Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBOARD STANDING COMMITTEES - 11022015 - TWIC Agenda Pkt            TRANSPORTATION, WATER & INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE November 2, 2015 1:00 P.M. 651 Pine Street, Room 101, Martinez Supervisor Candace Andersen, Chair Supervisor Mary N. Piepho, 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. Administrative Items, if applicable. (John Cunningham, Department of Conservation and Development)   4. REVIEW record of meeting for the September 8, 2015 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)   5. CONSIDER accepting a report on the status of implementing a regional taxicab permitting process in Contra Costa County, authorize staff to continue working with jurisdictions within the County to evaluate the feasibility of a regional permitting process and direct staff to return to the Committee once final options have been developed. (Timothy Ewell, County Administrator’s Office)   6. ACCEPT report on the implementation of Measure WW Park Project List and Expenditure Plan for the Unincorporated Areas of the county and RECOMMEND the Board of Supervisors adopt a Resolution providing Authorization to apply for local grand funds from the East Bay Regional Park District under Measure WW Park Bond Extension. (Kristine Solseng, Department of Conservation and Development)   7. CONSIDER report on Local, State and Federal Transportation Related Legislative Issues and take ACTION as appropriate. (John Cunningham, Department of Conservation and Development)   TWIC Packet Page# 1 8.The next meeting is currently scheduled for Monday, December 7, 2015.   9.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. 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) 674-7833, Fax (925) 674-7250 john.cunningham@dcd.cccounty.us TWIC Packet Page# 2 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 TWIC Packet Page# 3 TRANSPORTATION, WATER & INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE 3. Meeting Date:11/02/2015   Subject:Administrative Items Department:Conservation & Development Referral No.: N/A   Referral Name: N/A  Presenter: John Cunningham, DCD Contact: John Cunningham (925)674-7833 Referral History: This is an Administrative Item of the Committee.  Referral Update: Staff will review any items related to the conduct of Committee business. Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s): Take ACTION as appropriate. Fiscal Impact (if any): N/A Attachments No file(s) attached. TWIC Packet Page# 4 TRANSPORTATION, WATER & INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE 4. Meeting Date:11/02/2015   Subject:REVIEW record of meeting for the September 8, 2015 Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee Meeting. Department:Conservation & Development Referral No.: N/A   Referral Name: N/A  Presenter: John Cunningham, DCD Contact: John Cunningham (925)674-7833 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 September 8, 2015 Committee Meeting with any necessary corrections. Fiscal Impact (if any): N/A Attachments 9-8-15 DRAFT TWIC Minutes 9-8-15 TWIC Meeting Sign-In Sheet TWIC Packet Page# 5 9-8-15 TWIC Meeting Sign-In Sheet TWIC 6-1-15 Mtg Hand-Out, Delta Stewardship Council Water Chart TWIC 6-1-15 Mtg Hand-Out, EBMUD Pledge TWIC 6-1-15 Mtg Hand-Out, Elements of Transportation Funding Plans spkrcard TWIC Packet Page# 6 D R A F T TRANSPORTATION, WATER & INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE September 8, 2015 1:00 P.M. 651 Pine Street, Room 101, Martinez   Supervisor Candace Andersen, Chair Supervisor Mary N. Piepho, Vice Chair   Agenda Items:Items may be taken out of order based on the business of the day and preference of the Committee   Present: Candace Andersen, Chair      Mary N. Piepho, Vice Chair    Attendees: Julie Bueren, CC County Public Works Dept.  Stephen Kowalewski, CC County Public Works Dept.  Tanya Drlik, IPM Coordinator  John Cunningham, CC County DCD, Transportation Div  Mike Gibson, Alamo Improvement Association  Dean Christopherson, Alamo Improvement Association  Mark Seedall, CC County Water District  Lucinda Cartwright, CC County Civil Grand Jury  Sharon Burke, Alamo Today  JoAnn Semas, Citizen of Alamo  Carlos Velasquez, CC County Fleet Manager  Sandy Turk, Citizen of Alamo  Harold Mantle, CC County Civil Grand Jury  Smitty Schmidt, Citizen of Alamo                   1.Introductions Please see attached sign-in sheet, hand-outs and "Attendees" section, above.   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.Administrative Items, if applicable (John Cunningham, Department of Conservation and Development).   4.Staff recommends approval of the attached Record of Action for the July 16, 2015 Committee Meeting with any necessary corrections.       The Committee unanimously approved the 7/16/15 meeting record.   5.CONSIDER Report on the Activities of the IPM Advisory Committee and take ACTION as appropriate including CONSIDERATION of specific recommendations in the report above and DIRECT staff as appropriate. Recommendations are summarized in the Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s) section at the end of this report. (Tanya Drlik IPM Program Coordinator)       The Committee directed staff to 1) bring an IPM report to the Board of Supervisors, 2) adopt a policy regarding conversion of turf to drought tolerant landscaping, and 3) update the Committee on the the status of AB 551-CA.   TWIC Packet Page# 7   6.AUTHORIZE the Conservation and Development Director to submit grant applications to the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (“BAAQMD”) for the Fiscal Year 2015/16 “Charge!” grant program and Electric Vehicle Charging Station Demonstration Program. (Jamar Stamps, Department of Conservation and Development)       The Committee unanimously approved the staff recommendations and directed staff to bring the report to the Board of Supervisors on consent.   7.CONSIDER Report on Local, State, and Federal Transportation Related Legislative Issues and take ACTION as appropriate including CONSIDERATION of specific recommendations in the report above. (John Cunningham, Department of Conservation and Development)          8.The next meeting is currently scheduled for Monday, October 5, 2015 at 1:00pm.   9.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. 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 TWIC Packet Page# 8 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 For Additional Information Contact: Phone (925) 674-7833, Fax (925) 674-7250 john.cunningham@dcd.cccounty.us TWIC Packet Page# 9 TWIC Packet Page# 10 TWIC Packet Page# 11 TWIC Packet Page# 12 TWIC Packet Page# 13 TWIC Packet Page# 14 TRANSPORTATION, WATER & INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE 5. Meeting Date:11/02/2015   Subject:Taxicab Regionalization effort Submitted For: TRANSPORTATION, WATER & INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE,  Department:Conservation & Development Referral No.: 18   Referral Name: Monitor issues of interest in the provision of general transportation services, including but not limited to public transportation and taxicab services  Presenter: Tim Ewell, County Administrator's Office Contact: Tim Ewell (925)335-1036 Referral History: On September 5, 2013, the Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee received a staff report regarding the status of a regulatory structure for taxicab permitting within the unincorporated area, pursuant to Government Code § 53075.5. At that time, the Committee directed staff to work with the County Administrator’s Office (CAO) to: 1. Obtain advice from County Counsel regarding the County’s potential risk and exposure for not having a taxicab permitting ordinance or resolution pursuant to the California Code. 2. Coordinate with the Office of the Sheriff to identify resources and develop a budget for codifying and administrating a taxicab permitting ordinance or resolution. On June 5, 2014, the County Administrator’s Office returned to the Committee with a framework for the implementation of a taxicab ordinance in unincorporated areas of Contra Costa County. The implementation frame work, including roles of County departments, is summarized below: Treasurer-Tax Collector I. Issues general business license to taxi companies operating in the unincorporated area. II. Notifies applicants of the need to acquire a taxicab permit in jurisdiction where business is located. Sheriff’s Office I. Issues Permits to new taxicab operators and businesses located in the County unincorporated area. a. Applicant provides valid business license to operate in the unincorporated area. b. Sheriff facilitates referrals for the California Department of Justice Live Scan and drug testing TWIC Packet Page# 15 for permit applicants with businesses established in the unincorporated area, at cost of the applicant. c. Applicant provides proof of taxicab vehicle inspection conducted by private entity at time of application for a permit, at cost of the applicant. d. Sheriff to establish a fee for reviewing new applications and annual renewals as part of the Taxicab ordinance. II. Existing taxicab operators and businesses permitted in other jurisdictions within Contra Costa County doing business in an unincorporated area. a. Ordinance to allow a permit from any other jurisdiction within Contra Costa County to operate a taxicab to be accepted with no further action required by Sheriff’s Office. b. Business owner are still responsible for acquiring a business license to operate in the unincorporated area from Treasurer Tax Collector. At the June 5, 2014 meeting, the Committee approved the implementation framework and directed staff to work with County Counsel to draft the Ordinance for review by the Committee. Shortly following the meeting, the Contra Costa County Police Chief’s Association discussed at a regular meeting, the notion of a regional taxicab cooperative. On October 23, 2014, the County Administrator’s Office and Sheriff’s Office met with the Concord Police Chief and staff to explore options for implementing a regional taxicab cooperative with the intention of reporting back to the Committee with options and requesting direction. Shortly after that meeting, the Contra Costa County Local Government Leadership Academy, sponsored by the Contra Costa County Public Manager’s Association and local jurisdictions, received a submission from the City of Walnut Creek (Attachment A) to explore, as a project for Academy participants, the implementation of a regional taxicab permitting program. The project duration was from January through July 2015. In light of the Academy submission, staff recommended and TWIC approved the tabling of further discussion about implementing a taxicab permitting regime for the unincorporated area until the results of the Academy project were complete and an analysis by County and municipal stakeholders was completed to assess the viability of a regional approach.  Referral Update: In August 2015, the Academy completed and a workgroup of participants, including the County’s own Chrystine Robbins from the Sheriff’s Office and Fire Marshal Robert Marshall from Contra Costa Fire, issued a thorough report on how best to move forward with a regional approach. The research of the workgroup cited a current Joint Exercise of Powers Authority (JPA) model in Marin County as a successful example of a regional effort to address taxicab permitting. Since the report was issued, representatives from the county, cities and special districts have met twice to discuss a path forward. On August 26, 2015, the regional workgroup convened to discuss the Academy workgroup’s TWIC Packet Page# 16 On August 26, 2015, the regional workgroup convened to discuss the Academy workgroup’s findings and recommendations. The City of Walnut Creek, as the lead agency, offered to invite the General Manager of the Marin General Services Agency to discuss how that program worked and the interaction between the Authority, Marin County and cities within the County. On September 21, 2015, the regional workgroup convened to hear a presentation from the General Manager of the Marin General Services Authority about its operations and experience regulating taxis. Following that presentation the workgroup was encouraged that an example of a regional model had proved to be a feasible endeavor, but had reservations about establishing a new, standalone JPA within Contra Costa County to manage the operations. Alternatively, there was discussion regarding setting up an MOU process whereby a regional process would be “governed” by a set of MOUs between the County and cities. Following the discussion, the group agreed to report back to home agencies and return to the next workgroup meeting with the current position of each agency. Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s): I. ACCEPT a report on the status of implementing a regional taxicab permitting process in Contra Costa County; II. AUTHORIZE staff to continue working with the regional taxicab work group to evaluate the feasibility of establishing a joint taxicab permitting process, including, but not limited to, delegating the County’s permitting authority to a new or existing legal entity; III. DIRECT staff to return to the Committee once the regional workgroup has developed final options for consideration by County jurisdictions. Attachments Attachent A TWIC Packet Page# 17 TWIC Packet Page# 18 TWIC Packet Page# 19 TRANSPORTATION, WATER & INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE 6. Meeting Date:11/02/2015   Subject:ACCEPT report on the implementation of Measure WW Park Project List & Expenditure Plan & RECOMMEND the Board of Supervisors adopt a Resolution. Submitted For: TRANSPORTATION, WATER & INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE,  Department:Conservation & Development Referral No.: 9   Referral Name: Monitor the status of county park maintenance issues including, but not limited to, transfer of some County park maintenance responsibilities to other agencies and implementation of Measure WW grants and expenditure plan.  Presenter: Kristine Solseng, DCD Contact: Kristine Solseng (925)674-7809 Referral History: The TWIC Committee directed staff to return to the TWIC committee with a proposed Measure WW Expenditure Plan at their June 12, 2013 meeting. Referral Update: N/A Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s): ACCEPT report on the implementation of Measure WW Park Project List and Expenditure Plan for the Unincorporated Areas of the county and RECOMMEND the Board of Supervisors adopt a Resolution providing Authorization to apply for local grand funds from the East Bay Regional Park District under Measure WW Park Bond Extension. Fiscal Impact (if any): Negative action or delay in Measure WW process may jeopardize the County’s ability to complete the projects by December 2018, thus forfeiting any Measure WW funds associated with incomplete projects. Attachments Exhibit A: Draft BOS Resolution-TWIC 11-2-15 Measure WW - TWIC memo TWIC Packet Page# 20 TWIC Packet Page# 21 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board Adopted this Resolution on 12/08/2015 by the following vote: AYE: NO: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: RECUSE: Resolution No. ~~~DRAFT~~~~ A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CONTRA COSTA COUNTY TO APPLY FOR LOCAL GRANT FUNDS FROM THE EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT UNDER MEASURE WW PARK BOND EXTENSION. WHEREAS, the people of the East Bay Regional Park District have enacted the Measure WW Park Bond Extension which provides funds for the acquisition and development of neighborhood, community, regional parks and recreation land and facilities; and WHEREAS, the East Bay Regional Park District Board of Directors has the responsibility for the administration of the grant program, setting up necessary procedures; and WHEREAS, said procedures require the Applicant’s Governing Body to certify by resolution the approval of the Applicant to apply for the Local grant allocation of funds; and WHEREAS, the Applicant will enter into Contract with the East Bay Regional Park District; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Contra Costa, as follows: 1. Approves the execution of a grant contract in the amount of $3.05 million from the Local Grant Program under the East bay Regional Park District Measure WW Park Bond Extension; and 2. Certifies that the Applicant has or will have sufficient funds to operate and maintain the Projects; and 3. Certified that the Applicant has reviewed, understands and agrees to the General Provisions contained in the Contra shown in the Procedural Guides; and 4. Appoint the Director of Conservation and Development as agent to conduct all negotiations, execute and submit all document including, but not limited to, applications, agreements, amendments, payment requests and so on, which may be necessary for the completion of Projects. Contact: I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: December 8, 2015 David J. Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: , Deputy cc: TWIC Packet Page# 22 1 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPT. OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT 30 Muir Road Martinez, CA 94553 DATE: October 20, 2015 TO: Transportation, Water, and Infrastructure Committee (TWIC) Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II, Chair Supervisor Mary N. Piepho, District III, Vice Chair FROM: John Kopchik, Director, Department of Conservation and Development By: Kristine Solseng, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Measure WW Park Bond Extension - Proposed Work Plan for Allocating Funds in the Unincorporated County Areas Not Within a Community Service Area or Community Service District RECOMMENDATIONS ACCEPT report on the implementation of Measure WW Project List and Expenditure Plan for the Unincorporated Areas of the County and RECOMMEND the Board of Supervisors adopt a Resolution (see Exhibit A) providing Authorization to apply for local grand funds from the East Bay Regional Park District under Measure WW Park Bond Extension. Background: In November 2008, Alameda and Contra Costa County voters approved the East Bay Regional Park District’s (EBRPD) Measure WW Regional Open Space, Wildlife, Shoreline and Parks Bond Extension. From that, a total of $7.93 million is allocated to areas within the Unincorporated Area of the County. These funds were allocated to specific County Services Areas (CSA) ($2.49 million), Community Service Districts (CSD) and Recreation and Parks Districts ($2.39 million), and to unincorporated areas not in a CSA or CSD district ($3.05 million). The latter of these categories, distribution of $3.05 million, is the subject of this report before TWIC. Measure WW guidelines allow for funding a project that is located within a CSA provided it serves the residents of the unincorporated area(s) outside the CSA’s boundaries. All Measure WW funds must be fully expended by December 2018. Pursuant to the Measure WW, the projects must meet the following standards: Insure equitable geographic distribution of the funds. Use of the property/facilities must be for at least 25 years. TWIC Packet Page# 23 2 Provide lands and facilities for recreational activities and services and historic preservation. Capital projects may include acquisition of park land and development of recreational facilities, including renovation of existing facilities. Public art projects are eligible as long as they are in or adjacent to a parks and recreation facility. The matrix below outlines the proposed projects to be submitted to EBRPD for approval for areas in the unincorporated County not in a CSA or CSD. Proposed Project Description Estimated Amount District 1 – Urban Tilth Development of a 3.1 acre site into an agricultural park and riparian learning center in North Richmond. Property is owned by the County and leased to Urban Tilth, a 501(c)3 nonprofit organization. $450,000 District 1 – Mira Vista Fields Improvements to an approximately 8 acre open space park located below Mira Vista Elementary School in East Richmond Heights. Property is owned by the West Contra Costa Unified School District and will provide an easement or lease to Contra Costa County $150,000 District 2 – Alternative 1: Olympic Corridor Connector Segment Improvements of a linear park and path segment of the Olympic Corridor Connector between the Lafayette- Moraga Trail and the Iron Horse Trail. Property owned by the County. $600,000 District 2 – Alternative 2: Tice Valley Linear Park Improvements of a linear park and path near Tice Valley road. Property will be owned by the County. $600,000 District 2 – Alternative 3: Bonita Path Development of a linear park and path in the Saranap community. Property is privately owned and will either be purchased by or leased to the County. $600,000 District 3 – Excelsior Middle School Playfields Renovation of the playfields at Excelsior Middle School in Byron. Property is owned by the Byron Unified school district and will enter into an agreement Contra Costa County for site control. $600,000 District 4 – Iron Horse Trail Improvements Improvements along the Iron Horse Trail in the Contra Costa Centre area. Sites are owned by Contra Costa County and Contra Costa County Successor Agency. $600,000 District 5 – Las Juntas Elementary School Playfields Renovation of playfields at Las Juntas Elementary School in unincorporated Martinez. Property is owned by the Martinez School district and will enter in a 25 year lease with Contra Costa County. $550,000 District 5 – Pacheco Creekside Park Trail Improvements along the Pacheco Creekside Trail including, but not limited to, items such as ADA ramps, benches, and garbage containers. $50,000 Contingency Funds set aside should a project need additional funding $50,000 Total $3,050,000 On July 9, 2013 the Board of Supervisors determined that $600,000 would be allocated to each of the five supervisorial districts, with a $50,000 contingency fund available as needed. The above named projects are in various stages of development and all are expected to be completed within the three- year period allowed by the funding criteria. Staff has worked with each of the District Supervisors to identify projects that meeting the funding criteria. Given some projects are early in the development phase, there may be some changes to the final project list before it goes before the Board of TWIC Packet Page# 24 3 Supervisors. Additionally, staff recommends the funding request to EBRPD include a provision to allow up to 10% of the total contract amount be transferred between projects at discretion of grant administrator. As these projects are further developed, changes to the master agreement with East Bay Regional Park District may be necessary to shift funds as needed. Once the Board of Supervisors approved the proposed project list and adopts the attached Resolution, the County will enter into a master contract with EBRPD. Each individual project will then go through an application process for funding, once the specific design, environmental work, and construction budgets are more refined. cc: Jason Chen, Public Works Warren Lai, Public Works Susan Cohen, Public Works Kristine Solseng, Department of Conservation and Development TWIC Packet Page# 25 TRANSPORTATION, WATER & INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE 7. Meeting Date:11/02/2015   Subject:CONSIDER Report on Local, State and Federal Transportation Related Legislative Issues and 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)674-7833 Referral History: This is a standing item on the Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee (TWIC) referral list and meeting agenda. Referral Update: In developing transportation related legislative 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. Recommendations are summarized in the Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s) section at the end of this report and specific recommendations are underlined  in the report below. This report includes three sections, 1) LOCAL, 2) STATE, and 3) FEDERAL. 