OTAY MESA - MESA DE OTAY BINATIONAL (Representing East County) CORRIDOR STRATEGIC PLAN

Members

Patricia McCoy, Chair Mayor Pro Tem, Imperial Beach (Representing South County)

Greg Cox, Vice Chair Supervisor, County of San Diego

Crystal Crawford Councilmember, Del Mar (Representing North County Coastal) BORDERS

Sam Abed Councilmember, Escondido COMMITTEE (Representing North County Inland)

John Minto AGENDA Councilmember, Santee (Representing East County)

Wally Leimgruber Supervisor, Imperial County Friday, March 26, 2010 (Representing Imperial County) 12:30 to 2:30 p.m. Ben Hueso Council President, City of San Diego SANDAG Board Room Alternates 401 B Street, 7th Floor Rudy Ramirez Councilmember, Chula Vista San Diego (Representing South County)

Pam Slater-Price THIS MEETING WILL BE HELD JOINTLY WITH THE Chairwoman, County of San Diego COMMITTEE ON BINATIONAL REGIONAL Jim Wood Mayor, Oceanside OPPORTUNITIES (COBRO) AND THE CITY OF TIJUANA (Representing North County Coastal)

Carl Kruse Deputy Mayor, Poway AGENDA HIGHLIGHTS (Representing North County Inland)

David Allan Vice Mayor, La Mesa • OTAY MESA - MESA DE OTAY BINATIONAL (Representing East County) CORRIDOR STRATEGIC PLAN

David Ouzan Councilmember, Calexico (Representing Imperial County) • ANALYSIS OF BORDER ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE PRIORITIES, NOW AND TO Sherri Lightner Councilmember, City of San Diego 2030

Advisory Members

Thomas Buckley • CITY OF TIJUANA’S URBAN DEVELOPMENT Councilmember, Lake Elsinore PROGRAM FOR THE POPULATION CENTER (Representing Riverside County) 2010-2030 Jim Dahl Mayor Pro Tem, San Clemente (Representing Orange County)

Remedios Gómez-Arnau Consul General, PLEASE TURN OFF CELL PHONES DURING THE MEETING Consulate General of Mexico

Elsa Saxod San Diego County Water Authority YOU CAN LISTEN TO THE BORDERS COMMITTEE

Laurie Berman MEETING BY VISITING OUR WEB SITE AT WWW.SANDAG.ORG District 11 Director, Caltrans

Chris Devers Chairman, Pauma Band of Mission Indians MISSION STATEMENT Southern California Tribal Chairmen’s Association The Borders Committee provides oversight for planning activities that impact the borders of the San Diego region (Orange, Riverside and Imperial Counties, and the Republic of Mexico) as well as Richard Macias Director of Planning, government-to-government relations with tribal nations in San Diego County. The preparation Southern California Association and implementation of SANDAG’s Binational, Interregional, and Tribal Liaison Planning programs of Governments are included under this purview. It advises the SANDAG Board of Directors on major interregional

Gary L. Gallegos planning policy-level matters. Recommendations of the Committee are forwarded to the Executive Director, SANDAG Board of Directors for action.

San Diego Association of Governments ⋅ 401 B Street, Suite 800, San Diego, CA 92101-4231 (619) 699-1900 ⋅ Fax (619) 699-1905 ⋅ www.sandag.org

Welcome to SANDAG. Members of the public may speak to the Borders Committee on any item at the time the Committee is considering the item. Please complete a Speaker’s Slip, which is located in the rear of the room, and then present the slip to Committee staff. Also, members of the public are invited to address the Committee on any issue under the agenda item entitled Public Comments/Communications/Member Comments. Speakers are limited to three minutes. The Borders Committee may take action on any item appearing on the agenda.

This agenda and related staff reports can be accessed at www.sandag.org under meetings on SANDAG’s Web site. Public comments regarding the agenda can be forwarded to SANDAG via the e-mail comment form also available on the Web site. E-mail comments should be received no later than noon, two working days prior to the Borders Committee meeting. Any handouts, presentations, or other materials from the public intended for distribution at the Borders Committee meeting should be received by the Clerk of the Board no later than 12 noon, two working days prior to the meeting.

In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), SANDAG will accommodate persons who require assistance in order to participate in SANDAG meetings. If such assistance is required, please contact SANDAG at (619) 699-1900 at least 72 hours in advance of the meeting. To request this document or related reports in an alternative format, please call (619) 699-1900, (619) 699-1904 (TTY), or fax (619) 699-1905.

SANDAG offices are accessible by public transit. Phone 511 or see 511sd.com for route information.

Rev 020810 JOINT MEETING OF THE BORDERS COMMITTEE, COMMITTEE ON BINATIONAL REGIONAL OPPORTUNITIES (COBRO), AND THE CITY OF TIJUANA Friday, March 26, 2010

ITEM # RECOMMENDATION

+ 1. APPROVAL OF THE FEBRUARY 26, 2010, MEETING MINUTES APPROVE

2. PUBLIC COMMENTS/COMMUNICATIONS/MEMBER COMMENTS

Members of the public will have the opportunity to address the Borders Committee on any issue within the jurisdiction of the Committee that is not on this agenda. Speakers are limited to three minutes each and shall reserve time by completing a “Request to Speak” form and giving it to the Clerk prior to speaking. Committee members also may provide information and announcements under this agenda item.

CONSENT ITEM (#3) e +3. REPORT FROM THE CONSUL GENERAL OF MEXICO INFORMATION (Hon. Remedios Gómez-Arnau, Consulate General of Mexico in San Diego)

The attached report from the Consul General is the first in a series of periodic reports focusing on areas of mutual interest that contribute to the Borders Committee dialogue. This report highlights growth in surface transportation trade between Mexico and the United States and Canada.

REPORT ITEMS (#4 through #7)

+4. 2050 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN (RTP): DRAFT DISCUSSION TRIBAL TRANSPORTATION WHITE PAPER (Chairman Chris Devers, the Southern California Tribal Chairmen’s Association (SCTCA); and Jane Clough-Riquelme, SANDAG)

In preparation for the 2050 RTP and as part of the process of tribal consultation, the Interagency Technical Working Group has developed a background paper on tribal transportation issues which will serve as support for the policy discussions at the 2010 San Diego Regional Tribal Summit. This paper was reviewed by the Working Group at its March 17 meeting. Chairman Devers of the SCTCA will present the highlights of the paper for the Borders Committee's review and comment.

3 ITEM # RECOMMENDATION

5. OTAY MESA – MESA DE OTAY BINATIONAL CORRIDOR STRATEGIC PLAN: 2010 DRAFT PROGRESS REPORT

e +a. Otay Mesa – Mesa De Otay Binational Corridor DISCUSSION Strategic Plan: 2010 Draft Progress Report (Ron Saenz, SANDAG; and Luis Duarte, Instituto Municipal de Planeación - IMPlan)

SANDAG and IMPlan staff will provide a progress report on the implementation of key actions included in the Otay Mesa – Mesa de Otay Binational Corridor Strategic Plan in the areas of transportation, economic development, housing, and environment.

b. Briefing On State Route 11/Otay Mesa East Port of Entry INFORMATION Financial Strategy (Marney Cox and Christina Casgar, SANDAG; and Mario Orso, Caltrans)

SANDAG, in cooperation with Caltrans, the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA), and other stakeholders, is developing the new Otay Mesa East Port of Entry and associated transportation network, including State Route 11. This report will provide an update on efforts to develop the project’s financial strategy.

6. ANALYSIS OF BORDER ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE INFORMATION PRIORITIES, NOW AND TO 2030 (Maria Elena Giner, Deputy General Manager of the Border Environment Cooperation Commission)

The Border Environment Cooperation Commission (BECC) and the North American Development Bank (NADB) were created in 1993 under a side-agreement to the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) for the purpose of enhancing the environmental conditions of the U.S.-Mexico border region and advancing the well- being of residents in both nations. BECC focuses on the technical, environmental, and social aspects of project development, while NADB concentrates on project financing and oversight for project implementation. This report will highlight BECC’s key accomplishments, as well as general operational information, goals, and challenges.

4 ITEM # RECOMMENDATION

7. CITY OF TIJUANA'S URBAN DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR INFORMATION THE POPULATION CENTER 2010-2030 (Luis Duarte, IMPlan)

This presentation will provide an overview of the recently approved Urban Development Program for the Population Center 2010-2030 (PDUCPT, in Spanish) of the City of Tijuana, which includes the first land use regulations and innovative criteria for conservation areas.

8. UPCOMING MEETINGS INFORMATION

The next meeting of the Borders Committee is scheduled for Friday, April 23, 2010, at 12:30 p.m.

9. ADJOURNMENT

+ next to an item indicates an attachment e next to an item indicates available in Spanish / junto a uno de los puntos indica que está disponible en español

5 San Diego Association of Governments BORDERS COMMITTEE

March 26, 2010 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 1

Action Requested: APPROVE

BORDERS COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND ACTIONS MEETING OF FEBRUARY 26, 2010

The meeting of the Borders Committee was called to order by Chair Patricia McCoy (South County) at 12:31 p.m. See the attached attendance sheet for Borders Committee member attendance.

Chair McCoy acknowledged City of Oceanside Mayor Jim Wood, the alternate representative from North County Coastal; City of Poway Deputy Mayor Karl Cruse, the alternate representative from North County Inland; and, welcomed Charles “Muggs” Stoll, the new Director of SANDAG’s Land Use and Transportation Planning Department.

1. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES

Action: Upon a motion by Councilmember John Minto (East County) and a second by Councilmember Crystal Crawford (North County Coastal), the Borders Committee approved the minutes from the November 20, 2009 meeting.

2. PUBLIC COMMENTS/COMMUNICATIONS/MEMBER COMMENTS

Action: There were no comments/communications.

CONSENT (ITEM #3)

3. AGENDA FOR THE 2010 SAN DIEGO REGIONAL TRIBAL SUMMIT (INFORMATION)

SANDAG included in its Fiscal Year (FY) 2010 Budget and Overall Work Program the convening of a Tribal Summit as a component of the tribal consultation process for the 2050 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). An ad hoc task force composed of elected officials from the Borders Committee and the Southern California Tribal Chairmen’s Association (SCTCA) has helped develop a draft agenda for this event. On January 8, 2010, the Executive Committee approved the proposed agenda for the 2010 Tribal Summit, which would be held on April 9, 2010.

Action: Upon a motion by Supervisor Greg Cox (County of San Diego) and a second by Councilmember Crawford, the Borders Committee approved Consent Item No. 3.

REPORT ITEMS (#4 through #7)

4. PROPOSED AGENDA FOR THE 2010 SANDAG ANNUAL BINATIONAL EVENT (ACCEPT)

Since 1997, SANDAG has organized an annual event to address binational topics. Paul Ganster, Chair, Committee on Binational Regional Opportunities (COBRO), reported that in preparation for the 2010 binational event, COBRO set up a task force which identified issues for discussion. COBRO members recommended that the event be held on Tuesday, June 1, 2010, focus on discussing potential impacts to transportation infrastructure due to climate change, possible strategies to adapt to these impacts, and to provide input for the preparation of the 2050 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP).

Action: Upon a motion by Council President Ben Hueso (City of San Diego) and a second by Councilmember Crawford, the Borders Committee unanimously accepted COBRO’s recommendation that the 2010 binational event be held on Tuesday, June 1, 2010, following the format of the 2009 event as a binational seminar focusing on local binational climate change adaptation strategies, and to provide input for the preparation of the 2050 RTP.

5. FINAL COMPREHENSIVE FREIGHT GATEWAY STUDY (DISCUSSION)

Christina Casgar, Goods Movement Policy Manager, reported on the findings of the Comprehensive Freight Gateway Study, including forecast freight volumes out to the year 2050 for both Imperial and San Diego Counties.

Consul General Remedios Gómez-Arnau (Republic of Mexico) stated that information contained in the study will be distributed to individuals in Mexico’s Embassy in Washington D.C. and Foreign Affairs Ministry in Mexico City.

Action: This item was presented for discussion only.

6. MEXICO’S BICENTENNIAL PORT OF ENTRY SYSTEM IN TIJUANA (INFORMATION)

Carlos Lopez, Director of Regional and Urban Planning, Secretariat of Infrastructure and Urban Development of the State of Baja California (SIDUE, in Spanish), provided an overview of Mexico’s new southbound pedestrian crossing and plans for a multimodal transportation facility that will be located in Tijuana on the eastern side of the San Ysidro – Puerta México Port of Entry. Mr. Lopez reported that the “Sistema Puerta Bicentenario” is comprised of three projects: El Chaparral (south of Virginia Avenue); Puerta México (south of the current San Ysidro Port of Entry); and, Puerta México Este (south of the Trolley Station and next to the Tijuana-Tecate rail line). The executive design for these three

projects will be completed in 2010. The plans for El Chaparral include the addition of a north-south pedestrian crossing, approximately 19 new southbound inspection booths, and two new vehicular bridges, which will begin construction in April 2010. The Puerta México (San Ysidro Port of Entry) will have the addition of approximately 30 northbound lanes, including eight new SENTRI lanes, and northbound pedestrian facilities. The conceptual design for Puerta México Este includes a new southbound pedestrian crossing, office and commercial buildings, a multimodal transportation facility consisting of taxis, buses, and a connection to the rail facilities. Phase II, would link these facilities to bus rapid transit or light rail. Diplomatic Notes regarding the new north-south pedestrian crossing at Puerta México Este are in progress and all parcels of land necessary for the renovations to the area are either in the process of being acquired or have been acquired.

Mr. Ramon Riesgo of the National Office of Design and Construction (U.S. General Services Administration [GSA]) informed GSA has been notified via Diplomatic Note regarding the pedestrian crossing at the Trolley station. It will be part of Phase I and money has been secured; however, they still need to pinpoint the location. The Diplomatic Note also requires the United States to open a north- and southbound pedestrian crossing on the west side. As this is not part of Phase I, additional funding will have to be secured and environmental studies initiated to begin planning for this project. The United States hopes that diplomatically, an agreement can be reached so this will not slow down the project.

Council President Hueso (City of San Diego) expressed his interest in the Borders Committee drafting a letter of support for the new pedestrian crossings located on the east and west sides of the facility.

Councilmember Crawford suggested that the General Services Administration (GSA) report on the progress at the border at a future meeting.

Councilmember Minto asked if there had been any budget changes.

Mr. Riesgo stated no changes have been made. The project continues to be comprised of three stand alone funded phases.

Chairman Chris Devers, Pauma Band of Mission Indians (Southern California Tribal Chairmen’s Association) asked if Mexico has a process, such as the Native American Graves and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), they follow when they find archaeological artifacts.

Mr. Lopez stated Mexico has a process they follow which is very similar to NAGPRA.

Action: This item was presented for information only.

7. PLANS FOR A FUTURE MASS TRANSIT SYSTEM IN TIJUANA (INFORMATION)

Jorge Gutiérrez, Deputy City Manager, City of Tijuana, reported on the progress made on the planning of a mass transit system for the City of Tijuana, including two main routes connecting the San Ysidro-Puerta México and the Otay Mesa – Mesa de Otay Ports of Entry to the southeastern and southwestern portions of the city and relayed recent news that the project’s funding was recently approved by the federal transportation committee.

Action: This item was presented for information only.

8. UPCOMING MEETINGS

The next meeting of the Borders Committee is the Joint Meeting with the Committee on Binational Regional Opportunities (COBRO) and the City of Tijuana, scheduled for Friday, March 26, 2010, at 12:30 p.m.

9. ADJOURNMENT

Chair McCoy adjourned the meeting at 2:13 p.m.

Attachment: Attendance Sheet

CONFIRMED ATTENDANCE BORDERS COMMITTEE MEETING FEBRUARY 26, 2010 12:30 p.m. to 2:30 p.m.

GEOGRAPHICAL JURISDICTION NAME MEMBER/ ATTENDING AREA ALTERNATE Yes No City of Imperial Patricia Member Beach McCoy 3 (Chair) South County City of Chula Rudy Alternate Vista 3 Ramirez

City of Del Mar Crystal Member 3 North County Crawford Coastal City of Jim Wood Alternate 3 Oceanside City of Sam Abed Member 3 North County Escondido Inland City of Poway Carl Kruse Alternate 3

City of Santee John Minto Member 3 East County City of La Mesa David Allan Alternate 3

---- Ben Hueso Member 3 City of San Diego Sherri ---- Alternate 3 Lightner Greg Cox ---- Member 3 County of San (Vice Chair) Diego Pam Slater- ---- Alternate Price 3 County of Wally Member 3 Imperial Leimgruber Imperial County City of Calexico David Ouzan Alternate 3 Dr. Paul ----- Member Ganster 3 Cindy ----- Alternate COBRO Gompper- 3 Graves Angelika ____ Alternate 3 Villagrana County of City of Lake Thomas Member 3 Riverside Elsinore Buckley Consul General Remedios Member of Mexico Gomez- 3 Arnau Deputy Consul Martha Alternate Republic of General of Rosas 3 Mexico Mexico Lydia Consul Alternate 3 Antonio Consular Officer Elvira Felix Alternate 3

Pauma Chris Devers Member 3 Southern California Tribal Mark Mesa Grande Alternate 3 Chairmen’s Romero Association 2nd Denis Turner 3 SCTCA Alternate Laurie Member 3 Berman Caltrans Bill Figge Alternate 3

Elsa Saxod Member 3 San Diego County Water Howard Authority 3 Williams Alternate

Rich Macias Member 3 SCAG Mathew Alternate Gleason 3 City of San Jim Dahl Member County of Clemente 3 Orange Bill Alternate 3 Campbell

6 San Diego Association of Governments JOINT MEETING OF THE BORDERS COMMITTEE, COMMITTEE ON BINATIONAL REGIONAL OPPORTUNITIES (COBRO), AND THE CITY OF TIJUANA

March 26, 2010 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 3

Action Requested: INFORMATION

REPORT FROM THE CONSUL GENERAL OF MEXICO File Number 3400200

Introduction

The Consul General of Mexico in San Diego, Hon. Remedios Gomez-Arnau, would like to contribute to the Borders Committee dialogue by providing periodic reports on binational activities that tie into the purview of the Committee. This first report focuses on the increase in surface transportation trade between Mexico and the United States and Canada.

Discussion

Surface transportation trade consists largely of freight movements by truck, rail, and pipeline. About 85 percent of U.S. trade by value with Canada and Mexico moves by land modes. According to the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS), the U.S.- Mexico surface transportation trade totaled $23.0 billion in December 2009, up 15 percent from December 2008. The value of imports carried by truck was 15.5 percent higher in December 2009 than December 2008 while the value of exports carried by truck was 10.4 percent higher between those same periods. In December 2009, Texas led all states with $7.9 billion in surface trade with Mexico while California ranked second with $3.6 billion.

Trade using surface transportation between the United States and its North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) partners Canada and Mexico, increased by 10.5 percent between December 2009 and December 2008, with a value of $58.5 billion. The BTS reported that the value of U.S. surface transportation trade with Canada and Mexico fell 0.8 percent in December 2009 from November 2009. Month-to-month changes are commonly accounted for by seasonal variations and other factors.

The TransBorder Freight Data are a unique subset of official U.S. foreign trade statistics released by the U.S. Census Bureau. New data are tabulated monthly and historical data are not adjusted for inflation. The data is a valuable resource for binational planning efforts that is used and monitored regularly by the Consul General.

The news release and summary tables can be found at www.bts.gov. More information on TransBorder Freight Data and data from previous months are posted on the BTS Web site at http://www.bts.gov/transborder/.

Key Staff Contact: Hector Vanegas, (619) 699-1972, [email protected] San Diego Association of Governments JOINT MEETING OF THE BORDERS COMMITTEE, COMMITTEE ON BINATIONAL REGIONAL OPPORTUNITIES (COBRO), AND THE CITY OF TIJUANA

March 26, 2010 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 4

Action Requested: DISCUSSION

2050 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN (RTP): DRAFT TRIBAL File Number 3400500 TRANSPORTATION WHITE PAPER

Introduction

For the 2050 RTP process a tribal consultation work plan was developed collaboratively between SANDAG and the Southern California Tribal Chairmen’s Association (SCTCA). As part of that process the Interagency Technical Working Group was tasked with developing a White Paper to provide a background on tribal nations in the region, existing conditions related to transportation, to document the collaborative work that has been accomplished since the 2006 Summit, and to identify a set of strategies for the 2050 RTP. The Working Group, the Reservation Transportation Authority (RTA), and the SCTCA have been developing components of the White Paper through various workshops through the fall and winter.

The draft White Paper was reviewed by the Interagency Technical Working Group on Tribal Transportation Issues at its March 17, 2010, meeting. This will serve as the background paper to be included in the agenda packet for the 2010 San Diego Regional Tribal Summit. The White Paper is attached for the Border Committee’s review and comment.

CHARLES”MUGGS” STOLL Director of Land Use and Transportation Planning

Attachment: 1. Draft 2050 Regional Transportation Plan Tribal Transportation White Paper

Key Staff Contact: Jane Clough-Riquelme, (619) 699-1909, [email protected] Attachment 1

2050 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN WHITE PAPER

NATIONS WITHIN A NATION- Collaborative Transportation Planning in a Regional Landscape

Please comment by March 26, 2010

Direct questions and comments to: Jane Clough-Riquelme (619) 699-1909 or [email protected]

401 B Street, Suite 800 • San Diego, CA 92101-4231 • (619) 699-1900 Table of Contents

PROBLEM STATEMENT ...... 4 Introduction...... 4 2050 RTP Objectives ...... 4 BACKGROUND ...... 5 Tribal Nations in San Diego ...... 5 Current Conditions...... 7 Tribal Economic Development...... 8 Tribal Transportation Needs Assessment ...... 10 Technical Workshop – Identifying Strategies ...... 10 2006 San Diego Regional Tribal Summit...... 11 A REGIONAL GOVERNMENT-TO-GOVERNMENT FRAMEWORK ...... 12 Regional Partners ...... 12 Public Agencies ...... 12 Intertribal Organizations...... 13 Framework – Policy Level...... 13 Periodic Summits...... 14 SCTCA Representation on SANDAG ...... 14 Tribal Liaison to SCTCA Board of Directors...... 14 Tribal Issues Brought to SANDAG Policy Advisory Committees...... 14 Framework – Technical Level...... 15 Interagency Technical Working Group on Tribal Transportation Issues...... 15 SANDAG-RTA Partnership for Tribal Transportation Planning ...... 15 MILESTONES IN COLLABORATIVE TRIBAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING...... 16 Transportation Infrastructure...... 16 Supported the Indian Reservation Roads Inventory ...... 16 Identified Tribal Corridors and Coordinated Relevant Studies/Projects ...... 17 Transit/Mobility Planning ...... 18 Tribal Transit Feasibility Study ...... 18 FTA Tribal Transit Grant Program...... 18 Tribal TDM Outreach – Phase I (San Diego)...... 19 Tribal TDM Outreach – Phase II (Riverside)...... 19 Transportation Funding...... 19 Information Sharing/Technology Assistance ...... 20 2050 RTP PROCESS – RECOMMENDED STRATEGIES ...... 20

2 Attachments

Attachment A – Tribal Lands Map...... 24 Attachment B – California Native American Trust Lands...... 25 Attachment C – Kumeyaay Historical Map ...... 26 Attachment D – Square Footage of Gaming Facilities for Trip Generation Estimates ...... 27 Attachment E – Summary Results ...... 28 Attachment F – Tribal Lands Transportation Corridors Map...... 32 Attachment G – RTA Intertribal Service Area ...... 33 Attachment H – Tribal Working Group Charter ...... 34 Attachment I – Current Membership Roster...... 35 Attachment J – Timeline Matrix ...... 37 Attachment K – North Corridor With New Services ...... 38 Attachment L – South Corridor With New Services...... 39 Attachment M – NCTD Introduces New Route 388/389 ...... 40 Attachment N – Complete Tribal Transportation Strategies/Actions Matrix ...... 41

2050 RTP Tribal Transportation White Paper

NATIONS WITHIN A NATION:

Collaborative Transportation Planning in a Regional Landscape

PROBLEM STATEMENT

Introduction The U.S. Constitution and treaties recognize Native American communities as separate and independent political communities within the territorial boundaries of the United States— nations within a nation. In the San Diego region, there are 17 federally recognized tribal nations with jurisdiction over 18 reservations—the most in any county in the United States (Attachment A – Tribal Lands Map).

