I will now call to order the Transportation Policy Workshop of the Regional Transportation Commission. It's 9 a.m. June 16th, 2022. Clerk, could we have a roll call please? Commissioner Bertrand. Entending. Commissioner Sandy Brown. Here. Commissioner Randy Johnson. Here. Commissioner Alternate Hearst. Here. Commissioner Alternate Hernandez. Commissioner Alternate Schifrin. Here. Commissioner Alternate Quinn. Here. Commissioner McPherson. Commissioner Commissioner Alternate Johnson. Jenny Johnson. No, excuse me. Oh, that's you. I see you. Yeah. Thank you, Commissioner McPherson. Right. Commissioner Kristen Brown. Present. Commissioner Parker. And Commissioner Watkins. Here. You have a quorum, Commissioner Koenig. Thank you. Proceed to item two, additions or deletions to consent and regular agendas. Now, we did have some suggestions by commissioners before the meeting that since public comment is currently listed at the end of the meeting that we take public comment as item number three in respect to our 9.30 a.m. hearing as well as those in attendance from ambag for item 27. I'm going to suggest that we take public comment for 30 minutes or up until 9.30 and then proceed with item 26 and 27. And then move back to item three, the consent agenda and the consent agenda and move through the in the regular order there with time for additional public comment at the end of the meeting. Is that acceptable to the commissioners? Quick comment. I think for this meeting, given the way we've advertised, it's the right thing to do. In the future, I hope we could make it clear that there's at least generally oral communication at the beginning at the beginning of the meeting. I'd be fine with it anywhere as long as it's time certain. But at the beginning is the easiest way to do that. But I'm fine with it for this meeting. Thanks for that suggestion. Great. Then we will proceed with public comment until 9.30. If you have what you'd like to make, please use the raise hand feature. And I'll call on you in the order that hands are raised. If our first public speaker will be Mark, City Miller, and clerk, do we have a timer for provide two minutes for each speaker? Can you hear me? We can. Good. My name is greetings, Chair Kone, commissioners and commissioner alternates. My name is Mark, the city Miller co-chair of the no way greenway campaign. I am here today because the people have spoken. Measure D was about three things, replacing the rail and trail plan with a trail only plan, removing the existing railroad tracks using rail banking, and permanently ending all planning for future rail transit. In what can only be described as a landslide defeat, over 70% of Santa Cruz County voters forcefully rejected all of these ideas. Measure D's defeat is a political mandate from our community to reject rail banking and use the rail quarter to provide a truly equitable, reliable, and environmentally sustainable rail and trail facility to connect our community together, our county to adjacent counties, and to all of California. Measure D revealed a deep passion in our community for a future that includes both rail and trail. The people want a transportation system that is greener, more equitable, and more efficient than what we have now. Voters recognize that rail and trail is the best way to deliver on that future. Accordingly today, we the people call on the entire regional transportation commission and staff to pursue rail and trail together. Immediately end all efforts to rail bank the rail corridor, search for state and federal funding opportunities to fund both passenger rail and trail. Prioritize the most equitable, sustainable policy and funding strategies. Permanently end efforts to isolate South County from North County. At the end of the day, the people want a more equitable and more sustainable transportation system that leaves no one behind. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Moussidi Miller. Next up, Mr. Ryan Sarnataro. Okay, so what did the voters say in voting down measure D? Know the traffic on highway one. You know from your studies, the impact of a train on highway one traffic will be minimal. Know the rail banking. You know rail banking is required to protect the county from huge fiscal liability. Know the inequality. You know the sales tax required for a train will hurt low income residents. And a train ride will cost so much more than the bus that ridership will skew the higher income people. Yes to a trail next to rails. You know this option is too expensive to be completed with measure D funds. And the result will be a broken trail forcing users onto streets. Yes to a lower carbon footprint. You know the excavation, vegetation removal and retaining walls required for a trail next to rail has the largest current GHG footprint. Yes to a carbon free, fast and expensive train that solves our transit problems now. You know that's an impossible dream. A train is decades away at a cost beyond what society is likely willing to pay.  You have two choices. An interim trail that leads open the possibility of the train dream or a less useful more expensive environmentally destructive trail next to unused rails. I understand politically some of you are trapped in between the unrealistic expectations of voters fed years of disinformation and physical and fiscal reality. Sometimes responsibility requires courage. And if our better angels can ascend leadership will be rewarded. Do the right thing. Build the best trail as soon as possible in the least expensive and most environmentally friendly manner. You are not precluding a train. You're simply putting it into its proper context. Thank you. Thank you Mr. Sarnitaro. Next time I'm solid in sale. Good morning commissioners and alternates solid in sale living in the Santa Cruz part of our county. We look out today on a different world than we saw at the time of the last RTC meeting. On May 5 no one knew what the voters wanted with regard to the development of the rail corridor. Did they want to change course remove and rail bank the tracks to build a different kind of trail or did they want to preserve the tracks for future use and complete the trail already underway. Today while results are not final we have a clear answer from the voters. A thundering endorsement of trail and rail by a whopping 73 to 27 percent margin as of last night. Today I asked those commissioners who said they wanted to wait and see the results of the election to unequivocally state their readiness to proceed with the will of the people. Working together the RTC can make significant progress in the coming months. Now that the competing vision has been so roundly rejected approve the business plan expedite completion of the rail trail from Davenport to Watsonville stop threatening and start working cooperatively with roaring camp to develop realistic cost estimates for necessary repairs that are not Cadillac level excesses and look seriously at their conceptual proposal for expanded rail service vigorously apply for all potential grant funding and above all really move forward the level of public awareness of the potential for our rail corridor has taken a quantum leap as has the desire for results not further delay. Come commissioners alternates please heed the call don't stand in the doorway don't block up the hall. Thank you. Thank you Mr. Sao. Next up Brian Peoples. Hi this is Brian from Trail Now. You all should have received the letter from me with concerning Mr. Hurst's comments to Bloomberg. His comments were incorrect in the way of rail banking and it shows the misinformation being provided to the public about rail banking and I'm shocked at that a commissioner would go and publicly make false statements and the staff works hard to show the evidence. Now concerning measure D what we feel is the message from the voters is it's not trail only it's transit and trail that's the message it's not rail rail will never happen on that coastal corridor the sea level rising requirements alone will prevent it the coastal commission will never state of california will never allow for a fixed rail system investment that's deep from the ocean from the pacific ocean we want to advocate that we want transit and trail that's really the message from the community. Trail Now has always been a supporter of transit and trail we have never been trail only so we want you to step back first of all ask Mr. Hurst to apologize for mis providing misinformation a commissioner should not be doing that the staff works very hard to provide the public with detailed facts and he personally communicated misinformation to the public and secondly rail bank as soon as possible corridor has been closed for a decade now please open it we need that corridor open thank you. Thank you Mr. Peoples next up is Mr. Jack Nelson. Yes good morning commissioners I'm Jack Nelson I'm a retired land use planner and environmental planner I've served as chair of the local Sierra Club Transportation Committee I've served as co-chair of the campaign for sustainable transportation but I'm speaking for myself this morning I'd like to first endorse the remarks made by Mark Mercedes Miller and sell it and sale about measure D commissioners what I see here is we have the prospect of two north south main transportation corridors in the county one is the greenhouse gas highway and the other offers potentially the lowest per passenger mile or travel mile greenhouse gas emissions in terms of electric rail bicycling and walking those are all low energy demand potentially travel modes whereas the automobile whether electric or internal combustion is the highest energy demand system of transportation so with measure D's results I would suggest you just might have a request from the voters to save our butts on climate and move ahead with the rail corridor business plan and get going stop delaying please serve the future on climate thank you thank you mr. Nelson next up matt ferrell good morning chair conag commissioners and alternates matt ferrell also co-chair of the no way greenway committee first of all I would like to thank all the election workers and volunteers who helped make this election possible and all the work they continue to do in county ballots it's an important task for democracy and there were a lot of people who voted late in the election so they've been working really hard secondly I'd like to thank the vast number of community organizations who supported no on D this reflected the broader community support that was shown at the polls and it was really important I think in making it clear that this isn't just a limited priority for people when fort met with commissioners last year they presented a poll that showed that 74 percent of voters supported rail and trail the results today from the election are you know 72 percent so that poll seems very prescient in terms of saying what people in this county want so please move forward with rail and trail thank you for your time thank you ferrell next up very scott a mute uh thank you thank you commissioners and chair conan you know it this vote is is is really amazing I think it needs to be taken as an outright rejection of greenway period an outright rejection of trail only period um and it's consistent not just with fort's well conducted survey that showed support for rail transit in the 70s uh that's consistent also with rtc surveys done in 2014 and 2015 and surveys done by the transportation agency of monterey county uh a year ago I think all of which showed 70 percent in the neighborhood of 70 support for rail transit I want to point out something that is often forgotten about the tcaa the transporter alternatives analysis in the business plan that was the first chance to look at something lighter and more affordable and when you proceed with looking into lighter more modern affordable systems we're going to find that that rail transit is is more feasible than we ever thought so I'm asking the commissioners to pursue funding for rail repairs pursue funding for rail transit planning and reject rail banking which is just a distraction I'll remind uh the commissioners of director Preston's letter to the ctac of march 8th 2019 the rtc board unanimously affirmed its commitment to leave the railroad infrastructure in place maintain freight rail service and institute high capacity public transit service I'm asking the commissioners to support that and you have the public support in sticking to that commitment thank you thank you mr scott next up is melani clark good morning commissioners and staff um I just have a brief comment this morning on behalf of our in camp railroads we'd like to thank the voters of santa pierce county for overwhelmingly making the correct choice on measure d it's a particular importance to me because this is my family business um that I've been engaged in my all my whole life and measured you threatened its future I sincerely hope that the commission and staff take the outcome to heart and make decisions consistent with what the voters want boring camp has always extended its help to the rtc since its purchase of the corridor and we look forward to continue to do so as we move forward with rail and trail thank you for this opportunity to comment it's very much appreciated thank you miss park next up