 Yeah, good morning, and welcome to the June 14th special meeting of the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission. Who do we start with a roll call? Commissioner Rotkin Commissioner Chase Commissioner Bautorf Commission alternate Jenny Johnson. Yes, Commissioner Leopold here Commission alternate Merhorn Milhorn Commissioner Coonerty Commissioner Caput Commissioner Kaufman Gomez Commissioner Johnson Commission alternate Noyan Naroyan here. Naroyan Commissioner Bertrand and Commissioner McClendon. Here. Well, I would just wish an extra special Good morning to council member Naroyan from Santa Cruz. Nice to have you on the Regional Transportation Commission this morning So our next part is oral communications. We have a very long agenda today So we're definitely not going to have it longer than a half hour And I'm going to be very strict if you try to talk about things that are on the agenda Then I'm going to ask you to sit down Good morning. Good morning Good morning and happy flag day. My name is Casey Clark and I am a resident of the city of Watsonville, California I run an agency that has locations throughout the county. Not only do I drive the county roads for personal business. I Also drive for agency business, which is assisting developmentally disabled adults. I feel as many county residents Also feel personally invested in our roads This investment comes with frustration and embarrassment regarding the dismal state in which they currently exist Two weeks ago several Watsonville residents approached me to fill out the application for the measure D oversight committee Initially, I was more than happy to assist my family friends neighbors and our community with logical and fair representation as stated before I have financial oversight experience My job is to oversee multiple facilities for the developmentally disabled and I also serve as a board member on various board of Out Unfortunately, I was highly discouraged by the fact that the measure D oversight committee is after the fact auditing and not true independent citizen oversight Because of this I decided not to complete the application If this is the direction that the RTC is going to take from the start I'd rather not be a part of it and probably explains why so many people did not respond to your application process here in the South County Tract I'm concerned if you're talking about the progressive rail contract. You'll have to wait. I know but I'm not talking about that I'm talking about the the overriding issue of Keeping the tracks intact. I just wanted to give you copies of the various publications but also a copy of the Memo about this issue about the easements what happens when if you tear out tracks, sir I'm gonna ask you I told I warned at the beginning. I'm gonna be very strict about this We are gonna be talking about the progressive rail contract and the rail line on a later item I apologize for that, but I want to make sure we get we have a scheduled meet hearing at 9 30. Okay. That's fine And bring it up then. Thank you. All right Good morning. Good morning. My name is Peter Stanger I was a firefighter training with the firefighters here in Watsonville. I was with the post with the Register Pa Ronin when the earthquake came I was a postman marching with Caesar Chavez Here on Main Street my sons worked for Lows and fishes and Let's see the county fairgrounds I'm really concerned about Where the money goes for the South County? We just lost another piece of The bike lane east of Aptos village This is in addition to what I reported to you a couple months ago that we lost part of the bike lane That was West apply a boulevard on San Andreas we need the Public Works Department to maintain our existing bike lanes. This is not occurring our bike lanes are vanishing Also, I wanted to bring up one more item that was that on Plan 17 B of the master of the Monterey Bay scenic sanctuary trail master plan it was put out by the staff RTC staff that the plan 17 B would be 3.9 miles along San Andreas and then on Beach Street where there is no bike lane I'd like to correct that I googled it. It's 4.9 miles It's longer than if you just kept it along the railroad tracks And it's also doesn't account for the cost of putting in a bike lane on Beach Street We need bike lanes if they're not going to build them on Beach Street You're not going to maintain them on San Andreas and Soquel Avenue. I Don't know what to say. I would thank you Good morning. Good morning. My name is Ari Parker. I'm a resident of the Parro Valley. I'd like to be able to distribute this. This is a Revenue measure oversight committee report for measure G here in Watsonville and it's nice to see a lot of Elected officials from the other side of the county travel highway one and visit us. We appreciate that So I wanted to share a little bit about measure G which you have It's a half-cent sales tax collected within the city of Watsonville. It produced about 3.5 million Directly supports our public safety and additionally has an administrative maintenance taken out And at the end of 2016 opposed upon the residents of Watsonville was a half-cent sales tax for measure D Well and instead of going to Watsonville the 3.5 million that we have for a half percent It's less than 1 million that will be going to Watsonville And let me throw in I think the largest city in the county of Santa Cruz now so it seems like we're being short-changed and You know, we don't have that victim personality out here. We just straight up financially think we're being short-changed. We haven't seen much I I recognize that There's accountability to those of you that are elected officials But where's the accountability for those that are not and I'm sorry to see that Zach friend has not in attendance today since part of his district is in the city of Watsonville So, you know, there's no regional transportation committee to vote for So I'm concerned with that because it directly affects Watsonville and the Paro Valley Where is the accountability for that? We in the Paro Valley? You know can say I can't say that Santa Cruz County is moving Because it's not from our perspective you got lucky coming this way. Thank you so much Good morning. Good morning commissioners. How's everyone doing presently? I hope this fits into this open discussion I'm trying to advocate here for again mass transit Versus the use of funding for auxiliary lanes Came across something on the internet about called a push-and-pull approach to transportation I'll have to read this since I didn't memorize it One way to view our situation and the problem is to analyze it from a standpoint of where people should be in transit Where we should push them that's part of the push aspect and from which modes we should pull them This is commonly called a push-pull approach It emphasizes that urban transport measures must persuade users into using public transport and non motorized transport While developing strategies to push them out of automobiles and similar transport modes While developing strategies or to achieve the pole component one must provide good quality of service Which would require more funding especially for metro here in Santa Cruz County and Develop infrastructure for public transport and Non-motorized transport in general develop policies that improving additions for the use of these modes To arrive at a situation where you are pushed from cars Policies must be in place to discourage their use by eliminating fuel subsidies creating charges to automobiles Examples of maybe money for HOV lanes that people want to use them to discourage their use by eliminating Ownership and use and in general creating policies that increase the cost of using these modes specifically automobiles Using the revenue from these charges to enhance sustainable urban transport versus automobiles and widening projects This approach is generally used By transport economists as it follows the rationale of price-driven behavior Anything that affects the pocketbook people will stop using. Thank you. Thank you for your time. I Brain people's with trail now. Um, I thought it would be appropriate to talk a little bit about the history of this Organization I've been involved in this organization for over 20 years I know that because my start it being involved in this organization before my daughter was born Most of the people on the members here were not involved. So I want to give a little more background I've been in transportation for quite a number of years. I was on the Silicon Valley leadership group transportation committee I as a facilities manager in the Silicon Valley started shuttles from Caltran to the local facilities. I actually wrote an AB 2128 in 2006 with a tax bill federal tax at the state level to allow Corporations to give their employees commuter checks it fell in it failed in committee a lot of politics But the point is is I've been active in the transportation field and I want to make sure it's it's important to Understand the history of where how this organization has gotten to the point where we're at Um back in 2010 this organization changed the master plan from putting in bus rapid transit HOV lanes along highway one To a train for a train and the reason was is because they're going after proposition 116 funding. I Was at the town halls California Transportation Commission meeting where this organization was requesting the money It guaranteed that we would have a train actually at that meeting somebody stood up and said we're gonna have Transportation of Brussels sprouts from the north coast down to Watsonville This organization has continued to drive towards that. I actually met with Ellen Prairie former representative to our organization. She said Train won't work, but I just want to purchase the corridor, which I agree, you know, hey, we got to get it Thank you. Thank you Good morning. Good morning. My name is Jerry Fennie. I live in Aptos the executive director of RTC George Dondaro told people at a recent meeting in Scotts Valley that we need to keep a freight operator on the rail line So if you're gonna talk about the freight operations, we have an item on there You might have come in late, but I'm policing this pretty strictly That we're trying to focus our comments on things that aren't on today's agenda That is on today's agenda. We'll be getting to it about 10 o'clock. Okay. Yeah. Thank you. Good morning Morning missionaries Happy flag day My name is Victor Marani. I'm an over 50 year resident of Santa Cruz County My wife's family has been here for multiple generations As many of you know, there was an election on June 5th about nine days ago and There were several things I found very interesting since this was the first major election since measure D passed I Notice that there was a pattern Over in Santa Clara County. There was a historic recall of a judge Only the fifth one in last hundred years to recall from office. Why? Because you didn't uphold justice and essentially broke a very important bond of trust between the people and the judiciary There was a state senator recall down in Southern, California because he promised not to raise taxes in the First his first action in office was to raise the gas tax Now we have a gas tax repeal coming up in November for the entire state Senator Newman was recalled again in record numbers We also had a state proposition which believe it or not had to do with transportation Which basically promised that? If we vote for transportation dollars, they only spent for transportation dollars kind of unusual Once again proof that when you lose the trust of we the people they have a way of responding Many of us in the county especially in mid and South County feel deceived. We feel measured D stands for deception We're still stuck in traffic We're suffering You folks seem to be completely not listening years away from doing anything about gridlock fixing our roads Instead we've seen hundreds of thousands of dollars spent on studies consultants Spiked pensions for people. They're gonna be retiring but not performance That's not what taxpayers want I remember about 20 years ago. I was involved with the group that did not like what was going on with an illegal utility tax They went to groups like you. Thank you. Eventually. It was Repealed. Thank you. Thank you very much. Good morning. Gail McNulty, Santa Cruz County, Greenway A few weeks ago a man named Jarrett Walker came as a guest of your agency to speak to the public and also your commission He spoke about a few things, but he opened with the concept of Transportation and how it equates to freedom and opportunity as we sit here in Watsonville this morning We can recognize the fact that the people in Watsonville are surely at the short end of that stick Families who live in Watsonville and have parents who commute northbound daily Lose Possibly two or more hours out of every day that they could be spending with their children helping with homework things like that So it's not just their opportunity that it's affected. It's the future generations Now mr. Walker brought up a few things first of all he brought up the fact that as an agency When we're looking at the unified corridor study You should be very careful about what you choose to do on any one of those corridors not to jump in to rashly Then he pointed out that the Metro bus system actually is our current transit system that could be better utilized And that that someplace where we should be putting more energy and focus to see how it could work better And he did also note the induced traffic demand on the highway He cautioned against simply widening the highway because of the very demand that mr. St pointed out However after the fact one of our board members had a discussion with mr. Walker He caught him outside and he said what if we were to add high high-occupancy vehicle lanes to that mix and mr. Rocker Walker responded well that would change everything if Buses and carpools were able to get out of traffic You would be opening a new line of freedom for the people who live in South County and commute northbound I would like you to keep that in mind today As we think carefully about all of the decisions that lie ahead the rail corridor is A precious option jumping in too quickly in one particular direction that will bind us is a mistake Let's think about how to improve freedom for everyone in the county. Thank you Is there anyone else for oral communication in the few minutes we have left? Seeing none will move on to if there is any additions or deletions to the consent or regular agenda Good morning, mr. Chairman and commissioners We have handouts this morning for items 19 21 22 and 24 Okay, thank you Next we'll move on to the consent agenda. These are items in which we Deem is non-controversial and can pass as one item. Are there any questions comments or concerns from the commission? Seeing none. Is there anyone in the public who'd like to address us on item on consent? Seeing none Motion by Rockin second Seconded by Coonerty all in favor signify by saying aye. I and he opposed motion carries unanimously Next we'll move on to the regular agenda, which is Item 18 commissioner reports. Are there any commissioners reports about transportation that you'd like to share? Seeing none. We'll move on to item 19, which is the director's report. Good morning, mr. Dundarrow Good morning, mr. Chairman a few items to report to you today first city of Santa Cruz Segment seven of their rail trail update on that project this project runs between Natural Bridges Drive to Bay and California streets and this is known as phase one of segment seven And it is anticipated to be advertised for construction forbidding by the end of next week The contract awards anticipated for mid-July with construction to start in mid to late August Construction will last approximately six months and the groundbreaking ceremonies being planned for late August with a specific date To be announced as plans take shape phase two of this project from Bay, California to the wharf is well underway with design 95% complete environmental clearance and right of way still in progress The environmental documents for phase two are anticipated to be presented to the Planning Commission on July 26 And we'll go out for public comment prior to that Next item is the city Santa Cruz rail trail art opportunities master plan Which lays out a vision for public art along 3.7 miles of trail segments that fall within the city limits Trail will be the plan will be reviewed by the Arts Commission on June 13th That's yesterday and then go to City Council for adoption in the fall This plan lays out a foundation for future calls for art proposals, which will be released for each art opportunity area At this time there are three public art elements that are funded and planned for integration into the construction of segment seven as follows first a poetry Submitted by the community to be sandblasted in concrete at ADA ramps and sidewalks secondly decorative mosaic wrapped bollards and Third mural or art treatment on the timber leg retaining wall near La Branca Park and near a lagoon Copy of the master plan is available on the city arts website, and that's provided in my report Next the Twin Lakes Beachfront Ribbon cutting This is a county project at the Twin Lakes called the Twin Lakes Beachfront improvement project It's an important part of the Monterey Bay Sanctuary scenic trail network nearing completion Ribbon cutting for the project which adds walkways bike lanes improved parking space and Bluff protection East of the Santa Cruz Harbor is being planned for late July or early August Also, and many of you know that in the recent election proposition 69 passed by an overwhelming approval by the voters, which basically prohibits fuel taxes and fees from that were Authorized in Senate bill one From being used for non transportation purposes. So essentially it's protecting these transportation dollars In within the state Constitution as many of you know RTC has been Funneling these funds out as they come in to the local jurisdictions to fix their crumbling infrastructure This essentially applies to almost all kinds including roads highways bike paths sidewalks worn out transit buses And implementing regional projects that the community has identified as priorities I've attached a map which has been provided There's a website location in the report but a copy of the map that shows location the projects that are being funded through Senate Bill one is attached to my report and on the backside is the key showing what these projects are and whose the project sponsors Finally a continuation of our Speaker series at our August 2nd meeting which will be our next meeting after today Farhad Monsourian the general manager of Sonoma Marin area rail transit Will be our guest speaker speaking on the evolution of smart and At the August 16th transportation policy workshop meeting our guest speaker will be Carl Grattinger Division chief of Caltrans division of rail and mass transportation For a closer look at the state rail plan funding from Senate bill one and other topics related to the future Implementation of passenger rail in Santa Cruz County That concludes my report. I'll be glad to answer any questions. Are there questions for mr. Dandero? This cop and Gomez Sorry, it'd be real quick the length or the miles on the projects that we've got going on here that you mentioned about the natural bridges and The other one that's from Bay to the wharf. How many miles or in length are those two projects? Or two two miles Two for each No, total total I'm sorry Christian at our city of Santa Cruz Public Works director is here if you have additional questions But the entire length of the projects if project is 2.1 miles and I believe the first Phase one from natural bridges to Bay, California as 1.3 miles Thank you Are there any other questions? Mr. Mulher this this the map of SB 1 Santa Cruz County projects What what are all the numbers on the the little circles if you flip over on the backside of the sheet? That's the key. Thank you sure Alrighty hold on. Sorry. Mr. Coonerty during our communications. There was questions about the distribution of measured D dollars. Do you want to? To the cities do you want to talk about the collections and how they're going so far generally? Yeah, well, we do have an item at 930 We can get real close to our 930 start But I see mr. Peoples has a quick comment. He'd like quick quick comment I just want to reiterate the trend of the staff Propaganda on the rail his first three speakers have all been promoting trail He's doing the smart train and now he's having cal trains specifically for the rail plan So we're seeing this is the public's response or concern the propaganda by the staff All they do is bring more trained propaganda. Thank you Thank you So what it's 930 I'm gonna ask mr. McGlendon to hold off on his cow trans Presentation so we can start on time with our public hearing which is for the adoption of the measure D five-year program for projects for Projects for regional projects and community bridges lifeline. Good morning. Ms. Marconi. Good morning commissioners Rachel Marconi of your staff As mentioned by the chair this morning There is a public hearing to discuss how the regional transportation Commission intends to use measure D revenues over the next five years for several of the categories of Projects that are funded by measure D measure D is the countywide Transportation investment ballot measure that was approved by over two-thirds of voters in 2016 it has generally five buckets of funding in it about 30% of the funds go to cities and the counties by formula for improvements that they select through their own public processes 20% of the funds go for transit services for seniors and people with disabilities among that Pot of funding 4% of the overall measure D funds go to community bridges lifeline which Operates para transit service in our county and 16% of the overall measure D funds go to Santa Cruz Metro 25% of the measure D funds are for highway projects And 17% are for active transportation or the Monterey basing tracenic trail rail trail project and 8% of the funds are for the rail corridor There's also two components within the neighborhood category of funds five million dollars goes to the highway 17 wildlife crossing and Ten million dollars is designated for projects in San Lorenzo Valley along the highway nine corridor These the split of funds were approved by the voters through the expenditure plan that was approved for measure D and revenues began beginning collected in April of 2017 for this tax measure with the first payments being made from the state to our county in August September of 2017 so before you today are our proposals for how to spend the first the next five years of funding Those are exhibits a through f of the packet Because community bridges is not a public agency the regional transportation Commission Operates the public process so the community has an opportunity to provide input on how those funds are spent as well Today, I'm just going to highlight a few changes to the five-year plans from what was approved by the Commission last year Generally, we've updated the revenue estimates based on current trends the cost of projects have influenced how much money is proposed for different Components of the five-year plans schedule project schedules have modified when we anticipate spending different funds And we're also recommending reserving some funds specifically in the trail category For future decision-making on exactly where some of those funds will be spent For highway one we are recommending the Commission Approve actions today to allow us to advance Implementation of auxiliary lanes and the bicycle and pedestrian bridge over highway one at Shana clear Avenue for the trail component The funds are to fund construction and maintenance of projects that are currently under development as well as it to initiate work on a trail section between 17th Avenue and 47th Avenue in Capitola for the rail corridor We have ongoing analysis of possible uses of the corridor funding for that as well as maintenance of the bridges and track right away For the San Lorenzo Valley state route nine category Commission staff has been working closely with the community up in San Lorenzo Valley Kaltrans the County Public Works and Planning Departments in Santa Cruz Metro on a comprehensive complete streets corridor plan for that area Already out of 800 suggestions that were provided by the San Lorenzo Valley community We have started to identify a priority set of projects That are estimated to cost over 100 million dollars will 10 million dollars isn't gonna cover all of those and so we're really looking to use the measure Defunds to leverage other grants so that we can address some of those priority needs But there is one project that has continually rose to the top out in San Lorenzo Valley and that is a project to address Pedestrian access to the school complex in Feltin and so we're recommending the Commission set aside some funding so we can go after grants this year For projects in that area if possible And then for the highway 17 wildlife Corridor we are recommending that the full five million dollars that are available for that project Be made available in the next five years so the project can go to construction Kaltrans is the lead on that project I'm happy to answer additional questions about the five-year plans, but knowing that many people did not come Specifically for this item. I am keeping it rather short, but I'm happy to answer any questions Thank you for the report. I will see if commissioners have any questions Ms. Johnson Can you hear yeah, I guess I can hear it now So for the SR 9 Money that you're recommending that's going to be for Additional planning as well as going after grants for staff correct. Okay, great. Thanks Yeah, what we had initially included in the scope of work for the complete streets corridor plan did not it was Related to us through our focus group meetings that we had last month that additional work is needed to really address more comprehensively What the community wants up there and specifically around the combined school campus? That is part of what will be looked at in more detail. Thank you Other questions, mr. Johnson. Thank you. So let's talk a little bit about process here. Sure, so You're asking us to make a decision on a five-year plan And I'm just curious as in terms of what kind of collaboration and what kind of Conversation have you had with the communities in other words? Have you gone to Watsonville and asked them if they're satisfied with this or scots Valley? In terms of safe on 17. I mean, for example, I see safe on 17. I Considered 25,000 a paltry amount To help Ensure safety for the CHP the additional amount that we pay officers to kind of Patrol that very very dangerous road yet, you know Cruise 511 that virtually nobody uses because of ways and Google Maps and so forth is receiving 200,000 so I'm uncomfortable with us deciding on a five-year plan and having you know a 15 20 30 minute conversation about that This should be where it comes in my mind. It comes before us. We ruminate a little bit on it We discuss it We bring it back to our respective cities or groups or communities and say does this comport with what your interests are? This is staff centric kind of from a top down coming down and saying well This is what we believe but have you listened to the people specific I haven't seen any meetings in scots Valley based on this I don't know if maybe you did in Pajaro Valley or other places But this is too important for us to kind of just rely on a staff recommendation and I would feel Uncomfortable approving such a thing without further discussion. Does that make sense sure? Let me remind you of the process that we use so initially in April we went to all of the commission's advisory committees which are made up of representatives from Different districts within our county as well as public agency staff Our bicycle committee our elderly and disabled transportation advisory committee and our inner agency technical advisory committee I'll have reviewed the five-year plans the commission also reviewed the preliminary five-year plans at your last board meeting in May And so through that process that is how the five-year plans were developed We did have public hearing notices and local newspapers about today's meeting our our regional transportation commission website Includes information on measure D. Everyone that signed up for e-news Either on the highway the San Lorenzo Valley the rail The trail project all should have received an email about today's public hearing and the five-year plans as well So that's our basic public outreach efforts overall the measure D expenditure plan was Pretty well vetted through the community and many many meetings went into for two years to determine What would go into that expenditure plan? And it was through that process that projects like the safe on 17 and the cruise 5 1 1 program and highway 1 auxiliary lanes and the rail quarter construction projects were identified committee meetings with advisory groups and elected advisory groups for the most part Is not a robust discussion on what specifically should happen I could see it maybe for a one-year plan before a total five-year plan in which you know You have one meeting and a few discussions, but it's not robust enough Okay, we have you don't drill down enough on a meeting like this even with public input here to make an informed decision so What I would like to see is that we don't take a vote on this today that we we look at it more closely And come to our communities talk a little bit about what it offers instead of just kind of saying well, this is good Because I just don't feel comfortable doing a five-year promotion without the Ongoing conversation One point I would like to clarify is that years two through five of the plan as noted in the staff report are Preliminary and this is just showing how we anticipate using the funds But every year the Commission does refresh this five-year plan Other questions mr. Caput once the last time that We actually had a meeting here in Watsonville Concerning the allocation of money from measure D We have worked with we have attended meetings at Watsonville City Council And this did come up there, and we are working with City of Watsonville staff to return with an overall presentation on measure D The highway projects were one topic that Was especially a focus of that meeting Right, but most of it is either staff or city leaders Once the last time we had a meeting that involved all of the people that have showed up today We do have meetings in the city of Watsonville three to five times a year the regional transportation I wouldn't one was the last one the last one was on Tuesday the elderly and disabled transportation advisory committee met here in Watsonville and How many people showed up from the community? I apologize. I wasn't at the meeting. I can't tell you that I guess the problem I'm having too is maybe more public input. We need the community to actually Be able to voice their concerns on how the money is going to be spent We would happily accept your suggestions on how to do more outreach to the community about 4,000 people received probably the e-news on this meeting in this public hearing I'm concurring with what the public has to say in terms of the committee as an example Monterey Bay Community Power has an advisory committee and it was brought up with people in the audience like this to say that We really want to have more involved in the in the overall public policy. That's here We had 62 applicants and it was for 11 positions and they will help with the future of the direction with Monterey Bay Community Power is very impressive the number of applications that we received and it's upfront before the money is spent or allocated and I know that this may take a back step But I think that this is a time for making sure that we're making the right steps and that we do have some inclusion with somebody outside of our Voted body that's up here And again, I'm coming in this new so I think that I'm coming with this whole outside perspective instead of how things have progressed to this point and That's why I think that there are valid comments that were made about that For the the community involvement. I have asked also multiple times for the actual formula that tells city of Watsonville What we're getting out of this measure? We were told that this is helpful We know that we have made a tremendous sacrifice of the money from measure D That is supposed to go to different projects that were to offset Moving forward on the corridor In terms of how we want and relieving what type of traffic so at the sacrifice of Watsonville giving up a tremendous amount of the money It's really important that we actually Allow the community to see how that's done I know that we'll get some feedback and why we're slow at different things But if that committee was aware of where we are with that progress It might cut down on a lot of the controversy that we're doing on this particular commission when we're getting One side or the other instead of trying to find some middle ground there And I think that you'd be able to get more collective buy-in if we were able to have a bit more Involvement in the public with that process to be used and again, there's some good examples of how that's done and Five years out and they get to look in hindsight of how the money was spent It does make sense for them to be a bit inclusive to understand the process And then maybe that will help with some of the friction that we have with coming in they love this or they hate it And we'll get more buy-in I believe Mr.. Rockin With all due respect to my colleagues We've had years in which we've been discussing how this money should be spent before we actually put the plan together The public was deeply involved in that then we've had over a month in which we've had this exact plan in front of us and People had an opportunity to I read the thing carefully when I reviewed for today I looked at has something changed. What is there? Is there something that's different than what the public's been told for the last Two years about where the money's going. I don't see it Basically, everything is pretty much in line with what people have been expecting The public have often been beating us up because we spent so long talking about issues And there's no actual improvement out on the streets that includes at least two of my colleagues this morning Who've pushed hard on this question? Why do we keep talking about things? Where's the improvements to people voted for in? 2016 so I don't think we should put this off further I think we should hear from the public today if they perceive that there's something Wrong in the way we're spending this it doesn't comport with what we told them We would do when measure D was put in front of them. We should respond to that It's possible that in the hearing will discover something that's so out of line that we didn't catch ourselves that we need to then put It off but in the abstract notion that we should just give people more time for more discussion to talk about something We've been hashing over for two years. That would be a real mistake in my mind Mr. Bertrand Yeah, thanks for your responses and Detailing the definite public involvement. I do have a suggestion. I would certainly welcome a presentation in capital so I Don't know what the other cities would feel but that would be another way to get the word out and I also understand It's basically two in the next three years after that or are going to be refined So I think that's maybe not a five-year plan because you're reiterating it all time Have a quick mr. Johnson with respect to my cohort speaking about Involvement measure D was in November of 2016 was viewed from 30,000 feet They people agreed with the general Parameters of what measure D stood for You may have heard of the phrase of the devils in the details and the details here have not been fully Explained they haven't been fully Conversed and you know, it's one thing to say, you know, basically we're On highway one. We're gonna spend 1.5 million and the fourth year 12 million or whatever. What does that mean? Okay, we've never had a full discussion and in two years Most of our conversation has not been about the things that are really meaningful to people as far as quote to get The county moving again. Maybe you remember that phrase, but we've talked about rail trail. We've talked about Pathways and so forth. We haven't had a robust discussion about all the things that are pertinent for getting this county moving again So I agree with my other colleagues here in terms of slowing down Look a little drill down a little bit more to what this really means and see if it's meaningful to the people that it affects That's where I'm at well, I'll just add my comments that The staff responsibilities present us with this information. We are representative of the public It is our job to also meet with our constituencies and talk to them about these issues I know that I meet regularly with my constituents and at some of the meetings over the last month We've talked about how we're spending our transportation money I encourage my colleagues to use the avenues that they have whether they be at their city council meetings at Community meetings or asking for presentations the point of getting this information a month ahead of time was to provide Opportunity to engage the public in this conversation The measure D was not created out of out of you know grabbed out of the air it was a it was there was a robust discussion about how to do it and This Commission has talked In the past year about the highway several times we have talked about local streets if we've approved Millions of dollars for local streets coming from plans from city councils. We have Talked about transit. We have talked about the rail trail and you know, we're gonna talk later today about about the rail line So I think it's a misnomer to say that we're not talking about the things that people care about But we have a responsibilities at leaders in the community to engage the