I'd like to call to order this meeting of the Sacramento Transportation Authority Board of Directors to order for Thursday, June 12, 2025.

Madam Clerk, please call the roll and establish a quorum.

Good afternoon, Directors Desmond, Dickinson, Guetta, Hume, Kennedy, Kent, Maple, Rayful, Rodriguez,

Here, Singhalin, Here, Spice, Here, Vang, Here, and Chair Serna, Here.

We do have a quorum.

May I please read our statement?

This meeting of the Sacramento Transportation Authority is live and recorded with closed captioning.

It is cable cast on Metro Cable 14, the local government affairs channel, on the Comcast and DirecTV U-verse cable systems.

It is also live streamed at metro14live.satcounty.gov.

Today's meeting will be placed Sunday, June 15th at 2 p.m. on Metro Cable Channel 14.

Once posted, the recording of this meeting can be viewed on demand at youtube.com slash metro cable 14.

To make an in-person public comment, please complete a speaker request form and hand it to the Clerk.

The Chairperson will call your name when it's your turn to make a comment.

You may send written comments by email to boardclerk at satcounty.gov.

Your comment will be routed to the Board and filed in the record.

Great. Thank you.

If you can please rise and join me in the pledge.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands,

one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Hey, lady. How are you?

Good to see you.

Good to see you.

Okay.

Madam Clerk, would you please call our first item?

The first item is comments from the public regarding matters not on the agenda.

Do we have anyone sign up to speak?

I do not have any comment cards.

Okay, very good.

Next item, please.

Next item is our consent calendar, items number two through eight.

Okay.

Any member of the authority board wish to pull item for separate consideration, comment,

more vote?

Move approval, Mr. Chair.

Okay.

It's been moved.

Second.

It's been moved and seconded.

Madam Clerk, do we have anyone sign up to speak on consent?

We do not.

Okay.

We have a motion and a second.

Do we have to do a voice vote?

We can vote on the screens every one sign name.

Okay.

Please vote.

And Director Maple?

Where'd she go?

She went.

She went.

She went.

Yes.

What did those vote for?

You did any assembly.

And that vote does pass unanimously with those members present.

Okay.

Next item, please.

Next item on the agenda is item number nine.

It's to adopt the Sacramento Transportation Authority final budget for fiscal 2025-2026.

Who's starting?

Okay.

Hello.

Good afternoon, Chair, Vice Chair, and Board of Directors.

I'm Dustin Purinton, the accounting manager with STA.

I'm here to present the final to be approved 2026 budget.

So we wanted to summarize a couple of the key updates and decisions in the 2026 budget,

focusing on the changes since you saw the draft in May last month.

So the appropriations limit has been updated according to law.

The timing on the release of that's after the budget draft comes to the board.

And that new appropriations limit is $392.4 million.

That was item five on the consent calendar today.

The total appropriations for this budget is $228.9 million, well under the appropriations limit.

So there's also a new budget allocation in here.

Since the draft had come to the board, it is an $80,000 education and community listening session allocation.

And the purpose of this is to assess and communicate the need for future transportation measure

as determined by the new funding subcommittee that some of you are on.

And we also have updated the communication specialist position.

It's still included in the budget, but there are a couple of contingent pieces in there.

The board chair needs to approve it.

And it is subject to further subcommittee discussion before that is approved.

And the role of this position is to support public education and outreach for measure A and future potential measures.

So in closing, I'd like to say that this budget reflects financial prudence and strategic investment in engagement and education.

And a moment for any questions on what's before you.

All right. Thank you, Dustin.

Any questions for staff?

Seeing none.

Madam Clerk, do you have anyone signed up to address this matter?

Madam Chair.

Okay.

All right.

If there's no comment from board members, no questions, been moved.

Second.

Been moved and seconded.

Please vote.

We don't have everyone signed in, so can we take a roll call vote?

Sure.

Desmond?

Aye.

Dickinson?

Aye.

Guetta?

Aye.

Hume?

Aye.

Kennedy?

Aye.

Kent?

Aye.

Maple?

Aye.

Nelson?

Aye.

Rathel?

Aye.

Rodriguez?

Aye.

Sing Allen?

Aye.

Spies?

Aye.

Talamantes?

Aye.

Vang?

Yes.

And Chair Serna?

Aye.

Thank you.

All right.

Motion carries.

Thank you.

Next item, please.

Item number 10 is to receive an introductory presentation on the development of a countywide vehicle

miles traveled strategy.

1,000kids riding speed.

0,000kids.

Go on quick.

Item 10.

Okay.

So, item 10 is a presentation by Pharaoh Piers for a countywide VMT strategy.

AND WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT

WHAT IS SP7043 AND SQUAL AND

HOW IT RELATES TO VMT AND HOW

IT'S GOING TO LOOK AT IN THE

FUTURE WHAT IS POTENTIALLY

POSSIBLE.

AGENDA-WISE WE'RE GOING TO TALK

ABOUT BACKGROUND AND METHODS

THEN THRESHOLD AND MITIGATION

AND THEN AFTER THIS SLIDE I'M

GOING TO HAND IT OFF TO RON

MILAN WITH FERRON PEERS WHO

WILL DO THE REMAINING OF THE

PRESENTATION BUT WHY ARE WE

HERE?

WHAT'S THE POINT OF THIS

PRESENTATION?

WE THINK THAT VMT

MITIGATION IS A NEW REQUIREMENT

FOR PROJECTS UNDER CEQA.

IT IS A SUBSTANTIAL COST TO

THOSE ESPECIALLY WHEN IT'S A

ROADWAY CAPACITY PROJECT AND IT

IS OFTEN VERY CHALLENGING FOR

LOCAL AGENCIES TO DELIVER THOSE

PROJECTS GET THROUGH THE CEQA

PROCESS WHEN THEY HAVE TO SORT

OF IDENTIFY A VARIETY OF VMT

MITIGATION FOR THEIR PROJECT.

COST EFFECTIVE VMT MITIGATION

IS REALLY DIFFICULT TO FIND.

AND THEN TO IMPLEMENT.

SO WE SEE THERE'S A LOT OF

CHALLENGES WITH THIS AS WE MOVE

FORWARD WITH SOME OF OUR

PROJECTS.

THERE'S POTENTIALLY SOME

OPPORTUNITIES HERE.

SO A COUNTY WIDE APPROACH COULD

STREAMLINE SOME OF THAT

IDENTIFICATION OF VMT

MITIGATION, ALLOW PROJECTS TO

GET THROUGH CEQA QUICKER, AND

IT WILL ALLOW US TO POTENTIALLY

REDIRED SOME OF THOSE VMT

MITIGATION FUNDS INTO SOME HIGH

PRIORITY PROJECTS AS WELL.

SO THAT'S THE OPPORTUNITY SIDE.

SO FOR THIS PRESENTATION, WE'RE

GOING TO HAVE RON MYLAM WALK US

THROUGH THE 101 ON THIS PARTICULAR

TOPIC.

THANK YOU, KEVIN.

IT'S A PLEASURE TO BE HERE TODAY

TO SHARE A FEW THOUGHTS AND

INSIGHTS ABOUT SB 743 AND ITS

IMPLEMENTATION.

AND I LIKE THE WAY KEVIN FRAMED

IT IN TERMS OF THERE ARE SOME

REAL OPPORTUNITIES FOR AN AGENCY

LIKE STAA BECAUSE OF THE TYPES

OF PROJECTS THAT YOU DELIVER.

SOME OF THOSE PROJECTS DO

INVOLVE POTENTIALLY ADDING

CAPACITY TO THE ROADWAY SYSTEM

THAT COULD INDUCE VMT, BUT

OTHERS, YOUR ACTIVE

TRANSPORTATIONS, YOUR

ACTIVE TRANSPORTATIONS,

AND THOSE PROJECTS, AND

TRANSPORTATIONS, AND THOSE

PROJECTS DO INVOLVE POTENTIALLY

ADDING CAPACITY TO THE ROADWAY

SYSTEM THAT COULD INDUCE VMT,

BUT OTHERS, YOUR ACTIVE

TRANSPORTATION AND TRANSIT

PROJECTS, CAN ACTUALLY REDUCE

VMT AND QUALIFY AS

MITIGATION MEASURES IN AND OF

THEMSELVES FOR OTHER PROJECTS.

BUT TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT

MORE BACKGROUND ABOUT 743 AND

KIND OF HOW IT EVOLVED, HOW WE

GOT HERE AND KIND OF WHAT'S

NEXT WITH RESPECT TO THE

MITIGATION, WANTED TO START

WITH SOMETHING REALLY SIMPLE.

THE VMT IN ITS MOST BASIC

FORM IS A VERY SIMPLE METRIC.

IT ONLY INVOLVES TWO VARIABLES.

BASICALLY THE NUMBER OF VEHICLE

TRIPS MULTIPLIED BY THE LENGTH

OF THOSE TRIPS.

SO IF YOU HAD JUST ONE VEHICLE

TRIP GOING ONE MILE, WE GOT

ONE VMT.

PRETTY SIMPLE.

FOUR VEHICLE TRIPS GOING 10

MILES, WE HAVE 40 VMT.

THAT'S WHERE THE SIMPLICITY

STOPS, THOUGH.

WE END UP IN PRACTICE HAVING

NINE DIFFERENT METRIC

VERSIONS THAT WE MIGHT USE IN

TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS DEPENDING

ON WHY WE'RE ANALYZING VMT.

CAN I STOP YOU REAL QUICK?

YES.

SO JUST ROLL BACK A FEW SECONDS

TO THE SIMPLICITY PART.

THIS IS HUGELY IMPORTANT, AT

LEAST IT IS TO ME.

THAT, AND I THINK IT'S ONE OF

THE FUNDAMENTAL SHORTCOMINGS OF

ANY STATUTE QUITE FRANKLY THAT

USES VMT AS A KIND OF A SURROGATE

METRIC FOR GREENHOUSE GAS

EMISSIONS.