Federal legislation requires that federally recognized tribal governments be consulted in the development of Regional Transportation Plans (RTP) and programs (Title 23, U.S.C. 450.312). In particular, the new federal transportation bill, the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, and Efficient Transportation Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), passed in 2005, reinforces federal emphasis on tribal government participation. President Obama in his November 5, 2009, Memorandum on Tribal Consultation (Federal Register, vol. 74, No. 215, 11/9/09) reiterated the directive for public agencies to incorporate tribal consultation into their plans and programs in a timely and meaningful manner.

How this consultation should occur is left to the Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) and the tribal governments. SANDAG has forged a strong working relationship with the tribal nations in the region, based on a regional framework of communication, coordination, and collaboration with tribal governments in the regional transportation planning process. This white paper is intended to: provide background on the transportation needs as self-identified by the tribal nations in the region; discuss the development of the regional government-to-government framework that has emerged in recent years, document milestones in collaborative transportation planning which have occurred since the 2006 Tribal Summit, and discuss the proposed Tribal Transportation Strategies for the 2050 RTP which have emerged through dialogue with tribal leadership and the Interagency Technical Working Group for Tribal Transportation for consideration at the 2010 San Diego Regional Tribal Summit.

2050 RTP Objectives The RTP is a long-term blueprint of a region’s transportation system. The plan identifies and analyzes transportation needs of the metropolitan region and creates a framework for project priorities. As the region’s Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), SANDAG is responsible for facilitating the development of the RTP. In the San Diego region, the RTP is updated every four years. Usually, the horizon year for an RTP is 30 years; for this cycle,

SANDAG is thinking ahead 40 years. Each cycle of the RTP is an iterative process in which long-term goals in the region among diverse stakeholders are evaluated in light of existing and potential funding from federal, state, and local sources.

The most recent RTP approved by SANDAG’s Board of Directors in December of 2007 was titled “2030 RTP: Pathways to the Future.” The 2030 RTP is our region’s blueprint for a transportation system that enhances our quality of life and meets our mobility needs now and in the future. The foundation of the 2030 RTP lies in better connecting our freeway, transit, and road networks to our homes, schools, work, shopping, and other activities.

The 2050 RTP builds upon the existing transportation system in place today and the major projects in progress from the 2030 RTP. The objectives for the 2050 RTP with regard to tribal nations and regional transportation planning are to:

• Engage federally recognized tribal governments in the region in the transportation planning process in a timely, meaningful, and effective manner; • Strengthen the current framework for government-to-government engagement at a regional level; and • Based on a government-to-government dialogue and negotiation, pursue a set of mutually agreed upon prioritized strategies to improve tribal transportation in the region in four areas: roadways, transit, funding, and information sharing/technical assistance.

BACKGROUND

Historically, the relationship between local governments and federally recognized tribal governments has been contentious. While the federal-tribal relationship is well established, the local-tribal government relationship has not been as clearly defined. Despite efforts to reach out to local governments, tribal governments indicate that for many years they were not received. This has changed considerably in recent years. With the advent of gaming, local perceptions, according to various tribal leaders, have changed. As a condition of the development of gaming compacts, tribes are required to negotiate with the local land use authorities adjacent to them. What has not been clearly delineated by the state or federal government is the mechanism for inclusion of tribal inputs into regional transportation planning processes. The federal government requires ‘consultation’ with tribal governments, however the definition of meaningful consultation, or more in depth coordination and cooperation is being developed on a case by case basis in various parts of the country. There is clearly an increasing need to better coordinate and assess the impacts of tribal development and future plans on the regional transportation system, as well as how regional plans and planning principals, such as smart growth, affect tribal development.

Tribal Nations in San Diego Of the 107 federally recognized Indian tribes in California, 17 are located in San Diego County (Attachment B – California Native American Trust Lands). Historically, the tribal members of today’s bands represent four Indian cultural/linguistic groups who have

populated this entire region for more than 10,000 years, taking advantage of its abundant natural resources and diverse ecological system for their livelihoods. The four nations are: the Luiseño, who traditionally inhabited the land along the San Luis Rey River in north and northwestern San Diego County; the Cahuilla, who live in the mountains in the northeastern part of the county and into the Coachella and Imperial Valleys; the Cupeño, who live in the Warner Springs area; and the Kumeyaay (Northern Ipai/Southern Tipai), who live in the southern part of the county from the coast to the mountains and all the way to what is today Baja California (Attachment C – Kumeyaay Historical Map).

In the years just prior to California becoming a state, the federal government developed treaties with Native Nations in the region in an effort to reduce tribal and settler violence at the end of the U.S.-Mexican War and the onset of the Gold Rush. However, these treaties were never ratified—they were thwarted on the Senate floor by pressure from the new California Senators — and the tribal nations who had signed the treaties were never informed. In 1875, President Ulysses S. Grant signed an Executive Order based on several of the “lost treaties” creating tribal reservations for the Santa Ysabel, Pala, Sycuan, La Jolla, Rincon, and Capitan Grande.1 Most of the current tribal reservations were established by the end of the 19th century; however, several were established well into the 20th century.2 Today, these four ethnic groups are distributed over 18 reservations and are represented by 17 federally recognized tribal governments as shown in Table 1.3

As domestic sovereign nations, tribes are subject to federal regulations, but are not subject to local or state regulations, unless the U.S. Congress delegates implementation of federal law to the state. From a governance perspective, tribal governments are considered a separate category of government from the federal, state, and local governments. In addition to the standard governmental functions of regulating, taxing, and delivering services, tribal governments act to preserve and protect tribal culture and the tribal community, including determining tribal membership. Tribal governments also are responsible for the development, management, and operation of tribal economic enterprises. Most of the land within the boundaries of reservations is owned by tribes and held in trust by the federal government.4 Native American reservations currently cover more than 116,000 acres in the San Diego region—approximately four percent of the region’s land base.

1 The Capitan Grande Reservation included the Bands that would later become the Barona Band of Mission Indians relocated to the Barona Valley Ranch (1932) and subsequently the Barona Indian Reservation, and the Viejas Band of Kumeyaay Indians who relocated to Baron Long Ranch (1934) and subsequently the Viejas Indian Reservation. 2 The Jamul Indian Village did not receive federal recognition as a reservation until 1975; other bands that are still landless, such as the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians continue to seek recognition. 3 The original inhabitants of the still federally recognized Capitan Grande reservation established in the 1890s were moved to two different ranches in 1932 when the City of San Diego, by act of the U.S. Congress, acquired more than 7,000 acres of land inside that reservation territory to build the El Capitan Reservoir. Capitan Grande is currently uninhabited and jointly managed by the Barona and Viejas governments. 4 For many tribal governments land ownership is complex as often the reservations have non-Indian owned in-holdings and/or allotments or individual land parcels owned by tribal members. This complicates land and resource management for tribal governments.

Table 1 San Diego County Indian Reservations and Federally Recognized Tribal Governments

Reservation Name Tribal Government Barona Barona Band of Mission Indians Campo Campo Band of Mission Indians of the Kumeyaay Nation Capitan Grande Joint Power Authority between Barona and Viejas Ewiiaapaayp Ewiiaapaayp Band of Kumeyaay Indians5 Inaja and Cosmit Inaja Cosmit Band of Diegueño Mission Indians Jamul Indian Village Jamul Indian Village. A Kumeyaay Nation La Jolla La Jolla Band of Luiseño Indians La Posta La Posta Band of the Kumeyaay Nation Los Coyotes Los Coyotes Band of Cahuilla/Cupeño Indians Manzanita Manzanita Band of Diegueño Mission Indians Mesa Grande Mesa Grande Band of Diegueño Mission Indians Pala Pala Band of Mission Indians Pauma and Yuima Pauma Band of Luiseño Indians Rincon Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians San Pasqual San Pasqual Band of Diegueno Mission Indians Santa Ysabel Iipay Nation of Santa Ysabel Sycuan Sycuan Band of the Kumeyaay Nation Viejas Viejas Band of the Kumeyaay Indians Source: SANGIS, Bureau of Indian Affairs

Current Conditions A number of planning issues surround these reservations, as they are all located in remote areas outside of incorporated areas. The degree of remoteness ranges from those that are outside the urban transportation system, but near major highways such as Viejas, to those that are not even fully connected to maintained county roads, such as Los Coyotes. Inadequate access to and from the reservations often results in a lack of economic opportunities, as well as insufficient health, social, and cultural services.

5 Several official sources alternately refer to the Ewiiaapaayp tribe by the Spanish spelling “Cuyapaipe.”

Tribal Economic Development

Gaming is a traditional social activity among many tribal nations, however, tribal gaming enterprises expanded exponentially nationwide in the early 1990s as a result of the passage of the Federal Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA). The IGRA was the result of a legal battle between the Cabazon Band of Mission Indians and the State of California over the issue of the definition of sovereignty.6 The State claimed that Cabazon was violating state anti-gambling laws, while the tribe asserted their sovereign right to pursue their own economic interests. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of Cabazon, prompting Congress to pass a federal gaming regulatory act to define how gaming should be conducted nationwide and what role the states should have in that activity. Although several tribes in the San Diego region already had bingo facilities, by the 1990s, most of the tribes had developed or had agreements to develop gaming facilities as a means of economic development. San Diego County now has ten tribal gaming facilities, which is the greatest number of Indian gaming facilities in any county in the United States.7

Gaming-related and other types of development have led to rapid economic growth for these tribes, while also providing jobs and stimulating the regional economy.8 In the San Diego region, statistics show that the Indian gaming industry as a whole has created more than 12,000 permanent jobs in the region, resulting in a $1 billion industry with approximately $500 million in goods and services purchased annually and $500 million in payroll. It should be noted, however, that poverty levels among the Native American population remain below the national average and some gaming tribes have been much more successful than others.

This growth has been accompanied by increases in traffic, jobs-housing accessibility issues, and the need for additional resources such as water and energy.9 Even those tribes that do not have gaming facilities continue to have economic development, transportation, and infrastructure needs which have not been met.

Since the mid-1990s tribal governments in San Diego have been in the process of developing gaming compacts with the State of California which have allowed them to plan and develop gaming facilities on their reservations. The framework for the RTP is one of concentrating development in existing urban areas and connecting transit to appropriate land use patterns. Neither the 2030 RTP, nor its predecessor Mobility 2030, considered tribal land use patterns in forecast modeling as limited information was available from tribal governments. As part of the gaming compact process tribal governments are required to submit to the State a Tribal Environmental Impact Report, the findings of which are subject to negotiation between the tribal government and the local land use authority adjacent to it. However, there are currently no protocols in place for exchanging information regarding long-term land use and transportation plans on tribal lands into the regional planning process.

6 Neuman, Lisa. 2005. “Commentary: From Clean Water to Casinos: Why Sovereignty is Important to Native Americans.” Maine Policy Review. Vol. 13(2): 30-32 7 Several new projects or expansions have been approved, but put on hold due to the current economy. 8 For additional discussion on the impact of tribal gaming in California, see The Center for California Native Nations, “An Impact Analysis of Tribal Government Gaming in California.” University of California at Riverside. ND 9 For a comprehensive overview, see San Diego County study “Update on Impacts of Tribal Economic Development Projects in San Diego County,” April 2003. PDF version available from www.sdcounty.ca.gov/cnty/cntydepts/landuse/tedp.html.

The County of San Diego, in its capacity as the adjacent land use authority to all tribal developments in this region, conducted traffic needs assessments related to tribal developments which intensified after the 1988 IGRA. In its 2003 report on the impact of tribal development on its roadways, the County requested that SANDAG consider the impacts of tribal development on the regional transportation system.

“It is estimated that 38.5 miles of County-maintained arterials in the vicinity of the Reservations will need additional road capacity improvements. Of those 38.5 miles, approximately 15.6 were identified under Baseline Conditions as needing improvements solely due to non-tribal development in the unincorporated area. The additional 22.9 miles is due to existing and near-term development of tribal projects.” (p. 42).

The County undertook a traffic impact assessment and, based on that information, negotiated cooperative agreements with several tribes for “fair share” funding of traffic impact mitigation. Nonetheless, according to the County report, levels of service (LOS) on several road segments in the State Route (SR 76), State Route (SR 67), and State Route (SR 94) corridors were estimated to deteriorate with increased traffic volume associated with the gaming facilities. Both Caltrans and the County called for additional corridor studies in the unincorporated area associated with gaming facilities.

Currently, the main input required to accurately incorporate tribal land use into forecast modeling for the RTP is the square footage of gaming area which produces the most Average Daily Trips (ADT). Currently, ten tribal gaming facilities are in operation. The square footage is indicated in Attachment D – Square Footage of Gaming Facilities for Trip Generation Estimates. It is anticipated, that through government-to-government discussions with tribal governments, more accurate protocols can be developed for assessing impacts.

At the same time that there is concern about the impact of the development of gaming facilities on the regional transportation system, tribal lands are isolated from the regional transportation system as their lands are located in the unincorporated portion of the county. Although all non-gaming tribes10 in San Diego County receive funding from gaming tribes in the form of a Revenue Sharing Trust Fund (RSTF)11 to support the administration of their nations, their isolation from the transportation system, both in terms of infrastructure and transit services, is a limiting factor in their ability to improve the health and well-being of tribal members who reside on the reservation, as well as their exploration of alternative means of self-sufficiency. As more tribal members return to their reservations to live, this will continue to be an issue regardless of the success of tribal enterprises.

10 The 1999 Compact defines a ‘non-gaming’ tribe as a tribe that operates less than 350 gaming devices. Gaming devices are defined to be Class III devices. Class II devices, or bingo gaming devices, are not included in this count. 11 The State Controller’s Office began distributing checks to tribal governments in August of 2001. “Eighty-five of the 109 federally recognized tribes in California (those that have either small or no gaming operations) will receive checks that will provide these Tribes with funds to help meet the critical needs of their communities. Tribes will manage the RSTF distributions in a variety of ways, including providing per capita distributions of direct cash benefits.” Source: www.calindian.org/nl_fall2001.htm

Tribal Transportation Needs Assessment

In preparation for the 2030 RTP, to better understand the transportation needs of the tribal nations in the region, Caltrans District 11 and SANDAG designed, developed, and implemented a joint Tribal Transportation Needs Survey in 2005 (Attachment E – Summary Results) as part of the 2030 RTP process. It served as a component of an overall transportation needs assessment to: (a) initiate a process of building better relationships with tribes in San Diego and Imperial Counties, (b) establish a baseline of awareness of the transportation issues affecting each tribe in order to facilitate partnerships between Caltrans, tribal governments, and the regional transportation agencies, and (c) promote more efficient identification of mutual transportation concerns and the development of appropriate solutions.

For the purpose of examining long-range transportation issues, the tribal nations in the region were grouped into three clusters based on key transportation corridors: State Route 76, which runs east-west in North County; State Route 79, which runs north-south in the eastern half of the county; and, Interstate 8, which runs east-west in the southern area of the county (Attachment F – Tribal Lands Transportation Corridors Map).

Technical Workshop – Identifying Strategies

In preparation for the 2006 San Diego Regional Tribal Summit, SANDAG, Caltrans, County of San Diego, SCTCA, and RTA staff worked together to hold a technical transportation workshop to discuss the results of the Tribal Transportation Needs Survey and provide an opportunity for tribal transportation managers to discuss issues and strategies to improve tribal transportation programs in the region with the transportation planning staff from SANDAG, Caltrans, the County, MTS, NCTD, and the BIA.

The group analyzed the current situation of transportation programs in the region discussing first, the obstacles to overcome in order to improve tribal transportation programs, and then, those strengths in the region that could be leveraged for improvement. Among the obstacles tribal representatives mentioned: (a) the lack of communication and follow-up from agencies, (b) complex government processes and a lack of understanding of tribal processes, (c) lack of understanding of the transportation funding process and how to access it, (d) disconnects between transportation planning priorities of agencies and tribal governments, and (e) rigid organizational cultures and legal constraints that limit collaboration.

Among the strengths that could be leveraged to improve tribal transportation-related programs, the group mentioned the following: (a) tribal governments acknowledged that agencies are recognizing the problems and are willing to work on them, (b) that agencies have been working more effectively in recent years, and there is an increased one-on-one respect, (c) the existence of tribal liaisons in the agencies has facilitated communication and coordination, (d) policy mandates from the federal and state level are helping to create the political will to cooperate, (e) intertribal councils such as the RTA and the SCTCA are focusing more on policy-level tribal needs and partnerships, and (f) increasing evidence of a desire on both parts to understand each other and work on collaborative solutions.

The group then developed a set of strategies to improve tribal transportation programs in the region. The policy-level strategies were submitted to the SCTCA and SANDAG boards for consideration as part of the 2006 San Diego Regional Tribal Summit co-hosted by the two intergovernmental councils.

2006 San Diego Regional Tribal Summit

The SANDAG and SCTCA Boards at the Tribal Summit went through the strategies, discussed them, and then participated in an interactive polling exercise to determine where there were areas of mutual concern to identify possible areas of collaboration. Table 2 indicates the cooperative action agenda which emerged out of the Summit and was approved by both Boards and which have been the focus of collaborative planning since that time.

Table 2 2030 RTP – Collaborative Action Agenda on Tribal Transportation

Strategic Area Action Government-to-Government Framework a) Pursue formula for tribal representation in the SANDAG structure b) Develop a collaborative legislative agenda c) Form interagency working group on tribal transportation issues as an ongoing forum

Transportation Infrastructure a) Support tribal efforts to update Indian Reservation Roads Inventory (IRR) b) Identify corridors critical to tribal reservations and coordinate implementation of relevant studies

Transit a) Collaborate with interested tribes on Tribal Transit Feasibility Study b) Pursue funding to support tribal transit needs

Transportation Funding a)Create opportunities for pooling/leveraging transportation funding for mutually important projects b) Collaborate and advocate for new transportation funding in the region, including transit and TDM c) Identify mechanisms for providing ongoing funding for new or additional transportation programs, including transit services and TDM

Information Sharing/Technical Assistance Agencies will provide ongoing training to tribal governments on funding processes, transportation, and regional planning

A REGIONAL GOVERNMENT-TO-GOVERNMENT FRAMEWORK

As reservations continue to develop and interregional planning issues become more related to surrounding jurisdictions rather than federal and state agencies, the need for establishing a government-to-government framework at a regional level has become more and more apparent. Tribes operate under independent constitutions, have their own systems of governance, and establish and administer their own laws. This sovereign status of tribal governments dictates that the United States and all agencies operating within it are expected to engage in government-to-government relationships when engaging Native American tribes. Government-to-government interaction with Native American tribes should follow the principles of coordination, cooperation, and consultation.

The integrated work plan, which was developed in collaboration with the Reservation Transportation Authority, SCTCA, Caltrans, and the County of San Diego for the planning of the 2006 Tribal Summit, demonstrated that working collaboratively public agencies and tribal governments can create a mechanism for timely, meaningful, and effective involvement of tribal governments in the regional transportation planning process. One of the major outcomes of the Summit was the collaborative commitment among various regional partner agencies to develop a framework for engaging tribal nations in the planning process.

Regional Partners The core of the framework is an ongoing dialogue among key stakeholders at the regional level. Today, all three principal transportation planning agencies in the region have tribal liaisons: SANDAG, Caltrans, and the County of San Diego.

Public Agencies

Caltrans District 11: Caltrans was the first state agency in California to enact an agencywide policy on tribal consultation. Native American Liaison program was established in 2002 to work with the 19 tribes in its jurisdiction. Its objectives are to: (a) establish close coordination and early project involvement with tribal governments to streamline funding, environmental, and project delivery processes in areas on or near reservations; (b) ensure that Caltrans programs do not adversely affect important California Native American sites, traditions, or practices; (c) encourage cooperation between other agencies and local tribal governments; (d) assist with training, information dissemination, and project delivery; and (e) consider Tribal Employment Rights Ordinance (TERO) from individual tribes for employment and contracting opportunities for Native Americans on Caltrans projects on or near reservations.

County of San Diego: The County’s Tribal Liaison was established in 2001. Liaison responsibilities include: identifying and resolving issues related to impacts of tribal economic development projects on infrastructure and other county services in unincorporated areas; providing support and tracking legislation and policy matters related to tribes for the County Board of Supervisors and the Chief Administrative Officer;

participating in regional land use and transportation planning, economic and services forecasting, funding, and development activities; and assisting tribes with permitting and other issues.

San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG): It is through the Borders Committee that SANDAG has been pursuing government-to-government relations with tribal governments in the region. The Borders Committee discusses policy issues related to transboundary planning from three perspectives: interregional, binational, and tribal. In 2005 the Southern California Tribal Chairman’s Association joined the Borders Committee as an intertribal council of governments to engage in a dialogue on transboundary planning issues with other neighboring councils of government, including Imperial Valley, Riverside, and Orange Counties, as well as the Republic of Mexico as represented by the Consul General in San Diego. SANDAG’s Tribal Liaison is a member of the Land Use and Transportation Planning Department which provides technical support to the Borders Committee, as well as the Board of Directors and other Policy Advisory Committees.

Intertribal Organizations

Intertribal organizations play a key role as facilitators for this emerging regional government-to-government framework. SANDAG has a strong working relationship with two key intertribal associations to strengthen communication, coordination, and collaboration with area tribes.

Southern California Tribal Chairmen’s Association (SCTCA): The SCTCA is a multiservice, nonprofit corporation established in 1972 by a consortium of 19 federally recognized Indian tribes in Southern California. As an intertribal council, the SCTCA serves as a forum for a wide variety of issues for its member tribes. In June 2005, the SCTCA joined as an advisory member of the Borders Committee, similar to SANDAG’s relationships with other associations of governments, including Imperial Valley Association of Governments (IVAG) and Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG).

Reservation Transportation Authority (RTA): The RTA, founded in 1998, is a consortium of Southern California Indian tribal governments designated as a Public Law 93-638 contracting entity that provides transportation education, planning, and program administration for tribal government members. Their intertribal service area includes tribes in San Bernardino, Riverside, San Diego, and Imperial Valley (Attachment G – RTA Intertribal Service Area). At a technical level, SANDAG and the RTA have collaborated on a number of tribal transportation planning projects, particularly in the area of mobility management in recent years.

Framework – Policy Level The regional government-to-government framework for working with tribal nations in the region has been strengthened through the last several years. The priority was to build the institutional trust that would form the basis for future cooperation. It was important to work together on action items that were identified at the 2006 Summit that would have immediate results, as well as to build strategic alliances for more long-term solutions.