public about this And and to to suggest other ways that you think the staff can be I think that's great But that's the why we got it a month ahead of time before we held this public hearing so it's you can look retrospectively about what you didn't do over the last month or you can think in the future about what you Can do to better educate the people that we represent about the decisions that we make here at the regional transportation Commission Chair so embedded in those comments as a subtext that you represent your people well and nobody else on this commission does so Yeah, well Mr. Johnson, I'm trying to say that I'm going out trying to educate the people that I Represent about what's going on and and to the idea that you haven't done that in the last month and you criticize the staff For not engaging that conversation. I think you're placing the wrong emphasis. Well, that's you that's your opinion But it's misplaced. Well, you don't I understand that you don't share it. Mr. Chair Mr.. Rackin I would offer to my colleague that if you think you have the votes to put this off Make a motion to do so you have every right to do so put off the hearing Get some more input in other ways and see if it's gonna happen. I don't think the public wants this put off I think they want to see some money spent on improving transportation in the county Mr. Bertrand I'm gonna vote yes for this not because I disagree with you Randy I think we always have to do a better job getting out to the public and getting that input in that feedback It's a task that's never-ending for any one of us and it's almost an imperfect Challenge because it's so difficult to do but I saw Rachel write down that the suggestion of coming to city council Capitably very willing to have that opportunity. We have pretty good attendance at our meetings So I think a lot of cities have that too and I'd like to move that we accept this report Well, we have to have a public hearing first Miss Chase I just want to say that I am The representative of Metro on this body, but I also serve on the Santa Cruz City Council and in both of those Bodies we have had multiple discussions about our measure D allocations on many occasions that showed up on our agenda many times So there has been many opportunities for the public to engage on the allocations That's going to Metro and that is going to the City of Santa Cruz And I feel comfortable and confident that we have engaged the public on those issues And so I will support this item today Chair no So given so given that I'm trying to get to the public here. I know yeah, okay certain parameters and guidelines here so If that's the case and people want to move that eventually Will this commission be open to changes that are on this list here if that's the case maybe we can agree to move forward well, that's the point of the public hearing is that is to Receive input and then we are going to vote on this plan. So that's that that's what we're going to be doing Mr. Caput and then mr. Rockin Yeah, we're dealing with the sales tax which Is everybody pays into it? Okay, then all of a sudden instead of the allocation of money for measure D It's going to go on road miles rather than population So that's where South County Does get a short You know they get the shortage So what I'm getting at here is that when you have a sales tax You have poor people rich people and everybody pays into it and we do have a lower income Average by far in South County and they're putting in a lot of money and they want to make sure that they're represented So I don't see anything wrong with putting this off and looking at it. We're now starting to get specific rather than general information and I think People want to know that they're getting what they voted for and That's that's what is so important about getting more neighborhood and more community involvement So it's the people showing up here today is quite remarkable I haven't seen this many people in the council chambers in quite a while. So Are the people being listened to or do they when they go to a meeting? Do they just get The staff recommendation just keep keeps coming back the same. We don't know that We want to make sure that when people are speaking up that they're actually heard and something does change The problem I have here with what they're saying is maybe we can change it later The time to change it would be right now. It wouldn't be later Mr. Chanderu, could you remind us the process we went to for the formulation of the of the allocations by jurisdiction? Yeah, the the local road money the 30% of of measure D was negotiated between the cities and the county and the formula that we ended up with included road miles population and return to source By different percentages. I don't recall the exact percentages, but but road miles in population were the two strongest weighted Criteria for that and that was negotiated and and I remember working with this the City manager of Watsonville at the time and he was very satisfied with the outcome So I think that it was an equitable way of distributing the money and that formula was in the ballot text It was in the ballot text. It is it is part of the measure and it's in the ordinance. Yes All right, mr. Rockin As our staff presenter pointed out Where's the decision we make today following the public hearing will? Probably be not Changeable for the first year but in years to three five in the plan if something changes or the work things happen We'll still be in a position where those things could be modified And so I suggest again to my colleagues that you can hear from the public if the public tells us for example If others share Randy's view that with the 511 system is not very helpful or something Commission is quite capable of changing that after the public hearing Or anything else. I'm just picking one example and My view is we ought to get this thing done Then here from the public make any changes we want to make after we've heard from them Approve the five-year plan Allow our staff to proceed actually Building things and doing things to get the county moving on the first year of the plan And then as we see things change in years two through five if necessary will modify it and figure out This could be different something in some different way I don't think this is like sticking us with a plan that can't be modified over the next five years With the insufficient information from the public. I think the reality is we've done a pretty good outreach job We haven't got a lot of feedback on it because I don't think what's been done here is very controversial But again, if there's something that people don't like you can vote against it in the plan you can modify the plan We're not we're not you this is not the only plan we can approve you can take money out of two five You know that the five kept forgetting the numbers. I don't use that thing myself But Some part of the plan and move it to another another column Or you could decide that you want to put take money out of the first year of the plan and wait longer to spend money In later years when we know more or things have changed or something But I think we should proceed with that process after hearing from the public rather than sort of debating whether we know enough to do Anything at all and once again discuss things further and not spend money improving things Well, since we've moved past the question part of the About the actual plan. Why don't we open up the public hearing here from the public? And then we can come back and make decisions about how we want what we want to do on this item. Thank you I just we have a lot of items here today is there are there are many people who want to speak about this plan Is your hands really high? Okay, so we're going to give everybody two minutes to speak. Okay, Brian people's trail now So don't hold this against Rachel. She brought me in 20 years ago. So Good job Rachel bringing me into this involvement here. I just want to keep reminding her of that I Would say that no a plan the train people have always said hey the plan is a train And so no this organization doesn't shift from a plan I don't agree with building a trail for a future train And that's what you're doing on segment seven and additional design work But probably the most important thing I want this commission to answer is bonding. I don't think you can bond This measure I don't think so and I'd hope that legal counsel would come out with a statement That you can go out for a bond your five-year plan is Money coming in cash flow coming in but you have no plans for a bond because I don't think you can legally do it So I wish that you would have legal counsel come out and specifically say we can do a bond and then show in your plan When are you gonna do a bond because that's what you sold us on you said we're going to go out. We're a self-help County We're gonna go and get more money from the state in order to do that. You have to be held the bond Where's the bond? Please have legal counsel address that Good morning. Good morning. My name is Monica McGuire. I've lived in Santa Cruz 21 years and been a sideline participant for the same reason most other people are and Mr. Rodkin I was surprised that you exaggerated and mr. Leopold that you made assumptions according to what mr. Johnson said It is very very difficult for people to discern that a elderly meeting by the RTC is supposed to be our public time to come And speak about something or take the time out of our busy schedules to learn as I have done and again shown up at a Daytime meeting to do which is very difficult and you do not have a significant portion of the county Who would like to be here because of the times that you hold meetings and the short times that you allow for public input overall? I asked that each member of the panel here say how many meetings They have had and where to get public input on this in the last month mr. Mulhorn I'd like to know about district 2 please because I saw nothing about it where I could come ahead of time and give My input which I really want to give because I see tremendous problems in the fact that the RTC continues to show rail-oriented Demonstrations as well. I want to know when's the last time you showed one of the personal rapid transit sort as far as I can tell with A thousand people I've talked to about this in the last few months. There are incredible interests in the more modern and carefully capable of Santa Cruz Ideas in something like a simple monorail with small podcars that don't require stations and don't require Rebuilding 24 bridges and trestles. There are so many aspects of monetary expenditure That wind up under the surface devil in the details exactly as mr. Johnson Perfectly said and I asked that you care that it's so difficult to get public input that you not put people down On your own panel without even knowing what they've done yet Please find the way to find new input from the public. I have received nothing from my letters except Thank you so much. We'll give this to the RTC never an answered question. Thank you Good morning. Good morning. My name is Rick Clevel. I moved here on in December 15th 1990 I'm a relative newcomer. I Cannot believe that Santa Cruz the future facing County where I have spent much of my life Embracing a 200 year old technology to transport toxic materials across a pristine Landscape, there is no reason to do this though. We have an item Allow me to finish my statement. Then I'm not gonna allow you to come back later and make a comment as well I'm we have an item about about what you want to speak. It's the next item Okay, so I'm I want to give you a chance to speak. I'm just trying to keep to the things that are a part of this plan Okay, all right. Well, I'll come sure I come back for the next round there. It'll be it'll be the next item. All right. Thank you Hello, I'm Colleen Douglas. I've been in Santa Cruz residents since the 70s. I think that we must do something and I would like confirmation about the the fact that you can Spend money for a year and then totally change it not just modify here and there there is as we know There's so many different ideas that people have That we're in the middle of a changing time as far as I can tell and We need to be able to change but we also need to do something So I agree that we need to do something so I would support if we can do something for a year and move ahead With the ability to really change it. I'm not clear that you can really change it That's not clear to me like, you know, if there's I've been a rail supporter the whole time But I am willing to have buses there instead of rail for example so There are lots of different ideas floating around and as long as we can change it I would support going ahead for right now. Thank you. Thank you Good morning. Good morning again Peter Stanger here the Monterey Bay scenic sanctuary trail segment 18 is part of this and I Feel it's really a bad plan to have a bike lane on the front of the buildings on Beach Street And then have a bike trail on the back of the buildings. This makes no sense There's active transportation routes already in Watsonville the lack of a few key elements Keep the complete enjoyment for pedestrians and cyclists and nature enthusiasts would be on the wetlands Yet the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation staff is leading the commissioners down the wrong road They want you to Embrace this segment 18 of the scenic sanctuary trail Segment 18 is in the industrial part of the city. Yes, it'll be nice for the railroad But it is counterproductive to the safe and enjoyable Transportation of the citizens of Watsonville the resident general areas are already near Watsonville Slew strew slew and harkenslew all of which have trails partially or wholly completed The existing plans to build out the connecting trails and bridges that are already planned Would connect the residential areas better than the work plan by segment 18 But the residents don't need to go there. They don't want to go over to the Railroad tracks or even be near it to get to their homes in their schools. The Watsonville wetlands trails can more Easily be an enjoyable Transportation route for the citizens of Watsonville a thousand times better than putting segment 18 in as being proposed The prioritizing a segment 18 over the buildout of the trails and bridges of Watsonville wetlands is very unwise The Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission found funding for the Santa Cruz Yacht Harbor project Yet, I believe they should be able to find it for the Watsonville wetlands trails and build and bridges build out Good morning. My name is Kathy Marino I'm a lifelong resident Santa Cruz County and I agree with mr. Rottkin and mr. Leopold the five-year plan the the RTC Commission information all of your contacts all of your meetings have been available online the public's been notified they'd have had ample time to research to provide their opinions to you and their suggestions to you and I'm urging you to not let the apathy of the many Take down or slow us up. We need to move forward with measure defunding and I like your plan your fight your plan I like that after here is adjustable and thank you for your diligence. Thank you Good morning. Good morning. I wasn't planning on speaking on this item, but Thank you Michael st. Campaign for sustainable transportation Thank Commissioner Gomez for bringing up the community advisory council I was one of the people along with Joe Jordan here and maybe some others in the audience that were part of a coalition that developed or helped develop this community advisory council took about three to four months and Fortunately, Monterey Bay Community Power was very open to this idea and I think it's going to be a wonderful thing We had approached the RTC a Sustainable transportation and we spoke with mr. Dondaro About forming some type of committee of this to bring public input to the board here And it was basically turned down and the argument was well There's too much static from one side versus the other don't see how that's going to work Well, that's always going to be the case in a lot of situations So as another conduit into this board here, we could have some type of advisory committee And of course not a decision-making but just input as much as you guys have input at the same time There would be just basically a chairman that would bring this input from the committee the committee brings the input from the community and I think it's would be a very valuable process and I want to kind of back mr. Johnson mr. Caput and Miss Gomez for what they do you need the input? I think you could probably divide the money for the first year and then maybe get this advisory committee going. Thank you Morning. Good morning commission. My name is yonica Strauss I'm the executive director of bike Santa Cruz County, and we are thrilled to see these projects moving forward Both the rail trail and the San Lorenzo Valley corridor plan We are also thrilled that we have money to put towards these projects. So thank you for that We've been advocating for bike Santa Cruz County has been advocating for the rail trail for more than 15 years And we are very excited to see the groundbreaking this year And so thank you for continuing to support building the trail as soon as possible Thank you Good morning. Oh, Josh Stevens Santa Cruz City resident I wanted to say that so far in reviewing the measure D plan I'd say most of the line items are Looking quite solid I do have feel that it It also supports our Metro bus services. I do I Feel however that as the BYD bid got pulled out to get electric buses for the highway 17 corridor And that discussion for CNG buses are being done that a greener alternative should be considered either there or anywhere within the local routes to Keep advancing the greenhouse gas reduction agenda This there needs to also be more discussion of Implementing bus tracking if there's a possible budgeting within that category as that'll become a crucial component to cruise 5 on 1 services We are also still not using the text alert system for Metro as often as we should as important delays still go un Unimformed to the public I've noticed Especially with regards to highway 17 service highway 17 bus service also Is in dire need of more service on the weekends as packed buses and roads Tend to exacerbate the strain of capacity HOV lanes if those get considered within highway 1 improvements Consider the Houston model where they have a one Lane HOV lane that reverses with the commute direction based off time of day They have gates to allow this a flow of traffic and would save the cost of an and right of way space of two lanes Also, and finally for the measure D portion. We got to put that rail use portion to use right away It's the storms that took it out happened in like 2016 2017 and it's still it's still sitting there. So let's get these funds put to use. Thank you Good morning Good morning Chair Leopold and fellow commissioners great job Thank you for the work you're doing on behalf of everyone who lives in the Santa Cruz County and getting our County moving again And thanks to the RTC staff terrific job. I've spent some time with the five-year plan. I love it I think you should adopt it. I have one suggestion a couple of months ago RTC staff suggested that Some measure D funds could be leveraged against SB 1 funds to study the possibility of replacing the trestle in Capitola with a new trestle that would support both rail and trail and Then would avoid the detour through the village. That's currently in the master plan I would suggest that you take item to align item 12 in the rail trail budget and Allocate say $50,000 for your staff to explore this very exciting possibility for the future I would suggest taking it out of one of the first year or two budget allocations It looks like you got about 1.2 1.3 million there over the next three years Seems like 50,000 towards that idea would be money well spent and that's all I have to say. Thank you Thank you. Good morning Good morning. I'm about you sweats and it seems to be important to say how long I've been here I've been here since January 1970. So probably Guy weren't even born yet anyway, I Would like to suggest something Mr. Dondaro is retiring fairly soon is my understanding and I get the impression that Mr. Dondaro is very much in favor of the train part keeping the rails I would like a fresh perspective I would like somebody with a big calculator and add up all the costs that would be involved new Trestles new this new that the ties need to be replaced everything needs to be replaced if you want to do electric trains I want to know where all this electricity is coming from you're going to have wires in our beautiful senior corridor So, please take a take a moment and wait for mr. Dondaro's replacement and then revisit this Thank you Mr. Dondaro, I wish you a wonderful retirement Good morning. I'm Kerry Pico live in Aptos. I really don't I'm not going to speak about any particular issue I want you to know of the education of the public is I actually don't have a clue what the RTC is doing with measure D funds other than The topic of the rail trail thing. We don't hear about what you're working on the freeway The only thing I do see quite honestly are these big measure D signs next to the new green bike paths Which me as a resident I care about getting my streets I care about getting the highway Opened up between Watsonville and Santa Cruz since I see the traffic there But my point is I don't hear the plants coming out. I don't hear the focus on those things I just hear the noise that the RTC puts out on the next door that they're using to debate Again, the rail trail they could be talking about the other issues that we should be talking about in general so I'm just telling you're not doing a good job of Really addressing the whole picture you're distracted with this rail trail issue and I sure hope you get Back to focus. Thank you good morning Nancy bill is itch and I'm currently on the Watsonville city council and you know, I I go to Santa Cruz frequently I think we all do And I supported measure D. I I put an opinion out in both local no space newspapers And that was two years ago And I keep thinking when are we going to do something about the traffic? When are we going to do something about these lanes? I keep hearing. Oh, we have to have HOV lanes. We have to have this we have to have that What did we do on the other side right when you get in all that traffic and all of a sudden you get close to Santa Cruz three lanes are there everything opens up and it's great How long do we have to wait just to get an additional lane on each side? down here In fact, I think it should be expanded to larkin valley road, but I was told there isn't any money You know, we can't do it. We don't we stop at state park drive But please let's get going Measure D funds should be here to expand highway one so people don't have to continue this every single day Most of you live in north county. So you don't do that commute But many people do And it's just not fair that here we are In south county waiting to go forward waiting. It takes a 20 minute drive takes you an hour hour and a half You never are sure if you're going to get where you need to go. I hear people talk about it all the time I have a doctor's appointment. Oh, I was late a half an hour. Then my appointment got canceled We just don't know. Can we just move on and get highway one expanded at least as far as state park drive And eventually because we have sp1 funds, let's get down to larkin valley road. Thank you Good morning Morning, my name is ann nyland. I'm a santa cruz county resident and I am not a public speaker So please excuse me if I'm shaky. I'm a mother. I'm a student at cabrillo. I'm a journalist I work with friday night live They among other things work to affect positive change in safe driving city ordinances And I am I'm also a driving instructor From a student perspective recently cabrillo had a vote on whether or not to maintain funding for low-income Bus passes and the student involvement in this vote was record-breaking Students are They use public transportation. They need it and they take action to maintain it As a driving instructor, I can tell you that some students are cyclists and other students hate cyclists But regardless of their dance on Cyclists our communities youth They don't drive safely around cyclists and as a mother who you know, I'm on my bike a lot with my daughter Who's five and three quarters that three quarters is really important I can tell you it's scary out there on the road and if we don't maintain the bike lanes or expand the bike lanes and If we don't support the bike lanes, we are going to continue to have these atrocious cycling deaths and injury rates of our state Our culture of Santa Cruz is in flux and I urge you to consider supporting something that will Strengthen our community not just physically Please consider the bike path for your rail corridor. It's affordable and Will You know be there before my daughter is 80. Thanks Good morning Good morning. Gail McNulty, Santa Cruz county greenway. Um, first of all, I would like to Thank all of you. I mean, this is a ton of work that goes into a meeting like this. It's a 437 page agenda Fully stocked of with regular agenda items that as we know would have been on last week's agenda the regular Regularly scheduled meeting that this would have been had it been on the first Thursday of the month These are normally scheduled And especially those of you that sit on city councils and work full-time jobs beyond this It's a near impossible task to get through the amount of reading that I'm sure you have each week And this is of course just one of the many committees you sit on. So thank you for that I would like to suggest that if you do intend to vote on this today You switch the order of your agenda because the next item will actually directly negate Several of the things you're about to vote on in this particular item. For instance Segments nine and ten of the rail trail You would need approval from the rail operator to actually do anything there Even the highway actually the h o v lines that are considered in the ucis You would need permission from the rail operator in order to actually do any of those changes on the highway because the rail bridges Clearly go across in aptos So, um, this is really a good reason to table this vote And see how the following vote goes because you may be preempting your own rights with the following vote. Thank you Good morning. Good morning. My name is nick polayich. I'm a watsonville resident and I walked here So it was working great. They didn't use any gasoline or get stuck in traffic I've been involved in politics for 20 years local county state federal. I've worked on tons of issues Measure d was the biggest line con job I ever seen in my life And I've worked on a lot of issues Those fancy mailers that were sent out from the san francisco firm design didn't even say sales tax in there How can you push this on the people of 500 million dollars a 500 000 dollar campaign and you can't spell sales tax? Come on I mean, that's a con job Talk about devils in the details. It's the deceit is in the devil So I can come here and bash on all this election was held. It passed You tricked the people. I've heard I've seen some of you politicians before at your various Bodies and you tell something that of course is not true. That's politics. I get it campaign happened You won you got the money now. You got to spend the money Got to be a lot of arguments in it. Well, I'm not going to bother with that now instead I just got a simple technical question I was looking at this service and supplies for the 2018 And I see 516 thousand dollars I would just like a description of what we got for service and supplies of 516 thousand just for clarity I'm not passionate or anything like that at least not yet But I would just like to at least have an explanation of that. Thank you. Thank you Good morning. Good morning. Berry scott. I live in aptos and as as You all look at expenditures over the next five and ten and thirty years I wanted to point out two documents that are out there that I I'm pretty sure not all of you are familiar with in the The first a minor document is a letter from the california coastal commission to ambag That describes the value of our existing rail infrastructure And the trail and it's it's very clear Document eight pages long the other document is a state rail plan And there's an executive summary that's an easy read and it describes a vision for moving trips from highways very explicitly Moving from highways to railways. It describes 137 billion dollars coming Between now and 2040 to build a expanded state rail network. They had a presentation I think in november to the rtc here It and and I just want to say the our contribution to that 137 billion is some 950 million Which will be spent somewhere we could apply for it or somebody else could apply for it But that's money that we're going to be putting in that's our population weighted share that we could either use Perhaps some of it locally or let go to other counties to use. Thank you. Thanks Good morning Good morning. My name is ashley win and I live in las alva beach the The issue that I see that I don't see addressed in the five-year plan Is the fair allegation Of the funds from measure d in terms of each segment of the coastal rail Rail Trail coastal trail So right now it looks like we're spending five dollars In santa cruz or the northern part of the county to one dollar in the south south part of the county I would like to see that the measure d funds are fairly allocated by segment At the outset so we don't spend all the funds On one part of the county to the detriment of the rest of the county That's my first point. My second point is Miss billisage is right about getting measure d funds active on The auxiliary lanes on highway one It's ironic that the part of the county that opposed widening highway one Is the part of the county that benefits the most from where it was widened and that's the only part that works Everybody that lives from capitol a south Is being hurt every day by highway one And we need to fix highway one As soon as possible and so I would urge you to get to work on the measure d funds and the highway. Thank you Hi, I'm Lara Bezic And I'm not going to talk about the greenway or the transportation issue because I believe that These companies have done a really good job At confusing the issue and making this about transportation of people And it's actually about new industrial development and opening the doors and laying out the welcome mat for these dirty Gas coal or you know gas oil and chemical industries to come That's probably the next item that you want to talk to about it. It's about the actual progressive rail Contract, okay, so okay, so it's the next item on the agenda. I'll wait Good morning I'm from felton And I have to admit I'm the product of relentless efforts On the part of the staff of the regional transportation Um to get me involved in the highway nine improvement ideas and I came here today again Following an email following an extensive article in the sentinel because I wanted to see you approve The improvements that are planned for felton I I live one mile from the high school from the from the complex of high school middle school and elementary school My daughter completed School there unfortunately when she was in high school She couldn't either walk nor ride her bike one mile From downtown felton to the campus So this has been a wonderful development in our community And I came today thinking I was going to witness the approval of it That's what my hope is. Thank you you Good morning. Uh, good morning chair commissioners christ neider assistant director public works city of santa cruz Thank you very much for considering our request for some additional funding for the trail maintenance And the reason that that has increased and it's Essentially an estimate of half of our cost For maintaining the trail that the city is covering the other cost will be for because of Invasive weed abatement additional trash collection and things like that costs are anticipated to go up A couple of comments. Thank you very much for measure d for the voters This is a great source of funding for matching transportation grants That's the biggest thing that I see for the city and for The other agencies we are getting more transportation grants We recently got a safe routes to soul grant because we had measure d funding. We wouldn't have been able to apply without it Secondly bond funding is an important way to fund large projects. We recently spent 10 years of measure d funding or measure h funding, which is a city gas tax or sales tax On three years of paving streets. So we we improved streets for three years We spent 14 million dollars because we were able to bond for that money And so i'm anticipating that the rtc will do the same But it's not necessarily so the most important part is attracting transportation grants and this is really helping us to do that Thank you. Thank you Good morning. Good morning commissioners monoconic. I was born here in 1985 I think there you know the issue I have with the five-year plan It's the same issue I had with the the five-year plan last year Is that it seems like we're just really continuing the process of infrastructure building just one little piece at a time That's the strategy that we've had slung as i've been alive And it seems to be the same strategy we were pursuing today and we're not getting anywhere I think we really need money in the plan for urban prototyping right and you heard traffic's a problem today You heard the mention that you know the a third lane going with traffic is a great Solution that many cities like houston use Why don't we use that today? I got here from downtown santa Cruz in 20 minutes I knew I could I you know wait till the last minute everyone going the other direction is waiting an hour and a half Let's switch the lane today. They do this on highway five when it's under construction You put a little asphalt between And you have now a third lane going in the direction of traffic That's the point is we can urban prototype this and begin running express buses immediately This is a solution we could do in six months or less That's the kind of thinking we need. What can we do fast? Thank you Is there anyone else who'd like to address us about the measure d plan? Then I will close the public hearing and turn to my colleagues, uh, mr. Rockin I wanted to start by responding to some of the questions people had asked Not in the order of importance necessarily one of the comments early comments was about segment 18 on the Monterey Bay Sanctuary trail And whether that was the right place to put the the trail and whether there were other alternatives that were better I wanted to point out that uh, the Monterey Bay Sanctuary trail Plan depends upon local agencies Watsonville city council for example Telling people what they want where they wanted that trail to go and what form it would take that wasn't imposed on Watsonville It came from the city council in Watsonville And similarly in Santa Cruz and other places And that's been in place for 20 years And so to now to come along and decide no we've been talking about that trail for 20 years slowly working on little pieces of it And now we should Throw the whole thing out and start with a new plan in some other way Seems to me not a wise idea If it if it should happen City council in Watsonville still has the ability to stop that on some level It shouldn't be up to the rtc to like make that happen Because it's I think that's an issue that should be about local control Each city decided where they wanted that trail to go in their community and so forth second issue Just to know that the metro is planning to spend it's going to cost about a million dollars Is planning to have a real-time tracking system GPS system so we know where all of our buses are and where people get on and off the bus It's been basically impossible to do a lot of good planning with not knowing where people get on and off the buses And all we depend upon is we we know how many people got on and how many people You know got charged for the ride, but not necessarily where the on and off Are so it's difficult to plan routes and to figure out backups and deal with crisis issues But we are planning to in the next year. We do have the money We hope and we were planning to make that happen um A number of comments had to do with widening highway one And I just want to remind people, but maybe they are new to the county or maybe they've just forgotten but Uh, it cost about a half literally a half a billion dollars for an h o v lane and we try I supported I first opposed it and then and by the way the citizens citizens of santa cruz voted for um The highway widening in a higher percentage than the citizens of aptos So I you know that may be because the citizens santa cruz don't like widening highways much But they're willing to pay taxes where the people in aptos generally vote no on most taxes So for whatever reason I don't you shouldn't be blaming the city of santa cruz for the failure of the h o v measures But we put measures on the ballot. We tried really hard We spent years working on h o v and the reason why is it cost a half a billion dollars? Because you have to widen every bridge To make an h o v lane work the last speaker's idea that we should just move ahead and get a third lane and make that Thing happen I first I thought he was suggesting that we maybe change the lanes so that there are three lanes which you can do Three lanes moving one direction in the morning and the different three lanes in the afternoon That that's a possibility. There's things we should think about but the idea that you but but But Instantaneous planning by one person But but if you but if you try if you think you're going to have a through lane and h o v lane Which will allow buses to go really really quickly and people in carpools to get there faster and Encourage other people to see everybody passing them by which would be a great idea because