san joaquin valley regional policy council

Chair Supervisor Allen Ishida Tulare County Vice-Chair Mayor Robert Poythress City of Madera

Fresno Council of Governments Kern Council of Governments

Kings County Association of Governments Madera County Transportation Commission Merced County Association of Governments San Joaquin Council of Governments Stanislaus Council Of Governments Tulare County Association of Governments San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District

San Joaquin Valley Regional Policy Council

c/o Madera County Transportation Commission – 2001 Howard Road, Suite 201 – Madera, CA 93637

Phone: 559-675-0721 – FAX: 559-675-9328

Meeting Agenda Friday, June 22, 2012

Time: 10:00 a.m.

Fresno Council of Governments Sequoia Room

2035 Tulare Street, Suite 201 Fresno, California 93721

Toll Free Number: 1-800-325-1307

Participant Code: 243245

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

1. March 23, 2012 Regional Policy Council Meeting (enclosure)

GUEST SPEAKER

2. Dorene D’Adamo, California Air Resources Board Member will Address and Discuss Green House Gas Emission (SB 375) Targets and Implications for the San Joaquin Valley.

DISCUSSION/ACTION ITEMS . 3. Federal Transportation Reauthorization Bill P. Taylor Receive Update

4. Short Haul Rail/SB 325 JPA (enclosure) T. Smalley Receive Update and Approve Draft JPA Enabling Documents 5. Valley Voice Washington D.C. C. Malekos September 12-13, 2012 (enclosure) Approve Federal Legislative Priorities 6. Interregional Passenger Rail Act of 2012 (AB 1779) (enclosures) D. Leavitt

Receive Update and Direct Staff to Develop a Written Policy Position in Support of Act

7. Valleywide FY 2012-13 Overall Work Program (enclosure) M. Sigala Approve INFORMATIONAL ITEMS The following items are for informational purposes and require no action or vote. A member of the public or Regional Policy Council member may request that any informational item be “pulled” for further discussion. 8. California Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley M. Dozier 9. High Speed Rail HSR Staff 10. Blueprint R. Terry 11. Proposition 84 R. Terry 12. SJV Interregional Goods Movement M. Sigala 13. SJV Regional Energy Planning M. Sigala 14. Fall Policy Conference, 2012 T. King 15. Updated Meeting Calendar for FY 2012-13 (enclosure) M. Sigala 16. Peer-to-Peer Exchange on Rural/Urban Connections R. Terry OTHER ITEMS 17. Executive Director’s Report P. Taylor 18. Member Comments 19. Public Presentation for Items Not on Agenda. This portion of the meeting is reserved for

persons wishing to address the Committee on items within its jurisdiction but NOT on this agenda. Unscheduled comments may be limited to 3 minutes. Note: The general public may comment on listed agenda items as they are considered.

Next Policy Council Meeting: Friday, October 12, 2012 (Lemoore)

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Accommodations The Fresno Council of Governments offices and restrooms are ADA accessible. Representatives or individuals with disabilities should contact the Fresno Council of Governments at (559) 233-4148, at least 3 days in advance, to request auxiliary aids and/or translation services necessary to participate in the public meeting.

INFORMATIONAL ITEMS 8. California Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley M. Dozier SJV Housing Collaborative Affordable Housing Summit: On May 22, the SJVHC held an inaugural Affordable Housing Summit in Fresno. The collaborative hopes to serve as an advocate for affordable housing and is seeking regional solutions in the absence of RDAs through support for SB 1220 and other means. The SJVHC is a non-profit administered by the California Partnership for the SJV. Smart Valley Places Mid Flight Convention: A smart growth conference was held May 31, in Modesto in partnership with the Blueprint Integration project. The event was well attended and provided technical breakout sessions that focused on a variety of sustainable planning topics. California Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley Board Meeting: The next Partnership board meeting will be in held in September 2012 (location TBD). San Joaquin Valley Regional Broadband Consortium: The SJVRBC will be holding its quarterly meeting in July at the Tulare County Office of Education. As part of the grant, the consortium is developing resources that can be used to integrate broadband infrastructure into local and regional sustainable planning activities. 9. High Speed Rail – update not provided 10. Blueprint R. Terry The final report for the San Joaquin Valley Demographic Forecast Study 2010-2050 has been submitted by the Planning Center (consultant), a planning/economics consultant firm based in Southern California. The report was funded by the fourth year San Joaquin Valley Blueprint grant. The results of the study have been used as input to the San Joaquin Valley Housing Market Analysis Study and the San Joaquin Valley Fiscal Analysis Tool project, which are also funded by the Blueprint grant. The forecasts are for each of the eight counties in the San Joaquin Valley and include projections of population, households, housing units, income, ages and race/ethnicity. The study, in its entirety, can be found at http://valleyblueprint.org/san-joaquin-valley-demographic-forecast.html

A meeting attended by representatives from each of the eight valley MPOs, The Planning Center, DOF, HCD, ARB, Caltrans Headquarters and Districts 6 and 10, SJV Air Pollution Control District, the MPO valleywide coordinator and the UOP Business Forecasting Center, was held on 5/11/12. The purpose of the meeting was to (1) make State agencies aware of the San Joaquin Valley Demographic Forecast study, (2) give the opportunity for both The Planning Center and DOF to explain their projection methodologies and (3) provide an opportunity for dialogue between the Valley COGs and State agencies regarding transportation planning and SB 375 activities.

The San Joaquin Valley Market Study for Higher Density Residential Housing, which officially kicked-off April 3, is approaching completion; utilizing the demographic projections provided by the Demographic Forecast Study completed in April of 2012, the Concord Group (consultant) will provide analysis of housing demand, existing and projected stock, and consumer preferences to determine the market need/desire for units throughout the valley. Modeling specific to each metro area, city, county and additional sub-geographies as identified became available in draft form in late May 2012, with final figures and reporting scheduled to be available in mid-June 2012.

11. Proposition 84 R. Terry (Prop 84 Round 1) Blueprint Integration (BPI) outreach and circuit planning activities to valley cities with populations under 50,000 continues, and is scheduled to provide assistance to interested cities through January 2013. Completed tasks undertaken as part of this process will be posted on the Toolkit website (which is also a Blueprint funded on-going project) for utilization by other agencies with similar needs/interests. In addition, the BPI and Smart Valley Places projects held a joint convention on May 31, 2012 at the Modesto Centre Plaza to provide for additional outreach, networking and discussion opportunities for interested individuals on the topics of Blueprint Integration and development in the Valley. The convention was attended by approximately 200 individuals from all over the valley and received very positive feedback regarding the breakout sessions and topics covered. Caltrans was instrumental in providing financial support for the convention. This activity acted as the first of two conventions to be held during the Blueprint Integration project period. A date for the second convention has yet to be determined. (Prop 84 Round 2) On May 10, 2012, the Strategic Growth Council (SGC) unanimously approved SGC Staff’s recommendation for Proposition 84 Round 2 funding allocations. Fresno COG, on behalf of the eight (8) Valley MPOs, is a recipient of a $1,000,000 award for the San Joaquin Valley Greenprint, Modeling and SCS Completion Project. With this approval, a contract will now be sought to arrange grant funding. A copy of the May 10, 2012 SGC agenda and attachments can be found at http://www.sgc.ca.gov/meetings/20120510/. A Press Release announcing the award to the Fresno COG, on behalf of the eight (8) Valley MPOs can be found at http://fresnocog.org/media-or-press 12. Interregional Goods Movement Plan M. Sigala The San Joaquin Valley Interregional Goods Movement Plan is entering its 12 month and is approximately 50 percent complete. To date, an Economic and Demographic Profile, Importance of Goods Movement in the Valley, Commodity Flow Profile, Commodity Growth Profile, Industry Profiles, and The Community, Environmental, and Economic Impacts of Freight Movement segments of the final report have been completed as well as numerous stakeholder engagements. In July 2012, there will be two Prioritization Workshops in two Valley locations – Stockton and Visalia (north and south) as part of the Phase II of the project. Phase II is intended to identify and evaluate strategies for improving freight mobility, and identify strategies for mitigating the impacts of goods movement. At these public meetings, consultants will begin the process of gaining consensus regarding decision-making criteria, processes and initial project selection. The Goods Movement Plan is a critical component for assessing and determining major transportation projects for the San Joaquin Valley region. In addition, it is part of several other regional initiatives for promoting economic development and investment regionally, such as the SJV economic cluster analysis of the CA Partnership. All relevant information for this planning effort can be found at:http://www.sjvcogs.org/goods.html 13. Regional Energy Planning M. Sigala The SJV Regional Energy and Economic Development Roadmap planning grant application was submitted to the California Strategic Growth Council in February 2012. The $1 million planning grant application was an eight-county collaborative effort including EDCs, workforce

investment boards, the SJV Clean Energy Organization and numerous other partners. Awards were announced in late April and approved on May 10, 2012. Our Roadmap application was not recommended for funding. Our application was ranked 7 out of 13. Applications 1 thru 6 were recommended for funding. We are continuing to look at alternative sources of funding for the Roadmap and have since reconvened our Valleywide regional energy partners to begin our quarterly meetings again. The last meeting was held Wednesday, June 20, 2012 at 2pm. Concurrently, we are coordinating a meeting with the California Energy Commission, the Economic Development Administration, and private utility companies to further discuss regional planning efforts in the San Joaquin Valley. Congressman Costa's office is helping in convening this meeting which is tentatively scheduled for Wednesday, August 15 at 10am in Fresno. The Southwest Solar Transformation Initiative (SSTI) program has been launched and meetings with participating jurisdictions have occurred for the cities of Arvin, Atwater, Clovis, Delano, Hanford, Livingston, Madera, Merced, San Joaquin, Visalia, Fresno, Modesto, Mendota and Turlock. During the summer months, considerable technical work and assessments will be performed for each jurisdiction outlining best practices for implementation. The SSTI is part of the U.S. Department of Energy’s Rooftop Solar Challenge to help streamline and standardize permitting, zoning, metering and connection processes – and improve finance options for rooftop solar systems, with a particular focus on municipal buildings. The San Joaquin Valley Regional Policy Council/RTPAs are a partner in this program. The partnership agreement was approved at the May 2012 Fresno COG Policy Board meeting (Fresno COG is fiscal agent for the program). 14. Fall Policy Conference, 2012 T. King The 2012 Fall Policy Conference will be held October 10-12 in Lemoore at the Tachi Palace Hotel. The conference will begin on Wednesday evening October 10 with a reception on the second floor outdoor terrace overlooking the beautiful grounds of the hotel and the surrounding agricultural lands. The conference will start on October 11th Thursday morning and conclude after the Regional Blueprint Awards luncheon on Friday afternoon. A Regional Policy Council meeting will follow after the close of the conference on October 12th. Hotel rooms for the conference are available for booking now at a cost of $75 per night. Reservations can be made by calling (800) 615-8030 and requesting a room for these specific dates under the name of the Kings County Association of Governments. 15. Peer-to-Peer Exchange on Rural/Urban Connections R. Terry On July 18th, 2012, in coordination with the Local Government Commission (LGC), Fresno COG will be hosting a peer-to-peer exchange event regarding rural/urban connection strategies with representatives from SACOG. The intent of the meeting is to bring together staff members from around the valley to discuss the lessons learned by SACOG as they worked through their Blueprint and Sustainable Communities Strategies (SCS) processes, and the tools they utilized to inform and enhance their efforts. As agencies throughout the valley continue their work on Blueprint related activities, and begin focusing efforts on their respective SCS plans, such an exchange of information will greatly assist staff in analyzing and presenting information that will result in substantially better plans. In addition to the peer-to-peer exchange, the LGCC will also be hosting a dinner event for local elected officials following the peer-to-peer exchange. For any questions relating to this event, please contact Rob Terry with Fresno COG at [email protected] or by phone at (559) 233-4148 Ext. 222.

Fresno Council of Governments Sequoia Room

2035 Tulare Street, Suite 201 Fresno, California 93721

Regional Policy Council Meeting

Friday, March 23, 2012 10:00 a.m.

Members Attending:

Allen Ishida, Supervisor, County of Tulare, TCAG – Chair Robert Poythress, Mayor, City of Madera, Madera CTC – Vice-Chair Ampreet Dhaliwal, Mayor, City of San Joaquin (phone) Judy Case, Supervisor, County of Fresno, Fresno COG Cheryl Wegman, Councilmember, Kern County (phone) Doug Verboon, Supervisor, County of Kings, KCAG Ann Johnston, Mayor, City of Stockton, SJ COG Bill O’Brien, Supervisor, County of Stanislaus, StanCOG Charles Goeken, Mayor, City of Waterford, Stan COG (phone) Paul Boyer, Councilmember, City of Farmersville, TCAG

Seyed Sadredin, SJVAPCD

List of Other Attending: Appendix A

1. Approval of December 9, 2011 Minutes (enclosure) A. Ishida Supervisor Allen Ishida, Chair, opened the meeting with a round of introductions and a roll call to establish a quorum. A motion was made by Mr. Bill O’Brien to approve the minutes and seconded by Mayor Ann Johnston. Supervisor Doug Verboon abstained. The minutes were approved.

Chair Supervisor Allen Ishida Tulare County Vice-Chair Mayor Robert Poythress City of Madera Fresno Council of Governments Kern Council of Governments K i n g s C o u n t y Association of Governments Madera County Transportation Commission Merced County Association of Governments San Joaquin Council of Governments Stanislaus Council Of Governments Tulare County Association of Governments San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District


c/o Stanislaus Council of Governments – 1111 I St. #308-Modesto, CA 95354

Phone: 209-525-4600 Fax: 209-558-7833

Item 1

2. Federal Transportation Issues V. Mammano

Mr. Mike Duman presented on behalf of Mr. Vincent Mammano and the Federal Highway Administration. He reported currently the biggest federal issue to follow is the minute-to-minute changes to the Federal Transportation Reauthorization Act. The House passed their version of the bill which would go on to become an 18-month bill. The Federal Highway Administration is closely following the MPO threshold component of the bill. Mr. Duman explained that MPOs with populations over 200,000 would be in Tier 1 or 2 with provisions for agencies with populations under 200,000 to either opt out or fall under a grandfathering clause. Such decisions would remain at the local level. 3. Resolution for Sustainable Communities Strategies (SCS) V. Madueno Mayor Virginia Madueno was unable to present due to family illness. Item Not on the Agenda – High Speed Rail J. Abercrombie Mr. Jeff Abercrombie presented a PowerPoint presentation on the Revised Business Plan for High Speed Rail (HSR). The Revised Business Plan works to break the project into useable blocks where each segment built can bring income and ridership before the entire build-out is complete. Mr. Abercrombie pointed out all the building would be done without subsidy because of Proposition 1A requirements. In terms of cost, Mr. Abercrombie reported costs have gone up from 10% to 15% because material costs have gone up and the Rail Authority at this point better understands what it is going to take to build HSR. The new HSR Board has committed to using very low ridership projections so there would be no over-reliance on any one factor (i.e. spike in gas prices) to promote ridership. Chair Allen Ishida asked if the first phase of building going to coordinate right-of-ways (ROW) with existing electrical system ROWs. Mr. Abercrombie responded that the Revised Business Plan does not currently account for coordinated ROWs. Chair Ishida asked for Mr. Abercrombie to follow-up on any plans to coordinate ROW/electrical service. Mayor Johnston asked how serious the High Speed Rail Authority (HSRA) is about a blended system. She commented that the blended system seems to be the success or failure of the HSR although it was a late idea. Mr. Abercrombie pointed out that a blended system refers to shared tracks with regular rail and the HSRA is committed to a blended plan. Supervisor Doug Verboon brought up concerns of current rail systems from Hanford and Corcoran to Fresno. He expressed concern that because current rail runs North-South similar to HSR that the Revised Business Plan might not include the current system. Supervisor Verboon also brought up the point that HSRA emphasizes communication however Kings County has been waiting to meeting with HSRA since last June. Supervisor Judy Case expressed concern that the public only had 30 days to read and comment on the Business Plan and that was not enough time. Mr. Abercrombie reported the Revised Business Plan will only be available for approximately two weeks before it goes before the HSRA Board. Supervisor Case responded that she hoped there will be a longer public comment period as the public has been upset when they feel they are not given enough time to voice their opinions. Mayor Charles Goeken asked about the Bond Savings Rescission measures that may pass in November. Mr. Abercrombie said that those rescissions would negatively affect HSR but there is no current update.

