Related Links

CALL TO ORDER

The Regular Meeting of the Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) was called to order at 4:03 PM by Chairperson Glickman in Conference Room B-104, Valley Transportation Authority (VTA), 3331 North First Street, San Jose, California.

ROLL CALL

Chairperson Glickman requested that Agenda Item #11 and Agenda Item # 13 on the Regular Agenda exchange sequential order.

Jerry Grace, Interested Citizen expressed his concern about the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC).

Jim Lawson, State and Regional Government Affairs Manager, and Staff Liaison provided PAC the 2006 Updated Membership Roster. He recounted the activities surrounding the Historic Coach #6512 plaque dedication ceremony held Wednesday, February 15, 2006 in honor of Civil Rights Leader Rosa Parks in front of the Martin Luther King Jr. Library in Downtown San Jose as well as highlights of the Diversity Celebration held at the River Oaks Campus.

Mr. Lawson informed the PAC of the upcoming VTA Board of Directors Tour of VTA Transit Facilities and Construction Projects.  Mr. Lawson noted that all Advisory Committee members are invited.  The invitations will be sent to the PAC Members and the tour dates are slated for April 14, 2006 and
April 28, 2006.

Mr. Lawson reported that at the VTA Board of Directors Meeting March 2, 2006 the VTA Expenditure Plan was not adopted. The Board of Directors then established the Project Priority and Revenue Advisory Committee (PPRAC) for the purpose of determining project priorities.  The committee members are: Vice Chairperson Dean Chu, Board Member Don Gage, Board Member Liz Kniss, Board Member Dolly Sandoval, and Board Member Forrest Williams.  Mr. Lawson noted the Committee meetings would be publicly noticed, held in the evenings, and invited all PAC Committee Members to attend.  Mr. Lawson noted the objectives of the Project Priority and Revenue Advisory Committee include:  1) Review the Measure A and VTA Scenario project list; 2) Report to the Board of Directors on a monthly basis to receive feedback from the Board, as well as conceptual input, and approval at each stage; 3) Direct the Committee to create a work plan for its activities, which shall include working with the PAC and Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) for their input, with that information brought back to the Board at the April Board Meeting; 4) The Committee will conclude its deliberations and present recommendations to the Board no later than the August Board meeting, and may include a July Board of Directors Meeting.

Mr. Lawson noted the Infrastructure Bond Committee completed its deliberations and schedule of meetings.   The Committee provided direction for the development of the series of sixteen advocacy principles to guide VTA staff and recommends the advocacy principles be adopted by the Board of Directors at the April 6, 2006 Board meeting.

Mr. Lawson announced that VTA has been chosen as the recipient of the Silicon Valley NAACP Annual Freedom and Friendship Circle of Friends Award.   The award will be presented to VTA at the Freedom and Friendship Circle of Friends banquet in April 2006.  The award is bestowed on organizations that have shown superior commitment to the community and advocate for people’s rights.

Chairperson Glickman invited the PAC to submit their City Transportation Presentations.

Mr. Lawson reported that at the Board of Directors Meeting March 3, 2006, sales tax scenarios were discussed but with no action taken on the item.  Mr. Lawson informed PAC the County of Santa Clara would place a general sales tax on the June 2006 ballot.  Chairperson Glickman noted if the County measure is passed it would be at the discretion of the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors to direct and disperse the revenues derived from the tax.

Member Kishimoto asked what date the Silicon Valley Rapid Transit Corridor BART Extension to Milpitas, Santa Clara and San Jose (SVRTC) can re-apply for the New Starts Program.   Mr. Lawson replied that the date would depend upon the direction VTA staff and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) consider appropriate.  Mr. Lawson noted FTA conducts an annual review. The process adding criteria requires that preliminary or environmental engineering must be complete for the project to participate in the New Starts process.   Mr. Lawson stated that SVRTC could re-apply in late 2006, and he will ascertain the time constraints for re-application and report those findings back to PAC. 

Member LeZotte queried whether PAC will take a position on the proposed Santa Clara County Sales Tax measure slated for the June 2006 ballot.  Chairperson Glickman also inquired if the proposed sales tax can be an agendized item for discussion by PAC.  Mr. Lawson noted that the Board of Directors took no position on the County Sales Tax Measure at the March 3, 2006 Board meeting.

Member Kline indicated that at the County level he surmised support from the various cities would be solicited.  Member Kline would like to discuss the County measure in PAC.  Member Kishimoto inquired if the previously submitted information concerning VTP2030 must be resubmitted for consideration by the Project Priority and Revenue Advisory Committee.

Mr. Lawson assured Member Kishimoto that all information would be forwarded to the Committee for discussion.

