April 13, 2020 – 2:30 p.m. · 2020-04-11 · BOARD OF DIRECTORS AGENDA April 13, 2020 – 2:30 p.m. PLEASE NOTE: The SCTA/RCPA Business Office is closed, and this meeting will be

411 King Street, Santa Rosa, CA 95404 | 707.565.5373 | scta.ca.gov | rcpa.ca.gov

BOARD OF DIRECTORS AGENDA April 13, 2020 – 2:30 p.m.

PLEASE NOTE: The SCTA/RCPA Business Office is closed, and this meeting will be conducted entirely by teleconference pursuant to the provisions of the Governor’s Executive Orders N-29-20 and N-35-20, suspending certain requirements of the Ralph M. Brown Act.

SCTA/RCPA Board Members will be video-conferencing into the Board of Directors Meeting via Zoom. Members of the public who wish to listen to the Board of Directors meeting may do so via the following platform:

Join Zoom Meeting https://zoom.us/j/836552092

iPhone one-tap: +16699009128,,836552092#Telephone: (669) 900-9128,

meeting ID: 836 552 092

PUBLIC COMMENT: Public comment on specific agenda items will only be allowed during the meeting via Zoom Meeting by using the raise hand function, or by dialing *9. Verbal comments from call-in participants not using the Zoom Video platform can only be made by notifying Drew Nichols at [email protected] and identifying the item number, your name and phone number from which you will be calling. Please include “Public Comment” in the email subject line. The moderator will then ask for your comment.

Public comment will be limited to three (3) minutes. Public comment on items not on the regular agenda must be submitted in electronic written format as provided under Item 2 below. 1. Call to order the meeting of the Sonoma County Transportation Authority (SCTA) and the Sonoma

County Regional Climate Protection Authority (RCPA)

2. Public comment on items not on the regular agenda

As authorized by Executive Orders N-29-20 and N-35-20, all public comment must be submitted in electronic written format. Please submit public comment by email before noon on 4/13/20. Include “Public Comment” and the meeting name in the subject line of your email and limit written comments to three hundred (300) words. Send comments to [email protected] and they will be shared with all Board members and identified by the Clerk verbally at the meeting.

3. Consent Calendar

A. SCTA/RCPA Concurrent Items 3.1. Admin – meeting notes from March 9, 2020 (ACTION)*

B. SCTA Items 3.2. MTC – corrected Plan Bay Area 2050 list of regional projects (ACTION)* 3.3. Measure M – Maintenance of Effort FY17/18 reporting (ACTION)* 3.4. Measure M – appropriation request for Sonoma County Bicycle Coalition (ACTION)* 3.5. CTC – authorize SCTA to submit Hearn Avenue Interchange to the statewide competitive

Local Partnership Program for funding (ACTION)*

tel:707.565.5373

http://scta.ca.gov/

http://rcpa.ca.gov/

https://zoom.us/j/526915071

mailto:[email protected]


3.6. Vision Zero – agreement with Toole Design Group for professional services related to the data dashboard (ACTION)*

4. Regular Calendar

A. SCTA Items 4.1. SCTA Projects and Programming

4.1.1. Transit – FY20/21 Coordinated Claim for Transit (ACTION)* 4.1.2. Local Measure – November 2020 transportation sales tax ballot measure (ACTION)*

5. Reports and Announcements 5.1. Executive Committee report 5.2. Regional agency reports 5.3. Advisory Committee agendas* 5.4. SCTA/RCPA staff report

5.4.1. RCPA Activities (REPORT)* 5.4.2. Planning Activities (REPORT)* 5.4.3. SCTA/RCPA Community Affairs (REPORT)* 5.4.4. Highways – update on State Highway projects (REPORT)

5.5. Announcements

6. Closed Session 6.1. Public Comment on Closed Session Items 6.2. The SCTA and RCPA Board of Directors will consider the following in Closed Session:

Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation. Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2). 1 Case.

6.3. Report out of Closed Session

7. Adjourn *Materials attached.

The next SCTA/RCPA meeting will be held May 11, 2020

Copies of the full Agenda Packet are available at http://scta.ca.gov/meetings-and-events/board-meetings/

DISABLED ACCOMMODATION: If you have a disability that requires the agenda materials to be in an alternate format or that requires an interpreter or other person to assist you while attending this meeting, please contact the SCTA/RCPA at least 72 hours prior to the meeting to ensure arrangements for accommodation.

SB 343 DOCUMENTS RELATED TO OPEN SESSION AGENDAS: Materials related to an item on this agenda submitted to the SCTA/RCPA after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection in the SCTA/RCPA office at 411 King Street, Santa Rosa, CA, 95404, during normal business hours.

Pagers, cellular telephones and all other communication devices should be turned off during the committee meeting to avoid electrical interference with the sound recording system.

TO REDUCE GHG EMISSIONS: Please consider carpooling or taking transit to this meeting. For more information check www.511.org, www.srcity.org/citybus, www.sctransit.com or www.gosonoma.org.

http://scta.ca.gov/meetings-and-events/board-meetings/

http://www.511.org/

http://www.srcity.org/citybus

http://www.sctransit.com/

http://www.gosonoma.org/

BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING

Meeting Minutes of March 9, 2020

1. Call to order the meeting of the Sonoma County Transportation Authority (SCTA) and the Sonoma County Regional Climate Protection Authority (RCPA)

Meeting called to order at 2:32 p.m. by Chair Susan Gorin.

Directors Present: Director Susan Gorin, Chair, Supervisor, First District; Director Logan Harvey, Vice-Chair, City of Sonoma; Director Melanie Bagby, City of Cloverdale; Sarah Gurney, City of Sebastopol; Director Mark Landman, City of Cotati Director Jake Mackenzie, City of Rohnert Park; Director Kathy Miller, City of Petaluma; Director Joe Naujokas, City of Healdsburg; Director David Rabbitt, Supervisor, Second District; Director Chris Rogers, City of Santa Rosa; Director Sam Salmon, Town of Windsor; Director Shirlee Zane, Supervisor, Third District.

Directors Absent: none

2. Public comment on items not on the regular agenda

Duane DeWitt displayed a piece of pavement from a pothole on Burbank Avenue, advocating for a better and stronger emphasis on maintaining the existing roadways and infrastructure and stated the danger for these pieces in bicycle lanes.

Mr. DeWitt spoke on jurisdictions that fix the roads with these impermeable surfaces, to which Mr. DeWitt showed opposition to, and cited the SMART pathway is being constructed via funds by the Open Space District.

Mr. Dewitt commented that the funding from the Open Space District was marketed for to help save agricultural and open space lands, stating the funding was not intended for pavement.

Lastly, Mr. DeWitt commented on the outcome of the recent elections results.

3. Consent Calendar

A. SCTA/RCPA Items

3.1. Admin – meeting notes from January 13, 2020 (ACTION)*

3.2. Admin – resolution of commendation for Aleka Seville (ACTION)*

3.3. Admin – Fair Political Practices filing reminder (REPORT)*

B. SCTA Items

3.4. Measure M –2020 Bond Disclosure reports – Series 2011 and 2015 (REPORT)*

The consent calendar was approved by acclimation.

Chair Gorin took a moment to appreciate the work done by Aleka Seville for the RCPA by reading the Resolution of Commendation.

The Board of Directors followed and showed their appreciation for Ms. Seville.

4. Regular Calendar

A. SCTA Items

4.1 SCTA Planning

4.1.1 MTC – Plan Bay Area 2050 proposed list of regional projects (ACTION)*

Suzanne Smith introduced the proposed list of regional projects.

This is an MTC process, not an SCTA process, but is a 30-year plan, with no real money available;

3

financial constraint assumptions about funding are made.

Janet Spilman explained the rings of transportation ideas, fiscally constrained long-range plan (RTP), fiscally-constrained near term programming document (TIP), and committed projects.

Ms. Spilman explained the timeline and process from the idea to implementation. In March 2019, SCTA released a Call for Projects for inclusion in the RTP with an assumed budget of $2.9 billion. MTC has requested SCTA to place these projects within a county “budget” of $1.4 billion by March 27, 2020.

The Regionally Significant Project ideas are the projects that MTC would like from the CMAs that will need funding from state or federal sources. Regionally significant projects are projects over $250 million, capacity increasing, and could have impacts on air quality conformity analysis. The projects are assessed for cost benefits, air quality, and how well they meet MTCs goals.

At the same time, a revenue forecast on the availability of revenue region-wide in a 30-year time frame and then placed in an investment strategy.

Ms. Spilman described the differences in the programmatic categories and the regionally significant projects.

The revenue assumptions made by MTC for Sonoma County was displayed. These sources include the sales tax renewal, OBAG, RTIP, remaining county sales tax, LPP, and TFCA.

Ms. Smith noted that SMART’s sales tax is not included in this diagram given SMART is a regional project.

SCTA estimated project need for the next 30 years totals about $10 billion.

The draft proposal for the investment in the RTP for the next four years was displayed.

Ms. Smith added the previous project list was included in the staff report for context and there are roll over projects in the new list.

Chair Gorin summarized the item and asked if it is possible to add projects back to the list that were not carried onto the list presented.

Ms. Smith responded the projects can be added back, but they have to fit within the budget given by MTC.

Director Landman spoke on the legacy commitments, such as the Highway 101/Railroad Avenue improvements and the Highway 116 corridor improvements, and requested to keep these projects included on the list.

Director Rogers clarified the $49 million to SMART was to Windsor, but the increase in funding is an acknowledgement of construction beyond Windsor.

Director Rogers asked what the significant amount is as it pertains to being able drawdown additional funds for SMART to be built into this to get to Healdsburg.

Ms. Smith responded the $123 million came from the actual estimate cost to get from Windsor to Healdsburg. At the time of the staff report, that money was part regional/SMART money and the minimum to put in the list for SMART.

Ms. Smith referenced the Highway 37 interim projects as a demonstration of nominal support for the corridor. The intent is to demonstrate support for these projects and to ask MTC to support it regionally.

4

Director Rabbitt asked about the consequence with including a project, after adjusting project with a lower budget or is it better off having a “realistic dollar amount” with fewer projects.

Ms. Smith responded that it depends on the type of project. If it is a regional project, then there is a need to have regional money. It is purely a local project, like enhanced bus service, then they need to be in our plan.

Highway 37 and SMART to Cloverdale are regional projects that are included in the project list to demonstrate support, but will ask for regional support from the regional budget.

Director Mackenzie noted this item will come to MTC and that Sonoma County will receive a larger share by the work we do in cooperation with regional partners.

As we move this document to MTC, Director Mackenzie encouraged to continue to work in full cooperation with the North Bay MTC commissioners.

Plan Bay Area must meet statutory requirements as we move forward, there are fiscally constraints under federal transportation regulations, and if these are not based on reasonable expected revenues, federal/state entities will reject the plan.

It is very important to be clear on what we want from SCTA, otherwise Sonoma County’s MTC representatives cannot represent properly.

Vice Chair Harvey commented that since these numbers are a statement of support, it seems to make sense to reduce the amount for SMART to Cloverdale and include the projects from the City of Cotati.

Director Gurney expressed interested in the Cotati Highway 116 Corridor improvement project given

that Sebastopol finished Phase 1 of the corridor projects.

Director Gurney noted that Main Street in the downtown have regional and statewide significance due to the state highways and as the gateway to Sonoma Coast beaches.

Director Gurney asked how this document is revised in the next couple of years.

Ms. Smith responded there are two answers. This list is updated every four years and could be added in the next cycle; secondly, if the project fits in any of the programmatic categories, then it fits within the plan as of now.

Director Landman commented on the value of questions and discussions. The regional projects, there value in including them, even with a slight reduction for all projects.

Director Naujokas asked about the criteria for keeping some projects, such as the Hearn Avenue Interchange and Farmers Lane extension projects, but drop the Highway 116 project.

Ms. Smith responded this information is the response from the jurisdictions.

Director Naujokas further asked, when talking about demonstrating local commitment, is there some ratio or metric that shows that demonstration.

Director Rabbitt responded there is no metric or ratio.

Ms. Smith added that local projects need to be in the plan; regional projects can take the haircut.

What is critical for SMART to be in the plan is so they can pursue other funds. If it is not listed as “SMART to Cloverdale” in the Plan, then SMART is constrained by what grants can be sought for state and federal funding.

5

Director Miller expressed agreement with Director Landman’s proposal, and noted that Petaluma’s SMART infill station dropped out from the list.

Director Salmon commented on the local projects in the Plan and commented we are trying to do the same as everyone and Windsor had a project drop off as well.

Chair Gorin noted most projects are Highway 101 corridor focused and expressed sensitivity to the needs of the smaller cities. Two keys cities had projects drop – Cotati and Windsor – and Chair Gorin asked why they dropped off.

Ms. Smith responded this was due to the communication between the jurisdictions and SCTA about whether to put them in the program categories or be listed specifically.

Ms. Spilman also added within in the past year, SCTA has been talking of the advantages of not being listed separately and being in a programmatic category. The project name and scope can be changed; if a project is in this list, it cannot be changed.

Chair Gorin opened for public comment.

Director Rabbitt asked if the $30 million for Highway 101 is part of the RM3 funding.

Ms. Smith responded that project is under construction and needs to be included in case there is a cost overrun and the $30 million was based on the RM3 figure and the amount could be reduced.

Chair Gorin opened for Public Comment.

Duane DeWitt encouraged the Board to include the Hearn Avenue Interchange improvements on the projects list. This is a real need for the disadvantage census tracts in the area.

Mr. DeWitt suggested to have this project placed ahead of the Rainier Avenue crossing in Petaluma since Hearn Avenue is currently being used and Rainier is not built.

Steve Birdlebough expressed concerned in the difference in handling enhancing bus service when it becomes a project and with the bicycle/pedestrian facilities being categorized as a program.

In talking about reducing VMT and GHG emissions, if we want to meet those objects, there needs to be more funding in these categories.

Janice Cader Thompson commented on the Rainier crossing project and that Petaluma has not completed an EIR.

There is also a discrepancy on the funding estimates between this project list and the Petaluma City Council. The Petaluma City Council did not review this list before being submitted to SCTA, just through staff.

All the money going to one project is 1962 thinking and Ms. Cader Thompson advocated to have this project removed from the list.

Justin Gordon read a letter he submitted to the Press Democrat, Reshaping Measure M.

Tom Conlon shared the Board confusion and supported the comment by Mr. Birdlebough.

In terms of segmentation of projects and programming, and MTC’s legislative mandate of 19% reductions, Mr. Conlon expressed confusion with understanding the narrative for the projects submitted. This is understood, however, with enhanced bus service and SMART, just not with the other projects.

Chair Gorin asked Staff to clarify the questions raised.

6

Ms. Smith responded the plan covers four years, so the amount of money put forward assumes that we will be revisiting this in four years. This is not to minimize the idea of prioritizing or assigning funds in a meaningful manner, but reiterated to the Board there is no risk or loss opportunity in funding any type of project under the way this list is structured.

If someone came forward with a $123 bicycle/pedestrian facility that could be delivered in the next four years, SCTA would gladly seek an amendment with MTC.

We are very well covered to build any of the types of projects in this list.

Ms. Spilman added that transit/enhanced bus service project included in the list. In demonstrating that commitment to MTC that we consider this a priority project, enables the jurisdictions who applied for PDAs to meet the new standards.

Chair Gorin asked is there value to add the projects that were dropped off to list and if so, how do we rearrange the numbers.

Ms. Smith responded that we have to come within the budget, is not for staff to say whether a project should be included or not.

If there is a desire to include these projects, SCTA can reduced the Highway 101 category and SMART to Cloverdale category.

Staff revised the project list based on the comments from the Board of Directors and presented an updated list including the two projects from Cotati and the project from Windsor.

Director Rogers moved for approval of the revised project list, Director Bagby seconded. The motion was approved by unanimous support.

4.1.2 CTP – goals for the 2050 Comprehensive Transportation Plan (ACTION)*

Chair Gorin recalled the reconfiguring the goals and vision for the CTP in the previous months.

Director Rogers moved for approval as submitted, Director Bagby second. The motion was unanimously approved.

4.2 SCTA Projects and Programming

4.2.1 Local Measure – November 2020 transportation sales tax ballot measure (ACTION)*

Chair Gorin commented and summarized the previous work by the Ad Hoc and stakeholder groups. The Ad Hoc committee has recommended the stakeholders meet and reach agreement on a strategy.

Ms. Smith recalled the lengthy discussion at the previous Board meeting, noting that no direction or formal action was taken by the Board. Today’s meeting is the opportunity to further the discussion from February.

Staff is seeking guidance to move forward with the quarter cent tax, the term of the measure, and on the content of the strawman proposal.

The direction will help Staff craft the draft expenditure plan, circulate through the advisory committee, and bring back to the Board in April.

Ms. Smith highlighted the timeline, in that by May, the final draft of the expenditure plan will be presented for approval and to move forward.

The transit operators are present to answer questions related to the transit piece. There was also a transit webinar held to provide information on public transit, their budgets, ridership, etc.

7

Chair Gorin opened for questions from the Board of Directors.

Director Salmon commented on the need look at the measure carefully and that now may not be time to seek reauthorization at this time, referencing the outcome of Measure G.

Director Miller noted it is fairly easy at this point to reach an agreement on the quarter-cent and on the “until removed by voters” idea. There is a struggle more with various pots of money and how much will go in each pot, however.

Director Miller expressed general satisfaction with the proposed strawman presented at a quarter-cent and staff recommendation to revise the expenditure plan every 15 years.

Director Naujokas noted sensitivity to the electorate about new taxes, however remains optimistic if framed the right way, a compelling argument can be made.

Director Naujokas requested to simplify the expenditure plan as it comes off confusing to the electorate and supported the measure with a 20-year horizon at a quarter-cent starting at the end of the existing measure.

Director Landman supported on placing the measure on the ballot in November and not increasing the tax to a half-cent, and is flexible on the term of the measure (either in perpetuity or with a 20-year limit).

Director Landman asked about any definable benefit for improving transit service that can be calculated and/or seen in the categories on the strawman proposal.

Ms. Smith responded that the definitions and metrics for affordable access and Zero Emission

busses are currently being worked on by the operators.

Director Landman commented on the reduction of headways and how that could be received by the voters.

Director Gurney agreed with Director Salmon’s comment in that it may be difficult time to propose a tax measure reauthorization and agreed with Director Naujokas’ comment on the confusion of the strawman proposal.

Director Gurney further commented on the stakeholder group meeting with the Ad Hoc.

As to the term of the measure, Director Gurney remains open and supported the idea to check in with voters at 15-year increments to update the expenditure.

Vice Chair Harvey commented on the need for this to be simple and, while there were two failed measures last week, SCTA is not a new tax and provides funding for both roads and transit.

Director Mackenzie commented on Los Angeles’ one-cent tax for transportation and that they were successful between 2008 and 2016.

MTC has been asked to be invited to participate in SB 278 (Beall; FASTER measure). The FASTER proposal has also been discussion with Assembly member Chiu’s AB 1487, the formation of the Bay Area Housing Authority, and the possibility of a transportation/housing measure.

Director Rabbitt note that voters are possibly reaching a limit on taxes. It is difficult to reach the two-thirds threshold, especially given the history of Sonoma County.

Director Rabbitt supported the idea the measure be at a quarter-cent and further commented on the “until removed by voters” concept. There

8

should be more oversight and have active campaign to promote the measure. Measure G lost given to the absence of an active campaign promoting information.

Director Rogers commented that fixing roads is also good for bicyclists and the best illustration for projects is through a Venn diagram, in which most projects are within various categories. We are making this more exclusive when it is in fact inclusive.

Director Rogers suggested for a 20-year timeline at a quarter-cent and encouraged the stakeholder group to work together so everyone receives something.

Director Zane noted this has to be simple, and will not pass without 60% going into the roads given that not a lot of residents use public transit.

Director Zane encouraged to get this measure passed, however commented on voter- and tax fatigue and government Sinicism.

Director Bagby argued the day we stop having transportation is the day the measure expires, and expressed support on where the Board decides.

In terms in moving forward in November, Director Bagby will support the Board consensus and further commented on SMART/Measure I.

Chair Gorin expressed support for a 30-year timeframe and echoed all the comments from Board members on simplicity.

Ms. Smith responded if the Board goes with a 20-30-year tax, that is a true extension of Measure M, it will allow for the money for SMART since it would not expire until 2024.

If the question is “do we include SMART” (in the reauthorized measure), that’s a whole different,

political discussion and would be challenging to include SMART in the new measure.

Director Zane reiterated to keep this as simple as possible and be flexible.

Vice Chair Harvey stated concern with a “general transportation” category and added that when busses go fare free in Sonoma County, ridership increases.

Director Naujokas commented on the challenge of the first- and last mile connectivity.

Chair Gorin opened for public comment.

Emmet Hopkins commented this is inheritably a climate change measure and the future of transportation. We need to move quickly transform our transportation system and we need people a chance to move toward bicycles and transit.

Mr. Hopkins advocated for 50% of the measure for bicycles/transit project.

Janice Cader Thompson commented that Petaluma residents are angered and the safety elements are left out. The Rainier crossing project could kill the entire ballot measure and is irresponsible.

Chair Gorin clarified that specific projects are not listed in this measure.

Eris Weaver spoke on the need to keep local funding and supported the idea of the measure with a 20- or 30-year time.

Ms. Weaver was confident to find a way to make this happen with the meetings with the stakeholders.

Steve Birdlebough commented that transportation is not simple, but can be with a simple explanation a simple explanation of what you are doing.

9

The environmental and business communities have to be on the same page, and is hopeful that agreement will be reached.

Jerry Bernhart commented on bicycling in Sonoma. There is an absence of innovative approaches to transit in this strawman proposal, and would like believe this process could result being able to ride from Oakmont to the City of Sonoma.

A flat 60/40 split will not get us there, and Mr. Bernhart supported at least a 50/50 split.

Conner Duvane commented on the denotation of an emergency and to have urgency, boldness, creativity, and passion during emergencies.

Having the opinion that transportation being the largest contributor to GHG emissions, Mr. Duvane voice support with the coalition.

Kevin Anderson commented that it is really important to synthesis transportation policy to make it digestible for all students and that students are excited about the possibly of free transit.

Tom Conlon shared similar concerns and advocated to work on the specifics so that those who pay attention can understand, specifically understanding how free transit will impact ridership and the reduction of GHG emissions and congestion.

Dennis Harter thanked SCTA for the great success of Measure M and suggested to see a reauthorization at a quarter cent, with a term, and as it relates to SMART/transit, focus on the first/last mile connectivity.

Amy Jolly urged the Board of Directors not to lead with fear, but with bold, decisive leadership.

The transportation system is not there yet and there are concerns with the absence of community benefit programs, connections between climate, transit, etc. to make it accessible and understandable, the in the current budget.

Chair Gorin summarized the comments from the Board. A majority has expressed support for placing this on the ballot in November, but will confirm for final approval in April, support a quarter-cent sales tax, and suggested to refine the Connect Communities category.

Ms. Smith confirmed from the Board comments that a quarter cent measure with a fixed term added onto the current measure (i.e. no sunsetting the measure early), and is simplified is suggested.

In terms of the actual strawman itself, staff will work to provide options to simplify the message. And schedule an Ad Hoc meeting between now and next meeting.

Director Gurney commented on the free bus service in that the Sebastopol bus was aligned with the school schedule; experiencing significant youth ridership increases.

Director Landman commented there is value in the 50/50 split and illustrated that balance within the strawman proposal.

Director Zane commented that voters are cynical right now and do not want to tax themselves; roads need to be higher on the percentages over 50%.

Director Rogers urged for the Ad Hoc and Board of Directors to be bold and not reckless.

Director Bagby commented the measure is really about the projects that the cities bring.

Director Bagby challenged community groups to review the projects submitted and to lobby the

10

cities to ensure their plans are what is wished to be seen.

4.2.2 Mega-Measure – update on legislative effort for a regional transportation and/or housing measure (REPORT)

No update on FASTER available.

5. Reports and Announcements

5.1 Executive Committee report

The Executive Committee did not meet this month.

5.2 Regional agency Report

Director Mackenzie announced the North Bay MTC Commissioners will be meeting on March 25th.

5.3 Advisory Committee agendas*

Included in the agenda packet.

5.4 SCTA/RCPA staff report

5.4.1 RCPA Activities Report


Suzanne Smith announced ULI has postponed the resiliency panel due to COVID-19 concerns.

5.4.2 SCTA Planning Activities


5.4.3 SCTA/RCPA Community Affairs Report


5.4.4 Highways – update on State Highway projects

This is provided to the Board of Directors each month for their interest.

5.5 Announcements

N/A

6. Adjourn

The SCTA/RCPA Board of Directors meeting adjourned at 5:05 p.m.

11


Staff Report

Issue

Technical corrections to RTP list approved 3/9/2020

Recommendation

Approve the corrected list of regionally significant projects and the proposed investment strategy to submit to MTC for Plan Bay Area 2050.

Advisory Committee Recommendation

Not applicable to this item.

Alternatives Considered


Executive Summary

At the March SCTA meeting the Board requested several revisions to staff proposal for the Plan Bay Area project list. The changes included adding projects and subsequently redistributing funding amounts to balance the budget. The amended version was approved. In the process of revising staff unintentionally deleted a project – the SCTA Highway 37 interim projects for $5M. Since the March Board meeting, MTC has determined the last phase on Highway 101 does not require any funds from our county share since it is a committed project.

The final corrected version of the project list adds back Highway 37 interim projects and increases the commitment to $10M and adds $16M to the Highway Improvements.

Policy Impacts / Nexus to Agency Goals

SCTA policy focuses on a multimodal approach to addressing transportation needs. The project list for the RTP follows that general guidance by providing significant levels of forecasted revenues in different modal options. This approach will maximize the opportunity for project sponsors to be able to deliver key projects.

To: SCTA/RCPA Board of Directors Meeting Date: 4/13/20 From: Janet Spilman, Director of Planning Item Number: 3.2 Subject: Plan Bay Area - Regional Transportation Project (RTP) list investment revision

Consent Item: ☒ Regular Item: ☐ Action Item: ☒ Report: ☐

12

tel:707.565.5373

http://scta.ca.gov/

http://rcpa.ca.gov/

Financial Implications

These projects are for inclusion in a planning document. There are no fiscal impacts at this time, although inclusion in Plan Bay Area as either regionally significant or in a programmatic category will make projects eligible for funding in the future.

Is there a fiscal impact? Yes ☐ No ☒

Is there funding in the current budget? Yes ☐ No ☒

The funding source(s) to be used are: This is a planning exercise.

Background

The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) assembles a list of transportation projects to include in each cycle of Plan Bay Area (PBA). PBA has a planning window of about 30 years and is updated every four years.

The RTP list is a combination of large projects and programmatic categories that could be funded within a 30 year “budget” determined by MTC. In this exercise, MTC has predetermined that some categories, like road maintenance and transit costs, will come from regional sources. The county share for SCTA is $1,346 billion. This is the amount MTC determines to be available to fund transportation projects, minus project type or categories that MTC assumes to be funded by the region through 2050.

SCTA has historically added funds from the county share to some categories (road maintenance, bicycle projects, and transit) determined to be underfunded by the region in order to demonstrate local commitment.

March Board action

SCTA approved a list that includes specific projects, large regional projects or projects grandfathered in from previous plans, along with the more flexible programmatic categories.

The charts on the following page show 1) the original proposal, 2) the list approved March 9, and 3) the list with corrections.

