Solano Transportation Authority

Member Agencies: Benicia  Dixon  Fairfield  Rio Vista  Suisun City  Vacaville  Vallejo  Solano County

One Harbor Center, Ste. 130, Suisun City, CA 94585-2473  Phone (707) 424-6075 / Fax (707) 424-6074 Email: [email protected]  Website: sta.ca.gov

TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE (TAC) AGENDA

1:30 p.m., Wednesday, August 30, 2017 Solano Transportation Authority One Harbor Center, Suite 130 Suisun City, CA 94585

ITEM STAFF PERSON

1. CALL TO ORDER Daryl Halls, Chair

2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA

3. OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT (1:30 -1:35 p.m.)

4. REPORTS FROM CALTRANS, MTC, STA, AND LOCAL AGENCIES (1:35 – 1:45 p.m.) A. Caltrans SHOPP Projects Update Janet Adams B. SB 1 LS&R Requirements Anthony Adams

5. CONSENT CALENDAR Recommendation: Approve the following consent items in one motion. (1:45 – 1:50 p.m.)

A. Minutes of the TAC Meeting of June 28, 2017 Johanna Masiclat Recommendation: Approve TAC Meeting Minutes of June 28, 2017. Pg. 5

B. Fiscal Year (FY) 2017-18 Transportation Development Act (TDA) Liz Niedziela Matrix – August 2017 Recommendation: Forward a recommendation to the STA Board to approve the September FY 2017-18 Solano TDA Matrix as shown in Attachment C that includes TDA claims from the City of Dixon, the City of Fairfield, the City of Rio Vista, and the revised TDA claim for STA. Pg. 11

TAC MEMBERS Graham Wadsworth Joe Leach George Hicks Dave Melilli Tim McSorley Shawn Cunningham Jill Mercurio Matt Tuggle

City of City of City of City of City of City of City of County of Benicia Dixon Fairfield Rio Vista Suisun City Vacaville Vallejo Solano

The complete STA TAC packet is available1 on STA’s website: www.sta.ca.gov

6. ACTION FINANCIAL ITEMS

A. Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) Grant Memorandum of Anthony Adams Understanding (MOU) Recommendation: Forward a recommendation to the STA Board to approve the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for the Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) Collision Data Collection Grant as shown in Attachment A. (1:50 – 1:55 p.m.) Pg. 19

B. San Francisco Bay Restoration Parcel Tax (Measure AA) Funding Robert Macaulay Recommendation Forward a recommendation to the STA Board to authorize the STA Executive Director to submit the extension of the CDGW Grizzly Island Road bike lane for Measure AA funds. (1:55 – 2:00 p.m.) Pg. 25

7. ACTION NON-FINANCIAL ITEMS

A. SR 37 Corridor Project Update Robert Guerrero Recommendations: Forward a recommendation to the STA Board to authorize the Executive Director to submit comments on the draft SR 37 Corridor Study that include the Mare Island Interchange as a priority for Segment B and the SR 37/Fairgrounds Drive Project as a priority for Segment C. (2:00 – 2:10 p.m.) Pg. 57

B. Update Bicycle and Pedestrian Priority Projects List for Fiscal Year Ryan Dodge (FY) 2017-18 Cory Peterson Recommendations: Forward a recommendation to the STA Board to approve the STA Bicycle and Pedestrian Priority Projects List for FY 2017-18 as shown in Attachment A. (2:10 – 2:20 p.m.) Pg. 65

8. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS – DISCUSSION

A. Legislative Update Jayne Bauer (2:20 – 2:25 p.m.) Pg. 71

B. Discussion of 2018 State Transportation Improvement Program Janet Adams (STIP) Programming (2:25 – 2:35 p.m.) Pg. 95

The complete STA TAC packet is available2 on STA’s website: www.sta.ca.gov

C. Status of Senate Bill 595 Future Bridge Toll Expenditure Plan Janet Adams (2:35 – 2:40 p.m.) Pg. 105

D. Senate Bill 1 (SB 1) and State Transit Assistance Funds Population Liz Niedziela Based Priorities (2:40 – 2:45 p.m.) Pg. 123

E. One Bay Area Grant (OBAG) Cycle 2 Funding Agreements Update Anthony Adams (2:45 – 2:50 p.m.) Pg. 127

F. 2017 Solano Travel Safety Plan Update Anthony Adams (2:50 – 2:55 p.m.) Pg. 129

G. Project Delivery Update Anthony Adams (2:55 – 3:00 p.m.) Pg. 131

NO DISCUSSION

H. Abandoned Vehicle Abatement (AVA) Program Third Quarter Judy Kowalsky Report Pg. 137

I. Summary of Funding Opportunities Cory Peterson Pg. 139

J. Draft Meeting Minutes of STA Board & Advisory Committees Johanna Masiclat Pg. 143

K. STA Board and Advisory Committee Meeting Schedule for Johanna Masiclat Calendar Year 2017 Pg. 159

9. UPCOMING TAC AGENDA ITEMS

September 2017 A. Programming of 2018 STIP B. Draft Arterials, Highways and Freeways Element C. 4th Annual RTIF Report D. Discussion of Annual Pothole Report E. Updated Funding Agreements for Jepson Parkway F. Ramp Metering Phase 2 G. OBAG 2 Funding Agreements Update

The complete STA TAC packet is available3 on STA’s website: www.sta.ca.gov

November 2017 A. Countywide Active Transportation Plan (Bike/Ped) Update B. Update on Countywide GIS C. SB 1 Update D. RM 3 Update

10. ADJOURNMENT The next regular meeting of the Technical Advisory Committee is scheduled at, 1:30 p.m. on Wednesday, September 27, 2017.

TAC Meeting Schedule for the Remainder of Calendar Year 2017 No Meeting in October 1:30 p.m., November 29th 1:30 p.m., December 20th

Translation Services: For document translation please call: Para la llamada de traducción de documentos: 對於文檔翻譯電話 Đối với tài liệu gọi dịch: Para sa mga dokumento tawag sa pagsasalin: 707-399-3239

The complete STA TAC packet is available4 on STA’s website: www.sta.ca.gov Agenda Item 5.A August 30, 2017

TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE DRAFT Minutes for the meeting of June 28, 2017

1. CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the STA’s Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) was called to order by Daryl Halls at approximately 1:30 p.m. in the Solano Transportation Authority (STA)’s Conference Room 1.

TAC Members Present: Graham Wadsworth City of Benicia Jason Riley for Joe Leach City of Dixon Dave Melilli City of Rio Vista Tracy Rideout for Shawn Cunningham City of Vacaville Gary Cullen for Jill Mercurio City of Vallejo

TAC Members Absent: Joe Leach City of Dixon George Hicks City of Fairfield Tim McSorley City of Suisun City Shawn Cunningham City of Vacaville Jill Mercurio City of Vallejo Matt Tuggle Solano County

STA Staff and Others Present: (In Alphabetical Order by Last Name) Anthony Adams STA James Bloesch STA Intern Ramil Chettfour STA Intern Daryl Halls STA Erika Hansen STA Drew Hart STA Robert Macaulay STA Johanna Masiclat STA Lloyd Nadal STA Jim McElroy STA Project Manager John McKenzie Caltrans Liz Niedziela STA Brandon Thomson STA

2. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA On a motion by Graham Wadsworth, and a second by Jason Riley, the STA TAC unanimously approved the agenda. (5 Ayes)

5 3. OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT None presented.

4. REPORTS FROM CALTRANS, MTC AND STA STAFF

Presentations: 1. Caltrans SHOPP Update presented by Daryl Halls 2. SB 1 Update presented by Daryl Halls

John McKenzie, Caltrans District 4, announced that Caltrans nominated the I-80 High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) and High Occupancy Toll (HOT) Conversion Projects for consideration for SB 1 corridor funding project.

Anthony Adams announced that the CTC is holding a workshop on July 18, 2017 on Local Streets and Roads (LS&R) Implementation on SB 1 to be held at Caltrans Headquarters in Sacramento.

5. CONSENT CALENDAR On a motion by Dave Melilli, and a second by Jason Riley, the STA TAC approved the Consent Calendar A and B. (5 Ayes)

A. Minutes of the TAC Meeting of May 31, 2017 Recommendation: Approve TAC Meeting Minutes of May 31, 2017.

B. Fiscal Year (FY) 2017-18 Transportation Development Act (TDA) Matrix – July 2017 – Solano County Transit and revised Solano Transportation Authority (STA) Recommendation: Forward a recommendation to the STA Board to approve the July FY 2017-18 Solano TDA Matrix as shown in Attachment B that includes SolTrans and revised TDA claim for STA.

6. ACTION FINANCIAL ITEMS

A. 2017 Regional Transportation Impact Fee (RTIF) Update and Project Recommendations Anthony Adams summarized the funding allocation process of the RTIF revenue generated by Working Group 6 through FY 2017-18 and *FY 2018-19 FY 2023-24. He noted that the Working Group 6 RTIF funding commitment toward the Benicia Bus Hub project is nearing completion with a remaining balance of $75,388 (anticipated to be collected in FY 2017-18) and that any additional RTIF revenue collected for RTIF Working Group 6 for FY 2017-18 through *FY 2018-19 FY 2023-24 be applied toward the Fairgrounds Drive/SR 37 SolanoExpress Bus Stop.

*At the June 28th, 2017 meeting, the SolanoExpress Intercity Transit Consortium requested to extend the revenue generated by Working Group 6 from two (FY 2017-18 to FY 2018- 19) to six (FY 2017-18 to FY 2023-24) fiscal years as noted above in strikethrough bold italics.

Recommendation: Forward a recommendation to the STA Board to approve the RTIF Working Group project recommendations as specified in Attachment B.

On a motion by Graham Wadsworth and a second by Jason Riley, the STA TAC unanimously approved the recommendation. (5 Ayes)

6 7. ACTION NON FINANCIAL ITEMS

A. SolanoExpress Operations Implementation Plan Jim McElroy presented the implementation process of the two phases of SolanoExpress service changes based on the capital project timing. He noted that the proposed fare structure is not intended to be a fare increase, but is designed to make fares consistent across the entire SolanoExpress network. He added that the STA has budgeted for the marketing and promotion of this service and this will be covered in more detail at the August meeting of the Consortium. Mr. McElroy also reviewed the timeline for the Highway 37 at Fairgrounds Drive bus stop which determines the implementation date for the Red Line. He noted that staff is recommending a two-phase implementation that defers the consolidations of the Route 80 and Route 85 into the Green Line until January 2019 or when the new stop at Highway 37 and Fairgrounds is completed.

At the June 28th, 2017 meeting, the SolanoExpress Intercity Transit Consortium requested to modify the recommendation as shown below in strikethrough bold italics. The STA staff and the TAC concurred.

Recommendations: Forward a recommendation to the STA Board to authorize the Executive Director to: 1. Implement two phases of SolanoExpress service changes as shown in Attachment A: A. About January 1, 2018 July 1, 2018: Phase 1, Yellow, Green Express and Blue Lines B. About July 1, 2018 July 1, 2019: Phase 2, Green Line 2. Work with the SolanoExpress providers to implement a new unified fare structure across all SolanoExpress services, as generally identified in this agenda item; 3. Work with the SolanoExpress providers to proceed with hearings and outreach to comply with regulatory and funding regulations and laws; and 4. Develop and implement outreach and marketing plans to promote the SolanoExpress service changes.

On a motion by Dave Melilli and a second by Jason Riley, the STA TAC unanimously approved the recommendation as amended in strikethrough bold italics. (8 Ayes)

B. Approval of SolanoExpress Bus Stop Locations as Part of SolanoExpress Operations Implementation Plan Anthony Adams cited that the STA Board authorized Funding Agreements with the cities of Fairfield and Vacaville to construct the bus stops at the Solano Community College sites; however, the formal action to approve the stop locations will be recommended at their July Board meeting. He noted that STA staff is seeking a formal approval of the three bus stop locations to begin developing the project with the goal to have two sites constructed prior to July 2018 and the third prior to July 2019. He explained that all three stops are integral to streamlining the SolanoExpress Bus Service by reducing service times with focused stop locations serving Solano County residents and employers.

7 Recommendation: Forward a recommendation to the STA Board to approve the SolanoExpress Bus Stop Locations for the new SolanoExpress Operations Implementation Plan as specified in Attachment C and included locations at: 1. Fairfield Solano Community College Main Campus as shown in Attachment A; 2. Vacaville Solano Community College Satellite Campus as shown in Attachment B; and 3. Fairgrounds Drive/State Route 37 as shown in Attachment C.

On a motion by Dave Melilli, and a second by Graham Wadsworth, the STA TAC unanimously approved the recommendation. (5 Ayes)

Daryl Halls left the meeting.

C. Solano Active Transportation Plan (ATP) – Element of the Comprehensive Transportation Plan Robert Macaulay noted that as the scope of work for consultant services is being developed, STA staff would like the TAC members to weigh in on an opening statement/purpose that lays out the STA vision for the ATP. He cited that some comments on the proposed purpose have already been submitted by planning staff.

Graham Wadsworth, City of Benicia, suggested adding the following information to the Scope of Work during the Request for Proposal (RFP) process: 1. Targeting Younger People 2. Transit Oriented Development 3. Carefree Tourism 4. ADA Accessibility 5. STA Staff’s Task List

Anthony Adams also mentioned that additional funding may be obtained through the expansion of Caltrans Planning Grants of SB 1 which would allow to expand the scope.

Recommendation: Review and provide comments on the proposed purpose of the Solano Active Transportation Plan - Element of the Comprehensive Transportation Plan as shown in Attachment A.

8. INFORMATIONAL – DISCUSSION

A. Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) Grant Update Anthony Adams and Lloyd Nadal provided a brief explanation of two grants (Traffic Records and Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety) totaling $171,000 preliminary awarded by the OTS. Mr. Adams reported that the traffic records grant will be focused on procurement of collision data software and standardization of data reporting techniques. This data will help to identify the types and locations of collisions, and will have this data available and analyzed automatically. In consultation with the commanders of each police department within Solano County, all data will be collected and made available through an online portal. Mr. Nadal also reported that the pedestrian and bicycle safety grant will be focused on reducing injuries of middle and high school children within Solano County. He commented that the Solano Safe Routes to School Program launched a youth engagement program in January 2017 and with the potential support from this OTS grant, youth teams across the county will engage in Youth-led Participatory Action Research (YPAR) projects that can lead to sustainable solutions in transportation, safety and increasing physical activity.

8 NO DISCUSSION

B. Legislative Update

C. Summary of Funding Opportunities

D. Draft Meeting Minutes of STA Board & Advisory Committees

E. STA Board and Advisory Committee Meeting Schedule for Calendar Year 2017

9. FUTURE STA TAC AGENDA ITEMS A summary of the agenda items for August/September/October 2017 were presented.

10. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 2:45 p.m.

The next regular meeting of the Technical Advisory Committee is scheduled at, 1:30 p.m. on Wednesday, August 30 2017.

9 This page intentionally left blank.

10 Agenda Item 5.B August 30, 2017

DATE: August 18, 2017 TO: STA TAC FROM: Liz Niedziela, Transit Program Manager RE: Fiscal Year (FY) 2017-18 Transportation Development Act (TDA) Matrix – September 2017 – Cities of Dixon, Fairfield and Rio Vista and revised Solano Transportation Authority (STA) ______

Background: The Transportation Development Act (TDA) was enacted in 1971 by the California Legislature to ensure a continuing statewide commitment to public transportation. This law imposes a one- quarter-cent tax on retail sales within each county for this purpose. Proceeds are returned to counties based upon the amount of taxes collected, and are apportioned within the county based on population. To obtain TDA funds, local jurisdictions must submit requests to regional transportation agencies that review the claims for consistency with TDA requirements. Solano County agencies submit TDA claims to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), the Regional Transportation Planning Agency (RTPA) for the nine Bay Area counties.

The Solano FY 2017-18 TDA fund estimates by jurisdiction are shown on the attached MTC Fund Estimate (Attachment A). MTC updated the fund estimate on July 26, 2017.

TDA funds are shared among agencies to fund joint services such as SolanoExpress intercity bus routes and Intercity Taxi Scrip Program. To clarify how the TDA funds are to be allocated each year among the local agencies and to identify the purpose of the funds, the STA works with the transit operators and prepares an annual TDA matrix. The TDA matrix is approved by the STA Board and submitted to MTC to provide MTC guidance when reviewing individual TDA claims.

The cost share for the intercity routes per the Intercity Funding Agreement is reflected in the TDA Matrix. The intercity funding formula is based on 20% of the costs shared on population and 80% of the costs shared and on ridership by residency. Population estimates are updated annually using the Department of Finance population estimates and ridership by residency is based on on-board surveys conducted in April 2014. The intercity funding process includes a reconciliation of planned (budgeted) intercity revenues and expenditures to actual revenues and expenditures. In this cycle, FY 2015-16 audited amounts were reconciled to the estimated amounts for FY 2015-16. The reconciliation amounts and the estimated amounts for FY 2017-18 are merged to determine the cost per funding partner.

The reconciling calculations for FY 2015-16 planned versus actual subsidies from the local jurisdictions are approximately $440,000 less than had been budgeted for. Each of the local jurisdictions, except Dixon, will receive a credit toward the subsidy required for the FY 2017-18 Solano Express operations. Solano County’s contribution does not change. Dixon’s subsidy requirement increased by $5,666, primarily due to lower than anticipated fare revenue on Route 30.

11 Discussion: For FY 2017-18, the following four TDA claims are being brought forward for review:

City of Dixon The City of Dixon requested $706,321 in their local TDA funds, and $30,216 from the Vallejo/Benicia TDA funds. The $30,216 from Vallejo/Benicia completes swaps of LCTOP funds from FY 2015-16 and FY 2016-17, and will be used for operating. The TDA funds in the amount of $446,537 will be used for operating, and $290,000 will be used for capital projects. The City of Dixon’s capital projects include: • $190,000 for two vehicle replacements • $100,000 for transit IT upgrade

The City of Dixon’s TDA claim amounts are included in Attachment C, the TDA Matrix.

City of Fairfield/Suisun City (FAST) The City of Fairfield is requesting $5,319,799 in TDA funds. Consistent with prior years, the request includes both Fairfield and Suisun City’s TDA funds. TDA funds in the amount of $3,177,840 will be used for operating and $2,141,959 will be used for capital projects. The City of Fairfield’s capital projects include:  Fleet Repowers/Engine Replacements  Miscellaneous Small Capital  Extensive Bus Maintenance  Parking Program Implementation  FTC/Train Station Interior Improvements and Security Cameras  NextBus Signage and West Texas Gateway (match)

The Solano FY 2017-18 TDA fund estimates by jurisdiction are shown in the MTC Fund Estimate, included as Attachment A. MTC updated fund estimate on July 26, 2017 shows a reduction of funds available for FY 2017-18. The countywide total reduction is $171,966. The reduction is due to actual FY 2016-17 sales tax receipts coming in approximately 1 percent lower than estimated by county auditors and MTC last year.

Using the claim amounts provided by the City of Fairfield results in a negative balance of $11,618 for Suisun City due to the reduction in the Fund Estimate. The negative balance is shown in Attachment B. MTC will not allocate the full amounts claimed from Suisun City, as apportionment jurisdiction amounts cannot be negative in MTC's system.

In order to eliminate the negative balance, Attachment C provides an alternative TDA matrix that reduces the amount claimed against Suisun City for FAST's Local Transit by $11,618 and increases the amount claimed against City of Fairfield by $11,618 to provide full TDA funding to FAST without a negative balance for Suisun City's apportionment. All of the other TDA claim amounts are unchanged from the TDA matrix version shown in Attachment B.

The City of Fairfield’s TDA claim amounts are included in Attachment C, the TDA Matrix.

City of Rio Vista The City of Rio Vista requested $334,268 in their local TDA funds, $65,000 from the City of Dixon TDA funds, and $12,543 from the SolTrans TDA funds. The $65,000 from the City of Dixon, to be used for operations, was authorized by the STA Board on May 10, 2017. The action authorized Rio Vista to claim $65,000 against Dixon's Intercity Bus Replacement TDA reserves, following Rio Vista's unsuccessful FTA 5310 application. The $12,543 from SolTrans completes swaps of LCTOP funds from FY 2015-16 and FY2016-17, and will be used for operating. The 12 City of Rio Vista’s TDA funds in the amount of $315,968 will be used for operating, and $18,300 will be used for capital projects. The City of Rio Vista’s capital project includes: • $18,300 for the local match for one vehicle replacement

The City of Rio Vista’s TDA claim amounts are included in Attachment C, the TDA Matrix.

Solano Transportation Authority TDA Revision STA is requesting a revised amount of $1,445,541 in TDA funds. TDA funds in the amount of $521,046 will be used for transit programs, administration, coordination, and planning. TDA funds in the amount of $141,845 will be claimed against the Suisun City TDA share for operating and maintenance cost for the Suisun City AMTRAK station for FY 2013-14, FY 2014- 15, FY 2015-16, FY 2016-17 and FY 2017-18 ($78,297). The remaining balance ($63,548) is the Suisun City’s loan repayment which will be used for the Fairground Transit Facility Study.

Solano County TDA funds in the amount of $717,650 are to be claimed for the Intercity Taxi Scrip Program ($677,650) and Faith in Action’s program ($40,000) to provide medical transportation for seniors. This amount may be subject to future modification pending discussions with the Consortium regarding Intercity Taxi Scrip Program contributions from each jurisdiction and implementation of Phase 2 of the program.

An additional $65,000 to be claimed against Rio Vista’s TDA to pay back a funding swap from 5311 funding. The $65,000 will be used as capital to fund the SolanoExpress bus stop project.

STA is requesting a revised amount of $1,445,541 in TDA funds. STA’s TDA claim amounts are included in Attachment C the TDA matrix.

Fiscal Impact: The STA is a recipient of TDA funds from each jurisdiction for the purpose of countywide transit planning, and coordination, and programs. STA claims Suisun City TDA for maintenance of the Suisun Amtrak Station and County TDA for the Intercity Taxi Scrip Program. The STA Board approval of the September 2017 TDA matrix provides the guidance needed by MTC to process the TDA claim submitted by Cities of Dixon, Fairfield, and Rio Vista from their local TDA funds and by STA from various local TDA funds.

Recommendation: Forward a recommendation to the STA Board to approve the September FY 2017-18 Solano TDA Matrix as shown in Attachment C that includes TDA claims from the City of Dixon, the City of Fairfield, the City of Rio Vista, and the revised TDA claim for STA.

Attachments: A. FY 2017-18 TDA Fund Estimate for Solano County dated July 26, 2017 B. FY 2017-18 Solano TDA Matrix for September 2017 dated August 17, 2017 C. FY 2017-18 TDA Matrix for September 2017 dated August 18, 2017

13 This page intentionally left blank.

14 ƚƚĂĐŚŵĞŶƚ &zϮϬϭϳͲϭϴ&hE^d/Dd ZĞƐEŽ͘ϰϮϲϴ dZE^WKZdd/KEs>KWDEdd&hE^ WĂŐĞϵŽĨϭϳ ^K>EKKhEdz ϳͬϮϲͬϮϬϭϳ &zϮϬϭϲͲϭϳdZĞǀĞŶƵĞƐƚŝŵĂƚĞ &zϮϬϭϳͲϭϴdZĞǀĞŶƵĞƐƚŝŵĂƚĞ &zϮϬϭϲͲϭϳ'ĞŶĞƌĂƚŝŽŶƐƚŝŵĂƚĞĚũƵƐƚŵĞŶƚ &zϮϬϭϳͲϭϴŽƵŶƚǇƵĚŝƚŽƌΖƐ'ĞŶĞƌĂƚŝŽŶƐƚŝŵĂƚĞ ϭ͘KƌŝŐŝŶĂůŽƵŶƚǇƵĚŝƚŽƌƐƚŝŵĂƚĞ;&Ğď͕ϭϲͿ ϭϳ͕ϳϳϯ͕ϰϯϲ ϭϯ͘ŽƵŶƚǇƵĚŝƚŽƌƐƚŝŵĂƚĞ ϭϴ͕ϱϬϴ͕ϱϲϴ Ϯ͘ĐƚƵĂůZĞǀĞŶƵĞ;:ƵŶĞ͕ϭϳͿ ϭϴ͕ϯϮϱ͕ϳϴϬ &zϮϬϭϳͲϭϴWůĂŶŶŝŶŐĂŶĚĚŵŝŶŝƐƚƌĂƚŝŽŶŚĂƌŐĞƐ ϯ͘ZĞǀĞŶƵĞĚũƵƐƚŵĞŶƚ;>ŝŶĞƐϮͲϭͿ ϱϱϮ͕ϯϰϰ ϭϰ͘DdĚŵŝŶŝƐƚƌĂƚŝŽŶ;Ϭ͘ϱйŽĨ>ŝŶĞϭϯͿ ϵϮ͕ϱϰϯ &zϮϬϭϲͲϭϳWůĂŶŶŝŶŐĂŶĚĚŵŝŶŝƐƚƌĂƚŝŽŶŚĂƌŐĞƐĚũƵƐƚŵĞŶƚ ϭϱ͘ŽƵŶƚǇĚŵŝŶŝƐƚƌĂƚŝŽŶ;Ϭ͘ϱйŽĨ>ŝŶĞϭϯͿ ϵϮ͕ϱϰϯ ϰ͘DdĚŵŝŶŝƐƚƌĂƚŝŽŶ;Ϭ͘ϱйŽĨ>ŝŶĞϯͿ Ϯ͕ϳϲϮ ϭϲ͘DdWůĂŶŶŝŶŐ;ϯ͘ϬйŽĨ>ŝŶĞϭϯͿ ϱϱϱ͕Ϯϱϳ ϱ͘ŽƵŶƚǇĚŵŝŶŝƐƚƌĂƚŝŽŶ;hƉƚŽϬ͘ϱйŽĨ>ŝŶĞϯͿϭ Ϯ͕ϳϲϮ ϭϳ͘dŽƚĂůŚĂƌŐĞƐ;>ŝŶĞƐϭϰнϭϱнϭϲͿ ϳϰϬ͕ϯϰϯ ϲ͘DdWůĂŶŶŝŶŐ;ϯ͘ϬйŽĨ>ŝŶĞϯͿ ϭϲ͕ϱϳϬ ϭϴ͘d'ĞŶĞƌĂƚŝŽŶƐ>ĞƐƐŚĂƌŐĞƐ;>ŝŶĞƐϭϯͲϭϳͿ ϭϳ͕ϳϲϴ͕ϮϮϱ ϳ͘dŽƚĂůŚĂƌŐĞƐ;>ŝŶĞƐϰнϱнϲͿ ϮϮ͕Ϭϵϰ &zϮϬϭϳͲϭϴdƉƉŽƌƚŝŽŶŵĞŶƚǇƌƚŝĐůĞ ϴ͘ĚũƵƐƚĞĚ'ĞŶĞƌĂƚŝŽŶƐ>ĞƐƐŚĂƌŐĞƐ;>ŝŶĞƐϯͲϳͿ ϱϯϬ͕ϮϱϬ ϭϵ͘ƌƚŝĐůĞϯ͘Ϭ;Ϯ͘ϬйŽĨ>ŝŶĞϭϴͿ ϯϱϱ͕ϯϲϱ &zϮϬϭϲͲϭϳdĚũƵƐƚŵĞŶƚǇƌƚŝĐůĞ ϮϬ͘&ƵŶĚƐZĞŵĂŝŶŝŶŐ;>ŝŶĞƐϭϴͲϭϵͿ ϭϳ͕ϰϭϮ͕ϴϲϬ ϵ͘ƌƚŝĐůĞϯĚũƵƐƚŵĞŶƚ;Ϯ͘ϬйŽĨůŝŶĞϴͿ ϭϬ͕ϲϬϱ Ϯϭ͘ƌƚŝĐůĞϰ͘ϱ;ϱ͘ϬйŽĨ>ŝŶĞϮϬͿ Ϭ ϭϬ͘&ƵŶĚƐZĞŵĂŝŶŝŶŐ;>ŝŶĞƐϴͲϵͿ ϱϭϵ͕ϲϰϱ ϮϮ͘dƌƚŝĐůĞϰ;>ŝŶĞƐϮϬͲϮϭͿ ϭϳ͕ϰϭϮ͕ϴϲϬ ϭϭ͘ƌƚŝĐůĞϰ͘ϱĚũƵƐƚŵĞŶƚ;ϱ͘ϬйŽĨ>ŝŶĞϭϬͿ Ϭ ϭϮ͘ƌƚŝĐůĞϰĚũƵƐƚŵĞŶƚ;>ŝŶĞƐϭϬͲϭϭͿ ϱϭϵ͕ϲϰϱ dWWKZd/KEDEdz:hZ/^/d/KE ŽůƵŵŶ с^Ƶŵ;͗Ϳ & ' ,с^Ƶŵ;͗'Ϳ / :с^Ƶŵ;,͗/Ϳ ϲͬϯϬͬϮϬϭϲ &zϮϬϭϱͲϭϲ ϲͬϯϬͬϮϬϭϲ &zϮϬϭϱͲϭϳ &zϮϬϭϲͲϭϳ &zϮϬϭϲͲϭϳ &zϮϬϭϲͲϭϳ ϲͬϯϬͬϮϬϭϳ &zϮϬϭϳͲϭϴ &zϮϬϭϳͲϭϴ ƉƉŽƌƚŝŽŶŵĞŶƚ ĂůĂŶĐĞ ĂůĂŶĐĞ KƵƚƐƚĂŶĚŝŶŐ dƌĂŶƐĨĞƌƐͬ KƌŝŐŝŶĂů ZĞǀĞŶƵĞ WƌŽũĞĐƚĞĚ ZĞǀĞŶƵĞ ǀĂŝůĂďůĞĨŽƌ /ŶƚĞƌĞƐƚ :ƵƌŝƐĚŝĐƚŝŽŶƐ ;ǁͬŽŝŶƚĞƌĞƐƚͿ ;ǁͬŝŶƚĞƌĞƐƚͿϮ ŽŵŵŝƚŵĞŶƚƐϯ ZĞĨƵŶĚƐ ƐƚŝŵĂƚĞ ĚũƵƐƚŵĞŶƚ ĂƌƌǇŽǀĞƌ ƐƚŝŵĂƚĞ ůůŽĐĂƚŝŽŶ ƌƚŝĐůĞϯ ϰϱϰ͕ϴϳϮ ϯ͕ϲϯϯ ϰϱϴ͕ϱϬϱ ;ϱϮϳ͕ϯϱϰͿ Ϭ ϯϰϭ͕ϮϱϬ ϭϬ͕ϲϬϱ Ϯϴϯ͕ϬϬϲ ϯϱϱ͕ϯϲϱ ϲϯϴ͕ϯϳϭ ƌƚŝĐůĞϰ͘ϱ ^hdKd> ϰϱϰ͕ϴϳϮ ϯ͕ϲϯϯ ϰϱϴ͕ϱϬϱ ;ϱϮϳ͕ϯϱϰͿ Ϭ ϯϰϭ͕ϮϱϬ ϭϬ͕ϲϬϱ Ϯϴϯ͕ϬϬϲ ϯϱϱ͕ϯϲϱ ϲϯϴ͕ϯϳϭ ƌƚŝĐůĞϰͬϴ ŝǆŽŶ ϭ͕Ϭϱϳ͕ϲϴϯ ϰ͕ϱϰϵ ϭ͕ϬϲϮ͕ϮϯϮ ;ϱϬϭ͕ϳϵϱͿ Ϭ ϳϰϱ͕ϳϲϳ Ϯϯ͕ϯϳϬ ϭ͕ϯϮϵ͕ϱϳϰ ϳϳϲ͕ϲϭϯ Ϯ͕ϭϬϲ͕ϭϴϳ &ĂŝƌĨŝĞůĚ Ϯ͕ϲϰϰ͕ϴϯϲ ϭϵ͕Ϭϱϵ Ϯ͕ϲϲϯ͕ϴϵϱ ;ϲ͕ϭϮϭ͕ϬϵϵͿ Ϭ ϰ͕ϯϱϱ͕ϲϬϭ ϭϯϱ͕Ϯϴϳ ϭ͕Ϭϯϯ͕ϲϴϱ ϰ͕ϱϯϱ͕ϳϱϰ ϱ͕ϱϲϵ͕ϰϯϵ ZŝŽsŝƐƚĂ ϰϬϵ͕ϵϵϮ Ϯ͕ϰϰϬ ϰϭϮ͕ϰϯϮ ;ϯϯϱ͕ϳϰϭͿ Ϭ ϯϭϴ͕ϵϯϬ ϵ͕ϳϱϲ ϰϬϱ͕ϯϳϳ ϯϯϮ͕ϭϮϮ ϳϯϳ͕ϰϵϵ ^ŽůĂŶŽŽƵŶƚǇ ϭ͕ϭϱϴ͕ϳϵϲ ϲ͕ϭϵϯ ϭ͕ϭϲϰ͕ϵϴϵ ;ϲϯϴ͕ϰϬϲͿ Ϭ ϳϱϯ͕ϭϲϯ Ϯϯ͕ϱϵϴ ϭ͕ϯϬϯ͕ϯϰϰ ϳϴϰ͕ϯϭϱ Ϯ͕Ϭϴϳ͕ϲϱϵ ^ƵŝƐƵŶŝƚǇ ϰϮ͕Ϭϴϭ Ϯϰϲ ϰϮ͕ϯϮϴ ;ϭ͕ϭϲϲ͕ϲϭϭͿ Ϭ ϭ͕ϭϮϰ͕ϱϮϴ ϯϱ͕ϭϬϲ ϯϱ͕ϯϱϭ ϭ͕ϭϳϭ͕ϬϰϬ ϭ͕ϮϬϲ͕ϯϵϭ sĂĐĂǀŝůůĞ ϳ͕ϭϰϭ͕ϬϬϰ ϯϵ͕ϵϱϮ ϳ͕ϭϴϬ͕ϵϱϲ ;ϯ͕ϭϰϳ͕ϮϭϭͿ ϳ͕ϭϰϳ ϯ͕ϲϴϲ͕ϰϴϮ ϭϭϱ͕ϭϭϰ ϳ͕ϴϰϮ͕ϰϴϴ ϯ͕ϴϯϴ͕ϵϱϵ ϭϭ͕ϲϴϭ͕ϰϰϳ sĂůůĞũŽͬĞŶŝĐŝĂϰ ϳ͕ϵϵϬ͕ϵϮϮ Ϯϵ͕ϵϴϵ ϴ͕ϬϮϬ͕ϵϭϭ ;ϵ͕ϵϬϱ͕ϳϵϱͿ Ϭ ϱ͕ϳϯϲ͕ϳϳϳ ϭϳϳ͕ϰϭϯ ϰ͕ϬϮϵ͕ϯϬϱ ϱ͕ϵϳϰ͕Ϭϱϳ ϭϬ͕ϬϬϯ͕ϯϲϮ ^hdKd> ϮϬ͕ϰϰϱ͕ϯϭϯ ϭϬϮ͕ϰϮϵ ϮϬ͕ϱϰϳ͕ϳϰϮ ;Ϯϭ͕ϴϭϲ͕ϲϱϴͿ ϳ͕ϭϰϳ ϭϲ͕ϳϮϭ͕Ϯϰϵ ϱϭϵ͕ϲϰϱ ϭϱ͕ϵϳϵ͕ϭϮϰ ϭϳ͕ϰϭϮ͕ϴϲϬ ϯϯ͕ϯϵϭ͕ϵϴϰ 'ZEdKd> ΨϮϬ͕ϵϬϬ͕ϭϴϲ ΨϭϬϲ͕Ϭϲϭ ΨϮϭ͕ϬϬϲ͕Ϯϰϳ ;ΨϮϮ͕ϯϰϰ͕ϬϭϮͿ Ψϳ͕ϭϰϳ Ψϭϳ͕ϬϲϮ͕ϰϵϵ ΨϱϯϬ͕ϮϱϬ Ψϭϲ͕ϮϲϮ͕ϭϯϬ Ψϭϳ͕ϳϲϴ͕ϮϮϱ Ψϯϰ͕ϬϯϬ͕ϯϱϱ ϭ͘ĂůĂŶĐĞĂƐŽĨϲͬϯϬͬϭϲŝƐĨƌŽŵDd&zϮϬϭϱͲϭϲƵĚŝƚ͕ĂŶĚŝƚĐŽŶƚĂŝŶƐďŽƚŚĨƵŶĚƐĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞĨŽƌĂůůŽĐĂƚŝŽŶĂŶĚĨƵŶĚƐƚŚĂƚŚĂǀĞďĞĞŶĂůůŽĐĂƚĞĚďƵƚŶŽƚĚŝƐďƵƌƐĞĚ͘ Ϯ͘dŚĞŽƵƚƐƚĂŶĚŝŶŐĐŽŵŵŝƚŵĞŶƚƐĨŝŐƵƌĞŝŶĐůƵĚĞƐĂůůƵŶƉĂŝĚĂůůŽĐĂƚŝŽŶƐĂƐŽĨϲͬϯϬͬϭϲ͕ĂŶĚ&zϮϬϭϲͲϭϳĂůůŽĐĂƚŝŽŶƐĂƐŽĨϲͬϯϬͬϭϳ͘ ϯ͘tŚĞƌĞĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞďǇůŽĐĂůĂŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚ͕ĐŽŶƚƌŝďƵƚŝŽŶƐĨƌŽŵĞĂĐŚũƵƌŝƐĚŝĐƚŝŽŶǁŝůůďĞŵĂĚĞƚŽƐƵƉƉŽƌƚƚŚĞ/ŶƚĞƌĐŝƚǇdƌĂŶƐŝƚ&ƵŶĚŝŶŐŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚ͘ ϰ͘ĞŐŝŶŶŝŶŐŝŶ&zϮϬϭϮͲϭϯ͕ƚŚĞĞŶŝĐŝĂĂƉƉŽƌƚŝŽŶŵĞŶƚĂƌĞĂŝƐĐŽŵďŝŶĞĚǁŝƚŚsĂůůĞũŽ͕ĂŶĚĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞĨŽƌ^ŽůdƌĂŶƐƚŽĐůĂŝŵ͘

