Thanks, Louise. Do we have anything to report out of closed session? No, we don't mr. Chair. Okay, thank you. We're gonna move on with we're gonna go a little out of order because we have a special guest today We are pleased to have Assemblyman Mark Stone here to give us an update On what's going on in our beautiful state of California? So without further ado like some of them Mark Stone to please come up and fill us in Thank You mr. Chair happy to be here sort of visions of the past with RTC meetings and chambers here and a lot of familiar faces that which is which is really good. I was Thinking what to say that I was kind of amused to the paper today The the jab at the legislature saying we we made now surfing a state sport But we haven't done all of these things and what's interesting is we really have done all of those things that that individual was complaining about including making the state sport surfing which around here was really controversial with the skaters surfers loved it, but with the skaters we Heard some some complaints about that and bowlers and and others So from the state standpoint the last couple years has been really remarkably productive part of it is because we've State revenues are up and and we have money at the state level But I also think we've been pretty responsible with how we have spent the money And even though there were as we went through a budget process lots of complaints about the spending a lot of it's one-time money A lot of it is also looking at if it's an ongoing program what that long-term benefit is going to be so investments in people and programs as opposed to Just spending money for the sake of spending money The other thing that I think is remarkable for California is the amount of our reserve California now has more reserves than 38 states have general fund So we're pretty healthy from a fiscal standpoint Which has led to as you can probably imagine also lots of Consternation and in fights over what we're spending money on or not spending money on which is sort of what what brings me here to talk about some of the things that That we have been successful with and and are potentially at risk From a transportation standpoint we've done with Senate bill one really the biggest in first structure investment in the state in Probably 30 years and what's remarkable about it is its ongoing money It's permanent money that's going to be there for local jurisdictions and the state to meet the some very significant infrastructure backlogs and needs as we go over time and The hallmark of getting that piece done because it was a two-thirds vote because it is raising taxes and That two-thirds vote was bipartisan and brought a lot of people together because of what the package offered And it was not sort of the typical often when we do two-thirds votes in the legislature We have to sort of buy those last few votes. And so there's lots of little promises for this and Specific projects name here and there But what SB1 did is use the existing infrastructure of dispersing money out to the RTPAs like you are across the state and to the state agencies in order to help you meet your obligations of road construction of transportation active transportation Buses rail all of the components of transportation of sort of the future of transportation are accounted for in there and Interestingly enough. There's also a good chunk of money for research one of the lacks We realized in the way that we've done transportation funding was the lack of real Data collection and research and so there's a component in SB1 That's going to be very helpful to the state and to as we try and figure out our transportation network to do the research That's necessary to gather the data to figure out what it is our transportation system needs to look like moving forward The other piece that's tangential and I know your role is transportation but it's really important to the transportation question is the housing question and When the governor came to us a couple years ago asking for us to extend cap and trade the assembly which has been working on housing For the full-time. I've been up there So the governor you've really given a short drift when it comes to the housing question if we want cap and trade we want housing and He said yes and was good to his word. So we put some measures forward We passed some we put some measures on the ballot in order to address some of the housing need because in this state And you all know this that you really can't talk about transportation without housing nor can you talk about housing without transportation? They they sort of go one to the other and we have a real Sort of Disconnect when it comes to where people work and where people live and that's something we really need to figure out in a Much more robust and in a stronger way and and that's why we're trying to as we push for planning We're trying to link those two transit oriented development for example looking at transportation corridors and and how people move around the SB1 is a gas tax is a fuel tax and About 12 cents a gallon on gasoline and that it increased the Sales tax on diesel which at the time it was passed or first it was implemented about a year ago was about 24 cents a gallon so it was a big hit on on Diesel and as we tax through sales tax or a gallonage tax We we do recognize that it is a regressive taxing mechanism and a lot of folks that that sort of housing and transportation imbalance is because people a lot of folks who can't afford to live where they were Are traveling large distances and they're going to bear some of the brunt of the tax But until we can reform the tax system We're sort of stuck as you're stuck in local agencies are stuck with using very few tool very few taxing tools revenue generating tools in order to meet the broader needs So we have this it the SB1 has been criticized fairly roundly Most of the criticize criticisms that I see being played out in the media and in other campaigns around are really not true They're throwing very large numbers out of what's going to cost the average household They're talking about how this is just a way of putting money into the general fund coffers which again is not true and That it's really more tailored to to I'm not sure what I'm not sure I quite understand all of the arguments The genesis of SB1 was three years of Public hearings meetings around the state of a lot of work done to understand where the needs really are and How that money can be best applied? Which is how we came to splitting it between the state and local Jurisdictions, which is how we came to make sure that we were doling it out through the existing mechanisms rather than recreating another one why the focus on transit and other types of alternative transportation a large focus on Sort of walking and biking and and other kinds of active transportation that I know are really a part of your plans and very valuable To areas like Santa Cruz County So we built this in past it on a bipartisan basis not a lot of Republican support But some Republican support and what's interesting to me now on social media my colleagues who voted against it are still out there at all the ribbon cuttings for the projects that are being paid for out of SB1 because Politically there would like to fight it and railed against it But they also understand the benefit of the money coming into our local Jurisdictions it is also for the first time instead of bonding and we have a couple bond measures that the legislature put on the ballot which has been criticized and It is literally pays you go because it's money that's going to be raised and then spent Over time and it's an ongoing permanent source of funding And it's also the users of the system are paying for the system And it also guarantees and the voters did this the voters did this back in the 70s that said gas tax revenues Cannot be moved to the general fund and of course in tough fiscal times the state government figured out how to borrow if you will and You can talk to counties counties know what happens when the state borrows from them They don't always pay it back and that's always been a struggle But then in 2010 the voters said no you can't borrow transportation monies and then last June the voters said We're gonna put all new transportation revenues by the Constitution into a lockbox so they only can be spent on Transportation so there is no way that the a future legislature or future administration could be tempted to take those monies and bring them into the state's general fund Can't be borrowed can't be swept can't be stolen whatever term you want to use they will be used for transportation That's really the good news of this system And I know as I drive around my district Santa Cruz County Monterey County Parts of Santa Clara County, I see the signs up all over where SB1 money is now being spent and fixing addressing the long backlog of transportation projects that have been greatly frustrating to people over the years and Caltrans, of course, I know is also very happy at that prospect and and the conversations that we've been having around Responsibly understanding how roadways interact with the rest of the environment that they weigh in and I'm talking about the wildlife corridor up here The up at Laurel Curve and there's a large one on one-on-one that's down in Ventura County I think it is we're talking about others that will connect the Santa Cruz Mountains with the Gabelon Range to the south and with the Diablo range to the east of us and Caltrans has really been a partner and understanding how to use their advanced mitigation funds and how we've designed Sort of the philosophy of building roads now into SB1 and into the future so that a roadway Yes, it's to just move vehicles, which is I know what Caltrans likes to do But it's also it sits in our environment and it sits in our communities and it has to work with All of the above and so as we design as we repair as we rethink not just Transportation corridors for vehicles, but also transportation corridors for humans and for wildlife and for all the things that make our communities vibrant This is all now being better taken into account than it had been before So that's kind of the landscape For from a transportation standpoint, and we're also really looking hard at electric vehicles There's been there was a bill that did not pass that would meant would have mandated by it was either 2030 or 2035 That all new cars be electric that in the heavy transportation sector Buses trucks a little harder of a calculation because the storage issues and the the power of electric motors I know that Santa Cruz Metro is looking at highway 17 bus being electrified Which I always thought was astonishing because going up that hill great going down the other side you recharge The thing all the way to San Jose but going up the hill is definitely a challenge But the technology is really growing and from our standpoint the more the state can incentivize Increased in storage both in the energy sector, but also the transportation sector, then we help create the markets Internationally because California such a large market we help create the markets to drive innovation in the storage side Which we will all see the benefits from and that's what's going to then allow the heavy transportation sector to ultimately be electrified, which is the goal as well as Private vehicles and then getting the infrastructure in place to have charging stations Wherever people need them looking at fast charging slow charging And if we can get that all of those batteries connected into the train into the energy grid It's actually very very beneficial to the energy grid so Yes, I linked housing and transportation But energy and transportation are also intricately linked through some of these Mechanisms and we're trying to make sure we're looking at All of it the entire map as we make decisions, which I know people don't quite believe And we're still struggling with that because we tend to think of Transportation in a bucket and housing in a bucket and energy in a bucket But those buckets all blend if we're smart about how we're designing Policy for California in the future So from a fiscal standpoint the state's pretty healthy Hopefully we'll be able to hold on to the SB 1 program and really put that money to good use through you and the RTPAs throughout the state and Get some of the infrastructure investment really back on track But in a way, that's not just the way we'd always done it in a way that looks to what transportation needs to look like in California over the next 20 30 50 years So that's sort of where I think we stand I'm happy to answer questions about that or anything else that's that's of interest of course in the legislature We've done lots and lots of things the governor just got done last Sunday night with a whole Raft of bills that he signed and interestingly signed when you look at what he vetoed versus what he signed Signed a pretty good percentage of them But I think over the eight years that the governor was in there a lot of us learned how to work with him and how To try and engage with some of the policies a little bit earlier With the administration to ensure success so that as we were moving something through we're working with the stakeholders But also with the administration so that when we put something on his desk It has a better chance of getting signed and the administration whichever departments have Appropriate buy-in to what it is that we are interested in as well as things that I know this governor has been looking forward to and Just in closing. I will also have to say that California now being on the international stage and especially with climate when we held the climate summit a couple of years ago Jurisdictions from around the world were here in in California for California Not necessarily for the United States, which is backing away from prior obligations to climate but California has organized a number of different states and a lot of those states were represented and countries from around the world with a commitment to keeping the temperature growth under two degrees centigrade with a commitment to Decarbonizing their systems their fuels their energy sectors and some real commitments to the the future of this planet and for the first time In this conversation The oceans were put in the climate debate They had not been in this international forum before in California through the Ocean Protection Council made sure that oceans were a part of it And when you think about the bigger transportation picture when you think about sort of the bigger environmental picture Oceans obviously are a very very critical piece of it and for those of us who live along the coast We we know that we live that we have a lot of people coming to the coast to see who we are what we have and All of the resources that we have around here so California's in a pretty strong place in a leadership place and All of us and really all of you are a part of what makes that system work So I applaud your willingness to sit on the regional transportation Commission I know it's not always the easiest set of meetings It can be controversial in this county, but it's very very important to how this county looks and certainly how this county moves So I'm happy to take Questions that you may have Thank you. Thank you so much stoner for that upbeat presentation about our golden state Let's just hope that the voters Consider and focus on the benefits when they go to the ballot box of transportation indeed any questions are the commissioners One question commissioner portraying Mr. Sloan in terms of the Monies that we've set aside for emergencies. We know that governor bound has been very Consistent on that in his Governorship, what kind of protections do we have that or what kind of limits or what kind of conditions do