 Welcome Happy New Year. We're gonna call this RTC meeting for January 17th to order. Can we begin with a roll call? Commissioner Rotkin Commissioner Bautorf here Commissioner Chase Commissioner McPherson Commissioner Leopold here Commission alternate Mulherr here Commissioner Coonerty Commissioner Caput Commissioner Kaufman Gomez Commissioner Johnson Commissioner Brown Commissioner Bertrand here Commissioner Lowe here Thank you. Okay, we'll begin with the oral communications. I just want to have a little Guidelines before we are obviously here for one main reason today. I hope and Maybe we can focus on that issue So we are gonna have oral communications but I'd like you not to make sure you refrain from anything it has to do with the other things that are on the agenda and You can go ahead and line up and you'll have two minutes Very good morning commissioners and members of the public My name is Jack Nelson and I'm here for one main purpose also this morning Due to our beautiful rainy weather I was compelled to bring my visual aid in a trash bag and What what that is is just a symbolic representation of our planet earth You might recall that at your last meeting I mentioned we're traveling together on this planet at a speed of 66,000 miles an hour in our annual orbit around the Sun and If you look at the surface of the earth you can see in many places you see mostly ocean There was just a report out in science the journal science I saw a little news article about it haven't followed up yet But the scientists are telling us that our oceans are warming faster than we previously understood Even though it was already known that 93% of the global heat produced by our greenhouse gas to atmosphere is being absorbed by the oceans It's our credit card. That's temporarily saving us from The kind of heating that will take place But so we're good. This is kind of the bathtub we're in too so when when this ocean warms there's really kind of no going back and so This is this is the Holocaust that we must not build And greenhouse gases are are the Holocaust gas in this case Not to mention that recent study for me piles on Last April and scientific scientific American their Arctic meltdown issue and this is meant to be upside down here The researcher says Today, I'm startled again because it now appears that the ocean will likely be free of summer ice by 2040 a full 60 years earlier than we had predicted a little more than a decade ago The Arctic is changing exactly the way scientists thought it would but faster than even the most aggressive Predictions the recent behavior is off the charts. Thank you. Mr. Nelson. My name is Marilyn Schultz I am from La Selva Beach, but also having lived in Watsonville, Aptos and Rio del Mar Thank you very much for allowing me to speak today And I also appreciated the way all of you were looking at the first speaker I didn't notice that last time I came here to speak and I really appreciate it I'm here today because I believe most of you will vote for the preferred scenario today Man, this is a general comment period not about the unified core study. I'll have to ask you to come back when we do that Do you know what time that will be? I do not know my best guess will probably be an hour from now Thank you very much. Thank you. I'm sorry. I misunderstood. All right. I came in to introduce myself My name is James Sandoval on the newly elected general chairperson for smart transportation local 23 We represent the bus drivers and pair of transit in this county And I look forward to working with you guys to try to improve the transportation within this county I'm gonna leave my business card So if you guys didn't need any information or have any questions don't hesitate to contact me. Thank you Thank you. I have a video that I want loaded up. Does anybody have that handy? I'll let the next speaker go. Okay. Thank you Good morning Michael st. With campaign for sustainable transportation Welcome to the new year. Hope everything goes according to plans that everybody's in their lives And basically I'd like to thank the commissioners as well as staff and even all the advocates out here for all the hard work They put into this CFI or UCIS for me. It's been two years of study involvement. Also My friends Hey, no problems I've had a personal one-on-one with some of the commissioners here and staff written letters tried to relay pertinent information throughout the last two years In intervals of two and three minutes twice a month I want to thank you all for treating me cordially and and for listening. I really appreciate it I would imagine this gets pretty boring all the time listening to the same things over and over greenhouse gas emissions VMT induced demand rail banking various cost analysis by advocates and progressive rail issues But basically guess what this is part of your job is to listen to the constituents and also take their Things that they find through study and through efforts on their own to heart and try to listen with an open mind I personally was hoping over the last two years to find someone or two or three of you That on this commission to be a champion for those of us who are adamant about the severity of climate change and Would support projects that would help mitigate climate change and not exasperate it I Have a feeling today about how things are going to go Since this is 17th. I hope we can all listen to each other and treat each other with respect And as we proceed through the ERR by Caltrans on Litigation I hope all of us understand what's going on. Thank you. Thank you Good morning Josh Stevens here. I was originally going to start off with my script But this morning I did the Greenway commute trail only bikes and e-bikes and all that and I got a shredded Rain soaked piece of paper soaked shoes and soaked pants Now now for the actual meat and potatoes of the night's speech So for starters, we've got median traffic speeds along state route one commonly referred to as highway one And they can be slow as five miles per hour after five in the peak commuter direction headed southbound According to that bus on shoulder study these buses our buses they have to sit in the traffic on state route one and Kind of shows to goes to show the transportation tyranny in which we suffer When it comes to Santa Cruz Metro innovating on route offerings only one route comes to mind route 91x the current only local express bus route option It offers a time saving of 12 up to 20 minutes when traveling to Santa Cruz Metro or from Santa Cruz Metro to Cabrillo College versus route 71 Another key factor is of our transit tyranny is that we have Really long transit times for example prior to the 2016 service cuts We had former routes 56 54 serving Capitola and Los Alamos beach And one could take a trip from there as quickly as 12 minutes. Thanks to the express route 54 Fast-forward to today and that same trip takes a whopping 42 minutes And you have to walk over well over a mile Let's see another critical failure. We've got going on is how some bus service trips can constitute three or more Trips to make a single round trip for example, you live in Rio del Mar You want to go to Aptos deluxe foods? You got to take at least three route 55 buses because it only goes one direction Let's see what else and Another factor I noticed is communications Service disruptions delivered by text message via gov alert have not been coming through on January 6th There was a shutdown of Bay Street blocking five butter detouring five bus routes. There was no communication made So that's another issue on the hand. Thank you. Thank you Good morning. My name is Peter Stanger. I'd like to echo the comments of that last speaker My commute from La Selva Beach today. Well, there's no route 54 for over two years now So we get to ride our bikes or whatever to get over here When we go along highway or along San Andreas Road, the bike lane is filled with debris I've emailed public works the hazard website for The Santa Cruz Regional Transportation Commission I've even emailed my supervisor to get it cleaned up. No, it's not it's that narrow as you go through a S-curve that's 40 miles an hour with cars in the rain. I get up to Benita Drive I have to make a left turn with no turn pocket. No stop signs The cars are coming off the freeway to take the shortcut They don't want to stop for you and then I have to go along Benita where they're speeding along over 30 miles an hour I get up to Near State Park Drive at Aptos Rancher Road where I when I go to the bank Push the button that says For bikes to get the green light. It doesn't even work. I've reported that for over two months now then I get up to C-Cliff to State Park Drive where the bike lane disappears and a car goes whizzing by me Just about hitting me. Okay, then I keep on coming along Saned along Soquel Drive Hitting all the heavy traffic and whatnot with people and then the irony of it is as the rain's pouring down on me And I getting to the county building here I locked my bike up outside because that's where it is for us to lock up and I'm walking in the front door Who should arrive in a Tesla? In the pouring rain opening the door for his buddies, but the co-chairperson or Founder of Fort Tell me did the guy take Metro bus and but he's gonna tell you how to do mass transit in this county Let's just stay away from personal attacks. Okay, I didn't say anybody's name But I just want to say that you're being led by somebody and a group of people that don't use mass transit. Thank you That's an angry person bad day bad weather My video, please The video is about a minute and 15 seconds 15 seconds This was taken in December of 2018 meaning just a month ago. This is RTC property. It's not under progressive control It's under RTC control. It tells me that the RTC is out of control in how it can police itself I've said this once and before I have considered the management at the RTC Not capable of policing itself. I also think that it shows that it rewards people who are in Support of their policy which is pro-train These are people who have received money either directly or indirectly from funding from the RTC Those are not experts in planning or not. Otherwise the RTC is in really bad shape And quite honestly, it either makes the RTC look very dirty or a hint of corruption And I really don't want to go down that path But I'm telling you this is what I have seen since I got started four years ago. Thank you Hi, I'm Ryan Sarnataro from live oak I submitted some written comments this time on the subject of accounting and Will change of pace There's two ways to do bookkeeping and accounting and one of them is to take care of your taxes and just do the basics and just report things The other one is management accounting to provide Information in a format that the consumers of that information can look at and easily See what the factors are and make decisions based on that And I think that what and in my suggestions in my written comments that are more specific But basically what I'm saying is that it would be really good If the RTC could break out things in the way that people are thinking about them if people are thinking about the how Maintenance is happening on the corridor if people are thinking about what the difference is between Running buses and running trains if people are thinking about the future in terms of what kind of taxes are going to be required to support what kind of What kind of decisions get made that really would be much better if you could just set up a few simple tables and Communicate to people over multiple years what's happening and again your financial statements are always organized So that you just have one year or two years instead of giving that long view So I'm encouraging management, especially the new management to take a different look at how you report your financial data and In relation to what the last speaker said I also think that it would be good if the data that had to do with supporters of the Path that that management is is forwarding is going forward with Had their specific funds Disclosed so that it was easy for us to see that as well. Thank you. Good morning. I'm Brett Garrett I have comments on the highway one EIR is that during the Caltrans report or no, I'll be doing the Caltrans report. Okay. Thank you Hi, Gail McNulty and maybe Thorne has kindly shared her two minutes with me so that I too can share a video I'm going to share a video today of a young woman time here. You just get two minutes scale People do that all the time. I've seen other people Fifteen years old and I'm from Sweden. I speak on behalf of climate justice now is a longer than two minutes It's three minutes. Many people say that Sweden is just a small country and it doesn't matter what we do But I've learned that you are never too small to make a difference And if a few children can get headlines all over the world just by not going to school Then imagine what we could all do together if we really wanted to But to do that we have to speak clearly No matter how uncomfortable that may be You only speak of a green eternal economic growth because you are too scared of being unpopular You only talk about moving forward with the same bad ideas that got us into this mess Even when the only sensible thing to do is pull the emergency break You are not mature enough To tell it like it is Even that burden you leave to us children But I don't care about being popular I Care about climate justice and the living planet our Civilization is being sacrificed for the opportunity of a very small number of people To continue making enormous amounts of money Our biosphere is being sacrificed So that rich people in countries like mine Can live in luxury It is the sufferings of the many which pay for the luxuries of the few The year 2078 I will celebrate my 75th birthday If I have children, maybe they will spend that day with me Maybe they will ask me about you Maybe they will ask why you didn't do anything You can bring up the other speaker and then I will let the other Mr.. Mr.. Can I have the other speaker come up, please and I don't let her finish the video But I'm just gonna curtail the time. My name is Greta Thunberg. I am 15 years old and I'm from Sweden You only talk about moving forward. We get to the two-minute mark the same bad The emergency break you on you leave to us Can live in luxury if I have children maybe they will spend that day with me Maybe they will ask me about you Maybe they will ask why you didn't do anything While there still was time to act You say you love your children above all else and Yet you're stealing their future in front of their very eyes Until you start focusing on what needs to be done rather than it's what is politically possible There is no hope We cannot solve a crisis without treating it as a crisis We need to keep the fossil fuels in the ground and we need to focus on equity And the solutions within the system are so impossible to find then maybe we should change the system itself We have not come here to beg world leaders to care You have ignored us in the past and you will ignore us again You have run out of excuses and we are running out of time We have come here to let you know that change is coming whether you like it or not The real power belongs to the people Thank you. Thank you Sorry for that delay, mr. Hearst, that's okay. I'm used to waiting around a Lowell Hearst from the west side the west side of Watsonville 17 miles away 50 minutes about 21 miles an hour So I'm here to give you a quick traffic report from the South County You know it was pretty rainy today, but the traffic was moving really well until you got to Rio del Mar And then it was dead stop. I Saw about 12 semis on the road a CHP officer had somebody pulled over There were several tow trucks hauling cars away And so there was there was a lot of action on the road today what we what we What we really need to focus on is moving Santa Cruz forward and so I just want to share with you that You know folks are trying their best to drive as well as they can But there's but there's a lot of congestion and whatever you can do to help move this forward. That's what we'd like to say Thank you. Thank you, sir Okay, we're gonna go ahead and close the oral communications and move on to any additions or deletions to the Consenter regular agenda So commissioners there are a few replacement pages for today's agenda item seven has a revised staff report which was provided to you Item 11 has a replacement page Item 20 There's a replacement Add-on actually it's not a replacement page is an add-on page to attachment 3 and that was also provided to you And then there's an item 20 handout and And commissioners in addition legal the closed sessions listed on your agenda today will not be necessary Mr. Chair, I just wanted to comment on one item number six project and planning items Okay, so that brings us to the consent agenda and Will act on those as one comment unless any commissioner has a comment mr. McPherson. Yeah, right I just wanted to point out publicly. This is a huge project that was part of measure D The highway nine centers of alley complete streets corridor plan We are going to have some community open houses in Felton at the community hall on January 31st from 6 p.m. To 7 30 p.m. And in Boulder Creek the elementary school multipurpose room February 6th from 6 to 7 30 p.m. This is very important We want to get some input from the public, but we were very happy to have this draft plan for the highway nine corridor It's an important part of for the center ends of alley Any other commissioners have a comment the consent agenda Mr. Johnson, thank you chair I would like to pull a number 10 and you can either I guess now or at the end of the meeting Let's see. I think we can Let's put that with We'll put it at the end after we do the Item 20 we're going to call that item 22, okay Miss cotton gummas Thank you for item number nine This has to do with the accept the status report for measure D revenues and distribution I'd like us to know a little bit more about the committee makeup that was appointed to Evaluate or to take a look at what we're spending on the measure D Maybe even a report from them in with this data so that we know one that they've taken a look at the finances on that Anything else that comes in conversation with that particular committee in how the expenditure of the defunds are being spent Yes, commissioner. We'll be producing minutes for those committee meetings and those will be included in your agendas. Thank you Any other comments? Anybody from the public want to pull any from the consent agenda commissioner board off if it is possible to Go through item 10 Immediately after This these comments It would be helpful. I'm worried about losing a quorum and and There is a resolution attached to that and I would like to be able to move forward with With that item if possible, okay, we'll do that. I'll move it into a 19 a then Yes, sir Good morning again Peter Stanger is item 11 on the consent agenda I'd like to speak to that Go ahead speak to it now Thank you. I have an issue with the bicycle advisory committee and that is that it is really political appointees it's disheartening that people that are assigned to represent a district or are Given representation because of a district do not have to reside in that district So you can have somebody that lives in Santa Cruz Representing Watsonville You can have somebody that lives in La Selva Beach representing Scots Valley That person is not familiar with the roadways and is not familiar with representing the community and the constituents of the appointee and that is of serious flaw in The appointees that you have on your list I Also find it disheartening that The people that are on this list don't even have to ride a bike They might not be familiar with our roads our roads. They might not be familiar with our Bike lanes or the lack of bike lanes. They might not be familiar with the lack of bicycle safety and Separation from motorized traffic or bike paths availability. It's nice to come up here to Santa Cruz the land of Jump bikes the land of green lanes the land of clean bike lanes But in the rest of the county We don't have anything going for us and these appointees don't represent the areas that They're supposed to Well that you'd think they're supposed to represent and I really have a problem with the way that The Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation assigns them. Thank you. I appreciate your comments Anyone else from the public? Okay? I'll bring it back looking for a motion for the consent calendar I'll second Motion second by a Leopold second by Coonerty all in favor. Hi, any opposed? That motion carries unanimously with the exception of the items that have been pulled Okay, that takes us to the regular agenda will begin with commissioners reports any commissioners have anything you need to report Seeing none. I just have one quick one here Been on this commission for a little while and it's kind of become like a little family But one of our family members is going to be leaving us because she's no longer going to be a political figure so We'd like to just take a little moment to acknowledge Cynthia Chase and her years of service on Too many commissions to number I serve with our Metro and RTC and I know she's been busy in every venue and I have a Commissioner Leopold present to her a certificate of oppression from the RTC and all the members. Thank you, Cynthia It's always on appreciate the time that I've Been had a privilege to work with Commissioner Chase both at the Santa Cruz City Council in here and we'll miss her very much But I just want to say I don't think this she's no longer going to be a political figure An elected office at the moment Any other comments? Commissioner Chase There we go. Okay. I'll make it brief. I know we have a long agenda I appreciate the acknowledgement and I actually really appreciated serving on this Commission and I said it actually in my last meeting with my remarks to Outgoing Executive Director Dondaro. I had no idea how much I would enjoy learning about transportation thinking about transportation all the different modes I don't look at any community the same way now because I'm always looking at How do we move around each community and how can we improve that and what do we do well and what other communities do well? And so I just appreciate the opportunity to serve on this commission and appreciate the relationship with all of you And I thank you for giving me the opportunity to do that. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Okay, let's move on to the director's report Thank You chair Bordel. I Have a few items to report on The first item is I would like to inform you that progressive rail Notified the RTC that on January 7th. They removed the final four tank cars that were in storage on the branch Line and interchanged them with Union Pacific and Pajaro. I would like to thank Progressive rail for a job well done The city of Santa Cruz Public Work Direct Department issued a notice of intent to adopt a Recirculated mitigated negative declaration for the Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail segment 7 phase 2 from California Street to base Street and Pacific Avenue the comment period started on January 7th and will end on February 6 I'm proud to announce that the RTC received $250,000 in grant money from the California Department of Transportation and Caltrans Highway Safety Improvement Program or HSIP for pedestrian cross crossing safety projects on highway 9 in the San Lorenzo Valley The intersections where pedestrians cross will be improved with the H-SIP grant money include State Route 9 and Redwood Drive in Felton State Route 9 mid-block crossing between Graham Hill Road and Kirby Street in Felton State Route 9 Clear Creek Road in Brookdale State Route 9 Forest Street in Boulder Creek and State Route 9 Pool Drive in Boulder Creek That was a very Good announcement by Caltrans and we're very happy to be moving forward with those projects Once again, I'm going to reiterate the highway 9 So San Lorenzo Valley Complete Streets Corridor Plan and the open houses that Commissioner McPherson told us about earlier It's very important that we get public input to those two meetings that That were already announced and if you have not seen that that's an item 6 if you need Written direction as to where those meetings will be held Additionally Caltrans and FHWA Certified the final Tier 1 Tier 2 EIR and EA for the Highway 1 Corridor Investment Program The Tier 1 or planning level document is for the full HOV Lane project from San Andreas Larkin Valley Road To Morrissey Boulevard the Tier 2 or project level document is for the Auxiliary Lane project between Soquel Avenue Drive and 41st Avenue including the Bicycle and Pedestrian Overcrossing at Chanticleer Avenue I'm also pleased to announce that the RTC hired a new accountant to replace the barding Ben Wolfe Keith Rayburn Garcia started work at the RTC on January 2nd Keith has a BA in economics from Cornell University and is currently in the process of obtaining his CPA Finally the RTC has extended its search for a new director of finance and budget to replace retiring Daniel Nakuna the position will be open until filled with an initial filing date of January 29th a Special thanks to Daniel who has postponed his retirement for three months to allow RTC more time to fill this critical position That concludes my report. Thank you very much any questions on that report Okay, this moves on to our Caltrans report miss Lowe. Good morning, mr. Chair commissioners I would just like to let you know that Caltrans is undertaking a series of vulnerability assessments for the state highway system so that we have a better understanding of the Number one the climate factors the multitude of climate and weather related factors that can impact That are going to be increasing in intensity in future years to look at the portions of the transportation system that are vulnerable and Then to develop and prioritize the types of improvements that we need to make to be responsive and make the system more resilient and Adapt to the changing conditions Caltrans is conducting these one district at a time We just kicked off the there's several that have been completed and on our website I could forward the link to you if you're interested in looking at those District four is complete for example the neighboring district here and Hours for district five will be complete near the end of this calendar year and We look forward to Embarking on that together with you will be sharing information along the way and then our project information report is a robust and To not take too much time away from the rest of your agenda. I just make myself available to questions Are any questions of the commission commissioner Bertrand? Um, do you interact with the Coles Commission on these vulnerability assessments? Yes, thank you Commissioner Caput With the I Don't have it in writing anymore the crosswalk at March and Street and Highway 152 by Watsonville High School. I Believe it's on track, but I don't see it in writing anywhere. Yes, sir There may have been an update That isn't reflected in the copy that you received there We have a minor a project that includes that location. That's on schedule. It's a It's in the preliminary phase, so it'll be constructed in the summer and fall Excuse me that Yeah, I should be it should be by the end of the calendar year Okay, thank you Any other questions is it time for questions from the public on the CalTrans report? I believe there was a comment Good morning, I'm Brett Garrett I've been studying the EIR for the highway one project the widening of the freeway with auxiliary and HOV lanes I'm very concerned that the EIR makes some new claims that seem to me very far-fetched and even contradict each other The public has not responded to this these claims because they some of them were not included in the draft The EIR literally says building extra lanes will reduce carbon emissions compared to the no-build I If I believe that I might come around to support the highway construction because there is a climate emergency And we must reduce our climate emissions But do you really believe that widening the freeway will reduce carbon emissions? I'm skeptical to say the least the report claims there will be less carbon emissions because traffic will flow more smoothly Well, I'll believe that a car moving at a steady 35 miles an hour releases less carbon emissions than a car in a stop-and-go traffic That's reasonable But the report also claims there won't be induced traffic demand because the non-HOV lanes will still be congested And even without the induced traffic the VMT number goes up 29% Compared to no-build and somehow the diverted traffic will magically disappear from the Soquel Avenue Even though the freeway is still congested There's the report just seems to contradict itself in many ways One of the more interesting calculations is near the end of appendix K In a memorandum called the estimation of induced traffic demand and congestion related costs memorandum They seem to be saying there's a thousand miles of roads somewhere in the vicinity of the freeway And the new freeway lanes out a small percentage of that therefore the induced traffic will be small It's not logical it makes no distinction between lanes in a freeway and lanes in a cul-de-sac It's based on a 3% increase of total lane miles in the area It's calculated exactly the same lane way as if we had a 32 lane freeway and added a 33rd lane So CalTrans is saying build more highway lanes to reduce carbon emissions. It's preposterous It's a dangerous precedent to the rest of the state. Thank you before we have any other speakers I'm gonna make sure that your comments are limited to the CalTrans report That was a little bit anything like that would probably be more appropriate in the UCIS comments So if the other speakers are in that venue, then why would wait for that? Brian people it's trail now been in Transportation for over 30 years I actually am an engineer for Lockheed Martin for the chief engineer's office. So I do a lot of engineering stuff So I've been studying and I did read the Cal the EIR the CalTrain report and totally support the highway widening on that aspect the reports good the engineering aspects of it are Sufficient thank you. Thank you Okay, my intention is to say a few words about the highway one final EIR Are you saying not appropriate? I