WCCTAC
West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee
Minutes
April 27, 2007
The regular meeting of the West Contra Costa
Transportation Advisory Committee was called to order at 7:58 A.M. on Friday, April
27, 2007 by Chair Sharon Brown in the City Council Chambers of the City of
1. CALL TO ORDER/SELF INTRODUCTIONS
PRESENT: Sharon Brown, Chair (San Pablo), Maria Viramontes, (Vice Chair), Janet Abelson (El Cerrito), Maria Alegria (Pinole), Ed Balico (Hercules ), Tom Butt (Richmond), Bob Franklin (BART), John Gioia (Contra Costa County), Gayle McLaughlin (Richmond), Joe Wallace (AC Transit).
EXCUSED:Jerrold Parsons (WestCAT)
STAFF: Lisa Hammon, WCCTAC Managing Director
John Rudolph, WCCTAC Management Assistant
Nancy Cuneo, WCCTAC Administrative Analyst
Jeremy Hughes, WCCTAC Administrative Clerk
Bryan Otake, WCCTAC Counsel
2. Call to Order and Self Introductions
Gayle McLaughlin stated that she would have to leave at 8:30 to attend a funeral.
3. Public Comment
There were no comments from the public.
CONSENT CALENDAR
On motion by Ed Balico, seconded by Maria Viramontes and carried unanimously the WCCTAC Board voted to adopt the Consent Calendar as follows:
On motion by Joe Wallace, seconded by Gayle McLaughlin and carried unanimously Item 14 was moved to the beginning of the agenda.
REGULAR AGENDA
Item 14: WCCTAC Budget Items: Presentation, Issues, and
Discussion Regarding the FY 97-08 Budget.
Lisa Hammon began by introducing Item 14 and directing the Board's attention to page 14-1 which provided background information and discussion of the WCCTAC budget FY 07-08. Ms. Hammon noted that the primary issue for the budget in FY 07-08 is staff support for projects.
She mentioned that in the STMP Co-Op Agreement each project sponsor is allowed to claim reimbursement for the related project manager oversight responsibilities; the new program was implemented just this year and the budget is actually $480,020 while only $470,020 will be collected from member dues. She noted that over the next few years there will be a clearer idea as to how many funds will be available to support the staff functions.
Ms. Hammon proceeded by noting that the number two issue is that staff salaries are currently lower than industry standard as established by an independent review conducted mid-year 2006. She noted that some positions were lower than others; increases are reflected in the budget.
The third issue is that in 2006 the WCCTAC Board requested establishment of a reserve fund to cover future retirement costs in the amount of $9,000.
The fourth issue pertains to other fluctuations including outside consulting services.
Ms. Hammon continued by stating that the newly proposed staff positions provide for a Senior Project Administrator with the current Managing Assistant position being deleted and the position of Program Manager added. The positions of Transportation Specialist, Program Manager and Administrative Analyst would have their salaries raised to be competitive with industry standards.
She directed the Board’s attention to page 14-6 which lists ongoing projects that need to be completed, upcoming projects that are required/funded, projects that are not listed which have blended funding, and local initiatives and/or projects without designated funding.
Ms. Hammon continued by pointing out that the remainder of the report outlines TSM and Measure C funded projects.
In terms of member agency dues there are two options on the table:
Ms. Hammon made note of the San Pablo Avenue O & M funding and the sub-committee's debate about whether to pay the O & M costs from the dues or from the STMP program.
She remarked that doing so would require a capital component, as STMP funds cannot be used for operations. The Alameda County Congestion Management agency has said that there are definitely capital expenditures they could bill WCCTAC for; therefore if it is not desired to fund the O & M on top of the dues this would provide a savings over the method implemented over the last couple years.
WCCTAC has taken on an expanded role over the last 14 years. The decision before the Board is a policy decision of whether or not to move WCCTAC forward and further expand the agency’s scope or pull it back and align it more with projects.
Sharon Brown asked Mr. Otake if the manner in which dues are calculated would require changing the JPA documentation.
Mr. Otake stated “yes”.
John Gioia concurred that WCCTAC's scope goes beyond the other RTPC’s. However he questioned the near-doubling of dues and stated that perhaps a reevaluation WCCTAC's scope is in order. He noted that the 06-07 budget equaled the budget for all the other RTPC’s combined.