BECAUSE WHAT YOU'RE SHOWING US

HERE AND WHAT YOU'RE TELLING US

HERE IS THAT THIS HAS NOTHING TO

DO WITH GREENHOUSE GAS

EMISSIONS.

THIS HAS EVERYTHING TO DO WITH

HOW FAR A VEHICLE TRAVELS.

YOU'RE ON THE RIGHT TRACK.

THAT WITH RESPECT.

NO, IT IS THE RIGHT TRACK.

SHOW ME ON YOUR SLIDE WHERE IT

HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH GREENHOUSE

GAS EMISSIONS.

WHEN YOU TRAVEL ONE MILE IN A

VEHICLE.

THAT'S YOU'RE MAKING A CONNECTION

THAT IS NOT PART OF THE

SIMPLICITY THAT YOU JUST GOT

DONE EXPLAINING.

THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING.

SO WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT WHAT

POWERS THE VEHICLE, THAT'S

WHERE THE GREENHOUSE GASES

POTENTIALLY COME FROM, WHETHER

IT'S GAS OR ELECTRICITY.

THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING.

WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT WHAT

POWERS THE VEHICLE, THAT'S

WHERE THE GREENHOUSE GASES

POTENTIALLY COME FROM,

WHETHER IT'S GAS OR ELECTRICITY.

BUT WHAT YOU'RE PROBABLY GETTING

TO IS THE FACT THAT THE WAY THE

LAW WAS PASSED, IT IGNORES WHAT

POWERS THE VEHICLE.

IT TREATS ALL VMT EXACTLY THE

SAME.

WHICH DOES HAVE IMPLICATIONS FOR

MITIGATION.

SO THINGS THAT MIGHT REDUCE

THE EMISSIONS FROM A VEHICLE

AREN'T RELEVANT FOR 743.

THEY ARE REALLY TRYING TO

REDUCE HOW MUCH PEOPLE ARE

DRIVING.

NO, I UNDERSTAND THAT.

BUT I KNOW THAT WE'RE

TALKING ABOUT MORE IN THAT

CONTEXT.

BUT LIKE FOR INSTANCE IN THE

CONTEXT OF 375, IT IS VERY, VERY

RELEVANT AND THAT'S WHY I THINK

PERHAPS AT ONE POINT SB 375 WAS

UNDERSTANDABLE IN TERMS OF MAKING

THAT LEAP FROM HOW FAR A VEHICLE

TRAVELS, RIGHT, AND USING THAT AS

A SURROGATE FOR THE RELEASE OF

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS INTO OUR

ATMOSPHERE.

HOWEVER, SINCE SB 375 HAS BEEN

PASSED AND IMPLEMENTED, AND I'M

SPEAKING FROM EXPERIENCE AS A

FORMER CARD MEMBER TOO, THAT THE

MARKET FOR ZERO EMISSION VEHICLES

HAS EXPANDED SIGNIFICANTLY.

AND IS EXPECTED TO, AND IN FACT

BY LAW HAS TO, AT LEAST IN

CALIFORNIA, AT LEAST FOR THE TIME

BEING.

I KNOW THERE'S A COURT CASE.

SO THAT'S WHY I WANTED TO KIND OF

STOP YOU HERE AND JUST MAKE SURE

THAT WE ARE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE IN

TERMS OF UNDERSTANDING THAT IN

TERMS OF ITS MEASUREMENT, WHETHER

IT'S FOR SB 375 OR OTHERS, THAT

WHEN IT COMES TO GREENHOUSE

LEGISLATIVE, IT'S MEASUREMENT

CONNECTION, IT HAS SOME SERIOUS

SHORT COMINGS.

ESPECIALLY AS IT RELATES TO OUR

GAS TAX TOO, BY THE WAY.

YEAH, AND SO THAT'S WHY I WAS

MENTIONING WE HAVE NINE DIFFERENT

FORMS OF THE METRIC THAT WE USE

IN PRACTICE.

SOMETIMES WE ANALYZE VMT FOR

GREENHOUSE GASES, SOMETIMES WE

DO IT FOR AIR POLLUTANTS, SOMETIMES

WE DO IT FOR TRANSPORTATION

PURPOSES, SOMETIMES WE DO IT FOR

LAND USE PLANNING PURPOSES.

THE GRAPHIC HERE THAT SHOWS THE

GREEN ROADS AND THE GRAY ROADS IS

AN EXAMPLE OF HOW WE USE VMT FOR

AIR POLLUTION ANALYSIS.

WHERE THE VMT IS GENERATED AND

BY WHAT TYPES OF VEHICLES DETERMINES

HOW MUCH FUEL IS BURNED AND HOW

MUCH EMISSIONS SHOW UP WITHIN

THE GREEN AREA.

SO FOR AIR POLLUTANTS NEAR

SENSITIVE RECEPTORS WE MEASURE IT

ONE WAY, IF WE'RE DOING IT FOR

GREENHOUSE GASES OR FOR OTHER

PURPOSES WE'LL DO IT A DIFFERENT

WAY.

SO EVEN THOUGH IT'S A SIMPLE METRIC,

TWO VARIABLES, IT CAN GET

COMPLEX VERY QUICKLY AS THE

DISCUSSION JUST ALLUDED TO.

IN TERMS OF HOW WE GOT HERE, THE

CHAIR HAS ALREADY GIVEN US A

PRETTY GOOD IDEA THAT THERE IS A

CONNECTION HERE TO GREENHOUSE

GASES.

IN FACT, I'LL GO ALL THE WAY BACK

TO ASSEMBLY BILL 32, AB 32, 2006.

IT WAS WHEN THE STATE FIRST

STARTED TO PASS LEGISLATION

CONNECTED TO GREENHOUSE GASES AND

THE DESIRE TO REDUCE THEM.

SB 97 ON ITS HEELS INTRODUCED

GREENHOUSE GASES TO CEQA FOR THE

FIRST TIME.

IT WAS THE FIRST TIME THE STATE

BASICALLY INTRODUCED A DIRECT

METRIC INTO CEQA.

THEY DIDN'T TELL US HOW TO

MEASURE IT, THEY DIDN'T TELL US

WHAT THE THRESHOLD WAS AND THEY

DIDN'T TELL US HOW TO MITIGATE

IT, BUT THEY TOLD US WE HAD TO

ANALYZE IT.

FAST FORWARD TO SB 375, REDUCING

VMT AND GREENHOUSE GASES FROM

THE LAND USE AND TRAINING

TO MEASURE IT, THEY DIDN'T

TELL US HOW TO MEASURE IT,

THEY DIDN'T TELL US WHAT THE

THRESHOLD WAS AND THEY DIDN'T

TELL US HOW TO MITIGATE IT, BUT

THEY TOLD US WE HAD TO ANALYZE

IT.

FAST FORWARD TO SB 375, REDUCING

VMT AND GREENHOUSE GASES FROM

THE LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION

SECTOR IS VERY CHALLENGING.

MPOs WERE TASKED WITH THAT

RESPONSIBILITY AND ARB DOES A

GOOD JOB OF TRACKING THAT.

YOU CAN GO TO A WEBSITE SB 150

WHERE THEY TRACK THE

PERFORMANCE OF HOW THE MPOs HAVE

DONE OVER TIME AND IT

ACTUALLY SHOWS UNFORTUNATELY

THAT VMT AND GREENHOUSE GAS PER

CAPIT IN THE STATE HAS

CONTINUED TO INCREASE.

SO NOW WE HAVE 743.

THIS IS A MORE DIRECT EFFECT TO

REDUCE ACTUAL VEHICLE TRAVEL

REGARDLESS OF WHAT POWERS THE

CAR.

AND SO IT IS A PROXY FOR A LOT

OF OTHER POTENTIAL IMPACTS.

WE'VE TALKED ABOUT GREENHOUSE

GASES, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT AIR

POLLUTION.

SAFETY IS ANOTHER ONE.

THE MORE PEOPLE DRIVE THE MORE

RISK THEY HAVE OF POTENTIALLY

BEING EXPOSED TO A COLLISION.

SO VMT AS A METRIC IN SEQUA

DOES MEASURE THE IMPACT OF

DRIVING.

BUT IT TENDS TO BE A PROXY FOR

LOTS OF OTHER THINGS.

AND THAT'S HOW IT GETS USED BY

US PRACTITIONERS.

WITH RESPECT TO WHAT DID THE

LEGISLATURE EXPECT WHEN THEY

PASSED THIS, THERE'S THE

OBVIOUS CONNECTION TO REDUCING

GREENHOUSE GASES.

THIS COMES FROM THE LEGISLATIVE

INTENT OF THE LAW.

BUT THERE'S TWO MORE I WANT TO

HIGHLIGHT.

ONE IS THE PROMOTION OF

BASICALLY ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION

TO IMPROVE PUBLIC HEALTH.

AND THEN ENCOURAGING INFILL

DEVELOPMENT.

SO WHEN WE THINK ABOUT 743,

WE'RE SUPPOSED TO THINK ABOUT

ALL THREE OF THESE OUTCOMES WHEN

WE MAKE DECISIONS ABOUT WHAT

METRICS TO USE, WHAT METHODOLOGY,

AND FRANKLY WHAT TYPE OF

MITIGATION MEASURES ARE GOING TO

BE MOST EFFECTIVE.

THAT TAKES US TOWARDS THE MORE

DIFFICULT PARTS OF

IMPLEMENTING 743, THRESHOLD

AND MITIGATION.

SO WHAT CONSTITUTES A

SIGNIFICANT IMPACT?

UNDER THE CALIFORNIA

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT,

UNDER CEQA, WE HAVE TO USE

THRESHOLD TO HELP US DETERMINE

WHEN A CHANGE IN THE ENVIRONMENT

IS SIGNIFICANT.