think it'd be more appropriate when we get to the UCIS because it's gonna be more Appropriate that conversation Thank you And I think that's what we're here for us to get to that topic So we're gonna continue moving on I have one other item that we need to deal with and that is a 19a. This is Mr. Commissioner Johnson your concerns on this item Was there gonna be a staff report either can be yeah, who's going to go ahead and bring that up and do that Thank You miss check Good morning, my name is on a shank. I'm RTC planner We've spoken before about the need and desire of staff to provide improved mobility services and bring us up into the era of Providing a one-stop shop that's easily accessible through Phones and through the internet for people to be able to view bike share options transit options as well as ride-sharing options and Doesn't preclude other modes, but this service would allow us to provide a Much more robust trip planner It would also allow us to work with employers to distribute employee benefits commute benefits to their employees to conduct workplace challenges to Conduct regional challenges similar to what you might have seen with bike to work day this last year So it's a full-service platform that really would allow us to communicate In a much broader level with members of the public as well as employees at large employers And I'm happy to answer questions We've talked about this a couple different staff reports, but I know that we didn't have quorum at one of those meetings So let's see if we have any questions commissioner Johnson. Not so much questions. Excuse me So I think we've been here before probably three or four years ago the RTC took on some of the Requirements or basics from the Air Resources Board they had incentivized program in order to help with commute solutions now the RTC Had to give that money back because the program was such a colossal failure Instead of providing, you know the goals Meeting the goals that were promised. It was just a fraction of a fraction So you had people With quote, you know, and I read in this report anchor employer ploy employers that were part of this program the employees were given Little gifts, you know incentives And it didn't work. And so the money that the RTC took they had to give back to their resources board So this is kind of a that is a cautionary tale on programs like this now This is a 5-1-1 program number number one that has been funded already We have a commute solutions that we provide to full-time employees for At about 250 thousand dollars per so asking another $65,000 for a program like this that has been shown that that you know the intentions are good But the results are always not so good. So My problem is Commute solutions we pay a lot of money for those types of programs, but at the same time we don't gauge whether or not they're successful I've asked staff many many times. What is the before and what is the after how successful is this program and They can't answer because you know software problems. We can't do this I'm reading from the bottom of page 10 3 The $20,000 the RTC approved in December for dynamic ride matching program did not come to fruition Okay, so we spent $20,000 it didn't come through. Well, I'm just reading what was in the report So I'm really not in favor of spending another $65,000 on quote a One-stop trip reduction ride-sharing program when The past has shown that this has not been successful at all and it's just really a waste of money So that's that's how I feel Any other questions before I open up to the public? I'm just looking for questions at this point Let me get this is miss cop and go this first. I think I had a similar type of question $65,000 for software. Where did the last dynamic ride matching pilot part? Why did it fail? What do we know about that and It looks like it's going to be assigned to the city of Santa Cruz to work on this project. Is that correct and Otherwise are we looking at a particular company? So is this going to be going out to bid? So those are the kinds of questions. I have with this particular line in the Back it did you want to address those? Yeah, there's actually a number of questions. I'll address Kind of working backwards. This would go out to bid so we don't have a particular company in in mind And it's not necessarily assigned to the city of Santa Cruz. This would be a partnership with the city there They have a downtown TDM program that they'd like to kick off. They want to use this type of platform so they've Approached us and asked to partner with us on this. I think it would be a great Great way to spread out resources and get the program kicked off with a sufficient number of users these Previous pilot program for the scoop did not come to fruition meaning we didn't even start it. So the money was not spent We were not able in order for a program like this to work You have to get a few large employers in your database so that if a member of the public goes to use the system they'll actually find a rideshare match and we were not Because of the method that scoop uses after investigating it We were not able to get a couple of large employers on board. We do have we've been in communication with UCSC We also because of the partnership with down with the city of Santa Cruz We'll know we know we're gonna have downtown employers on board as well as UCSC providing a few thousand employees right off The bat which would give us a sufficient number of users in order to engage people and for them to find matches And in terms of gauging success this Software platform unlike other platforms that we've looked at in the past Now there is a whole slew of providers out there that in this kind of commute management system It's called commute manager, but really it applies to any type of trip whether recreational or event They provide for surveys So the city of Santa Cruz does their own baseline survey for downtown Santa Cruz We would do a baseline survey for other employers not within the downtown area And then be able to compare that once the pilot program has gained some momentum to see if Or how VMT and greenhouse gas reductions may have been affected Commute solutions and cruise 5-1-1 just for clarity that is the same program commute solutions was rolled into cruise 5-1-1 It's the new branding So we it's not two separate programs. We're funding. It's it's just this one program and We don't We might have FT equivalents, but we don't actually at it's a small agency. So we all wear multiple hats This is not the only program I work on we do have a couple employees that are working on this program But neither of us are working full-time on it just to clarify and then my final question on that is I'm not hearing anything about Watsonville. What are you doing to engage Watsonville to work with this? Because obviously South County is coming north and I just want to know what involvement engagement we're having with Watsonville in this We've contacted the city of Watsonville staff. They don't have the resources to Engage quite on the the same level of city of Santa Cruz staff However, they are going to connect us with a couple of large employers to involve in the anchor phase and We'll also provide us with some translation services for when we do our outreach. So they are able to we're working with them We also know from our commute patterns There are a number of Watsonville residents that are working within either the medical complex or downtown Santa Cruz And we plan on engaging those employers as well in the anchor phase Program, thank you. Mr. Mendez. Did you have a comment you wanted to add to this or I just wanted to say no Commissioner Johnson's price some history on the efforts of cruise 5 1 1 and and it is true that the the RTC does you know continually work to to Improve the services that provides to the community by engaging new technologies and so on and and unfortunately when we're doing that engaging new technologies that there are there are challenges and and that Commissioner Johnson is correct. We did have a challenge in a few years ago when we did get some money from the air district to to make that effort and unfortunately the The consultant that was hired, you know, not all of that the consultant promise would be delivered got delivered and that was that was the big problem and The RTC didn't actually give money back to the air district It was on a reimbursement basis and the RTC did get paid for some of the work that was done But basically then you know didn't get reimbursed for some of the work because again the project wasn't fully delivered And because of the you know the partnership with the consultant didn't work out as the RTC had hoped But we continue the efforts try to deliver the services to the community in the best possible manner and this is you know Of course, you know technology improves and so on etc So now we feel we're in a better spot to offer these services and the the companies that do this have Developed significantly since that time. Thank you. Commissioner. I'm all her near the question Thank you Are there any plans to create a true? Mobility as a service platform that integrates rideshare bike share card share public transit all into one At mobile application. I see that your plans are to integrate some of these services into the website, but Are we looking at an integrated mobile application that includes all these different ways that people can get around? That's the concept. Yes to some extent it it depends on the bike share and their providers providing their data so I know that Depending on the company that we end up hiring for this There's varying degrees of contracts and relationships that different companies have with Ubers and lifts and jumps and limes out there So it would it would probably partly depend on who we hired and the ability or the willingness of Uber and Lyme and all those companies to provide their API as well as our data to us Any other questions the commissioners Okay, I'll go ahead and open up to the public for any comments on this topic Hi Brian people's trail now, you know Randy I was at the meeting where you push back on it and truly Let me tell you guys my experience with this, you know, 25 years ago. I was on the other end of this I was working for the corporations promoting commuter programs Arranging shuttles to Caltrans. I worked in the Bay Area for high-tech companies. It's totally engaged with MTC Which is the Bay Area transportation agencies Understanding how they're trying to recruit ride-sharing and everything so I was on that end and I mean I was deep in it I've actually ever written a state bill To promote that kind of thing back about ten years ago got killed in committee But the short answer is you know, I I have a lot of experience with commuter programs from the corporate sense And it is difficult to reach out to the employees to get them. We were giving them cash We were saying take the bus ride-share Network systems. We never really developed an internal Some companies would do a you know a search where you can find your partners, but we relied on the Bay Area agency Where we're at now though with technology with was and and all that and the Ubers and the Googles and even Facebook A Local small agency like yourself should not be trying to develop software to to support this I think Randy was right on When he said that's not our charter you can't do it. I've been there 25 years ago I was on the other end you guys Googles doing it. They're having buses You staff for other areas you've got plenty of work You got plenty of work to do you got more reaching out to the community Not for those ride-shares, but for other aspects. So that's my recommendation. Thank you. Thank you for the comments Welcome miss. Hi, sir. Good morning. Clearly slur city of Santa Cruz transportation planner We are really excited to partner with RTC on this project as you may know We're expanding our downtown employee transportation demand management program and offerings We currently have about 56 and a half percent of our downtown employees who drive alone to work And our goal is to drop that to below 50 percent Comparatively the national average is over 76 percent So in the city of Santa Cruz we're about 20 percent below that and that's based on all the investments that you've heard that We've made over the years We think that this program is absolutely necessary to be able to monitor incentivize report and measure on our success and Now we're at a time where this tool is a type of thing that can be available and it's how people are accessing Transportation services the first thing you do is pull out your phone and see is there a jump bike near me When is the next bus coming? Is there a way that I can get an emergency ride home or be matched with a car pool and having a program like this enables People to have a one-stop shop to figure out what are the mobility options at their fingertips and make it easier And cheaper to be able to get around our community without needing to drive for every trip So we're really excited in the city that RTC is taking the leadership on this to bring this project forward We hope that you vote yes on it and we're looking forward to partnering. Thank you. Thank you for those comments Welcome. Hi. My name is Jessica Evans, and I I'm actually really interested try to get a little closer to the mic. Okay. I'm interested in seeing this project Implemented in maybe in stages because personally I really care a lot about being able to get on a bus and Use my phone to pay for the bus I care a lot about being able to look at my phone and see when is the next bus coming Where is the bus when is it coming and then being able to use my phone to pay for it? I I'm not sure if an app that tries to put car pooling and jump bikes and uber and lift Onto one app would be To me that just seems really overwhelming like and I you know Maybe you guys will do it, and it'll be awesome, but like could we just maybe start? With an app for Metro so that people can actually know when the bus is coming and pay for Thank you Good morning. I'm all for an improved cruise 5-1-1, but I need to know well I finally be able to find where my bus is to see if it is I or said bus that is late When I tried cruise 5-1-1 all I saw was a Google Maps widget trip planner Paste it into the web page. Is this my measure D tax dollars hard at work? The idea of pushing commuter benefits is great I am thankful my employer offers this focus on commuter benefits and none of the gamification The Bay Area if I recall correctly mandates commuter benefit Offerings for all employers. This is a real solution being able to use pre-tax commuter benefits has incentivized me to use public transit More than I would have before the current cruise 5-1-1 Program caters to cars all I want to see is where my buses are and service disruption announcements Why is it that transit agencies in every other direction that is in us can do this even Los Bonitos can track their buses and figure out where they are The current service disruption text alert system is late or is never reported Highway 17 detours yesterday due to a mudslide were announced via guv alert text messages But not until well after over an hour after kion covered said detour Another example is Halloween day when buses had delays due to half of the bus lanes being shut down on the Pacific Avenue side of Our downtown Metro. There was radio silence on the text messaging forefront Please focus on communicating public transit and not cars when revisiting cruise 5-1 or when revising cruise 5-1-1 I also ask that the board consider using one of their commute solutions staff to monitor ret metro radio Communications and push out service disruption alerts Maybe even use the CEO out of office stream the radio communications feed to the smartphone and push text that way There are many ways to communicate these events with little to no money involved. Thank you I'm gonna bring it back Commissioner Leopold Thank You chair You know the 5-1-1 service has been When it was in creation what there were people who could not conceive how that would work And what we saw as soon as it got put online During the 2017 storms that it was a vital critical resource for people in our community Adding to the and or enhancing the capabilities of 5-1-1 seems to make sense. I will also point out that the transit district recently received a grant to do What people are asking which is that we could you could know when your bus is coming I don't know exactly when that will be online Maybe within the next year and a half. I'm looking to Staff they might be able to come up and and just give a brief report about that but The the transit district is committed to that the board made that a priority and the staff went out and got the money to Make that happen and that could be tied in with this service. I don't mr. Clifford, maybe you just want to say a little bit about that service Go ahead mr. Clifford. Thank you sure chair commissioners Yes, I was smiling as the comments were made earlier about what the value would be in a smartphone application Showing the timing of your next bus at your stop As as the metro board members know we received a grant through the STIP program But funded actually as a result of SB 1. Thank you SB 1. Thank you prop 6 for going down And that is funding an AVL project an automatic vehicle locator project. So we over the course We've already awarded that so over the course of the next year. We're putting that on our system Installing GPS on our buses as soon as that is done that will tie into the smartphone application and we will launch our own application We will then move on to looking at other types of of partnerships For example, there was a discussion about a single application Being able to do jump bikes and Ubers and things like that that does exist today So it's just a matter of whether we can integrate with that down the road But that's exciting that we have that coming. I just want to make one last quick comment on the gov delivery We're trying to do our best on that that is our way of notifying our driver our customers That there is a problem with the service and it is delayed if you go back and visualize what happened last night It was it was in the evening that we had the mudslide the tree later in the evening that the tree came down We have one dispatcher working at that time who has to jockey keeping service on on on the road and rerouting that service around those kinds of problems and then running over to the gov delivery and making a Notification to our customers. So it's a delicate balance We try to do the best we can and I'm also trying to avoid adding another FTE that it would take to have somebody sit there And just be dedicated to that particular program, but we can do better and we'll keep trying to do better Thank you for that information. I'm sure public will be very happy when that Gets introduced. I would like to move the recommendation in the board packet a motion second Okay, and let me get a comment from the commissioner rod confers just one just one sentence for people who think this is cheap Mike just microphone For people who think this is cheap what Alex Clifford just talked about it's going to cost the district over a million dollars to put GPS's on all of our buses and the whole everything else that comes with it So these things it's great. We can do this We've needed it for a long time, but the choice has always been what routes would we cancel in order to have this service? And we've because a measure D We're now in a position to be actually able to fund to fund this and actually have this real significant improvement to the district Thank you commissioner moher, and you had an amendment. Yes. Thank you Just a further direction to staff that the request for proposals Require that a successful applicant possessed the capability of integrating with Mobility as a service and other transportation service providers in the county to provide an integrated map To make a motion okay with that amendment. I'm just looking over at staff to make sure that can be done So yes, I see that as a friendly amendment. Okay, any other comments from commissioners commissioner Johnson, right? So, you know, I'm not inherently opposed to innovation. I think on the face of it something like this a platform is Moving forward, but at the same time. I guess I'm just questioning How it's being paid for with new funds instead of extracting from what is existing in the either 511 pool of money or the Commute solutions pool of money. There's lots of money there and having to extract it from measure D Which in my mind maybe it's appropriate, but at the same time, you know $10,000 here $10,000 there pretty soon. You're talking about real money, and this is real money So for that reason, I'm not voting against the opportunity the innovation But I am voting against the money's coming out of What could go to other programs that might help with the efficacy of our transportation system? Thank you any other commissioner comments Okay, with that we'll have a vote all in favor. I opposed One that passes and the one Okay, that'll bring us back on track to the agenda will be at item number 20, which is the main reason We're here today. This will be for the unified quarter investment study Staff Have a staff report It's die car The staff report will be approximately 10 minutes, so I don't know if we want to continue to have people standing or The it's the length of the staff report is 10 minutes. You're welcome to stay standing But just giving you a warning that that's how long it's going to take. I don't see anybody budging. So go ahead. Miss die car Morning chair and commissioners. I'm ginger die car. I'm a senior transportation planner here at the RTC and project manager for the unified Carter study, it's been a privilege to be the manager for this study given all the engagement from our community The item I will be presenting to you as the final report of the unified Carter investment study and staff recommendations on the preferred scenario The determination of exemption of the unified Carter study from sequa and the grant of phase two of the agreement with progressive rail This commission RTC staff and consultants partner agencies community Organizations and members of the public have engaged in quite a process over the last couple of years in Discussing the transportation needs of the Santa Cruz County community and the a best approach forward Much appreciation goes out to all who have been engaged in this project. Well, thank you all As an example of the engagement On this project Included in the packet for this item. There are approximately 500 emails or letters that have been sent to the Commission Since the packet went out last Thursday We have received approximately 600 emails or letters with comments on this item and this were provided to you as a handout today The objective of the unified Carter investment study was no small feat to identify Transportation improvements for walk bike transit and auto that support an integrated transportation network on Three primary routes through Santa Cruz County Highway 1 so Cal and freedom as well as the Santa Cruz branch rail line was a substantial effort Funding was sought and provided from CalTrans through through two different grant awards in addition to funds from voter approval measure D a Travel demand model was developed for Santa Cruz County that that could be used to help facilitate this analysis and for use in future work Consultants were hired to perform the analysis Kimley Horn and strategic economics an RTC staff worked very closely with the consultants and providing local knowledge on projects reports and available data The goals and performance measures were identified based on the triple bottom-line analysis of environment equity and economy The CalTrans guidelines what was feasible to evaluate given available data and tools that are available to our county And last but not least input the goals and performance measures Were based on input from the public on issues and transportation that are most important to them a Range of measures 16 in total were evaluated to provide decision makers and the public with information about how future transportation scenarios Effect the measures or issues that are most important to them a Performance-based scenario analysis approach was used as a well-accepted Mechanism for bringing information to support decision-making Outreach to this community Outreach to this commission the public partner agencies RTC advisory committees community organizations was extensive through surveys workshops focus groups stakeholder meetings emails including over 40 outreach activities The quantitative step-to-scenario analysis of over 14 projects 16 performance measures providing existing conditions and forecasting for five different scenarios was quite an endeavor Today staff is seeking your acceptance of the final report of the unified Carter study in the preferred scenario The staff recommendation on the preferred scenario includes the following for highway one the projects include six sets of auxiliary lanes between Soquel Drive and San Andreas Road metering of on ramps and bus on shoulders between San Andreas Road to Morrissey Boulevard on Soquel and Freedom the staff recommended preferred scenario includes buffered protected bike lanes Pedestrian and bicycle improvements to intersections and where feasible bypass lanes for bus service and transit priority On the rail right of way Protection of the rail right of way for a high-capacity public transit service on a dedicated facility Freed service and bike and pedestrian trail The staff recommendation for the preferred scenario was slightly modified from the November 15th staff recommend Recommended preferred scenario Included in the packet there are a number of letters from partner agencies that are attached to the staff report That express support for various different projects to be included in the final preferred scenario it was a omitted by Not intentionally that since the last discussion of the unified Carter study on December 6th The city of Santa Cruz City Council in discussing the unified Carter study made a motion to include in its made a motion for the RTC to include in its final decision on the preferred scenario the city approved Multimodal intersection improvements on mission and Soquel and in the additional lanes on the highway Braun Bridge over the San Lorenzo River The preferred scenario advances the goals of the study safety reliability and efficiency and economic environmental and equity goals of the transportation network the key considerations the Okay The preferred scenario protects the rail right-of-way for a multimodal transit freight and bike and walk trail the preferred scenario provides flexibility and determining the most appropriate High-capacity public transit service as a dedicated facility on the rail Carter RTC staff will work with Metro to determine the scope of work that includes a high capacity Public transit alternative on a dedicated facility on the rail right-of-way Within an integrated transit network for Santa Cruz County The preferred scenario also emphasizes regional projects that improve the connection between Watsonville and Santa Cruz The preferred scenario provides a range of transportation options that meet the needs of all users and Funding for highway transit and bike and walk projects are often available for different sources so by prioritizing a mix of projects and being shovel ready with environmental review and Project design completed Santa Cruz County can be more competitive for funding With the completion of the unified corridor study the Regional Transportation Commission can now make a decision on phase two of the agreement with St. Paul and Pacific Railroad Which is a subsidiary of progressive rail as a reminder after extensive negotiations ample due diligence Excuse me ample due diligence and several public meetings in June of 2018 the RTC approved entering into a 10-year agreement With St. Paul and Pacific Railroad Phase one of the agreement which was approved in June 2018 allows St. Paul and Pacific the right to use the Santa Cruz branch rail line for freight Within 120 days after completion of the unified corridor study which is specified as March 15th 2019 the RTC must decide whether to grant phase two of the agreement This will give St. Paul and Pacific Railroad a non-exclusive license to use the Santa Cruz branch rail line for excursion service Subject to the RTC's approval of the operating plan, which is required to be submitted within one year If phase two excursion service is agreed upon the agreement specifies that the RTC will repair the rail line up to a class one Track classification within three years If RTC is unable to complete the repairs in three years St. Paul and Pacific's excursion service requirements are extended accordingly at no penalty to the RTC Once the repairs are made St. Paul and Pacific is responsible for maintenance of the rail right of way Graning a license to St. Paul and Pacific Railroad for phase two of the agreement the excursion services provides the greatest assurance that the rail right of way will be protected and Maintained for future transit services and a bike and pedestrian trail If phase two excursion service is not extended to St. Paul and Pacific they could terminate the entire agreement However, only the surface transportation board can relieve St. Paul and Pacific of its common carrier freight obligations Although there are no specified damages to the RTC for failing to grant a license for phase two the excursion services There is considerable uncertainty as to what would happen to the freight rail common carrier designation As well as the RTC's ownership of the Santa Cruz branch rail line if St. Paul and Pacific chooses to terminate the entire agreement The resolution that is included as attachment one of the staff report provides the details of the staff recommendation Based on the results of the unified corridor study The resolution includes the request to approve the notice of exemption of the unified corridor study from CEQA Since in accepting the unified corridor investment study There is not approval of a project nor a commitment to a definite course of action with potential impact on the environment acceptance of the unified corridor and the staff recommendation Provides commission support of the unified corridor study as the comprehensive corridor plan that is required as part of the application for Senate bill one congested corridors program funding that will be sought for highway one It also provides an acknowledgement that the unified corridor study included an analysis of future transportation use options for the rail right-of-way As discussed in measure D It also provides acceptance of existing conditions data and 2035 forecast The existing conditions transportation data that was compiled for all the performance measures Provides a substantial level of information on the Santa Cruz County transportation system and can be utilized in applying for funding for project funding The acceptance of the unified corridor study also protects the rail right-of-way for high capacity transit projects freight and a trail for bike and walk The acceptance of a preferred scenario will assist in guiding staff to advance priority projects By prioritizing a mix of projects and being shovel ready with environmental review and project design Completed Santa Cruz County can be in a much more competitive position to be awarded funding The staff recommendation before you today is for the regional transportation Commission to consider the findings the final draft unified corridor investment study and adopt a resolution Which is attachment one of the staff report accepting the unified corridor investment study, which selects a preferred scenario also a part of the attachment one Determines this action to be exempt from sequel The second part of the resolution is to a I'm sorry the staff recommendation is to grant St. Paul and Pacific Railroad a license to use the Santa Cruz branch rail line to provide excursion services in addition to freight services as specified under 2.4.1 of the administration coordination and license agreement entered into on July 16th 2018 by the RTC That is the end of my presentation. I'm happy to take questions and comments Frederick Venter vice president of Kimley Horn is also here a project He's also been project manager of the unified corridor study on the Consultant side. He's also here to respond to questions. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Commissioner. This this portion is just for questions only and then we'll open it to the public So if you have any questions, we'll take those now commissioner Johnson. Thank you, chair Was there ever a study done to the effect that if you have an excursion train what effect would that have on the Traffic on highway one, how much would it diminish the traffic on highway one? I Mean, it's a big part of you know, you mentioned it. So I'm just wondering was that part of the study That was not part of the unified corridor investment study. Was there a reason for that or I mean Part of what we're trying to do with passenger rail Excursion and so forth is to diminish the number of trips on highway one, especially during the peak times So why wasn't that included in the study? I? Think that I don't know how maybe I can get it started and Louise could add to this But the part of the commitment to the California Transportation Commission in Accepting the proposition 116 funds is to have some sort of passenger service and the excursion trains does qualify for that Excursion service so it's just a stepping stone towards meeting the Obligations in accepting those phones. Thank you. You want to add anything to that looks like a Mr. Venture would like to add something so go ahead and I can add to that if I Think the excursion trains would not have the frequency and capacity that Typical passenger service would have it would also be more on for recreational purposes So I think the impact on on any of the street systems for recreational work excursion trains is is going to be Minimal in terms of its impact on capacity on the road system. Thank you And this Mendez from admin briefly in the unified corridor study excursion services That's looked at is between Santa Cruz and and Davenport. However, I mean if if the Commission makes that available There can be other excursions And one of those that was proposed by the the existing operator is to have an excursion from San Jose to the To the boardwalk during tourist times and so on so we know tourist traffic is you know is also a significant factor in the Congestion that we see here. So things like that, you know could Give those tourist options for getting to Santa Cruz and around Santa Cruz Santa Cruz County if necessary Of course, that was not analyzed because that was not part of the unified corridor study Any other questions? Yes, I'm gonna get the commissioner for trans first So capital has been waiting for some time for a report on the safety of the trestle it goes across the river runs through Capitola and That should have been done significantly many years ago It's due in 2019 as mentioned in the report Seems to be this could be a major impediment for any kind of commercial use or Mass transit use on that particular line depending on the cost If this comes in rather high What do you project in terms of the contract the ACL it could be much higher than we're able to afford in this community So I'll take that question That's been a concern of mine as well I've been looking at the amount of work and repairs that would be needed on the branch line to actually allow this type of service We don't have that report yet There is the possibility that there could be significant work on the capital a trestle that exceeds the available funding that we have To to put towards the branch rail line That's why we put in our staff report The the requirement that we repair the line But the acknowledgement that if we were unable to repair the line that there really is no penalty to the RTC So I've really seen no harm in moving forward with the class The phase two license with progressive rail because we still have the opportunity to possibly get sections of the rail line up to The standards that would be required for excursion travel and be able to then transfer the maintenance responsibilities over to progress a rail so even though there's this unknown with respect to what the maintenance Costs would be to initially hand the line over without there being a penalty associated with it I still see there being benefit and allowing excursion travel and and handing over whatever maintenance I can to another operator Thanks, so As everyone in this room could imagine and as everyone who are residents of capital can imagine Any kind of accident that's on this trestle could potentially impact not only real property, but life So Having that train go over the trestle at a low speed that is deemed safe is not acceptable If the report comes out that there's actually some issues with this trestle and there's been many letters to this body and Significant other things that make me wonder about the trestle safety. I think this is a major importance to capital. Thank you Thank you It's there a commission Racken. I Have two quick questions one it says in On page 2011 Got the right page here in the resolute in the resolution on 2011 number eight Says protect the rail right away for high capacity public transit service goes on. I wanted to check whether Personal rapid transit is considered a high capacity public transit mode for the for the purpose of you know it was Would it be or could it be included in the? Study that's proposed here in terms of our options that will follow our action if we approve the staff recommendation I think it's a distinct possibility We would have to look at exactly what they're what they are proposing and whether it truly meets the definition of high-capacity Public transit, but it's not ruled out automatically is because this that is correct your character. That is correct Thank you. That's question one and question two in the UCI s there's discussion about programs to enhance employer support of electric vehicle purchased by their Or used by their employees a number of other kinds of options to sort of right now not waiting for all these other programs That are going to take several years to develop But there's nothing in the resolution that comes back and refers to that part of the program Would I be should I be nervous that because it's not in the resolution? That's not going to happen or tell me where does that now stand? It's part of this Preferred scenario when you read it in the text, but doesn't show up in the resolution And again, I don't expect you to tell me what the program is today in its details But is that in fact a program that staff will be working on to make sure that it gets developed in the short term? The resolution wasn't wasn't meant to sort of reiterate everything in the preferred scenario So if it's not the resolution if it's it's you know something that a plan that the RTC approves It's still part of the RTC policy. So yes, we would work on you know, whatever you you approve and direct us to That answers my two questions. Thank you. Thank you Excuse me if you're if you're wondering about whether you should applause or not Let's refrain from that There's many different modes of transportation that we all support and I don't want anybody to feel offended if their Transportation doesn't get the attention it deserves. So we're all here for transportation. So thank you, miss Copping Gomez Thank you Thank you, I have forwarded many questions to staff that I'm sure I'll wait to hear back from but there's a few of them here publicly That I think that I'd like to have a little bit more information about How long and at what cost will a full analysis of specific operations and capital funding sources? take for the The the mouse transit on the corridor so for the comparing the bus rapid transit to The rail option how much time how much money? What would be entailed to do that? It would really depend upon the scope of the work that we Define and so I'm going to have to work with Metro in accordance with the recommendation to come up with the scope of work There was a very Good letter from Caltrans about potential funding sources in the agenda package Those are the sorts of things that we are going to be looking towards but that said It's very hard to to lock down potential funding sources And get definitive answers with respect to that so You know I caution everyone to you know Not get too excited that all this funding is available and it would definitively come to Santa Cruz County but we should be able to provide a Fairly good Analysis as to you know what the options are and you know within a one-year period Another question will probably a little bit further off on that is what are new starts and small starts? The documentation requirements there's something in the report that mentioned that and I don't know what new starts and small starts mean The federal transit administration has some funding sources that they call new starts and small starts It used to be required to do an alternatives analysis prior First before you move into the environmental review But their requirements have changed so that the alternatives analysis requirement is within their environmental Review in order to expedite the process And I'll just ask one more out of everything I have here Some of the conversations that I've been having are people wanting to make sure that I validated information Beyond RTC's opinion, which I've done my best to possibly do Will we be able to direct staff to ask specific questions of the STB and other government agencies? Regarding the this corridor and the restrictions and what we can do what we can't do because there's a lot of things that will That I don't think we're directly asking the STB We we don't have STB coming in here giving us reports on some of the things everybody's Assuming that we need to get directly the information from other federal agencies or so it's important to remember that the surface transportation board is a board it is It doesn't meet very frequently and it's not very well staffed So trying to get direct answers as to what would happen For certain different Hypothetical possibilities is a very difficult thing to do It would be the equivalent of somebody coming to me and asking me what my board would do I don't know what you guys will do on a regular basis So I can only look at the guidelines that are provided and that the laws that kind of govern them they're primarily interested in protecting freight traffic as you know As mandated to them by the Interstate Commerce Act, which is a 19th century law They tend to Favour freight traffic and they're mainly interested in and maintaining freight traffic on the line And there is processes for abandonment and even rail banking but there's also processes for petitioners to petition and also for Financial assistance if you're claiming that it's not financially viable to maintain Freight traffic on the line for somebody else to take over and possibly even purchase the line So that's why we mentioned the the uncertainties there We can certainly try to contact the board, but my guess is we're not going to get very direct Answers they're probably going to give me some sort of answer like well You would have to actually file to abandon the line to find out whether or not abandonment would be a possibility And I just have the one final if that's okay The investment equitability is something that I know that we're concerned about the South County we've had millions of dollars in projects at the North End and I want to know how we're going to make sure that this is part of the process to make sure that we're getting the Equitability of the projects balanced so that we actually can see some Relief as primarily the South End when we've seen a lot of money spent on the North End How are we integrating that into the study the decisions and the priorities? I can I could start with that if you So there's there are some measure D funds that are available and those funds are Allocated on a formula basis and that has already been decided by this Commission as well as the local jurisdictions Watsonville Was very involved in and those negotiations for the measure D allocations Beyond that discretionary funds for projects that go through our TC That's only about five percent of the projects that five percent of the transportation funds that are available In our county and they are not formula based But they always come before this Commission to make a decision on where those funds would go to Thank you and one more thing with respect to the equitability question Even though a lot of the improvements Focused on highway one are not in the Watsonville area. I mean it's important to Understand the way highway one works and where the traffic is coming from a lot of the traffic commences and Watsonville or the the the vehicles commenced in Watsonville and then they hit the traffic in Aptos Capitola and Santa Cruz so even though a lot of the investments on highway one were focused Outside of the Watsonville city limits There is significant benefit to the Watsonville residents and this is true to You know the Monterey Bay Sanctuary Trail goes all the way from Santa Cruz to Watsonville and any Mass transit service on the line would also serve Watsonville. I have Commissioner Caput then Commissioner Johnson Commissioner Caput I Appreciate all the work you're doing here and we're trying to we're trying to please everybody and That's good. What I'm trying to get out of here is that We find opposition to any shift in priority What brought everybody here with measure D was we were promising to a lot of groups And they got a sense of priority Okay What I'm I'm not against the rail I'm for the rail and I'm not and I want to protect the bicycle paths and the walking and trail use and Is there a shift in priority my what I'm getting at is we're talking about passenger and freight service connecting Watsonville and Davenport Santa Cruz That's a that's a priority and then There is a caveat that says We will look in at metro use And you know HOV use and everything like that if There's a shift in the priority to that bus capacity Would that basically break up the? linkage between Santa Cruz and Watsonville as far as passenger service and freight service Get that started and then add on if you prefer so a lot of this would be determined in the future if the Staff recommendation is to look at high capacity public transit service and the commission makes that decision today Then we also are directed to work with metro to develop a scope of work to evaluate Public transit service whether it's but us be our bus rapid transit or rail and All of that decision-making would come back again to this commission as well as I would imagine metro To make that decision of how best to move forward and what to evaluate The bus rapid transit that we did evaluate in the unified corridor study on the rail right of way Did connect Watsonville and Santa Cruz? I can't imagine that wouldn't be something that would move forward in our evaluation it just the the option was that the Bus would travel on highway one from 129 to State Park Drive and then get on the rail right of way So but all of that is still if this Staff recommendation moves forward, then it would be coming back to the commission That's at what exactly we would be evaluating as far as these alternatives Yeah, right, and I'm getting it You shouldn't be under so much pressure here because it seemed that one time everybody was for the same thing Rail trail and bicycle path and then now we're talking about priorities. So you're doing very well. I want to thank you if I read this correctly right now a priority is rail and passenger service And freight service connecting Santa Cruz to Watsonville with a possibility of looking at Metro and whatever in the future that might change that before there might have been a shift that a shift in priority where passenger service and rail and Freight service was a lower priority Before so it in my reading this correctly freight and passenger service Tends to be a priority right now So once again with respect to freight traffic The surface transportation board is is the governing body regarding freight traffic we have a 10-year agreement with progressive rail and I don't think that there's any Desire to remove freight traffic from Watsonville So so freight should be continuing on the line and and there should not be an issue with prioritization of freight with respect to passenger travel on the Santa Cruz branch line Coming out of our Recommendation is to do an additional analysis as to what is the best type of passenger Service transit service high capacity Transit service on the Santa Cruz branch rail line So we do have a priority of trying to determine what that would be in terms of prioritization of other projects that could help relieve congestion and Move people between Watsonville and Santa and Santa Cruz We our recommendation is to move forward with the auxiliary lane projects And also to incorporate bus on shoulders within that so we are moving forward in many different directions to Continue in prioritized service between Watsonville and Santa Cruz Okay, and I believe I might be correct Kaltrain Kaltrans would be supporting Passenger and freight service between Santa Cruz Davenport Santa Cruz and Watsonville Yes, absolutely the the state rail plan Lays out the vision for California's rail system and the Santa Cruz branch line is a key component of that We have both short-term mid-term and long-term expectations for how How all the rail systems would would link up and this is an important link we support it wholeheartedly And and part of that would be okay. I'll make this quick the If I'm looking at it from the benefit to the Santa Cruz area now I mean I could argue I really want it for Watsonville but the benefit from Santa Cruz if we had freight and passenger service connecting to Watsonville the state of California with Funding for trains would then connect them to Monterey County Salinas Gilroy and potentially Seattle Washington and San Diego, California. Am I correct? Yes, yeah, and so if we had a break in the service between Santa Cruz and Watsonville where they couldn't get on a train and actually connect to all the other Proposals by the state of California. Santa Cruz would be cut off If there is a break in that train passenger service I'm talking about that corridor between Rio del Mar and what? Porter Capitola The branch line is an important connection So if if this if the if the rail line was broken it wouldn't be served So let any break anywhere would would stop that being able to get on the train one place and actually connect to Like I said Seattle and San Diego Okay Commissioner Johnson. Thank you chair. I had a prop 116 question It that you know props at 116 was a clean air and transportation improvement act of 1990 and You know embedded in that Was I mean we're always talking about rail service and the excursion train I guess would be a placeholder to Protect the 116 funds that were given to this Agency, but if you look at prop 116 and and how it described it There's also 20 million for competitive bicycle program for capital outlays for bicycle improvement projects that improve safety and convenience for Bicycle commuters, so my question is this even though most of the I guess information that flows on the CTC's requirement for this line. Isn't there also a possibility for That 20 million dollars to be used for but bicycle and bicycle only My understanding is when the CTC awarded us these prop 116 Funds to purchase the rail line. They were very specific in that they wanted to see it used as a rail line I've received a letter Via George the previous executive director dated November 2nd that reminded us of this requirement So any action to try to change it would require us to go back to the CTC and Ask them these sorts of questions, but my staff has informed me that at previous CTC meetings Commissioners have said flat out you better not rip out the rails So to go back and ask them to try to change what they decided when we purchased the rail line and allow some other use of the funds for another purpose would be Very questionable Well, I'll just add that I was in the room for many of those discussions with the California Transportation Commission as well As Caltrans and I spoke to virtually all the CTC commissioners when we made When we received this funding this was their big issue that we were just going to take this and turn it into a bike trail They had us make commitments. They had us We did you manage to put in the excursion service rather than Completely committing to passenger service because we weren't sure we what we would be able to do there, but at the time Several years back 2011-2012 this was the big concern and it's been reinforced by the many of the letters. We've received from the CTC since Any other questions on this side? I'm gonna get everybody a chance first before we go back Questions on this side Commissioner Bertrand So I know it's something that I've looked for for a long time in terms of Accountability on page 2011 the whereas number nine Basically says that we're going to do a cost-benefit analysis Working with the Metro in terms of trying to figure out what the best high capacity public transit Alternates are on the the right-of-way I commend that and I think that came from Metro in an earlier meeting and I commend RTC staff for putting this in the resolution There was a comment earlier in terms of how this body reports financial information to the public Can we present that information in a way that's understandable to the public and to the staff here so I can understand it. Thank you Thank you. Okay. No other comments Okay, I have a couple things I want to do before I open up to the public number one So I want to thank mr. I car miss Blake's leave for all the hard work and the rest of staff that you've done to make all these Presentations and answer all the questions of public. So now a round of applause for those Number two before we have the first public speaker a couple things we're going to limit this to two minutes But what I want to bring up is I want to bring up one of our stakeholders since I believe we're fortunate to have the person here It's on the dovetail of mr. Bertrand's questions about Metro I think would benefit everybody if we heard from the CEO and Metro about some of the concerns that they May have on this study so I'm going to ask him to come up front and share with him part of the presentation Metro's Concerns or comments on the ECIS. Thank you. Mr. Clifford. Mr. Chair commissioners. Thank you so much for that professional courtesy. Thank you Yes, I just want to report as you well know what the Metro board took an action Expressing certain concerns following the presentation of the report and the recommendations in November and I'd just like to say I'm going to go out on a limb here and my my board members will correct me if I get this wrong But I'd like to say that I really think that what you have before you today Meets both the spirit and the intent of the action taken by the Metro board I'm really impressed with the leadership at the RTC I really appreciate the time that guy has spent Looking at our concerns over the holidays in particular spending quality time looking at those concerns and trying to find solutions asking good questions and I'm here to tell you by my read of what you have before you today. I think it is a really good outcome And it went further than to just say in a board report what was intended But to put certain key things into the resolution which were important to us We'll get a chance to continue this new spirit of collaboration in the coming months and and years and hopefully Beyond that but in respect to this we'll get to work together to collaborate together to develop a scope of work that hopefully tries to answer the concerns that the staff and the Metro board expressed in that previous action and Thoroughly explore what the costs are of the different high-capacity solutions We're not here to tell you that bus BRT and that quarter is the right one and you ought to do that today We're not here to do that. We're just saying Everything train that PRT's if that's what's going to be Considered all need to be evaluated so that the most cost effective approach is ultimately recommended to you and with that You will have all of the capital costs associated with it through this process They'll have all the operating costs, but you'll go one step further. You'll go one step further to Evaluate where would that money come from that's such an important question to have answered and that was that was probably the most Important thing to both the staff and our Metro board whatever decision is ultimately made whether it is bus BRT or train or PRT Or whatever You when you make that decision you need to know where that money is coming from and if that source of money Is something that Metro already uses today to provide the service that we just Barely can can do and we desperately need to increase Frequency in some cases and span of service and and other solutions in the county if that Diversion of money is going to impact us you'll know that and you'll know that as a part of your decision And you'll you'll make a conscientious decision about that down the road. It's a great process I want to thank Guy and his staff for all that they have done and and I'm here to encourage you to adopt the Recommendation and resolution that you have before you today. Thank you for the opportunity and the professional courtesy Thank you for your comments, and we welcome our first speaker Thank you, Marilyn Schultz La Selva Beach train train train It makes me really sad To see that some of you haven't folded on that idea yet. I Think St. Paul's taking you for a ride. I Think that because I'm from Minneapolis St. Paul the metropolitan area 15 years ago I joined my sisters for a wonderful bike ride in the country in Leansboro They had taken out their railroad tracks They had put in bicycle paths to be used for that pedestrians and cross-country skiing Minnesota's moving forward. We're moving backwards. No wonder Minnesota wanted someplace to send their trains Thank you I'm here today because I believe that Most of you will vote for the preferred scenario today, and I urge you to vote. No, I Rode the Christmas choo-choo train with my family. I'm against an old-fashioned train Even if it's not as bad as the Christmas train I'm not necessarily against a well-planned light rail train if it makes sense financially And if we have the population to merit it at some point in the future It'd be really awesome We could put it on a platform above highway one. That would be a really logical place to have it. I Recommend railroad banking for right now and I recommend the use of the corridor for bicycles Walkers and e-bikes The technology is changing fast. We're just gonna get buried in the past the corridor Was purchased to help the transportation gridlock The train has been shown not to be a feasible solution for this problem So now the train is being touted for Really? Thank you for your comments. Oh my god. Thank you Gail McNulty I speak to you today as a mother deeply saddened and worried about our children's future My children are 7 11 and 13 Scientists give a 50-50 chance that the human race will go extinct in their lifetimes Transportation is our biggest local source of co2 The UN announced in October that we have at most 12 years to dramatically transition off of fossil fuels and lower our Emissions if we hope to protect a livable future for our children The preferred UCIS scenario you are being asked to approve today will have little to no effect on our local transportation emissions by 2035 To make matters worse this in effect ineffective plan would sacrifice Countless carbon sequestering trees and green space and eliminate the opportunity to build a wide continuous trail That would be a viable alternative for cars for many Well individuals And at a time when humanity's only hope is to keep fossil fuels in the ground The only true beneficiary of this plan would be progressive rail whose leaders have strong ties to the oil industry While individuals can and should make sustainable choices Decisions like the one you are considering today are far more impactful than anything we can do in our personal lives Unfortunately politicians at every level of our government are so ingrained in a get-the-money mindset that they mistake getting grants Making money and bolstering businesses as taking care of people. It's time for a green new deal Thank you for the climate improvements you have brought to your cities in the county based on