Board of Directors Meeting
Friday, November 9, 2007 10:30 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. Garden Ballroom – Wine & Roses 2505 West Turner Road Lodi, California 95242
AGENDA 10:30 I. Convene Meeting Chair Conway Introductory Remarks Deputy Chair Grupe 10:35 II. Self-Introductions Partnership Board & Public 10:45 III. Review and Approval of Minutes C. Conway • August 10, 2007 Board Meeting 10:50 IV. Transportation Malcolm Dougherty, Kome • Implementation of the Highway Ajise, CalTrans; 99 business plan – funding and Andrew Chesley, SJV next steps Regional COGs • San Joaquin Valley RTPA Trade Corridor Projects Hot List 11:15 V. Water Quality, Supply & Reliability • Briefing on discussions with Ray Watson, Convener northern and southern San Secretary Chrisman, Fritz Joaquin Valley water stakeholders Grupe, Sunne McPeak, Alan • Discussion of next steps for Autry, LeRoy Ornellas developing a shared position among water stakeholders 12:00 Lunch Recess • Discussion of board survey C. Conway, Gene Voiland responses, board engagement 1:00 VI. Health & Human Services – In-Depth Report • Health Goals (1:00 – 1:20) Mike Navarro, Co-Convener John Capitman, Laurie Primavera • Human Services Goals (1:20 – Luisa Medina, Co-Convener 1:40) Jane Middleton, Virginia Rondero Hernandez, Juanita Fiorello • Nursing Education Consortium Pilar De La Cruz-Reyes Update (1:40-1:50)
1:50 VII. Land Use, Ag & Housing Work Group • San Joaquin Valley Housing Trust – Barry Hibbard, Convener Action: Approval of Housing Rollie Smith Trust (1:50 – 2:05) • Blueprint Update (2:05 – 2:15) Carolina Simunovic 2:15 VIII. Work Group Review Board Members • Questions, answers, and suggestions from the board members on the work groups not covered in the above agenda items. 2:50 IX. Report from the Secretariat Ashley Swearengin • 2008 Meeting Schedule • Communications Update • Legislative Affairs 2:55 X. Public Comment C. Conway Adjournment
Meeting of the Board of Directors Friday, August 10, 2007 9:00 a.m. 4:45 p.m. Hanford Civic Auditorium
Draft Meeting Minutes
Present: Secretary Linda Adams, James Aleru, Mayor Alan Autry, Secretary Victoria Bradshaw, Marcelyn Buford, Secretary Mike Chrisman, Chair Connie Conway, Supervisor Kathleen Crookham, DeeDee D’Adamo, Dr. Frank Gornick, Jonnalee Henderson, Barry Hibbard, William Ing, Mayor Ferrell Jackson, Kirk Lindsey, Sunne McPeak, Luisa Medina, Mike Navarro, Pete Parra, Fred Ruiz, Lorraine Salazar, Paul Saldana, Stanley Simpson, Undersecretary Cindy Tuck, Eugene Voiland, Pete Weber. BRAC Liaison: Carolina Simunovic Staff: Ashley Swearengin, Carol Whiteside
I. Convene Meeting Chair Conway and Deputy Chair Chrisman called the Board of Directors of the California Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley (Partnership) meeting to order at 9:05 am.
II. Introductory Remarks Chair Conway officially welcomed DeeDee D’Adamo and James Aleru to their first Partnership board meeting. In addition, Chair Conway announced that the Governor recently appointed “regional consortium” board members. The new members are: Dr. Frank Gornick representing Central Valley Higher Education Consortium; Paul Saldana representing Central California Economic Development Corporation; and Barbara Goodwin representing the San Joaquin Valley Councils of Government. Also welcomed by Chair Conway was Carolina Simunovic, liaison for the Blueprint Regional Advisory Committee (BRAC).
Board members introduced themselves followed by the introduction of the members of the public. Secretary Chrisman thanked the communities involved in the Partnership on behalf of the board and indicated that the Partnership is a high priority for the Governor.
III. Review and Approval of Minutes Ms. Medina moved to approve the May 4, 2007, minutes and to ratify the Executive Committee actions. Ms. McPeak seconded the motion. The motion was passed unanimously.
IV. Board Priorities Mr. Voiland summarized the three issues that the board identified as top priorities: 1.) Air Quality 2.) Water Quality, Supply and Reliability and 3.) Transportation. He encouraged the board to consider the specific actions that need to be advanced in each
1
area. For example, the barrier to reaching air quality attainment is Nitrogen Oxide (NOx). It is estimated that $200 million per year is needed in funding to reach attainment. The transportation work group is focused on Highway 99, high speed rail, and goods movement, which are all projects that require significant investment. Developing an integrated regional water plan is the main focus of the Water Work Group. Without a unified Valley voice, we will not obtain the funding needed to complete these projects in a reasonable time frame. As Mr. Watson’s letter to the board emphasizes, Mr. Voiland encouraged the board members to listen to the reports and then help decide what the board should take on in each area.
Mr. Voiland acknowledged there are other significant priorities outside of the three on today’s agenda, including the methamphetamine problem and medical education. Ms. Medina expressed her full agreement of the top three priorities and urged the board not to overlook others such as the UC Medical School.
Air Quality Mr. Weber reviewed a PowerPoint presentation outlining the Air Quality Work Group issues of reaching attainment.
Nature of Problem: The San Joaquin Valley is the perfect location for ozone creation and retention, both climatically and geographically. The critical path to ozone attainment in the San Joaquin Valley is through NOx reductions. Mr. Weber indicated that 80% of NOx is from mobile sources with more than 50% of those emissions from heavy-duty diesel trucks. A significant issue is the “legacy fleet” that traverses the Valley, consisting of diesel engine trucks, tractors and locomotives which have a long life expectancy.
Mr. Weber reviewed the history of the attainment deadline and updated the board on the Valley’s “extreme” designation. An EPA approvable plan to reach attainment by 2013 (serious), 2017 (severe 15) or even 2020 (severe 17) is currently unavailable. With an extreme designation, the attainment deadline would be 2024 and would include the “black box.” The “black box” refers to the gap in technologies needed versus technologies available to reach attainment.
Solutions to Problem: The Air Quality Work Group submitted 29 recommendations which have been accepted by the Air District. In addition, the work group has recommended a “dual path” approach, which focuses on accelerating the attainment using alternative approaches. The Air District and the Air Resources Board both have committed to this strategy. The goal is to shave as many years off of the 2024 date as possible.
An incentive program has been recommended to reduce the attainment gap of 99 tons per day by 40%. The three most impacting areas are: 1.) Fleet modernization, resulting in the reduction of 41 NOx tons/day; 2.) Accelerated rule-making, resulting in the reduction of 20 NOx tons/day; and 3.) Short sea shipping, resulting in the reduction of 20 NOx tons/day. With these incentives, it is anticipated that attainment will be reached within the deadline with the exception of Arvin and Sky Park.
Funding: Annual funding of $500 million is required, estimating that the public sector will need to provide $200 million (State-$60 million, Federal-$100 million and Local $40
2
million) and the private sector another $300 million. Progress continues in obtaining federal funding. Sen. Feinstein has requested $15 million with half being allocated to the San Joaquin Valley, and Congressman Cardoza has included language in the Farm Bill to allow for $150 million over five years, with an effort to direct those funds toward non- attainment areas. Sen. Boxer has similar language to progress the idea. On the state level, Prop 1B has funds available, with $250 million pending in the 2007-08 assembly budgets. The San Joaquin Valley’s “fair share” is 30% to 45% and is targeting $60 million per year for five to six years. Local sources include the $40 million from the Indirect Source Rule (ISR), which is being challenged by the Building Industry Association. Sen. Florez has a bill pending that would increase DMV fees, generating $75 million per year. Other possible sources of funding that have been identified include: funds from a container fees bill, which was passed but vetoed; a toll road on H- 99 and/or I-5; and the Community Clean Air Fund, a foundation set up by the Air District to collect donations to improve the air quality.
Discussion Encouraged/Action Planning: Mr. Weber encouraged the board to discuss maximizing support for achievement of the air quality objectives and invited additional ideas that should be explored.
Mr. Ruiz commented regarding the $300 million needed annually from the private sector. He strongly encouraged tax incentives versus additional taxes to businesses or the community. He suggested that UC Merced could be helpful with the research needed on air quality technologies. Mr. Weber agreed that an innovative approach would need to be cost-effective and that tax incentives may not be enough.
Mr. Lindsey questioned Mr. Weber’s source of interviews with trucking companies. He indicated that the vast majority of truck drivers are individual owner/operators who do not typically have a plan for the purchase of new equipment. Mr. Lindsey questioned whether or not that target audience could be kept local and cautioned that the main problem would not be getting fleet operators to turn over their inventory but getting the individual owner/operator to purchase a new truck. Mr. Weber referenced the triangular trade program and discussed the assumption that small fleet operators would turn over their 8- to 10-year-old trucks and receive the incentives to buy new, donating their older models to owner/operators. Mr. Lindsey questioned the effectiveness of this trickle- down effect based on his understanding that there are many more trucks in demand by the owner/operators than the fleet managers could donate. Mr. Weber agreed to follow up with Mr. Lindsey on this component of the plan.
Ms. D’Adamo restated that through her involvement with other successful incentive programs, the industry nuances are critical and continued input from sources such as Mr. Lindsey is important. Ms. D’Adamo commented on the comprehensive nature of the Air Quality Work Group presentation and pointed out that in the coming years, a very complex set of rules would be adopted by the Air District and the California Air Resources Board (CARB). Although the extreme designation was not preferred, alternative solutions to reach attainment are not available. Meetings with some activist groups have been held to build consensus on the numbers. Without a unified front, it will be difficult to secure the funding needed to clean the air.
Mr. Hibbard offered caution concerning the toll road. Goods movement and logistics jobs are the manufacturing jobs of yesterday. He emphasized that industrial land is what
3
creates jobs and pointed to the voluntary emissions reduction project Tejon completed as an example. With $500,000 in mitigation funds, 17 1950’s ag engines were replaced and the industrial park created 5,000 jobs.
Mr. Weber informed the group of a partner program available called “Spare the Air” and encouraged any employers/employees to participate in becoming part of the solution. He also indicated that UC Merced will take part in a technology conference with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and CARB to focus on technologies needed to reach attainment.
Mr. Saldana shared that in 2002 he was involved in dialogue with the logistics industry after noticing that a number of trucks dropping goods in Southern California were returning empty. Mr. Saldana indicated there may already be sufficient systems in place if an effective management mechanism was developed.
Secretary Adams stated the Valley’s support for Prop 1B was very influential. Due to several efforts, trucks are eligible for funding, as well as all four corridors. Although the Governor has vetoed port container fees, Ms. Adams may be in a position to weigh in and negotiate. In addition, the CARB and State Consumer Services Agency are looking to bring gross pollutants off of the road through a smog check program.
Ms. Medina believes the Partnership should take a role in public education and sees a need to bring air quality issues to the public for engagement in problem-solving. She also has observed the failure to talk about the human cost in areas such as asthma, loss of school days and recommended the Partnership implement a public education campaign.
Mr. Parra inquired on the incentives regarding the private sector. The construction industry is concerned there is no existing technology available to meet the requirements. He questioned how it would be validated that incentives would be used to convert equipment. Mr. Parra requested this be taken into consideration when rules are being prepared.
Mr. Farrell requested the status of particulates coming from the Bay Area since the San Joaquin Valley is held to stricter standards. Ms. D’Adamo indicated that some changes and progress have been made; for example, smog check standards are now alike. A coordinating committee with Sacramento, the Bay Area and San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District has been formed. The upwind contributors are doing the same in enforcement at this point.
Mr. Lindsey observed the lack of discussion regarding inland ports or the idea of utilizing trains in the Bay Area. He believes that short rail is more measurable and attainable than short sea shipping. Mr. Lindsey indicated the goods movement in the Valley doesn’t exist in the State Goods Movement Action Plan. The plan is port centric and should have an amendment to include ag in goods movement which would qualify for funds. Mr. Lindsey stated his concern that rules in dealing with truck traffic seem to penalize domicile companies and are unable to touch interstate traffic. His concern is that local businesses may be unable to compete in this market.
4
Mr. Autry encouraged the San Joaquin Valley to go after every dollar possible. He stated that the Valley has no control over the trucks that continue to come through the Valley, especially now that the North American Free Trade Agreement has opened the roads up to Mexico. Mr. Autry recommended that the Valley take its destiny into its own hands and implement a user fee through a toll road system and get behind a bill to protect local truckers. He recommended the Partnership be innovative in solutions for a dramatic problem.
Mr. Ruiz restated the need to act now and showed support for the extreme designation and dual path approach.
Ms. Simunovic thanked Mr. Weber for his continued support for the air quality issues and commented that Earth Justice, an activist group, is filing an intervening lawsuit in support of the Air District’s position over the ISR rule opposed by the BIA.
Undersecretary Tuck stated that the Goods Movement Action Plan does include the Valley, specifically ag commodities.
Mr. Weber commented on the extreme designation and that he wanted the board to understand that the Air District has approved the plan and that the EPA does not have other options available at this time, other than to approve the designation. He requested support of the dual path plan and suggested there may be an opportunity to support the path in Sacramento or Washington. Mr. Weber also welcomed suggestions on obtaining funds to assemble a goods movement plan. Mr. Weber indicated that protecting the ISR rule will be critical. He will consider bringing a resolution before the board at the next meeting supporting the dual path plan.
Water Secretary Chrisman gave an overview of the State of California Bulletin 160, which is updated every five years and laid out over a 30-year period. He indicated that Bulletin 160 sets out the goals and objectives for water quantity, demands and usefulness and that it is a water planning tool. A major goal is to improve statewide water management systems and “tee up” regional water integration. Prop 1E and 84 provided programmatic and financial incentives.
The CalFed Record of Decision laid out a series of goals to meet the needs of the San Joaquin Delta, which 23 million people in the state of California depend on for water. The goals include ecosystem restoration, water use efficiency, water quality, water supply and reliability. The focus of water conveyance is to maintain standards and move water effectively. The current system is not working, and the Delta Vision Blue Ribbon Task Force (Task Force), a high–level, independent group, is charged with taking the lead and making recommendations to the cabinet committee.
The strategic growth plan includes $4.5 billion for surface and ground water storage components. The work of the Partnership can support this effort by making its views known and by keeping pressure on the Task Force to keep the priorities straight.
Kathy Wood, director of the San Joaquin Valley Integrated Regional Water Management Plan (IRWMP) and on loan from the Bureau of Reclamation, presented the Water Quality, Supply and Reliability update and PowerPoint. The IRWMP federal water plan
5
has been expanded to merge with the Partnership’s activities. Ms. Wood has made presentations to several of the counties to further develop a plan to include all eight counties. It is anticipated that a regional water plan will be available by the end of 2008.
Ms. Wood gave an update on the Water Work Group’s progress to date and reminded the board that this goal is closely related to quality of life and requires forward thinking, predicting and meeting the demands of the population in an innovative and collaborative process. By developing a regional water plan, the Valley will be in a competitive position when it comes to funding.
Jim Tischer, California Water Institute, gave an overview of the Governor’s comprehensive water plan in Senate Bill 59. He indicated that all of the work being done on a local, regional and a statewide basis are interconnected. Several factors, including climate change, air temperature, precipitation, and sea level rise, will affect water supplies, demands, quality and flood management ecosystems. A two-thirds chance of catastrophic disaster is predicted in the next 50 years. The Strategic Growth Plan proposes a $5.95 billion investment to ensure reliable water supplies. In addition, Mr. Tischer compared Senate Bill 59 to Sen. Perata’s Water Plan, which includes $5B but is mostly focused on ground water storage.
Mr. Tischer presented a resolution requesting support from the Partnership Board in support of a comprehensive water plan and urging the Legislature to work with the administration to pass a comprehensive water package and put that package before voters in 2008.
Ms. D’Adamo acknowledged the hard work and vision in integrating the water plan seamlessly into the Partnership goals. She inquired whether Sen. Perata’s plan allowed the region to successfully come up with a solution. Secretary Chrisman indicated that discussions are currently under way regarding the right kind of storage necessary and that the points discussed today are well taken.
Ms. Whiteside asked about the completion date for the integrated water plan. Ms. Wood stated that a conceptual plan will be finalized by December 2008; the final plan will be a consolidation of all efforts. The Valley-wide plan will go forward. As other local districts are finalizing their plans, they will be incorporated into the final. The intention is for the document to by a dynamic and living plan.
Secretary Chrisman restated that with the Task Force in place, there is a plan to have this on the November 2008 ballot, recognizing there is a whole series of moving parts. Ms. McPeak recognized Secretary Chrisman’s efforts in moving this goal forward and applauded his persistence. She also indicated that Secretaries Bonner, Kawamura and Chrisman are part of the Task Force and on the same timetable with the Governor’s Executive Order. Ms. McPeak noted the handouts contained a document, which Mr. Voiland was instrumental in publishing in 1998, with recommendations from the business community based on all the facts of a water solution in one package. Mr. Voiland suspects the Delta is one of the most studied water bodies in the world and indicated the data have been available for a long time. He stated it is now time to act. Secretary Chrisman also acknowledged that those involved know the Delta is not sustainable. Mr. Voiland suggested the recent levy issues involving Hurricane Katrina showed the impact, and he strongly supports what has been assembled and brought to the board today. Mr.
6
Weber moved to approve the resolution. Ms. D’Adamo seconded the motion. The motion was passed unanimously. Mr. Ing abstained.
Lunch Break
Transportation Mr. Lindsey gave an overview of the Transportation Work Group’s top three priorities and announced the next meeting will be September 14.
Highway 99: Malcolm Dougherty, Caltrans District 6 Director, presented a status report on State Route 99 and reviewed the importance of Prop 1B funding passed in November 2006. It is important to know that State Route 99 is the only state route identified with a specific allocation of funds. The business plan element of the San Joaquin Valley Route 99 Master Plan identifies 67 projects grouped into four improvement categories: 1.) freeway conversion – 4 projects; 2.) Capacity increasing – 25 projects; 3.) Major Operational Improvements – 34 projects; 4.) New Interchange – 4 projects. An update of each category was given by Mr. Dougherty. Currently 62% of the corridor satisfies the minimum six-lane requirement. Another 16 miles is under construction which will bring that figure to 46%. With the additional bonds, another 43 miles will be upgraded leaving two projects remaining to reach 100% compliance with the plan.
Mr. Lindsey pointed out that the $1 billion in Prop 1B was set aside for a $6 billion need. The projects Mr. Dougherty indicated are not yet completed, by design, because of funding. Mr. Lindsey requested Mr. Dougherty consider adding dates to the projects not yet in the queue. He added that new State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) augmentation funds will soon be available and may have an impact on the remaining projects. Mr. Lindsey recommended that the Valley take an aggressive approach in obtaining interregional funding.
Ms. McPeak stated the importance of protecting the rights-of-way along the 274 miles of State Route 99. Mr. Dougherty indicated this is not an issue for the projects either partially or fully funded at this time. However, the remaining projects have yet to be reviewed. Ms. McPeak suggested the cities and counties get involved as well to protect the land surrounding the future expansion of State Route 99. Alan McCuen, with Caltrans, stated they are currently working with city planning and Public Works directors and the planning community, but would welcome additional support. Ms. McPeak suggested that Caltrans, California Transportation Commission (CTC), and the Partnership communicate out to cities and counties in this effort asking for continued vigilance and cooperation to get the master plan completed. Ms. McPeak requested the board keep in mind that the funding/finance group had a discussion with the congressional delegation and that a 40% federal split was discussed. Ms. Whiteside would like to put this topic on the agenda for the Councils of Governments (COGs) and have them report on the status.
Mr. Lindsey indicated that Caltrans was asked to take on a daunting task with State Route 99 and has delivered a fantastic product doing everything the Partnership has asked of them. Mr. Dougherty stated they are currently working with local metropolitan planning organizations; a time line will be produced in a few months. Mr. Dougherty offered to submit a progress report at the next Partnership Board Meeting.
7
Ms. Whiteside announced that wireless is now available at rest stops in Tipton and Turlock.
High Speed Rail: Mr. Lindsey recapped the High-Speed Rail (HSR) special session held on August 9. The consistent theme was that the Partnership represents the Valley with one voice and it was important to remain unified from one end of the Valley to the other. Lt Gov. Garamendi participated in the special HSR session. Also attending was Congressman Costa, who has been involved with HSR for 20 years. Diligent efforts are being made in Washington D.C. Funding for this budget year was discussed, as well as alignment issues and land use.
Mr. Lindsey outlined the funding issue for HSR: the original request of $113 million was reduced to $15 million as it sits in the budget now. If approved, it will be transferred out of funds for inter-city rail (ICR). The challenge, if funds are taken from ICR, is the opposition there would be from within the rail systems. Mr. Lindsey suggested a potential funding source for the HSR may be the Public Transportation Account (PTA) CTC money. Currently, $77 million is available. If $15 million was taken to backfill ICR, it would eliminate any argument from within the rail industry. An additional $5 to $10 million could be taken to invest in HSR with the High-Speed Rail Authority (HSRA) ensuring it is specifically used for San Joaquin Valley work. Mr. Lindsey requested thoughts from the board on pursuing this option. Mr. Lindsey believes this option is good for the Valley and would have a dynamic impact if it comes to fruition.
Ms. McPeak agreed this is a creative suggestion for obtaining the essential base funding. She commented that both passenger rail and HSR have different functions but both are equally valuable. This funding would jump-start HSR development in the Valley. The next step is to accelerate legitimate capital expenditures such as engineering and rights-of-way that would potentially be paid back.
Goods Movement: Tony Boren, deputy director of the Council of Fresno County Governments, presented the San Joaquin Valley Goods Movement Plan, reviewing the background and acknowledging that goods movement has been studied for years. Mr. Boren recognized that the Valley has not been a primary focus in past conversations and that goods movement discussions have been very port centric. He emphasized that Highway 99 is the main street of California and a primary goods movement network. This requires the Valley to work together in the coming years since the population is estimated to increase by 168% by the year 2050. The San Joaquin Valley Goods Movement Plan is a work-in-progress and is designed to be user- friendly in conveying information to the public. Mr. Lindsey stated his appreciation for the plan and wanted to know which entity would be approving the final document. Mr. Boren indicated that the COGs would oversee the plan, with support from Caltrans, and would present information to the Partnership. Mr. Boren requested buy-in from the Partnership.
Ms. Whiteside commented that the overall integration will be through the Blueprint Planning Process. She stated the need for the plan’s completion in order for the Valley to be competitive when applying for funds. Mr. Lindsey commented there is a great funding opportunity with the air quality component.
Mr. Lindsey observed there are less box cars on trains now more than ever resulting in more intermodal (container) cars and, therefore, more truck driving. He would like to see
8
anticipated decreases in short-line truck traffic reflected in the San Joaquin Valley Goods Movement Plan.
Mr. Voiland restated the complexity of the three top priorities just put on the table and questioned the next generation of priorities, opening up the discussion to the board. Ms. Swearengin indicated that an additional matter is how the board wants to advance priorities. It was at the board’s request that a detailed presentation of the highest, top three priorities be reviewed, ensuring that significant items are being identified and advanced according to the strategic action plan.
Ms. Medina again restated her support of the top three priorities and added that the issues integrated well with one another. Chair Conway commended the presenters and was encouraged by the information and work of the strategic action plan. Mr. Ruiz commented that the prioritization is important to the board allowing them to become educated and to better understand the approach and process of the work groups. Mr. Ruiz recommended the same approach be taken for the next board meeting, taking the next three priorities and receiving detailed presentations.
Ms. McPeak moved that the board accept the high-speed rail option as a working premise and that the board empower the executive committee to further this course of action. Ms. McPeak further moved that the work group reports be accepted. Mr. Parra seconded the motion. The motion was passed unanimously.
Mr. Weber suggested the board address how to engage in advancing the next top three priorities. Chair Conway requested the board first listen to the work group presentations, with the understanding that the information presented will assist the board in selecting the next top three priorities.
V. Work Group Reports – Updates on Progress, Challenges Ms. Swearengin provided an overview of the work group presentations. The Energy Work Group is focusing their detailed presentation on the progress of the San Joaquin Valley Clean Energy Organization (SJVCEO). The remaining Work Group Conveners will present updates limiting their comments to one highlight and one “lowlight.”
Energy Ms. Henderson made opening remarks regarding the Energy Work Group and Secretary Kawamura’s enthusiastic support of their efforts. On June 7, Secretary Kawamura hosted a meeting in Sacramento bringing 50 industry and government leaders together to discuss energy opportunities. These efforts have been coordinated with the ‘25 x ‘25 meeting, a group committed to 25% renewable energy use by the year 2025. The meeting resulted in 30 people signing a commitment to get more involved with the San Joaquin Valley Clean Energy Organization (SJVCEO). The ‘25 x ‘25 group is interested in using the San Joaquin Valley to bring their national goals to a regional level. The Valley was chosen because of the infrastructure in place and will be used as a model. This project will bring visibility to the San Joaquin Valley and potential funding sources as well.
Rollie Smith, HUD, presented an update on the SJVCEO, which was developed for planning and coordination to support clean energy in the Valley. Mr. Smith requested
9
that the board approve the articles of incorporation and the by-laws so the SJVCEO could file the 501 (c)(3) status paperwork. Mr. Smith also asked that the board approve the appointment of board members as presented. Mr. Smith commented specifically regarding the nomination from the Central California Economic Development Corporations (CCEDC). The CCEDC was asked to reconsider their Fresno-based nomination of Steve Geil after the Partnership Board encouraged SJVCEO leadership to ensure its board was geographically diverse. Mr. Lindsey moved to approve. Mr. Saldana commented he would approve with the condition that Mr. Geil was appointed as the CCEDC’s nomination, stating he is an appropriate candidate and does in fact represent the Valley. Mr. Lindsey encouraged labor unions to be represented on the board. Secretary Chrisman agreed the SJVCEO would find a union representative to serve on the board. Ms. McPeak seconded the motion to approve the articles of incorporation, the by-laws and the roster of SJVCEO Board of Directors, including Mr. Geil. The motion was passed unanimously.
Mr. Lindsey commented on the work by Secretary Kawamura to secure ag loans and acknowledged that his work tremendously benefited the Valley. Ms. Henderson commented on the tie down regulations and acknowledged the work that Ms. D’Adamo, Congressmen Cardoza and Costa did involving the Farm Bill. Ms. D’Adamo was encouraged to see the specialty crops coming together throughout the state and very pleased with the House Bill which includes $1.7 billion for specialty crops. Mr. Weber commended Congressmen Cardoza and Costa for their speeches delivered on the floor of the House and encouraged the board to read them. Mr. Lindsey encouraged the board to write a letter to the congressmen thanking them for their efforts.
Higher Education and Workforce Development Secretary Bradshaw stated the most important role of the Secretaries is to make sure the San Joaquin Valley is at the table when decisions on policy or budget are being discussed. She recognized that this is beginning to happen.
The Labor and Workforce Development Agency is conducting statewide training focused on determining how to forecast jobs. All eight San Joaquin Valley counties are included in the training.
The Higher Education and Workforce Development Work Group, through the Central California Workforce Collaborative, has been focused on implementing the $1 million State Workforce Investment Board grant. Six areas will be applied in developing an infrastructure to align the demands and skill sets needed. Ms. Salazar and Secretary Bradshaw presented the six areas: 1.) Conduct an occupational analysis of key jobs in target industries. 2) Develop a Web-based inventory of vocational training and “gap analysis.” 3.) Create a “just in time” training fund. 4.) Address workforce supply on a regional basis – WorkKeys Certificate. 5.) Address workforce supply on a regional basis – Certified Assessment Centers for Manufacturing. 6.) Align vocational and career technical education with target industries.
Secretary Bradshaw again stated that the challenge is the significance and amount of work to be done. She does feel, however, the resources are available to complete the work.
10
Ms. McPeak recognized the crossover issues between the HEWD and K-12 work groups regarding computer literacy and standardized skills. She recommended the two work groups confer on that topic. Secretary Bradshaw also indicated that the State of California was to be the lead on a Department of Labor grant on computerized clerical training for the nursing programs.
Economic Development Mr. Simpson indicated the Economic Development Work Group has met twice and they are championing incentives to make businesses successful. Mr. Saldana elaborated that the strategic action plan, including a regionwide map of incentive programs, is scheduled for completion in August. Through the seed grant, the work group visited Los Angeles and conducted a marketing program. Mr. Saldana reported the lowlight in his opinion also is a great opportunity to address tourism. A marketing strategy meeting of key partners is scheduled for September.
K-12 Lee Anderson, chair of the association of county superintendents for region 7, commended the Governor, Mayor Autry, and the Central Valley Educational Leadership Institute for their work on the K-12 Work Group. He recognized that education is viewed as a “different animal.” Within the eight-county region, there are approximately 800,000 students, 1,100 schools and 200 school districts, resulting in more than 1,000 elected officials making policy and budget decisions with input from constituents. They are currently in the midst of a six-year standards-based reform and already see reform working. Some schools in the San Joaquin Valley have nearly doubled performance levels.
Marcy Masumoto, Central Valley Educational Leadership Institute at California State University, Fresno, highlighted the English Language Learner Academy (Academy) launch on August 9. Representatives from 16 school districts across the eight counties are involved. The Academy focuses on the principles of learning best practices. It is unique because it offers a combination of mentoring and coaching components to work with principles and administrators.
Participation in the work group meetings has been an issue, and stakeholder expansion needs to be included. Sustainability is a concern; there is a need to look for further funding.
Mr. Lindsey suggested engaging with stakeholders through the County School Board Association and questioned if equalized funding is an issue the Work Group needs to address. Mr. Anderson noted it is not a priority for the work that involves the Partnership; however, it does focus on the education side. He commented that 2008 will be the “Governor’s Year of Education.” Mr. Lindsey suggested that once an agenda was developed for equalized funding, the Partnership would consider supporting their efforts. Mr. Anderson added that career technical education also is a top priority, and he would be pleased to present the Partnership Board with a list of policies that would benefit from its support. Ms. Medina inquired about the Year of Education and its priorities. Secretary Bradshaw stated it is based on vocation and career education and that the Governor is backing his statements with funding opportunities.
11
Ms. Swearengin stated the Partnership is looking for a recommendation from the Valley county superintendents of education for a regional consortia board seat. Mr. Anderson announced that the nomination was shortcoming.
Ms. Simunovic inquired about the process of moving forward on the Partnership goals regarding student involvement. Mr. Anderson stated that none are in place, and extensive involvement is not foreseen. Ms. Masumoto added that while students are not involved in the work group meetings, many projects include student input. Josh Franco, a member of the audience, said there is an opportunity for involvement with students from the Leadership Academy. His student efforts at UC Merced continue, and he suggested to the board that outreach on “My Space” be considered as there is student interest in the work of the Partnership.
Health and Human Services Mr. Navarro reviewed the Health and Human Services Work Group (HHS) goals as they pertain to the Central Valley Health Policy Institute. He commented on the struggle for recruitment of health care practitioners in establishing the UC Merced Medical School. A business plan for funding the center is finished and a coalition meeting is set for September to launch the coalition. The Central Valley Nursing Education Consortium is to be established. Six hundred students were turned away because of capacity issues in Fresno City alone. This demonstrates that a desire is there; but the training and facilities do not exist and staffing is a large problem. An online component is now available; a report on the success will be made at the next board meeting. Needs of the uninsured will be addressed and the status reported. The work group also will explore models for delivering health services through telemedicine. UC Merced and UC Davis are leading this effort.
Ms. Medina reviewed the work group goals as they pertain to the Social Welfare Evaluation Research and Training Center (SWERT). A highlight of the work that SWERT has accomplished is the meth recovery project. SWERT has been busy making presentations to stakeholders and recruiting for the advisory council throughout the region. Another highlight is the seed grant HHS received.
Ms. Medina reported on behalf of HHS the challenge of the lack of competitiveness in the Valley involving grant sources.
Advanced Communications Services Ms. Whiteside reported that the plan developed by the Advanced Communications Services Work Group (ACS) has been impacted by additional resources now available. For example, the plan indicated ACS would look at and access broadband; but that effort is now led by the broadband industry and housed at California Emerging Technologies. Another example is the telehealth and telemedicine component which UC Merced will address through its seed grant. ACS is reviewing Caltrans’ policy and sees an opportunity to lay conduit in the construction phase. The computer literacy work continues with the K-12 Work Group.
A highlight for ACS, reported by Ms. Whiteside, is the recent graduation of the Pixley project students and the subsequent award of computers. In addition, a robotics class and competition are scheduled. Training for local government officials has created some barriers along with new infrastructure that requires a better understanding.
12
Land Use, Ag and Housing Mr. Hibbard introduced the components of the regional plan which have similar underlying factors with the Air Quality, Water and Transportation work groups. This involves reduction of trips, mobility, neutral paces, water linkages, Highway 99 and HSR. The Land Use, Ag and Housing Work Group (LUAH) has been charged with designing things not planned or developed for nearly 10 years. BRAC is the primary vehicle for this plan; roundtable meetings are being held to bring local entities and constituency together.
Mr. Smith updated the board regarding the nonprofit housing trust through the COGs and the blueprint process. The California Coalition for Rural Housing is providing incentives for local housing funds, working with 62 cities that want small growth housing. Ten cities are part of the regulatory reform process.
VI. Blueprint Regional Planning Process: Update Ms. Simunovic reviewed the significance of the process and the third meeting held in July 2007. She reviewed the schematic handouts for the Blueprint Regional Planning Process. Marjie Kirn, deputy director of Merced County Association of Governments, demonstrated the major integration of the Partnership work and the blueprint plan. The process is being completed, and they are obtaining support for implementation. Ms. Kirn stated they are optimistic regarding the time frame even though each county is facing issues.
Nathan Magsig, City of Clovis councilmember, reported on the legislative process as it relates to the Blueprint Planning Process and the importance of having cities, COGs, counties and others working together. AB32 was signed by the Governor in 2006 to reduce green house emissions back to 1990 levels. Mr. Magsig reviewed the highlights of SB375 (Steinberg), which is in appropriations now and ties into the Blueprint Process. Mr. Magsig also reviewed AB 1253 and AB842 stating that all of the efforts have been paying off.
Ms. Simunovic reviewed the calendar of events for meetings and the two summits planned for January and Spring 2008. The California Regional Progress Report was reviewed and progress was discussed.
Ms. McPeak was pleased to see the San Joaquin Valley consistently represented, in a collaborative way, more than any other region. Ms. Whiteside said this is the beginning of a statement, drafted to give a sense of what the Valley is about. Mr. Magsig agreed that the attempt is to have a statement reflect the vision of the region but to maintain the identity of each county. This statement is still being developed in conjunction with the counties. Chair Conway recognized that some counties are currently redrafting their general plans and was interested to know if this work was being incorporated. Mr. Magsig indicated that the conversations are under way; however, the vision is not to have the blueprint statement involved at the micro level where the county general plans are focused. He stated that the local COGs will approve the final result after elected officials have commented.
13
Ms. Whiteside recommended that a detailed report on the blueprint process be made to the Partnership Board at the February 2008 meeting, after the January blueprint summit.
VII. Partnership Seed Grants Allysunn Williams, Secretariat representative, recapped the seed grant process which allocated $2.5 million to 14 awardees that were competitively selected through a bidding process. Ms. Williams indicated that the majority of the seed grants have been fully executed and returned to the awardees. She referred to the board packet which contained a comprehensive update on the status of the work.
Ms. Williams highlighted the SWERT seed grant focused on meth recovery. Lt. Col. Swann, representing law enforcement, has engaged with HHS and will be meeting on September 7 with the advisory council. Self-Help Enterprises has established water projects in rural areas and is inputting information into the IRWMP with the Water Work Group. The Central Valley Higher Education Consortium launched the first “College Place” in Fresno County, a community-based center focused on non-traditional students. There is interest from Madera County and junior colleges in Merced and Modesto for additional sites.
VIII. Legislative Affairs Kathryn Stevens, Secretariat representative, reviewed the legislative overview handout included in the agenda package. Ms. Stevens indicated that several bills were vetted through the process which was approved at the Partnership Board Meeting in March. Ms. Stevens gave an overview and status report on the following items: • Partnership Endorsed State Legislation: AB 27; AB 575, AB 1223; AB 1129; AB 1403; AB 1455. • Action taken by the Executive Committee: SB 23. High-Speed Rail; Proposition 1B; Proposition 1C; Proposition 84. • Federal Issues/Legislation: H Con Res 157; Farm Bill: HR 1600 and S 1458; HR 2498; HR 6.
Ms. Stevens concluded her presentation by giving an overview of the federal budget process and announced that the legislative staffer meetings continue on a monthly basis in conjunction with Mr. Smith’s Federal Interagency Task Force meetings. Ms. Stevens encouraged participation at these meetings adding that they have been very engaging and helpful. Ms. Swearengin commented on the enormity of the Partnership’s scope of work and the growing coalition of the staffers.
IX. Annual Meeting and Report Richard Cummings, Great Valley Center representative, announced that the annual meeting, the Partnership Summit (Summit), will be held October 4 in Visalia. The Summit is designed to update the community on the activities of the Partnership and release the annual report. In addition, there will be two complementary events surrounding the Summit. On October 3 and 4, the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (Air District) will conduct its conference. BizTalk will be held October 5. A joint lunch is planned on October 4 with the Partnership and the Air District. Mr.
14
Cummings estimated that 300 participants will be available to go to work group sessions and engage in a Q&A on the Partnership.
Mr. Cummings expects to have a draft of the annual report prepared for Executive Committee review by August 24 and wants to go to press by September 18. The report is limited to 60 pages with appendices for more updates.
Ms. Whiteside suggested that each county take responsibility for getting a certain number of participants to the Summit. She reminded the board that the report would likely reflect baseline data; the Web site will be customized to allow for updates on an ongoing basis. Mr. Weber indicated the Air Quality Work Group would commit to having 100 participants at the Summit. Ms. Whiteside added that each participant would be charged $35 for a ticket to the event; scholarships are available. Ms. Whiteside elaborated on the structure of the Summit; it is not intended as a board meeting but an event designed to inform the community. Ms. Swearengin offered to send an electronic “save the date” announcement, once developed by GVC, to those in the Secretariat’s database.
X. Report from the Secretariat Ms. Swearengin reviewed the activities for the upcoming quarter. She recapped the progress made by the work groups, the engagement of work group conveners, getting stakeholders re-engaged in the Partnership and that mechanisms are now in place. Next quarter, the sustainability of the Partnership will be advanced.
The Secretariat hired Michael Lukens as new Communications Director to execute the next phase of communications for the Partnership. There will be additional outreach on local levels. A daily news briefing is distributed and is a great tool to remain on top of issues at a daily glance.
Ms. Swearengin also reviewed the recently appointed regional consortia board directors and anticipates more being added in the next quarter.
XI. Public Comment No public comments were made.
XII. Adjournment Chair Conway provided closing remarks and adjourned the meeting of the California Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley at 4:20 p.m.
15
This page has been left blank intentionally.
16
Transportation – Highway 99
Index
Description Page No.
Route 99 Business Plan Update – Summary Report 18
Route 99 Business Plan Update – Scope of Work 20
Route 99 Business Plan Update – Attachment A: Delivery Status 30
Route 99 Business Plan Update – Attachment B: Priority Category 2 31
Route 99 Business Plan Update – Attachment C: Priority Category 3 32
Route 99 Business Plan Update – Attachment D: Priority Category 4 33
Route 99 Business Plan Update – Attachment E: Other Major Projects 34
Route 99 Interstate Designation – Caltrans Status Report 35
Route 99 Interstate Designation – Scope of Work & Schedule 37
Interregional Transportation Improvement Program (ITIP) 38
Potential State Bond Funds/Potential Funding Options 39
Tax Credit Bond Financing 42
17 Route 99 Business Plan Update Caltrans Summary Report Partnership For The San Joaquin Valley Meeting November 9, 2007
Current Status of Activities: 1. Developed a draft Scope of Work and schedule for the Business Plan Update 2. Developed status lists of each Business Plan project a. Updated cost for all remaining projects b. Identified whether projects are fully funded, partially funded or unfunded. c. Identified project delivery phase and schedule for fully funded and partially funded project d. Initiated PSRs for several unfunded projects. 3. Initiated preparation of the draft Financial Plan 4. Developing alternative funding coordination proposals. Examples: a. 40% ITIP/40% Home County RTIP/20% from the other 7 Counties b. 40% Caltrans/40% Home County/20% from other 7 Counties c. 40% funded by Caltrans/ 60% funded by the eight MPOs based on population ratio d. On a county by county basis: Caltrans funds mainline and MPOs fund interchanges. e. On a project by project basis: i. For the mainline; Caltrans funds 80% the eight MPOs fund 20% based on population ratio. ii. For interchanges; Caltrans funds 20% the eight MPOs fund 80% based on population ratio. f. MOUs would be used to memorialize funding agreement.
Existing Funding Commitments To The Business Plan (See Table Listing Below) 1. Thirteen of the original 67 Business Plan projects are fully funded at a total commitment cost of $1.45 billion. a. Within this group of 13 fully funded projects all four of the Priority Category 1 projects are fully funded and one is currently in construction. b. Seven of these 13 projects became fully funded through Route 99 Prop 1B program funds. 2. There are partial funding commitments on an additional 5 of the 67 projects. Each of these projects are in some stage of project delivery, but they will need additional funding to allow them to be delivered to construction on schedule. 3. In the Priority 2 Category there are 20 unfunded projects remaining at a total uncommitted cost of $2.4 billion. Twelve of these are projects to widen from 4 lanes to 6 lanes at a total cost of $1.5 billion and 8 are projects to widen to 8 lanes at a cost of about $900 million.
18 Next Steps: 1. Establish Business Plan Update Advisory Team membership. 2. Finalize Scope of Work for the Business Plan Update 3. Agreement between Caltrans and MPOs to conscientiously work toward project funding coordination commitments. 4. Prioritize deferred and new Business Plan goals and objectives 5. Prioritize remaining/additional Business Plan projects considering: a. Priority categories b. Deliverability c. Technical need d. Cost 6. Prioritize PSR work for unfunded projects 7. Prepare draft Financial Plan
Recommendations To Move Forward: 1. Establish Business Plan Update Advisory Team 2. Commitment to establish multi-year project funding agreements 3. Reaffirm project lists and priority categories
19
Route 99 Business Plan Update San Joaquin Valley Rev. October 24, 2007
Background
In 1995, Business, Transportation and Housing Agency Secretary Sunne Wright McPeak requested that Caltrans prepare a Business Plan for the orderly improvement of State Route 99 throughout the San Joaquin Valley. The Department had already completed an acclaimed Route 99 Corridor Enhancement Master Plan. The Business Plan was initiated in June 2005 and completed by the requested target date of December 7, 2005. Because of the very short target completion date several Business Plan goals were deferred. As these two products were completed the combined Enhancement Master Plan Element and the Business Plan Element became known as the Route 99 Corridor Master Plan.
It is now appropriate to review the Plan against changed conditions, address those several incomplete Plan goals, and update as appropriate for current conditions. This Scope of Work establishes the Task Activities and Schedule for the Business Plan update. Attachment A is the Scope of Work and schedule for the Business Plan Element of the Route 99 Master Plan. It is the intent is that the Scope of Work serve as the guide for the Project Team to accomplish the update in an efficient, coordinated, and partnered manner.
20
ATTACHMENT A
SCOPE OF WORK--Business Plan Element
Task 1: Establish Project Team Task Duration: Oct. 15 – Nov 30
Product / Deliverable: Establishment of the Business Plan Update Team.
Task Description: Establish the Project Team to guide the update of the Business Plan. The Project Team will consist of at least representatives from Caltrans District 6 and 10, the eight San Joaquin Valley MPO’s, and the Great Valley Center. This “core team” shall decide whether to add representatives of other interests that may benefit the quality, utility and effectiveness of the business plan.
Task 2: Schedule For Key Team Decision Meetings Task Duration: Periodic meetings throughout the Business Plan update. July, 2006 – September 2008 Product / Deliverables: Guidance and decisions at key points during the Business Plan update task activities from the Project Team.
Task Description: Conduct Project Team meetings periodically and at key decision points though out the Business Plan update process.
Task 3: Develop Scope of Work Task Duration: Oct 1 – Nov 9
Product / Deliverable: An approved Business Plan Update Scope of Work.
Task Description: The first primary order of business of the Project Team is to review, modify as appropriate, and approve the scope of work. The intent of this Scope of Work is to provide the necessary guidance to produce an updated Business Plan Element that is responsive to the goals and objectives as agreed upon by the Project Team.
Task 4: Establish and Prioritize Deferred and Updated Goals and Objectives Task Duration: July 1 – Jan 1, 08
21 Product / Deliverable: An agreed upon set of Business Plan Element update goals and objectives.
Task Description: The initial Business Plan Element had intended to address several specific goals. Many of the key goals were addressed, but some were only marginally addressed due to time constraints associated with the five month delivery deadline. While the initial Plan did address identifying major projects that that will improve safety, reduce congestion and facilitate goods movement and achieve the priority of different types of project improvements, it did not adequately address the following goals:
• Establish a financial plan that would address the future funding sources and strategies. • Identify and apply specific performance measure criteria to help prioritize improvements, document expected benefits, and manage corridor operations. • Establish a corridor management strategy to assure long term success of all projects and the most efficient use of STIP and SHOPP funds along the corridor. Major projects from the10 Year SHOPP Plan need to be added to the Business Plan. In essence a Corridor System Management Plan similar to that required for Prop 1B CMIA projects. • Strategies for influencing land use decisions along the corridor. • Establish policies and strategies associated with Interstate designation.
In addition the Plan needs to be updated to reflect current status of activity, new laws, projects constructed, updated project cost information and new goals.
Task 5: Establish Environmental Documentation Approach Task Duration: Oct 1 – Nov 30
Product / Deliverable: The product of this task is an agreed upon strategy for preparation of environmental documents for improvements to the Route 99 corridor.
Task Description: As a result of voter approved Proposition 1B there will be seven projects funded and delivered to construction by December, 2012. In addition, with the passage of Proposition 1B and the consequent signing of AB 1039 by the Governor, a master EIR is allowed to be prepared. It is the intent of AB 1090 to streamline, coordinate, and improve environmental reviews for the corridor. This task will assess whether a Master EIR or some other approach appropriate to accomplish the intent of AB 1039.
22
This task will establish the policy approach to be followed for environmental documentation for all projects included in the San Joaquin Valley Route 99 Business Plan Element. Since AB 1039 is directed at both the San Joaquin and Sacramento valleys, this task may also establish a policy addressing environmental documentation in these two very diverse regions of the Route 99 corridor.
Task 6: Update Categorical Project Lists (STIP/SHOPP/ITS) Task Duration: Aug 1 – Oct 30
Product / Deliverable: An updated list of remaining and added Business Plan projects showing current scope, cost and project deliverability.
Task Description: This task activity will update the scope, cost and estimated deliverability of the partially funded and non-funded projects remaining from the original 67 improvement projects listed in the 2005 Business Plan. During the Business Plan update there may be additional project improvements added to the Business plan. These projects will also be included in the scope, cost and deliverability task. Deliverability is important since it will be an essential factor influencing funding priority decisions.
Task 7: Prepare Draft Corridor Improvement Financial Plan Task Duration: Sept 1 – Apr 30
Product / Deliverable: A draft Route 99 Corridor Financial plan will be developed for review and comment by all corridor stakeholders.
Task Description: The original 2005 Business Plan Element included 67 projects in four priority categories amounting to a total estimated cost, in 2005 dollars, of $6 billion. Approximately $1 billion of those improvements have now been funded. The original Business Plan did not include a financial plan addressing how the total $6 billion program of improvements would be funded. Financing a program of this magnitude requires a financial strategy incorporating ongoing funding agreements/commitments from the full cadre of funding sources to be able to meet this monumental challenge. This task will establish a universally agreed upon financial strategy and produce a financial plan to guide annual and/or biannual fund decisions by all stakeholders.
Task 8: Establish the Route 99 CSMP Strategy/Approach Task Duration: Nov 1 – Dec 30
23 Product / Deliverable:
Task Description: Corridor System Management Plans (CSMPs) now represent the most current business practice in planning and funding major transportation improvements on the State Highway System in California. The Route 99 corridor presents the opportunity to make the most efficient and coordinated project improvement and funding decisions based upon performance outcomes. This task activity will establish the strategy approach to be used as stakeholders make joint project and funding decisions.
Sub-segment CSMPs are being prepared by others along parts of the 297 mile San Joaquin Valley corridor. Outcomes from those sub-segment CSMPs will become part of this Business Plan by reference. The resulting strategy of this task will help stakeholders and decision makers when project priority and funding decisions need to be made.