Several concerned citizens provided public comment. Citizens reported concerns that: the HSRA has poorly planned for HSR, the budget has been unrealistic, public comment period has been limited and comparisons to European lines are inaccurate. 4. San Joaquin Valley Regional Rail Authority S. Mortensen Ms. Stacey Mortensen presented a PowerPoint on Regional Rail Authority and the relevant spot bill. She expressed hopes this rail project is a service that can unify the SJV and improve rail service, and give the SJV more influence in areas like Sacramento and Washington DC. Ms. Mortensen discussed the success of the Capital Corridor project, as it would be a model for building a local SJV Joint Powers Authority (JPA). To compare, she reported the SJV will only see modest expansion with only three additional trains planned from now until 2032 in comparison to the Capital Corridor that has grown exponentially with the addition of over five trains. Currently LOSSAN (southern CA passenger rail) is working to pass legislation that would create a JPA and if that passes, the SJV will be only the state-run rail service. Ms. Mortensen reported a key component to passing legislation on Regional Rail Authority is finding a solid cost- benefit analysis. Throughout the SJV, there is unanimous agreement that a SJV JPA will run the rail system more cost effectively than Caltrans can. Ms. Mortensen listed pros and cons of creating a JPA including: increased risks, perceived liability, a short legislation period, and more active and effective advocacy and rail growth similar to the Capital Corridor. Mr. Dan Leavitt then presented the possible structure of a SJV JPA that would include a 11-member agency board including representation from each of the SJV counties. He listed potential member agencies to the new JPA including the SJV COGS, Alameda and Contra Costa RTPA and/or a BART representative. Mr. Leavitt reported currently there are two spot bills in the work. The language is consistent with the LOSSAN draft legislation. The next key step in this process is to get sponsors and letters of support for legislation. The request for action today is to be an official sponsor of AB 1779 – Intercity Passenger Rail Act of 2012 for San Joaquin Corridor. Mr. Leavitt also asked for a letter of support from the Regional Policy Council for the partners down south in LOSSAN. Supervisor Verboon discussed his concerns with HSR and asked for added language that the legislation is not intended to give independent jurisdiction to HSR. Supervisor Verboon said that he would like to present this item to his Board. Ms. Mortensen commented that regional control is critical in regional rail because allowing member agencies to vote keeps the issue close to home. Ms. Mortensen agreed to follow-up with Supervisor Verboon on his specific questions. Mayor Ann Johnston asked what the Caltrans position is on regional rail. Ms. Mortensen responded that the upper management at Caltrans see this as a streamlining process where successful regional control would make Caltrans supervision unnecessary. Mayor Johnston moved to approve sponsorship of AB 1779 and Supervisor Judy Case seconded the motion. 5. Federal Transportation Reauthorization Bill (enclosure) V. Harris Mr. Vince Harris reported the current Federal Transportation Reauthorization Bill expired in 2009 and since then we have continued on extension resolutions. The current resolution is scheduled to term on March 31, 2012. The Senate passed their portion that will be a 2-year plan. For Congress to have a

continued resolution, there must be agreement for the bill to reach the President’s desk. Mr. Harris reported that Mr. Bret Manley (representative for Congressman Jeff Denham) feels that the House will continue to support the San Joaquin Valley (SJV) position on the MPO threshold. 6. Valley Legislative Affairs Committee (enclosure) C. Malekos a. Sacramento Valley Voice trip Ms. Cindy Malekos announced the Valley Voice Sacramento trip was held March 7-8, 2012. The group met with ten legislators that represent the SJV as well as the Governor’s office and the California Transportation Commission. Ms. Malekos reported the three priorities discussed were regional rail, protecting funding for SR 99 projects and lowering the local transportation funding threshold to 55%. b. Assembly Constitutional Amendment 23 R. Phipps Mr. Robert Phipps explained that ACA 23, sponsored by Assemblymember Henry Perea, is a narrow bill that only pertains to local transportation funding from sales tax. The need for this is based in the fact that State funding has stayed the same leaving the SJV living “from bond measure to bond measure”, meaning there is no funding for any kind for capital expansion, particularly for those counties that are not “self help”. Mr. Robert Poythress commented that he will be voting against ACA 23 because Madera County Transportation Commission (MCTC) wants to see a 60%-63% threshold. Mayor Ann Johnston commented that she would support lowering the threshold because she empathsizes with counties that are not self-help counties like San Joaquin. Supervisor Case commented that she is in a compromised position and she would like to see legislation at 60% because such a threshold captures a larger majority of population, and works to lessen special interest group influence in the process. Mr. Seyed Sedredin commented that this item has not been presented to his Board so he will have to abstain. Chair Ishida added that his impression from the Valleyvoice trip to Sacramento that the threshold will need to be 60% to get republican support. Several public comments were made before the vote was held. One citizen said that such legislation as this allows Sacramento to take more money. Another citizen said that two-thirds protects the minority. Chair Ishida entertained a motion at the 55% threshold then opted for a roll call vote. Roll Call: Mayor Johnston (SJ COG) made the motion YES Councilmember Boyer (TCAG) seconded YES Chair Ishida (TCAG) YES Mayor Dhaliwal (Fresno COG) YES Mayor Goeken (Stan COG) YES Supervisor Verboon (KCAG) NO Mayor Poytheress (MCTC) NO Supervisor O'Brien (Stan COG) NO Supervisor Case (Fresno COG) NO

When action for ACA 23 was taken, Mr. Seyed Sedredin abstained and Councilmember Cheryl Wegman did not respond/or was no longer on the phone. The motion failed as 2/3 vote was needed. c. Revised Legislative Platform V. Harris Mr. Vince Harris explained that High Speed Rail was removed from the Legislative Platform before the Valley Voice Sacramento trip because there was not SJV consensus on the issue. He reported the rest of the platform remains intact. Mr. Harris recommended approval of the revised Legislative Platform and that staff will make further revisions based on the Council’s action not to support the ACA 23 55% threshold. Supervisor Judy Case motioned to approve the revised Legislative Platform and Supervisor Doug Verboon seconded. The motion carried unanimously. 7. Greenhouse Gas Emission Targets for the Valley V. Harris Mr. Vince Harris reported that staff anticipates meeting with the Air Resources Board in October and discussions will include their Sustainable Communities Strategies (SCS). Mr. Harris reported each of eight SJV counties are actively engaged in completing the SCS process. The Directors’ Committee has discussed this item at their monthly meeting and developed a milestone schedule. Further in support of this effort, the eight SJV COGS received Proposition 84 funding to enhance all eight-counties’ modeling tools. Mr. Harris reported staff is in the process of reviewing deliverables. Mr. Harris thanked Fresno COG for their leadership and Mr. Mike Bitner for leading this effort. As for further reference, the eight SJV COG Directors met with the Air District in January focusing discussions on what the SJV Air Pollution Control District could do to support these efforts. Mr. Seyed Sedredin added that it is important to have an answer to the question what are we willing to do to meet 5 and 10 percent targets. He emphasized the importance of working out these scenarios before meeting with the Air Resources Board in October. 8. Regional Policy Council Workshop V. Harris Mr. Vince Harris brought up the topic that a Regional Policy Council workshop had been discussed at the COG Directors’ Workshop held in January. The workshop would serve as an opportunity to discuss Valleywide topics. Supervisor Ishida commented that electeds would independently discuss their input with staff. Informational Items pulled for discussion – 11. SJV Interregional Goods Movement M. Sigala Supervisor Allen Ishida reported they are checking how they can interact with consultants to look at local freight and rail. He added more information will come after the Cal COG meeting. 13. Short Haul Rail T. Smalley Mr. Ted Smalley reported that TCAG has re-engaged the railroad and there is a potential for partnerships to stop further rail abandonment. He reported that staff continues to move forward on implementation of SB 325 draft. Mr. Smalley anticipates a final draft to be finished in the summer. Mr. Smalley will make a full presentation at the next Regional Policy Council meeting in June. 14. Executive Directors’ Report V. Harris

Mr. Vince Harris had nothing further to report. 15. Member Comments Mayor Ann Johnston reported that construction on the Marine Highway will be begin shortly with an official launch next month. She added that specialty cranes ordered from Germany have recently arrived to offload highway pieces from the Port of Stockton. 16. Public Presentation None. Meeting was adjourned at 12:22 pm

Appendix A: List of Others Attending Terri King, KCAG Jesse Brown, MCAG Ted Smalley, TCAG Tony Boren, Fresno COG Rob Terry, Fresno COG Clark Thompson, Fresno COG Barbara Steck, Fresno COG Patricia Taylor, MCTC Vince Harris, Stan COG Rosa Park, Stan COG Carlos Yamzon, Stan COG Cindy Malekos, Stan COG (phone) Andrew Chesley, SJCOG Robert Ball, Kern COG (phone) Robert Phipps, Kern COG Tom Jordan, SJVAPCD Sharri Ehlert, Caltrans, District 6 Stacey Mortensen, San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission Dan Leavitt, San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission Rachel Audino, California Partnership Michael Sigala, SJV Coordinator/Sigala Inc Rebecca Caporale, SJV Coordinator/Sigala Inc. Jeff Abercrombie, High Speed Rail Darren Rose, High Speed Rail Mike Duman, Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Paul Szopa, Citizen Rick Parker, Citizen Greg Gatzka, Kings County Community Development Agency Oyilt Snerit, Citizen Connie Brook, Citizen Ron Arteno, Central Valley Tea Party Amanda Arteno, Central Valley Tea Party Frank Oliveira, Citizens for California High Speed Rail Accountability Maureen Fukuda, Citizens for California High Speed Rail Accountability Abu Fukuda, Kings County Citizens for California High Speed Rail Accountability Jason Ellard, VRPA Technologies, Inc.

of 14

JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS AGREEMENT TO IMPLEMENT AND MANAGE THE

CENTRAL CALIFORNIA RAILROAD AUTHORITY

DRAFT DATE: MAY 1, 2012

Item 4

of 14

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ARTICLE 1. DEFINITIONS

ARTICLE 2. PURPOSES OF THE AGREEMENT

ARTICLE 3. TERM

ARTICLE 4. CREATION OF THE AUTHORITY

ARTICLE 5. POWERS OF THE AUTHORITY

ARTICLE 6. BOARD OF DIRECTORS

ARTICLE 7. POWERS OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS

ARTICLE 8. MEETINGS OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS

ARTICLE 9. OFFICERS

ARTICLE 10. TERMINATION

ARTICLE 11. LIABILITY OF BOARD OF DIRECTORS, OFFICERS, COMMITTEE

MEMBERS & LEGAL ADVISORS

ARTICLE 12. BYLAWS

ARTICLE 13. NOTICES

ARTICLE 14. AMENDMENT

ARTICLE 15. PROHIBITION AGAINST ASSIGNMENT

ARTICLE 16. GOVERNING LAW

ARTICLE 17. SEVERABILITY

ARTICLE 18. AGREEMENT COMPLETE

ARTICLE 19. FILING WITH SECRETARY OF STATE

of 14

JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS AGREEMENT

TO IMPLEMENT AND MANAGE THE

CENTRAL CALIFORNIA RAILROAD AUTHORITY

THIS Agreement (“Agreement”) is made and entered into this ______ day of

_____________, 2012, by and between the COUNTIES OF KERN, KINGS, TULARE,

FRESNO and MERCED, each a political subdivision of the State of California,

hereinafter referred to as the "AUTHORITY"

RECITALS

WHEREAS, it is the intent of the Legislature to provide an alternative for

ensuring railroad service if the Surface Transportation Board authorizes the abandonment

or discontinuance of service on, or in the event of bankruptcy or sale of, short-line

railroads in the Counties of Kern, Kings, Tulare, Fresno, and Merced; and

WHEREAS, it is the intent of the Legislature to provide a means to consider and,

if justified, to pursue economic development opportunities and projects related to rail

service along railroad lines in participating counties; and

WHEREAS, it is the intent of the Legislature that enactment of the Central

California Railroad Authority not provide a justification for the Surface Transportation

Board to grant a petition for abandonment or discontinuance of service on the affected

short lines; and

WHEREAS, it is the intent of the Legislature that the authority be expanded to

include the Counties of Madera, Stanislaus, and San Joaquin if those counties request to

be included at a future date; and

WHEREAS, the Legislature finds and declares that maintaining a railroad service

through central California will provide economic benefits and do all of the following:

(a) Ensure continuing short-line freight railroad service between Kern County and

Merced County;

of 14

(b) Enable opportunities for the improvement of short-line rail service, including

passenger service connecting to high-speed rail stations, extending from Kern County to

the Port of Oakland;

(c) Reduce reliance on motor vehicles and encourage the use of rail service as an

alternative transportation means;

(d) Reduce traffic congestion on and deterioration of state and federal highway

systems and local roads in central California;

(e) Provide convenient and attractive short-line transportation service for shippers

and receivers through central California; and

WHEREAS, it is the intent of the member regional transportation agencies and

councils of governments forming this joint exercise of powers agreement to implement

and manage the Authority as provided by the Central California Railroad Authority Act

and that if the Act is amended, that the provisions incorporated in this Agreement is

amended to be consistent with the Act.

NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual promises, covenants and

conditions, hereinafter set forth, the sufficiency of which is acknowledged, the Parties

agree as follows:

ARTICLE 1

DEFINITIONS

"CCRA" shall mean the Central California Railroad Authority.

"Authority" shall mean the CCRA created by this Agreement.

"Board of Directors" shall mean the governing body of the Authority.

"Government Code" shall mean the California Government Code.

ARTICLE 2

PURPOSES OF THE AGREEMENT

of 14

This Agreement is entered into by the council of governments or county

association of governments within the Counties of Kern, Kings, Tulare, Fresno, and

Merced to implement and manage the Authority.

ARTICLE 3

TERM

This Agreement shall continue in full force and effect until terminated as provided herein.

ARTICLE 4

CREATION OF THE AUTHORITY

Pursuant to the Central California Railroad Authority Act (Gov. Code §§93300 et seq.),

there is hereby created a public entity separate and apart from the Parties, to be known as

the Central California Railroad Authority (“CCRA” or the “Authority”) having a service

area comprised of the Counties of Kern, Kings, Tulare, Fresno, and Merced, with such

powers as are hereinafter set forth. The state is not liable for any contracts, debts, or

other obligations of the authority. Agencies forming the joint powers agreement

implementing the Authority shall be liable for all debts and obligations of the Authority.

The Authority may not utilize or be a claimant for Transportation Development Act funds

and shall not be entitled to receive funds from the Public Transportation Account.

The Counties of Madera, Stanislaus, and San Joaquin may elect to join the Authority and,

if that election is made, the service area of the Authority is expanded to include those

counties.

ARTICLE 5

POWERS OF THE AUTHORITY

of 14

The Authority shall have all powers set forth in the CCRA Act, and is hereby authorized

to do all acts necessary for the exercise of said powers. Such powers include, but are not

limited to, the following:

(a) To acquire, own, operate, and lease real and personal property reasonably

related to the operation and maintenance of railroads.

(b) To issue revenue bonds pursuant to Gov. Code Section 93316 for any

purpose of the Authority.

(c) To acquire property by purchase, lease, gift or through exercise of the

power of eminent domain, within its area of jurisdiction.

(d) To operate railroads, including those outside its boundaries in order to

connect its lines with the lines of another railroad corporation, provided the service

begins within the Authority’s area of jurisdiction.

(e) To accept grants or loans from federal agencies.

(f) To select a franchisee, which may be a public or private entity, to acquire

or operate a rail transportation system within the area of the authority’s jurisdiction.

(g) The authority may acquire, own, lease, and operate railroad lines and

equipment, including, but not limited to, real and personal property, tracks, rights-of-way,

equipment, and facilities.

(h) The Authority may prepare a plan for the acquisition and operation of any

railroad line specified in Gov. Code Section 93301, at no expense to the state, to achieve

the purposes set forth in Gov. Code Section 93302.

(i) After preparation of a plan pursuant to Gov. Code Section 93314, the

authority may do any of the following:

(a) Conduct engineering and other studies related to the acquisition of

any railroad line.

(b) Evaluate alternative plans from the private sector to acquire,

finance, and operate a railroad system in a manner which achieves

the purposes specified in Gov. Code Section 93302.

(c) Establish criteria for the award of a franchise.

(d) Select a franchisee to acquire, finance, and operate the railroad

system.

of 14

(e) Accept grants, gifts, fees, or allocations from other entities,

including private and public sources.

(f) Employ an executive officer, other staff, and consultants deemed

appropriate for support of the activities of the authority.

(g) To carry out all provisions of this Agreement. Said powers shall be

exercised pursuant to the terms hereof and in the manner provided

by law.

ARTICLE 6

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Composition of the Board of Directors

The Authority shall be governed by the Board of Directors.

