From: Baltao, Elaine Sent: Monday, February 11, 2019 10:25 AM To: VTA Board of Directors <VTABoardofDirectors@vta.org> Subject: VTA's 2019 New Transit Service Plan Virtual Meeting - February 12, 1 p.m. VTA Board of Directors: As mentioned by the General Manager late last week, VTA is hosting an online virtual meeting tomorrow, February 12 at 1 p.m., for the 2019 New Transit Service Plan. The link to register to the meeting is below. Please share this link with your constituents and network. https://www.eventbrite.com/e/2019-new-transit-service-plan-online-virtual-meeting-tickets-55920494705 Thank you. Board Secretary’s Office Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority 3331 North First Street, Building B San Jose, CA 95134-1927 Phone 408-321-5680 board.secretary@vta.org

Conserve paper. Think before you print.

From: VTA Board Secretary Sent: Monday, February 11, 2019 4:24 PM To: VTA Board of Directors <VTABoardofDirectors@vta.org> Subject: From VTA: February 11, 2019 Media Clips

VTA Daily News Clips for Monday, February 11, 2019

1. BART Train Testing (various outlets)

2. BART testing to San Jose picks up; Nov. 1 opening tentatively set (Mercury News)

3. Transportation taxes paying for more than filling potholes: Roadshow (Mercury News)

BART Train Testing (various outlets)

KPIX Channel 5 (link to video)

ABC 7 News (Link to video)

Train testing along South Bay BART extension expected soon

Neighbors in the South Bay will soon see BART trains running between Fremont and San Jose.

It'll be some time before commuters are able to get on-board a Berryessa Station-bound train,

but testing along the extension begins next week.

The Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority is heading up current testing on the long-

awaited 10-mile line to San Jose. BART will take control later this year.

"There's been some technical difficulties that have delayed the opening of it," San Jose District

4 Councilman Lan Diep said, "But this is a good step forward."

Diep is also a VTA board member. He emphasizes the extension is a big deal for the Bay Area,

built in his district. The Berryessa Station first broke ground in April 2012.

A distance away at Fremont BART, commuters said they hope testing will deliver a better sense

of timing for station operations.

"I took BART and now I'm going to take a Lyft out to San Jose," Daily BART rider, Monique Calfe

said. "So, it'd be pretty convenient."

Calfe is a Richmond resident, and having to interrupt her travel to wait for a Lyft is truly leaving

her out in the cold.

When asked how much money or time is spent on the Lyft, she replied, "It's about $30 and I

want to say an hour or 45 minutes."

When trains finally carry travelers along the Berryessa extension, ridership is estimated to start

at 23,000 a day, and should double after 15 years.

Many tell ABC7 News they are already "on-board."

"Maybe it's just millennial inconvenience where I'm like, I'd rather be more convenient with

public transportation," Newark resident and BART rider, Biney Dev said. "And it's more green,

right?"

However, more than millennial inconvenience, many say it just makes sense..

"I think having a ring of rail to completely circle the Bay Area is very important," Councilman

Diep said.

The opening of Berryessa Station is tentatively set for November 2019. There are also plans to

extend BART from Berryessa Station to Downtown San Jose.

Check out more stories about BART or Building a Better Bay Area.

NBC Bay Area (link to video)

Back to Top

BART testing to San Jose picks up; Nov. 1 opening tentatively set (Mercury News)

Don’t blink in disbelief. Testing of BART trains on the often-delayed extension from Fremont to

the Berryessa area of San Jose begins in earnest next week , although the opening of the $2.3

billion, 10-mile line has been pushed back to Nov. 1.

Up to 20 trains a day could be running. Some will be just three car trains; others could have 10

cars.

The reaction of wanna-be BART passengers: Finally.

“I have been waiting for a long while for BART to come to San Jose,” said Pete Nyberg, 50, who

commutes from the South Bay to San Francisco, catches BART in Fremont or Millbrae and is

frustrated by the length of time to get the new line up and running. “What exactly takes so long

to test?”

The Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority had hoped to open the Berryessa link last year,

but the agency found a contractor had installed improper communications equipment and used

parts that needed to be replaced.

“Once we finish our testing, we will be able to more precisely predict the timing of the other

activities and opening day,” said VTA spokeswoman Bernice Alaniz.

Test trains will run depending on the needs of the testing program, thus there is no set

schedule and they can run at varying times.

VTA is conducting the current testing and then will hand over to BART all computers and

equipment to be integrated into BART’s control center in Oakland for further testing. BART will

take control later this year, simulating actual service plans with their tests.

Problems involved routers and other equipment related to communications systems that

control things like passenger information signs, next-train signals, public address systems,

closed-circuit television, radio, fire alarms and secure door access badges,

The installed parts were either used or otherwise out of compliance with the contract

specifications for manufacturer warranties. Replacement cost around $1.25 million.

The tracks from Fremont to Berryessa are completed. The two stations are essentially ready

with just some finishing touches remaining and solar panels are being added to the Milpitas

parking structure.

Ridership for the Berryessa extension is estimated to start at 23,000 a day and to double after

15 years.

A second phase will extend BART six miles from Berryessa into downtown San Jose and Santa

Clara and is projected to be completed in 2026.

Crews are now boring into the ground in parking spaces and sidewalks on Santa Clara

Street. While at least one lane of traffic will be open during the work, residents and workers in

the area can expect some delays. The drilling is expected to be about the same noise level as a

lawnmower.

Major construction isn’t expected downtown until next year.

Transportation taxes paying for more than filling potholes: Roadshow (Mercury

News)

Regarding your article “Repaving and filling potholes tops Measure B funding priorities.” So this

is what we get for our half-cent sales tax and 12 cent per gallon gas-tax increases? Filling

potholes, which lasts about a week in heavy traffic? Why are we wasting money on such a

short term and ineffective solution instead of lasting and proper infrastructure repair?

Joseph Gumina, San Carlos

A: Potholes and repaving are on the list because that’s what many motorists want and what all

public works chiefs know we desperately need. But there is much more on the horizon for

Measure B — $1.5 billion for BART through downtown San Jose, $1.2 billion to repave city

streets, $1.1 billion for Caltrain, $750 million for interchange improvements, $750 million for

county expressways, $500 million for transit operations, $350 million for Highway 85 upgrades

and $250 million for bicycle and pedestrian. programs.

As for the state gas tax, 90 projects have been completed and soon work will begin on repaving

El Camino Real and installing traffic management systems on Highway 1 in San Francisco, on

Interstate 880 from Auto Mall Parkway to Mowry Avenue in Fremont, on Highway 84 from

Thornton Avenue to Newark Boulevard in Newark, repaving Highway 1 from Santa Cruz County

to Bean Hollow Road in Pescadero.

And the gas tax is helping to pay for the improvements to Highway 4 at Interstate 680. Said

Randy-the-Contra-Costa-Man: “If people are excited about seeing heavy machinery near this

choke point, they should be thankful we have the gas tax. There will be more heavy machinery

in the near future and these will be widening Route 4, widening the overcrossings and replacing

the bridge at Grayson Creek. Gotta love it.”

Q: Is this true? Government taxes us for roads, spends the money on other stuff, then increases

taxes for roads promising to spend the extra money on transportation, then spends 85 percent

of that money on stuff other than roads, etc.

Mike Cheponis, Santa Clara

A: Rest easy. This is mostly a myth. The California Constitution has protected the gas tax since

1976 and in 2010 California voters further safeguarded gas tax revenue by barring short-term

loans to the General Fund or debt service payments on transportation-related general

obligation bonds.

