Minutes 09-18-2012 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

You will note that the total period is about 7 to 10 years. This information should be helpful when the BOCC discusses sections 8 and 10 (the second number 10) of the Implementation Agreement. The BRI Plan (page 26) states that the FTA typically considers the FFGA during Final Design. That information might be helpful when the BOCC discusses section 12 (B). B. State Funding of Light Rail Transit The TAC also learned that during the Preliminary Engineering phase would be the time to start contacting the state about funding, with the ultimate goal of receiving a State Full Funding Grant Agreement. II. Summary of Revenues and Costs in the Orange County BRI Plan Appendix A of the BRI Plan includes a page with three pie charts which give a summary of total revenues, total costs, and Orange County costs. That page is given in the attachment for your review. This information should be helpful when the BOCC discusses sections 8, 12, and 13. Chair Pelissier introduced Jim Ward from the Chapel Hill Town Council. PUBLIC COMMENT: Jim Ward, Chairman Chapel Hill Transit Public Transit Committee, said that he would not read the resolution that he just distributed, but he would just go through the gist of it. He said that Chapel Hill Transit is supportive of the process and of the Bus and Rail Investment Plan, but the Public Transit Committee cannot support the current proposed implementation agreement, which unnecessarily restricts Chapel Hill Transit's ability to operate the transit system in a manner responsive and responsible to the interests and needs of the riders and citizens of the community. He said that the current draft of the Implementation Agreement establishes a baseline of the number of hours of route service provided in 2010. The agreement prohibits funds from the local sales tax from being used to support operating costs below this floor. He said that the legislation requires that new funds do not supplant or replace existing funds, not existing hours of service. The latter interpretation could result in their not being able to support new or expanded service. He said that the current language of the agreement does not allow for any funds to be used for relief in the event of state or federal funds should they be reduced. This could force service cuts on established routes, but providing funding for introduction of new service. He said that they would not advocate support for this referendum with the current Implementation Agreement. The resolution is shown below: A RESOLUTION FROM THE PUBLIC TRANSIT COMIMTTEE REGARDING THE IMPLEMENTATION AGREEMENT FOR THE BUS AND RAIL INVESTMENT PLAN IN ORANGE COUNTY