Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
BOARD STANDING COMMITTEES - 04082024 - TWIC Agenda Pkt
AGENDA CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Transportation, Water & Infrastructure Committee Supervisor Diane Burgis, Chair Supervisor Candace Andersen, Vice Chair District 3 Office: 3361 Walnut Blvd. Suite 140, Brentwood, CA 94513 | 1516 Kamole St. Honolulu, HI 96821 9:30 AMMonday, April 8, 2024 ZOOM LINK https://cccounty-us.zoom.us/j/85061313447 | Dial: 888-278-0254 | ACCESS CODE: 198675 The public may attend this meeting in person at either above locations and/or remotely via call-in or ZOOM. AGENDA ITEMS may be taken out of order based on the business of the day and preference of the Committee. 1.INTRODUCTIONS Call to order and roll call. 2.PUBLIC COMMENT on any item under the jurisdiction of the Committee and not on this agenda (speakers may be limited to two (2) minutes). 3.REVIEW record of meeting for the March 11, 2024 Transportation, Water, and Infrastructure Committee 24-0981 TWIC 03.11.24 Meeting MinutesAttachments: 4.RECEIVE staff report and RECOMMEND Board of Supervisors approve submission of the grant application to the U.S. Department of Transportation under the Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) grant program. 24-0982 5.RECEIVE staff report and RECOMMEND that the Board of Supervisors approve the submission of a Letter of Interest Application Form and grant application to the MTC and ABAG for the 2024 PCA Grant Program. 24-0983 Page 1 of 2 1 Transportation, Water & Infrastructure Committee AGENDA April 8, 2024 6.CONSIDER report on Local, State, Regional, and Federal Transportation Related Legislative and Planning Activities 24-0984 April State Leg Report for TWIC.pdf 3/24/2024: BOS to state delegation re: accessible transportation State Net report (4-2-24).pdf Attachments: 7.RECEIVE Communication, News, Miscellaneous Items of Interest to the Committee and DIRECT staff as appropriate. 24-0985 Mokelumne Pedestrian/Bike Bridge Opening BaltimorePortClosure_West Coast Impacts Bicycle use soars following installation of separated bike lanes Bike Lanes Are Good for Business, but Store Owners Still Hate Them Attachments: ADJOURN until the next Transportation, Water, & Infrastructure Committee meeting to be held on Monday, May 13, 2024 at 9:30am. GENERAL INFORMATION This meeting provides reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities planning to attend a the 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 Committee less than 96 hours prior to that meeting are available for public inspection at 1025 Escobar St., 4th Floor, Martinez, during normal business hours. Staff reports related to items on the agenda are also accessible on line at www.co.contra-costa.ca.us. HOW TO PROVIDE PUBLIC COMMENT Persons who wish to address the Committee during public comment on matters within the jurisdiction of the Committee that are not on the agenda, or who wish to comment with respect to an item on the agenda, may comment in person, via Zoom, or via call-in. Those participating in person should offer comments when invited by the Committee Chair. Those participating via Zoom should indicate they wish to speak by using the “raise your hand” feature in the Zoom app. Those calling in should indicate they wish to speak by pushing *9 on their phones. Public comments generally will be limited to two (2) minutes per speaker. In the interest of facilitating the business of the Board Committee, the total amount of time that a member of the public may use in addressing the Board Committee on all agenda items is 10 minutes. Your patience is appreciated. Public comments may also be submitted to Committee staff before the meeting by email or by voicemail. Comments submitted by email or voicemail will be included in the record of the meeting but will not be read or played aloud during the meeting. For Additional Information Contact: John Cunningham (925)655-2915 Page 2 of 2 2 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Staff Report 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553 File #:24-0981 Agenda Date:4/8/2024 Agenda #:3. TRANSPORTATION, WATER & INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE Meeting Date: April 8, 2024 Subject: Record of Meeting for the March 11, 2024 Transportation, Water, and Infrastructure Committee Submitted For: N/A Department: CONSERVATION & DEVELOPMENT Referral No: N/A Referral Name: N/A Presenter: John Cunningham | DCD Contact: John Cunningham (925)655-2915 Referral History: This record was prepared pursuant to the Better Government Ordinance 95-6, Article 25-205(d) of the Contra Costa County Ordinance Code. Referral Update: Any handouts or printed copies of testimony distributed at the meeting will be attached to this meeting record. SEE ATTACHMENT. Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s): APPROVAL of the attached Record of Action for the March 11, 2024 Committee Meeting with any necessary corrections. Fiscal Impact (if any): N/A. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 4/3/2024Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™3 Meeting Minutes - Draft CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Transportation, Water & Infrastructure Committee Supervisor Diane Burgis, Chair Supervisor Candace Andersen, Vice Chair 9:30 AMDistrict 2 Office: 309 Diablo Rd. Danville, CA 94526 | District 3 Office: 3361 Walnut Blvd. Suite140, Brentwood, CA 94513 Monday, March 11, 2024 ZOOM LINK https://cccounty-us.zoom.us/j/85061313447 | Dial: 888-278-0254 | ACCESS CODE: 198675 The public may attend this meeting in person at either above locations and/or remotely via call-in or ZOOM. AGENDA ITEMS may be taken out of order based on the business of the day and preference of the Committee. 1.INTRODUCTIONS Call to order and roll call. Staff Present: John Cunningham | TWIC Staff Attendees: Raquel Caicedo, Maureen Toms, John Kopchik, Ryan Hernandez, Mark Watts, Alicia Nuchols, Jamar Stamps, Jill Ray, Jody London, Will Nelson, Cheryl Sudduth, Emily Groth, Jocelyn LaRocque, Matt Slattengren, Todd Fitzsimmons Candace Andersen and Diane BurgisPresent: 2.CONSIDER electing a committee member to the offices of Chair and Vice Chair for 2024. The Committee APPOINTED Supervisor Burgis as TWIC Chair and Supervisor Andersen as Vice Chair for 2024. 3.PUBLIC COMMENT on any item under the jurisdiction of the Committee and not on this agenda (speakers may be limited to two (2) minutes). No public comment. 4.REVIEW record of meeting for the December 18, 2023 Transportation, Water, and Infrastructure Committee Meeting. Attachments:12.18.23 Meeting Minutes Final The Committee unanimously ACCEPTED the December TWIC meeting Record . 5.RECEIVE presentation on drought resilience planning for state small water systems and domestic well communities as required under Senate Bill 552 and application to the California Department of Water Resources for technical assistance through the County Page 1 of 3 14 Transportation, Water & Infrastructure CommitteeMeeting Minutes - Draft March 11, 2024 Drought Resilience Planning Assistance Program and DIRECT staff as appropriate. Attachments:SB 552 County DRP Final update The Committee ACCEPTED the update and DIRECTED staff to promote transparency with community about future plans and to draw the attention of lawmakers to communities with limited income/resources. Additionally, staff was requested to provide an updated list of small water operators. No public comment. 6.CONSIDER report on Local, State, Regional, and Federal Transportation Related Legislative and Planning Activities Attachments:Measure X Progress Report 2023 Year End CCTA Accessibility Workshop Flyer Senate_Bill_925-MTC Regional Measure Mark W: TWIC March 2024 Report TWIC - Legislative Tracking List (3-5-24) Legislative Affairs Secretary Christy Bouma to Depart, New Legislative Affairs Secretary Appointed _ California Governor 3-6-24LAO-Overview-Climate-TransportationBudgetSolutions The Committee ACCEPTED the report and DIRECTED staff to bring to a district by district summary of legislative position changes to a future meeting . No public comment. 7.CONSIDER referrals to the Committee for 2024, REVISE as necessary, and DIRECT staff to bring the list to the Board of Supervisors for approval Attachments:TWIC Referrals 2024 - DRAFT The Committee ACCEPTED the referrals for 2024 with the addition of "Monitor development of a historic preservation ordinance", "Review and monitor Transportation Element development of the General Plan Update", and DIRECTED staff to provide an update/report on Referral #5. The Committee discussed the Iron Horse Corridor Management Program standing referral and the trail separation effort relative to park dedication funds and San Ramon Bollinger Overpass Project with a request for ongoing updates . No public comment. 8.REVIEW Status Report on 2023 referrals to TWIC and DIRECT staff to forward the report to the Board of Supervisors with revisions as appropriate. Attachments:2023 TWIC Referral Report The Committee ACCEPTED the report and DIRECTED staff to place the item on an upcoming Board of Supervisors agenda (consent). No public comment. 9.REVIEW and REVISE as appropriate, and ADOPT the 2024 Transportation, Water, and Page 2 of 3 25 Transportation, Water & Infrastructure CommitteeMeeting Minutes - Draft March 11, 2024 Infrastructure Committee Calendar. Attachments:2024 Calendar The Committee ADOPTED the 2024 meeting calendar and DIRECTED staff to coordinate with District offices to schedule an alternative date in November to accommodate the Veteran's Day holiday. No public comment. 10.RECEIVE Communication, News, Miscellaneous Items of Interest to the Committee and DIRECT staff as appropriate Attachments:March 5 2024 RTPC Memo_Final The Committee RECEIVED the communication and news . No public comment. ADJOURN until the next Transportation, Water, & Infrastructure Committee meeting to be held on Monday, April 8, 2024 at 9:30am. GENERAL INFORMATION HOW TO PROVIDE PUBLIC COMMENT For Additional Information Contact: Page 3 of 3 36 Meeting Minutes - Draft CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Transportation, Water & Infrastructure Committee Supervisor Candace Andersen, Chair Supervisor Diane Burgis, Vice Chair 10:00 AMDistrict 2 Office: 309 Diablo Rd. Danville, CA 94526 | District 3 Office: 3361 Walnut Blvd. Suite140, Brentwood, CA 94513 Monday, December 18, 2023 ZOOM LINK https://cccounty-us.zoom.us/j/82864391047 | Dial: 888-278-0254 | ACCESS CODE: 198675 The public may attend this meeting in person at either above locations and/or remotely via call-in or ZOOM. AGENDA ITEMS may be taken out of order based on the business of the day and preference of the Committee. 1.INTRODUCTIONS Call to order and roll call. Staff Present: John Cunningham, TWIC Staff Attendees: Raquel Caicedo, Maureen Toms, John Kopchik, Jerry Fahy, Alicia Nuchols, Jamar Stamps, Robert Sarmiento, Jody London, Jeff Valeros, Mark Watts, Jennifer Quallick, Lia Bristol, Peter Meyers, Doug Bleakly, Emily Warming, Jan Warren, Patt Young, Richard Diaz District II Supervisor Candace Andersen and District III Supervisor Diane Burgis Present: 2.PUBLIC COMMENT on any item under the jurisdiction of the Committee and not on this agenda (speakers may be limited to two (2) minutes). No public comment. 3.REVIEW record of meeting for the November 13, 2023 Transportation, Water, and Infrastructure Committee meeting. Attachments:TWIC Meeting Minutes13-Nov-2023 The Committee Accepted the Meeting Record 4.RECEIVE update on the Olympic Corridor Trail Connector Study and provide COMMENT and DIRECTION to staff as appropriate. Page 1 of 3 47 Transportation, Water & Infrastructure Committee Meeting Minutes - Draft December 18, 2023 Attachments:07.01.15 - TWIC Staff Report on Olympic Corridor Trail Connector Study The Committee ACCEPTED the update and DIRECTED staff to review the ability to use park dedication and livable community funding towards project development, collaborate with Public Works and the Contra Costa Transportation Authority as necessary, and to meet directly with District 2 to discuss other approaches to accelerate project development. Subsequent to the December TWIC meeting Public Works submitted a RAISE grant, and County staff initiated coordination with the Contra Costa Transportation Authority and the cities of Walnut Creek and Lafayette . Caller asked to provide brief context and clarification of the study . 5.CONSIDER proposed Caltrans Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant application DIRECTED staff to re-submit the grant and place on BOS Consent Calendar . No public comment. 6.CONSIDER report on Local, State, Regional, and Federal Transportation Related Legislative and Planning Activities. Attachments:MW - December Leg Report State Net Legislative Tracking Table (12-11-23) MW - Dec 2023 Budget Memo DOF Budget Letter 12-12-23 Updated _Big Three_ Revenue Outlook [LAO Forecast, EconTax Blog].pdf Committee ACCEPTED the report. Relative to the Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan update the Committee supported the careful weighing of the benefits offered by either a nonprofit or public sector based coordinating entity in a transparent manner . Comments from the Committee underscored their endorsement of collaboration with both non-profits and government agencies, expressing concern about over-reliance on any single entity for the program's success. They emphasized the critical importance of establishing robust internal infrastructure to support the program effectively. Relative to the budget and the transit "fiscal cliff", the Committee directed staff to extend invitations to transit leadership if necessary to strengthen our legislative endeavors. No public comment. 7.RECEIVE communication, news, miscellaneous items of interest to the Committee and DIRECT staff as appropriate. Page 2 of 3 58 Transportation, Water & Infrastructure Committee Meeting Minutes - Draft December 18, 2023 Attachments:Secretary Omishakin Appoints 25 Members to Transit Transformation Task Force _ CalSTA Seamless Bay Area Five Years Later Why 2023 was the year of the e-bike and not the self-driving car L.A.'s notoriously grim bus stops will start getting shelter in 2024 _ Urbanize LA Contra Costa County to install 28-mile micro-transit system with autonomous vehicles - ABC7 San Francisco The Committee RECEIVED the communication and news . 8.ADJOURN until the next Transportation, Water, & Infrastructure Committee meeting to be held on TBD. GENERAL INFORMATION HOW TO PROVIDE PUBLIC COMMENT Page 3 of 3 69 County Drought Resilience Plan Senate Bill 552 Transportation, Water & Infrastructure Committee March 11, 2024 710 Senate Bill 552 (2021) •Addresses gaps in local and state water management for drought resiliency and water shortage preparedness •County responsibilities apply to state small water systems (state smalls), which serve 5 to 14 connections,and domestic wells, which serve four or less connections,within the county's jurisdiction •Requirements for counties: Drought & Water Shortage Task Force Drought Resilience Plan 811 912 County Drought Task Force •Each county must establish a standing drought and water shortage task force to facilitate drought and water shortage preparedness for state smalls and domestic wells. •Must solicit membership from: •State governments •Local governments, including groundwater sustainability agencies •Community-based organizations •Local water suppliers •Local residents 1013 Drought Resilience Plan •Includes potential drought and water shortage risks and proposed interim and long-term solutions •Can be stand-alone document or included as an element of an existing plan •Must consider the following at a minimum: •Consolidations for existing water systems and domestic wells •Domestic well drinking water mitigation programs •Provision of emergency and interim drinking water solutions •Analysis of implementation steps •Analysis of local, state, and federal funding sources available for implementation •No mandated timeline •Looking to align with other County plans 1114 Example Mitigation Strategies •Direct support •Interim hauled or bottled water service, water quality testing, water treatment systems, or measurement of well levels •Accessible information, guidance, and tools to support water system improvement projects, long-term well maintenance, outage reporting, and interim drinking water requests •Encourage and facilitate voluntary consolidation where appropriate and desired by all water systems involved •Advocacy for additional funding •When funds are available, may provide technical and financial support retrofitting wells and pumps, drilling new or deeper wells, or installing water treatment systems •Consider updating well permit and land use policies •Monitoring and tracking to evaluate current conditions •Coordination with local agencies, such as groundwater sustainability agencies 1215 County Progress •Standing up an internal working group of County staff from the departments of Conservation and Development, Public Works, Health, Agriculture, and Office of Emergency Services that has been meeting regularly •Applied to County Drought Resilience Planning Assistance Program for Direct Technical Assistance (TA) on February 26, 2024 • $125,000 of Stantec (Dept. of Water Resources' TA provider) staff time • TA will provide logistic support for Task Force and support for developing the Drought Resilience Plan •Internal working group is in the process of scheduling an intake call with the Dept. of Water Resources and Stantec •Developing Task Force membership list •State Water Resources Control Board, Delta Stewardship Council,water and irrigation districts,groundwater sustainability agencies, and school non-transient non -community water systems •Who else? 1316 Thank you! Contact Ryan Hernandez with any questions. Ryan.Hernandez@dcd.cccounty.us 925-655-2919 1417 1629 TELEGRAPH AVENUE, SUITE 400 OAKLAND, CA 94612 510-506-7582 FAX 503-228-2320 nelsonnygaard.com MEMORANDUM To: Rashida Kamara, CCTA, Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors c/o Transportation, Water, and Infrastructure Committee From: Nelson\Nygaard Date: January 8, 2024 Subject: Q3 and Q4 2023 (Cycle 2) Measure X Progress Report Strategies Addressed in Cycle 2 to Date All four Cycle 1 tasks have continued into Cycle 2. Activities undertaken for tasks 1 through 3 directly align with strategies proposed for Cycle 2. For more information on the strategies in Cycle 2, see Attachment 1. All activities are derived from the Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan (ATSP). Strategy 1: Improve Connectivity Between Paratransit Programs/Eliminate Transfer Trips. (Cycle 1 Task 2: One Seat Ride Program Expansion and Enhancement) Funding Sources: Measure X and CCTA Measure J In-Kind: CCTA and County Staff time Noteworthy Activities CCTA staff and the consultant team have worked extensively with the existing one seat ride (OSR) pilot operators (County Connection, Tri Delta Transit, and WestCAT) and potential expansion partners to design an expanded OSR program with a medical trip pilot in West County. The proposed West County pilot meets several ATSP strategies: 1 – Improve connectivity between paratransit programs/eliminate transfer trips; 2 – Same-day trip programs (including wheelchair-accessible service); 4 – Service beyond ADA service areas. Expansion of existing Contra Costa OSR pilot is the subject of ongoing communication, discussion, and negotiations with AC Transit/East Bay Paratransit West County Medical Trip Pilot 1518 Q4 2022 Measure X Progress Report CCTA Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 2 Developed cost estimates and program parameters collaboratively with WCCTAC, CCTA, the City of San Pablo, and the County Provided support and coordination with WCCTAC and the City of San Pablo for program development Provided support to finalize program design with the City of San Pablo Provided support and coordination with the City of San Pablo and WCCTAC for funding approvals and program design approval Provided marketing materials to the City of San Pablo for advertisement of the program Estimated launch is late Q1 2024 Strategy 11: One Call/One Click (Cycle 1 Task 3: One Call/One Click) Funding Sources: Measure X and CCTA Measure J There was staff discussion of the topics, but the One Call/One Click (OC/OC) task will begin as part of Cycle 2 in 2024. Staff has been focusing on implementing the Coordinated Entity task. The decision to pause the OC/OC task was deliberate, there is currently no staff or consultant capacity to initiate this task which is operationally complex requiring significant staff time, consultant expertise, and substantial consultation with public transit operators and CBOs. Strategy 14: Travel Training Funding Sources: Measure X and CCTA Measure J Strategy 14: Travel Training is a new strategy being implemented in Cycle 2. Specific activities include: Staff and consultant discussions about the design and scope of travel training Staff coordination with transit agencies Strategy 20: Means-Based Fare Subsidy for low-income populations. (Cycle 1 Task 1: User-Side Subsidies) Funding Sources: Measure X and CCTA Measure J In-Kind: CCTA and County Staff time 1619 Q4 2022 Measure X Progress Report CCTA Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 3 Noteworthy Activities CCTA staff and the consultant team previously did background research on means-based fare programs and created pilot parameters. Specific activities include: Selection of County Connection and WestCAT as new partners for means-based fare programs Demand and cost estimates for County Connection and WestCAT’s means-based fare subsidy programs Creation of administrative and operations parameters for County Connection and WestCAT’s means-based fare pilots Coordination meetings between County Connection, WestCAT, Tri Delta Transit, CCTA staff, and the consultant team to prepare for pilots Creation of engagement materials for two new means-based fare subsidy programs Ongoing support for Tri Delta Transit’s East County Low Income Ticket Program Updates provided to the ATSP Task Force and Working Group Task 4: Establishment of Coordinating Entity (CE) Funding Sources: Measure X and CCTA Measure J In-Kind: CCTA and County Staff time Noteworthy Activities Staff and the consultant teams have worked on establishing an Advisory Committee, the CE structure and office. Specific activities include: Drafted roles and responsibilities for the CE and Office of Accessibility and Equity advisory committee Drafted bylaws for the Office of Accessibility and Equity advisory committee Worked with non-profit consultant to continue working on establishing a CE Posted job position for OAE program manager Hired OAE program manager Updated the ATS Working Group and Task Force and conducted outreach to impacted organizations. Measure X Expenditure and Invoices The Funding Memorandum of Understanding between County of Contra Costa and the CCTA for the Implementation of the Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan includes a Payment 1720 Q4 2022 Measure X Progress Report CCTA Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 4 Schedule as following. CCTA submitted a request for Payment 1 in the amount of $280,000 on November 4, 2022. Payment Schedule: Payment 1: 20% of Measure X funds will be paid within 60 days of receipt of an invoice and supporting documentation establishing that the MOU has been approved by both parties. Payment 2: 20% will be paid within 60 days of receipt of an invoice and supporting documentation establishing that the means-based user side subsidy pilot program is approved by the CCTA Board and is operational. (Task 1) Payment 3: 20% will be paid within 60 days of receipt of an invoice and supporting documentation establishing that the One Call/One Click strategy has been approved by the CCTA Board. (Task 2) Payment 4: 20% will be paid within 60 days of receipt of an invoice and supporting documentation establishing that the Board of Supervisors and CCTA have approved the Coordinating Entity recommendation in accordance with Schedule 1. (Task 3) Payment 5: 20% will be paid within 60 days of receipt of an invoice and supporting documentation verifying that the one-seat-ride funding parameters in Schedule 1 can be or will have been met. (Task 4) 1821 Q4 2022 Measure X Progress Report CCTA Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 5 Attachment 1 Background The Accessible Transportation Strategic (ATS) Plan defines how Contra Costa will improve transportation options for older adults, persons with disabilities, and veterans. The ATS Plan was collaboratively developed over several years in consultation with elected officials, non- profit based advocates, users of the system, and planning/operations staff. This effort was jointly conducted by the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) and Contra Costa County with oversight provided by a Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) and Technical Advisory Committee. The Board of Supervisors approved the ATS Plan on March 9, 2021 as did CCTA shortly thereafter. Consistent with the recommendations of ATS Plan, the details and timing of implementation activities will be governed by a newly formed Task Force (another recommendation of the ATS Plan) which had its first meeting on October 21, 2021. The Task Force has a similar composition to the PAC with elected officials, advocates, users of the system, etc. Measure X Goal The County’s Accessible Transportation Strategy falls under the GOAL 4: INTERGENERATIONAL THRIVING goal area established by the Measure X Community Advisory Board: GOAL 4: INTERGENERATIONAL THRIVING We strive to be a community that intentionally strengthens and provides support for all residents and for family members of all generations, including children, youth, and older adults. The selected strategies align with the Measure X Goal of Intergenerational Thriving in several ways. User-side subsidies will allow qualified low-income older adults and people with disabilities to make necessary trips with less impact on limited incomes. Expansion and enhancement of the One Seat Ride Pilot Program will increase access to potentially challenging trips, for example medical trips to different parts of the county. Development of a countywide one call/one click center will make it easier for individuals to identify appropriate transportation modes by phone or online and assist people in making travel plans. Establishment of a Coordinated Entity will help coordinate the variety of services in the County, allowing for seamless service for riders. 1922 Q4 2022 Measure X Progress Report CCTA Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 6 Cycle 1 The Measure X Goals align with the goals of ATS Plan implementation. The approved ATS Plan strategies proposed to the Measure X Advisory Committee and the Board of Supervisors to be funded by $1,400,000 of Cycle 1 Measure X funds initially are: User-side Subsidies for low-income populations for whom existing fares represent a barrier to access. Expansion and Enhancement of One Seat Ride Pilot Program allowing paratransit riders to travel throughout the county (and possibly outside the county) without having to transfer between paratransit vehicles. One Call/One Click Operations Center. Countywide, centralized phone and internet resource for all modes of transportation serving target populations. Assisting callers in making travel plans based on their abilities. Establishment of a Coordinated Entity that will be responsible for short- and long- term implementation of accessible transportation strategies including the identification of a new, on-going funding source to support continuing operations. Objectives Task 1: User-side Subsidies – By the end of 15 months, the Accessible Transportation Strategy will expend approximately $200,000 to provide User-Side subsidies to low- income older adults and people with disabilities. Task 2: One Seat Ride (OSR) Program Expansion and Enhancement – By the end of 15 months, this strategy will expend $500,000, of which $250,000 will be derived from Measure X funds, the remainder from participating transit agencies. Participation in the current program will have increased and OSR trips will reduce on board time relative to a comparable multi-agency transfer trip, and participants will have access to one seat rides throughout the county, and potentially to locations outside of the county. Task 3: One-Call\One-Click Center – By the end of 15 months, this strategy will expend $315,000 to research and evaluate different models and then establish and operate a one call/one click center for individuals to identify appropriate transportation modes by phone or online, and assist people in making travel plans. This will include at least one staff person, a telephone line, and website. Task 4: Establishment of Coordinated Entity (CE) – Over the span of 15 months, and an expenditure of $635,000 (with potential rollover to the next fiscal year), a CE will have been established by the Task Force, with the responsibility of coordinating a range of strategies to enhance the mobility of Contra Costa residents with disabilities including but not limited to the recommendations of the ATS Plan. The CE will 2023 Q4 2022 Measure X Progress Report CCTA Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 7 incorporate the functions of the One-Call\One-Click Center, and identify new strategies for mobility enhancement, identify new funding sources, and serve as an advocate at local and state levels for expanded mobility options for people with disabilities. Outcomes Limitations on mobility options for people with disabilities contribute to lower quality of life for older adults and people with disabilities in all aspects, including physical and mental health. They also exacerbate existing inequities among communities. Task 1 Outcome: User-side Subsidies - Achieving this objective will result in more affordable mobility options for qualifying low-income older adults and people with disabilities in the county. Task 2 Outcome: One Seat Ride Program Expansion and Enhancement - Achieving this objective will result in some paratransit trips in Contra Costa County being provided on one vehicle, whereas before it would require the major inconvenience of having to coordinate and wait for transfers between vehicles. Task 3 Outcome: Establishment of a One-Call\One-Click Center – Achieving this objective will result in the establishment of a more user friendly, single point of entry for Contra Costa residents seeking transportation options and planning for older adults and people with disabilities in the county. Task 4 Outcome: Establishment of Coordinated Entity – Achieving this objective will result in a new entity and function that centralizes advocacy and oversight of accessible transportation resulting in a more seamless transportation network available to people with disabilities and others throughout the county. Cycle 2 Based on the ongoing work and additional input from stakeholders, the Authority Board entered into a funding agreement with Contra Costa County to allow the Authority to receive $1,470,000 in Measure X funding, authorize the funds to be used for the tasks identified in the Service Plan in Agreement No. 679, and to allow the Executive Director or designee to make any non-substantive changes to the language. The FY 2023-24 Measure X Service Plan will focus on the following ATSP strategies: Strategy 1: Improve connectivity between paratransit programs/eliminate transfer trips to allow older adults and people with disabilities to travel throughout the county (and possibly outside Contra Costa County) without the need to transfer between paratransit vehicles. 2124 Q4 2022 Measure X Progress Report CCTA Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 8 Strategy 2: Same-Day Trip Programs (including Wheelchair-Accessible Service) will allow travelers to request a ride without reserving it a day in advance. This strategy can coordinate/overlap with Strategy 1. Strategy 3: Expand existing and add new Volunteer Driver programs (such as a Trip Mileage Reimbursement program). Expand the program by working with Mobility Matters and establish a new trip program. Strategy 4: Services beyond the ADA service parameters: Identify areas of greatest need that are viable for added service; develop a service model most appropriate for those areas; and identify potential providers. Strategy 8: Hospital Discharge Services to increase coordination with the Contra Costa Health Plan and Health Services programs. Strategy 11: One-Call/One-Click Information and Referral Program: Establish countywide, centralized phone and internet resources for all modes of transportation serving target populations, and assist callers in making travel plans based on their abilities. Strategy 13: Real-Time Transportation Information (Paratransit Vehicle Location, Bay Area Rapid Transit elevators, Wheelchair Spaces on Buses) provides passengers with real-time information about vehicles and various accessibility features. Strategy 14: Travel Training (Including Inter-Operator Trips) provides training to individuals to learn and use fixed-route transit, including transferring between different service areas. Strategy 16: Administer a Uniform Countywide ADA Paratransit Eligibility Certification Program to support, as necessary, the regional effort currently overseen by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. Strategy 18: Procure Joint Paratransit Scheduling Software to create a seamless system of services for passengers. Strategy 20: Means-Based Fare Subsidy for low-income populations for whom existing fares represent a barrier to access. 