we have on? dipping into those funds Well, the if you there are a number of different Reserves if you will there's the rainy day fund that the voters initiated and it has some very specific terms to dip into Most of them are fiscal or financial But those monies and those reserves the other reserves that the legislature has created in conjunction with the governor are Potentially a little bit more flexible as we dip into them But a lot of it can be used and will be used in an emergency situation And we've seen the wildfires across California those fairly quickly exhausted the financial Capability of the system, but even more startlingly Those fires we were literally one fire away from having no resources not money But men in equipment to go fight them so we in a bit of a controversial bill Because it was it was giving in my view a little too much to the investor-owned utilities on one end and changing The liability question for them in the way that the system has been set up to protect those who have lost Homes property through the fires the the part that was very compelling to me was a real investment in That infrastructure in pre-positioning equipment in doing Forestry management and the kinds of things that will reduce the impact of some of the fires so you don't come We're not gonna stop the fires, but we can reduce the impact of the fires so we've we've really increased our investments in our ability to respond to the fires and At the same time the reserves now give us a buffer in case the an emergency situation is significant And that's true whether it's fires or floods Pandemics whatever we have the ability to spend some of these reserves to address whatever the issue is But only as long as we have the reserves and so those other investments in those systems become important to look at long-term because as the next economy Cycle happens and we dip down the reason for the rainy-day fund and those reserves is When we're flush sort of lopping off a little bit of the spending of what we could otherwise spend so that we can fill in the Valleys of the next downturn and smooth that out so for cities and counties and other local agencies That lack of state money will have less impact Hopefully if we've if we've done this well, but in times like this We also have the ability to address emergency Consequences because some of that money is there but having money and then having other resources like equipment and manpower are Often two different things and we have to be responsible to both Thank you for that presentation. We appreciate you coming and spend some time with us So and feel free to come back whenever you feel like it happy to be here And and good luck with the rest of your meeting and decisions you get to make. Thank you very much, right Okay, we'll get back on track We will begin that this portion is the oral communications part of the meeting This is a chance when people with the public are allowed to come up and speak on anything that is not on the agenda We'll be trying to move along today. We have a lot of agendas So we'll be giving two minutes today for that oral communication. Ms. McNulty. Good morning everybody gail McNulty Santa Cruz County Greenway happy bike to school and work day Some of you may have ridden your bikes to school today for those are to work today for those of you Who don't do this daily wouldn't it feel great if you did it more often? What if every? Transportation decision we made in our county had to be fantastic for an eight-year-old and an 80-year-old Then we'd be planning a county where Ryan and Zach and Patrick's children Could when they get a little bit older could actually bike or walk to school with their friends every day Like most of us did when we were little instead of a county where this only happens twice a year Think about it There was no such thing as bike to school day when we were kids because every day was bike to school day My parents never drove me to school Growing up in the Chicago suburbs I walked our bike to school every day in the snow in the rain and in very hot weather The reason we celebrate bike to school day is because the auto industry has been allowed to dominate our society for so many years And now we have these if we were count planning our county for eight to 80 year olds Then when each of us reached the age of 80 perhaps And perhaps we shouldn't be driving anymore We'd have a fabulous system of buses to get us everywhere. We need to go when we need to be there We know that we need change the people losing hours every day commuting north and on the highway Know that we need change now not in 20 years When Jeanette said a con was transportation commissioner in New York City during the Bloomberg administration She installed New York City's first protected bike lane 30 days Days after the idea first came up. They didn't study study it for a year and they didn't wait for stakeholder buy-in They simply said, you know what if it doesn't work will take it out Change is hard, but change offers wonderful possibilities rather than feeling good about things. We might achieve in 20 years What if we were starting to think about things we can make better now? Thank you Morning, mr. Nelson Good morning commissioners and members of the public and RTC staff. Thanks for being here today my name is Jack Nelson and I Listened as you did with great interest to what assembly member stone had to say and I was Not surprised to hear him mentioned the linkage between transportation and housing and I was very happy to hear him also mentioned the linkage between transportation and energy and Mr. Stone presented some optimistic points He didn't mention earlier this year that the California Air Resources Board produced a report on how we're doing on climate emissions greenhouse gas emissions and California is moving forward in the energy sector in in the electric grid But it's still failing on trans on the transportation side Transportation emissions are still growing in California. So that's where you commissioners enter the picture and I'm here once again to Promote to you the idea that we really need to fix greenhouse gas emissions in our transportation decision-making and The Air Resources Board will tell you where those emissions are coming from they're coming out the tailpipes of cars Which are the highest energy demand form of transportation? So even if you fix the auto as far as making it electric you still have a high energy demand We have getting around The least energy demand of course is is walking or bicycling So then we bring in housing well if you can live within Bicycling distance you can ride a bike to work or maybe you have public transportation that uses less energy per person And then you ride your bike to the train station or the bus stop or maybe you know use a shared bike So there are fixes out there and they don't involve more cars. Thanks. Thank you, Mr. Nelson Good morning. Good morning commissioners. My name is Joe Martinez, and I'm here representing trail now Trail now is pleased that the UC is study is complete and trail now is looking forward to a Transportation transportation solution today We urge you to use caution going forward sir Sir if you want to talk on the unified quarter study, you'll have to wait till that agenda item comes up This is for items not on the agenda. Okay Okay Fair enough. Okay. Thank you Good morning Michael st. With campaign for sustainable transportation. I'm gonna have to refer to my papers to try to get this in in two minutes Basically, I just want to implore this commission to try and get away from the thought of widening highways as a solution to our problems Back in the 50s the government That we know now went the wrong direction with high-speed auto routes that increased urban sprawl As the speed increased on these so did the sprawl the Transit in the US never was giving this a chance to go out there People in Europe and around the world actually chased the people we stopped and went entirely with a highway system almost every American transit system has had a meltdown as a result of chronic deferred maintenance and And This is our own metro system. It's headed down this road in my studies I've learned that over 60 of our buses out of the approximate 100 we have are out of time If we spend state local funding wisely and focus to get the biggest bang for the buck To reduce congestion vehicle miles travel reduce greenhouse gas emissions focus on safety and eliminating single occupancy vehicles It becomes a win for everybody How do we do this you run buses reasonably often all day every day that has been the proven way around the world To attract riders to transit it's basically frequency I was in the airline industry for 41 years and without frequency my company would not have been in business I believe it's worth the investment to make more areas accessible to everyone to reduce a severe environmental impact of Overwhelming dependency on the car if cities and counties do not support it the riders will not come. Thank you. Thank you Hi, my name is Jessica Evans and I just wanted to say that all problems are local problems and the problem of transportation is an especially local problem and I Really happy to see the improvements to bike and pedestrian safety that have happened in the last few years with the green lines Lanes and other kinds of things that make Bicycling a little bit more feel a little bit more comfortable in our local streets And I think that we have a long way to go I want to point out that Bay Street still doesn't have any bicycle safety improvements Despite being a major transportation corridor for pedestrians and bicyclists for children and students of all ages I'm a little frustrated that Bay Street is kind of the orphan child of the bicycle safety Project in Santa Cruz right now Especially at the intersection of mission where we desperately need more safety improvements for that road. Thank you very much. Thank you Mr. Pico good morning, my name is Kerry Pico I'm here to actually address what I consider the financial fiduciary Responsibility of the RTC and its failure to actually act accordingly Honesty and credibility is critical to a public agency and what I see coming out of this agency is particularly the leadership Is is far from from an unbiased on its last credibility and let me point it out I don't have it all written out. So you'll excuse me stumbling when I read a rail Feasibility study that all its peers are Twice the cost or you know To the three times the cost of whatever is in the study something's wrong In fact, the smart train would be about Would be a good comparison and if we did that ours would be closer to about 500 million dollars to get done something like that when I read or hear that the traffic on highway one is mischaracterized so much and I won't go into those numbers But I do know them that it's misled on the importance of that traffic and how it relates to the train You lose credibility and honesty when I read that the Monterey Bay the MBS ST has a price in there and then when they put it out the bid It's three times the cost that's in that study Something's wrong and if anybody thinks that all the con companies gonna drop their price Just because the estimates were three times lower than reality something's wrong and I'm just telling you that you guys really don't have any credibility on doing something, right? You are not drunken sailors with somebody's credit card going into a house of ill repute hoping to spend the public monies On whatever you wish you have financial restraints You need to do that and you need to be open and honest about how you go about it. Thank you. Thank you Good morning. Hi, my name is teeny Andrea And I need to read if that's okay The Santa Cruz rail trail is going to do more for people with disabilities The special needs community are below beloved elders The school children people who are poor and disenfranchised people who cannot afford cars Insurance will benefit from rail to trail This inclusions of these community members is underdeveloped in Santa Cruz and they are well worth it because they are us 19 out of a hundred Americans live with a disability Whether a soldier comes back from war an elder or a child with a disability they are our family our neighbors and Love ones or perhaps the friendly beggar bag, you know grocery bagger that you see every week He smiles or she smiles that you and says has have a nice day and you know what it means They sincerely mean it do you want it to be the ones to tell the disabled community that they don't deserve a Transportation service that supports their needs. Have you consider the disabled community reach out get to know them You'll find that they have they want independence They want to be a part of the community. They want they don't want to just rely on family members taking them In their cars a lot of them are able to you know, we're talking about wheelchairs walkers young mothers with Strollers who can't afford cars that are would like to get on a train and be able to go from Watsonville To Santa Cruz one of my friends. She's two young kids She takes it out 45 minutes an hour and 20 minutes to get from Watsonville because she can't afford to live here She's third generation. She would love to have a rail. Thank you. Thank you Morning. I'm miles writer. I'm gonna try to get this three minutes done in two Only in the last few years have I paid much attention to the RTC. This is what I've come to recognize The population of the area of the Pajaro Valley Unified School District is Is 44% of the Santa Cruz County's total population? 