zone underfunded and severely limits the amount of maintenance that can be completed within the zone.
Furthermore, as actual maintenance funds are limited for the zone, it is difficult to accumulate enough funds for a capital replacement project. Given that the landscape and park areas in this zone are now 30 years old, they have reached the end of their useful life and need replacement.
Unfortunately, the decreasing value of the assessment has not allowed Special Districts to accumulate enough funds to implement a capital replacement project. This leaves the zone with limited funds for ongoing maintenance and no funds to replace the declining facilities.
LL-2 Zone 10 Example
47
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 92 of 100
Special Districts were formed with either no funding or with funding that was dependent
on rental income from a community center
As an example, CSA R-9 was formed in El Sobrante in 1974 for parks and recreation with
no funding
The residents turned down two attempts to pass an assessment to fund CSA R-9 in 1985
and 1998, and yet currently, there is considerable interest for a new park in El Sobrante
Special Districts is unable to provide any parks and recreation services until such time as the residents approve baseline funding for the CSA
Special Districts –Challenge 2
48
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 93 of 100
CSA R-10 was formed in Rodeo with the understanding that it would be funded with the proceeds from renting the Lefty Gomez Community Center, which was leased from the John Swett Unified School District
While this model was initially successful, over time the relatively low rental rates for the community center combined with low community interest and the departure of a long-time tenant left the CSA without funds for badly needed operations and maintenance services
The community center was viewed as too small for many events and in “poor” condition. It also lacked funding for necessary capital improvements to update the center
Given the lack of community support for the community center, the funding stream dwindled down to a level that was unsustainable for the County to manage
This was exacerbated by COVID -19, when all community rentals were cancelled, and the CSA was left without funding
In 2022 the Contra Costa County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) dissolved CSA R-10 due to a lack of steady funding stream and the Lefty Gomez Community Center was returned to the school
Subsequently, the County has ceased to provide community center services in Rodeo
Special Districts –Challenge 2
49
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 94 of 100
While some districts have adequate funding for existing operations, they are unable to
accumulate significant reserves to implement long-term capital replacement or upgrade projects
Districts with this financial problem have steady to slightly increasing funding from ad-valorem
service charges but given that the area is built-out and development which would generate
additional revenue is not occurring, these districts will not see enough revenue to generate
reserves for large capital projects.
Often, improvement to these districts is only able to occur when the State provides grant funding for park improvements
Special Districts –Challenge 3
50
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 95 of 100
◦At various times, our department has partnered with others to bring a ballot measure to the residents to increase assessments within specific zones. Each effort polled poorly, and the efforts were abandoned
◦Staff has developed strategies to increase flexibility of the use of some funds within zones and CSA's were feasible within existing ordinance and laws, but these are only marginally effective
◦Service levels have been reduced, impacting long-term sustainability of the infrastructure
◦Leveraged grant opportunities to make capital improvements, but this does not address on-going maintenance issues
◦Additional recurring long-term funding is necessary to provide the necessary capital investment and maintenance needs
◦Seed money necessary to work through options available to Special Districts
Special Districts –Where we've been and next steps
51
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 96 of 100
Take Aways
Road Program –Revenue impact from pandemic should be short-term. We will need to manage project delivery timelines and cash flow for several fiscal years.To help, discretionary funding allocations for projects needing a local match will help.
Flood Control Program –We must address the structural revenue challenge for Flood Control Zones with zero or low revenue streams. The revenue streams need to consider routine maintenance and capital replacement costs for the flood control facilities within the zone
Special Districts –We must address the structural revenue challenge for special districts with underfunded revenue streams.Revenue should be adequate to meet service level expectations by the community within each district
We are working with the County Administrator on identifying discretionary funding to be used for local match requirements.