2225 Workshop: Make the Leapto Accessibility Join us for the first accessibility transportation workshop created to solve the challenges our transportation partners face in the post-pandemic era. Together we’ll identify mobility issues, share best practices, and provide transit solutions to facilitate transportation accessibility for those who live and work in Contra Costa. Special Guest Speakers: Arun Prem, Executive Director, Facilitating Access to Coordinated Services (FACT) Inc. Jess Segovia, ADA Guru owner and JADA Compliance and Mobility Management trainer/consultant February 29 • 9 am - 3 pm Contra Costa Transportation Authority Headquarters 2999 Oak Road, Walnut Creek, CA 94597 (DIVCO Meeting Room 1) LUNCH WILL BE PROVIDED RSVP to rkamara@ccta.net by January 30 Partners: ARC Contra Costa • Choice in Aging • Centers for Elders Independence • El Cerrito Easy Ride • Get Around Taxi Program Go San Ramon! • Independent Living Resources of Solano & Contra Costa Counties • Lamorinda Spirit Van Mobility Matters • Pleasant Hill Senior Van Service • R-Transit • Rossmoor Dial-a-Bus • San Pablo Senior Transportation Senior Express Van • Seniors Around Town • Walnut Creek Senior's Club Mini Bus 2326 Metropolitan Transportation Commission and Association of Bay Area Governments Joint MTC ABAG Legislation Committee March 8, 2024 Agenda Item 3b Regional Transportation Measure Authorizing Legislation Subject: Update on Senate Bill (SB) 925 (Wiener), the MTC-sponsored regional transportation revenue measure authorizing bill. Overview: Staff have been working closely with Senator Wiener’s office on drafting the first set of substantive amendments to SB 925, consistent with the Commission’s direction provided in January. Staff have also been meeting regularly with a Bay Area working group set up to help inform the legislation as well as meetings with legislative staff, transit operators, county transportation agency staff and MTC’s Policy Advisory Council. The bill has not yet been referred to its first committee. However, we anticipate it will be doubled-referred to the Senate Transportation Committee and another committee, either the Senate Revenue and Taxation Committee or the Senate Local Government Committee. These committees are chaired by Senator Cortese, Senator Glazer, and Senator Caballero, respectively. Staff will seek Commission approval, ideally coming to the Legislation Committee first, on the next set of substantive amendments to address key issues, including share of funding to go to different expenditure categories, highway project eligibility, and any return-to-source provisions. Staff will provide a verbal update on any late-breaking news at your meeting. Recommendation: Information Attachments: None _________________________________________ Andrew B. Fremier 2427 Metropolitan Transportation Commission and Association of Bay Area Governments Joint MTC ABAG Legislation Committee January 12, 2024 Agenda Item 3b - 24-0101 Regional Transportation Revenue Measure Enabling Legislation Subject: Outline of proposed legislation enabling MTC to place a future regional transportation revenue measure on the ballot. Background: At the December 2023 Commission meeting, staff provided an overview of the draft elements of the enabling legislation for a future regional transportation revenue measure (enabling legislation) that had been presented to the MTC/ABAG Joint Legislation Committee earlier in the month, plus a recommendation that the enabling legislation include policy provisions to help deliver rider-focused outcomes for the Bay Area traveling public, including priorities identified in the Bay Area Transit Transformation Action Plan (TAP) and other goals and focus areas of the measure (see Attachment A). Specifically, staff recommended enabling legislation strengthen MTC’s role as a regional transit network manager by including statutory changes to accelerate implementation of key Bay Area Transit Transformation Action Plan (TAP) action items and other customer facing policies that would benefit from a regional approach, such as ambassadors to assist riders and support a safe atmosphere. Staff also sought guidance on whether the Commission wanted staff to explore governance changes, including potential consolidation of transit agencies, in the context of the enabling legislation. While no action was taken, numerous commissioners expressed support for including provisions in the enabling legislation to improve transit agency coordination, and specifically improving the transit rider experience by strengthening MTC’s authority as the region’s transit network manager. On the other hand, several commissioners expressed concerns about further exploring governance changes (including transit agency consolidations) in the context of the enabling legislation. While there were some comments noting that restructuring the region’s transit governance to have fewer operators could be beneficial at some point the future, given the COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM 7a (ATTACHMENT C) 2528 Joint MTC ABAG Legislation Committee Agenda Item 3b - 24-0101 January 12, 2024 Page 2 of 7 significant opposition from many stakeholders – including local, state and federal elected officials – and the importance of building a strong unified coalition across all nine counties in support of the regional transportation measure, the Commissioner directed staff to focus on transit coordination over consolidation. Based on feedback received to date, this memo presents an outline of the proposed enabling legislation for MTC to sponsor (see Attachment B for a summary of key provisions). Staff will incorporate additional input provided by this committee into a final proposed outline for Commission approval this month. Once approved, staff will share that outline with Senator Wiener, who has committed to authoring the bill, and would anticipate coordinating with his office on the introductory bill language in advance of the February 16 bill introduction deadline. Overview: What is the Regional Transportation Measure Trying to Achieve? As indicated last month, staff proposes that the revenue measure’s core goal be advancing "a climate-friendly transportation system in the Bay Area that is safe, accessible and convenient for all." At the December Commission meeting staff also presented a vision statement for the transportation revenue measure to serve as a “North Star” to keep in focus for the entirety of the legislative and ballot measure development process. Below is an updated version that is more concise and attempts to incorporate feedback from the Commission and stakeholders. A vision statement describes the future we want to achieve, not present conditions. (See Attachment C for a track changes version.) The Bay Area has a world-class, reliable, affordable, efficient and connected transportation network that meets the needs of Bay Area residents, businesses, and visitors while also helping combat the climate crisis; a public transit network that offers safe, clean, frequent, accessible, easy-to-navigate, and reliable service, getting transit riders where they want and need to go safely, affordably, quickly and seamlessly; local roads are well maintained; and transit, biking, walking and wheeling are safe, convenient and competitive alternatives to driving; enhancing access to opportunity, lowering 2629 Joint MTC ABAG Legislation Committee Agenda Item 3b - 24-0101 January 12, 2024 Page 3 of 7 greenhouse gas emissions, strengthening the region’s economy and improving quality of life. While the vision would not necessarily be incorporated into the legislation, it could be used in the “findings and declarations” portion of the bill and useful in the development of fact sheets and other materials. Therefore, staff requests the Committee’s feedback and endorsement of the vision language for final adoption by the Commission. Staff proposes the following three specific focus areas for the measure (see Attachment C for a track changes version): 1. Protect and Enhance Transit Service: Protect existing service – including through ensuring existing resources are maintained and used effectively – and enhance service frequency and areas served where needed and financially sustainable. 2. Make Transit Faster, Safer, and Easier to Use. Create a seamless and convenient Bay Area transit system that attracts far more riders by improving public safety on transit, implementing the Bay Area Transit Transformation Action Plan and strengthening regional network management. 3. Enhance Mobility & Access for All. Make it safer and more accessible for people of all ages and abilities to get to where they need to go by preserving and enhancing mobility for all transportation system users, including people walking, biking, and wheeling. Revenue Measure Funding –Expenditure Priorities and Funding Source Options Based on feedback at the Commission last month, staff recommends pursuing enabling legislation that would authorize Bay Area voters in 2026 or later to raise revenue (with no capped limit on amount) to invest in the expenditure categories listed below, which are described in more detail in Attachment D. MTC in our early work analyzing revenue options assessed tax rates needed to generate approximately $1 billion per year. Transit advocates have voiced support for raising at least $2 billion per year – a scale that would allow for significant investments in improving and expanding transit service, in addition to closing the formidable transit operating gap (transit operators continue to forecast shortfalls in excess of $700 million per year starting in FY 2025-26). Additionally, other stakeholders – including county 2730 Joint MTC ABAG Legislation Committee Agenda Item 3b - 24-0101 January 12, 2024 Page 4 of 7 transportation authorities and labor partners – have conveyed their top priorities for a measure include robust investments in safe streets and other capital improvements. The approach above would keep the door open for revenue generation at that “at least $2 billion” magnitude while providing flexibility to scale a measure according to what voters will bear. Proposed Expenditure Categories 1. Transit transformation. Sustain, expand and improve transit service for both current and future riders. Accelerate Transformation Action Plan customer-focused initiatives and other service improvements that are high priorities for Bay Area voters and riders, including safety, and help fund zero-emission transit transition. (Note incorporation of zero emission transit transition, which had been accidentally omitted from wording in December) 2. Safe streets. Transform local roads to support safety, equity and climate goals, including through bike/ped infrastructure investments, safe routes to transit, other safety enhancements and pothole repairs. 3. Connectivity. Fund mobility improvements that close gaps and relieve bottlenecks in the existing transportation network in a climate-neutral manner. 4. Climate resilience. Fund planning, design and/or construction activities that protect transportation infrastructure and nearby communities from rising sea levels, flooding, wildfires and extreme heat. Staff is not recommending any expenditure shares or dollar amounts for any of these categories at this time, given the importance of further conversation with Bay Area stakeholders and our legislative delegation, as well as uncertainty about the size of the revenue measure that the Legislature will authorize for placement on the ballot. However, staff recommend that the Commission incorporate the concept of flexibility into the introductory version of the bill version of the bill through a “flexible” category (amount to be determined) that would enable MTC to adjust the funding levels for the four categories over time, according to changing circumstances and need. 2831 Joint MTC ABAG Legislation Committee Agenda Item 3b - 24-0101 January 12, 2024 Page 5 of 7 Potential Source of Revenue for a Future Measure Regarding the revenue mechanism, staff continues to recommend pursuit of a menu of revenue options, subject to a maximum rate, and an allowance for revenue options to be pursued sequentially over time. Staff continue to recommend the Commission pursue the following revenue options for inclusion “on the menu”: 1) Sales tax; 2) Income tax; 3) Payroll tax; 4) Square footage-based parcel tax; 5) Bay Area-specific vehicle registration surcharge with tiered rates based on the value of the vehicle; and 6) Regional vehicle miles traveled (VMT) charge. Neither a vehicle registration surcharge or a regional VMT charge could be pursued in 2026 so these options will only make sense if the Legislature agrees to authorize sequential measures. Furthermore, staff recommends a regional VMT charge be conditioned upon the state having already implemented its own statewide road usage charge and a vehicle registration charge (with higher rates based on vehicle’s value), and that the regional charge may not be implemented sooner than 2030. Policy Provisions to Deliver on Rider-Focused Outcomes As described in the “background” portion of this memo, staff heard support at the Commission meeting for strengthening MTC’s ability to deliver transformational “rider focused outcomes” that were the focus of the Bay Area Transit Transformation Action Plan. Accordingly, staff recommends the enabling legislation designate MTC with responsibility for setting policies that are essential to the user experience of a seamless transit system and condition receipt of transportation funds on compliance with standards related to: • Fare payment (how fares are paid) • Fare integration (fare transfers, discounts, passes, etc.). • Schedule coordination • Mapping & wayfinding (includes directional signage and harmonious transit branding to make transit more accessible and recognizable across the region) • Real time information 2932 Joint MTC ABAG Legislation Committee Agenda Item 3b - 24-0101 January 12, 2024 Page 6 of 7 • Other customer-facing operating policies that would benefit from a regional approach, including safety and workforce development Notably, statutes related to MTC's existing transit coordination role already require establishing a "regional transit coordinating council," so the newly established Regional Network Management Council could be recognized to have a formal advisory role concerning key decisions MTC would make as a regional network manager. As referenced during discussion at the Commission, staff also recommends inclusion of a policy provision to expand the Bay Area Commuter Benefit Program (administered jointly by MTC and the Bay Area Air Quality Management District) to include a mandate requiring that large employers (with 50 or more employees located in the Bay Area) with locations near transit provide their staff with a universal transit pass, i.e., the Clipper BayPass. According to initial feedback Senator Wiener’s Office has received from the state’s Legislative Counsel, such a mandate would be subject to voter approval and would therefore need to be incorporated into the regional transportation measure. Conclusion Staff seeks the Committee’s support for the proposed vision, goal and focus areas, expenditure categories and summary of key policy provisions (Attachment B) outlined in this memo to forward to the Commission for final approval. Recommendations: Commission Approval Attachments: • Attachment A: Rider-Focused Outcomes from a Regional Measure • Attachment B: Summary of Key Provisions for Regional Transportation Revenue Measure Enabling Legislation (Draft) • Attachment C: Proposed Vision Statement and Focus Areas and Comparison with Prior Versions 3033 Joint MTC ABAG Legislation Committee Agenda Item 3b - 24-0101 January 12, 2024 Page 7 of 7 • Attachment D: Description of Expenditure Categories Andrew B. Fremier 3134 Attachment C Agenda Item 3b Page 1 of 2 Updated Proposed Regional Transportation Measure Vision Statement and Focus Areas: Comparison with Version Presented at December 2023 Commission Meeting Vision Statement (Updated) The Bay Area has a world-class, reliable, affordable, efficient and connected transportation network that meets the needs of Bay Area residents, businesses, and visitors while also helping combat the climate crisis; a public transit network that offers safe, clean, frequent, accessible, easy-to-navigate and reliable service, getting transit riders where they want and need to go safely, affordably, quickly and seamlessly; local roads are well maintained; and transit, biking, walking and wheeling are safe, convenient and competitive alternatives to driving; enhancing access to opportunity, lowering greenhouse gas emissions, strengthening the region’s economy and improving quality of life. Comparison with December Version Note: Text additions are reflected with italics and deletions indicated with strikethrough. The Bay Area has a world-class, reliable, affordable, efficient and connected transportation network that meets the needs of Bay Area residents, businesses, and visitors while also helping combat combats the climate crisis. The ; a public transit network that offers safe, clean, frequent, is accessible, easy to navigate, and reliable service; affordable, and gets getting transit riders where they want and need to go safely, affordably, quickly and seamlessly; local roads are well maintained. Service, fares, schedules, customer information and transit identity are coordinated and consistent across transit systems. ; and transit Transit, biking, and walking and wheeling are reliable and safe, convenient and competitive alternatives to driving; enhancing access to opportunity, lowering greenhouse gas emissions, strengthening the region’s economy and improving quality of life. resulting in increased transit ridership, biking and walking and reduced growth in vehicle miles traveled. The Bay Area has the resources needed to sustain and enhance multimodal transportation options (including associated infrastructure improvements) and accountability to ensure the region’s infrastructure and services are dependable, efficient and safe. 3235 Attachment C Agenda Item 3b Page 2 of 2 Focus Areas (Updated) 1. Protect and Enhance Transit Service: Protect existing service – including through ensuring existing resources are maintained and used effectively – and enhance service frequency and areas served where needed and financially sustainable. 2. Make Transit Faster, Safer, and Easier to Use. Create a seamless and convenient Bay Area transit system that attracts far more riders by improving public safety on transit, implementing the Bay Area Transit Transformation Action Plan and strengthening regional network management. 3. Enhance Mobility & Access for All. Make it safer and more accessible for people of all ages and abilities to get to where they need to go by preserving and enhancing mobility for all transportation system users, including people walking, biking, and wheeling. Comparison with December Version Note: Text additions are reflected with italics and deletions indicated with strikethrough. 1. Protect and Enhance Transit Service: Protect existing service – including through ensuring existing resources are maintained and used effectively – and enhance service frequency and areas served where needed and financially sustainable. 2. Make Transit Faster, Safer, and Easier to Use. Create a seamless and convenient Bay Area transit system that attracts far more riders by improving public safety on transit, and implementing the Bay Area Transit Transformation Action Plan and strengthening regional network management. 3. Enhance Mobility & Access for All. Make it safer and easier more accessible for people of all ages and abilities to get to where they need to go by preserving and enhancing access mobility for all transportation system users, including people walking, biking, and wheeling. 3336 Preparing for a 2026 Regional Transportation Measure: Outline of Proposed Enabling Legislation & Next Steps Commission Meeting January 24, 2024 3437 Why a New Regional Transportation Measure? Plan Bay Area 2050 The Plan identified a $110 billion funding gap to realize the plan’s bold vision Transit’s Future Depends on New Funding New reliable funds are needed to sustain service and improve the rider experience Deliver Results Regional funds can incentivize key regional policy goals & improve access and mobility regionwide 2 3538 Proposed “North Star” Vision Statement The Bay Area needs a world-class, reliable, affordable, efficient and connected transportation network that meets the needs of Bay Area residents, businesses, and visitors while also helping combat the climate crisis; a public transit network that offers safe, clean, frequent, accessible, easy-to-navigate and reliable service, getting transit riders where they want and need to go safely, affordably, quickly and seamlessly; local roads are well maintained; and transit, biking, walking and wheeling are safe, convenient and competitive alternatives to driving; enhancing access to opportunity, lowering greenhouse gas emissions, strengthening the region’s economy and improving quality of life. 3 3639 Regional Measure Goal & Focus Areas Goal: Create a climate-friendly transportation system that is safe, accessible and convenient for all Protect and Enhance Transit Service Protect existing service –including through ensuring existing resources are maintained and used effectively –and enhance frequency of service and areas served where needed and financially sustainable. Make Transit Faster, Safer and Easier to Use Create a seamless and convenient Bay Area transit system that attracts far more riders by improving public safety on transit and implementing the Bay Area Transit Transformation Action Plan. Enhance Mobility & Access for All Make it safer and easier for people of all ages and abilities to get to where they need to go by preserving and enhancing access for all transportation system road users, including people walking, biking and wheeling. 4 3740 Proposed Funding Categories Transit Transformation Sustain and/or expand transit service levels on bus, rail, and ferry lines to serve both current and future riders. Accelerate Transformation Action Plan improvements to the customer experience improve safety on transit and help fund the zero-emission transit transition. Safe Streets Transform local roads to support safety, equity and climate goals, including through including through bike/ped infrastructure investments, safe routes to transit, other safety enhancements and pothole repairs. Connectivity Fund mobility improvements that close gaps and relieve bottlenecks in the existing transportation network in a climate-neutral manner. Example project types include express lanes, rail-grade separations, rail extensions, rail safety,and interchange modernizations. Climate Resilience Fund planning, design and/or construction activities that protect transportation infrastructure from rising sea levels, flooding, wildfires, and extreme heat. 5 3841 Summary of Tax Revenue Options Tax Type Summary Sales tax Regional sales tax on the sale of tangible items. Some groceries are exempt. Income tax Regional supplemental income tax paid by taxpayer –withheld from paycheck (can be limited to those with an income above a specified threshold and/or include tiered rates) Payroll tax Employer-based tax on wages paid to employees, like Social Security. Can be structured to exempt small businesses. Parcel tax Per square foot assessment on parcels of real estate. Can include exemptions. Vehicle Registration Surcharge Tiered rates based on value of vehicle, similar to SB 1. Would not be considered until 2030 or later given DMV registration database overhaul and anticipated revenue capacity limitations. Vehicle Miles Traveled Fee Tax based on vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Would not be considered until State of California adopts a road usage charge to replace the gas tax. 6 3942 Core Elements of Enabling Legislation Topic MTC Staff Recommendation Goal of Measure & Expenditure Categories Specify core goals of measure and expenditure categories in legislation. Likely include minimum shares by category after legislative and stakeholder consensus is achieved. Accountability To deliver customer-facing priorities sooner, strengthen MTC’s network management role. Establish oversight committee to ensure funds spent according to statute and measure. Travel Demand Management Require employer of at least 50 employees to provide a subsidy to their employees to encourage alternatives to single occupancy vehicle trips. Geographic Area of Tax Authorize MTC to place on ballot within the nine counties or a subset. Citizen Initiative Option Allow measure to be placed upon the ballot directly by MTC or by a qualified voter initiative (e.g., S.F.’s Measure C, 2018), subject to a simple majority vote. Timing & Duration of Ballot Measure Allow on ballot November 2026 or later subject to no sunset in the statute. Permit subsequent ballot placement if unsuccessful. Duration to be determined by MTC. Revenue Options & Amount Authorize a menu of revenue options (parcel tax, income tax, payroll tax and sales tax as near-term options; and VMT-fee and vehicle reg. charge at later date) subject to further discussion with stakeholders and the Legislature. Allow revenue options to be pursued sequentially. Funding Distribution Specify intent to consider need and geographic balance in funding distribution. Defer specifics on distribution within each expenditure category subject to further legislative and stakeholder engagement. 7 4043 Voters Want a More Integrated Transit System With Stronger Oversight •MTC’s October 2023 poll showed Bay Area voters think provisions to create a more integrated transit system are important to include in a measure. •80 percent support oversight and accountability to ensure effective & efficient management of transit •73 percent strongly support creating a seamless Bay Area transit network with coordinated fares, routes, schedules and signage •61 percent support one regional agency responsible for setting transit fares, coordinating different service schedules and creating consistent transit maps and signage •Results track with Blue Ribbon Transit Recovery Task Force’s 2021 public opinion poll (summarized at right) Everyone wants the same things: 92% -Find real time information on wait times and vehicles important 91% -find more direct service, fewer transfers, and shorter wait times important 88% -find a regional network that can set fairs, align routes and schedules and standardize information important 92% -find easy to use and uniform maps and signage important 90% -find a single set of fares, passes, discounts and transfer policies important 80% find dedicated travel lanes along key transit routes for buses and carpools important Source: Blue Ribbon Transit Recovery Task Force Public Opinion Poll, April 2021 8 4144 Policy Provision: Strengthen MTC’s Role as Regional Transit Network Manager to Speed Up Rider-Focused Outcomes Staff recommends the authorizing legislation strengthen MTC’s coordination authority by designating it with responsibility for setting policies essential to the user experience of a seamless transit system and setting standards related to: •Fare payment •Fare integration •Schedule coordination •Mapping & wayfinding •Real time information •Other customer-facing operating policies that would benefit from a regional approach, including safety and workforce development.9 4245 What’s Next? Draft Bill Language & Prepare for Hearing Senator Wiener has introduced SB 925 –a spot bill. Assuming MTC action to sponsor the bill, it will be amended to incorporate MTC in mid-February and first hearing likely in early March. MTC staff and leadership are continuing to brief and seek feedback from Bay Area legislators to inform legislative strategy Partner/Stakeholder Engagement & Public Communication Continue regular engagement with Bay Area partners/stakeholders, including through the staff-level Transportation Revenue Measure Working Group, and begin coalition building at the state level. Initiate leadership-level Steering Committee to advise working group. Develop webpage and communication channels for public to stay informed and engaged throughout development of the enabling legislation. 10 4346 Joint MTC ABAG Legislation Committee Attachment D January 12, 2023 Agenda Item 3b Page 1 of 6 Description of Draft Expenditure Categories & Eligible Investments (Changes Compared to November Committee) Note: Text additions are reflected in italics and deletions indicated with strikethroughs. Category Description Examples of Eligible Investments (not exhaustive) Equity & Climate Considerations Transit Transformation Sustain, and/or expand, and improve transit service levels on bus, rail, and ferry lines to serve for both current and future riders. Accelerate Transformation Action Plan customer-focused initiatives that are high priorities for Bay Area voters and riders, including safety, and help fund the zero-emission transit transition improvements to the customer experience, improve transit safety and help fund the zero- emission transit transition. Notes: 1. Further analysis of the long- term transit operating needs will be available this fall as - Preservation of existing routes and frequencies - Increased frequencies frequency of service and/or areas served where needed and financially sustainable - Network restructuring that leads to net increase in transit service-hours. - Simplified and standardized fare programs & discounts - Improved signage Signage and wayfinding improvements at and around stations and bus stops. Priority could be given toward preserving existing service levels and/or enhancing service frequencies on transit lines that benefit residents in Equity Priority Communities or that primarily serve underserved demographic groups. Priority could be given toward programmatic investments on transit lines or at transit stops/stations that benefit residents in Equity Priority Communities or that primarily serve underserved demographic groups. 4447 Joint MTC ABAG Legislation Committee Attachment D November 3, 2023 Agenda Item 3a Page 2 of 6 Category Description Examples of Eligible Investments (not exhaustive) Equity & Climate Considerations part of the Plan Bay Area 2050+ process, enabling a better understanding of to what extent this measure could sustain existing levels and/or expand service frequencies. 2. This would include implementation of Transit Transformation Action Plan priorities, as well as complementary investments to grow ridership as identified in Transit 2050+. - Zero emission bus purchases and related infrastructure. - Improving bus stop site conditions and installing new or replacement amenities, including bus shelters, lighting, seating, and accessibility upgrades. - Transit priority infrastructure (signal priority, bus lanes for rapid/BRT, etc.) - Safety enhancements, such as community ambassadors, improved lighting & security cameras - Paratransit service expansion to enable "one-seat rides" Investments related to transit operations and/or Transformation Action Plan implementation are anticipated to all be GHG-neutral or GHG-reducing. 4548 Joint MTC ABAG Legislation Committee Attachment D November 3, 2023 Agenda Item 3a Page 3 of 6 Category Description Examples of Eligible Investments (not exhaustive) Equity & Climate Considerations - Shuttles or other flexible mobility options accommodating all users - Bikeshare subsidies & system expansion Safe Streets Transform local roads to support safety, equity and climate goals, including through bike/ped infrastructure investments, safe routes to transit, other safety and accessibility enhancements and pothole repairs. Note: This would help fund multi- benefit projects – to help encourage walking and biking for nearby trips and to enable first/last mile connections to transit – while also working to ensure geographic Projects would ideally include two or more features to yield progress toward the multiple goals concurrently outcomes in the program description, such as: - Street repaving projects - Buffered or protected bike lanes - Sidewalk improvements, bulb- outs and/or curb cuts Expanded sidewalks and/or bulb-outs Priority could be given toward road improvements or street redesigns located within an Equity Priority Community, contingent upon a robust community engagement process to engage local residents. As investments in this category are not anticipated to include additional roadway capacity, this category is anticipated to be a mix 4649 Joint MTC ABAG Legislation Committee Attachment D November 3, 2023 Agenda Item 3a Page 4 of 6 Category Description Examples of Eligible Investments (not exhaustive) Equity & Climate Considerations balance throughout the nine-county region. - Upgrades at and around bus stops to improve safety and accessibility - Parallel multimodal trails - Traffic calming features - Traffic signal optimization - Green infrastructure elements of GHG-neutral and GHG- reducing projects. Connectivity Fund mobility improvements that close gaps and relieve bottlenecks in the existing transportation network in a climate-neutral manner. Example projects include express lanes; rail safety improvements rail grade separations, rail extensions and interchange modernizations. Note: This would help the region implement near-to-medium - Rail extensions - Rail grade separation & modernization , at grade crossings and other rail safety projects - Zero emission bus purchases and related infrastructure - New ferry terminals - Carpool-to-express lane conversions Priority could be given toward projects that benefit residents in Equity Priority Communities or that primarily serve underserved demographic groups. Investments are primarily anticipated to be GHG-reducing (e.g., transit and rail improvements megaprojects), although select non-capacity- 4750 Joint MTC ABAG Legislation Committee Attachment D November 3, 2023 Agenda Item 3a Page 5 of 6 Category Description Examples of Eligible Investments (not exhaustive) Equity & Climate Considerations transportation investments for mobility and safety projects, including those already approved by voters but stalled due to increasing costs. - Highway interchange modernizations increasing highway investments such as HOV-to-Express Lane conversion projects or safety improvements at highway interchanges may be GHG- neutral. Climate Resilience Fund planning, design and/or construction activities that protect benefit transportation infrastructure and nearby communities from rising sea levels, flooding, wildfires and extreme heat by protecting them from sea level rise. Note: While funding would likely not be sufficient to advance climate resilience megaprojects, funding could allow the region to undertake - Local or subcounty resilience plans to refine future pipeline of projects - Design and environmental analyses for future sea level rise resilience projects - Implementation of specific sea level rise resilience projects, such as: o Levees & horizontal levees o Infrastructure elevation Priority could be given toward resilience planning, design and/or construction activities in Equity Priority Communities or to protect transportation facilities primarily used by underserved demographic groups. Among other factors, investments would be prioritized based on climate risk and investments would be contingent upon a robust community 4851 Joint MTC ABAG Legislation Committee Attachment D November 3, 2023 Agenda Item 3a Page 6 of 6 Category Description Examples of Eligible Investments (not exhaustive) Equity & Climate Considerations the necessary project development work so we can better compete for future state or federal funding in the years ahead. o Tidal gates o Wetland restoration engagement process to engage local residents. Investments related to climate resilience are anticipated to all be GHG reducing or GHG neutral. 