Minutes - October 2, 2003

MEMBERS PRESENT: Mark Church (Chair), Joe Galligan, Rich Gordon, Michael Guingona (5:07p.m.), John Lee, Lee Panza, Ira Ruskin

BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: None

STAFF PRESENT: Michael Scanlon, Joan Cassman, David Miller, Howard Goode, Joe Hurley, Shahla Yazdy, Roger Contreras, Rita Haskin, Martha Martinez, Jennifer Buhr

Chairman Church called the meeting to order at 5:05 p.m. and Richard Napier led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag.

CONSENT CALENDAR

The Board unanimously approved the following items under the Consent Calendar:

1. Approval of Minutes of September 4, 2003

2. Adoption of Financial Statements, August 2003

PUBLIC COMMENT

None at this time.

CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE (CAC) REPORT

Larry Shaine reported:

• Noted the presence of Doris Maez, Pat Dixon and Alfred Moye in the audience.
• Ricardo Gomez and Stephanie Wiegold attended their first meeting as the newest CAC members.
• At the last meeting, Ian McAvoy, Deputy Chief of Development, made a presentation on Bus Rapid Transportation (BRT). The system is an express service that can move rapidly and can control stop lights. Currently, the system is in the early conceptual stages.
• David Cropper will be facilitating a study session in the fourth floor dining room on October 11 from 8 a.m. – 12 p.m. The objective of the session is to give the CAC a better understanding of Measure A projects so that the CAC may make more informed and educated decisions and recommendations to the Board. The session will include review of the preliminary priority list of projects from C/CAG. The session is open to the public.
• In regards to item 10a of the agenda, Authorization to allocate Measure A funds for the Route 92/Route 1 Half Moon Bay Improvement Projects in the City of Half Moon Bay, the CAC expressed regret and displeasure that they were not able to review the document and therefore do not have a recommendation for the Board.
• In regards to item 10b, Authorization to Amend Current Funding Agreements and Documents Required for the Authority to Advance Construction Funds to Caltrans for the 101 Auxiliary Lane Project Between Marsh and Ralston, the CAC strongly support and applaud the staff for innovative thinking.
• The CAC also strongly support item 10c, Approval of the Request for FY2004 Funding for the Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Program. The CAC feels that the TSM is an excellent manner of reducing congestion while providing a great value.
• Invited all members of the Board to attend the next CAC meeting, which is on November 4 at 4:30p.m.

CHAIRPERSON’S REPORT

No report at this time.

SAMTRANS LIAISON REPORT

The written report from the September 10, 2003 meeting was included within the packet.

JOINT POWERS BOARD REPORT

Michael J. Scanlon reported on the October 2, 2003 Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board meeting, as follows:

• A Resolution of Appreciation was presented to Maria Ayerdi for her service on the JPB since 1999. The appointment of Ms. Ayerdi as the Executive Director of the Transbay Terminal JPA necessitated her resignation.
• Key Caltrain Performance Statistics:
  1. August Average Weekday Ridership went from 741,661 to 685,813 riders, which is a 7.5 percent decrease.
  2. Year-to-Date Ridership was down 6.2 percent, from 28,630 riders to 26,858.
  3. Total Revenue was off 9.9 percent from $1.9 million to $1.7 million.
  4. On-Time Performance was 95 percent versus 96.6 percent from last August.
  5. Shuttle Ridership had an increase of .2 percent with 4,026 riders up from 4,017.
• In regard to the Gilroy line, the monthly pass sales were off 25 percent, which compares to about 10 percent systemwide. The 10-Ride ticket sales were off 32 percent, which compares to 13 percent systemwide.
• There were 32,000 riders, averaging over 4,000 per game, for the Caltrain Giants game service. During the weekend service there is just under 400 riders per game. The preference clearly points to the rail service.
• The APTA Annual Conference in Salt Lake City was a great success. One of the main topics being discussed at the APTA Annual Conference included the reauthorization of the Federal Transit Program, which expired on September 30. Staff is currently operating under a five-month extension that was approved by the Congress last week. The focus during the extension time is aimed at taking the message of public transportation to the Congress, specifically that there is a great need for another authorization program for transit.
• The Proof-of-Payment system began on September 22. The rollout appears to have been successful. The public was well informed and staff members were at all the stations to provide assistance.
• The walkout that was scheduled to take place tomorrow, Friday October 3, by Amtrak should not be taking place afterall. Some of the Unions, in an effort to call attention to the lack of funding and the proposed budget, were going to shut down service for one day. Fortunately, Amtrak management went into court and in an effort to get an injunction, the judge has indicated that he would like to review all documents and will not make a ruling until October 20. Therefore, there is an agreement between Amtrak management and the Union that there would not be any action until October 20.
• JPB is serving as the co-lead agency on the Caltrain Extension Project in San Francisco along with the City and County of San Francisco. The Environmental document was submitted to the Federal Transit Administration in September. The next step will be to certify the document. The Board agreed with the staff recommendation to hold a joint public hearing along with the Redevelopment Agency and the San Francisco Planning Commission. Following the meeting each agency could complete their individual certification process.
• The Transbay Terminal Joint Powers Authority has indicated a willingness to be the designated lead agency for project funding, design, real estate acquisition and construction. Such an arrangement will keep with the JPB’s own strategic planning and financial capacity.
• The Monthly Safety and Security Report was distributed.
• There were discussions on the San Bruno Grade Separation Project.
• The Board unanimously authorized the following actions:
  1. Approved the Annual Adoption of Investment Policy and Authorization to Invest Monies with the Local Agency Investment Fund.
  2. Approved an Increase to the FY2004 JPB Operating Budget by $82,400 to Account for Metropolitan Transportation Commission Section 5303 Grant Funding.
  3. Authorized the Purchase of Twelve Additional Ticket Vending Machines (TVM) with Ventek International, Inc at a cost of $800,000.
  4. Reaffirmed the Intention to Construct and Operate the Caltrain Central Equipment Maintenance and Operating Facility at the Lenzen Yard Site in San Jose.
  5. Authorized the GO Pass Pilot Program for 2004. The GO Pass is used by Stanford University and seven companies representing 11,876 employees.

Director Lee questioned whether there are any revenue estimates regarding the Proof-of-Payment implementation.

Mr. Scanlon responded that the revenue increase has been gradual. Before, people were able to ride multiple times if the conductor did not punch the ticket whereas now the ticket will expire after four hours. Staff ensures that revenue will increase because riders will not be able to use one ticket for multiple rides. Because there are added benefits there are hopes for additional ridership, which will increase revenue as well. Mr. Scanlon pointed out because of 13C labor protections, staff was able to operate each train consist with fewer on-board personnel meaning that the Baby Bullet service will be operated, which will be added service, with the same number of crews. Overall there are no exact numbers for revenue increases at this time.

Director Lee questioned whether the numbers would be available over time.

Mr. Scanlon commented that the revenue will be known but it will be hard to isolate and attribute the numbers specifically to Proof-of-Payment.

Director Lee requested to have the cost per train.

Director Galligan questioned whether the increase could be because riders will have to pay now whereas they used to be able to slide by.

Mr. Scanlon responded that the system in place now is an honor system that will be backed by enforcement and escalating fine structure, which will ensure that people will have to pay to ride.

Director Galligan questioned if there is any data on how many people are utilizing the Intermodal Station including how many passengers are transferring at Millbrae to use BART.

Mr. Scanlon commented that once a year, there is a systemwide check on Caltrain. Additionally, there are special checks being conducted on the platforms particularly because of BART. The Ticket-Vending Machines also are able to report on where and what kinds of tickets are being purchased. Over the past month, there has been an increase in riders coming southbound on Caltrain from Millbrae where they are transferring from BART, which is encouraging. Mr. Scanlon pointed out that since September 11, 2001 200,000 jobs have been lost in Silicon Valley, which inevitably reduced the number of commuters taking Caltrain southbound.

Director Lee questioned if anyone had been fined since the implementation of Proof-of-Payment.

Mr. Scanlon reported that no tickets have been issued yet.

Director Galligan questioned if there has been a loss of riders that may be driving to San Bruno to take BART.

Mr. Scanlon responded that if there were, it wouldn’t be a loss because the San Mateo County Transit District is a full partner.

Director Galligan questioned if overall transportation travel is up or down.