52
Summary
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 97 of 100
Thank You
Q & A
53
4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 98 of 100
INFRASTRUCTURE, INVESTMENTS AND JOBS ACT (IIJA)DEPARTMENT:Countywide
REPORTING PERIOD:
CCC Department CFDA Federal Grantor
Agency
State Passthrough
Agency Name (if any)Program Title Program Description Federal Share County Match Federal Share County Match Federal Share County Match
PW Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA)
California Department of
Transportation Highway Safety Improvement Program
Countywide Guardrail Upgrades – Phase 2: This project proposes to
upgrade existing guardrails along arterials, collectors, and local roads at
various locations countywide. This project is a continuation of systemically
upgrading all guardrails in the unincorporated County. The rail height and
the end treatments of the guardrails will be upgraded to current Caltrans
standards. Guardrails are typically installed in locations where the terrain is
steep and where running off the roadway is likely to lead to serious injury.
The new end treatments are designed to absorb the impact and direct
errant vehicles back towards the traveled way, reducing the injury severity
of vehicles hitting the guardrail. Areas under consideration for this project
are: West County, Saranap, Alamo, and South Walnut Creek. These
guardrails have been selected to assure cost effectiveness.
$ 999,990 $ 493,710 $ 999,990 $ 493,710 $ - $ -
PW Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA)
California Department of
Transportation Highway Safety Improvement Program
Appian Way at Fran Way Pedestrian Crosswalk Enhancements: This project
proposes to upgrade the existing crosswalk at the intersection of Appian
Way and Fran Way in unincorporated El Sobrante. The purpose of the
project is to slow down vehicle traffic and increase pedestrian safety.
Improvements include installing rectangular rapid flash beacons (RRFBs),
bulb-outs, and a median refuge island. Curb ramps will be upgraded to
meet Americans with Disability Act standards.
$ 249,840 $ 260,960 $ 249,840 $ 260,960 $ - $ -
PW Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA)
California Department of
Transportation Highway Safety Improvement Program
Walnut Boulevard Bike Safety Improvements: This project will improve
bicyclist safety by widening the roadway shoulder for the southbound
direction along approximately 850 feet of Walnut Boulevard between the
intersections of Marsh Creek Road and Vasco Road in unincorporated
Brentwood. This route serves as a natural bicycling connector between
urban Brentwood and Oakley, and the lack of shoulder width along the
road makes it difficult for bicyclists to safely navigate. Adding the additional
pavement will improve the safety of bicyclists by providing increased
separation between bicyclists and vehicles.
$ 249,415 $ 900,585 $ 249,415 $ 900,585 $ - $ -
PW Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA)
California Department of
Transportation Highway Safety Improvement Program
Byron Highway Safety Improvements: This project proposes to construct
safety improvements along Byron Highway between Clifton Court Road and
Bruns Road. Improvements such as street lighting, edgeline rumble strips
and curve advance warning flashing beacons are being considered. Forty-
two collisions were recorded within a 5-year span. Of those collisions,
twenty nighttime collisions occurred along this segment, accounting for
48% of all collisions. Providing roadway lighting improves safety at night by
making drivers aware of the surroundings, which improves drivers’
perception-reaction times, and enhances drivers’ sight distance. Installing
edgeline rumble strips and curve advance warning flashing beacons will
alert drivers that they are drifting out of their travel lane.
$ 1,316,520 $ 146,280 $ 1,316,520 $ 146,280 $ - $ -
PW Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA)
California Department of
Transportation Highway Safety Improvement Program
Vasco Road Safety Improvements: This project proposes to install safety
improvements along Vasco Road between Walnut Boulevard and Camino
Diablo in unincorporated Brentwood. These improvements include
constructing a 0.75-mile-long no-passing zone with median striping,
centerline rumble strip, and delineators along the Vasco Road median.
Within a 5-year span, two collisions that resulted in fatalities and two
collisions that caused severe and minor injuries took place along the 0.75-
mile-long roadway segment where passing is currently allowed. Installing
the improvements will eliminate the collisions caused by unsafe passing
maneuvers. The project also proposes installing signal hardware upgrades
at the intersections of Vasco Road with Walnut Boulevard and Camino
Diablo. Twenty-eight collisions occurred within the 5-year span at these
two intersections due to failures to stop on red. Installing the signal
hardware upgrades will increase the traffic signals’ visibility and
consequently reduce the number of collisions.