AND IN MY SIMPLE TERMS,

THIS IS WHERE WE HAVE TO DECIDE

WHAT'S GOOD VMT VERSUS BAD VMT.

IT'S PROBABLY THE MOST DIFFICULT

DECISION THAT LEAD AGENCIES

STRUGGLE WITH.

BECAUSE WITHIN THE BUILT

ENVIRONMENT OF CALIFORNIA,

WE HAVE URBAN AREAS, RURAL AREAS,

SUBURBAN AREAS.

WE HAVE A LOT OF PLACES WHERE

THE DISTANCES BETWEEN HOMES,

JOBS, SCHOOLS, EDUCATION,

OPPORTUNITIES, THERE'S RELATIVELY

LONG DISTANCES.

AND SO THERE'S A CERTAIN AMOUNT

OF DRIVING THAT TYPICALLY IS

REQUIRED IF YOU'RE GOING TO

FULLY PARTICIPATE IN THE ECONOMY

AND SOCIETY, OBTAIN HEALTHCARE,

OBTAIN GROCERIES.

AND SO THE...

BACK, OKAY.

SO WHEN YOU'RE ESTABLISHING

THRESHOLDS, THE WAY CEQA

WORKS IS EACH LEAD AGENCY,

CITY, COUNTY, CALTRANS, AERB,

HAS THE DISCRETION TO PICK

THEIR OWN THRESHOLD.

THE STATE HAS MADE

RECOMMENDATIONS LARGELY TIED

TO GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION.

THEY DID NOT CONNECT THOSE

THRESHOLDS DIRECTLY TO INFIL

HOUSING OR PROMOTING ACTIVE

TRANSPORTATION.

THEY WERE TIED EXCLUSIVELY TO

GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION GOALS.

SO WHAT INDIVIDUAL CITIES,

COUNTIES, AND CALTRANS HAVE

DONE IS THEY'VE DONE THEIR OWN

ANALYSIS TO FIGURE OUT WHERE

TO DRAW THESE THRESHOLDS.

AND THEY'RE NOT ALL THE SAME.

IT VARIES BY JURISDICTION

DEPENDENT ON HOW THEY VALUE

VMT REDUCTION VERSUS ALL THE

OTHER OBJECTIVE THEY MIGHT HAVE

IN TERMS OF ACCOMMODATING

FUTURE GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT,

AND ECONOMIC ACTIVITY.

SO ONCE WE'VE FIGURE OUT THE

THRESHOLDS, WE THEN HAVE

IMPACTS TYPICALLY.

AND WE'VE GOT TO MITIGATE

THOSE IMPACTS.

AND ONE OF THE THINGS ABOUT

VMT IMPACTS AND WHY WE DRIVE

SO MUCH IS WHAT I SAID EARLIER.

THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT IS

BASICALLY FORCED DISTANCES TO

BE PRETTY LONG BETWEEN OUR

ORIGINS OF TRIPS AND OUR

DESTINATIONS OF TRIPS.

AND SOME OF THE BIG FACTORS

THAT REALLY INFLUENCE THIS, WE

REFER TO THEM COMMONLY AS THE

D'S, THESE ARE VARIABLES,

THINGS LIKE THE DENSITY OF

POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT.

THE CLOSER PEOPLE ARE LIVING

TOWARDS THEIR DESTINATIONS,

THE SHORTER THE TRIPS, THE

MORE LIKELY YOU COULD WALK OR

BIKE OR TAKE TRANSIT.

AS YOU IMPROVE THE DENSITY AND

GET PEOPLE CLOSER TOGETHER, IF

YOU HAVE A SUPPORTIVE NETWORK,

SO WALKING, BICYCLING IS

CONVENIENT, TRANSIT IS

EFFECTIVE, OR IF YOU DO HAVE

TO DRIVE, THE DISTANCES SHORT.

THESE ARE ALL THESE PHYSICAL

FORMS OF OUR DEVELOPMENT THAT

MAKE A REAL DIFFERENCE.

AT THE VERY BOTTOM OF THE LIST

IS DEMAND MANAGEMENT.

SO YOU MAY HAVE HEARD OF

TRANSPORTATION DEMAND

MANAGEMENT, TDM AS AN

ACRONYM.

THAT'S WHERE YOU'RE USING

INCENTIVES OR DISINCENTIVES

TO TRY AND CHANGE INDIVIDUAL

BEHAVIOR.

AND THE CHALLENGE WITH THESE

DIFFERENT D VARIABLES IS IF

YOU THINK OF THEM AS A

PYRAMID, THE BASIS OF OUR

COMMUNITIES AND OUR REGIONS ARE

ALL IN THAT PHYSICAL

DEVELOPMENT.

THAT'S WHERE YOU HAVE THE

BIGGEST EFFECT ON HOW MUCH WE

NEED TO TRAVEL BY VEHICLES.

SO YOUR REGIONAL

INFRASTRUCTURE, YOUR REGIONAL

POLICIES, AND THAT LOCATION

EFFICIENCY OF OUR LAND USES IS

THE BIGGEST EFFECT.

THAT'S WHAT WE'D LIKE TO CHANGE

IF YOU'RE TRYING TO REDUCE HOW

MUCH PEOPLE NEED TO DRIVE.

AT THE VERY TOP OF THE

PYRAMID IS WHERE WE'RE LEAST

EFFECTIVE.

WE CALL THAT BUILDING

OPERATIONS OR TDM.

PICTURE AN OFFICE BUILDING

WHERE YOU'RE OFFERING THE

TENANTS OF THE BUILDING,

TRANSIT PASSES AS AN EXAMPLE.

THAT HAS WHAT WE CALL A

NUDGE EFFECT.

IT HAS TO WORK WITH EACH

INDIVIDUAL PERSON, AND EACH

INDIVIDUAL PERSON HAS THEIR

OWN REASONS FOR WHY THEY MIGHT

DRIVE OR TAKE TRANSIT.

AND SO WHEN YOU'RE TRYING TO

NUDGE INDIVIDUALS, IT'S

VERY DIFFICULT TO CHANGE

BEHAVIOR.

AND SO WE TEND TO BE LESS

EFFECTIVE AT THE TOP OF THE

PYRAMID.

AND THE PROBLEM WITH THE TOP

OF THE PYRAMID IS IF YOU'RE

DOING TRANSIT PASSES OR

SOMETHING LIKE THAT, YOU

HAVE TO DO IT EVERY YEAR

CONTINUALLY.

SO IT'S EXPENSIVE.

AND GUESS WHAT?

THE BUILDING TENANTS CHANGE

OVER TIME.

SO FOUR YEARS FROM NOW THE

BUILDING TENANTS COULD BE

COMPLETELY DIFFERENT.

THE SAME STRATEGY DOESN'T

WORK ANYMORE BECAUSE THEY

DON'T WANT TO USE TRANSIT.

THEY'D RATHER BIKE.

SO YOU'RE ALWAYS CONSTANTLY

TRYING TO KEEP UP WITH THE

TENANTS AND CHANGE YOUR

STRATEGIES.

AND THOSE STRATEGIES, YOU

KNOW, LIKE I SAID, ARE GOING

TO REQUIRE YOU TO PAY FOR

THEM EVERY SINGLE YEAR.

SO WHEN WE THINK OF THIS IN

THE CONSTRUCT OF A

MITIGATION PROGRAM OR THE IDEA

OF CRAFTING A PROGRAM, WHAT

HAPPENS RIGHT NOW IN

PRACTICE IS WITHOUT A

PROGRAM APPROACH, EVERY

PROJECT HAS TO MITIGATE ITS

OWN VMT IMPACTS.

AND FOR TRANSPORTATION

PROJECTS, MOST OF THEM ARE

DONE ON WHAT WE CALL ON

SYSTEM MITIGATION.

THE MITIGATION IS TRIED TO

BE BUILT INTO THE PROJECT.

YOU MIGHT IMAGINE THAT'S

KIND OF DIFFICULT ON A

FREEWAY PROJECT.

HOW DO YOU BUILD ELEMENTS

INTO THE FREEWAY ITSELF TO

REDUCE VMT?

A LITTLE BIT EASIER IF

YOU'RE DOING SOMETHING LIKE

A COMPLETE STREETS PROJECT

WHERE THE INTENT IS TO

ACCOMMODATE ALL THE

DIFFERENT USERS AND MODES,

BUT IT'S STILL A

CHALLENGE.

SO WE DO LOOK TO OFF

SYSTEM MITIGATION.

SO THESE ARE OTHER

PROJECTS THAT COULD BE

IMPLEMENTED MAYBE IN THE

CITY, THE COUNTY OR IN

SOME CASES EVEN THE

REGION.

THE CHALLENGE THERE IS

THERE'S A LOT OF

COORDINATION BETWEEN

JURISDICTIONS.

PART OF CEQA MITIGATION IS

THE MITIGATION MEASURE HAS

TO BE EFFECTIVE AND

ENFORCEBLE.

AND IF THE MITIGATION

OCCURS IN ANOTHER

JURISDICTION YOU HAVE TO

HAVE AN AGREEMENT WITH

THAT JURISDICTION TO

IMPLEMENT.

SO THAT LEADS US TO

PROGRAM LEVEL SOLUTIONS.

HOW DO WE TAKE AT A

CITY, COUNTY OR EVEN

SUBREGIONAL LEVEL, HOW DO

THEM IN THEIR PROGRAM AND

MAKE IT EASY TO IMPLEMENT?

THAT'S WHAT A LOT OF

AGENCIES ARE EXPLORING

NOW.

WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE IN

PRACTICE, IF WE'RE DOING

THE ON SYSTEM MITIGATION

ONLY, WE'RE JUST TRYING TO

BUILD IT INTO THE

PROJECTS AND IT'S A

LITTLE EASIER TO DO IF

YOU'RE DOING THIS FOR

ARTERIAL PROJECTS, LOCAL

AGENCY PROJECTS.

