Agenda - Amazon Web Services

Transcription

CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE
and
2000 MEASURE A CITIZENS WATCHDOG COMMITTEE
Wednesday, September 7, 2016
4:00 PM
2000 Measure A Citizens Watchdog Committee (CWC) Public Hearing Agenda Item #20
begins at 6:00 PM (TIME CERTAIN)
PLEASE NOTE CHANGE IN MEETING LOCATION
VTA Auditorium
3331 North First Street
San Jose, CA
AGENDA
COMMITTEE MISSION STATEMENT:
The VTA CAC provides a communication channel for transportation stakeholders and residents
of the county by providing input, analysis, perspective and timely recommendations prior to VTA
Board of Director action on transportation policy issues and initiatives.
CALL TO ORDER
1.
ROLL CALL
2.
ORDERS OF THE DAY
3.
PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS:
This portion of the agenda is reserved for persons desiring to address the Committee on
any matter not on the agenda. Speakers are limited to 2 minutes. The law does not
permit Committee action or extended discussion on any item not on the agenda except
under special circumstances. If Committee action is requested, the matter can be placed
on a subsequent agenda. All statements that require a response will be referred to staff
for reply in writing.
4.
Receive Committee Staff Report. (Verbal Report) (Quigley)
5.
Receive Chairperson's Report. (Verbal Report) (Wadler)
6.
Receive Committee for Transit Accessibility (CTA) Report. (Verbal Report) (Morrow)
7.
Receive Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC) Report. (Verbal Report)
(Wadler)
3331 North First Street ∙ San Jose, CA 95134-1927 ∙ Administration 408.321.5555 ∙ Customer Service 408.321.2300
Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority
Citizens Advisory Committee
COMBINED CAC AND 2000 MEASURE A CITIZENS WATCHDOG
COMMITTEE CONSENT AGENDAS
8.
Approve the Regular Meeting Minutes of August 10, 2016.
9.
INFORMATION ITEM - Review the Legislative Update Matrix.
10.
INFORMATION ITEM - Receive information from the 2016 Transportation Systems
Monitoring Report.
11.
INFORMATION ITEM - Receive update on SR 237 Express Lanes Fiscal Year 2016
annual report.
CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE REGULAR AGENDA
12.
ACTION ITEM - Recommend that the VTA Board of Directors authorize the General
Manager to negotiate and enter into cooperative funding agreements with the City of Santa
Clara in the amount of $16.164 million for its voluntary contribution and with the City of
Sunnyvale for an amount up to $11.380 million to help fund mutually defined regional
transportation improvements to be delivered by the Santa Clara Valley Transportation
Authority, and to approve $4 million in Vehicle Registration Fee matching funds for the
SR 237 Express Lanes Phase 2 project.
13.
ACTION ITEM - Recommend that the VTA Board of Directors approve up to a $5.5
million advance of Vehicle Registration Fee (VRF) Program funding to the City of Gilroy
for the First Street repaving project.
14.
INFORMATION ITEM - Receive a status update on the Bus Shelter Enhancement
Strategy.
15.
INFORMATION ITEM - Review recommended 2017 Light Rail Operating Plan.
16.
INFORMATION ITEM - Receive an update on Phase I of the outreach efforts for VTA's
Next Network Plan.
17.
INFORMATION ITEM - Review and discuss the development of VTA's Complete Streets
Policy.
18.
INFORMATION ITEM - Review and discuss the current Citizens Advisory Committee
membership structure.
2000 MEASURE A CITIZENS WATCHDOG COMMITTEE (CWC)
REGULAR AGENDA
19.
ACTION ITEM - Approve the 2000 Measure A Citizens Watchdog Committee’s Annual
Report on Fiscal Year 2015 and the recommended publication strategy.
Page 2 of 3
20.
ACTION ITEM - Conduct, as part of the September 7, 2016, Citizens Advisory
Committee/Citizens Watchdog Committee meeting, the required 2000 Measure A
Citizens Watchdog Committee (CWC) public hearing to receive input from the public on
the Measure A Program, its expenditures, the results of the CWC’s annual independent
compliance audit, and on 2000 Measure A Program reports for the period of FY 2015.
(Begins at 6:00 p.m. TIME CERTAIN)
COMBINED CAC AND CITIZENS WATCHDOG COMMITTEE ITEMS
21.
Review the Citizens Advisory Committee and Citizens Watchdog Committee Work
Plans.
OTHER
22.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
23.
ADJOURN
In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Title VI of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964, VTA will make reasonable arrangements to ensure meaningful access to
its meetings for persons who have disabilities and for persons with limited English proficiency
who need translation and interpretation services. Individuals requiring ADA accommodations
should notify the Board Secretary’s Office at least 48-hours prior to the meeting. Individuals
requiring language assistance should notify the Board Secretary’s Office at least 72-hours
prior to the meeting. The Board Secretary may be contacted at (408) 321-5680 or email: board.secretary@vta.org or  (408) 321-2330 (TTY only). VTA’s home page is on the
web at: www.vta.org or visit us on Facebook at: www.facebook.com/scvta. (408) 3212300: 中文 / Español / 日本語 / 한국어 / tiếng Việt / Tagalog.
All reports for items on the open meeting agenda are available for review in the Board
Secretary’s Office, 3331 North First Street, San Jose, California, (408) 321-5680, the Friday,
Monday, and Tuesday prior to the meeting. This information is available on VTA’s website at
http://www.vta.org and also at the meeting.
Page 3 of 3
8
and
2000 MEASURE A CITIZENS WATCHDOG COMMITTEE
Wednesday, August 10, 2016
MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER
The Regular Meeting of the Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC)/2000 Measure A Citizens
Watchdog Committee (CWC) was called to order at 4:04 p.m. by Chairperson Wadler in
Conference Room B-104, VTA River Oaks Campus, 3331 North First Street, San Jose, California.
1.
ROLL CALL
Attendee Name
Stephen Blaylock
Clinton Brownley
Chris Elias
Sharon Fredlund
William Hadaya
Ray Hashimoto
Roberta Hughan
John Melton
Aaron Morrow
Charlotte Powers
Lucas Ramirez
Connie Rogers
Stephen Schmoll
Martin Schulter
Noel Tebo
Herman Wadler
Title
Member
Member
Member
Vice Chairperson
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Chairperson
Absent
Present
Absent
Present
Absent
Present
Absent
Present
Present
Absent
Present
Present
Absent
Present
Present
Present
A quorum was present.
2.
ORDERS OF THE DAY
Chairperson Wadler welcomed new Committee Member John Melton, representing North
County Cities.
Member Hashimoto arrived and took his seat at 4:07 p.m.
There were no Orders of the Day.
3.
PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS
There were no Public Presentations.
4.
Committee Staff Report
Aaron Quigley, Senior Policy Analyst and Staff Liaison, reported the VTA Board of
Directors (Board) took the following actions at their June 2; June 24, and; August 4, 2016,
meetings: 1) adopted the framework and funding amounts for the proposed sales tax
measure; 2) adopted resolution calling for a special election and the ordinance that would
enact the transactions and use tax should the measure pass; 3) adopted revised language
relating to State Route (SR) 85 Corridor transit improvements and approved appending the
list of projects to the tax measure resolution; 4) the Board terminated the contract for
convenience with its current paratransit provider, Outreach, and the effective termination
date is June 30, 2017; 5) staff will move forward with a new Request for Proposal (RFP)
for paratransit services; and 6) adopted Seven-Party Regional Funding Supplement to the
2012 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for the Peninsula Corridor Electrification
Process (PCEP).
Mr. Quigley announced John Ristow, Director of Planning and Program Development,
would be retiring from VTA at the end of August. He noted that Carolyn Gonot will serve
as Interim Director of Planning and Program Development and Dennis Ratcliff will serve
as Interim Director of Engineering & Transportation Infrastructure Development, SVRT
Program.
On order of Chairperson Wadler and there being no objection, the Committee received
the Committee Staff Report.
5.
Chairperson’s Report
Chairperson Wadler announced upcoming community meetings in the cities of Campbell,
Cupertino and Sunnyvale, noting VTA would appreciate Committee Member attendance
and feedback. He also noted the upcoming “Bus Redesign” Workshop on August 24, 2016,
at 6:00 p.m. will take place at the Alum Rock Library.
6.
Committee for Transit Accessibility (CTA) Report
Member Morrow provided a report on the discussions held at the August 8, 2016, CTA
Workshop meeting, highlighting: 1) VTA is currently soliciting input from members and
the public regarding the Paratransit RFP, and creating a laundry list of what customers like
and do not like about the service; 2) community meetings to solicit input have been well
attended; 3) met with Jim Lawson, Director of Public Affairs and Executive Policy
Advisor, and Board of Directors Chair Cindy Chavez to discuss concerns and input
regarding the process, and 4) stated VTA is committed to putting their best foot forward in
this effort.
7.
Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC) Report
Chairperson Wadler noted the City of Campbell ribbon cutting for the East Campbell
Avenue Portals Project took place on August 5, 2016.
2000 Measure A Citizens Watchdog Committee
Page 2 of 8
August 10, 2016
COMBINED CAC AND 2000 MEASURE A CITIZENS WATCHDOG
COMMITTEE CONSENT AGENDAS
8.
Regular Meeting Minutes of May 11, 2016
M/S/C (Ramirez/Rogers) to approve the Regular Meeting Minutes of May 11, 2016.
9.
2015 Annual CMP Monitoring and Conformance Report
M/S/C (Ramirez/Rogers) to recommend that the VTA Board adopt the 2015 Monitoring
and Conformance Findings, pursuant to California Government Code Section 65089.
10.
Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) Quarterly Attendance Report
M/S/C (Ramirez/Rogers) to receive the Citizens Advisory Committee Quarterly
Attendance Report.
11.
Legislative Update Matrix
M/S/C (Ramirez/Rogers) to review the Legislative Update Matrix.
12.
Transit Operations Performance Report – FY2016 Third Quarter
M/S/C (Ramirez/Rogers) to receive the FY 2016 Third Quarter Transit Operations
Performance Report.
RESULT:
APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
(Consent Agenda Items # 8-12)
MOVER:
Ramirez, Member
SECONDER: Rogers, Member
AYES:
Brownley, Fredlund, Hashimoto, Melton, Morrow, Ramirez, Rogers,
Schulter, Tebo, Wadler
NOES:
None
ABSENT:
Blaylock, Elias, Hadaya, Hughan, Powers, Schmoll
2000 MEASURE A CITIZENS WATCHDOG COMMITTEE REGULAR
AGENDA
13.
Compliance Audit Report on 2000 Measure A Program Revenues and Expenditures
for FY15
Mr. Quigley introduced Eugene Ma, of the Certified Public Accountants Macias, Gini &
O’Connell, LLP (MGO) for compliance auditing services for the 2000 Measure A Citizens
Watchdog Committee.
Mr. Ma provided a brief overview of the Compliance Audit Report on 2000 Measure A
Program Revenues and Expenditures for FY15.
Chairperson Wadler expressed appreciation for the detail on swap funds.
M/S/C (Morrow/Melton) to receive and accept the compliance audit report from the
Citizens Watchdog Committee's independent compliance auditor on Fiscal Year 2015 2000
Measure A revenues and expenditures.
NOTE: M/S/C MEANS MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED AND, UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED,
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
Page 3 of 8
August 10, 2016
RESULT:
MOVER:
SECONDER:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
14.
Morrow, Member
Melton, Member
None
Determine Date and Location of CWC Public Hearing
Stephen Flynn, Senior Management Analyst and Advisory Committee Coordinator,
provided the staff report.
The Committee confirmed that the CWC public hearing would be held on
September 7, 2016, at 6:00 p.m. in the Auditorium at the VTA River Oaks Campus.
M/S/C (Rogers/Melton) to conduct the 2000 Measure A Citizens Watchdog Committee’s
public hearing on FY 2015 Measure A expenditures on Wednesday, September 7, 2016, at
6:00 p.m. in the Auditorium at the VTA River Oaks Campus.
RESULT:
MOVER:
SECONDER:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
15.
Rogers, Member
Melton, Member
None
Publication Strategy for Combined Public Hearing Notice and Compliance Audit
Results
Vice Chairperson Fredlund suggested expediting publication materials to ensure they are
ready for the September public hearing. She indicated the strategy would be based on
materials devised in 2015 to include two ads (newspaper and on-line) on the Benefits and
Key Achievements Report.
M/S/C (Fredlund/Morrow) to allow the CAC/CWC to empower the Review
Subcommittee to authorize final approval, as to copy and format, of publication materials
for the September 7, 2016, public hearing.
RESULT:
MOVER:
SECONDER:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Fredlund, Member
Morrow, Member
None
Page 4 of 8
August 10, 2016
Mr. Flynn and Maria Cambra, Sales and Promotion Supervisor, provided the staff report.
Members of the Committee discussed the following: 1) expressed concern about the
additional cost for color; 2) request comparison Click Reports between black and white
and color adds to determine if strategy is working; 3) adds will be in community
newspapers and electronic media; 4) strategy to include one flight of color and one flight
of black and white in community newspapers, but will not be advertised in the San Jose
Mercury News; 5) request Click Reports to determine who is being driven to website, and;
6) dates of publication to be August 22 and August 29, 2016.
M/S/C (Fredlund/Melton) to approve the combination public notice and publication
strategy announcing the 2000 Measure A Citizens Watchdog Committee’s public hearing
and the results of the independent compliance audit on FY 2015 Measure A revenues and
expenditures.
RESULT:
MOVER:
SECONDER:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Fredlund, Member
Melton, Member
None
CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE REGULAR AGENDA
16.
OBAG 2 Project Scoring Criterion – Displacement Policies
Marcella Rensi, Transportation Planning Manager – Planning and Grants, provided the
staff report.
Members of the Committee discussed the following: 1) point system; 2) Surplus Land Act
directs public agencies to prioritize affordable housing, and; 3) implementation process
evaluation.
M/S/C (Morrow/Brownley) to recommend that the VTA Board of Directors adopt two
additional One Bay Area Grant 2 criteria to comply with Metropolitan Transportation
Commission's requirements for compliance with the California Surplus Lands Act and
rewarding jurisdictions with adopted anti-displacement policies.
RESULT:
MOVER:
SECONDER:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Morrow, Member
Brownley, Member
None
Page 5 of 8
August 10, 2016
17.
Express Lanes Operations Policies
Murali Ramanujam, Transportation Engineering Manager, provided an overview of the
staff report, and a presentation entitled “Recommended Changes to Existing Express Lanes
Operations Policies,” highlighting: 1) Silicon Valley Express Lanes; 2) Bay Area Express
Lanes Operators; 3) Bay Area Express Lanes Operations Policies; 4) Existing VTA
Express Lanes Operations Policies; 5) Key Milestones; 6) How Violation Enforcement
System Works, and; 7) HOV Violation.
Members of the Committee expressed concern that the new policy may cause confusion.
Public Comment
Omar Chatty, Interested Citizen, commented on the following: 1) expressed concern noting
when single occupancy drivers are restricted to two lanes it causes more accidents, more
congestion and more greenhouse gasses; 2) he suggested different highway profiles should
be considered, and; 3) noted his opposition to toll lanes.
Discussion ensued regarding: 1) suggested adding signage, such as “Flex Transponder
Required to Use This Lane” to make it clear to motorists, and; 2) extending the time of
express lane operations.
M/S/F (Morrow/Hashimoto) on a vote of 8 Ayes to 1 No to 1 Abstention to recommend
that the VTA Board of Directors approve the following Express Lanes operations policies
for implementation:
a) Require all users of Express Lanes to use FasTrak or FasTrak Flex transponder.
b) Require all eligible carpoolers including motorcycles, clean air vehicles and
buses to use FasTrak Flex transponder to obtain toll free passage.
c) Expand Express Lanes hours of operations to be in effect from 5 am to 8 pm.
RESULT:
MOVER:
SECONDER:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
FAILED
Morrow, Member
Hashimoto, Member
Schulter
Wadler
Tebo
Page 6 of 8
August 10, 2016
18.
Sales Tax Measure Administrative and Policy Items
John Sighamony, Senior Transportation Planner, provided an overview of the staff report,
highlighting the Sales Tax Measure Program Elements.
Discussion ensued regarding the following: 1) Caltrain electrification; 2) grade separation
funding; 3) local streets and roads requirement; 4) suggested using the CAC/CWC as the
oversight committee should the potential tax measure pass, and; 5) expressed concern about
economic and geographic equity.
On order of Chairperson Wadler and there being no objection, the Committee forwarded
to the Board of Directors the list of administrative guideline and policy items for November
sales tax measure.
Member Morrow left the meeting at 5:47 p.m.
19.
Development Review Quarterly Report for April-June 2016
Melissa Cerrazo, Transportation Planner, provided the staff report.
Members of the Committee discussed the following: 1) suggested VTA needs to
aggressively critique projects that exacerbate the jobs and housing balance as this affects
transportation, and; 2) importance of future planning for transit travel time improvements
in the Tasman Drive Corridor.
the Development Review Quarterly Report for April-June 2016.
20.
Dynamic Transit Program – FLEX Pilot Project Update
Greta Helm, Senior Advisor Business Development, provided an overview of the staff
report and a presentation entitled “FLEX Pilot Project Update,” highlighting:
1) Background; 2) Program Goals; 3) Timeline; 4) FLEX Service Details; 5) Ridership;
6) Ridership by Hour; 7) Ridership by Stop; 8) Other Performance Measures; 9) Operating
Costs; 10) Marketing and Promotion; 11) Rider Survey – Key Takeaways; 12) Non-Rider
Survey – Key Takeaways; 13) Areas for future Exploration; 14) FLEX Operators’
Feedback; 15) Key Pilot Findings, and; 16) Next Steps.
Discussion ensued regarding the following: 1) would like to see the cost breakdown, and;
2) encouraged VTA to continue looking for first last mile connection strategies, such as an
Uber/Lyft partnership.
information on the FLEX Pilot Project.
21.
Bus Shelter Enhancement Strategy Update
On order of Chairperson Wadler and there being no objection, the Committee deferred
receiving a status update on the Bus Shelter Enhancement Strategy.
Page 7 of 8
August 10, 2016
COMBINED CAC AND CITIZENS WATCHDOG COMMITTEE ITEMS
22.
Citizens Advisory Committee and Citizens Watchdog Committee Work Plan
On order of Chairperson Wadler and there being no objection, the Committee reviewed
the Citizens Advisory Committee and Citizens Watchdog Committee Work Plans.
OTHER
23.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
There were no Announcements.
24.
ADJOURNMENT
On order of Chairperson Wadler and there being no objection, the meeting was
adjourned at 6:20 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Anita McGraw, Board Assistant
VTA Office of the Board Secretary
Page 8 of 8
August 10, 2016
9
Date:
Current Meeting:
Board Meeting:
August 30, 2016
September 7, 2016
October 6, 2016
BOARD MEMORANDUM
TO:
THROUGH:
General Manager, Nuria I. Fernandez
FROM:
Director of Government Affairs, Jim Lawson
SUBJECT:
Legislative Update Matrix
FOR INFORMATION ONLY
BACKGROUND:
The Legislative Update Matrix describes the key bills that are being considered by the California
State Legislature during the second year of the 2015-2016 regular session, as well as during the
special session called by Gov. Jerry Brown to address issues related to transportation funding.
The matrix indicates the status of these measures and any VTA positions with regard to them.
DISCUSSION:
The purpose of this report is to provide an update on recent developments concerning important
transportation issues facing lawmakers in Sacramento.
Climate Change: During the week of August 22, the Legislature approved and sent to Gov.
Brown two major bills that are intended to put in place a framework for reducing greenhouse gas
emissions beyond 2020. The first measure, SB 32 (Pavley), requires the California Air
Resources Board (CARB) to establish a post-2020 greenhouse gas emissions limit equivalent to
40 percent below the 1990 level to be achieved by 2030, consistent with an Executive Order that
was issued by the Governor in April 2015. The bill, however, does not extend the “market-based
compliance mechanism” provisions in current law that were used by CARB to set up and
implement the state’s cap-and-trade system. According to the Legislative Counsel’s Office,
without action on the part of the Assembly and Senate, these provisions would sunset on
December 31, 2020.
AB 197 (Garcia), the second measure, is intended to address concerns raised by moderate
Democrats in the Assembly about the need for the Legislature to play a much stronger role in
overseeing how CARB is implementing cap-and-trade and other elements of the state’s climate
strategy. It is tied to SB 32, meaning that both bills must be signed by the Governor in order to
9
take effect.
Specifically, AB 197 provides for the appointment of one senator by the Senate Rules
Committee and one Assemblymember by the Speaker to serve as ex-officio, non-voting
members on CARB. It also creates the Joint Legislative Committee on Climate Change Policies
consisting of at least three senators and at least three Assemblymembers to ascertain facts and
make recommendations to the Legislature concerning the state’s programs, policies and
investments related to climate change. Under the provisions of AB 197, CARB would be
required to make a presentation at least once a year to the Joint Legislative Committee on
Climate Change Policies regarding the reported emissions of greenhouse gases, criteria
pollutants and toxic air contaminants from all sectors covered by its Scoping Plan prepared
pursuant to the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32). This presentation must include
an evaluation of emissions trends, and a discussion of the regulatory requirements, initiatives and
other programs that may influence those trends.
Other key elements of AB 197 are as follows:
 Requires CARB to make available on its Internet Web site information regarding the
emissions of greenhouse gases, criteria pollutants and toxic air contaminants for each facility
that reports data to CARB. This information must be updated at least annually and displayed
in a manner that illustrates the changes in emissions levels over time.
 When adopting rules and regulations pursuant to the Global Warming Solutions Act to
achieve emissions reductions beyond the 2020 limit and to protect the state’s most impacted
and disadvantaged communities, requires CARB to consider the social costs of greenhouse
gas emissions, and to prioritize both of the following: (1) rules and regulations that result in
direct emissions reductions at large stationary sources and from mobile sources; and (2)
rules and regulations that result in direct emissions reductions from other sources.
 Requires each Scoping Plan Update prepared by CARB to identify the following information
for each emissions reduction measure, including any market-based compliance mechanism:
(1) the range of projected greenhouse gas emissions reductions that would result from the
measure; and (2) the cost-effectiveness, including avoided social costs, of the measure.
Gov. Brown has indicated that he will sign both SB 32 and AB 197 into law. While these two
bills do not resolve the uncertainty surrounding the future of cap-and-trade, they are a step in
right direction. By committing California, in statute, to achieving a 2030 greenhouse gas
emissions limit, SB 32 and AB 197 put to rest the question of whether the state’s climate efforts
would continue beyond 2020. Thus, the two bills set the stage for the Assembly and Senate to
seriously consider legislation next year to reauthorize cap-and-trade, given that cap-and-trade is
viewed as being an integral part of the state’s climate strategy and would need to remain in place
to achieve the 2030 greenhouse gas emissions limit.
Bills Pending in the Legislature: The Legislature is in the home stretch of the 2015-2016
regular session, which will come to an end at midnight on August 31. Between now and then,
the Assembly and Senate will conduct lengthy floor sessions to finish up their work. Some of
Page 2 of 8
9
the measures of interest that are still alive in the legislative process are as follows:
 AB 1550 (Gomez) requires the three-year investment plan prepared by the Department of
Finance for the expenditure of cap-and-trade auction proceeds to do the following: (1)
allocate a minimum of 25 percent of available dollars to projects located within the
boundaries of, and benefitting individuals living in, disadvantaged communities; (2) allocate
a minimum of 5 percent of available dollars to projects that benefit low-income households;
and (3) allocate a minimum of 5 percent of available dollars either to projects that benefit
low-income households located within a half mile of a disadvantaged community, or to
projects located within the boundaries of a low-income community that is within a half mile
of a disadvantaged community. Under the provisions of the bill, money allocated pursuant to
one of the aforementioned cannot count toward any of the other required minimum
allocations. By contrast, current law requires a minimum of 25 percent of available cap-andtrade money to be expended for projects that benefit disadvantaged communities, with 10
percent required to be located within such communities. The 10 percent counts toward
achieving the 25 percent minimum.
 AB 1613 (Budget Committee) appropriates $1.2 billion in “uncommitted” cap-and-trade
auction proceeds currently sitting in the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund to 19 different
categories of expenditures. Included in the bill are appropriations for the Transit and
Intercity Rail Capital Program ($100 million) and the Active Transportation Program ($5
million).
 AB 1889 (Mullin) facilitates the expenditure of $1.1 billion in Proposition 1A bond proceeds
previously appropriated to the California High-Speed Rail Authority for projects in the
northern- and southern-most portions of the state's high-speed train system, including $600
million dedicated to electrifying the Caltrain Corridor.
 AB 1964 (Bloom) modifies the state’s Clean Vehicle Program, which enables certain lowemission vehicles to access carpool lanes with a single occupant. Specifically, this
legislation: (1) eliminates the 2019 sunset date for green stickers, but retains this sunset date
for white stickers; (2) eliminates the 85,000 cap on the number of green stickers that can be
issued by the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV); (3) sets several different expiration
dates for green stickers, depending on when a particular sticker is issued; (4) prohibits the
DMV from issuing green stickers if the sale of eligible vehicles reaches at least 9.2 percent of
the total new car market share for two consecutive years; and (5) requires Caltrans to
eliminate access to individual carpool lanes for green-stickered vehicles at the request of the
appropriate regional transportation planning agency (RTPA), if certain conditions are met.
 SB 20 (Pavley) creates the Low Carbon Fuels Council to: (1) coordinate state agencies’
activities related to the acceleration and development of the in-state production of low carbon
fuels; (2) identify and evaluate any gaps in existing programs, policies or activities that may
impede the in-state construction of new or the expansion of existing low carbon fuel
production facilities; and (3) make recommendations to the Legislature regarding changes to
current state law that need to be made in order to help California achieve its greenhouse gas
emissions reduction goals.
Page 3 of 8
9
 SB 1383 (Lara) requires CARB to approve and begin implementing a comprehensive shortlived climate pollutants strategy to achieve a reduction in methane by 40 percent,
hydrofluorocarbon gases by 40 percent, and anthropogenic black carbon by 50 percent below
2013 levels by 2030.
Bills on the Governor’s Desk: On July 25, Gov. Brown signed into law AB 516 (Mullin),
which calls for developing a statewide temporary license plate system to ensure that purchased
vehicles are identifiable to law enforcement officials and agencies that operate toll facilities
during the period between the point-of-sale and when permanent plates are received by the
buyer. The Governor also signed SB 882 (Hertzberg) on August 22, which prohibits a public
transit agency from charging a minor with an infraction or misdemeanor for acts of fare evasion.
While this measure decriminalizes fare evasion committed by minors, public transit agencies
would still be able to levy fines and penalties against minors for such acts through an
administrative adjudication process.
Bills of interest that have been approved by the Legislature and are awaiting consideration by
Gov. Brown include the following:
 AB 2374 (Chiu), among other things, deletes provisions in current law that limit the use of
the Construction Manager/General Contractor (CMGC) delivery method for expressway
projects to only those included in a voter-approved expenditure plan, thereby allowing VTA
and other regional transportation agencies, as defined, to use CMGC for any expressway
project, as long as it is not on the state highway system.
 SB 824 (Beall) provide a few more tools and a little more flexibility to enable public transit
agencies to more effectively manage and utilize their formula shares under the Low Carbon
Transit Operations Program (LCTOP). The modest changes to LCTOP proposed by this bill
would put public transit agencies in a better position to maximize reductions in greenhouse
gas emissions by allowing them to expend their formula shares in a way that makes the most
sense for their individual systems and their unique set of circumstances.
 SB 838 (Budget Committee) is the transportation budget trailer bill. Included in SB 838 are
provisions requiring the Controller’s Office to use the same list of eligible recipients and the
same proportional operator shares from the fourth quarter of FY 2015 to distribute any
unallocated FY 2016, and all FY 2017 and FY 2018 State Transit Assistance Program (STA)
revenue-based funds. These provisions are intended to undo controversial changes to the
methodology used to distributed STA revenue-based funds that were implemented by the
Controller’s Office beginning with the first quarter allocations for FY 2016. These changes
have resulted in a shifting of STA revenue-based funds not only between different regions of
the state, but also between different public transit operators within each region, thereby
creating winners and losers up and down the state.
 SB 998 (Wieckowski) prohibits motorists from parking, stopping or driving in a roadway
lane that has been designated for the exclusive use of public transit buses. While the Vehicle
Code prohibits motorists from parking, stopping or leaving their cars at a curbside bus stop,
Page 4 of 8
9
there are no comparable provisions in state law relating to bus-only lanes. SB 998 corrects
this deficiency, so that public transit agencies would be able to address situations where
motorists are inappropriately using bus-only lanes and obstructing the operation of their bus
rapid transit (BRT) service.
 SB 1128 (Glazer) eliminates the January 1, 2017, sunset date pertaining to the Bay Area’s
ordinance requiring certain employers in the region to offer one of four specified commute
benefits to their employees, and allows the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC)
and the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) to continue to implement
this ordinance on a permanent basis.
Transportation Funding: On August 17, Senate Transportation & Housing Committee
Chairman Jim Beall and Assembly Transportation Committee Chairman Jim Frazier jointly
released a revised transportation funding proposal that combines elements from their respective
bills, SBX1-1 and AB 1591, as well as incorporates some of the suggestions offered by Gov.
Brown and Republican legislators. Since then, the proposal has been amended into SBX1-1,
which is currently pending before the Senate Appropriations Committee, and has been
introduced in the Assembly as a new bill, ABX1-26.
In general, the Beall-Frazier proposal is intended to generate new transportation dollars through a
variety of revenue sources to: (1) address the significant funding shortfalls that currently exist
for maintenance and rehabilitation work related to state highways and local streets/roads; (2)
improve mobility in key goods movement corridors; (3) provide additional investments in public
transit; and (4) supplement existing resources for active transportation. In addition, the
Beall/Frazier proposal attempts to fix a number of lingering and nagging challenges that have
been plaguing transportation funding for years, such as the volatility of the variable gasoline
excise tax, the loss of purchasing power of both the gas and diesel excise taxes through inflation,
the repayment of all outstanding loans owed by the General Fund to various transportation
accounts, and the diversion of vehicle weight fee revenues to the General Fund.
The Beall/Frazier proposal establishes the Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account to be
funded with revenues derived from the following sources:
 Increase in the gasoline excise tax of 17 cents per gallon (estimated to generate $2.5 billion
per year), which would be indexed to inflation every three years.
 Registration surcharge of $38 per year imposed on all motor vehicles (estimated to generate
$1.3 billion per year), which would be indexed to inflation every three years.
 Registration surcharge of $165 per year imposed on zero-emission vehicles (estimated to
generate $16 million per year), which would be indexed to inflation every three years. This
surcharge would be paid by the owner of a zero-emission vehicle starting with the second
year of ownership.
 Revenues obtained by Caltrans through the rental or sale of property, the sale of documents,
and charges for other miscellaneous services provided to the public (estimated to generate
Page 5 of 8
9
$149 million per year). Currently, these revenues are deposited into the General Fund and
are used for debt service on general obligation bonds issued for transportation purposes.
The Beall/Frazier proposal calls for distributing the revenues deposited into the new Road
Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account in the following manner:
 $200 million per year would be taken off the top for allocation to local jurisdictions that have
sought and gained voter approval of a local transportation special tax, or that have imposed
uniform developer or other fees solely for transportation improvements. The California
Transportation Commission (CTC) would be required to develop guidelines to define the
specific methodology that would be used to distribute these funds.
 $80 million per year would be taken off the top and distributed to the Active Transportation
Program. In addition, Caltrans, on an annual basis, would be required to identify savings to
be achieved through efficiencies implemented by the department. The funds resulting from
these savings, up to a maximum of $70 million, are required to be allocated to the Active
Transportation Program.
 For FY 2018 only, $100 million would be taken off the top and allocated to Caltrans to be
used to fund the implementation of regional advance environmental mitigation plans for
future transportation projects.
 Of the amount remaining in the Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account after the
aforementioned set-asides, 50 percent would be allocated to Caltrans for maintenance of the
state highway system, and for projects programmed in the State Highway Operation and
Protection Program (SHOPP). The other 50 percent would be provided to cities and counties
for their local roadway systems. In the latter case, the funds would be equally divided
between cities and counties, with the cities’ portion being allocated by a formula based on
population, and the counties’ share by a formula based on vehicle registrations and miles of
maintained county roads.
The Beall/Frazier proposal includes new funding for public transit and trade corridors, which
would be derived from the following revenue sources:
 Increase in the percentage of cap-and-trade auction proceeds continuously appropriated to the
Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program from 10 percent to 20 percent.
 Increase in the percentage of cap-and-trade auction proceeds continuously appropriated to the
Low Carbon Transit Operations Program from 5 percent to 10 percent.
 Increase in the diesel sales tax by a rate of 3.5 percent to provide an estimated $216 million
annually in additional funding for STA. The Beall/Frazier proposal also calls for indexing a
portion of the diesel sales tax rate currently dedicated to STA to inflation every three years.
Public transit agencies would be required to expend these new revenues for the following
purposes: (1) capital projects or services to maintain or repair existing vehicles or facilities;
(2) the design, acquisition or construction of new vehicles or facilities that would improve
Page 6 of 8
9
existing services; or (3) public transit service that would complement local efforts related to
repairing or improving local transportation infrastructure.
 Increase of 30 cents per gallon in the diesel excise tax (estimated to generate $900 million
per year), which would be indexed to inflation every three years. These new revenues would
be deposited into the existing Trade Corridors Improvement Fund and used for goods
movement projects programmed by the CTC according to the process spelled out in current
law. In addition, revenues apportioned to California from the formula-based National
Highway Freight Program established by the federal Fixing America’s Surface
Transportation (FAST) Act would be deposited into the Trade Corridors Improvement Fund
and allocated to projects in the same manner.
In addition to raising new revenues for transportation purposes, the Beall/Frazier proposal
would:
 Address the volatility of the variable portion of the state’s gasoline excise tax by: (1) ending
the Board of Equalization’s annual adjustments; (2) converting the variable rate to a fix rate
of 17.3 cents per gallon; and (3) indexing the fixed rate to inflation every three years to
maintain purchasing power.
 End the erosion of purchasing power of the existing 18-cent-per-gallon gasoline and 13-centper gallon diesel excise taxes by indexing them to inflation every three years.
 Gradually recapture vehicle weight fee revenues for transportation purposes over a five-year
period. Currently, vehicle weight fee revenues, which amount to roughly $1 billion a year,
are transferred from the State Highway Account to the General Fund and are used to pay debt
service on transportation-related general obligation bonds. The Beall/Frazier proposal aims
to have 100 percent of these revenues going to the State Highway Account beginning in FY
2022.
 Require the repayment of approximately $700 million in outstanding loans owed by the
General Fund to the State Highway Account, the Motor Vehicle Fuel Account, the Highway
Users Tax Account (HUTA), and the Motor Vehicle Account over a two-year period. Under
the Beall/Frazier proposal, one half of this outstanding balance must be repaid by June 30,
2017, and the remainder by June 30, 2018. These one-time revenues would be split 50
percent to Caltrans for state highway maintenance and SHOPP projects, and 50 percent to
cities/counties for local streets/roads.
 Require gas tax revenues derived from boats, agricultural vehicles and off-road vehicles to be
deposited into HUTA, rather than the General Fund, and distributed as follows: (1) 44
percent to the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP); (2) 44 percent to
cities/counties for local streets/roads; and (3) 12 percent to the SHOPP.
The Beall/Frazier proposal incorporates a number of policy reforms that were either included in
the Governor’s transportation funding package, or suggested by Assembly and Senate
Republicans. These policy measures include:
Page 7 of 8
9
 Creating an Office of the Transportation Inspector General to ensure that Caltrans, the
California High-Speed Rail Authority and other state agencies expending state transportation
funds are operating efficiently, effectively, and in compliance with applicable federal and
state laws.
 Providing an exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for roadway
maintenance projects occurring within existing rights-of-way.
 Pulling the CTC out from under the California State Transportation Agency (CalSTA) and
re-establishing it as a separate state government entity.
 Establishing an Advance Transportation Project Mitigation Program administered by the
state Natural Resources Agency to improve the success and effectiveness of actions
implemented to mitigate the natural resource impacts of future transportation projects by
establishing ways to undertake such actions well before the projects are constructed.
 Extending indefinitely the statutory authorization for Caltrans to participate in a federal
program that allows states to assume the responsibilities of the Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
Technically, the special session called by Gov. Brown last year to consider issues related to
transportation funding expires on November 30. Therefore, if the Legislature is not able to pass
a transportation funding bill before the two-year regular session concludes on August 31,
lawmakers could conceivably be called back to Sacramento any time before midnight on
November 30 to vote on such a measure if a deal appears to be in the works.
Prepared By: Kurt Evans, Government Affairs Manager
Memo No. 5395
Page 8 of 8
9.a
LEGISLATIVE UPDATE MATRIX
2015 - 2016 State Legislative Session
August 19, 2016
1B205
2B
2016 Regular Session Calendar
JANUARY
DAY
4B
1
Statutes signed into law in 2015 take effect.
4
Legislature reconvenes.
10
Budget must be submitted by the Governor to the Legislature on or before
this date.
15
Last day for policy committees to hear and report fiscal bills introduced in
their house of origin in 2015.
22
Last day for any committee to hear and report to the floor bills introduced in
22
Last day to submit bill requests to the Legislative Counsel’s Office.
31
Last day for bills introduced in 2015 to be passed out of their house of
origin.
JUNE
DAY
8B
3
Last day for bills introduced in 2016 to be passed out of their house of
origin.
15
Budget must be passed by midnight.
30
Last day for legislative measures to qualify for placement on November 8
general election ballot.
JULY
DAY
14B
9B
1
Last day for policy committees to hear and report bills introduced in the
other house. Summer Recess begins upon adjournment, provided that the
Budget Bill has been enacted.
AUGUST
DAY
FEBRUARY
DAY
10B
1
Legislature reconvenes from Summer Recess.
12
Last day for fiscal committees to hear and report to the floor bills
introduced in the other house.
MARCH
19
Last day to amend bills on the Assembly and Senate floors.
17
Spring Recess begins upon adjournment.
31
28
Legislature reconvenes from Spring Recess.
Last day for each house to pass bills. Final Recess begins at the end of this
day’s session.
5B
19
Last day for new bills to be introduced.
DAY
APRIL
DAY
Last day for policy committees to hear and report fiscal bills introduced in
30
MAY
DAY
6
Last day for policy committees to hear and report to the floor non-fiscal bills
introduced in their house of origin in 2016.
5
27
Last day for fiscal committees to hear and report to the floor bills introduced
in their house of origin in 2016.
DAY
SEPTEMBER
1B
6B
22
DAY
7B
2015-2016 Legislative Update Matrix
Last day for the Governor to sign or veto bills passed by the Legislature
before September 1, and in his possession on or after September 1.
DECEMBER
12B
2017-2018 Regular Session convenes.
Page 1 of 55
9.a
State Assembly Bills
State Assembly
Bills
Subject
Last
Amended
Status
AB 12
(Cooley)
State Agency
Regulations
By January 1, 2018, requires each state agency to do all of the following: (1) review all provisions
of the California Code of Regulations adopted by that state agency; (2) identify any regulations
that are duplicative, overlapping, inconsistent, or out-of-date; and (3) adopt, amend or repeal
regulations to reconcile or eliminate any duplication, overlap, inconsistencies, or out-of-date
provisions.
8/19/15
Senate
Appropriations
Committee
AB 51
(Quirk)
Motorcycles: Lane
Splitting
Defines “lane splitting” to mean driving a motorcycle that has two wheels in contact with the
ground between rows of stopped or moving vehicles in the same lane, including on divided or
undivided streets, roads or highways. Authorizes the California Highway Patrol (CHP) to develop
educational guidelines relating to lane splitting in a manner that would ensure the safety of the
motorcyclist, and the drivers and passengers of the surrounding vehicles.
6/1/16
Governor’s
Office
AB 197
(E. Garcia)
Joint Legislative
Committee on Climate
Change Policies
Provides for the appointment of one senator by the Senate Rules Committee and one
Assemblymember by the Speaker to serve as ex-officio, non-voting members of the California Air
Resources Board (CARB). Creates the Joint Legislative Committee on Climate Change Policies to
ascertain facts and make recommendations to the Legislature concerning the state’s programs and
policies related to climate change. Requires CARB to consider adopting measures to achieve the
state’s greenhouse gas emissions limits based on the following priority: (1) measures the result in
direct reductions in the emissions of greenhouse gases from large stationary sources, such as oil
refineries, and from the transportation sector in the most technologically feasible and cost-effective
manner possible that account for the societal costs of the emissions of greenhouse gases; and (2)
measures that result in direct reductions in the emissions of greenhouse gases from other sources in
the most technologically feasible and cost-effective manner possible that account for the societal
costs of the emissions of greenhouse gases. Requires CARB to rank all emissions reduction
measures based on both of the following: (1) the reductions in emissions of greenhouse gases,
criteria pollutants and toxic air contaminants resulting from the implementation of the measure; and
(2) the cost-effectiveness of the measure.
8/2/16
Senate
Appropriations
Committee
VTA
Position
Page 2 of 55
9.a
State Assembly
Bills
AB 318
(Chau)
Lost Items Found on
Public Transit
Property
Subject
If a lost or unclaimed item worth $100 or more in value is found on a vehicle or the property of a
public transit agency, requires the person who found the item to turn it in to the public transit
agency, rather than to law enforcement. Provides 90 days for the owner of the item to reclaim it
from the public transit agency. Allows the public transit agency to require payment by the owner
of a reasonable charge to defray the costs of storage and care of the property. If the reported value
of the item is $250 or more, and no owner appears and proves his or her ownership of the item
within 90 days, requires the public transit agency to cause notice of the item to be published at least
once in a newspaper of general circulation. If, after seven days, no owner appears and proves his or
her ownership of the item, and the person who found or saved the item pays the cost of the
publication, provides that the title shall vest in that person. If the item was found in the course of
employment by an employee of the public transit agency, requires the item to be sold at public
auction. If the reported value of the item is less than $250, and no owner appears and proves his or
her ownership of the item within 90 days, provides that the title shall vest in the person who found
the item. If the item was found in the course of employment by an employee of the public transit
agency, requires the item to be sold at public auction. Applies all of the following with respect to
lost or unclaimed bicycles turned in to or held by a public transit agency: (1) if the owner of a
bicycle appears within 45 days after receipt by the public transit agency, proves his or her
ownership, and pays all reasonable charges, requires the public transit agency to restore the bicycle
to the owner; (2) if the bicycle remains unclaimed after 45 days, allows the public transit agency to
dispose of it by sale at a public auction to the highest bidder; (3) requires the public transit agency
to give notice of the sale at least five days prior to the auction by publication in a newspaper of
general circulation in the county in which the bicycle was found; (4) if a bicycle remains unsold
after the auction, allows the public transit agency to destroy or otherwise dispose of it; and (5)
allows a public transit agency to donate an unclaimed bicycle after 45 days to a charitable
organization if the agency’s board of directors holds a public hearing to determine the organization
that would receive the bicycle and the agency provides notice at least five days prior to the
donation by publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the county in which the agency
operates. Prohibits a public transit agency from donating unclaimed bicycles more than two times
per calendar year. Provides that the number of bicycles donated shall not exceed 25 percent of the
total number of lost or unclaimed bicycles found or saved by the public transit agency during the
prior six months. Requires any public transit agency that donates unclaimed bicycles to a
charitable organization pursuant to the provisions of this bill to submit a report, as specified, to the
Assembly and Senate Judiciary Committees by January 1, 2020. Repeals all of the provisions of
the bill on January 1, 2021.
Last
Amended
6/11/15
Status
VTA
Position
Senate Judiciary
Committee
Page 3 of 55
9.a
State Assembly
Bills
Subject
Last
Amended
Status
AB 338
(R. Hernandez)
LA Metro: Local
Transportation Sales
Taxes
In addition to any other tax that it is authorized to impose or has imposed, allows the Los Angeles
County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LA Metro) to impose a transactions and use tax at
the rate of 0.5 percent for a period not to exceed 30 years that would be applicable in the
incorporated and unincorporated areas of Los Angeles County. Requires the ordinance imposing
the tax to contain the following: (1) an expenditure plan that lists the transportation projects and
programs to be funded from net revenues from the tax; (2) a requirement that the expenditure plan
include measures to ensure that net revenues are share equitably between regions of the county; (3)
a provision limiting LA Metro’s costs of administering the ordinance and the net revenues from the
tax to 1.5 percent of the total tax revenues; (4) a requirement that the net revenues from the tax,
defined to mean the total tax revenues less any refunds, costs of administration by the state Board
of Equalization and LA Metro’s administrative costs, be used to fund the transportation projects
and programs identified in the expenditure plan; (4) a requirement that LA Metro, during the
period that the ordinance is operative, allocate 20 percent of all net revenues from the tax for
operating costs associated with bus service provided by LA Metro and the municipal transit
operators in Los Angeles County; and (5) a requirement that LA Metro, during the period that the
ordinance is operative, allocate 5 percent of all net revenues from the tax for rail operations.
Requires LA Metro to notify the Legislature prior to taking action on any amendments to the
adopted expenditure plan. Provides that the ordinance shall become operative if approved by a
two-thirds vote of the electorate in Los Angeles County. Authorizes LA Metro to incur bonded
indebtedness payable from the net revenues of the tax.
4/13/15
Senate
Transportation
& Housing
Committee
AB 516
(Mullin)
Temporary License
Plates
No later than January 1, 2019, requires the Department of Motor Vehicles to develop and
implement an operational system that allows a vehicle dealer or lessor-retailer to electronically
report the sale of a vehicle and provide a temporary license plate. Requires the dealer or lessorretailer to attach a temporary license plate at the point of sale. Allows a vehicle to operate with
temporary license plates until either: (1) the permanent license plates and registration card are
received by the vehicle owner; or (2) 90 days have lapsed from the vehicle’s selling date. Allows a
vehicle to continue to display a report-of-sale form or temporary license plates after 90 days if the
owner provides proof that he or she has submitted an application to the DMV, and it has been no
more than 14 days since the permanent license plates were issued to the owner. Requires the DMV
to assess a fee for the recording of notices of delinquent parking and toll evasion violations given to
the department by a processing agency that is sufficient to provide a total amount equal to at least
its actual costs related to administering the electronic report-of-sale and temporary license plate
system. Beginning January 1, 2019, authorizes vehicle dealers to raise their document processing
fees by $5. In addition, allows vehicle dealers to impose an electronic filing charge for reporting
vehicle sales and producing temporary license plates. Specifies that it is a felony for a person to
alter, forge, counterfeit, or falsify a temporary license plate.
6/23/16
Signed into
Law: Chapter
#90
VTA
Position
Support
Page 4 of 55
9.a
State Assembly
Bills
Subject
Last
Amended
Status
AB 590
(Dahle)
Cap-and-Trade:
Biomass Power
Generation
Allows cap-and-trade auction proceeds deposited into the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund to be
made available to the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission, upon
appropriation by the Legislature, for purposes related to maintaining the current level of biomass
power generation and geothermal energy generation in California, and revitalizing currently idle
facilities in strategically located regions. To be eligible for funding, requires a generation facility
to satisfy all of the following: (1) the energy is generated on and after January 1, 2016; (2) the
energy is generated using biomass wood wastes and residues or geothermal resources, and is sold to
a load-serving entity; (3) the energy is generated at a facility with a generation capacity of more
than three megawatts; and (4) the energy is generated within California and sold to customers
within the state. In prioritizing projects for funding, requires the State Energy Resources
Conservation and Development Commission to maximize the reduction of greenhouse gas
emissions achieved by a project for each dollar awarded. Working in consultation with the
California Air Resources Board (CARB), requires the State Energy Resources Conservation and
Development Commission to ensure that projects receiving funding achieve net reductions in
greenhouse gas emissions.
7/9/15
Senate
Appropriations
Committee
AB 620
(R. Hernandez)
LA Metro Express
Lanes: Low-Income
Assistance Program
Requires the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LA Metro) to take
additional steps to increase enrollment and participation in its existing low-income assistance
program related to its I-10 and I-110 express lanes. In this regard, requires LA Metro to improve
the awareness of the program through advertising, and by working with local community groups
and social service agencies to distribute information about the program. Requires LA Metro to
consider offering greater incentives to encourage participation in the program.
1/27/16
Senate Floor
VTA
Position
Page 5 of 55
9.a
State Assembly
Bills
Subject
Last
Amended
Status
AB 626
(Chiu)
Public Works
Contracts: Claims
Establishes a claim resolution process that would be applicable to all public works contracts entered
into by a public entity on or after January 1, 2016. Upon receipt of a claim from a contractor sent
by registered mail or certified mail with return receipt requested, requires the public entity to
conduct a reasonable review of the claim and, within a period not to exceed 45 days, to provide a
written statement to the contractor identifying what portion of the claim is disputed and what
portion is undisputed. Allows this time period to be extended by mutual agreement between the
public entity and the contractor. Requires the contractor to furnish reasonable documentation to
support the claim. Specifies that if a public entity needs approval from its governing board to
provide such a written statement to the contractor and its governing board does not meet within the
45-day period or within the mutually agreed to extension of time following receipt of the claim,
allows the public entity to have up to three days following the next publicly noticed meeting of its
governing board after the 45-day period or time extension to provide the written statement to the
contractor. Provides that failure by the public entity to respond to the claim within the specified
time period shall result in the claim being rejected in its entirety. Requires any payment due on the
undisputed portion of the claim to be processed and made within 60 days after the public entity
issues its written statement. If the contractor disputes the public entity’s written statement or if the
public entity fails to respond to a claim within the time prescribed, allows the contractor to demand
in writing an informal conference to meet and confer for settlement of the issues in dispute.
Requires any disputed portion of the claim following the conclusion of the meet-and-confer
conference, as identified in writing, to be submitted to non-binding arbitration, with the public
entity and the contractor sharing the associated costs equally. Unless otherwise agreed to by the
public entity and the contractor in writing, provides that the mediation conducted pursuant to this
bill shall excuse any further obligation to mediate after litigation has commenced. Allows a
contractor to present a claim to a public entity on behalf of a subcontractor or a lower-tier
subcontractor lacking legal standing to assert such a claim. Requires the contractor to notify the
subcontractor in writing within 45 days as to whether the claim was presented to the public entity,
or to provide the subcontractor a statement of reasons as to why the claim was not presented.
Subjects amounts for claims not paid by the public entity to the contractor in a timely manner as
required by this bill to bear interest at 7 percent per annum. Exempts certain state agencies from
the provisions of the bill. Sunsets the provisions of the bill on January 1, 2020.
6/8/16
Senate
Appropriations
Committee
AB 645
(Williams)
Electricity: California
Renewables Portfolio
Standard
Pursuant to the California Renewables Portfolio Standard, requires the California Public Utilities
Commission (CPUC), by January 1, 2017, to establish the quantity of electricity products from
eligible renewable energy resources to be procured by each retail seller for specified compliance
periods sufficient to ensure that the procurement of electricity products from these resources