(a) The Board of Directors shall be composed as follows:

(1) One member appointed by the Kern Council of Governments

(2) One member appointed by the Kings County Association of

Governments

(3) One member appointed by the Tulare County Association of

Governments

(4) One member appointed by the Fresno Council of Governments

(5) One member appointed by the Merced County Association of

Governments

(b) If the Counties of Madera, Stanislaus, or San Joaquin elect to join the

authority, the regional transportation planning agencies of the counties so

joining shall appoint one person to the board of directors.

(c) A board member appointed pursuant to (a) or (b) of this Article shall be

both an elected official of a city or county that belongs to the regional

transportation planning agency or council of governments appointing him

or her and a board member of that planning agency or council of

governments.

of 14

(d) All members of the board of directors shall serve for terms of two years

and until their successor have qualified.

(e) Notwithstanding any other provision of law that precludes the

simultaneous holding of incompatible offices, a local government officer

may be appointed and may serve as a member of the authority’s board of

directors if the person also meets the other applicable qualifications of the

CCRA Act.

(f) The board of directors may provide, by motion, ordinance, or resolution,

that each of its members may receive compensation in an amount not to

exceed one hundred dollars ($100) for each day of service. A member of

the board of directors shall not receive compensation for more than six

days of service in a month.

(g) The board of directors, by ordinance adopted pursuant to the procedures

and standards specified in Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 20200) of

Division 10 of the Water Code, may increase the amount of compensation

that may be received by members of the board of directors.

(h) The board of directors may provide, by motion, ordinance, or resolution,

that its members may receive their actual and necessary traveling and

incidental expenses incurred while on official business. Reimbursement

for these expenses is subject to Gov. Code Sections 53232.2 and 53232.3.

(i) A member of the board of directors may waive any or all of the payments

permitted by this Article.

(j) For the purposes of this subdivision, a “day of service” means any of the

following:

(1) A meeting conducted pursuant to the Ralph M. Brown Act

(Chapter 9 (commencing with Section 54950) of Part 1 of Division

2 of Title 5).

(2) Representation of the authority at a public event, provided that the

board of directors has previously approved the member’s

representation at a board of directors’ meeting and that the member

delivers a written report to the board of directors regarding the

of 14

member’s representation at the next board of directors’ meeting

following the public event.

(3) Representation of the authority at a public meeting or a public

hearing conducted by another public agency, provided that the

board of directors has previously approved the member’s

representation at a board of directors’ meeting and that the member

delivers a written report to the board of directors regarding the

member’s representation at the next board of directors’ meeting

following the public meeting or public hearing.

(4) Representation of the authority at a meeting of a public benefit

nonprofit corporation on whose board the authority has

membership, provided that the board of directors has previously

approved the member’s representation at a board of directors’

meeting and the member delivers a written report to the board of

directors regarding the member’s representation at the next board

of directors’ meeting following the corporation’s meeting.

(5) Participation in a training program on a topic that is directly related

to the authority, provided that the board of directors has previously

approved the member’s participation at a board of directors’

meeting, and that the member delivers a written report to the board

of directors regarding the member’s participation at the next board

of directors’ meeting following the training program.

Voting Protocols

A majority of the members of the authority constitutes a quorum for the

transaction of business, and all official acts of the authority require the affirmative vote of

a majority of the members of the authority.

ARTICLE 7

POWERS OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS

of 14

The Board of Directors shall have the following powers and functions:

(a) Adopt an annual budget.

(1) Notice of the time and place of a public hearing on the adoption of

the annual budget shall be published pursuant to Govt. Code Section 6061 not

later than 15 days prior to the hearing.

(2) The proposed annual budget shall be available for public

inspection at least 15 days prior to the hearing.

(b) Cause a post audit of the financial transactions and records of the authority

to be made at least annually by a certified public accountant.

(c) Do any and all things necessary to carry out the purpose of the CCRA Act.

ARTICLE 8

MEETINGS OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS

(a) The authority shall conduct its first meeting no later than 120 days after

abandonment or discontinuance of service on any railroad line specified in

Gov. Code Section 93301, provided the member regional transportation

agencies or councils of governments have a joint exercise of powers

agreement to implement and manage the authority.

(b) The Board of Directors shall hold at least one regular meeting each year

and shall provide for such other regular meetings and for such special

meetings as it deems necessary.

(c) All meetings of the authority shall be conducted pursuant to the Ralph M.

Brown Act (chapter 9 (commencing with Section 54950) of Part 1 of

Division 2 of Title 5).

ARTICLE 9

OFFICERS

of 14

The Board of Directors shall elect from its membership a President and Vice

President of the Board of Directors, to serve for two-year terms. The President, or in his

or her absence, the Vice President, shall preside at and conduct all meetings of the Board

of Directors.

In accordance of the CCRA Act, the Board of Directors shall adopt an

administrative code, by ordinance, which prescribes the powers and duties of the

authority officers, the method of appointment of the authority employees, and methods,

procedures, and systems of operation and management of the authority.

ARTICLE 10

TERMINATION

This Authority shall continue in full force and effect until terminated by the repeal

of the CCRA Act.

ARTICLE 11

LIABILITY OF BOARD OF DIRECTORS, OFFICERS, COMMITTEE

MEMBERS AND LEGAL ADVISORS

The members of the Board of Directors, officers, committee members and legal

advisors to any board or committees of the Authority shall use ordinary care and

reasonable diligence in the exercise of their powers and in the performance of their duties

pursuant to this Agreement. They shall not be liable for any mistake of judgment or any

other action made, taken or omitted by them in good faith, nor for any action taken or

omitted by any agent or employee selected with reasonable care, nor for loss incurred

through investment of Authority funds, or failure to invest, performed in good faith.

No director, officer, committee member, or legal advisor to any board or

committee shall be responsible for any action taken or omitted by any other director,

officer, committee member, or legal advisor to any board or committee. No director,

officer, committee member or legal advisor to any board or committee shall be required

of 14

to give a bond or other security to guarantee the faithful performance of their duties

pursuant to this Agreement.

The funds of the Authority shall be used to defend, indemnify and hold harmless

the Authority and any director, officer, committee member or legal advisor to any board

or committee for their actions taken within the scope of the authority of the Authority.

Nothing herein shall limit the right of the Authority to purchase insurance to provide such

coverage as is hereinabove set forth.

ARTICLE 12

BYLAWS

The Board of Directors may adopt Bylaws consistent with this Agreement which

shall provide for the administration and management of the Authority.

ARTICLE 13

NOTICES

Each Party to this Agreement shall provide the Authority with the address to

which communications are to be sent. Each Party shall address notices and other

communications to the Authority at the office address of the Authority as set forth in the

Bylaws.

The Authority shall promptly give each Party and copy of any notice provided to

the Authority from anyone, including notice from any insurance providers, or notice from

the other Party, or of any notice provided by the Authority to anyone, including any

insurance provider or notice to the other Party.

ARTICLE 14

AMENDMENT

Any matters of this Agreement may be modified from time to time by the written

consent of all the Parties without, in any way, affecting the remainder.

of 14

ARTICLE 15

PROHIBITION AGAINST ASSIGNMENT

Neither Party may assign any right, claim or interest, or delegate any obligation

that it may have under this Agreement, and no creditor, assignee or third party

beneficiary of either Party shall have any right, claim or title to any part, share, interest,

fund, premium or asset of the Authority.

ARTICLE 16

GOVERNING LAW

The Parties agree, that for the purposes of venue, performance under this

Agreement is to be in Tulare County, California.

The rights and obligations of the Parties and all interpretation and performance of

this Agreement shall be governed in all respects by the laws of the State of California.

ARTICLE 17

SEVERABILITY

In the event any provisions of this Agreement are held by a court of competent

jurisdiction to be invalid, void, or unenforceable, the Parties will use their best efforts to

meet and confer to determine how to mutually amend such provisions with valid and

enforceable provisions, and the remaining provisions of this Agreement will nevertheless

continue in full force and effect without being impaired or invalidated in any way.

ARTICLE 18

AGREEMENT COMPLETE

This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the council of

governments or county association of governments with respect to the subject matter

of 14

hereof and supersedes all previous agreement negotiations, proposals, commitments,

writings, advertisements, publications, and understandings of any nature whatsoever

unless expressly included in this Agreement. This Agreement may be executed in one or

more original counterparts, all of which together will constitute one and the same

agreement.

ARTICLE 19

FILING WITH SECRETARY OF STATE

The President of the Board of Directors of the Authority shall file a notice of this

Agreement with the office of California Secretary of State within 30 days of its effective

date, as required by Government Code Section 6503.5 and within 70 days of its effective

date as required by Government Code Section 53051.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the COUNTY OF KERN, COUNTY OF KINGS, COUNTY OF TULARE, COUNTY OF FRESNO and the COUNTY OF MERCED, the Parties, have executed this Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement Creating the JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS AGREEMENT TO IMPLEMENT AND MANAGE THE CENTRAL CALIFORNIA RAILROAD AUTHORITY as of the day and year first hereinabove written.

DRAFT

San Joaquin

Stanislaus

Merced Madera

Fresno

KingsTulare

Kern

San Francisco

Sacramento

Los Angeles

·}þ99

·}þ99

§̈¦5

§̈¦5

R E G I O N A LP O L I C Y C O U N C I L

S A N J O A Q U I N

1. San Joaquin Valley paSSenger rail Corridor 2. air quality empowerment

3. goodS moVement

4. regional energy planning

michaelsigala

Typewritten Text

ITEM 5

michaelsigala

Typewritten Text

michaelsigala

Typewritten Text

michaelsigala

Typewritten Text

michaelsigala

Typewritten Text

michaelsigala

Typewritten Text

michaelsigala

Typewritten Text

michaelsigala

Typewritten Text

michaelsigala

Typewritten Text

DRAFT

request: Support the intercity passenger rail act of 2012 For San Joaquin Corridor (Coauthors Assemblymembers Dickenson, Olsen and Perea, and Coauthor Senator Wolk)

idorBackground:

In 1996, the Capitol Corridor Joint Powers Authority (CCJPA) was created to oversee the administration of the Capitol Corridor service under the provisions of Senate Bill 457 (Kelley, Chapter 263, Statutes of 1996). Over the last 15 years, without direct financial contribution by member agencies, the CCJPA has successfully managed the Capitol Corridor between Auburn and San Jose. Capital investments, cooperation with the Union Pacific freight railroad, and state support have allowed for dramatic increases in the frequency of service (increases of 400 percent between Sacramento and Oakland), and the Capitol Corridor intercity passenger rail service has the best on-time performance in the nation for intercity service. In addition to more cost effective administration and operations, the CCJPA has shown that there are several other potential benefits to local authority administration of intercity passenger service including:

y The ability to have a stronger voice in advocating for service improvements and expansions;

y Local decision-making that is more responsive and adaptive to passenger issues;

y The ability to take better advantage of joint marketing and partnerships with local agencies; and

y More engagement by local communities to support the service.

This year, transportation planning agencies throughout the Central Valley began working together in order to set up a regional Joint Powers Authority and to support legislation that would enable regional governance of the San Joaquin intercity rail service.

purpose:

Assembly Bill 1779 will enable the transfer of administrative responsibility of the San Joaquin intercity passenger rail service from the Department of Transportation to a new joint powers authority. This bill is sponsored by the San Joaquin Valley Regional Policy Council, the Central Valley Rail Working Group, the San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission and the Sacramento Regional Transit.

Following the model of the CCJPA, AB 1779 is permissive legislation which would enable regional governance/management of the existing San Joaquin intercity passenger rail service between Bakersfield-Fresno-Stockton-Sacramento-Oakland.

AB 1779 defines the composition of the San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority (Authority), and extends the time for creating the Authority and executing an interagency transfer agreement with the Department of Transportation to December 31, 2013. As amended, AB 1779 ensures that

aB 1779 Congresswoman Kathleen galgiani

San Joaquin Valley passenger rail CorridorR E G I O N A L

P O L I C Y C O U N C I L

S A N J O A Q U I N

DRAFT




S A N J O A Q U I N

for not less than a three-year period, the level of state funding for intercity rail service in each corridor should be maintained at least to the current level of service in the corridor, providing fiscal stability that will allow appropriate planning and operation of these services. In order to transfer responsibility of the San Joaquin intercity passenger rail service to the Authority, AB 1779 requires that the transfer must result in administrative or operating cost reductions. Finally, AB 1779 prevents local resources from being used to offset any redirection, elimination, reduction, or reclassification of state resources for operating the San Joaquin intercity passenger rail service. With this measure, it is the intent of the Legislature that the San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority protect existing services and facilities and seek to expand service as warranted by ridership and available revenue.

Under the provisions of AB 1779, the state would continue to have prominent and very important roles with the San Joaquin intercity passenger rail service, even after the administration responsibility is turned over to the SJJPA. The state will continue to provide the funding necessary for service operations, administration and marketing. Furthermore, Caltrans Division of Rail would remain responsible for the development of the Statewide Rail Plan; the coordination and integration between the three state-supported intercity passenger rail services; the preparation of grant applications to the budget requests – like they have been for the Capitol Corridor under the CCJPA. With more efficient administration and stronger local/regional support, a regionally managed San Joaquin intercity passenger rail service can result in much higher frequencies of service, and increases in ridership and revenue – like that experienced by the Capitol Corridor under the regional administration of the CCJPA. Increases in San Joaquin intercity passenger rail service and ridership will result in more jobs, improve air quality, and will help promote sustainable development.

Intercity passenger rail is environmentally friendly, and the state has a continuing interest in the provision of cost-effective and efficiently administered intercity passenger rail services.

DRAFTSponsors/Supporters:

y San Joaquin Valley Regional Policy Council 1 (Sponsor)

y Central Valley Rail Working Group 2 (Sponsor)

y San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission (Sponsor)

y Sacramento Regional Transit District (Sponsor)

y San Joaquin Regional Transit District

y City of Merced

y Steve Cohn, Sacramento City Councilmember and Board Member of the Capitol Corridor Joint Powers Authority, Sacramento Regional Transit and Sacramento Area Council of Governments

y California Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley

y County of Fresno

y City of Modesto

y Madera County Transportation Commission

y San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District

y Merced County of Association of Governments

y City of Lodi

y City of Fresno Mayor Ashley Swearengin

y City of Elk Grove

y City of Sacramento

y Los Angeles-San Diego-San Luis Obispo (LOSSAN) Rail Corridor Agency

y City of Visalia

y San Joaquin Council of Governments (San Joaquin COG)

y City of Selma

y City of Mendota

y Fresno Regional Workforce Investment Board

y Sacramento Area Council of Governments

y Tulare County Association of Governments

y City of Stockton

y Stanislaus Council of Governments

y City of Turlock

y City of Huron

y City of Fowler

y City of Kingsburg

y Greater Stockton Chamber of Commerce 1 San Joaquin Valley Regional Policy Council Member Agencies are: Fresno Council of

Governments, Kern Council of Governments, Kings County Association of Governments,

Madera County Transportation Commission, Merced County Association of

Governments, San Joaquin Council of Governments, Stanislaus Council of Governments,

Tulare County Association of Governments, and San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control

District.

2 Central Valley Rail Working Group Member Agencies are: Sacramento Regional Transit

District, Sacramento Area Council of Governments, City of Sacramento, City of Elk Grove,

City of Galt, County of Sacramento, San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission, San Joaquin

Council of Governments, San Joaquin Regional Transit District, City of Stockton, City

of Manteca, City of Lodi, County of San Joaquin, Stanislaus Council of Governments,

City of Turlock, City of Modesto, County of Stanislaus, Merced County Association of

Governments, City of Merced, and County of Merced.




S A N J O A Q U I N

DRAFT

San Joaquin Valley air quality priorites R E G I O N A L


S A N J O A Q U I N

Cmaq 1. Preserve federal funding for the Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) Program that allows for air pollution reduction efforts.

Support for H.r. 1582 “Common Sense ozone regulation act”

2. Introduced by Rep. Kevin McCarthy,. H.R. 1582 removes the applicability of the now revoked 1-hour ozone standard in areas that have been designated as “extreme” non-attainment for the new, more heath protective 8-hour ozone standard.

Support for H.r. 5381 “the Commonsense exceptional events reform (Cleer) act”

3. Introduced by Congressman Jeff Flake, H.R. 5381(CLEER Act), would resolve many of the issues associated with EPAs method of acting upon exceptional events demonstrations.

establishment of air quality and Health empowerment Zone designation

4. The Establishment of Air Quality and Health Empowerment Zone Designation which would provide financial assistance for incentive programs in areas that face significant air quality, health, and economic challenges.

program requeStS

DRAFT

Cmaq

San Joaquin Valley air quality priorites

requests: preservation of the Congestion mitigation air quality (Cmaq) program

1. The San Joaquin Valley Regional Policy Council supports legislation and funding programs, such as the continuation of the Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) Program, that provide federal funding for air pollution reduction.