4952 Smith, Watts &Hartmann, LLC. Consulting and Governmental Relations March 4, 2024 To: Transportation, Water, and Infrastructure Committee c/o John Cunningham From: Mark Watts Re: March 2024 TWIC State Report I am pleased to provide the following report on acƟviƟes occurring in the state Capitol, including specifically updated informaƟon on legislaƟve and budgetary acƟviƟes. LegislaƟve AcƟviƟes Following the February 16 deadline to submit bill langauge for 2024, I have completed the initial review of legislation introduced and identified more than 50 active bills (including two‐year bills) of interest to transportation agencies and interests. A significant number of proposals are "spot" bills — those that are placeholders for more complete langauge for committee consideration. The deadline to make such complete amendments is in mid‐March. In the meantime, substantive bills are being set for policy committee hearings. Consultation with transportation committee staff indicate the Senate committee will schedule 2 bill hearings for this year: April 9 and April 22; while bill hearings for the Assembly will likely be April 1, 8, 15, and 22. Update ‐ Legislative Organization New Senate Leadership and Committee Assignments Senate President pro Tempore McGuire announced his new Senate Democratic Leadership team as well as numerous changes to Senate committee chairs and membership on February 9. Changes of particular note include significant changes to the leadership of committees with oversight of transportation, and the budget. Pro Tern McGuire's leadership team now is comprised of the following Senators: Gonzalez (D‐Long Beach), Majority Leader Ashby (D‐Sacramento), Assistant Majority Leader Wahab (D‐Hayward), Assistant Majority Leader Limon (D‐Santa Barbara), Democratic Caucus Chair Cortese (D‐San Jose), Majority Whip Durazo (D‐Los Angeles), Assistant Majority Whip Padilla (D‐San Diego), Assistant Majority Whip Key Senate committee changes in policy areas of interest include: 5053 Smith, Watts &Hartmann, LLC. Consulting and Governmental Relations Wiener (D‐San Francisco) to Chair of Budget & Fiscal Review, replacing Skinner (D‐Berkeley) with Skinner to Chair of Housing, replacing Wiener. Cortese (D‐San Jose) to Chair of Transportation, replacing Gonzalez (D‐Long Beach) Caballero (D‐Merced) to Chair of Appropriations, replacing Portantino (D‐Burbank), who is termed out and running for Congress. This change is effective March 11. Smallwood‐Cuevas (D‐Los Angeles) replaces Senator Caballero as a member of Budget & Fiscal Review Sub. 4, where housing‐related measures, including REAP 2.0, will be heard. Wahab (D‐Hayward) replaces Durazo (D‐Los Angeles) as Chair of Budget & Fiscal Review Sub. 5, which has jurisdiction over transportation and public safety funding. The Senate Governance and Finance Committee (previously Chaired by Caballero) was split into Local Government, chaired by Durazo (D‐Los Angeles), and Revenue & Taxation chaired by Glazer (D‐Orinda). Budgetary InformaƟon A series of recently released reports underscore the state's weak revenue collections and resulting significant budget challenges. The Legislative Analyst's Office (LAO) on February that weak revenue performance has increased the challenges to the state's projected budget deficit to $73 billion—a $15 billion increase compared to the revenue projections underlying the Governor's January budget. The LAO has recommended that the Legislature adopt the Governor's proposed mix of fund shifts and reductions in the transportation space and has identified $15.6 billion in additional one‐time and temporary spending across fiscal years 2023‐24 through 2025‐26 that the Legislature could reduce to address the deficit, including $1.9 billion in housing‐related spending and $1.9 billion in transportation related spending, largely for public transportation infrastructure. The Department of Finance (DOF) released its February Monthly Finance Bulletin, reporting preliminary General Fund cash receipts for the month $5 billion below the Governor's budget forecast. According to DOF, the primary driver of the shortfall was anemic personal income tax estimated payments, indicating weakness in receipts relating to tax year 2023. Additionally, year‐to‐date corporate tax cash receipts were $980 million below forecast due to higher corporate refunds and lower estimated payments. Next steps – Budget The Legislature began budget subcommittee hearings in earnest last week to dig in to the Governor’s budget proposals. Given this dismal budget news – and the potential for further decline – it is important to recognize that the budgetary revisions the Governor proposes in May will be significant. 5154 Smith, Watts &Hartmann, LLC. Consulting and Governmental Relations APPENDIX KEY BILLS OF NOTE FOR TRANSPORTATION AGENCIES AB 2535 (Bonta): This bill would eliminate general purpose lanes as an eligible use for TCEP under any circumstance and eliminate highway capacity as an eligible use in disadvantaged communities. Should a highway project under TCEP expand the highway footprint in limited instances, the bill would require full mitigation of all environmental impacts. AB 2086 (Schiavo): AB 2086 would require Caltrans to report to the Legislature on how it advanced its Core Four (safety, equity, climate action, and economic prosperity) priorities with the funding that was made available to it in the preceding 5 fiscal years. AB 2086 would also create a new role for the CTC to develop performance targets for the Core Four goals. AB 2290 (Friedman): AB 2290 would, among other things, require a bicycle facility that is identified for a street in an adopted bicycle plan or active transportation plan to be included in a project funded by the program that includes that street. This is of concern for rural counties and areas. SB 960 (Wiener): SB 960 would require all transportation projects funded or overseen by Caltrans to provide “comfortable, convenient, and connected” complete streets facilities unless an exemption is documented and approved. SB 960 would also require the CTC to adopt targets and performance measures related to making progress on complete streets. Finally, SB 960 would require Caltrans to adopt a Transit Priority Project policy for state and local highways. 5255 3/5/24, 11:25 AM State Net https://sn.lexisnexis.com/secure/pe/appwait_helper.cgi?wait_pid=20972&host=10.139.76.168&query_id=xQNdG6uURtWs&app=lpfs&mode=display 1/9 California HIGH SESSION ADJOURNMENT August 30, 2024 178 Days Remaining Moving Bill Our Forecast ▼Show More HIGH SESSION ADJOURNMENT August 30, 2024 178 Days Remaining Moving Bill Our Forecast ▼Show More Status actions entered today are listed in bold. File name: Master Author:Laura Friedman (D-044) Title:Transportation Planning: Regional Transportation Plans Fiscal Committee:yes Urgency Clause:no Introduced:12/05/2022 Last Amend:03/16/2023 Disposition:Pending Location:Senate Transportation Committee Summary:Requires a metropolitan planning organization to submit an adopted sustainable communities strategy or an alternative planning strategy, if applicable, to the State Air Resources Board for review. Status:06/14/2023 To SENATE Committees on TRANSPORTATION and ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY. Author:Laura Friedman (D-044) Title:Transportation: Planning: Project Selection Processes Fiscal Committee:yes Urgency Clause:no 1.CA AB 6 Slow ⓘ 2.CA AB 7 Slow ⓘ ✔✔✔ ✔✔✔✔✔ 1st Committee 1st Fiscal Committee 1st Chamber 2nd Committee 2nd Chamber Executive 1st Committee 1st Fiscal Committee 1st Chamber 2nd Committee 2nd Fiscal Committee 2nd Chamber 95% 95% 5356 3/5/24, 11:25 AM State Net https://sn.lexisnexis.com/secure/pe/appwait_helper.cgi?wait_pid=20972&host=10.139.76.168&query_id=xQNdG6uURtWs&app=lpfs&mode=display 2/9 HIGH SESSION ADJOURNMENT August 30, 2024 178 Days Remaining Moving Bill Our Forecast ▼Show More HIGH SESSION ADJOURNMENT August 30, 2024 178 Days Remaining Moving Bill Introduced:12/05/2022 Last Amend:09/01/2023 Disposition:Pending File:A-37 Location:Senate Inactive File Summary:Provides that the Secretary of Transportation, among other duties, is charged with developing and reporting to the Governor on legislative, budgetary, and administrative programs to accomplish coordinated planning and policy formulation in matters of public interest, including transportation projects. Requires the agency, the Department of Transportation, and the California Transportation Commission to incorporate specified principles into their existing program funding guidelines and processes. Status:09/11/2023 In SENATE. From third reading. To Inactive File. Author:Alex Lee (D-024) Title:Light Pollution Control Fiscal Committee:yes Urgency Clause:no Introduced:12/05/2022 Last Amend:06/28/2023 Disposition:Pending Location:Senate Appropriations Committee Summary:Relates to the Warren-Alquist State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Act, which requires the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission to adopt lighting and other building design and construction standards that increase efficiency in the use of energy. Requires, with certain exceptions, an agency to ensure that an outdoor lighting fixture that is newly installed on a structure or land that is owned, leased, or managed by the agency meets certain criteria. Status:09/01/2023 In SENATE Committee on APPROPRIATIONS: Held in committee. 3.CA AB 38 Very Fast ⓘ 4.CA AB 52 Slow ✔✔✔✔ 1st Committee 1st Fiscal Committee 1st Chamber 2nd Committee 2nd Fiscal Committee 2nd Chamber 5457 3/5/24, 11:25 AM State Net https://sn.lexisnexis.com/secure/pe/appwait_helper.cgi?wait_pid=20972&host=10.139.76.168&query_id=xQNdG6uURtWs&app=lpfs&mode=display 3/9 Our Forecast ▼Show More HIGH SESSION ADJOURNMENT August 30, 2024 178 Days Remaining Moving Bill Our Forecast ▼Show More Author:Timothy S. Grayson (D-015) Title:Income Tax Credit: Sales and Use Taxes Paid Fiscal Committee:yes Urgency Clause:no Introduced:12/05/2022 Last Amend:06/15/2023 Disposition:Pending Location:Senate Appropriations Committee Summary:Relates to the Sales and Use Tax Law. Allows a credit against those taxes to a taxpayer in an amount equal to the amount of tax reimbursement paid during the taxable year for sales tax on gross receipts that would be exempt from taxation pursuant to the sales and use tax exemption. Allows a similar tax credit against those taxes to a taxpayer in an amount equal to the amount of use tax paid during the taxable year for storage, use, or other consumption that would be exempt from taxation under that law. Status:09/01/2023 In SENATE Committee on APPROPRIATIONS. Held in committee and made a Two-year bill. Author:Tasha Boerner (D-077) Title:Vehicles: Required Stops: Bicycles Fiscal Committee:yes Urgency Clause:no Introduced:12/13/2022 Last Amend:03/09/2023 Disposition:Pending Location:Senate Transportation Committee ⓘ 5.CA AB 73 Very Fast ⓘ ✔✔✔✔ ✔✔✔ 1st Committee 1st Fiscal Committee 1st Chamber 2nd Committee 2nd Fiscal Committee 2nd Chamber 1st Committee 1st Fiscal Committee 1st Chamber 2nd Committee 2nd Chamber Executive 95% 5558 3/5/24, 11:25 AM State Net https://sn.lexisnexis.com/secure/pe/appwait_helper.cgi?wait_pid=20972&host=10.139.76.168&query_id=xQNdG6uURtWs&app=lpfs&mode=display 4/9 HIGH SESSION ADJOURNMENT August 30, 2024 178 Days Remaining Moving Bill Our Forecast ▼Show More FAILED Our Forecast ▼Show More Summary:Requires a person who is 18 years of age or older riding a bicycle upon a two-lane highway when approaching a stop sign at the entrance of an intersection with another roadway with two or fewer lanes, where stop signs are erected upon all approaches, to yield the right-of-way to any vehicles that have either stopped at or entered the intersection, or that are approaching on the intersecting highway close enough to constitute an immediate hazard, and to pedestrians, as specified. Status:07/11/2023 In SENATE Committee on TRANSPORTATION: Not heard. Author:Isaac G. Bryan (D-055) Title:Street Furniture Data: Statewide Data Platform Fiscal Committee:yes Urgency Clause:no Introduced:02/01/2023 Last Amend:04/11/2023 Disposition:Pending Location:Senate Transportation Committee Summary:Requires the Department of Transportation to develop guidelines for data sharing, documentation, public access, quality control, and promotion of open-source and accessible platforms and decision support tools related to street furniture data. Requires the Department to designate the Integrated Climate Adaptation and Resiliency Program Technical Advisory Council to advise on the development of the initial and subsequent guidelines, and review the reports related to those guidelines. Status:06/14/2023 To SENATE Committees on TRANSPORTATION and JUDICIARY. Author:Tasha Boerner (D-077) 6.CA AB 364 Very Fast ⓘ 7.CA AB 530 ⓘ ✔✔✔ X X X X 1st Committee 1st Fiscal Committee 1st Chamber 2nd Committee 2nd Chamber Executive 1st Committee 1st Chamber 2nd Committee 2nd Chamber Executive 95% X 5659 3/5/24, 11:25 AM State Net https://sn.lexisnexis.com/secure/pe/appwait_helper.cgi?wait_pid=20972&host=10.139.76.168&query_id=xQNdG6uURtWs&app=lpfs&mode=display 5/9 HIGH SESSION ADJOURNMENT August 30, 2024 178 Days Remaining Moving Bill Our Forecast ▼Show More Title:Vehicles: Electric Bicycles Fiscal Committee:yes Urgency Clause:no Introduced:02/08/2023 Last Amend:07/13/2023 Disposition:Failed Location:ASSEMBLY Summary:Prohibits a person under a specified age from operating an electric bicycle of any class. States the intent of the Legislature to create an e-bike license program with an online written test and a State- issued photo identification for those persons without a valid driver's license, prohibit persons under a specified age from riding e-bikes, and create a stakeholders working group to work on recommendations to establish an e-bike training program and license. Status:02/01/2024 In ASSEMBLY. Died pursuant to Art. IV, Sec. 10(c) of the Constitution. 02/01/2024 From Committee: Filed with the Chief Clerk pursuant to Joint Rule 56. Author:Eduardo Garcia (D-036) Title:Safe Drinking Water, Wildfire Prevention, Drought Prep Fiscal Committee:yes Urgency Clause:no Introduced:02/17/2023 Last Amend:05/26/2023 Disposition:Pending Location:Senate Natural Resources and Water Committee Summary:Enacts the Safe Drinking Water, Wildfire Prevention, Drought Preparation, Flood Protection, Extreme Heat Mitigation, Clean Energy, and Workforce Development Bond Act of 2024, which, if approved by the voters, would authorize the issuance of bonds in a specified amount to finance projects for safe drinking water, wildfire prevention, drought preparation, flood protection, extreme heat mitigation, clean energy, and workforce development programs. Status:06/14/2023 To SENATE Committees on NATURAL RESOURCES AND WATER and GOVERNANCE AND FINANCE. 8.CA AB 1567 Very Fast ⓘ 9. ✔✔✔ 1st Committee 1st Fiscal Committee 1st Chamber 2nd Committee 2nd Chamber Executive 95% 5760 3/5/24, 11:25 AM State Net https://sn.lexisnexis.com/secure/pe/appwait_helper.cgi?wait_pid=20972&host=10.139.76.168&query_id=xQNdG6uURtWs&app=lpfs&mode=display 6/9 HIGH SESSION ADJOURNMENT August 30, 2024 178 Days Remaining Our Forecast ▼Show More HIGH SESSION ADJOURNMENT August 30, 2024 178 Days Remaining Our Forecast ▼Show More Author:Damon Connolly (D-012) Title:Vehicles: Electric Bicycles Fiscal Committee:yes Urgency Clause:no Introduced:01/03/2024 Disposition:Pending Location:Assembly Transportation Committee Summary:Prohibits a person under 16 years of age from operating a class 2 electric bicycle. Requires a person operating, or riding upon, a class 2 electric bicycle to wear a helmet. Clarifies that an electric bicycle can only be placed in a certain class if it ceases to provide assistance when the bicycle reaches a max speed regardless of the mode. Status:01/16/2024 To ASSEMBLY Committee on TRANSPORTATION. Author:Kevin McCarty (D-006) Title:Sacramento Regional Transit District Fiscal Committee:no Urgency Clause:no Introduced:02/14/2024 Disposition:Pending Location:Assembly Local Government Committee Summary:Relates to existing law that requires each transit operator, including the Sacramento Regional Transit District, that offers reduced fares to senior citizens to also offer reduced fares to disabled persons and disabled veterans at the same rate established for senior citizens. The bill exempts the district from that requirement. CA AB 1778 ⓘ 10.CA AB 2634 ⓘ 1st Committee 1st Chamber 2nd Committee 2nd Chamber Executive 1st Committee 1st Chamber 2nd Committee 2nd Chamber Executive 95% 95% 5861 3/5/24, 11:25 AM State Net https://sn.lexisnexis.com/secure/pe/appwait_helper.cgi?wait_pid=20972&host=10.139.76.168&query_id=xQNdG6uURtWs&app=lpfs&mode=display 7/9 NO FORECAST SESSION ADJOURNMENT August 30, 2024 178 Days Remaining Our Forecast ▼Show More HIGH SESSION ADJOURNMENT August 30, 2024 178 Days Remaining Moving Bill Our Forecast ▼Show More Status:03/04/2024 To ASSEMBLY Committee on LOCAL GOVERNMENT. Author:Juan Alanis (R-022) Title:Public Resources: Water and Wildfire Resiliency Act Fiscal Committee:yes Urgency Clause:no Introduced:12/05/2022 Disposition:Pending Committee:Assembly Water, Parks and Wildlife Committee Hearing:03/19/2024 9:00 am, State Capitol, Room 444 Summary:Establishes the Water and Wildfire Resiliency Fund within the State Treasury, and would require the Treasurer to annually transfer an amount equal to 3% of all state revenues that may be appropriated as described from the General Fund to the Water and Wildfire Resiliency Fund. Requires the moneys in the fund to be appropriated by the Legislature and requires that 50% of the moneys in the fund be used for water projects, and that the other 50% of the moneys in the fund be used for forest maintenance. Status:04/20/2023 To ASSEMBLY Committees on WATER, PARKS AND WILDLIFE and NATURAL RESOURCES. Author:Thomas J. Umberg (D-034) Title:Transportation: Zero-Emission Vehicle Signage Fiscal Committee:yes Urgency no 11.CA ACA 2 ⓘ 12.CA SB 30 Very Fast ⓘ✔✔✔✔ 1st Committee 1st Chamber 2nd Committee 2nd Chamber Executive 1st Committee 1st Fiscal Committee 1st Chamber 2nd Committee 2nd Fiscal Committee 2nd Chamber 5962 3/5/24, 11:25 AM State Net https://sn.lexisnexis.com/secure/pe/appwait_helper.cgi?wait_pid=20972&host=10.139.76.168&query_id=xQNdG6uURtWs&app=lpfs&mode=display 8/9 FAILED Our Forecast ▼Show More HIGH SESSION ADJOURNMENT August 30, 2024 178 Days Remaining Our Forecast Clause: Introduced:12/05/2022 Last Amend:06/19/2023 Disposition:Pending Location:Assembly Appropriations Committee Summary:Requires the Department of Transportation, in coordination with the Governor's Office of Business and Economic Development (GO-Biz) and the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission, to develop and design light-duty zero-emission vehicle charging and fueling station signage to be placed along State highways based on charger or fueling type and vehicle compatibility, in order to increase consumer confidence in locating electric vehicle chargers and hydrogen fueling stations. Status:09/01/2023 In ASSEMBLY Committee on APPROPRIATIONS: Held in committee. Author:Aisha Wahab (D-010) Title:San Francisco Bay Area: Public Transportation Fiscal Committee:yes Urgency Clause:no Introduced:02/09/2023 Last Amend:01/03/2024 Disposition:Failed Location:SENATE Summary:Requires the Transportation Agency to develop a plan to consolidate all transit agencies that are located within the geographic jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. Status:02/01/2024 In SENATE. Returned to Secretary of Senate pursuant to Joint Rule 56. 13.CA SB 397 ⓘ 14.CA SB 960 ⓘ X X X X 1st Committee 1st Chamber 2nd Committee 2nd Chamber Executive 1st Committee 1st Chamber 2nd Committee 2nd Chamber Executive X 6063 3/5/24, 11:25 AM State Net https://sn.lexisnexis.com/secure/pe/appwait_helper.cgi?wait_pid=20972&host=10.139.76.168&query_id=xQNdG6uURtWs&app=lpfs&mode=display 9/9 ▼Show More Author:Scott D. Wiener (D-011) Title:Transportation: Planning: Transit Priority Projects Fiscal Committee:yes Urgency Clause:no Introduced:01/23/2024 Disposition:Pending Committee:Senate Transportation Committee Hearing:04/09/2024 1:30 pm, 1021 O Street, Room 1200 Summary:Requires all transportation projects funded or overseen by the department to provide comfortable, convenient, and connected complete streets facilities unless an exemption is documented and approved, as specified. Status:02/14/2024 To SENATE Committee on TRANSPORTATION. 95% 6164 Legislative A airs Secretary Christy Bouma to Depart, New Legislative A airs Secretary Appointed Published: Mar 04, 2024 SACRAMENTO – Governor Gavin Newsom today announced the appointment of Christine Aurre as Legislative A airs Secretar y in the O ice of the Governor, filling the role held by Christy Bouma since March 2022. “Christyʼs strong leadership and remarkable collaboration with our partners in the Legislature has been indispensable in delivering monumental wins for Californians and the future of our state. These many successes include transformative measures to modernize the stateʼs mental health care, behavioral health services, and substance use disorder treatment systems, new e orts to safeguard our communities from gun violence, an infrastructure package to accelerate projects across the state, sweeping measures to drive world-leading climate action, and the nationʼs first law to protect against price gouging by Big Oil. The dedication, care and empathy she brings to her work every day brings out the best in ever yone, and Iʼm deeply grateful for her ser vice and partnership over the last two years.” Bouma will continue to serve the Administration as a member of the State Compensation Insurance Fund. “Christine has been a critical member of my legislative a airs team with extensive experience working in and with the Legislature,” added Governor Newsom. “I thank her for stepping into this role as we continue to make progress on key priorities for the state.” Christy Bouma, of Sacramento, has been appointed to the State Compensation Insurance Fund. Bouma has served as Legislative A airs Secretar y in the O ice of Governor Gavin Newsom since 2022. She was a Principal at Capitol Connection from 2000 to 2022. Bouma was a Teacher f h i ifi d h l i i f h d 6265 for the Hesperia Unified School District from 1989 to 1999. She earned a Bachelor of Arts degree in Computer Science from Point Loma Nazarene College and a Master of Science degree in Computer Science from California State University, Sacramento. This position does not require Senate confirmation and the compensation is $71,190. Bouma is a Democrat. Christine Aurre, of Sacramento, has been appointed Legislative A airs Secretar y in the O ice of Governor Gavin Newsom, where she has served as Deputy Legislative A airs Secretary since 2022. She was Legislative Director in the O ice of State Senate Majority Leader Robert Hertzberg from 2019 to 2022. Aurre was Legislative Assistant in the O ice of State Assemblymember Patrick OʼDonnell from 2015 to 2019. She earned a Bachelor of Arts degree in Government from California State University, Sacramento. This position does not require Senate confirmation and the compensation is $228,492. Aurre is a Democrat. The Governor also announced the following appointment to the State Compensation Insurance Fund: Richard Guggenhime, of San Francisco, has been reappointed to the State Compensation Insurance Fund, where he has served since 2020. Guggenhime has been Senior Counsel at Perkins Coie since 2016. He was Senior Counsel at Schi Hardin from 2008 to 2016. Guggenhime was a Partner at Heller Ehrman from 1970 to 2006. He earned a Bachelor of Arts degree in Political Science and Economics from Stanford University and a Juris Doctor degree from Har vard Law School. This position does not require Senate confirmation and the compensation is $71,190. Guggenhime is a Democrat. ### 6366 Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 4 on Climate Crisis, Resources, Energy and Transportation Hon. Steve Bennett, Chair PRESENTED TO: LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE Overview of Proposed Climate and Transportation Budget Solutions MARCH 6, 2024 6467 LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE 1 Overall Budget Context State Faces a Multibillion-Dollar Budget Problem State revenues have come in significantly lower than what was projected in June 2023. In January, our office estimated that the Governor addressed a $58 billion budget problem. Based on more recent economic and revenue data, we now estimate the state has a $73 billion budget problem to solve in 2024-25. Significant Future Budget Deficits Projected Under the administration’s spending and revenue projections, even after adopting the Governor’s proposals, the state still would face annual operating deficits of between $30 billion and $40 billion in 2025-26 through 2027-28. Reducing One-Time and Temporary Spending Is a Key Tool for Addressing Budget Problem Maximizing one-time spending reductions allows the Legislature to minimize the use of other budget tools—like reserves—that likely will be needed to address deficits in future years. This strategy will not be as readily available as time passes— once one-time funds are spent, they no longer are available to pull back, leaving fewer (and often more disruptive) options for balancing the budget, such as making cuts to ongoing programs. Given the change in the state’s overall fiscal condition, making corresponding reductions to one-time spending that was dependent on the anticipated surplus is both reasonable and necessary— particularly for expenditures that were planned when the state had a different General Fund outlook but that have not yet been implemented. 6568 LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE 2 Recent Budgets Included Significant General Fund Augmentations for Climate and Transportation Programs Historic General Fund for Climate, Resources, and Environmental Programs… The 2021-22 and 2022-23 budget packages included agreements to provide a six-year total of about $39 billion from various sources (2020-21 through 2025-26). The 2023-24 budget made some reductions but maintained a multiyear total of $36 billion (93 percent). …And for Transportation The 2022-23 budget package planned for $10.9 billion over a five-year period through a Transportation Infrastructure Package ($9.5 billion) and Supply Chain Package ($1.4 billion). The 2023-24 budget made some adjustments to timing and fund sources but maintained the same overall level of intended funding. ª Includes departments in the California Natural Resources Agency and California Environmental Protection Agency, as well as the California Department of Food and Agriculture and the climate package amounts for the Governor's Office of Planning and Research and the California Public Utilities Commission. All amounts reflect the Governor's January 2024 proposals. Figure 1 General Fund Spending on Climate, Resources, and Environmental Programs Surged in Recent Yearsª (In Billions) 5 10 15 20 25 $30 2013-14 2015-16 2017-18 2019-20 2022-23 2024-25 General Fund Special Funds Bond Funds 6669 LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE 3 Governor’s Proposals for Climate, Resources, and Environmental Budget Solutions Governor Proposes $4.1 Billion in 2024-25 General Fund Solutions Reductions ($2 Billion). Makes $2 billion in program reductions across the budget window, plus $543 million in the out-years. Delays ($1.1 Billion). Postpones $1.1 billion in planned expenditures from the budget window to a future year, plus $635 million from 2025-26. Also delays $600 million in planned Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF) expenditures from 2024-25 to 2027-28. Fund Shifts ($1 Billion). Shifts $1 billion in planned spending from the General Fund to GGRF. This includes $557 million proposed for early action in the current year. Net General Fund Savings Over Multiyear Period Totals $3.6 Billion This is the net result of the additional out-year reductions, which are more than offset by the costs associated with the resumption of the delayed expenditures. 6770 LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE 4 Vast Majority of Intended Multiyear Funding for Climate and Environmental Programs Would be Maintained Figure 3 Governor's Proposal Would Retain Majority of Planned Multiyear Climate Funding (In Billions) 2 4 6 8 Drought and Water Resilience Wildfire and Forest Resilience Extreme Heat Nature-Based Solutions Coastal Resilience Community Resilience Sustainable Agriculture Circular Economy Zero-Emission Vehicles Energy Other $10 Retained Fund shift Delay Reduction Already Reduced Proposed 6871 LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE 5 Governor’s Proposals for Transportation Budget Solutions Governor Proposes $4.3 Billion in 2024-25 General Fund Solutions Cash Flow Adjustments ($2.8 Billion). Reverts funding previously provided back to the General Fund (resulting in savings during the budget window), with the intention to reappropriate the funds in future years based on when the administration expects the money will be needed to cover project expenditures. Delay ($1 Billion). Delays a portion of General Fund spending for the formula-based Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program (TIRCP) from 2024-25 to 2025-26. Fund Shifts ($791 Million). Shifts a share of expenditures for both formula-based and competitive TIRCP from the General Fund to GGRF in 2024-25. Reductions ($296 Million). Reduces a portion of funding for two activities: $200 million from the Active Transportation Program and $96 million from funding provided for the Port of Oakland. Net General Fund Savings Over Multiyear Period Totals $1.1 Billion This is the net result of the resumption of costs from postponed and delayed expenditures. 6972 LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE 6 Nearly All Intended Multiyear Transportation Funding Would be Maintained 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 $4.0 Port Operational Improvements Increased Commercial Driver's License Capacity Clean California Local Grant Program Supply Chain Workforce Campus Highways to Boulevards Pilot Program Local Climate Adaptation Programs Port of Oakland Improvements Grade Separation Projects within Competitive TIRCP Active Transportation Program Zero-Emission Transit Capital Program Port and Freight Infrastructure Program Competitive TIRCP Formula-Based TIRCP Funding Retained Cash Flow Adjustment Delay Fund Shift to GGRF Reduction TIRCP = Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program and GGRF = Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. Figure 2 Governor's Proposed Transportation Budget Solutions 2021-22 Through 2027-28 (In Billions) 7073 LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE 7 LAO Overarching Comments on Governor’s Proposals Proposed Approach Has Several Merits Continues to fulfill most state objectives. Focuses reductions on recent one-time augmentations. Does not reduce funding that has already been committed to specific projects. Utilizes available funds to sustain activities. Eliminates most planned General Fund for 2024-25 and the future. Certain Proposals Will Complicate Future Budget Decisions Proposed delays worsen out-year budget deficits, set expectations that may be hard to keep. Reliance on out-year GGRF makes assumptions about future priorities and revenues. Legislature Has Options for Additional or Alternative Budget Solutions Reduce remaining General Fund from 2024-25 and out-year plans. Reduce uncommitted prior-year and current-year funding. (This could require taking early action to pause program implementation and capture savings.) Use GGRF to preserve a different mix of priority programs. Use transportation special funds to replace General Fund. Other Considerations Governor gives precedence to administration’s initiatives over legislative priorities. Information on program effectiveness is limited. Significant federal funds coming to California for similar activities. 