13

Original proposal - 3/9/2020 Approved with revisions - 3/9/2020 Correction - 4/13/2020Projects Cost in $M Projects Cost in $M Projects Cost in $M

Santa Rosa Hearn Avenue Interchange 36.0$ Hearn Avenue Interchange 36.0$ Hearn Avenue Interchange 36.0$ Cotati Cotati Highway 116 Cotati Corridor Improvements 20.0$ Cotati Highway 116 Cotati Corridor Improvements 20.0$

Windsor Arata Lane Interchange 4.0$ Arata Lane Interchange 4.0$ Cotati Cotati US 101/Railroad Avenue Improvements (incl. Penngrove) 56.0$ Cotati US 101/Railroad Avenue Improvements (incl. Penngrove) 56.0$

Petaluma Petaluma Crosstown Connector and Rainier Interchange 115.0$ Petaluma Crosstown Connector and Rainier Interchange 123.0$ Petaluma Crosstown Connector and Rainier Interchange 123.0$ SCTA US 101 Marin/Sonoma Narrows (Sonoma) 30.0$ US 101 Marin/Sonoma Narrows (Sonoma) 20.0$ US 101 Marin/Sonoma Narrows (Sonoma) -$

Santa Rosa Farmers Lane extension between Bennett Valley Rd and Yolanda Avenue 72.0$ Farmers Lane extension between Bennett Valley Rd and Yolanda Avenue 72.0$ Farmers Lane extension between Bennett Valley Rd and Yolanda Avenue 72.0$ Petaluma Road Diet Extension - Petaluma Boulevard South 3.0$ Road Diet Extension - Petaluma Boulevard South 3.0$ Road Diet Extension - Petaluma Boulevard South 3.0$

SCTA Enhance bus service frequencies in Sonoma County 290.0$ Enhance bus service frequencies in Sonoma County 290.0$ Enhance bus service frequencies in Sonoma County 290.0$ SCTA Highway 37 interim projects 5.0$ Highway 37 interim projects 10.0$

SMART SMART to Healdsburg 123.0$ SMART to Cloverdale 49.0$ SMART to Cloverdale 49.0$ Projects subtotal 674.0$ Projects subtotal 673.0$ Projects subtotal 663.0$

Programs Programs ProgramsBicycle and Pedestrian Facilities 100.0$ Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities 100.0$ Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities 100.0$ Emission Reduction Technologies 22.0$ Emission Reduction Technologies 22.0$ Emission Reduction Technologies 22.0$ Highway Improvements 107.0$ Highway Improvements 107.0$ Highway Improvements 117.0$ Intersection Improvements 100.0$ Intersection Improvements 100.0$ Intersection Improvements 101.0$ ITS & New Technologies 10.0$ ITS & New Technologies 10.0$ ITS & New Technologies 10.0$ Multimodal Streetscape Improvements 10.0$ Multimodal Streetscape Improvements 10.0$ Multimodal Streetscape Improvements 10.0$ Roadway Improvements 100.0$ Roadway Improvements 100.0$ Roadway Improvements 100.0$ Transit Capital Projects 105.0$ Transit Capital Projects 105.0$ Transit Capital Projects 105.0$ Transit Improvements - Non Capital 108.0$ Transit Improvements - Non Capital 108.0$ Transit Improvements - Non Capital 108.0$ Travel Demand Management 10.0$ Travel Demand Management 10.0$ Travel Demand Management 10.0$

Programs subtotal 672.0$ Programs subtotal 672.0$ Programs subtotal 683.0$

Grand Total 1,346.0$ Grand Total 1,345.0$ Grand Total 1,346.0$ County Share 1,346.0$ County Share 1,346.0$ County Share 1,346.0$

Delta -$ Delta 1.0$ Delta -$

14


Staff Report

Issue

Is SCTA in compliance with Public Utilities Code 180200 and Measure M Policy 14 Maintenance of Effort (MOE)?

Recommendation

Staff recommends that the Board find that SCTA is in compliance with the Public Utilities Code Section 180200, the Traffic Relief Act of Sonoma County, and Measure M Policy 14.


The Technical and Citizens Advisory Committees both reviewed the reporting and recommended to the Board that the SCTA is in compliance with the Public Utilities Code Section 180200, the Traffic Relief Act of Sonoma County, and Measure M Policy 14.


None

Executive Summary

Measure M requires that all jurisdictions receiving Measure M local street rehabilitation program (LSR) funds report annually on their maintenance of effort. All 10 jurisdictions reported by the deadline and two jurisdictions did not reach their baseline expenditure percentage, however, the county taken as an aggregate is still in compliance with the Public Utilities Code and Measure M requirements.


This is an interpretation of the Measure M Strategic Plan Policy 14 that allows for individual jurisdictions to not meet their baseline MOE commitment, provided that collectively SCTA jurisdictions meet or exceed the baseline MOE commitment. The SCTA Board previously approved this interpretation each year since 2014.




The funding source(s) to be used are: N/A

Consequences of determining that individual jurisdictions must maintain their baseline contribution to transportation could result in a suspension of a portion of the Measure M Local Street Rehabilitation (LSR)

To: SCTA/RCPA Board of Directors Meeting Date: 4/13/20 From: James Cameron, Director of Projects and

Programs Item Number: 3.3

Subject: Measure M - Maintenance of Effort – Reporting FY18/19-Policy 14 and PUC Compliance


15

tel:707.565.5373

http://scta.ca.gov/

http://rcpa.ca.gov/

allocations to those jurisdictions, until contributions are brought back to FY 11/12 baseline levels. Estimated FY 20/21 allocations are shown in the attached table.

Background

The Traffic Relief Act for Sonoma County, Measure M, is governed by the Public Utilities Code. PUC 180200 requires that “local governments maintain their existing commitment of local funds for transportation purposes." The PUC does not specify how an existing commitment must be measured, in order to ensure compliance with the requirement.

Until 2010, Sonoma County jurisdictions received Proposition 42 funds, which had specific MOE requirements. Since the Prop 42 requirements were more stringent than Measure M, there seemed little need for a Measure M policy to address maintenance of effort. Once Proposition 42 funds ended, the SCTA acted to implement its own MOE policy. The SCTA board approved Measure M Policy 14 on July 11, 2011 after Technical and Citizens Advisory Committee (TAC and CAC) review.

Policy 14 (attached) requires that jurisdictions report the amount of local transportation funding, as a percentage of that jurisdiction’s overall general fund spending. By analyzing the commitment as a percentage of general funds, as opposed to the actual amount of transportation funding, the policy considers the possibility that transportation spending may go down, if there is a decrease in general fund spending. However, if the general fund increases, transportation funding would be expected to be increased by the same percentage.

The baseline percentage was set for FY 2011/12, since it was the year the policy was enacted. In each year since 2014 the SCTA board accepted the recommendation from the TAC & CAC and determined all jurisdictions were in conformance based on the submitted reporting. SCTA staff has now received FY 18/19 reporting from all Measure M Local Street Rehabilitation (LSR) Program recipients. A summary of that reporting is shown in the attached table.

Countywide, the commitment of transportation funding increased both in overall dollars and as a percentage of cumulative general funds. Eight of ten jurisdictions increased their individual percentage commitment of local funds for transportations purposes between the baseline in FY11/12 and FY18/19. The two jurisdictions that dropped below their baseline percentage are the Town of Windsor and the City of Sonoma. The Town of Windsor built a large capital project on Shiloh in the baseline year causing them to have a large baseline percentage and since then they continue to be below the baseline, but the Town consistently has one of the largest percentages of all the jurisdictions. The City of Sonoma acknowledges they did not meet the Measure M Maintenance of Effort Goal partly due to a slight shift in priorities for General Fund expenditures. Additionally, recent financial staffing changes along with the audit process and the City’s method for projecting total FY 2017/18 General Fund expenditures contributed to the decrease. In the future, the City of Sonoma will be able to use the knowledge gained going through this process to project and better track expenditures to meet their Maintenance of Effort requirement.

The PUC does not state that the commitment must be calculated as a percentage of the general fund or that it be met annually. Policy 14 requires that each jurisdiction provide reporting, but it does not state that each jurisdiction's individual commitment must be maintained. Since many small jurisdictions need to "bank" transportation funding for several years in order to deliver a reasonably sized project, a single year's baseline figure can easily be skewed, based on whether the baseline year contained a large transportation project. Additionally, Policy 14 does not specify consequences for a jurisdiction that does not individually meet their baseline figure. Finally, although the Traffic Relief Act of Sonoma County requires that local governments

16

maintain their existing commitment of local funds for transportation purposes, it does not state whether the commitment must be maintained individually by each jurisdiction, or collectively.

At the February 27, 2020 TAC meeting, the TAC recommended to the SCTA Board that the 18/19 MOE reporting is in compliance with the Public Utilities Code Section 180200, the Traffic Relief Act of Sonoma County, and Measure M Policy 14.

At the March 30, 2020 CAC meeting, the CAC recommended to the SCTA Board that the 18/19 MOE reporting is in compliance with the Public Utilities Code Section 180200, the Traffic Relief Act of Sonoma County, and Measure M Policy 14.

Given that all jurisdictions met the reporting requirements of Policy 14 and that collectively the commitment of transportation funding has increased over baseline, both in actual dollars and as a percentage of overall general fund spending, the CAC should consider recommending to the Board that SCTA is in compliance, with the PUC, the Traffic Relief Act of Sonoma County, and Measure M Policy 14.

Supporting Documents

MEASURE M - STRATEGIC PLAN POLICY 14

The Traffic Relief Act for Sonoma County is governed by the Public Utilities Code. PUC 180200 requires that “local governments maintain their existing commitment of local funds for transportation purposes.” The Measure M Expenditure Plan states “consistent with California Public Utilities Code Section 180200, the SCTA intends that the additional funds provided governmental agencies by the Traffic Relief Act for Sonoma County shall supplement existing local revenues being used for public transportation purposes and that local jurisdictions maintain their existing commitment of local funds for transportation purposes.” Measure M cooperative agreements for the Local Streets Rehabilitation Program also require maintenance of effort.

For the Local Streets Rehabilitation Program funding, each local agency shall be responsible for identifying which of their accounts have local funds for transportation purposes. For these purposes, expenditures would be calculated per fiscal year. A fiscal year is defined as July 1 through June 30. The baseline amount is transportation fund expenditures in FY11/12 which will be converted to percentage of general fund expenditure. Expenditures for each subsequent year will be compared to the baseline to determine the same percentage of general fund expenditures is occurring. Baseline percentages (FY11/12) and subsequent year percentages of discretionary fund expenditures on transportation shall be provided to SCTA by each jurisdiction no later than February 15, starting in February 2013. This is to allow agency audits to be completed prior to submittal.

17

Maintenance of Effort Calculations - % of Local Fund Expenditures on Transportation as a Percentage of the General Fund Expenditures

Jurisdiction FY 11-12 (BASELINE)

Transportation (A)

General Fund (B)

% (A/B)

County of Sonoma* $7,510,980 $360,118,999 2.1%

Cotati $96,726 $4,436,499 2.2%

Cloverdale $162,404 $5,270,429 3.1%

Healdsburg $916,656 $7,547,774 12.1%

Petaluma $775,000 $32,472,271 2.4%

Rohnert Park $558,407 $22,477,233 2.5%

Santa Rosa $2,298,378 $117,000,000 2.0%

Sebastopol $159,486 $4,884,137 3.3%

Sonoma (City) $749,256 $11,838,835 6.3%

Windsor $3,043,675 $13,108,791 23.2%

TOTALS $16,270,968 $579,154,968 2.8%

Jurisdiction FY18-19 Measure M Local Streets Rehab

Estimated FY 20/21 Allocation

Transportation (M)

General Fund (N)

% (M/N)

County of Sonoma* $22,479,443 $461,769,771 4.9% $2,280,473 Cotati $1,115,432 $6,524,391 17.1% $84,401 Cloverdale $399,886 $6,803,647 5.9% $67,341 Healdsburg $1,653,536 $13,461,452 12.3% $115,755 Petaluma $1,557,116 $48,011,408 3.2% $518,337 Rohnert Park $3,826,778 $38,082,987 10.0% $330,442 Santa Rosa $3,585,288 $171,044,555 2.1% $1,491,331 Sebastopol $876,414 $8,998,700 9.7% $68,023 Sonoma (City) $1,081,292 $19,259,398 5.6% $97,504 Windsor $2,574,060 $18,594,345 13.8% $244,438 TOTALS $39,149,245 $792,550,654 4.9% $5,298,050

18


Staff Report

Issue

Shall the Board appropriate funds to the Bike Month phase of the Bicycle Safety and Education Project under the Bicycle and Pedestrian Program of Measure M in the amount of $13,000?

Recommendation

Staff recommends that the Board adopt Resolution No. 2020-003, approving the appropriation request.


None, appropriations are not reviewed by the advisory committees.


None.

Executive Summary

SCBC requests an appropriation in the amount of $13,000 from the Measure M Bicycle and Pedestrian Program for implementing activities surrounding Bike Month. The funds are programmed and available.


None. The appropriation is within the established policies outlined in the Measure M Strategic Plan Chapter 4. Policy 7.


Is there a fiscal impact? Yes ☒ No ☐

Is there funding in the current budget? Yes ☒ No ☐

The funding source(s) to be used are: Measure M Bicycle and Pedestrian Program

Background

The Sonoma County Bicycle Coalition (SCBC) has an existing Measure M cooperative agreement to implement Safe Routes to School and Bike Month. There is no change to the overall amount programmed to SCBC.

To: SCTA/RCPA Board of Directors Meeting Date: 4/13/20 From: Seana L. S. Gause, Senior - Programming and

Projects Item Number: 3.4

Subject: Measure M Bicycle and Pedestrian Program Appropriation Request for Sonoma County Bicycle Coalition


19

tel:707.565.5373

http://scta.ca.gov/

http://rcpa.ca.gov/

The SCTA adopted the 2019 Measure M Strategic Plan, which sets forth the SCTA’s program and project implementation policies with regard to the use of funds provided under Measure M. Pursuant to the Strategic Plan and the associated cooperative funding agreements, each project sponsor must submit an appropriation request (attached) to initiate spending of Measure M funding for the fiscal year in which the funds are programmed. SCTA has received a request dated March 27, 2020, from the SCBC seeking an appropriation for Bicycle Safety and Education. The appropriation request is for $13,000 for the Bike Month Phase.

Coop Funding Agreement # Jurisdiction Category Description Phase Appropriation

Amount

M71515-A4 SCBC Bike/Ped Bicycle Safety and Education Bike Month $13,000

Total $13,000

SCBC has indicated that due to the COVID-19 shelter in place order, Bike to Work Day (part of Bike Month) may be postponed until the fall. Work has already occurred in preparation for this year’s events prior to the shelter in place order. An appropriation will allow SCBC to invoice for activities already performed and the appropriation would stay open for expenses to be incurred in the fall.


https://scta.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/SCBC_BTWM.Appropriation.Request.2020.REVISED_Redacted.pdf

20



SCTA Resolution No. 2020-003 Cooperative Agreement Number: M71515-A4

Project Sponsor: Sonoma County Bicycle Coalition Amount: $13,000

April 13, 2020

RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE SONOMA COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, COUNTY OF SONOMA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, APPROPRIATING MEASURE M FUNDS OF $13,000 TO THE SONOMA COUNTY BICYCLE COALITION FOR BICYCLE SAFETY AND EDUCATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH COOPERATIVE FUNDING AGREEMENT NO. M71515-A4

WHEREAS, the 2004 Sonoma County Traffic Relief Act Expenditure Plan (hereinafter “Expenditure Plan”) includes $1,200,000 in 2004 dollars, for the Bicycle and Pedestrian funding category; and WHEREAS, the Sonoma County Transportation Authority (hereinafter “Authority”) and the Sonoma County Bicycle Coalition (hereinafter “SCBC”) have entered into Cooperative Funding Agreement No. 71515-A4 (hereinafter “Cooperative Agreement”) regarding the Safe Routes to Schools and Bike Month Phases of the Bicycle Safety and Education Project (hereinafter “Project”) within the Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects Program; and WHEREAS, SCBC has submitted a Request for Appropriation of Funds dated February 20, 2020 in connection with the Project pursuant to the above referenced Cooperative Agreement; and WHEREAS, funds are included in the Authority’s Strategic Plan and annual budget for such projects. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Authority finds the Request for Appropriation of funds consistent with the Expenditure Plan, the Strategic Plan, and the Cooperative Agreement; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Authority appropriates $13,000 to SCBC pursuant to the Cooperative Agreement to be used for the purposes set forth in Attachment A attached hereto; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that funds will be disbursed to SCBC in accordance with the provisions of the Cooperative Agreement but shall not exceed on an annual basis, the amounts programmed by fiscal year, as shown in the Program of Projects in the 2019 Strategic Plan, as such plan may be amended from time to time; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the funds appropriated by the Authority under the Cooperative Agreement are hereby reflected in Attachment B; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this appropriation shall expire three years from the date of this Resolution. THE FOREGOING RESOUTION was moved by Director , seconded by Director , and approved by the following vote:

21

Resolution No. 2020-003 Cooperative Agreement Number: M71515-A4

Project Sponsor: Sonoma County Bicycle Coalition Amount: $13,000

April 13, 2020

Director Bagby Director Miller Director Gorin Director Naujokas Director Gurney Director Rabbitt Director Harvey Director Rogers Director Landman Director Salmon Director Mackenzie Director Zane

Ayes: Noes: Absent: Abstain:

SO ORDERED Susan Gorin, Chair This RESOLUTION was entered into at a meeting of the Sonoma County Transportation Authority held April 13, 2020 in Santa Rosa, California Attest: Suzanne Smith, Executive Director Attachment: “A” Use of Appropriated Funds “B” Chronological Listing of Fund Appropriation Resolutions

22

ATTACHMENT A Use of Appropriated Funds

SONOMA COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY

RESOLUTION NO. 2020-003 Date: April 13, 2020 Amount of Funds: $13,000 Appropriated to: Sonoma County Bicycle Coalition Program Category: Bicycle/Pedestrian Program Specific Project: Bicycle Safety and Education Appropriated For: Bike Month Phase B ($13,000) Scope of Work: Support implementation of the bicycle safety and education project with the Bike Month Phase and focus on educating the public.

Other Conditions: None Staff Comments: This is the eleventh appropriation; for implementing Bicycle Safety and Education.

23

ATTACHMENT B

Chronological Listing of Fund Appropriation Resolutions

COOPERATIVE FUNDING AGREEMENT NO. M71515-A4

Between the Sonoma County Transportation Authority

and the Sonoma County Bicycle Coalition

Project Number

Resolution Number

Date Funds Appropriated

Cumulative Total

M71515 2008-024 July 14, 2008 $60,000 $60,000 M71515 2009-032 November 9, 2009 $60,000 $120,000 M71515 2010-043 November 8, 2010 $60,000 $180,000 M71515 2011-037 September 12, 2011 $60,000 $240,000 M71515 2013-012 April 8, 2013 $34,000 $274,000 M71515 2014-006 April 14, 2014 $34,000 $308,000 M71515 2015-004 February 9, 2015 $34,000 $342,000 M71515 2016-002 April 11, 2016 $34,000 $376,000 M71515 2016-025 December 12, 2016 $19,000 $395,000 M71515 2017-017 July 10, 2017 $315,000 $710,000 M71515 2017-027 November 13, 2017 -$3,000 $707,000 M71515 2019-002 March 11, 2019 $10,000 $717,000 M71515 2020-003 April 13, 2020 $13,000 $730,000

TOTAL FUNDS APPROPRIATED $730,000

24

BOARD OF DIRECTORSPresidentAlex MalloneeVice PresidentBob StenderTreasurerCathy BalachSecretaryJenny Bard

Bjorn GriepenburgJohn Murphy

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOREris Weaver

OFFICE:750 Mendocino AvenueSanta Rosa, CA 95401

MAIL:P.O. Box 3088Santa Rosa, CA 95402

PHONE:707-545-0153

FAX:707-573-0147

EMAIL:General inquiries:[email protected]

Events:[email protected]

Safe Routes to School:[email protected]

Street Skills Classes:[email protected]

WEB:www.bikesonoma.org

March 27, 2020 Sonoma County Transportation Authority 411 King Street Santa Rosa, CA 95404 FUNDING APPROPRIATION REQUEST PROJECT NAME: Bike Month Program AGREEMENT NO. M71515-A4

The Sonoma County Bicycle Coalition has entered into a cooperative funding agreement

with the SCTA (No.M71515-A4) and is working on the administration and implementation

of the Bike Month program for FY 2019/2020. The Sonoma County Bicycle Coalition is

requesting that the Sonoma County Transportation Authority (SCTA) take action to

appropriate funds for the Bike Month Program at its next Board meeting.

Project Name & Description:

Bike Month Program

Bike to Work Month promotes cycling for transportation by offering a series of events during May, which is National Bike Month. The events encourage people to make riding a bicycle part of their daily transportation mix. SCBC produces Bike to Work Day, holds bicycle safety and mechanics classes, organizes family and commuter bike clinics, and provides enhanced support to bicycle commuters and students during Bike Month to encourage more people to use bicycles for everyday transportation. Physical events for the month of May have been cancelled in order to comply with the County’s Shelter in Place Order to reduce transmission of the COVID-19 pandemic. Some limited, “virtual” activities will ensue in May, with activities like bicycle clinics and Energizer Stations will be re-scheduled to the Fall of 2020.

Project Category: Bicycle/Pedestrian Project

Phase Development Phase of this Appropriation:

Bike Month Program

Amount of Measure M

$13,000

25

- 2 -

The current schedule for the Bike Month Project is as follows:

Project Development Phase Begin Complete

Scoping N/A N/A

Environmental N/A N/A

Right of Way N/A N/A

PS&E N/A N/A

Implementation January 2020 November 2020

Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely,

Eris Weaver

Executive Director

Appropriation Request:

Amount of Local Funding Match:

$16,500

Sources of Local Funding Match:

$4,500 - Local Bike to Work Day Sponsorships

$12,000 - MTC BTW Day Local Stipend

Total Project Cost: $29,500

26


Staff Report

Issue

Shall the Board select Hearn Avenue Interchange as the SCTA’s project nomination for the Local Partnership Competitive Program (LPP (C)) for the current cycle?

Recommendation

Staff recommends that the SCTA approve the proposed project nomination of Hearn Avenue Interchange for the Local Partnership Competitive Program.


The Technical and Citizens Advisory Committees reviewed the project and support the submittal.


None, Hearn Avenue Interchange Project was the only projects submitted in response to the call for projects.

Executive Summary

SCTA issued a call for projects for the Road Recovery and Accountability Act (SB-1) Local Partnership Competitive Program on February 3, 2020. SCTA received one application as a result of the call for projects. The City of Santa Rosa submitted an application for the Hearn Avenue Interchange project for $14 Million from the program for construction and construction support funding. This project has been reviewed by staff and meets the eligibility requirements of the program.


Hearn Avenue interchange is a Measure M project. Supporting full funding for this project is in alignment with SCTA policies and plans.




The funding source(s) to be used are: Local Partnership Program Funds, Measure M LSP funds

Measure M LSP funds in the amount of $3.45M are currently programmed to the Hearn Avenue Interchange Project in the Measure M budget. The remaining shortfall of local match ($10M) would need to be

To: SCTA/RCPA Board of Directors Meeting Date: 4/13/20 From: Seana L. S. Gause, Senior - Programming and

Projects Item Number: 3.5

Subject: Proposed Project for SB-1 Local Partnership Competitive Program: Hearn Ave I/C


27

tel:707.565.5373

http://scta.ca.gov/

http://rcpa.ca.gov/

programmed by the Board if the project is successfully selected for the SB-1 LPP (C) funds. Santa Rosa is using City funds in the amount of $550K to match the LPP funding.

Background

SCTA issued a call for projects for the Road Recovery and Accountability Act (SB-1) Local Partnership Competitive Program on February 3, 2020. The Local Partnership Program provides funding to regional transportation agencies in which voters have approved taxes dedicated solely to transportation improvements. The minimum program amount is $2 Million and the maximum is $25 Million. SCTA, as the taxing authority, is the eligible recipient of this funding program. The program requires a 1:1 match of local funds for the project in order to be eligible. It is a very competitive statewide program. Cycle 1 was oversubscribed by almost three times the amount available.

SCTA received one application as a result of the call for projects. The City of Santa Rosa submitted an application for the Hearn Avenue Interchange project which is linked below.

The City of Santa Rosa requests $14 Million from the program for construction and construction support funding. The City has $3.45M in existing programming for the Hearn Avenue Interchange Project in Measure M. The SCTA Board passed a resolution of support (SCTA2019-012) on September 9, 2019, to provide the additional matching funds to the Hearn Avenue Interchange Project from the Measure M Local Streets Projects Program should the project be successful in receiving Local Partnership Program funds.

This project has been reviewed by staff and meets the eligibility requirements of the program.

The California Transportation Commission staff will make recommendations for grant awards to projects in November 2020, and the Commission will approve projects in December. If successful the current schedule would open the new overpass at the end of 2023.


https://scta.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/SB1-Call-for-Projects-Packet.pdf

https://scta.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Hearn-App-for-Posting.pdf

https://scta.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/4.3.3-Staff-Report-Hearn-Grant-Support-DRAFT-AB-SS-edits-7-25-19.docx

https://scta.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/SCTA-Resolution-2019-012.pdf

28

https://scta.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/SB1-Call-for-Projects-Packet.pdf

https://scta.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Hearn-App-for-Posting.pdf



https://scta.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/SCTA-Resolution-2019-012.pdf


Staff Report

Issue

Shall the Sonoma County Transportation Authority (SCTA) approve the proposed Agreement with Toole Design Group, LLC for consulting services for the development of the Vision Zero Sonoma County Data Dashboard?

Recommendation

Staff recommends that the Board approve the attached Agreement with Toole Design Group, LLC for consulting services for the development of the Vision Zero Sonoma County Data Dashboard.




On December 10, 2019, SCTA issued a Request for Proposals for consulting services for the Vision Zero Sonoma County Data Dashboard. Two firms submitted proposals by the January 31, 2020 deadline. A three-member evaluation panel consisting of staff from SCTA and the Department of Health Services (DHS) reviewed and scored the two proposals. The evaluation panel interviewed both firms, and unanimously ranked Toole Design Group, LLC as the top proposal.

Executive Summary

Execution of the attached Agreement will allow SCTA and DHS staff to begin working with Toole Design Group, LLC to develop the data dashboard for the Vision Zero Sonoma County project. The data dashboard will provide injury and crash data from a variety of sources and will inform the development of a Vision Zero Action Plan for Sonoma County.


The Vision Zero Sonoma County project supports SCTA’s Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP) goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve safety and health. The project will create a regional plan to reduce non-motorized traffic fatality rates in Sonoma County.



To: SCTA/RCPA Board of Directors Meeting Date: 4/13/20 From: Tanya Narath, Data Specialist Item Number: 3.6 Subject: Vision Zero Sonoma County Data Dashboard Agreement


29

tel:707.565.5373

http://scta.ca.gov/

http://rcpa.ca.gov/


The funding source(s) to be used are: Sustainable Communities Grants (State – SB1), MTC Planning Funds

Background

SCTA will develop a robust data framework and data dashboard to support the Vision Zero Sonoma County Project (VZ-SC Project). The data framework will include injury and crash data from a variety of sources. It will also incorporate demographic, transportation, and other relevant data to support the development of the Vision Zero Action Plan for Sonoma County. The Vision Zero Advisory Committee (VZAC), policy makers, and members of the public will access data from the framework in an online data dashboard.

In October 2019, SCTA determined that consulting services were required to fulfill its deliverables on the Vision Zero Sonoma County project funded by a Caltrans Sustainable Communities Grant. Staff developed a draft Request for Proposals (RFP) for professional services to develop a Data Dashboard for the Vision Zero Sonoma County project.

The SCTA released the final RFP on December 10, 2019. The key dates outlined in the proposal were:

• Issued: December 10, 2019

• Written Questions: December 17, 2019

• Pre-Proposal Meeting: December 19, 2019

• Submit Proposals: January 31, 2020

• Possible Interview Dates: February 6-7, 2020

Because SCTA released the RFP close to the holidays, staff selected the end of January as the deadline to respond to allow sufficient time for consultants to prepare proposals.

SCTA staff created a distribution list of consultants to send the RFP to by reviewing SCTA’s standard list of consultants and adding additional consultants known to have expertise in Vision Zero and/or the development of data dashboards. The final distribution list had a broad spectrum of 75 consulting firms including planning, engineering, and web design.

Staff sent an email announcement of the release of the RFP to the consultant distribution list on December 10, 2019. In addition, staff posted the RFP announcement on the SCTA web site on the “Working with SCTA” page and a link posted in the “what’s new” section of the SCTA home page.

SCTA did not receive any written questions prior to the published deadline of December 17, 2019. Staff conducted the pre-proposal meeting as published in the RFP on December 19. Five firms attended the meeting, and SCTA published written responses to all questions asked during the meeting on its web site.

SCTA received two proposals by the RFP deadline—one on January 30 and one on January 31. Because fewer than three firms submitted proposals, staff documented a justification to proceed with the procurement in

30

accordance with procedures outlined in the Caltrans Local Assistance Procedures Manual.1 SCTA staff decided to move forward with the two proposals for the following reasons:

• Based on a thorough review of the written proposals, SCTA staff determined that both firms were qualified to do the work.

• SCTA staff determined that re-advertising the RFP would be unlikely to generate additional proposals. The scope of the RFP was specialized but not tailored to the expertise of specific firms.

A three-member evaluation panel consisting of staff from SCTA and the Department of Health Services (DHS) reviewed and scored the two proposals. The evaluation panel interviewed both firms, and unanimously ranked Toole Design Group, LLC as the top proposal.

Scope of Work

The Scope of Work for the Agreement includes the tasks and subtasks listed below.

Task 1: Identify and Develop Content

Build a strong foundation of relevant, accurate and timely injury, crash, and other supporting data for the unincorporated areas and the nine cities in Sonoma County. Identify gaps in data and define a plan to resolve.

Proposed tasks for identifying and developing content:

• Meet with agency staff to finalize project scope and solidify a schedule for completing the project. Schedule must align with overall VZ-SC Project timeline.

• Work with agency staff and VZAC to gather feedback on data and analysis needs.

• Gather existing available data for Sonoma County including injury, crash, transportation, infrastructure gaps, and demographics. Review with agency staff and VZAC to identify data gaps.

• Work with agency staff to determine how to incorporate information previously gathered for Sonoma County Community Based Transportation plans to represent community needs and concerns.

