Meeting Agenda Tuesday, July 2, 2013

Time: 10:00 a.m.

Meeting Location: Kings County Office of Education

Valley Oak Conference Room 876 East D Street

Lemoore, CA 93245

Toll Free Number: 1-866-906-7447 Participant Code: 5139581

TRANSFER OF CHAIR AND VICE-CHAIR RESPONSIBILITIES TO TERRI KING AND AHRON HAKIMI

APPROVAL OF MINUTES Enclosure

1. June 6, 2013 Directors’ Meeting T. King þ

DISCUSSION/ACTION ITEMS: 2. FTIP/Air Quality C. Anderson 3. Regional Transportation Plans / Sustainable Communities Strategies T. King

a. Discuss Planning Process and Schedule b. Follow Up - June 14, 2013 Facilitation Training B. Veenendaal 4. San Joaquin JPA for Passenger Rail D. Leavitt Update and Discussion 5. State Route 99 Bond Saving Program - Status of Project Programming C. Yamzon 6. Cap and Trade Discuss Valleywide Coalition for Disadvantaged Communities T. King M. Sigala/T. Jordan 7. Valley Legislative Affairs Committee (VLAC) C. Lehn þ

a. Receive Final Federal Legislative Platform b. Approve Lobbyist for Valley Voice D.C.

Kings County Association of Governments Terri King Chair Kern Council of Governments Ahron Hakimi Vice Chair Fresno Council of Governments Tony Boren Madera County Transportation Commission Patricia Taylor Merced County Association of Governments Marjie Kirn San Joaquin Council of Governments Andrew Chesley Stanislaus Council of Governments Carlos Yamzon Tulare County Association of Governments Ted Smalley

San Joaquin Valley Regional Planning Agencies’ Directors’ Committee

c/o Kings County Association of Governments – 339 West D Street, Suite B – Lemoore CA 93245 Phone: 559-852-2654 – FAX: 559-924-5632

Enclosure

INFORMATIONAL ITEMS þ The following items are for informational purposes and require no action or vote. A member of the public or Director may request that any informational item be “pulled” for further discussion. Written summaries of Informational Items are included in the agenda packet. 8. High Speed Rail D. Gomez 9. Caltrans Directors Report C.Bowen/S.Ehlert 10. Interregional Goods Movement Plan M. Sigala 11. Implementation of the San Joaquin Rail Authority (SB 325) T. Smalley 12. Proposition 84/Blueprint R. Terry 13. San Joaquin Valley Greenprint C. Thompson 14. California Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley R. Audino 15. Regional Energy Planning M. Sigala 16. Updated FY 2013-14 Meeting Calendars M. Sigala OTHER ITEMS 17. Director Items 18. Public Presentations for Items Not on Agenda. This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the Committee on items within its jurisdiction but NOT on this agenda. Unscheduled comments may be limited to three minutes. Note: The general public may comment on listed agenda items as they are considered.

Next Directors Meeting: Thursday, August 1, 2013 in Fresno (Fresno COG)

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Accommodations The meeting room and restrooms are ADA accessible. Representatives or individuals with disabilities should contact the SJV Regional Planning Agencies at (559) 266-6222, at least three days in advance, to request auxiliary aids and/or translation services necessary to participate in the public meeting.

Meeting Location: Stanislaus Council of Governments

1111 I Street, Suite 308 Modesto, CA 95354

Meeting Minutes For: Thursday, June 6, 2013

Time: 10:00 a.m.

Members Attending:

Terri King, KCAG Andy Chesley, SJCOG Carlos Yamzon, Stan COG Patricia Taylor, MCTC (absent) Tony Boren, Fresno COG Marjie Kirn, MCAG Ted Smalley, TCAG (absent) Ahron Hakimi, Kern COG Ben Kimball for Ted S.

Others:

See Appendix A for List of Others Attending

APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. May 2, 2013 Directors’ Meeting Andrew Chesley made a motion to approve, seconded by Ahron Hakimi. Motion carried.

Madera County Transportation Commission Patricia Taylor Chair Kings County Association of Governments Terri King Vice Chair Fresno Council of Governments Tony Boren Kern Council of Governments Ahron Hakimi Merced County Association of Governments Marjie Kirn San Joaquin Council of Governments Andrew Chesley Stanislaus Council of Governments Carlos Yamzon Tulare County Association of Governments Ted Smalley

San Joaquin Valley Regional Planning Agencies’ Directors’ Committee

c/o Madera County Transportation Commission – 2001 Howard Road, Suite 201 – Madera, CA 93637 Phone: 559-675-0721 – FAX: 559-675-9328

ITEM 1

2

DISCUSSION/ACTION ITEMS: 2. FTIP/Air Quality C. Anderson Cari Anderson circulated a discussion item memo on the 2008 Ozone Standard Conformity Determination Update, the 1-Hour Ozone Standard Plan Update and the 2012 PM 2.5 SIP Update along with an updated graphic (the RTP/Air Quality Planning Schedule). Cari Anderson reported on: 2008 Ozone Standard Conformity Determination Update: (Update was directly duplicated from discussion item memo bullet one)

• All eight SJV MPO documents have been approved and submitted for approval. Kern and Merced processed concurrent FTIP/RTP amendments that have been approved by Caltrans and submitted to FHWA. FHWA if working with both EPA and FTA to expedite the approvals to the extent possible; FHWA approval is anticipated no later than July 20, 2013.