7174 LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE 8 Update on Federal Funds Many of the federally funded activities are broadly similar to those supported by the state’s programs. Federal programs typically do not provide an identical dollar-for-dollar replacement for state funds, as they may have different eligibility criteria or allowable uses. IRA = Inflation Reduction Act and IIJA = Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. Figure 4 California Estimated to Receive Billions in Climate and Resources-Related Funds From IRA and IIJA Drought, Flood, and Water Resilience Clean Energy Zero-Emission Vehicles Wildfire and Forest Resilience Coastal Resilience Other Extreme Heat Mitigation Nature-Based Activities Total: $9.7 Billion 7275 LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE 9 LAO Overarching Recommendations Maximize General Fund savings by reducing significant one-time spending from the climate spending packages. Identify alternative and/or additional budget solutions. Consider taking early action to halt current-year spending and capture savings. Use GGRF to sustain the Legislature’s highest-priority activities. Minimize out-year commitments for both the General Fund and GGRF. Conduct robust oversight of spending and outcomes, and consider program evaluations. 7376 2024 Referrals to the Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee (For Review by TWIC at the March 11, 2024 Committee Meeting.) 1. Review legislative matters on transportation, water, and infrastructure. 2. Review applications for transportation, water, and infrastructure grants to be prepared by the Public Works and Conservation and Development Departments. 3. Monitor the Contra Costa Transportation Authority including efforts to implement Measure J. 4. Monitor EBMUD and Contra Costa Water District projects and activities. 5. Review projects, plans and legislative matters that may affect the health of the San Francisco Bay and Delta, including but not limited to conveyance, flood control, dredging, climate change, habitat conservation, governance, water storage, development of an ordinance regarding polystyrene foam food containers, monitor waste diversion initiatives, and water quality, supply and reliability, consistent with the Board of Supervisors adopted Delta Water Platform. 6. Review and monitor the establishment of Groundwater Sustainability Agencies and Groundwater Sustainability Plans for the three medium priority groundwater basins within Contra Costa County as required by the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act. 7. Review issues associated with County flood control facilities. 8. Monitor creek and watershed issues and seek funding for improvement projects related to these issues. 9. Monitor the implementation of the Integrated Pest Management policy. 10. 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. 11. Monitor and report on the East Contra Costa County Habitat Conservation Plan. 12. Monitor the implementation of the County Complete Streets, Active Transportation, and Vision Zero Policies. 13. Monitor and report on the Underground Utilities Program. 14. Monitor implementation of the Letter of Understanding with PG&E for the maintenance of PG&E streetlights in Contra Costa. 15. Freight transportation issues, including but not limited to potential increases in rail traffic such as that proposed by the Port of Oakland and other possible service increases, safety of freight trains, rail corridors, and trucks that transport hazardous materials, the planned truck route for North Richmond; freight issues related to the Northern Waterfront (and coordinate with the Northern Waterfront Ad Hoc Committee as needed), and the deepening of the San Francisco-to-Stockton Ship Channel. 16. Monitor the Iron Horse Corridor Management Program. 17. Monitor and report on the Contra Costa Transportation Authority’s Integrated Transit Plan. 18. Review transportation plans and services for specific populations and locations, including but not limited to Coordinated Human Services Transportation Plan for the Bay Area, CCTA East County Ferry Feasibility Study, Olympic Corridor Trail Connector Study Implementation, and the Contra Costa County Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan. 19. Monitor issues of interest in the provision and enhancement of general transportation services, including but not limited to public transportation, taxicab/transportation network companies, and navigation apps. 20. Monitor the statewide infrastructure bond programs. 21. Monitor implementation and ensure compliance with the single-use carryout bag ban consistent with Public Resources Code, Chapter 5.3 (resulting from Senate Bill 270 [Padilla – 2014]).(subsumed into #5) 22. Monitor efforts at the State to revise school siting guidelines and statutes. 23. Monitor issues related to docked and dockless bike share programs. 24. Monitor efforts related to water conservation including but not limited to turf conversion, graywater, and other related landscaping issues. 25. Monitor the County’s conversion to solar/distributed energy systems. 26. Monitor issues with County Airports as they relate to surrounding land use, transportation, and related infrastructure. G:\Conservation\TWIC\2024\TWIC Referrals 2024 ‐ DRAFT.Doc 7477 g:\conservation\twic\2023\twic2023referralreport.docx Status Report: Referrals to the Transportation, Water, and Infrastructure Committee - 2023 DRAFT REVIEW: March 11, 2023 TWIC Meeting Referral Status 1. Review legislative matters on transportation, water, and infrastructure. Recommended: continued staff/advocate support for AB540 (February, December)(Wicks), letter to Sen. Gonzalez re: SB1121, February Received report from Public Works staff on successful grant applications from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and budgeting scenarios to maximize funding. April Received and recommended approval of Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account (RMRA) Senate Bill 1 (SB1) funded road projects May Recommended reappointment of Contra Costa representatives on the Regional Measure 3 Independent Oversight Committee August Received 2020-2022 Infrastructure Report August 2. Review applications for transportation, water, and infrastructure grants to be prepared by the Public Works and Conservation and Development Departments. Reviewed and approved Caltrans Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant (February, December), Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) grant program (May), 3. Monitor the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) including efforts to implement Measure J. 4. Monitor EBMUD and Contra Costa Water District projects and activities. 5. Review projects, plans and legislative matters that may affect the health of the San Francisco Bay and Delta, including but not limited to conveyance, flood control, dredging, climate change, habitat conservation, governance, water storage, development of an ordinance regarding polystyrene foam food containers, water quality, supply and reliability, consistent with the Board of Supervisors adopted Delta Water Platform. 7578 g:\conservation\twic\2023\twic2023referralreport.docx Referral Status 6. Review and monitor the establishment of Groundwater Sustainability Agencies and Groundwater Sustainability Plans for the three medium priority groundwater basins within Contra Costa County as required by the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act. 7. Review issues associated with County flood control facilities. 8. Monitor creek and watershed issues and seek funding for improvement projects related to these issues. 9. Monitor the implementation of the Integrated Pest Management (IPM) policy. 10. 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. 11. Monitor and report on the East Contra Costa County Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP). Received an update on the HCP and recommended a report to the BOS. August 12. Monitor the implementation of the County Complete Streets, Active Transportation, and Vision Zero Policies. 13. Monitor and report on the Underground Utilities Program. Reviewed and made recommendations in response to a request from the Alamo Improvement Association to the County to host and maintain a Pipeline Information Center website.(Also referral #16) May 14. Monitor implementation of the Letter of Understanding (LOU) with PG&E for the maintenance of PG&E streetlights in Contra Costa. 7679 g:\conservation\twic\2023\twic2023referralreport.docx Referral Status 15. Freight transportation issues, including but not limited to potential increases in rail traffic such as that proposed by the Port of Oakland and other possible service increases, safety of freight trains, rail corridors, and trucks that transport hazardous materials, the planned truck route for North Richmond; and the deepening of the San Francisco-to-Stockton Ship Channel. 16. Monitor the Iron Horse Corridor Management Program. Reviewed and made recommendations in response to a request from the Alamo Improvement Association to the County to host and maintain a Pipeline Information Center website. (Also referral #13) May 17. Monitor and report on the Contra Costa Transportation Authority’s Integrated Transit Plan. 18. Review transportation plans and services for specific populations and locations, including but not limited to Coordinated Human Services Transportation Plan for the Bay Area, CCTA East County Ferry Feasibility Study, Olympic Corridor Trail Connector Study Implementation, and the Contra Costa County Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan. Reviewed and recommended the BOS approve CCTA actions relative to Measure X Funding MOU obligations and the form the of the coordinating entity recommended in the Accessible Transportation Strategic Plan. February, December Olympic Corridor Trail Connector Study: Added to referrals (February), received report, provided direction to staff to make progress on implementation. (December) 19. Monitor issues of interest in the provision and enhancement of general transportation services, including but not limited to public transportation, taxicab/ transportation network companies, and navigation apps. 20. Monitor the statewide infrastructure bond programs. 21. Monitor implementation and ensure compliance with the single-use carryout bag ban consistent with Public Resources Code, Chapter 5.3 (resulting from Senate Bill 270 [Padilla – 2014]). 7780 g:\conservation\twic\2023\twic2023referralreport.docx Referral Status 22. Monitor efforts at the State to revise school siting guidelines and statutes. 23. Monitor issues related to docked and dockless bike share programs. 24. Monitor efforts related to water conservation including but not limited to turf conversion, graywater, and other related landscaping issues. 25. Monitor the County’s conversion to solar/distributed energy systems. 26. Monitor issues with County Airports as they relate to surrounding land use, transportation, and related infrastructure. 7881 TRANSPORTATION, WATER & INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III 2024 Meeting Schedule DATE Location* TIME February 12 CANCELED 9:30a.m. March 11 Remote Meeting | ZOOM Physical Location TBD – see agenda for details 9:30a.m. April 8 Remote Meeting | ZOOM Physical Location TBD – see agenda for details 9:30a.m. May 13 Remote Meeting | ZOOM Physical Location TBD – see agenda for details 9:30a.m. June 10 Remote Meeting | ZOOM Physical Location TBD – see agenda for details 9:30a.m. July 8 Remote Meeting | ZOOM Physical Location TBD – see agenda for details 9:30a.m. August 12 Remote Meeting | ZOOM Physical Location TBD – see agenda for details 9:30a.m. September 9 Remote Meeting | ZOOM Physical Location TBD – see agenda for details 9:30a.m. October 7 Remote Meeting | ZOOM Physical Location TBD – see agenda for details 9:30a.m. November TBD Remote Meeting | ZOOM Physical Location TBD – see agenda for details 9:30a.m. December 9 Remote Meeting | ZOOM Physical Location TBD – see agenda for details 9:30a.m. The Agenda Packets will be posted and emailed out prior to the meeting dates. For Additional Information Contact: John Cunningham, Committee Staff Direct Line: 925-655-2915 Main Transportation Line: 925-655-7209 John.Cunningham@dcd.cccounty.us 7982 COMMISSIONERS Newell Arnerich, Chair Lamar Hernandez- Thorpe, Vice Chair Ken Carlson Paul Fadelli Federal Glover Loella Haskew Chris Kelley Aaron Meadows Sue Noack Scott Perkins Renata Sos Timothy Haile, Executive Director 2999 Oak Road Suite 100 Walnut Creek CA 94597 PHONE: 925.256.4700 FAX: 925.256.4701 www.ccta.net MEMORANDUM To: Matt Todd, TRANSPAC Chris Weeks, SWAT Robert Sarmiento, TRANSPLAN Sai Midididdi, TVTC John Nemeth, WCCTAC Sivakumar Natarajan, LPMC From: Timothy Haile, Executive Director Date: March 5, 2024 Re: Items of interest for circulation to the Regional Transportation Planning Committees (RTPCs) At its February 21, 2024 meeting, the Authority discussed the following items, which may be of interests to the Regional Transportation Planning Committees: A. Regional Measure 3 (RM3) Allocation Request Concurrence – Approval of Resolution 24‐06‐P Concurring with the Allocation of RM3 Funds for the Interstate 580 Richmond Parkway Interchange Operational Improvements Project (Project) Action: The Authority Board approved Resolution 24-06-P, which concurs with the RM3 allocation request in the amount of $950,000, for the Project in the City of Richmond. This allocation will fund the Project Initiation Document, environmental, and preliminary engineering for the Project. B. Innovate 680 – Interstate 680 Part‐Time Transit Lane/Transit Bus on Shoulder Testing and Training at GoMemtum Station (Project 8009.03) – Authorization to Execute Agreement No. 683 with Kimley‐Horn and Associates, Inc. (KHA) for Environmental and Engineering Services 8083 RTPC Memorandum March 5, 2024 Page 2 Action: The Authority Board authorized the Chair to execute Agreement No. 683 with KHA in the amount of $637,000, for environmental and engineering services, and to allow the Executive Director or designee to make any non- substantive changes to the language. C. State Route 4 Mokelumne Bike Trail/Pedestrian Overcrossing (Project 5002b) – Approval to Increase the Construction Allotment for Agreement No. 561 with Joseph J. Albanese for Construction Services Action: The Authority Board approved Resolution 21-41-P (Rev 3), which will increase the construction allotment amount by $600,000, for a new total construction allotment value of $10,934,257, to provide additional construction services. D. StreetLight Subscription Cost Share – Authorization to Execute Amendment No. 3 to Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) No. 80.09.02 with Cities/Town Participating in the Cost Share for the StreetLight Subscription to Add Contra Costa County. Action: The Authority Board authorized the Chair to execute Amendment No. 3 to MOU No. 80.09.02 between the Authority and jurisdictions participating in the cost share for the StreetLight Multi-Domain License and to allow the Executive Director or designee to make any non-substantive changes to the language. E. One Bay Area Grant Cycle 3 Project ‐ Contra Costa Countywide Safe Routes to Schools (SRTS): Bicycle/Pedestrian Safety Education and Encouragement Program (Project) – Authorization to Execute Agreement No. 679 with Contra Costa County (County), Agreement No. 684 with the City of San Ramon (City), and Approval of Resolution 21‐22‐G (Rev 1) to Reallocate the Previously Allocated Measure J Program 17 Funds as the City’s Local Match for the Project Action: The Authority Board approved Resolution 21-22-G (Rev 1) to reallocate the previously allocated Measure J Program 17, Commute Alternatives funds to the Project as the City’s local match obligation, authorization for the Chair to execute Agreement No. 679 with the County in the amount of $1,768,060 for the implementation of the Project at public K-12 schools in unserved areas of West County and public high schools in East and Central County and Agreement No. 684 with the City in 8184 RTPC Memorandum March 5, 2024 Page 3 the amount of $936,920 for the implementation of the Project at public K- 12 schools in Alamo, Town of Danville, and the City. F. Authorization to Execute Funding Agreement No. 08C.08 with Central Contra Costa Transit Authority (County Connection) for Innovative Deployments to Enhance Arterials Grant – Central Transit Signal Priority (TSP) System Action: The Authority Board authorized the Chair to execute Funding Agreement No. 08C.08 with County Connection for partial reimbursement of the SWIFTLY subscription costs for one year, in the amount of $20,000, for the central TSP system, and to allow the Executive Director or designee to make any non-substantive changes to the language. G. Connected Vehicle and Autonomous Vehicle Program – Approval to Utilize Fund Exchange Reserve (FER) Funds to Support GoMentum Station and Seek Input on the Draft Master Cooperative Agreement Action: Staff provided an overview of the draft master cooperative agreement and sought input from the Authority Board related to the framework and terms of the agreement. The Authority Board approved Resolution 24-09-P, which will utilize FER funds in the amount of $1 million, to support transition activities and operations at GoMentum Station. H. Approval to Issue an Urban Limit Line (ULL) Policy Advisory Letter to Local Jurisdictions Action: The Authority Board approved transmitting an Annual ULL Policy Advisory Letter to all Contra Costa County jurisdictions. I. Approval of Fiscal Year (FY) 2024‐25 Transportation Fund for Clean Air (TFCA) 40% Fund Expenditure Plan Action: The Authority Board approved Resolution 24-07-G, incorporating the Authority’s FY 2024-25 TFCA Expenditure Plan and allocation of the TFCA 40% funds in the amount of $1,841,290, and authorization for the Executive Director or designee to sign and submit the Expenditure Plan Summary application to the Bay Area Air Quality Management District. 8285 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Staff Report 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553 File #:24-0982 Agenda Date:4/8/2024 Agenda #:4. TRANSPORTATION, WATER & INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE Meeting Date: April 8, 2024 Subject: Safe Streets and Roads for All 2024 Grant Applications, San Pablo Dam Road Diet Project Submitted For: Warren Lai | PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR Department: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Referral No: 2 Referral Name: REVIEW application for TWIC grants to be prepared by the PUBLIC WORKS and CONSERVATION & DEVELOPMENT Departments Presenter: Carl Roner | PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Contact: Carl Roner (925)313-2213 Referral History: The County often seeks state and federal funding to augment local road funds, stretching local dollars to build improvements that would not be possible otherwise. The current opportunity is through the Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) grant program funded under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. This grant program is on its second of four annual cycles. Public Works submitted a SS4A application for the Vision Zero Tier One Projects during the last grant cycle; however, a grant from this previous cycle was not awarded to the County. Referral Update: On February 21,2024,the U.S.Department of Transportation (DOT)issued the Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO)for the SS4A grant program under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (also referred to as the “Bipartisan Infrastructure Law”or “BIL”).In the notice,the DOT solicited applications for transportation projects and activities to support planning,infrastructure,behavioral,and operational initiatives to prevent death and serious injury on roads and streets.These initiatives are to involve all roadway users,including pedestrians,bicyclists,public transportation,personal conveyance and micromobility devices,motorists,and commercial vehicle operators.Grant applications must be submitted by 2:00 p.m.Pacific Standard Time on May 16, 2024. The DOT has authorized and appropriated $1.2 billion to be awarded as part of the 2024 SS4A program under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.The SS4A grant categorizes applications as either:(a)Planning and demonstration grants,or (b)Implementation grants.Planning and demonstration grants are intended to fund the development or enhancement of a Comprehensive Safety Action Plan,which the County has already developed in the form of the Vision Zero Action Plan,which was adopted by the County in March 2022.Public Works is preparing to apply for an implementation grant to fund design and construction of the San Pablo Dam Road Diet Project, as previously identified in the Vision Zero Action Plan. The federal cost share for the construction of capital projects is 80%with a local match requirement of 20%. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 4/3/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™86 File #:24-0982 Agenda Date:4/8/2024 Agenda #:4. The minimum award amount for an implementation grant is $2.5 million. SS4A implementation grants must identify safety concerns to be addressed,and the projects and strategies that the County plans to implement based on the Vision Zero Action Plan.According to the NOFO,successful grant applications will: (1)Promote safety to prevent death and serious injuries on public roadways; (2)Employ low-cost, high-impact strategies that can improve safety over a wide geographic area; (3)Ensure equitable investment in the safety needs of underserved communities,which includes both underserved urban and rural communities; (4)Incorporate evidence-based projects and strategies and adopt innovative technologies and strategies; (5)Demonstrate engagement with a variety of public and private stakeholders; and (6)Align with the DOT’s mission and strategic goals,such as safety;climate change and sustainability; equity and justice; and workforce development, job quality, and wealth creation. The DOT will evaluate applications based on primary selection criteria,or merit criteria,listed in the following order of importance:(1)safety impact;(2)equity,engagement,and collaboration;and (3)effective practices and strategies.The DOT also evaluates projects in relation to other DOT strategic goals,such as climate and sustainability, economic competitiveness, and workforce development. Recommended Candidate Project: Public Works staff recommends submitting the San Pablo Dam Road Diet Project.This project will implement a road diet on San Pablo Dam Road by installing one travel lane in each direction,a center two-way left turn lane,and bike lanes between Appian Way and Castro Ranch Road in the unincorporated El Sobrante area.This project aims to reduce vehicle speeds by reducing lane widths and improving bicycle safety by installing buffered bike lanes. Next Steps: If authorized to proceed,staff will prepare the grant application package for the candidate project.If during project research staff discovers a critical constraint that would result in the project being cost prohibitive or will not meet the eligibility requirements of the funding program,staff will hold the application for further study to increase project readiness for the following grant cycle. Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s): RECEIVE staff report and RECOMMEND that the Board of Supervisors approve the submission of the grant application to the U.S.Department of Transportation under the Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A)grant program. Fiscal Impact (if any): Given the current fiscal constraints to gas tax revenue, which is the primary source of local match funding, Public Works staff will submit the San Pablo Dam Road Diet Project application “at risk.” If awarded, Public Works staff will need to seek other funding revenue to serve as the local match. This funding revenue has yet to be identified. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 4/3/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™87 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Staff Report 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553 File #:24-0983 Agenda Date:4/8/2024 Agenda #:5. TRANSPORTATION, WATER & INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE Meeting Date: April 8, 2024 Subject: 2024 Priority Conservation Area Grant Application Submitted For: Warren Lai | PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR Department: PUBLIC WORKS and DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION & DEVELOPMENT Referral No: 2 Referral Name: Review applications for TWIC grants to be prepared by the PUBLIC WORKS and CONSERVATION & DEVELOPMENT Departments Presenter: Carl Roner | PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Contact: Carl Roner (925)313-2213 Referral History: The County is seeking funding from the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) in coordination with the State Coastal Conservancy (SCC) to augment local funds for the Iron Horse Corridor (IHC). This will stretch local dollars to build improvements that would not be possible otherwise. The current opportunity is through the MTC and ABAG Priority Conservation Area (PCA) Grant Program. This program provides funding to cities, counties, park districts, utility districts, county transportation agencies, non-profits and other agencies to acquire, restore or improve places designated as Priority Conservation Areas within the nine-county Bay Area. This program was initiated in 2013. Referral Update: On March 11,2024,the MTC and ABAG issued the Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO)for the 2024 PCA Grant Program.In this notice,MTC and ABAG solicited applications for planning and design,project implementation, and acquisitions associated with the following program goals: ·Natural resource protection, restoration, or enhancement; ·Public access to open space and parklands; ·Support for the region’s agricultural economy; and ·Provision or enhancement of urban parks and green spaces. Among the eligible project types are pedestrian and bicycle facilities.Specifically pedestrian and bicycle trails, on-road bicycle facilities,sidewalks,bicycle infrastructure,pedestrian and bicycle signals,pedestrian and bicycle bridges,traffic calming,lighting and other safety-related infrastructure,staging areas,improvements to trails to improve accessibility for people with disabilities,and conversion and use of abandoned rail corridors for pedestrians and bicyclists. Recommended Candidate Project: Public Works and Conservation and Development staff recommend submitting the Iron Horse Corridor User Separated Trails Planning Study as a candidate project.This project will constitute the initial planning phase for CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 4/3/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™88 File #:24-0983 Agenda Date:4/8/2024 Agenda #:5. Separated Trails Planning Study as a candidate project.This project will constitute the initial planning phase for developing a master plan for the implementing user separated paths and other improvements in the IHC. Separation of pedestrian and wheeled transportation modes (bicycles,e-bikes,scooters,e-scooters)has been identified as the most pressing need from a safety and user experience standpoint in the IHC.Other improvements to be considered in the study are shade, drinking water, and rest areas. Next Steps: The application process follows a two-step process. If authorized to proceed, staff will prepare the first step, a Letter of Interest Application Form for the candidate project, which is due on May 8, 2024, at 11:59 p.m. The second step consists of preparing a full proposal, which is due August 28, 2024. If during project research staff discovers a critical constraint that would result in the project being cost prohibitive or will not meet the eligibility requirements of the funding program, staff will hold the application for further study to increase project readiness for the following grant cycle. Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s): RECEIVE staff report and RECOMMEND that the Board of Supervisors approve the submission of a Letter of Interest Application Form and grant application to the MTC and ABAG for the 2024 PCA Grant Program. Fiscal Impact (if any): The application for the 2024 PCA Grant Program does not require a local match.However,according to grant guidelines,project applicants should demonstrate the programmatic capability to deliver the project and how the project will leverage other resources,including other local/state/federal funding.Cost effectiveness and leveraging of staff and funding resources will be considered.If the project is eligible and well-suited to receive federal transportation funding, a federal match requirement of 11.47% will apply. A local match of $500,000 from the unincorporated San Ramon area park dedication funds is available. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 4/3/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™89 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Staff Report 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553 File #:24-0984 Agenda Date:4/8/2024 Agenda #:6. TRANSPORTATION, WATER & INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE Meeting Date: April 8, 2024 Subject: Report on Local, State, Regional, and Federal Transportation Related Legislative and Planning Activities Submitted For: TRANSPORTATION, WATER, & INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE Department: CONSERVATION & DEVELOPMENT Referral No: N/A Referral Name: Legislative Matters on Transportation, Water, and Infrastructure Presenter: John Cunningham - DCD | Mark Watts - Smith, Watts, & Hartmann, LLC Contact: John Cunningham 925-791-1368 Referral History: The transportation, water, and infrastructure legislation and planning report is a standing item on the Committee’s agenda. Referral Update: In developing transportation related issues and proposals to bring forward for consideration by TWIC, staff receives input from the Board of Supervisors (BOS), references the County’s adopted Legislative Platforms, coordinates with our legislative advocates, partner agencies and organizations, and consults with the Committee. This report includes four sections, 1: Local, 2:Regional, 3:State, and 4:Federal. 1. Local No report in April Information Only: Contra Costa Transportation Authority: Executive Director’s Report. 2. Regional No report in April Information Only: Metropolitan Transportation Commission/Executive Director’s Report. 3. State The County’s legislative advocate’s report is attached. Mr. Watts will attend the April Committee meeting. As mentioned by staff at the March TWIC meeting, a letter from the Board of Supervisors regarding accessible transportation issues was sent to our legislative delegation. The letter is attached to this report and requests that CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 4/3/2024Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™90 File #:24-0984 Agenda Date:4/8/2024 Agenda #:6. our representatives engage with state transportation governance to ensure the SB 125 transit transformation task force and the SB 1121 needs assessment process both take up accessible transportation issues in a substantive manner. 4. Federal No report in April Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s): CONSIDER report on Local, Regional, State, and Federal Transportation Related Legislative and Planning Issues and take ACTION as appropriate. Fiscal Impact (if any): None. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 4/3/2024Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™91 Smith, Watts &Hartmann, LLC. Consulting and Governmental Relations April 3, 2024 To: Transportation, Water, and Infrastructure Committee c/o John Cunningham From: Mark Watts Re: April 2024 TWIC State Report I am pleased to provide the following report on acƟviƟes occurring in the state Capitol, including specifically updated informaƟon on legislaƟve and budgetary acƟviƟes. LegislaƟve AcƟviƟes Senate Bill 1031 (Wiener): Regional TransportaƟon Revenue Measure. The recent amendments to SB 1031 (Wiener) establishes the measure now as the new legislaƟve vehicle for Connect Bay Area legislaƟon, which is MTC and the Senator’s effort to enact a regional transportaƟon revenue measure. Background On March 18, 2024, SB 1031 was amended to incorporate specific language reflecting the Commission’s adopted policy framework for a regional transportation revenue measure along with priorities of Senator Aisha Wahab (Hayward) related to transit consolidation that had previously been expressed in SB 926 (Wahab). Senior and Disabled Person TransportaƟon BOS leƩers requesƟng the state AdministraƟon adopt a firm commitment to senior and disabled persons transportaƟon needs in currently ongoing work group efforts were sent to the Contra costa delegation. The work of the Secretary’s Transit Transformation Task Force established in Senate Bill (SB) 125, and the needs assessment required under SB 1121 are both ideal opportunities to make progress in this policy area. In an effort to underscore these issues, it has been proposed that the TWIC Chair follow up in meeƟngs with these state TransportaƟon Secretary. Budget InformaƟon On April 2, 2024, the Assembly Leadership agreed to a portion of the Governor’s proposed “early budget actions” to address the state’s massive budget deficiency for the current year and next. They have agreed to $17 billion in early legislative actions to cut the state budget deficit. This package of spending cuts, delays and deferrals, circulated at a Democratic caucus meeting Tuesday, also calls for a freeze on yet‐to‐be‐disbursed one‐time funding that has not been endorsed by the Senate or the governor. It could come up for a floor vote as soon as April 11. This is expected to include a delay 92 Smith, Watts &Hartmann, LLC. Consulting and Governmental Relations of $1 billion from the formulaic portion of the Transit and Intercity Rail Capital programs (TIRCP), which will then force a spillover reduction in available state assistance to the county’s local transit agencies. Governor Newsome Administration CTC Appointments On March 29, 2024, the Governor reappointed Lee Ann Eager to the California Transportation Commission, where she has served since 2020. Previously, Eager was President and Chief Executive Officer of the Fresno County Economic Development Board from 2009 to 2023. Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program (TIRCP) Guidelines issued. The 2024 TIRCP grant cycle will program projects starting with the 2024‐25 fiscal year and ending with the 2028‐29 fiscal year. The new program cycle will include previously awarded and active projects that have not been fully allocated by the end of the 2023‐24 fiscal year, and projects selected with the 2024 cycle. This will necessitate the state to engage in the development of an outreach process to update the awarding guidelines. On their website, CalSTA welcomes input from all stakeholders to provide input on TIRCP, including interaction through public workshops and written comments. Please send your comments to: tircpcomments@dot.ca.gov. APPENDIX 93 Smith, Watts &Hartmann, LLC. Consulting and Governmental Relations KEY TransportaƟon BILLS OF NOTE AB 2535 (Bonta): This bill would eliminate general purpose lanes as an eligible use for TCEP under any circumstance and eliminate highway capacity as an eligible use in disadvantaged communities. Should a highway project under TCEP expand the highway footprint in limited instances, the bill would require full mitigation of all environmental impacts. AB 2086 (Schiavo): AB 2086 would require Caltrans to report to the Legislature on how it advanced its Core Four (safety, equity, climate action, and economic prosperity) priorities with the funding that was made available to it in the preceding 5 fiscal years. AB 2086 would also create a new role for the CTC to develop performance targets for the Core Four goals. AB 2290 (Friedman): AB 2290 would, among other things, require a bicycle facility that is identified for a street in an adopted bicycle plan or active transportation plan to be included in a project funded by the program that includes that street. This is of concern for rural counties and areas. SB 960 (Wiener): SB 960 would require all transportation projects funded or overseen by Caltrans to provide “comfortable, convenient, and connected” complete streets facilities unless an exemption is documented and approved. SB 960 would also require the CTC to adopt targets and performance measures related to making progress on complete streets. Finally, SB 960 would require Caltrans to adopt a Transit Priority Project policy for state and local highways. 94 1 of 2 The Board of Supervisors County Administration Building 651 Pine Street, Room 106 Martinez, California 94553 John Gioia, 1st District Candace Andersen, 2nd District Diane Burgis, 3rd District Ken Carlson, 4th District Federal D. Glover, 5th District March 27, 2024 Assemblymember Tim Grayson P.O. Box 942849 Sacramento, CA 94249-0015 RE: Ensuring the mobility needs of older Californians and those with disabilities are served by the State’s transportation system through Senate Bill 125 and 1121 established processes Dear Assemblymember Grayson, On behalf of the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors, I am writing to bring awareness to a unique opportunity which addresses a longstanding public policy blind spot in our transportation system, that of accessible transportation programs for older and disabled Californians. As described in the attached Draft Accessible Transportation Policy Blueprint, numerous State initiatives over the past two decades have repeatedly identified significant problems with accessible transportation services. These initiatives identified solutions to problems, but the solutions have never been implemented. With your assistance, two recently initiated State processes can be leveraged to efficiently address these persistent issues. The work of the Transit Transformation Task Force established in Senate Bill (SB) 125, and the needs assessment required under SB 1121 are both ideal opportunities to make progress in this policy area. The need to address this issue has been established time and time again by analysis from the State and other responsible agencies: Caltrans has established that: The State is fragmented in its approach to coordination. Given the coming “senior tsunami” now is the moment to take a hard look at alternative governance structures for delivering transportation services”1 and that there is a “…demonstrated need for increased funding…” 2 The California Department of Aging has established that: California’s over-60 population is projected to diversify and grow faster than any other age group. Increasing from 16 percent in 2010 to one quarter of the population by 2030, when there will be 10.8 million older adults in California.3 In the Bay Area, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission describes the situation as follows: Current senior-oriented mobility services do not have the capacity to handle the increase in people over 65 years of age…the massive growth among the aging…points to a lack of fiscal and organizational readiness…the closure and consolidation of medical facilities while rates of diabetes and obesity are on the rise will place heavy demands on an already deficient system.4 1 Mobility Action Plan (MAP) Human Service Transportation Coordination in California: A Legal and Regulatory Analysis 2 Caltrans MAP: Phase 1 Implementation Study Final Draft Report, Strategic Implementation Plan 3 California Master Plan for Aging 4 MTC: Coordinated Public Transit Human Services Transportation Plan Monica Nino Clerk of the Board and County Administrator (925) 655-2075 Contra Costa County 95 2 of 2 In response to the dire need described above, we are urging our state representatives to ensure that the California State Transportation Agency (CalSTA) and the California Transportation Commission (CTC) make use of the SB 125 Transit Transformation Task Force and the SB 1121 transportation needs assessment process to address this issue. Relative to SB 125, the Transit Transformation Task Force convened by CalSTA and is directed by statute to address issues including “persons with disabilities or specific populations”. Given the significant increase in demand and need for policy reform established by the State’s own analysis, CalSTA and the Task Force must comprehensively address issues of accessible transportation. The previous body of work by the State described in the attachment provides a start to addressing this issue. Relative to SB 1121, the needs assessment developed by the CTC must reflect the magnitude of the demographic and public health shifts described above. The increased cost to expand and improve accessible transportation, above and beyond conventional public transit and paratransit, to correspond with the forecasted increase in need must be addressed. The needs assessment should also acknowledge previous analysis by the State which demonstrated a need for increased funding and improved policies. We hope that both the SB 1121 needs assessment process and the SB 125 Task Force acknowledge and consider the State’s significant, prior analysis in this policy area. An appropriate response would address the fact that both conventional public transit and paratransit leave significant gaps in services for this vulnerable population. Both efforts should identify policy changes and funding increases necessary to adequately serve the target population and to, after decades of unfulfilled recommendations, equitably support accessible transportation. We appreciate your assistance with this issue which has languished for decades leaving vulnerable Californians with limited mobility options resulting in compromised access to medical care, goods, services, the ability to participate in the economy, and a reduction in quality of life. The County’s legislative advocate, Mark Watts (916-446-5508, mark@whstrat.com) can answer any questions and provide additional details regarding this request. Sincerely, FEDERAL D. GLOVER Chair, Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors Attachment: DRAFT California Accessible Transportation Policy Blueprint Copy • Honorable Members of the Contra Costa County State Legislative Delegation • Assembly & Senate Transportation Committee • Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors • Toks Omishakin - Secretary, California State Transportation Agency • Tanisha Taylor - Executive Director, California Transportation Commission • Mark Watts, Legislative Advocate • Mark Neuburger, California State Association of Counties 96 1 DRAFT California Accessible Transportation Policy Blueprint 97 2 Table of Contents Executive Summary ............................................................................................ 3 Policy Recommendations within the Current Scope of Funding ........................................ 3 Guiding Existing Funding ............................................................................................... 3 Better Utilize Coordinated Plan Funding Guidance for Federal Funding ..................... 4 Reform the “Unmet Needs” Process ............................................................................ 4 Utilize Regional Network Management entities where they are established.............. 4 Guiding Funding Assessment .............................................................................................. 4 Institutional Reforms Requiring Additional Funding .......................................................... 5 Enhance the Consolidated Transportation Services Agency (CTSA) mechanism ......... 5 Establish the California Mobility Council ...................................................................... 6 Acknowledgements .................................................................................................... 6 Policy Blueprint................................................................................................... 7 Introduction ................................................................................................... 7 Background .................................................................................................... 8 Defining Accessible Transportation .................................................................................... 8 Policy Background: Two decades of inaction ..................................................................... 8 Policy Background: The 1979 Social Service Transportation Improvement Act ................ 9 Primary Research - Rider Experience, Operator Needs, and Case Studies......................... 9 Rider Experience ......................................................................................................... 10 Operator Needs .......................................................................................................... 10 Case Studies ................................................................................................................ 11 Policy Recommendations ............................................................................. 16 Policies within the Current Scope of Funding ................................................................... 16 Guiding Existing Funding ............................................................................................. 16 Better Utilize Coordinated Plan Funding Guidance for Federal Funding ................... 16 Reform the “Unmet Needs” Process .......................................................................... 17 Utilize Regional Network Management entities where they are established............ 17 Guiding Funding Assessment ............................................................................................ 17 Institutional Reforms and Policies that Require Additional Funding ............................... 18 Enhance the Consolidated Transportation Services Agency (CTSA) mechanism ....... 18 Establish the California Mobility Council .................................................................... 20 Conclusion ..................................................................................................................... 21 Abbreviations ................................................................................................................ 22 Appendix ....................................................................................................................... 22 98 3 Executive Summary The State of California, in numerous initiatives over the two decades, has repeatedly identified a need to improve “accessible transportation”1 services used by older Californians and those with disabilities, yet few results have come from these initiatives. A Caltrans study in 2012 established that the current system provides ineffective and inefficient service with problems such as gaps in service, inconsistent service, underutilization of resources, duplication of service, inconsistent safety standards, and customer inconvenience. In one example, Caltrans established a need to “better accomplish” the intent of the 1979 Social Service Transportation Improvement Act (“SSTI Act”)2 and called for a “substantial and sustained effort” to develop a “statewide empowered framework for coordination” to address the “complex and fragmented jurisdictional landscape”.3 That 2012 call to action has not led to substantial changes and the need has only grown. Despite broad consensus on the need to improve this area of public policy, there has been minimal progress. Following is a summary of policy recommendations, incorporating recommendations from previous studies from sources including Caltrans and Health and Human Services, as well as recent primary research among users and providers of accessible transportation, and recent case studies of institutional reforms to improve accessible transportation. The full Policy Blueprint provides more background on the accessible transportation policy landscape, and includes supporting information for the policy recommendations from user focus groups, service providers surveys, and case studies of current best practices. Policy Recommendations within the Current Scope of Funding Guiding Existing Funding Currently, federal and state funds intended for accessible transportation are guided by local planning processes. However, these planning processes are not sufficiently guiding these fund sources as intended, contributing to the lack of efficiency and usefulness of services. As such, Caltrans recommended changes to funding guidance to support the prioritization provided in the Coordinated Plans and a preference for Consolidated Transportation Services Agencies, among other changes.4 1 Accessible Transportation (AT): An umbrella term for services provided to older persons and those with disabilities which include but not limited to city-provided “dial-a-ride,” ADA mandated public paratransit, volunteer driver programs, accessible wayfinding/public rights of way, non-profit and community-based transportation, mobility management programs, etc. 2 The intent of the Act is to “improve transportation service required by social service recipients”. 3 Caltrans California Mobility Action Plan (MAP) Strategic Implementation Plan 4 Caltrans MAP: Assessing Human Service Transportation Coordination in CA: An Analysis of Legal and Regulatory Obstacles: Possible Solutions 99 4 Better Utilize Coordinated Plan Funding Guidance for Federal Funding Federal law requires locally developed Coordinated Plans to guide Section 5310 federal funding intended for transit dependent and transit disadvantaged persons – including the elderly, disabled, and persons of limited means5 – which Caltrans reaffirms in its State Management Plan.6 However, our California case study shows an insufficient alignment between the priorities identified in the Coordinated Plans and the State Management Plan and the uses of Section 5310 funding. This alignment should be improved. Reform the “Unmet Needs” Process 7 California’s Transportation Development Act (TDA) requires jurisdictions to identify unmet transit needs and those needs that are reasonable to meet in order to guide state TDA funding. Prior Caltrans study has acknowledged significant shortcomings with the “unmet needs” process and specifically recommended legislative action to address the issues. The determination of unmet needs should consider the needs identified in Coordinated Plans so that TDA funds can be used for Coordinated Plan implementation, and should include a public review process to provide transparency. Utilize Regional Network Management entities in regions where they are established In some metropolitan regions within the state, coordination of transit services is being formalized across county boundaries through regional network management entities. For example, in the San Francisco Bay Area, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission has recently established a Network Management function that oversees the coordination of public transportation, fare payment, fare integration, schedule coordination, mapping & wayfinding, real time transit information, regional coordination of accessible transportation, and other customer-facing operating policies. Where such regional network management entities exist, they will sub-allocate funding for accessible transportation, and ensure coordination and standardization of accessible transportation services across county boundaries in a region. Guiding Funding Assessment Caltrans identified a “demonstrated need for increased funding”8 for local and regional entities who support coordinated transportation projects. This was reaffirmed in the 2021 California Master Plan for Aging (MPA) in which the Health and Human Services Agency called for strengthened CTSAs and the MPA Stakeholder Advisory Committee called for an increase in 5 Caltrans Transportation Development Act (TDA) Statutes and California Code of Regulations (2018) 6 Caltrans State Management Plan Federal Transit Programs (July 2020) 7 Caltrans California Mobility Action Plan (MAP) Strategic Implementation Plan, and MAP: Assessing Human Service Transportation Coordination in California: A Legal and Regulatory Analysis 8 Caltrans MAP: Phase 1 Implementation Study Final Draft Report, Strategic Implementation Plan (2010) 100 5 funding.9 One option developed by Caltrans is to have the CTSA be the recipient of new funding. That being said, “the amount of funding available to CTSAs remains a mystery” according to CalAct, a statewide non-profit organization representing small, rural, and specialized transportation providers. Some MAP Project Advisory Committee members also postulate that “the number is not that large”.10 There are two current initiatives authorized by state law to assess and make recommendations regarding transportation funding. SB 1121 requires the California Transportation Commission in consultation with CalSTA and Caltrans to prepare a needs assessment of the cost to operate, maintain, and provide for the necessary future growth of the state and local transportation system for the next 10 years. The completed Transportation Needs Assessment is due on or before January 1, 2025, and every 5 years thereafter.11 SB 125 requires CalSTA to convene a Transit Transformation Task Force that will develop policy recommendations relating to transit funding, improving the transit experience for all users, and growing transit ridership. CalSTA, in consultation with the task force, is required to submit a report of findings and policy recommendations based to the appropriate policy and fiscal committees of the Legislature on or before October 31, 2025. These initiatives should assess and recommend funding to implement recommendations from multiple previous state studies. Institutional Reforms Requiring Additional Funding Enhance the Consolidated Transportation Services Agency (CTSA) mechanism 12,13 The 1979 SSTI Act and the CTSA mechanism within the Act were established for the purpose of “improving 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.”14 In 2012 Caltrans identified inequitable implementation due to a “permissive rather than mandatory approach” and “political and funding barriers”. Caltrans and the Department of Aging have recommended strengthened CTSAs including requiring CTSAs in every county, making the CTSA the recipient, manager, and allocator of funding, and providing: Mobility Management Providing a single point of contact connecting users of accessible transportation with the most appropriate service for their needs. 9 California Master Plan for Aging: Goal 2: Livable Communities & Purpose 10 Caltrans MAP: Assessing Human Service Transportation Coordination in California: A Legal and Regulatory Analysis 11 Senate Bill 1121 (Gonzalez, 2022) 12 Caltrans MAP: Assessing Human Service Transportation Coordination in California: A Legal and Regulatory Analysis 13 California Master Plan for Aging: Goal 2: Livable Communities & Purpose 14 CalAct, What is a Consolidated Transportation Services Agency? 101 6 Cross Jurisdictional Service 15 Also known as one-seat-ride or regional trips, new policies would establish backend processes, seamless to the public, that accommodate riders traveling between different transit districts. Public Rights of Way (PROW) Traversable sidewalks, paths, and routes are critical for mobility equity. Improving community walkability is an established priority strategy of the MPA16 and the Commission on Aging 17. These neighborhood mobility issues are best addressed at the local level. CTSAs will be empowered to review capital improvement and other planning and programming documents to ensure high quality accessible access. Establish the California Mobility Council In order to provide ongoing support for institutional reforms, the California Health and Human Services Agency recommended the establishment of a Mobility Council to be “…responsible for dramatic improvement in transportation options for seniors…”18 with Caltrans stating, “Legislation is likely required”.19 The Mobility Council would have authority over reform of implementation of the Social Service Transportation Improvement Act, such as: Coordinated (originally Consolidated) Transportation Services Agency enhancement, unmet needs process reform, and integration of Coordinated Public Transit Human Services Transportation Plans with existing relevant processes. It would include representation of Regional Centers and other categories of transportation providers, and establishment of cross jurisdictional trip protocols. Acknowledgements We would like to acknowledge the Master Plan on Aging (MPA) and Disability and Aging Community Living Advisory Committee (DACLAC) for their critical work keeping these issues on the frontline of the Department of Health Care Service’s Long-Term Services and Support and the Department of Developmental Services’ Home and Community Based-Services Program. 15 Identified as an implementation task in the CA Health and Human Services Agency’s 2021 Master Plan for Aging (Initiative 16). 16 California Master Plan for Aging, 2023-24 Initiatives 17 California Commission on Aging, Transportation Task Team Report to the California Commission on Aging, Progress Report to the State Legislature on the Strategic Plan for an Aging California Population (First Report and Second Report) 18 Health and Human Services Agency, 2003 Strategic Plan for an Aging California, page 30 19 Caltrans, MAP: Assessing Human Service Transportation Coordination in California: A Legal and Regulatory Analysis, page 27 102 7 California Accessible Transportation Policy Blueprint Introduction The purpose of this Policy Blueprint is to provide an introduction to the longstanding problems in the accessible transportation landscape and policy recommendations to improve these systems for people with disabilities and older adults. Despite repeated studies over the last two decades, little to no reforms have come to fruition. The background section provides an overview of current issues, based on new research and a summary of previous research within the accessible transportation landscape. For this report, we conducted interviews with riders with disabilities, caretakers, and service providers to provide a current picture of gaps in the accessible transportation system and the changes needed to realize a more functional system. We also summarize previous research in California over the last two decades, and provide case studies of innovative practices and reforms in other states. These case studies are intended to showcase a variety of coordination strategies undertaken in other state and local jurisdictions. Based on this background, this report provides policy recommendations, separated into two categories: [1] Actions that can be done within the current scope of funding and [2] Reforms and improvements that would require new funding. Within the scope of current funding, there is an important need to utilize current studies to assess the funding needs for accessible transportation, and to more effectively match current funding with local plans. With additional funding, institutional reforms can drive increased coordination, efficiency, and effectiveness. At the state level, a “California Mobility Council” would guide state-wide policy reforms. At the local level, an empowered governance structure (known as Coordinated Transportation Service Agency) will be created in each county/region to implement state-level reforms and better meet the needs of riders in their jurisdiction. These CTSAs will be responsible for pursuing coordination efforts among various partners such as mobility management, coordinating service provision, joint equipment procurement, standardizing trip booking software, reviewing capital and operations plans within their jurisdiction, etc. Policy reforms are needed because the accessible transportation system is broken. Creating a more efficient, fast, and rider-focused accessible transportation network requires greater coordination amongst the various players in the landscape – leading to better outcomes for riders, service providers, and state and local governments. 103 8 Background Defining Accessible Transportation Accessible transportation is an umbrella term for services provided to older persons and those with disabilities with limited mobility. Perhaps the most known of these services is ADA Paratransit, a parallel service to fixed-route public transportation which is required to be run by transit agencies under The Americans with Disabilities Act. In addition to ADA Paratransit, there is a patchwork of other accessible transportation options. These options vary substantially by locality, have non-uniform accessibility standards, and range in costs. These include, but are not limited to, city-provided “dial-a-ride,” volunteer driver programs, non-profit and community-based transportation, mobility management programs, for-profit organizations contracted by governments to provide accessible transportation services at subsidized costs (i.e. Uber, Lyft, taxis), and non-emergency medical transportation, a Medicaid benefit for travel to medical appointments. Accessible transportation also refers to changes in the built environment (such as accessible public rights of way) that exist in parallel and as a complement to accessible vehicular transportation options. The problems with accessible transportation services have been well documented by the State of California and are well known amongst people with disabilities, older adults, and people relating to and serving seniors and people with disabilities. The following sections provide a summary of California’s policy assessment in these areas and the impact of deficient accessible transportation on users. Policy Background: Two decades of inaction The State of California, in numerous initiatives over the last 21 years, has continually identified a need to improve accessible transportation services used by older Californians and those with disabilities to little effect. The California Master Plan for Aging (MPA) identifies supporting “the expansion of integrated accessible transportation models” as one of their five key transportation initiatives.20 The MPA explicitly recommends exploring opportunities to strengthen Consolidated Transportation Service Agencies (CTSAs) to provide more convenient and coordinated service. A Caltrans study in 2012 established that the current system provides ineffective and inefficient service and problems such as gaps in service, inconsistent service, underutilization of resources, duplication of service, inconsistent safety standards and customer inconvenience.21 Caltrans established a need to “better accomplish” the intent of the 1979 Social Service Transportation 20 California Master Plan for Aging, 2023-24 Initiatives 21 Caltrans MAP: Assessing Human Service Transportation Coordination in California: A Legal and Regulatory Analysis (2010), page 5. 104 9 Improvement Act (“SSTI Act”)22 and called for a “substantial and sustained effort” to develop a “statewide empowered framework for coordination”23 to address the “complex and fragmented jurisdictional landscape”.24 That 2012 recommendation has not been fulfilled and the need has only grown. This blueprint goes into more detail about the policy recommendations from previous studies, Caltrans and Health and Human Services recommendations, bolstered by recent primary research with users and service providers, and case studies documenting current best practices. Policy Background: The 1979 Social Service Transportation Improvement Act Vital to these recommendations is an understanding of Consolidated Transportation Service Agencies, or CTSAs. CTSAs were created in 1979 under the AB120, the Social Services Transportation Improvement Act (“SSTI Act”)25 with the intention of centralizing key accessible transportation functions such as the dispatching of vehicles, purchasing and maintenance of equipment, training of vehicle drivers, identification and consolidation of all existing funding sources for social service transportation, and administration of various social service transportation programs. The intended benefits of CTSAs are to realize cost savings, create operating efficiencies, and reduce duplicative service provision and administration at a county/regional level. The SSTI Act did not mandate the implementation of CSTAs. Instead, they were seen as a flexible mechanism to deal with problems of inefficient and duplicative services. CSTAs provide an important coordination mechanism for counties and sub-regions but, so far, have been unsuccessful in meeting these needs. This is primarily due to a lack of state-level dedicated funding for CTSAs and optional implementation by localities. Strengthening CSTAs is an important cornerstone of improving the accessible transportation landscape. Primary Research - Rider Experience, Operator Needs, and Case Studies To get a better understanding of how the broken accessible transportation system negatively impacts riders, our project team interviewed riders with disabilities and older adults to ask about their holistic experience using accessible transportation. We also surveyed accessible transit service providers to understand the barriers and challenges they face. The responses we gathered reinforce what has already been known by the people in this community and what has been acknowledged by multiple studies over time: California’s accessible transportation system is in dire need of reform. The responses below capture the paralyzing impacts our broken system has on people’s lives and their wellbeing. 22 The intent of the Act is to “improve transportation service required by social service recipients”. 23 Caltrans California Mobility Action Plan (MAP) Strategic Implementation Plan, page 4. 24 Caltrans MAP: Assessing Human Service Transportation Coordination in California: A Legal and Regulatory Analysis, page 23. 25 AB120, Social Service Transportation Improvement Act (1979). 