• Work with agency staff to identify data that may require data sharing agreements (e.g. aggregate data on injuries from local hospitals).

• Work with agency staff and data providers to identify sensitive data and develop methods to share this data securely or apply data scrubbing techniques to produce data products that could be shared with wider audiences.

• Identify and recommend data sources to address data gaps and planning support needs. Review with agency staff and VZAC and incorporate feedback into final data plan. Planning support needs include the ability to:

o Conduct safety analysis

o Identify High Injury Network (HIN)

o Identify actions that can reduce crashes

1 https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/local-assistance/documents/lapm/lapm.pdf

31

o Develop crash reduction tool using actions identified in last task along with relevant research and data on effectiveness

Task 2: Design Data Dashboard

Design a data dashboard that allows for sharing of crash and injury data in forms that are understandable to different audiences (e.g. summary data for community members; ability to drill down to details for staff and policy makers). Automate data interfaces to minimize need for manual data loads. Include capability to display information on Vision Zero strategies and progress.

Proposed tasks for designing data dashboard:

• Work with agency staff to define requirements for data dashboard.

o Technical

o User interface

o Reporting

• Develop proposed technical architecture for data dashboard. Review with agency staff and incorporate feedback into final design.

o Back end database

o Data interfaces / APIs

o Web interface

• Recommend software solution options to implement technical architecture in alignment with VZ-SC Project budget. Review options with agency staff and VZAC and incorporate feedback into final software solution recommendation.

Task 3: Develop and Implement Data Dashboard

Develop, test, and implement data dashboard.

Proposed tasks for developing and implementing data dashboard:

• Work with agency staff to procure and configure selected software solution.

• Develop technical documentation for data dashboard solution. Review with agency staff and revise with feedback.

• Develop user documentation for data dashboard solution. Review with agency staff and VZAC and revise with feedback.

• Develop ongoing data maintenance solution and associated documentation

• Work with agency staff to develop training and ongoing user support plans.


Attached: Contract with Toole Design Group, LLC

32

AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTING SERVICES

This agreement ("Agreement"), dated as of April 13, 2020 (“Effective Date”) is by and between the Sonoma County Transportation Authority, a political subdivision of the State of California (hereinafter "SCTA"), and Toole Design Group, LLC (hereinafter "Consultant").

R E C I T A L S

WHEREAS, Consultant represents that it is duly qualified and experienced in the development of data dashboards and related services; and

WHEREAS, in the judgment of the Sonoma County Transportation Authority, it is necessary and desirable to employ the services of Consultant for technical assistance in development of the Vision Zero Sonoma County Data Dashboard.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals and the mutual covenants contained herein, the parties hereto agree as follows:

A G R E E M E N T

l. Scope of Services.

1.1 Consultant's Specified Services.Consultant shall perform the services described in Exhibit “A,” attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (hereinafter "Scope of Work"), and within the times or by the dates provided for in Exhibit “A” and pursuant to Article 7, Prosecution of Work. In the event of a conflict between the body of this Agreement and Exhibit “A”, the provisions in the body of this Agreement shall control.

1.2 Cooperation With SCTA. Consultant shall cooperate with SCTA and SCTA staff in the performance of all work hereunder.

1.3 Performance Standard. Consultant shall perform all work hereunder in a manner consistent with the level of competency and standard of care normally observed by a person practicing in Consultant's profession. SCTA has relied upon the professional ability and training of Consultant as a material inducement to enter into this Agreement. Consultant hereby agrees to provide all services under this Agreement in accordance with generally accepted professional practices and standards of care, as well as the requirements of applicable federal, state and local laws, it being understood that acceptance of Contractor’s work by SCTA shall not operate as a waiver or release. If SCTA determines that any of Consultant's work is not in accordance with such level of competency and standard of care, SCTA, in its sole discretion, shall have the right to do

SCTA20019

33

any or all of the following: (a) require Consultant to meet with SCTA to review the quality of the work and resolve matters of concern; (b) require Consultant to repeat the work at no additional charge until it is satisfactory; (c) terminate this Agreement pursuant to the provisions of Article 4; or (d) pursue any and all other remedies at law or in equity after adequate time was given to Consultant to remedy. 1.4 Assigned Personnel.

a. Consultant shall assign only competent personnel to perform work hereunder. In

the event that at any time SCTA, in its sole discretion, desires the removal of any person or persons assigned by Consultant to perform work hereunder, Consultant shall remove such person or persons immediately upon receiving written notice from SCTA.

b. Any and all persons identified in this Agreement or any exhibit hereto as the

project manager, project team, or other professional performing work hereunder are deemed by SCTA to be key personnel whose services were a material inducement to SCTA to enter into this Agreement, and without whose services SCTA would not have entered into this Agreement. Consultant shall not remove, replace, substitute, or otherwise change any key personnel without the prior written consent of SCTA. With respect to performance under this Agreement, Consultant shall employ the following key personnel: Laura Krull, Frank Proulx, Tom Lin.

c. In the event that any of Consultant’s personnel assigned to perform services under

this Agreement become unavailable due to resignation, sickness or other factors outside of Consultant’s control, Consultant shall be responsible for timely provision of adequately qualified replacements.

2. Payment. For all services and incidental costs required hereunder, Consultant shall be paid on a time and material/expense basis in accordance with the budget set forth in Exhibit B, provided, however, that total payments to Consultant shall not exceed $ 59,892, without the prior written approval of SCTA. Consultant shall submit its bills in arrears on a monthly basis in a form approved by SCTA’s Auditor and the Executive Director of SCTA. The bills shall show or include: (i) the task(s) performed; (ii) the name of the person performing the task; (iii) the time in quarter hours devoted to the task(s); (iv) the hourly rate or rates of the persons performing the task(s); and (v) copies of receipts for reimbursable materials/expenses, if any. Expenses not expressly authorized by the Agreement shall not be reimbursed. Travel expenses and per diem rates are not to exceed the rate specified by the State of California Department of Human Resources for similar employees (i.e. non-represented

SCTA20019

34

employees) unless written verification is supplied that government hotel rates were not then commercially available to Consultant at the time and location required as specified in the California Department of Transportation’s Travel Guide Exception Process at the following link: https://travelpocketguide.dot.ca.gov/. Unless otherwise noted in this Agreement, payments shall be made within the normal course of SCTA business after presentation of an invoice in a form approved by the SCTA for services performed. Payments shall be made only upon the satisfactory completion of the services as determined by the SCTA. Pursuant to California Revenue and Taxation code (R&TC) Section 18662, the SCTA shall withhold seven percent of the income paid to Consultant for services performed within the State of California under this agreement, for payment and reporting to the California Franchise Tax Board, if Consultant does not qualify as: (1) a corporation with its principal place of business in California, (2) an LLC or Partnership with a permanent place of business in California, (3) a corporation/LLC or Partnership qualified to do business in California by the Secretary of State, or (4) an individual with a permanent residence in the State of California.

If Consultant does not qualify, SCTA requires that a completed and signed Form 587 be provided by the Consultant in order for payments to be made. If Consultant is qualified, then the SCTA requires a completed Form 590. Forms 587 and 590 remain valid for the duration of the Agreement provided there is no material change in facts. By signing either form, the Consultant agrees to promptly notify the SCTA of any changes in the facts. Forms should be sent to the SCTA pursuant to Article 12. To reduce the amount withheld, Consultant has the option to provide SCTA with either a full or partial waiver from the State of California.

2.1 Cost Principles.

2.1.1 Consultant agrees to comply with Title 2, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards to the extent applicable.

2.2.2 Consultant agrees, and will assure that its contractors and subconsultants will be obligated to agree, that (a) Contract Cost Principles and Procedures, 48 CFR, Federal Acquisition Regulations System, Chapter 1, Part 31, et seq., shall be used to determine the allowability of individual Project cost items and (b) all parties shall comply with Federal administrative procedures in accordance with 2 CFR, Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards. Every sub-recipient receiving Project funds as a sub-recipient, contractor, or subconsultant under this Agreement shall comply with Federal administrative procedures in accordance with 2 CFR, Part 200, Uniform Administrative

SCTA20019

35

https://travelpocketguide.dot.ca.gov/

Requirements, Cost Principles and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards to the extent applicable.

2.2.3 Prior to Consultant seeking reimbursement of indirect costs, Consultant must have identified the estimated indirect cost rate in Exhibit A, prepare and submit annually to SCTA and Caltrans for review and approval an indirect cost rate proposal and a central service cost allocation plan (if any) in accordance with 2 CFR, Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards and Chapter 5 of the Local Assistance Procedures Manual which may be accessed at https://dot.ca.gov/programs/local-assistance/guidelines-and-procedures/local-assistance-procedures-manual-lapm.

3. Term of Agreement. The term of this Agreement shall be from April 13, 2020 to March 31, 2021 unless terminated earlier in accordance with the provisions of Article 4 below. 4. Termination.

4.1 Termination Without Cause. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, at any time and without cause, SCTA shall have the right, in its sole discretion, to terminate this Agreement by giving 5 days written notice to Consultant. 4.2 Termination for Cause. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, should Consultant fail to perform any of its obligations hereunder, within the time and in the manner herein provided, or otherwise violate any of the terms of this Agreement, SCTA may immediately terminate this Agreement by giving Consultant written notice of such termination, stating the reason for termination. 4.3 Delivery of Work Product and Final Payment Upon Termination. In the event of termination, Consultant, within 14 days following the date of termination, shall deliver to SCTA all reports, original drawings, graphics, plans, studies, and other data or documents, in whatever form or format, assembled or prepared by Consultant or Consultant’s subconsultants, contractors, and other agents in connection with this Agreement and shall submit to SCTA an invoice showing the services performed, hours worked, and copies of receipts for reimbursable expenses up to the date of termination.

4.4 Payment Upon Termination. Upon termination of this Agreement by SCTA, Consultant shall be entitled to receive as full payment for all services satisfactorily rendered and reimbursable expenses properly incurred hereunder, an amount which bears the same ratio to the total payment specified in the Agreement as the services satisfactorily rendered hereunder by Consultant bear to the total services otherwise required to be performed for such total payment; provided, however, that if services which have been satisfactorily rendered are to be paid on a per-hour or per-day basis,

SCTA20019

36

Consultant shall be entitled to receive as full payment an amount equal to the number of hours or days actually worked prior to the termination times the applicable hourly or daily rate; and further provided, however, that if SCTA terminates the Agreement for cause pursuant to Section 4.2, SCTA shall deduct from such amount the amount of damage, if any, sustained by SCTA by virtue of the breach of the Agreement by Consultant. 4.5 Authority to Terminate. The Board of SCTA has the authority to terminate this Agreement on behalf of the SCTA. In addition, the Executive Director of SCTA, in consultation with County Counsel, shall have the authority to terminate this Agreement on behalf of the SCTA.

4.6 Budget Contingency Clause.

4.6.1 It is mutually agreed that if the US Congress or the State Legislature fail to appropriate or allocate funds during the current year and/or any subsequent years covered under this Agreement do not appropriate sufficient funds for the program, this Agreement shall be of no further force and effect. In this event, SCTA shall have no liability to pay any funds whatsoever to Consultant or to furnish any other considerations under this Agreement and Consultant shall not be obligated to perform any provisions of this Agreement.

4.6.2 If funding for any fiscal year is reduced or deleted by the US Congress or the State Legislature for purposes of this program, SCTA shall have the option to either terminate this Agreement with no liability occurring to SCTA, or offer an Agreement Amendment to Consultant to reflect the reduced amount.

5. Indemnification. Consultant agrees to accept all responsibility for loss or damage to any person or entity, including SCTA and Caltrans, and to indemnify, hold harmless, and release SCTA and Caltrans, their officers, agents, and employees, from and against any actions, claims, damages, liabilities, disabilities, or expenses, that may be asserted by any person or entity, including Consultant, to the extent that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to Consultant’s or its agents’, employees’, contractors’, subconsultants’, or invitees’ performance or obligations under this Agreement. Consultant agrees to provide a complete defense for any claim or action brought against SCTA or Caltrans based upon a claim to the extent relating to such Consultant’s or its agents’, employees’, contractors’, subconsultants’, or invitees’ performance or obligations under this Agreement. Consultant’s obligations under this Section apply whether or not there is concurrent or contributory negligence on SCTA’s or Caltrans’ part, but to the extent required by law, excluding liability due to SCTA’s or Caltrans’ conduct. SCTA and Caltrans shall have the right to select their legal counsel at Consultant’s expense, subject to Consultant’s approval, which shall not be unreasonably withheld. This indemnification obligation is not limited in any way by any limitation on the amount or type

SCTA20019

37

of damages or compensation payable to or for Consultant or its agents under workers' compensation acts, disability benefits acts, or other employee benefit acts. 6. Insurance. With respect to performance of work under this Agreement, Consultant shall maintain and shall require all of its subconsultants, contractors, and other agents to maintain, insurance as described in Exhibit C, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. 7. Prosecution of Work. The execution of this Agreement shall constitute Consultant's authority to proceed immediately with the performance of this Agreement. Performance of the services hereunder shall be completed within the time required herein, provided, however, that if the performance is delayed by earthquake, flood, high water, or other Act of God or by strike, lockout, or similar labor disturbances, the time for Consultant's performance of this Agreement shall be extended by a number of days equal to the number of days Consultant has been delayed. 8. Extra or Changed Work. Extra or changed work or other changes to the Agreement may be authorized only by written amendment to this Agreement, signed by both parties. Minor changes which do not change the scope of work or significantly lengthen time schedules may be executed by the Executive Director of SCTA in a form approved by Counsel. The Board of Directors of SCTA must authorize all other extra or changed work. The parties expressly recognize that SCTA personnel are without authorization to order extra or changed work or waive Agreement requirements. Failure of Consultant to secure such written authorization for extra or changed work shall constitute a waiver of any and all right to adjustment in the Agreement price or Agreement time due to such unauthorized work and thereafter Consultant shall be entitled to no compensation whatsoever for the performance of such work. Consultant further expressly waives any and all right or remedy by way of restitution and quantum meruit for any and all extra work performed without such express and prior written authorization of the SCTA. 9. Representations of Consultant.

9.1 Standard of Care. SCTA has relied upon the professional ability and training of Consultant as a material inducement to enter into this Agreement. Consultant hereby agrees that all its work will be performed and that its operations shall be conducted in accordance with generally accepted and applicable professional practices and standards as well as the requirements of applicable federal, state and local laws, it being understood that acceptance of Consultant's work by SCTA shall not operate as a waiver or release. 9.2 Status of Consultant. The parties intend that Consultant, in performing the services specified herein, shall act as an independent contractor and shall control the work and the manner in which it is performed. Consultant is not to be considered an agent or

SCTA20019

38

employee of SCTA and is not entitled to participate in any pension plan, worker’s compensation plan, insurance, bonus, or similar benefits SCTA provides its employees. In the event SCTA exercises its right to terminate this Agreement pursuant to Article 4, above, Consultant expressly agrees that it shall have no recourse or right of appeal under rules, regulations, ordinances, or laws applicable to employees. 9.3 No Suspension or Debarment. Consultant warrants that it is not presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from participation in covered transactions by any federal department or agency. Consultant also warrants that it is not suspended or debarred from receiving federal funds as listed in the List of Parties Excluded from Federal Procurement or Non-procurement Programs issued by the General Services Administration. If the Consultant becomes debarred, consultant has the obligation to inform the SCTA. 9.4 Taxes. Consultant agrees to file federal and state tax returns and pay all applicable taxes on amounts paid pursuant to this Agreement and shall be solely liable and responsible to pay such taxes and other obligations, including, but not limited to, state and federal income and FICA taxes. Consultant agrees to indemnify and hold SCTA harmless from any liability which it may incur to the United States or to the State of California as a consequence of Consultant's failure to pay, when due, all such taxes and obligations. In case SCTA is audited for compliance regarding any withholding or other applicable taxes, Consultant agrees to furnish SCTA with proof of payment of taxes on these earnings.

9.5 Retention of Records/Audits

9.5.1 Consultant agrees to comply with Title 2, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards. 9.5.2 Consultant, its contractors and subconsultants shall establish and maintain an accounting system and records that properly accumulate and segregate incurred Project costs and matching funds by line. The accounting system of Consultant, its contractors and subconsultants shall conform to Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), enable the determination of incurred costs at interim points of completion, and provide support for reimbursement payment vouchers or invoices. All accounting records and other supporting papers of Consultant, its contractors and subconsultants connected with Project performance under this Agreement shall be maintained for a minimum of three (3) years from the date of final payment to Consultant and shall be held open to inspection, copying, and audit by representatives of SCTA, Caltrans, the California State Auditor, and auditors representing the federal government. Copies thereof will be furnished by Consultant,

SCTA20019

39

its contractors and subconsultants upon receipt of any request made by SCTA and/or Caltrans or its agents. In conducting an audit of the costs and match credits claimed under this Agreement, SCTA and/or Caltrans will rely to the maximum extent possible on any prior audit of Consultant pursuant to the provisions of State law. In the absence of such an audit, any acceptable audit work performed by Consultant’s external and internal auditors may be relied upon and used by SCTA and/or Caltrans when planning and conducting additional audits. 9.5.3 For the purpose of determining compliance with applicable State law in connection with the performance of Consultant’s contracts with third parties pursuant to GC Section 8546.7, Consultant, Consultant’s contractors, subconsultants, and Caltrans shall maintain and make available for inspection all books, documents, papers, accounting records, and other evidence pertaining to the performance of this Agreement, including, but not limited to, the costs of administering this Agreement. All of the above referenced parties shall make such materials available at their respective offices at all reasonable times during the entire Project period and for three (3) years from the date of final payment to Consultant under this Agreement. SCTA, Caltrans, the California State Auditor, or any duly authorized representative of Caltrans or the United States Department of Transportation, shall each have access to any books, records, and documents that are pertinent to a Project for audits, examinations, excerpts, and transactions, and Consultant shall furnish copies thereof if requested. 9.5.4 Consultant, its contractors and subconsultants will permit access to all records of employment, employment advertisements, employment application forms, and other pertinent data and records by the State Fair Employment Practices and Housing Commission, or any other agency of the State of California designated by Caltrans, for the purpose of any investigation to ascertain compliance with this Agreement.

9.6 Conflict of Interest. Consultant covenants that it presently has no interest and that it will not acquire any interest, direct or indirect, that represents a financial conflict of interest under state law or that would otherwise conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of its services hereunder. Consultant further covenants that in the performance of this Agreement no person having any such interests shall be employed. In addition, if requested to do so by SCTA, Consultant shall complete and file and shall require any other person doing work under this Agreement to complete and file a "Statement of Economic Interest" with SCTA disclosing Consultant's or such other person's financial interests. 9.7 Statutory Compliance. Consultant agrees to comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws, regulations, statutes and policies applicable to the services provided under this Agreement as they exist now and as they are changed, amended or modified

SCTA20019

40

during the term of this Agreement. All services performed by Consultant pursuant to this agreement shall be performed in accordance with California Senate Bill No. 1 (SB-1) (Chapter 5, Statutes of 2017), also known as the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017, including, but not limited to, Government Code Section 14460(a)(1), as well as all applicable Federal, State, and Local Laws, regulations, ordinances, all applicable Caltrans policies and procedures, and all applicable Caltrans published manuals, including, but not limited to, the applicable Grant Application Guide, available upon request. By signing this Agreement, Consultant assures SCTA that in the course of performing Project work, it will fully comply with the applicable provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability, as well as all applicable regulations and guidelines issued pursuant to the ADA. (42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.). In case of conflict between any applicable Federal, State, and Local laws, regulations, and ordinances, and/or any applicable policies, procedures or published manuals of either CALTRANS or SCTA, the order of precedence of the applicability of same to this Agreement shall be established in this order: 1) Federal laws and regulations; 2) California laws and regulations; 3) CALTRANS policies, procedures, and published manuals; 4) Local ordinances; and 5) SCTA policies, procedures, and published manuals. 9.8 Nondiscrimination.

9.8.1 Without limiting any other provision hereunder, Consultant, and any subconsultant or contractor employed by Consultant to perform work under this Agreement, shall comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, rules, and regulations in regard to nondiscrimination in employment because of race, color, ancestry, national origin, religion, sex, marital status, age, medical condition, pregnancy, disability, sexual orientation or other prohibited basis, including without limitation, the SCTA’s Non-Discrimination Policy. All nondiscrimination rules or regulations required by law to be included in this Agreement are incorporated herein by this reference. 9.8.2 Consultant, and any subconsultant or contractor employed by Consultant to perform work under this Agreement, shall comply with the provisions of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (Gov. Code Sections 12900 et seq.), the regulations promulgated thereunder (Cal. Code Regs., Tit. 2, Sections 11000 et seq.), the provisions of Article 9.5, Chapter 1, Part 1, Division 3, Title 2 of the Government Code (Gov. Code Sections 11135-11139.5), and the regulations or standards adopted by Caltrans to implement such article.

SCTA20019

41

9.8.3 Consultant, and any subconsultant or contractor employed by Consultant to perform work under this Agreement, shall permit access by representatives of the Department of Fair Employment and Housing and Caltrans upon reasonable notice at any time during the normal business hours, but in no case less than 24 hours’ notice, to such of its books, records, accounts, and all other sources of information and its facilities as said Department of Caltrans shall require to ascertain compliance with this clause. 9.8.4 Consultant, and any subconsultant or contractor employed by Consultant to perform work under this Agreement, shall give written notice of their obligations under this clause to labor organizations with which they have a collective bargaining or other agreement. 9.8.5 Consultant, and any subconsultant or contractor employed by Consultant to perform work under this Agreement, shall include the nondiscrimination and compliance provisions of this clause in all contracts and subcontracts it enters into to perform work under this Agreement.

9.9 AIDS Discrimination. Consultant agrees to comply with the provisions of Chapter 19, Article II, of the Sonoma County Code prohibiting discrimination in housing, employment, and services because of AIDS or HIV infection during the term of this Agreement and any extensions of the term. 9.10 Assignment of Rights. Consultant assigns to SCTA and Caltrans all rights throughout the world in perpetuity in the nature of copyright, trademark, patent, right to ideas, in and to all versions of the plans and specifications, if any, now or later prepared by Consultant in connection with this Agreement. Consultant agrees to take such actions as are necessary to protect the rights assigned to SCTA and Caltrans in this Agreement, and to refrain from taking any action which would impair those rights. Consultant's responsibilities under this provision include, but are not limited to, placing proper notice of copyright on all versions of the plans and specifications as SCTA or Caltrans may direct, and refraining from disclosing any versions of the plans and specifications to any third party without first obtaining written permission of SCTA and Caltrans. Consultant shall not use or permit another to use the plans and specifications in connection with this or any other project without first obtaining written permission of SCTA and Caltrans. 9.11 Ownership of Proprietary Property

9.11.1 Definitions

9.11.1a Work: The work to be directly or indirectly produced by Consultant or any subconsultant or contractor employed by Consultant to perform work under this Agreement.

SCTA20019

42

9.11.1b Work Product: All deliverables created or produced from Work under this Agreement including but not limited to, all Work and Deliverables conceived or made, or made hereafter conceived or made, either solely or jointly with others during the term of this Agreement and during a period of six (6) months after the termination thereof, which relates to the Work commissioned or performed under this Agreement. "Work Product" includes all deliverables, inventions, innovations, improvements, or other works of authorship Consultant, and any subconsultant or contractor employed by Consultant to perform work under this Agreement, may conceive of or develop in the course of this Agreement, whether or not they are eligible for patent, copyright, trademark, trade secret, or other legal protection.

9.11.1c Inventions: Any idea, methodologies, design, concept, technique, invention, discovery, improvement or development regardless of patentability made solely by Consultant or jointly with the Consultant’s contractor and/or subconsultant and/or the Consultant’s contractor and/or subconsultant’s employees with one or more employees of SCTA and/or Caltrans, during the term of this Agreement and in performance of any Work under this Agreement, provided that either the conception or reduction to practice thereof occurs during the term of this Agreement and in performance of Work issued under this Agreement.

9.11.2 Ownership of Work Product and Rights

9.11.2a Copyright Ownership of Work Product: Except in regard to Pre-existing Works, all Work Product derived by the Work performed by the Consultant, its employees, or by any of the Consultant’s contractor's and/or subconsultant's employees under this Agreement, shall be owned by Caltrans and SCTA and shall be considered to be works made for hire by the Consultant and Consultant’s contractor and/or subconsultant for Caltrans and SCTA. Caltrans and SCTA shall own all United States and international copyrights in the Work Product. As such, all Work Product shall contain, in a conspicuous place, a copyright designation consisting of a "c" in a circle followed by the four-digit year in which the Work Product was produced, followed by the words "California Department of Transportation and SCTA. All Rights Reserved." For example, a Work Product created in the year 2012 would contain the copyright designation© 2012 California Department of Transportation and SCTA. All Rights Reserved. 9.11.2b Vesting of Copyright Ownership: Consultant, its employees, and all of Consultant’s contractor's and subconsultant's employees, agrees to perpetually assign, and upon creation of each Work Product automatically assigns, to Caltrans and SCTA, its successors, and assigns, ownership of all United States and international copyrights in each and every Work Product, insofar as any such Work Product, by operation of law, may not be considered work made for hire by the

SCTA20019

43

Consultant’s contractor and/or subconsultant from Caltrans. From time to time, Caltrans and SCTA shall require its contractors, subconsultants, and/or subrecipients and their respective employees to confirm such assignments by execution and delivery of such assignments, confirmations, or assignment, or other written instruments as Caltrans and SCTA may request. Caltrans and SCTA, its successors, and assigns, shall have the right to obtain and hold in its or their own name(s) all copyright registrations and other evidence of rights that may be available for Work Product. Consultant shall require contractors, including subconsultants, to waive all moral rights relating to identification of authorship restriction or limitation on use, or subsequent modifications of the Work.

9.11.3 Inventions

9.11.3a Vesting of Patent Ownership: Consultant and its contractors, subconsultants, and respective employees shall assign to Caltrans and SCTA, its successors, and assigns, all Inventions, together with the right to seek protection by obtaining patent ownership rights and the right to claim all rights or priority there under, and the same shall become and remain Caltrans’ and SCTA’s property regardless of whether such protection is sought. The Consultant shall promptly make a complete written disclosure to Caltrans and SCTA of each Invention not otherwise clearly disclosed to Caltrans and SCTA in the pertinent Work Product, specifically pointing out features or concepts that the Consultant, its employees, and/or Consultant's contractor and/or subconsultant believes to be new or different. The Consultant, its employees, and Consultant's contractor and subconsultant shall, upon Caltrans and SCTA's request and at Caltrans and SCTA's expense, cause patent applications to be filed thereon, through solicitors designated by Caltrans and SCTA, and shall sign all such applications over to Caltrans and SCTA, its successors, and assigns. The Consultant, its employees, and Consultant's contractor and subconsultant shall give Caltrans and SCTA and its solicitors all reasonable assistance in connection with the preparation and prosecution of any such patent applications and shall cause to be executed all such assignments or other instruments or documents as Caltrans and SCTA may consider necessary or appropriate to carry out the intent on this Agreement.

9.11.3b Consultant: In the event that Caltrans and SCTA are unable for any reason whatsoever to secure the Consultant’s, its employees', and/or Consultant's contractor's, and/or subconsultant's signature to any lawful or necessary document required or desirable to apply for or prosecute any United States application (including renewals or divisions thereof), Consultant, its employees, and Consultant’s contractor and subconsultant hereby irrevocably designates and appoints Caltrans and SCTA and its duly authorized officers and agents, as its agent and attorney-in-fact, to act for and on Consultant, its employees and Consultant’s contractor's and subconsultant's behalf and stead, to execute and file

SCTA20019

44

such applications and to do all other lawfully permitted acts to further the prosecution and issuance of any copyrights, trademarks or patents thereon with the same legal force and effect as if executed by Consultant, its employees and Consultant’s contractor and subconsultant. Caltrans and SCTA shall have no obligations to file any copyright, trademark or patent applications.

9.11.4 Additional Provisions

9.11.4a Avoidance of infringement: In performing services under this Agreement, Consultant, and any subconsultant or contractor employed by Consultant to perform work under this Agreement, and their employees agree to avoid designing or developing any items that infringe one or more patents or other intellectual property rights of any third party. If Consultant, or any subconsultant or contractor employed by Consultant to perform work under this Agreement, or their employees becomes aware of any such possible infringement in the course of performing any Work under this Agreement, Consultant, or any subconsultant or contractor employed by Consultant to perform work under this Agreement, or their employees shall immediately notify Caltrans and SCTA in writing.

9.11.4b Pre-existing Works and License: Consultant agrees to require contractors and subconsultants to acknowledge that all Work Product shall be the sole and exclusive property of Caltrans and SCTA, except that any Pre-existing Works created by Consultant and third parties outside of the Agreement but utilized in connection with the Agreement (the "Pre-existing Works") shall continue to be owned by Consultant or such parties. Consultant agrees to notify Caltrans and SCTA in writing of any Pre-existing Works used in connection with any Work Product produced under this Agreement and hereby grants to SCTA and Caltrans a nonexclusive, irrevocable, worldwide, perpetual, royalty-free license to utilize the Pre-existing Works in connection with the Work Product.