Task 9: Refine and Apply Corridor Segment Performance Measures Task Duration: Jan 1 – Mar 30
Product / Deliverable: Updated and revised performance measure data with application procedures for each performance measure.
Task Description: This task will further research and establish a more effective performance measure approach for the Route 99 corridor. The product of this task activity will build upon and/or apply performance measures established as part of the Corridor System Management Plans under preparation as required for the Prop 1B Route Bond Program.
The original Business Plan identified several performance measure categories. Theses were safety, mobility, reliability, productivity, system performance, and return on investment-life cycle cost. Part of the performance measure analysis is to conduct before and after evaluations. Unfortunately, insufficient data was available to develop several of the performance measures. Benefit-cost ratio data was not available and data in several performance categories was not available for interchange project types. A “high-medium-low” structure had to be used for some performance measures. This type of approach is not conducive to effective before and after performance evaluation. Bond Program.
Task 10: Refine Strategies For Influencing Adjacent Land Use Decisions Task Duration: Feb 1 – Apr 30
24
Product / Deliverable: Land use coordination strategy applicable to the Route 99 corridor.
Task Description: From a corridor perspective it became apparent that land uses and local agency land use decisions affect the driving experience (operation and appearance) of Route 99. Most stakeholders noted that there needed to be some form of coordination of local land use decisions along the corridor and that the State may need to take a stronger role.
Land use coordination was generally discussed in the Business Plan but not refined into an action strategy due to time constraints for plan delivery. This task will build upon the original discussion, utilize key parts of the Blue Print Planning process currently underway in all eight San Joaquin Valley counties, and produce an appropriate land use coordination strategy.
Task 11: Establish Interstate Designation Related Policies Task Duration: Dec 3 – Jan 31
Product / Deliverable: Incorporation of Interstate designation decisions and policies are included in the Business Plan update.
Task Description: SAFETEA-LU, the current federal Transportation Act signed into law in August, 2005 designated Route 99 as a “future Interstate route”. Caltrans is engaged in a separate work activity to process an application FHWA for full designation as an Interstate route.
This task will assure that coordination of Interstate designation decisions and policies, being done as a separate study, are incorporated into the Business Plan update.
Task 12: Prepare Draft Updated Business Plan Element Task Duration: Apr 1- Jun 30
Product / Deliverable: Draft Business Plan Element
Task Description: This task will produce the draft Updated Business Plan Element for review and comment by all stakeholders.
25 Task 13: Prepare Final Corridor CSMP Strategy Task Duration: Sept 1 – Aug 30
Product / Deliverable: Final CSMP Strategy
Task Description: As a result of review and comment on the CSMP Strategy/Approach produced in Task 8, a final CSMP strategy will be included in the Business Plan. The CSMP Strategy will also be applied within the Business Plan activities, as appropriate.
Task 14: Prepare Final Corridor Financial Plan Task Duration: Apr 1 – June 30
Product / Deliverable: Final Corridor Financial Plan endorsed by all eight MPOs and the two Caltrans Districts in the San Joaquin Valley.
Task Description: This is the single most significant Business Plan Update product. This task will produce the final agreed upon and endorsed Financial Plan for funding all major improvements to the Route 99 corridor. Following review and comment of the draft Financial Plan a key activity of this task will be engaging in discussions with each financial stakeholder with funding decision authority with the intent of entering into multi-year and multi-agency financial agreements.
Task 15: Prepare Final Updated Business Plan Element Task Duration: May 1 – July 30
Product / Deliverable: Updated Business Plan Element
Task Description: This task will produce the updated Business Plan Element as the Route 99 corridor improvement plan.
26
Schedule Route 99 Business Plan Update Corridor: San Joaquin Valley Rte 99 ID Task Description 2007 2008 May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept 1 Establish Business Plan Update Team 2 Key Decision Meetings (Throughout Workplan) X X X X X 3 Develop Scope of Work 4 Prioritize Deferred and Updated Goals & Objectives 5 Determine Environmental Documentation Approach 6 Update Priority Category Project Lists 7 Draft Corridor Improvement Financial Plan(Separate Work Plan) 8 Establish Route 99 CSMP Strategy / Approach 9 Refine and Apply Corridor Segment Performance Measures 10 Refine Strategies for Influencing Adjacent Land Use Decisions 11 Establish Interstate Designation Related Policies 12 Prepare Draft Updated Business Plan Element 13 Prepare Final Corridor CSMP Strategy 14 Prepare Final Corridor Financial Plan 15 Prepare Final Updated Business Plan Element
Project Team Members: TBD
27
ATTACHMENT B
SCOPE OF WORK—Corridor Enhancement Plan Element
Task 1: Establish Project Team Task Duration: May 21 – June1 Product / Deliverable:
Task Description: Establish the Project Team to guide the update of the Corridor Enhancement Plan Element. The Project Team will consist of at least representatives from Caltrans District 6 and 10, the eight San Joaquin Valley MPO’s, and the Great Valley Center. This “core team” shall decide whether to add representatives of other interests that may benefit the quality, utility and effectiveness of the business plan. These may include selected representatives from the Route Corridor Enhancement Advisory Committee.
Task 2: Review and Finalize Scope of Work Task Duration: June 1 – June 15 Product / Deliverable:
Task Description: This task will produce the Scope Of Work for updating Corridor Enhancement Element. The first primary order of business of the Project Team is to review, modify as appropriate, and approve the scope of work. The intent of this Scope of Work is to layout the task activities and schedule for the update.
Task 3: Establish Enhancement Plan Element Update Purpose and Mission Task Duration: June 7 – 15 Product / Deliverable: New purpose and mission statement responsive to current corridor enhancement needs.
Task Description: The Enhancement Plan Element was the initial Route 99 Corridor Master Plan Element and was produced in FY 2004/05. A broad spectrum of interests came together with the common goal to establish a “corridor identity” and improve aesthetics along the corridor. Some sections of the initial Enhancement Plan were updated and included as part of the Business Plan Element completed in December, 2005, causing some inconsistency between the two Master Plan Elements. The purpose of this update is to: 1) make appropriate modifications to eliminate duplication between Business Plan content, 2) expand and enrich aesthetic feature content, and 3) include project improvement listings specific to aesthetic enhancements, corridor/community identity, and improved traveler information features.
Task 4: ESTABLISH ENHANCEMENT MASTER PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE
28 Task Duration: June 7 – June 21 Product / Deliverable:
Task Description:
Task 5: REFINE AND ADOPT ADVISORY COMMITTEE OPERATING PROCEDURES Task Duration: Product / Deliverable:
Task Description:
Task 6: IDENTIFY SPECIFIC ENHANCEMENT PLAN UPDATE NEEDS Task Duration: Product / Deliverables:
Task Description:
Task 7: UPDATE ENHANCEMENT PLAN AS AGREED UPON IN TASK 6 Task Duration: Product / Deliverable:
Task Description:
Task 8: PRODUCE DRAFT ENHANCEMENT MASTER PLAN ELEMENT Task Duration: Product / Deliverable: Task Description
29 ROUTE 99 BUSINESS PLAN -- SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY ATTACHMENT A
DELIVERY STATUS OF PROGRAMMED ROUTE 99 CAPACITY AND INTERCHANGE PROJECTS Rev 8/28/2007 KEY CONST R/W SUPPORT STATUS MAP PROJECT CAPITAL CAPITAL COSTS TOTAL COSTS Priority PROJ CO Rte PM EA FROM TO PROJECT NAMEDESCRIPTION COSTS COSTS PER PROJ Categ. # (X 1,000) (x1000) (X 1,000) (X 1,000)
R30.5/R3 7th Standard Rd. 7Th Standard Road 6 Ker 99 1.1 06-433501 Interchange Widening Modify Interchange $15,200 $1,300 $1,300 $17,800 2007 3 14 Tul 99 30.6/41.3 06-360200 Prosperity Ave. N. Goshen OH. Tulare to Goshen 6-Lane Widen from 4 F to 6 F $150,900 $2,000 $20,300 $173,200 2011 2 41.3/53.9, Goshen to Kingsburg 16 Tul,Fre 99 0.0/1.0 06-324500 N. of Goshen N. of Conejo Ave OC. 6-Lane Widen from 4F to 6 F $152,600 $2,000 $18,000 $172,600 2009 2
35 Mad 99 19.6/22.6 06-293301 S. of Ave 21 S. of 99/152 Separation. Fairmead Freeway 4 E to 6 F on 8 Lane R/W $59,000 $3,000 $9,000 $71,000 In Const. 1
30 Mad 99 9.1/9.8 06-407201 S. Madera OC N of Rte 99/145 Gateway Interchange Modify Interchange $8,000 $1,000 $3,000 $12,000 In Const. 3
39 Mer 99 0/4.6 10-415800 Madera County Line. Buchanan Hollow Rd. Plainsburg Road Freeway 4 E to 6 F on 8 Lane R/W $95,000 $7,300 $8,300 $110,600 2010 1 Buchanan Hollow 0.5 Km N. of Mchenry 40 Mer 99 4.6/10.5 10-415700 Road. Rd. Arboleda Drive Freeway 4 E to 6 F on 8 Lane R/W $127,000 $25,000 $12,000 $164,000 2010 1 0.4 Km N. of Atwater 44 Mer 99 23.8/26.5 10-414801 OH. 0.4 Km S. of Arena Way. Atwater Freeway 4 E to 6 F on 8 Lane R/W $51,000 $10,200 $11,500 $72,700 2007 1 Mitchell RD / Service RD PA & ED 48 Sta 99 9.7/10.9 10-1A6900 0.5 Km S. 1.0 Km N. of Mitchell Rd. Interchange Reconstruct Interchange $50,000 $2,000 $400 $52,400 2009 3 City of Ceres at Whitmore Rte 99 / Whitmore Ave PS & E 51 Sta 99 R11.9 10-2A7701 Overcrossing Interchange Reconstruct Interchange $31,800 $10,000 $10,000 $51,800 2007 3 PA & ED 55 Sta 99 15.6/17.5 10-403500 Rte 132 Kansas Ave Route 132 Expressway Reconstruct Interchange $45,800 $5,000 $3,200 $54,000 2011 3 0.3 Km S. to 0.6 Km N. PA & ED 59 Sta 99 20.8/21.4 10-472100 Deer Creek Br. of Pelandale Avenue Pelandale Interchange Modify Interchange $50,000 $18,000 $7,000 $75,000 2010 3
63 SJ 99 15.0/18.6 10-3A10000.6 Km N.of Arch Rd. 0.2 Km S. of Rte 4 West South Stockton 6-Lane Widen from 4 F to 6 F $159,000 $72,000 $19,500 $250,500 2012 2
Prog. Proj. Total Cost $1,277,600
LEGEND
Fully Funded (Not to const) Not Funded - 4F to 6F Draft Data. For information purposes only. Not Funded - 6F to 8F & Partially Funded Ops Projs Rte 99 Bonds-Funded In Construction
30 Other-Meas. Funds Eligible Constructed ROUTE 99 BUSINESS PLAN -- SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY ATTACHMENT B
PRIORITY CATEGORY 2 -- Capacity Increasing Projects Rev October 26, 2007
CONST. R/W KEY MAP PROJECT CAPITAL CAPITAL SUPPORT TOTAL COSTS PRIOR PSR PROJECT CAT STATUS CO RTE PM EANUMBER FROM TO DESCRIPT. COST COST COST PER PROJECT ( All Costs X $1000 )
Ker 99 17.0 22.6 1 SR 119 Wilson Rd O/C Widen From 6F to 8F $40,000 $47,000 $8,000 $95,000 2 In Prep Tul 99 0.0 16.0 7 Kern Co Line South of Tipton Widen From 4F to 6F $160,000 $800 $27,000 $187,800 2 Tul 99 16.0 23.5 8 South of Tipton Avenue 200 Widen From 4F to 6F $95,000 $1,000 $20,000 $116,000 2
Tul 99 23.5 30.5 06-48950K 11 Avenue 200 Prosperity Ave Widen from 4F to 6F $85,000 $800 $22,000 $107,800 2 In Prep Fre 99 15.8 18.5 19 Central Ave Jensen Ave Widen from 6F to 8F $36,000 $0 $11,100 $47,100 2 Fre 99 18.5 26.6 21 Jensen Ave Ashland Ave Widen from 6F to 8F $165,000 $0 $49,500 $214,500 2
Fre 99 26.6 31.6 06-44260K 25 Ashlan Ave Madera Co Line Widen from 4F to 6F $74,600 $2,000 $16,400 $93,000 2 Complete Mad 99 0.0 7.5 28 Avenue 7 Avenue12 Widen from 4F to 6F $60,000 $3,200 $10,000 $73,200 2 In Prep Mad 99 7.5 12.8 06-47090K 32 Avenue 12 Avenue 16 Widen from 4F to 6F $120,000 $14,000 $34,000 $168,000 2 Inactive Mad 99 12.8 20.5 34 Avenue 16 Avenue 21 1/2 Widen from 4F to 6F $77,000 $1,200 $16,000 $94,200 2 Mad 99 22.5 29.4 38 SR 152 Interchange Merced Co Line Widen from 4F to 6F $75,000 $3,200 $20,000 $98,200 2
Mer 99 11.6 17.6 10-0Q060K 41 S. of Childs Ave. Black Rascal Creek Widen from 4F to 6F $120,000 $40,000 $28,000 $188,000 2 In Prep Mer 99 17.6 21.3 10-0Q060K 42 Black Rascal Creek East Atwater OH Widen from 4F to 6F $85,000 $40,000 $20,000 $145,000 2 In Prep Mer 99 21.3 24.2 10-0Q060k 43 East Atwater OH West Atwater OH Widen from 4F to 6F $50,000 $8,000 $14,000 $72,000 2 In Prep Mer 99 28.8 36.2 10-0Q120K 45 Hammatt Avenue South Turlock OC Widen from 4F to 6F $74,000 $2,000 $11,000 $87,000 2 PA & ED STA 99 R10.0 R13.2 10-0E560K 49 Mitchell Road Hatch Road Widen 6F to 8F $95,000 $50,000 $27,000 $172,000 2 In Prep STA 99 R18.5 R24.7 10-0E560K 58 Carpenter Road San Joaquin County Line Widen 6F to 8F $62,000 $0 $15,000 $77,000 2 In Prep STA 99 R13.2 R15.1 10-0E560K 52 Hatch Road Tuolumne Blvd Widen 6F to 8F $60,000 $0 $18,000 $78,000 2 In Prep STA 99 R15.1 R16.8 10-0E560K 54 Tuolumne Blvd Kansas Avenue Widen 6F to 8F $60,000 $30,000 $18,000 $108,000 2 In Prep STA 99 R16.8 R18.5 10-0E560K 56 Kansas Avenue Carpenter Road Widen 6F to 8F $35,000 $30,000 $10,000 $75,000 2 In Prep SJ 99 5.3 15.0 10-0E6100 62 SR-120 in Manteca Arch Rd. in S.Stockton Widen 4F to 6F $207,300 $10,000 $26,700 $244,000 2 Complete SJ 99 28.3 38.8 67 Harney Road Sacramento County Line Widen 4F to 6F $130,000 $0 $38,000 $168,000 2
Category 2 Total Cost $2,708,800 LEGEND Fully Funded (Not to const) Not Funded - 4F to 6F Draft data. For information purposes only. Not Funded - 6F to 8F & Partially Funded Ops Projs Rte 99 Bonds-Funded In Construction Other-Meas. Funds Eligible Constructed 31 ROUTE 99 BUSINESS PLAN -- SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY ATTACHMENT C
PRIORITY CATEGORY 3 -- Major Operational Improvement Projects Rev October 26, 2007 CONST. R/W KEY MAP PROJECT CAPITAL CAPITAL SUPPORT TOTAL COSTS PRIOR. PSR PROJECT STATUS CO RTE PM EA NUMBER FROM TO DECRIPT. COST COST COST PER PROJECT CAT. (All Costs X $1000 Ker 99 22.7 23.2 06-46011K 3 Ming Ave SR58 Construct Auxiliary Lane $26,000 $2,200 $1,800 $30,000 3 10/18/2005 Ker 99 23.9 24.6 06-46012K 4 California Ave SR58 Construct Auxiliary Lane $29,000 $4,400 $2,100 $35,500 3 10/17/2005 Ker 99 27.8 28.1 06-49710K 5 Olive Dr. Interchange Reconstruct Interchange $10,800 $8,000 $3,900 $22,700 3 Inactive Tul 99 27.6 28.0 10 Paige Ave Interchange Reconstruct Interchange $52,000 $5,000 $10,500 $67,500 3 Tul 99 31.4 32.4 06-33220K 12 Cartmil Ave Interchange Reconstruct Interchange $43,000 $6,000 $10,000 $59,000 3 In Prep Tul 99 36.1 36.8 06-48740K 13 Caldwell Interchange Reconstruct Interchange $46,000 $12,000 $10,000 $68,000 3 Tul 99 39.6 41.3 06-47150K 15 Betty Dr Interchange Reconstruct Interchange $46,000 $14,200 $10,500 $70,700 3 In Prep Replace bridge structure and Fre 99 6.5 06-OH410K 17 Floral Rd/SR 43 Interchange Selma $23,000 $0 $5,700 $28,700 3 In Prep Floral Rd Central Ave/Chestnut Ave Fre 99 15.8 18 Interchange Improvements $42,000 $20,000 $10,500 $72,500 3 Interchange Cedar Ave/North Ave Fre 99 16.8 17.3 06-oH240K 20 Interchange Improvements $42,000 $20,000 $10,500 $72,500 3 In Prep Interchange Fre 99 20.3 22 Ventura Ave Interchange Interchange Improvements $42,000 $20,000 $10,500 $72,500 3 Fre 99 20.7 24.4 06-39210K 23 Fresno St Clinton Ave Add NB and SB auxiliary lanes $70,000 $198,000 $14,800 $282,800 3 Fre 99 20.5 21.0 N/A 24 Toulumne St Stanislaus St Interchange Improvements $10,000 $0 $2,400 $12,400 3 Fre 99 27.3 28.3 06-442700 26 Shaw Ave Interchange Interchange Improvements $12,000 $46,000 $12,000 $70,000 3 Update Mad 99 R7.1 R7.9 06-47100K 29 Avenue 12 Reconstruct Interchange $48,000 $9,300 $10,700 $68,000 3 Complete Mad 99 9.7 10.7 31 Route 99/145 Reconstruct Interchange $32,000 $7,200 $7,500 $46,700 3 Complete Reconstruct Interchange and Mad 99 21.7 23.7 36 SR 152 Interchange $78,000 $6,000 $17,000 $101,000 3 rail crossing Mad 99 26.1 27.2 37 Route 99/233 Reconstruct Interchange $55,000 $5,400 $12,800 $73,200 3 In Prep Sta 99 1.4 46 SR99 @ SR165 (Lander Ave) Modify Interchange $36,000 $10,000 $9,000 $55,000 3 Sta 99 R3.2 R4.0 10-0F410K 47 West Main Street Reconstruct Interchange $24,000 $10,000 $6,000 $40,000 3 2/1/2006 Sta 99 R11.3 10-0E560K 50 Pine Street Reconstruct Interchange $60,000 $50,000 $15,000 $125,000 3 Inactive New Freeway to Freeway Sta 99 14.9 15.6 10-0H770K 53 SR99 @ SR132 Sr132 East $78,000 $12,000 $20,000 $110,000 3 In Prep Interchange Sta 99 19.9 57 SR99 @ Standiford Modify Interchange $84,000 $20,000 $20,000 $124,000 3 Sta 99 R21.9 R23.2 10-0L330K 60 Kiernan Avenue/SR219 Reconstruct Interchange $65,600 $3,500 $12,000 $81,100 3 In Prep Sta 99 24 24.4 10-0L320K 61 Hammett Road Reconstruct Interchange $78,000 $6,000 $20,000 $104,000 3 In Prep Reconstruct and combine SJ 99 16.4 17.5 64 Mariposa Rd. and Farmington $66,000 $24,000 $14,000 $104,000 3 interchanges (stages 1 & 2) SJ 99 23.5 24.5 10-0L140K 65 Morada Lane in Stockton Reconstruct Interchange $54,000 $44,000 $10,000 $108,000 3 PA & ED SJ 99 25.2 25.4 10-0L130K 66 Eight Mile Rd. in Stockton Reconstruct Interchange $46,000 $42,000 $10,500 $98,500 3 PA & ED
Category 3 Total Cost $2,203,300 LEGEND Fully Funded (Not to const) Not Funded - 4F to 6F Draft data. For information purposes only. Not Funded - 6F to 8F & Partially Funded Ops Projs 32 Rte 99 Bonds-Funded In Construction Other-Meas. Funds Eligible Constructed ROUTE 99 BUSINESS PLAN -- SAN JOAQUIN VALLRY ATTACHMENT D
PRIORITY CATEGORY 4 -- New Interchange Projects Rev October 26, 2007
CONSTR. R/W KEY MAP PROJECT CAPITAL APITAL COS SUPPORT TOTAL COSTS PRIOR PSR PROJECT CAT. STATUS CO RTE PM EA NUMBER FROM TO DESCRIPT. COST COST COST PER PROJECT (All Costs X $1000
Ker 99 18 19 2 At Hoskings Avenue New Interchange $28,000 $34,000 $7,000 $69,000 4 Complete Tul 99 26.3 27.6 06-43040K 9 at Commercial Avenue at Agri-Center Construct New Interchange $46,000 $1,000 $9,500 $56,500 4 In Prep Grantland Diagonal Fre 99 29.4 06-OH360K 27 Construct New Interchange $55,000 $18,000 $13,800 $86,800 4 (Veterans Blvd) In Prep Remove existing Ave 16 Mad 99 12.3 14.3 06-48920K 33 Ellis Avenue Interchange interchange. Construct a new $80,000 $17,000 $18,500 $115,500 4 I/C
Cateory 4 Total Cost $258,800 LEGEND
Fully Funded (Not to const) Not Funded - 4F to 6F Draft data. For information purposes only. Not Funded - 6F to 8F & Partially Funded Ops Projs Rte 99 Bonds-Funded In Construction Other-Meas. Funds Eligible Constructed 33 ROUTE 99 BUSINESS PLAN -- SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY ATTACHMENT E
OTHER MAJOR PROJECTS NOT INCLUDED IN ORIGINAL BUSINESS PLAN Rev October 26, 2007
CONST. R/W KEY PROJECT CAPITAL CAPITAL SUPPORT TOTAL COSTS PRIORC PSR MAP PM AT. STATUS CO RTE EA PROJ FROM TO DESCRIPTION COST COST COST PER PROJECT NUMB (All Costs X $1000 Ker 99 27 27.8 06-OJ120K NA SR 204 Olive Dr Construct Auxillary Lane NB 2,000 3 In Prep Ker 99 27 27.8 06-OJ130K NA SR 204 Olive Dr Construct Auxillary Lane SB 3,000 3 In Prep Ker 99 27.0 31.1 06-OG840K NA SR204 Seventh Standard Rd 6F to 8F $45,000 $48,500 $8,000 $101,500 2 In Prep Ker 99 52.4 06-OG920K NA Woolomes Ave Modify I/C $3,000 $0 $750 $3,750 3 In Prep Fre 99 0.7 7.4 06-350704 NA SR 201 Floral Ave 4F to 6F $61,900 $100 $5,000 $67,000 2 Complete Fre 99 14.7 06-OH230 NA American Ave Modify I/C $21,000 $800 $5,000 $26,800 3 In Prep Mad 99 10.7 11.2 06-OJ320K NA 4th St Widen 4th St Bridge $11,000 3 In Prep Mad 99 13.5 15.0 08-OH330K NA 17th Ave Modify I/C 3 In Prep 4E to 6F & New Mission Ave Mer 99 10.2 12.8 10-363114 NA McHenry Rd Childs Ave Overcrossing $73,300 $25,600 $10,000 $108,900 1 I/C Complete Hammett Ave Mer 99 26.5 28.8 10-3169E4 NA Arena Way 4E to 6F & New Arena Way I/C $26,600 $9,000 $6,000 $41,600 1 Overcrossing Complete SJ 99/120 6.4 7.0 10-3A0904 NA At SR 99/120 I/C Reconstruct I/C $10,500 $300 $2,000 $12,800 3 Complete SJ 99 14.1 15.0 10-1A7004 NA At Arch Rd Reconstruct I/C $25,800 $6,100 $6,000 $37,900 3 Complete SJ 99 18.5 22.9 10-4454U4 NA SR 4 Hammer Lane 4F to 6F $19,500 $800 $4,000 $24,300 2 Complete
Cateory 4 Total Cost $424,550 LEGEND
Fully Funded (Not to const) Not Funded - 4F to 6F Draft data. For information purposes only. Not Funded - 6F to 8F & Partially Funded Ops Projs Rte 99 Bonds-Funded In Construction Other-Meas. Funds Eligible Constructed
een Stop" project, at the Phillip S. Raine Safety Roadside Rest Area near Tipton, was included in the original Business Plan to add environmentally sensitive and regional context features. At this point its $10 million rema 34 Route 99 Interstate Designation Caltrans Status Report Partnership For The San Joaquin Valley Meeting November 9, 2007
Accomplishments To Date:
1. There is general consensus between San Joaquin Valley MPOs and Caltrans to proceed with designation activities. 2. The current Federal Transportation Act: SAFETEA-LU, signed into law in August, 2005 designated Route 99 as a “future Interstate”. The designation is between the junction of I-5 and State Route 99 in Kern County to Sacramento metropolitan area. 3. Caltrans has submitted a conceptual proposal to FHWA for designation. In August, 2006 Caltrans District 6 and 10 staff and Headquarters staff met with California Division and Washington FHWA staff. At that meeting Caltrans presented a streamlined proposal. Caltrans’ proposal was met with general consensus of agreement, but with a qualified “wait and see what is submitted” aspect on the part of FHWA.
Caltrans’ Proposal: The Departments approach is engendered in five parts. 1. Rationale addressing Interstate Designation as identified in 23 U.S.C.139(a) or (b) of Appendix A and Appendix B. 2. Overview of the Department’s conceptual approach 3. Interstate conversion plan 4. Environmental approval process 5. Formal submittal to FHWA
Rationale: Under the rationale section, part of the work has already been accomplished through the “future Interstate” designation contained in SAFETEA-LU. The accomplished part relates to the requirement that the route is a logical addition or connection to the Interstate System requirement.
Overview Of Department’s Approach: It is proposed to break the entire 297 mile route into logical segments and that each segment, as they are added to the Interstate system each, would have connectivity to an existing Interstate route at on one end until the “golden spike” segment is completed. Design exception justifications responding to the 13 Interstate “controlling criteria” would be grouped for within each segment for ease of preparation and review. For example, all non-standard vertical clearances for a segment could be rolled into a single design exception. Future Route 99 improvement projects, including those identified as part of the Route 99 Business Plan, would be addressed as part of the design exception justifications within each segment.
Interstate Conversion Plan: Caltrans proposes segmenting Route 99 into logical portions that can be analyzed and reviewed until the total Farm-to-Market Corridor limits have been designated as an interstate freeway. The divided portions would, at all times, be connected to an interstate route: I-5 in Kern County and I-80 in Sacramento County. The tables below show a designation sequence, which begins at the northern and southern limits, working concurrently toward the middle of the route. The logical termini for the segments are at state highways or freeways.
35 Implementation from southern Kern County, northward SEQUENCE DESCRIPTION COUNTY PM PM Length 1 I-5 to Rte 58 East Kern 0.00 23.51 23.51 2 Rte 58 East to Rte 46 Kern 23.51 44.31 20.80 3 Rte 46 to Rte 198 Kern 44.31 57.58 13.27 Tulare 0.00 38.73 38.73 4 Rte 198 to Rte 41 Tulare 38.73 53.94 15.21 Fresno 0.00 19.51 19.51 5 Rte 41 to Rte 152 Fresno 19.51 31.61 12.10 Madera 0.00 22.65 22.65 TOTAL LENGTH 165.78 Implementation from Sacramento – southward SEQUENCE DESCRIPTION COUNTY PM PM Length 1 I-80 (XY I-305) to Rte 4 West Sacramento 24.01 0.00 24.01 San Joaquin 38.78 17.22 21.56 2 Rte 4 W to Rte 120 W San Joaquin 17.22 5.82 11.40 3 Rte 120 West to Rte 132 San Joaquin 5.82 0.00 5.82 Stanislaus 24.75 16.12 8.63 4 Rte 132 to Rte 140 East Stanislaus 16.12 0.00 16.12 Merced 37.30 13.86 23.44 5 Rte 140 East to Rte 152 Merced 13.86 0.00 13.86 Madera 29.36 22.65 6.71 TOTAL LENGTH 131.55
The last segments proposed for the Interstate designation are existing expressways in Merced and Madera Counties that occur in the central San Joaquin Valley. These expressway segments are all fully funded and scheduled delivery to construction by 2012. As a result, all expressway segments will have been upgraded to freeway status as is an absolute requirement for Interstate designation.
Environmental Approval Process: The designation as an Interstate route is an administrative act that could be done with a CE. However, following discussions with FHWA, it is not yet clear what type of environmental documentation is required. Ongoing communication within the Department and FHWA will be necessary to determine the study and documentation requirements for the environmental approval process.
Next Steps:
1. Conduct detailed field reviews for each of the proposed Interstate designation segments and prepare respective work plans design exception justifications. Initial focus will be on the segments to be proposed for designation in the near term. 2. In coordination with FHWA determine what type of environmental documentation will be necessary. 3. Obtain Department management decision on budget capacity
Recommendations To Move Forward:
1. Reaffirmation support among MPOs to move forward as justification for budgeting resources. 2. Seek Interstate designation budget funds (FY 07/08 and FY 08/09). 3. Set final budget and schedule 4. Conduct detailed design exception field investigations.
36 Rte 99 Interstate Designation Scope Of Work and Schedule
Corridor: San Joaquin Valley Rte 99 ID Task Description 2008 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept 1 Reaffirm Support To Proceed With Interstate Designation X 2 Obtain Interstate Designation Support Budget Authority 3 Establish Project Advisory Team 4 Schedule For Key Team Decision Meetings XX X 5 Develop Scope Of Work 6 Conduct Design Exception Field Investigations 7 Research and Collect Data For Grouped Design Except Justif. 8 Submit Interstate Number Application to AASHTO and FHWA 9 Establish Template Format and Initial Design Except for Seg 1 10 Review and Update Scope of Work and Budget As Approp.
Project Team Members: TBD 37 Interregional Transportation Improvement Program (ITIP)
The ITIP represents 25 percent of all funds available through the State Transportation Improvement Program. The State Transportation Improvement Program is the largest source of State funding available to widen or improve the operation of a highway. It is updated every two years. The ITIP portion of the funds is primarily used to improve State Highways of interregional significance. Use of ITIP resources are recommended by Caltrans and approved after a public hearing process by the California Transportation Commission.
Caltrans has prepared an Interregional Transportation Strategic Plan to guide the use of ITIP funds. The Plan includes 10 “Focus” routes which link major regions of the State and which are generally given higher priority for ITIP funding. Highway 99 is one of the 10 Focus routes.
A preliminary analysis of the distribution of ITIP funds dating back to 2002 indicates that about 10 to 15 percent of these funds have been used for improvements on Highway 99. This analysis is challenging due to the need to reconcile newly added funds with carry-over funds for each two year cycle. However in the most recent cycle Highway 99 received considerably less than even this percentage share.
The Need for More ITIP Expenditures on Highway 99
One way to advance delivery of the Highway 99 Program is to set a target that 25 percent of all ITIP funds Statewide be used for projects on Highway 99. Over the course of several funding cycles achieving this target would substantially increase the State’s commitment to upgrade Highway 99 from existing sources and create more partnering opportunities to combine these funds with other, locally controlled resources.
While other Interregional Focus routes are important no other route binds a major region of the State and which includes these factors:
• Serves the fastest growing region in the State; • Handles the high volumes of traffic existing and expected on the route; • Handles the high percentage of truck traffic that is pivotal to both the regional and State’s economy.
In order to achieve this objective the San Joaquin Valley must work closely together to advocate for increased this level of ITIP funds on a cycle-by-cycle basis, ensure we have projects moving through the pipeline and ready to use the additional funds and work closely with Caltrans at the District and Headquarters levels.
38 Potential State Bond Funds
Proposition 1B, which was approved by the voters in November, 2006 provides $19.9 billion in bond authority to improve transportation facilities over the next 10 years. Proposition 1 B included $1 billion for the exclusive purpose of improving Highway 99.
While this is a major infusion of transportation funds for California the Governor’s strategic Growth Plan identifies over $10 billion in transportation infrastructure needs over the next several years. This number has undoubtedly increased with the escalating cost of transportation projects.
Discussion has started to occur at the State level about an additional bond measure for transportation, possibly in 2010. If an additional bond measure comes under serious consideration it is important that the Valley be poised to move in a coordinated fashion to include a Highway 99 package into any proposal moving forward.
Some key elements to prepare for this opportunity include:
• An updated Highway 99 Business Plan with clear priorities that has received buy-in from key agencies and stakeholders; • A financial plan that demonstrates cost-effective use of existing funding resources as well as funding partnership opportunities that would quickly and effectively use new targeted bond funds; • A track record of successful delivery of the existing Highway 99 bond program; • An early and compelling case that can be made with key decision- makers in Sacramento that clearly demonstrates the additional need for funding and the substantial benefits to the Region and the State. This case could be made in terms of transportation benefits but also benefits to commerce, economic development and regional growth. • A strong and coordinated advocacy effort from the Valley; we may need to start by answering the question of why the original $1 billion is not enough.
39
Potential Funding Options for Future Improvements to State Route 99
SR 99 Corridor Impact Fee-This type of funding program would require “extraordinary” political consensus among the eight San Joaquin Valley counties on every level of government - local, state and federal. Implementation of such a fee would also require broad based visionary support and leadership including a number of political “champions” willing to work together with a fully engaged private sector. Any type of impact fee program requires detailed analysis and consideration, as issues are complex and there is a strong chance that any fee program will be heavily scrutinized and potentially subject to legal challenge.
There are a number of transportation factors to consider when any type of fee program is considered for State Route 99. These include:
• The role that State Route 99 serves as the San Joaquin Valley’s “Main Street”. Given the Valley’s north/south orientation and the reality that approximately 70% of its 3.6 million population lives within five miles of State Route 99, it is safe to assume that State Route 99 will continue to serve as the primary transportation corridor linking the urban centers of the Valley. When one takes into consideration the projected 9.4 million people that are forecast to live in the San Joaquin Valley in 2050, it is obvious that our “Main Street” will be facing major congestion challenges.
• The fact that State Route 99 serves as the San Joaquin Valley’s primary goods movement corridor. International and national trade is exploding with some forecasts predicting a 300% increase in the next twenty years. State Route 99 carries two to three times more truck traffic per lane (18% to 27%) than the average for the state of California (9%). The San Joaquin Valley and State Route 99 will feel the result of this growth in both increased maintenance and rehabilitation costs on the State Route 99 facility.
• Another factor is the San Joaquin Valley’s $20 billion a year agriculture industry’s heavy reliance on State Route 99 in order to move its product from farm to market. It is critical that mobility for both people and goods on State Route 99 be maintained and enhanced. Increases in both truck traffic and automobiles will present ever growing safety challenges, as congestion and capacity constraints along the corridor grow.
• Any fee program would also have to take into account the issue of the San Joaquin Valley’s “central” location relative to statewide travel. State Route 99 is a major goods movement corridor and is used not only for the benefit of the San Joaquin Valley, but also to distribute goods to other parts of the state and throughout the nation. Identifying a “fair and equitable” fee for both our homegrown and pass-through trips would be critically important.
There are a number of different approaches to a fee program that might be considered including: • development impact fees, • a corridor based vehicle miles traveled fee, • corridor trip based fees, • geographic zoned based fees, and • dedicated sales tax fees.
40
No matter what type of impact fee program might be implemented, it is important to understand that impact fees are not a stand alone solution, but should be used in combination with other local state and federal funding sources.
In the event that a development impact fee program is utilized there are several key points which must be understood, these include:
• Any fee program cannot fund existing need (growth impacts); • Impact fees help cover the cost of providing infrastructure necessitated by new development; • The establishment of a “rational nexus” is required between infrastructure need and development impact; • Fees must have “rough proportionality” with impacts of development and costs of infrastructure; • Development does not have to “exclusively benefit” but can “substantially benefit” from the overall improvement in regional mobility; • Fee programs are established to deal with indirect impacts that are “later in time or “further removed” in distance from development; • Cumulative impacts are individually minor but “collectively significant” impacts of multiple developments.
Tolling and Pricing Fee Option
Recent experiences in California with State Route 91 in Orange County and Interstate 15 show that toll traffic management with electronic dynamic pricing of access can reduce congestion during peak travel demand without necessarily adding highway lanes. As both population and VMT continue to grow in both the state and the San Joaquin Valley, State Route 99 may have the potential to utilize and benefit from a tolling and pricing program.
Toll system management has proven that it can expand travel choices and alleviate peak congestion. Any toll system might include such strategies as congestion management tolls, emission based tolls, rush hour shoulder lanes, and truck-only tolls. In order for a toll system to be effectively implemented on State Route 99 a number of issues would need to be addressed including:
• Review of Interstate Commerce Law pertaining to goods movement. • Participation by local, state and federal agencies, community stakeholders, individuals/organizations with interests in transportation, goods movement and economic development; • Extensive community outreach to ensure “support” for the program; • Compilation of data from existing studies and sources regarding current and future automobile and truck traffic on State Route 99; • Review of other areas and locations for application of pricing options • Cost/benefit analysis of each system or pricing option; • Analysis of the pricing/tolling option on congestion relief and other factors specific to the San Joaquin Valley.
41 42 43 44 45 46
c/o San Joaquin COG • 555 E. Weber Ave. • Stockton, California 95202 • 209-468-3913 • FAX 209-468-1084
October 5, 2007
Mr. Dale Bonner, Secretary Business, Transportation and Housing Agency Kern Council of Governments Subject: San Joaquin Valley RTPA Trade Corridor Projects Hot List Ronald Brummett Dear Secretary Bonner:
Merced County The eight San Joaquin Valley RTPAs have worked collaboratively to identify projects vital to Association of both the regional, as well as, national movement of goods. The product of this regional endeavor Governments is the 2007 San Joaquin Valley Regional Goods Movement Action Plan. Jesse Brown
Kings County This document is a framework which details three major topics of goods movement in the San Association of Joaquin Valley. First it provides background information and highlights goods movement issues Governments facing the San Joaquin Valley. Secondly, it describes and explains the goods movement system Terri King currently in place. Thirdly, it identifies projects strategically targeting system-wide improvements.
Stanislaus Council As part of the development of this plan, a two-tiered list of San Joaquin Valley Trade Corridor Of Governments Projects has been developed. Combined, these two tiers represent the San Joaquin Valley’s top Vince Harris priority goods movement projects. Tier I projects are top priority regional goods movement projects considered to meet all of the three key criteria:
Council of 1) Trade Corridors of National or International Significance (and) Fresno County 2) Have an identified local match of 50% (and) Governments Barbara Goodwin 3) Have an identified delivery date.
The Tier I Projects List is the San Joaquin Valley RTPA Trade Corridor Projects Hot List. Madera County Transportation Attached is a list of the Tier I projects. All projects are listed in geographic order from North to Commission South and have not been prioritized. Patricia Taylor Please give these lists a final review. If you have any questions or comments, please contact Tony Boren or Tom Webster at 559.233.4148. San Joaquin Council of Sincerely, Governments Andrew Chesley Chair
Tulare County Association of Governments Andrew T. Chesley George Finney Executive Director Ted Smalley Vice Chair Cc: John Barna, Executive Director John Bougart, BT&H Agency John Hummer, BT&H Agency Will Kempton, Director of Caltrans Malcolm Dougherty, Caltrans Kome Ajise, Caltrans D10 San Joaquin Valley COG Directors Group
San Joaquin Valley RTPA Trade Corridor Projects Hot List North to South Tier I* Project Cost Match 50% Match $ Source Delivery Date Location SR 4 (Crosstown Freeway) Extension to Port of Stockton $180,000,000 Yes $90,000,000 Measure K 2012 San Joaquin County Altamont Pass Rail Corridor / Central Valley Rail Freight Shuttle Demonstration Project $150,000,000 Yes $75,000,000 Measure K/Local 2011 San Joaquin County Crows Landing Intermodal Rail Facility. The project includes rail improvements along an alignment from the Port of Oakland to the Crows $52,000,000 $26,000,000 Landing Airfield in Stanislaus County. Yes P-P-P 2011 Stanislaus County Shafter Intermodal Rail Facility $30,000,000 Yes $15,000,000 Local 2008 Kern County Double Track Rail through Tehachapi Pass $85,000,000 Yes $42,500,000 BNSF 2012 Kern County
Total Cost: $497,000,000 Total Match: $248,500,000
Total TCIF Request: $248,500,000
*Tier I projects are considered the Hot List of Projects. They are goods movement projects which effect trade corridors of national significance, have an identified local match of 50%, and have an identified delivery date.
**Tier II projects are top regional priority projects that either have uncertainty of matching funds, are not nationally significant, or, no identified delivery date.
Water Quality, Supply and Reliability
Index
Description Page No.
Signed Resolution Supporting a Comprehensive Water Package 49
Comparison of Construction Schedules for Conveyance Options 51
Delta Vision Task Force – Working Framework 53
47
This page has been left blank intentionally.
48
A RESOLUTION OF THE CALIFORNIA PARTNERSHIP FOR THE SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY IN SUPPORT OF A COMPREHENSIVE WATER PACKAGE ON THE 2008 BALLOT AS DESCRIBED
WHEREAS, the California Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley ("Partnership") was established by Executive Order S-22-06 to focus attention on one of the most vital, yet challenged regions of the state and implement changes that would improve the economic well-being of the Valley and the quality of life of its residents. The Partnership has crafted a Strategic Action Proposal that will achieve those goals and has been charged by Governor Schwarzenegger to implement that Strategic Action Proposal; and
WHEREAS, the growing population and expanding economy of the San Joaquin Valley require an adequate water supply of sufficient quality that is reliable for all sectors, including the environment. Current water supplies are vulnerable to sudden disruption from catastrophic earthquakes and floods; groundwater supplies have been drawn down faster than they have been replenished; and current facilities are insufficient to address water storage and conveyance needs anticipated under future climate patterns. Each of these challenges must be addressed; and
WHEREAS, the Strategic Action Proposal’s recommendations for Water Quality, Supply and Reliability focus on; a) developing an Integrated Regional Water Management Plan for the San Joaquin Valley; b) incorporating major levee enhancements in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and San Joaquin Valley to safeguard and enhance regional water quality and water supply as well as provide for flood control; c) augmenting surface and groundwater banking programs and recycled water projects; d) improving water quality and expanding saline water management; e) expanding environmental restoration and conservation strategies; and f) expanding agricultural and urban water use and energy efficiency programs; and
WHEREAS, the Water Quality, Supply and Reliability recommendations require well crafted local, state and federal funding mechanisms for full implementation so the citizens of the San Joaquin Valley can achieve the Partnership’s vision of a Prosperous Economy, Quality Environment and Social Equity; and
WHEREAS, Governor Schwarzenegger has proposed a comprehensive water plan as part of his Strategic Growth Plan for California that includes water use efficiency, additional water storage, and a comprehensive Delta solution that includes an improved conveyance system to protect the integrity of the water supply to 25 million Californians; and
5010 N Woodrow Ave. 2nd Floor, M/S WC 142 Fresno, California 93740
559.294.6021 T 559.294.6024 F
www.sjvpartnership.org 49
WHEREAS, this package presents an historic opportunity to provide needed water investments as the Governor, the Legislature and the media are focused on California’s critical water issues and the need for immediate solutions; and
WHEREAS, without a comprehensive water solution and adequate funding mechanisms to complete in its entirety, investments proposed in the Governor’s water plan, California’s water system will not have the capacity it needs to respond to the challenges ahead; and
WHEREAS, despite ongoing investments in conservation, recycling and other water use efficiency programs, California infrastructure will be unable to support a strong economy and a healthy environment without investments in water storage and Delta sustainability as outlined in the Governor’s plan; and
WHEREAS, action is needed now in Sacramento to move forward with these investments to ensure Californians have the reliable water supply they deserve now and in the future.
NOW, THERFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CALIFORNIA PARTNERSHIP FOR THE SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY THAT THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS:
a) strongly support a comprehensive water plan that includes water storage, a comprehensive Delta solution (including improved conveyance and environmental protection) and water use efficiency; and
b) urge the Legislature to work with the Administration to pass a comprehensive water package that addresses the needs in their entirety this year and put that package before voters in 2008. PASSED APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 10 day of August 2007, by the board of the California Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley.
Connie Conway, Chair Fritz Grupe, Deputy Chair
50 2
Materials for Preparation of Meeting on October 11, 2007 – Draft 11-4-07 San Joaquin Valley Partnership Leaders on Water Policy
Comparison of Construction Schedules for Conveyance Options [Need timelines for both options. Get info from DWR.]
Through-Delta Conveyance
Design – Engineering – Environmental Certification and Permitting – Construction
Isolated Conveyance
Design – Engineering – Environmental Certification and Permitting – Construction
Approach to Reaching Consensus on Pursuing Simultaneously Both Options for Conveyance
General Concept
Adopt explicitly in state policy that the goal is continuous and simultaneous improvement in health of the Estuary, supply reliability and water quality. Establish qualitative and quantitative performance outcomes for Estuary (healthy fisheries), water supply reliability, and water supply quality. This is the foundation for adaptive management. (The monitoring and certification of progress on these performance outcomes will need to be assigned to a new governance structure.) Pursue simultaneously both: (a) improved through-Delta conveyance improvements (part of “no regrets actions” including construction of strategic levee systems); and (b) studies on the design, engineering and environmental certification and permitting on a range of isolated conveyance options (ranging from 5,000 cfs which could be a pipeline up to a 20,000 cfs large by-pass unlined channel). Immediately construct facilities and improvements (including strategic levee systems) to optimize through-Delta conveyance and operate for a reasonable, specified period of time to gain sufficient experience and empirical data (established in ROD as a minimum of 7 years). Evaluate results of optimized through-Delta against performance standards and determine how much isolated conveyance (if any) will be needed to augment or supplant the through-Delta conveyance. This will require establishment of specific decision points based on objective information and performance standards. Complete design and engineering studies on range of isolated conveyance options and secure environmental certification and permits. Construct appropriate (if any) isolated conveyance based on above decisions. Do not allow the operation of any isolated conveyance until storage above (and/or in) the Delta is constructed and commitments for water use efficiencies have been legally secured.
The above approach results in construction of any needed isolated conveyance in the same (and shortest realistic) timeframe as if the option of only an isolated conveyance were pursued. It achieves the best outcomes based on real-time data than if either option is pursued alone.
51
Essential Elements of Agreement to Reach Consensus
• Acknowledgement by all parties that the worst scenario for the Estuary is for the Delta to become an inland salt sea—which would irreparably destroy the Estuary. • Acknowledgement by all parties that a strategic levee system protects both the Estuary and exports. • Understanding by Peripheral Canal proponents why a big isolated conveyance alone is such a serious threat to the health of the Estuary. • Understanding by Delta interests and environmentalists why there is a need for greater export supply reliability and that will require improved conveyance (through-Delta or isolated, or a combination). • Commitment to link both efficient water use and storage to operation of conveyance. “Linkage” means more than separate authorization of these actions in legislation—it means inter- dependence—specifically, with respect to isolated conveyance means that it cannot be operated unless the other components are in place (including the construction of storage). • Clear definitions or descriptions of sufficient health of the Estuary, water supply reliability and water supply quality so that there is transparency about the basis for a decision about isolated conveyance. • Specificity about presumptions: For example, is it presumed that isolated conveyance of some type will be needed unless proved otherwise (based on quantitative performance of the through- Delta improvements) or is it presumed that through-Delta conveyance will be the preferred alternative unless it cannot meet performance standards. The clearer the performance standards and the stronger the linkages, the less critical are the presumptions. But, nevertheless, the presumptions become pivotal to agreement.
52 Delta Vision Task Force Draft – Three Essential Components of a Working Framework (Principles, such as submitted by the Stakeholder Coordinating Group, could flow from this Framework.)
¾ The Delta and exports are equally important. ¾ Solution must be comprehensive including both conservation and construction. ¾ Storage and conveyance must be coupled.
Protection of the Sacramento – San Joaquin Delta Estuary and the supply of water through the Delta for users in the San Joaquin Valley and Southern California are of equal importance to the future of California.