1) LOCAL Transportation Expenditure Plan (TEP) The Contra Costa Transportation Authority's (Authority) is in the process of developing both the 2014 Countywide Transportation Plan (CTP) and a Transportation Expenditure Plan (TEP). A TEP is a statutorily required component of a transportation sales tax. These items are standing item for the foreseeable future. New material below is shown in italics. As the TWIC has discussed at past meetings, the development of the CTP resulted in a dialog regarding the need for additional revenue for transportation improvements. The outcome of those discussions was to initiate the process to go to the ballot in November 2016 with a new transportation sales tax. The Authority Board approved this activity at their March, 2015 meeting. At previous TWIC and Board of Supervisors (Board) meetings we have discussed the basis on which the Authority is developing the plan, the process, and schedule. The Board has not yet endorsed the proposed transportation sales tax. For background purposes the latest full report to the Board is available at the link below. TWIC Packet Page# 26 September 15, 2015 http://64.166.146.245/docs/2015/BOS/20150915_640/650_09-15-15_826_AGENDApacket.pdf#page=128 TEP Update The Board approved the recommendations in the 9/15 staff report mentioned above. Below are updates on those actions where available: Process Per Board direction, County staff contacted Authority staff and met on October 13 and 27 to discuss process issues in bringing a transportation sales tax measure to the ballot. These issues included schedule, costs of the election, and relevant statutory authority. Outcomes of those meetings: • As was the case with Measure J (2008), the Authority agreed to reimburse the County for the cost of the election. • A tentative schedule for the various required approvals and hearings is being developed and will be distributed once it is finished.  Staff from both agencies will continue to meet as necessary during the development of the TEP and ordinance if the effort is sucessful. Board Priorities The Board is reviewing a draft letter transmitting comments and priorities on the TEP at their November 3, 2015 meeting. The draft letter is attached to this report (BOStoCCTAreTEP(11-3).pdf). Some of these priorities were discussed during our 10/13, 27 meetings with CCTA: • Maintenance: In contrast to both the Board's position and that of the Regional Transportation Planning Committees (RTPCs) of a 30% allocation for Local Streets Maintenance, the Authority proposal is likely to be 18% in the upcoming draft TEP. The existing substantial maintenance shortfall was discussed and acknowledged but Authority position was that 30% is not possible. • Accessible Transit: In concept, CCTA staff does not see any issues with the four recommendations in the draft letter. Regarding the mobility management/brokerage model being proposed, staff would like to examine the system in more detail to be sure it would function in Contra Costa County. The topic of the site visit to the Santa Clara County operation was discussed. At this time Santa Clara County cannot entertain a large group, staff proposed bring a few Board members to visit the site. • Improved Land Use Coordination: The concept of encouraging the development of employment sites to make use of underutilized transportation infrastructure was discussed and some different options were considered. At this time, the County needs to develop a more specific proposal in order to receive feedback and further the discussion. • Projects: The modification to the SR 239/TriLink project was discussed. The Authority is supportive of moving the Vasco-Byron Connector ahead as a priority. The concept of enhancing the Iron Horse corridor with improved bicycle facilities was also discussed favorably. RECOMMENDATION: The Committee should DISCUSS local transportation issues of interest to the County and take ACTION as appropriate. TWIC Packet Page# 27 2) STATE Legislation Attached is the latest report from the County's legislative advocate Mark Watts, (State Legislative Update 10_2015.pdf), and a clear, well organized report from the State Legislative Analyst's Office summary of the various transportation funding proposals being discussed (LAO - Transportation-Challenges-101615.pdf). Mr. Watts will be present at the TWIC meeting to discuss these documents and provide an overview of the state legislative situation. A list of bills tracked by the County is attached (StateLegListing.pdf) Iron Horse Corridor On October 19, 2015 a delegation from Contra Costa County went to Sacramento to meet with Caltrans leadership to discuss the status of the Iron Horse corridor relative to requirements placed on the County regarding it's use as a transportation corridor. That meeting is addressed in the attached legislative report from Mark Watts.  RECOMMENDATION: The Committee should DISCUSS state legislative activities of interest to the County and take ACTION as appropriate. 3) FEDERAL Expiration of Federal Transportation Funding Authorization: On October 27th the House passed a short term measure to extend funding authority until November 20th. The Senate is expected to pass the bill later this week. Congress has not passed a bill longer than two years since 2005. RECOMMENDATION: DISCUSS that status of federal transportation funding legislation and take ACTION as appropriate. Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s): CONSIDER Report on Local, State, and Federal Transportation Related Legislative Issues and take ACTION as appropriate including CONSIDERATION of specific recommendations in the report above. Fiscal Impact (if any): There is no fiscal impact. Attachments BOS to CCTA Re: TEP Tracked Bills - State Legislative Update 10_2015 LAO - Transportation-Challenges-101615 TWIC Packet Page# 28 The Board of Supervisors County Administration Building 651 Pine Street, Room 106 Martinez, California 94553 John Gioia, 1st District Candace Andersen, 2nd District Mary N. Piepho, 3rd District Karen Mitchoff, 4th District Federal D. Glover, 5th District November 3, 2015    Julie Pierce, Chair  Contra Costa Transportation Authority   2999 Oak Road, Suite 100  Walnut  Creek, CA 94597  DRAFT   Subject: Transportation Expenditure Plan & Potential Sales Tax  Measure  Dear Chair Pierce:  On October 20, 2015, the Board of Supervisors (Board) approved the following  comments be transmitted to the Contra Costa Transportation Authority. This letter  details our position on policies and funding levels for the Transportation Expenditure  Plan (TEP), currently under development by the Contra Costa Transportation Authority  (Authority). At its September 15, 2015 meeting the Board received a report on TEP  issues and formally recommended the positions detailed below.  This comment letter does not constitute an endorsement by the Board of the concept of  a 2016 transportation sales tax. The Board will consider that broader issue at a future  meeting in the context of the Board’s assessment of the need for new funding for  transportation and other services.  Local Streets and Roads: As you are aware, the demand for increased maintenance  funding is a national, statewide, and local problem. In reviewing data regarding the  County’s maintenance needs, it is clear that a substantial increase in Local Streets  Maintenance and Improvements funding is necessary.   An analysis performed by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) has  shown that in unincorporated Contra Costa County over a 24 year period, we have a  revenue shortfall of $442 million to address pavement and directly related non‐ pavement needs. Expanding on that analysis, assuming 30% revenues from a new TEP,  David Twa Clerk of the Board and County Administrator (925) 335-1900 Contra Costa County TWIC Packet Page# 29 Julie Pierce, Chair ‐ CCTA  October 20, 2015  Page 2 of 9 there would continue to be a $350 million shortfall over the same period. These figures  don’t include the maintenance demand for the 111 bridges in unincorporated County.   In addition to our current maintenance shortfall, we also have a need for more funding  to implement and maintain complete street projects in our unincorporated communities  to serve all of the users of our roads and enhance neighborhoods.  Considering the above, the Board supports the funding levels for local streets and roads  (maintenance and improvements) in a new TEP that the Regional Transportation  Planning Committees (RTPCs) have taken. Specifically, SWAT at 25%‐30%, TRANSPAC  at 30%, TRANSPLAN at 30% and WCCTAC at 28%. This support includes complete  streets concepts as detailed below. The Board recognizes the importance of improving  and maintaining our local streets and roads for all modes of transportation.  Recommendations from SWAT, TRANSPAC and WCCTAC include funding for  complete streets and multi‐modal projects within the local streets and roads category.  TRANSPLAN recommends 30% for local streets maintenance and improvements and  also recommends additional funding amounts for projects for bike and pedestrian  improvements, safe transportation for schools as well as Transportation for Livable  Communities. The Board supports the direction to include complete streets concepts  recognizing the importance of improving and maintaining our local streets and roads  for all modes of transportation.  During our discussion on maintenance needs, the topic of progress at the state  regarding transportation finance reform was considered. While the Board has hope that  the State will reform transportation financing practices, our data show that even if the  maximum funding increases considered during the recent special session of the State  legislature were enacted, we would continue to have a substantial maintenance backlog.   We  understand there is an interest in establishing a reporting mechanism to provide  additional accountability and tracking of maintenance funding. The Board is supportive  of this and is willing to work with the Authority and other member agencies to develop  a mechanism to ensure that maintenance expenditure practices are transparent.   Accessible Services/Mobility Management/Paratransit: As we indicated in our  October 21, 2014 comment letter on the Countywide Transportation Plan, the issue of  improvements to transit for the elderly and people with disabilities (accessible services)  is a priority for the Board. This issue is longstanding; the Board made similar comments  in 2002 during the effort to reauthorize Measure C. The Board is making these  comments due to the forecasted growth of the target population1 and increasing costs2.   1 65+ Bay Area population is forecasted to grow 137% by 2040. Data sources: 2010 Census, California Department of Finance, ABAG TWIC Packet Page# 30 Julie Pierce, Chair ‐ CCTA  October 20, 2015  Page 3 of 9 The Board believes this issue requires substantial, deliberate attention given that  accessible transit responsibilities are diffused in Contra Costa County, making progress  challenging. Accessible transit in the County consists of four different public Americans  with Disabilities Act (ADA) paratransit providers, program specific transit providers,  city‐based providers and the County itself has certain transportation obligations related  to health care and the Older Americans Act. This structure grew organically over time  and as such, no single organization falls naturally into a leadership role. With the  recommendations below, we want to provide a countywide direction and improve  services to our shared constituency while providing much needed cost controls.  In our October 2014 comment letter we indicated that accessible service would need, in  addition to additional funding, fundamental administrative changes if we are to  respond adequately in a cost‐effective manner to the projected demand for service. The  recommendations below build on those earlier comments and are consistent with the  2013 Contra Costa Mobility Management Plan (CCMMP), as well as the unfulfilled  recommendations in the 2004 Contra Costa Paratransit Improvement Study. The  recommendations in this letter and found in the CCMMP are also consistent with MTC’s  Coordinated Public Transit  –Human Services Transportation Plan Update for the Bay Area. The  MTC Plan has the recommendation of “strengthening mobility management” which  includes the designation of a Consolidated Transportation Services Agency3 (CTSA).  The designation of a CTSA is also a recommendation in the 2013 CCMMP.  The Board supports the following relative to accessible services in a new TEP:  1) The TEP should, in addition to providing additional operations funding, fund a  countywide mobility management4 program as recommended in the CCMMP5. The  CCMMP includes preliminary cost figures for implementation which may need to be  260% increase in paratransit cost per trip from 2004 to 2013 (average of all Contra Costa County transit agencies) Data source: 2004-2013 National Transit Database 3 CTSA: Adapted from several public sources: Created under AB 210 (1979 – “Social Services Transportation Improvement Act”). The purpose of the Act was to improve the quality of transportation services to low mobility groups while achieving cost savings, lowered insurance premiums and more efficient use of vehicles and funding resources. The legislation took the middle course between absolutely mandating and simply facilitating the coordination of transportation services. Designation of CTSAs and implementation of other aspects of the Act were seen as a flexible mechanism to deal with the problem of inefficient or duplicative transportation services. 