1-Hour Ozone Standard Plan Update: Cari Anderson reported on new information that is identified in the second bullet point (in bold, italic and underlined) which states:

• Final Board adoption previously scheduled to occur in June 2013 has now been delayed until September due to ongoing discussions with EPA. Both ARB and EPA have indicated it is likely that this SIP Update (which includes the VMT Recession Adjustment methodology) would be acted on to provide the SJV MPOs the ability to implement the methodology for the 2014 RTP development.

Cari Anderson stated this will impact the RTP/Air Quality Planning Schedule that she had revised based on the last Directors meeting for a March adoption for submittal in April. Section One, has one RTP scheduled for the seven MPOs and then Kings, an off cycle amendment and the 2015 TIP update. Section Two, the EMFAC section remains the same. Section Three, has been revised based on the new information of the 1-Hour Ozone Standard Plan update as well as the adoption date in March. Cari reported on a staff call last week to review this revised schedule to determine staff progress. Everyone is on track and the technical analysis is scheduled for July through September and then have all the documents drafted in the October timeframe for a November release. Cari Anderson also reported on a meeting with ARB earlier this week as well as the air district to talk about the budget updates. We went through three options to get those budget updates due to this 1-Hour Ozone Plan development and were asked to put together talking points with follow-up questions with EPA. We will be doing this early next week and try to have a staff call with EPA by the end of next week in order to have a recommended approach and schedule updating those budgets that ARB can take to their management and the District can take to their management to bring back to the Directors with the goal of having those budgets available in time for the March adoption on the 2014 RTP. Cari will continue to provide updates, as new information is available. Andy Chesley remarked if it has been delayed until September assuming there are successful discussions with EPA and ARB. Carrie responded yes, the 1-Hour Ozone Plan includes what we are calling a VMT Recession Adjustment and were hoping with the June action that that would be a SIP submittal to EPA where they can act on that methodology and allow us to use that in the 2014 RTP. Now ARB and EPA are saying that you shouldn’t count on that due to the delay and their continued discussions about the SIP. What that means is we need to emphasize the budget updates which would be a separate SIP submittal. Cari Anderson reported that the schedule is extremely rigid and what we have outlined is best case scenario to have budgets available for use that would include the VMT methodology in January. When you go to make your approval action in March those budgets and that methodology is available for you to use. It could go as late as February but should not exceed it. Exceeding it will impact your ability to adopt your 2014 RTP in March. If you cannot demonstrate conformity, you do not have an RTP. The question was asked by ARB management, what is the consequence if you miss the date. Typically we can turn around and say that we will lose this much money because we will go into the conformity lapse but we do not have that option this time. What we talked to ARB management about is that we needed to get the 2014 RTP done sooner than later and we need to have an SCS that meets the five and ten targets which also needs to be done sooner than later. Cari Anderson noted that we would know in July if we are going to make it or not. Andy Chesley noted that there are many things that are coming at us that make it difficult to stay on any kind of time schedule associated with this and it is so important to be able to try to keep as much discipline to this March date as possible. Carlos Yamzon stated that these factors putting us at risk are out of our control.

3

Cari Anderson reiterated based on the staff call last week, staff understood what the objectives were and there weren’t any red flags. Cari urged to continue to have those monthly staff calls to make sure that all eight/seven MPOs are on track. No further comments or questions. 3. Regional Transportation Plans / Sustainable Communities Strategies P. Taylor a. Discuss Planning Process and Schedule (no discussion as item was addressed in Item 2 above) b. Discuss High Speed Rail in RTPs with HSR Authority Planning Staff LaKeda Huckabay and John Mason Michael Sigala stated there was some discussion at the last Directors’ meeting about what to include in terms of high speed rail in everyone’s respective RTP’s and the Valleywide chapter. Michael reached out to Diana Gomez and Rey Sukys (FTA) who suggested contacting High Speed Rail Advanced Planning staff John Mason and Lakeda Huckabay who were graciously available to begin an introductory discussion on this item today on the phone. John Mason thanked Michael for inviting them and thanked the Directors for allowing them to participate. John mentioned that:

• Their board meeting is today. • They participated and commented in the OWP meetings. • They would provide any assistance or service with regards to high-speed rail. • They worked with FTA and Caltrans on the OWP hearings, and mentioned that Caltrans has a new division,

Senior Planner for High-Speed Rail and Transit Connectivity lead by Kelly Eagan. • They have commented on two EIR for RTP’s for Kern and Madera Counties. • They are looking forward to working with you and have many resources available to you.