michael sain thank you chair conig good morning commissioners michael sain with campaign for sustainable transportation I'd like to share with you a article from street blogs la and changes subject a little bit uh the title of this article is metro committee expected to vote to not build lower 710 freeway widening project um I think that's really exciting news uh basically metro and cal trans are now instead of touting the pursuit of an equity and environmentally focused multimodal investment strategy and that's the reason for canceling this widening project a few of their comments are interesting they kind of go along with a lot of the things that we're doing presently metro and cal trans are not doing this out of the kindness of its heart the community caught them trying to get around environmental laws and then when federal and state agencies essentially declared the project illegal and harmful local freeway builders reluctantly acknowledge the necessity of restarting their planning progress cal trans wishes to move forward with selecting the no build alternative uh as the locally preferred alternative alternative we believe this determined determination is responsive to current concerns related to property equity environmental air quality impacts I think we're going through the same process with our widening of our highway at this time uh the RTC does have the option at a 75 vote to adjust funding I think that funding should move away from the highway become more mass transit oriented specifically the rail and trail as well as slight widening of the highway for a dedicated bus on shoulder project thank you for your time thank you mr sain next up Jacob wasaki hi am I coming through yep okay uh so as we move past measure d uh one thing I'd like to bring up is a reminder of why the surface transportation board allowed the RTC to purchase the line in 2012 uh the terms under which the line was purchased is called the state of main precedent and this allows the separation of the physical assets in the right of way the purpose of the state of main precedent serves uh it has has basically twofold um one is that it helps state and local communities preserve freight rail service on lines where profitability is marginal the second is that it promotes the efficient use of existing freight rail corridors for mass rail mass transit without harming common carrier freight rail operations during the purchase process the RTC told the surface transportation board that we were purchasing the line with the intention of preserving freight now obviously freight is not going to generate a lot of money locally um if there were a lot of money being generated by freight we never would have been able to purchase the line in the first place um also I understand the repairs to the line are expensive however this is the responsibility we have uh assumed in exchange for the right to own this corridor and build a trail uh with the defeat of measure d the county general plan contains the objective still 3.7 preserving the corridor for availability to carry freight so while I understand that many commissioners see um maintaining this line for freight as a burden uh I'd like to encourage us to um come through on our responsibility and do what we told the surface transportation board we were going to do which is maintain this for freight thank you thank you mr wasaki next up miss sally arnold thank you measure d was about four things do you want to eliminate passenger rail from the general plan do you want to rail bank do you want to tear up the tracks do you want to trail only the answer to all four of these questions was a resounding no greenway folks can complain about the results but the fact is they set the terms of this election they wrote the initiative just the way they wanted they chose which uh whether to do this in a primary or general election they decided on their messaging to the voters this entire election was on their terms and they kept telling you let the voters decide well the voters have decided the voters of santa cruz county do not want to eliminate passenger planning for passenger rail from our general plan we do not want to rail bank we do not want to tear up the tracks and we do not want greenways trail only the election results about 72 almost 73 percent so far are consistent with the polling that was done about 18 months ago it's consistent with the ratio of communication that you receive every month on this issue now we have an expense had an expensive election that just confirmed what all the evidence was already pointing to the vast majority of this community likes the original plan for the Monterey basin sanctuary trail and future clean light rail despite their years of work trying to delay this project by demanding multiple studies and sowing confusion and discontent about the plan greenway has not been able to convince the community that we don't want what we want which is a rail and trail now is the time for the commission to listen to the vast majority of your constituents and act on the will of the people stop trying to rail bank build the Monterey basin sanctuary trail is planned prepare for future path future passenger rail service you have the chance to lead a really popular project thank you thank you miss arnold next step lani faulkner miss faulkner hi thanks i was just given the opportunity to unmute thank you dear commissioners equity transit joins the community and recognizing a clear voting majority opposed to measure d and the tenants of measure d which include rail banking and ripping out the tracks and the community obviously opposes changing the general plan and settling for trail only the percentage of voters who in midterm elections i'm sorry the percentage of voters who vote in midterm elections is comparatively small a strategy greenway assumed would be in their favor we know the people who took time to vote are those people who are highly committed to understanding what they are voting on and why while canvassing in the community i was very impressed with the hundreds of community members i spoke to the kinds of questions they asked and their determination to really understand what measure d meant for our community i've heard a few proponents of measure d state that voters simply voted no due to their confusion and lack of information but this underestimates the intellect wisdom and commitment our voting members of the community have for their democratic process the community was initially confused by measure d many people kept asking didn't we already vote to support rail in our community years ago let's get it done already why are we voting on this again but in the final weeks before the election it was clear that people were reading up and studying the issues they mentioned various articles and local papers were confusing they they took in all information available including leadership from the wider circles of our government made available through the work on the no one d campaign and participating organizations the landslide opposition to measure d is a clear sign to our county leadership and elected officials that the majority of this community wants both rail and trail as soon as possible and we urge the rtc to honor this directive and commit to seeking and applying for funding prioritizing rail is our next transit project moving away from highway building which is neither environmentally sound or equitable for meeting our transit needs thank you thank you miss falkner and i think we will have just enough time uh to hear from the remaining three members of the public with their hand up before we move uh to our public hearing right around 9 30 next up is miss robin belkin hello thank you for the opportunity to comment i just like to point out how rare it is to get 72 of public support for anything so measure d i think is just a resounding comment on what our community wants and i feel it demonstrates that the community supports moving forward with the rail and the trail and they outrightly reject greenway's trail only plan their rail banking plan and frankly i and others are tired of greenway's interference with the plan that has been in place and that the people clearly want it seems greenway has had a special seat at the table that isn't representative of our community and i don't know why they're there and i think hopefully it's clear to the rtc that they are not representative of what we want so anyhow i hope now that rtc will diligently pursue rail repairs rail transit planning and reject rail banking i finally just want to strongly support sally arnold's comments just now they are right on thank you thank you miss belkin next up mark johansson yes can you hear me we can all right thank you thank you chair gona now that the residents of santa cruz county have given you a strong mandate to proceed with the planning for trail and rail the next step is to proceed without delay to the next phase of the 2021 transit quarter analysis which is to prepare a business plan for the locally preferred alternative electrical passenger rail and to seriously look at cost-effective rail alternatives not only did the voters resoundingly defeat measure d but they expressed a strong desire to implement rail in the near term and not decades from now the commission should now direct staff to line up the studies necessary to seek all funding available for rail and trail and to move projects forward also it's not surprising to read in the election code section 9111 report on measure d that the passage of measure d would have had no effect on housing or the ability of the region to meet its housing needs and that's because rail has not been incorporated into the housing element and other elements of the county's general and specific plan also that analysis said that the measure wouldn't have no effect on the ability to compete for affordable housing funds near rail line the reason is because passenger rail is not currently in operation so all commissioners should arrange for a trip along the layer of the rail line and see for themselves the opportunity for high density housing along the line in many areas where that would make sense for those city and county elected leaders who have a serious interest in addressing this reason's housing needs it would be critical that your district's general and specific plans be developed to integrate rail transportation and housing planning and to create incentives for transit already development along the line we should be seeing how we can make passenger rail a reality and work toward a construction discussions including viable alternatives to rail banking not continuing the path of saying no thank you thank you mr joe hannison our final speaker this morning will be miss judy giddleton hey thank you commissioners for taking my call i'm judy giddleton and i am a wassenville resident and a train fiend and i look forward to you implementing what the voters want which is a safe trail and rail a rail prioritizing please complete the repairs that are on your schedule on your agenda and reject rail banking fiercely and then seek all funding it is available i hear daily about grants that are available and i think that the priority is to obtain all available funds for this project and in my final few seconds i'm just going to read you the poem that i wrote to you um it is dear regional transportation commissioners in response to our election your role is firm action track by track trestle by trestle train by train trail by trail advance us and serve us command us and earn us bring your skills to the forefront your work is important our trains and attraction get funding best action the former governor is listening your directive is riveting make our tracks stable yes yes you are able transport us support us and gear us delighted with all your might must you show up and build us the tracks you're obliged to because the votes demand of you wow and endorse us the train will reward us thank you thank you miss giddleton we'll now proceed to our regularly scheduled public hearing at 9 30 a.m its item 26 i do apologize for any member of the public who still wishes to speak we will have another opportunity at the end of our meeting to present our communications for items not on the agenda so again we'll proceed to item 26 public hearing on measure d of 2016 community bridges lifeline five-year plan and for report on this item we have miss rachel marconi our senior transportation planner with the rtc good morning commissioners and members of the community as noted we're now going to switch back in time to the 2016 measure d which was approved by two-thirds of santa cruz county voters that is a half-cent sales tax which provides critical funding to maintain and expand transit and paratransit services for seniors and people with disabilities maintain and improve our local roads and highways our rail corridor bicycle and pedestrian facilities so before you today is the measure d five-year program of projects for community bridges lifeline showing how it plans to use its formula allocation of four percent of measure d revenues um from fiscal year 2022-23 through fiscal year 26-27 prepare transit services for seniors and people with limited mobility as shown in exhibit a of the resolution the measure d ordinance approved by