what we now know all efforts must be Re-examined intensified and fast-tracked. We must go back to the drawing board and create bold fast-track a bold fast-tracked plan To move more people more quickly while protecting our trees in our atmosphere Our children need us to take the time to draft a more effective less harmful Transportation plan. Thank you. Thank you, miss penalty Welcome Hello, I'm Susan Cavalieri. Thank you for this opportunity. I just want to say that this is not 2016 when measure D was approved to add auxiliary lanes to highway one Since then co2 level levels and the atmosphere have increased wildfires have destroyed forests homes communities and Lives smoke from these fires made the air hazardous for health in the fourth California climate change Assessment released in August of 2018 scientists report that fire wildfires will increase Water supplies from snow bank snowpack will decrease Sea level rise sea levels will rise Temperature will increase and there will be heat related deaths more heat related deaths by 2050 They say reduction of greenhouse gas emissions must be a priority to decrease severe climate impacts and as Gail mentioned the new IPCC report released in October of 2018 warns that the world has only about 10 years to drastically decrease emissions to keep the earth's temperature under two degrees centigrade Otherwise there will be catastrophic environmental damage and instead of auxiliary lanes on highway widening which Would support a business as usual scenario and fossil fuel use And increase greenhouse gas emissions, please fund Electrified public transit with bus on shoulder Rapid bus rapid transit on so Cal new options such as PRT and Although rail is less carbon-intensive it may be limited by sea level rise and coastal erosion Our collective survival depends on ending fossil fuel dependence Thank you. Thank you My name is Rosemary Sarka. I'm a corporate officer at Roaring Camp railroads We think that our experience might be relevant And assuage some of the concerns of people who fear trains going through your neighborhood You know that we have been running as an old-fashioned steam train at in Felton for over 50 years But a mere 35 years ago. We bought the branch line from Felton to the Y We ran freight we picked up freight on that line up until 10 years ago when the recession made lumber coming into San Lorenzo at the Felton yard not feasible and We have run trains coming from back and forth right through downtown Santa Cruz right through neighborhoods For 35 years. I Just want to tell you that the number of complaints that we have received in that period of time From the community has been zero. Thank you Thank you Good morning. I'm David van Brink City of Santa Cruz and friends of the rail and trail This has been going on for a long time something like three decades if you go all the way to the beginning and Six years of studies wrapping up with the UCS We just got a great turnout for the trail ground breaking three four hundred people on a weekday, which is pretty awesome The more we look at it the clearer it gets the more we look at it The more organizations weigh in in favor of transit on the corridor We've got letters of support from UC Santa Cruz and Caltrans Support from the cities of Santa Cruz and Watsonville the Santa Cruz area Chamber of Commerce a bike Santa Cruz County the Bicycle Advisory Committee to the RTC the elderly and disabled committee to the RTC the friends of the rail and trail, of course And the tireless professionals of the RTC staff itself The correspondence log for this meeting shows literally which my mean here literally hundreds of individuals supporting rail and trail Years in the making let's move forward today. Let's close the deals activate the corridor and approve the staff recommendation. Thank you Thank you Good morning. My name is Anna Cameron and I live in the city of Watsonville Today you we all of us are tasked with making a transportation decision Which will affect the future of all county residents all ages all levels of mobility Families students working people singles residents as well as visitors commuters and recreational users the lack of Reliable economical transportation creates an equal access barrier To educational and job opportunities throughout the county and this is especially true for South County residents Much of the county population especially in Watsonville is youthful and will benefit from planning now For future rail transit to access these educational and job opportunities Rail will provide a high capacity public transit service to meet the transportation needs of all county residents Rail transit is fast. It's comfortable, and it will equitably serve the over one Third of County residents who live south of La Selva Beach. I urge you to approve the corridor study with the staff preferred scenario and Authorize phase two of the progressive rail contract. Thank you very much. Thank you Good morning commissioners chair. My name is Bruce saw Hill city of Santa Cruz Friends of the rail and trail first of all congratulations on the UC is So my message is that rail and trail is good for a planet people and profit in terms of the planet It has come out very recently that transportation is the single greatest source of greenhouse gases both both Bicycles and electric light rail get upwards of the equivalent of 600 miles per gallon per person Whether they're running on burritos or electrons. That's what we need to turn the tide against climate change Terms of profit rail equals commitment to the long term long term commitment drives associated investment This has happened all over the country mostly with private dollars in terms of people Transit on the corridor is a no-brainer the corridor goes through all but one of the dozen or so densest census tracts in the county and that transit should be rail as the national transit database tells us that rail transit Costs 40 to 60 cents per passenger mile and bus is a dollar to a buck 10 Those cents add up when you're removing 80 million vehicle miles from roadways according to the UC is rail also conquers the infamous Aptos Strangler and Scenario at least the scenario C bus plan stops short other bus plans may not This is important for accessibility and equity for the entire county So build the trail as soon as possible save the tracks and please move forward with the staff recommendation. Thank you. Thank you Hi, I'm Sally Arnold Resident of Santa Cruz County since 1976 We need to build this trail as soon as possible and the best way to do that is to stick with the existing plan Please vote to keep the tracks and to authorize phase 2 of the progressive rail contract So we can keep an active rail line in place for future transit Casual cyclists like myself could really benefit from having a safe car-free level bike path to get around the county And when built this trail will pass within 92 part within a mile of 92 parks 45 schools half the county's Population is going to get a lot of use and as for transit. We already have the tracks Why tear them out? They can provide much better service for cyclists than buses rather than having to hoist my bike onto a rack in front Of a bus assuming it hasn't already been filled I could just roll my bike onto a light rail car and suddenly be biking in Aptos and Watsonville Places that are too far for me to get by bike now A lot of people are talking about climate change and absolutely. It's important and that's why rail Transit is so important. It will lose less use less energy. It gets people out of their cars It'll allow it'll encourage more people to get on their bikes Please approve rail transit on the corridor and extend the progressive rail contract Thank you very much for your comments Hello mark Good morning chair botch often commissioners. My name is Mark Macete Miller I'm a professional engineer and I'm the chair of the Friends of the rail and trail Friends of the rail and trail fully supports the staff recommendations except we urge you to save us taxpayers The time and cost of the unnecessary alternatives analysis comparing passenger rail transit to bus rapid transit The unified corridor study has clearly demonstrated the superiority of passenger rail transit over bus rapid transit No further study is required. No amount of additional study will dramatically change these fundamental conclusions Rail transit will attract 75 percent more passengers We'll provide 35 percent faster travel times and cause an overall increase in Public transit use of 25 percent furthermore rail transit is eligible for substantial state funding and will seamlessly connect us to the coming state rail network Stating a preference now for passenger rail transit will save precious time and taxpayer money and move us toward a more sustainable more equitable Transportation in future as soon as possible Friends of the rail and trail urge you to fully support staff's second second recommendation and authorize phase two of the progressive rail contract Allowing passenger rail excursion services Doing so is the strongest way to demonstrate a commitment to use the rail corridor for high capacity public transit service And has many benefits including it will allow Construction of the very popular coastal rail trail to be done as soon as possible It unequivocally protects the rail right-of-way and all associated easements it keeps the measure deep promise to maintain the rail line and Will save us taxpayers millions of dollars by shifting the maintenance cost to a private party It avoids the time consuming and who knows how expensive property rights litigation And it will get residents and visitors out of cars off our streets and enjoying car-free access To parks beaches and other scenic destinations along our beautiful coast. Thank you. Thank you I have a handout and I'm going to let the next person go so the handout can make it out Okay, thank you. Come on up. Mr. Anderson Buzz Anderson resident of live oak What does ten million got dollars get you these days? What does a hundred million dollars get you these days for that matter? What does a billion dollars get you these days? No one really seems to know The original figure for the east span of the Bay Bridge was one billion dollars and final cost not counting demolition Approach six point five billion the California bullet train began as a thirty three billion dollar project But now estimates are as high as ninety eight billion one thing is certain However, there is a finite amount of money available. Yes, even taxpayer money As we see with segment 7a of the rail trail engineering estimates have been way off the mark with Anticipated bids of two point two million dollars, but actual bids coming in at seven million dollars Why doesn't the RTC staff start with a more difficult section on the rail trail so we can get a clear picture of actual costs? Perhaps they are afraid of what it might add up to be How much more money than the 15 million Allocated will be needed to bring the old tracks up to a level of safety to handle diesel locomotives and heavy freight cars How much money will it really take to retrofit or replace a trestle like the one in Capitola? And what about the real cost to bulldoze a rail trail between the existing tracks and topographical constraints throughout the corridor? And how about the cost of these massive concrete retaining walls? What about the price to control erosion when the sea terraces in La Selva Beach starts slipping into the sea or when the cost of land Use disputes multiply as we tear into people's backyards or encroach upon farmers fields And who gets sued when an RTC repaired section ends up derailing a fully loaded train Please don't throw good money after bad spending precious funds to accommodate and at best uncertain passenger train Decades from now is foolish Repairing old infrastructure building bits and pieces of a non-thrill trail and basically Gifting the corridor to a Midwestern freight corporation accomplishes nothing and suppresses all other transportation solutions. Thank you Mr. Pico Hi, Carrie Pico apt us before I get started I want to point out that the 10.2 million dollars from proposition 116 Bypass the use of 10 million dollars of the California Coastal Conservancy Fund and we wouldn't be in this mess today Of we have to do passenger traffic you have my handout and this is art the progressive contract by the numbers And by that by contract The cost of to the RTC will be roughly 15 million dollars not counting improvements to the Capitola Trestle and other things like that Progressive will pay us 3.6 million if everything goes according to the plan How and that means we lose at least 11.4 if everything goes according to plan However, progressive does not do passenger traffic. In fact 86 percent of By its own admission 86 percent head by the way, I meant to ask has anybody run this the contract number questions Okay, it's your time so 86 percent of the total revenue going through that contract is passenger service by progressive 73% of that is by the bay area to Santa Cruz Now how many people think that somebody's going to take a three to four-hour trip to get in a car drive to a train station drive to Take take Cal trains to Deirdre on to transfer on to a Capitola express Corridor Express that doesn't exist to Poirot train station that doesn't exist And then finally on to a progressive thing at a cost of $464 per family of four round trip for a day at the boardwalk. I don't think that's gonna happen So quite honestly, we're gonna lose 15 million dollars. We're not gonna lose just 11 So that will be your legacy in knowing going into this contract We're losing money going in and we're not getting anything out. We're going to lose It doesn't benefit the long-term efforts of the the tracks. Thank you. Thank you, sir Welcome, mr. Woodside. Thank you chairperson bought often may please the commission. My name is Stephen Woodside I'm a part-time resident of Capitola and I love passenger rail my love for rail stems from the fact that my Ancestors from Sweden came to this country came to California via ship and rail and Regularly came over from Vosona station to the then resort Camp Capitola Where generations of my family have been living and enjoying the wonderful environment ever since From a professional point of view after I finished at UC Santa Cruz in the second graduating class. I went to law school in Berkeley I I served 24 years in the Santa Clara County Council's office the last eight as County Council I worked on all of those rail projects with people like Rod Deirdre and Norma Netta and others to create a Vast system of bus light rail heavy rail, etc. I was at the table when Caltran Basically took over from the South Southern Pacific and I fully understand the complexities And it's challenging, but I still believe in passenger rail After leaving Santa Clara I served three terms as County Council in Sonoma and drafted the legislation That created the entity known as smart it took two efforts at the ballot to raise sales tax 10 years to go through a process and the trains are running carrying about 3,000 passengers per day and that is over the stretch of two counties with a combined population of more than Three-quarters of a million dollars and from my experience I can tell you that two two important things that you should keep in mind one You need to have an economic and tax-based and population-based to support passenger rail And as far as I can tell in my lifetime, you won't see that in this County. Sadly, I say that Secondly from the point of view of where you are now you seem to have elevated freight which costs a lot more Okay, but freight requires you to upgrade to the freight standard and it's incompatible with light rail I mean compatible with many of the alternatives. Thank you. Thank you Good morning, my name is Cara. I work at seascape resort in Aptos I'd like to respectfully remind the members of the committee of the responsibility to be conscientious to words By emphasizing stipulations at the first paragraph. Go ahead and pull that microphone closer. Thank you of the final Monterey Bay Sanctuary see new trail network plans Listing of goals Stating that the guiding framework for the developing this plan is to enhance a non motorized mobility as well as qualities including improved access and quality of life for Santa Cruz County residents and visitors By creating a pedestrian corridor The beauty of the Monterey Bay coastline will be easily and simply accessible to all residents and visitors Regardless of age ability or financial situation with limited Implementation cost shouldered by already burdened County taxpayers The corridor is wide enough for all types of individual and group of travel for families Tourists residents or athletes using strollers bicycle scooters rollerblades or on foot By adding rail you make it virtually impossible to keep all traffic on the corridor negatively infringing on it impacting the peace and safety of adjacent communities it seems counterproductive and Unnecessary to consider rail which significantly decreases the available pedestrian pathway critically degrading that experience and reducing the volume of individuals possible on the corridor People on the pedestrian corridor as well as adjacent neighborhoods such as the Salva Beach We'll have other highly valued peace and quiet disrupted with train noise Stunning natural views blighted and will cause a lengthy financial burden to the residents of the county and future generations With excessive expense to build run and maintain rail as well as cost of tickets and commuter lots I repeat by adding rail you make it virtually impossible to keep all traffic out in the corridor. Thank you for your time. Thank you My name is Micah Bosner I'm a cyclist. I have an idea for you Maybe we should do rail transportation on the rail line. I Mean, it's an idea, you know, I know when I was really involved in starting the rail trail process And I'm so glad that we're more or less in agreement about that I got a call from someone from Seattle who said hey Let me tell you how you can stop the trains with your trail so that it won't be noisy And I said I think trains are a public good and he said but you're a cyclist, right? I said, yeah I'm a cyclist. I'm not gonna take the train that much But I made a promise to Tony compost to other people in the community that when we get our awesome trail We're not gonna stop other people from having a great way to get around that doesn't destroy the environment And it gets them out of congestion and is socialized transportation because it doesn't cost a lot of money to go from Watsville to Santa Cruz or wherever else and I'm standing by that even though really I like riding my bike so That so I approve you doing this contract with progressive because the money you spend on upgrading the rails Is gonna be money well spent when we get our passenger rail service? There's nothing wrong with spending money to upgrade property that you own so that when you can have a vision that we can have passenger rail service That's a good use of public money You know in my spare time I sometimes think about the people in the 30s that All the public leaders who idiotically ripped up the rail system in the United States Which was an extremely amazing system good for the public good for the environment and I wonder what they thought Did they think it'll be quieter by my house? Did they think this will be better for my institution did they think you know? But this but I'll make more money if people drive cars What exactly were they thinking when they let the oil and auto industries rip up our rail system in the United States and replace? It with purposely crummy bus system called greyhound and nothing else For those people are interested in BRT. It's interesting But it's also a Trojan horse for private transportation to continue to run this country and not have what we really need Which is rail service? Please support the recommendations for rail. Thank you, mr. President There's a little piece on that map that is critical key to Pajaro station stop we do not have a way to get there by bus Correction we did have a way that with the bus that went to paro But Santa Cruz Metro Yanks that in their last service revisions of 2018 that Pajaro station is key I timed it myself December 26th last year Here is what to expect in terms of travel time 705 p.m. Past Watsonville Junction 8 p.m. Pastamian 806 p.m. Arrived at SJC not the plane one the train one Why we don't have a connection at paro already is beyond me having to go north to San Jose via highway 17 in order to go south on the rails is silly But alas that is how lots of public transit commutes seem to work rail service Connecting to paro would make our commute so much easier South County could connect to Silicon Valley in one hour Our entire County could connect as far north is Seattle as far south is San Diego and as far east as Chicago And less than two or three rail seats got a lag luggage or a bike no problem There will be space for you and your goodies The experience of travel is then enhanced you get to enjoy coastal views a diner car Where it gets me travelers from across the world and add up at your final destination and relaxed and without your ears ringing Did I mention that rail travel also effectively halves your carbon emissions versus flying that sounds like a green way if I ever heard of one With those new locomotives by Siemens going live on the National passenger rail network that cut could be even more for reference The Amtrak new newest locomotives are offering the latest here for emissions technologies Reducing nitrogen oxide emissions by eighty nine percent particulate matter by ninety five percent and ten percent Fuel savings on top of what is already efficient transit having rail service And Santa Cruz County is important. It's time mid in South County get some effective transit options Please back the UCIS scenario and emphasize putting more traffic. Thank you on a rail branch line. Thank you Welcome. Good morning. My name is Len be a I'm I've been a resident of Santa Cruz since 1970 I'm a member of the campaign for sustainable transportation And I want to focus my comments on the investment of funds to expand capacity on highway one The EIR states that there would be an almost one-third increase in vehicle miles traveled from the improvements on highway one Those figures when you dig down They're claiming that there's actually reduction in emissions along with that almost thirty percent increase and those figures are simply not credible They're based almost entirely on the state's projections of Vehicle miles per gallon in the future in other words We're depending entirely on state standards for achieving a reduction in emissions when we're actually what we're doing is increasing the amount of dependence on private automobiles without providing enough investment in in mass transit So I encourage you to to remove investment in additional capacity on the highway Adding bus on shoulder makes sense and isn't a move in the right direction But the investment in an increased capacity on the highway is not sustainable And that's really the important core value that we have to develop here. Thank you. Thank you Good morning. My name is Diane Dreyer, and I'm a resident of the county I'm with friends of the rail trail and I've been out volunteering. I've walked it to doors Talk to people in Capitola during that campaign Against measure L. I've also been at the optos farmers market The last few weeks and I can tell you that overwhelmingly We are getting a very positive response to keeping the rail Often I hear why would they do that? Why would they tear out the tracks? so we got I'd say you know about 80 Cards signed And they are delivered. They were delivered to you. Let's say let's keep the rail and build the trail as soon as possible Everybody wants to trail, but they also want to keep our options open, and that's what I want to stress rail transit is the future and Addressing the climate crisis will cost money in in all communities. There's no avoiding it And I really think that state rail funds will be made available to this county That's already been explored and contacts have been made with state officials So we will get millions of dollars. I'm confident of that I Really hope that you will think about future generations And keep our options open Please approve the preferred scenario. Thank you. Thank you Though I'm Robert Stevens, and I know most of you personally and I really appreciate your effort on this cause But there's really no reason to select a scenario now There's a false rush being put forward to lock you into a train contract relax and think forget the 120 days the $300,000 and all the felt false pressures that have been created to make this an urgent decision point Please do the following complete metros request for a non-modal specific analysis of the corridor Do a full analysis of the operation and capital funding sources for transit in the quarter of course You should do this duh. This is what I thought we were doing with this UC is why wasn't it included? For the three of you that represent metro you cannot support the current plan the RTC Says except this is a fair and open study of the corridor yet We have nothing to say except stay the course nothing has changed Now they want to promise an analysis for metro and what do you think the outcome will be stay the course You're gonna be throwing metro under the train, so please don't vote for this And though and through all the studies I see the term rail and trail operators now the new term is high-capacity Public transit what does that mean? I thought we were doing a study to have some clarity on that So the study does not meet the guidelines of measure D. We are talking about a train or a bus in the corridor now This is a conclusive study. We have no results on this If it isn't a train in the corridor, you need to rail bank And abandon the corridor is this possible did the study reveal anything about these two options? No, you didn't want to look at that because everybody wants a train Your own study on the cost of repairing the freight line is not out till later in the year Yet you want to engage in a contract that's gonna have you put money into a train corridor and you have no idea What the cost is? Thank you for your comments, sir Welcome Thank you. My name is solid in sale. I'm a 50 year county resident and 18 year e-bike rider I'd like to give you a short break from the deluge of contradictory projections to share a simple vision of the future Here's what I want it where I want to be in 16 years Which is a short time in terms of major civic projects There's a 12-foot wide minimum bike and pedestrian trail reaching from Watsonville to Davenport along the rail corridor There's a super-capacitor electric powered light rail system with abundant bicycle carrying capacity Reaching from Watsonville to Davenport that recharges every 30 seconds or at 30 seconds every stop without the need for overhead wiring Timed bustles buses or shuttles along with shared bicycles and ride shares Meet the train on arrival at every stop taking riders to destinations like Cabrillo College Dominican Sutter and Kaiser hospitals UCSC and downtown Santa Cruz area Riders can exit the train on Chestnut Street in Santa Cruz for access to downtown employers and businesses The downtown line terminates in Harvey West Park at a connection terminal for highway 17 express buses Santa Cruz employers provide fair subsidies to workers traveling from South County as a recruiting and retention tool That's more efficient than raising the wage to support transit Residents and visitors take their bikes and backpacks on our light rail north coastline To beaches and parks north of Santa Cruz Creating jobs at new businesses serving this new visitor population Highway one between Santa Cruz and Watsonville remains congested during commuting hours and weekends But is used primarily by autos headed out of the county in county travel has evolved over time So that most in county travel occurs via light rail bicycle shared vehicles and walking Thanks to the RTC for doing the right thing. Thank you, sir Craig Chatterton South County I am probably the minority based on the comments so far, but I can't reconcile the preferred scenario in this process And I hope I'm wrong I'd like to be wrong, but I'm really worried about this and I am encouraging you to reject the preferred scenario I don't believe that it adequately addresses the needs of the transportation in the community The previous talk person talked about the cost. It's projected to be nine hundred million dollars plus and That's before the overruns and the things will probably drive that up And that's a really heavy cost to pay relative to the benefits we get in fact all the scenarios Most of the metrics as has looked at by the dashboard Minimally improve some 2% 5% 10% most of them don't really move that much including peak travel times and speeds Barely budge. So if you look at it from a quality of a life standpoint for the residents in this county I don't see how many of us will really benefit from that and we're gonna pay a billion dollars more That's like thirty four hundred and fifty dollars per person in the county Now some of that money comes from the state some of that money comes from the Fed But if it's more than a billion dollars, let's say over two billion dollars that increase is going to come out of this county There's not going to be additional funding from other places to supplement that so I can't reconcile this and And come up with a cost benefit analysis that makes sense for me and that's why I would urge you to vote against this and Ironically, there's many things in the scenarios all scenarios that make a lot of sense You look at them and you say well most of the same things in terms of like collisions and accidents comes from things that are across the board increased Enforcement and education. We should have done those two years ago shame on us if those are good things to do Why aren't they already in place and they're independent of the scenarios requiring these billions of dollars? Thank you, sir Hello, my name is Nancy Connelly. I'm from Santa Cruz and And I don't have something written today because honestly this issue exhausts me I've been working on it for over five years and I Think what I've seen in working Toward well first of all say for any of you who understand is the symbolism of my shirt You'll understand