Background:

The Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) program was created under the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) of 1991, continued under the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21), and reauthorized by SAFETEA-LU. More than $8.6 billion was authorized over the five-year program (2005-2009), with annual authorization amounts increasing each year during this period. Through 2005, the program supported nearly 16,000 transportation projects across the country. Reducing pollution and other adverse environmental effects of transportation projects and transportation system inefficiency have been long-standing objectives of the Department of Transportation. The strategic plans for DOT and for the FHWA both include performance measures specifically focused on reducing air pollution from transportation facilities. By choosing to fund a CMAQ project, local governments can improve air quality and make progress towards achieving attainment status and ensuring compliance with the transportation conformity provisions of the Clean Air Act.

Recent transportation bill proposals being considered in Congress greatly threaten future designated funding for air pollution reduction programs such as the CMAQ program. As populations continue to grow in rural and urban areas alike, the CMAQ program provides the funding and the broad array of tools to accomplish healthy, clean, efficient, and sustainable alternative modes of transportation to meet the population demands. These alternative modes essentially reduce congestion, improve air quality, achieve energy independence, increase physical activity levels, and improve traffic safety, all of which are critical goals that are in the interest of the nation.

San Joaquin County The San Joaquin Council of Governments (SJCOG) prioritizes projects for funding from the CMAQ program according to the cost-effectiveness policies adopted by the eight San Joaquin Valley Metropolitan Planning Organizations in 2007. These cost-effectiveness policies promote projects that provide the greatest emission reductions per dollar of CMAQ funding spent. In the most recent 2009 CMAQ funding cycle SJCOG funded over $26 million in projects to significantly reduce vehicle emissions in San Joaquin County. These projects included corridor specific adaptive traffic control systems, two park-and-ride lots, five intersection signalization projects, and the purchase of multiple alternative fuel buses to support both existing and expanded transit services. One of the most notable projects funded through the 2009 CMAQ cycle was the expansion of the Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system in the City of Stockton. The funding for this project included the purchase of BRT vehicles, operations, and the modification of traffic signals along the new BRT corridor to allow for bus priority. In addition to specific transportation projects funded through the CMAQ program, SJCOG also funds its ongoing transportation demand management (TDM) program which focuses on ridesharing and alternative modes of transportation. The success of this program has resulted in hundreds of carpools, vanpools and bicycle trips occurring each day in San Joaquin County over single-occupancy vehicle trips. The future of these programs and the success of SJCOG in making quantifiable reductions in vehicle emissions in San Joaquin County is dependent on the continued funding of the CMAQ program.


S A N J O A Q U I N

DRAFT



S A N J O A Q U I N

Cmaq

Stanislaus County The CMAQ Program has enabled the Stanislaus County region’s communities to fund technological applications to improve transportation systems, increase transit services, improve flow of traffic, and allow for more bicycle and pedestrian commuting. This is in an effort to reduce vehicle emissions and improve the air quality in our region.

The Stanislaus Council of Governments (StanCOG) region received approximately $14.5 million in CMAQ funding for the Federal Fiscal (FFY) years 2010/11 and 2011/12 Call for Projects. About $1.3 million is funding the improvement of 6 Bicycle Pedestrian Paths for commuters, $1.8 million is funding the Purchase of Alternative Fuel Vehicles and a CNG Fueling Station, $3.6 million in funds is allowing for improvement to the flow of traffic and safety at 12 locations region wide, $5.8 million is funding signalization improvements at 16 regional locations, and approximately $2 million in funding is allowing an increase and improvements to transit services.

merced County The Merced County Association of Governments (MCAG) priority for CMAQ funding is for public transit services and vehicle purchases. If all transit needs are being met, other projects are pursued. Currently, the Merced County Region has approximately $7 million, funding 15 projects. About $3 million is funding 3 bikeway improvement projects, $2 million is funding a roundabout, and about $2 million is funding 11 cleaner-engine/cleaner-vehicle projects, abiding by the San Joaquin Valley’s cost-effectiveness policy. $3 million is unprogrammed and we anticipate programming that soon in somewhat similar ratios.

madera CountyThe Madera County Transportation Commission (MCTC) has used CMAQ funds in collaboration with the Madera Unified School District to convert its existing diesel school bus fleet to Compressed Natural Gas (CNG). This innovative partnership has improved CMAQ project delivery in Madera County and reduced the quantity of pollutants emitted near local schools.

Fresno CountyFresno COG prioritizes cost-effective projects for funding under the CMAQ Improvement Program. During the February 2008 funding cycle over 48% of the available funding was granted to projects that provide the greatest air pollution emission reductions for each dollar spent. The October 2009 cycle committed over 39% of available funds for cost-effective projects. In 2009, funding was granted for systems in support of the SJV ITS Strategic Deployment Plan; traffic signal synchronization projects and 9 miles of shoulder stabilization projects to reduce entrained dust in support of PM10 pollutant reduction. Many CNG and Hybrid Electric projects that support Fresno’s bus rapid transit system were also funded as well as CNG and electric powered maintenance vehicles, park and ride lots; and a variety of pedestrian/bicycle projects to reduce vehicle miles traveled and associated emissions.

Fresno COG had over $36 million in requests for projects that would reduce air pollution emissions, yet only had $13.4 million in available funding. Additional funding would speed emission reductions.

DRAFT



S A N J O A Q U I N

Cmaq

Kings CountyIn the Kings County Region, the CMAQ program is vital to our transit agency and member jurisdictions in funding their vehicle and infrastructure needs. This includes the transition from gasoline powered vehicles to ultra-low emission vehicle (such as CNG powered) fleets, idle-reduction (such as traffic lights and synchronization, intersection channelization, etc.) and goods movement projects. These projects are necessary if we are to have any opportunity to meet air quality standards.

Examples of the expenditures in the current four-year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) element:

y Transit: more than $3.4 million in CNG vehicle infrastructure, more than $1.0 million in CNG rolling stock, and more than $300,000 in service expansions.

y Goods Movement: $750,000 in infrastructure.

y Low Emission Vehicle Program: $3.5 million in vehicle purchases and $1.1 million in infrastructure.

y Reduced Idle Time Program: more than $3.6 million.

tulare County Tulare County has used CMAQ funds for a number of projects including CNG facilities and conversion of heavy and light duty public fleets to CNG (waste vehicles, transit buses, public safety vehicles), installing roundabouts, funding new transit routes, installing emissions traps and more.

Kern CountyGolden Empire Transit (GET) is the metropolitan Bakersfield provider of public transit services. Since 1992, GET has converted its entire bus fleet to natural gas. At the present time, it has a total of 100 vehicles, of which 19 are paratransit and 62 are full size buses. All buses are natural gas technology.

DRAFTrequest: Support for H.r. 1582 “Common Sense ozone regulation act”

The San Joaquin Valley Regional Policy Council requests support for H.R. 1582 “Common Sense Ozone Regulation Act” introduced by Rep. Kevin McCarthy,. H.R. 1582 removes the applicability of the now revoked 1-hour ozone standard in areas that have been designated as “extreme” non-attainment for the new, more heath protective 8-hour ozone standard.

Background:

y The federal non-attainment penalties which are currently imposed on San Joaquin Valley residents and businesses are unfair and unjustified. Despite significant challenges, air quality in the San Joaquin Valley has improved dramatically. These improvements are largely the results of major investment and sacrifice by Valley businesses and residents. Since 1980, stationary source emissions, which are controlled by the local air pollution control district, have been reduced by more than 80%. Although significant challenges remain, this past year, the Valley experienced its cleanest winter and summer in recent history.

y A common sense approach is warranted in implementing the new ambient air quality standards that the Federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is about to publish. H.R. 1582 will in no way delay clean air efforts in the San Joaquin Valley and will not remove EPA’s authority to establish a new 8-hour ozone standard. As an “extreme” non-attainment area for the current standard, the Valley is required to adopt all feasible control measures, and is working to develop advanced, yet currently unavailable, technologies to obtain additional reductions. In assessing the achievability of the new standard it is important to consider the fact that the proposed new standard encroaches on the naturally occurring, or background, ozone concentrations in the Valley. In promulgating feasible implementation strategies we must also be cognizant of the fact that many areas in the San Joaquin Valley suffer from chronic double-digit unemployment rates which are now nearing 20%.



S A N J O A Q U I N

H.r. 1582 - Congressman Kevin mcCarthy

DRAFTBackground:

Since 1977, multiple EPA guidance documents and regulations have either implied or documented the need for a “flagging system” to exclude ambient air quality monitoring data affected by an exceptional event. The Safe Accountable Flexible Efficient-Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFE-TEA-LU) of 2005 forced a promulgation date of March 2006 for EPA to propose a rule for flagging such exceptional data. The EPA published the final Exceptional Events Rule (EER) on March 22, 2007 (72 Federal Register 13560). Subsequent to publication of the final EER, the EPA indicated that guidance would be issued on means for handling data affected by high wind events, fires, and fire-induced smoke. Draft guidance for handing high wind events has been released for comment, but has yet to be finalized. Guidance concerning fires and fire-induced smoke has yet to be released.

Unfortunately, the process that was put in place by the EER is extremely burdensome, is open ended with no prescribed timeline for action, is not evenly applied in different EPA regions, and leaves areas with no recourse if they do not agree with EPA’s final determination.

Air quality in the San Joaquin Valley has been negatively impacted by exceptional events that are not possible to control including wind-blown dust, fires and fire induced smoke, and emissions from fireworks. The District has submitted 12 requests to have data associated with these events “flagged’ or excluded, and is in the process of developing an additional seven demonstrations. To date, EPA has acted and concurred with seven of the District’s requests.

Exceptional events demonstrations are tremendously time consuming to develop. A straight forward demonstration of a wind event can take in excess of 400 staff hours to develop. More complicated demonstrations can take considerably longer. The criteria by which the demonstrations will be judged is not well defined, and often times there is considerable back and forth between the District and EPA prior to a final action. Currently, there is no deadline for EPA to act upon the District’s demonstrations. There is a considerable backlog, dating as far back to 2008, of demonstrations that EPA has yet to act upon. As EPA develops new procedures and criteria, the District will likely be forced to revisit and update older submittals. In its most recent draft guidance on exceptional events, EPA is moving away from a more flexible “weight of evidence” approach to exceptional events and is moving to prescriptive thresholds that must be met. Often times, these prescriptive thresholds are not appropriate for all areas (An example is applying windspeed criteria that is appropriate for sandy desert areas to the San Joaquin Valley that has silty soils.). Finally, EPAs decisions are final with no appeal process.

request: Support for H.r. 5381 “the Commonsense exceptional events reform (Cleer) act”

request: Support for H.r. 5381 “the Commonsense exceptional events reform (Cleer) act”

The CLEER Act would require EPA to review exceptional events documentation within 90 days of submission, would require EPA to publicly disclose criteria upon which exceptional events demonstrations would be evaluated, would allow judicial review of EPA’s decisions, and would reduce the burden on states by basing EPA’s determinations on a preponderance of evidence with deference to the analysis and findings provided by the states.



S A N J O A Q U I N

H.r. 1583 - Congressman Jeff Flake

DRAFTrequests: establishment of air quality and Health empowerment Zone designation

The San Joaquin Valley Regional Policy council supports the Establishment of Air Quality and Health Empowerment Zone Designation which would provide financial assistance for incentive programs in areas that face significant air quality, health, and economic challenges. Given the Valley’s air quality challenges and continued double digit unemployment rates, the Valley would be a prime candidate for designation under this new program. The program would provide a mechanism for ongoing appropriations for incentive programs to accelerate the introduction of new emissions reduction technologies.

Background:

y Despite significant progress, the San Joaquin Valley continues to be severely impacted by adverse air quality and is in severe non-attainment of several federal and state air quality standards for particulates and emissions. Since 1980, when air programs in the Valley began taking shape, we have reduced emissions from stationary sources by 80% and total emissions by nearly 60%. These reductions in emissions have come about as the result of significant investment by Valley businesses. The number of days and the magnitude by which the Valley exceeds the health-based standards have been reduced dramatically. However, we need to do much more before we have healthier air for all Valley residents. The region’s topography and meteorology provide ideal conditions for trapping air pollution for long periods of time, and producing harmful pollutants such as ozone and particulate matter.

y The Valley’s non-attainment status leads to a number of negative health and economic impacts. A recent study by California State University, Fullerton estimates the annual value of the impacts from air pollution at $5.6 billion. In order to attain the standards and avoid the negative health and economic impact, the Valley will need to achieve significant emissions reductions beyond those obtained through existing federal, state, and local regulatory programs. The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District’s draft attainment plan obtains approximately 90% of the required emissions reductions from new and existing regulatory programs. The remaining emissions reductions can not be achieved through regulatory programs and will need to be achieved through incentive-based programs. The majority of the incentive-based reductions will address mobile sources of pollution which account for 80% of the nitrogen oxide emission in the San Joaquin Valley.

For additional information Contact:



S A N J O A Q U I N

air quality and Health empowerment Zone

DRAFT


S A N J O A Q U I N

program requeSt

San Joaquin Valley goods movement priorities:

Federal transportation authorization

nepa Streamlining and regulatory reform

1. Change federal NEPA regulations to set a specific review time in which Federal resource agencies are required to provide comments to the project sponsor. The time limit could be six (6) month or one (1) year as long as there is a defined time for review.

2. Permit integrating state and federal environmental impact studies without compromising environmental standards, to avoid project cost increases that occur due to lengthy processes.

metropolitan planning organizations

1. Maintain 50,000 population threshold for metropolitan planning organization designation.

2. Maintain federal planning funds for MPOs to continue regional planning activities and goods movement programs.

High priority Corridors on the national Highway System

1. Guaranteed $2 billion annually for High Priority Corridors on the National Highway System with priority for those areas listed as “moderate and above” 8-Hour Ozone nonattainment and PM2.5 nonattainment areas.

Create Freight Corridor program

1. Guaranteed $1 billion annually for freight corridors with priority for those areas listed as “moderate and above” 8-Hour Ozone nonattainment and PM2.5 nonattainment areas.

port Corridor management plans

1. Include Port Corridor Management Planning in criteria for existing planning grants.

2. Redefine port funding as within 25-50 miles of a port and a port access corridor as within 300 miles of a port.

Freight rail line notification and protection

1. Revise short-haul rail abandonment regulations to require short-haul rail line operators to notify transportation planning agencies and metropolitan planning agencies of their intent to abandon a segment of rail line.

2. Guaranteed $1 billion annually for national short-haul rail program with priority for those areas listed as “moderate and above” 8-Hour Ozone nonattainment and PM2.5 nonattainment areas.

3. Require short-haul rail line operators to file environmental and economic impact reports that address local and regional issues in accordance with NEPA.

DRAFT

nepa Streamlining and regulatory reform

goods movement priorities:Federal transportation

authorizationR E G I O N A LP O L I C Y C O U N C I L

S A N J O A Q U I N

requests: national environmental protection act regulatory reform

1. Change federal NEPA regulations to set specific review time in which federal resource agencies are required to provide comments to the project sponsor.

2. Permit integrating state and federal environmental impact studies without compromising environmental standards to avoid project cost increases that occur due to lengthy processes.