Mr. Scanlon responded that overall, transportation trips are down for the Bay Area. However, the total trips on transit are up compared to last year but there weren’t connections to BART then so it is not a linear comparison.

Director Galligan commented that since the airport is the largest employer and since BART goes right into the airport, he anticipated that a couple of thousand cars are off the freeway a day by the employees either coming from the south or north.

Mr. Scanlon agreed that the airport has been the largest employer in the past but there have been massive lay-offs. Additionally, some of the employers at the airport give parking as a benefit. BART can make an impact but there are currently no discounts for the airport employees but only the airline employees.

REPORT OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

• Howard Goode, Chief Development Officer, reported that there will be a community workshop on Thursday, October 23 in Daly City to discuss "Our Transportation Future" with the community. There are two other workshops that are being planned in Pacifica on November 20 and in Redwood City on January 24.
• Mr. Goode reported that there was a meeting with the Congestion Management and Air Quality Committee (CMAQ) of C/CAG. Director Guingona was also in attendance. On the agenda was the output of the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) to C/CAG with regard to candidate projects for a new Measure. In the aggregate, the list of potential projects comes to about $3.5 billion based on cost estimates. In contrast, the money that would be available with a new sales tax Measure would be about half the amount of $3.5 billion. Therefore there is a great task in dealing with what can and will be done. Subcommittees of C/CAG were asked to go through the potential projects and group them by priority of high, medium and low. It was this list that was forwarded to CMAQ Committee and was the focus of discussion at the meeting, which was earlier this week. There was concern regarding how the priorities had been arrived at. The list was sent back to the TAC for further work, particularly on being more explicit on the criteria that were utilized in determining the rankings of the projects. The discussions and concerns at the meeting represented a good illustration on what can be expected as the Measure moves forward.

Director Guingona commented that he was there to represent Daly City and its projects. He reported that it was never expected that the individual councilmembers that serve on the committee fully accept the rankings of the projects on the list that came from the TAC. The way in which people were conducting themselves in the meeting involved each city petitioning why they thought their projects were more important and the discussion evolved into what criteria was used in ranking the projects. Director Guingona commented that the people are losing the regional aspect of Measure A and commented that there will be reasons for why projects will pass in some cities versus others. Every question that was addressed to staff will be answered including which projects will be eligible for other funds. Director Guingona reported that no other projects will be added to the list.

Mr. Scanlon, in regard to the update of Measure A, stated that the comments of Mr. Goode and Director Guingona refer strictly to the technical track and Mr. Scanlon commented that responses have not been received from all the cities yet. There is a concurrent track that includes polling of those who are advocating for the Measure and citizens at large. There will need to be a blending of both tracks because the only way the Measure will pass is if two-thirds of the voters approve it.

Director Lee commented that although local cities want to identify projects within their areas it is important to remember that this is a regional issue.

Director Panza questioned what the focus of the three workshops will be.

Rita Haskin, Chief Communications Officer, responded that the workshops are a part of the outreach and education process. The purpose of the workshop is to let people know what the TA has done with the current Measure A money, what projects are up for consideration and have the attendees rank the project and have them put $1.5 billion (non-spendable) into what they think is most important. They would rank, within categories, which projects deserve the money. The results will aid in the process of determining what percentage of money a project will receive.

Director Panza questioned what efforts are being done to ensure a high number of people attending these workshops.

Ms. Haskin commented that staff is working with an outside firm who has developed mailing lists for North County, South County and Coastside. Just for North County there are at least 2,500 people on the mailing list. Save the Date cards as well as invitations will be sent out, newspaper ads will be run and there will be announcements at City Council meetings, which will then be broadcast out to the residents. A news release will also be done.

Director Panza commented that the date for the Daly City workshop conflicts with a Council workshop.

Mr. Scanlon reported that the date will be changed due to other conflicting scheduled events.

FINANCE

a) Authorization to Allocate Additional Measure A Funds for the Route 92/Route 1 Half Moon Bay Improvements Project in the City of Half Moon Bay

Mr. Goode reported the City has been working cooperatively with Caltrans and the Authority on this project over the past several years and despite many setbacks, has been able to reach closure with the project.