where I'm going and I applaud you If you don't I'm against this scenario that's being proposed. I dissent I Think the current plan is unrealistic. I've lived in Europe for over a decade. I love trains where it's appropriate and where it's affordable I don't feel our community can support a train. I don't think our community can afford a train I've been a bike commuter for years 20 years in this county. I've been hit twice and so I'm discouraged I've become a cynic From what I've seen from the RTC staff Commissioners contractors hired and so I Don't think I'm going to add anything that you haven't already heard. There's a lot of stats out there There's a lot of scenarios. It's been a lot of work done. So I'm just going to leave it at that that I am Disappointed if you will move forward with this because I think it will do a disservice to our community Thank you Now I am here on behalf of someone else Do I have to get to the back to the line someone who's unable to attend? Yeah, they have to be here to come to the podium Yeah, we can't have someone on getting the line and come to go through the process I can get in line for them. No, no, no only the person who's here can get in line and come through the process Thank you. Please step forward ma'am Chair and commissioners my name's Jillian green site and I'm here representing the Sierra Club You received our letter and we'll note that we did not recommend a particular scenario But instead recommended a set of principles which we feel very important for you to consider as you choose or Recommend or vote on a scenario in the interest of time. I'll just read the highlights from our letter and Starting with the Sierra Club Transportation policy states that transportation strategies must protect natural systems and open space reduce vehicle miles traveled and promote environmental and economic justice and access for all in crafting the preferred scenarios the RTC should prioritise transit and active transportation by eliminating autocentric projects Retaining transit and a trail on the rail corridor Designing all projects to enhance pedestrian and bicycle safety and comfort and aiming to reduce Existing VMT vehicle miles traveled rather than generating new excursion or growth opportunities We note that higher property values should be considered an undesirable byproduct not a goal of transit improvements Specifically the Sierra Club supports efforts to attract and enable new developments only if these efforts Focus on truly affordable housing furthermore. We ask the RTC to consider a number of factors and assess Impacts and finally I see times gone We I would end with that the public ownership of the existing rail corridor must not be put at risk nor subject to Expensive lengthy property rights litigation. Thank you very much Hi, Bill Smallman Felton. I have a separate compelling reason Why to move forward with removing the tracks and installing the trail only which I have been advocating It would be extremely cost-effective to remove the rail tracks install underground utility pipelines in particular large diameter pipelines to distribute recycled water The Soquel Creek Water District is going to spend 90 million dollars on the cost ineffective plan installing small diameter pipelines in city streets using only 15% of the water which is currently Carrying thousands of tons of pollutants out into the bay Restoration traffic control cross lines engineering and all the other obstacles in city streets is over 60% of the cost to Install underground pipelines and conduits. I know I've been estimating such projects for over 30 years Preferred options are not found by hiring biased Consultants they're found by putting this decision to a vote Soquel Creek Water District can install larger diameter pipelines for a third of the cost in the corridor Difference is now the other agencies can now tap into the remaining 85% of this water This project will cost tens of million dollars less than the current plan all the money saved just allowing the installation of underground Utilities in the rail corridor will pay for the restoration of a bike path that the greenway and trail now envision In my opinion by your actions You are promoting a complete boondoggle and I do not believe it's this legacy that you want to leave It's been proven over and over and not enough people will ride this cost exorbitant train The electric bicycles in the city have been a resounding success and all this new spectacular innovations using the latest technology Are going to set the worst president in the history books if you keep promoting this ineffective outdated archaic train The solution to the water problem is real the threat of salt water intrusion would be eliminated And we would have a world-class radar bike path. They'll put your stamp on the Thank you. Thank you very much welcome Good morning commissioners. My name is David eight former developer of the LSBA director development of development director of the LSBA. I I've spoken at nauseam about the effects that the current traffic crisis has had on southern Residents we've taken our daughter out of school. I work fewer hours and it is it is unbearable We passed measure D two years ago We purchased our corridor six years ago and now we are assigning a ten-year lease with a freight company That promises to run excursion so we can Him maintain our corridor. We're not talking about solutions. We're talking about Prolonging the congestion And I think the 800 pound gorilla in the room was outlined recently in a good times article and then even prior to that in a good times article with a messy miller and he talks about Transit oriented development tells us what we need our housing units along our corridor and this this idea of up zoning so that we create a Transit corridor and then that enables us to create high density development on that So we're we're not we're we're talking about something much bigger than a train or a trail We're talking about the future character of Santa Cruz County, and I don't think people have been very forthcoming with that with that that issue that this is more of a Gateway a gateway vote into a much larger a much larger Scenario that will impact Santa Cruz County, and that's all I have to say. Thank you. Thank you Hello, good afternoon. I guess it is afternoon. Nope. Hi. My name is Teenie Andrea And firstly, I live right across the street from the rail. I try to educate for keeping the rail line We have it in place It's the last open corridor in the county versus highway one I feel that every day we delay costs us more money And I'm really worried about also people and kids that are on the road If we don't have a separate corridor with the with the trail where kids can ride their bike and Where we and then at a later date soon that we put in a light a state-of-the-art High rail that will serve the whole county. I'm down in Aptos and Everyone I've talked to that lives down in South County in Watsonville I haven't met one person who does not support keeping the rail line in place I also feel because it's an inequity. I Feel that again every day is a delay and then lastly I've taken numerous times from Oxford, California to downtown LA they have a great rail line and People bring their wheelchairs strollers Bicycles into the first third of the of the right light rail. It's quiet then I Think it's fantastic. Do not please do not rip up the rail line. Thank you Thank you Good morning. My name is Laurie Negro. I am a fourth generation Santa Cruz native and the owner of Betty burgers I have three locations in Santa Cruz and a fourth opening in Aptos I also own the building on the corner of trout Gulch and Soquel where the railroad tracks have an easement through my property it was When I look at the size of the easement granted I see no room for a trail. Maybe I'm missing something I Also own property on 505 Seabright Avenue with a crossroad of Murray when the Christmas train ran a few years ago Working and dining at the location became almost intolerable with the blurring horns at the intersection Hiring and retaining employees in Santa Cruz as we all know has become extremely difficult not just for me It's across the board the idea of loud busy trains rolling through freight trains Rolling through the neighborhood will make it far worse having said that I believe a world-class trail would be an asset to all Obviously as a business owner along the rail corridor. I have a vested interest My understanding is that the Santa Cruz regional trans Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission Has owned the rail quarter for eight years. You would think they would be talking to property owners businesses Especially since Properties such as mine have the tracks on them. I have never heard from this organization who is really my neighbor It is difficult to understand how this organization can make long-term transportation investment plans without communicating with their neighbors Signing a long-term contract with an out-of-town railroad company is not in the best interest of our community I ask that you not approve the proposed train plan today, but ask RTC staff to reach out to its neighbors further Or reach out find a solution that works for all. I'm certainly willing to help. Thank you for your time. Thank you for your comments Welcome, Mr. Garrett. Thank you. I'm Brett Garrett from Santa Cruz I I strongly support doing the alternatives analysis that Metro has requested and I do strongly request that the analysis should include emerging Technologies such as personal rapid transit. I really appreciate the staff for expanding the recommendation to a more generalized high-capacity transit The phrase high capacity. I just want to emphasize at least my definition It needs to be a high-capacity system. It doesn't mean each vehicle needs to be high capacity We need high capacity in people per hour, which is not the same as a lot of people per vehicle I do want to suggest a couple of amendments to the proposed resolution and scenario Item 10 of the resolution authorizes the executive director to execute a license for progressive rail to run Excursion trains. I believe this goes well beyond what phase 2 requires I don't think excursion trains should be authorized until after the comprehensive Alternatives analysis is done It may be premature and dangerous to authorize the excursion trains because the contract basically says if the excursion train is Successful we won't have an option to run other forms of transit alongside or above the tracks Let's keep our options open to run a personal rapid transit system above the rail corridor PRT can coexist with railroad tracks and freight My other suggestion for amending the scenario goes with the recommendation from the campaign for sensible Sustainable transportation to remove the provisions for auxiliary lanes and HOV lanes. I do support bus on shoulder I think it can be done with minimal construction. It does not require the auxiliary lanes I support this CFST in their recommendation to not build the auxiliary lanes and HOV lanes. Thank you very much. Thank you, sir Morning, just a quick reminder. There's been some public Process regarding people's personal interest that I think is inappropriate. You're here to represent the public good Not a few people's quibble about trains in their backyard. If that doesn't work for them, they're welcome to move I think I wanted to recognize Commissioner Rodkins concerned PRT not being specifically mentioned here Just like ripping out rails failing to recognize something that could be useful in the future would be very short-sighted and counterproductive When I was born Los Angeles was tearing out rails now. They're spending hundreds of millions of dollars putting them back in You know, what's the problem if the rails seem compatible with bike trails pedestrian other uses and going back to PRT a Crucial link could be established between a train Let's say by the boardwalk parking lot and the metro center that would increase metro use it increased train use And be very small segment But a train that doesn't go anywhere people want to go really doesn't have much use and you won't get much Ridership so the PRT link could increase ridership metro feeding the train and from any Stop on the rail which would probably be the boardwalk down to the metro center This would be a pretty economical way to increase the feasibility of the rail much sooner than if there was not such a link So I'm just asking you know, I've asked you to build it tomorrow But let's be realistic don't preclude it ever being built at least by not mentioning it in your report. Thank you very much Thank you Welcome good morning commissures. My name is P. I canna from ecology action ecology action supports the staff draft preferred scenario But with the caveat that beyond the measure D approved auxiliary lanes We don't we don't support highway 1 projects that increase capacity car vehicle capacity Beyond public transit which reduce support on the highway So and then I did I wanted to also state Two specific things so one one request is in the resolution as it's worded now when they talk about bike lanes improvements on the Soquel freedom corridor I believe it's the wording is stated as buffeted versus protected and I would ask that Language to be insured that clearly states along this corridor that Protected bike lanes are preferred over buffeted Realizing that the full length of the corridor you can't have protected bike lanes but to prioritize those and clearly state that in the resolution and anywhere else in the UCS the state that that would that would be great and then also the second thing You know commissioner rockin brought up earlier About programs Programs can be implemented tomorrow They can help the RTC staff and partners can work with residents and work sites to make sure that what we have we can better utilize to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and Gasoline fueled drive-alone trips to reduce those those types of trips in Santa Cruz So it asks that that those those programs be better prioritized in the language So there's a way to insert text to say you know the RTC staff will work They're called transportation demand management programs that those be prioritized as something that they can be can be done tomorrow So a lot of these projects are going to take years to implement And we can prioritize some of those programs. I appreciate it. Thank you Hello, Mr. House. Good morning. My name is Yonika sauce and the executive director of bikes in a cruise County Today you have the opportunity to support sustainable progress Bicycling can provide the solution that we all seek a healthy and clean form of transportation for all Your decision today has the potential to give the green light to construct the rail trail and what mr. Preston says could take as little as 10 years Please support keeping the tracks so that we can build the rail trail as soon as possible The rail trail is not the only important project in the UCS Protected bike lanes on the Soquel freedom corridor have the potential to drastically reduce safety hazards and exponentially increase Ridership because they provide a physically separated facility on a major cross-county route Please update the resolution language to include protected and buffered bike lanes on the Soquel freedom corridor Lastly bike Santa Cruz County feels the evidence for passenger rail in our county is significant and we support continuing to consider passenger rail service options Please adopt the staff recommendation and thank you for your dedication and commitment to our community And thank you for your continued support of safe and comfortable bicycling in Santa Cruz County. Thank you Welcome Good morning. My name is Ed Porter, and I'm the president of Santa Cruz PRT We brought you a couple weeks ago in an electronic form this brochure about ATN personal rapid transit and automated transit networks And another paper copy today Which I hope you all received I was made slightly nervous by Kind of a key comment by staff as we started this item and that was the shovel ready reference Which I think started with President Obama And I would like to think maybe that was the area when that was the key consideration because shovel ready kind of excludes What I'm here to talk to you about today and that is elevated solar-powered PRT ATM And I'd really like to see a fresh and believable commitment from our RTC To reducing our Transportation CO2 emissions that's in the pie chart of all the CO2 emissions the biggest slice And something that we can really get at right now Whereas many of the others we can't do as much about but we can take a big chunk out of it With this kind of transportation and when you open the meeting with those young ladies from Sweden I wondered why why did they come to Santa Cruz and why are they telling this group about that subject and Saying that it's something that should be a top priority Is there a climate mandate for us on the RTC? I'm not sure But are we willing to forget about carbon emissions or are willing to or do we want to do something about them? Are we willing to forget about safety and the? 30 to 40,000 people killed on highways every year in the United States or the 8,000 people killed on so-called light rail every year in the United States I think we should have those in our top priorities and With PRT The record is it's 100% safe unheard of that's the light rail that we need. Thank you, sir Hello Hi Karina McFarlane live oak the morning I've despite my accent. I've lived in Santa Cruz for 20 years and in the States nearly 30 I Benefited from training with the Santa Cruz probation department in restorative justice to keep first-time offenders out of the criminal system So I'm very interested in models that help Get us to a place better than we are today each time and you know now I've submitted before the deadline and it's in the public record that we did actually go through a randomly select Citizens from all points of the county and take them through this dynamic Facilitation and the most profound thing for me that I want to share is that I've never been in a civic discourse Where I was silent for 11 hours. I was a silent witness So all of us who are training to do this dynamic facilitation Did not say a word and we watched these seven citizens come in and say well the trainer be nice And but I you know I read this and I read that and well, I don't know who the bad guys are and Some of that somebody's got to be the bad guy And but wouldn't that be nice and wouldn't this be nice and and and in the room It just shifted and shifted and shifted until they had this Wow, we have this incredible opportunity the coastal corridor and It could be rebranded and it could be like the Jack O'Neill wetsuit of before and the one-wheel Skateboard like the whole of the country could be looking look what Santa Cruz did with the the coastal corridor They did arrive at that they would like to see it rail banked and they would like to see it be the most phenomenal beyond what anyone's seen or been in Multimodality transport trip transit corridor. Thank you. Thank you Paul shell hammer the preferred scenario before you now accomplishes two important things First it puts the trail only concept behind us Allowing trail construction to proceed consistent with the award-winning trail master plan you previously adopted This is important because this year is shaping up as the year of trail construction and we need to get on with that construction without further interruption and second it moves us forward toward having a real rail transit proposal to consider one with equipment and Frequency and stations specified One with so that we can look at specific costs and benefits up to now the rail transit debate has been a war of hypotheticals and fear mongers With a real CIR with a real sequel EIR out in public we will see for the first time Exactly what is being proposed and what the consequences would be? This will get us to a more informed more substantive and less emotional discussion Exactly where we need to be There are two cautions As to how you should proceed from here First you need to keep the tracks on this right away What you put on those tracks is a different question, but you need the tracks for two reasons You need tracks as a necessary part of not having to ship 15 million local dollars back to Sacramento and you need tracks to fully protect the Continuity of the right-of-way and your ownership of it Rail property easements are a miserably complicated subject and there is more than one way to end up With only bits and pieces of a right-of-way that do no one any good and second you need to make sure That the process of deciding between BRT and transit does not Does not metastasize into two full thank you sir alternative analysis with those cautions I urge you to support. Thank you the preferred scenario Hi, my name is Jessica Evans, and I live in Santa Cruz the city of Santa Cruz So you know that I support from past comments that I support Preserving the rail easement for future use and mass transportation I think potentially there could even be some freight shipping into North County at some point which would save a lot of co2 emissions because freight transport is safer and More efficient than truck freight But I'm really here speaking at this moment because I'm I'm actually Very concerned that the overall Unified corridor study came back and made a recommendation that doesn't seem to focus on reducing vehicle miles traveled I feel like having I don't quite understand what happened between scenario B and scenario preferred scenario which sort of shovels in a huge amount of freeway widening Possibly just so that everyone will feel like they got a piece of the pie There's no actual freeway widening potential before 2035 so how would congestion Be a thing that got relieved before 2035. There's no funding for anything before 30 25 So congestion relief wouldn't happen before 2035 and add to that, you know all congestion relief on freeways is temporary So what would we be buying by putting millions and millions of dollars into, you know, if we could get them I just don't understand it like how does it make sense to widen the freeway increase vehicle miles traveled? The plan to increase vehicle miles travel the plan to increase greenhouse gas emissions relative to baseline that we get from you know having Higher fuel standards We don't have any Actual source of funding for this like why do we have that in the unified quarter study? Thank you. Thank you There I had a slide And it says one minute for some reason I'm hoping I get to Mono Koenig Santa Cruz County Greenway. Good morning honorable commissioners I'm urging you to vote no on the preferred scenario and approving the UC UCS today because it does not include the necessary Economic and environmental analysis that was promised in measure D You can see here a quote from the measure D voter approved expenditure plan that promises those two things before we move forward with the corridor and Unfortunately the UCS lacks both environmental and economic analysis in terms of economic analysis There's not a cost benefit analysis the performance measures that were mentioned look only at benefits But not at cost and in fact when you divide the benefits of the preferred scenario by the cost it becomes anything but the preferred scenario Second you don't look at the most critical economic Piece of analysis, which is the cost per trip and when you use the numbers from the unified corridor study And again divide the number of users by the cost you can see that bike and pedestrian infrastructure Outperforms all the others hands down Maybe that's why communities all over the country indeed all over the world are investing so heavily in trail infrastructure And let's make no mistake This will reduce traffic on the highway as any of you who were driving last week noticed There was an eerie calm on Friday evening as you went south and that was because schools were out And so the trail will allow North County families to get off the roads and onto the trail so that South County breadwinners can get to work and what's as you can see here is that Rail doesn't make any sense and the thousand signatures that we collected on the Greenway Petitions stated not only that people wanted to trail But they don't think a train makes economic sense And I think you have the wisdom of the crowds evident here And so I'm worried that if we try to build the trail around the rail line. We are putting our best idea Hostage to our worst idea The other part is you haven't done the environmental analysis it was promised in measure D You're about to commit 15 million dollars to fix up the rail without the environmental or economic analysis promised. Thank you Thank you so much for listening to all of us And thank you for being well being willing to sit in your chairs of decision-making Responsibility I'm Jack Nelson. I'm a retired environmental planner and land use planner I'm a member of the campaign for sensible transportation. I'm also the chair of the Sierra clubs transportation committee I appreciate Jillian already sharing some of the Sierra clubs letter with you the this morning Within the preferred scenario, I'd like to zero in on one component which is widening of highway one and We've got a new document that was just released January 3rd I'm holding volume one of three main volumes before me. It's the highway one finally I are and It's it's been curious to me that in the past three years your commission has never had a study session on the draft EIR and I'm not sure how far you've cracked open this finally I are but here's one heart-stopping Item from within this first volume table three dash one Shows that with the HOV lanes preferred alternative that vehicle miles traveled would increase 2035 by 103 million vehicle miles per year This can only be a recipe for climate catastrophe Yes, you can get consultants who will torture the numbers efficiently so that they confess that There's going to be this Goldilocks world where traffic is going to flow at fuel-efficient speeds and Queenhouse gases despite all those vehicle miles will magically go down. I Don't believe it So and I'm also appreciating Gail McNulty Bringing in the Swedish 15 year old girl to talk to you this morning She's she's right You know, I've heard from some of you that you feel it's not politically feasible to do the right thing But it's your obligation. Thank you. Thank you Good morning again Michael St. Campaign for sustainable transportation I've changed my presentation four times over the last 45 minutes, so I'll get to it try not to repeat things Campaign for sustainable transportation does not support the preferred scenario in nor the 2035 and primarily for what people have said It's very car eccentric and after hearing Ginger die car present this morning. I understand the city of Santa Cruz would like More car eccentric Performance they want to move to the additional lanes over the bridge San Lorenzo River also the mission street intersection improvements And they even mentioned so Cal as more improvements So that moves three more car projects over to the scenario possibly Out of the 11 boxes that would be filled at that time five of them are automobile oriented and that's for our Since sensible or sustainable transportation people. That's way way over the board. We basically had supported be without any car Involvement at all. So that's where we are at this present time I also want to go back to 2003 and 4 when they were doing a study similar to this There was a comment made that to keep congestion from exceeding 15 percent Metro would have to increase to 8.5 percent of Carried in Pasadena for the trip for the county We're not even close to that actually the latest numbers I could get off the RTC website from 2011 and 12 cars are doing 85 percent Which is the heavy load walking 10 percent transit was as low as 1.8 to 3 percent And then they also had biking at around 3.2 percent So we haven't done anything and I think this scenario does not do much for transit You do have a bus on shoulders, but I believe that's in combination with cars on the ox lanes The time are my dad. Thank you. That was quick. There was I had some really important stuff coming up I think they moved it faster on you Mike this Brian trail now only I want to remind you mass transit isn't necessarily public transit The study showed actually trail only had the most users five times what a train at five times What a bus head so you actually have to keep that in that your additional? From an engineer's perspective your your study if you're gonna put PRT in there you have to include Using it as a trail. So we asked that Secondly Davenport to Wilder That's not part of the study Can we accept that you're not gonna have a train running up to Davenport from Wilder? So we're asking you and I just come from the farmers from the farmers that you do not include that Part of the giveaway to progressive rail ended at Wilder because that will ensure That we move forward with a trail because you are will likely lose the ten million dollar grant Because of the delays if we have to Go to court and fight we don't want that and that's gonna happen if you have a train You don't need the train Please pull that as part of the progressive the other thing I want to encourage is take a moment back and call CTC staff. I've been talking to them There's a lot of misconceptions of what's going on in the way of proposition 116 funds being returned You have the opportunity you should have your staff go talk to them and find out the true requirements They are actually surprised that you're not gonna go and ask for funding from SB one and self-help County With that new tier one Completion on highway one you are in a great position to get SB one self-help County to widen highway one and to throw the train as the priority now That's confusing to them Don't go and send the wrong message to them Please you need to go and talk to CTC staff before you approve this. Thank you. Thank you, Brian I am Steven Slade executive director of the land trust We only have an opinion on one aspect of this study, which is the trail I and we have an opinion on it because we committed five million dollars of matching funds we're funding partner and so far we've only raised three and a half million and Honestly, you cannot raise money for a project until this commission Settles the issue of are we building the rail trail according to