105 10 Rider Experience26 The Focus Group Summary report shares testimonials from people with cognitive and physical disabilities and their caregivers expressing their holistic experiences using paratransit services. Participants represented nine California counties – Alameda, Contra Costa, Kern, Los Angeles, Orange, Sacramento, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, and Sonoma Counties. The Focus Group Summary displays the day-to-day challenges riders face navigating California’s accessible transportation system. Accessible transportation services are crucial for getting people with disabilities to places they need to go and providing additional supportive services not met by the current fixed-route transit system. Despite this, riders still face challenges that inhibit their mobility and lead to inequitable outcomes. People with disabilities consistently cite excessively long trip times, infrequent and unreliable service, and scheduling challenges as their main concerns with using accessible transportation. Other issues include limited hours of operation, limited service area, sub-optimal operator training and adherence, prohibitively high costs, and poor vehicle condition. Moreover, riders feel their needs are not being treated as a priority by state leaders. “I don’t feel that anybody in the office has a sense of what it’s like to ride paratransit or public transportation,” said Laurent, a visually impaired resident of Santa Rosa. The riders we interviewed say more political will and resources are key to achieving their mobility needs. Operator Needs Accessible transportation service providers require more funding and greater degree of coordination amongst stakeholders to improve their operations and meet the urgent needs of riders. Our project team conducted a survey of these accessible transit service providers, receiving nine responses from five paratransit operators, three community group/non-profit organizations, and one county human services department. These results provide key insights into the outstanding needs, barriers, and challenges faced by operators and their partner organizations. The findings are summarized below: Increasing Staffing: 26 Seamless Bay Area, Focus Group Summary, Disability Access Research Project “We go to work, we go to school. [...] Whatever it is, they have to understand that we are human beings that do exactly what they do and our children do exactly what they do, even if our children don’t have disabilities. We need to elevate the perception and the respect for people with disabilities. We do what you do. We need to go where you go. We need to be 106 11 ➢ Hire more operators with more experience to deliver quality and higher pay to attract and retain workers. More Robust Operations: ➢ Expanded service area and longer hours of service. ➢ Standardization of wheelchair lifts on vehicles. ➢ Funding to buy and operate more vehicles. Deeper Coordination: ➢ Coordination among nonprofits/community organizations providers. ➢ Unify service operators to work on the same software. ➢ Coordination with social service agencies for eligibility requirements, staff training, etc. Increasing Rider Input and Research: ➢ More rider voices on policy/advisory bodies and in public meetings to share their experience. ➢ Research to assess demand for accessible transportation services in underserved communities. Expanding Communications: ➢ More robust marketing to educate the public on accessible transit services. Streamlining User Experience: ➢ Ability to pay fares with transit cards and credit/debit cards. ➢ Shorter eligibility wait times for users. In summary, the needs of both riders and service providers are not being met by the current structure of accessible transportation services. These first-hand accounts add to the multiple studies conducted by California agencies that identify social service transportation as being complex, fragmented, and inefficient. These shortcomings hamper the mobility of people with disabilities and older adults, leading to inequitable outcomes and worsened quality of life. 107 12 Case Studies 27 Recent case studies highlight several examples of regions that have strengthened regional coordination and governance structures, leading to tangible improvements for people with disabilities and older adults using paratransit and other curb-to-curb services. Recent technology developments – including real-time booking software, ride-hailing apps, and other innovations – have reinforced the need for coordination amongst the various providers. Without a clear entity responsible for coordination, new innovations risk proliferating existing issues of fragmentation, duplicative provision of service, and complexities for both users and operators. The case studies mentioned below report how other regions have implemented coordination strategies in tandem with emerging technologies to maximize efficiencies and improve the rider experience. The Regional Transportation Collaborative (RTC) Program in the Rappahannock-Rapidan region of Virginia provides an example of “mobility management” practices and the accompanying cost-efficiencies brought about by more efficient fleet and staff use. RTC has a similar-regional structure akin to CTSAs, albeit with voluntary participation by its partner organizations that are local non-profit/community group service providers. The program was established by the Rappahannock-Rapidan Regional Commission (RRRC), one of 21 Virginia Planning District Commissions that are tasked with supporting member local governments in transportation planning, housing, environmental planning, land use planning, project and program management, and economic development.28. RTC enters into annual agreements with partner organizations and provides them with resources, assistance, and guidance. In return, partner organizations agree to meet performance metrics set out by RTC. One important way RTC improves the provision of service is by coordinating partner organizations via a centralized booking software to match riders with whatever service best fits their needs. When booking a trip, riders call one of the many partner service providers. While the individual interfaces with a single non-profit organization or community group, the information from these calls get redirected to the centralized booking system so that the provision of service takes on a more holistic, comprehensive, and regional approach. Using all the information input from the individual service providers, the software is able to track which riders are in the same area and which riders are heading in the same direction. It uses this information to coordinate rides, avoiding duplicative service and opening up vehicles and drivers to serve other trips. Ultimately, the service provider for the trip may not be the same one who the individual booked their trip through, but this approach should provide a more efficient service that better serves riders and still meets their accessibility needs. 27 Seamless Bay Area, Case Studies Summary, Disability Access Research Project 28 Rappahannock-Rapidan Regional Commission 108 13 RTC also creates cost-efficiencies through the shared use of resources and staffing. Many of their non-profit organizations and community groups service providers do not have the resources to hire many permanent staff. To alleviate these issues, RRRC facilitates the sharing of existing staff within non-profit organizations and community groups to help other groups with marketing, mobility management, volunteer coordination, and more. Additionally, RRRC has their own staff who are tasked with helping all partner organizations with their needs. All- in-all, 12 shared staff work across 5 different organizations. As of December 2023, the RTC also had 11 vehicles being shared between 7 service providers. This helped reduce the capital costs of service providers and means that vehicles that would usually be sitting in parking lots can be used by other providers to deliver service. CSTAs would expand upon this model, creating even greater levels of cost-efficiencies through the joint procurement of vehicles and the centralized administration of regional transportation funding. According to RTC Mobility Manager Kristin Lam Peraza, this voluntary and collaborative partnership between RTC, local non-profits, and community groups help provide enhanced services for older adults and people with disabilities.29 She also says RTC helped service providers by creating cost efficiencies, providing stability to partner organizations, and helping expand service. The RIDES Program in Harris County, Texas also shows how a county-level mobility management coordinator can reduce costs through service coordination and establish monitoring and compliance guidelines for operators. The RIDES Program is a subsidized demand-response, curb-to-curb service providing transportation for people with disabilities and adults 65 and older.30 The RIDES Program launched in 2003 after a 1998 study highlighted gaps in Houston’s transportation system and in 2008 became part of the newly formed Harris County’s Community Services Department under the Transportation Division.31 The RIDES Program contracts with private transportation companies to serve a mix of partner organizations (nonprofit and for-profit organizations, community groups, municipal governments, etc) to improve mobility options for older adults and people with disabilities unable to access fixed-route or ADA paratransit services. Similar to the Regional Transportation Collaborative (RTC) Program in the Rappahannock- Rapidan region of Virginia, RIDES creates quicker and more cost-efficient service by coordinating trips into a centralized booking software, enabling service providers to fulfill trips in a more efficient manner. For shared rides, this unified booking system creates the most efficient travel routes by tracking which riders are in the same area and which riders are 29 Our primary source was Kristin Lam Peraza, Mobility Manager for the Regional Transportation Collaborative of the RRRC. 30 Harris County Transit, RIDES Program website. 31 Rides Specialized Transportation for Harris County, National Aging and Disability Transportation Center. 109 14 heading in the same direction. It uses this information to coordinate rides, avoiding duplicative service and opening up vehicles and drivers to serve other trips. For same day taxi service, this booking software enables the various providers to see all riders requesting trips and if their vehicle meets a riders accessibility needs. This way, the closest vehicle, regardless of service provider, can be deployed to pick up this passenger. Unlike in Virginia, however, RIDES is coordinating contracted private service providers (not non-profit/community organizations) via their booking software. The Transit Transformation Action Plan (TAP) in California’s Bay Area is advancing accessible transportation coordination by the standardization of fare payment and eligibility requirements, reducing barriers to cross-jurisdictional trips, and creating centralized information portals for riders through new county-level entities. TAP is a collaborative and voluntary effort that is currently underway between the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), the region’s MPO, and transit agencies. The Transit Transformation Action Plan (TAP) identified 27 near-term actions that would yield immediate benefits for riders and build momentum for longer-term improvements. These actions are bundled into five distinct categories: [1] Fares & Payment, [2] Customer Information, [3] Transit Network, [4] Accessibility, and [5] Funding. There are five actions under the Accessibility category of which are as follows: ➢ Action 21: Designate a Mobility Manager to coordinate rides and function as a liaison between transit agencies in each county, consistent with the 2018 Coordinated Plan. ➢ Action 22: Fund additional subregional oneseat paratransit ride pilot projects and develop cost-sharing policies for cross jurisdictional paratransit trips. ➢ Action 23: Identify the next steps for the full integration of ADA-paratransit services on Clipper Next Generation. ➢ Action 24: Identify key paratransit challenges and recommend reforms through the Coordinated Plan update. ➢ Action 25: Adopt standardized eligibility practices for programs that benefit people with disabilities (paratransit and Clipper Regional Transit Connection (RTC)). The TAP Accessibility Action Items are “first major push in decades for regional improvements in accessible transportation.”32 These Action Items are designed to craft a more coherent and user-friendly system out of the fragmented Bay Area accessible transportation landscape. For reference, there are 20 paratransit agencies operating in the Bay Area33 and this does not include the patchwork of other accessible transportation options such as volunteer driver 32 Drennen Shelton, a Planner at MTC working on the TAP Accessibility Action Items 33 511 SF Bay, ADA Paratransit 110 15 programs, non-profit and community-based transportation, mobility management programs, and city-provided “dial-a-ride”. All of these Action Items are still in various stages of development. However, the important thing to note is that this work is enabled by MTC as a regional entity that has taken up the responsibility of coordination to improve the overall rider experience. MTC develops the Coordinated Plan for the region. However, case study interviews identify an insufficient match between the priorities identified in the Coordinated Plans and the State Management Plan and the uses of Section 5310 funding. The MTC regional coordination role is proceeding in a complementary fashion with the development of CTSAs in some of the Bay Area’s 9 Counties, including Solano County and Contra Costa County, which are leading coordination within those counties. Florida’s Commission for the Transportation Disadvantaged (CTD) could be a governance structure considered by California to streamline our accessible transportation network. The Commission develops policies and procedures to coordinate services and “is guided by a philosophy of centralized (statewide) policy development and decentralized (local) implementation.”34 Florida’s CTD is an independent state agency housed within the state's Department of Transportation which “functions independently from the supervision and direction of the FDOT, with its own rule making and budget authority.”35 The state-level CTD board is composed of seven voting members, at least two of whom are people with disabilities or use the transportation disadvantaged system and at least one of whom must be over 65 years old. The other five commissioners are from the business community. Ex officio non-voting members of CTD include representatives from state agencies and departments for Elder Affairs, Persons with Disabilities, Children and Families, Health Care Administration, in addition to a county manager or administrator appointed by the Governor. The CTD contracts with Community Transportation Coordinators (CTC) who are responsible for providing and/or contracting transportation services at the county-level. A CTC can be a public transportation agency, a private for-profit transportation company, a not-for-profit human services agency, or a local government entity. CTCs receive funding from state and federal sources. The CTD also contracts Designated Official Planning Agencies (Planners) to conduct and coordinate planning activities including the development of local service plans and reviewing annual operating reports that are submitted to the CTC. 34 Florida Commission for the Transportation Disadvantaged, 2023 Annual Performance Report 35 Identified in the Florida Commission for the Disadvantaged 2023 Annual Performance Report. 111 16 The Local Coordination Board (LCB) is a local advisory body to the CTD and assists the CTC to identify local service needs and provide information, advice, and direction on the coordination of transportation disadvantaged services. A local elected official chairs a LCB with other members from local and state stakeholders. These include state agencies, riders of the Coordinated System, academics, transportation industry, the workforce development system, medical community, and military veterans. Policy Recommendations Based on previous studies, new primary research, secondary research on reforms utilized by other states (see Case Studies Summary 36), we have identified a set of policy recommendations to alleviate the issues and foster the mobility that is badly needed by those with disabilities and older adults. The policy recommendations are separated into two categories: [1] Actions that can be done within the current scope of funding and [2] institutional reforms and improvements that would require new funding. Within current funding, there is an important need to utilize current studies to assess the funding needs for accessible transportation, and to more effectively match current funding with local plans. With additional funding, institutional reforms can drive increased coordination, efficiency, and effectiveness. Policies within the Current Scope of Funding Guiding Existing Funding Currently, federal and state funds intended for accessible transportation are guided by local planning processes. However, these planning processes are not sufficiently guiding these fund sources as intended, contributing to the lack of efficiency and usefulness of services. As such, Caltrans recommended changes to funding guidance to support the prioritization in the Coordinated Plans and a preference for Consolidated 36 Seamless Bay Area, Case Studies Summary, Disability Access Research Project 112 17 Transportation Services Agencies, among other changes.37 Better Utilize Coordinated Plan Funding Guidance for Federal Funding Federal law requires locally developed Coordinated Plans to guide Section 5310 federal funding intended for transit dependent and transit disadvantaged persons – including the elderly, disabled, and persons of limited means38 – which Caltrans reaffirms in its State Management Plan.39 However, our California case study shows an insufficient match between the priorities identified in the Coordinated Plans and the State Management Plan and the uses of Section 5310 funding. Reform the “Unmet Needs” Process 40 California’s Transportation Development Act (TDA) requires jurisdictions to identify unmet transit needs and those needs that are reasonable to meet in order to guide state TDA funding. Prior Caltrans study has acknowledged significant shortcomings with the “unmet needs” process and specifically recommended legislative action to address the issues. The determination of unmet needs should consider the needs identified in Coordinated Plans so that TDA funds can be used for Coordinated Plan implementation, and should include a public review process to provide transparency. Utilize Regional Network Management entities in regions where they are established In some metropolitan regions within the state, coordination of transit services is being formalized across county boundaries through regional network management entities. For example, in the San Francisco Bay Area, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission has established a Network Management function that oversees the coordination of public transportation, fare payment, fare integration, schedule coordination, mapping & wayfinding, real time transit information, regional coordination of accessible transportation, and other customer-facing operating policies. Where such regional network management entities exist, they will sub-allocate funding for accessible transportation, and ensure coordination and standardization of accessible transportation services across county boundaries in a region. Guiding Funding Assessment Caltrans identified a “demonstrated need for increased funding”41 towards local and regional entities which are supporting coordinated transportation projects. This was reaffirmed in the 37 Caltrans MAP: Assessing Human Service Transportation Coordination in CA: An Analysis of Legal and Regulatory Obstacles: Possible Solutions 38 Caltrans Transportation Development Act (TDA) Statutes and California Code of Regulations (2018) 39 Caltrans State Management Plan Federal Transit Programs (July 2020) 40 Caltrans California Mobility Action Plan (MAP) Strategic Implementation Plan, and MAP: Assessing Human Service Transportation Coordination in California: A Legal and Regulatory Analysis 41 Caltrans MAP: Phase 1 Implementation Study Final Draft Report, Strategic Implementation Plan (2010) 113 18 2021 California Master Plan for Aging (MPA) in which the Health and Human Services Agency called for strengthened CTSAs and the MPA Stakeholder Advisory Committee called for an increase in funding.42 However, the consideration of reforms is impeded by a lack of data about the cost and funding needs of the fragmented system of accessible transportation. According to CalAct, a statewide non-profit organization representing small, rural, and specialized transportation providers, “the amount of funding available to CTSAs remains a mystery.” Some MAP Project Advisory Committee members also postulate that “the number is not that large”.43 There are two current initiatives authorized by state law to assess and make recommendations regarding funding for transportation in California. SB 1121 requires the California Transportation Commission in consultation with CalSTA and Caltrans to prepare a needs assessment of the cost to operate, maintain, and provide for the necessary future growth of the state and local transportation system for the next 10 years. The completed Transportation Needs Assessment is due on or before January 1, 2025, and every 5 years thereafter.44 SB 125 requires CalSTA to convene a Transit Transformation Task Force that will develop policy recommendations relating to transit funding, improving the transit experience for all users, and growing transit ridership. CalSTA, in consultation with the task force, is required to submit a report of findings and policy recommendations based to the appropriate policy and fiscal committees of the Legislature on or before October 31, 2025. These initiatives should assess and recommend funding to implement recommendations from multiple previous state studies. Institutional Reforms and Policies that Require Additional Funding Enhance the Consolidated Transportation Services Agency (CTSA) mechanism 45,46 The 1979 SSTI Act and the CTSA mechanism within were established for the purpose of “improving 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.”47 In 2012 Caltrans identified inequitable implementation due to a “permissive rather than mandatory approach” and “political and funding barriers”. Caltrans and the 42 California Master Plan for Aging: Goal 2: Livable Communities & Purpose 43 Caltrans MAP: Assessing Human Service Transportation Coordination in California: A Legal and Regulatory Analysis 44 Senate Bill 1121 (Gonzalez, 2022) 45 Caltrans MAP: Assessing Human Service Transportation Coordination in California: A Legal and Regulatory Analysis 46 California Master Plan for Aging: Goal 2: Livable Communities & Purpose 47 CalAct, What is a Consolidated Transportation Services Agency? 114 19 Department of Aging have recommended strengthened CTSAs including requiring CTSAs in every county, making the CTSA the recipient, manager, and allocator of funding, and including: Mobility Management Providing a single point of contact connecting users of accessible transportation with the most appropriate service for their needs. Cross Jurisdictional Service 48 Also known as one-seat-ride or regional trips, new policies would establish backend processes, seamless to the public, that accommodate riders traveling between different transit districts. Public Rights of Way (PROW) Traversable sidewalks, paths, and routes are critical for mobility equity. Improving community walkability is an established priority strategy of the MPA49 and the Commission on Aging 50. These neighborhood mobility issues are best addressed at the local level. CTSAs will be empowered to review capital improvement and other planning and programming documents to ensure high quality accessible access Recent case studies (see the “Case Studies” section) highlight several examples of regions that have strengthened regional coordination and governance structures, leading to tangible improvements for people with disabilities and older adults using paratransit and other curb-to- curb services. Similar to the Regional Transportation Collaborative (RTC) Program in the Rappahannock-Rapidan region of Virginia, CTSAs should be responsible for regional coordination efforts. This will lead to cost-efficiencies and a better rider experience brought about by service coordination and a more efficient use of staffing and capital (vehicles, facilities, etc). RTC has a similar-regional structure akin to CTSAs, albeit with voluntary participation by its partner organizations that are local non-profit/community group service providers. 48 Identified as an implementation task in the CA Health and Human Services Agency’s 2021 Master Plan for Aging (Initiative 16). 49 California Master Plan for Aging, 2023-24 Initiatives 50 California Commission on Aging, Progress Report to the State Legislature on the Strategic Plan for an Aging California Population 115 20 One important way RTC improves the provision of service is by coordinating partner organizations via a centralized booking software to match riders with whatever service best fits their needs, providing a more efficient service that better serves riders and still meets their accessibility needs. The county-level RIDES Program in Harris County, Texas also achieves cost reductions through joint service procurement and coordination via a centralized booking software system – enabling service providers to fulfill trips in a more efficient manner. One important distinction is that the RIDES Program does coordinate existing operators. Instead, they contract directly with private transportation companies to serve a mix of partner organizations (nonprofit and for-profit organizations, community groups, municipal governments, etc). This is due, in part, to the limited scope of publicly and non-profit accessible transportation providers in the sprawling Harris County, especially in the region’s rural and suburban areas. CTSAs will also create cost-efficiencies through the shared use of staffing and resources similar to RTC. A regional entity will facilitate the sharing of existing (and potentially new) staff to help partner groups with marketing, mobility management, volunteer coordination, and more. This method of staff organization will help reduce overhead costs and the sharing of some capital between providers (i.e. buses, facilities, etc) will create greater efficiencies. Importantly, CSTAs will expand upon these models, creating even greater levels of coordination through the joint procurement of vehicles and the centralized administration of regional transportation funding. Establish the California Mobility Council In order to provide ongoing support for institutional reforms, the California Health and Human Services Agency recommended the establishment of a Mobility Council to be “…responsible for dramatic improvement in transportation options for seniors…”51 with Caltrans stating, “Legislation is likely required”.52 The Mobility Council would have authority over reform of implementation of the Social Service Transportation Improvement Act, such as: Coordinated (originally Consolidated) Transportation Services Agency enhancement, unmet needs process reform, and integration of Coordinated Public Transit Human Services Transportation Plans with existing relevant processes. It would include representation of Regional Centers and other categories of transportation providers, and establishment of cross jurisdictional trip protocols. Case study support: 51 Health and Human Services Agency, 2003 Strategic Plan for an Aging California, page 30 52 Caltrans, MAP: Assessing Human Service Transportation Coordination in California: A Legal and Regulatory Analysis, page 27 116 21 The structure of California’s Mobility Council could draw on the model of Florida’s Commission for the Transportation Disadvantaged (CTD). Florida’s CTD is an independent state agency housed within the state's Department of Transportation which “functions independently from the supervision and direction of the FDOT, with its own rule making and budget authority.”53 More specifically, the Commission develops policies and procedures to coordinate services and “is guided by a philosophy of centralized (statewide) policy development and decentralized (local) implementation.”54 The California Mobility Council would be similarly tasked with, delegated the authority to, and afforded finances to improve statewide policies for the betterment of accessible transportation services. The CTD contracts with Community Transportation Coordinators (CTC) who are responsible for providing and/or contracting transportation services at the county-level. A CTC can be a public transportation agency, a private for-profit transportation company, a not-for-profit human services agency, or a local government entity. CTCs receive funding from state and federal sources. The CTD also contracts Designated Official Planning Agencies (Planners) to conduct and coordinate planning activities including the development of local service plans and reviewing annual operating reports that are submitted to the CTC. The Local Coordination Board (LCB) is a local advisory body to the CTD and assists the CTC to identify local service needs and provide information, advice, and direction on the coordination of transportation disadvantaged services. A local elected official chairs a LCB with other members from local and state stakeholders. These include state agencies, riders of the Coordinated System, academics, transportation industry, the workforce development system, medical community, and military veterans. Conclusion The accessible transportation system in California is fragmented, complex, and inefficient. Despite calls by people with disabilities, older adults, and advocates, the legislature has not worked to reform this system in the last two decades. The recommendations in this document provide California with a viable path towards revitalizing our accessible transportation landscape. New governance structures, streamlining funding mechanisms, and reforming coordinated transportation planning will drastically improve the accessible transportation system. 53 Identified in the Florida Commission for the Disadvantaged 2023 Annual Performance Report. 54 Ibid 117 22 118 23 Abbreviations ADA: Americans with Disabilities Act CTC: Florida’s Community Transportation Coordinators CTD: Florida’s Commission for the Transportation Disadvantaged CTSA: Consolidated Transportation Service Agency DACLAC: Disability and Aging Community Living Advisory Committee MAP: Caltrans’ Mobility Action Plan MPA: Master Plan for Aging SSTI Act: 1979 Social Service Transportation Improvement Act, or AB120 Appendix Caltrans, Mobility Action Plan Strategic Implementation Plan Caltrans, Mobility Action Plan: Assessing Human Service Transportation Coordination in California: A Legal and Regulatory Analysis Social Service Transportation Improvement Act, or AB120 (1979) Master Plan for Aging, 2023-24 Initiatives SB 1121 (Legislative text here) SB 125 (Legislative text here) Seamless Bay Area, Case Studies Summary, Disability Access Research Project Seamless Bay Area, Focus Group Summary, Disability Access Research Project 119 4/2/24, 9:36 AM State Net https://sn.lexisnexis.com/secure/pe/appwait_helper.cgi?wait_pid=5412&host=10.139.75.176&query_id=QVF83iwkLQUk&app=lpfs&mode=display 1/12 California HIGH SESSION ADJOURNMENT August 30, 2024 150 Days Remaining Moving Bill Our Forecast ▼Show More HIGH SESSION ADJOURNMENT August 30, 2024 150 Days Remaining Moving Bill Our Forecast ▼Show More Status actions entered today are listed in bold. File name: Master Author:Laura Friedman (D-044) Title:Transportation Planning: Regional Transportation Plans Fiscal Committee:yes Urgency Clause:no Introduced:12/05/2022 Last Amend:03/16/2023 Disposition:Pending Location:Senate Transportation Committee Summary:Requires a metropolitan planning organization to submit an adopted sustainable communities strategy or an alternative planning strategy, if applicable, to the State Air Resources Board for review. Status:06/14/2023 To SENATE Committees on TRANSPORTATION and ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY. Author:Laura Friedman (D-044) Title:Transportation: Planning: Project Selection Processes Fiscal Committee:yes Urgency Clause:no 1.CA AB 6 Slow ⓘ 2.CA AB 7 Slow ⓘ ✔✔✔ ✔✔✔✔✔ 1st Committee 1st Fiscal Committee 1st Chamber 2nd Committee 2nd Chamber Executive 1st Committee 1st Fiscal Committee 1st Chamber 2nd Committee 2nd Fiscal Committee 2nd Chamber 95% 95% 120 4/2/24, 9:36 AM State Net https://sn.lexisnexis.com/secure/pe/appwait_helper.cgi?wait_pid=5412&host=10.139.75.176&query_id=QVF83iwkLQUk&app=lpfs&mode=display 2/12 HIGH SESSION ADJOURNMENT August 30, 2024 150 Days Remaining Moving Bill Our Forecast ▼Show More HIGH SESSION ADJOURNMENT August 30, 2024 150 Days Remaining Moving Bill Introduced:12/05/2022 Last Amend:09/01/2023 Disposition:Pending File:A-40 Location:Senate Inactive File Summary:Provides that the Secretary of Transportation, among other duties, is charged with developing and reporting to the Governor on legislative, budgetary, and administrative programs to accomplish coordinated planning and policy formulation in matters of public interest, including transportation projects. Requires the agency, the Department of Transportation, and the California Transportation Commission to incorporate specified principles into their existing program funding guidelines and processes. Status:09/11/2023 In SENATE. From third reading. To Inactive File. Author:Alex Lee (D-024) Title:Light Pollution Control Fiscal Committee:yes Urgency Clause:no Introduced:12/05/2022 Last Amend:06/28/2023 Disposition:Pending Location:Senate Appropriations Committee Summary:Relates to the Warren-Alquist State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Act, which requires the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission to adopt lighting and other building design and construction standards that increase efficiency in the use of energy. Requires, with certain exceptions, an agency to ensure that an outdoor lighting fixture that is newly installed on a structure or land that is owned, leased, or managed by the agency meets certain criteria. Status:09/01/2023 In SENATE Committee on APPROPRIATIONS: Held in committee. 