9.11.4c Contractors and Subconsultants: Through contract with its contractors and subconsultants, Consultant shall affirmatively bind by contract all of its contractors, subconsultants, and service vendors (hereinafter "Consultant’s Contractor/Subconsultant") providing services under this Agreement to conform to the provisions of this Agreement. In performing services under this Agreement, Consultant’s Contractor/Subconsultant shall agree to avoid designing or developing any items that infringe one or more patents or other intellectual property rights of any third party. If Consultant’s Contractor/Subconsultant becomes aware of any such possible infringement in the course of performing any Work under this Agreement, Consultant’s Contractor/Subconsultant shall immediately notify the Consultant in writing, and Consultant shall then immediately notify the SCTA and Caltrans in writing.

SCTA20019

45

9.11.5 Ownership of Data

9.11.5a Upon completion of all Work under this Agreement, all intellectual property rights, ownership, and title to all reports, documents, plans, specifications, and estimates, produced as part of this Agreement will automatically be vested in Caltrans and SCTA and no further agreement will be necessary to transfer ownership to Caltrans and SCTA. The Consultant, its contractors, and subconsultants, shall furnish SCTA and Caltrans all necessary copies of data needed to complete the review and approval process. To the extent the Consultant Services contain Preexisting Consultant Data, Consultant hereby grants to Caltrans and SCTA a non-exclusive, non-transferable, non-assignable, royalty-free license to use such Preexisting Consultant Data solely for the purpose of completing and maintaining the project.

9.11.5b It is understood and agreed that all calculations, drawings, and specifications, whether in hard copy of machine-readable form, are intended for one-time use in the Project for which this Agreement has been entered into.

9.11.5c Consultant, its contractors, and subconsultants, are not liable for claims, liabilities or losses arising out of, or connected with, the modification or misuse by Caltrans or SCTA of the machine-readable information and data provided by Consultant, its contractors, and subconsultants, under this Agreement; further, Consultant, its contractors, and subconsultants, are not liable for claims, liabilities or losses arising out of, or connected with, any use by Caltrans or SCTA of the Project documentation on other projects, for additions to this Project, or for the completion of this project by others, excepting only such use as may be authorized, in writing, by Consultant, its contractors, and subconsultants.

9.11.5d Any sub-agreement in excess of $25,000.00, entered, into as a result of this Agreement, shall contain all of the provisions of this clause.

9.12 Authority. The undersigned hereby represents and warrants that he or she has authority to execute and deliver this Agreement on behalf of Consultant.

10. Content Online Accessibility. SCTA follows the County of Sonoma’s policy that requires all documents that may be published to the Web meet accessibility standards to the greatest extent possible, and utilizing available existing technologies.

10.1 Standards. All consultants responsible for preparing content intended for use or publication on a SCTA-managed or SCTA-funded web site must comply with applicable Federal accessibility standards established by 36 C.F.R. Section 1194, pursuant to Section

SCTA20019

46

508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. § 794(d)), and the County’s Web Site Accessibility Policy located at http://webstandards.sonoma-county.org.

10.2 Certification: Consultants must complete the Document Accessibility Certification Form attached hereto as Exhibit D which shall describe how all deliverable documents were assessed for accessibility (e.g. Microsoft Word accessibility check; Adobe Acrobat accessibility check, or other commonly accepted compliance check.) 10.3 Alternate Format: When it is strictly impossible due to the unavailability of technologies required to produce an accessible document, Consultant shall identify the anticipated accessibility deficiency prior to commencement of any work to produce such deliverables. Consultant agrees to cooperate with SCTA staff in the development of alternate document formats to maximize the facilitative features of the impacted document(s), e.g. embedding the document with alt-tags that describe complex data/tables.

10.4 Noncompliant Materials; Obligation to Cure. Remediation of any materials that do not comply with County’s Web Site Accessibility Policy shall be the responsibility of Consultant. If SCTA, in its sole and absolute discretion, determines that any deliverable intended for use or publication on any SCTA-managed or SCTA-funded Web site does not comply with County Accessibility Standards, SCTA will promptly inform Consultant in writing. Upon such notice, Consultant shall, without charge to SCTA, repair or replace the non-compliant materials within such period of time as specified by SCTA in writing. If the required repair or replacement is not completed within the time specified, SCTA shall have the right to do any or all of the following, without prejudice to SCTA’s right to pursue any and all other remedies at law or in equity:

a. Cancel any delivery or task order;

b. Terminate this Agreement pursuant to the provisions of Article 4;

c. In the case of custom EIT developed by Consultant for SCTA, SCTA may have any

necessary changes or repairs performed by itself or by another contractor. In such event, contractor shall be liable for all expenses incurred by SCTA in connection with such changes or repairs; and/or

11. Demand for Assurance. Each party to this Agreement undertakes the obligation that the other's expectation of receiving due performance will not be impaired. When reasonable grounds for insecurity arise with respect to the performance of either party, the other may in writing demand adequate assurance of due performance and until such assurance is received may, if commercially reasonable, suspend any performance for which the agreed return has not been received. "Commercially reasonable" includes not only the conduct of a party with

SCTA20019

47

http://webstandards.sonoma-county.org/

respect to performance under this Agreement, but also conduct with respect to other agreements with parties to this Agreement or others. After receipt of a justified demand, failure to provide within a reasonable time, but not exceeding thirty (30) days, such assurance of due performance as is adequate under the circumstances of the particular case is a repudiation of this Agreement. Acceptance of any improper delivery, service, or payment does not prejudice the aggrieved party's right to demand adequate assurance of future performance. Nothing in this Article limits SCTA’s right to terminate this Agreement pursuant to Article 4. 12. Assignment and Delegation. Neither party hereto shall assign, delegate, sublet, or transfer any interest in or duty under this Agreement without the prior written consent of the other, and no such transfer shall be of any force or effect whatsoever unless and until the other party shall have so consented. 13. Method and Place of Giving Notice, Submitting Bills and Making Payments. All notices, bills, and payments shall be made in writing and shall be given by personal delivery or by U.S. Mail or courier service. Notices, bills, and payments shall be addressed as follows: TO: SCTA : Tanya Narath, Data Specialist Sonoma County Transportation Authority 411 King Street Santa Rosa, CA 95404 TO: CONSULTANT: Toole Design Group, LLC 8484 Georgia Ave Suite 800 Silver Spring, MD 20910 When a notice, bill or payment is given by a generally recognized overnight courier service, the notice, bill or payment shall be deemed received on the next business day. When a copy of a notice, bill or payment is sent by facsimile or email, the notice, bill or payment shall be deemed received upon transmission as long as (1) the original copy of the notice, bill or payment is promptly deposited in the U.S. mail and postmarked on the date of the facsimile or email (for a payment, on or before the due date), (2) the sender has a written confirmation of the facsimile transmission or email, and (3) the facsimile or email is transmitted before 5 p.m. (recipient’s time). In all other instances, notices, bills and payments shall be effective upon receipt by the recipient. Changes may be made in the names and addresses of the person to whom notices are to be given by giving notice pursuant to this paragraph. 14. Mandatory Organic Waste Recycling. It is understood and agreed that pursuant to Public Resources Code Sections 42649.8 et seq., if Contractor generates four (4) cubic yards or more

SCTA20019

48

of organic waste or commercial solid waste per week, the Contractor shall arrange for organic waste recycling services or commercial waste recycling services that separate/source organic waste recycling. Contractor shall provide proof of compliance, i.e. organic waste recycling services or commercial waste recycling services that separate/source organic waste recycling, upon request from the Caltrans Contract Manager. 15. Drug-Free Workplace Certification. By signing this Agreement, Consultant hereby certifies under penalty of perjury under the laws of California that Consultant will comply with the requirements of the Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1990 (Gov. Code Sections 8350 et seq.) and will provide a Drug-Free workplace by doing all of the following:

a. Publish a statement notifying employees that unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensation, possession, or use of a controlled substance is prohibited and specifying actions to be taken against employees for violations, as required by Government Code Section 8355(a).

b. Establish a Drug-Free Awareness Program as required by Government Code Section 8355{a){2)) to inform employees about all of the following: 1. The dangers of drug abuse in the workplace. 2. The person's or organization's policy of maintaining a Drug-Free

workplace; 3. Any available counseling, rehabilitation, and employee assistance

programs. 4. Penalties that may be imposed upon employees for drug abuse

violations. c. Provide, as required by Government Code Section 8355{a){3), that every

employee who works on the proposed contract or grant: 1. Will receive a copy of the company's Drug-Free policy statement. 2. Will agree to abide by the terms of the company's statement as a

condition of employment on the contract or grant. d. Failure to comply with these requirements may result in suspension of

payments under this Agreement or termination of this Agreement or both, and Consultant may be ineligible for the award of any future state contracts if CALTRANS or SCTA determines that any of the following has occurred: (1) Consultant has made a false certification or, {2) Consultant violates the certification by failing to carry out the requirements as noted above.

e. The above requirements shall be passed through to any subconsultants or contractors employed by Consultant to provide work under this Agreement.

16. Miscellaneous Provisions.

SCTA20019

49

16.1 No Waiver of Breach. The waiver by SCTA of any breach of any term or promise contained in this Agreement shall not be deemed to be a waiver of such term or provision or any subsequent breach of the same or any other term or promise contained in this Agreement. 16.2 Construction. To the fullest extent allowed by law, the provisions of this Agreement shall be construed and given effect in a manner that avoids any violation of statute, ordinance, regulation, or law. The parties covenant and agree that in the event that any provision of this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void, or unenforceable, the remainder of the provisions hereof shall remain in full force and effect and shall in no way be affected, impaired, or invalidated thereby. Consultant and SCTA acknowledge that they have each contributed to the making of this Agreement and that, in the event of a dispute over the interpretation of this Agreement, the language of the Agreement will not be construed against one party in favor of the other. Consultant and SCTA acknowledge that they have each had an adequate opportunity to consult with counsel in the negotiation and preparation of this Agreement. 16.3 Consent. Wherever in this Agreement the consent or approval of one party is required to an act of the other party, such consent or approval shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. 16.4 No Third Party Beneficiaries. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall be construed to create and the parties do not intend to create any rights in third parties.

16.5 Applicable Law and Forum. This Agreement shall be construed and interpreted according to the substantive law of California, regardless of the law of conflicts to the contrary in any jurisdiction. Any action to enforce the terms of this Agreement or for the breach thereof shall be brought and tried in Santa Rosa or the forum nearest to the city of Santa Rosa, in the County of Sonoma. 16.6 Captions. The captions in this Agreement are solely for convenience of reference. They are not a part of this Agreement and shall have no effect on its construction or interpretation. 16.7 Merger. This writing is intended both as the final expression of the Agreement between the parties hereto with respect to the included terms and as a complete and exclusive statement of the terms of the Agreement, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1856. No modification of this Agreement shall be effective unless and until such modification is evidenced by a writing signed by both parties.

SCTA20019

50

16.8. Survival of Terms. All express representations, waivers, indemnifications, and limitations of liability included in this Agreement will survive its completion or termination for any reason.

16.9 Time of Essence. Time is and shall be of the essence of this Agreement and every provision hereof.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the Effective Date.

CONSULTANT: _______________

Toole Design Group, llc_________

By: ________________________

Name: RJ Eldridge__________

Title: Executive Vice president___

Date:

__3/30/2020________________

SCTA: SONOMA COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY

CERTIFICATES OF INSURANCE ON FILE WITH AND APPROVED AS TO SUBSTANCE FOR SCTA:

By: ___________________________ Executive Director

Date: ________________

APPROVED AS TO FORM FOR SCTA:

By: ______________________________ County Counsel

Date: _______________

SCTA20019

51

EXHIBIT A: SCOPE OF WORK PROJECT OBJECTIVE

SCTA wishes to develop a robust data framework and data dashboard to support the Vision Zero Sonoma County Project (VZ-SC Project). The data framework will include injury and crash data from a variety of sources. It will also incorporate demographic, transportation, and other relevant data to support the development of the Vision Zero Action Plan for Sonoma County. The Vision Zero Advisory Committee (VZAC), policy makers, and members of the public will access data from the framework in an online data dashboard. TASK 1: IDENTIFY AND DEVELOP CONTENT

Build a strong foundation of relevant, accurate and timely injury, crash, and other supporting data for the unincorporated areas and the nine cities in Sonoma County. Identify gaps in data and define a plan to resolve. Proposed tasks for identifying and developing content:

• Meet with agency staff to finalize project scope and solidify a schedule for completing the project. Schedule must align with overall VZ-SC Project timeline.

• Work with agency staff and VZAC to gather feedback on data and analysis needs. • Gather existing available data for Sonoma County including injury, crash,

transportation, infrastructure gaps, and demographics. Review with agency staff and VZAC to identify data gaps.

• Work with agency staff to determine how to incorporate information previously gathered for Sonoma County Community Based Transportation plans to represent community needs and concerns.

• Work with agency staff to identify data that may require data sharing agreements (e.g. aggregate data on injuries from local hospitals).

• Work with agency staff and data providers to identify sensitive data and develop methods to share this data securely or apply data scrubbing techniques to produce data products that could be shared with wider audiences.

• Identify and recommend data sources to address data gaps and planning support needs. Review with agency staff and VZAC and incorporate feedback into final data plan. Planning support needs include the ability to:

o Conduct safety analysis o Identify High Injury Network (HIN) o Identify actions that can reduce crashes o Develop crash reduction tool using actions identified in last task along with

relevant research and data on effectiveness

SCTA20019

52

TASK 2: DESIGN DATA DASHBOARD

Design a data dashboard that allows for sharing of crash and injury data in forms that are understandable to different audiences (e.g. summary data for community members; ability to drill down to details for staff and policy makers). Automate data interfaces to minimize need for manual data loads. Include capability to display information on Vision Zero strategies and progress. Proposed tasks for designing data dashboard:

• Work with agency staff to define requirements for data dashboard. o Technical o User interface o Reporting

• Develop proposed technical architecture for data dashboard. Review with agency staff and incorporate feedback into final design.

o Back end database o Data interfaces / APIs o Web interface

• Recommend software solution options to implement technical architecture in alignment with VZ-SC Project budget. Review options with agency staff and VZAC and incorporate feedback into final software solution recommendation.

TASK 3: DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT DATA DASHBOARD

Develop, test, and implement data dashboard. Proposed tasks for developing and implementing data dashboard:

• Work with agency staff to procure and configure selected software solution. • Develop technical documentation for data dashboard solution. Review with agency

staff and revise with feedback. • Develop user documentation for data dashboard solution. Review with agency staff

and VZAC and revise with feedback. • Develop ongoing data maintenance solution and associated documentation • Work with agency staff to develop training and ongoing user support plans.

SCTA20019

53

EXHIBIT B: PROJECT BUDGET

PROJECT ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED HOURS

STAFF RATES ESTIMATED COST

Task 1 - Identify and Develop Content 1.1 Project Kickoff 16 A, B, C, D $2,640 1.2 Data Gathering and

Assessment 58 B, C, E, F $6,264

1.3 Developing the Data Plan 50 A, B, C, E, F $6,050 Subtotal: 124 A, B, C, D, E, F $14,954 Task 2 - Design Data Dashboard 2.1 User Interface 96 A, B, C, D, E $10,674 2.2 Develop Technical

Architecture 96 B, D, E $10,146

Subtotal: 192 $20,820 Task 3 - Develop and Implement Data Dashboard 3.1 Develop Data Dashboard 130 A, B, D, E $14,170 3.2 Develop Technical

Presentation 72 A, B, D, F $8,948

Subtotal: 202 $23,118 Labor Subtotal: $58,892

Travel Expenses: $700 Other Direct

Expenses: $300

Total Costs: $59,892

RATE TABLE Letter Rate Role Staff

A $251 Principle-in-Charge Brooke DuBose, AICP B $123 Project Manager Laura Krull C $160 Task 1 Lead Frank Proulx, PhD D $126 Task 2/3 Lead Tom Lin E $86 GIS Specialist Staff F $110 Planner Staff

Letters listed in budget above correspond with rates listed in rate table

SCTA20019

54

EXHIBIT C: INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS INSURANCE: With respect to the performance of work hereunder, CONSULTANT shall maintain, and shall require all of its subcontractors, sub-consultants, and other agents to maintain, insurance as described below: 1. Workers’ Compensation Insurance: Workers’ compensation insurance with statutory limits as required by the Labor Code of the State of California. Said policy shall be endorsed with the following specific language:

(1) “This policy shall not be canceled or materially changed without first giving thirty (30) days’ written notice to the Sonoma County Transportation Authority.”

2. General Liability Insurance: Commercial general liability insurance covering bodily injury and property damage using an occurrence policy form, in an amount no less than one million dollars ($1,000,000.00) combined single limit for each occurrence. Said commercial general liability insurance policy shall either be endorsed with the following specific language or contain equivalent language in the policy: (1) “Sonoma County Transportation Authority, its officers and employees, is named as additional insured for all liability arising out of the operations by or on behalf of the named insured in the performance of this Agreement.” (2) “The inclusion of more than one insured shall not operate to impair the rights of one insured against another insured, and the coverage afforded shall apply as though separate policies had been issued to each insured, but the inclusion of more than one insured shall not operate to increase the limits of the company’s liability.” (3) “The insurance provided herein is primary coverage to the Sonoma County Transportation Authority with respect to any insurance or self-insurance programs maintained by SCTA.” (4) “This policy shall not be canceled or materially changed without first giving thirty (30) days’ written notice to the Sonoma County Transportation Authority.” 3. Automobile Insurance: Automobile liability insurance covering bodily injury and property damage in an amount no less than one million dollars ($1,000,000.00) combined single limit for each occurrence. Said insurance shall include coverage for owned, hired, and non-owned vehicles. Said policy shall be endorsed with the following language:

SCTA20019

55

(1) “This policy shall not be canceled or materially changed without first giving thirty (30) days’ written notice to the Sonoma County Transportation Authority.” 4. Professional liability insurance: Professional liability insurance for all negligent and professional activities of CONSULTANT arising out of or in connection with this Agreement in an amount no less than one million ($1,000,000) combined single limit for each occurrence. Said policy shall be endorsed with the following specific language or contain equivalent language in the policy: (1) “This policy shall not be canceled or materially changed without first giving thirty (30) days’ written notice to the Sonoma County Transportation Authority.” 5. Documentation: The following documentation shall be submitted to SCTA: 1) Properly executed Certificates of Insurance clearly evidencing all coverages, limits, and endorsements required above. Said Certificates shall be submitted prior to SCTA’s execution of this Agreement.

(2) Signed copies of the specified endorsements for each policy. Said endorsement copies shall be submitted within thirty (30) days of SCTA’s execution of this Agreement.

(3) Upon SCTA’s written request, certified copies of insurance policies. Said policy copies shall be submitted within thirty (30) days of SCTA’s request.

6. Policy Obligations: CONSULTANT’s indemnification and other obligations shall not be limited by the foregoing insurance requirements. 7. Material Breach: If CONSULTANT, for any reason, fails to maintain the insurance coverage required by this Agreement, the same shall be deemed a material breach of contract. SCTA, in its sole discretion, may terminate this Agreement pursuant to the provisions of paragraph 4.2 and obtain damages from CONSULTANT resulting from said breach. Alternatively, SCTA may purchase the required insurance coverage, and without further notice to CONSULTANT, SCTA may deduct from sums due to CONSULTANT any premium costs advanced by SCTA for such insurance. These remedies shall be in addition to any other remedies available to SCTA.

SCTA20019

56

County of Sonoma Website Accessibility Questionnaire

County of Sonoma Policy requires that all County websites and web-based applications be accessible to staff and members of the public with disabilities.

For more information regarding the details of this policy, please see 9-3 Web Accessibility Policy, published in the County of Sonoma’s Administrative Policy Manual (http://sonomacounty.ca.gov/CAO/Administrative-Policies/9-3-Website-Accessibility-Policy/).

Please review the following questions and note your responses in the spaces provided.

1. Rate the overall level of accessibility compliance of your website or web-basedapplication:

a. Fully compliant – All content and functionality meet or exceed the criteriadelineated in Section 508 and WCAG 2.0 Level AA.

b. Partially compliant – Some content or functionality meet or exceed the criteriadelineated in Section 508 and WCAG 2.0 Level AA.

c. Not compliant.

Fully Compliant Response(s): a

Response and/or Comments:

1 | P a g e

EXHIBIT D: DOCUMENT ACCESSIBILITY CERTIFICATION FORMSCTA20019

57

http://sonomacounty.ca.gov/CAO/Administrative-Policies/9-3-Website-Accessibility-Policy/

2. Does each non-text element have a meaningful "alt tag" (alternative text attribute) or include a meaningful text description adjacent to each non-text element?

a. Fully compliant – Yes.

b. Partially compliant – Yes and no. Non-text elements exist but only some have meaningful alt tags or adjacent meaningful text description.

c. Not compliant – No, none of the non-text elements have meaningful alt tags or adjacent meaningful text descriptions.

d. N/A. This site does not contain non-text elements.

Fully Compliant Response(s): a, d


3. Has transcription and captioning been provided for all audio and video content? Is the captioning synchronized with the video content?

a. Fully compliant – Yes. Synchronized captions is provided for all video content. Transcription is provided for all audio content.

b. Not compliant – No, Audio and/or video content exists but associated captioning and transcriptions have not been provided.

c. N/A. There is no audio or video content in the site.



2 | P a g e

SCTA20019

58

4. Does the audio and video content include user controls? Are those controls available to keyboard users and assistive technology?

a. Fully compliant – Yes, user controls are provided with audio and video content and those controls are available to keyboard users and assistive technology.

b. Not compliant – No. User controls are not provided or those controls are not available to keyboard users and assistive technology.

c. N/A. There is no audio or video content in the site.

Fully Compliant Response(s): a, c


5. If any audio plays automatically for more than 3 seconds, is there a mechanism available to pause or stop the audio, or to control volume independently from the overall system volume?

a. Fully compliant – Yes, there is audio that automatically plays for more than 3 seconds and there is a mechanism available to control the volume of the audio without affecting the overall system volume.

b. Fully compliant – Yes, there is audio that automatically plays for more than 3 seconds and there is a mechanism available to pause or stop the audio.

c. Not compliant – No. There is audio that automatically plays for more than 3 seconds but there is no mechanism to stop, pause or alter the volume without affecting the system volume.

d. N/A. There is no automatic audio or the automatic audio plays for less than 3 seconds.

Fully Compliant Response(s): a, b, d


3 | P a g e

SCTA20019

59

6. Is all content and functionality perceivable, understandable and operable without the need to see color? Does the color of all text and controls have sufficient contrast with the background?

a. Fully compliant – Yes, any use of color as to imply meaning or convey information is understandable without color and all adjacent colors used for meaningful content meet or exceed the minimum contrast ratio of 4.5:1.

b. Not compliant – No, the site does not use color appropriately.



7. Is all content and functionality perceivable, operable, and understandable without the use of cascading style sheets (e.g. CSS disabled, not supported by the browser, etc.)? Is the un-styled content presented in the same relative order as styled content?

a. Fully compliant – Yes. All content and functionality is perceivable, operable, understandable, and presented in the same relative order with our without the use of style sheets.

b. Not compliant – No. Some content or functionality is not perceivable, operable, or understandable without style sheets or the relative order of the content is different with and without the use of style sheets.

c. N/A. The site does not use cascading style sheets (CSS).



4 | P a g e

SCTA20019

60

8. If cascading style sheets (CSS) are used, is the site designed so it will not interfere with style sheets preferences set by user in the browser?

a. Fully compliant – Yes, the site design does not interfere with style sheets set user preference in the browser.

b. No, the site design affects or interferes with user preferences set in the browser.

c. N/A. The page does not use cascading style sheets (CSS).



9. If any page includes server-side image maps, are accompanying text links provided for all links within the server-side image maps?

a. Fully compliant – Yes, each link in the server-side image maps is accompanied by a separate text link.

b. Partially compliant – Yes and no. Only some of the links from the server-side image maps are accompanied by separate text links.

c. Not compliant – No, separate text links are not provided for any link from server-side image maps.

d. N/A. The site does not include any server-side image maps.



5 | P a g e

SCTA20019

61

10. If the site includes one or more client-side image maps, does each map region have a meaningful "alt tag" (alternative text attribute) or does the page include a meaningful description of the non-text element in adjacent text?


b. Partially compliant – Yes and no. Only some of the non-text elements associated with the image map(s) have meaningful alt tags or text descriptions.

c. Not compliant – No. None of the non-text elements associated with the image map(s) have meaningful alt tags or text descriptions.

d. N/A. The page does not include any client-side image maps.



11. If the site uses tables, are the tables reserved for data presentation? Are the row the column headers perceivable and operable?

a. Fully compliant – Yes, all tables are used for data presentation only (not for display or layout) and have perceivable row and/or column headers. All row and column headers are coded as table headers and have been associated to the appropriate scope.

b. Not compliant – Some tables are for display or layout, are not coded properly, or are not associated to the appropriate scope.

c. N/A. The site does not use tables.



6 | P a g e

SCTA20019

62

12. Does the site include content that may cause the screen to flicker with a frequency greater than 2 Hz and lower than 55 Hz?

a. Not compliant – Yes.

b. Fully compliant – No.

Fully Compliant Response(s): b


13. If the site uses scripts that affect content displayed to the user, is there equivalent text provided that is accessible to a screen reader?

a. Fully compliant – Yes. The site contains scripts that affect content displayed to the user, but the page or script contains equivalent text that is accessible to assistive technology.

b. Not compliant – No. While the site contains scripts that affect content displayed to the user, neither the page nor the script contains equivalent text that is accessible to assistive technology.

c. N/A. The site does not use scripts that affect content displayed to the user.



7 | P a g e

SCTA20019

63

14. Is every web page capable of full functionality using only the keyboard?

a. Fully compliant – Yes, all functionality of the content is perceivable and operable through a keyboard interface. When focus is shifted to a component using the keyboard, the shift in focus is perceivable and the keyboard interface can be used to shift focus away from that component.

b. Not compliant – No, some functionality is not perceivable or operable using a keyboard interface alone.



15. Is all content designed for maximum compatibility with the current and future user agents, e.g. assistive technologies?

a. Fully compliant – Yes, content is implemented using markup languages, all content is contained within appropriate landmarks or regions, elements have complete start and end tags, elements are nested according to their specifications, elements do not contain duplicate attributes, ARIA markup not been used when standard markup would suffice, any IDs used are unique, except where specifications allow these features. For all user interface components (including but not limited to: form elements, links and components generated by scripts), the name and role can be programmatically determined, states, properties, and values that can be set by the user can be programmatically set, and notification of changes to these items is available to user agents, including assistive technologies.

b. Not compliant – No, some content or interface components do not comply with this guideline.



8 | P a g e

SCTA20019

64

16. If the site includes links to PDF (portable document format) or other files, is the content in those files accessible to those using assistive technology?

a. Fully compliant – Yes. While the site includes links to files, the structure and tags of each document has been remediated and verified as accessible.

b. Not compliant – No, the site includes links to files that have not been verified as accessible.

c. N/A. The site does not include any links to PDF or other files.



17. If the site includes electronic forms that are designed for completion online, does each form permit users of assistive technology to access the information, field elements, and functionality required for completion and submission of the form including all directions and cues?

a. Fully compliant – Yes, the site contains forms designed to be completed online. All forms comply with all accessibility requirements.

b. Not compliant – No. The site contains one or more forms designed to be completed online, but at least one of these forms is inaccessible to people using assistive technologies in at least one respect.

c. N/A. The site does not contain any forms designed to be completed online.



9 | P a g e

SCTA20019

65

18. If the site includes forms or functionality that requires a timed response, has a method been provided that allows the user to extend the time limit or pause the timer and is that method available to assistive technology?

a. Fully compliant – Yes, the site contains forms or functionality that requires timed responses. Methods have been implemented to allow time extension or delay and those methods are accessible.

b. Not compliant – No, the site contains forms or functionality that requires timed responses. However, methods have not been implemented to allow time extension or delay or those methods are accessible.

c. N/A. The site does not contain any forms designed to be completed online.



19. If data validation occurs, are the errors and corrective actions perceivable? Are these error messages available to assistive technology?

a. Fully compliant – Yes. All error messages fully describe the error and corrective action and these messages are available to assistive technology.

b. Not compliant – No. At least one error message does not fully describe the error or corrective action and/or is not available to assistive technology.

c. N/A. The site does not include data validation routines.



10 | P a g e

SCTA20019

66

20. If any page includes redundant navigational links to other web pages within the same website, is there a link allowing users to skip over those links? Is this “skip to content” link available to assistive technology?


b. Not compliant – No.

c. N/A. The page does not contain any redundant navigational links.