There was a time when money from the sales tax on gas purchases went into the General Fund.

Legislation to extend the state’s sales tax on gasoline was enacted to support the General Fund

and signed into law by Gov. Ronald Reagan in 1971. This was worth between $1.5 billion and $3

billion annually. Then last June voters passed Proposition 69, which dedicated all current

sources of state transportation monies to transportation.

Bottom line: The gas tax and countywide transportation sales taxes all must go for roads and

transit.

Conserve paper. Think before you print.

From: VTA Board Secretary Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2019 12:03 PM To: VTA Board of Directors <VTABoardofDirectors@vta.org> Subject: From VTA: February 13, 2019 Media Clips

VTA Daily News Coverage for Wednesday, February 13, 2019

1. Food-tampering suspect speaks out from jail (KTVU Ch. 2)

2. White dust leads to bust at Los Altos bus stop (Los Altos Town Crier)

3. LA roads to benefit from VTA Measure B funds (Los Altos Town Crier)

4. VTA May Cut Service on ‘Hotel 22,’ Region’s Only 24-Hour Bus Route (San Jose Inside)

5. Bay Area High Speed Rail Plan Halted After Gov. Newsom’s Address (KPIX Ch. 5)

6. Bay Area leaders hold out hope for 'Valley to Valley' high-speed rail connection

(Business Journal)

7. Construction of long-delayed Warm Springs BART West Access Bridge moving along

(Mercury News)

8. Polling show SF residents reject congestion pricing proposal (San Francisco Examiner)

9. Does the Green New Deal Eliminate Air Travel? It Wants to Make Public Transit A

Priority (Bustle.com)

10. Here's How Not to Report on a Public Transit Crisis (Jezebel.com)

Food-tampering suspect speaks out from jail (KTVU Ch. 2)

David Lohr, 48, a transient, is sitting in jail, accused of tampering with food at two Safeway

stores in Sunnyvale. But in a jailhouse interview with KTVU, Lohr said he had done nothing

wrong.

Deputy Mike Low of the Santa Clara County sheriff's office believes otherwise.

"Bleach had been poured on some eggs as well as beer bottles," Low said.

Investigators say surveillance images show Lohr in shorts, in a Safeway where other food was

contaminated.

"There were reports of an empty hydrogen peroxide bottle that was located in the heating tray

of some rotisserie chickens," Low said.

Last fall, Lohr was accused of pouring a mixture of vinegar and hydrogen peroxide in coolers at

Target stores in Arizona.

And in Los Angeles, federal prosecutors say he poured bleach into grocery-store freezers

containing ice, beer and frozen shrimp.

"This is a bizarre case, which could have led to some serious public-health issues," Low said.

KTVU crime reporter Henry Lee went to visit Lohr at a downtown Oakland jail, where he's

awaiting transfer to Los Angeles. Cameras weren't allowed.

Lohr denied committing any crimes. Hypothetically speaking, he said someone poured bleach

under the food - not on it - to make the air cleaner, so clean that now "you can see snow in the

mountains."

Told that investigators say a child carrying a bag of contaminated ice had his black shirt turned

brown from bleach, Lohr became angry and said, "Is that a crime?"

He said he was not mentally ill.

Authorities say the suspect uses public transportation and that his downfall was two observant

VTA drivers..

"The initial bus driver that was driving the bus saw the individual pouring a substance on board

a VTA bus," said transit agency spokeswoman Holly Perez. "Once that suspect left the vehicle, a

second operator spotted the suspect in Los Altos."

Authorities say the suspect poured salt and hydrogen peroxide on the bus.

Although Lohr is in custody, the FBI is still asking anyone who may have interacted with him to

come forward.

Safeway says all the affected products have been removed from shelves and that inspections by

the health department found "no areas of concern."

Back to Top

White dust leads to bust at Los Altos bus stop (Los Altos Town Crier)

A 48-year-old man who caused the evacuation of a local public bus by allegedly sprinkling a

mysterious white powder inside is in federal custody following an investigation that uncovered

a warrant for similar crimes.

Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Office deputies arrested David Lohr, residence unknown, at a Los

Altos bus stop near the intersection of East El Camino Real and San Antonio Road Wednesday

(Feb. 6). He was booked on a felony no-bail warrant out of the FBI’s Los Angeles office for

charges related to tampering with consumer products, according to a Sheriff’s Office press

release issued Monday.

The Sheriff’s Office credited two Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) bus operators for

helping bring Lohr to justice. The first, Juan Balleza, promptly de-boarded his bus Wednesday

morning after Lohr was seen spreading the white powder – later determined to be salt – and

hydrogen peroxide as the vehicle traveled near the intersection of East El Camino Real and

Maria Lane in Sunnyvale, according to the release. Although Lohr left the scene, a VTA alert

notified other bus operators about the search for him, and driver Michael Grenz contacted

authorities upon spotting Lohr sitting at the Los Altos bus stop at 9:55 a.m., less than an hour

later.

Salt and receipts in Lohr’s pockets led investigators to area Safeway stores, according to the

release. At one, employees noted discovering hydrogen peroxide spilled in a heated tray of

rotisserie chicken Jan. 26. Video surveillance at the store allegedly showed Lohr pouring bleach

onto cartons of eggs.

“Further investigation is being conducted with the grocery store to determine whether any

chickens and or eggs were sold to the public,” according to the release.

The Sheriff’s Office is not disclosing the exact location of the Sunnyvale store because the

investigation is on going, Deputy Mike Low said.

Although salt and hydrogen are not considered hazardous, bleach can be toxic, causing

irritation to the eyes, mouth, throat and lungs, according to the National Institutes of Health.

Anyone with information on the case is asked to contact the Santa Clara County Sheriff’s

Office at (408) 808-4500 or the Sheriff’s Office Investigative Services anonymous tip line at

(408) 808-4431.

Back to Top

LA roads to benefit from VTA Measure B funds (Los Altos Town Crier)

The recent release of Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority funding from Measure B’s

half-cent sales tax could mean more than $1.5 million over two years headed to Los Altos for

city road repairs and maintenance. Additional funds will go toward improvements along

Interstate 280 and Foothill Expressway in Los Altos.

VTA officials celebrated the end of legal opposition to the 2016 voter-approved initiative last

month with the report that funds can now be used on a range of projects, from a BART

extension into downtown San Jose to lane expansion on Foothill Expressway and filling potholes

on city streets. Los Altos City Councilwoman Jeannie Bruins, also an ex-officio VTA board

member, was on hand Jan. 30 to accept a $138,274 “advance” for Los Altos road fixes. Los Altos

Hills received $37,843 for its advance and Mountain View’s totaled $353,498.

“After this initial advance, funding for the remainder of local streets and roads projects will

come in the form of reimbursements once those projects get underway in the respective cities

and the county,” said VTA spokeswoman Holly Perez.

Perez said Los Altos has been allocated $571,706 annually for fiscal years 2018 and 2019.

Plans to overhaul Foothill Expressway, with expanded auto and bike lanes, and modified

interchanges, also are included in Measure B funding, though that project’s timeline is still

subject to a decision by the county’s Expressway Policy Advisory Board.

“That prioritization has not yet occurred, so we cannot say when this project will move

forward,” Perez said.

In the highway program category, $3.5 million in Measure B funds for the 2018-2019 fiscal year

have been allocated to northbound Interstate 280 for a second exit lane to Foothill Expressway.