Background

San Joaquin Valley transportation agencies are grateful for the emphasis that Congressional proposals for Transportation Reauthorization have placed on regulatory reform in the project delivery process. The Valley also appreciates Congress’ continued support for transportation planning efforts as a small share off the top of each program we help administer.

y Time is money in transportation. Unnecessary project delays inflate the cost of already expensive projects.

y Local governments and state DOTs should have a reasonable expectation of the time it takes for federal agencies to review environmental documents.

y NEPA standards are typically exceeded by the California Environmental Quality Act. Integration is an inexpensive, relatively simple policy fix that has the potential to greatly improve project delivery and lower costs.

requests: metropolitan planning organization Structure and Funding

1. Maintain 50,000 population threshold for metropolitan planning organization designation.

2. Maintain federal planning funds for MPOs to continue regional planning activities and goods movement programs.

Background

The Valley’s transportation planning agencies appreciate Congress’ continued support for transportation planning efforts as a small share off the top of each program we help administer.

y The Valley is concerned about proposals to eliminate MPOs designations for those agencies within the 50,000-200,000 population threshold.

y Locally elected officials should represent the needs of their constituents through the MPO in the planning and selection process of transportation-related activities.

y Changing the population threshold disenfranchises locally elected officials and further strengthens the role of unelected state department of transportation officials, who do not necessarily consider or thoroughly understand the transportation issues in all regions of a state.

y We urge you to reject the consideration of phasing out over 50 percent of the United States’ Metropolitan Planning Organizations.

metropolitan planning organizations

DRAFT

request: High-priority Corridors on the national Highway System

1. Guaranteed $2 billion annually for High-Priority Corridors on the National Highway System for Extreme 8-Hour Ozone nonattainment and PM 2.5 nonattainment areas.

request: Create Freight Corridor program

1. Guaranteed $1 billion annually for freight corridors for Extreme 8-Hour Ozone nonattainment and PM 2.5 nonattainment areas.

request: port Corridor management plans

1. Include Port Corridor Management Planning in criteria for existing planning grants.

2. Redefine port funding as within 25-50 miles of a port and a port access corridor as within 300 miles of a port.

Background

y Home to more than 4 million people, the San Joaquin Valley’s status as the “nation’s salad bowl” and its proximity to major ports in northern and southern California classify it as a major hub of interstate commerce.

y The agricultural base of the San Joaquin Valley is a $25 billion industry that provides produce and dairy products to the global economy.

y Placing a funding emphasis on projects and programs that improve freight delivery is beneficial for interstate commerce and national interests to improve a struggling economy.

y The Valley is home to over 31,000 miles of roadways and is highly dependent on efficient road, rail, air and port systems that support timely goods-to-market transactions.

y The Valley’s critical role in national agricultural goods movement and as a thoroughfare for imports that enter through California ports should be recognized in a national goods movement program.

y By focusing scarce resources on regions with heavy, through-way, goods movement traffic and poor air quality, the national interest is served by addressing multiple problems through individual projects. CMAQ has proven a valuable program in the Valley for the same reason and we support its continuation.

y Using ozone and PM 2.5 non-attainment areas as criteria for goods movement funding benefits other regions besides the Valley, particularly Southern California and the ports of Long Beach and San Pedro. However, regions in states as diverse as Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and New Jersey also benefit.

High-priority Corridors


authorizationR E G I O N A LP O L I C Y C O U N C I L

S A N J O A Q U I N

DRAFT

High-priority Corridors Freight rail line notification and protection


S A N J O A Q U I N

requests: Short-line rail

1. Revise short-haul rail abandonment regulations to require short-line rail operators to notify transportation planning agencies of their intent to abandon a segment of rail line. This change would not necessarily delay the abandonment process.

2. Guaranteed $1 billion annually for national short-line rail program for Extreme 8-Hour Ozone nonattainment and PM 2.5 nonattainment areas.

3. Require short-line rail operators to file environmental and economic impact reports that address local and regional issues in accordance with NEPA.

Background

Investment in short-line rail projects can reduce the number of semi-trucks on California’s highways and provides another option for transporting Valley goods to state ports. By reauthorizing the transportation bill to maximize short-line rail, the following benefits will be achieved:

economic Stimulus – Transportation investment on average results in 45,000 new jobs per $1 billion in expenditures. In addition, rail increases state revenue through exports;

trade deficit reduction – Better rail infrastructure between the Valley and the ports will help increase the 40 percent share of the $25 billion in agricultural products exported from the Valley;

energy independence – Products shipped by rail are 10 times more energy efficient than trucks, reducing oil consumption and our dependence on foreign sources;

improved air quality – Rail access between the Valley and the port could reduce 400 trucks per day on I-5 – one of the largest reductions in diesel emissions for any project in the state;

Combat Climate Change – Using rail to transport more freight between the Ports and the Valley would result in the reduction of hundreds of tons of greenhouse gas emissions per year.


authorization

DRAFT

department of energy


S A N J O A Q U I N

regional energy planning

request: Support regional energy planning efforts in the San Joaquin Valley

The San Joaquin Valley MPOs participate in the Department of Energy’s Sunshine Initiative through the Southwest Solar Transformation Initiative (SSTI). Fourteen Valley jurisdictions are participating in the SSTI program to help streamline and standardize permitting, zoning, metering and connection processes – and improve finance options for rooftop solar systems. In calendar year 2012, these cities will receive a “roadmap of recommendations and best practices” and technical assistance to help them facilitate solar rooftop development more efficiently in their communities. We urge the Department of Energy to continue funding the Sunshine Initiative, and other regional energy planning and development efforts, for our eight county region.

Background - substantial resources are currently being invested in all forms of energy in the Valley. What the Valley lacks is: 1) a comprehensive understanding of the breadth and depth of these energy-related investments; 2) a true understanding of how these investments have contributed to the regional economy, and 3) a framework and roadmap for new energy-related investment within the region. The SSTI program is one component of this regional energy planning effort the Valley MPOs are working on with much more analysis, research and policy development needed.

AB 1779 (Galgiani) Page 1

AB 1779 GALGIANI (COAUTHORS ASSEMBLYMEMBERS DICKINSON, OLSEN AND PEREA)

(COAUTHOR SENATOR WOLK)

INTERCITY PASSENGER RAIL ACT OF 2012 FOR SAN JOAQUIN CORRIDOR

BACKGROUND

In 1996, the Capitol Corridor Joint Powers Authority (CCJPA) was created to oversee the administration of the Capitol Corridor service under the provisions of Senate Bill 457 (Kelley, Chapter 263, Statutes of 1996). Over the last 15 years, without direct financial contribution by member agencies, the CCJPA has successfully managed the Capitol Corridor between Auburn and San Jose. Capital investments, cooperation with the Union Pacific freight railroad, and state support have allowed for dramatic increases in the frequency of service (increases of 400 percent between Sacramento and Oakland), and the Capitol Corridor intercity passenger rail service has the best on-time performance in the nation for intercity service. In addition to more cost effective administration and operations, the CCJPA has shown that there are several other potential benefits to local authority administration of intercity passenger service including:

The ability to have a stronger voice in advocating for service improvements and expansions;

Local decision-making that is more responsive and adaptive to passenger issues;

The ability to take better advantage of joint marketing and partnerships with local agencies; and

More engagement by local communities to support the service.

This year, transportation planning agencies throughout the Central Valley began working together in order to set up a regional Joint Powers Authority and to support legislation that would enable regional governance of the San Joaquin intercity rail service.

PURPOSE

Assembly Bill 1779 will enable the transfer of administrative responsibility of the San Joaquin intercity passenger rail service from the Department of Transportation to a new joint powers authority. This bill is sponsored by the

San Joaquin Valley Regional Policy Council, the Central Valley Rail Working Group, the San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission and the Sacramento Regional Transit. Following the model of the CCJPA, AB 1779 is permissive legislation which would enable regional governance/management of the existing San Joaquin intercity passenger rail service between Bakersfield-Fresno-Stockton-Sacramento-Oakland. AB 1779 defines the composition of the San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority (Authority), and extends the time for creating the Authority and executing an interagency transfer agreement with the Department of Transportation to December 31, 2013. As amended, AB 1779 ensures that for not less than a three-year period, the level of state funding for intercity rail service in each corridor should be maintained at least to the current level of service in the corridor, providing fiscal stability that will allow appropriate planning and operation of these services. In order to transfer responsibility of the San Joaquin intercity passenger rail service to the Authority, AB 1779 requires that the transfer must result in administrative or operating cost reductions. Finally, AB 1779 prevents local resources from being used to offset any redirection, elimination, reduction, or reclassification of state resources for operating the San Joaquin intercity passenger rail service. With this measure, it is the intent of the Legislature that the San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority protect existing services and facilities and seek to expand service as warranted by ridership and available revenue. Under the provisions of AB 1779, the state would continue to have prominent and very important roles with the San Joaquin intercity passenger rail service, even after the administration responsibility is turned over to the SJJPA. The state will continue to provide the funding necessary for service operations, administration and marketing. Furthermore, Caltrans Division of Rail would remain responsible for the development of the Statewide Rail Plan; the coordination and integration between the three state-supported intercity passenger rail services; the preparation of grant applications to the

AB 1779 (Galgiani) Page 2

federal government; and the development of state budget requests – like they have been for the Capitol Corridor under the CCJPA. With more efficient administration and stronger local/regional support, a regionally managed San Joaquin intercity passenger rail service can result in much higher frequencies of service, and increases in ridership and revenue – like that experienced by the Capitol Corridor under the regional administration of the CCJPA. Increases in San Joaquin intercity passenger rail service and ridership will result in more jobs, improve air quality, and will help promote sustainable development. Intercity passenger rail is environmentally friendly, and the state has a continuing interest in the provision of cost-effective and efficiently administered intercity passenger rail services.

VOTES & BILL STATUS Assembly Transportation Committee, 11-0 Assembly Local Government Committee 7-0 Assembly Appropriations Committee, “B” roll

call Assembly Floor, 64-11

SPONSORS/SUPPORTERS San Joaquin Valley Regional Policy Council1

(Sponsor) Central Valley Rail Working Group2 (Sponsor)

1 San Joaquin Valley Regional Policy Council Member Agencies

are: Fresno Council of Governments, Kern Council of Governments, Kings County Association of Governments, Madera County Transportation Commission, Merced County Association of Governments, San Joaquin Council of Governments, Stanislaus Council of Governments, Tulare County Association of Governments, and San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District.

2 Central Valley Rail Working Group Member Agencies are:

Sacramento Regional Transit District, Sacramento Area Council of Governments, City of Sacramento, City of Elk Grove, City of Galt, County of Sacramento, San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission, San Joaquin Council of Governments, San Joaquin Regional Transit District, City of Stockton, City of Manteca, City of Lodi, County of San Joaquin, Stanislaus Council of Governments, City of Turlock, City of Modesto, County of Stanislaus, Merced County Association of Governments, City of Merced, and County of Merced.

San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission (Sponsor)

Sacramento Regional Transit District (Sponsor) San Joaquin Regional Transit District City of Merced Steve Cohn, Sacramento City Councilmember

and Board Member of the Capitol Corridor Joint Powers Authority, Sacramento Regional Transit and Sacramento Area Council of Governments

California Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley

County of Fresno City of Modesto Madera County Transportation Commission San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Merced County of Association of Governments City of Lodi City of Fresno Mayor Ashley Swearengin City of Elk Grove City of Sacramento Los Angeles-San Diego-San Luis Obispo

(LOSSAN) Rail Corridor Agency City of Visalia San Joaquin Council of Governments (San

Joaquin COG) City of Selma City of Mendota Fresno Regional Workforce Investment Board Sacramento Area Council of Governments Tulare County Association of Governments City of Stockton Stanislaus Council of Governments City of Turlock City of Huron City of Fowler City of Kingsburg Greater Stockton Chamber of Commerce

FOR MORE INFORMATION Victoria Grajek, Chief of Staff Assemblymember Cathleen Galgiani [email protected] (916) 319-2769 Dan Leavitt, Manager of Regional Initiatives San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission [email protected] (209) 944-6266

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

6/14/12

1

Regional Governance of the SAN JOAQUIN Intercity Rail Service

SJV Regional Policy Council Presentation: June 22, 2012 Dan Leavitt San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission

§  AB 1779 (Galgiani, Dickinson, Olsen, Perea, Wolk) §  Amends Existing Government Codes §  AB 1779 is Permissive, not Mandatory §  Extend Time Period for Transfer Agreement to

December 31, 2013 §  Identify Composition of San Joaquin JPA §  Protects Against Use of Local Funds to Expand San

Joaquin Service §  Requires Administrative Cost-Savings

Legislation

michaelsigala

Typewritten Text

ITEM 6

6/14/12

2

Letters of Support

¨  Central Valley Rail Working Group (sponsor)

¨  SJV Regional Policy Council (sponsor)

¨  Sacramento RT (sponsor)

¨  San Joaquin RRC (sponsor) ¨  CA Partnership for SJV

¨  Stanislaus COG ¨  San Joaquin COG

¨  Madera CTC

¨  Merced CAG

¨  Tulare CAG ¨  Sacramento Area COG

¨  Mayor of Fresno ¨  Steve Cohn, Sacramento City

Council, CCJPA Board member

¨  City of Modesto ¨  City of Merced

¨  City of Lodi ¨  City of Elk Grove

¨  City of Sacramento

¨  City of Visalia

6/14/12

3

Letters of Support

¨  City of Stockton ¨  City of Selma

¨  City of Mendota ¨  City of Turlock

¨  City of Huron

¨  City of Fowler ¨  City of Kingsburg

¨  San Joaquin RTD ¨  Los Angeles-San Diego-San

Luis Obispo (LOSSAN) Rail Corridor Agency

¨  Fresno County ¨  Fresno Regional Workforce

Investment Board ¨  SJV Air Pollution Control District

¨  Greater Stockton Chamber of Commerce

§  AB 1779 spot bill submitted February 22 §  AB 1779 in print on March 28 §  AB 1779 passes Assembly Transportation

Committee (11-0) on April 16 §  SB 1225 passes Senate Transportation

Committee (6-0) on April 24 §  AB 1779 passes Local Government Committee

(7-1) on April 25

Progress

6/14/12

4

Progress

§  May 9 – Assembly Appropriations Hearing for AB 1779 (in “suspense”)

§  May 25 – Passed Assembly Appropriations on “B” Roll Call

§  May 30 – Assembly Vote on AB 1779 (64-11) §  June 19 or July 3 – Senate Trans. Comm. Hearing §  July – Senate Appropriations Hearing §  August – Senate Vote on AB 1779 §  August/September – Governor’s Desk

Assembly Appropriations Analysis

§  “One-time special fund cost to Caltrans in the range of $150,000 to implement a transfer agreement with the JPA, including supporting the transition of Caltrans' equipment and facilities. Following implementation of the JPA, Caltrans would realize ongoing administrative savings of about $300,000”.

§  “Fulfilling legislative intent to maintain current funding state levels to the SJC for at least five years could create cost pressure if overall state funding for intercity rail were to be reduced during this time.”

6/14/12

5

Key Appropriation Amendments

§  Sec. 2 (4): “For not less than a five-year three-year period, the level of state funding for intercity rail service in each corridor should be maintained at a level equal to at least the current level of service in the corridor,…”

§  14070.2 (b): “It is the intent of the Legislature that the San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority protect existing services and facilities and seek to expand service as warranted by ridership and available revenue.”

Next Steps

§  Additional Bi-partisan Co-Authors for AB 1779 §  Additional Letters of Support for AB 1779 §  Continue to Meet with Alameda and Contra Costa

Region Representatives §  Continue to Partner with LOSSAN Board §  Develop Draft JPA Agreement §  Develop Details for Business Case for Regional

Management

6/14/12

6

§  Presentations: CVRWG (4) , SJV Regional Policy Council (2), SJV Directors’ Mtg (4)

Fresno COG (2), Tulare CAG, Madera CTC, Kern COG (2), SJRRC (3), Valley Voice, CA Partnership for SJV, Fresno Co., StanCOG (2), Kings CAG, SJVRC, Kings Co. (2), CA CV EDC, City of Wasco, SJ COG (2)

§  Meetings: Directors of SJV RTPAs, Sac RT, CCJPA, LOSSAN Board, SANDAG, Mayor

of Fresno, SJVRC, Caltrans Director, Caltrans Director of Planning, Caltrans DOR, Amtrak, Fresno Co. Supervisors Perea & Case, Alameda CTC, Contra Costa TA, CHSRA, Governor’s Office, Kern Co. Supervisor Watson, Kern Chamber of Commerce, City of Fresno Planning, SJV Air Pollution Control District, City of Visalia, CA Partnership for SJV, Fresno Workforce Board, EDC Serving Fresno Co., Office of Speaker Perez, Staff for SJV Assembly/Senators, Save Bakersfield, City of Bakersfield, City of Wasco

Presentations/Meetings

QUESTIONS?

DATE: June 22, 2012

TO: SJV Regional Policy Council

FROM: Michael Sigala, Valleywide Coordinator

RE: Valleywide Overall Work Program, FY 2012-13 ____________________________________________________________________________ An Overall Work Program (OWP) is a federal and state mandated planning and budgeting work product that Regional Transportation Planning Agencies (RTPA) develop on an annual basis. The OWP includes a description of what work is to be accomplished, when, by whom, and using which specific funding. The OWP is a one-year scope of work and budget for transportation planning activities and funding sources to be accomplished between July 1 and June 30 of the state fiscal year. The Valleywide Overall Work Program for FY 2012-2013 details coordinated activities that all eight regional planning agencies are actively engaged in. Several of the work program items were prioritized as a result of the January 2012 Directorsʼ Committee Workshop. Each Valley RTPA will also include a Valleywide Chapter in their respective Overall Work Program that details and proportionally budgets for the shared tasks identified in the attached Valleywide OWP. The Valleywide OWP is a summary document and is not intricately tied to the regional transportation plan (RTP), regional transportation improvement program (RTIP) or federal transportation improvement program (FTIP) of each Valley RTPA. The San Joaquin Valley Regional Transportation Planning Agenciesʼ Directorsʼ Committee approved this item at their April 5, 2012 meeting. Requested Action: Approve Valleywide Overall Work Program for Fiscal Year 2012-13.