Regarding the issue of funding, Mr. Gioia noted that different agencies use different sources of funding. He expressed reservations about using “return to source funds” as it may detract from other projects. He noted that CCTA staff is paid by the administrative component of Measure C. He asked, regarding Measure J projects, could they be paid out of project costs as opposed to the dues structure.
Lisa Hammon stated that WCCTAC will not be a manager of Measure J projects; the cities and other agencies will. WCCTAC would be using staff time in working on the determination of how monies will be spent up front and on a monitoring level of how to spend additional monies. It is not known if these expenses are reimbursable under Measure J.
Mr. Gioia asked Bob McCleary of CCTA if there was an opportunity for Measure J monies to fund staff working directly on a program.
Mr. McCleary noted that historically, CCTA works with local jurisdictions and pays them for their project management and only for their project management. He noted that 1.5 percent is extracted from Measure C for strategic planning and CCTA provides oversight for all those activities.
Mr. Gioia noted that there is currently in place, a regional transportation fee within the county. Is it possible for these monies to pay for portions of implementing and administering some of the projects outlined in the WCCTAC budget?
Ms. Hammon responded by noting that this is already in the program. Each of the sponsors for the eleven projects outlined in the STMP Program is allowed to take up to two percent for project oversight and management on the developer fee list.
Mr. Gioia asked Mr. Otake if there are currently these provisions under WCCTAC.
Mr. Otake replied no and stated that the legal restrictions provide that the developer fees can only be used for capital and any administrative tasks made necessary.
Mr. Gioia asked that if WCCTAC takes the lead on a project would then monies be available through which the administrative portion could be paid.
He noted that this is currently built into the existing and the proposed STMP plan and agreements.
Mr. Gioia stated that he does not see it as a revenue source in the budget.
Ms. Hammon noted that $10,000 for the oversight on the projects is listed as revenue.
Mr. Gioia asked if in future years this could be a larger source of funding for projects to which WCCTAC provided the lead oversight.
Ms. Hammon noted that WCCTAC is listed as the sponsor of 5 of the 11 STMP Projects.
Mr. Gioia remarked that moving forward this could be a way to phase into a new position by ramping up staff and utilizing money generated by fees instead of dues.
He continued by stating that the county would not agree to and vote to approve a doubling of its dues and questioned the need to reexamine the dues structure as it would be time-consuming and without consensus.
Chair Brown agreed.
Ed Balico agreed that the fee structure needs to be looked at and asked should not the Board reevaluate WCCTAC's objective and perhaps get rid of projects that are beneath CCTA's scope of work.
Chair Brown noted that originally WCCTAC began informally
without funding but required formal structure after the passing of Measure C.
She noted that the current system had worked well with
Vice Chair Viramontes remarked that the idea came out of a number of existing formulas which use a population to road use formula to calculate dues. She noted that it made sense to model the dues structure in a manner consistent with the means by which most funding is obtained, via the population/road use ratio.
Gayle McLaughlin asked if the current proposed increase could be reached without altering the existing formula.
Vice Chair Viramontes responded yes, but the smaller jurisdictions would not receive a break in fees.
Chair Brown stated that it made no sense that this was a
recommendation for
Vice Chair Viramontes stated that it was not a
recommendation for
Chair Brown stated that she believed that the old system
should remain in place which would mean that
Vice Chair Viramontes stated that she has never considered WCCTAC like the other regions. She made note that WCCTAC is a JPA whose mission has always been greater as a sub-regional collaboration well in advance of the rest of the county. She remarked that WCCTAC was the original sub regional transportation committee whose mission has always been to serve as advocates for the region.
Joe Wallace expressed serious reservations about advocating for fees which are not currently in the jurisdiction’s budgets.
Janet Abelson stated that she sees no relationship between
WCCTAC and road miles in
Mr. Wallace stated that WCCTAC needs to continue its work as an advocate for urban areas and recommended that WCCTAC be more aggressive in its endeavors.
Mr. Gioia agreed that the
He continued by advising that WCCTAC should be mindful of public perception with regard to a regional agency with a half million dollar budget.
Bob McCleary of CCTA noted that
Vice Chair Viramontes stated that she is not opposed to slow growth with regard to increasing staff however it should be noted that the fee structure has not been changed in twenty years and it may be time for a change to move forward in the next twenty years. She stated that the Managing Director has outlined to the Board what is needed to move forward and it is up to the Board now to decide whether or not they want to invest in that.
Regarding phasing in the revised fee structure over the next three years, Vice Chair Viramontes stated that it would be easier to push for an increase all at once rather than one year at a time over the next three years.
