Skip to Main Content Skip to Side Navigation Skip to Top Navigation

Board of Directors Meeting

November 09, 2001

San Jose Hyatt
Mediterranean Center
1740 North First Street
San Jose, Californi

Summary Minutes

1. CALLED TO ORDER at 8:41 a.m.

ROLL CALL: Members Present: Attaway, Chavez, Cortese, Dando, Gage, Gonzales, D. Kennedy, J.P. Kennedy, Lieber, McHugh, Springer, McLemore (Ex-Officio), Nadler, Valerio, Williams,

Members Absent: Alvarado, Beall (Ex-Officio), Eakins, Yeager

A quorum was present.

2. PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS

There were no public presentations.

3. Provided a report on the process and recommendation of the SVRTC Policy Advisory Board (PAB).

Inquired if individuals wanted to address the Board of Directors under Agenda Item #3 or Agenda Item #4 on the Agenda.

Irvin Dawid, Loma Prieta Chapter of the Sierra Club, noted non-support of Alternative 11: BART on Union Pacific.

Michael C. Macarelli, interested citizen, noted that he expected a comprehensive study and that the final MIS did not consider studying high-speed light rail as an alternative. He recommended that VTA Board of Directors remand the report back to the PAB with instructions to include as an alternative, high-speed light rail.

Laura Stuchinsky, Silicon Valley Manufacturing Group (SVMG), noted support of the PAB’s recommendation that BART be chosen as the Preferred Alternative.

Greg Perry, interested citizen, noted that it is important to consider alternatives and that other alternatives have not been considered.

Thanked speakers who came forward with their concerns.

Stated that there was a very exhaustive process and that all viable alternatives were reviewed and studied through established criteria.

Thanked individuals that came forth, voiced their opinion about the alternatives and noted that it is time to take a position.

Expressed agreement with previous remarks and noted that this is a window of opportunity.

Approved the Silicon Valley Rapid Transit Corridor Policy Advisory Board’s (PAB) recommendation to: 1) select a BART extension to Milpitas, San Jose and Santa Clara as the Preferred Investment Strategy for the Silicon Valley Rapid Transit Corridor; 2) carry forward a BART compatible alternative into the environmental compliance phase along with the BART extension until negotiations between VTA and BART have been approved; and 3) fully support the Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s (MTC) inclusion of $834 million (2001 dollars) in Federal Transit Administration New Starts funding in their regional rail expansion plan.

4. Congratulated Peter M. Cipolla, General Manager, and VTA staff for completing the Agreement and inquired about potential development revenue opportunity.

Echoed congratulations and requested further explanation of the dispute resolution process and whether it would work with the partnership.

Referred to Page 3 of the Board Memorandum, that mentions the Project will be built to BART standards and inquired if those standards were equivalent to VTA’s standards.

Inquired about the difference between the definition of the lead agency, VTA and the responsible agency, BART.

Inquired about revenue streams and the quarterly adjustments relating to the rate of the VTA sales tax.

Inquired if VTA does look to the TDA Funds as a revenue stream, what negative impact might that lead to other projects or systems that now depend on TDA funding.

Expressed concern due to the controversy surrounding the funding and requested a mechanism that continually communicates with the public to let them know exactly what we are doing so that there is not any confusion.

Echoed support for the BART-type system.

Congratulated Mr. Cipolla, VTA staff and everyone involved in negotiating the Agreement. Inquired why in Appendix J, Written/Verbal Comments received by Mail/Phone/E-mail in Attachment B, the names of the members of the General Public have been lined out and suggested that in the future that as comments are solicited on future projects and issues that there be an attempt to clarify with people whether or not they are requesting anonymity.

Thanked Mr. Cipolla, staff of VTA and BART for all the work done.

Referred to Page 4 of the Board Memorandum, that states VTA will further pay a proportionate share of BART’s fixed overhead costs and inquired if that meant fixed overhead costs as what the Project consists of or fixed overhead costs for the overall.

Congratulated VTA staff and the public policy members involved in the negotiations.

Commented that a key milestone has been reached and requested that VTA refocus on Caltrain, expansion of Caltrain services.

Eugene Bradley, Santa Clara VTA Riders Union, urged VTA Board of Directors to do whatever it takes so that the $48 million does not get cut from bus and light rail service and to find any reasonable revenue stream possible in order for BART to connect with buses and light rail in this County.

Henry Bender, interested citizen, recommended that VTA explicitly state in the planning process and give emphasis to opening the first portion of the line from the county line to Milpitas.

Ed Blackmund, interested citizen, noted his support for VTA and BART coming to an operating agreement. He expressed concern about funding the Agreement without cutting back on light rail and bus service and suggested taking BART directly to the airport.

Ross Signorino, interested citizen, suggested a bus system that goes into neighborhoods so that people can use buses and can get out of their cars.

Kim Strickland, Bay Area Transportation and Land Use Coalition, distributed a memo regarding the VTA BART Agreement and expressed concern that it could result in massive bus and rail transit service cuts for Santa Clara County riders.

Mr. Dawid noted support of previous statements made by the Bay Area Transportation Land Use Coalition, the Riders Union and others. Urged the public to review the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) documents that will follow.

Ms. Stuchinsky congratulated VTA and BART for the hard work and commented that the SVMG looks forward to bringing BART to Santa Clara County in a manner that will ultimately expand the transportation options available to the residents of Santa Clara County.

Mr. Perry expressed concern regarding the VTA and BART Agreement.

Thomas Blalock, BART Board Member, District #6, expressed his support for BART to Santa Clara County and stated that the Alternative Study was very through.

Neil Struthers, interested citizens, stated that he understood and shared the concerns about bus and light rail, but encouraged the Board of Directors to take advantage of the opportunity to leverage another $900 million for the community.

Authorized the General Manager to enter into a comprehensive agreement between the San Francisco BART and the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) for the design construction, operation, maintenance and on-going funding of a BART extension from Warm Springs to Milpitas, San Jose and Santa Clara in Santa Clara County. Further adopted Resolution No. 01.11.45 communicating to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) VTA’s support for the adoption of the 2001 Regional Transportation (RTP) and the 2001 Regional Transit Expansion Plan (RTEP) by MTC on December 19, 2001, and request MTC to acknowledge and support the comprehensive agreements that VTA has established with its transportation partners to govern the maintenance, operation and expansion of the Altamont Commuter Express, Caltrain and BART services.

Expressed appreciation for the speakers that came forward and stated that there are next steps necessary to make this project a reality. Clarified that VTA is not trading bus service or light rail service for an agreement with BART. Thanked everyone who dedicated the time necessary to get this done on time.

Thanked everyone in the different cities and organizations who offered assistance to bring BART to this region.

Recognized and thanked Mayor Gonzales for the tremendous effort he put into making this BART extension possible.

Thanked everyone who participated today and throughout the process.

5. ADJOURNED at 10:04 a.m.