Item 7

SJV Regional Planning Agencies 2012-2013 Overall Work Program, 4/5/2012 Page 1

San Joaquin Valley Regional Planning Agencies

FY 2012-‐2013 Overall Work Program

San Joaquin Council of Governments Stanislaus Council of Governments Merced County Association of Governments Madera County Transportation Commission Fresno Council of Governments Kings County Association of Governments Tulare County Association of Governments Kern Council of Governments


San Joaquin Valley Regional Policy Council Members and Staff as of March 2012

Fresno Council of Governments (Fresno COG) Supervisor Judy Case, County of Fresno, Mayor Amarpreet Dhaliwal, City of San Joaquin [Alternate: Mayor Jose Flores, City of Clovis] STAFF: Tony Boren, Executive Director – Fresno COG Kern Council of Governments (Kern COG)

Councilmember Cheryl Wegman, City of Wasco Mayor Manuel Cantu, City of McFarland [Alternate: Councilmember Harold Hanson, City of Bakersfield]

STAFF: Rob Ball, Acting Executive Director – Kern COG Kings County Association of Governments (KCAG)

Supervisor Tony Barba, Kings County Supervisor Joe Neves, Kings County

STAFF: Terri King, Executive Director – KCAG Madera County Transportation Commission (MCTC) Councilmember Robert Poythress, City of Madera, Policy Council Vice Chair

Supervisor Tom Wheeler, County of Madera [Alternate: Supervisor Frank Bigelow, Madera County] STAFF: Patricia Taylor, Executive Director – MCTC Merced County Association of Governments (MCAG)

Mayor Pro Tem Joe Oliveira, City of Gustine [Alternate: Supervisor John Pedrozo, County of Merced] STAFF: Jesse Brown, Executive Director – MCAG

San Joaquin Council of Governments (SJCOG) Mayor Ann Johnston, City of Stockton Councilmember Steve DeBrum, City of Manteca [Alternate – Councilmember Chuck Winn, City of Ripon] STAFF: Andy Chesley, Executive Director – SJCOG Stanislaus Council of Governments (StanCOG) Mayor Charles Goeken, City of Waterford Supervisor Bill O’Brien, County of Stanislaus [Alternate – Supervisor Vito Chiesa, County of Stanislaus] STAFF: Vince Harris, Executive Director – StanCOG Tulare County Association of Governments (TCAG)

Supervisor Allen Ishida, County of Tulare, Policy Council Chair Councilmember Paul Boyer, City of Farmersville [Alternate: Councilmember Rudy Mendoza, City of Woodlake]

STAFF: Ted Smalley, Executive Director – TCAG San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, Seyed Sadredin, Executive Director


BACKGROUND The San Joaquin Valley (SJV) is a large, diverse, and complex area that contains millions of acres of the world’s most fertile farmland, a wealth of natural resources, and large urban environments. The 240-‐mile long valley stretches from Stockton to Bakersfield and encompasses the eight-‐county region (Kern, Kings, Tulare, Fresno, Madera, Merced, Stanislaus and San Joaquin). The San Joaquin Valley Regional Planning Agencies (Valley RPAs) have organized in response to the need to address certain issues of “Valleywide” concern. Air quality, regional transportation planning, freight and goods movement, and certain rail issues in particular require a broader more coordinated approach to planning. The Valley RPAs first entered into a Memorandum of Understanding on September 21, 1991 agreeing to coordinate regional planning activities. Specifically this MOU provides for the close coordination of planning activities where interregional issues are involved. Areas currently being coordinated are the Regional Transportation Plan, the Transportation Improvement Program, air quality conformity process, transportation control measures, congestion management planning, Blueprint planning and transportation modeling. The MOU establishes a strong working relationship between the eight existing regional planning agencies and satisfies federal requirements to have a cooperative agreement between agencies located within the nonattainment area boundaries. To facilitate this cooperation, monthly Directors’ Committee Meetings are held to promote continual and comprehensive regional planning. In 2006, the eight San Joaquin Valley RPAs again renewed their commitment to regional planning and created the San Joaquin Valley Regional Policy Council, consisting of two elected officials from each regional planning agency. The Regional Policy Council provides guidance on common interregional policy issues, and represents the Valley at public forums. In 2009, the Regional Policy Council was amended to add a representative from the SJV Air Pollution Control District. The Regional Policy Council meets quarterly. The FY 2012-‐2013 Valleywide Overall Work Program details coordinated activities that all eight regional planning agencies are actively engaged in. Several of the work program items were prioritized as a result of the January 2012 Directors’ Committee Workshop. Each RPA will also include a Valleywide Chapter in their respective Overall Work Program that details and proportionally budgets for these shared tasks. {Note – the terms Regional Planning Agency (RPA), Regional Transportation Planning Agency (RTPA), Metropolitan Planning Agency (MPO) and Council of Governments (COG) are used interchangeably in this document.}


FY 2012-‐2013 Valleywide Activities

PURPOSE: To promote coordination, cooperation and communication among the eight San Joaquin Valley Regional Planning Agencies, including the Regional Policy Council, and other federal, state and local governments, related to various regional planning processes.

1. Intercity Rail

Lead: San Joaquin Council of Governments In 1996, the Capitol Corridor Joint Powers Authority (CCJPA) was created to oversee the administration of the Capitol Corridor service under the provisions of Senate Bill 457 (SB 457). SB 457 authorized the State to enter into interagency transfer agreements with specified joint exercise of powers entities to assume responsibility for intercity passenger rail services and be allocated funds for that purpose. The local/regional agencies along the Pacific Surfliner and San Joaquin corridors chose not to take advantage of SB 457, and therefore the administrative responsibility for the San Joaquin and Pacific Surfliner services has remained with Caltrans Division of Rail. Acknowledging the success of the CCJPA, the Los Angeles-‐San Diego-‐San Luis Obispo Rail Corridor Agency Joint Powers Board (LOSSAN Board) approved in concept a framework for a potential local authority to manage the “Pacific Surfliner” state-‐supported intercity passenger rail service and is in the process of drafting legislation using SB 457 as a model. If LOSSAN legislation is successful, the Valley would be the only state-‐managed rail service left in California. The next objective would be to discuss strategies to increase rail service for existing lines, coordinate those efforts with High Speed Rail plans and develop the option of creating a Valley JPA. At the November 2011 meeting of the Central Valley Rail Working Group (CVRWG), staff discussed the LOSSAN Board’s efforts towards regional governance of the Pacific Surfliner, and asked the CVRWG if there might be similar interest in the Central Valley for regional governance of the San Joaquin service. The CVRWG directed staff to move forward and set up a Subcommittee to work with other agencies to explore the concept of setting up a regional JPA and supporting legislation that would enable regional governance of the San Joaquin service. The overall goal of a regional JPA would be to transform the existing San Joaquin intercity rail service from a State/Amtrak managed service to a service under local/regional authority that could be more responsive to local/regional needs, issues, and wishes of the riders of the service. In addition to more cost-‐effective operations, there are several other potential benefits to local authority management. ONGOING AND FUTURE ACTIVITIES

• Coordinate meetings and discussions with the San Joaquin Valley Rail Committee on options for developing a JPA structure

• Research and evaluate options for State legislation • Draft a White Paper on Intercity Rail • Coordinate presentations on Intercity Rail at various county agencies to raise awareness,

generate interest for the project, and build consensus for a regional governance structure • Reach out to counties outside the Valley for input on successful strategies


• Make the business case for cost effectiveness: A detailed Business Case must demonstrate

that the Initiative results in lower costs than the current Caltrans oversight • Indentify Member Agencies and select the Managing Agency, perhaps the San Joaquin Valley

Rail Committee • If consensus on regional governance is achieved, support legislation to enable regional

governance of the San Joaquin intercity rail service

2. State Route 99 Coordination Lead COG: Kern Council of Governments There has been active coordination and consultation between the Valley RPAs and Caltrans (owner/operator of SR 99). Working with the Great Valley Center and Caltrans, a Business Plan and a Master Plan were developed for the SR 99 corridor running through the Valley. It was in major part due to this coordination that the Proposition 1B bond included a SR 99 earmark, the only transportation earmark in the bond placed before the voters. Those funds have been awarded to needed projects, but there is an additional $5 billion plus in projects remaining to be funded. The next objective is to develop the necessary Corridor System Management Plans required by the State, update the Business Plan and Master Plan, and coordinate and reach consensus for continued project selection and funding alternatives. ONGOING AND FUTURE ACTIVITIES

• Coordinate and communicate for ongoing consensus regarding project selection and prioritization

• Maintain close communication with Caltrans to update project savings totals • Revise and update the “99 Business Plan” • Revise and update as needed the “SR 99 White Paper” developed as background for the

federal surface transportation reauthorization bill • Include in the updated Business Plan an auxiliary lane concept and identification of SHOPP

eligible projects • Maintain a close working relationship with Caltrans and the California Transportation

Commission for ongoing support and communication

3. Joint Funding Strategies – STIP, IIP and SHOPP

Lead: Tulare County Association of Governments The State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) is a multi-‐year capital improvement program to assist the State and local entities to plan and implement transportation improvements, and to utilize resources in a cost effective manner. STIP funded improvements include state highways, local roads, public transit, intercity rail, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, grade separations, transportation system management, transportation demand management, soundwalls, intermodal facilities, safety, and environmental enhancement and mitigation. Interregional Improvement Program (IIP) funds are programmed by Caltrans on a Statewide priority basis, for use primarily on the State highway system (outside urbanized areas) and projects


that generate economic development. Eligible projects include interregional roads (outside of metropolitan areas) and Intercity rail. The purpose of the State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP) program is to maintain the operational integrity and safety of the State highway system. It includes State highway safety and rehabilitation projects, seismic retrofit projects, land and building projects, landscaping, some operational improvements, and bridge replacement. Unlike STIP projects, SHOPP projects may not increase roadway capacity. The eight Valley RPAs developed a coordinated programming proposal for the 2012 STIP. Similar to the 2010 San Joaquin Valley coordinated STIP, the goal of the proposal was to balance the collective annual programming capacity of all eight RPAs against programming priorities of each RPA that may exceed or be below the individual annual programming shares. The Valley’s 2012 coordinated STIP illustrates our commitment to regional collaboration where benefits are shared, maximized and maintained within our region. The Valley would like to continue and expand upon its commitment to develop coordinated funding strategies including the IIP and SHOPP programs in FY 2012-‐13. ONGOING AND FUTURE ACTIVITIES

• Conduct follow up and programming coordination as needed for the 2012 Valleywide STIP • Develop a milestone timeline for IIP programming • Develop a milestone timeline for SHOPP programming • Maintain a close working relationship with Caltrans and the California Transportation

Commission for ongoing support and communication

4. San Joaquin Valley Interregional Goods Movement Lead: Valleywide Coordinator, and All The San Joaquin Valley region is one of the four major international trade regions in California. The San Joaquin Valley (SJV) Goods Movement Study project has completed three phases of goods movement related studies in the valley. The project will provide for improvements to the eight-‐county San Joaquin Valley truck model and integration with local model. The first phase of the study described the goods movement system and freight flows for the region and generated a list of key issues and problems. Phase II of the study developed the San Joaquin Valley Truck model tool. In Phase III, the SJV truck model tested modified scenarios from Phase II and other goods movement scenarios in future years. The completed model product will be used by each of the county Regional Planning Agencies and HQ Modeling and Travel Analysis Branch. The San Joaquin Valley Regional Planning Agencies recently developed the 2007 San Joaquin Valley Regional Goods Movement Action Plan. The purpose of the plan is to provide a knowledge base for the understanding of freight and goods movement issues facing the San Joaquin Valley. The Plan also provides a platform for promoting strategies to improve overall movement of goods in the Valley and identifies goods movement projects that competed for some of the $2 billion Proposition 1B Trade Corridor Improvement Funds (TCIF).


Increasingly, goods movement continues to play a more central role in transportation planning. It is anticipated that future funding may emulate the approach of the Trade Corridor Improvement Fund tying transportation funding to trade corridors and movement of goods. In addition, a system-‐wide approach is a critical component. Trade corridors of national significance and statewide efficiencies have become central criteria for funding. This emphasis requires continued Valleywide collaboration. It is widely understood that working collaboratively as a Valley was the key factor in securing the Valley’s “fair share” of TCIF funds under Proposition 1B. Individual projects that appear to be isolated from the system rather than key program components can no longer effectively compete for transportation funding. Emphasis on system-‐wide efficiency and a comprehensive goods movement system seem to have become key elements of competitive funding. It is anticipated these trends will continue to shape transportation funding into the foreseeable future. In fiscal year 2010-‐2011, the eight Valley RPAs received a funding award for a Caltrans Partnership Planning grant for the San Joaquin Valley Interregional Goods Movement Study for a comprehensive strategy by mode and east/west goods movement. The Study will build on previous work efforts and further refine the criteria and decision-‐making process for future coordinated selection for Valleywide projects. The Study will occur over a 24-‐month period that began in May 2011. PREVIOUS COMPLETED ACTIVITIES

• San Joaquin Valley Regional Goods Movement Action Plan, 2007 • Draft San Joaquin Valley Regional Goods Movement Action Plan, 2008 • California Interregional Intermodal System (CIRIS) Implementation Plan 2006 • SR 58 Origin and Destination Study • State Route 99 Business Plan • Interstate 5 and State Route 99 Origin and Destination Study, 2009 • East Side Business Plan (Short Haul Rail), Tulare County, 2010 • SR 223, 166, 119, 46 and 65 Truck Origin and Destination Studies, 2011 • Coordinated with goods movement staff, Caltrans District 6 and 10, and Caltrans Goods

Movement headquarters for pre-‐planning activities including developing a request for proposals

• Selected Cambridge Systematics to undertake the current planning effort ONGOING AND FUTURE ACTIVITIES

• Demographics, Economics and Circulation analysis • Importance and Benefits of Freight • Community education and stakeholder outreach • Compile goods Movement Data and Prepare Report • Assess Demand Growth, Trends, and System Performance • Evaluate Community, Environmental, and Economic Impact of Goods Movement • Identify Strategies for Improving Goods Movement • Mitigating Strategies for Local Communities and Environment • Develop SJV Interregional Goods Movement Plan • Coordinate with state and federal partners to prioritize funding to implement the Plan


5. Short Haul Rail (SB 325 Implementation)

Lead: Tulare County Association of Governments SB 325 (Central California Railroad Authority Act) creates an authority to ensure railroad service if the Surface Transportation Board authorizes the abandonment or discontinuance of service on, or in event of the bankruptcy or sale of, existing short line railroad operations in the San Joaquin Valley Counties. Communities heavily reliant on short rail services stand to lose access to goods movement and shipping services if an alternative is not developed to ensure dependable rail service for the San Joaquin Valley Counties. The governor signed SB 325 on September 6, 2011. The bill requires the authority to conduct its first meeting not later than 120 days after abandonment or discontinuance of service on, or the bankruptcy or sale of, the short-‐line railroads in the member counties if the members have formed a joint exercise of powers agreement to implement and manage the authority. To date, five of the Valley’s eight counties have expressed a strong desire to join a joint powers authority under SB 325, with the option to join open for the remaining three counties. ONGOING AND FUTURE ACTIVITIES

• Support the Valley RPAs Directors’ sub-‐committee in drafting a JPA including managing meetings and ongoing communications.

• Manage data on short-‐haul rail and develop rail industrial sites from each county • Distribute the JPA to participating COGS and process comments and feedback • Establish funding and governance structure for JPA • Elect Chair and Vice Chair • Establish short term and long term goals, and draft budget • Conduct first meeting of JPA, within 120 days of an actual filing • Implement ongoing meetings and business of the JPA

6. High Speed Rail Lead: All Throughout the discussions taking place over the past couple of decades, the Valley Regional Planning Agencies have occasionally met jointly or in smaller groups with the various Commissions/Authority overseeing the High Speed Rail effort. Although positions have varied to some degree regarding the exact details of High Speed Rail, its routes and its placement of stations, the Regional Planning Agencies have been good at exchanging information and tracking our various positions.

At this time, there is no Valleywide consensus or agreement on a position for the advancement of High Speed Rail.