― The Delta is a valuable natural asset and unique multi-faceted special place with the largest estuary on the West Coast of North and South America which must be protected and preserved for future generations. ― The Delta also is the source and “switching yard” for vital water supply for people, farms and factories throughout California that is critical to quality of life and economic prosperity.
Protecting these two beneficial uses and fixing the Delta requires a comprehensive solution including both conservation and construction.
― Increasing demand for water from a growing population and expanding economy requires significant improvements in water use efficiency throughout California, including conservation, water reuse and recycling, conjunctive use, watershed management and voluntary transfers. ― New storage and improved conveyance must be constructed to capture water that is truly surplus to the environment and efficiently move it to areas of need so that environmental impacts from the operations of the current system can be reduced. Strategically-located levees must be strengthened or rebuilt.
Construction of facilities must couple storage and conveyance to operate the system with sufficient flexibility to protect both the environment and economy.
― New storage facilities—both surface and groundwater—are needed to capture surplus water and retain it for dry years so that exports of out the Delta can be reduced while meeting water supply needs south of the Delta. ― Conveyance alone seriously compromises the ability to protect the estuary and provide sufficient flows. Sunne Wright McPeak September 20, 2007 53 Delta Vision Task Force Framework of Principles
E + E
C + C
S + C
Estuary (Environment) + Exports (Economy)
Conservation + Construction
Storage + Conveyance
54
Structure of 8/10 Board Agenda & Day of the Board Meeting 8 SURVEYS RETURNED What did you like most about the structure of the 8/10 agenda? • Visiting with a work group. • I thought we had a more detailed focus on the really big issues. The more in depth presentations encouraged more Board engagement and discussion than we had had before. • The amount and breadth of issues covered in one day. • Not much. • Good agenda items and reports. • Well organized. What did you like the least about the structure of the 8/10 agenda? • Personal introductions take a long time, but are necessary. • The afternoon really dragged on. Although the topics were relevant, there didn’t seem to be much energy and involvement on the part of the general board. • Amount of time spent on Work Group reports (if there was no new significant business from before). • (2) Too long, can read reports instead. • The problem was the length on some of the items/subjects. What was the most valuable to you on 8/10? • Feedback from work groups • We took some informed actions. • Getting caught up on the work being done. • Getting to know board members. • High Speed Rail, Water update, statewide report • Information highway. What was the least valuable to you on 8/10? • The routine updates. • Long day • Committee reports were too detailed. A quick briefing would be better. • Redundancy on certain topics. Please provide your thoughts on the length of the 8/10 meeting. • The total hours devoted to the meeting were ok. • An alternative meeting structure is preferred! • Need executive reports to be read by board members, and focus on priority items of the board, not all funded partners. • Too long. I think the meeting could have been wrapped up within 4-5 hours. • Probably should focus shorter presentations. Would you be more interested in an alternative meeting structure, such as meeting during the afternoon of the board dinner and then finishing the meeting by noon the next day? • Yes - One day meeting would be better • (2) NO • I would consider it. It would break the day up, but may be a hardship on some. It might get more people to attend the dinner which would be beneficial for networking. • (2) Yes! Going past 2:00 on a Friday is rough for those of us traveling. • I am fine either way--- it will just depend on my schedule. How would you prefer to engage on issues? (Mark all that apply) • Email updates on work group meetings • Shorten the length of reports. Just highlight priorities, not every action. Become educated and informed on issues related to the Partnership (6/8) • Develop a deep understanding on critical issues so we as a Board can really decide how we want to engage the issue. • Read some materials in advance rather than hear reports again on the next day. Advocacy (4/8) • This should be explored and discussed in-depth. I suspect there are many strong opinions pro & con. • Some interest Involvement with Work Groups (4/8) • Limited • Selectively • Some interest 55 • Air quality, water, high speed rail Other: Please explain (0/8) • Big Issues – Both sides presented How do you suggest that the board deal with non-primary topics? • Sub groups • Written material • Rather than talk about all of them at every meeting perhaps have a more detailed presentation on particular topics on every nine (?) months or so. • Depending on the topic, email may be sufficient with quick recaps at the meeting. • Not deal with them. • Brief updates • E-mail, reports, consent calendar? Additional Comments and Suggestions: • Eliminate dinner, have a working breakfast with work group committees and board members. • It was a very successful meeting and wonderfully organized. Great job to all of the organizers and conveners. As indicated above, I think all the updates are important, but some could have been shortened significantly to keep a better and more engaging meeting flow. • This success of the Partnership will hinge key deliverables. My concern is that we have too much on our plate. I suggest that we focus on several key areas (air quality, etc.), and that the work groups be given the latitude to continue their work at the work group level. Additionally, much of what is done at the work group level fails in the category of information, education, outreach. These areas should remain a focus of the Partnership, in particular at the staff level. ] • Unfortunately, some presenters “present” too long and then when others present, they leave the table, leave the building or engage in conversation with others. • Expand the governance role of our functions in making recommendation to the Gov for specific projects, ie., research in higher ed, Workforce Board collaboration for training. Work Group Involvement How would you prefer to be updated on the ongoing work group efforts? Read quarterly summary sent in board packet. (6/8) • I prefer concise, meaningful summaries. Brief verbal updates at board meeting. (5/8) Ongoing email updates as appropriate. (5/8) • When urgent? • As long as they say something new Additional Comments and Suggestions: • Quarterly summary should report on target goals. • E-mail briefings as needed (as suggested-include them in Mike’s daily update), with a BRIEF verbal report once or twice a year at the board meeting to help with continuity. Strongly Strongly Board Packet Agree Disagree Agree Disagree I am satisfied with the level of detail included. 6 2 I am satisfied receiving an emailed package of the board agenda and 3 1 2 supporting documents prior to the board meeting. I am satisfied receiving a hard copy in the mail prior to the board 5 2 meeting. I would prefer receiving a hard copy at the board meeting instead of in 1 4 1 the mail. Overall, I am satisfied with the Board Packet. 5 2 Additional Comments and Suggestions • I prefer my packet mailed in advance, and do not need another one at the meeting. Strongly Overall Communications Agree Neutral Disagree Agree I am satisfied with the amount of updates I receive 4 1 1 I am satisfied with the monthly newsletter “The Partnership Update” 3 2 Overall, I am satisfied with the Partnership Communications 4 2 Additional Comments and Suggestions: • Would like to see e-mail updates on work group performance and issues. • Mike Luken’s daily update is the best way for me to keep up to speed. I would recommend expanding it to include informational updates on work groups, meetings. Calendar. Good job, Mike! 56
Health and Human Services
Index
Description Page No.
HHS – Health: Work Group Update 58
HHS – Health: Health Reform 2007 Impact on the Valley 61
HHS – Health: San Joaquin Valley Health Enterprise Zone Project 80
HHS – Health: Health Enterprise Zone Task Force 93
HHS – Social Services: Work Group Update 95
HHS – Social Services: Methamphetamine Recovery Project Framework 97
HHS – San Joaquin Valley Nursing Education Consortium Progress Update 99
57
Work Group Consultants’ Update 11/09/07
Work Group: HHS Health Consultant: Dr. John Capitman/L. Primavera Organization: Central Valley Health Policy Institute (CVHPI)
The Central Valley Health Policy Institute (CVHPI) at California State University, Fresno works closely with the Public Health Partnership (representing public health leaders from throughout the region) and several task work groups. This report highlights recent efforts with respect to two of the activities included in Goal 2: Enhance Access to appropriate health care services and improved public health management. Completed and planned efforts on other activities have been summarized in quarterly reports.
Health Activities by Goal and Objective
Goal 2, Objective A: Provide incentives for difficult to recruit health and medical professionals Action: Develop region-wide strategic plan for enterprise zones and financial incentives (Health enterprise zone project) 1. Activities to identify necessary elements of a Health Enterprise Zone to attract and retain providers; a. Regional Health Enterprise Zone Task Force in place b. Consulting team from the California Partnership in place and include Economic Development, Higher Education, Workforce Development, K-12 Education, Land Use, Agriculture and Housing and ACS. c. First Task Force meeting held September 15th to define the scope of work and develop the work plan. d. CVHPI research team is conducting interviews with authors and implementers of HEZ legislation in other states for lessons learned. e. CVHPI is currently reviewing Tulare County’s proposal for a Healthcare Incentive Zone and will access and review a workforce document produced by San Joaquin County. f. CVHPI is analyzing Physician-Related Data Resource data to calculate specific population rates for identified physician specialists to better define the problem of access in the Valley. g. Conducting interviews (25-35) with providers, recruiters and health business consultants to identify attractive incentives. • October 10th Public Health Partnership update • October 15th Meeting with Marcy Masumoto, Project Manager of the K-12 Education Work Group to discuss overlapping interests in developing programs for medical support staff • October 22 meeting with Kaweah Delta Health Care District and their legislative advocates, CJ Strategies, to discuss federal strategies for recruiting and retaining physicians in shortage areas • October 24th meeting with the Tulare/Kings Hospital Council to present and receive feedback on the HEZ project
58 • October 30th meeting with the California Program on Access to Care (University of California Office of the President), Gilbert Ojeda to discuss the HEZ concept • November 1st meeting with the Fresno/Madera Hospital Council to present and receive feedback on the HEZ concept.
Next steps over the next two quarters involve the following activities:
• Schedule presentations with Valley medical societies, the UCSF Family Practice residents, the regional federal department directors through Rollie Smith, and the Central California Economic Development Corporation. • Meet with Maureen Larkin, Director of Physician Recruitment at Adventist Health in Hanford to discuss their success in recruiting physicians. • Schedule meetings with regional representatives from the state legislature, 8-county Board of Supervisors and City government representatives. • The second Regional Task Force meeting will be March 2008. • Based on statewide and regional conversations and interest, CVHPI will be developing a policy brief that describes current programs/resources available to address health professional shortages in the Valley and to respond as to why these particular programs currently fail to address the unique needs of the Valley
Challenges:
Although there is enormous interest across the region about the HEZ project, the greatest current challenge is the development of consensus around the scope of a Health Enterprise Zone area. The scope of the project needs to determine the types of professionals to be included in a HEZ, i.e., primary care, specialty care, dental care, allied care and/or other professionals.
Goal 2, Objective C: Develop a regional plan to address the needs of the uninsured • California State Rural Health Association requested use of CVHPI’s June, 2007 report, Health Reform 2007: Impact on the Valley (Riordan and Capitman) and technical assistance in developing an analysis of the impact of the various health reform proposals on rural health in the State. The report is complete and posted on the CSRHA website. Dr. Capitman, Executive Director and Deborah Riordan, Health Policy Analyst are acknowledged for their contribution to this publication. • 8/11CVHPI participated in the California Speaks public forum specific to health reform • 8/13 Dr. Capitman and Deborah Riordan participated on a phone call with Herb Schultz, Governor’s office specific to health reform • 8/16 Deborah Riordan participated on the CRSHA call with Herb Schultz, Governor’s office specific to health reform • Capitman and Riordan provided numerous presentations on Health Reform throughout the Valley this past quarter, including 9/5 presentation to the Fresno Madera Medical Society, 9/25 talk for the Blueprint Leadership Training. • A Healthy Communities Access Program (HCAP) meeting was held with Assistant Secretary Kim Belches’ office staff on August 23rd, 2007. The purpose of the
59 meeting was to discuss the needs of the uninsured in the Valley. Norma Forbes, Executive Director for HCAP, Tim Curley, Director for Business and Government Relations for Children’s Hospital Central California, Dr. Edward Moreno, Director and Public Health Officer for Fresno County Health Department and Laurie Primavera, Associate Director for CVHPI will be participants in the meeting.
Next steps and Challenges:
Health care financing and delivery system reforms lie at the center of all efforts to address access to appropriate health services in the San Joaquin Valley, because of its low-income population, large uninsured populations, and heavy reliance on public financing. Finding long-term solutions to challenges as diverse as reimbursement rates to providers of public-financed care, access to acute care and specialty services in rural communities, and health professional shortages and maldistribution will be stymied until the fundamental financing challenges are addressed. While some of the policy options being debated at the state and national levels may promote more efficient and effective approaches to health care financing and delivery in the region, our work has pointed to a set of unique demographic, health care access, and health system resource challenges facing our region. The Partnership can delay planning and problem solving around health care financing and delivery until there is a clear state and national progress on crafting and implementing reforms or begin articulating a regional consensus on a San Joaquin Valley strategy.
60 Policy Brief June 2007
C C CCentral H CaliforniaH S Center for Health and Human Services Central Valley Health Policy Institute Health Reform 2007 Impact on the Valley
Deborah Gibbs Riordan, PT, MPH John Amson Capitman, PhD
California State University, Fresno College of Health and Human Services61 Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank the following people for their invaluable assistance with the publication of this report.
Editing and Design Cheryl McKinney Paul
Event Planning and Administrative Support Shelley Hoff Latricia Washington
Web Support Carla Hawks
Leadership and Project Support Carole Chamberlain, Program Offi cer, The California Endowment Benjamin Cuellar, Dean, College of Health and Human Services, California State University, Fresno Laurie Primavera, Associate Director, Central Valley Health Policy Institute The Members of the Regional Advisory Council, Central Valley Health Policy Institute
Central Valley Health Policy Institute The Central Valley Health Policy Institute was established in 2002 at California State University, Fresno to facilitate regional research, leadership training and graduate education programs to address emerging health policy issues that infl uence the health status of people living in the San Joaquin Valley. The Institute was funded in July, 2003 by The California Endowment, in partnership with the University, to promote health policy and planning in the region. Additional information about the Central Valley Health Policy Institute, it’s programs and activities (including this report), a health related calendar, and academic and community resources may be found at: www.csufresno.edu/ccchhs
Central Valley Health Policy Institute Central California Center for Health and Human Services College of Health and Human Services California State University, Fresno 1625 E. Shaw Avenue, Suite 146 Fresno, CA 93710-8106 559.228.2150 Fax: 559.228.2168 Suggested Citation Riordan, D.G., and Capitman, J. (2007, June). Health Reform 2007: Impact on the Valley. Fresno, CA: California State University, Fresno.
Copyright Information Copyright © 2007 by California State University, Fresno. This report may be printed and distributed free of charge for academic or planning purposes without the written permission of the copyright holder. Citation as to source, however, is appreciated. Distribution for profi t of this material is prohibited without specifi c permission of the copyright holder.
This brief was supported through a grant from the California Endowment to California State University, Fresno. The views expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily refl ect those of the funders or the University.
62 HEALTH REFORM 2007: IMPACT ON THE VALLEY
INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND
In a bold and historical move that has riveted the attention Californians, like others in the United States, fi nd themselves of the nation, as well as other states, California’s Governor in a climate of increasing public concern regarding the cost, Schwarzenegger has committed to making 2007 the year quality and availability of health coverage. California’s of healthcare reform for the state. Healthcare reform has size, world ranking economy, diversity and large number of typically been a political “no-win” situation because of unauthorized residents provide a unique set of challenges for the broad disagreements among advocates, healthcare health reform. In spite of the Governor’s bipartisan legislative stakeholders, and public offi cials about desired goals and successes in 2006, health care reform debates have been methods for reform. The Governor has taken up the challenge fashioned around decidedly partisan philosophies. by proposing a comprehensive, shared responsibility proposal that mandates universal coverage. The proposal Republicans insist that the number and needs of the uninsured has elicited statements of concern from almost every special are exaggerated and that expanding public coverage is too interest group while setting the bar quite high for competing expensive. Instead they propose increasing the fl exibility proposals. Although the Governor has yet to put his proposal of the insurance market while offering tax incentives and in legislative language, it has remained a major player in potentially less expensive plans with high deductibles. California’s health reform debate. California now fi nds itself The Republicans propose that these plans will increase in the spotlight and how this debate plays out will likely have the affordability of insurance and effectively decrease the considerable infl uence on the national health reform debate number of uninsured Californians while continuing to that is rapidly becoming one of the most visible issues in the allow residents a choice in their insurance coverage. The 2008 Presidential race. Republicans also want to improve access by increasing Medi-Cal provider rates and supporting the “neighborhood The San Joaquin Valley now has a unique opportunity to clinic” model of primary care. infl uence health policy and healthcare reform by giving a voice to the health disparities experienced by its residents Democrats see the challenge of uninsured and under- and infl uencing the negotiations that are ongoing as the insured Californians as one of several indicators of a health reform debate heats up failed private market for healthcare. They want to leverage federal resources, while increasing employer and consumer A number of events have given Valley residents an opportunity responsibility for providing coverage to their employees. The to input into the process, including a business health summit Governor has proposed a comprehensive plan that stresses sponsored by Assembly Minority Leader Mike Villines on shared responsibility. Whether or not that responsibility is March 2, 2007; the Central Valley Health Policy Institute’s equally shared has been a contentious issue for consumers, annual conference Health Reform 2007: Impact on the Valley on March 22, 2007; the Town Hall Meeting sponsored by Assemblymember Juan Arambula and featuring Assembly Speaker, Fabian Núñez on May 12, 2007; a Central Valley Regional Network meeting for the Latino Coalition for a Healthy California on June 1st to discuss Latino health issues; and a number of events sponsored by It’s Our Healthcare! It’s Our Healthcare is a coalition of consumer advocates, seniors, health advocates, communities of faith, and labor united in supporting the campaign for quality, affordable healthcare for every Californian and working to ensure that the voice of the people of California is heard in the debate over healthcare reform.
1 63 HEALTH REFORM 2007: IMPACT ON THE VALLEY providers and employers. Governor Schwarzenegger.
Finally, SB 840, the single-payer health coverage bill has AN OVERVIEW OF THE enjoyed signifi cant grass root support but fi ghts strong MAJOR HEALTHCARE PROPOSALS opposition from insurers and businesses represented by the California Chamber of Commerce. The projected cost, Gov. Schwarzenegger’s Health Care Proposal 3-4 stigma against “government control” and the overwhelming The Governor’s plan focuses on “shared responsibility issues surrounding transition from a market-based to a single among employers, individuals, providers and government” payer model are signifi cant “road blocks” to this proposal. and proposes to cover all currently uninsured Californians. The plan includes an individual and an employer “pay or Federal issues that are infl uencing California’s debate include play” mandate as well as mandated fees to be collected the lack of comprehensive national immigration reform, the from health providers and hospitals. The plan also includes potential for ERISA challenges (see text box) to proposals expanded eligibility for public health insurance programs that promote an employer mandate and the assumption that for all children, regardless of documentation status, and federal funding will be available to match the proposed single, childless and poor adults (up to 100% of the federal expansions of public coverage, as in the reform proposals poverty level (FPL) or an income of $10,210 per year or from the Governor, California State Senator Don Perata and less) that are legal residents. Subsidized coverage would also California Assemblymember Fabian Núñez. be available for low-income individuals and families (up to 250% of the FPL, an income of $25,525 or less per year for Health care reform is not new to California. The Health an individual or $51,625 or less for a family of four) who Insurance Act of 2003 or Senate Bill 2 (SB 2) was an are legal California residents . Cost containment strategies employer “pay or play” measure passed by the legislature target prevention, health promotion and wellness programs. and signed by Governor Davis in 2003. SB 2 required large Insurance reforms include guaranteed issue (the requirement and medium sized California employers to either pay a that the insurer accept anyone who applies for coverage, fee to the state (pay) to provide health insurance for their regardless of pre-existing conditions or health status) and a employees or to provide coverage directly to their employees requirement that health plans must spend 85% of premiums (play). However, a coalition of business groups sponsored on patient care or a medical loss ratio of 85% (the ratio a referendum (Proposition 72), that sought to repeal the between the cost to deliver medical care and the amount of law prior to implementation. This action caused SB 2 to be money that was taken in by a plan). The plan estimates that placed on hold until the election in November 2004. SB 2 it can be fully funded through reallocation of county funds, was subsequently defeated, although it did receive 49% of assessments on employers and providers, and streamlining the vote. of state programs.
Senator Sheila Kuehl fi rst introduced single payer legislation AB 8, Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez’s Health in 2003 and her SB 840 bill, that included fi nance language, Care Coverage Legislation5 passed in both legislative houses in 2006 but was vetoed by This bill expands subsidized coverage to all children, regardless of documentation status in families with an The Employee Retirement Income Security Act income up to 300% of the FPL and expands subsidized (ERISA) was enacted in 1974 as a means of coverage to parents up to 300% of the FPL. It also establishes regulating fraud and mismanagement in pri- a state purchasing cooperative, the California Cooperative vate-sector employer and union pension plans. Health Insurance Purchasing Program, funded by employer It also established standards, reporting and contributions for those employers who choose not to offer disclosure requirements for employee benefi ts, health coverage to their employees and their dependents. including healthcare. These benefi t plans are Employees working for an employer that pays into the exempt from state insurance laws. As a result, Cooperative must enroll in a Cooperative coverage plan. recent ERISA legal challenges have generally The legislation has recently been amended to include the resulted in courts prohibiting states from requir- same insurance reform strategies (guarantee issue and 85% ing employers to provide healthcare coverage to medical loss ratio) as the Governor’s plan. The Núñez plan employees 1-2
2 64 HEALTH REFORM 2007: IMPACT ON THE VALLEY requires the California Health and Human Services Agency by the Lewin Group found that the total health spending for to develop health care provider performance benchmarks and California residents under the current system to be about encourage fi tness, wellness and health promotion programs. $184.2 billion for 2006, and that the single payer program Núñez’s plan also calls for the state to extend coverage, within would achieve universal coverage while reducing total fi ve years, to the estimated 2.5 million unemployed, low- spending in the state by a net $7.9 billion. 8 income or childless adults who lack insurance coverage. Senate Republican Caucus Proposal: SB 236 “Cal SB 48, Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata’s CARE” 9 Health Care Coverage Legislation 6 Cal CARE proposes that it will improve healthcare access for This legislation would require that all full-time and part- every Californian with more health care options and services time working/taxpaying Californians and their dependents, that are more affordable and cost-effi cient. It includes a in households earning above 400% of FPL ($40,840 for an number of specifi c strategies that address access, affordability individual and $82,600 for a family of four), have a minimum and choice. It includes no employer or individual mandates coverage policy. This minimum coverage is defi ned as and does not expand public health coverage. However, it benefi ts required of licensed California health plans plus does provide that funding for the California Families and prescription drug coverage. The plan creates a “Connector” Children Act of 1998 (Proposition 10) be directed totally or state purchasing pool that is funded by employer fees and towards funding local Children’s Health Initiatives under employee premiums. Employers would be mandated to pay the direction of First 5 California. Cal CARE also calls a certain percentage of employee wages for health care or for an increase in Medi-Cal provider rates to move toward pay into the Connector Trust Fund. Employee premiums parity with Medicare rates over an eight year period. Cal would be no more than 5% of annual income. Employees CARE would require that Medi-Cal services be more closely under 400% of the FPL, or for whom policy costs would be aligned with private health care benefi ts (decreasing the higher than the 5% limit, would be exempt from the coverage scope of services) which would require a federal waiver. mandate. It promotes the Health Savings Account/High Deductible Health Plan as a strategy for increasing the number California SB840 Senator Sheila Kuehl’s California Universal residents with health insurance. It also promotes tax credits Healthcare Act 7 for providers who offer care to the uninsured and dictates SB 840 fundamentally alters the fi nancing of health care that funding currently allocated for state-only programs for in California, shifting the current employer based/multi- the uninsured or underinsured be redirected to community payer system to a single fi nancing system. As proposed, health clinics. Additionally, the Senate Republican Caucus the bill will: 1) provide comprehensive medical benefi ts Proposal decreases the physician oversight requirement for to every California resident, 2) authorize participation of nurse practitioners and physician assistants running primary all licensed medical providers, 3) incorporate federal and care clinics in order to increase fl exibility for establishing other public programs into the universal system, 4) prohibit primary care clinics in underserved areas the sale of private health insurance, and 5) regulate health care costs. The program would be fi nanced with current Assembly Republican Caucus Health Care Reform government health care funding for incorporated federal/ Package 10 county programs, a payroll tax to replace employer benefi t The Assembly Republican Health Care Reform Package is a plans and other taxes to replace insurance premiums. The series of 18 bills that, like the Senate Republican proposal, measure would be governed by an appointed commissioner address maximizing choice, reducing cost, and increasing charged with establishing the universal system’s budget, access. There are several strategies that overlap with Cal setting rates, establishing expenditure limits, developing CARE including decreasing physician oversight on nurse a capital management plan, seeking all necessary waivers practitioner-run clinics, increasing Medi-Cal rates for and exemptions, and establishing equitable distribution of physicians and providing tax credits to physicians providing services and fi nancing. This bill contains the structure and charity care. The package also strongly supports the Health policy for a universal single payer system while the fi nancing Savings Account/High Deductible Plan as a strategy to provisions are in a companion measure, SB 1014 (Kuehl).8 increase affordability. However, it differs in a number of An actuarial analysis of a prior version of this legislation insurance reforms including creating a single group health
3 65 HEALTH REFORM 2007: IexpansionsMPACT ON THEof California’s VALLEY Healthy Families program. and worker’s compensation policy, guaranteeing coverage for pre-existing conditions, and allowing out-of-state insurers A SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY PERSPECTIVE to offer health benefi t plans to Californians. The package ON HEALTHCARE REFORM also supports a bill to allow an individual to waive specifi ed benefi ts currently required under state regulations as a More than 150 people including consumers, advocates, strategy to decrease insurance plan costs. The bill includes providers, policy researchers and community leaders language that would make it easier for small businesses to attended the Central Valley Health Policy Institute’s Health join together for the purpose of obtaining group rates from Reform 2007 conference. The conference provided extensive insurers. opportunity for individuals to ask questions, comment on proposals and voice issues of concern for the Valley with State health reform measures also must be considered within regard to healthcare reform. Issues raised at the conference the context of the national health policy debate. Critical provided the basis for this discussion of the San Joaquin to successful fi nancing of SB 840 is to seek and receive Valley Perspective on healthcare reform. Input from other a federal waiver so that current federal payments to the ongoing discussions of regional needs including other state for health care services continue. The waiver process health reform convenings, collaboration with the California may be contentious given the current administration’s Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley Health and Human perspective on health reform. The governor’s proposal and Services workgroup partners and meetings with state health both Democratic proposals rely on expanding eligibility policy experts also supported the identifi cation of key for public insurance. This will require an increased funding regional issues critical to the health reform debate. commitment and possibly regulatory changes from both the state and federal governments. The coverage expansion is Based on this process of collecting regional, community and within federal guidelines but the availability of funding may expert input on the elements of health reform proposed in be in question. The Governor and the Republican proposals California this year, ten key regional health reform issues also call for increasing Medi-Cal reimbursement rates which emerged. These issues can be grouped into three general again raises concerns about the availability of funding. categories: demographic issues, access issues, and resource Additionally, the State Children’s Health Insurance Program issues. Critical to the health reform discussion is that any is up for reauthorization, it has previously been funded under or all of the elements of reform “do no harm” to Valley a block grant, and may not be adequately funded to support
Health Reform 2007: Impact on the Valley March 22, 2007 Speakers
Dr. John Capitman Executive Director of the Central Valley Health Policy Institute - Moderator
Dr. David Carlisle Director, Offi ce of Statewide Health Planning and Development - Keynote Speaker
Robin Podolsky Press Secretary for Senator Sheila Kuehl’s District Offi ce
Agnes Lee Principal Consultant, Senate Offi ce of Research
Patricia Lynch Vice President, State Government Relations Services, Kaiser Permanente
Julie Griffi ths District Director, Assemblyman Mike Villines, Assembly Republican Leader
4 66 HEALTH REFORM 2007: IMPACT ON THE VALLEY residents.
DEMOGRAPHIC ISSUES The Knox Keene Act describes required basic benefi ts that must be offered by most Health Maintenance Racial/Ethnic Diversity The SJV is very diverse, with higher percentages of Organization (HMO) Plans and some Preferred Latino and Asian residents compared to the state as Provider Organization (PPO) plans. Any plan licensed a whole. Over 1,000,000 Latinos reside in the region under the California Department of Managed Care along with 111,000 “Other Asians” (Asians not of must include physician services, hospital inpatient Chinese or Japanese descent), primarily of Laotian and outpatient care, diagnostic lab and radiology and Hmong ethnicities.11 Given this diversity, it services, home health services, preventive health is important to Valley residents that health reform services, emergency health care, and hospice care. proposals include mandates to provide care that is both Knox-Keene does not require drug, vision or dental culturally respectful and linguistically competent. coverage.1 Senator Kuehl’s SB 840 legislation includes translation services as a benefi t. It also instructs the Director of the Offi ce of Health Planning to establish standards for culturally and linguistically competent care income band. The number of residents with incomes between and pursue federal funding for the provision of a “language 200% - 300% of the FPL includes 549,000 individuals or services” program. Benefi ts included in the Governor, Perata 15% of the regional population which compares to 13% of and Núñez plans will likely be similar to those mandated the entire state population in this income group. The Valley by the Knox-Keene Act (see text box) which includes basic also has signifi cantly more uninsured than the rest of the state. benefi ts and also lists the right of an enrollee to receive This increased percentage appears to be composed primarily assistance in his or her primary language. Other aspects of of adults living below 100% of the FPL. There are 172,000 promoting culturally responsive and respectful care are not of these poor uninsured adults in the San Joaquin Valley.11 addressed by these proposals. Also it is probable that this number is underestimated due to the number of undocumented agriculture workers in the Large Numbers of Poor Residents region. It is unclear whether the income limits on subsidized health care purchasing will disproportionately affect the Valley. Currently only parents with incomes under 100% of the What is clear is that the Valley is poorer than the state as a FPL are eligible for Medi-Cal. The Governor’s plan to cover whole, with 1,700,000 residents or almost 50% of the region documented adults at 100% FPL would address the needs of having incomes under 200% of the Federal Poverty Level the Valley as would SB 840. AB 8 would expand Medi-Cal (FPL). By comparison, 34% of all Californians are in this eligibility to parents up to 133% of the FPL and provide a
Table 1 San Joaquin Valley and California Poverty Levels, 2005
Federal Poverty San Joaquin Valley California Levels (FPL)*
%Number%Number
0-99% FPL 21.7% 799,000 15.1% 5,450,000
100-199% FPL 24.9% 918,000 19.6% 7,083,000
200-299% FPL 14.9% 549,000 13.0% 4,713,000
300% FPL and above 38.5% 1,420,000 52.3% 18,900,000
Source: 2005 California Health Survey11
* In 2007, for a single person, an income of $ 10,210 =100% of the FPL; $15,315 = 150% of the FPL $20,420 = 200% FPL; $25,525 = 250% FPL; $30,630 = 300% FPL; $40,840 = 400% FPL. 12
5 67 HEALTH REFORM 2007: IMPACT ON THE VALLEY
“benchmark” health plan for parents with incomes between party lines. Both the Senate and Assembly Republican Caucus 133% and 300% of the FPL. This “benchmark” plan would proposals emphatically refuse to cover either undocumented likely be similar to that of the current Healthy Families children or adults. SB 840 covers all individuals with the coverage. The bill also has intent language to cover childless “intent” to reside in California, regardless of documentation adults under 300% of the FPL within fi ve years. SB 48 also status. In the middle ground are the proposals from extends coverage that is identical to that of AB 8 to working Democratic legislative leaders and the Governor’s parents with incomes up to 300% of the FPL, but has no proposal with the intent to cover all children regardless of provision for childless adults. documentation status, but do not cover undocumented adults at any income level. Speaker Núñez’s proposal does include High Unemployment Rates intent language to cover childless adults with incomes below The San Joaquin Valley counties experience unemployment 300% of the FPL within fi ve years but it is not clear if this rates that are higher than two-thirds of other California would include unauthorized immigrants. counties.13 Proposals such as AB8 and SB46 (Nunez and Perata) tie expanding coverage and affordable coverage The Governor’s plan seeks to levy a hospital and provider products to employment status. They do not address seasonal fee (4% and 2% respectively) as a return on the increased employment or multiple employers and, as a result, these bills Medi-Cal rates included in his proposal. His proposal also would have less impact on increasing coverage in the Valley redirects $2 billion currently in the safety-net care pool, and than other parts of the state. The result for the Valleymay used by public hospitals for the provision of uncompensated be increases in local administrative costs and a decrease in health care for the uninsured, to the new purchasing pool. continuity of care due to “churning”, a continuing process of The Governor is using these measures to fund his proposal. enrollment and disenrollment as residents move in and out Cal-CARE also proposes transferring funding from safety of employment. net hospitals to primary care clinics. It would require that state-only program funding that provides health care to The Governor’s individual mandate would be enforced uninsured or underinsured individuals be targeted towards regardless of employment status which could force more community clinics and health centers. State-only funding for Valley residents into minimum coverage policies. Similarly, hospital services to unauthorized residents may be then at the elements of the Republican proposals that include High risk. Deductible Plans linked to Health Savings Accounts also are not responsive to the demographics of a population that is An “employer mandate” (as defi ned in the Perata, Núñez, and predominantly the working poor. SB 840 separates health Governor’s proposals) has a different meaning for employers coverage from employment and would more effi ciently that hire unauthorized immigrants in that the employer would address employment characteristics unique to the valley. be paying for healthcare that his/her workers generally could not access. Agricultural employers in the San Joaquin Large Numbers of Unauthorized/Undocumented Valley would be particularly vulnerable to this “Catch-22” Residents as they would not be able to admit to illegal hiring practices, Although there are no credible surveys identifying the actual their “undocumented” and uninsured workers would not be number of unauthorized immigrant adults in the San Joaquin eligible for new coverage, and yet, these employers would Valley, it is probable that the Valley is home to a signifi cant number given the availability of agriculture, construction and service jobs. This population’s health will continue to be the responsibility of counties and the Valley’s safety net system under all the health reform proposals, except SB 840. Any measures that propose to transfer current funding for the uninsured from safety net providers will increase the fragility of those systems and impact the health of unauthorized immigrants.
Responses to concerns regarding providing health care for unauthorized residents in California are also poised along
6 68 HEALTH REFORM 2007: IMPACT ON THE VALLEY be required to pay into the system.
ACCESS ISSUES
Disproportionate Number of Publicly Insured and Uninsured Residents working individuals/families above 300% of the FPL. Out- The San Joaquin Valley suffers from both higher percentages of-pocket costs such as deductibles and co-payments have of Medi-Cal enrollees per population and a higher number not been determined in these plans although the Núñez plan of uninsured residents, for all or part of the year, than does indicate that cost-sharing would be minimal for primary the state as a whole and most other regions in the state.11, and preventive care. 14 All of the proposals seek a decrease in the number of uninsured persons. The proposed strategies vary widely on Senator Kuehl’s single-payer plan imposes a 3.78% payroll their potential to impact the uninsured poor. The Governor, tax on employees that is the full cost of the health coverage Senate Republicans and Assembly Republicans hope to premium; however wages below $7,000 will be exempt from make healthcare insurance more affordable by allowing the tax. Deductibles and co-payments for primary care are insurers fl exibility. These proposals also rely heavily High prohibited by the plan. Deductible Health Plans along with tax free Health Savings Accounts as an effective strategy for increasing coverage. The elements of the Perata and Núñez legislation would However, these plans are untenable for low and middle result in health insurance coverage for approximately 69% income individuals and families and other marginalized of currently uninsured adults and children. The Governor’s populations. High Deductible Health Plans offer lower plan and SB 840 propose that all individuals will have premiums in exchange for higher deductibles and are usually insurance coverage albeit from very divergent strategies. linked with a tax-free health savings account. Low and The Governor’s individual mandate without exclusions will middle-income earners generally do not benefi t from this be diffi cult to enforce and does not provide for affordable, tax subsidy due to their marginal tax rates and small income usable coverage for individuals and families above 250% of tax liability.15,16 The high deductible plans which generally the FPL. It also does not include those individuals that are range from around $1000 per person to as high as $10,000 undocumented and not paying into the state tax system. SB annually encourage individuals and families to forego less 840 includes all individuals with intent to reside in California expensive, preventative health care. For low and middle- with premium costs that are progressive in that they are a income individuals and families this means that routine percentage of taxable wage earnings. The Republican Senate healthcare must compete with other monthly necessities such and Assembly proposals offer no expansion of insurance as food and rent.17-19 The Governor, Senate Republicans and coverage to Californians although aligning state tax credits Assembly Republicans also propose increasing affordability with federal tax credits for Health Savings Accounts and by allowing insurers greater fl exibility in the number/scope increasing insurer’s fl exibility in plan design may result in of benefi ts they are required to offer. This cost containment the affl uent uninsured opting to become insured. strategy has the potential for increasing out of pocket costs and decreasing access for needed services for unforeseen Shortage and Maldistribution of Health medical conditions that employers and/or individuals have Professionals/Lower Reimbursement Rates “opted out” of coverage. The San Joaquin Valley experiences greater shortages of health professionals than other regions in the state.20 This The Governor’s proposal, although providing a subsidized challenge is compounded by the Valley’s rural environment purchasing pool for individuals with incomes from 100%- and large numbers of publicly insured and uninsured 250% of the FPL, also includes a $500 deductible/$3,000 residents. Medi-Cal reimbursement rates are lower than other out-of-pocket maximum which, according to Health Access areas in the state, creating a disproportionate burden on those California calculations (personal communication with Hanh professionals that do provide care to uninsured, underinsured Quach of Health Access), could add up to as much as 1/3 of and publicly insured patients. The Republican proposals most a benefi ciary’s income. The Perata/Núñez proposals expand clearly address the maldistribution of health professionals. subsidized coverage for families with incomes up to 300% The Assembly Republican Caucus has sponsored a bill of the FPL and also provide for more affordable options to to relax the physician supervision requirements on nurse
7 69 HEALTH REFORM 2007: IMPACT ON THE VALLEY practitioners who run clinics. This measure could effectively increase the number of clinics available in underserved Public health investments at the county level urban fringe and rural neighborhoods (AB 1643). They in California are supported through multiple have also sponsored a bill with the intent to raise Medi-Cal Federal, state and county sources. One of the reimbursement rates for doctors (AB 1312) as well as a bill that creates a tax credit for uncompensated care provided largest sources of public health funding is de- by doctors (AB 1592). The Senate Republican proposal rived from Realignment. This mechanism, es- also includes strategies to decrease physician oversight on tablished in 1991, transfers a portion of local clinics managed by nurse practitioners and other physician revenues from sales tax and vehicle license extenders, such as physician’s assistants. It also increases fees, as well as some State general funds to the Medi-Cal rates for non-physician providers. The Senate counties, to fund a broad range of programs Republicans would make increased Medi-Cal reimbursement based on prior investments by the counties. rates a budget priority over the next eight years, bringing These programs include Community Health them towards parity with Medicare rates. The Governor’s and Indigent health care services.23 proposal would increase physician, hospital outpatient and inpatient and health plan Medi-Cal rates but also assesses a fee on hospitals and physicians of 4% and 2% of gross revenues respectively. The timeline for implementing the Govenor’s provider rate increase, or the fee assessment on RESOURCE ISSUES hospitals and physicians, is not outlined in the proposal. Historical Underfunding of Public Health in the It should be noted that increasing Medi-Cal reimbursement San Joaquin Valley rates is highly dependent on federal fi nancial participation, There is consensus that the relatively lower tax base and high as the federal government matches state Medi-Cal rates of poverty in the San Joaquin Valley have resulted in a spending dollar for dollar. Proposals under the current long-term pattern of lower investment in public health than federal administration to cut Medicaid spending places this is experienced in other regions of the state. This disparity assumption in jeopardy.21 Proposed statewide increases has been linked to inequities in realignment fund distribution in provider Medi-Cal reimbursement rates also do not (see text box). An analysis of county public health spending specifi cally address disparities in reimbursement rates found that the Valley counties were spending over 80% less, experienced by providers in the San Joaquin Valley. per capita, on residents living in poverty that other counties SB 840 may have the most regional impact through the with only 5% of county budgets in the Valley allocated to establishment of ten health planning regions within the public health.22 Again regional inequities in funding have not state. Each planning region will have a Regional Planning been addressed in any of the proposals other than with SB Director and Medical Offi cer with the responsibility to assess 840. It is possible that through the establishment of health regional needs and the opportunity to advocate for resources planning regions and strong regional leadership through to address those needs through negotiations with the state the director and medical offi cer appointments, that regional Health Commissioner. Providers may have an opportunity to inequities could be addressed. increase their reimbursement rates through negotiations with the Health Commissioner. However, none of the proposals Disproportionate Chronic Disease, Lack of directly addresses or provides specifi c mechanisms to Coordinated Care, Disease Management ensure that Medi-Cal reimbursement rates are equitable Programs across California regions nor do they propose strategies that The rates of both asthma and diabetes are higher in the address the shortage of health professionals in the Valley, San Joaquin Valley than in any other region in the state. particularly in rural areas. California Department of Health statistics indicate that four of the Valley counties rank highest in the state for deaths due to diabetes.24 Analysis of 2005 California Health Interview Survey data found that the San Joaquin Valley had a higher
8 70 HEALTH REFORM 2007: IMPACT ON THE VALLEY
residents. percentage of residents with asthma visit an urgent care provider or emergency room in the past 12 months when Insurance reforms that guarantee coverage for pre-existing compared to every other region in the state.11 Inadequate conditions, included in the Perata, Núñez and Governor’s management of chronic health conditions is linked to other proposals, may increase the opportunity for individuals with regional health issues including health professional shortages, chronic disease to access disease management programs lower reimbursement rates, underfunding of public health but, without insurance rate regulation, affordability may still services and a lack of long term care infrastructure. It is also be a problem. The weakening of coverage requirements for impacted by the large immigrant population, lower levels of private insurance plans included in the Governor’s and the health literacy, and poor air quality in the Valley. Senate and Assembly Republican proposals may result in increasing numbers of Californians whose health insurance Chronic disease management is an element of the Governor, does not provide adequate coverage for chronic disease Perata and Núñez proposals. These proposals focus on the management. potential for long-term health care cost savings that may be achieved through disease prevention and greater assumption The Republican proposals have addressed guaranteed of individual responsibility for health. None of these coverage for pre-existing conditions by increasing funding proposals address the underlying disparities in health status to the current state run high risk pool program, the Major or the inadequacy of healthcare and the lack of preventive Risk Medical Insurance Program25 (see text box) but costs health services that plague Valley communities. Senator for coverage through this program are still high with Sheila Kuehl’s proposal also emphasizes preventive care monthly premiums ranging from 125% to 137.5% of a and proposes no co-payments for other types of care for the plan’s standard average individual rate.26 Ironically, disease fi rst two years of the proposal. It is not clear whether there or case management services are not required of health plans might be costs associated with chronic disease management providing coverage for individuals in this program. in the future. The Kuehl proposal would also use funds that currently go to counties for chronic disease prevention Lack of Infrastructure for Long Term Care and management programming as a funding component of Long-term care for the frail aged and others with disabilities the single-payer system. Counties would have the option remains one of the most signifi cant drivers of healthcare of fi nding new funding sources to continue these efforts, costs and public liability growth. California once led the which would have an unknown effect on San Joaquin Valley nation in long-term care fi nancing and delivery innovations intended to permit more elders and others with disabilities to remain in home and community settings. However, program development has not kept pace with the growth of this sector The Major Risk Medical Insurance Program of the population. is a purchasing pool that serves people insur- ers refuse to cover due to pre-existing con- The inadequacy of regional infrastructure to address the long ditions and/or concerns about medical risk. term care needs of residents of the San Joaquin Valley is Services are delivered through contracts with directly related to the rural nature and youth of the population. health insurance plans. Subscribers pay pre- However, the region has experienced explosive growth in miums that cover 62% of program costs with part due to in-migration by urban ‘baby boomers” from the remainder covered by state appropriation. more expensive locations in the Bay Area or Los Angeles through equity transfers. As this group ages, the shortage The length of participation in the program is of resources to address chronic health conditions and their limited to 36 months. The program is man- impacts on functioning will reach “crises” proportions. SB aged by the Major Risk Medical Insurance 840 does identify rehabilitative care, hospice care, home Program (MRMIB) who also manages Cal- health care and adult day care as covered services. Skilled ifornia’s State Children’s Health Insurance nursing facility care is limited to 100 days which is the length Program and Healthy Families.25 of time covered under Medicare. Proposals that include “Knox-Keene” basic benefi ts (Perata, Núñez and Governor’s subsidized care) would be required to include hospice care
9 71 HEALTH REFORM 2007: IMPACT ON THE VALLEY equal to the provisions under Medicare Part A27 and up to and coverage limitations continue to produce access barriers. 100 home health visits per year. There are no provisions for For example, safety net clinics in the Valley consistently skilled nursing care in the Perata, Núñez and Governor’s voice concerns over lack of access to behavioral health proposals. SB 840 has the potential to direct new attention services for both children and adults. to improving access to comprehensive community-oriented long term care services through its broad coverage and the Additionally, regulatory barriers persist for publicly insured development of regional health planning roles. However, as patients that disallow payment for same day mental health with the other proposals, SB 840 does not call for focusing services after a primary care visit. Medi-Cal will also not new policies and resources on long-term care. reimburse for services provided by a Masters in Social Work (MSW) mental health provider. SB 840 is the only proposal Need for Integration of Behavioral Health/ that is openly inclusive of behavioral health and substance Substance Abuse Services with Primary Care abuse services. Both the Perata and Núñez proposals do not The issue of mental health care parity has been the subject specifi cally address these services, although the implication of national debates, but has been somewhat overlooked in is that coverage will be comprehensive and include benefi ts the health reform discussion in California. Behavioral health currently required by licensed California health plans (Knox- and substance abuse challenges are known to increase the Keene Act protections) which include some mental health risk of needing other health services, and poor management coverage but no substance abuse treatment provisions.31 of behavioral health problems is often mentioned as a key The Governor’s proposal indicates that subsidized coverage factor in excessive use of emergency medical services. will include these “Knox-Keene” basic benefi ts. However, Historical patterns of mental health/substance abuse funding, individuals not eligible for subsidized coverage may be primarily through realignment funds, have left San Joaquin vulnerable to diminished coverage for behavioral health as Valley counties with inadequate resources to meet mental they look for affordable coverage in the private marketplace. health needs. New funding through the 2004 Proposition 63 The Governor’s and the Senate and Assembly Republican Mental Health Services Act is not expected to be suffi cient proposals open up the opportunity for insurers to decrease to signifi cantly reduce unmet need among the most severely reimbursement for behavioral health and substance abuse mentally ill or among those who seek assistance in primary services by easing the scope of services restrictions on care settings.28-30 insurers. None of the proposals identify specifi c strategies to improve the access to and the delivery of behavioral health Medi-Cal funds mental health/behavioral health services in and substance abuse services to Californians. primary care and other settings. However, provider capacity
Concerns Voiced by Community Members
1. Pharmaceutical costs 2. Minimal coverage criteria 3. Fraud 4. Workman’s Comp integrated into the proposals 5. 2% physician fees for state-employed MDs and FQHC docs 6. Insurance needs of undocumented farm-workers 7. Complexity of Medi-Cal billing system 8. Guaranteed issue/Concern about increase premium costs 9. 15% Administrative cap will drive insurers out of the state and will do nothing to decrease premium costs 10. Excess profi ts for insurance companies 11. Should the payroll tax on employers be progressive?
