agenda thursday, october 6, 2016 9:00...

Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission

AGENDA

Thursday, October 6, 2016 9:00 a.m.

See the last page for details about access for people with disabilities and meeting broadcasts. NOTE

Para información sobre servicios de traducción al español, diríjase a la última página. En Español

To receive email notification when the RTC meeting agenda packet is posted on our website, AGENDAS ONLINE

please call (831) 460-3200 or email [email protected] to subscribe.

COMMISSION MEMBERSHIP

Caltrans (ex-officio) Tim Gubbins City of Capitola Dennis Norton City of Santa Cruz Don Lane City of Scotts Valley Randy Johnson City of Watsonville Jimmy Dutra County of Santa Cruz Greg Caput County of Santa Cruz Ryan Coonerty County of Santa Cruz Zach Friend County of Santa Cruz John Leopold County of Santa Cruz Bruce McPherson Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District Karina Cervantez Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District Cynthia Chase Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District Ed Bottorff

The majority of the Commission constitutes a quorum for the transaction of business.

NOTE LOCATION THIS MONTH County Board of Supervisors Chambers

701 Ocean St., 5th floor Santa Cruz, CA

mailto:[email protected]�

SCCRTC Agenda October 6, 2016 2

1. Roll call

2. Review of items to be discussed in closed session

CLOSED SESSION

3. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL-EXISTING LITIGATION. (Paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Section 54956.9 of the Government Code) Santa Clara Superior Court Case No. 16CV293441

OPEN SESSION 4. Report on closed session 5. Oral communications

Any member of the public may address the Commission for a period not to exceed three minutes on any item within the jurisdiction of the Commission that is not already on the agenda. The Commission will listen to all communication, but in compliance with State law, may not take action on items that are not on the agenda.

Speakers are requested to sign the sign-in sheet so that their names can be accurately recorded in the minutes of the meeting.

6. Additions or deletions to consent and regular agendas

CONSENT AGENDA

All items appearing on the consent agenda are considered to be minor or non-controversial and will be acted upon in one motion if no member of the RTC or public wishes an item be removed and discussed on the regular agenda. Members of the Commission may raise questions, seek clarification or add directions to Consent Agenda items without removing the item from the Consent Agenda as long as no other Commissioner objects to the change.

MINUTES 7. Approve draft minutes of the September 1, 2016 Regional Transportation

Commission meeting

8. Accept draft minutes of the September 8, 2016 Budget and Administration/ Personnel Committee meeting

9. Accept draft minutes of the September 14, 2016 Safe on 17/Traffic Operations

Systems meeting

10. Accept draft minutes of the September 15, 2016 Interagency Transportation Advisory Committee meeting


POLICY ITEMS

No consent items PROJECTS and PLANNING ITEMS

11. Approve amendment to Legal Counsel Agreement for the Highway 1 Auxiliary

Lanes Project (Resolution)

BUDGET AND EXPENDITURES ITEMS

12. Accept status report on Transportation Development Act (TDA) revenues

13. Accept Fiscal Year (FY) 2015-16 SCCRTC Annual Internal Financial Statements

14. Approve Fiscal Year (FY) 2016-17 Transportation Development Act (TDA) Claim from the RTC for Administration, Planning, and Operations (Resolution)

15. Approve out of state travel for Transportation Research Board (TRB) 2017 Annual Meeting

ADMINISTRATION ITEMS 16. Approve the Regional Transportation Commission meeting schedule for 2017

17. Approve CalPERS health benefit contribution rates for plan year 2017 (Resolution)

18. Approve the Bicycle Advisory Committee membership appointments INFORMATION/OTHER ITEMS

19. Accept monthly meeting schedule 20. Accept correspondence log 21. Accept letters from RTC committees and staff to other agencies - None

22. Accept miscellaneous written comments from the public on RTC projects and

transportation issues

23. Accept information items a. Notice from the RTC for the Transportation in San Lorenzo Valley Community

Meeting on October 11, 2016

b. News Release on September 1, 2016 from the California Association of Counties (CSAC): “Transportation Funding on the Legislative Back Burner, Again!”

c. Article from the Sacramento Bee on September 8, 2016 “This is what the climate bill Jerry Brown signed means” by David Siders


d. Letter dated September 14, 2016 to Senators Kevin De Leon and Jean Fuller, Assembly Members Anthony Rendon and Chad Mayes, and Governor Jerry Brown regarding California’s transportation fiscal crisis and the Special Session on Transportation and Infrastructure Development

e. Special District Risk Management Authority (SDRMA) President’s Special Acknowledgement Award – Workers’ Compensation Program

REGULAR AGENDA

24. Commissioner reports – oral reports

25. Director’s Report – oral report (George Dondero, Executive Director) 26. Caltrans report and consider action items

a. District Director’s report b. Santa Cruz County project updates

27. Project Updates from County of Santa Cruz Public Works – oral presentation

(Steve Wiesner, Assistant Director of Public Works)

28. Community Bridges Programs in the November 2016 Transportation Improvement Ballot Measure (Karena Pushnik, Senior Transportation Planner/Outreach Coordinator) a. Staff report b. Community Bridges’ Lift Line Measure D Fact Sheet

29. Highway 1 Mar Vista Bicycle/Pedestrian Overcrossing: Consultant Services

Agreement (Kim Shultz, Senior Transportation Planner) a. Staff report b. Moffat and Nichol Project Approval/Environmental Document (PA/ED) Scope

of Work

30. Amendments to the Fiscal Year (FY) 2016-17 Budget and Work Program (Luis Mendez, Deputy Director) a. Staff report b. Resolution amending the FY 2016-17 Budget and Work Program c. Transportation Development Act (TDA) Estimates and Revenue


31. Next meetings

The next RTC meeting is scheduled for Thursday, November 3, 2016 at 9:00 a.m. at the Watsonville City Council Chambers, 275 Main St. Ste 450, Watsonville, CA. The next Transportation Policy Workshop is scheduled for Thursday, October 20, 2016 at 9:00 a.m. at the RTC Offices, 1523 Pacific Ave., Santa Cruz, CA.

HOW TO REACH US

1523 Pacific Avenue, Santa Cruz, CA 95060 Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission

phone: (831) 460-3200 / fax: (831) 460-3215

275 Main Street, Suite 450, Watsonville. CA 95076 Watsonville Office

phone: (831) 460-3205 email: [email protected] / website: www.sccrtc.org COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Written comments for items on this agenda that are received at the RTC office in Santa Cruz by noon on the day before this meeting will be distributed to Commissioners at the meeting. HOW TO STAY INFORMED ABOUT RTC MEETINGS, AGENDAS & NEWS Broadcasts: Many of the meetings are broadcast live. Meetings are cablecast by Community Television of Santa Cruz. Community TV’s channels and schedule can be found online (www.communitytv.org) or by calling (831) 425-8848. Agenda packets: Complete agenda packets are available at the RTC office, on the RTC website (www.sccrtc.org), and at the following public libraries:

- Aptos Library - Boulder Creek Library - Branciforte Library - Capitola Library - Felton Library - Garfield Park Library

- La Selva Beach Library - Live Oak Library - Santa Cruz Downtown Library - Scotts Valley Library - Watsonville Main Library

For information regarding library locations and hours, please check online at www.santacruzpl.org or www.watsonville.lib.ca.us.

On-line viewing: The SCCRTC encourages the reduction of paper waste and therefore makes meeting materials available online. Those receiving paper agendas may sign up to receive email notification when complete agenda packet materials are posted to our website by sending a request to [email protected]. Agendas are typically posted 5 days prior to each meeting. Newsletters: To sign up for E-News updates on specific SCCRTC projects, go to www.sccrtc.org/enews.


http://www.sccrtc.org/�

http://www.communitytv.org/�


http://www.santacruzpl.org/�

http://www.watsonville.lib.ca.us/�


http://www.sccrtc.org/enews�


HOW TO REQUEST

ACCOMMODATIONS FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES The Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission does not discriminate on the basis of disability and no person shall, by reason of a disability, be denied the benefits of its services, programs, or activities. This meeting location is an accessible facility. If you wish to attend this meeting and require special assistance in order to participate, please contact RTC staff at 460-3200 (CRS 800/735-2929) at least three working days in advance of this meeting to make arrangements. People with disabilities may request a copy of the agenda in an alternative format. As a courtesy to those person affected, Please attend the meeting smoke and scent-free.

Si gusta estar presente o participar en esta junta de la Comisión Regional de Transporte del Condado de Santa Cruz y necesita información o servicios de traducción al español por favor llame por lo menos con tres días laborables de anticipo al (831) 460-3200 para hacer los arreglos necesarios. (Spanish language translation is available on an as needed basis.) Please make advance arrangements (at least three days in advance) by calling (831) 460-3200.

SERVICIOS DE TRADUCCIÓN/ TRANSLATION SERVICES

TITLE VI NOTICE TO BENEFICIARIES The RTC operates its programs and services without regard to race, color and national origin in accordance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. Any person believing to have been aggrieved by the RTC under Title VI may file a complaint with RTC by contacting the RTC at (831) 460-3212 or 1523 Pacific Avenue, Santa Cruz, CA 95060 or online at www.sccrtc.org. A complaint may also be filed directly with the Federal Transit Administration to the Office of Civil Rights, Attention: Title VI Program Coordinator, East Building, 5th Floor-TCR, 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE, Washington, DC 20590.

AVISO A BENEFICIARIOS SOBRE EL TITULO VI La RTC conduce sus programas y otorga sus servicios sin considerar raza, color u origen nacional de acuerdo al Titulo VI del Acta Sobre los Derechos Civiles. Cualquier persona que cree haber sido ofendida por la RTC bajo el Titulo VI puede entregar queja con la RTC comunicándose al (831) 460-3212 o 1523 Pacific Avenue, Santa Cruz, CA 95060 o en línea al www.sccrtc.org. También se puede quejar directamente con la Administración Federal de Transporte en la Oficina de Derechos Civiles, Atención: Coordinador del Programa Titulo VI, East Building, 5th Floor-TCR, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE, Washington, DC 20590.

S:\RTC\TC2016\TC1016\2016-10-06-rtc-agenda.docx


Santa Cruz County Regional

Transportation Commission

MINUTES

Thursday, September 1, 2016

9:00 a.m.

County Board of Supervisors Chambers 701 Ocean St., 5th floor

Santa Cruz, CA

1. Roll Call

The meeting was called to order at 9:04 a.m. Members present: Don Lane Zach Friend Karina Cervantez Jimmy Dutra Ryan Coonerty Cynthia Chase Ed Bottorff Virginia Johnson (alt) Greg Caput Michael Termini (alt) Donna Lind (alt) Dave Reid (alt) Aileen Loe (ex-officio) Staff present: George Dondero Luis Mendez Jennifer Rodriguez Yesenia Parra Rachel Moriconi Grace Blakeslee Kim Shultz Karena Pushnik

2. Oral communications Brian Peoples, TrailNow.org, said that it is very important for the Commission to be transparent and communicate with the community the difference between the rail trail and a rail with trail. Mr. Peoples stated that TrailNow.org supports Measure D.

Jack Nelson, Campaign for Sensible Transportation, said that widening Highway 1 will expand the county’s greatest producer of green house gases and that Senate Bill 1383 seeks to reduce emissions by 40% by 2030.

3. Additions or deletions to consent and regular agendas A handout for Item 17 and add-ons for Items 19 and 20 were distributed.

CONSENT AGENDA

Commissioner Coonerty moved and Commissioner Alternate Termini seconded the consent agenda. The motion passed unanimously with Commissioners Lane, Friend, Dutra, Caput, Bottorff, Cervantez, Coonerty, and Commissioner Alternates Lind, Reid, Termini, and Johnson voting “aye”.

MINUTES

4. Approved draft minutes of the August 4, 2016 Regional Transportation Commission meeting

5. Approved draft minutes of the August 4, 2016 Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies meeting

6. Accepted draft minutes of the August 8, 2016 Bicycle Advisory Committee meeting

7. Accepted draft minutes of the August 9, 2016 Elderly and Disabled Transportation Advisory Committee meeting

8. Approved draft minutes of the August 18, 2016 Transportation Policy Workshop meeting

9. Accepted draft minutes of the August 18, 2016 Interagency Transportation Advisory Committee meeting

POLICY ITEMS

No consent items

PROJECTS and PLANNING ITEMS No consent items

BUDGET AND EXPENDITURES ITEMS

10. Accepted status report on Transportation Development Act (TDA) revenues

ADMINISTRATION ITEMS

No consent items

INFORMATION/OTHER ITEMS

11. Accepted monthly meeting schedule 12. Accepted correspondence log 13. Accepted letters from RTC committees and staff to other agencies – None 14. Accepted miscellaneous written comments from the public on RTC projects and

transportation issues

15. Accepted information items 1. Article from the August 20, 2016 Sentinel “Getting Santa Cruz moving” by Don

Lane and Zach Friend

REGULAR AGENDA

16. Commissioner reports – oral reports None 17. Director’s Report – oral report George Dondero, Executive Director, reported on: the updated Santa Cruz County

bikeways map, produced by the RTC and now available; the Frazier-Beall transportation funding bill still on hold; $145 million of cap-and-trade revenues allocated to fund the Transit and Intercity Rail Program, and the California Transportation Commission’s Active Transportation Program; the Final Schematic Plan for the City of Santa Cruz Rail Trail Project being presented on September 19th and construction scheduled to occur by 2018; and public information activities being planned for Measure D for the upcoming November ballot.

18. Caltrans report and consider action items

Aileen Loe, Caltrans District 5 Deputy Director, reported on: applications for the newest round for the Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant program due November 4th; the 2017 Environmental Excellence Awards through the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA); and updates to the projects listed on the comprehensive semiannual list for State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP). Commissioners discussed: project locations for Highway 152 pedestrian signals; pedestrian crosswalks needed in Watsonville; American Disabilities Act (ADA) compliances for sidewalks; and coordination between Santa Cruz County Public Works and Caltrans for access to traffic light controllers in Capitola on 41st Avenue. Commissioner Chase arrived to the meeting.

19. 9:15 PUBLIC HEARING: Adoption of the 2016 Surface Transportation Block Grant Program (STBG)

Rachel Moriconi, Senior Transportation Planner, presented the staff report. Ms.

Moriconi reported that the proposed list of projects to receive the approximately $7 million in available STBG funds have been vetted through the RTC advisory committees and all public works representatives. The evaluation criteria included: the number of people served; demonstrated safety needs; preservation of existing programs; and reducing the number of miles needed to drive.

Commissioners discussed: the scope and timeline of projects; the deliverability of

projects that are partially funded; the repairs needed on the sinking bridge at Casserly Road in Watsonville; projects that put safety first versus aesthetic projects;

the goal of having Open Streets events throughout the county; Cruz511 and the bikeways map moving forward with technology advances; support for Measure D to bring money to the districts for transportation projects; and Caltrans and the Federal Highway Administration being the lead agencies for the Highway 1 Draft Environmental Impact Review/Environmental Assessment (EIR/EA).

Chair Lane opened the Public Hearing at 9:49 a.m. Jack Nelson, said that Open Streets is a visionary process that cannot be measured

with statistics and that funds should be redirected from studying Highway 1 to sustainable transportation alternatives.

Janneke Lang, Bike Santa Cruz County, said that she appreciates the support

received for the Open Streets events and asked the Commission to approve the request of $20,000 to support having an Open Streets event in Watsonville in 2017.

Alex Clifford, Santa Cruz Metro, thanked the Commission for their staff’s

recommendation of STBG funding for a compressed natural gas bus and stated that they are working on acquiring new buses through various grant programs, and so far have received enough funding for 5 out of the 70 buses needing to be replaced.

Brian Peoples, said that it is very important to have clear communication with the

community on how tax payers’ money will be spent and that a decision needs to be made on whether there will be a train or a trail.

Peter Scott, Campaign for Sensible Transportation, stated that he is particularly

interested in pedestrian issues and supports the Pacific Avenue sidewalk project. Stanley Socolow, resident, said that having funds allocated toward finalizing the

Highway 1 Draft EIR/EA will be an obstacle for Measure D and the effects of widening the highway need to be verified.

Raymond Santee, Central Home Supply, stated that there are shortfalls of widening

Highways 1 and 9, and the proposed changes will make it difficult to conduct business at the Santa Cruz location. Mr. Santee said that there needs to be more access to Harvey West and to the University of California Santa Cruz (UCSC).

Chair Lane closed the Public Hearing at 10:04 a.m. Commissioner Friend moved and Commissioner Alternate Termini seconded staff

recommendations to: 1. Adopt Resolution 04-17 to program approximately $7 million in Surface

Transportation Block Grant Program (STBG) funds in the 2016 Regional Transportation Improvement Plan (RTIP) as recommended by staff; and amend the RTC Budget and Work Program to exchange the federal STBG funds for state funds (RSTPX) for those projects that will be implemented within the next twelve months, and apply the funds to the corresponding RTC projects in the RTC budget, as applicable;

2. Request that the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG) incorporate these funding actions into the Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program (MTIP) as applicable; and

3. Amend allocations to include $10,000 to the Watsonville Open Streets event, contingent on the event taking place in 2017, by reducing allocations by $5,000 from both the Water Street project in Santa Cruz and the Freedom Boulevard project in Watsonville.

The motion passed unanimously with Commissioners Lane, Friend, Chase, Dutra, Caput, Bottorff, Cervantez, Coonerty, and Commissioner Alternates Lind, Reid, Termini, and Johnson voting “aye”.

20. Roadmap for Rail Corridor development George Dondero, Executive Director, presented the staff report. Mr. Dondero

reported that the context of relevant work that affects plans for the rail corridor have been reviewed and any decisions made will be consistent with the goals included in the approved Regional Transportation Plan.

Commissioners discussed: the importance of the data provided from the Unified

Corridor Study to clarify the three main corridors available for use and to assist with making efficient decisions for the best uses of the corridors; decisions for the corridors dependent on Measure D passing; the need to have an outline and a year-long timeline with the different scenarios for the rail corridor; the importance of building infrastructure that is adaptable to future technology advances; scarce resources and being realistic with what is possible for the rail corridor; forming an ad-hoc working group to assist with transparency efforts; the rail corridor being an underused asset; making a decision to use the rail corridor now versus conducting more studies; legal obstacles with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements and a possible change of use for the rail corridor that would include environmental review; providing expectations for the community and Commission to guide discussion towards an outcome; the option of having the rail infrastructure for possible future use; and using a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats analysis (SWOT) for strategic decisions.

Bud Colligan, Live Oak resident, said that there needs to be a fair, timely, and

transparent analysis with a strategic solution set by a balanced group of people to determine facts. Mr. Colligan noted that the Great Santa Cruz Trail Study was done by a broad group of community leaders and is supported by many in the county.

Jack Nelson, stated that the RTC has done well with providing public process for

public input, and should utilize the input received and consultant analysis to develop the rail corridor as a resource for alternative and sustainable transportation.

Brian Peoples, said that the rail corridor needs to be utilized now to deal with traffic

congestion, while a timely analysis that includes vehicle technology and social transit is concurrently conducted. Mr. Peoples noted that the ideology of trains needs to stop and there needs to be an emphasis on building public trust.

Ernestina Saldaña, stated that she is disheartened that Open Streets will not be

taking place in Live Oak and doesn’t believe a rail with trail will work in the neighborhood. Ms. Saldaña said that the streets are difficult and dangerous to cross because of the heavy traffic and widening the highway will increase cars and green house gas emissions.

Commissioner Friend moved and Commissioner Chase seconded the motion to direct staff to come back to the Commission on their first meeting after the November election with an outline for the possible uses of the rail corridor: a rail with trail, trail only, and bus rapid transit (BRT), with 3 key components: 1. The legal requirements, including whether a full Environmental Impact Report

(EIR) would be required; 2. A cost analysis for each option, based on current studies; and 3. A general timeline for implementation of these projects.

The motion passed unanimously with Commissioners Lane, Friend, Chase, Dutra, Caput, Bottorff, Cervantez, Coonerty, and Commissioner Alternates Lind, Reid, Termini, and Johnson voting “aye”.

21. Amendments to the Fiscal Year (FY) 2016-17 Budget and Work Program

Luis Mendez, Deputy Director, presented the staff report. Mr. Mendez reported that the amended RTC Budget and Work Program includes funding for the Highway 9/San Lorenzo Valley Plan and the Unified Corridor Investment Study through recent grants awarded to the RTC from the Caltrans’ Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant Program.

Commissioner Chase moved and Commissioner Dutra seconded staff

recommendations to approve Resolution 05-17 to: 1. Amend the FY 2016-17 Budget and Work Program to add newly secured grant

funds and the corresponding work program elements; and 2. Authorize the Executive Director to solicit necessary consultant services and

enter in necessary agreements with partner agencies to produce the work funded by the newly secured grants.

The motion passed unanimously with Commissioners Lane, Friend, Norton, Chase, Dutra, Caput, Bottorff, Cervantez, Coonerty, and Commissioner Alternates Lind, Reid, and Johnson voting “aye”.

22. Review of items to be discussed in closed session

CLOSED SESSION

23. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL-EXISTING LITIGATION. (Paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Section 54956.9 of the Government Code) Santa Clara Superior Court Case No. 16CV293441

OPEN SESSION 24. Report on closed session

No closed session

25. Next meetings The next RTC meeting is scheduled for Thursday, October 6, 2016 at 9:00 a.m. at

the County Board of Supervisors Chambers, 701 Ocean St., 5th floor, Santa Cruz, CA.

The next Transportation Policy Workshop is scheduled for Thursday, September 15, 2016 at 9:00 a.m. at the RTC Offices, 1523 Pacific Ave., Santa Cruz, CA.

The meeting adjourned at 11:11 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Jennifer Rodriguez, Staff Attendees: Alex Clifford Santa Cruz Metro Bill Granite Rock Brian Peoples TrailNow.org Bud Colligan Chris Schneider City of Santa Cruz Claire Fleisler City of Santa Cruz Eric Child Ernestina Saldaña Heather Adamson Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments Jack Nelson Campaign for Sensible Transportation Jeanne LePage Ecology Action Jenneke Lang Bike Santa Cruz County John Presleigh Santa Cruz County Public Works Kara Guzmen Santa Cruz Sentinel Maria Ester Rodriguez City of Watsonville Murray Fontes City of Watsonville Peter Scott Campaign for Sensible Transportation Raymond Santee Central Home Supply Scott Hamby City of Scotts Valley Steve Sokolow

S:\RTC\TC2016\TC0916\2016-09-01-RTC-Minutes.docx


Budget and Administration/Personnel Committee

MINUTES

Thursday, September 8, 2016 3:00 pm

The meeting was called to order by Committee Chair Schiffrin at 3:06 pm

Commissioner John Leopold Members Present

Commissioner Alternate Patrick Mulhearn Commissioner Alternate Virginia Johnson Commissioner Alternate Tony Gregorio Commissioner Alternate Andy Schiffrin

George Dondero Daniel Nikuna RTC Staff

Luis Mendez Yesenia Parra

1. Introductions-Self introductions were made

2. Additions or changes to consent and regular agenda Replacement pages for item 7 were distributed.

3. Oral communications - none

CONSENT AGENDA

Commissioner Alternate Mulhearn moved and Commissioner Alternate Johnson seconded to accept the consent agenda. The motion passed unanimously with Commissioner Leopold; and Commissioner Alternates Mulhearn, Johnson, Schiffrin and Gregorio voting “aye.”

4. Accepted monthly TDA revenue report 5. Approved the February 18, 2016 Budget & Administration/Personnel Committee

minutes

Santa Cruz County CAO’s Office 701 Ocean Street, 5th Floor

Santa Cruz, CA 95060

Budget and Administration/Personnel Committee September 18, 2016 Page | 2

\\RTCSERV2\Internal\B&ACOM\Bap2016\2016-09-8\2016-09-8-Bap-Minutes.Docx

6. Accepted FY 15-16 third and fourth quarters warrants and monthly credit card reports

REGULAR AGENDA

7. Amendments to the Fiscal Year (FY) 2016-17 Budget and Work Program

Deputy Director Luis Mendez presented the staff reported noting that the budget was last amended at the September 1, 2016 Commission meeting, TDA revenues for FY15-16 came in higher than projected, FY14-15 TDA revenues were lower than projected and that the TDA reserve fund has not yet been replenished, and that new higher estimates for State Transit Assistance (STA) funds are anticipated due to passage of Senate Bill 838. Commissioners discussed RSTPX fund allocations and Highway 1 draft EIR funding and expected release date. Commissioners directed staff to share information with the public on the cost to respond to the EIR public comments. Commissioner Leopold moved and Commissioner Alternate Mulhearn seconded to approve the proposed amended fiscal year (FY) 2016-17 Budget and Work Program. The motion passed unanimously with Commissioner Leopold; and Commissioner Alternates Mulhearn, Johnson, Schiffrin and Gregorio voting “aye.”

8. Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) – Service Hours Reduction

Deputy Director Luis Mendez presented the staff report noting that the proposal for service hour reduction is no longer necessary based on funding approved at the September 1, 2016 Commission meeting. Responding to a Commissioner question, Mr. Mendez said that the State reduced FSP funds to Santa Cruz County by about $40,000 per year. He noted that if Measure D passes, that there would be sufficient funds to continue the FSP service at its current level.

9. The meeting adjourned at 3:33 p.m.

The next Budget and Administration/Personnel Committee meeting is scheduled for Thursday, November 10, 2016 at 3:00 p.m. in the CAO’s Conference Room, 701 Ocean St. 5th floor, Santa Cruz CA

Respectfully submitted, Yesenia Parra, Staff Attendees: Alex Clifford Santa Cruz METRO

JOINT MEETING OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY TRAFFIC OPERATIONS SYSTEMS (TOS) OVERSIGHT

COMMITTEE AND

SAFE ON 17 TASK FORCE

DRAFT MINUTES Wednesday, September 14, 2016

10:00am-12:00pm Meeting Participants Captain Ceto Ortiz, San Jose CHP Lt Ian Troxell, Santa Cruz CHP Jennifer Wilson, Caltrans D5 Devin Porr, Caltrans D5 Jaime Maldonado, Metropolitan Transportation Commission Giovanni DiFabio, Metropolitan Transportation Commission Bernard Walik, Caltrans D4, Public Information Ramiel Gutierrez, Caltrans D4, Office of Traffic Safety Ernesto Ramirez, Caltrans D4, Maintenance Sharon Toline, Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District David Sears, Member of the Public Jeff Bates, Redwood Estates Services Association Susana Cruz, Caltrans D5, Public Information Officer Thomas Bowen, San Jose CHP Kelly McClendon, Caltrans D5 Planning Ray Kwan, Caltrans D4 Maintenance (teleconference) Tom Barnett, Caltrans D5 Maintenance Ramin Bolourchian, Caltrans D4 TMC Ed Orre, CalFire Erich Friedrich, Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments Patty Ciesla, Santa Clara County FireSAFE Council Gary Richards, San Jose Mercury News, (teleconference) Jacques van Zeventer, Caltrans D5 (teleconference) Julie Andersen, Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Meredith Manning, Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Kirk Lenington, Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District John Presleigh, Department of Public Works, Santa Cruz County Marshall Ballard, Valley Transit Authority Amy Naranjo, Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission Ginger Dykaar, Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission

Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission 1523 Pacific Ave, Santa Cruz, CA 95060

1. Introductions – Introductions were made. 2. Additions or Deletions to the Agenda –added oral communications item for

public to present information on topics not on agenda, added Transportation Improvement Measure discussion under Information Items.

3. Reviewed and Accepted Minutes of the March 9, 2016 Joint TOS

Oversight Committee and Safe on 17 Meeting 4. Received Information Items –

- Safe on 17 Annual Report - Ginger Dykaar discussed the 2015 Safe on 17 Annual Report that was completed in May. It provides a summary of the collision and citation statistics for Hwy 17 as well as a discussion of the Caltrans projects that have been constructed during the year. Electronic copies of the report were provided with the agenda packet. - Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) Update - Amy Naranjo discussed the reductions in allocations from Caltrans and the current instability in the source of matching funds for FSP. Service hour reductions were considered by the Regional Transportation Commission Budget & Administration Committee earlier this month. At this time, no cut in service is recommended. If the Transportation Improvement Measure (Measure D) does not pass at the November election, FSP service reductions would be reconsidered. - Articles/Public Feedback – Ginger Dykaar discussed a number of articles that were published related to Hwy 17.

5. Oral Communications – David Sears suggested using advances in technology to reduce collisions on Highway 17. Caltrans stated that traffic control standards compiled in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices need to be followed by Caltrans. Suggestions were provided to Mr. Sears to contact the California Traffic Control Devices Committee and Caltrans Office of Traffic Engineering to share his ideas.

6. Received Update on California Highway Patrol Safe on 17 Program Statistics and Public Information Efforts - Lt Ian Troxell with Santa Cruz CHP stated that collisions continue to be high in 2016 on the Santa Cruz County side compared to the same number of months in 2015. There used to be 2 officers that patrolled Hwy 17 every day between 6am and 6pm and now there is just one officer during the same time period. Extra enforcement is used to add additional enforcement at locations and times where there are higher numbers of collisions. Tom Barnett from Caltrans suggested increasing education efforts and Jennifer Wilson from Caltrans suggested using changeable message signs for education on reducing speeds. Santa Cruz CHP currently uses twitter, facebook and Start Smart teen classes for education about safe driving practices. Lt Troxell will talk to their Public information Officer to see how education can be increased to help to increase safe driving practices. Other

suggestions for reducing collisions were automated speed enforcement and variable speed limits. Automated speed enforcement is not currently legal in CA but there are efforts to legalize automated enforcement. Ginger Dykaar from RTC will try to find a speaker for the March meeting to present information about automated speed enforcement.