eventually I changed my views and supported the h o v lane unfortunately It failed at the ballot It several measures never even got to the ballot because people bailed from them earlier on And so it's not something that the r.t.c. Can just make happen We ended up with the measure d because all the failures an initial plan wasn't Essentially for an h o v lane to fix the traffic on highway one and we were unable to do that as a county fred Culey put together a committee with millions of people that met forever and was unsuccessful Many attempts were made and every lots of people thought it was a great idea But they were not willing to spend it was it would have been a half-send sales tax for that purpose before measure d happened And that would have been a great idea, but we couldn't persuade people to do it So don't blame the r.t.c. That somehow we don't have a h o v lane or that we're taking forever to do it Passing this plan today will allow us to actually get the process moving on the auxiliary lanes Which is not as good as a through lane It's i don't have illusions that it's kind of like totally fix the traffic It's certainly the first part we did by santa Cruz made it a lot better I assume it'd be better in other parts of the of the plan the reason we stopped at state park Is because there's not congestion really that much going going further south In the afternoon and but the reality is With the people of this county didn't support an h o v lane much as it might be a great idea And there's nothing we can do to make that happen And I doubt we're going to get another half-send sales tax to make that happen That's why there's so much and i'm not going to get into the issue. It's the next topic That's one of the reasons there's so much controversy about the rail right of way Because many people think that that might be an option instead of an h o v lane for some kind of mass transit Whether it's a train or a bus or whatever the hell it is That's that's one of the reasons that's such a heated discussion Because we've basically given up on that h o v lane on highway one. It's just impossible to get the money to make it happen Mr. Bertrand Hey, let's let's respect the the commission listen to speakers now This is the chance for the commissioners. Mr. Bertrand. Thank you very much. Mr. Chair so I appreciate Everyone's participation It gives us some feedback and and actually that's important, but we also have to keep order I just want to respond to a couple of things I heard the lady who talked about an issue which actually has been on my mind and that is Some of the different committees that the rtc has are on ours. You can't get to Totally agree with that. I think that's a flaw of the system for a feedback like the bike committee and stuff like that Disability committee So that's why I said immediately that I think a plan should be enforced or put in place So that you actually go to the city So you have more of a direct participation possibility and those are in the evenings. It does require you participate The thing that occurs to me is that Any single change in our pattern streets, etc. Take a long time and I'll give you an example A woman who is on the bike committee Phone me up and said wrote me an email. I responded This took place back and forth for about six or eight months And she was concerned about bromar coming up to 41st That project hasn't been completed, but we just got funded. But by the time it's completed It will have taken probably three years one street That was a project that got funded through the rtc So another example is park avenue, which is on Of the the official bike highway up and down california, which I'm a biker I took that up to washington and over to idaho's but it wasn't on that one the bicentennial We had participation from the public there and I took input about that bike lane It was just a measly little thing. I got expanded to five feet on either side So if you participate in your own community reach out to your representatives and tell them your concerns That's your chance for direct input People do send me emails. I respond to them. I have a lot of meetings last week and a half I've been having meetings on this particular issues coming up. What's the name of it? I can't remember But anyway, it's a big issue and somehow when when you see the importance of it You reach out and you say I want some direct impact here and that's how you do it That's why we are elected Thank you Other mr. Coonerty sure So one, thank you to everyone for coming out today Two, I want to note that there are 25 projects before us for a 9.5 million dollars That's in addition to the millions of dollars being spent by the cities and the metro To improve service this year. There's 4 million more than 4 million dollars To expand highway one To auxiliary lanes all the way to state park There's more than 30 million dollars allocated over the next five years This commission it would be illegal for us to make any Allocations for beyond one year. We're required by law to to to only do it in one year. We're able to leverage funds State and federal funds because of this we're able to bond in cities because of this You're seeing a roadway construction happening all across this county Um Of all the comments over two meetings. There have been two comments about $50,000 for the 511 system $20,000 for the segment 18 Which was brought up today. That's less than 1 percent of what we're talking about today And I mean just sort of as a prelude to the next item To watch this community lose its mind and tear itself apart when we're agreeing about 98 percent of everything and 98 percent of how we Move across this county and the kinds of choices we want to make For my most of my life, there was no agreement between north and south county about the transportation options yet We have past attacks with two-thirds vote That will expand That expands the highway going forward. There was uh, no money for bus service There was very little money for lift line, which is a critical way for the Seniors and the disabled in this community to move around yet this year for the first time we'll have almost 800 thousand dollars to add drivers and an outreach workers I think I mean I we can we can all focus on the on the one or two percent that we disagree with in this case On the less than one percent we disagree with or we can focus on where we're moving together as a county And how we're going to get there and the fact that we have moved Far beyond when I remember all the discussions from 10 years ago about highway one widening And this the acrimony in this community and now we actually have a plan. We have resources and it's being spent I think it's important to keep that context of mind and we can keep Trouting out the same mythologies about north south divides and who's getting what money and when When the plan was all agreed to by every city and the counties when it's clear in the expenditures Where the money is going and that the money is being divided We can keep coming up with conspiracy theories about who's gonna Who's secreting away the money, but we have a we have a plan in front of us on pages 21 dash 9 through 21 dash 15 17 That articulates exactly how and my guess is is if we took a poll Whether it's in this room or in community meetings or online We would agree with 98 percent of how the money is being spent And we should we can focus on what divides us And end up tearing down everything that unites us as we move forward But I would encourage us to focus on some of the good news coming out of this and to figure out how we're going to work Together forward to get all these complicated process projects built As soon as possible. So with that, I will move the staff recommendation Motion by community seconded by Bertrand, uh, mr. Rock and then ms. Kaufman Gomez Not on I have a question of staff Mark Massetti Miller had suggested that we might take 50 000 dollars out of a much larger item that might not miss 50 000 dollars In the first year I mean eventually could possibly be replaced and I wanted that wouldn't know what the staff This was about the capitol a trestle a study to figure out whether there's a way to make that Function in such a way that we wouldn't use streets in capitol or for any whatever we end up Whether it's a bike path or a train or what you know, whatever's happening And I wonder whether uh, what your thoughts are about the the uh sensibility of doing that Um as far as it being consistent with the voter approved expenditure plan I do think it would meet the You know requirements of that expenditure plan and be within the rights of the commission to make that decision I'll defer to my directors if they have any additional comments. Sure. Just uh, just to add to that There is already a a river bridge analysis that's uh, going to be starting soon So it is possible to add some funds to that To include Additional analysis of the capitol the bridge for that For that suggestion and it's true some of the money could could be moved from the river bridge rehabilitation, which is it's also for bridges and and move that over to the Analysis part to do some of that work That's a possibility. I want to move an amendment to the main motion. Maybe it'll be friendly But if not, I'd like to have a vote on an amendment that would do precisely that It's friendly. It would be considered friendly amendment to the to the uh, seconder. So it's the uh, recommended actions plus this uh, moving Ms. McNulty, it's the time for the commissioners to speak so uh, just to get it clear. It's Asking that the one change in this plan that $50,000 $50,000 be moved to look at uh, the capitol uh, trestle for expansion for also adding both trail and and the rail and and No, I mean the point is it's a study. We're not doing anything It's just to figure out whether that's feasible and what it would happen It might not take 50,000 and the issue um My understanding is again and that that would be done in such a way that could be added to the existing study That's already going on that would if that's the staff's way of handling if that'd be fine with me I just want to make sure everybody was clear what that was so Ms. Kaufman Gomez and mr. Caput Yes, I concur too that we can see about shifting a bit of the funds Um, I was actually looking at the cruise 501 to see if that's feasible from that particular bucket of 150 to help shift this over Especially since it's a very minimal kind of a service at this point with all of the technology that really hasn't kept up with where that money is and um Understanding maybe a little bit more how that's being spent and being able to resource Um, just to respond to that it cannot be moved from the cruise 501 bucket That's within the highway corridors Category so those funds are limited to projects that were identified in the expenditure plan for the highway corridors Good. Well, we we do know that they're We we know rtc will find a way to move the funds over in terms of that and the study and not Moving anything but just at least getting us back getting back to us about that particular trestle Now the other thing too is um, you know, I think everybody needs to understand we have a patience level here that moving asphalt concrete planning takes a lot of time and that We need to still see the action though in terms of where this money is we've only had it Maybe a year in terms of that. I like the plan that we've got it. We've got a plan in place for the year And that even though this says five years out it still allows More dialogue with any type of revisions as we're seeing some of the progress being made here And I still encourage us to sort of evolve the committee that's going to be made up Um of the the audit side of the funds to see if we can actually expand that capability for that particular commission For the future so that we can get to Paving now with what we can do with the funds we have to work with as well as Expand the capability for the communication For the community to participate at more flexible times that maybe that committee would be able to offer the time for People to meet and and whatnot And expand the scope of that particular committee So I'm in support of moving forward so we can see some concrete being poured But I also want to make sure that we're very much inclusive of The capability of that particular outside committee Mr. Caput Johnson I think it's wonderful that we have so many people here And I guess what I'm trying to get across here is that the Population of watsonville is different in this in a in a large scale Than the rest of the county So when when people are coming here and saying what's best for south county, what's best for watsonville in the area? It's really It may not be best The the local people do know what's going to help them out and what's going to you know benefit them It would be like myself telling Scots valley what I think is best for them. I have to listen to scots valley. I have to listen to everybody Is Is the car going to be is the automobile going to be the thing that we're going to cater to and and make sure that We have bigger and wider highways in order to get people to move from one place to another Well, we have we have to look at affordable housing. We have to look at the population the age demograph demographics also In in watsonville if And we are seeing some more affordable housing in the rest of the county. I think that that's really good to see But if the affordable housing is going to go here in watsonville Most most people and with the young population we have Their concern is going to and from schools and our elementary schools are full So we're talking about local cars and local Traffic increasing greatly and how many are going to actually benefit from From adding more lanes to the freeway It will help, but it will it will it help for how long How wide can you make a freeway to keep moving traffic? Will it be good for two years? But maybe 10 for 10 years from now won't be good because of a growing population because of more People relying on the automobiles to get around so i'm looking at alternative try types of transportation Uh measure d had some good components Helping out metro wonderful. I think that's a wonderful thing Also local roads where people are you know using every day out in the unincorporated area that's helping a lot too But there are areas that in the future. I think we're going to have to look at it We're going to have to look at it very closely So the other thing is The population of washington is very young and the population of south county Is one of the youngest in the state of california per capita You look at the schools. You look at the routes. You look at parks You look at all kinds of things that we need to do here And also if you look at how many people are here from actually Um south county district four We don't uh, I don't know. We don't have any spanish interpretation A lot of people May not be able to be here today because they're working in the fields We'll see them when we leave here and if we're driving by uh, you know the agriculture areas and we'll see them working out there They're people that are part of the population. They can't vote in many cases because they are here As legal uh residents are they're here on work visas And some are undocumented and a lot of their kids are undocumented also So what i'm getting at is we really have to look at how we're How we think we're benefiting a group or uh an area when we don't live actually in that area And that's why I would think it would be good to have more time get a little bit more clarity On how we're going to address a lot of these problems that we that they're all interconnected And how they affect every part of the county. So I I haven't seen much of a change in any of the plans proposed by uh measure d Since the beginning there might be a little change here A little change there a little bit more money to north county a little bit less over in another part but Right now we have we're down to specifics And I think we're getting close But uh that old promise of we'll change it later to make it fit. I don't buy it anymore I I think we got to look at it and then uh, I would propose that we do have a meeting in the evening And uh, we do have a one here and maybe one in You know scott's valley if they want to have it also because When you get down to how fair and how the money is going to affect a certain area We need a little more clarity right now. Thank you Ms. Kauffman Gomez mr. Johnson and then mr. Bertrand I believe I've already spoken but um, I am sorry I'll move this long because I know we have a long afternoon. Okay. Mr. Johnson. Thank you chair and mr. Bertrand, um I appreciate the comments by my colleague in terms of and it's an old bill, uh, clinton comment, um That uh, it's better to focus more on what unites us than divides us I would quarrel however that it's only a divide of one percent With when I hear the groans that happen in this in this audience I know it's more than one percent because there's a lot of dissension and disagreement in terms of the the I guess the direction of where these monies are being spent I'm also a little disheartened by the fact that Out of all the proposals The only thing that we can look as far as changing is a $50,000 study another study For trestle when there's just so much more out there to do Okay, it's disheartening and it kind of proves my point in terms of We should be you know if we should be doing our job in shifting dollars here. So for example cruise 511 You know embedded in there are things like You know being able to call 511 and make change your route We can't do that here in santa cruz county like you can in other communities They have things like traveler information and people carpooling and whatever But I've asked over the past four or five years. What is the outcome and how what's the Efficacy of this program I they can't tell me okay yet. We're going to spend close to a million dollars over five years on this program yet Safe on 17 where people you know, I would like to see from a chp And we used to have the either excuse me either the captain or the director or the commander of the chp Come here and give us reports on what is the direction of the safety on highway 17? We've noticed that the a number of accidents and the number of fatalities Is directly related to the patrolling there yet. We're only advocating 25 000 I would like to see a shift there. Okay people die when you don't have the right kind of patrol Yet, we're only advocating 25 000 If anything we should shift the 511 from highways from from from that to highway 17 and reverse it Give 511 25 000. Okay, because everybody here I think well, I'm not going to ask to raise your hands But I would assume that if you have a cell phone chances are you're using ways you're using Google maps or whatever to look for those little red lines when you're worried about the traffic, right? So and there are a lot more changes. I don't think I have the votes to kind of go through this Everywhere. I think some of the as mentioned premature Money's being spent until the ucis study is completed We should be we should be talking about that We should be taking some of those things off the table a little bit But no, we're going to add 50 000 for another trestle trestle study. So When I say we need I think a little bit more Debate that's more robust that drills down Um, I guess we can talk about it and say hey, we've done all that But I think the results of this motion prove that we really haven't. Thank you to Bertrand Mr. Bertrand I just want to make sure it's captured that um, Trina Gomez, uh, your your suggestion Was a good one to expand the auditing committee and that way I think we could capture a lot more input and as far as meetings in the evening I think, um, I don't know how that would work But I certainly would go back to my original suggestion and having the city council meetings that usually meet in the evening You know take up reports from the rtc to get that exposure And I also like to say that um, sometimes it's hard to you know, speak out on issues You know, it's a little bit difficult and I want to support Randy, you know, it's sometimes difficult to say what you want to say But you have a perfect right here on this commission to speak what you want. Thank you and Have that input But we all have that right and it's great that everyone's here exercising it. Thank you All right, well, um So there's a motion on the table. Uh, it's been seconded A amendment has been made chair before you go there Can I make a a motion for a friendly amendment to Shift monies from 511 to save on 17 and vice versa They considered a friendly amendment. Uh, it's it's not considered a friendly amendment. Let me and let me explain why um, I think, uh We are increasing we're more than doubling the freeway service patrol on highway 17 from 100,000 to 250,000 Uh, the system management program Uh, I mean we can have rachel talk more about it, but um Increasing our carpool capacity. I think I've pointed this out before It's my understanding that the average car occupancy in Uh in los angeles is like 1.19 People per car and if they could increase it to 1.25 people per car They would solve the uh traffic problems in la And um, I think we are we have a slightly higher car occupancy here But not much and if we could go from 1.25 people per car to 1.3 people per car We could solve the pain that people are feeling Coming in on highway one and so I I I too would like to see better outcomes From our carpool But I think um, it's a small amount of money when you consider how much money we're spending Overall on our freeways to try to get more occupancy in our cars Which would which would immediately solve the problem versus long-term construction projects So it's not a friendly amendment would you care to Uh, uh make a motion. I would like to make a motion on that effect Motion by johnson I'll second it seconded by cap it. Is there any discussion? Question mr If the staff could weigh in maybe rachel is there an allowance to shift money from the 5 1 1 fund to the highway 17 protection fund or The way you made it is that that money wasn't allowed to be touched No, what it would be is that you couldn't move cruise 5 1 1 money from the highway buckets over to a rail or trail bucket Within that you would have the discretion I do want to point out that item 12 on your consent agenda Did include funding for the safe on 17 program So just something for your consideration And that comes from the vehicle registration fees that people pay Okay Actually, I did want to say part of what rachel mentioned the amount that's being shown here for Safe on 17 is an additional amount to what's already Provided through other sources like for example the rtc already provides from the safe program money for the first safe on 17 Cal trance actually spends quite a bit of money on what's happening down the safety and highway 17 It's it's it and the chp also spent other sources of money on that program So it's not that that amount of money shown isn't the only amount of money being spent for safety and highway 17 It was also mentioned of course the free resources patrol program Contributes to to that as well so it is Commissioner Johnson is correct. It is a small amount But it is a small amount that is part of a much larger amount See what drilling down does you get more information Or you just read your packet. It's so uh, uh, you know Um, uh Ms. Naroyan Sorry, I'm new at this. Oh, there we go. Um, I'd also like to add I happen to be working for the state legislature And working for a legislator who represented that part of highway 17 when the program was launched And I was also present at when the program was reviewed a year after it was launched It was incredibly successful It in fact it was seen as one of the most successful safe on You know fill in the blank with your freeway or highway in the country And it actually was one of the most successful multi-jurisdictional Um collaborations, uh, and it did involve many pots of money from many different jurisdictions So this is just a slice of it. It doesn't represent all of it like was mentioned Um, and so it's just it's really important for people to know This is our contribution to it and and not the full amount of money and surprisingly It was incredibly effective with not a lot of money There's there weren't a lot of things that had to be tweaked to make 17 a lot safer and to have that Fatality number go way down. So I feel really confident that and really happy that to see the rtc contributing Ms. Kaufman Gomez, um, it might also be a good timing I know that we have a thick agenda this time and maybe in the future But this might be just something that give us an education, you know Give us a 10 minute presentation on how the money is being allocated how the program works What the effectiveness is and and that way we know how our money is spent wisely on something that's a safety item Particularly as it results to be where that's at. So we do we do an annual report to the commission I think we did it back in january No, I think it was Oh, anyway, it was recently just before you arrived But we we do plan to do that every year and um, we give a very in-depth report But I'll get you a copy of the latest report because there's quite a bit of information in that And there is a quarterly safe on 17 Meeting that goes on that I know I get invited to because I've twice a year twice a year All right, so we have an amendment on the table to move money from the 511 to the To the highway safety patrol All in favor signify by saying aye Aye All opposed no Motion does not carry. So we're back to the original motion Which is the recommended actions plus the one change about the the trestle bridge study All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye any opposed. No So mr. Johnson and mr. Caput is voting. No, but it otherwise passes Uh, so, uh, I know we want to get to our our next item But I'm we're just going to do a five minute break to give us a chance to uh To use the bathroom before we get started on this. So Could we try to have everyone sit down so we can continue with the next item? Uh, mr. Dondero Could all all could all rtc members return We'll now move on to item number 22, which is the santa cruz branch rail line short line operator agreement And consider california environmental quality act findings of exemption Good morning, uh, mr. Mendes Good morning commissioners in the interest of time. I will do my best to make my uh oral staff report brief As as you know in 2012 the rtc after over a decade of negotiation with the new pacific and a lot of due diligence and extensive public input The rtc purchased the santa cruz branch rail line using state Rail and transit funds to preserve the rail line for transport or transportation as a transportation corridor continue freight service Implement recreational rail service and build a bike and pedestrian path next to the rail line And the rtc established a framework to try to minimize Its liability by ensuring that it would not become a common carrier for rail service Unfortunately the uh carrier for rail service currently has become very unreliable and the rtc decided to uh Go through a process of trying to Select a replacement Operator and the rtc decided on negotiating With progressive rail for a new agreement for rail service on the on the rail line now the rtc completes negotiations on this draft agreement And and release the draft agreement for public Review on may 9th 2018 Now the rtc staff along with the rtc's ad hoc committee and the rtc as a whole Approach the negotiations With certain priorities including ensuring that the agreement allows the rtc the ability to implement whatever decision the rtc may take At the end of the unified corridor investment study Ensuring that the agreement meets the requirements of the state and federal regulatory and funding agencies ensuring that the agreement Minimizes rtc liability Implementing a framework For reliable rail service to the local businesses Who depend on that rail service and the ability To hold the operator Accountable to the community the draft agreement before you does meet those priorities among others And it is designed as a face to a face as a two-face agreement to ensure that A reliable operator can take over operations and serve the customers that need to be served and also give the rtc The time it needs to make its its decision on the unified corridor investment study the the timeline for the unified corridor investment study at this point is that there will be a draft out for the to the entire community in August And there'll be time for the community to review that draft Then they find it will come back to the commission possibly in october or so With a recommendation from staff and then at that time a 120 day period four months Will begin for the rtc to consider what it's going to do With the rail line And give and give the the opportunity to the rtc to make its decision about the future of the rail line And if the rtc decides, you know, not to proceed with rail service on the on the rail line, then the operator may leave and The rtc may go through the process of abandoning the rail line and removing the tracks if that's what this commission and this community So desires So with that staff does recommend that the rtc Approve the attach administrative license administration coordination license agreement with progressive rail for rail operations sanctuary's branch rail line and Authorize the executive director to enter into that agreement on behalf of the rtc It also replacement pages were sent to you to add That the rtc make a finding of exemptions from sequa For this decision now the rtc did make Release a notice of exemption in 2010 when the rtc Made the decision to buy the line for for the purposes mentioned at the beginning and that included the continuation of freight rail service So this actually covered by that notice of exemption But the but the rtc may make an additional notice of exemption. And so that's why Replacement pages were sent to you and the additional notice of exemption that's now attachment four to this item was also Included so now the recommendation does include also releasing that notice of exemption Okay, thank you. So this is a big opportunity for us to ask questions I'm going to try to keep it. There's a lot of people want to speak here today So I ask my commissioners colleagues to ask questions rather than Then state opinions and then we'll wait to hear from the public before we come back. Mr. Coonerty Louise you mentioned this and I don't know what so that george or brook wants to answer this question But I just want to make clear And ask you to answer this as succinctly and clearly as possible the following two questions Does approving this contract create any additional legal or economic hurdles for the rtc To choose to remove the tracks Railroad tracks after the unified corridor study No Does does approving this contract generate any additional state or federal regulatory hurdles If the rtc chooses to remove the tracks after the unified corridor study No Thank you Thanks. Are there other questions mr. Johnson? I had a question. So our With respect to iowa pacific are we still under contract with iowa pacific? That is correct. I pacific is still the operator at this point. So is it fair to say that we're under no impending Really either decision or I guess Financial Malady in case we don't provide A rail system for them Uh, as I mentioned in my report, I didn't go into the details, but The current operator has become quite unreliable Oops And that was iowa pacific, I think Okay Okay And uh, and so there've been there've been issues And um, we've heard from some of the some of the customers on the lines Well, they're not getting the service that they that they need from my iowa pacific So, you know, it does have become, you know, somewhat of an an urgency to Try to get a different operator in there that can take care of the needs of the customers Yeah, last question if if after this We're bifurcating an agreement apparently with a progressive rail One here one there after ucis If we decide to leave and and forgo that agreement with them, is there a 300 000 buyout that is part of this? There is a a clause yes that um It says that if the rtc decides not to Proceed with rail service in the line and decides to abandon that the rtc would pay Progressive rail three hundred thousand dollars. There's also of course a Look away that damages clause in case a progressive rail also, you know has to leave Um So, so yeah, those things are in there. Thank you. Um, mr. Mulford Hello, okay, uh, just a couple of questions. Um, louis How how much of the rail line is currently considered accepted? I couldn't tell you entirely for sure right now Because I know that definitely What's considered class one is the is the section of the line that's used by uh by big trees To come to the boardwalk. So they use about about a a mile of it. I do know that Unipacific, I'm sorry iopacific did improve the line in various places to make sure it was Class one, but some of those sections they haven't used so They we so I couldn't tell you if those sections are still uh under class one Um And um section 2.4 Of the acl it discusses the the railway Transportation services the the phasing of the contract Um, I have a question about 2.4.1. Uh, the the first sentence there Discusses How these the phasing is is triggered So, uh, if upon completion of the study the commission determines that the freighties and property should be used for Transportation service passenger rail service The commission immediately will immediately will grant the railway a non-exclusive license What does upon completion mean and what does determines mean? Is that a Um We would we vote to approve the ucis and that triggers this or is there Then also a second vote where we determine Affirmatively that we're going to pursue passenger rail service that that's that's unclear to me Okay It would be the second phase would be triggered when the rtc does make the active decision to After the unified quarter investment study and the and the rtc takes, you know It's four months after that to to consider What to do next with the rail line and at the end the commission decides that it's going to keep the track in place and continue Rail service in the line and try to pursue passenger rail service for the future then that will begin the The second phase Of the agreement so it's a it would so we vote to accept the ucis And then we would have a second vote to affirmatively endorse a okay. That's correct. Okay In uh section 6.1 Uh discusses um The railway construction and removal of railroad facilities um 6.1.1 Gives us the the authority to make improvements or adjusted adjustments to to the rail line facilities Section 6.1.2 though says that any of these changes that material and materially interfere with Freight service have to be approved by the surface transportation board What are activities related to developing the scenic sanctuary trail interfere with the freight service? under 6.1.2 We do not do not expect that any development of the trail Would interfere materially with the Ability of the operator to meet its obligations on the service transportation board to serve the cost the the freight customers on the rail line and maintain Safe operations as they do that So the the the lee road segment wouldn't require the surface transportation board to approve our our activities there Now we know we would not have to go to the service transportation board to get approval For that segment we can proceed with it as long as it is meeting the it is meeting the The requirements of the service transportation board to not materially impact freight operations Even as the commission worked For over two years on the master plan for the Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail Network The rail operator was involved in that planning process To make sure that the master plan as it was created and vision at that time Took into consideration The the needs of keeping the rails Rail service on the line so that it would not Interfere with it with their obligations under the service transportation board So that plan that the arch see adopted, you know Got that involvement from the rail operator to make sure it would materially impact their operations um In section eight is the the the the termination clause is the various mechanisms that we would use or the Rail operator would use to extricate ourselves from this agreement Section 8.2.3 seems to be our exit clause as far as I can I can understand it Where we Where it says that the if the commission determines that the the last sentence there the commission determines that the freight easement property Should not be used for freight service from mile point seven to mile point zero the commission will then terminate the agreement um I don't see any reference in determination clauses for for passenger rail service That that seems to just state that if we want out of the agreement entirely we get out of the agreement entirely But it doesn't make any mention of keeping the freight service and just getting rid of the passenger service We would have to completely walk away from our deal with progressive. Is that accurate? Well the phase one of the agreement is really just freight service it is The possibility of having some sort of excursion passenger service that would kick in with with phase two So if the rtc exercised this This clause then it would be you know as part of the the phase one before we get into phase two And actually since you mentioned that section it reminded me of one thing that i'm meant to say during during my staff report oral staff report Especially go counsel to the rtc on stb matters Did suggest some minor modification of that language? that i i'll distribute to you says at the end of that agreement that i would say that um, you know, they can They basically take attention to account, you know approval of of the stb of an evening abandonment So just to make sure that we meet the requirements of the stb In the language that we put in here, so i'll have that distributed to you so you can see what the what those changes are