10 72 HEALTH REFORM 2007: IMPACT ON THE VALLEY
RECOMMENDATIONS/NEXT STEPS
The nation is looking to states as “laboratories” of health Addressing the San Joaquin Valley’s unique concerns in reform. Modeling proposals will never adequately predict healthcare reform could be an additional goal in the health all costs, short and long-term health outcomes or unintended reform debate. Below is a list of policy options that address consequences. It is in the best interest of the region that we the issues and concerns of Valley residents and could be encourage thoughtful reform in the broadest of contexts incorporated in a state health reform program: and avoid piecemeal solutions that refl ect the power of special interests. At a recent Families USA Health Action Demographic Issues Conference, Senator Barak Obama pointed out that we are in the midst of an important historical moment on health care 1. Cultural respect and linguistic competency standards, that we have not seen for over 40 years, since the Medicare that refl ect the need and diversity in the Valley, should bill was signed into law in 1965. “Plans that tinker and be incorporated into all health reform proposals. These halfway measures now belong to yesterday.” 32 standards must be developed and enforced based on a review of national and international best practices. As the reform debate continues to weave its way through Accountability should be built into pay for performance partisanship and special interests towards a compromise it is initiatives as they are developed for public insurance critical that stakeholders be wary of incremental programs. legislation and support resolutions that are balanced and responsive to the needs of Valley residents, while doing 2. National or state immigration reform would both clarify no harm. None of the plans are specifi cally responsive to and simplify the application of all of the health reform the array of unique San Joaquin Valley health needs. SB proposals. If any proposal other than Senator Kuehl’s 840 comes closest to providing the opportunity to address SB 840 legislation is implemented an unfair burden will inadequate and disproportionate funding of Valley health be placed on Valley counties as their responsibility for through the establishment of Health Planning Regions. providing health care for unauthorized/undocumented However, most of the regional issues and concerns addressed uninsured will continue. Reform proposals must here could be included in any of the proposals without adequately fund counties with a disproportionate share major structural change. Despite broad philosophical of unauthorized/undocumented residents. differences each of the proposals includes some strategy or strategies that would improve either coverage, 3. It is critical to the success of any health reform measure access or quality of health care for Valley residents. that the feasibility for implementing the employer and individual mandate be articulated in detail with specifi c Clearly it is important to keep in mind that all of the attention to implementation plans. It is not clear from plans are subject to future appropriations of both federal any of the proposals whether funding mechanisms and state funds to expand coverage and improve access. derived from either individual or employer contributions For example, Speaker Núñez’s bill states, “The premium unfairly impact Valley businesses and residents. True assistance benefi t… shall only apply to individuals and costs for individuals must be assessed that include all their dependents when the State Department of Health Care out-of-pocket health care costs, including co-payments, Services determines that it is cost effective for the state.” 5 deductibles and non-covered services such as dental and vision. Health care costs that drive employers to decrease Other than SB 840, which does away with the insurance the number of employees or move out of California will industry in its entirety, the proposals presented that do not increase the economic “health” of Californians or address regulation of insurers do not address the regulation increase the number of insured. of rates as a cost-driver. Skyrocketing pharmaceutical costs are also not addressed, although SB 840 proposes negotiated governmental bulk purchase of pharmaceuticals.
11 73 HEALTH REFORM 2007: IMPACT ON THE VALLEY
4. The considerable number of seasonal and possibly idea that Medi-Cal patients are diffi cult to care for and undocumented agricultural, service and construction that paperwork is burdensome, must be addressed. workers in the Valley presents a coverage issue that is Additional issues affecting enhanced reimbursement diffi cult for any of the proposals to address and traditional rates include the need for the state legislature to health coverage may not be viable in this industry sector. support reimbursement increases regardless of federal SB 840 separates coverage from employment but does participation. Increased reimbursement should be for all not completely address the complexity of employment providers, not just physicians, and implementation of patterns for seasonal employees. Demonstration increases must be timely. projects to explore creative models for coverage of agricultural/undocumented workers are needed. One 2. The Republican Senate (Cal CARE) and Assembly (AB possibility would be a public-private partnership 1592) Caucuses have introduced measures providing where seasonal employers, such as farmers, contract tax credits to physicians and providers that provide with Federally Qualifi ed Health Clinics or other local charity care, however, the defi nition of “charity care” safety-net providers, to provide care for their workers. is somewhat restrictive and may be only marginal in This strategy must be coordinated with models of impact. Adding strategies to the present proposals that transportable personal health records, such as the MiVia support supplemental payments and/or measurable tax de Salud program (see text box), for adequate health risk credits to providers, with a defi ned percentage of their and chronic disease management. practice serving the uninsured, have the potential for improving access to San Joaquin Valley residents.
3. Lack of access is also a refl ection of the health MiVIA is an electronic and transportable, professional shortages that are endemic to the San Personal Health Record (PHR) for migrant and Joaquin Valley. A number of strategies to improve these seasonal agricultural workers. It was piloted in shortages should be considered. The need for a regional Sonoma County impacting over 1500 workers. medical school at UC Merced is apparent, however, The ability to store and download critical health it is a long term solution. Local health professional information such as diagnosis, medications, “pipeline programs” should be fully and consistently allergies, chronic conditions, treatment plans funded in the San Joaquin Valley. Health businesses and test results will enhance health outcomes should be fi nancially supported through tax incentives and decrease duplication of services. MiVIA or programmatic reimbursement to develop and sustain “work to career programs” for staff. Federal and state allows patients, or any advocate whom they supported health professional programs throughout the authorize, to download their information at any state should have mandated internships and/or rotations time or to have the information downloaded by to underserved rural and urban regions with measurable a health care provider.33 unmet health needs. Exploring creative demonstration projects that identify and implement feasible and sustainable economic development incentives for a wide Access Issues range of health businesses should be supported.
1. Increasing provider reimbursement rates for Medi- 4. The individual mandate proposed by the Governor Cal has been proposed by several of the proposals as will likely force many Californians to purchase high a means to increase access to healthcare for Medi-Cal deductible plans, specifi cally those individuals and patients. Although providers support these efforts it is families above the income limit for the purchasing pool. not a guarantee that more physicians would be willing It is critical that insurers be mandated to provide products to accept Medi-Cal patients. Historically increases in the high deductible plan market that, at a minimum, in physician rates have not had an effect on Medi-Cal provide basic primary care, including screening and other participation.34 Increases must be adequate to incentivize preventive care measures that are subject to affordable provider participation in public insurance. Other negative deductibles and co-payments. perceptions of Medi-Cal participation, including the
12 74 HEALTH REFORM 2007: IMPACT ON THE VALLEY
Resource Issues decreased access. These proposals do not make it clear which services, programs and populations will remain 1. SB 840 has the potential for addressing regional needs as County responsibilities. with a restructuring of the state’s system of health care that includes the concept of “health planning regions.” 4. The Medi-Cal Redesign proposal of 2006 established These health planning regions will consist of contiguous Acute and Long-Term Care Integration Health Plan counties that are grouped based on patterns of health Demonstration projects in three urban counties (Orange, care utilization, resources including workforce, health Riverside and San Diego). These projects were designed needs, geography and population and demographic to integrate primary, acute and long-term care for seniors characteristics. Governance for these planning regions and persons with disabilities. Unfortunately, other rural will be appointed positions that include a regional and urban/rural mix counties have not received the same planning director and a regional medical offi cer. The opportunity.35 The Program for All Inclusive Care for regional planning director can serve up to two eight–year the Elderly or PACE (see text box) was fi rst introduced terms and must reside in the region he or she serves. If in San Francisco, but it has not yet been replicated in this model were to be implemented questions might arise the Valley. Other states have begun developing and as to the authority this director would have in resource implementing Rural PACE programs but this rural allocation, whether the Valley would be better served model has not been introduced in California. Given the if the director was an elected position. and would the aging population it is imperative the health resources be planning region structure best meet the needs of Valley allocated to exploring alternative models of integrated, residents. community-based long term care. None of the proposals specifi cally address this need. A minimum requirement 2. The reallocation of realignment funding must be of all health plans and health reform proposals is reconsidered and the reallocation should be based on reimbursement for community-based long term care unmet need. The San Joaquin Counties are considered case management even if they do not offer coverage for “underequity” counties, with seven of the eight counties experiencing equity shortfalls that are more than ten percent of their total realignment allocations. The Program of All-Inclusive Care for the Elder- Realignment funding was originally based on historical ly (PACE) is a capitated benefi t authorized by the spending, caseloads and population as of 1991 or even Balanced Budget Act of 1997 (BBA) that features earlier. Even though the goal of realignment was to a comprehensive service delivery system and in- address historical differences in funding allocations tegrated Medicare and Medicaid fi nancing. The among counties, inequities persist based on the funding program is modeled on the system of acute and formula. The last revision of the realignment funding long term care services developed by On Lok Se- structure was in 1994-95 and, given the growth of the nior Health Services in San Francisco, Califor- Valley and persistence of many unmet health needs, revaluation of this funding stream is long overdue. 23 nia. The model was tested through CMS (then HCFA) demonstration projects that began in the 3. SB 840 maintains that the state will assume fi nancial mid-1980s. The PACE model was developed to responsibility for the health care programs currently address the needs of long-term care clients, pro- provided by cities and counties in California. The viders, and payers. For most participants, the Republican Senate proposal also proposes that state- comprehensive service package permits them only programs that provide services to underinsured to continue living at home while receiving ser- or underinsured residents be redirected to community vices rather than be institutionalized. Capitated clinics and health centers. This potential transfer of fi nancing allows providers to deliver all services funding from county public health programs needs to be participants need rather than be limited to those carefully scrutinized for any unintentional consequences reimbursable under the Medicare and Medicaid that will increase the vulnerability of Valley counties 36 due to cuts in prevention program services, resulting in fee-for-service systems.”
13 75 HEALTH REFORM 2007: IMPACT ON THE VALLEY
long term care services. of employing these “licensed-waived” mental health providers including redefi ning “supervision” and 5. Mental health care parity must be a priority for all allowing them to provide limited unsupervised services health care packages proposed by reform legislation and could be investigated through demonstration projects at proposals. High Deductible Plans or strategies that allow Federally Qualifi ed Health Clinics. insurers to decrease the scope of offered services must not be allowed to exclude mental health services. 7. A signifi cant barrier to integration of primary care with mental health/substance abuse treatment is the Medi- 6. Based on interviews with clinic providers, access Cal reimbursement policy disallowing same day visits to mental health services is severely limited due to for mental health/substance abuse services. This policy shortages of licensed mental health providers. Master has been cited by clinic providers as limiting their ability of Social Work and other “licensed-waived providers” to provide appropriate care to their patients. Often can provide Medi-Cal reimbursable services if they are providers are forced to take a loss on these same day under the supervision of a licensed provider who has services because transportation, work and child care signed a plan of care document. Resources for exploring issues prevent patients from returning for treatment on strategies to address health professional shortages must a subsequent day. Clearly, it is also a critical issue if a include mental health providers. Alternate models patient is in crises. Policy and/regulatory reform should be explored to address this barrier to appropriate mental
14 76 HEALTH REFORM 2007: IMPACT ON THE VALLEY
health/substance abuse treatment.
REFERENCES
1. Assembly Health Committee. (2007). Health care reform 2007-issues overview and proposal comparison. Revised February 20, 2007: background information for Health care reform: what are the choices? Part I. Available at: http://www.assembly.ca.gov/acs/newcomframeset.asp?committee=10
2. Legislative Analyst’s Offi ce. (2007). The 2007-08 budget: perspectives and issues. Available at: http://www.lao. ca.gov/analysis_2007/2007_pandi/pandi_07.pdf
3. Offi ce of the Governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger (2007). Governor’s health care proposal. Available at: http://www. stayhealthycalifornia.com/
4. Gruber J. (2007). Modeling health care reform in California. Available at: http://gov.ca.gov/pdf/press/Gruber_ Modeling_Health_Care_Reform_In_California_fi nal_study_020207.pdf
5. California State Legislature. Bill search for AB 8. Available at: http://www.legislature.ca.gov/cgi-bin/port- postquery?bill_number=ab_8&sess=CUR&house=B&author=nunez
6. California State Legislature. Bill search for SB 48. Available at: http://www.legislature.ca.gov/cgi-bin/port- postquery?bill_number=sb_48&sess=CUR&house=B&author=perata
7. California State Legislature. Bill search for SB 840. Available at: http://www.legislature.ca.gov/cgi-bin/port- postquery?bill_number=sb_840&sess=CUR&house=B&author=kuehl
8. California State Legislature. Bill search for SB 1014. Available at: http://www.legislature.ca.gov/cgi-bin/port- postquery?bill_number=sb_1014&sess=CUR&house=B&author=kuehl
9. The California State Senate Republican Caucus. Cal CARE. Available at: (http://republican.sen.ca.gov/calcare/
10. The California State Assembly Republican Caucus. Republican issues focus: Assembly Republican Health Care Reforms Will Maximize Choice, Reduce Costs And Increase Access. Available at: (http://republican.assembly. ca.gov/index.asp?RefID=3734&page=focus
11. UCLA Center for Health Policy Research (2007). 2005 California health interview survey [Data Files]. Available from http://www.chis.ucla.edu
12. Department of Health and Human Services (January 24, 2007). Annual update of the HHS poverty guidelines. Federal Register, Vol. 72, No. 15, January 24, 2007, pp. 3147–3148. Available at: http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/ 07fedreg.pdf
13. State of California Employment Development Department. Report 400 C: Monthly labor force data for counties, March, 2007. Available at: http://www.calmis.ca.gov/fi le/lfmonth/0703pcou.pdf
15 77 HEALTH REFORM 2007: IMPACT ON THE VALLEY
14. California HealthCare Foundation. Medi-Cal county data. Available at: http://www.chcf.org/topics/medi-cal/index. cfm?subsection=countydata 15. Woolhandler S., Himelstein H.U. (April 2007). Consumer directed healthcare: except for the healthy and wealthy it’s unwise. Society of General Internal Medicine. Available at: http://pnhp.org/PDF_fi les/CDHC_Unwise.pdf
16. California Budget Project. (2007). Health savings accounts: No solution for the uninsured. Budget Brief, January 2007. Available at: http://www.cbp.org/pdfs/0701_bb_hsa.pdf
17. Reinhardt UE. Insurance: a closer look at HSAs. Health Affairs Blog, April 12, 2007. Available at: http://healthaffairs. org/blog/2007/04/12/insurance-a-closer-look- at-hsas/
18. Pryor, C., Cohen, A., and Prottas, J. (2007). The Illusion of Coverage: How health insurance fails people when they get sick. The Access Project, March 2007. Available at: http://www.cbp.org/pdfs/0701_bb_hsa.pdf
19. Committee on Child Health Financing. (2007). High-deductible health plans and the new risk of consumer-driven health insurance products. Pediatrics; 119:622-626. Available at: http://www.pediatrics.org/cgi/content/ full/119/3/622
20. Riordan, D.G. and Capitman, J.A. (2006). Health professional shortages in the San Joaquin Valley: The impact on federally qualifi ed health clinics. Fresno, CA: California State University, Fresno. Available at: http://www. csufresno.edu/ccchhs/documents/HPSReport-FinalCopy.pdf
21. Ku, L., Schneider, A., and Solomon, J. (2007, February). The administration again proposes to shift federal Medicaid costs to states. Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Available at: http://www.cbpp.org/2-14-07health.pdf
22. Offi ce of the California State Controller. (2006). Counties Annual Report for Fiscal Year ending June 30, 2004. Sacramento, CA: State of California. Available at: http://www.sco.ca.gov/ard/local/locrep/counties/reports/ 0304counties.pdf
23. Hill, E.G. (2001). Realignment revisited: an evaluation of the 1991 experiment in state-county relationships. LAO Report. Available at: http://www.lao.ca.gov/2001/realignment/020601_realignment.pdf
24. California Department of Health Services and California Conference of Local Health Offi cers. (2006). County Health Profi les 2006. Available at: http://www.dhs.ca.gov/hisp/chs/OHIR/reports/healthstatusprofi les/2006/profi les.pdf
25. Managed Risk Medical Insurance Board. (2007). MRMIB Program Handbook and Application for Year 2007. Available at: http://www.mrmib.ca.gov/MRMIB/MRMIPBRO.pdf
26. Managed Risk Medical Insurance Board. (March, 2006). California Major Risk Medical Insurance Program: 2006 Fact Book. Available at: http://www.mrmib.ca.gov/MRMIB/MRMIPFBV3_23_06.pdf
27. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Medicare Hospice Benefi ts. Available at: http://www.medicare.gov/ publications/pubs/pdf/02154.pdf
28. Legislative’s Analyst Offi ce. (2004). Proposition 63: Mental health services expansion and funding. Available at:
16 78 HEALTH REFORM 2007: IMPACT ON THE VALLEY
http://www.lao.ca.gov/ballot/2004/63_11_2004.htm
29. Medi-Cal Policy Institute. (April 2001). Mental health services in Medi-Cal. Medi-Cal Facts, Number 10. Available at: http://www.chcf.org/documents/policy/MediCalMentalHealth.pdf
30. Lund, L.A. (February 2005). Mental health care in California counties: Perceived need and barriers to access, 2001. DHS Center for Health Statistics, County Health Facts No. 05-02. Available at: http://www.dhs.ca.gov/hisp/chs/ OHIR/reports/countyhealthfacts/mentalhealth2001.pdf
31. State of California Department of Managed Care. (2005). Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975, including amendments enacted as of February 2005. Available at: http://www.dmhc.ca.gov/library/statutes/knox- keene/html/knox-keene_act.htm
32. Families USA. Health Action 2007 Conference - Day 1: Opening Plenary, January 25, 2007. Available at: http://www. kaisernetwork.org/health_cast/uploaded_fi les/012507_familiesusa_open_transcript.pdf
33. MiVia. About MiVia. Available at: http://mivia.org/about_us.shtml
34. University of California, San Francisco. (2003, May). Physician participation in Medi-Cal, 2001. Prepared for the Medi-Cal Policy Institute. Available at: http://www.chcf.org/documents/policy/MediCalPhysParticipation2001. pdf.
35. California Department of Health Service. (March, 2005). Medi-Cal Acute and Long Term Care Integration (ALTCI). Available at: http://www.dhs.ca.gov/mcs/mcpd/MCReform/PDFs/Acute%20and%20Long%20Term%20Care%20 Integration%20Final%203-23-05.pdf
36. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Program for All Inclusive Care for the Elderly (PACE): Overview. Available at: http://www.cms.hhs.gov/pace/
17 79 California Partnerships for the San Joaquin Valley Seed Grant Program
Full Legal Name(s) and Address(es) of Entity Submitting the Proposal (Applicant):
California State University, Fresno Foundation 4910 N. Chestnut Fresno, CA 93726
Central Valley Health Policy Institute 1625 E. Shaw Avenue, Suite 146 Fresno, CA 93710
Phone #: 559-228-2150 Fax number: 559-228-2168 E-mail: [email protected]
Project Name (short title up to 50 letters): San Joaquin Valley Health Enterprise Zone Project
Funding Requested
I hereby certify that the information provided in the Proposal is correct and represents the intended use of all sources of funds identified in the Proposal, and that I will inform the Business, Transportation and Housing Agency immediately of any changes in the funding Proposal.
______Central Valley Health Policy Institute Signature of Authorized Representative Entity Date: February 28, 2007
______California State University Fresno Foundation Signature of Authorized Representative Entity Date: February 28, 2007
80 Table of Contents
I. Cover Sheet......
II. Table of Contents......
III. Description of Proposed Project ......
IV. Work Plan, Deliverables and Expected Outcomes ......
V. Capabilities of Applicant(s)......
VI. Financial Information......
VII. Attachments ......
81 III. Description of the Proposal
Overall Project Goal
The goal of the San Joaquin Valley Health Enterprise Zone (SJVHEZ) Project is to explore the feasibility of establishing Health Enterprise Zones in communities in the eight counties of the San Joaquin Valley. The project responds to a specific California Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley priority objective and will engage a broad cross-section of the region’s stakeholders and communities in articulating this innovative model. After discussing the concept of enterprise zones and variations on the health enterprise zone concept, as explored in other states, this section outlines the feasibility issues to be explored in the proposed project.
Enterprise Zones: California’s Enterprise Zone (EZ) Program provides tax breaks to economically distressed areas to promote business development and job creation. California’s original EZ law created 10 zones in 1984. The Legislature also enacted the Employment and Economic Incentive Act in 1984, which created nine Economic Incentive Program Areas. The two programs were later merged and, over time, the Legislature has expanded the number of EZs to the current level of 42. There are 10 EZs located in the eight San Joaquin Valley Counties. EZs are designated for 15 years; however, a 1998 measure allowed EZs designated prior to 1990 to receive a five year extension, for a total of 20 years. EZ designation allows businesses located within the zone’s borders to claim a variety of state tax breaks. They include: tax credits for hiring certain categories of individuals; tax credits for sales taxes paid on qualified machinery and parts; an extension from 10-15 years in which businesses can “carry forward” net operating losses into future years to reduce taxable income; increased ability to “expense” the cost of certain investments, so that companies can deduct the full cost of certain purchases rather than depreciating them over a number of years; and preferential treatment when bidding on state contracts.1
Health Enterprise Zones: The HEZ concept is new and if demonstrated in the San Joaquin Valley would represent a state and national experiment that will receive considerable attention as a model for replication in other regions and states. The HEZ concept differs from the EZ model in that the primary outcome will be increased access to quality healthcare and improved health status in communities. The secondary outcome will be stimulating local economic growth and job development. The first Health Enterprise Zone law was enacted in New Jersey in 2004 as Chapter 139 (A2638) to provide a solution to the state's struggle to recruit and retain a primary care workforce in rural and urban areas. The law institutes three financial incentives for primary care physicians and dentists practicing in state designated underserved areas or “HEZs”. The financial incentives include: a gross income tax deduction of the amount of their net income from a practice located in a HEZ that is proportional to their gross receipts from providing health care services to eligible recipients of state public health coverage programs; low interest loans for constructing and renovating office spaces and purchasing equipment for practices located in a HEZ; and exemption for real property taxation for medical and dental offices located in a HEZ, if the municipality in which it is located adopts such a resolution. Primary physicians and dentists practicing within five miles of a HEZ will also be eligible for the gross income tax deduction and the loan program if at least half of their gross receipts are for providing care to
82 recipients of state public health coverage programs and at least half of their public health coverage patients reside in an HEZ. Primary physicians and dentists practicing within five miles of a HEZ are not eligible for the property tax exemption.2
Illinois has proposed legislation (SB0007) for a Health Enterprise Zone. This proposal broadens the application to include physician specialists, physician assistants, advanced practice nurses, optometrists and pharmacists. A health professional that practices at least 50% of the year in an area certified by the state as a HEZ, based on the federal definition of a medically underserved area, or has been determined as specialty shortage area by the state, is eligible to apply for an income tax credit. The amount of the credit is limited to $10,000 per taxable year for a specialist practicing in a specialty shortage zone; $7,500 per taxable year for a general practitioner or specialist practicing in an HEZ; and $5,000 for an advanced practice nurse, physician assistant, dentist, optometrist or pharmacist practicing in a HEZ. The legislation also proposes to amend the property tax code to allow any taxing district, upon majority vote of its governing authority, to reduce any portion of taxes on property operated by a health care professional in a certified health care enterprise or specialty shortage zone.3
It may be possible to further enhance the HEZ model by incorporating a concept that developed out of efforts by the Washington, D.C. based Consumer Health Foundation to provide a forum for community members to “speak out” about the problems in their community that affect their health and wellbeing and brainstorm innovative solutions to these problems. One of the recommendations was to designate neighborhood “Wellness Opportunity Zones”. These zones would be designated by local governments as areas where financial and other incentives would be available and reinforced by reforms in policy and regulations for projects that improve health and wellbeing, including safe parks and exercise areas, access to quality food, affordable housing, and reliable public transportation.4 This concept opens the possibility of linking new private sector investment in healthcare services through the HEZ with initiatives that promote consumer responsibility for health and wellness through community designation, associated public programming, and new health-related quality of life ventures.
There are a few other existing practices designed to attract and retain healthcare providers in underserved areas. One such practice is establishing clinics staffed by visiting specialist physicians who would travel up to several times per week/month to rural areas. It is said to have a significant impact in providing medical access in rural areas. With the average age of the visiting specialist being 55 years, it has been suggested that more generous incentives in terms of complementary equipment and supplies needs to be offered to attract a new generation of visiting specialists.5
Other existing practices that the HEZ may consider adopting are: 1) providing tuition waivers to students in medical schools in rural communities who would be willing to serve in small town setting; 2) recruiting international medical graduates using state sponsored programs to serve in Health Professional Shortage Areas; and 3) use telecommunication or e-health technology to provide local access to medical specialists and diagnostic services that cannot be sustained on a full-time basis.
83 Developing a HEZ Model for the San Joaquin Valley: The initial objectives of the San Joaquin Valley HEZ Project are to identify the elements for successful recruitment and retention of health professionals and health services in underserved areas of the region, foster consumer awareness and responsibility for healthy living and wellness practices, and explore the feasibility of applying this model through community and stakeholder participation. The approach will be built on the experiences of HEZ legislation implemented or proposed in other states and also include national, state, regional and local input. It is expected that by exploring a variety of HEZ applications based on extensive review of best practices, perceived barriers and needed resources, as well as feasibility study and cost-benefit analysis of several alternative models, will translate into increased health resources that communities both want and need and improved access to health services in the San Joaquin Valley. In order to achieve these objectives this program will undertake specific measures which are delineated below.
Identify Essential Elements of a Health Enterprise Zone: In order to identify the essential elements of a HEZ from the bottom-up, the program proposes to form a task force that can suggest a practical and achievable set of incentive strategies and legislative propositions for a feasible HEZ. The Task Force will also examine extensions of the HEZ model designed to promote community engagement in health promotion/wellness. In addition, to ensure the involvement of Partnership Work Groups and Partnership leadership in the process, a consulting team comprised of representatives from these groups will be established. The proposal includes initiating the following tasks:
Establish a HEZ Task Force: A Regional Health Enterprise Zone Task Force will be comprised of resource persons and stakeholders from multiple sectors from the San Joaquin Valley including: a) elected officials, b) health care providers c) state, county and city government representatives, d) consumers of health care, e) health care and health policy advocates, f) representatives from business, chambers of commerce, economic development and trade organizations, g) health care entrepreneurs, and h) employment developers/higher education leaders. The primary mission of the Task Force will be to formulate a model for a HEZ that combines an explicit set of incentives for healthcare services business development, provider recruitment and retention, and fostering consumer engagement in health promotion/wellness.
Establish a Consulting Team from Related Work Groups: The development of the HEZ has implications well beyond the concerns of the Health and Human Services work group, a consulting team will be formed drawing experts from related work groups to coordinate efforts within the partnership. The consulting team will ensure coordinated use of Partnership resources and maintain the regional focus of the program. The related work groups which may be included in the consulting team includes, Economic Development; Higher Education and Workforce Development; Land Use, Agriculture and Housing; and Advanced Communication Systems and Information Technology. The Consulting Team will formulate a work plan articulating their scope of effort, meeting schedule and dissemination of information. This will help coordinate efforts with other Work Groups to make best use of resources and maintain regional focus in carrying out the project’s objectives. The consulting team will provide quarterly updates to Partnership Board and engage the leadership by incorporating feedback into project efforts.
84
85 Compilation of Data and Information on HEZ: In order to ascertain the best HEZ strategy, the task force will meet for the first time (Task Force Meeting One) and identify key questions that should be answered in developing the HEZ model. The compilation of data and gathering of information on HEZ will be conducted through the following interviews:
• Interview Authors and Implementers of HEZ Legislation: To answer the key questions developed by the task force, several interviews will be conducted with authors and implementers of HEZ legislation in other states to gather more information and identify the barriers and resources needed to carry out such initiatives. The lessons learned from the interviews will be summarized and presented to the Task Force.
• Interview Health Business Providers, Recruiters, and Consultants: In order to obtain data on business perspectives and strategies that may be critical for enticing health care business development within the HEZ, several interviews (25-35) will be undertaken with health care providers, recruiters and business consultants. Business perspectives on incorporating initiatives to engage communities in health promotion/wellness into HEZ models will also be explored. The data and information obtained from the interviews on lessons learned and best practices for successful HEZ legislation will be summarized and presented to the Task Force.
• Interview State Agency and Legislative Staff: For the success of any potential legislation, it is crucial to seek advanced knowledge on the contemporary legislative environment and trends. Several in depth interviews (25-35) will be conducted with state agency and legislative staff to determine the feasibility of tax and other forms of incentive legislation, such as easing local and county government restrictions and relaxing ‘certificate of need’ regulations.
• Dialogue with Health Business Stakeholders: Key national, state, local and financial stakeholders in the health business and development sector will be identified and a contact list will be created. These stakeholders will be contacted and included in the dialogue for formulating the best and practically sound HEZ model.
Prepare Final Concept Paper: After receiving feedback from interviews, the findings will be analyzed and summarized into a draft Concept Report. The draft will be disseminated to the Partnership Board, consulting team, interviewed experts and business/development stakeholders for comments. The Partnership Board and the consulting team will have the opportunity to provide input through informal question and answer sessions and presentations. Once feedback from all stakeholders and experts regarding elements of proposed HEZ model are received, it will be integrated into the final Concept Report.
Selecting Communities for Feasibility Assessment: After the receipt of the report of summarized findings, the regional task force will meet for the second time (Task Force Meeting Two) and select eight communities (one from each county) for feasibility assessment. The task force will ensure that the conceptual HEZ model is comprehensive and understandable in its form; it will then be presented for community input.
86 Feasibility Assessments in the Eight Selected Communities: A feasibility study analyzes the viability of an idea with an aim to answer whether a project is worthy of implementation and to ascertain the likelihood of the project's success. This proposal plans to analyze the potential implementation of the HEZ model in eight communities selected from each of the San Joaquin Valley counties. It is expected that by testing the implication of the proposed HEZ model in each county, a comprehensive understanding of the project can be realized – on one hand capturing the intra-regional variability and on the other acquiring the cross-cutting universality of the model. The feasibility analysis will examine the proposed model compared to the existing system, taking into consideration the technological advancement in health care provision, competition and integration of market elements in health services and extension of managed care in the health care system. Community feedback will also be sought on incorporating efforts to engage communities in health promotion/wellness as part of the HEZ model.
It is imperative for a feasibility study to undertake various aspects of viability of the project depending on the nature of the elements of the business venture and the market where it is being considered. Some of the issues that will be addressed in assessing the feasibility of the HEZ and healthy living/wellness zone model will be economic/financial, market, technical, organizational or managerial, scheduling, cultural, and legal factors.
• The economic/financial aspect of the feasibility analysis will investigate whether the benefits (both health and other) from the project substantially outweigh its costs and whether it fosters better health outcomes compared to status quo (or other projects) using the same resources. It also verifies whether the project will be able to meet all the eligibility criteria and the objectives it set out to achieve. • The technical feasibility aspect will validate the practicality of the HEZ model’s system requirements in terms of inputs, outputs, programs and procedures and whether these can be implemented with the existing state of knowledge and technology. The analysis will also investigate how much time might be required to build the new system and can it be put into practice within a stipulated time frame. • The organizational and managerial aspects of the feasibility study will investigate whether the model will garner enough support to be successfully implemented both from within (governance, structure) and from outside (support from partnerships and alliances among stakeholders). • The marketing feasibility analysis will assess whether the size, scope, maturity and future direction of the market and health care industry in the region will be able to initiate the program and how it may affect its sustainability. • The cultural aspect of the feasibility analysis will evaluate the impact of the program on the local culture, e.g., peoples’ lifestyle, attitudes, behavior and understanding of health and health care; and also environmental factors such as level of pollution, climate, location, distance from major health care facilities, etc. • The final crucial aspect of the feasibility analysis will be to look at the legal requirements in establishing the HEZ and consumer responsibility/wellness model at respective locations. It will assess how the planned model will hold up after being scrutinized at the local level.
Hosting Community Forums and Stakeholder Interviews: At this stage, the community leaders and stakeholders from the eight selected communities will be identified and invited to a
87 community forum which will serve as a platform to further analyze the HEZ and consumer responsibility/wellness model from the perspective of the community stakeholders. They will include consumers, providers, business leaders and other concerned informal and formal leaders from the selected communities. The primary objective will be to identify and assemble diverse community stakeholders who can play effective and critical roles regarding feasibility of HEZ model and its implementation. In the first meeting (Community Meeting One) the forum will finalize regional meeting schedules, locations and agendas for meetings and discuss the HEZ model framed by the Task Force report. The goal will be to identify perceived barriers and existing resources to embark on such a venture. A report of Community Meeting One proceedings will be disseminated by email and newsletter to all stakeholders in order to identify specific questions and concerns.
The community forum meetings will identify additional key informants in each of the communities and individual interviews will be conducted (40-50 interviews). The interviews will address questions raised in each community's first meeting and clarify intra-regional differences in needs, resources, barriers and overall feasibility. The community forum will provide quarterly updates on the project’s progress to the Partnership Board and Consulting Team and incorporate feedback into project efforts in order to maintain constant engagement with these entities. In the second community meeting (Community Meeting Two), the forum will discuss and analyze the recommendations for legislative and regulatory strategies based both on perceived barriers and potential for effectiveness. The forum will reach a consensus as to the structure of the model and how much flexibility to build into it to allow response to unique community needs. The findings from community concerns by a broad range of stakeholders will be summarized and included in the Community Feasibility Report, which will be disseminated to all task force and community stakeholders, financing, health business and development stakeholders and the Partnership Board.
Develop recommendations for proposed legislation: Before developing recommendations for proposed legislation, a cost-benefit analysis will be conducted, including at least three different HEZ models with various combinations of incentives. It is anticipated that such a study will add another dimension to the discussion around choosing the most beneficial HEZ model to produce optimum health benefits to the people in the San Joaquin Valley. At this stage, the task force will reconvene for the third time (Task Force Meeting Three) to review the Community Feasibility Report and outline proposed legislation and/or regulatory changes to be submitted to the Partnership leadership, taking into consideration the results from the cost-benefit analysis. The committee will discuss the report and reach a consensus on the best possible HEZ model and consumer responsibility/wellness model for the Valley.
Developing Final Recommendation: Experts from other Partnership Board and other work groups will be engaged in developing a final recommendation on the HEZ model. Approval and acceptance of the model’s strategic plans, including implementation strategies by the Partnership, will be sought before the Final Report is made public. The report will include the San Joaquin Valley HEZ Concept Report, the Community Feasibility Report, the Cost-Benefit Analysis and the Final HEZ Model.
88 HEZ Project in Context of Partnership’s Strategic Action Plan
The San Joaquin Valley HEZ Project supports the initiative (Recommendation 6) to develop high-quality health and human services and its accompanying strategies to: • Improve workforce development and retention by providing incentives to difficult-to- recruit health and medical professionals. • Support regional disease prevention and health promotion services.
This proposal also addresses the Health and Human Services Workgroup Goal 2 to enhance access to appropriate health care services and improved public health management and its Objective A to provide incentives for difficult to recruit health and medical professions. It clearly responds to the immediate action item under Objective A of identifying necessary elements of financial incentives, including enterprise zones, to attract and retain providers. This proposal will lead to addressing the short term action of developing a region-wide strategic plan for financial incentives and enterprise zones targeted to providers.
The San Joaquin Valley HEZ Project speaks to the key recommendation of developing high quality health and human services by proposing an innovative approach to addressing the shortage of health professionals in the San Joaquin Valley. The Health Enterprise Zone concept provides immediate results by engaging local leaders in the design and application of a model that increases the probability that needed health resources will come to their community, be successful and integrate and commit to the community on a long term basis. The outcome of these immediate results will lead to the short term action of developing a region-wide strategic plan for financial incentives and enterprise zones that are targeted to providers and the unique health needs of each community. These infrastructure supports lay the groundwork for improved healthcare workforce development and retention and will ultimately lead to improved regional disease prevention and health promotion services due to improved access to healthcare.
The HEZ is an innovative approach with limited national application to date. The California State Rural Health Association did receive a grant from the U.S. Department of Agriculture for the “Transforming the Future Health of Rural Communities through Economic Development Project.” This capital campaign project has the objective of providing training and technical assistance to seven rural California healthcare organizations that have identified an interest and need to prepare for developing and implementing a capital campaign in their communities. It does not involve policy and regulatory reform issues and does not impact new health business development.
The HEZ Project engages a broad cross section of both regional and local stakeholders, including local business leaders, health providers, economic development experts, consumers, advocates and public officials. It is plausible that creative strategies identified through both the regional task force process and community level feasibility discussions could include the use of existing resources such as local Economic Development Corporations as resource centers and process changes such as streamlining permitting and licensing at both the local and state levels. Some prospective functions of the resources center may include assistance with land acquisition and environmental remediation, identifying development loans and seed capital investments, organizational support, and operational funding for healthcare work force development. The
89 resources centers could also disseminate tax incentive information to the business community, and arrange for business finance and technical assistance through professional business counselors to advise new and potential healthcare business owners and provide resource referrals and training opportunities. Several other Work Group’s tasks include assessing current capabilities and coordinated new investment throughout the region to offer this kind of support to prospective business developers.
This project adds to the knowledge of the partnership leadership in exploring credible, sustainable, and successful strategies for increasing the number of health professionals in San Joaquin Valley communities. Results of this effort may provide support for both legislative reform and systemic streamlining of processes for encouraging health business development. CVHPI will provide in-kind project funding for the salaries, fringe benefits and associated indirect costs of the Principal Investigator and Associate Director. The public-private collaboration, linking public policy and regulatory incentives with private health enterprise, is fundamental to the HEZ concept. The HEZ Project will involve city, county and state government. Cities and counties will explore the feasibility, and cost, of waiving local business and building ordinances. Legislative leaders will explore the feasibility and cost of providing tax incentives. This project will engage the residents of the region by requesting they volunteer their time in the development, decision-making and implementation of the HEZ at both the task force level and in the eight selected communities.
Impact on the San Joaquin Valley
The project targets and integrates all eight counties of the San Joaquin Valley region in its effort to determine the most feasible and cost-effective HEZ model. It does so in two broad ways. First, the project ensures representation from each of the eight counties on the Task Force to identify necessary elements in designing the HEZ and consumer responsibility/wellness models. This includes adequate representation of elected officials, health care providers, local public health officials, and advocacy groups in conceptualizing the model in the region. It is assumed that engaging the stakeholders from each of the Valley counties will substantially enrich the foundation of the program in terms of its scope and the understanding of the HEZ and consumer wellness model goals and objectives. By bringing together all the major stakeholders from all eight counties, the task force will be able to produce not only a comprehensive model that addresses each county’s needs, but also identify the areas of cooperation and redundancy.
Secondly, once the HEZ and consumer responsibility/wellness model has been conceptualized, the project proposes to undertake separate feasibility assessments of the model in each county. This will be critical in understanding the strengths and weaknesses of the model. The eight counties are not identical in terms of resource availability and health care needs. There are substantial differences between health care market, income, purchasing power, demographics, levels of poverty, etc. This indicates that an inflexible program may not lead to an optimal use of resources and maximum health outcomes in all areas. It is important to design a model that takes a sector wide approach, but has built-in flexibility to be able to be customized for different locations based on community priorities and needs. It is expected that such a rigorous and detailed feedback from the study will strengthen the model.
90 HEZ Regional Task Force Partners Bernice Bonillas, Bicultural Consumer Perfecto Munoz, Coordinator, HEAT Kern County San Joaquin County
Steve Schilling, CEO, Clinica Sierra Bob Kavanaugh, Board of Directors, St. Vista Joseph's Medical Center Kern County San Joaquin County
Blong Xiong, Acting President, Fresno Cleopathia Moore, MCAH Director, City Council Stanislaus County Health Services Agency Fresno County Stanislaus County
Marcia Sablan, MD, Sablan Medical Ray Campanur, Economic Development Clinic and Workforce Alliance Fresno County Stanislaus County
Roger Palamino, Executive Director, Julie Griffith, District Director, Economic Opportunities Commission Assemblymember Mike Villines Fresno County Fresno County
Lynne Ashbeck, Regional Vice Rick Rawson, CEO, Adventist Health President, Hospital Council of Northern Systems and Central California Kings/Fresno Counties Regional
Judith A. (Judy) Horn, Community Teresa Plascencia, Principal Consultant, Director, Kings Partnership for Children Assembly Member Nicole Parra Kings County Fresno, Kings, Tulare and Kern Counties
Stanley Simpson, Chairman Emeritus, John Frye, CEO, Madera Community Buckman-Mitchell, Inc., Bd. Member, Hospital California Partnership for the SJV Madera County Tulare County
Michael Sullivan, CEO, Golden Valley John Solis, CEO, San Joaquin County Health Centers Worknet Merced County San Joaquin County
James Green, Government Affairs Paul Saldana, CEO, Tulare County Director, Visalia Chamber of Commerce Economic Development Corporation Tulare County Tulare County
91 Exhibit A Attachment 1
Budget: A. Salaries/Wages 62,636 Cost Share Deborah Riordan, MPH (40% x $56,400 x .5 yr) (40% 34,968 x $59,220 x 1 yr) Cheryl Paul Admin Asst. (15% x $39,000 x .5 yr) (15% 9,068 x $40,950 x 1 yr) Mohammad Rahman (20% x $60,000 x .5 yr) (20% x 18,600 $63,000 x 1 yr)
Benefits (calculated at percentage of salary) medical, B. 21,732 dental, vision and life Deborah Riordan, MPH 36% 12,588 Cheryl Paul Admin Asst. 27% 2,448 Mohammad Rahman 36% 6,696 C. Travel: 3,308 Mileage for 5 round trips per county (2/yr 1, 3/yr 2) @ .485 x 6820 miles. To be reimbursed at rates not to 3,308 exceed rates permitted for the states represented employees. D. Operating Expenses 19,270 Office supplies 703 Rent 14,407 Communications 2,160 Printing 2,000 E. Other 18,054 16 County Meetings (2 in each of 8 counties) 1,750 Refreshments and Room Rental fees Indirect/Overhead (15%) 16,304 Foregone Indirect @ 28% of TDC 30,435 TOTAL BUDGET $125,000 30,435
92 Health Enterprise Zone (HEZ) Task Force
First Last Role Organization/Title Address City Zip Phone Fax E-Mail Preferred contact PROJECT STAFF: Central Valley Health Policy Institute/ John Capitman Principal Investigator Executive Director 1625 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 146 Fresno 93710 (559) 228-2157 (559) 228-2168 [email protected] [email protected]; also Lionakis Beaumont Design Group/ his secty, Susan Boutelle, Michael Navarro Convener Principal Architect 1207 'I' St. Modesto 95356 (209) 576-8222 [email protected] Central Valley Health Policy Institute/ Laurie Primavera HHS Work Group Leader Associate Director 1625 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 146 Fresno 93710 (559) 228-2156 (559) 228-2168 [email protected] Central Valley Health Policy Institute/ Mohammad Rahman Project Staff Senior Research Fellow 1625 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 146 Fresno 93710 (559) 228-2163 (559) 228-2168 [email protected] Central Valley Health Policy Institute/ Deborah Riordan Project Director Health Policy Analyst 1625 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 146 Fresno 93710 (559) 228-2169 (559) 228-2168 [email protected] Central Valley Health Policy Institute/ Debbie Wray Administrative Analyst Administrative Analyst 1625 E. Shaw Ave., Ste. 146 Fresno 93710 (559) 228-2155 (559) 228-2168 [email protected] First Last Title and/or Suffix Organization Address City Zip Phone Fax E-Mail Preferred contact TASK FORCE MEMBERS: johnalexander@mercedcountyhe John Alexander Executive Director Merced County Health Care Consortium P.O. Box 2627 Merced 95344 (209) 381-2000, ext. 604 althcare.org email (559) 221-6154 (office) or Lynne Ashbeck Regional Vice President Hospital Council of Northern and Central California 1625 East Shaw Ave., Ste. 139 Fresno 93710 (559) 650-5694 (cell) (559) 221-1678 [email protected] (661) 599-2835 1566 Belmont St. Delano 93215 (661) 398-0151 (Delano email) (661) 599-2835 (mother's phone #; Bernice Bonillas Co-Director Health Care for All-Kern County 7412 Kroll Way (mother's address) Bakersfield 93309 (661) 725-9758 [email protected] try it first) Stanislaus Economic Development & Workforce 1010 10th Street Place Reynaldo Campanur Workkeys Administrator Alliance P.O. Box 3091 Modesto 95353 (209) 558-4473 [email protected] Vice President-Patient Care Mary Farrell Services Madera Community Hospital 1250 E. Almond Ave. Madera 93637 (559) 675-5597 [email protected] email Robyn Flores Grants Development Mgr. Kaweah Delta Health Care District 400 W. Mineral King Visalia 93291 (559) 624-2521 (559) 635-4054 [email protected] Madera Community Hospital (Mary Farrell as email and secty Cat Hof: John Frye Chief Executive Officer alternate) 1250 E. Almond Ave. Madera 93637-5606 (559) 675-5555 (559) 675-5509 [email protected] [email protected] Judy Fussel Senior Vice President Buckman Mitchell, Inc 309 W. Main St. Visalia 93291 (559) 635-3573 [email protected] email Julie Griffiths District Director Assemblymember Mike Villines 6245 N. Fresno St., Ste. 106 Fresno 93710 (559) 446-2029 (559) 442-2028 [email protected] Judy Horn Community Director Kings Partnership for Children P.O. Box 185 Hanford 93232 (559) 584-4822 (559) 584-5701 [email protected] email #9 Atherton Island: Send copies of large Bob Kavanaugh Board Member St. Joseph's Medical Center documents by mail Stockton 95204 (209) 943-5443 (209) 463-1550 [email protected] Trish Kelly Sacramento Director CA Center For Regional Leadership 1131 11th Ave. Sacramento 95818 (916) 448-2456 [email protected]
Associate Director of 820 Scenic Dr. Cleopathia Moore Community Health Services Stanislaus County Dept. of Public Health P.O. Box 3271 Modesto 95350 (209) 558-6010 (209) 558-8008 [email protected]
University of California Office of the President/ (510) 642-3729 Perfecto Munoz Interim Program Manager California Program on Access to Care 1950 Addison St., Ste. 203 Berkeley 94704 (209) 401-3506 [email protected] Fresno County Economic Opportunities email and email asst: Roger Palomino Chief Executive Officer Commision; Assistant Carolyn Felix Moreno 1920 Mariposa Mall, Ste. 300 Fresno 93721 (559) 263-1000 (209) 263-1009 [email protected] [email protected] 1382 E. Alluvial Ave., Ste. 106 Fresno 93720 Sandi Palumbo Executive Director Fresno-Madera Medical Society P.O. Box 28337 Fresno 93729-8337 (559) 224-4224, ext. 114 (559) 224-0276 [email protected] Governmental Affairs Teresa Plascencia Coordinator Fresno County Farm Bureau 1274 W. Hedges Ave. Fresno 93728 (559) 237-0263 (559) 237-3396 [email protected] Susan Vierra, Director of Administrative Services: Richard Rawson Chief Executive Officer Hanford Community Medical Center 450 N. Greenfield Ave. Hanford 93230 (559) 585-5110 (550) 584-7401 [email protected] email Susan Vierra Marcia Sablan MD Sablan Medical Corporation 927 "O" Street Firebaugh 93622 (559) 659-3037 (559) 659-3464 [email protected]. email President/Chief Executive (559) 688-3388 ext. 5, Paul Saldana Officer Economic Development Corporation, Tulare 4500 South Laspina Tulare 93274 then ext. 203 (559) 688-1406 [email protected] (661) 635-3050 Steve Schilling Chief Executive Officer Clinica Sierra Vista 1430 Truxtun Ave., Ste. 400 Bakersfield 93301 (Sarah is his secy) (661) 869-1041 [email protected] Economic Development Work Chairman Emeritus Group Convener/ Buckman Mitchell, Inc. Stanley Simpson CPSJV Board (Judy Fussel as alternate) 309 W. Main St. Visalia 93291 (559) 635-3522 (559) 738-5517 [email protected] email (209) 468-3526 is secty, San Joaquin County Worknet; Alternate: Mike Rosemary or John Solis Executive Director Miller 56 South Lincoln St. Stockton 95203 (209) 468-3500 [email protected] Michael Sullivan Chief Executive Officer Golden Valley Health Centers 737 W. Childs Ave. Merced 95340 (209) 383-1848 (209) 383-0136 [email protected] 93 Kings County Supervisor for Alene Taylor District 5 Kings County Board of Supervisors 1400 W. Lacy Blvd. Hanford 93230 (559) 582-3211, ext. 2364 (559) 707-8824 [email protected] telephone First Last Title and/or Suffix Organization Address City Zip Phone Fax E-Mail Preferred contact
Blong's email: [email protected]; [email protected] (Chief of Staff); [email protected] Blong Xiong Councilman, District 1 Fresno City Council 2600 Fresno St. Fresno 93721 (559) 621-8000 (559) 268-1043 (scheduler) Public Health Partnership please copy Judy Sagouspe on all correspondence: Carol Barney Public Health Director Madera County Public Health Department 14215 Road 28 Madera 93638 (559) 675-7893 [email protected] [email protected] email, and please copy Tracey Kruse on all correspondence: Ray Bullick Director of Health Tulare County Health and Human Services Agency 5957 S. Mooney Blvd. Visalia 93277 (559) 737-4686 [email protected] [email protected]
Steve Chambers Special Project Manager Kern County Department of Public Health 1800 Mount Vernon Ave. Bakersfield 93306 (661) 868-0389 [email protected] email
Ken Cohen Director San Joaquin County Health Care Services Agency P.O. Box 1020 Stockton 95201 (209) 468-6010 [email protected] Mary Ann Lee Director Stanislaus County Health Services Agency 820 Scenic Dr. Modesto 95350 (800) 834-8171 [email protected] please copy secty Veronica (Ronnie) Murray: Edward Moreno Director and Health Officer Fresno County Department of Community Health 1221 Fulton Mall, 6th floor Fresno 93721 (559) 445-3200 [email protected] [email protected] William Mitchell Director Public Health Services of San Joaquin County 1601 E. Hazelton Ave. Stockton 95205 (209) 468-3412 [email protected] email, and please copy secty Luanne Guerzon: Perry Rickard Director Kings County Department of Public Health 330 Campus Dr. Hanford 93230 (559) 582-3211, ext. 2605 [email protected] [email protected]
Margaret Szczepaniak Associate Director San Joaquin County Health Care Services Agency P.O. Box 1020 Stockton 95201 (209) 468-6010 [email protected] please copy Meredith Craig on all correspondence: John Volanti Public Health Director Merced County Health Department 260 E. 15th St. Merced 95340 (209) 381-1200 [email protected] [email protected] 820 Scenic Drive John Walker Public Health Officer Stanislaus County Health Services Agency P.O. Box 3271 Modesto 95350 (209) 558-8804 (559) 558-7286 [email protected] Community Health Forum, San Joaquin County Lita Wallach Coordinator Health Care Services P.O. Box 1805 Woodbridge 95258 (209) 210-8898 [email protected] CONSULTING TEAM: ACS/IT Work Group (209) 522-5103 (office) Barbara Patrick Special Projects Coordinator Great Valley Center 201 Needham St. Modesto 95354 (661) 805-7770 (cell) [email protected] CPSJV Secretariat Representatives Office of Community and Economic Development Mike Lukens Communications Director Office, CSU, Fresno 5010 N. Woodrow Ave., M/S WC 142 Fresno 93740 (559) 347-3908 (559) 294-6024 [email protected] email Office of Community and Economic Development Allysunn Williams Associate Director Office, CSU, Fresno 5010 N. Woodrow Ave., M/S WC 142 Fresno 93740 (559) 347-3906 (559) 294-6024 [email protected] email Economic Development Work Group Chairman of Central CA Economic Development Corp and Executive Director of Madera County Bobby Kahn Economic Development Commission 2425 W. Cleveland Ave., Ste. 101 Madera 93637 (559) 675-7768 [email protected] K-12 Education Work Group Amy Arambula Education Liaison City of Fresno, Office of Mayor Alan Autry City Hall, 2600 Fresno St. Fresno 93721-3600 (559) 621-7906 (office) [email protected] Central Valley Educational Leadership Institute, (559) 278-0388 (office) Walter Buster Director CSU, Fresno 5005 N. Maple Ave., M/S ED303 Fresno 93740-8025 (559) 696-9872 (cell) [email protected] contact through Marcy Masumoto Central Valley Educational Leadership Institute, Marcy Masumoto Project Manager CSU, Fresno 5005 N. Maple Ave., M/S ED303 Fresno 93740-8025 (559) 304-2190 (cell) [email protected] Workforce Development Work Group Workforce Development Office of Community and Economic Development, 5010 N. Woodrow Ave., Ste. 200, (559) 269-4472 (cell) or 559- Manjit Atwal Coordinator CSU, Fresno M/S WC142 Fresno 93740 294-6023 [email protected] email 94 Work Group Consultants’ Update to the Board, 11/9/2007
Work Group: HHS Social Services Consultant: Juanita Fiorello Organization: Central CA. Social Welfare Evaluation, Research and Training Center (SWERT) Quarter: Third Calendar Quarter 2007 – UPDATED 10/25/2007 Phone: 294-9772 Email: [email protected]
Activities by Goal and Objective
1. Goal 3, Objective A: Establish an ongoing collaborative and a regionwide model Continuum of Care for methamphetamine education, prevention, treatment, and recovery
• Central Ca. Area Social Services Consortium continues to support goal and strategies, including commissioning of a Methamphetamine Policy Briefing related to the impact of substance abuse on child welfare systems. • All county presentations have been completed. Council is formed and growing; now consists of 26 members representing seven counties. Co-chairs have been identified, one for the north counties (Madera, Merced, San Joaquin and Stanislaus) and one for the south counties (Fresno, Kern, Kings, Tulare). • The first Advisory Council meeting on Sept. 7 was a resounding success! The enthusiasm and commitment of all participants was very clear. Roundtable discussions resulted in values, beliefs and concepts that should be the foundation of the model. The Council adopted a framework for the project, including a Vision, Mission, and project timetable (attached). • Activities supported by the seed grant are under way. Initial process to hire a Project Coordinator has begun. The Coordinator will serve as the link between communities, counties, Council members and the SWERT.