$ 715,050 $ 79,450 $ 715,050 $ 79,450 $ - $ -
PW Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA)
California Department of
Transportation Highway Safety Improvement Program
Deer Valley Road Traffic Safety Improvements: This project proposes to
install safety improvements along several of the horizontal roadway curves
of Deer Valley Road where severe collisions have occurred. Improvements
such as curve advance warning signs and widening shoulders are being
considered. The goal of this project is to improve driver awareness at these
curves to prevent lane departures and prevent cars from running off the
road.
$ 1,125,810 $ 125,090 $ 1,125,810 $ 125,090 $ - $ -
PW Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA)
California Department of
Transportation
Transportation Alternatives/Active
Transportation Program
San Pablo Avenue Complete Street/Bay Point Trail Gap Closure: This project
proposes to implement a road diet and construct a Class I shared use path
along the San Francisco Bay Trail.
$ 10,517,000 $ 1,200,000 $ 10,517,000 $ 1,200,000 $ - $ -
DEPARTMENT IMPACT WORKSHEET FY 2022/23 - Q2 (period ending December 31, 2022)
Application Amount Grant Award Amount Amount Expended
FINANCIAL INFORMATION PROGRAM INFORMATION
1/2 4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 99 of 100
CCC Department CFDA Federal Grantor
Agency
State Passthrough
Agency Name (if any)Program Title Program Description Federal Share County Match Federal Share County Match Federal Share County Match
PW Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA)
California Department of
Transportation
Transportation Alternatives/Active
Transportation Program
Pacifica Avenue Safe Routes to School: Reconfigure Pacifica Avenue to
install a two-way cycle track, new and widened sidewalks, bulb-outs, and
raised crosswalks from Intel Drive to Port Chicago Highway.
$ 3,902,000 $ 440,000 $ 3,902,000 $ 440,000 $ - $ -
PW Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA)
California Department of
Transportation
Bridge Investment Program/Highway Bridge
Program
Byron Highway Bridge Replacement over California Aqueduct (Bridge No.
28C0121) $ 19,870,559 $ 4,708,020 $ 19,870,559 $ 4,708,020
PW Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA)
California Department of
Transportation
Bridge Investment Program/Highway Bridge
Program
Bridge Preventative Maintenance $ 658,330 $ 519,101 $ 658,330 $ 519,101
PW Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA)
California Department of
Transportation
Bridge Investment Program/Highway Bridge
Program
Del Monte Drive Bridge Painting and Poly Overlay (Bridge No. 28C0207) $ 793,000 $ 374,000 $ 793,000 $ 374,000
PW Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA)
California Department of
Transportation
Bridge Investment Program/Highway Bridge
Program
Freeman Road and Briones Valley Road Bridge Maintenance $ 723,000 $ 217,000 $ 723,000 $ 217,000
PW Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA)
California Department of
Transportation
Bridge Investment Program/Highway Bridge
Program
Marsh Creek Road Bridge Replacement (Bridge No. 28C143 & 28C145) $ 14,095,984 $ 5,078,552 $ 14,095,984 $ 5,078,552
PW Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA)
California Department of
Transportation
Bridge Investment Program/Highway Bridge
Program
Marsh Drive Bridge Replacement Over Walnut Creek $ 13,282,696 $ 3,965,338 $ 13,282,696 $ 3,965,338
PW Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA)
California Department of
Transportation
Bridge Investment Program/Highway Bridge
Program
Pleasant Hill Road Bridge Rehabilitation (Bridge No. 28C0154) $ 900,586 $ 577,433 $ 900,586 $ 577,433
PW Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA)
California Department of
Transportation
Bridge Investment Program/Highway Bridge
Program
Second Avenue Bridge Replacement (Bridge No. 28C0383) $ 7,108,000 $ 1,262,000 $ 7,108,000 $ 1,262,000
$ 76,507,780 $ 20,347,519 $ 76,507,780 $ 20,347,519 $ - $ -
2/2 4-10-23 TWIC Meeting - Agenda Packet, Page 100 of 100