But it says that that process occurs After the completion of the study and prior to the grant of the license What are what are our exit options? After we grant the license So this this exit clause seems to only be in effect between the between the ucis and the granting of the license for transportation services Yes, that that is correct. So you say we're saying once phase two kicks in What is the possibility the possibility for exiting uh from the agreement? I'm gonna ask our legal counsel to uh help me with this if that's okay. That's great. Thank you Mr. Belaj, uh Bob bob Our counsel needs to use the microphone I Section 8.2 After the transportation license is granted progressive has to meet certain service obligations Um, and it is in the event that they fail to do that that we would have the right to terminate We are only able to terminate if they don't meet those metrics. That is correct. That's what the contract provides If we make a policy decision unrelated to the operations or the performance of this company We have no way of getting out of the agreement the agreement doesn't provide a specific remedy in that situation So, um, it's certainly something that could be negotiated down the line and certainly something that we have seen in other jurisdictions so Let's try to respect the speaker So, um, it's certainly something that that happens if contracts don't work out So that's something again the stb would need to approve but is Within the party's rights to renegotiate a contract in the future Thank you Are there other questions? Mr. Caput, you bet I'll try to make it just questions and a statement later, but Anyway, uh, the Right now we don't have any money coming in from the current contract we have with Iowa pacific. Is that correct? That is correct. Okay, and then if we were to go ahead with progressive money would come in To the county to work on the rail there there be some some fees associated with you know The service that the operator provides So a small percentage of their their revenues both for freight or or passenger service they provide would come to the rc It wouldn't it would not be An amount that would be enough for the commission to make vast improvements on the rail line It was just a small amount to help with some of the now maintenance efforts and so on But the operator is responsible for maintaining the railroad infrastructure that the rc hands to them So they will be spending money doing that Okay, and this might be a legal question, but if we were to go forward with progressive With the new contract that would actually help in a sense terminating the Abandoned agreement we have with Iowa pacific Would that be correct? Yes, currently the um the commission did send Iowa pacific a notice of default Because they're not meaning the requirements of the agreement. Uh, so In a sense, it's almost like the agreement is sort of terminated already because they're not they're not really meaning the The the provisions in the agreement so we tell them you're in default and they and what they responded was We'll cooperate with you to select a new operator So if I can answer that question from a legal perspective The current acl doesn't actually terminate until the stb approves the transfer to the new operator So we are under contract with Iowa pacific Even though they are in default and we have notified them of that default It doesn't actually terminate until the abandonment or until the transfer is approved by the stb. That's what the contract provides What i'm getting at is we would have some money coming in for fixing the rail And that would include uh in the future looking at Rail service for freight with south county and also possibly uh passenger passenger service In the in the future Actually, there would be some money coming in that could be used towards that It's not going to be something that will that will allow huge improvements to the facilities Right The cost of money between passenger service and freight service Is all related to the speed of how fast the train can actually go on the current rail system That's correct. All right And the last one if anybody knows that what is the top speed of freight service Uh Between south county and north county compared to a reasonable Passenger speed of a of a train Going from north to south or south to north Currently as the as the Facilities stand the top speed for freight service is 10 miles per hour and that's you know, that's what it's been for for many many For many years. That's what unipacific used as well In terms of the speed that Would be necessary for any passenger rail service that might be in place in the future for for Commuter service and so on that would have to depend on what the community decides, you know, you would like You know if you want a top speed of 25 miles per hour 30 miles per hour Or 40 miles per hour for that for that service And so that would be something you know to be looked at in the future for like Mr. Johnson very quickly. Thanks chair. So didn't staff a way back when I think it was at sierra northern or Sierra northern and also iowa pacific Didn't you make the same claims that they would be able to financially contribute to this line and they failed miserably? I mean indeed every every operator that we've negotiated with Uh, you know that is included in in the contract that they'd make some Contributions Or pay some fees To the rtc. They they are required to maintain the rail line. That's not the question I understand the question is didn't you make the same claims? They are required to maintain the rail line at a certain level And Unfortunately, like I mentioned in the beginning my staff for right now iowa pacific is not doing that so it's not meeting that agreement Also the fees that the iowa pacific is required to pay to the rtc. I Pacific is not doing that right now They have they have been doing that in the past but It's been About a year now or a little more that they have not paid those fees. Thank you Other questions, mr. Bertrand So in section 2.6.1 it mentions that the Potential contractor or progressive is satisfied with the condition of the line And so they made that inspection So if you go to section 5.1, we're talking about initial repairs So on one hand, um progressive is saying they're satisfied with the condition of the line Which presumes I suppose that they can operate on it Okay, so I hear an answer no, but I'd like an answer from louise And so where does that leave us in terms of initial repairs? There are repairs needed on the line the Vast majority of the repairs have to do with storm damage that occurred in the winter of uh What was actually February of 2017? When that damage was sustained So that's that's where the vestment of the repairs and it's not just repairing the the track But also repairing the road bed one of the one most significant ones of wash out of mile post 5 uh near the sluice where Yeah, it's just a large wash wash out under the tracks and that needs to be repaired as as Has mentioned in past meetings rtc has been working with FEMA to Assist with that and female has agreed has agreed to assist The rtc with that so we're working with them up there. Okay. Um, I do know about the FEMA grant and I hope you get it I know there's some that would not want us to do that, but um, it's money to this area So I definitely want that to happen So the wash out is the major issue How much are we going to have to spend to repair the rest of the line because In this 5.1 we talk about we're going to do initial repairs. So is it Beyond the wipe of the wash out or are there other ideas? Excuse me things that we have to work on There are a variety of other things Uh, all the damage is sustained by the by the railroad infrastructure in that winter So that that wash out that I mentioned was the largest largest item. There's a smaller wash out a little further than that There there was slides that covered the track and in various places and so on trees that came down debris all sorts of things So the rtc is working on that. I think in a past meeting You approved a yes, we did an engineering contract to work on on those items So currently we have a very rough estimate of what what the cost will be For all the work is between two and three million dollars. And like I mentioned We're working with FEMA to get assistance with that. So we expect most of that will be covered by FEMA Okay, thank you very much. Um section 7.2 So what's the procedure that the rtc does to monitor revenue? What kind of reporting are we Getting from our operators You know, it's been mentioned already that we've been Experienced in arrears and payments. Um, how do we track this and how fast do we respond to arrears? So that we make sure we're getting our proper payments to the citizens of Santa Cruz As it's stated there in the agreement that there are regular Reports that the operator is supposed to provide to the to the rtc, which has been happening And there's supposed to be a payment that then follows and unfortunately recently the payments have not followed For the most part they have not been Fees due to the rtc, but sometimes there are fees and When the rtc staff receives those reports, of course, we think we look at them to Make sure they have all the information they're supposed to have and if backup information is needed On how they arrive at those reports that is requested from the uh, from the operator Now some of the backup information however because it is a private business Um Some of it cannot be made public and that's that's indicated in the agreement that we currently have so Okay I have a question in terms of section 8.24 So in section, uh, 2.4.1 There's a line towards the end about a third uh, two thirds down On this is dealing I think with the 120 days failure to act Basically this commission on the proposed plan within such time period will result in the plan being considered approved by the commission provided And then there's some howevers and then in section 8.22 Upon termination Upon termination of this agreement whether through the expiration of the term or the parties contemplate railways that cooperate at the expense of Oh 8.24. I'm sorry The railway can terminate this agreement if By 120 days after completion of study the commission has not granted a license So these seems to be these seem to be contradictory. So one case If we don't have an agreement The operator can just say it's uh granted and in this case It seems like we could terminate it. So i'm just trying to understand those two sections I can speak to that there's multiple triggers in this agreement as to it just depends on what this commission does Um after it receives the study. So um that in the definition of the term study in the agreement It defines completion as the date on which not the draft but an actual recommendation is made So that's your first opportunity or obligation to actually act on The phase two transportation license If you do not act if you do not act On that license either to approve or deny it Then the railway may terminate after 120 days. So that's their right. The plan is a separate issue And that assumes that you would be granting a phase two transportation license You have 120 days to approve that plan It cannot occur you can't be required to approve it before you've actually granted the transportation phase two license So that's in there as well If if you grant the license and the plan is submitted and you do not act either to approve or deny within another 120 days Then it's deemed approved. However, if there's any sequel requirements that would apply to that It's not approved. So there's kind of a continuing progression of what your decisions will be along this line And um the agreement has laid those out in a way that You have a substantial amount of time to make those decisions. Okay. Thank you um so 8.5 I wanted to add a time element I dropped my pages so I can't remember exactly what it was, but um, Thank you very much liquidated damn. Okay, right so If the operator pulls out I want a time element I'm I would like to know if we could put a time element in here because if they pull out in six months in a year and then get their Their money as opposed to pulling out in two or three years Basically, I want to make sure that they've done an adequate effort to make this thing work and not just sort of milk the citizens of Santa Cruz So I think there was five years in here. I'd like to have two to five years something like that You're asking on the form of a question. Can we do that? Can we do that? Right? I don't know how far this negotiation has gone. So this is an 8.5 liquidated damages Can you point us to the exact 8.5 Well, I think this section liquidated damages liquidated damages for the to the rtc If the railway Leaves so this is this is a payment to read to the rtc if the railroad decides to to abandon right and leave So I want to make sure they they've stayed here a reasonable period of time to try to make this contract work I don't want it to be a short period of time That's that's my point Yeah, yeah, I don't understand the logic there Um, we have other questions. I got wrong here. I know miss cough and gomas had. Oh, yeah Thank you, uh This is um really a complex and uh, none of us here have taken this lightly for our conversation today. So, um Um Right now we know we have some some freight issues Because we we've seen the letters. Um, we've witnessed the issue. We have repairs that are due In the event that this is not approved What are we going to do to make sure that the services are still being provided to the freight vendors that are using this line? currently both rtc and the federal government administration are Are working applying significant pressure to um hypo pacific uh to do a couple of things make make uh Some repairs on uh a small section of the track that needs uh some repairs and also have their locomotive inspected We have been told and that was uh Communicating in this morning that People are on the way to make sure that happens beginning early next week So that's you know, so that's good to hear. Uh, but also, um rtc staff has been working on the possibility of Contracting out for some for some of that work in case that hypo pacific is unable then to to do that And then there and there are a couple of ways of doing that in addition the If the rtc decides to go ahead and Approve this agreement and enter into the agreement with with progressive rail then progressive rail can Work with the stb to come on the on the rail line Much sooner rather than the way that the typical the typical 30 days that that happens so they can come in I'll you know, I don't know the exact number of days, but you know within days And then they can they can come in and do the work that is necessary and bring the the equipment in to move Of the cars that need to be moved progressive rail as already mentioned that you know, it'll take A few weeks to bring a locomotive in But there are other ways to do it. They've mentioned something that's called the a track A track mobile that can be that's lighter. They can come in here much sooner To take care of the the needs of the customers Now they do have of course One of the problems is hypo pacific doesn't have much motivation At this point because they're leaving progressive rail does have significant motivations They want to come in here improve Their metal in a sense to make sure that you know, the community sees that they're going to be responsible and do what's going to be needed For the customers and and for the community And they do have experience in in similar situations elsewhere where hypo pacific left operations And progressive rail took over and in reference checks on how that worked out Particularly with the north kialine for our transportation They expressed great satisfaction at how progressive rail came in And their customers already that were that were suffering as a result of what had been happening before with hypo pacific And as progressive rail came in they they did all the all the right things to then start You know serving the customers as they needed it and also Uh, you try to keep some of the Customers from leaving the area because that was part of what some some of the shippers were already Working on doing so So what i'm hearing here in summary is it's going to take over a week for the repair And even if the repair is done, um, that's part of it The other part is the locomotive and we won't even be seeing a locomotive for over three weeks If this contract were to be ratified Um, the the option to bring in the track mobile, which is the It's like a small truck that also has railroad wheels that can use be used for switching cars They can bring that in on short notice. So Um until they get the the regular locomotive on site So we don't have the exact about a time on that But it's a matter of days not weeks to get get that unit on site Yeah, because I I know we have vendors that are out thousands of dollars at this point So I know that that's important The the difference between the the contract from iowa pacific and this particular one Are there any expanded a number of services? Between the two contracts For us to vote on this progressive For example, this is freight. Um, this was some of the the passenger part of it. Um on the iowa pacific We're not asking to expand any services that were currently not Technically in contract with iowa pacific to perform If i'm understanding the question I I want to say yes, that's correct The clarity here is we're not going out and taking a vote on something that we're expanding any services Yes Now in the event that the corridor study Says no to rail and we have our our vendors for freight here That still needed or or it splits it says, you know, the the the vendors are fine But we're not doing anything with the passenger in this study Hypothetically comes to that conclusion. Do we have this vendor to still continue the freight service? Will they remain here? Will we have to pay them on an exit if they decide that they're not going to if the findings Find any truth to that matter? previous Analysis that was that was done for the rtc and from consultants at the rc hired Concluded that because of the there isn't a tremendous amount of freight service on this line That for the economics to work on this line a combination of freight service and then passenger excursion service Would make sense So that's that was the analysis If I can just answer the question from the the contractual standpoint The agreement provides that if freight service is maintained from mile post seven to zero We and terminate all other services terminated on the line including passenger Transportation as well as other freight. We would not owe the the operator anything We would not owe them that penalty. It's only if we remove it from the entire line including mile post zero to seven As louis indicates it would be up to the provider the operator to determine Whether they want to continue providing service in that circumstance But in order to do that we would not owe the operator any penalties So the the situation hypothetically if the corridor study came back to say that Passengers not going to be acceptable then we're at risk again in six months time With not having the continuity of services for freight Because they can leave as a result of not getting the phase two cleared with the corridor study So there's no obligation for the for the operator to leave. They don't it doesn't automatically terminate They may continue service. Um, but they do have the right to discontinue service So we still would then put our our businesses at at risk for the south county that use this corridor Potentially you could yes if they decide not to provide service I think that's all my questions for tonight I want to make sure that we have a lot of people standing up, uh, uh, mr. Caput I'll also just make an announcement. I think there's enough chairs for everybody here I think the people who are standing up are standing up to speak But they have turned on a screen in the other room and there's chairs in the conference room If you find that more comfortable to sit in you just head out the door and head to the left And there's a conference room with a screen that is airing this very, uh, meeting So mr. Caput, I'll make it quick because I want to hear from the public also, but We currently have some freight service going on Right now Yes, yes, we do. Okay. And and some actually comes from one not today Actually, there's no nothing moving on the rail line as of today Is that because of the uh, the one that crosses the power river? No, it's because the io pacifics locomotive has not been inspected Received its 92 day inspection from the fra Okay, so they are working to remedy that And uh, okay, that'll be I guess, uh They're all related. We're talking about short-term abandonment We're talking about how sturdy and how strong the contract, uh, if we go ahead with progressive is And whether or not they're gonna, you know, pull out in what six months or one year or five years or whatever they, uh Financially they're what they're reporting Uh is stronger than when we were promised before The before you mean economic, um, strength the strength of the company progressive They they appear to be very strong. Yes So we're I guess what we're all worried about is, uh Fool me once, uh Shame on you fool me twice. It's going to be shame on us So commissioner since we have a two phases to this Contract and we're just trying to get through phase one today If between now and the Star of phase two you want to see more detailed financial reports from the company You have the right to ask for those and i'm sure they'd be willing to Provide those they did provide some performance in their proposal That um that they made to the commission back in january, but if you want more detailed, uh financials from them I'm sure they can provide those Thank you, uh miss johnson Thank you, um I share uh commissioner kafan govmez is concerned about the reliability of freight service on the rail line And um, I know that the bahara bridge has been out and you and an rtc was notified 10 or 11 days ago And I am concerned and I heard louise speak to at least two options of potentially Repairing that bridge other than our pacific who's disincentivized to go repair it Or and or progressive going in and repairing it So I wonder about those two options and I wonder why there wasn't some kind of a backup plan in the beginning um That we had for repair when we knew we had a failing operator Indeed we've known that there are problems with our pacific for some time I mean, that's why we we came to the commission With uh recommendation for a notice of default To them and and for a process to select A new operator and we did indicate that it you know, it was possible that at some point in time There'd be a challenge and provided and providing the service So, uh, you know, uh, that's that's what happens when operations are are failing, I suppose and Indeed we have Since that time Did look at possible ways to to provide Service if that if that came to be However, it's not something that can be implemented in Immediately does take it does take Some days to get that in place and certain arrangements And one of the challenges for the rtc as well is that the rtc is not a common carrier operator And the rtc chose not to be a common carrier operator And for that purpose there's for that reason the rtc does not have Insurance as a as a common carrier operator and if the rtc does Take on certain responsibilities on the rail line Without that insurance then it could be you know an issue for the rtc So that so that that is one challenge that that needs to overcome and At least in one of those options I would also just like to point out that we have learned some lessons through our experience with iowa pacific That are reflected in the proposed agreement before each day and one of those Is that we have requested the operator provide? Financial security for their maintenance obligations So that in the event we end up in a situation where our operator is not providing maintenance. We have outside recourse And I appreciate that I think that's great. Um, I just I'm still stuck on the fact that we had as a commission and as a community no backup plan to prepare to repair Parts of this line when there was an emergency as we were under now With freight stuck on the other side of the bahara river Sorry for our bridge and we've got businesses who are suffering Financially because we can't get the freight over we knew we had a failing operator We knew there was a problem here and we should have had a backup repair plan and And the backup repair plan of saying oh the commission you need to Approve this contract and that's our backup plan. I just don't find that to be An acceptable backup plan, but thank you mr. Chair for the opportunity So now i'm gonna open it up for a public comment bob if you just wait one second if I don't know whether Councilmember billisic is still here. She told me that she might need to leave early And I told her I would try to get her up here if she's still here Then I I just call her to the front Then we will heard from our friends at big creek lumber Thank you. Thank you so much for your consideration You know iopis iowa pacific is out so we know that And progressive rail is here What are we going to do with our businesses that need help and need support? I really think that We need to do we need to go forward at least for Watsonville businesses. I mean we've talking about 400 people that may lose jobs We're talking about businesses that can't get their product moved We need to do something and progressive rail is here In talking about the big picture Of rail and I I uh, I think we need to do something about Rail between Watsonville and Santa Cruz. In fact, I'd like to see something go around the whole peninsula Go to Monterey, but you know, I think at one time. I said I think progressive rail is the answer But i'm not sure that it is now I think it is for this immediate thing Right now to move our freight But i'm looking at you know smart trains and things like that and and the future I think that we need to have Something that can get people from Watsonville To Santa Cruz you can tell our freeways a mess And maybe we need to look at other options like smart trail down the road But for right now the immediacy is a progressive rail then we talk about bikers and and um You know people want to walk and and we need that I I think we need that too And it would be great to have the whole corridor having bikes and having having uh walkers, but I think we need to also look at property owners Farmers I've heard from the farmers say You don't have any restroom facilities. You don't have any benches. You don't have anything along those lines So it's a big plan that needs to take place And it's but for today Progressive rail we need it at least to move our freight. Thank you. Thank you for your consideration. Yeah, thank you And we are going to have two minutes for every speaker And bob you've been waiting a long time. Thank you for your waiting and thank for everyone lining up in order to hear Thank you Chairman leopold members of the commission. I'm bob relage big creek lumber company big creek lumber company small family owned Business, it's been operating continuously in santa cruz county for 72 years Have two rail issues the first one has been alluded to and discussed already that has to do with Five rail cars that we have they're stalled on the other side of the power row river bridge and another one in route It's hardship for us. I don't have time to dwell on that Other than to thank staff and also some a number of members of the public We're trying to figure out a mechanism to solve that problem The bigger problem for us, of course is long-term Use of that rail our watsonville yard has been receiving Rail freight for almost 50 years and in fact we we bought that property where our watsonville yard is Specifically because it did have rail access. I think the people here Helpful for them to understand the distance from the county line To our retail facility in the industrial area of watsonville Is miniscule compared to the total length of the rail system in uh in santa cruz county Our employees and our company depend on that freight service. I want to quickly give you a little bit of economic Uh information about that we get six to eight rail cars a month The cost difference to our company To buy smaller lots of material and have it trucked here is in excess of $40,000 a year Potentially without that rail service That particular yard Could lose $500,000 a half a million dollars in a year With the loss of that With the loss of that service You know, we've got We don't have a lot of employees. Was that two minutes? It goes by fast. I apologize the mackerel Close out it's critical to us. We need dependable Maintenance and inspection Our company needs to have some sort of Reliable service we don't want to be Thrown into the bus for an issue that's much larger than we are. Thank you. I can answer any questions you have I appreciate it So I just want to just remind Remind everyone That we want to be respectful to everybody. So uh to the extent that We don't uh jeer Or or uh a hassle anybody for making any comments. I'd appreciate that James Eggleston from La Selva beach I'm stunned by the irregularity of this procedure over the last many months The staff's claim of due diligence is belied by a public record substantial public record Of progressive and its principles Fraudulent business practices and mistreatment of communities in which this is operated Your public bidding process issued an rfp Documents now reveal that was essentially predetermined in progressive's favor Before you issued the rfp That would make it fraudulent Your united corridor study Is to determine the intended use Of the rail line and here i'm talking about from watsonville north You are predetermining that By granting the progressive rail contact and incredibly you're about to issue a negative declaration under sequa Based on progressive rails claim That federal rail law preempts any and all environmental regulation locally and by the state Now you know it's a hotly disputed legal issue and may have to be determined By the courts But from a policy matter it is hard to believe That you as elected representatives of the people of santa cruz are willing to throw environmental protection on the rail Whether or not you have to Certainly as a policy matter you should do a study Because that would inform your decision You are negligent in your duties if you approve this contract now slow down Table the progressive rail contract for a few months Finish the united corridor study Do an environmental impact study You are the regional transportation commission Not the regional rail commission do your job Thank you Good morning Good evening or morning afternoon i guess at this point My name is Doug green and i am the current president of the la selva beach improvement association I'm not here representing the association because i know many of our members are on both sides of the spectrum As to what ought to be done particularly past our area But i have also worked for several government agencies and in Echoing my friend jim is there's always been a fiduciary responsibility to Follow a tract of how you do things And what i'm hearing here is again Contracts are being approved without the pertinent think studies being done ahead of time And just as an example our bluff in the selva beach a few years ago We had a major and spent a lot of money done on an impact or on an engineering study because we happen to know that our Bluff has a great deal of erosion And that erosion is affecting the railroad tracks below us And without an environmental study of the condition of the bluff area not only at la selva beach But anywhere else that those tracks come close to the edge Is derelicts in of duty in my opinion to approve a contract for a train service that could run up there And potentially completely destroy any bluff area along the coast I feel that if there's a way to get a contract done For watsonville so that this freight service can be continued whether that means pushing iowa pacific to do their job or Modifying your contract to get progressive just for that part of the spectrum The studies need to be done first To follow all of our elected fiduciary duties as i have to do as president of the selva beach You people have a fiduciary duty And should do it in the right order that it should be done the contract should not be signed today Take your time. Thank you. Thank you afternoon I'm brandon kett. I live here in watsonville been here most of my life I will be brief I took a lot of notes listening to your good questions of your staff and it kept shortening my speech so But anyway, our county seat as we all know is 20 miles away and it should only take 30 minutes to get there But with our gridlock problem, it can take an hour or more and it it makes uh, it makes it really tough for us watsonville folks to get to our county seat We need to improve our transportation options, especially in light of our growing population At the railroad corridor is one of the most scenic rail lines on the coast of california It would be a mistake to remove the rails It's a valuable asset that belongs to all of our citizens The united corridor study is due For a decision by you folks the end of the year. It sounds like and Hopefully it will shed some light on the importance And viability of keeping rail in our county I have read the proposed contract for progressive rail Progressive is offering to put money into our railroad corridor And our corridor needs to be operational and to generate income Uh, the the contract provides that progressive rail must cooperate With you folks for any future public projects Such as passenger service and trails Also, it requires that progressive must supply construction services at reasonable rates This proposed agreement provides the flexibility needed To accomplish our much needed goal of improving transportation In our county. Thank you. Thank you Good after Time to time in the audience. I really think you should be in the back of the it's fine to hold up signs But you're blocking other people's views. So please put it stand in the back with your signs if you need to hold them up Thank you Good afternoon My name is rick cleffel. The choice we face is very simple Will we employ an out-of-state company to use an obsolete technology To transport toxic and dangerous materials across our pristine Coastal environment Or will we use the same land to turn it into the world's First bicycle freeway This is would be a bad boon to both commuters and tours and businesses It's simple the past or the future you choose we vote This is my Hi, good afternoon. I'm I'm claire cleffel and I just wanted to say that I'm here to represent all the people who actually Live on the railroad tracks And I think the proposition that we need a freight train is highly exaggerated I've lived on the railroad tracks since 1992 and all I've ever seen going up down those railroad tracks is the coal is the Car full of rocks that was going to the cement plant I think we need to look to the future and we need to find a place for our bicycle riders to ride And we need to be able to move people but I think freight Is just really the wrong direction and I think that it's not actually supported by what goes up and down that railroad track Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you Good afternoon Good afternoon members of the commission My name is solid in sale I live on the west side within the city of santa cruz and have been a county resident for over 50 years Today's meeting is the latest installment in our family feud Over whether or not we should continue to include rail in our long range transit plans for santa cruz county I'm reminded of a time 40 years ago When a vocal opposition opposed plans to implement the first countywide paramedic system Opponents of upgrading ambulance services from basic scoop and run EMT level to paramedic advanced life support Raised one objection after another From rejecting the analysis of county health services staff and the emergency medical care commission To predicting system insolvency or the demise of one or more hospitals While opponents ultimately succeeded in delaying the upgrade to paramedics for eight years Until 1985 The system that was eventually implemented with great success Was exactly what had been proposed originally Our county's current sophisticated EMS system Is the outgrowth of the action of its early advocates who clearly envisioned a future that benefited the many As opposed to the few I support approval of the contract with progressive rail While I genuinely sympathize with those who just don't want any rail operations in their neighborhood ever I don't believe such opposition is in the best interests of the many Approval of the contract will assure continuity of freight service for long-standing county businesses like big creek lumber Meet our legal obligations to maintain services on the line And position us to begin restoration and improvements to the track If the the outcome of unified corridor study is decision to continue rail as a backbone of our regional transit system. Thank you Good afternoon Good afternoon. Um, my name is bonnie more and i've been a resident of this county for Almost 50 years and I just would like to shed some light on the issue of progressive rail Coming into our county here, which I think is a very bad idea If you take a look at the the projects that they've got around the country, you'll see that they're a propane Toxic material Transporter and a storage house This is santa cruz county and we're a coastal community the the level of Risk that you're taking and putting on the community is horrifying to me If you ever have an opportunity and I suggest that the public does this as well You need to google Kingman, arizona and take a look there and see what happened when a propane train Derailed and they had to evacuate an entire community of people It is hazardous. It is not okay. And this is santa cruz. You have to remember where you're living Take a look at winslow