Janet Abelson remarked that
She stated that she would like to see it made quite clear
in bullet points the benefits that the city of
Ms. Hammon stated that she had prepared a list of the benefits of membership in WCCTAC; it was however, not in the current packet.
Vice Chair Viramontes interjected that pages 4-1 and 4-2 list current project benefits.
Ms. Abelson stated that pages 4-1 and 4-2 list benefits of current projects and she is asking for benefits of the proposed increase.
Vice Chair Viramontes clarified that staff has stated that they have too many projects for the current staffing and in order to move forward staff needs to be increased.
Ms. Abelson interjected and requested that the Managing Director answer.
Ms. Hammon noted that each time there has been an adjustment in the budget put before the city councils WCCTAC has assembled a list of general benefits as some things can not be pulled apart jurisdiction by jurisdiction. She noted that a list of specific benefits has not yet been prepared.
Ms. Abelson remarked that she is looking for justification for a doubling of the budget. She stated that a doubling of the budget warrants a doubling in value to the effected jurisdictions and requested that Ms. Hammon address this.
Ms. Hammon responded by stating that over time the number of projects taken on has not been proportionate to increases in staffing. There are too many projects currently for the staff on hand and moving forward, in particular when considering STMP project management and Measure J projects, there is a serious need for increased staffing.
Ms. Hammon continued by stating that she would create a report detailing the benefits to each city council.
Gayle McLaughlin spoke out in favor of the proposed budget amendments.
Maria Alegria stated that the discussion should be framed with regard to how it benefits the region.
Ed Balico felt that Lisa should go before the city councils prior to approval of the budget. He expressed support for Option A without further delay.
John Gioia reiterated his feeling that the staffing increase should be phased in over time and expressed reservations about a doubling of the budget. He stated if WCCTAC is administering regional transportation fees why not have the developer fees pay for the increases.
Ms. Hammon replied that she did not know that the recovery of the administrative costs would fund a whole position. If it’s phased in over time then the Board must make a decision which projects to drop as the current staff is not capable of managing the proposed scope of work as it is currently.
Mr. Gioia recommended looking at removing projects for which WCCTAC is not absolutely necessary and/or for which other agencies are taking the lead.
Tom Butt asked if the Richmond Intermodal station project is covered by project funds.
Ms. Hammon noted that WCCTAC now maintains an oversight role but the Richmond Redevelopment Agency is the project funding sponsor.
Mr. Butt asked if for the agreement between VBN and WCCTAC is being funded via project monies.
Ms. Hammon replied no.
Mr. Butt stated that the Board should take a hard look at how much funding can be shifted to project money instead of membership dues. He recommended that the Board accept the budget as proposed but take a hard look at every project and transition the costs into project money moving forward. He expressed reservations about the possibility of losing momentum if the budget is not approved as proposed.
Ms. Abelson concurred with Mr. Butt and stated that the preceding provided members with something to present to the city councils.
Ms. Hammon stated that she could definitely put something together to espouse this.
Bob Franklin suggested finding out how much dues would be raised with and without the addition of the new position with the idea that without the position the Board would have to cut a range in projects.
Vice Chair Viramontes drew attention to another proposal by the committee which would use fees from the San Pablo O & M to subsidize the rate. The proposal suggested taking incoming San Pablo Avenue O & M fees applying them to the dues thus creating a reduction. The committee recommended not to do so however because the San Pablo Ave Project is already under-funded.
She noted that if the Board is reluctant to approve the
increase in dues they do have the option to subsidize dues by detracting from
development along
Ms. Hammon noted that the funds would be drawn from the $1.65 Million for the San Pablo Avenue Corridor Project.
Tom Butt and John Gioia both expressed support for taking funds from the San Pablo Avenue Corridor Project.
On Motion by Maria Viramontes, seconded by Joe Wallace and carried unanimously the WCCTAC Board voted to adopt the budget amount with the due increase; accept that the San Pablo O & M cost will be paid from the developer fee project; staff requested ways to draw funds from developer fees where possible with direction to propose a mid-year review plan to transition on how the dues could go down on the basic fees next year. The Board also voted to keep the original dues allocation structure.
Gayle McLaughlin and John Gioia left the meeting.
Chair Brown initiated a two minute break.
Item 9: Board Member Comments and Announcements
Janet Abelson gave a report about a Smart Growth conference that she had attended. She noted that a number of different fields are merging on top of Smart Growth. She stated that how cities are taking action to reduce carbon emissions and neighborhood development which rates buildings on their green building principles were represented at the conference.