15 This page intentionally left blank.

16 FY 2017-18 TDA Matrix DRAFT September 2017 Attachment B

17-Aug-17 FY 2017-18 Paratransit Local Transit Intercity FAST FAST FAST SolTrans SolTrans SolTrans FAST FAST SolTrans AGENCY TDA Est from Projected Carryover Available FY2016-17 ADA Paratransit Dixon FAST Rio Vista Vacaville SolTrans Rt 20 Rt 30 Rt 40 Rt. 78 Rt. 80 Rt 85 Rt. 90 Intercity Intercity STA Other Transit Total Balance MTC, 7/26/17 Carryover Adjustment for Allocations / Subsidized Readi- Delta City Subtotal Subtotal Planning Swaps Capital 7/26/17 2/28/17 Allocation Returns after Intercity Ride Breeze Coach 7/26/17 6/30/17 Taxi (1) (1) (2) (1) (3) (4) (5) (6) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)

Dixon 776,613 1,329,674 2,106,287 5,000 446,537 $ 4,911 $ 112,848 $ 3,705 $ 8,685 $ 2,982 $ 6,020 $ 3,026 $ 124,491 $ 17,687 $ 22,700 $ 65,000 290,000 $ 971,415 1,134,872 Fairfield 4,535,754 1,033,685 5,569,439 40,000 763,813 62,607 $ 96,554 $ 135,088 $ 167,970 $ 40,714 $ 25,114 $ 107,924 $ 93,684 $ 493,295 $ 173,752 $ 132,533 2,141,959 $ 3,807,959 1,761,480 Rio Vista 332,122 405,377 737,499 5,000 315,968 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - 0 $ - $ 9,699 $ 65,000 $ 18,300 $ 413,967 323,532 Suisun City 1,171,040 35,351 1,206,391 0 134,790 705,816 $ 17,216 $ 37,135 $ 58,085 $ 9,104 $ 6,059 $ 27,599 $ 33,897 $ 146,333 $ 42,761 $ 46,463 $ 141,845 $ 1,218,009 -11,618 Vacaville 3,838,959 7,842,488 11,681,447 -7,147 70,000 475,291 905,260 $ 139,981 $ 192,801 $ 131,387 $ 30,552 $ 16,440 $ 35,576 $ 31,455 $ 495,624 $ 82,568 $ 112,196 1,329,000 $ 3,462,792 8,218,655 Vallejo/Benicia (SolTrans) 5,974,057 4,029,305 10,003,362 85,000 1,346,163 2,472,761 $ 31,729 $ 90,533 $ 31,941 $ 541,986 $ 266,902 $ 291,623 $ 12,772 $ 166,976 $ 1,100,511 $ 174,530 $ 186,830 3,025,171 $ 8,557,941 1,445,421 Solano County 784,315 1,303,344 2,087,659 512,650 $ 17,335 $ 34,895 $ 23,647 $ 36,799 $ 13,841 $ 23,727 $ 8,219 $ 84,095 $ 74,367 $ 22,925 $ 694,037 1,393,622

Total 17,412,860 15,979,224 0 33,392,084 -7,147 717,650 2,720,057 446,537 768,423 315,968 905,260 2,472,761 $ 307,726 $ 603,300 $ 416,735 $ 667,839 $ 331,337 $ 492,470 183,053 $ 1,510,814 $ 1,491,645 $ 521,046 $ 458,675 $ 6,804,430 $ 19,126,120 14,265,964

NOTES: Background colors on Rt. Headings denote operator of intercity route Background colors denote which jurisdiction is claiming funds

(1) MTC February 22, 2017 Fund Estimate; Reso 4268; columns I, H, J (2) Correction from MTC on 2/28/17 for Solano County apportionment mistakenly attirbuted to the Vallejo apportionment; correction has been included in 7/26/17 Fund Estimate Projected Carryover amount. (3) Vacaville return of $7,146.65, per MTC 4/18/17.$180,000 route planning allocation included in Projected Carryover. (4) STA will be claimant. Amounts subject to change. $40,000 will go to Faith In Action. (5) Includes flex routes, paratransit, local subsidized taxi (6) Consistent with FY2017-18 Intercity Transit Funding Agreement and FY 2015-16 Reconciliation (7) Claimed by STA from all agencies per formula; presented to STA Board on May 10, 2017. Suisun City amount includes $12,240 unclaimed from FY16-17 and $34,223 for FY17-18. (8) Suisun City item to be claimed by STA for Suisun Amtrak station maintenance (includes FY16-17 $50,000 unclaimed and FY17-18 $50,000 and $41,845 return). STA will use $63,548 for STAF Loan Repayment for Fairground Transit Facility Study (9). SolTrans item includes LCTOP fund swap with Dixon ($30,216), Rio Vista ($12,543), and Vacaville ($144,070) for FY15-16 and FY16-17. Dixon item to be claimed by Rio Vista, per 10- May-17 STA Board approval of Rio Vista claiming $65,000 against Dixon's Intercity Bus Replacement TDA reserves, based on Rio Vista's unsuccessful FTA 5310 application. Rio Vista item to be claimed by STA for repayment of STAF loan authorized 11-Feb-15. (9) Transit Capital purchases include bus purchases, maintenance facilities, etc. (10) Suisun City negative balance due to reduction in Projected Carryover in 7/26/17 MTC Fund Estimate. MTC will not allocate full claim amount, as apportionment jurisdiction amounts cannot be negative in MTC's system. FAST claim amount was approved by City of Fairfield prior to revised fund estimate. Staff will discuss whether negative amount will be unallocated to FAST or STA. Unallocated amount may be claimed in FY 2018-19 if necessary.

(0) TDA Matrix 17 FY 2017-18 TDA Matrix DRAFT September 2017 Attachment C

18-Aug-17 FY 2017-18 Paratransit Local Transit Intercity FAST FAST FAST SolTrans SolTrans SolTrans FAST FAST SolTrans AGENCY TDA Est from Projected Carryover Available FY2016-17 ADA Paratransit Dixon FAST Rio Vista Vacaville SolTrans Rt 20 Rt 30 Rt 40 Rt. 78 Rt. 80 Rt 85 Rt. 90 Intercity Intercity STA Other Transit Total Balance MTC, 7/26/17 Carryover Adjustment for Allocations / Subsidized Readi- Delta City Subtotal Subtotal Planning Swaps Capital 7/26/17 2/28/17 Allocation Returns after Intercity Ride Breeze Coach 7/26/17 6/30/17 Taxi (1) (1) (2) (1) (3) (4) (4a) (5) (6) (6) (7) (8) (9)

Dixon 776,613 1,329,574 2,106,187 5,000 446,537 $ 4,911 $ 112,848 $ 3,705 $ 8,685 $ 2,982 $ 6,020 $ 3,026 $ 124,491 $ 17,687 $ 22,700 $ 65,000 290,000 $ 971,415 1,134,772 Fairfield 4,535,754 1,033,685 5,569,439 40,000 763,813 62,607 $ 96,554 $ 135,088 $ 167,970 $ 40,714 $ 25,114 $ 107,924 $ 93,684 $ 493,295 $ 173,752 $ 132,533 2,141,959 $ 3,807,959 1,761,480 Rio Vista 332,122 405,377 737,499 5,000 315,968 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - 0 $ - $ 9,699 $ 65,000 $ 18,300 $ 413,967 323,532 Suisun City 1,171,040 35,351 1,206,391 0 134,790 694,198 $ 17,216 $ 37,135 $ 58,085 $ 9,104 $ 6,059 $ 27,599 $ 33,897 $ 146,333 $ 42,761 $ 46,463 $ 141,845 $ 1,206,391 0 Vacaville 3,838,959 7,842,488 11,681,447 -7,147 70,000 475,291 905,260 $ 139,981 $ 192,801 $ 131,387 $ 30,552 $ 16,440 $ 35,576 $ 31,455 $ 495,624 $ 82,568 $ 112,196 1,329,000 $ 3,462,792 8,218,655 Vallejo/Benicia (SolTrans) 5,974,057 4,029,305 10,003,362 85,000 1,346,163 2,472,761 $ 31,729 $ 90,533 $ 31,941 $ 541,986 $ 266,902 $ 291,623 $ 12,772 $ 166,976 $ 1,100,511 $ 174,530 $ 186,830 3,025,171 $ 8,557,941 1,445,421 Solano County 784,315 1,303,344 2,087,659 512,650 $ 17,335 $ 34,895 $ 23,647 $ 36,799 $ 13,841 $ 23,727 $ 8,219 $ 84,095 $ 74,367 $ 22,925 $ 694,037 1,393,622

Total 17,412,860 15,979,124 0 33,391,984 -7,147 717,650 2,720,057 446,537 756,805 315,968 905,260 2,472,761 $ 307,726 $ 603,300 $ 416,735 $ 667,839 $ 331,337 $ 492,470 183,053 $ 1,510,814 $ 1,491,645 $ 521,046 $ 458,675 $ 6,804,430 $ 19,114,502 14,277,482

NOTES: Background colors on Rt. Headings denote operator of intercity route Background colors denote which jurisdiction is claiming funds

(4a) Using the claim amounts provided by Fairfield would result in a negative balance of $11,618 for Suisun City due to reduction in Projected Carryover in 7/26/17 MTC Fund Estimate. MTC will not allocate full claim amount, as apportionment jurisdiction amounts cannot be negative in MTC's system. FAST claim amount was approved by City of Fairfield prior to revised fund estimate. This TDA matrix reduces the amount claimed under Suisun City for FAST's Local Transit by $11,618 and increases the amount claimed under City of Fairfield by $11,618 to provide full TDA funding to FAST without a negative balance for Suisun City's apportionment. (5) Includes flex routes, paratransit, local subsidized taxi (6) Consistent with FY2017-18 Intercity Transit Funding Agreement and FY 2015-16 Reconciliation (7) Claimed by STA from all agencies per formula; presented to STA Board on May 10, 2017. Suisun City amount includes $12,240 unclaimed from FY16-17 and $34,223 for FY17-18. (8) Suisun City item to be claimed by STA for Suisun Amtrak station maintenance (includes FY16-17 $50,000 unclaimed and FY17-18 $50,000 and $41,845 return). STA will use $63,548 for STAF Loan Repayment for Fairground Transit Facility Study (9). SolTrans item includes LCTOP fund swap with Dixon ($30,216), Rio Vista ($12,543), and Vacaville ($144,070) for FY15-16 and FY16-17. Dixon item to be claimed by Rio Vista, per 10- May-17 STA Board approval of Rio Vista claiming $65,000 against Dixon's Intercity Bus Replacement TDA reserves, based on Rio Vista's unsuccessful FTA 5310 application. Rio Vista item to be claimed by STA for repayment of STAF loan authorized 11-Feb-15. (9) Transit Capital purchases include bus purchases, maintenance facilities, etc.

(0) TDA Matrix 18 Agenda Item 6.A August 30, 2017

DATE: August 18, 2017 TO: STA TAC FROM: Anthony Adams, Project Manager RE: Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) Grant Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)

Background: The California Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) is a state agency whose goal is to eliminate traffic deaths and injuries. It seeks to accomplish this goal by making available grants to local and state public agencies for programs that help them enforce traffic laws, educate the public in traffic safety, and provide varied and effective means of reducing fatalities, injuries and economic losses from collisions. OTS draws from several federal government funding sources for its grants. OTS also mounts public awareness campaigns and acts as a primary traffic safety resource in order to enlist the help of the general public and the media encouraging traffic safety.

OTS has numerous “areas of concentration” for grant applications. All of these areas of concentration have no local match requirement, no minimum or maximum grant amount, and funds must be expended within one fiscal year. The call for projects was on December 5, 2016.

This year, STA applied for and was awarded, on a countywide basis, two separate OTS areas of concentration for grant funding:

Traffic Records $170k: The program goal is to establish/improve record systems that aid in identifying existing and emerging traffic safety problems and aid in evaluating program performance. Accurate and current records are needed to support problem identification and to evaluate countermeasure effectiveness.

Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety $171k: The program goal is to increase safety awareness among pedestrians, bicyclists and motorists through various approaches including education, enforcement and engineering.

Discussion: On June 6th, OTS contacted STA to inform us that STA have been preliminarily awarded both applications and that the next steps will be to finalize a budget, timeline, and sign a contract. Work can begin on the proposed projects by October 1st, 2017.

This grant will be used to purchase CrossRoads traffic collision software. This software will allow police departments within each jurisdiction to provide standardized collision data along with geo-coded spatial locations. This data is especially important when attempting to conduct safety analysis on a particular intersection or corridor. This data will be uploaded automatically to a centralized countywide data portal. The data portal will allow police agencies and public works agencies to access this data in real-time, rather than waiting up to 2 years for SWITRS to publish the data online. This effort is meant to close the gap on data availability and improve access to HSIP safety funding in the future. 19

STA will purchase of the CrossRoads software for each participating jurisdiction and will include the installation of the software, implementation of a countywide data portal, and training of staff on how to utilize the software.

As this is a countywide effort, prior to beginning work on this program, STA needs to obtain a signed memorandum of understanding from each of our member agencies. Each police department will need to provide one resource person to assist in the implementation of the software and training of existing staff. There are no fiscal requirements on the part of each of the cities, with the exception of the $1,000 annual software maintenance fee that will begin 5-years after the program commences.

Fiscal Impact: $1,000 annual software maintenance fee, per member agency, that will begin 5-years after the program commences. The balance of the costs will be covered the OTS grant.

Recommendation: Forward a recommendation to the STA Board to approve the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for the Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) Collision Data Collection Grant as shown in Attachment A.

Attachment: A. City of Benicia OTS Collision Data Collection MOU Example

Memorandum of Understanding Between the STA of Solano Transportation Authority and the City of Benicia

This Memorandum of Understanding (hereinafter referred to as “MOU”) is between the City of Benicia (hereinafter “City”) and the Solano Transportation Authority (hereinafter “STA”). This MOU sets forth the terms of agreement reached between City and STA..

1. BACKGROUND

STA has received a grant from the California Office of Traffic Safety (“OTS”) to establish a Countywide collision records system to facilitate the sharing of collision information between/among cities and STA, to identify high collision locations, determine appropriate countermeasures, and direct limited resources for safety improvements so as to more effectively reduce traffic collisions, and the fatalities, injuries and property damage that result from traffic collisions.

OTS recognizes the benefit of such a Countywide collision records database and the potential benefits to having the ability to access such a database for statewide use.

2. PURPOSE

The purpose of this MOU is to outline a framework of conditions on which City and STA will collaborate to establish a Countywide collision records database, and continue to maintain it so as to share collision information.

3. CITY OBLIGATION

City will permit the vendor selected by STA through the grant project to install the new system on the City’s network if City does not currently have a collision records database system, or update the collision records database system if City currently has an existing system. The installation of the Countywide collision records database system shall be at no cost to City.

City will maintain the installed Countywide collision records database by installing updates provided by STA’s vendor and keeping database current.

City will permit STA to obtain City’s collision data via City’s database and/or SWITRS[CBS1].

City will upload monthly City’s collision data onto Countywide collision records database.

City will permit STA and other cities in the STA of Solano to access City’s collision data in the Countywide collision records database.

City will not provide collision data that is not originated by City in the Countywide collision records database to a third party. Public requests for data for a certain city, other than City, or STA, shall be directed to that city, STA, or California Highway Patrol that has jurisdiction over such data.

1 of 3 06.Aa_AttachA_Benicia MOU re collision databaseMemorandum of Understanding 8/24/20178/14/2017 21 City will be responsible for costs on the continued maintenance of the City’s collision database, whether existing or new, including potential license fees or upgrade costs for the collision software, if it becomes necessary, five years after the software system is installed.

If necessary, after five years, City is responsible to pay for a fair share of the cost in maintaining the Countywide database if City chooses to continue to participate in the Countywide database system.

4. STA OBLIGATION

STA will permit City and other cities in the STA of Solano to access STA data in the Countywide collision records database.

STA will not provide collision data that is not originated by STA in the Countywide collision records database to a third party. Public requests for data for all cities and STA shall be directed to that city or California Highway Patrol that has jurisdiction over such data.

STA will be responsible for costs on the continued maintenance of the Countywide collision records database, including potential license fees or upgrade costs for the collision software, for the first five years after the software system is installed as part of the grant project.

STA will be responsible for continued maintenance of the Countywide collision records database as long as said database continues to function and provide benefits to the STA and its member agencies.

5. TERM

This MOU remains in effect for five (5) years from the date of the last signature below and so long as the Countywide collision records database is functional. Either City or STA may terminate their participation by giving the other party a 60‐day written notice. Either City or STA may terminate the Countywide collision records database if deemed necessary due to insufficient participation by cities, the database not functioning as intended, technical difficulties that cannot be resolved, the database not providing the benefits intended for cities, STA and OTS, insufficient funding/resources to sustain the program, or without having to provide a reason.

6. CONTACT INFORMATION

CITY OF BENICIA SOLANO TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY Lorie Tinfow, City Manager Anthony Adams, Project Manager 250 East L Street One Harbor Center, Suite 130 Benicia, CA 94510 Suisun City, CA 94585 Phone Number: 707‐746‐4200 Phone Number: 707‐399‐3215

2 of 3 06.Aa_AttachA_Benicia MOU re collision databaseMemorandum of Understanding 8/24/20178/14/2017 22

The following authorized representatives of the City and STA have executed this MOU as of the last date below.

CITY OF BENICIA SOLANO TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY

Signature Signature

Print Name, Title Print Name, Title

Date: Date:

3 of 3 06.Aa_AttachA_Benicia MOU re collision databaseMemorandum of Understanding 8/24/20178/14/2017 23 This page intentionally left blank.

24 Agenda Item 6.B August 30, 2017

DATE: August 30, 2017 TO: STA TAC FROM: Robert Macaulay, Director of Planning RE: San Francisco Bay Restoration Parcel Tax (Measure AA) Funding

Background: In June of 2016, the voters of the nine Bay Area counties approved a $12 per year parcel tax to fund activities that will restore or manage Bay wetlands. Measure AA, the San Francisco Bay Clean Water, Pollution Prevention and Habitat Restoration Measure, can fund shoreline projects that protect and restore San Francisco Bay by: reducing trash, pollution and harmful toxins; improving water quality; restoring habitat for fish, birds, and wildlife; protecting communities from floods; and increasing shoreline public access and recreational areas. Proceeds will be disbursed via competitive grants.

The governing Authority for Measure AA approved grant guidelines in June of 2017, and is preparing to call for projects at the Authority’s September 2017 meeting.

Separately, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) is pursuing a project, with Solano County as the co-permittee, to implement a wetland restoration project that will require raising Grizzly Island Road in order to flood surrounding levees. The project will involve a Class II (or perhaps Class IV) bike lane, but not all the way out to the Hill Slough bridge.

Discussion: STA staff believes that Measure AA funds may be a good supplement to CDFW funds in order to extend the new bike lane up to the Hill Slough Bridge. (The current CDFW project limits end 1,200 feet before the bridge). The Guidelines specify that a funded project must fulfil one of three requirements, including: (3) Provide or improve public access or recreational amenities that are part of a project to restore, enhance, or protect tidal wetlands, managed ponds, or natural habitats identified in paragraph.

Grizzly Island Road is shown in the Solano Countywide Bicycle Plan as a future Class III bike route for its entire 16.2 mile length. The proposed CDFW project would result in a Class II or Class IV facility, which is an upgrade to the plan. While not entirely consistent with the letter of the Plan, the extension of a Class II or IV bike lane along Grizzly Island Road to the Hill Slough Bridge in conjunction with, and primarily funded by, a wetlands restoration project is consistent with the intent of the Plan.

STA staff is proposing to partner with Solano County and CDFW to apply for Measure AA funds in order to complete the extension of the CDFW project bike lane to the Hill Slough Bridge. The Measure AA funds can be used for any phase of the project. Depending upon further discussions with the CDFW and County, STA may take on either a lead or supporting role in pursuing the funds.

25 The Measure AA parcel tax includes three projects of immediate interest to Solano County, as detailed below. 1. Restoration, management and monitoring of wetlands and other shoreline habitat, including the mouth of Spring Branch Creek, and installation and management of public trails. 2. Establishment of improved water circulation in the marshes to the south of Highway 37 along the north edge of San Pablo Bay between Port Sonoma at the Petaluma River to Mare Island in Vallejo, in order to improve habitat for wildlife, improve water quality, and reduce mosquito production. 3. Environmental phase (CEQA/NEPA) for the SR 37 sea-level rise and flood protection project; Project would provide integrated flood protection and sea-level rise adaptation by elevating the current SR 37 infrastructure to withstand future seal-level rise and storm surges; The project limits are SR 37 from SR 80 to SR 101. Project would include elevation of the roadway and storm surge protections that would improve flood protection levees, berms, etc. and would protect vital wetland and marsh habitat. The project would also benefit wildlife, and accommodate shoreline public access by integrating 17 miles of bicycle/pedestrian infrastructure along a modified Highway 37 corridor between Vallejo and Novato. The Measure AA Authority has published a map of projects that have already been identified as eligible to receive Measure AA funding. The map is provided as Attachment B. A complete list of projects already identified as eligible to receive Measure AA funds, updated at the Authority’s meeting of June 30, 2017, is provided as Attachment C.

Fiscal Impact: None. There is no local match requirement for Measure AA funds, and STA is not proposing to supplement the CDFW project funds with a local source such as TDA Article 3.

Recommendation: Forward a recommendation to the STA Board to authorize the STA Executive Director to submit the extension of the CDGW Grizzly Island Road bike lane for Measure AA funds.

Attachments: A. This attachment has been posted on STA’s Website. Click here for immediate review and printing: Measure AA Grant Program Guidelines B. Measure AA Initial Project Map C. Measure AA Project List as of June 30, 2017

26 Napa |þ221 SONOMA Prospect Slough C a c h Point Blue’s STRAWPoint Blue’s e HudemanSlou g h Souand th Island Edgerly S ProgSonoma ram– l EnhWetlands ancement Fairfield o Baylands OpportunityWetlands Area u R ush g Tidal RestorationTidal and h Pub lic Access Pub lic R anch Improvements Sonoma“BigBreak” Creek NAPA PetalumaMarsh RAlleviationFloodand epair Expansion andExpansion SkagIsland g s RanchHaire 80 R estoration MarshSonomaTidal Creek R estoration NapaLower §¨¦ Watershed SuisunCreek EnhImproveto ancement Napa-Sonoma WetlandsR iver EnhProg ancement ram Hab itatWaterandQuality Marshes Tolay Creek Watershed Creek Tolay Sears PointWetland andSears MarshStrip Watershed RestorationWatershed Project |þ37 Enh ancements Tolay Creek Creek Tolay BahiaWetlands Lag oon 37 SR CullinanRanch Sears Point Sears Lower PetalumaLower River Level Sea SOLANO R iparian Floodand R ise R estoration ProtectionProject SimmonsSloug h Vallejo Sacramento River NovatoBaylands r e v i

n Bel Marin Bel 780 i Keys Wetlands Keys §¨¦ Benicia q u San PabSanBay, lo Marsh Pacheco oa Shoreline n J Lone Tree Point, RodeoPoint, Tree Lone R estoration Sa MARIN PointRegional Bay Lower WalnuLower t Shoreline New PinoleCreek York Slough Creek Restoration Creek Pittsburg BreakRegionalBig Lower GallinasLower Creek R estoration Wetlands Chelsea Shoreline-Oakley PointPinoleRegional MartinezRegional MarshMcNab ney McInnis MarshHab itatMcInnis Restoration FranciscoSanShoreline – Martinez PointPinole Shoreline–Marsh AntiochCreek East Bay Interpretive Center Interpretive Bay R estorationIII Phase MarshRestoration R egionalShoreline Concord SlougDutch h TiscorniaMarsh PointMolate BreunerMarshand R estorationProject R egionalShoreline Creek Rheem Lower San R estorationand CONTRA |þ242 Nature Based NatureBased Project Access Pub lic NorthRichmond Shoreline Adaptationand Rafael PabSanMarsh lo- R estorationan of CorteLower COSTA Armored ShorelineArmored MaderaCreek Creek WildcatLower VegetationEnh ancements 580 RegionalMiller-Knox Shoreline– for Hig hTide Refug e andRefug Hig e for hTide MaderaCorte §¨¦ Lag oonMarshandRestoration ShorelineProtection EcologReserve ical Marsh Stege Western Expansion and RestorationandExpansion R estorationProg ram Bothin Arambu ru RegionalPoint el Isab Shoreline – Marsh Island Hab Brooks itatIsland WetlandRestoration Access Puband lic |þ24 Improvement Project Project Improvement |þ131 McLaugPark hlin– State Eastshore Project RestorationAlb Beach any Access Puband lic R ichardsonBay McLaugParkNorth h– State linStrip EastshoreBasin Berkeley SausalitoPreserve Marine Eelgrass McLaugPark h– StateBrickyard lin Eastshore Berkeley PointEmery FortWaterfrontBaker R ehab ilitationProject – 64 Pier Crescent Emeryville Sub tidalDebris Oakland |þ13 Crissy Field Crissy R& emoval R emediation 80 OaklandShorelineGateway EducationalProg rams §¨¦ 680 Tennessee PointAlameda §¨¦ HollowCrane - 70 Pier PointAlamedaLagSeaplane oon Cove Park Cove Lower SausalCreek Lower Alameda PointAlameda Crown Beach – Neptune PointNeptune – Crown Beach Islais Creek Islais Encinal Beach Warm Water Cove ParkWarm WaterCove Pier 94 – Wetlands EnhWetlands ancement– 94 Pier Marin LutherKingJr. OakportProject Heron's Head Park Head Heron's R egionalShoreline– LeandroSanCreek Lower Candlestick Point:Candlestick WaterQualityProject Yosemite Slou gYosemite h WetlandRestoration PROJECTS BAYWIDE Regional Bay Slou TidalShoreline gOyster –Restoration h Daly Spartina Project Invasive Creosote Piling CreosoteRemoval City Restoration Eelgrass and Oyster Shorelines:Living Invasive Sea Lavender EradicationRestoration &Lavender Sea Invasive Vegetation enh ancements for Hig h Tide Refug e andRefug e Vegetation HigTide enhfor h ancements ShorelineProtection LomaOroMarshClimateAdaptation Hayward RegionalHayward Shoreline Hayward ShorelineHayward ALAMEDA TriangHaywardMarsh – le Frank's Landing Eden Tract EcologReserve ical South Bay Salt PondSaltSouth Bay |þ92 R estoration Project: A 101 Landing Eden l ¤£ am 280 Coyote e §¨¦ Point Creek Alameda da Creek Fisheries Coyote Hills RegionalHills Coyote Park: R estoration and Pub lic Access Project Project R estorationAccess Puband lic

SAN Bair San DonEdwards Island NWR Bay Francisco MATEO Redwood East PaloAlto East Anticipated City Shoreline Restoration Project PondSaltSouth Bay SAFER Bay SAFER SouthFranciscoSan R estorationProject:Ravenswood FrancisquSanProtection,Flood itoCreek ShorelineProject Bay Anticipated Levee Project Restoration RecreationandEcosystem Project, S.F. Bay to Higto101 hBay way S.F. Project, 2 Ft Sea Level Rise |þ82 Jose San South Bay Salt PondSaltSouth Bay Trail Bay 4 Ft Sea Level Rise AlvisoR estoration Prj:

C 280 o Developed §¨¦ yo te SANTA CLARA C r e 84 e |þ k

MAY 2017 Examples of Projects Anticipated to be Eligible for Restoration Authority Grants 27 This page intentionally left blank.

Examples of projects anticipated to be eligible for Restoration Authority grants. Last updated June 30, 2017 TOTAL LEAD (AND CURRENT PHASE PROJECT SCHEDULE CURRENT PROJECT COUNTY PROJECT DESCRIPTION PARTNER) SCHEDULE TOTAL COST LOCATION (Phase; dates or (Phase; dates PHASE COST ORGS years) or years) Peninsula and South Bay Phase 2 of the Yosemite Slough Restoration & Development Project will green and open a 21-acre section of waterfront parkland in San Francisco's Candlestick Point California State Recreation Area that has remained closed to the Department of public since the park's inception in 1977, add 21 acres of Parks and restored waterfront parklands and recreational space in a Candlestick Recreation disadvantaged community, improve air and water quality, Peninsula and Point - Yosemite San (State Parks), Planning and Construction: reduce and clean stormwater runoff, provide wildlife $1,300,000 $6,400,000 South Bay Slough Wetland Francisco California State Design: 2016-2018 2018-2019 habitat, and improve the ability of the park's natural Restoration Parks systems to buffer the impacts of climate change. The Foundation; San project will also provide valuable public access amenities Francisco Bay including a new 1,100 sq. ft. zero net energy Education Trail Center, 1.1 miles of new waterfront biking and pedestrian trails (including a section of the San Francisco Bay Trail), and ADA-accessible park viewing and picnic/BBQ areas. Peninsula and South Bay

Environmental education programs for students of all ages Golden Gate at the Crissy Field Center related to restoration projects. National Parks Crissy Field San The Center offers place-based exploration that focuses on Conservancy, Educational - - - - Francisco the interaction between humans and nature and makes National Park Programs use of the natural and cultural resources of the restored Service, Presidio Crissy Field wetland and the Tennessee Hollow watershed. Trust

29 TOTAL LEAD (AND CURRENT PHASE PROJECT SCHEDULE CURRENT PROJECT COUNTY PROJECT DESCRIPTION PARTNER) SCHEDULE TOTAL COST LOCATION (Phase; dates or (Phase; dates PHASE COST ORGS years) or years)

The project would plan and implement the remaining projects required for the conversion of the former military post at Fort Baker to its National Park future, including Fort Baker National Park shoreline restoration and eelgrass bed protection, climate Planning, Peninsula and Waterfront San Service; San Construction: change adaptation design, revegetation, trail Permitting, and $2,014,500 $15,997,500 South Bay Rehabilitation Francisco Francisco Bay 2021-2023 improvements, visitor amenities, and stormwater Design: 2019-2021 Project Water Trail management. Water Trail: provide ADA launch at Fort Baker near yacht club or existing ramp, establish vendor to provide rentals and community programs.

Design and construction of a living, natural shoreline to protect Heron’s Head park from erosion and sea level rise, Planning and create habitat enhancements and protect public access; Conceptual Design: Peninsula and Heron’s Head San expansion of the Port’s existing habitat education and Port of San 2017-2018; Construction: $400,000 - South Bay Park Francisco outreach program for K-12 graders on Bay habitat and Francisco Engineering Design 2020 natural history; and removal of a creosote-pile pier in the and Permitting: waters to the north side of Heron’s Head Park, to improve 2018-2019 wildlife habitat.

Design and construction of shoreline improvements to Port of San Planning, Peninsula and San support habitat creation, protect against erosion and Francisco; San Construction: Islais Creek Permitting and $50,000 $500,000 South Bay Francisco remove creosote piles. Water Trail: ADA path to beach Francisco Bay TBD Design: underway launch, restrooms, secure equipment/boat storage facility. Water Trail

Pier 64 - Engineering Design and construction of a new soft shoreline to create Planning and Peninsula and Subtidal Debris San Port of San Design and habitat, improve public access, and protect the park from Conceptual Design: $250,000 - South Bay Removal & Francisco Francisco Permitting: sea level rise. 2018-2019 Remediation 2019-2021 Conceptual Design: Design and construction of Phase 2 of a future 9-acre park complete; Planning, (4-acre Phase 1 funded). Improvements include shoreline Port of San additional Permitting and Peninsula and Pier 70 - Crane San restoration, habitat creation, bay fill removal and public Francisco; San Planning, Design: 3 - $4,000,000 South Bay Cove Park Francisco access. Bay Trail extension (0.12 mile) needed as part of Francisco Bay Permitting and years; habitat restoration and shoreline enhancements at new Trail Design: on hold Construction: 1 park. due to lack of year funds.

30 TOTAL LEAD (AND CURRENT PHASE PROJECT SCHEDULE CURRENT PROJECT COUNTY PROJECT DESCRIPTION PARTNER) SCHEDULE TOTAL COST LOCATION (Phase; dates or (Phase; dates PHASE COST ORGS years) or years) Establish expanded native vegetation in the wetland, transition zone, and upland flats of Pier 94, improving native plant diversity and wildlife habitat within the Pier 94 – constraints of the local fill substrate and the southeastern Wetlands San Francisco shoreline setting. The habitat stewardship at Construction; Enhancement - Pier 94 will maintain and improve the dynamic native plant Operations, Planning, Peninsula and Terrestrial and San community diversity, wildlife habitat and facilitate the Golden Gate Monitoring, Permitting, and - $245,950 South Bay Wetland Francisco recovery of rehabilitated natural ecosystem processes. Audubon Society and Design: 2018 Vegetation Activities include steering dynamic vegetation changes and Maintenance: Management resetting upland native vegetation succession, reversing 2018-2022 Project weed dominance until native vegetation can become established. Onsite open bed native plant nursey, in-marsh propagation and transplanting are proposed. Native oysters are considered for this project.

Restoration of a vibrant, contiguous, and diverse mosaic of Presidio Trust, native plant communities (freshwater marsh, freshwater National Park meadow, and riparian) and wildlife habitat at the edge of Peninsula and Tennessee San Service, Golden the Bay in the Presidio, just upstream from Crissy Field; - - - - South Bay Hollow Francisco Gate National creation of hiking trails; and education, public Parks engagement, and community stewardship opportunities at Conservancy the edge of a major urban center.