3.CA AB 38 Very Fast ⓘ 4.CA AB 52 Slow ✔✔✔✔ 1st Committee 1st Fiscal Committee 1st Chamber 2nd Committee 2nd Fiscal Committee 2nd Chamber 121 4/2/24, 9:36 AM State Net https://sn.lexisnexis.com/secure/pe/appwait_helper.cgi?wait_pid=5412&host=10.139.75.176&query_id=QVF83iwkLQUk&app=lpfs&mode=display 3/12 Our Forecast ▼Show More HIGH SESSION ADJOURNMENT August 30, 2024 150 Days Remaining Moving Bill Our Forecast ▼Show More Author:Timothy S. Grayson (D-015) Title:Income Tax Credit: Sales and Use Taxes Paid Fiscal Committee:yes Urgency Clause:no Introduced:12/05/2022 Last Amend:06/15/2023 Disposition:Pending Location:Senate Appropriations Committee Summary:Relates to the Sales and Use Tax Law. Allows a credit against those taxes to a taxpayer in an amount equal to the amount of tax reimbursement paid during the taxable year for sales tax on gross receipts that would be exempt from taxation pursuant to the sales and use tax exemption. Allows a similar tax credit against those taxes to a taxpayer in an amount equal to the amount of use tax paid during the taxable year for storage, use, or other consumption that would be exempt from taxation under that law. Status:09/01/2023 In SENATE Committee on APPROPRIATIONS. Held in committee and made a Two-year bill. Author:Tasha Boerner (D-077) Title:Vehicles: Required Stops: Bicycles Fiscal Committee:yes Urgency Clause:no Introduced:12/13/2022 Last Amend:03/09/2023 Disposition:Pending Location:Senate Transportation Committee ⓘ 5.CA AB 73 Very Fast ⓘ ✔✔✔✔ ✔✔✔ 1st Committee 1st Fiscal Committee 1st Chamber 2nd Committee 2nd Fiscal Committee 2nd Chamber 1st Committee 1st Fiscal Committee 1st Chamber 2nd Committee 2nd Chamber Executive 95% 122 4/2/24, 9:36 AM State Net https://sn.lexisnexis.com/secure/pe/appwait_helper.cgi?wait_pid=5412&host=10.139.75.176&query_id=QVF83iwkLQUk&app=lpfs&mode=display 4/12 HIGH SESSION ADJOURNMENT August 30, 2024 150 Days Remaining Moving Bill Our Forecast ▼Show More FAILED Our Forecast ▼Show More Summary:Requires a person who is 18 years of age or older riding a bicycle upon a two-lane highway when approaching a stop sign at the entrance of an intersection with another roadway with two or fewer lanes, where stop signs are erected upon all approaches, to yield the right-of-way to any vehicles that have either stopped at or entered the intersection, or that are approaching on the intersecting highway close enough to constitute an immediate hazard, and to pedestrians, as specified. Status:07/11/2023 In SENATE Committee on TRANSPORTATION: Not heard. Author:Isaac G. Bryan (D-055) Title:Street Furniture Data: Statewide Data Platform Fiscal Committee:yes Urgency Clause:no Introduced:02/01/2023 Last Amend:04/11/2023 Disposition:Pending Location:Senate Transportation Committee Summary:Requires the Department of Transportation to develop guidelines for data sharing, documentation, public access, quality control, and promotion of open-source and accessible platforms and decision support tools related to street furniture data. Requires the Department to designate the Integrated Climate Adaptation and Resiliency Program Technical Advisory Council to advise on the development of the initial and subsequent guidelines, and review the reports related to those guidelines. Status:06/14/2023 To SENATE Committees on TRANSPORTATION and JUDICIARY. Author:Tasha Boerner (D-077) 6.CA AB 364 Very Fast ⓘ 7.CA AB 530 ⓘ ✔✔✔ X X X X 1st Committee 1st Fiscal Committee 1st Chamber 2nd Committee 2nd Chamber Executive 1st Committee 1st Chamber 2nd Committee 2nd Chamber Executive 95% X 123 4/2/24, 9:36 AM State Net https://sn.lexisnexis.com/secure/pe/appwait_helper.cgi?wait_pid=5412&host=10.139.75.176&query_id=QVF83iwkLQUk&app=lpfs&mode=display 5/12 HIGH SESSION ADJOURNMENT August 30, 2024 150 Days Remaining Moving Bill Our Forecast ▼Show More Title:Vehicles: Electric Bicycles Fiscal Committee:yes Urgency Clause:no Introduced:02/08/2023 Last Amend:07/13/2023 Disposition:Failed Location:ASSEMBLY Summary:Prohibits a person under a specified age from operating an electric bicycle of any class. States the intent of the Legislature to create an e-bike license program with an online written test and a State- issued photo identification for those persons without a valid driver's license, prohibit persons under a specified age from riding e-bikes, and create a stakeholders working group to work on recommendations to establish an e-bike training program and license. Status:02/01/2024 In ASSEMBLY. Died pursuant to Art. IV, Sec. 10(c) of the Constitution. 02/01/2024 From Committee: Filed with the Chief Clerk pursuant to Joint Rule 56. Author:Eduardo Garcia (D-036) Title:Safe Drinking Water, Wildfire Prevention, Drought Prep Fiscal Committee:yes Urgency Clause:no Introduced:02/17/2023 Last Amend:05/26/2023 Disposition:Pending Location:Senate Natural Resources and Water Committee Summary:Enacts the Safe Drinking Water, Wildfire Prevention, Drought Preparation, Flood Protection, Extreme Heat Mitigation, Clean Energy, and Workforce Development Bond Act of 2024, which, if approved by the voters, would authorize the issuance of bonds in a specified amount to finance projects for safe drinking water, wildfire prevention, drought preparation, flood protection, extreme heat mitigation, clean energy, and workforce development programs. Status:06/14/2023 To SENATE Committees on NATURAL RESOURCES AND WATER and GOVERNANCE AND FINANCE. 8.CA AB 1567 Very Fast ⓘ 9. ✔✔✔ 1st Committee 1st Fiscal Committee 1st Chamber 2nd Committee 2nd Chamber Executive 95% 124 4/2/24, 9:36 AM State Net https://sn.lexisnexis.com/secure/pe/appwait_helper.cgi?wait_pid=5412&host=10.139.75.176&query_id=QVF83iwkLQUk&app=lpfs&mode=display 6/12 HIGH SESSION ADJOURNMENT August 30, 2024 150 Days Remaining Our Forecast ▼Show More HIGH SESSION ADJOURNMENT August 30, 2024 150 Days Remaining Our Forecast ▼Show More Author:Damon Connolly (D-012) Title:Vehicles: Electric Bicycles Fiscal Committee:no Urgency Clause:no Introduced:01/03/2024 Last Amend:04/01/2024 Disposition:Pending Committee:Assembly Transportation Committee Hearing:04/08/2024 2:30 pm, 1021 O Street, Room 1100 Summary:Authorizes a local authority within the County of Marin, or the County of Marin in unincorporated areas, to adopt an ordinance or resolution that would prohibit a person under a specified age from operating a class 2 electric bicycle or require a person operating a class 2 electric bicycle to wear a bicycle helmet. Requires such ordinance or resolution to make a violation an infraction punishable by either a specified fine or completion of an electric bicycle safety and training course. Status:04/01/2024 From ASSEMBLY Committee on TRANSPORTATION with author's amendments. 04/01/2024 In ASSEMBLY. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Committee on TRANSPORTATION. Author:Pilar Schiavo (D-040) Title:Department of Transportation funding: Report Fiscal Committee:yes Urgency Clause:no Introduced:02/05/2024 Disposition:Pending CA AB 1778 ⓘ 10.CA AB 2086 ⓘ 1st Committee 1st Chamber 2nd Committee 2nd Chamber Executive 1st Committee 1st Chamber 2nd Committee 2nd Chamber Executive 95% 95% 125 4/2/24, 9:36 AM State Net https://sn.lexisnexis.com/secure/pe/appwait_helper.cgi?wait_pid=5412&host=10.139.75.176&query_id=QVF83iwkLQUk&app=lpfs&mode=display 7/12 HIGH SESSION ADJOURNMENT August 30, 2024 150 Days Remaining Our Forecast ▼Show More HIGH SESSION ADJOURNMENT August 30, 2024 150 Days Remaining Our Forecast ▼Show More Location:Assembly Transportation Committee Summary:Requires the California Transportation Commission to adopt guidelines for the Department of Transportation to use to determine whether the use of the funding made available to the department is advancing the Core Four priorities of safety, equity, climate action, and economic prosperity established by the Transportation Agency. Status:02/20/2024 To ASSEMBLY Committee on TRANSPORTATION. Author:Laura Friedman (D-044) Title:Transportation: Class III Bikeways: Bicycle Facilities Fiscal Committee:yes Urgency Clause:no Introduced:02/12/2024 Last Amend:04/01/2024 Disposition:Pending Committee:Assembly Transportation Committee Hearing:04/08/2024 2:30 pm, 1021 O Street, Room 1100 Summary:Prohibits the allocation of Active Transportation Program funds for a project that creates a Class III bikeway unless the project is on a residential street with a posted speed limit of specified number of miles per hour or less. Status:04/01/2024 From ASSEMBLY Committee on TRANSPORTATION with author's amendments. 04/01/2024 In ASSEMBLY. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Committee on TRANSPORTATION. 11.CA AB 2290 ⓘ 12.CA AB 2535 ⓘ 1st Committee 1st Chamber 2nd Committee 2nd Chamber Executive 1st Committee 1st Chamber 2nd Committee 2nd Chamber Executive 95% 95% 126 4/2/24, 9:36 AM State Net https://sn.lexisnexis.com/secure/pe/appwait_helper.cgi?wait_pid=5412&host=10.139.75.176&query_id=QVF83iwkLQUk&app=lpfs&mode=display 8/12 HIGH SESSION ADJOURNMENT August 30, 2024 150 Days Remaining Our Forecast ▼Show More Author:Mia Bonta (D-018) Title:Trade Corridor Enhancement Program Fiscal Committee:yes Urgency Clause:no Introduced:02/13/2024 Disposition:Pending Committee:Assembly Transportation Committee Hearing:04/15/2024 2:30 pm, 1021 O Street, Room 1100 Summary:Prohibits the California Transportation Commission from allocating funding under the program to a project that adds a general purpose lane to a highway or expands highway capacity in a community that meets certain criteria relating to pollution impacts. Status:03/04/2024 To ASSEMBLY Committees on TRANSPORTATION and NATURAL RESOURCES. Author:Marc Berman (D-023) Title:School Zones and Walk Zones Fiscal Committee:yes Urgency Clause:no Introduced:02/14/2024 Last Amend:03/12/2024 Disposition:Pending Committee:Assembly Transportation Committee Hearing:04/15/2024 2:30 pm, 1021 O Street, Room 1100 Summary:Provides that the Planning and Zoning Law requires the legislative body of a city or county to adopt a comprehensive general plan that includes a circulation element to plan for transportation routes. Requires, upon any substantive revision of the circulation element on or after specified date, such legislative body to identify and establish school walk zones for all schools located within the scope of the general plan. Expands exemption from what constitutes a speed trap to include school zones. Status:03/12/2024 From ASSEMBLY Committee on TRANSPORTATION with author's amendments. 03/12/2024 In ASSEMBLY. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Committee on TRANSPORTATION. 13.CA AB 2583 ⓘ 14 1st Committee 1st Chamber 2nd Committee 2nd Chamber Executive 95% 127 4/2/24, 9:36 AM State Net https://sn.lexisnexis.com/secure/pe/appwait_helper.cgi?wait_pid=5412&host=10.139.75.176&query_id=QVF83iwkLQUk&app=lpfs&mode=display 9/12 HIGH SESSION ADJOURNMENT August 30, 2024 150 Days Remaining Our Forecast ▼Show More NO FORECAST SESSION ADJOURNMENT August 30, 2024 150 Days Remaining Our Forecast ▼Show More Author:Kevin McCarty (D-006) Title:Sacramento Regional Transit District Fiscal Committee:no Urgency Clause:no Introduced:02/14/2024 Disposition:Pending Committee:Assembly Local Government Committee Hearing:04/10/2024 1:30 pm, State Capitol, Room 447 Summary:Relates to existing law that requires each transit operator, including the Sacramento Regional Transit District, that offers reduced fares to senior citizens to also offer reduced fares to disabled persons and disabled veterans at the same rate established for senior citizens. The bill exempts the district from that requirement. Status:03/04/2024 To ASSEMBLY Committee on LOCAL GOVERNMENT. Author:Juan Alanis (R-022) Title:Water Resiliency Act of 2024 Fiscal Committee:yes Urgency Clause:no Introduced:12/05/2022 Last Amend:03/06/2024 Disposition:Pending Location:Assembly Water, Parks and Wildlife Committee 14.CA AB 2634 ⓘ 15.CA ACA 2 ⓘ 1st Committee 1st Chamber 2nd Committee 2nd Chamber Executive 1st Committee 1st Chamber 2nd Committee 2nd Chamber Executive 95% 128 4/2/24, 9:36 AM State Net https://sn.lexisnexis.com/secure/pe/appwait_helper.cgi?wait_pid=5412&host=10.139.75.176&query_id=QVF83iwkLQUk&app=lpfs&mode=display 10/12 HIGH SESSION ADJOURNMENT August 30, 2024 150 Days Remaining Moving Bill Our Forecast ▼Show More FAILED Our Forecast ▼Show More Summary:Requires the Treasurer to annually transfer an amount equal to a specified percent of all State revenues from the General Fund to the State Water Resiliency Trust Fund. Appropriates moneys in the fund to the State Water Commission for its actual costs of specified water infrastructure projects. Requires the State Auditor to annually conduct a programmatic review and an audit of expenditures from the Trust Fund and to report those findings. Status:03/06/2024 From ASSEMBLY Committee on WATER, PARKS AND WILDLIFE with author's amendments. 03/06/2024 In ASSEMBLY. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Committee on WATER, PARKS AND WILDLIFE. Author:Thomas J. Umberg (D-034) Title:Transportation: Zero-Emission Vehicle Signage Fiscal Committee:yes Urgency Clause:no Introduced:12/05/2022 Last Amend:06/19/2023 Disposition:Pending Location:Assembly Appropriations Committee Summary:Requires the Department of Transportation, in coordination with the Governor's Office of Business and Economic Development (GO-Biz) and the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission, to develop and design light-duty zero-emission vehicle charging and fueling station signage to be placed along State highways based on charger or fueling type and vehicle compatibility, in order to increase consumer confidence in locating electric vehicle chargers and hydrogen fueling stations. Status:09/01/2023 In ASSEMBLY Committee on APPROPRIATIONS: Held in committee. 16.CA SB 30 Very Fast ⓘ 17.CA SB 397 ⓘ ✔✔✔✔ X X X X 1st Committee 1st Fiscal Committee 1st Chamber 2nd Committee 2nd Fiscal Committee 2nd Chamber 1st Committee 1st Chamber 2nd Committee 2nd Chamber Executive X 129 4/2/24, 9:36 AM State Net https://sn.lexisnexis.com/secure/pe/appwait_helper.cgi?wait_pid=5412&host=10.139.75.176&query_id=QVF83iwkLQUk&app=lpfs&mode=display 11/12 HIGH SESSION ADJOURNMENT August 30, 2024 150 Days Remaining Our Forecast ▼Show More HIGH SESSION ADJOURNMENT August 30, 2024 150 Days Remaining Author:Aisha Wahab (D-010) Title:San Francisco Bay Area: Public Transportation Fiscal Committee:yes Urgency Clause:no Introduced:02/09/2023 Last Amend:01/03/2024 Disposition:Failed Location:SENATE Summary:Requires the Transportation Agency to develop a plan to consolidate all transit agencies that are located within the geographic jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. Status:02/01/2024 In SENATE. Returned to Secretary of Senate pursuant to Joint Rule 56. Author:Scott D. Wiener (D-011) Title:Transportation: Planning: Transit Priority Projects Fiscal Committee:yes Urgency Clause:no Introduced:01/23/2024 Disposition:Pending Committee:Senate Transportation Committee Hearing:04/23/2024 1:30 pm, 1021 O Street, Room 1200 Summary:Requires all transportation projects funded or overseen by the department to provide comfortable, convenient, and connected complete streets facilities unless an exemption is documented and approved, as specified. Status:02/14/2024 To SENATE Committee on TRANSPORTATION. 18.CA SB 960 ⓘ 19.CA SB 961 ⓘ 1st Committee 1st Chamber 2nd Committee 2nd Chamber Executive 1st Committee 1st Chamber 2nd Committee 2nd Chamber Executive 95% 130 4/2/24, 9:36 AM State Net https://sn.lexisnexis.com/secure/pe/appwait_helper.cgi?wait_pid=5412&host=10.139.75.176&query_id=QVF83iwkLQUk&app=lpfs&mode=display 12/12 Our Forecast ▼Show More Author:Scott D. Wiener (D-011) Title:Vehicles: Safety Equipment Fiscal Committee:yes Urgency Clause:no Introduced:01/23/2024 Disposition:Pending Committee:Senate Transportation Committee Hearing:04/09/2024 1:30 pm, 1021 O Street, Room 1200 Summary:Requires certain trucks and trailers to also be equipped with side guards, as specified. Requires the Department of the California Highway Patrol to adopt rules and regulations requiring driver inspections of side guards and requiring the department to inspect side guards that have been involved in collisions. Status:02/14/2024 To SENATE Committee on TRANSPORTATION. ⓘ 95% 131 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Staff Report 1025 ESCOBAR STREET MARTINEZ, CA 94553 File #:24-0985 Agenda Date:4/8/2024 Agenda #:7. TRANSPORTATION, WATER & INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE Meeting Date: April 8, 2024 Subject: Communication, News, Miscellaneous Items of Interest to the Committee Submitted For: TRANSPORTATION, WATER, & INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE Department: CONSERVATION & DEVELOPMENT Referral No: N/A Referral Name: N/A Presenter: John Cunningham | DCD Contact: John Cunningham (925)655-2896 Referral History: This is a standing item on the TWIC Agenda. Referral Update: 3/21/2024: Bay Area News Group:Dozens mark opening of Mokelumne Pedestrian/Bike Bridge Over Highway 4 3/29/2024: Politico:Baltimore port closure could speed up West Coast cargo shift 3/6/2024: Momentum Magazine:Bicycle use soars following installation of separated bike lanes, according to new study 3/7/2024: Business Insider:Bike lanes are good for business Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s): RECEIVE information and DIRECT staff as appropriate. Fiscal Impact (if any): None. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 4/3/2024Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™132 A cyclist rides across the new Mokelumne Trail Bicycle and Pedestrian OvercrossingA cyclist rides across the new Mokelumne Trail Bicycle and Pedestrian Overcrossing on Wednesday, March 20, 2024, in Brentwood, Calif. The overcrossing provides a safeon Wednesday, March 20, 2024, in Brentwood, Calif. The overcrossing provides a safe access for cyclists and pedestrians over State Route 4 for commuting and recreationalaccess for cyclists and pedestrians over State Route 4 for commuting and recreational travel and is part of the Mokelumne Trail. (Aric Crabb/Bay Area News Group)travel and is part of the Mokelumne Trail. (Aric Crabb/Bay Area News Group) NEWSNEWS TRANSPORTATIONTRANSPORTATION Dozens mark opening of newDozens mark opening of new Mokelumne pedestrian/bikeMokelumne pedestrian/bike bridge over Highway 4bridge over Highway 4 The multispan bridge closes a gap in the trailThe multispan bridge closes a gap in the trail that was created by the highway’s expansionthat was created by the highway’s expansion • • NewsNews 133 By By JUDITH PRIEVEJUDITH PRIEVE | | jprieve@bayareanewsgroup.comjprieve@bayareanewsgroup.com | Bay Area News | Bay Area News GroupGroup PUBLISHED: PUBLISHED: March 20, 2024 at 3:31 p.m.March 20, 2024 at 3:31 p.m. | UPDATED: | UPDATED: March 21, 2024 at 9:24 a.m.March 21, 2024 at 9:24 a.m. Dozens of pedestrians and cyclists marked the opening of a new bridge overDozens of pedestrians and cyclists marked the opening of a new bridge over Highway 4 in Brentwood by making the inaugural journey across the 850-foot-Highway 4 in Brentwood by making the inaugural journey across the 850-foot- long span on Wednesday morning.long span on Wednesday morning. The new, nearly $14 million multi-span structure, which broke ground almost twoThe new, nearly $14 million multi-span structure, which broke ground almost two years ago, will years ago, will close the gapclose the gap in the Mokelumne Trail that was created when in the Mokelumne Trail that was created when Highway 4 was expanded more than 20 years ago.Highway 4 was expanded more than 20 years ago. “This is a really important day,” said Tim Haile, executive director of Contra Costa“This is a really important day,” said Tim Haile, executive director of Contra Costa Transportation Authority. “It ’s been a really long time coming in. This has been aTransportation Authority. “It ’s been a really long time coming in. This has been a gap in the network for quite some time.”gap in the network for quite some time.” For nearly two decades, Highway 4 cut right through the Mokelumne Trail inFor nearly two decades, Highway 4 cut right through the Mokelumne Trail in Brentwood, blocking access and forcing pedestrians and cyclists to take a longBrentwood, blocking access and forcing pedestrians and cyclists to take a long detour on busy Lone Tree Way to continue on the path into Antioch.detour on busy Lone Tree Way to continue on the path into Antioch. 134 “We would not be here today if it wasn’t for the advocacy of this man,” he told the“We would not be here today if it wasn’t for the advocacy of this man,” he told the large crowd gathered. “And literally, this project fell off the shelf, and when Timlarge crowd gathered. “And literally, this project fell off the shelf, and when Tim Haile came on board, one of his tasks was to talk with new board members andHaile came on board, one of his tasks was to talk with new board members and find out what they want to do and Bob raises his hand and says, ‘you know, Ifind out what they want to do and Bob raises his hand and says, ‘you know, I think you forgot about us.’”think you forgot about us.’” Bicyclists ride near the new Mokelumne Trail Bicycle and Pedestrian Overcrossing onBicyclists ride near the new Mokelumne Trail Bicycle and Pedestrian Overcrossing on Wednesday, March 20, 2024, in Brentwood, Calif. The overcrossing provides a safeWednesday, March 20, 2024, in Brentwood, Calif. The overcrossing provides a safe access for cyclists and pedestrians over Highway 4 for commuting and recreationalaccess for cyclists and pedestrians over Highway 4 for commuting and recreational travel and is part of the Mokelumne Trail. (Aric Crabb/Bay Area News Group) travel and is part of the Mokelumne Trail. (Aric Crabb/Bay Area News Group) Cyclist Jerry Post, one of a dozen or so members of Delta Pedalers at theCyclist Jerry Post, one of a dozen or so members of Delta Pedalers at the ceremony, was happy to see the new trail and eager to ride across it as he waitedceremony, was happy to see the new trail and eager to ride across it as he waited for authorities to cut the ribbon.for authorities to cut the ribbon. “It’s gonna make it a lot safer to get from Brentwood over to Antioch, because“It’s gonna make it a lot safer to get from Brentwood over to Antioch, because riding a bike underneath the freeway – well, cars don’t care about cyclists,” theriding a bike underneath the freeway – well, cars don’t care about cyclists,” the 69-year-old Brentwood resident said. “So, you’re kind of dodging cars and69-year-old Brentwood resident said. “So, you’re kind of dodging cars and fighting the cars all the time if you gotta cross underneath the freeway …it’sfighting the cars all the time if you gotta cross underneath the freeway …it’s brutal.”brutal.” Cyclist Stacey Keller-Moore, 65, agreed.Cyclist Stacey Keller-Moore, 65, agreed. “A lot of us have to use Lone Tree (Way) and kill ourselves,” Keller-Moore said.“A lot of us have to use Lone Tree (Way) and kill ourselves,” Keller-Moore said. “We are so thrilled to have this.”“We are so thrilled to have this.” Contra Costa Transportation Authority Board Chair Newell Arnerich, a DanvilleContra Costa Transportation Authority Board Chair Newell Arnerich, a Danville councilmember, credited former Brentwood Mayor Bob Taylor with advocatingcouncilmember, credited former Brentwood Mayor Bob Taylor with advocating for the bridge. Others did the same.for the bridge. Others did the same. 135 Timing is everything, Arnerich added.Timing is everything, Arnerich added. “It takes a lot of people,” he said. “An incredible number of people make a project“It takes a lot of people,” he said. “An incredible number of people make a project like this happen.”like this happen.” Funding for the overcrossing came from Measure J taxpayer dollars, the StateFunding for the overcrossing came from Measure J taxpayer dollars, the State Route 4 Bypass Authority and Bay Area Toll Authority bridge toll funds.Route 4 Bypass Authority and Bay Area Toll Authority bridge toll funds. At 16 feet in width, the bridge will also be wide enough for future autonomousAt 16 feet in width, the bridge will also be wide enough for future autonomous shuttles — small electric pod cars now in the development stage — that possiblyshuttles — small electric pod cars now in the development stage — that possibly could traverse the bridge in the future, authorities said.could traverse the bridge in the future, authorities said. “We’re planning transportation for the future,” Arnerich said. “We’re not just“We’re planning transportation for the future,” Arnerich said. “We’re not just building projects. We’re making the connectivity, looking at the future, breakingbuilding projects. We’re making the connectivity, looking at the future, breaking down the barriers.down the barriers. “So for the bicyclists, this is a bicycle overcrossing, for the pedestrians, this is for“So for the bicyclists, this is a bicycle overcrossing, for the pedestrians, this is for pedestrians, and by the way, it’s a future autonomous vehicle for personal micropedestrians, and by the way, it’s a future autonomous vehicle for personal micro (transit) devices that will go over this.”(transit) devices that will go over this.” Haile also called the bridge an “icon” and “catalyst” for the city of BrentwoodHaile also called the bridge an “icon” and “catalyst” for the city of Brentwood because it will improve access to businesses in the community and the nearbybecause it will improve access to businesses in the community and the nearby Brentwood Innovation Center, a 300-acre mixed-use business park.Brentwood Innovation Center, a 300-acre mixed-use business park. “This is not only to help provide and close the gap in the bicycle network, but it ’s“This is not only to help provide and close the gap in the bicycle network, but it ’s also to be a catalyst for a future transit stop as well,” he said.also to be a catalyst for a future transit stop as well,” he said. Brentwood Mayor Joel Bryant told the crowd that “bridges are aboutBrentwood Mayor Joel Bryant told the crowd that “bridges are about connections.”connections.” “The fact is we now have a bridge to connect ourselves to each other, all the way“The fact is we now have a bridge to connect ourselves to each other, all the way from down South San Francisco all the way to the foothills of the Sierra, you canfrom down South San Francisco all the way to the foothills of the Sierra, you can be on trail systems,” he said.be on trail systems,” he said. “We are working together as a community to connect with each other, to connect“We are working together as a community to connect with each other, to connect with our health, connect with our mental peace,” he said.with our health, connect with our mental peace,” he said. Contra Costa County Supervisor Diane Burgis likened the trail system to a quilt.Contra Costa County Supervisor Diane Burgis likened the trail system to a quilt. 136 “It’s like a quilt while we’re building these trails; sometimes it’s big pieces and“It’s like a quilt while we’re building these trails; sometimes it’s big pieces and sometimes it’s small pieces,” she said. “This is a big piece.”sometimes it’s small pieces,” she said. “This is a big piece.” 137 Burgis also credited resident and longtime cyclist Bruce “Mr. Bicycle” Ohlson forBurgis also credited resident and longtime cyclist Bruce “Mr. Bicycle” Ohlson for attending every transportation meeting for decades and advocating for safeattending every transportation meeting for decades and advocating for safe bicycle lanes.bicycle lanes. Over the years, Ohlson said he reminded everyone involved with the BrentwoodOver the years, Ohlson said he reminded everyone involved with the Brentwood Highway 4 expansion that the connecting bridge was required in theHighway 4 expansion that the connecting bridge was required in the environmental documents. It wasn’t an easy battle, though, he said, noting atenvironmental documents. It wasn’t an easy battle, though, he said, noting at least one leader decades earlier didn’t want “motorists money spent on bicyclists’least one leader decades earlier didn’t want “motorists money spent on bicyclists’ amenities,” he said.amenities,” he said. For Burgis, the new bridge connecting the Brentwood and Antioch sides of theFor Burgis, the new bridge connecting the Brentwood and Antioch sides of the trail offers much for all.trail offers much for all. “Our residents will now have a safe bridge to access the Mokelumne Trail, which“Our residents will now have a safe bridge to access the Mokelumne Trail, which opens so many possibilities for families and people,” she said. “Now that the trailopens so many possibilities for families and people,” she said. “Now that the trail is officially connected, cyclists, trail walkers and those seeking environmentallyis officially connected, cyclists, trail walkers and those seeking environmentally friendly ways to travel can get to where they need to go.”friendly ways to travel can get to where they need to go.” A pedestrian walks across the new Mokelumne Trail Bicycle and PedestrianA pedestrian walks across the new Mokelumne Trail Bicycle and Pedestrian Overcrossing on Wednesday, March 20, 2024, in Brentwood, Calif. The overcrossingOvercrossing on Wednesday, March 20, 2024, in Brentwood, Calif. The overcrossing provides a safe access for cyclists and pedestrians over State Route 4 for commutingprovides a safe access for cyclists and pedestrians over State Route 4 for commuting and recreational travel and is part of the Mokelumne Trail. (Aric Crabb/Bay Area Newsand recreational travel and is part of the Mokelumne Trail. (Aric Crabb/Bay Area News Group) Group) 138 Pedestrians walk across the new Mokelumne Trail Bicycle and Pedestrian OvercrossingPedestrians walk across the new Mokelumne Trail Bicycle and Pedestrian Overcrossing on Wednesday, March 20, 2024, in Brentwood, Calif. The overcrossing provides a safeon Wednesday, March 20, 2024, in Brentwood, Calif. The overcrossing provides a safe access for cyclists and pedestrians over State Route 4 for commuting and recreationalaccess for cyclists and pedestrians over State Route 4 for commuting and recreational travel and is part of the Mokelumne Trail. (Aric Crabb/Bay Area News Group) travel and is part of the Mokelumne Trail. (Aric Crabb/Bay Area News Group) Pedestrians walk across the new Mokelumne Trail Bicycle and Pedestrian OvercrossingPedestrians walk across the new Mokelumne Trail Bicycle and Pedestrian Overcrossing on Wednesday, March 20, 2024, in Brentwood, Calif. The overcrossing provides a safeon Wednesday, March 20, 2024, in Brentwood, Calif. The overcrossing provides a safe access for cyclists and pedestrians over State Route 4 for commuting and recreationalaccess for cyclists and pedestrians over State Route 4 for commuting and recreational travel and is part of the Mokelumne Trail. (Aric Crabb/Bay Area News Group) travel and is part of the Mokelumne Trail. (Aric Crabb/Bay Area News Group) 139 1 John Cunningham From:Lara DeLaney Sent:Friday, March 29, 2024 1:44 PM To:John Cunningham Subject:FW: Baltimore port closure could speed up West Coast cargo shift Baltimore port closure could speed up West Coast cargo shift BY TANYA SNYDER | 03/29/2024 11:59 AM EDT The Baltimore Port closure could help them make that case — along with the impending Sept. 30 expiration of a labor contract between 36 East Coast and Gulf Coast ports and 70,000 dockworkers. | Ulysses Muñoz/The Baltimore Banner via AP 140 2 With the Port of Baltimore closed for weeks at minimum, shippers and port authorities are starting to adjust to the new normal – and that could accelerate a shift in trade to ports on the West Coast that’s already been happening for some time. In the short term, congestion could increase at ports all across the country, but analysts are paying extra attention to the West Coast, which has already been absorbing traffic that normally would be bound for the Eastern Seaboard amid continuing Houthi attacks in the Red Sea and low water levels in the Panama Canal. “If I was a shipper, I would be very worried about, ‘can I send to the West Coast, which is way safer at this point than the East Coast? Maybe I’d have more control over what's happening?’” said Simona Stan, a professor of marketing at the University of Montana business school who specializes in supply chains and logistics, particularly surrounding disasters. “I can see many companies thinking like that.” Even before the disaster, import volumes had started shifting to the West Coast, according to data published by consulting firm Oliver Wyman the day before the bridge collapse. Fitch Ratings predicted Wednesday that “the bridge collapse could add momentum” to that shift. That could exacerbate congestion at ports on the West Coast. Los Angeles and Long Beach, the two busiest ports in the country, are already notoriously congested, with ships often waiting two to four days to load or unload cargo. But that extra traffic could be a boon for trucking companies and railroads that operate in that area, Stan said. Tensions with China have depressed imports from China by about 3 percent a year for the last five years, though imports to the East Coast from other Asian countries — that are closer to the East Coast — have been growing by 8 percent a year, according to the Oliver Wyman study. But imports from India are a “jump ball” in terms of which coast they go to, said John Janson, vice president of global logistics at the apparel company SanMar. “They can go east or west,” he said. “For cost and service, there's some lanes that we can move to the west, and we will do that.” The Oliver Wyman study found that “in 2023, about 70 percent of imports from India passed through U.S. East Coast ports.” “But who can project right now, with all the things that are going on?” Janson added. In the short