21. Taking into consideration your responses to the previous questions, if the site likely contains barriers to people with disabilities, do you have an alternative accessible version of the content that contains the equivalent information?


b. Not compliant – No. While the site appears to contain barriers to access for people using assistive technologies, we do not have an alternate accessible version of equivalent content.

c. N/A. The site does not appear to contain any barriers for people using assistive technologies.



11 | P a g e

SCTA20019

67

22. Testing the website or application for accessibility to persons with disabilities and compatibility with assistive technology:

a. Describe the testing methods and tools used.

b. Describe the results of these tests.

23. Describe the accessibility successes and challenges identified during the site evaluation and any plans for addressing deficits:

Questionnaire completed by:

Date:

Applicable Website(s) or application(s):

12 | P a g e

SCTA20019

68


Staff Report

Issue

Shall the Sonoma County Transportation Authority (SCTA) approve the Coordinated Claim for Fiscal Year 2020-2021 (FY20/21) related to State and local transit funding?

Recommendation

Staff recommends that the Board of Directors review and approve the attached FY20/21 Coordinated Claim.


The Transit Technical Advisory Committee (TTAC) recommended SCTA approval of the FY20/21 Coordinated Claim at the March 11, 2020, meeting.

The FY20/21 Coordinated Claim was included in the March 17, 2020, agenda packet for the Transit Paratransit Coordinating Committee (TPCC); however, this meeting was canceled due to the Local Public Health Emergency declared on March 2, in response to the Coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak.


None.

Executive Summary

Each year SCTA develops and adopts a Coordinated Claim for Transportation Development Act (TDA), State Transit Assistance (STA), and Measure M funds. These funds are the primary source of operating revenue for all of Sonoma County’s transit operators. The Coordinated Claim documents inter-jurisdictional funding agreements for transit services in Sonoma County as they relate to the distribution of these fund sources.

Funding in the Coordinated Claim is calculated based on the latest fund estimates prepared by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and the County Auditor’s office, and on previously established agreements for allocating funding among the transit operators.

Due to loss of ridership and sales tax revenues during the Covid-19 pandemic, transit operators have been advised to reduce their claims by at least 10 to 15 percent. To reduce the need for adjustments of funding shared between multiple operators, MTC will hold all County Block Grant allocations until

To: SCTA/RCPA Board of Directors Meeting Date: 4/13/20 From: Dana Turrey, Senior Transportation Planner Item Number: 4.1.1 Subject: FY20/21 Coordinated Claim for Transit Funding

Consent Item: ☐ Regular Item: ☒ Action Item: ☒ Report: ☐

69

tel:707.565.5373

http://scta.ca.gov/

http://rcpa.ca.gov/

late fall to allow for final FY19/20 revenue and a fall update to estimated FY20/21 revenue. MTC is working with state and federal partners to get financial relief for operators for lost revenues during this emergency. Staff will provide an update at the Board meeting.


The proposed FY20/21 Coordinated Claim is consistent with the following policies:

• SCTA Resolution 2019-003 adopting the County Block Grant formula for STA Population-Based funds for five years

• SCTA Resolution 2001-008 dedicating TDA funds to transit

• MTC Resolution 2858 (1996) dedicating 25 percent of TDA funding to Golden Gate Transit




The funding source(s) to be used are: TDA, STA, and Measure M

Background

To coordinate the distribution of TDA, STA, and Measure M funds among transit operators with service areas that cross jurisdictional boundaries within Sonoma County, the SCTA adopts a Coordinated Claim by May 1 each year as required by the MTC. The revenue streams from all of these sources are affected by changes in the economy, population, legislation and programs; thus, operators must be prepared for some instability in funding. The Coordinated Claim documents existing inter-jurisdictional funding agreements for transit services in Sonoma County as they relate to the distribution of TDA, STA and Measure M funds.

While the fund estimates are subject to fluctuation over the course of the fiscal year, the Coordinated Claim serves as the basis from which transit operators base their annual TDA & STA funding requests to MTC. Transit operators generally make their annual claims to MTC in May and June, so that funding is received prior to the start of the new fiscal year.

Transportation Development Act (TDA) revenues are derived from sales tax receipts (0.25% of the state sales tax).

TDA funds in the Coordinated Claim are first divided among the jurisdictions by share of the countywide population, which fluctuates over time. As documented in the Coordinated Claim, most jurisdictions provide TDA funding to Sonoma County Transit for a variety of contract transit services.

Based on a contribution formula established in FY 96/97, all Sonoma County entities contribute to Golden Gate Transit (GGT). Collectively, as required by MTC resolution 2858, these contributions provide an amount equal to 25% of Sonoma County’s fiscal year TDA funds.

70

TDA funds can be used for non-transit purposes if MTC makes a finding that “all transit needs which are reasonable to meet are being met” in those jurisdictions claiming funds for other purposes. In 2001, SCTA recognized the increased need for paratransit services and continuing unmet transit needs and determined that use of TDA funds for non-transit purposes be phased out by 2002 (Resolution 2001-008).

In order to fund complementary paratransit services required by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, each entity that contracts with Sonoma County Transit contributes an additional 20% of their fixed-route contributions to support ADA required paratransit services.

State Transit Assistance (STA) funds are derived from a portion of sales tax revenues collected from the sale of vehicle fuels. They are allocated from two subcategories:

1. Population-Based Funds are distributed through a County Block Grant for local transit.

2. Revenue-Based Funds are allocated to operators eligible for TDA Article 4: Sonoma County Transit, Santa Rosa CityBus, Petaluma Transit, Golden Gate Transit, and SMART.

STA County Block Grant

In FY18/19, under the new MTC policy framework, SCTA became responsible for coordinating the development of an STA Population-Based distribution program to STA-eligible operators in Sonoma County through a County Block Grant. This new policy framework coincided with the augmentation of the STA program through Senate Bill 1 (SB-1), the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017, which increased the diesel sales tax. The STA County Block Grant is accompanied by several policy conditions, largely aimed at improving transit coordination and efficiency while stabilizing funding.

In FY19/20, the SCTA adopted the following framework for distribution of the STA population-based funding and agreed to maintain the framework for a period of five years:

1) An off the top portion of the funding is distributed to SMART based on their combined share of transit ridership and revenue hours (hours of operation), weighting each factor at 50%. In the proposed FY20/21 Coordinated Claim, this portion makes up 10.53% of the total STA population-based funds.

2) Eighty percent of the funding is distributed among Petaluma Transit, Santa Rosa CityBus, and Sonoma County Transit based on their share of countywide population.

3) The remaining amount is distributed among Petaluma Transit, Santa Rosa CityBus, and Sonoma County Transit based on their combined share of local bus transit ridership and hours of operation (revenue hours), weighting each factor at 50%. In the proposed FY 20/21 Coordinated Claim, this portion makes up 9.47% of the total STA population-based funds.

Population share, transit ridership, and revenue hours are updated with each Coordinated Claim using the most current and consistent data sources.

71

Measure M funds are local revenues also derived from sales tax receipts (0.25%) with bus transit receiving 10% and Sonoma SMART receiving 5% of the incoming revenue. Measure M is administered by SCTA. Local bus operators generally use Measure M funds to support fixed-route and paratransit. SMART’s portion of Measure M is for capital costs in development of the rail system.


Attached: FY20/21 Coordinated Claims for Transit Funding

72

Sonoma County Coordinated Claim FY 2019-20 Summary

Sonoma County

TDA Coordinated ClaimFiscal Year 2020-21Updated: 03-02-2020

FY 2020-21 TDA / STA / Measure M - Fund Summary 1.6

Forecasted Revenue: $26,300,000 100.00% $6,053,193 $3,945,000 100.00% $36,298,193 100.00%

MTC Contributions: 920,500 3.50% ---- ----- 920,500 2.54%County Administration (Auditor) 45,000 0.17% ---- ----- 45,000 0.12%Article 3 - Bicycle & Pedestrian Projects 506,690 1.93% ---- ----- 506,690 1.40%

FY 2020-21 Funds to Transit Operators $24,827,810 94.40% $6,053,193 100.00% $3,945,000 100.00% $34,826,003 95.94%

Petaluma Transit 1,913,783 7.71% 677,612 11.19% 326,978 8.29% 2,918,373 8.38%Santa Rosa CityBus 6,684,360 26.92% 2,048,889 33.85% 922,542 23.39% 9,655,792 27.73%Sonoma County Transit 10,062,207 40.53% 2,829,278 46.74% 1,380,480 34.99% 14,271,966 40.98%Golden Gate Transit 6,167,460 24.84% ----- ---- ---- ---- 6,167,460 17.71%SMART ---- ---- 497,413 8.22% 1,315,000 33.33% 1,812,413 5.20%

Totals by Funding Source $24,827,810 100.00% $6,053,193 100.00% $3,945,000 100.00% $34,826,003 100.00%% by Funding Source 71.29% 17.38% 11.33% 100.00%

FY 2021 TDA, STA & Measure M Summary

TDA Total TDA / STA / MEASURE MMEASURE M

TPCC Draft - 03-11-2020

STA Block-Grant

73

Sonoma County TDA Coordinated Claim Page 1 of 4

Sonoma County

TDA Coordinated ClaimFiscal Year 2020-21

I. TDA Funds Available 1.6

SCTA Adopted Coordinated Adopted FY 2020 TDA Estimate: $26,800,000

Claim Distribution Revised FY 2020 TDA Estimate (1-2020): $25,500,000FY 2020-21 FY 2019-20 Auditor's FY 2021 Estimate: $26,300,000

TDA Forecast $26,300,000 $26,800,000

Less: MTC Administration 131,500 134,000 % Change- FY 2020 Adopted EstimateMTC Planning 789,000 804,000 vs. FY 2021 Auditor's Estimate: -1.87%County Administration 45,000 45,000

Subtotal: 25,334,500 25,817,000Less: Article 3 Pedestrian/Bicycle Funding (2.0%) 506,690 516,340

Total: Article 4 and 8 available $24,827,810 $25,300,660

A. Distribution by Apportionment Area

FY 2020-21 FY 2019-20Area Population* Percent Apportionment Apportionment Difference

Cloverdale 9,257 1.8489% $459,042 $459,133 ($91)Cotati 7,919 1.5817% 392,693 387,855 4,838Healdsburg 12,501 2.4968% 619,908 606,262 13,646Petaluma 62,247 12.4326% 3,086,746 3,152,102 (65,356)Rohnert Park 43,339 8.6561% 2,149,124 2,191,512 (42,388)Santa Rosa 175,625 35.0776% 8,709,011 8,971,939 (262,928)Sebastopol 7,885 1.5749% 391,007 391,374 (367)Sonoma 11,556 2.3081% 573,047 572,534 513Windsor 28,565 5.7053% 1,416,501 1,410,474 6,027County 141,781 28.3180% 7,030,732 7,157,475 (126,743) Total 500,675 100.0000% $24,827,810 $25,300,660 -$472,850

* California Department of Finance - January 1, 2019 - Based on published population by entity - Table E-1.

B. Funds allocated to Golden Gate Transit for regional transit services:

FY 2020-21 FY 2019-20Area Distribution Allocation Allocation

Cloverdale 10.17992% $46,730 $47,207Cotati 29.05000% 114,077 112,199Healdsburg 10.17992% 63,106 62,334Petaluma 29.05000% 896,700 911,840Rohnert Park 29.05000% 624,320 633,961Santa Rosa 25.00000% 2,177,253 2,242,985Sebastopol 10.17992% 39,804 40,240Sonoma 10.17992% 58,336 58,866Windsor 10.17992% 144,199 145,020County 29.05000% 2,042,428 2,070,514

Total $6,206,953 $6,325,16625.00% 25.00%

of County TDA

Transit TAC Draft - 02-05-2020FY 2021

TDAUpdated: 03-02-2020

II. Distribution of TDA Funds

74


Sonoma County


1.6

C. Contribution to Sonoma County Transit for intercity services between Petaluma and Santa Rosa: (Sonoma County Transit Routes 44 & 48)

FY 2020-21Percent of Fixed-Route Paratransit

Area Route Budget* Allocation Allocation**

Petaluma 14.64% $230,220 (1) $46,044

* Cotati and Rohnert Park contributions to Sonoma County Transit Routes 44 & 48 are included in Section D. (1) - includes contribution for maintenance of the ** Assumes 20% of fixed-route contribution for ADA complementary paratransit services. Petaluma Transit Mall.

FY 2019-20 FY 2020-21Total 80% 20% Percent Total 80% 20%

Area Contribution Fixed Route Paratransit of TDA Contribution Fixed Route Paratransit

Cotati $220,294 $176,235 $44,059 Remainder $224,289.00 $179,431.20 $44,857.80Sebastopol 172,427 137,942 34,485 Remainder 175,838 140,670 35,168Healdsburg 341,654 273,323 68,331 Remainder* 358,310 286,648 71,662Cloverdale 282,360 225,888 56,472 Remainder* 285,168 228,134 57,034Windsor 903,966 723,173 180,793 Remainder 917,575 734,060 183,515Rohnert Park 609,362 487,490 121,872 Remainder 594,345 475,476 118,869Sonoma 250,467 200,374 50,093 Remainder 256,432 205,146 51,286

Total $2,780,530 $2,224,424 $556,106 $2,811,957 $2,249,566 $562,391

E. Other contract services between apportionment areas:

FY 2020-21 Claiming FY 2019-20Area Contribution Agency Purpose Contribution

Cloverdale Total FR * PT $127,144 County $129,567Cloverdale* 101,715 County Local Route 68 103,654Cloverdale** 25,429 County Local Paratransit Contribution** 25,913

CountyCounty 113,109 Santa Rosa Support for Santa Rosa Transit Mall Operations 100,866

Golden Gate TransitGolden Gate Transit 39,493 Santa Rosa Support for Santa Rosa Transit Mall Operations 37,722

Cotati Total FR * PT 54,327 County 55,362Cotati* 43,461 County Local Routes 10 & 11 44,290Cotati** 10,865 County Local Paratransit Contribution** 11,072

Healdsburg 198,491 County 202,274Healdsburg* 158,793 County Local Route 67 161,819Healdsburg** 39,698 County Local Paratransit Contribution** 40,455

Rohnert Park FR & PT Total 930,458 County 948,189Rohnert Park* 744,366 County Local Routes 10,11,12,14 758,551Rohnert Park** 186,092 County Local Paratransit Contribution** 189,638

Sebastopol FR & PT Total 175,364 County 178,706Sebastopol* 140,291 County Local Route 24 142,965Sebastopol** 35,073 County Local Paratransit Contribution** 35,741

Sonoma FR & PT Total 258,279 County 263,201Sonoma* 206,623 County Local Routes 32 & 34 210,561Sonoma** 51,656 County Local Paratransit Contribution** 52,640

Windsor FR & PT Total 354,727 County 361,487Windsor* 283,782 County Local Route 66 *** 289,190Windsor** 70,945 County Local Paratransit Contribution** 72,297

* Contributions assume a -1.87% change over FY 2019-20 (from page 1).** Assumes 20% of fixed-route contribution for ADA complementary paratransit services.*** Includes contribution for maintenance of the Windsor Intermodal Facility.

Updated: 03-02-2020

FY 2021 TDA

D. Funds allocated to support intercity Sonoma County Transit/Paratransit services:

Transit TAC Draft - 02-05-2020

75


Sonoma County


1.6

F. Paratransit Contributions

See paratransit contributions detailed in Section II, C,D,E and summarized in Section III column F.

Prior-Year Revenue Adjustment*

*Prior year revenue adjustments are reflected in "Prior Year TDA Funds Available" on page 4. Balances are in accordance withMTC's Regional Fund Estimate dated February 26, 2020.

IV. Distribution of TDA Article 3 Pedestrian/Bicycle FundsFY 2020-21

Area Population Apportionment Cloverdale 1.8489% $9,368Cotati 1.5817% 8,014Healdsburg 2.4968% 12,651Petaluma 12.4326% 62,995Rohnert Park 8.6561% 43,860Santa Rosa 35.0776% 177,735Sebastopol 1.5749% 7,980Sonoma 2.3081% 11,695Windsor 5.7053% 28,908County 28.3180% 143,484

Total 100.0000% $506,690

Article 3 Summary

Projected FY 2020-21 Apportionment $506,690

- Other

FY 2020-21 Article 3 Funds Available for Distribution 506,690

Projected Prior-Year Fund Balance* 1,419,084

Total Article 3 Funds Available $1,925,774

* Per MTC Regional Fund Estimate 02-26-2020. Article 3 claimants should confirm their prior-year balance with SCTA prior to submitting a claim to MTC.

Transit TAC Draft - 02-05-2020FY 2021

TDAUpdated: 03-02-2020

76


Sonoma County


A. B. C/D. E. +/- F. Projected Projected ProjectedFY 2020-21 FY 2020-21 FY 2020-21 FY 2020-21 FY 2020-21 FY 2020-21 Prior-Year TDA Total TDA

TDA Contributions Contributions Contract Contributions to TDA Funds FundsAgency Apportionment to GGT to SCT Services SC Paratransit Entitlement Available* Available

Cloverdale $459,042 ($46,730) ($228,134) ($101,715) ($82,462) $0 $0 $0Cotati 392,693 (114,077) (179,431) (43,461) (55,723) 0 0 0 Healdsburg 619,908 (63,106) (286,648) (158,793) (111,360) 0 0 0Petaluma 3,086,746 (896,700) (230,220) ---- (46,044) 1,913,783 1,065,240 2,979,023Rohnert Park 2,149,124 (624,320) (475,476) (744,366) (304,961) 0 0 0Santa Rosa 8,709,011 (2,177,253) ---- 152,602 ---- 6,684,360 1,590,769 8,275,129Sebastopol 391,007 (39,804) (140,670) (140,291) (70,240) 0 0 0Sonoma 573,047 (58,336) (205,146) (206,623) (102,942) 0 0 0Windsor 1,416,501 (144,199) (734,060) (283,782) (254,460) 0 0 0County 7,030,732 (2,042,428) 2,479,785 1,565,924 1,028,194 10,062,207 4,377,214 14,439,421GGT ---- 6,206,953 -- (39,493) -- 6,167,460 (273,498) 5,893,962

Total $24,827,810 $24,827,810 $6,759,725 $31,587,535

* From MTC's Regional Fund Estimate dated 02-26-2020. Claimants should confirm prior-year balances with MTC prior to submitting a claim for prior-year funds.

Measure M Transit Distribution

TDA Forecast $26,300,000

FY 2020-21 Measure M Forecast $26,300,000

Measure M Distribution to Transit (19%) $4,997,000

- Distribution for Bicycle & Pedestrian Projects (4%) 1,052,000- Distribution to SMART (5%) - Capital 1,315,000- Distribution to Transit Operators (10%) 2,630,000

Distribution to Transit Operators based on TDA Population PercentagesDistribution

Petaluma Transit 12.4326% 326,978Santa Rosa CityBus 35.0776% 922,542Sonoma County Transit 52.4897% 1,380,480

Total 100.0000% $2,630,000

FY 2020-21

III. Summary of TDA Fund Activity 1.6

FY 2021 TDA & Measure M Summary


77

Sonoma County TDA Coordinated Claim Attachment "A"

Sonoma County


G. H. I.

A. B. Distribution C/D. E. +/- F. Projected Coordinated Projected ProjectedFY 2020-21 Initial FY 2020-21 Percent FY 2020-21 FY 2020-21 FY 2020-21 FY 2020-21 Claim Prior-Year TDA Total TDA

TDA Distribution Contributions after GGT Contributions Contract Contributions to TDA Distribution Funds FundsApportionmen Area / Claimant Apportionment Percent to GGT Subtotal Contribution to SCT Services SC Paratransit Entitlement Percent Available* Available

Petaluma - Petaluma Transit 3,086,746 12.43% (896,700) 2,190,046 8.82% (230,220) ---- (46,044) 1,913,783 7.71% 1,065,240 2,979,023Santa Rosa - Santa Rosa CityBus 8,709,011 35.08% (2,177,253) 6,531,758 26.31% ---- 152,602 ---- 6,684,360 26.92% 1,590,769 8,275,129County - Sonoma County Transit 13,032,053 52.49% (3,133,000) 9,899,053 39.87% 230,220 (113,109) 46,044 10,062,207 40.53% 4,377,214 14,439,421GGT - Golden Gate Transit ---- ---- 6,206,953 6,206,953 25.00% ---- (39,493) ---- 6,167,460 24.84% (273,498) 5,893,962

Total $24,827,810 100.00% $24,827,810 100.00% $24,827,810 100.00% $6,759,725 $31,587,535

* From MTC's Regional Fund Estimate dated 02-28-18. Claimants should confirm prior-year balances with MTC prior to submitting a claim for prior-year funds.

Claim Summary by Apportionment Area - FY 2020-21 TDA Funds

SonomaPetaluma Santa Rosa County FY 2020-21

Apportionment Apportionment Apportionment TDAClaimant Area Area Area*** Entitlement

Petaluma - Petaluma Transit 1,913,783 1,913,783Santa Rosa - Santa Rosa CityBus 6,571,251 113,109 6,684,360County - Sonoma County Transit 276,264 9,785,944 10,062,207GGT - Golden Gate Transit 896,700 2,137,760 3,133,000 6,167,460

Total by Apportionment Area $3,086,746 $8,709,011 $13,032,053 $24,827,810

Attachment "A"

Consolitated Summary of TDA Claims by Eligible Operator 1.6


78

Sonoma County STA Coordinated Claim FY 2020-21

Sonoma County

STA Coordinated ClaimFiscal Year 2020-21Updated 03-11-2020

1.5

Funds Available $6,053,193 100.00%

$497,413 8.22%

B. Population-Based Distribution to Bus Transit $4,842,554 80.00%Operators

C. Performance-Based Distribution to Bus Transi $713,226 11.78%Operators

* Year two of a five-year distribution agreement established in FY 2019-20.

Combined %50% Ridership/ Available for

Operator Ridership % Ridership Revenue Hours % Revenue Hours 50% Revenue Distribution

SMART 417,055 11.76% 12,942 4.67% 8.22% $497,413

Total $497,413

Available for Operator Population* % Population Distribution

Petaluma Transit 62,247 12.43% $602,056 Santa Rosa CityBus 175,625 35.08% $1,698,654 Sonoma County Transit 262,803 52.49% $2,541,844

Total 500,675 100.00% $4,842,554

C. Performance-Based Distribution to Bus Transit Operators

Combinded %50% Ridership/ Available for

Operator Ridership % Ridership Revenue Hours % Revenue Hours 50% Revenue Distribution

Petaluma Transit 340,410 10.88% 27,222 10.30% 10.59% $75,556 Santa Rosa CityBus 1,811,688 57.92% 106,443 40.29% 49.11% $350,235 Sonoma County Transit 975,755 31.20% 130,524 49.41% 40.30% $287,434

Total 3,127,853 100.00% 264,189 100.00% 100.00% $713,226

STA Revenue-Based Funds Total STA FundsA. Distribution for B. Bus Operator C. Bus Operator Total Funds

for Regional Population-Based Performance-Based Available for Available for Available for Operator Rail Service Distribution Distribution Distribution Distribution Distribution

Petaluma Transit $602,056 $75,556 $677,612 $49,080 * $726,692 Santa Rosa CityBus $1,698,654 $350,235 $2,048,889 $151,559 $2,200,448 Sonoma County Transit $2,541,844 $287,434 $2,829,278 $245,847 $3,075,125SMART $497,413 $497,413 $1,685,153 *+ $2,182,566

Total $497,413 $4,842,554 $713,226 $6,053,193 $2,131,639 $8,184,832

* Prior-year unclaimed funds are available, Consult MTC Regional Fund estimate for balances.+ SMART STA Revenue-Based Funds are systemwide, not dedicated to service in Sonoma County

STA Block-Grant Funds

STA

A. Performance-Based Distribution to SMART for Regional Rail Service

A. Performance-Based Distribution to SMART for Regional Rail ServicePortion of Ridership and Revenue Hours in Sonoma County

B. Population-Based Distribution to Bus Operators

Summary of FY 2020-21 Distribution of STA Funds - by Operator

FY 2020-21 - Block Grant Funds*

79


Staff Report

Issue

What is the content of the proposed DRAFT Expenditure Plan? How shall the SCTA proceed with a possible measure in the November 2020 ballot?

Recommendation

Provide feedback on the DRAFT Expenditure Plan and direction on next steps to keep SCTA’s option of a November 2020 ballot measure available in these uncertain times caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.


The Countywide Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee, Technical Advisory Committee and Citizens Advisory Committee all reviewed the DRAFT Expenditure Plan. CBPAC was generally supportive, TAC expressed on-going concerns about shortfalls in pavement funding and the CAC offered several collaborative comments that have been incorporated into the DRAFT as well as other comments about types of projects allowed and the program distributions that may require additional edits pending further stakeholder discussion. The CAC was pleased with the new structure of the Draft and, while they were not able to vote to support the Expenditure Plan, felt it was generally heading in the right direction. Several stakeholders are planning to convene and discuss prior to the April 13 SCTA Board meeting.


A DRAFT Expenditure Plan format was emailed to all of the advisory groups on March 16 with blanks left in the four program categories. A prior strawman proposal was discussed by Advisory Committees and the SCTA ad hoc Committee and Board in January, February and March.

Executive Summary

The Measure M ¼-cent transportation sales tax will expire in 2024. In order to maintain our status as a self-help county and deliver critical transportation projects, the SCTA is considering a sales tax extension for the November 2020 ballot. The DRAFT Expenditure Plan with staff recommendation based on Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP) needs is derived from project submittals from public works departments, transit agencies and the SCTA/RCPA.


The SCTA currently manages a ¼-cent sales tax dedicated to a multi-modal expenditure plan known as Measure M. The DRAFT Expenditure Plan maintains the ¼-cent tax for an additional 20 years, eliminates the

To: SCTA Board of Directors Meeting Date: 4/13/20 From: Suzanne Smith, Executive Director Item Number: 4.1.2 Subject: November 2020 transportation sales tax ballot measure – DRAFT Expenditure Plan

with Comprehensive Transportation Plan based funding levels Consent Item: ☐ Regular Item: ☒ Action Item: ☒ Report: ☐

80

tel:707.565.5373

http://scta.ca.gov/

http://rcpa.ca.gov/

Highway 101 and SMART programs, and re-structures the program categories to address roadway, bus and bicycle and pedestrian needs.

If voters do not renew Measure M by 2024, the SCTA and its member jurisdictions will no longer have a local funding source to leverage State and federal dollars for transportation projects. By putting a measure on the ballot in 2020, the SCTA will be able to plan for new projects and fund new projects sooner.


Is there a fiscal impact to this item? Yes ☒ No ☐


The funding source(s) to be used are: The cost of the election may need funds if the measure is unsuccessful. If voters approve the measure, the new measure funds can pay the election costs.

Background

The SCTA Board has been discussing when and how to ask voters to continue support for a local tax for transportation. In March 2019, then Chair Landman formed the Measure M ad hoc committee to help focus the approach. Members of the ad hoc are Chair Susan Gorin and Directors Bagby, Gurney, Landman, Rabbitt and Rogers.

On July 9, 2019, the SCTA issued a call for projects for the Comprehensive Transportation Plan 2050 asking project sponsors to identify and rank their 10 highest priority projects for consideration in a new tax measure; as well as submit and rank up to 5 transit projects. The result was just over $3B in requests ranging from bike safety projects to interchanges across Highway 101 to SMART extension to Cloverdale with increased service.

Figure 1 – CTP Measure Priorities by Category (Dollars in Millions)

38%

27%

12%

23%Smooth and maintained roads(38%)Move traffic and improve safety(27%)Build bikeways and pathways(12%)Increase Bus Service (23%)

81

In the early fall of 2019, the SCTA hired Muelrath Public Affairs and EMC to help guide and perform an initial poll. EMC conducted the first round of polling in September by surveying 600 likely 2020 voters. The results were positive for a ¼-cent and less optimistic for a ½-cent.

There was very solid support for a ¼-cent with 73% and good support for a ½-cent with 67%. However, when presented with an opposition statement, the support drops to 64% and 58% respectively. After adding in “lean support,” the numbers go to 66% and 59%.

Following the poll, the ad hoc committee reviewed the project lists submitted by each jurisdiction and deliberated on a possible structure for the measure. The ad hoc proposed a strawman that was structured with two “buckets” of project types reflecting the importance of:

a. Improving the backbone of the transportation system across all modes of road maintenance, active transportation and bus service, and

b. Connecting communities through infrastructure projects, both big and small, that help people move safely and reliably wherever they need to go.

The SCTA advisory committees reviewed the strawman proposal in late January and early February. In February and March, the Board took public comment and deliberated on the strawman. The direction to staff was to drop the proposed structure, simplify the content and provide greater detail on the overall expenditure plan. The DRAFT Expenditure Plan is the staff effort to address these comments and provide a framework for the next round of discussions.

The DRAFT Expenditure Plan includes four programs in two categories. Staff has analyzed the CTP projects submitted as the highest priorities for the new measure and divided them into these categories and then applied the program percentage of the total need:

A. Fix roads, fill potholes, improve traffic – 65% Smooth & maintained roads 38% Move traffic & improve safety 27%

B. Improve alternatives to cars, fight climate change – 35% Increase bus service, affordability, & first/last mile connections 23% Build bikeways & pathways 12%

The cost of elements of the roadway projects that directly benefit bicycle and pedestrians can be quantified at approximately 25%; the result is an estimated 50/50 split between roads and alternatives.