7. Received information on Highway 17 Wildlife Passage and Bay Area Ridge Trail Feasibility Study - Julie Andersen from Midpeninsula Regional Open Space (Midpen) is leading this locally, regionally and nationally important project and will collaborate with many partners (including Caltrans) to complete this work. Midpen is at the initial phase of developing wildlife passage across Hwy 17, between Los Gatos and Bear Creek Road. This project will improve safety for both motorists and wildlife. This passage was identified as a high-priority project by the public and is part of Midpen’s adopted Vision Plan which is partially funded by Measure AA, a bond measure approved by voters in 2014.

8. Highway 17 Hazardous Fuel Reduction Project – Update – Patty Ciesla from

Santa Clara County FireSafe Council started work this summer on their project to reduce wildfire risk along Hwy 17 near Redwood Estates in Santa Clara County. The excessive amounts of dead and diseased vegetation along the highway are a fire hazard for residences near the highway right of way and motorists along Hwy 17. FireSAFE has been funded by Cal Fire to remove vegetation near Redwood Estates residences and Caltrans has been removing dead trees in the right of way in the vicinity of this project. The vehicle fire that ignited the brush along Hwy 17 in June, 2016 was an example of this concern. Three acres were burned but all structures were saved. There was a concern with evacuation routes and Patty will be convening a meeting to discuss the challenges and coordinate evacuation plans. Caltrans D5 maintenance stated that there is not a similar problem of dead and dying vegetation on the Santa Cruz County side of Hwy 17 due to healthier vegetation, slopes less steep and different weather. Patty will investigate installing improved wildfire risk signage along Highway 17.

9. Received Caltrans District 5 Highway 17 Project Update

Kelly McClendon discussed the public comments received from the Hwy 17 Access Management Study. The study was undertaken to improve mobility, access, safety and reduce conflict points along the Hwy 17 corridor in SCC. Public comments included a range of issues that are outside of the scope of the plan but applicable to the discussion at the Safe on 17 Task Force meeting. The Hwy 17 Access Management Plan will be completed in fall 2016.

Kelly McClendon stated that there is a stormwater mitigation project starting in spring 2017 on Highway 17 between Pasatiempo and the Hwy 1/17 interchange. The project scope includes drainage improvements, shoulder widening and removal of invasive acacia plants.

10. Received Caltrans District 4 Highway 17 Project Update

Ramiel Gutierrez from Caltrans D4, presented the project update for the Santa Clara County side of Hwy 17. On Hwy 17 from 0.1 mile north of Hebard Way to 17/280/880 interchange, a project is planned to overlay existing asphalt, install a new guardrail system, crash cushions, curb ramps, rumble strips and striping. The project is planned to being construction in summer 2020. Another D4 project from the Santa Cruz County line to the Main St overcrossing is planned for construction in 2020 to mitigate roadway departure incidents. The project will install rumble strips, lighting at intersections, striping, dynamic speed warning signs and high friction surface treatments (HFST) at spot locations. John Presleigh from Santa Cruz County requested that the HFST be installed sooner. Ramiel Gutierrez is going to investigate if the HFST can be installed earlier than currently scheduled.

11. Received Traffic Operations Systems Updates

Traffic Management Center (TMC) Update - Ramin Bolourchian stated that if anyone sees any problems with the changeable message signs (CMSs), to please contact the TMC. Concern was raised that the CMS on Hwy 17 north of Hwy 9 causes traffic to slow down and back up. Suggestions were also made to move the CMS in the SB direction on Hwy 17 (currently located south of the intersection of Santa Cruz Ave in Los Gatos) to the north of Hwy 9 so that people have options to get off Hwy 17 onto Hwy 9 if there is a message stating that traffic on Hwy 17 is delayed or stopped. Currently, the only location to exit Hwy 17 after the CMS is Bear Creek Rd. Ramin from Caltrans D5 TMC, stated that the location north of Hwy 9 could be considered when the CMS needs to be replaced. Jacques van Zeventer discussed a project to replace a number of the traffic detectors on Hwy 1. The detectors should be up and running in the next month or two. Jacques stated that there will be detectors between Soquel and Freedom Blvd that will be replaced as PeMs currently shows this stretch of Hwy 1 to have no detection. Ginger Dykaar stated that there are 23 CCTVs now on Hwy 1 between Watsonville and Santa Cruz. Caltrans website provides streaming videos of a number of the cameras for viewing. Images from all the cameras that are updated every 5-20 minutes are available on CT quickmap. Ginger Dykaar discussed the graphs in the agenda packet of speed and flow from the new Hwy 17 traffic detector at Laurel Curve. Data shows a difference in NB and SB traffic on both weekdays and weekends. Data can be useful for determining best times for enforcement activities by CHP.


Interagency Technical Advisory Committee (ITAC)

DRAFT MINUTES

Thursday, September 15, 2016 1:30 p.m. SCCRTC Conference Room

1523 Pacific Ave, Santa Cruz, CA ITAC MEMBERS PRESENT Teresa Buika, University of California at Santa Cruz (UCSC) Jim Burr, Santa Cruz Public Works Claire Fliesler, Santa Cruz Planning Murray Fontes, Watsonville Public Works and Planning Proxy Erich Friedrich, Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG) Jessica Kahn, Scotts Valley Public Works and Planning Proxy Barrow Emerson, Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District (METRO) Steve Wiesner, County Public Works and Planning Proxy STAFF PRESENT Grace Blakeslee Ginger Dykaar Rachel Moriconi

OTHERS PRESENT Kelly McClendon, Caltrans –by phone

1. Call to Order: Chair Wiesner called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m.

2. Introductions: Self introductions were made.

3. Oral Communications: None

4. Additions or deletions to consent and regular agendas: None.

CONSENT AGENDA 5. Approved Minutes of the August 18, 2016 ITAC meeting (Fontes/Fliesler). The motion

passed unanimously by all members present.

6. Received 2016 Surface Transportation Block Grant Program (STBG) Project List REGULAR AGENDA 7. Coastal Resilience Mapping Tool Presentation

Dr. David Revell provided a presentation on regional Monterey Bay climate change initiatives and the Coastal Resilience Mapping Tool which shows coastal areas that could be affected by sea level rise, increased storm wave events, and coastal erosion. It includes projections for

Year 2100 and 2200. He highlighted some of the local and regional initiatives, which include consideration of sediment and sand levels, erosion mitigation and adaptation strategies.

8. Status of ongoing transportation projects, programs, studies and planning documents METRO – Barrow Emerson reported that METRO is monitoring the bus service changes and may make minor schedule adjustments. METRO will be purchasing four electric buses, starting a study about buses on highway shoulders with Monterey-Salinas Transit (MST), and reviewing bus stops and bus stop facilities. AMBAG – Erich Friedrich reported that the AMBAG board recently reviewed the draft regional growth forecast and will be using the forecast in scenario modeling for the 2018 Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP)/Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS). Regional Transportation Commission (RTC): Grace Blakeslee reported that the RTC will be conducting traffic counts at several locations in October and requested agencies let her know if there are additional locations where they would like count data. Rachel Moriconi announced new Bikeways Maps are now available for distribution. Scotts Valley – Jessica Kahn reported that the city received bids for microsurfacing Mount Hermon Road. Santa Cruz – Jim Burr and Claire Fliesler reported that the Branciforte Creek bicycle/pedestrian bridge and the citywide paving project, including slurry seal of 50 streets, are out to bid. Design work continues for the Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail Network (MBSST) Segment 7. New Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP)-funded signal upgrades are 90% complete. The city is considering installing contra-flow bicycle lanes on Pacific Avenue between Church Street and Cathcart Street. Funding authorization for the Bay Street improvement project has been submitted to Caltrans. Environmental review and non-infrastructure components for the Active Transportation Program (ATP)-funded safe routes to schools project have begun. Watsonville – Murray Fontes reported that the Freedom Boulevard reconstruction project is under construction. UCSC – Teresa Buika reported that the ATP-funded bicycle path realignment project is expected to be completed this month. County of Santa Cruz – Steve Wiener reported that the Twin Lakes/East Cliff Dr. beach front project construction is starting. Storm damage repairs on Highland Way, El Rancho Road, and Felton-Empire Road are expected to finish construction in October. The County is also working on the HSIP-funded guardrail and striping projects. The ATP-funded radar speed feedback sign project near schools is almost done. The Freedom Blvd. pavement project is done.

9. Update on the Sustainable Communities Strategy Implementation Project: Draft Toolkits Erich Friedrich from the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG) provided an update on the Sustainable Communities Strategy Implementation Project, including the draft toolkits that include housing, transportation, and economic development strategies that would implement the sustainable development vision of the Metropolitan Transportation Plan

(MTP)/Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS). The toolkits focus on mixed use infill development along high quality transit corridors as a way to reduce vehicle miles traveled and associated greenhouse gas emissions. The toolkit includes policies, strategies, and case studies that can be used by and customized to each local jurisdiction; including during the planning stage for transportation projects. Mr. Freidrich requested that ITAC members review and provide input on the draft toolkit cut sheets within the next few weeks. AMBAG is working on releasing an interactive web version of the toolkit this fall.

10. Transportation Funding Updates Rachel Moriconi reported that the Governor signed legislation that will at least temporarily restore some State Transit Assistance funding for METRO. The California Transportation Commission (CTC) approved new policies regarding fund advances and scope changes for Active Transportation Program (ATP) projects. She noted that the regular State legislative session ended without action on a transportation funding package, though legislators could be called back for the special session on transportation in November. She noted that the most recent state cap-and-trade auctions yielded only $8 million which could impact implementation of cap-and-trade programs. Caltrans planning grant applications are due November 4, 2016. Agencies that would receive Measure D revenues are sharing information with their boards and the community on projects that could be funded from the measure.

11. The committee agreed to move the next ITAC meeting to October 27 at 1:30pm in the SCCRTC Conference Room, 1523 Pacific Avenue, Santa Cruz, CA. This is one week later than the typical meeting date.

The meeting adjourned at 3:15 p.m.

Minutes prepared by: Rachel Moriconi \\RTCSERV2\Shared\ITAC\2016\Sept2016\Sept2016-ITACminutes.docx

AGENDA: October 6, 2016

TO: Regional Transportation Commission FROM: Luis Pavel Mendez, Deputy Director RE: Amendment to Legal Counsel Agreement for the Highway 1 Auxiliary

Lanes Project RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends that the Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) approve the attached resolution (Attachment 1

) authorizing the Executive Director to amend the agreement with the Law Office of Hopkins and Carley to an amount of $100,000 for legal services associated with the Highway 1 Soquel/Morrissey Auxiliary Lanes project.

BACKGROUND In January of 2012, the RTC awarded a contract to RGW Construction Inc (RGW), to construct the Highway 1 Soquel to Morrissey Auxiliary Lanes project. Construction activity began in February 2012 and was completed in late 2014. During construction RGW Inc., the construction contractor, filed notices of potential claim, and in July 2015 filed a lawsuit against the RTC seeking about $1.2 million in payment beyond the contract amount. On advice of RTC’s special legal counsel for construction, Paul Taylor, and the concurrence of the Santa Cruz County Counsel, the RTC hired Patrick Stoll for litigation services. Patrick Stoll has represented the RTC will through a series of discovery actions. Unfortunately, due to an aggravated medical condition Patrick Stoll had to withdraw his representation of the RTC. The RTC’s Litigation Ad-Hoc Committee met on August 29, 2016 to discuss the matter and provided direction to RTC staff and County Counsel on the replacement of legal counsel. DISCUSSION Criteria in review of replacement legal counsel included proximity to Santa Cruz and the venue of legal proceedings in Santa Clara County Superior Court, depth of legal staff to address all legal actions in an effective and cost efficient manner, and legal acumen and trial experience to lead all facets of litigation including mediation and trial. Patrick Stoll and the County Counsel’s Office identified and reviewed several individuals at different legal firms meeting these qualifications and with input from the Litigation Ad-Hoc Committee focused on litigation attorney Dave Lively as lead counsel with the Law Office of Hopkins and Carley located in San Jose. Mr. Lively

Amendment to Legal Counsel Agreement for the Hwy 1 Aux Lanes Project Page 2

has extensive experience working on construction claims with particular success in court and availability of associates in the firm to provide support in legal proceedings, including Mathew James, who lives in Santa Cruz County. RTC staff and Brooke Miller, County Counsel’s Office met with Mr. Lively on September 14th

to review his experience, the construction project and the case. At the conclusion of that meeting, there was agreement to enter into an agreement with Mr. Lively, in the amount of $15,000 under the RTC Executive Director’s administrative authority so as to address pending legal matters in a timely manner. Since that date, Patrick Stoll has transferred all project and case files to Mr. Lively and has pledged to work with Mr. Lively to make the transition as smooth as possible. Significantly more than $15,000 will likely be necessary in this agreement for legal services to continue to address this lawsuit.

Staff estimates that $166,000 is available in the FY 2016-17 budget for legal costs and settlement of the lawsuit associated with the Highway 1 Soquel/Morrissey Auxiliary Lanes Project. Considering the work that has been done in this fiscal year, staff estimates that about $27,500 has been spent to date in this fiscal year leaving approximately $138,500 available. Accordingly, staff recommends that the RTC approve the attached resolution (Attachment 1

) authorizing the Executive Director to amend the agreement with the Law Office of Hopkins and Carley for legal services to an amount not to exceed $100,000 associated with the Highway 1 Soquel/Morrissey Auxiliary Lanes project.

SUMMARY RTC’s litigation attorney for a lawsuit associated with the Highway 1 Soquel/Morrissey Auxiliary Lanes project can no longer serve RTC due to aggravated medical condition. The Office of Santa Cruz County Counsel assisted RTC staff in identifying a replacement attorney meeting the criteria recommended by the RTC’s Litigation Ad-Hoc Committee. Staff recommends that the RTC approve the attached resolution (Attachment 1

) authorizing the Executive Director to amend an agreement with the Law Office of Hopkins and Carley for legal services to an amount not to exceed $100,000 to address ongoing legal proceedings.

1. Resolution authorizing the Executive Director to amend the agreement with Hopkins and Carley for legal services

Attachments:

Error! Bookmark not defined.

S:\RTC\TC2016\TC1016\Hwy1-AuxLane\StaffReport.docx

ATTACHMENT - 1 RESOLUTION NO.

Adopted by the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission

on the date of October 6, 2016, on the motion of duly seconded by

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO AMEND THE AGREEMENT

WITH HOPKINS AND CARLEY FOR LEGAL SERVICES ASSOCIATED WITH THE HIGHWAY 1 AUXILIARY LANES PROJECT

WHEREAS, the construction contractor for the Highway 1 Soquel/Morrissey Auxiliary Lanes

Project, RGW Construction, Inc., filed a lawsuit against the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission (RTC); and,

WHEREAS, the RTC previously contracted with legal counsel in response to this action and that

party can no longer serve in this capacity for medical reasons; and WHEREAS, the RTC’s FY 2016-2017 Budget provides funds for ongoing legal services to

respond and defend the interests of the RTC in this matter; and WHEREAS, with input from the RTC’s Litigation Ad-Hoc Committee and recommendation from

the Santa Cruz County Counsel’s office, the Executive Director entered into an agreement for $15,000 with the law office of Hopkins and Carley for legal services to address the RGW lawsuit;

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE SANTA CRUZ COUNTY REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION:

1. The Executive Director is authorized to amend the agreement to an amount of $100,00 with the Law Office of Hopkins and Carley to retain Dave Lively as legal counsel for necessary legal services associated with the Highway 1 Soquel/Morrissey Auxiliary Lanes Project;

2. The Executive Director is authorized to further amend the agreement with the Law Office of

Hopkins and Carley consistent with the approved RTC budget.

AYES: COMMISSIONERS NOES: COMMISSIONERS ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS

__________________________________

Don Lane, Chair ATTEST: __________________________________ George Dondero, Secretary Distribution: Hopkins & Carley, RTC file S:\RESOLUTI\2016\RES1016\Hopkins&Carley-AuxLane.doc

SANTA CRUZ COUNTY REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION TDA REVENUE REPORT

FY 2016-2017

CUMULATIVEFY15 - 16 FY16 - 17 FY16 - 17 DIFFERENCE % OF ACTUAL ESTIMATE ACTUAL AS % OF ACTUAL TO

MONTH REVENUE REVENUE REVENUE DIFFERENCE PROJECTION PROJECTION

JULY 601,300 618,978 629,500 10,522 1.70% 101.70%

AUGUST 801,800 825,373 839,400 14,027 1.70% 101.70%

SEPTEMBER 872,384 898,032 872,266 -25,766 -2.87% 99.95%

OCTOBER 617,500 635,655

NOVEMBER 823,300 847,505

DECEMBER 917,127 762,375

JANUARY 631,600 637,176

FEBRUARY 842,100 849,639

MARCH 763,406 783,442

APRIL 559,000 555,688

MAY 745,400 740,917

JUNE 795,139 904,623

TOTAL 8,970,056 9,059,403 2,341,166 -1,217 -0.01% 26%

Note:

S:\RTC\TC2016\TC1016\Consent Agenda\[September 2016 TDA.xlsx]FY2017


TO: Regional Transportation Commission FROM: Daniel Nikuna, Fiscal Officer RE: Fiscal Year (FY) 2015-16 SCCRTC Annual Internal Financial Statements RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends that the Regional Transportation Commission review and accept the FY 2015-16 Annual Internal Financial Statements. BACKGROUND The objective of these internal financial statements is to provide an overview of the financial position of the Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) more frequently than does the annual audit report. The annual financial reporting is also an opportunity to fully analyze the financial position at year end, and guide management as they make financial decisions for the new fiscal year. DISCUSSION The RTC currently has 12 funds, equally divided between Governmental (Operating) and Trust Funds types. Three Trust Funds – In Lieu of Social Security, PERS-Health, and Miscellaneous Deductions were set up to accumulate payroll funds transferred from “General Fund” pending final disbursement. Of the three funds, only the PERS-Health remains significant; the other two funds are either inactive (In Lieu of Social Security) or increasingly less important as third party payments are increasingly being made electronically through the payroll account at Santa Cruz County Bank. The remaining trust funds (TDA, STA, and STP Exchange) are used to pass through funds to local jurisdictions. In the detail sections of the financial report, current year actual revenues and expenditures are compared to the budget. The financial statements are on accrual basis so that the revenues and expenditure were recognized respectively when earned and incurred regardless of when cash was exchanged in the transactions. The financial highlights are included in the transmittal. The statements are intended for internal use; however, they are available for review by the general public. SUMMARY The FY 2015-16 annual internal financial statements have been completed and staff recommends review and acceptance by the Commission. Attachment:

FY 2015-16 SCCRTC Annual Internal Financial Statements

\\Rtcserv2\internal\FISCAL\RTC Items\FY2016\FY2016 Internal Financials\FY2016 Annual FinancialsStaff.docx

September 27, 2016 To the Commissioners Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission Santa Cruz, California Staff is pleased to present the FY2016 annual internal financial statements of the Regional Transportation Commission (RTC). Overall, the RTC’s financial position is healthy. The following projects were completed in FY2016: Unified Corridor Investment – Phase I, Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail (MBSST) Master Plan, and Passenger rail Study. The RTC commenced or continued work on MBSST (for design, permitting, and environmental clearing for three segments of 32-mile rail trail), User Oriented Transit Travel Planning and the Sustainable Transportation Prioritization Plan. Most of the work, including the Expenditure Plan for the Transportation Investment Plan (TRIP) ballot measure scheduled for vote in November 2016, was done in FY2016. The RTC funded the Ecology Action’s Bike to Work ($50,000) and the County’s Community Traffic Safety Coalition ($100,000) at the same level as in FY2015 (Page 9). Assets – No fixed assets were acquired in FY2016 – these are assets valued each at $1,500; however the RTC purchased $12,112 worth of office equipment (Page 9) which included four computers ($6,206), a projector ($1,454) and a ergonomic chair ($799). The audited financial statements will reconcile and capitalize the non depreciable Rail Trail related assets. The combined cash balance in Governmental Funds at $2,978,624 is $432,183 down from a year ago because the lump sum amounts received in prior years were expended. Also, the annual transfer of $50,000 from SAFE to Cruz 511 and the increase in payroll costs have also affected the cash balance. Similar to prior years the cash balance in the Trust Funds is high due to unclaimed TDA and STP Exchange allocations (Pages 24 & 26). Due From Other Funds ($365,138) consists of FY2016 accrued fourth quarter payroll ($205,088) to be paid first by the General Fund in FY2017 and to be reimbursed by other funds, transfer from General Fund to Rail/Trail ($110,000), transfer from SAFE to Cruz 511 ($50,000) and a small amount due from the Hwy 1 PA/ED to General Fund ($50). Excluding Due From Other Funds the receivables in Governmental Funds are down $400,796; and the Rail/Trail shows the most decrease from $375,444 to $18,924 as a result of the completion of the bridge rehabilitation project. Liabilities and Fund Balances - The accounts payables including Salaries Payable are adequately covered by cash and receivables. Net of Due To Other Funds, Governmental Funds’ total payables are down $318,276 to $419,924. Just like the case of the receivables, the Rail Trail shows the most change with these payable going from $298,223 in FY2015 to the current $3,354 (Page 16). Again, the Deferred Revenues are funds received in advance prior to incurring any costs. Revenues and Expenditures – The RTC no longer receives the previously dependable FHWA PL funds from AMBAG, however the RTC was awarded three new federal grants through Caltrans for the User Oriented Transit Travel Planning ($150,000), Sustainable Transportation Prioritization Plan ($229,735), and Cruz511 ($350,000) projects. For the MBSST Project, the RTC has secured the match to Federal funds from Coastal Conservancy ($1,000,000) and Santa Cruz County land Trust ($3,300,000). The Aux Lane Construction shows a zero fund balance because there are no new funding sources except for the small interest revenues of $1,786 – the expenditures are being funded by the cash advance (the balance is the Deferred revenues on Page 20). The FY2016 TDA Receipts of $8,970,056 are $342,652 (4%) above the estimate and $420,716 (5%) higher from a year ago; and it is another record high. The FY2016 STA receipts totaled $914,807 in the first two quarters and the total for the year was estimated at $1,829,613 on the assumption that the performance in the second half would not be any better due to a sudden change by the State Controller of the allocation formula. The State Controller is revising the allocation formula and it is expected that STA could be the same as in FY2015. The payroll costs are up in FY2016 mostly due to increases in certain benefit costs and the additional temporary staff who was hired to work on TRIP, however the payroll costs are under budget (Page 7). The RTC was financially strong in FY2016, continuing to secure new funding sources remains a challenge. Sincerely, Daniel Nikuna, Fiscal Officer

\\Rtcserv2\internal\FISCAL\RTC Items\FY2016\FY2016 Internal Financials\FY2016 Annual transmittal.docx

Table of Contents I. SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................................................................... 1

A. Combined Balance Sheet ........................................................................................................................................... 2 B. Combined Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and

Change in Fund Balance ...................................................................................................................................... 3 II. GOVERNMENTAL (OPERATING) FUNDS ................................................................................................................... 4

1. ADMINISTRATION, PLANNING, AND RIDESHARE A. Combined Balance Sheet ........................................................................................................................................... 5 B. Combined Revenues, Expenditures and

Change in Fund Balance ...................................................................................................................................... 6 C. Revenues and Expenditures Detail

1. SCCRTC – Payroll ....................................................................................................................................... 7 2. Rideshare ...................................................................................................................................................... 8 3. SCCRTC - General Operations ..................................................................................................................... 9 4. FHWA PL (AMBAG) .............................................................................................................................. 10 5. Rural Planning (State Subvention) ............................................................................................................ 11

2. SERVICE AUTHORITY FOR FREEWAY EMERGENCIES (SAFE) FUND ....................................................... 12-13 3. FREEWAY SERVICE PATROL (FSP) FUND ...................................................................................................... 14-15 4. RAIL/TRAIL AUTHORITY FUND ........................................................................................................................ 16-17

5. HIGHWAY 1 PA/ED FUND.................................................................................................................................... 18-19 6. HIGHWAY 1 AUX LANES CONSTRUCTION FUND .......................................................................................... 20-21

III. TRUST/FIDUCIARY FUNDS ........................................................................................................................................... 22

1. TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT (TDA) FUND ................................................................................. 23-24

2. SURFACE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM (STP) EXCHANGE ....................................................................... 25-26 3. STATE TRANSIT ASSISTANCE FUND (STA) ..................................................................................................... 27-28 4. OTHER TRUST FUNDS .......................................................................................................................................... 29-30

\\Rtcserv2\internal\FISCAL\FINANCE\Internal Financials\FY2016\Semi Annual Financials\FY2016FINREPT_Annual.docx


TO: Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) FROM: Daniel Nikuna, Fiscal Officer RE: Fiscal Year (FY) 2016-17 Transportation Development Act (TDA) Claim from the

RTC for Administration, Planning, and Operations RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends that the Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) adopt a resolution (Attachment 1) approving the FY2016-17 Article 3 and Article 8 Transportation Development Act (TDA) claim (Attachment 2

) for RTC administration ($649,719) and RTC planning services ($675,915).

BACKGROUND The Transportation Development Act (TDA), established by the State Legislature in 1971, designates ¼% of the state sales tax for certain transportation projects, programs, and administration. Each year, consistent with the RTC’s Rules and Regulations and the Transportation Development Act (TDA), some of the funds are used for RTC programs. The Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) must submit a claim for TDA funds for RTC administration and planning. Also, the RTC must approve a resolution in order to access the funds. DISCUSSION Attached is a claim in the amount of $1,325,634 (Attachment 2) for Transportation Development Act funds for administration and planning services in FY2016-17. This claim is consistent with the proposed October 6, 2016 RTC budget (see separate agenda item) and it reflects funds allocated to the RTC based on the Auditor Controller’s revenues estimate for FY2016-17. Any future changes to the current estimate will be reflected in subsequent budget amendments. Staff recommends that the RTC adopt the resolution approving the claim for TDA funds (Attachments 1

).

SUMMARY In order to access funds for the operations of RTC programs in FY2016-17, approval of the attached claim and resolution is needed.

1. Resolution Approving Article 8 Claim for Administration and Planning Attachments:

2. SCCRTC Article 3 and Article 8 Claim

s:\fiscal\rtc tda claim\fy2017\fy2017 claimstaffrep.docx

ATTACHMENT 1

RESOLUTION NO.

Adopted by the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission

on the date of October 6, 2015 on the motion of Commissioner duly seconded by Commissioner

A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FY2016-17 CLAIM UNDER ARTICLE 3 AND ARTICLE 8 OF THE TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT FOR

ADMINISTRATION AND PLANNING SERVICES BY THE SANTA CRUZ COUNTY REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION

BE IT RESOLVED BY THE SANTA CRUZ COUNTY REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION:

1. Under PUC Section 99233.1, a claim from the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission for Transportation Development Act Administration is approved in the amount of $649,719.

2. Under PUC Sections 99233.2, 99233.9 and 99402, a claim from the SCCRTC for planning services to accomplish the Commission’s FY 2015-16 work program is approved in the amount of $675,915.

AYES: COMMISSIONERS

NOES: COMMISSIONERS

ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS

ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS

Don Lane, Chair ATTEST: George Dondero, Secretary Distribution: SCCRTC Fiscal

s:\resoluti\2016\res1016\rtc_fy2017_tda_resolution.docx

ATTACHMENT 2

October 6, 2016

Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission 1523 Pacific Avenue Santa Cruz, CA 95060 RE: FY2016-17 CLAIM FOR FUNDS FOR ADMINISTRATION AND PLANNING SERVICES Members of the Regional Transportation Commission: This letter constitutes a claim of the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission for Transportation Development Act Article 3 and Article 8 funds for the purpose of providing transportation planning and administrative services, as outlined in the Regional Transportation Commission’s FY2016-17 work program and the Commission’s Rules and Regulations. The amounts requested under each fund source are: Article 3 – TDA Administration $ 649,719 Article 8 – TDA Planning 675,915 TOTAL $1,325,634 This claim is consistent with the Commission’s FY2016-17 proposed October 6, 2016 budget. Sincerely,

Daniel Nikuna Fiscal Officer

Cc: RTC Fiscal

S:\FISCAL\RTC TDA Claim\FY2017\FY2017 TDAClaim Attachment1.docx

Transportation Development Act (TDA) – Local Transportation Funds CLAIM FORM

Project Information

1. Project Title: RTC TDA Planning and RTC TDA Administration 2. Implementing Agency: SCCRTC 3. Sponsoring Agency (if different) – must be a TDA Eligible Claimant: SCCRTC 4. Article 3 TDA Administration funding requested this claim:

Article 8 TDA Planning funding requested this claim: $649,719

$675,915

5. Fiscal Year (FY) for which funds are claimed: FY 2016-17 6. General purpose for which the claim is made, identified by the article and section of the TDA which

authorizes such claims: Article 3 & 8 TDA Administration and Planning 7. Contact Person/Project Manager Name: Daniel Nikuna, Fiscal Officer; Telephone Number:

(831) 460-3200

Secondary Contact (in event primary not available): Telephone Number:

Luis Mendez (831) 460-3212 E-mail:

[email protected]

8. Project/Program Description/Scope (use additional pages, if needed, to provide details such as work elements/tasks.

TDA-Administration:

• Implement fiscal, personnel and administrative functions for Commission operations – including staff hiring, assignment lists, and performance evaluations; fiscal, personnel and administrative policies, procedures and systems.