Terri King stated last month we talked about what to include in the Valleywide chapter in our RTP’s, and then we have our own RTP’s and since high speed rail is not supported across the valley some are concerned about what to include in our Valleywide chapter. Cari Anderson requested to poll the MPOs on who will include it in order to meet fiscal constraint requirements. Carrie Bowen commented that she doesn’t believe high speed rail has the fiscal constraint requirement under railroad. While working with David Ballenstine that issue arose and he stated (2 to 3 years ago) that it does not apply because they don’t have the same rules as FHWA but Carrie Bowen did mention it should be verified. Carrie Bowen’s concern is regarding the fill material that will be needed (to meet grade), how the material will be brought in and the air quality impact it will create from generating all those trips and inquired if that is an issue you’ll (Cari Anderson) examine. Cari Anderson responded it depends, we include construction of facilities in the regional conformity analysis and it would be a bigger piece of the project level analysis for each individual piece as it gets constructed. The key for that is how long the construction schedule is, whether it’s greater or less than five years. Tom Jordan commented that they’ve worked with the high-speed rail and triggered general conformity because of the type of funding and they have entered into a mitigation agreement with them on the construction side where they are going to be providing funds to mitigate the emissions associated with the construction of each segment in the valley. Carrie Bowen directed a question to Tom Jordan regarding providing funds to whom. Tom responded to the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. Cari Anderson clarified what person stated that high speed rail has no fiscal constraint requirement. Carrie Bowen replied David Ballenstine but it should be verified. Tony Boren commented that from a planning perspective to assume that the money will be there because that is the way it is proceeding. Cari Anderson responded that is the reason she requests to poll each MPO. Cari explained that it will be different and she thinks that they will need to quantify it to get Kern County to demonstrate conformity. Cari’s concern is that if we need to take credit for it on the air quality side, we need a Federal determination. Historically it has to be a legally enforceable binding commitment which typically is the money. Carrie believes it will be different by MPO. Ahron Hakimi stated that the Federal government is willing to look the other way whether the money is there or not for high-speed rail and are comfortable taking full credit whether the money will be there or not. Tony Boren concurred and stated that would be the right approach.

4

Tony Boren questioned how the Valleywide chapter would address high speed rail. Terri King responded that it should be a general description that the state is planning a high speed rail station going from A to B with the existing plans on the map and any detailed information should be added to your individual RTPs. Elizabeth Jonasson commented to encourage those MPOs that are supportive of high speed rail coordination, in terms of assumptions and what is going in, to make sure that it’s a cohesive system rather than in terms of individual counties. No further comments or questions. c. San Joaquin Valley Envision Tomorrow Scenario Development C. Yamzon Mike Costa reported that the Envision Tomorrow contract with Fregonese Associates was established over a year ago and in that process Fregonese Associates was contracted with seven valley MPOs to develop two of their land use scenarios for their RTP’s and SCSs. Currently Stan COG staff is responsible for the contract and has been working with your staff to develop the scenarios, to determine moving forward in the schedule and how the scenario developments affect that schedule. Currently, four of the valley MPOs participating in this contract have scenarios one and two delivered from Fregonese Associates and are moving forward to developing them and their additional scenarios. There are two MPOs that have scenario one delivered to them but have not yet determined when they are going to move forward with their second scenario development. One MPO has opted out to develop their scenarios. They have one delivered but will not be moving forward with scenario two due to their own capacity to develop the scenario with their own modeling system. Tony Boren asked Mike Costa to identify the three MPOs that were highlighted. Mike Costa responded that three MPOs that are not having the second scenario are San Joaquin, Kings, and Madera. Terri King responded for Kings that a second scenario is needed but are not far enough in the planning process. Diane Nguyen responded for San Joaquin that they would have Fregonese Associates do a second scenario. No further comments or questions. d. June 14, 2013 Facilitation Training B. Veenendaal Alley Fiori reminded everyone that a week from tomorrow next Friday at 1:00pm at Fresno COG they are holding a meeting management facilitation training for the SCS process for all valley MPOs including staff, directors, and elected officials. They will be conducting basic facilitation and meeting management training as well as reviewing some of the lessons learned from Plan Bay Area which MIG facilitated. They encourage those attending to RSVP to Brenda Veenendal by June 11th (next Tuesday) at 4pm. Carlos Yamzon directed a question towards Alley Fiori regarding the length of the training (time). Alley Fiori responded about two and one-half hours. No further comments or questions. 4. San Joaquin Valley Interregional Goods Movement Plan M. Fisher Presentation - Receive Draft Executive Summary of Plan Michael Fisher (Cambridge Systematics) circulated a copy of the Draft Executive Summary. Michael Fisher recollected their meeting last fall regarding a draft priority project list. Cambridge took that draft priority project list to two regional workshops with the stakeholder’s advisory committee, continued to work with input received from those meetings to refine the list with the product of a final priority project list that represents all of that input. There is full agreement from everyone on those projects now and are included in the Draft Executive Summary. Michael Fisher stated they have prepared this Draft Executive Summary that is still subject for review and look forward to your input and guidance in finalizing this report. Michael continued to present the Draft Executive Summary key points to the Directors (PowerPoint presentation). Ahron Hakimi and Terri King posed questions regarding the Draft Executive Summary. Ahron Hakimi commented on two issues: One, the focused of goods movement with respect to agriculture, in Kern County petroleum is also an emphasis. Two, emphasizing the distribution centers at the base of the Grape Vine. Terri King commented on a project that is listed in the wrong category. Tony Boren directed a question regarding if the report identifies what percentage of trucks are on SR99 and I-5. Michael Fisher acknowledged that information is presented in the technical reports but is unsure that it is included in the final report. Tony Boren stated that the Goods Movement will be a centerpiece of their legislative trip to Washington