Advancing the ballot measure in 2020 will allow Sonoma to:

• Plan now. From inception to completion transportation project take years if not decades to deliver. Planners and engineers need reliable known funding sources to develop and implement projects that will meet our transportation needs.

• Stay competitive. It allows Sonoma to be competitive leveraging regional, State and Federal fund sources.

82

Schedule of Next Steps Target Completion Date

Advisory committee and stakeholder input March/April 2020

SCTA Board Initial Draft Expenditure Plan April 13, 2020

SCTA Board Final Draft of Expenditure Plan May 11, 2020

Cities and County Presentations May – June 2020

Poll #2 June 2020

SCTA final approval of Expenditure Plan July 13, 2020

Board of Supervisors places on the ballot Aug 4, 2020


Attached: DRAFT Expenditure Plan with staff recommendation based on CTP needs

83

Go Sonoma Act Better Transportation for All of Sonoma County

Draft Expenditure Plan CTP Based Recommendation

Sonoma County Transportation Authority - March 2020

4/3/2020 12:44 PM

I. EXPENDITURE PLAN SUMMARY New transportation investment is needed in our community. Without it, we will experience more traffic, increased greenhouse gas emissions and poorly maintained streets that leads to time away from our family and friends, bad air quality, increased costs for car maintenance and impacts to our climate. This plan, Go Sonoma, benefits everyone who lives and works in Sonoma County. Through a public process we have developed a plan that shows how we will fix local streets, improve transportation corridors, increase bus transit service, and improve safety for cyclists, pedestrians and drivers. Without increasing the current tax rate, more than twice as much money will be dedicated to local roads, bus service and bike projects and cannot be taken away for any other purposes. Sonoma became a self-help county in 2004 when it passed the Traffic Relief Act known as Measure M. In order to maintain our status as a self-help county and deliver critical transportation projects, we need Go Sonoma to be in place now so we can get projets ready and before we lose our standing. As a self-help county with a reliable revenue source the Sonoma County Transportation Authority (SCTA) leveraged other funding at a ratio of 5:1 to widen the Highway 101 corridor. With a secure local funding source the SCTA has been able to secure highly competitive State and federal funds that would not have been possible without a local commitment that gets projects shovel ready. All projects will have a match requirement of at least 15%. The new investment plan will include four programs in two categories:

A. Fix roads, fill potholes, improve traffic Smooth & maintained roads 38% Move traffic & improve safety 27%

B. Improve alternatives to cars, fight climate change Increase bus service, affordability, & first/last mile connections 23% Build bikeways & pathways 12%

The Go Sonoma Act will continue, for 20 years, the ¼-cent sales tax currently dedicated to transportation.

84

2

II. OUR TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM VISION AND GOALS Go Sonoma is needed now in order to meet our transportation vision and goals and ensure key projects can be planned and built without delays. Since most of the projects identified in Measure M have been completed or are under way, a continuation of a local and reliable source of funding now will result in more matching funds for new improvements coming on line sooner. VISION: Connecting people, places and goods as we transition our transportation network to zero-emissions by 2050. Our guiding principles are to improve safety, equity and quality of life. GOALS: Our transportation system should be:

1. Connected and Reliable: Deliver a seamless network that allows people to use a variety of transportation types easily, affordably and dependably.

2. Safe and Well Maintained: Provide safe and well-maintained transportation

infrastructure.

3. Community Oriented and Place-Based: Implement place-based (or context sensitive) transportation projects, tailored to urban, suburban and rural communities that will improve local mobility.

4. Zero Emissions: Provide zero-emission transportation opportunities that meet diverse community needs, improve health and enhance quality of life.

III. GO SONOMA ACT EXPENDITURE PLAN

85

3

The Go Sonoma Act translates the SCTA goals into investments for specific programs in four program categories. Each program category will receive a percentage share of sales tax revenues, currently estimated at $26 million annually. The program allocates 1% of the revenue for administration and audits. BALLOT QUESTION: Without raising taxes, shall the Sonoma County Transportation Authority implement the Go Sonoma Act to repair potholes; reduce congestion; make biking and walking safer; expand local bus service; reduce greenhouse gas emissions; improve evacuation routes; and enhance transportation services for students and seniors by continuing, for 20 years, the current ¼-cent sales tax dedicated to transportation, providing approximately $26 million annually? A. Fix Roads, Fill Potholes, Improve Traffic – 65% SMOOTH & MAINTAINED ROADS Fixing potholes and making our roads smooth to drive and ride on is a central focus of the Go Sonoma Act. Approximately $9.9 million annually (or 38% of the sales tax revenue) will be used by cities and the County to fix existing roads and keep them well maintained. All projects will take into consideration bicycle and pedestrian needs, traffic calming, intelligent transportation system technology, construction methods that reduce emissions, and appropriate safety measures. These components of a road project are eligible for sales tax revenue. This program will help achieve the transportation system goals of: 1) Connected and Reliable, 2) Safe and Well Maintained, and 3) Community Oriented and Place Based. Funds for this program will be allocated by a 50% population/50% road mile formula and local governments must maintain their existing commitments of local funds for transportation purposes. Below is a chart that estimates how much each jurisdiction can anticipate receiving annually.

Jurisdiction Formula Estimated Annual Sales Tax Funding Population /

Road Mile Split

Cloverdale 1.59% $157,393 Cotati 1.27% $125,580 Healdsburg 2.18% $215,865 Petaluma 9.78% $966,615 Rohnert Park 6.24% $616,221 Santa Rosa 28.15% $2,781,097 Sebastopol 1.28% $126,852 Sonoma 1.84% $181,829 Windsor 4.61% $455,837 County 43.04% $4,252,710 Total 100% $9,880,000

86

4

MOVE TRAFFIC & IMPROVE SAFETY In addition to fixing local roads, the Go Sonoma Act will provide approximately $7.0 million annually (or 27% of the sales tax revenue) for projects that get traffic moving and improve safety. Moving people and goods around Sonoma County means making changes to our roadway system, providing alternatives and using technology to ensure reliability and safety. Projects will compete for the funds in this program based on the following criteria:

• Improve the flow of traffic with operational projects such as interchange improvements, traffic signals, turn lanes, or roundabouts

• Use best practices for bikeway design on city streets including pedestrian improvements and transit elements on roadway projects in cities

• Show improvements to safety for travelers of all modes • Improve connections within and between communities • Target high traffic areas with right-sized solutions that have regional benefit • Maximize the movement of people and reduce travel time • Has clear local support through a resolution of the local governing Board • Be cost effective and leverage other grants above the required match when possible • Address resiliency • Are included in a local general plan and the SCTA’s Comprehensive Transportation Plan

All projects will require environmental review, engineering and matching funds before construction can begin. All projects will take into consideration bicycle and pedestrian needs, traffic calming, intelligent transportation system technology and system implementation, and appropriate safety measures. This program will help achieve the transportation system goals 1) Connected and Reliable, 2) Safe and Well Maintained, and 3) Community Oriented and Place Based Projects included in Moving Forward 2050, our Comprehensive Transportation Plan, is located here: <link to CTP Measure list of priority road projects>. B. Improve Alternatives to Cars , Fight Climate Change – 35%. INCREASE BUS SERVICE, AFFORDABILITY & CONNECTIONS FOR FIRST/LAST MILE Funding for local transit improvements in the Go Sonoma Act will expand and enhance local bus operations to provide a more reliable service that works for more people. This program includes maintenance of existing bus service, increased bus frequencies and extended hours of operations, and a community benefit program to provide free rides for students and seniors. Increased bus frequencies and extended hours of operations should be prioritized where routes make first and last mile connections to major bus transit hubs, schools and rail stations. Approximately $6 million (or 23% of sales tax revenue) annually is dedicated to this program. Of that amount, 3% annually is dedicated to community benefit programs that support first/last mile and commuter programs to be managed by SCTA.

87

5

Below is a chart estimating how much each category and each Transit Agency can expect from the measure annually:

Operators Service Area Population

%

Service Continuity*

10%

Service Expansion

8%

Student / Senior Rides

up to 2%** Petaluma Transit 12.43% $323,248 $258,598 Reimbursement of

costs Santa Rosa CityBus 35.08% $912,019 $729,615 Reimbursement of

costs Sonoma County Transit

52.49% $1,364,733 $1,091,787 Reimbursement of costs

100.00% $2,600,000 $2,080,000 $520,000 *The 2004 Measure M Bus Service program is now considered exisiting service but will be continued in the new measure **Remainder, if any, to be distributed by population formula to Service Expansion This program will help achieve the transportation system goals 1) Connected and Reliable, 2) Safe and Well Maintained, 3) Community Oriented and Place Based, and 4) Zero Emissions BUILD BIKEWAYS AND PATHWAYS This program will better separate bikes from cars and make it easier to bike and walk. It includes building new infrastructure for bicycles and pedestrians that will increase overall safety, close critical gaps in existing routes, and promote the use of active transportation through community benefit programs to support safety education and encouragement like Safe Routes to School and Vision Zero. In addition, numerous local road improvement projects will include improved bicycle lanes striping and sidewalk improvements. Approximately $3.1 million (or 12% of sales tax revenue) annually is dedicated to this program and will be used for bicycle and/or pedestrian projects that compete based on the criteria below. Of the total annual amount, 1% is dedicated annually to community benefit programs that support safety education and encouragement.

• Demonstrate the potential to shift from cars to active transportation measured by a reduction in vehicle miles traveled

• Use best practices for bikeway design, considering appropriate facilities that maximize use and safety

• Implement safety improvement priorities identified through Vision Zero, a plan to prevent all road deaths and serious injuries

• Design for all ages and abilities This program will help achieve the transportation system goals 1) Connected and Reliable, 2) Safe and Well Maintained, 3) Community Oriented and Place Based, and 4) Zero Emissions

88

6

IV. OVERSIGHT AND ADMINISTRATION The implementation of the Go Sonoma Act will be the responsibility of the Sonoma County Transportation Authority. The SCTA is composed of twelve elected officials; a representative from each of the nine cities in Sonoma County and three members of the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors. The SCTA will be responsible for developing and updating a strategic plan to guide allocation decisions. The SCTA will develop the initial strategic plan by December 31, 2023 and prepare and update it at least every five years during the term of the plan. The Citizens Advisory Committee established under the Ordinance No. 1 that created the SCTA will serve as an independent oversight body that will advise the SCTA on the administration of the Go Sonoma Act and report to the public via annual audits of the Act and annual reports on progress. The SCTA will work closely and cooperatively with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and the California Transportation Commission (CTC) on programming state and federal grants to match funding from the Go Sonoma Act for programs and projects. These partnerships will help to maximize the state and federal funds that can be leveraged with a local source of funds and to deliver projects in a timely manner. V. IMPLEMENTATION GUIDELINES The Go Sonoma Act will begin on April 1, 2025 and will end on March 31, 2045. Environmental reporting, review and approval procedures as provided for under the National Environmental Policy Act, the California Environmental Quality Act, or other applicable laws will be adhered to as a prerequisite to the implementation of any project. The State of California is leading the nation with a path to eliminate greenhouse gas emissions by 2045 and reverse the growth of vehicle miles travelled. Go Sonoma is designed to boost the ability of jurisdictions to get climate fighting projects funded and meet those objectives for the state. Use of the retail transactions and use tax under this Transportation Expenditure Plan will be subject to the following restrictions:

1. The tax proceeds must be spent for the purposes of funding the transportation

programs and projects as allowed in the Go Sonoma Act and may not be used for other purposes.

2. In accordance with California Public Utilities Code Section 131100, the tax proceeds

will be used to supplement, and may not be used to replace, existing local property tax or other local revenues used for transportation purposes.

89

7

3. The tax proceeds will be expended in Sonoma County. 4. The SCTA is charged with a fiduciary duty in administering the tax proceeds in

accordance with the applicable laws and this Go Sonoma Act. Receipt of tax proceeds may be subject to appropriate terms and conditions as determined by the SCTA in its reasonable discretion, including, but not limited to, the right to require recipients to execute funding agreements and the right to audit recipients’ use of the tax proceeds.

Actual tax proceeds may be higher or lower than estimated in this Go Sonoma Act. The Go Sonoma Act expenditure plan is based on the percentage distributions to each Program Category and the dollar values included are estimates only. Actual tax proceeds will be programmed annually in accordance with the percentage distributions in the Go Sonoma Act expenditure plan. The Sonoma County Transportation Authority will prepare a Strategic Plan prior to December 31, 2023, for review by the SCTA Board and the CAC. It will identify funding prioritization criteria consistent with the goals and objectives of the 2020 Comprehensive Transportation Plan and the Go Sonoma Act for Sonoma County expenditure plan. The Strategic Plan will include general procedures for project sponsors to initiate a project and identify an implementation schedule and the programming of funds based on successful calls for projects. The Strategic Plan will include the evaluation criteria for prioritization of projects. The Strategic Plan will be updated at least every five years during the life of the Go Sonoma Act. The SCTA is authorized to bond for the purposes of advancing the commencement of or expediting the delivery of transportation programs or projects. The SCTA may issue limited tax bonds, from time to time, to finance any program or project in the Go Sonoma Act as allowed by applicable law and as approved by the SCTA, and the maximum bonded indebtedness shall not exceed the 20 year amount of proceeds of this retail transactions and use tax, estimated to be $850 million in 2020 dollars. Such bonds will be payable solely from the proceeds of the retail transactions and use tax and may be issued any time before expiration of the tax.

90

scta.ca.gov Revised 4/1/2020

CTP: Proposed Measure ProjectsApril 2020

191


Proposed Measure Project Cost Totals by Sponsor

2

$- $100 $200 $300 $400 $500 $600 $700 $800 $900

Cost ($M)

Smooth and maintained roads Move traffic and improve safety Build bikeways and pathways92


Proposed Measure Project Cost Totals by Sponsor – Transit Only

3

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Petaluma Transit Santa Rosa CityBus SCTA Sonoma County Transit

Cost ($M)

Notes: 1) Excludes 2004 Measure M enhanced bus service2) Sonoma County Transit serves multiple jurisdictions

93


Proposed Measure Project Cost Totals by Sponsor

4

0100200300400500600700800

Cost ($M)

Smooth and maintained roads Move traffic and improve safety

Build bikeways and pathways Increase bus service

94


CTP Priority Project Needs for New Measure through 2045 ($M)

5

$1,314.3

$937.9

$427.5

$455.0 Smooth and maintained roads (42%)

Move traffic and improve safety (30%)

Build bikeways and pathways (14%)

Increase bus service (14%)

Note: 14% for “increase bus service” excludes 2004 Measure M enhanced bus service95


CTP Priority Project Needs for New Measure through 2045 ($M)Adjusted to carry forward Measure M 10% for Enhanced Bus Service

6

38%

27%

12%

23%Smooth and maintained roads (38%)

Move traffic and improve safety (27%)

Build bikeways and pathways (12%)

Increase Bus Service (23%)

96


Cloverdale

7

Project TypeSmooth and maintained roadsMove traffic and improve safetyBuild bikeways and pathwaysIncrease bus service

$30.4

$25.4

$15.6

Cost by Project Type ($M)

Project Name Project Cost ($M) Measure M Priority Project TimeframeSmooth and maintained roads $30.4 2024-2044Cloverdale Downtown Complete Streets Improvement Project $0.6 5 AnnualCloverdale Neighborhood Streets Reconstruction & Maintenance Pgm $24.8 1 unknownCitrus Fair Drive Greenway Project $1.4 8 TBDCloverdale River Trail Extension $1.9 10 TBDNorth Cloverdale Gateway Project $1.5 7 TBDSidewalk & bike lane completion on Cloverdale Blvd. $2.0 2 TBDSidewalk improvements & traffic calming $0.8 3 TBDSouth Cloverdale Gateway Project $5.0 6 TBDSouth Cloverdale River Trail $0.5 9 TBDSouth Downtown Multimodal Enhancement Project $2.5 4 TBD

Total $71.4

97


Cloverdale – Project Descriptions

8

Project Name DescriptionSmooth and maintained roadsCloverdale Downtown Complete Streets Improvement Project

Road surface & improvement project intended to extend the effective service

Cloverdale Neighborhood Streets Reconstruction & Maintenance Pgm

Cloverdale Annual Rehabilitation Program for Local Streets , including slurry seals, seal cracks, asphalt overlays and reconstruction

Citrus Fair Drive Greenway Project Complete bike & pedestrian connection from SMART Transit Center to Tarmen Neighborhood and South Cloverdale Blvd.

Cloverdale River Trail Extension Complete bike and pedestrian paths along Crocker Road/First Street connecting River Road and the Cloverdale River Trail and Cloverdale Blvd.

North Cloverdale Gateway Project Complete bike and pedestrian enhancement on North Cloverdale Blvd. from the Highway 128 intersection to North Street.

Sidewalk & bike lane completion on Cloverdale Blvd.

Construct new sidewalks, pedestrian bridges and bike lanes along both sides of Cloverdale Blvd.

Sidewalk improvements & traffic calming Construct sidewalk bulb-outs and improve crosswalks on Cloverdale Blvd. from Lake Street to Franklin StreetSouth Cloverdale Gateway Project Complete bike and pedestrian enhancements at the South Cloverdale Blvd./Highway 101 overcrossingSouth Cloverdale River Trail Complete bike and pedestrian paths creating the South Cloverdale River Trail (Asti Road and river frontage)

connecting to the Great Redwood Trail & Cloverdale Airport.South Downtown Multimodal Enhancement Project

Construct "Complete Streets" bike & pedestrian facilities by expanding sidewalks, constructing new curb ramps, adding crosswalks and bike lanes

98


Cotati

9


$11.6

$98.0

$1.6 Cost by Project Type ($M)

Project Name Project Cost ($M) Measure M Priority Project TimeframeSmooth and maintained roads $11.6 2024-2044Highway 116 Cotati Corridor Improvements $15.0 1 2025La Plaza Reunification $15.0 5 2030Old Redwood Hwy rehab - Plaza to Gravenstein Hwy $8.0 3 2022US 101/Highway 116 North Bound On-Ramp Improvements $10.0 8 2035US 101/Railroad Avenue Improvements. $40.0 2 2030US 101/West Sierra Avenue South Bound Off-Ramp Improvements $10.0 6 2035West Cotati Avenue Sidewalks $1.6 7 TBD

Total $111.2

99


Cotati – Project Descriptions

10

Project Name DescriptionSmooth and maintained roadsHighway 116 Cotati Corridor Improvements

This project is a widening of Highway 116 between US 101 and Stony Point Road, including phased closure of driveway access to 116, the addition of signalized intersections, new bike lanes, and new sidewalk to improve the vehicle LOS, improve the safety of 116 for all modes of transportation, and create safe new corridors for pedestrian and bicyclists. Improvements to this State facility are identified in the adopted Bike and Ped Master Plan, as well as the City's General Plan.

La Plaza Reunification Joining of all 4 legs of La Plaza Street around La Plaza Park, and re-routing vehicle and bicycle traffic around La Plaza Park to connections with Old Redwood Highway, West Cotati Avenue, West Sierra Avenue, and East Cotati Avenue. Project would re-create the central town plaza and encourage and activate a pedestrian and bicycle friendly downtown.

Old Redwood Hwy rehab - Plaza to Gravenstein Hwy

This project consists of widening Old Redwood Highway for safer bike lanes, sidewalks, and center island medians. Also includes various signal improvements to improve congestion.

US 101/Highway 116 North Bound On-Ramp Improvements

This project is the creation of traditional north bound on-ramp for US 101 at the interchange with Highway 116. Highway 116 currently circulates through city streets to reach the US 101 north bound on-ramp at the intersection of Commerce Boulevard and Old Redwood Highway. This project will create a new leg from the existing US 101 south bound off ramp to provide a safer and more efficient path for traffic on Highway 116.

US 101/Railroad Avenue Improvements. This project is the creation of a new south bound off ramp and north bound on ramp at Railroad Avenue. There continues to be growth outside of Cotati and Penngrove that will exacerbate traffic in both Penngrove and in downtown Cotati, as these are the only options to access US 101. Improvements would include safety improvements on Railroad Avenue from Petaluma Hill to US 101.

US 101/West Sierra Avenue South Bound Off-Ramp Improvements

This project is the creation of a new south bound off ramp at West Sierra Avenue to improve transportation options for vehicles traveling south bound on US 101 by giving vehicles another option to access the Cotati/ southern Rohnert Park area, and relieving congestion at the US 101/116 interchange. Currently, no other south bound option exists between Highway 116 and Old Redwood Highway in Petaluma.

West Cotati Avenue Sidewalks Closing key gaps in sidewalk between 116 (site of significant pending commercial/residential development) and a key east/west pedestrian corridor under US 101 at Clifford, including a school connection to Thomas Page Academy on West Cotati Avenue.

100


Healdsburg

11


$34.5

$32.2

$12.8


Project Name Project Cost ($M) Measure M Priority Project TimeframeSmooth and maintained roads $34.5 2024-2044Dry Creek Road Improvements $6.0 1 TBDGrove Street Neighborhood Plan Implementation - Complete Streets $2.5 9 TBDHealdsburg Avenue Complete Street Improvement Powell to N CityLim $9.5 2 TBDHealdsburg Avenue-Mill Street Improvements $2.0 6 TBDHealdsburg Plaza Streetscape Rehabilitation $2.2 4 TBDUS-101 Central Healdsburg Offramp Improvements (Roundabout) $10.0 5 TBDADA Upgrades $8.0 8 AnnualFoss Creek Pathway Class II $1.3 10 TBDFoss Creek Segments 9 & 10 $3.5 7 TBD

Total $79.6

101


Healdsburg – Project Descriptions

12

Project Name DescriptionSmooth and maintained roadsDry Creek Road Improvements Reconstruct and partially widen Dry Creek to implement street curbs, sidewalks,

enhanced safety pedestrian crossing class 1 pathway and lane reconfiguration; reconstruct and widen north half of Grove St/Dry Creek Rd intersection.

Grove Street Neighborhood Plan Implementation - Complete Streets Road improvements including curb, gutter, sidewalk, and bike facilities. Complete street project.

Healdsburg Avenue Complete Street Improvement Powell to N CityLim Road diet, bicycle facilities, pedestrian improvements, enhanced safety, and streetscape. Complete street project.

Healdsburg Avenue-Mill Street Improvements Reconstruct Healdsburg Avenue to re-align street curbs, reduce number of vehicle lanes, implement parking, landscaped center medians, sidewalks and other pedestrian features. Mill Street reconstruction and partial widening to implement street curbs, sidewalks, and possibly lane reconfiguration.

Healdsburg Plaza Streetscape Rehabilitation Streetscape project to improve safety and remove ADA barriers on all walkways within the Healdsburg Plaza extending down Center Street up to and include Police Department frontage.

US-101 Central Healdsburg Offramp Improvements (Roundabout) The Northbound 101 offramp crosses Soutbound Healdsburg Avenue (stop sign) creating a unique traffic situation. The Central Healdsburg Area Plan calls for a roundabout at this location.

ADA Upgrades Sidewalk repair, gap closures, and ramp upgrades.Foss Creek Pathway Class II Class 2 (Bike Lanes)Foss Creek Segments 9 & 10 Construction of Class 1 pathway (ped and bike)

102


Petaluma

13


$243.6 $217.0

$22.9


Project Name Project Cost ($M) Measure M Priority Project TimeframeSmooth and maintained roads $243.6 2024-2044Caulfield Lane Reconstruction $4.0 10 2028D Street Reconstruction $4.0 6 2028East Washington Street Reconstruction $8.0 8 2035Petaluma Crosstown Connector and Rainier Interchange $115.0 1 TBDSouthern Crossing at Caulfield Lane $72.0 3 TBDTraffic Signals ITS Upgrades $10.0 5 2030Washington Street Bridge Seismic Retrofit $4.0 2 2021Class 2 bicycle lane segments citywide $0.9 9 TBDLynch Creek Trail Rehabilitation $7.0 4 2035Petaluma River Trail $15.0 7 2025

Total $483.5

103


Petaluma – Project Descriptions

14

Project Name DescriptionSmooth and maintained roadsCaulfield Lane Reconstruction Project includes the reconstruction of Caulfield Lane from Highway 101 to Garfield Drive which

will also include the installation of curb ramps, new traffic signal detection cameras and striping.D Street Reconstruction Project includes the reconstruction of D Street from Windsor Drive to Petaluma Boulevard South

which will also include the installation of curb ramps, new traffic signal detection cameras and striping.

East Washington Street Reconstruction Project includes the reconstruction of East Washington Street from Hwy 101 off Ramp to Bodega Avenue which will also include the installation of curb ramps, new traffic signal detection cameras and striping.

Petaluma Crosstown Connector and Rainier Interchange Extend Rainier Ave to cross highway 101 and terminate at Petaluma Blvd North. Construct interchange with highway 101 and Rainier Ave extension

Southern Crossing at Caulfield Lane Construct extension of Caulfield Lane to cross the Petaluma River and terminate at Petaluma Boulevard South

Traffic Signals ITS Upgrades Project includes the installation of fiber optic interconnect communication, upgrading traffic controllers with adaptive upgrades, advanced detection system for automated traffic signal performance measures and the installation of battery backup systems to create a comprehensive transportation network that is intelligent, scalable, flexible and resilient during a natural disaster.

Washington Street Bridge Seismic Retrofit Seismically retrofit the Washington Street bridgeClass 2 bicycle lane segments citywide Class 2 bike lanes throughout PetalumaLynch Creek Trail Rehabilitation Project includes the reconstruction of Lynch Creek Trail which includes a 10' wide concrete multi

use trail, signing striping and new lightingPetaluma River Trail Construct a multi-use bicycle and pedestrian path from shollenber Park to the NWP trail at the

Petaluma River including path and under the SMART rail line and Highway 101

104


Rohnert Park

15

Project TypeSmooth and maintained roadsMove traffic and improve safetyBuild bikeways and pathwaysIncrease bus service $63.9 $44.1

$17.9


Project Name Project Cost ($M) Measure M Priority Project TimeframeSmooth and maintained roads $63.9 2024-2044Central Rohnert Park PDA – Commercial Connector Street Completion $5.7 3 2022-2025Central Rohnert Park PDA - Rohnert Park Expressway Slip Streets $3.6 2 2022-25Citywide Advanced Traffic Management System (ATMS) Implementation $5.7 9 2025Redwood Drive Bridge Replacement at Hinebaugh Creek $10.0 8 2030Southwest Boulevard Corridor Improvements $2.2 4 2025State Farm Drive Overcrossing $17.0 1 2035Central Rohnert Park PDA Complete Streets Improvements $6.0 10 2025Enhanced Bike/Pedestrian Crossings at NWP Railroad $2.0 5 2022Highway 101 Bicycle/Pedestrian Crossing $7.0 6 2035Trail to Crane Creek Regional Park $2.9 7 2020

Total $125.9

105


Rohnert Park – Project Descriptions

16

Project Name DescriptionSmooth and maintained roadsCentral Rohnert Park PDA – Commercial Connector Street Completion

Extension of City Center Drive between State Farm Drive and Commerce Boulevard (currently “Padre Center Parkway”); new street connecting Rohnert Park Expressway to City Center Drive; new street connecting Rohnert Park Expressway; three traffic signals; widening of Commerce Boulevard Bridge over Hinebaugh Creek

Central Rohnert Park PDA - Rohnert Park Expressway Slip Streets

Four slip streets on both sides of Rohnert Park Expressway between Commerce Boulevard and SMART Railway, each consisting of 10' vehicular travel lane, 18' diagonal parking lane, and 8' concrete bike path

Citywide Advanced Traffic Management System (ATMS) Implementation

Implementation of Citywide ATMS at 26 of 38 existing intersections (including cabinet and detection replacement/upgrade; ATMS infrastructure/software, programming) and installation of 6.7 miles of fiber or copper in new interconnect conduit.

Redwood Drive Bridge Replacement at Hinebaugh Creek

Redesign and replacement of vehicular bridge

Southwest Boulevard Corridor Improvements Overlay and reconstruction of Southwest Boulevard and complete streets implementation as well as streetscape and urban design improvements to encourage bicycle and pedestrian use while accommodating vehicular traffic.

State Farm Drive Overcrossing Overcrossing of Highway 101 between State Farm Drive and Business Park Drive consisting of bridge overpass with two (2) vehicular travel lanes, two (2) unprotected bike lanes, pedestrian access.

Central Rohnert Park PDA Complete Streets Improvements

Various improvements within the Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area to improve active and multi-modal transportation, including but not limited to: enhanced pedestrian/bike crossings or infrastructure (over- or under-crossings or bridges) at arterials and/or the SMART rail line; traffic calming devices; traffic signal detection and/or ped/bike actuation; median, sidewalk, curb and gutter improvements including bulbouts, pedestrian safety islands; striping and pavement markings; street furniture and amenities including bike storage; bus stop amenities; wayfinding signage.