The Los Altos City Council has yet to decide specifically how Measure B funding for local roads

will be spent and when.

“We are currently building our five-year Capital Improvement Project budget and plan to

discuss with council,” said Sharif Etman, administrative services director.

He said all funding, including updated Measure B funds and Capital Improvement projects, is

scheduled for discussion during a March 26 council study session.

After being approved with 72 percent of the vote in 2016, Measure B’s funding was frozen for

nearly two years while a Saratoga resident challenged the validity of the initiative in court.

Opponents appealed to the state Supreme Court, which refused to grant a hearing, effectively

ending the challenge and releasing the funding. VTA had collected $360 million thus far of the

$6.3 billion, 30-year sales tax, which it had put into an escrow account during the court

challenge.

To learn more about Measure B, visit vta.org/measure-b-2016.

Back to Top

VTA May Cut Service on ‘Hotel 22,’ Region’s Only 24-Hour Bus Route (San Jose

Inside)

That Santa Clara Valley Transit Authority (VTA) may discontinue some all-day, express and

school routes and reduce frequency on others—including its only 24-hour line known as Hotel

22—in response to a looming budget shortfall.

The proposed changes come at the direction of the VTA board in response to a projected $20

million-plus deficit in the coming fiscal year. But the planned cost-cutting measure of halting

Route 22 from 1am to 4am has drawn considerable backlash from advocates for the homeless,

who rely onthe round-the-clock bus line for shelter on cold nights.

A midnight protest is planned for March 6 to call attention to the looming cutback.

Commuter routes for South County riders could also be affected, according to draft

plans appended to meeting agendas and on the VTA blog. A post by the authority announcing

some of the changes said the VTA board is attempting to avoid decreasing transit in the South

County because of the high number of commuters riding to and from San Jose.

“Routes 14, 17, and 19 in Gilroy would still be restructured into a bidirectional loop as proposed

in the 2017 Next Network Plan, but service levels would not change. Route 16 in Morgan Hill

would be renamed to Route 87, but would otherwise remain unchanged,” wrote Holly Perez,

public information officer for the authority, in the blog post.

The VTA is proposing to cut two “commute period trips” on Express Route 168, which connects

the Gilroy Transit Center with Diridon Station, reducing the number of trips from seven to five

“to better match demand without sacrificing rider convenience.”

Perez told the this newspaper in an email that additional proposed South County changes

include changing the frequency for weekday midday on Route 68 between Santa Teresa Station

and Gilroy to every 15 minutes from 30 minutes, eliminating 3 of 9 daily trips in each direction

on Express 121, eliminating 2 of 7 daily trips in each direction on Express 168 and discontinuing

routes on Express 185.

The VTA said it will continue to consult the public on the 2019 draft transit service plan. The

plan will not be adopted until fall of 2019, and public input is being sought as the authority

considers cutting routes or changing service schedules.

VTA scheduled a “virtual meeting” Feb. 12 to continue collecting community input on the

changes. According to a VTA blog post, the authority is facing a $26 million deficit in 2019. The

proposed changes are set to save the authority $15 million annually, with 70 changes across

bus and light rail services in the current draft of the plan.

Back to Top

Bay Area High Speed Rail Plan Halted After Gov. Newsom’s Address (KPIX Ch. 5)

Governor Gavin Newsom’s State of the State announcement that high speed rail may be limited

to the central valley and won’t be coming to Silicon Valley and the Bay Area anytime soon

surprised rail commuters in San Jose.

“I think it’s idiotic. And I think that our country is going backwards,” said Janko Kostoski, who

was catching a train at Diridon Station in San Jose.

Another commuter, who sometimes uses Uber to get from Fresno to San Jose, was also

disappointed.

“They have to make it easier for us. Transportation is number one, like in other countries. Like

in Japan and China, and it’s all about commuting,” said Abir Alhuniti. She said she is forced to

commute into the city from far away due to the high cost of living in Silicon Valley.

High speed rail was over budget and years behind schedule. But transportation experts say

those problems could have been solved without putting the brakes on.

“Shock is a great word to describe how I feel. And a bit dismayed,” said Dr. Karen Philbrick,

Executive Director of the Mineta Transportation Institute in San Jose.

“High Speed Rail was a real solution that could move people reliably, safely and economically.

And the fact that the bread basket of our nation, in the central valley region, will not be

connected to the hub of Silicon Valley is deeply disturbing,” she said.

But the man for whom the Diridon Station was named is still optimistic.

“I think what the Governor is saying is that we have to find a way to complete the studies and

come up with 17 billion dollars for the connection between the Central Valley and

Silicon Valley,” said Rod Diridon, a former Santa Clara County Supervisor who advocated for

light rail in San Jose in the 1980’s.

Diridon says he’s spoken to Newsom personally and thinks this isn’t the end of the line.

“I think he was staking out his own turf. I think the project will go ahead but it will be his

project,” Diridon said.

Under Newsom’s plan, high speed rail will only serve cities in the Central Valley, from Merced

to Bakersfield.

Back to Top

Bay Area leaders hold out hope for 'Valley to Valley' high-speed rail connection

(Business Journal)

Gov. Gavin Newsom's announcement Tuesday that he is drastically scaling back the vision for

California's high-speed bullet train to focus on the Central Valley throws San Jose's future as a

connection for the project into limbo.

Newsom on Tuesday said the original vision to connect Los Angeles and the Bay Area with a 3-

hour train ride had become too expensive. "The project, as currently planned, would cost too

much and take too long," he said. "There’s been too little oversight and not enough

transparency."

He added: “Right now, there simply isn’t a path to get from Sacramento to San Diego, let alone

from San Francisco to (Los Angeles). I wish there were."

Instead, the state's High-Speed Rail Authority will focus for now on the first phase: Building out

the segment from Bakersfield to Merced.

During his gubernatorial campaign, Newsom had promoted a so-called "Valley to Valley"

segment that would connect Bakersfield in the Central Valley with Silicon Valley at San Jose's

Diridon Station. But even that project has always faced challenges, Randy Rentschler, legislative

director of the regional infrastructure agency Metropolitan Transportation Commission, which

plans transit for the 9-county Greater Bay Area, told the San Francisco Chronicle.

“Look, we all knew San Jose was difficult,” he said, “and the Transbay Terminal (in San

Francisco) — that was a long way off, even on a good day.”

Newsom “is just telling us in plain-speak what those of us in the business kind of already knew,”

Rentschler told the Chronicle. “We’re just surprised that he said it.”

Other local leaders were more optimistic. “High-speed rail is going to happen, and it’s going to

connect San Francisco to Los Angeles,” said state Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco. “Nothing

the governor said today is going to change that.”

BUSINESS PULSE POLL

SPONSORED BY

Gov. Newsom is cutting back California's High-Speed Rail project— is he making the right

move?

Top of Form

Yes, the project was already costing too much, and needed to be scaled down.

Yes, but only temporarily — the other sections should still be built later.

No, the state needs High-Speed Rail from SF to LA — for various reasons — despite the cost and

effort.

He should have killed off the project completely.

I don't know/I'm not sure.

Vote

Bottom of Form

This poll is not a scientific sampling. It offers a quick view of what readers are thinking.

Carl Guardino, CEO of the Silicon Valley Leadership Group, a regional business advocacy group,

said Bay Area leaders will seek private and federal infrastructure dollars for the project.