Port of San Design and construction of a 2-acre expanded park, Planning, Peninsula and Warm Water San Francisco; San Construction: 1 including new wildlife habitat, public access, and shoreline Permitting and $50,000 $5,000,000 South Bay Cove Park Francisco Francisco Bay year protection. Bay Trail (0.10 mile) spur to waterfront. Design: 3 years Trail San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge, Enhancement, management, and monitoring of tidal Ducks Construction wetlands on Inner, Middle, and Outer Bair Island in Unlimited, (Vegetation Peninsula and San Redwood City, and provision of public access. Construction Bair Island Peninsula Open establishment) and - $3,000,000 - South Bay Mateo of two miles of levees was completed. Two miles of Space Trust; San Monitoring: 2017 - ecostone slope habitat left to plant. Potential Extension of Francisco Bay ? Bay Trail (0.84 miles) as part of Bair Island restoration. Trail; Save the Bay; SF Bay Bird Observatory

31 TOTAL LEAD (AND CURRENT PHASE PROJECT SCHEDULE CURRENT PROJECT COUNTY PROJECT DESCRIPTION PARTNER) SCHEDULE TOTAL COST LOCATION (Phase; dates or (Phase; dates PHASE COST ORGS years) or years) The Eastern Promenade Project at Coyote Point involves a perched beach, along a new crenulate-shaped bay, a 13' wide paved trail from the Western Promenade to the Bluff trail on the Coyote Point knoll, and visitor amenities, including a new restroom with a changing area and shower towers, benches, seating walls and picnic areas. In the Design complete; Coyote Point Peninsula and San lower parking area by the restroom, there are nine ADA County of San construction is Eastern - $3,500,000 $5,550,000 South Bay Mateo car and van parking spaces. The parking area is flush with Mateo Sept. 2018 - Aug. Promenade the Promenade Trail, there are two ADA-adapted paved 2019. ramps and three beach mats to provide universal access to the beach and bay. The project is designed for future sea level rise as well as the high winds and constant wave action along the shoreline. The perched beach will also retain the sand from being washed away. Midpeninsula Restoration and maintenance of shoreline habitat and Regional Open Peninsula and East Palo Alto San construction, management, and operation of public access Space District, - - - - South Bay Shoreline Mateo facilities. Community based restoration and stewardship City of East Palo activities in the Palo Alto Baylands. Alto, Save the Bay The South San Francisco Bay Salt Pond Restoration Project is the largest wetland restoration project on the west coast of the United States, working to restore 15,100 acres of South Bay Salt former industrial salt ponds. Upcoming project elements at Don Edwards Ponds: Ravenswood include: restoration of almost 280 acres of Peninsula and San San Francisco Planning and Construction: Ravenswood tidal wetlands and 15 acres of ecotone, enhancement of n/a $15,000,000 South Bay Mateo Bay National Permitting: 2017 2019-2020 Complex - Ponds 70 acres of pond habitat for waterbirds, flood protection Wildlife Refuge R3, R4, R5, S5 for adjacent communities, and new trail connections and interpretive features. Additional elements include adaptive management applied studies and monitoring as well as project support and outreach. Operation and maintenance of critical levees and Don Edwards San associated water control structures on the pond system in San Francisco Peninsula and San Francisco Mateo, the southern reach of San Francisco Bay in order to Bay National - - $3,500,000 - South Bay Bay National Santa provide wildlife habitat and public recreation and protect Wildlife Refuge Wildlife Refuge Clara low-lying communities from flooding due to levee failures, storm events, and sea level rise.

32 TOTAL LEAD (AND CURRENT PHASE PROJECT SCHEDULE CURRENT PROJECT COUNTY PROJECT DESCRIPTION PARTNER) SCHEDULE TOTAL COST LOCATION (Phase; dates or (Phase; dates PHASE COST ORGS years) or years) Along San Francisquito Creek between San Francisco Bay San Francisquito and Highway 101, protect previously flooded parts of East Creek Flood Palo Alto and Palo Alto against a 100-year creek flow after Operations, Protection, San San Francisquito three feet of future sea level rise, and create Maintenance, Peninsula and Ecosystem Mateo, Creek Joint Construction: approximately 15 acres of new marsh habitat for and $41,400,000 $43,700,000 South Bay Restoration and Santa Powers current - 2018 endangered and other species and new trail connections. Monitoring: Recreation Clara Authority It is anticipated that Restoration Authority funding will be 2024 Project, S.F. Bay sought to provide for the maintenance and monitoring of to Highway 101 the project’s marsh restoration actions. Restore several hundred acres of marsh wetlands, protect against a 100-year tide with two feet of freeboard and after three feet of future sea level rise, and enhance SAFER Bay recreational opportunities along approximately eleven (Strategy to San miles of Bay shoreline in Palo Alto, East Palo Alto and San Francisquito Advance Flood Planning, Peninsula and Mateo, Menlo Park. The current 100-year tidal floodplain includes Creek Joint $3,500,000 - Protection, Permitting, and - - South Bay Santa thousands of homes, businesses, and major infrastructure, Powers $4,000,000 Ecosystems, and Design: 2018 Clara including highways and a regional water treatment plant Authority Recreation along and airport, and large areas of potential marsh cannot be the Bay) restored until the adjacent developed areas are protected. It is anticipated that Restoration Authority funding will be sought to provide for project design and construction. The South San Francisco Bay Salt Pond Restoration Project is the largest wetland restoration project on the west coast of the United States, working to restore 15,100 acres of South Bay Salt former industrial salt ponds. Upcoming project elements in Don Edwards Pond the Alviso Pond Complex include levee breaches and Peninsula and Santa San Francisco Planning and Construction: Restoration lowering to achieve: restoration of around 700 acres of - $1-2,000,000 South Bay Clara Bay National Permitting: 2017 2018-2020 Project: Alviso - tidal wetlands and 20 acres of ecotone to improve fish Wildlife Refuge, Island Ponds habitat and water quality, enhancements of the Island Ponds, and new trails and interpretive features. Additional elements include adaptive management applied studies and monitoring as well as project support and outreach.

33 TOTAL LEAD (AND CURRENT PHASE PROJECT SCHEDULE CURRENT PROJECT COUNTY PROJECT DESCRIPTION PARTNER) SCHEDULE TOTAL COST LOCATION (Phase; dates or (Phase; dates PHASE COST ORGS years) or years) The South San Francisco Bay Salt Pond Restoration Project is the largest wetland restoration project on the west coast South Bay Salt of the United States, working to restore 15,100 acres of Pond former industrial salt ponds. Upcoming project elements in Restoration Don Edwards the Alviso Pond Complex include levee breaches and Peninsula and Project: Alviso - Santa San Francisco Planning and Construction: lowering to achieve: restoration of around 700 acres of - $15,000,000 South Bay Mountain View Clara Bay National Permitting: 2017 2018-2020 tidal wetlands and 20 acres of ecotone to improve fish Ponds (A1, A2W, Wildlife Refuge, habitat and water quality, enhancements of the Island Charleston Ponds, and new trails and interpretive features. Additional Slough) elements include adaptive management applied studies and monitoring as well as project support and outreach. Construction of a 3.8-mile tidal flood protection levee to protect the community of Alviso and the San Jose-Santa U.S. Army Corps Construction: Clara Regional Wastewater Facility, which services 1.4 of Engineers; 2022-2025; South San million residents and businesses in Silicon Valley; Santa Clara Planning, Operations, Francisco Bay Santa South Bay restoration, enhancement and monitoring of 2,800 acres Valley Water Permitting, and Maintenance $57,600,000 $173,000,000 Shoreline Clara of wetlands; and improvement of public access, including District; State Design and Project completion of the Bay Trail spine. Future feasibility studies Coastal Monitoring: will assess other at-risk areas in Santa Clara County, Conservancy n/a namely Palo Alto, Mountain View, and Sunnyvale. East Bay Alameda County Flood Control Restoration and enhancement of creek mouth habitats for and Water Alameda Creek East Bay Alameda birds, fish, water quality, and flood protection in this Conservation - - $12,000,000 - Fisheries regionally significant watershed. District; Alameda Creek Alliance East Bay Dune Restoration, Shoreline Clean-up and Public Access. Construction $500,000 (plus Regional Park Project Alameda Point - Water Trail: improve the beach dunes and create a (Vegetation $10,000/year East Bay Alameda District; San Development: - Encinal Beach formalized kayak launch on Encinal Beach, improve boat establishment): in Francisco Bay 2018 ramp, new restrooms. 2019-2021 maintenance) Water Trail Manage endangered least tern colony, restore shoreline East Bay $8,000,000 areas, including wetland, beach and dune, acquire lands to Regional Park (plus Alameda Point protect wildlife habitat, and extend trail to restored East Bay Alameda District; San TBD 2020 (est) - - $100,000/year Restoration shoreline areas. Alameda Point Trail (6.0), a multi-use Francisco Bay in pathway around perimeter of Alameda Point as part of Trail maintenance) wetlands restoration.

34 TOTAL LEAD (AND CURRENT PHASE PROJECT SCHEDULE CURRENT PROJECT COUNTY PROJECT DESCRIPTION PARTNER) SCHEDULE TOTAL COST LOCATION (Phase; dates or (Phase; dates PHASE COST ORGS years) or years) Transformation of vast paved areas around Seaplane Lagoon into ecologically rich constructed habitats and Alameda Point wetlands with visitor amenities, including picnic and East Bay Alameda City of Alameda - - - - Seaplane Lagoon camping areas, a pedestrian and bicycle promenade, and water access points for boats. Sea level rise adaptation strategies are integrated into the design. Coyote Hills Restore marsh, seasonal wetlands and coastal prairie, $12,000,000 Regional Park - improve water circulation and quality, enhance habitat for East Bay Phase 2: 2020- (plus Phase 1: 2017- East Bay Restoration and Alameda endangered Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse and California Regional Park 2022, Phase 3: - $200,000/year 2020 Public Access Clapper Rail, acquire lands to protect wildlife and develop District 2022-2024 in Project public access to restored areas. maintenance) East Bay Restore dune habitat, remove legacy structures and Construction Regional Park $1,000,000 Crown Beach – shoreline debris, and improve public access. Water Trail: Development: (Vegetation East Bay Alameda District; San - (plus Neptune Point Install firm surface beach crossing, ADA improvements 2022-2024 establishment): Francisco Bay $25,000/year) near vendor. 2024-2027 Water Trail Restoration of diked baylands to wetlands to benefit Construction; endangered species and other wildlife. Specifically, in the Hayward Area Maintenance Planning: Current - East Bay Franks Tract Alameda near-term, installation of rip-rap for the levee and repair of Recreation and and $100,000 $525,000 +4 months the access trail to the San Francisco Bay Trail in the near- Park District Monitoring: 5 term to repair the badly eroded northern levee. years East Bay Phase 2: 2019- Hayward $17,000,000 Restore shoreline bird habitat, enhance endangered Regional Park 2020; Regional (and California Least Tern and Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse District, Construction East Bay Shoreline - Alameda Phase 1: 2017 - $100,000/year habitat, improve water quality and circulation, and restore Hayward Area (Vegetation Habitat in failing levees. Horizontal Levee and marsh restoration. Recreation and establishment): Restoration maintenance) Park District 2020-2023 Improvements to the levees around the Oliver Salt Ponds just north of the San Mateo Bridge to reduce overtopping Phase 2: 2019- $17,000,000 and flooding of western snowy plover habitat; 2020; Hayward Area (and Hayward improvements to the Bay Trail from the Hayward Shoreline Phase 1: 2017- Construction East Bay Alameda Recreation and - $50,000/year Shoreline Interpretive Center to Johnson’s Landing to provide year- 2020 (Vegetation Park District in round access; and improvements to the levees near establishment): maintenance) Hayward Landing to protect Triangle Marsh and prevent 2020-2023 flooding of the adjacent landfill. Restore habitat and fish passage to the approximately 1 mile intertidal reach of San Leandro Creek. Revegetate the Lower San banks with wetland and upland plants and tree cover. East Bay Planning, Leandro Creek Construction: $8,500,000 - East Bay Alameda Design a sea level rise comprehensive partnership resilient Regional Park Permitting, Design: $550,000 (mouth is in the 2018 - 2020 (?) $16,500,000 plan. Install a public access bike/ped pathway and park District 2017-2020 MLK Shoreline) areas per CalTrans funded Trail Master Plan. Maintain community engagement and education programs.

35 TOTAL LEAD (AND CURRENT PHASE PROJECT SCHEDULE CURRENT PROJECT COUNTY PROJECT DESCRIPTION PARTNER) SCHEDULE TOTAL COST LOCATION (Phase; dates or (Phase; dates PHASE COST ORGS years) or years) Restoration and enhancement of tidal wetland habitat at the mouth of Sausal Creek and along the shoreline of the Alameda Channel at Fruitvale Bridge Park, including City of Oakland, Lower Sausal restoration of habitats for wildlife and water quality, East Bay Alameda Friends of Sausal - - $741,500 - Creek improvements to public access and wildlife viewing Creek opportunities, stabilization of eroding shoreline, public outreach and education, volunteer stewardship, and long- term monitoring and maintenance. Installation and maintenance of trash collection facilities East Bay near the mouths of East, Elmhurst and Damon Creeks to Regional Park $3,000,000 improve wildlife habitat and water quality and help with District, San Martin Luther (and stormwater management. Trail (0.6) along Doolittle Drive Francisco Bay Development TBD East Bay King Jr. Regional Alameda Perpetuity n/a $100,000/year as part of shoreline enhancement. Water Trail: Doolittle Trail, San 2020 (est) Shoreline in Drive Boat Launch - remove existing docks, renovate docks Francisco Bay maintenance) and ramp, reconfigure parking lot, upgrade restrooms. Water Trail, Community based restoration and stewardship activities. Save the Bay Berkeley North Rehabilitate Berkeley North Basin Strip and daylight East Bay $15,000,000 Construction Basin Strip - Schoolhouse Creek, stabilize eroding shoreline, remove Regional Park (and Development: (Vegetation East Bay McLaughlin Alameda weeds, plant natural turf and riparian vegetation, improve District, San - $50,000/year 2020-2025 establishment): Eastshore State public access to restored area, and construct Bay Trail Francisco Bay in 2025-2035 Park public access (0.22 miles) Trail maintenance) Albany Beach Enhance Albany Beach by arresting beach erosion, Restoration and expanding dune and wetlands, constructing wetland and East Bay $4,000,000 Construction Public Access rain garden features to improve water quality, complete a Regional Park (and Development: (Vegetation East Bay Project - Alameda key segment of the SF Bay Trail, expand shoreline access District - $50,000/year 2016-2019 establishment): McLaughlin area available to the public and construct visitor amenities. San Francisco in 2019-2029 Eastshore State Improved public access adjacent to restored Albany Bay Trail maintenance) Park mudflats (0.44 miles). McLaughlin Improvements to Eastshore State Park along Powell Street City of Eastshore State (the northern edge of the Emeryville Crescent), including a Emeryville, East East Bay Park – Alameda new bioswale to filter rain and runoff before it enters the - - - - Bay Regional Emeryville Bay and improved opportunities for public access and Park District Crescent wildlife viewing. Berkeley $3,600,000 Rehabilitate Berkeley Brickyard area by removing imported Construction Brickyard - East Bay (and fill and soil contaminants, stabilize eroding shoreline, Development: (Vegetation East Bay McLaughlin Alameda Regional Park - $100,000/year establish new coastal scrub and prairie, and provide 2017-2020 establishment): Eastshore State District in shoreline access to restored areas. 2019-2029 Park maintenance)

36 TOTAL LEAD (AND CURRENT PHASE PROJECT SCHEDULE CURRENT PROJECT COUNTY PROJECT DESCRIPTION PARTNER) SCHEDULE TOTAL COST LOCATION (Phase; dates or (Phase; dates PHASE COST ORGS years) or years) Oakland Restore eroding shoreline, improve water quality, establish East Bay $12,000,000 Gateway Bay-upland transitional areas, and develop public access Regional Park (and East Bay Shoreline Alameda via a bicycle/pedestrian link (1.0 miles) between Gateway District, San - - - $200,000/year ("Gateway park at base of Bay Bridge and 50+ miles of Bay Trail in SF, Francisco Bay in Park/The Link") Alameda, and Contra Costa. Trail maintenance)

Creation of tidal wetlands and enhancement of the existing East Bay Oakport Project Alameda City of Oakland - - - - seasonal wetlands for wildlife.

Reconstruction of seasonal wetlands and adjoining uplands Oro Loma Oro Loma Marsh into a treatment wetland and upland ecotone for cleaning Sanitary District, East Bay Climate Alameda treated wastewater and demonstrating adaptation East Bay - - - - Adaptation strategies related to sea level rise, water quality Dischargers protection, and infrastructure sustainability. Authority Oyster Bay $900,000 (and Regional Restore tidal marsh areas, prevent shoreline erosion, East Bay $10,000/year East Bay Shoreline - Tidal Alameda protect Bay water quality, and provide public access to Regional Park - - - in Slough restored areas. District maintenance) Restoration

Protection of natural habitats and trail access at Point City of East Bay Point Emery Alameda Emery using natural shoreline protection methods to - - - - Emeryville reduce erosion and undercutting of the park and trail.

The South San Francisco Bay Salt Pond Restoration Project is the largest wetland restoration project on the west coast of the United States, working to restore 15,100 acres of former industrial salt ponds. Upcoming project elements at Eden Landing include: restoration of over 1,375 acres of tidal wetlands between Old Alameda Creek and the Alameda Creek Flood Control Channel, the possible Calif. Dept. of Eden Landing - addition of 400 acres of enhanced pond habitat, Permitting: Fish and Southern Eden construction of innovative flood protection elements, and Planning (EIS/R): 2018, East Bay Alameda Wildlife, San - $35,000,000 Landing (South around 4 miles of new Bay Trail. Additional elements 2017 Construction: Francisco Bay Bay Salt Ponds) include adaptive management applied studies and 2019-2020 Trail monitoring as well as project support and outreach. New shoreline trail (3.5 miles) as part of the South Bay Salt Pond Restoration project, and completion of missing Bay Trail segments to line the Peninsula to the East Bay; specifically San Jose Bay Trail Reach 9B, a 540-foot bike-ped bridge, 1.1 mile trail, and undercrossing connection to the 9-mile Guadalupe River Trail.

37 TOTAL LEAD (AND CURRENT PHASE PROJECT SCHEDULE CURRENT PROJECT COUNTY PROJECT DESCRIPTION PARTNER) SCHEDULE TOTAL COST LOCATION (Phase; dates or (Phase; dates PHASE COST ORGS years) or years) Operation and maintenance of critical levees and associated water control structures on the pond system on Calif. Eden Landing the Hayward shoreline south of the San Mateo Bridge in Department of East Bay Ecological Alameda order to provide wildlife habitat and public recreation and Fish and - - - - reserve protecting low-lying communities from flooding due to Wildlife, Save levee failures, storm events, and sea level rise. Community the Bay based restoration and stewardship activities. The 25-acre project will improve tidal action, implement Hayward Area Triangle Marsh - and modify water control structures, promote native East Bay Alameda Recreation and - - $250,000 - Hayward vegetation and enhance habitat for the endangered Salt Park District Marsh Harvest Mouse Create sea level rise resilient tidal marsh and transition zone to benefit and contribute towards the recovery of East Bay $4,000,000 Construction Bay Point endangered and special status species, provide water Regional Park (and Contra Development: (Vegetation East Bay Regional quality benefits, improve shoreline public access to District, San - $50,000/year Costa 2016-2019 establishment): Shoreline restored areas. Water Trail: install floating low freeboard Francisco Bay in 2019-2027 dock, including path of travel to the J channel, and Water Trail maintenance) consider kayak accessible campground. $3,000,000 Big Break Protect and enhance habitat for the threatened California Delta Science Construction (and Regional Contra Black Rail and Giant Gartner Snake, restore wetlands and Center; East Bay Development: (Vegetation East Bay - $50,000/year Shoreline - Costa coastal prairie, and provide shoreline public access to Regional Park 2022-2024 establishment): in Oakley restored areas. District 2024-2027 maintenance) $1,000,000 Brooks Island Construction Restore and expand Caspian Tern nesting area, install East Bay (and Habitat Contra Development: (Vegetation East Bay protective fencing, and develop viewing areas away from Regional Park - $25,000/year Improvement Costa 2019-2020 establishment): nesting sites. District in Project 2020-2023 maintenance) Ducks Unlimited, Restoration of tidal marsh and floodplain habitat functions Contra Costa Chelsea Contra for wildlife and flood protection at the mouth of Pinole County Flood East Bay - - $225,000 - Wetlands Costa Creek in Hercules. Restoration of transition area between Control and the tidal flood plain and the Pinole Creek riparian corridor. Water Conservation District

38 TOTAL LEAD (AND CURRENT PHASE PROJECT SCHEDULE CURRENT PROJECT COUNTY PROJECT DESCRIPTION PARTNER) SCHEDULE TOTAL COST LOCATION (Phase; dates or (Phase; dates PHASE COST ORGS years) or years) State Coastal Creosote Piling Removal of 420 tons of debris, including 460 creosote Conservancy, Removal and pilings in fall 2016 San Francisco Bay which are leaching National Fish Restoration- City Contra chemicals and negatively impacting fish and wildlife and and Wildlife 1/1/14- East Bay 1/1/14- 12/31/17 $1,750,000 $2,250,000 of Richmond Costa replacement with native habitat for herring spawning. Foundation, City 12/31/20 Red Rocks Restoration phase planned for 2017 or 2018. Post and Port of Warehouse site construction monitoring through Dec 2020. Richmond, NOAA Fisheries State Coastal Removal of 2,500 creosote and concrete pilings, pier and a Conservancy, large warehouse at the terminal four site which are City and Port of Creosote Piling leaching chemicals and negatively impacting fish and Richmond, Removal and wildlife and replacement with native habitat for herring NOAA Fisheries, Restoration- City Contra 1/1/15- East Bay spawning. 30% design planning completed in summer Water 1/1/15- 12/31/20 $5,000,000 $7,000,000 of Richmond Costa 12/31/25 2015. Next phase 60% design and CEQA and permitting to Emergency Terminal Four occur spring 2017 to spring 2018. Piling removal target for Transportation Site fall of 2019 or 2020. Post construction monitoring through Authority Dec 2025. (Ferries), Chevron Construction Revegetation - (earthmoving, Restoration of tidal wetlands to benefit fish and wildlife at Calif. Dept. of 2020-2022 Dutch Slough levee the edge of the Delta on the eastern Contra Costa Water (~$5 million); $38,000,000 Tidal Marsh Contra improvement, and $25,000,000 East Bay shoreline, including construction of associated levees to Resources, Calif. Operations, (~$24,000,000 Restoration Costa vegetation (construction) provide flood protection, vegetation management, and Dept. of Fish and Maintenance & secured) Project management): construction of public trails. Wildlife Monitoring - 2017-2019 (or 2020-2022+ (?) 2020) Contra Costa Restoration, enhancement and monitoring of degraded County Flood East Antioch wetlands at the mouth of East Antioch Creek. Includes Control and Planning, Contra Construction: East Bay Creek Marsh Marina outlet channel, hazardous material abatement on Water Permitting, Design: $4,300,000 $7,600,000 Costa 2025 - tbd Restoration the affected portion of the Hickmont Cannery site, and Conservation present conveyance improvements under Wilbur Avenue. District, City of Antioch

39 TOTAL LEAD (AND CURRENT PHASE PROJECT SCHEDULE CURRENT PROJECT COUNTY PROJECT DESCRIPTION PARTNER) SCHEDULE TOTAL COST LOCATION (Phase; dates or (Phase; dates PHASE COST ORGS years) or years) State Coastal Conservancy, The Nature Conservancy, San Francisco Restoration of eelgrass and oyster beds, tidal marsh, and San Francisco Bay Living upland ecotone habitats in a multi habitat living shorelines Contra State University, 1/1/15- East Bay Shorelines approach to provide shoreline protection from waves and 1/1/15 - 12/31/23 $2,500,000 $4,000,000 Costa ESA, USGS, 12/31/28 Project: Giant erosion while providing habitat for wildlife and improving Olofson Marsh water quality. Environmental, EBRPD, USFWS, U.C. Davis, other organizations Contra Costa Resource Enhancement of flood protection, restoration of riparian Conservation and fisheries habitat, improvement of water quality, and District; City of Planning, Pinole Creek Contra improvement of recreational opportunities at the mouth Pinole, Contra Construction: East Bay Permitting, Design: - $4,500,000 Restoration Costa and along the lower reaches of Pinole Creek. This is Step 2 Costa County 2025 - tbd present or the Pinole Creek Demonstration Project. Located Flood Control nearby, but separate from, the Chelsea Wetlands project. and Water Conservation District Enhancement and restoration of wetlands and riparian habitat along four miles of Walnut Creek and Pacheco Creeks to restore and enhance habitat, provide sustainable Contra Costa flood protection, and allow opportunities for public access County Flood Lower Walnut and recreation. Restore wetlands to improve ecological Planning, Contra Control and Construction: East Bay Creek function and habitat quantity, quality and connectivity. Permitting,and - $14,000,000 Costa Water 2020-2021 Restoration Create sustainable benefits that consider environmental Design: 2017 -2019 Conservation changes such as sea level rise and sedimentation. Project District is located directly adjacent to the Pacheco Marsh Restoration, and will likely be combined for implementation. East Bay Regional Park $5,000,000 District, Contra Restore degraded portions of Wildcat Creek channel, Project (and Lower Wildcat Contra Costa County Construction: East Bay remove barriers to fish passage, and improve public access development: - $25,000/year Creek Costa Flood Control 2020-2023 to restored areas. 2020 in and Water maintenance) Conservation District

40 TOTAL LEAD (AND CURRENT PHASE PROJECT SCHEDULE CURRENT PROJECT COUNTY PROJECT DESCRIPTION PARTNER) SCHEDULE TOTAL COST LOCATION (Phase; dates or (Phase; dates PHASE COST ORGS years) or years) Martinez East Bay $5,000,000 Regional Complete Phase III marsh restoration, stabilize and restore Construction Regional Park Project (and Shoreline - Contra the rapidly eroding "shark bite" marsh, and protect water (Vegetation East Bay District, San development: - $50,000/year Marsh Costa quality. Enhanced public access (0.3 miles) as part of establishment): Francisco Bay 2019-2023 in Restoration shoreline restoration. 2023-2033 Trail maintenance) Phase III Planning, design, environmental compliance, and Mt. View construction to enhance habitat value of McNabney Marsh Sanitary District, McNabney to improve water quality and marsh function to benefit East Bay Planning, Marsh Contra Construction: East Bay shorebirds, waterfowl, fish, and other wildlife and to Regional Park Permitting, and $600,000 $5,900,000 Enhancement Costa 2018 - ? provide shoreline public access and interpretive signs to District, and Design: 2017-2018 Project enhance habitat at McNabney Marsh in the Peyton Slough Calif. Dept. of Marsh Complex Fish and Wildlife Miller-Knox $3,000,000 Regional Enhance beach, restore tidal lagoon and drainage, stabilize East Bay (and Shoreline - Contra East Bay eroding shoreline, acquire land to protect wildlife habitat, Regional Park - - - $25,000/year Lagoon and Costa and improve access. District in Marsh maintenance) Restoration East Bay Regional Park Preserve and enhance San Pablo Marsh, improve California District, Contra Ridgway's Rail habitat, remove imported fill, stabilize $5,000,000 Costa County North Richmond eroding shoreline, establish upland-Bay transitional areas, (and Contra Flood Control East Bay Shoreline - San acquire lands to protect wildlife habitat, and develop - - - $50,000/year Costa and Water Pablo Marsh public access for wildlife viewing and education. Goodrick in Conservation Avenue Trail connection (0.27 miles) to Dotson Family maintenance) District, San Marsh restoration along enhanced habitat area. Francisco Bay Trail Contra Costa Restoration of tidal wetland areas, reestablishment of County Flood habitat for sensitive wildlife, and creation of public access Control and and interpretation opportunities. Plan includes new tidal Water Planning, Design, Pacheco Marsh Contra channels, levee breaches and removal, and grading of Conservation Construction: East Bay and Permitting: - $10,100,000 Restoration Costa gentle upland transitions to facilitate habitat type District, John 2020-2021 2018-2019 adaptation to rising tides. Adjacent to Lower Walnut Creek Muir Land Trust, Restoration, and at least part of Pacheco Marsh will likely East Bay be combined for implementation. Regional Park District

41 TOTAL LEAD (AND CURRENT PHASE PROJECT SCHEDULE CURRENT PROJECT COUNTY PROJECT DESCRIPTION PARTNER) SCHEDULE TOTAL COST LOCATION (Phase; dates or (Phase; dates PHASE COST ORGS years) or years) Point Isabel $4,000,000 Regional Protect Hoffman Marsh, stabilize eroding shorelines, East Bay (and Shoreline - Contra remove contaminated fill, enhance upland/Bay transitional East Bay Regional Park - - - $50,000/year Wetland Costa areas, protect Bay water quality, and provide public access District in Restoration and to restored areas. maintenance) Public Access Point Molate Regional Acquire and restore shoreline, enhance largest eelgrass East Bay $4,000,000 Shoreline population in San Francisco Bay, stabilize eroding Regional Park (and Contra East Bay Restoration and shorelines, remove Bay fill, and develop public access to District, San - - - $100,000/year Costa Public Access restored areas via a trail connection (4.0 miles) from RSR Francisco Bay in Project , Bridge pathway along entire length of peninsula. Trail maintenance) Richmond Point Pinole Regional Stewardship, maintenance, and monitoring of restored East Bay Construction $800,000 (and Shoreline - wetlands and prairie at Dotson Family Marsh, protect Regional Park Project Contra (Vegetation $100,000/year East Bay Dotson Family endangered California Ridgway's Rail and Saltmarsh District, San Development: - Costa establishment): in Marsh Harvest Mouse habitat, and enhance public access (1.4 Francisco Bay 2018-2026 2016-2026 maintenance) Restoration and miles) as part of shoreline restoration. Trail Public Access East Bay Regional Park Point Pinole District, Contra Regional Realign and restore about 1/2 mile of Rheem Creek, Contra Costa County East Bay Shoreline - connect with restored Dotson Family marsh and acquire Construction: 2019 - $300,000 - Costa Flood Control Lower Rheem land to protect wildlife. and Water Creek Conservation District Point Pinole $5,000,000 Regional Develop a San Francisco Bay Interpretive Center, provide East Bay Project (and Shoreline - San Contra East Bay interpretive exhibits and hands-on educational programs Regional Park Development: - - $200,000/year Francisco Bay Costa at the restored Dotson Family Marsh. District 2020 in Interpretive maintenance) Center East Bay Regional Park $1,200,000 Stabilize eroding shoreline, clean up site, improve water Construction San Pablo Bay, District, San Project (and Contra quality, and improve public access. Water Trail: access to (Vegetation East Bay Lone Tree Point, Francisco Bay development: - $25,000/year Costa and across the sandy beach, restrooms and picnic facilities, establishment): Rodeo Trail, San 2019-2023 in parking area within 300 feet of beach access. 2020-2023 Francisco Bay maintenance) Water Trail

42 TOTAL LEAD (AND CURRENT PHASE PROJECT SCHEDULE CURRENT PROJECT COUNTY PROJECT DESCRIPTION PARTNER) SCHEDULE TOTAL COST LOCATION (Phase; dates or (Phase; dates PHASE COST ORGS years) or years) The project restored tidal salt marsh habitat for Ridgway's Planning, rail and other wildlife through restoration of adjacent Permitting, University of Planning, coastal prairie grassland, removal of invasive species and Design: Western Stege California, Permitting, Design; native plant vegetation. Additional pollution removal $900,000; Marsh Contra Berkeley, Office Construction; East Bay activities needed. Potential for additional habitat n/a Construction: $3,500,000 Restoration Costa of Environment, Monitoring and enhancement work on 7.5 acres of tidal wetland and $2,150,000; Program Health and Maintenance: approximately 20 acres of coastal terrace prairie and Monitoring and Safety 2018 - 2020 meadow habitat. Additional potential for trash collection Maintenance: along Meeker Slough for Western Stege Marsh. $450,000 North Bay Restoration, management and monitoring of wetlands and beach habitats, protection of adjacent existing City of Benicia, Benicia infrastructure, installation and management of public North Bay Solano San Francisco - - - - Shoreline trails, and protection of wetlands and Bay from urban Bay Trail stormwater. Upgrades to existing path (0.2 miles) to new park. Restoration of remaining 290 acres to tidal marsh through San Pablo Bay upland and/or beneficially reused dredged sediments to National Wildlife create wetland and associated habitats for salt marsh Refuge, Ducks harvest mice; Monitoring and adaptive management of Unlimited, entire 1,549-acre site. STRAW program to involve STRAW, the North Bay Cullinan Ranch Solano volunteers in on-the-ground shovel-ready restoration Friends of the - - - - projects. Creation of approx. 0.3 miles of ne public trail, San Pablo Bay interpretive signage, and a fishing and wildllife observation National Wildlife pier at the edge of Dutchman Slough, which will link to Refuge, U.S. Fish existing access from Mare Island via a foot bridge where and Wildlife visitors can walk or bike ride from the City of Vallejo. Service Restoration, management and monitoring of wetlands and other shoreline habitat, including the mouth of Spring Solano Land North Bay Rush Ranch Solano - - $1,000,000 - Branch Creek, and installation and management of public Trust trails. Restoration and enhancement of tidal and managed Calif. marshes within Suisun Marsh to benefit federal and state Department of Suisun Creek listed terrestrial and aquatic species, waterfowl and Fish and Watershed shorebirds. Refer to the Suisun Marsh Programmatic North Bay Solano Wildlife, Suisun - - - - Enhancement Biological Opinion and Suisun Marsh Habitat Management, Resource Program Restoration, and Preservation (i.e. the Suisun Marsh Plan) Conservation for details on the planning, permitting, project design, District construction, maintenance, and monitoring.

43 TOTAL LEAD (AND CURRENT PHASE PROJECT SCHEDULE CURRENT PROJECT COUNTY PROJECT DESCRIPTION PARTNER) SCHEDULE TOTAL COST LOCATION (Phase; dates or (Phase; dates PHASE COST ORGS years) or years) Establishment of improved water circulation in the marshes to the south of Highway 37 along the north edge San Pablo Bay Strip Marsh Solano, of San Pablo Bay between Port Sonoma at the Petaluma North Bay National Wildlife - - - - Enhancement Sonoma River to Mare Island in Vallejo, in order to improve habitat Refuge for wildlife, improve water quality, and reduce mosquito production. Calif. Dept. of Enhancement of tidal marshes and managed wetlands on Fish and the east side of the lower Napa River, improvement of Wildlife, Napa public access including new trails and interpretive County Regional elements, creation of bird islands, installation of water Park and Open control structures, and monitoring and operation along the Lower Napa Napa, Space District, North Bay Lower Napa River, including Mare Island and Vallejo - - - - River Wetlands Solano City of American waterfront, American Canyon south to the Solano County Canyon, San line, and between Green Island Road and north along the Francisco Bay tidal Napa River. Site is adjacent to airport, connects Napa Trail, San Sanitation to Pond 9/10 trail. Water Trail: improve ramp or Francisco Bay add floating dock, maintain facilities, including restroom. Water Trail Development of a long-term management plan for the 45 acre Edgerly Island wetland, monitoring and enhancement Edgerly Island of the 2,000 acre South Wetland Opportunity Area, and Napa County and South implementation of the Napa County Youth Ecology Corps Flood Control North Bay Wetlands Napa Program which aims to train young adults in natural and Water - - - - Opportunity resource management. Crews would work on invasive Conservation Area species management and habitat enhancement projects to District enhance the resilience of tidal wetland habitat and buffer against sea level rise. Fly Bay in the Huichica Creek Unit of the Napa-Sonoma Marshes Wildlife Area has significant scenic, natural, and aesthetic values which the State has committed to Fly Bay, Huichica preserving. The proposed project is to replace two water California Planning, Creek Unit control structures and repair their surrounding levee North Bay Napa Department of Permitting, and - - $350,000 (Napa-Sonoma (approximately 0.10 mile) to ensure continued and Fish and Wildlife Design: n/a Marshes) improved water management capabilities and prevent flooding of adjacent private farmlands, homes, railroad tracks, sanitation facility, and county roads.