arizona. Look at litchfield park arizona Near the like air force base where they actually store things under old salt caves and caverns They don't have it out and exposed where you're going to have it here a freight line car that transports propane goes between 90 and Between 70 and 90 feet long And what you're asking is for a holding area for 30 of those tanks And if you think that you're going to get passenger rail on top of what they're going to do on their freight rail and their Propane transport you're mistaken. And if you think it's healthy and okay for bicyclists or pedestrians to walk along a rail line Go and walk on the rail line go to an active rail line and take a walk and see what it's like Try and put a bicycle next to a freight train that's coming through town Even when they are going at 10 miles an hour and put your children on that line Thank you. Thank you Good afternoon Hi, my name is celia more and I live on the west side and I literally live 10 feet from the railroad tracks And I live on seaside and rank in street. It's in your guys's report As it being somewhere through the quiet zone that it won't be able to be quiet So they will be blowing their horns 10 feet from my house Across from us is a preschool Three blocks is bayview elementary school One block is garfield park We don't even have sidewalks to our park I have to walk with the cars We don't have a safe way to get to the schools. We don't have safe ways to get to our to our parks But yet you want to put in a rail and activate a rail line that's been there and has not had any rail on it for I've since I've been here. I haven't seen anything That wants to carry propane which has been termed mega bombs because if one of those Propane tanks has a leak You're you're on metal on metal one little spark Boom there goes everything My life Is not worth your guys's decision to put in a rail line. That's going to transport something that can take my life away My life is more important than your guys's monetary Assumptions of what you may get through this rail line. It is a joke Right now people walk on that rail line and That that intersection right there has been deemed Unsafe through the city the city won't touch it. There's one stops. There's there's it's a four way There should be a four-way stop But it's a two-way stop because the rail line goes straight through the street So a car literally cannot stop there to let the rail go through it is completely an unsafe intersection Thank you. Good afternoon. Good afternoon. My name is Shane white I'm speaking on behalf of Justin white my brother. He is the ceo of our company and this is our take on the situation Hello, I'm the ceo of knd landscaping in watsonville We have 68 employees and are very active in the community Do business from Santa Cruz to Monterey and I've taken a special interest in the rail corridor as a professional landscaper and a plant enthusiast I have walked miles of the rail corridor and counted all the heritage trees That will be cut by the current rail with trail plan We plant trees move earth and create landscapes for a living Including large commercial projects and walking the corridor. I've seen firsthand what the current plan of record will do Millions of cubic yards of dirt will need to be moved huge cuts to the hillside and larger tany walls will need to be built They will tremendously Caught be costly and upon visual inspection does not appear wide enough to support a rail and Train without doing immense environmental damage. As such, I am 100 opposed to signing the progressive rail contract We are starting the best use of the corridor according to measure D While we can train our options bringing a questionable operator and turn over public assets to an out of state profit making business And create a huge divisive issue when the ucis is six months away. I would never make a real business decision like this Kandy landscape has grown from 20 employees to 68 employees and Watson in the last five years We work with many watchable businesses supportive of greenway the trail advocated by greenway is a new economy Clean jobs economic development health safety and personal transportation The rail fantasy is the old economy belching diesel engines environmental damage Fixed schedules long lead times with economic conditions are changing rapidly and a huge upfront public investment With little known transportation value payback if you want to talk about business and jobs No ceo would make these types of decisions and it's not good for the jobs economy or the people Good afternoon. I will just say that remember we're talking about the progressive rail contract So keeping it to the progressive rail contract will help us address the issue There will be lots of time for we're going to talk about what we're going to do with the actual line when the unified corridor study is done Good morning, ladies and gentlemen and members of the santa cruz county transportation commission. My name is gary plump I'm a former 32 year resident of santa cruz county And as an advocate for preserving the santa cruz branch rail line and its potential as a viable transportation entity I do feel that the anti rail actions put forth by trail now and greenway are misinformed and short-sighted Why are they so vehemently opposed to trains? I hear people Misperceptions everywhere. I hear people talking about pollution and so forth today's modern diesel locomotive. It's clean burning diesel natural gas Battery powered. There's no electrical wires that somebody alluded to earlier. Look at europe. Okay Denying a contract with progressive rail will has has serious ramifications for the four companies in downtown Watsonville who depend on rail to receive and transport their products by imposing their self-serving agenda Trail now and greenway will cause hardships on those companies as we already alluded to Greenway on trail now Elitist attitude is self-serving and is from funded by nimby not in my backyard deep pocket individuals who want to remove The rail and replace it with the trail if this is allowed to happen Santa Cruz county will lose a valuable transportation asset to move people and freight now and in the future Also, it will lose the ability to connect with amtrak, which monterey county is moving and within two years You will have the capital a quarter extended with a stop in Watsonville junction. Have you folks ridden the smart train? I noticed that no member of trail now or or Trail now or greenway have Try it. You may like it the smart train is a great environmentally friendly train To connect with future amtrak service in paharo The santa cruz branch rail line has been in place for over 140 years No trains have fallen off the cliff and is part of santa cruz county history Let's keep it intact and say a resounding yes to progressive rail and to preserve the rail line, which i'm very passionate about Thank you I appreciate everyone's passion, but I uh, I want to I will stop future speakers if they start name calling the other side It's not it we let's talk about the policy issues and let's not ascribe characteristics to the other the other members Good afternoon. My name is joe martinis. I live in aptos. I'm here to tell you To say no to progressive rail There are 10,000 reasons to say no And greenway and trail now Are are have that support? So Again, please say no to progressive rail Thank you Good afternoon. Good afternoon. My name is kary pico Greg randy john as you will not find this in your packet, but this comes from documents $600,000 that's how much the rtc spends every year administering and maintaining the rail corridor Not counting the bridge repairs $364,000 is how much sierra northern lost one year on administering freight With the stb document by the way the first one the first document is with the rtc financial audits This one is from the stb Notification sierra northern spent 500,000 and they only earned 136,000 on freight. That's why freight's not working Um, what can we expect from the progressive contract if you use iowa's pacific's numbers of what the actual freight is By contract the rtc will get $6,000 back. Woohoo. You spend 600,000 bucks and you get 6,000 back If you use progressive's marketing plan and you actually believe their freight is going to go 10 times higher to 3,000 cars a year That will bring it up to $43,000 per year Well, let's include passenger service if you use iowa pacific's you'll get another 28,000 or a total of $70,000 coming in my point is we're not even close to the 600,000 you're spending lastly Well, it put it together if you add everything up The rtc will spend 600,000 a year they will get $50,000 back. Oh what I want to tell you also is in passenger service They're outsourcing so Progressive will probably get at best 30% of that revenue you put it in the contract. We'll get about 20,000 So when you add it all up The rtc will spend 5.5 million dollars To support progressive so 10 million dollars That's how much the rtc said that they took from the proposition 116 when they ignored the california Coastal conservancy money sitting on the table with no strings attached Good afternoon. Hi susanne healthman aptos I appreciate that you're trying to solve some real problems And I'd like to add my voice to those who have indicated that progressive rail is not the solution to those problems One of the underlying assumptions is that the time to Form an agreement even for phase one with progressive rail is because iowa pacific has become an unstable rail provider Iowa pacific has always been an unstable rail provider It missed every rail performance standard in its contract with the rtc starting in 2013 It stored rail cars earlier and in prohibited locations for years before it hit the newsstands in 2017 Thanks to an involved citizen The rtc never notified iowa pacific of non-payment of fees until november 2017 So why now is iowa pacific suddenly an unstable provider when it has been doing the same thing for five solid years? I urge you To wait until we have a unified study to make a change. I understand their problems We need solutions, but I don't think progressive rail is the solution. Thank you. Thank you Good afternoon. Good afternoon, uh, let me start by saying that I support the staff's Recommendation to approve the deal with progressive rail I've worked for the current operator here in lottsonville for about three years now and in that time Unfortunately, I've continuously seen them put the customer's needs As second and we need to be putting the customer first As a result of this we now have local businesses here in lottsonville that are suffering Um, so it's time to do the right thing and if iowa pacific won't do it Then you guys as commissioners have a responsibility to do the right thing and bring progressive in here. Thank you Good afternoon. Good afternoon. My name is ted burk. I'm a businessperson from capitol And a member of the santa criss county business council board of directors And I want to remind you all that the greenway approach was endorsed unanimously by the 24 member board of directors And 86 percent of all business council members in a secret ballot This was an overwhelming endorsement by the leading county-wide business organization Which includes many south county business organizations such as KND landscaping who spoke just a moment ago par harrow dunes resort gruntski law firm watchenville hospital driscoll's lakeside organics And watchenville coast produce So commissioners with that said the business community and so many others are hoping that you won't vote this morning To tie up the 32 mile rail line for 10 plus years With oil tanker cars I think that the majority of you know that Transferring control to progressive rail is not the appropriate use of the rail line Nor is the focus of fossil fuel transportation and storage In sync with santa criss values and aesthetics So why then is it even being considered? Furthermore your so-called independent study has yet to come out and yet you now want to rush this through And if you do rush to jam this 10-year contract through today And by so doing Deprive the people of determining a better use you may get to where you are hell-bent to go initially But you're going to get there by yourselves and not by building a community along the way The people of our county from north to south look at you commissioners to be the essential filter of deliberating well-intentioned But flawed ideas and in fact that really is your job Many people see the rtc today as an agency run amuck in bias Without regard to better alternatives and a deaf ear to constructive objections Thus the citizens of santa criss county rely upon you to do your job Independent of the preference of the rtc staff and free of their frequent and obvious rail bias Good afternoon. Good afternoon. I'm jacquard martinez. I'm the resident here in watsonville I first want to just want to point out the concern I have a lot run a lack of voice in this room and that is the low-income Latino workforce we have here in watsonville As well as the high skilled young workforce that we have in this community I want to speak specifically about a concern I have about entering an agreement with a progressive rail And that is that I believe will be going down Setting things in motion that would be expensive or challenging To go back on This is a low-income community that relies on its cars This is a workforce that relies on its automobiles to get to their place of employment Or into the fields to do work in ag This is a young community that needs High paying jobs not in santa criss but here in watsonville I believe this decision to move forward with progressive will set these things in motion that will eventually lead to a passenger An attempt to bring a passenger trail trained to santa criss And instead of providing Equitable transportation to our residents. I think it'll in turn hurt this community by Increasing the amount of people from outside this community moving into watsonville And furthering the gentrification that we're already seeing in this community. Thank you Hi, my name is stanley socalo. I live in santa criss county near the city of santa criss Um, I think a lot of people here who are speaking Passionately haven't read the document. I read the contract last night. I have a few comments about it The first thing it concerns me is that it says that the Rail freight corridor the portion of the whole corridor that's dedicated to the freight operations Is 10 feet wide from the center of the track to each side? So that's 20 feet width of the track of the whole corridor A large significant portion Of the corridor is only 30 feet wide And so that leaves only 10 feet Uh leftover for the the trail Two feet of shoulders on each side Six inches for a fence it leaves a five and a half foot wide paved trail I don't know why you don't say That it's the minimum required which By law is eight feet six inches from the center of the track The passenger train feasibility study all illustrated eight feet six inches from the center of the track At least in the narrow sections make it eight feet six inches So that the the the uh The trail has enough width in those narrow areas Second it says um The progressive rail has the right to stockpile materials outside of that corridor on the rest of the Property it doesn't say that the stockpiling won't interfere with the trail I think it should make that clear the contract gives progressive rail the right to build maintenance storage facilities outside of that 20-foot wide corridor But it doesn't say that those won't interfere And it also doesn't say that whatever they build there At the end of the contract or if they're they abandon it that whatever was affixed to the Property becomes property of the rtc that they can't demolish buildings or whatever It should make that clear um Thank you. Thank you Good afternoon. Good afternoon. I'm pj mccosie. I'm with delmar foods We're a frozen fruit and vegetable processor We'll be celebrating our 60th year in business Next year. I've been president for an owner for about 33 of those For all the time that delmar has been in business We've utilized our spur to load rail cars of frozen fruits and vegetables to ship east We have many customers that are on the eastern seaboard and the products that we Are able to provide them come out of the region here There's a direct relationship between the price of gasoline and diesel And the demand for rail service And i'm sure that you folks are all aware of the Changes that are going on in the trucking industry right now the department of transportation Has a lot of new compliance Requirements that is causing the trucking industry a lot of woes There are shortages of truck drivers A lot of the equipment has to be taken out of service Prices on freight east i've never seen as high The trucking rates last week were just unbelievably high If you look at the I drove over from my plant. We have about 500 people working there right now You look at the at the track that goes from just the other side of highway one through town here Many of those properties may not be using rail today, but if you're thinking long term They very well may be Using rail in the future and that may determine the industrial activity that we have here in watsonville, which i think is an important part The status quo right now is completely unacceptable We have no rail service and we have this miserable line of tankers That are stored that are going all the way out to san andres road If we can get rid of those with progressive rail i'm all in favor of it. Thank you Good afternoon Good afternoon. My name is lilliania molas. I'm a lifelong resident of watsonville and i work for driscolls Of local berry company who's been in the community for 100 years In my role at driscolls i'm responsible for all of our transportation within the united states So that encompasses truck air and rail Within really what we wanted to speak to here was just understanding that for a highly perishable item like barry's Standard rail is just not an option to move this type of freight The main reason is the fact that this product has to be moved in a very time sensitive matter And rail is not traditionally known for being able to maintain schedules In the sense of if you were to go from here to chicago could take several weeks where Product that is this perishable just would not be able to sustain that Another thing to consider is that the thousands of shipments we do ship We have been able to ship about 47 shipments via intermodal rail Which is really the only viable option we've been able to find to utilize any type of rail service But that's only specific to expedited options which are only able to go from like say stockton or from southern california And in those types of opportunities you have to incorporate truck and rail The other component too to understand is that when it comes to perishable products We have to ship consistently all day long and so rail only really gives one option of loading And instead of being able to load consistently as product is coming in and able to ship In addition to that considering the amount of payload and the amount of Challenges on our receiving side all those factors allow it to where the rail does not provide an option for our transportation Thank you. Thank you Good afternoon. Okay. Good afternoon. Thank you My name is kent griffin. I am the supply chain director for rider affiliated companies One of the largest berry growers in the in the watsonville santa cruz area We have over 3700 local employees and farm on over 20 20 different ranches in the district And also support a number of local businesses Rider affiliate finds it troublesome that the decision a decision could be made now To move ahead with a progressive rail contract before the unified corridor study is complete We are also concerned that entering into a new 10-year contract with progressive Might jeopardize the implementation of other scenarios trade only scenarios or other transportation alternatives So rider affiliate companies opposes the approval of the progressive rail contract. Thank you Good afternoon. Good afternoon. Thanks for the opportunity to speak before you chairman leopold My name is kurtis hill. I'm from san bonito county and I came over today because You have kind of the similar issues here going on today that we have in in the holister area. We have 11 mile Line that goes from holister to gilroy We're looking for cal train to come in to to extend down into to holister and also expand Freight due to the trucking costs and the growth going on in our community. I see a lot of parallels With that issue with what you have here You've got contractors that came before you that that need this rail service coming in and out of of watsonville It drives your economic engine to a certain extent the one thing that I you know, so I support your staff's recommendation to Towards approving the progressive Contract one of the things on the bigger term just for me sitting here from the outside looking in Don't do what la did back in the 50s when they ripped up their tracks in order to put Accommodate general motors with their buses You've got track laid down You know, I know that smart up in marine county is doing well Starting out great. You that looks like a good fit for this county moving commuters up and down getting them off highway one We're looking for that same thing in our county because our roads are choked so that's kind of the side issue, but the main thing is is is Your vendors here in in watsonville need progressive rail. Thank you. Thank you Good afternoon. Good afternoon. I'm lauren cutter long-term resident of santa cruz county And I urge you to vote no on this contract with progressive rail I opposed the contract for the many reasons outlined today and in the public forums over the past few months Thank you to greenway and others for doing the investigative work to shed light on these very real and significant threats to our community if progressive wins this contract One concern I highlight is traffic gridlock I live near the intersection of 41st avenue and the corridor 41st avenue already suffers gridlock traffic and freight rail would greatly exacerbate the problem The costs both social and economic Of this contract would be pushed to us your constituents With significant impacts to our daily quality of life. Thank you. Thank you Good afternoon. Hello. My name is dean cutter. I'm from santa cruz, california And I have to say mr. Leonard. I really appreciate your your attempts to try to keep people civil and nice And it's a really good forum um I am in favor of the greenway option And for that reason I do not support the progressive rail contract In my opinion, um There seems to be a trained at any cost mindset in the rtc It just seems that way to me And it seems there's been a strategy of kind of like a ratchet to promote the pro train agenda The first ratchet was the acceptance of the ten million two hundred thousand dollars to purchase the line Knowing there was a stipulation the money could only be kept if the line was used for recreational and freight train purposes And uh, this has been used as a tool against the huge public desire for a greenway in our county We should give the money back The acceptance of the ten million two hundred thousand dollars is being now used as an argument as a to contract with progressive rail Uh a contract with progressive rail will further prevent conversion of the line to a greenway Again, you are going counter to the desires of a large Constituency If you vote for progressive rail, we will all lose control over the use of the rail line Please don't take us down with the rail at any cost ship Please vote against the contract. Thank you. Thank you Good afternoon. Good afternoon chair commissioners My name is jillian greensight and i'm here speaking on behalf of the sierra club You received our letter of june 6th and i will summarize As a general statement the sierra club is in support of moving freight by rail And i think if you ratify this contract, it would be very important for you to track Whether more freight is removed from the roadways onto the rail line So in the future we could base our opinions on some data not just general statements As you know Santa Cruz sits in one of the world's relatively few biodiversity hotspots Therefore it is critical that for any of the human infrastructure we put in that we consider environmental issues And the sierra club's letter has detailed for you some areas where which we feel should be part of this contract We feel that there should be an environmental protocol with best management practices regarding pesticides if any are used Any tree trimming tree removal that adhere to local state and federal regulations To avoid bird nesting periods, etc needs to be spelled out Progressive rail is not responsible for fencing as per the contract But fencing will need to be built and we would encourage that you make sure that that is Cognizant of and designed to avoid preventing wildlife crossing We are opposed to the railcar storage on the north coast Although there seems to be some vagueness about whether that will actually take place That needs to be spelled out clearly section 6.3 regarding buildings again It's a bit vague where they might be or if they would be But that needs to be spelled out so we clearly know who has control over such land use issues And uh, finally that we would ask you that you consider Negotiating with progressive rail to undertake upgrading the line to class 4 continuously welded rail within the time span of the contract. Thank you Good afternoon. My name is Matthew J. I'm general manager for lineage logistics here in town We have three cold storage warehouses Two are on rail spurs What I'd like to say is that we need rail service here in town We are uh in the middle of the season right now And uh, we probably expect well over 100 million pounds of fruits and vegetables that come through If we don't have a rail option For our customers, it's just going to it's going to back up and it's going to be a problem for our economy So that's really what we want to say is that You know, we need to go forward with progressive rail just really to help keep our economy going This is the timing is that we are in the peak season right now. It's coming in heavy and we got to go forward Thanks for your comments My name is glenn salts I'm a resident of santa cruz county And I've written a letter to the rtc as a citizen and physician About grave concerns to public health if you hastily support a progressive rail before review of the ucis study You are not compelled to contract with progressive rail today, and I appreciate mr. Leopold Your choice of saying it's not fair to characterize people as rail haters I support greenway and progressive rail and voted for Train in portland where I had lived previously And rode the train to the airport as recently as 48 hours ago My habit suggests using medical language to frame your decision There are alternatives to surgical implantation of the midwestern freight carrier into our santa cruz public Body once implanted you will not be able to reduce the Progressive trail implant without sustaining Damage emergency do something today does not substitute for informed consent and risks and alternatives Uh We can view Terrible medicine as a not good way to inform public policy And we do not want to damage future public trust to support future clean transportation That includes hov electric bus and safe cycling Morph rate in a tourist train Of sipping lattes or a glass of wine is not a solution for transportation in south county Is not social justice and is more like anesthesia Because voting for progressive rail today will not reduce highway 1 commute by a single minute now or in the future Do not approve progressive rail contract today. Thank you. Thank you Good afternoon. Hey everybody. I can speak fast. I'm going to go really quick First off everybody's really passionate in this room. That's great But I saw let's be patient tolerant and understanding of everybody. That's how we're going to get to consensus in this community I'm an entrepreneur. I co-founded and the CEO of inboard technology We make lightweight personal electric vehicles and we're totally agnostic trains buses planes anything it all works for us So I've got no stake in this. I'm not a nimby. I believe in data Data insights, and I think if you look at the age demographic in this room for the pro trainers It gives you an inclination of where the future is headed Lightweight personal mobility. We're 30 people in Santa Cruz We've raised 12 million dollars and brought that to this community over the last two years If you want to find out more watch shark tank season eight episode 10 We're undergoing the biggest transportation paradigm shift since the internal combustion engine in 1900 The amount of change we're about to see over the next 10 years is going to be massive We're engaged with the likes of Daimler tesla for gm shape for automotive group and bird the fastest growing company in the history of the world When looking at this, we've engaged with california assembly member christin olson the german ministry of transportation Karima deli who's the head of the french parliament who's chairing the eu commission on mobility and all of it is looking at decentralized ways Divorcing ourselves from traditional infrastructure and adopting new multimodal ways of transportation This is how my generation is going to look and to be totally honest We're going to look back at this commission here and we're going to say were they looking forward to the future Or were they looking backwards in antiquated technology? Um, you know, I think we're being very short-sighted. We're looking at sunk cost And we're getting in bed with non-community stakeholders I had a great conversation with jason collada who runs public affairs with progressive And he doesn't know why the agreement has to be even for the entire line He doesn't want it for the west side He said that he doesn't agree with the way the ceo and the legal counsel have negotiated the matter So why are we rushing into these things? I mean the guy's right there and he'll tell you You a massive opportunity in front of you to embrace a new and emerging technology and platforms Right now you guys have had nine months to do something and we haven't done it And now it's like, you know, you need a babysitter and you're about to go out for dinner and they cancelled So you just run out in front. There's a drug dealer on the corner. You know, it's just for tonight It's not a big deal. We'll get another one later on. This is not the best way to move forward. Thanks everybody While a very highly entertaining speech It's totally not fair that I have to follow that guy Yeah, well, hold on for one moment. You know calling My concern about people calling each other names also has to do with calling out people's age So, uh, thank you Let's let's remember everybody in the room And we all have, you know, some might call that experience but some other might say that they look at things a different way But let's remember let's focus on the issues not on on the personalities of the individual speakers Wow, have you turned on the button yet? I still have two minutes. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah So i'm john martinelli And I would like to thank all of you for The time that you spend doing this kind of stuff because it can't be fun And I've been watching you and you're really paying attention to the speakers and I really appreciate that Um, I'm a business guy and I'm a bike rider I understand and support the idea of continuing rail service for freight for watsonville watsonville needs that we get that But we need to break this thing into and leave the northern part of the of the of the rail Open for a bike trail and a and a and a walking lane It would be an amazing resource That would bring people that that would stay in our hotels pair hotel occupancy tax and all that good stuff that We could we'll never have it again The Via terse oh so bike lanes and and hiking trails connect communities. That's something that we're also missing So between watsonville and santa cruz. There are so many Crossings that if we have a train going up there, it's going to create gridlock That will impact our our roads a lot worse than they are now Because it has to stop at every one of those every one of those crossings And and and also as a as a And I wish we had more time to really talk about this, you know greg Our community is not engaged and we do need to spend more time Having conversations like this and i'm sorry that I wasn't prepared for this But I I do support freight rail for watsonville But let us do a a a bike trail and a hiking trail in the north end of the county and turn it into Just the the coolest thing that this county could have to bring people that that are going to spend money in our community watsonville needs Support it's we're very poor and and anyway, so Next time i'm going to come more prepared, but thank you for your for your support. Thank you Good afternoon Good afternoon commissioners. I'm william howe. I'm a long time multi-generational resident in santa cruz Working real estate and uh working job creation Dear commissioners Your decision today will Impact and affect the entire 32 miles of the central corridor for the next 10 years As you're all aware the ucis study is set to be available this fall It would be poor practice to accept a 10-year contract Just prior to receiving and evaluating this important report a yes today would severely restrict and remove all the corridor options If progressive rail group has any long lasting interest in santa cruz county, they will they'll reapply The contract is filled and i've read this thing multiple times the contract is filled with concerns of red flags To the disadvantage of the rtc and the citizens of santa cruz county the proponents who have assured everyone There is no likelihood that freight or rail storage will materialize north of watsonville yet progressive rail contract only refers to and references exhibits storing up to 100 cars on the north coast I've so rarely seen a contract that gives party terms and rights that they don't intend to use This group is here to make a profit who blames them no one We support even the last few companies that currently use commercial freight in watsonville This there is a current freight operator now voting no on this proposed contract gives rtc the ability to come back And draft a clear and clean agreement to ensure those freight users are protected Please don't let one mile affect the remaining 31 Also As you protect the interests of a few companies remember the vast number of local businesses That would be negatively impacted by poor and disruptive freight use Consider those impacts who adjacent properties to those who have made massive and lengthy efforts to attract and retain those businesses Those local businesses have spent hundreds of millions of dollars and employ many thousands of people Please thank you. Thank you Good afternoon. Good afternoon. My name is tad velletrop. I'm a resident of santa cruz um Very concerned about the rush to hand over the santa cruz county rail corridor To an out-of-state rail company one with questionable ethics and motives uh, and no real uh stake in our communities And while I recognize the the need to provide service for four shippers in watsonville, there are certainly Solutions that would allow us to work around this without locking us into a 10-year contract With progressive a contract that would greatly that could greatly restrict our ability To develop our choices regarding how we utilize this precious corridor Deeply concerned that no one seems to know or say what progressive has in mind for our corridor Why is it that the public doesn't know? What they want to ship through our communities or what they might store along the line What are the possible dangers the hazards? What are we not being told when it comes to progressive? And this corridor process Rail rail or a combination of the two These should be choices That the public gets to make unfettered by progressive's authority and their bottom line I urge our commissions to exercise prudence here To hold off on this corridor give away Give the public the benefit of the results of the feasibility study that is pending and allow us to make informed choices With clarity and options that currently are not afforded our constituents. Thank you. Thank you Good afternoon. Good afternoon I wanted to get in a little bit and share a little bit of my driving experience over this year Especially when it pertains to dealing with those big heavy freight trucks along our roads When we pass through when I have to pass along them on a Nero shoulderless highway like that of highway 17 It's stressful I love it I love as well as my friends experiencing anxiety that shouldn't need to be had while driving But here we are with portions of the highway known as big moody curve and redwood estates pick and pull Is accident rubbish pickups are poorly executed and tires get damaged talk about playing with my life Where's the fabricated outrage when it comes to this my item? There's a speed limit on highway 17 for trucks of 35 miles per hour for certain segments causing a huge bottleneck The highway 17 bus it was one time involved in a side swipe hit and run by a pickup Because of how dangerous this corridor is in tandem with poorly trained drivers Talking about the drivers on the road not our bus drivers. They're great Shout out to them Memorial Day weekend inbound departure 815 from san jose deriden actual departure 903. Thanks to traffic labor day 11 30 a.m Departure arrived into san jose 140 two hours trip time is a norm during holiday travel Um to wrap this all together We have traffic problems and to sit by and let freight traverse to corridors like 17 laurel street mission street and any other narrow corridor Especially those with only one lane per direction is to enable this problem The question today is do we accept progressive rail or do we let some mystery company picked by the surface transportation board? by force could the by the Become the fearful wicked operator of the