"It makes sense for high-speed rail to extend from the agricultural Capitol of the Central Valley

to the Innovation Capitol of Silicon Valley," he said in a statement. "During his speech,

Governor Gavin Newsom, exhibited his commitment to doing the hard work to get the Valley to

Valley connection done. He spoke to the hard work of prioritizing while also balancing ‘dollars

and cents’ so I appreciate his approach in starting with the Bakersfield to Merced connection."

The original vision for California high-speed rail

Here's a closer look at what California's bullet train was supposed to look like, before Gov.

Newsom's focus on the Central Valley.

Guardino said Newsom was "also clear that California remains committed to investments in

Caltrain and completing the environmental work for the Valley to Valley project."

He added: "Of course, this will be a collaborative process and we will have to work together to

raise private and federal infrastructure funds. It will be much easier to do our work if we get the

first phase of high-speed rail completed."

After his State of the State Address, Newsom took to Twitter to say he’s not abandoning high-

speed rail. “We have the capacity to complete the rail between Merced and Bakersfield. We will

continue our regional projects north and south,” he said. “Finish Phase 1 enviro work. Connect

the Central Valley to other parts of the state.”

We're going to make high-speed rail a reality for CA. We have the capacity to complete the rail

between Merced and Bakersfield. We will continue our regional projects north and south.

Finish Phase 1 enviro work. Connect the Central Valley to other parts of the state.

Newsom's decision also throws the future of San Francisco's recently completed $2.2 billion

Salesforce Transit Center, also envisioned as a Caltrain station, into question.

Back to Top

Construction of long-delayed Warm Springs BART West Access Bridge moving

along (Mercury News)

Bridge and plaza project expected to be complete by 2020

While it’s still more than a year from completion, construction is humming along on a long-

delayed pedestrian and bicycle bridge intended to connect thousands of workers and future

residents of new homes in south Fremont to the Warm Springs BART station, officials said.

One set of major support columns have been completed, and another set is on the way as work

on the foundation continues, according to Hans Larsen, Fremont’s public works director.

Later this year, Larsen said major portions of the bridge structure — which are being built off-

site — will be incorporated.

Riders using the Warm Springs BART station should notice changes there, too, including a

barricade installed next to the station agent’s booth to separate the work zone from public

space, according to a city statement.

“Minor construction activities will take place on the platform and concourse levels of the

station, including modifications to signage, directional tiles, guardrails, and the station’s

communications systems,” the statement said.

The station will remain open during construction, but there will be “noise and dust and single-

tracking of BART trains may be required” on nights and weekends, according to a BART

statement.

When completed, the Warm Springs BART West Access Bridge will span the width of the Union

Pacific railroad tracks adjacent to the BART station, allowing thousands of employees from the

Tesla factory, as well as other area companies to walk or bike directly off a train to work.

The project is expected to add a functional flair to what officials have dubbed the “Innovation

District” in the city’s south end.

Officials also hope that future residents of roughly 4,000 new homes going up in the area —

more than half of them directly west of the BART station — will make use of the bridge and

plaza.

“The plaza will provide a community gathering space with seating, bicycle lockers, solar

charging stations, an information kiosk, and public art,” the city statement said.

The bridge, along with a public plaza at its western base, were originally scheduled to be

complete by early 2019, for about $25 million. It is now expected to be completed in 2020, the

city said.

As previously reported by this news organization, the project went over its original budget by

nearly $10 million before shovels even hit the ground last summer, as Fremont received

construction bids more than $4 million over the city engineer’s estimate in 2017.

The city faced delays during the bidding process when the two lowest bidders on the project

were rejected for not making enough of an effort to employ local contractors, with one bidder

appealing the decision.

The delay added to the project timeline and total cost in what Larsen called a “red-hot

construction market.”

The bulk of the project is being funded by a portion of the 30-year, $8 billion Measure BB sales

tax fund, passed by Alameda County voters in 2014. Alameda County Transportation

Commission provided about $30 million from the sales tax funds to pay for the construction of

the bridge and plaza.

The balance is being covered by Fremont’s capital improvement and traffic impact funds,

according to staff reports.

Back to Top

Polling show SF residents reject congestion pricing proposal (San Francisco

Examiner)

Tanked. Flatlined. Dead-on-arrival.

No matter how you word it, support for congestion pricing downtown among San Franciscans is

nearly as low as it can get, according to a city poll released Tuesday.

Yet on that same morning the Board of Supervisors, acting in their capacity as the San Francisco

County Transportation Authority board, authorized $500,000 to further study the concept in

San Francisco.

The low support from San Franciscans was revealed in the latest Dignity Healthy CityBeat poll

from the San Francisco Chamber of Commerce, which interviewed 500 San Franciscans

between January 10 and 14 this year by landline and cell phone.

The CityBeat poll revealed only 16 percent of San Franciscans strongly support charging a $3 fee

to people driving in and out of downtown during commute hours.

On the flipside, 51 percent of respondents strongly oppose the plan, with 14 percent

“somewhat” opposing the plan, and 14 percent “somewhat” supporting the plan. All told, that’s

30 percent of San Franciscans backing the idea, and 65 percent rejecting it.

At the same time, the poll also showed 82 percent of San Franciscans saying they thought

traffic congestion on city streets is getting worse, which is up from 74 percent last year.

City officials hope charging a fee to enter San Francisco will help persuade Bay Area commuters

to arrive in The City by BART and other forms of public transit, while also generating funds for

public transit improvements.

Juliana Bunim, senior vice president of the Chamber of Commerce, said the Chamber’s poll

reveals San Franciscans don’t agree with that strategy.

“Our poll shows that people are sick of gridlock and congestion and want real transportation

options,” she said. “We need to give people reliable and accessible ways to commute

throughout the Bay Area to support our workforce.”

Though the transportation authority board ultimately approved funds for transportation

authority staff to study congestion pricing, it wasn’t without caveats.

Referencing low support in the CityBeat poll, Supervisor Rafael Mandelman said instituting the

scheme would be “a heavy lift.”

“I think there is inherent concern and doubt about this approach,” he said, while acknowledging

it is “one of the few tools we have left” to combat downtown traffic congestion is congestion

pricing.

Supervisor Sandra Fewer said she worried reducing vehicle traffic would hurt Chinatown

businesses, as well as business in other neighborhoods.

“I’m happy to approve the funding to approve the study but wanted to be transparent” about

her feelings, Fewer said. “I don’t really dig it.”

Back to Top

Does the Green New Deal Eliminate Air Travel? It Wants to Make Public Transit A

Priority (Bustle.com)

Since Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez first introduced it, the Green New Deal has drawn interest from

skeptics, critics, supporters, and more. The proposal, which seeks to aggressively combat

climate change while also addressing economic inequality, does offer a number of progressive

solutions for its goals. So if you're wondering whether the Green New Deal eliminates air travel,

don't worry too much.

Within the official outline for the Green New Deal, which was released on Feb. 7, the 10-year

goal to move America towards 100% renewable energy is explained in detail. And yes, one of

those details is the reduction of air travel — but the outline doesn't exactly say it wants to get

of air travel. Rather, it outlines a plan to reach a point where air travel "stops becoming

necessary" as a means of transportation, and it aims to achieve this in a number of ways.

The outline reads in part,

[We aim to] totally overhaul transportation by massively expanding electric vehicle

manufacturing, build charging stations everywhere, build out highspeed rail at a scale where air

travel stops becoming necessary, create affordable public transit available to all, with goal to

replace every combustion-engine vehicle

MSNBC on YouTube

At another point in the outline, the authors explain that the 10-year goal aims for "net zero"

emissions, rather than "zero" emissions, because "we aren’t sure that we’ll be able to fully get

rid of farting cows and airplanes that fast."