44 TOTAL LEAD (AND CURRENT PHASE PROJECT SCHEDULE CURRENT PROJECT COUNTY PROJECT DESCRIPTION PARTNER) SCHEDULE TOTAL COST LOCATION (Phase; dates or (Phase; dates PHASE COST ORGS years) or years) Stewardship, maintenance, and monitoring of restored and enhanced wetlands within the Napa-Sonoma Marshes on the west side of the lower Napa River to improve water Calif. Napa-Sonoma quality and habitat values for endangered species, fish North Bay Napa Department of - - $250,000 - Marshes waterfowl, shorebirds, and other wildlife, including an Fish and Wildlife infrastructure assessment and surveys to help identify and prioritize potential future projects and infrastructure needs to maintain the area's intended habitat values. The Southern Crossing Unit is approximately 260 acres of seasonal wetland, diked historic tidelands, wetlands, and upland grasslands. Existing levee along the Napa River need to be reasonably maintained and repaired as needed to allow the wetlands to function properly as high quality Southern wildlife habitat. Project components include maintaining California Planning, Crossing Unit North Bay Napa and enhancing habitat for resident and migratory birds, Department of Permitting, and - - $1,700,000 (Napa-Sonoma mammal, amphibian, and reptile species, creating seasonal Fish and Wildlife Design Marshes) ponds, replacing existing and installing new water control structures, levee setbacks and improvements, and levee repairs to approximately 2 miles of existing levees for flood protection from the Napa River and constructing public access features. San Pablo Bay National Wildlife Restoration of the 1,100 acre Haire Ranch to wetlands to Refuge benefit endangered species and other wildlife. Current (UCFWS), Ducks project goal is to reverse subsidence at the site by planting Unlimited, Haire Ranch Construction: 2017 North Bay Sonoma cattails and tule, in addition to flooding the area with National 2017 - 2037+ $500,000 $2,500,000 Restoration - ? groundwater and adding sediment to raise the elevation. Resources When the site is ready, the levee will be breached to Conservation restore tidal marsh habitat. Service, and a private Foundation

45 TOTAL LEAD (AND CURRENT PHASE PROJECT SCHEDULE CURRENT PROJECT COUNTY PROJECT DESCRIPTION PARTNER) SCHEDULE TOTAL COST LOCATION (Phase; dates or (Phase; dates PHASE COST ORGS years) or years) Assess and design a project to reconnect diked seasonal wetlands and pickleweed marsh to Hudeman Slough and San Pablo Bay to restore historic bayland, improve hydrology for diked pickleweed marsh, reconnect upland Hudeman ecotone to marsh complex, assess feasibility of Sonoma Valley Slough implementation of wetland restoration features and County Enhancement recycled water to protect existing recycled water storage Sanitation $450,000 ($167,500/ Planning, Wetlands Tidal ponds onsite, and incorporate measures to ensure existing District, Sonoma Construction: ($27,500 for $5,000 for North Bay Sonoma Permitting, and Restoration, and public access supported by future project implementation. County Water 2020-2022 education/ education/ Design: 2018-2020 Education and Water Trail: repair ADA dock, develop campground, Agency, San access) access) Public Access improve restrooms. Update and expand existing wetland Francisco Bay Improvements restoration and public access trail education components Water Trail (signs, trails) at the Hudeman Slough Enhancement Wetlands, expand opportunities for environmental education programs for students and the public, including maintenance and installation of visitor amenities. Sonoma County Water Agency (Lead), Sonoma Resource Enhancement of the river and wetlands to improve water Conservation Lower Petaluma quality and provide habitat for fish and wildlife; completion North Bay Sonoma District , Friends - - - - River of trail segments and provision of water access for non- of the Petaluma motorized boats at the mouth of the Petaluma River. River, City of Petaluma, Calif. Dept. of Fish and Wildlife Sonoma County Water Agency - Lead, Sonoma Restoration of wetlands and creek habitat and upland Resource Lower Sonoma North Bay Sonoma transitional areas to improve water quality, provide habitat Conservation - - - - Creek for wildlife, and manage sediments. District (partner), Sonoma Land Trust and others STRAW involves on-the ground, shovel-ready restoration Point Blue $125,000 - Point Blue's projects, completed with volunteer labor, that create Conservation Operations, $600,000 $162,000 - STRAW Program buffer areas adjacent to wetlands and improve the Science Construction: Maintenance, (Construction); $780,000 North Bay Sonoma - Sonoma ecological health of SF Bay. Projects will increase the (STRAW); San 2017-2022 & Monitoring: ($37,000 - (Construction Baylands resilience of these ecosystems and engage students and Pablo Bay NWR tbd $180,000 for + O, M, & M) community members. (USFWS) O, M, & M)

46 TOTAL LEAD (AND CURRENT PHASE PROJECT SCHEDULE CURRENT PROJECT COUNTY PROJECT DESCRIPTION PARTNER) SCHEDULE TOTAL COST LOCATION (Phase; dates or (Phase; dates PHASE COST ORGS years) or years) Pond 6A in the Napa River Unit is currently managed by CDFW to control salinity levels and to optimize wildlife habitat. It is surrounded by Napa Slough to the north and west, Pond 6 to the south, and Devil’s Slough to the east Pond 6A, Napa with a private duck club in the northeastern corner of the River Unit pond. Tidal action and wind/wave erosion due to prevailing California Planning, (Napa-Sonoma winds are deteriorating the levee that separates the pond North Bay Sonoma Department of Permitting, and - - $1,000,000 Marshes - Ponds from the private duck club. The private duck club consists Fish and Wildlife Design 6, 6A, 7, 7A, and of seasonal marshland which is dry for most of the year, 8) but is flooded in October, and remains flooded throughout duck-hunting season. The existing levee bordering the duck club needs to be reasonably maintained and repaired as needed to allow CDFW to manage the pond and protect the club’s waterfowl habitat. Pond 8 in the Huichica Creek Unit is approximately 102 acres and located on the northern boundary of the Pond 8, Huichica NSMWA near the Napa River. Pond 8 is a muted tidal pond Creek Unit and is bordered by Milton Road Sanitation Yard to the California Planning, (Napa-Sonoma north, residents along Milton Road to the east, and tidal North Bay Sonoma Department of Permitting, and - - $500,000 Marshes - Ponds marsh to the west and south. The primary components of Fish and Wildlife Design 6, 6A, 7, 7A, and the proposed project include levee improvements/repairs 8) to approximately 0.2 of a mile of existing levees for flood protection for Milton Road residents and maintain the habitat functionality of the Pond. Ringstrom Bay Unit is approximately 396 acres and located on the northwestern corner of the NSMWA. It is bordered by vineyards on the north and northeast, seasonal wetlands or diked farmlands on the southeast and northwest, and the Wingo Unit on the southwest. The unit Ringstrom Bay consists of diked saline seasonal wetlands, muted tidal, California Planning, Unit (Napa- brackish marshes, moist grasslands, and seasonal marsh. North Bay Sonoma Department of Permitting, and - - $1,000,000 Sonoma Ringstrom Unit is managed with both reclaimed water and Fish and Wildlife Design Marshes) muted tidal flushing from Steamboat Slough through operation of a tide gate. The primary components of the proposed project include replacing an existing water control structure and levee improvements/repairs to approximately 1 mile of existing levees for flood protection from adjacent landowners and adjacent vineyards.

47 TOTAL LEAD (AND CURRENT PHASE PROJECT SCHEDULE CURRENT PROJECT COUNTY PROJECT DESCRIPTION PARTNER) SCHEDULE TOTAL COST LOCATION (Phase; dates or (Phase; dates PHASE COST ORGS years) or years) Sonoma Land Trust (SLT) recently completed restoration of nearly 1,000 acres of tidal wetlands at Sears Point. SLT $84,000 plans to build upon this project by restoring denuded ($34,000 Sears Point riparian habitats along several miles of upland seasonal Planning, Sonoma Land Construction: funding and North Bay Riparian Sonoma streams that drain to the Bay and to the Petaluma River. Permitting, Design: $300,000 Trust 2018-2020 need $60,00 Restoration The Sears Point uplands contain more than nine miles of 2017 for Final drainages. SLT has prioritized just over two miles for Design) immediate restoration and is working on preliminary designs Completion of tidal marsh restoration project elements, including development of ecotone and high tide refugia. Stewardship, maintenance, monitoring, and adaptive management of newly restored wetlands to improve Sonoma Land habitat quality for endangered species, fish, waterfowl, Trust, Ducks shorebirds, and other wildlife. Restoration of riparian Unlimited, San Sears Point habitat in 5 miles of drainages and enhancement of Pablo Bay Wetland and wetlands to provide wildlife habitat and improve National Wildlife Funding North Bay Watershed Sonoma watershed function. Plan and develop additional public Refuge, Sonoma - - - needed for Bay Restoration access connections from the Bay Trail to adjacent County Regional Trail only Project protected properties. Development of a visitor center, with Park interpretive exhibits and educational programs at the San Department, Pablo Bay National Wildlife Refuge. Connector Trail San Francisco feasibility assessment currently funded by Bay Trail (0.6 Bay Trail, STRAW miles) - connect existing Bay Trail between Sears Point and Tubbs Island. STRAW program to involve volunteers in on- the-ground shovel-ready projects. Sears Point, San San Pablo Bay Pablo Bay Development of a visitor center, with interpretive exhibits National Wildlife North Bay National Wildlife Sonoma and educational programs at the San Pablo Bay National - - - - Refuge, Sonoma Refuge Visitor Wildlife Refuge. Land Trust Center San Pablo Bay National Wildlife Refuge, Ducks Construction, Restoration of the 3,300 acre Skaggs Island (a former Unlimited, Operations, military base) to wetlands to benefit endangered species Planning, National Maintenance, North Bay Skaggs Island Sonoma and other wildlife; creation of recreational trails and public Permitting, and $1,300,000 $54,000,000 Resources and access for wildlife viewing. Trail construction (6.5 miles) as Design: 2017-2018 Conservation Monitoring: part of tidal wetland restoration. Service, San 2018 - ? Francisco Bay Trail

48 TOTAL LEAD (AND CURRENT PHASE PROJECT SCHEDULE CURRENT PROJECT COUNTY PROJECT DESCRIPTION PARTNER) SCHEDULE TOTAL COST LOCATION (Phase; dates or (Phase; dates PHASE COST ORGS years) or years) This project will restore sediment transport of Sonoma Sonoma Creek Sonoma Creek, reduce barriers to fish migration, and protect Planning, "Big Break" Resource North Bay Sonoma existing agriculture and infrastructure by repairing Permitting, and 2017-2022 $177,400 $1,104,211 Repair and Flood Conservation numerous levee breaks and reinforcing 1.4 miles of Design: 2017-2018 Alleviation District existing levees along lower Sonoma Creek Project partners completed the first year of construction to enhance 400 acres of degraded and impounded tidal marsh habitat at the mouth of Sonoma Creek in the wetlands of northern San Pablo Bay. Year 1 post- Sonoma Creek construction data and field observations suggest a need for Audubon Operations, Tidal Marsh additional construction to address water entrapment in California, San Maintenance Enhancement to the marsh not reached in year one construction, continued Construction: 2017 North Bay Sonoma Pablo Bay and $1,120,000 $1,390,000 Improve Habitat enhancement of the channel drainage system through - 2019 National Wildlife Monitoring: and Water Sonoma Creek marsh, removal of the original relic berms Refuge, STRAW ongoing - 2025 Quality which have been identified as priority mosquito breeding ground, complete 3 acres of marsh transition zone, and reshape and revegetate installed transition zone. STRAW program to involve volunteers in on-the-ground shovel- ready restoration projects. Assess, design, and implement project to reconnect Tolay Creek watershed with its historic drainage to San Pablo Bay Tolay Creek via Tolay Creek Slough. Benefits include: delivery of Sonoma Land North Bay Watershed Sonoma - - - - sediment to evolving Sears Point marsh, improved access Trust Enhancement for anadromous fish, alleviate flooding in lower Sonoma Creek, and potential trail connection.

Restoration of parcels adjacent to the California Sonoma Land North Bay Tolay Lagoon Sonoma Department of Fish and Wildlife’s Tolay Lagoon and State - - - - Trust Highway 37.

49 TOTAL LEAD (AND CURRENT PHASE PROJECT SCHEDULE CURRENT PROJECT COUNTY PROJECT DESCRIPTION PARTNER) SCHEDULE TOTAL COST LOCATION (Phase; dates or (Phase; dates PHASE COST ORGS years) or years) The Southern portion of Tolay Creek Unit is located immediately south of SR 37 and is an intertidal lagoon. This subunit is bordered by private hay farms on the north, east, and southeast. It is bordered by Highway 37, Vallejo sanitation District property, USFWS lands and Tolay Creek. The proposed project will repair approximately 0.3 miles of Tubbs Island, access road with clean, fill material to bring the road and California Tolay Creek Unit levee back to existing grade level and pre-existing Department of (Napa-Sonoma Planning, conditions. This repair will help prevent further damage to Fish and North Bay Marshes; Sonoma Permitting, and - - $300,000 the Unit and surrounding private property and maintain Wildlife, San including Vallejo Design safe access for the public and adjacent landowners. The Francisco Bay Sanitation levee erosion is near a parking lot immediately off of Hwy Trail District Levee) 37 where there are regular visitors. This levee road provides access to surrounding neighbors including the Vallejo Sanitation District and US Fish and Wildlife Service. The adjacent property is substantially lower in elevation than the CDFW land and is protected by this levee. Levee top trail desired (2.7 miles) The Wingo Unit of the Napa Sonoma Marshes Wildlife Area was once open to tidal action before it was diked to create agricultural lands prior to CDFW owning the land. The Unit is surrounded by levees protecting the internal seasonal wetlands from brackish tidal waters/runoff from nearby Wingo Unit California Planning, sloughs and Sonoma Creek. The proposed project is to North Bay (Napa-Sonoma Sonoma Department of Permitting, and n/a:n/a n/a $3,000,000 repair approximately 2 miles of an existing levee by raising Marshes) Fish and Wildlife Design: n/a and/or widening levee to ensure continued and improved water management capabilities and prevent flooding of adjacent private farmlands, homes, railroad tracks, and county roads.

$50,000 for log groins and Restoration of a native oyster reef along the shoreline at Audubon Operations, beach Aramburu Island, and improvements to the log groins, California, Marin Maintenance, and North Bay Aramburu Island Marin - nourishment $1,390,000 annual monitoring, beach nourishment, and non-native County Parks Monitoring: and $85,000 invasive species control. and Open Space present - 2021 for 2018 monitoring Monitoring and management of 400 acres of new marsh Operations, plain, seasonal wetland, and 35-40-acre transition zone Marin Audubon Maintenance, and North Bay Bahia Wetlands Marin - - $400,000 and upland habitat. Additional funding for seasonal Society Monitoring: wetland and upland enhancement work. present - 2027

50 TOTAL LEAD (AND CURRENT PHASE PROJECT SCHEDULE CURRENT PROJECT COUNTY PROJECT DESCRIPTION PARTNER) SCHEDULE TOTAL COST LOCATION (Phase; dates or (Phase; dates PHASE COST ORGS years) or years) Design and implementation of tidal restoration in Novato, using dredged sediment to raise elevations prior to Bel Marin Keys State Coastal North Bay Marin breaching, construction of a levee to protect neighboring - - $25,000,000 $115,000,000 Wetlands Conservancy communities from flooding, and completion of Bay Trail segments. Undertake planning and design related to sea level rise adaptation solutions to address the Mill Valley - Sausalito Construction of Marin County Trail, loss of marsh habitat, and educational outreach. the Pilot Flood Control Planning: Current - North Bay Bothin Marsh Marin Planning efforts include the creation of transitional high Project and $75,000 $1,800,000 District, Marin 2019 marsh along the back edge of Bothin Marsh by re-using Design: 2019 - County Parks dredged sedimetn from Coyote Creek to improve habitats n/a and increase shoreline resiliency. The Burdell Unit of the Petaluma Marsh Wildlife Area has Construction & significant Wildlife Habitat Values and also acts as flood Operations, Burdell Unit (of protection for the Burdell Mitigation Bank and Gnoss Field California Planning, Maintenance, North Bay Petaluma Marin Airport. This proposed project will create a new offset Department of Permitting, Design: and $2,000,000 $13,000,000 Marsh) engineered levee that will allow for the necessary flood Fish and Wildlife 2017-2018 Monitoring: protection of existing infrastructure and seasonal habitat 2019-2021 & and create additional tidal marsh habitat. TBD Enhancements to existing marshes along Corte Madera Marin County Lower Corte Creek and implementation of sea level rise adaptation North Bay Marin Flood Control - - - - Madera Creek measures by beneficially re-using dredged sediment from District the lower reach of Corte Madera Creek. Restoration of tidal marsh habitat by removing fill and Construction: providing refuge for the California Ridgway's rail and Corte Madera 2017-2018; provision of environmentally sensitive public access. Spur Marin Audubon Planning, Ecological Operations, access to restored wetlands (0.2 miles). Also potential for Society, San Permitting, and North Bay Reserve Marin Maintenance, - $850,000 coarse material placement along eroding shorelines to Francisco Bay Design: present - Expansion and and reduce erosion and feed sediment, and possible potential Trail 2017 Restoration Monitoring: for vegetation enhancements for high tide refuge and 2018-2028 shoreline protection. Historically, Day Island Unit of Petaluma Marsh Wildlife Area was two islands surrounded by salt marsh. Long ago the area was diked and filled to create a land bridge between the islands and the proposed Black Point Day Island Unit subdivision. Today, Day Island supports muted tidal, open California Planning, North Bay (of Petaluma Marin water habitat and upland transition habitat along the San Department of - - $500,000 Permitting, Design Marsh) Pablo Bay. Approximately 2 miles of subsided levee protect Fish and Wildlife adjacent private landowners and homes. Improvements through raising and/or enforcing levees are needed to maintain the functionality of the unit and protect flooding of nearby land and homes.

51 TOTAL LEAD (AND CURRENT PHASE PROJECT SCHEDULE CURRENT PROJECT COUNTY PROJECT DESCRIPTION PARTNER) SCHEDULE TOTAL COST LOCATION (Phase; dates or (Phase; dates PHASE COST ORGS years) or years) State Coastal Conservancy, San Francisco The Nature Bay Living Restoration of eelgrass and oyster beds on the San Rafael Conservancy, Shorelines shoreline to provide shoreline protection from waves and San Francisco 1/1/11 - North Bay Marin 1/1/11- 12/31/22 2,400,000 3,800,000 Project: San erosion while providing habitat for wildlife and improving State University, 12/31/27 Rafael and water quality. ESA, USGS, SFEP, Hayward EPA, U.C. Davis, CDFW, other organizations Improvements to replace 2.0 miles of aging coastal levees and enhancements to wetland habitats to protect the Marin County Lower Gallinas Santa Venetia community from flooding, provide for sea North Bay Marin Flood Control - - - - Creek level rise adaptation, beneficially re-use creek sediment, District reduce impacts from flood control maintenance, and improve recreation including navigation. Reconnection of Gallinas and Miller Creek with restored Marin County wetlands to provide habitats for threatened and Parks, Marin McInnis Marsh endangered species, improve flood protection capacity Planning, County Public Construction: $5,000,000 - North Bay Habitat Marin and sediment conveyance efficiencies, increase transitional Permitting, and $1,100,000 Works, Las 2020-2023 $10,000,000 Restoration estuarine habitats, and contribute to sea level rise Design: 2017-2020 Gallinas Valley adaptation. Bay Trail alignment at McInnis subject to Sanitary District change based on restoration plans. To make flood protection improvements to the existing stormwater pond at the base of the Marin City watershed that provides critical flood protection to the only road into and out of Marin City (a disadvantaged community) as well as to Highway 101 which is the major infrastructure link Marin County Final analysis between San Francisco and the North Bay. Both of these Flood Control Planning, and preferred $270,000 (for $2,000,000 - North Bay Marin Pond Marin roadways have flooded in recent storm events (i.e. 2014) and Water Permitting, and alternatives: final analysis) $5,000,000 significantly impacting traffic and impeding the ability of Conservation Design June 2017 emergency vehicles to access Marin City. Restoration of District the pond for wildlife habitat and water quality will also be included as part of the final pond improvements. The pond system connects to San Francisco Bay through a culvert and is high vulnerable to the impacts of sea level rise.

52 TOTAL LEAD (AND CURRENT PHASE PROJECT SCHEDULE CURRENT PROJECT COUNTY PROJECT DESCRIPTION PARTNER) SCHEDULE TOTAL COST LOCATION (Phase; dates or (Phase; dates PHASE COST ORGS years) or years) Pilot projects at the Romberg Tiburon center sites to test Romberg- innovative, nature-based solutions to restoring, repairing, Tiburon: Nature- and renovating armored shorelines in the San Francisco San Francisco Based- Bay to adapt to sea level rise and protect critical public Planning, State University North Bay Adaptation and Marin infrastructure, historic buildings, and public access to the Permitting, Design: - $750,000 - Romberg Restoration of Bay. The Romberg Tiburon center campus is a former US 2 years Tiburon Center an Armored Navy base with almost 0.5 mile of filled and armored Shoreline shoreline, including seawalls and rip-rap revetment, on which pilot projects can take place. Marin County Implementation of a natural flood protection approach to Flood Control reduce flooding, increase sea level rise resiliency and District and North Bay Novato Baylands Marin increase tidal wetland and other wetland habitat along Friends of - - $5,000,000 - lower Novato Creek. Potential future restoration may Novato Creek include opportunities for new Bay trail alignment. Novato Sanitary District Marin County Demonstration of sand/gravel bay beach designs to Flood Control combat wind-wave shoreline erosion as part of sea level District, Marin rise adaptation efforts. Protection of one of the largest North Bay Richardson Bay Marin County Parks, - - - - eelgrass beds in San Francisco Bay to provide food and City of Mill shelter for fish and invertebrates and feeding grounds for Valley, Audubon migratory waterbirds. California Protection of important eelgrass habitat and shoreline in Sausalito Marine the City of Sausalito, restoration of tidal marsh along the Marin Audubon North Bay Eelgrass Marin - - - - shoreline and enhancement of the shoreline edge as Society Preserve habitat and public park. Operations, Enhancement of seasonal wetlands for birds and other Marin Audubon Maintenance, and North Bay Simmons Slough Marin - $25,000 $500,000 wildlife and monitor progress of enhancement work. Society Monitoring: present - 2027 Planning, Planning, Permitting, and Permitting: Design Part 2 $60,000, and (permits; time Design Part 2; Creation of high tide refuge habitat for Ridgway's Rail Planning, Tiscornia Marsh TBD); Construction: which inhabit the marsh. Improvements to public access Marin Audubon Permitting, and North Bay Restoration Marin Construction (1 n/a $2,000; on the levee top. Restoration of tidal marsh habitat and Society Design Part 1: Project year); Operations, adaptation to sea level rise. 2017-2018 Operations, Maintenance, Maintenance, and and Monitoring Monitoring (10 years) $750,000

53 TOTAL LEAD (AND CURRENT PHASE PROJECT SCHEDULE CURRENT PROJECT COUNTY PROJECT DESCRIPTION PARTNER) SCHEDULE TOTAL COST LOCATION (Phase; dates or (Phase; dates PHASE COST ORGS years) or years) Monitoring of existing and restored wetlands habitat in Marin Audubon Operations, Petaluma Marsh what is the largest historic wetlands in San Francisco Bay, Marin, Society, Calif. Maintenance, and North Bay Expansion and and enhancement of upland refuge habitat to provide high - - $150,000 Sonoma Dept. of Fish and Monitoring: Restoration tide refuge for wildlife and allow for adaptation to sea level Wildlife present - 2027 rise. Completion of transition zone restoration. Environmental phase (CEQA/NEPA) for the SR 37 sea-level rise and flood protection project; Project would provide integrated flood protection and sea-level rise adaptation by elevating the current SR 37 infrastructure to withstand North Bay future seal-level rise and storm surges; The project limits CMAs: NVTA SR 37 Sea Level Napa, are SR 37 from SR 80 to SR 101. Project would include (Napa Valley Planning, Rise and Flood Sonoma, North Bay elevation of the roadway and storm surge protections that Transportation Permitting, and - $30,000,000 - Protection Solano, would improve flood protection levees, berms, etc. and Authority), Design: July 2018 project Marin would protect vital wetland and marsh habitat. The SCTA, STA, TAM, project would also benefit wildlife, and accommodate and Bay Trail shoreline public access by integrating 17 miles of bicycle/pedestrian infrastructure along a modified Highway 37 corridor between Vallejo and Novato. Santa Invasive Sea Clara, Treating or removing invasive Limonium ramosissium and California Lavender Alameda, L.duriusculum in locations around the bay. Funding for Construction: 2018 Construction: North Bay Invasive Plant $400,000 $400,000 Eradication & San treatment and removal were initiated at 13 top sites in - 2023 2023 - 2033 Council Restoration Mateo, 2016, which will also cover 2017 field work at these sites. Marin Baywide / Multi-Region Removal of up to 30,000 creosote pilings in San Francisco NOAA Fisheries, Creosote Piling Bay as part of future programmatic projects which will $20,000,000 Baywide / State Coastal Removal and Multiple remove creosote pilings that leach chemicals and 1/1/17-1/1/22 1/1/17-1/1/37 (for 10 $100,000,000 Multi-Region Conservancy, Restoration negatively impact fish and wildlife and replacement with projects) Ports, Cities native habitat for herring spawning. State Coastal Conservancy, U.S. Fish and Coordinated effort to eradicate invasive cordgrass from San Francisco Wildlife Service, Baywide / San Francisco Bay (which impacts wildlife habitat and flood 1/1/2000- 1/1/2000- Estuary Invasive Multiple Olofson $37,000,000 $50,000,000 Multi-Region protection) and restore and enhance native wetland 1/1/2020 1/1/2035 Spartina Project Environmental plants. and hundreds of landowners/ partners

54 TOTAL LEAD (AND CURRENT PHASE PROJECT SCHEDULE CURRENT PROJECT COUNTY PROJECT DESCRIPTION PARTNER) SCHEDULE TOTAL COST LOCATION (Phase; dates or (Phase; dates PHASE COST ORGS years) or years) State Coastal Living Conservancy, Shorelines: Near Restoration of living shorelines to provide protection from San Francisco Baywide / -Shore Linkages Multiple waves and erosion while providing habitat for wildlife and State University, 1/1/17-1/1/22 1/1/17-1/1/37 $10,000,000 $40,000,000 Multi-Region for San improving water quality. U.C. Davis, SFEP, Francisco Bay: EPA, NOAA, Baywide others State Coastal San Francisco Restoration of subtidal habitats including eelgrass, oyster, Conservancy, Baywide / Bay Subtidal seaweed beds, sand habitat and other submerged habitat Multiple SFEP, NOAA, 1/1/17-1/1/22 1/1/17-1/1/37 $5,000,000 $50,000,000 Multi-Region Habitat areas to provide ecosystem function an resources for a CDFW, USFWS, Restoration variety of aquatic, avian and other wildlfe species. others This project focuses on building natural shoreline systems and internal marsh features that emulate and reinforce the San Francisco processes that can sustain high marsh habitats during State University accelerated sea level rise and tidal marsh retreat. This Romberg Project will test new nature-based methods for Tiburon Center, establishing resilient and sustainable high marsh SFEI, Peter Baye, vegetation structure, and beachface nourishment along Marin County wave-eroded marsh edges to slow erosion and trigger Construction Vegetation Flood Control, natural high marsh building processes at Corte Madera (larger): 2019; $100,000 per Enhancements Town of Ecological Reserve and Blackie’s Pasture. The project will Operations, site per year Baywide / for High Tide Tiburon, CA Construction Multiple be the first to use reintroduction of a native endangered Maintenance, - (for Multi-Region Refuge and Department of (pilot): 2017-2018 salt marsh plant as a tool to enhance habitat for and Construction & Shoreline Fish and Widlife, endangered salt marsh wildlife species, California sea-blite Monitoring: Monitoring) Protection East Bay (Suaeda californica), as well as a tool for recovery of the 2020-2025 Regional Park endangered plant itself. This project would also include District, arboring of both sea-blite and pickeweed to raise their Richardson Bay stature along shoreline edges or channels, as well as Audubon, State coarse material placement along eroding shorelines to Coastal reduce erosion and feed sediment to wave built berms. Conservancy Specific sites could include Blackie’s Pasture, Giant Marsh, and Corte Madera Ecological Reserve.

55 This page intentionally left blank.

56 Agenda Item 7.A August 30, 2017

DATE: August 22, 2017 TO: STA TAC FROM: Robert Guerrero, Senior Project Manager RE: State Route (SR) 37 Corridor Project Update

Background: SR 37 is 21 miles in length from Hwy 101 in Marin County to I-80 in Solano County. The SR 37 Corridor has been divided into three Segments, Segment A which is located in Marin and Sonoma Counties, Segment B which is located in Solano and Sonoma Counties, and Segment C which is located in Solano County. Most of the immediate traffic congestion problems occur in Segment B, which is the two lanes Segment, while Segments A and C have four to six lanes (2/4 in each direction) (Attachment A). All three segments continue to experience daily traffic congestion and are projected to be impacted by future sea level rise and are vulnerable to near- term flooding.

The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and the Transportation Authorities of Marin, Sonoma, Napa and Solano Counties have funded a Project Initiation Document (PID) Equivalent for the corridor. The PID Equivalent is a Design Alternatives Assessment (DAA) and is called the SR 37 Transportation and Sea Level Rise Corridor Improvement Study. The primary focus of the SR 37 Corridor Study is Segment B, from SR 37/SR 121 intersection in Sonoma County to the Mare Island Interchange in Solano County.

The Corridor Study is being developed in two phases. The first phase will study the entire corridor and identify improvements from a corridor wide conceptual level. The second phase will focus on project specific improvements for Segment B (SR 37 from Mare Island in Solano County to SR 121/SR 37 Intersection in Sonoma County). The first phase draft study is nearly complete and is available for review and comment. The second phase is being completed in parallel and is anticipated to be completed by April 2018.

Related to this effort, on June 14th, the STA Board provided direction to STA staff to establish an Environmental Task Force for Segments B and C of the SR 37 Corridor project. The general purpose of this task force was to identify guiding principles that would later be used to help select a project and project alternatives for future engineering and environmental analysis. The task force would also help develop information that would help in the development of a “Purpose and Need” statement for future environmental analysis under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

The SR 37 Environmental Task Force consists of five Solano County elected participants:  Supervisor Erin Hannigan, Chair  Supervisor John Vasquez, Solano BCDC Representative  Robert McConnell, Vallejo Vice Mayor  Jessie Malgapo, Vallejo City Council  Elizabeth Patterson, Benicia Mayor

57 In addition, Belia Ramos, the Napa County Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) representative will be participating due to Napa County’s close rpximity to Segment C of the SR 37 Corridor.

STA SR 37 Environmental Task Force The first meeting for the Environmental Task Force is scheduled for Thursday, August 24th. The Task Force will primarily focus in three areas: developing a consolidated understanding of the ecological function of the natural and agricultural lands along the SR 37 corridor, discussing the existing transportation situation on SR 37 and its nearby alternatives along with the general impacts of alternative actions, and examining the urban land uses that generate traffic along SR 37. The information gathered on these three topics will be a vital part of establishing a record for the need to make improvements to the SR 37 corridor and the purposes of those improvements. Initially, the Task Force will be focused on updating Solano County’s Policymakers, discussing how the various topics affect Solano County, and determining priorities for each of these topic areas.

The Task Force will meet on a bi-monthly basis, with the next three meetings generally focused on information gathering information on the ecological, transportation and land use and plans along the SR 37 corridor. The later meetings will be focused on preparing the guiding principles that can help guide Executive Committee and NEPA/CEQA Lead Agency in the selection of the best project alternative. The Attached Task Force schedule provides the preliminary task force work plan (Attachment B). Once the Task Force has completed this work plan, its information will be provided to the STA Board and SR 37 Policy Committee.

Discussion: On May 10th, the STA Board approved STA staff’s recommendation to be the lead agency for developing and implementing transportation projects for the corridor in Segments B and C. Two efforts are currently underway in parallel of each other:

SR 37 Phase 1 Corridor Study MTC is anticipated to publicly release the draft Phase 1 Corridor Study at the September 25th SR 37 Policy Committee Meeting. STA staff is seeking approval from the STA Board to have the Policy Committee and MTC include the Mare Island Interchange as a priority project as part of Segment B of the Corridor Study. This will allow for the interchange to be included and cleared as part of an environmental document for Segment B. However, STA will retain the ability to pursue an environmental document for the interchange independent from other projects in Segment B if the projects as a whole get bogged down in the environmental process. Other projects likely to be identified in Segment B are the two lane section and the SR 121/SR 37 intersection.

In addition, SR 37/Fairgrounds Drive is another project STA staff is recommending as a priority for Segment C. This project has transit elements that will assist in reducing congestion on the corridor and is a major activity center with Six Flags Discovery Kingdom located adjacent to this interchange. STA is currently working with the County and the City of Vallejo to finalize a funding agreement for the design phase of the project. The Mare Island Interchange and the SR 37/Fairgrounds Dr. Project are recommended to be incorporated into a final set of STA comments for MTC and the SR 37 Policy Committee to consider for the Phase 1 Corridor Study. Attachment A is a map that illustrates the corridor segments.

58 Recommendation: Forward a recommendation to the STA Board to authorize the Executive Director to submit comments on the draft SR 37 Corridor Study that include the Mare Island Interchange as a priority for Segment B and the SR 37/Fairgrounds Drive Project as a priority for Segment C.

Attachments: A. SR 37 Corridor Segments Map B. STA SR 37 Environmental Task Force Meeting Schedule

59 This page intentionally left blank.

60 SR 37 Corridor Segments Attachment Attachment A

61 This page intentionally left blank.

62 ATTACHMENT B

STA State Route 37 Environmental Task Force Meeting Schedule

Thurs., Aug. 24th Introductions, Purpose, Orientation to Corridor and Major Issues

Oct. 19th Details on Existing Data, Studies, Plans and Major Issues:  Environmental  Transportation

Dec. 21st Details on Existing Data, Studies, Plans and Major Issues:  Environmental  Flooding  Economic/Social

Feb. 23rd Details on Existing Data, Studies, Plans and Major Issues Remaining issues requested by Committee Draft of Corridor Principles

April 27th Final Corridor Principles

June If needed

63 This page intentionally left blank.

64 Agenda Item 7.B August 30, 2017

DATE: August 17, 2017 TO: STA TAC FROM: Ryan Dodge, Associate Planner Cory Peterson, Planning Assistant RE: Update Bicycle and Pedestrian Priority Projects List for Fiscal Year (FY) 2017-18

Background: The Solano Transportation Authority (STA) administers the Countywide Bicycle and Pedestrian Plans that identify and plan for the implementation of bicycle and pedestrian transportation projects across Solano County.

The Bicycle and Pedestrian Priority Projects List is developed through a collaborative effort of the Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC), Pedestrian Advisory Committee (PAC), STA staff, and public works and planning staff from the member agencies. A review of the list is conducted on an annual basis and changes are made to reflect completed projects and changing priorities. The list creates a foundation for funding strategies with discretionary funding sources, such as Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 funds, Transportation Funds for Clean Air (TFCA) funds from the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), and Clean Air Funds (CAF) from the Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District (YSAQMD).

As a result of this prioritization and update process, our member agencies have been successful in delivering several priority bicycle and/or pedestrian projects over the past several years.

The process for updating the Bicycle and Pedestrian Priority Projects List involves STA staff beginning with previously adopted lists, eliminating completed projects, and consulting with the cities and the county on their current priorities. STA staff then identifies projects that are most ready for construction. These projects are categorized as either Tier 1 or Tier 2 projects. All other projects fall into a Tier 3 list of envisioned future projects, which are not included in the attached list since it is annually updated. In general, the following guidelines are used to assign projects to either Tier 1 or Tier 2:  Tier 1 projects are those that have (nearly) completed: o Right-of-way o Design o Environmental  Tier 2 projects have been identified as an emerging priority but have significant or unknown work relating to the Tier 1 elements above.

Discussion: The updated list, included as Attachment A, was reviewed and recommended for approval by the BAC and PAC in July and August of 2017. If funding opportunities arise during the next year, this list will be used to select which projects should receive the available funds.

65 STA is in the process of updating the Countywide Bicycle and Pedestrian Plans and combining them into a single Solano Active Transportation Plan. This update process will allow for a comprehensive update of all potential Active Transportation projects and a new prioritized list. That process should be completed in calendar year 2018, and used for future project prioritization.

Projects fully funded by not yet constructed will remain on the list until implemented. Projects will remain to reflect priorities, but also in case of additional funding needed in the future.

Recommendation: Forward a recommendation to the STA Board to approve the STA Bicycle and Pedestrian Priority Projects List for FY 2017-18 as shown in Attachment A.