4 Mobility Management Defined: Mobility management (MM) is a strategic approach to the coordination of transportation service, revenue streams, technology implementation, and customer service. MM directs passengers to the most appropriate and cost-effective transportation option using information, incentives, and other voluntary measures. Best implemented on a larger scale, a mobility-managed service area provides a full range of well synchronized mobility services in a cost effective manner. 5 A small non-profit, “Mobility Matters” (formerly, “Senior Helpline Services”) has begun providing some mobility management in Contra Costa County. However, that organization has limited funding thorough grants expiring in 2016. TRANSPAC provides Mobility Matters some Measure J funds (20a – Sr/Disabled Transportation) for a volunteer driver program. No Measure J funds are used for mobility management functions. TWIC Packet Page# 31 Julie Pierce, Chair ‐ CCTA  October 20, 2015  Page 4 of 9 refined as we move ahead. As implementation progresses, the Board strongly  recommends consideration of a transition to the mobility management/brokerage6  model used in Santa Clara County.   2) Currently, Measure J has eligibility requirements placed on local jurisdictions in order  to receive Local Streets & Maintenance funding. As mentioned in the Local Streets and  Roads section above, additional requirements are being considered for supplementary  maintenance funding. Similar to those requirements, the Board is proposing that  eligibility for transit funding under a new TEP be contingent upon participation in the  implementation of the mobility management program and other identified  improvements to accessible services.  3) Implementing the service model proposed in #1 above is a substantial investment. We   believe that the County and Authority Board members would benefit from a tour of the  Santa Clara County accessible services operation, OUTREACH. The OUTREACH  operation is non‐profit based and is a national model for cost‐effective procurement,  contracting and operations7. During a time  where our own transit operations show a  trend of increasing costs, the OUTREACH model has shown reduced costs8. The Board  is requesting attendance from Authority members on this tour tentatively scheduled for  mid‐November.   4) One barrier to progress on this issue is the understandable resistance to any changes  in service to a sensitive population. As we move ahead with this effort, an explicit  commitment should be made by all agencies involved to insulate current accessible  transit customers from service degradations or interruptions.  The Authority should be aware that the Board is fully committed to pursuing  improvements to accessible transit. The Santa Clara County mobility  management/brokerage model includes County support by way of competitive pricing  on vehicle maintenance, vehicle parking and bulk fuel purchases. The Board is currently  exploring the possibility of duplicating that service in Contra Costa.   6 A mobility management operation can, over time, transition to a “brokerage” model. A brokerage model splits functions related to ADA paratransit/accessible service with a transit agency. Those functions span a continuum starting with administrative responsibilities (contracting with service providers, monitoring performance, customer service) all the way up to a full service brokerage (central call center/dispatch, management of a coordinated system, etc). Adapted from FTA Report #0081, “Accessible Services for All”: http://www.fta.dot.gov/documents/FTA_Report_No._0081.pdf#page=39 7 Federal Transit Administration, “Accessible Transit Services for All” December 2014 www.fta.dot.gov/documents/FTA_Report_No._0081.pdf#page=246 8 19% decrease in cost per trip from 2004 to 2013 Data source: 2004-2013 National Transit Database TWIC Packet Page# 32 Julie Pierce, Chair ‐ CCTA  October 20, 2015  Page 5 of 9 Improved Land Use Coordination: In our October 2014 letter and at our September 15th  discussion, the Board discussed the need for economic development and balancing jobs  and housing to make more efficient use of our transportation infrastructure. The  following statistics underscore the structural problems that challenge our transportation  network as well the potential benefits of addressing these problems:  1) The five cities in the Bay Area with the longest commute times are all in Contra Costa  County9;  2) Contra Costa is second only to Solano for having the lowest number of jobs relative to  housing10 and is forecast to be the only County in the Bay Area with fewer jobs than  housing units in 204011; and   3) Travel patterns are imbalanced resulting in substantially underutilized infrastructure.   For example, State Route 4 in East Contra Costa County carries approximately 2.3 times  as many vehicles in the commute direction as in the non‐commute direction12.  Long and congested commute patterns cause residents to spend more of their time  commuting than in other, more valuable activities and contribute substantially to  unhealthful and climate‐altering emissions. A primary cause of this unbalanced,  inefficient and resource‐intensive transportation pattern is that it can be difficult to find  jobs and housing in close proximity, or to find jobs and housing connected by transit.  The potential sales tax measure now under consideration may present an opportunity  to better address a root cause of the transportation challenges we face.  The Board would like to discuss with the Authority and other stakeholders the  possibility of developing policies in the TEP for promoting development that reduces  congestion and makes better use of transit and other existing infrastructure. We  propose  that conversation include two types of approaches: a) funding allocations; and b) new  policy incentives.  To  stimulate discussion, we have included some initial ideas below  on each of these two approaches.  We  would welcome a discussion on these and other  ideas that others may have.  Initial Ideas on the Funding Allocation Approach: The TEP could allocate a portion of  the future funds to a congestion reduction program related to stimulating certain types  of new development. Funds for such a program could be used to stimulate certain infill  9 MTC's "Vital Signs": Oakley, Brentwood, Antioch, Hercules, Pittsburg 10 ABAG: San Francisco Bay Area: State of the Region: Economy/Population/Housing – 2015 (Figure 4.27 (Jobs to Housing Ratio, Bay Area Counties)) 11 ABAG: Draft Plan Bay Area: Forecast of Jobs, Population, & Housing, March 2013 (Table 14 (SF Bay Area County Housing and Job Growth, 2010-2040)) 12 MTC’s Vital Signs TWIC Packet Page# 33 Julie Pierce, Chair ‐ CCTA  October 20, 2015  Page 6 of 9 and other development that demonstrates positive impacts on the transportation  system, such as reduced demand on the most congested freeways and roads, better  utilization of transit, greater off‐peak utilization, reduced average commute times, and  reduction of out‐of‐county commute trips. This could take the form of development in  Priority Development Areas (PDAs) near transit or other types of development that  achieve the demand reduction goal. For Contra Costa County, jobs/housing balance is a  key concern. A focus on developing employment centers that would offer well‐paying  jobs proximate to housing (i.e. priority industrial areas or priority employment areas)  could have merit. Stimulating development that establishes well‐paying jobs in East  County, for example, could reduce strain on Highway 4, offer a far easier commute for  East County residents and make better use of prior transportation investments by  stimulating the counter commute.  Subject to feasibility studies, demonstration of congestion reduction, and Authority  approval, local jurisdictions could request funding for projects that would stimulate  development that would reduce congestion.  Such investments could include  transportation infrastructure (e.g. improvements to transit and roadways in areas  targeted for job growth).  However, to realize the congestion reduction benefit of the  desired development, a broader range of investments could be considered, such as  advanced telecommunication/broadband infrastructure, water, sewer, power, impact fee  offsets, land assembly, or other investments.  The analysis should consider not only the  direct growth in jobs (and housing) likely to result from the investment, but also the net  growth in jobs (certain jobs such as advanced manufacturing can have relatively high  job multipliers).   Initial Ideas on the Policy  Incentives Approach:  The TEP might include additional  policy incentives to promote infill and other development that reduces congestion. For  example, the TEP could include incentives for local agencies to adopt and implement  certain land‐use policies such as PDAs, priority industrial areas or priority employment  areas, greater density along transit or employment targets. Alternatively, incentives  could be linked to certain TEP funding categories. For instance, economic  development/jobs‐housing balance/congestion reduction goals could be a criteriacriteria  for allocating funding to any competitively awarded pots of funds.   Finally, the Board hopes there can be a discussion regarding if and how the potential  measure can address the fundamental shifts in the statewide transportation planning  and funding landscape resulting from recent landmark greenhouse gas reduction  legislation , (for instance the State’s replacement of the Level of Service (LOS) metric  with a Vehicle  Miles Travelled (VMT) metric). At this time, it may be appropriate to  consider revisions to the Authority’s Growth Management Program and Technical  TWIC Packet Page# 34 Julie Pierce, Chair ‐ CCTA  October 20, 2015  Page 7 of 9 Procedures that would incrementally and strategically adapt to the new VMT standard  while maintaining the local benefits of the current LOS standard.   The Board would welcome discussion on these and other ideas related to these  challenging land use and transportation issues.  Bicycle Transportation Issues: Contra Costa County currently has the lowest rate of  trips‐by‐bike rate in the Bay Area according to the MTC13. Please consider a strategic  approach to developing and prioritizing bicycle project and program activities to  reverse this rate to improve the County’s ranking.  One component of that strategic approach could be to further expand and improve the  County’s network of separated, Class I trails. These facilities often have a substantial  number of users, traveling at varying speeds, on a single path. For example, a “bicycle  expressway” could be a separate project in the Iron Horse corridor that would  accommodate faster cyclists. This would increase usage, safety, and comfort for both  cyclists and pedestrians and merits consideration during development of the TEP.    Major Projects: The following is an update to the Board’s priority project list  transmitted in our October 2014 comment letter. The Board also intends on pursuing  these priorities at the appropriate Regional Transportation Planning Committees.  The TriLink/State Route 239: This project continues to be a priority. In the  interest of advancing a project within a shorter time frame, the Board is  requesting that the Vasco‐Byron Highway connector phase be prioritized in the  TriLink program of projects.  The Kirker Pass Road Truck  Climbing Lanes: This project addresses congestion  and safety along in this critical TRANSPAC and TRANSPLAN connector road.   