5

this year and it would be critical to provide a good foundation. Michael Fisher noted that if you think there is information that should be highlighted and are not in the executive summary, we have the information available to include making it a more useful tool. Matt Fell asked what the approval process is moving forward. Michael Sigala responded that it will be circulated before you (Directors) first then to the Policy Council on June 21st. Michael commented that he would imagine the Policy Council would like to receive and accept the final report. Michael asked the Directors whether you think the report will be ready to approve in June or wait until October. Terri King responded that June is premature and she would like to see the truck percentage data included. Terri also mentioned she has some comments that she will email them (Cambridge) directly. Andy Chesley commented on the immense work done and acknowledges using the information to conduct a presentation on goods movement pertaining to rail. Andy also commented on recommendations with regards to updating this goods movement for the future (three to five years out). Michael Fisher responded that his initial reactions are one, some of the regions in their goods movement planning are looking at creating some set of performance measures and two, when thinking of the next study (as Andy Chesley commented earlier) were you thinking of what was missed in the study or changes that are anticipated that would suggest some new work, research, etc. A conversation ensued about the Marine Highway which is funded through a grant under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 TIGER program. This program is administered by the Maritime Administration (MARAD) and managed by the Port of Stockton with support from the Ports of Oakland and West Sacramento. No further comments or questions. 5. San Joaquin JPA for Passenger Rail D. Leavitt Update and Discussion No update. Next Board meeting is July 26th in Fresno. 6. State Route 99 Bond Saving Program - Status of Project Programming C. Yamzon Carlos Yamzon circulated a memorandum that will be on the CTC agenda next week. It is an action item recommending that the California Department of Transportation recommend that the California Transportation Commission keep the SR99 Corridor Program Reserve at $25 million to address unforeseen expenses for the ongoing SR99 Corridor Construction Program. A conversation ensued between Carlos Yamzon, Carrie Bowen, Sharri Bender Ehlert and others that will continue after the meeting discussing the financial background and logistics concerning a commitment of $9 million by Stanislaus for an allocation of $35.8 million. No further comments or questions. 7. Valley Legislative Affairs Committee (VLAC) J. Findley a. Federal Legislative Platform Jeff Finley reported that VLAC has received comments from the Directors that are included in the list. Also included were air quality items forwarded by Cari to VLAC from the air district. Jeff stated they are looking for any changes that you would like to see made today and for approval of the SJVRPC Draft 2013 Federal Legislative Platform so that it is presented to the Regional Policy Council for their final approval on June 21st. Ben Kimball remarked that he mentioned to their board that the water item was removed in which there was a lot of interest in and may be brought up in the Regional Policy Council meeting. Motion for approval of the SJVRPC Draft 2013 Federal Legislative Platform by Andy Chesley, seconded by Marjie Kirn. Motion carried. No further comments or questions. b. Discuss and Approve Retaining a Lobbyist for Valley Voice D.C. The conversation ensued regarding retaining a lobbyist with experience. Jeff Finley commented he has been having conversations with Melissa of Fresno that Mr. Simon (Simon and Co) has handled some trips in the past and may be able to coordinate the trip at the expense of ten thousand dollars. Terri King summarized the discussion with two