AND THIS IS A GOOD

EXAMPLE FROM THE ARDEN

WAY COMPLETE STREETS

MASTER PLAN, YOU KNOW

LOOKING AT THE BICYCLE

AND PEDESTRIAN

FACILITIES BEING BUILT

IN THEIR PROJECTS.

IF YOU'RE GOING TO

INVEST IN THEIR PROJECTS

SYSTEM, THOUGH, THIS IS

WHERE YOU CAN HAVE A

BIGGER EFFECT.

YOU COULD POTENTIALLY

INVEST IN THE TRAIL

SYSTEM COUNTYWIDE.

YOU COULD INVEST INTO

EVEN COUNTYWIDE TRANSIT.

MORE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE

A BIGGER EFFECT.

AND SO WHEN WE'RE

THINKING ABOUT V.M.T.

MITIGATION AND TRYING TO

BE COST EFFECTIVE, HAVING

THE LARGEST EFFECT IS

GOING TO BE IMPORTANT AND

IF WE ONLY WORK AT THE

PROJECT SCALE, WE'RE

GOING TO HAVE LESS

OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT.

HERE'S ANOTHER GOOD

EXAMPLE OF BUILDING IT INTO

THE PROJECT.

SO BRT LANES, MAKING

TRANSIT MORE EFFECTIVE.

THOSE ARE GOOD EXAMPLES OF

THE TYPES OF PROJECTS THAT

ARE V.M.T.

MITIGATION AND POTENTIALLY

COULD BE FUNDED BY THOSE

OTHER PROJECTS THAT ARE

CREATING V.M.T.

IMPACTS.

ANOTHER EXAMPLE HERE, THE

MOBILITY HUBS.

TYPICALLY MOBILITY HUBS

ARE WHERE WE'RE TAKING

TRANSIT STATIONS AND TRYING

TO REALLY IMPROVE THE

ABILITY TO EXTEND THAT FIRST

MILE, LAST MILE.

IN FACT, IN SOME OF THE

IMPROVEMENTS, YOU CAN

ACTUALLY DO THINGS LIKE E-Bike

SHARE, THOSE KINDS OF THINGS

AND GO BEYOND ONE MILE

PRETTY EASILY.

SO JUST MAKING IT EASIER

PEOPLE GET AROUND WITHOUT

HAVING TO DRIVE.

SO WHAT THIS IS GOING TO

LEAD YOU TO, YOU'RE GOING TO

SEE THIS IN OTHER SESSIONS,

IS THINKING ABOUT THIS

PROGRAM LEVEL MITIGATION.

AND YOU'VE PROBABLY ALL HEARD

OF IMPACT FEE PROGRAMS.

THAT'S A FORM OF BASICALLY

PROGRAM BASED MITIGATION.

THERE ARE IMPACT FEE PROGRAMS

ALREADY DEVELOPED IN THE STATE

BASED ON REDUCING V.M.T.

THE FIRST ONE WAS IN L.A.

BUT NOW PEOPLE ARE LOOKING TO

EVEN SIMPLER PROGRAMS.

WE CALL THOSE V.M.T.

MITIGATION EXCHANGES AND BANKS.

EXCHANGES ARE LARGELY A LIST

OF PROJECTS THAT HAVE EVIDENCE

THAT THEY REDUCED V.M.T.

AND COULD BE EFFECTIVELY BUILT

BY A PROJECT APPLICANT OR PAID

FOR FULLY BY A PROJECT

APPLICANT THAT IS CREATING V.M.T.

IMPACTS.

V.M.T. BANKS, THEY SOUND SIMPLE.

THEY'RE ACTUALLY A LITTLE MORE

COMPLEX.

THE IDEA IS YOU JUST PURCHASE

V.M.T. REDUCTION CREDITS BASED

ON HOW MANY V.M.T. YOUR PROJECT

IS GENERATING ABOVE A THRESHOLD.

YOU STILL HAVE TO COME UP WITH

THE VERIFICATION THAT ALL THE

PROJECTS THAT THE BANK IS GOING

TO PAY FOR WILL ACTUALLY REDUCE

V.M.T.

SO THERE'S A WHOLE VERIFICATION

PROCESS THAT CAN BE SOMEWHAT

COMPLEX.

BUT THIS IS WHAT WE'LL SPEND A

LITTLE BIT MORE TIME IN OTHER

SESSIONS TALKING ABOUT THE

DETAILS.

THAT'S THE OVERVIEW AND WE CAN GO

DIRECTLY TO QUESTIONS.

ALL RIGHT.

VERY GOOD.

THANK YOU.

DIRECTOR DICKINSON.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.

AND THANKS FOR THE PRESENTATION.

IT'S REALLY QUITE INTRIGING.

AND I WANT TO COMMENT MORE ON THAT

IN A MOMENT.

I WILL SAY BY WAY OF FULL

DISCLOSURE THAT OF COURSE SB 743

WAS A BILL BY THEN SENATE PRO

TEM PRESIDENT DARYL STEINBERG

AND I ACTUALLY MANAGED THE BILL

ON THE ASSEMBLY FLOOR.

SO I'VE GOT A LITTLE BIT OF

HISTORY WITH IT AS WELL.

AND I WOULD SAY THAT IT WAS

REALLY FUNDAMENTALLY FOCUSED ON

TWO THINGS.

ONE WAS TO GET AWAY FROM USING

LEVEL OF SERVICE AS THE MEASURE

FOR WHAT NEEDED TO BE DONE TO

MITIGATE TRAFFIC IMPACTS WITH

NEW DEVELOPMENT BECAUSE LEVEL

OF SERVICE JUST MEANT YOU BUILT

BIGGER FACILITIES RATHER THAN

LOOKED AT HOW YOU COULD REDUCE

TRAVEL.

THAT WAS ONE CORE OBJECTIVE.

AND THE SECOND WAS REALLY WHAT

YOU'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT

PRIMARILY.

WHICH IN EFFECT WAS TRYING TO

HAVE PROJECTS ACTUALLY

INTERNALIZE THE EXTERNALITY OF

WHAT THEY WERE PUTTING INTO THE

AIR IN TERMS OF GREENHOUSE

GASES.

SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE

DON'T DO VERY OFTEN IN A LOT OF

PROJECTS AND A LOT OF WHAT WE DO

IN THE PUBLIC REALM.

BUT WHAT'S INTRIGING TO ME ABOUT

THIS IS OF COURSE THERE'S BEEN A

STRUGGLE WITH HOW MUCH THE

MITIGATION COSTS FOR SIGNIFICANT

NEW PROJECTS BECAUSE THE

EXTERNALITY IS QUITE SIGNIFICANT

OF WHAT'S PUT INTO THE AIR.

AND IT MAKES IT HARD ON A SINGLE

PROJECT BASIS LOTS OF TIMES

ECONOMICALLY TO MAKE THAT PROJECT

WORK WITH THE KIND OF

MITIGATION THAT'S REQUIRED.

SO THE IDEA OF THE MITIGATION

BANK IS WHAT'S INTRIGUING TO ME.

THE IDEA OF LOOKING AT WHAT YOU

COULD DO ON A COUNTY WIDE OR EVEN

LARGER REGIONAL BASIS TO MITIGATE

THE IMPACTS OF PROJECTS SEEMS TO

ME TO HAVE A LOT OF PROMISE.

IT IS, ONE COULD SAY, PROBLEMATIC

TO THE EXTENT THAT IT MIGHT ALLOW

PROJECTS TO HAPPEN THAT OTHERWISE

YOU WOULD SAY THAT'S REALLY NOT A

PROJECT WE SHOULD BUILD BECAUSE

YOU GET THE MITIGATION OVER HERE

BUT YOU GET THE IMPACTS OVER

THERE WHERE THE NEW PROJECT IS

BUILT.

SO I THINK THAT'S GOING TO BE

AN ELEMENT OF DISCUSSION WITH

RESPECT TO THE IDEA OF SETTING

UP A BANK.

BUT AT THE SAME TIME THERE ARE

PROJECTS CLEARLY THAT WE WOULD

ALL LIKE TO SEE HAPPEN TO ENHANCE

AND GROW OUR COUNTY, OUR REGION, OUR

CITIES.

SO LOOKING AT ALTERNATIVE FORMS OF

MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF SB 743

LIKE USING A BANK, TO ME IT MAKES

GREAT SENSE TO EXPLORE.

THIS IS THE FIRST OF THREE

PRESENTATIONS I THINK YOU SAID

KEVIN YOU'RE GOING TO DO ON THIS.

I LOOK FORWARD TO THE NEXT TWO.

CAN YOU TELL US WHETHER ANYONE HAS

ANY KIND OF CONCRETE OR TANGIBLE WAY

STARTED TO WORK ON OR MOVE

FORWARD IN ANY PLACE AROUND THE

STATE THE IDEA OF A MITIGATION

BANK FOR VMT?

YEAH, SO THE THREE DIFFERENT

PROGRAM TYPES, IMPACT FEES, AN

EXCHANGE OR A BANK, IMPACT FEES

ARE IN PLACE IN A FEW PLACES.

THE FIRST ONE WAS IN L.A. AS PART

OF THEIR WEST SIDE SPECIFIC PLAN.

CITY OF ORANGE ALSO HAS ONE.

SOME JURISDICTIONS HAVE DONE IN

LIEW FEE PROGRAMS, KIND OF A

LIGHT FEE PROGRAM LIKE SAN DIEGO.

AT THE NEXT LEVEL, THE BANKS

OR EXCHANGES, THERE HAVE BEEN

PILOT STUDIES.

CITY OF L.A. THROUGH L.A. METRO

DID ONE OF THE PILOTS WHERE THEY

WERE BASICALLY TESTING THE USE OF

TRANSIT PASS SUBSIDIES AS AN

EXCHANGE OR BANK FORMAT.