Member Caserta commended Mr. Lawson for his comments but tended to agree with Member Kline that the County would seek support from the cities and questioned that if PAC did agendize the sales tax as an action item would a majority vote be necessary.  Mr. Lawson responded in the affirmative. 

Chairperson Glickman suggested the PAC apprise the Board of Supervisors through the VTA Board of Directors of the County’s transportation needs, and the County measure would be an appropriate discussion for the PAC as well as a valuable contribution to the Supervisors.   Chairperson Glickman also noted that with the passing of the County Sales Tax the role of the VTA Board of Directors would remain an advisory role.

There was no City Grouping Report.

BUSINESS REFERRED TO COMMITTEE BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS/ GENERAL MANAGER

CONSENT

M/S/C (Kishimoto/ LeZotte) to approve the Minutes of February 9, 2006.

Draft 2005 Monitoring and Conformance Report and Conformance Findings.

REGULAR

Member Brodsky drew the Committee’s attention to Section 4.9 of the Draft 2005 Monitoring and Conformance Report and Conformance Findings noting the maps illustrate the “F” level” of service is more prevalent in the north regions of the County.

Member Brodsky suggested that to decrease traffic congestion ridership numbers must increase and a closer examination must be made of transit needs of Santa Clara County.

Member Kishimoto referenced Section 4-28, and noted that Peak Hour Gateways are demonstrating record numbers of vehicles and expressed concern that the Peninsula Gateways receive more attention and be addressed. 

Upon inquiry of Member Kline regarding maps illustrating future transportation growth within Silicon Valley, VTA staff responded that the documents are illustrated in VTP 2030 and available on VTA.org.

On Order of Chairperson Glickman, there being no objection, the Committee reviewed the Draft 2005 Monitoring and Conformance Report and Conformance Findings.

Mr. Grace requested VTA staff explain the FY 2006 Second Quarter Transit Operations Performance Report (July1, 2005-December 31, 2005).

Member Kline commented that performance numbers in the FY2006 Second Quarter Transit Operations Performance Report appear to demonstrate a marked performance improvement overall. 

On Order of Chairperson Glickman, there being no objection the Committee received the FY 2006 Second Quarter Transit Operations Performance Report (July 1, 2005- December 31, 2005).

Mr. Lawson provided the memorandum from VTA Board of Directors Chairperson Cindy Chavez and discussed suggestions submitted by other Committees in response to Chairperson’s Chavez’ call for Full Participation, Full Information. 

The recommendations include: 1) Invite Board Members to Advisory Committee meetings; 2) Incorporate recommendations and suggestions to the Board in the form of Board Memorandums and; 3) Limit discussions of work plans.

Member Moylan suggested that PAC and the Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) conduct one or two annual joint Committee meetings.   Member Moylan further suggested a casual gathering before the meeting for interaction with both Committee members and also pointed out that all members should have a copy of the updated PAC bylaws.  Members Kline and LeZotte agreed with member Moylan’s suggestion for a joint meeting. Chairperson Glickman responded that he would endeavor to correlate the joint meeting with staff. 

Chairperson Glickman suggested that if PAC sends recommendations to the Board the information ascertained from the TAC should be available to PAC some days before the PAC meeting.  This time span allows PAC members ample time to research issues before the meeting. 

Member Kishimoto expressed concern that the feedback mechanism from the Board has not been done in a timely manner.   Chairperson Glickman responded he will endeavor to ascertain an improved feedback mechanism from the Board regarding PAC’s suggestions, recommendations, actions, and issues presented to the Board. Mr. Lawson noted the current VTA Board is dynamic and is committed to Full Participation, Full Information.

On order of Chairperson Glickman, there being no objection, the Committee discussed VTA Chairperson Cindy Chavez’ 2006 initiative, “Full Participation, Full Information,” and strategies to increase effectiveness of the Policy Advisory Committee.

The Agenda was taken out of order.

John Sighamony, Transportation Planner III, gave a brief overview of the Local Program Reserve Funds (LPR) for the City of Monte Sereno’s Local Streets and Roads Rehabilitation Program.  At the December 1, 2005 meeting the VTA Board programmed $40,826 in Federal Surface Transportation (STP) funds for roadway rehabilitation projects in the City of Monte Sereno.  Based on the functional classifications of the streets in Monte Sereno none of the roadways are eligible for federal aid.  VTA staff recommends the VTA Board replace Monte Sereno’s federal STP programming with $41,000 in LPR funds. 

M/S/C (Kishimoto/Gomez) to review and recommend that the VTA Board of Directors program $41,000 in Local Program Reserve funds for the City of Monte Sereno’s Local Streets and Roads Rehabilitation Program; and authorize the General Manager to enter into a funding agreement with the City of Monte Sereno.