6

possibilities: One, Jeff Finley’s proposal and two, Andy Chesely’s pending proposal (depending on costs). Terri King followed up with depending on costs how the MPOs will allocate the expenses (approximately ten thousand dollars). The consensus was to allocate funds based on percentage population. Andy Chesley will report to COG Directors by email concerning details about his lobbyist proposal and expense by early next week. No further comments or questions. 8. Regional Policy Council Meeting - June 21, 2013 M. Sigala Receive Input on Agenda Topics and Action Items Terri King commented that most of the items are the same as their Director’s agenda with the addition of Cap and Trade, AB 32. Michael Sigala added that the objective is the goods movement presentation final report which is open to suggestions. For item 7b Legislative Support for Pending Bills, it would be good if we can get a list of anything since it is sort of timely on the state side. Mat Fell commented on discussion item #2 (goods movement plan) would be an action item for the Regional Policy Council. Michael Sigala clarified that it is listed “receive and approve final draft report”. After discussion, the consensus was to accept the final draft report pending final edits. Michael Sigala confirmed that edit should be submitted by next Wednesday. No further comments or questions. 9. FY 2013-14 Directors’ Committee Meeting Calendar M. Sigala Discuss and Approve A discussion ensued among the Directors. Marjie Kirn raised concerns about the Thursday’s meeting day for the Directors as she has a schedule conflict with her Technical Planning Committee. Consensus was the July’s date and location was agreed upon with the reminder of the calendar was still considered a draft. No further comments or questions. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS 10. High Speed Rail D. Gomez Bobby Pentorali reported that their Board just passed a resolution to allow their CEO to negotiate with Tutor Perini to award their first construction contract running from Madera County to American Ave in the County of Fresno. They are targeting to have an EIR for Fresno to Bakersfield by the end of the year. 11. Caltrans Directors Report C.Bowen/S.Ehlert Carrie Bowen commented on the letter you received regarding the Local Obligation Authority. The Local Obligation Authority balance is $777 million and the concern is that the projects are not going to be ready, that local projects will not be ready in time for the Federal fiscal year. Typically, Caltrans has been able to deliver, along with their partners, all of your projects and get additional funds from other states that don't. This is largely in part due to Buy America that has caused the delay. What the letter is asking is if you have any other projects that might be ready but doesn't have the Buy America to put them on an excel spreadsheet they sent you and get it back in by June 14th. In Buy America right now, we are reporting that we have $2.5 billion on 10 projects that will be delayed due to Buy America. You may have also read about the audit that the Business Transportation Secretary announced conducted by the State Smart Transportation Institute (SSTI). Last year when Caltrans started the program review under Malcolm one of the tools we used was SSTI. Cari Bowen added that Katrina Pierce is the new Division Chief of Environmental Analysis. She set up some training in May 29th in Southern California for consultants and local partners and is willing to do that in Northern California if we let her know we have that need. Carrie Bowen declared that we have that need and any time we can be on the same page with consultants that you might be hiring it would help the processes go more smoothly. You can let me or Sharri know if you're interested. Carrie Bowen continued to report that statewide we have $12.5 billion in construction to date. It consists of 165 bond projects and 684 projects total. District 10 has $750 million in construction. Other issues going on are copper wire theft at a cost of $75 million (yearly) statewide. On the positive side they did have their first arrest in District 10 who was arrested by Ken Baxter’s son. Lastly, District 7 in the Los Angeles area reported that there had been situations involving delaying traffic on freeways for their own personal agenda (e.g. a rock group in van stopped traffic to play their music that were later arrested and fined $37,000).

7

Sharri Bender Ehlert reported on the SR99 Bond Program that they have a myriad of projects still in their infancy. They had the ground breaking on Avenue 12 and last Friday we had a ground breaking for a bond savings job in Tulare and two more projects all in three weeks. District 6 is in the $600 million range and the region has 22% of all the construction statewide (District 5, 6 and 10). No comments or questions. 12. Implementation of the San Joaquin Rail Authority (SB 325) T. Smalley No updates. 13. Proposition 84/Blueprint R. Terry No updates. 14. California Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley R. Audino Rachel Audino circulated a project overview pertaining to the National Urban and Community Forestry Challenge Grant Program that they are currently working on. They are seeking to convene a variety of regional partners to develop an analysis of our region’s urban parks, green spaces and green job opportunities in order to develop nationally applicable web based tools. They are seeking to build off three current regional initiatives:

• The San Joaquin Valley Greenprint • Smart Valley Places • The San Joaquin Valley Blueprint Planners Toolkit

Rachel Audino stated they are seeking support (in concept) from the Directors. Submittal for proposal is due July 15th and is requesting feedback, questions, or comments. Tony Boren remarked that the California Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley is not seeking any funding. Rachel Audino responded that at this point they have not announced that and are working on the preliminary budgets and other details. Stacie Dabbs added that this is a relatively small grant of about $900,000 dollars made available nationwide. They are looking for an award of about $75,000 for a one year scope of work for the entire program. Tony Boren added on a related matter (Blueprint ) they (Fresno COG) received a letter from Ted James having issues with some aspects of the Greenprint. Tony Boren will have Clark Thompson email it to everyone. Motion for support in concept by Tony Boren, seconded by Ahron Hakimi. Motion carried. No further comments or questions. 15. Regional Energy Planning M. Sigala Michael Sigala reported there is a NARC webinar today from 11am to 12pm on the South West Solar Transformation Initiative Project. No comments or questions. OTHER ITEMS 16. Director Items Terri King reported that her staff was on a call regarding the performance indicator studies (SANDAG). The call alarmed the smaller and medium size MPOs and she was concerned about implications of this study and the state wide impact it might have. Terri King sent an e-mail with staff providing a synopsis of the concerns that were expressed. Terri King requested to take an approach to caution the use of these indicators statewide that it doesn’t apply to smaller or medium size MPOs or agencies and we might be held accountable to some of these larger agencies scope since we don’t have the data available and would be impossible to utilize. Terri King cautioned if this goes before the CTC to present statewide it would be difficult. So if we wanted to provide any comments to either CTC or whoever is responsible we might want to consider that. Andy Chesley reported that this was brought up at the CALCOG meeting and stated that it was clear in that there are some limitations the way it could be applied in rural or small urban areas. Andy Chesley stated that teaming up with her