achieves 50 percent of retail sales by December 31, 2030. Requires the quantities to reflect
reasonable progress in each of the intervening years sufficient to ensure that the procurement of
electricity products from eligible renewable energy resources achieves 25 percent of retail sales by
December 31, 2016; 33 percent by December 31, 2020; 38 percent by December 31, 2023; 44
percent by December 31, 2026; and 50 percent by December 31, 2030. Requires the CPUC to
require retail sellers to procure not less than 50 percent of retail sales of electricity products from
eligible renewable energy resources in all subsequent years.
As
Introduced
Senate
Appropriations
Committee
VTA
Position
Page 6 of 55
9.a
State Assembly
Bills
Subject
AB 678
(O’Donnell)
Energy Efficiency and
Greenhouse Gas
Reductions Ports
Program
Requires the California Air Resources Board (CARB), in conjunction with the State Energy
Resources Conservation and Development Commission, to develop and implement an Energy
Efficiency and Greenhouse Gas Reductions Ports Program. Provides that the purpose of this
program is to fund energy efficiency upgrades and investments at public ports that help reduce the
emissions of criteria pollutants, toxic air contaminants and greenhouse gases. Authorizes CARB to
expend cap-and-trade auction proceeds that it receives from an appropriation from the Greenhouse
Gas Reduction Fund to implement the program. In order to receive funding from the program for
energy-related projects, requires a port to develop and adopt, in consultation with the respective
electric utility providing service to the port, an energy plan. Requires a port’s energy plan to be
approved by the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission. Provides
that the plan shall: (1) adhere to the state’s preferred energy loading order; and (2) require
benchmarking for energy retrofit projects and reporting of measurable energy savings. In
prioritizing projects for funding, requires CARB to consider the extent to which a project would
reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and provide environmental and public health co-benefits,
including improved air and water quality.
8/18/15
Senate
Appropriations
Committee
AB 779
(Garcia)
Local Government:
Financial Disclosures
Within six months of the close of a fiscal year, requires a city, county or special district to post a
link on the home page of its Internet Web site that contains the names, positions and total
compensation, including a breakdown of the types of compensation provided, of each elected
official within that entity for the previous fiscal year and the 10 employees with the greatest total
compensation. Defines “total compensation” to include payments for salaries, overtime, unused
vacation time, stipends, pension contributions, retirement contributions, health premium
contributions, automobile allowances, phone allowances, and technology allowances. Specifies
that “total compensation” does not include reimbursements or payments for work-related travel
expenses.
6/2/16
Senate
Governance &
Finance
Committee
AB 828
(Low)
Regulated
Transportation
Services
Until January 1, 2018, excludes any motor vehicle operated in connection with a transportation
network company from the definition of “commercial vehicle” if the vehicle: (1) is operated only
for passenger service; (2) is limited to seven passengers, not including the driver; (3) is operated
exclusively by the person to whom it is registered or insured; (4) is not a paratransit vehicle; (5) is
not operated for public transit services; and (6) is not operated for school bus services. Requires
the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to conduct an investigation to consider whether
existing statutes and regulations relating to for-hire passenger transportation services meet the
public interest, encourage innovation, and create a fair and competitive transportation market
among companies that provide regulated transportation services. Requires the CPUC to complete
this investigation, and report its conclusions and recommendations to the Legislature by January 1,
2017.
6/30/16
Senate
Appropriations
Committee
Last
Amended
Status
VTA
Position
Page 7 of 55
9.a
State Assembly
Bills
Subject
AB 869
(Cooper)
Fare Evasion and
Prohibited Conduct on
Transit Vehicles
For those public transit agencies that use an administrative adjudication process for fare evasion
and passenger misconduct violations, provides that a person who fails to pay the administrative
penalty when due or to have the violation dismissed may be subject to criminal penalties. Requires
the public transit agency to include in the notice of fare evasion or passenger misconduct a printed
statement indicating that the person may be charged with an infraction or misdemeanor if the
administrative penalty is not paid when due or is not dismissed. Requires the public transit agency
to dismiss the original notice of fare evasion or passenger misconduct, and to make no further
attempts to collect the administrative penalty if the person is charged with an infraction or
misdemeanor after failing to pay the administrative penalty or failing to successfully complete the
administrative adjudication process. Requires the public transit agency to serve the person charged
with an infraction or misdemeanor with a new notice of fare evasion or passenger misconduct that
sets forth the criminal violation.
6/18/15
Senate Floor
AB 1030
(Ridley-Thomas)
Cap-and-Trade:
Disadvantaged
Workers
For projects involving hiring that are seeking an allocation of cap-and-trade auction proceeds from
the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, requires priority to be given to those projects that support the
targeted training and hiring of workers from disadvantaged communities for career-track jobs.
7/7/15
Senate
Appropriations
Committee
AB 1108
(Burke)
Zero-Emission
Vehicles
Declares that it is the policy of the state to foster the use of zero-emission vehicles as an
environmentally and economically beneficial strategy to reduce air pollution, and promote public
health and well-being. No later than December 31, 2017, requires the California Air Resources
Board (CARB) to adopt a regulation establishing that by 2025, no less than 15 percent of all new
car sales within the state shall be zero-emission vehicles.
8/16/16
Senate Floor
AB 1289
(Cooper)
Transportation
Network Companies:
Drivers
Requires a transportation network company to conduct, or have a third party conduct, a local and
national criminal background check for each participating driver that includes both of the
following: (1) a multi-state and multi-jurisdictional criminal records locator or other similar
commercial nationwide database with validation; and (2) a search of the U.S. Department of
Justice National Sex Offender Public Website. Prohibits a transportation network company from
contracting with, employing or retaining a driver if he or she is currently registered on the U.S.
Department of Justice National Sex Offender Website, or has been convicted of any of the
following: (1) a violent felony; (2) any misdemeanor assault or battery; (3) any domestic violence
offense; or (4) driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs.
8/2/16
Senate Floor
AB 1360
(Ting)
Transportation
Network Companies:
Ridesharing
Allows a transportation network company or a charter-party carrier of passengers that prearranges a
ride among multiple passengers who share the ride in whole or in part to charge an individual fare,
rather than a vehicle-mileage or time-of-use fare, provided that all of the following conditions are
met: (1) the vehicle seats no more than seven passengers, not including the driver; (2) the driver is
a participating driver, as defined; (3) the vehicle is not used to provide public transit services or to
carry passengers over a fixed route; (4) the vehicle is not used to provide pupil transportation or
public paratransit services; and (5) the individual fare for each passenger is less than the fare that
would be charged for the same ride to a passenger traveling alone.
7/2/15
Senate Energy,
Utilities &
Communications
Committee
Last
Amended
Status
VTA
Position
Page 8 of 55
9.a
State Assembly
Bills
Subject
Last
Amended
AB 1364
(Linder)
California
Transportation
Commission
Excludes the California Transportation Commission (CTC) from the California State
Transportation Agency (CalSTA), and establishes it as a separate and independent entity in state
government.
As
Introduced
Senate
Transportation
& Housing
Committee
AB 1549
(Wood)
State Highway Rightsof-Way: Fiber-Optic
Cables
Requires Caltrans to maintain an inventory on a centralized database of all broadband conduits that:
(1) house fiber optic communication cables; (2) are owned by the department; (3) are located in
state highway rights-of-way; and (4) are installed on or after January 1, 2017. Requires Caltrans to
make this information available, upon request, to companies or organizations working on
broadband deployment. During the design phase of a Caltrans-led highway construction project
that is parallel to the highway, spans at least two overpasses, and involves construction methods
suitable for installing broadband conduit, requires the department to notify companies and
organizations working on broadband deployment of the project on its Internet Web site to
encourage collaborative broadband installations. As part of each project, requires Caltrans to
install broadband conduit capable of supporting fiber optic communication cables if no company or
organization working on broadband deployment collaborates with the department and if no
broadband conduit previously exists in a project area.
6/30/16
Senate
Appropriations
Committee
AB 1550
(Gomez)
Greenhouse Gas
Reduction Fund:
Investment Plan
Requires the three-year investment plan prepared by the Department of Finance for the expenditure
of cap-and-trade auction proceeds deposited into the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund to do the
following: (1) allocate a minimum of 25 percent of available dollars in the fund to projects located
within the boundaries of, and benefiting individuals living in, disadvantaged communities; and (2)
allocate a minimum of 20 percent of available dollars to projects that either benefit low-income
households, or are located within the boundaries of, and benefit individuals living in, low-income
communities, which must be separate from the minimum 25 percent required for disadvantaged
communities. Defines “low-income households” to mean those with household incomes at or
below 80 percent of the statewide median income, or with household incomes at or below the
threshold designated as low income by the Department of Housing and Community Development’s
list of state income limits. Defines “low-income communities” to mean census tracts with median
household incomes at or below 80 percent of the statewide median income, or with household
incomes at or below the threshold designated as low income by the Department of Housing and
Community Development’s list of state income limits.
8/2/16
Senate
Appropriations
Committee
Status
VTA
Position
Page 9 of 55
9.a
State Assembly
Bills
Subject
AB 1555
(Gomez)
Cap-and-Trade
Auction Proceeds: FY
2017 Funds
For FY 2017, appropriates $800 million in cap-and-trade auction proceeds deposited into the
Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund for the following:
(1) $290 million to the California Air
Resources Board (CARB) for low carbon transportation and infrastructure programs; (2) $10
million to CARB for active transportation and transit pass investments; (3) $100 million to the
Department of Community Services and Development, and the California Conservation Corps for
weatherization and low-income solar rooftop programs; (4) $100 million to the State Energy
Resources Conservation and Development Commission, and the Department of Water Resources
for equipment and other replacement programs; (5) $10 million to the Department of Water
Resources for energy efficient groundwater pump replacement grant programs; (6) $5 million to
the Department of Food and Agriculture, and $15 million to the Department of Resources
Recycling and Recovery to provide incentive programs for water diversion, biogas development
and compost programs; (7) $10 million to the Department of Food and Agriculture for on-farm
energy and water efficiency programs; (8) $100 million to the Department of Fish and Wildlife for
wetland development, rehabilitation and enhancement; (9) $85 million to the California Coastal
Conservancy for wetland and watershed restoration, and carbon sequestration; (10) $15 million to
the Natural Resources Agency for riparian and revegetation programs; (11) $25 million to the
Natural Resources Agency for local-climate-beneficial projects for urban greening, urban canopies,
urban brownfield conversation, and other related projects; (12) $10 million to the Natural
Resources Agency for agricultural and rangeland carbon sequestration programs; and (13) $25
million to the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection for urban forestry. States the intent of the
Legislature to set aside and reserve $150 million in future cap-and-trade auction proceeds for
legislative priorities.
3/28/16
Assembly
Budget
Committee
AB 1569
(Steinorth)
CEQA: Exemption for
Certain Transportation
Projects
Exempts from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) a project that consists of the
inspection, maintenance, repair, rehabilitation, replacement, or removal of existing transportation
infrastructure, including highways, roadways, bridges, tunnels, culverts, public transit systems,
bikeways, paths and sidewalks serving bicycles or pedestrians, and the addition of auxiliary lanes
or bikeways to existing transportation infrastructure, if the project meets all of the following
conditions: (1) the project is located within an existing right-of-way; (2) any area surrounding the
right-of-way that is to be altered as a result of construction activities that are necessary for the
completion of the project will be restored to its condition before the project; and (3) the project
does not add additional motor vehicle lanes, except auxiliary lanes.
3/28/16
Assembly
Natural
Resources
Committee
Last
Amended
Status
VTA
Position
Page 10 of 55
9.a
State Assembly
Bills
Subject
AB 1572
(Campos)
School Transportation
Provides that a pupil attending a public, non-charter school that receives Title 1 federal funding
shall be entitled to free transportation to and from school if either of the following conditions are
met: (1) the pupil resides more than one-half mile from the school; or (2) the neighborhood
through which the pupil must travel to get to school is unsafe due to such factors as stray dogs, lack
of sidewalks, known gang activity, presence of environmental problems and hazards, required
crossings of freeways or busy intersections, or other reasons as documented by stakeholders.
Requires a school district not currently providing transportation to all pupils attending schools that
receives Title 1 federal funding to implement a plan to ensure that all pupils entitled to free
transportation pursuant to this bill receive it. Requires the plan to be developed in consultation
with teachers, school administrators, regional and local transit authorities, local air districts,
Caltrans, parents, pupils, and other stakeholders. Specifies that if free, dependable and timely
transportation is currently not already available to pupils who are entitled to it pursuant to this bill,
the school district must ensure that such pupils are provided free transportation. Allows a school
district to partner with a municipality owned transit system to provide the transportation required
pursuant to this bill to middle school and high school pupils if all of the following conditions are
met: (1) all drivers of the municipality owned transit system are public employees; and (2) the
municipality owned transit system can certify that the transit system can ensure consistent,
adequate routes and schedules to enable pupils to get home, to school and back, and does not
charge the school district more than marginal cost for each transit pass. Creates the Transportation
and Access to Public School Fund. Requires all transportation provided pursuant to this bill to be
reimbursed by the Transportation and Access to Public School Fund. Upon appropriation by the
Legislature, requires revenues distributed to the Transportation and Access to Public School Fund
to be allocated to local educational agencies pursuant to a process established by the Department of
Education.
Last
Amended
4/21/16
Status
VTA
Position
Assembly
Appropriations
Committee
Page 11 of 55
9.a
State Assembly
Bills
AB 1591
(Frazier)
Transportation
Funding
Subject
Last
Amended
Proposes to generate new revenues for transportation purposes from the following sources: (1) an
increase in the gasoline excise tax of 22.5 cents per gallon; (2) an increase in the diesel excise tax
of 30 cents per gallon; (3) a registration surcharge of $38 per year imposed on all motor vehicles;
and (4) a registration surcharge of $165 per year imposed on zero-emission vehicles. Requires the
repayment over the next two years of approximately $879 million in outstanding loans owed by the
General Fund to the State Highway Account, the Motor Vehicle Fuel Account, the Highway Users
Tax Account (HUTA), and the Motor Vehicle Account. Beginning July 1, 2019, and every three
years thereafter, indexes the gas tax and the diesel excise tax to inflation. Calls for the revenues
derived from the 30-cent-per-gallon increase in the diesel excise tax to be deposited into the Trade
Corridors Improvement Fund and used for goods movement projects programmed by the California
Transportation Commission (CTC). Requires the revenues derived from the 22.5-cent-per gallon
increase in the gas tax and the two vehicle registration surcharges to be deposited into a new Road
Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account. Requires the revenues in the account to be used for the
following purposes: (1) road maintenance and rehabilitation; (2) safety projects; (3) railroad
grade separations; and (4) active transportation and pedestrian/bicycle safety projects in
conjunction with any other allowable project. Requires 5 percent of the funds in the Road
Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account to be set aside for counties that currently do not have a
local transportation sales tax, but gain voter approval for one after July 1, 2016. Allocates the
remaining balance in the account after the 5-percent set-aside as follows: (1) 50 percent to Caltrans
for state highway maintenance, or State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP)
projects; and (2) 50 percent to cities and counties for their local roadway systems. In the latter
case, equally divides the funds between cities and counties, with the cities’ portion being allocated
by a formula based on population, and the counties’ share by a formula based on vehicle
registrations and miles of maintained county roads. Requires cities and counties to use their
formula shares for any of the following: (1) improvements to transportation facilities that will
assist in reducing further deterioration of the existing roadway system; (2) to satisfy a local match
requirement for federal or state funds for similar purposes; or (3) an active transportation or
pedestrian/bicycle safety project that is done in conjunction with any other eligible project. Allows
a city or county to spend its formula share for other priorities only if it has an average Pavement
Condition Index that meets or exceeds 85. In order to remain eligible for an allocation from the
Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account, requires cities and counties to maintain their
historic commitment of local funds for street/road purposes by annually spending not less than the
average of its expenditures from FY 2010, FY 2011 and FY 2012. Increases the percentage of capand-trade auction proceeds distributed to the Transit and Intercity Rail Program from 10 percent to
20 percent. Requires 20 percent of cap-and-trade auction proceeds to be distributed to the Trade
Corridors Improvement Fund. Converts the variable gas tax rate to a fixed rate of 18 cents per
gallon and indexes it to inflation every three years, beginning July 1, 2019. Eliminates the Board of
Equalization’s annual adjustments to the diesel excise tax rate pursuant to the 2010-2011
transportation funding swap. Prohibits vehicle weight fee revenues from being used to pay debt
service on transportation general obligation bonds or from being loaned to the General Fund.
As
Introduced
Status
VTA
Position
Assembly
Transportation
Committee
Page 12 of 55
9.a
State Assembly
Bills
Subject
AB 1592
(Bonilla)
Contra Costa
Transportation
Authority:
Autonomous Vehicles
Pilot Project
Authorizes the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) to conduct a pilot project for the
testing of autonomous vehicles that do not have an operator, and that are not equipped with a
steering wheel, a brake pedal or an accelerator, provided that the following requirements are met:
(1) the testing is conducted only at a privately owned business park designated by CCTA and at the
GoMentum Station located within the boundaries of the former Concord Naval Weapons Station;
(2) the autonomous vehicles operate at speeds of less than 35 miles per hour; and (3) a change in
ownership of the property comprising the GoMentum Station does not affect the authorization to
conduct the testing. Requires CCTA or a private entity or a combination of the two to obtain an
instrument of insurance, surety bond or proof of self-insurance in an amount of $5 million prior to
the start of testing of any autonomous vehicle on or across a public road. Requires the operator of
the autonomous vehicle technology being tested to disclose to an individual participating in the
pilot project what personal information, if any, concerning the individual is collected by the
autonomous vehicle. Specifies that the bill does not limit the authority of the Department of Motor
Vehicles (DMV) to promulgate regulations governing the testing and operation of autonomous
vehicles on public roads, with or without the presence of a driver inside the vehicle.
8/2/16
Senate Floor
AB 1595
(Campos)
Mass Transportation
Employees: Human
Trafficking Training
Requires a private or public employer that provides mass transportation services in California to
train its relevant employees in recognizing the signs of human trafficking and how to report those
signs to the appropriate law enforcement agency. Requires the Department of Justice to develop
guidelines for this training that include all of the following: (1) the definition of human trafficking,
including sex and labor trafficking; (2) myths and misconceptions about human trafficking; (3)
red flags of human trafficking to be aware of, including physical and mental signs; and (4)
guidance on how to report human trafficking, including national hotlines and that the person
reporting may do so confidentially. By January 1, 2018, requires this training to be incorporated
into the initial training process for all new employees who are likely to interact or come into
contact with victims of human trafficking. Requires all existing employees who are likely to
interact or come into contact with victims of human trafficking to receive this training by January
1, 2018. Exempts taxi services and airlines from the provisions of the bill.
3/29/16
Assembly
Appropriations
Committee
AB 1610
(Budget Committee)
Transportation Budget
Trailer Bill
Provides that after the amounts required under current law have been repaid using either tribal
gaming or Budget Stabilization Account revenues to various transportation accounts for prior loans
made to the General Fund, or in any year during which any portion of the outstanding loans are
repaid from the Budget Stabilization Account in an amount that is greater than or equal to the
amount of tribal gaming revenues, requires tribal gaming revenues to be remitted to the California
Gambling Control Commission for deposit in the General Fund. For the third and fourth quarters
of FY 2016, and for all four quarters of FY 2017 and FY 2018, requires the Controller’s Office to
calculate and publish the allocation of State Transit Assistance Program (STA) revenue-based
funds based on the same list of public transit operators and the same individual operator ratios that
were published by the Controller’s Office for the fourth quarter of FY 2015. Requires the
remaining FY 2016 distributions of STA revenue-based funds to individual public transit operators
be adjusted so that the total FY 2016 amount received by an operator ultimately reflects the FY
2015 operator ratios. Effective April 1, 2017, increases the base vehicle registration fee from $43
to $53, which shall be adjusted annually pursuant to the Consumer Price Index.
6/13/16
Assembly Floor:
Concurrence
Last
Amended
Status
VTA
Position
Support
Page 13 of 55
9.a
State Assembly
Bills
Subject
Last
Amended
Status
VTA
Position
AB 1640
(Stone)
Retirement: Public
Transit Employees
Clarifies that public transit employees whose interests are protected under Section 5333(b) of Title
49 of the United States Code and who became a member of a state or local public retirement system
prior to December 30, 2014, are exempt from the California Public Employees’ Pension Reform
Act of 2013 (PEPRA).
6/20/16
Senate Floor
AB 1641
(Allen)
Private Shuttles
Allows a public transit agency, by ordinance or resolution, to permit the vehicles of a private
shuttle service provider to stop for the loading or unloading of its passengers alongside any or all
curb spaces designated for the passengers of the public transit agency’s buses. States that it is not
the intent of the Legislature to replace public transit service.
As
Introduced
Assembly
Transportation
Committee
AB 1661
(McCarthy)
Sexual Harassment
Training and
Education
Requires local agency officials to receive sexual harassment prevention training and education if
the agency provides any type of compensation, salary or stipend to those officials. Defines “local
agency official” to mean any member of a local agency’s legislative board and any elected local
agency official. Allows a local agency to also require any of its employees to receive such training
and education. If applicable, requires each local agency official or employee to receive at least two
hours of sexual harassment prevention training and education within the first six months of taking
office or commencing employment, and every two years thereafter. Provides that this training shall
be in addition to any other law requiring similar or related training. Requires a local agency to
maintain records indicating both of the following: (1) the dates that local agency officials or
employees satisfied the requirements of this bill; and (2) the entity that provided the training.
Requires an entity that develops curricula for this training and education to consult with the Office
of the Attorney General, city attorney or county counsel regarding the sufficiency and accuracy of
the curricula content. Allows an entity to include local sexual harassment prevention training and
education policies in the curricula.
6/13/16
Senate
Appropriations
Committee
AB 1665
(Bonilla)
Contra Costa
Transportation
Authority:
Transactions and Use
Taxes
Until December 31, 2024, allows the Contra Costa Transportation Authority to impose a
transactions and use tax for the support of countywide transportation programs at a rate of not more
than 0.5 percent that would, in combination with all other such taxes imposed in the county, exceed
the state’s limit of 2 percent, subject to the following conditions: (1) the authority adopts an
ordinance imposing the tax by the appropriate voting approval requirement; and (2) the ordinance
is submitted to the county’s electorate on a November general election ballot and is approved by
the voters pursuant to Article XIII C of the California Constitution.
5/9/16
Signed into
Law: Chapter
#45
AB 1707
(Linder)
Written Public
Records Requests
Requires a local agency’s response to a written request for public records that includes a denial of
the request, in whole or in part, to be in writing. Requires a local agency’s written response
demonstrating that the record in question is exempt under an express provision of state law to also
identify the type of record withheld and the specific exemption that justifies the withholding of that
type of record.
3/28/16
Assembly Local
Government
Committee
Sponsor
Page 14 of 55
9.a
State Assembly
Bills
Subject
Last
Amended
Status
AB 1710
(Calderon)
Zero-Emission and
Near-Zero-Emission
Vehicles
By January 1, 2019, requires the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to develop and
implement a comprehensive program to promote zero-emission and near-zero-emission vehicle
deployment in the state to drastically increase the use of those vehicles, and to meet the goals
established by the Governor and the Legislature. Requires this program to consist of a portfolio of
incentives, including the following: (1) an employer incentive program; (2) an incentive program
targeted at low-income individuals; and (3) on-road incentives. Specifies that incentives may
include grants, loans, revolving loans, or other appropriate measures. Requires the incentives to be
funded with cap-and-trade auction proceeds deposited into the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund,
subject to annual appropriations by the Legislature. For purposes of calculating the amount of sales
and use tax owed, excludes the cost of a new or used zero-emission or near-zero-emission vehicle
purchased by a low-income individual that does not exceed $40,000. For each taxable year
beginning January 1, 2017, and before January 1, 2026, provides an income tax credit in an amount
equal to $2,500 to a qualified taxpayer who purchased a zero-emission or near-zero-emission
vehicle during the taxable year.
4/5/16
Assembly
Appropriations
Committee
AB 1717
(Hadley)
Cap-and-Trade: HighSpeed Rail
Provides that if the state’s high-speed rail project becomes ineligible for cap-and-trade funding
from the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund because of the selection of an alternative initial
operating segment by the California High-Speed Rail Authority that is not as described in its 2012
business plan, requires the 25 percent in cap-and-trade auction proceeds that is required to be
allocated to the authority under current law to be, instead, continuously appropriated to the Transit
and Intercity Rail Capital Program.
3/18/16
Assembly
Transportation
Committee
VTA
Position
Page 15 of 55
9.a
State Assembly
Bills
Subject
Last
Amended
Status
AB 1746
(Stone)
Transit-Bus-Only
Traffic Corridors
Allows the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA), the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit
District (AC Transit), the Central Contra Costa Transit Authority (County Connection), the
Livermore Amador Valley Transit Authority, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation
Authority (LA Metro), North County Transit District, the San Diego Association of Governments
(SANDAG), and the San Diego Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) to utilize the shoulders of state
highways within their service areas as transit-bus-only traffic corridors, subject to the approval of
Caltrans and the California Highway Patrol (CHP). Requires these agencies to determine jointly
with Caltrans and the CHP which state highway segments within their service areas would be
designated as transit-bus-only traffic corridors based on right-of-way availability and capacity, peak
congestion hours, and the most heavily congested areas. Requires the agencies to actively work
with Caltrans and the CHP to develop guidelines that ensure driver and vehicle safety, as well as
the integrity of the highway infrastructure. Requires the agencies and Caltrans to monitor the state
of repair of highway shoulders used as transit-bus-only traffic corridors. Requires the agencies to
be responsible for all costs associated with this effort, including those costs related to repairs
attributable to the operation of transit buses on highway shoulders. Two years after an agency
commences the operation of public transit service on a highway shoulder, requires the agency, in
conjunction with Caltrans and the CHP, to submit a report to the Legislature that includes all of the
following: (1) information regarding the geographic scope of the service; (2) a copy of the
guidelines agreed to by the agency, Caltrans and the CHP; (3) information about any highway
modifications; (4) information regarding the costs associated with the service; and (5)
performance measures used to evaluate the success of the service, such as safety, freeway
operations, and public transit travel time reliability and savings. Requires the agency to post the
report on its Internet Web site to enable the public to access it.
5/24/16
Senate
Transportation
& Housing
Committee
AB 1768
(Gallagher)
High-Speed Rail:
Bond Funding
Specifies that no further bonds shall be sold for high-speed rail purposes pursuant to the Safe,
Reliable High-Speed Passenger Train Bond Act for the 21 st Century (Proposition 1A), except as
specifically provided with respect to an existing appropriation for early improvement projects
related to the Phase I blended system. Upon appropriation by the Legislature, requires the unspent
proceeds received from outstanding bonds issued and sold for high-speed rail purposes prior to the
effective date of the provisions of this bill to be redirected to retiring the debt incurred from the
issuance and sale of those outstanding bonds. Allows the remaining unissued bonds, as of the
effective date of the provisions of this bill, that were authorized for high-speed rail purposes to be
issued and sold. Upon appropriation by the Legislature, requires the net proceeds from the sale of
these remaining unissued bonds to be made available to fund projects in the State Highway
Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP). Makes no changes to the authorization under
Proposition 1A for the issuance of $950 million in bonds for rail purposes other than high-speed
rail.
2/25/16
Assembly
Transportation
Committee
AB 1780
(Medina)
Cap-and-Trade: Trade
Corridors
Requires 20 percent of the annual amount of cap-and-trade auction proceeds deposited into the
Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund to be continuously appropriated to the California Transportation
Commission (CTC) to be allocated to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in trade corridors consistent
with the guidelines developed by the commission for the Proposition 1B Trade Corridors
Improvement Fund.
3/28/16
Assembly
Appropriations
Committee
VTA
Position
Sponsor
Page 16 of 55
9.a
State Assembly
Bills
Subject
Last
Amended
Status
AB 1785
(Quirk)
Vehicles: Wireless
Electronic Devices
Recasts provisions in current law to prohibit a person from driving a motor vehicle while holding
and operating a handheld wireless telephone or an electronic wireless communications device for
any purpose, unless the device is specifically designed and configured to be used in a voiceoperated and hands-free manner. Specifies that this prohibition shall not apply to manufacturerinstalled systems that are embedded in a motor vehicle. Allows a handheld wireless telephone or
an electronic wireless communications device to be operated in a manner requiring the use of the
driver’s hand while he or she is operating the vehicle only if both of the following conditions are
met: (1) the handheld wireless telephone or electronic wireless communications device is mounted
on a vehicle’s windshield in the same manner as a portable Global Positioning System, or is
mounted on or affixed to a vehicle’s dashboard or center console in a manner that does not hinder
the driver’s view of the road; and (2) the driver’s hand is used to activate or deactivate a feature or
function of the handheld wireless telephone or electronic wireless communications device with the
motion of a single swipe or tap of the driver’s finger. Provides that a violation is an infraction
punishable by a base fine of $20 for a first offense and $50 for each subsequent offense.
8/3/16
Senate Floor
AB 1813
(Frazier)
California High-Speed
Rail Authority:
Membership
Provides for the appointment of one senator by the Senate Rules Committee and one
Assemblymember by the Speaker to serve as ex-officio members of the California High-Speed Rail
Authority. Specifies that the ex-officio members shall participate in the activities of the HighSpeed Rail Authority to the extent that such participation is not incompatible with their positions as
members of the Legislature.
As
Introduced
Signed into
Law: Chapter
#117
AB 1814
(Allen)
State Highways:
Roadside Rest Areas
Authorizes Caltrans to enter into one or more agreements for the operation of safety roadside rest
areas by private entities in conjunction with the development of a retail establishment.
4/11/16
Assembly
Transportation
Committee
AB 1815
(Alejo)
Cap-and-Trade:
Disadvantaged
Communities
Technical Assistance
Program
Upon an appropriation of cap-and-trade auction proceeds deposited into the Greenhouse Gas
Reduction Fund, requires the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) to establish a
comprehensive technical assistance program for eligible applicants assisting disadvantaged
communities that the agency determines require technical assistance in accessing programs funded
with cap-and-trade auction proceeds. Requires this program to provide assistance to eligible
applicants with regard to any of the following: (1) identifying state agencies with appropriate grant
programs; (2) developing competitive project proposals to apply for cap-and-trade funding
available through state agencies; (3) coordinating existing local programs to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions with new programs receiving cap-and-trade funding; (4) conducting community
outreach to residents of disadvantaged communities that CalEPA determines require such
assistance; or (5) conducting the planning process for future greenhouse gas emissions reductions
programs. Requires the technical assistance provided pursuant to the bill to promote programs that
reduce greenhouse gas emissions and demonstrate a direct, meaningful benefit to disadvantaged
communities. Requires the three-year cap-and-trade investment plan developed by the Department
of Finance and submitted to the Legislature to allocate money from the Greenhouse Gas Reduction
Fund to CalEPA to implement the technical assistance program.
5/2/16
Assembly
Appropriations
Committee
VTA
Position
Page 17 of 55
9.a
State Assembly
Bills
Subject
Last
Amended
Status
AB 1833
(Linder)
Advanced Mitigation
Program
Requires Caltrans to establish an Advanced Mitigation Program to accelerate project delivery and
improve the outcomes of environmental mitigation for transportation infrastructure projects.
Allows the program to utilize mitigation instruments, including mitigation banks and conservation
easements. Allows Caltrans to use advanced mitigation credits to fulfill mitigation requirements of
any environmental law for a transportation project eligible for the State Transportation
Improvement Program (STIP), or the State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP).
4/25/16
Assembly
Appropriations
Committee
AB 1841
(Irwin)
Office of Emergency
Services:
Cybersecurity
By July 1, 2017, requires the Office of Emergency Services, in conjunction with the Department of
Technology, to transmit to the Legislature a cybersecurity incident response plan, known as the
Cyber Security Annex to the State Emergency Plan Emergency Function 18 or EL 18, which must
include all of the following: (1) methods for providing emergency services; (2) command
structure for statewide coordinated emergency services; (3) emergency service roles of appropriate
state agencies; (4) identification of resources to be mobilized; (5) public information plans; and
(6) continuity of government services. By July 1, 2018, requires the Office of Emergency Services,
in conjunction with the Department of Technology, to develop cybersecurity incident response
standards for state agencies to prepare for cybersecurity interference with, or the compromise or
incapacitation of, critical infrastructure and the development of critical infrastructure information,
and to transmit critical infrastructure information to the office. In developing the standards,
requires the Office of Emergency Services to consider all of the following: (1) costs to implement
the standards; (2) security of critical infrastructure information; (3) centralized management of
risk; (4) industry best practices; (5) continuity of operations; and (6) protection of personal
information. Requires each state agency to report on its compliance with these standards to the
Office of Emergency Services in a manner and at a time directed by the office, but no later than
January 1, 2019. Requires the Office of Emergency Services to provide suggestions to a state
agency to improve its compliance with the standards.
8/2/16
Senate
Appropriations
Committee
AB 1851
(Gray)
Clean Vehicle Rebate
Project
For purposes of the state’s Clean Vehicle Rebate Project, requires the California Air Resources
Board (CARB), until January 1, 2026, to provide specified rebate amounts for the purchase of
battery electric, fuel-cell and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. Limits these rebates to the first
$60,000 of the manufacturer’s suggested retail price or the final sales price, whichever is less.
Until January 1, 2026, requires CARB to issue specified rebates to a property owner or lessee up to
the costs associated with the purchase and installation of electric vehicle charging stations.
Requires the rebates for clean-fuel vehicles and electric vehicle charging stations to be funded with
cap-and-trade auction proceeds deposited into the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, subject to
annual appropriations by the Legislature. For purposes of calculating the amount of sales and use
tax owed, requires, until January 1, 2026, that the value of a trade-in vehicle be deducted from the
sales price of the purchase of battery electric, fuel-cell and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles.
Requires cap-and-trade auction proceeds deposited into the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund,
subject to annual appropriations by the Legislature, to be used to reimburse cities and counties for
any resulting loss of revenues. Deletes the current 85,000 cap on the number of decals, stickers or
other identifiers that can be issued by the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to allow plug-in
hybrid electric vehicles to use high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes without the required number of
occupants in the vehicle.
4/13/16
Assembly
Appropriations
Committee
VTA
Position
Page 18 of 55
9.a
State Assembly
Bills
Subject
Last
Amended
AB 1866
(Wilk)
High-Speed Rail:
Bonding Funding
these remaining unissued bonds to be made available to fund the construction of water capital
projects, including desalination facilities, wastewater treatment and recycling facilities, reservoirs,
water conveyance infrastructure, and aquifer recharge. Makes no changes to the authorization
under Proposition 1A for the issuance of $950 million in bonds for rail purposes other than highspeed rail.
As
Introduced
Assembly
Transportation
Committee
AB 1873
(Holden)
Board of Infrastructure
Planning,
Development and
Finance
Within the Office of Planning and Research, creates the Board of Infrastructure Planning,
Development and Finance. Requires the board to categorize and recommend the priority of the
state’s infrastructure needs and develop funding to finance those projects.
4/19/16
Assembly
Appropriations
Committee
AB 1886
(McCarty)
CEQA: Transit
Priority Projects
Specifies that a transit priority project shall be considered to be within one-half mile of a major
transit stop or high-quality transit corridor and, thus, shall qualify for limited review under the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) if all parcels within the project have no more than
50 percent, rather than 25 percent, of their area farther than one-half mile from the stop or corridor.
5/11/16
Senate
Environmental
Quality
Committee
AB 1889
(Mullin)
High-Speed Rail: FY
2013 Proposition 1A
Appropriations
For purposes of expending Proposition 1A bond proceeds appropriated to the California HighSpeed Rail Authority in the FY 2013 Budget Act, clarifies that a corridor or usable segment is
deemed to be suitable and ready for high-speed rail operation if the bond proceeds are to be used
for capital costs for a project that would enable high-speed trains to operate immediately, or after
additional planned investments are made on the corridor or useable segment and passenger train
service providers will benefit from the project in the near-term.
8/15/16
Senate Floor
AB 1908
(Harper)
HOV Lanes in
Southern California
Prohibits establishing a high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane on a state highway in Southern
California, unless the lane is established as an HOV lane only during the hours of heavy commuter
traffic, as determined by Caltrans. Requires existing HOV lanes in Southern California to be
modified to conform to this provision. On or after May 1, 2018, provides that if Caltrans
determines that there is an adverse impact on safety, traffic conditions or the environment by
limiting the use of HOV lanes in Southern California only during the hours of heavy commuter
traffic, authorizes the department to submit to the Legislature a notice of that determination and of
the intent to reinstate 24-hour HOV lanes in Southern California. Provides that Caltrans may
reinstate 24-hour HOV lanes following the submittal of the notice to the Legislature.
3/17/16
Assembly
Transportation
Committee
Status
VTA
Position
Support
Page 19 of 55
9.a
State Assembly
Bills
Subject
Last
Amended
AB 1910
(Harper)
Transportation
Advisory Ballot
Measure
Requires the Secretary of State’s Office to submit the following advisory question to the voters as
part of the November 8, 2016, general election ballot: “Shall the California Legislature
disproportionately target low-income and middle-class families with a regressive tax increase on
gasoline and annual vehicle registrations to fund road maintenance and rehabilitation, rather than
ending the diversion of existing transportation tax revenues for nontransportation purposes,
investing surplus state revenue in transportation accounts, repaying funds borrowed from
transportation accounts, prioritizing roads over high-speed rail, and eliminating waste at the
Department of Transportation?”
As
Introduced
Assembly
Transportation
Committee
AB 1919
(Quirk)
Local Transportation
Authorities: Bonds
Clarifies that accrued interest and premiums received on the sale of bonds by a local transportation
authority may be used either for the payment of bond debt service or for transportation purposes for
which the debt was incurred.
4/4/16
Senate Floor
AB 1938
(Baker)
Bay Area Toll
Authority
Clarifies that the existing 1 percent limitation on the amount of direct contributions or loans that the
Bay Area Toll Authority (BATA) may make to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission
(MTC) applies to any revenues derived from bridge tolls, fees or taxes, regardless of classification.
As
Introduced
Assembly
Transportation
Committee
Status
VTA
Position
Page 20 of 55
9.a
State Assembly
Bills
Subject
Last
Amended
Status
AB 1964
(Bloom)
HOV Lanes: LowEmission and Energy
Efficient Vehicles
On January 1, 2018, ends the authority of the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to issue
decals, stickers or other identifiers allowing battery electric, hydrogen fuel cell and compressed
natural gas vehicles to use high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes without the required number of
occupants in the vehicle. Specifies that decals, stickers or other identifiers issued for these vehicles
before January 1, 2018, are valid until January 1, 2019. Provides that decals, stickers or other
identifiers allowing plug-in hybrid electric vehicles to use HOV lanes without the required number
of occupants in the vehicle issued by the DMV prior to January 1, 2018, are valid until January 1,
2019. Provides that decals, stickers or other identifiers issued to plug-in hybrid electric vehicles
after January 1, 2018, and prior to January 1, 2019, are valid until January 1, 2021. Beginning
January 1, 2019, authorizes the DMV to issue an unlimited number of decals, stickers or other
identifiers to allow HOV lane access for plug-in hybrid vehicles, which shall be valid for a fouryear period. Prohibits the DMV from issuing decals, stickers or other identifiers for plug-in hybrid
electric vehicles if the sale of new plug-in hybrid electric vehicles reaches at least 89.2 percent of
the total new car market share for two consecutive years. Prohibits the DMV from reinstating the
issuance of decals, stickers or other identifiers for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles if there is a
subsequent decrease in the sales of new plug-in hybrid electric vehicles resulting in less than 9.2
percent of the total new car market share in a later year. Requires Caltrans to remove an individual
HOV lane, or a portion of the lane, from the access provisions of this bill upon the request of, and
with the concurrence of, the regional transportation planning agency (RTPA) whose jurisdiction
includes the lane, following a finding by the department as follows: (1) the lane, or portion of the
lane, exceeds a level of service C; (2) the operation or projected operation within the next 12
months of vehicles with decals, stickers or other identifiers in the lane, or portion of the lane,
significantly contributes to, or is projected to significantly contribute to, congestion of the lane; and
(3) alleviating the congestion by reducing the use of the lane by non-eligible vehicles through
increased enforcement or further increasing vehicle occupancy is either infeasible in the immediate
future or is forecast to result in increased congestion in the corridor overall.
6/30/16
Senate
Appropriations
Committee
AB 1982
(Bloom)
California
Transportation
Commission
Membership
Increases the membership of the California Transportation Commission (CTC) to 15 by providing
for the Senate Rules Committee and the Assembly speaker to each appoint an additional member.
Requires one member appointed by the Senate Rules Committee and by the Assembly speaker to
be a person who works directly with communities in California that are most significantly burdened
by, and vulnerable to, high levels of pollution, including communities with diverse racial and ethnic
populations, and communities with low-income populations.
4/12/16
Assembly
Transportation
Committee
VTA
Position
Page 21 of 55
9.a
State Assembly
Bills
Subject
Last
Amended
Status
VTA
Position
AB 2014
(Melendez)
Freeway Service
Patrols: Program
Assessment
No later than June 20, 2018, and every five years thereafter, requires Caltrans, in coordination with
the California Highway Patrol (CHP) and regional and local entities, to publish a statewide
Freeway Service Patrol Program Assessment. Requires this assessment to do all of the following:
(1) identify, quantify and analyze existing freeway service patrols, and identify opportunities to
increase or expand service levels; (2) analyze and provide recommendations regarding the current
and anticipated future financial condition of the program; (3) include, as attachments, supporting
data provided to Caltrans by regional and local entities, and by the CHP; (4) examine the financial
sustainability of maintaining current freeway service patrols, the route miles unserved or
underserved by freeway service patrols, and historical, current and future state and local funding for
freeway service patrols; (5) analyze and quantify the public benefits received or to be received
from existing and potential new freeway service patrols; and (6) discuss how freeway service
patrols relate to other state policies, plans and goals. Requires the state budget to include a line
item for Caltrans and the CHP to identify the amount of local assistance and state funds provided in
support of freeway service patrols.
4/13/16
Assembly
Appropriations
Committee
AB 2028
(Cooper)
CalPERS: Wrongful
Termination and
Service Credits
Requires a member of the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS) who was
involuntarily terminated from employment on or after January 1, 2017, and subsequently reinstated
to that employment pursuant to an administrative, arbitral or judicial proceeding to be reinstated in
CalPERS with all retirement benefits that the member otherwise would have accrued.
6/13/16
Assembly Floor:
Concurrence
AB 2030
(Mullin)
SamTrans and BART:
Contracting Issues
Allows the San Mateo County Transit District (SamTrans) and the Bay Area Rapid Transit District
(BART) to use an informal bidding process for materials, supplies and equipment contracts, under
which a minimum of three quotations are obtained from vendors, for those contracts between
$5,000 and $150,000.
6/1/16
Governor’s
Office
AB 2034
(Salas)
Federal Environmental
Review Process
Extends indefinitely the statutory authorization for Caltrans to participate in a federal program that
allows states to assume the responsibilities of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) under
the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). In addition, extends indefinitely provisions in
existing law that authorize Caltrans to consent to the jurisdiction of the federal court’s with regard
to the assumption of FHWA’s responsibilities under NEPA and that waive the state’s Eleventh
Amendment protection against NEPA-related lawsuits brought in federal court for as long as
Caltrans participates in the program.
3/17/16
Senate
Transportation
& Housing
Committee
Page 22 of 55
9.a
State Assembly
Bills
Subject
Last
Amended
AB 2049
(Melendez)
High-Speed Rail:
Bond Funding
these remaining unissued bonds to be made available as follows: (1) 40 percent for the State
Transportation Improvement Program (STIP); (2) 40 percent for the State Highway Operation and
Protection Program (SHOPP); and (3) 20 percent for the Trade Corridors Improvement Fund.
Makes no changes to the authorization under Proposition 1A for the issuance of $950 million in
bonds for rail purposes other than high-speed rail.
As
Introduced
Assembly
Transportation
Committee
AB 2087
(Levine)
Regional Conservation
Frameworks
Authorizes the California Department of Fish and Wildlife to approve regional conservation
frameworks to: (1) enhance the long-term viability of native species, habitat and other natural
resources; (2) inform infrastructure planning; and (3) allow for the creation of mitigation credits in
certain circumstances. Requires a regional conservation framework to include: (1) important
habitat and other resource conversation elements within the framework area; (2) an explanation of
the conservation purpose of and need for the regional conservation framework; (3) a description of
the prioritization of the conservation actions and habitat enhancements; and (4) a description of
how the framework’s conservation goals and objectives aid in climate adaptation. Allows an
enhancement that measurably advances the objectives of a regional conservation framework to be
used to create mitigation credits.
8/2/16
Senate
Appropriations
Committee
AB 2090
(Alejo)
Low Carbon Transit
Operations Program
Authorizes Low Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP) funding to be expended by a public
transit agency to support the operation of existing bus or rail service if all of the following occur:
(1) the governing board of the public transit agency declares a fiscal emergency within 90 days
prior to requesting its formula share of LCTOP funds; (2) the LCTOP funds are necessary to
sustain the agency’s public transit service in the fiscal year in which the money is to be spent; (3)
the governing board of the public transit agency would be required to reduce or eliminate public
transit service if the LCTOP funds are not received; (4) the governing board makes a finding that a
reduction in, or elimination of, public transit service would increase greenhouse gas emissions
because customers would choose other less-efficient modes of transportation; (5) the public transit
agency does not request funds over consecutive funding years unless it has declared a fiscal
emergency in each year; and (6) the public transit agency does not request funds for more than
three consecutive funding years. Requires the LCTOP funds to be expended to provide public
transit operating assistance that meets both of the following criteria: (1) the expenditures support
current bus or rail service operating costs, which may include labor, fueling, maintenance, and
other costs to operate and maintain those services; and (2) the recipient public transit agency
demonstrates that each expenditure directly sustains public transit service that would otherwise be
reduced or eliminated in the upcoming year if those funds were not received.
5/27/16
Senate
Appropriations
Committee
Status
VTA
Position
Support
Page 23 of 55
9.a
State Assembly
Bills
Subject
Last
Amended
Status
AB 2094
(Obernolte)
Transportation
Development Act
(TDA) Funding
Beginning in FY 2017, requires $1 billion in cap-and-trade auction proceeds deposited into the
Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund to be transferred to the Retail Sales Tax Fund for allocation
pursuant to the Transportation Development Act (TDA) if certain conditions are met. Provides that
in each fiscal year in which this transfer occurs, requires $1 billion in TDA funding to be
redirected, as follows: (1) 50 percent to Caltrans for maintenance of the state highway system, or
for projects funded through the State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP); and
(2) 50 percent to cities and counties for local streets/roads.
3/18/16
Assembly
Transportation
Committee
AB 2100
(Calderon)
21st Century
Infrastructure Act of
2016
Requires the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), the State Energy Resources
Conservation and Development Commission, the Independent System Operator, and the California
Air Resources Board (CARB) to review and evaluate their policies and plans for the expansion of
21st century infrastructure. Requires these agencies to do all of the following: (1) develop an
interagency permitting committee to institute reforms and modernize infrastructure permitting and
reviews; (2) strengthen dispute resolution mechanisms to quickly resolve conflicts and ensure that
interagency disputes do not delay projects that are consistent with existing state policy priorities;
and (3) identify duplicative, burdensome or unnecessary requirements, permits or processes, and
evaluate whether they can be minimized or eliminated in a manner that would not jeopardize safety
or electrical grid reliability.
3/18/16
Assembly
Natural
Resources
Committee
AB 2126
(Mullin)
CMGC Contracting:
Caltrans
Increases the number of state highway projects for which Caltrans may use the Construction
Manager/General Contractor (CMGC) method of project delivery from six to 12. For at least eight
of these projects, requires Caltrans to use department employees or consultants under contract to
the department to perform all design and engineering services. For all 12 projects, requires
Caltrans to use department employees or consultants under contract to the department to perform
all construction inspection services.
As
Introduced
Senate Floor
AB 2170
(Frazier)
Trade Corridors
Improvement Fund:
Federal Dollars
Requires revenues apportioned to California from the National Highway Freight Program
established by the federal Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act to be allocated by
the California Transportation Commission (CTC) for projects pursuant to the process that was used
for the Proposition 1B Trade Corridors Improvement Fund.
8/2/16
Senate
Appropriations
Committee
VTA
Position
Page 24 of 55
9.a
State Assembly
Bills
Subject
Last
Amended
Status
AB 2196
(Low)
VTA Enabling
Statutes
Makes a number of technical clean-up changes to the enabling statutes of the Santa Clara Valley
Transportation Authority (VTA). Consistently uses “VTA” as the name of the organization
throughout the enabling statutes. Uses the term “boundaries” to refer to VTA’s area of jurisdiction.
Clarifies that the representatives on the VTA Board of Directors from the cities may be either
mayors or city council members. Changes references to “board of supervisors” to “board of
directors” to reflect the appropriate governing board of VTA. Deletes obsolete provisions that
relate to one-time events that occurred to form the Santa Clara County Transit District in the 1970s,
and that occurred to implement the merger of the Transit District and the Santa Clara County
Congestion Management Agency (CMA) to form VTA in the mid-1990s. Deletes obsolete
provisions that have been superseded by the enactment of other state laws. Clarifies that the
administrative head of VTA is a “general manager,” not an “executive director.” Changes
references to “transit facilities” to “transit and other transportation facilities” to reflect the fact that
VTA is a multi-modal transportation organization. To match federal procurement regulations,
raises the minimum dollar amount from $2,500 to $3,500, above which VTA must obtain three
quotes from vendors for the purchase of materials, supplies and equipment, as well as increases the
maximum amount allowed under this procurement method from $100,000 to $150,000.
6/8/16
Assembly
Transportation
Committee:
Concurrence
AB 2222
(Holden)
Cap-and-Trade
Funding: Transit Pass
Program
Creates the Transit Pass Program to support local programs that provide free or reduced-fare public
transit passes to any of the following: (1) pupils attending public middle schools or high schools
that are eligible for funding under Title 1 of the federal No Child Left Behind Act of 2001; (2)
students attending a California community college who qualify for a waiver of student fees
pursuant to the Education Code; or (3) a student who attends a campus of the California State
University or the University of California, and who receives an award under the Cal Grant
Program, the federal Pell Grant Program, or both. Requires Caltrans to administer this program.
Provides that the Transit Pass Program is to be funded from money made available for this purpose
through appropriations by the Legislature. Requires Caltrans to develop guidelines describing the
criteria that public transit agencies shall use to make available free or reduced-fare transit passes to
eligible participants. Defines “eligible participants” to mean a public agency, including a transit
operator, school district, community college district, the California State University, or the
University of California. Requires Caltrans to develop performance measures and reporting
requirements to evaluate the effectiveness of the Transit Pass Program, including an annual update
of the number of free or reduced-fare transit passes distributed to students and whether the program
is increasing transit ridership among students. Requires funds allocated to the Transit Pass
Program to be expended to provide low- or no-cost public transit passes to students through
programs that support new or existing transit pass programs. Allows a public transit agency to give
priority to an application from an eligible participant with an existing, successful transit pass
program, provided that the eligible participant can demonstrate that the additional funds will further
reduce the cost of the transit pass or expand program eligibility. Requires each public transit
agency to receive $20,000 from the Transit Pass Program. After the initial $20,000 amount is
allocated, requires the remaining program funds to be distributed according to the State Transit
Assistance Program (STA) formula. Requires any funds not used by a public transit agency in a
fiscal year to be added to the allocation for the Transit Pass Program for the following fiscal year.
8/2/16
Senate
Appropriations
Committee
VTA
Position
Sponsor
Page 25 of 55
9.a
State Assembly
Bills
Subject
Last
Amended
AB 2233
(Brown)
Highways: Exit
Information Signs
Requires Caltrans to adopt rules and regulations to allow for the placement, near exits and offramps on freeways located in urban and rural areas, of informational signs identifying the closest
hospital owned and operated by a county that includes the full name of the hospital, if both of the
following conditions are met: (1) the county requests the placement of the sign; and (2) the county
agrees to pay for the cost of the sign. Requires Caltrans to erect the sign or signs within 30 days of
receipt of payment from the county.
As
Introduced
Assembly
Transportation
Committee
AB 2257
(Maienschein)
Local Agency
Meetings: Online
Posting of Agendas
Requires an online posting of an agenda for a meeting occurring on or after January 1, 2019, of a
legislative body of a local agency that has an Internet Web site to be posted on the agency’s
primary Internet Web site homepage accessible through a prominent, direct link to the current
agenda. Requires the direct link to be posted in an open format that meets all of the following
requirements:
(1) retrievable, downloadable, indexable, and electronically searchable by
commonly used Internet search applications; (2) platform independent and machine readable; and
(3) available to the public free of charge and without any restriction that would impede the reuse or
redistribution of the agenda. Provides that a local agency that has an Internet Web site and an
integrated agenda management platform does not have to comply with this requirement if all of the
following are met: (1) a direct link to the integrated agenda management platform is posted on the
local agency’s primary Internet Web site; (2) the integrated agenda management platform may
contain the prior agendas of the legislative body of the local agency occurring on or after January 1,
2019; and (3) the current agenda of the legislative body of the local agency is the first agenda
available at the top of the integrated agenda management platform.
6/22/16
Senate Floor
AB 2289
(Frazier)
SHOPP Projects
Clarifies that capital projects to improve the operation of state highways and bridges are eligible for
funding under the State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP).
As
Introduced
Signed into
Law: Chapter
#76
AB 2292
(Gordon)
Disadvantaged
Communities:
CalEnviroScreen
By July 1, 2017, requires the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) to revise its
CalEnviroScreen tool used to identify disadvantaged communities for investment opportunities for
cap-and-trade auction proceeds from the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund to include areas of the
state that are disproportionately impacted by any of the following: (1) high poverty rates; (2) high
rent burden and severe rent burden where households pay more than 50 percent of their household
income in gross rent; or (3) high cost of living.
4/14/16
Assembly
Appropriations
Committee
Status
VTA
Position
Page 26 of 55
9.a
State Assembly
Bills
Subject
AB 2293
(C. Garcia)
Cap-and-Trade: Green
Assistance and
California Green
Business Programs
Requires the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) to establish and administer the
Green Assistance Program to do all of the following: (1) provide technical assistance, including
assistance with the development of competitive project proposals, to small businesses and small
non-profit organizations applying for an allocation of cap-and-trade auction proceeds from the
Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund; (2) assist small businesses in applying for cap-and-trade funding
for energy upgrades to meet and exceed the state’s greenhouse gas emissions reduction goals; (3)
advise small businesses in complying with all applicable federal, state and local air quality laws;
(4) identify state agencies with appropriate grant programs; and (5) coordinate existing local
programs to reduce greenhouse gas emissions with new programs receiving cap-and-trade funding.
Requires CalEPA to also establish the California Green Business Program to provide support and
assistance to green business certification programs operated by local governments that certify
small- and medium-sized businesses that voluntarily adopt environmentally preferable business
practices. Annually appropriates an unspecified amount of cap-and-trade auction proceeds to the
Green Assistance Program and to the California Green Business Program. In the case of the
California Green Business Program, requires a minimum of 25 percent of the funding to be used for
local government programs benefitting disadvantaged communities.
4/27/16
Assembly
Appropriations
Committee
AB 2332
(E. Garcia)
Caltrans: State
Transportation Goals
By 2020, requires Caltrans to increase the annual number of complete streets projects undertaken
by the department by 20 percent over the 2016 baseline. Establishes the following goals for
Caltrans: (1) reducing the number of transit, pedestrian and bicyclist fatalities by 10 percent, based
on the 2016 baseline; and (2) by 2020, reducing vehicle miles traveled by 15 percent of the
statewide per capita relative to 2010 levels reported by Caltrans district. Establishes a Caltrans goal
to increase travel by non-automobile modes by doing all of the following: (1) tripling the amount
of bicycle travel relative to 2010-2012 California Household Travel Survey levels; (2) doubling the
amount of pedestrian travel relative to 2010-2012 California Household Travel Survey levels; and
(3) doubling the amount of transit travel relative to 2010-2012 California Household Travel Survey
levels. Requires the draft five-year Interregional Transportation Improvement Program (ITIP) to
include complete streets projects. Not later than July 1, 2017, requires the California
Transportation Commission (CTC) to adopt targets and performance measures for the assets
management plan prepared by Caltrans that reflect state transportation goals and objectives.
Requires these targets and performance measures to include all of the following: (1) improving
mobility, access and safety for non-motorized users in disadvantaged communities by requiring not
less than 35 percent of State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP) projects to be
located in urban and rural disadvantaged communities; (2) providing targeted and meaningful
benefits to residents in disadvantaged communities; (3) prioritizing projects identified by the
community through strong public participation in disadvantaged communities; and (4) prioritizing
projects that recruit, hire or train low-income, formerly incarcerated, underrepresented, or
disconnect youth and adults, and other individuals with barriers to employment. Requires Caltrans
to hold at least one public hearing in each of its districts on SHOPP projects. Requires these
hearings to be accessible by public transit and held at times that are convenient for disadvantaged
community residents.
4/5/16
Assembly
Transportation
Committee
Last
Amended
Status
VTA
Position
Page 27 of 55
9.a
State Assembly
Bills
Subject
Last
Amended
Status
AB 2348
(Levine)
Retirement Plans:
Infrastructure
Investments
Authorizes the Department of Finance to identify infrastructure projects in the state for which the
department will guarantee a rate of return for an investment made in that infrastructure project by
the Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS). Creates the Reinvesting in California
Special Fund as a continuously appropriated fund. Requires money in the fund to be used to pay
the rate of return on investments made in infrastructure projects. States the intent of the Legislature
to identify special fund dollars to be transferred to the Reinvesting in California Special Fund.
5/27/16
Senate
Appropriations
Committee
AB 2355
(Dababneh)
Intercity Rail Services:
Noise Mitigation
Requires Caltrans to develop a program for the reasonable mitigation of noise and vibration levels
in residential neighborhoods along railroad lines where the department contracts for state-funded
intercity rail passenger service.
As
Introduced
Assembly
Transportation
Committee
AB 2374
(Chiu)
CMGC Contracting:
Local Expressways
Clarifies that regional transportation agencies, including the Santa Clara Valley Transportation
Authority (VTA), may use the Construction Manager/General Contractor (CMGC) project delivery
method to design and construct projects on expressways that are not on the state highway system.
Deletes provisions in current state law that require an expressway project to be developed in
accordance with an expenditure plan approved by the voters in order for the regional transportation
agency to be able to use CMGC contracting for that project.
8/17/16
Senate Floor
AB 2382
(Lopez)
High-Speed Rail
Authority:
Membership
Beginning with an available vacancy on and after January 1, 2017, requires one of the Governor’s
appointments to the California High-Speed Rail Authority to be a person, other than a current or
former elected official, who is from a disadvantaged community.
4/11/16
Assembly
Transportation
Committee
AB 2398
(Chau)
State Highways
Every five years, requires the California Transportation Commission (CTC) to report to the
Legislature both of the following: (1) the number of selections, adoptions and location
determinations for state highway routes; and (2) the amount of money allocated for the
construction, improvement or maintenance of the various highways under the jurisdiction of
Caltrans.
3/18/16
Assembly
Transportation
Committee
AB 2411
(Frazier)
Miscellaneous
Caltrans Revenues
On July 1, 2017, prohibits revenues generated by Caltrans through the rental or sale of property, the
sale of documents and other miscellaneous services to the public from being transferred to the
General Fund and used for debt service on general obligation transportation bonds. Instead,
requires these revenues to be retained in the State Highway Account and used for transportation
purposes.
5/27/16
Senate
Transportation
& Housing
Committee
AB 2426
(Low)
Workplace Charging
Station Grant Program
Until January 1, 2021, requires the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to establish and
implement the Workplace Charging Station Grant Program to award grants to commercial property
owners or lessees for the installation of electric vehicle charging stations in their parking facilities
for employees or visitors.
3/18/16
Assembly
Transportation
Committee
VTA
Position
Support
Page 28 of 55
9.a
State Assembly
Bills
Subject
Last
Amended
Status
VTA
Position
AB 2468
(Hadley)
Public Employees’
Retirement
Authorizes a public agency that has contracted with the California Public Employees’ Retirement
System (CalPERS) to offer an alternative formula from the one required by the Public Employees’
Pension Reform Act of 2013 to be applicable to miscellaneous, non-safety employees hired after
January 1, 2017, and who are new members, provided that the agency and the representative
employee organization have agreed to its application in a valid memorandum of understanding.
Specifies that the alternative formula would be 1 percent at 55 and 1.7 at 62.
4/12/16
Assembly Public
Employees,
Retirement &
Social Security
Committee
AB 2542
(Gatto)
Streets and Highways:
Reversible Lanes
When submitting a capacity-increasing project, or a major street or highway lane realignment
project to the California Transportation Commission (CTC) for approval, requires Caltrans or a
regional transportation agency to demonstrate that reversible lanes were considered for the project.
3/15/16
Senate Floor
AB 2564
(Cooper)
Clean Vehicle Rebate
Program
Requires the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to adopt regulations for the Clean Vehicle
Rebate Program that do all of the following: (1) limit eligibility based on a person’s gross annual
income; (2) increase the rebate payment by $500 for all eligible vehicle types for low-income
applicants; (3) include outreach to low-income households; and (4) prioritize rebate payments for
low-income applicants. Defines “low income” to mean a resident whose household income is less
than or equal to 300 percent of the federal poverty level.
4/20/16
Senate
Environmental
Quality
Committee
AB 2620
(Dababneh)
Proposition 116
Passenger Rail
Funding
Requires Proposition 116 funds not expended or encumbered by July 1, 2020, to be reallocated to
any other existing passenger rail project with existing rail service by the California Transportation
Commission (CTC).
4/11/16
Senate
Appropriations
Committee
AB 2653
(E. Garcia)
Greenhouse Gas
Reduction Fund:
Report on Economic
Benefits
Requires each state agency receiving allocations of cap-and-trade auction proceeds from the
Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund to report the following information to the California
Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA): (1) the number of business entities receiving
financial assistance or entering into contracts paid in whole or in part using cap-and-trade auction
proceeds; (2) the amount of other public or private moneys leveraged when business entities
receive cap-and-trade auction proceeds; (3) the location, industry sector and number of employees
of the business entities receiving cap-and-trade auction proceeds; (4) the number of jobs created,
including wage levels, by business entities receiving cap-and-trade auction proceeds; and (5)
outcomes from actions taken to assist residents of disadvantaged communities and other target
populations with business, employment and training opportunities offered through activities funded
in whole or in part with cap-and-trade auction proceeds or other state funding sources overseen by
the reporting agency that are directly related to climate change mitigation, climate change
adaptation and greenhouse gas emissions reductions.
4/27/16
Assembly
Appropriations
Committee
Page 29 of 55
9.a
State Assembly
Bills
Subject
AB 2675
(Chiu)
Tax Exclusions and
Credits: Electric
Vehicle Infrastructure
For each taxable year beginning on or after January 1, 2017, and before January 1, 2020, allows an
income tax credit equal to 10 percent of the amount paid or incurred for electric vehicle
infrastructure during the taxable year for use at a qualified dwelling, not to exceed $2,500.
Beginning January 1, 2017, and until January 1, 2020, excludes 10 percent of the price of electric
vehicle infrastructure purchased for a qualified dwelling from the state portion of the sales and use
tax, up to the first $400,000. Defines “qualified dwelling” to mean a multi-family residence or
dwelling unit, a mobile home or manufactured home located at a mobile home park, duplex,
townhome, apartment, and condominium.
5/2/16
Assembly
Appropriations
Committee
AB 2702
(Atkins)
Greenhouse Gas
Emissions Reductions
Study
Requires the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to conduct a study that outlines best practices
and policies for meeting the state’s goals related to reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
3/18/16
Assembly
Appropriations
Committee
AB 2722
(Burke)
Transformative
Climate Communities
Program
Creates the Transformative Climate Communities Program to be administered by the Strategic
Growth Council. Under the program, requires the council to award competitive grants to eligible
applicants for the development and implementation of neighborhood-level transformative climate
community plans that include multiple, coordinated projects that would contribute to a reduction in
greenhouse gas emissions, as well as demonstrate potential climate, economic, workforce, health,
and environmental benefits located in disadvantaged communities. Specifies that eligible
applicants under the Transformative Climate Communities Program include any of the following:
(1) a non-profit organization; (2) a community-based organization; (3) a faith-based organization;
(4) a coalition or association of non-profit organizations; (5) a community development finance
institution; (6) a community development corporations; (7) a local agency; or (8) a joint powers
authority. In order to be eligible for funding under the Transformative Climate Communities
Program, a plan or project implementing a plan must demonstrate that it will achieve a reduction in
greenhouse gas emissions. In awarding grants under the program, requires the Strategic Growth
Council to prioritize plans and projects implementing plans that maximize, to the extent feasible,
climate, public health, environmental, workforce, and economic benefits.
8/2/16
Senate
Appropriations
Committee
AB 2741
(Salas)
California
Transportation Plan
Beginning in 2020, requires Caltrans to submit updates to the California Transportation Plan to the
California Transportation Commission (CTC) for its approval. Requires Caltrans to submit a draft
of the updated plan to the CTC for its comments by June 30, 2020, and every five years thereafter.
If the CTC does not approve an updated plan, requires Caltrans to revise its proposed update in
consultation with the commission.
6/8/16
Senate
Appropriations
Committee
AB 2742
(Nazarian)
Public-Private
Partnerships
Extends existing statutory authority for Caltrans and regional transportation agencies, including the
Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA), to utilize public-private partnerships for
transportation infrastructure projects to January 1, 2030.
As
Introduced
Assembly
Appropriations
Committee
Last
Amended
Status
VTA
Position
Support
Page 30 of 55
9.a
State Assembly
Bills
Subject
Last
Amended
Status
AB 2762
(Baker)
Altamont Pass
Regional Rail
Authority
Establishes the Altamont Pass Regional Rail Authority for purposes of planning and delivering a
cost-effective and responsive interregional rail connection between the Bay Area Rapid Transit
District (BART) regional rail system and the Altamont Commuter Express in the Tri-Valley within
the city of Livermore. Provides that Phase 1 of the project shall consist of an extension of BART
along Interstate 580 to a new station in the vicinity of the Isabel Avenue Interchange in the city of
Livermore. By December 1, 2017, requires the authority to publish a detailed management, finance
and implementation plan relating to the project. Requires the Livermore Amador Valley Transit
Authority (LAVTA) to provide all necessary administrative support to the authority for an initial
one-year period. At the conclusion of the initial one-year period, allows the authority to select
LAVTA, the San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission or another existing public rail transit agency
to provide administrative support for a three-year term. Requires BART to assume ownership of all
physical improvements constructed as part of the project, as well as operational control,
maintenance responsibilities and related financial obligations. Specifies that the authority shall not
be responsible for any core BART system upgrades that pre-exist its establishment, including those
needed to support prior system expansions such as the extension to Silicon Valley.
4/5/16
Assembly
Transportation
Committee
AB 2796
(Bloom)
Active Transportation
Program
For funding cycles occurring on or after January 1, 2018, requires a minimum of 10 percent of all
available Active Transportation Program funds to be programmed for planning and noninfrastructure purposes, including activities related to safe routes to school. Of this amount,
requires a minimum of 50 percent to be programmed for planning activities to develop
comprehensive active transportation master plans, including community engagement activities
related to the development of a master plan. Provides that if a project contains both infrastructure
and non-infrastructure activities, only the portion of funding used for planning and noninfrastructure activities shall contribute to meeting the minimum percentages required by the bill.
Specifies that if applications submitted in any funding cycle are not sufficient to exceed the
minimum percentages required by this bill, the funds may be expended for other authorized
purposes. Requires the guidelines for the Active Transportation Program adopted by the California
Transportation Commission (CTC) to allow for the streamlining of project delivery by authorizing
an implementing agency to do both of the following: (1) seek CTC approval of a letter of no
prejudice (LONP) that would allow the agency to expend its own funds for a project programmed
in a future year of an adopted program of projects in advance of an allocation of funds, and to be
reimbursed at a later time for eligible expenditures; and (2) notify the CTC of its intent to expend
its own funds for a project programmed in the current fiscal year of an adopted program of projects
in advance of an allocation of funds upon transmittal and receipt of an allocation request by the
CTC, and to be reimbursed upon approval of the allocation for eligible expenditures occurring after
the commission’s receipt of the request.
6/30/16
Senate
Appropriations
Committee
VTA
Position
Page 31 of 55
9.a
State Assembly
Bills
Subject
AB 2800
(Quirk)
Climate-Safe
Infrastructure Working
Group
Requires state agencies to take into account the expected impacts of climate change when planning,
designing, building, and investing in state infrastructure. By July 1, 2017, requires the Natural
Resources Agency to establish a Climate-Safe Infrastructure Working Group for the purpose of
examining how to integrate scientific data concerning projected climate change impacts into state
infrastructure engineering. Requires the working group to consist of: (1) registered professional
engineers with relevant expertise in state infrastructure design from the Departments of
Transportation, Water Resources and General Services, and other relevant state agencies; (2)
scientists with expertise in climate change projections and impacts from the University of
California, the California State University and other institutions; and (3) licensed architects with
relevant experience in state infrastructure design. Specifies that the working group may wish to
consider and offer recommendations on the following issues: (1) the current barriers to integrating
projected climate change impacts into state infrastructure design; (2) the development of
practicable guidelines for planning and designing infrastructure that is more resilient to the
expected impacts of climate change; (3) the identification of gaps in the critical information that
engineers responsible for infrastructure design and construction need to address climate change
impacts; (4) consideration of the appropriate engineering design for multiple projected scenarios
for future climate change; and (5) consideration of a platform or process to facilitate
communication between climate scientists and infrastructure engineers. By July 1, 2018, requires
the working group to recommend to the Legislature a process for integrating scientific knowledge
of projected climate change impacts into state infrastructure design and for addressing any
information gaps in a timely manner. Specifies that the provisions of the bill will become
inoperative on July 1, 2020.
8/2/16
Senate
Appropriations
Committee
AB 2843
(Chau)
Public Records:
Employee Contact
Information
Provides that the home addresses, home telephone numbers, personal cellular telephone numbers,
and birth dates of all employees of a public agency shall not be deemed to be public records, and
shall not be open to public inspection. Allows disclosure of this information to be made in the
following circumstances: (1) to an agent or a family member of the individual to whom the
information pertains; (2) to an officer or employee of another public agency when necessary for
the performance of official duties; (3) to an employee organization pursuant to regulations and
decisions of the Public Employment Relations Board; or (4) to an agent or employee of a health
benefit plan providing health services or administering claims for health services to public agencies
and their enrolled dependents.
6/28/16
Senate Floor
AB 2847
(Patterson)
California High-Speed
Rail Authority:
Reporting
Requirements
Requires the business plan prepared by the California High-Speed Rail Authority to identify
projected financing costs for each segment or combination of segments of the high-speed rail
system for which financing is proposed by the authority. In the business plan and in other reports
that High-Speed Rail Authority is required to prepare, specifies that the authority shall call out any
significant changes in scope for segments of the high-speed rail system identified in the previous
version of the report, and provide an explanation of adjustments in cost and schedule attributable to
the changes.
5/23/16
Senate Floor
Last
Amended
Status
VTA
Position
Page 32 of 55
9.a
State Assembly
Bills
Subject
Last
Amended
Status
VTA
Position
AB 2853
(Gatto)
Public Records
Allows a public agency that posts a public record on its Internet Web site to refer a member of the
public that requests to inspect that public record to the Web site where it is posted. If a member of
the public requests a copy of the public record due to an inability to access or reproduce it from the
Web site where it is posted, requires the public agency to promptly provide a copy to the member
of the public.
6/16/16
Senate Floor
AB 2866
(Gatto)
Autonomous Vehicles
By July 1, 2018, requires the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to adopt regulations for the
testing and operation of autonomous vehicles without a driver in the vehicle, and not equipped with
a brake pedal, accelerator pedal or steering wheel.
4/11/16
Assembly
Appropriations
Committee
ACA 3
(Gallagher)
Public Employees’
Retirement
Calls for placing before the voters an amendment to the California Constitution to make several
changes to retirement benefits for public employees. Requires any enhancement to a public
employee’s retirement formula or benefit adopted on or after the effective date of this constitutional
amendment to apply only to serve performed on and after the operative date of the enhancement,
and not to any service performed prior to that date. Provides that if a change to a public
employee’s retirement membership classification or a change in employment results in an
enhancement to the retirement formula or benefit applicable to that employee, requires that
enhancement to apply only to serve performed on or after the operative date of the change, and not
to service performed prior to that date. Specifies that an increase to a retiree’s annual cost-of-living
adjustment within existing statutory limits is not considered to be an enhancement to a retirement
benefit.
As
Introduced
Assembly Public
Employees,
Retirement &
Social Security
Committee
ACA 4
(Frazier)
Local Transportation
Special Taxes
Calls for placing before the voters an amendment to the California Constitution to allow a city,
county or special district to impose, extend or increase a sales and use or a transactions and use tax
for the purpose of providing funding for local transportation projects, if approved by a 55 percent
majority vote. Defines “local transportation project” to mean the planning, design, development,
financing, construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, improvement, acquisition, lease, operation,
or maintenance of local streets, roads and highways; state highways and freeways; and public
transit systems. Specifies that this constitutional amendment shall become effective upon approval
by the voters, and shall apply to any local measure imposing, extending or increasing a sales and
use or transactions and use tax to fund local transportation projects that is submitted at the same
election.
8/17/15
Assembly
Appropriations
Committee
ACA 11
(Gatto)
Public Utility Reform
Act of 2016
Calls for placing before the voters an amendment to the California Constitution to authorize the
Legislature to reallocate and reassign all or a portion of the functions of the California Public
Utilities Commission (CPUC) to other state agencies, departments, boards, or others entities that it
may create. Requires the Legislature’s reallocation or reassignment of the CPUC’s functions to be
done to further consumer protection, public health, environmental protection, increased
transparency, public access, and the preservation of the ability of third parties to advocate for and
intervene on behalf of those who need their advocacy. Requires the Legislature to adopt
appropriate structures to: (1) provide greater accountability for the public utilities of California;
(2) provide the necessary guidance to focus regulatory efforts on safety, reliability and ratesetting;
and (3) implement statutorily authorized programs for reducing greenhouse gas emissions
5/27/16
Senate Energy,
Utilities &
Communications
Committee
Support
Page 33 of 55
9.a
State Assembly
Bills
Subject
Last
Amended
Status
ABX1-1
(Alejo)
Transportation
Funding
Retains the revenues generated by vehicle weight fees in the State Highway Account, and requires
the General Fund to pay debt service on transportation general obligation bonds. With regard to the
revenues derived from increases in the state gasoline excise tax resulting from the transportation
funding swap initially enacted in 2010 and reaffirmed in 2011, requires all of the money to be
allocated in the following manner: (1) 44 percent to the State Transportation Improvement
Program (STIP); (2) 44 percent to cities and counties for local streets and roads; and (3) 12
percent to the State Highway Operation & Protection Program (SHOPP). With respect to any loans
made to the General Fund from the State Highway Account, the Public Transportation Account, the
Bicycle Transportation Account, the Motor Vehicle Fuel Account, the Highway Users Tax
Account, the Pedestrian Safety Account, the Transportation Investment Fund, the Traffic
Congestion Relief Fund, the Motor Vehicle Account, and the Local Airport Loan Account with a
repayment date of January 1, 2019, or later to be repaid to the account from which the loan was
made by December 31, 2018. Recaptures revenues generated by Caltrans through the rental or sale
of property, the sale of documents and other miscellaneous services to the public for transportation
purposes.
As
Introduced
Assembly Desk
Support
ABX1-2
(Perea)
Public-Private
Partnerships
transportation infrastructure projects indefinitely.
As
Introduced
Assembly Desk
Support
ABX1-3
(Frazier)
Transportation
Funding: State
Highways and Local
Roadways
Declares the intent of the Legislature to enact a bill to establish permanent, sustainable sources of
transportation funding to maintain and repair highways, local roads, bridges, and other critical
transportation infrastructure.
9/3/15
Conference
Committee
ABX1-4
(Frazier)
Transportation
Funding: Trade
Corridors and Local
Transportation
Infrastructure
transportation funding to improve the state’s key trade corridors, and support efforts by local
governments to repair and improve local transportation infrastructure.
As
Introduced
Senate Rules
Committee
ABX1-6
(R. Hernandez)
Cap-and-Trade:
Affordable Housing
and Sustainable
Communities Program
Requires 20 percent of the cap-and-trade auction proceeds provided to the Affordable Housing and
Sustainable Communities Program to be allocated to rural areas. Requires half of these funds to be
allocated to eligible affordable housing projects. Requires the Strategic Growth Council to amend
its guidelines for the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities Program to be consistent
with the provisions of this bill.
As
Introduced
Assembly Desk
VTA
Position
Page 34 of 55
9.a
State Assembly
Bills
Subject
Last
Amended
Status
ABX1-7
(Nazarian)
Cap-and-Trade:
Public Transit Funding
Increases the amount of cap-and-trade auction proceeds continuously appropriated from the
Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund to the Low Carbon Transit Operations Program from 5 percent to
10 percent, and to the Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program from 10 percent to 20 percent.
As
Introduced
Assembly Desk
Support
ABX1-8
(Chiu)
Diesel Sales Tax
Increases the sales and use tax rate on diesel fuel by 3.5 percent. Dedicates the revenues derived
from this increase to the State Transit Assistance Program (STA).
As
Introduced
Assembly Desk
Support
ABX1-9
(Levine)
Richmond-San Rafael
Bridge
By September 30, 2015, requires Caltrans to implement an operational improvement project that
does the following: (1) temporarily restores to automobile traffic the third eastbound lane on I-580
that existed prior to 1977 and that was temporarily restored immediately following the Loma Prieta
earthquake, from the beginning of the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge in Marin County to Marine
Street in Contra Costa County; and (2) temporarily converts the existing one-way bicycle lane
along the north side of westbound I-580 from the Marine Street Interchange to Stenmark Drive and
the toll plaza in Contra Costa County into a bidirectional bicycle and pedestrian lane. Requires
Caltrans to keep the temporary third automobile lane and the temporarily bidirectional bicycle lane
in place until the department has completed the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge Access Improvement
Project.
As
Introduced
Assembly Desk
ABX1-10
(Levine)
Public Works
Contracts: MegaInfrastructure Projects
Prohibits a state entity in a mega-infrastructure project contract from providing for the payment of
extra compensation to the contractor until the project has been completed, and an independent third
party has verified that the project meets all architectural or engineering plans and safety
specifications of the contract. Applies to contracts entered into or amended on or after the effective
date of the bill. Defines “mega-infrastructure project” to mean the erection, construction,
alteration, repair, or improvement of any public structure, building, road, or other public
improvement of any kind that exceeds $1 billion in cost.
As
Introduced
Assembly Desk
ABX1-12
(Nazarian)
LA Metro: PublicPrivate Partnerships
Authorizes the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LA Metro) to enter
into agreements with private entities for transportation projects in Los Angeles County, including
on the state highway system, subject to various terms and requirements. Allow LA Metro to
impose tolls and user fees for use of those projects. Requires LA Metro to implement such projects
on the state highway system in cooperation with Caltrans pursuant to an agreement that addresses
all matters related to design, construction, maintenance, and operation of state highway facilities in
connection with the project. Authorizes LA Metro to issue bonds to finance any costs necessary to
implement such a project, payable from revenues generated from the project or other available
resources.
As
Introduced
Assembly Desk
ABX1-13
(Grove)
Cap-and-Trade: State
Highways and Local
Streets/Roads
For FY 2016, reduces the amount of cap-and-trade auction proceeds deposited into the Greenhouse
Gas Reduction Fund that are continuously appropriated to the Affordable Housing and Sustainable
Communities Program from 20 percent to 10 percent. Beginning in FY 2017, continuously
appropriates 50 percent of the cap-and-trade auction proceeds deposited into the Greenhouse Gas
Reduction Fund to the State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP), and 50 percent
to cities and counties for local streets/roads.
As
Introduced
Assembly Desk
VTA
Position
Page 35 of 55
9.a
State Assembly
Bills
Subject
Last
Amended
Status
ABX1-14
(Waldron)
General Fund
Appropriations: State
Highways and Local
Streets/Roads
Continuously appropriates $1 billion from the General Fund to be distributed as follows: (1) 50
percent to the State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP); and (2) 50 percent to
cities and counties for local streets/roads.
As
Introduced
Assembly Desk
ABX1-15
(Patterson)
Caltrans: Capital
Outlay Support
Reduces the FY 2016 appropriation to Caltrans for capital outlay support by $500 million and,
instead, distributes this money as follows: (1) 50 percent to the State Highway Operation and
Protection Program (SHOPP); and (2) 50 percent to cities and counties for local streets/roads.
As
Introduced
Assembly Desk
ABX1-16
(Patterson)
Pilot Program:
Transferring State
Highways to Local
Agencies
Establishes a five-year pilot program under which two counties, one in Northern California and one
in Southern California, would be selected to operate, maintain and make improvements to all state
highways within their respective jurisdictions. For the duration of the pilot program, requires
Caltrans to convey all of its authority and responsibility over state highways in a participating
county to the applicable county or regional transportation agency. Requires the pilot program to
begin no later than January 1, 2017. Requires the California Transportation Commission (CTC) to
administer and oversee the pilot program, and to select the counties that will participate in the
program from applications received by the commission. For the duration of the pilot program,
requires funding to be appropriated as block grants in the annual Budget Act to the participating
counties in an amount equivalent to federal and state dollars otherwise to be expended by Caltrans
on state highways in those counties, including money for operations, maintenance, capital outlay
support, the State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP), and the State
Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). In consultation with Caltrans, requires the CTC to
determine the applicable grant amounts for each participating county, and to submit its
recommendations to the Governor and the Legislature. Provides that any cost savings realized by a
participating county, compared to comparable expenditures that otherwise would have been
undertaken by Caltrans on state highways in the county in the absence of the pilot program, may be
used by the county for other transportation priorities consistent with eligible expenditures for the
funding sources involved, subject to approval by the CTC.
As
Introduced
Assembly Desk
ABX1-17
(Achadjian)
Cap-and-Trade: State
Highway Operation
and Protection
Program
Beginning in FY 2017, continuously appropriates 25 percent of the cap-and-trade auction proceeds
deposited into the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund to the State Highway Operation and Protection
Program (SHOPP).
As
Introduced
Assembly Desk
ABX1-18
(Linder)
Vehicle Weight Fee
Revenues
Beginning January 1, 2016, prohibits vehicle weight fee revenues from being used to pay debt
service on transportation-related, general obligation bonds.
As
Introduced
Assembly Desk
VTA
Position
Support
Page 36 of 55
9.a
State Assembly
Bills
Subject
Last
Amended
Status
ABX1-19
(Linder)
California
Transportation
Commission
Excludes the California Transportation Commission (CTC) from the California State
Transportation Agency (CalSTA), and establishes it as a separate and independent entity in state
government.
As
Introduced
Assembly Desk
ABX1-20
(Gaines)
State Government:
Elimination of Vacant
Positions
Requires the Department of Human Resources to eliminate 25 percent of the vacation positions in
state government that are funded by the General Fund. Continuously appropriates $685 million
from the General Fund, with 50 percent to be made available to Caltrans for maintenance of the
state highway system or for projects funded under the State Highway Operation and Protection
Program (SHOPP), and 50 percent to be made available to cities and counties for local
streets/roads.
As
Introduced
Assembly Desk
ABX1-21
(Obernolte)
Environmental
Quality: Highway
Projects
Prohibits a court in a judicial action or proceeding under the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) from staying or enjoining a project related to constructing or improving a highway unless
the court finds either of the following: (1) the project presents an imminent threat to the public
health and safety; or (2) the project site contains unforeseen important Native American artifacts,
or unforeseen important historical, archaeological or ecological values that would be materially,
permanently and adversely affected by the project unless the court stays or enjoins the project.
As
Introduced
Assembly Desk
ABX1-22
(Patterson)
Design-Build
Contracting: Highway
Projects
Authorizes Caltrans to utilize design-build contracting for an unlimited number of state highway
projects, and requires the department to contract with consultants to perform construction
inspection services related to those projects. For design-build contracts for state highway projects
administered by regional transportation agencies, including the Santa Clara Valley Transportation
Agency (VTA), eliminates the requirement in existing law that Caltrans perform construction
inspection services related to those projects.
As
Introduced
Assembly Desk
VTA
Position
Page 37 of 55
9.a
State Assembly
Bills
Subject
Last
Amended
Status
ABX1-23
(E. Garcia)
Transportation
Projects:
Disadvantaged
Communities
By January 1, 2017, requires the California Transportation Commission (CTC) to establish a
process whereby Caltrans and local agencies receiving funding for highway capital improvement
projects from the State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP), or from the State
Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) prioritize projects that provide meaningful benefits to
the mobility and safety needs of disadvantaged community residents, as identified by the
community through strong public participation. In this regard, requires the CTC to do all of the
following: (1) establish a funding floor where no less than 35 percent of rehabilitation and
reconstruction projects are located in urban and rural disadvantaged communities, and provide
meaningful benefits to the residents of those communities; (2) include robust public stakeholder
engagement with regard to the development of guidelines relating to the prioritization of projects in
disadvantaged communities; and (3) prioritize projects that recruit, hire and train low-income,
formerly incarcerated, or disconnected youth and adults, as well as other individuals with barriers
to employment. Specifies that a “disadvantaged community” means a community with any of the
following characteristics: (1) an area with a median household income that is less than 80 percent
of the statewide median household income based on the most current census-tract-level data from
the American Community Survey; (2) an area identified as among the most disadvantaged 25
percent of areas in the state according to the California Environmental Protection Agency
(CalEPA), based on the latest version of CalEnviroScreen scores; or (3) an area where at least 75
percent of public school students are eligible to receive free or reduced-price meals under the
National School Lunch Program. Requires $125 million to be appropriated annually from the State
Highway Account to the Active Transportation Program, with these additional funds to be used for
network grants that prioritize projects in underserved areas.
As
Introduced
Assembly Desk
ABX1-24
(Levine)
Bay Area
Transportation
Commission
Effective January 1, 2017, redesignates the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) as the
Bay Area Transportation Commission. Requires commissioners to be elected by districts
comprised of approximately 750,000 residents, based on the 2010 Census. Declares the intent of
the Legislature that the district boundaries should be drawn by a citizen’s redistricting commission.
Requires each district to elect one commissioner, except that a district with a toll bridge within its
boundaries would elect two commissioners. Requires the initial elections for commissioners to
occur in 2016. Requires the elected commissioners to take office on January 1, 2017. Declares the
intent of the Legislature that campaigns for commissioners should be publicly financed. Specifies
that each commissioner’s term of office is four years. Effective January 1, 2017, deletes the Bay
Area Toll Authority’s status as a separate entity from MTC and merges the authority into the Bay
Area Transportation Commission.
As
Introduced
Assembly Desk
VTA
Position
Page 38 of 55
9.a
State Senate Bills
3B
State Senate Bills
Subject
Last
Amended
Status
VTA
Position
SB 20
(Pavley)
Low Carbon Fuels
Council
Creates the Low Carbon Fuels Council to consist of six members as follows: (1) the chair of the
California Air Resources Board (CARB) or designee; (2) the chair of the State Energy Resources
Conservation and Development Commission or designee; (3) the director of the Governor’s Office of
Business and Economic Development or designee; (4) one member appointed by the Senate Rules
Committee; (5) one member appointed by the Assembly speaker; and (6) one member appointed by
the Governor, with the advice and consent of the Senate. Requires the council to do all of the
following: (1) coordinate state agencies’ activities related to the acceleration and development of the
in-state production of low carbon fuels and very low carbon transportation fuels; (2) identify and
evaluate any gaps in existing programs, policies or activities that may impede the in-state construction
of new or the expansion of existing low carbon fuel production facilities or very low carbon
transportation fuel production facilities; and (3) make recommendations to the Legislature for changes
in the law needed to achieve the state’s greenhouse gas emissions reduction goals.
8/15/16
Assembly Floor
SB 32
(Pavley)
Greenhouse Gas
Emissions Limit
Based on the best available scientific, technological and economic assessments, requires the California
Air Resources Board (CARB) to approve in a public hearing a statewide greenhouse gas emissions
limit that is equivalent to 40 percent below the 1990 level to be achieved by 2030. Requires a statewide
greenhouse gas emissions limit to include short-lived climate pollution. Requires CARB to consider
historic efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and objectively seek and account for cost-effective
actions to reduce such emissions across all sectors. Makes conforming changes to other provisions of
the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32) to reflect the addition of a 2030
statewide greenhouse gas emissions limit, except for the provisions related to CARB’s authority to
implement a market-based compliance mechanism. Requires CARB to make recommendations to the
Governor and the Legislature on how to continue reductions of greenhouse gas emissions beyond 2030.
6/30/16
Assembly
Appropriations
Committee
SB 39
(Pavley)
HOV Lanes: LowEmission and FuelEfficient Vehicles
Increases the number of green stickers that can be issued by the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV)
to allow certain low-emission and fuel-efficient vehicles to use high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes
regardless of the number of occupants from 70,000 to 85,000.
4/8/15
Assembly
Transportation
Committee
Page 39 of 55
9.a
State Senate Bills
Subject
Last
Amended
Status
VTA
Position
SB 122
(Jackson)
CEQA: Record of
Proceedings
At the request of a project applicant, requires the lead agency for California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) purposes to prepare a record of proceedings concurrently with the preparation of a negative
declaration, mitigated negative declaration, environmental impact report (EIR), or other environmental
documents for the project, as specified. Requires the Office of Planning and Research to establish and
maintain a database for the collection, storage, retrieval, and dissemination of environmental
documents, notices of exemption, notices of preparation, notices of determination, and notices of
completion provided to the office. Requires a lead agency to submit a sufficient number of copies, in
either a hard copy or electronic form as required by the Office of Planning and Research, of its draft
environmental document, proposed negative declaration or proposed mitigated negative declaration to
the State Clearinghouse for review and comment by state agencies. Requires a lead agency to accept
comments on these documents through electronic mail and to treat such comments as equivalent to
written comments.
6/1/15
Assembly
Appropriations
Committee
SB 189
(Hueso)
Clean Energy and
Low-Carbon
Economic and Jobs
Growth Blue Ribbon
Committee
Creates the Clean Energy and Low-Carbon Economic and Jobs Growth Blue Ribbon Committee within
the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) to be comprised of seven members
appointed by the Governor, the Speaker of the Assembly and the Senate Rules Committee. Requires
the committee to consist solely of persons with expertise in economic, financial or policy aspects of
clean energy, economic growth, job creation, workforce standards, or employment opportunities for
disadvantaged workers. Requires the committee to advise state agencies on the most effective ways to:
(1) expend funds related to clean energy and the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions; and (2)
implement policies in order to maximize California’s economic and employment benefits. In addition,
requires the committee to do all of the following: (1) develop guidance for tracking, reporting and
evaluating jobs outcomes for state clean energy and low-carbon investments; (2) develop guidance to
measure the quantity and quality of jobs created by state clean energy and low-carbon investments, as
well as the geographic and demographic distribution of those jobs; (3) advise state agencies on the
most effective ways to require responsible contractor standards, as applicable, and minimum training
and skill certifications for workers to ensure high-quality work for state clean energy and low-carbon
investments; (4) advise state agencies on the most effective ways to connect disadvantaged
communities to good quality jobs and career pathways created by state clean energy and low-carbon
investments; and (5) advise state agencies on the most effective ways to align state clean energy and
low-carbon training funds with existing state workforce development investments and strategies.
8/17/15
Assembly
Appropriations
Committee
SB 207
(Wieckowski)
Greenhouse Gas
Reduction Fund:
State Agency
Reporting
Requires any state agency expending cap-and-trade auction proceeds from the Greenhouse Gas
Reduction Fund to post on its Internet Website a record describing each expenditure and how that
expenditure would reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
3/24/15
Assembly Natural
Resources
Committee
Page 40 of 55
9.a
State Senate Bills
Subject
Last
Amended
Status
VTA
Position
SB 321
(Beall)
Variable Gas Tax
Rate
In calculating adjustments to the variable gas tax rate to be made for FY 2017 and each fiscal year
thereafter in order to ensure that the same amount of revenue is generated as by the former state sales
tax on gasoline pursuant to the 2010-2011 transportation funding swap, requires the Board of
Equalization to use a combined average based on an estimate of fuel prices for the current fiscal year
and the actuals for the four previous fiscal years, rather than using projections of fuel prices for only the
upcoming fiscal year.
8/18/15
Senate Floor:
Concurrence
SB 344
(Monning)
Commercial Driver’s
License: Education
Beginning January 1, 2018, requires a person, in addition to a written and driving test, to successfully
complete a course of instruction from either a commercial driver training institution or a program
offered by an employer that has been certified by the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) before he
or she is issued an original commercial driver’s license. Provides an exemption to this course of
instruction requirement in the following cases: (1) a commercial motor vehicle driver with military
motor vehicle experience who is currently licensed with the U.S. Armed Forces; (2) a commercial
motor vehicle driver who presents a valid certificate of driving skill from an approved employer-testing
program that includes a course of instruction that meets the minimum standards set by the DMV; (3) a
commercial motor vehicle driver who presents a certificate issued by the California Highway Patrol
(CHP) or a Transit Driver Training Record DL 260 form signed by an employer trainer certified by the
Federal Transit Administration’s “Train-the-Trainer” Program; or (4) a commercial motor vehicle
driver who has received and documented training in compliance with the Education Code.
6/23/15
Assembly
Appropriations
Committee
SB 398
(Leyva)
Green Assistance
Program
Establishes the Green Assistance Program to be administered by the California Environmental
Protection Agency (CalEPA). Requires the Green Assistance Program to provide technical assistance
to small businesses, small non-profit organizations and disadvantaged communities in applying for an
allocation of cap-and-trade auction proceeds from the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. Specifies that
the Green Assistance Program may include the following: (1) basic information on available programs
funded with cap-and-trade auction proceeds, and the eligibility requirements and deadlines for those
programs; and (2) referrals to designated contact people in public agencies administering programs
funded with cap-and-trade auction proceeds. Requires CalEPA to use existing resources appropriated
by the Legislature in the annual Budget Act to administer the Green Assistance Program.
6/2/15
Assembly
Appropriations
Committee
SB 400
(Lara)
Cap-and-Trade:
High-Speed Rail
Requires not less than 25 percent of the cap-and-trade auction proceeds continuously appropriated to
the California High-Speed Rail Authority from the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund to be allocated for
projects that either reduce or offset greenhouse gas emissions directly associated with the construction
of the high-speed rail project and provide a co-benefit of improving air quality. Requires priority to be
given to measures and projects in communities that are located in areas designated as extreme nonattainment. Provides that measures and project eligible for funding may include the following: (1)
public transit improvements that reduce congestion; (2) transportation improvements that reduce
congestion, including network improvements and roadway modifications; (3) alternative transportation
options, including infrastructure improvements that support clean transportation, facilitate bicycle and
pedestrian use, and connect bicycle and pedestrian routes to public transit facilities; (4) natural
systems, including rural and urban forests, that reduce greenhouse gas emissions or increase the
sequestration of carbon to mitigate the impacts of greenhouse gas emissions, and create greater climate
resiliency; and (5) the use of low- and zero-emission equipment for transportation and construction.
6/1/15
Assembly
Appropriations
Committee
Support
Page 41 of 55
9.a
State Senate Bills
Subject
SB 433
(Berryhill)
Variable Gas Tax
Rate: Department of
Finance
For FY 2017 through FY 2021, requires the Department of Finance, rather than the Board of
Equalization, to calculate any adjustments to the variable gas tax rate that would be needed to ensure
that the same amount of revenue is generated as by the former state sales tax on gasoline pursuant to the