Objective B, begin implementation of prevention and treatment modalities across the region, is dependent upon completion of Objective A, targeted for December 2008, and establishment of available funding subsequent years.
Planned Activities:
• Next Council quarterly meeting is 12/14/07 in Visalia. Two regional meetings are being planned for November 2007, one for north counties and one for south counties, to begin developing strategies for community-level outreach and engagement efforts targeting specific geographic areas. • A work plan draft is underway; target date for presentation to the Council is November 30, 2007.
2. Goal 4, Objective A, Support and promote proactive foster care prevention and increase relative placements.
95 Central CA. Social Welfare Evaluation, Research Work Group Consultants’ And Training Center Update to the Board, 11/9/2007t
• Central Ca. Area Social Services Consortium continues to support research and development activities, including a pilot data gathering project to quantify the prevalence of methamphetamine abuse in child welfare cases in three Central Valley counties. • CWDA Regional Children’s Committee and the SWERT continue to work together on relative approval processes, including support of AB 340 legislation. Current efforts include active support of selection of a Valley county to pilot implementation.
Objective B, support stable and continuous foster care prevention services, is targeted for 2008.
Planned Activities:
• Upon completion of background materials, initiate work group meetings comprised of appropriate state and local child welfare representatives. • Initiation of case review project utilizing Social Work interns in Fresno, Madera, and Tulare counties. • Continued efforts to have a Valley county selected to pilot AB 340 legislation.
3. Goal 5, Objective A, Recommend a methodology for proposal evaluation in the State competitive bid process for new grant resources that considers counties’ socioeconomic characteristics
• Clarification at state, local level regarding intent and purpose of goal. Clarified meaning with the state Dept. of Health and Human Services. The term “funding allocation” in the Strategic Action Proposal leads to concerns about altering State formulaic funding allocations, but the adopted HHS Work Group Integrated Work Plan did not include nor intend to address funding allocation methodologies. It only addresses funding made available by State departments to counties via a competitive bid process. • At October Work Group meeting, initiated discussions about moving forward with information-gathering strategies. Compilation of county-specific demographic data is completed; next step is to establish a small team to gather and review grant proposal review criteria from State Departments.
Objective B, HHS Work Group as a change agent, is dependent upon achievement of Objective A and planned for 2008.
Planned Activities:
• Establish a work group to begin the information-gathering process regarding current State grant evaluation methodologies.
96
Local Solutions to Regional Issues
Methamphetamine Recovery Project Framework
Recovery is Possible
and
A Regional Voice is a Strong Voice
VISION: We envision Valley residents as free of the impact of methamphetamine and other substance abuse, living healthy and productive lives.
PROJECT MISSION: Support and advocate for integration and expansion of local efforts to identify, plan, fund, implement and sustain community-specific solutions to abuse of methamphetamine and other addictive substances.
COUNCIL MISSION: The Council serves as the link between the communities they represent and achievement of Project goals, to identify regional strategies for advocacy, education, prevention, treatment, and recovery, including ongoing evaluation of Project progress.
Fiscal and support resources, including funding awarded through the Partnership and funding from the Central California Area Social Services Consortium, will be used to provide administrative support to the regional Advisory Council, comprised of key stakeholders from each of the eight Valley counties.
The Council and its collaborative community partners will develop strategies to complete the project deliverables described below.
• Serve as advocates to develop strategies for civic outreach and engagement in the Project at every level of regional communities. • Assist with identifying and quantifying local and regional needs and issues; • Review and develop consensus on evidence-based, outcomes-driven models of care most likely to be effective for Valley residents; • Identify technical assistance needs and resources to support longitudinal tracking of outcomes and impact on related public services, and development of program models that could be replicated at other sites; • Finalize a strategic plan for support and expansion of existing programs and new components of a long- term, comprehensive continuum of care, including identification of sustainable funding sources; and • Develop the Council’s role as an ongoing regional resource for local, state, and federal efforts to identify and implement strategies to reduce the use and impact of methamphetamine and other substances.
9/18/07 97 PROJECT TIMETABLE:
Year One (July1, 2007 through June 30, 2008)
First Quarter: (7/01/07 – 9/30/07) • Convene a working collaborative that includes Valley Social Service directors, local law enforcement, Alcohol and Drug Programs, Justice, Corrections, Social Services, research faculty, community providers, and community consumer participants. • Gather input from Advisory Council participants to reflect community views on effective models for education, prevention, treatment, sustainable recovery, and community capacity building. • Establish a meeting schedule of dates, times and locations most likely to support maximum participation by collaborative members. • Implement communication systems for widespread knowledge of and participation in Council activities.
Second and Third Quarters: (10/01/07 – 3/31/08) • Draft a project agenda, work plan, and possible standing and ad hoc committee structures as needed to accomplish tasks and achieve milestones described in the work plan. • Aggregate available local, state and national data to define the direct and indirect impact of methamphetamine and other substance us and abuse. • Identify and quantify regional issues and possible regional solutions. • After definition of scope, review and select sample concepts and theoretical models with the potential for improving Valley outcomes affected by substance abuse. • Initiate collaborative community-based review and evaluation of proposed continuum of care models.
Fourth Quarter: (4/1/08 – 6/30/08) • Based on community participation and input, develop a draft model and a regional plan for to address local and regional prevention and treatment needs, including possible funding sources for planning support.
Year Two (July 1, 2008 through December 31, 2008, 6 months)
First Quarter: 7/01/08 – 9/30/08) • Identify potential funding sources to support the cost of model development. Sources may include public and private donations, philanthropic awards, and governmental funding opportunities.
Second Quarter: (10/1/08 – 12/31/08) • Draft a proposal for the design of a comprehensive model that addresses all phases of substance abuse issues, including prevention education, community-based and residential treatment, aftercare, and relapse prevention. The Scope of Work will include measurable outcomes, recommendations for regional oversight and accountability, approaches to funding for direct services, and phased-in implementation timelines. • Dependent upon available funding, prepare written recommendations for moving forward to select a qualified vendor, finalize a service agreement and begin model development.
9/18/07 98
PROGRESS UPDATE October, 2007
Consortium Goal:
Increase the number of RN graduates in the San Joaquin Valley by 250 each year, beginning in January, 2008.
• Objective I: Increase retention of nursing students by 6% and NCLEX pass rates by 10%. • Increased NCLEX passing scores for valley nursing programs from 80% in 2004-2005 to 84.32% in 2006-2007. This translates to approximately 200 more nurses for the valley. • Working on retention strategies such as tutoring and mentoring programs for students that will help them stay in the program.
New Opportunities: Standardize the use of testing strategies by all the valley nursing programs that will help graduate nurses pass the NCLEX exam.
Continued Challenges: Additional funding needed to help support the efforts.
• Objective II: Increase the supply of faculty and create centralized faculty resource center. • Completed our first faculty training course sponsored in part by the grant. 23 valley RNs have completed the on-line certificate course which will now allow them to serve as clinical faculty. These RNs were referred by either hospitals or colleges and will now have the opportunity to teach students.
New Opportunities: The grant will help sponsor 2 more classes in January and July, 2008.
Continued Challenges: Having more Associate degree nurses further their education by going back to school to obtain their bachelors or masters degree in nursing. In addition, having hospitals release these nurses to teach a clinical rotation.
99 • Objective III: Create a Computerized Clinical Placement System (CCPS). • Reviewing responses to the Request for Proposal (RFPs) for the computerized clinical placement program that were sent out to interested parties. Only had one RFP response which did not meet the minimum number of points to be selected. New RFPs with a 30 day timeline to be sent November 1st..
New Opportunities: Utilize the computerized clinical placement program to develop a “faculty pool” where nursing schools can post their faculty needs and faculty can post their availability.
Continued Challenges: Identifying the right vendor, costs involved in maintaining the program, location for the system, and on-going financial support.
• Objective IV: Enhance the Use of Distance Learning in Nursing Education • Working with 3 valley Junior Colleges (Modesto, Fresno, & Bakersfield) that have distance learning nursing programs. They will be awarded grant monies for tutoring the students in the distance education nursing programs.
New Opportunities: Look to work with the CSU systems that have an RN to BSN distance education program to help gain additional faculty.
Continued Challenges: Securing additional funding.
• Objective V: Sustained Funding of the grant
New Opportunities: Apply for a Department of Labor grant, anywhere from $500,000 to $2,000,000 for expansion of simulation labs in the 11 valley colleges with nursing programs; sponsor additional skills lab faculty that would allow nursing programs to expand their programs; and, also allow hospitals to utilize the simulation labs for specialty training and remediation of staff.
Work with the Regional Health Occupation Resource Center (RHORC) that will be giving $5,000 to both Fresno City College and Bakersfield College for faculty training on simulation equipment.
Continued Challenges: Have sufficient expert faculty for simulation lab equipment, have critical care scenarios developed and obtain additional funding from businesses like Leardal.
Future Meetings:
December 12, 2007 Steering and Consortium meeting 1:00 p.m. – 4:00 p.m. Bakersfield Mercy Hospital
100
Land Use, Ag and Housing Work Group
Index
Description Page No.
LUAH Strategic Action Plan Goal 6 102
San Joaquin Valley Housing Trust – Report to the Board 103
San Joaquin Valley Housing Trust – Applegate Flier 106
101
Goal 6: Ensure safe, accessible, inclusive, and healthy communities that provide a variety of housing types affordable to Valley residents and working people, increasing opportunities for home ownership. Indicators: Increase in the number of local housing initiatives undertaken with local NGO participation. Increase in the number of affordable housing units build for working families, low and low to moderate income families, seniors and farmworkers. Increase in the number of regulatory incentives provided and number of units in each jurisdiction. Objective A: Increase the number and availability of housing units for people of all income levels of the region, especially working families. Improve access and coordination 1. Establish a regional housing 1. Implement and administer the Establish local housing resource Immediate: ACI Core Group for local residents and volunteers trust fund for affordable housing. housing trust fund to facilitate the centers to provide housing with COGs, local housing to participate in, support, and 2. Facilitate the development of a provision of workforce housing in information and assistance to both authorities, Habitat for advocate for community based regional outreach/education the region. the users and the providers of Humanity Short Term: housing initiatives. campaign that promotes the 2. Collaborate with master affordable housing in every 1st action: Governor, state and benefits of higher density, mixed planned community developers to county. federal legislators, ACI Core use, public transit oriented ensure a mix of housing types for Group with COGs; 2nd action: communities. all income levels. ACI Core Group with COGs Intermediate: 1st action: Trust Fund Governing Board, community based housing agencies, developers, local governments; 2nd action: Local governments, COGs, local housing authorities, NGOs, advocates Long Term: Counties, Housing Trust Fund, HCD, HUD Objective B: Provide incentives for affordable housing that meets the needs of all income levels in the region. Improve access and coordination Identify and reform regulatory Create employee assistance Short Term: ACI Core Group for local residents and volunteers barriers to affordable housing. programs and education in with COGs, local housing to participate in, support, and Identify and highlight incentives. financial literacy to aid families in authorities, Habitat for advocate for community based (See “Putting the Pieces achieving home ownership. Humanity Intermediate: Local housing initiatives. Together”, a report on smart governments, HUD, HCD, state growth from the Urban Land legislature, builders, developers Institute) Long Term: Banks and credit unions, Chambers of Commerce and business councils, housing advocates, community based housing corporations
102
November 9, 2008
To: the Board of Directors of the California Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley From: SJV Affordable Communities Initiative Core Group, Rollie Smith, convener Re: Approval of the San Joaquin Valley Housing Trust
The San Joaquin Valley Affordable Communities Initiative (SJVACI) Core Group is part of the LUAH Work Group of the Partnership implementing the housing recommendations of the Partnership Strategic Action Proposal (SAP) which called for the formation of a regional housing trust.
AB 1129 (Arambula), introduced to give state support to the SJV Regional Housing Trust in its formation and development, was endorsed by the Partnership Board. SB 586 (Dutton), signed by the Governor, reserves $37 million of Prop 1C Funds for housing trusts and half of that ($18.5m) for new housing trusts. We want to reserve as much of that as possible for Valley jurisdictions through the SJVHT.
Attached is a summary of the Regional Housing Trust that is being proposed to the Partnership. We are developing the Board of Directors and securing the funding for the organization. We believe that this organization will be a principal vehicle for implementing the values and goals of the Valley Blueprint process and the Land Use, Agriculture and Housing Strategic Action Plan in housing the Valley’s growing number of residents and workforce.
The Core Group includes the following members:
Allysunn Williams, CSUF Mark Gregory, realtor Ana Fuentes, Merced CAG Masoud Niroumand, City of Merced Anita Hellam, Stanislaus County Habitat for Humanity Matthew Jendian, CSUF, Fresno Housing Alliance Anthony Zepeda, San Joaquin County COG Michael Lane, Self Help Enterprises Inc Bob Hoskins, Kings County Housing Authority Mike Prandini, BIA Fresno Bob Keenan, BIA of Tulare and Kings Miriam Krehbiel, United Way of Kern County Candice Steelman, MCAG Nick Benjamin, Madera Housing Authority Carlos Yamzon, Stanislaus County COG Nick Ortiz, Nicole Parra Christie Hendricks, Merced County Office of Education Paul McDougall, California HCD Christina Lehn, Kings County Randy McNary, Kings County Housing Authority Clark Thompson, Fresno COG Rhonda Haynes, City of Visalia Darrel Hildebrand, Kern COG Rollie Smith, US HUD Darryl Rutherford, California Coalition for Rural Ron Prestridge, City of Madera Housing Sara Hedgpeth Harris, Fresno Housing Alliance Denard Davis, South Dos Palos Housing Project Scott Cochran, County of Tulare COG Dennis Wallace, Habitat for Humanity Bakersfield Sharon Sheltzer, City of Visalia Don Borgwaldt, Merced County Housing Authority Steven Pelz, Kern County Housing Authority Elizabeth Wright, Blueprint, County of Tulare COG Teresa Kinney, Congressman Cardoza Elliott Balch, Assemblyman Arambula Tina Sumner, City of Clovis Gregg Jordan, International Electrical Workers Tony Miranda, Fresno Habitat for Humanity Larry Roselle, US Department of HUD Vince Harris, Stanislaus County COG Laurie Mercer, County of Tulare Will Larsen, Kern County COG Leslie Gacad, City of Fresno Yvette Quiroga, Fresno County
103 San Joaquin Valley Housing Trust: A Fund and an Organization for Housing in a Manner that Sustains the Values, Economy, and Ecosystem of the Valley
Regional Housing Trust Fund: The SJV Regional Housing Trust is envisioned as a fund in which local jurisdictions that participate will build up and receive flexible funds that help them achieve the housing goals of their housing elements. The funds can be used for acquiring land, providing incentives to private developers, leveraging government programs and private loans, front-end master planning, and many more uses that would incentivize housing that is affordable to people who live and work in the locality. The funds would be used to encourage higher density, smart growth, or new urbanism projects that link jobs, transportation, and housing to ensure that the growth of the Valley preserves agricultural lands and promotes clean energy, air quality, and economic expansion in accords with the values being articulated through the regional Valley Blueprint process.
Regional Housing Trust Organization: The Trust is being established as a nonprofit organization with a special relationship to the California Partnership and the SJV Blueprint.
Purposes: The by-laws state the following purposes for the organization: 1. Work with the California Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley to maintain a comprehensive and integrated and coordinated regional housing strategy. 2. Establish and support a broad network of partners to accelerate development of affordable and workforce housing in the Valley. 3. Develop and serve as a resource for information and expertise to increase investments in affordable and workforce housing in the Valley. 4. Incentivize the development of housing trust funds for local jurisdictions. 5. Ensure that the Valley is maximizing value received from available federal, state and local housing programs. 6. Communicate and demonstrate how the Valley can lead efforts to implement innovative strategies in creating affordable housing that is aligned with sustainable development and the preservation of farmlands and natural habitats. 7. Serve as a source of technical assistance and advocacy to local jurisdictions in order for them to achieve their goals as stated in the housing elements of their general plans.
The Board of Directors shall be constituted as follows:
The Chair and Deputy Chairs of the California Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley (collectively, the “Partnership Representatives”) shall appoint one (1) director from each of the three (3) work groups of Energy, Economic Development and Land Use, Agriculture and Housing; each of the eight (8) SJV COGs shall each appoint one (1)
104 approved representative; the Housing Authorities throughout the Valley shall appoint one (1) director from a housing authority; the four (4) nonprofit developers of affordable housing and the three (3) housing advocates representing the three geographic regions of the Valley shall be elected by those present at annual meeting of the Corporation. After the initial selection of the Board, three (3) individuals with specialized expertise in child care, universal design, and workforce development and up to additional Directors with other areas of specialized expertise shall be appointed at the Board’s discretion.
Activities of the Regional Trust Organization: To achieve the purposes of the organization, the following activities would be undertaken. Raise trust funds through public and private sources Provide funding for projects meeting criteria, using process established by board Assist jurisdictions in establishing their own trust funds and in planning and the effective use of trust funds in relation to their housing elements Assist COGS with Regional Housing Needs Assessments (RHNA) and with housing planning in relation to transportation and land use Assist jurisdictions to tie their plans and their projects into blueprint processes and smart growth principles Assist jurisdictions who have signed onto the National call to Action for Affordable Housing through Regulatory Reform review policies and regulations to remove obstacles and promote procedures that will foster housing affordable to residents and workforce. Community education related to housing including assisting jurisdictions avoid NIMBYism.
Funding of Regional Trust Fund: • Prop 1C as seed funding • Accounts of participating jurisdictions (individual trust funds) • Private fundraising—Foundations, Corporations, Banks, Individuals • Other state and federal funds
Funding of Regional Trust Organization (administration, planning, services, and education): • Private Foundations • State legislature in starting trust—3 year administrative costs • Administrative fees and Membership dues
Until the Trust is organized and funded, California Coalition for Rural Housing has offered to attempt to raise resources for providing staff support to the Housing Trust Working Group.
105
What holds you back from meeting the Affordable Housing Goals in your Housing Element?
National Call to Affordable Housing through Regulatory Reform and The San Joaquin Valley Housing Trust—a Project of the California Partnership
Invite you to meet with
Bryant Applegate, Special Counsel Director of the United States Affordable Communities Initiative US Department of Housing and Urban Development, Washington DC
This is a special session for Cities and Counties and their Partners to
1. Learn best practices in modifying regulations and developing policies to remove obstacles to and promote housing affordable to Valley residents and workforce.
2. Learn about and participate in the San Joaquin Valley Regional Housing Trust, linked to the California Partnership and SJV Blueprint, to assist local jurisdictions flexible funds—how to set up a housing trust regulatory reform—how to facilitate affordable housing smart growth—how to use the techniques of the new urbanism
There will be three 2-hour working sessions in the Valley:
October 31—City of Merced -- 2:00 to 4:00PM Merced Civic Center- 678 West 18th Street - Merced, California 95340
Nov 1—City of Selma -- 10 to noon Selma City Hall - 1710 Tucker Street, Selma CA 93662
Nov 1—City of Bakersfield – 2:30 to 4:30 Bakersfield E&CD 1600 Truxtun Avenue - Bakersfield CA 93301
We are limiting each session to 15-20 people who are interested in discussing ways to modify regulations and policies to support housing for our residents.
Please RSVP and indicate which session you will attend: Send email or call [email protected] 559-487-5033 x240
106
Work Group Consultants’ Reports The attached reports summarize Third Quarter Activity from July 2007 through September 2007 for each of the Partnership’s 10 work groups. Index Work Group/Seed Grant Page No.
Advanced Communications Services 108 Seed Grant: San Joaquin Valley eHealth Network Grantee Organization: University of California, Merced 111
Air Quality 113 Seed Grant: Air Quality Education in Environmental Justice Areas Grantee Organization: The Maddy Institute 117
Economic Development 118 Seed Grant: Central Valley Marketing and Cluster Development Grantee Organization: California Central Valley Economic Corporation 121 Seed Grant: Building Investment and Entrepreneurship in the San Joaquin Valley Grantee Organization: Golden Capital Network 122
Energy 124 Seed Grant: Growing Clean Energy Capacity in the San Joaquin Valley Grantee Organization: Kings River Conservation District/San Joaquin Valley Clean Energy Organization 126
Health and Human Services (Health) 128 Seed Grant: San Joaquin Valley Health Enterprise Zone Project Grantee Organization: Central Valley Health Policy Institute 131
Health and Human Services (Human) 134 Seed Grant: Methamphetamine Recovery Project Grantee Organization: California State University, Fresno Foundation 135
Higher Education and Workforce Development 136 Seed Grant: Developing a College Going Culture in the San Joaquin Valley Grantee Organization: Central Valley Higher Education Consortium 141
K-12 Education 143 Seed Grant: English Language Learner Leadership Academy Grantee Organization: Fresno County Office of Education 148
Land Use, Agriculture and Housing 154 Seed Grant: Farmland Conservation Model Program/Uniform Farmland Database Grantee Organization: Council of Fresno County Governments 158 Seed Grant: Integrating Land and Water Solutions in Tulare Lake Basin Grantee Organization: Tulare Basin Wildlife Partners 159
Transportation 160 Seed Grant: Metro Rural Loop Corridor Preservation Feasibility Study Grantee Organization: City of Fresno, Planning and Development Department 163
Water Quality, Supply and Reliability 164 Seed Grant: San Joaquin Valley Regional Water Plans Integration/University Farm Recycled Water Usage Grantee Organization: California Water Institute 167 Seed Grant: Sowing Seeds for Community Health Grantee Organization: Self-Help Enterprises 168 107 Work Group: Advanced Communications Services and Technology Consultant: Barbara Patrick, Special Projects Coordinator Organization: Great Valley Center Quarter: 3rd 2007 Phone: 209-522-5103 Email: [email protected]
Description of Activity by Goal and Objective
Goal 1: Objective A. Raise the profile of access to advanced communications services (ACS) as a fundamental and necessary service for all residents and businesses.
Consultant conferred with Business, Transportation and Housing staff regarding task force report. Information in report is foundational to ACS work because there are no maps currently available to the public regarding the extent of broadband deployment in the Valley.
Goal 1: Objective B. Inform local elected officials about the benefits of ubiquitous access to ACS and provide model policies and other tools to help facilitate deployment.
Research has begun on model policies currently in practice in jurisdictions in California and elsewhere that facilitate ubiquitous broadband deployment.
Goal 1: Objective E. Increase deployment of ACS by current and prospective service providers.
Consultant has conferred with Bay Area group on the prospect of convening stakeholders in the above groups to begin development of an action plan.
Goal 2: Objective A. Increase utilization of ACS by all residents.
Second phase of Pixley Connect has begun. Community representatives will be invited to participate in Partnership Summit to report on how this project has enhanced their community and its residents.
Goal 2: Objective B. Inform local elected officials about the importance and benefits of access to ACS and IT for all residents and businesses.
Consultant has conferred with Bay Area group on the prospect of convening stakeholders in the above groups to begin development of an action plan.
Goal 2: Objective C. Implement projects to provide access to ACS and IT for all residents and businesses to eliminate the digital divide.
Regular conversations between Sunne McPeak and Carol Whiteside regarding opportunities for California Emerging Technology Fund (CETF) and the ACS Work Group to partner on this effort.
Goal 2: Objective D. Develop and implement a program to ensure all high school students graduate with basic computer literacy skills. (See K-12 Education)
Consultant has conferred with Dr. Barbara O’Connor from California State University, Sacramento, regarding computer literacy standards for high school and community college students. Conversations have begun with work group consultant for K-12 Education, Dr. Marcy Masumoto, who also will be working on this issue.
Goal 2: Objective E. Expand the number of public locations for access to ACS to help disadvantaged residents and businesses to bridge the digital divide.
Consultant has conferred with Bay Area group on the prospect of convening stakeholders in the above groups to begin development of an action.
108 Goal 3: Objective A. Develop and implement a plan to expand and replicate the most successful strategies and programs to bridge the digital divide.
Research continues on the most successful strategies that have been developed for rural and disadvantaged communities and populations.
Goal 3: Objective B. Foster demand for ACS access in underserved and disadvantaged communities, such as encouraging economic development and growth of home-based businesses.
Consultant met with One Economy regarding Digital Connectors program for Pixley and 21C opportunity, which could serve as model for other underserved communities in the Valley.
Goal 4: Objective A. Develop and implement a telemedicine and eHealth plan to connect health clinics with medical centers.
Consultant is coordinating with CETF and seed grant recipient University of California, Merced, to design the pilot system of telehealth/telemedicine sites in the San Joaquin Valley: the San Joaquin Valley eHealth Network.
Planned Activities by Goal and Objective (for next 3-6 months)
Goal 1: Objective A. Raise the profile of access to advanced communications services (ACS) as a fundamental and necessary service for all residents and businesses.
ACS will schedule a meeting in the fourth quarter subsequent to release of report from Governor’s California Broadband Task Force.
Goal 1: Objective B. Inform local elected officials about the benefits of ubiquitous access to ACS and provide model policies and other tools to help facilitate deployment.
Research to continue in next quarter.
Goal 1: Objective C. Identify communities and neighborhoods without affordable connection to delivery of ACS.
Governor’s California Broadband Task Force will issue a report this fall, which may be helpful in acquiring information.
Goal 1: Objective D. Increase availability of affordable ACS in rural and other underserved areas.
Will work on fleshing out ideas for TOZ at future work group meetings such as how large of an incentive would be needed and what type. This is likely to be included in the task force report.
Goal 1: Objective H. Identify and seek all available funding for deployment of ACS.
Funds are available through the CETF. Work plan will identify other sources as well. Future meetings will discuss prospective legislation to eliminate restrictions.
Goal 1. Objective J. Incorporate ACS infrastructure into all new residential and commercial construction.
Representatives from the California and Valley building industry associations will be invited to the fourth quarter meeting. Local affordable housing advocates also will be included.
Goal 2: Objective C. Implement projects to provide access to ACS and IT for all residents and businesses to eliminate the digital divide.
Conversations will continue in the future.
109 Goal 4: Objective A. Develop and implement a telemedicine and eHealth plan to connect health clinics with medical centers.
Will continue to monitor progress and work with implementers of seed grant.
Challenges/Problems/ Bottlenecks/Feedback
Goal 1: Objective A. Raise the profile of access to advanced communications services (ACS) as a fundamental and necessary service for all residents and businesses.
When Task Force Report is released, ACS work group can begin moving forward based on Partnership work plan and information in report.
Goal 1: Objective B. Inform local elected officials about the benefits of ubiquitous access to ACS and provide model policies and other tools to help facilitate deployment.
Majority of CA jurisdictions that have shown leadership in this area are in highly urbanized, affluent areas that have little in common with most SJV cities. Most successful rural jurisdictions are working under the leadership of their state government.
Goal 1: Objective C. Identify communities and neighborhoods without affordable connection to delivery of ACS.
ACS Work Group has not yet received this information.
110
Quarter/Dates of Activity: September 2007 through October 2007 Seed Grant: San Joaquin Valley eHealth Network Project Grantee Organization: School of Natural Sciences, University of California, Merced Contact Person: Maria Pallavicini, Ph.D. Phone: 209-228-2969 Email: [email protected]
Description of Quarter’s Activity/impact on Partnership Goals & Objectives
The contract for the seed grant with University of California, Merced, was finalized on Sept 10. Thus, per university policy, the grant began at the date the contract was executed. Due to the delay in finalizing the contract, I project that the grant is approximately one quarter behind schedule at this point but that we will be able to move forward rapidly.
The goals planned for the first quarter were to recruit an Assessment and Implementation Team, recruit an analyst, coordinate two regional meetings, and begin site assessment. Progress has been made toward achieving some of the stated goals, particularly those that did not require significant funds upfront.
Activities included staff recruitment, media events and planning meetings.
The Telemedicine Team will be made up of the PI (Maria Pallavicini), Telemedicine Project Manager, Analyst, IT support and academic representation from UC Merced, UCSF at Fresno and UC Davis, AT&T, and Michael Byrne, from the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development, and three community members. The following staff recruitment is in progress or completed: • Telemedicine Project Manager- in progress • Analyst- in progress • IT support for eHealth Centers- completed
We anticipate having personnel on board by December 1.
Since award of the Seed Grant, two other sources of funding to support the overall initiative were obtained. Generous awards from the California Emerging Technologies Foundation (CETF) and the AT&T Foundation were obtained to leverage funding initiated and provided by the Seed Grant. These awards expanded the scope of the eHealth Initiative to create a Valleywide vision for a telemedicine network, focusing on rural underserved. The Valleywide planning effort will involve site assessment of more than 90 sites receiving the federal rural designation, development of a connectivity plan, and an implementation plan. Establishment of four eHealth Centers, supported by the Seed Grant and supplemented with funds from the AT&T Foundation, will be located at sites that are part of the larger plan for the Valley.
At about the same time that UC Merced received awards for our telemedicine initiative, UC distributed funds derived from Prop 1D bond money to each of the five medical schools to support infrastructure for telemedicine for education. UCSF at Fresno received $2 million through the UC campus. UC Merced, UC Davis and UCSF at Fresno have agreed to partner in the planning and development of the telemedicine Initiative to leverage funds from multiple sources, to ensure that institutions are not competing with each other, and to develop strategies to distribute efforts throughout the region.
A number of meetings were held in support of the above activities: 1. Media event announcing the Telemedicine Initiative for the Valley with broad coverage from Bakersfield to Stockton and representation from CETF, Governor’s Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley, and AT&T Foundation. 2. UC Merced-UC Davis Telemedicine Center to discuss UCD role/subcontract in eHealth centers and larger vision for the SJV eHealth Network. 3. UC Academic Partners- UC Merced, UCD, UCSF at Fresno to establish understanding of UC campus partnerships/roles in the Valley for telemedicine initiative leveraging resources from the three campuses. 4. UC Office of the President- Cathryn Nation and Tom Nesbitt- Integration of San Joaquin Valley Telemedicine Planning with UC System-wide plans for telemedicine for California
111 Planned Activities for next 3-6 months:
1. Complete staff recruitment, finalize, Telemedicine Assessment Team. 2. Attend Telemedicine Technology Summit at UCD, including vendor presentations, to benefit from UC system-wide vendor contracts for telemedicine equipment. 3. Begin site assessments, coordinating assessments of nine potential sites with the 90+ to be evaluated for CETF. 4. Coordinate regional meeting in the Southern Valley- Bakersfield- Kings County.
Challenges/Problems/Bottlenecks/Feedback
Major challenges ensued in two areas:
1. Delays in executing the contract with BTH due to policies about equipment ownership and overhead on the Seed Grant. According to BTH policies, the telemedicine equipment ownership resides with BTH, whereas UC Merced wanted equipment ownership to reside with the clinics. Both equipment ownership and overhead issues were resolved in early September, allowing the contract for the Seed Grant to be finalized between BTH and UC Merced.
2. Identifying qualified individuals to manage the Telemedicine Initiative. The pool of qualified individuals to manager this initiative is very small, and it is unexpectedly challenging to recruit a qualified individual. Consequently, the project has started without a project manager. I anticipate that we will be able to complete the recruitment into this position no later than the end of the year, in 2007.
If you have you coordinated any outreach, please describe briefly
The media event on campus announcing the Telemedicine Initiative was a major outreach event to the community, explaining the concept of telemedicine, acknowledging the generous sponsors of the initiative and describing the plans for the next 12-18 months. The outcome of the media event was a flood of e-mail from health care providers and elected officials in the Valley requesting to be part of the Initiative.
The media event led to national recognition of the Valley’s efforts. An interview with a Washington-based organization: www.NextGenWeb.org was recently completed and will be broadcast as podcasts from their site and others.
112
Work Group: Air Quality Consultant: Mark Keppler Organization: The Maddy Institute Quarter: 3rd 2007 Phone: 559-294-9119 Email: [email protected]
Description of Activity by Goal and Objective
Goal 1: Achieve U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) standards for 8-hour ozone and PM2.5 by the current attainment date, or as soon as practicable thereafter
AQ Work Group Monthly Meetings
Pete Weber, Mark Keppler and Katie Stevens participate in biweekly meetings of the Air District’s Fast Track Task Force (FTTF). This group is responsible for advancing or promoting initiatives to help bring the Valley into attainment as quickly as possible.
On July 27, Rick McVaigh of the Air District gave an update of the FTTF. 1. ARB Off-Road Rule – On July 26, Katie Stevens gave testimony on behalf of the Air Quality Work Group in support of an enhanced rule proposed by Seyed Sadredin from the Air District. This was the first big win for the FTTF as they advocated successfully for a rule that included a mandatory incentive program that would provide another 3 tons/day in emissions reduction (called the SOON program). Initially industry had been opposed to the rule, but FTTF members worked to set a good policy precedent – to give industry a chance to opt-in and obtain incentives. At the ARB hearing, DeeDee D’Adamo committed herself to matching our $5 million in Moyer discretionary. 2. Funding - Currently seeking Prop 1B Air Quality Mitigation funds. Through Senator Feinstein, the Air District received a $7.5 million earmark for SJV for diesel emissions reduction projects. Secured $150 million in EQIP air pollution money which was provided in the House version of the Farm Bill. 3. Identifying new technology/methods to get us to attainment: o Expanding District’s Spare the Air program o Triangular Truck Trading (may be very cost-effective) o Short Sea Shipping (SSS). Setting up conference to further explore SSS.
On August 24, the Air District gave an update on FTTF Progress – the main focus is on innovative programs, i.e., the group is looking at a truck trade-down program, and possibly integrating this program into the ARB’s truck regulation. We know that additional incentives are needed and believe that we can align the two. We also discussed the following: o Spare the Air program – new approach for next summer. Want a more focused, week-long, publicized program to practice air-friendly behaviors for the entire week. o SSS – putting together a conference in November, with potential funding from Operation Clean Air. Hope to have draft agenda by next fast track meeting on Sept 11. o Working on Community Clean Air Fund internally. o Symposium August 3-4 in Visalia, on “taking the fast track.”
ARB Dual Path Task Force
On August 22, 29, and 30, members of the AQWG participated in ARB-hosted meetings held around the Valley to hear from task force members and residents about local air quality concerns in the San Joaquin Valley. The task force is a temporary entity charged to explore ideas to accelerate air quality progress for the region through additional programs and specific strategies. The group is comprised of members of environmental/community groups, local businesses/industries and government.
Goal 2: Encourage EPA adoption of tighter federal emission control standards
No action taken.
113 Goal 3: Implement incentive mechanisms to accelerate adoption of air quality mitigation technologies
Funding for Incentive Programs
August 27, the AQWG sent letter in support of SB 240 to the Assembly Appropriations Committee. The bill, introduced by Senator Dean Florez, allows the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (District) to increase the annual fee imposed on a motor vehicle registered within the District's jurisdiction to support programs designed to reduce motor vehicle emissions and to achieve and maintain state and federal air quality standards in the District.
August 27, Partnership wrote a letter to Assembly Appropriators in support of SB 23 (Cogdill) as introduced. This bill requires the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (District) to develop and administer a vehicle replacement pilot program (VRP) through which vehicles that meet certain air emissions standards can be donated to the pilot program to be made available to replace up to 200 high-polluter vehicles voluntarily turned in to the program annually by persons who reside within the jurisdiction of the air district.
On September 19, ARB released their draft concepts for implementation of the Prop 1B Goods Movement Emission Reduction Program (guidelines by which $1 billion in funding will be allocated, $250 million of which was appropriated in the 2007-08 Budget). ARB is holding a series of workshops in each of the trade corridors to seek public input on program design, including how to apply the funding criteria in the legislation and which specific types of projects should be eligible for funding. They are proposing to develop funding targets for source sectors (trucks, locomotives, etc.) and for the four trade corridor regions (Los Angeles/Inland Empire, Central Valley, Bay Area, and San Diego/Border). ARB will use the information gained from the workshops to develop recommendations to the Board on funding targets and the Program Guidelines. The AQWG analyzed the draft guidelines and disseminated to the WG as well as federal and state legislative staffers. They coordinated outreach to ensure strong Valley participation at the Fresno workshop.
Federal Outreach
On July 3, members of the Air Quality Work Group sent a letter to Speaker Nancy Pelosi urging her to ensure that the air quality subprogram funded from new funding sources is included in the House version of the Farm Bill. Currently, Rep. Dennis Cardoza, supported by more than 100 other members of Congress, has proposed an air pollution subprogram within EQIP in his EAT Healthy for America Act, HR 1600. That subprogram would increase, and make more certain, funding to help alleviate air pollution.
On July 6, Pete Weber sent a thank you note to Senator Boxer who recently introduced S.1456, the Agricultural Air Quality Incentives Act of 2007, and Senator Feinstein who is an original co-sponsor. This bill would authorize USDA to provide cost-share assistance and incentives payments to farmers who undertake measures designed to mitigate air quality impacts. Farmers would be eligible for funding from the Environmental Quality Incentive Program if they operate in areas with low air quality that is a result of agricultural pollution and emissions. The bill would also allow USDA to prioritize funding for areas where agricultural producers coordinate their air conservation activities. Funding for this program would start at $25 million in the first year and increase to $100 million by the fifth year of the program.
On July 11, the AQWG consultants finalized a letter to be sent by our congressional delegation to the Director of the President’s Office of Management and Budget, Rob Portman regarding the air quality FY09 budget request. 1. Request that the President’s budget contain language targeting funding to air basins with “extreme” non-attainment designation for 8-hour ozone and non-attainment designation for PM 2.5. 2. Encourage Administration to fully fund DERA at its authorized level of $200 million in the FY09 budget with the increase in funding targeted primarily at the most challenging air basins, as described above. 3. Stated that we would like to work with him to identify possible line item funding in various agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Transportation and the Department of Energy.
On August 7, the AQWG sent thank you letters to Congressmen Cardoza, Costa, and McCarthy for supporting and securing the $150 million EQIP air quality subprogram in the House version of the Farm Bill.
On August 20, the AQWG sent a thank you letter to Senator Feinstein for her work in securing $7.5 million in DERA funding in the Senate Interior-Environment Appropriation bill to provide grants for retrofits, engine replacement, equipment replacement and technology development in the San Joaquin Valley as well as securing $1.4 million to complete the Central California Ozone Study.
114 On September 13, various members of the Air Quality Work Group and Energy Work Group signed a letter to Chairman Harking requesting his support in including the $150 million EQIP air quality subprogram in the Senate version of the Farm Bill.
Goal 4: Promote clean energy projects (with Energy Work Group)
San Joaquin Clean Energy Organization
AQWG worked with the Energy WG to design structure of the Clean Energy Organization and participated in the first meeting with the newly established board.
Additionally, the AQWG and Energy WG are actively supporting efforts by the “25x’25” Initiative to establish a national renewable energy goal to generate 25% of our energy from renewable resources like wind, solar, and biofuels by the year 2025. This national goal was attached to the Senate energy bill, HR 6, by unanimous vote and has been endorsed by over 100 members of Congress. In August, the 25x’25 Initiative and the Clean Energy Organization agreed to work together to make the Valley a regional "demonstration project" for the achievement of the goals of the 25x’25 Vision.
Goal 5: Improve transportation mobility and goods movement (with Transportation Work Group)
AQWG consultants remain engaged in activities of the Transportation Work Group and the COG Regional Policy Council regarding goods movement plans and high-speed rail.
High-Speed Rail activities – AQWG coordinated with state and federal legislative offices and WG members, along with the Transportation WG, to ensure Valley stakeholder participation in CHRSA public hearings on the draft EIR/EIS Valley-Bay Area Corridor proposal. AQWG provided testimony at the two Valley hearings in Merced and Stockton.
AQWG and FTTF are currently planning a conference on Short Sea Shipping to explore its feasibility.
Goal 6: Encourage “green” local government policies and sustainable communities
The AQWG is working through the FTTF to schedule a Clean Air Technology Conference in coordination with EPA Region IX.
Goal 7: Accelerate research on emission-reduction strategies and clean-air technologies, establishing the San Joaquin Valley as a leader in innovation
No action taken.
Goal 8: Improve public understanding of air quality issues and solutions
See Attached Seed Grant Quarterly Report for information on the Air Quality Education in Environmental Justice Areas project
Public Education Campaign
AQWG is working through the FTTF to provide recommendations for an enhanced “Spare the Air Day” program so as to maximize the reduction of emissions during poor air quality days.
Planned Activities by Goal and Objective (for next 3-6 months)
The AQWG will continue to hold monthly meetings.
Over the next few months, ARB will continue to finalize guidelines for the allocation of $1 billion in Prop 1B air quality mitigation funding. The AQWG will coordinate outreach to ensure that Valley stakeholders are made aware of the proposals and participate in each public hearing opportunity.
We will also continue to monitor federal appropriations as they are likely passed over the next few months. The AQWG is particular interested in a couple of programs to provide funding for air quality incentive programs. Additionally, we will prepare for next year’s state and federal budget requests. 115
If you have coordinated any outreach, please describe briefly.
The AQWG remains directly involved with legislators and their staff, conducting consistent legislative outreach. The Partnership and Interagency Task Force convene Valley district office staffers from both the Congressional and State delegations monthly in which the AQWG attends and fully participates.
On August 7, the AQWG met with Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, Dr. Stephen Johnson, in Fresno at the invitation of Congressman George Radanovich. The Congressman had asked Pete Weber to organize a small meeting with members of the Air Quality Work Group of the California Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley and other key stakeholders. The purpose was to brief the Administrator on the unique air quality challenges of the Valley and to enlist his support for solutions, and the Administrator and his staff, in turn, briefed us on some of the actions they are taking to benefit clean air in the Valley.
On August 22, Pete Weber, Mark Keppler, Andy Chesley and Katie Stevens met with Congressman McNerney in Stockton to discuss air quality challenges, efforts to secure incentive funding at the federal level, potential for transportation improvements, etc.
The AQWG helped coordinate Valley participation in the High Speed Rail hearings throughout the state. They have also coordinated advocacy campaigns to Congress in support of preserving the EQIP air quality subprogram in the Farm Bill.
Additionally, The Maddy Institute has facilitated outreach in the rural cities to implement the Environmental Justice program.
116
Quarter/Dates of Activity: Q1 July 2007 through September 2007 Seed Grant: Air Quality Education in Environmental Justice Areas Grantee Organization: The Maddy Institute, California State University, Fresno Contact Person: Mark Keppler Phone: 559-294-9119 Email: [email protected]
Description of Quarter’s Activity and Impact on Partnership Goals and Objectives
On July 14, The Maddy Institute held its first event in Arvin - a "Tune In-Tune Up" event - co-sponsored with Valley Clean Air Now (“Valley CAN”). Approximately 360 cars were tested, 280 failed, and 250 cars received appointments for repairs. Even with a small population of less than 13,000, this event was more successful than the event held earlier this year in the city of Fresno, which has a population of over 481,000 and where 250 cars were tested, 180 cars failed and 104 coupons were redeemed.
Major Recommendations and Strategic Actions (Section IV of SAP) • Recommendation 5: Attain clean air standards. Strategic Action: Improve public education.
Work Group Reports (Section V of the SAP) Air Quality Work Group • Goal 8: Improve Public Understanding of Air Quality Issues and Solutions Objective A: Conduct a Public Education Campaign
Planned Activities for next 3-6 months:
• School Bus Fleet Modernization January 2008 – June 2008: organizing purchase equipment purchased, staff members trained
• Air District’s Indirect Source Rule (“ISR”) September 2007 – December 2008: Planning work with the SJVAPCD on outreach, followed by implementation of plan
• Clean and Green Local Government Operations • October 2007: Arvin workshop • January 2008: Prepare flexible electronic “How To” kit • February 2008: Parlier Workshop
• Lawnmowers and Leafblowers • October 2007: Meet with SJVAPCD regarding incentive programs • April 2008: Coordination of three working group meetings
Challenges/Problems/Bottlenecks/Feedback
1. Getting a final contract approved by the State. 2. Determining (i.e., getting conflicting statements) whether we were to go through the University or the Foundation to administer the grant.
If you have coordinated any outreach, please describe briefly
Efforts between our two contractors, Valley CAN and Community Focus have been coordinated with face-to-face meetings, email and phone calls. In addition, the Air Quality Work Group (AQWG) has been apprised of our activities. We anticipate on-going cooperation between our contractors and involvement of the AQWG for the duration of this grant.