SCCRTC as Regional Transportation Planning Agency for Santa Cruz county distributes Transportation Development Act (TDA) Local Transportation Fund (LTF) and State Transit Assistance (STA) funds for planning, transit, bicycle facilities and programs, pedestrian facilities and programs and specialized transportation in accordance with state law and the unmet transit needs process. This task involves maintaining day-to-day operations of the Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) and implementation of the claims process for TDA funds, including:

• Manage, coordinate and distribute Transportation Development Act (TDA) funds (Local Transportation Fund and State Transit Assistance), including apportionments, allocations and claims.

• Coordinate review of appropriate TDA claims with advisory committees. • Maintain records and pay claims for TDA, STA and other trust fund accounts. • Manage, distribute and monitor funds that flow through the RTC budget. • Provide staff support to the Budget and Administration/Personnel Committee. • TDA Fiscal Audits and Internal Financial Statements • TDA Triennial Performance Audit and implement recommendations in performance audit • Prepare and submit to Caltrans the indirect cost allocation plan (ICAP). • Coordinate annual unmet transit needs process, including outreach to traditionally underrepresented

communities, public hearing and adopt resolution of unmet transit needs finding. • Assist transit operators with annual financial audits. • Obtain TDA fund estimates from County Auditor Controller. • Monitor TDA revenue receipts, compare to estimates and adjust estimates as necessary. • Produce and distribute annual financial report. • Prepare and submit to State Controller the annual Financial Transactions Report and Government

Compensation in California Report.

TDA-Planning:

• Regional Planning Coordination - coordination of regional transportation planning activities consistent with federal and state law to maintain a coordinated approach to transportation planning on a local, regional, state and federal level; includes RTC, Interagency Technical Advisory Committee, citizen advisory committee meetings, and coordination meetings with other agencies; tracking state and federal legislation

These funds are used on the following planning projects. Additional information on these projects and programs is available in the RTC Overall Work Program.

• Regional Transportation Plan development, including planning and implementation in coordination with AMBAG for the Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy, and environmental review.

• Unified Corridor Study for three primary transportation routes to identify and performance-based analysis of multimodal transportation investments that provide the greatest benefits

• Transit Planning • Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Specialized Transportation Planning, including the Pedestrian Safety

Workgroup and review of specialized transportation programs. • Highway and Roadway Planning: including planning and coordination with Caltrans and local

jurisdictions regarding road system needs and funding options • Highway 9/San Lorenzo Valley Complete Streets Corridor Transportation Plan development • Santa Cruz Branch Rail Line planning, including analysis of possible uses of the corridor. • Public information program, including implementation of the regional Public Participation Plan,

public outreach, website, surveys and other methods to collect community input, and response to public inquiries.

• Transportation Improvement Program (TIP): Programming funds, monitoring projects • Monitoring and providing input on state and federal legislative actions which could impact planning or

implementation of transportation projects. • Transportation monitoring, including data collection, providing data and input for travel demand

models. • Pass through TDA funds to the Community Traffic Safety Coalition ($100,000) and Bike to Work

($50,000) for bicycle and pedestrian education and safety programs.

9. Project Location/Limits: Santa Cruz County – RTC 10. Justification for the project. (Why is this project needed? Primary goal/purpose of the project; problem to

be addressed; project benefits; importance to the community)

These funds are needed to implement the multimodal programs and projects overseen by the RTC and to ensure funds to other entities are used efficiently and effectively, as well as to meet the obligations and responsibilities of the RTC as the Transportation Planning Agency established per TDA statutes under California Government Code Section 29532.1f.

11. Project Goals: Measures of performance, success or completion to be used to evaluate project/program (ex. increase

use of facility/service, decrease collisions, etc.): Ongoing review of budget and operations by RTC and public; reports on RTC projects and programs; quarterly reports on the Overall Work Program (OWP); TDA fiscal and performance audits.

Number of people to be served/anticipated number of users of project/program (ex. number of new or

maintained bike miles; number of people served/rides provided):

The RTC serves all travelers in Santa Cruz County through planning, project development and project implementation covering the entire region.

12. Consistency and relationship with the current Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) - Is program/project

listed in the RTP and/or consistent with a specific RTP Goal/Policy? Yes – consistent with the following goals from the 2014 RTP: • Goal 1: Improve access to jobs, schools, health care and other regular needs in ways that

improve health, reduce pollution and retain money in the local economy. • Goal 2: Reduce transportation related fatalities and injuries for all transportation modes. • Goal 3: Deliver access and safety improvements cost effectively, within available revenues,

equitable and responsive to the needs of all users of the transportation system and beneficially for the natural environment.

13. Impact(s) of project on other modes of travel, if any (ex. parking to be removed): NA 14. Estimated Project Cost/Budget, including other funding sources, and Schedule:

What is the total project cost? Administration:$792,590; Planning: $3,556,418 Is project fully funded? Yes What will TDA funds be used on (ex. administration, brochures, engineering, construction)?

• Administration & Planning 15. Preferred Method and Schedule for TDA fund distribution: Biannually in two equal installments

16. TDA Eligibility: YES?/NO?

A. Has the project/program been approved by the claimant's governing body? Attach resolution to claim. (If "NO," provide the approximate date approval is anticipated.)

YES, RTC budget

B. Has this project previously received TDA funding? YES C. For capital projects, have provisions been made by the claimant to maintain the project or facility,

or has the claimant arranged for such maintenance by another agency? (If an agency other than the Claimant is to maintain the facility provide its name: ________________________________ )

NA

D. Bike, Ped, and Specialized Transportation Claims: Has the project already been reviewed by the RTC Bicycle Committee and/or Elderly/Disabled Transportation Advisory Committee?

NA

E. For "bikeways," does the project meet Caltrans minimum safety design criteria pursuant to Chapter 1000 of the California Highway Design Manual? (Available on the internet via: http://www.dot.ca.gov

NA

).

17. Goals for next fiscal year (ex. identify opportunities to maximize economies of scale). Describe any areas

where special efforts will be made to improve efficiency and increase program usage:

• Continue to implement administrative and personnel changes to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of Commission operations

Administration

• Develop policies, procedures and systems as needed to ensure effective and efficient operation of agency

• Implement, as appropriate, recommendations of the Triennial Performance Audit • Monitor grants and revenues • Prepare budget and work program, and manage cash flow • Annual fiscal audit

• Implementation of state and federally-mandated planning and programming requirements Planning

• Monitor and participate in efforts at the federal, state and local level related to global warming • Develop and implement public participation programs

• Produce and distribute RTC agency reports and project fact sheets • Coordinate with AMBAG, TAMC, Santa Cruz METRO, Caltrans, and local jurisdictions on Regional

Transportation Plan (RTP) and Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (MTP/SCS) update and implementation

• Continue working with AMBAG to collect data for the Regional Travel Demand Model, RTP, MTP/SCS and other planning efforts

• Monitor state and local highway projects • Complete the Passenger Rail Feasibility Study • Complete Phase I of the Unified Corridor Plan

18. List the recommendations provided in your last Triennial Performance Audit and your progress toward

meeting them. Describe the work your agency has undertaken to implement each performance audit recommendation and the steps it will take to fully implement the recommendation. For any recommendations that have not been implemented, explain why the recommendation has not been implemented and describe the work your agency will undertake to implement each performance audit recommendation. Describe any problems encountered in implementing individual recommendations.

R1. Enhance recruitment efforts to fill vacant positions on the Elder ly & Disabled Transportation Advisory Committee.

Performance Audit Recommendations to the SCCRTC:

RTC staff has expanded recruitment efforts, including evaluation of methods to reimburse member travel expenses to meetings.

R2. Receive the Annual State Controller Repor t from Santa Cruz Metro.

The recommendation has been implemented with the receipt of annual reports. R3. Consider development of an annual report for Commute Solutions.

The Commute Solutions program has been revamped based on program evaluation, with ridematching services now merged into the broader Cruz511 Traveler Information program.

R4. Update the SCCRTC Rules and Regulations.

Implemented; revised Rules and Regulations were approved by the Commission on 8/7/2014.

Local Agency Certification: This TDA Claim has been prepared in accordance with the SCCRTC’s Budget, SCCRTC’s Rules and Regulations, and Caltrans TDA Guidebook (http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/MassTrans/State-TDA.html). I certify that the information provided in this form is accurate and correct. I understand that if the required information has not been provided this form may be returned and the funding allocation may be delayed. Name _Daniel Nikuna_______________ Title: Fiscal Officer Date:

9/16/16

S:\FISCAL\TDA\RTC TDA Claim\FY2017\FY2017 RTC TDA Claim Form.docx

http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/MassTrans/State-TDA.html�


TO: Regional Transportation Commission FROM: George Dondero, Executive Director RE: Out of State Travel for Transportation Research Board (TRB) 2017

Annual Meeting RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends that the Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) approve out of state travel for the Executive Director to attend the Transportation Research Board (TRB) 2017 annual meeting in Washington DC. BACKGROUND The Transportation Research Board (TRB) was established in 1920 as the National Advisory Board on Highway Research to provide a mechanism for the exchange of information and research results about highway technology. Now the TRB’s mission is to promote innovation and progress in transportation through research. In an objective and interdisciplinary setting, TRB facilitates the sharing of information on transportation practice and policy by researchers and practitioners; stimulates research and offers research management services that promote technical excellence; provides expert advice on transportation policy and programs; and disseminates research results broadly and encourages their implementation. The organization accomplishes its mission through standing committees, publications, and an annual meeting. DISCUSSION The TRB annual meetings take place in Washington DC in January. The 96th

annual meeting will be held January 8-12, 2017 and it is expected to attract over 12,000 transportation professionals from around the world. The annual meeting will include more than 5,000 presentations in nearly 750 sessions and specialty workshops.

Traditionally the Executive Director attends the TRB annual meeting and occasionally the Executive Director is joined by other RTC staff. The Executive Director currently sits on the TRB Transportation and Sustainability Committee, which meets during the Annual Meeting. When attending the TRB annual meeting, the Executive Director takes the opportunity to meet with Santa Cruz County’s federal legislative delegation to learn first-hand of the challenges and opportunities for transportation in Washington DC and to communicate the RTC’s concerns and priorities directly.

Out of State Travel for TRB Conference Page 2

The cost for the Executive Director to travel to Washington DC, participate in the TRB annual conference and meet with Santa Cruz County’s legislative delegation is estimated to be about $3500. There are sufficient funds in the RTC’s “transportation/travel/education” budget line of the approved 2016-17 RTC budget to cover this cost. Therefore, staff recommends that the RTC approve out of state travel for the Executive Director to attend the Transportation Research Board (TRB) 2017 annual conference in Washington DC. SUMMARY The Transportation Research Board (TRB) holds an annual meeting to promote innovation and progress in transportation research. Typically, the Executive Director attends the TRB annual meeting in Washington DC and meets with the Santa Cruz County’s federal legislative delegation. There are sufficient funds in the RTC budget to cover the estimated cost and staff recommends that the RTC approve out-of-state travel for the Executive Director to attend the TRB annual meeting in January 2017.

1. Homepage for conference Attachments:

\\RTCSERV2\Shared\RTC\TC2016\TC1016\Consent Agenda\TRB-Out of State Travel\SR- Out of State Travel - TRB2017.docx


TO: Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) FROM: Yesenia Parra, Administrative Services officer RE: Regional Transportation Commission Meeting Schedule for 2017 RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends that the Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) approve the proposed 2017 meeting schedule for the RTC’s regular meetings and Transportation Policy Workshop (TPW) meetings BACKGROUND Every year the RTC approves the schedule of RTC and TPW meetings for the following year. Three RTC meetings and one TPW meeting are scheduled to take place in the City of Watsonville in order to provide a greater opportunity for those who live and work in the southern part of the county to participate in RTC meetings. One meeting is scheduled to take place in each of the other cities in the county. The remaining five meetings are scheduled to take place at the County Board of Supervisors Chambers. This is consistent with the RTC meeting schedules of the past several years. DISCUSSION RTC meetings are generally held on the first Thursday of the month and TPW meetings are held on the third Thursday of the month. Due to the end of the year holidays, the January RTC meeting is generally on the second or third Thursday of the month. The proposed RTC meeting schedule for 2017 is as follows: RTC meeting schedule for 2017 Meeting Date Meeting Location

January 19 *Special Meeting Date Santa Cruz City Council Chambers

February 2 Watsonville City Council Chambers March 2 County Board of Supervisors Chambers April 6 County Board of Supervisors Chambers May 4 Capitola City Council Chambers

2015 RTC Meeting Schedule Page 2

June 1 Watsonville City Council Chambers July No Meeting

August 3 Scotts Valley City Council Chambers September 7 County Board of Supervisors Chambers

October 5 County Board of Supervisors Chambers November 2 Watsonville City Council Chambers December 7 County Board of Supervisors Chambers

RTC TPW meeting schedule for 2017 Meeting Date Meeting Location

January 19 Cancelled due to holiday schedule February 16 RTC Offices, Santa Cruz

March 16 RTC Offices, Santa Cruz April 20 RTC Offices, Santa Cruz May 18 RTC Offices, Santa Cruz June 15 RTC Offices, Santa Cruz

July No Meeting August 17 Watsonville City Council Chambers

September 21 RTC Offices, Santa Cruz October 19 RTC Offices, Santa Cruz

November 16 RTC Offices, Santa Cruz December 21 RTC Offices, Santa Cruz

All RTC and TPW meetings start at 9:00 am. Agenda packets are posted on the RTC website http://sccrtc.org/meetings/commission/agendas/ one week prior to the meeting. TPW meetings are tentative until confirmed at the prior regular RTC meeting. Staff recommends that the RTC approve the proposed RTC and TPW meeting schedules. To provide further opportunity for people who live or work in the southern part of the county to participate, and per the RTC Rules and Regulations, the RTC scheduled one TPW meeting in the City of Watsonville. SUMMARY Every year the RTC approves a schedule for RTC and TPW meetings for the following year. For 2017 three RTC meetings and one TPW meeting will be held in the City of Watsonville, to provide more opportunities for people who live or work in

2015 RTC Meeting Schedule Page 3

the southern part of the county to participate. Staff recommends that the RTC approve the proposed RTC and TPW meeting schedules for 2017.


TO: Regional Transportation Commission FROM: Yesenia Parra, Administrative Services Officer RE: CalPERS health benefit contribution rates for plan year 2017 RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends that the Regional Transportation Commission adopt a resolution (Attachment 1) to continue providing CalPERS Health Benefits to RTC employees pursuant to the approved Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs). BACKGROUND Medical insurance is currently offered to all RTC active and retired employees through the CalPERS Health Benefits Program as established in the Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) with the RTC’s two bargaining groups and in the Executive Director’s employment agreement. As per these agreements, the RTC contributes to the cost of the employee’s health insurance premiums at levels established by each Memoranda of Understanding with the Community of RTC Employees (CORE), the RTC Association of Middle Management (RAMM), and the Executive Director’s employment contract. Currently, all of the RTC bargaining agreements are identical in terms of the amounts that the RTC contributes toward employee and dependent health premiums. The amount contributed by RTC for retired employees and their dependents is set at a lower amount than for active employees with annual increases as required by law. The CalPERS Health Benefits Program is governed by PEMHCA, the Public Employees Medical and Hospital Care Act. To offer employee benefits through this program, the RTC must abide by PEMHCA rules and annually adopt and file resolutions with CalPERS regarding health insurance contribution rates for the upcoming year. Resolutions must be filed by November of the preceding year to establish the following year’s contribution amounts. DISCUSSION The current Memoranda of Understanding for both the Community of RTC Employees (CORE) and the RTC Association of Middle Management (RAMM) specify the percentage of health insurance premiums to be paid by the RTC and by employees respectively based on the premium costs set each year by CalPERS per the calendar. Premium and contribution rates for 2017 are included in

CalPERS Health Premiums Page 2

Attachment 2. Premium payments made for the Executive Director are consistent with those provided to employees in the bargaining units. The attached resolution (Attachment 1) reflects the contribution levels and provisions established in the MOUs currently in effect until March 2018.

SUMMARY To continue in the CalPERS Health Insurance program governed by the Public Employees Medical and Hospital Care Act (PEMCHA), the RTC must comply with the rules and regulations set forth by PEMCHA and submit a resolution by November 2016 that sets the contribution rates for health insurance premiums for the upcoming year. The resolution before you today fulfills this commitment to meet the PEMHCA rules. Staff recommends that the RTC adopt the attached resolution (Attachment 1) outlining the RTC’s health insurance contribution amounts for RTC

active employees and retirees for calendar year 2017. Attachments:

1. Resolution for CalPERS Health Benefits – All Employees 2. CalPERS/RTC Health Plan Rates for 2017 and MOU excerpt

S:\RTC\TC2016\TC1016\Consent Agenda\CalPERS\2016-10-06-CalPERS-SR.docx

CHANGE PERS GROUP UNEQUAL 3 FIXED – EE & ANNUITANT Revision July 2009

RESOLUTION NO. Adopted by the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission

RESOLUTION FIXING THE EMPLOYER'S CONTRIBUTION UNDER THE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' MEDICAL AND HOSPITAL CARE ACT

WHEREAS, (1) Government Code Section 22892(a) provides that a local agency contracting under

the Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act shall fix the amount of the employer's contribution at an amount not less than the amount required under Section 22892(b)(1) of the Act, and

WHEREAS, (2) Government Code Section 22892(c) provides that a contracting agency may fix the

amount of the employer's contribution for employees and the employer's contribution for annuitants at different amounts, provided that the monthly contribution for annuitants is annually increased to equal an amount not less than the number of years the contracting agency has been subject to this subdivision multiplied by 5 percent of the current monthly contribution for employees, until such time as the amounts are equal; and

WHEREAS, (3) Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission, hereinafter referred to as

Public Agency is local agency contracting under the Act for participation by members of the Community of RTC Employees Unit, RTC Association of Middle Managers and the Executive Director now, therefore be it

RESOLVED, (a) That the employer's contribution for each employee shall be the amount necessary

to pay the full cost of his/her enrollment, including the enrollment of his/her family members in a health benefits plan up to a maximum of $973.61 per month with respect to employee enrolled for self alone, $1844.73 per month for an employee enrolled for self and one family member, and $2398.15 per month for an employee enrolled for self and two or more family members, plus administrative fees and Contingency Reserve Fund Assessments.

RESOLVED, (b) That the employer's contribution for each annuitant shall be the amount necessary

to pay the full cost of his/her enrollment, including the enrollment of his/her family members in a health benefits plan up to a maximum of $857 per month with respect to employee enrolled for self alone, $907per month for an employee enrolled for self and one family member, and $963 per month for an employee enrolled for self and two or more family members, plus administrative fees and Contingency Reserve Fund Assessments; and be it further

RESOLVED, (c) That Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission has fully complied

with any and all applicable provisions of Government Code Section 7507 in electing the benefits set forth above.

Adopted at a regular/special meeting of the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission at _______ a.m this 6th day of October 2016.

Signed: _________________________________ (Don Lane, Chairman) Attest: _________________________________ (George Dondero, Secretary)

JEames

Typewritten Text

Attachment: 1

JEames

Typewritten Text

EE Cost For Plan

EE Cost Admin 0.31% of Premium

Total EE Cost

EE 3011 1,024.85 973.61 51.24 3.18 54.42 27.21EE+1 3012 2,049.70 1,844.73 204.97 6.35 211.32 105.66EE+2 3013 2,664.61 2,398.15 266.46 8.26 274.72 137.36

EE 454 783.46 783.46 0.00 2.43 2.43 1.21EE+1 455 1566.92 1566.92 0.00 4.86 4.86 2.43EE+2 456 2,037.00 2037.00 0.00 6.31 6.31 3.16

EE 450 990.05 973.61 16.44 3.07 19.51 9.76EE+1 451 1,980.10 1844.73 135.37 6.14 141.51 70.75EE+2 452 2,574.13 2398.15 175.98 7.98 183.96 91.98

EE 450 733.29 733.29 0.00 2.27 2.27 1.14EE+1 451 1,466.58 1466.58 0.00 4.55 4.55 2.27EE+2 452 1,906.55 1906.55 0.00 5.91 5.91 2.96

EE 2821 733.39 733.39 0.00 2.27 2.27 1.14EE+1 2822 1,466.78 1466.78 0.00 4.55 4.55 2.27EE+2 2823 1,906.81 1906.81 0.00 5.91 5.91 2.96

EE 3201 830.30 830.30 0.00 2.57 2.57 1.29EE+1 3202 1,660.60 1660.60 0.00 5.15 5.15 2.57EE+2 3203 2,158.78 2158.78 0.00 6.69 6.69 3.35

EE 721 736.27 736.27 0.00 2.28 2.28 1.14EE+1 722 1,472.54 1472.54 0.00 4.56 4.56 2.28EE+2 733 1,914.30 1,914.30 0.00 5.93 5.93 2.97

EE 3251 932.39 932.39 0.00 2.89 2.89 1.45EE+1 3252 1,864.78 1844.73 20.05 5.78 25.83 12.92EE+2 3253 2,424.21 2398.15 26.06 7.52 33.58 16.79

EE 426 1062.26 973.61 88.65 3.29 91.95 45.97EE+1 427 2,124.52 1,844.73 81.76 6.59 88.35 44.17EE+2 428 2,761.88 2,398.15 106.28 8.56 114.84 57.42

BLUE SHIELD HMO

RTC Employees and RetireesMedical Plan Rates - 2017

Coverage Effective:January 1 2017 through December31, 2017

Plan Code

Monthly Premium

RTCContribution

EE Monthly CostsEE PAY PERIOD COST

Anthem Select HMO

Anthem Traditional HMO

KAISER HMO

HealthNet SmartCare

PERSCare PPO

United Health Care

PERS CHOICE PPO

PERS Select* PPO

JEames

Typewritten Text

Attachment: 2

13

The following is only a summary of the terms of enrollment and benefits for employee insurances available to employees in this bargaining unit. In the event of a discrepancy between Article 10 and the insurance plan document, the plan document for insurances specified below (medical, dental, vision, long term disability, life) is controlling. Copies of plan documents are available to employees from the ASO. 10.1 MEDICAL COVERAGE & FLEXIBLE CREDIT PERS offers employees choices in medical plans. Enrollment of some domestic partners is permitted in PERS medical. A. Employees in this bargaining unit may enroll in a medical plan offered by PERS in accordance with the provisions of the Public Employees' Medical & Hospital Care Program or a PERS approved Commission offered alternate medical plan. Employees have the option of enrolling their eligible dependents in a PERS approved Commission offered medical plan. Alternate medical plans must conform to PERS plans, rules, and regulations. B. For coverage during the term of this agreement the Commission shall contribute to PERS Public Employees' Medical & Hospital Care Program or any other PERS approved Commission offered alternate medical plans the following monthly amount for active, eligible employees in budgeted positions who elect to participate in such program:

1. For the remainder of calendar year 2007, the Commission will provide the following monthly medical contribution for active employees:

Employee Only: 95% of the 2007 premium for Blue Shield HMO ($460.00) Employee + one dependent: 75% of the 2007 premium for Blue Shield HMO ($726.32) Employee + two or more dependents: 75% of the 2007 premium for Blue Shield HMO ($944.21)

2. For calendar year 2008, the RTC will provide the following monthly medical

contribution for active employees: a. Employees only: 95% of the 2008 premium for Blue Shied Access (EXT)

HMO ($506.28) b. Employees + one dependent: 80% of the 2008 premium for Blue Shield

Access (EXT) HMO ($852.69) c. Employees + two or more dependents: 80% of the 2008 premium for Blue

Shield Access (EXT) HMO ($1,108.50)

3. Beginning in calendar year 2009, the RTC and Union agree to participate in a Flexible Credits Program in accordance with IRS Section 125 provisions. Further information about the Flexible Credits Program can be found in Article 10.12.

4. For calendar year 2009, the RTC will provide monthly benefit contributions for active

employees:

14

a. Flexible Credit Contribution

(1) Employees only: 95% of the 2009 premium for Blue Shied Access (EXT) HMO premium less the PEMHCA contribution in 3(b)(1) below

(2) Employees + one dependent: 85% of the 2009 premium for Blue Shield Access (EXT) HMO less the PEMHCA contribution in 3(b)(1) below

(3) Employees + two or more dependents: 85% of the 2009 premium for Blue Shield Access (EXT) HMO less the PEMHCA contribution in 3(b)(1) below

b. PERS PEMHCA CONTRIBTION (1) EE only = $456 (2) EE+one dependent = $507 (3) EE+two or more dependents = $563

5. For calendar year 2010, the RTC will provide monthly benefit contributions for active

employees:

a. Flexible Credit Contribution (1) Employees only: 95% of the 2010 premium for Blue Shied Access (EXT)

HMO premium less the PEMHCA contribution in 3(b)(1) below (2) Employees + one dependent: 90% of the 2010 premium for Blue Shield

Access (EXT) HMO less the PEMHCA contribution in 3(b)(1) below (3) Employees + two or more dependents: 90% of the 2010 premium for Blue

Shield Access (EXT) HMO less the PEMHCA contribution in 3(b)(1) below

b. PERS PEMHCA CONTRIBTION (1) EE only= $507 (2) EE+one dependent$557 (3) EE+two or more dependents = $613

Employees in this representation unit hereby authorize the Commission to make a payroll deduction in the amount equivalent to the remainder of the premium required for the Public Employees’ Medical & Hospital Care Program, or any other PERS approved Commission offered alternate medical plan in which they and their dependents are enrolled. C. Employees hereby authorize the Commission to make a payroll deduction for the payment of the required PERS administrative fee based upon the plan selected by the employee. D. Should PERS require a contribution to the Public Employees' Contingency Reserve Fund, employees hereby authorize payroll deductions equivalent to any such contributions required by PERS. E. Pre-Tax Dollar Program. The Commission will make available to members of this representation unit a voluntary program of pre-tax dollar contributions as provided in Internal Revenue Code Section 125. F. Survivor Coverage.

15

Upon the death of an active employee who has dependents covered under a medical plan offered through the Commission, the Commission shall provide coverage under that plan five (5) months following the death of the employee for the surviving eligible dependents. G. Retiree Health Care

1. Employees in this bargaining unit who retire through PERS may enroll in a PERS health plan or any Commission offered alternate medical plan, as provided under the Public Employees' Medical & Hospital Care Program and PERS regulations.

a. For the remainder of 2007, the Commission will provide monthly contributions for retirees not to exceed the actual cost of the plan selected:

(1) Retiree only: $357 per month (2) Retiree plus one: $407 per month (3) Retiree plus two or more: $463 per month

b. For calendar year 2008, the RTC will provide the following monthly medical

contributions for retirees, not to exceed the actual cost of the plan selected: (1) Retiree only: $407 per month (2) Retiree plus one: $507 per month (3) Retiree plus two or more: $563 per month

c. For calendar year 2009, the RTC will provide the following monthly medical

contributions fro retirees, not to exceed the actual cost of the plan selected: (1) Retiree only: $457 per month (2) Retiree plus one: $507 per month (3) Retiree plus two or more: $563 per month

d. For calendar year 2010, the RTC will provide the following monthly medical

contributions fro retirees, not to exceed the actual cost of the plan selected: (1) Retiree only: $507 per month (2) Retiree plus one: $557 per month (3) Retiree plus two or more: $613 per month

2. Nothing in this agreement guarantees continued medical insurance coverage upon or after the expiration of this agreement and the underlying Memorandum of Understanding for retirees, their dependents, or their survivors. The Commission reserves the right to make modifications to retiree medical coverage, including termination of coverage, upon or after the termination of this Memorandum of Understanding.

10.2 DENTAL CARE The Commission offers two dental plans. One is Delta Dental. This is a "fee-for-service" plan. Enrollees may go to any dentist and be reimbursed 80% for basic and preventative services and 50% on major services. Or enrollees may go to a preferred provider and be reimbursed at 100% for basic and preventative services and 60% for major services. The other plan is PMI and covers most services at 100%. This plan also has some orthodontia coverage. The Commission agrees to

of 34

ARTICLE 19 VEHICLE MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT

A. The RTC agrees to reimburse employees for authorized use of their private vehicles on RTC business at the Internal Revenue Service maximum allowable rate as confirmed by the Fiscal Officer.

B. Changes to the above rate will commence the first day of the month which occurs thirty (30) days after the publication of the change of the IRS allowable rate in the Federal Register.

C. It is understood that payment of vehicle mileage reimbursement to an employee provides compensation for all direct and indirect costs associated with ownership, insurance (including deductible), maintenance, and operation of the employee's vehicle(s) on RTC business.

D. Employees must be authorized to use their private automobile(s) on RTC business by the RTC Administrative Office. Each employee must provide proof of insurance coverage on the vehicle(s) to be driven on RTC business in an amount not less than:

1. $100,000 per accident bodily injury and $50,000 per accident property damage;

OR

2. $100,000 combined single limit for auto liability, including bodily injury and property damage. E. In the event that an employee who is required to use a private vehicle on RTC business, should incur property

damage in connection with a vehicle accident, and the employee is unable to recover the costs of such property damage from either his/ her own insurance company or from any other driver, or other source, such costs shall be paid to such employee of the RTC in the sum not exceeding $150.00, provided that any claims the employee may have against his/her insurance company or any third party have been litigated or settled, and provided further that the employee is not found guilty of a violation of the California Vehicle Code or Penal Code in connection with the accident causing such damage.