What's more, at still another point in the outline, the authors explain why such drastic steps are

needed for industries as valuable as the transportation industry: "Simply put, we don’t need to

just stop doing some things we are doing (like using fossil fuels for energy needs); we also need

to start doing new things (like overhauling whole industries or retrofitting all buildings to be

energy efficient)."

It's not surprising, necessarily, that a climate change proposal would address air travel:

transportation is the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in the nation, according to a

report by the Rhodium Group as released by Vox. Vox further noted thata full re-haul of the rail

system in the United States wouldn't be that unheard of, given that many countries offer

extensive high-speed train offerings instead of flights, in countries like Japan, South Korea, and

Italy, where trains travel as fast as 200 miles per hour.

One of the proposals in the “Green New Deal” is to build high-speed train lines so flying is less

necessary. This is not a radical proposal. In Japan, the Shinkansen covers distance approx LA-

San Francisco in 2.5 hrs. At peak, trains every 10 minutes. The line was built in 1964.

Vox also reports that shifting transportation needs from airplanes to trains will definitely

decrease greenhouse gas emissions in a dramatic way — but only if those high-speed trains run

on electricity, not on coal power.

To the publication, Yonah Freemark, a doctoral candidate studying the politics of transportation

at MIT, said, “Outside of the US, Canada, and Australia, every developed country has invested

quite considerably in high-speed rail transportation systems."

He added, "I think there is no reason to think that the United States is any different [in its

transportation potential] than any other country.”

As of Feb. 12, five presidential candidates have cosponsored the New Green Deal.

Back to Top

Here's How Not to Report on a Public Transit Crisis (Jezebel.com)

(link to video)

The New York City subway system is crumbling. The Metropolitan Transportation Authority that

runs the system can’t seem to find the cash to fix it. But rather than self-reflect on decades of

neglect, fund mismanagement, and big, flashy, money-sucking projects, the MTA blames fare

evaders for its budget woes.

According to The New York Times, fare evaders make up about four percent of the subway’s

ridership. Often, they are riders who cannot afford a hefty $2.75 MetroCard swipe. Sometimes,

they are riders with expired MetroCards at an entrance with no or broken machines;

sometimes, they are riders who are so fed up with the MTA’s shitty service it seems pointless to

cough up the price equivalent of a small coffee just to sit in a tunnel for 30 minutes. Whatever

the reason, they are not riders who deserve to be heckled on video by Inside Editionreporters.

And yet:

Outstream Video

https://twitter.com/i/status/1094309962912677888

Indeed, Inside Edition sent a reporter on an “investigative” journey into the subway, which

consisted primarily of sticking a microphone and camera into commuters’ faces and harangue

them for farebeating.

The intrepid investigation includes hard-hitting questions like, “We just caught you jumping—

why did you do that?” in addition to chyrons screaming about the farebeating EPIDEMIC and

exciting graphics detailing that six people in a city of 8.5 million walked through an exit door at

one Manhattan station. (There’s also a particularly fun moment in which the reporter runs after

an alleged farebeater and hounds him about why he didn’t pay his fare, then yells at him when

he understandably tries to smack the microphone out of his face.)

It’s true that farebeating costs the MTA a lot of money. According to Inside Edition’s actual

reporting, the city lost $215 million to farebeaters last year. But blaming commuters for not

paying fares is kind of like blaming consumers for using plastic straws. Bad behavior

doesn’t help a disintegrating system, but it’s also not the root cause. Sending a reporter to narc

on people trying to get through their day isn’t going to stop intermittent track fires from

transforming my A train into an F and then an N and then, I don’t know, an East River duck boat

that dumps me somewhere in Queens.

You know what might? Reporting on the congressmen and MTA board members in Albany

who oversee subway funding but never ride it, or the flashy station renewal projects that do

not in any way improve service, or that NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio would rather run for President

than back congestion pricing in his own damn city. Though I suppose that’s not as click-y as

stationing a hall monitor by a turnstile for 12 hours. SEE IT.

Back to Top

Conserve paper. Think before you print.

From: VTA Board Secretary Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2019 12:47 PM To: VTA Board of Directors <VTABoardofDirectors@vta.org> Subject: From VTA: February 14, 2019 Media Clips

VTA Daily News Coverage for Thursday, February 14, 2019

1. BART on its way to San Jose (ABC 7 News) (Link to Video)

2. San Jose BART service tentatively begins in November (SF Curbed)

3. San Jose community briefs for the week of Feb. 15 (Mercury News)

4. Managed Lanes deal almost finalized (The Daily Journal- San Mateo County)

BART on its way to San Jose (ABC 7 News) (Link to Video)

BART will reach a historic milestone by the end of the year when its trains reach into San Jose

for the first time in its history.

Two construction workers were using a jackhammer at the corner of Santa Clara and Market

streets in downtown San Jose. It's a kind of music to the ears of San Jose residents who have

been waiting for action, not words, that BART is coming. Initial work to map underground utility

lines and to do soil sampling is underway where the future downtown station will be built.

"I think that this is something that's been missing from the BART system. We should be

connected to one of our most important centers in the Bay Area," said Bevan Dufty, president

of the BART Board of Directors.

BART will make its long-awaited entry into Santa Clara County by year's end with the opening of

a 10-mile long extension from the existing Warm Springs station in Fremont to two new

stations, one in Milpitas and then one at Berryessa in San Jose.

Those stations are mostly completed while VTA conducts tests of its track and signal

communications and the trains. The chair of the BART board and the president of the VTA

board took a tour of the Berryessa station the other day. VTA is in charge of construction as the

transit agency in Santa Clara County. In a few weeks, VTA will then turn over this phase to BART

for system integration and safety certification.

"The testing will be done in that environment and integrated with the BART system," said

Bernice Alaniz, VTA communications manager. "That's about another 90-day process, and

following that becomes the actual simulated service testing and the training of the operators,

which is about another 90 days or so."

A year-end opening puts the project about three years later than originally planned, in part due

to some technical issues with networking equipment that required rigorous testing. VTA says it

had an overarching goal.

"When our residents and riders get on BART lines in Santa Clara County that they can be

confident that they're going to be as safe as possible," said Teresa O'Neill, chair of the VTA

Board.

As BART comes to downtown San Jose, the Mayor is very concerned about some of the issues

highlighted in our week-long series about BART, such as fare cheats, sanitation issues and drug

use in the stations. That's why he prefers San Jose Police to patrol the four new BART stations in

his city.

"It's having local police agencies there at the station that understand the local community and

understand also when there's communication that needs to be had about who's coming and

going and who's been engaged in crime, who's not," said Mayor Sam Liccardo.

There are still seven years to hammer out the details. The next phase is the continuation of

BART from Berryessa to a station at Alum Rock, then down Santa Clara Street to a new

downtown station near Market Street. From there, BART will make a stop at Diridon Station

near SAP Center before making its final way to the city of Santa Clara. About five miles of this

six mile route will be underground.

If you roll the clock back a half-century-- BART construction under Market Street in San

Francisco disrupted traffic and pedestrians for years. After many meetings and public input,

VTA will avoid that in San Jose by using a single tunnel with excavation that won't dig up Santa

Clara Street. The downtown station will be at ground level.

"We would have had to excavate from the top down (with a plan to create two tunnels), and

that is essentially opening up Santa Clara Street and digging down," said Brandi Childress, VTA

public affairs manager. "We would have put plates over the top so cars could drive as we're

building the station box, and then we restore the area later."