Shahla Yazdy, Engineer, reported this project proposes to widen State Route 92 from two to four lanes from Main Street to 290 meter east, along Route 92, with a taper to the existing two-lane highway facility. In addition the project proposes to widen North Main Street to add bike lanes, widening Route 1 at the Route 92/1 intersection to accommodate a second left turn lane going eastbound and adding a westbound right turn lane on Route 92 to northbound Main Street, street lighting, landscaping, traffic signal modifications, and a right turn lane from eastbound 92 to Main Street.

Joe Hurley, Director of Transportation Authority Program, reported that after several meetings with Caltrans, Transportation Authority staff and the City of Half Moon Bay, the unresolved issues of the project were resolved and all parties came to an agreement on July 25, 2003, which was a self-imposed deadline proposed by the City to resolve all design issues in order to avoid the loss of project funds. The project has increased for a total of $13.5 million from the $9.28 million originally included in the Project Report. Project elements in question included the right-turn lane at westbound Route 92 and North Main Street and the additional cost for undergrounding the utilities rather than relocating. Staff recommends that the Authority allocate an additional cost of $3.97 million contingent on the City securing the additional $925,000.

Mr. Hurley also reported that in December 2001, the Authority and the City of Half Moon Bay entered into a Fund Exchange Agreement in order to preserve $535,000 in Federal STP funds granted to the City which were due to expire. The Agreement stated that the money would be used on the 101 Auxiliary Lane Project and credited against the Transportation Authority obligation for that project. Staff recommends that the Board approve the additional allocation of $3,297,000 to the City of Half Moon Bay for this project, contingent upon the City allocating $925,000 for the project, and also to release the Authority of the obligation associated with the Fund Exchange Agreement.

Director Galligan questioned where the additional $3.3 million would be coming from and whether other projects would now be delayed.

Mr. Hurley responded that the money is not specifically earmarked for another project. The money is from the Streets and Highways component of the Transportation Authority.

Director Panza questioned why Half Moon Bay was not going to cover the full $1.9 million for the Route 92 to Main Street right-turn lane and the undergrounding of the utilities.

Mr. Hurley clarified that the total being asked of Half Moon Bay is $1.9 million. Half Moon Bay has already committed $1.03 million and now they are being asked for an additional $925,000.

Mr. Goode reported that the $925,000 will cover part of the cost for the items. There has always been an expectation that the City would pay for those items and at this time there is a more accurate estimate, which is a higher amount than was originally expected.

Mr. Goode clarified that the cost presented to the Board tonight is different from last week’s staff report because of the estimate of the utilities relocation.

Dan Pincetich, Half Moon Bay City Manager, reported that the additional requirement of $950,000 was reviewed at a special council meeting and the money would be easily budgeted with other means that the City has available despite that fact that the Council would like to have less cost for the City.

Jim Grady, City Councilmember of Half Moon Bay, reported that Route 92 has been a project that has been looked in for a long time. Over the last year, Half Moon Bay has been working very closely with Caltrans and the result is a project that meets the needs of the County, Caltrans and the City, as well as the TA. Route 92 and Route 1 are the gateways to the Coast from San Mateo County and are often congested. The City Council unanimously adopted this project and Mr. Grady asked for the support of the Board. Mr. Grady also stated that over the past year the project has been brought down from eight lanes wide to six so the $3 million is not anywhere near the amount that would be necessary for the original project of eight lanes.

Director Galligan questioned whether there were some ill feelings from the Half Moon Bay City Council regarding the direction of making the 35/92 intersection safer.

Mr. Grady responded that he was unaware of any ill feelings for the project and commented that the Council wants to be able to provide input and be able to review the EIR related to the project, which is still in the process of being developed therefore there hasn’t been any input to date.

Mr. Goode clarified that there are two different segments. One includes the Climbing Lane project, which Caltrans is the lead on, between 280 and Route 35. The other involves the Curve Correction Project, which is just east of Half Moon Bay. The Caltrans lead project, on this side of the hill, has been through the public part of the environmental process and approval is pending with the Federal Highway Administration. In regards to the Curve Correction Project, the EIR has gone through the public comment process but hasn’t been finalized.

Mr. Galligan expressed concern regarding the safety of the intersection.

Mr. Scanlon commented in regard to Larry Shaine’s report and apologized to the CAC for not having the opportunity to review the report since it was not finalized before their meeting.