Periodic Summits

The overarching element of the government-to-government framework is having periodic summits between the Boards of Directors of the two principal intergovernmental agencies— SCTCA and SANDAG. By bringing together the entire board of each agency, it offers an opportunity for tribal and non-tribal elected officials from the region to engage in a diplomatic dialogue, identify issues of mutual concern, and develop priority actions that can be carried out through the partnership framework.

SCTCA Representation on SANDAG

One of the key issues raised by the tribal leaders at the 2006 Summit was tribal representation at SANDAG. The SANDAG Board and the tribal governments recognized the benefits to be gained by taking a cooperative approach to planning for an improved quality of life for the San Diego region. The leadership of SANDAG and the SCTCA had discussions over several months regarding the development of a formula for tribal representation which would respect tribal sovereignty and involve tribal governments in policy decisions at SANDAG. At a policy level, SCTCA and the SANDAG signed a Memorandum of Understanding on January 26, 2007 memorializing the agreement to have the SCTCA join the SANDAG Board of Directors and Policy Advisory Committees, including Transportation, Regional Planning, and Public Safety, as advisory members. Tribal leaders are now part of the regional decision-making process at a policy level, offering a tribal perspective to complex regional issues.

Tribal Liaison to SCTCA Board of Directors

At the policy level, the representatives of the SCTCA sit on the SANDAG Policy Advisory Committees; however, the SCTCA also wanted to ensure that major initiatives in which SANDAG was engaged also were shared directly with the entire tribal leadership. Therefore, the SANDAG Tribal Liaison coordinates with the SCTCA representatives to SANDAG to bring briefings on major, agencywide initiatives to inform the tribal leadership and obtain feedback from all tribal nations to the process. This has included the Coordinated Plan for Health and Human Services Transportation, the Regional Energy Strategy, and the Environmental Mitigation Program, among others. This creates a systematic feedback loop to ensure that all tribal nations are involved in the process and have an opportunity to raise issues and provide direction.

Tribal Issues Brought to SANDAG Policy Advisory Committees

As members of the various SANDAG Policy Advisory Committees, SCTCA representatives have brought tribal issues to their respective committees. Several presentations on a number of issues have been brought to the Policy Advisory Committees, including: background on Public Law 280 and its impact on tribal nations in California, the Intertribal Court System among San Diego tribes, tribal energy planning efforts, intertribal initiatives on fire recovery, and tribal transportation initiatives, among others. On a periodic basis, the SANDAG Tribal Liaison would meet with the SCTCA representatives to discuss current issues, develop an agenda of presentations, and provide technical assistance when requested to bring these briefings to the appropriate Policy Advisory Committees.

Framework – Technical Level Interagency Technical Working Group on Tribal Transportation Issues

One of the critical technical outcomes of the 2006 Tribal Summit was the collaborative strategic action of creating an ongoing forum for discussion on tribal transportation issues between the tribal nations and public agencies that have an influence tribal transportation. The Boards of SCTCA and SANDAG approved the charter (Attachment H – Tribal Working Group Charter) for the Interagency Technical Working Group on Tribal Transportation Issues (Working Group) in the summer of 2006. The Barona Band of Mission Indians hosted the kick off meeting in October of that year. The Working Group forms part of the SANDAG structure and reports to the Borders Committee, and all tribes in San Diego can be members. Currently thirteen of the seventeen tribes in the region are formal members of the Working Group (Attachment I – Current Membership Roster).The Working Group has co-chairs (a tribal leader and a SANDAG executive staff) at the request of the tribal nations. The Working Group is staffed by SANDAG, meets quarterly, and tribal nations alternate hosting the meetings at different reservations. Since 2006, Pala, Pauma, Rincon, San Pasqual, Barona, Campo, and Viejas have hosted the Working Group.

The purpose of the Interagency Technical Working Group on Tribal Transportation Issues (Working Group) is to serve as a forum for tribal governments in the region to discuss and coordinate transportation issues of mutual concern with the various public planning agencies in the region, including SANDAG, Caltrans, the County of San Diego, and the transit operators. In partnership with the Reservation Transportation Authority (RTA), the Working Group monitors and provides input on the implementation of the strategies and planning activities related to transportation mutually developed through the San Diego Regional Tribal Summit.

The Working Group responsibilities include reviewing current activities and plans being implemented by SANDAG and the tribal governments in an effort to coordinate programs, address issues of concern, and ensure that the needs and issues of tribal governments are being incorporated into the transportation planning process at the regional level. The Working Group provides feedback and comments on current and planned activities and provides technical advice on the implementation of these activities. The Working Group also assists with the associated outreach to the tribal community on transportation issues of regional significance.

SANDAG-RTA Partnership for Tribal Transportation Planning

SANDAG and the Reservation Transportation Authority signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) in 2005 to collaborate on tribal transportation. SANDAG and the RTA have pursued and attained funding for a number of tribal transportation planning projects since the 2006 Summit, which are detailed in the next section. The focus of much of the collaborative planning work between the RTA and SANDAG has been in expanding the RTA’s mission from transportation infrastructure on tribal reservations to mobility, including transit and transportation demand management. In so doing, the RTA becomes SANDAG’s mobility partner, taking the lead on integrating tribal mobility projects into the system, benefiting not only tribes, but the rural population as well.

MILESTONES IN COLLABORATIVE TRIBAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING

For the 2030 RTP, a set of objectives was established for tribal transportation planning. Through the consultation process, including a survey of tribal transportation needs, a technical workshop to analyze the results collaboratively, and a policy-level summit, a set of cooperative strategies to improve tribal transportation were developed between the SCTCA and the SANDAG Board of Directors. Attachment J is a timeline matrix which demonstrates the recommendation, action, and the milestone achieved. There are four principal, transportation-related policy areas that were considered in the 2030 RTP that resulted from the bilateral analysis with tribal governments, as well as for future collaboration: roadway infrastructure, funding, transit, and information sharing/data gathering. The matrix highlights the collaborative nature of all of the various efforts. In some cases tribal nations took the lead, while in others the County, SANDAG, or the RTA.

Transportation Infrastructure As with all land use authorities, improvements in transportation infrastructure are key to improving the potential of each tribal nation’s ability to compete in a global economy and provide access to housing, jobs, education, entertainment, and healthcare for its citizens. Efforts have been made in both assisting tribes in increasing their own transportation planning funding through updating their Reservation Roads Inventory through the Bureau of Indian Affairs, as well as tribal governments making significant contributions to county and state road infrastructure as an element of their mitigation agreements with the County of San Diego.

Supported the Indian Reservation Roads Inventory

One of the innovations for tribal nations in the 2005 SAFETEA-LU transportation legislation was significant changes in the Indian Reservation Roads (IRR) program. Traditionally, the formula for tribes to receive transportation funding through the Bureau of Indian Affairs is by the number reservation road miles. For small, land-based tribes like those in California, that has resulted in their receiving minimal funding. However, the current legislation acknowledges that tribal transportation systems for many tribes include access to state highways, as well as county and city roads. Therefore, under the current legislation tribes can include segments of roads and highways not owned by them in their inventory. In order to do that a letter of acknowledgement is required from the owner of the road.

Caltrans headquarters received a grant from the FHWA to support efforts of the tribes in California to update their IRR inventories to increase their share of funding—most of the tribal nations in San Diego were able to participate in the initiative. The tribes and agencies that form the Working Group have been collaborating to ensure that all tribes in San Diego region who want to update their inventory to increase their transportation planning funding have the support to do so. Caltrans hired a consultant to work with tribes to do the technical inventories. Caltrans then sent every participating tribe a compact disc with all of the completed data. Each tribe, then, is responsible for submitting a Tribal Transportation Plan, a resolution indicating the road segments to be considered in their inventory, and letters of acknowledgement from the owners of the non-tribal road segments to be

included. Caltrans and the County of San Diego, through the Working Group, provided the tribes who requested them with letters of acknowledgement for the segments of roads or state highways that are critical to their tribal transportation system.

To date, California tribes have increased their share of IRR funding from 1 percent to 5 percent. The current funding formula has been so successful for California tribes that there is now a controversy among large, land-based tribes and small, land-based tribes as to whether to maintain the current formula. Many of the applications for updating their inventories of San Diego tribes have been held up in the Albuquerque office of the BIA. The National Tribal Advisory Committee to the BIA IRR continues to discuss the formula and whether it will be included in the new authorization.

Identified Tribal Corridors and Coordinated Relevant Studies/Projects

State Routes

A number of work undertaken in this time period affected State Routes 76, 79, and 67. One particular project highlights the importance of collaboration for infrastructure improvements that has received national attention as the way the Department of Transportation should work on a government-to-government basis with tribal nations. Caltrans and the RTA are conducting a study of SR 76 east of the Interstate 15 to determine what kinds of operational improvements can be made to improve the safety of the SR 76 East corridor. The study identified estimated costs for potential operational improvements, as well as a methodology for allocating fair share contributions to the developing property owners in the corridor. Additionally, this study identified potential alternative funding options from federal, state, local, and private sources. The study was funded by a grant from statewide Caltrans grant; the Pala Band of Mission Indians provided the local match; and the RTA conducted the study. By bringing together the State, the tribes, the County, SANDAG, environmental resource agencies, and the public during the study process, new and innovative measures were explored for strengthening the State’s existing ability to plan and fund transportation improvements.

County/Reservation Roads

A number of infrastructure projects have been planned, designed, and implemented since 2007. These projects are a combination of Caltrans-permitted projects, County-permitted projects, and County CIP projects. These were all projects that involved collaborations between the County Department of Public Works and various tribes. For example, the Valley Center Road Widening project (completed 2009) was designed and constructed by the County with funding contributions from San Pasqual, Rincon, Pauma, and Pala. In some cases, the tribe was the lead, such as the Lake Wohlford improvements at the entrance to Valley View or the improvements to Black Canyon Road near Mesa Grand funded by a grant Mesa Grande received. All of these projects listed in the Milestone Matrix (Attachment J) demonstrate the improvements made in infrastructure serving tribal nations and the unincorporated area of the county.

Transit/Mobility Planning Tribal Transit Feasibility Study

SANDAG was awarded a transit planning grant from Caltrans to determine the feasibility of implementing transit service in one or two key transportation corridors between selected tribal reservations and cities and/or urbanized community planning areas in the unincorporated area of San Diego County. This report examines traditional public transit services, as well as the potential for nontraditional services that could be funded by private sources and/or public-private partnerships.

The study was a collaborative effort between SANDAG, the Reservation Transportation Authority (RTA), and the region’s transit agencies—the Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) and the North Country Transit District (NCTD). SANDAG contracted with IBI Group to conduct the technical analysis for this study, which provides the information needed to leverage additional funding for transit service for the 17 federally recognized tribal governments in San Diego County. The Tribal Transit Working Group, composed of tribal members and agency staff advisory members, provided guidance to the consultant throughout the study.

The study identified transportation corridors and service options to make better connections between the tribal reservations and the urban transit system. Recommendations included potential service enhancements to existing services, as well as new rural transit routes focused on connecting the tribal community (Attachments K and L – Tribal Transit Corridor Maps). The study provided a financial assessment, as well as identified potential sources of funding.

FTA Tribal Transit Grant Program

The Tribal Transit Feasibility Study provided the technical basis for the Working Group to pursue funding. The Working Group directed the RTA to develop a proposal for the FTA Tribal Transit program, based on the recommendations of the Tribal Transit Feasibility Study. The RTA applied successfully for FY07, FY08, and FY09 funding. Although the RTA received the highest level of funding for each cycle, the awards were significantly less than the total project costs to fund the entire plan. The Working Group discussed the options available and decided to focus the funds on supporting an enhanced service of one of NCTD’s routes, the 388/389, which runs from the Escondido Transit Center through Valley Center to Pala. One of the principal recommendations for the Northern Corridor was to enhance that service and create an Express portion of the route that would run up and down the Interstate 15 from the Escondido Transit Center to Pala, completing a service loop and permitting those on the SR 76 to take an express bus to and from the Escondido Transit Center (Attachment M – 388 flyer). In addition to the operating funds provided by the Tribal Transit program, the RTA successfully applied for ARRA funds associated with the FY08 funding cycle. Only FY08 Tribal Transit grant recipients could compete for these funds. The RTA recently announced they received $1.2 million for transit capital improvements for the region through this program. The proposal was based on the recommendations in the Tribal Transit Feasibility Study.

Tribal TDM Outreach – Phase I (San Diego)

The objective of this collaborative project between the RTA and SANDAG was to strengthen the participation of tribal nations in the San Diego region in the regional Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program. The tribal gaming facilities are now major employers in the region, yet their involvement in the region’s commuter services program (iCommute) was limited. Sycuan, Viejas, Barona, and Campo in the Interstate 8 corridor have an approximate total of 9,000 employees. In the SR 76 corridor Pala, Pauma, Rincon, and San Pasqual have a total of 5,500 employees. It is estimated that each gaming facility attracts a daily count of anywhere from 7–15,000 guests. The tribal governments invest extensively in the San Diego region. Statistics show that the Indian gaming industry as a whole purchases approximately $263 million in goods and services annually. As few tribal members currently live on the reservations, tribal members and non-tribal employees travel from all over the region and other counties, including Riverside, Imperial, and even Orange Counties, to jobs on the reservations. As a service-based hospitality industry, the majority of the employees are low-skilled labor and often minorities who travel long distances from neighboring regions where housing is more affordable.

SANDAG, the RTA, and the Southern California Tribal Chairmen’s Association (SCTCA) collaborated on an assessment of the needs of tribal employers; developed a strategy to meet their needs; and SANDAG assisted the RTA in developing a business/marketing plan for establishing a Tribal Transportation Management Association (TTMA) that would collaborate with SANDAG’s TDM program (iCommute). The tribal TMA, a private, nonprofit, member-controlled organization would provide the institutional framework for the recommended TDM programs and services that were developed as a result of the study. Six tribal enterprises participated in the study and completed commute surveys in their facilities, including: Pala, Pauma, Rincon, Viejas, Sycuan, and Santa Ysabel.

Tribal TDM Outreach – Phase II (Riverside)

The RTA successfully applied for a Caltrans Environmental Justice–Context-Sensitive grant to expand their Tribal TDM project to their member tribes in Riverside and San Bernardino. That project was initiated in February 2010 and will involve the Southern California Association of Governments, the Riverside County Transportation Commission, and the San Bernardino Association of Governments. The RTA also will continue to refine their business plan for the Tribal Transportation Management Association with SANDAG’s technical assistance. Transportation Funding One of the action items established at the 2006 Tribal Summit was the importance of creating opportunities for pooling or leveraging transportation funding. During this period, the County of San Diego and several tribal nations negotiated innovative mitigation agreements, which included components for supporting collaborative transit and transportation demand management initiatives.

Pala Mitigation Agreement With County of San Diego

In 2007, the County of San Diego and the Pala Band of Mission Indians entered into an agreement related to the expansion of their gaming facility, which included consideration for future transportation demand management and transit improvements such as: (a) transportation demand management program being developed by the RTA with assistance from SANDAG; (b) possible Park-and-Ride facility at the Interstate 15/State Route 76; (c) Interregional Transit Service Plan being developed by San Diego and Riverside agencies; and (d) support for a North County Transit District bus stop. Pala was an active member of the RTA’s initial TDM Outreach program.

Pauma Mitigation Agreement With County of San Diego

In 2008, the County of San Diego and the Pauma Band of Luiseno Indians entered into an agreement related to the building of a gaming facility and hotel, which included support for transportation demand management and transit, as well as fair share contributions for the operational improvements on the State Route 76 as determined from the Caltrans Operational Improvements Study. The agreement included a commitment to consider membership with a specific contribution based on the RTA’s business plan in the Tribal Transportation Management Association (TTMA) initiative of the RTA—should the TTMA be formed. Pauma also made a commitment to a specific goal of having 20 percent of their employees participate daily in carpools, vanpools, or other rideshare programs.

Information Sharing/Technology Assistance One of the commitments that resulted from the 2006 Tribal Summit was to systematically provide ongoing training to tribal governments on funding processes and transportation and regional planning. SANDAG has worked closely with the Tribal Transportation Assistance Program currently managed by the National Indian Justice Center (NIJC) contracted by Caltrans, to ensure that tribal nations in San Diego are aware of and have the appropriate and timely information for taking advantage of funding opportunities and other tribal transportation planning training. The NIJC has been invited to the Working Group on a number of occasions to share information and training opportunities with area tribes. The Working Group has resulted in an important venue for discussing statewide transportation issues with San Diego tribes.

In addition, SANDAG, through its Service Bureau, has made available to tribal governments a technical support for planning and data analysis services. A number of tribes have taken advantage of the services provided for their own planning efforts.

2050 RTP PROCESS – RECOMMENDED STRATEGIES

Building on the successes of the last RTP, the members of the Working Group were asked to review the tribal transportation planning objectives and strategies developed in the last cycle for the 2030 RTP, determine which have been accomplished, which continue to be issues that must be addressed, and identify any new areas that should be considered in the process (Attachment N – RTP Tribal Transportation Strategies).

Several workshops were held with the Working Group, as well as the RTA and the SCTCA Board, between September and November of 2009 to obtain input on updating the 2030 Tribal Transportation Strategies for the 2050 RTP planning process. Their recommendations are listed in Table 3 and will be the subject of discussion at the 2010 San Diego Regional Tribal Summit. The objective is to identify and prioritize a set of strategies to be incorporated into the 2050 RTP.

Table 3 2050 RTP - Proposed Strategies for Tribal Transportation

Strategic Area Action Government-to-Government Framework Public agencies should understand tribal plans, how they are developed and implemented Develop collaborative legislative agenda that benefits the region

Transportation Infrastructure Identify corridors critical to tribal reservations and coordinate the funding and implementation of relevant studies Identify critical regional arterials serving tribal nations which should be included in the RTP Coordinate the incorporation of existing Tribal Transportation Plans (TTP) into the current RTP

Transit Collaborate on the issue of reverse commuting for tribal enterprise employees and pursuing funding opportunities Collaborate on the pursuit of funding opportunities to implement the recommendations from the Tribal Transit Feasibility Study Collaborate on the development of a Tribal Transportation Management Association (TTMA) for increased tribal participation in TDM programs regionwide.

Transportation Funding Create opportunities for pooling/leveraging transportation funding for mutually important projects Collaborate and advocate for new transportation funding in the region, including transit and TDM Identify mechanisms for providing ongoing funding for new or additional transportation programs, including transit services and TDM

Information Sharing/Technical Assistance Agencies will provide ongoing training to tribal governments on funding processes, transportation, and regional planning Provide information on technical support for planning and data analysis services to tribal governments parallel to member agencies

BIBLIOGRAPHY

2001 California Indian Legal Service, “California Makes Distribution of Revenue Sharing Trust Fund, CILS News, Vol. 8, Fall.

2006 San Diego Association of Governments/Southern California Tribal Chairmen’s Association. “Proceedings for the 2006 San Diego Regional Tribal Summit.” March 10, 2006.

2003 San Diego County. “Update on Impacts of Tribal Economic Development Projects in San Diego County,” April. PDF version available from www.sdcounty.ca.gov/cnty/cntydepts/landuse/tedp.html

2002 State of California Department of Transportation, “Transportation Guide for Native Americans,” November.

2006 State of California Department of Transportation/San Diego Association of Governments. “Polling Results from Tribal Transportation Technical Workshop. February 8, 2006.

2006 State of California Department of Transportation/San Diego Association of Governments. “2005 Tribal Transportation Needs Survey.”

23 Attachment A TTribalribal LL andsands inin thethe SanSan DiegoDiego RR egionegion

Orange Riverside County County

Riverside County PALA San Diego County RESERVATION TORRES-MARTINEZ PAUMA & YUIMA RESERVATION RESERVATION

LA JOLLA LOS COYOTES RESERVATION |}·79 RESERVATION 5 RINCON ¨§¦ RESERVATION |}·76 ¨§¦15 |}·76 SAN PASQUAL RESERVATION |}·78 IIPAY NATION OF SANTA YSABEL |}·78 MESA GRANDE |}·78 RESERVATION

INAJA-COSMIT P RESERVATION A BARONA C I RESERVATION I F I I C C |}·56 CAPITAN GRANDE O RESERVATION C E E 15 A ¨§¦ |}·79 N EWIIAAPAAYP

}67 San Diego County Imperial County ¨§¦805 |· RESERVATION |}·52 VIEJAS 125 RESERVATION 8 5 ¨§¦15 |}· ¨§¦ ¨§¦ |}·163 (Baron Long) MANZANITA ¨§¦8 RESERVATION SYCUAN LA POSTA |}·94 RESERVATION |}·94 RESERVATION JAMUL INDIAN VILLAGE |}·54 CAMPO RESERVATION |}·75 |}·125 ¨§¦5 ¨§¦805 Planning Division GIS |}·94 Portions of this map contain geographic information 905 copyrighted by SanGIS. All rights reserved. |}· United States of America/California 20 Miles North Estados Unidos Mexicanos/Baja California January 2003

24 Attachment B

Oregon Idaho Oregon Idaho Smith River ·161 ¦¨§5 ·197 ¤£199 ¤£101 ·96 · 395 Elk Valley Karuk XL Ranch ¤£ Fort Bidwell ·263 ·3 DEL NORTE Karuk XL Ranch Quartz Valley 3 ¤£97 · ·139 Quartz Valley MODOC XL Ranch ·169 Resighini ·96 ·299 Cedarville 265 Native American Trust Lands SISKIYOU · Yurok Karuk Alturas ¤£101 DISTRICT 2 Karuk Karuk ·169 · ·299 Lookout · Big Lagoon Likely Hoopa Valley Trinidad ·89