SO THEY MOVE THINGS PROBABLY THE

FURTHEST ALONG WHERE THEY ACTUALLY

HAD THE DATA TO DO THE

VERIFICATION.

AND YOU DO FIND SOME THINGS THAT

MAYBE ARE UNIQUE OR SURPRISING,

THIS IS ALL NEW.

SO EACH ONE OF THOSE PILOTS

THAT'S GOING ON IS HELPING US TO

ADVANCE THE PRACTICE TO FIGURE

OUT WHAT IS THE BEST WAY OF DOING

THIS.

BUT IT IS STILL VERY EARLY AND

PEOPLE ARE IN THAT MORE PILOT

STAGE AND THEY ARE, YES, WE'VE

BEEN RUNNING THIS FOR TWO OR

THREE YEARS AND WE KNOW WHAT

WE'RE DOING.

SO IN YOUR SUBSEQUENT

PRESENTATIONS WILL YOU BE

TELLING US MORE ABOUT WHAT'S

BEEN HAPPENING AROUND THE

STATE?

YEAH, WE CAN ACTUALLY DO A

LITTLE COMPARISON OF WHO'S

DOING IMPACT FEES, WHO'S DOING

BANKS OR EXCHANGES AND HOW FAR

DID THEY ACTUALLY GET AND WE'LL

KEEP THAT UP TO DATE AS CLOSE TO

THE PRESENTATION DATA AS POSSIBLE.

I THINK THAT WOULD BE REALLY

HELPFUL AND INSTRUCTIVE FOR US

AS WE THINK ABOUT WHAT WE MIGHT

DO IN SACRAMENTO COUNTY.

AND I ALSO TAKE THE CHAIR'S

POINT THAT OF COURSE IN 2013

WHEN THIS LEGISLATION WAS BEING

CONSIDERED, WE DIDN'T HAVE NEARLY

THE PERCENTAGE OF EVS OR ZERO

EMISSION VEHICLES ON THE ROAD

THAT WE HAVE TODAY.

SO MAYBE THERE'S SOMEONE OUT

THERE WHO WANTS TO LOOK AT

AMENDING 743 TO TAKE THAT INTO

ACCOUNT.

BUT IN THE MEANTIME, WE STILL ARE

DOMINATED BY COMBUSTION ENGINE

AND GRAND GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS.

SO TO ME IT MAKES SENSE TO TRY TO

IMPLEMENT THIS AS IT WAS INTENDED

WHEN THE LEGISLATION WAS SIGNED

INTO LAW.

THANKS, MR. CHAIR.

GREAT.

THANK YOU.

DIRECTOR KENT.

THANK YOU.

I'M GOING TO PURPORT TO SPEAK

FOR SOME UNSPECIFIED CONSTITUENCY

FOR WHICH I'M GOING TO

FOR WHICH I MAY OR MAY NOT SPEAK

ACCURATELY FOR A MINORITY OR A

MAJORITY.

BUT NONETHELESS, WHAT I'M

HEARING IS THAT THERE'S AN

ECONOMIC TRADE-OFF

IMPLIED BY ON SYSTEM, OFF SYSTEM

MITIGATION, INVESTMENT IN

CAPACITY, AND IN INCENTIVES

AND DISINCENTIVES.

AND SIMPLISTICALLY, WHAT IT

AMOUNTS TO IS IF THERE'S NO

MORE LOCAL OPPORTUNITY FOR

EMPLOYMENT, AND INDIVIDUALS HAVE

TO MAKE THEIR LIVING IN THE

EXISTING CORRIDORS WHICH HAVE

RESTRICTED CAPACITY.

PUTTING INVESTMENT IN LOCAL

CAPACITY DOES NOT ASSIST WITH

THEIR ECONOMIC WELL-BEING.

AND I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND

WHAT DEGREES OF FREEDOM YOU

HAVE TO TAKE THAT INTO ACCOUNT

AND HOW YOU MANAGE THAT

TRADE-OFF IN POLICY.

YEAH, THAT'S A FUN QUESTION

BECAUSE WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT

VMT, YOU CAN BREAK IT DOWN

INTO ITS COMPONENT PARTS.

SOME OF THE TRIPS ARE MADE

BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO WORK.

THE COMMUTE TRIP MIGHT TAKE

ADVANTAGE OF THOSE LONGER

DISTANCE CORRIDORS.

OTHER TRIPS ARE MADE NEAR THE

HOME TO GO TO SCHOOL, TO GO

GROCERY SHOPPING, TO GO MEET

A FRIEND FOR COFFEE.

AND SO WE HAVE VMT FOR

DIFFERENT PURPOSES AND THEY'RE

USING DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE

NETWORK.

AND SO YOU CAN MEASURE THE VMT

FOR EACH OF THOSE COMPONENT

PARTS AND YOU CAN TARGET YOUR

MITIGATION TO EACH COMPONENT

PARTS.

ARE YOU TRYING TO REDUCE THOSE

LONG DISTANCE COMMUTE TRIPS?

OR ARE YOU TRYING TO REDUCE

THOSE LOCAL DRIVING TRIPS AND

GET MORE OF THOSE MADE BY

WALKING AND BICYCLING OR ON

TRANSIT?

SO YOU CAN BECOME PRETTY

SOPHISTICATED WITH HOW YOU

TARGET THE TYPE OF VMT YOU

WANT TO ANALYZE AND WHAT TYPE

OF MITIGATION STRATEGY SO THAT

YOU CAN ADDRESS WHATEVER YOUR

COMMUNITY VALUES MOST.

AND SO THERE'S NO RIGHT OR

WRONG HERE.

IT COMES DOWN TO HOW DO

COMMUNITIES VALUE VMT AND VMT

REDUCTION.

WE TEND TO TRY AND PUT IT IN

LIKE AT LEAST THREE BUCKETS.

WHAT ARE YOU TRYING TO PROTECT

IN THE COMMUNITY?

WHAT ARE YOU TRYING TO AVOID

AS THE WORLD CHANGES AROUND

YOU?

AND THEN WHAT ARE YOU TRYING

TO CREATE?

ARE YOU TRYING TO CREATE MORE

OPPORTUNITIES TO WALK AND BIKE?

THAT'S ONE THING.

ARE YOU TRYING TO PROTECT THAT

EXISTING ABILITY TO GET TO WORK

ON TIME?

THOSE ARE ESSENTIAL QUESTIONS

TO BE ABLE TO ANSWER TO PICK

THE RIGHT METRICS AND HOW YOU

BREAK THEM DOWN AND THEN TARGET

THE MITIGATION ACCORDINGLY.

DIRECTOR HUGH.

THANK YOU CHAIR.

IF I CAN JUST STAY WITH THIS

SORT OF LINE OF THINKING HERE

FOR A SECOND.

THIS KIND OF GOES BACK TO WHAT

THE CHAIR BROUGHT UP IN HIS

ORIGINAL COMMENTS IN SO FAR AS

ELECTRIFICATION OF THE FLEET

CANNOT BE CONTEMPLATED AS A WAY

TO MEET AIR QUALITY ATTAINMENT.

AND THEN IT GOES TO WHAT

DIRECTOR DICKENSON WAS TALKING

ABOUT AS FAR AS WHEN THIS LAW

WAS ENACTED THE NUMBER OF EVS

OR ZERO EMISSION VEHICLES WERE

FAR FEWER THAN THEY ARE NOW AND

ASSUMINGLY THAT TREND LINE IS

GOING TO CONTINUE TO INCREASE.

AND SO WHEN WE THINK ABOUT WHAT

WE'RE TRYING TO PROTECT OR WHAT

WE'RE TRYING TO ENCOURAGE OR

WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO MOVE AWAY

FROM IN A WORLD WHERE EVS ARE

THE NORM WHY ARE THESE METRICS

STILL IMPORTANT?

ARE YOU LOOKING OUT FOR HOW WE

SPEND OUR TIME AND HOW HEALTHY

OUR LIFESTYLE IS OR WHAT WOULD

BE THE?

YEAH, YOU JUST PICKED UP ON A

COUPLE OF THEM.

SO LET'S GET TO PUBLIC HEALTH,

LET'S GET TO SAFETY.

SO ONE OF THE CHALLENGES WE

HAVE RIGHT NOW WITH ELECTRIC

VEHICLES IS THE CURRENT ONES

RUN AROUND THE NETWORK WHILE

THEY GENERATE LESS EMISSIONS OUT

OF THE TAILPIPE ON A PER-MILE

BASIS, THEY'RE ALSO HEAVIER THAN

A GAS-POWERED VEHICLE.

SO IN TERMS OF COLLISIONS,

ESPECIALLY COLLISIONS WITH THE

MOST VULNERABLE POPULATIONS,

PEDESTRIANS, BICYCLISTS,

THEY CARRY A LOT MORE WEIGHT

AND THEREFORE MORE KINETIC

ENERGY IN A COLLISION AND

THE COLISION SEVERITY IS WORSE.

SO WHILE YOU MIGHT SOLVE A

GREENHOUSE GAS PROBLEM BY AN

ALL ELECTRICITY, AND THE

COLLISION SEVERITY IS WORSE.

SO WHILE YOU MIGHT SOLVE A

GREENHOUSE GAS PROBLEM BY AN

ALL ELECTRIC FLEET, YOU MAY

HAVE ACTUALLY MADE THE SAFETY

PROBLEM WORSE.

THOSE ARE THE TYPE OF TRADE-OFFS

THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO ASSESS.

SO WHEN WE LOOK AT VMT AS THIS

PROXY VARIABLE, AND THAT'S

PROBABLY THE BEST WAY TO

DESCRIBE IT, IT'S NOT

OFTENTIMES DESCRIBING ANYTHING

DIRECTLY, IT'S THIS PROXY FOR

LOTS OF THINGS, AIR

POLLUTANTS, GREENHOUSE GASES,

SAFETY, LAND USE EFFICIENCY.