Mr. Sighamony reported that in the 2005 Regional Transportation Plan, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) includes $900 million in future federal transportation revenues for local road rehabilitation projects over the next 25 years.   As a faction of the third cycle of Local Streets and Roads Rehabilitation MTC has released $16.01 million in STP funds for local streets and roads rehabilitation and reconstruction projects in the County.  The funds are available for FFY through 2009.

The proposed program has two components:  1) 85 percent need based targets and; 2) 15 percent allocated to county expressways.  The need-based projects are calculated based on each individual city and the County’s percentage of total costs of reconstruction and maintenance of local streets and roads countywide.  The remaining 15 percent is available to the County expressway system for the third cycle. 

M/S/C (Gomez/Brodsky) to review and recommend that the VTA Board of Directors approve the programming of Federal Surface Transportation Program (STP) funding for local streets and roads rehabilitation projects during federal Fiscal Years (FFY) 2007 through 2009.

Mr. Sighamony gave an overview of the Application Procedures and Evaluation Criteria for Community Design and Transportation Program Capital Grants.  The VTA Board of Directors adopted the Community Design and Transportation (CDT) Program in 2002 as the primary program for integrating land use and transportation.  The program proactively influences the development and planning process by providing information,  resources and planning, technical, and design assistance to VTA Member Agencies.

VTA has established two new Grant Fund Programs: CDT Capital Grants, and CDT Planning Grants.  The Planning Grant Program provides the funding for preparation of projects for implementation by Member Agencies, and in August 2004 VTA issued the CDT Planning Grants Program call-to-projects.  The VTA Board awarded planning grants totaling $475,000 in February 2005.  Two additional cycles of $475,000 are funded, and another call for projects is anticipated for 2006.

The CDT Capital Grants Program assists Member Agencies in designing and building pedestrian and transit friendly projects. The Capital Grants Program also includes maintaining transit and pedestrian friendly elements in capital projects related to streets, transit facilities, and core areas. 

Both of the programs provide assistance to Member Agencies with design, planning and construction of projects embracing the concepts, practices, principles and actions outlined in VTA’s Community Design and Transportation Manual of Best Practices for Integrating Transportation and Land Use.

Member Brodsky noted that the fastest connections between core areas should be considered.

Chairperson Glickman stated that a simple process for cities to apply for to the CDT Grants programs is desirable and should be considered.

M/S/C (Brodsky/Kishimoto) to review and recommend that the VTA Board of Directors approve the evaluation criteria and procedures for selecting projects and awarding Community Design and Transportation Program Capital Grants.

Mr. Grace expressed concern about Line #22 and noted that he is very interested in the criteria for Lifeline Transportation Projects.

Adam Burger, Transportation Planner I, presented a brief overview of the Scoring Criteria for Lifeline Transportation Projects.  The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) has established the Lifeline Transportation Program to fund projects that result in the improved mobility for low-income residents of the San Francisco Bay Area.  The goals that MTC has established are: 1) Improve the range of transportation choices by adding new or expanded services such as transit services, enhanced fixed route services, youth programs, shuttle services, taxi voucher programs, and capital improvement programs.  The transportation needs of the disabled and elderly in low-income communities should be considered in funding projects; 2) By way of community outreach programs such as the Community – Based Transportation Plan (CBTP) address the transportation barriers and gaps that are identified on a countywide basis for low-income areas; and 3) Develop CBTP programs in cooperation with broad partnerships and a variety of stakeholders such as transit operators, public agencies, and outreach to unrepresented stakeholders.

Mr. Burger, commented that MTC has proposed that the Lifeline Transportation Program be administered at the county level as a 3-year demonstration program.  Congestion Management Agencies (CMAs) will administer the program, except in Santa Clara County where the program is to be jointly administered by VTA and the County of Santa Clara.  On January 5, 2006, the VTA Board of Directors authorized the General Manager to execute a Cooperative Agreement between the County of Santa Clara and VTA to develop and administer a Lifeline Transportation Program in Santa Clara County. This agreement established a Joint Lifeline Transportation Committee (JLTC), which includes members from VTA, the County, and the following three countywide community organizations: The Housing Authority of Santa Clara County; Silicon Valley Leadership Group (SVLG); and Second Harvest Food Bank.

Mr. Burger stated that VTA and County staff proposed weighting each of the five scoring criteria that will be used to evaluate the submitted projects. The maximum points proposed for the implementation plan is 30; project need, stated goals, and objectives is 25; project budget and sustainability is 20; cost-effectiveness is 15; and coordination and program outreach is 10 points with total points of 100.