3 5 Trinidad · ¦¨§ Big Bend ·96 139 SHASTA 299 · Legend ·299 · ·255 Blue Lake Roaring Creek TRINITY XL Ranch HUMBOLDT ·299 Montgomery Creek LASSEN Native American Trust Land Table Bluff 151 Rohnerville ·299 · ·299 Rohnerville ·3 ·273 ·44 $+ No Registered Trust Land - Tribal Offices Redding ·44 ·139 ¤£395 ·36 ¤£101 Susanville * Buena Vista Rancheria ·36 ·36 · DISTRICT 1 · ·172 ·36 * Ione Band of Miwok Indians ·36 ·147 ¤£395 Susanville * Mechoopda Indian Tribe of the Chico Rancheria Greenville TEHAMA ·89 * Potter Valley Tribe 99 PLUMAS ¤£101 · 70 ·32 · * Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria Round Valley Paskenta ·284 BUTTE ·70 * Lower Lake Rancheria 32 +$ Mechoopda Indian Tribe of Chico Rancheria · ·49 Laytonville Grindstone Creek · ·1 ·191 ·162 Berry Creek MENDOCINO ¦¨§5 SIERRA 149 · Enterprise Sherwood Valley GLENN Mooretown 162 · 162 89 Caltrans District Boundary ¤£101 · Berry Creek · LAKE Mooretown Sherwood Valley ·20 NEVADA · 45 Redwood Valley · Colusa ·20 80 Coyote Valley Robinson COLUSA DISTRICT 3 ¦¨§ State Highway Colusa ·70 YUBA ·267 Pinoleville 20 Upper Lake ·89 ·128 · ·20 · Guidiville 28 Robinson ·174 PLACER · Potter Valley Tribe +$ 20 20 ·29 · · ·1 SUTTER ·253 Robinson Scotts Valley 99 Hopland ·20 · ·49 City Boundary 175 Sulphur Bank Cortina · Big Valley ·70 53 113 Manchester Point Arena 281 · · 65 128 · · · 5 ·89 · 16 ¦¨§ 193 · · ·193 · 29 Auburn · EL DORADO 88 Cloverdale 175 · · ·89 County Boundary 50 101 99 £ ¤£ Dry Creek Rumsey · ¤ ® Middletown Washoe (Woodfords Community) 80 Stewarts Point 128 16 88 · 29 · ¦¨§ Shingle Springs · · ¤£50 ·89 +$ 113 49 · SONOMA Lower Lake Rancheria Koi Nation YOLO · · ALPINE ¦¨§505 NAPA ¦¨§80 +$ Buena Vista Rancheria 116 Route Signs · 128 · · 88 AMADOR · ·4 SACRAMENTO ·16 +$ · ·12 ·29 Ione Band of Miwok Indians 121 124 KË AØ 1 · %&n( · · ¤£395 Interstate United States State +$ ·113 26 80 · · CALAVERAS 182 ¦¨§ 104 Jackson 395 · Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria · 108 ¤£ 160 · SOLANO · ·116 Bridgeport 5 88 121 ¦¨§ 99 · · 12 · · · ·12 ·49 Sheep Ranch · · ·270 MARIN ·37 ¦¨§680 ·12 ·167 · TUOLUMNE 88 · 26 Nevada ¤£101 · ·4 ·49 Tuolomne 1 580 Lytton · ¦¨§ ·4 24 · · 4 · · SAN JOAQUIN Chicken Ranch ·120 CONTRA COSTA 120 MONO 120 · ·120 · · ·158 Benton Paiute SAN FRANCISCO DISTRICT 4 205 ¦¨§ 49 ¦¨§580 ·219 · DISTRICT 10 ¤£395 580 203 ¦¨§ 132 132 · 92 · · · · 880 MARIPOSA ¦¨§ 84 STANISLAUS · ·33 ¤£6 ALAMEDA ·84 ·266 5 ¦¨§ 49 1 · Timbi-Sha Shoshone · 59 99 · 130 · 140 41 280 · · · Bishop 84 ·35 ¦¨§ MADERA · ·168 SANTA CLARA 140 · SAN MATEO 9 · ·168 · · 395 Timbi-Sha Shoshone North Fork ¤£ 165 · 59 MERCED · Picayune ·33 Big Pine ¤£101 233 Big Sandy 1 · · 152 152 · SANTA CRUZ 152 · 152 · · ·145 Cold Springs DISTRICT 9 25 Table Mountain 1 · 41 · 129 · · · ·33 · · 99 · 168 ·156 · Fort Independence 180 156 · · ·145 INYO ¤£395 ·180 ·180 ·25 ·63

68 Lone Pine · ·68 SAN BENITO DISTRICT 6 · ·33 ·245 ·136 FRESNO ·43 5 · ·201 1 ¦¨§ · · ¤£101 ·201 Timbi-Sha Shoshone 41 198 190 146 · · · · 63 127 · · ·216 · 25 245 190 · 198 · · Timbi-Sha Shoshone 269 · · TULARE Timbi-Sha Shoshone Santa Rosa Rancheria ·65 PACIFIC 198 · 137 ·137 · MONTEREY ·198 ·190 ·99 Tule River ·178 KINGS ·190 · 395 Tule River ¤£ ·178 ·41 DISTRICT 5 ·43

·1 155 · · ·155 ·178 ·46 ·178

41 46 · · ·65 ·46 ¦¨§15 14 ¦¨§5 · ·127 101 ·41 ¤£ ·58 KERN

SAN LUIS OBISPO ·227 95 395 ¤£ Arizona OCEAN ·202 ¤£ ·166 Fort Mojave ·166 15 · ·58 ¦¨§ ·1 SAN BERNARDINO

SANTA BARBARA ¤£101 ¦¨§40 ·135 ·247

246 · ·33 VENTURA Santa Ynez ¦¨§5 Chemehuevi 18 DISTRICT 8 ·1 ·154 · 14 · 138 ¤£101 · ¤£95 LOS ANGELES ·150 · ·2 ·62 ·126 DISTRICT 7 330 · 62 · 38 62 · San Manuel · · 210 ¦¨§ Twenty-Nine Palms

·62 Colorado River 177 Morongo Agua Caliente · ·60 ¦¨§10 RIVERSIDE ·111 215 · 79 · ·243

Soboba Agua Caliente 95 Twenty-Nine Palms ¤£ ¦¨§15 ·74 ·74 Cabazon ORANGE 10 10 74 Augustine ¦¨§ ¨§ · Cabazon ¦ ·215 ·79 Ramona ·74 ·86 ·74 Santa Rosa Reservation ·195 Torres-Martinez 111 371 · 79 · DISTRICT 12 Pechanga · Cahuilla Pauma-Yuima Pala 5 79 ¦¨§ La Jolla · Los Coyotes Rincon 76 ·86 ·76 · · IMPERIAL San Pasqual Santa Ysabel ·78 15 ·78 · ·78 ¦¨§ Mesa Grande · · Santa Ysabel Mesa Grande ·78 Inaja Cosmit DISTRICT 11 Barona Capitan Grande SAN DIEGO ·111 ·67 Cuyapaipe · Viejas Fort Yuma ¦¨§8 8 8 Sycuan Manzanita ¦¨§ ¦¨§ La Posta Jamul 98 Campo · ·94

Baja California California Department of Transportation Division of Transportation Planning July 2009 Sonora 0 15 30 60 90 120 Data Source: Bureau of Indian Affairs, January 2009 Miles

25 Attachment C

26 Attachment D

SQUARE FOOTAGE OF GAMING FACILITIES FOR TRIP GENERATION ESTIMATES

Square Square Number Of Footage Of Footage Of Gaming Year Existing Number Of Gaming Machines; Number Of Name** Casino Name Opened Operation Restaurants Floor Tables Employees

SR76 Corridor

Pala Band of Pala Casino 2001 650,000 8 70,000 2,250; 85 1,800 Mission Indians Resort & Spa

Pauma Band of Casino Pauma 2001 65,000 3 35,000 1,050; 23 500 Mission Indians

Rincon Band of Luiseño Harrah’s Rincon 2002 263,000 8 59,000 1,600; 46 1,500 Nation Casino & Resort

San Pasqual Band of Valley View Casino 2001 42,000 1 30,000 1,250; 10 629 Mission Indians

I-8 Corridor

Barona Band of Barona Valley Ranch 1994 712,000 9 310,000 2,000; 63 3,500 Mission Indians Resort & Casino

Campo Band of Golden Acorn 2001 60,000 1 40,000 750; 12 485 Kumeyaay Indians Casino

Sycuan Band of the Sycuan Casino 1983 233,000 6 115,000 2,000; 63 2,500 Kumeyaay Nation & Resort

Viejas Band of Viejas Casino 1991 285,000 5 95,000 2,240; 96 2,800 Kumeyaay Indians & Turf Club

Totals: 2.3 million 41 754,000 13,140; 398 13,714

(2005: 2.3 million 38 754,000 12,680; 388 13,295)

Source: Cruz, Manny, “San Diego Indian Gaming,” San Diego Metropolitan Magazine, April 2006, pp. 58-59

* The Santa Ysabel and La Posta Tribal Governments each have agreements with the County of San Diego for developing gaming facilities with a maximum of 350 gaming machines and are expected to open in early 2007.

27 Attachment E

Summary Results -- 2005 Tribal Transportation Needs Survey

Identification of Problems

For the purpose of examining long-range transportation issues, the tribal nations in the region were grouped into three clusters based on key transportation corridors: State Route 76 (SR 76) which runs east-west in North County; SR 79 which runs north-south in the eastern half of the county; and Interstate 8 which runs east-west in the southern area of the county (Attachment C – Tribal Lands Transportation Corridors Map). The tribal groupings by transportation corridor are the following:

• State Route 76: La Jolla Band of Luiseno Indians; Pala Band of Mission Indians; Pauma & Yuima Band of Mission Indians; Rincon Band of the Luiseno Nation; and the San Pasqual Band of Mission Indians.

• State Route 79: The tribal governments whose primary corridor is the SR 79 include: Inaja-Cosmit Reservation; Los Coyotes Band of Cahuilla Indians; Mesa Grande Band of Mission Indians; and Santa Ysabel Band of Mission Indians.

• Interstate 8: The tribal governments whose primary corridor for their reservation is Interstate 8 include: Barona Band of Mission Indians; Campo Band of Kumeyaay Indians; Ewiiaapaayp Band of Kumeyaay Indians; Jamul Indian Village, La Posta Band of Mission Indians; Manzanita Band of Kumeyaay Indians; Sycuan Band of the Kumeyaay Nation; and the Viejas Band of Kumeyaay Indians.

Lack of Mechanism for Communication, Cooperation, and Coordination

The survey revealed that, in general, communication between tribal governments and the three public agencies they must interact with regarding transportation – Caltrans, County of San Diego, and SANDAG – was adequate. However, tribal representatives indicated they were often unclear which agency they should approach on any given transportation related issue. Tribal representatives indicated a need for a better understanding of agency processes and clearer guidelines on how to approach the agencies. In general, there was a lack of understanding regarding the regional transportation planning processes. Two of the main barriers to tribal government involvement in the transportation planning process were: (a) the lack of adequate staff to dedicate exclusively to this area of planning, and (b) information related to these processes was not sufficiently shared among both tribal staff and elected officials.

Lack of Long-Range Transportation Planning

The majority of the tribal governments in the San Diego region do not have Tribal Transportation Plans (TTPs) in place. Most cited the lack of funding and personnel as the reason for not having one. There are several who do have long range transportation plans in place, such as San Pasqual. As tribal developments become more and more complex, the need to incorporate transportation plans into their overall strategies becomes increasingly important. In recent years, several tribes have pooled their resources and developed circulation elements with the assistance of an intertribal transportation organization – the Reservation Transportation Authority.

Lack of Protocols for Sharing Comprehensive Land Use Plans

Eleven tribal governments have a general or comprehensive plan to guide development and facilities. Most indicated that although these are not public documents, under specific circumstances they would be willing to share the information with other agencies. Increasingly, tribal governments are expanding their areas of development from the commercial development of casinos to other forms of land use, including expanding housing options for tribal members.

It will be important in the near-term to establish mutually acceptable protocol for sharing this information with other jurisdictions in the region. At the moment, various tribes are taking significant steps to reach out to neighboring communities in the unincorporated area of the county through liaison meetings with community planning groups, as well as private initiatives such as the Alpine Revitalization effort, the Sycuan-Dehesa Subcommittee, and the North County Inland Regional Leadership forum.

Lack of Training Opportunities

Tribal government representatives have indicated that they have had limited access to relevant training opportunities. They are generally interested in receiving specialized training and/or technical assistance and cited most frequently the following areas: (1) tribal transportation planning, (2) ways to become more involved in the transportation planning process, (3) grant proposal writing, (4) approaches for developing a funding strategy, and (5) transportation engineering.

Lack of Transportation Funding

According to the survey results, most of the tribes in San Diego County do not operate with an annual transportation budget, but rather on an “as needed basis.” The funding is sporadic and largely dependent on funding from the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) for specific projects. Most of the tribes acknowledged that they do not receive funding from outside sources. Of those that do, revenues ranged from $5,000 to $1.9 million annually, depending on the project. Of those tribes that have allocated specific transportation budgets, many indicated that these budgets are a small portion of the overall tribal budget.

The main source of federal funding for tribal roads within the reservations is the BIA Indian Reservations Roads (IRR) Program. However, this funding is very limited. Federal IRR funding is allocated according to a “relative need” formula. Tribes from other states, particularly

those with larger land bases, benefit from the formula because they are able to demonstrate a greater need based upon larger inventories of road miles, vehicle miles traveled, and population figures. California tribes, which generally have smaller reservations, receive a very low allocation, not nearly enough to meet their needs. In 1999, the California Transportation Commission (CTC) identified $275 million in needed road improvements on tribal lands. According to a report by Caltrans, if the funding formula remains as it is, the expected IRR funding over the next 10 years would be just $50 million, only 18 percent of the identified needs. Caltrans concluded that at current funding levels it would take 55 years to fund existing needs, not taking future needs into account.1 Tribes are also eligible to receive most types of state transportation funds. However, tribes have had limited participation in past regional transportation planning efforts.

Priorities for Transportation Improvements

This section presents the two main transportation improvements identified by the tribes in order of their overall ranked importance and provides examples of some of the concerns/needs that various tribes expressed regarding that issue area. Overall, there was a consensus among the tribal governments surveyed regarding transportation improvement priorities; however, there were some differences when responses were grouped by the three previously described transportation corridors. For the tribes in the SR 76 corridor, they ranked road system as the principal area for improvement, followed by public transit, bikeways, and park/ride facilities. Tribal governments in the SR 79 corridor prioritized road system, emergency vehicles, and bikeways. While the tribal governments in the I-8 corridor prioritized road system, public transit, emergency vehicles, and pedestrian walkways. The two highest ranked transportation needs in the survey were improvements to the road system and public transit.

• Road System Sixteen of the 17 San Diego tribes who participated in the survey indicated that their highest priority was roads on or accessing their reservation. Current roadway uses include accessing destinations such as health care services, residential areas, educational facilities, and casinos. Tribes in all three corridors rated the need for roadway system improvements as high. Tribal representatives cited a variety of road system needs such as: (a) paving and erosion control; (b) accessibility to the reservation; (c) maintenance of paved roads; (d) safety issues related to specific state routes; (e) alleviating traffic flow; and (f) traffic calming.

An issue mentioned by almost all of the tribes was the complexity of which jurisdiction ultimately has the responsibility for maintenance of the roads on the reservation, as well as a growing concern for engaging in discussions related to access to the reservations from either county roads or state highways.

1 State of California Department of Transportation, “Transportation Guide for Native Americans,” November 2002.

• Public Transit For tribal members who have been living on their reservation for many years, access to public transportation is critical to their well-being. In recent years, many tribes in the region have been encouraging the return of tribal members to live on reservation land. In many cases, the first priority is given to tribal elders who have limited mobility. As this population grows, the availability of public transit to meet their transportation needs and service the reservations will need to be addressed.

Eleven tribes currently have bus service on their reservations and indicated that improvements to current bus service are needed. Respondents indicated the following needs: (a) increased hourly stops; (b) additional bus stop locations in general, and specifically near convenient locations; and (c) bus services to accommodate the needs of special populations needing to access medical services, educational facilities, and social services.

Tribal representatives in the SR 76 and I-8 corridors indicated that improvements to bus service were the second most important improvement needed. La Posta, for example, indicated that the closest transit stop is four or five miles from the reservation. The children of Los Coyotes have to be taken by their parents to the La Jolla reservation to catch the school bus; their day begins at 5 a.m. and they do not return home until early evening.

The rural bus routes that service tribal reservations are currently limited (see Attachment D – Proximity of Rural Transit Routes to Tribal Lands). In the spring of 2006, MTS approved the implementation of a large-scale series of changes to its bus services, as part of its Comprehensive Operational Analysis (COA). The objective of the COA was to re-align services to best serve productive market segments and develop a financially sustainable service. This will have some impact on the mobility options for people living and working in the rural areas of the region, including where many tribal lands are located.

31 Attachment F

32 Reservation Transportation Authority (RTA): Attachment G Intertribal Service Area

15 San Bernardino County 210

215

60 Morongo Calimesa Desert Hot Springs City of Norco 91 Riverside Moreno Banning Valley Palm Cathedral Riverside County Beaumont Springs City Corona 215

Perris San Jacinto Soboba Palm 15 Rancho 74 Mirage Desert Hemet Cabazon Menifee Canyon Indian Indio 10 Lake Wells Orange La Coachella Lake 79 Agua Caliente County Elsinore Quinta 74 Wildomar 241 Ramona Augustine

74 111 Murrieta Santa Rosa Temecula 371 Cahuilla 79 Torres-Martinez Pechanga

Pala Pauma and Yuima 86

Los Coyotes 76 5 La Jolla

Rincon 15 76

Oceanside Vista San Pasqual Iipay Nation of 78 Pacific Ocean Santa Ysabel Carlsbad Escondido San 78 Marcos Mesa Grande 78 Encinitas San Diego County Imperial County Solana 67 Inaja and Cosmit Poway Beach Barona 79 Del 56 Mar Capitan Grande City of San Diego

805 Santee 67 52 Viejas Ewiiaapaayp

El 8 5 Cajon 163 8 La Sycuan Mesa Manzanita March 20, 2009 Lemon 94 Grove Jamul Indian Village Tribes in San Diego Region Coronado La Posta National 54 94 Tribes in Riverside Region City 8 Chula Campo 5 Vista 125 94

Imperial Beach Mexico

0 2.5 5 10 Miles Source: Riverside County Transportation and Land Management Agency 33 Attachment H

COMMITTEE/WORKING GROUP CHARTER Interagency Technical Working Group On Tribal Transportation Issues (Adopted January 2007)

PURPOSE The purpose of the Interagency Technical Working Group on Tribal Transportation Issues (Working Group) is to serve as a forum for tribal governments in the region to discuss and coordinate transportation issues of mutual concern with the various public planning agencies in the region, including SANDAG, Caltrans, the County of San Diego, and the transit operators. In partnership with the Reservation Transportation Authority (RTA), the Working Group will monitor and provide input on the implementation of the strategies and planning activities related to transportation mutually developed through the San Diego Regional Tribal Summit. There is currently no other working group that can serve this function.

LINE OF REPORTING The Working Group reports to the Borders Committee, which reports to the Board of Directors on tribal- related transportation activities.

RESPONSIBILITIES The Working Group responsibilities include reviewing current activities and plans being implemented by SANDAG and the tribal governments in an effort to coordinate programs, address issues of concern, and ensure that the needs and issues of tribal governments are being incorporated into the transportation planning process at the regional level. The Working Group will provide feedback and comments on current and planned activities and provide technical advice on the implementation of these activities. The Working Group also assists with the associated outreach to the tribal community on transportation issues of regional significance.

MEMBERSHIP The voting membership of the Working Group shall be comprised of one representative from each of the federally recognized tribal governments and California tribes in San Diego County. These voting members shall be appointed by the leadership of their respective tribes for a term of one calendar year. Caltrans, the County of San Diego, the Reservation Transportation Authority, Metropolitan Transit System, and North County Transit District shall each be entitled to appoint one advisory member of the Working Group. Each entity represented in the Working Group, whether voting or advisory, may additionally appoint an alternate representative to serve in the primary member’s absence. Any member who misses two meetings in a row or three meetings in a calendar year shall be removed and replaced by that member’s alternate, if any. Should a vacancy occur in the position of a primary or alternate member, a represented entity shall be entitled to appoint a replacement representative.

MEETING TIME AND LOCATION The Working Group will meet quarterly as determined by the group. The location will rotate among tribal reservations, and, when deemed appropriate, at the SANDAG offices. SELECTION OF THE CHAIR The Working Group shall have a Chair and Vice-Chair, who will be chosen by a vote of the voting members of the Working Group on an annual basis.

DURATION OF EXISTENCE The Working Group will continue as long as the tribal governments and participating agencies determine that it serves as an effective means of communication and coordination, subject to annual review.

34 Attachment I

INTERAGENCY TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP ON TRIBAL TRANSPORTATION ISSUES MEMBERSHIP

The purpose of the Working Group is to serve as a forum for tribal governments in the region to discuss and coordinate transportation issues of mutual concern with the various public planning agencies in the region, including SANDAG, Caltrans, the County of San Diego, and the transit operators. The Working Group will monitor and provide input on the implementation of the strategies and planning activities related to transportation mutually developed through the San Diego Regional Tribal Summit The Working Group reports to the Borders Committee, which reports to the Board of Directors on tribal-related transportation activities. The Working Group will meet quarterly. The location will rotate among tribal reservations, and, when deemed appropriate, at the SANDAG offices.

Staff contact is: Jane Clough-Riquelme, SANDAG Tribal Liaison (619) 699-1909; [email protected]

MEMBERS (Tribal Governments) Albert ‘Boxie’ Phoenix (Co-Chair) Bo Mazzetti (Tribal Chair) Barona Band of Mission Indians Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians

Monique LaChappa (Tribal Chair) Carmen Mojado (Tribal Secretary) Campo Band of Mission Indians San Luis Rey Band of Luiseño Indians

Willian Micklin (Executive Director) Dave Toler (Delegate) Ewiiaapaayp Band of the Kumeyaay San Pasqual Band of Diegueño Nation Indians

Ray Hunter (Tribal Councilmember) Johnny Hernandez (Tribal Chair) Jamul Indian Village. A Kumeyaay Iipay Nation of Santa Ysabel Nation Virginia Christman (Councilmember) Eric LaChappa (Secretary/Treasurer) Viejas Band of Kumeyaay Nation La Posta Band of the Kumeyaay Nation ADVISORY (Public Agencies) Anthony Spann (Transportation Division) Milton Campbell (Tribal Councilmember) Bureau of Indians Affairs, Southern Los Coyotes Band of Cahuilla/Cupeño California (BIA) Indians Mark Bobotis (Tribal Liaison) Mark Romero (Tribal Chair) Caltrans, District 11 Mesa Grande Band of Mission Indians Theresa Brownyard (Tribal Liaison) Andrew Moro (Business Mgr.) County of San Diego Pala Band of Mission Indians Devin Braun Chris Devers (Tribal Chair) (Senior Transportation Planner) Pauma Band of Luiseño Indians Metropolitan Transit System (MTS)

Interagency Technical Working Group on Tribal Transportation Issues Revised: March 2010 35 ADVISORY (Public Agencies) - Continued

Timothy McCormick (Director of Service Planning) North County Transit District (NCTD)

Tony Largo (Executive Director) Reservation Transportation Authority (RTA)

Renée Wasmund (Chief Deputy Executive Director Co-Chair, Working Group) San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG)

Interagency Technical Working Group on Tribal Transportation Issues 2 Revised: March 2010 36 Attachment J

Collaborative Tribal Transportation Planning Milestones/Accomplishments (2006-2010)

FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 MAJOR STRATEGIC AREAS/ACTIONS JFMAMJJASONDJFMAMJJASONDJFMAMJJASONDJFMAMJJASONDJFMAMJ Strengthen the Mechanisms for Engaging Tribal Governments Action: Held policy-level summit

Action: Developed collaborative action agenda Action: Created interagency working group on tribal transportation issues Transportation Infrastructure Action: Supported Indian Reservation Roads Interagency discussions to ensure tribes could include county/state highways in IRR Inventory process Inventories Action: Identified tribal corridors and coordinate relevant studies/projects 1. State Routes * SRSR7676 Operatiperationalonal Immprovproveemenmentsts SSttudyudy RTA cconontracted;tracted;PPalala pprovroviiddeded localocal mamattchch * SR76 East widening to Rosemary Quarry Significant funding from Pala per Mitigation * SR79 @ Ipaay Nation entrance Ipaay Nation designed, constructed, and funded 2. County/Reservation Roads * Valley Center Road County funding with contributions from San Pasqual, Rincon, Pala, and Pauma * Wildcat Canyon Road Barona/County shared cost * Pala Mission Road (culvert improvement) Pala/County shared cost * Viejas Grade/Willows Road intersection Viejas provided full funding * Dehesa Rd/entrance at Sycuan entrance Sycuan designed, constructed, and funded *Lake Wohlford Improvements at Valley San Pasqual designed, constructed, and funded View entrance * Valley Center Road Bridge Replacement Federal and County funding *Black Canyon Bridge Replacement Federal grant/County funding *Black Canyon Rd Improvement near Mesa Constructed by the Calif. Innovative Readiness Training Grande Program at request of Mesa Grande Transit/Mobility Planning Action: Sought funding and implement tribal- focused transit planning projects 1. Tribal Transit Feasibilty Study Caltrans Transit Technical Assistance Grant 2. FTA Tribal Transit Program RTA received funding for FY07; FY08; and is pending FY09; MOU w/NCTD 3. Tribal TDM Outreach - Phase I (San Diego) Caltrans EJ Grant/Partnership with SANDAG 4. Tribal TDM Outreach - Phase II (Riverside) EJ Grant/Dist 8 Transportation Funding Action: Created opportunities for pooling/leveraging transportation funding Includes provisions to collaborate on funding for 1. Pala Mitigation Agreement with County Tribal TMA; transit; I-15/SR76 P&R Includes provisions to collaborate on funding for Tribal TMA; 2. Pauma Mitigation Agreement with County transit; I-15/SR76 P&R Information Sharing/Technical Assistance Action: Agencies provided ongoing training to tribal governments on funding processes, transportation, and regional planning

Lead Agency/Group Caltrans County of SD Reservation Transportation Authority (RTA) SANDAG/ALL Tribe(s) Draft 3/11/2010 37 NORTH CORRIDOR W/NEWSERVICES 38 Tribal TransitFeasibility Study Attachment K

July 07 SOUTH CORRIDOR W/NEWSERVICES 39 Tribal TransitFeasibility Study tahetL Attachment

July 07 Attachment M NCTD Introduces New Route 388/389 Working with the Reservation Transportation Authority (RTA) and San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), NCTD is revamping BREEZE bus route 388 to include route 389 and operate more buses seven days a week.