voters requires each agency receiving measure d revenues to prepare an and annually hold a public hearing on their planned use of measure d funds for the next five years lifeline served as the consolidated transportation services agency for santa cruz county and provides trans paratransit services for folks to get to medical appointments um meal sites groceries um and other locations since lifeline is the only agency receiving a direct allocation of measure d funds that is not a public agency the regional transportation commission um oversees approval of the five-year plan lifelines five-year plan includes additional drivers training and outreach and administration to extend its service to the weekends um and later hours which was not possible before measure d went into effect it also includes funding for its new operations facility in washington bill and funding to leverage grants to purchase new vehicles including electric vehicles as well as the equipment and upgrades to its maintenance and operations facility needed to support those vehicles these projects address several of the priorities that were identified in the unmet transit needs list that was adopted by this board and at your main meeting and the regional transportation commission's elderly and disabled transportation advisory committee reviewed lifelines proposed use of measure d funds at its may 2020 meeting and recommends that the rtc approves a five-year plan as proposed by lifeline staff recommends that you hold a public hearing to give the public an opportunity to provide input on lifelines proposal and then adopt by resolution the measure d five-year plan as shown in attachment one in exhibit a doug underhill and hasos borigas from community bridges lifeline paratransit services are available to answer any questions that you might have on the specific proposals in their plans and with that i'll turn it back to you for any questions you might have a staff or lifeline staff thank you mismora connie are there any questions from members of the of the commission seeing none i'll officially open the public hearing any member of the public wishes to address us on this item please raise your hand let's see uh hand raised by miss margie bidek please proceed good morning i just wanted to comment on measure d is this the appropriate time to do so i'm afraid not this is um for comments on the 2016 measure d and community bridges lifeline five-year plan i would do all another opportunity to comment on the recent election at the end of our meeting which um i wouldn't say that i forgot to lower my hand my apologies all right no worries thank you very much mr brian people hi it's brian from trail now thank you um we absolutely support lifeline you know my mother died of al s a year ago and she was a big user of lifeline it was a game changer for her it was interesting um the difficulty was getting her to initiate that use uh once she got comfortable with it it worked fabulous um it's probably one of the best uh metro programs we have for our community because it's from the point a of where they're at to point b to the doctors there's no fixed rail system that could support that there's no bus system that can support it lifeline works really well for that so um fully supported one other note um measure d 2016 measure d originally came out with 24 funding for the train and we came out as a political action committee opposed to measure d because of that the language in measure d 2016 was changed prior to the election shifting the rail to only eight percent and um and moving those monies to lifeline where it belonged and we're we are seeing the results of that and after the language was shifted trail now became a supporter and our supporters gave the most funding for measure d uh 2016 measure d and 2016 measure d has been a game changer for our community we're able to widen the highway we're able to invest in our roads and we have been able to invest in lifeline so thumbs up on lifeline the only suggestion i would get if is more advertising and more outreach uh to bring more customers to it uh we're a big promoter and thank you for the work rachel thank you thank you mr peoples last call for members of the public wishing to address us on the side of all right seeing none i will close the public hearing and return it to the commission for comments and action let's see i hand from uh commissioner mcpherson yeah thank you uh chair crony i i really think um on measure d of 2016 everybody can say it passed because this was included and this is one significant element of measure d 2016 that allowed it to be approved by county voters uh by more than two-thirds of county voters uh this is a tremendous part of measure d uh 2016 i want to continue to say the year and uh i think it's a tremendous program a great uh presentation by miss marconi and i would move the recommended actions to approve the five-year program of projects uh that were listed second all second motion by supervisor or commissioner mcpherson second by but that was commissioner shifrin all right and then i'll build our next comment from christian rottgen yeah i i want to start i support the motion that's on the floor i i wanted to start by just clarifying to the public after uh brian people's comment there may be some confusion we have two kinds of paratransit service in the in the county one of them is the one that we're looking at now and that's the lifeline project that's run by community bridges that's a service that takes up people not for any kind of ride but for specific kinds of purposes that include medical visits shopping visits and uh there's another one i'm forgetting where it is but but there's specific ones those rides are free um as i understand it and um people who are ill income eligible um and um otherwise need those kinds of rides can work those out with lifeline the metro transit system also runs a paratransit service it's open to members of the public with disabilities and have to be certified that you have uh either elderly or disabilities particularly disability situation that requires you to use that service rather than the fixed route buses those those rides will take you anywhere for any purpose and you can be visiting a friend or whatever else you like and we do charge for those rides we actually charge twice the cost of what it would be to take a fix a ride on a fixed route bus all right so the public should be aware that what we're looking at this morning is part of the paratransit option that's available to people in this county but uh i think brian's comments about metro service kind of conflated i'm not sure which is much which uh service is mother used but but it could be either of those two kinds of services that are out there i just wanted to try and clarify that situation thank you thank you mr robkin mr bertrand thank you guys chair um yeah i just like to comment as an elected official i've heard that these two available services are you know very important for situations of those who actually need them for a variety of reasons and so i think many of us are elected and when we hear from the public that it meets a need we know we spent the money wisely and when i was on the senior council i did work to get this expanded funding and i'm glad it did and i'm glad that they're using their money wisely to go electric and make sure that their facilities can meet the challenge of keeping their services operational so i think um this is a wise spending of money and i think us as elected officials on d and all our other variety of councils um are doing our job thank you very much thank you commissioner bertrand all right we have a motion on the floor uh by commissioner mcpherson and second by commissioner shifrin to approve the resolution and the community bridges lifeline measure d five-year program of projects so any further discussion none a short roll call vote please i just wanted to start off by apologizing to commissioner brandy writer i did not include her on the roll call but she is present uh commissioner bertrand i agree commissioner sandy brown i commissioner uh johnson hi commission alternate hers i commissioner alternate hernandez commission alternate shifrin hi commissioner alternate quinn yes commissioner koneg hi commissioner mcpherson hi commissioner christin brown oh i think we may she may just go here i think we may have lost can you hear me oh there you are yes yes i vote i thank you commissioner parker and commissioner rockin hi that was unanimous great thank you thank you miss marconi and the lifeline team for being available for questions we'll now proceed to item 27 adoption of the findings statement of overriding considerations and mitigation monitoring and reporting program as required by cqa guidelines and adoption of the 2045 cent and cruise county regional transportation plan representation on this item we have transportation planner amy naranjo amy take it away mr onho we cannot hear you at the moment if you are trying to speak there we go sorry my uh my audio was turned off here let's get my video on there we go all right and you can see my screen yes here we can see you yeah excellent well thank you and good morning commissioners and members of the public my name is amy naranjo and i'm a transportation planner for the rtc so the rtc is prepared the final 2045 santa cruz county regional transportation plan this plan describes the existing transportation system network forecast the amount of existing transportation uh excuse me forecast the amount of funding anticipated for transportation projects and identifies transportation programs and projects to advance the region's goals over the next 22 years projects identified in the 2045 rtp include maintenance of maintenance of and improvements to local roadways highways bicycle and pedestrian facilities transit service specialized transportation for seniors and people with disabilities and transportation demand management programs throughout the development of the rtp staff has solicited the input of the rtc at rtc advisory committees partner agencies project sponsors and members of the public at key milestones during the review and approval of the policy element the financial element and the action element which defined the financially constrained project list uh at the march rtc meeting at the march third meeting the rtc accepted the final draft of the 2045 rtp and today's staff rec staff is recommending adoption of the final 2045 rtp as well as the eir findings so the association of monterey bay area governments or ambag develops the long range transportation plan referred to as the as the metropolitan transportation plan or mtp for the monterey bay area tri county region including santa cruz monterey and san veneto counties ambag combines the sustainable community strategy or the scs along with the mtp so as required by the california environmental quality act or sequa both the mtp scs and the santa cruz county rtp require environmental review ambag is the lead agency for preparation of the eir and the three regional transportation planning agencies including the rtc serve as the responsible agencies under sequa uh ambag certified the final eir for the 2045 mtp scs yesterday at their june 15th ambag board of directors meeting the final eir includes additional language that addresses public comments received and includes all the responses to the comments that were received as well the details regarding the potential environmental impacts of the 2045 rtp are available in the findings and statement of overriding conditions which are included in your packet as attachment to exhibit it this document provides specific reasons why the benefit of a proposed project outweighs the adverse effects including the discussion of social economic and environmental benefits of the project and why alternatives although feasible from a technical standpoint are rejected so today's staff is recommending that the rtc consider the following one consider the the final environmental impact report for the 2045 rtc rtp to adopt the resolution that adopts the findings statement of overriding considerations and the mitigation monitoring and reporting program related to the eir that was certified by ambag as a lead agency under sequa for the 2045 rtp and then finally approve a resolution adopting the final 2045 rtp um and so that concludes my staff report i'm happy to take your questions heather adamson ambag planning director is also on the call and as well as george sticks from ringcon consulting and they can answer any questions that are related specifically to the eir thanks for your time thank you mr ronho there are questions from members of the commission i see uh recognized commissioner rockin i just wanted to ask when to the next time we would be updating this plan we'll likely start work on the next rtp um probably in the coming months after we're we're done with this rtp so we so we so we advance this every year by one year effectively is that how that works we as opposed to every five years or how often does it actually get reconsidered as a plan and then have a new new eir done on it yeah the uh the rtp is done every four years um and it's and it's typically a multi-year process and the development of this uh so the the work for this rtp started in 