44% maybe everybody knew that I didn't Transportation issues are also Disproportionately severe for that 44% of the population. I live farm run a business Raised a family and have kids at all attended Pajaro Valley schools We are severely underrepresented on the RTC Currently only three of the 12 seats come from the area the Pajaro Valley Unified School District Sometimes there's four never there five which would be close, but not quite proportional representation And so what do we have? Obviously, we've got mind-numbing gridlock on highway one that gets worse by the month and that is dramatically more severe impact on South County residents We have side streets that are almost equally congested to highway one at the Well, it's all the time now. We have bus service stuck in the same traffic We have roads in the hills and the Pajaro Valley that are nearly abandoned Including the main artery of our most important agricultural crop which I happen to grow Where ruts and potholes are damaging the work of thousands of people We have a boondoggle of a trail being worked on that is unlikely ever to reach Watsonville We have part prime farmland in city streets being used to store empty rail tanker cars We have woefully inadequate rail service or have had woefully Inadequate rail service to where it actually matters and this included Includes a mysterious complete stoppage of surface in the weeks before June 14th vote on a new contract. Thank you, Mr. Ryder Yeah, I'll do the last minute some other time. Thank you. Thank you Okay, that concludes your communications Mr. Dondir, do we have any additions or deletions to the agenda? Yes, we have two handouts item one for item 31, which is director's report and What was it the For item 34 the unified quarter investment study is a replacement set of pages Okay, thank you Brings us to the consent agenda. These are items we usually deal with in all in one motion is there to portray All anything but I do want to make a comment from capitol's perspective Is that okay with the chair on the consent which consent item item 17 item 17 a comment Is there anybody else who wants to pull anything on the consent agenda? Go ahead, okay? I'd just like to point out the thank you RTC for working with capitol to make this Transportation development proposal this will mean for capitol that along Park Avenue which leads out to the freeway We'll be able to have safe walkways Here before it's been a path and very unsafe for people People don't use that road at night and also also mean five foot on either side for bike Which is tremendous so this is a great boom for the biking community and also for improving safety on Park Avenue Thank you. Thank you Motion by second second by Brown. Mr. Johnson. I was just gonna say I'll vote yes on everything but 23 So Julie noted Okay, is there anybody from the public that would like to pull anything on the consent agenda? Yes, sir And I use highway one quite a bit sir is there an item that did your dad? I wrote a letter to the council on Tuesday that I don't know if you got Distributed or not. I'm trying to just which item you're addressing on our on our agenda so I can be specific Well, I'm talking about transportation You have just a good general comment. Hi. Well, okay. I consider the Congestion of highway one just excuse me sir. We're trying to vote on the consent agenda I want to hear what you have to say so what I'm gonna do is this is not about the consent agenda It's just a general comment So I'm gonna give you two minutes to talk on a general comment. Is that okay with you? Absolutely. Okay, great. Go ahead I'm oversimplifying the transportation problem I'm sure but to me the number one Issue is highway one congestion and then the extra 30 minutes or 45 minutes that it takes to go from Watsonville to Santa Cruz and vice versa much of the day and so I Would like to suggest that the that the commission Focus in on that issue and try to get a third lane Added All the way from highway 17 to apt us to me that is would be should be the first and primary Goal of this commission. So thank you for those comments. I appreciate them So I'll bring it back to the chair. We have a vote on the consent agenda item all in favor opposed and Except just note that there is a commissioner Johnson voted no on item 23 Okay, we'll move forward to commissioner reports any commissioner have any report Seeing none In public public Build there was a public comment about people who need ADA and need help getting back and forth in this county And that touched me quite a bit. So this is actually a very personal statement of mine My mother had polio and She could not get around It was very difficult getting her places going on vacations. We did not go camping with my mother so Trying to understand what it means to people and individuals who need wheelchairs or Any other kind of transportation aid is very difficult unless you are that person So I appreciate those comments. I was lucky enough in one sense to learn from the time I was a child what it was like to live with a mother who could not get around So keep that in mind when you think about ADA requirements and the money to need the money Needed to fund it. Thank you Okay, our next item is we have a request from a commissioner for trend for an item to be discussed about a Unified quarter investment study review committee. So I'll Respect you again commissioner for trend. Thank you chair my thought process on this has evolved and When I jumped on this committee Commission, excuse me I was very much focused on the unified quarter investment study because I think that is a critical piece and it's been delivered and So I was trying to figure out what is the best way for the commissioners here to do their due diligence and Live up to the responsibility of our position to the county of Santa Cruz So the idea to me came up. That's the chair to appoint a subcommittee To actually deep dive down into the study itself Individuals on this committee who would commit to spend their own time Usually offer their budgeted time for whatever job they may have or maybe they've retired But the idea is to actually spend some deep dive time so that we could help each other better understand And better ferret out the issues that are embedded in that study So I still would like to see that and I would like to volunteer to be on that committee if the chair so Goes in that direction Mr. Schiffin We all have the responsibility of reading the unified quarter study and I don't think that We're all equal, but some are more equal than others. I think we all need to Do it and if commissioners don't do it, then that's their Responsibility to their constituency. I don't support having a special subcommittee We're gonna hear from the public in a number of forum and it's gonna come back to the commission and we should we all should Take our responsibility seriously. This is a critical study that commission is going to be making important decisions and We're all equal in having to respond to it I don't think this is some area where we can depend on some commissioners to do Research on an item that we're all not involved in We're all involved in the unified quarter study We're all gonna need to vote on the unified quarter study And I don't think it's appropriate to set up a particular subcommittee to work on this Study separate from the public forum and separate from the commission meetings Hang out of comments. Mr. Johnson. Well, the only thing I would say is that we retweet routinely Develop and implement subcommittees because subcommittees have the opportunity in the words of commissioner Bertrand of deep diving drilling down and Really spain paying special attention and bringing out facts interviewing people that a That a whole commission probably could not so on the one hand We root, you know, because we always have subcommittees whether it's choosing chairs or we have a budget subcommittee I mean if you use that logic then we shouldn't have a budget subcommittee because every commissioner should be responsible for Deep diving into the budget. Why do we have a budget subcommittee because those people are the ones who? Routinely meet they get probably additional information So I think it's a somewhat of a fallacy to disregard the I think I think the Idea of having a subcommittee on this matter. It's really that simple Other comments, no I just wanted to respect the intent of your suggestion Commissioner Schifrin is absolutely correct. We all have responsibility to read it thoroughly and analyze it thoroughly I think we could go either way as a commission. I just wanted to respect the intent of your suggestion, which is We have to take it very seriously and spend a lot of time Analyzing what's been put before us I take mr. Schifrin's comments also and I was actually hoping you'd be on the committee Seriously, I'm not seeing that out of you know trying to get laughs in the audience But I am on the finance subcommittee and you sit on the finance subcommittee and I enjoy your comments And I enjoy the fact that you put a lot of effort into Making that committee successful. So I don't think this would be a committee that puts out a report and Then the Commission hears that report This is a committee for us to get a better idea of the complexity of that study So it's for people who would like to do it It's not necessary as something that's going to hang up the Commission in general It's basically to help individuals who would like to participate to do a better Under to create a better understanding of the report Mr. Schifrin certainly if a minority of the commissioners want to get together and Talk about the study and get into it and spend more time on it. That's totally appropriate we have you know as Commissioner Johnson says we have committees that meet on a regular basis on things that come forward on a regular basis This is a one-time study that is of critical importance to some of the decisions that the Commission is going to be making in the future It's it's not a situation where we have sort of an ongoing role Where we were negotiating with UP to buy the rail line. We had a subcommittee to help with those negotiations Yes, but particular kinds of tasks. It does make sense to have subcommittees when we're all faced with having to make a decision on This study then we're all you know, we all have that same responsibility If some Commissioners want to get together and talk about it separately as long as they don't violate the Brown Act That's totally appropriate, but to set up a you know a sort of a formal Subcommittee what's going to be the role of staff? What role is it going to have with the public? It starts raising questions that in a in the context in which his study is going forward, which is already pretty controversial It's just going to add another level of complexity to it in confusion to it in my view So I I certainly urge commissioners if they want to get together and talk about it to do so But I think set you know agreeing formally to set up a separate body to be doing that Is is not really appropriate Mr. Brown like other commissioners I Absolutely appreciate and respect the intent of the proposal but I think commissioners difference point that there are those of us who want to get together and Take a deeper dive or maybe Absorb some of this information in a group setting I think I mean that I certainly think that we can do that Without violating the Brown Act and would hope that staff can answer our questions as they arise Rather than setting up a formal process That would work for me and I'd be happy to participate in that conversation Okay Commissioner Kaufman Gomez having be having been the newest member of this particular commission It's been a tremendous learning curve for me and I still need a lot more of that attention on this and Listing a lot more in terms of what our community has to offer and and I know that I've always had the door open for that as an Opportunity and a lot of things. I don't know what I don't know until I hear from you as a community members and Do want to have a bit more dialogue with those that have a lot more depth of knowledge To the process to get us to this point with this corridor study. I don't know phase one I'm I'm smacked into here's phase two and your packet for this afternoon Don't worry this morning to be looking over the materials and I will have a lot of questions that I don't know I need to be asking and that's why I'm gonna reach out to ask for help or any other commissioners It would like to be willing to sit with me on this whether it needs to be formalized or not I'm wanting to be very open on both ends of working with commissioners as well as the public to get a better handle and understanding of this and Not having having a fresh open mind for this as a commissioner. So I'm I'm telling people I'm what that opportunity in time Thank you. Any other comments? I'm gonna go ahead and weigh in on this and then I'm gonna look for a motion for somebody I can appreciate the the request and its sincerity of a commissioner Bertrand to have a subcommittee I think about the subcommittees I've been on since I've been on this board and on Metro and I've been on numerous subcommittees and normally what they are is They're to facilitate an action and I think that for us As far as I'm strong on the RTC, this is this is game time for the RTC This is the biggest thing we've had to deal with since I've been on here And it's not like we you know, and sometimes a subcommittee helps to do work for others so they can bring back information We can use whereas this I think this is critical to each person here to weigh in on this and to discuss it And I don't see it as an opportunity to break break up into committees and discuss I think this is something where we need to get back with our constituents Deal with the public and make a recommendation about how we're gonna move forward as a county So I and I don't want to distract from staff and have to support a committee because that all requires that so I Don't personally see the need for it, but I'm looking for a motion for somebody on this on this item Well, I would move that we take no action on this item. Is there a second? Second second motion a second to take no action on this item is Let me open it up to the public and see if there's anybody the public who wants to weigh in on this item Two minutes. I really come back to the credibility issue in the numbers And I'm not going to dive deep into it here But there's a credibility on how it's presented in the numbers and I think a review committee Would be really critical That's it Great. Thank you. Good morning. Oh, miss Colligan. Mr. Vattorff commissioner Vattorff and all commissioners My name is bud Colligan. I'm the co-chair of the Monterey Bay Economic Partnership And I'm also board member of Greenway this Issue even this discussion here has been a very divisive topic in our community and I think the biggest reasons and I don't have a position on on Commissioner Bertrand's suggestion or Commissioner Schifrin's Retort to that But I would say that the biggest reason that this has been divisive is because there is no common set of facts and My sense is that the responsibility of the commission is to try to get to a common set of facts So that we can actually be debating investment decisions and Transportation decisions and not whether certain data is wrong and certain data is right and that's where we've been for the last three years So I would really urge you Whether it's in a subcommittee or not to take the time to do this right as Commissioner Vattorff just said this is game time, you know We're gonna be making decisions on a billion dollars of investment And this is a poor county that doesn't have a lot of money. So those decisions are gonna be critical The notion of arbitrary timelines on this whole thing is just ridiculous It sounds like you know, the Kavanaugh hearings, you know We should our objective should be to do this right and to get the right decisions Not marched to some arbitrary timeline and those decisions It should have the broadest public support and the way to get broad public support is to have a common set of facts To start with thank you. Thank you I'm gonna go in and interrupt the public comment right now just for some clarity The next item after the director's report is we're going to talk about the unified quarter study And I believe that's why you're all here. I want to focus the comments on this item specifically I mean be very specific. This is about whether we should form a subcommittee to discuss unified quarter study We already know that we're all gonna discuss it So if you're gonna come to the podium, I would like you to weigh in on whether you think there's a merit of having a Subcommittee or not not talking about the unified quarter study. It is our next item. Okay. Thank you Sort of coincidentally it does work with regard to the subcommittee You know, I mentioned the underrepresentation of South County And I think that all the commissioners need to support South County Commissioners and protecting the interests of the underrepresented constituents. I don't want to create a north-south battle, but With this is a county with two ends and and they need to be treated fairly And I think this committee could help in doing that because right now we're looking The last thing we wanted to do is rush through this proposed approval. There is a schedule. It doesn't make a bit of sense and Quarter studies full of weird combinations focusing on the quarter study and I'm talking about a committee right now Okay, then I would love to hear you talk when we get to the next item, but unified quarter study Okay, and I would support The ability because there's a proposed timeline that's very short. This is not about a time. Okay This is about a committee and it's very specific people. We are going to talk about the unified quarter. Okay. Thank you And I would recommend that this committee Include a more equal representation from South County. Thank you I just want to this just govins again. I just want to say that I Don't think that you guys should have a separate official working committee I think that you know the idea of getting together and and brainstorming and and working together I mean, you know, we all know that when you get together and you talk about stuff You can learn it better and faster and you can share your perspectives.  