SO EVEN IF YOU WERE ABLE TO

SOLVE THE GREENHOUSE GAS PROBLEM,

IT COULD STILL BE A USEFUL

METRIC TO GAUGE SOMETHING LIKE

SAFETY.

BUT IT'S ALSO POSSIBLE THAT

THERE ARE OTHER METRICS THAT

ARE MORE MEANINGFUL TO THE

COMMUNITY, AND I SHOULD POINT

OUT THAT SEQUA DOESN'T PREVENT

US FROM USING A HOST OF

DIFFERENT METRICS TO ANALYZE

YOUR TRANSPORTATION NETWORKS,

WHETHER IT'S FROM A TRANSIT

LENS, A BICYCLE LENS, A

SCOOTER LENS, A SAFETY LENS.

SO VMT IS ONE THAT IS

MANDATED BY THE STATE, AT LEAST

FOR LAND USE PROJECTS.

THE STATE HAS ELECTED TO USE

IT FOR TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS,

BUT EVERY LEAD AGENCY GETS TO

MAKE THAT DECISION FOR

THEMSELVES.

SO IF OTHER METRICS ARE

BETTER SUITED TO YOUR

PARTICULAR COMMUNITY FOR

TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS, YOU

DO HAVE THAT CHOICE.

AND SO THEN FOR THE SAFETY

ASPECT, THE SAFETY PROXY, IF

YOU WILL, IS IT NOW BECOME A

PROBABILITY EQUATION THAT THE

MORE VMT IS THE MORE LIKELIHOOD

THAT THIS COULD HAPPEN?

YEAH, SO WHEN YOU THINK

ABOUT THIS FROM A PREDICTING

THE FUTURE KIND OF THING,

YEAH, WE DO HAVE TO MAKE

FUTURE YEAR FORECASTS AS PART

OF CEQUAL ANALYSIS.

AND WE CAN RELY ON SOME

RESEARCH, LIKE THERE'S SOME

RESEARCH RELATED TO WHAT WE

CALL VMT PER CAPITA.

THAT'S HOW MUCH VMT WE

GENERATE AS INDIVIDUALS.

AND WHEN YOU FIND PLACES THAT

GENERATE A LOT OF VMT PER

CAPITA, YOU ALSO TEND TO FIND

THERE'S A HIGHER LEVEL OF

COLLISIONS, THERE'S EVEN MORE

SEVERE COLLISIONS.

AND THIS HAS ALL BEEN

DOCUMENTED PRETTY WELL IN

BOTH THE FORMER OFFICE OF

PLANNING AND RESEARCH, THE

GOVERNOR'S OFFICE, AND

CALTRANS.

THEY'VE GOT ALL THIS STUFF ON

THEIR WEBSITE IF YOU WANT TO

READ MORE ABOUT IT.

SO THERE IS THOSE

RELATIONSHIPS THAT WE HAVE TO

BE MINDFUL OF AND THAT THERE

IS THIS BASIC RELATIONSHIP,

HIGHER PROBABILITY OF THOSE

HIGHER COLLISIONS AND MORE

SEVERE COLLISIONS AS YOU

JUST RELY MORE ON DRIVING,

WHETHER THAT'S IN AN ELECTRIC

VEHICLE OR A GAS-POWERED ONE.

THANK YOU.

DIRECTOR DICKENSEN.

THANKS, CHAIR.

I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY I

NEGLECTED TO SAY AND PROBABLY

SHOULD HAVE BECAUSE IT'S

RELEVANT TO THE OTHER

COMMENTS THAT THE AIR

RESOURCES BOARD AND DIRECTOR

GUERRA AND THE CHAIR ARE

CERTAINLY FORMIT WITH IT HAS

CONSISTENTLY MAINTAINED THAT

EVEN IF WE HAD AN ALL EV

FLEET, WE STILL HAVE TO REDUCE

OUR MILES TRAVELLED IN ORDER TO

MEET REQUIREMENTS, OUR GOALS

WITH RESPECT TO REDUCTION OF

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS OUT OF

THE TRANSPORTATION SECTOR.

SO IT'S NOT AS I DON'T THINK WE

WANT TO LEAVE THE IMPRESSION

THAT IF WE JUST HAD AN ALL

ELECTRIC FLEET THAT WOULD

SOLVE THE ISSUE.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE TO

MENTION THAT.

THAT'S WHY I CAN'T STAND THE

TERM ZERO EMISSION BECAUSE

YOU'RE GETTING YOUR ELECTRONS

FROM SOMEWHERE AND UNLESS IT'S

GOING TO BE UNLESS YOU'RE IN

THE SMUD SERVICE AREA IN 2031

WITH A GUARANTEE THAT'S AN

ALL RENEWABLE PORTFOLIO, THOSE

ELECTRONS COULD VERY WELL

BECOME FROM OUT OF STATE COAL.

SO SOMETHING TO MAKE SURE

TO MENTION THAT.

ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU AGAIN.

OH, MR. BUSY.

YEAH, REAL QUICKLY I JUST WANT

TO HIGHLIGHT A COUPLE OF THINGS

THAT I SEE A LOT OF VALUE IN

DOING THIS WORK.

I THINK THAT THE STATE OR THE

REGION COULD TAKE A MUCH

STRONGER ROLE IN THIS SPACE BUT

IF WE GET OUT IN FRONT OF IT

POTENTIALLY WE HAVE A LITTLE

MORE LOCAL CONTROL ON WHERE

THIS IS GOING TO GO.

IF WE GET OUT IN FRONT OF IT

POTENTIALLY WE HAVE A LITTLE

MORE LOCAL CONTROL ON WHERE

THIS IS GOING TO GO.

IF WE GET OUT IN FRONT OF IT

POTENTIALLY WE HAVE A LITTLE

LEVEL MAKES A LOT OF SENSE.

I THINK THERE ARE REAL

APPLICABLE EXAMPLES WITHIN ALL

YOUR JURISDICTIONS TO DO THIS.

AN EXAMPLE CITY OF ELK

ROVE HAS LOTS OF ROADWAYS THAT

THEY'RE PLANNING TO WIDEN BUT

AT THE SAME TIME THEY REALLY

WANT LIGHT RAIL DOWN TO ELK

ROVE OR THEY WANT BRT DOWN TO

ELK ROVE.

I KNOW THAT JURISDICTION WELL.

THEY HAVE THE LAGUNA CREEK

EDIT REGIONAL TRAIL PROJECT.

AND THEN SIMILARLY IN OUR

FRIENDS IN CITRUS HEIGHTS

HERE YOU HAVE THE SUNRISE

TOMORROW PROJECT.

THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY THERE

FOR SOME OF THAT VMT

MITIGATION WHEN LET'S SAY

CALTRANS PLANTS TO WIDEN 80

IS AN EXAMPLE.

I THINK THERE ARE A LOT OF

OPPORTUNITIES HERE.

THE OTHER ONE THAT REALLY

JUMPS OUT TO ME TOO IS AS WE

LOOK AT HOW THE CAPITOL ARIER

REGIONAL TOLING AUTHORITY

THEY'RE LOOKING AT IT EXPANDING

TOLING THROUGHOUT THE

REGION.

THEY'RE GOING TO PLAN EVENTUALLY

IN 20, 25 YEARS TO ADD

TO ADD THE CAPITOL ARIER

REGIONAL TOLING AUTHORITY

TOLING TO ALMOST ALL MAJOR

FREEWAYS IN SACRAMENTO COUNTY

YOU KNOW, POTENTIALLY THROUGH

THIS VMT MITIGATION THOSE

REVENUES CAN RETURN BACK TO US.

ON THE YOLO 80 PROJECT THEY

ANTICIPATE ABOUT $12 MILLION

ANNUALLY IN REVENUE THAT WILL

GO ONLY TO VMT MITIGATION.

SO OVER A 20 YEAR PERIOD THAT

IS A LOT OF MONEY FOR THAT

PROJECT AND WE ANTICIPATE

THAT WE'LL BE ABLE TO DO THAT.

SO WHEN YOU KNOW SACRAMENTO

COUNTY I MEAN WE HAVE WAY,

MOST SAY ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE

MORE POTENTIAL EXPRESS LANES

THAT ARE COMING TO SACRAMENTO

COUNTY AT SOME POINT IN THE

FUTURE.

AND THIS IS A GOOD WAY OF

TAKING THOSE REVENUES AND

ACTUALLY PUTTING THEM BACK IN

THE COMMUNITY, FUNDING TRANSIT,

FUNDING, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A

LOT OF TRANSIT NEEDS, RIGHT,

ESPECIALLY ON THE OPERATIONAL

SIDE, BUT WHETHER THAT'S LIGHT

RAIL OR BUS RAPID TRANSIT OR

COULD BE EVEN OUR VALLEY RAIL

PROJECT OR CAPITAL CORRIDOR.

IT COULD INCLUDE ACTIVE

TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS AS

WELL AS SOME OF OUR

TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT

ASSOCIATIONS THAT WE HAVE

THROUGHOUT THE REGION.

SO I THINK THIS IS A I'M

TRYING TO MAKE SURE EVERY

UNDERSTANDS THAT THIS COULD

BE REALLY BENEFICIAL TO US

AND GET THEM TO THE

COMMUNITY.

SO I THINK THIS IS A I'M TRYING

TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE

UNDERSTANDS THAT THIS COULD

BE REALLY BENEFICIAL TO US AND

GETTING OUT IN FRONT OF IT IS

THINKING STRATEGICALLY I

THINK IS A SMART WAY OF

POTENTIALLY CONTROLLING

SOME REVENUES IN THE FUTURE.

SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU.