2019 and we're finishing today june 16 2022 so it takes a considerable amount of time um and in the process for the next rtp will likely be a major major update and so that work will likely start happening i'm assuming in the next couple of months okay well then the comment i have uh commissioner konig is that um there are some issues raised about the fact that the this plan doesn't really incorporate any kind of rail stuff into it by a couple members of the public i got emails emails about that um i'm fine approving this plan today i think the next time we get to look at the overall pictures certainly happened before we're anywhere near rail service and it was pointed out that the reason that the ambag doesn't include uh the rail issues is because at this point there's no integration in the county plan of the uh the impacts of if we do build a rail project what that and that might be before 45 it won't be next year it won't be the next four years but it might be before 45 and the question would be um that we don't include the say housing opportunities that are opened up by use of a possible rail line and other kinds of things like that since it's not in the county plan or city plans um in the in the housing elements and so forth the ambag doesn't incorporate those into the question of what kind of transportation systems necessary to serve those uses so i don't think it'd be almost premature in fact it would be premature at this point to try and speculate about what that might look like when we're so far away from actually getting a real rail program even if we're successful with that um i'm fine with approving the plan that's in front of us now but we should be clear in response to these comments from the public and we'll probably get some work now i hope not a whole lot because i don't think there's much we can do about it in the short term but i i think that uh we need to address those in the next time we look at a major uh revision of this plan probably because it sounds like probably in about four years thank you very much thank you commissioner rockton except your director Preston did you want to respond to that yeah i did want to make a comment regarding um why rail transit was not on the you know the constrained list um and included in the ir analysis um we had considerable discussion with ambag about trying to get it on to the constrained list um uh to to do so we would have to model uh local funding um for that in order to open up the doors to the state and federal funding so we would have to model about um you know the equivalent of a half-cent sales tax um in order to to be able to do so um we could have done that in the last um this rtp cycle but if we did not make progress in passing a sales tax in that period of time we would then have to remove it for the next cycle which would be this coming cycle that you're talking about so if that's something that the commission would like to see done um um it'll be good to to get that direction so that um we can include it in the next cycle thank you director Preston is heather adamson did you want to respond to that as well yes i just had a couple comments on the on the lane use related comments um like Amy said uh ambag also will be getting our process to update um uh a bigger update for the next cycle which will be you know scheduled for adoption in 2026 the first step is to look at our land use um assumptions and modeling and that will begin next year in 2023 um that will coincide with all the jurisdictions updating their housing elements which are due in december 2023 so we will have that new uh land use information related to new housing and where it will be cited and that information will go into our our next mtp and of course uh be included in a future eir um as for the rail it isn't as as um executive director Preston mentioned it is included on our unconstrained list uh if something were and for reasons that he mentioned we had we had a lot of discussion about this if something were to change in the next couple years prior to us really seeing the draft next update of the transportation plan in 2025 we have done a mid-cycle amendment in the past and and recirculated a supplemental eir for other projects and other in the other counties and so that's not unheard of um if something were to you know move really quickly and uh on the rail project and we needed that before of course that could be evaluated and done mid-cycle um but nothing prohibits you from working on on the rail planning um in any direction just because it's not identified as a constrained project it is in the plan um we would just need to do additional work to move it from uh unconstrained to a constrained and that would include additional environmental analysis um or it can just be done as part of our regular update cycle that we'll start next year thank you great thank you Ms. Adamson Mr. McPherson yeah just very briefly I think transit oriented housing is exactly where this conversation should go in the future that's all I need to say thanks thanks Bruce enough said all right thank you Commissioner McPherson any further questions or comments from members of the commission seeing none I'll open it for public comment Mr. Brian Peoples hi this is uh Brian from Triangle thank you Amy great report you know it's interesting um the mitigation plans that you call out a lot of them are our reason we uh we're having the mitigation requirements is because we're trying to accommodate a train that will never show up you know segment seven we're destroying heritage trees you're excavating into the hillside um the north coast farm land is being going to be destroyed because you're going to have a trail next to the old tracks I would ask Mr. Rotkin to say you know why are we doing that why are we destroying farmland when we have a perfect corridor for an old railroad tracks um look at Harkins Slip um the wetlands are going to be destroyed when you try to have a 60 trains a day and a trail going through there it's not realistic so when you have an EIR and you have mitigation plans you need to follow through with them you're trying you're actually imposing more detriment to the community because of the idea that you're going to have a train in the future and in reality you won't you know the idea that we're going to have a this huge fixed rail system it feels like you're trying to make us like San Jose or or San Francisco our community doesn't want to grow and become a huge major overbearing with population the idea of having the 60 trains a day flying through Manfrisa beach flying through La Selva 20 feet from the Pacific Ocean it's going to be real difficult to get any type of funding for that you're not going to get the support for 60 trains a day speeding through our community so let's have a plan for transit and trail let's have transit on the corridor so that our community can begin using that corridor in a realistic manner thank you for your time thank you Mr. Siebel Rick Braxell sorry about that thank you chair canik and other commissioners we just want to i want to speak for fort our friends a rail trail to reiterate some of the points that we made in a letter we sent in that really support what Mike rockin has said this morning that we really feel that this needs this plan needs to be updated now since measure D has made it clear what the Santa Cruz residents mandate for rail and trail along the rail line and there are a number of places where this these eri findings find significant and unavoidable impacts on greenhouse gas reduction and unavoidable delays in daily vmt's so we would like to recommend that the commission look at the most environmentally secure alternative alternative three infill and transit and this should be looked at further as um really being the best environmentally friendly uh approach which was also mentioned by one of the commissioners so um thank you for considering that thank you miss braxel next up mr jack nelson uh thank you this is jack nelson and i'd first just like to call your commissioners attention to your correspondence on this item in your item handout including from fort and also from rick longinati of campaign for sustainable transportation that one pointing out that with this er vehicle miles traveled per capita will increase so that alone should be a red flag to your commission that is something is wrong with this rtp this rtp if i may use my brief moments to speak truth to power this rtp is a local suicide pact on climate this will not address our climate need in the future and future generations will look back and unless you change course will condemn your actions on this plan so i think some of you are probably considering this just a procedural formality today to adopt this plan but i'm here to tell you commissioners this is wrong this is a crime against humanity to grow the greenhouse gases emitted from our transportation system in santa criss county it's wrong it's wrong it's wrong thank you thank you mr nelson next up robin belkin hi i'm just uh weighing in on the last comment i agree the bureaucratic foot dragging in this community when we've had this resounding 72 percent overwhelming support for rail and trail has got to be addressed more quickly we do need to update the plan now and it is urgent i just find this so frustrating i hear comments from staff that if something changes you can always work on the rail and um yes something has changed you have overwhelming community support for this and you can't put it off till 2025 or whenever you're planning on doing that it needs to start immediately we have a huge community will right now let's do what it takes thank you thank you miss belkin next up ryan sarnataro you heard it from uh guy preston that a train is going to require a sales tax increase you know that you can't get a sales tax increase through the county when only six thousand people a day are going to use that train and you have a quarter million people in the county so this whole idea that you're going to bend your eir to accommodate something that is politically impossible not to mention the ecological and other impacts of it that uh that make a train uh a poor option for our not even a realistic option so i i just want to point that out and make sure that the commissioners understand that their place in this is to speak truth to ignorance and that ignorance is being expressed in the community and when i say ignorance i don't mean stupidity i mean they just don't really understand what the choices are here they want the beautiful train that flies in the air but it's not possible and as soon as we can actually ground to the fact that we do have in that corridor an option to provide at least some level of transportation and possibly a way to orient it so that future transportation options as they emerge from our ever-advancing technology will be able to be deployed flexibly that's where you need to go thank you thank you mr sarnadaro next up mr barry scott uh thank you uh chair conan and i want to thank uh commissioner rockin for his comments about infill and uh the uh you know a transit focus with with housing infill and um the i i i think the the half-scent sales tax assumption is premature what we haven't done is pursue a business plan that looks at lighter vehicles a streetcar option which is included in our list of options that might be significantly less expensive than the earlier studies that looked at at heavier vehicles more expensive vehicles that required two staff members to operate for example and so i think we need to be really careful about closing for closing on opportunities here and i wish we could include some funding as constrained for development of rail transit planning consistent with all of the studies all of the studies that we've done and and public sentiment toward transit on this corridor and there's no question but that rail transit is the right transit alternative for the corridor it's just it's a question of what size should that be and what kinds of funding opportunities exist and i think an earlier rejection of a public private partnership is is similarly premature many excellent transit public transit programs and transportation investments generally are nationally are our public private partnerships of some sort so i hope uh we can um preload our regional transportation plans with anticipation of some kind of rail transit on that corridor because we don't have time to to defund it or second guess it let's let's move forward thank you thank you mr scott next up lony faulkner i thank you commissioners uh equity transit agrees with mike rockins proposal to please revisit this plan prioritizing rail transit we're concerned that the 2045 rtp does not reflect public views of our transportation future nor does the 2045 rtp reflect our decades plus efforts and funding which led us to the approval of the tcaa study indicating that clean passenger rail is our next transit priority which meets equity and environmental requirements not met through further highway widening proposed in the 2045 rtp similar to our progress with rail future highway funding is not currently funded funding for highway widening would need to be acquired through grants bonds and other sources not yet identified there are proven creative financing options to bring