2010 transportation funding swap. Similarly, for FY 2017 through FY 2021, requires the Department
of Finance, rather than the Board of Equalization, to adjust the diesel excise tax rate to maintain
revenue neutrality with the increase in the state sales tax rate on diesel fuel that was enacted as part of
the 2010 transportation funding swap.
5/7/15
Assembly
Revenue &
Taxation
Committee
SB 773
(Allen)
Vehicle Registration
Fraud Study
Until January 1, 2021, requests the University of California to conduct a study on motor vehicle
registration fraud and failure to register a motor vehicle. If conducted, requires the study to include all
of the following: (1) quantification of the magnitude of the problem; (2) the strategies being used by
motorists to commit motor vehicle registration fraud; (3) the reasons for the behaviors of motorists
who commit motor vehicle registration fraud or who fail to register their motor vehicles; (4) the costs
to the state and local governments in lost revenues; (5) increases in air pollution; (6) other costs and
consequences of these behaviors; and (7) recommended strategies for increasing compliance with
registration requirements. Requires the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to enter into an
agreement with the University of California to share its vehicle registration information with university
researchers if the study is conducted. Requests the University of California to post a report regarding
the study on its Internet Web site by January 1, 2018.
6/15/16
Assembly
Appropriations
Committee
Last
Amended
Status
VTA
Position
Page 42 of 55
9.a
State Senate Bills
Subject
SB 824
(Beall)
Low Carbon Transit
Operations Program
Makes a number of changes to the Low Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP) to enhance
flexibility in the use of the funds by public transit agencies. Clarifies that a recipient transit agency may
use its LCTOP formula share to purchase zero-emission buses, including electric buses, or to install the
necessary equipment and infrastructure to operate and support such buses, without also having to
expand service. Provides that a recipient transit agency that has used its LCTOP funding share for any
type of operating assistance in a previous fiscal year may use LCTOP money to continue the same
service or program in any subsequent fiscal year, so long as the agency can demonstrate that
greenhouse gas emissions reductions will be realized. For capital projects, requires a recipient transit
agency to do all of the following: (1) specify the phases of work for which the agency is seeking an
allocation of funding from LCTOP; (2) identify the sources and timing of all funding required to
undertake and complete any phase of a project for which the agency is seeking an allocation from the
program; and (3) described intended sources and timing of funding to complete any subsequent phases
of the project through construction or procurement. Requires a recipient transit agency to demonstrate
that each expenditure of LCTOP funding does not supplant another source of funds. Allows a recipient
transit agency that does not submit an expenditure for funding in a particular fiscal year to retain its
funding share, and to accumulate and utilize that funding share in a subsequent fiscal year for a larger
expenditure. Requires the recipient transit agency to specify the number of years that it intends to
retain its funding share and the expenditure for which the agency intends to use these dollars. Limits
the number of fiscal years that a recipient transit agency may retain its funding share to four fiscal
years. Allows a recipient transit agency, in any particular fiscal year, to loan or transfer its funding
share to another recipient transit agency within the same region for any identified eligible expenditure.
Allows a recipient transit agency to apply to Caltrans to do either of the following: (1) reassign any
savings of LCTOP funding allocated for a completed expenditure to another eligible expenditure; or
(2) reassign to another eligible expenditure any LCTOP funding previously allocated to an expenditure
that the agency has determine is no longer a high priority. Allows for the use of Letters of No Prejudice
(LONPs), so that recipient transit agencies can advance their projects or services with local money and
then get reimbursed with LCTOP dollars when that funding becomes available.
Last
Amended
8/15/16
Status
VTA
Position
Assembly Floor
Support
Page 43 of 55
9.a
State Senate Bills
Subject
Last
Amended
Status
VTA
Position
SB 838
(Budget & Fiscal
Review Committee
Transportation
Budget Trailer Bill
Provides that after the amounts required under current law have been repaid using either tribal gaming
or Budget Stabilization Account revenues to various transportation accounts for prior loans made to the
General Fund, or in any year during which any portion of the outstanding loans are repaid from the
Budget Stabilization Account in an amount that is greater than or equal to the amount of tribal gaming
revenues, requires tribal gaming revenues to be remitted to the California Gambling Control
Commission for deposit in the General Fund. For the third and fourth quarters of FY 2016, and for all
four quarters of FY 2017 and FY 2018, requires the Controller’s Office to calculate and publish the
allocation of State Transit Assistance Program (STA) revenue-based funds based on the same list of
public transit operators and the same individual operator ratios that were published by the Controller’s
Office for the fourth quarter of FY 2015. Requires the remaining FY 2016 distributions of STA
revenue-based funds to individual public transit operators be adjusted so that the total FY 2016 amount
received by an operator ultimately reflects the FY 2015 operator ratios. Effective April 1, 2017,
increases the base vehicle registration fee from $43 to $53, which shall be adjusted annually pursuant to
the Consumer Price Index. On January 1, 2019, ends the authority of the Department of Motor
Vehicles (DMV) to issue decals, stickers or other identifiers allowing battery electric, hydrogen fuel
cell and compressed natural gas vehicles to use high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes without the
required number of occupants in the vehicle. Eliminates the 85,000 cap in current law and, instead,
authorizes the DMV, until January 1, 2019, to issue an unlimited number of decals, stickers or other
identifiers to allow HOV lane access for plug-in hybrid vehicles without the required number of
occupants in the vehicle.
6/10/16
Senate Floor:
Concurrence
SB 876
(Liu)
Homelessness: Use
of Public Spaces
Provides that persons experiencing homelessness shall be permitted to use public space at any time that
the space is open to the public without discrimination based on their housing status, and without being
subject to criminal, civil or administrative penalties. Allows persons experiencing homelessness to use
public space for all of the following: (1) free movement without restraint; (2) sleeping or resting, and
protecting oneself from the elements while sleeping or resting, in a non-obstructive manner; (3) eating,
sleeping, accepting, or giving food in a space in which food is not otherwise generally prohibited; and
(4) praying, meditating, worshipping, or practicing religion. Defines “public space” to mean any
property that is owned by a government entity or upon which there is an easement for public use, and
that is held open to the public, including plazas, courtyards, parking lots, sidewalks, public
transportation facilities and services, public buildings, shopping centers, and parks. Provides that the
ability to rest does not apply to a space during a time when it is closed to all persons or when a fee is
required for entry or use.
3/28/16
Senate
Transportation &
Housing
Committee
SB 882
(Hertzberg)
Fare Evasion:
Minors
Prohibits a public transit agency from charging a minor with an infraction or misdemeanor for acts of
fare evasion. Specifies that nothing in the bill shall limit the ability of a public transit agency to assess
a minor an administrative penalty for acts of fare evasion, not to exceed $250 upon a first or second
violation and not to exceed $400 upon a third or subsequent violation.
5/31/16
Governor’s Office
Page 44 of 55
9.a
State Senate Bills
Subject
SB 885
(Wolk)
Design Professional
Contracts:
Indemnity
Commencing with all contracts, and amendments thereto, entered into on or after January 1, 2017,
provides that a design professional shall only have the duty to defend himself or herself from claims
that arise out of, pertain to or relate to the negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct of the design
professional. Specifies that all provisions, clauses, covenants, and agreements contained in, collateral
to, or affecting any such contract that purport to require a design professional to defend claims against
another party shall be unenforceable. Specifies that the bill does not prohibit a design professional from
mutually agreeing with another party to the timing or immediacy of a defense, and provisions for
reimbursement of defense fees and costs. Specifies that the bill shall not be construed to affect: (1) any
duty of a design professional to defend any claims brought against him or her on an ongoing basis
during their pendency; or (2) a design professional’s obligation to reimburse reasonable defense costs
incurred by other persons or entities, limited to the design professional’s degree of fault as determined
by a court, arbitration or negotiated settlement.
6/16/16
Assembly
Judiciary
Committee
SB 901
(Bates)
Advanced Mitigation
Program
Requires Caltrans to establish an Advanced Mitigation Program to accelerate project delivery and
improve the outcomes of environmental mitigation for transportation infrastructure projects. Allows
the program to utilize mitigation instruments, including mitigation banks and conservation easements.
Allows Caltrans to use advanced mitigation credits to fulfill mitigation requirements of any
environmental law for a transportation project eligible for the State Transportation Improvement
Program (STIP), or the State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP). Beginning with
FY 2017, requires Caltrans to set aside at least $30 million per year from the annual appropriations for
the STIP and the SHOPP for the planning and implementation of projects in the Advanced Mitigation
Program.
As
Introduced
Senate
Transportation &
Housing
Committee
SB 902
(Cannella)
Federal
Environmental
Review Process
Extends indefinitely the statutory authorization for Caltrans to participate in a federal program that
allows states to assume the responsibilities of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) under the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). In addition, extends indefinitely provisions in existing
law that authorize Caltrans to consent to the jurisdiction of the federal court’s with regard to the
assumption of FHWA’s responsibilities under NEPA and that waive the state’s Eleventh Amendment
protection against NEPA-related lawsuits brought in federal court for as long as Caltrans participates in
the program.
As
Introduced
Senate
Transportation &
Housing
Committee
SB 903
(Nguyen)
Transportation
Loans
Acknowledges that as of June 30, 2015, there is $879 million in loans of certain transportation revenues
still outstanding, and requires this amount to be repaid by the General Fund from the Budget
Stabilization Account no later than June 30, 2016. Requires the loan repayments to be distributed as
follows: (1) $148 million to be allocated by the California Transportation Commission (CTC) to fund
construction and associated support costs for projects that are programmed in the Traffic Congestion
Relief Program (TCRP), but which have not received their full allocations pursuant to current law; (2)
$334 million to the Trade Corridors Improvement Fund; (3) $265 million to the Transit and Intercity
Rail Capital Program; and (4) $132 million to the State Highway Operation and Protection Program
(SHOPP).
As
Introduced
Senate
Transportation &
Housing
Committee
Last
Amended
Status
VTA
Position
Page 45 of 55
9.a
State Senate Bills
Subject
Last
Amended
Status
VTA
Position
SB 940
(Vidak)
High-Speed Rail:
Selling of Property
Prior to selling property, requires the California High-Speed Rail Authority to send notification by
certified mail to the last known owner advising him or her that the property will be offered for sale.
Provides that the High-Speed Rail Authority shall not sell the property until at least 30 days after the
notification has been sent.
4/12/16
Governor’s Office
SB 951
(McGuire)
Golden State Patriot
Passes Program
Creates the Golden State Patriot Passes Program as a pilot program to provide veterans with free access
to public transit services. Requires Caltrans to administer the program. By January 1, 2018, requires
Caltrans to select three transit operator applicants to receive funding under the pilot program. If there
are sufficient applicants, requires Caltrans to do all of the following: (1) not select a transit operator
applicant that is currently providing veterans with free access to public transit services; (2) select
applicants that serve entirely different counties; (3) select one application that primarily serves an
urban area, one that primarily serves a suburban area, and one that primarily serves a rural area. Caps
the amount of funding that a participating transit operator primarily serving an urban area could receive
under the program at $2 million. Establishes caps for participating transit operators primarily serving
suburban and rural areas at $900,000 and $100,000, respectively. Requires a transit operator selected to
participate in the pilot program to match any state money that it receives with local funds. Sunsets the
pilot program on January 1, 2022.
4/26/16
Senate
Appropriations
Committee
SB 998
(Wieckowski)
Bus-Only Lanes:
Motorist Violations
Prohibits a person from operating, parking, stopping, or leaving standing a motor vehicle in a highway
or roadway lane that has been designated for the exclusive use of public transit buses.
8/11/16
Assembly Floor
SB 1001
(Mitchell)
Employment: Unfair
Immigration-Related
Practices
Provides that it is unlawful for an employer to do any of the following: (1) engage in an unfair
immigration-related practice against an applicant for employment or an employee; (2) attempt to
reinvestigate or reverify an incumbent employee’s authorization to work using an unfair immigrationrelated practice; or (3) discriminate against an applicant for employment or an employee with
authorization to work based on the specific status, or term of status, that accompanies the authorization
to work.
3/28/16
Senate
Appropriations
Committee
SB 1051
(Hancock)
AC Transit:
Automated
Enforcement of
Parking Violations in
Bus-Only Lanes
Until January 1, 2022, authorizes the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District (AC Transit) to install
automated forward-facing cameras on its public transit vehicles for the purpose of video imaging of
parking violations occurring in transit-only traffic lanes.
8/4/16
Assembly Floor
CoSponsor
Page 46 of 55
9.a
State Senate Bills
Subject
Last
Amended
Status
VTA
Position
SB 1063
(Hall)
Wage Differential:
Race or Ethnicity
Prohibits an employer from paying any of its employees at wage rates less than the rates paid to
employees of another race or ethnicity for substantially similar work, except where the employer can
demonstrate: (1) the wage differential is based on one or more of the following factors: a seniority
system; a merit system; a system that measures earnings by quantity or quality of production; or a bona
fide factor other than race or ethnicity, such as education, training or experience; (2) each factor relied
on is applied reasonably; and (3) the one or more factors relied on account for the entire wage
differential.
4/20/16
Senate
Appropriations
Committee
SB 1066
(Beall)
FAST Act
Requires the fund estimate for the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) prepared by
Caltrans and the California Transportation Commission (CTC) to identify and include federal funds
derived from apportionments made to the state under the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation
(FAST) Act. Conforms state law related to driving under the influence of alcohol to federal law in
order to allow California to be eligible to receive certain federal grant funding under the FAST Act.
6/29/16
Assembly
Appropriations
Committee
SB 1128
(Glazer)
Bay Area Regional
Commute Benefit
Ordinance
Eliminates the January 1, 2017, sunset date, and indefinitely extends provisions in current law that
authorize the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) and the Metropolitan
Transportation Commission (MTC) to jointly adopt a regional commute benefit ordinance requiring
certain employers to offer their employees one of three specified commute benefits. Deletes bicycle
commuting as a pretax option under the ordinance and, instead, allows an employer covered by the
ordinance, at its discretion, to offer commuting by bicycle as an employer-paid benefit. If the covered
employer chooses to offer a subsidy to offset the monthly cost of commuting by bicycle, requires such
subsidy to be either the monthly cost of commuting by bicycle or $20, whichever is lower. Deletes
provisions in current law that require BAAQMD and MTC to jointly report to the Legislature regarding
the implementation of the regional commute benefit ordinance.
As
Introduced
Assembly Floor
Support
Page 47 of 55
9.a
State Senate Bills
Subject
Last
Amended
Status
VTA
Position
SB 1141
(Moorlach)
Pilot Program:
Transferring State
Highways to Local
Agencies
Establishes a five-year pilot program under which two counties, one in Northern California and one in
Southern California, may be selected to operate, maintain and make improvements to all state highways
within their respective jurisdictions. For the duration of the pilot program, requires Caltrans to convey
all of its authority and responsibility over state highways in a participating county to the applicable
county or regional transportation agency that has jurisdiction in the county. Requires the California
Transportation Commission (CTC) to administer and oversee the pilot program, and to select the
county or counties that will participate no later than January 1, 2018, from applications received by the
commission. Provides that participation of a county in the pilot program is voluntary. Specifies that if
the CTC is unable to select at least one county to participate in the pilot program by January 1, 2018,
because no county has submitted an application, the provisions of the bill shall become inoperative on
January 15, 2018. For the duration of the pilot program, requires funding to be appropriated as block
grants in the annual Budget Act to the participating counties in an amount equivalent to federal and
state dollars otherwise to be expended by Caltrans on state highways in those counties, including
money for operations, maintenance, capital outlay support, the State Highway Operation and Protection
Program (SHOPP), and the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). In consultation with
Caltrans, requires the CTC to determine the applicable grant amounts for each participating county, and
to submit its recommendations to the Governor and the Legislature. Provides that any cost savings
realized by a participating county, compared to comparable expenditures that otherwise would have
been undertaken by Caltrans on state highways in the county in the absence of the pilot program, may
be used by the county for other transportation priorities consistent with eligible expenditures for the
funding sources involved, subject to approval by the CTC.
4/5/16
Senate
Transportation &
Housing
Committee
SB 1197
(Cannella)
Intercity Rail
Corridors:
Extensions
At any time after an interagency transfer agreement for an intercity rail corridor between Caltrans and a
joint powers board has been executed, allows the agreement to be amended to extend the affected rail
corridor to provide intercity rail service beyond the defined boundaries of the corridor. Requires a
proposed extension to be recommended and justified in the business plan for the intercity rail corridor
by the joint powers board, and to be approved by the California State Transportation Agency (CalSTA).
As
Introduced
Senate
Transportation &
Housing
Committee
SB 1259
(Runner)
Toll Facilities:
Veterans
Exempts vehicles registered to a veteran and displaying a specialized veterans license plate from the
payment of tolls or other charges on a toll road, high-occupancy toll (HOT) lane, toll bridge, toll
highway, vehicular crossing, or any other toll facility.
4/21/16
Assembly
Veterans Affairs
Committee
SB 1320
(Runner)
California
Transportation
Commission and
SHOPP Projects
Excludes the California Transportation Commission (CTC) from the California State Transportation
Agency (CalSTA) and, instead, establishes the commission as a separate entity in state government to
act in an independent oversight role. Requires Caltrans to submit its proposed program of projects for
the State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP) to the CTC. Requires Caltrans to
program capital outlay support resources for each project included in the SHOPP. Requires Caltrans to
provide the CTC with detailed information for all programmed SHOPP projects, including cost, scope
and schedule. Specifies that the CTC is not required to approve the SHOPP in its entirety, as submitted
by Caltrans, and may approve or reject individual SHOPP projects programmed by the department.
Requires Caltrans to submit to the CTC for approval any changes in a programmed SHOPP project’s
cost, scope or schedule.
As
Introduced
Senate
Transportation &
Housing
Committee
Page 48 of 55
9.a
State Senate Bills
Subject
SB 1383
(Lara)
Short-Lived Climate
Pollutants
No later than January 1, 2018, requires the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to approve and
begin implementing a comprehensive short-lived climate pollutants strategy to achieve a reduction in
methane by 40 percent, hydrofluorocarbon gases by 40 percent, and anthropogenic black carbon by 50
percent below 2013 levels by 2030. Prior to approving this strategy, requires CARB to: (1) evaluate
the best-available scientific, technological and economic information to ensure that the strategy is cost
effective and technologically feasible; and (2) incorporate and prioritize, as appropriate, measures that
provide co-benefits related to job growth and local economies; public health, particularly in
disadvantaged communities; and the potential for new innovations in technology, energy and resource
management practices.
4/12/16
Assembly
Appropriations
Committee
SB 1397
(Huff)
Highway
Changeable Message
Signs: Advertising
Authorizes Caltrans, subject to federal approval, to enter into an agreement pursuant to a best value
competitive procurement process with a contractor to construct, upgrade, reconstruct, and operate a
network of changeable message signs within the rights-of-way of the state highway system. Requires
the contractor, subject to certain standards established by Caltrans, to contract and receive funds for the
placement of advertising on these changeable message signs when they are not being used by the
department. Requires revenues derived from advertising on these changeable message signs to be
allocated between Caltrans and the contractor. Requires the revenues received by Caltrans to be
deposited into the State Highway Account, subject to appropriations by the Legislature. Authorizes
Caltrans to adopt guidelines and procedures relative to advertising on changeable message signs.
5/31/16
Senate Floor
SB 1402
(Pavley)
California LowCarbon Fuels
Incentive Program
Establishes the California Low-Carbon Fuels Incentive Program to be administered by the California
Air Resources Board (CARB), in conjunction with the State Energy Resources Conservation and
Development Commission. Authorizes cap-and-trade auction proceeds deposited into the Greenhouse
Gas Reduction Fund to be appropriated for the program. Requires the program to provide incentives
for the in-state production of low-carbon transportation fuels from new and existing facilities using
sustainable feedstock. Requires priority to be given to projects providing direct benefits to
disadvantaged communities.
3/28/16
Senate
Appropriations
Committee
SB 1405
(Pavley)
Zero-Emission
Vehicles
Requires the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to conduct a study to determine the feasibility
and efficacy of providing grants to public transit agencies to subsidize cost-effective rides serving
disadvantaged communities through the use of zero-emission vehicles that are utilized by rental car,
transportation network, taxicab, or car-sharing companies in a manner that complements the service
provided by the public transit agency.
4/13/16
Senate
Appropriations
Committee
SB 1436
(Bates)
Local Agency
Executive
Compensation
Prior to taking final action on a recommendation related to a local agency executive’s salary, salary
schedule or compensation paid in the form of fringe benefits, requires the legislative body of the agency
to orally report a summary of the recommendation during the open meeting in which the final action is
to be taken.
4/6/16
Governor’s Office
Last
Amended
Status
VTA
Position
Page 49 of 55
9.a
State Senate Bills
Subject
SB 1464
(De Leon)
Greenhouse Gas
Emissions Reduction
Programs:
Consultation
In identifying priority programmatic investments, requires the three-year investment plan prepared by
the Department of Finance for the expenditure of cap-and-trade auction proceeds deposited into the
Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund to do both of the following: (1) assess how proposed investments
interact with current state regulations, policies and programs; and (2) evaluate if and how those
proposed investments could be incorporated into existing programs. Requires the investment plan to
recommend metrics that would measure progress and benefits from the proposed programmatic
investments.
4/11/16
Assembly
Appropriations
Committee
SCA 7
(Huff)
Motor Vehicle Fees
and Taxes:
Restrictions on
Expenditures
Calls for placing before the voters an amendment to the California Constitution to prohibit the
Legislature from borrowing revenues derived from fees and taxes imposed by the state on motor
vehicles or their use or operations, and from using these revenues other than for state highways, local
streets and roads, and fixed guideway mass transit as specified in Article 19 of the Constitution. Also
prohibits these revenues from being pledged or used for the payment of principal and interest on bonds,
or for other indebtedness. Requires the revenues derived from that portion of the vehicle license fee
that exceeds 0.65 percent of the market value of a vehicle to be used for street and highway purposes.
Prohibits the Legislature from borrowing these revenues and from using them other than as specifically
permitted. Also prohibits these revenues from being pledged or used for the payment of principal and
interest on bonds, or for other indebtedness.
5/28/15
Senate
Transportation &
Housing
Committee
SJR 24
(Beall)
Federal
Transportation
Funding
Urges Congress and the President to do the following: (1) fully fund the Transportation Investment
Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) Program at a level of $525 million in FY 2017 to provide
additional critical transportation investment in California and elsewhere; and (2) to work together to
finally find a long-term, sustainable funding solution to restore the lost purchasing power of the federal
fuel excise tax, and provide California and the rest of the country with the resources needed to rebuild
our infrastructure, invest in our people through good, well-paying jobs, and restore our economy.
As
Introduced
Senate Floor
Last
Amended
Status
VTA
Position
Page 50 of 55
9.a
State Senate Bills
SBX1-1
(Beall)
Transportation
Funding
Subject
Proposes to generate approximately $5.5 billion per year in new revenues for transportation purposes
from the following sources: (1) an increase in the gasoline excise tax of 12 cents per gallon; (2) an
increase in the diesel excise tax of 22 cents per gallon; (3) a registration surcharge of $35 per year
imposed on all motor vehicles; (4) a registration surcharge of $100 per year imposed on zero-emission
vehicles; (5) a road access charge of $35 per year imposed on all motor vehicles to be collected by the
Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) as part of the annual vehicle registration process; (6) an
increase in the diesel sales tax rate of 3.5 percent for the State Transit Assistance Program (STA); (7)
an increase in the percentage of cap-and-trade auction proceeds continuously appropriated to the Transit
and Intercity Rail Capital Program from 10 percent to 20 percent; and (8) an increase in the percentage
of cap-and-trade auction proceeds continuously appropriated to the Low Carbon Transit Operations
Program from 5 percent to 10 percent. Requires the repayment of approximately $1 billion in
outstanding loans owed by the General Fund to the State Highway Account, the Motor Vehicle Fuel
Account, the Highway Users Tax Account (HUTA), and the Motor Vehicle Account by June 30, 2016.
Beginning July 1, 2019, and every three years thereafter, indexes the gas tax and the diesel excise tax to
inflation and the change in average fuel efficiency. Requires the new $35 vehicle registration surcharge
and the $35 road access fee to be indexed to inflation on an annual basis. Calls for 12 cents of the 22cent increase in the diesel excise tax to be deposited into the Trade Corridors Improvement Fund and
used for goods movement projects programmed by the California Transportation Commission (CTC).
Requires the balance of the revenues generated from the diesel excise tax increase, as well as from the
gas tax increase, the road access charge, the two vehicle registration surcharges, and the one-time
revenues from the General Fund loan repayments, to be deposited into a new Road Maintenance and
Rehabilitation Account. Requires the revenues in the account to be used for the following purposes:
(1) road maintenance and rehabilitation; (2) safety projects; (3) railroad grade separations; (4) active
transportation and pedestrian/bicycle safety projects in conjunction with any other allowable project; or
(5) wildlife crossings. Every year, requires 5 percent of the funds in the Road Maintenance and
Rehabilitation Account to be set aside for allocation to counties that currently do not have a local
transportation sales tax, but gain voter approval of one after July 1, 2016. Requires the CTC to develop
guidelines to define the specific methodology that would be used to distribute these funds to eligible
counties and to cities within those counties. Requires these funds to be expended for road maintenance
and rehabilitation purposes. Allocates the remaining balance in the account after the 5-percent set-aside
as follows: (1) 50 percent to Caltrans for state highway maintenance, State Highway Operation and
Protection Program (SHOPP) projects, or other eligible purposes; and (2) 50 percent to cities and
counties for their local roadway systems. In the latter case, equally divides the funds between cities and
counties, with the cities’ portion being allocated by a formula based on population, and the counties’
share by a formula based on vehicle registrations and miles of maintained county roads. Establishes a
substantial oversight role for the CTC to ensure that the funds allocated from the Road Maintenance
and Rehabilitation Account are used by Caltrans and cities/counties in manner that is consistent with
performance criteria adopted by the commission related to highway/roadway performance, greenhouse
gas emissions, social equity impacts, and public health impacts. Converts the variable gas tax to a fixed
rate of 17.3 cents per gallon, which would be indexed every three years to inflation and the change in
average fuel efficiency. Requires a total of $550 million in cap-and-trade auction proceeds dedicated to
high-speed rail to be set aside for intercity, commuter and urban rail projects. Annually allocates $100
million in cap-and-trade funds to the Active Transportation Program.
Last
Amended
4/21/16
Status
VTA
Position
Senate
Appropriations
Committee
Support
Page 51 of 55
9.a
State Senate Bills
Subject
Last
Amended
Status
SBX1-2
(Huff)
Cap-and-Trade:
State Highways and
Local Roadways
Requires the Legislature to appropriate cap-and-trade auction proceeds generated from the
transportation fuels sector for transportation infrastructure, including public streets and highways, but
excluding high-speed rail.
As
Introduced
Senate
Transportation &
Infrastructure
Development
Committee
SBX1-3
(Vidak)
High-Speed Rail:
Bond Funding
Specifies that no further bonds shall be sold for high-speed rail purposes pursuant to the Safe, Reliable
High-Speed Passenger Train Bond Act for the 21st Century (Proposition 1A), except as specifically
provided with respect to an existing appropriation for early improvement projects related to the Phase I
blended system. Upon appropriation by the Legislature, requires the unspent proceeds received from
outstanding bonds issued and sold for high-speed rail purposes prior to the effective date of the
provisions of this bill to be redirected to retiring the debt incurred from the issuance and sale of those
outstanding bonds. Allows the remaining unissued bonds, as of the effective date of the provisions of
this bill, that were authorized for high-speed rail purposes to be issued and sold. Upon appropriation by
the Legislature, requires the net proceeds from the sale of these remaining unissued bonds to be made
available as follows: (1) 50 percent to Caltrans to fund repair and new construction projects on state
highways and freeways; and (2) 50 percent to Caltrans to create a program to fund repair and new
construction projects on local streets and roads, with each county receiving a base amount of funding,
and any additional funding being allocated based on a county’s population. Makes no changes to the
authorization under Proposition 1A for the issuance of $950 million in bonds for rail purposes other
than high-speed rail.
8/17/15
Senate
Transportation &
Infrastructure
Development
Committee
SBX1-4
(Beall)
Transportation
Funding: State
Highways and Local
Roadways
Declares the intent of the Legislature to enact statutory changes to establish permanent, sustainable
sources of transportation funding to maintain and repair the state’s highways, local roads, bridges, and
other critical transportation infrastructure.
9/4/15
Conference
Committee
SBX1-5
(Beall)
Transportation
Funding: Trade
Corridors and Local
Transportation
Infrastructure
transportation funding to improve the state’s key trade corridors, and support efforts by local
governments to repair and improve local transportation infrastructure.
As
Introduced
Assembly Desk
SBX1-6
(Runner)
Cap-and-Trade:
High-Speed Rail
Prohibits the use of cap-and-trade auction proceeds for the state’s high-speed rail project. Requires 65
percent of the cap-and-trade auction proceeds deposited into the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund to be
distributed to the California Transportation Commission (CTC) for allocation to high-priority
transportation projects, as determined by the commission. Requires the CTC to allocate these funds as
follows: (1) 40 percent to state highway projects; (2) 40 percent to local street/road projects, equally
divided between cities and counties; and (3) 20 percent to public transit projects.
As
Introduced
Senate
Transportation &
Infrastructure
Development
Committee
VTA
Position
Page 52 of 55
9.a
State Senate Bills
Subject
Last
Amended
Status
VTA
Position
SBX1-7
(Allen)
Diesel Sales Tax
Increases the sales and use tax rate on diesel fuel by 3.5 percent. Dedicates the revenues derived from
this increase to the State Transit Assistance Program (STA). Restricts the expenditure of these
revenues to transit capital projects, or services to maintain or repair a public transit agency’s existing
vehicle fleet or facilities, including the following: (1) rehabilitation or modernization of existing
vehicles or facilities; (2) design, acquisition and construction of new vehicles or facilities that improve
existing public transit services or that enable the implementation of future planned services; or (3)
services that complement local efforts for repair and improvement of local transportation infrastructure.
9/3/15
Senate
Appropriations
Committee
Support
SBX1-8
(Hill)
Cap-and-Trade:
Public Transit
Funding
Increases the amount of cap-and-trade auction proceeds continuously appropriated from the Greenhouse
Gas Reduction Fund to the Low Carbon Transit Operations Program from 5 percent to 10 percent, and
to the Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program from 10 percent to 20 percent.
As
Introduced
Senate
Appropriations
Committee
Support
SBX1-9
(Moorlach)
Caltrans:
Architectural and
Engineering Services
Prohibits Caltrans from using any non-recurring funds, including loan repayments, bond funds or grant
funds, to pay the salaries or benefits of any permanent civil service position within the department.
Beginning on July 1, 2016, requires Caltrans to contract with qualified private entities for a minimum
of 15 percent of the total annual value of architectural and engineering services with respect to public
works projects undertaken by the department. Increases this percentage each year to a minimum of 50
percent by July 1, 2023.
As
Introduced
Senate
Transportation &
Infrastructure
Development
Committee
SBX1-10
(Bates)
State Transportation
Improvement
Program
Revises the process for programming and allocating the 75-percent share of federal and state funds
available for regional transportation improvement programs (RTIPs). Requires the California
Transportation Commission (CTC) to compute the annual county share amounts for each county for
programming and allocation under the RTIPs. Requires these funds, along with an appropriate amount
of capital outlay support dollars, to be appropriated annually through the Budget Act. Upon the
enactment of the Budget Act, requires Caltrans to apportion the RTIP county shares for each county as
block grants to the applicable regional transportation planning agency (RTPA). Requires the RTPAs to
identify the transportation capital improvement projects to be funded with these dollars in their RTIPs.
Requires the CTC to incorporate the RTIPs into the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP).
Eliminates the role of the CTC in programming and allocating funding for RTIP projects, but retains
certain oversight roles of the commission with respect to the expenditure of these dollars. Repeals
provisions in current law governing the computation of county shares over multiple fiscal years.
As
Introduced
Senate
Transportation &
Infrastructure
Development
Committee
Page 53 of 55
9.a
State Senate Bills
Subject
Last
Amended
Status
VTA
Position
SBX1-11
(Berryhill)
CEQA: Exemption
for Certain
Transportation
Projects
Exempts from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) a project that consists of the
inspection, maintenance, repair, restoration, reconditioning, relocation, replacement, or removal of
existing transportation infrastructure, including highways, roadways, bridges, tunnels, public transit
systems, and paths and sidewalks serving either bicycles or pedestrians, if the project meets all of the
following conditions: (1) the project is located within an existing right-of-way; (2) any area
surrounding the right-of-way that is altered as a result of construction activities that are necessary for
the completion of the project will be restored to its condition before the project; and (3) the project
applicant agrees to comply with all conditions otherwise authorized by law or imposed by a city or
county as part of any local agency permit process that are required to mitigate potential impacts of the
project. Prohibits a court in a judicial action or proceeding under CEQA from staying or enjoining a
transportation infrastructure project that is included in a regional sustainable communities strategy
(SCS) or alternative planning strategy unless the court finds either of the following: (1) the project
presents an imminent threat to the public health and safety; or (2) the project site contains unforeseen
important Native American artifacts, or unforeseen important historical, archaeological or ecological
values that would be materially, permanently and adversely affected by the project unless the court
stays or enjoins the project.
9/4/15
Senate
Transportation &
Infrastructure
Development
Committee
SBX1-12
(Runner)
California
Transportation
Commission
Excludes the California Transportation Commission (CTC) from the California State Transportation
Agency (CalSTA) and, instead, establishes the commission as a separate entity in state government to
act in an independent oversight role. Requires Caltrans to submit its proposed program of projects for
the State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP) to the CTC for review by January 31 of
each even-numbered year. Requires Caltrans to program capital outlay support resources for each
project included in the SHOPP. Requires Caltrans to provide the CTC with detailed information for all
programmed SHOPP projects, including cost, scope and schedule. Specifies that the CTC is not
required to approve the SHOPP in its entirety, as submitted by Caltrans, and may approve or reject
individual SHOPP projects programmed by the department. Requires Caltrans to submit to the CTC for
approval any changes in a programmed SHOPP project’s cost, scope or schedule.
8/20/15
Senate
Appropriations
Committee
Page 54 of 55
9.a
State Senate Bills
Subject
Last
Amended
Status
VTA
Position
SBX1-13
(Vidak)
Office of the
Transportation
Inspector General
Creates the Office of the Transportation Inspector as an independent state government entity to ensure
that Caltrans; the California High-Speed Rail Authority; and all other state agencies expending state
transportation funds are operating efficiently, effectively, and in compliance with applicable federal and
state laws. Requires the Governor to appoint a transportation inspector general, subject to confirmation
by the Senate, to a six-year term. Provides that the transportation inspector general cannot be removed
from office during that term, except for good cause. Requires the transportation inspector general to
review policies, practices and procedures, and to conduct audits and investigations of activities
involving state transportation funds in consultation with all affected state agencies. Specifically,
requires the transportation inspector general to do all of the following: (1) examine the operating
practices of Caltrans, the High-Speed Rail Authority and all other state agencies expending state
transportation funds to identify fraud and waste, opportunities for efficiencies, and opportunities to
improve the data used to determine appropriate project resource allocations; (2) identify best practices
in the delivery of transportation projects, and develop policies or recommend proposed legislation
enabling state agencies to adopt these practices when practicable; (3) provide objective analysis of, and
when possible, offer solutions to, concerns raised by the public or generated within agencies involving
the state’s transportation infrastructure and project delivery methods; (4) conduct, supervise and
coordinate audits and investigations relating to the programs and operations of all state transportation
agencies with state-funded transportation projects; and (5) recommend policies promoting economy
and efficiency in the administration of programs and operations of all state transportation agencies with
state-funded transportation projects. Prohibits the Office of the Transportation Inspector General from
conducting any audit or investigation that would be redundant to or concurrent with any audit or
investigation of the same matter.
9/3/15
Senate
Appropriations
Committee
SBX1-14
(Cannella)
Public-Private
Partnerships
transportation infrastructure projects indefinitely.
As
Introduced
Senate
Transportation &
Infrastructure
Development
Committee
SCAX1-1
(Huff)
Motor Vehicle Fees
and Taxes:
Restrictions on
Expenditures
Calls for placing before the voters an amendment to the California Constitution to prohibit the
Legislature from borrowing revenues derived from fees and taxes imposed by the state on motor
vehicles or their use or operations, and from using these revenues other than for state highways, local
streets and roads, and fixed guideway mass transit as specified in Article 19 of the Constitution. Also
prohibits these revenues from being pledged or used for the payment of principal and interest on bonds,
or for other indebtedness. Requires the revenues derived from that portion of the vehicle license fee
that exceeds 0.65 percent of the market value of a vehicle to be used for street and highway purposes.
Prohibits the Legislature from borrowing these revenues and from using them other than as specifically
permitted. Also prohibits these revenues from being pledged or used for the payment of principal and
interest on bonds, or for other indebtedness.
As
Introduced
Senate
Appropriations
Committee
Support
Page 55 of 55
10
Date:
Current Meeting:
Board Meeting:
August 30, 2016
September 7, 2016
October 6, 2016
BOARD MEMORANDUM
TO:
THROUGH:
FROM:
Acting Director of Planning & Program Development, Carolyn M. Gonot
SUBJECT:
2016 Transportation Systems Monitoring Program Report
BACKGROUND:
The Transportation Systems Monitoring Program (TSMP) was initiated by the VTA Technical
Advisory Committee and approved by the Board of Directors in September 2008 to monitor the
conditions and performance of selected transportation system assets in Santa Clara County. The
TSMP and annual reports were developed in response to concerns raised by local jurisdictions on
the ability and resources needed to maintain the County’s transportation infrastructure to
acceptable standards.
This program also follows the goals of Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP21), the federal reauthorization transportation funding program that emphasizes performancebased management of transportation infrastructure assets at the state and local levels.
The primary purpose of this report is to serve as an asset management tool by providing
information on the inventory and general health of selected key transportation systems in a
single, public friendly report that leverages existing data already available. Where data was
unavailable, a survey was used to fill in the gaps of the information being sought such as
conditions of the roadside assets (e.g. traffic signal controllers, roadway striping and streetlight
poles).
The TMSP report also has secondary beneficial uses such as the following:
 Enable the residents and external stakeholders to better understand the performance of the
County’s transportation systems and effectiveness of transportation investments;
 Communicate progress towards stated transportation systems goals and objectives to
VTA’s committees and Santa Clara County’s communities;
 Provide additional context for future funding and policy decisions on future
transportation system performance.
10
The Draft 2016 TSMP Report is the sixth annual edition since this monitoring program was
initiated. Each new report released has highlighted different aspects of Santa Clara County’s
transportation network building upon previous editions. Below are examples from past reports:
 2010 TSMP Report (1st Edition) - Introduced 13 components to monitor using 18
performance measures.
 2011 TSMP Report (2nd Edition) - Focused on the monitoring of litter and landscape
conditions on the freeways.
 2013 TSMP Report (3rd Edition) - Added a new section on inventory of traffic signal
controllers, performance of express lanes, and comparisons of transportation systems
with peer counties in the Bay Area.
 2014 (4th Edition) - Featured a new “dashboard” format that displayed performance
measures and conditions, and a table that highlighted trends for key transportation assets.
 2015 (5th Edition) - Expanded more detailed information on freeway litter, landscape and
graffiti maintenance and conditions of roadside assets.
The 2016 TSMP Report (6th Edition) includes two new data sets: an inventory of ramp meters,
and a survey of use and application of green bike lanes by local agencies. In addition, the TSMP
web page will be updated to include highlights from the report in a dash-board format with an
interaction section for Santa Clara County community residents to submit comments and input at
<http://www.vta.org/tsmp>. The updated TSMP website is anticipated to be active by October
2016. Attachment B shows a draft layout of the web page.
DISCUSSION:
Attachment A of this memo is a copy of the 2016 TSMP final draft report that includes a
summary table of the tracked key performance indicators and a presentation. Below are
highlights from this year’s report:
Pavement Conditions
There are approximately 10,000 lane miles of roadway pavement in Santa Clara County
maintained by local jurisdictions. The average Pavement Condition Index (PCI) for Santa Clara
County is 68, which is considered to be “Fair Condition” compared with the Bay Area PCI goal
of 75. This is the same score from the previous year, reflecting stable pavement conditions that
was on a downward trend from a PCI score of 70 in 2011. Roadways that are not maintained to
a PCI score of 70 or higher cost more to repair in the future if rehabilitation maintenance is
deferred over time.
Local Bridge/Overcrossing Conditions
The average Sufficiency Rating (SR) for the 489 bridges/overcrossings in Santa Clara County is
81.0 (based on a scale of 0 to 100), which is considered to be in “Good Condition.” This is the
same score as the previous year. SR 81.0 is an upward trend from 78.3 in 2012. Local bridges are
defined by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) as bridge structures that are at least 20
feet in length and designed specifically for automobile traffic loads (not including bicycle/
pedestrian and railroad/light rail overcrossings). For most bridges and overcrossings in Santa
Page 2 of 4
10
Clara County, the bridge sufficiency inspections are conducted by Caltrans staff, who later input
the data into FHWA’s National Bridge Inventory (NBI) database.
Freeway Roadside Litter, Landscape and Graffiti Conditions
Caltrans maintains approximately 310 roadside miles (miles of freeway shoulders) including 128
interchanges in Santa Clara County. To assess the litter, landscape and graffiti conditions along
the freeways, two sources of data collection were used. First was a drive-by visual assessment
conducted by VTA staff using video monitoring, and second was a spot-check field assessment
made by Caltrans staff. Both assessments were made using a single day, observation approach.
The locations with the most amounts of litter observed at the time of monitoring were at US 101/
Story Road, US 101/Trimble Road and SR 87/Capital Expressway interchanges. The locations
with the most noticeable untrimmed landscaping were observed near I-680/Montague
Expressway and US 101/Trimble Road to US 101/Story Road. The locations with the most
noticeable incidents of graffiti were observed along US 101 between Oakland Road to Story
Road. In general, the overall conditions for all of the freeway corridors in Santa Clara County
were moderately littered, had moderately neglected landscaping, and had a slight amount of
graffiti (compared with previous years). Photos of the observed conditions for each of the
freeway corridors and interchanges are included in the main report.
Based on Caltrans FY 2015 Maintenance Level of Service (LOS) Report for Santa Clara County,
the Roadside LOS score that includes a combined assessment of vegetation, fences, tree/brush
encroachment, litter/debris, graffiti and ramp conditions, dropped from “good condition” (71
points) in FY 2012 to “poor condition” (48 points) in FY 2015 (based on a scale of 0 to 100
points). The trend for this measure has varied over the past several reporting periods. It should
be noted that the annual LOS evaluations are subjective based on a few random single-day
samples and are not necessarily representative of freeway conditions for the whole reporting
cycle year.
Local Agency Roadside Assets Conditions (e.g. Traffic Controllers, Pavement Markings,
Signage, Curb and Gutter)
In order to gain a perspective on the conditions of roadside assets maintained by local
jurisdictions and their ability to maintain the assets, a self-assessment survey was used to obtain
this information. Based on responses from Santa Clara County’s local jurisdictions to the TSMP
Roadside Asset Self-Assessment Survey, an average of 76% of local assets are in “good
condition” and the ability to maintain these assets is “medium” (on a scale from low to high).
Maintaining traffic signs were identified by the local cities as difficult to upkeep, due to the large
inventory of signs. 68 percent of the approximate 182,000 signs in Santa Clara County were
assessed to be in “good condition.”
Roadway Safety (Auto Accident Collisions)
The monitoring of auto accident collisions on Santa Clara County’s roadways is a new measure
that was recently added to this report. The monitoring of these collisions, specifically those
involving pedestrians and bicyclists, can serve as a measure for evaluating the effectiveness of
the county’s Complete Streets programs and Vision Zero initiatives in reducing vehicle collision
Page 3 of 4
10
related fatalities.
The collision records are processed, maintained and made available to the public on California
Highway Patrol’s Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS). These records are
released on annual basis but is typically two years behind the current year. Provisional data for
2014 that was made available for this report shows that there were 14,222 total collisions in
Santa Clara County. Of these collisions, 6,721 collisions involve injuries, 7,397 involved
property damages, and 104 collisions involved fatalities.
Historical data shows that while there is a downward trend in total collisions from 15,100 to
14,222 collisions between 2010 and 2014, there was an increase in the number of fatalities from
81 to 104. The three major categories of fatal collision involved other autos (32%), pedestrians
(29%), and objects (28%).
Bikeways
With the expanding network of bicycle facilities that has become of equal importance with motor
vehicle facilities in Santa Clara County, the monitoring of bikeways was recently included in the
TSMP. At this time, the TSMP report only monitors the progress of bicycle facilities built
compared with the countywide plan. Future reports may eventually include the monitoring of the
conditions and performance of the bikeways.
To date, approximately 234 miles of on-street bicycle projects, 110 miles of off-street (trail)
projects and 25 across-barrier connections (bridges) have been completed based on VTA’s 2008
Countywide Bicycle Plan.
Additional Information
Additional information on other areas such as congestion, inventory of transit assets and air
quality are included in the main report.
Prepared By: Eugene Maeda
Memo No. 5602
Page 4 of 4
10.a
ROADSIDE ASSETS
CONGESTION
PAVEMENT | BIKEWAYS
TRANSIT
2016 TRANSPORTATION
SYSTEMS MONITORING
REPORT (DRAFT)
September 2016
BRIDGES | CURB & GUTTER
LITTER | LANDSCAPE | GRAFFITI
SAFETY
10.a
10.a
Table of Contents & Introduction
Table of Contents
Introduction .............................................. 1
2016 Highlights.........................................2
Pavement ...................................................6
Bridges..................................................... 11
(MAP-21), the federal reauthorization
transportation funding program that emphasizes
performance-based management of
transportation infrastructure assets at the state
and local levels.
Figure 1. Typical Transportation Project Life Cycle.
Freeway Litter, Landscape and Graffiti
Maintenance ........................................... 14
Monitoring
Roadside Assets ..................................... 34
Roadway Safety ...................................... 38
Air Quality ............................................... 41
Mode Share ............................................ 42
Bikeways ................................................. 43
Notes on Report ..................................... 46
Acknowledgements ................................ 50
Why Monitor?
The residents of Santa Clara County have made
significant investments in its transportation
infrastructures. A concern raised by local
agencies is their ability to maintain Santa Clara
County’s transportation systems to acceptable
levels. To address this concern, VTA’s Technical
Advisory Committee initiated an effort to
develop a countywide transportation system
monitoring program (TSMP), which was
adopted by the VTA Board of Directors in
September 2008.
The primary purpose of this report is to serve as
an asset management tool by providing an
inventory and general assessment on the
conditions and performance of selected key
transportation systems in a single report on an
annual basis.
Other benefits include:
 Enable the county and external stakeholders to
better understand the performance of the
county’s transportation system and the
effectiveness of transportation investments;
 Communicate progress towards stated
transportation system goals and objectives;
 Provide additional context for future funding
and policy decisions.
In addition, the TSMP follows the goals of
Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century
Introduction
The 2016 TSMP Report is the sixth edition of
this report since the Transportation Systems
Monitoring Program (TSMP) was first released
in 2010. Each new report released highlights
different areas of Santa Clara County’s
transportation network as new information is
added:
 2010 (1st ed.) introduced 13 areas to monitor
and 18 performance measures
 2011 (2nd ed.) introduced monitoring of litter
and landscape conditions on the highways
 2013 (3rd ed.) featured inventory of traffic
signal systems, introduced monitoring of
express lanes and included comparisons of
transportation systems with peer counties in
the Bay Area
 2014 (4th ed.) featured a new report format,
key performance measures table, expanded:
pavement, bridge, and litter and landscape
monitoring sections, new safety section and
revised air quality section.
 2015 (5th ed.) featured expanded litter and
landscape
 2016 (6th ed.) ramp metering inventory and
green bike lanes materials and applications
2016 TSMP Monitoring Report | 1
10.a
Summary
ABOUT THE DATA
One of the goals established when developing the TSMP concept was to take advantage of available data
from existing resources that could be consistently be tracked over time to identify trends into a single,
comprehensive report. Where data was unavailable, a survey was used to fill in gaps of the information
being sought such as the conditions of the county’s roadside assets (e.g. traffic signal controllers, roadway
signage and streetlight poles). The performance measures and sources used for this report are
summarized in the Notes Section.
2016 Highlights
TABLE 1 - SELECT KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
Indicators
Previous
Period
Current
Period
Goal
Pavement
Local Pavement
Conditions
(Avg. PCI scale of 0-100
points)
68
68
(2014)
(2015)
75
(Avg. SR scale of 0-100
points)
(% moderately littered or
worse)
Littered Freeway
Monitored
Interchanges
(% moderately littered or
worse)
Roadway
Maintenance LOS
(0-100 points)
Litter/Debris
Maintenance LOS
(0-100 points)
 Yes
 No