7. Air Quality Transportation Planning & Coordination Lead: San Joaquin COG To ensure a coordinated and comprehensive approach to transportation and air quality planning among the eight San Joaquin Valley transportation planning agencies and the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, the Valley RPAs expend resources targeted at federal air quality conformity, green house gas/AB 32 compliance, coordinated Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP) and Regional Transportation Plans (RTPs), and development of Sustainable Community Strategies under SB 375. Coordination among the RTPAs, the Air District and other air quality and transportation agencies is proving to be a very effective process. The Valley RTPA Directors have budgeted to continue joint funding for a valleywide Air Quality Coordinator, responsible to the Directors, to ensure that air quality conformity and related modeling within the Valley is accomplished on a consistent and timely basis. In addition, the RTPA Directors have budgeted additional funding to provide coordination on air quality policy issues beyond the technical needs of the Valley. Towards this end, Cari Anderson Consulting was hired to conduct the requisite analysis and coordination. Transportation conformity is required by the federal Clean Air Act and ensures that federal funding is given to transportation activities that are consistent with air quality goals. The Clean Air Act strengthened conformity requirements for transportation projects, necessitating a more enhanced level of technical analysis of plans, programs, and projects than in the past. Conformity determinations must be conducted at least every four years, or as amendments are made to plans or projects. The federal transportation conformity rule requires interagency consultation on issues that would affect the conformity analysis, such as the underlying assumptions and methodologies used to prepare the analysis. Consultation is generally conducted through the San Joaquin Valley Interagency Coordinating Committee (ICC). The ICC has been established to provide a coordinated approach to Valley air quality, conformity and transportation modeling issues. Each of the eight Valley Regional Transportation Planning Agencies (RTPAs) and the Air Pollution Control District are represented. In addition, the Federal Highway Administration, Federal Transit Administration, the Environmental Protection Agency, the California Air Resources Board and Caltrans have members on the committee. PREVIOUS COMPLETED ACTIVITIES

• Monitored developments of federal and State Clean Air Acts • Executed MOU with eight Valley RTPAs and the Air District to ensure a comprehensive and

cooperative approach to air quality transportation planning • Presented air quality transportation issues to the Air District Board • Assisted in the development of travel and emissions travel forecasts • Projected motor vehicle emission forecasts • Continued to work jointly with the Air District in all matters pertaining to transportation • Adoption of the San Joaquin Valley Transportation Control Measure (TCM) program • Structuring agreements between various counties to accomplish air quality conformity

certifications • Assisted with ongoing Air Quality efforts in the San Joaquin Valley; development of the

Ozone plan, the PM10 plan, the PM 2.5 plan, the CO plan, Air District Rules, and Conformity Determinations

• Assisted the Air District in developing new motor vehicle emission budgets for the Ozone Plan, and for the PM10 and PM 2.5 Plans


• Participated with the other Valley RTPAs in the San Joaquin Valley Interagency Coordinating Committee to address pertinent transportation modeling, air quality modeling, and transportation conformity analysis issues

• Continued coordination among Valley transit agencies • Comments on proposed air quality plans, rules, regulations and new standards

ONGOING AND FUTURE ACTIVITIES

• Monitor state and federal guidance related to air quality transportation planning requirements

• Provide technical support and assistance on applicable transportation planning issues to the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD)

• Participate with the other Valley RTPAs in the San Joaquin Valley Interagency Coordinating Committee to address pertinent transportation modeling, air quality modeling, and conformity analysis issues

• Conduct conformity determinations to ensure that the Regional Transportation Plan, FTIP, and subsequent amendments conform to the State Implementation Plans (SIPs), as required by federal laws and regulations

• Submit future-‐year travel forecasts to the SJVAPCD and the California Air Resources Board as requested

• Continue with the ongoing public education process and work to develop outreach programs on conformity, air quality, and other transportation issues

• Continue to work with the SJVAPCD to jointly estimate and evaluate the effects of EMFAC 2011 and current California mobile source control measures on motor vehicle emission projections

• Identify methods, procedures, and/or alternatives to analyzing the effect of transportation modes, infrastructure and land use patterns on air quality

• Attend and participate within the Valley RTPA Directors' Committee meetings on a regular basis

• Conduct Valley TPA sub-‐committee meetings on a regular basis for purposes of identifying consistent approaches to development of the: Regional Transportation Plan; the Regional Transportation Improvement Program; transportation and emissions modeling; transportation control measures; and conformity

• Continue the work of the SB 375 subcommittee and modeling to determine suitable green house gas emission targets for the Valley by Fall 2012

• Continue to work towards a coordinated Sustainable Community Strategy “plan” for the Valley

8. Relationship Development with External Agencies and Entities

Lead: Madera CTC and Valleywide Coordinator In order to maintain ongoing communication and cooperation with other external agencies, the Valley RPAs have included in this year’s OWP a relationship development component to foster routine “two way” communication with our funding, policy and neighboring California transportation agencies.


Federal entities that will be formally outreached to in FY 2012-‐2013 include the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), the Federal Rail Administration (FRA), the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). State entities that will be formally outreached to include the California Transportation Commission (CTC), Caltrans Districts 6 and 10, Caltrans Headquarters, California Association of Council of Governments (CALCOG), Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), Sacramento Council of Governments (SACOG), San Diego Association of Governments ( SANDAG), and the California Air Resources Board (ARB).


• Valleywide Coordinator to develop template for quarterly communications with FTA, FRA, FHWA and EPA

• Written correspondence to commence prior to the beginning of FY 2012-‐13 • Directors to coordinate and attend 1/3 of CTC meetings • Directors to meet with at least two CTC Board Members they don’t currently know • Directors to meet quarterly CTC Valley representative • CTC staff to be invited Directors Committee meeting once a year • RPA staff to be encouraged to take more leadership positions on Valleywide matters • Valley Directors to develop and maintain relationships with Caltrans Director and Deputy

for Planning • Caltrans staff to be invited to attend “Valley Voice” advocacy trips • All Valley Directors should attend and speak at each CALCOG meeting • Valley Directors Committee meeting should be moved to a time of the month where Valley

Directors can review and discuss CALCOG agenda prior to CALCOG meeting to develop joint strategy on issues

• Meet with SCAG representative to discuss how they are approaching their SCS • Coordinate with SANDAG regarding the SCS meeting • Request MTC staff come to a Valley Directors Committee meeting • Valley Directors to meet twice with management of ARB • The Valley ARB representative needs to be added to the SJV Regional Policy Council

9. San Joaquin Valley Regional Blueprint Planning

Lead: Fresno Council of Governments Today, 4 million people live in the San Joaquin Valley. According to the Department of Finance, the Valley’s population will grow to over 9.4 million by 2050. How will the region accommodate this anticipated growth? Will it be through expansion of current cities or the development of new ones? How will intra and interregional transportation accommodate commuters, travelers, and goods movement? And how will the balance be maintained between the development of new infrastructure and the need to preserve the region’s most important resources? A look at the current economy of the region points to agriculture as the Valley’s economic base. While growth of agriculture has altered some of the natural environmental landscape over time, perhaps even more concerning is the rate at which prime agricultural land is being converted to urban uses. Much of the land conversion was due to the attractiveness of Valley home prices to


residents of the Bay Area and Los Angeles regions. However, these new Valley residents often commute back to their place of origin for employment compounding transportation impacts, air quality dynamics, and presenting significant civic engagement challenges. Highway 99 bears a major share of commuter traffic, and is also burdened with extraordinary truck traffic transporting goods. Insufficient for current traffic loads, Highway 99 is further impacted by industrial growth and new distribution centers, especially in the Southern San Joaquin Valley. At both the federal and state levels, policymakers have begun to recognize the extraordinary challenges facing the Valley. Through executive orders issued by two presidents, the Federal Interagency Task Force was formed to help coordinate federal efforts within the region. Following suit, Governor Schwarzenegger signed an executive order creating the California Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley, a state effort to direct resources to the region. Through the Blueprint process, regional leaders have worked closely with the Partnership to address the significant issues facing the region. Teaming with the San Joaquin Valley Partnership enables pooling of resources, consistency of vision, and combined momentum to solutions. PREVIOUSLY COMPLETED ACTIVITIES

• Blueprint Governing Board Workshop – August 2005 • Blueprint Grant application package (COG MOU, letters of support)– October 2005 • Blueprint Grant Award Notifications – 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010 • Establish SJV COG Directors Association Policy Subcommittee • Establish the Blueprint Coordinating Committee (BCC) • Institutional Framework for SJV Regional Blueprint Planning • Community Outreach Plans • SJ Valley Modeling group established • Blueprint Vision Summit –June 28, 2006 • Established and Convened Blueprint Regional Advisory Committee (BRAC) • Blueprint Media Campaign – Ongoing, Blueprint Media Subcommittee • Attended Blueprint Learning Network Workshops (May, 2006; September, 2006;

November, 2006; June, 2007; Sept. 2007; November 2007) • Alternative Blueprint Scenarios • Hybrid Alternative Blueprint Scenarios • Choose Preferred SJV Regional Blueprint Scenario • Valleywide Blueprint Summit – Jan 2009 • Established Valley Blueprint and Blueprint Toolkit web sites


• Continue to work with Valley MPOs and Valleywide Blueprint Planners working group • Continue to engage Regional Policy Council in all aspects of SJV Blueprint integration • Monitor local commitment to integrate Blueprint principles into general plans • Coordinate with activities related to development of Sustainable Communities Strategies • Determine the impact of various densities on the fiscal health of cities and counties in the

SJV • Determine the market demand for higher density residential housing projects • Coordinate with Greenprint – Develop Valleywide resources-‐oriented companion piece to

Blueprint • Work with Smart Valley Places in work with local agencies • Monitor and report on progress integrating Blueprint principles


• Continue public outreach efforts • Prepare reports and monitor contractors as necessary • Participate in Blueprint-‐related meetings and workshops • Continue to Coordinate Tribal consultation • Coordinate with Prop 84 grant activities

10. Valley Legislative Affairs Committee Lead: Stanislaus Council of Governments A Valley Legislative Affairs Committee (VLAC) has been established at the staff level. They are responsible for tracking legislation which would have a Valley impact, in particular legislation affecting the duties and responsibilities of the Valley’s Regional Planning Agencies. Not only do they track the bills but they also exchange pertinent information that may be crucial towards developing a support/oppose/amend position for each of the agencies. Where legislative positions appear to have a consensus within the Valley, the Regional Policy Council should be informed so they may make a unified statement. The intent is to increase the awareness at the State level that the Valley is actively engaged in the process, and deserves being acknowledged as having a unified position. Too often, in looking at a bill analysis, the larger planning agencies will have been consulted and their positions will be posted. The San Joaquin Valley needs to weigh in on the legislative process in order to be more effective. The annual “Valley Voice” advocacy trips are coordinated by VLAC. The Washington D.C. trip was held in September 2011 and the Sacramento trip in March 2012. VLAC meets monthly and amended its bylaws in 2011 to align the VLAC chair and vice chair with the respective chair and vice chair from the Directors’ Committee. PREVIOUS COMPLETED ACTIVITIES

• Annual “Valley Voice” advocacy trips to Sacramento (2008, 2009, 2010, 2011) • Annual “Valley Voice advocacy trips to Washington DC (2009, 2010, 2011) • Monthly coordination meetings • Development of the Valleywide Legislative Platform • Ongoing coordination and advocacy with federal and state legislative offices


• Plan “Valley Voice” Washington D.C. trip for September 2012 • Plan “Valley Voice” Sacramento trip for early 2013 • Continue tracking legislation, communication with legislative offices, letter campaigns and

other activities to increase awareness and a unified position for the Valley


11. Valleywide Model Improvement Plan Lead: Fresno Council of Governments With the passage of AB 32 and SB 375 it has become increasing important for the Valley Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) to continue coordination of valley wide transportation modeling and air quality activities. In 2010, the Valley was awarded a $1 million grant from the Strategic Growth Council for valleywide model improvements to meet the requirements of AB 32 and SB 375. The Strategic Growth Council is charged with, among other things, making Proposition 84 funds available for data gathering and model development necessary to comply with SB 375. As a result, the valley RPAs have developed a Model Improvement Plan (MIP) to deal with the requirements of SB 375. The plan includes a Short Term and Long Term component. The short-‐term model improvements will be completed in time for the 2014 RTP. The 2014 RTP is our first RTP that will have to be fully SB 375 compatible. Additional improvements and timing will be determined by the results of the Long Term Model Improvement Plan. ONGOING AND FUTURE ACTIVITIES

• Short Term (upgrade each valley model) o Improve each valley MPO model to be more sensitive to “Smart Growth” strategies o Integrate the 4D elasticities into each model o Improve interregional travel estimates

• Long Term (Develop long term model improvement plan)

o Develop land use modeling tools o Determine model coverages (individual county, multiple county or county wide) o Determine long term model improvements (advanced 4 step models, tour based

models or activity based models)

• Implement the long term Model Improvement Plan • Incorporate employment data forecast into model

12. Coordination with the California Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley Lead: Tulare County Association of Governments The Valley’s Regional Planning Agencies sought and received a consortia board membership on the Governor-‐appointed Partnership Board – Ted Smalley, Executive Director of the Tulare County Association of Governments. There is increased interaction between the Partnership and the Regional Policy Council seen most recently in coordinating common goals that have fostered a better network of communication and subsequent action to occur. The recently award “Smart Valley Places” application to HUD resulted in a $4 million grant to the Valley’s 15 largest cities. Simultaneously, the Valley RPAs were awarded $1 million from the Strategic Growth Council for similar work activities (see Prop. 84 section). This association has already resulted in higher


visibility at the State level, with Valley representatives being offered a “seat at the table” on more issues where previously we were overlooked or excluded from the policy discussions. ONGOING AND FUTURE ACTIVITIES

• Continue to attend Partnership meetings and workgroups to provide updates and information regarding RPA Valleywide work efforts

• Continue to coordinate and receive updates from Partnership staff at Director and Regional Policy Council meetings

• When possible, coordinate Regional Policy Council meetings with CA Partnership meetings

13. Proposition 84, Sustainable Communities Implementation Lead: Fresno Council of Governments The Valley MPOs have received a $1 million grant through Round 1 of the Prop 84 -‐ Sustainable Communities Planning Grant and Incentive Program to assist the smaller communities (population under 50,000) to move toward implementation of the SJV Blueprint and address SB 375. The Valley RPA Directors have agreed to invest 19% of this first round funding to SCS (Sustainable Communities Strategy) Outreach; 53% for local government Blueprint Principle Integration into general plans and 28% on a Valley Greenprint. A Round 2 application for additional funding was submitted in February of 2012. Successful funding of this second round application will enable implementation of identified Greenprint best practices and strategies, SCS implementation and additional efforts to support Blueprint integration into local planning practices. The eight MPOs in the San Joaquin Valley are to develop their first sustainable communities strategy in their next RTP by 2013/2014. The valley-‐wide Blueprint process provides the foundation for more sustainable growth in the San Joaquin Valley in the next 40 years. SCS development will be instrumental in the implementation of Blueprint goals and objectives. As part of the ongoing regional collaboration efforts in the Valley, the eight MPOs in the Valley will be working together to the extent possible on the SCS development. A preliminary partnership model of 3-‐4-‐1 has been brought to the discussion table, which means the northern 3 valley counties including San Joaquin, Merced and Stanislaus, the 4 mid-‐valley counties including Fresno, Madera, Kings and Tulare, and the southern county Kern as sub-‐regions working more closely with each on targets and SCS development. In concert with the SCS development program, integrating approved Blueprint Principles into general plans will be one of the major focus areas of this proposal. The General Plan is the single most important policy guide for cities and counties. It provides direction for staff reports, planning commission recommendations, and city council and board of supervisors’ decisions. A climate plan, in concert with the general plan, provides additional guidance for local governments to reduce community and municipal greenhouse gases, address climate change, and promote sustainability and resource conservation and efficiency. Cities and counties are essential partners in California’s efforts to implement climate change-‐related mandates. Many cities and counties in the Valley currently lack the expertise and resources to integrate the adopted Blueprint Principles into their general plans. The Greenprint Program is also a vital component to the San Joaquin Valley’s Urban and Rural Blueprint Roadmap Programs. While the urban and rural programs focus on the strategies, policies


and planning for integrated land use and transportation planning, the Greenprint Program will focus on the open space side of the equation. Focusing primarily on the conservation and preservation of natural open space, habitat corridors and vital farmland, the Greenprint Program also becomes the counterbalance to urban and rural community development, suggesting clear boundaries to growth while it defines the value and role strategic and vital open space in the context of the comprehensive regional program. ONGOING AND FUTURE ACTIVITIES SCS Outreach Tasks

• Process an RFP to solicit proposals for a valley-‐wide outreach plan • Coordinate with the other Valley MPOs on SCS and RFP efforts • Develop and execute consultant contract • Develop valley-‐wide outreach plan • Customize the outreach plan for each COG to be consistent with their individual Federal public participation plan