Enhanced Bike/Pedestrian Crossings at NWP Railroad

Enhanced Bike/Pedestrian Crossings at NWP Railroad

Highway 101 Bicycle/Pedestrian Crossing Bike/pedestrian bridge crossing of Highway 101, location to be determined through Measure M funded feasibility study

Trail to Crane Creek Regional Park Construction of a multi-use trail connecting Water Tank No. 8 service road east of Petaluma Hill Road to Crane Creek Regional Park.

106


Santa Rosa

17


$308.6 $251.5

$74.5


Project Name Project Cost ($M) Measure M Priority Project TimeframeSmooth and maintained roads $308.6 2024-2044Chanate Road - Resiliency Corridor $12.5 7 2040Downtown Connectivity to Support Housing Density Intensification $25.0 1 2025Fulton Road Interchange @ Hwy 12 - Phase 2 $50.0 8 2040Hwy 101 Corridor Interchange Improvements $98.0 3 2022Southeast Santa Rosa Multi Modal Resiliency Corridor Enhancement - Road $66.0 6 2030-2045Citywide Bikeways and pathways Projects 1st Phase - Plan Update $6.0 9 2035Climate Adaptation Technology Innovation Transport Initiatives $6.5 2 2025East West Bikeways and pathways Connections $24.0 4 2022Southeast Greenway Multi Use Path and Crossings $20.0 5 2040Southeast Santa Rosa Multi Modal Resiliency Corridor Enhancement - Bike/Ped $18.0 6 2030-2045

Total $634.6

107


Santa Rosa – Project Descriptions

18

Project Name DescriptionSmooth and maintained roadsChanate Road - Resiliency Corridor Project includes: fire evacuation route (Mendocino Avenue to Parker Hill Road) includes roundabout @

Parker Hill Rd and Chanate Rd and modifying existing median.Downtown Connectivity to Support Housing Density Intensification

Projects to be determined pending City Council approval early 2020, possible multi modal transportation projects that address climate adaptation, housing intensification and financial stability could include Fourth Street, Sixth Street, Third Street, B Street, Healdsburg Avenue, Mendocino Avenue streetscape.

Fulton Road Interchange @ Hwy 12 - Phase 2 Convert the existing signalized intersection of Fulton Road and Highway 12 into a full interchange (including sidewalks and bike lanes)

Hwy 101 Corridor Interchange Improvements Phase 1 - Reconstruct the over crossing and interchange at Hearn Avenue and Highway 101, including the addition of turn lanes, bike lanes and sidewalks. ($28.0 M construction phase) – 2022. Phase 2 - Reconstruct the over crossing and interchange at Mendocino Ave/Hopper Ave and Highway 101, including the addition of turn lanes, bike lanes and sidewalks as part of the recovery and resiliency and financial stability efforts $40.0 M – 2040. Phase 3 - Expand bike, pedestrian, transit, and vehicle improvements across Hwy 101 in south Santa Rosa at Bellevue Avenue and Highway 101 so that mobility options are available to all south Santa Rosa neighborhoods, an under served area, and encourage a healthy climate for business and growth. $30.0 M - 2040

Southeast Santa Rosa Multi Modal Resiliency Corridor Enhancement - Road

Phase 2 - Improve and widen Yolanda Avenue between Petaluma Hill Road and Santa Rosa Avenue including 2 travel lanes in the westbound direction and one travel lane in the eastbound direction with a center two way left turn lane, adding bike lanes and sidewalks. ($20.0 M) – 2035. Phase 3 - Construct Farmers Lane from Bennett Valley Road and Farmers Lane to Petaluma Hill Road at Yolanda Avenue. The project will include sidewalks, bike lanes, transit route and serve as an evacuation route. ($46.0 M) - 2030

108


Santa Rosa – Project Descriptions, continued

19

Project Name DescriptionCitywide Bikeways and pathways Projects 1st Phase - Plan Update

Construct bicycle and pedestrian projects based on the results of the studies conducted in the Climate Adaptation, Technology and Innovative Solutions (Transportation Initiatives) programmatic project implementing Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan priorities

Climate Adaptation Technology Innovation Transport Initiatives

Programmatic efforts to address Climate adaptation - Improve transit corridor efficiency reducing per-trip travel time and per-capita CO2 emissions. Continue to implement emission reduction technologies to improve the flow of traffic and adapt to emerging technology related to mobility options (autonomous vehicles) with the deployment of ITS technology, upgraded signal controllers. Complete First Phase active transportation corridor studies identified in the Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan Update 2018 (BPMPU 2018) Implement Short term Implementation goals identified in the BPMPU 2018, such as Vision Zero, safe routes to school, first & last mile connections to transit & rail, regional bike share, bike & pedestrian safety & education activities. Ongoing programs to support these transportation initiatives. This project also includes intersection improvements, transit improvements, bicycle and pedestrians facilities and emission reduction technologies. Total cost estimate ~ $6.5

East West Bikeways and pathways Connections

Phase 1 - This project proposes to construct a bicycle and pedestrian overcrossing of US Highway 101 in northern Santa Rosa, connecting the Mendocino Avenue high-frequency transit corridor and Santa Rosa Junior College Campus with the Coddingtown Transit Hub and North Santa Rosa SMART Station area. ($14.0 M)- 2022. Phase 2 -Construct a bike and pedestrian at grade crossing at Jennings Avenue @ SMART ($5.0 M) – 2025. Phase 3 - Install bike lanes on Steele Lane/Guerneville Road ($5.0 M) - 2030

Southeast Greenway Multi Use Path and Crossings

Provide continuous pedestrian, bicycle, and non-motorized transportation connections from Spring Lake Regional Park to Farmers Lane and links to downtown Santa Rosa, surrounding neighborhoods and schools, and the regional trail system. This project could also include multimodal streetscape improvements at crossings.

Southeast Santa Rosa Multi Modal Resiliency Corridor Enhancement - Bike/Ped

Phase 1 - Pedestrian and bicycle enhancements and safety enhancements at 4th Street and Hwy 12/Farmers Lane. ($8.0 M) - 2030. Phase 4 - Construct a shared use bike and pedestrian path (Taylor Mountain Regional Park Trail) from Bennett Valley Road/Farmers Lane to Petaluma Hill Road/Yolanda Avenue ($10.0 M) - 2045

109


Sebastopol

20


Project Name Project Cost ($M) Measure M Priority Project TimeframeSmooth and maintained roads $21.3 2024-2044Bodega Corridor Project $5.0 1 2021-2024Alternate West Route to Sebastopol $5.0 4 2030West Sebastopol Active Transport Plan $8.3 3 2025

Total $39.6

$21.3

$10.0

$13.3


110


Sebastopol – Project Descriptions

21

Project Name DescriptionSmooth and maintained roadsBodega Corridor Project Repaving, add bike lanes, 3 sidewalk gap closures, roadway widening, shoulder stabilizingAlternate West Route to Sebastopol Improve a west side routing to connect SR 116 south of Sebastopol with Bodega Highway west of

Sebastopol utilizing a number of alternate routes such as Pleasant Hill Road, Bloomfield Road, and possibly others

West Sebastopol Active Transport Plan Bodega Ave - Ragle Road - Mill Station Road: Bicycle and pedestrian access - west route

111


Sonoma

22


Project Name Project Cost ($M) Measure M Priority Project TimeframeSmooth and maintained roads $23.9 2024-2044Intersection Improvements at SR12 Broadway and SR12 West Napa St. $6.0 5 2024Intersection Improvements at SR12 Sonoma Highway and West Napa St $3.0 4 2023Intersection Improvements at West Spain St. and Fifth St. West $2.0 2 2021Safety Improvements at Fifth St. West $3.0 1 2020Broadway (SR12) Streetscape Enhancements and Traffic Circulation $6.0 3 2022

Total $43.9

$23.9 $14.0

$6.0


112


Sonoma – Project Descriptions

23

Project Name DescriptionSmooth and maintained roadsIntersection Improvements at SR12 Broadway and SR12 West Napa St.

Improve this 4-way Stop intersection currently operating at LOS D. The intersection creates many points of conflict and motorist confusion, due to long pedestrian crossings and very busy pedestrian traffic in front of the Historic Sonoma Plaza.

Intersection Improvements at SR12 Sonoma Highway and West Napa St

Improve this misaligned signaled intersection to better allow pedestrian traffic and improve vehicular turning movements.

Intersection Improvements at West Spain St. and Fifth St. West

Improve this 4-way Stop intersection currently operating at LOS E.

Safety Improvements at Fifth St. West Resolve Safety problem primarily at the intersection of Fifth St. West and Studley St. and Safeway egress.

Broadway (SR12) Streetscape Enhancements and Traffic Circulation

Enhance the Broadway streetscape to improve the pedestrian experience, provide sustainable landscaping, and increase public safety for pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists.

113


Sonoma County

24


Project Name Project Cost ($M) Measure M Priority Project TimeframeSmooth and maintained roads $575.3 2024-20448th Street East Corridor Improvements 2: Napa Rd. to Napa St. $4.0 3 20248th Street East Corridor Improvements 3: Hwy 121 @ 8th St East $4.0 3 2024Airport Boulevard Widening Ordiance Road and Aviation Boulevard $50.0 2 TBDArnold/Madrone Intersection Improvements $2.0 5 TBDMirabel Road Corridor Improvements 3: River Rd @ Mirabel $3.6 1 2026Mirabel Road Corridor Improvements 4: Hwy 116 at Mirabel Rd $24.2 1 2026Railroad Ave Improvements $4.0 4 TBDRiver Road Widening - Fulton to Old Redwood Hwy $7.0 8 TBDTodd Road Reconstruction $30.0 7 TBD8th Street East Corridor Improvements 1: Sonoma/Schellville Trail $7.0 3 2024Bodega Bay Trail $7.7 6 2021Mirabel Road Corridor Improvements 1: West County Trail Extension $3.0 1 2026Mirabel Road Corridor Improvements 2: River Rd. to Hwy 116 $12.1 1 2026Russian River Trail $27.0 9 2030Sonoma Valley Trail (aka Central Sonoma Valley Trail) $26.0 10 2025

Total $787.0

$575.3

$128.9

$82.9


114


Sonoma County – Project Descriptions

25

Project Name DescriptionSmooth and maintained roads8th Street East Corridor Improvements 2: Napa Rd. to Napa St. 8th Street East widening Napa Rd to Napa Street8th Street East Corridor Improvements 3: Hwy 121 @ 8th St East Install traffic signal system on Route 121 and improve channelization at 8th StreetAirport Boulevard Widening Ordiance Road and Aviation BoulevardThis is Phase 1. 2) widens Brickway to LaughlinRd; 3) widens Airport Blvd between ORH

and US 101; 4) Airport Blvd I/C #22191; 5) Widens Laughlin Rd to 2 lanes, controls at River Rd.

Arnold/Madrone Intersection Improvements Signalization & Intersection ImprovementsMirabel Road Corridor Improvements 3: River Rd @ Mirabel Signalization or Roundabout & intersection improvementsMirabel Road Corridor Improvements 4: Hwy 116 at Mirabel Rd Construct roundabout at current intersection controlled by single stop sign.Railroad Ave Improvements Signalization and intersection improvementsRiver Road Widening - Fulton to Old Redwood Hwy River Rd/Mark West Springs – construct 2 additional lanes from Fulton to Old Redwood

Hwy.Todd Road Reconstruction Widen Todd Road to include General Plan requirements - reconstruct from Stony Point

Road to Llano Road extend east to Petaluma Hill Road8th Street East Corridor Improvements 1: Sonoma/Schellville Trail Connects the City of Sonoma bike path to the Sonoma County Bay Trail. Follows the

abandoned railroad right of way. Regional NetworkBodega Bay Trail Provides a 3 mile long Class I bike path alternative to Highway 1. 1.1 miles have been

completed from Keefe Avenue to the Bodega Bay Community Center. The County will complete the remaining 1.9 miles.

Mirabel Road Corridor Improvements 1: West County Trail Extension

Connects downtown Forestville with Forestville Youth Park

Mirabel Road Corridor Improvements 2: River Rd. to Hwy 116 Widening for pedestrian & bike facilitiesRussian River Trail Regional Class I bike path along the middle and lower reach of the Russian River. The

approximate length is 23 miles.Sonoma Valley Trail (aka Central Sonoma Valley Trail) Provides a 13.80 mile long Class I bike path alternative to Highway 12 between Santa

Rosa and Sonoma. 0.42 miles have been completed. The County will complete the remaining 13.38 miles.

115


Windsor

26


Project Name Project Cost ($M) Measure M Priority Project TimeframeSmooth and maintained roads $1.0 2024-2044Arata Lane Interchange Phase 2B NB On-ramp (CIP FY 2016-2017) $4.0 2 2023-2024Jaguar Way Roadway (CIP 2015-2016) $9.0 3 2024-2025Shiloh Road Interchange Reconstruction $45.0 5 2028-2029US 101 Overcrossing of Arata Lane $18.0 6 2030-2035Downtown Ped & Bike Crossing of US 101 Phase 1 - Underpass Widen $7.0 1 2027-2029Downtown Ped & Bike Crossing of US 101 Phase 2 - Overcrossing $16.6 4 2029-2031

Total $100.6

$1.0

$76.0

$23.6


116


Windsor – Project Descriptions

27

Project Name DescriptionSmooth and maintained roadsArata Lane Interchange Phase 2B NB On-ramp (CIP FY 2016-2017)

Construction of the Northbound on-ramp to US 101 will compelte the Arata Lane interchange with US 101. This proejct also includes the relocation of a portion of Los Amigos Road north of Arata Lane. Rights of way have been obtained in prior phases.

Jaguar Way Roadway (CIP 2015-2016) Provide a street link between Windsor Road and Starr Road, including access to Windsor High School. The project consists of one-half mile of new roadway improvements, including one travel lane in each direction, bike lanes, street lighting, sidewalks, and a bridge crossing at Starr Creek.

Shiloh Road Interchange Reconstruction Reconstruct the Shiloh Road/US 101 interchange to provide two lanes in each direction. It is anticipated that the existing overcrossing will be replaced and ramps reconfigured. It is expected that 60 percent of project costs will come from federal, state, or regional funds.

US 101 Overcrossing of Arata Lane Replace the US 101 overcrossing of Arata Lane to provide lane capacity and enhanced bicycle and pedestrian facilities, including sidewalks. It is expected that 60 percent of project costs will come from federal, state, or regional funds.

Downtown Ped & Bike Crossing of US 101 Phase 1 -Underpass Widen

Improving existing US 101 underpass by widening the space under US 101 using new tie-back walls and adding Class I paths with protected two-way bike lanes and widened pedestrian paths. Improvements also include new lighting, landscaping, color and artwork.

Downtown Ped & Bike Crossing of US 101 Phase 2 -Overcrossing

Improving east and west connectivity of central Windsor with a new bicycle and pedestrian bridge over crossing US 101 with touchdown areas at each end of the bridge.

117


Petaluma Transit

28


Project Name Project Cost ($M) Measure M Priority Project TimeframeFare Free Program $9.7 3 2024-2044Ongoing Bus Stop Improvements $6.7 4 2024-2044Service expansion $37.4 2 2024-2044Transit Fleet & Facility Electrification (transitioning toward zero emissions fleet by 2029) $11.9 1 2024-2044Transit Innovation Projects $9.9 5 2024-2044

Total $75.6

118


Petaluma Transit – Project Descriptions

29

Project Name DescriptionFare Free Program Discounted or fare-free programs system-wide or for specific groups, such as K-12,

seniors, low-income, weekend pilot, summer pilot, or paratransit riders.

Ongoing Bus Stop Improvements Addition of shelters, benches, trash cans, real-time information displays, concrete accessibility pads, solar security lighting, maps, infoposts, etc. at various existing bus stops in Petaluma.

Service expansion Service expansion including increased service and span on major routes & arterials, additional weekend and holiday service, additional west side and school tripper service, Phase I BRT implementation on E. Washington.

Transit Fleet & Facility Electrification (transitioning toward zero emissions fleet by 2029)

Purchase of Battery Electric Fixed Route and Paratransit buses (differential cost), facility charging infrastructure, purchase of Evergreen power, solar array, and backup generator.

Transit Innovation Projects Innovative transit projects using new technology to serve new markets, including micro-transit, TNC partnership, automated vehicle pilot program, AVL upgrades, and school tripper technology.

119


Santa Rosa CityBus

30


Project Name Project Cost ($M) Measure M Priority Project TimeframeEnhanced Core Network and Rapid Bus (operating) $148.9 2 2024-2044Enhanced Core Network Part 1 of 3 (capital)--Fleet Expansion (transitioning toward zero emissions fleet by 2029) $13.7 4 2024-2044Enhanced Core Network Part 2 of 3 (capital)--Facility Expansion $15.0 4 2024-2029Enhanced Core Network Part 3 of 3 (capital)--Rapid Bus planning, engineering, and infrastructure $11.6 4 2023-2027Systemwide Fare-free Transit and Paratransit $50.0 3 2024-2044Transit Fleet Electrification (transitioning toward zero emissions fleet by 2029) $20.0 1 2024-2044

Total $259.2

120


Santa Rosa CityBus – Project Descriptions

31

Project Name DescriptionEnhanced Core Network and Rapid Bus (operating) 50% increase in service hours to implement Reimagining CityBus phase II priorities and

support City's downtown development vision. Includes additional 15 minute service on Santa Rosa Avenue and Sonoma Avenue (completing frequency upgrades on corridors identified for future Rapid Bus service), Saturday-level service until 11:00pm on most routes (Monday-Saturday), improved weekend service, targeted route restructuring/extensions for more direct service, targeted peak frequency improvements.

Enhanced Core Network Part 1 of 3 (capital)--Fleet Expansion (transitioning toward zero emissions fleet by 2029)

10 new battery electric fixed-route buses, 2 new paratransit vehicles, and 2 new non-revenue vehicles, phased with operating expansion. Includes replacement of these vehicles in out years.

Enhanced Core Network Part 2 of 3 (capital)--Facility Expansion

Transit Mall and Coddingtown Transit Hub Expansion; improved links to SMART stations; Park and Rides

Enhanced Core Network Part 3 of 3 (capital)--Rapid Bus planning, engineering , and infrastructure

Rapid Bus planning, engineering,technology, and infrastructure

Systemwide Fare-free Transit and Paratransit Funds systemwide fare-free transit and paratransit services to increase transit ridership and mode share; support housing and affordability-related goals; and enable CityBus to reinvest funds currently spent on fare collection into improved service. Costs assume up to a 60% increase in paratransit demand due to free fares. This project is scalable, with several options for targeted fare-free or discount programs for K-12 students, low-income individuals, and seniors, as well as start-up funding for EcoPass unlimited ridership programs for residential or institutional partners.

Transit Fleet Electrification (transitioning toward zero emissions fleet by 2029)

Accelerates transition to all-electric transit and paratransit fleets by supporting purchase of battery-electric vehicles, deployment of charging infrastructure, and provisions for resiliency. With purchase of Sonoma Clean Power Evergreen power, Santa Rosa CityBus could be 100% carbon-free.

121


SMART

32


Project Name Project Cost ($M) Measure M Priority Project TimeframeSMART Pathway $40.0 4 2022

Total $40.0

122


SMART – Project Descriptions

33

Project Name DescriptionSMART Pathway Construction of Class 1 non-motorized pathway in discreet segments along and/or within the SMART right-of-

way YOE cost estimated at $40m.

123


Sonoma County Transit

34


Project Name Project Cost ($M) Measure M Priority Project TimeframeSCT Countywide Bus Stop Improvements $1.7 5 2024-2044SCT Expanded Core Intercity Routes $25.9 2 2024-2044SCT Expanded Local Transit Services $16.4 3 2024-2044SCT Fleet Replacement & Electric Charging Infrastructure (transitioning toward zero emissions fleet by 2029) $27.2 1 2024-2044SCT Local Route Fare-Free Program $8.5 4 2024-2044

Total $79.7

124


Sonoma County Transit – Project Descriptions

35

Project Name DescriptionSCT Countywide Bus Stop Improvements Expanded NextBus real-time information panels at bus stops and shelters, additional and

replacement passenger shelters and benches.

SCT Expanded Core Intercity Routes Expanded weekday and weekend service (including paratransit) on "core" intercity routes 20, 30, 44, 48 and 60.

SCT Expanded Local Transit Services Expanded weekday and/or weekend transit services (including paratransit) on routes 10, 12, 28, 32 and 68.

SCT Fleet Replacement & Electric Charging Infrastructure (transitioning toward zero emissions fleet by 2029)

Scheduled bus replacements (CNG & Electric) and expanded electric charging capabilities at SCT's transit facility in Santa Rosa and on-route in various cities throughout Sonoma County.

SCT Local Route Fare-Free Program Free fares on all SCT local routes and local paratransit trips (replaces respective local city-based funding for fare-free routes).

125


RCPA

36


Project Name Project Cost ($M) Measure M Priority Project TimeframeRural EV Charger Network $5.9 NA TBDCountywide Bikeways and pathways Signage Program $0.5 NA 2021GreenTRIP Sonoma County $0.5 NA TBD

Total $6.9

$5.9

$0.5 $0.5


126


RCPA – Project Descriptions

37

Project Name DescriptionRural EV Charger Network Develop a network of EV charging stations on government-owned properties outside of major city centers at locations that

may not receive traditional grant funding due to being outside of long-standing cell-coverage zones required for grant-mandated network chargers and/or would require match funding that is currently a barrier for access to grant funding. A methodology developed by the County of Santa Clara Office of Sustainability indicate that non-residential public EV chargers that are available 7 days/week reduce 6.77 MTCO2e/year. https://www.sccgov.org/sites/dnz/Documents/Task-3D-EV-Charging-Stations-as-GHG-Mitigation-Mechanism-under-CEQA_White-Paper.pdf

Location: Identified government-owned locations for 280 charging ports include: Cloverdale Park & Ride, Geyserville Park & Ride, Guerneville Park & Ride, Ragle Ranch Regional Park, Healdsburg Veterans Memorial Beach Regional Park, Los Guilicos Juneville Hall Facilities, Penngrove Park & Ride, Boyes Hot Springs Park & Ride, Tom Schopflin Fields Regional Park, Cotati Park & Ride #1, Healdsburg Park & Ride, Occidental Community Center, Shiloh Ranch Regional Park, Spring Lake Regional Park Upper Lot Shady Oaks, Taylor Mountain Regional Park, North Sonoma Mountain Regional Park, Maxwell Farm Regional Park, Cotati Park & Ride #2, Spring Lake Regional Park Lower Parking Lot, Sebastopol Park & Ride, Schellville Park & Ride, Occidental Park & Ride East Upper Lot #2, Monte Rio Recreation And Park District, Monte Rio Creekside Park, Helen Putnam Regional Park, Gualala Point Regional Park, Fulton Park & Ride, River Keeper Stewardship Park, Stillwater Cove Regional Park

Countywide Bikeways and pathways Signage Program

Develop and implement a countywide bicycle and pedestrian signage program based on recommendations in the SCTA Countywide Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, 2014 Update. Program would facilitate and encourage bike/ped access to/from major centers of activity (SMART, transit hubs, employment centers, shopping centers, schools).

GreenTRIP Sonoma County Customize and pilot use of one or more GreenTRIP tools in Sonoma County (certification program, parking database, connect). http://www.transformca.org/landing-page/greentrip

127


SCTA

38


Project Name Project Cost ($M) Measure M Priority Project TimeframeHighways 116 and 121 Intersection Improvements $22.0 NA 2019Landscaping - Highway 101 HOV Corridor $18.0 NA 2015-2030Countywide Expansion of Micromobility and first/last mile $90.0 NA 2021Safe Routes to School $26.0 NA ongoingTransportation Management $40.0 NA 2021

Total $196.0

$40.0

$116.0

$40.0


128


SCTA – Project Descriptions

39

Project Name DescriptionHighways 116 and 121 Intersection Improvements Intersection improvements will install a roundabout to reduce congestion and improve

facilities for bicycles and pedestrians.Landscaping - Highway 101 HOV Corridor Follow up landscaping for Highway 101 projects as outlined in the 2014 Highway 101 Corridor

Landscaping & Tree Planting Plan. The Plan is available on SCTA's Web site at: http://www.sctainfo.org/reports/Highway_101_Corrider_Landscaping_and_Tree%20Planning_Plan/Highways_101_Corrider_Landscaping_and_Tree%20Planning_Plan_January_2014.pdf

Countywide Expansion of Micromobility and first/last mile Expand Bikeshare and other shared micromobility to all communities in Sonoma County. Includes the development of a comprehensive micro-mobility strategy to increase access to clean, affordable, reliable transportation options for rural communities in Sonoma County. Research best practices and emerging trends in micro-mobility; identify potential solutions for different place types (small city; large city; etc.); identify implementation resources (funding, expertise, etc.).

Safe Routes to School Safe Routes to School - 60 school locations in Sonoma County

Transportation Management Development of a transportation management association (2-3 FTE plus volunteers) to provide a variety transportation demand management services to individual and groups of employers, institutions including, but not limited to: Sales and Promotion of TDM and transit products; Central Information source for VMT reducing options, and Management of funding and incentives.

129


Transit – Technical Advisory Committee

MEETING AGENDA March 11, 2020 – 10:00 a.m.

Sonoma County Transportation Authority Large Conference Room

411 King Street, Second Floor Santa Rosa, CA 95404

ITEM

1. Introductions

2. Administrative 2.1. Approval of Meeting Notes: January 8, 2020 – ACTION* 2.2. Approval of Meeting Notes: January 22, 2020 – ACTION**

3. Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) list investment strategy – Discussion*

4. Regional Funding updates, if available – Discussion 4.1. Tax Measure Reauthorization 4.2. Regional Measure 3 4.3. FASTER Bay Area 4.4. TFCA County Program Manager FYE 21, Round 1 Project Submittals – Discussion**

5. Coordinated Claim FY20-21 Draft – ACTION*

6. STA Block Grant, Lifeline Reporting – Discussion

7. Transit Operator Updates – Discussion

8. Emergency Coordination – Discussion 8.1. COVID-19 Response 8.2. County-level EOC exercise

9. Technology Updates (real-time information, AVL, passenger counters, fare apps, etc.) – Discussion

10. Other Business / Comments / Announcements

11. Adjourn – ACTION *Materials attached **Materials to be handed out

The next SCTA/RCPA meeting will be held April 13, 2020 The next T-TAC meeting will be held April 8, 2020

ACCOMMODATION FOR PERSONS LIVING WITH A DISABILITY: If you have a disability that requires the agenda materials to be in an alternate format or that requires an interpreter or other person to assist you while attending this meeting, please contact SCTA/RCPA at least 72 hours prior to the meeting to ensure arrangements for accommodation. SB 343 DOCUMENTS RELATED TO OPEN SESSION AGENDAS: Materials related to an item on this agenda submitted to the Transit-Technical Advisory Committee after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection in the Sonoma

130

tel:707.565.5373

http://scta.ca.gov/

http://rcpa.ca.gov/

411 King Street, Santa Rosa, CA | 707.565.5373 | scta.ca.gov | rcpa.ca.gov

Countywide Bicycle & Pedestrian Advisory Committee

MEETING AGENDA The SCTA/RCPA office is temporarily closed due to the Local Public Health Emergency declared on March 2,

2020 in response to the Coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak.

March 24, 2020 – 1:30 p.m.

Sonoma County Transportation Authority Meeting to be held by GoToMeeting

https://www.gotomeet.me/scta-rcpa or dial 312-757-3121 Access code: 689-734-461

The Countywide Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (CBPAC) will be conducted pursuant to the provisions of the Governor’s Executive Order, which suspends certain requirements of the Ralph M. Brown Act. CBPAC members will be teleconferencing into the CBPAC meeting. Members of the public who wish to listen to the CBPAC meeting may do so via the following teleconference call-in number and access code: Call-in number: 312-757-3121 Access code: 689-734-461

Instructions for Public Comment: Please submit any comments in writing to Dana Turrey at [email protected] by 12:30pm on March 24 (please identify the agenda item related to your comment and indicate whether your comment should be read aloud or only submitted for the record).

ITEM

1. Introductions (roll call)

2. Approval of Meeting Notes: January 28, 2020 - DISCUSSION / ACTION**

3. Public Comment (see instructions above)

4. Sales Tax Measure (Measure M Reauthorization) Ad Hoc Strawman – Discussion**

5. Transportation Development Act, Article 3 (TDA3), FY21 Proposed Program of Projects – DISCUSSION / ACTION*

6. Roundtable Updates – Discussion

7. Vision Zero Update – Discussion

8. Bike Share Updates – Discussion

9. Upcoming Active Transportation Grants and Events – Information*

10. Other Business / Comments / Announcements – Discussion

11. Adjourn – ACTION *Materials attached **Materials to be posted prior to meeting

131

tel:707.565.5373

http://scta.ca.gov/

http://rcpa.ca.gov/

https://www.gotomeet.me/scta-rcpa



Technical Advisory Committee

MEETNG AGENDA The Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) will be conducted pursuant to the provisions of the Governor’s Executive Order, which suspends certain requirements of the Ralph M. Brown Act. TAC members will be

teleconferencing into the TAC meeting. Members of the public who wish to listen to the TAC meeting may do so via the following teleconference call-in number and access code:

Call-in number: 312-757-3121

Access code: 689-734-461 Link: https://www.gotomeet.me/scta-rcpa

Instructions for Public Comment: Please submit any comments in writing to Seana Gause at [email protected] by 12:30pm on March 26 (please identify the agenda item related to your comment

and indicate whether your comment should be read aloud or only submitted for the record).