The northbound project, estimated to cost $18 million, is scheduled for  construction in 2018 and will provide a northbound truck climbing lane and  paved shoulders for future Class II bike lanes between Clearbrook Drive in the  City of Concord and the easternmost Hess Road intersection in the  unincorporated area. The project is needed to improve safety for motorists and  bicyclists along this stretch of road that experiences high truck traffic and is a  major commute corridor between Central and East County. With sustained  grades steeper than eight percent, trucks are unable to match the speed of other  vehicles on the roadway, causing significant congestion and creating a safety  hazard. The southbound project will add a truck climbing lane in the opposite  13 MTC: Regional Bicycle Plan for the San Francisco Bay Area – 2009 Update. TWIC Packet Page# 35 Julie Pierce, Chair ‐ CCTA  October 20, 2015  Page 8 of 9 direction and is estimated to cost over $20 million. There is no date yet for  construction, but project development activities are expected to be started within  the next few years.  Capitol Corridor Voucher  Program: This is a new proposed program that the  Board is requesting WCCTAC and CCTA explore. WCCTAC is currently  involved in a high capacity transit study that would explicitly or effectively  extend BART service in West  Contra Costa County. Given that a service  expansion of this type is typically a long‐term process; a more immediate  solution should be considered.  The Capitol Corridor Joint Powers Authority (CCJPA) currently operates the  Capitol Corridor service through Contra Costa County. In order to provide some  service increase to West  Contra Cost residents in the short term, a TEP‐funded,  Capitol Corridor voucher program for Contra Costa residents should be  considered. The CCJPA is currently involved in a Capitol Corridor Vision   Planning process, which calls for coordination with WCCTAC and CCTA relative  to the high capacity transit study. Either the CCJPA planning process or the  WCCTAC High Capacity Transit Study may be an appropriate mechanism by  which to explore this concept.   Marsh Creek Trail: The Board also suggests consideration of an emerging  transportation project: a multi‐use path in the Marsh Creek corridor that would  connect east and west County on or near Marsh Creek Road. This project is in the  concept stage and discussion among local jurisdictions has begun. The project  would be a significant community asset and may mature enough in the next year  to warrant eligibility for funding.   The following projects continue to be a priority: North Richmond Truck  Route,  I‐680 HOV Gap Closure, Iron Horse/Lafayette‐Moraga Trail Connector, Vasco  Road Safety Improvements, and Northern Waterfront Goods Movement  Infrastructure.   The Board of Supervisors greatly appreciates staff and consultant assistance during our  deliberations on TEP development. We  look forward to your response and additional  engagement on this critical issue.     Sincerely,        TWIC Packet Page# 36 Julie Pierce, Chair ‐ CCTA  October 20, 2015  Page 9 of 9   John Gioia, Chair  Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors  Supervisor, District I    C:  David Twa, County Administrator  Sharon Anderson, County Counsel  Julie Bueren, Director – Public Works Department  John Kopchik, Director ‐ Conservation and Development   Patricia Tanquary, CEO – Contra Costa Health Plan  Sherry McCoy, Chair ‐ WCCTAC  Don Tatzin, Chair – SWAT  Robert Taylor, Chair, TRANSPLAN  Loella Haskew, Chair – TRANSPAC    TWIC Packet Page# 37 California Status actions entered today are listed in bold. File name: TWI­OtherLeg 1. CA AB 2 Community Revitalization Authority  Authorizes certain local agencies to form a community revitalization authority with a community revitalization and investment area to carry out provisions of the Community Redevelopment Law in that area for infrastructure, affordable housing, and economic revitalization and provides for the issuance of bonds serviced by tax increment revenues. Requires the authority to adopt a community revitalization and investment plan. Requires the use of certain funds for low and moderate income housing. Latest Action 09/22/2015  Signed by GOVERNOR. 09/22/2015  Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter No. 319 319 2. CA AB 148 K­14 School Investment Bond Act of 2016  Reduces the minimum amount that a school district must set aside for ongoing and major maintenance of school buildings in a fiscal year. Authorizes a grant for new construction or modernization to be used for seismic mitigation. Requires an interagency plan to streamline the school facilities construction application and review process. Enacts the K­14 School Investment Bond Act of 2016 to provide funds for the construction and modernization of education facilities. Latest Action 05/28/2015  In ASSEMBLY Committee on APPROPRIATIONS: Held in committee. 3. CA AB 325 Community Development Block Grant Program  Relates to the Community Development Block Grant Program. Requires the Department of Housing and Community Development to enter into a grant agreement with the applicant. Provides for a list of activities and procedures to receive a grant. Authorizes the Department to make changes to the final list of activities if the applicant makes changes to the original application or the federal government or the Legislature requires changes. Provides procedures for funds disbursement notification. TWIC Packet Page# 38 File name: TWI­TransLeg Latest Action 10/01/2015  Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter No. 397 397 4. CA AB 1362 Local Government Assessments Fees and Charges  Defines stormwater for purposes of the Proposition 218 Omnibus Implementation Act to mean any system of public improvements or service intended to provide for the quality, conservation, control, or conveyance of waters that land on or drain across the natural or man­ made landscape. Latest Action 03/23/2015  To ASSEMBLY Committee on LOCAL GOVERNMENT. 5. CA SB 8 Taxation  Expands the Sales and Use Tax Law to impose a tax on the gross receipts from the sale in the State or, or the receipt of the benefit in the State of services at a specified percentage rate. Latest Action 02/19/2015  Re­referred to SENATE Committee on GOVERNANCE AND FINANCE. 6. CA AB 1 Drought: Local Governments: Fines  Prohibits a city, county, or city and county from imposing a fine under any ordinance for a failure to water a lawn or having a brown lawn during a period for which the Governor has issued a proclamation of a state of emergency based on drought conditions. Latest Action 07/13/2015  Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter No. 62 62 7. CA AB 4 Vehicle Weight Fees: Transportation Bond Debt Service  Prohibits weight fee revenues from being transferred from the State Highway Account to the Transportation Debt Service Fund, the Transportation Bond Direct Payment Account, or any other fund or account for the purpose of payment of the debt service on transportation general obligation bonds. Prohibits loans of weight fee revenues to the General Fund. TWIC Packet Page# 39 Latest Action 06/02/2015  Withdrawn from ASSEMBLY Committee on TRANSPORTATION. 06/02/2015  In ASSEMBLY. Ordered to second reading. 8. CA AB 6 Bonds: Transportation: School Facilities  Provides that no further bonds shall be sold for high­speed rail purposes pursuant to the Safe, Reliable High­Speed Passenger Train Bond Act for the 21st Century. Requires the net proceeds of other bonds to be made available to fund construction of school facilities for K­12 and higher education. Latest Action 04/20/2015  In ASSEMBLY Committee on TRANSPORTATION: Failed passage. 04/20/2015  In ASSEMBLY Committee on TRANSPORTATION: Reconsideration granted. 9. CA AB 8 Emergency Services: Hit­and­Run Incidents  Authorizes a law enforcement agency to issue a Yellow Alert if a person has been killed or has suffered serious bodily injury due to a hit­and­ run incident and the law enforcement agency has specified information concerning the suspect or the suspect's vehicle. Authorizes the Department of the California Highway Patrol to activate such alert within the requested geographic area upon request if it concurs with the law enforcement agency that specified requirements are met. Latest Action 09/28/2015  Signed by GOVERNOR. 09/28/2015  Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter No. 326 326 10. CA AB 21 Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006: Scoping Plan  Requires the State Air Resources Board in preparing its scoping plan for achieving the maximum technologically feasible and cost­ effective reductions in greenhouse gas reduction, to consult with specified State agencies regarding matters involving energy efficiency and the facilitation of the electrification of the transportation sector. TWIC Packet Page# 40 Latest Action 09/18/2015  In SENATE. Ordered to Inactive File due to inaction prior to Fall Recess. 11. CA AB 23 Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006: Compliance  Exempts categories of persons or entities that did not have a compliance obligation under a market­based compliance mechanism from being subject to that market­based compliance mechanism. Latest Action 03/23/2015  In ASSEMBLY Committee on NATURAL RESOURCES: Failed passage. 03/23/2015  In ASSEMBLY Committee on NATURAL RESOURCES: Reconsideration granted. 12. CA AB 28 Bicycle Safety: Rear Lights  Requires that a bicycle operated during darkness upon a highway or a sidewalk be equipped with a red reflector or a solid or flashing red light with a built­in reflector on the rear that is visible for a specified distance to the rear when directly in front of lawful upper beams of headlamps on a motor vehicle. Latest Action 10/07/2015  Signed by GOVERNOR. 10/07/2015  Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter No. 549 549 13. CA AB 33 Electrical Corporations: Procurement Plans  Requires the Public Utilities Commission to determine what role large scale energy storage could play as part of the state's overall strategy for procuring a diverse portfolio of resources and to consider specified factors in making that determination. Latest Action 09/08/2015  In SENATE. Read second time. To third reading. 09/08/2015  Re­referred to SENATE Committee on RULES. 14. CA AB 157 Richmond­San Rafael Bridge  Authorizes the lead agency to complete theTWIC Packet Page# 41 design work for the project simultaneously with the environmental review conducted pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act if the Metropolitan Transportation Commission and the Department of Transportation develop a project to open the third lane on the Richmond­San Rafael Bridge to automobile traffic on the eastbound level and to bicycle traffic on the westbound level. Latest Action 10/01/2015  Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter No. 393 393 15. CA AB 227 Transportation Funding  Retains weight fee revenues in the State Highway Account. Deletes the provisions relating to the reimbursement of the State Highway Account for weight fee revenues and relating to the making of loans to the General Fund, thereby providing for the portion of fuel excise tax revenues that is derived from increases in the motor vehicle fuel excise tax in 2010 to be allocated to the State Transportation Improvement Program, to the State Highway Operation Program, and to city and county roads. Latest Action 04/15/2015  In ASSEMBLY. Read second time and amended. Re­referred to Committee on BUDGET. 16. CA AB 323 Environmental Quality Act: Exemption  Amends the California Environmental Quality Act that exempts a project or an activity to repair, maintain, or make minor alterations to an existing roadway, if the project of activity is carried out by a city or county with a specified population to improve public safety and meets other specified requirements, to extend that exemption to a specified date. Latest Action 07/06/2015  Signed by GOVERNOR. 07/06/2015  Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter No. 52 52 17. CA AB 327 Public Works: Volunteers  Extends the provisions of existing law that provides governing public works does not apply to specified work performed by a volunteer, a volunteer coordinator, or a member of the TWIC Packet Page# 42 California Conservation corps or a community conservation corps. Latest Action 07/06/2015  Signed by GOVERNOR. 