rail to our community that do not necessitate requiring a sales tax increase and have been done in cities like portland public private partnerships as barry scott just mentioned um were also mentioned at the global glas gals summit as an excellent way to move forward with uh creative financing for such products projects the resounding defeat of the 2022 measure d greenway initiative indicates a clear mandate to continue to integrate and emphasize rail and trail planning and projects along the santa cruz coast rail line the statement of overriding considerations is deeply concerning as the list of 44 serious and drastic unmitigated environmental impacts including the plan's inability to meet long-term state greenhouse gas reduction targets and significant and unavoidable increases in daily vehicle miles traveled per capita should sound a very loud alarm for the rtc and for our community eir alternative three infill and transit was determined to be the environmentally superior alternative that was redirected primarily because ambag does not have the land use authority and cannot require local agencies to make major changes to the general plan we need to do everything we can do quickly to mitigate climate change by priorities prioritizing partner thank you next up michael sain uh thank you chair coning uh i wasn't going to speak on this subject but i i really do want to second the opinions of jack nelson and also the last speaker that spoke um i look at these metropolitan transportation plans original transportation plans and if you take them in a general sense basically all they tend to do is try to mitigate and make excuses for widening highways and increasing greenhouse gas emissions and vehicle miles traveled i went back to the 2005 metropolitan transportation plan which was supposed to be through 2035 and we had approximately 80 percent was our mode transportation for cars the rest was biking walking metro etc well presently it's the same i mean nothing has happened since 2005 and it's just another bunch of lots of hundreds of hundreds of pages of excuses for not doing the right thing um very disappointing uh i would not pass this i know it's going to get a little bit more bigger issue in the next three to 40 years but like the lot one of the speaker said we don't have time to wait uh we need to get something going on both corridors uh whatever it is uh transfer money look for funding get both corridors going the rail trail was something small like mr scott was saying and then also go to the uh dedicated bus on shoulder system on the highway thank you very much thank you mr sing next up ben vernasah okay good morning everybody um i just want to make a few comments about what's going on in the bay area the bay area has now a group of all the people in or the transportation commissions in that area to build and complete a 2600 mile trail around the bay area how about that and they're going to go and get some of that trail money that the state set aside now that's all that's a lot of miles that's between here and maybe to chicago the other thing that's really happened that's important is the bay bridge is adding a bicycle lane they estimate listen to this they estimate that the traffic that will be eliminated the car traffic and so forth eliminated will be equivalent to one lane now that's quite important so i just want you to all keep this in mind that there's trail money out there now by the state and we need a trail especially uh in mid county we need a trail and also from watsonville to the beaches we need a trail now what you've done on the north side is build trails that are monsters they're unsafe and so forth anyway i wanted to bring you up to date on that because it's very important what they're doing in the bay area that we're not doing so let's go get them thank you thank you mr ronassa all right so you know further members of the public with their hands raised i'll return it to the commission for action commissioner rottkin i'll move approval of the staff recommended resolution and i do have comments but i'll wait for a second is there a second second the person second right great we have a motion by commissioner rottkin and a second by commissioner mcpherson to adopt the staff recommendation and uh yep commissioner rottkin please so i wanted to start by um actually thanking and even praising bud colligan one of the leaders of greenway for his early concession comments um as a result of the way way fewer than half of the votes were in recognizing that there was a clear statement being made by the public unfortunately not all and that's to say the leadership of greenway um as far as i understand it um but a lot of greenway supporters have not got the message yet and we've been hearing from some of them this morning um you know which people want to suggest though you know the vote meant this people didn't know what they were doing blah blah blah right i'm afraid that's not an adequate response and i thought mr colligan's response was much more um admirable um and in terms of uh you know that there's something people have said something and we do have an answer and it's not a complete answer but a much better answer than we did before about what people want us to do i'm but i want to say that when people are saying we you know the comments this morning that we're not taking action fast enough climate change is a problem i certainly share the view that we need to move as quickly as we can but there's no way this agency the art regional transportation commission can sort of adopt a strategy for how we're going to use rail to address all kinds of issues short of knowing what the use of the land uses are going to be along the final line the way that it happens that takes a little bit of time for that to develop we can't impose that on the county or the cities in our in our county and so i that was that was why i made the comment earlier that it makes sense to wait you know to our next revision of this when we some of those agencies might begin when they think about the rail potential begin to actually move on their housing projects i want to point out and this is a response to the person i think was ryan saratana who you know points out that the study that we did the tcaa shows only 6 000 riders on the train and so forth that's a result of the fact that in when ronald reagan was president before ronald reagan was president when you did a proposal for transportation planning of some kind you were able to project the use of that project in terms of what it would look like after it was constructed how many people would use it at that point but the reagan administration did was change the federal rules so that you can only they won't give you any federal money if the planning you do is based on projections of the ridership you would have when you complete the project has to be based on who would take it today right now if they just were plop down on them or something in terms of who's who's where's the existing housing uses and other public uses and that's how you get this number of only 6 000 people are going to use it and therefore it doesn't make any difference and it doesn't affect anything but clearly we need to begin you know at least thinking about this at the local level in terms of what the ultimate potential is for housing development and other kinds of public uses and so forth along this line when when it actually transportation line when it actually gets constructed and so that's why i think it's i made the motion to approve this today but i'm arguing that you know we don't we don't we're not going to be able to like incorporate the impacts of rail like you know snapping our fingers and telling our staff you know just do it make it happen it requires a lot of other agencies to take some actions for us to be able to do that in a legal and constructive way so that i wanted to explain my my motion this morning thank you thank you commissioner rockin commissioner herst thank you very much chair i i too think we should move forward and we should move forward in the most positive way we can and i'm glad we're looking at what other agencies are doing because transportation just doesn't stop at the city limits or the county line you know it's we should have that all encompassing view and and whatever we can do and so i'm glad to hear that there's an emphasis on partnerships and future planning you know what we do today and what we did yesterday does affect the future and and it's time that we get moving and prepare for a brave new world that you know we don't know how it's going to shape in many respects but looking at what other agencies and partnering up with other agencies and trying to really meet the needs of the people that's what we should be all about and so thanks for helping us get moving thank you commissioner herst commissioner shifrin yes thank you i'm going to support the motion one reason is that if we don't have an approved rt regional transportation plan all the funding for all our projects are threatened um secondly it i don't i never think of the rtp is being substantively all that important because as the representative for ambag said it can be changed at any time it meets federal and state requirements but ultimately if the commission wants to move forward on a project that isn't in the plan it can do so it just needs to amend the plan and we've done that in the past i do think um you know listening to some of the public comments any hope that hyperbole will be notched down after the election is gone um you know i i i could take issue with a number of speakers who have from my perspective overdramatized the reality but i need since i've worked on and the segment five trail segment is in the third district of the county the comments that that segment is going to destroy agricultural land on the north coast needs to be responded to it's taking hyperbole to the to the max the impact on agricultural land is extremely minor and it will not affect the viability of the land that is used for farming on the north coast so i do think though that the commission's going to have to do things a little differently as a result of of the of the election from my perspective substantively the election really wasn't about anything politically it was about sending a message and the message was does the commission want uh does the public want to remove the tracks from the rail line to build the trail or not and i think we've heard very clearly that the public does not want to remove the tracks well i think the commission needs to listen to that it's consistent with what the commission has done over the decades it's consistent with the commission's decision on the tcaa it's it's on the unified corridor study those um all supported using the corridor for public transit and i think the voters have given a resounding support for that direction there are a couple of consequences that are not really on on our agenda today but i think we're going to need to talk about them and i think that has to do with mid county segments and whether it really makes sense to consider an interim what's being called an interim trail as feasible um given this vote is the commission really going to seriously consider an adverse abandonment on the line um and after this vote if it's not and i think there's a very strong case that the interim um trail option is not feasible and should be dropped from the eir as an infeasible option i think at least we should consider that i also have been concerned about the misuse of the term from my perspective ultimate trail it's not the ultimate trail it's the preferred option in our rail trail plan that was adopted unanimously by this commission and um was approved by the various um by the various um locale at the various cities so from my perspective we need to continue to do what we have been doing and moving forward with the trail and i think the the public as i see the vote the public strongly supports having that trail move forward um at the same time i think we need to be more uh vigorous in our support for the potential of rail and i think that's not before us today but certain community members had said well maybe we really need to do the um the uh the business plan i don't know whether that would be helpful or not but i think the the results of measure d does justify a discussion on what more the commission can be doing to try to move funding for um a public transit rail alternative forward so um i hope i i would urge that that come back on our agenda sometime in the not too distant future so we can really have a chance to to talk about and focus on whether the commission is going to be willing to do anything different than it's done before and if so what because i think we've received a very loud message and i hope the commission is going to be willing to hear it thank you thank you commissioners commissioner hernan as yeah you know i just you know i agree with uh a lot of the comments um you know i want to see too if uh we can look at the business plan with light rail if indeed we didn't look at that option and you know give it back on track and you know look forward with this plan rtb as well um later on maybe see if we can add an addendum or revise a future plan but yeah i agree with uh move forward with this plan thank