March 26, 2020 – 1:30 p.m. Sonoma County Transportation Authority

Meeting to be held remotely via GotoMeeting. Information provided above. ACTION ITEMS

1. Introductions

2. Public Comment

3. Approval of Minutes, February 27, 2020* DISCUSSION/ACTION

4. SB-1 Local Partnership Program – Proposed Project Nomination: Hearn Avenue Interchange*

5. Measure M DISCUSSION

5.1 Measure Reauthorization Update: Draft Expenditure Plan**

INFORMATION ITEMS

6. Measure M Invoicing/Obligation Status* 7. SB743/VMT Update*

https://arcg.is/18mvGy

8. Regional Information Update

8.1 Inactive Federal Obligation Status*: project sponsors should be prepared to address status of inactive obligations at the meeting: https://dot.ca.gov/programs/local-assistance/projects/inactive-projects

Currently Inactive: Petaluma, County of Sonoma, Sonoma Marin Area Rail Transit and Rohnert Park; County of Sonoma and Cloverdale pending

9. SCTA/RCPA DRAFT Board Agenda, April 13, 2020**

10. Other Business / Comments / Announcements

11. Adjourn *Materials attached. **Materials distributed separately

132

tel:707.565.5373

http://scta.ca.gov/

http://rcpa.ca.gov/

https://www.gotomeet.me/scta-rcpa


https://arcg.is/18mvGy

https://dot.ca.gov/programs/local-assistance/projects/inactive-projects

The next S C T A meeting will be held April 13th, 2020 The next TAC meeting will be held on April 23rd 2020

Copies of the full Agenda Packet are available at www.scta.ca.gov

DISABLED ACCOMMODATION: If you have a disability that requires the agenda materials to be in an alternate format, or that requires an interpreter or other person to assist you while attending this meeting, please contact SCTA at least 72 hours prior to the meeting to ensure arrangements for accommodation.

SB 343 DOCUMENTS RELATED TO OPEN SESSION AGENDAS: Materials related to an item on this agenda submitted to the Technical Advisory Committee after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection in the Sonoma County Transportation Authority office at 411 King St, Santa Rosa, during normal business hours.

TAC Voting member attendance – (6 Month rolling 2019) Jurisdiction September October Nov/Dec January February March

Cloverdale Public Works

Cotati Public Works

County of Sonoma DHS*

County of Sonoma PRMD*

County of Sonoma Regional Parks*

County of Sonoma TPW* (by phone)

Healdsburg Public Works

Petaluma Public Works & Transit

Rohnert Park Public Works (by phone)

Santa Rosa Public Works**

Santa Rosa Transit**

Sebastopol Public Works (by phone)

SMART

Sonoma County Transit*

Sonoma Public Works

Windsor Public Works

*One Vote between all **One Vote between all NB: No meeting held in July 2019

133


Citizens Advisory Committee MEETNG AGENDA

The Citizen’s Advisory Committee (CAC) will be conducted pursuant to the provisions of the Governor’s Executive

Order, which suspends certain requirements of the Ralph M. Brown Act. CAC members will be teleconferencing into the CAC meeting. Members of the public who wish to listen to the CAC meeting may do so via the following

teleconference call-in number and access code: Join Zoom Meeting: https://zoom.us/j/749971540

Meeting ID: 749 971 540 Dial in: +1 (669) 900-9128

Instructions for Public Comment: Please submit any comments in writing to Drew Nichols at

[email protected] by 12:30pm on March 30 (please identify the agenda item related to your comment and indicate whether your comment should be read aloud or only submitted for the record).

March 30, 2020 at 4:00 p.m. Sonoma County Transportation Authority

Meeting location: Zoom, information provided above.

1. Introductions

2. Public Comment ACTION ITEMS

3. Administrative

a. Approval of February 24, 2020 Meeting Minutes* - ACTION

4. Measure M – DISCUSSION/ACTION

a. Measure M Project Presentation

b. Measure Reauthorization*

c. Local Streets Rehabilitation Maintenance of Effort – Reporting FY18/19-Policy 14 and PUC Compliance*

d. Local Streets Rehabilitation Maintenance of Effort (MOE) - Policy Update*

e. Measure M Financial Statements*

5. SB-1 Local Partnership Program – Proposed Project Nomination: Hearn Avenue Interchange

INFORMATIONAL ITEMS

6. Green New Deal transportation studies – INFORMATION a. http://t4america.org/maps-tools/the-green-new-deal-for-transportation/ b. http://t4america.org/maps-tools/congestion-con/

7. Highway Updates – DISCUSSION

8. Announcements

9. Adjourn

134

tel:707.565.5373

http://scta.ca.gov/

http://rcpa.ca.gov/

http://t4america.org/maps-tools/the-green-new-deal-for-transportation/

http://t4america.org/maps-tools/congestion-con/


Staff Report

Issue

Information Only.

Recommendation

Information Only.





Executive Summary

Due to COVID-19, the Urban Land Institute (ULI) and RCPA decided to reschedule the ULI Resilience Advisory Panel from March 2020 to a later date. RCPA will work with ULI and the Steering Group to select a new date.

RCPA is compiling data for the 2018 Greenhouse Gas Inventory Update and will publish the update in summer 2020.

The BayREN Water Bill Savings Program has a new name: Water Upgrades $ave.


All activities support RCPA policies and goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions at least 25% below 1990 levels by 2020, 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 and 80 percent 1990 levels by 2050.




The funding source(s) to be used are:

RCPA operational funding and various grants including BayREN, California Energy Commission Shift Implementation Grant and funding through Sonoma Clean Power for technical assistance to support EV infrastructure expansion.

To: SCTA/RCPA Board of Directors Meeting Date: 4/13/20 From: Suzanne Smith, Executive Director Item Number: 5.4.1 Subject: RCPA Activities Report

Consent Item: ☐ Regular Item: ☒ Action Item: ☐ Report: ☒

135

tel:707.565.5373

http://scta.ca.gov/

http://rcpa.ca.gov/

Background

Planning and Coordination

Urban Land Institute Resilience Advisory Panel

The Sonoma County Resilience Advisory Panel was scheduled for the week of March 16-20, 2020. In early March, ULI and RCPA assessed the risks presented by COVID-19 and made the difficult decision to reschedule the panel to a later date. Most of the work to organize the panel is complete, but some RCPA staff time will be required for final preparations for the rescheduled panel.

Program Coordination

RCPA staff coordinated with Zero Waste Sonoma and the Ag and Open Space District to convene community based organizations, RCDs and the California Climate & Agricultural Network (CalCAN) to discuss carbon sequestration opportunities in Sonoma County. RCPA convened a policy subcommittee of this group on February 27 to prioritize near term policy actions and consider potential funding sources for this work.

RCPA staff coordinated energy program implementation with County of Sonoma Energy and Sustainability Division staff on the following programs:

• Bay Area Regional Energy Network • Sonoma County Energy Independence

Program

• Sonoma County Energy Watch • Sonoma County Green Business

Program

RCPA staff met with Sonoma Clean Power staff to leverage resources and advance implementation of programs including:

• EV 101 • Electrify America collaboration • EverGreen outreach • Advanced Energy Center

• Municipal solar and storage • CALeVIP • E-bike incentive pilot program

2018 Greenhouse Gas Inventory Update

RCPA staff compiled data for the 2018 Greenhouse Gas Inventory Update. Once RCPA staff has the necessary data for all sectors (e.g. building energy, transportation, water, solid waste, etc.) the emissions for each sector will be calculated and reported with comparisons to past inventories. The inventory update will be complete in summer 2020. RCPA will provide the data to its members to assist them in their climate planning and policy development. The inventory results will also inform the development of RCPA’s 2030 Climate Emergency Mobilization Strategy.

Urban Sustainability Directors Network (USDN)

In its role as the main USDN contact for Sonoma County, RCPA participates in USDN activities that align with RCPA’s Strategic Plan and support the work of its members. The USDN network provides many opportunities for best practice sharing and learning from the work of other USDN members. In March, RCPA staff participated in the following USDN online meetings:

• USDN Strategic Communications Learning Group Call - COVID-19 Impacts on Communications

• USDN Climate Action Plan Learning Group - How is COVID-19 Impacting our Work

136

• USDN/BEI Building Electrification Learning Group - Lessons Learned from BEI

The Building Electrification Initiative (BEI) is a project supported by USDN and the Carbon Neutral Cities Alliance that pilots strategies to scale up the electrification of building heating and cooling systems. There were eight cities participating in the initiative last year, and BEI will add two more cities this year. Berkeley and Los Angeles are the only cities participating from California. In 2019, the learning group focused on an overview of building electrification. In 2020, it will work on actionable strategies that cities can take to accelerate the transition from natural gas to electricity. RCPA will share lessons learned from this group with its members to support their work on building electrification policies and programs.

Implementation

California Energy Commission Grant: Shift Sonoma County Implementation

With a grant from the California Energy Commission, RCPA staff are collaborating with The Climate Center (formally known as the Climate Protection Campaign) to boost electric vehicle (EV) awareness within Sonoma County through EV101, an EV concierge service to serve as a one-stop-shop for consumers to find information on EVs and charging. EV101 launched alongside SCP’s Drive EV program in August 2018 providing information to Sonoma County Residents. During 2020, RCPA and Climate Center staff will be adding new content to EV101, sharing testimonials of EV drivers, increasing online advertisements, developing EV content for the Advanced Energy Center, and providing member jurisdictions collateral to help further encourage EV conversations. RCPA will also be tracking countywide progress in accelerating EV adoption in Sonoma County, connecting EV101 outreach to identified goals.

Bay Area Regional Energy Network

The Bay Area Regional Energy Network (BayREN) implements effective energy saving programs on a regional level and draws on the expertise and experience of local governments to develop and administer successful climate, resource, and sustainability programs. BayREN is a collaboration of the nine counties that make up the San Francisco Bay Area. The RCPA represents Sonoma County in BayREN and partners with the County of Sonoma Energy and Sustainability Division to implement the single family, multifamily, and codes and standards programs. More information at www.bayren.org

Single Family Home+

BayREN Home+ offers cash rebates for single-family home improvements, plus certified contractors and support every step of the way. Bay Area single-family residents can choose from a menu of single measure upgrades to save energy and improve their home. More information at www.bayrenresidential.org

Table: Sonoma County Home+ Participation January 1, 2019, to January 1, 2020

Number of households 630

Number of submitted rebates 2,001

Total amount of rebates $830,430

Energy Efficiency Kits Delivered 31

Local Home+ Contractors 13

137

http://www.bayren.org/

http://www.bayrenresidential.org/

Bay Area Multifamily Building Enhancement Program Supports Housing Affordability

The Bay Area Multifamily Building Enhancement (BAMBE) supports housing affordability by lowering energy costs at apartment complexes, making them more affordable for tenants. Heating, cooling, domestic hot-water equipment, lighting fixtures and appliances are among the areas where energy savings can be found during free inspections of multi-family units. The program also provides a $750 per unit rebate to help pay for upgrades. More information at www.bayareamultifamily.org.

Table: Sonoma County BAMBE Participation (as of December 31, 2019)

In Technical Assistance In Construction Total Completed 2013-2019

5 properties (525 units) <5 properties (100 units) 15 properties (1,136 units)

Codes and Standards

RCPA staff continue to work with BayREN to support our member cities in exploring the benefits of and the process to establish reach codes to reduce energy use and increase use of renewable energy for new construction. RCPA is pleased to provide letters of support for jurisdictions considering energy reach codes. Codes and Standards updates include:

• A March 27th Residential training that included three different BayREN training modules was postponed because of the State and County shelter-in-place orders.

• An April 17 Nonresidential Title 24 Energy Codes training was also postponed because of shelter-in-place orders.

• The Energy and Sustainability Division (ESD) representative attended the BayREN Q1 Codes & Standards Forum on March 3, 2020, and the BayREN Codes and Standards (C&S) 2020 Kickoff Meeting on March 6, 2020.

• ESD continues to participate in both the BayREN C&S and Reach Code conference calls.

More information on BayREN Codes and Standards work at www.bayrencodes.org.

Water Bill Savings Program

RCPA staff continued to develop the Water Bill Savings regional program — now known as BayREN Water Upgrades $ave — in collaboration with Partner Utilities from Town of Windsor, City of Hayward, and East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) and WBSP Committee members representing BayREN’s single family, multifamily, and codes and standards programs.

During February-March, the RCPA program team:

• Submitted the draft BayREN Annual Report chapter on Water Upgrades $ave for review (March 20). • Completed draft-final of Program Operator Request for Proposal (March 20). • Prepared to present to the City of Sebastopol’s March 17 City Council meeting; presentation was

postponed because of the COVID19 emergency. • Worked with marketing consultant BluePoint Planning to set priorities for branding and marketing

activities for 2020 (March 13)

138

http://www.bayareamultifamily.org/

http://www.bayrencodes.org/

• Met with Sonoma County Energy and Sustainability Division (ESD) staff to report on ESD activities promoting BayREN’s Home+ (single family), BAMBE (multifamily), and Codes and Standards programs (March 11).

• Met with ABAG Finance staff to discuss logistical details for ABAG Financing Service that provides funds for Water Upgrades $ave customer project installation (March 5).

• Convened regular monthly Water Upgrades $ave Committee meeting with BayREN representatives (March 4) to discuss utility enrollment status and outreach plan and present status reports on Program Operator Request for Proposal development and Master Agreement packet review.


None

139


Staff Report

Issue

Planning Activities Report

Recommendation

Information only





Executive Summary

Update on activities of planning staff that are not on the regular agenda.





Is there funding in the current budget? Yes ☐ No ☐


Background

DATA MANAGEMENT AND FORECASTING

• Modeling and analysis support – The updated travel model is now available for project level analysis and preliminary work has begun to support project level or planning work in unincorporated Sonoma County and in the City of Santa Rosa.

Data and analysis from the Sonoma County Travel Behavior Study is now being used to enhance the Sonoma County Travel Model. Current work is focused on using mobile source origin and destination

To: SCTA/RCPA Board of Directors Meeting Date: 4/13/20 From: Janet Spilman, Director of Planning Item Number: 5.4.2 Subject: Planning Activities Report


140

tel:707.565.5373

http://scta.ca.gov/

http://rcpa.ca.gov/

data to update and improve estimates of trips, trip lengths, and VMT for travel entering and exiting Sonoma County and providing resources to support local efforts to implement SB743 requirements.

• SB 743/Vehicle Miles Traveled Support – Staff continues to work with local planning and engineering staff to prepare for SB 743 compliance. Continued work includes:

o Refinement of VMT summary tables which include summaries for different types of VMT summarized at the jurisdiction, traffic analysis zone, and countywide level. Travel model scripts and reports have been revised to generate resident end/per capita home-based VMT and work site/per employee work VMT estimates per state recommendations. Staff continues to provide resources and training to local staff on VMT estimation techniques and methods and on interpreting the summaries and resources provided by SCTA staff.

o Refinement of VMT maps summarizing current average VMT by traffic analysis zone for travel originating at residential locations (or home-based VMT), or for travel ending at employment locations. Interactive web maps that can be used for VMT screening are now available online.

• Vision Zero Sonoma County Data Dashboard

o Staff completed the selection process for consulting services to assist in the development and implementation of the Vision Zero Data Dashboard. The consulting contract is on the April 13 board agenda for approval. Once the board approves the contract, staff will work with the consultant and the Department of Health Services to organize a kick-off meeting for the data dashboard component of the project.

o Staff created an online map for the CHP Lakeville Traffic Safety Working Group which displays traffic collisions on Lakeville Highway categorized by collision type (https://sonomacounty.maps.arcgis.com/apps/View/index.html?appid=97b682d0165246d2a13dc4fc1d7777f3). This map is a prototype of the data that will be included in the Vision Zero Sonoma County Data Dashboard.

o Staff participated in a webinar for the release of Getting to the Curb: A Guide to Building Protected Bike Lanes that Work for Pedestrians, https://walksf.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/getting-to-the-curb-report-final-walk-sf-2019.pdf. The report highlights the importance of addressing pedestrian access to the curb when designing new bike facilities. Staff is developing content for a Vision Zero Sonoma County web page and will include links to this report and others related to the Vision Zero Sonoma County project on the new page.

PLANS

• Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP) - Work on the CTP since the last meeting has been largely administrative.

• Plan Bay Area 2050 (PBA 2050)

o Regional Growth Framework

141

https://sonomacounty.maps.arcgis.com/apps/View/index.html?appid=97b682d0165246d2a13dc4fc1d7777f3

https://sonomacounty.maps.arcgis.com/apps/View/index.html?appid=97b682d0165246d2a13dc4fc1d7777f3

https://walksf.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/getting-to-the-curb-report-final-walk-sf-2019.pdf

https://walksf.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/getting-to-the-curb-report-final-walk-sf-2019.pdf

Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) Planners and housing staff in Sonoma County are participating in the regional housing methodology committee.

MTC re-opens window to add Priority Development Areas Many jurisdictions in the Bay Area have not prioritized growth areas that will allow the region to meet it’s GHG reduction target. Sonoma County jurisdictions have enough PDAs to meet the target.

O Plan Bay Area -Regional Transportation Plan – item 3.2 on this agenda

PROGRAM MANAGEMENT – MOBILITY INITIATIVES

• Regional Bike Share Pilot Program o Staff participated in planning and coordination calls with Gotcha and the Transportation

Authority of Marin (TAM). o Staff participated in the regional bike share capital working group call to share experiences

and resources. o Gotcha began the technical demand analysis for Sonoma and Marin counties and shared

preliminary results with staff and agency partners. o Staff shared a revised draft Coordination Agreement with project partners for legal review. o Staff held a virtual TAC meeting with Gotcha and agency partners on March 25.

• Emergency Ride Home Program – Staff continues to manage and promote the program. The

Emergency Ride Home program will reimburse rides home in cases of a qualifying emergency for anyone who works in Sonoma County and gets to work using an alternative transportation option, such as carpooling, vanpooling, public transit, bicycling, or walking. Program rules, restrictions, and reimbursement forms are available online. scta.ca.gov/ERH

• Sonoma County Clean Commute Pilot Program – Staff continues to work with County staff to promote and monitor the program. The Sonoma County Clean Commute Pilot Program allows County employees to set aside pre-tax income to pay for SMART Eco-Passes, e-Cash on Clipper, and Commute with Enterprise Vanpools through My Commuter Check. https://sonomacounty.ca.gov/HR/Benefits/Clean-Commute/

ADMINISTRATION OF ALTERNATIVE TRANSPORTATION FUNDING

• Transportation for Clean Air Fund, County Program Manager (TFCA, CPM) funds may be used for cost-effective projects that reduce on-road motor vehicle emissions within the Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s (BAAQMD) jurisdiction. Eligible project types include trip reduction, clean air vehicles and infrastructure, arterial management, and bicycle projects. Staff has participated in BAAQMD working group discussions on revised program guidelines.

o The FY 20/21 call for projects was released on February 11, 2020 and applications were due by March 9, 2020. Since staff did not receive any applications for the competitive portion set aside for small jurisdictions within the BAAQMD by the March 9, 2020 deadline, the competitive portion was opened up to the County of Sonoma, City of Santa Rosa, and City of Petaluma for applications by April 6. The proposed program will be brought to the Board of Directors in May 2020. http://scta.ca.gov/projects/funding/

142

http://www.scta.ca.gov/ERH

https://sonomacounty.ca.gov/HR/Benefits/Clean-Commute/

http://scta.ca.gov/projects/funding/

• Transportation Development Act, Article 3 (TDA3) funds may be used for bicycle lanes, bicycle and pedestrian paths, and related planning and marketing efforts. Sonoma County’s cities/towns and the County of Sonoma are eligible to apply.

o The FY 20/21 call for projects was released on February 18 and applications were due on March 16, 2020. The Countywide Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (CBPAC) approved the program at the March 24, 2020 meeting held virtually. The proposed program will be brought to the Board of Directors in May 2020. http://scta.ca.gov/projects/funding/

• Coordinated Claim for Transit Funding – on this agenda

COORDINATION & OUTREACH

Local Activities

• Spare the Air Resources Team meeting with local and regional agencies, non-profit advocacy groups, and citizens

• Sonoma County Area Agency on Aging Advisory Council: Transportation and Mobility Committee, Steering Committee for Connected Communities Transportation Needs Assessment meetings were canceled in February and March

• Safe Routes to School Alliance meeting with program coordinators, local public works staff and law enforcement

Regional Coordination

• MTC/ABAG committees: Regional Modeling Working Group – Discussed MTC/ABAG land use and travel model development, big data resources, and annual work plan; Transit Finance Working Group, Active Transportation Working Group, Transportation Demand Management Working Group

• CTA Planners meeting

• Bay Area County Transportation Authority meeting – cancelled in March


None

143

http://scta.ca.gov/projects/funding/


Staff Report

Issue

Update on Sonoma County community affairs related to transportation and climate change.

Recommendation






Executive Summary

The April 2020 Community Affairs Update covers the following subjects:

a. Resilience Advisory Panel Rescheduled b. Moving Forward Forum Rescheduled to October 7 c. Self-Generation Incentive Program Assistance training d. Transit, Housing Get Relief in Massive COVID-19 Assistance Package e. Fewer vehicles on the road, slowing economy lead to blue skies in Bay Area


No policy impacts.



Is there funding in the current budget? Yes ☐ No ☐


To: SCTA/RCPA Board of Directors Meeting Date: 4/13/20 From: Brant Arthur, Community Affairs Specialist Item Number: 5.4.3 Subject: SCTA/RCPA Community Affairs


144

tel:707.565.5373

http://scta.ca.gov/

http://rcpa.ca.gov/

Background News

Resilience Advisory Panel Rescheduled

In coordination with the Urban Land Institute’s executive leadership, the RCPA has decided to reschedule the Sonoma County Resilience Advisory Services Panel to a later date. Our decision to reschedule this panel is guided by a precautionary approach intended to safeguard health and minimize travel given the evolving COVID-19 risk assessment and the presence of COVID-19 cases in Sonoma County, as well as in communities where panel participants are based.

We also recognize that interactions with and feedback from local stakeholders and the public are crucial to the success of any ULI panel, and it is critical to hold the panel at a time when local stakeholders feel comfortable fully participating in panel week activities. Once we have selected a new date for the panel, we will share the dates for the public reception and presentation of recommendations.

Moving Forward Forum Rescheduled to October 7

We have decided to reschedule the Moving Forward 2050 Forum to Wednesday, October 7, 2020 in order to increase public health during the coronavirus emergency. We hope you'll be able to join us in October for this event focused on the potential to transform our transportation system. For more info, visit: http://scta.ca.gov/2050

Partner News

Self-Generation Incentive Program Assistance training

Sonoma Clean Power (SCP) plans to launch the Self-Generation Incentive Program (SGIP) assistance program in April 2020 to help residential customers install battery energy storage systems under 30kW by providing the SGIP rebate money upfront. SCP hopes to also include government customers in the near future.

Contractors and installers wishing to participate in the program must attend one training. The first training was held on March 31st. The second training date is to be announced. If you are interested, please contact: [email protected]

MTC: Transit, Housing Get Relief in Massive COVID-19 Assistance Package

On March 27, President Trump signed into law the $2 trillion COVID-19 emergency relief package —negotiated in coordination with Speaker Pelosi. The deal includes $25 billion for public transportation, an estimated $1.3 billion of which will flow quickly to the Bay Area, and $13.9 billion for emergency housing assistance.

The $1.3 billion in relief for Bay Area transit operators included in the bill, which is formally called H.R. 748: Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, represents about 35 percent of the $3.7 billion for all California operators. These funds can be used for expenses related to COVID-19, including reimbursements for lost revenue and operating costs, the purchase of personal

145

http://scta.ca.gov/2050


https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/DIVB_EMSU.pdf

protective equipment, and paying the administrative leave of operations personnel due to reductions in service. For more info: https://mtc.ca.gov/whats-happening/news/transit-housing-get-relief-massive-covid-19-assistance-package

Fewer vehicles on the road, slowing economy lead to blue skies in Bay Area

The Mercury News reported that every day since March 14, the EPA Air Quality Index has reported all nine Bay Area counties bathed in green on its color scale, for good quality air. It’s rare to have so many consecutive clean-air days. Last week, air-quality sensors that measure particulate matter showed the lowest average readings of any week so far in 2020 — down 21% in Oakland, 36% in San Jose and 41% in San Francisco from the week before.

Blue skies this month show what the future might look like when more of California’s vehicles are electric, said Ronald Cohen, a chemistry professor at UC Berkeley who studies Bay Area air trends. But for now, they symbolize lost jobs and lost economic activity. Read more: https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/03/23/coronavirus-bay-area-air-quality-improving-as-people-stay-home/

Upcoming Events

• 5/7 - Sustainable Enterprise Conference of Sonoma, Online or in-person, 9am-12pm, https://sustainableenterpriseconference.org/coronavirus-disease-2019-covid-19

• 5/14 - Sonoma County Bike to Work Day, https://www.facebook.com/events/509310719944893/

• 10/7 - Moving Forward Forum, Finley Center, Santa Rosa, 9am-12pm

Social Media / Community Outreach

Facebook activity, 9/22-10/19/19 SCTA RCPA CA37

Page Likes (change from last month)

622 (0%) 605 (0%) 682 (0%)

People reached last month 466 (-23%) 187 (-10%) 18 (-93%)

Post engagements last month 132 (+7%) 65 (-14%) 0 (-100%)

Newsletter:

• Monthly newsletters for SCTA and RCPA were sent on March 6, 2020 • The SCTA newsletter was sent to 309 recipients with a 32% open and 8% click rate • The RCPA newsletter was sent to 261 recipients with a 41% open and 10% click rate

146

https://mtc.ca.gov/whats-happening/news/transit-housing-get-relief-massive-covid-19-assistance-package

https://mtc.ca.gov/whats-happening/news/transit-housing-get-relief-massive-covid-19-assistance-package

https://airnow.gov/index.cfm?action=airnow.mapsarchivecalendar&maptype=aqipeak&domainid=49&calyear=2020&calmonth=3

https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/03/23/coronavirus-bay-area-air-quality-improving-as-people-stay-home/


https://sustainableenterpriseconference.org/coronavirus-disease-2019-covid-19

https://www.facebook.com/events/509310719944893/

Related News

Sonoma hopes for darker skies during annual Earth Hour March 26, 2020 – Sonoma Index-Tribune https://www.sonomanews.com/news/10854386-181/sonoma-hopes-for-darker-skies?sba=AAS “Faster Bay Area” Hits the Brakes March 23, 2020 – STREETSBLOG SF https://sf.streetsblog.org/2020/03/23/faster-bay-area-hits-the-brakes/ Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit sale-tax extension Measure I fails March 4, 2020 – North Bay Business Journal https://www.northbaybusinessjournal.com/industrynews/transportation/10781099-181/sonoma-marin-area-rail-transit-sale-tax SMART, Sonoma County bus systems step up cleaning to safeguard against coronavirus March 6, 2020 – The Press Democrat https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/10789131-181/smart-sonoma-county-bus-systems Sonoma County grapples with road tax extension following election losses March 11, 2020 – The Press Democrat https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/10805100-181/sonoma-county-grapples-road-tax Close to Home: Rethinking transit in Sonoma County March 9, 2020 – The Press Democrat https://www.pressdemocrat.com/opinion/10799370-181/close-to-home-rethinking-transit Sonoma County transit agencies reducing service amid coronavirus spread March 17, 2020 – The Press Democrat https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/10830362-181/sonoma-county-transit-agencies-reducing Coronavirus: Bay Area air quality is improving as people stay home March 23, 2020 – The Mercury News https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/03/23/coronavirus-bay-area-air-quality-improving-as-people-stay-home/

147

https://www.sonomanews.com/news/10854386-181/sonoma-hopes-for-darker-skies?sba=AAS

https://sf.streetsblog.org/2020/03/23/faster-bay-area-hits-the-brakes/

https://www.northbaybusinessjournal.com/industrynews/transportation/10781099-181/sonoma-marin-area-rail-transit-sale-tax

https://www.northbaybusinessjournal.com/industrynews/transportation/10781099-181/sonoma-marin-area-rail-transit-sale-tax

https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/10789131-181/smart-sonoma-county-bus-systems

https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/10805100-181/sonoma-county-grapples-road-tax

https://www.pressdemocrat.com/opinion/10799370-181/close-to-home-rethinking-transit

https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/10830362-181/sonoma-county-transit-agencies-reducing