Altogether, BART to San Jose is 16 miles long, costing $7 billion for construction. Voters

approved three tax measures, the first one 19 years ago. Additional funds came from the state

and federal government. Projected daily ridership is 52,000.

Back to Top

San Jose BART service tentatively begins in November (SF Curbed)

Berryessa Station seven years in the making

It’s really happening.

Although the date appears to be tentative, the San Jose Mercury News reports that the first

BART passenger service to San Jose will begin November 1.

However, the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA), which is constructing the

Berryessa/North San Jose BART Station, predicts that the start of passenger service will be “no

later than December 31, 2019.”

Plans for San Jose BART service stretch back to the 1950s and the earliest days of BART

planning. VTA broke ground on Berryessa Station in 2012.

Originally scheduled to be completed in 2015, a series of delays have beset the project,

including a mix-up in 2018 when a contractor installed the wrong kind of communications

equipment resulting in a do-over.

At a cost of $2.3 billion, the new station near Berryessa Road and North Capitol

Avenue connects to nearby Warm Springs Station via ten miles of track. When complete, the

trip from downtown San Francisco to San Jose will finish in roughly 60 minutes.

VTA estimates that by 2030 some 25,000 passengers will enter and exit the station daily. The

planned downtown San Jose BART station, approximately six miles from Berryessa, is not

projected to go into service until 2026.

Back to Top

San Jose community briefs for the week of Feb. 15 (Mercury News)

VTA meeting

Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority will hold a community meeting Feb. 19 at 11 a.m. to

discuss the most recent draft of the VTA’s new service plan, which is set to launch in

preparation for BART service to Santa Clara County.

The meeting will be held at the Martin Luther King, Jr. Library, 150 E. San Fernando St. Maps of

the VTA service changes can be found online at newtransitplan.vta.org.

Back to Top

Managed Lanes deal almost finalized (The Daily Journal- San Mateo County)

TA votes for owner/operator arrangement plus joint powers authority; C/CAG to vote this

week

After months of discussion, a split vote, meetings and more meetings, the owner and operator

arrangement for the Managed Lanes project is all but set in stone.

Ownership of the tolled express lane facility coming to Highway 101 in San Mateo County will

likely belong to both the San Mateo County Transportation Authority and City/County

Association of Governments, and those agencies will likely contract with the Bay Area

Infrastructure Financing Authority to operate the facility.

In San Mateo County, a joint powers authority will likely be created to make policy decisions

related to the express lane facility and that JPA will be comprised of an equal number of

members from the TA and C/CAG.

The owner/operator arrangement as described above was unanimously approved by the TA at

a meeting Feb. 7 and it will become official if C/CAG also votes for that arrangement at its

meeting Thursday, Feb. 14.

“I want to thank BAIFA for their flexibility in coming forward with an option that allows San

Mateo County to serve our interests and continue to be owners. It also builds on our successful

relationship with MTC and allows us to work collaboratively with BAIFA and with its operating

experience to successfully implement the managed lanes,” said Board Member Maureen

Freschet, also San Mateo deputy mayor, according to a video of the meeting. “I also think the

JPA is a great idea, and I know we talked about a joint policy committee, but a JPA is a much

more efficient method moving forward.”

Other rejected arrangements include ceding both ownership and operator duties to BAIFA or

maintaining local control of the tolling facility and have the Santa Clara Valley Transportation

Authority operate it.

C/CAG is a joint powers authority comprised of board members representing each city and the

county that works on quality of life issues such as air quality and transportation, among others.

The TA oversees the county’s half-cent sales tax revenue for transportation, and is under the

umbrella of the San Mateo County Transit District.

BAIFA is a joint powers authority between the Metropolitan Transportation Commission and

the Bay Area Toll Authority, or BATA, that manages express lanes elsewhere in the state.

The half-a-billion-dollar Managed Lanes project aimed for completion by 2022 will construct a

new lane in each direction of Highway 101 in San Mateo County and then the far left lane in

each direction will be converted to a tolled express lane with real-time surveillance equipment.

Such a facility promises speeds of 45 mph at all times on the express lanes, which will be free

for buses and carpools of three people or more, but other motorists who choose to use those

lanes will have to pay a toll. Tolls will fluctuate based on traffic volumes, but initial projections

suggest prices will average $1 per mile in San Mateo County.

The operator of an express lane facility manages all aspects of day-to-day operations, while the

owner decides tolling policies — whether two-person carpools or clean air vehicles can use the

express lanes at a discount or for free, for example — as well as how net revenue is spent and

the details of an equity program if one is adopted, among other responsibilities.

The proposed JPA would ensure the TA and C/CAG have equal decision-making power. Three

members from each agency would likely serve on the JPA and officials are contemplating the

following rules: At least four votes would be required to approve anything and at least five

members of the JPA would have to be present for the vote. And Board Member Emily Beach,

also Burlingame vice mayor, said there has been discussion about certain proposals — a

managed lanes equity program, for example — requiring at least five votes for adoption.

Board Member Karyl Matsumoto, also South San Francisco mayor, suggested a mediator or

facilitator from another agency be present for JPA meetings, and Beach proposed two-year

terms for JPA members.

While the express lane facility in San Mateo County is expected to generate $10 million to $20

million each year in net revenue, Matsumoto anticipates revenue losses the first year or two,

which has occurred with express lane facilities elsewhere.

If that happens, SamTrans CEO Jim Hartnett suggested money would likely be borrowed from

the TA to cover those losses, and the money would be paid back with future toll revenue. The

project also includes a contingency if there are construction overruns and, if needed, STIP

funding and federal grants are other potential funding sources, officials said.

The JPA may also be set up in such a way that its funding decisions are merely non-binding

recommendations to the TA and C/CAG and not obligations, Chair Don Horsely said.

If C/CAG votes for the same arrangement that the TA approved last week, then a next step is to

file an application with the California Transportation Commission to allow BAIFA to operate the

facility. April Chan, executive officer for the TA, said that while she does not foresee any

roadblocks with the CTC application, that process will likely span months and require a public

hearing.

“It’s not a slam dunk,” she said.

Back to Top

Conserve paper. Think before you print.

From: VTA Board Secretary Sent: Friday, February 15, 2019 5:00 PM To: VTA Board of Directors <VTABoardofDirectors@vta.org> Subject: From VTA: February 15, 2019 Media Clips

VTA Daily News Coverage for Friday, February 15, 2019

1. A night on Route 22: ‘Homeless riders’ fear loss of overnight bus (San Jose Spotlight)

2. San Jose police shooting: Abducted UPS driver hailed for helping thwart carjackers during

chase (Mercury News)

3. One suspect dead, one in custody after chase, standoff in San Jose

4. San Jose hostage situation involving UPS truck ends, suspect shot, killed ABC 7 News)

A night on Route 22: ‘Homeless riders’ fear loss of overnight bus (San Jose

Spotlight)

Less than half a mile away from the gates of the platinum-plated campus of Stanford University

– the hotbed of Silicon Valley riches – a group huddled around a dimly-lit transit station and

shivered in the bitter cold.

They held their oversized backpacks close to them, trying to stay warm despite their hoodies,

beanies and gloves. It was nearing midnight and their only refuge — a warm, inviting bus —

lingered a few feet away, its gleaming lights breaking through the dark night.

But the doors were locked, and the men and women had nowhere else to go. The group stood

patiently at the Palo Alto Transit Center in the cold, waiting for the driver to let them in to begin

the slow, bumpy ride to San Jose — a chance to close their eyes and sleep in a warm, safe

place.