117
Work Group: Economic Development Consultant: Jennifer Faughn Organization: Central California Economic Development Corporation Quarter: 3rd 2007 Phone: 661-366-0756 Email: [email protected]
Description of Activity by Goal and Objective
Goal 1, Objective A Infrastructure (Champion: Mike Locke, San Joaquin Partnership):
• A database of all contacts including City Manager and County CAOs was developed in ACT for easy correspondence. • The ED Work Group sent correspondence in August introducing the Infrastructure Sub Committee to City Managers and County Administrative Officers. The letter included an invitation to attend an introductory meeting at the Partnership Summit in October, and, a 3-page issue paper outlining the challenges for communities in infrastructure in keeping up with growth. The eventual goal is to identify a point person from the League of Cities to champion the effort. • All City Managers and CAOs were called to encourage and verify their attendance at the summit, and to glean their interest in the Infrastructure Committee. Just over 100 calls were made and reception by officials was positive. Many called back to say they were interested and could not attend the event, however to please keep them in the loop. Smaller cities seemed to have the most interest noted by the City Manager personally calling back. • The breakout session on October 4th was designed to give an overview of the Work Group’s efforts and highlight the objectives of the Infrastructure Goal. This session was promoted in the Partnership Newsletter in advance of the Summit. Stan Simpson, Partnership Board member, convened the meeting; Paul Saldana, Partnership and CCEDC Board member, provided an overview of the ED Work Group; Jennifer Faughn, Work Group Consultant provided an overview of Marketing Seed Grant efforts; Tracewell Hanrahan gave an overview of the Entrepreneurship Seed Grant; finally, Mike Locke, CCEDC Board member, gave an introductory presentation on the Infrastructure Goal and Committee formation.
Goal 1, Objective B Incentives (Champion: Bill Bassitt, The Alliance-Stanislaus County):
• Katie Stevens, Government Affairs coordinator, attended the ED Work Group meeting and is assisting in planning a “Government/Legislative Day” in Sacramento. • Incentive Zone Publications: The region-wide Enterprise/Incentive Zone information draft was presented at the August 17th meeting. A rep from Compass Maps made a presentation at the meeting to discuss the Region-wide Enterprise Zone Map. The first draft of the map was sent to board members for revisions. • CCEDC consultant has been gathering information from the 8 EDC offices on incentive zones for a joint marketing brochure. Also in process is the gathering feedback from EZ Managers for an issue paper. (To date, met with: Tulare, Kings, Fresno, Merced, Stanislaus, San Joaquin)
Goal 1, Objective C Marketing (Champion: Richard Chapman, Kern EDC):
• The very aggressive trade mission program is well underway. The program includes visits with site selectors, brokers and tenant reps to discuss and provide information on Central California. The EDC directors will rotate participation. As a result of these missions, we have had four site selectors and businesses tour sites in the region. • The missions so far include: 1. Los Angeles in July 2. San Francisco in August 3. Phoenix in September • A new logo and business system was developed. • Preparation for the Food Pack Trade Show in Las Vegas.
118 Goal 2, Clusters (Champion: John Lehn, Kings County EDC):
• CCEDC consultant has compiled a draft list of existing regional and sub-regional industry trade associations and economic development partners from the 8-county region. • A joint meeting of the Workforce and EDC Directors was held July 20...11:30am-2:00pm to discuss Executive Pulse and The Connectory and each counties involvement with initiating these new business tools.
Goal 3, Entrepreneurship (Champion: Scott Galbraith, Merced County EDC with Dr. Timothy M. Stearns, Lyles Center for Innovation and Entrepreneurship)
• The Partnership Economic Development Work Group, Entrepreneurship Subcommittee held an informative summit in Fresno on September 24, 2007. The forum arranged by the Lyles Center at California State University, Fresno. The event was success and a summary of the event prepared by the Lyle’s center follows: • A strategy was formulated for building a strong foundation in entrepreneurship and innovation across the valley. Excellent representation and much was accomplished. The energy for moving forward on this initiative was outstanding. • Below are the six subcommittees created with the name of the lead individual. 1. Network of Professionals/Clearinghouse for Entrepreneurship Activities Lead: Kristine Walter, [email protected] 2. Early State Capital – Angel Lead: Craig Scharton, [email protected] 3. Entrepreneurship Focus in Education Lead: Genelle Taylor, [email protected] 4. Intellectual Property and Technology Commercialization Lead: Mike Summers, [email protected] 5. Ongoing Funding Stream to Support Entrepreneurship and Innovation Lead: Ashley Swearengin, [email protected] 6. Role of Local Government in Entrepreneurship Development Lead: Frank Quintero/Mike Dozier, [email protected], [email protected]
Goal 4, Renewable and Clean Energy (Champion: Steve Geil, Fresno County EDC)
• The Partnership Board appointed Steve Geil to serve on the Clean Energy Board. • Full notes are provided in the Energy Work Group Report.
Goal 5, Tourism (Champion: Paul Saldana, Tulare County EDC)
• A meeting was held in September between representatives from the Central Valley Tourism Association (CVTA), California Travel & Tourism Commission, Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley and local tourism representatives. The representatives discussed the challenges CVTA faced with accepting the Partnership grant, the goals of the Action plan and exchanged ideas on how a regional marketing plan might be developed. Local representatives not already participating in CVTA agreed to become more active and participate in CVTA. A broader discussion of the need and opportunity for funding a marketing strategy will be discussed at future meetings. Another meeting will be held in the fall with the hopes that a broader coalition can be developed to support the marketing planning efforts.
Planned Activities by Goal and Objective (for next 3-6 months)
Goal 1, Objective A -- Infrastructure:
• A letter will be sent as a follow-up to the 1st meeting requesting each entity’s Infrastructure Plan and their Financial Policy. These items will help determine the need for a Regional Authority. In addition, a recap of the first meeting and a copy of the 3-page issue paper will be sent. Follow-up Calls will be made. • The Work Group will attempt to get on the agenda for regional meetings of the League of Cities and the County Association to further knowledge of the plan. • A meeting date will be set during the first quarter of 2008.
Goal 1, Objective B -- Incentives:
• The consultant will work with CPSJV staff to edit and design the Information brochure on Enterprise Zones in the eight-county area. It will be posted to the web site at californiacv.com.
119
Goal 1, Objective C -- Marketing:
• Over the next 3 months, the CCEDC Board will conduct further trade missions to site selectors and tenant representatives (brokers) in the Atlanta, Chicago and Dallas. • The Consultant will work with the CCEDC board to prepare new marketing materials, including and Electronic Newsletter and a Real Estate Forecast for the region.
Goal 2, Objective A -- Clusters:
• The Consultant and Work Group will finalize contact data on business associations and cluster businesses from the eight-county region. • The Consultant and Work Group will identify existing databases of businesses and work through EDC’s and WIB’s to access senior executives at regional cluster businesses (i.e., Executive Pulse). • The Consultant and Work Group will partner with the Office of Community and Economic Development to identify university researchers and programs that are aligned with each target cluster.
Goal 3, Entrepreneurship
• Tentatively, a meeting is planned on November 5 (Monday). • Also, if you know of individuals who were not on the original contact list but would add value to the effort, please inform them of the next meeting or send their contact information to Kristine Walter [email protected]. • The task between now and November 5th is to complete the Action Plan Worksheet. In addition, each subcommittee lead should submit a list of names and email addresses of each member in the group.
Goal 4, Renewable and Clean Energy
• Attend Energy Work Group meetings and follow their lead.
Goal 5, Tourism
• Will hold regional stakeholders meeting • Identify revenue sources for marketing strategy • Continue discussions with CVTA
If you have coordinated any outreach, please describe briefly.
John Lehn continues to work with the Workforce group to enhance working relationships and use of business tools through joint participation of Workforce and ED Directors. The ED Work Group undertook an outreach to get City Managers and CAOs more involved in the Partnership and the Annual Summit and ED Work Session. The Entrepreneur Sub-Committee has extended a region-wide effort to get other groups involved with its September kick- off meeting and action plan.
120
Quarter/Dates of Activity: Q1 July 2007 through September 2007 Seed Grant: Central Valley Marketing and Cluster Development Grantee Organization: California Central Valley Economic Development Corporation Contact Person: Bobby Kahn, Jennifer K. Faughn Phone: 661-366-0756 Email: [email protected]
Copies to be distributed at Partnership Board Meeting.
121
Quarter/Dates of Activity: Q1 July 2007 through September 2007 Seed Grant: Building Investment and Entrepreneurship in the San Joaquin Valley Grantee Organization: Golden Capital Network Contact Person: Jon Gregory Phone: 530-893-8828 Email: [email protected]
Description of this Quarter’s Activity and Impact on Partnership Goals and Objectives:
The activities of this grant are designed to foster a dynamic business climate to encourage and support entrepreneurs (Strategic Action Proposal Economic Development Goal #3), by addressing important needs in three areas: 1. Building local private equity investment capacity, particularly at the stages between friends/family and later-stage private equity; 2. Developing a strong infrastructure that supports entrepreneurship and business growth; 3. Initiating and sustaining venture capital, deal-flow-generation programs and activities.
During the first quarter of the grant (July - Sept 2007), the following activities occurred to support the overall goals: • Pacific Community Ventures (PCV) developed, marketed and delivered a full-scale conference on Capital Access designed to educate entrepreneurs on the equity capital finance process. This event was attended by 75 people representing 37 companies from the San Joaquin Valley. • PCV began the development of a series of Executive Education Events geared toward CEOs of growing San Joaquin Valley companies and designed to increase management capacity at those companies. o Initiated planning for October CEO Forum “Hiring and Retaining Key Employees” o Partnered with SBA, Regional SBDC and UC Merced to market event to entire San Joaquin Valley • Partnerships with each EDC are being cultivated to support the “Equity 101/ Finance Education for Entrepreneurs” workshop series being developed for the eight-county region and a draft format of the pilot workshop is being developed in cooperation with the Madera County EDC. • An agreement has been reached with Porterville Community College to provide assistance in their exploration to create a regional incubator. Porterville Community College was successful in receiving a grant to underwrite this initial effort. • Extensive data collection has been conducted and a subcommittee has been convened to push through a comprehensive Valley wide economic vitality website. A placeholder website (www.sjvgrowbiz.com) has been created to advertise the workshop series which has been marketed already in several venues to test level of interest and may be used in the next phase of launching the collection of resources. • On September 24, 2007, the Lyles Center convened a San Joaquin Valley Entrepreneurship and Innovation work group meeting on the Fresno State University campus. Over 50 people attended from the region and a cross section of all stakeholders was represented. Six subcommittees were formed to undertake specific challenges and outcomes.
Planned Activities for next 3-6 months
• The CVBI Pacific Incubator Network meeting will be held November 30 to share information and best practices between those entities interested in business incubation. • The workshop series “Equity 101/ Finance Education for Entrepreneurs” will have been launched beginning in Madera County. At least four of such workshops will be delivered during the next six months. • Meetings are being scheduled with software/website creators to further develop the valley resource ‘portal’ concept. Additional key stakeholders will be recruited to join in this effort. • Present “Equity 101” to the staff at a minimum of four professional services providers or to a network meeting of such service providers. • Provide support for, and participate in, the delivery of one Venture Forum designed to increase deal flow in the San Joaquin Valley. • Deliver at least one Executive Education Event (CEO Forum) for CEOs and entrepreneurs of growing Central Valley. This event will be entitled “Hiring and Retaining Key Staff.” • Initiate planning for a second CEO Forum for entrepreneurs. • A second workgroup for regional stakeholders in developing infrastructure to support entrepreneurs and business expansion will be held on November 5, 2007, and hosted by the City of Clovis EDD.
122 Challenges/Problems/Bottlenecks/Feedback
3. Cooperation and communication are key challenges in continuing the effort to bring “buy in” from all the stakeholders in the economic development of the region. The strategy for success is for all voices to be heard and goals to be expanded to accommodate specific local concerns. 4. Travel distance is a problem for some communities to have representation at the various workgroups. While efforts need to be made to have face-to-face interaction, video or telephone conferencing might be explored for interim planning sessions. Although some meetings may be rotated around the eight-county region, Fresno still offers the most venues for large meetings and is fairly central geographically. 5. Preliminary indications are that there may be some difficulty in getting ‘buy in’ from the existing professional community when it comes to education on entrepreneurship and capital access (ie: An Emerging Business conference targeting the professional sector was cancelled due to lack of registrations). One possible solution being discussed is attaching the information workshop to an existing meeting of such a professional network. This would present the information to a ‘captured’ audience and also provide efficiencies in delivering the product.
If you have coordinated any outreach, please describe briefly.
Much time and effort is being invested in developing relationships with the top management of the EDC and the SBDC. A series of face-to-face meetings to understand and address key concerns are being scheduled throughout the region.
There is focus on the outreach for the workshop series which requires partnership with both the Economic Development Councils and other state/local agencies for best possible outcomes. In working with Madera County EDC, and specifically with Bobby Kahn, Chairman of the Central Valley EDC, a plan of action has been drafted to create a series that will be attractive in achieving the EDC goals, as well as the seed grant outcomes. Mr. Kahn has agreed to assist in inviting, and will host, a gathering of all the Chamber of Commerce directors in his county, as well as several leading banking officials, Pacific Community Ventures, staff from the EDC, the Small Business Development Corporation and SCORE. This meeting will take place in November to review and finalize the workshop format. It is anticipated that once this is achieved, we will establish a beachhead from which future programs can be successfully undertaken and replicated.
123
Work Group: Energy
Consultant: Paul Johnson Organization: Paul Everett Johnson and Associates California State University, Fresno Quarter: 3rd 2007 Phone: 206-819-6664 Email: [email protected]
Consultant: Tim Fisher Organization: Great Valley Center Quarter: 3rd 2007 Phone: 209-522-5103 Email: [email protected]
Description of Activity by Goal and Objective
During this quarter the priorities of the Energy Work Group (EWG) remained: • Conduct marketing and outreach to increase the depth and breadth of stakeholder awareness and involvement in the Energy Work Group and its activities. • Support efforts to successfully establish the San Joaquin Valley Clean Energy Organization (SJVCEO) as the principal vehicle and focal point through which the Partnership will implement the energy provisions of its Strategic Action Proposal. • Begin work to implement EWG recommendations not directly related to the creation of the SJVCEO.
Specific accomplishment during the quarter included: • Held a work group meeting in August in Modesto. At this meeting we reviewed and established the current status of Energy Work Group Objectives. Please email Paul or Tim for meeting highlights or Matrix of Progress Reports. • Significantly expanded the membership base of the EWG, expanding to approximately 50 members by the end of September 2007. • Focused priority attention and undertook numerous activities to support EWG Objective IA – creation of a regional San Joaquin Valley Clean Energy Organization (SJVCEO). During this quarter the following progress was made: o At its August meeting, the CA Partnership approved a 24-member Board of Directors, Articles of Incorporation, and By-laws for the SJVCEO. o The SJVCEO Board held its initial meeting on September 13, confirmed the initial focus areas for the office of communities (Objective 2b), and the agricultural sector (Objective 3A), and selected its officers and Interim Executive Director. A fact sheet on the SJVCEO describing its priorities, Board and key staff may be obtained electronically by emailing Paul or Tim. • Began work on Energy Work Group recommendations not directly related to the creation of the SJVCEO. This includes: o Scoping out actions needed to develop a regional clean energy plan (Objective 1A); o Developing Web links informing the public about clean vehicles (Objective 2A); o Documenting Energy Star residences in the region (Objective 2C); o Creating an inventory of model green building ordinances; and, (Objective 2D); and o Beginning development of energy policy primer for local governments (Objective 5C).
Planned Activities by Goal and Objective (for the next 3-6 months)
Over the next quarter we expect to: • Continue efforts to market and expand the membership of the EWG. • Provide updated information for the EWG Webpage. • Hold at least one EWG meeting. • Continue progress on EWG objectives initiated date and firm up priorities for tackling all of the EWG objectives. • Hold a meeting of the SJVCEO Board on October 30, 2007, in Fresno.
124 Specific planned activities include: • Development of a SJVCEO (Objective 1A). During the next quarter we expect to continue support to the SJVCEO as it begins operation through a CA Partnership seed grant. The focus of the SJVCEO over the next quarter will be to: o Establish a Web site o Conduct strategic planning o Initiate fundraising efforts o Plan and co-sponsor a clean energy conference with the Sierra Club in Fresno in December. • Development of a Regional Energy Plan (Objective 1B). We plan to start developing a work plan to create this plan during the fourth quarter of 2007. • Development of website specific to energy issues, including ‘clean energy vehicles’ (Objective 1A &2A). • Propose outline of ‘Energy Primer’ for local government officials (Objective 2D). • Draft ‘Green Ordinance’ for Visalia. (Objective 2C & 2D). • Begin audits of public buildings and ag processors in the SJ Valley for energy efficiency (Objective 5C)
Challenges/Problems/Bottlenecks/Feedback
Our group is faced with an abundance of opportunities. Our greatest challenge is to maintain our focus on our priorities.
If you have coordinated any outreach, please describe briefly.
• Distribution of Compact Fluorescent Lights • Co-ordination with PG&E on Energy Efficiency Training in Stockton
125
Quarter/Dates of Activity: Q1 July 2007 through September 2007 Seed Grant: Growing Clean Energy Capacity in the San Joaquin Valley Grantee Organization: Kings River Conservation District/San Joaquin Valley Clean Energy Organization Contact Person: Cristel Tufenkjian Phone: 559-237-5567 x 118 Email: [email protected]
Description of this Quarter’s Activity and Impact on Partnership Goals and Objectives
The purpose of this grant is to formally establish and begin operation of the San Joaquin Valley Clean Energy Organization (SJVCEO).
On September 13, 2007, the Board of Directors of the SJVCEO held its first meeting and the organization formally began operation. The intent of the SJVCEO is to bring existing efforts together to create an integrated network of energy solution providers focused on regional opportunities and needs. The SJVCEO will help the Valley address its economic, environmental and growth challenges through increased use and reliance on clean energy (that is, energy efficiency and renewable energy sources. The organization is being established as an independent 501C (3) organization with a strong, close working relationship with the California Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley (CA Partnership). The SJVCEO will be the principal vehicle and focal point through which the CA Partnership will implement the energy provisions of its SAP. Specific accomplishments during the quarter included:
Accomplishment Applicable Applicable CA Seed Grant Partnership Energy Task Work Group Goal/ Objective 1. Leveraged additional resources to: a) recruit SJVCEO Board; and, b) develop SJVCEO Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws. #1 #IA 2. Developed a clean energy partnership with the City of Visalia to help the City increase its level of clean energy investments with assistance for the SJVCEO. Developed an MOU between the City and SJVCEO to formally establish this partnership which will serve as a model for SJVCEO to other communities in the region. (See Visalia Work plan #1 # 2ADE and work products at Attachment 1) #3 3. Leveraged additional resources and developed a partnership with the national 25 by ’25 Initiative - committed to a goal of producing 25% of #1 # 3A the energy used in this country from renewable sources by 2025. As part of this effort, the SJV has been designated as a regional #3 demonstration project to show how this goal can be achieved. A MOU has been developed to formalize this partnership. 4. Held an initial meeting of the Board of the SJVCEO on September 13. At this meeting the Board: a. Selected Officers #1 # 1A b. Selected an Interim Executive Director for the SJVCEO c. Confirmed the initial SJVCEO priorities to establish partnerships #2 with the 25 by ’25 Initiative and Visalia. 5. After the Board Meeting, developed a Work plan to guide start-up #2 # 1A operation of the SJVCEO
Planned Activities for next 3-6 months
The SJVCEO will undertake a number of start-up activities as it begins operation, including: • Work with the SJVCEO Board to develop a Business Plan and fundraising strategy for the organization; • Pursue funding consistent with Business Plan and fundraising strategy; • Develop Website, logo, and selected marketing materials; • Develop and put administrative systems and procedures in place for the SJVCEO;
126 • Begin to shape the scope and process for developing a regional clean energy plan; • Continue the Partnership with Visalia, sign MOU with the City, and seek additional cities; • Develop data base on resources and best practices; and • Sign MOU with 25 x ‘25. Identify opportunities and pursue funding for demonstration projects.
Challenges/Problems/Bottlenecks/Feedback
A lot of positive developments have occurred over the past few months. The grant and the Board are in place and projects are beginning to take shape. The key challenge as we move forward will be to stay focused on maintaining steady momentum and not to try to grow the organization too fast.
If you have coordinated any outreach, please describe briefly.
We have coordinated outreach on the birth of the SJVCEO, the partnerships with Visalia and the 25 x ‘25 initiative through the CA Partnership staff. In addition, we have included representatives from key energy related work groups on the SJVCEO Board. We will continue to rely on the CA Partnership staff and our Board as a means of coordinating outreach.
Attachments to request via email:
#1 Visalia Work Plan and Products #2 SJVCEO Board Meeting Agenda #3 SJVCEO Work Plan
127
Work Group: Health and Human Services (Health) Consultant: Dr. John Capitman/Laurie Primavera Organization: Central Valley Health Policy Institute, California State University, Fresno Quarter: 3rd 2007 Phone: 559-228-2155 Email: [email protected]
Description of Activity by Goal and Objective
Goal 1: Objective A. Establish a UC Merced medical school within 10 years. Action: Work with UC Merced to identify and engage key leaders to champion effort. • 8/24 meeting with Brandy Nikaido to coordinate Coalition planning • Central Valley Health Policy Institute (CHVPI) has prepared a draft Coalition list to be approved by UC Merced • Delays in Coalition meeting due to UC Merced work with Office of the President and internal stakeholders.
Goal 1: Objective B. Establish Central Valley Nursing Education Consortium • NCLEX survey completed. Survey revealed that NCLEX passing scores have improved from 80% in 2004/2005 school year to 84.32% for valley nursing programs that used an NCLEX preparation testing program (ATI) to help prepare nursing students for the NCLEX. As a result of these findings, the regional nursing consortium will be recommending that all nursing schools utilize a preparatory program and require their students to take the NCLEX exam within 60 days of graduation to potentially increase the number of nursing students who pass the state licensing exam. • 23 nurses completed the faculty training certificate course offered by CSU Fresno through grant funds. The 23 new faculty members are now available to serve as clinical faculty for nursing programs in the Valley. A new course will be offered beginning in January 2008. • RFP’s have been sent out and a bidder’s conference was held to solicit proposals for the computerized clinical placement program. RFP’s were due October 3, 2007, a selection committee meets October 24 to make recommendations for the best program. • Three junior colleges will be given $5,000 each to enhance their distance learning programs.
An opportunity that is not included in the Strategic Action Plan, but pertains to Goal 1: Develop a Child and Adolescent Psychiatry Fellowship • SWERT and UCSF psychiatry faculty have met to discuss the goal and to use the platform of the fellowship to expand training opportunities for non-psychiatric practitioners • Fresno County Department of Behavioral Health completed a needs assessment of local counties to support the goal • Community Behavioral Health Center is conducting its own feasibility study in partnership with Fresno County • No immediate movement on a Fellowship to date
Goal 2: Objective A. Provide incentives for difficult to recruit health and medical professionals Action: Develop region-wide strategic plan for enterprise zones and financial incentives (Health enterprise zone project) • Refer to attached HEZ report.
Goal 2: Objective B. Enhance public health management capabilities • Deferred to later in 2008.
Goal 2: Objective C. Develop a regional plan to address the needs of the uninsured • California State Rural Health Association requested use of the Health Reform 2007 and CVHPI support to develop an analysis of the impact of the various health reform proposals on rural health in the State. The report is complete and posted on the CSRHA website. Dr. Capitman, Executive Director and Deborah Riordan, Health Policy Analyst, are acknowledged for their contribution to this publication. • 8/11CVHPI participated in the “California Speaks” public forum specific to health reform • 8/13 Dr. Capitman and Deborah Riordan participated on a phone call with Herb Schultz from the Governor’s office, specific to health reform
128 • 8/16 Deborah Riordan participated on the CRSHA call with Herb Schultz, Governor’s office specific to health reform • Deborah Riordan provided numerous presentations on Health Reform throughout the Valley this past quarter. • A Healthy Communities Access Program (HCAP) meeting was held with Assistant Secretary Kim Belshe’s office staff on August 23, 2007. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the needs of the uninsured in the Valley. Norma Forbes, Executive Director for HCAP, Tim Curley, Director for Business and Government Relations for Children’s Hospital Central California, Dr. Edward Moreno, Director and Public Health Officer for Fresno County Health Department and Laurie Primavera, Associate Director for CVHPI, participated in the meeting.
Goal 2: Objective D. Improve delivery of health care services through the use of information technology infrastructure and services. Action: Assess e-health readiness • Analyze data from consumer survey: Upon receiving the data the following task will be conducted: a) data cleaning b) data analyzing using statistical tools c) reporting the findings as a part of the study on assessment of e- health readiness and telemedicine diffusion in the Central Valley • Develop interview questionnaire for case studies: A second step in the study is to conduct case studies of several sites based on their status of e-health/telemedicine adaptation at their facilities. In light of some literature review and analyzing various frameworks of technological diffusion theories, a questionnaire set has been developed for interviewing health care providers and managers at health clinics. The questionnaire will be shared with colleagues of the E-health Research Committee at the CVHPI before it is finalized. • Select sites for interviews: A ‘clinic selection matrix’ has been developed to choose approximately 9 clinics for conducting the case studies. The matrix takes into consideration factors such as the geographical location of the clinics and the state of their e-heath/telemedicine technological adaptation levels. The sites will be finalized pending approval from CVHPI E-Health research committee.
Goal 5: Objective A. Develop and propose alternative evaluation methods for State distribution of new grant sources. • 7/3 meeting with Secretariat to discuss goal • 7/10 meeting with Juanita Fiorello and Dr. Suzanne Kotkin-Jaszi to discuss goal • Refer to SWERT Quarterly Report, which follows.
Planned Activities by Goal and Objective
Goal 1, Objective A: Review list with UC Merced contact, Ms. Nikaido, the week of 10/8/07 and finalize Coalition date and plans.
Goal 1, Objective B: • Selection of a clinical placement software program will be made. • Plan for January 2008 faculty development through CSU Fresno program.
Goal 2: Objective A. Refer to HEZ report.
Goal 2: Objective B. Initiate planning discussions through PHP meetings next quarter.
Goal 2: Objective C. • Continue to focus on health reform to insure representation of Valley needs specific to health reform efforts. Deborah Riordan will be presenting on ton Channel 24 for The Maddy Institute report and speak at The Maddy Institute luncheon 10/11/07. • Continue to explore funding opportunities for consensus building forum that can develop a bipartisan plan to address the needs of the uninsured. • Explore potential pilot projects to address the needs of the uninsured.
Goal 2; Objective D: • Data analysis of the consumer survey will be conducted and the findings will be reported and shared for in-house review. • The questionnaire for case studies will be approved. • The sites will be selected for interviews based on feasibility of conducting interviews at those locations. • A pilot case study interview will be conducted. 129 • Findings from the pilot study will be analyzed and suggested changes will be incorporated in the final questionnaire. • Interviews in a number of clinics will be completed.
Challenges/Problems/Bottlenecks/Feedback
1. The most recent challenge has been to clarify Goal 5, Objective 1. We continue to work closely with our Social Service, State and Secretariat partners.
If you have coordinated any outreach, please describe briefly.
1. 6/13&8/8 Attended Public Health Partnership meetings to provide Partnership updates and exchange information specific to the approved work plan 2. 7/18 established meeting with Co-Conveners, Will Ing, State representative, SWERT and CVHPI leads to coordinate efforts, communicate progress and address issues 3. 6/8 Dr. Capitman and L. Primavera met with Norma Forbes, HCAP to integrate the work of HCAP with the California Partnership Goal 2, Objective B 4. 7/2 conference call with Cathy Martin, Executive Director for the California State Rural Health Association to discuss health reform interests and the work of the Partnership 5. 7/10 Dr. Capitman met with Dr. Karen Kraus, UCSF faculty to discuss the Child and Adolescent Psychiatry Fellowship effort 6. 7/10 conference call with Trish Kelly to schedule a Partnership report to Poder Popular 7. 7/19 Poder Popular presentation in Visalia
130
Quarter/Dates of Activity: Q1 July 2007 through September 2007 Seed Grant: San Joaquin Valley Health Enterprise Zone Project Grantee Organization: Central Valley Health Policy Institute, California State University, Fresno Contact Person: John Capitman, Deborah Riordan, Project Director Phone: 559-228-2168, 559-228-2169 Email: [email protected], [email protected]
Description of this Quarter’s Activity and Impact on Partnership Goals and Objectives
All first quarter activities listed on the project work plan have been successfully implemented. A regional health enterprise task force has been identified. In order to be responsive and flexible to the project process we have recently added members based on the suggestions of the Public Health Partnership, the lead organization in this effort. Another addition may occur due to the changes at the Tulare Chamber of Commerce.
We have successfully established a consulting team from related CPSJV work groups including Barbara Patrick from the Advanced Communications Services and Information Technology work group; Bobby Kahn from the Economic Development work group; Cheri Cruz from the Higher Education work group; Walt Buster, Marcy Masumoto and Amy Arambula from the K-12 Education work group and Manjit Atwal from the Workforce Development work group. The work plan for this group includes acting as a resource for questions or concerns and providing feedback/input on the project as appropriate. The consulting team members will also be asked to help us identify and connect with expert contacts to interview. There will be no exclusive meeting for the consulting team; instead we would ask to be placed on the agenda of the workgroup meetings once per quarter and would solicit input formally at this time. The consulting team will also be invited to all stakeholder meetings for added opportunity to respond to the project as it develops, if their schedule permits. We would also hope that this activity would include a mutual exchange of information and prevent replicating work that has already been completed.
The literature has been equivocal at best in documenting the effectiveness of Enterprise Zones so the project staff has spent significant effort in researching and conducting interviews with experienced contacts on Health Enterprise models, community responsibility models and Health Enterprise legislation on both a national and state level. That effort is continuing however, research to date implies that financial incentives alone may not be sufficient to encourage new health businesses/providers in underserved areas. A new focus has begun to investigate the regulatory and financial barriers for starting new physician practices.
This quarter we also held our first San Joaquin Valley Health Enterprise Zone Task force meeting. The meeting provided significant input and strategic direction to the project staff. Participants in the meeting included five project staff, 17 task force members, 4 Public Health Partnership members and 3 consulting team members. Follow-up meeting information has been distributed to all participants (attending and not attending) including a cover letter with next steps, the power point presentation, a meeting summary and a comprehensive participant contact list. Key questions were identified by the participants, which included: 1. How should the problem of health professional shortages be defined (what disciplines, what health and demographic indicators, etc.)?; 2. What are the financial and regulatory barriers to establishing a new medical practice?; 3. Are there state and national health business models that have resulted in documented increases in health access; and 4. What economic incentives have proven results in recruiting and retaining physicians?
The San Joaquin Valley Health Enterprise Zone Project is responsive to the Health and Human Services Work Group Goal 2: “Enhance access to appropriate health care services and improved public health management” and its activities support Objective A under Goal 2: “Provide incentives for difficult-to-recruit health and medical professionals. This quarter we have increased our understanding of the complexity of the idea of “incentives”. There are many examples of economic incentives; however, it is unclear as to their effectiveness, feasibility and sustainability. It is critical that we research, through best practices and expert interviews, local, state and federal strategies as well as economic, regulatory and financial strategies. Incentives must also be politically acceptable so that the potential loss of revenue through tax credits or loan forgiveness fully justifies the improvement in health and overall community well- being.
131 Planned Activities for next 3-6 months
Scheduled activities this month include the following:
October 10: Present update at the monthly Public Health Partnership meeting.
Week of October 15: Schedule and speak with Marcy Masumoto, Project Manager for the K-12 Education Work Group to discuss overlapping interests in developing programs for medical support staff.
October 22: Meeting with Kaweah Delta Health Care District and their Legislative Advocates, CJ Strategies, to discuss federal strategies for recruiting and retaining physicians in shortage areas.
October 24 (tentative): Meet with the Tulare/Kings Hospital Council to present and receive feedback on the HEZ concept.
October 30: Meet with the California Program on Access to Care (out of the University of California Office of the President), Gilbert Ojeda to discuss the HEZ concept.
November 1 (tentative): Meet with the Fresno/Madera Hospital Council to present and receive feedback on the HEZ concept.
March 2008: Second task force meeting
Specific activities over the next two quarters involve scheduling presentations with valley medical societies, the UCSF Family Practice residents, the regional federal department directors (through Rollie Smith) and the Central California Economic Development Corporation. We also plan to schedule time with Maureen Larkin, Director of Physician Recruiting at Adventist Health in Hanford to discuss their success in recruiting physicians.
Other “next steps” include meeting with regional representatives from the state legislature, from the eight counties’ Board of Supervisors as well as city government representatives. There is also needed follow-up on initial contacts made in the first quarter that will be completed in the second quarter.
We think that these contacts will create a “cascade effect” in connecting us with other important experts and stakeholders. As we continue to more clearly define the problem and develop potential parameters for the San Joaquin Valley concept of a Health Enterprise Zone this network of stakeholders and experts will be critical in shaping the final product.
Research activities will also continue. We are currently reviewing Tulare County’s proposal for a Healthcare Incentive Zone and will access and review a workforce document produced by San Joaquin County. We are analyzing Physician-Related Data Resource data to calculate specific population rates for identified physician specialists to better define the problem of access in the valley. This work should be completed by the end of October.
Finally, the culmination of efforts in the first three quarters will be a report summarizing findings and outlining recommendations for review by the task force.
Challenges/Problems/Bottlenecks/Feedback
Challenges: A major challenge is to develop consensus on how the problem should be defined. There remain varying viewpoints on whether the Health Enterprise Zone designation should focus specifically on primary care, specialty care, dental care, or allied health care and/or have a broader, more inclusive focus. Another challenge is the limited existence and outcomes data on Health Enterprise Zone models. Finally, it is challenging to be inclusive in our approach due to the scope of interest in this project. We have attempted to stay open and flexible to all participant suggestions and requests to add members to the task force. It is critical to the success of this project and the potential for a legislative result that all the counties and interests feel that they are adequately represented.
Problems/Bottlenecks: To date the project has not encountered either problems or bottlenecks as everyone we have contacted has been eager to participate and share. There is some difficulty in contacting out-of-state legislators and stakeholders in HEZ legislation but we will continue to be persistent in following- through with those contacts.
132 Feedback: Feedback from the first task force meeting was very positive. There was some concern voiced regarding task force representation which has been addressed. Task force members have been proactive in providing contacts for further interviews and consulting team members have offered to support the project as needed. Other comments included voicing a need for an interim task force meeting prior to the scheduled March meeting which has been taken under advisement. At their request, we will provide updates to the Public Health Partnership at their monthly meetings.
If you have coordinated any outreach, please describe briefly.
The Health Enterprise Zone concept is intriguing to a variety of interest groups and as a result, gradually we are developing a network of contacts that are not directly involved with the project itself both in state and out of state. Direct community outreach is scheduled for the third through fifth quarter. We have been responsive to additional requests for project updates including requests from David Quackenbush, CEO of the Central Valley Health Network; Adam Francis, Legislative Assistant at the California Academy of Family Physicians; and Will Ing, Special Assistant To The Secretary of the California Health and Human Services Agency; and Jon Haubert, a governmental affairs consultant for Kaweah Delta Health Care District.
133
Work Group: Health and Human Services (Human) Consultant: Juanita Fiorello Organization: Central California Social Welfare Evaluation, Research and Training Center California State University, Fresno Quarter: 3rd 2007 Phone: 559-294-9772 Email: [email protected]
Description of Activity by Goal and Objective
Goal 3: Objective A. • Advisory Council formed, seven of eight counties represented. • First Council meeting held 9/07/07. Co-chairs identified for north and south Valley counties. • Work plan development initiated, including communication network for Council activities.
Goal 4: Objective A. • Partnership with California Welfare Directors Assoc., Children’s Regional Committee, approved by CWDA. Research plan being developed for case review in three counties to begin quantifying prevalence and impact of substance abuse, including methamphetamine, on child welfare systems. • Letter of Support for AB 340, concerning the relative approval process, completed by Partnership Board. Efforts initiated to promote a Valley county as a pilot site for implementation.
Goal 5: Objective A. • Clarification at state, local level regarding intent and purpose of goal. It is specific to new competitive grant resources only, with no connection to formulaic funding allocation methods. • Consultation with consultation with Partnership and state resources to identify strategies for moving forward. Initial steps will include review of current proposal evaluation methodologies within relevant State departments.
Planned Activities by Goal and Objective
Goal 3: Objective A. Schedule north/south regional meetings for strategic planning for outreach and engagement at community levels; conduct next Council quarterly meeting, 12/14/07 in Visalia; Council to adopt a work plan with task timelines. Prepare a draft Continuum of Care model based on community input and feedback. Continue to recruit Council members from under-represented counties.
Goal 4: Objective A. Focus on efforts to establish a Valley county as a pilot site for AB 340. If successful, partner with and assist the selected county in implementation.
Goal 5: Objective A. Based on input from Work Group co-conveners and state representative, develop work plan for implementing strategies. Establish a stakeholders’ group to move the process into local levels.
Challenges/Problems/Bottlenecks/Feedback
• Assigned staff and key stakeholders in the region have extensive workloads and limited time to devote to Work Group activities. • Planned activities are driven by response times/delays from other participants. • Key regional participants have limited fiscal resources to pursue each of the goals.
134
Quarter/Dates of Activity: Q1 July 2007 through September 2007 Seed Grant: Methamphetamine Recovery Project Grantee Organization: Central California Social Welfare Evaluation, Research and Training Center, California State University, Fresno Foundation Contact Person: Dr. E. Jane Middleton Phone: 559-294-9754 Email: [email protected]
Description of this Quarter’s Activity and Impact on Partnership Goals and Objectives
• Formation of the project’s Advisory Council completed. • First Council meeting held 9/7/07; co-chairs identified for north and south counties. • Developed a stakeholder base of approximately 95 individuals • Initiated communication systems for outreach and engagement
Establishes the ongoing collaborative body for oversight, direction, and management of project goals and objectives.
Planned Activities for next 3-6 months
• Council’s next quarterly meeting set for 12/14/07 in Visalia. • Develop a plan for grass-roots outreach and engagement in the process. • Regional meetings of Council members and interested parties in north and south Valley tentatively scheduled for November 2007. • Work Plan and task list for Council activities to be completed. • Meeting agendas under development, but will include focus on legislative issues, civic engagement at community levels, development and public input to a draft continuum of care.
Possible agenda presentations for Council meetings include guest speakers such as Renee Zito, State Alcohol and Drug Programs, the Partnership Legislative Committee, and others involved in programs, activities, or initiatives related to the project goals.
Challenges/Problems/Bottlenecks/Feedback
• Time and resources, both at the SWERT and at Council member level, continue to be a consistent challenge. • Civic engagement is a critical component, but there are few or no resources to help Council members lead that effort at their own community levels.
135
Work Group: Higher Education and Workforce Development
Consultant: Cher Cruz, Executive Director (Higher Education) Organization: Central Valley Higher Education Consortium, California State University, Fresno Quarter: 3rd 2007 Phone: 559-292-0576 Email: [email protected]
Consultant: Manjit Atwal Organization: Office of Community and Economic Development, California state University, Fresno Quarter: 3rd 2007 Phone: 559-294-6023 Email: [email protected]
Higher Education and Workforce Development Quarterly Meeting
Friday, July 20, 2007
On Friday, July 20, the Higher Education and Workforce Development and Economic Development work groups held a joint meeting at the Greater Fresno Area Chamber of Commerce. The purpose of the session was to have each work group provide updates on activities that are related to both groups so that they can continue to develop strategies and set priorities for further alignment of economic and workforce development resources in the region.
At the meeting, our workgroup provided updates on each of the following objectives. • Standardized Objective Assessments across region - WorkKeys • Completion of Employment Studies in high-growth/high-wage occupations in targeted sector industries across region • Web-Based Inventory of all employment demand and vocational training across region • Standardized and consistent Business Intelligence Tools such as Executive Pulse and Connectory implemented across region • Completion of a pilot to assess employer value of Manufacturing Skills Certificate in the region • Initiation of meetings with Community College partners to address gaps in vocational training in the region based on the Employment study and training inventory
Details about each objective are included in this report.
The Economic Development work group provided updates on the following: • Regionwide networks of industry clusters (Goal 2) • Ensuring a prepared workforce to support the targeted industry clusters (Goal 2B) • Fostering a dynamic business climate to encourage and support entrepreneurs (Goal 3)
Overall, this meeting provided a platform for each stakeholder group to gain an in-depth knowledge on region-wide activities that were advancing in areas of importance to them. At the end of the day, they had the tools needed to directly align their efforts for maximum results.
The next quarterly meeting is tentatively scheduled for December 10, 2007.
Description of Activity by Goal and Objective
Objective A: Align workforce development resources to support target industry clusters.
This umbrella objective will be accomplished through meeting the following supporting objectives:
Objective B: Conduct occupational analysis of key jobs in target industries.
136 Fresno County Workforce Investment Board (FCWIB) is facilitating this process. FCWIB has worked with all LWIA’s to prepare a list of region-wide employers to be surveyed. The list currently includes 3000 employers. The survey tool has also been finalized.
The survey process is underway and will be conducted for all occupations in each of the target industries and gather information on: • The required skills and educational levels for the jobs • Job requirements/hiring criteria for each job • Projected future demand for the jobs (Current, 1 and 3 years) • Copies of Job Descriptions for each job • Career Ladders/Lattices can then be developed for the local areas
We anticipate completing the employer surveys early next year. Reports will then be published for each county, as well as the region. We believe it is critical that we find funding to do this employer survey each years due to the fact that economic conditions change.
Objective C: Develop web-based inventory of vocational training and “gap analysis.”
FCWIB has been working with LWIA’s in the region to create a listing of all vocational schools per the Eligible Training Provider List from the BVPPE, as well as securing a list of post secondary schools from the Chancellor’s office of Community Colleges.
The data from the occupational analysis describe in Objective B, will be used to evaluate training capacity for Vocational Education through out the region. The work group members will work closely with our Community Colleges to expand capacity, if needed.
Objective D: Implement region-wide business intelligence tool.
Stanislaus Alliance Worknet has been working with Executive Pulse and partnering counties in the CCWC. It is in the process of rolling out Executive Pulse. A survey tool has been prepared and distributed to work force and economic development partners for review. This survey includes data such as 1) Company Profile, 2) Company Information (included Workforce Data, Sales, Facility/Equipment Details) 3) Details of Meeting Information.
The Workforce Investment Board Business Specialists as well as Economic Development and Community College business staff will have access to use this when serving local businesses.
As far as the Connectory, San Joaquin County is currently meeting with the proprietor to discuss next steps.
Objective E: Create a just-in-time training fund.
CA Labor & Workforce Development Agency’s Employment Training Panel (ETP) awarded Kern Community College District $500,000 for training in high-wage occupations, such as manufacturing, logistics and construction. These Just- in-Time Training Funds are available now through a process put into place at Bakersfield College.
Objective F: Address workforce supply on a regional basis.
• Career Readiness Certificate and WorkKeys Implementation
FCWIB has developed a regional Work Ready Certificate using the WorkKeys system. FCWIB is coordinating the effort, and been meeting with LWIA’s for roll out of the WorkKeys system.
Profiler Training has been scheduled with ACT. Webcasts are scheduled for Oct. 4, October 18 and Nov. 1. The Training week will be November 6-9. Alliance Worknet currently has received names of planned attendees.
• Manufacturing Skills Standards Certification
Tulare and Merced counties were selected to pilot the Manufacturing Skills Standards Certification. Both Counties have done some independent investigation and both will coordinate Manufacturers Council of the Central Valley. . Merced WIB has become certified as a Manufacturing Skills Certification Center and has ordered their tests.
137 Merced WIB has made initial plans with the Central Valley Manufacturers Association to select two primary Manufactures to pilot the certifications. They are trying now to set up meetings with those employers to design the process with them. Tulare is also moving forward.
The CCWC group is meeting on November 16, 2007, in Madera. At this meeting they will select a time frame for a regional meeting around this certification. Once a date and time has been identified Merced will be the host and procure the facilitator.
Objective G: Align vocational and career technical education with target industries.
Workforce development directors from regional community colleges and ROP leaders continue to be engaged in this work group. We are also connecting with regional community colleges and their Career Advancement Academy programs. These programs that establish pipelines for undereducated, underemployed youth and young adults who will have the opportunity to increase their performance levels in reading, writing, and mathematics, and obtain career technical training skills that will lead to careers and additional higher education opportunities
Objective H: Establish San Joaquin Valley Workforce Consortium.
The Central California Workforce Collaborative (CCWC) continues to meet on a regular basis. The next meeting is being held on November 16, 2007, in Madera, California.
CCWC has been working diligently to advance the goals and objectives of the $1m grant from the State WIA program (15% money). This grant was helps to implement infrastructure for the 8 county Region. All LWIA’s are benefiting from this award. This grant is directly aligned with the first goal of this work group.
Objective I: Align the efforts of the San Joaquin Valley’s economic development corporations, the San Joaquin Valley Workforce Consortium and the California Community College Central Region Consortium.
Representatives from each of the entities were in attendance at the July 20 meeting. A follow up joint meeting will be scheduled in 2008.
Goal 2: Develop a college going culture in the San Joaquin Valley
Objective A: Improve academic preparation and increase expectations for student achievement
The college going website- www.collegenext.org has been updated to provide students, parents, and the general public online information about college admission, college planning, and financing a college education. In September, a new feature was added for workforce training and development.
Objective B: Increase accessibility of financial aid & Objective F: Ensure accessibility to educational opportunities
Located at the Manchester Mall in Fresno, the College Place where students and the general public can receive assistance and information about attaining a higher education. As a benefit for those interested in attending college, the Center is equipped with 18 computer stations and college coaches ready to provide guidance and assistance.
The College Place is strategically situated within the mall, a popular hub for community and social services as well as shopping. This non- traditional setting helps prospective college students, older adults, parents that have time conflicts due to work and family obligations. The Center stays open evenings and on the weekends.
Our target audience is non-traditional, economically disadvantaged, and working class Fresno residents. The College Place gives access to a college resource library, 18 computer stations with high speed internet for web-based college information, and one-on one coaching on how to prepare and enroll in college.
The Center actively promotes Central Valley colleges and universities, and rotates outreach from Central Valley colleges to promote going to college, working, and living in the Valley as an effort to increase the quality of life for residents and the overall economy of this region.
138 Objective C: Increase availability of information and resources to students and parents.
The collegenext.org web site has been revised to enhance the parent and students section, links, and resources. CVHEC staff and outreach personnel have been advertising this website as the premier college going website in schools, community organizations, and at the College Place
Furthermore, CVHEC has also created and approved a college going pledge that will be distributed to businesses in the Valley to “pledge” to help our work group move forward to meet some of the objectives outlined in the strategic action plan. Overall 50 resolutions have been signed by our Valley Superintendents and Valley college/university leaders as an expression of sincerity to work collaboratively in making a difference in the Central Valley's college going rate; especially for youth who may be low income and first in their families to attend college.
Objective D: Increase collaboration between higher education and P-12 education.
P-16 Councils are thriving in Kern, Merced, Tulare, and Kings County. These are partnerships involving preschool through college educational leaders. Our work group continues to support and cultivate these partnerships.
Objective E: Align academic content to support economic vitality.
Discussions continue with key stake holders among institutions of higher education, WIBSs, and employers to determine latest employment trends and workforce needs.
Objective F: See Objective B
Objective G: Expand vocational and career technical education programs and courses.
The higher education workgroup is a partner in the Career Advancement Academy (CAA):
CAA provides skill assessment, training, job shadowing, and placement assistance for unemployed or underemployed 18-30 year olds. Our grant partners are Fresno City College, Reedley College, North Centers at Willow and International and Madera, Merced College, and West Hills Community College at Lemoore and Coalinga.
Goal 3: Develop comprehensive education and training systems to meet the healthcare worker shortage in the region
Objective A: Establish a Medical Education Program at University of California Merced within 10 years
Objective B: Establish the Central Valley Nursing Education Consortium
The San Joaquin Valley Nursing Education Consortium held a meeting on Wednesday, September 12, 2007, at 1:00 pm. and will be held at the Kaweah Delta Education Building in Visalia. The grant and the four objectives were reviewed. Those four objectives include: Student Support, Centralized Faculty Resource, Computerized Clinical Placement and Distance Education.
Objective 1: Student Support
The team leading this objective is looking at how they can use the allocated monies to advance this goal of gather ATI and NCLEX results data to help faculty better prepare students. 6 of the 10 valley nursing programs currently use a review testing system. They would like to recommend that all programs implement a system (i.e. ATI) and that hospitals require their new graduates to take the NCLEX within 60 days of graduation as the success of passing the NCLEX seems to decrease the longer the graduate waits to take the exam.