07/06/2015  Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter No. 53 53 18. CA AB 464 Transactions and Use taxes: Maximum Combined Rate  Amends existing law that authorizes cities and counties, and if specifically authorized, other local government entities, to levy a transactions and use tax for general purposes, in accordance with the procedures and requirements set forth in the Transactions and Use Tax Law, including a requirement that the combined rate of all taxes imposed in the county to not exceed a specified percentage. Increases the maximum combined rate. Latest Action 08/17/2015  Vetoed by GOVERNOR. 19. CA AB 518 Department of Transportation  Amends existing law authorizing a local agency to enter into an agreement with the appropriate transportation planning agency to use its own funds to develop, and construct a project within its own jurisdiction. Deletes a provision requiring the department to compile information and report to the Legislature. Latest Action 03/05/2015  To ASSEMBLY Committee on TRANSPORTATION. 20. CA AB 1088 Education Facilities: Bond Act: Greene Act  Repeals provisions requiring the existing school building capacity for a high school district to be calculated without regard to multitrack year­ round school considerations. Requires a workgroup to recommend changes to shorten and streamline the construction or modernization of schools process. Requires regulation recommendations regarding designing facilities. Requires baseline eligibility for modernization funding. Enacts a specified facilities bond act. Latest Action 05/06/2015  In ASSEMBLY. Read second time andTWIC Packet Page# 43 amended. Re­referred to Committee on APPROPRIATIONS. 21. CA AB 1098 Transportation: Congestion Managment  Deletes traffic level of service standards as an element of a congestion management program and deletes related requirements, including a requirement that a city or county prepare a plan when highway or roadway level of service standards are not maintained. Requires performance measures to include vehicle miles traveled, air emissions, and bicycle, transit, and pedestrian mode share. Requires an evaluation of how a congestion management program contributes to achieving a greenhouse gas reduction target. Latest Action 03/26/2015  To ASSEMBLY Committees on TRANSPORTATION and LOCAL GOVERNMENT. 03/26/2015  From ASSEMBLY Committee on TRANSPORTATION with author's amendments. 03/26/2015  In ASSEMBLY. Read second time and amended. Re­referred to Committee on TRANSPORTATION. 22. CA AB 1119 Public Utilities: Rights of Way  Requires a municipal corporation, before using any right of way within any other municipal corporation or county, to request the entity that has control of such right of way to agree with it upon the location of the use and the terms and conditions to which the use shall be subject. Authorizes the proposing municipal corporation to bring an action against the county if they are unable to agree on the terms and conditions and location of the use. Repeals related provisions. Latest Action 10/09/2015  Signed by GOVERNOR. 10/09/2015  Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter No. 670 670 23. CA AB 1265 Transportation Projects: Comprehensive Development  Relates to existing law which authorizes the Department of Transportation and regional transportation agencies to enter into comprehensive lease agreements. Provides that TWIC Packet Page# 44 a lease agreement shall not be entered into under these provisions on or after a specified date. Includes within the Definition of regional transportation agency, the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, thereby authorizing the authority to enter into public­private partnerships. Latest Action 05/06/2015  In ASSEMBLY Committee on APPROPRIATIONS: To Suspense File. 24. CA AB 1284 Bay Area State­Owned Toll Bridges  Provides that the Toll Bridge Program Oversight Committee is subject to the Bagley­Keene Open Meeting Act. Latest Action 08/11/2015  Signed by GOVERNOR. 08/11/2015  Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter No. 172 172 25. CA AB 1344 County Office of Education Charter Schools  Extends the authorization of a governing board of a school district to render a city or county zoning ordinance inapplicable to a proposed use of school district property, except when the proposed use is for nonclassroom facilities to the governing board of a county office of education. Prohibits a county office from rendering such ordinance inapplicable to a charter school facility, unless the school is physically with the jurisdiction of the office. Latest Action 04/22/2015  In ASSEMBLY Committee on EDUCATION: Not heard. 26. CA AB 1347 Public Contracts Claims  Establishes, for state and local public contracts, a claim resolution process applicable to all claims by contractors in connection with public works. Specifies the procedures that are required of a public entity upon receipt of a claim sent by certified mail. Relates to failure of a public entity to respond to a claim within a specified time. Provides for a mutually agreed waiver and commencement of a civil action. Authorizes nonbinding mediation. Provides for a certain contractor claim procedure. Latest Action 10/11/2015 TWIC Packet Page# 45 Vetoed by GOVERNOR. 27. CA ACA 4 Local Government Transportation Projects: Special Taxes  Proposes an amendment to the Constitution to provide that the imposition, extension, or increase of a sales and use tax or a transaction and use tax imposed by a county, city, city and county, or special district to provide funding for local transportation projects requires the approval of a specified percentage of its voters voting on the proposition. Latest Action 08/27/2015  In ASSEMBLY Committee on APPROPRIATIONS: Not heard. Alert: Xpress 28. CA SB 1 Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006: Compliance  Amends the State Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. Authorizes the State Air Resources Board to include the use of market­based compliance mechanisms. Exempts categories of persons or entities that did not have a compliance obligation under a market­based compliance mechanism from being subject to that market­based compliance mechanism. Requires all participating categories of persons or entities to have a compliance obligation beginning on a specified date. Latest Action 01/15/2015  To SENATE Committee on ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY. 29. CA SB 5 Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006: Compliance  Relates to the State Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. Authorizes the State Air Resources Board to include the use of market­based compliance mechanisms. Exempts categories of persons or entities that did not have a compliance obligation under a market­based compliance mechanism from being subject to that market­based compliance mechanism through a specified date. Latest Action 04/15/2015  In SENATE Committee on ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY: Failed passage. 04/15/2015  In SENATE Committee on TWIC Packet Page# 46 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY: Reconsideration granted. 30. CA SB 9 Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund: Transit/Intercity Rail  Modifies the purpose of the Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program. Provides for the funding of defined transformative capital improvements. Updates project selection criteria under the program to projects that reduce greenhouse emissions and expand transit service. Requires approval of a multi­year program of projects. Requires entering into a multi­year funding agreement for a project. Authorizes the approval of related letters of no prejudice in allowing an applicant to expend its own moneys. Latest Action 10/09/2015  Signed by GOVERNOR. 10/09/2015  Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter No. 710 710 31. CA SB 16 Transportation Funding  Creates the Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Program and a related fund for deferred highway and local road maintenance. Provides for an increase in motor vehicle fuel tax, a vehicle registration fee, commercial vehicle weight fees. Transfers a portion of the diesel fuel tax increase to the Trade Corridors Investment Fund. Increases the vehicle license fee for transportation bond debt service. Relates to petroleum storage taxes. Relates to allocation for supplemental project allocation requests. Latest Action 09/09/2015  In SENATE. From third reading. To Inactive File. 32. CA SB 32 Global Warning Solutions Act of 2006  Requires the State Air Resources Board to approve a specified statewide greenhouse gas emission limits that are the equivalent to a specified percentage below the 1990 level to be achieved by 2030. Revises current provisions of existing law regarding the implementation of the next update of a greenhouse gas scoping plan under existing law. Requires reports regarding reaching these limits. Latest Action 09/10/2015  Re­referred to ASSEMBLY Committee on NATURAL RESOURCES. TWIC Packet Page# 47 09/10/2015  From ASSEMBLY Committee on NATURAL RESOURCES with author's amendments. 09/10/2015  In ASSEMBLY. Read second time and amended. Re­referred to Committee on NATURAL RESOURCES. 33. CA SB 39 Vehicles: High­Occupancy Vehicle Lanes  Increases the number of vehicle identifiers that the Department of Motor Vehicle is authorized to issue for HOV lane usage. Latest Action 05/22/2015  To ASSEMBLY Committee on TRANSPORTATION. 34. CA SB 40 Air Quality Improvement Program: Vehicle Rebates  Requires incentives for qualifying zero­emission, battery­electric passenger vehicles under the Clean Vehicle Rebate Project of the Air Quality Improvement Program to be limited to vehicles in that category with a manufacturer's suggested retail price of a specified amount. Requires the rebate for certain vehicles to be a specified sum, subject to the availability of funds. Latest Action 04/06/2015  From SENATE Committee on TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING with author's amendments. 04/06/2015  In SENATE. Read second time and amended. Re­referred to Committee on TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING. 35. CA SB 114 Education Facilities: Kindergarten Through Grade 12  Revises the definition of modernization under the Leroy F. Greene School Facilities Act of 1998 to include replacement facilities. Requires a school district to certify that it has a certain school facilities master plan consistent with a certain sustainable communities strategy. Makes changes concerning evaluation of certain costs, eligibility, a statewide school facilities inventory, grants for seismic mitigation purposes, funding of joint­use facilities. Enacts a facilities­related bond Act. Latest Action 09/11/2015  In SENATE. To Inactive File. TWIC Packet Page# 48 Alert: Xpress 36. CA SB 119 Protection of Subsurface Installations  Makes changes relating to a regional notification center and subsurface installations. Provides for delineation of areas to be excavated, preservation of certain plans, excavator damages for improperly inaccurate field mark, pipeline safety, an exemption for certain residential property owners using hand tools, the creation of an advisory committee, the use of moneys collected as a result of the issuance of citations, gas corporations' damage prevention programs, sewer line tagging, and related reports. Latest Action 10/10/2015  Vetoed by GOVERNOR. 37. CA SB 194 Vehicles: High­Occupancy Vehicle Lanes  Makes technical, nonsubstantive changes to existing law that authorizes local authorities and the Department of Transportation to establish exclusive or preferential use of highway lanes for high­occupancy vehicles on highways under their respective jurisdictions. Latest Action 02/19/2015  To SENATE Committee on RULES. 