Now, Silicon Valley lawmakers are facing the controversial decision to cut service on the

overnight bus sheltering countless homeless people.

In an effort to cut costs, VTA recently proposed discontinuing Route 22’s service between 1

a.m. and 4 a.m. — a crucial time during where many use the bus as a warm place to rest, feel

safe or commute from a late-night job.

“We are certainly aware of the impact that this proposal could have on homeless riders and

those who may rely on this service as transportation to get to and from work,” said VTA

spokesperson Holly Perez.

But who are the “homeless riders” of Route 22, now dubbed ‘Hotel 22’?

It’s a severely disabled man who rides the bus to warm up his freezing hands. It’s an elderly

woman who once slept on the bus but now takes it home to a cottage in Santa Clara. It’s a

homeless Air Force veteran who takes it to a Palo Alto hospital. It’s a Guatemalan immigrant

who hops on after work where he hands out extra pizzas to starving fellow riders.

And now Hotel 22 may be another thing the riders have to say goodbye to.

Over the course of two nights, San José Spotlight’s team rode Route 22 — during the most frigid

hours of the early morning.

Riders are forced off the bus at the Palo Alto Transit Center and wait nearly 30 minutes while

the driver takes a break.

One evening, Jose Melchado sat on a cold bench at the transit station waiting to get back on

the bus. He is a disabled man that has been homeless for 8 months.

Melchado, 68, has taken the bus twice a day, every day, for the last five months.

“We use it. We need it. It’s not going to be good for us,” Melchado said. “It’s going to hurt me

because I’ll have to look for another place to stay. It’s unfair.”

A 2018 report by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development said that nearly half

of all unsheltered people in the country were in California. In Santa Clara County, at least 75

percent of the 7,254 homeless residents are unsheltered, like Melchado.

Frank “Jay” Borstllino, an Air Force veteran, wound up homeless after a fight with his father.

The former bank teller and grocery store clerk sleeps at a shelter a few nights a week.

But when he can’t find a shelter bed, Route 22 is it.

“I think it would be a disservice (to cut it). There are people who really need it,” said Borstllino,

49, who’s taken Route 22 the last three months. It would eliminate a means for people to stay

warm.”

While riding the bus, Borstllino discovered the Palo Alto veteran’s hospital, a “much nicer”

facility, he said, that helps treat his anxiety, PTSD and diabetes. “Route 22 means staying warm,

getting to the hospital, getting a good meal, getting clothes, shoes, and everything you need to

shower and shave,” he said.

Bus 22 has been a refuge and a community gathering place to many from all walks of life.

Brayan Pacheco isn’t homeless, but he experienced extreme poverty in Guatemala. Now he

works nights at an Italian restaurant in Palo Alto and takes Route 22 to get home.

Pacheco, 29, brings leftover pizzas from his restaurant to feed hungry riders.

“I always see a lot of people that have nowhere to sleep,” said Pacheco, a Mountain View

resident. “I’ve never been homeless but I am from Guatemala and I know what poverty is. I

know what it feels when you don’t eat for one week. I know what they feel. I know how it feels

when you have nowhere to work and you have nothing.”

Many riders, such as Allan Gilbert, 52, were unaware that the bus line’s service during these

times might be discontinued.

“I have no idea what I’m going to do. This is a direct route for me,” said Gilbert, a dishwasher at

Shake Shack who uses the bus to get home to a halfway house every night.

“Route 22 is one of the longest routes VTA has, so it’s a popular rest for some people to get out

of the weather and go back and forth riding it,” Gillbert added, as he waited in a line to reboard

the bus. “It’s a safe shelter.”

And for some residents, Route 22 was a stop in their journey home.

Judy Okida was previously homeless for four years. She was forced into the streets after her

husband died in 2012 and she could no longer afford rent in Santa Clara. Rent for her studio

apartment near Levi’s Stadium spiked to $1,600 a month.

“It’s very dangerous being out there,” Okida said. “I’ve had people follow me down the street,

begging or trying to get money out of you. It’s bad at night.”

Okida, 70, said she got “lucky” and found housing through her pastor who connected her to a

man looking to rent a “cottage” on his property. It costs just under $500 to rent.

“Tonight I’m going home,” Okida said while on the bus. “It’s wonderful. I feel like a normal

human being.

Being homeless made her “lose track of what it means to be human.”

“You feel so demeaned. You lose your humility. It’s the worst experience. I wouldn’t wish it on

anyone.”

Cutting service without an alternative, some housing advocates say, would devastate the South

Bay’s most vulnerable residents.

“Homelessness is a community problem, it requires a community solution,” said Ray Bramson,

the CIO of the nonprofit Destination: Home. “Our big goal is how we can deepen our

partnership with VTA and other providers. The meeting will be an opportunity to begin a

discussion.”

Currently, Route 22 is the only bus line that runs 24 hours in Santa Clara County, from East San

Jose to Palo Alto. Although ridership for the route is high, VTA faces severe deficits. The

proposed service plan, affecting 70 changes across bus and light rail routes, could save at least

$15 million annually.

What’s next?

VTA is hosting community meetings and plans to work with nonprofits to discuss potential

solutions before the Board of Directors decides Route 22’s fate in May. Any service changes

would go into effect in Fall 2019, coinciding with the start of BART service to San Jose.

“While we recognize that members of our community have used our buses as a safe haven, the

cities and county play a critical role in tackling homelessness,” said Perez from VTA. “We want

to serve the community and strike that balance with being financially viable and continuing

transit services.”

Andrea Urton, CEO of HomeFirst, the largest provider of sheltering services in Santa Clara

County, weighed in on how her organization could partner with VTA.

“We are here and available,” she said. “We work closely with the city of San Jose and operate

the largest outreach program. We are always open to sending our highly-trained outreach staff

out to engage and assess their needs and offer whatever resources we can.”

According to Bramson, VTA can help organizations such as Destination: Home by potentially

funding case managers or helping support housing subsidies. The meeting will allow community

organizations and VTA to discuss potential partnerships.

“We depend on them in the same way we look at the city of San Jose when it funds and

operates overnight warming locations,” Bramson said. “These public agencies all have a role to

play. The fact that people rely on this service tells us how dire this situation is.”

San Jose police shooting: Abducted UPS driver hailed for helping thwart carjackers

during chase (Mercury News)

Police say kidnapped deliveryman drove slow so that they could keep pace, and drove

straight into spike strips to end pursuit

A UPS driver is being credited for his nerves of steel when, while abducted by armed carjackers

and forced to lead a police chase, he drove slowly so authorities could keep pace then hit spike

strips on purpose to end the pursuit, police said.

A chance encounter at a South San Jose transit station between officers and two people in an

illegally parked car set off the violent sequence that ended with the fatal shooting of a suspect

by police Thursday night. Sources identified the man who was killed as Mark Morasky of

Saratoga. Morasky was on parole for a 2012 carjacking and two associated robberies in San Jose

and Saratoga, court records show.

San Jose Police Chief Eddie Garcia said Morasky and a woman were inside a black SUV parked

illegally at the Valley Transportation Authority light-rail station at Pearl and Chynoweth avenues

around 5 p.m.Thursday, and attracted the attention of plainclothes deputies with the Santa

Clara County Sheriff’s Office. The Sheriff’s Office provides transit police for VTA.