the master plan or not? so I urge you to make a decision and I know it's confusing because we just heard from someone used to be trail now advocating for trail delay and Of course, the real issue here is the train not the trail We only care about the trail and building it as soon as possible. You have the plan We are willing to provide matching funds. Let's get it done. Thank you. Thank you, sir Good morning. My name is Bill Spence. I live in the silver beach the silver beach improvement association voted overwhelmingly in 2th October of 2017 to oppose rail in the corridor if the Commission votes to move ahead with phase 2 that Commits the county to rebuild rail on the quarter That is in direct opposition to the desires of the residents of the silver beach Further the rail right of way at the silver is one of the narrowest in the county the scenic trail master plan states that the right of Way is between 40 and 60 feet in this segment a physical measurement with a tape measure Shows that it's less than 30 feet that 10 feet is critical based on the details of the same plan a 30-foot Right-of-way would only support an 8-foot path. Is that acceptable the path is 12 feet everywhere else within the plan By forcing rail on to the quarter higher What I hear alternative higher density transportation such as carts and bikes That could leverage the quarter are going to be limited in our choices by that choke point But what if the Commission decides later than 8 foot path is too narrow after putting rail in the In the quarter what will the Commission do then will people on bikes be forced off the corridor of Manresa on to busy surface Streets like San Andreas to get around the problem just like Capitola La Silva Beach could not support the influx of people and traffic on our streets The corridor traffic must stay in the corridor through the silver beach as promised in the scenic trail master plan Otherwise it will destroy the fabric of our community The trestle of silver has a similar physical problem if the rail is not required The trestle could easily be converted to carry people and bikes over the drainage and stay in the corridor the rail on the quarter Rail on the quarter requires a completely new structure for people's and bikes to be built on the inland side of the trestle But where does it go? Having corridor traffic pushed on the silver streets and down into the drainage is not an option even if that's temporary Again the mass of people and traffic will completely disrupt our community and way of life. Thank you, sir Please keep people on the trail Ryan Sanataro live oak One of the most disturbing and annoying Parts of this debate is the fake news that you can have a trail and the train. I'm sorry It doesn't fit you got one or the other Assertions by organizations that are supported by the RTC at the ground breaking The other day. Oh, we're getting the trail now. No, you're not getting the trail now you're getting a path and That path is inadequate for the transportation needs of this county. It's inadequate for a vision of the future Really you the the fact that we've got to this point here and people are still saying oh you can have the rail and the trail We're the facts in this we do need to come if we don't have a common set of facts We're not going to be able to make a reasonable decision And it seems to me that there's enough people on this commission who are Laboring under this misconception that we can still have both we at some point It will be proven that we can't have both and if that's 30 years in the future or that's now It seems to me it would be much better for the decision to be made now to take those rails out and Exploit the opportunity that we have to turn the Santa Cruz rail corridor into a world-class destination and a world-class personal transportation system personal transportation Infrastructure that will move more people than you could possibly Imagine will ever sit on a train subsidized by taxpayers on unhappy with their increased property taxes sales taxes and other bills, so please Reconsider thank you afternoon My name is Johanna Lai Hill. I live in Amptos I I've spoken before and I addressed you about the UCS and how I found that it was I I Sighted specific inconsistencies on tables and what have you today. I don't want to talk about that I understand it's a broad scope it focuses on the corridors just true to its name focuses on transportation between Watsonville Santa Cruz and and Not much in between and that's what I wanted to talk to you about they brought the study is a compilation of a lot of other studies and I went on the RTC website and found some of the studies they drew upon and one was the household California household travel survey of 2012 and they use these tables, but they didn't use the center table And I urge you to go look and what what specifically says is it in Santa Cruz County the trip lengths Two miles or less are 40% of all trips So that means people are not going very far and of course they do use the the highway and they will use the corridor, but 65% of all trips are five miles or less and I hope that you will consider that too Where I live I live within walking distance of a shopping center if I were to be able to access the trail If there's rail and trail there will be a huge fence That separates me from the trail I will have to walk a half a mile out of the way and then a half a mile back then the half a mile to the shopping center I I urge you to look at other people like me in communities How will this the projects affect people individually and how might they use? Inside their communities rather than from point A to point B. Thank you. Thank you Welcome missioners. My name is Gray Jameson. I live in live oak I'm a high school senior and I took the morning off school to be here today I'd like to speak to you about The unified quarter study because that's what we're all here for So the first thing that I have a big problem with about trail only is the weather today It's very rainy and I don't know how so many people got here I got here by driving a car because I had no other way that was feasible and I don't think that people will be riding bikes in this weather I could barely see driving with the windshield wipers at full blast So I don't think that biking in this weather as at all safe even on a protected trail And public transit is a much better option than that Secondly, I work at the boardwalk and I live within a 15-minute walk of The 41st Avenue rail junction that could be a station and I would ride that every day that I would have work And I hear from many of my colleagues at the boardwalk that they would do the same and many of them live in Watsonville and complain Constantly about the traffic situation that our county is facing I would also like to talk about the fact That Okay, I think your time you're doing good. Sure. Okay We need transportation options our county is barely holding on with its bus system like Alex Clifford said I try to take the bus as much as I can. I don't own a car. I don't plan to and Biking in this county is difficult. We support biking and we have fairly good bike infrastructure in many places But we don't have enough and we need to support that and we need to trail right now I was there at the groundbreaking and it was wonderful and I cannot wait to be able to ride my bike over that new bridge Because when I don't take public transit to get to work I bike and that bridge is the connection to my work. Thank you Thanks for coming up Good afternoon Keith Otto at the last meeting. I said we all have another think coming. Let's Think carefully Before decisions are made at the June meeting discussion among commissioners included the will of the people being mentioned multiple times And if or when phase 2 is affirmed, there's no mechanism for the RTC to exit the contract No exit this item alone should give us pause at the December meeting Commissioner staff the director described the preferred scenario as a list of potential projects that might be considered Not a commitment to any particular project the item before you today is very different Let's be very clear the grant of a phase 2 license very much Commits to the use of trains in the rail corridor for one It requires the RTC to repair the tracks from Buena Vista to Davenport Investments in rail train services are too costly to implement are too costly to maintain that maintenance being a forever liability I Support freight services in Watsonville increased investment in SC Metro increased investment in Highway 1 including HOV lanes to enable express bus service and promote ride sharing Many agree with my view, but not everybody does So let's vote to clearly determine the will of the people this will either confirm or Correct the RTC direction at some point the commissioner the commission is going to ask taxpayers for more funds You need overwhelming support. You need to get this right Let's vote vote no on the item today vote no on future investments in rail until the will of the people can be Determined thank you for your consideration in these very important. Thank you Good morning, Krishna director of public work city of Santa Cruz, and I want to thank ginger for bringing up the council action on December 11th I Wanted to emphasize a couple of things our projects that we are talking about are in the regional transportation plan It's important for the city that this the UCIS Doesn't preclude us from asking for federal and state funding for those projects in the future, and that's the primary point of that I Want to emphasize multimodal We do multimodal improvements and intersections. It's for everyone's use We want to make sure transit can get through emergency services goods and services are delivered and Biking pedestrian safety a project at an intersection where we add a protected left-turn lane who benefits from that Clearly, it's better access. It's better safety, but bikes and pedestrians on the parallel corridor Their safety is what's really improved with that it improves. It's amazing how much improves for bikes and pedestrians We want to make sure we're able to include the totality of the project Funded under any program, and that's the important part Again, it serves everyone transit emergency services goods and services bikes pedestrians Yes, and cars. So thank you very much. Thank you Good morning. My name is Ashley Wynn from Los Alva Beach I'm not going to belabor points. I've made in the past I do want to point out I want to raise a question that I would like to see addressed here and that is if the commission adopts the preferred scenario Does that foreclose the possibility of having hove lanes? sought sought after prior to 2035 The report of the staff clearly shows that The transit times with hove lanes is 32 minutes the transit time with bus on shoulders is 40 and Rail transit is 41 clearly Hov lanes are the superior option in the only way we get to a preferred solution in terms of people's Lifestyles and the quality of life Obviously hove lanes should require electric vehicles in the future to address climate change issues. I Heard the Watsonville City Council debate this they were very concerned about adding hove lanes And that's the only thing that's really going to help so my question to you as a board is Will adopting this preclude hove lanes Prior to 2035 or preclude the staff from seeking Hove lanes prior to 2035 if it does I urge you to reject it And I think the metro for imposing An important issue and that is whether environmental Electric buses small electric buses on the rail Corridor makes more sense Then the lunacy the economic lunacy of a train on tracks On us that sit on a cliff that won't be there in 60 years. Thank you, sir. Hello Peter Stanger again I just wanted to put my two bits in and ask that you not accept the preferred scenario for the UCIS I Really very much want to see Transportation in our county improved as a South County resident I Would like to see be able to get on a bus and get up to Santa Cruz without having to fight the traffic Yeah, I own two cars, but yeah, I also prefer bicycling. I Would like to see our bicycle Infrastructure made safe. I mean we're leading the state in deaths With bicyclists and injuries with bicyclists. There's nothing to be proud about and If we embark on the train scenario as being put out here today Most of the money is going to be going right away to improving those tracks and so we can get our ducks in a row and Start moving ahead with a rail That's really not what we need right now. What we need is transportation What we need is base is safe bicycling and I urge you to keep that in mind. Thank you. Thank you Berry Scott apt us. Sorry. I'm late. What did I miss? Yeah, really, you know, I want to thank the commissioners the this is such a a The process is is the kind of thing that if we had young voters following it They might might get discouraged from voting, but it takes a lot of it does it takes a lot of homework and a lot of research and a lot of work on all of your parts to To make a decision on something so huge and that's why we have studies and that's why we have a process How many studies have we had and at a certain point you have to have faith in that process? I have faith in that process I've been waiting for for years for something to come out and I I Suspected that rail, you know a rail line that's been there 143 years already for good to say And and the success of rail around the world. We already have a rail line I was pretty sure that the studies would conclude that this is what we need to do That doesn't make it easy to do though. It's an expensive thing and there's it's an unpopular thing To some people so you know what do you do? But but be careful, you know Bill Monning came to a small group and he spoke about votes that he had and he said you know The one thing I never did was was vote to make sure that I would be reelected So I always had to vote for the right thing. That's what he said. I believe that Can't be always easy to do it can't always be the popular thing to vote for the right thing to do And I'll say this because I know there's a big call for it. Let's put it to the public to a vote Ask yourself. What would have happened during the the civil rights era? If school for school for you know equal education for everyone had been put to the to the popular vote Don't don't don't plan that way. Follow the process. You have consultants You have planners you have the rest of the world to look at for the success of rail transit I I hope that you'll vote yes on the resolution I hope that you'll get a progressive rail phase two. Thank you. Thank you, sir Hi, and thank you again for your attention and receptiveness. I just wanted to just put my voice behind The global warming, you know that scientists around the world agree this biggest issue you hear about all day I'm sure you think about I hope you think about all day all day, too. We have to get people out of cars It's that that's a fundamental issue and there's gonna be a resistance Of course, and we all know this and you're hearing a lot of it today From what I can from what I can tell not just from today But from reading the papers and talking to people a lot of it is natural fear of change And that's completely understandable and then a big chunk of it too is protecting interests and I've heard that today at times and I urge you to resist Those two sources of resistance because they're based on fear and greed If we were gonna do what's right, and we know what's right is to get people out of cars We have to have an alternative, and I'm open to anything anything But this does seem like the best one we have the land we have tracks the technology is old But the science isn't putting a large vehicle that can house Lumber of people and bicycles and a lot of things in it on smooth metal Physics is is in a favor of this idea There are other ideas out there, and I welcome them I've heard a few today, and that's great that we're considering them But at the same time of course you guys all have to be practical So we need an alternative and this does seem like the best one It does come with risks, and I and I'm afraid of them too just like a lot of other people And I do think we need to very closely examine costs There are legitimate concerns that I've heard about ridership and about erosion And but I know we have a lot of professionals looking at this all day long now for years I urge you to do the right thing and to be courageous You got to push through this resistance. Thank you sir. Hi Hello, I'm Sean from I'm an advocate for the disabled and special needs community Every vision Santa Cruz County meeting and workshop had the same first concerns traffic homelessness crime and mental health crises Many attendees meant those that they could see people get stuck downtown when arrested suspects are brought downtown Then release downtown many are without support And who does anyone go to when they need help to their friends if you need mental or physical health care It's on Emeline Street Watsonville only serves traffic or small claims court Cases once a week City of Watsonville is treated like a child by Santa Cruz The Santa Cruz Watsonville divide started when the railroad was first planned on our coast There were different plans in competition and since then someone has always profited from encouraging an Imaginary divide of race and culture and the disability community needs people movers 19 of a hundred Americans lives with a disability We all have the same needs Disabled people are doing everything that you are and some locals are doing things that no one else in the world is doing Jeff Denholm leases a fleet of fire engines to our state forestry service and brought some market a biodegradable fire retardant already Stock piled around the state before the campfire the most expensive natural disaster in history Foster Anderson broke his neck in a motorcycle accident then moved across the country to serve the needs of the disabled Santa Cruz community for 30 years. I Develop adaptive athletic teams and find them full funding for US and Hawaiian events the technologies that allow mobility Are not coming in 2035. They're here now and the train is one of them. We're supposed to be helping one another That's the reason we're all here today Please do not delay to meet the needs of all of our community members cooperation is what makes America great Thank you Commissioners Lowell Hurst from city of Watsonville I think you've heard it all today and I think you've heard it all over the months and over the years and actually over the decades as Well, you guys should be experts on this already and I think you are let's move forward. Let's be bold. Let's be brave Let's be smart Don't wimp out Do the right thing. Thank you. Thank you And on that note, I'm gonna go ahead and close the public comment period I'll bring it back one one thing I wanted to say before we the commissioners decide on this is We have two recommendations in front of us as you can see on the staff report One and two one considers the final draft of the unified quarter study and two is granting of st Paul the license I'm gonna split those up into two separate votes So we're gonna have two items to talk about so first item We're gonna talk about is consider the finding of the final draft unified quarter study. I'm gonna start with Commissioner Leopold Chair are we making motions? Are we just taking comments? What what's this is we're gonna have the conversation at a motion This is this is that where we this is what we've all been waiting for Okay. All right. Well, thank you chair and thank you for everyone's participation Today and through the many months in which we've had this discussion, you know, the unified quarter study Started about a year ago In the terms of a public process there were public meetings held there was tremendous amount of outreach there were requested meetings There were additional meetings added. There were focus groups with stakeholders We've heard hours of public testimony. We scheduled a special meeting in the evening to hear public testimony Where we heard more? Testimony we've received emails letters. Many of us have received visits It's a dense report that has a lot of information some of which is easily Acquired and some which takes a lot of work to understand what exactly it means We've had lots of chances to ask questions And I think it's If we had everybody stand up we could this commission could probably tell you where everybody in this room stands on this Because we've heard from you a bunch of times The one thing that we learned in the in the conversation That led to the successful passage of measure D is that we as a community don't want just one thing We want many things we we care about a multimodal future Because we we choose to get around in different ways some choose to get around in cars some on bikes Some would like other alternatives And some get around on buses and one thing I know Because I spent a lot of time help the helping us acquire the rail corridor is that there was a Commitment from this commission and a and a requirement from our funders to look at transit on that corridor They won a train and for a long time it seemed like that would be the only thing we would consider and But during this process we've taken a look at a number of different things. We've Heard from our transit partner in the transit district about doing an alternative analysis in which we are going to take a look at the different Transportation Alternatives that could go on there But the fact remains is that we're going to have transit on the rail corridor In the future and we're going to have a path That it's going to be mainly 12 feet wide there might be some places where it's only eight feet wide But we will have an opportunity to have a 32-mile path that's protected from Traffic and That will serve in the needs of people and we have already started construction Just last week we started construction on on a small piece But later on this year the city of Santa Cruz is going to start on segment 7 Hopefully in 2020 we'll have completed the work to start the five miles on the north coast Either this year or next year we start design work on a segment 9 which was connects see bright to To 17th Avenue And once the design work is done we can start construction there So we're underway with the construction of this trail The the recommendation that's before us Is a good recommendation It doesn't mean that everything is my preference I'm not a great fan of putting more concrete on the highway But I do think that if we want to could seriously consider bush on shoulder We've done the analysis there isn't the the possibility of doing that with our existing concrete And if we add the auxiliary lanes, which there are some who consider that to be important for their for their car That also provides a great opportunity for us with the bus and we've one thing that we've heard and it may be a Unifying factor in our transportation discussions is people like our transit district and they want better options on For our transit district and so making sure that we have the infrastructure to be able to support our transit district becomes important so I think that this recommendation helps us add that infrastructure to be able to Support the bus on shoulders and it help increase the reliability Of getting the bus to and from north and south county or vice versa I think the issue of of bicycle travel is really important and one of the things we know in creating the the Monterey Bay Sanctuary scenic trail or the rail trail Is that having it separated from cars makes it a lot safer and which we believe and Most of the bicycle people that I talked to say will encourage people to actually ride We shouldn't think that that's the only place where Protection from vehicles is is a great idea and if I find fault in this recommendation And I would suggest that we make changes and prioritize Protected bike lanes rather than simply buffered bike lanes where that is Possible Yeah It's it's it's really critical that people feel safe on their bike and any but any of us who've ridden a bike on Soquel Drive or freedom or As some streets, it's it can be terrifying and if you have children with you all the more so so and Whatever we can do to promote and prioritize protected bike lanes seems much better than buffered on the I'll just add my comments about the rail is We made a commitment when we purchased this line to have some kind of rail service on there We tried to make it Make the requirements as least impactful as possible but what we thought we needed to have the conversation with the public but we do have requirements there and Since we're going to be maintaining that that corridor for transit We should continue our Our contract with progressive rail who is shown to be so far a good partner With us on the rail line that's currently open and we should complete the repairs of the rail line and allow them to to seek Freight service on the North County Because when they are if they are successful that does take trucks off the roads and that's safety and congestion relief And if excursion service works That's a benefit because one of the pillars of our economy is tourism So I think it's important for us to move forward. It does not preclude us looking at other things on that corridor for transit but for those who think it's It's going to be easy to extricate ourselves from having a rail line I as someone who was very involved in just acquiring the rail line Even when we were purchasing the rail line under the exact same conditions that the previous owner had It took a long time just to get that through the STB and that was that was not making any changes The last thing I'll say is that for those people who think that we should have direct democracy on this and just vote on something The the history is not great When when this commission in 2004 decided that they would primarily Put a measure they would put a measure on the ballot that primarily had HOV lanes required a two-thirds vote and It got 47% So when we put a multimodal measure on there that addressed many different needs We got the necessary two-thirds so Putting something on there without the adequate information doesn't necessarily mean that we'll get a good sense of what people want and We have spent so much time so much energy. We have received so much testimony that there are 12 Representatives most of us elected To be able to sort through that and and make a decision we are representatives of the people So I don't support going out and and just trying to say yay or nay on a particular point of view So I would be prepared to move the recommendations and the change the resolution just to put protected bike lanes instead of buffered or protected bike bike lanes In this resolution Is there a second? Okay We also like that. I'll start down this end. Mr. Cap. I was gonna mention that At one point every all of you in order to get to this position We're allies There's people that are for the bike. There's people for the trail people for the rail rail line and so I'm I'm for all three of them and I know there are people that say if you're all for all three of them They're all gonna fail. I don't think so. I'm ready to move forward I think we if somebody said hey, we're gonna move forward and we're gonna drop the bicycle path I would be against that I would say no we have to have the bicycle path if they said we're not gonna have a walking trail But we're gonna go for rail and bike. I'd say no And if you say you're gonna have the bike and the walking trail only and not have rail I would say no So what I'm saying is saying is we were allies at one point and we should be allies right now We want to go forward doing nothing is really not an option We can't just sit here and not do anything with it. We have to move forward I think what we're voting on today is we're gonna be moving forward I did hear one comment that You know farmers are for the bikes and for the walking trail There are farm farmers that are only for the rail line and passenger services, okay, and freight services, okay They don't want people on bikes going through their farmland. They don't want people walking through their farmland because of when they do pesticide and You know putting Pesticide out on their fields so they don't want to be have people exposed to that, but we purchased a rail line when I first got on the board of the supervisors and I Remember it clearly it said we're purchasing a rail line. We can't just now say we're changing the deed I think that deed has strong limitations on what we can do We can't just discard the the rail line. It's it runs with the land it runs with the Purchase it's part of the contract and is there any clarification on that am I correct? If we said we're not going to do anything with the rail We're just going to do a bike trail and a walking trail Would we be violating the contract and maybe conditions that are running and with the lands? I'm going I'm going to read directly from a letter that we received from the California Transportation Commission As you are aware proposition 116 funds must be used for rail projects within Santa Cruz Which facilitate recreational commuter inner-city and inner-county travel? Okay, and then I'll close out by saying this I've heard about banking But to me the problem with the word banking it sounds like you can go and make a deposit and then Within a day or two if you need money you can go and make a withdrawal When you bank a rail line You're only banking it and you're not going to be able to get it back I mean it's not that easy we're talking about years once it's banked and it's paved over you don't just go and Bring it back without a huge delay and a huge amount of money So anyway, I'm just making that clear. So I'm ready to vote on this and well I want to hear from every other committee. I agree I'll second the motion though. The motion has been second. I'll go to Commissioner Bertrand. Yeah, thank you I'll be honest My Christmas had sort of a pale over it After we decided to put off our vote and move to now In general, I think public is in a similar situation We've been asked to make a decision that we know is going to come back to us in the form of a tax rate increase Maybe some other kind of thing like for property owners Levy on their property What are the issues that's bothered me is trying to make sense of What the proposals are there in all these different scenarios and how they best Meet the