Attachment: A. Bicycle and Pedestrian Priority Projects List for Fiscal Year (FY) 2017-18

66 Bicycle and Pedestrian Priority Projects for FY 2017-18, Approved By BAC and PAC Sponsor Project Description Cost Shortfall Funding Plan Committee Tier Countywide Enhanced Bikeway Enhancements to bike projects above and N/A N/A As needed Bicycle (BAC) 1 Infrastructure beyond scope of work for willing jurisdictions. i.e. green paint, vertical separation, buffered bike lanes Dixon Green Bike Lanes on Rehrmann Dr from North Lincoln St to Evans $15,000 $15,000 Seeking TDA funding Bicycle (BAC) 1 Rehrmann Drive Rd is receiving bike lanes as part of a OBAG in the amount of Safe Routes to School Project. This line item Approx $15k for CON is to enhance that project by adding green to in Fall of 2017. the bike lanes. Dixon South First Street Pedestrian safety project. Offset intersection $235,000 TBD Included in Dixon's Pedestrian (PAC) 1 Corridor Study - with several conflict points between people Capital Improvement Chestnut Street / South driving and people walking (predominantly Plan (CIP) First Street Traffic school-aged children). Signal Dixon South First Street Pedestrian safety project. Wide intersection $235,000 TBD Included in Dixon's Pedestrian (PAC) 1 Corridor Study - South with people driving at high speeds, conflicting Capital Improvement First Street / Valley with people walking (predominantly school- Plan (CIP) Glen Drive Traffic aged children). Signal Dixon / Vaca-Dixon Bike Route: Road widening to add Class II (bike lanes) on $750,000 $750,000 Possible HSIP funded Bicycle (BAC) / 1 Solano Porter Road Porter Road between West A Street and Pitt project. Status update Pedestrian (PAC) County School Road (approx. 1.5 miles). This needed in December completes the Vaca-Dixon bikeway. 2017.

Fairfield East Tabor Ave Improve pedestrian access by installing $1,700,000 $0 Fully funded. ATP Pedestrian (PAC) 1 Crossing sidewalk over an at‐grade crossing at East Cycle 3 funded Tabor Avenue and Railroad Avenue. Second project. Will remain on portion of project includes widening of priority project list until sidewalk along Tolenas Road (in Solano implemented. County) from school to East Tabor Avenue.

Fairfield Green Valley Road Proposed improvements (marked crosswalks, $150,000 $150,000 Not specifically listed Pedestrian (PAC) 1 Crossing Project flashing beacons, and curb ramps) to Ridge as a priority project in Trail crossing Green Valley Road near the Ped Plan but Westlake Drive. conceptually covered.

Solano Suisun Valley Farm to Construct 5' to 6' shoulders on Abernathy $3,030,000 $350,000 Partially funded. Bicycle (BAC) / 1 County Market Project Phase 3 Road from Rockville Road to Mankas Corners Required local match Pedestrian (PAC) Road, on Mankas Corners Road from Fairfield not identified City Limit to Abernathy Rd and on Suisun Valley Road from Fairfield City Limit to Rockville Road STA Safe Safe Routes to School The Solano Safe Routes to School (SR2S) $485,000 $85,000 Partially funded. ATP Bicycle (BAC) 1 Routes to Safety Evaluation and Program is engaging in an in-depth and Cycle 2 funded, local School Intervention Project comprehensive evaluation project addressing match needed for student travel safety, increasing physical FY2017-18 activity and measuring the efficacy of the program. The goal is to work with at least 10 schools within the county (primarily those nearest identified high collision areas). SR2S staff will evaluate schools within these high- collision areas performing bicycle and pedestrian safety audits and strategize and implement community-driven solutions in order to increase walking and biking to school and decrease the amount of pedestrian/bike fatalities and injuries nearest the school.

Suisun City McCoy Creek Trail - This project will construct a ten-foot wide $4,200,000 $0 Fully funded. ATP Pedestrian (PAC) 1 Phase II (minimum) Class I bikeway/multi-use path Cycle 3 funded approximately one mile in length. This trail will project. Will remain on connect to the completed McCoy Creek Trail - priority project list until Phase 1 segment (completed in September implemented. 2008) at Pintail Drive and will transform restricted maintenance areas along McCoy Creek/Laurel Creek into a safe, ADA compliant, recreational and educational trail.

67 Bicycle and Pedestrian Priority Projects for FY 2017-18, Approved By BAC and PAC Sponsor Project Description Cost Shortfall Funding Plan Committee Tier Vacaville Elmira Road Bike Path North Side of Elmira Road from existing 10' $815,000 $815,000 Vacaville's Priority Bicycle (BAC) 1 sidewalk from just west of Edwin Drive to Project for ATP Cycle Leisure Town Road. This project would 4 funding opportunity. provide a gap closure to the existing Elmira Road sidewalk on the north side to the Jepson Parkway. Benicia Benicia Urban Benicia waterfront between First Street and $2,687,000 $2,687,000 See BUWEMP; Pedestrian (PAC) 2 Waterfront the Marina, identified in the Benicia Urban RW/ENV clearance Improvements Waterfront Enhancement and Master Plan. needed The project includes a Class I Bay Trail segment parallel to B Street, a perimeter trail around the green, and widened First Street sidewalk to mirror the existing First Street Promenade.

Dixon Downtown Streetscape The project Includes sidewalks, benches, $1,000,000 TBD Included in Dixon's Pedestrian (PAC) 2 Project Phase 4 landscaping, crosswalks, bulbouts and street Capital Improvement lighting on two blocks of West A Street (from Plan (CIP). Part of the UPRR tracks to SR-113) and one block on Dixon Revitalization South Jackson Street and West Mayes Street. Plan.

Dixon Pond A Accessibility Parkway Road to Pitt School Road. Would $350,000 TBD Not included in Dixon's Pedestrian (PAC) 2 Project Phase 1 connect Vaca-Dixon Bikeway to SR-113 Capital Improvement (Downtown Dixon). Plan (CIP).

Dixon Pond A Accessibility Would complete multi-use pathway around $350,000 TBD Not included in Dixon's Pedestrian (PAC) 2 Project Phase 2 Pond A. Capital Improvement Plan (CIP).

Dixon Pond C Accessibility Multi-use path with landscaping around Pond $700,000 TBD Included in Dixon's Pedestrian (PAC) 2 Project C. Capital Improvement Plan (CIP)

Fairfield Fairfield to Vacaville Complete Class I bikeway (bike path) $700,000 $700,000 Bicycle (BAC) 2 Intercity Gap Closure connection from Nelson Road to the Vacaville city southern boundary Fairfield West Texas Street Enhance pedestrian linkages among the $3,000,000 $3,000,000 Seeking funding. Pedestrian (PAC) 2 Gateway Linear Park Bicycle/Pedestrian Trail, the Submitted as CTP Fairfield Transportation Center, and the Park Priority for Fairfield; Crossing Apartment Project. Specific Will be ATP Cycle 4 improvements include sidewalks, signage, application in 2018 public art and new trees.

Rio Vista Airport Rd Continue multi-use path along Airport Rd from $1,536,000 $1,336,000 Partially funded. Bicycle (BAC) 2 the current terminus at Church Rd to St. Submitted for Urban Francis Way Greening Grant, but was unsuccessful. Will be ATP Cycle 4 Candidate. Rio Vista Airport Road Bicycle Church Road to St. Francis Way. Class I $700,000 TBD Submitted for Urban Pedestrian (PAC) 2 and Pedestrian bikeway (multi-use path) or Class II bikeway Greening Grant, but Improvements (bike lanes). Project would extend existing was unsuccessful. Class I bikeway (multi-use path) on Airport Will be ATP Cycle 4 Road from Church Road to Liberty Island Candidate. Road. Rio Vista St. Francis Way Bicycle Airport Road to Rolling Green Drive. Project $386,000 TBD Submitted for Urban Pedestrian (PAC) 2 and Pedestrian would include Class II bikeways (bike lanes), Greening Grant, but Improvements curb, gutter, and sidewalk improvements. was unsuccessful. Would provide improved access to D.H. White Will be ATP Cycle 4 Elementary School. Candidate. Solano Tri-City and County Cordelia Hills Sky Valley: Cordelia Hill: $2,750,000 $590,000 Partially funded. Pedestrian (PAC) 2 County Regional Trail Transportation enhancements including $2,160,000 in federal Connections upgrade of pedestrian and bicycle corridors funds already awarded including open space acquisition along to the project; No Cordelia Hill Sky Valley and McGary Road. funds requested at this Project is predominately right of way time acquisition. Suisun City Lotz Way Class I Class I bikeway/multi-use path on Lotz Way, $1,730,000 $0 Completely funded. Bicycle (BAC) / 2 Bikeway / Multi-Use from Grizzly Island Trail at Marina Boulevard OBAG Cycle 2 Project. Pedestrian (PAC) Path to the Train Depot at Main Street May seek additional funding.

68 Bicycle and Pedestrian Priority Projects for FY 2017-18, Approved By BAC and PAC Sponsor Project Description Cost Shortfall Funding Plan Committee Tier Vacaville Elmira Road Bike Path North Side of Elmira Road from existing 10' $710,000 $710,000 RW and ENV Pedestrian (PAC) 2 sidewalk from just west of Edwin Drive to clearance needed Leisure Town Road. This project would provide a gap closure to the existing Elmira Road sidewalk on the north side to the Jepson Parkway. Vacaville Vaca Valley Parkway / I- The project consists of the construction of $14,500,000 $12,500,000 Partially funded. Pedestrian (PAC) 2 505 Corridor Multi- roundabouts at East Monte Vista Ave and OBAG Cycle 2 Project. Modal Improvements Vaca Valley Parkway and NB and SB I-505 May seek additional Project ramps, new ped/bike facilities crossing I505, funding. reduce accessibility barriers, and eliminate two existing signals.

Vallejo Bay Area Ridge Trail - Construction of Bay Area Ridge Trail TBD TBD Planning grants Pedestrian (PAC) 2 Carquinez / Vallejo Bluff segment(s) east of Carquinez Bridge on the ($250,000) awarded in south side of the City of Vallejo, and other 2016: may request potential areas. additional planning funding in 2017-18 to extend trail to existing connections, and may request funding for construction in 2018- 19

69 This page intentionally left blank.

70 Agenda Item 8.A August 30, 2017

DATE: August 18, 2017 TO: STA TAC FROM: Jayne Bauer, Marketing and Legislative Program Manager RE: Legislative Update

Background: Each year, STA staff monitors state and federal legislation that pertains to transportation and related issues. On February 8, 2017, the STA Board approved its 2017 Legislative Platform to provide policy guidance on transportation legislation and the STA’s legislative activities during 2017.

A monthly legislative update provided by STA’s State lobbyist is attached (Attachment A). An updated list of state bills of interest is available in the Legislative Bill Matrix online.

Discussion: State Transportation Funding Updates on the following are detailed in Attachment A:  Initiative to repeal SB 1 (“Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017” state transportation funding package)  Cap and Trade program extension  Amendments to RM3 legislation (SB 595 Attachment B)

STA letter urging doubling the appropriations for the Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program (TIRCP) and the Low Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP) is included here as Attachment C.

The following lists STA-supported bill status to date:

AB 28 (Frazier) - Department of Transportation: environmental review process: federal pilot program. This bill would re-enact, until January 1, 2020, the California Department of Transportation's (Caltrans') authority to waive its 11th Amendment right to sovereign immunity from lawsuits brought in federal court thereby allowing Caltrans to continue assuming the role of the United States Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT) for National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) decision making. STA Position: Support. Chaptered on March 29th.

AB 1113 (Bloom) – State Transit Assistance Program Formula Clarification This bill amends the statutes governing the State Transit Assistance (STA) program to clarify several ambiguities in law that led to administrative changes made in 2016 by the State Controller’s Office. STA Position: Support. Chaptered on July 21st.

71 AB 1324 (Gloria) – Local Sales Taxes for Transportation This bill would authorize a Metropolitan Planning Organization or Regional Transportation Planning Agency authorized to levy a sales tax to levy that tax in only a portion of the jurisdiction, as an alternative to the entire jurisdiction, in which the organization or agency has authority if approved by the required percentage of the voters in that portion of the jurisdiction. The bill would require the revenues derived from the sales tax to be used only within the area for which the tax was approved by the voters. AB 1324 would benefit counties that have transportation needs that differ between rural and suburban areas, and that have difficulty obtaining the required 2/3 voter support countywide for local transportation sales tax measures. STA Position: Support. Failed deadline, may be acted upon in January 2018.

ACA 4 (Aguiar-Curry) - Local government financing: affordable housing and public infrastructure: voter approval. This measure would lower the voter threshold to 55% for special taxes for purposes of funding the construction, rehabilitation or replacement of public infrastructure or affordable housing, which specifically includes improvements to transit and streets & highways, as well as protection from impacts of sea-level rise. This measure would also reduce the threshold to 55% for local governments to increase property taxes to cover bonded indebtedness to fund similar project types. STA Position: Support. Referred to Comm. on Local Government & Appropriations April 24th.

ACA 5 (Frazier and Newman) – Protection of Transportation Revenues AssemblyMember Frazier introduced Assembly Constitutional Amendment (ACA) 5 to dedicate for transportation purposes all vehicle fee and gasoline/ diesel tax revenues raised by SB 1. STA Position: Support. ACA 5 has been chaptered and will be on the June 2018 statewide ballot.

SB 1 (Beall) - Transportation funding. Comprehensive $52.4 billion transportation funding bill. STA Position: Support. Chaptered.

SB 595 (Beall) – Regional Measure 3 This bill is for Regional Measure 3 and would authorize the nine counties in the Bay Area to vote on an unspecified increase in tolls on the Bay Area’s bridges to be used for transportation projects throughout the region. Bay Area leaders in both houses are working on the legislation, which could take shape in the coming weeks. STA Position: Support. Amended in Assembly Transportation Committee July 19th and scheduled for hearing in Committee on Appropriations August 23rd.

SCA 6 (Wiener) – Lower Vote Threshold for Local Transportation Taxes The California Constitution subjects the imposition of a special tax by a city, county, or special district upon the approval of two-thirds of the voters. This measure would lower that threshold to 55 percent of voters for taxes for transportation purposes. STA Position: Support. Held in Appropriations Committee and under submission May 25th.

Federal Legislative Update (Akin Gump): STA’s federal legislative advocate (Susan Lent of Akin Gump) continues to work with STA staff to craft STA’s strategic objectives to align with those of the new administration. August is Congressional summer recess, but one item of note is that President Trump issued a new Executive Order on environmental streamlining August 15th. It doesn't change the law, but does demonstrate a commitment to advance projects more quickly through the federal environmental review process.

Fiscal Impact: None.

Recommendation: Informational.

Attachments: A. State Legislative Update B. SB 595 RM3 Amended 7-19-17 C. STA Letter re Cap and Trade

73 This page intentionally left blank.

August 1, 2017

TO: Board of Directors, Solano Transportation Authority

FM: Joshua W. Shaw, Partner Matt Robinson, Legislative Advocate

RE: STA Board Memo – August 2017

Legislative Update The Legislature is currently on Summer Recess and will reconvene on August 21. When they return, they will have until September 1 to move bills out of their final fiscal committees. The Legislature will adjourn the 2017-18 Legislative Session on September 15.

SB 1 Repeal As we have previously reported, on May 5, Assembly Member Travis Allen (R-Huntington Beach) filed an initiative to repeal SB 1. The initiative, entitled “ELIMINATES RECENTLY ENACTED ROAD REPAIR AND TRANSPORTATION FUNDING BY REPEALING REVENUES DEDICATED FOR THOSE PURPOSES,” was cleared for signature by the Secretary of State on July 10. The initiative must receive 365,880 valid signatures by January 8, 2018 to qualify for the next General Election ballot, slated for November, 2018. As of this writing, however, the sponsor has not begun to circulate signature petitions; in fact, Mr. Allen has sued the California Attorney General, arguing that the official ballot title & summary statement that the AG’s office prepared for those petitions is misleading. Specifically, his lawsuit says the official ballot summary misleadingly describes the initiative as a measure to repeal money for road repairs; the lawsuit also points out that the words “tax” and “fee” do not appear in the official ballot measure title.

Nonetheless, in anticipation of a potential ballot initiative, the Fix Our Roads Coalition (of which STA is a member), has been actively discussing a strategy for ensuring the initiative’s defeat.

Cap and Trade On July 25, Governor Brown signed AB 398 (E. Garcia), which extends the state’s Cap and Trade program through December 31, 2030. The bill also improves the program’s structure by establishing a price ceiling for auction allowances, limiting the use of out-of-state carbon offsets, and decreasing free carbon allowances by over 40 percent by 2030.

When the Legislature reconvenes later this summer, Legislative leaders will turn to finalizing a Cap and Trade Expenditure Plan, which could include a reconfiguration of the continuous appropriation of Cap and Trade auction proceeds established by SB 862 (Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review) [Chapter 36, Statutes of 2014]. The continuous appropriation currently supports the Transit and Intercity Capital program (TIRCP), the Low Carbon Transit Operations program (LCTOP), the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities program, and the California high-speed rail project.

Tel: 916.446.4656 Fax: 916.446.4318 1415 L Street, Suite 1000 Sacramento, CA 95814

75 RM3 For the last several months, members of the Bay Area Caucus have been meeting to discuss the potential for legislation authorizing a toll increase on the Bay Area’s bridges. Commonly referred to as Regional Measure 3, the increased toll(s) could fund a number of Bay Area transportation improvements across all nine counties. Senator Beall has authored legislation moving through the process, but it lacked significant details until quite recently. Now SB 595 authorizes the Bay Area Toll Authority to select the amount of the proposed toll increase, not to exceed $3, to be placed on the ballot for voter approval. The members of the Bay Area Caucus continue to meet regularly to hone in on a path forward for RM3, and have held several briefings with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, local agencies, and other stakeholder groups.

Recently, the bill was amended to include a list of projects for funding. In terms of benefits for Solano County, SB 595 includes the following: • I-80/680/SR 12 Interchange Improvements $175 million • Solano Westbound I-80 Truck Scales $125 million • Highway 37 Corridor Access Improvements and Sea Level Rise Adaptation $150 million • Corridor Express Lanes (I-80 Red Top Road to I505) $300 million* • Ferries (new vessels, added frequency and service expansion) $325 million*

* A portion of which could be spent in Solano County; other regional projects are also eligible for these funds

We have been very involved on your behalf in the effort to craft an RM3 path forward that favors Solano’s priorities. However, the negotiations are not yet complete: some legislators are continuing to push for different toll revenue distribution schemes than what is currently in SB 595, with some clearly desiring investments on new or added projects in certain of their jurisdictions, and/ or others advocating for enhancements to some of the existing investments.

As well, some legislators indicate they want more amendments along policy lines, such as creation of an Inspector General office to oversee expenditure of these funds by the various local agencies and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. The bill is currently in the Assembly Appropriations Committee and will be heard after the Legislature returns from Summer Recess.

76 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY JULY 19, 2017 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY JULY 3, 2017 AMENDED IN SENATE MAY 26, 2017 AMENDED IN SENATE APRIL 18, 2017 AMENDED IN SENATE APRIL 5, 2017 AMENDED IN SENATE APRIL 3, 2017 SENATE BILL No. 595

Introduced by Senator Beall (Coauthors: Senators Hill, McGuire, Skinner, Wieckowski, and Wiener) (Principal coauthors: Assembly Members Bonta, Chiu, Mullin, and Ting) (Coauthors: Assembly Members Berman, Chu, Low, Quirk, and Thurmond)

February 17, 2017

An act to amend Sections 30102.5, 30891, 30911, 30915, 30916, 30918, 30920, 30922, and 30950.3 of, and to add Sections 30914.7 and 30923 to, the Streets and Highways Code, relating to transportation, and making an appropriation therefor.

legislative counsel’s digest SB 595, as amended, Beall. Metropolitan Transportation Commission: toll bridge revenues. Existing law creates the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) as a regional agency in the 9-county San Francisco Bay area with comprehensive regional transportation planning and other related

77 SB 595 Ð 2 Ð responsibilities. Existing law creates the Bay Area Toll Authority (BATA) as a separate entity governed by the same governing board as the MTC and makes the BATA responsible for the programming, administration, and allocation of toll revenues from the state-owned toll bridges in the San Francisco Bay area. Existing law authorizes the BATA to increase the toll rates for certain purposes, including to meet its bond obligations, provide funding for certain costs associated with the bay area state-owned toll bridges, including for the seismic retro®t of those bridges, and provide funding to meet the requirements of certain voter-approved regional measures. Existing law provided for submission of 2 regional measures to the voters of 7 bay area counties in 1988 and 2004 relative to speci®ed increases in bridge auto tolls on the bay area state-owned toll bridges, subject to approval by a majority of the voters. This bill would require the City and County of San Francisco and the other 8 counties in the San Francisco Bay area to conduct a special election on a proposed increase in the amount of the toll rate charged on the state-owned toll bridges in that area to be used for unspeci®ed speci®ed projects and programs. The bill would require the BATA to select the amount of the proposed increase, not to exceed $3, to be placed on the ballot for voter approval. If approved by the voters, the bill would authorize the BATA, beginning January 1, 2019, to phase in the toll increase over a period of time and to adjust the toll increase for in¯ation after the toll increase is phased in completely. The bill would specify that, except for the in¯ation adjustment and as otherwise speci®ed in statute, the toll schedule adopted pursuant to the results of this election may not be changed without the statutory authorization of the Legislature. By requiring this election, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require the BATA to reimburse from toll revenues, as speci®ed, the counties and the City and County of San Francisco for the cost of submitting the measure to the voters. Because the bill would specify that the revenue resulting from the increased toll charge would be continuously appropriated to the MTC for expenditure, it would make an appropriation. This bill would require the BATA to establish an independent oversight committee no later than January 1, 2020, with a speci®ed membership, to ensure the toll revenues generated by the toll increase are expended consistent with a speci®ed expenditure plan. The bill would require the BATA to submit an annual report to the Legislature on the status of the projects and programs funded by the toll increase.

78 Ð 3 Ð SB 595

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above. Vote: majority. Appropriation: yes. Fiscal committee: yes. State-mandated local program: yes.

The people of the State of California do enact as follows:

line 1 SECTION 1. The Legislature ®nds and declares all of the line 2 following: line 3 (a) The San Francisco Bay area's strong economy and growing line 4 population are placing a tremendous burden on its aging line 5 transportation infrastructure. Between 2010 and 2040, the line 6 population is forecasted to grow by 2.3 million, while the number line 7 of jobs are projected to grow by 1.3 million. line 8 (b) Traf®c congestion on the region's seven state-owned toll line 9 bridges degrades the bay area's quality of life, impairs its economy, line 10 and shows no signs of abating. Between 2010 and 2015, combined line 11 volumes on the region's seven state-owned toll bridges grew by line 12 11 percent, while volumes on just the Dumbarton Bridge, the line 13 Richmond-San Rafael Bridge, and the San Mateo-Hayward Bridge line 14 grew by 20 percent. line 15 (c) In 2015, ®ve of the region's top 10 worst congested roadways line 16 were in the South Bay (San Mateo or Santa Clara Counties). line 17 (d) In the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge corridor from line 18 Hercules to San Francisco, weekday traf®c speeds average less line 19 than 35 mph from 5:35 a.m. until 7:50 p.m. line 20 (e) Weekday congestion on the west approach to the San line 21 Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge in the eastbound direction typically line 22 begins before 1 p.m. and continues until 9:30 p.m. line 23 (f) Weekday northbound traf®c congestion on State Highway line 24 Route 101 from Novato to Petaluma begins by 3 p.m. and typically line 25 lasts over three hours. line 26 (g) Daily peak-hour traf®c on State Highway Route 37 between line 27 Marin and Solano Counties jumped over 40 percent from 2010 to line 28 2015.

79 SB 595 Ð 4 Ð

line 1 (h) The region's only rail link across San Francisco Bay, the line 2 Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART), is 44 years old and faces line 3 multibillion-dollar capital funding shortfalls to accommodate line 4 growing ridership and achieve a state of good repair. Meanwhile, line 5 BART ridership is at record levels, exceeding 128 million in ®scal line 6 year 2016, a 27-percent increase from ®scal year 2010. line 7 (i) Annual ridership on ferries from Alameda, Oakland, and line 8 Vallejo to San Francisco and South San Francisco more than line 9 doubled between 2010 and 2016, from 1.1 million to 2.5 million. line 10 (j) Ridership on the weekday transbay bus service provided by line 11 the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District rose 33 percent between line 12 2012 and 2016. line 13 (k) Truck traf®c in and out of the Port of Oakland grew by 33 line 14 percent since 2000 and contributes to worsening congestion on line 15 the region's bridges and roadways. An estimated 99 percent of the line 16 containerized goods moving through northern California are loaded line 17 or discharged at the port. line 18 (l) The last time bay area voters had the opportunity to approve line 19 new funding for improvements in the bridge corridors was in 2004, line 20 when voters approved Regional Measure 2, a $1 toll increase. line 21 (m) To improve the quality of life and sustain the economy of line 22 the San Francisco Bay area, it is the intent of the Legislature to line 23 require the Metropolitan Transportation Commission to place on line 24 the ballot a measure authorizing the voters to approve an line 25 expenditure plan to improve mobility and enhance travel options line 26 on the bridges and bridge corridors to be paid for by an increase line 27 in the toll rate on the seven state-owned bridges within its line 28 jurisdiction. line 29 SEC. 2. It is the intent of the Legislature to authorize or create line 30 a transportation inspector general to conduct audits and line 31 investigations of activities involving any toll revenues generated line 32 pursuant to the regional measure described in Section 30923 of line 33 the Streets and Highways Code, if the voters approve that measure. line 34 SEC. 3. Section 30102.5 of the Streets and Highways Code is line 35 amended to read: line 36 30102.5. Consistent with Section 30918, the Bay Area Toll line 37 Authority shall ®x the rates of the toll charge, except as provided line 38 in Sections 30921 and 30923, and may grant reduced-rate and line 39 toll-free passage on the state-owned toll bridges within the line 40 jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission.

80 Ð 5 Ð SB 595

line 1 SEC. 4. Section 30891 of the Streets and Highways Code is line 2 amended to read: line 3 30891. The commission may retain, for its cost in administering line 4 this article, an amount not to exceed one-quarter of 1 percent of line 5 the revenues allocated by it pursuant to Section 30892 and of the line 6 revenues allocated by it pursuant to Sections 30913, 30914, and line 7 30914.7. line 8 SEC. 5. Section 30911 of the Streets and Highways Code is line 9 amended to read: line 10 30911. (a) The authority shall control and maintain the Bay line 11 Area Toll Account and other subaccounts it deems necessary and line 12 appropriate to document toll revenue and operating expenditures line 13 in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. line 14 (b) (1) After the requirements of any bond resolution or line 15 indenture of the authority for any outstanding revenue bonds have line 16 been met, the authority shall transfer on a regularly scheduled basis line 17 as set forth in the authority's annual budget resolution, the revenues line 18 de®ned in subdivision (b) of Sections 30913, 30914, and 30914.7 line 19 to the commission. The funds transferred are continuously line 20 appropriated to the commission to expend for the purposes line 21 speci®ed in subdivision (b) of Sections 30913, 30914, and 30914.7. line 22 (2) For the purposes of paragraph (1), the revenues de®ned in line 23 subdivision (b) of Section 30913 and subdivision (a) of Section line 24 30914 include all revenues accruing since January 1, 1989. line 25 SEC. 6. Section 30914.7 is added to the Streets and Highways line 26 Code, to read: line 27 30914.7. (a) If the voters approve a toll increase pursuant to line 28 Section 30923, the authority shall, consistent with the provisions line 29 of subdivisions (b) and (c), fund the projects and programs line 30 described in this subdivision that shall collectively be known as line 31 the Regional Measure 3 expenditure plan by bonding or transfers line 32 to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. These projects line 33 and programs have been determined to reduce congestion or to line 34 make improvements to travel in the toll bridge corridors, from toll line 35 revenues of all bridges: line 36 (1) BART Expansion Cars. Five hundred million dollars line 37 ($500,000,000). line 38 (2) Corridor Express Lanes: Interstate 80 between Alameda line 39 County and Contra Costa County, Alameda County Interstate 880, line 40 Alameda-Contra Costa Interstate 680, San Francisco Highway

81 SB 595 Ð 6 Ð

line 1 101, San Mateo Highway 101, State Route 84, State Route 92, line 2 Solano Interstate 80 Express Lanes from Red Top Road to line 3 Interstate 505. Three hundred million dollars ($300,000,000). line 4 (3) Goods Movement and Mitigation: Interstate 580 and line 5 Interstate 880 in Alameda County, Port of Oakland, Freight Rail line6 Improvements. One hundred twenty-®ve million dollars line 7 ($125,000,000). line 8 (4) Bay Trail/Safe Routes to Transit. One hundred ®fty million line 9 dollars ($150,000,000). line 10 (5) Ferries: new vessels to add frequency to existing routes and line 11 service expansion in the Counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, San line 12 Mateo, San Francisco, and Solano, and the Antioch terminal. line 13 Three hundred twenty-®ve million dollars ($325,000,000). line 14 (6) BART to Silicon Valley: Phase Two. Four hundred million line 15 dollars ($400,000,000). line 16 (7) Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit District (SMART). Forty line 17 million dollars ($40,000,000). line 18 (8) Capitol Corridor Connection. Ninety million dollars line 19 ($90,000,000). line 20 (9) Caltrain Downtown Extension: Transbay Terminal Phase line 21 Two. Three hundred ®fty million dollars ($350,000,000). line 22 (10) MUNI Expansion Vehicles. One hundred forty million line 23 dollars ($140,000,000). line 24 (11) Core Capacity Transit Improvement Serving the Bay Bridge line 25 corridor. One hundred forty million dollars ($140,000,000). line 26 (12) Alameda±Contra Costa Transit District (AC Transit): line 27 Rapid Bus Improvements. Fifty million dollars ($50,000,000). line 28 (13) New Transbay BART Tube and Approaches. Fifty million line 29 dollars ($50,000,000). line 30 (14) Tri-Valley Transit Access Improvements. One hundred line 31 million dollars ($100,000,000). line 32 (15) Eastridge to BART Regional Connector. One hundred thirty line 33 million dollars ($130,000,000). line 34 (16) San Jose Diridon Station. One hundred twenty million line 35 dollars ($120,000,000). line36 (17) Dumbarton Rail/Altamont Corridor Express line 37 (ACE)/BART/Shinn Station. One hundred thirty million dollars line 38 ($130,000,000). line 39 (18) Highway 101/State Route 92 Interchange. Fifty million line 40 dollars ($50,000,000).

82 Ð 7 Ð SB 595

line 1 (19) Contra Costa Interstate 680/State Route 4 Interchange line 2 Improvements and Transit Enhancements. One hundred ®fty million line 3 dollars ($150,000,000). line 4 (20) Marin-Sonoma Narrows. One hundred twenty-®ve million line 5 dollars ($125,000,000). line 6 (21) Solano Interstate 80/Interstate 680/State Route 12 line 7 Interchange Improvements. One hundred seventy-®ve million line 8 dollars ($175,000,000). line 9 (22) Solano West-Bound Interstate 80 Truck Scales. One line 10 hundred twenty-®ve million dollars ($125,000,000). line 11 (23) Highway 37 Corridor Access Improvements from Highway line 12 101 to Interstate 80 and Sea Level Rise Adaptation. One hundred line 13 ®fty million dollars ($150,000,000). line 14 (24) San Rafael Transit Center/SMART. Thirty million dollars line 15 ($30,000,000). line 16 (25) Marin Highway 101/580 Interchange. One hundred line 17 thirty-®ve million ($135,000,000). line 18 (26) North Bay Transit Improvements: Contra Costa, Marin, line 19 Napa, Solano, and Sonoma. One hundred million dollars line 20 ($100,000,000). line 21 (27) State Route 29, South Napa County. Twenty million dollars line 22 ($20,000,000). line 23 (b) (1) Not more than ____ 16 percent of the revenues generated line 24 from the toll increase shall be made available annually for the line 25 purpose of providing operating assistance for transit services as line 26 set forth in the authority's annual budget resolution. The funds line 27 shall be made available to the provider of the transit services line 28 subject to the performance measures described in paragraph (2). line 29 (3). If the funds cannot be obligated for operating assistance line 30 consistent with the performance measures, these funds shall be line 31 obligated for other operations consistent with this chapter. line 32 (2) The Metropolitan Transportation Commission may annually line 33 fund the following operating programs as another component of line 34 the Regional Measure 3 expenditure plan: line 35 (A) Transbay Terminal. Five million dollars ($5,000,000). line 36 (B) Ferries. Thirty-®ve million dollars ($35,000,000). line 37 (C) Regional Express Bus. Twenty million dollars ($20,000,000). line 38 (2)

83 SB 595 Ð 8 Ð

line 1 (3) Prior to the allocation of revenue for transit operating line 2 assistance under paragraph (1), paragraphs (1) and (2), the line 3 Metropolitan Transportation Commission shall: line 4 (A) Adopt performance measures related to fare-box recovery, line 5 ridership, or other indicators, as appropriate. The performance line 6 measures shall be developed in consultation with the affected line 7 project sponsors. line 8 (B) Execute an operating agreement with the sponsor of the line 9 project. This agreement shall include, but is not limited to, an line 10 operating plan that is consistent with the adopted performance line 11 measures. The agreement shall include a schedule of projected line 12 fare revenues and any other operating funding that will be dedicated line 13 to the service. For any individual project sponsor, this operating line 14 agreement may include additional requirements, as determined by line 15 the commission. line 16 (C) In an operating agreement executed pursuant to line 17 subparagraph (B), the Metropolitan Transportation Commission line 18 shall grant a project sponsor at least ®ve years to establish new or line 19 enhanced service. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission line 20 shall use a ridership forecast as the basis for performance measures line 21 adopted pursuant to subparagraph (A) and to establish performance line 22 measures in following years. If transit service does not achieve line 23 the performance targets within the timeframe granted to the project line 24 sponsor, the project sponsor shall notify the Metropolitan line 25 Transportation Commission, agree to a new timeframe determined line 26 by the commission to achieve the performance targets, and take line 27 needed steps to remedy the transit service to meet the performance line 28 standards. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission may take line 29 action to redirect funding to alternative project sponsors if the line 30 performance targets are not met within the new timeframe. line 31 (c) (1) For all projects authorized under subdivision (a), the line 32 project sponsor shall submit an initial project report to the line 33 Metropolitan Transportation Commission before July 1, ____. line 34 This report shall include all information required to describe the line 35 project in detail, including the status of any environmental line 36 documents relevant to the project, additional funds required to line 37 fully fund the project, the amount, if any, of funds expended to line 38 date, and a summary of any impediments to the completion of the line 39 project. This report, or an updated report, shall include a detailed line 40 ®nancial plan and shall notify the commission if the project sponsor

84 Ð 9 Ð SB 595

line 1 will request toll revenue within the subsequent 12 months. The line 2 project sponsor shall update this report as needed or requested by line 3 the commission. No funds shall be allocated by the commission line 4 for any project authorized by subdivision (a) until the project line 5 sponsor submits the initial project report, and the report is reviewed line 6 and approved by the commission. line 7 (2) If multiple project sponsors are listed for projects listed in line 8 subdivision (a), the commission shall identify a lead sponsor in line 9 coordination with all identi®ed sponsors, for purposes of allocating line 10 funds. For any projects authorized under subdivision (a), the line 11 commission shall have the option of requiring a memorandum of line 12 understanding between itself and the project sponsor or sponsors line 13 that shall include any speci®c requirements that must be met prior line 14 to the allocation of funds provided under subdivision (a). line 15 (d) If the voters approve a toll increase pursuant to Section line 16 30923, the authority shall within 24 months of the election date line 17 include the projects in a long-range plan. The authority shall update line 18 its long-range plan as required to maintain its viability as a strategic line 19 plan for funding projects authorized by this section. The authority line 20 shall, by January 1, 2020, submit its updated long-range plan to line 21 the transportation policy committee of each house of the line 22 Legislature for review. line 23 SEC. 7. Section 30915 of the Streets and Highways Code is line 24 amended to read: line 25 30915. With respect to all construction and improvement line 26 projects speci®ed in Sections 30913, 30914, and 30914.7, project line 27 sponsors and the department shall seek funding from all other line 28 potential sources, including, but not limited to, the State Highway line 29 Account and federal matching funds. The project sponsors and line 30 department shall report to the authority concerning the funds line 31 obtained under this section. line 32 SEC. 8. Section 30916 of the Streets and Highways Code is line 33 amended to read: line 34 30916. (a) The base toll rate for vehicles crossing the line 35 state-owned toll bridges within the geographic jurisdiction of the line 36 commission as of January 1, 2003, is as follows: line 37 line 38 Number of Axles Toll line 39 line 40 Two axles $ 1.00

85 SB 595 Ð 10 Ð

line 1 Three axles 3.00 line 2 Four axles 5.25 line 3 Five axles 8.25 line 4 Six axles 9.00 line 5 Seven axles & more 10.50 line 6 line 7 (b) If the voters approve a toll increase, pursuant to Section line 8 30921, commencing July 1, 2004, the base toll rate for vehicles line 9 crossing the bridges described in subdivision (a) is as follows: line 10 line 11 Number of axles Toll line 12 Two axles $ 2.00 line 13 Three axles 4.00 line 14 Four axles 6.25 line 15 Five axles 9.25 line 16 Six axles 10.00 line 17 Seven axles & more 11.50 line 18 line 19 (c) If the voters approve a toll increase, pursuant to Section line 20 30923, the authority shall increase the base toll rate for vehicles line 21 crossing the bridges described in subdivision (a) by the amount line 22 approved by the voters pursuant to Section 30923. The authority line 23 may, beginning January 1, 2019, phase in the toll increase over a line 24 period of time and may adjust the toll increase for in¯ation based line 25 on the California Consumer Price Index after the toll increase has line 26 been phased in completely. line 27 (d) The authority shall increase the amount of the toll only if line 28 required to meet its obligations on any bonds or to satisfy its line 29 covenants under any bond resolution or indenture. The authority line 30 shall hold a public hearing before adopting a toll schedule re¯ecting line 31 the increased toll charge. line 32 (e) Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit the line 33 adoption of either a discounted commute rate for two-axle vehicles line 34 or of special provisions for high-occupancy vehicles under terms line 35 and conditions prescribed by the authority in consultation with the line 36 department. line 37 SEC. 9. Section 30918 of the Streets and Highways Code is line 38 amended to read: line 39 30918. (a) It is the intention of the Legislature to maintain line 40 tolls on all of the bridges speci®ed in Section 30910 at rates

86 Ð 11 Ð SB 595

line 1 suf®cient to meet any obligation to the holders of bonds secured line 2 by the bridge toll revenues. The authority shall retain authority to line 3 set the toll schedule as may be necessary to meet those bond line 4 obligations. The authority shall provide at least 30 days' notice to line 5 the transportation policy committee of each house of the line 6 Legislature and shall hold a public hearing before adopting a toll line 7 schedule re¯ecting the increased toll rate. line 8 (b) The authority shall increase the toll rates speci®ed in the line 9 adopted toll schedule in order to meet its obligations and covenants line 10 under any bond resolution or indenture of the authority for any line 11 outstanding toll bridge revenue bonds issued by the authority and line 12 the requirements of any constituent instruments de®ning the rights line 13 of holders of related obligations of the authority entered into line 14 pursuant to Section 5922 of the Government Code and, line 15 notwithstanding Section 30887 or subdivision (d) of Section 30916 line 16 of this code, or any other law, may increase the toll rates speci®ed line 17 in the adopted toll schedule to provide funds for the planning, line 18 design, construction, operation, maintenance, repair, replacement, line 19 rehabilitation, and seismic retro®t of the state-owned toll bridges line 20 speci®ed in Section 30910 of this code, to provide funding to meet line 21 the requirements of Sections 30884 and 30911 of this code, and line 22 to provide funding to meet the requirements of voter-approved line 23 regional measures pursuant to Sections 30914 and 30921 of this line 24 code. line 25 (c) The authority's toll structure for the state-owned toll bridges line 26 speci®ed in Section 30910 may vary from bridge to bridge and line 27 may include discounts for vehicles classi®ed by the authority as line 28 high-occupancy vehicles, notwithstanding any other law. line 29 (d) If the authority establishes high-occupancy vehicle lane fee line 30 discounts or access for vehicles classi®ed by the authority as line 31 high-occupancy vehicles for any bridge, the authority shall line 32 collaborate with the department to reach agreement on how the line 33 occupancy requirements shall apply on each segment of highway line 34 that connects with that bridge. line 35 (e) All tolls referred to in this section and Sections 30916, line 36 31010, and 31011 may be treated by the authority as a single line 37 revenue source for accounting and administrative purposes and line 38 for the purposes of any bond indenture or resolution and any line 39 agreement entered into pursuant to Section 5922 of the Government line 40 Code.