you thank you mr vertran well thank you very much co-chair conning um um i'm actually not too sure which way or the community has told us to go but i'm sure one thing is that this community is divided on how to implement a vision that we um substantiated long time ago when we bought the quarter and i know my concept of the vision has changed um i remember Dennis Norton was our representative on the city council captola and he asked me to make a statement and i did i made a statement before the board of supervisors and supported this at that time i had a different vision which i won't go over in terms of what i said but i've been cognizant of the fact that the more i learned about what is being anticipated in terms of making the vision a reality has tempered how i've approached things so visions can be approached from a variety of perspectives some people approach it from you know they've had a lot of experience in this world of trying to accomplish things my background tends to think of things in terms of hard casting of elemental things that make things possible that's funding that's infrastructure that's a whole variety of issues whether they're environmental equity issues um the reality being able to get the public to support it or people have a vision especially when i was younger it's very aspirational you know you are motivated by things that need to be corrected you're motivated by things that need to be addressed because the world is not right because we're not doing our part in addressing those things and these things are very real considerations what i just mentioned are very real considerations for the younger community and those to see a future perhaps for themselves and perhaps for their kids visions need to be a compromise visions need to be approached from both angles so that the reality for our community and for the people that we represent can be realized the other aspect that i think about a lot right now in our world is in transition it's an inflection point um we're we're sort of at the top we're approaching the top of the hill we don't know what the possibilities of the future are going to entail but what they're going to offer us and you know i think people mike has even mentioned i mentioned this before we don't know what technology is going to give us to solve our problems and i will support this what's on the agenda right now we're going to vote on pretty soon i don't think we're ready to take into account all the things that we will be able to bring to bear to solve our current problems but we are in development of those things and the next plan i think will hopefully bring some of those things in one thing i would like to ask our council our commission to do is to be more involved with them back i think that if we're going to have our our part in making these changes this is my last point we should be more involved over the next four years i i appreciate heather i appreciate her her staff you know it it is an effort that it's extreme and it's very hard to put together and it's been mentioned that this is something that's required of us but i think maybe it's also required of us as a local agency involved in transportation to be more involved in this yes we're focused on transportation we have that part we're not in housing we're not in other things that are addressed in the plan but i think in terms of i just put forward to the commission that in terms of our responsibility maybe we should be more responsible by being involved ahead of time and so those are my three comments and i am supported in motion thank you thank you commissioner pertran commissioner brown thank you chair konig i um i just wanted to make a quick comment here i had some comments that i was planning to make um but i i think i'm gonna just leave leave those aside we don't need to hear another uh round of speech on what the um the way forward i think that you know the results of measure d speak for themselves in my mind um and i i just want to say that i do support uh moving forward along the lines that i've heard several commissioners uh raised today commissioner rockin and commissioner shifrin i think followed up on that um i do think that we have a responsibility to be responsive to the public and um to to move forward in a way that um takes those you know that clear message into account um and i do think that uh the the um action we're taking today while i um and i do not support highway widening and you know i've i've hung in there i've i've supported moving forward with the overall planning process through uh the regional transportation plan i'll i'll do so again today um but i i also believe that you know when we're looking at the the whole picture um as i think the rtp ought to reflect and it doesn't currently and and i think i hope it will in the future um i recognize the urgency as jack nelson and others have said um but i want us to think about the um the the difference in the conversation about the highway versus the rail corridor and we always seem to be you know it just strikes me that we always seem to be in um talking in austerity mode when it comes to the rail corridor and i think we all and myself included have sort of internalized that and kind of accepted we never speak that way when it comes to the highway which is a extremely expensive uh project which i believe is not in our interest uh due to climate realities and for for many many reasons induced demand being the big one a big one um but i think we ought to start thinking about like getting out of that mindset of austerity mode when it comes to thinking about our uh our rail corridor and so i i just wanted to say that today um i hope others are ready to have that conversation and i look forward to having that conversation in the coming months so i'll i'll leave it there and uh thanks everyone for um all of your work to keep us moving forward thank you commissioner brown commissioner quinn oh thank you uh first of all i'll be supporting it also and i'm greatly reassured by uh director preston's comments about the flexibility it allows us to uh moving forward second thing i'll say is in probably response to the many many emails i've received about measure g i think obviously we need to be aware of it and recognize and acknowledge it i also want to thank mr preston and the team for their continued diligence and taking you know our beliefs and our aspirations and matching them with the reality uh the scientific facts the engineering facts and the barriers ahead and i think that would be an increasingly important role for the rtc going forward is matching you know what we're hearing are the are the beliefs and the wishes of the public with with the realities that are out there the fiscal constraints the the pros and cons of everything and i look forward to weighing the pros and cons very deliberately in a data driven way going forward thank you commissioner quinn any other comments by members of the commission uh commissioner johnson thank you chair um i would just like to uh compliment uh mike rodkin uh first comments maybe a couple months ago when uh lots and lots of people went side wanted to go sideways on the commitment of what measure d stood for and where the pots of money were going to go and when people said we don't want widening of the highway we don't want any money going into asphalt he reminded them that that was part of the bargain so anybody who wants to kind of renege on the tenants of measure d uh do so at your own risk because that's was what the people voted for so thank you thank you commissioner johnson any further uh comments i'll just add a couple comments first off uh i thoroughly agree with commissioner mcpherson that the three words most important are transit oriented development and i want to remind everyone that the county is in the process of a sustainability update which really lays the groundwork for that particularly in the urban area of the unincorporated county and it will help us in our in the coming year to update our housing element with the you know over 4 000 units being asked of us through the rena process by the state i'm completely committed to ensuring we get the most out of our urban infill projects and transit oriented development and that's why i've worked with commissioner mcpherson to bring forward additional recommendations to improve our transportation demand management programs and encourage that kind of development within the county since we are many others have spoken about measure d i'll make a few comments now about that as well it's clear measure d lost by a large margin and that voters do not want to change the county general plan i think it's important to recognize that the rejection of greenway's proposed solution does not mean that our problems are solved this no vote doesn't make the corridor wider doesn't fix any of our trestles and it does not deliver money needed to build an operated train my goal has always been to help our community solve problems not to create them so if this commission wants to explore solutions using the relatively small amount of tax money set aside for maintaining the corridor let's do it i am happy to consider a passenger rail eir or bonding to complete as much maintenance on the rail corridor as possible or finding ways to conduct a passenger rail test when it comes to applying for state money we have submitted grant applications for roughly a hundred million dollars to build the next segments of the trail and keep the tracks we'll see how we do we'll see if we can afford it with the extreme negativity that has surrounded this issue i don't think that we are in a position to get to yes on any solution at the moment i believe a new tax measure to fund a train wouldn't fail just as badly in this past election and the way the city's sales tax is trending would suggest as much my hope is that with this measured done we can leave the negative activity behind us and that we can take a more collaborative approach as we encounter problems that we can help each other over them rather than blame each other for them and that we can take a scientific view and look for ways to prove ourselves wrong rather than selectively seeing the things that prove us right that's the attitude that i'm going to bring to the table and i hope my colleagues will too that we have a yes commissioner shifrin there's something else want to add yeah i just wanted to follow up on your comments because i really appreciate them i think it's really important that we move forward in a in a collaborative way here i mean there was a very strong message from the public but in the end i think people really share very similar goals in terms of wanting a trail that really serves the public and i think people want transit that really serves the public it's true we don't know how to get there from here and it's going to be difficult but i think if we work together and try to look for solutions that extend the trail try to move forward with identifying funding for the unpotential feasibility of public transit on the corridor i am really hoping that we will get past the negativity and we'll be able to work collaboratively on solutions that are in line with what the commission's been trying to do over the last decade so thank you for your comments thank you any further discussion seeing none we have a motion by commissioner rock in a second by commissioner macpherson at court roll call vote please commissioner burtrane i agree commissioner sandy brown i commissioner johnson i commission alternate herst i commission alternate hernandez yeah commission alternate shifrin hi commission alternate quinn yes commissioner konig hi commissioner macpherson commissioner christin brown i think she might have left us commissioner parker yes and commissioner rockin hi that passes unanimously with commissioner christian brown not voting sorry about that thank you then the commission has adopted 2045 Santa Cruz can regional transportation plan now we'll now proceed back to the top of our agenda to items three that's the consent agenda so that's items three through 22 are there any questions or comments from commissioners on the consent agenda i move the consent agenda i'll wait for the public public all right sorry all right we ask my drawer well is there any member of the public which is to comment on items on the consent agenda michael saint yes thank you uh chair konig just to make a few comments consent agenda item six under projects and planning um i would like to thank the rtc director preston and staff for their persistence and work in continuing the original goal of building the monoray bay scenic sanctuary trail next to the tracks the nbs st has always been the best plan and should continue to be the plan going forward we look forward to the start of construction of the segment seven be later this summer uh continuing in the same thoughts we wholeheartedly support the rtc once again and director preston on item number 21 a b and c these letters sent to the caltrans grant application committee are vital and continuing construction of segment eight and nine safe routes to downtown watsonville and segments 10 and 11 of the monoray bay sanctuary uh scenic sanctuary trail in my humble opinion this will deliver us a trail sooner than other alternatives