ARTICLE 20 INSURANCE BENEFITSTiming of Payroll Deductions. The RTC may take monthly payroll deductions in any one pay period in a month for all insurances (including medical plans, dental plans, vision plan, long term disability plan, life insurance) for employees being newly appointed to a position in the representation unit; employees leaving the representation unit; and employees in this representation unit who are beginning or returning from leaves of absence without pay. The RTC may take monthly payroll deductions in any one pay period in a month for all insurances on a regular basis for all employees in this representation unit, provided there is agreement with other employee organizations for such monthly payroll deductions in any one pay period. Plan Documents Controlling. The following is a general description of the benefits available to eligible representation unit employees and retirees. This description is for informational purposes only and is not intended to create a benefit or right in excess of those that are provided in the insurance plan documents for medical, dental, vision, long term disability and life insurance, which are controlling. Copies of plan documents are available through the ASO.

20.1 MEDICAL COVERAGE

A. Employees in this representation unit may enroll in a PERS health plan in accordance with the provisions of the Public Employees' Medical & Hospital Care Program. Employees have the option of enrolling their eligible dependents (including domestic partners) in this program.

B. For coverage during the term of this agreement the RTC shall contribute to PERS Public Employees’ Medical & Hospital Care Program or any other PERS approved RTC offered alternate medical plans the following monthly amount for active, eligible employees in budgeted positions who elect to participate in such program:

1. For the remainder of calendar year 2007, the RTC’s monthly contribution toward health care costs for active employees shall be as follows:

Employee only: 95% of the 2007 premium for Blue Shield HMO ($460.00) Employee + one dependent: 75% of the 2006 premium for Blue Shield HMO ($726.32) Employee + two or more dependents: 75% of the 2006 premium for Blue Shield HMO ($944.21)

of 34

2. For calendar year 2008, the RTC will increase monthly contributions for active employees in an amount equal to:

Employee only: 95% of the 2007 premium for Blue Shield HMO ($506.28) Employee + one dependent: 80% of the 2007 premium for Blue Shield HMO ($852.69) Employee + two or more dependents: 80% of the 2007 premium for Blue Shield HMO ($1108.50)

3. Beginning in calendar year 2009, the RTC and Union agree to participate in a Flexible Credits Program in accordance with the IRS Section 125 provisions. Further information about the Flexible Credits program can be found in Article 10.12

4. For calendar year 2009, the RTC will increase monthly contributions for active employees in an amount equal to:

A. Flexible Credit Contribution 1. Employees only: 95% of the 2009 premium for Blue Shield Access (EXT) HMO premium

less the PEMCHA contribution in 3(b)(1) below 2. Employees + one dependent: 85% of the 2009 premium for Blue Shield Access (EXT)

HMO premium less the PEMCHA contribution in 3(b)(1) below 3. Employees + two or more dependents: 85% of the 2009 premium for Blue Shield

Access (EXT) HMO premium less the PEMCHA contribution in 3(b)(1) below B. PERS PEMCHA CONTRIBUTION

1. EE only = $456 2. EE + One dependent = $507 3. EE + two or more dependents = $563

5. For calendar year 2010, the RTC will provide monthly benefit contributions for active employees:

A. Flexible Credit Contribution 1. Employees only: 95% of the 2010 premium for Blue Shield Access (EXT) HMO premium

less the PEMCHA contribution in 3(b)(1) below 2. Employees + one dependent: 90% of the 2010 premium for Blue Shield Access (EXT)

HMO premium less the PEMCHA contribution in 3(b)(1) below 3. Employees + two or more dependents: 90% of the 2010 premium for Blue Shield

Access (EXT) HMO premium less the PEMCHA contribution in 3(b)(1) below B. PERS PEMCHA CONTRIBUTION

1. EE only = $507 2. EE + One dependent = $557 3. EE + two or more dependents = $613

C. Employees in this representation unit hereby authorize the RTC to make a payroll deduction in the amount equivalent to the remainder of the premium required for Public Employees Medical & Hospital Plan or any other PERS-approved RTC offered alternate medical plan in which they are enrolled.

D. Should PERS require a contribution to the Public Employees' Contingency Reserve Fund, employees hereby authorize payroll deductions equivalent to the contributions required by PERS.

E. Pre-Tax Dollar Program. The RTC will make available to members of this representation unit a voluntary program of pre-tax dollar contributions as provided in Internal Revenue Code Section 125.

F. Survivor Coverage. Upon the death of an active employee who has dependents covered under a medical plan offered through the RTC, the RTC shall provide coverage under that plan five (5) months following the death of the employee for the surviving eligible dependents.


TO: Regional Transportation Commission FROM: Cory Caletti, Senior Transportation Planner/Bicycle Program Manager RE: Bicycle Advisory Committee Membership Appointments RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends that the Regional Transportation Commission make the following appointments to the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission’s Bicycle Advisory Committee:

1. Amelia Conlen(voting) and Melissa Ott (alternate) to represent the City of Santa Cruz; and

2. Murray Fontes (voting) to represent the City of Watsonville. _____________________________________________________________________________ BACKGROUND Seats on the Regional Transportation Commission’s Bicycle Advisory Committee correspond to City and Supervisorial District seats on the Regional Transportation Commission (RTC). Commissioners may nominate individuals for RTC consideration. Two additional seats for Bike to Work and the Community Traffic Safety Coalition also exist and nominations are made by the respective agency. Seats for three-year terms on the Bicycle Committee expire on a rotating basis. The Bicycle Advisory Committee’s description, role and membership are in the 2014 RTC Rules and Regulations. DISCUSSION Staff continually works to fill vacancies on the Bicycle Advisory Committee and seek diverse representation of the Santa Cruz County community. City of Watsonville Vacancies currently exist for voting and alternate seats representing the City of Watsonville. Murray Fontes, a 16-year registered professional engineer with the City of Watsonville, has applied for the voting seat position and has been nominated by Commissioner Dutra via communication with RTC staff. Mr. Fontes is familiar with cycling issues within the City and works actively to improve conditions for bicycle travel. His application is attached with personal information redacted (Attachment 1

).

City of Santa Cruz Bill Fieberling, a long time Bicycle Advisory Committee member and recent alternate, passed away which has left a vacancy for the City of Santa Cruz. Amelia Conlen, previously representing District 4, requested appointment to serve as the voting member of the City of

Bicycle Advisory Committee Membership Appointments Page 2

Santa Cruz. Melissa Ott, currently serving as the voting member wishes to serve as the alternate. Ms. Conlen is the past Executive Director of Bike Santa Cruz County, and organization that has contributed to numerous bicycle improvements under her tenure, and is now a staff member of the City of Santa Cruz. As a marker of progress related to improved gender representation, it should be noted that Ms. Conlen was elected as the Committee’s first female chair earlier this year. Her application was provided previously and is on file. Ms. Ott’s application was also submitted previously and is on file. Commissioner Don Lane nominated Ms. Conlen and Ms. Ott to serve as representatives of the City of Santa Cruz as voting and alternate members, respectively, through communication with RTC staff. Staff recommends that the Regional Transportation Commission approve nominations submitted by Commissioners Lane and Dutra for the RTC’s Bicycle Advisory Committee. A draft roster is included as Attachment 2

.

Should the RTC make the recommended appointments vacancies will still exist for an alternate seat for the City of Watsonville; voting and alternate seats for Districts 4; and an alternate seat for District 5. Staff will continue to work to recruit applicants to fill vacancies and welcomes recommendations from Commissioners. SUMMARY Staff recommends that the Regional Transportation Commission appoint Amelia Conlen and Melissa Ott to serve as voting and alternate representatives of the City of Santa Cruz as nominated by Commissioner Lane. Staff also recommends that the RTC appoint Murray Fontes as the voting member representing the City of Watsonville as nominated by Commissioner Dutra.

1. Application from applicant Murray Fontes Attachments:

2. Draft Bicycle Committee roster

S:\RTC\TC2016\TC0416\Regular Agenda\Bike Com nominations\SR_BikeCom_nominations.docx

COMMITTEE APPOINTMENT APPLICATION

Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission (SCCRTC) Bicycle Committee

Meetings are currently held the second Monday of every other month at 6:30 p.m. in the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission conference room, located at 1523 Pacific Avenue in downtown Santa Cruz. At least one meeting each year will be scheduled for an alternate location. Please refer to the Committee description, bylaws and recruitment process for more information. If you are interested in serving on this committee, please complete this application, and return it to the Regional Transportation Commission office. Please type or print clearly Name: _____________________________________________________________

Home address: _______________________________________________________

Mailing address (if different): ___________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________

Phone: (home) ________________ (business/message/mobile)_ ______

E-mail: _____________________________________________________________

Length of residence in Santa Cruz County: __________________________________

Position(s) I am applying for: � Any appropriate position

� _______________________________ � ______________________________

Previous experience on a government commission or committee (please specify)

____________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________

Attachment 1

murray.fontes

Text Box

Murray Fontes

murray.fontes

Text Box

Same

murray.fontes

Text Box

[email protected]

murray.fontes

Text Box

24 years

murray.fontes

Text Box

Bike Committee Member or Alternate

murray.fontes

Text Box

Interagency Technical Advisory Committee, Santa Cruz County RTC (2012 - Present)

murray.fontes

Text Box

X

Attachment 2 DRAFT BICYCLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ROSTER – October, 2016

Representing Member Name/Contact Info Appointment Dates

District 1 - Voting Soquel, Live Oak, part of Capitola

Grace Voss 462-4884 [email protected]

First Appointed: 2016 Term Expires: 3/19

Alternate Kem Akol [email protected] 247-2944


District 2 - Voting Aptos, Corralitos, part of Capitola, Nisene Marks, Freedom, PajDunes

David Casterson, Chair [email protected] 588-2068


Alternate Jim Cook [email protected] 345-4162

First Appointed: 12/13 Term Expires: 3/18

District 3 - Voting Big Basin, Davenport, Bonny Doon, City of Santa Cruz

Peter Scott [email protected] 423-0796


Alternate William Menchine (Will) [email protected] 426-3528


District 4 - Voting Watsonville, part of Corralitos

Alternate Vacant Term Expires: 3/18

District 5 - Voting SL Valley, Summit, Scotts Valley, part of Santa Cruz

Rick Hyman [email protected]



City of Capitola - Voting Andy Ward [email protected] 462-6653


Alternate Daniel Kostelec [email protected] 325-9623


City of Santa Cruz - Voting

Amelia Conlen [email protected]


Alternate Melissa Ott [email protected]


City of Scotts Valley -Voting

Lex Rau [email protected] 419-1817


Alternate Gary Milburn 427-3839 hm [email protected]/438-2888 ext 210 wk


City of Watsonville - Voting

Murray Fontes [email protected]



Bike To Work - Voting

Emily Granville [email protected] 415-637-2744


Alternate Piet Canin [email protected] 426-5925 ext. 127


Community Traffic Safety Coalition - Voting

Leo Jed, Vice-Chair [email protected] 425-2650


Alternate Jim Langley [email protected] 423-7248


All phone numbers have the (831) area code unless otherwise noted. S:\Bike\Committee\BC2016\BC_Oct_2016\Roster.docx








Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission THREE MONTH MEETING SCHEDULE

October 2016

Through December 2016

All meetings are subject to cancellation when there are no action items to be considered by

the board or committee Please visit our website for meeting agendas and locations

www.sccrtc.org/meetings/

Meeting Date

Meeting Day Meeting Type Meeting

Time Meeting Place

10/6/16 Thursday Regional Transportation Commission 9:00 am County Board of Supervisors Chambers

10/11/16 Tuesday Elderly & Disabled Transportation Advisory Committee 1:30 pm Commission Offices

10/17/16* Monday Bicycle Advisory Committee *Note meeting date is one week later 6:00 pm Commission Offices

10/20/16 Thursday Transportation Policy Workshop 9:00 am Commission Offices

10/27/16* Thursday Interagency Technical Advisory Committee *Note meeting date is one week later 1:30 pm Commission Offices

11/3/16 Thursday Regional Transportation Commission 9:00 am City of Watsonville Council Chambers

11/10/16 Thursday Budget & Administration/Personnel Committee 3:00 pm CAO Conference Room


11/17/16 Thursday Interagency Technical Advisory Committee 1:30 pm Commission Offices

12/1/16 Thursday Regional Transportation Commission 9:00 am County Board of Supervisors Chambers

12/12/16 Monday Bicycle Advisory Committee 6:00 pm Commission Offices

12/13/16 Tuesday Elderly & Disabled Transportation Advisory Committee 1:30 pm Commission Offices

12/15/16 Thursday Interagency Technical Advisory Committee 1:30 pm Commission Offices


RTC Commission Offices – 1523 Pacific Ave. – Santa Cruz, CA

Board of Supervisors Chambers/CAO/RDA Conference room – 701 Ocean St-5th floor – Santa Cruz, CA

City of Capitola-Council Chambers – 420 Capitola Ave – Capitola, CA

City of Santa Cruz-Council Chambers – 809 Center St – Santa Cruz, CA

City of Scotts Valley-Council Chamber – 1 Civic Center Dr – Scotts Valley, CA

City of Watsonville-Council Chambers – 275 Main St Ste 400 – Watsonville, CA

http://www.sccrtc.org/meetings/�

Correspondence Log October 6, 2016

1

Date Letter Rec'd/Sent Format Incoming/

Outgoing Response First Last Organization First Last Organization Subject

07/12/16 Letter I SCCRTC Raymon Cancino Community Bridges Endorsement of the Safety, Pothole Repair, Traffic Relief, Transit Improvement Measure

08/05/16 Letter I Daniel Nikuna SCCRTC Debbie Kinslow SCMTD TDA and STA Monies Received for Fiscal Year 2015-2016

08/21/16 Letter I Don Zach

Lane Friend SCCRTC Howard Sosbee Rail Trail

08/24/16 Letter I Greg Nadeau Federal Highway Administration

Jim Ron

Debra George Mary Maura

Kemp DeCarli

Hale Dondero Gilbert

Twomey

SBAG SLOCOG

TAMC SCCRTC SBCOG AMBAG

MPO Coordination and Planning Area Reform Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: Docket Number FHWA-2016-0016

08/25/16 Email I CJ 08/25/16 SCCRTC Jim W Blain Comment on the Notion of Rail Trail

08/26/16 Email I CJ 08/26/16 SCCRTC Stephanie Maynard Paperless Policy

08/29/16 Email I CC 08/30/16 SCCRTC Dan Denevan North Coast Trail

08/30/16 Email I JR 08/31/16 SCCRTC Barry Scott Thank You for the Rail and the Trail

TO FROM


2



TO FROM

08/31/16 Email I JR 08/31/16 SCCRTC Steve Piercy Surface Transportation Block Grant Program

08/31/16 Email I JR 08/31/16 SCCRTC Steve Walker Bad Roads in Corralitos

09/01/16 Email I JR 09/02/16 SCCRTC David Eselius US Fluoridation Delaney Clause

09/06/16 Email I YP 09/26/16 SCCRTC John Hunt Failed Culvert Under RR Tracks at La Selva

09/06/16 Email I CJ 09/15/16 SCCRTC Stephanie Maynard Executive Director Salary Survey

09/06/16 Email I CJ 09/26/16 SCCRTC John Eastman Sentinel Article 09/02/16

09/08/16 Letter O Kelly McClendon Caltrans, District 5 Daniel Nikuna SCCRTC FY2017 OWPA

09/09/16 Email I CJ 09/26/16 SCCRTC Barry Scott Support Funding of Aptos Village Rail

Crossing Improvements


3



TO FROM

09/09/16 Email I CJ 09/26/16 SCCRTC Catherine Marino Rail Trail

09/10/16 Email I SCCRTC Joe Martinez Aptos Village Project

09/12/16 Email I KP 09/27/16 SCCRTC Barbara McCrary Local Transportation Projects

09/12/16 Email I KP 09/26/16 SCCRTC Laura Caldwell New System for Email Communication

09/13/16 Letter I George Dondero SCCRTC John Hoole Department of Transportation

STIP Planning, Programming & Monitoring (PPM) Program for Fiscal Year 2016/2017

09/20/16 Memorandum O STBG Project Sponsors Rachel Moriconi SCCRTC Approval of STBG Funds

09/21/16 Letter I George Dondero SCCRTC Kelly McClendon Caltrans, District 5 Notice to Proceed for the Highway 9/Santa Lorenzo Valley Corridor Plan

09/22/16 Email I CJ 09/26/16 SCCRTC Frank Siri Highway One Widening


4



TO FROM

09/22/16 Email I KP 09/27/16 SCCRTC Zia Isola Lompico Roads

09/22/16 Email I KP 09/26/16 SCCRTC Nathaniel James Transportation Funds

09/23/16 Letter I George Dondero SCCRTC Kelly McClendon Caltrans, District 5 Notice to Proceed for the Unified Corridor Investment Study Phase II

09/24/16 Email I CJ 09/26/16 SCCRTC Frank Remde Road Improvements Needed in South

County

S:\Correspondence Logs\correslogfy1617\[1610.xlsx]Sheet1

JEames

Typewritten Text

Comments from the Public

JEames

Typewritten Text

Transportation in San Lorenzo Valley

Community Meeting October 11 at 6pm

San Lorenzo Valley Performing Arts Complex (located on the SLV High School campus at 7105 Highway 9, Felton)

Help kick-off the Highway 9/SLV Transportation Corridor Plan. Share your vision for Highway 9, learn about upcoming projects, and

participate in development of this action plan. Highway 9 serves as the “Main Street” for Felton, Ben Lomond, Brookdale and Boulder Creek and is the backbone for people and goods moving through San Lorenzo Valley. San Lorenzo Valley resi-dents, businesses, schools and others are invited to help the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission (RTC), in partnership with County Supervisor Bruce McPherson, Caltrans, County Public Works, County Planning, and Santa Cruz METRO, develop a master plan for Highway 9. Building on past community input, this corridor-specific plan will analyze and priori-tize projects that can be implemented in the short and mid-term. Measure D, which is on the No-vember ballot, includes $10 million specifically earmarked for transportation projects along the Highway 9 corridor.

Supervisor Bruce McPherson will lead a discussion about Measure D immediately following this event.

Learn more and sign up to receive updates on Highway 9/SLV Plan: http://sccrtc.org/projects/streets-highways/hwy-9-plan/

Thank you in advance for your participation to improve transportation in SLV!


1523 Pacific Ave, Santa Cruz, CA 95060 831-460-3200; [email protected]

www.sccrt.org

9/2/2016 Transportation Funding on the Legislative Back Burner, Again! California State Association of Counties

http://www.counties.org/pressrelease/transportationfundinglegislativebackburneragain 1/1

P R E S S R E L E A S E

Transportation Funding on the Legislative Back Burner, Again!

For Immediate Release:

September 1, 2016

Contacts:

Gregg Fishman, [email protected] (916) 327-7500

Eva Spiegel, [email protected] (916) 658-8228

Orville Thomas, [email protected] (916) 446-2259

Will Kempton, [email protected] (916) 446-1280

(Sacramento) The California Legislature just closed out its two-year session without making progress on what is arguably the

most critical issue in the state; the dramatically poor condition of our highways, streets, roads, and bridges. Despite the best

efforts of Senator Jim Beall and Assembly Member Jim Frazier who Chair the two Transportation Committees, and some of

their colleagues across the aisle, their compromise legislation never even got a meaningful hearing.

“Our transportation system is dangerously underfunded, and everyone knows it,” said Chris McKenzie, Executive Director of

the League of California Cities. “Bad roads affect everyone in the state. They impact the environment and economy, reduce

fuel efficiency and increase the cost of vehicle maintenance. Everybody agrees that our transportation infrastructure deficit

issues have to be addressed, but the political will and leadership to act on this issue has been lacking.”

“For two years now, our coalition has been telling the Legislature about the poor and dangerous condition of our

transportation infrastructure,” said Michael Quigley, Executive Director of the California Alliance for Jobs. “California has not

devoted enough resources to maintain the existing transportation infrastructure, so now, roads are crumbling, bridges are

unsafe, and drivers are paying thousands of dollars more per year in vehicle maintenance. In the meantime, California

construction companies are laying off workers and in some cases, going bankrupt.”

“It is very disappointing that our roads and bridges will continue to deteriorate due to the Legislature’s inaction on this issue.

The only opportunity left this year to address the critical funding shortfall for repairing our transportation system will be later

in the fall,” said Will Kempton, Executive Director of Transportation California.

“The Transportation Special Session called by the Governor last year remains in effect through the end of November, so it’s

conceivable a bill could be considered before then. However, this approach would require the support of legislative leaders

and a commitment to get something done.”

“The longer we wait to begin fixing our roads the more it’s going to cost taxpayers and, frankly, the backlog of deferred

maintenance jeopardizes public safety and California’s economic vitality,” said Matt Cate, Executive Director of the California

State Association of Counties. “Fixing and investing in our transportation network remains a top priority for CSAC and we are

committed to seeing this through the Legislature.”

The Fix Our Roads Coalition represents a broad coalition of cities, counties, labor, business, and transportation advocatesworking to address California’s chronic transportation infrastructure funding shortfall. For more information visitwww.http://fixcaroads.com.

###

http://www.counties.org/sites/main/files/imagecache/lightbox/main-images/fix_our_roads_logo.jpg

http://www.http/fixcaroads.com

http://www.counties.org/

http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article100734142.html

This is what the climate bill Jerry Brown signed means By David Siders

[email protected]

When Gov. Jerry Brown signed Senate Bill 32 into law on Thursday, he said of the sweeping climate change bill, “This is big, and I hope it sends a message across the country.”

Q: So what, exactly, does it do?

A: SB 32 comes a decade after California’s landmark Assembly Bill 32, which required the California Air Resources Board to reduce statewide emissions of greenhouse gases to 1990 levels by 2020. The legislation Brown signed Wednesday expands on that mandate, requiring California to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030.

In adopting a more aggressive standard, the state is empowering the air board to enact further regulations to reduce emissions, while not prescribing what those regulations must entail.

Here is the relevant language in the bill:

In adopting rules and regulations to achieve the maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective greenhouse gas emissions reductions authorized by this division, the state board shall ensure that statewide greenhouse gas emissions are reduced to at least 40 percent below the statewide greenhouse gas emissions limit no later than Dec. 31, 2030.

Q: That’s not very specific. How will it affect Californians?

A: Existing regulations, as well as goals expressed by the Brown administration, offer an outline of how the state might ratchet down emissions.

First, since the transportation sector is the single largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in the state – accounting for more than one-third of total emissions – California has a lot riding on what your commute looks like in 15 years.

Brown wants to reduce petroleum use in cars and trucks by as much as 50 percent, and regulators could further tighten the state’s low carbon fuel standard, which requires producers of gasoline and other transportation fuels to reduce the carbon intensity of their products.

Brown also wants to put 1.5 million zero-emission vehicles on California roadways by 2025, and he adopted a goal last year of making all new passenger vehicles sold in California zero-emission by 2050.



That’s a tall order that will almost certainly rely on technological advances to overcome consumer fears about the cost and range of zero-emission vehicles. The California Plug-In Electric Vehicle Collaborative estimates only 231,482 plug-in cars have been sold in the state since 2011, and greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector ticked up slightly – not down – in 2014.

One way to reduce emissions is to reduce vehicle miles traveled, which could be accomplished by shifting drivers onto high-speed rail and by encouraging people to live in city cores.

The state last year enacted a goal of increasing to one-half from one-third the proportion of electricity the state derives from renewable sources. The Brown administration wants to double the energy efficiency of buildings and make heating fuels cleaner, while also better managing forests and farmland.

The state is planning to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on a range of emission-reduction programs, from clean vehicle rebates and high-speed rail to efforts to reduce methane from dairies.

Q: Will it make a difference?

A: For Californians living near major sources of pollution, it might. One of the state’s more recent areas of focus is on so-called “short-lived climate pollutants,” a hazardous class of pollutants, including black carbon, that sickens millions of people worldwide each year.

Reducing those pollutants, scientists say, can both improve public health and slow the pace of global warming.

But California represents such a small fraction of the world’s total greenhouse gas emissions that even if it does continue to dramatically reduce emissions, the broader impact on global warming will be minimal.

Q: So what’s the point?

A: As an example to other governments, California could be significant. Brown and other proponents of the state’s climate change policies argue that the state has demonstrated that a large economy can reduce emissions while enjoying economic growth. Emissions have declined since 2001, though progress has slowed amid the economic recovery.

While reducing emissions, California has supported a growing clean technology sector, technology that could be exported to other states and countries. Meanwhile, Brown has signed more than 125 sub-national jurisdictions around the world on to a nonbinding pact to reduce their emissions.

“If California stopped all of our emissions tomorrow, it really wouldn’t change the global warming picture in a physical sense,” said Jeffery Greenblatt, staff scientist at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. “But we set a huge political example.”


The enactment of SB 32 required Brown and Democratic legislative leaders to overcome intense lobbying from the oil industry, as well as reservations from moderate Democrats in the Assembly. If the bill had failed, it would have served as an embarrassment for a fourth-term governor who has made climate change the centerpiece of his administration.

Q: Didn’t Brown lose on cap and trade?

A: In an effort to preserve California’s cap-and-trade program beyond 2020, Brown last month proposed amending Senate Bill 32 to authorize the extension.

Lawmakers resisted, and the proposal fell flat. The program, in which polluters pay to offset carbon emissions, is a major piece of California’s climate effort, and amid an ongoing legal challenge, its future is uncertain.

Yet SB 32 should give Brown leverage for negotiating an extension, with the legislation allowing his administration to order more onerous regulations, instead.

“They’re going to get commands to do things,” Brown said last month, “and they’re going to plead for a market system called cap and trade so they can respond in a way that’s more beneficial to their bottom line.”

Q: Didn’t Brown sign two bills?

A: Yes. Brown also signed Assembly Bill 197, giving lawmakers more authority over the California Air Resources Board.

One long-standing criticism of California’s climate policies has focused on the power wielded by the board, and AB 197 helped Brown and legislative leaders gain support from business-friendly Democrats in the Assembly.

The bill creates six-year term limits for ARB members, adds two nonvoting lawmakers to the board and creates a new legislative oversight committee.

AB 197 also targets climate change programs to “disadvantaged communities” and requires the ARB to consider the social costs of greenhouse gas emissions.

Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon, D-Los Angeles, said Thursday that he is committed to “bringing the benefits of greenhouse gas reductions to every community in California.”

David Siders: 916-321-1215, @davidsiders

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article100734142.html#storylink=cpy

https://twitter.com/davidsiders�

http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article100734142.html#storylink=cpy�

http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article100734142.html#storylink=cpy�

September 14, 2016

To: Senator Kevin De Leon, President pro Tempore, California State Senate

Senator Jean Fuller, Republican Leader, California State Senate

Assembly Member Anthony Rendon, Speaker, California State Assembly

Assembly Member Chad Mayes, Republican Leader, California State Assembly

cc: Governor Jerry Brown The 2015-16 Biennial Session of the Legislature has come and gone. This past year, legislators have acted on health reform, addressed issues of poverty and assistance for the developmentally disabled community and moved forward to increase the state’s minimum wage. A balanced budget was approved and substantial dollars set aside for a rainy day fund. Greenhouse Gas Emission targets and overtime pay for farmworkers were the latest issues that were tackled.

We appreciate these significant 2016 accomplishments. However, the Legislature has yet to respond to one of our state’s most important issues, California’s transportation fiscal crisis. Every year for the past two legislative sessions, transportation advocates, stakeholders and the general public have worked to find a solution to this crisis and each year the problem has gone unresolved.

Just before the Legislature adjourned, business leaders from across the state joined other transportation stakeholders in Sacramento to hear from Legislators and Administration officials regarding the status of legislation on transportation funding and reform. What we were told was not good news. While there are some leaders willing to talk about the crisis and even offer solutions, consensus has been stymied by differences of opinion and no real engagement among the principal parties.

Everyone in California seems to recognize that our transportation system is in terrible shape and the cost of repairs are going up each year. For decades, we have underinvested in the state’s mobility network, and that lack of investment has resulted in a broken system that materially affect our quality of

September 14, 2016 Page 2 life, impacts the safety of the traveling public, and adds to the cost of vehicle maintenance and repairs. A recent report by a national research group finds that the average Californian pays more than $2,500 a year in increased vehicle repair expenses resulting from driving on bad roads. That adds up to a $53.6 billion annual price tag and a hidden tax on the public due to our crumbling infrastructure.

The necessity for increasing investment in our transportation system isn’t just about unsafe roads and deteriorating highways, it’s also about jobs, the economy and meeting the state’s aggressive climate change objectives. According to U.S. News, more than 14 million jobs – about 11 percent of the civilian workforce in this country – are directly related to infrastructure. Each $1 billion invested in infrastructure produces 13,000 jobs and the projected annual savings from moving people and goods more efficiently runs into the billions of dollars. Moreover, funding for road repairs, transit and traffic relief should be at the top of the list as part of AB 32 solutions to achieve California’s innovative greenhouse gas reduction targets. Emissions today caused by congestion and bad roads undo all the good work done to date, as it takes time to ramp up to new standards.