Don't walk away. Don't be lazy. Do the work This is why you're here if you want to be on this committee, please be willing to do the work. Thank you. Thank you for those comments Miss McNulty Hi, I do like the idea of a subcommittee and to be honest I don't know enough of your bylaws to know whether this would be possible or not But I would actually love to see that subcommittee Include representatives from some of the organizations who have been part of this conversation I know that right now we've got public meetings scheduled for the 15th and the 16th and I've been invited And I was told one person from our organization may come to a one hour and 15 minute meeting on the 17th Which to be honest seems incredibly inadequate for a conversation that has been driving this country or this County for so long and the polarizing situation that we're in I mean for exactly the same reason that Andy Schifrin said He does not want to have the subcommittee because it is a polarizing Conversation it's the exact reason that we do need to have it and if at all possible it should not be constrained to only members of this Commission it should include stakeholder groups because one hour and 15 minutes is not enough to arise at a compromise and to assume that we can't Well, that's a big failure Because we know some of our speakers several of our speakers mentioned that to get funding for any of these projects will be in a Better place if we have a community consensus so going for a community consensus having this subcommittee and Engaging some of us at the table as part of that conversation That is not an hour and 15 minutes long But that is probably a couple of months long Because to be fair to spend this money wisely to make these plans and come up with Equitable solutions that are going to have an impact We need that input. We need to work together. Thank you Mr. Scott, thank you Barry Scott apt us Precisely because I think we've seen a very asymmetrical Kind of a public relations battle between the two opposing sides with respect to the rail corridor I think every member needs to be I think the committee you need to have is All of you committee you need to all of you do the work and the idea of bringing in stakeholders It's frightening to me again. They already have an an asymmetrical level of power and funding and an operation while others are trying to advocate for Transit and cycling and fairness. I That you have a huge task before you you have a huge task before you and I know that you all want to do the right thing So I would I would advise against a committee and I'd further advise That you'd be very cautious about what stakeholder groups are able to do to influence your decisions. Thank you Thank you for those comments. Okay, I'll bring it back. I'll bring it back before I vote to comment You I want to offer a friendly amendment to the maker of the motion that we encourage members of the commission to get together on an ad hoc basis to discuss and and educate one another and Obviously that can't be a brown act meeting by just want to encourage folks to get together and Acceptable to the maker the motion me too second motion second simple any other comments before we vote mr. Portray With that friendly amendment, I will agree with the motion Okay, so we're going to take it can I get a roll call vote I Commissioner Brown I Commissioner Randy Johnson. Hi commissioner Kaufman Gomez. Yes commissioner cap it Commission alternate shifrin. Hi Commission alternate Mulherrn Yes, commission alternate Johnson. Yes Commissioner Botthorff. Hi Motion carries unanimously. Thank you And just to be clear that means we're gonna be taking no action and there will be not will not be a committee It will be each own commissioners responsibility To take this seriously and to weigh in when the time comes Okay, that moves on to the next item, which will be our director's report. Mr. Don Darrell. Yes. Thank you, mr Chairman morning just a few items for you this morning Many of you may be aware of a very narrow walkway that's Hanks on the side of the San Lorenzo River trestle Connecting the boardwalk and the Seabright neighborhood And on September 18th the California Coastal Commission unanimously approved the plans for a new 10-foot wide multi-use path and This is a project under the city of Santa Cruz and There the lead agency on it and this will connect the Seabright neighborhood with the boardwalk area the Riverwalk levy path and downtown Santa Cruz and We expect to see that completed before Memorial Day of next year Another trail item the North Coast Rail Trail draft EIR was Released back in August and we took public comments until September 24th Staff received approximately 100 comments from members of the public agencies and organizations Two public meetings were held one on August 22nd in Santa Cruz and one on August 23rd in Davenport RTC staff and consultants are in the process of revealing comments and addressing the issues that were raised The final EIR is expected to be released this winter Although exact timing will depend on the time needed to respond to all of these comments The RTC's website contains the draft EIR the slides that were presented at the public meetings and maps of the proposed alignment As well as alternatives studied Once the EIR is certified the RTC selects a preferred project The lead agency on this segment the Federal Highway Administration's Central Federal Lands Division will complete the design Complete the NEPA clearance that's the federal environmental clearance and the construction funding for this project comes from a $6 million grant from federal highways federal lands access program And also funds from land trust of Santa Cruz County RTC's RSTP program and measure D Construction is anticipated for the 2020 calendar year also, I'm According to our agency Rules and regs. I'm reporting to you that two RTC staffers will be traveling out of state to attend the rail Volusion conference in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania October 21st through 24th I've got an item in here about projects at risk our assemblyman Talked extensively about Senate bill one and what's at risk if proposition six should be passed So I've attached the table of Projects which you this commission approved back in December of last year and it shows Several columns one is the column of the amount of funding that you approve That's assuming that Senate bill one remains whole. There's also a column that shows worst-case scenario and Whatever agency you're with I think you'll find some projects in there that you're familiar with and if Proposition six should pass by the voters then you're looking at the worst-case scenario So that's just an information item for you We've also included a photo of Assemblymember Stone along with Assemblywoman Caballero Who visited the? agron Biofuels plant in Watsonville recently and they also met with The folks in the photo including CPUC inspectors the president of Western Iowa energy and Howard Cohen who's marketing manager for the railroad? and The two assembly members received a briefing on rail operations both current and planned and then finally A photo of the locomotive that just arrived in Watsonville This is going to serve the needs of the local Freight customers owner progressive rail says a local company will change the name on From Wisconsin northern to st. Paul and Pacific which is the local railroads name and replace city of Barron with the city of Watsonville So that concludes my report, and I'll be glad to answer any questions Thank you questions. Mr. I just want to make a comment on the San Lorenzo River tressel Yes, project. It's really exciting that the coastal commission has approved that I just wanted to give a little bit of history and blow the Horn of Commissioner Coonerty and the secretary of resources John Laird who Actually at the groundbreaking for the Twin Lakes project agreed to try to find some state money to pay for that project and Directed a directed us and the city of Santa Cruz to a $500,000 grant to help with the construction and Really sort of gave that project a kick forward, and it's exciting that it now Hopefully will come to fruition. It's a it's a it's a pathway That's probably used by hundreds of non thousands of people every year as people from the east side get to the boardwalk so Widening that tressel which is now that pathway, which is now very dangerous Courageous people to walk over the railroad tracks, which is not a good idea. I think it's exciting that that's moving forward So thank you and thanks for the commission support. Thanks for the comments any other comments Okay, good. Well, then we're gonna move on to our next item, which is the Caltrans report miss low Thank You mr. Chair morning commissioners I would just like to to also underscore some of the points from from Assemblyman stone and that our future is multimodal Cal trance has just released the state rail plan and of course you received that very comprehensive presentation last time in Watsonville and The state rail plan shows how we intend to integrate our systems and modes and work work very diligently on integrating freight along with electrification of our systems blending the high-speed rail with regular conventional rail Leveraging new technologies to make our rail infrastructure work better for California into the future in District 5. We're also kicking off the development of our bicycle and pedestrian plan. We're very excited about that This is a statewide effort following on the the state plan toward an active, California There are 12 districts in California and district 5. I'm pleased to report is one of the first ones In the state to develop its plan and we look forward to working with your communities and your staff on that We also hope to announce in the very near future the opening of a charging station to green the fleet We have been working through the Monterey Bay air resources district to install a fast charging station at the camp Roberts rest area South of here. So when you are making trips to see us in San Luis Vosville, you're welcome anytime You should have an opportunity in the near future to top up your tank there at the camp Roberts rest area top up your battery At the camp Roberts rest area. I Also want to just mention a few funding opportunities that are coming forward You have benefited greatly in the past and currently from Caltrans funded grants planning grants. We We provide new opportunities every year for this the newest cycle Is the applications are due for our sustainable transportation planning grants on November 30th And on October 19th, we will be having a workshop in our office at 10 a.m. Come on down two opportunities from the US DOT about new and exciting things include Sponsoring the formation of two new university transportation centers The US DOT is offering 15 million dollars to fund these two centers Providing students an opportunity to participate in cutting-edge transportation research one research program focuses on congestion relief And the other on improving the durability and extending the life of transportation infrastructure Funding from these two centers would be from the federal Consolidated Approach Bations Act of 2018 And eligible applicants are limited to seven and a half million for each center So 15 million for two and that's a national program the other national program is By the federal transit administration is offering 6.3 million dollars nationwide for transit coordination projects to improve access to health care as you know the the the Importance in providing for equity among how our transportation system serves our Communities and our public is to ensure that there's equitable and fair access to health care So with that with that emphasis this program is also open and applications are due November 13th Finally, I would just mention that we are working to release the Relieve the backlog of infrastructure needs with SB 1 and you'll see in the project update That's included in your packet this time there are four projects listed that have SB 1 funding and they represent Construction cost accumulated total of about 50 million dollars of those just those four projects in addition to all the other projects that are Listed in that report that are ongoing Any questions any questions miss lohm a commissioner shuffling? Yes at the last Commission meeting you weren't here, and I don't remember the name of the person who was but I raised the issue of The possibility of Caltrans contracting with a downtown street steam to do litter Cleanup on the north coast on highway one The person did follow up did talk to the maintenance Division and they were supposed to get in touch with Commissioner Coonerty's office My quite my request is that you look into what's happened. We haven't heard from them And we're hoping that they will follow through and it would be possible to get a contract to help with the cleanup on the on the highway segment that goes from the city of Santa Cruz To the city's landfill We'll follow up with you. Thank you. Thank you commission for track So some my constituents have brought that up to and the person that was here last time Did send a letter to the Commission and I passed that information on to those who are interested, so I thank you for that Thank you Pedestrian push button line for March and Street and East Beach right by Watsonville High School It was on the work order for 2019 and the funding supposedly is there. I just want to an update make sure it's moving along Mr. Caput I believe all the ADA projects and the pedestrian signal projects are on schedule I Don't I don't have a more specific update on that location To my knowledge those of the pedestrian signal upgrades Freeway actually makes becomes one way for probably about Half a mile Thank you Any other questions comments? Okay. Thank you for those information miss low Okay, we'll move on. I can't believe I'm saying this we've been waiting forever Seems like and saying everything we're not going to do anything until a unified quarter investment study is here and it's here I'm happy to say it is here Which means that all of us the commissioners and everybody in the public all have a lot of work to do right now, so Let's get started and I have a presentation from Mr. Dondaro, okay, I'd like to introduce you item. Mr. Chairman So the primary objective of the unified quarter investment study is to identify Multimodal investments to serve the community's future Transportation needs the study looks at potential projects beyond those already funded in the measure D expenditure plan The study was conceived just prior to the 2012 acquisition of the rail right-of-way Which provides a parallel corridor with unused capacity Implied in this study is the question. How best can we use the rail right-of-way in? Combination with transportation improvements on the parallel corridors highway 1 and Soquel and freedom to address future transportation needs in the community Measure D specifies that RTC will evaluate future uses of the rail right-of-way The UCS has been informed by a public process over several years to obtain input from the community and this commission At this point, I'd like to thank Caltrans our partners for the initial Planning grant that we got for this and we've also added some measure D money to it But Caltrans staff has shown a real interest in this project. We appreciate that So at this point, I'd like to introduce the project team. Not all of these people will speak to you today first of all RTC staff members include