and save taxpayers millions of dollars by focusing on one trail project and that's the monoray bay scenic sanctuary trail network next to the tracks thank all of you for your hard work and staying focused on this plan thank you thank you mr saint brian peoples hi it's brian from trail now i'll comment on item six um so this is a good example of where we're spending a lot of our resources to accommodate a train that really isn't going to make a big ever come and what that does is it pulls away valuable resources from other needed areas like metro like building the trail we've only built 1.2 miles of trail and over a decade um spending on average 10 million dollars a mile this segment this segment is not even a mile and it's already over budget by 10 million dollars we did not support continuing to move forward with uh with this segment because you're destroying trees you're violating the 2045 transportation plan the eio by imposing additional destruction of the of the corridor just to accommodate a train that will truly never come what we're what i would suggest people start to do is go out to a project of a rail system i was just in seattle they're building this huge rail system it truly isn't realistic for our community and what really is realistic is opening the coast of corridor now as a trail as a transportation resource so i just wanted to highlight again the burden that is being placed on our community by keeping the coastal corridor closed for decades and decades more if we continue to think that we're going to keep a train there thank you for your time thank you mr peoples rena mcfarland hi thank you and i'm never quite sure where it's okay to comment on particular things but this is um after the binary nature of measure d initiative and the narrative distortion and the negativity so bloomberg so national media city lab article if you could just and we are we're there will be an opportunity for general public comment okay okay sorry direct items to uh items on our consent agenda at the moment okay thanks thank you okay um seeing no other members of the public that wish to speak for action on the consent agenda second jock's motion which he's about to make okay great to have a motion by uh commissioner second by commissioner like that thumbs up is a reaffirmation of the motion any further discussion seeing none clerk roll call vote please commissioner burtrane i agree commissioner sandy brown i commissioner johnson hi commissioner alternate hers hi commission alternate hernandez yeah commission alternate shifrin commission alternate quinn yes commissioner konig hi commissioner mcfiersen hi commissioner perker mine was the higher pitched voice yes thank you commissioner perker commissioner rockin hi and commission alternate shifrin i already said i oh sorry about that didn't hear you that was unanimous all right thank you the consent agenda being being passed proceed to items 23 commissioner reports any member of the commission wish to share report seeing none oh sorry commissioner rockin yes quickly i i have a column i think it will be in today's uh lookout what we call that a magazine or whatever this online publications are called suggesting next steps for the rtc um i'm not sure everybody will agree with me that's for sure but it just to let people know that at least i'm sure i'm not the only one from a commission thinking about what our next steps need to be given the what's happened with the election but i'm not going to take time to go over that now people you're welcome to read that get some idea where i'm please trying to go thank you thank you commissioner rockin being no other commissioners will proceed to item 24 the director's report mr president thank you chair konig um i'm going to start with a quick announcement um since our next regularly scheduled rtc meeting is not until august 4th rtc will be having a special rtc meeting on thursday july 21st at 9 a.m the purpose of the meeting will be to make ab 361 findings within 30 days of the august 4th meeting as required for the rtc to be able to continue to meet either virtually or in hybrid format so commissioners should mark their calendars first july 21st and let their alternates know if you cannot attend our august meeting we're considering having a hybrid meeting and having it in the board of supervisor chambers and also making it available virtually it is a lot more work for staff so if commissioners have comments on the desire to have that format you can make those comments after i complete my report um the association for commuter transportation brings together traffic demand management professionals from across the united states canada and other countries this year's conference will be in chicago beginning on july 31st um amanda marino who has been working on rtc's cruise 511 program will be attending the conference over the course of four days the conference will include many informative and educational sessions on the state of the practice for traffic demand management programs the conference will pick off with a session on diversity equity and inclusion there will also be sessions on effectively community effective community engagement with purpose healthy streets through vision zero the future of telework mobility strategic planning improving transit shuttle and band pool ridership um i also want to call your attention to a couple items that were approved as part of today's consent agenda um the first uh consent item number nine the rtc will serve as the local access fund administrator for the transportation networks companies or tnc access for all program and this is to improve the accessibility of transportation for persons with disabilities in santa cruse county uh tnc's those are the uber's and the lifts of the world they collect the 10 access fee as required by the cpuc and rtc will now administer a program which will use that the to provide an option for individuals um in wheelchairs to call on a wheelchair accessible vehicle on demand uh rtc uh still needs to be accepted by the state as the administrator and it will take some time to get this program up and running uh staff will provide more information as the program is developed amanda marina will be staffing this new program also with item 18 the commission approved the 2016 measure d annual report for fiscal year 21 the measure d taxpayer oversight committee or toc worked very hard to help produce the fiscal year uh annual report which highlights the progress we have made um in the delivery of the measure d expenditure plan and these are volunteers of our community uh highlights include the funding grants received due to the leveraging power of having a local revenue source so thank you to the voters for passing 2016 measure d the toc for volunteering their time to produce this report and staff for their hard work and dedication and delivering the measure d expenditure plan um i also want to mention that staff continues to monitor the federal and state budget process and work with legislators to ensure santa priest county continues throughout funding opportunities for its projects on the federal level rtc received notice from congress member anna eshoo that she has requested 2.5 million dollars for the boulder creek complete streets improvement project a letter to chair brown from representative anna eshoo regarding the boulder creek project funding request is included in today's packet on page 21-1 i'm pleased to also announce that senator alex pedia has requested that the fiscal year 23 federal budget includes 6.8 million dollars for the monorail base and terry scenic trail coastal rail trial and 3.5 million for preliminary engineering for the scott's creek highway one coastal resiliency project the senator's list also proposes funding for the santa priest metro pacific station transit oriented development of 4.9 million uh metro para cruise facility of 5.5 million and six new electric vehicles at about 229 000 while it is likely to be several months of negotiation before the federal appropriation bill is finalized and it is common for most congressionally directed spending requests to not make it into the final budget as it happened last year we are very appreciative that senator pedia and congress person eshoo have continued to identify these as priority projects and staff will continue to push for a final budget that includes funding for these important transportation projects on the state side the california legislature met its june 15th constitutional deadline for passing a balanced state budget the bill only represents an agreement between the two houses of the legislature and further negotiations between the legislative leaders and governor gabin newson are expected before a final version of the state budget is approved and signed into law while the next fiscal year starts on july 1st the budget process will likely extend while beyond that date as lawmakers regularly have follow-up measures amending provisions of their spending plan to reflect compromises with the governor throughout the summer both the governor and the legislature have proposed significant increases in funding for transportation infrastructure including funding for transit freight ports active transportation climate adaptation and other purposes i have an announcement on a highway one project advertisement on june 6 cal trans advertise the highway one forty first avenue to soquel drive auxiliary lane and bus on shoulder project for construction bids the project will construct auxiliary lanes and a bus on shoulder facility in both directions of highway one between the forty first avenue and soquel drive interchanges in the city of capitol and live uh an incorporated section of the county the project also includes construction of a new bicycle and pedestrian over crossing at champ clear avenue the project is funded by measure d state transportation improvement program federal highway improvement program and senate bill one solutions to congestive quarter funds with an engineer's estimate of twenty six million dollars the bid opening is scheduled for late july instruction is anticipated to begin later this year and take approximately two years to complete rtc is very pleased to welcome matthew schroeder as the newest member of the rtc team matt began working on monday as a transportation planner one and has a bachelors of arts degree in environmental studies with an emphasis in politics policy and justice from seattle university matt also completed a masters of urban planning degree at san jose state university matt worked for over three years on the safe routes to school program or the city of kupertino public works department with the traffic engineering division there he worked on increasing travel to and from school by bike walking and transit executed public outreach and assisted in the implementation of kupertino's bicycle and pedestrian transportation plans matt also assisted on the design launched an implementation of an on-demand micro transit shuttle service at the meanna minneta transportation institute matt worked as a research assistant on a caltrans contractor to define transit equity and evaluate transit equity metrics matt also worked at the city of san jose department of transportation planning division as a graduate intern where he assisted with planning design data collection analysis and public outreach for various bike travel improvement projects and for micro mobility implementation matt is a member of the american planning association matt is already working with the website update team to implement gis visualization tools and strategies for the information that is available to the public on rtc's um projects and programs people will also be working with senior planner rachel more cony on the santa priest county transportation equity action plan funded with a recently secured sustainable communities grant from caltrans so welcome matthew and um with that i conclude my director's report thank you director prestan are there any questions from members of the commission commissioner shifrin yes i wanted to respond to the executive director's request for feedback on having hybrid meetings um while it's definitely will be an inconvenience to have to leave the comfort of my home to go to uh commission meetings i think it's important for the public members of the public who can make it to a commission meeting and who want to make it and actually speak to uh people in person uh to have that opportunity so i know that only five commissioners can be at the hybrid meeting at the board of supervisors chambers because of the limited size but i think you know it's very understandable that commissioners from south county and other areas of the county where it's a hassle to get into the city will continue to do it virtually i certainly support that but i think to the extent that we can stop moving back to the normalization of public participation i think that's a good thing and so i do support starting to have hybrid meetings uh at our next meeting in august i i will not be available for the july 21st meeting thank you commissioner shifrin mr rockin i just wanted to ask uh director guy prestan if you have anything to tell us about what's happening with possibility of bonding uh money from uh measure d which will allow us to