Through a special Federal Transit Administration Grant, beginning January 25, BREEZE Routes 388/389 will depart Escondido Transit Center every hour.

Route 388 will travel counter- clockwise every two hours through Valley Center to Pala while Route 389 will travel every two hours North on I-15 to Pala and then through Valley Center before returning to Escondido Transit Center.

The RTA is pleased to work with NCTD to improve Route 388 service by reducing travel times and providing more trips to tribal employment areas.

This proposal would reduce travel times to Pala Casino from 65-minutes to 36- minutes on the 389, and expand the total number of trips serving these areas from six to sixteen each day.

Under this plan, service to Valley View Casino will also begin January 25.

40 Attachment N

COMPLETE TRIBAL TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIES/ACTIONS MATRIX Developed through the 2030 RTP Process

Italics = completed Bold = new for 2050 RTP STRATEGY/ACTION 2030 Priority 2050 Priority RCP Update 1. Government-to-Government Framework: ¾ Form tribal transportation agencies or committees that can address/discuss regional X transportation concerns. ¾ Tribes should be voting members on regional decision-making bodies, such as X SANDAG ¾ Government agencies should understand tribal plans, how they are developed and X implemented ¾ Tribes will each develop an internal consultation policy/agreement and disseminate to other government agencies ¾ Develop collaborative legislative agenda that benefits tribal nations X ¾ Create mechanisms for identifying common concerns related to land use X developments 2. Transportation Infrastructure: ¾ Tribes and MPOs should develop a collective Indian Reservation Road (IRR) road X inventory to assure that California gets its fair share of federal IRR funds ¾ Identify corridors critical to tribal reservations and coordinate the implementation of X relevant studies, including funding ¾ Identify critical regional arterials serving tribal nations which should be included in the X RTP ¾ Coordinate the incorporation of existing Tribal Transportation Plans (TTP) into the X current RTP 3. Transit: ¾ Collaborate with interested tribal governments on a Reservation Transit Feasibility X Study to examine potential alternatives for transit and private/public partnerships in selected corridors ¾ Collaborate on pursuing financing for recommendations from the Reservation Transit X X Feasibility Study ¾ Consider the potential of collaborating on the issue of reverse commuting for tribal X X enterprise employees to reduce traffic congestion and improve the safety of rural routes to reservations with gaming facilities. ¾ Collaborate on the development of a Tribal Transportation Management Association for increased tribal participation in TDM programs regionwide. X X

Last edited 2/28/10 jcl

STRATEGY/ACTION 2030 Priority 2050

4. Transportation Funding: ¾ Create opportunities for pooling or leveraging transportation funding for mutually X X important projects ¾ Collaborate and advocate for new transportation funding for the region X ¾ Identify mechanisms for providing ongoing funding for new or additional transportation X X programs, including transit services. ¾ Examine existing mechanisms for allocating transportation mitigation funds from tribal X compacts

5. Information Sharing/Technical Assistance ¾ Develop a useful, accessible interagency directory of agencies/contact information for specific transportation issues (bus stops, road improvements, etc.) and keep it updated. ¾ Create a single Web-based clearinghouse with information on transportation programs and processes. ¾ Agencies will provide ongoing training to tribal governments on funding processes, X X transportation, and regional planning ¾ Look for opportunities to streamline processes through an audit/evaluation of agency procedures ¾ Provide information on technical support for planning and data analysis services to X tribal governments parallel to member agencies ¾ Look for opportunities to streamline processes related to tribal governments through an audit/evaluation of agencies procedures. ¾ Develop inter-institutional protocols for sharing land use and transportation data RCP relevant to the development of regional comprehensive and transportation plans.

Last edited 2/28/10 jcl

42 San Diego Association of Governments JOINT MEETING OF THE BORDERS COMMITTEE, COMMITTEE ON BINATIONAL REGIONAL OPPORTUNITIES (COBRO), AND THE CITY OF TIJUANA

March 26, 2010 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 5a

Action Requested: DISCUSSION

OTAY MESA – MESA DE OTAY BINATIONAL CORRIDOR STRATEGIC PLAN: File Number 3400200 2010 DRAFT PROGRESS REPORT

Background

The attached Otay Mesa – Mesa de Otay Binational Corridor Strategic Plan: 2010 Draft Progress Report highlights key transportation, economic development, housing, and environmental strategies. This third progress report since the Strategic Plan was completed in 2007 was presented at the February 2, 2010, Committee on Binational Regional Opportunities (COBRO) meeting. Input received from COBRO members was incorporated into this draft. The Borders Committee is asked to review and comment on the 2010 Draft Progress Report.

CHARLES “MUGGS” STOLL Director of Land Use and Transportation Planning

Attachment: 1. Otay Mesa – Mesa de Otay Binational Corridor Strategic Plan: March 2010 Draft Progress Report

Key Staff Contact: Ron Saenz, (619) 699-1922, [email protected] Attachment 1

Otay Mesa – Mesa de Otay Binational Corridor Strategic Plan

March 2010 Draft Progress Report

[THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY]

2 Otay Mesa-Mesa de Otay Binational Corridor Strategic Plan – March 2010 Draft Progress Report

OTAY MESA-MESA DE OTAY BINATIONAL CORRIDOR STRATEGIC PLAN

2010 Draft Progress Report

INTRODUCTION February 2010 meeting and provided input, which was incorporated into this draft. As a follow up to the Regional Comprehensive Plan (RCP) initiatives, in 2005, TRANSPORTATION ACTIONS the SANDAG Borders Committee and the Committee on Binational Regional ISSUE IMPLEMENT THE FUTURE Opportunities (COBRO) identified the OTAY MESA EAST-MESA DE Otay Mesa – Mesa de Otay binational OTAY II PORT OF ENTRY (POE) corridor study area for a binational planning AND CONNECTING ROADS pilot project. Transportation, economic development, housing, and environmental EARLY ACTION Establish the Otay Mesa conservation were identified as the main issue East-Mesa de Otay II POE Technical areas for the Otay Mesa – Mesa de Otay Commission to advance planning and Binational Corridor Strategic Plan. implementation of the future Otay Mesa East-Mesa de Otay II POE and connecting The Otay Mesa – Mesa de Otay Binational roads as a binational project, in Corridor Strategic Plan created a process for collaboration with Caltrans, SIDUE, and collaboration and established a framework IMPlan, and based upon discussions with for binational planning. This partnership the United States (U.S.) interagency continues to grow through the coordination group. implementation of several initiatives identified in the Strategic Plan and serves as a Progress guide for future binational planning efforts. In the past year, Caltrans, the U.S. General The Otay Mesa – Mesa de Otay Binational Services Administration (GSA), the County of Corridor Strategic Plan was approved in 2007 San Diego, SANDAG, and the Mexican by both the SANDAG Board of Directors and government continued to make progress to the City of Tijuana City Council. Since then, advance the implementation of the proposed two annual joint policy meetings of the Otay Mesa East – Mesa de Otay II POE and Borders Committee, the Committee on connecting roads on both sides of the border Binational Regional Opportunities (COBRO) (Figure 1). Caltrans District 11 has taken the and the City of Tijuana were held in 2008 and lead on several planning tasks to advance this 2009 to review progress on selected actions of project. In Mexico, the Secretariat of the strategic plan. This 2010 Progress Report Communications and Transportation (SCT) is an update on the implementation of select also has undertaken required studies for the strategies since last reported in the June 2009 Mesa de Otay II POE and connecting roads. Strategic Plan Progress Report. COBRO reviewed the 2010 Draft Progress Report at its

Otay Mesa-Mesa de Otay Binational Corridor Strategic Plan – March 2010 Draft Progress Report 3

Figure 1 State Route 11 / Otay Mesa Port of Entry

Source: Caltrans, 2009

4 Otay Mesa-Mesa de Otay Binational Corridor Strategic Plan – March 2010 Draft Progress Report

PROGRAMMATIC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT and revenue study, and specialized legal and STATEMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT bond counsel. REPORT (PEIS/PEIR) FOR SR 11 AND THE OTAY MESA EAST POE SANDAG submitted a letter of interest for a possible Transportation Infrastructure Finance Caltrans, in cooperation with GSA and FHWA, and Innovation Act (TIFIA) loan. SANDAG initiated project-level environmental anticipates a TIFIA loan could cover up to one clearance studies for State Route 11 (SR 11) third of the eligible costs for the SR 11/Otay and the Otay Mesa East POE. A Tier II Mesa East POE; and the loan would be repaid Environmental Impact Report/Environmental with future toll revenues. SANDAG is also Impact Statement (EIR/EIS) is evaluating forging a Master Agreement with project design and operational alternatives for SR 11, partners such as the U.S. GSA and the U.S. the POE, and a potential Commercial Vehicle Customs and Border Protection (CBP). Enforcement Facility (CVEF). The Tier 2 EIR/EIS for both SR 11 and the new POE, is ITS Pre-Deployment Strategy for the anticipated to be completed in early 2011. Otay Mesa East POE

In addition, the engineering studies for both Federal Highway Administration (FHWA’s) SR 11 and the new POE are also expected to vision for the research of Intelligent and be completed by December 2010. The design Efficient Border Crossings is to enable the and right-of-way acquisition are scheduled implementation of innovative Intelligent for 2011 and construction is expected to Transportation Systems (ITS) solutions for a begin in late 2012/13, with completion in binational border system that ultimately 2014/15. improve safety and mobility, reduce emissions, and facilitate trade and travel Future Project Financing without compromising the vital mission of securing America's borders. To advance this A total of $13 million is programmed by the vision the FHWA Office of Freight state for the environmental clearance phase. Management and Operations offered a SAFETEA-LU also includes $800,000 for this research grant to explore ways of effectively project, $4.9 million in Border Infrastructure deploying this technology at the U.S.-Mexico Program (BIP) funds, and an additional and U.S.-Canada POEs. $75 million has been allocated toward construction from the state’s Proposition 1B In an effort to evaluate these technologies, Trade Corridors Improvement Fund. SANDAG and Caltrans District 11 applied in Depending on the alternative and year of the Fall of 2009 for this FHWA grant to study construction, the cost for SR 11 ranges from an ITS pre-deployment Strategy for the $300 to $360 million. The POE facility is Otay Mesa East POE. The title of the proposed estimated to cost in the range of $300 to study is the: Technology Pre-Deployment $350 million depending on the functionality Proposal for Otay Mesa East POE A Clean, of POE. Green, and Smart Border. This proposal was selected in January 2010 for an approximately SANDAG and Caltrans are working jointly to $1.2 million grant. develop a financial strategy to build the SR 11/Otay Mesa East POE project. SANDAG is This grant will be used to research the seeking services from an investment banking Otay Mesa East POE as a case study for an team to assist with bond placement, traffic intelligent and efficient border crossing through the use of ITS applications. These

Otay Mesa-Mesa de Otay Binational Corridor Strategic Plan – March 2010 Draft Progress Report 5

applications would be used to reduce delays MEXICO caused by traffic congestion, better accommodate projected trade and travel Garita Mesa de Otay II (POE) demand, and increase economic growth and job opportunities on both sides of the border All the road access projects connecting to without sacrificing border safety and security. Mesa de Otay II POE are being planned by the Secretariat of Communications and This study will also include the collaboration Transportation (SCT) with input from of FHWA to support the development of a Tijuana’s Municipal Planning Institute plan for a tolling system that can (IMPlan) and the Secretariat of Infrastructure accommodate dynamic pricing at the border. and Urban Development of Baja California This opportunity also allows all parties (SIDUE). There is no definite construction start involved to plan a holistic approach to ITS at date as this is dependent on a bidding process the new border crossing that enables a in Mexico. The executive project design stage "Clean, Green, and Smart Border." is at 25 percent completion and construction cost estimates are approximately $50 million. The ITS components/areas included in this This would include: Boulevard Las Torres as a research are: electronic toll collection systems, passenger vehicle access, a dedicated border wait-time monitoring systems, variable boulevard for commercial truck access, and pricing of tolls to reduce wait times, the construction of three interchanges at the enhanced border security systems, and Tijuana-Mexicali Toll road with advanced traveler information systems. It will Boulevard Hector Teran Teran, Calzada be the first North American international land Las Torres and the Cañón Rinconada cargo border crossing project that proposes the use access to Mesa de Otay II POE. (Figure 2). of nontraditional transportation project financing to improve capacity and operation of an international land border crossing.

Another key aspect of this research initiative is to examine and develop marketing strategies such as discounting for lower- emission trucks (promoting a green border) and advance toll payment (pre-payment discounting). It will also focus on prioritizing the discounting or pricing for guaranteed usage and on determining what ITS technology is needed to implement these strategies.

6 Otay Mesa-Mesa de Otay Binational Corridor Strategic Plan – March 2010 Draft Progress Report

Figure 2 Otay Mesa East-Mesa de Otay II POE and Connecting Roads

Source: SIDUE, 2009

The new Mesa de Otay II POE is planned to ISSUE IMPLEMENT IMPROVEMENTS TO have 20 northbound lanes crossing into the EXISTING OTAY MESA-MESA DE United States and 12 southbound lanes OTAY POE AND CONNECTING crossing into Mexico. Eight northbound and ROADS four southbound lanes will be dedicated for commercial trucks. Work on this POE is EARLY ACTIONS programmed to begin in 2010 and end in 2014/2015 with a total cost of $123 million. a. Coordinate with CBP and Mexican Customs on the process to fund and The configuration of the pedestrian and implement identified short-term capital public transit access to the planned Mesa de and operational improvements at the Otay II POE also are being developed. A Otay Mesa-Mesa de Otay Commercial transit facility is planned to be conveniently POE. located to connect the new POE and the future mass transit service in Tijuana. b. Explore the feasibility of short-term operational and capital improvements at The State of Baja California announced that the Otay Mesa-Mesa de Otay Passenger funds to acquire the POE parcel were secured POE (operations and facilities). by the Mexican federal government and this transaction is under way.

Otay Mesa-Mesa de Otay Binational Corridor Strategic Plan – March 2010 Draft Progress Report 7

Progress Some highlights of the proposed Otay Mesa POE Modernization include: As last reported, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), in April 2009, was • Expansion of the passenger vehicle awarded approximately $21.3 million of crossing from 12 to 24 primary American Recovery and Reinvestment Act passenger vehicle inspection booths; (ARRA) funds for some initial Otay Mesa POE modernization projects which will cover the • Acquisition of a 10.5 acre parcel cost of land acquisition and design for the immediately east of the commercial expansion project. The expansion project facility that would accommodate four would make improvements to both new commercial inspection booths; commercial and non-commercial portions of and the existing port. • Relocation of the existing hazardous In July 2009, GSA awarded the Architecture waste inspection facility located just and Engineering design contract for the west of the southbound vehicle Otay Mesa POE Modernization project. This crossing in Otay Mesa. began a design phase that is scheduled to be complete in May 2011. In addition, an EIS for this project is anticipated to be released in MEXICO Summer of 2010. Construction is subject to the availability of construction funding that In 2009, the City of Tijuana repaved the south has not yet been authorized by Congress. The and northbound lanes connecting to the construction authorization is anticipated to Mesa de Otay POE with ‘white topping.’ The be made in Fiscal Year (FY) 2012. If the landscaped area between the southbound authorization is given as planned, and northbound crossing was removed to add construction completion would be in an additional northbound passenger vehicle December 2015. lane. The northbound taxi lane that connects to the Mexican Customs facility and runs parallel to the southbound crossing lanes will eventually be eliminated when the POE’s modernization is completed (Figure 3).

8 Otay Mesa-Mesa de Otay Binational Corridor Strategic Plan – March 2010 Draft Progress Report

Figure 3 Otay Mesa/Mesa de Otay Port of Entry

1. Pedestrian Bridge and Ramps 2. Flag Pole 3. Drop Off/Pick Up 4. Taxis Parking Area (42 Spaces) 5. Services/Information

Pedestrian Walkway SENTRI Lane Bus Lane Public Transit Route (Buses) Public Transit Route (Taxis)

INDAABIN’s Project Area

ADUANA’s Project Area

Source: IMPlan, 2009

Otay Mesa-Mesa de Otay Binational Corridor Strategic Plan – March 2010 Draft Progress Report 9

There also have been advances in the Next Steps planning of an east-west pedestrian bridge and the installation of a transit intermodal IMPlan will continue to work with center. They both are 80 percent complete stakeholder agencies on both sides of the per the executive project design stage. Final border to ensure efficient pedestrian and designs are anticipated to be complete by transit movement and connectivity. As Spring 2010. Construction would immediately preliminary POE designs are developed, more follow when the POE’s modernization is detailed discussions will focus on pick-up and completed. It is expected to take four months drop-off points for public transportation near to construct and a total cost of approximately the Mesa de Otay POEs. In addition, input will $3 million. Recommendations from the be provided on making the planned SANDAG-IMPlan study “Evaluation of pedestrian bridge design pedestrian friendly Tijuana’s Public Transportation Facilities at and handicap accessible. the Otay Mesa – Mesa de Otay POE; South Bay BRT” completed in 2008 were considered in this planning. ISSUE FACILITATE IMPROVEMENTS TO CROSS-BORDER AND REGIONAL The configuration of the pedestrian and PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION public transit access to Mesa de Otay is in the SERVICES planning stages. These plans are dependent on the commencement of United States EARLY ACTION Initiate advanced construction to modernize the Otay Mesa – planning work to extend the South Bay Mesa de Otay POE. Bus Transit (BRT) service between Eastern Chula Vista and the Otay Mesa The improvements at Avenida Josefina POE. Rendon and the SENTRI lane access also is at the 80 percent executive project design Progress completion stage. When the POE’s modernization is completed, construction SANDAG is in the process of completing the would immediately be initiated and environmental document for the Phase One completed in four months. The total cost of South Bay Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) alignment. this project would be approximately Figure 4 illustrates the South Bay BRT $1 million. alignment. Several technical studies are being conducted including: traffic, habitat, noise, Engineering and design work has been and visual. Extensive public outreach was completed to resolve an ongoing bottleneck done in Fall 2009 as part of the California that occurs at the Mexican Commercial Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The (Imports) Customs exit to Boulevard Bellas Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) is Artes. The traffic improvement consists of expected to be completed and permits are adding traffic signals at this location and anticipated to be secured by Spring of 2010. signal synchronization throughout the Final design is expected to start in April 2010 boulevard that will be completed in the first and completed in 2011. The South Bay BRT four months of 2010 with a cost of project is on schedule to be implemented in approximately $300,000. late 2012.

10 Otay Mesa-Mesa de Otay Binational Corridor Strategic Plan – March 2010 Draft Progress Report

Figure 4

Source: SANDAG, 2010

Otay Mesa-Mesa de Otay Binational Corridor Strategic Plan – March 2010 Draft Progress Report 11

Pending the completion of the MND, It is anticipated that in 2010 these studies will SANDAG negotiations with the land owner at be completed which will permit the Nicola Tesla Court are on hold. This is the identification of specific goals. Once location of the proposed transit station, approved by FONADIN, the solicitation which could be either on a long-term lease or bidding process will begin for construction acquisition. The proposed transit station is and concession of two transit corridors and adjacent to the Otay Mesa POE. their respective auxiliary routes. The two high volume trunk lines that will be constructed EARLY ACTION Evaluate the City of are: Route 1, traversing 18.4 Km or 11.4 miles Tijuana’s draft Public Transportation that would connect downtown Tijuana with Plan, focusing on routes that would the Puerta Mexico (San Ysidro) POE and the serve the Otay Mesa-Mesa de Otay POE southeastern part of the city and Route 2 and the proposed Otay Mesa East-Mesa (BRT type) will connect the Mesa de Otay area de Otay II POE. (including the POEs) along a 30 Km or 18.6 mile route to Santa Fe and Progress Ciudad Industrial on the southwest portion of the city (Figure 5). The City of Tijuana is incorporating the Federal Program of Mass Transit Support to develop studies to be delivered to Mexico’s National Infrastructure Fund (FONADIN) with the review of SCT, SEDESOL (Secretariat of Social Development) and SHCP (Secretariat of Finance) with the purpose of securing funding for project investment.