term, traffic headed for Baltimore is being rerouted to other East Coast ports, which are trying to strike a balance between publicly expressing support for Baltimore and eagerly vying to take their business. “The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey can take on additional cargo,” said New York Gov. Kathy Hochul and New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy in a rare joint statement on Thursday. “Along with our federal partners, we will continue to work together to support our neighbors in Baltimore and consumers nationwide." Competition among ports is fierce, and traffic can be severely disrupted by things like labor issues and sometimes unpredictable global supply chain paroxysms. Shippers pulled freight away from the West Coast last year in response to labor disputes there that 141 3 threatened work stoppages, and West Coast ports, like the behemoth Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, have been working to get that business back. The Baltimore Port closure could help them make that case — along with the impending Sept. 30 expiration of a labor contract between 36 East Coast and Gulf Coast ports and 70,000 dockworkers. “This is an opportunity for the other ports to step up to the plate and take more capacity and show the great work that they're doing,” said Chris Burroughs, vice president of government affairs at the Transportation Intermediaries Association. Even before the bridge collapse, intermodal logistics officials were fielding more requests from clients looking for more capacity at West Coast ports . Dan Murray, senior vice president for the American Transportation Research Institute, said shippers are facing “a suite of decision factors” in deciding where to import or export, “and the Key Bridge collapse is one consideration.” But so are “missile attacks on the Red Sea” and labor issues on both coasts and, perhaps more than anything, the costs of ground transportation to get the freight where it’s ultimately going when every mile in a truck costs $2.80. “The complexity of the shipper decision-making makes the Key Bridge collapse one of a dozen considerations,” Murray said. He said he’ll be looking at data over the coming weeks and months to see how long term the shifts are as traffic moves from Baltimore to other ports. “That's obviously one of the big fears of everyone, is if they shift to other ports, will they come back when the port is open? It's an unknown.” Ry Rivard contributed to this report. View this article online. You received this POLITICO Pro content because your customized settings include: Labor and Management Relations (and) California. You can customize all of your alert criteria on your settings page. This email alert has been sent for the exclusive use of POLITICO Pro subscriber, lara.delaney@cao.cccounty.us. Forwarding or reproducing the alert without the express, written permission of POLITICO Pro is a violation of copyright law and the POLITICO Pro subscription agreement. Privacy Policy | Terms of Service Copyright © 2024 by POLITICO LLC. To subscribe to Pro, please go to politicopro.com. 142 4 This email was sent to lara.delaney@cao.cccounty.us by: POLITICO, LLC 1000 Wilson Blvd. Arlington, VA 22209 USA Politico Transaction: correlation=77d33e26-3024-4f11-9e29-6dea0d84eecc, doc=0000018e-8adc-d570-adaf-aefefe850001, send=268e5cfe-3be1-4e67-8c10-e4f167b83418, user=0000016a-5a20-dd89-a76a-df7ba5ed0000 143 NEWS, ADVOCACY March 6, 2024 Bicycle use soars following installation of separated bike lanes, according to new study A recent study shows that a separated bike lane installed in Cambridge, Massachusetts has been a resounding success. The study conducted by a volunteer-led team BCU Labs on behalf of the Boston Cyclists Union (BCU) delves into the significant impact of bike lane improvements on local ridership and community mobility. The study, part of an ongoing […] Written by: Ron Johnson A recent study shows that a separated bike lane installed in Cambridge, Massachusetts has been a resounding success. The study conducted by a volunteer-led team BCU Labs on behalf of the Boston Cyclists Union (BCU) delves into the significant impact of bike lane improvements on local ridership and community mobility. The study, part of an ongoing series focusing on bike data analysis, aims to advocate for enhanced cycling infrastructure and promote mobility justice in Boston. The study highlights the transformative effect of even small-scale bike lane enhancements on neighborhood biking habits. Drawing on examples from cities where bike ridership has more than doubled following the installation of improved bike lanes, the research underscores the potential for strategic } Bicycle use soars following installation of separated bike lanes, according to new study ADVERTISEMENT Report Ad Do not sell 144 infrastructure projects to catalyze substantial increases in cycling activity. One such project examined in the study is the recent overhaul of a half-mile section of Garden Street in Cambridge. Under the Cycling Safety Ordinance, which mandates the construction of 25 miles of separated bike lanes by 2026, Cambridge revamped Garden Street by replacing door-zone bike lanes and sharrows with fully separated bike lanes in both directions. Despite initial concerns about parking loss, the city opted to retain most parking spaces while converting the street to one-way tra c for cars. “Separated bicycle lanes increase comfort for people biking by using a buffer zone and physical barrier to separate them from vehicles,” said Brooke McKenna, Cambridge’s assistant director for street management, leading up to the installation. “This separation increases safety, and building a network of these separated lanes will encourage more people to bike by more-comfortably connecting important destinations throughout Cambridge.” The study monitored biking activity before and after the Garden Street project, revealing a remarkable surge in ridership. Within just four months of the project’s completion, bike mode share on residential streets within a half-mile radius increased by 300%, with bike volumes soaring by over 500%. This surge in biking activity extended beyond Garden Street, encompassing surrounding streets as well. Analyses comparing Bluebikes ridership data indicate a significant spike in ridership in the vicinity of Garden Street, further emphasizing the project’s impact on local cycling habits. The findings suggest a pent-up demand for cycling among residents, underscoring the pivotal role of safe infrastructure in encouraging active transportation. The Garden Street project was not without controversy and even resulted in a failed lawsuit by the now-ubiquitous “streets for all” type group, which seems to actually mean streets for cars. This one, of course, dubbed Cambridge Streets for All. In a recent ruling, Middlesex Superior Court Judge Maureen Hogan dismissed the lawsuit, Aster et al. vs. City of Cambridge, which challenged the city ’s efforts to implement a citywide network of protected bike lanes. Filed in fall 2022, the lawsuit argued that the bike lane projects violated the city ’s tra c rules and regulations. The judge sided with the City of Cambridge, stating that bike lanes and related tra c control devices are not considered rules and regulations, granting the city authority to make changes. The lawsuit also sought to halt the installation of new protected bike lanes, but the court rejected this request last year. A recent study shows that projects such as this are often controversial for specific reasons, such as how they are communicated to the surrounding region. Personal testimonials from community members, such as daily bike commuters who previously avoided Garden Street due to safety concerns, further illustrate the tangible benefits of enhanced bike infrastructure. One commenter, on Reddit, said, “I live off of (G)arden. I got a bike because they put in these bike lanes. I know several friends and colleagues who did the same.” The study also examines tra c count data before and after the installation of bike lanes, revealing a substantial increase in bike ridership despite seasonal fluctuations. Adjusted for seasonal variations, the project’s impact on bike ridership nearly quadruples, highlighting the enduring effect of safe infrastructure on cycling behavior. In addition to promoting cycling, the study indicates a reduction in driving, as reflected in the increased bike/car mode-share. The data suggests that strategic investments in cycling infrastructure can incentivize individuals to choose active transportation over driving, contributing to broader city goals of reducing tra c congestion and promoting sustainable mobility. Looking ahead, the BCU encourages community members to identify streets in need of improvement and actively participate in advocating for safer cycling infrastructure. Through data-backed analysis and community engagement, the BCU aims to foster a more bike-friendly environment in Boston and beyond. 145 DISCOURSE TRANSPORTATION Bike lanes are good for business Study after study proves it. So why do so many shops and restaurants still oppose better streets? Pete Ryan for BI Adam Rogers Mar 7, 2024, 3:48 AM PST SaveShare Log in Subscribe Jump to Main content Search Account 146 B usinesses hate bike lanes. Sure, they reduce pollution, slow the pace of climate change, cut tra c fatalities, and make cities healthier and more pleasant. But they also take away parking spaces, which makes it tougher for shoppers to load up their cars with piles of stu . Freaked-out business owners have been ghting bike lanes coast to coast, in cities from San Diego to Cambridge, Massachusetts. They worry — not unreasonably — that anything that makes it harder for customers to get to their stops will eat into their already precarious margins. “As someone whose family had a small business when I was growing up, I know how invested you get in it,” says Joseph Poirier, a senior researcher at the urban-planning consultancy Nelson Nygaard. “It’s your whole life. Anything you think could threaten that, even if the government and their consultants tell you it’s not going to be a problem, is very scary. It makes sense.” It’s also wrong. Four decades’ worth of research proves it. I know this because I’ve read every study and report I could nd that looked speci cally at the economics of bike lanes since 1984 — 32 research articles, to be exact. The results show that making streets friendlier for bikes — and sidewalks friendlier for pedestrians — is actually good for business. The rise of “complete streets” and “road diets,” as urban planners call them, has been a huge boon to businesses in cities. Advertisement Jump to Main content Search Account 147 I won’t walk you through every study, because most of them actually use survey data. Do you think bike lanes discourage shopping? How much do you spend when you ride your bike here? Surveys aren’t the most reliable way to look at this question. People lie, they misremember, they get stu wrong. And anecdotal experience tends to loom too large. One angry customer who complains about not being able to nd parking trumps the 10 who rode their bikes to your shop and didn’t say boo. More confoundingly, survey after survey has shown that business owners overestimate how many of their customers drive to their stores, versus walking or biking. In a study of the e ects of street improvements on a shopping corridor in Los Angeles published in 2012, more than half of the store owners on the bike-laned part of the boulevard thought most of their customers drove. The actual number was 15%. So what we need is nancial data. Revenue numbers. Sales taxes. Credit-card receipts. Employment gures. That’s the good stu . And for methodological rigor, we want to case- match our study areas to similar neighborhoods that didn’t Jump to Main content Search Account 148 I get bike lanes — and to numbers for the city overall, to establish a baseline. That cuts the number of useful studies to just about half a dozen. Here, in brief, is what they tell us. n 2013, a researcher at the University of Washington named Kyle Rowe looked at two shopping districts in S eattle that got put on road diets. Rowe compared sales taxes in these “Neighborhood Business Districts” with those in similar districts in the city that didn’t get bike lanes. In one NBD, which replaced car lanes and three parking spots with two bike lanes, sales closely tracked those in the bike- less areas, both in peaks and troughs. Conclusion: Bike lanes did nothing to reduce business. And in the other NBD, which replaced 1 2 parking spaces with a bike lane, sales quadrupled. Was the spike in business because more cyclists came to shop? Rowe, a careful researcher, declines to make that leap. “It would be logical to assume that more bicyclists were coming to the NBD because of the new facility,” he writes, “but no conclusion can be made to connect mode choice to economic performance.” Still, there’s no mistaking the data: Adding bike lanes certainly didn’t hurt sales — and may have boosted them dramatically. A year later, the New York City Department of Transportation conducted the same kind of study on a larger scale, examining sales-tax data in seven retail-heavy Jump to Main content Search Account 149 neighborhoods. A few were plaza-type hubs; the others were more linear retail corridors. All had been through the kind of extensive changes to pedestrian access, mass transit, tra c calming , landscaping, and bike paths that New York was pushing at the time. The results were striking. Compared with the overall business climate in each borough, sales in the bike-friendly areas soared by 84 percentage points in Brooklyn, 9 percentage points in Manhattan, and 32 percentage points in the Bronx. “Better streets,” the report concludes, “provide bene ts to businesses in all types of neighborhoods,” from “lower- income neighborhoods with ‘mom & pop’ retail” to “glitzier areas with sky-high rents.” The next couple of studies got even more speci c. In 2018, Joseph Poirier, the urban planner I quoted earlier, looked at sales data from three retail neighborhoods in San Francisco with newly installed bike lanes. Drawing on everything from industry coding conventions to map data, he was able to draw detailed distinctions among hundreds of businesses: what they sold (retail versus restaurants), where they were located (right next to a bike lane versus a few blocks away), and who their customers were (co ee shops serving locals, say, versus a furniture store serving the entire city). Advertisement Jump to Main content Search Account 150 The results were mixed. In two of the three districts, shops and restaurants serving locals did way better than places serving a wider area. In the other district, sales tanked relative to the number of people a shop employed, suggesting that bike lanes gave an advantage to smaller businesses. “The takeaway is that it’s probably a minimal e ect on businesses when you put in a bike lane,” Poirer says. “That actually makes a lot of sense. If you think of a busy downtown district, there’s not that many parking spaces relative to the number of people who come to the business.” In this case, bike lanes didn’t seem to help businesses much. But overall, it didn’t hurt them. In 2019 Poirer was on a team that did another study of San Francisco. They looked at businesses directly adjacent to two kinds of bike infrastructure — Class II, which creates dedicated bike lanes denoted by a paint stripe, and Class III, where signs instruct cars and bikes to share the street. (Either way, blocks with the new lanes lost an average of three parking spaces.) Once again, the results were mixed. On Class II lanes, bars and barber shops and banks enjoyed increases in sales, while furniture stores and gas stations Jump to Main content Search Account 151 were more likely to experience decreases. Older businesses tended to decline more than new ones. Overall, in the year after the bike infrastructure went in, businesses on Class II streets lost a median of $27,921 compared with $19,390 for those on Class III lanes. But similar shops that weren’t on a bike lane lost $25,296. When it came to bike lanes, there were lots and lots of winners. But there were some losers, too. The most de nitive study, to my eye, came in 2020. Jenny Liu and Wei Shi, researchers at Portland State University in Oregon produced a 260 -page report looking at neighborhoods that got bike lanes and other street improvements in Portland, San Francisco, Minneapolis, and Memphis. The team cross-referenced nancial information like sales taxes with geographic data, so they could tell exactly where businesses were in relation to the street improvements. They ran three kinds of econometric analyses on each site. And they looked not only at revenue but also at the number of employees — per business and in total — in each study area. “I was really trying to be rigorous methodologically, to provide the kind of evidence that people can use to talk to their communities,” says Liu, the director of the Center for Urban Studies at Portland State. Like Poirier, Liu and Shi found that in many cases, only certain kinds of businesses bene ted from the bike lanes and street improvements. Food and beverage did better; retail did worse. And just slapping a bike lane on a hectic thoroughfare didn’t do anyone any good. “On really large streets with high tra c volumes or speeds, even if you add a bike lane or pedestrian improvements, it still isn’t really Jump to Main content Search Account 152 Bike lanes don't hurt the shops next to them. They usually help bring in customers. Boston Globe inviting ,” Liu says. “Just having street calming doesn’t always have positive results.” But overall, Liu’s team found, retail areas bene ted from better streets. Sometimes nothing changed, but more often the areas near bike lanes wound up with more employees and more revenue. That was true in Portland, at two sites in San Francisco, one site in Minneapolis (at the other, retail did better than food), and one site in Memphis (at the other, food did a bit better than retail). Across the country, again and again, the numbers told the same story: Either “business activity remained pretty much constant,” Liu says, or “certain types of businesses became much more prosperous.” ack in the 1960s, when the advent of suburban ight and climate-controlled malls began to draw business away from Jump to Main content Search Account 153 B You can pack way more bikes than cars into a small space — and that means way more shoppers. UCG/Getty Images America’s once thriving downtowns, cities tried to stanch the ow by banning cars on shopping streets. It was called, not exactly trippingly, “pedestrianization,” and it was a disaster. Pedestrian-only plazas couldn’t compete with the G olden Age of the Automobile, and many downtowns turned into boarded-up wastelands. That extinction event is still encoded in the genetic memories of today’s retailers and restaurateurs. But things have changed. Nowadays, online retail is crushing brick-and-mortar worse than any half-assed pedestrian plaza ever could. What’s more, demand for new homes means lots of cities are putting them downtown, trading daytime workers for all-the-time residents close enough to ride a bike. COVID showed us it’s worth giving up parking spaces for outdoor restaurants. America’s cities are undergoing nothing short of a total rethink of what and whom downtowns are for. Jump to Main content Search Account 154 Nationwide numbers of bike lanes are tough to come by. By one count, there are nearly 20,000 miles of bike-ready paths in the United States, but that includes rural routes and trails. Still, city after city is working to create European-style streets. Portland has over 430 miles of bike lanes, about the same as Chicago; New York City has more than 1,500; Los Angeles has added almost 1,000 miles since 2010. And every new mile of bike lane per square mile of city increases the number of cyclists by 1%. The training wheels are about to come o the “complete street” movement. Now, advocates and policymakers should be honest about all this. Even if bike lanes boost revenues and employment overall, some individual businesses are going to win and some are going to lose. An older business selling heavier goods, or drawing from a wider watershed for its customer base, might well be in trouble. “Newer businesses who are thrilled with density and development around them are pivoting to a customer who’s younger, who’s arriving on a Advertisement Jump to Main content Search Account 155 scooter or a bike,” says Larisa Ortiz, a managing director at the urban-planning consultancy Streetsense. “But this process of evolution toward bike lanes and mobility does not come without loss.” One way I’d propose to help businesses adjust to the total remaking of the urban landscape is the most American solution of all: Just hand them some money. All you’d have to do is build funds into the budgets for street-improvement projects to compensate adjacent businesses for any sales they wind up losing. If your business takes a hit from all the bikes, you get a pay-out. The most e ective way to deal with opposition from local businesses is to just get the bike lanes built. Before-and- after surveys tend to show that in the long run, everyone winds up satis ed. “It’s a political question, and oftentimes it’s a very divided community when it comes to these types of projects,” Poirier says. “But once a street is changed, generally speaking, after six months or a year, nobody remembers what it used to look like. It’s the new normal.” All the data in the world may prove that bike lanes are good for business. But nothing beats experiencing them. Adam Rogers is a senior correspondent at Business Insider. About Discourse Stories Through our Discourse journalism, Business Insider seeks to explore and illuminate the day’s most fascinating issues and ideas. Our Jump to Main content Search Account 156 writers provide thought-provoking perspectives, informed by analysis, reporting, and expertise. Read more Discourse stories here. NEW LOOK Sign up to get the inside scoop on today’s biggest stories in markets, tech, and business — delivered daily. Read preview Sign up By clicking “Sign Up”, you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You can opt-out at any time. Related stories ECONOMY More pedestrians were killed on Los Angeles' Vermont Avenue than in the state of Vermont in 2022 — and it's become an ad for a measure to make streets safer TRANSPORTATION I'm 41 and don't know how to drive. People make fun of me, but I'm better o without a car. TECH Tesla FSD is still a work in progress amid tech challenges, lawsuits More from Transportation TRANSPORTATION ECONOMY Boeing lost its way. Other companies should take heed. Email addressEnter your email Jump to Main content Search Account 157 Bike Lanes Are Good: A Bibliography My sources for the article "Bike lanes are good for business." This is more than just the economics articles; it's everything I think is relevant. If you want one and hit a paywall, send me a note and I'll see what I can do. Arancibia, Daniel, et al. “Measuring the Local Economic Impacts of Replacing On-Street Parking With Bike Lanes: A Toronto (Canada) Case Study.” Journal of the American Planning Association, vol. 85, no. 4, Oct. 2019, pp. 463–81, h ps://doi.org/10.1080/01944363.2019.1638816. Bent, Elizabeth M., and Krute Singa. “Modal Choices and Spending Pa erns of Travelers to Downtown San Francisco, California: Impacts of Congestion Pricing on Retail Trade.” Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, vol. 2115, no. 1, Jan. 2009, pp. 66– 74, h ps://doi.org/10.3141/2115-09. Blackwell, Angela Glover. “The Curb-Cut Effect.” Stanford Social Innovation Review, winter 2017, h ps://ssir.org/articles/entry/the_curb_cut_effect#. Home Books Press Journalism Bio Contact 158 Buehler, Ralph, and John Pucher. “Cycling through the COVID-19 Pandemic to a More Sustainable Transport Future: Evidence from Case Studies of 14 Large Bicycle-Friendly Cities in Europe and North America.” Sustainability, vol. 14, no. 12, June 2022, p. 7293, h ps://doi.org/10.3390/su14127293. Clifton, Kelly, et al. Consumer Behavior and Travel Choices: A Focus on Cyclists and Pedestrians. 2013. h ps://nacto.org/docs/usdg/consumer_behavior_and_travel_choices_clifton.pdf. Cox, Susan Jane Buck. “No Tragedy on the Commons.” Environmental Ethics, vol. 7, spring 1985, pp. 49–62. Credit, Kevin, and Elizabeth Mack. “Place-Making and Performance: The Impact of Walkable Built Environments on Business Performance in Phoenix and Boston.” Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science, vol. 46, no. 2, Feb. 2019, pp. 264–85. h ps://doi.org/10.1177/2399808317710466. Dill, Jennifer, and Theresa Carr. “Bicycle Commuting and Facilities in Major U.S. Cities.” Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, vol. 1828, no. 1, Jan. 2003, pp. 116–23. Zotero, h ps://doi.org/10.3141/1828-14. Drennen, Emily. Economic Effects of Traffic Calming on Urban Small Businesses. 2003. San Francisco State University, h ps://railvolution.org/rv2005_pdfs/rv2005_228c.pdf. Fitch, Dillon, et al. Bicyclist Behavior in San Francisco: A Before-and-After Study of the Impact of Infrastructure Investments. National Center for Sustainable Transportation, Aug. 2016, h ps://escholarship.org/uc/item/3qv2h032. Fonseca-Sarmiento, Camila. Assessing the Economic Effects of Context-Sensitive Main Street Highways in Small Cities. 2022–33, Minnesota Department of Transportation, Sept. 2022, h ps://www.mndot.gov/research/reports/2022/202233.pdf. Hass-Klau, Carmen. “Impact of Pedestrianization and Traffic Calming on Retailing: A Review of the Evidence from Germany and the UK.” Transport Policy, vol. 1, no. 1, Oct. 1993, pp. 21– 31, h ps://doi.org/10.1016/0967-070X(93)90004-7. Jeffe, Eric. “The Complete Business Case for Converting Street Parking Into Bike Lanes.” Bloomberg CityLab, 13 Mar. 2015. h ps://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-03-13/every-study-ever- conducted-on-the-impact-converting-street-parking-into-bike-lanes-has-on-businesses. Kariuki-Cobbe , Julie e, et al. The Environmental, Social, and Economic Benefits of Sustainable Travel to Local High Streets and Town Centres. Climate Exchage, May 2023, h ps://era.ed.ac.uk/handle/1842/40625. Kirschner, Franziska. “Parking and Competition for Space in Urban Neighborhoods: Residents’ Perceptions of Traffic and Parking-Related Conflicts.” Journal of Transport and Land Use, vol. 14, no. 1, June 2021, pp. 603–23, h ps://doi.org/10.5198/jtlu.2021.1870. Knoflacher, H. “A New Way to Organize Parking: The Key to a Successful Sustainable Transport System for the Future.” Environment and Urbanization, vol. 18, no. 2, 2006, pp. 387– 400, h ps://doi.org/10.1177/0956247806069621. Lea, Nancy Smith, et al. Economic Impact Study of Bike Lanes in Toronto’s Bloor Annex and Korea Town Neighbourhoods. Clean Air Partnership, 2019. Lee, Alison, and Alan March. “Recognising the Economic Role of Bikes: Sharing Parking in Lygon Street, Carlton.” Australian Planner, vol. 47, no. 2, June 2010, pp. 85– 93, h ps://doi.org/10.1080/07293681003767785. Home Books Press Journalism Bio Contact 159 Litman, Todd Alexander. “Economic Value of Walkability.” Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, vol. 1828, no. 1, Jan. 2003, pp. 3–11, h ps://doi.org/10.3141/1828-01. Liu, Jenny, and Wei Shi. Understanding Economic and Business Impacts of Street Improvements for Bicycle and Pedestrian Mobility: A Multi-City, Multi-Approach Exploration. NITC-RR-1031/1161, Transportation Research and Education Center, 2020, h ps://doi.org/10.15760/trec.248. McCormick, Cullen. York Boulevard: The Economics of a Road Diet. UCLA, 2012, h ps://nacto.org/docs/usdg/yorkblvd_mccormick.pdf. McCoy, Raleigh, et al. “Bikes or Bust? Analyzing the Impact of Bicycle Infrastructure on Business Performance in San Francisco.” Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, vol. 2673, no. 12, Dec. 2019, pp. 277–89. h ps://doi.org/10.1177/0361198119850465. Millard-Ball, Adam. “The Width and Value of Residential Streets.” Journal of the American Planning Association, vol. 88, no. 1, Jan. 2022, pp. 30–43, h ps://doi.org/10.1080/01944363.2021.1903973. Monsere, Chris, et al. Lessons from the Green Lanes: Evaluating Protected Bike Lanes in the U.S. NITC-RR-583, National Institute for Transportation and Communities, June 2014. O’Connor, David, et al. “Shopping Travel Behaviour in Dublin City Centre.” Proceedings of the ITRN 2011, 2011. Poirier, Joseph A. “Bicycle Lanes and Business Success: A San Francisco Examination.” Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, vol. 2672, no. 7, Dec. 2018, pp. 47–57. h ps://doi.org/10.1177/0361198118792321. Pooley, Colin. “Walking Spaces: Changing Pedestrian Practices in Britain since c. 1850.” The Journal of Transport History, vol. 42, no. 2, June 2021, pp. 227–46. SAGE Journals, h ps://doi.org/10.1177/0022526620940558. Popovich, Natalie, and Susan L. Handy. “Bicyclists as Consumers: Mode Choice and Spending Behavior in Downtown Davis, California.” Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, vol. 2468, no. 1, Jan. 2014, pp. 47–54, h ps://doi.org/10.3141/2468-06. Rijo, Stephen Antonio. Economic and Traffic Impacts Following the Installation of New Bicycle Facilities: A Denver Case Study. 2015. University of Denver, Masters, h ps://digitalcommons.du.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2399&context=etd. Rogers, Adam. “The Design and Science of Patio Dining During a Pandemic.” Wired, 17 June 2020. www.wired.com, h ps://www.wired.com/story/the-design-and-science-of-patio-dining-during-a- pandemic/. ---. “The Pandemic Might Have Redesigned Cities Forever.” Wired, 30 Dec. 2021. www.wired.com, h ps://www.wired.com/story/the-pandemic-might-have-redesigned-cities- forever/. Rossmore, Graham. Dining or Parking? Managing the Curb During COVID-19 and Beyond: An Analysis of the L.A. Al Fresco Program. 2023–49, UCLA Institute of Transportation Studies, 16 June 2023. escholarship.org,h ps://escholarship.org/uc/item/1p53w0bx. Rowe, Kyle. Bikenomics: Measuring the Economic Impact of Bicycle Facilities on Neighborhood Business Distiricts. University of Washington College of Built Environments, 19 July 2013, h ps://bikewalkkc.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Bikenomics_v4.pdf. Home Books Press Journalism Bio Contact 160 Schultheiss, William, et al. “A Historical Perspective on the AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities and the Impact of the Vehicular Cycling Movement.” Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, vol. 2672, no. 13, Dec. 2018, pp. 38– 49, h ps://doi.org/10.1177/0361198118798482. Shill, Gregory H. “Should Law Subsidize Driving?” New York University Law Review, vol. 95, no. 2, May 2020, pp. 498–579, h ps://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage? handle=hein.journals/nylr95&div=13&id=&page=. Shoup, Donald C. “Cruising for Parking.” Transport Policy, vol. 13, no. 6, Nov. 2006, pp. 479– 86, h ps://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2006.05.005. ---. “Cruising for Parking.” Access, no. 30, Nov. 2007, pp. 16– 22, h p://shoup.bol.ucla.edu/CruisingForParkingAccess.pdf. ---. “The High Cost of Free Parking.” Journal of Planning Education and Research, vol. 17, no. 1, Sept. 1997, pp. 3–20, h ps://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X9701700102. Stantec Consulting, et al. Vancouver Separated Bike Lane Business Impact Study. Vancouver Economic Development Commission, 20 July 2011, h ps://council.vancouver.ca/20110728/documents/penv3- BusinessImpactStudyReportDowntownSeparatedBicycleLanes-StantecReport.pdf. Stehlin, John. “Cycles of Investment: Bicycle Infrastructure, Gentrification, and the Restructuring of the San Francisco Bay Area.” Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, vol. 47, no. 1, Jan. 2015, pp. 121–37, h ps://doi.org/10.1068/a130098p. Szabo, Eva, et al. Bike Lanes, On-Street Parking and Business. Cycle Toronto Ward 14 Advocacy Group, Nov. 2016, h ps://bikeleague.org/wp- content/uploads/2023/02/toronto_study_bike_lanes_parking.pdf. Telegraph Avenue Progress Report. Oakland Department of Transportation, Jan. 2017, h ps://oaklandca.s3.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/Design/oak062598.pdf. The Economic Benefits of Sustainable Streets. NYC Department of Transportation, 13 Jan. 2014, h ps://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/dot-economic-benefits-of-sustainable- streets.pdf. Volker, Jamey M. B., and Susan Handy. “Economic Impacts on Local Businesses of Investments in Bicycle and Pedestrian Infrastructure: A Review of the Evidence.” Transport Reviews, vol. 41, no. 4, July 2021, pp. 401–31, h ps://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2021.1912849. Von Schneidemesser, Dirk, and Jody Be ien. “Local Business Perception vs. Mobility Behavior of Shoppers: A Survey from Berlin.” Findings, June 2021, h ps://doi.org/10.32866/001c.24497. Weisbrod, Glen, and Henry O. Pollakowski. “Effects of Downtown Improvement Projects on Retail Activity.” Journal of the American Planning Association, vol. 50, no. 2, June 1984, pp. 148– 61, h ps://doi.org/10.1080/01944368408977171. Wild, Kirsty, et al. “Beyond ‘Bikelash’: Engaging with Community Opposition to Cycle Lanes.” Mobilities, vol. 13, no. 4, July 2018, pp. 505–19. h ps://doi.org/10.1080/17450101.2017.1408950. Yu, Chia-Yuan, et al. “Assessing the Economic Benefits and Resilience of Complete Streets in Orlando, FL: A Natural Experimental Design Approach.” Journal of Transport & Health, vol. 8, Mar. 2018, pp. 169–78. h ps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2017.11.005. © 2 0 2 1 A d a m R o g e r s Home Books Press Journalism Bio Contact 161