Objective 2: Centralized Faculty Resource
30 students are enrolled in an on-line faculty training course being taught by Dorothy Frazier of CSU Fresno. 29 students will complete their course in September 2007, and will be available to begin teaching clinical rotations. A new class is being planned to start in January 2008.
139 This group is also working on plans for the development of a faculty pool that can be utilized by the different colleges when they need to find faculty. In addition, they hope to develop a Webpage that would be housed at the Hospital Council and would have different links that would be of help to nursing instructors looking for opportunities, information on how to register for a faculty training program, and also on how to return to school to get a higher degree.
Objective 3: Computerized Clinical Placement
The RFPs for a computerized clinical placement system have been sent out. The return date is October 3 and a Bidders Conference is being held on September 13. A review committee will be selected and asked to review the returned RFPs in October and make a recommendation to the Steering Committee.
Objective 4: Distance Education
The team working on this objective has decided to allocate their resources to junior colleges in the valley that have distance education programs for entry level RNs. Those include Bakersfield College with Porterville, Fresno City with the Madera Center, and Modesto with Columbia. Also, $5,000 will be set aside to begin to work on a collaborative model similar to the one in Oregon.
The next meeting has been scheduled for Wednesday, December 12, 2007, from 1 to 4 p.m. at Mercy Hospital in Bakersfield in the 3rd Floor Classroom.
Planned Activities by Goal and Objective (for next 3-6 months)
A .Workforce Funding Collaborative
The SJV Workforce Funding Collaborative members have preliminarily agreed to develop the fund to support efforts that target low-income, low-skilled workers in high-growth, high-demand industry sectors, for the development of job opportunities with career ladders. As our fund develops, we will refine our goal and develop criteria for dissemination of funds to investment-worthy projects.
Discussions continue with Walter S. Johnson Foundation, The California Endowment, and California Wellness Foundations. Also, several organizations and corporations have been invited to the table, including Wells Fargo Bank, the Fresno Regional Foundation, the United Ways of the Valley, and the CA Wellness Foundation, Kaiser Permanente to advance this effort.
B. Strategic Planning Session with CVHEC
A special planning session is being planned October 18 during the next Board meeting to discuss a strategic action planning session coordinated by the CVHEC Executive Director and the workforce development directors will be providing an update on related goals and objectives to their higher education partners.
C. Advocacy
The higher education work group supported two major initiates in August 2007 - 1) SB 890 The Early College Commitment Bill 2) AB 178 Incentive for College Readiness
140
Quarter/Dates of Activity: Q1 July 2007 through September 2007 Seed Grant: Developing a College Going Culture in the San Joaquin Valley Grantee Organization: Central Valley Higher Education Consortium, California State University, Fresno Contact Person: Cheri Cruz Phone: 559-292-0576 Email: [email protected]
Description of this Quarter’s Activity and Impact on Partnership Goals and Objectives
The Community-based college access center seed grant meets Goal 2 of the Strategic Action Proposal: Develop a college-going culture in the San Joaquin Valley.
Objective C: Increase availability of information and resources to students and parents.
The College Place fully launched in August 2007. State Center Community College District is providing space for the project in the second floor of the Manchester Mall, next to the Manchester Education Resource Center. Our computer lab has 18 computers stations equipped with high speed internet. Banners from all of the Central Valley Higher Education Consortium (CVHEC) colleges and universities are on display and a resource library has been coordinated. A needs assessment has been developed for visitors and an appointment log.
The mission of The College Place is to support the educational growth and development of students from underrepresented racial, ethnic, and cultural backgrounds; first generation college students; improve high school retention; and insure that all Fresno residents who visit the Center have equal opportunities for academic and career success.
CVHEC recruits and trains College-Going Coaches and Mentors who share college-going information and explore college options and opportunities showing it is possible and affordable. The College Place: • Provides quick college information and connects prospective students with college advisors. • Provides information regarding all Central Valley colleges and universities. Patrons of The College Place have contact college coaches • Holds non-traditional hours of 2 p.m. to 8 p.m., Monday through Friday and 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. on Saturdays.
We have hired two college coaches and a CSU, Fresno professor, Albert Valencia, has been hired on a part-time basis to provide training and mentoring to the interns. Flyers have been created, A PSA has been produced, and advertisement of the CVHEC website has been added.
Since our grand opening in August, 2006, the College Place has served nearly 100 visitors.
CVHEC has developed a partnership with Fresno Unified School District. All of the new counselors (24) that were hired this have toured the College Place and are sharing informational flyers with their students. In addition, during the month of September, FUSD hosted a parent workshop at the College Place titled “Powerschool.” This workshop demonstrated to a group of parents how they can go on-line to check the progress of their children’s assignments and tests. As a result, parents can become empowered to get involved in their children’s education and become more supportive of their students’ academic progress.
Planned Activities by Goal and Objective
• Expanding on the success of our partnership with FUSD, we will be co-hosting a community resource fair in November to further get our message out that college is “possible and affordable!” This has become the slogan we have endorsed as it clearly sends a positive message to the public. • Our plan is to air a PSA message in November. We are targeting viewers of the local TV news station, Channel 26 because market research yields that their audience is our target demographic of youth and young adults. • A direct mailing is being planned to target households of residents who are potential visitors of the college place. • The CVHEC Web site is being revised to “beef” up the parent and students section, links, and resources. • Highlight: Forged Partnership with the City of Fresno: • In September, the City of Fresno provided $50,000 to expand the work of the College Place. As a result we entered into a contract agreement at Manchester Mall for a lease of a kiosk. The kiosk will be staffed in the 141 evenings and on the weekends by an intern. Included with the kiosk is a laptop computer for folks to access (with guidance) our CVHEC website and other college going resources.
Challenges/Problems/Bottlenecks/Feedback
1. Need to mobilize staff at the local colleges and universities around the work of the Partnership and our Seed Grant Project, the College Place. 2. I have received numerous requests from education and social services agencies to aid in the replication of the College Place. Currently, CVHEC does not have the sufficient staffing to honor all of the requests we are receiving. As a result we are considering two strategies: a) Hire a consultant to assist in attending meetings and providing professional development on setting up community–based college access centers. b) Creating a partnership with the Central Valley Library Consortia to replicate the model on a larger scale – Modesto to Bakersfield. 3. Marketing/advertising is very expensive. We will need to be very inventive on how we market the College Place to the public.
142
Work Group: K-12 Education Consultant: Walt Buster and Marcy Masumoto Organization: Central Valley Educational Leadership Institute, California State University, Fresno Quarter: 3rd 2007 Phone: 559-304-2190 Email: [email protected]
Description of Activity by Goal and Objective
Please note that July and August are very difficult months to actively plan and carryout functions with K-12 educators due to vacation schedules and back-to-schools activities.
Goal 1: Increase the achievement level of students, schools and school districts in the San Joaquin Valley. Objective A: Implement a school and school district support system through county offices of education.
Major Focus: Ensure that the K-12 Work Group is visible in the Valley and supportive of efforts that will raise the achievement level of all students and eliminate the achievement gap. To that end the Work Group attended or facilitated the following: • Work Group meetings: 8/9 and 8/27 • Communications with Lee Andersen and other superintendents and administrators at each of the 8 county offices • E-mail distributions • Legislative lobbying in Sacramento and in the Valley to support Assemblyman Arambula’s bill AB 1403. Bill was suspended. • Met with the new Secretary of Education to enlist his support and help with the K-12 Work Group. • Attended and provided input at Office of the Secretary of Education’s Listening sessions held in 2 locations in the region and another held outside our region but including SJV work group representatives. • Madera County office of Education has a contract with the State Department of Education to provide a variety of leadership services for region VII (includes 5 of our 8 counties). One of their primary programs is the Regional System of District and School Support (RSDSS) providing support to needy districts (Title I and NCLB accountability requirements) and strengthening the Regional Capacity Building Collaborative which includes 29 districts. • Coordinated facilities and program for four-day conference for approximately 100 coaches and staff for Springboard Schools’ statewide training in Fresno July 30 – Aug. 3.
Objective B: Implement a curricular and instructional program to ensure all children are able to read at or above grade level.
Major Focus: Consistent with Objective A, the work group seeks to build connections with organizations and events focused on improving reading achievement for students in Valley Schools. To that end the Work Group attended or facilitated the following: • CVELI participated in the July 9 panel discussion,” How to Get our Third Graders Reading on Grade Level”; event sponsored by Fresno Citizens for Good Government. • Springboard work: Springboard is a partner with CVELI and provides coaching for educational leaders in 15 Valley districts. Dr. Masumoto represents the Partnership at all CVELI events. • Application of new learning and mentoring in 16 districts resulting from EL Leadership Academy. This is supported by the seed grant that was given to the Fresno County Office of Education.
Objective C: Provide school choice, and intra-district and inter-district options consistent with state and federal law.
Major Focus: Ensure that the Work Group and interested parties receive relevant and current updates on choice and charters. • Lozano Smith, a local law firm and a major supporter of CVELI and CSU Fresno, hosted with CVELI a Legal Forum at CSUF on September 26-28. The first day of the Forum focused on Leadership and Boardmanship, the second day dealt with Student Law, and the third day focused on Special Education Law. The Forum included
143 discussion about charter schools and jurisdictional expectations of school and district leaders as well as student issues including drug testing. • Some work group members have met with Charter School organizations that plan to create sites in the region. • James Bushman, Principal of University High School has expressed interest in joining the Work Group.
Objective D: Establish an executive leadership academy to train principals of low-performing schools in “turn-around” educational and management services.
Major Focus: Leadership Matters. To that end the Work Group attended or facilitated the following: • This is a major component of the seed grant. Two sessions have been held. Jill Tafoya from the Fresno County Office of Education coordinates this effort. There are 84 participants from 16 districts representing all 8 counties. • CVELI and Springboard Schools will hold the first session of the Executive Leadership Centers for 26 Valley superintendents on October 15. The series will focus on the role of the superintendent in eliminating the achievement gap in Valley superintendents.
Objective E: Coordinate and integrate health and human services organized around school attendance boundaries.
Major Focus: Ensure that educators in Valley schools understand the importance of school based health services in improving student achievement. • Attended meeting about Health Enterprise Zones which is one of the seed grant projects. • Involved with the launch of the Human Investment Initiative led by the Fresno Business Council and outlines a comprehensive blueprint to address poverty and develop programs and services around schools and neighborhoods in Fresno. • Attended Fresno County Human Services Conference “Together We Can: Creating Endless Possibilities for Children and Families across Fresno County” on September 27. This conference focused largely on Foster care services and support. We learned about a Foster Youth Services pilot project including the FCOE and 5 school districts in this county which provides comprehensive services for foster students. This program is seeking support to extend their best practices to other schools and areas. • Attended and provided input at a Fresno County strategic planning event considering high priority actions spanning across multiple sectors of the county.
Goal 2: Develop a college-going culture in the San Joaquin Valley. Major Focus: This is a goal that we should consider changing to read “Develop educational systems in the Valley that provide graduates with the choice of college attendance, trade or technical school attendance, or entry in the job market with employable skills.”
Objective A: Support collaborations between school districts and the community colleges, CSU and UC Systems. • Made contacts with CVHEC, community college reps, UC reps to begin planning for upcoming events. • Met with Higher Ed/WFD work group consultant to coordinate plans. • County offices of education held “College Nights” to link students and their families with colleges, clarify college requirements, and gain better understanding of what colleges have to offer. • Christine Frazier, EdD, Assistant County Superintendent of Schools from Kern County, is taking the lead to coordinate and lead this part of the action plan. • CVELI attended a made a presentation at the Kremen School of Education conference for leaders in all CSU Schools of Education.
Objective B: Increase the rates of high school graduates completing courses for college admission. See above. • Through the EL High School Network, CVELI and Springboard Schools continue to work with 14 high schools in the region to enhance programs, instruction and support of EL students to improve their opportunities to attend college. A “student voice” section of this network directly works with students to help them articulate needs and potential solutions to their school leadership as well as enhancing their own communication, leadership and self- empowerment skills. • Several of our Work Group members attended FUSD Family Leadership Conference on September 29 where approximately 800 parents attended sessions (in 3 languages and with additional translation services) dealing with methods of supporting students and schools to college requirements and readiness. This event may serve as a model to others in the region.
144 Goal 3: Implement a computer literacy initiative for K-12 students aligned with community college curriculum.
Major Focus: provide Valley students with modern tools to increase student achievement • CVELI is a partner with the Anytime, Anywhere Learning Foundation (www.aalf.org). • Karen Ward has just been appointed as a project manager for AALF and this will augment her role with the high school network. She will assist in planning a major conference for the Central Valley on the role of technology in eliminating the achievement gap. In addition, Dr. Buster is chairperson of the AALF board. • Sunne McPeak, Executive Director of the California Emerging Technology Fund met with our Work Group on Aug. 9 to explain the organization’s mission, assess interest of work group members/county offices of education, and inform the group in the specific computer literacy curriculum she has seen implemented in other regions. • Workforce Development Work Group will attempt to conduct an assessment of businesses to determine what instrument/if community colleges and/or businesses in the region are using any particular curriculum and/or standard for computer literacy.
Goal 4: Implement research-based programs to reduce substance abuse, including voluntary drug testing. Major Focus: Keep Valley students sane and sober so they can achieve at the highest levels.
Objective A: Implement a substance abuse program. • Tulare Co. Office of Education leading regional project gained funding from the federal level to evaluate the impact of Character Counts programs in the valley, one mechanism to impact student values and decision-making away from substance abuse.
Objective B: Coordinate and integrate health and human services organized around school attendance boundaries. SEE 1 E
Planned Activities by Goal and Objective
Goal 1: Increase the achievement level of students, schools and school districts in the San Joaquin Valley. Objective A: Implement a school and school district support system through county offices of education.
• Scheduled meetings next quarter: Nov. 8, Nov. 24 to be held at San Joaquin and Merced County offices of education. • Work Group will review goals and objectives to make recommendations for modification of the action plan. • FCOE was asked to compile data on achievement levels of 8 county region based on newly released state achievement data. • Reviewing goals and objectives to revise action plan for next year, gleaning input from COE’s. • Continuing support and expansion efforts for Springboard Schools in the Valley. • County offices of education continue to support resources and programs. • Engage representatives from as many of the 8 county offices of education as possible in the October 4 CPSJV Annual Summit.
Objective B: Implement a curricular and instructional program to ensure all children are able to read at or above grade level.
• Merced County Office of Education is submitting a proposal to assess and evaluate the impact of preschool on student achievement in the 8 county region. Each of the counties is supportive of the proposal and project and anticipates to fully support this project. • County offices of education continue to support resources and programs. • Promoting Volunteer reading programs (such as Fresno Reads) as one mechanism to enhance reading and learning.
Objective C: Provide school choice, and intra-district and inter-district options consistent with state and federal law.
Planning a forum illuminating the benefits, challenges and issues surrounding charter schools. This may engage the Education and Business Network in Fresno, the City of Fresno and other partner organizations as well as involve educational leaders from various charter schools/agencies.
145 Objective D: Establish an executive leadership academy to train principals of low-performing schools in “turn-around” educational and management services.
• Conducting Executive Leadership Center seminars on Oct. 15, Nov. 27 and Jan. 17 for superintendents and district level administrators to focus on performance improvement strategies and the role of the chief administrators. • Based on the seed grant, the EL Leadership Academy sessions will continue to be held as well as “excursion” staff development opportunities provided for participating educational leaders.
Objective E: Coordinate and integrate health and human services organized around school attendance boundaries. • Meeting with consultant for the HEZ seed grant project. • Continuing involvement and engagement with the Human Investment Initiative in Fresno to pursue pilot project in Fresno Unified neighborhood(s).
Goal 2: Develop a college-going culture in the San Joaquin Valley. Objective A: Support collaborations between school districts and the community colleges, CSU and UC Systems.
• Meeting with the CVHEC membership on Oct. 18, encouraging expansion and active involvement with P-16 councils. • Have representatives and speakers attending Nov. 8 work group meeting to initiate an exchange of ideas and understanding between K-12 and higher education. Representatives include: CVHEC, UC Merced, Campaign for College Opportunity, San Joaquin Delta College, AVID program, and independent colleges. • From November to January, intend to complete an assessment of current programs and projects in the region working towards this goal. • January 16 meeting in Bakersfield intended to be a workshop to consider data collected and begin identifying priorities for this goal.
Objective B: Increase the rates of high school graduates completing courses for college admission. See above.
Goal 3: Implement a computer literacy initiative for K-12 students aligned with community college curriculum. • Planning a technology conference in the spring of 2008. • Taking a group of work group and district people to an event on Oct. 23 regarding the role of technology in the region. • Engage the Superintendent of Corcoran Unified with this goal since his district is becoming a model district for laptop computer programs in rural and high poverty areas.
Goal 4: Implement research-based programs to reduce substance abuse, including voluntary drug testing. Objective A: Implement a substance abuse program. Conduct an assessment in the region of successful and model programs/schools.
Objective B: Coordinate and integrate health and human services organized around school attendance boundaries. Conduct an assessment in the region of successful and model programs/schools.
Challenges/Problems/Bottlenecks/Feedback
13. Time – With the complexity of the goals and objectives and scale of educational programs, services and needs spanning the region, assessment, planning and coordination of high-leverage activities with this work group require time of high level administrators who have limited time to devote to this work. While county offices of education have committed staff time to our work, the mere complexity of managing and coordinating the work while implementing projects takes more time than the work plan acknowledges. 14. Funding – considering that staffing for this project this year is taking a substantial portion of the funding for this project, we recognize that there will not be sufficient funds to carry out the work fully next year. We have met with the CSUF Development staff to solicit their fundraising support to expand and continue this work.
146 15. Relationships and communications -- While we have gained significant support, building relationships and establishing effective and efficient communications with the 8 county superintendents balanced with the numerous other interested individuals/organizations continues to be a challenge. The consultants have initiated contacts with each of the county offices of education to build relationships. We have also met with the Secretariat and Assistant Director of the CPSJV to brainstorm strategies, and discussed with the Assistant to the State Superintendent of Schools to enlist his help working with the offices of education. We are developing an electronic newsletter and are building the materials on the Partnership Web site.
If you have coordinated any outreach, please describe briefly.
• Primary outreach this quarter included distribution of electronic and hardcopy brochures for the legal forums and the Executive Leadership Center sent directly to superintendents and channeled through County Offices of Education. • The Partnership also included notices of upcoming events in the Daily News Briefings as well as on the website. • Electronic and telephone communications with work group representatives and potential work group members. • Submitted materials for the CPSJV Annual Report. • Presented to the CSUF Kremen School of Education Community Council on September 18, CVELI strategic planning group on August 30. Also met with CA Education Secretary David Long and staff and attended/spoke at his Learning Session on the same day.
Presentations were made to the Education and Business Network, CPSJV Annual Summit, the CSUF Superintendents Advisory Council and the CSU system deans and faculty groups were made during the fir
147
Quarter/Dates of Activity: Q1 July 2007 through September 2007 Seed Grant: English Language Learner Leadership Academy Grantee Organization: Fresno County Office of Education Contact Person: Don Holder Phone: 559-265-3071 Email: [email protected]
Description of this Quarter’s Activity and Impact on Partnership Goals and Objectives
“The goal of the California Partnership with the San Joaquin Valley Seed Grant Project is to gather research identifying effective English Learner instruction, curriculum, and intervention strategies, plus those organizational support structures already proven to produce improved student learning and increase college acceptance rates, to create an Academy where those proven practices can be taught to district leaders; then support those leaders through mentoring at the site level with the help of a coaching network provided by the eight county superintendents of schools identified by this project in collaboration with California State University, Fresno.”
Components of the strategic action plan proposal included are: Goal 1 Increase the achievement level of students, schools, and school districts in the San Joaquin Valley. Objective A Implement a school and school district support system through County Offices of Education. Objective B Implement a curricular and instructional program to ensure all children are able to read at or above grade level Objective D Establish an executive leadership academy to train principals of low-performing schools in turn-around educational and management services.
Planned Activities
Activity Responsible Agency Attendants/Parties Timeline Regional Planning meeting Fresno County Office of Representatives from eight May 22, 2007 Education counties; development of Academy Design Team Hiring of part time Academy Fresno County Office of Larry Powell, Fresno County June 11, 2007 director Education Office of Education Nominations for Academy Fresno County Office of Superintendents of Fresno, Kern, May-July 2007 Participants Education Kings, Madera, Merced, San Joaquin, Stanislaus, and Tulare counties Academy Design Team Fresno County Office of Design Team meeting July 5, 2007 Meeting Education Selection of Academy Eight County Offices of County Superintendents/District July 2007 participants Education Superintendents Superintendents First Academy Session Fresno County Office of 16 participating district/school August 9. 2007 Education teams COE/Springboard coaches Academy Excursion Fresno County Office of Participating district/school teams August 21-22, McREL Balanced Leadership Education that elected to attend McREL 2007 excursion Second Academy Session Fresno County Office of 16 participating district/school September 17, Education teams 2007 Modesto COE/Springboard coaches September 18, 2007 Visalia
Impact on Partnership Goals and Objectives
Academy Session One • Participants gained knowledge of factors that influence English proficiency including cultural and environmental factors which will help them design effective instructional and support programs 148 • Participants were trained to be able to analyze the nature of their EP populations and understand that not all EL students are at the same level either academically or in acquiring English, enabling them to create master schedules more effectively. • Content of Session I emphasized a closer look at English Learner students with an emphasis on factors beyond language that influence learning. Statistics from the San Joaquin Valley, a compilation of English Leaner data, educational typologies, and the video, The New Americans, gave participants an in-depth look English Learner students.
Excursion One • Participants will report an increase in their effectiveness as leaders. • Participants will report an increase in their willingness to share their knowledge and experience with other administrators, creating a ground swell affect of schools believing improved test scores for EL students is possible • McREL’s Balanced Leadership: School Leadership That Works was the first of four McREL leadership sessions available to Academy participants. Session intended outcomes included 1) an increased understanding of McREL’s research on school leadership, which links principal’s leadership practices with student achievement leadership; 2) increased knowledge and skills about improving leadership practices; and 3) increase awareness of the degree to which participants fulfill research-based leadership responsibilities. (Balanced Leadership: An Overview-Participants Manual)
Academy Session Two • Participants will understand the importance of using data to measure and assess progress of students acquiring English at the same time learning academic content in a variety of sessions and will increase a culture of data collection and analysis to validate the effectiveness of the instructional program and to guide adjustments in program delivery. • Content of Session II addressed the importance of data collection and data management and provided participants with the knowledge and skill to make data driven decisions in order to impact the learning of EL students and address goals of the English Learner Master Plan.
Participating Districts
County District Participants Coaches Fresno Alvina Elementary Charter School District Fresno Unified School District 14 4 Monroe Elementary School District Washington Colony Elementary School District Kern Fairfax School District 5 1 Kings Armona Unified School District 3 1 Madera Madera Unified School District 6 2 Madera County Office of Education Merced Hilmar Unified School District 6 2 San Joaquin Lammersville School District Stockton Unified School District 12 2 Tracy Unified School District Stanislaus Newman-Crows Landing Unified School District 10 2 Patterson Unified School District Tulare Earlimart School District 14 2 Culter-Orosi Unified School District
149 Planned Activities for the Next 3-6 Months
Academy Sessions Excursion Event DATES STRAND DATES EVENT ORGANIZATION August 2007 Visalia August McREL Leadership: FCOE/McREL 12:00-5:00 Whole Group 21-22 “Balanced Leadership” August 8 Orientation Strand 1 Limited space available An In-Depth Look at English Language Learners
5:30-6:00 Reception 6:00-8:00 Dinner (Guest Speaker) September Strand 1 continued 2007 An In-Depth Look at No scheduled excursions English Language Learners Modesto Sept 17 Visalia Sept 18 October Stand 2 October Executive Leadership CVELI/ACSA/ 2007 McREL Leadership 15 Center Springboard Piccadilly “Effective Change Leadership” Smitcamp House Inn-Fresno CSU Fresno Oct 18 & Oct 19 November Strand 3 Novemb Executive Leadership CVELI/ACSA/ 2007 Systems, Organizations, er Center Springboard and Structures 27 Smitcamp House Modesto Nov CSU Fresno 5 Visalia Nov 6 December 2007 Decemb Title III Accountability CDE No scheduled Academy er Institute Sessions 9-10-11 San Diego FCOE/MCREL Decemb McREL Leadership er “Professional Learning 11-12 Community” Limited space available
January Stand 4 January Executive Leadership CVELI/ACSA/ 2008 Managing Data 17 Center Springboard Smitcamp House Modesto Jan CSU Fresno 9 January FCOE/McREL Visalia Jan 22-23 10 McREL Leadership January “Sustainable Leadership Superintendents’ 29-30 and Continuous Symposium Improvement” Limited Space Available
New Superintendents Training February 2008 Strand 5
150 Academy Sessions Excursion Event Effective English Language Modesto Feb Learner Programs 26 Visalia Feb 27 March 2008
Modesto Mar Strand 5 continued Others To Be Announced 12 Effective English Language Visalia Mar Learner Programs 13 April 2008
Modesto Apr Strand 6 14 Professional Development Visalia Apr 15 May 2008 Strand 7 Modesto A Plan of Action May 6 Visalia May 7 June 2008 Strand 8 TBA Courageous Leadership June 26 12:00-5:00 Final EL Action Plan/Share 5:30-6:00 Reception 6:00-8:00 Dinner (Guest Speaker)
151 Challenges/Problems/Bottlenecks/Feedback
Participant districts/schools are similar in percent of ELs and levels of socio-economic populations, but vary drastically in type--urban/rural, size, availability of resources, and number of administrators. A challenge is to ensure that the needs of all Academy participants are being met and that session content is useful and applicable for all.
The Academy was originally designed to accommodate 64 participants. A problem has been to accommodate counties that wished to add more districts and districts that wanted to add additional people to their teams. Due to limited space, a waiting list was established.
Feedback/Evaluations Session I
The most meaningful activities The most important new ideas I The next step for my team is today were learned today are -Being able to share ideas with fellow -We have a long way to go -Formulate a general plan administrators -English Learners typologies, -Meet together and discuss today’s -New Americans and time to bond with concise information, and wow! More activities group time to think -Sharing activities with staffs I will -I have participated in most of these -Again, I appreciate my peers coach activities, but never with a team. seeing/doing these activities. It -Ensuring the superintendent Thank you. lends credibility to the work I do understands the necessity of -Discussing the statistics posted on -Inclusion of the social aspect for attendance the wall ELs was very helpful -Discussing what an EL focus will -Video was excellent, discussion on -Looking beyond language and look like typologies, charts around the room academics -Support to districts through county -Student profiles, typologies -It’s not just the language, look at services -Team collaboration the whole child -Establishing an Action Plan -Newcomer vs. 1st and 2nd generation -Immigrant experiences -Compiling data to monitor students -Learning the perceptions that are still -Real issues beyond language -Deeper understanding of the needs believed by administrators -Statistics regarding EL students of English Learners and Immigrants -Gallery Walk, Who Are Our Students, and their families -To develop new strategies to The New Americans -That EL students are unique and all implement at district level -Opportunity for colleagues to offer aspects should be considered -Professional Development for all new ideas and perspectives -Seeing real student profiles and the staff on the Best Practices for EL -Understanding that one size does not challenges they face students. fit all and EL students are unique -Looking at research and finding -Look at data and programs to meet -Gaining further understanding of our Best Practices student needs students -Heart…not just levels and scores; -Evaluating our district more -Practical and inspirational Evaluating systems and resources effectively -Understanding the complex issues -Evaluate our EL methods involving ELD -Take this information back to other district leaders -We need to unpack the EL standards as a district and develop a better working knowledge of them -Dialogue and timeline of events to implement
Feedback/Evaluations Session II Scale 1 = Lowest to 5 = Highest
Rating 4.5 The day’s content addressed a relevant issue in my district/school about English Learner data and its use. 4.3 The day’s content extended and deepened my knowledge about collecting, managing, and interpreting data as it applies to English Learners. 4.4 The day’s content influenced my thinking about the importance of collecting, managing, and interpretation of data for EL students 4.3 I can apply what I learned about data collecting, management, and interpretation at my district/school. 4.2 The Best Practice Matrix-DATA will assist in guiding next steps in my district/school.
152 If you have coordinated any outreach, please describe briefly.
Outreach has been structured in several formats to provide participants with supplemental information and opportunities beyond the content scheduled for Academy sessions. A. Ongoing collaboration with the eight county design team members B. Incorporation of a coaching model. Each County Office/Springboard Schools has assigned a coach to participant districts/schools in order to provide support in accomplishing the work necessary to address the needs of English Learners. C. Invitation to guest speakers and practitioners who have made systemic changes in their districts/schools that have proven successful in closing the achievement gap or accelerating learning for English Learners. D. Excursions (Registration fees paid by Academy) 1. McREL Training: (Six days of additional training) Effective Change Leadership Developing A Purposeful Community Choosing the Right Focus 2. Central Valley Education Leadership Institute Seminars Three leadership sessions 3. Title III Accountability Institute Closing the Achievement Gap for English Learners and Immigrant Students 4. Association of California School Administrators Superintendents’ Symposium
153
Work Group: Land Use, Agriculture and Housing Consultant: Carol Whiteside Organization: Great Valley Center Quarter: 3rd 2007 Phone: 209-522-5103 Email: [email protected]
Description of Activity by Goal and Objective
Goal 1: Objective A. Assist with development of regional consensus on values, goals, strategies and guidelines for the Regional Blueprint Plan.
Consultants participate in 2 meetings per month with the COGs’ Regional Coordinating Council. Have met with most COG Directors individually. Consultants attended the September COG Directors meeting and plan to attend all future meetings.
Goal 1: Objective B. Develop a high-value parks and open space strategy to be used in the development of the Regional Blueprint Plan.
The Westside/Wetlands interest group met on August 21 regarding a large scale wetlands/ conservation strategy for 3 northern SJV counties. Funding opportunities were explored. Consultant and convener met with head of the Dept of Conservation in Sacramento about this resources plan. Staff is working to find funding for a concept and outreach publication that will be used to garner greater support for the effort.
Goal 2: Objective A. Increase the overall average density of new development.
Blueprint Regional Advisory Committee was held on July 19 to determine regional vision and values. Attended meeting of Valley Wide Planners on September 27 which is discussing components that need to be included in a toolkit to accompany the SJV Blueprint.
Goal 2: Objective B. Reduce urban run-off by decreasing the land covered by commercial and industrial parking.
Work continues on model ordinances. Draft was sent to attorneys in Q3 to garner their input.
Goal 2: Objective C. Promote the adoption and implementation of zoning ordinances that are form-based and more flexible to encourage desired outcomes.
Staff work has been given to law firm for their comment.
Goal 2: Objective D. Study and adopt a strategic concept for accommodating new growth.
Blueprint Regional Advisory Committee (BRAC) met on July 19 to determine regional vision and values.
Goal 3: Objective A. Develop and implement a plan for the provision of regional infrastructure.
This activity will follow regional plan.
Goal 3: Objective B. Develop and implement a process of monitoring the performance and adequacy of regional infrastructure and determining future needs.
COG staff has begun the conversation about regional infrastructure and metrics.
Goal 4: Objective A. Improve the sharing, access and use of planning and environmental resource data.
ICE Center met with COG staff to establish standards for METADATA to provide greater reliability.
154
Goal 5: Objective A. Develop a long-range plan to maintain the viability of agriculture in the region.
On July 25 at GVC, work commenced on the Agriculture Plan for California. On September 19, consultant spoke to CA Food and Ag Board regarding doing Agriculture Plan for California.
Goal 5: Objective C. Reduce the loss of farm land attributable to General Plan amendments.
Work on seed grant to Fresno COG to develop a model for all counties continues.
Goal 6: Objective A. Increase the number and availability of housing units for people of all income levels.
Rollie Smith and the Housing Sub-Committee continue to refine the SJV Regional Housing Trust Proposal for Organization. Composition of the Board of Directors has been recommended.
Goal 6: Objective B. Provide incentives for affordable housing that meets the needs of all income levels in the region.
Rollie Smith and the Housing Sub-Committee continue to refine the SJV Regional Housing Trust Proposal for Organization. Composition of the Board of Directors has been recommended.
Goal 7: Objective A. Use the San Joaquin Valley as a pilot for testing new permitting and environmental review incentives that will facilitate and infill and refill developments.
Consultants continue to work with Blueprint Project Managers and Valley wide Professional Planner's Group. Julia Lave Johnson of the Governor's Office of Planning and Research will give presentation at the October meeting of LUAH regarding Climate Change and CEQA.
Goal 7: Objective B. Develop an innovative approach to establishing a voluntary, high-value open space conservation system.
See Goal 1: Objective B.
Goal 7: Objective C. Increase the coordination among local General Plans regionwide.
This activity will follow regional plan.
Planned Activities by Goal and Objective (for next 3-6 months)
Goal 1: Objective A. Assist with development of regional consensus on values, goals, strategies and guidelines for the Regional Blueprint Plan.
Coordination activities will continue with the Regional Coordination Council and the COG Directors. Work on the "Components of a Regional Land Use Strategy" will continue with additional input from LUAH members and be brought back in 2008.
Goal 1: Objective B. Develop a high-value parks and open space strategy to be used in the development of the Regional Blueprint Plan.
The Westside/Wetlands interest group will meet again in Q4.
Goal 2: Objective A. Increase the overall average density of new development.
Blueprint Regional Advisory Committee is scheduled for December 3. Base-case scenario will be discussed. Other scenarios will be discussed in 2008 with preferred scenario to be chosen in Fall of 2008.
155 Goal 2: Objective B. Reduce urban run-off by decreasing the land covered by commercial and industrial parking.
Coordination with attorneys to draft sample language continues. Model ordinances will be out for review in Q4.
Goal 2: Objective C. Promote the adoption and implementation of zoning ordinances that are form-based and more flexible to encourage desired outcomes.
Close coordination of this effort will continue.
Goal 2: Objective D. Study and adopt a strategic concept for accommodating new growth.
BRAC meeting is scheduled for December 3 to finalize recommended vision and values. Base-case scenario will be discussed as well. Congress of local elected officials is being planned for early 2008.
Goal 4: Objective A. Improve the sharing, access and use of planning and environmental resource data.
Base case maps to be reviewed in Q4.
Goal 5: Objective A. Develop a long-range plan to maintain the viability of agriculture in the region.
Work will continue on the California Agriculture Plan in Q4 and into 2008
Goal 5: Objective C. Reduce the loss of farm land attributable to General Plan amendments.
Seed Grant awardees will give presentation at October 10 LUAH meeting on the progress of their plan to date.
Goal 6: Objective A. Increase the number and availability of housing units for people of all income levels.
Rollie Smith will present Housing Trust proposal to LUAH meeting participants on October 10.
Goal 6: Objective B. Provide incentives for affordable housing that meets the needs of all income levels in the region.
Rollie Smith will present Housing Trust proposal to LUAH meeting participants on October 10.
Goal 7: Objective A. Use the San Joaquin Valley as a pilot for testing new permitting and environmental review incentives that will facilitate and infill and refill developments.
Consultants have planned a series of meetings in Sacramento during Q4 regarding the above outlined issues.
Challenges/Problems/Bottlenecks/Feedback
Goal 2: Objective A. Increase the overall average density of new development.
COGs are conducting meetings to determine local input. Regional process moves in concert with that input which is coming out rather slowly.
Goal 2: Objective D. Study and adopt a strategic concept for accommodating new growth.
Political difficulties always arise in discussion of local land uses.
Goal 3: Objective B. Develop and implement a process of monitoring the performance and adequacy of regional infrastructure and determining future needs.
COGs are moving forward with local input. BRAC work follows local one. BRAC input is essential to move discussion to more regional level.
156 Goal 6: Objective A. Increase the number and availability of housing units for people of all income levels.
Key to success of this trust will be the implementation by local elected officials of a means to garner matching funds that will be required to draw down Prop 1C funds.
Goal 6: Objective B. Provide incentives for affordable housing that meets the needs of all income levels in the region.
Key to success of this trust will be the implementation by local elected officials of a means to garner matching funds that will be required to draw down Prop 1C funds.
157
Quarter/Dates of Activity: Q1 July 2007 through September 2007 Seed Grant: Farmland Conservation Model Program/Uniform Farmland Database Grantee Organization: Council of Fresno County Governments Contact Person: Tony Boren, Todd Sobrado Phone: 559-233-4148 Email: [email protected], [email protected]
Description of this Quarter’s Activity, and impact on Partnership Goals and Objectives:
A great deal has been accomplished this quarter, as follows: • Completion of the work plan • Identification of the organizational structure for outreach purposes • The identification of the variables significantly affecting the sustainability of agriculture within an area • Completion of the initial round of GIS mapping • Identification of and initial outreach to those stakeholders that we would like to assist us on the Farmland Conservation Model Program advisory committee • Determination of groups to which the team is targeting its outreach • Identify centers of influence that could assist us in gaining access to targeted stakeholders • Start of work on our outreach strategy.
All of these activities impact Land Use, Housing and Agriculture Work Group goals and objectives because they are all needed to create the Farmland Conservation Model Program. The Farmland Conservation Model Program fits within Partnership Goals and Objectives and is complementary to the Blueprint planning process currently in process within the eight counties making up the San Joaquin Valley.
Planned Activities for next 3-6 months:
In the next three to six months, the Farmland Conservation Model Program will undertake the following activities: • Complete the GIS mapping exercise to locate strategically significant farmlands • Identify strategic farmlands • Conduct public outreach to targeted stakeholders • Identify and understand farmland conservation tools for the Toolbox. • Write the report for the Farmland Conservation Model Program
If you have coordinated any outreach, please describe briefly.
We have developed an outreach plan and have identified the groups with whom we will be meeting. We’ve spoken with key ‘centers of influence’ to determine the best way to conduct our outreach. Since we are at the beginning of the planning process, we have been guarded with regard to the GIS information pertaining to agricultural conservation. Once this information has been reviewed by domain experts, we will release the data to stakeholders and interested parties.
Groups that we will be actively targeting include the farming community, the business community, elected officials as well as the general public. The farming community will be accessed through the Fresno Farm Bureau, whereas the business community will be accessed through the Fresno Chamber of Commerce. Outreach activities for the Farmland Conservation Model program are ongoing.
158
Quarter/Dates of Activity: Q1 July 2007 through September 2007 Seed Grant: Integrating Land and Water Solutions in Tulare Lake Basin Grantee Organization: Tulare Basin Wildlife Partners Contact Person: Carole Combs, Grant/Project Manager Phone: 559-799-7204 Email: [email protected]
Description of this Quarter’s Activity and Impact on Partnership Goals and Objectives
We laid groundwork for three grant deliverables based on our three completed Tulare Basin Regional Conservation Plans: 1. Outreach Strategic Plan drafted; 2. Fundraising Strategic Plan drafted; and 3. Conservation Bank site recommendations to Tulare County drafted.
We received a grant award of $40,875 from Tulare County Association of Governments to do in-depth Riparian-Wildlife Corridor Survey and Report in support of Conservation Bank site recommendations. We initiated similar grant requests for funding from Fresno, Kings, and Kern Counties for similar in-depth reports by the end of 2008, to assist with development of possible regional mitigation bank or, at minimum, to assist each County with mitigation needs related to anticipated transportation and housing developments. We entered into an especially close partnership with the California Water Institute, as water needs are integral to our priority conservation projects and as Basin-wide IRWMP is an objective of the Partners. We planned the October 17 meeting of Tulare Lake Basin Working Group as Conservation Priority Setting meeting to provide the necessary strategic and substantive foundation for our Comprehensive Fundraising Plan. Please email Carole Combs, see above, for the attached agenda for the meeting and list of partner organizations. Fifty-eight representatives from these groups are expected to attend.
Planned Activities for next 3-6 months
From October – December 2007 we will complete our Outreach Strategic Plan, Comprehensive Fundraising Plan, and Conservation Bank site recommendations for Tulare County. We will do this working with lead consultants (Leslie Friedman Johnson and Tasha Newman of Conservation Strategy Group and Will Murray of Will Murray Company). From January – March 2008, we will begin implementing the Outreach Strategic Plan and Comprehensive Fundraising Plan (through grant completion in December 2008) and work with Fresno COG Transportation Technical Committee on in depth survey to provide mitigation site recommendations by June 2008. We expect a grant from Kings County Fish & Game Fines Commission (obtained with the assistance of the Kings County Planning Agency) to prepare similar work on behalf of Kings County during the January – June time frame. We will develop and get approval for a proposal for similar work in Kern County to be completed by December 2008.
Challenges/Problems/Bottlenecks/Feedback
We have plenty of challenges, but no problems or bottlenecks to report. Please note that we have decided not to create a “steering committee”, as the participants in the Tulare Lake Basin Working Group in effect serve as that committee.
If you have coordinated any outreach, please describe briefly.
During this first quarterly reporting period, we initiated partnerships with Tulare, Fresno, Kings and Kern County planners and Blueprint representatives. We made a presentation to the Tulare County Association of Governments (TCAG) Board and met frequently with TCAG staff to plan and implement our Conservation Bank site recommendations deliverable.
During this reporting period, we reached out to the more than 40 agencies and nonprofits participating in Tulare Lake Basin Working Group (Partners) to orchestrate the October 17 meeting where we plan to reach a consensus on “land and water solution” priorities for future funding and implementation.
159
Work Group: Transportation Consultant: Barbara Patrick, Special Projects Coordinator Organization: Great Valley Center Quarter: 3rd 2007 Phone: 209-522-5103 Email: [email protected]
Description of Activity by Goal and Objective
Goal 1: Objective A. Improve Highway 99 to freeway standards to increase safety.
Caltrans officials gave presentation at August Partnership Board meeting on Highway 99 funding issues. Work continues on prioritization and funding issues.
Goal 1: Objective B. Increase Highway 99 capacity.
Federal Highway Administration continues to work with Caltrans to formally establish policies for ongoing and future projects that would be affected by interstate designation for Hwy 99. Segment- specific feedback will be sought from FHWA as those segments are more clearly defined.
Goal 1: Objective C. Create a San Joaquin Valley Route 99 Corridor identity.
The plan to attach San Joaquin Valley Route 99 corridor logo to existing interchange signs has hit a snag. Caltrans has determined that this plan may provide safety challenges.
Goal 1: Objective D. Build an ongoing coalition of civic leaders to support improvements to the Highway 99 corridor.
Work continues on the establishment of this committee. Input is being sought on prospective members. Manuel Alvarado will be GVC representative.
Goal 3: Objective A. Increase benefits to the San Joaquin Valley from goods movement specific to the region.
Goods Movement Action Plan for the San Joaquin Valley has been finalized. Draft report has been reviewed by each of the 8 COGs and will be approved by their Boards of Directors in the September/October timeframe. WG receives regular reports from the coordinator of the project at Fresno COG.
Goal 7: Objective A. Encourage the Regional Blueprint Plan Process to integrate land use and transportation planning to improve mobility.
The work of the Regional Blueprint process continues and will do so at least through Fall of 2008. Local meetings are making the land use/transportation link. Blueprint Regional Advisory Committee (BRAC) was held on July 19. BRAC will knit together the local work into a regional recommendation.
Goal 7: Objective B. Incorporate into regional transportation plans actions that support and encourage implementation of the Regional Blueprint Plan.
Blueprint meetings continue in the 8 counties. Input that originates at the local level is discussed at the regional level by the BRAC. BRAC meeting was held on July 19 with initial work on vision/values and "base case scenario".
Goal 10: Objective A. Provide tangible benefits and mitigate impacts to the region while assisting the state in meeting transportation goals.
Special Session on High Speed Rail was conducted in conjunction with August Partnership Board meeting. Partnership position on HSR was adopted by the board and continues to be refined. Transportation WG consultant gave testimony at 3 HSRA meetings on behalf of the Partnership.
160 Planned Activities by Goal and Objective (for next 3-6 months)
Goal 1: Objective A. Improve Highway 99 to freeway standards to increase safety.
Partnership is planning a Special Session on Highway 99 funding during Q4. Presentation on status of Highway 99 will be given at the Partnership Summit in October.
Goal 1: Objective B. Increase Highway 99 capacity.
Discussions between FHWA and Caltrans continue. WG will be updated at Q4 meeting.
Goal 1: Objective C. Create a San Joaquin Valley Route 99 Corridor identity.
Caltrans continues to explore alternatives for displaying approved logo signs. Update report will be provided at Q4 meeting.
Goal 1: Objective D. Build an ongoing coalition of civic leaders to support improvements to the Highway 99 corridor.
January 2008 is anticipated date for inaugural meeting of the Master Plan Advisory Committee.
Goal 2: Objective A. Support construction of projects to improve safety and capacity of vital east-west corridors.
COG directors/ project managers will give update on status of east-west corridors at Q4 Work Group meeting.
Goal 2: Objective B. Incorporate plans for improving east-west corridors into Regional Blueprint Plan.
COG directors/ project managers will give update on status of east-west corridors at Q4 Work Group meeting.
Goal 3: Objective A. Increase benefits to the San Joaquin Valley from goods movement specific to the region.
Goods Movement Action Plan for the San Joaquin Valley will be approved by the Boards of Directors for the 8 COGs in the September/October timeframe. Partnership will participate in the opportunity to give comment on the expenditure of Prop 1B funds in late October in Stockton. Presentation on the Goods Movement effort will be given at the October Summit.
Goal 5: Objective A. Implement a comprehensive and efficient alternative transportation system for intra- regional and inter-regional passenger trips.
Discussion took place at the September WG meeting on the status of this goal. A report will be given by several of the counties at the Q4 Transportation WG meeting.
Goal 7: Objective A. Encourage the Regional Blueprint Plan Process to integrate land use and transportation planning to improve mobility.
Local and regional work on the Blueprint continues.
Goal 7: Objective B. Incorporate into regional transportation plans actions that support and encourage implementation of the Regional Blueprint Plan.
BRAC meets on December 3 to continue their work.
Goal 8: Objective A. Develop and implement a system for tracking economic development that results from investments in transportation improvements.
Congress of local elected officials is being planned for early 2008.
Goal 9: Objective A. Integrate ITS into all transportation planning and construction projects.
161 Presentation will be given at Q4 WG meeting on the status of this goal.
Goal 10: Objective A. Provide tangible benefits and mitigate impacts to the region while assisting the state in meeting transportation goals. HSR continues to be a top priority of the WG with regular updates on status at WG meetings. Presentation on HSR will be given at October Summit.
Challenges/Problems/Bottlenecks/Feedback
Goal 1: Objective A. Improve Highway 99 to freeway standards to increase safety.
Adequate funding will be an on-going problem. When prioritization of unfunded projects has been formalized, an opportunity for engagement by the Partnership Board will exist.
Goal 1: Objective B. Increase Highway 99 capacity.
There is concern because 99 was the only earmark in the Transportation Bonds that it will be the only money obtained for the corridor. It falls over $6 billion short of funding the projects in the Master Plan. Special Session on Highway 99 will be convened to identify areas appropriate for Partnership intervention.
Goal 1: Objective C. Create a San Joaquin Valley Route 99 Corridor identity.
Costs for this project (initially estimated to be $75,000) will rise significantly if existing poles cannot be utilized.
Goal 3: Objective A. Increase benefits to the San Joaquin Valley from goods movement specific to the region.
COGs are mobilized for action with the adoption of the SJV Goods Movement Action Plan.
Goal 5: Objective A. Implement a comprehensive and efficient alternative transportation system for intra- regional and inter-regional passenger trips.
Status report will be given at Q4 meeting.
Goal 6: Objective A. Improve roadside rest stop amenities and facilities.
The search for funding to maximize the potential of SJV rest stops continues to be a problem.
Goal 7: Objective A. Encourage the Regional Blueprint Plan Process to integrate land use and transportation planning to improve mobility.
Some of the transportation action items need to be timed with the Blueprint process which is on a different schedule than the work of the Partnership. There is still not a transparent connection between the two efforts.
162
Quarter/Dates of Activity: Q1 July 2007 through September 2007 Seed Grant: Metro Rural Loop Corridor Preservation Feasibility Study Grantee Organization: City of Fresno, Planning and Development Department Contact Person: Keith Bergthold Phone: 559-621-8049 Email: [email protected]
Description of this Quarter’s Activity and Impact on Partnership Goals and Objectives
On June 14, the MRL Committee hosted a major stakeholder kickoff meeting at the CSUF Smittcamp Alumni House which was well attended by the partnering cities and agencies.
The consultant VRPA has gathered, analyzed and prepared preliminary data related to demographics and population projections, corridor and cross section alternatives, as well as land use and agriculture land concepts.