ginger die car and Grace Belixley Who put many many hours into getting this report out to you and I've been working with grace and ginger? Throughout the process and then our consultant team is comprised of Frederick Ventner engineer and project manager Michael Schmidt who's led the modeling effort and very technical stuff and Darrell de poncie who's done much of the performance measure analysis and then finally Sarah Graham is here from strategic economics And they're a sub consultant to Kimley Horn doing the consulting the economic piece of the report so at this time I'd like to hand it over to Frederick and We'll present Some highlights of this study Thank You George. Good morning commissioners and public Indeed a long awaited moment. We're very proud to present to you the step two analysis results I'm just gonna do some brief introductions and then Darrell's gonna Walk you through the results from the performance measures So going back for those of you just a little bit of a recap historic study corridor includes basically three routes It is so Cal Drive and also freedom boulevard those are arterial streets start in Watsonville next then all the way through to Santa Cruz downtown The second route is highway one Which also starts and in Watsonville and it ends at Davenport Goes through the freeway sections also the street section then once it comes more an arterial road and then a highway section north of Santa Cruz and then the rail right-of-way corridor Which runs from the power road station and all the way to Davenport The quick recap you will recall and just to explain where we are We started out last year with goals and performance measures identifying the goals and specifically the performance measures that were Regarded as the starting point for this Analysis that we're presenting today We've identified various projects and those would be capital improvement projects that would go above and beyond and would also include some measure deep projects And those were also then we developed the scenarios So you will remember they were a scenarios a through e had a workshops input from the community presented it to you and We selected four alternative scenarios that would be analyzed mixed some of the modes around in those And then here we are today with step two which is a presentation of the performance measures Analysis based on the inputs up to now So there are really three big components in this and it gets extremely complex if you really look through the data So we got to present it slowly today. I'm sure there's going to be lots of questions There's lots of more opportunity to also get questions and feedback in the future But there's a component of this that regards infrastructure. It's like what projects can we do? How are we going to implement them? How will it work? What do they look like? What will they cost? Then we took those Infrastructure projects put them in the model or did it off model and said what are the performance? What are the what are these projects doing to travel right and travel is not just for cars. It's for cars Bikes beds buses and also then again for the rail as well and then so and then the last step from those so you have those two components they go into a Performance measure and that we then present today So a quick recap for the scenarios Just so everybody knows and we would love for you in your packet on The performance dashboard and it's on page hundred eighty five I think it's going to help be very helpful if you can keep this These scenarios pictures in front of you because everything is color-coded the way we presented in the rest of the presentation You can clearly see what it is so scenario a Covers HOV lanes Various improvements along highway one which includes the ox lanes meter amp metering of the ramps improvements on San Lorenzo River the bridge and Mission Street improvements We've got the what we call the BRT light So if we talk about BRT light that would be a BRT light service on the arterial system They would which would run in long freedom Boulevard and so Cal Drive and then some various intersection improvements So that could be on the street system and for the rail corridor a trail only option Scenario B is a little more transit focus with a lot less Freeway improvements to enhance So the intent was to see what is that really the transit do a little bit for us So bus on shoulder do metering on the ramps to help flow on it on the freeway network And then some street improvements We keep the BRT light and then for the rail trail we have the ped And bike trail with the rail service scenario C was also more heavy on Transit but instead of the rail service on the rail right away we put a BRT service So that's probably one of the bigger changes So there's a BRT service on the rail corridor in scenario C Scenario E is a little bit more generic. So we have some HOV lanes freeway improvements We left out a some of the street improvements localized, but there we have the rail On the trail as well. So look at the colors blue for a yellow for B C for orange and E for green So I'm gonna hand it over to Darrell, and he's gonna walk you through the results from the performance measures Thank you morning commissioners So just to start off just to recap what Frederick mentioned the performance measures that were evaluated here We're all based on the goals that were determined right at the very beginning of this study They were based on your own objectives and the county-wide level and We're designed to maximize the benefits that come out of whatever improvements are ultimately constructed as part of this so the Safety reliability and efficiency environment and health economic vitality equitable access all of those were the foundation Under which the performance measures that we're going to talk about are So first off with safety we collected data from the California Highway Patrol to understand what kind of Safety history we have on the corridor looking at all the different collisions in the different corridor sections And we made assumptions that in the future by 2035 Based on changes in traffic volume those collisions would also increase so from that baseline we then looked at the different project alternatives that were part of each scenario and used federal highway administration research and various sources to understand what those types of improvements were likely to do in terms of impacting crashes and We determined that the crash reductions would be as we're showing here so based on Without any improvements at all it looked like we would have about 3,300 crashes a year in the county and that We would be saving up to two to Two to three hundred crashes depending on the alternative scenario B had the best reduction So that was based both on reductions in traffic volumes that we'd get from increasing transit and from those improvements The other side of safety is the cost so crashes have cost associated with them It's up to ten million dollars for fatality a hundred thousand dollars for an injury Up to ten thousand dollars for PDO for property damage only crashes so crashes Currently cost almost five hundred million dollars a year in the county and in the future We would project it to be over seven hundred thousand seven hundred million dollars a year With the various alternatives proportional to the amount of crash reduction We would see savings of between fifty and eighty million dollars a year scenario B because that had the highest crash reduction Was the one that had the biggest reduction So in terms of reliability and efficiency Auto average auto speeds were probably the best indicator of where we're getting those efficiencies in for vehicular traffic This is a county-wide average Auto speed that we're showing here based on what we get out of the travel demand model We expect that as Yet traffic volumes increase in the future. We'll see speeds go down as congestion increases so when we look at our various scenarios we're projecting that the future baseline will actually Have a bit of a speed reduction compared to now as you would expect scenarios a and e Effectively would bring traffic congestion levels to where it is now based on The fact that we have increased capacity on SR one So the fact that these differences look pretty small But remember we're talking about the entire county-wide Traffic system so just that a few facilities are making that much difference is pretty big the other side of the Coin here is transit travel time. So that's a tricky one to measure But what we ultimately decided to do to show you guys today is what it would look like on the three different routes the rail corridor SR one and So Cal freedom corridor and we can see for each one. That's the travel time in minutes for those different routes depending on what Options we have on the table. So scenario a we don't have a rail Option so that one isn't there, but we we can see that their rail services and services Express bus on SR one using an HOV lane where the best performing transit travel times to minimize the Time distance between Watsonville and Santa Cruz Then lastly we've got mode share. So all of our scenarios would reduce auto traffic As a proportion of overall trips We're increasing transit bike and walking in all the scenarios the ones that invest in transit more increase that transit Benefit so if we look at scenario B, that's where we have the Largest variety of transit options. So we're seeing the highest switch over to there And then when you look at scenarios B and E those ones include the trail trail as well as a Buffered bike lane along so Cal freedom. So we get a slightly better Transition to bike trips on those two scenarios and the clickers Okay, there we go So vehicle miles traveled that's basically the number of miles when you add the number miles every vehicle travels and add them up All together right now. We've got about five and a half million Vehicle miles traveled per day in the county. We're projecting that by the 2035 that would increase to about six million So when we look at our various alternatives The ones that invest in SR one with adding capacity will slightly increase vehicle miles traveled because people are Transitioning from more direct surface roads to the freeway where they can drive faster The ones that don't make that investment and we put more people into transit will reduce the vehicle miles traveled When we look at it on the other side in terms of greenhouse gas emissions we see that all the Scenarios are pretty similar in the outcome there the scenarios with the higher VMTs also have higher Efficiencies so that that brings that difference down a little bit when we look at the no build based on baseline We're also seeing a pretty big reduction in GHG and that's because of the assumptions in the model about improved vehicle fleet efficiency in the future and Just reduced emissions in general because of that and then we looked at environmentally sensitive areas It was an important part of the measure D requirement that we did in environmental analysis so we explored several different factors we looked at Natural habitat we looked at Drainage water wetlands seismic faults. We looked at the just topography We looked at flood and erosion hazards hazardous materials farmland All of those areas types of things that could be impacted by this study So this is one example. We have maps of all of those things in the final report. This is showing our Habitat areas and then we mapped each one of those And then the three study corridors to see where those study corridors would overlap with any of these environmental sensitivities and and Then for each scenario we looked at where the actual construction activity would be based on those scenarios to refine that mapping and identified the locations of each and every one of those overlaps so that we could determine Basically, how many miles of impact we would likely have to each of those different sensitivities. So again, the scenarios came out with fairly similar results the Biggest changes would have been in the North County based on what type of Alternatives were constructing along that route another big factor For our goals was equity. So Household transportation costs is a pretty important factor there Vehicles are very expensive to operate. So those drive a significant portion of the household costs the difference between Household that owns one vehicle versus two is pretty substantial Basically, we're talking about almost $45 a day in expense per household if you have two vehicles So these alternatives have the opportunity to help Households reduced from a two vehicle to a one vehicle model because they would be additional transportation options for them transit would become more Accessible bicycle and pedestrian trips are a little bit easier. So when we look at the projected Difference between where things are now and where things are in the future Where this these alternatives would bring the average household transportation costs back to similar to where it is now Despite the fact that inflation is likely to increase transportation costs ahead of incomes Then we also want to look at equity. So the level of investment we're putting out there Is it going to benefit? Everybody equally is it going to? Disproportionately benefit one group over another so based on the population in the county if 14 cents of every dollar of investment went to a transportation disadvantaged household Then we could say we have a proportional level of investment these scenarios all of them are closer to 25 cents of a dollar that's based on Travel demand modeling we've looked and seen for each one of those projects who's likely to use it and The users from the transportation disadvantaged areas of the county Represent about 25% of the users for all of the scenarios So for economic fatality, there's a number of things that go in that but one of the important ones is level of public investment So how much do these things cost and how much money do we have on the table right now? So for each of the scenarios We have identified here how much the overall package would cost to build and then how much of Currently identified funding is there from local sources and known grant programs and Other things like that these do assume the continuation of SB 1 so Propositions 6 could change this outlook a little bit, but that's where things stand right now. So scenario C Would have the lowest public investment need while scenario E is the highest, right? And then in terms of ongoing costs, so that was just the capital. This is talking about transit So for the transit options each we have to maintain and operate those services So depending on the level of service out there and the revenues available This is what we have now So scenario B has the highest operation cost because that's where we're adding the most vehicle miles of transit into the system scenario E would be second Assuming that we're bringing in fair revenues and all that other kind of stuff. We have funding as shown to Cover most of those but there's a little bit more additional funding that would need to be found there's also costs associated with roadway improvements and Other things that we don't aren't reflecting here. Those are typically maintained by local agencies and Caltrans and whatnot. So Those need to be considered as well And then I'll pass it over to Sarah to continue in the economic discussion Hi, good morning. I'm Sarah Graham with strategic economics and we conducted an assessment of economic benefits associated with the projects and That assessment is based on the premise that transportation projects Generate economic benefits by improving access for households for businesses and for visitors and For each scenario we evaluated the change in visitor tax revenue and other benefits such as property value or development potential and business