Figure 5 Draft/Preliminary Corridor Analysis for the Metropolitan Zone

Corridor 2 Corridor 1 18%18% DE LAof DEMANDA the DEmetropolitan ZONA METROPOLINA zone SE demandENCUENTRA is EN capturedEL CORREDOR on 2 STACorridor FE - OTAY 2 (Santa Fe – Otay)

27%27% DE LA of DEMANDA the metropolitan DE ZONA METROPOLINA zone SE demand is captured on ENCUENTRA EN EL CORREDOR 1 REFUGIO – SANCorridor ISIDRO 1 (Refugio – San Ysidro)

UN45% 45% DEof LAthe DEMANTA total TOTALmetropolitan ES MOVIDA PORzone demand is captured ESTOSon the CORREDORES two corridors

Draft/Preliminary Corridor Analysis for the Metropolitan Zone Propuesta preliminar para análisis de los corredores Source: IMPlan, 2009

12 Otay Mesa-Mesa de Otay Binational Corridor Strategic Plan –March 2010 Draft Progress Report

NEW ACTION Collaborate with the The CBF would enable ticketed airline San Diego County Regional Airport passengers to travel between Mexico’s TIJ and Authority in the upcoming market San Diego, California, via an enclosed, demand study of a cross-border terminal elevated pedestrian bridge. The CBF will connection between Otay Mesa and consist of: a main building on the U.S. side of Tijuana International Airport (TIJ) toward the border housing U.S. CBP inspection its possible implementation. facilities along with shops and services to accommodate travelers; an approximately

525-foot pedestrian bridge from the main Progress building on the U.S. side connecting into TIJ’s

passenger terminal on the Mexican side; and In January 2007, the San Diego County parking facilities and areas for car rentals and Regional Airport Authority evaluated potentially bus service on the U.S. side. The feasibility issues related to a cross-border CBF is expected to serve 2 million passengers terminal between the United States and annually, a number that is forecasted to Tijuana International Airport. In addition, in increase to 4.9 million by 2030. May 2008, the Airport Authority completed a market demand study of the cross-border The following summarizes the latest project terminal to evaluate existing demand and developments: capacity at Tijuana International Airport (TIJ), review data on existing U.S. passengers that • On October 2, 2009, the travel from the Tijuana Airport, conduct a U.S. Department of State published in survey of San Diego residents that may use the Federal Register a Notice of the Tijuana Airport if a convenient cross- Receipt of Application for a border connection existed, and develop Presidential Permit for the CBF. The projections of expected passenger growth at notice requested comment on Otay- the Tijuana Airport. Tijuana Venture, LLC.’s application for a Presidential Permit to authorize the The San Diego County Regional Airport construction, operation, and Authority Board decided not to dedicate maintenance of a new international additional funds to further study the pedestrian bridge by December 30, crossborder terminal but decided to include it 2009. in the Regional Airport Strategic Plan. • Per the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements, the Draft In 2008, in an effort to advance this concept, Environmental Assessment (EA) was a private investment group - the Otay-Tijuana released on December 29, 2009. The Venture, LLC. - purchased 52 acres of draft EA addresses the potential undeveloped industrial land in Otay Mesa to environmental effects of the develop the U.S. side of the crossborder construction and operation of the airport terminal project. Its intent is to build a United States portion of the CBF. full-service crossborder passenger facility. This Input is being sought on whether proposed San Diego-Tijuana Cross Border issuance of a Presidential Permit for Facility (CBF) project includes the construction this proposed bridge would be in the and operation of the CBF and an above-grade U.S. national interest. Comments pedestrian bridge linking border facilities in regarding this draft EA were due on the United States with a commercial February 12, 2010. passenger airport terminal at the TIJ.

Otay Mesa-Mesa de Otay Binational Corridor Strategic Plan – March 2010 Draft Progress Report 13

• Concurrent to the EA process the for light industrial and research and project proponents are seeking to development uses and to establish a receive the City of San Diego’s redevelopment process that would renew and Planned Development Permit and retain existing industrial lands for similar uses Vesting Tentative Map approvals in the future. including the Otay Mesa Community Plan Update approval. In addition, In September 2009, SANDAG and the this project will be evaluated through San Diego Regional Economic Development the California Environmental Quality Corporation completed the San Diego Region Act (CEQA) approval process, which is 2009 Employment and Residential Lands expected to begin in Spring 2010. Inventory & Market Analysis report. In November 2009, SANDAG updated the Approval of the Presidential Permit from the Regional Economic Development Information Department of State is pending. Otay-Tijuana (REDI) system, an internet-based mapping, Venture, LLC., anticipates that the crossborder analysis, and reporting tool to keep the airport terminal could be operational as early inventory up to date and provide broad as 2012. public access to it.

The purpose of compiling the land-based ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS inventory databases is to help address concerns expressed by land brokers and ISSUE PROMOTE CREATION OR developers, as well as businesses in our high- EXPANSION OF COMMON technology industry clusters, about the EMPLOYMENT CLUSTERS ON increasing costs, rapid absorption, and BOTH SIDES OF THE BORDER pressure to convert existing “industrial” land AND ADDRESS FUTURE over to a residential or commercial use. The INDUSTRIAL LAND USE SUPPLY region has a limited supply of these “prime” AND DEMAND industrial sites. In addition, these industrial sites are where a significant portion of our EARLY ACTION Develop the 2007 emerging growth high-technology companies San Diego Regional Economic Evaluation are clustered, and these companies and sites and Prosperity Strategy (REPS) with provide the best opportunity for future Participation from the Consulate of economic growth and expansion. Mexico in San Diego, San Diego Dialogue, and the Tijuana Economic The report highlighted the following Development Corporation, among other significant characteristics for the Otay Mesa Stakeholders, in the REPS Advisory study area. Nearly 60 percent of the region’s Working Group. Gross Developable Employment Land is located in five planning Areas. Three of those Progress are located in the Otay Mesa study area, which include Otay (2,201 Acres or 22%), As reported in the 2009 Progress Report, the Otay Mesa (1,343 Acres or 13%), and SANDAG Board of Directors accepted the Chula Vista (811 Acres or 8.1%). 2007 San Diego Regional Economic Evaluation and Prosperity Strategy (REPS) as an element of the Regional Comprehensive Plan. The REPS’ Strategic Goal 4 called for reserving prime employment land (existing and vacant)

14 Otay Mesa-Mesa de Otay Binational Corridor Strategic Plan – March 2010 Draft Progress Report

In addition, of the 10,000 gross developable Borderless Biotech & Mexico’s Emerging Life acres, 20 percent (2,040 acres) are Sciences Industry, which outlines progress on immediately available for development (can this collaborative effort. The report describes be developed within one year). More than the San Diego border region as a portal for 36 percent of these immediately available borderless biotech due to its strategic location acres are located in the planning areas of: along the U.S.-Mexico border and the unique Otay (391 acres or 19.2%) and Otay Mesa opportunity to work with Mexico’s emerging (343 acres or 16.8%). life science industry. Merck which is the only private sector U.S. participant has based upon The City of San Diego has 690 acres of the progress in fostering collaborative immediately available employment land. Fifty relationships among the participating regions percent of these acres are in Otay Mesa made during the first year of the Initiative, (343 acres) while more than 99 percent of the has extended their participation through immediately available employment land June 2010. (391 acres) in the unincorporated County is in the Otay Planning Area. In 2008, stakeholders from the Mexican regions of Cuernavaca, Guadalajara, Guanajuato, and Monterrey were in the ISSUE PROMOTE CREATION OR process of formally establishing the Mexican EXPANSION OF COMMON Life Sciences Alliance to collaboratively EMPLOYMENT CLUSTERS ON promote their capabilities internationally, BOTH SIDES OF THE BORDER including a showing at the San Diego BIO AND ADDRESS FUTURE tradeshow in June 2008. They also agreed to INDUSTRIAL LAND USE SUPPLY co-develop a proposal to the Inter-American AND DEMAND Development Bank (IDB). Under a three-year grant, IDB funding would be used to support EARLY ACTION Within the Alliance activities to build commercialization framework of San Diego Dialogue’s infrastructure (e.g., training and policies) Crossborder Innovation and within participating research institutions, Competitiveness Initiative, begin the business support services for new life science implementation of selected start up companies, and international recommendations from the Borderless outreach for research and business Innovation study outlined below: development opportunities which include Establish the Crossborder Innovation and linkages with San Diego’s life sciences Competitiveness Center. community. Under the proposal UCSD Extension (San Diego Dialogue and Global Initiate a crossborder program to foster CONNECT) and Merck & Co., would serve as scientific and technology relationships, partners to the Alliance. awareness of research, and commercialization of discoveries in the The Mexican Life Sciences Alliance became life sciences between the San Diego-Baja formalized as a Mexican civil association California region and other regions in (asociación civil) in mid-2009, and submitted Mexico. its proposal to the IDB shortly thereafter. The proposal is currently under review by the IDB. Progress

In June 2007, the San Diego Dialogue produced the first briefing paper titled

Otay Mesa-Mesa de Otay Binational Corridor Strategic Plan – March 2010 Draft Progress Report 15

Beginning in Fall 2009, San Diego Dialogue The planned land use includes a system of and Global CONNECT launched a process of territorial units that would include one providing advice and input to new Mexican central urban area and the identification of life science start-up firms. Among the 24 sub-urban centers. A hierarchical companies reviewed to-date, two have offices transportation network of commercial in Otay Mesa. These were referred to corridors and services also will be developed. CONNECT for participation in its springboard The formation of districts and neighborhoods coaching and mentoring program, and as of will be developed at a different scale through February 2010, one is undergoing the process. future specific plans. Through a series of workshops in Mexico, additional companies are being assessed for The program identifies where planned land bridging into the San Diego market. This use areas would increase density, mixed used, activity will continue through the end of and public infrastructure. In addition, the June 2010. San Diego Dialogue and Global program incorporates recent Secretariat of CONNECT will also hold additional workshops Social Development (SEDESOL) regulations in Mexico and San Diego on topics such as the that require that communities become more different kinds of capital available to life self sufficient in order to reduce the use of science companies and the creation of automobiles. organized angel investor networks. To advance these goals, the City of Tijuana has established a series of plans that include HOUSING ACTIONS improving the transportation network and implementation of a mass transit system. NEW ACTION Collaborate with IMPlan and the Urban Land Institute (ULI) on sharing resources, planning techniques, ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIONS and strategies as they relate to Smart Growth planning. ISSUE ADDRESS CONSERVATION OF SENSITIVE HABITAT AND URBAN Progress RIVER CORRIDORS (E.G., ALAMAR RIVER AND OTAY RIVER In 2009, IMPlan updated the City of Tijuana’s WATERSHED) AND WATER Urban Development Program (Programa de QUALITY Desarrollo Urbano del Centro de Población de Tijuana or PDUCPT). The PDUCPT is updated EARLY ACTION Support plans for every five years and grants the City zoning habitat restoration and rehabilitation authority to regulate land use. IMPlan along the Alamar River riparian corridor. coordinates the preparation of the PDUCPT and also oversees implementation of long- Progress term urban and regional planning. In mid-2009, IMPlan completed an The 2009 PDUCPT promotes smart growth environmental impact study analyzing the practices such as land use densification and 2nd and 3rd sections of the Arroyo Alamar. infill development of urban zones as a This study identified habitat restoration strategy to avoid sprawl and to concentrate changes that would affect the planned access to urban services. expressway and the river channel. In order for these restoration efforts to be effective, Mexico’s National Water Commission

16 Otay Mesa-Mesa de Otay Binational Corridor Strategic Plan – March 2010 Draft Progress Report

(CONAGUA) is negotiating resources for As reported in past progress reports agencies implementation and environmental and Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) compensation. both from the U.S. and Mexico continue to seek solutions to the problems that plague Also in 2009, through aerial photography the Los Laureles Canyon and the Tijuana River specific native habitat was identified as being Estuary. threatened by urban growth. Steps have been taken by the city to protect these areas from In 2009, the Tijuana River National Estuarine impending growth. Through the PDUCPT the Research Reserve (TRNERR) secured a grant City has adopted the use of legal instruments from the United States Environmental such as the transfer of development rights Protection Agency (U.S. E.P.A.) to, among and the recording of areas and lots in the other tasks, hire a full-time Watershed City’s Tax Assessor records that could Coordinator (WC). The WC will seek to potentially be transferred. Other tools to establish and maintain regular conserve land include the purchase of communication and cooperation between the conservation easements and payment for Reserve and other programs, organizations, environmental services that could give the and government entities whose actions City the ability to conserve land. influence the long-term health of the Reserve. In addition, the City has already began the process to conserve a riparian corridor known The goal of this three-year TRNERR/U.S.E.P.A. as La Cañada los Sauces in Playas de Tijuana project is to further develop programs aimed located in the northwest corner of the City at restoring and protecting the water quality, which connects north to the Tijuana River habitat, and environment of the Tijuana River Estuary. This will serve as a prototype for Watershed. The WC is conducting on-the- future conservation efforts. ground watershed improvement projects in Mexico and the U.S. and spearheading larger, longer-term efforts to expand the ability of EARLY ACTION Link the creation of regional agencies to manage sediment in conservation areas to the objectives and coastal ecosystems. goals established in “A Binational Vision for the Tijuana River Watershed” and the The WC is promoting the following projects: Border 2012 programs. • Control erosion in Los Laureles Canyon Progress and promote work in that area as model for other locations Tijuana River National Estuarine • Prevent sediment from entering the Research Reserve (TRNERR) and Reserve Los Laureles • Secure conservation easements in urban canyons in Mexico During coastal storm events, the effect of raw • Tire reutilization designs sewage, sediment, and trash generated • Trash consolidation and tire recycling upstream, such as in the Tijuana community of Los Laureles Canyon, impacts Tijuana and In Tijuana, the TRNERR along with support San Diego beach water quality, coastal and from Mexico’s Secretariat of Environment and ocean resources. Natural Resources (SEMARNAT) have identified the Los Laureles sub-watershed to receive restoration to its riverbed,

Otay Mesa-Mesa de Otay Binational Corridor Strategic Plan – March 2010 Draft Progress Report 17

revegetation, and conservation of land. Coastal Storms Real Time, Remote Erosion IMPlan is facilitating direct communication Monitoring and Outreach Pilot for the with property owners of designated Los Laureles area. This project proposes to conservation lands in Los Laureles to set aside combine real-time sedimentation monitoring land. technology and educational outreach efforts in Los Laureles Canyon to address this Since December of 2009, large quantities of binational pollution problem in the Tijuana earth have been moved to make room for the River Watershed. “Border 2012 Park” in Tijuana. This first of its kind project will feature engineered and This project’s goal is to quantify data on patented retaining walls made from recycled upstream sedimentation/trash generation and tires. Thousands of used tires will be used as provide outreach efforts that integrate part of the effort to reduce the flow of waste members of the Los Laureles community tires into the Tijuana River Estuary, and as directly in the monitoring, training, and one of the steps to promote new public instituting a local alert system. In this manner, policies in Mexico. technology efforts will provide researchers and community stakeholders on either side of In addition, an engineered solution to the U.S.-Mexico border a mechanism to produce high quality pervious pavers will be evaluate and implement best management put to the test by the Spring of 2010. A practices to reduce risk to human health and collaborative effort between the WC, the the environment. UCSD Jacobs School of Engineering and a group of residents from Los Laureles canyon Project benefits include: will begin soon; the project will ensure a daily production of standardized commercial • Implementation of an advanced warning quality pavers. system and emergency evacuation plan that involves local community members After years of negotiation with the City of will also assist in ultimately saving lives Tijuana, the construction of sediment basins during coastal storm events. in Los Laureles canyon has been initiated. The • More accurate alert systems to warn the first project started last fall but additional public of imminent health hazards. funding is needed to complete other important components. • May be applied to northwestern Mexico and Southern California where similar The WC recently obtained permits from steep canyons and low-income Mexico’s SEMARNAT to import approximately communities exist. 20,000 native plants to Tijuana. Some of these plants will be used to restore reconstructed Next steps slopes in Los Laureles, and the rest would become part of the first ever “Native Plant Additional funding will be sought to carry out Nursery” in Tijuana. This one acre parcel specific activities and to assist with key located at the municipal nursery has been planning efforts in the watershed. granted to the watershed coordination group.

In 2009, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Coastal Services Center initiated the San Diego

18 Otay Mesa-Mesa de Otay Binational Corridor Strategic Plan – March 2010 Draft Progress Report 2050 RTP – Tribal Transportation White Paper

March 26, 2010

Summary

• Problem statement • Background • Government to government framework • Milest ones i n coll ab orati ve pl anni ng • 2050 RTP Tribal Transportation Strategies

1 Tribal Lands in the San Diego Region

Building a Regional Government to Government Framework

2 SANDAG Structure

SANDAG Board of MakesDirectors regional public policy

Executive Transportation Public Safety Borders Regional Planning Committee Committee Committee Committee Committee

Sets agenda; Policy Policy Policy Policy oversight for recommendations recommendations recommendations recommendations budget and work on planning and on public safety & on interregional on Regional program; reviews programming; Homeland programs & Comprehensive grant applications; strong focus & Security related to projects Plan development & makes commitment to ARJIS & Criminal implementation recommendations meet public Justice Research on legislative transit needs activities proposals & agency policies

Formed Interagency Working Group on Tribal Transportation Issues

• Forum between • Reports to Borders Tribal gov’ts and • Tribes voting public agencies members • Tribal advisory to • Public agencies projects advisory role • Develop • Meet quarterly collaborative • Kick-off 10/2006 agenda

3 Milestones in Collaborative Transportation Planning

• Transportation infrastructure • Transit • Funding • IfInformati on s har ing /thi/technica l assistance

Tribal Transportation Projects

• 2007 Tribal Transit Feasibility Study • 2008 Tribal TDM Program – Partnering with RTA • 2009 FTA Tribal Transit Program

4 2050 RTP Tribal Transportation Strategies

• Government to government framework • Transportation infrastructure • Transit • Funding • Information sharing/technical assistance

2050 RTP – Tribal Transportation White Paper

March 26, 2010

5 Otay Mesa - Mesa de Otay Binational Corridor Strategic Plan 20102010 ProgressProgress ReportReport

March 26, 2010

A Living Document

Transportation Actions/Strategies Issue Economic Development Areas Housing Environment

SANDAG 1 Study Area

Otay Mesa East - Otay II POE

Multimodal Otay Mesa East – Otay II Port of Entry (POE) facilities and Conceptual Multimodal Transit Facilities connectinggg roadsroads

Cañon Rinconada

Carretera Cuota

Alamar Expressway

SANDAG 2 Otay Mesa - Mesa de Otay POE Proposed GSA Modernization

Expand from 13 to 24 Acquired 10.5 acre parcel ppyprimary inspection booths

Otay Mesa POE

Relocation of hazardous Add 4 new commercial waste inspection facility inspection booths

Otay Mesa - Mesa de Otay POE Planned Transit

South Bay Bus Rapid Transit ()()(BRT) service from Otay Mesa POE to downtown San DiegoSan Diego

SANDAG 3 Otay Mesa-Mesa de Otay POE Planned Transit Facilities

Otay Mesa – Mesa de Otay Port of Entry (POE) Planned Transit Facilities

Future Otay Mesa Transit Center

Potential Transit Center

Otay Mesa - Mesa de Otay POE Proposed Improvements

SANDAG 4 City of Tijuana Proposed Mass Transit System

18%18% DE of LA the DEMANDA metropolitan DE ZONA METROPOLINA zone SE demandENCUENTRA is EN capturedEL CORREDOR on 2 STA Corridor FE - OTAY 2 (Santa Fe – Otay)

27%27% DE LAof DEMANDA the metropolitan DE ZONA METROPOLINA zone SE demand is captured ENCUENTRA EN EL CORREDOR 1 REFUGIO – SANon ISIDRO Corridor 1 (Refugio – San Ysidro)

UN45% 45% ofDE LAthe DEMANTA total TOTALmetropolitan ES MOVIDA POR zone ESTOSdemand CORREDORES is captured on the two corridors

PropuestaDraft/Preliminary preliminar para Corridor análisis de Analysis los corredores for the Metropolitan Zone

Proposed Crossborder Facility

Tijuana International Airport

SANDAG 5 Economic Development

San Diego Regional Economic Evaluation aand d Pros ospeperit tyy StStrate ategygy (REP S) Mexican Life Sciences Alliance

Environment

Tijuana River National Estuarine Research Reserve

Los Sauces Los Laureles Canyon

SANDAG 6 Otay Mesa - Mesa de Otay Binational Corridor Strategic Plan 20102010 ProgressProgress ReportReport

March 26, 2010

SANDAG 7 State Route 11/Otay Mesa East Port of Entry Financial Strategy Update

Borders Committee March 26, 2010

Project Area

1 Project Progress

• Scoping Document: Project Study Report • Exchange of Diplomatic Notes • Financ ia l Feas ibility St ud y • POE Feasibility Study • SANDAG Sponsored Toll Legislation Approved – SB 1486 (Ducheny) • Tier I Program EIS/EIR, Approved – October 2008 • USU.S. P res iden tilPtial Perm it – Approved by State Department – December 2008 • Worked with GSA to Select Consultant for Enhanced Program Development Study for POE

Estimated Project Budget: $615$615--$715$715 Million

Programmed Funding Available: Sta te (STIP) Tier II E nv./E ng. $13. 0 M Federal (SAFETEA-LU) Tier II Env./Eng. $ .8 M Border Improvement Tier II Env./Eng. $ 4.9 M Program (BIP) State (Prop. 1B TCIF) Construction $75.0 M

TOTAL $93.7 M Remaining Funds Needed: (Toll Funds/Other): $521.3 - 621.3 M

2 Project Schedule

Tier II Environmental Doc. 2010 Design/Right of Way 2011 Begin Construction 2012-13 End Construction 2014-15

SANDAG Responsibilities

Finance, Traffic & Revenue, ITS • Background research and preparation • SANDAG Board approval (2009) • RFP posted for Investment Banking Services (February 2010) • TIFIA Letter of Interest Submitted (March 2010) • Traffic and Revenue Study RFP (Summer 2010) • Concept of Operations/ ITS Pre-deployment Strategy RFP (Summer/Fall 2010) • Project uniqueness, interest and support

3 Investment Banking Services Preferred Skill Requirements

• Financed major transportation toll facilities – Auto and truck (freight) users priced separately – Used/ applied for TIFIA loans – Public/ public organizational structure • Complex financial modeling capabilities • Senior underwriting experience • Hands on & team approach to solve problems

Investment Banking Services Firm Selection Schedule

• Proposal Due Date – March 12 • Short List Meeting – March 25 • Notification of Intent to Award – April 2010 • Approval of Contract – May 2010 • Notice to Proceed – June 2010

4 Intelligent Transportation System (ITS)(ITS) PrePre--DeploymentDeployment Strategy

• ITS White Paper - Completed by SANDAG and Caltrans, May 2009: – Grant awarded for $1.5 M from FHWA – Coordinate with ITS Joint Program Office and Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration – ITS discussion with Mexican representatives – Upcoming RFP for Concept of Operations and ITS Strategy

State Route 11/Otay Mesa East Port of Entry Financial Strategy Update

Borders Committee March 26, 2010

1010

5 Border Environment Cooperation Commission and €* € North Amerlcan Development Bank ri € q"rybtro o"d! rcFe

Since 1997, the US-Mexico Border Water Infrastructure Program, funded by Congress through EpA, has awarded grants to water and wastewater systems in the border region through the project Development Assistance Program (PDAP) for project development and design and the Border Environment Infrastructure Fund (BEIF) for construction.

Proeram Disbursements t70.o As of January 31, 2010, NADB had received 5639.5 million am.o tsoo.0 from EPA to fund the BE|F program. Of the funds lmo! t awarded to BEIF and available for projects: ?so; o 86.2% has been contracted with project sponsors t2m.0 Irm.o o StYo has been disbursed t. o $125 million are committed to projects in construction or under development

Notable improvements have been made in construction implementatlon and fund disbursement. This program will naturally carry a reasonable fund balance due to the multi-year construction schedules that are typical infrastructure projects. of However, unliquidated EE|F balances once as high as $gZO m:ttion have been reduced to s125 million even with the continuation of annual funding awards to BEIF. A recent program policy change to decouple the award of funds for the design and construction phases is expected to support an even more efficient fund liquidation process.t With this most recent change in managing the US- Mexico Border funds, the program has completed the modifications necessary to address all of the recommendations of the March 2008 audit report by EPA's Office of Inspector General (OlG). Proiect Development BECC and NADB, in close coordination with EPA, continue to work with project sponsors to advance the development of projects previously selected to receive funding from the program. There are: proiects o 53 currently under development (construction value > S27S million) o Proiects selected to receive only PDAP will be construction-ready and in need of approximately $50 million of BEIF funding support from the FY2O11 federal appropriation or sooner.