70
69
68
67
90
81.2
81.0
(2014)
(2015)
80

80
70

Litter Maintenance
Littered Freeway
Shoulder Miles
Trend
(Yearly)

Bridges
Local Bridge
Conditions
Goal
Met
80%
48%
61%
(2015)
(2016)
-
-
60%
40%
80%
67%
67%
(2015)
(2016)
-
-
60%
40%
90
81
67
(2013)
(2015)
87

70
50
90
52
61
(2013)
(2015)
80

70
50
10.a
Summary
Roadside Assets
Previous
Period
Current
Period
Goal
Goal
Met

90%
Traffic Signals
(% in good condition)
82
84
(2015)
(2016)
-
-
70%
50%
90%
Pavement Markings
73
71
(2015)
(2016)
-
-
70%
50%
90%
Traffic Signs
67
68
(2015)
(2016)
-
-
70%
50%
90%
Light Poles
74
79
(2015)
(2016)
-
-
70%
50%
90%
Curb & Gutter
78
79
(2015)
(2016)
-
-
70%
50%

Congestion
60%
CMP Intersections
46%
47%
(% at LOS C or above)
(2012)
(2014)
CMP Freeway –
General Purpose
Segments
-
-
40%
50%
42%
41%
(2014)
(2015)
-
-
CMP Freeway –
Carpool Segments
50%
40%
30%
75%
62%
59%
(2014)
(2015)
-
-
65%
55%
Trend (Yearly)
10.a
Summary

(in hours)
Number of Tolled
Vehicles
(in thousands)
Transit
Light Rail Annual
Ridership
(in Millions)

360
181
(2015)
(2016)
525.2
475.5
(2015)
(2016)
Previous
Period
Current
Period
10.95
11.32
(2014)
(2015)
32.48
32.62
(in Millions)
(2014)
(2015)
-
-
Goal
11.60
34.00
-
-
(0-500; see Notes on
Report section)
Air Quality Index
Annual Unhealthy
Days
(Days per year where
AQI>100)
475 K
Goal
Met


Trend (Yearly)
11.5 M
10.5 M
9.5 M
36 M
33 M
84.5%
77.4%
(2014)
(2015)
95%

85%
85.9%
85.6%
(2014)
(2015)
92.5%

90%
80%
100.0%
99.67%
99.67%
(2014)
(2015)
99.55%

99.5%
99.0%
50
39
40
(2014)
(2015)
-
-
40
30
20
5
7
(2014)
(2015)
-
-
10
0
6 PM
5 PM
4 PM
3 PM
550 K
Air Quality
Air Quality Index
Annual Median
9 AM
100
625 K
75%
100%
System Annual %
Scheduled Service
Operated
8 AM
250
30 M
95%
Bus Annual On-time
Performance
7 AM
30
400
Bus Annual Ridership
Light Rail Annual Ontime Performance
EB
50
6 AM
>45
Thousands
HOV Only Mode
Operation
(2015)
42
(2016)
Millions
(minimum mph)
44
Millions
Speed Monitoring
WB
70
5 AM
Express Lanes (SR 237/I-880 Connector)
10.a
Summary
Population
1.89
1.92
(millions)
(2014)
(2015)
Registered Drivers
1.30
1.35
(millions)
(2014)
(2015)
Registered Vehicles
1.51
1.65
(millions)
(2013)
(2015)
Goal
-
-
-
Goal
Met
-
-
-
Trend (Yearly)
Millions
Current
Period
Millions
Previous
Period
Millions
County Census
Information
2M
1.5 M
1.5 M
1M
2M
1.5 M
1M
TABLE 2 - INVENTORY OF ASSETS
Assets
Quantity
Year Data
Collected
Bikeways – Across Boundary Connections
Bikeways – Miles of On-Street Facilities
Bikeways – Miles of Off-Street Facilities
Bridges (Local)
Transit – Bus and Light Rail
Bus – Fleet Age (avg.)
Bus – Fleet Size
Bus – Route Mileage
Bus – Routes
Bus – Stops
25 connections
234 mi
110 mi
489 NBI Bridges
2016
2016
2016
2016
*Updated
*Updated
*Updated
*Updated
10.6 Yrs.
493
1,236 mi
75
3,844
99
2016
2016
2016
2016
2016
*Updated
*Updated
*Updated
*Updated
*Updated
79.6 mi
42.2 mi
61
265 Operational
14 Non-operational
9,953 Lane Miles
1,181 Local Controllers
160 State Controllers
2016 *Updated
2016 *Updated
2016 *Updated
Light Rail – Fleet Size
Light Rail – Miles of Track
Light Rail – Route Mileage
Light Rail – Stations
Freeway – Ramp Meters
Pavement (Local)
Traffic Signal Controllers
2016 *Updated
2016 *Updated
2016 *Updated
2013
NOTES:
Table 1 - Not all Performance Indicators have established goals. In those instances, a dashed line is used
to indicate that goals have not been set yet.
10.a
Pavement
Pavement
Overview
INVENTORY
Inventory: 9,953 lane miles
There are approximately 9,953 lane miles of
pavement in Santa Clara County maintained by
local agencies. The term “lane miles” is a
measure of road length which represents the
number of miles of every driving lane. For
example, 5 miles of a 2-lane road (2 lanes in
each direction) is equal to 20 lane miles (5 miles
x 2 directions x 2 lanes = 20 miles). This
measure is used to better reflect the total
amount of pavement that needs to be
maintained.
Changes in inventory from year to year can be
caused by addition or reductions of new or old
roads, such as widening of existing roadways,
extension of lanes or removal of existing lanes
(road diet projects) or by inconsistencies of
yearly reporting and inspecting.
CONDITION
Pavement Condition Index (PCI)
The 3-year rolling average PCI score for Santa
Clara County’s roadways is 68 (Fair),
compared with the Bay Area’s regional goal of 75
(Good).
PCI is a numerical index between 0 and 100
which is used to indicate the general condition of
pavement. Zero is considered to be the worst or
failed condition and 100 represents a roadway
that is in excellent or best condition (new).
Condition: 68 PCI [Fair] (3-yr average)
Needs: $2,314M (to eliminate back-log and
attain PCI of 75 in 10 years),
Sources: MTC Vital Signs 2015 PCI Scores, 2014
California Statewide Local Streets and Roads
Needs Assessment Report
arterial, collector and residential) over a 3-year
time period. This measurement accounts for
incremental changes or wearing down of the
roadways over time.
Figure 2.
Current
Overall
PCI
Excellent
Very Good
Good
At risk
Poor
Failed
Figure 3.
Overall
PCI by
Road
Type &
% of
2012
Network
73
69
Arterial
Collector
Fair
64
Residential
Percent of Network (by Lane Miles)*
30%
14%
67%
*From 2015 Data
The PCI score presented here represents a
weighted average based on a percentage of the
roadway network by roadway category (e.g.
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
10.a
Pavement
PCI Description
PCI is based on the number and severity of
pavement distresses observed during a visual
inspection of a roadway. Visual examples of the
PCI index scale are shown below.
Pavement Surface
PCI
100
Figure 4
Example
Pavement
Surface &
PCI
Condition and Pavement Evaluation
PCI is based on visual inspection of the top
surface of pavement. Distresses originating
below the pavement are not typically noticed
until it “makes its way up” causing cracks or
depressions on the surface. These distressed
conditions can originate from deteriorating
underlying pavement, base, sub-base, and
subgrade layers.
In addition to PCI, there are also numerous
methods of determining pavement condition.
However, many of these methods are too
detailed and cost prohibitive for frequent
reporting purposes.
60
Layer
Asphalt
5
Base
Figure 5.
Typical
Pavement
Section
Sub-Base
Table 3. PCI & Condition Description
At risk
(59 – 50)
Poor
(49 – 25)
Failed
(24 – 0)
Natural
Subgrade
Newly constructed or resurfaced and
have few if any signs of distress.
Show only low levels of distress, such as
minor cracks or surface damage as a
result of water permeation.
The low end of this range exhibit
significant levels of distress and may
require a combination of rehabilitation
and other preventive maintenance to
keep them from deteriorating rapidly.
Pavements are deteriorated and require
immediate attention and possibly
rehabilitative work. Ride quality is
significantly inferior to better pavement
categories.
Pavements have extensive amounts of
distress and require major rehabilitation
or reconstruction. Pavements in this
category affect the speed and flow of
traffic significantly.
Pavements need reconstruction and are
extremely rough and difficult to drive on.
PCI Trend
Based on historical PCI scores, this year’s score
of 68 shows that there is a leveling trend in
average PCI for the county. PCI scores for the
Bay Area are based on a 3-year moving average
which means that the current PCI of the county
may be worse or slightly better than the PCI of
68.
Figure 70
6.
PCI
Trend
(3-yr
AVG)
69
68
67
68.5
68.0
68.0
Fair
(69 – 60)
Description
Newly constructed or resurfaced and
have few if any signs of distress.
67.2
67.3
67.8
68.4
69.1
69.6
69.3
Excellent
(100 – 90)
Very Good
(89 – 80)
Good
(79 – 70)
Compacted
Subgrade
66
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Condition
(PCI)
Excellent
Very Good
Good
At risk
Poor
Failed
Fair
10.a
Pavement
Figure 11.
Life Cycle
Pavement tends to deteriorate at an increasing
rate over time. The current PCI is at the high end
of the “Fair” range and is approaching the “AtRisk” category where a PCI of 60 warns of
potential rapid deterioration.
General Deterioration Curve
60
40
20
0
Figure 12.
Age (Years)
Bay Area
Counties
2015 3-yr
AVG PCI
100
80
60
40
20
0
Good
Good
Current
Condition
Distribution
2015
Fair
2014
At risk
0%
20%
2013 40%
Poor/Failed
0%
2013
60%
80%
100%
50%
Current &
Historical
Distribution
Data
Excellent
Very Good
Good
At risk
Poor
Failed
2015
Good
25.68% 27.46% 27.96%
Fair
17.84% 18.61% 18.90%
At risk
11.86% 11.99% 12.67%
Poor/Failed 15.90% 16.22% 16.97%
No Data
0.13% 0.22% 0.10%
Based on the 2014 California Statewide Local
Streets and Roads Needs Assessment, a biannual report, Santa Clara County’s needs
is $2.3B in order to eliminate accumulated
2012
pavement maintenance back-log and achieve a
PCI in the low 80’s (Good) within about 10
years. This cost is estimated based on number of
lane miles within a PCI range and cost of
rehabilitation.
0% and
20%
60%
80%
100%
Treatments
Cost 40%
PCI helps to indicate the severity of roadway
deterioration and maintenance and
rehabilitation treatments needed to improve
pavement conditions. Estimated treatment costs
are also provided in the California Local Streets
& Roads Needs Assessment 2014 Update report.
% in Good Condition
If the condition categories are combined into
“Good,” “Fair/At-Risk,” and “Poor,” a
generalized “% in Good condition” can be
developed. The result is 51% of pavement is
in “Good” condition.
Figure 10.
Current
Combined
Distribution
51.37%
0%
20%
40%
31.66%
60%
Fair
100% NEEDS
2014
Excellent/
28.59% 25.50% 23.42%
Very Good
Figure 9.
66 68 69 64 59 67 70 68 65
55
"Bay Area"
Alameda
Contra Costa
Marin
Napa
San Francisco
San Mateo
Santa Clara
Solano
Sonoma
Condition Type Distribution
Because different conditions of pavement
require different levels of maintenance, it can be
useful for decision making purposes to look at
the full spectrum of pavement condition
Excellent/ Very
categories.
Figure 8.
100%
Peer County Comparison
The PCI goal established for the Bay Area’s local
roadways is 75. Santa Clara County has a PCI
score of 68, which is slightly better than the Bay
Area’s PCI average of 66 (Fair Condition).
Current PCI
80
PCI
Current
Life Cycle
50%
2013
2014
2015
Good
54.27% 52.96% 51.37%
Fair/At-Risk 29.71% 30.60% 31.66%
Poor
16.03% 16.44% 16.97%
Current &
Historical
Combined
Distribution
Data
100
Figure 7.
0%
16.97%
80%
100%
10.a
Pavement
Table 4. PCI and Treatment.
Condition
(PCI)
Excellent/
Very Good
(100 – 80)
Good
(79 – 70)
Fair
(69 – 60)
At risk
(59 – 50)
Poor
(49 – 25)
Failed
(24 – 0)
Common Treatment
Costs
($/sq. yard)
Preventative Maintenance
< $4.75
Industry News
 New “Vital Signs” website by MTC provides
interactive and extensive historical local
pavement data. An interactive map is
provided and individual jurisdictions and
street conditions can be viewed.
$4.75
Preventative Maintenance
Figure 14. Vital Signs PCI Area Map
(Base)
Mix of Preventative
Maintenance & Thin Overlay
$18.50
(3.9 x Base)
$29.00
Thick Overlay
(6.1 x Base)
Mix of Thick Overlay &
Reconstruction
$46.75
(9.8 x Base)
$64.50
Reconstruction
(13.6 x Base)
California Crude Oil Price Index
Asphalt is a petroleum based product that is
mixed with cement, aggregate or crushed rock
and sand that is used for constructing the top
layer of roadways. The cost of paving asphalt
can vary from year to year. One key indicator is
the price of crude oil; if crude oil prices increase,
so does price of paving asphalt. As of March
2015, Caltrans has stopped creating their own
asphalt price index in favor of using the
California crude oil price index. This
information helps estimate construction costs
for projects.
Figure 15. Vital Signs PCI Street Map
The graph below shows the California crude oil
price index along with the previous Caltrans
paving asphalt price index. The graph helps
illustrate the fluctuations in cost of over the last
15 years.
Figure 13. Caltrans Asphalt Price Index and
Figure 16. Vital Signs PCI Change Over Time
California State Wide Crude Oil Price Index
800
Asphalt
Crude Oil
600
400
200
2017
2015
2013
2011
2009
2007
2005
2003
2001
0
10.a
Pavement
 Recent pavement publications include:
NCHRP Synthesis 492:
Performance Specifications
for Asphalt Mixtures
NCHRP Synthesis 477:
Methods and Practices on
Reduction and Elimination of
Asphalt Mix Segregation
6/20/2016
Provides examples of
engineering tools used in the
development and
implementation of
performance specifications
for asphalt mixtures
NCHRP) Report 818:
Comparing the Volumetric
and Mechanical Properties of
Laboratory and Field
Specimens of Asphalt
Concrete
6/8/2015
Provides guidance on how to
reduce or eliminate
segregation during aggregate
production, mix design,
asphalt mix production, mix
transport and transfer, and
placement
NCHRP Report 807:
Properties of Foamed
Asphalt for Warm Mix
Asphalt
4/15/2016
Provides proposed practices
for evaluating the causes and
magnitude of variability of
specimen types tested in
quality control and assurance
programs for asphalt paving
projects.
NCHRP Report 815: ShortTerm Laboratory
Conditioning of Asphalt
Mixtures
11/10/2015
Develops procedures and
associated criteria for
laboratory conditioning of
asphalt mixtures to simulate
short-term aging
NCHRP Report 810:
Consideration of
Preservation in Pavement
Design and Analysis
Procedures
7/20/2015
Explores the effects of
preservation on pavement
performance and service life
on pavement design and
analysis procedures.
5/9/2015
Presents methods for
measuring the performancerelated properties of foamed
asphalts and designing
foamed asphalt mixes with
satisfactory aggregate coating
and workability.
NCHRP Report 805:
Improved Test Methods for
Specific Gravity and
Absorption of Coarse and
Fine Aggregate
5/9/2015
Develops test methods for
determining the specific
gravity and absorption of
coarse and fine aggregates.
10.a
Bridges/Overcrossings
Overview
INVENTORY
Inventory: 489 local NBI bridges
There are 489 local bridges (bridges,
overcrossings, or culverts) reported for Santa
Clara County based on the National Bridge
Inventory (NBI), a database compiled by the
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA).
“Local” bridges are bridges that are maintained
by local agencies (not Caltrans). FHWA defines
NBI bridges as structures that carry or directly
support automobile traffic which span 20ft or
longer in length; this can also include creek
culvert structures. Caltrans manages NBI for all
Santa Clara County agencies and also publishes
a list of local bridges every year.
Condition: 81.0 SR [Good]
Needs: $204M (to maintain SR for 10 years)
Source: 2014 Caltrans Local Bridge List, 2014
California Statewide Local Streets and Roads Needs
Assessment
Some new and existing culverts were added to
the local bridge list. It is possible that past
inaccurate “Length” code of less than 20 feet
caused these structures not to be classified as
NBI bridges. There was also creek widening
project for Silver Creek at Jackson Ave in San
Jose, which necessitated a new bridge. One
duplicate record was also removed. Changes to
the local NBI bridge inventory are shown in
Table 5.
In order to be eligible for federal funding for
bridge improvements, the bridge must meet the
NBI definition of a bridge. There are many local
bridges that do not qualify under the NBI
definition but require regular maintenance and
monitoring by local agencies without federal aid.
Table 5. Changes to Local Agency NBI Bridge List by Caltrans for Santa Clara County.
Status
Added
Added
Comment
Exist Culvert
Exist Culvert
Agency
Milpitas
Milpitas
Bridge
No.
37C0433
37C0434
Added
Exist Culvert
Milpitas
Feature Intersected
JWO HERMINA
STREET
SE OF ELMWOOD
CORCTNL
AT RUSSELL LANE
SR
67.9
75.7
Year Built
1978
1994
37C0435
Facility Carried
NORTH ABBOTT
AVE
GREAT MALL
PARKWAY
ESCUELA
95.7
1984
JWO S ABEL STREET
92.4
2006
JWO S ABEL STREET
75.9
2006
W. LITTLE LLAGAS
CREEK
W. LITTLE LLAGAS
72.4
2013
97.4
2013
CREEK CREEK
SILVER
86.4
1970
Added
Exist Culvert
Milpitas
37C0436
PARKWAY
ALVAREZ COURT
Added
Exist Culvert
Milpitas
37C0437
Added
New Culvert
Morgan Hill
37C0438
MACHADO
AVENUE
MONTEREY ROAD
Added
New Culvert
Morgan Hill
37C0439
Removed
Replaced
San Jose
37C0239
WATSONVILLE
ROAD
JACKSON AVE
Added
Replacement
San Jose
37C0797
JACKSON AVE
SILVER CREEK
86.4
2014
Removed
49er Stadium
Santa Clara
37C0323
KIFER RD
CALABAZAS CREEK
95.7
2003
10.a
NBI, which contains the national bridge
database.
CONDITION
Current Sufficiency Rating
0%
100%
Santa Clara County has a current average
2012
Sufficiency Rating (SR) of 81.0 (Good).
Poor
No Data
Sufficiency Rating (SR) Description
Similar to the pavement condition index, SR
ranges from 0 to 100 (poor to best condition).
Figure 18 below depicts how SR reflects four
weighted categories, one of which is “structural
adequacy and safety” which represents only 55%
of the overall SR score. Therefore SR, should
not be solely relied upon as a measure of
structural condition.
Figure 18. Details of Sufficiency Rating
B Serviceability and Functional
Obsolescence (30% Max)
• Defense Highway
• Lance on the Structure
• Average Daily Traffic
• Approach Roadway Width
• Structure Type
• Bridge Roadway Width
• Vertical Clearance Over Deck
• Deck Condition
• Structural Condition
• Deck Geometry
• Underclearances
• Waterway Adequacy
• Approach Roadway Alignment
55%
A
B
C
15%
30%
D 13%
C
A Structural Adequacy and Safety
(55% Max)
• Superstructure
• Substructure
• Culvert
• Inventory Rating
D
Essentiality for Public Use (15%
Max)
• Defense Highway
• Detour Length
• Average Daily Traffic
Special Reductions (13% Max)
• Detour Length
• Traffic Safety Features
• Main Structure Type
SR is a federal standard of bridge condition
assessment set forth by the National Bridge
Inspection Standards (NBIS) and was developed
mainly as a tool for evaluating eligibility for
federal funding.
Figure 19.
Current SR
Distribution
Figure 20.
Current SR
Distribution
Data
Historical SR
The overall average SR has been improving with
the most notable improvement in 2014 (SR81.2).
This slight jump is likely due to improved bridge
conditions and the adding of new local bridges
that are in good condition.
0%
100%
2012
81.2 81.0
Good
58.09%
79.7
79
80Fair
78.4
26.56%
78.3 78.6
12.66%
78Poor
No Data
2.70%
82
Figure 21.
SR
Trend
76
Good
Fair
Poor
2015
Fair
2014
Good
2013
2.70%
2012
Poor
No Data
Average
Overall
SR
2011
Figure 17.
2010
Fair
58.09%
26.56%
12.66%
2009
Good
% in Good Condition
Since there are two federal funding categories
for bridges (rehabilitation for 80≥SR>50 and
replacement for SR≤50), a “good,” “fair” and
“poor” metric can be developed by using SR.
Using this measure 62% of bridges are in
Santa Clara County are in “Good”
condition.
No Data
It is also worth noting that in 2014, Caltrans
updated its reporting method to: distinguish
NBI versus non-NBI bridges, eliminate duplicate
bridges, and by adding bridges that were
previously recorded as a single bridge are now
recorded as two separate bridge structures.
These changes had an overall improvement to
the average SR.
Inspections are typically performed every 2
years. The SR for each bridge is updated in the
10.a
Other Condition Ratings
“Structurally Deficient” (SD) is a term that is
related to the SR rating and implies that one of
the categories in “Structural Adequacy and
Safety” is rated below average and indicates that
the bridge structure needs maintenance or
repairs.
“Functionally Obsolete” (FO) is another term
related to SR that indicates how the bridge
functionality compares to current design
standards for attributes such as traffic load,
vertical clearances, alignment, and lane widths.
In many cases, the only way to fix a FO rated
bridge is to replace the entire bridge.
Bridge Health Index (BHI) is a number from 0
to 100 used to reflect the structural condition of
an individual bridge. BHI is based on a detailed
structural inspection and analysis of all bridge
structural elements and combines level of
severity and extent of any defects found.
Caltrans developed BHI in order to better
determine the structural condition of a single
bridge or a network of bridges.
Caltrans has recently begun publishing BHI for
local bridges and it is anticipated that this
method will attract more attention as more data
becomes available.
NEEDS
Based upon the 2014 California Statewide Local
Streets and Roads Needs Assessment, a biannual report, Santa Clara County needs
$204M in order to maintain current bridge
conditions for the next 10 years. This cost is
based upon estimated maintenance and
construction costs and somewhat generalized
condition reports which describe the condition
of different substructures of each bridge.
10.a
Freeway Litter, Landscape, Graffiti Maintenance
Freeway Litter, Landscape
and Graffiti Maintenance
BACKGROUND
VTA Technical Advisory Committee has
identified freeway litter, landscape, and graffiti
maintenance as a major roadway maintenance
issue. The accumulation of litter and poorly
maintained landscaping on the freeways
throughout Santa Clara County are aesthetic and
environmental problems. The cleanliness of the
freeways and groomed landscaping also
represents civic community pride to both local
and regional travelers.
INVENTORY
Based on the Litter Control and Landscape
Maintenance Study for Santa Clara County
conducted in 2005 and TSMP assessment
results, there are approximately 307 roadside
miles (shoulder length miles), 128
interchanges, and 1,193 acres of
landscaped area on the state highway system
in Santa Clara County that require regular
maintenance.
MAINTENANCE
Depending on available
resources allocated from the
State’s annual budget, which
varies from year to year,
Caltrans may have up to 13
maintenance crews at any
given time that cover several counties. The crews
consist of the following teams: 1 bridge crew, 1
vegetation spray crew, 1 special programs crew,
5 road maintenance crews, and 5 landscape
Overview
Inventory: 307 Freeway Roadside
Miles
Condition: 61% Littered or Worse
Condition on freeways
Needs: $11.2M (to maintain “slightly littered”
condition per year)
Source: 2008 Litter Control Pilot Program, VTA.
maintenance crews. In addition to Caltrans
crews, the non-profit Adopt-a-Highway (AAH) is
utilized in many locations for litter removal.
The crews rotate between Santa Clara, San
Mateo, and San Francisco Counties, and each
running on variable schedules. The AAH crew
typically picks-up litter from freeways 1 or 2
pick-ups per month. There are also special
programs that supplement freeway litter
maintenance; these crews typically consist of
three teams and work four days per week. Road
sweeping is performed on a daily basis,
theoretically covering the same location every 6
weeks. Road sweeping has recently been made a
higher priority.
Caltrans, in
partnership with
volunteer
organizations
like Beautiful Day, sponsor single clean-up days
each year. Each year there are many single
clean-up days. The California Highway Patrol
(CHP) also participates in freeway clean-up
events by sponsoring four litter clean-up days
per year.
10.a
CONDITION
Caltrans Maintenance LOS
Caltrans monitors the overall maintenance
quality of their facilities by visually inspecting
random samples of roads (generally 20%) in
order to relate a general condition and relate
maintenance activities needed to improve the
condition. They assign the overall condition a
“Maintenance LOS” value which ranges from 0100. The LOS made up of 4 weighted categories:




For the purposed of this report, the following
scale is used to assign an overall condition to all
Maintenance LOS scores:
Figure 22. LOS Rating System
Good
100-71
Fair
70-51
Poor
50-0
Overall Maintenance LOS Trend
Although no LOS scores were received last year,
0% Maintenance
100% LOS,
according this year’s Caltrans
2012
the overall LOS has decreased to Fair.
Good
Figure 23.
Overall
Maintenance
LOS Trend
Goal=,
90
Fair
87
80
Poor
70 76
No Data73
60
58.09%
26.56%
12.66%
82
Good
 Roadside Vegetation (weeds)
 Fences
0%
 Tree/Brush Encroachment
Figure 24.
Historical
Roadside
Maintenance
LOS Trend
Travelway (40%)
Drainage (15%)
Roadside (15%)
Traffic Guidance (15%)
Condition
LOS
Roadside Maintenance LOS Trend
Roadside Maintenance is a subset of the overall
LOS, and seems to have had a steady downward
trend with this year being a new low of 48 out of
100. Items evaluated as part of this group are:
81
2.70%
Fair
Poor
2012
Good
58.09%
80
71
Fair 63 58 26.56%
70
56
60
Poor
12.66%
50
No Data
2.70%
40
Good
Fair
48
Poor
No Data
At this time, Caltrans Maintenance LOS report
does not include the maintenance condition of
established landscape areas.
Litter/Debris Maintenance LOS Trend
Looking in further detail, “Litter/Debris” LOS,
which is a subset of “Roadside” LOS, has a
somewhat flat trend line. The current
Litter/Debris LOS is 61 out
is
0% of 100, which
100%
much less than the statewide goal
of
80.
2012
Figure 25.
67
 Litter/Debris
 Graffiti
100%
 Ramps
Historical
Litter/Debris
Maintenance
LOS Trend
No Data
This year, Caltrans increased guardrail
inspections requirements which resulted in a
decrease in LOS statewide; for Santa Clara
County, this may account for about 7 to 10 point
decrease in overall LOS.
Good
Goal=
58.09%
80
Fair
80 26.56%
70 56 56 58
Poor
12.66%
52
60
No Data
2.70%
50
Good
Fair
61
Poor
No Data
10.a
Drive-by Visual Assessment Survey
In order to provide additional perspective, TSMP
performed drive-by video surveys of most of Santa Clara
County’s freeways and expressways. This was done to
obtain a general “snapshot” impression of current
roadside maintenance conditions. The survey was then
analyzed for 3 categories: litter, landscape, and graffiti.
The following grading scales were used for each category:
Figure 26. Litter Grading Scale.
Figure 27. Landscape Grading Scale.
1 – None
2 – Slight
1 – Attractive
2 – Decent
3 – Moderate
4 – Extreme
3 – Moderate
4 – Neglected
Condition
(Number)
Description
None
Virtually no litter can be observed along the
(1)
freeway. The observer has to look hard to see
any litter, with perhaps a few occasional litter
items in a 1/4-mile. Any litter seen could be
quickly collected by one individual. The freeway
has a generally neat and tidy appearance;
nothing grabs the eye as being littered or messy.
Slight
A small amount of litter is obvious to the
(2)
observer. The litter along the freeway could be
collected by one or two individuals in a short
period of time. While the freeway has a small
amount of litter, the eye is not continually
grabbed by litter items.
Moderate Visible litter can readily be seen along the
(3)
freeway or ramp, likely requiring an organized
effort for removal. This area is “littered” and
clearly needs to be addressed.
Extreme
Continuous litter is one of the first things
(4)
noticed about the freeway. Major illegal
dumpsites might be seen, requiring equipment
and/or extra manpower for removal. There is a
strong impression of a lack of concern about
litter on the freeway.
Condition
(Number)
Attractive
(1)
Decent
(2)
Moderate
(3)
Neglected
(4)
Description
No noticeable weeds. Landscaped areas are well
maintained with healthy, thriving, and or attractive
landscaping. Areas likely to have attractive ground cover,
such as ivy, tan bark, or gravel. No vegetation
encroaches or impairs road users.
Some noticeable weeds that are less than 2ft high.
Landscaped areas are well maintained with generally
healthy landscaping. Non landscaped areas are mowed
or cleared in such that no overgrown brush is present.
Areas may or may not have ground cover. No vegetation
encroaches or impairs road users. May include roads
with only roadside barriers with only minor weeds, or
better.
Weeds are apparent which may be close to 2ft high and
will need to be abated soon. Landscape may be
encroaching the edge of pavement, bicycle lane, or
sidewalk and may begin to impair road users or partially
obscure road signs. Tree saplings or hardy brush is
beginning to grow in or in front of traffic safety devices.
Weeds are pervasive and may be 2ft high or greater.
Landscape is overgrown and may be encroaching the
edge of traveled way of streets, bicycle lanes, or
sidewalks and impairing road users or obscuring road
signs. Dead or dying plants or trees may be observed.
10.a
Figure 28. Graffiti Grading Scale.
1 – None
2 – Slight
(Congestion Management Program). Surveys
were conducted from July to August in 2015.
Surveys were supplemented by Google Street
View where needed.
Results
See the following sections:
3 – Moderate
Condition
(Number)
None
(1)
Slight
(2)
Moderate
(3)
Extreme
(4)
4 – Extreme
Description
No graffiti currently present.
Some graffiti is present and likely small in size
and may not be clearly visible. Not likely to be
distracting to most drivers. Entire location has
less than 36 square feet (6’x6’) of graffiti.
Graffiti is present and likely medium in size and
clearly visible. Distracting to most drivers and
may hold drivers attention for a second. May
constitute many clusters of small instances of
graffiti or one to two medium sized instances.
Entire location has less than 240 square feet
(6’x40’) of graffiti.
Either large solitary instance or large areas of
smaller instances of graffiti, and are visible and
obtrusive. Solitary instances are very distracting
to drivers and may hold drivers attention for
more than a second. May illicit concerns of
neighborhood safety. Entire location has more
than 240 square feet (6’x40’) of graffiti.
For the purpose of this report, freeway and
expressway segments are defined by VTA’s CMP
“Overall Conditions”, page 18
“Freeway Conditions”, page 22
“Selected Interchange Conditions”, page 30 and
“Expressway Conditions”, page 32
During the survey it was observed that some
segments had recently been cleaned of litter by
AAH (or other group) and that some of the
regular graffiti hot spots were painted over. It
was also noted that that many usual graffiti hot
spots had been recently abated but two rail road
bridges over HWY 101 were still graffitied. In
addition, it was observed that various locations
with sound walls had weeds growing out of
construction joints between the pavement and
the wall or in accumulated sediment. These
observations serve as reminders that
maintenance conditions are constantly in flux.
NEEDS
According to a follow-up report to the initial
Litter and Landscape study, “Litter Control Pilot
Program, US 101 between I-880 and Blossom
Hill Road, 2008,” $11.2 million a year was the
estimated cost needed (using probationers
through the Special Persons Program) to attain
acceptable levels highway litter (slightly littered)
for all of Santa Clara County. Additionally, in
fiscal year 2014/2015, Caltrans has spent about
$1.3 million on litter abatement, $0.7 million on
street sweeping, and $0.4 million on cleanup of
illegal encampments.
10.a
Overall Conditions
Below are the overall results of the drive-by survey assessment for Santa Clara County freeways.
Figure 29. Overall Freeway Conditions.
LITTER
LANDSCAPE
3
GRAFFITI
3
[Moderate]
Figure 31. Overall Expressway Conditions.
LITTER
1
[Moderate]
[No Graffiti]
LANDSCAPE
2
2
[Slightly
Littered]
[Decent]
GRAFFITI
1
[No Graffiti]
Figure 30. Overall Interchange Conditions.
LITTER
LANDSCAPE
3
GRAFFITI
3
[Moderate]
1
[Decent]
[No Graffiti]
Figure 32. Overall Freeway Conditions by Rating.
RATING
LITTER
LANDSCAPE
GRAFFITI
LITTER (%)
LANDSCAPE (%)
GRAFFITI (%)
1
4.0
2.1
271.8
1.3%
0.7%
86.5%
2
117.6
151.4
30.4
37.5%
48.3%
9.7%
3
166.2
146.4
7.0
53.1%
46.7%
2.5%
4
25.0
13.0
3.7
8.0%
4.1%
1.2%
UC
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
NR
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
313.2
313.2
313.2
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
Total
Figure 33. Overall Interchange Conditions by Rating.
RATING
LITTER
LANDSCAPE
GRAFFITI
LITTER (%)
LANDSCAPE (%)
1
0
0
11
0.0%
2
4
1
0
3
5
7
1
4
3
4
UC
0
NR
0
Total
12
GRAFFITI (%)
0.0%
91.7%
33.3%
8.3%
0.0%
41.7%
58.3%
8.3%
0
25.0%
33.3%
0.0%
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
12
12
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
Figure 34. Overall Expressways Condition by Rating.
RATING
LITTER
LANDSCAPE
GRAFFITI
LITTER (%)
LANDSCAPE (%)
GRAFFITI (%)
1
63.6
8.0
111.3
52.6%
6.6%
92.1%
2
40.5
81.5
3.1
33.5%
67.5%
2.6%
3
10.8
23.6
0.5
8.9%
19.5%
0.4%
4
0.0
1.8
0.0
0.0%
1.5%
0.0%
UC
4.6
4.6
4.6
3.8%
3.8%
3.8%
NR
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.1%
1.1%
1.1%
120.8
120.8
120.8
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
Total
10.a
Figure 35. Litter Conditions Assessment Map.
10.a
Figure 36. Landscape Conditions Assessment Map.
10.a
Figure 37. Graffiti Conditions Assessment Map.
10.a
Freeway Conditions
Below are the results of the drive-by survey assessment, grouped by rating, for Santa Clara County
freeways.
Figure 38. SR 17 Conditions.
RATING
1
2
3
4
UC
NR
Total
LITTER (mi)
0.0
2.1
19.7
5.9
0.0
0.0
27.7
LANDSCAPE (mi)
0.0
12.9
9.1
5.7
0.0
0.0
27.7
GRAFFITI (mi)
18.8
3.0
5.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
27.7
LITTER (%)
0.0%
7.5%
71.3%
21.3%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
LANDSCAPE (%)
0.0%
46.5%
33.0%
20.5%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
SR 17 NB near Campbell Ave
SR 17 SB near SR 85
SR 17 NB before Hamilton Ave
SR 17 SB near Lark Ave
SR 17 NB before Hillside Dr
SR 17 SB near Summit Rd
GRAFFITI (%)
67.9%
10.8%
21.3%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
10.a
RATING
1
2
3
4
UC
NR
Total
LITTER (mi)
0.0
21.2
26.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
47.7
LANDSCAPE (mi)
0.0
24.1
23.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
47.7
GRAFFITI (mi)
44.5
1.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
47.7
LITTER (%)
0.0%
44.4%
55.6%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
LANDSCAPE (%)
0.0%
50.6%
49.4%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
SR 85 NB at De Anza Blvd
SR 85 SB after Moffet Blvd
SR 85 NB at Quito Rd
SR 85 SB after Prospect Rd
SR 85 NB after Blossom Hill Rd
SR 85 SB before Almaden
GRAFFITI (%)
93.4%
6.6%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
10.a
RATING
1
2
3
4
UC
NR
Total
LITTER (mi)
0.0
4.4
14.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
18.4
LANDSCAPE (mi)
0.0
13.2
5.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
18.4
GRAFFITI (mi)
12.3
6.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
18.4
LITTER (%)
0.0%
24.1%
75.9%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
LANDSCAPE (%)
0.0%
71.6%
28.4%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
GRAFFITI (%)
67.1%
32.9%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
SR 87 NB after 85
SR 87 SB after 101
SR 87 NB after Willow St
SR 87 SB before Hillsdale Ave
SR 87 NB before Skyport Dr
SR 87 SB after Branham Ln
10.a
Figure 41. US 101 Conditions.
RATING
1
2
3
4
UC
NR
Total
LITTER (mi)
0.0
56.5
56.7
2.0
0.0
0.0
115.3
LANDSCAPE (mi)
0.0
66.1
45.0
4.2
0.0
0.0
115.3
GRAFFITI (mi)
107.1
4.4
0.0
3.7
0.0
0.0
115.3
LITTER (%)
0.0%
49.0%
49.2%
1.8%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
LANDSCAPE (%)
0.0%
57.3%
39.0%
3.6%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
GRAFFITI (%)
93.0%
3.8%
0.0%
3.2%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
US 101 NB at I-680
US 101 SB at Lafayette St
US 101 NB before Taylor St
US 101 SB before Rengstorff Ave
US 101 NB after Metcalf Rd
US 101 SB at CA-25
10.a
RATING
1
2
3
4
UC
NR
Total
LITTER (mi)
1.4
6.5
9.7
2.2
0.0
0.0
19.8
LANDSCAPE (mi)
0.0
4.7
14.3
0.7
0.0
0.0
19.8
GRAFFITI (mi)
17.1
2.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
19.8
LITTER (%)
7.2%
32.7%
48.9%
11.2%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
LANDSCAPE (%)
0.0%
23.9%
72.5%
3.6%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
GRAFFITI (%)
86.5%
13.5%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
SR 237 WB at 880
SR 237 EB after Zanker Rd
SR 237 WB at Maude Ave
SR 237 EB before Great America
SR 237 WB after 85
SR 237 EB before 101
10.a
Figure 43. I-280 Conditions.
RATING
1
2
3
4
UC
NR
Total
LITTER (mi)
1.4
17.5
21.8
2.4
0.0
0.0
LANDSCAPE (mi)
0.0
18.1
25.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
GRAFFITI (mi)
38.9
3.2
1.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
LITTER (%)
3.2%
40.6%
50.7%
5.5%
0.0%
0.0%
LANDSCAPE (%)
0.0%
42.0%
58.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
GRAFFITI (%)
90.2%
7.3%
2.5%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
43.1
43.1
43.1
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
I-280 NB at Magdalena Ave
I-280 SB after Alpine Rd
I-280 NB before 17
I-280 SB at N Stelling Rd
I-280 NB before 87
I-280 SB after 11th St
10.a
RATING
1
2
3
4
UC
NR
Total
LITTER (mi)
0.0
2.4
11.7
6.6
0.0
0.0
20.6
LANDSCAPE (mi)
0.0
4.0
15.1
1.6
0.0
0.0
20.6
GRAFFITI (mi)
18.0
2.6
1.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
20.6
LITTER (%)
0.0%
11.7%
56.6%
31.7%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
LANDSCAPE (%)
0.0%
19.5%
72.9%
7.6%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
GRAFFITI (%)
82.4%
12.8%
4.8%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
I-680 NB Before McKee Rd
I-680 SB before Jacklin Rd
I-680 NB at Montague Expwy
I-680 SB before Alum Rock Ave
I-680 NB before Scott Creek Rd
I-680 SB before King Rd
10.a
RATING
1
2
3
4
UC
NR
Total
LITTER (mi)
1.2
7.0
6.1
6.0
0.4
0.0
20.8
LANDSCAPE (mi)
2.1
7.9
9.6
0.8
0.4
0.0
20.8
GRAFFITI (mi)
15.1
3.3
2.0
0.0
0.4
0.0
20.8
LITTER (%)
5.9%
33.8%
29.5%
28.8%
1.9%
0.0%
100.0%
LANDSCAPE (%)
10.0%
38.2%
46.0%
3.9%
1.9%
0.0%
100.0%
GRAFFITI (%)
72.5%
16.0%
9.6%
0.0%
1.9%
0.0%
100.0%
I-880 NB after Brokaw Rd
I-880 SB before W Hedding St
I-880 NB after 280
I-880 SB before 87
I-880 NB before Trimble Rd
I-880 SB after Park Ave
10.a
Selected Interchange Conditions
Table 6. Interchange Conditions.
NO
RTE
1
101
2
CROSSING
LITTER
LANDSCAPE
GRAFFITI
SR 152 East
2
2
1
101
Story Rd
4
4
3
3
101
Trimble Rd
4
4
1
4
101
SR 237
3
3
1
5
101
Oregon Expwy
3
3
1
6
680
Montague Expwy
3
4
1
7
880
Montague Expwy
3
3
1
8
880
US 101
2
3
1
9
280
Page Mill Rd
2
3
1
10
237
N Mathilda Ave
2
3
1
11
87
Capitol Expwy
4
4
1
12
85
Saratoga Ave
3
3
1
Figure 46. Map of Interchange Monitoring Locations.
1
10.a
Figure 47. Selected Interchange Photos.
#1 US 101/SR 152 East
#2 US 101/Story
#3 US 101/Trimble
#4 US 101/SR 237
#5 US 101/Oregon-Page Mill
#6 I-680/Montague
#7 I-880/Montague
#8 I-880/US 101
#9 I-280/Page Mill
#10 SR 237/Mathilda
#11 SR 87/Capitol
#12 SR 85/Saratoga
10.a
Expressway Conditions
Below are the results of the drive-by survey assessment, grouped by rating, for Santa Clara County
Expressways.
Table 7. Almaden Expressway Conditions.
RATING
1
2
3
4
UC
NR
Total
LITTER (mi)
11.5
5.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
16.6
LANDSCAPE (mi)
0.7
7.2
8.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
16.6
GRAFFITI (mi)
16.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
16.6
LITTER (%)
69.3%
30.7%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
LANDSCAPE (%)
4.2%
43.4%
52.4%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
GRAFFITI (%)
100.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
GRAFFITI (mi)
16.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
16.4
LITTER (%)
32.3%
50.0%
17.7%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
LANDSCAPE (%)
0.0%
73.8%
26.2%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
GRAFFITI (%)
100.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
GRAFFITI (mi)
19.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
19.6
LITTER (%)
55.1%
44.9%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
LANDSCAPE (%)
4.6%
82.7%
12.8%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
GRAFFITI (%)
100.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
GRAFFITI (mi)
12.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.7
0.0
14.0
LITTER (%)
87.9%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
12.1%
0.0%
100.0%
LANDSCAPE (%)
21.4%
66.4%
0.0%
0.0%
12.1%
0.0%
100.0%
GRAFFITI (%)
87.9%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
12.1%
0.0%
100.0%
GRAFFITI (mi)
13.8
1.5
0.0
0.0
1.3
0.0
16.6
LITTER (%)
28.3%
40.4%
23.5%
0.0%
7.8%
0.0%
100.0%
LANDSCAPE (%)
7.8%
72.9%
11.4%
0.0%
7.8%
0.0%
100.0%
GRAFFITI (%)
83.1%
9.0%
0.0%
0.0%
7.8%
0.0%
100.0%
Table 8. Capitol Expressway Conditions.
RATING
1
2
3
4
UC
NR
Total
LITTER (mi)
5.3
8.2
2.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
16.4
LANDSCAPE (mi)
0.0
12.1
4.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
16.4
Table 9. Central Expressway Conditions.
RATING
1
2
3
4
UC
NR
Total
LITTER (mi)
10.8
8.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
19.6
LANDSCAPE (mi)
0.9
16.2
2.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
19.6
Table 10. Foothill Expressway Conditions.
RATING
1
2
3
4
UC
NR
Total
LITTER (mi)
12.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.7
0.0
14.0
LANDSCAPE (mi)
3.0
9.3
0.0
0.0
1.7
0.0
14.0
Table 11. Lawrence Expressway Conditions.
RATING
1
2
3
4
UC
NR
Total
LITTER (mi)
4.7
6.7
3.9
0.0
1.3
0.0
16.6
LANDSCAPE (mi)
1.3
12.1
1.9
0.0
1.3
0.0
16.6
10.a
Table 12. Montague Expressway Conditions.
RATING
1
2
3
4
UC
NR
Total
LITTER (mi)
7.4
3.9
0.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
12.0
LANDSCAPE (mi)
0.3
7.3
2.6
1.8
0.0
0.0
12.0
GRAFFITI (mi)
11.5
0.0
0.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
12.0
LITTER (%)
61.7%
32.5%
5.8%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
LANDSCAPE (%)
2.5%
60.8%
21.7%
15.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
GRAFFITI (%)
95.8%
0.0%
4.2%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
LANDSCAPE (mi)
1.8
1.2
1.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
4.0
GRAFFITI (mi)
4.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
4.0
LITTER (%)
100.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
LANDSCAPE (%)
45.0%
30.0%
25.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
GRAFFITI (%)
100.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
LANDSCAPE (mi)
0.0
4.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.3
5.4
GRAFFITI (mi)
4.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.3
5.4
LITTER (%)
75.9%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
24.1%
100.0%
LANDSCAPE (%)
0.0%
75.9%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
24.1%
100.0%
GRAFFITI (%)
75.9%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
24.1%
100.0%
GRAFFITI (mi)
13.0
1.6
0.0
0.0
1.6
0.0
16.2
LITTER (%)
21.6%
48.1%
20.4%
0.0%
9.9%
0.0%
100.0%
LANDSCAPE (%)
0.0%
74.1%
16.0%
0.0%
9.9%
0.0%
100.0%
GRAFFITI (%)
80.2%
9.9%
0.0%
0.0%
9.9%
0.0%
100.0%
Table 13. Oregon Expressway Conditions.
RATING
1
2
3
4
UC
NR
Total
LITTER (mi)
4.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
4.0
Table 14. Page Mill Road Conditions.
RATING
1
2
3
4
UC
NR
Total
LITTER (mi)
4.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.3
5.4
Table 15. San Tomas Expressway Conditions.
RATING
1
2
3
4
UC
NR
Total
LITTER (mi)
3.5
7.8
3.3
0.0
1.6
0.0
16.2
LANDSCAPE (mi)
0.0
12.0
2.6
0.0
1.6
0.0
16.2
10.a
Roadside Assets
Overview
Roadside Assets
Reponses: 16 responses out of 17
BACKGROUND
Inventory: 198,369 traffic signs
In order to form a perspective on local
transportation infrastructure that is not yet
systematically inventoried and/or regularly
inspected for condition, a self-assessment survey
was conducted with local agencies. This survey
asked general questions about the inventory,
condition, and ability to maintain assets in a
“good” condition. The results are shown below.
Condition: 84% traffic signs in good condition
The information received from this selfassessment survey is mainly substantiated on
estimates and not through documentation. The
results should also be treated as “snap-shot” in
time.
In addition, the survey this year introduced a
new section which allowed respondents to share
frequency of maintenance strategies for each
asset type.
Table 16. Average Local Asset Conditions.
Local Assets
Traffic Signals
Traffic Signals Timing
Pavement Markings
Traffic Signs
Light Poles
Curb & Gutter
Litter Control
Sidewalks
INVENTORY
The survey asked respondents to provide total
inventory of the items listed below, to the best of
their ability.



Traffic Signs: 198,369
Street lamps: 110,237
Sidewalks: 7,859 miles
CONDITION
Because asset condition can be easier to
approximate than inventory, conditions for a
greater number of assets were requested.
% in Good
Condition (avg.)
84%
71%
68%
79%
79%
83%
78%
Ability to
Maintain (avg.)
High
High
Medium
Medium
High
Medium
Medium
Medium
10.a
Condition Distribution
Below are frequency charts for the condition
portion of the self-assessment survey.
Responses
Roadside Assets
Table 23.
Sidewalks
n/a
0-9
10-19
20-29
30-39
40-49
50-59
60-69
70-79
80-89
90-100
8
6
4
2
0
% in Good Condition
n/a
0-9
10-19
20-29
30-39
40-49
50-59
60-69
70-79
80-89
90-100
Traffic
Signals
Responses
Table 17.
% in Good Condition
8
6
4
2
0
n/a
0-9
10-19
20-29
30-39
40-49
50-59
60-69
70-79
80-89
90-100
Responses
Table 18.
Pavement
Markings
% in Good Condition
ABILITY TO MAINTAIN
This metric helps communicate the amount of
need in maintaining a transportation asset. A
low ability to maintain generally indicates that
current funding is not enough to maintain a
network of assets to a desired condition. The
following pie charts represent the number of
responses received for each category of “ability
to maintain.”
Figure 48. Ability to Maintain Responses.
Legend:
6
# = Number of responses
Traffic Signals
Traffic Signal Timing
4
2
3
8
% in Good Condition
8
6
4
2
0
Pavement Markings
1
Light Poles
2
Curb & Gutter
1
2
6
2
11
8
Litter Control
% in Good Condition
0
1
n/a
0-9
10-19
20-29
30-39
40-49
50-59
60-69
70-79
80-89
90-100
Responses
Litter
Control
8
6
4
2
0
0
2
7
% in Good Condition
Table 22.
0
4
11
8
6
4
2
0
n/a
0-9
10-19
20-29
30-39
40-49
50-59
60-69
70-79
80-89
90-100
Responses
Curb &
Gutter
Traffic Signs
7
% in Good Condition
Table 21.
7
12
n/a
0-9
10-19
20-29
30-39
40-49
50-59
60-69
70-79
80-89
90-100
Light
Poles
Responses
Table 20.
1
1
0
n/a
0-9
10-19
20-29
30-39
40-49
50-59
60-69
70-79
80-89
90-100
Traffic
Signs
Responses
Table 19.
8
6
4
2
0
7
8
Sidewalks
0
5
2
9
10.a
Roadside Assets
FREQUENCY OF MAINTENANCE
This metric helps communicate the maintenance
strategy selected for each of the following
transportation assets.
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
N/A
Weekly
Bi-Weekly
Monthly
Quarterly
Annually
Biannually
As-Needed
Other
Light
Poles
Responses
Table 27.
8
6
4
2
0
N/A
Weekly
Bi-Weekly
Monthly
Quarterly
Annually
Biannually
As-Needed
Other
Traffic
Signals
Responses
Table 24.
Maintenance Strategy
Table 28.
10
8
6
4
2
0
N/A
Weekly
Bi-Weekly
Monthly
Quarterly
Annually
Biannually
As-Needed
Other
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
N/A
Weekly
Bi-Weekly
Monthly
Quarterly
Annually
Biannually
As-Needed
Other
Responses
Curb &
Gutter
Responses
Table 25.
Pavement
Markings
LOCAL NEWS
Recent Efforts
Gilroy: Sign reflectivity study starting in late
2016.
Monte Sereno: OBAG funded street rehab and
updating pavement management report.
Palo Alto: Upgraded all traffic signals systems
and testing connected vehicle technology,
recognized by ITS America. Developing
infrastructure management software for
pavement.
San Jose: Improved response time to 7 days
(from 21) for litter removal.
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
N/A
Weekly
Bi-Weekly
Monthly
Quarterly
Annually
Biannually
As-Needed
Other
Litter
Control
Responses
Table 29.
10
8
6
4
2
0
N/A
Weekly
Bi-Weekly
Monthly
Quarterly
Annually
Biannually
As-Needed
Other
Traffic
Signs
Responses
Table 26.
Santa Clara County: Box culvert replacement in
San Tomas Expressway; won 2016 APWA
project of the year in Utilities category.
Current Challenges
Theft or Damage
Gilroy: Copper theft down due to preventative
measures.
Santa Clara County: increase in copper wire
theft.
Inadequate Resources
 Limited budget for ADA compliant curb
ramps, implementing complete streets
policies, and maintaining GIS software.
10.a
Roadside Assets
FREEWAY RAMP METERS
As an effort to reduce freeway congestion,
beginning in 2008, freeway ramp meters have
been constructed throughout Santa Clara
County. There are currently 265
operational ramp meters (nearly half of
all active ramp meters in the Bay Area), 14
non-operational, and 50 future ramp meters.
This means that about 80% of the originally
planned meter system is installed and
operational. Travel time savings have been
observed between 2% and 26%.
In 2015, activity includes activation of:



30 meters along US 101 between SR 85
south and Monterey Rd in Gilroy,
38 meters along I-680 between King
Road and Scott Creek Road, and
19 meters along SR 85 between US 101
north and De Anza Blvd.
Figure 49. Freeway ramp meter location and status.
10.a
Roadway Safety
users of the roadway (auto drivers, truck drivers,
motorcyclists, bicyclists, or pedestrians.) There
are many causes of collisions and they are
generally related to: driver characteristics,
weather conditions, and physical road layout.
The California Highway Patrol (CHP) collects
and maintains a collision database called the
Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System
(SWITRS). This database is used in monitoring
collision types and their severities throughout
the state. Because of the nature of collision
reporting, full year datasets are typically
released 2 years later. As a result, 2014 data was
recently released and made available to the
public in late 2016.
Roadway Safety
Transportation has a significant effect on public
health and safety and includes concerns road
user collisions, air quality, and active
transportation (bicycling and walking).
ACCIDENT COLLISIONS
Road safety is a primary concern of community
leaders, transportation professionals and all
Provisional 2014 SWITRS data was obtained for
this report. There were 14,222 total
collisions, which included 6,721 injury
collisions, 104 fatal collisions, and 7,397
property damage only collisions. The total
percentage of collisions decreased in 2014 by
0.7%. Fatal pedestrian and bicycle involved
collisions also decreased 16% and 40%
respectively.
Figure 51.
14.3k
14.1k 14.2k
15k
13k
104
94
93
91
89
81
83
Figure 53.
2014
Fatal
Collisions
Involved
With
40
30
20
10
0
34
30 29
5
5
1
Train
80
6500
Other
90
6.6k 6.6k6.7k
Bicycle
100
6.5k
Object
Historical
Fatal
Collisions
6.9k 6.8k
6000
110
Figure 52.
Historical
Injury
Collisions
7000 6.8k
Pedestrian
Historical
Total
Collisions
19k 16.6k
15.5k
17k
15.1k
14.9k
Motor Vehicle
Thousands
7500
Figure 50.
Data Source: CHP, Provisional 2014 SWITRS, Section 8 or Online Report 1 – Collisions and Victims by Motor Vehicle
Involved.
10.a
Roadway Safety
Fatal Collisions
Below is a heat map of only fatal collisions where red areas represent concentrated collision locations.
Locations are approximate and this year 94 of 104 collisions (90%) are mapped. Non-mapped collisions
result from incomplete information on CHP report. Also included is 2014 provisional collision data
queried from UC Berkeley’s Transportation Injury Mapping System (TIMS) and verified with provisional
2014 SWITRS primary collision factor (PCF) data.
Figure 54. Fatal Collisions Heat Map.
Source: Safe Transportation Research and Education Center (SafeTREC), University of California Berkeley, TIMS.
Primary Collision Factor (PCF) Violation
01 - Driving or Bicycling Under the
Influence of Alcohol or Drug
02 - Impeding Traffic
03 - Unsafe Speed
04 - Following Too Closely
05 - Wrong Side of Road
06 - Improper Passing
07 - Unsafe Lane Change
08 - Improper Turning
09 - Automobile Right of Way
10 - Pedestrian Right of Way
11 - Pedestrian Violation
12 - Traffic Signals and Signs
13 - Hazardous Parking
14 - Lights
15 - Brakes
16 - Other Equipment
17 - Other Hazardous Violation
18 - Other Than Driver (or Pedestrian)
19 - (Not Used)
20 - (Not Used)
21 - Unsafe Starting or Backing
22 - Other Improper Driving
#
%
12
11.5%
0
15
0
3
0
4
15
3
2
15
5
0
0
0
1
1
3
0
0
0
0
0%
14.4%
0%
2.9%
0%
3.8%
14.4%
2.9%
1.9%
14.4%
4.8%
0%
0%
0%
1%
1%
2.9%
0%
0%
0%
0%
23 - Pedestrian or Other Under the
24 - Fell Asleep
00 - Unknown
- - Not Stated
Type of Collision
A - Head-On
B - Sideswipe
C - Rear End
D - Broadside
E - Hit Object
F - Overturned
G - Vehicle/Pedestrian
H - Other
- - Not Stated
Vehicle Involvement
Pedestrian Collision
Motorcycle Collision
Bicycle Collision
Truck Collision
0
0%
0
10
15
0%
9.6%
14.4%
#
7
9
14
8
23
4
27
7
5
%
6.7%
8.7%
13.5%
7.7%
22.1%
3.8%
26%
6.7%
4.8%
#
32
17
5
9
%
30.8%
16.3%
4.8%
8.7%
10.a
Roadway Safety
Severe Injury Collisions
Below is a heat map of only severe injury collisions where red areas represent concentrated collision
locations. Locations are approximate and this year 275 of 346 collisions (80%) are mapped. Non-mapped
collisions result from to incomplete information on CHP report. Also included is 2014 provisional
collision data queried from UC Berkeley’s Transportation Injury Mapping System (TIMS) and verified
with provisional 2014 SWITRS primary collision factor (PCF) data.
Figure 55. Severe Injury Collision Heat Map.
Source: Safe Transportation Research and Education Center (SafeTrec), University of California Berkeley, TIMS.
Primary Collision Factor (PCF) Violation
01 - Driving or Bicycling Under the
02 - Impeding Traffic
03 - Unsafe Speed
04 - Following Too Closely
05 - Wrong Side of Road
06 - Improper Passing
07 - Unsafe Lane Change
08 - Improper Turning
09 - Automobile Right of Way
10 - Pedestrian Right of Way
11 - Pedestrian Violation
12 - Traffic Signals and Signs
13 - Hazardous Parking
14 - Lights
15 - Brakes
16 - Other Equipment
17 - Other Hazardous Violation
18 - Other Than Driver (or Pedestrian)
19 - (Not Used)
20 - (Not Used)
21 - Unsafe Starting or Backing
#
%
48
13.9%
1
71
3
15
0
13
57
29
17
19
24
0
1
0
0
7
4
0
0
1
0.3%
20.5%
0.9%
4.3%
0%
3.8%
16.5%
8.4%
4.9%
5.5%
6.9%
0%
0.3%
0%
0%
2%
1.2%
0%
0%
0.3%
22 - Other Improper Driving
23 - Pedestrian or Other Under the
24 - Fell Asleep
00 - Unknown
- - Not Stated
2
0.6%
0
0%
0
10
24
0%
2.9%
6.9%
Type of Collision
A - Head-On
B - Sideswipe
C - Rear End
D - Broadside
E - Hit Object
F - Overturned
G - Vehicle/Pedestrian
H - Other
- - Not Stated
#
37
25
40
73
63
32
55
14
7
%
10.7%
7.2%
11.6%
21.1%
18.2%
9.2%
15.9%
4%
2%
Vehicle Involvement
Bicycle Collision
Pedestrian Collision
Motorcycle Collision
Truck Collision
#
54
66
54
6
%
15.6%
19.1%
15.6%
1.7%
10.a
Air Quality
Air Quality
Air pollution caused by motor vehicles and land
use activities is of great concern to the public
and is monitored by the Federal Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA).
The AQI is an index for general reporting on
how clean or polluted the air is and what health
effects may be experienced in a few hours or
days after breathing the current air in your area.
AQI ranges from 0 [Good] to 500 [Hazardous].
See below table for more information.
The EPA receives air quality data from state and
local agencies and provides this data to the
public. The EPA monitors levels of chemicals
and toxins such as: ground-level ozone, particle
pollution (also known as particulate matter),
carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen
dioxide. Each compound has been linked to
various human health risks and is monitored
separately. In order to incorporate monitoring
of separate compounds into a single scoring
system the “Air Quality Index” (AQI) was
created.
According to the EPA, in 2015, Santa Clara
County experienced 7 days of AQI>100
[pollution>moderate] (where pollution was
unhealthy, or unhealthy for Sensitive Groups).
See below for AQI for each day for 2015.
Additionally, the county also had a median
AQI of 40 [good]. This is a slight
improvement over 2015, which had 5 days of
AQI>100 but a median AQI of 39 [good].
Figure 56. Air Quality Tile Plot.
Jan
Sun
Mon
Tue
Wed
Thur
Fri
Sat
67
73
92
85
88
95
86
84
87
73
64
63
41
60
90
78
73
Jul
Sun 30
Mon 64
Tue 117
Wed 56
Thur 35
Fri 43
Sat 47
28
35
29
25
23
31
34
33
35
31
40
41
41
40
77
48
55
56
61
64
60
37
37
31
33
35
44
32
58
61
36
54
64
62
43
Aug
31
61
51
48
64
45
47
Feb
43
87
84
61
36
24
22
33
35
32
47
54
58
66
51
51
59
52
66
62
43
42 31 147
31 28 119
27 33 79
45 40 65
54 38 57
45 35 55
40 105 38
31
32
36
42
49
32
34
38
74
64
61
45
33
28
Mar
31
34
37
37
45
56
48
56
55
63
38
36
38
44
42
32
40
33
41
42
37
33
42
38
32
44
32
41
Apr
42
45
42
43
43
51
46
Sep
Oct
37 48 42 119 54
38 80 29 93 43
42 87 35 49 39
32 143 35 44 50
33 93 41 49 35
31 58 48 33 42
42 48 122 36 45
43
42
42
44
45
47
38
56
42
41
55
51
48
32
48
42
46
47
61
87
58
41
55
55
45
44
41
41
40
33
34
38
50
53
55
40
43
36
34
51
47
40
May
49
47
36
49
93
58
60
35
44
36
34
36
40
34
Nov
32
31
28
34
36
45
43
44
42
41
47
38
53
41
41
35
38
48
53
61
67
42
40
45
41
42
42
36
35
34
31
35
44
43
65
39
38
36
36
33
34
38
70
71
40
36
54
48
60
35
33
34
33
44
43
46
Jun
40
32
34
31
33
38
37
47
93
38
47
48
71
55
58
58
64
80
52
48
67
49
58
44
46
53
51
36
Dec
59
62
60
70
41
38
54
35
53
54
32
29
30
38
32
36
35
32
62
29
33
31
25
31
38
42
55
38
52
54
62
48
64
Data Source: Environmental Protection Agency, 2015 Tile Plot by AirData.
AQI
Condition
0-50
Good
51-100
Moderate
101-150
Unhealthy for
Sensitive Groups
151-200
Unhealthy
201-300
Very Unhealthy
301-500
Hazardous
Description
Air quality is considered satisfactory, and air pollution poses little or no risk.
Air quality is acceptable; however, for some pollutants there may be a moderate health
concern for a very small number of people. For example, people who are unusually
sensitive to ozone may experience respiratory symptoms.
Although general public is not likely to be affected at this AQI range, people with lung
disease, older adults and children are at a greater risk from exposure to ozone, whereas
persons with heart and lung disease, older adults and children are at greater risk from
the presence of particles in the air.
Everyone may begin to experience some adverse health effects, and members of the
sensitive groups may experience more serious effects.
This would trigger a health alert signifying that everyone may experience more serious
health effects.
This would trigger health warnings of emergency conditions. The entire population is
more likely to be affected.
10.a
Mode Share
Mode Share
Balancing mode share and encouraging use of
alternate modes of transportation to single
occupant auto driving is one strategy of
managing traffic congestion. Promoting active
transportation—bicycling and walking—is also
good for personal health and good for the
environment. It is also encouraged to use
transportation that has less impact on the
environment, such as carpooling and using
public transportation.
Every year, the US Census Bureau surveys
United States Citizens and asks about their
“Means of Transportation to Work.” In 2014,
Santa Clara County respondents polled that
about 3.5% used active transportation
(bicycling and walking) to get to work. This is a
decrease from the 2013 survey where
respondents polled at about 4.0% using active
transportation.
Carpooled
Work at Home
10.3%
4.8%
Public
Transportation
4.1%
Figure 57
2014 Means of
Transportation
to Work in
Santa Clara
County
Walked 1.8%
Bicycled 1.7%
Motorcycle or
Taxi 1.2%
Drive Alone
76.1%
Public
Carpooled
Transportation
10.3%
4.4%
Work at Home
4.1%
Figure 58
2013 Means of
Transportation
to Work in
Santa Clara
County
Walked 2.1%
Bicycled 1.9%
Motorcycle or
Taxi 1.4%
Drive Alone
75.8%
Data Source: Census Bureau, 2014 and 2013 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates.
10.a
Bikeways
Bikeways
In 2008, VTA updated its Countywide Bicycle
Plan to both define a regional bicycle system and
identify ways to improve both safety and
convince. As a result, numerous improvements
were identified and categorized in to various
projects lists; some of these categories include:
On-street Projects, Off-street Projects, and
Across Barrier Connections (ABCs). This plan is
currently (as of 6/2016) going through an
extensive updating process which has resulted in
new baseline inventory data and reorganization
of data categories for Cross-county Bicycle
Corridors (CCBCs).
ABCs enable bicyclists and pedestrians to
conveniently and safely cross freeways,
waterways and railroad tracks rather than make
circuitous detours to existing roadway
crossings.
For the purpose of the TSMP, the monitoring of
planned Cross County Bicycle Corridor (CCBC)
projects compared with the number of miles and
projects completed is used to measure the
county’s progress towards achieving its vision
for cross-county bike mobility in Santa Clara
County. The below tables present the areas
measured and the progress made through 2016
on the planned bike improvements identified in
the 2008 Countywide Bicycle Plan.
The first table presents the number of planned
CCBCs miles, total completed on-street facility
miles and completed off-street facility miles on
CCBCs. Bike on-street projects are bike projects
along roadways shared with autos; and bike offstreet projects are bike projects along trails or
paths shared with pedestrians.
As of March 2016, approximately 234 miles of
on-street projects, 110 miles of off-street
projects, and 25 across barrier
connections were completed. This
accounts for 45% of CCBCs and 7% of
potential ABC’s identified in the 2008
Countywide Bicycle Plan. A map showing
the total completed cross-county on-street
bicycle projects is included on the next page.
Table 30. Cross-County Bicycle Corridors.
Cross-County Bicycle Corridors
2016
Total length planned to construct (CBP 2008)
758
Completed miles (on-street)
234
Completed miles (off-street)
110
Overall percent complete
45%
Table 31. Across Barrier Connections.
Across Barrier Connections
2016
Total potential ABC’s (CBP 2008)
353
Under construction
0
Completed ABCs
25
Unbuilt
328
Overall percent complete
7%
10.a
Bikeways
Figure 59. Map of Completed On-Street Bicycle Projects.
10.a
Bikeways
Green Bike Lanes
As the Santa Clara County continues to improve
and expand its bicycle networks, one improvement
that is being implemented are “green bike lanes.”
Green bike lanes refers to the application of a
green pigment, such as green paint, to help
distinguish bicycle facilities from general purpose
vehicle facilities.
Table 32 shows the results of a survey of local
agencies and their current use of green bike lanes,
the materials used, and the type of application.
Green bike lanes are typically installed at
intersections where there are heavy vehicle and
bicycle traffic volumes to increase visibility and
provide a buffer between vehicle lanes and a
bicycle lane.
Table 32. Survey of local uses of green bike lanes.
Gilroy
Y
X
Los Altos
Y
X
Los Gatos
Y
Morgan Hill
N
Mountain
View
Y
Palo Alto
Y
San Jose
Y
X
Santa Clara
Y
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Through
inter-sections
and Lateral
Shifts
X
X
X
Continuous
Intersection
Approaches
and
Departures
Conflict
Points
First and Last
Points
High Friction
Surface
Treatment
X
Y
Epoxy with
Green
Aggregate
Cyclegrip
MMAX Resin
(Ennis-Flint)
X
Cupertino
Type of Application
Green Slurry
Pre-formed
Thermoplastic
Extruded
Thermoplastic
City
Uses
Green
Bike
Lanes?
Water-based
Paint
Materials
X
X
X
X
X
X
10.a
Notes on Report
Notes on Report
2016 SUMMARY
Key Performance Indicators
Pavement
Bridges
See Pavement
See Bridges section.
section.
Maintenance
See Roadside
Maintenance
section.
Air Quality
See health & safety
section
Congestion
Current freeway LOS data retrieved from VTA 2015 Congestion Monitoring Program (CMP) Monitoring
and Conformance Report and the current intersection LOS data was retrieved from the 2014 report both
of which are available at http://www.vta.org/cmp/monitoring-report. For the sake of this report, AM and
PM freeway lane miles of LOS were combined. Freeway LOS is normally analyzed every year but
intersection LOS is usually only analyzed every 2 years, therefore, for the purposed of this report, only
every other year is reported every 2 years when both freeway and intersection data are available at the
same time.
Express Lanes Program
Current information was taken from the SR 237 Express Lanes FY (fiscal year) 2015 Report which will be
reported to the VTA board of directors on October 6th 2016, available on VTA website:
http://www.vta.org/get-involved/board-of-directors. Previous data was taken from prior annual reports.
Transit
Statistics on transit ridership were obtained from Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority’s FY2013
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, and found in Table 21 Operating Information – Operating
Indicators. This and previous reports can be accessed at: http://www.vta.org/about-us/financial-andinvestor-information-accepted.
Population
Population data from United States Census Bureau provided on their website at State & County Quick
Facts page http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06/06085.html and by reviewing the Santa Clara
County Quick Facts Database http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/download_data.html.
Vehicle and Driver
Registered drivers and vehicles statistics can be found on California DMV Statistics Page here
https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/dmv/detail/pubs/media_center/statistics or by searching “Licenses
Outstanding” and “Vehicles Registered by County” at https://www.dmv.ca.gov/. Historical registered
drivers and registered vehicles by county can also be found on SWITRS report on Table 8B; because it
take about two years to finalize, this is a lagging data source. Registered vehicles for 2014 could not be
found on the DMV’s website and is not yet available through SWITRS.
Recent Inventory
Pavement
See pavement section.
Bridges
See bridges section.
Bus
Current bus data was retrieved from internal VTA report called “VTA Facts, Current Bus System Data,
January 2015. Bus fleet includes all the following bus types: articulated (69), standard (257), hybrid 40-ft
(80), community bus (54), and Express (40, also hybrid engines). Bus route mileage is reported as the
total round trip. Although this report is not published on the website, much of this information can be
found in other reports such as the Annual Service Transit Plan (fleet size, number of routes & stops, and
weekly ridership) which can be found on VTA’s website here: http://www.vta.org/reports-and-studies.
Additionally, a Bus System Overview fact sheet is provided periodically on VTA’s website here:
http://www.vta.org/news-and-media/resources/vta-newsroom-fact-sheets-vta-information.
Light Rail
Current light rail data was retrieved from internal VTA report called “VTA Facts, Current Light Rail
System Data, January 2015. In addition to the fleet of 99 standard vehicles, there are also 4 historic
10.a
Notes on Report
trollies that operate during the Christmas holiday season. Route miles define the extent of the operational
network and represent the total extent of routes available for trains to operate. Track miles takes into
account multiple track routes (e.g. for each route mile where there is double track, there are two track
miles; where there are four tracks, there are four track miles). Although this report is not published on
the website, much of this information can be found in other reports such as the Annual Service Transit
Plan (fleet size, number of routes & stops, and total ridership) which can be found on VTA’s website here:
http://www.vta.org/reports-and-studies.
Signal Controllers
See 2013 Transportation Systems Monitoring Report http://www.vta.org/tsmp.
PAVEMENT
Current (2014) pavement conditions were downloaded from a new MTC website called “Vital Signs”
which can be found here: http://www.vitalsigns.mtc.ca.gov/street-pavement-condition. MTC also
published the PCI scores on their website here: http://www.mtc.ca.gov/news/street_fight/pci_2014.htm.
Because of this new publishing platform, and the change from consultants to in-house work, there is some
new data and there is some missing data. TSMP staff received some supplemental data from Local Streets
and Roads working group (LSRWG), but this did not make up completely for the missing data. For
instance, Figure 3 PCI for road types was provided by LSWG but MTC no longer provides information on
percent of network by road type; however, this information should be relatively unchanged for at least a
few years. A new development this year includes that MTC has, for the first time, published county wide
PCI data going all the way back to 2001, for both yearly and 3-year averages. Prior to 2012 no raw network
values were published and no county wide PCI values were regularly published by MTC; therefore, in
previous TSMP Reports, 3-year rolling averages were used to develop a county-wide weighted average PCI
prior to 2012.
*Arterial % of system also includes express ways.
MTC reports on pavement conditions yearly and TSMP staff had in the past collected and stored this data
year to year in order to show trends in the data. This data relates the overall PCI and total number of
lanes miles for each city and county. By MTC’s lead, the overall PCI is reported as a 3-year rolling
average. It is worth repeating that PCI starts with human observation and interpretation; therefore, it is
possible to receive different results year to year for the same condition.
For 2013 pavement condition data, see MTC Website at
http://www.mtc.ca.gov/news/press_releases/rel663.htm. For 2012 pavement condition data, see MTC
website at http://www.mtc.ca.gov/news/pressreleases/ rel624.htm; for 2011 data:
http://www.mtc.ca.gov/news/press_releases/rel586.htm; for 2010 data:
http://mtc.ca.gov/library/potholereport/ index.htm.
Caltrans Paving Asphalt price index was access from Caltrans’ website: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/esc/
oe/ac_index.html. Caltrans uses this index to adjust compensation according to the projects special
provisions section called “Adjustments for Price Index Fluctuations.” The index is used to illustrate how
paving costs have changed over time; however, TSMP staff is not yet able to equate a change in this price
index with a dollar cost.
BRIDGES
The primary data source used for local bridges is a spreadsheet provided by Caltrans (called Local_Agency
_Bridge_List _2014_10_31.xlsx) on their website here: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LocalPrograms
/hbrr99/hbrr99a.htm. This information is usually updated at least once a year. Unfortunately, as this list
is updated, records from previous years are removed from website which makes it difficult to observe
long-term trends, and TSMP staff must rely on previously downloaded records. Other data sources used
to verify this list are: Caltrans Structure Maintenance & Investigations list
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/structur/strmaint/local/localbrlist.pdf, FHWA NBI (National Bridge
Inventory) 2014 ASCII Files http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge/nbi/ascii.cfm?year=2014, and
NationalBridges.com. FHWA NBI does provide a county-wide count of bridges along with a county of
structurally deficient and functionally obsolete bridge; however, this county-wide SR includes both local
and state owned bridges, and because of the nature of this report, a count of local assets and SR is
preferred at this time. These sources are mainly used to obtain the SR of a particular bridge, which as
stated in the report, is a combined structural/functional metric and is therefore not solely a measure of
bridge structural integrity.
The main challenge to TSMP staff is that no county-wide SR for local bridges is provided by Caltrans;
therefore, TSMP staff must calculate an average SR for the entire county. Because of the shift in reporting
10.a
Notes on Report
format last year (2013), TSMP calculated an artificially high SR of 82.8 for the 2013 bridge conditions, but
has now been corrected to SR of 78.3 in this year’s report.
As Caltrans continues to publish BHI (bridge health index) data for local bridges, SR may eventually be
replaced with BHI as TSMP’s measure of bridge condition.
FREEWAY LITTER, LANDSCAPING AND GRAFFITI MAINTENANCE
Caltrans did not provide TSMP staff with FY2014 LOS score reports for Santa Clara County; therefore
there is a gap in our data trend in this report. Caltrans Maintenance LOS is not distributed to the public
but is provided on a request only basis. Through yearly requests, TSMP has received enough data to begin
showing trend graphs. Litter LOS goal is found in Caltrans’ FY 2011 Statewide LOS Report. Overall
Roadway Maintenance LOS goal is 87 per the June 2-15 issue of “the Mile Marker” performance report by
Caltrans Headquarters’. Information on current highway maintenance crews and their schedules is based
on prior TSMP communication with Caltrans District 4 regional manager in 2012. To find more
information or volunteer with Beautiful Day visit BeautifulDay.org.
Initial identification of haul routes, gateways, and landfills/disposal sites, and definition of litter and
landscape scales are referenced from: Litter Control and Landscape Maintenance Study for Freeways in
Santa Clara County, T. Y. Lin International, Final Report, December 20, 2005. Monitoring locations were
then selected by proximity to gateways, landfill/disposal site, and having a history of litter problems.
Litter and landscape scales are also based upon concepts from Keep America Beautiful community
appearance index rating scales.
Graffiti scale was created by TSMP staff based initially from Western Australia’s graffiti management
toolkit, Appendix D Graffiti Grading System, provided on their website here:
http://www.goodbyegraffiti.wa.gov.au/local-councils/graffiti-management-toolkit
Estimate of $11.2 million (using probationers) for annual freeway roadside maintenance for Santa Clara
County is referenced from: Litter Control Pilot Program, US 101 between I-880 and Blossom Hill Road,
Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, California Department of Transportation, August 2008.
This estimate was created by applying the actual annual costs incurred during the pilot study. Estimate of
Caltrans FY2014 maintenance costs were provided by Deputy Chief to TSMP staff; these estimates may or
may not include outstanding invoices.
ROADSIDE ASSETS
A brief survey was designed by TSMP staff and sent to 17 local agencies of which 2 did not respond. Some
questions did not apply to some agencies and there for the some agencies answered with “n/a”. For
instance, some agencies do not own their own streetlights, instead local utility companies, such as PG&E,
own and operate them. Some amount of local news was provided so this section includes some of the
feedback provided by the respondents.
Ramp meter information was taken from VTA board agenda packet for March 2016. Additional
information about activity in 2015 was provided by VTA staff.
ROADWAY SAFETY
Provisional 2014 collision data was taken from the iSWITRS system:
http://iswitrs.chp.ca.gov/Reports/jsp/ CollisionReports.jsp. Total collisions, injury collisions, fatal
collisions, and property damage only collisions show in the TSMP report are taken from iSWITRS system
Report 1 – Collisions and Victims By Motor Vehicle Involved and limited to Santa Clara County. The
majority of this information can be obtained the Annual Report from Table 8F – Injury Collisions by
County and Table 8D – Injury Collisions by County. It has been noticed that the iSWITRS system is
continually updated while the SWITRS Annual Reports are not retroactively corrected; for example, 2012
SWITRS Annual Report Table 8A shows 82 fatal collisions and 6,639 injury collisions in Santa Clara
county, whereas the iSWITRS Report 1 shows 83 fatal collisions and 6,640 injury collision. To be more
straight forward, some of the categories shown in Figure 53 are combined crash types as defined by CHP.
The following combined TSMP categories are correlated to CHP categories by (TSMP:CHP), Object: Fixed
Object + Parked Motor Vehicle + Other Object, Motor Vehicle: Other Motor Vehicle + Motor Veh on
Other RDWY, Other: Non-Collision + Animal + Not Stated. Figure 53 Data is taken from iSWITRS Report
1 not TIMS, which may be slightly different and do not provided all the same categories.
Heat mapping and preliminary table data are provided by Safe Transportation Research and Education
Center, University of California Berkeley, Transportation Injury Mapping System (TIMS)
http://tims.berkeley.edu/. TIMS updated the provisional 2014 data from the CHP on May 20th 2016. For
10.a
Notes on Report
the TSMP report, TIMS data is used along with the heat maps but is not used to report the overall number
of collusions by severity. Because of the limited reports available (from the CHP SWITRS system) that are
limited on a county basis, there are currently no SWITR reports for “Type of Collision” on a county basis.
According to CHP’s SWITR Glossary (http://www.chp.ca.gov/switrs/pdf /2012-glossary.pdf) a collision
resulting in a “severe wound” is defined as an injury which prevents the injured party from walking,
driving, or performing activities he/she was normally capable of before the collision.
AIR QUALITY
Annual Air Quality Index (AQI) annual median data from http://www.epa.gov/airdata/, accessed June
20th 2016. The AirData-Air Quality Index Summary Report displays an annual summary of Air Quality
Index (AQI) values for Santa Clara County. Air Quality Index is an indicator of overall air quality, because
it takes into account many different pollutants measured within a geographic area. Although AQI includes
all available pollutant measurements, users should be aware that many areas have monitoring stations for
some, but not all, of the pollutants. Air quality data is received from state agencies. Interactive maps of
monitoring stations are available here: http://www.epa.gov/airdata/ad_maps.html.
MODE SHARE
2012 1-year estimates journey to work mode data was taken from US Census Bureau’s website:
http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=ACS_12_1YR_S080
1&prodType=table using their “FactFinder” search tool. 2011 can be found on US Census Bureau’s
website: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=
ACS_11_1YR_S0801&prodType=table.
BIKEWAYS
This information was researched by VTA planning staff by contacting local agencies and reviewing
existing information. The information provided helps illustrate the progress being made to complete the
goals set forth in the 2008 county bicycle plan. Over time, the goals and projects planned in the 2008
plan have changed and therefore a shifting target is experienced which could result in a decrease in
percent complete calculations.
Green bike lanes survey was provided by Matthew Jue from the City of Campbell. The informal survey was
conducted in 2016 and was used to assist city staff in selecting green bike lanes construction materials and
application types.
10.a
Acknowledgements
Acknowledgements
PARTICIPATING AGENCIES:
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans District 4)
City of Campbell
City of Cupertino
City of Gilroy
City of Los Altos
Town of Los Altos Hills
Town of Los Gatos
City of Milpitas
City of Monte Sereno
City of Morgan Hill
City of Palo Alto
City of San Jose
City of Santa Clara
City of Saratoga
City of Sunnyvale
County of Santa Clara
MOTT MACDONALD
Kirk W. Meyer, PE, Engineer IV, Deputy Project Manager
Ankit Sharma, EIT, Engineer III
VTA PROJECT STAFF
Eugene Maeda, Senior Transportation Planner, Project Manager
Murali Ramanujam, Transportation Engineering Manager
Casey Emoto, Deputy Director, Project Development
Wilson Huges, Student Intern
10.b
Home>Projects and Programs>Programs>Transportation System Monitoring Program
Transportation System Monitoring Program
Pavement
Bridges
Litter
Pavement Conditions
Landscape Roadside
Safety
Bike
10.b
Home>Projects and Programs>Programs>Transportation System Monitoring Program
Transportation System Monitoring Program
Pavement
Bridges
Litter
Road Litter Conditions
Landscape Roadside
Safety
Bike
11
Date:
Current Meeting:
Board Meeting:
August 30, 2016
September 7, 2016
October 6, 2016
BOARD MEMORANDUM
TO:
THROUGH:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
FY 2016 SR 237 Express Lanes Annual Report
BACKGROUND:
At its December 2008 meeting, the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) Board of
Directors approved the Silicon Valley Express Lanes Program (Program). The purpose of the
Program is to provide congestion relief through the implementation of a roadway pricing system
that allows for the use of unused capacity in carpool lanes. This is accomplished by allowing
solo commuters to use the available capacity in the carpool lanes for a fee. The fee changes
dynamically in response to existing congestion levels and the available capacity in the lanes.
The result of these changes is the implementation of express lanes from what formerly were
carpool lanes. Implementation of express lanes is also part of the Bay Area Regional
Transportation Plan update that was approved by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission
(MTC) on July 18, 2013.
Specifically, the primary objectives of the Program are:
1. Provide congestion relief through more effective use of existing roadways;
2. Provide commuters with a new mobility option; and
3. Provide a new funding source for transportation improvements including public transit.
DISCUSSION:
This memorandum summarizes the fourth full fiscal year (7/1/15 -6/30/16) of operation for the
SR 237 Express Lanes. The SR 237 Express Lanes have served over 2.4 million toll paying
customers (about 19 percent of the just over 12.6 million users that have used the express lanes
since inception). About 220,000 vehicle hours of travel time savings have been gained in the
corridor since the express lanes opened for tolling on March 2012.
Attached to this memorandum is the SR 237 Express Lanes Fiscal Year 2016 annual report.
11
Below are key observations for Fiscal Year 2016 (FY 2016):
HOV ONLY Mode Operations
The express lane system is operated to maximize person throughout as much as possible while
still maintaining speeds of 45 miles per hour or higher as much as possible in the express lanes
by making use of the system’s ability to vary toll rates. If the flow rate in the express lane
continues to increase to the point where travel in the express lane also begins to deteriorate with
speeds dropping well below 45 mph, the system goes into HOV ONLY mode meaning that only
HOVs (i.e., carpoolers) and HOV lane qualified vehicles are allowed in the express lane. FY
2016 saw the continued increase of traffic levels including increased use of the express lanes by
clean air vehicles (CAVs) that resulted in the increase in the amount of HOV ONLY mode
operations.
Express Lanes Operations
In FY 2016, the SR 237 Express Lanes maintained the performance standard of operating at 45
miles per hour (mph) and higher for about 96 percent of the express lanes operating hours. The
four percent of time where speeds were lower than 45 mph included periods of time with HOV
ONLY mode operations.
During FY 2016, this HOV ONLY operations amounted to a total of about 181 hours (113 hours
for the westbound AM commute period and 68 hours for the eastbound PM commute period)
that equates to an average of about 40 minutes per day. In FY 2016, for the first-time the HOV
ONLY restriction in the westbound AM commute period far exceeded the total for the eastbound
PM commute period. The westbound AM commute period HOV ONLY restriction occurs due
to congestion caused by the queue formed by SR 237 traffic merging onto northbound US 101
near Mathilda Avenue. Similarly, the eastbound PM commute period experiences HOV ONLY
restrictions due to recurring downstream congestion on I-880 that occurs north of the Santa Clara
County limits (north of Dixon Landing Road).
Traffic volume served by the SR 237 Express Lanes during FY 2016 was over three million
vehicles including both carpoolers and solo drivers (also referred to as single occupant vehicles
or SOVs). This is an increase of over 35,000 vehicles over FY 2015. The non-tolled traffic grew
by about 85,000 vehicles (three percent) while the amount of toll-paying customers decreased by
about 50,000 (nine percent).
The increase in non-tolled traffic is mainly attributable to the growth in CAVs that are allowed to
use express lanes with a qualified decal sticker (green or white). Monthly spot counts by VTA
staff within the SR 237 Express Lanes limits indicate that up to 30 percent of the total traffic
volume consists of CAVs. The existing legislation qualifying CAVs as carpool lane eligible
vehicles sunsets on January 1, 2019.
In FY 2016, despite the overall increase in traffic usage levels, the SR 237 Express Lanes
managed to provide travel time savings in the corridor of up to 7 minutes in both the westbound
direction (between Dixon Landing Road and Great America Parkway) during the morning
commute period and the eastbound direction during the evening commute peak. The travel time
savings in both directions are significantly affected by downstream congestion beyond the SR
237 Express Lanes limits.
Page 2 of 3
11
A six-month pilot project rolling back the double white lines from First Street to Zanker Road in
the westbound direction of SR 237 was made permanent in FY 2016. This implementation
allows carpoolers traveling westbound from Calaveras Boulevard in the City of Milpitas to
access the express lanes earlier by about three-quarters of a mile. This striping modification was
implemented in partnership between several agencies including the California Department of
Transportation (Caltrans), CHP, the City of Milpitas and VTA.
Enforcement
The most common enforcement action addressed motorists crossing the double white lines. The
majority of the double white line crossings (between 50 to 200 vehicles per hour) occurred
between McCarthy Boulevard and Zanker Road during the peak commute period in the
westbound direction of SR 237. The primary citation issued has been for carpool lane violations,
amounting to about 52 percent of all citations (almost 1,700 total citations in FY 2016). VTA
worked with the CHP to conduct focused enforcement activities on a periodic basis.
Toll Rates
Since opening of SR 237 Express Lanes in March 2012, the corridor has experienced a consistent
increase in traffic volumes over the four years. Consistent with the increased traffic usage, the
average toll rate in the corridor has increased. The average toll rate for FY 2016 was $2.60
compared to $2.30 for FY 2015. The maximum toll rate in the corridor for FY 2016 was $7.00.
Toll Revenues and Expenses
The SR 237 Express Lanes have been well used and have generated toll revenues that have
exceeded projections. The average toll revenue per month for FY 2016 was about $104,000.
This translates to an average revenue of about $4,800 per tolling day. The month of November
was the lowest revenue month at about $79,300 while June was the highest at $121,400. Overall,
the SR 237 Express Lanes resulted in positive net revenue over expenses of about $373,000, with
gross toll revenue including investment earnings of $1,317,000 and total expense of $944,000.
These are preliminary unaudited numbers as of August 16, 2016. Final audited number may
vary.
Prepared By: Murali Ramanujam
Memo No. 5700
Page 3 of 3
11.a
SR 237 Express Lanes
tuu
Fiscal Year 2016
Annual Report
July 2016
11.a
This page intentionally left blank
11.a
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1:
Figure 2:
Figure 3:
Figure 4:
Figure 5:
Figure 6:
Figure 7:
Figure 8:
Figure 9:
SR 237 Express Lanes Traffic Volumes & Revenue by Quarter .................................. 4
FY 2016 SR 237 Express Lanes – Switchable /FasTrak flex Tags usage ..................... 6
SR 237 Express Lanes Average Daily Tolled Vehicles by Month ............................... 7
SR 237 Express Lanes Monthly Tolled Vehicles Percentage ....................................... 8
FY 2016 SR 237 Express Lanes Average Traffic Volumes & Revenue....................... 9
FY 2016 SR 237 Express Lanes Average Toll Rate by Month................................... 10
FY 2016 SR 237 Tolled vs. Non-Tolled Traffic Volumes .......................................... 10
FY 2016 SR 237 Express Lanes Citations Issued by CHP ......................................... 11
FY 2016 SR 237 Express Lanes Westbound Average Double White Line Crossings
between McCarthy Boulevard and Zanker Road ........................................................ 12
Figure 10: FY 2016 SR 237 Express Lanes Eastbound Double White Line Crossings between
Zanker Road and McCarthy Boulevard ...................................................................... 13
Figure 11: FY 2016 SR 237 Westbound Express Lanes Average Corridor Speeds ..................... 15
Figure 12: FY 2016 SR 237 Eastbound Express Lanes Average Corridor Speeds ...................... 15
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: FY 2016 SR 237 Express Lanes Traffic Volumes & Revenue Performance .................. 3
Table 2: SR 237 Express Lanes Traffic Volumes & Revenue by Quarter .................................... 3
Table 3: FY 2016 SR 237 Express Lanes Westbound vs. Eastbound HOV Only Hours .............. 4
Table 4: FY 2016 SR 237 Express Lanes HOV ONLY Operations Summary ............................. 4
Table 5: FY 2016 SR 237 Express Lanes Tolled Vehicles by Direction....................................... 5
Table 6: FY 2016 SR 237 Express Lanes – Clean Air Vehicle Counts (AM Peak) ...................... 5
Table 7: FY 2016 SR 237 Express Lanes – Clean Air Vehicle Counts (PM Peak) ...................... 5
Table 8: FY 2016 SR 237 Express Lanes Traffic Volumes & Revenue by Month ....................... 9
Table 9: FY 2016 SR 237 Express Lanes Citation Statistics ........................................................ 11
Table 10: FY 2016 SR 237 Express Lanes Westbound Average Double White Line Crossings
between McCarthy Boulevard and Zanker Road ........................................................ 12
Table 11: FY 2016 SR 237 Express Lanes Eastbound Double White Line Crossings between
Zanker Road and McCarthy Boulevard ...................................................................... 13
Table 12: FY 2016 SR 237 Express Lanes Average Corridor Speeds ......................................... 14
SR 237 Express Lanes | FY 2016 Annual Report
Page i
11.a
This page intentionally left blank
Page ii
11.a
Fiscal Year 2016: SR 237 Express Lanes
Traffic Operations Summary
During the Fiscal Year (FY) 2016, the SR 237 Express Lane (EL) served a total of about
3,092,000 vehicles, including 475,500 Single Occupant Vehicles (SOV) /tolled and 2,616,500 High
Occupancy Vehicles (HOV) /non-tolled. The total lane utilization for the FY 2016 compared to
FY 2015 increased by about 35,600 vehicles (1%), the total non-tolled vehicles increased by
about 85,200 vehicles (4%), and the tolled vehicles decreased by about 49,600 vehicles (9%).
The estimated toll revenue collected for the FY 2016 was approximately $1.24 million compared
to $1.19 million from FY 2015, an increase of about $50,000 (5%).
Overall, 55% of the tolled vehicles were in the westbound direction (from I-880 southbound to
SR 237) and 45% in the eastbound direction (SR 237 to I-880 northbound).Westbound morning
peak period tolled vehicles were approximately 50% of the total tolled vehicles and eastbound
were approximately 34% during the afternoon peak period; the off-peak directions during both
morning and afternoon periods combined is about 16% of the total tolled vehicles.
Toll Rates
The average toll rate for FY 2016 was $2.60 compared to $2.30 for FY 2015. On November 23,
2015, the maximum toll rate for the westbound morning direction was increased from $6.00 to
$7.00, and the eastbound afternoon toll rate was increased from $5.00 to $6.00. The minimum
toll rate for the morning and afternoon tolling period is $0.30 and $0.50 respectively.
Clean Air Vehicle Volumes
A sample vehicle counts of the Clean Air Vehicles (CAV) in the SR 237 EL conducted monthly
during the FY 2016 indicates an average of about 30% in the westbound direction during the
morning peak hour (8 a.m. - 9 a.m.); and about 25% in the eastbound direction during the
evening peak hour (5 p.m. – 6 p.m.).
HOV Only Operation
The HOV Only operation activates when the corridor speed falls below the 45 mph during the
EL hours of operation. During the FY 2016, the EL were restricted to HOV Only operation for a
total of approximately 181 hours. The westbound morning commute consisted of about 113
hours while the eastbound evening commute had a total of about 68 hours. At an average this is
about 40 minutes of HOV Only operations in a day.
Page 1
11.a
Enforcement (California Highway Patrol)
During the FY 2016 California Highway Patrol (CHP) issued a total of 1,743 citations, compared
to 537 citations issued during FY 2015. CHP enforcement hours for FY 2016 totaled
approximately 970 hours while FY 2015 were about 300 hours. VTA staff coordinated two CHP
enforcement blitz, one in March and the second in April. The blitz enforcement occurred for a
total of six days (March 1, 2016 - March 3, 2016 and April 26, 2016 – April 28, 2016). CHP
issued a total of 447 citations during the two blitz periods.
SR 237 Express Lanes Maintenance Activities Summary
September 2015 - Caltrans repaved SR 237 between North First Street and Fair Oaks Avenue for
both eastbound and westbound direction in September 2015. During the repaving, the express
lanes in-pavement vehicle detectors along the WB SR 237 at First Street were replaced by
TransCore staff in coordination with Caltrans staff and their contractors.
October 7-8, 2015 - TransCore performed a semi-annual maintenance on the electronic toll
system. A semi-annual maintenance is a two night scheduled preventive maintenance activity in
addition to the weekly and monthly preventive maintenance.
October 22, 2015 - TransCore replaced the in-pavement vehicle detector along the SR 237
eastbound near Zanker Road off-ramp.
October 26 -29, 2015 - the express lane’s double white lines were restriped to improve visibility.
March 14, 2016 - TransCore performed a semi-annual maintenance on the electronic toll system.
A semi-annual maintenance is a two night scheduled preventive maintenance activity in addition
to the weekly and monthly preventive maintenance.
June 21, 2016 - TransCore replaced three in-pavement vehicle detector for the I-880 northbound
lane 1 at Site 1 near Dixon Landing Road, Site 2 at the toll gantry, and Site 6 between Zanker
Road and North First Street. In addition, TransCore also replaced the defective overhead laser for
the northbound toll gantry.
Page 2
11.a
Table 1: FY 2016 SR 237 Express Lanes Traffic Volumes & Revenue Performance
Express Lanes Traffic Volumes
Reporting
Period
FY 2016
Total
Vehicles
3,091,906
Non-Tolled
Vehicles
2,616,386
Tolled
Vehicles
475,520
% Tolled
Vehicles
15.4%
Estimated
Revenue
$1,249,885
FY 2015
3,056,354
35,552
2,531,175
85,211
525,179
49,659
17.2%
$1,196,099
$53,786
(1%)
(4%)
(-9%)
(-1.8%)
(5%)
Net Difference
Table 2: SR 237 Express Lanes Traffic Volumes & Revenue by Quarter
Total
Vehicles
Period
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
TOTAL
NonTolled
Vehicles
Tolled
Vehicles
%
Tolled
Vehicles
Estimated
Revenue
Q3*
75,639
62,520
13,119
17.34%
$
20,627
Q4
624,677
496,970
127,707
20.44%
$ 198,547
Q1
670,350
536,073
134,277
20.03%
$ 206,773
Q2
673,951
527,996
145,955
21.66%
$ 249,107
Q3
709,004
543,542
165,462
23.34%
$ 282,404
Q4
713,015
533,427
179,588
25.19%
$ 311,612
Q1
752,504
590,658
161,846
21.51%
$ 310,622
Q2
722,422
577,768
144,654
20.02%
$ 289,141
Q3
743,734
593,055
150,679
20.26%
$ 313,103
Q4
781,245
629,678
151,567
19.40%
$ 312,455
Q1
779,572
634,809
144,763
18.57%
$ 309,437
Q2
722,025
602,072
119,953
16.61%
$ 257,832
Q3
758,050
627,415
130,635
17.23%
$ 291,426
Q4
796,707
666,879
129,828
16.30%
$ 337,405
Q1
787,719
665,723
121,996
15.49%
$ 298,411
Q2
735,181
624,615
110,566
15.04%
$ 274,843
Q3
767,141
648,510
118,631
15.46%
$ 337,924
Q4
801,865
12,614,801
677,538
10,239,248
124,327
2,375,553
15.50%
18.8%
$ 338,707
$ 4,940,376
Total
Estimated
Revenue
$ 219,175
$ 1,049,897
$ 1,225,320
$ 1,196,099
$ 1,249,885
*FY 2012 Q3 include only two weeks of March.
Page 3
11.a
Figure 1: SR 237 Express Lanes Traffic Volumes & Revenue by Quarter
900,000
$400,000
800,000
$350,000
700,000
$300,000
$250,000
500,000
$200,000
400,000
$150,000
300,000
200,000
$100,000
100,000
$50,000
0
Revenue
Traffic Volumes
600,000
$-
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
Toll
Non-Toll
FY 2015
FY 2016
Total Revenue
Table 3: FY 2016 SR 237 Express Lanes Westbound vs. Eastbound HOV Only Hours
Reporting Period
Westbound
(HH:MM)
Eastbound
(HH:MM)
Total
(HH:MM)
FY 2016
113:44
67:41
181:25
FY 2015
60:37
299:14
359:51
Table 4: FY 2016 SR 237 Express Lanes HOV ONLY Operations Summary
Day
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
TOTAL
FY 2015, Total
% of
Net Time
Avg.
Tolling
(HH:MM)
Time/Day
Hours1
51:16
5.8%
0:58
80:57
9.2%
1:32
80:01
9.1%
1:32
85:11
9.6%
1:38
62:26
7.1%
1:12
359:51
8.1%
1:23
FY 2016, Total
% of
Net Time
Avg.
Tolling
(HH:MM)
Time/Day
Hours1
0:33
28:50
3.3%
0:57
50:30
5.7%
0:52
46:15
5.2%
0:48
41:40
4.7%
0:16
14:10
1.6%
181:25
4.1%
0:41
1
Percentage based on total daily (17 hours) and quarterly (1105 hours) operating hours for Express Lanes
Page 4
11.a
Table 5: FY 2016 SR 237 Express Lanes Tolled Vehicles by Direction
Direction
AM
PM
Total
Percentage
Westbound
239,334 (50%)
51,420 (11%)
290,755
61%
Eastbound
23,411 (5%)
161,355 (34%)
184,765
39%
TOTAL
262,745 (55%)
212,775 (45%)
475,520
Table 6: FY 2016 SR 237 Express Lanes – Clean Air Vehicle Counts (AM Peak)
SOV
CAV
HOV
Total Vehicles
Quarter 1
Average
274
350
980
1,604
Westbound (8 a.m. – 9 a.m.)
Quarter 2 Quarter 3 Quarter 4
Average
Average
Average
197
210
200
401
562
556
898
797
794
1,496
1,569
1,550
Total
Average
220
467
867
1,555
Percent
14%
30%
56%
100%
Table 7: FY 2016 SR 237 Express Lanes – Clean Air Vehicle Counts (PM Peak)
SOV
CAV
HOV
Total Vehicles