west that we have less control of Because the feds pick it out instead of us when a natural disaster event happens A recession jacks up gas prices. Do we want to keep redundant keep the rail or do we just want to let it go to waste? Thank you. Thank you Good afternoon. Good afternoon supervisor and board. My name is jonathan kolodinsky Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you on this issue. I'm a local small businessman and I observed the oil tankers in the watsonville area Fundamentally i'm in support of local business and don't want to do anything to impede the success of the existing businesses But that being said i'm opposed to the progressive rail deal north of watsonville I fully support freight train service here in watsonville and see that that's been a vital part of the community for decades Um and don't necessarily mind the tankers in the watsonville industrial area But don't know that the people of santa cruz who prefer storage of petroleum tankers to a well-maintained pedestrian corridor It just doesn't seem fitting for the santa cruz county community as a whole And I don't think that the trestles could support the train traffic Where would stations go and how many people would really use this? There is only room for one direction of rail traffic And I can't understand how there would ever be an efficient passenger rail system the cons just simply Outweigh the pros. Let's not rush a decision that has been Going to have such a significant impact on the county for years to come And please don't mortgage our environment and the financial future by approving this contract. Thank you After good afternoon. My name is glenn schaller. I'm the political coordinator at the monterey based central labor council afl cio We have 80 affiliated unions about 37 working Working-class families So, um, we have supported the idea of having light rail and bike trail in this county Since the hearings were held in sacramento to first get a hold of that 11 million dollars We strongly supported measure d here in santa cruz county and measure x in monterey county Because of the race class and geographic issues that are there in both counties The city of selenus and the city of watsonville are the two most union dense communities in our two counties And not surprisingly many people leave those communities in the early morning to work in agriculture in hospitality We need a way for folks to be able to get from one place to the other and we need a freight train Available to the mostly union companies that you've heard from today I'm a very proud member of teamsters 912 from right here in watsonville And most of the employers you've heard from today have 912 members who live here in watsonville or in surrounding areas I really urge you to vote for the progressive rail contract. This is a great way to move this forward You have ways to address issues as they come up and it moves us into the situation where we can use more information In the future to change things if we have to thank you. Thank you Good afternoon. Good afternoon. I'm laura bezich and I came to say that I don't believe this is about transportation I believe this is about new industrial development from these companies that are Serving the petroleum and the chemical industries and they're using this to get their foot in the door So that they can come later on and and use these legal clauses and things in the contract To do more development in that direction, which is not good for the people of santa cruz You know, we're currently In of six mass extinction and it's caused by these very corporate entities that this company serves We don't want to be engaging with the company with that reputation Who say one thing now it's about lumber. It's about food It's not about that. Look at their track record Look at what they've done in their own hometown and the chemical spills and the pollution that they've cost They don't care about people. They're master manipulators and maybe you haven't seen through that yet Please don't sell us out We need you to take a stand here now in this time in this country To stand for the values that this country was founded on and keep this place beautiful Keep it for the people of america Good afternoon. Thank you I Commissioner leopold. I mean, excuse me commissioner. Coonerty's questions to staff at the outset were significant He asked If the contract would create any hurdles to removing the track staff said no Is the $300,000 liquidated damage clause a hurdle? Is a time limit for exercising the escape clause are hurdle I submit it is Commissioner Coonerty's alternate at the last meeting mr. Schifrin Said that staff was executing The policy of this commission He may be right You guys are gonna have to answer that I submit that a bad policy Has resulted in a bad contract And all you need to do Is look at the response to the public records act request Initially ignored by six weeks. Why? I submit it was ignored because they did not want the public to know That they had a deal in the works with um progressive before they did the rfp And excuse me before they did the rfp and before they issued a notice of default to iowa pacific If iowa pacific Was in default in december They were in default a year before I submit that staff is executing your policy In a way to create an appearance of fairness an rfp when they knew The game was up before they issued it And anyone who has read the public records responsive to the request about the transactions before the or before the arti arti What can read and see That this was a done deal. Thank you. I opposed the contract Good afternoon. Good afternoon. My name is greg becker. I live south of liselva for since 1980 I've written a couple of pieces for the sentinel and paharonian About these topics and in fact tomorrow in tomorrow's paharonian, you can pick up a commentary. It's called a What is called a rail Travelogue and commentary I am probably the only person in this building who has actually ridden the train from watsonville to santa cruz And you can read about that in tomorrow's paharonian But I want to talk about is hazardous material reporting This is a place that blindsides many Local governments including our friends in sonoma and marin counties And mr. Mansourian will be able to share with this commission his experience in discovering how hazardous materials are reported By rail They are not The santa cruz county environmental health service is our reporting agency for hazardous materials They have not received a report from iowa pacific And they do not expect to receive one from progressive rail When you hear about exemption Environmental hazards are exactly the place where exemption most comes to bear You will never Know nor do they know now what is in those cars? It says liquefied petroleum gas hazardous material 1075 and mr. Mendez has told people that the cars are empty If you talk to hazardous material people they'll tell you the cars are never empty And in fact are more dangerous half filled because of the presence of oxygen There is a great possibility. No, not a great possibility. It could happen So I would ask you to consider your loss Pardon my quivering voice I consider your loss of local control Beaman Thank you. Thank you Good afternoon Hi, I'm Roxby Hartley. I'm the operations director at agron I don't know if everybody knows where a biodiesel producer in the city of Watsonville We have a spur we can spark six cars for offloading material Biodiesel next year. We think we'll offset about 20,000 pound no 20,000 tons of carbon dioxide for the environment And also our fuel reducers particulates Now to get our business operation. We need to be able to have a reliable operation on the line When we order cars, we'll be getting 10 cars a week at least And those cars are 50 000 a piece So we're going to have half a million dollars of goods on the rail Every week and we need to be sure that can get delivered. So we need a low risk operator in place So we can get our business going. Thank you very much. Thank you Good afternoon. Good afternoon commissioners. My name is Matt ferrell. I live in Santa Cruz From 1980 to 1982 I lived at cedar street in aptos, which is directly across from the rail line and there was freight service on the line at that time and I'm here to encourage you to support the agreement with progressive rail And move forward with re-establishing that service on the line. I think it's a benefit to the community. Thank you. Thank you Good afternoon I'm paul shellhammer. I live here in south county We have south county businesses that use the freight services of the branch rail line And more will do so With the transload facility in watsonville that the proposed operating agreement provides for It would be greatly to the south county's disadvantage if this agreement were not approved today We understand that there are those elsewhere in the county Who can't wait until there actually is a transit rail proposal so they can have a fight about transit rail But there is no transit rail in this agreement None of the community's options regarding transit rail are foreclosed by this agreement None of the commission's options Regarding transit rail are foreclosed by this agreement This agreement has nothing to do with transit rail Orson wells used to promise on behalf of palmas on wines. We will sell no wine before its time I'd like to see our community Promise we will have no transit rail fight before its time I urge you to approve this operating agreement as recommended by your staff. Thank you. Thank you Good afternoon. Good afternoon chairman leopold commissioners bruce saw hill santa Cruz I encourage you to adopt the progressive agreement as advised and I said this is not about as mr. Schollhammer said this is not about the ultimate disposition of the rail line whether it's the fort vision or the greenway vision or something else with Electric skateboards or atomic hovercraft or whatever It's um, it's about taking care of our existing freight obligations Which seem to be just about entirely in Watsonville and avoiding being having a freight operator be assigned to us by the federal government Who might have no concern for the community rather than one that wants to become a good neighbor in a local business so it's almost It's almost like when you own a car you operate it on a network You drive it on streets that other people share and so you have to carry insurance And you have to wear your seatbelt. Well, we need to have a rail operator And that's like carrying insurance and wearing your seatbelt and even if you're only going to own the car for another year Um, the policeman isn't going to understand that when you say well The seatbelt broke and I figured I was going to sell it in a year. So I don't need one So I encourage you to To adopt the progressive rail agreement. Thank you. Thank you I'm ryan sanitaro santa cruz and We have a freight problem and we have a rail corridor that has a A big question about how it's going to be used the coast portion You got two separate issues here And uh, and john martinelli said uh break it in two. Well, why wasn't it in two to start? Why doesn't this contract just address the freight issue? Why does it conflate the uh, the rail corridor the The coastal portion. Well, I think it does because staff Refuses to And to engage with the community to engage with the the real wishes of people to have the possibility of a trail And they've put these things together. So they have you have all these people here saying approve the contract because I want freight Well, guess what we want freight. We don't want Progressive rail to get their teeth into the and their rights on the right of way up up and down the coast and It it's I think that the the simple fact that These negotiations were started way in advance and they were conflated. I mean progressive rail. What are they? They're all They're a freight company. They don't want an excursion train up. They're not going to make money that way so you need to to Refuse the contract today and get staff to put something together that actually addresses the needs of this community To have both freight and the options For the coast. Thank you Thank you Good afternoon Thank you commissioners. I'm sure you're thoroughly testing your patients and your bladders First off, I imagine how stressful this is for for you all The pressures and persuasion of such a big decision However, please don't fall victim to this persuasion Look deep inside yourselves And ask is this truly the best decision for not just us, but as the planet as a whole. Thank you Hi Brian people. It's trail now Um, I'm enjoying the the the awakening of the public and and so this is an enjoyment for all of us I think you know, I've been I said I've been coming here for 20 years um And so it's good to see the public voicing there and I'm hopeful that Not only the commissioners, but staff listens because I don't think staff listens I was actually our group was actually part of One of the five proposing companies Our proposal was to sub out freight North south of lee road We were going to do that and we were going to bring 2.5 million dollars to Work with the the the community on finding alternative uses of that rail line from lee road north Um, I was actually pretty offended that That staff was working behind the behind the scenes You know, I don't have a lot of time. I'm an engineer for a corporation. I'm building a house I got kids going off to college and then when I get Some back room deals from staff Where they're playing a game and they come out with an rfp Saying hey, we're we're looking for creative ideas and and then You know, you're you're wasting my time You're wasting roaring camps time. You're wasting other people can't afford time if you're playing games That's wrong to do that personal tax. Just try to keep it to the contra I got personally attacked I was personally attacked with my time I don't have a lot of time for this. This is games and that's the big problem with this agency To this community. So there's no trust Again, I've been dealing with this agency for 20 years All right active for 10 So i'm tired of the game playing It's getting old Thank you I want to just remind everybody that we're trying to talk about the progressive rail contract Not the individuals Whatever side you take or even the staff or the personal commissioners. So good afternoon. Good afternoon My name is Doug Erickson By day I work for a tech company. I've been in tech for 30 years By night and weekends. I run the Santa Cruz new tech meetup We're 4 000 plus members we meet on the first wednesday of every month We're the eighth largest in the u.s. Which says something about our community My wife and I moved here in 1974 and we raised our family here and We love the whole Monterey Bay here We've We were my wife and I are here to urge you to vote no today on the contract or at the very least Do not sign it until you have fixed some of the flaws that are currently in it. So Um As the sierra club and many other petitioners and voices here today have indicated The contracts flawed with emissions that would protect our coast our wildlife Our tourism and our community and as we've heard today, there's no clause in in phase two That uh that would allow us to extract ourselves from the from this relationship so But it shouldn't be a surprise because progressive is a freight company. They're not a transportation company And that's what we need in Santa Cruz is we need to address these issues. I'm neither pro train or pro trail I'm saying we need to address these issues. This contract is a mistake. Um, I can having been in this business The tech business. I've seen a lot of contracts in 30 years and This one smells like diesel and toxic waste. So I would urge you to to listen to the constituency majority And to your recent consultant Jared Walker who warned about the danger of one group rushing to claim a space before all concerns have been addressed That's it. Thank you Good afternoon. Good afternoon. My name is trover park I am a supporter of rail and trail on the santa cruz branch rail line and I am an 18 year old supporter of that um I want to call out a couple things that people have mentioned about the progressive rail contract now. I um I have a little bit of inherent bias on bias on rail. I'm an employee of the santa cruz big trees in pacific railway and um, I want to point out though that people seem to have an inherent fear about uh pro pain And other toxic materials being shipped on the line um I know the santa cruz branch line well I operate on a very small portion of that line and there is purely no area Uh north of watsonville where any hazardous materials are going to be shipped. I think it's a uh ill-informed concern Because of the fact that there's just purely nowhere that that material is going to be shipped There's very little freight cut out past watsonville But hopefully that would be developed by a company like progressive rail um But at the at the present stage that that's just not there and there's a very uh small chance that Basically no chance that there would ever be toxic shipments past watsonville. The other thing um someone mentioned About the tank cars being stored on the line. I'm not in support of tank cars being stored on the line I think it's a waste of uh that branch rail line. It's a very Um a great opportunity we have here to use it, but um Someone mentioned that railroads do not have the right or don't have the uh Need to inform people what's in those cars I know people walk along those cars while they're stored out on the line And I'd like you to take a look when you next time you go out there on the triangular plaques on the side of those cars Those are called hazmat plaques if there are anything in those cars that are toxic that plaque will have something on it It's a requirement by the federal railroad administration to have a plaque on the side of the cars if they are shipping Toxic materials and I know this because I took a whole rules class on this And uh, so if there is toxic materials in the cars, there will be plaques there And if there aren't then there won't be anything on the plaque. Thank you Good afternoon everyone. Thank you for being here and thank you for all your work It's very clear to me that this is a very complicated county And I think it's absolutely essential that all the needs including freight needs And the needs of bikers and walkers be taken into account And this seems to me to be a rushed decision. So I would ask you to take a step back Listen to the various people more carefully and in more depth as some of you has said Vote no on this now and take some time to listen more carefully to the community. Thank you Thank you Good afternoon. Good afternoon commissioners monu konig. Uh, I work in polling and survey research I helped greenway to collect 10 000 signatures of support in favor of a greenway and not a train very specifically I'm currently working on with the public works departments in the county on a stormwater survey Um, I want to urge you to spend your remaining time today finding a third way A solution that helps the businesses in watsonville to deliver the freight they need to Without signing the progressive rail contract as it stands before you today There are issues with the contract as commissioner burtrant pointed out section 5.1 initial rehabilitation and repair Requires the tracks to be repaired to milepost seven not the miniscule amount used today Which staff said will cost 2.2 to 3 million dollars. Maybe the FEMA money will come through Maybe it won't but if you sign this contract today, we're on the hook for it Uh, furthermore, there's the 300 000 dollar termination clause, which if we do not do uh rail between milepost zero and seven We're liable for Um Commissioner cap it asked about what we get in return. Uh, what the payments are going to be I'd point him to section 7.4 license fees Which says the progressive rail is not required to pay a dime until uh a year and a quarter from the signing of this contract So we were not expect any money from progressive rail for uh more than a year Uh, as someone who works in public opinion, I can tell you that the prospects for funding passenger rail don't look good Right, both, uh, sonoma and marine passed a sales tax to support their smart train Uh, santa claire passed a sales tax to support bart Um, and the cal train if the temperature in this room doesn't show you, uh, we're not going to get a sales passed Passed for a passenger train in this community. So let's not commit ourselves to it Um, what's the solution? I think commissioner, uh, johnson hinted at it Uh, let's first move to implement plan b fix the pahero river bridge and implement an independent track mobile Or mobile if necessary Um, second conduct a full eir of the progressive contract so that we do get a true sense of the impacts of more intense great use And finally, uh, go back to progressive and renegotiate some of the problematic causes raised today. Any other work? Thanks Good afternoon. Good afternoon. My name is jasmine. It's great to see some familiar faces and some friends as well as some new faces But that's what a community is I suppose However, I'm not going to be speaking on my own behalf today I received a statement from the mayor of capitol a michael termini and I would like to read an email from him Verbatim for the rest of the room if that's acceptable Dear rtc members first. Let me apologize for this 11th hour email I was planning on speaking today, but had a last minute emergency My issues with the complete lack of cooperation by staff in the matter of a much needed inspection of the capitol attress Eight months ago. We met with george and louise in the capitol city manager's office and determined the trestle was due to Be inspected since the last inspection called for another to be performed in five years The last inspection was five years ago and since then the trestle has experienced significant damage after the Running of the polar express two years ago Let me be perfectly clear. I do not care if a trail only a rail and trail or just a rail happens on this right of way My only interest is the protection of the citizens of capitol I do not need to elaborate on the damage to life and property that would occur should the trestle fall I will close in saying the staff of the rtc has completely turned a deaf ear to our request for the last eight months And I find it has gone from simple negligence to criminal I assure you if this matter is not attended to immediately I will not be satisfied with merely bringing to our city council the steps necessary to through legal steps To prevent trains from crossing the trestle, but will expend all my energy in bringing criminal charges against staff and members of the rtc Should a disaster occur. Sincerely michael termini mayor city of capitol. Thank you Good afternoon. Good afternoon. Um chair leopold commissioners. My name is sarah clark. I'm an attorney I represent santa cruz county greenway on this matter I urge you urge you caution in moving forward to approve this proposed contract today The california environmental quality act is the state's bedrock environmental law It is intended to inform agencies like yourself and the public of the environmental harm of proposed projects And to require mitigation and alternatives when the harm is significant as elected officials You all know about sequas requirements Yet the rtc has done absolutely no analysis of the potential environmental impacts of increased freight traffic on this line This is a problem both as a policy matter and as a legal matter We detailed the potential harms to air quality to traffic to public health to biological resources And noticeably although rtc responded to some of the legal issues Has provided no information about these potential environmental impacts nor has it rebutted our detailed letter Instead the rtc is choosing to rely on technical technicalities raising a real specter of community litigation In my experience courts are not inclined to defer to exemptions and preemption When it is such a significant project with high controversy and a likely increase of abuse In addition, I wanted to briefly address Staff's response that there are no hurdles created by this agreement to a choice on the unified corridor investment study This is this response was not true both as a legal matter and as a practical matter The commission may terminate the proposed agreement, but if it does it needs to go to the surface transportation board To pursue abandonment of the line If progressive comes in and builds up the freight service then the surface transportation board is not likely to grant an abandonment petition Even if the progressive goes with the commission to the stv And for that reason you've created a legal impediment. Thank you Good afternoon Good afternoon. I'm bill cook. I live in Santa Cruz I'm here today to urge the commission not to rush headlong into this proposed agreement with progressive rail We know the rtc has known about iowa pacifics need to get out of the agreement since december However, the commission has not yet undertaken any crucial studies to understand Whether this proposed course of action is the right one for this community We have no environmental review Even though increased freight operations would bring pollution noise traffic and construction throughout the county We have no economic review even though the past two operators have failed and conditions for freight transportation has worsened And we have no results from the unified corridor investment study Even though the commission promised the voters that it would study all potential uses of the corridor in an open transparent public process These studies are essential for making an informed decision about the future of this valuable asset. Thank you Thank you Good afternoon. Good afternoon. My name is Barbara Rettger. I'm just finishing The greenway attorney the rtc staff has presented you with only One possible path forward either sign the agreement with progressive rail or suffer the consequences Greenway is here today to present you with the viable alternative that Better meets all the rtc's stated goals do not Do not sign The contract with progressive rail today instead explore Other options for servicing existing freight customers in watsonville Greenway is not opposed to continued operation in this part of the line Negotiate with iowa pacific To help them get the trains back up and running In the interim period agree to forgive debt and how and help cover cost This short term cost would be much less than the repair costs for the rest of the line Enter into a short term contract with a new operator for Just this four a mile section of track Either have them work as a subcontractor to iowa pacific or agree to transfer only a portion of the freight easement Engage union pacific to serve watsonville shippers via short switch moves from watsonville junction yard One rtc consultants proposed this idea in 2004 or If none of these work out work for the four existing freight customers to use trucking services in the interim period Then undertake the necessary studies adequate environmental review and economic analysis and already underway a unified corridor investment study Then after all these studies are done if the results say that the freight is in the best interests of the county Consider entering a long-term contract with a new operator. Thank you Thank you Good afternoon. Good afternoon members of the commission My name is david eight from lasalva beach And I wanted to speak to the effects that this transportation crisis has had on me my family and my community Um became really apparent about three years ago And we took our daughter out of terra redwood school and now we home school because we just couldn't spend the Hour and a half every day to get her into the soak hill village Um, I work fewer hours. I'm home for fewer dinners. It has been really difficult and we've Felt real optimism with the passing of measure d that there would be near-term solutions to this crisis And I would like to inform you that I don't feel that optimism anymore I feel that greenway has provided the rtc with a simple focus solution to the issues presented by the failure of iowa pacific That this option would meet all of the rtc's stated goals Existing freight customers would have their needs met This would mitigate any risk associated with stopping freight service The rtc would stay in compliance with all requirements imposed by prop 116 funding and california transportation commission The rtc would be able to complete the unified corridor study Without a weight on the scale. I think if we just Hold our horses wait for Our unified corridor study to complete. We can make an informed decision about the future of transportation in this community. Thank you Thank you Hi commissioners. My name is carolin bridget flin. I've lived in Santa Cruz for about 30 years I really appreciate the amount of time it takes to serve on something like you're doing so I appreciate your service I'm urging you to I thought that the languaging of considering a third way Is a great way to think about this it does seem as if there is a way to address south county freight concerns and not address the entire rail In my letter to you when I said I was seriously concerned and urging you not to adopt the current contract as stated The two things that I pointed out there are lots of issues One is my reading of their proposal Is that progressive is an excellent organization and they want to they want to aggressively expand their freight service So i'm stating from their proposal the successful resurrection of an underlight underutilized railroad Is precisely where progressive excels haven't taken Several lines from the brink of abandonment which are now thriving conduits of commerce Just one example is progressives wisconsin northern railroad where they acquired 37 miles of coat hangers and rusty trail and today generate over 70 000 railcars a year Rolling over the most heavy-duty track in wisconsin So they have a lot of ideas about expanding freight and that's a concern to many of us And the contract is for the entire rail line. So again, I suggest For there are media problems to address with south county Create a contract that addresses south county The last thing I wanted to say is that it seems to me looking at the rfp That there was genuinely inadequate time for other people to bid I was really surprised to learn that progressive fate For progressive rail had formally pitched their service to the scc rtc In a 27 page in person presentation in october The rfp came out in december and it gave less than 30 days Over the christmas holidays For other people to respond. I think it was an adequate timing. I urge you a third option. Thank you Good afternoon. Good afternoon monica maguire again I don't want to repeat items. You've already heard but I would love to underline them Let's just hold that thought please the pieces I haven't heard discussed is how many public questions have been asked By me and others in writing that have not had public answers Over many months. That's very concerning and brings up the Great idea of another principle to bring up here of the precautionary principle Because there hasn't been a good discussion of both sides of the passions on this We don't have the ability to say that there's enough known and precaution is what we want our elected officers to take Additionally, there seems like there's this Way that we've been promoted to fight about certain things while other items have not been answered And that's not necessarily your fault, but it would be great if you would step up and say Why don't we make a complete list of both sides and use this county's incredible resources of the santa cruz county mediation conflict resolution center and the nvc center These are incredible resources here that no one's brought up yet and that we really all desire Not to mention you have this much public input. You've feared complacency in the past. You haven't got it now Let's pull together and talk. It's a really wonderful time And lastly, I've seen firsthand in this county how phases work Another reason to bring in the precautionary principle because phases Mean that fewer people show up at the next phase or the next little piece or the next little piece And that's taken as complacency when really it's just too inconvenient for us Thank you so much for your attention and all your good work Good afternoon. Good afternoon commissioners. My name is robert singleton. I'm the executive director of the santa cruz county business council I'm going to keep my comments short so our organization back in July of last year voted 86 of our membership voted in favor of the trail only option However, that's not really what i'm here to talk to you about today We also don't have an official stance on this contract in particular We just have a lot of concerns and we've actually sent you guys official correspondence in the past Of which we didn't get an answer which was unfortunate, but we have asked some questions Our biggest concern is really about how the signing of this contract may perhaps undermine the results of the unified corridor study coming out Whether that is a preferred trail only option or perhaps bus rapid transit or any other means of transportation We feel that that study really the results of that study should come out before we jump into anything In particular commissioner mulhorn's a line of questioning earlier about the phase two and the legal remedies for being able to exit a contract after you're already entered into it I think is Really exemplifies where our concerns lie And there's plenty of others have been mentioned today, so I won't get into it But perhaps there is a third option in a way to balance these concerns in a way to still be able to fulfill our freight obligations For our south county businesses while making sure that we aren't putting the car before the horse and reacting before the results of the Unified corridor study come out. So thanks for that consideration Good afternoon. Good afternoon. Thank you all. My name is janey soido um on my drive-in this morning We came by past the rail yard and noticed big creeks lumber sitting there in the yard just waiting I you know, I think I think that here in watsonville we appreciate when county bureaucracy leaves us alone, but we don't appreciate when we've been neglected and regardless of your opinions On whether or not rail transit belongs on the santa cruz branch line You really need to take care of watsonville today I heard a speaker earlier say that express concern that pgr would come in and build up business And that that caused the stb to be unlikely to To approve abandonment gosh, that would be awful if we built up more rail business here in town And improved our economy. So anyway, um, I appreciate your concern. I appreciate staff's work I appreciate council working so hard on this. Thank you Thank you Buenas tardes. Mi nombre es aurelio gonzález y soy resident de aquí de la ciudad de watsonville Good afternoon. My name is aurelio gonzález and I'm a resident here of the city of watsonville I'm in support of the freight rail for progressive I hope you guys do you do diligence on this contract And if it does not work out, we are able to pull out. We we can't get rid of our rail We need to improve it. We need to progress with it And and look into the future Everybody speaks about saying doing something, but yet at the same time I've been hearing about a lot of let's delay this. Let's do another study. Let's do another six months Let's look into it again We have residents here in the city of watsonville 400 approximately they might lose their jobs because we're going to stop we're going to look and we're going to study it Well, there's so many people that might be able to sit down in sanik who's north of us on this couch and watch and go to work But there'll be some residents here. They might be in jeopardy of losing their jobs So there might just be 400, but those are significant 400 for the residents of the city of watsonville so please I support the rail and uh Make sure you do you do jail is on the contract for the progressives. Thanks. Thank you Good afternoon. Good afternoon. My name is denise leonberger. Chelle. I live in santa cruz for 30 years I'm 66 and 11 12th old I just wanted to throw that instance age was important apparently But what I want to say is if they if the commission has the ability to sit back and not vote today There's been enough opposition and enough good points on both sides to relook at this and not vote today I think we need to do something about the watsonville corridor. Keep that open get that moving It's obviously really important to all of us It's the east coast as well as the west coast and in between Keep working on this and make it the best decision for the environment and for the people. Thank you. Thank you Good afternoon chair leopold commissioners My name is mark misciti miller. I'm a professional engineer with more than three decades of experience in public works infrastructure I'm the chair of the chamber of commerce in santa cruz. I'm the chair of the friends of the rail and trail You've received letters both from the chamber and fort. You've received my personal letter and I know today You've heard a lot of noise and hand ringing from all points of view As commissioners, you know that the goal today is to be responsible stewards of an asset the county owns To protect the individuals and businesses that rely on that asset today and in the future Prudentialed experienced transit professionals attorneys staff and commission members have evaluated all the proposals And the recommended operator thoroughly Regardless of who had been selected The no-track opponents would be making arguments against going forward just as they will argue every step of this process into the future This contract does no harm This contract puts in place a credible proven rail operator This contract prevents hardship and disruption of freight services for both south and north county customers It protects the county from fiduciary and legal risks And most importantly it leaves all options forward Open going forward I