Mr. Burger commented that the VTA Board of Directors approved the scoring criteria at its March 2, 2006 Board Meeting.   The Call for Projects was released on March 3, 2006 and the deadline to submit projects is April 24, 2006.  This information will also be presented at a workshop describing the proposal process scheduled for Monday, March 13, 2006, at 9:30 a.m. held at the Santa Clara County Social Services Agency, 333 West Julian Street, San Jose.

Mr. Lawson clarified that this is a new federal three-year trial program administered through MTC and does not replace any current program.

On order of Chairperson Glickman, there being no objection, the Committee reviewed the Scoring Criteria for Lifeline Transportation Projects.

Jim Unites, Operations Planning Program Manager, provided a report on the Paratransit Eligibility Certification Program Modifications.   Mr. Unites noted at the Transit Planning and Operations (TPO) Committee meeting slated for March 23, 2006, the TP&O would be asked to approve the modifications to the Paratransit Eligibility Certification Process and adopt a model that has been based on the MTC Regional Model. 

At the March 2005 Board of Directors meeting, the Board approved the staff-recommended modifications to the eligibility certification process that included: a more user-friendly streamlined one page application process and free transportation to the interviews.   The Board directed staff to monitor and evaluate the new program and directed the Committee for Transit Accessibility (CTA) to review a proposal submitted by Ms. Terry Applegate.   VTA staff was also directed by the Board to conduct customer satisfaction surveys.

Mr. Unites reported that VTA’s Paratransit Program annually transports approximately 950,000 passengers annually and has an active client base of 10,000 residents. The total operating budget of $24.6 million annually provides Paratransit transportation to County residents. 

Member Kline queried why the in-person interview has been deleted.  Mathew O. Tucker, Chief Operations Officer, reported that research has reflected the majority of interviewed applicants would be approved after the application process and health care professional consultation.   Mr. Tucker added that in-person interviews could still take place on a per case basis. 

Member LeZotte noted that residents were being re-certified annually whose conditions and disability clearly would not change or improve.   Member LeZotte noted that she represents the disabled community on the San Jose City Council and the feedback received was negative for the in-person interview process. 

Chairperson Glickman questioned the criterion objectives for applicants of the Paratransit Program.   Mr. Tucker replied it is the functional capability of completing a transit trip from the beginning of the trip to the end. 

On order of Chairperson Glickman, there being no objection, the Committee reviewed the Paratransit Eligibility Certification Program Modifications.

Chairperson Glickman announced the following appointments to the Caltrain Subcommittee: Dominic Caserta, Steve Glickman, Yoriko Kishimoto, Norman Kline, Linda J. LeZotte, and Christopher Moylan.  Chairperson Glickman thanked and expressed his appreciation to the PAC members who volunteered for the Caltrain Subcommittee.

On order of Chairperson Glickman, there being no objection, the Committee appointed the Caltrain Subcommittee.

OTHER

Member Brodsky announced that at the Cities Association Meeting held March 9, 2006, a discussion of the principles of the proposed County Sales Tax is anticipated.  Mr. Brodsky suggested the PAC embrace a similar forum.

Member Kline suggested a discussion in general terms concerning the County sales tax.

Chairperson Glickman noted PAC could provide valuable input and submit recommendations to the Board regarding transit needs in relation to the proposed county sales tax. 

Mr. Lawson reminded PAC that a facet of the proposed tax indicates a consideration included in the tax to fund transportation needs for local jurisdictions with adopted expenditure plans. 

Member Macias questioned if PAC should take a position on measures that may or may not include transportation.

Chairperson Glickman stated that it is well within the competence of the PAC to make a recommendation to the Board concerning the County sales tax. 

Chairperson Glickman requested staff agendize the county sales tax for the April meeting.

Member Kishimoto indicated the need for discussion concerning the VTP 2030 Plan.  Upon inquiry of Member Kishimoto referencing the Board Memorandum Agenda Item #15 from Board Chairperson Cindy Chavez stating a recommendation to add to the PAC Work Plan discussion regarding the Project Priority and Revenue Advisory Committee.  Chairperson Glickman requested staff place the item on the Work Plan.

Member Brodsky referenced a presentation to increase ridership through internet outreach and gathering sites he presented to Sustainable Silicon Valley.org and suggested that he present it to the PAC.   Chairperson Glickman requested Member Brodsky submit the information to VTA staff, and they will distribute the information to the Committee for review and discussion at a future meeting. 

On order of Chairperson Glickman, there being no objection, the Committee Work Plan was reviewed.

There were no announcements.

On order of Chairperson Glickman, there being no objection, the meeting was adjourned at 5:59 PM

Respectfully submitted,

Jacqueline F. Golzio, Board Assistant
VTA Board of Directors

NOTE:    M/S/C MEANS MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED AND, UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED, THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.