Quarter 1
Average
162
243
863
1,268
Eastbound (5 p.m. – 6 p.m.)
Quarter 2 Quarter 3 Quarter 4
Average
Average
Average
163
228
218
281
329
319
811
897
694
1,255
1,454
1,231
Total
Average
193
293
816
1,302
Percent
15%
23%
62%
100%
The average Clean Air Vehicle (CAV) counts for the FY 2016 is based on an average of
total 12 counts performed during the peak commute hour. This spot based count for the
express lane was conducted near Zanker Road interchange.
Page 5
11.a
Figure 2: FY 2016 SR 237 Express Lanes – Switchable /FasTrak flex Tags usage
14,000
12,000
No of flex tags
10,000
8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000
HOV3+
HOV2
SOV
July '15
81
190
189
Aug '15
124
231
369
Sep '15
219
313
534
Oct '15
259
410
852
Nov '15
372
429
740
Dec '15
435
477
749
Jan '16
739
755
846
Feb '16
1,156
1,088
1,223
Mar '16
2,789
2,774
2,529
Apr '16
3,365
3,659
2,904
May '16
4,149
4,313
3,316
June '16
4,733
4,760
3,832
Page 6
11.a
Figure 3: SR 237 Express Lanes Average Daily Tolled Vehicles by Month
3000
FY 2013
2500
FY 2014
FY 2012
FY 2015
FY 2016
Tolled Vehicles
2000
1500
1000
500
0
Month
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
Page 7
11.a
Figure 4: SR 237 Express Lanes Monthly Tolled Vehicles Percentage
30%
FY 2013
25%
FY 2012
20%
Toll Percentage
FY 2014
FY 2015
15%
FY 2016
10%
5%
0%
Month
FY 2012
FY 2013
FY 2014
FY 2015
FY 2016
Page 8
11.a
Table 8: FY 2016 SR 237 Express Lanes Traffic Volumes & Revenue by Month
FY 2016
Period
Month
Tolled
Vehicles
July
August
September
October
November
December
January
February
March
April
May
June
41,563
41,454
38,979
40,821
33,541
36,204
36,538
38,963
43,130
40,266
42,241
41,820
NonTolled
Vehicles
225,353
216,393
223,977
230,044
200,292
194,279
203,034
211,270
234,206
217,408
225,335
234,795
Total
Vehicles
% Tolled
Vehicles
266,916
257,847
262,956
270,865
233,833
230,483
239,572
250,233
277,336
257,674
267,576
276,615
15.6%
16.1%
14.8%
15.1%
14.3%
15.7%
15.3%
15.6%
15.6%
15.6%
15.8%
15.1%
Estimated
Revenue
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
104,236
101,854
92,321
101,307
79,330
94,207
101,830
109,880
126,214
102,007
115,254
121,446
Figure 5: FY 2016 SR 237 Express Lanes Average Traffic Volumes & Revenue
300,000
$120,000
250,000
$100,000
200,000
$80,000
150,000
$60,000
100,000
$40,000
50,000
$20,000
0
Revenue
$140,000
Traffic Volumes
350,000
$-
Toll
Non-Toll
Total Revenue
Page 9
11.a
Figure 6: FY 2016 SR 237 Express Lanes Average Toll Rate by Month
$3.50
$3.00
$2.5
$2.5
Toll Rate
$2.50
$2.4
$2.5
$2.6
$2.8
$2.8
$2.9
$2.7
$2.9
$2.5
$2.4
$2.00
$1.50
$1.00
$0.50
$0.00
Figure 7: FY 2016 SR 237 Tolled vs. Non-Tolled Traffic Volumes
475,520
(15.4%)
2,616,386
(84.6%)
Toll
Non-Toll
Page 10
11.a
Figure 8: FY 2016 SR 237 Express Lanes Citations Issued by CHP
Mechanical
(7%)
Primary Collision
Factor
(9%)
DWL Crossing
(27%)
Cell Phone
(2%)
DWL Crossing
Seatbelt
(1%)
Carpool
Speed
Speed
(2%)
Seatbelt
Cell Phone
Primary Collision
Factor
Mechanical
Carpool
(52%)
Table 9: FY 2016 SR 237 Express Lanes Citation Statistics
Month
July
August
September
October
November
December
January
February
March
April
May
June
Total
Total
Citations
40
107
101
90
51
85
92
316
286
312
150
113
1,743
Verbal
Warnings*
12
27
20
22
6
30
39
61
28
10
16
6
277
DWL
Crossing
0
37
27
29
14
28
20
113
65
91
27
20
471
Carpool
32
45
49
19
35
18
45
93
200
198
89
75
898
Speed
1
1
3
2
1
10
0
14
2
2
2
0
38
Seatbelt
0
2
1
1
0
2
2
2
1
3
1
0
15
Cell
Phone
2
1
4
2
0
3
5
8
6
2
0
9
42
Primary
Collision
Factor
5
15
6
17
0
9
11
55
7
7
18
4
154
Mechanical
0
6
11
20
1
15
9
31
5
9
13
5
125
Hours
24
64
60
60
32
56
64
184
143
148
86.3
48
969.3
* Verbal warnings are not included in the Total Citations.
Page 11
11.a
Table 10: FY 2016 SR 237 Express Lanes Westbound Average Double White Line Crossings
between McCarthy Boulevard and Zanker Road
Time
5 am
6 am
7 am
8 am
9 am
10 am
11 am
12 pm
1 pm
2 pm
3 pm
4 pm
5 pm
6 pm
Quarter 1
Average
Quarter 2
Average
Quarter 3
Average
Quarter 4
Average
Total
Hourly
Average
Total EL
Hourly
Volume
(05/11/16)
Violation
Percent
111
144
139
146
169
244
97
65
76
76
47
75
215
103
98
136
136
148
173
174
53
51
65
64
35
74
158
52
108
141
123
110
163
180
41
35
53
40
27
50
138
43
126
141
133
119
156
247
58
42
61
58
31
57
191
62
111
141
133
131
165
211
62
48
64
60
35
64
176
65
700
1,329
1,619
1,733
1,679
1,695
752
505
561
500
241
358
566
344
15.8%
10.6%
8.2%
7.5%
9.8%
12.5%
8.3%
9.6%
11.4%
11.9%
14.6%
17.9%
31.0%
18.9%
Figure 9: FY 2016 SR 237 Express Lanes Westbound Average Double White Line Crossings
between McCarthy Boulevard and Zanker Road
250
Violators
200
150
100
50
0
5am
6am
7am
8am
9am 10am 11am 12pm 1pm
Time of Day
2pm
3pm
4pm
5pm
6pm
Page 12
11.a
Table 11: FY 2016 SR 237 Express Lanes Eastbound Double White Line Crossings between
Zanker Road and McCarthy Boulevard
Time
Quarter 1
Average
Quarter 2
Average
Quarter 3
Average
Quarter 4
Average
Total
Hourly
Average
Total EL
Hourly
Volume
(05/11/16)
Violation
Percent
0
-5
-11
-17
-49
-23
-13
-20
-40
-43
-15
-9
-24
-30
-1
-3
-12
-9
-31
-25
-12
-17
-26
-38
-10
-2
4
-8
-1
-3
-12
-9
-31
-25
-12
-17
-26
-38
-10
-2
4
-8
-3
-5
-7
-14
-34
-14
-16
-24
-35
-51
-15
5
45
0
-1
-4
-10
-12
-36
-22
-13
-19
-32
-43
-12
-2
7
-12
49
94
243
276
706
551
680
847
1,100
1,705
1,228
1,357
1,451
1,250
-2.6%
-4.3%
-4.2%
-4.5%
-5.1%
-3.9%
-2.0%
-2.3%
-2.9%
-2.5%
-1.0%
-0.1%
0.5%
-0.9%
5 am
6 am
7 am
8 am
9 am
10 am
11 am
12 pm
1 pm
2 pm
3 pm
4 pm
5 pm
6 pm
* Negative number indicates vehicles exiting the express lanes between Zanker Boulevard and Calaveras Boulevard
Figure 10: FY 2016 SR 237 Express Lanes Eastbound Double White Line Crossings between
Zanker Road and McCarthy Boulevard
50
40
30
Violators
20
10
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
5am
6am
7am
8am
9am 10am 11am 12pm 1pm
Time of Day
2pm
3pm
4pm
5pm
6pm
* Negative number indicates vehicles exiting the express lanes between Zanker Boulevard and Calaveras Boulevard
Page 13
11.a
Table 12: FY 2016 SR 237 Express Lanes Average Corridor Speeds
Time
12:00 a.m.
1:00 a.m.
2:00 a.m.
3:00 a.m.
4:00 a.m.
5:00 a.m.
6:00 a.m.
7:00 a.m.
8:00 a.m.
9:00 a.m.
10:00 a.m.
11:00 a.m.
12:00 p.m.
1:00 p.m.
2:00 p.m.
3:00 p.m.
4:00 p.m.
5:00 p.m.
6:00 p.m.
7:00 p.m.
8:00 p.m.
9:00 p.m.
10:00 p.m.
11:00 p.m.
Average
Westbound
Average
Eastbound
71
70
67
70
61
70
73
70
76
72
72
73
61
72
48
70
42
69
46
69
51
69
70
69
71
69
71
68
72
63
71
58
69
55
64
51
67
52
70
57
71
66
71
68
72
69
72
70
The highlighted hours represents the EL hours of operation

Average speeds for the FY 2016 SR 237 westbound is based on an average of five vehicle
detector stations (VDS) between I-880 and North First Street, and a total of 36 weekdays (3
days /month).

Average speeds for the FY 2016 SR 237 eastbound is based on an average of three VDS
between Zanker Road and I-880, and a total of 36 weekdays (3 days /month).