needs of this community That's why I jumped on to the RTC because I thought the UCS would provide that I'm a little more confused Yes, SB 1 says we need to look at all these different categories and those are addressed in the UCS and So we're following the law But it doesn't leave me with the clear feeling That we can afford it So I have an MBA I was the city treasurer Capitola and I started focusing on What is feasible? There's a lot of aspirational goals that we have. I would love to remodel my house if you saw it You could tell why I? Would love to do all sorts of other things My car is a wreck. I just got him one. Maybe I should get another one because it doesn't look nice Or I would love to put my kids through better schools But those are aspirational things and you do what you can do Based on what your income is in this case, it's the income that Santa Cruz residents through commercial activity Whether it's wage or whether its visitors Can afford us in terms of tax revenues so my earlier comments was Talking about metros Take on this And I was very happy to see What I think is a change in the direction of the RTC if metro says that we're Almost at the brink of being able to provide decent service Many of us were in the room when we heard people from transportation Areas of this country talk to us about what makes sense is a decent metro system decent fares best able to expand and contract as needed but when metro comes to us and says We need to look carefully at what the options are and do what I think a lot of us think of When we're trying to make a decision that's a financial decision is a cost-benefit analysis of what we're going to get for the Dollars we're going to spend I was very encouraged. I met with guy. I was very encouraged to hear him say That this is something that I would like to move forward on It's in our resolution Not the way I would write it, but it's the same content and I don't want to put words in the RTC's mouth But my sense is that we're not going to move forward on things that we can't afford. I Hope that's correct the proposals that the RTC will get as they make Recommendations will be proposals that come to us and we'll have to make decisions on that So some of those are going to be in the future But also as it says in the resolution that we don't have a preferred solution right now We don't have preferred ways to move forward because we're going to evaluate To me this is what you need to do When you determine that you're going to take the best use of public dollars The best use of public dollars is an enormous responsibility Because every time we decide to spend money on something we're taking money away from something else We have huge needs in this community Educate our children You can't walk almost anywhere in cap in in capital or partially but in Santa Cruz and see homeless issues housing The rose aren't just bad on how we won there hot there bad all up and down the valley. I was in San Lorenzo Valley We have huge needs in this area So in terms of a cost-best analysis, how much money we're going to take away from the public purse and spend on something That's in the quarter To some extent is aspirational, but we need that analysis to figure out if it's still something that's possible Few other points. I am for protective bike lanes. I've Done cross-country biking having a truck go by you semi is not fun I Look in terms of the Excursion rail. I would love to start talking with roaring camp and encourage this excursion rail up north I'm not sure where it should end, but I think that is a high possibility For success. I think it's been said Bruce just mentioned that one of the main aspects one of the main stool seat One of the main Things that support this area in terms of economic activity is tourism I was on focus ag and I talked to people up in Davoport. They would love to have people come up that way I'm very very very very happy to see That part of this is going to be an integrative approach to how we're going to how we're going to plan our Transportation we're going to have buses. How are they going to link into something that's potentially on the quarter How are we going to link with you see how we're going to link with the bus schedules of stuff like that? We had someone very articulately Detail how we have so many problems right now with Metro I'm from Capitola try to get a connection at our bus terminal from Santa Cruz to somewhere else. It's very on You just can't predict it. This is not working So I'd like to close with this you did hear some comments from mr. Woodside who was part of the smart Effort that's seemingly successful and Marin Sonoma And I think his comments have to be taken very seriously We need The the base to support any kind of effort that's going to demand an economic Excuse me an economic draw in terms of taxes They have it in Marin they have it in Sonoma So what are we going to do that? Somehow solves our transportation issues, but still within our budget still within our means to do it And that's what I'm looking forward to in this analysis that I hope we provide It was also said earlier that provide that information to the public in ways. They can understand it Ultimately we just talked about direct election Ultimately if the public cannot understand the information given to it You're not going to get the support The ultimate here is the ballot box Thank you Commissioner Kaufman Gomez Thank You chair I Want to be clear that this resolution is to maximize the benefits for safety efficient mobility health equity Natural environment and economic vitality All of these have been brought up as concerns from everybody that has spoke at the podium here as well as what we've done here as commissioners to read through the materials Listen to what RTC has been providing us with documentation and substantiating that documentation from outside agencies and I just want to be very crystal clear that my vote today is Based off of all of the information I'm collecting all of the discussions I've had with you that have had an opportunity to meet with me one-on-one or the Infamous emails where we're all been going through as well I've made a dedicated effort to make sure that I was able to go out there to meet with you to do my due diligence To read everything Into research as much as I can especially being one of the newest commissioners here with quite a large learning curve I know that there's also a lot of misinformation that's out there and it's been really frustrating to hear What's going on with cherry picking and and and the like which is another reason why I Don't take it from what the print is telling me But to make sure from where the agency resource comes from that's giving us the information We're using for this report Before I'm even reaching to any conclusions This vote is to represent Watsonville Those are the residents that I'm here representing Those are the ones that are concerned the most especially when we're in that highway one parking lot and the kind of relief efforts that they're after And we know that we have to make compromises. This isn't a perfect plan or perfect solution This is something for us to move forward with we still have to do a lot more analysis work We have to still deal with the environmental issues the the issues with where money is going to come from I mean we're dealing with We and we expect the RTC to just roll over every rock they possibly can find to find out where this money is going to come from for these projects and Leverage what we possibly can with the measure D funds because obviously measure D funds are barely a down payment for Getting any of these projects started let alone To be to be completed we know that this is a live planning document and It's to help us set the course for what we want to do for transportation needs I mean most of you don't even know what you're gonna plan for dinner and yet We're doing something here for the next 20 or 30 years out There's a lot involved in this we don't need to rule out things that haven't had a full Process to make use of what we have we have limited resources here Not only a funding, but we also have limited land resource uses that are here We have the density that's going on we have very little in terms of what to work with to make it flexible We can't add these other lanes that can't exist because we financially can't do that and we don't have the land space for doing it We have to be as creative as possible This particular resolution Gives us that with guidelines in order to achieve those the criteria that we need here We're getting things in here that are buffered and protected. We definitely understand The safety component vision zero is what Watsonville's adopted and we're looking at having this plan Seriously integrate a lot of what that vision is that we have for Watsonville we've heard from Metro as you know several of us are commissioners with Metro and We've heard the word cannibalization We certainly aren't up here to make a vote on something that's going to do any type of devastating damages For what infrastructure we have out there now? We wanted to work cohesively we want to work collaboratively We want to make sure that again It's a highest and best efficient use and resource and also the time it takes Because we do know that there's a huge divide at this county in terms of the resources that we have how they're being spent and the cost to the quality of life of many people that are in this community and the Frustrations because there's a tremendous amount of frustration when it comes time to Planning your life on what you can do and the sacrifices you make to get the wages that you need for your family to be able to come home And put food on the table and for the cost of living that we have in this community I want to have something moving forward. We don't need to delay this We're hearing you're rushing this through work. This is not a rush job We know that we still need to be very thorough and very Set on on making sure that we're stewards of the taxpayers money We need to decide which wheels to move forward with in this corridor I think that this is a little bit of a sidestep to say mass transit versus the train So that part has been listened to from what the recommendation was initially So we will go through the due diligence process of finding out the highest and best use of what wheels will need to go in that particular corridor Based on the history lesson which Gives us a direction. We need to look at train, but we'll get to the outcome once we're thorough with that type of research Again the message that I have from Watsonville is that they want the train for the mass public Corridor but our patient to go through the process to see what the outcome is going to be on that one and They know what we all know that we need to have the patients on on reaching that threat and our patients is right at the threshold at This point. We've waited a really long time We've talked about the public safety for the bicycles and pedestrians But they're not the primary modality. We're going to find from Watsonville coming to mid to North County It's it's to complement what we need to on the modalities The first mile last mile is a big piece of that and how Metro can complement that I want to see that we can get more of our youth to those education Resources that we have mid in North County and I think transportation is a huge factor in doing that We know we found money 115 million dollars for the fish hook mission project money can be found it's the RTC's responsibility and Assignment to find the resources we need for that because I'll tell you South County is looking at $115 million being spent at the North County and they're saying where is it at the out the south end for this relief We're told that even every project that works its way south will help Watsonville But every single project that works its way south is just still providing a Neutral relief as we get more people on that that corridor so Watsonville still doesn't see the relief that every single one of these ancillary lanes has When it comes to the time We measure D took two years 2016 we passed it barely with two-thirds We had to compromise to put something on the ballot to make that happen We're still not going to see tires on pavement likely for one of the auxiliary lanes until maybe 2022 We're talking six years to have some relief of something that the voters have decided on We know that even if this train was going to be here a decade in the course of land use planning and transportation planning It's probably a short window, but we have to realize that we've been working on this since the 90s on what to do with the corridor and the transportation needs Greenhouse gas emissions we've talked about that and again We we're looking at the overall equity and the health of everything and all of the components that go with that and it will Be the responsibility of the RTC staff to work with us to make sure each of those goals are achieved and That we work through that process to make that efficiency And the selection of the projects and prioritizing the projects that we can do to make that happen And as a representative for Watsonville, it's my obligation representing my constituents to prove the resolution and Instruct the RTC to take this action to be thorough to be transparent to be inclusive to be creative and productive and in achieving the projects that we can successfully Accomplished that are on this list of of items here, and that's where I'm coming from in what my message is Thank you Commissioner Johnson. Thank you chair. Excuse me. So I had a quick question about Working jointly with Metro on this process. So does that mean that they will have a person at the table that kind of Takes in this information side-by-side with people from the RTC Absolutely, okay, because I think that's important to get on bias and and fair statement. So I Think you know at the core of my concern is Cost versus benefits and costs always has to enter the equation because it's been mentioned That's why we tax ourselves because we tax ourselves for things that we think are going to be important Measured was part of to quote get this Santa Cruz County moving again hasn't happened and I keep hearing things like 10 years hence We're going to start moving and this is going to happen. That's going to happen I'm not afraid of the future But at the same time I respect the past and one of the things I think when we pay attention to the past history We don't want to exclude things that show us in detail What's real and what isn't? If you look at history And one of my concerns with train of course is you keep you keep hearing that 3000-4000 people on this rail line will make it feasible But if you talk to people who do trains, it's more than 12,500 to 15,000 people On daily trips that make things work and even then sometimes it's a little iffy the The rail feasibility study Excuse me as you can tell I have a cold in 19 and 2016 was very very very Iffy in terms of supporting rail and that kind of is the core to what my concerns are You know Bruce and I live in Fifth District, Scotts Valley All the way up through San Lorenzo Valley We don't take we don't take advantage of these things Okay, but we were willing to support parts of measure D because we know for example that Why in the highway will in fact work? Okay for those people who are concerned about greenhouse gases You talk about having a train that you'll drop in a electric Motorized by electricity But the same thing is going to happen in Five ten fifteen years for cars you see more and more and more every company is moving towards electrified vehicles You know, I'm glad that the the commission is pumping the brakes a little bit in terms of you know looking at Alternative analysis Bill smallman Bill smallman was here from San Lorenzo Valley I believe talking about a benefit of a corridor that would allow water to be moved at a fraction of the cost That's innovative to me Okay, so the more we kind of push forward in a rush Kind of obviates the the process of us being able to analyze what other benefits might arise Out of the process that we're trying to pursue, you know I heard a woman talk about 20 cars that were signed. Okay at Flee markets or wherever, but there were 10,000 signatures signed That wanted a trail only I think that trail only is is migrating more towards incorporating other aspects Maybe bus rapid transit and so forth and to me that's important. Okay, so I'm not opposed to You know What what works but I do want us to be very realistic and you know, there are things on on this Here that I like certain things that I don't like but I'm willing to listen to the people I'm willing to talk to them. I'm willing to have an open mind, but I don't want to ignore history and History has shown that Expensive rail systems you have to be pretty sure that they're gonna work and a lot of times they don't And that's my only concern. Thank you. Thank you Commissioner Mohr Okay, I just wanted to make a You know to get back to measure these very briefly things have happened that wouldn't have happened already Without measure D. I mean you can see the construction process going on and the major Recipient of those funds 30% of them was for local roads and I think people throughout this county have seen Improvements been make to made to local roads since measure D was passed 2016. So it's it's paying dividends as we speak I just want to make clear that we're the These are two motions and I'm just going to speak to the first one at this point that I really appreciate the language and the staff recommendation that positively Responds to the request made by the Metro board to analyze all transit options and I want to thank our new director guy Preston for recognizing the importance of the Existing transit system that need to have a deeper understanding Of the capital operational and financial needs of that system relative to how we ultimately Decide the use of the rail corridor. So that's what I see as The first item that we're going to vote on and that's the only comments that I would like to make toward that in I just wanted to echo some of the comments that were already made in particular as a Metro rep really appreciating the change in the language that Was made to really address the concerns of Metro I do want to clarify that the motion that was made at the Santa Cruz City Council in December My understanding is that that is potentially not necessary for us to make any modifications because those items will be considered as part of The projects and Could you clarify that? Yes The projects at the city of Santa Cruz would want to move forward with I've heard from from the city and the city Engineer spoke to us today It does not preclude Any funding to be put towards those projects in the future. This is a planning a regional corridor planning study So all of the funding Mechanisms that the city had been considering For their projects are still available some funding sources Okay, and I just want to clarify too that in our discussion at council We really did focus on multi multimodal. So it wasn't just around the vehicle Accommodations and projects related to that but we really did emphasize that the improvements really would need to be focused on multimodal Transportation and then I'll just wrap up by saying a lot of people were thinking that I wasn't going to be here today Because the date got moved and I'm glad that I am because I've been a part of years of listening to folks and I think that this Commission has been responsive to things. We've modified and changed based on the feedback We've heard and so I'm happy to be here to finalize the vote today Based on the feedback that we've heard. So thank you First of all, I want to appreciate everybody's comments on the tone of people's comments today It's much better than some past meetings that we've had and I never take that for granted I don't think anybody that spoke today has got some bizarre narrow interest that makes it inappropriate for their comments So, you know people I think honestly are trying to express their concerns about things and there are many Contradictions in what we're trying to do here that make it that you know comment that I might go Well, I have an answer to that and believe me people have been in meetings with me before no I listened to what everybody said I could answer almost every point that people made my colleagues don't have the patience for that So I'm not going to do it Thank you. So I I just want to say that I think that the decision to have a preferred rail Option that however makes clear that that doesn't prohibit a serious study of what the mode will be on the On the rail quarter is the appropriate balance That's achieved in the resolution that's in front of us. I think that's a little tricky seems like a preferred Choice means the decisions been made clearly has not been made the rest of the comment I want to make has to do with the Difficulty in being in a situation where you have to face the reality of other Agencies that have control over your decision and ultimately you don't control everything So when people raise concerns, you know, well, why would we keep these rails in place? Everybody knows that whatever rail thing we end up with for passenger rail in the end if it's passenger rail Or certainly if it ends up being a bus thing of some kind or a PRT The these that we wouldn't be using these rails You'd be using continuously welded modern rail system of some kind The reason for keeping the rails in just to be clear that which my vote is based on has to do with Making sure not only that we don't lose the 10 or 11 or maybe somebody said 15 But I think it's more like 11 million bucks of the 116 money It has much more to do with preserving our ownership of this right away that you know We need more information about it But it's like the idea that somehow we would tear the rails out and then hope that the CTC would you know Not only would they let us keep the money In the scheme of these things ten million dollars is a massive amount of money But it's nothing really in terms of what we're doing overall But but the idea that the property owners would all be suing us immediately for their right underlying land And we might lose the whole thing would be a complete disaster from my point of view So that's one of the reasons why I'm willing to keep the current rail in rather than pull it out for a rail banking scheme or Aside from the fact that rail banking has never actually happened anywhere where it came back, but That could change I wouldn't base everything just on that But the idea that we would risk this corridor after we've finally got it after all this work Would that be a disaster? I think there has to be public transit. I like the phrase that the staff has used here the probably forgotten what it is already, but it's the you know having some kind of a Transit quarter that that moves lots of people sort of you know mass transit on this quarter not just bicycles I don't own a car. I have a motorcycle a bicycle and a bus pass and that's how I get around I rent cars if I have to go somewhere far away that you can't get to with a I don't want to ride my motorcycle over highway 17 but Despite my you know love of bicycling and riding up to UCSE and all this other stuff We need to move a lot of people and it's not realistic to think that people are really Weather aside going to ride their bicycles not I don't care how electric they are from Watsonville to Santa Cruz for a job in Our town it's not going to happen. It happened for some people I would do it, but you're not going to persuade any modal shift to happen on that basis So we need some form of public mass mass transit on this quarter, and I want to make sure that that happens The final thing I want to talk to him is Actually two more things the auxiliary lanes. I like what John Leopold had to say about that I I'm not a fan of auxiliary lanes. I don't think I do believe in induced traffic I don't think in the end you're going to reduce the congestion We had a public speaker that came in our series that told us in fact two of them told us this But one guy was really clear about it. Nothing you can do will deal with congestion You can provide people alternatives to ways to get somewhere without being stuck in the congestion But whatever expansion of highway space you give people will take it up and you did as it shows our own studies Eventually you'll lose the benefit of having done it, but as John pointed out We don't have a place to run buses our buses are stuck in the traffic right now and the idea of those auxiliary lanes I don't know that I'll ever be able to persuade others to join this vision But at some point I'd love to see those auxiliary lanes take the cars off of them and make it into a pure bus lane that runs down there That's not the current view I'm willing to take the risk that I won't be successful and the buses will have to share that lane with some cars, but nonetheless Having some way for buses to get here rather than being stuck in the traffic with all the cars is absolutely essential We send three or four sometimes even five buses Between Santa Cruz and Watsonville for a route would take one bus if it could could get back quickly enough to be used again But there's three of them out there on the highway waiting to come back And so the cost to the district of having buses stuck in traffic is huge in terms of Unless not just the buses the drivers and their salaries are stuck out there as well So as somebody who doesn't like widening highways I still support this auxiliary lane plan just because I think in the long run it's part of what we need to do to get where we have to be Finally People asked a very reasonable question Why would we make a contract with a company that's focuses on freight and Maybe excursion services even they don't even provide that they're gonna find a subcontractor to do excursion service But why would we make a contract with these guys when what we really want is some form of passenger service You know, that's not an excursion thing on the weekend or something The answer that has to do once again with these the pragmatic reality of Showing the CTC that we're moving forward with train. They've if I don't know why they think having freight service and Excursion service is a mark of our commitment to eventually have rail You can make an argument that that's not the best way to go that the freight is really in a way Almost competes with the passenger stuff and we shouldn't be going there But I've really looked into this carefully and really tried to understand it and my view is that we need to do this We're not gonna have passenger service on this on this route before the serious passenger service and again It's not a we're not talking about a diesel train. It's some kind of a battery Battery operated trolley or tram or something that that's what I'm looking. That's what we that's what we can afford And that's what we probably would carry the passengers we need here given our population But my view is this is a way to get to where we need to be that's always hard the public Don't always appreciate that People want why can't we get this doing going now? Can't we have to train tomorrow and stuff? Unfortunately, I was spent 26 years on the Santa Cruz City Council. I know that you don't get anything tomorrow I mean things take time to happen and a public transit corridor that goes between two different cities and requires federal and state funding It takes time. It's gonna be but it would be irresponsible of us to go Well, it's gonna take too long and therefore let's just come up Let's do a bike path now and we could have that would give a lot of some people would get on the bike path and ride it From Watsonville to Santa Cruz, but we have to plan for the future. That's that's our obligation as a commission We're not we're providing the actual service The transit district does that but we have to plan for how we actually will solve these problems And if they could be solved in 10 years my god I would be so happy 10 years is optimistic and that's just the reality of the world that we live in But if we don't make these commitments now, we'll be in big trouble and I think if we don't sign this contract Or allow the contract to continue as we had planned with the the folks from Minnesota I think in the end we would lose this right of way. We'd have other kinds of problems Understand there's gonna save me speaking on the next one. That's all I just want to stay on topic So I just want to say I think that the preferred scenario is a reasonable scenario. It doesn't give me It's not the one I would pick if I got the vote if I were the czar here or something It's the one this community will support and it's the best we can do and I think it's pretty good I don't feel like it's oh have to suffer through it. It's all we can afford. No, it's not a bad plan It's a very good plan given what our real constraints are and I'm gonna support it Sure First of all I want to like Mike recognize the tone and the quality of the comments from both sides Dare I say that maybe we forced you all through so many painful meetings that Friendship and respect is beginning to develop between everyone but But I but I think we're there's been a real improvement So what I mean, there's a couple big picture things that I want to focus on in my hopefully brief remarks first Is that while we're spending an inordinate amount of time on the? rail corridor One thing to remember is that we have all these other corridors And we actually have agreement the first time my lifetime that we have an agreement on what we're gonna do next on highway One there's an agreement for how we want to work with the metro that Agreement for what we want to do on to the Soquel corridor and that and because of the voters for the first time in my Lifetime, there's actually money to do it or at least part of it That is a big it's not universal agreement as we heard but that is a major step forward for this community and really hopefully bridging some of the divisions that have that have hurt this county and most importantly the residents in this community For a long long time, and so I'm really optimistic about all the other all this Recommendations in the plan and getting to implement them The second piece is what I it sounds like based on where the commissioners are voting today Is we're really moving forward with a commitment in the corridor to a trail and transit and What