I DON'T REPRESENT ELK

GROVE BUT I KNOW THAT THEY

JUST DON'T WANT IT.

THEY'VE ACTUALLY PLANNED FOR

IT IN FACT MORE THAN 20

YEARS AGO.

SO I JUST WANT IT.

NO, NO, I'D SAY THEY MORE

THAN WANT IT.

OKAY.

OKAY.

SO I WANT IT.

SO I WANT IT.

SO I WANT IT.

SO I WANT IT.

SO YOU'VE ACTUALLY PLANNED

FOR IT.

NO, I'M SPEAKING AS A FORMER

PROJECT MANAGER FOR LAGUNA

RIDGE WHERE THERE'S AN ACTIVE

IOD IN THE MIDDLE OF THE

PROJECT FOR A LIGHT RAIL

STATION.

SO ALL RIGHT.

VERY GOOD.

WE DO HAVE ONE PUBLIC

SPEAKER.

MR. ALLISON.

GOOD AFTERNOON.

I'M DAN ALLISON

REPRESENTING MYSELF.

IT WAS A GOOD

PRESENTATION AND I LOOK

FORWARD TO ADDITIONAL

ONES.

I THINK PROGRAM LEVEL

MITIGATION IS WELL WORTH

EXPLORING.

I THINK IT'S A GREAT IDEA.

SOME PROJECTS HAVE SO MUCH

VMT PROJECT IMPACT THAT THEY

SHOULD BE REJECTED NO MATTER

WHAT.

THEY'RE JUST BAD PROJECTS.

I ASK HOW WILL GEOGRAPHIC

EQUITY BE HANDLED?

WHAT IF AN UPPER INCOME

COMMUNITY GETS BIKE

FACILITIES AND A LOWER INCOME

COMMUNITY GETS MORE VMT WITH

AUTO POLLUTION AND TRAFFIC

VIOLENCE?

THE POINT THAT VMT IS ALSO A

PROXY FOR SAFETY IS AN IMPORTANT

ONE.

I REALIZE IT'S NOT PART OF 743,

BUT IT IS CRITICALLY IMPORTANT.

EVERY VEHICLE ON THE ROAD

DECREASES SAFETY FOR PEOPLE

USING OTHER MODES.

THE BANKS AND EXCHANGES SOUND

SIMILAR TO ME TO CAP AND TRADE

THAT THIS STATE HAS, WHICH HAS

ITS PLUSES AND MINUSES.

IT'S BEEN CRITICIZED BUT IT'S

ALSO BEEN VERY EFFECTIVE.

SO I THINK IT'S INTERESTING TO

SEE WHAT THE RELATIONSHIP THERE

IS.

I HAVE SOME DOUBTS THAT THE BANK

WILL EVER BE BIG ENOUGH TO

COVER CALTRANS FREEWAY

EXPANSIONS.

THEY ARE TREMENDOUS V.M.T.

INDUCING PROJECTS.

AND I DON'T KNOW THAT ANY OTHER

PROJECTS WE COULD DO COULD MAKE

UP FOR THAT EVEN WITH TOLING.

SO I CAUTION IN THAT SENSE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU, DAN.

MADAM CLERK, WE DON'T HAVE ANY

OTHERS THAT SIGNED UP FOR THIS

ITEM?

I DO NOT BELIEVE SO.

YOU HAVE ALL OF THE PUBLIC

COMMENT CARDS.

VERY GOOD.

DIRECTOR GERRAH.

THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.

I WOULD BE REMISS IF I

ACTUALLY DIDN'T HIGHLIGHT

A CONCERN THAT I WAS WAITING TO

ASK UNTIL THE STUDY COMES BACK.

BUT I WANT TO LAY IT OUT THERE.

ONE OF THE CONCERNS ABOUT

BANKING THAT I WOULD FEAR, AND

IT'S SIMILAR TO THAT OF LOOKING

AT A FREEWAY, BUT I THINK IT WOULD

BE A TRAVESTY IF A BANK THAT WAS

CREATED, SAY, EVEN TO FUND OUR

BUS RAPID TRANSIT SYSTEM TO

STOCKTON BOULEVARD AND ACTIVE

TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS WOULD

WOULD STILL RESULT IN WHAT WE

HAVE TODAY ON SOME INTERNAL

INTERIAL AVENUES WHERE YOU HAVE

THREE LANES GOING EACH DIRECTION

AND AS A TRADE-OFF.

BECAUSE I THINK THAT HAS LED TO

THE SEPARATION IN COMMUNITIES

AND NEIGHBORHOODS, THE SAFETY

ISSUES ON INTERSECTIONS.

SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT FROM

THE ONSET, I THINK THERE IS SOME

BENEFITS TO LOOKING AT A BANK,

BUT NOT AT CONTINUING TO REPLICATE

SOME OF THE TERRIBLE TRANSPORTATION

DESIGNS THAT HAVE ONLY CONTINUED

TO CREATE SOME OF THE PROBLEMS THAT

WE'RE TRYING TO TURN BACK TODAY.

SO I'LL LEAVE IT TO THAT.

THANK YOU, DIRECTOR.

ALL RIGHT.

THIS IS JUST AN INFORMATIONAL

ITEM, REQUIRING NO ACTION ON OUR

PART.

SO WITH THAT, WE WILL GO ON TO THE

NEXT ITEM.

ITEM NO. 11 IS THE EXECUTIVE

DIRECTOR'S REPORT.

OKAY, THANK YOU.

I WANT TO FOLLOW UP ON SOME OF

THE COMMENTS FROM THE LAST BOARD

MEETING REGARDING STOCKTON

BULLEVARD AND THE CAPITAL

CORRIDOR PROJECT.

SO, YES, STAFF, WE KIND OF

REACHED OUT TO SOME OF THE

BOARD MEMBERS THAT HAD SOME

COMMENTS ABOUT THAT PROJECT.

AND THEN WE TALKED WITH THE

CITY OF SACRAMENTAL STAFF AS

WELL REGARDING ITS CURRENT

STATUS AND POTENTIAL NEXT STEPS.

SO, WE TALKED TO THE STAFF,

THEY'RE WILLING TO COME BACK TO

SDA FOR PRESENTATION IF THAT'S

SOMETHING THE BOARD WANTS ON

THAT PROJECT.

THEY HAVE INITIATED A

CONSULTANT FOR ANITIAL DESIGN

SLASH ENVIRONMENTAL WORK.

SO, I THINK THEY'RE INTERESTED

IN GETTING THAT GOING A LITTLE

FARTHER.

SO, IT MIGHT BE FALL SLASH

WINNER BEFORE THEY WOULD WANT

TO COME BACK.

BUT I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM

THE BOARD ON IF THAT'S AN

INTEREST FOR THAT TO COME BACK

AS AN INFORMATIONAL

PRESENTATION.

DIRECTOR GUERRA.

YES, THANK YOU, MR.

CHAIR.

YES, I WOULD LIKE THAT TO COME

BACK.

BUT I ALSO WOULD LIKE TO

RESPECTFULLY REQUEST IF WE HAD

THE COUNTY D.O.T.

INVOLVED IN THIS.

WE HAD THE COUNTY D.O.T.

INVOLVED IN THIS.

I REMEMBER EARLY ON WE WERE

HAVING A NUMBER OF STAKEHOLDER

MEETINGS WITH THE COUNTY D.O.T.

BECAUSE MANY OF THAT, THAT BOTH

NORTH AND SOUTH IS A FURIGID

SPLIT OWNERSHIP.

AND MORE SPECIFIC.

JURISDICTION.

MULTI.

YES, MULTI-JURISDICTION.

SO IF WE COULD DO THAT AND ALSO

AN UPDATE ON THE MOU BETWEEN

THE THREE AGENCIES.

YEAH.

GOOD CALL.

DIRECTOR MAPLE.

THANK YOU, CHAIR.

I JUST WANTED TO SHARE THE

SAME COMMENTS AS DIRECTOR GUERRA

AND SAY WE WERE IN SACOG THIS

MORNING WITH SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES

ON THIS BOARD AND IT WAS

ACTUALLY THIS PROJECT WAS

DISCUSSED ABOUT ITS MULTI-JURISDICT

BOUNDARIES AND I THINK THERE'S

SOME EXCITEMENT ABOUT IT.

ALSO ON OTHER BOARDS THAT I'M

ON SO I THINK IT WOULD BE A

TIMELY PRESENTATION FOR THIS

BOARD.

THANK YOU.

VERY GOOD.

THANK YOU.

UH, DIRECTOR MAPLE, I CAN SEND

YOU THAT EMAIL TO YOU IF YOU

WANT THAT I SENT TO.

OKAY.

FOR BACKGROUND.

OKAY.

SO I'LL WORK WITH COUNTY, COUNTY

CITY STAFF, MAKE SURE WE GET

A LITTLE INFORMATIONAL ITEM ON

THAT.

AND THEN SEPARATELY IT WAS

REQUESTING ME WITH THE CAPITAL

CORRIDOR STAFF TO REVIEW THE

STATUS OF THE CAPITAL CORRIDOR

PROJECT AND THE FUNDING GAP.

I SORT OF PROVIDED A BRIEFING

TO DIRECTOR DICKINSON ON THIS.

BUT THAT PROJECT, YOU KNOW, IT'S

COMPLETED SEQUA, IT STILL NEEDS

COMPLETE NEPA.

ONCE NEPA IS COMPLETED IT CAN

MORE AGGRESSIVELY PURSUE FUNDING.

SO IT'S IN A LITTLE BIT OF A

HALFWAY BETWEEN SEQUA AND NEPA

RIGHT NOW.

BUT I ANTICIPATE IT WILL BE MUCH

MORE COMPETITIVE ONCE IT'S

THROUGH NEPA AND THERE'S SOME

OPPORTUNITIES FOR FEDERAL

FUNDING FOR THAT IN THE FUTURE.