87 SB 595 Ð 12 Ð

line 1 (f) It is the intent of the Legislature that the authority should line 2 consider the needs and requirements of both its electronic and line 3 cash-paying customers when it designates toll payment options at line 4 the toll plazas for the toll bridges under its jurisdiction. line 5 SEC. 10. Section 30920 of the Streets and Highways Code is line 6 amended to read: line 7 30920. The authority may issue toll bridge revenue bonds to line 8 ®nance any or all of the projects, including those speci®ed in line 9 Sections 30913, 30914, and 30914.7, if the issuance of the bonds line 10 does not adversely affect the minimum amount of toll revenue line 11 proceeds designated in Section 30913 and in paragraph (4) of line 12 subdivision (a) of, and subdivision (b) of, Section 30914 for rail line 13 extension and improvement projects and transit projects to reduce line 14 vehicular traf®c. A determination of the authority that a speci®c line 15 project or projects shall have no adverse effect will be binding and line 16 conclusive in all respects. line 17 SEC. 11. Section 30922 of the Streets and Highways Code is line 18 amended to read: line 19 30922. Any action or proceeding to contest, question, or deny line 20 the validity of a toll increase provided for in this chapter, the line 21 ®nancing of the transportation program contemplated by this line 22 chapter, the issuance of any bonds secured by those tolls, or any line 23 of the proceedings in relation thereto, shall be commenced within line 24 60 days from the date of the election at which the toll increase is line 25 approved. After that date, the ®nancing of the program, the issuance line 26 of the bonds, and all proceedings in relation thereto, including the line 27 adoption, approval, and collection of the toll increase, shall be held line 28 valid and incontestable in every respect. line 29 SEC. 12. Section 30923 is added to the Streets and Highways line 30 Code, to read: line 31 30923. (a) For purposes of the special election to be conducted line 32 pursuant to this section, the authority shall select an amount of the line 33 proposed increase in the toll rate, not to exceed three dollars ($3), line 34 for vehicles crossing the bridges described in Section 30910 to be line 35 placed on the ballot for approval by the voters. line 36 (b) The toll rate for vehicles crossing the bridges described in line 37 Section 30910 shall not be increased to the rate described in line 38 subdivision (c) of Section 30916 prior to the availability of the line 39 results of a special election to be held in the City and County of line 40 San Francisco and the Counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin,

88 Ð 13 Ð SB 595

line 1 Napa, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano, and Sonoma to determine line 2 whether the residents of those counties and of the City and County line 3 of San Francisco approve the toll increase. line 4 (c) The revenue derived from the toll increase shall be used to line 5 meet all funding obligations associated with projects and programs line 6 described in Section 30914.7. To the extent additional toll funds line 7 are available from the toll increase, the authority may use them line 8 for bridge rehabilitation and for projects and programs aimed at line 9 reducing congestion and improving travel options in the bridge line 10 corridors. line 11 (d) (1) Notwithstanding any provision of the Elections Code, line 12 the Board of Supervisors of the City and County of San Francisco line 13 and of each of the counties described in subdivision (b) shall call line 14 a special election to be conducted in the City and County of San line 15 Francisco and in each of the counties that shall be consolidated line 16 with the November 6, 2018, general election. line 17 (2) The following question shall be submitted to the voters as line 18 Regional Measure 3 and stated separately in the ballot from state line 19 and local measures: ªShall voters authorize the Regional Measure line 20 3 expenditure plan that does the following: line 21 (A) Directs revenues generated through the collection of bridge line 22 tolls to provide the following projects: line 23 (B) Approves a ____ toll increase and authorizes the Bay Area line 24 Toll Authority, beginning January 1, 2019, to phase in the toll line 25 increase and to adjust that amount for in¯ation after the toll line 26 increase has been phased in completely, on all toll bridges in the line 27 bay area, except the Golden Gate Bridge?º line 28 (3) The blank provision in the portion of the ballot question line 29 described in subparagraph (B) of paragraph (2) shall be ®lled in line 30 with the amount of the toll increase selected pursuant to subdivision line 31 (a). line 32 (e) The ballot pamphlet for the special election shall include a line 33 summary of the Regional Measure 3 expenditure plan regarding line 34 the eligible projects and programs to be funded pursuant to Section line 35 30914.7. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission shall line 36 prepare a summary of the Regional Measure 3 expenditure plan. line 37 (f) The county clerks shall report the results of the special line 38 election to the authority. If a majority of all voters voting on the line 39 question at the special election vote af®rmatively, the authority

89 SB 595 Ð 14 Ð

line 1 may phase in the increased toll schedule beginning January 1, line 2 2019, consistent with subdivision (c) of Section 30916. line 3 (g) If a majority of all the voters voting on the question at the line 4 special election do not approve the toll increase, the authority may line 5 by resolution resubmit the measure to the voters at a subsequent line 6 general election. If a majority of all of the voters vote af®rmatively line 7 on the measure, the authority may adopt the toll increase and line 8 establish its effective date and establish the completion dates for line 9 all reports and studies required by Sections 30914.7 and 30950.3. line 10 (h) (1) Each county and city and county shall share translation line 11 services for the ballot pamphlet and shall provide the authority a line 12 certi®ed invoice that details the incremental cost of including the line 13 measure on the ballot, as well as the total costs associated with the line 14 election. line 15 (2) The authority shall reimburse each county and city and line 16 county participating in the election for the incremental cost of line 17 submitting the measure to the voters. These costs shall be line 18 reimbursed from revenues derived from the tolls if the measure is line 19 approved by the voters, or, if the measure is not approved, from line 20 any bridge toll revenues administered by the authority. line 21 (i) If the voters approve a toll increase pursuant to this section, line 22 the authority shall establish an independent oversight committee line 23 no later than January 1, 2020, to ensure that any toll revenues line 24 generated pursuant to this section are expended consistent with line 25 the applicable requirements set forth in Section 30914.7. The line 26 oversight committee shall include two representatives from each line 27 county within the jurisdiction of the commission. Each line 28 representative shall be appointed by the applicable county board line 29 of supervisors and serve a four-year term and shall be limited to line 30 two terms. The oversight committee shall annually review the line 31 expenditure of funds by the authority for the projects and programs line 32 speci®ed in Section 30914.7 and prepare a report summarizing its line 33 ®ndings. The oversight committee may request any documents line 34 from the authority to assist the committee in performing its line 35 functions. line 36 (j) If voters approve a toll increase pursuant to this section, the line 37 authority shall annually prepare a report to the Legislature, in line 38 conformance with Section 9795 of the Government Code, on the line 39 status of the projects and programs funded pursuant to Section line 40 30914.7.

90 Ð 15 Ð SB 595

line 1 (k) Except as provided in subdivision (c) of Section 30916 and line 2 Section 30918, the toll rates contained in a toll schedule adopted line 3 by the authority pursuant to this section shall not be changed line 4 without statutory authorization by the Legislature. line 5 SEC. 13. Section 30950.3 of the Streets and Highways Code line 6 is amended to read: line 7 30950.3. (a) The authority shall prepare, adopt, and from time line 8 to time revise, a long-range plan for the completion of all projects line 9 within its jurisdiction, including those of the Regional Traf®c line 10 Relief Plan described in subdivision (c) of Section 30914 and the line 11 Regional Measure 3 expenditure plan described in subdivision (a) line 12 of Section 30914.7. line 13 (b) The authority shall give ®rst priority to projects and line 14 expenditures that are deemed necessary by the department to line 15 preserve and protect the bridge structures. line 16 SEC. 14. If the Commission on State Mandates determines line 17 that this act contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement line 18 to local agencies and school districts for those costs shall be made line 19 pursuant to Part 7 (commencing with Section 17500) of Division line 20 4 of Title 2 of the Government Code.

91 This page intentionally left blank.

August 18, 2017 Page 1 of 2

The Honorable Kevin de León The Honorable Anthony Rendon President Pro Tempore, California State Senate Speaker, California State Assembly State Capitol, Room 205 State Capitol, Room 219 Sacramento, CA 95814 Sacramento, CA 95814

RE: Double Investment in Public Transportation in FY 2017-18 Cap and Trade Expenditure Plan

Dear President pro Tempore de León and Speaker Rendon:

On behalf of Solano Transportation Authority, I write to you today to respectfully request that you strengthen the state’s commitment to public transportation and clean air by doubling the percentage of annual Cap and Trade auction proceeds directed to the Transit and Intercity Rail Capital program (TIRCP) and the Low Carbon Transit Operations program (LCTOP). These programs, which respectively receive 10% and 5% of annual Cap and Trade auction proceeds have: driven the public transportation industry’s investments in cleaner technologies, including electric transit buses and tier IV locomotives; accelerated the expansion of electrified rail throughout the state; and, increased transit service levels and operational efficiencies in disadvantaged communities. STA applied for these highly competitive funds in 2015, requesting $10M in capital funds for the new Fairfield/Vacaville Intermodal Train Station. The request included a transit operations component to connect a bus route to the station, which is located in a community of concern. STA was unsuccessful, but plans to submit project funding requests in the future. As you are aware, the transportation sector is responsible for 38% of the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the state. These emissions contribute not only to climate change, but to air quality challenges – the subject of the recently enacted AB 617 (C. Garcia) [Chapter 136, Statutes of 2017] – which disproportionately impact our state’s most vulnerable communities. These emissions are attributable to our state’s reliance on single- occupancy vehicle travel and a freight and rail network largely dependent on diesel fuel. Public transportation is the solution for reducing emissions from the transportation sector because, when it is fast and efficient, it pulls people out of their cars and puts them into a shared vehicle with low per-person emissions. Public transportation also supports other modes of zero-emission travel, like bicycling and walking. With additional investment of Cap and Trade auction proceeds, public transportation agencies like ours will be able to further invest in projects that expand capacity, increase service levels, and improve accessibility and reliability for the traveling public with a focus on low-income and disadvantaged communities. With additional funding, our agency would advance the following projects: 1. Vallejo Station Parking Structure Phase B 2. Fairfield/Vacaville Intermodal Train Station 3. SolanoExpress Intercity bus facilities and operations expansion

93 Page 2 of 2 STA Ltr. to The Honorable KdeLeon and ARendon, CA State Senate dated August 17, 2017 RE: Double Investment in Public Transportation in FY 2017-18 Cap and Trade Expenditure Plan

These projects would result in benefits that include:

• bringing transit connectivity to Vallejo (a disadvantaged community) • creating transit-oriented development around two highly used transit facilities (Vallejo Transit Center and Vallejo Ferry Station – the most heavily impacted ferry in the Bay Area) by converting surface parking lots into housing • providing passenger rail service to a growing population in Fairfield and Vacaville that is adjacent to Travis Air Force Base and other major employment centers • constructing 3 transit stops to accommodate the efficiency improvements of SolanoExpress bus service, and providing operations funds As noted in the Brown Administration’s California Transportation Plan 2040, these types of projects will be instrumental in meeting our future mobility needs and reducing GHG emissions to meet our 2030 and 2050 GHG emissions targets. Thank you for your consideration of our request. If you have any questions about the importance of the TIRCP and LCTOP to our agency and the benefits of additional investment in public transportation, please contact STA Executive Director Daryl Halls at 707-424-6075. Sincerely,

James P. Spering, Chair Solano County Supervisor, District 3 cc: The Honorable Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Governor, State of California The Honorable Holly Mitchell, Chair, Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee The Honorable Bob Wieckowski, Chair, Senate Budget Subcommittee No. 2 on Resources, Environmental Protection, Energy and Transportation The Honorable Phil Ting, Chair, Assembly Budget Committee The Honorable Richard Bloom, Chair, Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 3 on Resources and Transportation The Honorable Bill Dodd, Senate District 3 The Honorable Jim Frazier, Chair, Assembly Transportation Committee The Honorable Cecilia Aguiar-Curry, Assembly District 4 The Honorable Tim Grayson, Assembly District 14 STA Board Members

94 Agenda Item 8.B August 30, 2017

DATE: August 21, 2017 TO: STA TAC FROM: Janet Adams, Deputy Executive Director/Director of Projects RE: Discussion of 2018 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) Programming

Background: The State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) is a multi-year capital improvement program of transportation projects on and off the State Highway System, funded with revenues from the State Highway Account and other funding sources. The STIP is composed of two sub- elements: 75% to the Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP), with projects decided by regional agencies, and 25% to the Interregional Transportation Improvement Program (ITIP). The STIP cycle is programmed every two years and covers a five-year period. STA’s 2012 STIP programmed projects are shown in Attachment A. Solano County averages about $10M per 2-year STIP cycle in population shares of STIP funds.

The 2016 STIP was historic (in that the STIP fund estimate was negative creating the need to de- program $750 million in programmed projects statewide, including $6 million from Solano’s Jepson Parkway project. The passage of Senate Bill 1 (SB 1) created stability to the STIP, while it isn’t expected increase the overall average historic shares to the county, but it has restored traditional STIP funding.

Since early 2000, the STA has been programming a substantial amount of the county STIP shares to Jepson Parkway. However, the California Transportation Commission (CTC) is moving away from off system projects, like the Jepson Parkway with STIP funds. The focus is now on system (highways) projects and interregional and regional transit projects, such as the Capitol Corridor. This move was evident in 2016-17 when the Jepson Parkway allocations were placed as the lowest priority by the Commission when the limited amount of funds were being allocated.

In addition to providing stability to the STIP, SB 1 also has two new major competitive grants categories, Solutions for Congested Corridors Program ($250 million annually) and the Trade Corridors Enhancement Program ($300 million annually). These two programs are ideal for Solano County’s major priority highway projects. These projects include the I-80 Express Lanes, the I-80/I-680/State Route (SR) 12 Interchange and the I-80 Westbound Cordelia Truck Scales. However, both programs are expected to require matching funds, currently anticipated to be 30%.

On August 17, 2017, CTC adopted the 2018 STIP guidelines (Attachment A). For Solano County, the 2018 STIP Fund Estimate (Attachment B). Solano has a “Base” amount of $7.167 M. This “Base” amount is a minimum that will be available to Solano during the 2018 STIP horizon. Meaning, even if Los Angles has a $300M project (programming request in excess their county shares) and CTC uses other county’s shares, this “Base” amount will still be available to Solano.

95 Solano also has $2.774 M in Advanced Project Delivery Estimate (APDE) funds, which are funds that can be advanced from the 2020 STIP to conduct Preliminary Engineering (PE) phases on projects to get them “shovel ready.” The Unprogrammed Balance of $11,198 is available to Solano. This is the $5 M that was unallocated from Jepson Parkway and the $6 M that was deprogrammed from the 2016 STIP. These amounts left unprogrammed from the 2016 STIP are available to be reprogrammed during the 2018 STIP. The Formula Distribution of $12,404 is available to Solano, this is our normal 2018 STIP distribution. The Planning, Programming, and Monitoring (PPM) Share is $477,000 for FYs 2020-21 through 2012-23.

Discussion: Investment Plan and Prior Commitments STA staff is recommending a continued commitment to the Jepson Parkway Project for an amount to not-to-exceed $11.198 M. This amount represents the previous STIP programming commitments to the Project. The final amount programmed to the Jepson Parkway will be based on matching funding commitments from the two local partners. Currently, the Vacaville next segment has $3.3 M STIP funding programmed for FY 2018-19. Additionally, the Fairfield Vacaville Train Station Project has an unfunded need to complete a Train Station Depot building. STA staff will be meeting with these two cities over the next month to determine the final programming recommendation for these local projects and the willingness of each city to commit to providing the necessary match funding to complete the remaining phases of the project.

As previously mentioned, the I-80/I-680/SR 12 Project remains a priority project for funding from SB 1 competitive grants categories. The next phase of this Project that needs to be made shovel ready based on recent STA Board direction, is the Phase 2A construction package (Attachment C). The overall project cost is estimated at $75 M. The amount needed for design is between $8 M to $10 M. This amount, if programmed to the Project, will be part of the match requirements.

Another relatively new and evolving priority for the STA is SR 37. With the SR 37 Corridor Plan wrapping up in 2018, the next step will be funding of the Environmental Document for the priority segment. While this next Phase of the Project could costs up to $30 M, staff is looking at the STIP to provide matching funds to get this effort initiated and to attract other funding partners. While the STIP investment may be around $5 M, a portion of the needed amount, it represents a commitment of Solano County to the project. The final determination of programming to SR 37 will be based on meetings to be held with Caltrans and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission on a funding plan.

2018 STIP Development Schedule The following is a 2018 STIP development schedule including STA TAC, STA Board, MTC, and CTC meetings:

August 30, 2017 TAC STIP 2018 info (update on STIP) September 13, 2017 STA Board STIP 2018 info September 27, 2017 TAC recommends 2018 STIP project recommendations to STA Board October 11, 2017 STA Board approves 2018 STIP Solano project recommendations to MTC October 13, 2017 Deadline for CMAs to submit project listings to MTC December 20, 2017 MTC approves 2018 Bay Area RTIP recommendations to CTC March 21, 2018 CTC adopts 2018 STIP

Fiscal Impact: In committing 2018 STIP PPM funds, STA will be continuing its commitment to facilitating planning, programming, and project monitoring activities in Solano County. The programming of Solano’s STIP funds are at the discretion of the STA Board.

Recommendation: Informational.

Attachments: A. This attachment has been posted on STA’s Website. Click here for immediate review and printing: CTC 2018 STIP Guidelines B. MTC’s 2018 STIP Fund Estimate County Targets, 8-04-2017 C. Jepson Parkway Corridor & Segments D. Listing of Three I-80 Projects E. I-80/I-680/SR 12 Interchange Construction Package 2A F. Information on Train Station

97 This page intentionally left blank.

98 MTC Resolution No. 4308 Attachment 1-B Numbers based on Final Draft 2018 STIP FE (CTC dated 8/4/17) Draft 2018 STIP Fund Estimate County Targets 8/4/2017 Metropolitan Transportation Commission All numbers in thousands

Table 1: County Guaranteed Minimum (Base) 2018 STIP FY 2019-20 Base Share Alameda 8,789 Contra Costa 15,815 Marin 0 Napa 2,847 San Francisco 0 San Mateo 11,938 Santa Clara 20,982 Solano 7,167 Sonoma 0 County Totals 67,538

Table 2: County Share Targets a b c a+b+c=d e d+e=f Through 2016 STIP 2018 STIP 2018 STIP 2018 STIP FY 2022-23 Carryover Regional Target APDE Target + New Distrib. Balance Set-aside* Capacity Formula Dist. APDE Alameda 40,024 8,789 (5,063) 43,750 8,950 52,700 Contra Costa 27,372 44,039 (31,090) 40,321 6,121 46,442 Marin 7,484 (32,447) (571) 0 1,674 0 Napa 4,927 6,514 (376) 11,065 1,102 12,167 San Francisco 20,304 (3,989) (1,548) 14,767 4,540 19,307 San Mateo 20,661 30,068 (1,598) 49,131 4,620 53,751 Santa Clara 47,354 20,982 (3,632) 64,704 10,589 75,293 Solano 12,404 11,198 (945) 22,657 2,774 25,431 Sonoma 15,197 (16,876) (1,177) 0 3,408 552 County Totals 195,727 68,278 (46,000) 246,395 43,778 285,643

Note: Counties with negative balance have a "$0" new share. * Regional set-aside includes $31 million from ARRA/Caldecott payback, and $15 million from SFOBB Bike/Ped Access projects (both deleted in 2016 STIP)

Table 3: Planning, Programming, and Monitoring Amounts FY 2020-21, FY 2021-22, and FY 2022-23 g h g-h=i j i-j=k f-i=m PPM Limit Currently PPM MTC Share for CMA Share for 2018 STIP FY 2020-21 Programmed Available for FY 2020-21 FY 2020-21 CMA Target FY 2021-22 for Programming FY 2021-22 FY 2021-22 Capacity FY 2022-23 FY 2020-21 MTC+CMA FY 2022-23 FY 2022-23 less PPM** Alameda 2,001 0 2,001 466 1,535 41,749 Contra Costa 1,369 0 1,369 302 1,067 38,952 Marin 374 0 374 87 287 0 Napa 246 0 246 53 193 10,819 San Francisco 1,015 0 1,015 237 778 13,752 San Mateo 1,033 0 1,033 246 787 48,098 Santa Clara 2,368 0 2,368 544 1,824 62,336 SolanoDRAFT 620 0 620 143 477 22,037 Sonoma 762 0 762 171 591 0 County Totals 9,788 0 9,788 2,249 7,539 237,743 ** Assumes CMA programs up to PPM limit.

J:\PROJECT\Funding\RTIP\18 RTIP\FE Targets\[DRAFT 2018 STIP FE Targets 2017-08-04.xlsx]2017-08-04

99 Jepson Parkway Project Phasing Plan Jepson Parkway Phase 3B

Rd City of Vacaville

Town

Construction: Future $30M Leisure

Jepson Parkway Phase 3A City of Vacaville Construction: FY 2018‐19 $3.3M STIP

Jepson Parkway Phase 1 City of Vacaville Construction: FY 2016‐17 $19.38M STIP

Jepson Parkway Phase 2B City of Fairfield Construction: Pending $32.6M Total Cost

Jepson Parkway Phase 2A City of Fairfield Construction: FY 2016‐17 $13.8M STIP

100 Draft 2018 STIP Priorities

Local match for following SB1 Eligible Projects DRAFT 2018 STIP PRIORITIES 2018 State Transportation Improvement Program $12.4M I‐80/I‐680/SR 12 Interchange (Phases 2a, 2 and 3) $360M I‐80 Express Lane (Red Top Road in Fairfield to I‐505 in Vacaville) $120M I‐80 Westbound Truck Scales $170M

101 102 $77$&+0(17

Attachment#2ͲEstimateforIntermodalStationBuilding Notes: 1) Constructionestimatebasedon'SchematicBallParkCostEstimateforIntermodalStation'preparedbyFMGArchitectsand datedMarch7,2016.SeeProjectCostEstimateAttachment#2A.

2) BuildingConceptualOverview(FMGArchitects,December2015).SeeProjectCostEstimateAttachment#2B. 3) Cityhascompleted50%ofthepreͲconstructiontasksassociatedwiththeseimprovements.Thisincludesthecompletionof thefollowingtasks:conceptualdesign,environmentalclearancesandlandacquisition/rightͲofͲwayclearance. Item DESCRIPTION PERCENTAGE TOTAL Notes # 1 Building $1,744,900.00 2OverhangandArticulation$ 250,000.00 3Misc.siteamenitiesandimprovements$ 250,000.00 4 Identifyingsign $ 150,000.00 5 SubtotalConstructionCost $2,394,900.00 GeneralContractor'sMobilizationOverhead 6 25.00%$ 598,725.00 andProfit

BasedonItem#5.Construction 7 EscalationtoConstruction 9.00%$ 215,541.00 CostIndexfromENR,escalated from2015to2018$.

ConstructionphaseengineeringandProject 8 5.00%$ 119,745.00 BasedonItem#5. Management 9ConstructionManagementandInspection 10.00%$ 239,490.00 BasedonItem#5. 10 Contingency 20.00%$ 478,980.00 BasedonItem#5. 11 TotalPhase3ConstructionCost $4,047,381.00

Amtrak, New Fairfield-Vacaville103 Intermodal Station 21 This page intentionally left blank.

104

Agenda Item 8.C August 30, 2017

DATE: August 21, 2017 TO: STA TAC FROM: Janet Adams, Deputy Executive Director/Director of Projects RE: Status of Senate Bill 595 Future Bridge Toll Expenditure Plan

Background: Bridge Tolls On March 2, 2004, Bay Area voters passed Regional Measure 2 (RM 2), raising the toll on the seven state-owned bridges in the Bay Area by $1.00. This extra dollar is to fund various transportation projects within the region that have been determined to reduce congestion or to make improvements to travel in the toll corridors. The projects are specifically identified in Senate Bill (SB) 916. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) manages the RM 2 funding for projects and programs, and both MTC and the STA are project sponsors for most of Solano County capital RM 2 projects for a total of $184 M with the STA, the Cities of Benicia, Fairfield, Vacaville and Vallejo, and SolTrans serve as project implementing agencies, depending on the project. In addition, the I-80/I-680/State Route (SR) 12 Interchange Complex also received $100 million from toll bridge revenues. Further, the bridge toll fund provide an annual operating revenue of nearly $2 million for SolanoExpress and $2.7 million for the ferry system annual operating. Currently these operating funds have no annual adjustments to provide for increasing operating costs.

These bridge toll funds have been essential in providing Solano County with the opportunity to improve multi-modal mobility. The funds have in some cases fully funded the improvements, but they also leveraged other state and federal funds. However, there is still a significant amount of important projects that need to be invested in to reduce congestion in Solano County. These include investments in highway and transit facilities as well as the continued dedication to SolanoExpress operating.

Discussion: Raising the Bay Area Bridge Toll is a two step process, the first step to legislative authority and the second step is Bay Area voter approval. The legislative authority would be provided in Senate Bill 595 (Beall) (Attachment A). This Bill provides for the Expenditure Plan that would go to voters. The Bill has recently passed a major committee, the Assembly Transportation Committee. Attachment B summarizes the current Expenditure Plan. For Solano County, this Plan provides for earmarks for the 80/680/12 Interchange, I-80 Truck Scales and State Route 37. It also provides for an opportunity for the Regional Programs that include the Bay Trail/Sae Routes to Transit, the Corridor Express Lanes, Ferry’s (new vessels, service frequency and expansion) and North Bay Transit Improvements.

At this time, this is an informational item for the STA TAC and Board. As this bill moves forward, it is expected that adjustments will be made to the Expenditure Plan.

105

Fiscal Impact: None.

Recommendation: Informational.

Attachments: A. SB 595 Beall (July 17, 2017) B. SB 595 Expenditure Plan (July 17, 2017) C. List of STA Adopted RM 3 Priorities

106

SB-595 Metropolitan Transportation Commission: toll bridge revenues.(2017-2018) BILL START

AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY JULY 19, 2017

AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY JULY 03, 2017

AMENDED IN SENATE MAY 26, 2017

AMENDED IN SENATE APRIL 18, 2017

AMENDED IN SENATE APRIL 05, 2017

AMENDED IN SENATE APRIL 03, 2017

CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE— 2017–2018 REGULAR SESSION

SENATE BILL No. 595

February 17, 2017

107 An act to amend Sections 30102.5, 30891, 30911, 30915, 30916, 30918, 30920, 30922, and 30950.3 of, and to add Sections 30914.7 and 30923 to, the Streets and Highways Code, relating to transportation, and making an appropriation therefor.

LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST

SB 595, as amended, Beall. Metropolitan Transportation Commission: toll bridge revenues.

Existing law creates the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) as a regional agency in the 9-county San Francisco Bay area with comprehensive regional transportation planning and other related responsibilities. Existing law creates the Bay Area Toll Authority (BATA) as a separate entity governed by the same governing board as the MTC and makes the BATA responsible for the programming, administration, and allocation of toll revenues from the state-owned toll bridges in the San Francisco Bay area. Existing law authorizes the BATA to increase the toll rates for certain purposes, including to meet its bond obligations, provide funding for certain costs associated with the bay area state-owned toll bridges, including for the seismic retrofit of those bridges, and provide funding to meet the requirements of certain voter-approved regional measures. Existing law provided for submission of 2 regional measures to the voters of 7 bay area counties in 1988 and 2004 relative to specified increases in bridge auto tolls on the bay area state-owned toll bridges, subject to approval by a majority of the voters.

This bill would require the City and County of San Francisco and the other 8 counties in the San Francisco Bay area to conduct a special election on a proposed increase in the amount of the toll rate charged on the state-owned toll bridges in that area to be used for unspecified specified projects and programs. The bill would require the BATA to select the amount of the proposed increase, not to exceed $3, to be placed on the ballot for voter approval. If approved by the voters, the bill would authorize the BATA, beginning January 1, 2019, to phase in the toll increase over a period of time and to adjust the toll increase for inflation after the toll increase is phased in completely. The bill would specify that, except for the inflation adjustment and as otherwise specified in statute, the toll schedule adopted pursuant to the results of this election may not be changed without the statutory authorization of the Legislature. By requiring this election, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require the BATA to reimburse from toll revenues, as specified, the counties and the City and County of San Francisco for the cost of submitting the measure to the voters. Because the bill would specify that the revenue resulting from the increased toll charge would be continuously appropriated to the MTC for expenditure, it would make an appropriation.

This bill would require the BATA to establish an independent oversight committee no later than January 1, 2020, with a specified membership, to ensure the toll revenues generated by the toll increase are expended consistent with a specified expenditure plan. The bill would require the BATA to submit an annual report to the Legislature on the status of the projects and programs funded by the toll increase.

This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

DIGEST KEY Vote: MAJORITY Appropriation: YES Fiscal Committee: YES Local Program: YES

BILL TEXT THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:

(a) The San Francisco Bay area’s strong economy and growing population are placing a tremendous burden on its aging transportation infrastructure. Between 2010 and 2040, the population is forecasted to grow by 2.3 million, while the number of jobs are projected to grow by 1.3 million.

(b) Traffic congestion on the region’s seven state-owned toll bridges degrades the bay area’s quality of life, impairs its economy, and shows no signs of abating. Between 2010 and 2015, combined volumes on the region’s seven state-owned toll bridges grew by 11 percent, while volumes on just the Dumbarton Bridge, the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge, and the San Mateo-Hayward Bridge grew by 20 percent.

108 (c) In 2015, five of the region’s top 10 worst congested roadways were in the South Bay (San Mateo or Santa Clara Counties).

(d) In the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge corridor from Hercules to San Francisco, weekday traffic speeds average less than 35 mph from 5:35 a.m. until 7:50 p.m.

(e) Weekday congestion on the west approach to the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge in the eastbound direction typically begins before 1 p.m. and continues until 9:30 p.m.

(f) Weekday northbound traffic congestion on State Highway Route 101 from Novato to Petaluma begins by 3 p.m. and typically lasts over three hours.

(g) Daily peak-hour traffic on State Highway Route 37 between Marin and Solano Counties jumped over 40 percent from 2010 to 2015.

(h) The region’s only rail link across San Francisco Bay, the Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART), is 44 years old and faces multibillion-dollar capital funding shortfalls to accommodate growing ridership and achieve a state of good repair. Meanwhile, BART ridership is at record levels, exceeding 128 million in fiscal year 2016, a 27-percent increase from fiscal year 2010.

(i) Annual ridership on ferries from Alameda, Oakland, and Vallejo to San Francisco and South San Francisco more than doubled between 2010 and 2016, from 1.1 million to 2.5 million.

(j) Ridership on the weekday transbay bus service provided by the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District rose 33 percent between 2012 and 2016.

(k) Truck traffic in and out of the Port of Oakland grew by 33 percent since 2000 and contributes to worsening congestion on the region’s bridges and roadways. An estimated 99 percent of the containerized goods moving through northern California are loaded or discharged at the port.

(l) The last time bay area voters had the opportunity to approve new funding for improvements in the bridge corridors was in 2004, when voters approved Regional Measure 2, a $1 toll increase.

(m) To improve the quality of life and sustain the economy of the San Francisco Bay area, it is the intent of the Legislature to require the Metropolitan Transportation Commission to place on the ballot a measure authorizing the voters to approve an expenditure plan to improve mobility and enhance travel options on the bridges and bridge corridors to be paid for by an increase in the toll rate on the seven state-owned bridges within its jurisdiction.

SEC. 2. It is the intent of the Legislature to authorize or create a transportation inspector general to conduct audits and investigations of activities involving any toll revenues generated pursuant to the regional measure described in Section 30923 of the Streets and Highways Code, if the voters approve that measure.

SEC. 3. Section 30102.5 of the Streets and Highways Code is amended to read:

30102.5. Consistent with Section 30918, the Bay Area Toll Authority shall fix the rates of the toll charge, except as provided in Sections 30921 and 30923, and may grant reduced-rate and toll-free passage on the state-owned toll bridges within the jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission.

SEC. 4. Section 30891 of the Streets and Highways Code is amended to read:

30891. The commission may retain, for its cost in administering this article, an amount not to exceed one-quarter of 1 percent of the revenues allocated by it pursuant to Section 30892 and of the revenues allocated by it pursuant to Sections 30913, 30914, and 30914.7.

SEC. 5. Section 30911 of the Streets and Highways Code is amended to read:

30911. (a) The authority shall control and maintain the Bay Area Toll Account and other subaccounts it deems necessary and appropriate to document toll revenue and operating expenditures in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.

109 (b) (1) After the requirements of any bond resolution or indenture of the authority for any outstanding revenue bonds have been met, the authority shall transfer on a regularly scheduled basis as set forth in the authority’s annual budget resolution, the revenues defined in subdivision (b) of Sections 30913, 30914, and 30914.7 to the commission. The funds transferred are continuously appropriated to the commission to expend for the purposes specified in subdivision (b) of Sections 30913, 30914, and 30914.7.