8

(Deanna from a rural county) comments and working through CALCOG would be a good approach. Another concern brought up was that you can’t solve every problem in the State of California. A conversation ensued regarding who they should present their concerns to with the consensus being San Diego (who is the lead) and CC the Strategic Growth Council and CALCOG. Terri King reported that Michael Sigala sent an email regarding SCS overview and any comments should be submitted by next Wednesday. Andy Chesley reported they would be meeting with MTC and ABAG in a few weeks concerning MTC hiring a Goods Movement Coordinator. Andy Chesley offers to use their experience in Goods Movement to facilitate their process and work with them. On another matter Andy Chesley was contacted by Bill Higgins concerning the Air Resources Board staff requests to formally join their Regional Targets Advisory Committee and MPO representatives to talk about the next four years regarding targets. Andy Chesley and Bill Higgins sensed that ARB staff does not want to work with our existing targets. Andy was invited to attend and will keep the group apprised of what occurs. Diane Nguyen reported that San Joaquin COG is hosting the Fall Policy Conference. Diane Nguyen’s objective was to confirm a date for the Fall Policy Conference. Diane Nguyen stated the conference is usually held during the month of October/November for a period of two days. Diane circulated an October calendar with possible dates to select from. The consensus among the Directors because of other meeting constraints and conferences was to hold the Fall Policy Conference on the 10th and 11th of October. Tony Boren reported on two items: first their board had a discussion on the SANDAG lawsuit and will be inviting SANDAG staff to present to their board and share their experience. Second, Tony Boren highlighted AB 1290 which he believes has the potential to directly impact all of us that basically brings the SCS to into the CTC program process. CALCOG originally took an opposition but are reconsidering. A conversation ensued regarding an opposition to the bill and the consensus was to voice their opposition to Bill Higgins. Andrew Chesley motioned that the Directors send a letter stating their opposition toward the bill listing their concerns/opposition to Bill Higgins, seconded by Tony Boren. Motion carried. Ben Kimball reported that Genesee & Wyoming purchased Rail America. They had a meeting in Tulare County with Vice President of Genesee &Wyoming informing us that they wanted to see the rail expand and businesses grow. To demonstrate their resolve they terminated their regional manager which was seen as a positive shift for rail. 17. Public Presentations for Items Not on Agenda. No comments or questions.

Meeting adjourned at 12:34 p.m.

Next Directors Meeting: Tuesday, July 2, 2013 (Hanford/Lemoore)

9

Appendix A: List of Others Attending

Mat Fell, MCAG Diane Nyguen, SJ COG Rosa Park, Stan COG Mike Costa, Stan COG Arthur Chen, Stan COG Ben Kimball, TCAG Lezlie Kimura, Air Resources Board Bobby Pentorali, High Speed Rail Carrie Bowen, Caltrans, District 10 Sharri Bender Ehlert, Caltrans, District 6 Christine Cox, Caltrans, Central Region Environmental Division Gail Miller, Caltrans, District 6 Michael Fisher, Cambridge Systematics Cari Anderson, Valleywide Air Quality Coordinator Michael Sigala, Valleywide Coordinator for MPOs Jose Ramirez, Sigala Inc. Rachel Audino, CA Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley Mike Wells, Fresno Metro Ministry On the phone: Mike Bitner, Fresno COG Lauren Dawson, Fresno COG Derek Winning, MCTC Jeff Findley, MCTC Aaron Hoyt, SJ COG Tom Jordan, San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Stacie Dabbs, CA Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley Elizabeth Jonasson, CA for Clean Air Alley Fiori, MIG Nate Ross, Information Center for the Environment, UC Davis John Mason, High Speed Rail Authority (Sacramento) Lakeda Huckabay, High Speed Rail Authority (Sacramento) Carrie Kenworth, CR Business

Approved  6/21/13  1  

 

San Joaquin Valley Regional Policy Council 2013 Federal Legislative Platform

INTRODUCTION The San Joaquin Valley Regional Transportation Planning Agencies include the San Joaquin Council of Governments, Stanislaus Council of Governments, Merced County Association of Governments, Madera County Transportation Commission, Fresno Council of Governments, Kings County Association of Governments, Tulare County Association of Governments, and Kern Council of Governments. In 2006, the San Joaquin Valley Regional Planning Agencies expanded their Memorandum of Understanding to form a Regional Policy Council, comprised of two elected officials from each of the eight Valley counties, to discuss and build consensus on issues of Valleywide importance. The Regional Policy Council, in coordination with the San Joaquin Valley Regional Transportation Planning Agencies, has established a San Joaquin Valley Legislative Platform that reflects the Regional Policy Council’s priorities in Federal legislative matters. The Legislative Platform provides guidance to the eight Valley Regional Transportation Planning Agencies and their lobbying partners when taking action on specific legislative proposals. The platform is intended to provide a unified voice when communicating legislative issues of regional importance to the Valley’s Federal legislative delegation as well as relevant Federal agencies. GENERAL PRINCIPLES • Protect and enhance current Federal funding levels for transportation related

programs. • Continue to advocate as a region to advance common goals for improvements in

Federal legislation and policies. VALLEY VOICE ADVOCACY EFFORTS • Continue to pursue State and Federal support for the projects and legislative

priorities identified through the Regional Policy Council’s advocacy program called, “Valley Voice”.