The sample data was collected during a typical weekday (Tuesday – Thursday), and does
not include rainy day, major traffic incidents, and is not taken before/after a public holiday.
Page 14
11.a
Figure 11: FY 2016 SR 237 Westbound Express Lanes Average Corridor Speeds
80
70
Spped (mph)
60
50
45
40
30
20
10
0
Non EL Hours
EL Hours
Time of Day
EL hours of operations for the westbound SR 237 are 5 a.m. – 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. – 7 p.m.
Figure 12: FY 2016 SR 237 Eastbound Express Lanes Average Corridor Speeds
80
70
Spped (mph)
60
50
45
40
30
20
10
0
Time of Day
Non EL Hours
EL Hours
EL hours of operations for the eastbound SR 237 are 5 a.m. – 9 a.m. and 3 p.m. – 7 p.m.
Page 15
12
Date:
Current Meeting:
Board Meeting:
August 31, 2016
September 7, 2016
October 6, 2016
BOARD MEMORANDUM
TO:
THROUGH:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Third-party Agreements of Voluntary Contributions and Programming of VRF
Funds to Transportation Improvement Projects
Policy-Related Action: Yes
Government Code Section 84308 Applies: No
ACTION ITEM
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommend that the VTA Board of Directors authorize the General Manager to negotiate and
enter into cooperative funding agreements with the City of Santa Clara in the amount of $16.164
million for its voluntary contribution and with the City of Sunnyvale for an amount up to
$11.380 million to help fund mutually defined regional transportation improvements to be
delivered by the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, and to approve $4 million in
Vehicle Registration Fee matching funds for the SR 237 Express Lanes Phase 2 project.
BACKGROUND:
As noted by the California Department of Finance, Santa Clara County is the fastest growing
county in California and as the economic recovery continues, the demand for housing and
business has triggered rapid construction and development trends in the region. Many of these
land development projects, especially those closest to freeway ramps, are projected to result in
additional traffic congestion on the already congested freeways. Left unchecked, this congestion
may inhibit the region’s ability for sustained growth and innovation in the years ahead.
Moreover, the ability to add freeway capacity is no longer an option due to right-of-way,
financial and environmental constraints.
Agencies in Santa Clara County have recognized the need to strike a balance between economic
growth and traffic efficiency and are leading the way in bringing forward potential solutions.
One outcome has been implementation of innovative approaches to fund improvements of
freeway, transit and other regional facilities as mitigation measures to address traffic impacts
12
linked to land development projects.
Working with its Congestion Management Program (CMP) member agencies, the Santa Clara
Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) has developed the following structure for a program of
voluntary contributions to regional transportation improvements:
 VTA, as the Congestion Management Agency for Santa Clara County, comments on
documents supporting the development of land use projects with respect to how these
projects may affect CMP facilities, including freeways, County expressways, CMP
intersections, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and the transit system;
 A member agency approving a land use project, in its role as the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Lead Agency, may choose to condition project
approval with a voluntary contribution from the developer toward regional transportation
improvements to offset identified impacts to regional transportation facilities (including
the citing of the contribution in the CEQA document);
 he member agency could execute an agreement to transfer funds to VTA or other
agencies for use on the specified regional transportation projects.
This process was discussed at length and developed with VTA Technical Advisory Committee's
(TAC's) working groups: Systems Operations and Management (SOM) Working Group and the
Land Use/Transportation Integration (LUTI) Working Group. Information on the process was
shared with the VTA Board of Directors at its March 2014 meeting and also shared with the
Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC), TAC, Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) and the
Congestion Management Program and Planning (CMPP) Committee in February 2014.
The consensus from all committees was that this structure of voluntary contributions offers a
useful tool for local agencies to consider when reviewing development projects and provides
guidance for pursuing contributions. Additionally, it provides VTA and others a consistent
approach to commenting on regional projects and benefits that are mutually beneficial to
countywide jurisdictions such as VTA and local jurisdictions. Regional transportation projects
that receive funding from voluntary contributions would improve overall mobility in Santa Clara
County and thereby increase business competitiveness, economic vitality and quality of life for
its residents. Table 1 summarizes a list of benefits.
Table 1: Benefits of Voluntary Contributions
Consistent Review Process and Collection
of Funds
More Streamlined CEQA Process Related
to Freeway Impacts
Ability to better assess and approve
development projects that otherwise would be
rejected due to unmitigated significant adverse
impacts
Transportation projects will receive
necessary capital
Establishment of Mitigation Options
Reduction of Congestion Impacts
Business Competiveness and Economic
Vitality
Overall Mobility Improvements
Page 2 of 4
12
Separately, Senate Bill 83 (Hancock) was signed into law in 2009 authorizing countywide
transportation agencies such as VTA to implement a Vehicle Registration Fee (VRF) of up to
$10 on motor vehicles registered within the county for transportation programs and projects.
The voters of Santa Clara County approved a VRF by majority vote on November 2, 2010.
The Board adopted an expenditure plan allocating the revenue to transportation-related programs
and projects that have a relationship or benefit to the persons who pay the fee. This plan
dedicates 80% of the VRF revenues to the Local Road Improvement and Repair Program, in
which the revenue is returned directly to Member Agencies based on each city/town’s population
and the County of Santa Clara’s road and expressway lane mileage.
Another 15% of the revenue is directed to the “Countywide Program.” On December 10, 2015,
the VTA Board of Directors Program adopted a three-year “Countywide Program” for
FY2015/16 through FY2017/18 as follows:
1. On August 4, 2016, the VTA Board allocated $4.5 million for Intelligent Transportation
System projects.
2. Reserve the remaining funds for matching funds for regional roadway transportation
projects included in the adopted Valley Transportation Plan. Approximately $8 million is
available for programming under this category.
Up to the remaining 5% of the VRF revenue is reserved for Program Administration, with
unused funds reverting to the “Countywide Program” and added to the 15% discussed above.
DISCUSSION:
Two large-scale land-use projects under development in Santa Clara County have been approved
with conditions related to the providing of funding for regional transportation improvements
and/or studies.
CityPlace Santa Clara
In the City of Santa Clara, CityPlace Santa Clara is a proposed multi-phased, mixed-use
development of approximately 240 acres of city-owned land that includes a new urban center
with a retail and entertainment district, office development and residential uses, as well as
outdoor amenities, infrastructure, parkland, and open space.
The Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for City Place Santa Clara dated October 2015,
found significant impacts related to adverse traffic impacts on US 101 and SR 237. In order to
mitigate these impacts, the City of Santa Clara as the lead agency under CEQA, included a
provision as a condition for project approval for the project developer, Related Santa Clara LLC,
to contribute $16.164 million towards planned regional transportation projects identified in the
Valley Transportation Plan (VTP) 2040 document. One of the recommended projects was SR
237 Express Lanes: North First Street to Mathilda Avenue (also referred to as SR 237 Express
Lanes Phase 2). This project would improve freeway operations in the CityPlace Santa Clara
affected freeway segments and enhance traffic carrying capacity for SR 237.
Page 3 of 4
12
The SR 237 Express Lanes Phase 2 project is scheduled to complete design at the end of 2016
with construction contract advertisement planned for early 2017. The construction cost for the
SR 237 Express Lanes Phase 2 project is approximately $20 million. The CityPlace Santa Clara
funds covers most of the construction cost. Because of the countywide significance of the SR
237 Express Lanes Phase 2 project, staff additionally recommends that the VTA Board program
$4 million in VRF matching funds to cover the remaining construction funding gap. The
combination of the CityPlace Santa Clara voluntary contribution and the $4 million in VRF
matching funds will help ensure that the SR 237 Express Lanes Phase 2 project continues to
progress as scheduled.
Moffett Towers II
In the City of Sunnyvale, the Moffett Towers II project is a 47.4 acre site proposed as an office
complex development.
To mitigate the project’s impact to existing freeway segments; as a condition of project approval,
the City of Sunnyvale identified a freeway voluntary contribution of $380,000 to the SR 237
Express Lanes Phase 2 project. In addition, the City of Sunnyvale, included a provision in the
development agreement for the project landowner, MT II LLC, to contribute $11 million towards
the improvements under development at the US 101/SR 237/Mathilda interchange.
Agreements
The transfer of voluntary contributions from the lead agency for the conditioned land
development project to a regional transportation improvement requires an agreement between the
jurisdictional agencies. In the case of VTA, the General Manager requires Board authorization to
negotiate and execute grant agreements above $1 million. VTA staff recommends that the Board
of Directors authorize the General Manager to enter into negotiations and execute the necessary
agreements with the cities of Santa Clara and Sunnyvale for the funding identified above. Upon
execution of agreements, VTA will be eligible to receive the approximately $27.5 million in
contributions towards the delivery of important transportation projects.
ALTERNATIVES:
The VTA Board could decide to forego the identified voluntary contributions from the cities of
Santa Clara and Sunnyvale and/or decline to program the VRF funds to the SR 237 Express
Lanes project.
FISCAL IMPACT:
VTA will receive $16.164 million from the City of Santa Clara and up to $11.380 million from
the City of Sunnyvale towards transportation improvement projects to be delivered by VTA. This
action would also make $4 million in VRF matching funds available to the SR 237 Express
Lanes Phase 2 project.
Prepared by: Lam Trinh
Memo No. 5671
Page 4 of 4
13
Date:
Current Meeting:
Board Meeting:
August 31, 2016
September 7, 2016
October 6, 2016
BOARD MEMORANDUM
TO:
THROUGH:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Vehicle Registration Fund Advance: City of Gilroy North First Street Paving
Policy-Related Action: No
ACTION ITEM
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommend that the VTA Board of Directors approve up to a $5.5 million advance of Vehicle
Registration Fee (VRF) Program funding to the City of Gilroy for the First Street repaving
project.
BACKGROUND:
Senate Bill 83 (Hancock) was signed into law in 2009 authorizing countywide transportation
agencies such as VTA to implement a Vehicle Registration Fee (VRF) of up to $10 on motor
vehicles registered within the county for transportation programs and projects. The voters of
Santa Clara County approved a VRF by majority vote on November 2, 2010.
The VTA Board of Directors adopted an annual expenditure plan allocating the VRF revenue to
transportation-related programs and projects that have a relationship or benefit to the persons
who pay the fee. The VRF expenditure plan dedicates 80% of the VRF revenues to the Local
Road Improvement and Repair Program. This revenue is returned directly to Member Agencies
based on a formula based on each city/town’s population and the County of Santa Clara’s road
and expressway lane mileage.
An additional 15% of the VRF revenue is directed to the Countywide Program. The Countywide
Program consists of 1) Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) projects allocated through a
competitive process, and 2) Project Match program which can provide a funding match, at the
Board of Directors’ discretion, to projects included in the Valley Transportation Plan.
The remaining five percent of the VRF revenue is reserved for Program Administration.
13
Unexpended annual Program Administration funds are returned to the Countywide Program
discussed above.
VRF receipts and interest received between July 1, 2015 through June 30, 2016 is $16,332,112.
The total VRF program receipts to date is $76,901,059.
DISCUSSION:
The City of Gilroy has requested up to a $5.5 million advance of funding from the VRF 80%
Local Road Improvements and Repair Program funds to reconstruct and repave the urban
sections of State Route 152 (SR 152), also referred to as First Street.
The First Street project scope is approximately 11,700 centerline feet of mostly 5-lane travel way
repaving, lane restriping, and traffic signal loop replacements.
The specific street sections are:
 First St. from Santa Teresa Blvd. to Monterey St.
 Monterey St. from First St. to Leavesley Rd.
 Leavesley Rd. from Monterey Street to Murray Ave.
As these sections of First Street are part of SR 152, Caltrans is responsible for the maintenance
and repair of the roadway. Caltrans District 4 staff are in the process of preparing the preliminary
reports needed to submit this project to compete for funding in Caltrans’ State Highway
Operations and Protection Program (SHOPP). Caltrans’ preliminary cost estimate is
approximately $5.5 million. If Caltrans is successful in funding the project, the money should be
available for construction in 2021.
First Street (SR 152) is in very poor condition with average Pavement Condition Indices (PCI) in
the low 50’s. A PCI of 70 is generally when a road becomes a candidate for repaving. The street
provides essential circulation through the City of Gilroy, and the City is very interested in
accelerating the rehabilitation project. The City will be replacing the water line on this section of
First Street in 2017/2018. Caltrans, City and VTA staff agree that it would be more efficient and
cost effective to perform the repaving of the roadway at the same time the water line is scheduled
to be replaced. To that end, the City of Gilroy has requested a commitment from Caltrans to
reimburse the City from the SHOPP in 2021 if Gilroy advances the paving project with other
funds.
The City of Gilroy receives approximately $300,000 per year in formula funding from the
Vehicle Registration Fee program. The advance of funds would represent approximately 15
years of annual allocations to the City of Gilroy. VTA staff recommends that the VTA Board of
Directors advance up to $5.5 million to Gilroy from the VRF program. The funds would be
allocated to Gilroy on a cash flow basis as funds are required for construction in 2018.
If the City of Gilroy is successful in reaching a repayment agreement with Caltrans for the
SHOPP funding, the City would be able to repay the VRF program earlier. Should the City fail
to collect SHOPP funding, the VRF funds would be repaid, over time, from the City of Gilroy's
Page 2 of 3
13
annual formula allocation.
The VRF program has the available funds to meet the 80% annual commitments to the other
cities and County.
ALTERNATIVES:
The VTA Board of Directors may decline to advance the funds, or advance an alternative
amount.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact to this action because the VRF matching funds are simply being
advanced to the City of Gilroy in order to expedite the North First Street paving project.
Prepared by: Marcella Rensi
Memo No. 5718
Page 3 of 3
14
Date:
Current Meeting:
Board Meeting:
August 29, 2016
September 7, 2016
September 1, 2016
BOARD MEMORANDUM
TO:
THROUGH:
FROM:
Chief Operating Officer, Inez Evans
SUBJECT:
Bus Shelter Enhancement Strategy Update
BACKGROUND:
Bus stops are the first place where transit passengers interact with VTA’s service. The type and
quality of passenger amenities at bus stops are key indicators of the quality of the transit service
itself. With the current VTA bus shelters approaching the end of their life-cycle, VTA has an
opportunity to enhance its bus shelters to improve passenger comfort, protection, accessibility,
and safety.
VTA currently has 557 bus shelters under a contract with Clear Channel Outdoor (CCO). CCO
is responsible for installing, maintaining, cleaning, and repairing bus shelters in exchange for the
right to sell and post advertising on 75% of the shelters. The vendor shares advertising revenue
with VTA and member cities of the Transit Shelter Advertising Program (TSAP). The TSAP
shelter locations were selected based on a mix of factors including ridership, advertising
viability, and distribution between member jurisdictions.
VTA initiated the agreement with CCO on October 31, 1995 and is on its final two-year
extension, which expires October, 31 2017. VTA’s main motivation for the agreement was to
reduce expenses by passing the shelter maintenance and capital construction activities to the
contractor. Based on passenger input, VTA is considering a new shelter design, expanded sites,
and adding lit shelters and other features where feasible. When the agreement ends in 2017, VTA
will take ownership and maintenance responsibility of the CCO shelters from the current TSAP
agreement.
Replacing the current bus shelters with new bus shelters is an opportunity for VTA to implement
the Transit Passenger Environment Plan (TPEP). The TPEP provides the policy framework to
allocate shelters (and other bus stop amenities) by ridership. The passenger survey conducted for
the TPEP identified bus shelters as the second most important amenity at bus stops, with 46% of
respondents ranking bus shelters as the most important bus stop amenity. The TPEP identifies a
14
new shelter design concept (clear, customizable and modern), which is scalable in terms of size
and amenities, based on ridership at the bus stop. The design is adaptable to constraints in the
built environment. Examples of the TPEP shelter concept are available for review in
Attachments A and B.
DISCUSSION:
Shelter Design
VTA has developed specifications for a new request for proposals for a new standard VTA bus
shelter. The new VTA standard shelter will have a new, modern design, which considers the
needs of disabled passengers, and is fully compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act by
providing room for passengers with wheelchairs or mobility devices to wait for buses inside of
the shelters. Sidewalk improvements to improve accessibility will accompany the installation of
the new VTA shelters.
Feedback from VTA passengers recommended clear shelter panels to enhance security in VTA
bus shelters. Taking this input, the shelter design includes clear glass panels, to improve
visibility at bus shelters. The shelter design also includes options for windscreens, advertising
panels, trash receptacles, solar lighting, and real-time information (RTI) signs.
Shelter Needs
With the current bus shelters reaching the end of their 20-year useful life span, VTA has an
opportunity to change its standard shelter. There are currently 557 bus shelters in the VTA bus
network. To meet the TPEP ridership standards for shelters at bus stops, an additional 150
shelters will be added to the bus network, for a total of 707 bus shelters. Priority locations for
shelter replacement and new shelter installations include transit centers, the West San CarlosStevens Creek Corridor, El Camino Real, and Santa Clara-Alum Rock Corridor. Replacing the
existing VTA 557 bus shelters is estimated to cost $25.3 million dollars, and expanding the
number of shelters to implement the TPEP is estimated to cost $6.8 million, totaling $32 million
to enhance the shelter program. The cost will include site assessment, design and engineering,
accessibility improvements, procurement and installation.
Next Transit Shelter Advertising Agreement
VTA plans to release a Request for Proposal (RFP) for a shelter agreement next year, with a new
agreement to take effect in November 2017. This new shelter advertising agreement presents an
opportunity for VTA to establish a design for a new standard VTA shelter, new advertising
technology, an updated advertising revenue arrangement, and a new maintenance agreement.
Options for new advertising technology, including digital ads and Bluetooth proximity
marketing, and enhanced digital advertising at VTA-owned transit centers will be encouraged in
the RFP.
ADVISORY COMMITTEE DISCUSSION/RECOMMENDATION:
At their August 10, 2016 meeting, the Citizens Advisory Committee had this item on their
agenda. The item was deferred to a future meeting.
Page 2 of 3
14
The Technical Advisory Committee received this item at their August 11, 2016 meeting. The
City of San Jose commended VTA on its effort to improve information signs at bus stops and
requested VTA coordinate its effort with the City's wayfinding sign effort.
Prepared By: Rodrigo Carrasco
Memo No. 5660
Page 3 of 3
14.a
14.b
15
Date:
Current Meeting:
Board Meeting:
August 29, 2016
September 7, 2016
October 6, 2016
BOARD MEMORANDUM
TO:
THROUGH:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Next Network: Light Rail Service Plan Recommendation
BACKGROUND:
In 2017, the BART to Silicon Valley Phase I extension will be complete and VTA will adjust
both light rail and bus services to better serve the VTA-BART connections at the Milpitas and
Berryessa BART stations. The VTA Light Rail to BART connection will be at the Montague
Light Rail station, and VTA will modify the light rail service plan to better serve this connection
as well as the ongoing needs of Santa Clara Valley residents and workers.
VTA is currently conducting an extensive outreach effort concerning the upcoming operating
plan changes planned for the fall of 2017. This effort, known as VTA’s Next Network Plan, has
largely focused on the design of the bus network as the question being posed by VTA (“how
should we balance funding for ridership- and coverage-purposed services?”) pertains to
geographical allocation of transit routes and is less applicable to light rail, which is restricted to
operating on tracks. However, themes such as frequency, connectivity and hours of operation
apply to both modes and are being analyzed in tandem.
In May 2016, staff brought, for review, three different operating plans with three different
optional enhancements to the VTA Board of Directors. Staff recommended Scenario 2, with the
Commuter Express and Winchester increased frequency optional enhancements. Staff was asked
to return to the Board of Directors with an update on the recommended scenario with additional
details.
DISCUSSION:
The recommended light rail operating plan includes the following changes (Attachment A):
 A new line from Alum Rock to Mountain View, operating all day and making every stop.
This new line would double the Light Rail service at the Milpitas BART Station.
15
 The existing Winchester to Mountain View line would be modified to a Winchester to
Old Ironsides line. The service would be improved from the current 15 minute peak hour
frequencies to 15 minute frequencies all day.
 The Commuter Express, which currently operates three trips each peak period between
Santa Teresa and Baypointe, would operate from Santa Teresa to St. James Station and be
Expanded to six trains each peak period, instead of the current three.
 There would be no changes to the existing Santa Teresa to Alum Rock line and the
existing Almaden Service.
Implementing the new service plan requires updating system-wide wayfinding signage at all
VTA light rail stations. Signage will be refreshed and wayfinding improvements will change the
numbering, nomenclature, and color of the light rail lines. In addition, two stations in the City of
Milpitas will be renamed to reduce passenger confusion when VTA BART opens. Montague
light rail station will become Milpitas light rail station, and I-880/Milpitas light rail station will
become Alder light rail station. The improvements are scheduled to begin in the fall of 2016 and
take at least one year to complete.
Going forward, staff will continue to conduct outreach activities for the new operating plan and
refine cost and staffing estimates. Outreach for the new light rail operating plan will continue to
be included in other Next Network related outreach meetings, and staff will begin more outreach
targeted to existing light rail riders later this year. This plan, along with the planned bus network
changes, will formally be recommended for adoption by the Board in the spring of 2017.
Financial Impact:
These changes would equate to a 14% operating cost per year, or approximately $11M per year.
This will be partially offset by an estimated $3M in fare revenue per year for an estimated net
cost increase of $8M. This cost increase takes into account the additional operators and
maintenance staff that will be required to operate this new service. Additional staff will need to
be hired within the next 6 months in order to be ready for the start of BART to Berryessa service
in the fall of 2017.
Prepared By: Jason Kim
Memo No. 5659
Page 2 of 2
15.a
16
Date:
Current Meeting:
Board Meeting:
August 29, 2016
September 7, 2016
September 23, 2016
BOARD MEMORANDUM
TO:
THROUGH:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
VTA's Next Network Plan Outreach Update
BACKGROUND:
The Transit Ridership Improvement Program (TRIP) is a two-year planning and policy effort
that strives to increase ridership, improve VTA’s farebox recovery rate, and connect with
Milpitas and Berryessa BART Phase 1 stations through transit service, infrastructure, technology
and information improvements. A key component of this effort is VTA’s Next Network Plan,
which is a redesign of VTA’s transit network that would be implemented in the fall of 2017,
coincident with the opening of BART Phase I.
VTA transit service plans are designed in two-year increments. Typically, VTA staff will
develop a draft plan, seek Board and public input, make adjustments based on feedback, and
present the plan in the span of six months. The Next Network Plan will address large scale
changes to the transit network, including a potential change in the Agency’s view on the purpose
of public transit. Therefore, VTA initiated the planning process nearly a year earlier than is
standard, with a robust two-part community and decision-maker engagement effort. The first
phase of engagement asks how transit can be more useful and how VTA should balance the
tradeoffs in transit service design. That input will inform a draft transit service plan that will be
released in December 2016. The second phase of engagement in early 2017 will ask the
community if the changes proposed by the draft service plan accurately capture the community’s
desires for public transit.
VTA's Board of Directors was introduced to the TRIP in late 2015. Subsequently, the Board was
presented with a project update in February 2016 and received the Transit Choices Report and a
preview of the network concepts in April 2016. This memorandum provides a summary of what
staff heard over the Phase 1 outreach during this spring and summer.
16
DISCUSSION:
VTA project staff conducted extensive community outreach during May through August. The
two-fold outreach effort involved direct in-person discussions with the community as well as an
extensive online engagement effort, all with four primary goals in mind:
1. Inform the community about the project purpose and timeline
2. Convey the important policy choices involved in developing VTA’s Next Network
3. Gather community policy preferences
4. Learn what kind of transit network the community wants
The in-person and online outreach efforts included surveys that asked about a series of transit
policy choices as introduced by the project's Transit Choices Report in February. These policy
choices represent tradeoffs in transit design, such as frequency versus expanded service hours,
weekend versus weekday service, and the ridership goal versus the coverage goal.
Direct Engagement
Project staff conducted 12 VTA-hosted community meetings throughout the county. At these 90minute meetings, participants engaged in discussions with VTA staff about their experiences
riding transit, the purpose of the project, and their value preferences in transit service. One
community meeting was simultaneously streamed live over the internet, with an online "chat
room" for questions and discussion. Over 100 residents attended the VTA-hosted meetings.
In addition to the 90-minute meetings, VTA has hosted three four-hour Community Leader
Workshops as of this writing, with a fourth workshop planned for East San Jose in late August,
co-hosted by the Transit Justice Alliance. These Leader Workshops are led by Jarrett Walker and
Associates, and are designed to bring together elected officials, city staff, and community leaders
to discuss their values for public transit. Those values were tested as attendees worked
collaboratively to design a transit network for a fictional city where the needs of the community
exceeded resources and tough choices between good goals needed to be made. The variety of
strategies employed in the network planning exercise underscored the variety of perspectives on
the purpose of public transit and generated debates about how VTA should operate transit. These
workshops in Mountain View, Campbell and Downtown San Jose recorded over 100 attendees.
In addition, the project team also engaged VTA's light rail and bus operators, recognizing that
operators represent the "front line" and have unique insights into rider preferences because they
interact with riders on a daily basis. Lastly, project staff also attended 15 third-party meetings
(not hosted by VTA) and conducted discussions on the Next Network project. This "out in the
community" strategy was particularly effective, reaching over 300 residents, business leaders,
community activists, and transit riders.
Online Engagement
The project team launched a dedicated project website - nextnetwork.vta.org - in early 2016. The
website is currently focused on informing the community about the project and gathering
feedback through a number of interactive features. The website is currently attracting an average
Page 2 of 4
16
of 52,000 page views every month.
The website features basic project information and welcomes visitors to download detailed
project reports, explore the network concepts and participate in multiple surveys. The surveys
have garnered over 1,000 unique responses.
Additionally, project staff are publishing a series of blog posts on various topics relevant to the
development of VTA's Next Network. In addition to social media sharing, each blog post has a
comment posting area, where readers have the option to comment and engage in a discussion
with project staff. The blog series has successfully engaged the community, generating over
1,000 comments, likes, retweets, questions, and shares.
What the Community Said
A number of clear themes have emerged through the public engagement process.
Tallying the Transit Choices Survey votes, participants expressed particularly strong preferences
in four tradeoff questions:
1. Participants prefer better service frequency over shorter walks to bus stops.
Overwhelming majorities expressed a willingness to walk further to the bus stop if it
means the bus would come more often.
2. Participants prefer faster buses over shorter walks to bus stops. Participants are willing to
walk further to the bus stop if it means the bus itself travels faster. This indicates a desire
for more rapid services, which stop approximately every 3/4 of a mile.
3. Participants prefer frequency over one-seat rides. Participants are willing to transfer
between routes if it means the buses come more often.
4. Participants want VTA to provide more transit service where ridership potential is higher
over coverage service where ridership potential is lower. Increasing the number of rides
provided, increasing the viability of transit as a travel option and improving the cost-perpassenger are common themes advocated by respondents.
Participants expressed less strong and inconsistent preferences on three tradeoff questions:
1. Participants were split between more weekday versus more weekend service.
2. Participants were split between more frequent service versus a longer service span over
the course of a day.
3. Participants were split between more service frequency in the peak periods versus in the
middle of the day.
VTA also asked the community how they would balance ridership and coverage goals of transit
service. The ridership goal seeks to maximize the number of trips provided and costeffectiveness of transit service, while the coverage goal seeks to provide service to as many
places as possible, even if ridership is low. Following the ridership goal leads VTA to put more
transit service in areas where ridership potential is high while the coverage goal leads VTA to
Page 3 of 4
16
put transit service in as many places as possible. Ridership and coverage are both worthy goals,
but they are fundamentally in conflict with each other. VTA addresses this question as a choice
along a spectrum between the goals. How much of VTA’s operating funds should be spent on
ridership-purposed service, and how much on coverage-purposed service. VTA’s present
balance is 70% ridership/30% coverage. In-person and online respondents were asked to vote
along a spectrum that ranged from 70% ridership/30% coverage to 90% ridership/10% coverage.
At the time of this writing, about 700 votes have been received with the community expressing
the following preferences:
 About one-quarter of all respondents voted to maintain the status quo (70%
ridership/30% coverage) and about three quarters of respondents cast a vote for a more
ridership-oriented network
 ne-third of all votes were for a 90% ridership/10% coverage network
 The average ridership/coverage balance is slightly above 80% ridership/20% coverage
Next Steps
VTA project staff will use the input received during the first phase of outreach to design a draft
network. The draft network will be presented to VTA’s Board of Directors in December 2016,
followed by the second phase of community outreach in early 2017. The second phase will ask
“Did we get it right?” and will feature much more detailed analysis and public discussion than
the present phase of outreach, including details of individual routes, impacts to Title VI minority
and low income communities, and compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act
regarding impacts to paratransit passengers. The input received over the second phase will be
used to refine the draft plan to present to the VTA Board of Directors for final approval in spring
2017.
Prepared By: Jay Tyree
Memo No. 5645
Page 4 of 4
17
Date:
Current Meeting:
Board Meeting:
August 29, 2016
September 7, 2016
October 6, 2016
BOARD MEMORANDUM
TO:
THROUGH:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
VTA Complete Streets Policy Development
BACKGROUND:
VTA is developing a Complete Streets policy that will apply to VTA’s capital project delivery
and project funding activities. The policy will also guide how VTA implements the Complete
Streets requirement of the transportation sales tax measure (Measure B) on the November 2016
ballot, should voters approve the measure.
The policy will also fulfill regional and state Complete Streets requirements and intentions
established by Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s Resolution 3765 and One Bay Area
Grant requirements, Caltrans Deputy Directive 64-R-1, and the California Complete Streets Act
of 2008. The goal is to develop an effective policy and procedures that ensure projects sponsored
by, or funded by, VTA include high-quality design elements that support all roadway users.
DISCUSSION:
Complete Streets are streets that are planned, designed, built and maintained for the safe mobility
of all roadway users including pedestrians, bicyclists, transit riders, transit operators, motorists,
movers of commercial goods, and people of all ages and abilities. Not all roadways are
candidates to become Complete Streets; however, all street design can benefit from applying
Compete Streets design principles.
VTA Implementation of Complete Streets
VTA has supported Complete Streets for many years. VTA’s Board of Directors adopted a
multi-modal design policy in January 2009 that directed staff to follow the approach to project
design exemplified in the redesign of the US 101/Tully interchange. VTA’s Community Design
and Transportation Manual and Bicycle Technical Guidelines provide Member Agencies with
best practices for Complete Streets design. VTA’s Complete Streets Program has brought
17
educational workshops to Member Agency staff. VTA is currently leading Complete Streets
design studies for three multi-jurisdictional corridors that include segments in Milpitas, Santa
Clara, San Jose, Sunnyvale, and Santa Clara County.
To further support these efforts, VTA is developing a Complete Streets design policy that will
accomplish the following:
1) Define how VTA will integrate Complete Streets into all aspects of project delivery, and
2) Define the Complete Streets requirements for recipients of funding administered by VTA,
including the new transportation sales tax measure funding.
Local Implementation of Complete Streets
All Member Agencies support Complete Streets concepts in some way. To be eligible for One
Bay Area Grant (OBAG) funding, Member Agencies have either adopted a resolution
establishing Complete Streets policies or have updated their General Plan’s Circulation Element
to comply with the California Complete Streets Act of 2008, or both. Attachment A shows each
Member Agency’s approach to OBAG Complete Streets compliance. In addition, many Member
Agencies have additional policies or practices that support Complete Streets.
Schedule
VTA will develop the policy through the remainder of 2016, with a proposed completion date of
early 2017. A detailed schedule is provided as Attachment B.
Stakeholder Coordination
To develop VTA’s Complete Streets Policy, VTA will engage the Technical Advisory
Committee (TAC) and its working groups, the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee, and
advocacy organizations with an interest in Complete Streets. In June and August 2016, VTA
staff discussed the policy development and timeline with representatives of various
transportation advocacy organizations and the TAC working groups: Capital Improvement
Program (CIP) Working Group, the System Operations and Management (SOM) Working
Group, the Land Use and Transportation Integration (LUTI) Working Group.
Policy Elements
As noted above, the Complete Streets Policy will apply to VTA’s capital project delivery and
programming activities. Several broad topics are being considered for inclusion in the policy:
 Complete Streets requirements for funding programmed by VTA, including the
transportation sales tax measure on the November 2016 ballot.
 Policy and procedures for VTA staff to follow for VTA-sponsored capital projects.
 Coordination between VTA Transit Operations and Member Agencies on projects that have
the potential to impact transit.
 Endorsement of National Association of City Transportation Officials and other Complete
Page 2 of 3
17
Streets guidelines.
 Codifying procedures that VTA already follows that fall under the Complete Streets
umbrella.
In developing the policy, VTA will be seeking stakeholder input on potential elements of the
policy, including:
 Definition of Complete Streets.
 Context sensitive approach (i.e., design elements based on street type and function).
 Exemptions for certain types of projects (e.g. freeway mainline projects).
 Integration into project delivery milestones.
 Local agency processes for delivering Complete Streets.
 MTC’s Complete Streets checklist requirements.
 Complete Streets checklist for local funding.
 Public review process (e.g. BPAC, public meetings).
 Funding programs where the policy should/could apply.
 Process for monitoring Complete Streets compliance.
 Other case-by-case exemptions (e.g. cost prohibitive).
NEXT STEPS:
VTA will continue to work with the Technical Advisory Committee, its working groups, and
advocacy organizations to develop the policy. VTA will present draft policy language to VTA
committees in December 2016. The final policy language will be presented to the Board of
Directors for adoption in early 2017.
Prepared By: Adam Paranial
Memo No. 5601
Page 3 of 3
17.a
ATTACHMENT A: Method for Complying with MTC’s Complete Streets OBAG Requirements
Note: All Member Agencies are currently compliant, either through adopting a resolution with MTC’s required elements or by
updating the Circulation Element of their general plan after 1/1/2010, or both.
Method of Compliance with OBAG CS
MTC-Required Elements of Resolution1
Implementation
X
X
X
X
X
X
X2
8/19/2014
Yes
1/15/2013
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
12/1/2014
No
Yes
11/5/2012
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
2002
Yes
12/8/2015
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Yes
6/18/2015
Yes
1/24/2013
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Los Gatos
Yes
1/7/2011
No
Milpitas
Yes
1/15/2013
No
11/30/2015
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
10/17/2012
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X2
Campbell
Yes
Cupertino
Yes
Gilroy
No
Los Altos
No
Los Altos Hills
Monte Sereno
Yes
Morgan Hill
Yes
2/24/2010
No
Mountain
View
Yes
7/12/2012
No
Palo Alto
No
San Jose
Yes
11/1/2011
No
Santa Clara
Yes
11/16/2010
No
Saratoga
Yes
11/17/2010
Yes
Sunnyvale
Yes
7/26/2011
No
Yes
Street Network/
Connectivity
X
No
All
Projects/Phases
Consultation w/
Bike Ped Plans
X
Santa Clara
County
CS in all
Departments
11/6/2012
Yes/No
Yes
Jurisdiction
Context Sensitive
Exemption
Process
Serve all Users
Complete Streets
Principles
Adoption Date of
Resolution/
Ordinance
Complete Streets
Resolution
Yes/No
Date of CE update
(must be after
1/1/2010 to be
compliant)
General Plan CS
Update
BPAC
Consultation
Collect & Evaluate
Data
(All Member Agencies are compliant)
Written finding.
Signed by PW
Director or
equivalent.
Available for
public review.
11/20/2012
1/ http://mtc.ca.gov/sites/default/files/OBAG%202%20Complete%20Streets%20Resolution.pdf
2/ Santa Clara County and Saratoga have broadened exemption language to provide more flexibility.
4
17.b
ATTACHMENT B: Schedule for VTA Complete Streets Policy Development
Step 1: Introduce Policy Development, Understand Concerns, Expectations of Stakeholders
Jul/Aug 2016 Introduce Complete Streets Policy development to stakeholders
Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Working Group
Systems & Operations Management (SOM) Working Group
Land Use and Transportation Integration (LUTI) Working Group
Advocacy organizations
Sep 2016
Introduce policy development at VTA committees as discussion item
Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC)
Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)
Policy Advisory Committee (PAC)
Congestion Management Program & Planning Committee (CMPP)
Step 2: Develop Draft Policy with Input from Stakeholders
Sept 2016
Discuss proposed policy elements with stakeholders
CIP Working Group
SOM Working Group
Oct/Nov 2016 Draft policy language (rev #1) to stakeholders for review and comment
CIP Working Group
SOM Working Group
LUTI Working Group
Oct/Nov 2016 Joint LUTI, SOM Working Group meeting to discuss CS (proposed)
Selected Member Agencies to present their implementation process for CS, Discussion of
challenges to CS implementation process
Dec 2016
Draft policy language (rev #2) for review/comment to VTA Committees
BPAC
TAC
PAC
CMPP
Step 3: Present and Adopt Final Policy
Feb/Mar 2017 Final policy brought for adoption
BPAC, TAC, PAC
CMPP
VTA Board of Directors
5
18
Date:
Current Meeting:
Board Meeting:
August 24, 2016
September 7, 2016
N/A
BOARD MEMORANDUM
TO:
THROUGH:
FROM:
Board Secretary, Elaine Baltao
SUBJECT:
Review Current Citizens Advisory Committee Membership Structure
BACKGROUND:
The Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) is a 17-member committee representing the residents
of the various city/county groupings of the VTA Board of Directors, as well as specified
community stakeholder groups with an interest in transportation. The CAC advises the Board
and VTA administration on issues impacting the communities and organizations they represent.
It also serves in two other functions: (1) as the ballot-specified Citizens Watchdog Committee for
the 2000 Measure A Transit Improvement Program; and (2) as the 2008 Measure D ballotspecified advisory body that reviews and comments on VTA’s comprehensive transit program as
part of the countywide transportation plan. The CAC’s mission statement is:
The VTA CAC provides a communication channel for transportation stakeholders and
residents of the county by providing input, analysis, perspective and timely
recommendations prior to VTA Board of Director action on transportation policy issues
and initiatives.
Advisory committee bylaws govern the proceedings of the committee and its meetings and must
be consistent with the VTA Administrative Code. All amendments to advisory committee
bylaws require VTA Board of Directors approval.
The VTA Administrative Code establishes the membership structure of the CAC. Currently, 14
of the 17 positions are directly appointed by a defined entity representing a specific stakeholder
group, such as the Chambers of Commerce Coalition of Santa Clara County. Conversely, three
positions, all in the Community Interests section, do not have a defined appointing authority and
instead are appointed by VTA’s Administration & Finance Committee from applications or
nominations received at-large (the current CAC membership roster with members’ affiliation is
shown on Attachment A).
18
DISCUSSION:
Several months ago the Committee established the ad hoc Membership Structure Subcommittee.
Its purpose was to review the existing CAC membership structure to determine if it is optimally
configured to best represent the Board of Directors and citizens of Santa Clara County. The
members of the subcommittee are:




Noel Tebo
Chairperson Herman Wadler
Stephen Blaylock
Marty Schulter
The Subcommittee will be sharing and discussing its initial findings at the September 2016 CAC
meeting while also gathering input and direction from the Committee.
Any proposed changed to the CAC membership structure would require future approval by the
VTA Board of Directors.
Prepared By: Stephen Flynn, Advisory Committee Coordinator
Memo No. 5542
Page 2 of 2
18.a
and
2000 MEASURE A WATCHDOG COMMITTEE
SEPTEMBER 1, 2016 MEMBERSHIP ROSTER
Membership: 17
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Quorum: 9
Represents
Appointing Authority
CITY & COUNTY GROUPINGS
San Jose
City of San Jose
San Jose
City of San Jose
North County
North County Cities
West Valley
West Valley Cities
South County
South County Cities
Santa Clara County
County of Santa Clara
BUSINESS & LABOR
Silicon Valley Leadership Group Silicon Valley Leadership Group
8.
Building Industries
9.
Organized Labor
10.
Chamber of Commerce
11.
Commercial Real Estate
12.
13.
COMMUNITY INTERESTS
Senior Citizens
Bicyclists & Pedestrians
14.
Disabled Community
15.
16.
17.
Environmentalists
Disabled Persons
Mass Transit Users
Homebuilders Association of
Northern California
South Bay AFL-CIO Labor
Council
Santa Clara County Chambers of
Commerce Coalition
Building Owners and Managers
Association Silicon Valley
Sourcewise
VTA Bicycle & Pedestrian
Advisory Committee
VTA Committee for Transit
Accessibility
At-large (VTA A&F Committee)
Vacancies: 1
Current Representative
Noel Tebo
Charlotte B. Powers
John Melton
Clinton W. Brownley
Connie Rogers
Roberta H. Hughan
Vacant (formerly Bena
Chang)
Ray Hashimoto
Lucas Ramirez
William Hadaya
Sharon Fredlund
Stephen Schmoll
Herman H. Wadler
Aaron Morrow
Chris C. Elias
Martin B. Schulter
Stephen C. Blaylock
19
Date:
Current Meeting:
Board Meeting:
August 29, 2016
September 7, 2016
N/A
BOARD MEMORANDUM
TO:
THROUGH:
FROM:
Advisory Committee Coordinator, Stephen Flynn
SUBJECT:
2000 Measure A Citizens Watchdog Committee FY 2015 Annual Report and
Publication Strategy
ACTION ITEM
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve the 2000 Measure A Citizens Watchdog Committee’s Annual Report on Fiscal Year
2015 and the recommended publication strategy.
BACKGROUND:
In November 2000, Santa Clara County voters approved Measure A, a 30-year half cent sales tax
devoted to enhancing the county’s public transit system. The Measure A ballot specified that,
among other duties, the Citizens Watchdog Committee (CWC) is responsible for reviewing all
2000 Measure A expenditures, having an audit conducted each fiscal year by an independent
auditor, holding public hearings and issuing reports at least annually basis to inform county
residents how the funds are being spent, and publishing the results of the independent audit and
the annual report in local newspapers.
In fulfillment of its ballot-defined responsibilities, for the subject period of FY 2015 (July 1,
2014 - June 30, 2015) the CWC:
 Completed its review of 2000 Measure A expenditures.
 Had an independent compliance audit conducted of 2000 Measure A financial statements
and records and evaluated the results.
19
 Published in local newspapers the results of the independent audit and the notice
announcing the public hearing. These items were published during late August/early
September 2016 as a combined notice in 23 general circulation newspapers in VTA’s
service area, including several foreign language ones that satisfy Title VI requirements. In
addition, they were also prominently posted on VTA’s website, posted on social media
sites, announced via email to GovDelivery subscribers and past attendees of VTA public
meetings and forums, and distributed in flier format to libraries and other public buildings
throughout Santa Clara County.
 Will be conducting a public hearing on September 1, 2016 in the Auditorium of VTA’s
River Oaks Administration Complex to receive input from the community on 2000
Measure A Program expenditures, the results of the annual independent audit, and on
Measure A Program reports.
Two steps will remain to complete the process for FY 2015: (1) complete development of the
CWC Annual Report; and (2) publish the Committee’s finding on whether 2000 Measure A
funds were spent in accordance with the intent of the ballot.
DISCUSSION:
To guide development of both the CWC’s combination Public Hearing/Audit Results Notice and
its Annual Report, the Committee has previously empanelled a subcommittee comprised of
members Charlotte Powers and Ray Hashimoto and Vice Chairperson Sharon Fredlund.
The Subcommittee focused on the following goals for the FY 2015 Annual Report:
 Have the reports be eye-catching.
 Show the success of Measure A funds used in relation to the mandates of the measure.
 Emphasize the benefit/positive impact to citizens and local communities of each Measure
A project completed and that achieved significant milestones during the period.
 Utilize the three separate version format developed for the FY14 reports that proved very
successful. The tri-version format allows the reader to choose the topic area focused on
and the level-of-detail that best suits their needs. The three versions are: (A) abbreviated
version for publication in local newspapers; (B) summary report that focuses on benefits
and key achievements; and (C) comprehensive report for placement on VTA’s website.
Newspaper (abbreviated)
This version (Attachment A) is for publication in local newspapers. To minimize ad size and
thus expense, it contains no photos and the text includes primarily the information required by
the ballot, most importantly the Committee’s conclusion on how Measure A funds were spent
during the period. However, it mirrors the revised format developed for FY14 that is more eyecatching, utilizing extensive use of bullets as well as a pie chart on Measure A expenditures
during the period. The report also includes a very brief overview of Measure A and the CWC’s
ballot-defined duties. It also refers the reader to VTA’s website for more detailed CWC reports
and other 2000 Measure A Transportation Improvement Program information as well as
instructions on where printed copies of select Measure A reports are available.
Page 2 of 5
19
Summary Report on Benefits and Key Achievements
This version (Attachment B) is for placement on VTA’s website as well as for distribution to
libraries and other public buildings throughout the county. It includes slightly expanded
background and explanation compared to the newspaper version, but differs significantly in its
extensive use of project photos and graphics to help the reader better visualize and understand
the enormity, complexity and benefits of Measure A projects. The main theme is how key
accomplishments achieved during the period improve the lives of residents, workers, commuters
and employers in Santa Clara County. As with all versions of the CWC Annual Report, this
version states the Committee’s conclusion on whether during the period 2000 Measure A tax
dollars were spent in accordance with the intent of the measure. The report also lists the CWC
membership, is signed by the CWC chairperson, and directs the reader to the comprehensive
version of the report on VTA’s website for additional information.
Since this version is also intended for hardcopy distribution to public locations, it was
specifically limited to a maximum of two pages (front and back), with the main content being on
the first page. This approach saves printing costs and administrative burden while allowing the
report to be tri-folded mechanically instead of by hand.
As a reminder, at its August 2016 meeting the CWC authorized to Subcommittee to approve the
final version of this report so, as suggested by Vice Chairperson Fredlund, it could be posted to
the VTA website in advance of and distributed at the CWC’s public hearing on September 7th,
2016.
Comprehensive Version
Attachment C is the comprehensive version for placement on VTA’s website. It includes
slightly expanded background and explanation compared to the summary and newspaper
versions. As with the other two versions, this version indicates the Committee’s conclusion on
the use during the subject period of 2000 Measure A tax dollars. The report also includes the
listing of CWC membership and is signed by the CWC chairperson.
However, to simplify development of the report while expanding the use of project photos and
graphs to help the reader comprehend the enormity and complexity of Measure A projects, this
version utilizes a brief introductory cover letter from the CWC chairperson attached to report
from the CWC’s independent compliance auditor, which also includes the detailed project pages
describing the current status of 2000 Measure A projects.
PUBLICATION STRATEGY
The publication strategy determines in which general circulation newspapers in VTA’s service
area and on approximately which dates the abbreviated version of the Annual Report will be
published. It also includes alternate strategies for informing the public.
Page 3 of 5
19
Attachment D shows a recommended publication strategy for the CWC Annual Report on
FY 2015. It mirrors in part the strategy used for publishing the late August/early September
2016 public hearing notice, which the Committee approved at its August 2016 meeting. This
plan primarily utilizes community and foreign-language newspapers to reach a wide and diverse
audience. As with all publication strategies for the CWC, this was developed with the input of
VTA’s Marketing Department staff, who have expertise on the pricing structures and circulation
patterns of local newspapers due to placing large volumes of VTA advertisements, public notices
and other similar items. Attachment D shows the costs for both single and multiple day ads
(“flights”) in each newspaper, as well as color costs versus standard black & white. For daily
newspapers, the strategy reflects the specific day(s) with the best balance of readership to cost.
As with the publication strategies for previous Annual Reports, this one includes placing ads in a
broad spectrum of non-English language newspapers including: El Observador (Spanish); Viet
Nam (Vietnamese); Philippines Today (Tagalog); Korea Daily Times (Korean); and Sing Tao
(Chinese). Using these newspapers helps increase the distribution and availability of the report
by providing access and availability to non-English speaking members of the community. As
was done with the publication strategy for the combination public hearing notice and audit
results approved by the CWC in August, this publication strategy includes the cost of translating
the ads into the respective language of the associated newspaper. Translation and publication in
foreign language newspapers also satisfies federal Title VI requirements.
OTHER METHODS OF INFORMING THE PUBLIC
As it has done in past years, it is recommended the Committee utilize other cost-effective
methods for informing the public of its findings and the availability of its Annual Report, in
addition to the required publication in local newspapers. The CWC has continually investigated
new and innovative ways of sharing with the public its finding and Annual Report. Many of
these methods have also been used to notify the public on the CWC’s public hearing and the
results of its independent compliance audit. Some of these methods for distributing information
in addition to local newspapers and posting on the VTA website include:
 Requesting free online advertising from newspapers the CWC places advertisements in.
 Placing electronic ads on VTA’s Wi-Fi network Express buses and light rail vehicles.
 Including a summary in Take-One, the free quarterly informational pamphlet available on
VTA buses and light rail.
 Placing informational signs on VTA buses, light rail vehicles (LRV’s), bus stops and
shelters, light rail stations, Park & Rides, and other facilities.
 Distributing hard copies of the summary report (Benefits and Key Achievements) to
libraries, hospitals and other public buildings throughout Santa Clara County.
 Placing electronic ads on network sites such as Yahoo, Patch, Ad Taxi or the Bay Area
News Group.
 Posting notices VTA’s social networking channels, including Facebook and Twitter, as
well as sending email announcements to GovDelivery subscribers and past attendees of
VTA public meetings and forums.
 Posting a notice on public access channel CreaTV San Jose.
 Issuing a news release.
Page 4 of 5
19
 Using public service announcements (PSA) on local radio or TV stations, such as KLIV.
It should be noted that not all PSA’s are free. In fact, most are not.
 Providing to Mr. Roadshow, San Jose Mercury News columnist Gary Richards.
 Providing CWC members with the electronic file of the Annual Report as well as
hardcopies, both for distribution to their stakeholder groups, community, civic, charitable
and trade organizations, and friends and neighbors.
Most, but not all, of the listed methods are low or no-cost.
ALTERNATIVES:
The 2000 Measure A ballot requires that the Committee issue a report at least annually to inform
county residents on how funds are being spent, and publish its finding in local newspapers. The
Committee may accept, reject or modify as it sees fit the recommended versions of the Annual
Report or the recommended publication strategy.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Publication of the CWC Annual Report is paid from 2000 Measure A Transit Improvement
Program funds. Sufficient Measure A funds are currently available for this activity.
Prepared by: Stephen Flynn, Advisory Committee Coordinator
Memo No. 5490
Page 5 of 5
19.a
Newspaper Version of Annual Report
on FY15
WILL BE FORWARDED UNDER SEPARATE COVER
19.b
Summary Report on Benefits and Key
Achievements for FY15
19.c
Comprehensive Version of Annual Report on
FY 2015
19.d
Recommended Publication Strategy
20
Date:
Current Meeting:
Board Meeting:
August 22, 2016
September 7, 2016
N/A
BOARD MEMORANDUM
TO:
THROUGH:
FROM:
Advisory Committee Coordinator, Stephen Flynn
SUBJECT:
Conduct CWC Public Hearing
ACTION ITEM
RECOMMENDATION:
Conduct, as part of the September 7, 2016 Citizens Advisory Committee/Citizens Watchdog
Committee meeting, the required 2000 Measure A Citizens Watchdog Committee (CWC) public
hearing to receive input from the public on the Measure A Program, its expenditures, the results
of the CWC’s annual independent compliance audit, and on 2000 Measure A Program reports for
the period of FY 2015.
BACKGROUND:
In November 2000, Santa Clara County voters approved Measure A, a 30-year half cent sales tax
devoted to enhancing the county’s public transit system. The Measure A ballot specified that,
among other duties, the Citizens Watchdog Committee (CWC) must:
 Review all 2000 Measure A expenditures.
 Have an audit conducted each fiscal year by an independent auditor to ensure tax dollars
are being spent in accordance with the intent of this measure.
 Hold public hearings and issue reports “on at least an annual basis to inform Santa Clara
County residents how the funds are being spent.”
 Publish the results of the independent audit and the annual report in local newspapers.
20
DISCUSSION:
To fulfill its responsibility, at its August 2016 meeting the Citizens Watchdog Committee voted
to conduct its public hearing on FY 2015 (July 1, 2014 - June 30, 2015) 2000 Measure A
expenditures on Wednesday, September 7, 2016 at 6:00 p.m. in the VTA River Oaks
Auditorium.
The public hearing will be held in combination with the monthly Citizens Advisory Committee
(CAC)/CWC meeting. The hearing will begin time-specific at 6:00 p.m. The CAC/CWC
general meeting will begin at its normal 4:00 p.m. start time. If the CAC/CWC meeting is still
underway at 6:00 p.m., it will be paused to conduct the CWC public hearing, then resume at the
conclusion of the public hearing.
Purpose
The public hearing provides the public with the defined opportunity to share their views,
opinions, and concerns with the CWC on the 2000 Measure A Program expenditures, the results
of the annual independent audit, and on 2000 Measure A Program reports.
The CWC will combine the input received at the hearing with information and input received
from the independent compliance audit and other sources to render a conclusion on whether 2000
Measure A tax dollars are being spent in accordance with the intent of the measure.
Public Notice
 The public notice announcing the hearing was published twice in mid-to-late
August/early September 2016 in the following general circulation newspapers in VTA’s
service area:
The Metro
Sing Tao (Chinese)
El Observador (Spanish/Hispanic)
Viet Nam (Vietnamese)
Philippines Today (Tagalog)
Korea Daily Times (Korean)
Milpitas Post
Morgan Hill Times
Gilroy Dispatch
Santa Clara Weekly
Mountain View Voice
Palo Alto Weekly
Los Altos Town Crier
Evergreen Times
Silicon Valley Community Newspapers (Nine total: Almaden Resident; Cambrian
Resident, Campbell Reporter; Cupertino Courier, Los Gatos Weekly Times; Rose
Garden Resident, Saratoga News; Sunnyvale Sun; and Willow Glen Resident)
Page 2 of 4
20
 In addition, the public announcement was:
Posted on VTA’s website
Placed as a flash banner on the homepage of VTA’s website
Informational signs on VTA vehicles and facilities
Electronic postings on VTA Wi-Fi (Express Bus and light rail)
Posted on electronic media sites such as Ad Taxi
Distributed to libraries and other public buildings throughout Santa Clara County
Requested for free online advertising from the aforementioned general circulation
newspapers in VTA’s service area
Posted to Facebook and mentioned via Twitter
Announced via email to GovDelivery subscribers and to past attendees of VTA
public meetings and forums
Provided to Mr. Roadshow, San Jose Mercury News columnist Gary Richards
Provided to CWC members for distribution to their stakeholder groups,
community, civic, charitable and trade organizations, and friends and neighbors.
 The public notice specified the hearing time, location and purpose and how written
comments could be submitted. It also indicated that sign language services and
additional interpreter services would be provided with prior request. It further indicated
that detailed program information could be accessed both on VTA’s website and at
specified VTA facilities, libraries and other public facilities.
 The notice published in newspapers referred the public to VTA’s website for more
information. The detailed version on VTA’s website provided additional information and
explanation, including a brief history of the 2000 Measure A Program, a listing of the
projects contained in the ballot along with links to the detailed project status pages,
photographs or renderings of some of the projects, and a description of the CWC’s role,
responsibilities and limitations.
The Hearing Process
 The CWC chairperson formally opens the hearing, describing its purpose. At its
conclusion, the chairperson formally closes the hearing, at which time normal the
Committee resumes its normal business.
 The Committee receives input from the public at the hearing but does not debate nor
engage in extended discussion with speakers or other CWC members. Committee
members may ask brief questions to clarify a statement or issue. If readily available or
easily answered, the Committee or staff may provide brief answers to a speaker’s
question. All other questions will be referred to staff to provide a written response from
the Committee.
Page 3 of 4
20
 All speakers will be requested to fill out a blue speaker’s card and to verbally state their
name for the record. Speakers will be limited to providing comments on 2000 Measure A
Program-related issues only, and will be limited to two minutes unless the chairperson
deems that additional time is warranted.
Following the Hearing
 transcript of the proceedings prepared by a court reporter and an audio recording of the
hearing will be available to the public within a reasonable period following the hearing.
 The Committee will develop its conclusion on whether 2000 Measure A tax dollars are
being spent in accordance with the intent of the measure, which is then reflected in the
CWC’s Annual Report.
 The CWC’s finding will be published in local newspapers. This notice will also indicate
that the detailed Annual Report is available and how to access it on VTA’s website.
 The Committee will determine a publication strategy for informing the public of its
findings and the availability of its Annual Report, both via the required ads in local
newspapers as well as other methods such as informational posting on electronic media
sites, posting on social media including Facebook and Twitter, email announcements to
GovDelivery subscribers and past attendees of VTA public meetings and forums, etc.
ALTERNATIVES:
There is no alternative since the 2000 Measure A ballot mandates that the CWC hold a public
hearing at least annually.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no significant fiscal impact associated with conducting the CWC's required public
hearing.
Prepared by: Stephen Flynn, Advisory Committee Coordinator
Memo No. 5489
Page 4 of 4

Agenda - Amazon Web Services

Transcription

Similar documents

I`m helping to end MS by participating in the 2016 Jayman BUILT MS

The Board of Directors of Qatar Fuel (WOQOD) is pleased to invite

5 `S` Training Program at ABV-IIITM, Gwalior on 21.07.2016

4 star ALOE HOTEL, PAPHOS

loyola institute for ministry on-campus open house thursday, may 12

HALF OFF - Bavarian Inn

The Magic Wizard

Herald Sun - Fostering Connections

KMEA Standards Handout

2016 MW Alliance Raffle - Manitowish Waters Alliance LTD