AND THEN I THINK, YOU KNOW, WITH

THOSE TWO PROJECTS, THOSE ARE

NOT MEASURE A PROJECTS.

SO I'M GOING TO, I THINK IT

MAKES SENSE FOR THIS BROADER

QUESTION OF HOW ARE WE GOING TO

SUPPORT THESE NON MEASURE A

PROJECTS AND THAT GOES BACK TO

THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON WHAT SHOULD

SDA BE DOING, RIGHT?

SO I'M GOING TO MAKE SURE THAT

GETS REFERRED BACK SO WE CAN, WE

HAVE SOME LEVEL OF

UNDERSTANDING HOW WE DEAL WITH

THESE TYPES OF PROJECTS IN

THE FUTURE.

AND THEN THE SB1

COMPETITIVE PROGRAMS.

SO THE CTC RELEASED STAFF

RECOMMENDATIONS ON THAT LAST

FRIDAY.

WE HAD FOUR APPLICATIONS

SUBMITTED THROUGHOUT, ACTUALLY

WITHIN THE SACRAMENTO AREA.

OF $127 MILLION WAS REQUESTED.

NONE OF THOSE PROJECTS WERE

AWARDED WITH THE EXCEPTION OF

THE I-STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT

PROJECT WHICH RECEIVED $25

MILLION.

THERE'S A LOT OF REASONS PROBABLY

WHY A LOT OF THE PROJECTS DID NOT

GET AWARDED.

AND WE'RE GOING TO DO DEBRIEFS WITH

THE CTC STAFF.

I'VE WORKED, I'VE REACHED OUT TO

ALL THE APPLICANTS, PCTPA, DEREK

MINIMA AT THE CONNECTOR, AND

JAMES CORLISTS.

I'VE ASKED THAT WE MEET AND

DISCUSS.

THIS IS THE FIRST TIME WE'VE DONE

A REGIONAL PRIORITIZATION TO

TRY TO MAKE SURE WE'RE ALL MOVING

IN THE SAME DIRECTION.

THERE'S A PRIORITY ACROSS THE

REGION.

THE FACT THAT NONE OF THE

PROJECTS THAT WERE PRIORITIZED

EITHER BY SACOG OR SDA WERE

FUNDED IS CONCERNING.

AND, YOU KNOW, I DON'T WANT TO

REPEAT THE SAME THING AND LET'S

JUST MAKE IT BETTER.

I'M VERY HAPPY THAT THE I-Street

BRIDGE PROJECT WAS FUNDED.

I THINK THAT'S A WIN FOR THE

REGION.

SO I'M EXCITED ABOUT THAT.

BUT I THINK THERE'S A LITTLE

MORE WORK TO DO ON THAT.

KEVIN, EXCUSE ME.

DIRECTOR KENNEDY.

YEAH, KEVIN, I DON'T MEET

TO INTERRUPT YOU.

I'M SORRY.

I JUST, YOU KNOW, JUST AS A

THOUGHT, IT WOULD BE INTERESTING

TO SEE IF OUR FREEWAY EMERGENCY

ASSISTANCE PROGRAM HAS SEEN AN

UPTICK ON HIGHWAY 50 SINCE THIS

PROGRAM'S BEEN GOING, SINCE THIS

PROJECT'S BEEN GOING THROUGH.

I DON'T EXPECT YOU TO ANSWER THAT

NOW, BUT IT WOULD BE AN

INTERESTING THOUGHT.

WE'LL TAKE THAT AS A

FOLLOW-UP ITEM.

YEAH.

I WILL SAY WE HAVE AN EXISTING

AGREEMENT THAT WE EXTENDED ON

CONSENT WHICH ALLOWS US TO

PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SERVICES

DURING CONSTRUCTION AND THE

CALTRANS IS USING THAT.

SO I KNOW ON THIS WEEKEND THERE'S

SOME ACTUALLY WORK ON 80 WITH A

LOT OF CLOSURES AND WE'RE

PROVIDING ADDITIONAL SERVICE.

BUT WE CAN GET YOU AN ANSWER

ON THAT.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

AND THEN JUST A REMINDER, THE

NEXT JULY WHERE THERE'S NO

BOARD MEETINGS BECAUSE WE HAVE A

RECESS.

AND THEN IN AUGUST WE ANTICIPATE

COMING BACK WITH SOME OF THE

VMT MITIGATION PROGRAM OPTIONS

FOR DISCUSSION.

AND THEN WE ANTICIPATE THAT EVERY

YEAR SACOG GOES THROUGH THIS

PROCESS WHERE THEY IDENTIFY THE

REGIONAL PRIORITIES FOR FEDERAL

FUNDING.

THEY'RE GOING TO RESTART THAT

PROCESS AGAIN.

AND SO WE ANTICIPATE POTENTIALLY

SOME ACTION IN AUGUST ASSOCIATE

WITH THAT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE

PRIORITIES OF THE SACRAMENTO

COUNTY ARE REFLECTED WITHIN WHAT

SACOG PROVIDES AND WHAT'S USED

ULTIMATELY FOR CAP TO CAP.

THANK YOU.

GREAT.

THANK YOU KEVIN.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR OUR EXECUTIVE

DIRECTOR?

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

WE DO HAVE ONE MEMBER OF THE, OH

WAIT THAT'S THE NEXT ITEM.

WE DON'T HAVE ANYONE SIDE TO

SPEAK ON THIS MATTER CORRECT?

WE DO NOT.

OKAY.

VERY GOOD.

NEXT ITEM THEN.

OUR FINAL ITEM IS COMMENTS AND

REPORTS FROM AUTHORITY MEMBERS.

OKAY.

DIRECTOR TELAMANTIS, ANY REPORT

OUT ON CARTER?

NOTHING REALLY EXCITING.

I MEAN WE DID A ROAD MAP AND

TIMELINE FOR STAFFING FOR THE

AD CAUSEWAY PROJECT.

WE TALKED ABOUT TOLL

EXEMPTIONS AND TOLL ENFORCEMENT

AND VIOLATIONS AND RELEASING

PROPOSALS FOR TOLL PROGRAM

MANAGEMENT AND ON-CALL

SERVICES.

WE TALKED ABOUT TOLL

EXEMPTIONS AND TOLL

ENFORCEMENT AND VIOLATIONS

AND RELEASING PROPOSALS FOR

TOLL PROGRAM MANAGEMENT AND

ON-CALL SERVICES AND I GOT

VOLUNTEERED TO BE ON THE

COMMITTEE TO INTERVIEW THE

PEOPLE THAT APPLY.

VERY GOOD.

THANK YOU.

DIRECTOR GUERRA, DO YOU HAVE

ANYTHING TO REPORT ON THE NEW

TRANSPORTATION FUNDING

SUBCOMMITTEE?

YEAH.

WE HAD OUR FIRST MEETING TODAY

WITH THE CHAIR OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE

FROM REGIONAL TRANSIT.

HAPPENS TO BE SITTING NEXT TO

ME.

BORN MEMBER MAPLE HERE.

AND WE DISCUSS SOME

INFORMATION.

ABOUT HOW THE MULTIPLE AGENCIES

CAN WORK TOGETHER AND WILL BE

WORKING TOGETHER.

ALSO DO WANT TO THANK FOR OUR

EARLY CONVERSATION WITH THE

SUBCOMMITTEE THAT DIRECTED OUR

STAFF, KEVIN BUCEY AND HIS TEAM

TO BEGIN TO COMMUNICATE WITH

ALL OUR RESPECTIVE CITY MANAGERS

AND DOT DIRECTORS MOVING FORWARD

ON HOW TO BEST COMMUNICATE WITH

OUR CONSTITUENTS AND THE NEXT

STEPS.

VERY GOOD.

THANK YOU.

AND THEN MR.

HUME, ANYTHING TO REPORT OUT

ON THE, WE'VE GOT TO FIND A BETTER

NAME FOR THIS, THE ROLE IN THE

REGENT SUBCOMMITTEE.

WE'LL TAKE

NOMINATIONS AFTER THE REGENT.

WE'RE WORKING ON A NEW NAME.

THERE YOU GO.

VERY GOOD.

ALL RIGHT.

ALL RIGHT.

MR. ALLISON?

THE RON R COMMITTEE?

I'D LIKE TO BE ON THAT ONE.

ALLISON, AGAIN?

I WASN'T SURE WHAT WOULD COME

FROM THE SUBCOMMITTEE, BUT I JUST

WANT TO EXPRESS THAT I'M GLAD

THAT STA IS EXPLORING BOTH

FUNDING AND THE ROLE OF STA IN

THE REGENT.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT.

VERY GOOD.

ANY FURTHER COMMENTS FROM, YES,

DIRECTOR MAPLE.

THANK YOU, CHAIR.

I JUST WANT TO GET TO GET

TO GET TO GET TO GET TO GET TO

GET TO GET TO GET TO GET TO GET

RATED.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT.

ALL RIGHT.

I THINK THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.

I THINK THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.

YES, DIRECTOR MAPLE.

THANK YOU, CHAIR.

I JUST WANTED TO SPEAK UP BRIEFLY

ON THAT AND THANK DIRECTOR GARA

FOR HIS WORK.

BUT I JUST REALLY APPRECIATE THIS

BODY, THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,

FOR WORKING WITH RT AND OTHER

PARTNERS EARLY ON IN THE PROCESS.

I THINK THAT'S GOING TO MAKE IT

BETTER IF IT COMES TO FURITION.

SO THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT.

I BELIEVE, MADAM CLUCCER, THAT

COMPLETES OUR AGENDA, CORRECT?

YOU ARE CORRECT, CHAIR.

ALL RIGHT.

IF THERE'S NO FURTHER VISIONS

BEFORE THIS BOARD, THEN WE ARE

JURNED.

YOU ARE CORRECT.