2013 LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES Goods Movement • Continue to protect and solicit funding for Highway 99, a major trade corridor in the

San Joaquin Valley, and other regionally significant corridors.

ITEM  7  

Approved  6/21/13  2  

 

MAP-21 Implementation • Consider potential impacts of the “Buy America” requirement to avoid unintended

consequences that are creating significant risks and administrative burdens to state and local government transportation projects.

Future Federal Transportation Reauthorization Bill • Support reauthorization of Federal Transportation Bill identifying long-term funding

sources for all modes of transportation. • Support inclusion and funding for the Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ)

Program. • Maintain current MPO population threshold. Air Quality • Support Air and Health Quality Empowerment Zone designation to provide new

incentive funding and tax incentives to address impacts of nonattainment of federally mandated air quality standards in the San Joaquin Valley.

San Joaquin Valley Regional

Planning Agencies’ Directors’ Committee

INFORMATIONAL ITEMS – JULY 2, 2013

8. High Speed Rail D. Gomez Diana Gomez, Central Valley Regional Director, or her representative may be in attendance to provide an update and answer any questions. 9. Caltrans Directors Report C. Bowen / S. Ehlert Carrie Bowen, District 10 Director, and Sharri Ehlert, District 6 Director, or their representatives may be in attendance to provide an update and answer any questions. 10. Interregional Goods Movement Plan M. Sigala The San Joaquin Valley Interregional Goods Movement Plan is entering month 25 and is approximately 95 percent complete. To date, Phase One (tasks one thru six) including: Economic and Demographic Profile, Importance of Goods Movement in the Valley, Commodity Flow Profile, Commodity Growth Profile, Industry Profiles, and The Community, Environmental, and Economic Impacts of Freight Movement segments of the report have been completed as well as an identification of the final project list and numerous stakeholder engagements. Phase Two and Three (tasks seven thru nine) of the Plan are: Identify and Evaluate Strategies for Improving Freight Mobility (task 7), Identify Strategies for Mitigating the Effect of Goods Movement on Local Communities and the Environment (task 8), and the Final Report including Institutional/Funding Arrangements Needed to Implement the Plan, and Executive Summary (task 9). Tasks 7 and 8 are complete. The Final Report and Final Executive Summary are in draft form and will be finalized by the end of July 2013. The next monthly meeting of the Technical Working Group will be on Thursday, July 18, 2013 at 10 am. All relevant information for this planning effort can be found at: http://www.sjvcogs.org/goods.html 11. SJV Rail Authority (SB 325) T. Smalley Ted Smalley (TCAG) will be available to answer any questions. 12. Proposition 84/Blueprint R. Terry (Prop 84 Round 1) Blueprint Integration (BPI) outreach and circuit planning activities to the 46 valley cities with populations under 50,000 has recently concluded. 40 of the 46 cities have coordinated assistance efforts with their respective circuit planning team, with the six electing not to participate doing so based upon their lack of staffing and/or project needs. Attached for your reference is a project description and matrix of deliverables. All cities participating received their final deliverables in the month of April, with follow-up and project close-out activities taking place in the months of May and June. Each agency has received a letter from the project management team seeking their feedback and ensuring their project needs have been addressed. If you are aware of any of your