Since 2007, the President's proposed budget has reflected onV SfO lrtltP|DFmoor!oU}|rdoo gooterhlirtuCcn p|ofnn million for this program, greatly diminished from I'r|}z0t|l the Ssonn to S1o0M It ItY2qlT appropriation levels previous years. thru FY2011 rcfiect propoacd in This limited funding 0 commitment cannot sufficiently address the funding needs of the a projects that will be construction ready in Fy20l1 much less the total I needs of more than $1.t billion of unfunded applications documented a in the FY2ooglto prioritization process. should this trend in Sro- , million appropriations continue into Fy2O1l and beyond, the c construction of projects selected annually for project development L u x It l| I O'01 3 G !a !! !t ! o.lo fi through PDAP will be delayed and the backlog of needed water and wastewater infrastructure will be extended, threatening the environment and human health of residents in and beyond the border region.

'The US-Mexico Border water tnfrastructure Program Transition Plan was developed in response to the olG's recommendations. US-Mexico Border Proeram Accomplishments

The US-Mexico Border Program has accomplished a significant human health and environmental impact in and beyond the border region. The following are a few of the notable accomplishments supported by these resourceS:

. More than S32 million in PDAP technical assistance grants provided to more than 150 communities for the development of projects. 5535.0 million in BEIF funds committed to the implementation of drinking water and wastewater infrastructure projects valued at 51.59 billion and directly benefiting 7.2 million border residents, many of whom live in rural or underserved communities.

A leveraging strength of more than $2.00 of other sources to every $f.OO BEIF reflects the program's ability as a catalyst for motivating other stakeholder participation in projects.

Every project, whether located in the US or Mexico, has provided an environmental and human health benefit for the U.S. A capacity to eliminate more than 350 million gallons per day of untreated or inadequately treated wastewater discharges has been achieved, equivalent to the wastewater discharge of nearly 8 million persons or 1.86 million households. Influenced by the availability of this critical bi-national funding program, a significant increase of investment by Mexico has been experienced in the border region through programs of the Comisi6n Nacional del Agua (National Water Commission) for drinking water and wastewater infrastructure, reflecting the priority given to meeting the needs of this region. Service coverage for drinking water, sewer and wastewater treatment have increased dramatically in Mexico's border region with the most significant being an increase in wastewater treatment coverage from 2l%o to 82% (1995-2009!, whereas Mexico's national average wastewater treatment coverage is less than 40%.

Service Coverage in Mexico 100 km Border Region 1995-2009

1& r rc: | 1995 70' r 2005 s s c 2009 € s 20 to o 3trrr pja-L, tt.|ailtts

\,\rasbwabr lr€atnent corcrqF in ttlexbo's boder r€bn hc irrcnaged fiom 21oh to 82o/o (1995-2000), whereas llexbob naikx|al sverage rvasbsEbr lrcatn€nlcovorage ig bcr than 40%. BEGG Prospectus 2O1O: An Evolving Role in the US-Mexico Border

Established by the US and Mexican governments in 1994, the Border Environment Cooperation Commission (BECC) and North American Development Bank (NADB) have cooperatively worked to certify and finance environmental infrastructure projects with the intent of improving the environmental and human health conditions in the border region. As of December 31, 2009, their joint accomplishments have included: o L67 certified projects (81 US/85 Mexico) representing nearly 53.64 billion in environmental infrastructure investment, directly benefiting 12.6 million border residents. Certified projects have leveraged approximately $3.fi) for every $1.00 of construction financing provided by NADB. o Water and wastewater projects valued at S2.1 billion providing new or improved services to 10.7 million border residents. Other benefits include: E A dramatic improvement to service coverage for drinking water and wastewater in Mexico's border region including an increase in wastewater treatment coverage from 2l% to 82% (1995-209r), whereas Mexico's national average is less than 40%. E Positive economic impact where investments in water and wastewater occur. BECC conducted a study in 5 US communities which estimated that a million dollars invested in water and wastewater infrastructure would, over 10 years, result in S11.1M in private sector investment,22l new iobs, $1.7M in tax revenue, and S52.2M in private sector goods. o Water conseruation projects estimated to save energy and to decrease water losses by approximately 330 MGD, enough to serve the average demands of some 4 million people. o Solid Waste proiects accommodating approximately 1,550 tons/day of waste previously disposed of in open or uncontrolled sites. o Air Quality proiects related to paving will eliminate approximately 100,0(X) tons per year of PM1s, caused primarily by vehicular traffic on unpaved roadways. . Energy projects anticipated to prevent greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to almost 700,000 metric tons of COz-e per year through the use of alternative energy and fuel sources.

BECC continuously supports a pipeline of 80 to 100 environmental infrastructure projects and has long-established competencies to facilitate the development of traditional projects related to water, wastewater, and solid waste. In addition, BECC continues to build capacity necessary to advance solutions for emerging environmental sectors, such as air quality, transportation, energy and climate change planning. With increasing attention to these environmental issues and the experience and partnerships built BECC has responded with the following activities: o Strentthening Border Stakeholder Cooperation with increased participation in forums such as B2OL2 border-wide and regional taskforce/policy groups, Border Governors' Conference (including the Water, Energy and Environment Tables), Border Legislators' Conference, and other environmental topic meetings, BECC offers its knowledge and experience to assist in project/program coordination, consistent information exchange, and strategy development. o Strategic Planning is occurring on a state-by-state basis with initial environmental infrastructure assessments in all 6 Border States in Mexico completed. BECC anticipates having the reports for the 4 US Border States complete in 2010. As recommended in a recent audit report by the Government Accountability Office (GAO-10-126, Dec 09), an overall needs assessment of the region is necessary to improve the effectiveness of infrastructure program investments in the border region o Climate Change Planning, Mitigation and Adaptation Initiatives including the development of essential technical assistance tasks such as greenhouse gas inventories and projections as well as energy resource assessments for the 6 Mexican states. In 2010, BECC will focus on climate action planning as well as identifying opportunities in current climate action efforts for the US states, supporting the efforts of both countries for emission reductions. . Energy Efficiency and Renewable Source Projects which can be implemented for a broad range of uses such as municipal lighting, utility services, as well as residential needs. Hand-in-hand with a more efficient use of water, BECC is working to facilitate energy efficiency efforts that can be quick and cost- effective for large energy users like utilities. BECC also hopes to replicate programs, like that certified in San Diego supported by State legislation, which establishes a feasible financing tool for residential installation of renewable energy source technology. BEGG Prospectus 2O{O: An Evolving Role in the US-Mexico Border

BECC has instituted a culture which strives to both "do things right" and "do the right things". Built upon the foundation of its strategic planning efforts, BECC employs the following management tools: o Balanced Scorecard (BSC) - a method of translating strategy into specific action plans and utilized to measure program performance. o lSO9001:2008 Quality Management System (qMS) - assuring process compliance to a high quality standard, monitored through periodic internal audits and formal re-certification audits every three years. o 15014001 Environmental Management System (EMSI measureable 6€CC/arA06 establishes objectives for decreasing LoliCrl Rarulti Char^ environmental impacts induced by its operations, including efforts to offset its carbon footprint, to reduce energy use and 5ilrPro,cct Outcome waste, as well as to increase environmental awareness. Obiective o Results Measurement System - a framework developed specifically document the results projects through g lmplement to of &lnput performance indicators, focused on achieving positive '-\I DTMANO ) ( SUPPLY -____.V environmental and human health impacts. I

Considering the significant accomplishments along the border and BECC's commitment to accountability and excellence, external stakeholders have expanded their confidence in the institution and have requested an increased role in many national and bi-national initiatives such as the US- Mexico Border Infrastructure Program, Border 2012 and Methane to Markets - all funded through the US EPA and complemented by contributions from local, state and federal resources on both sides of the border.

With 13 million people living in the US-Mexico border region (100km/62 mile), a dynamic network of cultural, social, environmental and economic relationships link the residents of these two countries, setting a strong foundation for cross-border economic activity, as reflected by the following border facts: . Approximately 90% of the border region population resides in 14 paired trans-border communities. . Approximately 132,000 pedestrians, 523,000 passenger vehicles, 12,000 commercial trucks, and 2,000 rail containers are estimated to cross the border on any given day. o 250 million northbound crossings ocourred in 2006, for example, which were made up of: o One-day trips, typically for retail purchases, accounting for >95% of the northbound crossings o Nearly S50 billion in taxabte sales, making retail the 2nd largest employer in US border counties. . Of the 2,300 maquiladoras residing in Mexican border states, 90% trace their origin to US firms. o New employment in the US has been established to meet the needs of this industrial sector (warehousing, transportation and professional services) Population growth in the border region of Mexico has been heavily motivated by social networks, the availability of employment opportunities, and greater access to infrastructure and services. Social and economic conditions for US border communities, although still considered better than that of their southern border neighbors, often reflect some of the lowest US standards of living. The US-Mexico Border Counties Coalition published "At the Cross Roads: US/Mexico Border Counties in Transition", which compared the US border counties, considered as the 51't State, to the US States and found the following statistics for this US border county region: o The 5.7 million residents would rank 13th in population and 15th in population growth. o Per capita income for the region, not including San Diego, would rank 51't; however, personal income actually grew 41,.4o/o compared to 293% for the nation. . Exposure to unsanitary conditions existing on both sides of the border may influence its ranking as 2nd in incidence of tuberculosis and 3'd in deaths due to hepatitis.

With the primary intent of protecting the environment and human health of the border region and a secondary effect of fostering the development of economic opportunities and access to other well-being essentials, BECC's work and the continuous investment from border stakeholders for environmental infrastructure is necessary to meet the needs of the region and to improve the quality of life for border residents.

GOCEF/BEGG nww.coceLorg 03/29/2010

BECC Briefing California/Baja California

March 25-26, 2010

19941994 2009

TopicsTopics • BECC Overview • Arizona / Sonora Projects – Certified Projects and Technical Assistance – Pipeline – Projects Under Development • US-Mexico Border Infrastructure Program – PDAP/BEIF • Special Border Initiatives – Strategic Planning - State Environmental Infrastructure Needs Reports – Climate Change Strategies

19941994 2009

1 03/29/2010

BECC Overview USUS--MexicoMexico Border Environment Cooperation Agreement Signed in October 1993 - Side Agreement to NAFTA

Border Environment Cooperation Commission (BECC)

North American Development Bank (NADB) “Preserve, protect, and enhance US-Mexico border region by identifying, developing, implementing and overseeing environmental infrastructure projects”

A project that will “prevent, control or reduce environmental pollutants or contaminants, improve the drinking water supply, or protect flora and fauna so as to improve human health, promote sustainable development, or contribute to a higher quality of life” 19941994 2009

BECC Overview Board of Directors

A unique and innovative structure among binational organizations, where civil society is represented within its Board of Directors.

Representative of the Representative of the border states (New Mexico) border states (Baja California)

Public member who is resident Public member who is resident of the border region (Texas) of the border region (Nuevo Leon)

19941994 4 2009

2 03/29/2010

BECC Overview Mandate Scope BASIC SECTORS • Water • Sewage systems • Wastewater treatment • Water Reuse • Storm Water Systems • Solid Waste EXPANDED SECTORS • Water Conservation • Air Quality Jurisdiction Public Transportation 100 km north and 300 km south of the • international boundary • Clean and Efficient Energy Projects beyond these areas may be eligible if they remedy a cross‐border environmental or • Hazardous Waste health problem. • Solid Waste Reduction& Recycling 19941994 • Municipal Planning 2009

BECC Overview

19941994 6 2009

3 03/29/2010

BECC Overview

Project Implementation includes the physical construction of the certified project. NADB is responsible for project oversight and financial activities. BECC assists NADB, border stakeholders and project sponsors in facilitating this task.

Project Close-out requires a verification of one-year operational performance for the project, including a review of the project’s compliance with performance standards, such as: operations; benchmarking goals; compliance/mitigation of environmental clearance requirements; and benefits achieved for human health and environment.

Facility Operations (Financial Obligations and Results Monitoring) requires continuing coordination with the project sponsor to satisfy any financial obligations established with the NADB and environmental and human health objectives established throug h certifi cati on o f the pro jec t.

Project Facility Close-Out 19941994 Implementation Operations 2009

BECC Overview • US-Mexico Border Program (EPA-funded Program for PDAP and BEIF): Water and Wastewater Projects • Border 2012 and Special Grants (EPA-funded Program): Address Border 2012 objectives • Solid Waste Environmental Program: NADB grant program for municipal solid waste projects. • NADB’s Loan Programs for construction applicable to water, wastewater, solid waste, air quality, and energy. Includes Bank’s role as financial & institutional advisor and as investment banker • Technical Assistance Programs for all sectors BECC and NADB provide grant assistance to project sponsors for institutional strengthening and project development studies. • Institutional Capacity Building: BECC and NADB provide training to project sponsors for institutional strengthening through Sector workshops and Utility Management Institute.

19941994 8 2009

4 03/29/2010

BECC Overview • Value – Added Benefits of Certification – Environmental Impacts are sufficiently reviewed including potential trans-boundary effects as well as addressing any formal environmental norms and clearance requirements. – Strong Technical Feasibility Practices are applied through an analysis of cost-effective alternatives, allowing for appropriate technology and operation and maintenance expectations. – In-depth Financial Analyses take into account capital investment needs, life-cycle costs and determine affordability requirements, including sufficient revenues to support financial sustainability. – Community Participation activities support a transparent process and consider key principles of environmental justice by engaging participation through informal and formal outreach. – Sustainable Development concepts are incorporated throughout the project cycle and important impacts to community development

19941994 and regional planning are considered. 2009

BECC Overview US 81 CERTIFIED PROJECTS 167 MX 86 TOTAL INVESTMENT (()BD) $3. 65 POPULATION BENEFITED (M) 12.8 NADB FINANCED PROJECTS* 132 NADB FINANCING* (BD) US 40% MX 60% Loans - $456M Grants - $621.5 (BEIF $532.7M) $1.08 *Only contracted agreements are included, not total approvals.

Projects are support by Technical Assistance PDAP (MD) BECC (MD) TOTAL (MD) 19941994 provided through BECC: $ 32.4 $ 5.26 $ 37.66 2009

5 03/29/2010

BECC Overview 83 Water and Wastewater: 17 Solid Waste Management: Providing improved drinking 2.9 million residents with water treatment/distribution as improved waste collection and well as wastewater collection/ disposal services, resulting in the treatment for the benefit of more cappyppypacity to properly dispose of than 12 million border residents, 1,550 tons of waste per day most significantly impacted by new capacity to eliminate 350MGD of untreated or 11 Air Quality Projects: inadequately treated sewage 6.7 million residents benefited from reduced exposure to air pollution from vehicular traffic on 25 Water Conservation: unpaved streets. Approximately 100,,py000 tons per year of PM10 Estimated annual water anticipated to be eliminated. savings of 330 million gallons per day. As a comparison, this 3 Energy: quantity is sufficient to serve Offset demands of the average drinking water traditional fossil-fuel based demands of 4 million people. energy production, avoiding nearly 700,000 metric tons of CO2-e per year. 19941994 11 2009

Economic Impact Study Infrastructure and Well-being A MILLION DOLLARS INVESTED IN WATER AND WASTEWATER INFRASTRUCTURE OVER 10-YEARS RESULTS IN:

$11.1 million in private sector investment 221 new jobs created $1.7 million in tax revenue $$gpyp52.2 million in goods produced by the private sector Infrastructure investment is a driver or catalyst for new private sector economic activity and job/wealth creation

19941994 2009

6 03/29/2010

CA Certified Projects & TA CERTIFIED CA PROJECTS TA Funds to CA 13 (MD) PDAP $ 2.00 BECC $ 0.19 TOTAL INVESTMENT (MD) $254. 66 TOTAL $ 2.19 Current Technical Assistance 9 Water and Wastewater from PDAP TA Fund: •Palo Verde, PERs-EID-IS •Holtville (2), PERs-EID-IS 1 Clean Energy •Heber, Water Distribution Study.

Technical Assistance from 3 Water Conservation BECC TA Fund Completed: •Brawley, Feasibility SW Study 19941994 •Brawley, PER, WW 2009

CA Certified Projects Certification Cost Benefited Project Status Date (MD) Population Brawley, California ‐ Water Treatment Plant 09/28/1995 $25.71 21,000 Completed Replacement. San Diego, California ‐ Wastewater Reuse 06/18/1997 $99.59 26,400 Completed

Calexico, California ‐ Water 06/24/1998 $11.33 1,110,549 Completed Heber, California ‐ Wastewater 03/26/1999 $3.38 21,000 Completed Westmorland, California ‐ Wastewater 08/11/1999 $4.41 1,700 Completed

Brawley, California ‐ Water and Wastewater 09/30/1999 $13.76 2,566 Completed

Heber, California ‐ Water and Wastewater 09/30/1999 $6.87 2,566 Completed Desert Shores, California ‐ Wastewater 06/26/2002 $1.20 2,000 Completed Imperial, California ‐ Water Conservation 09/25/2003 $5.00 1,000 Completed Seeley, California ‐ Water and Wastewater 12/05/2003 $2.19 8,500 Completed

Bard, California ‐ Water conservation 12/05/2003 $8.06 2,000 Completed Imperial, California ‐ Automation System for the Under 07/16/2008 $2.52 11,700 Imperial Irrigation District. Construction San Diego County ‐ Frontera FIRST Clean Energy 12/10/2009 $70.64 1,336,865 Under Design 19941994Program for Households. 14 2009

7 03/29/2010

BAJA Certified Projects & TA CERTIFIED BAJA PROJECTS TA Funds to 23 BAJA (MD) PDAP $ 1.82 BECC $ 0.67 TOTAL INVESTMENT (MD) $998. 07 TOTAL $ 2.49 Technical Assistance from 17 Water and Wastewater BECC TA Fund Completed: •TJ, Greenhouse Gas Inventory •TJ, SW, Construction Supervision •TJ, Public Participation Plan •Tecate, Master Plan 2 Solid Waste Management •Ensenada, Master Plan •TJ, Institutional Capacity Develop. •Mexicali, Tire Recycling Eval. •Mexicali, WW, EA 4 Air Quality •TJ, Final Design Evaluation.

19941994 2009

BAJA Certified Projects Certification Cost Benefited Project Status Date ( MD ) Population Under Ensenada, Baja California ‐ Wastewater Treatment Plant 09/28/1995 $8.19 250,000 Construction Under Tijuana, Baja California ‐ Wastewater (ECOPARK) 06/18/1997 $0.18 1,349,711 Construction Tijuana, Baja California ‐ Wastewater 06/18/1997 $42.01 1,349,711 Completed Mexicali, Baja California ‐ Wastewater 12/05/1997 $54.97 600,939 Completed Tecate, Baja California ‐ Water and Wastewater 06/22/2000 $9.73 70,000 Completed

Tijuana, Baja California ‐ Wastewater 10/16/2001 $27.43 1,349,711 Completed Tecate, Baja California ‐ Solid Waste 09/25/2002 $4.75 70,000 On Hold Under Baja California ‐ Air Quality 04/03/2003 $487 600,939 Construction Mexicali, Baja California ‐ Wastewater 09/22/2003 $30.16 600,939 Completed Tijuana, BC ‐ Air Quality and Paving Project. 06/21/2006 $54.55 1,349,711 Completed Under Tijuana, BC ‐ Solid Waste Project. 06///21/2006 $4.54 1,349,711 Construction Playas de Rosarito, BC ‐ Expansion of the Water Distribution Under 10/26/2006 $10.02 8,652 and Wastewater Collection System. Construction Under Mexicali, BC ‐ Wastewater Collection System, East Sector. 10/30/2007 $46.96 1,349,711 Construction Tecate, BC ‐ Expansion of the water distribution and Under 10/30/2007 $2.78 8,5652 wastewater collection systems. Construction Playas de Rosarito, BC., Mex.: Metropolitan Urban roads and 10/30/2007 $40.91 8,5652 Under Design 19941994streets System 16 2009

8 03/29/2010

BAJA Certified Projects

Certification Cost Benefited Project Status Date ( MD ) Population Tijuana, BC ‐ Expansion of the Wastewater Collection 11/27/2008 $1.80 2,705 Completed System. Tijuana, BC ‐ Expansion of the Wastewater Collection Under 11/28/2008 $8.98 33,915 Systems Construction Under Rosarito, BC ‐ WWTP Expansion (Rosarito I) 07/21/2009 $4.53 21,802 Construction Rosarito, BC ‐ Wastewatwer Collection Expansion to Un‐ 07/21/2009 $0.71 2,014 Completed served area‐ LOMAS DE ROSARITO Rosarito, BC ‐ Wastewater Collection Expansion to unserved Under 07/21/2009 $0.69 4,528 area ‐ INDEPENDENCIA Construction Rosarito, BC ‐ Wastewater Collection Expansion to Unserved Under 07/21/2009 $1.42 6,806 area ‐ AZTLAN Construction Tijuana, BC ‐ Expansion of the water and wastewater Under 07///21/2009 $30.40 700,000 systems project in Tijuana and Playas de Rosarito, B.C. Construction Air Quality Project located in Municipio de Tijuana, Baja Under 07/24/2009 $125.45 1,349,711 California in the state of Construction

19941994 2009

PipelinePipeline Number of Projects in BECC’s Pipeline (FEBRUARY‐2010)

Solid Air Clean Water /Wastewater Est. Cost State Waste Quality Energy Non‐BEIF BEIF TOTAL (MD)

California 0 0 0 1 5 6 $23.19 Arizona 0 0 0 1 2 3 $3.27 New México 0 0 0 0 4 4 $42.37 Texas 3 0 3 0 6 12 $411.13 Total US 3 0 3 2 17 25 $479.96 Baja California 0 1 1 0 11 13 $69.47 Sonora 1 2 0 0 8 11 $52.32 Chihuahua 0 2 1 0 6 9 $107.46 Coahuila 0 1 0 1 1 3 $3.84 Nuevo León 2 2 0 0 1 5 $14.76 Tamaulipas 1 1 5 2 10 19 $4,888.15 Total MX 4 9 7 3 37 60 $5,136.00

Total Projects 7910554 85 19941994 18 2009

9 03/29/2010

CA Pipeline Possible Cost Benefited Project Type Description Certification Status (USD) Population date Expand and improve the existing Heber, California ‐ WWTP. The current effluent quality Wastewater Treatment WW does not meet several discharge 11.6 6000 TBD On Hold Plant Expansion. standards as established by the current NPDES permit Replace the deteriorated 3.2‐mile Holtville Wastewater wastewater gravity main and 41 Gravity Main 30% Preliminary WW associated manholes that convey raw 1.92 3384 6/2/2011 Replacement Engineering Report sewage from the town to the wastewater treatment plant. Upgrading the Water Treatment Plant Heber Water Treatment to comply with the primary maximum Final Design Under W 32.26 213976 6/2/2011 Plant Improvement contaminant level for total Review trihalomethanes (TTHM). Drinking water infrastructure to serve City of Holtville Water an estimated 109 households that 60% PER Completed, Distribution System W currently use untreated surface water 2.78 6339 6/2/2011 Draft EID and IS EtExtens ion from the IilImperial IiIrriga tion Dis tr ic t Canal and/or hauled water. Replace two pipeline segments Holtville Residential approximately 600 linear feet each, of 60% PER Completed, Wastewater Collection WW substandard 4‐inch pipeline with an 8‐ 3.28 6300 6/2/2011 Draft EID and IS Pipeline inch pipeline as well as associated manholes and household connections. The Project will Connect 168 Palo Verde Wastewater households to wastewater services, 30% Preliminary Collection and WW $2.54M 420 NA benefiting an estimated population of Engineering Report 19941994 Treatment 2009 420 inhabitants.