Item 10: Legal Counsel Comments and Announcements
Mr. Otake informed the Board that under AB-1234 or the Local Government Sunshine Act, one of the requirements for reimbursements holds that a brief presentation be given by members attending any event paid for by WCCTAC. He noted that members can as well place an item on the consent calendar in the interest of saving time.
Item 11: Bike to Work Day 2007
Nancy Cuneo, Administrative Analyst for WCCTAC directed
the Board's attention to Bike to Work Day materials placed at their stations.
She noted that WCCTAC is partnering with 511 Contra Costa and the East Bay Bicycle
Coalition to encourage alternative forms of transportation. She noted that on
Bike to Work Day there will be energizer stations located throughout
She also made note of the Richmond Greenway opening that will take place on the day before Bike to Work Day and the Team Bike Challenge which occurs throughout the month of May.
Item 12: Issues Related to the Sub regional
Transportation Mitigation Fee Program
Lisa Hammon provided a brief report on the status of the STMP Financial Analyst position. She noted that interviews were held with four firms by the ad hoc subcommittee
of the Board which included Maria Alegria and Sharon Brown as well as staff and consultants, Finance Directors Bradley Ward and Richard Loomis, WCCTAC Counsel and WCCTAC Consultant Michael Bernick.
She noted that the decision was exceptionally difficult as all the firms presented a number of great ideas about how to structure financing. She remarked that the decision will move forward however a recommendation cannot be made at this time. Ms. Hammon stated that a recommendation would be put forth at the next meeting.
Chair Brown noted that it may be necessary to go before each of the city councils before final approval is given.
Item 13: I-80 Integrated Corridor Mobility Project and
the Corridor Mobility Improvement Account (CMIA) in the State Infrastructure
Bond Program
Ms. Hammon noted that the Contra Costa portion of the first phase of Project Development in the amount of $954,000 has been recommended by the Contra Costa Transportation Authority to be drawn from the STIP Augmentation funds. She then introduced John Rudolph.
John Rudolph directed the Board's attention to part two in a series detailing the components of the I-80 integrated Corridor Mobility Project.
He began by providing a synopsis of part one which
included a description of the various kinds of local roads, ITS components
which include changeable message signs and modifying peoples driving behavior along
with components which communicate between all the different kinds of roadways
throughout
Mr. Rudolph then directed the Board’s attention to a handout detailing the I-80 project as follows:
1. Exhaustion of the Tool Box: Transportation lanners use a variety of tools to alleviate congestion. Every tool has been attempted on I-80. These tools include:
2. Due to the geometry of the freeway, with sound walls on one side and the Bay on the other the creating additional lanes is not an option.
3. New ITS Tools –Coordinated. Better management of existing lanes space means implementing a variety of other tools which may be grouped together under the heading Intelligent Transportation Systems or ITS. These tools attempt to achieve more efficient use of existing lane space.
4. Three higher level side benefits of ITS applications are:
5. Motorists will see at least six benefits:
6. Transit users will realize even quicker commute times with transit receiving built-in priorities through intersections, ramps, and HOV/HOT lanes.
7. Residents in municipalities along the I-80 corridor will realize at least three improvements:
Tom Butt expressed great skepticism. He stated that the
proposal is really no different than adding another lane to the freeway and encourages
people to move further away and have to make an extended commute (e.g. making
it easier for people from Solano to get to
Janet Abelson noted a project which gave signal preemption to buses and emergency vehicles. She asked how this relates to the I-80 Integrated Corridor Mobility Project.
Mr. Rudolph remarked that this would be part of the Integrated Corridor Mobility project.
Ms. Abelson asked what would happen if traffic could not
get through a series of signals for an extended period of time. How would this
system enable them to do so while also performing similar tasks for
He noted that part of the project development costs go toward hiring a consulting firm to go out into the field and gauge where traffic is coming from onto the arterials and how to adjust signal lights with minimum delay.
Ms. Abelson remarked that the program does not provide incentive for people to use public transit.
Chair Brown reiterated Mr. Butt's sentiment about
Maria Alegria said it would helpful to have Caltrans come and discuss the I-80 Corridor Mobility Project.
With no further business to come before the WCCTAC Chair
Brown adjourned the meeting at 9:37 until the next meeting of the West Contra
Costa Transportation Advisory Committee to be held May 25, 2007 in the City
Council Chambers of the City of