38. CA SB 313 Local Government: Zoning Ordinances: School Districts  Conditions the authorization to render a city or county zoning ordinance inapplicable to a proposed use of school district property upon compliance with a notice requirement regarding a schoolsite on agricultural land. Requires the governing board of a district to notify a city or county of the reason the board intends to take a specified vote. Requires the vote to be based upon findings that such an ordinance fails to accommodate the need for renovation or expanding an existing school, or for a new school. Latest Action 06/02/2015  In SENATE. To Inactive File. 39. CA SB 321 Motor Vehicle Fuel Taxes: Rates: Adjustments  Relates to motor fuel tax rates. Requires the State Board of Equalization to adjust the rate in a manner as to generate an amount of revenue equal to the amount of revenue loss attributable to an exception that reflects the combined average of the actual fuel price over previous fiscal years and the estimated fuel price for theTWIC Packet Page# 49 current fiscal year. Relates to revenue neutrality for each year. Latest Action 09/11/2015  In SENATE. From Unfinished Business. To Inactive File. 40. CA SB 491 Transportation: Omnibus Bill  Provides provisions regarding transportation to include vehicle registration fees for air quality, transit security, hazardous materials license endorsement, commercial driver cargo security, commercial motor vehicle speedometers, use of flags and lighting on oversized loads, placing a lighted fusee to a vehicle, truck tractor wheel service breaks, use of saddle mounts or tow­ bars, securing vehicles from fumes and hazards, earphones prohibition, bikeways, highway descriptions, and vehicle accident reports. Latest Action 10/02/2015  Signed by GOVERNOR. 10/02/2015  Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter No. 451 451 41. CA SB 564 Vehicles: School Zone Fines  Requires that an additional fine be imposed if a certain violation occurred when passing a school building or school grounds and the highway is posted with a standard warning sign and an accompanying sign notifying motorists that increased penalties apply for traffic violations that are committed within that school zone. Requires the funds from additional fines be deposited in the State Highway Account for funding school zone safety projects within the Active Transportation Program. Latest Action 05/22/2015  To ASSEMBLY Committee on TRANSPORTATION. 42. CA SB 595 Vehicles: Prima Facie Speed Limits: Schools  Makes technical nonsubstantive changes to existing law concerning the prima facie speed limit when approaching or passing a school. Latest Action 03/12/2015  To SENATE Committee on RULES. 43. CA SB 632 Vehicles: Prima Facie Speed Limits:TWIC Packet Page# 50 Schools  Allows a city or county to establish in a residence district, on a highway with a posted speed limit of 30 miles per hour or slower, a 15 miles per hour prima facia limit when approaching at a distance of less than 500 feet from, or passing, a school building or the grounds thereof, contiguous to a highway and posted with a school warning sign that indicates a speed limit of 15 miles per hour, while children are going to or leaving the school, either during school hours or during the noon recess period. Latest Action 04/14/2015  In SENATE Committee on TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING: Not heard. Alert: Xpress Priority: High 44. CA SCA 1 University of California: Legislative Control  Proposes an amendment to the Constitution to repeal the constitutional provisions relating to the University of California and the regents. Requires the university and the regents to be continued in existence subject to legislative control as may be provided by statute. Requires the Legislature from enacting any law that restrains academic freedom or imposes educational or curricular requirements on students. Latest Action 01/15/2015  To SENATE Committees on EDUCATION and ELECTIONS AND CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS. 45. CA SCA 7 Motor Vehicle Fees and Taxes:Restriction on Expenditure  Proposes an amendment to the Constitution to prohibit the Legislature from borrowing revenues from fees and taxes imposed by the State on vehicles or their use or operation, and from using those revenues other than as specifically permitted by a specified Article. Provides that none of those revenues may be pledged or used for the payment of principal and interest on bonds or other indebtedness. Revises the use of specified fuel tax revenues for mass transit purposes and for boating­related activities. Latest Action 05/28/2015  From SENATE Committee on TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING with author's amendments. TWIC Packet Page# 51 05/28/2015  In SENATE. Read second time and amended. Re­referred to Committee on TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING. 46. CA AB 2 a Transportation Projects: Comprehensive Lease Agreements  Amends existing law that authorizes the Department of Transportation and regional transportation agencies to enter into comprehensive development lease agreements with public and private entities for certain transportation projects. Extends this authorization indefinitely and includes within the definition of regional transportation agency the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority. Latest Action 08/27/2015  In ASSEMBLY. Assembly Rule 63 suspended. 08/27/2015  In ASSEMBLY. Read second time. To third reading. 47. CA SB 1 a Transportation Funding  Creates the Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Program to address deferred maintenance on the state highway system and the local street and road system and other purposes. Provides an increase the motor vehicle fuel and diesel fuel excise tax, vehicle registration fees, a new road access charge, the breakout of road maintenance funds, an increase in the vehicle license fee for bond debt service, funding for state highways, general fund loan repayment. Relates to gasoline and diesel excise tax neutrality. Latest Action 09/01/2015  From SENATE Committee on APPROPRIATIONS with author's amendments. 09/01/2015  In SENATE. Read second time and amended. Re­referred to Committee on APPROPRIATIONS. 48. CA SB 3 a Transportation Bonds: Highway and Road Projects  Provides that no further bonds shall be sold for high­speed rail purposes pursuant to the Safe, Reliable High­Speed Passenger Train Bond Act for the 21st Century, except as specifically provided with respect to an existing appropriation for high­speed rail purposes for early improvement TWIC Packet Page# 52 projects in the Phase I blended system. Requires the redirection of unspent proceeds for repair and new construction projects on State highways and freeways. Continues funding for certain rail purposes. Latest Action 09/14/2015  Returned to Secretary of Senate pursuant to Joint Rule 62(a). 49. CA SB 4 a Transportation Funding  Declares the intent of the Legislature to enact statutory changes to establish permanent, sustainable sources of transportation funding to maintain and repair the state's highways, local roads, bridges, and other critical transportation infrastructure. Latest Action 09/10/2015  In SENATE. SENATE refused to concur in ASSEMBLY amendments. *****To CONFERENCE Committee. 50. CA SB 5 a Transportation Funding  Declares the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation to establish permanent, sustainable sources of transportation funding to improve the state's key trade corridors and support efforts by local governments to repair and improve local transportation infrastructure. Latest Action 09/01/2015  In SENATE. Read third time. Passed SENATE. *****To ASSEMBLY. 51. CA SB 9 a Department of Transportation  Prohibits the Department of Transportation from using any nonrecurring funds, including, but not limited to, loan repayments, bond funds, or grant funds, to pay the salaries or benefits of any permanent civil service position within the department. Requires the Department to contract for architectural and engineering services with respect to public works of improvement, with a minimum of percentage of total value of these services to be contracted by a specified date and increasing to a new minimum. Latest Action 09/14/2015  Returned to Secretary of Senate pursuant to Joint Rule 62(a). TWIC Packet Page# 53 52. CA SB 12 a State Transportation Commission  Excludes the State Transportation Commission from the Transportation Agency. Establishes it as an entity in State government, and requires it to act in an independent oversight role. Requires the Department of Transportation to program capital outlay support resources for each program project. Provides the Commission may approve or reject individual projects. Requires the Department to submit any change in programmed project's cost, scope, or schedule to the Commission for its approval. Latest Action 08/20/2015  In SENATE. Read second time and amended. Re­referred to Committee on APPROPRIATIONS. 53. CA SB 13 a Office of the Transportation Inspector General  Creates the Office of the Transportation Inspector General in state government as an independent office that would not be a subdivision of any other government entity, to build capacity for self­correction into the government itself and to ensure that all State agencies expending State transportation funds are operating efficiently, effectively, and in compliance with federal and state laws. Requires the appointment of a related Inspector General. Specifies Office funding sources. Latest Action 09/03/2015  From SENATE Committee on APPROPRIATIONS with author's amendments. 09/03/2015  In SENATE. Read second time and amended. Re­referred to Committee on APPROPRIATIONS. 54. CA SCA 1 a Motor Vehicles Fees and Taxes: Expenditure Restrictions  Proposes an amendment to the Constitution to prohibit the Legislature from borrowing revenues from fees and taxes imposed by the State on vehicles or their use or operation, and from using those revenues other than as specifically permitted by the Constitution. Prohibits using such revenues for interest on mass transit voter­approved bonds. Relates to the use a motor vehicle fuels tax revenues and vehicle license fee revenues. Latest Action 09/08/2015 TWIC Packet Page# 54 From SENATE Committee on TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT: Be adopted to Committee on APPROPRIATIONS. TWIC Packet Page# 55 Smith, Watts &Hartmann, LLC. Consulting and Governmental Relations 980 Ninth Street, Suite 2000  Sacramento, CA 95814 Telephone: (916) 446-5508  Fax: (916) 266-4580         MEMORANDUM    TO:  John Cunningham    FROM:  Mark Watts    DATE:  October 26, 2015    SUBJECT: Legislative Update       Special Session    Recent hearing    On Wednesday the Special Session Conference committee met in Ontario to conduct the second of  their hearings.     Under the guidance of the Co‐Chairs, Assemblymember Jimmy Gomez and Senator Beall testimony  on the state's transportation infrastructure needs was taken from a wide range of stakeholders,  including several city and county officials, the construction industry and labor.    One key development was in response to an observation made by AM Olbernolte that there is an  inherent conflict between the state goals to reduce gas consumption and the proposals that would  increase taxes on fuels. The Legislative Analyst Office (LAO) indicated they are developing an  assessment to be shared with the committee that will investigate how differing fuel scenarios will  play out and whether they remain suitable as a platform for funding transportation.    In addition, several committee members again expressed interest in ensuring that funding will be  made available for transit.     Following an in depth discussion into the truck weight fee issue, which the co‐chairs stated compels  legislators to understand the cross‐cutting implications related to the state's budget,  Assemblymember Olbernolte inquired about an approach that would see some current transit  funding swapped out and backfilled with cap and trade funds. The LAO responded by indicating they  will be looking into strategies that repurpose funds.     On Thursday, I accompanied the co‐chairs to a meeting with the editorial board at the LA Times. It  was a positive presentation and the Times was receptive and will likely step up and again write a  TWIC Packet Page# 56 2 supportive opinion piece when the committee reaches a point where they could take action.     Next Steps    Although no additional hearing has been scheduled yet, given that the LAO will be providing  additional analytical materials elated to the topics discussed above, it is a strong likelihood. In the  meantime, the Administration has indicated they will continue their outreach to conferees and the  leaders of the four legislative caucuses.     Iron Horse Trail     On October 16, Supervisor Anderson, accompanied by Julie Bueren, Carrie Ricci and myself, met with  Secretary Brian Kelly and CTC Executive Director Will Kempton to discuss the status of the Iron Horse  Tail grants and their restrictions, made in the mid‐80s. These were very positive sessions, with a  strong willingness indicated to updating the grants to focus on preservation of the trail corridor for  Active Transportation purposes.     