urge you to approve the progressive rail contract today. Thank you Thank you. Good afternoon Good afternoon. Thank you chair leopold members of the commission. My name is susie mariam I'm from santa cruz and i've worked for the city of watsonville for the last 17 years The freight corridor you are considering as you know is not an unused resource in the county It's been used by freight operators for over a hundred years Businesses in watsonville currently use the corridor and you know they will suffer greatly if the rtc Does not settle on a rail operator today You've heard from them. They're suffering Would you rather that they further clog our overburdened roads with truck traffic? As you've heard today that option is financially infeasible And I would rather have propane Hazardous materials flammable gases transported by train than on our roadways, especially highway 17 Currently as you might have noticed driving to watsonville this this morning There are rail cars stored on the line our businesses that use the line can't operate with Iowa pacific renting storage space to other carriers Impeding access and creating nuisances in our city As we in watsonville know Utilization of the rail line is not an option. It's a necessity for our local businesses to survive We have a thriving industrial sector Fronting on the rail line and it's heavily reliant on that rail line The time is up for negotiation. Please approve the contract with progressive rail today. Thank you Thank you. Well, good afternoon. Good afternoon Chair leopold and rtc commissioners My name is anna cammer and I am a resident of the city of watsonville um, I am also although i'm representing i'm just as a Resident of the city of watsonville. I'm also on the planning commission. I say right there use it um, so I know what a difficult job you have to um take in public opinion and to Measure what you you know all of the reading the packet because I read that packet I know what a chore that is but um, it's important to take in all of the information in order to make a really good decision and um, I'm before you today to support the Taking on a progressive rail as a contractor or an operator on the railroad on the rail line because Watsonville a couple steps statistics about watsonville 40 of the people in watsonville are under the age of 24 That's a young population young population coming up going to need jobs going to need um You know transportation A third of the people the residents of the county live in watsonville Most of them are not here today because they're out working So I feel like i'm taking on those People's opinions I live right on the clifford corridor where the bus goes And I see people and I've talked to them going up and down that corridor people want transportation The businesses in watsonville need this freight line and they need it soon So I urge you to vote for this real contract. Thank you Good afternoon afternoon green mcfarland sands cruise live oak um, I just want to say that I know when bills go through congress That the way they work is that there's all kinds of little side Conversations and deals and all things like that. I think that's what's happened with this contract So that freight in watsonville can't get taken care of unless you have this whole other thing lumped in So I have no idea how you do a third way at this juncture I don't know if there's a way to have friendly amendments and friendly riders go into that contract, but I urge you to Imagine if there's a third way today. Thank you. Thank you Before you start, I want to give you your time. Could I just see how many people still want to speak? If people could just line up that would be great to keep this moving as quickly as possible Thank you, uh, mike said I used to live in I was born raised on the peninsula and still am A bit annoyed that they tore out the tracks in monoray because If I didn't drive down here Yesterday, I would have been stuck on the traffic. I would have had to leave where I currently live in napa Like at 4 a.m. So traffic is tremendously horrendous and You really need to keep those tracks in place because you cannot foreclose future options Somebody talked about the precautionary principle while the precaution here is to keep the tracks intact You take them out you bring up all kinds of legal issues as Well, all of you got my email last week about that If you lose those tracks you're you know Why bother with anything actually? anyway I just wanted to address a couple of points first just To preserve the tracks this contract needs to be approved the issue about whether it goes beyond Beyond it through is the excuse me through the selva beach and the santa cruz Well, I don't think you're going to see any hazardous waste. You might see conceivably You know some lumber being hauled in or out that sort of thing as far as freight's concerned but just to just a pertinent fact would be That there's 10 to 12 million beach visitors a year in this town according to what I The survey of beaches that I did the length of the beach times areas. It's all the way from Davenport to Watsonville and Manrasa beach Uh I think a tourist train Is something you really need to look at and I hope the Unified quarter study considers that as part of the passenger rail service. The reason I say that is Well, the point is that the location of this line cannot could not be better to serve the tourists as well as locals Thank you. And thank you for waiting. I appreciate that Good afternoon German layer poles and RTC members. My name is Nancy Connolly. I'm a 29 year resident of santa cruz Westside I work in santa. I work in Watsonville I'm a founding member of greenway and I'm also a board director of save our shores So you kind of see where I'm going with my decision I urge you all to say no to the progressive rail contract today Um I work in agriculture in santa cruz in Watsonville and I understand the need for freight Um, I do find it interesting that we are one of the largest agricultural companies In the city and we were never contracted contacted By progressive rail to investigate our need for freight With that said The ucis is less than six months away and this is a study that's intended to Determine the best use of the rail um and Mr. Leopold you asked that we keep our comments today to progressive rail However, I think I feel that the decision that you will make today will affect the Whole rail the whole future of the rail And by saying yes to progressive rail you'll lock up our coastal corridor for the next 10 years in the name of running freight um But for reasons of public health transportation livability conservation environment economic revitalization possibly historic preservation and community identity um, I urge you to say no to progressive rail and to um Go with your conscience Look at what the best use is for our community And um, I thank you for your time today. Thank you So I'm going to this is the last call if you're not in line. I'm going to uh, uh, that this will be the last comment Uh, I see uh councilmember, uh, hernandez Good afternoon Good afternoon But my name is philippa hernandez. I'm from here watsonville city of watsonville born and raised here born in district one Which is the industrial area right here where the where the uh, the watsonville train station is at grew up playing around that area You know, it's funny that The rtc was being criticized today for not moving forward on projects and here we are today with people asking for more delays You know, I think we need to move forward. I urge you to vote yes for the progressive contract South county will face an economic disaster if we do not pass this now Voting no could be very expensive as big creek stated as much as 500 thousand a year To vote for more delays is a is a kiss of death to our local businesses to our local jobs Recently, we've already faced a huge job loss when dole left our community We need to keep those 500 jobs that del mar foods has Our community is already economically disadvantaged We don't want to exacerbate this anymore just to appease plain and simple nimbyism. Thank you Thank you Sorry to get off topic, but someone stated six p.m. Meetings in south county. That does sound like a great idea The board of supervisors will be here next monday, uh at seven o'clock. I hope we'll see you all there Hello gail mcnulty santa cruz county greenway um Contrary to the popular belief of many of the people in this room today Today's vote will not take up the tracks or build a greenway Or solve any of our gridlock problems This is we have a current need and that current need Is to make sure that the businesses in watsonville that need freight right now are able to get that freight And yes, this agency has some responsibility there And it's important that watsonville businesses are supported and the businesses throughout the county are supported The pahero bridge needs to be repaired That can be done that this agency can meet these needs Without signing an agreement with progressive rail today So i'm not a civil engineer. I'm not a transportation planner. I actually began my career as a research assistant for the washington post and moved to california as part of a journalism fellowship program And those skills have actually come in handy lately It seems that I and others working with me have done the due diligence on progressive rail that this agency should have done and unfortunately didn't Director dandero did write a rebuttal to our case against progressive rail Which is a very well documented well researched and linked Document that I hope all of you had had have had the opportunity to read Because if you have not you are naive And if you have not read that and if you have not read both director dandero's response to that And our response to his response You are naive I'm gonna ask you to stop stop with the name calling. That's what I apologize, but but I I'm trying to give a warning because watsonville's at risk santa cruz is at risk This operation coming to our county Could do harm in many ways and you need to move forward carefully and I have for you I will be handing out An op-ed that ran today in san francisco chronicle one from the sentinel And also a letter that you all received from our lawyer, which you may not have had time yet to read Thank you Good afternoon. Good afternoon And thank you for holding the meeting here in watsonville. My name is jenny sarmiento I'm a resident of watsonville. I'm also a planning commissioner And I am here to urge you to sign the contract with progressive rail We cannot afford to lose Not one single job in watsonville. We're talking about four or five hundred jobs that possibly could be lost Especially right now when housing is so expensive And families in watsonville have to pull together To pay the rent to three families per household It's unbelievable that the impact the negative impact that this would have in watsonville So I urge you to keep in mind those families that would if they're displaced They will have to seek jobs in santa cruz in the city of santa cruz There goes another negative impact on the transportation the traffic going up north. Thank you. Thank you Good afternoon. Good afternoon. Joe jordan resident of the monterey bay region, but in particular santa cruz Thanks to all of you for everything you're doing and also I just want to say thanks to everybody out here who's been listening and talking You know given what's going on at the federal government now I am I am a democracy junkie and I I could sit here for another five or six hours This is a great process and I'm learning a lot And uh, I'm a big fan of getting to know other people and what makes them tick what they're thinking and maybe where they got Some bogus information or whatever But uh, I mainly decided to come up here and talk everything I would say has been said But uh, I want to represent for a true Major a couple of environmental heroes in our community who could not be here today Namely, uh, you might even be able to guess who he is by looking at me. He looks somewhat like me Um, peter scott another physics guy at least half of you know him right and his wife cilia former mayor of santa cruz I I am involved in a group called the campaign for sustainable transportation And we decided not to take a stand on this issue because There's a bit of dissension in our ranks. I mean, I have really good friends and people whose views and information I greatly respect on both sides of this issue But peter um, said he had to leave the meeting yesterday early, so I didn't get to sound him out I should have called him last night, but he said he in no uncertain terms very forcefully that he Was very concerned if you don't vote now to go ahead with this progressive rail contract As framed I didn't get to ask I'm not enough of an expert on this to know What the rush is unless I mean, maybe it's just there's a gap that has to be filled by hooker by crook You know and it could be that progressive as one of my friends who's also not here He's a big fan of prt. Just like I am by the way I'm open to prt bus rapid transit trains You know as somebody else in planes and automobiles, whatever But as the other guy said progressive rail may well be a company that's mainly a fossil fuel entity That just happens to be dabbling in transportation. I don't know but thank you get her done. Thanks I I believe this is going to be our last speaker so Barry scott aptos, um, you know, I I follow this so closely and I thank everyone The folks that I've talked to on the commission that have been diggers like I am dig dig dig There's a lot of fluff out there and then there's the facts. There's a contract and there's the process Um, there are there you all voted eight eight votes I to to negotiate with the Progressive we have the rail line. We have a legal team. We have uh, director of uh, or or mr. Bautorf, uh, having gone out there with george don darron. We've done a lot of due diligence. Yes, there's a lot of concerns and a lot of Frightening things that have been raised, but I think that we're in good shoes the you are the stewards of Of this this incredible asset and it's mr. Cooner deep said Last year at some time on the radio said this is our children's rail line The and and we have to take care of it and taking care of it means Living up to our obligations to our customers The last thing and it's so important. Watsonville is it loses so often and if we don't do transit You know for them eventually and we need the freight business to keep the the line alive So that we can have transit for south county people and really everyone else freight's great But to me it's a key to the future and i'm a friend a friend of smart and i'm a friend of the rail and trail. Thank you thank you thanks to everyone who Gave testimony and thanks to everybody who stuck around To find out what the commissioners have to say so i'll look to my colleague mr. Rockin First i want to thank everybody for the comments and for the tone of people's comments I mean with few exceptions People really were respectful of each other and that makes such a huge difference in making these difficult decisions The first thing i want to say is that a bunch of the testimony and the letters and emails we've received has been about the The character of um progressive rail that they're gonna they're gonna bring propane and Earlier stuff it wasn't didn't come out today, but fracking to santa cruz county and everything else that the I think the 18 year old and remember his name that got up and spoke not to talk about people's age again But that's what i'll remember about Identifying him that he was self-identified his His comment that Why would you be carrying massive amounts of you know petrochemicals or toxic waste or In santa cruz county, we're not on the roads of somewhere else We're the end of the line and with the end of the electrical line that comes here And the rest of the country's on a grid and we still have one power line that comes into our county um That's going to change but the um To me That is a kind of a fear tactic that's not realistic about what could happen here The fact that in the midwest where there is fracking and all kinds of toxic stuff that we would never allow happen in our county And that that's the business in the midwest means that's what they do there if they come here they're going to have to Ship vegetables and fruits and and you know stuff that people need for construction things in modern technology to make Probably electric motorcycles or whatever In large amounts, but the idea that somehow because it's they do something in the midwest They're going to bring that here and that's going to be what happens I think is very misleading about the business they were trying to develop here and The propane that they're going to move would otherwise be here Anyway, people use propane in this county and they come come on trucks if it doesn't come on the train And there's lots of evidence that it's a lot safer on trains than it is on trucks So that issue doesn't move me much about this issue Secondly, I do believe our legal advice from our legal counsel that We We don't have a choice of just kind of like Ignoring and most people were not saying that we should get rid of the freight service But we that we don't need to do the freight service that we're not under any compulsion to do so or that we don't have to spend And that the idea that we got to move ahead with at least showing that we're trying to Study and move ahead with the possibility of rail chances to keep the 10.2 million dollars that we got from prop 116 I believe that we have to do something in that direction and that the Lots of people have ideas about what we do it what our legal obligations are I'm going to take our legal counsel's advice on that matter and my own common sense about it that The the ctc would be very the state agency would be very unhappy if all of a sudden we just declare Well, thanks for the money, but we're not doing anything to do with rail We want nothing to do with it They're going to want their money back and there's going to be lots of other issues and people are pretty cavalier About how easy it would be to just raise that 10.2 million dollars to buy it, you know replace it with something else I don't think it's quite that easy So i'm very interested in trying to figure out how do we get to the place of eventually having rail service I think people have a myself as well It's difficult when you have to try and how do you get to a final goal when it's not a straight line I mean it's not like let's get started right now building rail if you believe in rail service Let's get that real passenger rail service going It might take us a while to do that It might be that we have to keep the rail we might have to do all kinds of additional study work and other kinds of issues And that's the reason why a number of speakers didn't quite get this idea that we have a two-part Proposal here that the first part of it is we're stuck with that if we vote yesterday But we could decide after the the quarter study comes out that we don't want to have rail here At which point I don't think we would be wise to start spending a lot of money at that point We might have to make a hard decision to pay back the money or do something else But we're not there yet. We don't know what that study is going to show Um and as a number of speakers pointed out until we get the information about that everybody has their ideas about You know what this is about, but i'm not persuaded that rail is the past and dead or something else on the other hand I'm not a real fanatic in that if the study shows us that rail is not really feasible or not likely feasible in the reasonable Planning horizon I'm not going to fight for a train that makes no sense on the other hand I honestly believe that the representation that somehow we could make us a transportation corridor with electric bikes or People bicycling and walking is not realistic So my view about keeping the rail is not because I believe we need to have a train or that that's where we're going But if we tear that I know enough from santa criss county politics And if you tear the rail out and make it into a park basically, which is something we need and that's part of the plan That you'll never get that back for a transportation corridor for bus rapid transit or for some of the other ideas people had So i'm not inclined to be pretty quick. That's the precautionary principle again I'm not quick to tear that rail out only because I think it protects a transportation corridor Not because I know we're going to ever have a train and also people have an idea that the train is going to be a diesel train We're talking about something a lot smaller some kind of a tram or something I imagine if we ever have a rail service, I don't know we'll find out Hopefully the corridor study will enlighten us on that matter I don't believe that Approving this and they're being stuck with the first phase of it means that we're stuck with the second phase I think we can get out. I don't think there's issues with that There's some costs and consequences to it, but that's a risk. I think we should take to protect what otherwise is going on Finally Because there's a lot of us here probably everybody has comments on this I I was surprised at the end of the comments from the public to hear that As some people said let's come up with a third way, which is always in the abstract a great idea Got two people to stick to groups two ideas. Let's have a third way that brings us all together But the proposal specifically that what we solve this is go back and negotiate some new agreement with iowa Iowa pacific that Pardon me that i'm not talking about the people but the idea john is insane I mean Because the same groups and the same people that made those comments were suggesting that we were In their election to not have gotten rid of them five years ago And we've we learned that we know that we're not going to make a deal with them It's over and so we need to have some other alternative here and we did go through I thought a very reasonable process I think it's misleading to suggest that we the fix was in or that we needed to have We were trying to make this agreement with progressive at the expense of others We were trying to move ahead as quickly as we could to get something done here Because we are in a railroad that's in default and it's causing real problems for freight shippers and so forth So I don't know the easy path that we're going to get from where we are now signing this contract To get to eventual what I'd like to see some kind of Transit service on this corridor. I don't know whether it's a train or something else But real transit service that allows people to go 14 miles to Santa Cruz and back Not on their bicycles. I'm a bicycle fanatic. I ride my bicycle up to school At the university. It's an 800 foot climb. So I consider myself a fanatic when I do that But I don't think that's a reasonable transportation alternative. It's a great Recreation alternative. I'm in favor of it. I'm glad we're not just talking about a rail and no Trail or something else that would be there, but to me I don't see in any way that voting for this contract Forecloses the difficult decision we have to make about what we're going to do with this corridor That's going to be coming up for us probably next january or december Starting in october, but probably take us two months to get there. So i'm in favor of supporting voting for this contract I've read it over very carefully. I have read every word and everything that's been sent to me email Pages everything else. It's a thousand pages worth of stuff at least And there's nothing in that that's persuaded me that we're putting ourselves at some huge risk to make this contract So that's why i'm going to support the staff recommendation Mr. Batur and then miss johnson Thank you for those comments, you know, I I want to bring us back and focus on why we're here The item on the agenda before us is whether we're going to review Sign a contract with progressive Railroad and and what's happened what's in this room what's been in this room for the past year is Train versus trail and that's not what we're talking about today, but that's the passion So that's what's overflowing and even though mr. Rockins comments are all over that I'm going to focus back on why we're here. This is about Providing rail service for an operator that is not meeting the needs which we've identified And because of that and because we learned from the last time with iowa pacific that they weren't fulfilling our needs The director initiated a visit where myself and him went back to meet with progressive We're going to say that this was our due diligence now Some people have asked me deep questions about that On the trip was just myself and the director dandero. We did not bring herald a revero with us We did not look into deep dark secrets We looked at some things with progressive But what I saw from progressive and it was an extensive trip. It was three days We went to iowa. We went to wisconsin. We went to minnesota Dead of winter I might point out and the dead of winter for california And it was pretty cold But the the point is is that they took us and showed us everything they had did they show us put their positive foot forward Of course they did Did they bring in negative people to talk to us? Well, there wasn't a lot of people there But we did meet with the mayor of lakeville and he shared with us in private meetings when we had these meetings There was no one else in the room, but executive director dandero and myself and who we chose to be with We asked any questions that we wanted to And all I was looking for on that trip in my direction from this board Was to go find a good operator And when I came back from that trip my report was that this was a good operator They were going to try to develop rail service Okay, which was quoted in there and some people say that developing rail service is a negative thing I don't believe it's a negative thing. I I saw the town of lakeville where they went into abandoned properties They they they took them over they started their business business grew around them Their model is to develop business and be profitable Their model is not to store tank cars Is storing tank cars a part of the business that goes with rail? Absolutely Because they work for customers and customers own cars and they try to meet the needs of their customers So when i'm back here looking the most important thing for me it is to find reliable information And people can speculate and they can give us all kind of end to end about what's going to happen The most trusted person that I have is the legal authorities from this county Okay, our attorney has answered all the questions that we ask I've attended every meeting over the past two years. We go to numerous closed sessions. We ask all the questions We've gathered information I don't want you to think that we're just shooting from the hip to make a decision today And the decision in front of us was reinforced today by a lot of people from watsonville saying don't abandon watsonville And I believe that that you know when you look and i'm going to go get out of the loop a little bit But there's a unified quarter study and I've told people I want to wait for the study before I decide whether we have a trail or a train and I believe this board By putting this contract here and by having the the clause that we have There may be a price tag that we put on the contract and you may think that that's an exorbitant fee And i'm not being fiscally responsible to put that on there But what i'm doing is i'm giving this board and this body and this community a chance to look at the study Evaluated for 120 days and if the will of the people wants us not to continue the contract Then we'll extricate extricate ourselves from that Our attorney has guaranteed us or has guided us the best they can That we're going to be able to do that and I believe that And being up here what I have to do is have to gather the facts make an intelligent decision Not be biased and try to represent the best interests of santa cruz county And the only other comment I want to make is that even though my tag up there says that i'm a santa cruz metro representative I'm also a city counseling for the city of capitol And I want you to know that that I do not have any concerns that might have been expressed earlier about fears for capitol And there has been no measure in capitol or any vote taken that says that we have any distrust or any problem with the rtc So with that I'd like to make a motion that we adopt staff recommendation to approve the contract with progressive railway Second so there's a motion by a bot or seconded by rockin and so then it was miss johnson Mr. Cappett Mr. Mulhern and mr. Coonerty then miss norian hope I get it all right Thank you. I'll keep my comments brief um commissioner mcpherson Who I his alternate and I believe it is really good public policy to preserve the option of passenger rail For the future when we can better develop both feasibility and affordability. That's just good public policy We believe that we need a reliable rail operator in order to fulfill our legal obligations No matter what decisions we eventually make For the use of the rail corridor In the future Progressive seems to be a competent and reliable operator We want to see freight service continue to watsonville as it has been for decades. We need to support our businesses That's extremely important and although this contract as uh Does support that We do have other issues with it and for that reason I will not be supporting Approval of this contract because although the proposed contract solves some of the problems we face with io pacific It exacerbates other issues. I'll be very succinct in outlining them The commission made a commitment to this community to investigate the best use of the rail corridor via the unified corridor study The preferred use of the rail corridor has now become the most contentious transportation Conversation we've had in many many years Ironic since we were all here many of us for the highway one Conversation by putting this contract in place now We are now limiting the rtc in the community to a time window Of four to six months to select a preferred use of the rail corridor After the unified corridor study is published It's hard to imagine that the divisiveness of this issue Can be resolved in four to six months The immediate problem before us Is we need an operator to provide rates for freight service to watsonville in the watsonville community Extremely important the line a few miles north of watsonville is unusable until repaired Which the rtc staff says will take at least till august or september to scope and then it goes out to bid for construction So maybe by the spring perhaps by the early summer of 2019 We will have our rail corridor repaired north of watsonville and if you track that timeline what that means is Our freight operator whoever we put in place now is going to be providing freight To watsonville for the next 12 to 15 months and it's hard to imagine And that's good. We want that to see that happen But it's hard to imagine that that provision of service is going to be an investment of 300 000 dollars Which happens to be the penalty it would take for our rtc to get out of This contract if we chose not to go to fees too By putting this contract contract in place we were saying to progressive That they will only be providing freight service to watsonville again for the next 12 to 15 months That penalty will come from measure d And I think as does commissioner rick fearson that that's unpalatable to the community Considering how difficult was to get it passed and get in collaboration Around that funding measure and as commissioner mulhern has pointed out we get into phase two We have no clear path to get out of the contract Um, which is disconcerting for anybody who's ever done contracts whether you're a rail contract expert or not What we need now is a shorter term solution so that we can provide freight service to watsonville Until we get to the unified corridor study Um folks call it the third option today I don't know what you want to call it But that's really what we need here to solve what's in front of us so that we can have a respectful community dialogue Without penalty without a financial penalty as to what the use of the rail corridor is for the future Um, we need a different contract for freight to watsonville Thank you Okay, uh, mr. Caput And after that will be yet mr. Mulholland This goes back At least seven years When I first got on I remember we were talking about purchasing a railroad line That's what we were purchasing and actually if we did not go forward with purchasing a railroad We wouldn't be having really a discussion right now about bicycle and walking paths and Which which is a wonderful part of this whole idea If we didn't have the railroad that we purchased with taxpayer money And it was mostly state money, but that's what They don't get money on their own. You all pay it. I all we all pay it together It's always taxpayer money, whether it's federal state or local My my vision from the whole time was to have all three That would be the railroad line uh passenger service for south county including freight service And uh, also to have a walking path and also to be able to have bicycles Use it. So the problem is how are the three going to be able to do it together? Well, right now, maybe we don't have every answer But I think that we can work it out and right now for us to not do anything with a railroad I think would be irresponsible It maybe a few months ago It looked like we were rushing into progressive But we did put it off and we put it off to today But every time that I went to a meeting Over the last seven years and there were a lot of them in the evening and there were workshops There were a lot in the afternoon. They were in watsonville. They were in santa Cruz And they always included railroad line Uh bicycle and uh walking paths so my My idea for this is for what's good for district four and south county And um and right now we have to do something and I think we uh, we're not rushing into it I think it's a great idea right now to at least get a contract and get some money in here And try to fix up the rail line And I am very concerned about hazardous materials, uh, you know being transported And obviously I would not none of us would be for doing that until the rail line is actually fixed or whatever But uh, so we're not rushing into that and I agree with uh people almost a lot of people mentioned Our freeways, uh the freeways right now are how we're transporting all hazardous material Highway 17 101 connecting into 156 and highway 129 Uh there and propane is going, uh, you know everywhere also So we're not rushing and saying we're trying to get that all done today What we're saying is we're trying to go ahead with a sensible plan with progressive and I'm trusting that they're going to be able to come through on their promises but um I'm I'm ready to move for approval on this And uh, hopefully we can, uh, you know move forward. I do respect both sides, but Uh, I think in the best interest of watseville and south county We need to go forward. So I will move for approval when we're done discussing. Oh, yeah We already have a motion on the table, uh, uh, mr. Cap there's a second as well So, uh, mr. A bop dwarf and then mr. Rockin made the motion in second so mr. Mollhorn and then mr. Coonerty I'll get you on there. Thank you very much. Um, so I'm I'll pare down some of my comments. Um, I'm glad that everybody is An agreement that this is about an administration coordination and licensing agreement a contract Uh, not a proxy vote for the future of the rail line Um, I disagree though that this is a two-part contract. This is if I can quote our council here It's uh, it's one contract with multiple triggers Those triggers aren't aren't decision points where commissioners get to vote or decide on on which Route to take their triggers that are enacted once we reach those thresholds Um, for example, uh section 5.1 of the contract regarding railroad facilities Commits the commission to bringing somewhere in the vicinity of 23 24 miles of rail line Up to class 1 standards within three years Uh, no mention of where we're going to find the money for it or Whether there is money available. I I'm I'm assuming that the federal and state governments They have pots of rail money, but none of this information has been clarified for us um I mentioned earlier some of my concerns in section 2.1. I mean 2.4 point 1 Regarding the the phasing of the agreement Um, I hear I've heard a lot of people Say that there's a 120 day review period after we received the ucis I see 120 day review period After the rail operator presents us with a plan for transportation services The the contract says that upon completion of the study And that we determined that the freight easement property is going to be used for transportation services The rail operator is immediately granted the license They then have a year to present the commission with the plan and then we have 120 days to review that plan so that that's Again, the decision-making process is pushed out of our hands and is now just a trigger in the contract of furthermore After that point in section 2.4 point 1.3. I'm sorry um The levels of service that uh progressive is committing to are less restrictive i'm sorry the the the the three years in which in which I uh Progressive is allowed to bring their uh their passenger rail services to to play um Is is a less restrictive requirement than what then the Iowa pacific Contract was Iowa pacific contract had very clear Thresholds that had to be met in order to be considered compliant They had decision points at three months five months six months And all these metrics built into the process to require compliance and if they didn't meet those thresholds Well, they obviously were still in business here, but This contract is less restrictive in that regard um And the the passenger requirements for for carrying passengers are are exactly the same I mean, I actually This contract is in