performance Using the factors shown here on the slide So we thought about the area impacted by the transportation Improvement is it corridor wide or is it very local? We looked at who benefits from the Individual improvements is it is it households? Is it visitors? Is it benefit is it businesses? We also thought about is the project creating a new transportation route. Is it connecting up destinations in a new way? And then finally we thought about is it creating a new amenity a new attraction that would be in addition to a new travel path So to measure the visitor tax revenue we evaluated how the individual projects could influence visitor behaviors like hotel stays and spending and many of the projects included are actually located away from The major visitor destinations and therefore those projects would be assumed to have sort of a marginal and diffuse impact on these factors But those projects along the rail corridor would significantly benefit visitors by linking up visitor destinations and via bicycle Pedestrian access or transit So based on how each of the projects could influence visitor behavior We measured how that would translate into changes in transit Occupancy tax also known as the hotel tax and visitor related sales tax So shown on this bar graph The no-build scenario reflects a general continuation of historic trends in visitor spending and Then each scenario represents an increment of change over that no-build scenario Ranging from about seven hundred and sixty thousand dollars to one point two million dollars on an annual basis And then in addition to the visitor related tax revenue We also evaluated each of the transportation Projects for its potential impacts on actually a pretty broad range of economic benefits Including changes in business location decisions development potential business performance local tax revenue and user benefits Those project level impacts were then translated into an assessment of the Relative level of benefits for each of the benefit categories at the scenario level and that's what's shown here for example, the development potential and for development potential and property values research shows that projects providing new connections or new access are likely to have the greatest impact on development So new transit service and other new facilities that connect destinations would be expected to have relatively larger Impacts on development and therefore the scenarios that include those types of projects are ranked higher Similarly improvements that ease access for businesses Would be expected to have a relatively larger impact on business location decisions So scenarios that include key highway improvements and local Intersection improvements would be expected to impact those decisions and scenarios that include those types of projects were ranked relatively higher so Actually, the the this shows the results on a scenario basis that includes all the impacts from individual projects and With that I'm actually turning it back to Thank you So there's about a trillion numbers in front of you Okay, so we hope that we're not gonna have even if we mold divide divided by about a thousand Hope we don't have that many questions, but there will be questions Also in terms of the process, we know that the other document was posted Friday It's a lot of information if you read it every time I read it There's still something new that pops up at me and you know I've developed own little cheat sheets and I'm like what's this say and then I think again So we have more outreach coming up We are having stakeholder meetings and those would be specific groups have been identified. They were also part of the step one process We're gonna have advisory committees from RTC meetings coming up public workshops in a couple of weeks and also focus group meetings And of course, there's gonna be a agency outreach and presentations to the city council So there is over the next month a whole process involved to get more comments present this again Get the questions in and then I'm really developing a preferred scenario that will then come back to you November 15th and then Taking action December 6th the end of the year on on this project I Think that's the presentation in a nutshell Thank you very much. Thank you for the presentation and for delivering us the document I'm gonna hope that to encourage my commissioners to maybe not have so many questions, but take the time to look into this which we all know we need to do and and move forward What I am going to do is before I open up the public comment Is it was mentioned that this is this is this is a big deal It's serious and I want to allocate as much time as you possibly can so Because we're not going to resolve anything today because I as was just mentioned this document is a week old and we all need to research it I'm going to put the this item on the agenda for the TPW meeting on October 18th to be sold discussion item Maybe I shouldn't say sold but the primary discussion item at that meeting to allow At least another couple maybe two three hours to discuss this because I know we need to fully vet this as we move forward So by my scale that will give the TPW meeting of October 18th And then our regular meeting of November 1st and then as Fred Rick said we were going to make a decision on this on December 6th with the other workshops Hopefully have enough time for us all to get our feelings known and more importantly to research the issues and to make a Good decision for Santa Cruz County So with that any questions of the board before I open up to the public Mr. Johnson. Yes. Thank you chair. So I appreciate you This being presented to us Now when you mentioned that the TPW would it be in a public place like this instead of the small? Yeah, yes, okay And you mentioned December 6th as a final date I Appreciate the fact that we want to move forward on things like this But at the same time I'm not going to commit or lock myself into a kind of an arbitrary time for us to vote on this because It may work out that December 6th is the very best time for us to decide but it may not I'm going to amend that to proposed date to vote Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you Thank you very much. I just had a couple of questions one process question We're going to be installing a new executive director Will that executive director have an opportunity to weigh in on the staff report prior to staff recommendation? It's my hope if our schedule proceeds that we have a new executive director on board by December 3rd so I'm not sure how that is going to weigh into his ability to weigh into that and to That's our timeline he or she will be or she implementing this planning level document that's going to inform our Funding allocation decisions for for the foreseeable future. I would imagine that he or she Might be interested in having some voice in the decision-making process Absolutely, and that's why I think to Mr. Johnson's point the date of December 6th right now is a target date And and by no means I don't think this board should be bound to that I think if we move along as planned and it seems like that's the appropriate time to vote We can just say we're not going to vote on this item before December 6th. Okay. Yeah, and then thank you and then just well a Question about about the data that's presented in the report Scenarios a and b don't include freight rail Scenario C only includes freight rail and ops in Watsonville But we have a a ten-year contract with progressive rail for freight service on the full 32 mile corridor How does that affect the outcomes of the scenarios if we insert freight rail service into all the scenarios? Well the contract to my correct me on this or if they if there's any mistake in this our contract with Progressive rail is contingent on once this board receives a Staff recommendation on the on the on the study which we have not received we just received the document There will be a staff recommendation from the date of the stack recommendation a 90-day clock ticks as to when the progressive rail Has an exit clause? Oh, no, I mean it we we considered the impacts on on the the county or transportation infrastructure on in each of these scenarios With various components comprising composing the these scenarios, but all of our scenarios are lacking a Critical feature being the freight rail service So none of our scenarios have considered the the full actual transportation package except for what is a scenario e? And see for freight rail service in Watsonville What I'm saying is that that the environmental condition conditions have changed or the policymaking environment has changed since we Initiated the scenario analysis and now we have freight rail service How does that affect the outcomes? Projected in these scenarios, and I guess that's a question for the consultants does does injecting Freight rail service into all of the scenarios affect the outcomes Or would you say that because it affects all of them? They all will be similarly affected like like like for example every we're we're funding Measured projects regardless of the scenarios and so those are anticipated in the outcomes of the scenario analysis But we did not analyze the effects of freight rail service along a 32 mile corridor in the scenarios How does that affect the analysis? If I might know I'm mr. Chair In negotiating an agreement with progressive rare the Commission kept in mind the fact this study was coming to you and you wanted You know the options available in that agreement so you could make your decision on on this study Without having a full commitment to that To any particular type of rail service so so the agreement does allow the art the RTC to select Scenarios that don't have rail service. No, I'm not talking about the progress of rail contract I'm talking about the the effects of freight rail service on the scenarios So for example the freight rail service is the primary use of the rail line How does that? Intersect with the uses on the rail line for passenger rail service or transit if the primary use on the rail line is freight I Think mr. Dicar wants to give us some information on this, please ginger Morning commissioners. I'm ginger die car senior transportation planner here and project manager for the unified corridor study We've heard a lot of comments from the community and I believe you're commissioners in the past too about how best to do this Analysis and if we could have done it all in a project by project basis That would have been brought a lot of good information And if you look through the port report we did that as much as we possibly could But given the tools that we have and in particular the travel demand model that requires the transportation projects to be brought together But your decision as it comes up could potentially Create a new scenario that is not one of these four Scenarios and then we would bring the information together for that particular scenario in order to move that forward in the future Does that answer your question? So there could there could be these could be refined further now that we have this new information That's correct. Great. Thank you Thank you, mr. Dicar I must start all the way down Any questions on that end? Miss Johnson go ahead Yeah, it's going I have some concern that Patrick had regarding the lack of freight Being part of the of the analysis, but I did have a couple of questions And first of all, I want to thank the staff and the consultants for The report very enlightening a lot of information I think very well done and I hope that those in the community that have questioned the validity of this report With some of us on the Commission will recognize the level of hard work and the level of information It's put before us. I think does give us a lot of tools To make some good decisions. And so I just want to thank you for that and acknowledge the credibility of the document. I Think it's credible I wanted to know from the consultants. What were your sources for the cost estimates included in their report? Frederick Venter so for Where do we start so for the highway one projects Improvement project was mainly the Caltrans data that's available HIV lanes the auxiliary lanes and the ramp metering For the arterial railway network for the Buffett bike lanes for the BRT Improvements will we develop those based on best information out there? for intersection improvements We a lot of those came from the city and the county CIP's And you know, we've communicated that with the cities got some input So there's numerous CIP projects in in the various agencies. So those are included And then for a rail service Bus services also best practices and some information that was available in the end for the engineering cost estimates We use the it's known as the Caltrans 11 page preliminary cost estimate methodology and really what it does it It takes quantities you feed it into the spreadsheet And those quantities relate to construction bridges and then there's various formulas that Caltrans as they've added based on their Experience to bring in all the soft costs and that actually gave us then the the ultimate bottom line numbers that we show you So you use existing Information that was out there from the various partners of various transportation agencies in the county Which just sounds like you did plus Caltrans And was there any kind of Massaging of that information or to sort of true it up to 2018 numbers to sort of make it as I understand This is a 50,000-foot level planning document for purposes of general decision-making And I understand that this is not project-level Numbers, so I just recognizing that it is relatively important for us to understand the relative costs of these choices Yes, so did you do anything to sort of true it up to current numbers absolutely? Absolutely, so that the probably the biggest increases were all the estimates that came in on the rail on the trail You know for some of the segments that is out currently for bird And you know that it was like every once in a while with oh new beds are in let's update it the engineering engineering news record Determines index numbers for increases in construction cost estimates and they really available online you anybody can find them It averages here between three point five and five percent per annum So any cost that had a base year of like 2015 we would look at the engineers record indices and bring it up to To a base year analysis. So all the costs are presented in the same year Great. Thank you. And then on page 156 and again on 160 You've listed 41 million dollars for the cost to reverse policy of the use of the rail corridor And I wonder if someone on staff or your consultant team could walk us through what that 40? What is what is that number? If I could just add to the question that you had previously commissioner Johnson Metro we worked very closely with Metro to come up with the cost information for any transit improvements that were increased too So all of the transit improvements additional routes frequencies, etc. And cost information was very much defined by Metro staff As far as your question on the additional costs if there was a reversal of decision to Not use the rail right away for passenger rail or for rail service, but to use it for either a trail only or a bus rapid transit worked with Deputy director Mendez and the information that I have on my notes here is that There is about 29 million that would need to be repaid to the Between the California Transportation Commission as well as some of the STIP funds Some of that the you need to look at the escalated amount of funds. There was originally 11 million that was Funded by the California Transportation Commission, but if we wouldn't need to pay back those funds it would be escalated for current dollars there's also about 10 and a half million