bring you know money forward from the next 25 years of income to the president to be able to speed up a bunch of variety of projects obviously interest rates are going up and we're kind of losing the amazing gap that we had before but what are we doing anything on this and what where are we at in that process if anywhere well if you remember from the bond presentation we need to show a reasonable expectation that the commission could expend the funds within three years of bonding so um the projects that we consider bonding on are all projects that we are have or are planning on submitting grant applications for we have to wait until we receive notification as to whether or not those projects will have the additional matching funds from the state and possibly the federal government on one of our applications to be able to then bond and actually have the project go forward to construction so we're still a little ways out but we're very focused on it we know interest rates are rising it's one of the the unnecessary the necessary things that need to go on right now to control inflation hopefully that'll start to show its effects and and result in prices stabilizing and going down so there may be some benefits and I know from bonding in the past where we ended up with interest rates you know in the four percent range we were able to refinance that when interest rates did go back down so it is you know a game that we all play we're not going to miss the boat completely and we may have some higher costs and interest rates but we will still have opportunities to advance projects and and avoid the escalating costs and bring projects forward sooner so people can start benefiting from those projects as soon as possible thanks that's very responsive to my question thank you thank you commissioner rockin other questions or comments i'll just add that I concur with commissioner shifrin I'd love to see a hybrid meeting in august I recognize that it is a bit of additional work to set up but I think ultimately it will help make our meetings more accessible to all members of the public as well as help the commission work together I've been holding hybrid town hall meetings since the beginning of the year and I'm consistently impressed by the number of people that show up both in person and continue to show up online so it's really been a positive thing as far as meeting making meetings more accessible commissioner parker just my two cents I agree with your comments and commissioner shifrin's comments as well being from south county that it seems as long as we can still participate virtually that that representation can still happen in a timely fashion and and it's much appreciated that hybrid is an option and we do appreciate staff having to go the extra mile or multiple miles to make that happen thank you thank you commissioner parker all right seeing no further questions or comments was there any member of the public that wishes to comment on the director's report seeing none will proceed to thank you director preston proceed to item 25 the caltrans report good morning uh chair and commissioners my name is brandy rider and i'm the office chief for transportation planning here in caltrans district five I don't have a lot of announcements today but I did want to make one announcement related to a recent notice of funding opportunity the usdot has opened applications for the first round of funding for the bridge investment program this program will provide 12.5 billion over five years with nearly 2.4 billion available in this fiscal year 2022 and so the purpose of the the dollars is to plan replace rehabilitate and protect and preserve the nation's largest bridges the planning applications there's two different grants available one are planning grants planning process feasibility and revenue forecasting and then there's also construction grants for large construction projects those planning applications are to be submitted by july 25th of 2022 and then the bridge construction projects are september 8th of 2022 the notice of funding opportunity is out and available and if you have any questions feel free to follow up with me I'm sure that the RTC is well aware of the NOFA being out and available and then one last update is kind of a highlight as we recently are kicking off our sustainable community grants the next round of transportation planning grants is getting ready to kick off we have some materials that will be coming out for review of both public review and we'll be coordinating with the RTC staff so they have an opportunity and then we'll be kicking those that grants that go off at the end of the fall and that's all I have for today if you have any questions I'm happy to answer thank you miss writer are there questions from members of the commission seeing none any member of the public that wishes to comment on the caltrans report seeing none oh I'm sorry we have a hand raised by fort zoom host hi commission I apologize for the wrong name now this is being a sequel I am wondering if the commission could maybe comment on which bridges we could possibly apply for funding for and I realize this is a big question um but maybe we could follow up and then email to me or fort that would be awesome thank you thank you miss uh say go maybe we could just ask staff to respond to that request you know reasonably timely fashion yeah I have no I have no idea what they might be yeah we I didn't mean now necessarily okay just so you know we're aware of the notebook we were actually looking into it um sure it just came out yeah I didn't mean at this meeting just at some point give them a response by looking into it thank you all right thank you director Preston all right um seeing no further comments thank you miss writer for the report from caltrans will now proceed to item 28 oral communications it's an opportunity for the member of the public to address the commission on items in the jurisdiction of the commission that's not on the agenda um and for members who have not already spoken this morning during that general comment period we find that woman has been trying twice to get on in the wrong place farland if you're still president want to make a comment yeah go ahead Karina yeah thank you so going back to the bloomberg city lab article the title of it was train fanatics in quotes score a win in california battle over idle tracks then it goes on to say the outcome represents a win for rail advocates who dream of restoring passenger service to santa cruz like we ever had passenger service on the branch line it goes on to say but it's it also highlights the torturous process of building transportation infrastructure in california and the differing visions for sustainable growth which made me think of supervisor ellen pyrie lead representative to the rtc through the purchase of the rail corridor who said that the branch line had never been viable for passenger rail but that's a fight for another day and it always stuck with me that why does it have to be a fight you step in and you find yourself in a fight and we have so many leading edge initiatives in santa cruz county from all the conflict resolution initiatives to restorative justice neighborhood accountability board for first-time offenders all of that we really want participants of country democracy models that support citizens to stand shoulder to shoulder looking back at these huge problems that we have together and emerging with clarity in keeping with whole systems dynamics so that's what i wanted to say that we're in the 21st century and we'd really like to see some more participatory democracy models in the county that allow us to stand shoulder to shoulder probably the biggest thing through the campaign was people that i talked to that just said i'm so confused and i'm really shocked by the negativity of the campaign thank you thank you mr carlin any other members of public that wish to address us all right seeing none uh we'll move on 29 review of items to be discussed in closed session thank you chair chronic we do have a closed session today regarding labor negotiations for the mid-management unit and the core group and i would just give um miss para and an executive director the opportunity to note their abstentions for the record and the portions they'll be abstaining from okay and will there be any reportable actions we do not anticipate a reportable action today okay and where we sent a link for the closed session this morning yes it came one was it came from kind of uh ctv webinars and mine came in yesterday right and um we'll take public comment on items that are in the closed session agenda miss corwin thank you commissioners um i am mr corwin i am your admin assistant uh but today i'm speaking as a member of the public uh let's have a little bit of fun show of hands who gets too many emails on rtc topics okay i'll take that as our third question um so go to your go to your agenda packet go to page 306 this is your correspondence log and i want you to look in the upper right hand corner there's red text says link to full comments click that is every email that comes into the rtc that might pertain to to you this is members of the public who want to speak to you directly um so i wanted to draw your attention to this because this is something uh new that the admin team has wanted to bring to you we hear you that you get way too many emails you can't respond to all of them i get it we want to make your job as easy as possible members of the public that are still on this call i i hope that you're paying attention to this too and i want you to know there's actually no reason to cc every commissioner on your emails to the rtc commission if you email info at sccrtc.org and you're trying to get the attention of your commissioners it will go on this document and it will be available one week when we post when we post the agenda packet it's available to the commissioners commissioners go ahead and take a look at that document when you're you know on your own time um when you're ready for that so um if you if you liked what i if you liked what we're doing on staff um and you appreciate the work that your core members uh core folks are doing um then please uh consider a yes vote today's proposal thank you thank you miss corvin all right so you know uh other members of the public with their handrails uh director presto or something you want to add yeah the request of legal counsel i was um i'm letting the commission and the public know that i will be abstaining in closed session for items relating to um cost of living adjustments and and anything that could affect my compensation as well and uh yesenia para uh will also be abstaining from the discussions for the association of um the rtc middle management association um uh as she is a member all right thank you and mr riley kebran is there a comment you want to make there is yeah um i would like to um i'm the associate transportation engineer with the rtc and i know you just um mentioned um chair conic that you were closing the public comment so i just wanted to make sure that if you pay for me to um on my own time make a comment to uh the commission go ahead okay thank you very much for that um like i mentioned i'm coming to you on my own time i am a associate transportation engineer here at the rtc and um i also have been coordinating with the the core members um in the negotiations for the labor negotiations which is the item on closed session um we just wanted to highlight to to you guys at the commission um as the as the commissioners um respectfully uh the great work that the rtc staff um in the core group have um been providing and i know it comes up time and time again um through public comment and also comment from um uh commissioners um applauding and thanking staff for the excellent excellent work that they do um i joined the the staff a little over six months ago and have been really blown away at the the caliber of staff here at the rtc how wonderful they work and how wonderful we work providing services for santa cruz county and doing transportation planning services as well as um work on the rail line itself and i just wanted to like applaud applaud the staff um and say that we are doing a really good job and i'm serving the community really well and we ask that the commission look upon the um proposal from the core members and as you're considering that remember the high caliber staff you do have and that we would we want to to enable the rtc to continue to attract really high caliber staff um and these negotiations are part of so thank you very much for hearing my talk my my message on behalf of the four staff thank you mr. de bren all right we do not anticipate any reportable action out of closed sessions so that brings us to the end of our open session agenda the next rtc meeting is scheduled for thursday august 4 2022 at nine a.m. actually we have a meeting uh to to certify our ability to meet in private or something i forget the date it's july 21st uh it will be a it's not sing like it but i'm sorry i'm lying sing a line in a special meeting uh on the next full regular meeting would be uh thursday august thanks uh the will now uh take a five minute break and reconvene closed session at 11 17th thank you good job at sharing thank you thank you