many ways word for word the iow pacific contract And I realize now that that the talking point is well, we didn't have a bad contract. We had a bad operator Well, yeah, we had a bad operator, but we had no levers in that contract to remove that operator That's why we had this this bad player now in position for the past five years and all of these different facilities Are going to pot because we had no way of getting rid of them. So I'm so I can't I can't support a contract that further disadvantages our decision makers in the future And then we also hear that there's a way out and I've already covered part of that that that the uh that After phase two of the agreement. There really isn't a way out. Um, and I would posit that Maybe there isn't a way out even after we received the ucis. It's it's unclear At what point we would be making those decisions between the the the acceptance of the ucis And the initiation of some kind of transportation services so For me I would be insupportive Of a straight freight contract because I agree that that freight services really first of all are the core business of progressive rail So and I think that their freight proposals are fantastic I would I would enthusiastically support freight service with progressive rail on the first seven miles of the rail corridor I would also support continuing this item until after the ucis if we want to Consider a a a full two phase agreement or the passenger and the freight service agreement with progressive rail I would be happy to consider that that whole package after the ucis but I think that We would all be better served by Agreeing to some sort of freight contract probably would have to be at the first meeting in august because this this item was agendized Um, and then looking at at other options Perhaps even a second rfp for for passenger rail service after pardon me after we received the ucis But the motion's been made. Um, I believe my point's been made. I'll be voting no Before our next speaker, I think our council just wanted to clarify. Thank you I just wanted to clarify um what you mentioned about the obligation to grant the transportation license That is only, um activated if upon completion of the study you actually your commission actually elects To retain the use of the corridor for transportation service That's not clear actually in the well What it says is if upon completion of the study that commission determines the freight easement property should be used for How do we determine Is it doesn't say specifically that an affirmative vote of the body will then proceed So it determines is is nebulous. So so I hear your your point. I would refer you to section 8.2.4 And that is essentially encapsulating that decision that once you have decided on the basis of the study that transportation service will be Kept on the line. That's the point at which You would grant the transportation at the phase two license And you have 120 days to do that before the railway can terminate again. It doesn't automatically terminate I just wanted to clarify what the contract says. Okay. Thank you Okay, so I'm trying to get everybody I have uh, uh, mr. Coonerty, miss noroyan, miss kaufman gomez, mr. Bertrand Mr. Coonerty. All right. Thank you um So I guess let me When this issue came before I cited several criteria That I felt were were important to me the first criteria is our legal fiduciary And frankly moral authority to the people and the companies Who have jobs right now or depending on this freight service and making sure that we provide For them the second obligation was to the voters who we promised That we would do a unified corridor study and then make a determination about this and other Decisions and that this would in no way impede it. Um, I read the contract. I've read everyone's comments I go back. I went and asked our attorney Who's our regular county? Attorney who is one of the best attorneys I've ever worked with whether this in any way impede to any of our future decisions And our answer was unequivocal Uh in no And it requires the this body to take action But I also think it's him It's uh incumbent upon us take action because we can't have Essentially every transportation decision decided for a population of 300,000 people on this one issue at every RTC meeting hijacked by by one one this one particular issue when we are moving 98 percent of our people Through other means across this county. Um, so I'm looking forward to the ucis and I'm looking forward to having To having this commission Make a decision for the at least interim future and so we can start doing real transportation planning I passed out a What I hope will be a friendly amendment. This has been reviewed by our council and also agreed to buy progressive Uh, it changes section two five point two point five point one which is that um Instead of allowing them to store railcars In locations other than exhibit b. It would be only in uh, uh railcars and uh locations approved by this commission uh, and then the second part is to um an item 6.3 where uh, they're talking about, uh creating a place for freight operations and It had been mentioned in the in the previous draft the railway may store equipment and materials the location known as Wrigley is located between Swift street natural bridges at milepost 2.15 and it strikes that um as a as a location So I would hope that the maker and the seconder would Would agree to these uh to these amendments Wait for the maker How does the maker uh, oh you're the maker the motion I can call the attorney to the podium. Did you slip that does these uh adjustments Somebody could give me a copy. I don't not sure what we're talking about So I think the you know, these are negotiation points the agreement is up for you know Any changes that you and progressive wish to agree to? Um progressive representative is here. I don't know if he can speak to these I don't have a concern with these from a legal standpoint so long as progressive would agree I don't know if it's appropriate to have him weigh in on that I know that I've been in some discussions on these items and I don't think that these are critical items But if uh, if he'd like to weigh in on these I'd sure like to hear his opinion Well, thank you commissioners. Um I'm jason colada director of public affairs for progressive rail I'm really not that scary of a guy contrary to some things said earlier, but um I I do want to say that the railroad would be agreeable to Uh, to both of these changes. Thank you for that input jason. So with that, uh, I will accept the friendly amendment And it's friendly to the second as well. Okay Is there anything else mr. Kernarney? Uh, no, that's it. All right So now we will ask, uh, mizna ryan Uh, followed by miss koffman gomes Does it work? Oh, there we go. So I thank you everyone for being out here today I know this is not the way most people would spend. Um, a wonderful sunny day But it's real obvious regardless of where you fall on this issue Um, we all care about our community and that's something to be commended I've lived in much bigger cities in my life and we tend to get more people out for everything regardless of what the issue is so You know, hooray for the community being involved and being engaged. So Um, I appreciate the speaker who admitted his opposition To this contract and that it was based on wanting to oppose rail everywhere And that was really honest and up front. Um, and so as much as I don't agree with that position I appreciate that, you know, he didn't get into the minutiae progressive and whether or not they were The right people to contract with but but just came right out and said where they were on this issue Um, I believe regardless of who the rtc was Trying to create a contract with and provide services that there would be the same opposition because I really do think ultimately the discussion today was about whether or not You want to see rail or some sort of form of other transportation on on the trail? I don't share this position. I think the the um, no train or no Transportation or motorized transportation approach really shuts out just a lot of options And whether it's a train a bus a trolley a magic carpet Whatever it might be we need to fully utilize that space It's the last undeveloped north south corridor that we have in our county And a trail only solution does not accomplish fully utilizing that space Um, you know with that said though, however, we're here to decide the contract and the item before us is about the rtc's legal obligation To provide service on these tracks They're failed to do that their failure to do that will result in the feds taking control I don't want that. Um, I want us to be able to still have local control and be able to work directly with the service provider When issues come up, um, I believe progressive is competent. They've shown that And I believe the proposal has not been rushed into There's been a lot of opportunity for community input. And so I'm also concerned about people's jobs very much so in south county So i'm going to go ahead and support going forward and um honoring the contract I'm a little worried that we're going to have a new group called magic carpet way, but uh Sorry, I couldn't help it I wanted to make it very clear that we need to be open to what could possibly be on that corridor. Yes Um, so then we have miss kaufman gomez. Mr. Bertrand mr. Johnson and miss chase Halfway point almost here Um, we've heard don't rush We've heard uh, don't lock up this corridor. We've heard, um, it concerns about evidence We've heard about preserve options Um Alternatives to sort of come up at this point the triggers versus phases um We've heard about support freight, which is where Majority the opposition was about doing anything with this corridor for the bicycles and the pedestrians But then we're now hearing that they support the freight um I'm a little frustrated that we really don't have another option if this isn't voted on for uh, the community of Watsonville for those um that use the freight corridor Um This is a motion on the floor to just approve a new contract Um We're here because of iowa pacific that's failed to perform the contractual obligations for a Local businesses that rely on the freight services To deliver and receive their products This is just a vote for a vendor replacement contract It's a regional transportation's commission and responsibility To ensure the stability of ongoing services For the economic viability of these businesses that rely on this transportation modality It's also our responsibility to remain in compliance with proposition 116 Proposition 108 The federal ready railroad administration The california department of transportation And with our voters pertaining to the immediate and future land use of this corridor Not a vote to remove or add tracks to extend the business model in any way Nor eliminate the rights of the people to decide on what to do with this corridor That course of action Which began back in the 90s was set into motion when the voters made the decision to purchase the corridor in 2012 To conduct the eir's to perform the rail transit feasibility studies That's where we are right now and today And i can assure you uh that we're not here to make any of the changes to the types of activities that have not already been approved As a result of this contract and that any future activity or expansion on this corridor Will be will be determined once the unified corridor study is completed The outcome of this contract will not eliminate the 12 miles of rails 12 miles of trails and pedestrian pathways that we've already worked on along this corridor This is in response to many of the emails that have come through and flooded everybody here With information Not all of the respondents may be aware understand the complexity of the corridor Asking that we wait for the completion of the unified corridor study is not feasible To our vendors that currently need this service We have freight businesses that need a vendor today That can immediately address the repairs And provide the services the rtc is responsible for contracting so that they can move their freight I for one Don't want a crisis in my community to see the rtc delay taking any action So that the businesses in was able have to shut down And create another cannery strike suffrage that took was able decades to recover As a result of not getting their materials in and out of the rail line That has deferred maintenance and the vendor that no longer is providing the services That are contract that they were contracted to do It was devastating in the 80s when that happened and that we're talking about this same segment of population that had the jobs in the 80s Very similar in terms of the same location in the industrial location for watsonville now I understand that not all contracts are perfect Which is why I will expect the rtc to cautiously watch how those vendors conducting their business activity in our community This is simply a vote to recommend Approval of progressive rail in order to provide the continuity of service Provide maintenance of the line and to fill the obligations of the contract to its fullest extent I do expect that we need to make sure that the rtc Follows up with the hazmat issue with any type of cargo that's going on That we get a business plan Before phase two comes along If that is what's decided that will happen with this particular corridor We're not asking for anything above and beyond what this corridor was intended for From the previous vendor We want to make sure that our current vendors get what they need The impact it's going to have will be a huge fiscal impact on the businesses The the community with the jobs the cost of the materials that are going on here that are being transported I think there was a brief message Mention as well in terms of the cost of our fuels With our sp1 funds that the tax for the the diesel is going to be going up And this may be another option where those that move their freight Use this as an option to get their materials delivered and I don't want to Determine that possibility from occurring for those vendors that need this freight Again, I'm not happy with being able to come to a screeching halt here and say if we don't have this done There's no solution tomorrow if we don't approve this for those vendors The little bit of moving a temporary here and there's temporary is not a solution for those Vendors that have used this corridor in this line for nearly a hundred years and many of our Vendors have indicated for decades that they've used it and they they need to have a continuity And I don't want that to be in jeopardy for them We will wait for the corridor study for anything above and beyond the scope of moving One vendor to another vendor in this vote today Right, um, then uh, we have uh, mr. Bertron and then mr. Johnson and miss jace I saw a lost track here. Um, that's why I wrote it down. I'm glad you did so fellow commissioners and public um listening to the testimony from the public was very encouraged to see that As we listened to each other We started coming together We started realizing that the concerns of the businesses in watsonville And the concerns of people that would be living along the line And the concerns of the people who are very concerned about in general the future of santa cruz county We started coming together and the words were a third option People are trying to say and I heard it many times that we want freight for watsonville When I first heard about this possibility. I said I remember reels was here Watsonville is the jewel of this particular proposal. This is why progressive came here. They understand that business This contract got written because They held off for things like The train that santa didn't ride Or some other kind of option that moved people And I think they felt that they were going to get a lot of revenue after that for that I'm not sure But we asked them would you just do watsonville? so Putting things in perspective. I had a couple of things I asked when I first got here I remember a discussion. We're trying to figure out What does this all mean in terms of the rtc's legal responsibilities? And the position that we're in with ctc and the federals In their rules and regulations And remember bruce bruce saying, you know There's two there's a lot here that I don't understand I'm saying, you know this echoed in my mind, too And so I asked of staff that we get An actual presentation to the rtc about what our legal position is And what are our responsibilities in terms of our legal position? We never got it that curtailed public discussion That decision not to bring that information to the public And to members of the rtc us Made it so that our discussion was not as focused as it could be I've read all the emails going back and forth about Whether we can or can't do rail banking Whether we can or can't Pay off the ct's for the 116 funds I'm a little confused so like that commercial where someone's buying a car And there's this floppy thing going in the air and and people are saying You're switching things in me. I don't understand what's going on here So I ask things like that because I want staff to inform the commission And that was very important in my mind The other thing I look at is the history. I think it's important to understand the history here This is going to be the fifth railroad line being considered It was up So we all know they dropped out because 90 percent of their business evaporated Then it was sierra northern They came in here because they thought they were going to get a sweet deal on the switching yard near sacramento Well, they didn't get the sweet deal on sacramento They knew ahead of time that there was no business here to support what they needed to do to keep the line up in terms of maintenance So if we give the line to someone else And there's no business who's going to pay that And now it's Iowa Pacific They didn't get a sweet deal somewhere else. They tried to deal with on their own And they're obviously deficient So I listen like a lot of us did Through the presentation from progressive I've been in marketing I thought those guys did a great job You know, I was almost a believer You know, they did their research. They found out all sorts of things about the community Including the suntan special the suntan special went out of business because cars were coming over the hill They're going to bring back the suntan special and somehow really inflate their bottom line. I don't believe it I really don't The most important thing to me Is the contract that rtc made with the public of santa cruz That is the most important thing And that was embodied In the results of measure d Think about that. We voted for that George the rtc the staff to put that together and all the all the organizations that helped make that happen Many of the volunteer organizations here Are in this On this audience right now that was an immense achievement But to recognize the will of the people The unify quarter study was put in place We are dishonoring We are dishonoring that vote if we don't make sure that we allow that study to go forward Until we make a decision That is critical You do not accept The will of the people through a vote and then make a decision That you don't have the proper information for We've heard comments here that were going to leave businesses in watsonville in the lurch, but i've also heard comments here that rtc knew about this And they didn't say anything and now we find out That Gives me some pause It really does So I'm looking at progressive trying to figure out what to do UP went Sierra northern went Iowa pacific went now they were sort of forced into We played their hand on them They probably would still be our Our operational Our our record provider of transportation If we hadn't sent him that letter The unify quarter study comes out I Bet you one agency that's going to be reading that is progressive They're going to say here is a detailed study about what's going to make sense in santa cruz They're not from santa cruz They haven't really a clue especially when they say they're going to bring back to suntan special Think about it They read their history books like I said, but they don't live here They don't know the community They don't know the people in this room They don't know what they're dealing with So I think the unify quarter study is going to be very important for them And I want the unify quarter study to be just as important for this body And I want everyone here to vote no Mr. Johnson Thank you chair. So, uh, what a long meeting We're trying to get an evening meeting. That's what they asked for That's that's a play way of saying johnson. Hurry up, but um You know, I think everybody here is sincere in their hope for Better things for our county And I I think probably the biggest disappointment I have is that the original intent of Some of the people was to quote keep our options open But with this contract, we're doing exactly the opposite. We're closing our options We're not only closing our options, but we're also Um being tethered to a three hundred thousand dollar buyout that we don't need to do now Part of my part of the issue here If you sit here and listen and see what is out there and read what is out there You get an idea that the people are not satisfied with this Okay, they like the process and my colleague jack Bertrand has said as much that these these, um Programs or this process was set in place and now in in essence It's being discarded with kind of like a false choice Or a strong input being put out there and people talking about losing 4 000 jobs and south county not being able to be serviced by a Rail operator that's simply not true They could be serviced by a rail operator, but it's it's I don't know if it's willful ignorance or blindness. I think that's a legal term, but What we're doing is we're closing our eyes to that option and saying no We have to go with progressive rail now progressive rail may be a very fine company But as mentioned, they're an outsider. They don't fully understand the values of santa Cruz county You heard people today and and I if I go down the line from susan stanley lauren dean john tad laura doug erickson They have a legitimate concerns And the biggest one is that we don't have to do this okay, but Because because staff says we do and the staff report i mentioned before This is the third time that staff has made this recommendation And they were wrong the last two I'll never forget When pacific or sierra northern Was contemplated they were passed. I made a strong objection I said the the this is not a good company for this rail line I got like usual. I got voted down. I think 11 to 1 They went away and later on ellen purie said randy You were right randy was right. She actually said that in a public meeting I felt so good about that Because it doesn't happen very often So, you know, i'm looking at things like the new economy The young man who is here, uh, he spoke very quickly But he's talking about the future of what lies out there. It isn't it isn't diesel trains. Okay it isn't Being stuck to the past is kind of looking towards the future and I just think uh, the This is kind of a bad policy with a bad contract. We're locking ourselves in in an unnecessary way Excuse me an unnecessary way and You know the options available to us are Better if we either delay or say no or at least give us ourselves a chance to kind of Become a better provider for transportation in this county I would you know, I want somebody really to explain to me the whole thing about these businesses who I'm you know, I'm I'm Very very sympathetic to about making sure that their pods or their their uh side rails filled with box cars Have transportation, but I think mr. Bertrand mentioned You know, this is a problem that's been going on and all of a sudden we have to hurry up to solve it when We should have been more diligent and more structured in our approach to solving problems. That's kind of what we do I predict that this is going you know This voting yes on this is going to Further erode the trust that the people have in this agency and this commission because we really aren't listening I think that the support for a yes is a mile wide and about an inch thick Okay, it doesn't really make sense, but we want to go forward with it because it either sounds good or You know the the our our legal staff. Listen legal Opinions are almost by definition gray area. Okay, they're not black and white I mean often legal opinions get, you know, they go before This court they go up they get struck down I'm not convinced that we are in any way of financially In parallel because if we don't provide quote another Progressive rail for this line. We have one already. That's what we said Iowa Pacific is not out of contract. They're still here. I guess until that really happens We're not going to have anybody breathing down our neck and saying hey, we're going to sue you Lawsuits happen all the time. You know when we're when we're closed session We get you know every year we probably get eight or nine lawsuits against the city and they're And they're routinely cast aside for the most part and Hey, come after us if you really want to but we're not doing this right now We're just actually inviting the fact that hey if we don't do something We're really going to have to pay a lot of money. I think it's garbage so In case you haven't guessed yet. I'm voting no on this Um, and I think for all the right reasons. Thank you Is chase Well at this point there is virtually nothing left to say But i'm going to say a few more things and i'll keep it very very brief So one thing I really appreciated about today was that we had a really really packed house I think that is incredibly important for this process and I especially appreciate that we heard voices today That we have not heard from before. I think that was really important and needed to be factored in But I also want to recognize that we have for literally months been hearing from many of you many many many times about this issue And that really was heard So where we're at today was a process that we have been following for a very long time that very much took into consideration The hundreds of emails that we received the meetings we had in person the many many comments we had at our transportation policy workshops at our rtc meetings And as in individual meetings that we've been having and those comments did inform Where we got to today Many people are happy about where we are today many people are not But I really want to underscore the fact that this was a very open and public process in which you all had influence And it did get factored in we did do our many discussions with progressive We made alterations to the contract taking into consideration many of your concerns And I appreciate that because I think that we got to a better place than we were when we started So I appreciate the Commentary that we've had today even and including those that don't agree with where we're going on this But I am going to support the recommendation today because I think that we have done the due diligence That is necessary to move forward with this and I really appreciated hearing from folks that Came out today who have not come to speak to us before so thank you Well, I'll just make a couple of comments, you know, this is uh, this is clearly a passionate issue We heard a passion today. We we've heard passion throughout the course of this conversation We've also heard a lot of misinformation And part of the Part of the job that I've been doing over the last couple of months is answering emails and I've answered a lot of emails Um From people and I've met with people and people have come to disrupt my constituent meeting to ask me more questions um, but there's Here's what this contract isn't It doesn't it's not going to open oil drilling on the north coast It's not going to facilitate offshore oil drilling It doesn't mean we won't be able to have passenger service It isn't a reflection of some kind of Um, uh brown act misuse to talk about a contract Um There's just you know, this misinformation is implied on top of some hyperbole Right and we heard some today Uh, we aren't voting on a 10 year contract Or we're voting on a contract that has a phase one in which we are respecting the unified corridor study And if we if this commission decides not to pursue rail as an option We have a buyout I'm always surprised when people think of $300,000 a lot But the 11 million that we'd have to pay back isn't very much, but you know, that's That's something else. We we've heard about, you know oil trains You know that somehow we're going to be filling these uh rail lines with oil trains. That's not accurate either and for you know, uh five of us up here voted to ban fracking and all oil development of the Unincorporated parts of the county and seven of us up here have voted to sue oil companies over their Impact over their climate change impact on our community. It seems To assume that all of a sudden we're going to get in bed with the oil companies. It's just not a realistic argument Um and the idea that somehow we're rushing this right, I mean and then this is where there's a lot of inconsistencies because Um if we're doing our job If or if the staff is doing a job and recognizing that the operator is failing They bring to us that we need to that we need to get out of this And that was in december and we chose to Start negotiations with one company in january And people said don't rush and by the way, don't sign a long-term contract And at the time I told people well if you don't want a one contract if you have to have all these phases and buyouts and other pieces That is a complicated contract. It doesn't happen quickly And sure enough negotiating with the company To have effective means to get out of the contract to respect what the comments we've made to the public is not easy But we've come up with a contract where we can do that Took a few months Then we gave almost six weeks for you all to see it For your lawyers to see it for your lawyers to write us 50 page letters And for us to respond So this isn't a rush job Um and we are honoring the commitment of the unified corridor study and I I disagree with my colleague who feels like he hasn't gotten the information Staff has been very willing to provide information We've held lots of closed sessions to understand what our legal requirements are and which our attorney has provided that information Um You know some people have said it's it's down to you're either saying you want the rail service or you're not We're trying to to find something that does respect the community The fact that there are people who need to use freight is I don't think is is is really debatable here We heard from the businesses Both sides have understood the need for that especially on the southern portion of line There are other people who say Don't even think about uh the freight on the rest of the line. That's that's ridiculous And others who said we have to do a EIR because we're going to have so much traffic You know they um Uh and other people have suggested we continue on with iobo pacific Which has failed every single test that we've given them and which is why we started a process Uh six months ago And we hear today that they can't even keep up on their 92 day inspection on their rail line on their on their engine So that doesn't seem like a realistic point of view I don't think that That uh That we are Going against what the community wished by voting for this contract. I think I expect that we will have an equally robust Uh conversation about the unified corridor study Which is going to be out for a long time before there's even any recommendations Um and I expect this chamber or whatever chamber we're in to be filled when it comes time to talking about the unified corridor study That's healthy. We should agree that that's healthy But I just want to um encourage people Not to look for a conspiracy, right because we've heard a lot of conspiratorial things Uh not assume That elected officials are are acting in the worst interest Uh not assume that somehow we're trying to get around what it is you asked us to do Uh we are trying to honor all those pieces and and and part of that It doesn't mean that just because uh a recommendation comes out that doesn't agree 100 with your position That there's something wrong with the process It's going to be a recommendation and then we're going to we're going to discuss and we're going to have a A lot of conversation about it, but let's let's just move away from that conspiracy piece and uh I hate it when people lecture me about what measure d was about Because I spent a lot of time on measure d spent a lot of time as In terms of crafting the measure spent a lot of time raising money walking precincts Trying to convince people to support the measure. I spent a lot of time on that measure And we all get to interpret what your vote meant But uh, you don't own the right to determine what measure d meant. We all get to have our own Perspective, but you shouldn't share it as as the gospel because it's just an analysis of your own And not anything else So i'm going to support this contract I uh, I think uh We we gave uh staff a difficult task in coming up with these two pieces um Of these two phases, but I feel confident that we are Uh working with the community. We are helping local businesses and we're keeping all of our options open so With that i'll ask for uh, the the motion on the floor Is the recommended actions with the two language changes, uh that were discussed All in favor signify by saying aye I Opposed no So that was bertron johnson Uh mulhern and johnson Johnson and johnson are against So it is uh three o'clock. We have uh to my commissioners We have one item that we have to vote on today That requires action. We have a couple other items that are informational and so we should uh i'm going to ask that we uh that we uh Postpone The north coast rail trail piece because that is just informational As well as with the uh with the approval of uh The our caltrans representative that we won't hear the caltrans Presentation, but we do have to take item number 24 Which is the adoption of the findings statements of overriding considerations and mitigation monitoring and reporting programs as required by Sequel gligalines and the adoption of the 2040 santa cruz county regional transportation plan I would ask that those that are still in the chamber to wait for your conversations to your outside Ms. Dicar, good afternoon. I was going to start out by saying good evening commissioners But uh chair leopold already stole my joke, so I'll get going here and I'll try to keep this very short Um, I'll assume that you want me to go directly to the staff recommendations. Is that correct to leave time for public comment if there is some So good afternoon commissioners there are tc has prepared the 2040 santa cruz county regional transportation plan As you know, this is a long-range transportation plan for our county for casting amount of funding Anticipated for transportation projects and identifies transportation programs and projects to advance the region's goal over the next 22 years The staff recommends that the regional transportation commission consider the final environmental impact report for the 2040 santa cruz county regional transportation plan To adopt a resolution which is attachment to adopting the findings statement of overriding considerations And mitigation monitoring and reporting program related to the environmental impact report Certified by the association of monorail bay area governments as a lead agency under sequa For the 2040 santa cruz county regional transportation plan The third recommendation is to adopt a resolution adopting what's in attachment three the final 2040 santa cruz county regional transportation plan With that I'd be happy to take any comments and questions I also wanted to inform you that heather adamson has been Waiting for her turn To discuss the plan Wait, this is nine o'clock this morning If you um have questions related to the eir as well as staff from rincon. All right. Well, we'll see who's daring enough to ask questions Yeah You're so long Well, no We'll see if any member of the public wants to address us about this item Seeing none. I will bring it back to the commission for action Anyone Motion by bertrand seconded by rockin all in favor signify by saying aye. Aye Any opposed motion carries unanimously um Okay Next then thank you for your work and uh, mr. Chair I if I if I might just take one one more minute. Yeah on item 23 Well, it is an informational item. I just want to call to your attention that part of that is Accepting the anticipated schedule for the release of the draft Environmental document for the north coast with a 45 day public review period And the public meetings that go along with that. So I just want to call that to your attention Yeah, it's just to make sure that everybody knows everybody knows it's later when they come to us and say we didn't have enough time Because this is going to happen Before starts start happening before you come back to your next meeting Yeah Look office life to know that we shouldn't just like do it on the base of information I'm going to move that we accept that and just do it a vote. I don't doubt we'll debate it I don't want somebody can we take action? I don't want somebody challenging the outcome because we didn't Can we take action if it's not listed for action? Well, it it is the recommendations are you know, except Okay So you're moving the recommended actions and particularly the 45 day comment period. Is there a second second second by by torf Um, is there any discussion? Seeing none all in favor signify by saying aye. Aye any opposed motion carries unanimously Next we have uh two items in our closed session Is there anyone here who would like to speak to us about those items before we go into closed session Seeing none. Do we expect anything reported out of closed session? We don't expect that to be the case. Okay. I would ask That that at least a group of us stay here for closed session. Thank you and thank you for everyone being here