Last year, Governor Brown convened a Special Session on Transportation and Infrastructure Development to address the transportation issue, but there has been little progress. The Governor also put forward a proposal which has been largely ignored by the Legislature, and Republicans have proposed legislation that focuses on reforms and existing revenues. Senator Jim Beall and Assembly Member Jim Frazier recently introduced identical bills to provide additional funding and reforms and would redirect some existing revenues, but hearings have not yet been set and the Legislature has adjourned without formally discussing these solutions to a problem that affects all Californians.

The transportation industry, labor, business leaders and local government associations have pushed for action in Sacramento for the past four years to no avail. No legislative fix has been forthcoming, and investment in transportation infrastructure continues to fall woefully short of meeting basic needs to serve the state’s growing population and dynamic economy. By failing to act, the state also runs the risk of abrogating its role as a partner with local and regional agencies who rely on state

September 14, 2016 Page 3 financial participation to meet system needs and commitments to their constituents.

Our leadership must meet face to face to solve this problem. Leaders in both parties and the Governor must work together to develop a consensus approach that will provide additional funding, protect and dedicate those dollars for transportation improvements and include appropriate reforms so the money is spent in an accountable and efficient manner. The current Special Session does not expire until the end of November, and there is still time to act. We, the undersigned business leaders, employers and transportation stakeholders, call on the legislative leadership to work together with the Governor to pass a comprehensive transportation bill before adjournment of the Special Session. It is time to stop ignoring the transportation needs of our state.

Respectfully,

Jim Wunderman Bay Area Council

Lucy Dunn Orange County Business Council

Gary Toebben Los Angeles Chamber of Commerce

Kish Rajan Southern California Leadership Council

Rob Lapsley California Business Roundtable

Carl Guardino Silicon Valley Leadership Group

John Hakel Southern California Partnership for Jobs

Michael P. Quigley California Alliance for Jobs

Will Kempton Transportation California

Jenny Larios Mobility 21

Chris McKenzie League of California Cities

Matt Cate California State Association of Counties

Oscar De La Torre Northern California District Council of Laborers

Rocco Davis Laborers’ International Union of North America

Bob Alvarado Northern California Carpenters Regional Council

Cesar Diaz State Building & Construction Trades Council of California

Mando Esparza Southern California District Council of Laborers

Ron Sikorski Operating Engineers Local 12

September 14, 2016 Page 4

Russ Burns Operating Engineers Local 3

Jose Mejia California State Council of Laborers

Tim Cremins International Union of Operating Engineers – CA/NV

Josh Shaw California Transit Association

James H. Roberts Granite Construction

Rich Gates DeSilva Gates Construction

Tom Holsman Associated General Contractors of California

Mark Breslin United Contractors

Tim Schott California Association of Port Authorities

Bill Higgins California Association of Councils of Governments

James P. Halloran Caterpillar

Tee Ness Hawthorne CAT

Mike Aparicio Skanska

Jim Ghielmetti Signature Homes

Brock Lodge Vulcan Materials Company

Mary Rotelli Teichert Construction

Clinton W. Myers Myers & Sons Construction

Tom Foss Griffith Company

Brad Diede American Council of Engineering Companies

Paul Von Berg Southern California Contractors Association

Donald “Matt” Pim Riverside Construction Company

Mike Crawford Sukut Construction

Dave Sorem Engineering Contractors Association

Gary Hambly California Construction & Industrial Materials Association

RJ Cervantes California Trucking Association

Jeff Petersen Kiewit

Gilbert Ivey BizFed

Michael Shaw California Manufacturers & Technology Association

Chad Wright Laborers-Employers Cooperation & Education Trust-Southwest

Bryan Zatica Building Industry Association of Southern California

Tom Tietz California Nevada Cement Association

Russ Snyder California Asphalt Pavement Association

September 14, 2016 Page 5

Mark Watts Smith Watts & Hartmann

David Ackerman DGA Associates

Jeffrey Spencer Sacramento Transportation Authority

Matt Henry Fehr & Peers

Emily Cohen United Contractors

Eddie Bernacchi Politico Group

Bob Sears Vulcan Materials Company

Mark Kempton Skanska

John Franich Transportation California

Steve Clark Granite Construction

DeAnn Baker California State Association of Counties

William G. Dorey Transportation California

Kelly Kolander Past CEO, O.C. Jones & Sons

Kiana Valentine California State Association of Counties

Please Submit Maintenance Service Requests at the Following Link: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/maint/msrsubmit/

Caltrans District 5

District Director

Timothy Gubbins

Provide a safe, sustainable, integrated and

efficient transportation system to enhance

California’s economy and livability.

SUMMER 2016

Vista Points Project

Enhances Livability Four granite mosaics and an inlaid picnic

table—all designed by Caltrans Landscape

Architecture—were recently installed at the

following District 5 vista points:

• (SB) SR154, Rancho Cielo

• (SB) US 101, Arroyo Hondo

• (MON) SR 1, Julia Pfeiffer Burns

Caltrans produced the initial artwork for the

life-sized animal mosaics. The fabricator’s

artist then transformed the concepts into

computerized drawings used to water-jet cut

the multi-colored stone pieces. The $700,000

project installed interpretive elements at

seven vista points in four counties. It also

featured 40 porcelain enamel displays on

natural stone boulders and free standing

stone-veneer walls. The exhibits inform the

public on local history, cultural importance

and unique area natural resources.

Continued on back

Latest Mile Marker Released The 2016 second quarter Mile Marker is now

available online. This report provides a

transparent, plain-language accounting of

Caltrans’ performance. The latest edition

features: how the new Asset Management

has directed $250 million to key projects, new

elements in two of the Department’s largest

funding sources, and how value analysis has

saved billions of dollars on hundreds of

projects since 2000.

Other topics include an innovative design in

an iconic San Francisco parkway protecting

the environment, and how California

motorists may soon benefit from wireless

technology to estimate their travel times.

More information: http://www.dot.ca.gov/milemarker/docs/2016/Mile

Marker_v3Iss2_final.pdf.

Input Sought on SR 68 Plan The Transportation Agency for Monterey

County’s SR 68 Scenic Highway Plan is under

way and gathering input on proposed

transportation improvements and wildlife

connectivity along the highway between

Salinas and the Monterey Peninsula.

The plan will analyze current and future travel

patterns along the corridor, develop a

preferred corridor concept and identify

sustainable operational and capacity

improvements for the next 20 years.

The proposed improvements include a

roundabout; bypass; bicycle, pedestrian and

transit facilities; advanced traffic

management system; and systemic safety

evaluation. The comprehensive study will also

incorporate performance-based planning and

programming, a benefit/cost analysis, and

extensive public outreach. The second public

workshop is planned for later this year.

The planning effort is funded by a Caltrans

Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant

and is scheduled for completion in 2017. More

information: http://www.sr68sceniccorridorstudy.com/.

District Director’s Report A quarterly publication for our transportation partners

Highway 154 at Rancho Cielo Vista Point in Santa Barbara County

SUMMER 2016

Caltrans District 5, 50 Higuera Street, San Luis Obispo, California 93401

Public Information Office (805) 549-3318

www.dot.ca.gov/dis05 email:[email protected] Santa Barbara-San Luis Obispo- Monterey-San Benito-Santa Cruz

Vista Project continued

To ensure interpretive accuracy, Caltrans

conducted extensive stakeholder outreach to

tribal representatives, historians, biologists,

and various local agencies. More than 300

photographers, artists, map makers and

museum groups enthusiastically donated

images to the project either for free or

minimal costs.

Other vista point project locations:

• (SLO) SR 1, San Simeon Bay

• (SLO) SR 1, Piedras Blancas

• (MON) SR 1, Big Creek

• (SCR) SR 1, La Selva

Sustainable Freight Plan

The California Sustainable Freight Action Plan

features a long-term 2050 vision and guiding

principles to improve the freight system’s

efficiency while reducing pollution and

enhancing the state’s competitiveness in

goods movement. The plan’s key goals

include the following:

Sustainable Cocoon Planter

Saves Water

Innovative technology increases

efficiency and minimizes impacts

• Improve freight system efficiency

25 percent by 2030

• Deploy 100,000 plus zero-emission

vehicles/equipment and maximize

near zero-limits by 2020

• Foster future economic growth for

freight and goods movement The draft plan is available online. Public

comments are due to Caltrans by July 6, 2016.

More information: http://dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/offices/ogm/cs_freight_ac

tion_plan/Documents/CSFAP_Main%20Document

_DRAFT_050216%20v2.pdf

Social Media Connections District 5 posts daily to Facebook and has

1,500 plus likes, so far. We tweet real time

traffic/roadwork information daily with 1,000

followers. Check us out on Twitter, Facebook

and You Tube.

Photos source: Land Life Company

Caltrans is experimenting with alternative planting methods in remote

sites and difficult terrain to reduce water use and planting costs. So far,

the District has installed 30 plants using a self-irrigating system called

Cocoons along Highway 46 east of the Estrella River in San Luis Obispo

County. An additional 30 will soon be placed along Highway 1 near Post

Ranch in Monterey County.

The Cocoon produces independent, strong trees, which do not rely on

external irrigation and can survive harsh conditions, according to the

Land Life Company. Mycorrhizal fungi are added to the soil surrounding

a plant’s roots, increasing the surface absorbing area from 100 to 1,000

times while improving access to soil moisture and nutrients. The Cocoon

is 100 percent biodegradable and requires no follow-up irrigation or

maintenance after planting.

The planters cost $9 each and annually save about 50 gallons of water

per plant. They last underground up to three years depending upon soil

type and area conditions—the timeframe it will take to determine how

well the product performs in establishing plants.

Statewide, Landscape Architecture is committed to finding alternative

ways to reduce water use while meeting permit requirements. Reducing

labor costs and materials related to irrigation watering systems helps

sustain our planting projects. Increasing efficiency and minimizing

environmental impacts with innovative techniques also helps the

Department meet its mission, vision and goals. More information on

Caltrans’ water conservation efforts: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/16_la_design/water_conserv/.

DPROJECT UPDATE – SANTA CRUZ COUNTY

PROJECT UPDATE – SANTA CRUZ COUNTY

PREPARED FOR THE OCTOBER 6, 2016 SANTA CRUZ COUNTY REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING

California Department of Transportation

District 5, 50 Higuera Street, San Luis Obispo, California 93401 District 5 Public Information Office (805) 549-3318 www.dot.ca.gov/dist05 email: [email protected]

Santa Barbara – San Luis Obispo – Monterey – San Benito – Santa Cruz

CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS

Project Location Description Construction Timeline

Construction Cost

Funding Source

Project Manager (Resident Engineer)

Contractor Comments

1. Accessible Pedestrian

Signals (1G2804)

Various highways: 14 intersections in Santa Cruz County

Install accessible pedestrian signals

Spring 2016-Fall 2016 $1.3 Million SHOPP

Kathy DiGrazia

(LB)

PTM General Engineering Services, Inc. Riverside, CA

Locations: SR 1 in Santa Cruz (3) SR 17 in Scotts Valley (2) SR 129 in Watsonville (3) SR 152 in Watsonville (6)

2. Hwy. 9 Pollution Source Control

(0Q5904)

At and near Boulder Creek at various locations from 0.9 mile south of Glengarry Rd to 0.2 mile north of Mcgaffigan Mill Rd (PM 3.7-18.7)

Construct retaining wall & viaduct structure. Replace drainage pipes. Rehab maintenance turnaround.

Winter 2014-September 5,

2015 (One year plant

establishment starting Nov.

2015)

$1.8 Million SHOPP Doug

Hessing (KB)

Granite Rock Company,

San Jose, CA

Construction completed on Sept. 5, 2015. Plant establishment beginning in November for one year.

3. Monterey-Santa Cruz

ADA (0R5104)

On SR 1 and SR 9 at various locations (other locations in Monterey County)

Construct curb ramps, sidewalks, and modify signal and lightings

Fall 2015 – Fall 2016 $1.2 Million SHOPP

Kathy DiGrazia

(HB)

Pacific Infrastructure, Vacaville, CA

Construction completed but awaiting HQ concurrence for acceptance. Work is complete—awaiting for HQ acceptance.

4.

Hwy. 17 Shoulder Widening and

Concrete Guardrail (0T9804)

In Santa Cruz County near Scotts Valley from 0.4 mile South of Sugarloaf to 0.1 mile South of Laurel Road (PM 8.3-9.4)

Shoulder widening and concrete guardrail

May 11, 2016-

Summer 2017 $6.2 Million SHOPP

Doug Hessing

(DP)

Granite Construction

Inc. of Watsonville

Construction began on May 11, 2016 and work consists of shoulder widening and drainage improvements.

Page 1







CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS (Cont’d.)


Construction Cost

Funding Source

Project Manager (Resident Engineer)

Contractor Comments

5. Hwy. 129 Curve

Realignment (0T5404)

East of Watsonville between 0.4 mile west of Old Chittenden Rd and 0.1 mile east of Chittenden underpass (PM 9.5-10.0)

Curve realignment

Spring 2016—Spring

2017 $5 Million SHOPP

Doug Hessing

(KB)

Graniterock Company,

Watsonville, CA

Most of the roadwork will be done with one-way signal traffic control, already installed, with about 7-10 days of full closures at the end of the project. Temporary striping and K-rail now in place. Phase 1 earthwork nearing completion.

6. Hwy. 152 Centerline

Rumble Strip (1G4004)

In Santa Cruz County from the Casserly/Carlton Rd. Intersection to the SCr/SCl County line

Open grade overlay and metal beam guardrail upgrade

Fall 2016—Winter 2016 $9.6 Million SHOPP

Doug Hessing (TBD)

TBD Project contract awarded on July 25 and approved Sept. 1.

PROJECTS IN DEVELOPMENT


Estimated Construction

Cost

Funding Source

Project Manager Phase Comments

7. Hwy. 17 Storm Water

Mitigation (0Q600)

On SR 17 between 0.74 miles north of the fishhook and Sims Rd. (PM 0.7-1.4)

Storm water mitigation Spring 2017 $7.4 Million SHOPP

Doug Hessing (TBD)

PS&E/ROW

Periodic closures expected in the right southbound lane will be confined to the following times on weekdays only: 8 pm to 7 am (spring) 9 am to 1 pm 8 pm to 7 am (summer)

8.

Hwy. 129/Carlton Rd Intersection

Improvements (1F350)

Near Watsonville from 0.1 mile west to 0.2 mile east of Carlton Rd (PM 3.2-3.5)

Construct accel/decel and 2-way left turn lanes

2018 $2 Million SHOPP Doug Hessing Phase I On schedule and in design

phase.

Page 2







PROJECTS IN DEVELOPMENT (Cont’d.)


Estimated Construction

Cost

Funding Source

Project Manager Phase Comments

9. Hwy. 152 ADA (1E020)

Near Watsonville from Wagner Avenue to south of Holohan Road (PM 1.3-R2.0)

ADA compliance (install sidewalks)

2018 $1.9 Million SHOPP Kathy DiGrazia PS&E/ROW

Project Report and Environmental Document approved in February 2016

Page 3

AGENDA: October 6, 2016 TO: Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) FROM: Karena Pushnik, Senior Transportation Planner/ Outreach Coordinator RE: Community Bridges Programs in the November 2016 Transportation

Improvement Ballot Measure RECOMMENDATIONS This is an information item. Community Bridges Staff will present information about their transportation program and additional Lift Line service that would be funded from the November 2016 Transportation Improvement Ballot Measure (Measure D). BACKGROUND There is a lack of funding available to Santa Cruz County to operate, maintain, and improve the local multi-modal transportation system. Therefore, the Regional Transportation Commission conducted extensive coordination with the public and with entities that plan, build, or operate our transportation network to develop a Transportation Improvement Expenditure Plan for the November 2016 ballot that would have the best chance of voter approval.

Santa Cruz County is part of the 15% of the population in California that does not live in a “self help” county with local, independent, and secure revenue that cannot be taken by the state and can be used only for local transportation needs. Without local funding, Santa Cruz County can’t compete as well as other counties to leverage additional state and federal funding for a comprehensive set of transportation options to meet the diverse needs of the community.

At its June meeting, the RTC approved the final Expenditure Plan with five categories of projects to repair and maintain local streets and roads; provide transportation services for seniors and people with disabilities; make traveling safer for drivers, buses, pedestrians and bike riders; preserve and maintain the rail corridor; build the coastal rail trail; and improve traffic flow and reduce congestion by placing a ½-cent sales tax on the ballot.

DISCUSSION One of the categories is Transportation for Seniors and People with Disabilities. Seniors comprise the fastest growing segment of the population in Santa Cruz County, with

nearly 100 people turning 60 every week. Due to age or ability, some people need assistive transportation services to meet their mobility needs. Community Bridges’ Lift Line program provides door-to-door transportation services to medical care for low income seniors and residents. Lift Line is currently a recipient of Transportation Development Act funds administered by the RTC, and the RTC annually reviews their needs, budgets, and rides provided to seniors and people with disabilities for safety net medical transportation and other appointments. The Transportation Improvement Measure designates 4% of the funds for Community Bridges or about $650,000 annually, to meet mobility needs over the next 30 years. In addition, 16% of the measure funds are designated for the Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District, resulting in an anticipated $2.6 million per year to maintain both fixed route and ParaCruz service. Attached is a fact sheet describing the additional Lift Line services the Transportation Improvement Ballot Measure D would provide (Attachment 1.) Because the expenditure plan was amended at the June 2016 meeting, the RTC did not receive specifics from Community Bridges about the services it would deliver with measure funds. Community Bridges Chief Executive Officer, Raymon Cancino, will provide a presentation at the RTC meeting. SUMMARY Five categories of transportation projects are included in the Transportation Improvement Expenditure Plan approved by the RTC that will be on the November 2016 ballot. To provide specialized transportation services to seniors and people living with disabilities in the county, Community Bridges is one of the funding recipients and will provide more information about the services they provide, clients they serve, importance of transportation to their client’s well being, and the additional services that the Transportation Improvement Ballot Measure D would provide. Attachment 1: Community Bridges Lift Line Measure D Fact Sheet S:\RTC\TC2016\TC1016\Regular Agenda\CommunityBridges\SR_LiftLineMeasureD.docx

W H A T I T M E A N S F O R S E N I O R SA N D D I S A B L E D R E S I D E N T S

Lift Line , a program of Community Bridges , is the only free door-to-

door paratransit service in Santa Cruz County . Each year , Lift Lineprovides 80,000 rides to seniors, veterans, disabled residents andsick children , ensuring they receive critical medical attention andmaintain their independence for as long as possible .

W H A T I S L I F T L I N E ?MEASURE D

Lift Line serves any low- income resident of Santa Cruz County inneed , completely free of charge to the rider . They provide door-to-door assistance from origin to destination , including medicaltransportation throughout Santa Cruz County and as far as SanFrancisco .

W H O D O E S L I F T L I N E S E R V E ?

Santa Cruz County is one of the most expensive places to l ive in thenation , with one out of every five residents l iving in poverty . Free ,

reliable transportation for medical care is crucial , and demand forthis service will only continue to increase .

W H Y D O E S L I F T L I N E M A T T E R ?

Should Measure D pass , Lift Line will receive 4% of proceeds eachyear , for the next 30 years . This is especially critical , considering theincrease in our local senior population . Seniors comprise thefastest growing segment in our community , with nearly 100 localpeople turning age 60 every week . And according to the U .S . CensusBureau , the senior population nationally is expected to double by2050 .

Measure D will allow Lift Line to accomplish the following :

H O W W I L L M E A S U R E D H E L P L I F T L I N E ?

Increase door-to-door service from five to seven days per weekIncrease ability to serve by up to 30%Cover paratransit service area METRO ParaCruz is no longer ableto reachContinue operating county-wide - no matter the location - toensure that all low- income seniors and residents have access tomedical care

As I got older, I was afraid of hurting myself or someone elseon the road. So I gave up driving. Now I use Lift Line to takeme to my appointments, and wherever I need to go. BecauseI live out in the mountains, my only other option is a taxi.The cost of that adds up so quickly.


TO: Regional Transportation Commission FROM: Kim Shultz, Senior Transportation Planner RE: Highway 1 Mar Vista Bicycle/Pedestrian Overcrossing: Consultant

Services Agreement RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends that the Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) authorize the Executive Director to negotiate an agreement with the firm of Moffat and Nichol to perform duties required for the Project Approval and Environmental Documentation phase of the Highway 1 Mar Vista Bicycle/Pedestrian Overcrossing Project. BACKGROUND Based on the conceptual planning work completed by Caltrans in August 2002 and the draft Tier I preliminary design and environmental analysis of the Highway 1 Corridor, the stage is set for work to begin on the preliminary design and environmental analysis (referred to as project approval and environmental documentation (PA/ED)) phase of the Highway 1 Mar Vista Drive Pedestrian/Bicycle Crossing Project. In June 2016, the RTC approved a cooperative agreement with Caltrans allowing the RTC to manage the PA/ED phase of the project and authorized staff to release a request for proposals (RFP) to secure consultant services to perform the duties necessary to complete this work. DISCUSSION Staff prepared and released an RFP in July 2016 with input from Caltrans environmental and Santa Cruz County Public Works engineering staff. RTC hosted a pre-proposal meeting on July 28th with 16 consultant representatives participating. On August 11th the RTC received proposals from four consultant teams meeting the requirements of the RFP. Three of those firms were from the San Francisco Bay Area and one from the Sacramento area. A proposal evaluation committee was created composed of Caltrans, Santa Cruz County Public Works and RTC staff. Evaluation criteria included:

Understanding of the project Experience with similar projects in similar locales Relevant experience and qualifications of the proposed project manager and

key consultant team members

Highway 1 Mar Vista Overcrossing Page 2 June 2, 2016

Familiarity and experience with Caltrans and Federal Highway Administration

(FHWA) procedures Quality of the approach to work

After review of the proposals two consultant teams were interviewed on August 31st. Both consultant teams characterized the schedule as aggressive and subject to extension if sensitive environmental resources cannot be avoided. Both teams have experience working with Caltrans through all phases of the project development process, including final design and the construction phase, as requested in the RFP. Both firms proposed early engagement of the community to identify a preferred alternative prior to engaging in detailed environmental analysis as the best method to meet the proposed project schedule and budget. After evaluating the written proposals, reviewing qualifications and experience of the consultant team members, listening to presentations and interviewing the consultant teams, the evaluation committee unanimously recommends the consultant team of Moffat and Nichol. Qualifications of the Moffat and Nichol team include:

Highly regarded bridge design team with 5 similar pedestrian bridge projects currently underway in California

Leading the design and public engagement process is Steven Grover, who specializes in pedestrian/bicycle facilities and is a member of Caltrans’ Pedestrian Advisory Committee

Inclusion of Laura Prickett, who currently manages the environmental analysis for the Highway 1 Corridor Project, to lead the environmental documentation process.

The structural engineering team of BKF Engineers has experience working with Caltrans District 5 engineering staff, including current work with the City on Santa Cruz on the Highway 1/9 Intersection Project.

The full scope of services offered by Moffat and Nichol is presented in Attachment 1. With the recommendation of the evaluation committee the cost proposal for the Moffat and Nichol team was opened to reveal a proposed cost of $471,229. This exceeds the amount of $300,000 available in the FY 2016-2017 RTC budget for these consultant services consistent with the RTC programming action of April 2007 based on the cost estimates available at that time. The various proposing consultant teams indicated that the budget for all phases of this project is low. Staff proposes to meet with the Moffat and Nichol team to determine opportunities for cost savings to meet the RTC’s budget constraints and negotiate an agreement. Staff would return to the next RTC meeting with the results of the negotiation and appropriate recommendations to either enter into an agreement with Moffat and Nichol or negotiate with the second highest qualified firm, Mott MacDonald. On this basis, staff recommends that the Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) authorize the Executive Director to negotiate an agreement with the firm of Moffat and Nichol to perform duties required

Highway 1 Mar Vista Overcrossing Page 3 June 2, 2016

for the PA/ED phase of the Highway 1 Mar Vista Bicycle/Pedestrian Overcrossing Project. SUMMARY A Cooperative Agreement with Caltrans was executed to authorize the RTC to manage the preliminary design and environmental analysis (referred to as Project Approval and Environmental Documentation (PA/ED)) phase of the Highway 1 Mar Vista Drive Pedestrian/Bicycle Crossing Project. Accordingly, a request for consultant services to conduct this work yielded proposals from four qualified teams. A proposal evaluation committee comprised of Caltrans, Santa Cruz County Public Works and RTC staff unanimously recommend the consultant team led by Moffat and Nichol (see Attachment 1 for the proposed scope of services). The consultant’s proposed cost of this work exceeds the available budget. Staff recommends authorizing the Executive Director to negotiate an agreement with Moffat and Nichol that meets the RTC’s budget constraints. Staff would return to the next RTC meeting with the results of the negotiation and appropriate recommendations. Attachments:

1. Moffat and Nichol PA/ED Scope of Work

S:\RTC\TC2016\TC0616\Regular Agenda\Hwy1-MarVista\StaffReport-160602.docx

ATTACHMENT 1

Moffatt & Nichol Page 1

SCOPE OF WORK – DESIGN DEVELOPMENT AND CALTRANS PA&ED Mar Vista POC at State Route 1 August 11, 2016

Firm Legend M&N Moffatt & Nichol SGA Steven Grover & Associates BKF BKF Engineers HWE Horizon Water & Environmental PC Parikh Consultants UFS Universal Field Services

Task 1 – Preliminary Design

1.1 Project Management |M&N Provide project management services for control and administration of the work during the contract. Implement quality control procedures, maintain project filing system, submit invoices and progress reports, and monitor subconsultant activities. Provide overall team direction, budget management, and client/agency coordination. Prepare a project schedule utilizing MS Project software and submit for RTC concurrence.

Deliverables Project Schedule with monthly updates Monthly Invoices and Progress Reports Agency Correspondence

1.2 Project Meetings |M&N TEAM Organize and conduct one team kickoff meeting (in‐person), PDT meetings (six in‐person, six teleconference), and project progress/review and stakeholder meetings (six in‐person, six teleconference). Prepare agendas and sign‐in sheets and distribute minutes.

Deliverables

Meeting Agendas and Minutes

1.3 Data Collection and Review and Site Visits |M&N TEAM

Obtain and review available data and information for design of the project. The information will be sought from RTC, Santa Cruz County, Caltrans, and other government agencies or organizations. Data to be reviewed includes:

Previous reports or documents related to the project Road as‐built plans Environmental Documents Utility Maps Hydraulic Analysis/Flood Records Aerial photos and digitized topography Survey control data Current CADD files Right‐of‐way/property owner information

ATTACHMENT 1


Organize and conduct two site visits with RTC, Caltrans, and consultant team to identify physical features and constraints that will affect design of the improvements, and to gain a clearer understanding of RTC and Caltrans objectives for the project. Observations will be made with regard to current freeway and local street geometry, landscaping and utility features, and confirmation of survey data requirements to be performed by the team. Field information will be recorded using field notes and digital photos.

Deliverables

Field Notes and Digital Photos

1.4 Survey and Mapping |BKF Develop project base sheets using available Santa Cruz County GIS mapping. Mapping will be supplemented with limited topographic survey information as needed to confirm project site constraints for the development of the project design alternatives. Existing information obtained from the data collection task will be used to update the base sheets. The base sheets, available in AutoCAD, will illustrate the existing right of way lines and utilities within the project area in order to provide a proper base for the development of the Project Report design.

Deliverable

Project Base Map (AutoCAD format)

1.5 Utility and Agency Coordination |BKF, M&N Coordinate with the affected utility companies and property owners (Caltrans, Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E), Soquel Creek Water District, Santa Cruz County Sanitation District, tele‐communication companies, etc.) to make preliminary determination of ownership rights and relocation cost liabilities, and other information/requirements in compliance with PA&ED standards. Prepare an existing utility base map in AutoCAD format for identified utilities within the project limits. Identify any potential high risk utility impacts per Caltrans requirements. Determine if utility relocations should be considered. If the relocations of the utility encroachments in Caltrans R/W are not feasible, prepare a Longitudinal Utility Encroachment Exception (LUEE) Report for Caltrans review and approval.

1.6 Public Outreach |SGA, M&N, BKF, HWE Confer with RTC to establish goals, procedures and responsibilities for conducting public outreach during this phase of the project. Two public meetings will be provided, as follows:

Public Meeting No. 1. Provide support to RTC for a meeting to be held shortly after receipt of Notice to Proceed and initial data gathering activities. Goal of this meeting will be to inform the community about the project and gather feedback, for the purpose of understanding the community’s vision, goals, and priorities for the project. Support RTC by providing graphic analyses of the project context including geometric constraints map, visual and environmental resources, historic land use patterns, and functional requirements for the project. Provide a template for a feedback questionnaire for RTC’s use during and after the meeting. Prior to the meeting, conduct a pre‐planning teleconference with the project team, RTC, Caltrans, and Santa Cruz County.

Public Meeting No. 2. Provide support to RTC for a meeting to be held after analysis of alternatives at the conclusion of conceptual design studies. Goal of this meeting will be to present conceptual design alternatives to the community and other stakeholders and describe how their input from Public Meeting No. 1 informed the design alternatives. Desired outcome of Public Meeting No. 2 is consensus around a single preferred design alternative.