But as the deputies approached to cite the vehicle, the car’s occupants spotted them and drove

away. A few minutes later, when the deputies caught up to them the female suspect opened

fire at them with a shotgun, Garcia said.

The car entered Highway 87, and moments later, the female suspect fired multiple times at law

enforcement officers who were in pursuit, which now included San Jose Police Department

officers and their Air3 police helicopter.

“Several rounds struck the sheriff’s vehicle,” Garcia said. “Deputies were not injured and did

not return fire.”

At some point, the fleeing SUV drove the wrong way on the freeway before exiting at Curtner

Avenue, toward Communications Hill, Garcia said. The two suspects abandoned their vehicle,

then spotted a UPS deliveryman walking in the area. Threatening him with the shotgun, they

forced him into his delivery truck and and made him drive them away.

Garcia said an interview of the UPS driver revealed that he drove slower than freeway speed, in

part by convincing his abductors that the delivery truck had a speed limiter that did not allow

him to go over 50 mph. Then he purposely drove over spike strips to help disable the vehicle,

Garcia said.

“He should make UPS proud, he definitely saved lives. He was calm, he was cool,” Garcia said.

“He just used common sense. What he did, you can’t train, when you are accosted, taken at

gunpoint, and made to drive, like something you see in the

movies.”

About 6 p.m., the UPS truck made it to the intersection of First Street and Trimble Road where

dozens of police cars immediately surrounded it. The location is not far from the offices of

PayPal, eBay, Google and other prominent technology firms.

Soon after, the UPS worker was released, and the female suspect also left the truck and

surrendered to police. At one point, friends of the man still inside the vehicle said they

approached police officers at the corner of First Street and Component Drive and told them

that they were in contact with the suspect by phone. Referring to the “three strikes” law that

mandated life imprisonment for multiple felony offenders, the suspect’s friends told reporters

Instead, sources said, Morasky started the truck and drove it a few feet, prompting police to

move two armored vehicles to block its escape paths.

As the police were getting into position, Morasky, carrying a shotgun, jumped out of the truck

and tried to run. In a sequence partially captured on television cameras, he was seen running

and then falling to the ground. Sources said that a San Jose police officer had fired a single shot

that hit and killed the suspect. The scene was secured by 7 p.m.

Matthew O’Connor, a spokesman for UPS, said the company was providing support for the

driver who was held hostage and other employees who work with him.

“We’re giving our driver some privacy after yesterday’s incident, and we’re offering grief

counseling to the driver and our other employees in the area,” he said.

The officer who opened fire, described as a 12-year SJPD veteran, was placed on paid

administrative leave and a shooting investigation was launched by the police department in

conjunction with the District Attorney’s Office, which is routine after an officer-involved

shooting in the county. The officer is expected to be named at a later date.

One suspect dead, one in custody after chase, standoff in San Jose

UPS driver who had been taken hostage released unharmed

One suspect was fatally shot by police and another was in custody after a hostage was released

unharmed following a low-speed pursuit of a hijacked UPS truck by South Bay law-enforcement

officers Thursday night.

A body bag was visible in a parking lot at the southeast corner of First Street and Trimble Road.

San Jose police confirmed a fatal police shooting late Thursday night, and called a Friday

afternoon news conference to provide additional details.

According to reports, the chase began near Pearl and Chynoweth avenues in San Jose, with the

suspect firing at pursuing officers.

The suspects abandoned the car at some point, carjacking a UPS truck and taking the driver

hostage before fleeing with police in pursuit.

According to several observers, the pursuit involved multiple marked and unmarked law

enforcement vehicles along Highway 87 north from Communications Hill before exiting onto

city streets. Officers from the San Jose Police Department and Santa Clara County Sheriff’s

Office were involved in the incident.

The truck eventually stopped near the intersection of First Street and Trimble Road with dozens

of police cars at the scene. The area is home to some of the biggest names in technology, with

offices nearby for PayPal, eBay, Google and others.

A long line of San Jose police vehicles blocked North First Street, and restaurant and retail

patrons huddled behind closed doors while heavily armed police swarmed the area and the

standoff unfolded.

Just before 6:30 p.m., KGO-TV Channel 7 said that a person who had been held hostage inside

the truck was released and at least one suspect had exited the truck and was in custody. Police

on the scene told this news organization that a suspect was in custody.

Shortly before 7 p.m., a second suspect attempted to flee the vehicle, pointing a weapon at

officers, who fired once.

At one point, friends of the suspect reportedly approached police at the corner of First Street

and Component Drive, saying they had the suspect on their mobile phone. They told media

they had asked police to pass along the word that the suspect, whom they described as a “two-

striker,” wanted to surrender.

Shortly after 8 p.m., sheriff’s deputies described the scene as secure with no law enforcement

officers suffering injury before thanking other agencies for assistance.

San Jose hostage situation involving UPS truck ends, suspect shot, killed ABC 7

News)

The Santa Clara County Sheriff's Office says the suspect who was in a standoff in a UPS truck

was shot and killed after attempting to run from the truck.

Santa Clara County Sheriff deputies and San Jose police were in a standoff with the suspect at

North First Street and West Trimble Road after a slow speed chase.

Deputies surrounded a UPS truck in San Jose following a chase on Thursday evening.

Friends have identified the suspect as Mark Morasky. They said they were on the phone with

him during the standoff and talked him into surrendering, claiming he was prepared to go to jail

before he was shot.

The sheriff's office said around 5 p.m., deputies in plain clothes attempted to stop Morasky who

was driving an SUV near Chynoweth Ave and Pearl Ave in San Jose. Deputies didn't elaborate

the reason for the traffic stop.

They say Morasky took off and started firing at deputies in his escape. A patrol car was hit with

a bullet in that initial pursuit. Morasky and his female passenger were able to get away on foot

near Curtner and Communications Hill.

They commandeered a nearby UPS truck. The UPS driver inside was taken hostage, and the

second vehicle pursuit began. Spike strips were deployed at Highway 87 and Taylor Street, but

deputies say the suspect continued driving. The pursuit eventually ended at North First and

Trimble.

The Santa Clara County Sheriff's Office says one shot took a suspect down, just before 7 p.m.

"He was very close to just turning the gun over and turning himself in," the suspect's friend,

Amanda Bazzani said.

Bazzani and others who identified as Morasky's friends were unable to explain his earlier

actions.

"You have to realize this person was armed with a gun. Some sort of shotgun, some sort of long

gun," Sgt. Reggie Cooks told ABC7 News. "He already showed a propensity toward violence in

that he shot multiple times at our deputies-- one of which hit one of our pursuit cars."

Sky7 was overhead the moment the woman with Morasky was taken into custody. She faces

several charges, including attemtped murder of a police officer, San Jose PD said Friday in a

press conference.

Sky7 also captured the hostage being released.

Shortly after, Morasky ran from the UPS truck, armed with a gun.

Moments after Morasky went down, Sgt. Cooks told the media, "I do know-- at least one shot

fired and we can confirm that the suspect is down."

A yellow tarp was put over his body. Friends who were on-scene were visibly distraught.

"He called me from inside the truck," Bazzani said.

Bazzani claims the group of friends convinced Morasky to let go of the hostage. Adding, he was

only moments from surrendering.

"He wanted us to call dispatch and tell them to back up and give him time to make his phone

calls and be ok with the decision of giving himself up to do life in prison," Bazzani said. "Because

he's a two striker."

We searched Morasky's records and found he was previously arrested for robbery and

possession of stolen property.

His friends tell ABC7 News he had a one-year-old daughter.

Conserve paper. Think before you print.