The county staff “take‐away” from these meetings indicated that the following actions would need to  be taken:    ‐ Provide an updated accounting of the expenditure of grant funds.   ‐ Obtain user data from EBRPD on the trail corridor to better understand the potential for  preservation of the corridor for Active Transportation purposes.   ‐ Develop a concept for the corridor to enhance it as an Active Transportation Corridor.   ‐ Discuss concept with EBRPD.    TWIC Packet Page# 57 Presented to: Conference Committee on SBX1 4 and ABX1 3 Hon. Jim Beall, Chair Hon. Jimmy Gomez, Chair Overview of Proposals to Address Transportation Challenges L E G I S L A T I V E A N A L Y S T ’ S O F F I C E October 16, 2015 LAO 70 YEARS OF SERVICE TWIC Packet Page# 58 1LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE October 16, 2015 LAO 70 YEARS OF SERVICE In 2015-16, we estimate that $28 billion in transportation revenues will be provided from all levels of government. Local governments provide half of all transportation funding in California. Local funding sources include local sales taxes, transit fares, development impact fees, and property taxes. About one-fourth of the state’s transportation funding comes from the federal government. The remaining one-fourth of funding comes from various state revenue sources—primarily excise taxes on gasoline. In addition to the funds identifi ed above, the state also receives revenue from other sources (primarily vehicle registration fees) to support the California Highway Patrol and the Department of Motor Vehicles. Transportation Funding in California Comes From Various Sources Local Federal Gasoline Excise Tax Weight Fees Diesel Sales and Excise Taxes Cap-and-Trade State TWIC Packet Page# 59 2LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE October 16, 2015 LAO 70 YEARS OF SERVICE Funding Challenges. The state and local governments face signifi cant funding needs to maintain and repair existing transportation infrastructure and meet future travel demand. For example, best practices indicate that state highways should receive preventive and minor corrective maintenance on average every fi ve to seven years. However, the California Department of Transportation’s (Caltrans’) current funding level for this type of work only allows for such maintenance on a stretch of pavement every 20 years on average. Caltrans estimates indicate it would cost an additional $1 billion annually to fully fund maintenance of pavement, bridges, and culverts. State Transportation Revenues Fund Various Programs Revenue Source Allowable Uses Current Uses Gasoline and diesel excise taxes Article XIX Section 2 of the State Constitution limits use of revenues to construction, maintenance, mitigation, and associated administrative costs of state highways, local roads, and transit fi xed guideways. Highway Maintenance Program, SHOPP, STIP, local streets and roads, and Caltrans administration. Vehicle registration fee Article XIX Section 3 of the State Constitution limits use of revenues to: (1) construction, maintenance, mitigation, and associated administrative costs of state highways, local roads, and transit fi xed guideways and (2) state administration and enforcement of traffi c laws. Support of DMV and CHP. Vehicle weight fees Same as vehicle registration fees.Debt service on transportation bonds. Cap-and-trade auction revenue Article XIII A Section 3 of the State Constitution, various court decisions regarding what constitutes a fee versus tax, and Health and Safety Code 39712 limits use of revenues to activities that reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Transit and intercity rail capital program and transit operating grants. SHOPP = State Highway Operation and Protection Program; STIP = State Transportation Improvement Program; Caltrans = California Department of Transportation; DMV = Department of Motor Vehicles; and CHP = California Highway Patrol. TWIC Packet Page# 60 3LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE October 16, 2015 LAO 70 YEARS OF SERVICE Comparison of Major Funding Proposals Governor Senate Committeeb Senate Republican Assembly Republican New Taxesa $3 Billion Annually $4.6 Billion Annually —— • $65 vehicle registration fee • 6 cents per gallon gasoline excise tax • 11 cents per gallon diesel excise tax • Index gasoline and diesel excise tax rates for infl ation • $70 from two vehicle registration fees and $100 additional fee for zero emission vehicles • 12 cents per gallon gasoline excise tax • 22 cents per gallon diesel excise tax • Index gasoline and diesel excise tax rates for infl ation • 3.5 percent diesel sales tax Allocate Existing Revenuea $600 Million Annually $400 Million Annually $2.9 Billion Annually $4.4 Billion Annually • $500 million from cap-and- trade • $100 million Caltrans effi ciency savings • $400 million from cap-and- trade • $1.9 billion from cap-and- trade • $1 billion from weight fees • $1.2 billion from cap-and- trade • $1 billion from weight fees • $1 billion General Fund • $685 million from vacant positions • $500 million Caltrans effi ciency savings One-Time Fundinga $879 million in loan repayments $1 billion in various loan repayments $2.4 billion in various loan repayments a Revenue estimates provided by proponents of each proposal. b Proposals approved by the Senate Transportation and Infrastructure Development Committee. TWIC Packet Page# 61 4LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE October 16, 2015 LAO 70 YEARS OF SERVICE Increase Funding for Transportation. All proposals provide a signifi cant ongoing increase in funding for transportation programs—ranging from almost $3 billion to $5 billion annually. Allocate Existing Revenues. The proposals all allocate some existing revenues to transportation, with some proposals allocating a few hundred million dollars and others providing billions of dollars. All proposals allocate cap-and-trade auction revenues. Allocating weight fees, which currently benefi t the General Fund, or providing direct General Fund support, would require budgetary trade-offs regarding other non-Proposition 98 General Fund priorities. Shift Toward Vehicle Registration Fees. The proposals that raise new revenues do so with a mix of fuel taxes and vehicle fees. This approach would likely provide stable and modestly growing revenues over time. Index Fuel Excise Taxes. The proposals that raise new revenues also eliminate the current variable tax adjustment process and instead index tax rates for infl ation. This approach would likely result in more stable and predictable transportation revenues. LAO Comments on Funding Proposals TWIC Packet Page# 62 5LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE October 16, 2015 LAO 70 YEARS OF SERVICE Comparison of Major Expenditure Proposals Governor Senate Committeea Senate Republican Assembly Republican Expenditure of New Ongoing Revenue $1.7 Billion for State Programs $2.2 Billion for State Programs —— • $1.5 billion SHOPP and Maintenance • $200 million Trade Corridors • $1.9 billion SHOPP and Maintenance • $300 million Trade Corridors $1.3 billion for Local Programs $2.4 Billion for Local Programs • $1.05 billion Local Streets and Roads • $250 million Local Partnership Program • $1.9 billion local roads • $200 million Local Partnership Program • $300 million STA Expenditure of Existing Ongoing Revenue $500 Million for Local Programs $400 Million for Local Programs $2.9 Billion for Highways and Roads $4.4 Billion for Highways and Roads • $400 million Transit and Intercity Rail Grants • $100 million Low Carbon Road Program • $400 million Transit and Intercity Rail Grants One-Time Expenditures $879 Million $1 Billion $2.4 Billion • $334 million Trade Corridors • $265 million Transit and Intercity Rail • $148 million TCRP • $132 million SHOPP • For SHOPP local roads and Local Partnership Program • For highways and roads — a Senate Transportation and Infrastructure Development Committee. SHOPP = State Highway Operation and Protection Program; STA = State Transit Assistance; and TCRP = Traffi c Congestion Relief Program. TWIC Packet Page# 63 6LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE October 16, 2015 LAO 70 YEARS OF SERVICE Fully Fund Cost-Effective Maintenance. Preventative and minor corrective maintenance, which is performed by the Caltrans Highway Maintenance Program, is signifi cantly more cost-effective than allowing highways to deteriorate such that major rehabilitation is needed. Caltrans estimates fully funding maintenance would require an additional $1 billion annually and would reduce future State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP) costs by up to several billions of dollars each year. In light of these benefi ts, we recommend fully funding maintenance as part of any transportation funding package. Using Cap-and-Trade Revenues. All proposals allocate cap-and-trade auction revenues to increase funding for transportation programs. There is currently legal uncertainty as to how the state can spend cap-and-trade revenue. To eliminate this uncertainty the Legislature would have to approve these revenues as a tax. Absent that, it could minimize legal risk by targeting cap-and-trade revenues to transportation projects that have a closer nexus to greenhouse gas emission reductions. Simplify Distribution of Funds. The current system of distributing transportation revenues is complex and may not allow fl exibility to ensure funding meets transportation priorities as revenues and priorities change over time. Some of the special session proposals create additional and more complex formulas for allocating funds among programs. The Legislature could consider allocating new and existing funding in the same manner and further could consider simplifying the system of allocating transportation revenues to better ensure funding is allocated to the highest priorities. LAO Comments on Expenditure Proposals TWIC Packet Page# 64 7LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE October 16, 2015 LAO 70 YEARS OF SERVICE Comparison of Other Major Proposals Governor Senate Committeea Senate Republican Assembly Republican Accountability Requires Caltrans to meet certain performance standards • Requires CTC oversight of SHOPP projects • Requires CTC oversight of SHOPP projects — • Creates a transportation Inspector General • Creates a transportation Inspector General • Requires Caltrans effi ciencies Procurement Methods Extends P3 authority by ten years and allows construction manager general construction method for 12 additional projects —Permanently extends P3 authority Permanently extends P3 authority Other • CEQA exemptions for certain types of projects • Constitutional and statutory restrictions on existing and new revenue • CEQA exemptions for certain types of projects — • Constitutional restrictions on new revenue • Increases Caltrans use of consultants • Constitutional restrictions on existing and new revenue a Senate Transportation and Infrastructure Development Committee. CTC = California Transportation Commission; SHOPP = State Highway Operation and Protection Program; P3 = public-private partnership; and CEQA = California Environmental Quality Act. TWIC Packet Page# 65 8LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE October 16, 2015 LAO 70 YEARS OF SERVICE Increase CTC Oversight. Most of the proposals require greater accountability for Caltrans. However, the legislative proposals generally require stronger accountability measures than those proposed by the Governor. Specifi cally, two legislative proposals establish a stronger role for the California Transportation Commission (CTC) by requiring the CTC to perform project-level oversight and approval functions for the SHOPP. These legislative proposals are consistent with prior LAO recommendations to increase CTC’s role in project-level oversight for the SHOPP. Improve Public-Private Partnerships (P3s) Process. The state has experienced some challenges with using P3 procurement in the past. If the Legislature chooses to extend the authority for Caltrans to use the P3 procurement method, we recommend the Legislature require a more robust project selection and evaluation process in order to ensure that more appropriate projects are selected for P3 procurement. LAO Comments on Other Major Proposals TWIC Packet Page# 66