Planned Activities for next 3-6 months
City of Fresno’s Assistant Planning Director Keith Bergthold along with partners from the private and public sectors are leading an outreach effort to engage the local jurisdictions and encourage regional cooperation and collaboration. A power point presentation has been developed for the multi city/county tour and to date we have met with Madera County, the City of Madera, Coalinga, Orange Cove, Firebaugh, Kerman, Selma, and Chowchilla. We will be meeting with the City of Sanger, Clovis, Kingsburg, Mendota, Fowler, Huron, Reedley, Parlier, San Joaquin and the County of Fresno between November and December.
An example of these presentations can be viewed by clicking the link below.
(Presentation to Madera County Board of Supervisors on 10/23/07) http://madera.granicus.com/viewpublisher.php?view_id=12#bos
As a result of the outreach meetings, we have discovered that Tulare and Kings County have expressed an interest in the project and in response we have developed a four-county version of alternative corridor concept. We will be visiting the Tulare and Kings County jurisdictions in November and December.
A modeling assumptions meeting with the Fresno and Madera Counties will be scheduled for November. An update to the stakeholders on the feasibility study is slated for mid-January and we will be scheduling another round of updates to the cities and counties from February to March.
Challenges/Problems/Bottlenecks/Feedback
1. Keeping a firm commitment to the Blueprint process is challenging while trying to vet a fairly specific urban regional form (MRL) with participating jurisdictions ahead of the blue print process. 2. One challenge is assessing the multi alternative scenarios while trying to focusing on one alternative that accomplishes the vast majority of our goals such as the Metro Rural Loop. 3. A large amount of donated and in-kind hours are dedicated to this project.
If you have coordinated any outreach, please describe briefly.
See above information on outreach efforts, and please email Keith Bergthold’s assistant Trai Her, [email protected], for a list of presentation dates and for a copy of the PowerPoint presentation if you are interested.
163
Work Group: Water Quality, Supply and Reliability Consultant: Jim Tischer, Kathy Wood, Sarge Green Organization: California Water Institute, California State University, Fresno Quarter: 3rd 2007 Phone: 559-260-6148, 559-298-6072, 559-647-9198 Email: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Description of Activity by Goal and Objective
Goal 1: Develop and implement a comprehensive San Joaquin Valley Regional Water Plan
Goal 2: Strengthen levees in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and San Joaquin Valley to safeguard regional water quality and quantity and provide flood control.
Goal 3: Augment surface, groundwater banking programs and recycled water projects in the San Joaquin Valley.
Goal 4: Develop and implement water quality and salinity management infrastructure.
Goal 5: Expand environmental restoration and habitat conservation strategies.
Goal 6: Expand agricultural and urban water-energy use efficiency programs.
Planned Activities by Goal and Objective (for next 3-6 months)
Goal 1. Integrated Regional Water Management Plan (IRWMP) development for the Tulare Lake Hydrologic Region (Fresno, Kings, Tulare & Kern Counties) is moving forward well. Several water agencies have developed and adopted IRWMP’s and functional equivalents during the period. (Upper Kings Basin Water Forum, Kaweah Delta Regional Water Management Implementation Program, Westside Regional Drainage Plan and Poso Creek IRWM Plan). The California Water Institute will work with these entities to develop a basin-wide plan that can serve as a framework for the larger San Joaquin Valley IRWMP.
Outreach work continues with water agencies, resource managers and the public in the northern San Joaquin Valley Hydrologic Region (Madera, Merced, Stanislaus and San Joaquin Counties) to encourage support for a unified Valley- wide IRWM. Enthusiasm is less highly evolved in the northern area than the southern area. Engagement will continue during 4Q07 to develop support.
Ms. Kathy Wood formerly of the Bureau of Reclamation joined CWI full time and is tasked with developing the unified IRWM. A unified IRWM “straw person” will be developed in 4Q07 for comment by agencies and others.
Mr. Sarge Green an experienced water and resource manager joined CWI to assist in the development of the IRWM and CPSJV water goals attainment.
CWI and corporate sponsors hosted an elected/water leaders (Kern, Tulare, Kings, Fresno, Madera Counties) IRWM scoping dinner at the Downtown Club in Fresno on July 26, 2007. 57 city and county elected leaders along with water district/ agency board presidents and general managers attended. Enthusiasm by the group was very high for a unified San Joaquin Valley IRWM. A similar event will be hosted for the northern 4 counties.
It should be noted that Mr. Sarge Green and Mr. Dick Moss of Provost and Pritchard, Visalia testified in Washington D.C. in late September in front of the Congressional Water and Power Subcommittee for funding of a unified San Joaquin Valley IRWMP. The testimony was at the request of Valley Congressman Jim Costa.
Goal 2. The Water Education Foundation hosted a Delta Vision Workshop on July 27, 2007, at the Fresno Convention Center. The event was well attended by over 175 people. Successful development of a Sustainable 21st Century Delta is critically important to the people of the San Joaquin Valley and California. 25 million Californians use water that passes through the Delta.
164 CWI staff attended several Delta Vision Stakeholder Workgroup and Blue Ribbon Task Force meetings in the Delta region during the period. Delta Vision Blue Ribbon Task Force recommendations will be released for public comment November 30, 2007. More information on Delta Vision may be obtained at: www.deltavision.ca.org
CWI staff will continue full engagement with the Delta Vision process.
Additionally CWI staff attended a federal flood control meeting in Stockton hosted by Congressman Dennis Cardoza in August. Key linkages between flood control, water supply and groundwater banking with other Valley counties became apparent as a result of the forum and will be pursued by CWI staff. Continued tie-in with federal water efforts is essential if all funds, efforts and resources are to be leveraged successfully.
Goal 3. The Upper San Joaquin River Basin Project continues in the development stage by DWR & Bureau of Reclamation. There is intense interest in surface storage development in many water agencies at all levels of government and the public in San Joaquin Valley. Many outside the region are however firmly opposed to development of any further storage under any conditions and are certain that low-flow toilets will save the day. The storage issue will no doubt be resolved at the ballot box by voters in 2008.
Observers should note however that a realistic, sustainable 21st Century water policy requires not only surface storage, but also groundwater banking, conveyance enhancements and conservation to be viable. Much like the California Partnership circular initiatives diagram, water policy needs to proceed holistically as well. CWI will continue to promote all the elements contained in Goal 3.
Goal 4. Proactive engagement continues to be made with the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Board and staff to further water quality improvement objectives while augmenting and conserving precious groundwater supplies. Salinity is currently however a secondary concern while issues related to the form and content of the 2008 water bond are on the political agenda. CWI staff will continue to seek opportunities to highlight the importance of developing a viable long-term salinity management plan to safeguard water quality in the San Joaquin Valley.
Goal 5. Engagement continues with state and federal habitat agencies and NGO’s to expand environmental restoration and support habitat enhancement strategies. Excellent work of national stature is proceeding with the Tulare Basin Wildlife Partners in Kern and Kings Counties. CWI staff engages with the Wildlife Partnership at every opportunity to leverage each entity’s reach and improve environmental outcomes. More information on the Tulare Basin Wildlife Partners may be accessed by going to: http://tularebasinwildlifepartners.org/.
While the San Joaquin Valley Ecosystem Restoration Plan between Friant and NRDC is awaiting congressional approval and funding, CWI staff have effected liaison work not only with bordering San Joaquin River entities in the 5 county area but also with Sacramento River riparian governance entities that have a 30 year record of success in ecosystem enhancement. The DWR sponsored San Joaquin River Management Program can be located at: http://www.sjrmp.ca.gov The Sacramento River Conservation Forum can be accessed at: http://www.sacramentoriver.ca.gov The longer term goal is to ensure that viable governance structures are in-place when the San Joaquin River is fully restored.
Goal 6. Expanding agricultural water and energy conservation use programs take on added importance as urban and agricultural water availability south of the Delta is reduced by judicial order, declining smelt populations and drought. Concurrently peak-season power availability is an issue of major concern throughout California as water for hydro power generation is reduced by drought.
CWI’s sister organization The Center for Irrigation Technology continues to manage The Agricultural Pump Efficiency Program in both PG&E and SCE service areas as well as statewide agricultural energy user forums for the California Public Utility Commission (CPUC). CWI will continue to maintain close coordination with CIT in the evolution of water and energy conservation programs in 4Q07 and into 2008.
Challenges/Problems/Bottlenecks/Feedback
1. The California drought, recent judicial determinations, decline of the Delta Smelt, global warming and population growth have combined to raise the level of water awareness somewhat in Sacramento and the balance of the state. Given the life-giving nature and economic importance of water in California’s desert climate combined with ideological triggers, great courage will need to be displayed by public policy makers at all levels to avoid “meat axe” water operational decisions and narrow vision policy decisions. Well thought out and executed water public
165 policy must be developed and implemented posthaste or a ‘Perfect Storm” will envelop California’s water system and seventh largest world economy. 2. The wider water community appears to be favorably deposed towards the goals of the Water Element of the CA Partnership however CWI staff will need to more clearly articulate the benefits of IRWM participation to water agencies, local governments and NGO’s for full engagement and buy-in.
If you have coordinated any outreach, please describe briefly.
1. CWI staff coordinated with the Water Education Foundation in the presentation of the Delta Vision Workshop in late July. 2. CWI staff assisted the Local Government Commission in an Ahwahnee Water Principals workshop in Visalia during September. Similarly Kathy Wood made a Fresno COG and Statewide Learning Blueprint Network presentations over a two week period also in September. More information on the Ahwahnee Water Principals can be accessed at the LGC website: www.lgc.org 3. CWI staff met with California Department of Conservation executive staff (Deputy Director Brian Leahy) in Sacramento in September to set up a GIS and watershed coordinator joint effort. Future coordination should leverage funds from each organization to achieve greater mutual mission fulfillment. CWI staff will also promote DOC’s upcoming $9 million Watershed Coordinators PSP to SJV agencies and NGO’s. More information on the Department of Conservation’s Watershed Coordinator’s Program may be accessed at: www.consrv.ca.gov 4. CWI staff will work more closely with the Energy Work Group in 4Q07 for mutual goal attainment.
.
166
Quarter/Dates of Activity: Q1 July 2007 through September 2007 Seed Grant: San Joaquin Valley Regional Water Plans Integration and University Farm Recycled Water Usage Grantee Organization: California Water Institute, California State University, Fresno Contact Person: David Zoldoske, James Tischer, Kathy Wood Phone: 559-278-2066, 559-260-6148, 559-285-2930 Email: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Description of this Quarter’s Activity and Impact on Partnership Goals and Objectives
1. Integrated Regional Water Management Plan (IRWMP) development for the Tulare Lake Hydrologic Region (Fresno, Kings, Tulare & Kern Counties) is moving forward well. Several water agencies have developed and adopted IRWMP’s and functional equivalents during the period. (Upper Kings Basin Water Forum, Kaweah Delta Regional Water Management Implementation Program, Westside Regional Drainage Plan and Poso Creek IRWM Plan). The California Water Institute will work with these entities to develop a basin-wide plan that can serve as a framework for the larger San Joaquin Valley IRWMP.
Outreach work continues with water agencies, resource managers and the public in the northern San Joaquin Valley Hydrologic Region (Madera, Merced, Stanislaus and San Joaquin Counties) to encourage support for a unified Valley-wide IRWM. Enthusiasm is less highly evolved in the northern area than the southern area. Engagement will continue during 4Q07 to develop support.
2. Liaison has been affected with DWR staff directly responsible for the advancement of recycled municipal water usage in California as a component of the California Water Plan. Drs. Manlicher Alemi and Fawzi Karajeh have indicated that they will assist CWI in the adoption of on-campus recycled water usage from the Campus Pointe project in the mid- development stage. Additionally, the Central Valley Water Clean Water Coalition in Auburn (Warren Tellefsen, Executive Director) has indicated they will assist CWI in the adoption of recycled water on- campus. Further engagement with the individuals and organizations will proceed in 4Q07.
California Water Institute team progress in both areas is consistent with Goals 1 and 3 of the Water Element Recommendations in the October 2006 Strategic Action Plan as well as the Partnership Major Initiative “Implement and Integrated Framework for Sustainable Growth.”
Planned Activities for next 3-6 months
CWI plans full engagement with water and elected leadership, NGO’s and the public in the two hydrologic regions (Tulare Lake and San Joaquin River) to lay the ground work for a programmatic IRWM to be delivered to the California Partnership Secretariat by December 30, 2008. A draft document should be out for public comment by early October 2008.
Additionally measurable progress with concrete deliverables will proceed as scheduled for the on-campus recycled water project.
Challenges/Problems/Bottlenecks/Feedback
1. Water managers are facing numerous “Perfect Storm” conditions in the water environment throughout the San Joaquin Valley. It is difficult to get the full focus and time required for another water planning effort. All managers do however acknowledge how important the success of the IRWM effort is and will engage to the extent that they can.
If you have coordinated any outreach, please describe briefly.
• Coordination has been affected with all other water related seed grantees (Self-Help Enterprises, Visalia and Tulare Wildlife Partners, Three Rivers) in the development of the San Joaquin Valley IRWM. • Outreach has also coordinated with the Councils of Government (COG) in all or most of the 8-county area as related to Blueprint Land-Use intersections. • CWI has been well received by all groups engaged with so far.
167
Quarter/Dates of Activity: Q1 July 2007 through September 2007 Seed Grant: Sowing Seeds for Community Health Grantee Organization: Self-Help Enterprises Contact Person: Tom Collishaw, Paul Boyer Phone: 559-651-1000 x681 Email: [email protected], [email protected]
Description of this Quarter’s Activity, and impact on Partnership Goals and Objectives
This first quarter, after an advertising and recruitment process, 2.6 new staff were hired to help accomplish the goals of the seed grant. Training of new staff is well underway. Contacts have been made with environmental health staff in Kern, Kings and Tulare Counties as well as State engineers at the State Department of Public Health (CDPH) to identify small disadvantaged community water systems that do not meet primary drinking water standards.
Planned Activities for next 3-6 months
Training of new staff will continue. A list of needy communities with drinking water issues will be developed. Applications for water project funding will be prepared for at least two communities.
Challenges/Problems/Bottlenecks/Feedback
1. Need to have engineering completed for community CDPH applications that are due in January. 2. Staff anticipates difficulty in implementing a DWR Water Use Efficiency Program within very short time frame.
If you have coordinated any outreach, please describe briefly.
Staff is coordinating with the Caruthers Community Services District in Fresno County and the Stone Corral School District in the Tulare County community of Seville and the Sociology Department at California State University, Fresno, to implement community surveys in those communities in upcoming months.
168
Board of Directors Proposed Meeting Schedule 2008
Day/Date Location
Friday, February 8 Fresno County, Location TBD
Friday, May 16 Madera County, SCCCD Madera Campus
Friday, September 12 Merced County, UC Merced
Friday, December 12 Stanislaus County, CSU, Stanislaus
169
This page has been left blank intentionally.
170
Communications Update Report to the California Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley Board of Directors November 9, 2007
Communications Plan Update – Phase II Implementation Phase II of the Communications Plan, aimed at building public support for the Partnership, is well underway. Phase II is focused on media and community outreach to support the Partnership’s identity.
The media outreach strategy already has resulted in significant editorial support for the Partnership’s efforts. The Fresno Bee, Bakersfield Californian, Hanford Sentinel, and Modesto Bee each have written articles or editorials praising the Partnership’s regional approach, and the Visalia Times-Delta has editorialized in support of the San Joaquin Valley Clean Energy Organization’s efforts. In addition, the Stockton Record has acknowledged the Partnership’s role in the high-speed rail issue. (Copies of those editorials and news articles are attached.)
The Fresno Bee previously has written in support of the Water Work Group’s efforts.
Other major elements of Phase II include: • Developing a Partnership Speakers Bureau and collateral tools to assist Speakers Bureau participants. • Creating an inventory of community and regional events throughout the Valley to increase awareness and exposure. The Partnership’s communications team is compiling an inventory of those events. • Identifying success stories through Work Group progress and pitching those stories to media outlets.
Phase I of the Communications Plan was designed to create an effective internal communications structure and create materials and tools to support the launch of the external communications/outreach efforts of Phases II and III. Phase I is essentially complete with the successful delivery of the Partnership brand map, Web site, fact sheets, PowerPoint, and Partnership Progress electronic newsletter.
Communications Tools Web site, Phase II The new and improved Partnership web site is more than 60% completed. The new site will feature a content management system that will allow individual work groups more access and control to communicate and share documents. The individual work group sections have been expanded from one page to several
171
pages including overview, action plan, announcements, and document library pages.
The site will also feature some interactive components and animations, including an interactive overview chart that demonstrates the work and interdependencies of the initiatives within the Partnership and an interactive map that demonstrates the massive undertaking by showing the collaborative partners by county area.
Additionally, there will be an animation for each work group and the Partnership overall that will load randomly on the homepage, so visitors are exposed to a different work group each time they visit.
The site is built, and the content management is almost completed. Before launch, the site will need to be tested for quality assurance. Our anticipated launch in early December if not sooner. e-newsletter – A monthly electronic newsletter is sent to all Partnership stakeholders that highlights successes of the Partnership and includes updates on the progress of the Work Groups, important dates, and a features section that profiles people connected to the Partnership and showcases impacts of the Partnership’s work.
Partnership News Briefing – A daily overview of news stories, information and events related to Partnership priorities and activities is sent to Board members, Work Groups, and other government and legislative contacts.
Supporting materials -- The Partnership logo, fact sheets, PowerPoint presentation, and contact lists have been made available to work group consultants and the Board on the communications tools page. A communications policy guides the use of the tools to support the brand of the Partnership by creating consistent imaging and messaging.
Speakers Bureau Partnership Board members will be contacted to provide input on organizations and groups that should be targeted for speaking opportunities. Board members and Work Group participants also will be recruited to speak at those events to raise awareness and encourage involvement in and support of Partnership activities. Supporting materials for Speakers Bureau participants will be expanded in Phase II.
Outreach The Communications Team continues to build and fine-tune the communications management system to ensure effective outreach and communications with key stakeholders throughout the San Joaquin Valley. The database organizes stakeholders by sector and industry. Through various strategies, including the
172
“refer a friend” on the newsletter and the “sign-up” function through the Web site, the stakeholder base continues to grow.
Audience Mapping The Communications Team has created an audience map for the Partnership and continues to work with each work group to create a tailored audience map. The audience map exercise helps to identify key stakeholders, identifying what they want, what we want from them, and the obstacles to overcome. This tool helps drive the communications tactics (how we communicate) and the messages that we deliver (what we communicate) to maximize our effectiveness.
173 We work together, or Valley dies
10.10.2007 By Michael Fitzgerald / Stockton Record
The San Joaquin Valley falls behind the rest of California and the nation in earnings, employment, education, roads, pollution and health care. It's unfair.
It's un-Californian. Social equity should be inherent in a progressive state. But state government, dominated by urban interests, often neglects this region.
This region also neglects itself. Its culture spurns higher education and the urbanism necessary to retain its best and brightest. And various Valley governments have not worked together.
A refreshing exception began in 2005. That year, the governor signed into being the California Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley.
The partnership unites leaders from eight counties from San Joaquin to Kern. Its job is to identify where the Valley lags and to work with Sacramento and Washington to catch up.
The partnership just issued its first report. The report outlines the game plan: 10 working groups tackling quality-of-life problems over a 10-year period.
It also brags about a few early successes: helping land $1 billion of the estimated $6 billion to upgrade Highway 99. Finding a way to crank out sorely needed nurses. Starting a bilingual academy for English learners.
To spread prosperity, the Economic Development group is looking at a regional infrastructure financing authority. This could, for instance, issue bonds to help pay some of the $6 billion Highway 99 repair bill.
The Higher Education and Workforce Development group is striving to create better-educated and skilled workers and to "foster a college-going culture in the region."
The Air Quality group is encouraging new emission reduction technology, proposing incentives to upgrade the Valley's diesel fleet and supporting new ways to move goods and people such as high-speed rail.
The rail issue illustrates the other good aspect of the partnership: It has banded together eight fiefdoms into a regionalism that makes for better policy and stronger clout.
Counties such as Fresno were agnostic on an important issue for San Joaquin County, namely whether a proposed high-speed-rail line running from Los Angeles up the Valley would cross into the Bay Area via the Pacheco Pass, leaving out San Joaquin County, or the Altamont.
Southern Valley counties got the line either way.
But San Joaquin County asked for support, and the other counties said, "We are not going to divide this region. We will all advocate for the Altamont Pass," recounted Carol Whiteside, president of the Great Valley Center and a partnership member.
"We have a much louder voice in Sacramento and in Washington when we speak together," Whiteside said.
Take air quality, said Fritz Grupe, a Stockton developer and deputy chairman of the partnership. Estimates are for a $3 billion fix - a daunting $200 million a year for 15 years.
174
"If we don't get all eight counties to work together," Grupe said, "we're never going to get a fix." Grupe believes the partnership is more than a new bureaucracy. "The main thing that I have high hopes for, ... I really believe that on some of these issues that are multicountywide that this is an effective way to deal with them."
Of course, the partnership faces some high hurdles.
As it admits in its report, it must stay unified while maintaining the support of leaders and the public over at least a decade while tackling complex problems that require staggering amounts of money to solve. But the partnership is a promising new approach, Grupe said.
"Hey, look, you guys down in Kern County. Why should we worry about your air pollution if you're not worried about our water? We're not two separate counties here. ... It's not an easy sell sometimes, but it's at least an opportunity we didn't have before. There is at least the spirit of trying to cooperate."
Contact columnist Michael Fitzgerald at (209) 546-8270 or [email protected].
175
Opinion
Our View: Partnership gives more bang for Valley buck Once upon a time, there were four people who lived in the country. One had a bucket of nails, another had a hammer. A third had a stack of wooden boards, and a fourth had some whitewash.
They all wanted to build a fence, but knew they didn't have enough money to buy all the supplies. So they pooled their resources and built the best darned fence in the whole land.
As simplistic as this example may be, it's a telling example of the impetus behind the California Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley.
Last week, members of the Partnership and state politicians brainstormed their way through two days of talks in Hanford, planning for the short- and long-term future of the Central Valley.
Formed two years ago by executive order of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, the Partnership brings together representatives from all eight Valley counties, who want to add timbre to their collective voice in Sacramento.
Prior to their second session on Friday, several members of the Partnership sat down with us to discuss the challenges they face.
The bottom line, according to Tulare County Supervisor Connie Conway, is quality of life. It's a no-brainer. California is growing at such a huge rate -- and not just her county, or ours, but the whole state. And there are only so many dollars up for grabs to make sure we have clean air and water and hassle-free roads.
After all, how can we attract new and larger businesses to Kings County? By providing easy freeway access in and out, a workforce that is educated and trained in various vocational skills, as well as cities with reasonably-priced housing and good schools for their employees.
It's a daunting task, one that the Partnership knows could take years to accomplish. But it's not outside the realm of possibility, according to member counties. In fact, funding for upgrades to Highway 99, a water conservation plan in the Legislature and a clean energy group can be directly linked to the group's work.
The best part is that its plan is not a study that is doomed to sit on a shelf and gather dust. It is a living document.
We all want to drink clean water. We all want to breathe clean air. We all want to drive on highways that are safe and well-built.
And when it comes to playing with the big boys -- Los Angeles or the Bay Area -- there's more power in numbers. And that's the thinking behind this coalition of like-minded government officials.
"We are the Central Valley! Hear us roar!"
(Aug. 14, 2007)
176
Local approach for regional issues just makes sense last updated: October 09, 2007 03:57:12 AM
A regional partnership formed to address the historic neglect of valley needs and interests continues its work, and in the process may offer us an alternative model of governance that might work a great deal better than the dysfunctional system in place in Sacramento.
The California Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley, which held its annual meeting last week, already has achieved some impressive results, pulling in millions in funding for job training efforts and helping to secure $1 billion of state bond money as a down payment on improvements to the crumbling Highway 99, the main transportation artery of the valley.
The 30 members of the partnership -- state and local officials, business leaders, civic group representatives and activists of various stripes -- are broken into committees to address broad issues such as job creation, transportation, air quality, water problems and others.
The upshot of their work to this point is a 10-year plan to improve the economy of the valley, its environment and to address the many quality of life issues that face us.
By contrast, the people elected to address those very issues in Sacramento continue to dither and posture, spending their time on re-election efforts, campaign fund raising, rewarding their special interest backers with lucrative legislation and wallowing in petty squabbles.
Perhaps it's time to devolve most of the power vested in the governor's office and the Legislature onto a series of regional agencies -- covering multiple counties with shared interests and needs -- and leave Sacramento with a stripped-down agenda.
We have long argued for more regional efforts to address our problems. Many -- if not most -- of the issues we face cut across the artificial lines of cities and counties. Water and air, transportation, economic development -- all these have impacts without regard to local boundaries, and ought to be addressed accordingly.
There are a number of gratifying examples of regional cooperation under way, beyond the work of the partnership. The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District spans eight counties. The San Joaquin Valley Blueprint Planning Process covers the same turf and is affiliated with the Great Valley Center in Modesto, another leader in regionalism's rise.
In Stanislaus County, the nine mayors and some county supervisors have been meeting to try to better coordinate land-use planning. Dire money shortages are forcing rural fire districts to talk about working more closely together, possibly even consolidating.
Not all of our officials believe in regional approaches, but there are some promising signs of what they can do. We ought to go with what works.
Our Point
The California Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley underscores the potential for regional cooperation and action; perhaps the politicians in Sacramento can learn from what's going on here.
177
Article published Sep 18, 2007
EDITORIAL Rx for clean air: clean energy
Clean air is an easily understood concept. Most people will find the term "clean energy" a little more difficult to grasp. It helps to understand that the two terms are closely related.
This region ought to embrace the concept of clean energy as willingly as it strives to clean its air, because the two objectives must occur together. Conversely, if we don't learn to adopt practices and policies that embrace clean energy, we probably don't have much hope of ever having cleaner air.
Thankfully, there is a new initiative to direct the region's strategies in energy use that is being directed by the California Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley. The coalition has formed the San Joaquin Valley Clean Energy Organization to help the Valley address the challenges of growth by continued reliance on clean energy.
What is clean energy? It refers to conservation, renewable energy sources and more efficient use of energy, especially through improved technologies.
Renewable energy refers to energy sources such as solar, wind and biomass, and to an extent, hydro power, which can be used over and over, as opposed to energy sources such as fossil fuels that are burned once and then gone. Efficient energy strategies refer to new devices and designs that reduce the amount of power used to accomplish the same thing, such as passive lighting systems.
Visalia is in a particularly good position to become a leader in this effort thanks to a partnership with the San Joaquin Valley Clean Energy Organization. The SJVCEO will provide advice and support, including access to grant funding, as the city embarks on increasing its use and reliance on clean energy.
Few Visalians are probably aware of the extent to which the city of Visalia already practices strategies that use clean energy. The city is increasing its use of compressed natural gas in its vehicles and is buying a couple more transit buses that run on gas. Besides being cheaper than gasoline, CNG burns more cleanly, reducing air pollution.
When the city built its two new police substations, it emphasized making them "green" buildings, that is, built with the latest in energy-saving design and technology. It used straw bales for construction because they are excellent insulators. It used solar lighting, high ceilings and fans, and low-voltage electronic devices. Even the way the building was laid out and designed was done to maximize energy efficiency in heating and lighting.
The city is undergoing energy audits of their other buildings to identify ways it can make further energy savings. The federal government has grants available to cities that adopt clean energy strategies.
Why should this matter to Visalians? The best of reasons — it will save public money, especially over the long term, allowing the city to apply funding resources to more worthy things than simply paying the light bill.
The city can also serve as a role model for individuals who are trying to do the right thing in their own homes. With the price of crude oil at an all-time high, and electricity rates spiking, who does not want to find a way to cut down on energy use? Motorists might not be able to convert to a CNG vehicle .
178
Homeowners might find it difficult to convert their home to a green building. But they can adopt some of the simple things that will bring the Valley closer to greater reliance on green energy.
SJVCEO officials hope to achieve a proportion of clean energy use that is known as "25 by ‘25," or 25 percent use of clean energy by the year 2025. How much is being used now? That's one of the things the organization hopes to establish, and one of the problems in the San Joaquin Valley: The Valley has a number of haphazard uses of more efficient energy; but it is not coordinated, there is no clear notion of the gaps nor of the potential, and there is likely duplication in some programs.
One area of huge potential is agriculture, which is a huge energy consumer but also has potential for conservation and energy renewal, especially in use of biomass.
The Valley has long faced obstacles in management of natural resources such as air and water because of the fractious nature of its many interests — urban, rural, agriculture, environmental, business and many types of enterprises. The San Joaquin Valley Clean Energy Organization believes it has an advantage in addressing energy because it has a diverse range of participants. Its board of directors contain residents from academia, technology, environment, large and small business, public and private sectors, agriculture and, most of all, utility companies. The willingness of utilities to promote and reward energy conservation and efficiency is vital to progress.
Why should we all care? If lower energy bills and more efficient use of energy weren't enough incentive, consider this: If the Valley can make significant progress on use of clean energy and continue to reduce its reliance on fossil fuels, we'll breathe easier, too. And there will come a day when the Sierra Nevada is visible to residents every day of the year, and not just on those select few when the wind blows the right way. That is something we should all look forward to.
179
Why don't we try doing it like this? Valley partnership offers an alternative model of state governance
10/08/07 Fresno Bee
A regional partnership formed to address the historic neglect of Valley needs and interests continues its work, and in the process may offer us an alternative model of governance that might work a great deal better than the dysfunctional system in place in Sacramento.
The California Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley, which just held its annual meeting, has already achieved some impressive results, pulling in millions in funding for job training efforts and helping to secure a $1 billion chunk of state bond money as a down payment on improvements to the crumbling Highway 99, the main transportation artery of the Valley.
The 30 members of the partnership -- state and local officials, business leaders, civic group representatives and activists of various stripes -- are broken into committees to address broad issues such as job creation, transportation, air quality, water problems and others.
The upshot of their work to this point is a 10-year plan to improve the economy of the Valley, its environment and to address the many quality of life issues that face us.
By contrast, the so-called "leaders" elected to address those very issues in Sacramento continue to dither and posture, spending their time on re-election efforts, campaign fundraising, rewarding their special interest backers with lucrative legislation and wallowing in petty squabbles.
Perhaps it's time to devolve most of the power vested in the governor's office and the Legislature onto a series of regional agencies -- covering multiple counties with shared interests and needs -- and leave Sacramento with a stripped-down agenda. Then it won't hurt so much when the people up in the capital abdicate their duties to their constituents in favor of satisfying their special-interest masters.
We have long argued for more regional efforts to address our problems. Many -- if not most -- of the issues we face cut across the artificial lines of cities and counties. Water and air, transportation, economic development -- all these have impacts without regard to local boundaries, and ought to be addressed accordingly.
There are a number of gratifying examples of regional cooperation already under way, beyond the work of the partnership. The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District spans eight counties. The San Joaquin Valley Blueprint Planning Process covers the same turf, and is affiliated with the Great Valley Center in Modesto, another leader in regionalism's rise.
Locally, planning officials in Fresno County and its cities are talking about a regional approach to planning under the sobriquet of the Metro-Rural Loop. Water officials regularly meet across jurisdictional lines. In the process, we see better chances for successful outcomes for the Valley than we are likely to get from Sacramento. We ought to go with what works.
Tell us what you think. Comment on this editorial by going to http://www.fresnobee.com/opinion, then click on the editorial.
180
Legislative Overview
CA Partnership-Endorsed State Legislation
AB 575 (Arambula) - Prop 1B AQ Mitigation Criteria/Funding A bill to require that $1 billion to mitigate air pollution from goods movement, approved by voters under the Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality, and Port Security Bond Act of 2006 (Proposition 1B), be appropriated to the highest priority projects according to a set of region-neutral criteria. This bill is consistent with the actions and objectives of the California Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley (Partnership), as set forth in their Strategic Action Proposal, by providing the incentive funding needed to “implement incentive mechanisms to accelerate adoption of air quality mitigation technologies.”
Related, the Air Quality Work Group has sent letters in support of Prop 1B funding and criteria for allocation of funds as efforts transition in the legislature.
Status: Bill held in Assembly Appropriations Committee. However, the allocation of Proposition 1B “Goods Movement Emission Reduction” (AQ Mitigation) Program funding has been determined by criteria passed as part of the 2007-08 Budget, through trailer bill SB 88.
On September 19th, ARB released their draft concepts for implementation of the Prop. 1B Goods Movement Emission Reduction Program. They have scheduled public workshops in the four trade corridors, including a workshop in Fresno on October 10th. Members of the AQWG participated. Corresponding deadlines are as follows:
Early November 2007: ARB staff will release the proposed Program Guidelines as well as hold public meetings.
December 6-7, 2007: The Board will hold a public hearing and consider adoption of the Guidelines.
January until June 2008: Local agency applications will submit project applications. Following the close of the application process, staff will post eligible applications on its website. The Board will hold a public hearing to consider approval of specific local agency project applications.
AB 1223 (Arambula) - Net Energy Metering A bill to permit an agricultural customer who uses solar or wind generation to offset the customer's own electrical needs to aggregate the electricity use of properties adjacent or contiguous to the generator that are under the same ownership to its full electricity usage over a 12-month cycle at the retail rate. This bill is consistent with the actions and objectives of the California Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley (Partnership), as set forth in their Strategic Action Proposal, by advancing an important mission of the Partnership to “promote energy use efficiencies and adoption of clean, renewable energy technologies to ensure a reliable supply, grow the economy, and improve air quality.” Specifically, this legislation directly addresses the Air Quality Work Group’s objective of “implementing a net metering program within [the] same agricultural operation or water district,” and the Energy Work Group’s objective to “work with state agencies to explore and demonstrate innovative approaches to increase use of
181 renewable energy, including trading of net metering credits, streamlining requirements for interconnection to grid, and structuring incentives for renewable energy production.”
The Partnership Board and Executive Committee have sent letters in support of the bill.
Status: Assemblymember Arambula says that the bill will now be two-year bill -- they will take it back up in January.
AB 1129 (Arambula) - Housing Trust Fund A bill to establish the San Joaquin Valley Rural Regional Affordable Housing Trust Fund.
Status: Held in Assembly Housing Committee as a two-year bill.
Related, SB 586 (Dutton) was signed by the governor on Saturday, October 13. This bill allocates the $100 million Affordable Housing Innovation Fund created by the Housing and Emergency Shelter Trust Fund Act of 2006 (Proposition 1C) by:
• Committing $ 35 million of Prop 1C funding for matching housing trust funds such as we are trying to create through our SJV Housing Trust. • Committing 50% of these funds to new housing trust funds like the SJV Housing Trust and the funds it will assist jurisdictions create. • Giving priority and set aside for counties under 425,000 residents to allow them time to meet match requirements. The four counties of the Valley this provision will especially assist are: Tulare (420,619), Merced (246,751), Kings (147,729), and Madera (144,396).
AB 1403 (Arambula) – Education A bill to establish an innovative, five-year Central Valley School District Improvement Pilot Program. This legislation is consistent with the goals and objectives of the California Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley toward the implementation of “a school and school district support system through the County Offices of Education.” Specifically, this bill would allow two County Superintendents (Fresno and Tulare) to opt to assume additional responsibility for ensuring the academic success of those struggling school districts within their jurisdiction that are both identified for program improvement or corrective action under the federal No Child Left Behind and have 50 percent of more of their schools ranked in deciles 1 and 2 of the state Academic Performance Index.
Partnership Board and Executive Committee have sent letters in support of the bill.
Status: Placed on the Suspense File in Senate Appropriations, and did not pass out of committee.
AB 1455 (Arambula, Villines) – Air Quality Zones The bill as most recently amended would authorize the State Air Resources Board to designate “California Air Quality Zones” for the purpose of providing incentives for owners of mobile and stationary sources of air pollution to invest in air pollution control equipment that produce surplus emission reductions, and for owners of stationary sources of air pollution to invest in the production and utilization of renewable energy technologies. Areas eligible include those that: 1) have been in nonattainment for PM 2.5 and in serious, severe, or extreme nonattainment for ozone using the 8-hour rule, and 2) have countywide unemployment rate at least 50% higher than the statewide average for at least two of the last three years.
The bill’s goal is to improve air quality in the state’s dirtiest air basins and generate jobs in the most disadvantaged communities.
182 Status: Placed on the Suspense File in Senate Appropriations, and did not pass out of committee.
SB 23 (Cogdill) – Vehicle Replacement On July 26, the Executive Committee agreed to offer support for SB 23 as introduced. The bill, as introduced, would require the Air District, in consultation with the Air Resources Board, to develop and administer a vehicle exchange program to replace high polluting vehicles with donated, smog-compliant vehicles according to specified conditions.
Status: Signed by the governor on Sunday, October 14. The bill was tied to the enactment of SB 719, a bill to restructure the board of the SJV Air Pollution Control District, which the governor also signed.
H Con Res 157 (Rep. Radanovich with Rep. Nunes) – Renewable Energy/Biofuels On July 25, 2007, the Partnership’s Executive Committee passed a resolution supporting House Concurrent Resolution 157 with the goal of improving the health of Valley citizens and achieving a reduction in all federally-regulated emissions, including nitrous oxides. H Con Res 157 reiterates the commitment of Congress, as established in the Energy Policy Act of 2005, to develop alternative and renewable energy, in particular biodiesel and other biofuels, and to support the research and development of biodiesel and biofuels from agricultural products and byproducts.
Status: Bill introduced on May 23, 2007. Referred to House Science and Technology Committee where it awaits action.
Action Taken by Executive Committee
AB 340 (Hancock) - This bill creates a pilot project in up to five counties that will allow county welfare departments to merge duplicative foster placement processes for licensing and approving relatives, foster families, and adoptive parents.
Status: The governor signed on October 11. The Executive Committee approved a letter to Secretary Belshé asking that at least one of the pilot projects be implemented in a Valley county.
Sustainability of the Partnership AB 27 is a bill to authorize the CA Partnership through 2019. The board of the Partnership directed staff to work with the author on the language of this bill as well as maintain ongoing discussions regarding all approaches for sustainability of the Partnership.
Status: AB 27 is held in Assembly Jobs Committee as a two-year bill.
Water On August 10, the Partnership board adopted a resolution a) strongly supporting a comprehensive water plan that includes water storage, a comprehensive Delta solution (including improved conveyance and environmental protection) and water use efficiency, and b) urging the Legislature to work with the Administration to pass a comprehensive water package that addresses the needs in their entirety this year and put that package before voters in 2008.
Status: In response, the Partnership sent copies of the resolution and cover letter to the Valley State and Federal delegation, committee chairs and leaders in both houses, and the governor. The governor called a “special session” to work with the Legislature to develop a comprehensive water package this year.
183 The deadline passed to have a bond measure in time for the February ballot (October 16). However, negotiators have another month to place an item on the ballot should the legislature agree to a supplemental ballot book.
State Budget Issues The governor signed the 2007-08 Budget on August 24, 2007 which includes the following allocations that the Partnership has been closely tracking:
High-Speed Rail (HSR) The 2007-08 Budget provided $20.69 million to continue development of the high-speed rail project. Activities include completion of a more detailed and achievable financial plan, and completion of preliminary engineering and environmental studies. $3.5million of the funding is allocated to the Orange County Transportation Authority and shall be used for the HSR infrastructure in that area.
Status: Following the Partnership’s HSR meeting in Hanford on August 9, the Partnership board approved a working position on HSR that included some “proposed next steps.” Accordingly, the position was revised by the Transportation Work Group and approved by the Executive Committee on August 30, 2007:
• The High Speed Rail needs to serve the entire San Joaquin Valley (Bakersfield to Sacramento), and the region must stay together as it works towards implementation of this initiative. Amtrak should remain as a complimentary service to High Speed Rail; • $15.5 million must stay in the 2007-08 budget as a minimum funding level; • The High Speed Rail ballot measure must remain on the 2008 ballot; • The Federal government needs to contribute to the high speed rail project. Congress should seriously consider the establishment of a Federal high speed rail authority with powers similar to California’s authority; • Passenger rail is also a priority for the Valley and is meeting immediate demand, while the high speed rail initiative will address mid- and long-term demand; • Land use patterns are a critical success factor for high speed rail. The Blueprint regional planning process needs to be tightly connected to the efforts to implement high speed rail in the Valley; • The route between the San Joaquin Valley and the Bay Area will have a significant impact on the Valley being served as an entire region; and • Submit a letter to the High Speed Rail Authority (a) supporting connection for the whole Valley from Bakersfield to Sacramento; (b) recommending that the economic viability of developing both the Altamont and Pacheco Pass routes be evaluated; and (c) that if it turns out that only one route is economically viable, or if one route must be implemented before the other, the Altamont corridor be the preferred route.
Actions Taken: • Submitted formal public comment to the CHRSA indicating position on alignment as stated above. • Sent letters providing the working position to the governor and leaders in both legislative houses. On August 24, the governor signed a budget that includes $20.69 million for HSR. • Received revisions to the working position from the Transportation Work Group and the COG Regional Policy Council, and received final approval for the revised position from the Executive Committee on August 30. • Sent letter to the HSRA requesting an additional meeting in Stockton. Secured a meeting in Stockton on Sept 18 at the San Joaquin Council of Governments, Regional Center Board Room, 555 E. Weber Ave from 4-6pm. • Sent letters to Rep. Costa and Senators Feinstein and Boxer supporting the creation of a National HSR Authority.
184 • Provided public comment at HRSA scheduled hearings in support of the Partnership working position.
Proposition 1B Implementation (Dollars in Millions)
Corridor Mobility $608 Local Transit $600 State Transportation Improvement Program $727 Local Streets and Roads $950 State Highway Operation and Protection Program $403 Grade Separations $123 Highway 99 $14 Local Seismic $14 Intercity Rail $188 School Bus Retrofit $193 Air Quality $250 Transit Security $101 Port Security $41
Proposition 1B provides $1 billion to fund projects intended to improve air quality along four of California's major transportation corridors: from the Los Angeles ports to the Inland Empire, State Route 99 in the Central Valley, the San Francisco Bay Area, and the San Diego border region. The Budget Act contained $250 million for the Air Board to award during 2007-08. The Air Board is developing program guidelines and will solicit project proposals pursuant to criteria in SB 88 as enacted. The projects to be funded are intended to achieve air quality improvements above and beyond anything required by current law or regulation.
Proposition 1B also provides $193 million to replace older, higher-polluting school buses. The Budget contained $193 million to be awarded in 2007-08 for this purpose. This funding will allow all school buses of model year 1976 and earlier to be replaced. Once this is accomplished, the Air Board will allocate the balance of the remaining funds to local air districts in proportion to the number of school buses of model years 1977 through 1986 operating in each district. The air districts will then allocate the funding for either the retrofit of the buses, or their complete replacement.
Proposition 84 - Water Quality The budget appropriated $1 billion in Proposition 84 funds for expenditure in 2007-08, including $859 million for programs administered by the Resources Agency. Specifically, the Budget provides $105.3 million to the State Water Resources Control Board (Water Board), to be used for the following programs: • $75.7 million and 8 positions for the State Water Pollution Control Revolving Fund Program, which provides low-interest loans or grants to construct municipal wastewater treatment facilities, storm water pollution control projects, non-point source pollution projects, and estuary enhancement projects. This funding will provide the state share so that locals may obtain federal matching funds. • $6.2 million and 1.5 positions for the Agricultural Water Quality Grant Program, which provides grants for public agencies or nonprofit organizations to improve agricultural water quality, including research projects and construction of agricultural drainage water improvements. • $14.6 million and 3 positions for the Urban Storm Water Grant Program, which provides grants to local public agencies for projects that contain storm water runoff, such as facilities that divert the runoff to treatment plants.
Proposition 84 provides $1 billion for integrated regional water management and $65 million for statewide planning activities to address California’s future water supply needs. Although the
185 Administration’s water supply proposals were not ultimately approved in the Budget, the Governor has called a “special session” to work with the Legislature to develop a comprehensive water package this year that includes the following components:
• Water Storage Projects • Delta Sustainability and Conveyance • Water Stewardship and Restoration • Water Conservation
The deadline passed to have a bond measure in time for the February ballot (October 16). However, negotiators have another month to place an item on the ballot should the legislature agree to a supplemental ballot book.
Federal Issues/Legislation
Farm Bill The Farm Bill passed by the House includes a number of provisions important to the Valley and the Partnership, and we continue to monitor Farm Bill activities. On July 27, 2007, the House of Representatives passed a new Farm Bill (H.R. 2419) to replace the current legislation that expired Sept. 30.
On October 25, the Senate Agriculture Committee passed their version of the Farm Bill by a voice vote, and Agriculture Chairman Harkin said he expected the bill to be on the floor next week. The Senate will add the Finance Committee’s agricultural tax package to the farm bill before final passage.
Status: Per the board’s request, the Partnership sent thank you letters to Reps. Costa, Cardoza and McCarthy for their work in the House Agriculture Committee on preserving the interests of the Valley in the House-version of the Farm Bill.
The AQWG and Energy WG members sent a letter to Chairman Harkin (Senate AG Committee) requesting that he preserve the $150 million for air quality programs within the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) in the 2007 Farm Bill. They also requested that it be placed under the general EQIP program, instead of Conservation Innovative Grants (CIG) as was provided in the House-version.
Water Related to the goals of the Partnership’s Water Work Group, Congressman Jim Costa introduced HR 2498, a bill to provide for a study coordinating and integrating sub-regional integrated regional water management plans into a develop a unified Integrated Regional Water Management Plan for the eight counties in the San Joaquin Valley that would address issues related to: (a) water quality; (b) water supply (both surface, groundwater banking and brackish water desalination); (c) water conveyance; (d) water reliability; (e) flood control; (f) water resource-related environmental enhancement; and (g) population growth. The bill would award a grant to the California Water Institute, located at California State University, Fresno, to conduct a study coordinating and integrating sub-regional regional water management plans into a unified Integrated Regional Water Management Plan for Kern, Tulare, Kings, Fresno, Madera, Merced, Stanislaus, and San Joaquin counties.
Valley Congressmen Cardoza, McCarthy, Nunes and Radanovich are all original cosponsors of the bill.
Status: Introduced May 24, 2007 and referred to Natural Resources Committee, Subcommittee on Water and Power. A hearing on the bill was held in the Subcommittee on September 25, 2007. Sargeant "Sarge" Green, with the Partnership’s Water Work
186 Group and Manager of the Westside Resource Conservation District, was a key witness and gave testimony in support of the bill.
The House Subcommittee on Water and Power passed HR 2498 with amendment on October 16. Rep. Costa hopes the House will consider the bill prior to adjournment.
Energy We continue to monitor energy proposals and legislation for consistency with the Energy Work Group Strategic Action Plan. Provisions important to the Partnership have been identified and discussed.
Status: On June 21, the Senate passed their version of HR 6, attaching substantive policy and programmatic legislation to the House-passed version which had originally provided the fiscal offset to fund new energy provisions. On August 4, the House passed their energy bills, HR 3221 and HR 2776. HR 2776 was rolled into the final passage of HR 3221 and provides the budget offset needed to pay for the energy provisions. The House bill includes over $15 billion in revenues.
Bush has threatened to veto both the House and Senate energy bills, because “will result in less domestic oil and gas production, higher taxes to disadvantage a single targeted industry, and duplicative energy efficiency and R&D efforts that are largely underway already.”
On October 15, the House passed by voice vote H Con Res 25, a bill to express the sense of Congress that it is the goal of the United States that, not later than January 1, 2025, the agricultural, forestry, and working land of the United States should provide from renewable resources not less than 25 percent of the total energy consumed in the United States and continue to produce safe, abundant, and affordable food, feed, and fiber. Emails were sent to the Valley delegation indicating the Energy Work Group’s support for the bill.
Timeline: House and Senate aides have begun what may be a lengthy process of reconciling the two competing energy bills in advance of hard negotiations this fall.
On October 15, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee said staff members of relevant House and Senate committees will start getting down to business on reaching agreement on comprehensive energy legislation. Democratic leaders last week said there would be no formal conference proceedings for the legislation, but there will be a series of informal talks.
Budget Chairman Conrad said that passing energy provisions as part of the Farm Bill will be one of the most important goals because the prospects for the energy bill are bleak.
Federal Budget On Sept 26, the House and Senate approved a continuing resolution to keep federal agencies operating at current levels until Nov. 16 (scheduled adjournment date). It is unlikely that Congress will adjourn by this date with the appropriations and policy workload left to complete.
The CR will give Congress time to complete work on appropriations bills. It is possible that the unfinished appropriations bills will be rolled into one large omnibus bill and sent to the President by end of session.
The House will begin the second session of the 110th Congress Jan. 15. With Congress now expected to return from the two-week Thanksgiving recess for at least two weeks in December to finish FY08 appropriations, lawmakers could have a month or less in their home districts before returning to Washington.
187