(2) For the purposes of paragraph (1), the revenues defined in subdivision (b) of Section 30913 and subdivision (a) of Section 30914 include all revenues accruing since January 1, 1989.

SEC. 6. Section 30914.7 is added to the Streets and Highways Code, to read:

30914.7. (a) If the voters approve a toll increase pursuant to Section 30923, the authority shall, consistent with the provisions of subdivisions (b) and (c), fund the projects and programs described in this subdivision that shall collectively be known as the Regional Measure 3 expenditure plan by bonding or transfers to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. These projects and programs have been determined to reduce congestion or to make improvements to travel in the toll bridge corridors, from toll revenues of all bridges:

(1) BART Expansion Cars. Five hundred million dollars ($500,000,000).

(2) Corridor Express Lanes: Interstate 80 between Alameda County and Contra Costa County, Alameda County Interstate 880, Alameda-Contra Costa Interstate 680, San Francisco Highway 101, San Mateo Highway 101, State Route 84, State Route 92, Solano Interstate 80 Express Lanes from Red Top Road to Interstate 505. Three hundred million dollars ($300,000,000).

(3) Goods Movement and Mitigation: Interstate 580 and Interstate 880 in Alameda County, Port of Oakland, Freight Rail Improvements. One hundred twenty-five million dollars ($125,000,000).

(4) Bay Trail/Safe Routes to Transit. One hundred fifty million dollars ($150,000,000).

(5) Ferries: new vessels to add frequency to existing routes and service expansion in the Counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, San Mateo, San Francisco, and Solano, and the Antioch terminal. Three hundred twenty-five million dollars ($325,000,000).

(6) BART to Silicon Valley: Phase Two. Four hundred million dollars ($400,000,000).

(7) Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit District (SMART). Forty million dollars ($40,000,000).

(8) Capitol Corridor Connection. Ninety million dollars ($90,000,000).

(9) Caltrain Downtown Extension: Transbay Terminal Phase Two. Three hundred fifty million dollars ($350,000,000).

(10) MUNI Expansion Vehicles. One hundred forty million dollars ($140,000,000).

(11) Core Capacity Transit Improvement Serving the Bay Bridge corridor. One hundred forty million dollars ($140,000,000).

(12) Alameda–Contra Costa Transit District (AC Transit): Rapid Bus Improvements. Fifty million dollars ($50,000,000).

(13) New Transbay BART Tube and Approaches. Fifty million dollars ($50,000,000).

(14) Tri-Valley Transit Access Improvements. One hundred million dollars ($100,000,000).

(15) Eastridge to BART Regional Connector. One hundred thirty million dollars ($130,000,000).

(16) San Jose Diridon Station. One hundred twenty million dollars ($120,000,000).

(17) Dumbarton Rail/Altamont Corridor Express (ACE)/BART/Shinn Station. One hundred thirty million dollars ($130,000,000).

(18) Highway 101/State Route 92 Interchange. Fifty million dollars ($50,000,000).

(19) Contra Costa Interstate 680/State Route 4 Interchange Improvements and Transit Enhancements. One hundred fifty million dollars ($150,000,000).

(20) Marin-Sonoma Narrows. One hundred twenty-five million dollars ($125,000,000).

(21) Solano Interstate 80/Interstate 680/State Route 12 Interchange Improvements. One hundred seventy-five million dollars ($175,000,000).

110 (22) Solano West-Bound Interstate 80 Truck Scales. One hundred twenty-five million dollars ($125,000,000).

(23) Highway 37 Corridor Access Improvements from Highway 101 to Interstate 80 and Sea Level Rise Adaptation. One hundred fifty million dollars ($150,000,000).

(24) San Rafael Transit Center/SMART. Thirty million dollars ($30,000,000).

(25) Marin Highway 101/580 Interchange. One hundred thirty-five million ($135,000,000).

(26) North Bay Transit Improvements: Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, Solano, and Sonoma. One hundred million dollars ($100,000,000).

(27) State Route 29, South Napa County. Twenty million dollars ($20,000,000).

(b) (1) Not more than ____ 16 percent of the revenues generated from the toll increase shall be made available annually for the purpose of providing operating assistance for transit services as set forth in the authority’s annual budget resolution. The funds shall be made available to the provider of the transit services subject to the performance measures described in paragraph (2). (3). If the funds cannot be obligated for operating assistance consistent with the performance measures, these funds shall be obligated for other operations consistent with this chapter.

(2) The Metropolitan Transportation Commission may annually fund the following operating programs as another component of the Regional Measure 3 expenditure plan:

(A) Transbay Terminal. Five million dollars ($5,000,000).

(B) Ferries. Thirty-five million dollars ($35,000,000).

(C) Regional Express Bus. Twenty million dollars ($20,000,000). (2) (3) Prior to the allocation of revenue for transit operating assistance under paragraph (1), paragraphs (1) and (2), the Metropolitan Transportation Commission shall:

(A) Adopt performance measures related to fare-box recovery, ridership, or other indicators, as appropriate. The performance measures shall be developed in consultation with the affected project sponsors.

(B) Execute an operating agreement with the sponsor of the project. This agreement shall include, but is not limited to, an operating plan that is consistent with the adopted performance measures. The agreement shall include a schedule of projected fare revenues and any other operating funding that will be dedicated to the service. For any individual project sponsor, this operating agreement may include additional requirements, as determined by the commission.

(C) In an operating agreement executed pursuant to subparagraph (B), the Metropolitan Transportation Commission shall grant a project sponsor at least five years to establish new or enhanced service. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission shall use a ridership forecast as the basis for performance measures adopted pursuant to subparagraph (A) and to establish performance measures in following years. If transit service does not achieve the performance targets within the timeframe granted to the project sponsor, the project sponsor shall notify the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, agree to a new timeframe determined by the commission to achieve the performance targets, and take needed steps to remedy the transit service to meet the performance standards. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission may take action to redirect funding to alternative project sponsors if the performance targets are not met within the new timeframe.

(c) (1) For all projects authorized under subdivision (a), the project sponsor shall submit an initial project report to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission before July 1, ____. This report shall include all information required to describe the project in detail, including the status of any environmental documents relevant to the project, additional funds required to fully fund the project, the amount, if any, of funds expended to date, and a summary of any impediments to the completion of the project. This report, or an updated report, shall include a detailed financial plan and shall notify the commission if the project sponsor will request toll revenue within the subsequent 12 months. The project sponsor shall update this report as needed or requested by the commission. No funds shall be allocated by the commission for any project authorized by subdivision (a) until the project sponsor submits the initial project report, and the report is reviewed and approved by the commission.

(2) If multiple project sponsors are listed for projects listed in subdivision (a), the commission shall identify a lead sponsor in coordination with all identified sponsors, for purposes of allocating funds. For any projects authorized under subdivision (a), the commission shall have the option of requiring a memorandum of understanding between itself and the project sponsor or sponsors that shall include any specific requirements that must be met prior to the allocation of funds provided under subdivision (a).

111 (d) If the voters approve a toll increase pursuant to Section 30923, the authority shall within 24 months of the election date include the projects in a long-range plan. The authority shall update its long-range plan as required to maintain its viability as a strategic plan for funding projects authorized by this section. The authority shall, by January 1, 2020, submit its updated long- range plan to the transportation policy committee of each house of the Legislature for review.

SEC. 7. Section 30915 of the Streets and Highways Code is amended to read:

30915. With respect to all construction and improvement projects specified in Sections 30913, 30914, and 30914.7, project sponsors and the department shall seek funding from all other potential sources, including, but not limited to, the State Highway Account and federal matching funds. The project sponsors and department shall report to the authority concerning the funds obtained under this section.

SEC. 8. Section 30916 of the Streets and Highways Code is amended to read:

30916. (a) The base toll rate for vehicles crossing the state-owned toll bridges within the geographic jurisdiction of the commission as of January 1, 2003, is as follows:

Number of Axles Toll

Two axles $ 1.00

Three axles 3.00

Four axles 5.25

Five axles 8.25

Six axles 9.00

Seven axles & more 10.50

(b) If the voters approve a toll increase, pursuant to Section 30921, commencing July 1, 2004, the base toll rate for vehicles crossing the bridges described in subdivision (a) is as follows:

Number of axles Toll

Two axles $ 2.00

Three axles 4.00

Four axles 6.25

Five axles 9.25

Six axles 10.00

Seven axles & more 11.50

(c) If the voters approve a toll increase, pursuant to Section 30923, the authority shall increase the base toll rate for vehicles crossing the bridges described in subdivision (a) by the amount approved by the voters pursuant to Section 30923. The authority may, beginning January 1, 2019, phase in the toll increase over a period of time and may adjust the toll increase for inflation based on the California Consumer Price Index after the toll increase has been phased in completely.

112 (d) The authority shall increase the amount of the toll only if required to meet its obligations on any bonds or to satisfy its covenants under any bond resolution or indenture. The authority shall hold a public hearing before adopting a toll schedule reflecting the increased toll charge.

(e) Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit the adoption of either a discounted commute rate for two-axle vehicles or of special provisions for high-occupancy vehicles under terms and conditions prescribed by the authority in consultation with the department.

SEC. 9. Section 30918 of the Streets and Highways Code is amended to read:

30918. (a) It is the intention of the Legislature to maintain tolls on all of the bridges specified in Section 30910 at rates sufficient to meet any obligation to the holders of bonds secured by the bridge toll revenues. The authority shall retain authority to set the toll schedule as may be necessary to meet those bond obligations. The authority shall provide at least 30 days’ notice to the transportation policy committee of each house of the Legislature and shall hold a public hearing before adopting a toll schedule reflecting the increased toll rate.

(b) The authority shall increase the toll rates specified in the adopted toll schedule in order to meet its obligations and covenants under any bond resolution or indenture of the authority for any outstanding toll bridge revenue bonds issued by the authority and the requirements of any constituent instruments defining the rights of holders of related obligations of the authority entered into pursuant to Section 5922 of the Government Code and, notwithstanding Section 30887 or subdivision (d) of Section 30916 of this code, or any other law, may increase the toll rates specified in the adopted toll schedule to provide funds for the planning, design, construction, operation, maintenance, repair, replacement, rehabilitation, and seismic retrofit of the state-owned toll bridges specified in Section 30910 of this code, to provide funding to meet the requirements of Sections 30884 and 30911 of this code, and to provide funding to meet the requirements of voter-approved regional measures pursuant to Sections 30914 and 30921 of this code.

(c) The authority’s toll structure for the state-owned toll bridges specified in Section 30910 may vary from bridge to bridge and may include discounts for vehicles classified by the authority as high-occupancy vehicles, notwithstanding any other law.

(d) If the authority establishes high-occupancy vehicle lane fee discounts or access for vehicles classified by the authority as high-occupancy vehicles for any bridge, the authority shall collaborate with the department to reach agreement on how the occupancy requirements shall apply on each segment of highway that connects with that bridge.

(e) All tolls referred to in this section and Sections 30916, 31010, and 31011 may be treated by the authority as a single revenue source for accounting and administrative purposes and for the purposes of any bond indenture or resolution and any agreement entered into pursuant to Section 5922 of the Government Code.

(f) It is the intent of the Legislature that the authority should consider the needs and requirements of both its electronic and cash- paying customers when it designates toll payment options at the toll plazas for the toll bridges under its jurisdiction.

SEC. 10. Section 30920 of the Streets and Highways Code is amended to read:

30920. The authority may issue toll bridge revenue bonds to finance any or all of the projects, including those specified in Sections 30913, 30914, and 30914.7, if the issuance of the bonds does not adversely affect the minimum amount of toll revenue proceeds designated in Section 30913 and in paragraph (4) of subdivision (a) of, and subdivision (b) of, Section 30914 for rail extension and improvement projects and transit projects to reduce vehicular traffic. A determination of the authority that a specific project or projects shall have no adverse effect will be binding and conclusive in all respects.

SEC. 11. Section 30922 of the Streets and Highways Code is amended to read:

30922. Any action or proceeding to contest, question, or deny the validity of a toll increase provided for in this chapter, the financing of the transportation program contemplated by this chapter, the issuance of any bonds secured by those tolls, or any of the proceedings in relation thereto, shall be commenced within 60 days from the date of the election at which the toll increase is approved. After that date, the financing of the program, the issuance of the bonds, and all proceedings in relation thereto, including the adoption, approval, and collection of the toll increase, shall be held valid and incontestable in every respect.

SEC. 12.

113 Section 30923 is added to the Streets and Highways Code, to read:

30923. (a) For purposes of the special election to be conducted pursuant to this section, the authority shall select an amount of the proposed increase in the toll rate, not to exceed three dollars ($3), for vehicles crossing the bridges described in Section 30910 to be placed on the ballot for approval by the voters.

(b) The toll rate for vehicles crossing the bridges described in Section 30910 shall not be increased to the rate described in subdivision (c) of Section 30916 prior to the availability of the results of a special election to be held in the City and County of San Francisco and the Counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano, and Sonoma to determine whether the residents of those counties and of the City and County of San Francisco approve the toll increase.

(c) The revenue derived from the toll increase shall be used to meet all funding obligations associated with projects and programs described in Section 30914.7. To the extent additional toll funds are available from the toll increase, the authority may use them for bridge rehabilitation and for projects and programs aimed at reducing congestion and improving travel options in the bridge corridors.

(d) (1) Notwithstanding any provision of the Elections Code, the Board of Supervisors of the City and County of San Francisco and of each of the counties described in subdivision (b) shall call a special election to be conducted in the City and County of San Francisco and in each of the counties that shall be consolidated with the November 6, 2018, general election.

(2) The following question shall be submitted to the voters as Regional Measure 3 and stated separately in the ballot from state and local measures: “Shall voters authorize the Regional Measure 3 expenditure plan that does the following:

(A) Directs revenues generated through the collection of bridge tolls to provide the following projects:

(B) Approves a ____ toll increase and authorizes the Bay Area Toll Authority, beginning January 1, 2019, to phase in the toll increase and to adjust that amount for inflation after the toll increase has been phased in completely, on all toll bridges in the bay area, except the Golden Gate Bridge?”

(3) The blank provision in the portion of the ballot question described in subparagraph (B) of paragraph (2) shall be filled in with the amount of the toll increase selected pursuant to subdivision (a).

(e) The ballot pamphlet for the special election shall include a summary of the Regional Measure 3 expenditure plan regarding the eligible projects and programs to be funded pursuant to Section 30914.7. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission shall prepare a summary of the Regional Measure 3 expenditure plan.

(f) The county clerks shall report the results of the special election to the authority. If a majority of all voters voting on the question at the special election vote affirmatively, the authority may phase in the increased toll schedule beginning January 1, 2019, consistent with subdivision (c) of Section 30916.

(g) If a majority of all the voters voting on the question at the special election do not approve the toll increase, the authority may by resolution resubmit the measure to the voters at a subsequent general election. If a majority of all of the voters vote affirmatively on the measure, the authority may adopt the toll increase and establish its effective date and establish the completion dates for all reports and studies required by Sections 30914.7 and 30950.3.

(h) (1) Each county and city and county shall share translation services for the ballot pamphlet and shall provide the authority a certified invoice that details the incremental cost of including the measure on the ballot, as well as the total costs associated with the election.

(2) The authority shall reimburse each county and city and county participating in the election for the incremental cost of submitting the measure to the voters. These costs shall be reimbursed from revenues derived from the tolls if the measure is approved by the voters, or, if the measure is not approved, from any bridge toll revenues administered by the authority.

(i) If the voters approve a toll increase pursuant to this section, the authority shall establish an independent oversight committee no later than January 1, 2020, to ensure that any toll revenues generated pursuant to this section are expended consistent with the applicable requirements set forth in Section 30914.7. The oversight committee shall include two representatives from each county within the jurisdiction of the commission. Each representative shall be appointed by the applicable county board of supervisors and serve a four-year term and shall be limited to two terms. The oversight committee shall annually review the expenditure of funds by the authority for the projects and programs specified in Section 30914.7 and prepare a report summarizing its findings. The oversight committee may request any documents from the authority to assist the committee in performing its functions.

(j) If voters approve a toll increase pursuant to this section, the authority shall annually prepare a report to the Legislature, in conformance with Section 9795 of the Government Code, on the status of the projects and programs funded pursuant to Section 30914.7.

114 (k) Except as provided in subdivision (c) of Section 30916 and Section 30918, the toll rates contained in a toll schedule adopted by the authority pursuant to this section shall not be changed without statutory authorization by the Legislature.

SEC. 13. Section 30950.3 of the Streets and Highways Code is amended to read:

30950.3. (a) The authority shall prepare, adopt, and from time to time revise, a long-range plan for the completion of all projects within its jurisdiction, including those of the Regional Traffic Relief Plan described in subdivision (c) of Section 30914 and the Regional Measure 3 expenditure plan described in subdivision (a) of Section 30914.7.

(b) The authority shall give first priority to projects and expenditures that are deemed necessary by the department to preserve and protect the bridge structures.

SEC. 14. If the Commission on State Mandates determines that this act contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement to local agencies and school districts for those costs shall be made pursuant to Part 7 (commencing with Section 17500) of Division 4 of Title 2 of the Government Code.

115 This page intentionally left blank.

116

July 13, 2017

TO: Board of Directors, Solano Transportation Authority

FM: Joshua W. Shaw, Partner Matt Robinson, Legislative Advocate

RE: SB 595 (Beall) – Regional Measure 3

Toll Bridge Increase Bill Passes Key Committee The bill authorizing a toll increase on the Bay Area’s seven bridges, SB 595 (Beall), commonly referred to as Regional Measure 3, passed out of the Assembly Transportation Committee.

The increased tolls could fund a number of Bay Area transportation improvements across all nine counties. For the last several months, members of the Bay Area Caucus have been meeting to discuss the potential expenditure program and other policy matters for possible inclusion in the bill. In the last 48-60 hours, Senator Jim Beall (the author and Chair of the Senate Transportation Committee) and Assemblymember Jim Frazier (Chair of the Assembly Transportation Committee) worked with the members of the Bay Area delegation to come up with a near-consensus package of expenditure investments, as well as guidelines for several policy provisions.

That bill was heard in and passed out of Chair Frazier’s Assembly Transportation Committee today, on a vote of 10-2 (with two members abstaining).

Notably, the package agreed to today by the two Chairs includes these priority projects of the Solano Transportation Authority, at these corresponding amounts: • I-80/680/SR 12 Interchange Improvements $175 million • Solano Westbound I-80 Truck Scales $125 million • Highway 37 Corridor Access Improvements and Sea Level Rise Adaptation $150 million • Corridor Express Lanes (I-80 Red Top Road to I505) $300 million* • Ferries (new vessels, added frequency and service expansion) $325 million*

* A portion of which could be spent in Solano County; other regional projects are also eligible for these funds

Additionally, there are other funding programs which could benefit Solano County. Please see the attachment for the detailed investment list that was distributed in committee today.

We note that in the last day or two Chair Frazier was quite successful in increasing the share of funding allocated to several of the projects listed above, projects of particular importance to the Solano Transportation Authority.

Tel: 916.446.4656 Fax: 916.446.4318 1415 L Street, Suite 1000 Sacramento, CA 95814

117 Not Done Yet? Before voting for the bill today, several committee members – including Chair Frazier – indicated they hope to continue discussions on the distribution of toll revenues, some clearly desiring more investments on projects in certain of their jurisdictions not listed here, and/ or for enhancements to some of the exiting investments listed. As well, some members indicated they wanted more amendments along policy lines, such as creation of an Inspector General office to oversee expenditure of these funds by the various local agencies and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission.

Of particular note, Assemblymember Aguiar-Curry stated that she is very concerned about the impact of potential toll increases on her constituents, many of whom she noted pay not just one but two tolls on their trips west. In committing that he would work on finding a way to reduce the economic impact on such commuters, Senator Beall acknowledged that was a concern not only of Assemblymember Aguiar- Curry’s, but that he would also work on the same concern expressed by Chair Frazier and Senator Dodd.

We will continue to report to you as the bill progresses.

118 119 120 Solano County Priority Projects and Operating Needs (Future Bridge Toll)

4/26/2017 10-Year* 10-Year* 10-Year Project Project $1 Toll $2 Toll $3 Toll Project Title Sponsor Number Cost Increase Increase Increase ($214 M) ($428 M) ($642 M)

1 I-80 Corridor Goods Movement Corridor STA Improvements (Freight) $100 M $200 M $300 M 1.1 WB Truck Scales Relocation $170 M

I-80/I-680/SR 12 Interchange • Package 2A – WB 12 Jameson to EB I-80 ($75M) • Package 2 – I-680/Red Top Interchange ($65M) • Package 3 – WB I-80/SB I-680 Connector ($165M) 1.2 • Package 4 – NB I-680/EB I-80 Connector ($100M) $630 M • Package 5 – SR 12/Red Top/Business Center Dr. Extension ($125M) • Package 6 – I-680/I-80 HOV Connectors ($100M)

2 I-80 Corridor MLIP/SolanoExpress STA $114 M $228 M $342 M

2.1 I-80 Express Lanes $180 M

2.2 Fairfield Transportation Center $50 M

2.2 Vallejo Station Phase B $28 M

2.2 SR 37/Fairgrounds Dr. Transit Access & Center $121 M

2.3 SolanoExpress - Bus Capital $26.8 M

2.3 SolanoExpress - Capacity Expansion $12.5 M

State Route 37 - Project 3 STA $30 M $30 M $30 M Approval/Environmental Document (PA/ED)

3.1 SR 37 PA/ED $30 M $30 M $30 M $30 M

* If 10 Year Plan adopted, then request new Expenditure Plan every 10 years * Solano County Residents pay 14% of Bay Area Bridge Tolls - STA seeking Return to Source for Our Regional Projects

Contact Information: Daryl Halls, Executive Director Solano Transportation Authority [email protected] (707) 424-6075

121 This page intentionally left blank.

122 Agenda Item 8.D August 30, 2017

DATE: August 18, 2017 TO: STA TAC FROM: Liz Niedziela, Transit Program Manager Brandon Thomson, Transit Mobility Coordinator RE: Senate Bill 1 (SB 1) and State Transit Assistance Funds Population Based Priorities

Background: In April 2017 Senate Bill 1 (SB 1) – the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 – was passed by a two-thirds majority in the California Legislature and signed into law by Governor Jerry Brown. As the largest transportation investment in California history, SB 1 is expected to raise $52.4 billion for transportation investments statewide over the next decade. By 2018-19, MTC estimates SB 1 will generate more than $365 million per year for transportation in the nine-county Bay Area. Most of that funding will be directed to tackling the enormous backlog of maintenance and repairs for our local streets, roads and public transit systems. Funding will also be available for mobility improvements and expanding bicycle and pedestrian access. The Bay Area is also well-positioned to benefit from the new statewide competitive grant programs to reduce congestion and improve freight movement along trade corridors.

Revenues to pay for SB 1 programs will come from new transportation-related fees and adjustments to state taxes on diesel fuel and gasoline. SB 1 will effectively take the state gas tax back where it used to be 20 years ago. In 1994, the base excise tax on gasoline was 18 cents per gallon, or around $3 dollars per tank of gas, as a result of the voter-approved gas tax increase in Proposition 111. That rate has been fixed for more than two decades, even though $3 buys significantly less maintenance and construction than it did in the 1990’s. SB 1 sets the excise tax on gasoline at 30 cents per gallon – equivalent to what 18 cents in 1994 would be worth today.

The second part of the state gas tax is a price-based excise tax, which SB 1 sets at 17.3 cents per gallon beginning in 2019 – precisely where it was set when the gas tax swap was enacted in 2011. SB 1 eliminates the yearly adjustment based on the price of fuel, which has resulted in wild swings from a high of 21.5 cents per gallon in 2013-14 to a low of 9.8 cents per gallon today.

Discussion: SB 1 provides a significant infusion of funding for public transit, including formula-based and competitive funding. The State Transit Assistance (STA) program, the state’s flexible transit funding program which may be used for capital or operating purposes, would be boosted by approximately $250 million per year from an increase in the diesel sales tax rate of 3.5 percent, though actual revenues will depend on the price of diesel fuel. These funds would augment the existing STA program and would not be subject to additional requirements or conditions. MTC estimates the Bay Area would receive approximately

123 $70 million more per year in revenue-based STA funds and $24 million more per year in population-based funds.

STA staff recommends prioritizing needs for the increased amounts of SB 1 Population Based Funds. STA has identified two countywide priorities; Intercity Taxi Scrip Phase 2 and expanding SolanoExpress service. Staff is proposing the STA Board submit a letter to MTC specifying these countywide priorities for these new funds in advance of these funds being included in a new regional program.

Recommendation: Informational.

Attachment: A. Estimate of STAF in Senate Bill 1for Population Based Funds

124 Estimate of State Transit Assistance Funding in Senate Bill 1 (Beall/Frazier)

Baseline Current STA Estimate of Net Estimate of Net Increase in Bay Area Transit Operators Estimates Funding (FY 2016-17 Increase in FY 2018-19 FY 2017-18* Estimate) Estimate*

Statewide STA Funding $ 266,873,000 $ 166,666,500 $ 250,000,000 Alameda CTC - Corresponding to ACE $ 186,347 $ 116,275 $ 174,413 Caltrain $ 3,877,168 $ 2,419,246 $ 3,628,873 County Connection $ 438,211 $ 273,431 $ 410,147 City of Dixon $ 3,400 $ 2,121 $ 3,182 ECCTA (Tri Delta Transit) $ 202,949 $ 126,635 $ 189,952 City of Fairfield $ 85,636 $ 53,434 $ 80,151 Golden Gate Transit $ 3,432,072 $ 2,141,518 $ 3,212,280 City of Healdsburg $ (744) $ 224 $ 336 Livermore Amador Transit Authority $ 177,130 $ 110,524 $ 165,786 Marin Transit $ 639,229 $ 398,861 $ 598,293 Napa Valley Transit Authority $ 44,265 $ 27,620 $ 41,430 City of Petaluma $ 9,942 $ 6,204 $ 9,306 City of Rio Vista $ 530 $ 488 $ 732 SamTrans $ 2,384,429 $ 1,487,818 $ 2,231,729 City of Santa Rosa $ 97,323 $ 60,727 $ 91,090 Solano County Transit $ 199,935 $ 124,754 $ 187,131 Sonoma County Transit $ 105,377 $ 65,752 $ 98,628 City of Union City $ 29,967 $ 18,698 $ 28,048 Valley Transportation Authority $ 9,173,929 $ 5,724,279 $ 8,586,427 VTA - Corresponding to ACE $ 199,485 $ 124,473 $ 186,710 WCCTA (Western Contra Costa Transit Authority) $ 229,652 $ 143,296 $ 214,945 WETA $ 943,358 $ 588,629 $ 882,945 SUBTOTAL $ 22,459,586 $ 14,015,008 $ 21,022,533 AC Transit $ 6,938,750 $ 4,329,588 $ 6,494,389 BART $ 15,941,572 $ 9,947,101 $ 14,920,667 SFMTA $ 29,034,278 $ 18,116,589 $ 27,174,911 SUBTOTAL $ 51,914,600 $ 32,393,279 $ 48,589,967 Total Revenue Based Funds $ 74,374,186 $ 46,408,287 $ 69,612,500 Population Based Funds $ 26,001,993 $ 16,249,984 $ 24,375,000 Bay Area Grand Total $ 100,376,179 $ 62,658,271 $ 93,987,500

* $250 million assumed statewide. FY 2017-18 amount is estimated at 66 percent of revenue forecast since diesel sales tax increase takes effect November 1, 2017. Also note transit operator shares are based on FY 2014-15 revenue-based STA factors. Actual funding amounts should be expected to change and will not be known until State Controller issues fund estimate in August 2017.

Source: Metropolitan Transportation Commissions. Contact: Rebecca Long at [email protected]

125 This page intentionally left blank.

126 Agenda Item 8.E August 30, 2017

DATE: August 17, 2017 TO: STA TAC FROM: Anthony Adams, Project Manager RE: One Bay Area Grant (OBAG) Cycle 2 Funding Agreements Update

Background: Every four to five years, federal cycle funds are available for distribution at the regional level. In the San Francisco Bay Area, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) calls these federal cycle funds the One Bay Area Grant (OBAG). MTC has now set out policies and established funding amounts for the second cycle of OBAG called OBAG 2. This covers Fiscal Years (FYs) 2017-18 through 2021-22. Based on MTC’s criteria for distribution, population and housing production, STA was allocated a total $21.17M over the next five years.

At its meeting on September 14, 2016, the STA Board programmed $2.75 million in Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds to sustain and continue the Solano Safe Routes to School and Solano Mobility/Rideshare Programs, $6.86 million in OBAG 2 Surface Transportation Program (STP) funds to fund STA’s planning, project delivery and fund programming efforts over the five year cycle.

At the May 10, 2017 STA Board meeting, $4.64M in CMAQ funds were programmed for the following projects. 1. Benicia’s Park Rd Project, $2,000,000 2. Vacaville’s I-505/Vaca Valley Pkwy Project, $1,907,456 3. Fairfield’s Grange Middle School SR2S, $260,000 4. STA’s SR2S Program, $178,547 5. STA’s Mobility Call Center, $300,000 In addition, $5.9 million in STP funds was programmed for local road rehabilitation projects at local priority projects to the Cities and $1.056 million FAS funds was programmed to the County. Finally, $2.05 million in PCA funds was also programmed to the County for the Suisun Valley Phase 2 project.

Discussion: OBAG Cycle 2 Funding Agreements & Checklist An updated template of the OBAG Cycle 2 funding agreement was approved by the STA TAC at their May 14, 2017 meeting. The due date for this agreement was set at July 31, 2017. To date, the cities of Fairfield and Benicia have submitted an executed funding agreement; the cities of Dixon and Rio Vista did not receive OBAG funding (their funding shares were swapped out for other non-federal funds) and therefore do not need to have a funding agreement. The following is a status update provided by the remaining agencies:

127 Solano County: Funding Agreement on August Council Agenda Vacaville: Funding agreement expected by end of September Vallejo: Funding agreement on August 22nd Council Agenda Suisun City: Has yet to schedule the agreement on their Council Agenda

Fiscal Impact: No direct impact to the STA’s General Fund.

Recommendation: Informational.

128 Agenda Item 8.F August 30, 2017

DATE: August 17, 2017 TO: STA TAC FROM: Anthony Adams, Project Manager RE: 2017 Solano Travel Safety Plan Update

Background: The Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) is a bi-annual funding program for local safety projects. Every two years, a Call for Projects is released with jurisdictions applying based on accident data. If a particular location has a high incidents of accidents, then depending on the preferred treatment, a project would receive a Benefit/Cost (B/C) ratio. A B/C ratio above a certain number, 3.5 for cycle 8, would mean the project is eligible for HSIP funding. While the Program is “competitive” it is also a “formula” based program, with most applicants receiving an award.

$10 million from the HSIP was set aside and exchanged for state funds to implement a new safety analysis program, the Systemic Safety Analysis Report Program (SSARP). The intent of the SSARP is to assist local agencies in performing collision analysis, identifying safety issues on their roadway network, and developing a list of systemic low-cost countermeasures that can be used to prepare future HSIP and other safety program applications. STA was awarded a $555,555 grant for a countywide safety analysis study, the largest grant awarded statewide during this grant cycle. This grant will build on the recently adopted 2016 Solano Safety Plan, which identified 76 locations, by identifying additional locations and prescribing potential treatments. The primary goal is to identify locations throughout Solano County where high- benefit and low-cost safety countermeasures may be implemented in order to save the most lives.

STA selected DKS and Associates to develop the 2017 Solano Travel Safety Plan. Their schedule consisted of having locations identified in May, which were confirmed by member agencies in June. These identified were analyzed for treatment and HSIP eligibility.

Discussion: On August 9th and 10th DKS and Associates met with STA and our member agencies for one- hour workshops. These workshops were intended to propose a “menu” of treatments at each location, provide their corresponding collision “costs,” and go over the types of collisions occurring at these locations with member agencies. DKS requested that each local agency return the list of their locations and preferred treatments types by August 18th. These selected treatment types will be analyzed and corresponding B/C ratios will be developed and provided by the next September 27th TAC meeting.

The next steps are to provide member agencies with safety locations, proposed treatments, and B/C ratios. Each local agency will select their preferred treatment for each location. The 2 or 3 top locations per jurisdiction will have an HSIP application developed for them in early 2018.

Fiscal Impact: None.

Recommendation: Informational. 129 This page intentionally left blank.

130 Agenda Item 8.G August 30, 2017

DATE: August 17, 2017 TO: STA TAC FROM: Anthony Adams, Project Manager RE: Project Delivery Update

Background: As the County Transportation Authority and Congestion Management Agency (CMA) for Solano County, the Solano Transportation Authority (STA) works with its eight member agencies to allocate and program federal, state and regional transportation funds and to coordinate the programming and delivery of federal and state funded transportation projects. To aid in the delivery of locally sponsored projects, a Solano Project Delivery Working Group was formed, which assists in updating the STA’s Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) on changes to State and Federal project delivery policies and updates the TAC about project delivery deadlines.

The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC)’s Resolution 3606 describes delivery policies for the San Francisco Bay Area. MTC monitors projects that do not meet stated deadlines and reprograms funds to other project in the region; Caltrans further enforces the deadline by not supplying an E-76 authorization for construction past stated deadlines. Projects programmed in Fiscal Year (FY) 2017-18 should have provided their Request for Authorization (RFA) to proceed with obligation from Caltrans by MTC’s November 1, 2017 deadline. Projects that fail to meet this deadline are subject to funds being reprogrammed to later years or loss of funds.

Discussion: PROJECT DELIVERY STATUS Project on Schedule The list is an update received from PDWG members August Project Behind Schedule 2017. Under MTC Review In Danger of Losing Funds FY 2015-16 OBAG Projects Project Sponsor Project Name Update Rio Vista SR12 SR2S Crossing Construction complete Solano County Suisun Valley Bike Construction complete and Ped Imps Suisun City Suisun-Fairfield Construction complete Intercity Rail Station Suisun City Driftwood Dr. SR2S Project Under Construction. Expected completion Project end of August. Vacaville Vacaville SR2S Construction complete Project Vallejo Vallejo SR2S Project Construction complete

131 Solano Countywide has three OBAG Cycle 1 projects scheduled for obligation in FY 2016-17. Those projects and their statuses are included below: FY 2016-17 OBAG Projects Project Sponsor Project Name Update Vacaville Alison Dr Bike/Ped Project under construction. Vallejo Downtown Streetscape Phase IV E-76 Issued May 30th. Project obtained additional funding and is working with contractor extend project limits. Dixon SR2S Project Project bids came back high. Dixon is requesting TDA funds to fill shortfall. Project will also request additional TDA funding to provide green bike lanes. BAC and STA to consider request in September/October.

Solano County and its cities also have a total of 14 Local Safety Program (HSIP) projects in Cycle 5, 6, and 7; totaling $5.8M. HSIP Cycle 8 projects must request RFA by June 30th. HSIP Projects Project Sponsor Project Name Update Cycle 5 Solano County Midway/Sievers Rd Project Complete Solano County Solano County Guardrail Project Project Complete 2013 Solano County Pleasants Valley Rd Project Complete. Vallejo Sonoma Blvd Improvements Caltrans has indicated that they will provide a permit for this project. Two final comments are being resolved by consultant by end of August. RFA will be submitted in late mid-September. Cycle 6 Fairfield Travis Blvd Striping Project Complete Fairfield North Texas at Acacia St Left Project Complete Turn Phase Solano County Cordelia-Lake Herman Rd Project Complete

Solano County Hartley-Rockville Rd Safety Project Complete Improvements Solano County Dixon Ave-Putah Creek Rd Widening complete, Slurry completed, project awaiting close-out. Suisun City Walters Rd/Pintail Dr Project Complete Cycle 7 Suisun City EB State Rt. 12 between Advertising for CON in late 2017. Pennsylvania Ave and Marina Blvd

132 Suisun City 1) Sunset Ave between Highway In conversation with Caltrans to obtain 12 and a point approx. 300 feet encroachment approval, still need to north of Railroad Ave East. 2) complete design. Advertisement for Walters Rd between Highway 12 CON expected in late 2017. and E. Tabor Ave. Benicia The intersection of East 5th St Design contract bids came back high, and Vecino St, and along East seeking additional funding or scope 5th St between I-780 and Vecino revision. St Benicia The intersection of Military Currently under contract with designer. West, West 7th St, Carolina Dr, RFA for CON expected in early 2018 and Buena Vista Cycle 8 Various Locations: Upgrade existing painted edge lines and PE E-76 Obtained, Field review centerlines to thermoplastic with Solano County complete, RFP compiled will be raised pavement markers released in September. (RPMs) and thermoplastic markings for stop signs Various Locations: Install new PE E-76 Obtained, Field review Solano County guardrail and upgrade existing complete, RFP compiled will be guardrail. released in September.