San Joaquin Valley Regional

Planning Agencies’ Directors’ Committee

INFORMATIONAL ITEMS – JULY 2, 2013

local member agencies that have not returned the feedback letters, please encourage them to do so at their earliest convenience. SEE ATTACHMENT FOR MORE INFO. (Blueprint) In conjunction with representatives from SACOG and the Local Government Commission, remaining Blueprint balances at all of the eight Valley COGs/RTPAs have been combined to provide for training on the fiscal impact analysis tool IMPACS (created by SACOG as part of their Urban Footprint Model). Various trainings and webinars have been provided in conjunction with these activities, with additional discussions and presentations planned for the future. Beginning next fiscal year, the training activities formerly associated with the Blueprint will now be provided as part of the on-going Valley Planner’s Network. For any questions regarding the above notated items, please contact Rob Terry at (559) 233-4148 Ext. 222 or via email at rterry@fresnocog.org. 13. San Joaquin Valley Greenprint C. Thompson Clark Thompson (Fresno COG) may be in attendance to provide an update and answer any questions. 14. CA Partnership for the SJV R. Audino New Board Members for California Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley The Governor's office recently announced eight new appointments to the California Partnership's board of directors: Monica Blanco-Etheridge, California Workforce Investment Board Genoveva Islas-Hooker, Central California Regional Obesity Prevention Program Dorothy Leland, Chancellor, UC Merced Billy Powell, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Mary Renner, Central Valley Health Network Max Rodriguez, Madera County Board of Supervisors Luisa Medina, Central California Legal Services Inc (reappointed) Dorene D'Adamo - California State Water Resources Control Board (reappointed) RICO II Grant OCED received a $158,013 grant from the California Workforce Investment Board for a Regional Industry Cluster of Opportunity II (RICO II) grant. Through this grant, OCED will leverage existing partnerships in Kern County to support the expansion of an ecosystem that will support the emergence of an innovative, regional Alternative and Renewable Fuel and Vehicle Technology (ARFVT) Industry Cluster in the San Joaquin Valley. Highlighting the workforce infrastructure already established by the Kern Community College District’s Clean Energy Center and Workplace Learning Resource Center, OCED will facilitate a process to replicate similar training programs between Workforce Investment Boards and Community Colleges in other counties of the San Joaquin Valley. Smart Valley Places CEC Meeting Sept 19, 2013 10am-12pm Clovis Council Chambers

San Joaquin Valley Regional

Planning Agencies’ Directors’ Committee

INFORMATIONAL ITEMS – JULY 2, 2013

Smart Valley Places Convention November 5, 2013 Visalia Convention Center 15. Regional Energy Planning M. Sigala The next valleywide Regional Energy and Economic Development meeting will occur in August 2013, location TBD. We are in discussions with the San Joaquin Valley Clean Energy Organization (SJV CEO) to more formally collaborative on valleywide meetings and activities related to energy and economic development. Michael Sigala is working with Courtney Kalashian on this and will bring a proposal concept back to the Directors’ Committee in August or September 2013.

June  26,  2013  

Meeting Dates & Locations

Fiscal Year 2013 – 2014

All Meetings are on Thursdays at 10am unless noted

DATE

LOCATION

JULY 2, 2013 (Tuesday) LEMOORE (Kings)

AUGUST 1, 2013 FRESNO

SEPTEMBER 5, 2013 MADERA

OCTOBER 9, 2013 (Wed) STOCKTON (San Joaquin)

NOVEMBER 7, 2013 FRESNO

DECEMBER 5, 2013 BAKERSFIELD (Kern)

JANUARY 2, 2014 VISALIA (Tulare)

FEBRUARY 6, 2014 FRESNO

MARCH 6, 2014 MODESTO (Stanislaus)

APRIL 3, 2014 MERCED

MAY 1, 2014 FRESNO

JUNE 5, 2014 MADERA

San  Joaquin  Valley  Regional  Planning  Agencies’  Directors’  Committee  

 

S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

7 8 9 10 11 12 13 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 8 9 10 11 12 13 1414 15 16 17 18 19 20 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 15 16 17 12 13 20 2121 22 23 24 25 26 27 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 22 23 24 25 26 27 2828 29 30 31 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 29 30

S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S1 2 3 4 5 1 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

6 7 8 9 10 11 12 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 8 9 10 11 6 13 1413 14 15 16 17 18 19 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 15 16 17 18 19 20 2120 21 22 23 24 25 26 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 22 23 24 25 26 27 2827 28 29 30 31 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 29 30 31

S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S1 2 3 4 1 1

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 2 3 4 5 6 7 812 13 14 15 16 17 18 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 9 10 11 12 13 14 1519 20 21 22 23 24 25 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 16 17 18 19 20 21 2226 27 28 29 30 23 24 25 26 27 28 23 24 25 26 27 28 29

30 31

S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

6 7 8 9 10 11 12 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 8 9 10 11 12 13 1413 14 15 16 17 18 19 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 15 16 17 18 19 20 2120 21 22 23 24 25 26 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 22 23 24 25 26 27 2827 28 29 30 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 29 30

= Executive  Directors'  Committee  Meetings= Washington  DC  Valley  Voice  (Sep  11  &  12,  2013)= Policy  Council  Meetings  (Oct  11,  Dec  13,  March  21  &  June  20)

= Fall  Policy  Conference  (October  10  &  11  2013)= Sacramento  Valley  Voice  (March  2014,  dates  tbd)

Version:  June  26,  2013

April May June

July August

2014January February March

San  Joaquin  Valley  Regional  Policy  Council  (&  RPA  Directors'  Comm.)

2013

Meeting  Calendar  FY  2013-­‐2014

September

October November December

July  2  -­‐  Lemoore  Aug  1  -­‐  Fresno  Sep  5  -­‐  Madera  Oct  9  -­‐  Stockton  Nov  7  -­‐  Fresno  Dec  5  -­‐  Bakersfield  Jan  2  -­‐  Visalia  Feb  6  -­‐  Fresno  Mar  6  -­‐  Modesto  April  3  -­‐  Merced  May  1  -­‐  Fresno  June  5  -­‐  Madera  

 

!!