Provide plan graphics for up to five (5) conceptual alternatives along with 3D visualizations for up to three (3) alternatives. Provide a written and graphic comparison matrix assessing the alternatives. The conceptual

ATTACHMENT 1


designs will include features to minimize the project’s impact on the natural landscape and aesthetics of the project site. Provide a template for a feedback questionnaire for RTC’s use during and after the meeting. Prior to the meeting, conduct a pre‐planning teleconference with the project team, RTC, Caltrans, and Santa Cruz County.

Deliverables Meeting Materials, Graphics, Handouts Questionnaire Template Meeting Summary

1.7 Design Concept and Preliminary Geometric Plans (15%) |SGA, M&N Conduct alternatives analysis of up to five feasible alternatives for the overcrossing structure and approaches. Prior to beginning analysis, conduct a workshop with RTC and Caltrans staff to identify objectives and project constraints. After development of alternatives, conduct a workshop with RTC and Caltrans to review and evaluate alternatives, leading to selection of a preferred alternative.

Develop 15% conceptual drawing set for the preferred alternative in accordance with Caltrans applicable design standards and guidelines for the PA&ED phase.Provide a 3D model showing:

• Embankments, retaining walls, supports, main span and approach structure geometrics • Geometric horizontal and vertical alignment and clearances including falsework considerations • Utilities, property lines, environmentally restricted areas

Provide concepts for aesthetic design features and a preliminary materials palette. Develop conceptual‐level cost estimates.

Review the initial design to confirm that the Highway Design Manual (HDM) requirements are adhered to. If design exceptions are required, they will be highlighted and discussed with Caltrans to confirm the fact sheets will be considered for approval. The termini areas and geometrics will be evaluated in consideration of potential impacts and continuous and safe circulation of the users.

Deliverables Preliminary Alternatives 15% Drawings of Preferred Alternative Preliminary Design Exception List Conceptual Cost Estimates

1.8 Environmental Documentation and Reports |HWE, M&N, BKF, SGA

Based on review of the project area and proposed improvements, it is anticipated that a Categorical Exclusion (CE) will be the NEPA document pursuant to 23 CFR 771.177(c), which identifies construction of bicycle and pedestrian facilities as a categorically excluded activity. The technical studies identified in Task 1.8.1., below, will be prepared to confirm that the project would not result in a significant environmental impact pursuant to NEPA. In the event that a significant impact would occur, or if there is substantial controversy on environmental grounds, then a higher level NEPA document would be required. Caltrans will be the lead NEPA agency, pursuant to the Renewed Memorandum of Understanding between FHWA and Caltrans State Assumption of Responsibility for Categorical Exclusions. A CE cannot address multiple alternatives; therefore, a preferred alternative will be selected prior to Caltrans approval of the CE.

Based on review of the project area and proposed improvements, it is anticipated that appropriate mitigation measures can be identified to reduce the potential for impacts to less than significant. Therefore, it is anticipated that an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) will be the appropriate CEQA

ATTACHMENT 1


document. The technical studies identified in Task 1.8.1 will be prepared to determine if the project may have a significant environmental impact pursuant to CEQA. In the event that a significant unmitigable impact would occur, an environmental impact report would be required. Consistent with Caltrans’ Procedures, it is anticipated that RTC will be the lead CEQA agency.

1.8.1 ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNICAL STUDIES

Based on information provided by RTCthe following technical studies and memoranda are anticipated, and will be subject to the review and approval by Caltrans environmental specialists in the respective subject areas: Traffic Technical Memorandum addressing parking loss, Noise Technical Memorandum addressing noise during construction, Air Quality Technical Memorandum addressing air quality during construction, Initial Site Assessment (hazardous waste/hazardous materials), Water Quality Assessment Report (WQAR), Natural Environmental Study (NES) including a wetland delineation and assessment, Visual Impact Assessment with up to 4 visuals simulations, Land Use and Community Impacts Technical Memorandum, Archaeological Study Report (ASR), Historic Resources Evaluation Report (HRER), and Historic Properties Survey Report (HPSR). Due to the inclusion of the Mar Vista Overcrossing in the SR 1 EIR/EA and accompanying technical studies, this scope assumes that technical studies prepared for the Mar Vista Overcrossing will consist primarily of information from the SR 1 technical studies, which will be packaged to present information relevant to the Mar Vista Overcrossing project.

All work will be in accordance with Caltrans’ Standard Environmental Reference (SER). The studies will be prepared by experienced staff that meet the qualification requirements in the SER.

Traffic Technical Memorandum. Conduct a parking survey to quantify the number of parking spaces that would be removed by the proposed project. The results of the parking survey will be presented in a technical memorandum subject to review and approval RTC and Caltrans. The technical memorandum will include appropriate construction‐phase traffic control measures from the SR 1 Draft EIR/EA, such as the requirement to develop and implement a traffic management plan (TMP) during construction of the project.

Noise Technical Memorandum.Prepare a Noise Technical Memorandum addressing predicted construction‐period noise impacts only.

Air Quality Technical Memorandum.Prepare an Air Quality Technical Memorandum addressing air quality impacts during construction following the approach described in the Caltrans SER, and referencing the quantitative analysis of construction‐phase air quality impacts described in the Air Quality Study Report prepared for the SR 1 project. The memorandum will provide information specific to the project, such as construction techniques and a description of the project area, including locations of sensitive receptors. Other information in the memorandum will be obtained from the SR 1 AQSR, such as a discussion of regional meteorology and climate, a description of the area's topography, a description of the applicable regulations and the agencies, such as the Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District, that are involved with air quality in the area. The memorandum will include appropriate construction‐phase air quality control measures from the SR 1 Draft EIR/EA, such as the requirement to comply with Caltrans’ Standard Specifications Section 14 provisions for air quality and dust control.

Initial Site Assessment (ISA).Review available data, including previous studies, site investigation reports, groundwater monitoring reports, and Federal and State record reviews within one mile of the project site. Prepare a Phase I ISA study for the proposed project based on the proposed APE map.

Water Quality Assessment Report (WQAR).Prepare a WQAR using applicable information from the WQAR prepared for the SR 1 Draft EIR/EA, such as descriptions of existing surface water and groundwater resources, and will update information as needed, such as verifying current water quality information. The

ATTACHMENT 1


impacts of the Mar Vista Overcrossing will be identified, along with avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures – which are anticipated to consist of construction‐phase best management practices (BMPs) identified in the SR 1 Draft EIR/EA. Based on initial evaluation of the project area, it is anticipated that the project may be designed such that runoff from permanent impervious surfaces would drain to landscape areas.

Natural Environmental Study (NES). Establish the Biological Study Area (BSA) for the Mar Vista Overcrossing and conduct reconnaissance‐level surveys of the BSA to verify and update, if necessary, information presented in the NES prepared for the SR 1 Draft EIR/EA. Fieldwork will include verifying the previous delineation of resources (e.g., wetlands, waters, riparian habitat) that are subject to the jurisdiction of the Army Corps of Engineers, California Coastal Commission, and California Department of Fish and Wildlife; verify the previous mapping of natural communities/habitat types; and assessment of habitat for special status species, such as federally California red‐legged frog, which may occur in areas of freshwater marsh that have been identified north of SR 1 in this vicinity. Prepare the NES using applicable information from the NES prepared for the SR 1 Draft EIR/EA, such as descriptions of habitat types and relevant special status species. The NES will be prepared in accordance with Caltrans’ NES template and will document the methods and results of field surveys, evaluate effects, and provide input on significance. Measures to avoid, minimize, and/or mitigate impacts will be identified and are anticipated to be consistent with applicable measures from the NES prepared for the SR 1 Draft EIR/EA. Horizon assumes that spatial data from the SR1 NES will be available in electronic format and the existing mapping of wetlands and natural communities will be sufficient for use in characterizing and quantifying impacts for the Mar Vista Overcrossing.

Visual Impact Assessment.Prepare a “Complex” Visual Impact Assessment in accordance with Caltrans District 5 requirements.

Land Use and Community Impacts Technical Memorandum.Prepare the Land Use and Community Impacts Technical Memorandum using applicable information from the Community Impact Assessment prepared for the SR 1 Draft EIR/EA, such as demographic information, focused on the Mar Vista Overcrossing project area. Identify land use and community impacts, such as the potential partial acquisition of properties and consistency/inconsistency with the Local Coastal Program, and propose measures to avoid, minimize and/or mitigate impacts. Based on conditions in the project area and the nature and scale of the project, it is assumed that the memo will not be required to address growth, economics, or relocations.

Archaeological Study Report (ASR).Prepare an Area of Potential Effects (APE) mapfor archaeological resources for the Mar Vista Overcrossing, for Caltrans approval. This scope assumes that the spatial data for the SR 1 APE map will be available in electronic format to expedite preparation of the APE map.A record search will be conducted within a half‐mile radius at the Northwest Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System at Sonoma State University to address the possibility that new information may be available since cultural studies were completed for the SR 1 Draft EIR/EA. A sacred lands search and list of interested Native American groups will be requested from the Native American Heritage Commission, and, if requested, assistance will be provided to RTC in meeting AB 52 requirements. Prepare the ASR using applicable information from the ASR prepared for the SR 1 Draft EIR/EA, such as descriptions of the environmental setting and previously‐evaluated resources, and recommended avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation measures. It is assumed that the project design would be located entirely within areas that have previously been surveyed for cultural resources. In the event that the project would affect any areas that have not been surveyed, a separate scope and budget would be prepared to conduct and document a pedestrian survey.

ATTACHMENT 1


Historic Resources Evaluation Report (HRER).Prepare an APE map for historic architectural resources for the Mar Vista Overcrossing, for Caltrans approval. This scope assumes that the spatial data for the SR 1 APE map will be available in electronic format to expedite map preparation. Based on review of available information regarding buildings and structures in the anticipated APE, it is anticipated that no buildings or structures will need to be evaluated for National Register of Historic Places eligibility for the HRER. Prepare the HRER using Caltrans’ required format, presenting information from the HRER prepared for the SR 1 project, and describing the potential for impacts, documenting the research methods utilized. If any impacts are identified, avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation measures will be identified consistent with measures included in the SR 1 HRER.

Historic Properties Survey Report (HPSR). An HPSR will be prepared to document the resources identified in the ASR and HRER following the standard Caltrans format. It is anticipated that a short form HSPR, which would facilitate faster processing by Caltrans and the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) would be the appropriate document. The HPSR, together with the ASR and HRER, will be transmitted to Caltrans for forwarding to the SHPO for concurrence in the findings.

Deliverables Draft, Final Draft, and Final Technical Studies and Memoranda (electronic copies only) of the following technical studies/memoranda:

Traffic Technical Memorandum Noise Technical Memorandum Air Quality Technical Memorandum Initial Site Assessment (ISA) Water Quality Assessment Report (WQAR), Natural Environmental Study (NES) including a wetland delineation and assessment Visual Impact Assessment Land Use and Community Impacts Technical Memorandum Archaeological Study Report (ASR) Historic Resources Evaluation Report (HRER) Historic Properties Survey Report (HPSR)

TASK 1.8.2 CONFIRM NEPA CE AND PREPARE ADMINISTRATIVE DRAFT INITIAL STUDY

Upon Caltrans approval of the technical studies, Horizon will coordinate with Caltrans to obtain Caltrans’ confirmation that the project will be processed as a CE pursuant to NEPA. Approval of the NEPA CE is discussed in Section 2.1. Horizon will prepare an Administrative Draft Initial Study and Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for review by RTC, as CEQA lead agency. The IS/MND will be prepared in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21080 (c) and the CEQA Guidelines Section 15070, summarizing the results of the technical studies described above, as well as applicable engineering studies such as the Preliminary Geotechnical Report, Storm Water Data Report, and Location Hydraulic Study. The IS will include detailed explanations of all checklist determinations and discussions of potential environmental impacts. This will include limited technical analysis of environmental topic areas not addressed in environmental technical studies or engineering studies due to project area conditions and the proposed improvements, such as energy and mineral resources.

Deliverable

Administrative Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (electronic)

ATTACHMENT 1


TASK 1.8.3 APPROVAL DRAFT INITIAL STUDY

Horizon will revise the Administrative Draft IS/MND to address RTC’s comments and will submit the Approval Draft to RTC for approval.

Deliverable

Approval Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (electronic)

TASK 1.8.4 PUBLIC REVIEW IS/MND

Horizon will prepare the Notice of Intent to Adopt (NOI) for review by RTC. The NOI will be attached to the Public Review IS/MND. Fifty (50) copies and an electronic file of the IS/MND will be provided. Horizon will submit the IS/MND to agencies/interested parties as directed by RTC, and will submit 15 copies of the IS/MND the State Clearinghouse. The IS/MND would be subject to a mandatory 30‐day public review period.

Deliverables

Public Review Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (50 paper copies)

Mailing to agencies/interested parties (paper copies for agencies only)

1.9 Design Studies and Reports |BKF, PC, M&N Prepare and update the following reports in accordance with Caltrans guidelines for inclusion into the Project Report (PR):

Preliminary Foundation Report (PFR). Review geologic maps, previous geotechnical studies including previously performed explorations for SR1 HOV project and prepare a Preliminary Foundation Report in accordance with Section 2‐3 of the Caltrans OSFP Information and Procedures guide. Submit PFR as part of Bridge Advance Planning Study Package for RTC and Caltrans review and approval.

Storm Water Data Report (SWDR). The SWDR shall include project impacts on water quality, minimization measures, recommended best management practices (BMPs), erosion control measures, and a preliminary hydro‐modification assessment to determine the magnitude of the impacts and the need for minimization. Perform a drainage assessment and analysis for the project area to identify significant issues, address flood plains and establish general drainage requirements. This initial assessment is critical to prepare the SWDR. The SWDR will include Treatment Best Management Practices Checklists. Conforming to water quality issues is a critical project element as it may require additional right of way or mitigation. Areas for quality treatment will be identified and balanced to avoid deficits.

Location Hydraulic Study (LHS). Prepare an LHS to evaluate potential changes in floodplain hydraulics, perform a floodplain risk assessment, and recommend potential mitigation measures.

Transportation Management Plan (TMP). Staging requirements for the project will be developed for inclusion and support in developing the TMP. An assessment of the construction traffic impacts and mitigation will be conducted. In ensuring that all elements have been considered to mitigate traffic impacts during construction, the TMP checklist will be reviewed and completed for the Project. The documents will be provided for Caltrans review and to confirm traffic management strategies, traffic detours, lane closures, etc.

Risk Management Plan (RMP). As a verification of the reliability of the schedule and cost, a risk analysis will be conducted and a risk management plan prepared. The risk management plan will be a “live” document that is updated continuously throughout the life of the project. The risk management plan will highlight project components with schedule impacts sensitive to changes in the assumptions in the PR Document, such as right of way acquisition and utility relocations.

ATTACHMENT 1


Deliverables Draft and Final copies of the following reports:

Preliminary Foundation Report Storm Water Data Report Location Hydraulic Study Transportation Management Plan Risk Management Plan

1.10 Design Exceptions |BKF Review the developed geometrics of the proposed overcrossing for nonstandard features and prepare Design Exception Fact Sheets, for those standards that cannot be met, for Caltrans review and approval. As part of this task, Design Information (DIB) 77, Design Checklist, and DIB 82‐05, Pedestrian Accessibility Guidelines for Highway Projects, will be reviewed for HDM compliance. Caltrans Accessibility standards are more stringent than federal guidelines as Caltrans standards consider construction tolerances thus a thorough geometric review in view of Caltrans standards is warranted. For the Fact Sheets provide data, exhibits, and preliminary details to support the exception and to obtain Caltrans approval.

Deliverables

Draft and Final Mandatory and Advisory Fact Sheets

1.11 Right‐of‐Way Data Sheets |UFS Review existing R/W maps and tax assessor data to identify affected and/or adjacent properties. Prepare R/W Data Sheet and R/W cost estimate for up to three property takes or TCE’s. The R/W Data Sheet will be signed by authorized R/W Agent and included as an attachment to the Project Report.

Deliverables

Draft and Final R/W Data Sheet

1.12 Bridge Advance Planning Study (APS) |M&N, SGA Prepare Bridge Advance Planning Study (APS) in accordance with Section 3‐2 of the Caltrans OSFP Information and Procedures Guide for thepreferred alternative. Controlling issues such as vertical and horizontal clearance limitations, soil conditions, construction space limitations, environmental and site constraints, public input, other considerations will be evaluated. Develop preliminary aesthetic details for architectural bridge lighting, railing, and concrete barrier. Prepare and submit APS package for RTC and Caltrans review and approval.

Deliverables

Draft and Final Bridge APS Package

1.13 Preliminary Plans | BKF, SGA, M&N

Refine 15% concept design selected as the potential preferred alternative in Task 1.7 and prepare preliminary design plans based on community and agency input. Plans will include the typical cross sections, profiles including superelevations, and layout drawings of the selected alternative. The work will be detailed to an appropriate level to perform the required evaluations and prepare accurate cost estimates for the Project Report.

Deliverables

Preliminary Plan Package

ATTACHMENT 1


1.14 Preliminary Cost Estimates | BKF, SGA, M&N Prepare preliminary cost estimate for the preferred alternative including construction, right of way, utility relocation, and support costs for the preferred alternative (only) to establish funding boundaries for the project. Costs will be based on available mapping and design data and individual cost items quantified. The preliminary cost estimate will be prepared using the Caltrans’ Standard format for Project Planning Cost Estimate (6‐page format).Prepare and submit Project Planning Cost Estimate package for RTC and Caltrans review and approval.

Deliverables

Draft and Final Project Planning Cost Estimate Package

Task 2 – Approval Documents

2.1 Prepare and Approve Project Report and Final Environmental Documents |BKF, M&N, HWE

TASK 2.1.1 PREPARE PROJECT REPORT

Upon completion of Task 1 services, assemble and circulate Draft Project Report for review and comment. The items completed in Task 1 will be used to ensure that the following are addressed and noted in the Draft Project Report:

Present the project’s goals and general information including describing the viable alternatives

Recommend that the Draft Environmental Document be publicly circulated to obtain feedback

Provide background information to include history, community interaction and existing conditions

Identify the purpose and need of the Project

Discuss the viable alternatives including a brief description and explanation of rejected alternatives

Incorporate environmental findings and recommendations

Identify all utilities within the right of way to ensure compliance to current Caltrans standards

Discuss the evaluations that were conducted

Note considerations such as permitting, cooperative agreements and staging that may affect the approval of the project

Following review and receipt of comments from Caltrans, the participating agencies and interested parties and in conjunction with the public circulation period of the draft environmental document, the organize, attend, and lead a JRT (Joint Resolution Team) comment/response resolution meeting to discuss conflicting comments and obtain necessary clarifications and resolutions. Other design modifications will also consider balancing the requirements and sort out the needs of the stakeholders that may have been presented through the environmental process.

During the preparation of the final Project Report, closely monitor the progress of the critical activities and the progress of the final environmental document. These activities must be integrated into the overall design process. Comments from the Draft Project Report will be incorporated and the document updated to reflect the receipt of comments from the Draft Environmental Document and in consideration of the selected preferred alternative and in compliance with the requirements for a Final Project Report. After performing a final QA/QC review, assemble and distribute the Final Project Report for Caltrans final review. Any resulting minor comments will be incorporated. A finalized Project Report ready for signature will be available and ready when the final environmental document is signed.

All gaps or revisions in the design, caused by changes or pending design and policy decisions, will be specifically targeted prior to the submission of the final PR and will require immediate resolution. Closely monitor the progress of the critical activities and the progress of the final environmental document. These

ATTACHMENT 1


activities must be integrated into the overall design process. Assemble and distribute the FPR for City’s and Caltrans' final review and incorporate resulting comments.

Deliverable

Draft and Final Project Report

TASK 2.1.2NEPA CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION / CEQA ADMINISTRATIVE DRAFT FINAL IS/MND

Coordinate with Caltrans to obtain Caltrans’ certification that the project is determined to be processed with a CE pursuant to NEPA. If requested by Caltrans, complete the Caltrans Categorical Exclusion Checklist for Caltrans’ signature. Consistent with Caltrans’ Project Development Procedures Manual Chapter 12, Project Approvals and Changes to Approved Projects, it is anticipated that the CE form would be attached to the Project Report.

Prepare an Administrative Draft Final IS/MND for RTC’s review and approval. The final document will reference the review process, comments letters received, responses to comments, and any required edits/updates to the Public Review document. A moderate volume of public comments is assumed.

Deliverable

Administrative Draft Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (electronic)

TASK 2.1.3APPROVAL DRAFT FINAL IS/MND

Revise the Administrative Draft IS/MND to address RTC’s comments and submit the Approval Draft to RTC for approval.

Deliverable

Approval Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (electronic)

TASK 2.1.4FINAL IS/MND

Twenty‐five (25) paper copies and an electronic file of the Final IS/MND will be provided. Provide the document (paper or electronic version) to each agency/interested party who submitted a comment letter during the 30‐day public review period. Upon approval of the IS/MND, prepare a Notice of Determination (NOD) and submit 15 copies of the IS/MND and NOD to the State Clearinghouse. This scope of work includes the CEQA filing fee.

Deliverables

Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (25 copies)

Mailing to commenters on the Public Review IS/MND (paper copies for agencies only)

Assumptions

RTC will identify community stakeholders to be added to the mailing/notification list, will maintain contact/mailing lists, and perform all physical and digital distribution of mailings

RTC will prepare all graphics for the mailing/notifications, newspaper ads, etc.

RTC will facilitate (lead) the public meetings

RTC will manage reservations, transportation, setup, AV equipment, and breakdown for public meetings, including printing presentation materials

A preferred alternative will be selected following completion of Task 1.7, prior to the initiation of environmental studies. Therefore technical environmental studies will evaluate only one build alternative and a no build alternative

ATTACHMENT 1


Technical studies, reports, etc. will be reviewed approved by Caltrans in two rounds

Sea Level Rise evaluation will not to be required. During the course of the project, if it is determined that such evaluation is needed this can be for additional scope and fee

Base sheets shall consist of available background information such as Santa Cruz County’s GIS mapping. Base sheets will be supplemented with right of way and utility information from available existing information. A‐B‐C Mapping base sheets, which can be used for the PS&E phase of the Project, can be provided for additional scope and fee

Potholing of utilities is excluded for this scope but can be provided as an optional service if the need becomes required to establish design limitations or costs

A maximum of six design exceptions will be required

One day of field survey (2‐man crew) will be provided for supplemental topographic data gathering

Landscape conceptual plans will not be required for this phase

AGENDA: October 6, 2016 TO: Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) FROM: Luis Pavel Mendez, Deputy Director RE: Amendments to the Fiscal Year (FY) 2016-17 Budget and Work Program RECOMMENDATIONS The Budget and Administration/Personnel (B&A/P) Committee and staff recommend that the Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) adopt a resolution (Attachment 1) approving the proposed amended fiscal year (FY) 2016-17 Budget and Work Program (Exhibit A to Attachment 1

) and exchanging Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG) funds for the Santa Cruz County Open Streets project.

BACKGROUND In March of each year, the Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) approves a budget and work program for the upcoming fiscal year. In the fall, the RTC amends the budget and work program to incorporate information from prior year end balances, new projects or funds, updated estimates, and other necessary changes. The budget is also amended as necessary during other times of the budget year. The fiscal year 2016-17 budget and work program were last amended by the RTC on September 1, 2016 to incorporate new planning grants because the planning work was already under way. The currently proposed amendments were reviewed by the Budget and Administration/Personnel (B&A/P) Committee at its September 8th meeting and the Committee recommends approval. DISCUSSION The proposed amended FY2016-17 budget (Exhibit A of Attachment 1

) is balanced and implements the RTC’s priority projects and on-going programs. Proposed budget changes are discussed below. Explanations for specific line items in the budget are included as notes.

Transportation Development Act (TDA) (pp. 1, 2 & 17 of amended budget) One of the main sources of funding for transportation in Santa Cruz County is the TDA, which established that ¼% of the state sales tax would go to transportation. Consistent with the RTC rules and regulations, most of the TDA revenue received by the RTC goes to Santa Cruz METRO for its transit operations. Some of the funds are used for the RTC’s operations, some are used for bicycle and pedestrian promotion

10/06/16 RTC Meeting – FY 2016-17 Budget and Work Program Page 2

and safety programs, some are apportioned to specialized transportation services for seniors and people with disabilities and the remainder is apportioned to the local jurisdictions for bicycle and pedestrian projects by population. FY 2015-16 TDA Revenue

- As required by state law, the RTC obtains TDA revenue estimates from the County Auditor-Controller and uses those estimates for the production of its budget. The total of actual revenues and interest received in FY 2015-16 was $346,350 higher than estimated.

FY 2016-17 TDA Revenue Estimate

– The RTC approved a FY 2016-17 budget with the TDA revenue estimate provided by the County Auditor Controller in January 2016 (Column 2 below.)

Table 1: FY 2015-16 & 2016-17 TDA Budget Column 1 Column 2 Column 3

TDA FY 2015-16 Final Budget

FY 2016-17 Budget

Approved Sept. 2016

Proposed Amended

FY 2016-17 Budget

Revenue estimate from Auditor Controller 8,628,404 9,059,403 9,059,403

Estimated interest 12,000 12,000 12,000

Prior FY revenue & interest 346,350

Replenish TDA reserve & meet 8% target -133,244

Replenish RTC reserve funds used in FY 2015-16 -74,997

Apportioned to TDA recipients 8,640,404 9,071,403 9,209,512 In FY 2014-15, TDA revenues came in below the Auditor Controller’s estimate. The RTC used TDA reserve funds to meet its apportionment commitments to all of the TDA recipients and opted not to reduce TDA apportionments in FY 2015-16 to replenish the TDA reserve fund. Therefore, of the $346,350 in FY 2015-16 TDA revenues above the estimate, $133,244 is proposed to replenish the TDA reserve fund and meet the 8% TDA reserve target, and $74,997 to replenish the RTC reserve funds used in FY 2015-16. This leaves $138,109 for additional distribution to the TDA recipients as established in the RTC Rules and Regulations. TDA revenues can vary significantly from month to month. RTC staff will continue to monitor TDA revenues, and if it seems that apportionments to TDA recipients should be revised, staff will return to the B&A/P Committee and the RTC with appropriate recommendations. State Transit Assistance (STA) funds (pp. 1 & 2 of amended budget) Each year the California State Controller provides an estimate of State Transit Assistance (STA) funds. Santa Cruz METRO has been the only transit agency in Santa Cruz County authorized to use STA funds. The RTC has allocated all of the STA funds to Santa Cruz METRO. Due to recent efforts throughout the state to clarify STA funding eligibility, in the future other entities in Santa Cruz County may


be eligible to receive some of the STA funds. Based on recent passage of Senate Bill (SB) 838, Santa Cruz METRO will be the only transit agency eligible for STA funds at least through FY 2017-18. The State Controller will issue a new FY 2016-17 STA funds estimate soon, which should increase the amount of STA funds available to Santa Cruz METRO. Other Proposed Budget Amendments Unspent funds from prior year projects have been carried over in the proposed amended budget, as explained by notes throughout Exhibit A of Attachment 1

. Some expenditure and funding lines have also been updated to reflect current estimates and incorporate secured grants.

Administration Budget (p. 4)

- The administration budget includes carryovers from FY 2015-16; set-aside for eventual replacement of the current copy machine which has surpassed its estimated life; funds for needed computer software upgrades and funds to begin the total compensation study required by labor agreements. It also includes the budget vehicle for replenishing the RTC reserve fund. In addition, it includes the movement of funds remaining in the “In Lieu of Social Security Fund” back to the general RTC administration. This fund was established to hold payments to the Social Security Administration while the RTC fully established itself as an autonomous agency after separation from the County. All required payments have been made and it took some time to reconcile all accounts with the Social Security Administration. Now the remaining funds may be moved back to the RTC administration budget.

CRUZ511 (p. 5)

- The budget for the RTC’s CRUZ511 program includes carryovers of funding and expenditures from FY 2015-16.

Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) (p. 7)

- The FSP budget includes carryover from FY 2015-16 and updated revenues from Caltrans consistent with the state formula. FSP state funds are based on a formula that includes congestion on Highways 1 and 17. As the recently installed and operational detectors on Highway 17 provide more congestion data, the amount of FSP funds that the RTC receives from Caltrans should be a bit higher, though compared to historic levels, funds from Caltrans for FSP have dropped about 20%.

Rail/Trail Authority Budget (p. 8)

– The Rail/Trail Authority budget includes updated carryovers in funding and expenditures from FY 2015-16. It also includes more funds for right-of-way clean up and maintenance and for legal expenses. Recently, the RTC began receiving revenues from storage of empty rail cars on the rail line consistent with the administration, coordination and license agreement between the RTC and Santa Cruz & Monterey Bay (SC&MB) Railway. This is new revenue and it can vary unpredictably. Due to uncertainty about the amount of revenue that will be generated by the Polar Express event, potential revenues to the RTC from this event are not included in the proposed budget.


Highway 1 Projects (pp. 9 & 10)

– The budgets for the highway projects include updated carryover and estimates in both funding and expenditures. New funding recently programmed by the RTC to complete the environmental documents for the Highway 1 corridor is also included. Unfortunately, the Highway 1 auxiliary lanes construction project has not been closed out due to claims from the contractor. Very limited funds remain for the project to address and settle those claims.

Planning Program Budget (pp. 12, 13 and 14)

- The budget for the planning program includes carryovers from FY 2015-16 for contract work for three projects; recently secured funds for three projects and updated estimates.