• Create templates/public outreach materials for valley-‐wide SCS outreach • Conduct public workshop to involve stakeholder in the SCS development process • Launch media campaign to engage public involvement in the SCS development

Local Government: Blueprint Principle Integration into General Plans

• Continue analysis of existing General Plans to determine consistency with the Blueprint • Coordinate “Best Practices” menu of options to incorporate Blueprint Principles. Coordinate

integration of selected “Best Practice” menu items -‐ each jurisdiction will self-‐ select the options that best it their community

• Continue series of workshops will be held on the implementation issues with the Blueprint • Provide instruction on the Blueprint Toolkit development and use • Continue oversight of consultant providing “circuit planner” assistance to small

jurisdictions • Uploading of tools as they are developed into the web based Blueprint Roadmap toolkit • Prepare technical memoranda for sub-‐task findings • Prepare draft and final reports

Greenprint Tasks

• Coordinate and monitor the Steering Committee to advance Phase of the San Joaquin Valleywide Greenprint Planning Program

• Develop and execute consultant contract(s) • Develop background information, including a description of the Valleywide Greenprint

Planning Program, its relation to Blueprint and the need for and benefits to be to be derived from the Program, including economic and land use implications

• Compile, display, and analyze the open space and resource information, including maps, photographs, and statistical information

• Develop a comprehensive inventory of organizations, plans, programs, and other assets in the San Joaquin Valley that complement Greenprint

• Define alternative growth scenarios for the year 2050 • Compile an illustrated draft and final comprehensive alternative report that includes all

scenarios and next steps • Develop the formal report into presentations to be given to the Planners Subcommittee,

Valley MPO Directors, Regional Policy Council and other committees as appropriate


14. Regional Energy Planning

Lead: Valleywide Coordinator & Kern Council of Governments The eight valley RPAs have led a regional planning effort dating back to 2010 regarding the economic development opportunities of energy that exists in the San Joaquin Valley. The Valley is poised to capture jobs and industry investments, and potentially become a net energy producer and exporter if investment strategies are implemented accordingly and regional assets are appropriately aligned. As we understand, no thorough understanding of the region’s energy economy currently exists; particularly not a comprehensive understanding of the energy economy in relation to statewide and regional investment, policy, and programs in business attraction and development, innovation, taxation, education and training, transportation, housing, land-‐use, environmental remediation and permitting, or the many other areas that can and will influence energy. In FY 2010/11, the RPAs presented this concept, along with the National Association of Regional Councils (NARC), to the Regional Policy Council and were directed to continued discussions of the topic. A valleywide working group was assembled consisting of the San Joaquin Valley Clean Energy Organization, Economic Development Corporations, Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E), Southern California Edison, Cal State Bakersfield, UC Merced, and others. A draft planning document, the SJV Regional Energy and Economic Development Roadmap, was developed and in February 2012 a $1 million application was submitted to the Strategic Growth Council for funding to implement the Roadmap. The Valley is also a partner in the Southwest Solar Transformation Initiative (SSTI) program that includes a regional team of public and private partners committed to advancing solar power adoption by homeowners and businesses across participating municipalities within the Southwest region. SSTI is part of the U.S. Department of Energy’s Rooftop Solar Challenge and has received funding to help “streamline and standardize permitting, zoning, metering and connection processes – and improve finance options for residential and commercial rooftop solar systems.” During the first year (Phase 1), SSTI efforts will focus on constructing the framework for this regional, collaborative model, aggregating and defining best practices in all focus areas for each participating jurisdiction, providing a centralized online technical resource center, and engaging with participating agency staff to tailor and implement solar-‐friendly policies and programs. The Valley RPAs role in this effort is to facilitate outreach and assistance to the Valley jurisdictions throughout this planning process. ONGOING AND FUTURE ACTIVITIES

• Continue to seek other funding sources to implement the SJV Regional Energy and Economic Development Roadmap if the 2011 $1 million grant application to the Strategic Growth Council is not funded

• Continue communications with Valley partners including CSU Bakersfield, CSU Fresno, UC Merced, Southern CA Edison, PG&E, the Central Valley EDCs, and the Central Valley Workforce Investment Boards

• Assist in implementing the Southwest Solar Transformation Initiative with our member agencies and program partners

• Continue to work with the SJV Clean Energy Organization to enhance the energy economy and readiness of the Valley to partake to energy related programs and policies


15. 2012 Federal Transportation Reauthorization Act Lead: All The new federal transportation bill, tentatively scheduled for 2012, provides an unparalleled opportunity for the eight Valley Counties to explore funding potential within the new and updated federal act, probably aligned with a National Goods Movement Program. This would be a jointly agreed upon strategy, and would be separate from individual County “High Priority” projects. It is clear the Valley counties struggle to compete with California’s major metropolitan areas from a performance/congestion based priority system. Further, the Valley metropolitan areas are not considered rural to compete for rural funding. The Valley is unique and requires unique consideration for agricultural goods movement. Currently the Regional Planning Agencies’ Executive Directors are in regular and constant communication with Caltrans, CALCOG, DOT, and our federal legislators to ensure the Valley is adequately accounted for in the 2012 Federal Transportation Reauthorization Act.

16. Regional Transportation Plans Lead: All The Valley’s Regional Planning Agencies have jointly developed a common Valley Chapter for each agency’s Regional Transportation Plan since the early 1990’s, in response to the federal transportation act in effect at the time. In that chapter the issues that are Valleywide are highlighted and discussed. These issues generally include air quality, blueprint, high speed rail, State Route 99 and the need for additional east-‐west corridors, Amtrak passenger service, and any other common discussion items as described in this 2012-‐2013 Valleywide Overall Work Program.

17. Networking / Fall Policy Conference

Lead: Kings County Association of Governments One of the greatest assets to our coordinative efforts is the networking between staff at the various Regional Planning Agencies. The Executive Directors have encouraged this networking-‐ recognizing that our enhanced communication poises all of us to have better information on activities going on at the state and federal level. Beyond that staff is able to learn from each other and increase their individual skills, adding value to each of our agencies. In addition, when too many meetings outside of the Valley are scheduled, such coordination (identifying who from the Valley might be in attendance) and subsequent communication allows a better coverage of important topics. The annual Fall Policy Conference offers a productive opportunity for networking. In October 2011 the Conference will be held in Bass Lake, with the Madera County Transportation Commission as the host. In October 2012, the Fall Policy Conference will be held in Lemoore and hosted by the Kings County Association of Governments.


18. San Joaquin Valley Web Sites/ Centralized Data

Lead: Merced Association of Governments The San Joaquin Valley Regional Policy Council and Directors Committee have become more prominent as a unified voice for the Valley. In 2010, the informational website, www.sjvcogs.org was created and is currently maintained by MCAG. At the staff level, it has been recommended that all shared sites supporting valleywide efforts through the RTPAs and Regional Policy Council, be hosted and maintained by the same RTPA for improved coordination of information as well as potential cost savings. These include the Blueprint www.valleyblueprint.org, the San Joaquin Valley RTPA/Policy Council site at www.sjvcogs.org, and the future Blueprint Toolkit. In FY 2010/11, the Directors approved MCAG’s hosting of both www.sjvcogs.org and www.valleyblueprint.org in order to facilitate better communication, and provide a centralized data portal for sharing information across RTPAs and the general public. Monthly coordination meetings are conducted with MCAG and various staff to ensure the web information is current and accurate. The Blueprint Toolkit web site is managed through a consultant agreement.

19. Coordination of SJV Regional Policy Council Lead: Patricia Taylor (MCTC), Chair of Directors’ Committee, & Valleywide Coordinator The day-‐to-‐day coordination of the Valley Regional Policy Council is guided by the Chair of the Executive Directors’ Committee, which in 2012-‐13 is the Madera County Transportation Commission, Executive Director Patricia Taylor. The 2012-‐13 Vice Chair is Terri King, Executive Director for the Kings County Association of Governments. The Chairperson consults with the other Valley Executive Directors to develop the agendas for the Regional Policy Council, and is charged with circulating the agenda and attached materials to the Regional Policy Council. As Chair, she will be responsible for the minutes (action minutes) of the Regional Policy Council. She will also be charged with keeping all pertinent records concerning the Regional Policy Council. However it is the charge of each Executive Director to aid the Chair in fulfilling her task by providing appropriate documents and agenda material timely. The Valleywide Coordinator (Sigala Inc.) has been retained to conduct the administrative, coordination, research and project management functions related to the activities of the Regional Policy Council. Michael Sigala, Principal, works in close consultation with the Policy Council Chair and Vice Chair, and the Directors. ONGOING AND FUTURE ACTIVITIES

• Reformat and implement a new meeting agenda that includes a consent calendar, priority items listed and discussed first, and written updates for informational items

• Consider scheduling an annual Regional Policy Council retreat • Continue using the Regional Policy Council meetings as a true forum to discussing and

reaching consensus on significant regional issues


20. Coordination of Executive Directors’ Committee Lead: Patricia Taylor (MCTC), Chair of Directors’ Committee, & Valleywide Coordinator Like the day-‐to-‐day coordination of the Policy Council, the Executive Directors’ Committee will also be guided by the current Chair of the Executive Directors’ Committee. She will consult with the other Valley Executive Directors to develop the agendas for the Executive Directors’ meetings, and is charged with circulating the agenda and attached materials. As Chair, she will be responsible for the minutes (action minutes) and with keeping all pertinent records. However it is the charge of each Executive Director to aid the Chair in fulfilling her task by providing appropriate documents and agenda material timely. The Valleywide Coordinator (Sigala Inc.) has been retained to conduct the administrative, coordination, research, and project management functions related to the activities of the Director’s Committee. Michael Sigala, Principal, works in close consultation with the Directors, and reports to the Chair. Chair Rotation Schedule Patricia Taylor – Madera 2012-‐13 Terri King – Kings 2013-‐14 Rob Ball – Kern 2014-‐15 Andy Chesley – San Joaquin 2015-‐16 Ted Smalley – Tulare 2016-‐17 Jesse Brown -‐ Merced – 2017-‐18 Tony Boren – Fresno – 2018-‐19 Vince Harris – Stanislaus – 2019-‐20 ONGOING AND FUTURE ACTIVITIES

• Reformat and implement a new meeting agenda that includes a consent calendar, priority items listed and discussed first, and written updates for informational items

• Hold another Directors Workshop to benchmark progress from the agreed upon goals and objectives from the January 2012 Directors Workshop

• Continue to improve on methods of communication and collaboration between Directors and respective organizations.


Proposed FY 2012/13 Budget

Valleywide Activities Lead Total Cost (A)

1. Intercity Rail SJ COG (B)

2. SR 99 Coordination Kern COG (B)

3. Joint Funding Strategies TCAG (B)

4. SJV Interregional Goods Movement

Valleywide Coordinator, All

$170,000

5. Short Haul Rail (SB 325 Implementation) TCAG (B)

6. High Speed Rail All (B)

7. Air Quality Transportation Planning SJ COG $198,985

8. Relationship Development w/ External Agencies MCTC & Valleywide Coord.

(B)

9. SJV Regional Blueprint Planning Fresno COG (B)

10. Valley Legislative Affairs Committee Stan COG/MCTC (B)

11. Valleywide Model Improvement Plan Fresno COG (B)

12. Coordination with CA Partnership TCAG (B)

13. Prop. 84, Sustainable Communities Fresno COG (B)

14. Regional Energy Planning Valleywide Coord. & Kern COG

$60,000 (C)

15. Federal Transportation Reauthorization All (B)

16. Regional Transportation Plans All (B)

17. Networking/ Fall Policy Conference KCAG (B)

18. Web Site Coordination/Centralized Data MCAG (B)

19. 20.

Coordination of the SJV Regional Policy Council and Executive Directors’ Committee

MCTC & Valleywide Coor.

$100,000

Total $528,985

(A) Total cost is the total direct Valley RPA cost for this activity and does not include any state or federal

matching funds. Costs are equally or proportionally (by population) apportioned to each Valley RPA. Fresno COG is the fiscal agent for most shared Valleywide activities. PLEASE SEE THE DETAILED COST BREAKDOWN ON THE NEXT PAGE FOR COST APPORTIONMENTS.

(B) There are no direct costs for these items. Individual RPA staffing and related cost for these items are included in each respective RPAs’ OWP/budget.

(C) DOE funds passed through for participation in the Southwest Solar Transformation Initiative program with no direct RPA cost.


San Joaquin Valley Regional Planning AgenciesFY 2012-2013 Overall Work ProgramDetailed Cost Breakdown for Directly Funded Valleywide Activities

SJV Interregional Goods Movement Plan Cambridge Sigala Inc Fresno COGSystematics (project mangr) (fiscal agent) Total FY 2012-13

MPO Share By Population Fresno 23.6% $35,460 $2,837 $1,891 $40,188 Kern 20.8% $31,215 $2,497 $1,665 $35,378 Kings 3.9% $5,811 $465 $310 $6,586 Madera 3.8% $5,713 $457 $305 $6,475 Merced 6.4% $9,611 $769 $513 $10,892 San Joaquin 17.2% $25,813 $2,065 $1,377 $29,255 Stanislaus 13.2% $19,727 $1,578 $1,052 $22,357 Tulare 11.1% $16,650 $1,332 $888 $18,869

Total FY 2012-13 $150,000 $12,000 $8,000 $170,000An additional $20,366 in MPO in-kind contributions will also be provided

Air Quality Transportation Planning Carrie Anderson SJ COGConsulting (planner) Total FY 2012-13

MPO Share By Population Fresno 23.54% $35,702 $11,140 $46,841 Kern 20.67% $31,349 $9,781 $41,130 Kings 3.90% $5,915 $1,846 $7,760 Madera 3.81% $5,778 $1,803 $7,581 Merced 6.45% $9,782 $3,052 $12,835 San Joaquin 17.33% $26,283 $8,201 $34,484 Stanislaus 13.29% $20,156 $6,289 $26,445 Tulare 11.00% $16,683 $5,205 $21,888

Total FY 2012-13 $151,663 $47,322 $198,985

Regional Energy Planning Participating Sigala IncSouthwest Solar Transformation Initiative (SSTI) Jurisdictions (12) (project mangr) Total FY 2012-13Total FY 2012-13 $12,000 $48,000 $60,000An additional $30,000 of in-kind contributions will also be provided by the Valley RPA, Participating Jurisdictions and Project Manager

Valleywide Coordinator Sigala IncTotal FY 2012-13

MPO Share By Population Fresno 23.6% $23,640 $23,640 Kern 20.8% $20,810 $20,810 Kings 3.9% $3,874 $3,874 Madera 3.8% $3,809 $3,809 Merced 6.4% $6,407 $6,407 San Joaquin 17.2% $17,209 $17,209 Stanislaus 13.2% $13,151 $13,151 Tulare 11.1% $11,100 $11,100

Total FY 2012-13 $100,000 $100,000

S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 18 9 10 11 12 13 14 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 2 3 4 5 6 7 815 16 17 18 19 20 21 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 9 10 11 12 13 14 1522 23 24 25 26 27 28 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 16 17 18 19 20 21 2229 30 31 26 27 28 29 30 31 23 24 25 26 27 28 29

30

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

7 8 9 10 11 12 13 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 2 3 4 5 6 7 814 15 16 17 18 19 20 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 9 10 11 12 13 14 1521 22 23 24 25 26 27 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 16 17 18 19 20 21 2228 29 30 31 25 26 27 28 29 30 23 24 25 26 27 28 29

30 31

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

6 7 8 9 10 11 12 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 3 4 5 6 7 8 913 14 15 16 17 18 19 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 10 11 12 13 14 15 1620 21 22 23 24 25 26 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 17 18 19 20 21 22 2327 28 29 30 31 24 25 26 27 28 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

31

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

7 8 9 10 11 12 13 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 2 3 4 5 6 7 814 15 16 17 18 19 20 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 9 10 11 12 13 14 1521 22 23 24 25 26 27 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 16 17 18 19 20 21 2228 29 30 26 27 28 29 30 31 23 24 25 26 27 28 29

30

= Executive Directors' Committee Meetings= Sacramento Valley Voice (Dates TBD)= Washington DC Valley Voice (September 12 & 13, 2012)

= Policy Council Meetings (Oct 12, Dec 14, Mar 22 & June 21)

= Fall Policy Conference (October 11 & 12, 2012)Revised: June 14, 2012

San Joaquin Valley Regional Policy Council & RTPAs

2013January February March

April May June

July August September

October November December

2012

Meeting Calendar FY 2012-‐2013

!"

michaelsigala

Typewritten Text

Item 15

michaelsigala

Typewritten Text

michaelsigala

Typewritten Text