The motion to allocate the additional $3,947,000 in Measure A funds for the Route 92/Route 1 Half Moon Bay Improvements Project contingent upon Half Moon Bay increasing their project contribution from $1.03 million to $1.955 million and agreeing to discharge the Authority from its separate contractual obligation to pay $535,000 to the City was adopted unanimously, by roll call, and resolution 2003-18 was adopted.

b) Authorization for the Executive Director to Amend Current Funding Agreements and Documents Required for the Authority to Advance Construction Funds to Caltrans for the 101 Auxiliary Lane Project between Marsh and Ralston

Mr. Hurley reported that at a previous meeting there was a report that notifications had been sent out to the contractors indicating that because of the budget impasse they weren’t going to be able to pay state funds to the contractors after July 20. Staff raised concern and tried to deal with the crisis to allow the project to move forward because there were time sensitive components of the project that would have significant effects on the completion as well as costs associated to the delay of the project. Fortunately, the budget passed and the immediate need to address the issue subsided. However, staff has been made aware that there are going to be two additional spikes as far as unavailability of state money. One is going to occur in November and the other will occur in March. Therefore, staff proposes to put a plan in place to deal with such a spike so that the construction of the 101 Auxiliary Lane Project is allowed to move forward. The specific terms and conditions of the advancement will be worked out but at no time will exceed what has previously been approved for this particular project.

Director Panza questioned what the timing for the amendment is and wondered if the final agreement would be coming back to the Board.

Mr. Hurley responded that the Board would be giving the authority to the Executive Director to negotiate the specific terms and conditions.

David Miller, Legal Counsel, commented that the agreement would be subject to a cap and there would be no more total money allocated than what has already been approved. Basically it would be a set of cashflow set of controls that would be delegated to the Executive Director to manage.

Director Panza questioned whether interest would be accrued if the dispersing was ahead of schedule.

Mr. Miller commented that in order to keep the project going and avoiding any delays the Authority is essentially advancing funds interest free, subject to the cap of the amount of funds authorized.

Director Panza commented that he is concerned with setting a precedent with Caltrans.

Mr. Scanlon reported that there is already something under California law where certain contractors do automatically get some kind of loan if they are willing to continue working.

Mr. Goode commented that if a contractor is under state contract for a highway project and the state is unable to pay their invoices, if the contractor is willing to work and carry the invoices then the state is required, by state law, to pay interest when the payments are made. Mr. Goode reported if the amendment is implemented, there would be advancements of the Authority’s share earlier than what would have otherwise been the case. At the end of the project, the state would have to pay 100 percent of the bills and the Authority wouldn’t be paying any because the money would have already been utilized.

Director Lee commented that this is a critical project in process and the TA’s exposure is very minor and it is essential not to slow down or stop the project at this point.

The motion to authorize the Executive Director to amend the current funding agreements and documents required for the Authority to advance construction funds to Caltrans for the 101 Auxiliary Lane Project between Marsh Road and Ralston Avenue passed unanimously, by roll call, and resolution 2003-16 was adopted.

c) Approval of the Request for FY2004 Funding for the Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Program for a Total Amount of $392,320

Mr. Goode reported that this report is a follow-through action item on an element in the annual budget, which is to allocate TSM money in the Measure to the Peninsula Traffic Congestion Relief Alliance and to the City of Menlo Park.

Christine Maley-Grubl, Executive Director of the Alliance, handed out an informational report pertaining to the FY 2002-2003 accomplishments and FY 2003-2004 goals of the Peninsula Traffic Congestions Relief Alliance.

The motion to approve the request for FY 2004 funding for the Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Program passed unanimously, by roll call, and resolution 2003-17 was adopted.

REQUESTS FROM THE AUTHORITY

None at this time.

REPORT FROM LEGAL COUNSEL

None at this time.

WRITTEN COMMUNICATION TO AUTHORITY

The communications packets were distributed to the Board members.

DATE/TIME OF NEXT MEETING:

Thursday, November 6, 2003, 5:00 p.m. at the SamTrans Administrative Building, 1250 San Carlos Avenue, San Carlos, CA 94070

ADJOURNED: 6:30p.m.