dollars from the Central Federal lands for the North Coast project that we would not get if it was not constructed by 2020 and the timeframe for making that change in policy and direction would Not meet that deadline and then also some staff time was added in there I believe it's on the order of them one and a half million to go through and Work with the different agencies that would require that reversal Yeah, I'm a little confused and Maybe I've got it wrong So I'm gonna ask Luis to clarify so it seems to me that in the past when I've asked this question You I thought I remember it correctly, but I'm a person of a certain age So for a prop 116 money Is it not correct that our current excursion use? Passenger use along the rail line from rowing camp to Santa Cruz and the and the annual holiday train Does that not whatever we do irrespective of the rest of the rail corridor? Does that not? Satisfy our prop 116 obligation That we don't have to pay it back it It's hard to say exactly what will make sure you satisfy that the California Transportation Commission at any point at any one particular point in time because Depending on who's in the California Transportation Commission their interpretation can change about things now based on questions that we have We have asked in the past We did ask whether just the existing service from big trees that goes from Felton to The Board of Art would that be sufficient to qualify For the prop 116 funds we were told no that that would not be it Then when we talked about having some additional excursion service and they said Yes, the district excursion service could Qualify and so that's why the Commission then submitted an application To implement additional excursion service and that's how the Commission was able to get get approval for the prop 116 money as well as state STIP other transit money STIP transit money as well and You know depending where you talk to a Transportation Commission then some people might say okay Well, that may be fine, but only for that section in which you are actually Implementing some sort of excursion service if you're not using the entire line for the excursion service Then maybe you should pay back You know some of the some of that money because I'm using the entire line So it can be up to the interpretation of whoever happens to be at the California Transportation Commission at that particular point in time Okay, thank you Any other questions on this side? Commissioner Johnson. Yeah, I have a question about process I know the city of Scotts Valley. We have consultants that are helping us with our theater group and That consulting team met with every city council member To ask about what their perspective on things were I never got a call from anybody and and this is more of a Jack Bertrand kind of question because he was always interested in the process Who are you talking to? Who did you talk to? Did you talk to? Commissioners on a regular basis just the chair just staff members Because I'm trying to get a feeling for what kind of input did you get in terms of Guiding this process because you came up with four scenarios, but at the same time If I'm my colleague here had mentioned there may be an opportunity for different scenarios You you decided on these four as a combination, but it's kind of like building your own pizza, right? Sometimes you want this that and the other thing on it But you guys decided that we're going to just go with these scenarios with these ingredients And I'm wondering if you didn't talk to lots of the commissioners. Why didn't you? Commissioner could I respond to that and then I'll ask maybe ginger to to also step up Well, I'm actually asking the consultants if that's okay. Well, but I think I have a relevant Piece of that and that is that we have been talking to you throughout the whole process and that the four scenarios were approved by this commission Early last year is that correct? So, I mean it's not like we've been doing this in a vacuum and we did I'll do you know a lot of extensive Outreach with the public as well very early on with some online surveys and some workshops and so on but I'll let the Consultant to answer your question So as mentioned in the step one process There was extensive outreach to public workshops and held at live oak and the other one on Watsonville Evening workshops. We had a full-day session with specific stakeholders. Those would include a couple of interest groups Staff from RTC side on the economic Evaluation reached out to every city had lots of discussions about those Getting information for the economic analysis Once we had the scenarios selected which was approved by the board it was in December last year Then that was our sort of you're getting out the gates and run the analysis for these So we were then tasked to come back to you to at this point where we are now to prove to show the results You know and then see how we could refine those into a preferred alternative. Yeah, it's been my experience So it's one thing to kind of come out of the gates, but it's another thing to kind of have Markers where you make sure that you're on the right track and sometimes the way to do that is to have be consultive and Get feedback from interested parties as of as far as representatives are concerned. Hey, am I on the right track here? Are we doing the right thing? And I think that's really important and I didn't really sense it from you all Mr. Schifrin Yeah, I think it's important to remember the context in which his study is being done I mean, there's tremendous divisiveness in the community about a couple of these alternatives The consultants never talked to me and I'm glad they never talked to me because There are already many members of the public who believe that commissioners on one side or the other have already made up their mind And the study is just a sham So I think it was very important that the consultants acted independently Based on the scenarios that this commission approved and the idea that somehow they should have been Meeting with commissioners I would be very concerned about that and I think many members of the public would be concerned about that because what we wanted Was an independent analysis and an independent analysis Doesn't mean that you ask people along the way whether they like what you're doing What it means is that you wait until it comes out and then you get mad You don't try to influence influence it along the way and I think that's at least from what I know That's what's going on here. We the commission approved a set of scenarios They're not exactly what I would love but those are the scenarios that they approve We now have a report with an excess of information about all of those scenarios that we're and the public are going to be Evaluating I think the process has been a very from what I know The process has been a very clean one the consultants have done what they were asked to do which was take the The public information and the Commission direct direction from phase one and do a phase two We now have phase two and we're going to get more I'm sure we're going to get lots more information from the public and then the Commission is going to have to make a Decision and my sense is that the process has been a good process in terms of Trying to maneuver through a very divisive controversial situation to come up with an outcome that has as much credibility as it possibly can so I'm glad that there has not been Individual meetings assuming that there haven't been individual meetings with commissioners along the way I don't want to open this up into a debate of the commissioners It's my recollection that we chose these scenarios and we voted on them and what I'd really like to open up with the public to hear Them so is there any more questions real quick, mr. Mr. Bertrand Yeah, I'd like to reiterate with Commissioner Mulhern said about Interacting with our new executive director who he or she might be and giving that individual Time to make sure they're on board and understand the development that led into this and also There's probably going to be that person's imprint because after all they're going to be running this organization Hopefully many years into the future I Haven't made up my mind one way or the other which which scenario is going to be the best And so I'd like to say that to people my interest here in this study as it gives me a very clear Vehicle or instrument to understand what actually will be the best for Santa Cruz I eat the scenarios Which ones are going to be the best so I just heard something interesting a little bit and if I may ask ginger to come back There was a mention that the different scenarios could be regrouped I mean depending on how we saw the results I want to get a better understanding of that and also I'd like to know if that is the case How would that affect the proposed timeline at this point? Temporarily not decided completely, but how would you see that working out for this commission? Well, let me clarify a little bit. I'm certainly not asking to redo for other scenarios and Lengthen this process any further, but the commissioners here are the decision-makers if you see that things need to be adjusted But I feel like the information that we have on the report is the analysis that we can provide obviously it's a draft Some additional Adjustments can be made to make some considerations But we this is the scope of work that has the consultants have done so but Given that you are the decision-makers if you feel like there needs we the preferred scenario would end up being a Slightly different combination from what's presented before you today, then that's your decision Thank you. That was a great answer Also in terms of Patrick's comments about including Progressive in terms of commercial activity Presumably there might be taking trucks off the road and so I think his comment was well placed Commissioner Kaufman government. Yes, certainly. I will not attest to being a planner and To get information based on planners synopsis of things It takes a lot from my mind to sort of wrap around of what this means and how to interpret it and how to relay it or or things about Other scenarios are the way that the methodology and their reports are done. It's like 22% or ADA how does that affect this and the different mode out different options that are here? The seniors the disadvantage. I I think I would like to know a little bit more about how that plays out with this particular result of this this analysis work So I have some questions about that and the and again, I don't even have My questions. I'll lead out until I can digest this better. So I certainly know I need more time I would like to have a little bit of Questions answered about the modalities. We don't currently use. I mean, how how did we come up with numbers on? Expanding bus. How did we come up with numbers on how many would use the rail? Can we talk a little bit more about? Things that we don't currently use and how those numbers came and were developed Mike Schmidt Kimley Horn and associates you asked actually two questions that I'll probably address is when you asked about how we did the rail forecast and that actually What we did is we pivoted off the work that was previously done for the 2015 rail feasibility study, which relied on what's called a Direct ridership model which basically is fancy speak for Farron Pierce took the Origin destination information from the travel demand model as well as a lot of information about the built environment and compared that to known Riderships in different areas throughout the state and they use as a basis for developing a forecast So we took that data and incorporated that into our study The other part of it is you've asked about it, which is really the transit, which is the bus and the Brt. We use the travel demand model to develop those forecasts. So that takes into consideration socioeconomic considerations network considerations future growth a lot of the aspects like that to help develop a forecast and The other question I haven't and I know we have a lot going on. So this is the one that I Has to do with money and I think that we have some commissioners that will probably be also responsive How how does this tell us about how we're leveraging the money we have available? I mean can we how do we get 5 to 5 to 1 on our measure D to help this project along with whatever scenarios come out of it How do we tell the public how we're going to leverage the money the best way possible? It's maybe it's a broad question, but I When it comes to money and projects everybody's going to say this is too costly How do we justify where our costs are going and and I think that we have to have those that kind of conversation for the public investment performance measure what we did is we looked at the Forecasts that were conducted through the regional transportation plan which goes to 2040 and we scaled those back for the time period Covered in this project Then we also looked to see what new information was out there What did the SB guideline SB 1 guidelines tell us about the competitive programs at the boat the formula based programs? Also, we looked to see if there's been any changes in trends in terms of grant awards What's been coming to Santa Cruz County and we updated the RTP revenues based on that We also looked at any new programs that had come online that were not considered in the regional transportation plan and assumed those revenues And then in the table that looks at the perform Public investment we looked at how those could be distributed by project based on project eligibility So whether it's the geography if they're in a particular Location in our county or by mode is usually one of the most significant Factors and being eligible for a grant source or also by outcome I did we did not do an analysis of how measure D would leverage those funds the measure D funds that are included in this analysis Are those identified for the trail and a small portion of the funding that's allocated to local jurisdictions for neighborhood projects and in reverse of that The consequences if if proposition 6 is passed what I don't see anything in here about How this outcome will change if that were to occur it would be very significant We estimated that box me 40% of the funding that we anticipate them to be available for UCS Scenario projects and UCS scenarios would go away and so our public investment performance and for measure would be significantly Impfected thank you Okay, great go ahead and we're gonna open it up to the public And show of hands of how many people would like to speak Okay, we're gonna do two minutes. I just want to hope I can maintain a quorum here. So come on up and Remember that it's just out, but I'd love to hear your comments Hello, my name My name is Willman Sheen. I'm a president of Santa Cruz and a longtime member of the Bicycle Advisory Committee the RTC's Bicycle Advisory Committee is an alternate and voting member over the years My first off I'd like to appreciate and recognize the work that staff has done It's an incredible amount of work and consultants as well getting your arms around all this information is no easy task and I think that The analogy that comes to mind. It's a little bit like lowering the water in the reservoir You know that you can start to see where the rocks are and I think that that's very important that we recognize That there are rocks there's some that were possibly known all along and some that may have never been Exposed by them, you know, we're off the radar so to speak To me the most important Emission in this study is the fact or distinction is that the Comparison between a trail only design and a rail with trail design ends up producing numbers that are almost identical in every sense I mean, and they're virtually in the noise when you talk about an