BAJA Pipeline Cost Benefited Possible Project Type Description Status (MD) Population Certification Greenhouse Gas GHG Under Inventory & Forecast AQ Study $0.06 NA NA development for Baja California Tijuana, BC –WWC Construction of wastewater collection infrastructure for the Financial Expansion to unserved WW $0. 62 2,484 8/30/2010 unserved area Santa Cruz in Analysis areas ‐ SANTA CRUZ Tijuana , BC. Tijuana, BC –WWC Construction of wastewater collection infrastructure for the Financial Expansion to unserved WW $0.8 4,314 8/30/2010 unserved area Los Alcatraces, in Analysis areas –ALCATRACES Tijuana, BC. Playas de Rosarito, BC – Construction of wastewater WWC expansion to collection infrastructure for the Financial unserved areas –EJIDO WW unserved area Plan Libertador & $5.5 21,762 8/30/2010 Analysis PLAN LIBERTADOR & Ampliacion , in Playas de AMPLIACION Rosarito, BC. Construction of drinking water Tijuana ,BC WDS and and wastewater collection W Technical WWC to Lázaro infrastructure for the unserved $4.44 9,895 10/6/10 WW Assistance Cárdenas Tijuana ,BC area Lazaro Cardenas 2da Sección Tijuana ,BC WWC Construction of wastewater collection infrastructure for the Technical Expansion to 5ta WW $0.72 2,060 4/13/11 unserved area Altiplano 5ta Assistance 19941994Seccion 2009 Seccion

10 03/29/2010

BAJA Pipeline

Cost Benefited Possible Project Type Description Status (MD) Population Certification Tijuana, BC –WDS and Construction of water WWC expansion to distribution and Unserved Area Granjas W wastewater collection infrastructure for unserved Technical Buenos Aires‐Generacion WW $10.6 13,569 2/9/2012 area Granjas Buenos Aires‐ Assistance 2000, and Cueros de WWTP Generacion 2000 and Venado Wastewater construction of Cueros de Treatment Plant Venado WWTP Playas de Rosarito, BC – Construction of wastewater WWC expansion to collection infrastructure for Technical WW $0.93 3,865 9/6/2011 unserved areas Lucio the unserved area Lucio Assistance Blanco Blanco Tijuana ,BC WWC Construction of wastewater collection infrastructure for Technical expansion to Lomas de San WW $1.7 8,925 8/29/11 the unserved area Lomas Assistance Antonio de San Antonio Construction of drinking water and wastewater Tijuana ,BC WDS –WWC W Technical collection infrastructure for $1.76 2,629 9/14/11 to Lomas de Tlatelolco WW Assistance the unserved area Lomas de Tlatelolco, The project is planned to Tecate, BC. install a renewable energy $39.8 Pollution Control / CE run‐of river hydroelectric TBD 7/2/11 90% Final Design 2 Reduction Project plant project to generate 20 19941994 MW of electricity 2009

USUS--MexicoMexico Border Program Success through Effective Program Management • Implementation of a Biannual Project Prioritization Process – identifies needs and prioritizes funding to address the most severe environmental and human health conditions; provides a pipeline of needs. • Issuance of the By‐pass and Schedule Provision – establishes new management controls including the development of schedules (5 ½ year) • Enactment of the Policy for US‐Mexico Border Program (OCFO) – aims to optimize project completion rates, reduce program balances and clarify management controls. • Development of a program Transition Plan ‐ defines an approach to decouple grant awards for project planning/design and construction to develop a portfolio of projects ready for construction investment, as appropriated. Program Accomplishments • More than $32 million in PDAP technical assistance grants and $532.7 million in BEIF funds committed to drinking water and wastewater infrastructure projects valued at $1.58 billion and directly benefiting 7.2 million border residents. • Leveraging strength of more than $2.00 of other

19941994 sources to every $1.00 BEIF. 22 2009

11 03/29/2010

USUS--MexicoMexico Border Program

19941994 2009

USUS--MexicoMexico Border Program Service Coverage in Mexico 100 km Border Region 1995‐2009

96 88 82.2 92

100 78 90 72 80 1995 70 89 60 2009 2005 50 64 2009 40 30 2005 20 10 0 20.8 1995

Water Sewer Wastewater Treatment

Wastewater treatment coverage in Mexico’s border region has increased from 21% to 82% (1995-2009), whereas Mexico’s national average wastewater 19941994 treatment coverage is less than 40%. 24 2009

12 03/29/2010

USUS--MexicoMexico Border Program

Ongoing Investment Needs • 53 projects currently under development (> $275M) – 27 projects have BEIF reserved from FY07/08 funds – 26 projects selected for PDAP (FY09 funds) will be construction‐ ready and in need of >$50M BEIF from FY2011 or sooner. • FY09/10 unfunded applications represent a construction investment need of >$800M. • BECC assessments estimate >$300M is required to achieve 100% coverage in eligible areas of Mexico. (Based on the needs estimated by BECC for 38 municipios specifically adjacent to US‐Mexico border.) • Investment needs also continue to exist in the US, i.e. NM water connections not served by wastewater (>$300M).

19941994 25 2009

Border Initiatives-Initiatives-Needs Assessments • Strategic Planning – An overall needs assessment of the region is necessary to improve the effectiveness of infrastructure program investments in the border region (GAO-10-126, Dec 09) – BECC has completed initial environmental infrastructure assessments in all 6 Mexican states and anticipates having the reports for the 4 US Border States complete in 2010.

19941994 2009

13 03/29/2010

State of Basic Infrastructure

Mexican Municipios in the 300 km BECC border zone: US counties in the 100 km BECC border zone: a) 224 muniiiicipios i6ttin 6 states. a) 47 cou nties in 4 states. b) Area: 697,000 km2 b) Area : 375,000 km2 c) Aprox. Population 16.5 million c) Aprox. Population : 13.2 million d) Número de localidades: 31,834 comunidades. Fuente: US Census Bureau Office. 2006. Source : CONAPO INEGI.

‐ Total population for the BECC bi‐national region: 29.7 million 2 19941994 ‐ Area in the BECC bi‐national: 1 million km . 27 2009

State of Basic Infrastructure

(300 km border region)

(100 km border region) 19941994(100 km border region) 2009

14 03/29/2010

State of Basic Infrastructure

(300 km border region)

(100 km border region) 19941994(100 km border region) 2009

State of Basic Infrastructure

(300 km border region)

(100 km border region)

19941994 (100 km border region) 2009

15 03/29/2010

State of Basic Infrastructure Estimated Investment Needs ‐ 300 km region by state

Note: These 903 million dollars were calculated with the BECC index numbers with 2008 dollars . BECC is moving in the next months to re‐calculate these numbers taking in account the inflation and other factors .

19941994Source: BECC index number cost 1/ US $200/pers. as initial investment for drinking water per capita . / 2/ US $ 150/pers. for sewer /3/ US $ 100/hab. for Wastewater treatment/pers. 4/ US $10,000 /ton/day for Landfill construction from: “La basura en el limbo”.‐ Comisión Mexicana de Infraestructura Ambiental y la Agencia de Cooperación2009 Técnica Alemana (GTZ) 2003.

Baja CA Border Region Needs Baja California population and average coverage in basic sectors 1990‐2030

1‐ Baja California (BC) has the fastest rate for population growth among the 6 border Mexican states. 2.‐ BC in 2010 is 38% smaller than Nuevo León (the state with the biggest population 4.5 million people), but in the year 2030, BC is expected to be nearly the same size. 3.‐ Anticipating similar investment trends, BC could keep a high coverage of drinking water (around 95%), almost 100%, very close to the population growth. 5.‐ Significant progress has occurred in wastewater treatment coverage and consistent coverage increases have also been achieved for sewer infrastructure; however, maintaining current investment trends will continue to leave a coverage Census gap of around 17% to 20% in these Source: INEGI “Censos de Población y Vivienda” 1990 & 2000 , Conteo de Población INEGI 2005 and 19941994sectors. CONAPO Population projections 2005‐2030 / Estadisticas CONAGUA 2008 revisión 2009 / and BECC 2009 calculations.

16 03/29/2010

State of Basic Infrastructure Sonora population and average coverage in basic sectors 1990‐2030

1‐ Sonora in 2010 has the smallest population among the Mexican border states with 2.53 million people, a fact anticipated to stay the same for the next 20 years given its stable rate of growth. 2.‐ The effort in the last 15 years in Sonora to increase the coverage in its basic sectors has had very good performance. 3.‐ With similar investment commitments, it is projected that in 2015, Sonora can achieve 100% coverage in drinking water, sewer will be 98% and wastewater treatment could be 92%.

Census

19941994 Source: INEGI “Censos de Población y Vivienda” 1990 & 2000 , Conteo de Población INEGI 2005 and CONAPO Population projections 2005‐2030 / Estadisticas CONAGUA 2008 revisión 2009 / and BECC calculations. 2009

State of Basic Infrastructure Chihuahua population and average coverage in basic sectors 1990‐2030

1‐ Chihuahua in 2010 has 3.42 million people, second among the six Mexican border states, below only Nuevo León (4.5 million). 2.‐ The rapid growth in population is primarily influenced by the growth experienced in the cities of Juárez and Chihuahua. 3.‐ Theincreaseinwastewater treatment coverage in CHIH, as in the other 5 Mexican states, can be largely contributed to projects in the region supported by BECC/NADB resources. This coverage increased from 0% in 1995 to 80% in 2010. 4.‐ In the year 2030 Chihuahua is projected to have a population of 3.83 million people and the trends show that the drinking water and Census wastewater treatment coverage will 19941994be at 92%. Source: INEGI “Censos de Población y Vivienda” 1990 & 2000 , Conteo de Población INEGI 2005 and CONAPO 2009 Population projections 2005‐2030 / Estadisticas CONAGUA 2008 revisión 2009 / and BECC calculations.

17 03/29/2010

State of Basic Infrastructure Coahuila population and average coverage in basic sectors 1990‐2030

1‐ Coahuila in 2010 has 2.65 million people, fifth place in size among the six Mexican border states.

2.‐ Following the successful investment performance momentum ofthelast10yearsinCoahuila,by the year 2015, a coverage of 100% in drinking water, sewer and wastewater treatment services is ppjrojected.

3.‐ Ideally, this important achievement will allow investments in the state to be reassigned to other critical infrastructure needs.

Census

State of Basic Infrastructure Nuevo León population and average coverage in basic sectors 1990‐2030

1‐ Nuevo León in 2010 has 4.50 million people, the largest population among the six Mexican border states. 2.‐ Nuevo León has consistently invested significant resources to achieve 100% coverage in the basic sectors. 3.‐ In the year 2010, this investment trend places Nuevo León with coverage at 100% in all the services. 4.‐ One unique influence for this achievement is that 95% of the State’s population is concentrated in Monterrey, mitigating issues related to “dispersion” as experienced elsewhere. Census

19941994 Source: INEGI “Censos de Población y Vivienda” 1990 & 2000 , Conteo de Población INEGI 2005 and CONAPO 2009 Population projections 2005‐2030 / Estadisticas CONAGUA 2008 revisión 2009 / and BECC calculations.

18 03/29/2010

State of Basic Infrastructure

Tamaulipas population and average coverage in basic sectors 1990‐2030

1‐ Tamaulipas in 2010 has 3.23 million people, it is the fourth place in size among the six Mexican border states. 2.‐ Tamaulipas since 1990 had a remarkable performance in drinking water service, followed closely by the sewer sector. 3.‐ The bigger concern in the last decade has been the wastewater treatment sector; however, efforts to develop projects in the cities of Matamoros, Reynosa and Nuevo Laredo has allowed Tamaulipas to improve this condition. 100% coverage is expected for this sector in the near future. Census

Emerging Issues - 20102010 • Climate Change

General warming will cause changes in atmospheric circulation and water vapor transport that will shift Southwestern North America and subtropics to an even more arid climate in the near future. Bad enough ... Richard Seager Lamont Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University Palisades, New York

19941994 2009

19 03/29/2010

Emerging Issues - 20102010 Drought frequency and severity will increase forcing migration to urban areas Effects of and influence greater scarcity of resources Cities will expqperience frequent water Climate shortages affecting population wellness and health Change on Industries requiring water for operation will experience loss of production Border Basic environmental Infrastructure and Flood control infrastructure will be Residents overwhelmed by weather extremes Energy costs will face l arge var iabili ty if We Do due to climate extremes and oil/gas production problems Nothing: Existing unsustainable urban development practices will be affected by nature 19941994 Lack of education on climate change will 2009 cause unwillingness to modify bad habits

Advancing Sustainability • Energy Infrastructure Diagnostics INVENTORY OF for the Border GREENHOUSE • Training seminars for government officials, researchers and others EFFECT • Renewable Energy Potential for the GASES Border Region • Data sources ID for GHG BECC/NADB ROLE • Sector level information for 9State by State economic activities inventories and • Emission factors according Diagnostics 1990‐ to proper protocols 2020 • I&F for each border 9Various Energy state related Studies • Public Participation • Environmental Education • Capacity Building

19941994 2009

20 03/29/2010

BECC/NADB ROLE CLIMATE CHANGE • Mitigation Plans MITIGATION • Public Participation • Environmental Education • Project Identification • Project Planning • Project Implementation

19941994 2009

Border Initiatives – Climate Change

19941994 2009

21 03/29/2010

Border Initiatives – Climate Change

19941994 2009

Border Initiatives – Climate Change

19941994 2009

22 03/29/2010

Advancing Sustainability Gross Emissions per capita 1995‐ 2005 (by state)

19941994 2009

Border Initiatives – Climate Change Climate Change Action Planning, Mitigation and Adaptation Initiatives • Climate Change Action Planning - Mexico – Develop State Inventories and Forecasts – Complete – Border-wide Training – Provided to Technical Work Groups (TWG) of all 6 States via Webinars Objective: Trained TWG will obtain the capacity to implement climate action planning process in each state. • Training 1 (2 days): Review of I&F Data and Planning Template Cost: $50,000 (BECC) • Training 2 (3-4 days): Identification & Design of Policy Options Cost: $70,000 (TBD) • Training 3 (3-4 days): Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Policy Options Cost: $70,000 (TBD) BECC will deploy staff to all 6 states to support local training venues. 19941994 • Identify Emission Reduction Activities – US & Mexico 2009

23 03/29/2010

Border Initiatives – Climate Change Expanded Sectors • Clean and Renewable Energy: Bioenergy, wind, solar • Waste-to-Energy – Landfill Methane Outreach Program (LMOP) – Methane to Markets Initiative – Scrap Tire Management • Energy Efficiencies: Audits, water utilities, public lighting industry, equitipment repltlacement, recycling • Transportation Waste Management, Air Quality and Energy Potential Impact: Reducing Greenhouse Gases 19941994 2009

ThankThank YouYou.. MiMiMaria Elena Giner, P.E . Deputy General Manager [email protected] Temis Alvarez Regional Manager [email protected] Mario Modesto Project Manager [email protected] Joel Mora, MS, EIT Project Manager [email protected] 877877--277277--17031703 www.cocef.org 19941994 2009

24 29/03/2010

URBAN DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR THE POPULATION CENTER OF TIJUANA 2009-2030

MARCH 2010

URBAN DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR THE POPULATION CENTER OF TIJUANA 2009-2030 MUNICIPAL PLANNING CONTEXT

MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2008-2010 (COPLADEM)

MUNICIPAL URBAN MUNICIPAL LEVEL DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2008-2030 (IMPLAN)

URBAN DEVELOPMENT POPULATION CENTER COMMUNITY LEVEL PROGRAMS (IMPLAN).

PARTLY URBAN DEVELOPMENT DELEGATION OR PROGRAMS STRATEGIC ZONE (IMPLAN) LEVEL

COMMUNITY NEIGHBORHOOD PROGRAMS LEVEL (IMPLAN) 2

1 29/03/2010

URBAN DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR THE POPULATION CENTER OF TIJUANA 2009-2030

ON AUGUST 18TH 2009, THE URBAN DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM WAS APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF TIJUANA AND WAS SUBMITTED TO THE STATE OF BAJA CALIFORNIA CONGRESS FOR ITS APPROVAL

URBAN DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR THE POPULATION CENTER OF TIJUANA 2009-2030

POPULATION CENTER SUFACE 227,517 acres (74.33 %) MUNICIPAL TERRITORIAL SIZE 306,072 acres URBAN AREA OF P.C. 76,486 acres (33.61 %) MUNICIPAL POPULATION 2009 1, 606,113 URBAN POPULATION 98.54 % MUNICIPAL POPULATION 2030 3, 401,489

SA N DIEGO

TECATE

CENTRO DE POBLACION DE TIJUANA

ROSARITO

ENSENADA

2 29/03/2010

URBAN DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR THE POPULATION CENTER OF TIJUANA 2009-2030 Analysis and processing of information

Hydrology Vegetation Areas Topography

Population Density Land Use Public infrastructure

Housing Density Electrification System Potable Water System

URBAN DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR THE POPULATION CENTER OF TIJUANA 2009-2030 Models of pressure and conservation

CURRENT STATE PRESSURE

UTPs with bigger index of conservation: UTPs with bigger pressure: Cerro Gordo, Santo Domingo, Najera, Santa Cueros de Venado, Santa Fe, San Anita, El Carrizo, San Ysidro Ajolojol , El Antonio del Mar, Valle Redondo, Valle de Monumento. las Palmas. CURRENT STATE/ PRESSURE POLICY OF LAND USE 6

3 29/03/2010

URBAN DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR THE POPULATION CENTER OF TIJUANA 2009-2030 STRATEGIC

ESTRATEGIC PRINCIPLES

Social Environment- Urban Equity Integrity ESTRATEGIC

NORMATIVE URBAN Económic ESTRATEGIC STRUCTURE Prosperity

URBAN DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR THE POPULATION CENTER OF TIJUANA 2009-2030 STRATEGIC PRINCIPLES

RE-DENSIFICATION PUBLIC SPACE ORDERLY GROWTH

URBAN STRUCTURE URBAN MOBILITY METROPOLIZATION 8

4 29/03/2010

URBAN DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR THE POPULATION CENTER OF TIJUANA 2009-2030 LEGAL STRATEGY

LAND USE MAP 2009-2030 THE FIRST LAND USE REGULATION

COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR ROADS

HOUSING INDUSTRY

COMMERCIAL

CONSERVATION URBAN CU CENTER INFRASTRUCTURE URBAN 9 SPECIAL USES SC SUBCENTER

URBAN DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR THE POPULATION CENTER OF TIJUANA 2009-2030

URBAN STRUCTURE

INFRASTRUCTURE SYSTEM OPEN SPACES SYSTEM

ROADS SYSTEM BUILDING SYSTEM

5 29/03/2010

URBAN DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR THE POPULATION CENTER OF TIJUANA 2009-2030 ROAD NETWORK SCHEME 2009-2030

URBAN DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR THE POPULATION CENTER OF TIJUANA 2009-2030

PROCEDURES FOR PROCESSING AND ISSUING AREAS OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS

6 29/03/2010

URBAN DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR THE POPULATION CENTER OF TIJUANA 2009-2030 DEVELOPMENT STAGES

DENSIFICATION

SHORT TERM

MEDIUM TERM

SHORT TERM

MEDIUM TERM

LONG TERM LONG TERM

URBAN DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR THE POPULATION CENTER OF TIJUANA 2009-2030 URBAN DEVELOPMENT POLICIES

DENSIFICATION

IMPROVEMENT

CONSOLIDATION

GROWING

GROWING CONSERVATION

7 29/03/2010

URBAN DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR THE POPULATION CENTER OF TIJUANA 2009-2030 STRATEGIC PROJECTS AND ZONES

URBAN DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR THE POPULATION CENTER OF TIJUANA 2009-2030 PROGRAMMED

Program for the development of the Metropoli-Metropolitan Schedule

Binational Strategic Plan Otay Mesa-Mesa de Otay SANDAG-IMPLAN

Local Schedule of enviromental transversality

Plan for the incorporation of developing exchange mechanisms SDU DAU IMPLAN

Plan of support and promotion for the formation of industrial clusters SEDECO

8 29/03/2010

URBAN DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR THE POPULATION CENTER OF TIJUANA 2009-2030 PROGRAMMED

Plan for the recovery of green areas and recycling of water CESPT- TIJUANA CITY

Implementation of massive public transportation system for Tijuana SDU DAU IMPLAN City Manager

Implementation of the technical unit for easements SIDUE SDU IMPLAN

URBAN DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR THE POPULATION CENTER OF TIJUANA 2009-2030 INSTRUMENTAL

ADMINISTRATIVE

Social Environment -Urban Equity Integrity INSTRUMENTS

ECONOMICAL JURIDICAL Económic FINANCIAL Prosperity

9 29/03/2010

URBAN DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR THE POPULATION CENTER OF TIJUANA 2009-2030

ADMINISTRATIVE INSTRUMENTS

PLANS AND PROGRAMS SYSTEM

CREATION OF ENTITIES

MECHANISM FOR ORGANIZATION AND PARTICIPATION

INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT

LEGAL INSTRUMENTS

FEDERAL-STATE-MUNICIPAL REGULATION

ECONOMIC-FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS

SOURCES OF FINANCING

IDENTIFICATION OF FUNDS

URBAN DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR THE POPULATION CENTER OF TIJUANA 2009-2030

THE NEED HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED TO CREATE AN AGENCY WITHIN THE MUNICIPAL STRUCTURE FOCUSED ON RESOURCING AT THE LOCAL, NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL LEVELS, THAT WILL FACILITATE COMPLIANCE WITH PLANS SET FORTH IN THE MUNICIPAL MASTER PLANS

“GRACIAS”

www.implantijuana.com

10 29/03/2010

ISSUE COLLABORATE WITH THE U.S. EPA IN THE BORDER 2012 PROGRAM, THE BINATIONAL AIR QUALITY TASK FORCE, AND THE SAN DIEGO COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT (APCD) IN BINATIONAL CLEAN AIR EFFORTS

EARLY ACTION Support the San Diego APCD cross-border clean air demonstration projects.

Progress

In 2008, the APCD received a grant from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to fund the second phase of the San Diego/ Tijuana Clean Diesel Demonstration Project, with the objective of mitigating the air quality impact of increased cross-border, heavy-duty diesel truck traffic.

The first phase of this project was completed in 2008 and retrofitted 50 cross-border trucks with Diesel Oxidation Catalysts (DOCs) plus a Spiracle crankcase filtration system. In 2009, the second phase of the project was completed. Ten border drayage trucks were retrofitted with Diesel Particulate Filters (DPF). DPFs reduce particulate matter emissions by 85 percent.

During 2009, the APCD also applied for a grant from the EPA’s National Clean Diesel Funding Assistance Program to retrofit crossborder drayage trucks. This was to be funded through the ARRA of 2009 (Recovery Act). However, funding was not awarded for this project.

Otay Mesa-Mesa de Otay Binational Corridor Strategic Plan – March 2010 Draft Progress Report 19