that's from the beginning what's been important to me is to recognize that we retain the optionality as Transportation is going through a real revolution and whether it's e-bikes or electric cars Self-driving cars light rail all these things that we preserve our ability for future generations To figure out how best to move across this county in the in the most in the best way possible with the most equity and Lowest carbon footprint possible, and I think that is where we're going and finally We've got a public referendum. I think that's always a possibility in California. Let me just say We spent a lot of time debating and talking to each other You will have two ballot questions one ballot questions We'll say do you want to build a world-class trail through the county and people will say yes And the other ballot question will say do you want to give back 20 million dollars and delay a trail for ten years and and And rip out the tracks and people will say no and then we'll spend another four years arguing about what those results meant So let's not waste our time and effort And let's start moving forward and today We also need to recognize that this organization all of our cities and county has a limited amount of time And resources and money and we need to start getting to projects right now That will improve the quality of life for people right now that would reduce our carbon footprint right now And we've done a lot of planning and we've done a lot of conversations But we need to start having a bias towards action For both for all the environmental reasons and the climate change But also for the quality of life of people who are trying to get back and forth to work to jobs to schools back to their families We we have we have a lot of opportunities. We have a lot of small Programs that can make a big difference in cumulative and I think that's our that's a big opportunity and I'm excited to be moving forward Thank you commissioner Brown So I just want to The outset express my appreciation for all the folks who have been involved in this really long somewhat daunting process of So staff fellow commissioners members of the public who have read Copious amounts of materials. I mean with thousands of pages. I looked at the stack on my floor in my office Yesterday and it was you know this high and that just doesn't even include most of the the materials that we've we've received and and sifted through over the the course of this planning process and I really appreciate staff for making the you know really difficult challenging information accessible to us answering our questions and to those of you in the community who you know have engaged and really Demonstrate that you care very much about how we Make decisions for the future how we make decisions now that will Effect our future And so you know I would just say as a commissioner. I feel quite I know I have my You know own preferred scenario I could come up within my mind And then I could convince myself that there are all kinds of problems with that. This is a really complex Set of projects and considerations that we we're looking at here, you know as commissioners I think we're obligated to look at the big picture and To weigh diverse sometimes competing interests and demands at least with with respect to or certainly with respect to funding priorities And to make our best assessments around some Overarching questions, and I just want to organize my brief comments in those areas. So one it does the UCS Improve transportation options for residents of the county one speaker suggested that Scenario be cannot be reconciled, but I think the same could be said of any Scenario and any or any constellation of priorities and Projects that we we put together So the question is how do we put together a package that that does meet those best meet those priorities and expectations? And needs of the community and you know, I would I would add Because it is significant the voters who agreed to be taxed to support these multimodal transportation options Does the decision we make today constrained future decision making and if so how you know We a lot people come to us and tell us we're locking ourselves in to future Planning and you know future, you know the major commitments of funding that we're precluding certain possibilities And I think it's our responsibility to make decisions now that that do not constrain The possibilities for the future given that new technologies will be coming before us I mean will be think you know the future commissioners and the public that sits here You know decades from now will be making decisions based in a completely in a world that we can't even imagine in terms of new Technologies and you know the way some of this plays out with the regulatory environment funding possibilities, etc So we want to pave the way for that future and you know be ready for taking some action now and so Also, I think that we have a responsibility to You know be good stewards of the public public resources public dollars and I believe that making these decisions now Are in the best interest for the future also? You know we have this this all of these environmental concerns public safety concerns You know health equity that we need to weigh you know those perspectives need to be To wade and we have to make our again our best assessments of how the decisions we make now Will meet those priorities So and I think that we've on balanced on a pretty good job I mean you know it's it's not easy to to sift through all this information and and really You know understand it and digest it. It's not easy to You know to weigh all of those competing interests my I personally I'll say a few things about the you know, I do appreciate first of all the the language changes related to high-density transit and Protected bike lanes. Those are big priorities for me So I appreciate that those have have been included here for our consideration today. I personally believe in induced demand, so I don't think that The and I don't think that anything I've read convinces me that What we've read in terms of some of the whereas is in this resolution that I am you know going to support us moving forward with that That we've identified Benefits certain benefits of auxiliary lanes and metering on ramps to improve safety and traffic flow I don't believe that but it's in here and On balance. I think that the the plan does a lot of things that I like So I also don't think that we have seen that the unified corridor investment study recognizes long-term benefits of high occupancy vehicle lanes on highway one And I don't you know, I don't know. I don't know the answer to that. I'm not saying I disagree, but I don't know and you know and also that Highway widening is going to be the solution. So, you know, I disagree with that I think it's our responsibility to stay that even when we are being asked to Potentially pave the way for some of those projects. So that being said, I I want to just reiterate my my gratitude for all of the time that people spent and You know, it's it's it's daunting to be making this decision today in some ways, but it's also Kind of feels anticlimactic because we're We're really just this is the culmination of something but it's actually really just the starting point for the future. So Thank you all for Being here and participating. I look forward to the future Thank you Okay, the good news is I'm the last speaker and I'm gonna be short Somebody mentioned that that depends on which side you're on out there and My experience over the past two years of this is this not you guys are not like a side. You're like a salad Okay, it's not just the train or the bike. It's so many different things Okay, and I know much more about PRT than I ever knew existed. Okay, so So the dilemma comes to us is you know, we're sitting here trying to figure out what's best for us and and you know I share some of the concerns of the fellow commissioners for me I'm here as a Capitola City Councilman, which gets me nominated to the metro board that gets me selected to be on the RTC So I'm coming from Capitola. It's a town that had vision Capitola And we just had the measure L that that that that lost I come from a town that doesn't want to train And then I go to Metro and I'm working on trying to deliver the best possible bus service We can do and we have a CEO that's motivated to provide good things and I'm thinking what's best for Metro Is it best for Metro to run on an HOV lane or bus on shoulder down highway one or on or on the trail? And I personally think that the best place for it to be is on highway one in some expeditious manner And then I come here as an RTC commissioner Trying to be inspired by by transportation, which I am by by all the staff here because you can't be around them and not be inspired So I think what what helps me try to take what we're going to do here is is we're going to pick a preferred scenario And we're going to use it as a guideline to give us at least some place to move forward because I'm for The with the language in here high capacity public alternatives Because I'm going to tell you the way the future is changing so fast somebody made a comment about how it's going to change We have to be open to what it's going to do the corridors there So many other good uses on it. I don't know what that transportation mode is going to be on there But I think we should continue looking at it and and and maybe as we're doing the other projects It'll present itself. So with that, uh, I'm going to be supporting the the uh, the preferred scenario And I'm ready to have a roll call vote if if you would go ahead and do that This is just on item one Well, my motion was was the recommended actions and and the resolution Well, we're going to take the resolution with that with the exception of item 10 would not be on there and item two would not be on there I stated out at the beginning that that we're only going to vote on I took that as as uh, as That's what we're going to have. We're going to talk about it But I made a motion that that was inclusive of everything You can divide a question if you want Yeah, I I think I clearly stated in beginning that it was only going to be on item one And I preclude anybody if I'm talking on item two because we're just going to vote on that So if you want to re amend your motion to just include item one Well, you don't you don't have to change the chair you should just divide the motion I did that I did that already and I just I just want to make sure the commissioner leopold's clear that we're just voting on item one And the resolution would include the resolution could be divided if I'm correct into Nine items and then item 10 would be one of its own Yes, you can do that Thank you I'll hold before before we call it shall we clear with that Let's go ahead and go with a uh, uh, a roll call vote on on item one commissioner chase Commissioner rotkin. Hi commissioner coonerty. Hi commissioner leopold. Hi commissioner brown. Hi commissioner botorf. Hi commissioner mcpherson Commission alternate mullhorn. Hi commissioner johnson. Hi commissioner kaufman gomez. Hi commissioner burtrane. Hi commissioner cap it Amazing that is a unanimous vote I think it sends a great message to the community and to staff So with that, uh, let's move on to item two, which is a uh item to grant st. Paul railroad a license to use the Santa Cruz branch rail And I'm going to start with commissioner mcpherson Yeah, I know that uh, we were going to combine these but, um I'd like to make a recommendation on number two And I know there's going to be moments and groans we've been talking about this for a couple of years now But we have a deadline of march 15th And the motion i'm going to make is is certainly not To be negative reflection on the progressive rail because Their freight service to watserville. They've done what they've said they're going to do But uh, I strongly recommend that this commission needs additional information Regarding the phase two contract and if you could say well, what in the world could that be? Some of it's been somewhat more clarified About the full scope of options with caltrans or the california transportation commission And the surface transportation board, but i'm concerned about the exposure to litigation For one and what this impact might be if we move on this the way it is And I know that progressive knows it It has It earlier it has access to watserville and a seven mile radius or so now with The storm damages that is north of watserville right now. So I I do not think that that's going to make them pull out of this or anything I think that they would be a good partner if they should if we should move along with this So I would like to um, and I know I I'm not one to say just do it study it again, but for me. I need more information about some of Basic issues on this a few of which I've named and so I'd like to just Delay a decision on this until our march 15th me or whatever that meeting date is that's coming up in march that we had We delay this decision on the preferred scenario until our march meeting The license excuse me to uh until our march meeting Second second ocean second by commissioner mulher and i'm going to start on this end Like i'll be really brief. I don't support the motion I think we have the information that we need to make the decision now And if I thought if we had more time would really give us different information or allow us a Different kind of a contract that would somehow give us more flexibility I would support the motion, but I don't think that's really likely So I'm going to vote no on this motion. I hope we can actually decide this today. Thank you Yeah, based on my other comments, I guess time for us to make decision and move forward Commissioner leopold, I don't I don't support the motion. I understand the need That people have for additional information this change of common carrier. It should have been an administrative function and we we tried to make lots of ways to Address people's concerns and give plenty of time to answer questions The progressive rail has done everything they said they were going to do And uh, I'm ready to move forward with it Thank you. Commissioner brown comment Thank you, mr. Mulher Commit if we were to initiate phase two of this contract It will commit the rtc to an aggressive capital program that isn't currently envisioned in any of our plans As per the contract phase two this agreement We will pay for our cause payment for repairs from milepost seven to milepost 31.39 So the entire Length of the rail corridor will need to be reconstituted within the next three years I'm sorry. That's been feasible I also believe that there are some other questions about our rights and responsibilities Within this rail corridor that haven't been answered For example, what would happen where we to allow progressive rail to maintain their freight easement and their freight operations But not improve the rail corridor north of milepost seven It's a question that hasn't yet been asked or answered and I think that is a legitimate question What our liabilities might be should we not continue with phase two? It's just been Assumed that we would continue with Transportation services on the corridor which I might add to all of our rail advocates out there only encompasses excursion rail and Which actually satisfies the requirements of prop 116 Which our project was only envisioned to be a dinner train from Santa Cruz to Davenport And in fact the ctc waived the commuter rail requirements of prop 116 So that they could approve our project of a dinner train from Santa Cruz to Davenport So I think that there are there's a big gap between The approved project and the intent to continue with some sort of commuter rail project on the rail line And I think that there are a lot of questions that remain unanswered regarding our liabilities and responsibilities So I will be supporting the motion Mr. Dott Well, excuse me. I think freight service from mile post three, which Serves Watsonville is important and keeping that intact Allows us to do this with this measure. So I'll I'll support the measure Commissioner Coffman Gomez Probably haven't witnessed the majority of the activity with the progressive in Watsonville Um, I'm not quite clear on what kind of litigation or potential litigation as a result of the initial Contract for the phase two to just be rolled in I'm still going to be listening to weigh in a little bit more about how I'm going to decide on this particular item for the vote Thank you Commissioner, we're trying um, I'm supportive versus motion and I've long contended that Our main focus should be on Watsonville. I'm not certain certainly we haven't had Train activity going north for a long time The idea that it's all of a sudden going to develop I think we should sit back and figure out a little bit more what this contract means But more importantly, I'd like to give room to our new executive director to determine that I think that we've recognized already that there's a new person at the helm And this is a contract that is going to influence how we proceed for the next 10 20 years We we have no idea at this point. I think for the person at the helm They should be the ones that make those recommendations Make themselves satisfied that for this agency. It is a good contract. So I totally agree with bruce We need that room Thank you Commissioner cap it if you can just clarify the motion Right right now in front of us is item number two Which is grant st paul and pacific rarity license to use the santa cruz branch rail line to provide excursion service In addition to freight service as specified under 2.4 1 of the administration of coordination license agreement So we're voting on that agreement and and and what commissioner mcpherson has asked for is To postpone the vote to allow more time to look into some concerns that's been brought up by Various members on the panel and allow the new executive director to have conversation with Agencies that might be able to make people understand and feel more comfortable before they vote Yeah, I'll uh, I'll be against the motion because I'm ready to vote on going forward Thank you Well, I actually have a question because I um to um I'm a little bit conflicted here about the need to move forward today And that's kind of information that we might be able to get In order to make this decision. I'm not necessarily opposed to moving forward but I would like to know based upon um, maybe commissioner mcpherson the kinds of questions that you have and commissioner mollern the questions related specifically to Potential legal challenges how realistic is it that will get additional information some of my colleagues seem to think not and Others do and so i'm feeling a bit conflicted here about how to proceed so it would be helpful to hear from staff in response to the The idea that we we might have some additional data gathering to do the reality of that Well, I can certainly try. Um, I've contacted the ctc this week. Um, I've also received letters from them. Um, they seem pretty Um, pretty certain that We would have to pay back the funding if we didn't continue with rail Now that said, you know, what does that mean with respect to this contract and excursion rail and and is there a nexus between the two? They are not as clear when when those questions are asked I don't know that if I asked them again and present to them in a different way if they would be more clear Or not The surface transportation board. Um, I have less confidence in being able to get answers from from them. They seem to be pretty Non-committal and hard to get in touch with but I can certainly try I can also, you know approach progressive rail and see, um, you know, what their feelings are about You know backing out of this agreement if if if we were not to to grant a transportation easement I do want to remind, um the commission that you know, we I plan on being Very serious about my fiduciary responsibilities One of the first things I asked, um when I came on board was, you know, what really is our financial liability towards Um, You know the progress rail agreement, you know, and I've looked at the cost estimates of trying to get the rail line Between zero and seven um To a point where they could do excursion travel and I've also looked at it from seven to, you know, 31 Point whatever It is to the end And you know, I have my own concerns about putting together a funding plan to do that Sort of work And I've contacted our legal counsel and said, you know, if I cannot afford to do all these repairs As far as I can tell and looking at the agreement is there a penalty or You know, some sort of damages against the rtc and the way the contract's written. There is not You know, and this kind of goes back to commission or brettrans, um Concerns regarding the capitol attressal. Um, you know, I take that very seriously too safety is is my utmost importance There is no way that we are going to put a train over a bridge that is unsafe That said, I don't have the funding to do major capital repairs on a bridge of that nature but if I've got An opportunity to apply for state funding to do repairs on the capitol attressal Then I might have the ability to do that sort of work, but If the ctc Looks at me and says well, you put in an application to repair the capitol attressal, but you have no train service Why would I possibly spend money on the capitol attressal that I put myself between a rock and a hard place I don't see them as looking towards making capital improvements on a line that there's no rail on So I can ask the questions and I certainly will go back and try to provide an offer, you know a way of Presenting this differently if you think that that will be helpful and if this motion does pass But I'm not sure that there's going to be a whole lot more information available On February 7th or at our march. I think march 15th meeting, but before you vote. I would like to also Make sure that we provide clarification that our next meeting is February 7th and not in march Because I would like if this motion was to pass. I would like to come back February 7th and not wait till march If I may add one one clarification because it was a common made that the California transportation commission waved the requirement for passenger rail on the line And this might help to to also clarify why the ctc is so firm and in its letters that we've been we've been receiving now proposition 116 state law The state law will pass by the voters so the language in that state law states that There was 11 million dollars available to santa cruz county For for two possibilities one was intercity passenger rail projects connecting the city of santa cruz and the city of wassenville or Other rail projects in santa cruz county which facilitate recreational commuter intercity or intercounty travel So it is written state law That the rtc had that option in order for the rtc to have that option to use recreational rail service to access that money The rtc had to match the prop 116 money dollar for dollar So this agency did approve 10 million dollars in 2000 Towards both the purchase of the rail line and improvements on the rail line and also counter in san far Secured a million and a half dollars towards the project So that that was how this rtc then was able to buy to match the The prop 116 funny and have that option to acquire this line With recreational rail service and not just regular intercity passenger rail service So the this so it's it wasn't a ctc guideline that they could waive it's state law So if and part of what the ctc has told us If you want to have approval of using that money for something that isn't a rail project because it is state law passed by the voters The legislature can the state legislature can change that it is written into the prop 116 But it's not it's not a simple majority of the state legislature. It's it's a super majority So thank you. I'm gonna go to commissioner cooner. Sure. I have two questions So in general when we're under threat of litigation We should move into closed sessions. So my answer my question to the attorney is Are we under credible threat of litigation that it would warrant a closed session discussion So I think at this time we don't we haven't done an analysis to support that today we could enter into closed session Um, I think that what's being requested is that we do an analysis to determine whether in our opinion There's a significant threat that we would be facing litigation if we didn't proceed with a phase two License part of that would likely involve the executive director's communications with progressive to determine whether that's a likely outcome Thank you. Uh, then the second question I have is for the executive director. So Uh To commissioners Bertrand's point Um, this was your recommendation under your signature To enter into this con phase two of the contract. So um, uh, there's been a point that you need to go out and get more information and and Be made more comfortable in your decision. But uh the report Today before us was your recommendation to us that we should move forward. So Is there something that we don't know that is causing you to change that recommendation or Or did what you tell us today is you you believe we need to move forward? I still believe the right decision is to move forward with the The recommendation that was provided in the staff report Because there's really no Penalty written in the contract with respect to if we cannot complete the repairs So if the the repairs on the line exceed the funding available to us, then I don't see Any plan being provided by Progressive rail for for a portion of the rail line that cannot be funded and brought up to Class one standard is something that this I would recommend approval of in the future So I don't I see it as an opportunity to have a rail provider on the line To be able to maintain the line and help maintain the line for us And also meeting the ctc's requirement so that I can apply for additional funds to continue to maintain that rail line Okay My comments on ours is you know, we we just got done passing the unified course studied by an anavis vote And I think that sends a strong message My concern as the chair is that I've got concerns from other members Who have wanted to ask for time another 30 days possibly to make sure some things are fully vetted I think at this point after doing this for as long as we've all done this I don't see how that can be detrimental to make sure that we make possibly the same kind of vote So I will be supporting the measure also. So at this point, I'm going to go ahead and call for a roll call vote Oh Commissioner rotkin. No commissioner coonerty. No commissioner leopold. No commissioner brown Commissioner botorf. Yes. Commissioner McPherson. Yes. Commissioner alternate milhorn. Yes. Commissioner johnson. Yes commissioner kaufman gomez No Commissioner Bertrand. Yes commissioner cappett. No Motion passes six to five. Is that my correct count? I'm sorry the motion fails six to five. Sorry I wouldn't move that we I move that we approve the staff recommendation for item number two second Is there any further discussion on that from anyone? If I don't know it's just because I think we should I'm just not as comfortable as I should be and I think I could I could be more comfortable in 30 days So I'm going to be voting no Any other comments commissioner kaufman gomez Regardless of the outcome the information I think is still worthy of of receiving to the commission So please let's have that information be made available to us No objection to any other comments We'll go ahead with the roll call vote Commissioner rotkin. I commissioner coonerty. Hi commissioner leopold. Hi commissioner brown. Hi commissioner botorf. No Commissioner mcpherson. No commissioner milhurt alternate mulher. No commissioner johnson. No commissioner kaufman gomez Commissioner bertrand Yes, commissioner cappett. So I decided to get in here. No I mean, I'm sorry. Yes You knew you had all the fame there that motion passes six to five with that we're in a time deadline. So we're gonna Yeah Okay, thank you for the correct number that passes seven to four um, let's move on to the Last item on our agenda, which is Find the agenda again that item 21. Does there a staff report? Is there a staff report on item 21? You should make it really short. We did read the report Yes, this is just Could I ask people to please be quiet as you're leaving the room so we can hear. Okay. Thank you So it's recommended you actually make a determination that convened bidding for railroad crossing signal work on the sankers branch rail line Would be unavailing would not produce An advantage and would not be in the public interest and to authorize the executive director to enter into a prevailing wage No bid contract agreement with progressive rail So last single pacific railroad in the amount of eighty one thousand three hundred seventy three dollars to complete Railroad crossing signal repairs at beach street in wassenville Which resulted is because the signal crossing was hit by a by a truck that was delivering at a local a local business We do have footage of that and the art staff Learned in December 2018 and not what like the staff report says December 2017 That io pacific actually did not File a claim against the insurance company for that truck trucking firm So staff and the guild council are working to get the information necessary to do that So it is the so that the and were to try to Recover all the costs associated with that repair in the meantime the repairs need to be made and the rtc has the option To enter into a no bid Pre-gaining wage agreement with regressive rail To do that so Depending any staff or cut any public comments. I moved the staff recommendation second any questions The comment that i want to make Sorry this thing back and forth The staff had told me to make sure that we've got them included in the loop of the repairs So that our public works is involved in the process and whatever permits or anything else that you may need On behalf of the city of wassenville. That's correct. We receive that communication as well Any other comments anyone from the public like to weigh in on this topic Thank you commissioners lowell her city wassenville is very important that we move forward with these repairs. Thank you. Thank you, sir With that we'll go for a vote all in favor. I opposed Motion carries unanimously and we are adjourned to the next meeting