analysis, but fundamentally it's Not accurate that the trail only approach is as represented in the study if you use the Vision that Greenway has had and trail now has had for the idea of a linear park with a wide general purpose multimodal transportation System essentially that's it consists of a wide paved path and a separated Pedestrian walkway that would be ADA compliant that's substantially different than what is represented here And so therefore those differences ripple through this entire study and in effect make Much of this data irrelevant or inaccurate the second in second most important thing I believe is that of all of the Scenario a groupings with the highway expenditures. There's no attempt to Leverage the expense of all that infrastructure approximately 85% of the cost of that highway Infrastructure is over crossings and bridges and there was no attempt at all to include our bus rapid transit Or the expense of those bridges being leveraged for future Multi excuse me for My name is Kerry Pico I will also say I was not prepared to see that if you add a lane to your highway Your speed actually slows down And so I what I want to say is I don't want to blame these guys, but if there's garbage in you get garbage out So something else that came out in this study and obviously nobody's bred at all and digested at all But the cost of a trail only is five point seven million dollars per mile Compare that to what's used in the MBSST, which is one point one less than one million dollars per mile And then you add the bridges and all that stuff, but the point is The numbers are all over the place. They were relevant In fact, we calculated how much per square foot if you accounted for the width and all that stuff the cost for a trail Only cost more than a trail with rail just the trail component and yet it's a much simpler job So if you're not going to do things fairly nobody's going to believe you guys in any of this stuff This is such a biased Set of information going in and nothing can be trusted and and if I offer all my information But I'm just telling you you guys lost it You just don't have any trust and that's the problem and I don't care how it comes out But if you do it honestly and fairly I don't care if it's rail trail highway, whatever I Just want it to be fair honest and responsible and I don't see that Thank you Hello, my name is Bruce saw Hill Hello chair commissioners I'm a board member of Friends of the rail and trail and also an ex cycle committee member of the RTC And so I have a question actually for the consultants and that is when you I've done some travel demand modeling in my life And so I wanted to ask if the travel demand model includes synergies an example would be at this new smart rail system in Marin and Sonoma at the point they had had seven hundred thousand riders They had carried sixty thousand bikes and this is pretty amazing and wondering if effects like this were also considered Thank you Thank you Good afternoon Commissioners Casey buyer from the Santa Cruz area Chamber of Commerce One I want to compliment the staff that's been working on this for over three plus years Since measure D and also your consultants who are also diligently working on this. There was a comment made that this is a rush to judgment I've been in 23 of the RTC meetings over the last two years on this subject matter alone Each meeting is usually one or two hours long. There's a dialogue and conversation about what's going on locally How it fits into the region for here and what's the best use of all of the rail trails? I don't like everything in this in this project and I don't think anybody in the room does but it the end answer is What's the best use for the community and I think this product this? Consultant project Arise at those solutions that give you the opportunity to make those decisions Don't let anybody fool you that you're not doing your job as you are I'm on many planning commissions myself And it's a very difficult challenge to let the consultants do their work then to present you a document Then you do your job in bringing it back to the public there will be public comment means workshops going forward and I think one of your commissioners mentioned that there's a deadline date that Deadline date is a subject matter date it gives you an opportunity to work to that and obviously in planning processes you can extend the date based upon the information you Receive from the consultants from the community from the public in your own in-depth education on the document So again, thank you for what you do for the community. I appreciate all the hard work and the work ahead Thank you Michael st. I'm here basically as a citizen and a taxpayer not as CFST I want to just say I have a lot of respect for all you do and especially the staff members a lot of work went into this Our group went over this study on Tuesday my initial impression and actually the impression of the group Was no matter what scenario chose Not much of any better Happened than the no-build scenario And as a taxpayer, I would say is spending almost three-quarters of a billion dollars and not vastly improving on The no-build some scenario is somewhat financially Irresponsible but in fairness and with my respect for this group and all the money put in in time I'm going to be one of the first public members to select a scenario Basically, I have spent time on this and my choice Personally is scenario B and with a change of two areas and in addition of another one eliminating the Ramp metering unless it's for bus rapid transit only would be suggested a widened Mission Street intersection Check that off the list in the excursion rail by doing this You save a hundred and thirty eight million dollars on that scenario bringing the cost down to 694 million and those are the things that that does by those changes You get all high marks on economic economic benefits. It's cheapest by 56 million allows passenger rail service Scenario B is the safest transport speeds the same Highest transit usage less public investment needed Funding for the costs and maintenance From outside sources is highest You also have a lowest available collision costs for scenario B VMT is a wash except for higher transit VMT, which is a good thing and you also have a lowest pollutant For for item B. Good luck on all everything you do and I'll see you in the next meeting Good afternoon, I was all set to say good morning. I'm Brett Garrett. Thank you for this report I've spent a lot of time going through the details I I find myself reverse engineering trying to break it down by project and figure out where the numbers came from So if that raw data exists, it would be helpful to provide it I do encourage you to think outside the box and above the ground I do feel like scenarios missing that should be studied I advocate for an elevated pod car system personal rapid transit And in a way, I feel like this study also advocates Personal rapid transit because when I try to put together a personal rapid transit scenario It ends up being cheaper than any of the scenarios and when I go through the goals It seems to me that my scenario meets every single goal Better than any of the scenarios. I'm just kind of astonished that that's that's how I read it And I hope I'll have a chance to talk to many of you individually about some of these issues and Bring in someone that's actually working on a PRCT system and building a prototype and can actually speak for why it's feasible and Why it's why you're gonna see it existing in the next couple years And I did put together a scenario that I handed to all of you, but you should have received it, I hope And Yeah, I was gonna read but I guess I've said what I need to say. Thank you very much Thank you Buzz Anderson Imagine the RTC as a group of physicians with the patient being the transportation problems. We find ourselves in as In the medical field your first responsibility is to do no harm The most harmful thing you can do is to misspend the taxpayers money For as you all know every dollar spent unwisely is a dollar taken away for more needy alternative projects and programs Spending funds on a train that will never come to fruition is a disservice to the public There are better uses for the hundreds of millions of dollars needed to realize a light rail system that studies have shown will not alleviate congestion It would be much wiser to invest in a wide paved thoroughfare I think it would be much less expensive to build and maintain and could be used for zero emission technology advanced modes of transportation At the very least when physicians are faced with a difficult case They seek a second opinion and who better to offer a second opinion than the citizens of Santa Cruz County of which you represent Let's work together to get the important decision on what to do with the rail corridor in the hands of the voters a Trail only or a rail trail solution should be advanced as a ballot initiative. Thank you Thank you. Hi Jessica Evans So since the 1950s America has been engaged in road and transit planning that was designed to reduce congestion that was the goal the only goal and I Think that we have found that The evidence on the ground shows us that that goal it doesn't work so we need to take congestion reduction and just set it aside because It's not an equitable or useful way to do our transportation planning So I encourage The Commission to look at scenario B. Obviously it came out ahead on all these different measures I also encourage you to look at You know adding in freight to Watsonville, which we obviously need to have freight to Watsonville because we have Businesses in Watsonville that need freight so that should be at a minimum be added and I think that it's reasonable to See whether we can do some time Shifting and and you know have freight running all the way into Santa Cruz if progressive finds that they have customers in Santa Cruz, maybe they can run freight trains at night I know that this is something that works even if we just have like little electric Cholley's Anyways, I do like measure B. It's 21 point one percent total for miles bike to transit and walk combined That's the highest percentage of any of these scenarios and I Encourage you to have fun with your reading. I know I'm gonna be digging in First of all, I want to I want to thank the every commissioner every single one of you I trust your integrity. I I'm impressed with the work that you do and I know it's super hard This is such a big decision.  I would remind everyone and I'm sure you're mindful of regional transportation plans everywhere Vision 2040 the state plans and so forth that emphasize Active transportation and transit over vehicles. So I was delighted to see the the results and spent some time on this weekend of Scenario B, and I would agree with Jessica that freight should be retained for Watsonville But we saw in the slide show today the fewest number of collisions the lowest cost of collisions all of these in scenario B Transit mode share. It's the highest bike mode shares the highest lowest vehicle miles traveled lowest greenhouse gas emissions more funding available The highest tax revenue and the economic vitality have measures all high up and down the The column it's also the second least costly and the the last thing I'd add I took a page 165 of a section on person trips by screen line and mode where you take the three corridors And you have these these some number of nine screen lines and you count the number of people who pass through these by mode To compare just scenario a trail only with scenario B the number of bicycles that collectively pass through these points is 5686 5686 for scenario a scenario B has 7,761 for transit riders Passing through those points 5688 and then 15,557 transit users. Thank you, Mr. Scott. Thanks Hi, Jack Nelson, and I'm speaking now for the campaign for sensible transportation And I can't say much in two minutes, but I do have a two-page letter here that I'll ask your staff to circulate to you and your staff and consultants One thing that we've noticed in looking at this study is that there's a baseline assumption that Auxiliary lanes will be built before this analysis even begins and then three out of four of these scenarios Have yet additional auxiliary lanes added on top of that so How do we see a eco green scenario here that isn't so heavily still? Autocentric could we have an even less autocentric? Scenario than any of these and find out through the model process what that does what if If it turned out that's that's the that's the winning ticket to a Sustainable future is to stop being as autocentric as these plans are Two words that I would hope would Stick with you as a question mark the two words are induced travel and Induced travel was not addressed in the highway one draft EIR that's still out there still somewhere to be finished And the state of California has weighed in on induced travel it passed Senate bill 743 on transportation impacts and the Office of Planning and Research has issued a technical advisory on Evaluating transportation impacts in Sequa that's dated April 2018 and it says agencies Consider induced travel. What is induced travel? It's when you widen the freeway and people start using it more and you lose the benefit you're aiming for and you may Actually make things worse or not get very far for all the money you spent so I would hope you at all would look at that Whoops, thank you, Mr. Nelson, and I'll pass my letter over to your staff. Thank you very much Good afternoon computers. My name is Pia cannon from ecology action I want to thanks thank the team for producing this data rich document There's a lot to go through in terms of what transportation looks like now when it looked like in the future I did want to comment one thing in terms or a question was it didn't seem like the bicycle Shares changed very much over the different scenarios And I was wondering if the team considered things like the recent jump bike bikeshirts in the city of Santa Cruz Because those numbers are pretty high if they also looked at things like a run of Gulch The city takes numbers on that because that's a new bicycle facility that you know is similar to a rail trail That would be built, you know throughout the county in terms of the impact of the numbers and also to look at data in terms of electric bike usage and the increase of That mode of transportation in terms of how that might impact increase bike ridership when one of the statewide documents of this You know in court the unified corridor study References the Caltrans goals of tripling bike ridership in short order So and also doubling transit trips and doubling pedestrian ships So, you know, hopefully when you look through all this data and you look for solutions You know we can look at those active transportations and transit as some of the things that we want to invest in so thank you Thank you. I would like to echo the thank you to staff for all of the hard work that it went into this report And I do agree that there are some good tools in here to work with however. I'm in With many other people concerned about the contrived nature of the scenarios Santa Cruz doesn't like change. We all know that in 2016 when 17 washed out people joked that Hey, I don't mind waiting three hours to commute over the hill as long as we don't make it easy for people who live over there Or who work over there to live over here So I think we actually really need to start by asking ourselves a very difficult question Do we truly want to alleviate gridlock? And make a more equitable transportation system for our county If the answer to that question is yes, then perhaps we should be having this conversation At least the highway portion with Santa Clara County since at least half of our commutators are heading that direction This one of the things t