Regional Surface Transportation Program (RSTP) Exchange (p. 15)

– At its September 1st meeting, the RTC programmed federal Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG) funds to a variety of projects and exchanged those federal funds for state RSTPX funds for some projects. For the Santa Cruz County Open Streets project, the RTC programmed $10,000 in STBG funds for an Open Streets event in Watsonville, contingent on Bike Santa Cruz County being able to implement the project at that level of funding. Therefore, the STBG funds were not exchanged for RSTPX funds. Bike Santa Cruz County has determined they will be able to make the program work with the level of funding provided. Therefore, staff recommends that the federal STBG funds be exchanged for state RSTPX funds for this project.

The B&A/P Committee and staff recommend that the RTC adopt the attached resolution (Attachment 1) approving the proposed amended FY2016-17 Budget and Work Program (Exhibit A of Attachment 1

) including the exchange of Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG) funds for the Santa Cruz County Open Streets project. Staff will continue to monitor all revenues, including TDA, seek additional revenues, and manage costs to maintain a sound budget. Staff will return to the B&A/P Committee and the RTC with recommendations as necessary, if further budget and work program changes are needed.

SUMMARY The proposed amended FY 2016-17 Budget (Exhibit A of Attachment 1

) incorporates information from FY 2015-16 year end balances, carryovers from the previous fiscal year, updated revenue and cost estimates, and other necessary changes. The B&A/P Committee and staff recommend that the RTC approve the proposed amended FY 2016-17 Budget and Work Program.

1. Resolution amending the FY 2016-17 RTC budget and work program Attachments:

2. TDA estimates and revenues

S:\RTC\TC2016\TC1016\Regular Agenda\FY17Bgt&WP\16-17 FallBudg&WP Amend.doc

RESOLUTION NO. 09-17 Adopted by the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission on the date of October 6, 2016 on the motion of Commissioner duly seconded by Commissioner

A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE FY 2016-17 BUDGET AND WORK PROGRAM FOR THE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION

WHEREAS, the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission adopts and periodically

amends a budget and work program for each fiscal year to guide its expenses and work; BE IT RESOLVED BY THE SANTA CRUZ COUNTY REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION:

1. The FY 2016-17 Budget and Work Program for the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) are hereby amended as shown in Exhibit A; and

2. The Executive Director is authorized to adjust Transportation Development Act (TDA) revenue

payments consistent with the amended FY 2016-17 RTC budget; and

3. The 2016 Regional Transportation Improvement Program for Santa Cruz County is hereby amended to exchange federal Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG) funds for state RSTPX funds for the Santa Cruz County Open Streets project and the Freeway Service Patrol.

AYES: COMMISSIONERS NOES: COMMISSIONERS ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS ______________________________ Don Lane, Chair ATTEST: ___________________________ George Dondero, Secretary Attachments: Exhibit A - SCCRTC FY 2016-17 Budget and Work Program as amended Distribution: RTC Fiscal

S:\RESOLUTI\2016\RES1016\BUDWPAMEND FY16-17.doc

lmendez

Typewritten Text

RTC 10/06/16 Meeting: FY 2016/17 Budget & Work Program Replacement Pages

lmendez

Typewritten Text

30-5

SANTA CRUZ COUNTY REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (SCCRTC)

FISCAL YEAR 2016-17 BUDGET

PROPOSED OCTOBER 06, 2016

lmendez

Typewritten Text

EXHIBIT A

Table of Contents Page I. BUDGET SUMMARY

A. Projected Revenue Summary.................................................1 B. Apportionment Summary – TDA and Other Funds...............................2 C. SCCRTC Operating Budget Summary...........................................3

II. SCCRTC OPERATING BUDGET DETAIL - BY WORK PROGRAM A. SCCRTC - Administration...................................................4 B. Cruz511/Rideshare.........................................................5 C. Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies (SAFE)..........................6 D. Freeway Service Patrol (FSP)..............................................7

E. Rail/Trail Authority......................................................8 F. Highway 1 Environmental Document and Design ..............................9 G. Highway 1 Construction ..................................................10 H. Countywide Bike Signage..................................................11 I. SCCRTC Planning (all other programs)...............................12,13,14

III. PASS THROUGH GRANTS AND PROGRAMS

A. STP Exchange Projects....................................................15

IV. FUND BALANCES AND RESERVES A. Status of Reserve Funds..................................................16

V. SUPPLEMENTAL SCHEDULES

A. Staff Positions..........................................................17 B. TDA Allocation Balances..................................................18

VI. GLOSSARY OF TRANSPORTATION FUNDING TERMS.................................19 - 22

I:\FISCAL\BUDGET\FY16-17BUDGET\OCT2016\TABLECONTENTS1016.DOC

SANTA CRUZ COUNTY REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSIONPROJECTED REVENUE SUMMARY

FY 2016-2017 BUDGET

-1-

1 PROJECTED REVENUE SUMMARY2 FY16-17 FY16-173 SOURCES APPROVED PROPOSED DIFFERENCE NOTE4 09/01/16 10/06/165 Transportation Development Act (TDA):6 Auditor's 1/4 Cent Sales Tax Estimate 9,059,403 9,059,403 07 Previous FY Revenues Budgeted 0 346,350 346,350 - Revenues above estimate in FY 2015-168 Interest Estimate 12,000 12,000 09 Total TDA Apportioned 9,071,403 9,417,753 346,350

1011 State Transit Assistance (STA) 1,995,440 1,995,440 012 Planning Grant Funds/Others:13 State planning funds (RPA and STIP PPM) 512,000 512,000 014 RSTP Exchange 50,000 385,000 335,000 - Programmed by RTC at its 09/01/16 meeting15 Land Trust 127,473 127,473 016 Coastal Conservancy 500,000 977,784 477,784 - Carryover from FY 2015-1617 Transit & Transportation Planning grants 595,221 667,671 72,450 - Carryover from FY 2015-1618 RTC Funds Budgeted 292,776 353,446 60,670 - Carryover from FY 2015-16 & to cover carried over & anticipated expen19 Planning/Other Total 2,077,470 3,023,374 945,90420 Rideshare:21 RSTP & RSTP Exchange 263,010 340,937 77,927 - Carryover from FY 2015-1622 SAFE Funds 50,000 50,000 023 Service Authority for Freeway Emergency (SAFE):24 DMV Fees and interest 241,000 241,000 025 Other - MTC SAFE & RTC SAFE 158,300 158,300 026 Freeway Service Patrol (FSP):27 Caltrans Grant 170,598 160,702 -9,896 - per Caltrans formula distribution28 RSTP Exchange, STIP, Reserves & Interest 208,902 234,448 25,546 - Carryover from FY 2015-1629 Rail/Trail Authority:30 Leases and Licenses 85,000 85,000 031 RSTP Exchange 527,822 560,064 32,242 - Carryover from FY 2015-1632 Transfer - in from TC Planning 110,000 110,000 033 Rail/Trail Funds Budgeted 167,188 169,946 2,758 - Carryover from FY 2015-1634 Highway 1:35 RSTP Exchange 956,247 1,944,805 988,558 - Carryover from FY 2015-16 & new programmed funds36 CMIA, STIP & Other 229,298 195,998 -33,300 - Carryover from FY 2015-1637 Bike Signage Project:38 Active Transportation Program Funds 320,000 320,000 039 RSTP Exchange and RTC Funds 50,000 50,096 96 - Carryover from FY 2015-1640 RSTP Exchange Program 11,520,293 11,791,561 271,268 - Carryover from FY 2015-1641 TOTAL 28,201,971 30,849,423 2,647,452

I:\FISCAL\BUDGET\FY16-17Budget\Oct2016\[FY2017Oct16-2.xlsx]Fund Balance 9/28/2016 9:44

SANTA CRUZ COUNTY REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSIONAPPORTIONMENT SUMMARY

FY 2016-2017 BUDGET

-2-

1 APPORTIONMENT SUMMARY2 FY16-17 FY16-173 CLAIMANTS APPROVED PROPOSED DIFFERENCE NOTE4 09/01/16 10/06/165 Transportation Development Act (TDA): (1)67 TDA Reserve Fund 133,244 133,244 - Replenish reserves used in FY 2014-15 & meet Rules and Regulations target8 RTC Reserve Fund 74,997 74,997 - Replenish reserves used in FY 2015-169 RTC Planning 0

10 SCCRTC: % Chg11 Administration 565,923 574,722 8,799 - 1.55% - Revenues above estimate in FY 2015-1612 Planning: Overall Planning 517,863 525,915 8,052 - 1.55% - Revenues above estimate in FY 2015-1613 Bike to Work 50,000 50,000 0 0.00%14 Bike & Pedestrian Safety (CTSC) 100,000 100,000 0 0.00%15 Subtotal 1,233,786 1,250,637 16,851 1.37%1617 Santa Cruz METRO 6,701,163 6,804,838 103,675 - 1.55% - Revenues above estimate in FY 2015-1618 Specialized Transit (Community Bridges/CTSA) 658,360 668,545 10,186 - 1.55% - Revenues above estimate in FY 2015-1619 Volunteer Center 78,376 79,589 1,213 - 1.55% - Revenues above estimate in FY 2015-1620 City of Capitola 14,791 15,020 229 - 1.55% - Revenues above estimate in FY 2015-1621 City of Santa Cruz - Non Transit 93,863 95,316 1,452 - 1.55% - Revenues above estimate in FY 2015-1622 City of Scotts Valley 17,552 17,823 272 - 1.55% - Revenues above estimate in FY 2015-1623 City of Watsonville 76,644 77,830 1,186 - 1.55% - Revenues above estimate in FY 2015-1624 County of Santa Cruz 196,868 199,914 3,046 - 1.55% - Revenues above estimate in FY 2015-1625 Subtotal 7,837,617 7,958,875 121,258 1.55%2627 TOTAL TDA APPORTIONED 9,071,403 9,417,753 346,350 - Revenues above estimate in FY 2015-162829 State Transit Assistance (STA) - SCMTD 1,995,440 1,995,440 03031 Planning Grant Funds/Others: 2,077,470 3,023,374 945,904 - Carryover from FY 2015-16, new programmed funds & updated estimates3233 Rideshare 313,010 390,937 77,927 - Carryover from FY 2015-163435 SAFE 399,300 399,300 03637 Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) 379,500 395,150 15,650 - Carryover from FY 2015-163839 Rail/Trail Authority 890,010 925,010 35,000 - Carryover from FY 2015-164041 Highway 1 1,185,545 2,140,803 955,258 - Carryover from FY 2015-16 & new programmed funds4243 Bike Singnage Project 370,000 370,096 96 - Carryover from FY 2015-164445 RSTP Exchange Program 11,520,293 11,791,561 271,268 - Carryover from FY 2015-164647 TOTAL 28,201,971 30,849,423 2,647,4524849 (1) TDA apportionments are based on formulas in the RTC's Rules and Regulations. Balance not used for Planning and Administration is allocated to other TDA claimants as follows:50 85.5% to SCMTD, 8.4% to Community Bridges and 1% to the Volunteer Center; remaining funds are proportionally allocated to cities and the county according to population.

SANTA CRUZ COUNTY REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSIONBUDGET SUMMARY

FY 2016-2017 BUDGET

-3-

1 BUDGET SUMMARY23 TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL4 FY 15-16 SALARIES & SERVICES & FY16-17 SALARIES & SERVICES & FY16-17 SALARIES & SERVICES &5 ADOPTED BENEFITS SUPPLIES ADOPTED BENEFITS SUPPLIES PROPOSED BENEFITS SUPPLIES6 OPERATIONS PROGRAMS 03/03/16 09/01/16 10/06/16 (1)78 SCCRTC - Administration 740,818 233,318 507,500 659,500 238,000 421,500 792,590 238,000 554,590 9 CRUZ511/Rideshare 336,666 205,566 131,100 291,100 210,000 81,100 331,422 210,000 121,422

10 SAFE 443,807 129,507 314,300 399,300 135,000 264,300 399,300 135,000 264,300 11 Freeway Service Patrol 378,060 76,060 302,000 379,500 77,500 302,000 379,500 77,500 302,000 12 SCCRTC Planning 2,608,901 1,329,677 1,279,224 2,301,094 1,286,173 1,014,921 3,556,418 1,286,173 2,270,245 1314 Total Operations Programs 4,508,252 1,974,128 2,534,124 4,030,494 1,946,673 2,083,821 5,459,230 1,946,673 3,512,557 1516 CAPITAL PROGRAMS1718 Rail/Trail Authority 1,040,010 185,010 855,000 890,010 190,010 700,000 925,010 190,010 735,000 19 Highway 1 Env Docs & Design 2,030,549 241,958 1,788,591 956,247 230,000 726,247 1,944,805 230,000 1,714,805 20 Highway 1 Construction 369,220 40,000 329,220 229,298 30,000 199,298 195,998 30,000 165,998 21 Countywide Bike Signage 58,000 312,096 370,096 58,000 312,096 2223 Total Capital Programs 3,439,779 466,968 2,972,811 2,075,555 508,010 1,937,641 3,435,909 508,010 2,927,899 2425 TOTAL ALL PROGRAMS 7,948,031 2,441,096 5,506,935 6,106,049 2,454,683 4,021,462 8,895,139 2,454,683 6,440,456 2627282930 FY 15-16 FY16-17 FY16-1731 FY 15-16 FY 15-16 ACTUAL LESS FY16-17 FY 15-16 ADOPTED VS FY16-17 FY16-17 PROPOSED VS32 PROGRAM ADOPTED ACTUAL ADOPTED ADOPTED ADOPTED FY 15-16 PROPOSED ADOPTED FY16-1733 03/03/16 6/30/16 03/03/16 09/01/16 03/03/16 ADOPTED 10/06/16 09/01/16 ADOPTED3435 SCCRTC - Administration 740,818 712,836 (27,982) 659,500 740,818 (81,318) 792,590 659,500 133,090 36 Rideshare 336,666 168,576 (168,090) 291,100 336,666 (45,566) 331,422 291,100 40,322 37 SAFE 443,807 290,906 (152,901) 399,300 443,807 (44,507) 399,300 399,300 - 38 Freeway Service Patrol 378,060 328,260 (49,800) 379,500 378,060 1,440 379,500 379,500 - 39 Rail/Trail Authority 1,040,010 274,560 (765,450) 890,010 1,040,010 (150,000) 925,010 890,010 35,000 40 Highway 1 Env Docs & Design 2,030,549 918,423 (1,112,126) 956,247 2,030,549 (1,074,302) 1,944,805 956,247 988,558 41 Highway 1 Construction 369,220 156,842 (212,378) 229,298 369,220 (139,922) 195,998 229,298 (33,300) 42 SCCRTC Planning 2,608,901 1,626,025 (982,876) 2,301,094 2,608,901 (307,807) 3,556,418 2,301,094 1,255,324 4344 Total Operating Budget 7,948,031 4,476,428 (3,471,603) 6,106,049 7,948,031 (1,841,982) 8,525,043 6,106,049 2,418,994 4546 Notes: (1) Includes staffing shown on page 16

FY16-17 PROPOSED DETAILFY15-16 ADOPTED DETAIL FY16-17 ADOPTED DETAIL

BUDGET COMPARISONPRIOR YEAR AND BUDGET YEAR

SANTA CRUZ COUNTY REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSIONADMINSTRATION

FY 2016-2017 BUDGET

-4-

1 ADMINISTRATION2 FY16-17 FY16-173 WORK ELEMENT #102 APPROVED PROPOSED DIFFERENCE NOTE4 09/01/16 10/06/165 REVENUES:6 TDA Administration 565,923 649,719 83,796 - Revenue above estimate in FY 2015-167 RTC Funds 93,577 133,412 39,835 - Carryover from FY 2015-16 & to cover carried over & anticipated expenses8 Other revenue 9,458 9,458 - transfer from "In Lieu of Social Security" fund9 TOTAL REVENUES 659,500 792,590 133,090

10 EXPENDITURES:11 Salaries & Benefits 238,000 238,000 01213 Services and Supplies:14 Telephone 13,000 13,000 015 Liability Insurance 14,000 14,000 016 Utilities 9,000 9,000 017 Office Rent 89,000 89,000 018 Travel/Training19 Vehicle Maintenance, Rentals and Service 4,000 4,000 020 Transportation/Travel/Education 26,000 26,000 021 Fixed Assets 10,000 15,000 5,000 - Set aside for eventual copy machine replacement22 Office Expenses23 General Supplies & Expenses 30,000 30,000 024 Duplicating 6,000 6,000 025 Postage 5,500 5,500 026 Membership 15,000 15,000 027 Sponsorship 1,000 1,000 028 Advertisement/Publication 6,000 6,000 029 Office Equipment Repair/Maintenance 6,500 6,500 030 Contingency/Special Expense 25,000 25,000 031 County Mainframe/Intranet 6,000 6,000 032 Computer Software 6,000 12,000 6,000 - system wide upgrades needed33 Services34 Commissioners' Stipend 11,000 11,000 035 Fiscal & Triennial Performance Audit 30,000 57,093 27,093 - Carryover from FY 2015-1636 Annual Report/Fact Sheets 10,000 10,000 037 Accounting, Payroll and Auditing Fees 15,000 15,000 038 Human Resources/Employee Relations 10,000 20,000 10,000 - To initiate total compensation study39 Administrative Consulting Services 10,000 10,000 040 Legal Counsel 20,000 30,000 10,000 - Carryover from FY 2015-1641 Computer/website support, service & programming 36,000 36,000 042 Custodial - Janitorial Services 7,500 7,500 043 Provision for RTC reserves 74,997 74,997 - one time for movement of funds to RTC reserves44 Subtotal Services & Supplies 421,500 554,590 133,0904546 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 659,500 792,590 133,090

SANTA CRUZ COUNTY REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSIONCRUZ511 - RIDESHARE

FY 2016-2017 BUDGET

-5-

1 Rideshare/CRUZ511: 721400

2 FY16-17 FY16-173 WORK ELEMENT #179 APPROVED PROPOSED DIFFERENCE NOTE4 09/01/16 10/06/165 REVENUES:6 RSTP Exchange 63,010 102,813 39,803 - Carryover from FY 2015-167 SAFE funds 50,000 50,000 09 RSTP 200,000 238,124 38,124 - Carryover from FY 2015-16

10 TOTAL REVENUES 313,010 390,937 77,92711 EXPENDITURES:12 Salaries & Benefits 210,000 210,000 01314 Services and Supplies:15 Rideshare:16 Telephone 500 500 017 Membership 600 600 018 Postage 1,000 1,000 019 Other - Office Expense 2,000 2,000 020 Transportation/Travel/Education 2,000 2,000 021 Advertisement & Promotion Materials 10,000 10,000 022 Technical Support/Programming 5,000 5,000 023 Bicycle Map Production and Printing 0 0 024 Cruz511 Technical Support 10,000 10,000 025 Park & Ride Lot Project 50,000 90,322 40,322 - Carryover from FY 2015-1626 Subtotal Services & Supplies 81,100 121,422 40,32227 Unappropriated Revenues: 21,910 59,515 37,605 - Carryover from FY 2015-162829 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 313,010 390,937 77,927

Note:

SANTA CRUZ COUNTY REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSIONSERVICE AUTHORITY FOR FREEWAY EMERGENCIES (SAFE)

FY 2016-2017 BUDGET

-6-

1 SAFE: 721825

2 FY16-17 FY16-173 WORK ELEMENT #178 and #175 APPROVED PROPOSED DIFFERENCE NOTE4 09/01/16 10/06/165 REVENUES:6 DMV Fees 238,000 238,000 07 Interest 3,000 3,000 08 Local Financial Assistance (MTC SAFE) 50,000 50,000 09 SAFE Reserve Funds Budgeted 108,300 108,300 0

10 TOTAL REVENUES 399,300 399,300 011 EXPENDITURES:12 Salaries & Benefits 135,000 135,000 01314 Services and Supplies:15 Office Expense 2,000 2,000 016 Transportation/Travel/Education 2,000 2,000 017 HWY 17 Utility Charges (Electricity) 1,200 1,200 018 Liability Insurance 5,000 5,000 019 Legal Counsel 1,000 1,000 020 Contingency/Special Expense 2,500 2,500 021 Network Access 1,000 1,000 022 System Maintenance 46,000 46,000 023 CHP Operations 600 600 024 Safe on 17 100,000 100,000 025 Freeway Service Patrol 0 0 026 Call Answering 3,000 3,000 027 Callbox Upgrade 50,000 50,000 028 To Cruz511 50,000 50,000 029 Subtotal Services & Supplies 264,300 264,300 030 Unappropriated Revenues 0 0 03132 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 399,300 399,300 0

Note:

SANTA CRUZ COUNTY REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSIONFREEWAY SERVICE PATROL (FSP)

FY 2016-2017 BUDGET

-7-

1 FREEWAY SERVICE PATROL (FSP) : 721827

2 FY16-17 FY16-173 WORK ELEMENT #177 APPROVED PROPOSED DIFFERENCE NOTE4 09/01/16 10/06/165 REVENUES6 Caltrans 170,598 160,702 -9,896 - per Caltrans formula distribution7 RSTPX and STIP 150,000 333,448 183,448 - Carryover from FY 2015-16 & recently programmed funds8 Interest 1,000 1,000 09 FSP Reserve Funds Budgeted 57,902 -57,902 - unnecessary due to carryover from FY 2015-16 above

10 TOTAL REVENUES 379,500 495,150 115,6501112 EXPENDITURES13 Salaries & Benefits 77,500 77,500 01415 Services and Supplies:16 Telephone & Mobile Device Service 2,000 2,000 017 Transportation/Travel/Education 1,000 1,000 018 Liability Insurance 4,000 4,000 019 Legal Counsel 1,000 1,000 020 Contingency/Special Expense 5,000 5,000 021 Supplies 4,000 4,000 022 Towing 285,000 285,000 023 Subtotal Services & Supplies 302,000 302,000 024 Unappropriated Revenues: 0 115,650 115,650 - Due to Carryover from FY 2015-16 & recently programmed funds25 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 379,500 495,150 115,650

Note:

lmendez

Typewritten Text

30-15

SANTA CRUZ COUNTY REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSIONRAIL/TRAIL AUTHORITY

FY 2016-2017 BUDGET

-8-

1 RAIL/TRAIL AUTHORITY: 722100

2 FY16-17 FY16-173 WORK ELEMENT #682 APPROVED PROPOSED DIFFERENCE NOTE4 09/01/16 10/06/165 REVENUES:6 STIP 0 0 07 Leases, Licenses & Other Revenue 85,000 85,000 08 Transfer from TC Funds 110,000 110,000 09 RSTP Exchange 527,822 560,064 32,242 - Carryover from FY 2015-16

10 Rail/Trail Authority Reserve Funds Budgeted 167,188 169,946 2,758 - Carryover from FY 2015-1611 TOTAL REVENUES 890,010 925,010 35,00012 EXPENDITURES:13 Salaries & Benefits 190,010 190,010 01415 Services and Supplies:16 Liability Insurance 5,000 5,000 017 Rail line ROW clean up, maintenance & signage 40,000 50,000 10,000 - To address more of the needs18 Consulting Services:19 Consultants for Rail Operations & Property Management 20,000 20,000 020 Haz Mat Investigation and Related Costs 10,000 10,000 021 Site Management Plan 0 0 022 General Contingency 15,000 15,000 023 Construction Management Consultant 0 0 024 Legal Counsel 20,000 30,000 10,000 - To assist with new contract for further bridge work25 Rail line rehabilitation 590,000 605,000 15,000 - Carryover from FY 2015-1626 Subtotal Services & Supplies 700,000 735,000 35,0002728 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 890,010 925,010 35,000

Note:

SANTA CRUZ COUNTY REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSIONHIGHWAY 1 ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS AND DESIGN

FY 2016-2017 BUDGET

-9-

1 HWY 1 ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT & Design: 722200

2 FY16-17 FY16-173 WORK ELEMENT #683 APPROVED PROPOSED DIFFERENCE NOTE4 09/01/16 10/06/165 REVENUES:6 RSTP Exchange - HOV Lanes 411,422 427,537 16,115 - Carryover from FY 2015-167 RSTP Exchange (STBG 2016) - HOV Lanes 830,000 830,000 - Programmed Sept. 1, 2016 to complete environmental documents8 RSTP Exchange - Mar Vista Overcrossing 345,000 487,443 142,443 - Carryover from FY 2015-169 RSTP Exchange - Aux Lanes 199,825 199,825 0

10 TOTAL REVENUES 956,247 1,944,805 988,55811 EXPENDITURES:12 Salaries and Benefits 230,000 230,000 01314 Services and Supplies:15 Hwy 1 HOV Lanes PA/ED: 16 PA/ED Consultant - Nolte Contract 300,000 723,000 423,000 - Carryover from FY 2015-16 & estimate to complete PA/ED17 PA/ED on Call Consultants 0 0 018 PA/ED Public Information, materials, postage & meetings 1,422 1,422 019 ROW Consultant 0 5,000 5,000 - Estimate to complete PA/ED20 Reserve for future year expenses 0 348,115 348,115 - For future year expenses21 Highway 1 Morrissey-Soquel Aux Lane22 Legal Costs 185,000 185,000 023 Hwy 1 Mar Vista Drive Overcrossing:24 PA/ED Consultant 200,000 300,000 100,000 - Carryover from FY 2015-1625 PA/ED Public Information, materials, postage & meetings 20,000 20,000 026 ROW Consultant 5,000 5,000 027 Reserve for future year expenses 0 112,443 112,443 - For future year expenses28 Subtotal Services & Supplies 711,422 1,699,980 988,5582930 Unappropriated Revenues: 14,825 14,825 031 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 956,247 1,944,805 988,558

SANTA CRUZ COUNTY REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSIONHIGHWAY 1 CONSTRUCTION

FY 2016-2017 BUDGET

-10-

1 HWY 1 CONSTRUCTION: 722200

2 FY16-17 FY16-173 WORK ELEMENT #683 APPROVED PROPOSED DIFFERENCE NOTE4 09/01/16 10/06/165 REVENUES:6 STIP Construction 07 CMIA Construction 229,298 195,998 -33,300 - Carryover from FY 2015-168 Other Revenues 09 TOTAL REVENUES 229,298 195,998 -33,300

10 EXPENDITURES:11 Salaries and Benefits 30,000 30,000 01213 Services and Supplies:14 Hwy 1 Morrissey-Soquel Aux Lane Construction:15 Construction contract with contingency 109,298 0 -109,298 - Construction completed & retention released16 Supplemental construction activity 0 0 017 Traffic management 0 0 018 Traffic enforcement 0 0 019 Miscellaneous other 0 0 020 Construction management consultant 0 0 021 Construction design support 0 0 022 Legal Counsel 90,000 165,998 75,998 - Updated estimate23 General Contingency 0 0 024 Subtotal Services & Supplies 199,298 165,998 -33,3002526 Unappropriated Revenues 0 0 027 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 229,298 195,998 -33,300

SANTA CRUZ COUNTY REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSIONHIGHWAY 1 CONSTRUCTION

FY 2016-2017 BUDGET

-11-

1 COUNTYWIDE BIKE SIGNAGE:2 FY16-17 FY16-173 WORK ELEMENT #615 APPROVED PROPOSED DIFFERENCE NOTE4 09/01/16 10/06/165 REVENUES:6 Active Transportation Program Funds 320,000 320,000 07 RSTP Exchange 40,000 42,096 2,096 - Carryover from FY 2015-168 RTC Funds 10,000 8,000 -2,000 - Less needed due to carryover funds9 TOTAL REVENUES 370,000 370,096 96

10 EXPENDITURES:11 Salaries and Benefits 58,000 58,000 01213 Services and Supplies:14 Construction with contingency 200,000 200,000 015 Engineering Activity - including PS&E, counts and permits 30,000 30,000 016 Public Outreach 12,500 12,500 017 Future Year Expenses 69,500 69,596 96 - Carryover from FY 2015-1618 Subtotal Services & Supplies 312,000 312,096 961920 Unappropriated Revenues 0 0 021 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 370,000 370,096 96

SANTA CRUZ COUNTY REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSIONPLANNING REVENUES SUMMARY

FY 2016-2017 BUDGET

-12-

1 PLANNING REVENUES: 721600/721700/721750

2 FY16-17 FY16-173 SOURCES APPROVED PROPOSED DIFFERENCE NOTE4 09/01/16 10/06/165 REVENUES:67 TDA Planning 667,863 675,915 8,052 - Revenues above estimate in FY 2015-168 Rural Planning Assistance (RPA) 337,000 337,000 09 STIP for Planning (PPM) 175,000 175,000 0

10 RSTP Exchange 50,000 385,000 335,000 - Programmed by RTC at its 09/01/16 meeting11 Land Trust 127,473 127,473 012 Transit Planning Grants 486,907 489,521 2,614 - Carryover from FY 2015-1613 Coastal Conservancy 500,000 977,784 477,784 - Carryover from FY 2015-1614 Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant 108,314 178,150 69,836 - Carryover from FY 2015-1615 RTC Funds Budgeted 199,199 210,575 11,376 - Updated estimate1617 TOTAL REVENUES 2,301,094 3,556,418 904,662

Note:

SANTA CRUZ COUNTY REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSIONPLANNING EXPENDITURES

FY 2016-2017 BUDGET

-13-

1 PLANNING EXPENDITURES: 721600/721700/721750

2 FY16-17 FY16-173 EXPENDITURES APPROVED PROPOSED DIFFERENCE NOTE4 09/01/16 10/06/165 Staff & Overhead by Program6 Regional Planning Coordination 127,918 127,918 07 Unified Corridor Study Phase II 35,344 35,344 08 Work Program 34,535 34,535 09 Public Information 41,914 41,914 0

10 Bicycle/Pedestrian Planning 70,753 70,753 011 MBSST Network 50,000 50,000 012 MBSST Projects 127,473 127,473 013 Specialized Transportation 69,753 69,753 014 User Oriented Transit Travel Planning 66,527 66,527 015 Sust Transp Prioritization Plan 77,165 77,165 016 Highway 9 Study 27,159 27,159 017 Regional Transportation Plan for MTP 210,291 210,291 018 Regional Travel Demand Model 21,557 21,557 019 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) 220,487 220,487 020 Highway & Roadway Planning 105,297 105,297 021 Subtotal Staff and Overhead 1,286,173 1,286,173 022 Services & Supplies23 Passthrough Programs24 Bike To Work Program (Ecology Action) 50,000 50,000 025 Bike & Ped Safety (Comm. Traffic Safety Coalition) 100,000 100,000 026 Ecology Action - Countywide SR2S Education 25,000 25,000 - Programmed by RTC at its 09/01/16 meeting27 Open Streets - County HSA/Bike SCC 10,000 10,000 - Programmed by RTC at its 09/01/16 meeting2829 Professional Services (contracts)30 Sacramento Assistant - - 031 Washington Assistant 44,600 44,600 032 Engineering and Other Technical Consultants 50,000 60,000 10,000 - Updated estimate33 User Oriented Transit Travel Planning 27,000 30,000 3,000 - Carryover from FY 2015-1634 Environmental Documents for RTP/MTP 25,000 25,000 035 MBBST Projects - services and materials 500,000 1,277,784 777,784 - Carryover from FY 2015-16 & Programmed by RTC at its 09/01/16 m36 Sust Transp Prioritization Plan 45,188 124,066 78,878 - Carryover from FY 2015-1637 Highway 9 study consultant 144,000 144,000 038 SC METRO & DPW for Hwy 9 study 24,262 24,262 039 Unified Corridor Study Consultant 182,400 182,400 04041 RTC Work Element Related Items42 Traffic Monitoring services 15,000 15,000 043 Printing Documents and Pub Info Materials 40,000 40,000 044 User Oriented Transit Travel Planning Materials 8,133 8,133 045 Transfer to Rail/Trail Authority 110,000 110,000 046 Subtotal Services & Supplies 1,014,921 2,270,245 904,6624748 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 2,301,094 3,556,418 904,662

SANTA CRUZ COUNTY REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSIONPLANNING FUNDS SOURCE DETAIL

FY 2016-2017 BUDGET

-14-

1 PLANNING DETAIL: 721600/721700/721750

2 FY16-17 RTC Sust FTA5304 FTA5304 FTA5304 STIP3 EXPENDITURES PROPOSED TDA FUND RPA Transp SustComm SustComm Trnst for PPM Land Coastal RSTPX4 10/06/16 Plng Plng Plng SustComm Trust Conserv5 Staff & Overhead 6 Regional Planning Coordination 127,918 30,338 11,163 86,417 7 Unified Corridor Study Phase II 35,344 9,284 - - 26,060 8 Work Program 34,535 12,653 - 21,882 9 Public Information 41,914 26,025 15,889 -

10 Bicycle/Pedestrian Planning 70,753 40,753 - 30,000 11 MBSST Network 50,000 - - 50,000 12 MBSST Projects 127,473 - 127,473 13 Specialized Transportation 69,753 44,445 25,308 14 User Oriented Transit Travel Planning 66,527 7,630 58,897 15 Sust Transp Prioritization Plan 77,165 8,851 68,314 16 Highway 9 Study 27,159 6,974 - 20,185 17 Regional Transportation Plan for MTP 210,291 95,159 16,528 98,604 - 18 Regional Travel Demand Model 21,557 5,000 16,557 19 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) 220,487 8,371 - 67,116 145,000 20 Highway & Roadway Planning 105,297 42,316 - 62,981 21 Subtotal Staff & Overhead 1,286,173 321,318 101,926 337,000 68,314 26,060 20,185 58,897 175,000 127,473 - 50,000 2223 Services & Supplies24 Passthrough Programs25 Bike To Work Program (Ecology Action) 50,000 50,000 - 26 Bike & Ped Safety (Comm. Traffic Safety Coalition) 100,000 100,000 - 27 Ecology Action - Countywide SR2S Education 25,000 - 25,000 28 Open Streets - County HSA/Bike SCC 10,000 - 10,000 2930 Professional Services31 Sacramento Assistant - - - 32 Washington Assistant 44,600 4,600 40,000 33 Engineering and Other Technical Consultants 60,000 37,779 22,221 34 User Oriented Transit Travel Planning 30,000 - 3,483 26,517 35 Environmental Documents for RTP/MTP 25,000 25,000 - - 36 MBBST Projects - services and materials 1,277,784 - 977,784 300,000 37 Sust Transp Prioritization Plan 124,066 14,230 109,836 38 Highway 9 study consultant 144,000 - 144,000 39 SC METRO & DPW for Hwy 9 study 24,262 - 24,262 40 Unified Corridor Study Consultant 182,400 - 182,400 4142 RTC Work Element Related Items43 Traffic Monitoring services 15,000 15,000 - 44 Printing Documents and Pub Info Materials 40,000 12,218 27,782 - 45 User Oriented Transit Travel Planning Materials 8,133 - 933 7,200 46 Transfer to Rail/Trail Authority 110,000 110,000 - 47 Subtotal Services & Supplies 2,270,245 354,597 108,649 - 109,836 182,400 168,262 33,717 - - 977,784 335,000 4849 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 3,556,418 675,915 210,575 337,000 178,150 208,460 188,447 92,614 175,000 127,473 977,784 385,000

SANTA CRUZ COUNTY REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSIONSTP EXCHANGE PROGRAM

FY 2016-2017 BUDGET

-15-

1 RSTP EXCHANGE PROGRAM: 7220002 FY16-17 FY16-173 WORK ELEMENT #101 APPROVED PROPOSED DIFFERENCE NOTE4 09/01/16 10/06/165 REVENUES:7 Interest 30,000 30,000 - 8 RSTP Exchange Funds Budgeted - Carryover 11,490,293 11,761,561 271,268 - Carryover from FY 2015-169 TOTAL REVENUES 11,520,293 11,791,561 271,268

1011 EXPENDITURES:12 City of Capitola13 Clares Street Traffic Calming 100,000 100,000 - 14 38th Avenue Rehabilitation 438,000 438,000 - 15 Bay Ave/Capitola Ave Intersection Modification/Roundabout 31,000 31,000 - 16 Upper Pacific Cove Parking Lot Pedestrian Trail and Depot Park bus stop 200,000 200,000 - 1718 City of Santa Cruz19 Soquel Ave at Frederick St Intersection Modifications 188,000 188,000 - 20 Water St. Pavement Rehab - design phase 47,000 47,000 - 2122 City of Scotts Valley23 Mt. Hermon Rd/Scotts Valley Dr/Whispering Pines Dr Intersection Improvement 346,000 346,000 - 2425 City of Watsonville26 Freedom Blvd Reconstruction (Broadis to Alta Vista Ave) 900,000 900,000 - 27 Freedom Blvd Plan Line (Green Valley to Buena Vista) 135,000 135,000 - 2829 County of Santa Cruz30 Branciforte Drive Chip Seal 174,000 174,000 - 31 Glen Arbor Road Recycle, Overlay & Chip Seal 400,000 400,000 - 32 Granice Creek Road Recycle & Overlay 500,000 500,000 - 33 Aptos Village Plan Improvements 1,340,000 1,340,000 - 34 Davenport Road Repairs 34,962 34,962 - 35 Capitola Road Slurry Seal (30th-17th Ave) 87,141 87,141 - 36 East Cliff Dr. Cape Seal (12th to 17th Avenues) 147,000 147,000 - 37 Empire Grade 2" Layer Seal: City of SC limits to 130' N of Heller Drive 24,684 24,684 - 38 Empire Grade 2" Layer Seal (130' north of Heller Dr to 0.79 mi north of Heller) 67,472 67,472 - 39 Green Valley Rd 3" Layer Seal: Devon Ln to Melody Ln (0.58 mi) 20,877 20,877 - 40 Mt. Hermon Rd 3" Layer Seal: Graham Hill to 1000' N of Locatelli Ln 218,927 218,927 - 41 Portola Drive Cape Seal: E. Cliff to 24th 132,340 132,340 - 42 State Park Drive Improvement 587,000 587,000 - 43 17th Ave. Cape Seal (Brommer - East Cliff) 241,000 241,000 - 44 Summit Rd Chip Seal (Soquel-San Jose Rd-Old SC Hwy) 129,527 129,527 - 45 Twin Lakes Beachfront 200,000 200,000 - 46 Open Streets - County HSA/Bike Santa Cruz County 10,000 10,000 - Programmed by the RTC at is 09/01/16 meeting4748 Santa Cruz METRO49 CNG Bus Replacement 500,000 500,000 - 5051 SCCRTC52 Highway 1 Corridor Environmental Review 830,000 830,000 - 53 MBSST - North Coast Phase 2 Environmental Review 300,000 300,000 54 Ecology Action - Countywide Safe Routes to Schools Education 25,000 25,000 55 Park and Ride Lot Program 130,000 130,000 56 Bike Route Signage 60,906 60,906 - 57 Highway 1 Soquel-Morrissey Auxiliary Lanes 185,000 185,000 - 58 Highway 1 Bicycle/Ped Overcrossing near Mar Vista 500,000 500,000 - 59 Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail Network 132,000 132,000 - 60 TOTAL PROJECT EXPENDITURES 9,352,836 9,362,836 10,000 6162 Unobligated Funds 2,162,457 2,428,725 266,268 - Carryover from FY 2015-1663 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 11,515,293 11,791,561 276,268

SANTA CRUZ COUNTY REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSIONFUND BALANCES AND RESERVES

FY 2016-2017 BUDGET

-16-

12 FUND BALANCES & RESERVES: 10/06/163 TDA RTC RIDESHARE RAIL/TRAIL HWY 1 HWY 1 SAFE RSTP STA TOTAL4 DESCRIPTION FUND FUND FUND AUTHORITY PA/ED & ENG CONSTR OPERATING FSP EXCHANGE FUND ALL5 (1) (2) (3) FUND (4) FUND (4) FUND (4) FUND (5) FUND (5) FUND (4) (6) FUNDS67 Fund Balance 7-01-16 2,587,290 1,173,904 288,345 427,537 195,998 416,186 60,928 11,761,561 458 16,912,206 8 FY 2015-16 Revenues budgeted (346,350) (346,350) 9 Anticipated Revenues & Carryover Funds 883,266 883,266

10 Revenues From Prior Fiscal Year 133,244 74,997 208,241 11 Restricted Reserve carried over (620,175) (532,305) (169,791) (1,322,271) 12 Budgeted Carryover from FY 2015-16 (1,620,765) (343,987) (169,946) (1,325,628) (195,998) (108,300) - (9,362,836) (13,127,460) 13 Subtotal Fund Balance 133,245 372,609 - 118,399 (14,825) (0) 138,096 60,928 2,398,725 458 3,207,633 14 To Cashflow Reserve (297,612) (61,742) (359,354) 15 To Restricted Reserve Fund (133,245) (74,997) 0 (208,242) 16 Unappropriated Revenues 59,515 - 14,825 (0) - 15,650 89,989 17 Total Fund Balance - - 59,515 118,399 (0) (0) 76,353 76,578 2,398,725 458 2,730,027 181920 Reserve Funds

21 Reserve Target (8% target for TDA fund; 30% target for others) 753,420 1,343,379 - - - - 231,533 2,328,332

22

23 Cashflow Reserve (0% target for TDA fund; 8% target for others) 297,612 61,742 359,354

24 Restricted Reserve (8% target for TDA fund; 22% target for others)

753,420 607,302 - - - - 169,791 - - - 1,530,512

25 Total Reserve Funds 753,420 904,914 231,533 1,889,867 2627 Reserve Fund Difference from Target (0) (438,465) - - - - - - - - (438,465) 282930 Notes:31 - Numbers in parentheses are negative numbers. All other numbers are positive numbers.32 - Funds within each category (column) are restricted for use on projects/programs within that category. 33 - Fund Balance (7-01-16) = Balances of funds not used at the end of prior fiscal year. 34 - Budgeted Carryover = Portion of Fund Balance used in current fiscal year budget.35 - Unappropriated Revenues = Amount of revenues designated for specific projects/programs that likely will not be expended in in the current fiscal year, but will be needed in future years.3637 (1) 8% reserve established in RTC Rules and Regulations for the TDA Fund; 8% available in this proposed budget38 (2) 3.6 month (or 30%) operating reserve target established in RTC Rules and Regulations for the RTC Fund ; 2.42 months (or 20.21%) available in this proposed budget39 (3) Reserve for the Rideshare fund is included with the RTC Fund40 (4) Reserve funds not proposed for capital project funds41 (5) 3.6 month (or 30%) operating reserve target approved for the SAFE Fund to cover SAFE, FSP and Cruz511 operations42 (6) This is a pass-through fund, all receipts are paid to Santa Cruz Metro.

SANTA CRUZ COUNTY REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSIONSTAFF POSITIONS

FY 2016-2017 BUDGET

-17-

12 FY16-17 FY16-173 AUTHORIZED APPROVED PROPOSED DIFFERENCE NOTE4 STAFF POSITIONS: 09/01/16 10/06/1656 POSITIONS FTE FTE FTE78 Executive Director 1.00 1.00 0.009 Deputy Director 1.00 1.00 0.00

10 Fiscal Officer SCCRTC 1.00 1.00 0.0011 Administrative Services Officer 1.00 1.00 0.0012 Transportation Planner I-IV 8.00 8.00 0.0013 Accounting Technician 0.50 0.50 0.0014 Administrative Assistant I-III 1.75 1.75 0.0015 Transportation Planning Technician 2.00 2.00 0.0016 Paid Intern 0.50 0.50 0.001718 TOTAL POSITIONS 16.75 16.75 0.0019202122 FY16-17 FY16-1723 BUDGETED APPROVED PROPOSED DIFFERENCE NOTE24 STAFF POSITIONS: 09/01/16 10/06/162526 POSITIONS FTE FTE FTE2728 Executive Director 1.00 1.00 0.0029 Deputy Director 1.00 1.00 0.0030 Fiscal Officer SCCRTC 1.00 1.00 0.0031 Administrative Services Officer 1.00 1.00 0.0032 Transportation Planner I-IV 7.00 7.00 0.0033 Accounting Technician 0.50 0.50 0.0034 Administrative Assistant I-III 1.75 1.75 0.0035 Transportation Planning Technician 2.00 2.00 0.0036 Paid Intern 0.25 0.25 0.003738 TOTAL POSITIONS 15.50 15.50 0.00

SANTA CRUZ COUNTY REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSIONTDA ALLOCATION BALANCES

FY 2016-2017 BUDGET

-18-

12 TDA ALLOCATION BALANCES3 FY16-17 UNSPENT AVAILABLE4 CLAIMANTS PROPOSED PRIOR FUNDS5 10/06/16 ALLOCATIONS ADJUSTMENT 10/06/166 SCCRTC7 TDA Administration 574,722 574,722 8 TDA Planning 675,915 675,915 9 Subtotal 1,250,637 - - 1,250,637

101415 SCMTD 6,804,838 6,804,838 1617 Specialized Transit 668,545 668,545 18 - 19 Volunteer Center 79,589 79,589 2021 City of Capitola 15,020 169,501 184,521 2223 City of Santa Cruz - Non Transit 95,316 228,409 323,725 2425 City of Scotts Valley 17,823 92,170 109,993 2627 City of Watsonville 77,830 346,932 424,762 2829 County of Santa Cruz 199,914 783,753 983,667 3031 TOTAL 9,209,512 1,620,765 - 10,830,276

Note: Allocations for the Cities and the County use the most recent population figures from the Department of Finance

19

Glossary of Transportation Funding Terms Used in the SCCRTC Budget

AB2766: This bill authorized a Department of Motor Vehicles vehicle registration fee of up to $4.00 to be used by air pollution control districts for planning and incentive programs to reduce motor vehicle emissions. The Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District (MBUAPCD) annually conducts a grant program to distribute approximately $1.5 million in AB2766 funds in Santa Cruz, Monterey, and San Benito counties for this purpose. The SCCRTC has received AB2766 funds for some of its own programs, in addition to serving as a pass-through agency for grants used by some local non-profit organizations.

AB3090 Loan: Loan secured with an AB3090 designation from the CTC to be paid with funds eventually available to a project from the

STIP. Active Transpor tation Program: The ATP consolidated federal and state programs including the Transportation Alternatives Program,

the Bicycle Transportation Account and Safe Routes to Schools into one program (ATP) to encourage increased use of active modes of transportation such as bicycling and walking.

ARRA: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act passed by Congress and signed by the President in 2009 as an economic

stimulus package with funds for transportation projects ATP: Active Transportation Program CMAQ: see Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program CMIA: Corridor Mobility Improvement Account – a $4.5 billion program for highway improvements authorized by Proposition

1B, a transportation bond measure approved by California voters in November 2006. Coastal Conservancy Funds: State bond funds available for Coastal Conservancy projects through state ballot measures. Commission Reserves: The SCCRTC maintains a Reserve Fund for its operations. Commission Reserve funds are budgeted as

necessary to fully fund the operating budget or for special projects. Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program: A federal funding program specifically for projects and programs

which contribute to the attainment of a national ambient air quality standard. The SCCRTC programs CMAQ funds for Santa Cruz County. CMAQ funds for planning projects appear in the SCCRTC budget.

20

c/o Carryover. Funds carried over from prior fiscal years. DMV Fees: Department of Motor Vehicles revenue, used by the SCCRTC for the Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies (SAFE),

see Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies funds for more detail. Federal Earmark: Funds for specific projects secured by members of congress through federal legislation. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Planning (PL) Funds from AMBAG: These funds are derived from one percent "off the

top" of the funds available to each State for federal highway projects. PL funds are to be used for metropolitan planning. Funds are available for use by Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) and are allocated by a formula established by Caltrans in consultation with the MPOs. Caltrans is responsible as the "pass through" agency for administering PL funds. AMBAG passes through a portion of its FHWA PL funds to the SCCRTC for regional transportation planning purposes.

FHWA: Federal Highway Administration

Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) Grants: Caltrans annually grants funds to the SCCRTC to operate FSP services - a roving tow truck service which helps clear incidents on Highway 17 during peak travel periods. The SCCRTC has a Memorandum of Understanding with the San Francisco Bay Area Metropolitan Transportation Commission to contract for the FSP service for Santa Cruz County.

FSP: Freeway Service Patrol FSP Funds: Funds designated in the annual state budget for FSP programs and distributed by a formula established in the FSP

statutes. Proposition 116: Clean Air and Transportation Improvement Act of 1990 passed by the voters in November 1990, provided bond

funds for passenger rail and other projects including $11 million for Santa Cruz County. Regional Surface Transportation Program (RSTP): A federal funding program established by ISTEA to fund mass transit,

highway, bicycle, pedestrian and local streets and roads projects. The SCCRTC programs STP funds for Santa Cruz County. Sometimes called RSTP for Regional Surface Transportation Program.

Regional Surface Transportation Program Exchange (RSTPX): The annual Federal Apportionment Exchange Program,

21

administered by Caltrans, allows the SCCRTC the option to exchange all or a portion of its annual apportionment of Regional Surface Transportation Program (RSTP) funds for non-federal (State) funds. State funds have fewer oversight requirements than Federal funds. The funds pass through the SCCRTC to the local jurisdictions and other eligible public agencies, and therefore appear in the SCCRTC budget.

RPA: Rural Planning Assistance RSTP: Regional Surface Transportation Program RSTPX: Regional Surface Transportation Program Exchange Rural Planning Assistance (RPA): These state funds are allocated annually to regional transportation planning agencies in rural

areas to support planning programs. SAFE: Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies Service Author ity for Freeway Emergencies (SAFE) Funds: Under the provisions of state enabling legislation, the Santa Cruz

County SAFE collects a $1-per-year addition to the vehicle registration fee (listed as DMV Fees in the budget) to fund the capital, planning, maintenance, and operation of a call box system on Highways 1, 9, 17, 129, and 152 in Santa Cruz County. SAFE funds can also be used for changeable message signs (CMS), freeway service patrol (FSP) and other selected motorist aid systems.

SGC: Strategic Growth Council established in 2008 by SB732 and responsible for allocating grant funds used to implement

AB32 and SB375 STA: State Transit Assistance STBG: Surface Transportation Block Grants State Planning and Research Funds: These funds are awarded by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) annually

on a discretionary basis.

22

State Transit Assistance (STA): State Transit Assistance funds are derived from statewide sales tax on gasoline and diesel fuel as part of the Transportation Planning and Development (TP&D) program. Transit operations and capital improvement projects are eligible uses of STA funds. The SCCRTC receives State Transit Assistance funds and allocates 100 percent annually to the Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District (SCMTD).

State Transpor tation Improvement Program (STIP): A portion of State Transportation Improvement Program funds are allocated

to our region for programming by the SCCRTC. STIP regional share funds programmed for SCCRTC projects, such as the Freeway Service Patrol, the Rideshare Program and Planning activities, appear in the SCCRTC budget.

STIP: State Transportation Improvement Program STP: Regional Surface Transportation Program (RSTP) STP Exchange: Regional Surface Transportation Program Exchange (RSTPX) Surface Transportation Block Grants (STBG): A federal funding program established by the Fixing America’s Surface

Transportation (FAST) Act to fund mass transit, highway, bicycle, pedestrian and local streets and roads projects. This grant program was previously known as RSTP. The SCCRTC programs STBG funds for Santa Cruz County.

TDA: Transportation Development Act Transpor tation Development Act (TDA): State law enacted in 1971. Local TDA funds are generated from a State tax of one-

quarter of one percent on all retail sales in the county. Revenues are allocated annually by the SCCRTC to support transportation planning and administration, bus transit, transportation for the elderly and handicapped, and bikeway and pedestrian projects.

Transpor tation Development Act (TDA) Reserves: This reserve fund is maintained in order to provide the full TDA allocations to

TDA recipients in the event there is a shortfall in actual versus projected TDA revenues. Occasionally some TDA Reserve funds are allocated to a special project.

I:\FISCAL\BUDGET\FY16-17Budget\Oct2016\GLOSSARY1016.doc revised 10/16

FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 FY 09-10 FY 10-11 FY 11-12 FY 12-13 FY 13-14 FY 14-15 FY 15-16 FY 16-17

Auditor Difference Difference CumulativeActual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Controller Actual of Actual to as % of % of Actual

Month Revenue Revenue Revenue Revenue Revenue Revenue Revenue Revenue Revenue Revenue Estimate Revenue Estimate Estimate to Estimate

JUL 516,100 543,200 570,200 454,800 410,500 499,800 533,900 556,100 591,100 601,300 618,978 629,500 10,522 1.70% 101.70%

AUG 688,100 724,300 760,200 539,000 547,300 666,400 711,800 741,500 788,200 801,800 825,373 839,400 14,027 1.70% 101.70%

SEP 795,777 863,255 634,334 719,093 819,955 699,895 718,257 818,354 791,871 872,384 898,032 872,266 -25,766 -2.87% 99.95%

OCT 522,100 599,500 567,100 490,500 458,300 486,400 556,500 596,900 616,700 617,500 635,655

NOV 1,062,100 799,300 756,100 555,900 611,000 648,500 742,000 795,900 822,300 823,300 847,505

DEC 644,010 638,280 700,859 625,785 776,432 804,308 733,930 732,985 719,449 917,127 762,375

JAN 584,700 583,600 538,600 465,300 502,700 510,100 534,300 557,700 601,300 631,600 637,176

FEB 777,600 778,200 590,700 620,400 670,300 680,100 712,400 728,800 801,800 842,100 849,639

MAR 583,478 543,629 578,624 607,400 510,760 625,667 632,278 802,890 739,331 763,406 783,442

APR 488,600 494,300 432,400 385,100 412,600 441,300 475,600 504,100 524,400 559,000 555,688

MAY 651,500 659,000 464,400 562,700 605,300 588,400 634,100 672,100 699,200 745,400 740,917

Transportation Development Act (TDA) Estimates and Revenues

JUN 734,297 652,069 606,615 605,859 631,912 756557 759,038 780,261 853,689 795,139 904,623

TOTAL 8,048,362 7,878,633 7,200,133 6,631,837 6,957,059 7,407,427 7,744,102 8,287,590 8,549,340 8,970,056 9,059,403 2,341,166 -1,217 -0.01% 25.84%

% Chg 1.77% -2.11% -8.61% -7.89% 4.90% 6.47% 4.55% 7.02% 3.16% 4.92% 1.00%

I:\FISCAL\TDA\MonthlyReceipts\Luis-Budget\[FYsEstmts&Revs0916.xls]Sheet1

lmendez

Typewritten Text

ATTACHMENT 2

SANTA CRUZ COUNTY REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSIONSTP EXCHANGE PROGRAM

FY 2016-2017 BUDGET

-15-

1 RSTP EXCHANGE PROGRAM: 7220002 FY16-17 FY16-173 WORK ELEMENT #101 APPROVED PROPOSED DIFFERENCE NOTE4 09/01/16 10/06/165 REVENUES:7 Interest 30,000 30,000 - 8 RSTP Exchange Funds Budgeted - Carryover 11,490,293 11,761,561 271,268 - Carryover from FY 2015-169 TOTAL REVENUES 11,520,293 11,791,561 271,268

1011 EXPENDITURES:12 City of Capitola13 Clares Street Traffic Calming 100,000 100,000 - 14 38th Avenue Rehabilitation 438,000 438,000 - 15 Bay Ave/Capitola Ave Intersection Modification/Roundabout 31,000 31,000 - 16 Upper Pacific Cove Parking Lot Pedestrian Trail and Depot Park bus stop 200,000 200,000 - 1718 City of Santa Cruz19 Soquel Ave at Frederick St Intersection Modifications 188,000 188,000 - 20 Water St. Pavement Rehab - design phase 47,000 47,000 - 2122 City of Scotts Valley23 Mt. Hermon Rd/Scotts Valley Dr/Whispering Pines Dr Intersection Improvement 346,000 346,000 - 2425 City of Watsonville26 Freedom Blvd Reconstruction (Broadis to Alta Vista Ave) 900,000 900,000 - 27 Freedom Blvd Plan Line (Green Valley to Buena Vista) 135,000 135,000 - 2829 County of Santa Cruz30 Branciforte Drive Chip Seal 174,000 174,000 - 31 Glen Arbor Road Recycle, Overlay & Chip Seal 400,000 400,000 - 32 Granice Creek Road Recycle & Overlay 500,000 500,000 - 33 Aptos Village Plan Improvements 1,340,000 1,340,000 - 34 Davenport Road Repairs 34,962 34,962 - 35 Capitola Road Slurry Seal (30th-17th Ave) 87,141 87,141 - 36 East Cliff Dr. Cape Seal (12th to 17th Avenues) 147,000 147,000 - 37 Empire Grade 2" Layer Seal: City of SC limits to 130' N of Heller Drive 24,684 24,684 - 38 Empire Grade 2" Layer Seal (130' north of Heller Dr to 0.79 mi north of Heller) 67,472 67,472 - 39 Green Valley Rd 3" Layer Seal: Devon Ln to Melody Ln (0.58 mi) 20,877 20,877 - 40 Mt. Hermon Rd 3" Layer Seal: Graham Hill to 1000' N of Locatelli Ln 218,927 218,927 - 41 Portola Drive Cape Seal: E. Cliff to 24th 132,340 132,340 - 42 State Park Drive Improvement 587,000 587,000 - 43 17th Ave. Cape Seal (Brommer - East Cliff) 241,000 241,000 - 44 Summit Rd Chip Seal (Soquel-San Jose Rd-Old SC Hwy) 129,527 129,527 - 45 Twin Lakes Beachfront 200,000 200,000 - 46 Open Streets - County HSA/Bike Santa Cruz County 10,000 10,000 - Programmed by the RTC at is 09/01/16 meeting4748 Santa Cruz METRO49 CNG Bus Replacement 500,000 500,000 - 5051 SCCRTC52 Highway 1 Corridor Environmental Review 830,000 830,000 - 53 MBSST - North Coast Phase 2 Environmental Review 300,000 300,000 - 54 Ecology Action - Countywide Safe Routes to Schools Education 25,000 25,000 - 55 Freeway Service Patrol 250,000 250,000 - Programmed by the RTC at is 09/01/16 meeting56 Park and Ride Lot Program 130,000 130,000 - 57 Bike Route Signage 60,906 60,906 - 58 Highway 1 Soquel-Morrissey Auxiliary Lanes 185,000 185,000 - 59 Highway 1 Bicycle/Ped Overcrossing near Mar Vista 500,000 500,000 - 60 Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail Network 132,000 132,000 - 61 TOTAL PROJECT EXPENDITURES 9,352,836 9,612,836 260,000 6263 Unobligated Funds 2,162,457 2,178,725 16,268 - Carryover from FY 2015-1664 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 11,515,293 11,791,561 276,268

lmendez

Typewritten Text

30-23