ATP Cycle 2 Project Project Sponsor Project Name Update STA, Vallejo, Improvements at 7 Funds for PSE phase allocated, amendment to Benicia schools switch implementing agency from STA to Vallejo on August CTC Agenda. RFQ is to be issued in late August.

ATP Cycle 3 Project Project Sponsor Project Name Update Vallejo Bay Trail/Vine Trail Kick-off meeting with Caltrans in July. Field review requested from Caltrans. RFP for Env and Design released week of August 7th. Suisun City McCoy Creek Phase 2 Field review package being compiled. Will be submitted in September. Fairfield E. Tabor/Tolenas Elem Project manager left for another position. SR2S Interwest will be hired as the project manager. Field review package expected in Spring 2018.

Federal Earmark Project Sponsor Project Name Update Solano County Redwood Pkwy- FMS listing is being updated with additional Fairgrounds Dr $94k in funding for FY 17/18. PE obligation expected in Spring 2018.

133 This page intentionally left blank.

134 UPCOMING PROJECT DELIVERY DEADLINES HSIP Deadlines Cycle 7 HSIP program: PE Authorization: Past Due CON Authorization: December 31, 2018 (RFA due October 1, 2018)

Cycle 8 HSIP program: PE Authorization: September 30, 2017 (RFA due June 30, 2017) CON Authorization: December 31, 2019 (RFA due October 1, 2019)

INACTIVE OBLIGATIONS UPDATE To adhere to FHWA project delivery guidelines and MTC’s Resolution 3606, project sponsors must invoice for obligated projects every 6 months. If a project has not been invoiced during the previous 6 months, it is placed on the Caltrans Inactive List. More information regarding Inactive Obligations and its repercussions can be found on Caltrans Local Assistance website: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LocalPrograms/Inactiveprojects.htm

This version of the inactive obligation list was substantial. Numerous jurisdictions had multiple projects that were listed as inactive. This is likely a result of summer vacations and a lack of meetings in July. Every project sponsor was emailed their list of inactive projects and assured STA that they would be invoicing Caltrans by the August 21st deadline.

Fiscal Impact: None

Recommendation: Informational.

135 This page intentionally left blank.

136 Agenda Item 8.H August 30, 2017

DATE: August 30, 2017 TO: STA TAC FROM: Judy Kowalsky, Accounting Technician RE: Fiscal Year (FY) 2016-17 Abandoned Vehicle Abatement (AVA) Program Third Quarter Report

Background: The Solano Transportation Authority (STA) administers the Abandoned Vehicle Abatement (AVA) Program for Solano County. These administrative duties include disbursing funds collected by the State Controller's Office from the Department of Motor Vehicle (DMV) vehicle registration fee of $1 per registered vehicle, using the funding formula of 50% based on population and 50% on vehicles abated.

The AVA Member Agencies for Solano County are the City of Benicia, City of Dixon, City of Fairfield, City of Rio Vista, City of Suisun City, City of Vacaville, City of Vallejo, and County of Solano.

Discussion: For the Third Quarter, STA received the allocation from the State Controller’s Office in the amount of $103,989 and has deducted $3,119 for administrative costs. The STA disbursed cost reimbursement to member agencies for the Third Quarter in the total amount of $87,694. The remaining AVA fund balance after the third quarter disbursement to the member agencies is $37,492.

Attachment A is a matrix summarizing the AVA Program activities through the Third Quarter FY 2016-17 and is compared to the total FY 2015-16 numbers of abated vehicles and cost reimbursements submitted by the members of the Solano County’s AVA Program. This matrix shows total program activities at 116% compared to the FY 2015-16.

The Cities of Fairfield and Vallejo have abated more vehicles to date as compared to all of FY 2015- 16. The Solano County Department of Environmental Management abated over 190 vehicles at one county property location in the third quarter.

The City of Rio Vista continues to have no report of abated vehicles for the quarter.

Fiscal Impact: None

Recommendation: Informational.

Attachment: A. Summary of Solano Abandoned Vehicle Abatement (AVA) Program for FY 2016-17 and FY 2015-16

137 ATTACHMENT A

Summary of Solano Abandoned Vehicle Abatement (AVA) Program for FY 2016-17 and FY 2015-16 Third Quarter Ending March 31, 2017

FY 2016-17 (Q1 – Q3) FY 2015-16

# of % of Abated # of Reimbursed Cost per Abated Reimbursed Cost per Vehicle from Abated Amount Abatement Vehicles Amount Abatement Prior FY Vehicles

City of Benicia 382 $9,314 $24 87% 441 $17,142 $39

City of Dixon 121 $8,877 $73 59% 204 $19,483 $96

City of Fairfield 2,446 $72,901 $30 119% 2,047 $97,435 $48

City of Rio Vista 0 $0 $0 0% 0 $0 $0

City of Suisun 206 $14,126 $68 93% 221 $24,834 $112

City of Vacaville 82 $32,866 $400 91% 90 $48,411 $538

City of Vallejo 3,353 $112,959 $34 122% 2,745 $197,408 $72

Solano County Unincorporated 201 $2,122 $11 609% 33 $4,561 $138 area

Total 6,791 $253,166 $37 116% 5,871 $409,274 $71

The total remaining AVA fund available after the second quarter disbursement to member agencies is $37,492. This amount is available for disbursement to member agencies utilizing the funding formula, in addition to the State Controller’s Office allocation for the fourth quarter FY 2016-17.

138 Agenda Item 8.I August 30, 2017

DATE: August 17, 2017 TO: STA TAC FROM: Cory Peterson, Planning Assistant RE: Summary of Funding Opportunities

Discussion: Below is a list of funding opportunities that will be available to STA member agencies during the next few months, broken up by Federal, State, and Local. Attachment A provides further details for each program.

AMOUNT APPLICATION FUND SOURCE AVAILABLE DEADLINE Regional September 29, 2017 Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) IDEA: (Category 1) 1. $13 million Innovative Deployments to Enhance Arterials November 17, 2017 (Category 2) **Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) 2. Anticipated $5 million November 3, 2017 Charge Program Carl Moyer Off-Road Equipment Replacement Program (for Approximately $10 Due On First-Come, 3. Sacramento Metropolitan Area) million First-Served Basis Due On First-Come, Air Resources Board (ARB) Clean Vehicle Rebate Project Up to $7,000 rebate 4. First-Served Basis (CVRP) per light-duty vehicle (Waitlist) Approximately $5,000 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) Hybrid Due On First-Come, 5. to $45,000 per Electric Vehicle Purchase Vouchers (HVIP) (for fleets) First-Served Basis qualified request State

1. Caltrans Adaptation Planning Grant Program $7 million October 20, 2017

Federal

Up to $10,000 per 1. People For Bikes Community Grant October 13, 2017 applicant

Fiscal Impact: None.

Recommendation: Informational.

Attachment: A. Detailed Funding Opportunities Summary

139 This page intentionally left blank.

140 ATTACHMENT A

The following funding opportunities will be available to the STA member agencies during the next few months. Please distribute this information to the appropriate departments in your jurisdiction.

Fund Application Application Amount Program Description Proposed Additional Source Contact** Deadline/Eligibility Availabl Submittal Information e

Regional Grants Metropolitan Linda Lee September 29, 2017 Approx. IDEA provides a funding opportunities to cities, N/A Certain types of projects Transportatio MTC (Category 1, $13 counties, and transit agencies to deploy qualify for either Category n [email protected] commercially available million advanced technologies along their arterials to 1 or 2. For more Commission (415) 778-5225 technologies) improve mobility, sustainability, and safety across information, visit MTC’s (MTC) all modes. Agencies may deploy mature, website on the grant: Robert Rich November 17, 2017 commercially available technologies (Category 1), http://mtc.ca.gov/our- IDEA: MTC (Category 2, or integrate newer connected and automated work/operate- Innovative [email protected] connected/automated technologies (Category 2). Goal is to improve coordinate/arterial- Deployments (415) 778-6621 vehicle technologies) travel time and safety on arterials across the Bay operations/idea- to Enhance Area. Paid for through federal funds. innovative-deployments- Arterials enhance-arterials BAAQMD Grants Programs November 3, 2017 $5 million The Charge Program is an incentive that offers N/A Minimum grant application Charge Information Request grant funding to help offset the cost of purchasing is $10,000; enough for Program Line Must be in BAAQMD and installing new publicly available electric three Level 2 (6.6KW or boundaries (western vehicle charging stations. Funded through the higher) dual port charging 415 749-4994 Solano County) Transportation Funds for Clean Air fund. stations.

Carl Moyer Gary A. Bailey Ongoing. Application Approx. The Off-Road Equipment Replacement Program N/A Eligible Projects: install Off-Road Sacramento Due On First-Come, $10 (ERP), an extension of the Carl Moyer Program, particulate traps, replace Equipment Metropolitan Air First-Served Basis million, provides grant funds to replace Tier 0, high- older heavy-duty engines Replacement Quality Management maximum polluting off-road equipment with the cleanest with newer and cleaner Program (for District Eligible Project per available emission level equipment. engines and add a Sacramento (916) 874-4893 Sponsors: private non- project is particulate trap, purchase Metropolitan [email protected] profit organizations, $4.5 new vehicles or Area) rg state or local million equipment, replace governmental heavy-duty equipment authorities, and with electric equipment, operators of public install electric idling- transportation services reduction equipment http://www.airquality.or g/mobile/moyererp/inde x.shtml

141 Fund Application Application Amount Program Description Proposed Additional Source Contact** Deadline/Eligibility Availabl Submittal Information e

Air Graciela Garcia Application Due On Up to The Zero-Emission and Plug-In Hybrid Light-Duty N/A Eligible Projects: Resources ARB First-Come, First- $7,000 Vehicle (Clean Vehicle) Rebate Project is Purchase or lease of Board (ARB) (916) 323-2781 Served Basis rebate per intended to encourage and accelerate zero- zero-emission and plug-in Clean Vehicle [email protected] (Currently applicants light-duty emission vehicle deployment and technology hybrid light-duty vehicles Rebate are put on waitlist) vehicle innovation. Rebates for clean vehicles are now http://www.arb.ca.gov/m Project available through the Clean Vehicle Rebate sprog/aqip/cvrp.htm (CVRP)* Project (CVRP) funded by the Air Resources Board (ARB) and implemented statewide by the California Center for Sustainable Energy (CCSE). Bay Area Air To learn more about Application Due On Approx. The California Air Resources Board (ARB) N/A Eligible Projects: Quality how to request a First-Come, First- $5,000 to created the HVIP to speed the market Purchase of low-emission Management voucher, contact: Served Basis $45,000 introduction of low-emitting hybrid trucks and hybrid trucks and buses District 888-457-HVIP per buses. It does this by reducing the cost of these http://www.californiahvi (BAAQMD) info@californiahvip. qualified vehicles for truck and bus fleets that purchase p.org/ Hybrid org request and operate the vehicles in the State of Electric California. The HVIP voucher is intended to Vehicle reduce about half the incremental costs of Purchase purchasing hybrid heavy-duty trucks and buses. Vouchers (HVIP)*

Statewide Grants Caltrans Julia Biggar October 20, 2017 $7 million The Adaptation Planning Grant Program, a N/A Minimum grant application Adaptation Caltrans Available product of the Road Repair & Accountability Act is $150,000. Local match Planning [email protected] of 2017 (also known as SB 1), is a grant program is required. ov to support local and regional adaptation planning Grant (916) 654-6344 efforts on the local transportation system. http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/t Program Projects could include resiliency studies, climate pp/grants.html Brigitte Driller vulnerability assessments, adaptation plans, Caltrans natural and green infrastructure adaptation plans, [email protected]. and updating existing plans to incorporate gov adaptation. (916) 653-0426

Federal Grants People For Zoe Kircos October 13, 2017 Up to The PeopleForBikes Community Grant Program N/A Must have at least a 50% Bikes 303-449-4893 x106 $10,000 supports bicycle infrastructure projects and match. Community [email protected] per targeted advocacy initiatives that make it easier http://www.peopleforbikes rg applicant and safer for people of all ages and abilities to .org/pages/grant- Grant ride. guidelines

**STA staff, Cory Peterson, can be contacted directly at (707) 399-3214 or [email protected] for assistance with finding more information about any of the funding opportunities listed in this report

142 Agenda Item 8.J August 30, 2017

DATE: August 21, 2017 TO: STA TAC FROM: Johanna Masiclat, Clerk of the Board RE: Draft Meeting Minutes for STA Advisory Committees

Attached is the most recent Draft Meeting Minutes of the STA Advisory Committees that may be of interest to the STA TAC.

Attachments: A. Arterials Highways & Freeways Draft Meeting of June 29, 2017 B. Bicycle Advisory Committee Draft Meeting Minutes of July 6, 2017 C. Pedestrian Advisory Committee Draft Meeting Minutes of August 3, 2017

143 This page intentionally left blank.

144

Agenda Item 4.A ______, 2017

ARTERIALS, HIGHWAYS, & FREEWAYS COMMITTEE AGENDA Draft Minutes for the meeting of June 29, 2017

1. CALL TO ORDER – SELF INTRODUCTIONS Len Augustine called the meeting to order at 1:35 p.m. in STA Conference Room 1.

Voting Members Present: In Alphabetical Order by Last Name Len Augustine City of Vacaville Erin Hannigan County of Solano Elizabeth Patterson City of Benicia Harry Price City of Fairfield Bob Sampayan City of Vallejo Pete Sanchez City of Suisun City

Voting Members Not Present: In Alphabetical Order by Last Name Steve Bird City of Dixon Norman Richardson City of Rio Vista

Also Present: In Alphabetical Order by Last Name Anthony Adams STA Shawn Cunningham City of Vacaville Ryan Dodge STA Sheila Ernst STA Daryl Halls STA Robert Macaulay STA Matt Tuggle County of Solano

2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA With a motion from Board Member Price, and a second by Board Member Patterson, the Arterials, Highways, and Freeways committee approved the June 29, 2017 agenda. (6 Ayes, 2 Absent)

3. OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT None.

145

4. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Minutes of the Arterials, Freeways & Highways Committee Meeting of May 23, 2016 Recommendation: Approve the Arterials, Freeways & Highways Committee Meeting minutes of May 23, 2016.

With a motion by Board Member Patterson, and a second by Board Member Price the Arterials, Highways, and Freeways committee approved the recommendation. (6 Ayes, 2 Absent)

5. ACTION ITEM A. CTP Arterials, Highways and Freeways Draft Element Chapters 1 – 6 Robert Macaulay provided an overview of the Arterials, Highways and Freeways Element chapters 1 through 6. He explained that during 2016, the Arterials, Highways and Freeways Committee and STA Board reviewed and approved several portions of the Arterials, Highways and Freeways Element. Mr. Macaulay stated that STA staff has been working on development of the Resources chapter of the Element, integrating the other chapters in a unified document, and re-examining some of the previously-adopted chapters. Mr. Macaulay concluded that the chapters of the policies, milestones, priority projects implementation and conclusion will be composed and presented to the group at a later time.

Board Member Patterson complimented STA staff on how this segment of the CTP was well written.

The group discussed the “WAZE” phone and GPS applications.

Recommendation: Forward a recommendation to the STA Board to adopt the Resources Chapter of the Arterials, Highways, and Freeways Element Chapters 1 - 6 provided as Attachment A.

With a motion by Board Member Price, and a second by Board Member Sanchez the Arterials, Highways, and Freeways committee approved the recommendation. (6 Ayes, 2 Absent)

6. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS - DISCUSSION A. State Route 37 Project Update Robert Guerrero provided a brief update on the State Route 37 project highlighted the SR 37 Policy Committee Tasks completed and addressed financial options and the estimated timeline.

B. I-80 Interchange Project Update Robert Guerrero provide an update on the 1-80 Interchange Project. He explained that this multi-year, multi-phase southwest project limits are near Fairfield's Green Valley and Cordelia neighborhoods, the northeast project limits near Suisun City. Mr. Guerrero stated that the project will improve safety and travel times for motorists on I-80, I-680, Highway 12 and adjacent city streets.

146

C. Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) Grant Update Anthony Adams provided an update on the OTS Grant. He stated that OTS awarded STA $171,000 for each applications for Traffic Records and Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety. He explained that the traffic records grant will be focused on procurement of collision data software and standardization of data reporting techniques. Mr. Adams added that the pedestrian and bicycle safety grant will be focused on reducing injuries of middle and high school children within Solano County. He stated that next steps will be to finalize a budget, timeline, and sign a contract.

7. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS A summary of the future agenda items for 2017 was presented.

8. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 2:30 p.m. The next Arterials, Highways, and Freeways committee is to be determined.

147 This page intentionally left blank.

148

Agenda Item 3.A September 7, 2017

BICYCLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE (BAC) Minutes for the Meeting of July 6, 2017

1. CALL TO ORDER/SELF INTRODUCTIONS The meeting of the STA’s Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC) was called to order by Chair Lund at approximately 6:33 p.m. at the STA in Conference Room 1.

BAC Members Present: Nancy Lund, Chair City of Benicia Barbara Wood Member at Large James Fisk City of Dixon Mike Segala, Vice – Chair County of Solano Ray Posey City of Vacaville Lori Wilson City of Suisun City BAC Members Absent: Catherine Moy City of Fairfield Mick Weninger City of Vallejo Vacant City of Rio Vista Others Present: Nick Burton County of Solano Jason Riley City of Dixon Adam Brown City of Vacaville Glen Grant Adventure Cycling Erik Watkins Resident Kirbee Brooks Solano County Public Health David Gao Chan Solano County Public Health STA Staff Present Ramil Chettfour STA Drew Hart STA Ryan Dodge STA Bob Macaulay STA Cory Peterson STA Esther Wan STA 2. CONFIRM QUORUM Quorum was confirmed.

3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA

On a motion from Lori Wilson, and a second from Barbara Wood, the BAC unanimously approved the agenda. (6 Ayes, 2 absences, 0 Abstentions)

4. OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC & STAFF COMMENTS

149

A. Bike to Work Day Recap Nancy Lund requested to get the numbers from every energizer station. Bob Macaulay addressed that the numbers were down by a little bit this year compared to last year. Ms. Lund highlighted that Vallejo had many cyclists and that they even ran out of Bike to Work Day (B2WD) bags to give out.

Ray Posey requested more information concerning the Green Valley Road Crossing with the ridge trail. Drew Hart stated that there is a Linear trail that crosses Green Valley Road that has been previously identified for Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 funding for $250,000 to construct two lighted crosswalks. Mr. Hart indicated that at the time, Fairfield has estimated the cost would be about $50,000 but later on to realized that the cost would exceed $250,000 so the decision was made to move the funding to another project at the Solano Community College. He noted that there will be a new Solano Express bus stop just south of the community college. Ray Posey asked if the City of Fairfield plans to reapply the Green Valley Crossing project for funding and Drew Hart responded that Fairfield would most likely reapply.

Mike Segala asks about the status of recommending a BAC member from the City of Rio Vista. Bob Macaulay responded that he will follow up with Mayor Richardson concerning the status of recommending a BAC member.

Jim Fisk highlighted that the Top 10 Bike Rides had great response from his customers and Nancy Lund added that the Top 10 Bike Ride maps were a great hit in Benicia.

5. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Recommendation: Approve STA BAC Meeting Minutes of March 3, 2017. On a motion by James Fisk, and a second by Barbara Wood, the BAC approved the minutes of March 3, 2017. (6 Ayes, 2 Absences, 0 Abstentions)

6. ACTION NON – FINANCIAL A. Bike and Pedestrian Plan Purpose Statement Bob Macaulay provided an overview on the Bike and Pedestrian Plan Purpose statement. Mr. Macaulay noted that the STA staff concluded that it would be effective for BAC to review and weigh in on the opening statement that lays out STA’s vision for the Active Transportation Plan. He added that once all staff and citizen committees have had an opportunity to comment, the updated version will be forwarded to the Active Transportation Committee. Bob Macaulay request that BAC members provide comments on the purpose statements on later than July 14th by 5:00 p.m.

Recommendation: Forward a recommendation to the STA TAC and STA Board to approve the Purpose Statement for the Countywide Bike and Pedestrian Plan.

BAC members agreed to change the motion to direct STA staff to send the purpose statement to BAC members to comment.

On a motion by Mike Segala, and a second by James Fisk, the BAC forward a recommendation to the STA staff to send the Purpose Statement for the Countywide

150

Bike and Pedestrian Plan to BAC members to comment, and when comments are received, they will be shared amongst the committee members. (6 Ayes, 2 Absences, 0 Abstentions)

B. Priority Project List Drew Hart provided an overview on the Priority Project List. Mr. Hart addressed the process for updating the Priority Project List involves STA staff beginning with the previously adopted lists, eliminating completed projects and consulting with the cities and county on their current priorities. He request BAC members to make a recommendation to update the Bicycle Priority Projects List for fiscal year 2017-2018 which will then be recommended to the STA TAC and Board for approval.

Nick Burton noted that the Tier I project, Dixon/Solano County Vaca-Dixon Bike Route: Porter Road cannot receive potential funding from Highway Safety Improvement Plan (HSIP) and One Bay Area Grant (OBAG). Drew Hart agreed with Nick, by utilizing local funding instead of state or federal funding, there would be a huge cost savings. Mr. Hart stated that if we only use TDA Article 3 and Yolo Solano Air Quality Management District (YSAQMD) funds, it would keep the cost low.

Drew Hart added that the City of Dixon is planning to have green bike lanes especially in conflict areas such as school crossings. Mr. Hart added that if Dixon completes green bike lanes, it would be the first city in Solano County to have green bicycle lanes.

Mike Segala asked why Solano County’s Suisun Valley Farm to Market Project is still a Tier II project and not moved to Tier I. Mr. Segala stated that a lot of the construction has begun including moving water lines. Drew Hart responded that completing Dixon’s Vaca-Dixon Bike Route: Porter Road project took higher priority and Nick Burton respond that OBAG funds will not be available for a few years whereas local funds can get the project completed quickly. After further discussion among BAC members, they agree to move the Suisun Valley Farm to Market Project from Tier II to Tier I. Mike Segala asked Jason Riley about re-scoping the Green Bike Lanes project and how soon the funding would return and Mr. Riley respond that it would be around early September.

Recommendation: Forward a recommendation to the STA TAC and STA Board to approve the BAC Priority Project List for 2017-18. On a motion by Mike Segala, and a second by Ray Posey, the BAC forward a recommendation to the STA TAC and STA Board to approve the BAC Priority Project List for 2017-18 as revised by the BAC to move Solano County’s Suisun Valley Farm to Market Project from Tier II to Tier I. (6 Ayes, 2 Absences, 0 Abstentions)

C. US Bicycle Route Designation Drew Hart provided an overview on the US Bicycle Route Designation. Mr. Hart stated that the STA BAC will receive a brief presentation from Glen Grant from Adventure Cycling discussing about the possible alignment through Solano County. He added that each individual local jurisdiction will have to adopt a resolution of support for the alignment for American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) to recognize the designation.

151

Glen Grant highlighted our current highway numbering system and how Adventure Cycling would like to do the same for bicycle routes especially for long distance biking tours across the US. Mr. Grant indicated that Adventure Cycling would like to make US Bike Route 50 to go through Solano County. He noted that Adventure Cycling have proposed specific routes that goes through Solano County and the second step is to obtain approval from all of the road owners, third it goes to Caltrans to designate the route, and finally Caltrans nominate the route to AASHTO to approve the designation of the route. Glen Grant presented some proposed routes to the BAC members and Nancy Lund recommended Mr. Grant to look at the Top 10 Bike Rides in Solano County that was recently published to provide ideas for alternative bike routes. Nancy Lund request that the proposed routed provided by Glen Grant needs to be zoomed in more so she can see which specific streets the designated bike route would be located. Bob Macaulay clarified with Mr. Grant that there is currently no urgency to have the BAC member designate a route to go through Solano County. Nick Burton clarified that the board would not approve Pleasants Valley Road to be a national bike route.

The BAC members agree to change the recommendation to direct STA staff to work with Adventure Cycling to come back with a detailed proposal.

Recommendation: Direct STA staff to work with Adventure Cycling to come back with a detailed proposal to the BAC. On a motion by Lori Wilson, and a second by James Fisk, the BAC recommend STA staff to work with Adventure Cycling to come back with a detailed proposal to the BAC. (6 Ayes, 2 Absences, 0 Abstentions)

8. INFORMATIONAL – DISCUSSION A. Reports and Updates from Staff Drew Hart addressed that Caltrans District 4 is continuing their work on the Bicycle Master Plan and he added that there was a public workshop in Vallejo. Mr. Hart indicated that the City of Fairfield is working on the Linear Park trail assessing the assets and opportunities for a bike trail. He stated that STA staff is working on having someone from the Linear Park trail taskforce to present in a future BAC meeting. Drew Hart updated BAC members that the I-80/680/SR12 interchange project is progressing well but because of this past wet winter, the dirt is still too wet to move so the date for completion is planned for the end of 2017. Chair Lund asked if this project involves the Green Valley overcrossing and Mr. Hart replied that it is included in the I-80/680/SR12 project. Drew Hart noted that E. Tabor Avenue and Vallejo’s Bay Trail Vine Trail is fully funded by TDA Article 3 funding but Suisun City’s McCoy Creek is only partially funded. Mr. Hart stated that since SB1 passed, funds from that bill will assist to fully fund the McCoy Creek project. He also announced that STA is looking forward to ATP Cycle 4 and that there will be a call for projects in 2018.

9. INFORMATIONAL – NO DISCUSSION A. 2017 BAC Attendance Matrix and Membership Status Esther Wan provided the 2017 Attendance Matrix and the Membership Status for the Bicycle Advisory Committee members.

152

10. COMMITTEE MEMBER COMMENTS AND FUTURE AGENDA TOPICS Chair Lund is proposing to the Parks and Recreation department in Benicia to begin having family bike workshops on the weekends. Ms. Lund suggested that she would like to designate safe bike routes to school as well as public parks for children to ride on. She believes that these workshops would teach children to ride safely as well as riding with their parents. Nancy Lund highlighted how she like to see families riding bicycles more often which relates back to the Active Transportation Plan. Ms. Lund also added that electric bikes are the future.

11. ADJOURNMENT The STA BAC meeting adjourned at approximately 7:55 p.m. The next meeting of the STA BAC meeting is on Thursday, September 7, 2017.

153 This page intentionally left blank.

154

Agenda Item 4.A October 5, 2017

PEDESTRIAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE (PAC) Minutes for the Meeting of August 3, 2017

1. CALL TO ORDER/SELF INTRODUCTIONS The meeting of the STA’s Pedestrian Advisory Committee (PAC) was called to order by Sandra Newell at 6:14 p.m. at the STA in Conference Room 1.

PAC Members Present: Sandra Newell City of Dixon Tamer Totah City of Fairfield Sean Strickland City of Suisun City Marilyn Royse City of Vacaville Joseph Joyce Solano County Victor Anes Member at Large PAC Members Absent: Kevin McNamara, Chair City of Rio Vista Teresa Booth, Vice – Chair City of Vallejo Cynthia Ripley Bay Area Ridge Trail Others Present: Deborah Barr City of Dixon Nick Lozano City of Suisun City Randy Craig City of Suisun City Adam Brown City of Vacaville STA Staff Present: Ryan Dodge STA Esther Wan STA Cory Peterson STA Ramil Chettfour STA

2. CONFIRM QUORUM Quorum is confirmed.

3. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA With a motion from Sean Strickland and a second from Marilyn Royse, the PAC unanimously approved the Agenda (6 Ayes, 2 Absences, 0 Abstentions).

4. OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT None.

5. COMMENTS FROM AGENCY STAFF None. 6. CONSENT CALENDAR 155

Approve the following consent item in one motion. (Note: Item under consent calendar may be removed for separate discussion.) A. Minutes of the STA PAC Meeting of June 1, 2017 On a motion by Sean Strickland, seconded by Marilyn Royse, the STA PAC approved the minutes of June 1, 2017 unanimously. (6 Ayes, 2 Absences, 0 Abstentions)

7. ACTIONS NON-FINANCIAL A. Pedestrian Priority Projects - Update Ryan Dodge provided an overview of the Pedestrian Priority Projects List.

Deborah Barr from the City of Dixon have prepared a short presentation on the Pond A: Path Improvements, Pond C: Path Improvements, Downtown Streetscape Project, Valley Glen/SR113 Street Light, and Chestnut Street/South First Street Traffic Signal Project. Sandra Newell noted that because of the limited funding, if we can only fund one project, which project would have the highest priority? Deborah Barr responded that after the traffic and safety analysis, then can Dixon determine which project has top priority. Tamer Totah asked if Deborah Barr has any data on how many children are crossing Valley Glen Drive and if there are any injuries or fatalities. Ms. Barr currently does not have the statistics but will forward that information to the PAC once she receives them. She explained that most of the residents are located on the west side of Dixon and many students utilize Valley Glen Drive to cross over to the east side of Dixon to reach the high school. Deborah Barr added that younger students utilize Chestnut Street to get to the elementary school.

Nick Lozano provided an overview on the McCoy Creek Trail Phase II Project. Mr. Lozano highlighted that Suisun City received full funding for this project from Active Transportation Program (ATP) funds. He indicated that the funds covered most of the project except environmental. Nick Lozano plans to meet with Caltrans next month to discuss the environmental studies. As for the Lotz Way Class 1 Bikeway/Multi-Use Path Project, Mr. Lozano explained that funding was received from the One Bay Area Grant (OBAG) Cycle 2 to help fund this project.

Adam Brown stated that the Vaca Valley Parkway /I-505 Corridor Multi-Modal Improvement Project is scheduled to begin construction not until 2020-2021. As for the Elmira Road Bike Path, Mr. Brown explained that it has not been a priority project and is currently waiting for funding to begin the design process.

Nick Lozano noted that the Lotz Way Class 1 Bikeway/Multi-Use Path Project can be pushed down to Tier 2 because they will not be able to begin construction until next year, but requested to keep the McCoy Creek Trail Phase II Project in Tier 1.

PAC members agree to push the West Texas Street Gateway project from Tier 1 to Tier 2. Deborah Barr request that either the South First Street Corridor Study – Chestnut Street / South First Street Traffic Signal project of or the First Street Corridor Study – South First Street / Valley Green Drive Traffic Signal project be pushed to Tier 1. Ms. Barr indicated that these projects are noted in the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) to assist in funding.

156

Victor Anes asked how long have Tier 2 and Tier 3 projects have been on the Pedestrian Priority Project List and Ryan Dodge responded that we can review the past Pedestrian Priority Project Lists from previous fiscal years to see how long some of these projects have been sitting on the Pedestrian Priority List. Victor Anes also request a flowchart of all the committees involved with making the decision of finalizing the list.

PAC members agreed to change all the Tier 3 projects to Tier 2 projects. The committee agreed to have 5 Tier 1 projects and the remaining are all Tier 2 projects.

Recommendation: Review, change, and approve the STA Pedestrian Priority Project List for FY 2017-18 using Attachment A.

On a motion by Tamer Totah, seconded by Marilyn Royse, the STA PAC Review, change, and approve the STA Pedestrian Priority Project List for FY 2017-18. (6 Ayes, 2 Absences, 0 Abstentions)

B. PAC Field Trips Ryan Dodge reminded PAC members that a poll was sent out for the committee to decide on a date that works best for a PAC Field Trip. PAC members requested the email to be resent so they can take the poll to select a date for the field trip. Sean Strickland stated that he will not be able to attend the field trip if it takes place on a Saturday in October.

8. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS – DISCUSSION A. Funding Opportunities Ryan Dodge provided an update on current funding opportunities.

9. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS-NO DISCUSSION A. 2016-17 PAC Meeting Attendance Matrix and Membership Status No discussion.

10. COMMITTEE MEMBER COMMENTS AND FUTURE AGENDA TOPICS Sandra Newell announced that she will not be able to attend the next PAC meeting because she will be out of the country. Sean Strickland stated that he may not be able to attend the next PAC meeting or the field trip because he will be out of the state. Ryan Dodge indicated that if the PAC field trip occurs in October, the PAC meeting will likely be canceled.

11. ADJOURNMENT The STA PAC meeting adjourned at approximately 7:49 p.m. The next scheduled meeting of the STA PAC is Thursday, October 5, 2017.

PAC 2017 Meeting Dates (The PAC meets every First Thursday on even months, unless otherwise rescheduled) *Please mark your calendars for these dates* 6:00 pm, Thursday, October 5, 2017 6:00 pm, Thursday, December 7, 2017

Questions? Please contact STA Associate Planner, Ryan Dodge at (707) 399-3230 or [email protected]

157 This page intentionally left blank.

158 Agenda Item 8.E June 28, 2017

DATE: June 20, 2017 TO: STA TAC FROM: Johanna Masiclat, Clerk of the Board RE: STA Board and Advisory Meeting Schedule for Calendar Year 2017

Discussion: Attached is the STA Board and Advisory meeting schedule for STA Board and Advisory meeting schedule for Calendar Year 2017 that may be of interest to the STA TAC.

Fiscal Impact: None.

Recommendation: Informational.

Attachment: A. STA Board and Advisory Meeting Schedule for Calendar Year 2017

159 STA Board: Meets 2nd Wednesday of Every Month Consortium : Meets Last Tuesday of Every Month TAC: Meets Last Wednesday of Every Month STA BOARD AND ADVISORY BAC: Meets 1st Thursday of every Odd Month COMMITTEE MEETING SCHEDULE PAC: Meets 1st Thursday of every Even Month PCC: Meets 3rd Thursday of every Odd Month CALENDAR YEAR 2017 (Updated Aug. 21, 2017) SR2S‐AC Meets Quarterly (Begins Feb.) on the 3rd Wed.

DATE TIME DESCRIPTION LOCATION STATUS

Tues., August 29 1:30 p.m. Intercity Transit Consortium STA Conference Room Confirmed Wed., August 30 1:30 p.m. Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) STA Conference Room Confirmed Thurs., September 7 6:30 p.m. Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC) STA Conference Room Confirmed Wed., September 13 6:00 p.m. STA Board Meeting Suisun City Hall Confirmed Thurs., September 21 1:00 p.m. Paratransit Coordinating Council (PCC) Solano Community College Tentative Tues., September 26 1:30 p.m. Intercity Transit Consortium STA Conference Room Confirmed Wed., September 27 1:30 p.m. Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) STA Conference Room Confirmed Thurs., September 28 9:30 a.m. Consolidated Transportation Services Agency (CTSA‐ TBD Confirmed AC) Thurs., October 5 6:00 p.m. Pedestrian Advisory Committee (PAC) STA Conference Room Confirmed Wed., October 11 6:00 p.m. STA Board Meeting Suisun City Hall Confirmed Thurs., October 12 9:30 a.m. Dixon Mobility Senior Summit Veteran’s Memorial Hall Confirmed No meeting due to STA’s Annual Awards Intercity Transit Consortium N/A N/A in November (No STA Board Meeting) Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) N/A N/A Thurs., November 2 6:30 p.m. Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC) STA Conference Room Confirmed Wed., November 8 6:00 p.m. STA’s 20th Annual Awards Joseph Nelson Community Center Confirmed Wed., November 15 11:30 a.m. Safe Routes to School Advisory (SR2S‐AC) STA Conference Room Confirmed Thurs., November 16 1:00 p.m. Paratransit Coordinating Council (PCC) SolTrans Operations Facility Tentative Tues., November 28 1:30 p.m. Intercity Transit Consortium STA Conference Room Confirmed Wed., November 29 1:30 p.m. Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) STA Conference Room Confirmed Thurs., December 7 6:00 p.m. Pedestrian Advisory Committee (PAC) STA Conference Room Confirmed Wed., December 13 6:00 p.m. STA Board Meeting Suisun City Hall Confirmed Tues., December 19 1:30 p.m. Intercity Transit Consortium STA Conference Room Confirmed Wed., December 20 1:30 p.m. Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) STA Conference Room Confirmed Thurs., December 28 9:30 a.m. Consolidated Transportation Services Agency (CTSA‐ County Multi‐purpose Room Tentative AC)

160