Del Mar BOARD OF DIRECTORS AGENDAWelcome to SANDAG. Members of the public may speak to the Board of Directors on any item at the time the Board is considering the item. Please complete

Board Members

Ron Roberts, Chair Supervisor, County of San Diego

Terry Sinnott, Vice Chair Mayor, Del Mar

Matt Hall Mayor, Carlsbad

Mary Salas Mayor, Chula Vista

Richard Bailey Mayor, Coronado

Bill Wells Mayor, El Cajon

Catherine Blakespear Mayor, Encinitas

Sam Abed Mayor, Escondido

Serge Dedina Mayor, Imperial Beach

Kristine Alessio Councilmember, La Mesa

Jerry Jones Councilmember, Lemon Grove

Ron Morrison Mayor, National City

Jim Wood Mayor, Oceanside

Steve Vaus Mayor, Poway

Kevin Faulconer Mayor, City of San Diego

Myrtle Cole Council President, City of San Diego

Dianne Jacob Chair, County of San Diego

John Minto Mayor, Santee

Jim Desmond Mayor, San Marcos

David A. Zito Councilmember, Solana Beach

Judy Ritter Mayor, Vista

Advisory Members

Hon. John Renison Supervisor, District 1 Imperial County

Malcolm Dougherty, Director California Department of Transportation

Harry Mathis, Chair Metropolitan Transit System

Rebecca Jones, Chair North County Transit District

Joe Stuyvesant, Navy Region Southwest Executive Director U.S. Department of Defense

Garry Bonelli, Commissioner San Diego Unified Port District

Mark Muir, Chair San Diego County Water Authority

Cody Martinez, Chairman Southern California Tribal Chairmen’s Association

Hon. Marcela Celorio Consul General, Mexico

Kim Kawada Chief Deputy Executive Director, SANDAG

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

AGENDA Friday, December 15, 2017

9 a.m. to 12 noon SANDAG Board Room 401 B Street, 7th Floor

San Diego

AGENDA HIGHLIGHTS

• ELECTION OF 2018 SANDAG BOARD OFFICERS

• PROPOSED NEW BOARD POLICY NO. 039: AUDIT POLICY ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND AUDIT ACTIVITIES

• REGIONAL GROWTH FORECAST METHODOLOGY – SAN DIEGO FORWARD: THE 2019 REGIONAL PLAN

• TransNet SMART GROWTH INCENTIVE PROGRAM AND ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION GRANT PROGRAM: CYCLE 4 CALLS FOR PROJECTS

• AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES PROGRAM: PROPOSED SANDAG PROJECT SUBMITTAL

PLEASE SILENCE ALL ELECTRONIC DEVICES DURING THE MEETING

YOU CAN LISTEN TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING BY VISITING OUR WEBSITE AT SANDAG.ORG

MESSAGE FROM THE CLERK In compliance with Government Code §54952.3, the Clerk hereby announces that the

compensation for legislative body members attending the following simultaneous or serial

meetings is: Executive Committee (EC) $100, Board of Directors (BOD) $150, and Regional

Transportation Commission (RTC) $100. Compensation rates for the EC and BOD are set pursuant

to the SANDAG Bylaws, and the compensation rate for the RTC is set pursuant to state law.

MISSION STATEMENT The 18 cities and county government are SANDAG serving as the forum for regional

decision-making. SANDAG builds consensus; makes strategic plans; obtains and allocates resources;

plans, engineers, and builds public transit; and provides information on a broad range of topics

pertinent to the region’s quality of life.

San Diego Association of Governments ⋅ 401 B Street, Suite 800, San Diego, CA 92101-4231

(619) 699-1900 ⋅ Fax (619) 699-1905 ⋅ sandag.org

2 102717

Welcome to SANDAG. Members of the public may speak to the Board of Directors on any item at the time the Board is considering the item. Please complete a Request to Comment form, which is located in the rear of the room, and then present the form to the Clerk of the Board seated at the front table. Members of the public may address the Board on any issue under the agenda item entitled Public Comments/Communications/Member Comments. Public speakers are limited to three minutes or less per person. The Board may take action on any item appearing on the agenda.

Both agenda and non-agenda comments should be sent to SANDAG via [email protected]. Please include the Board meeting date, agenda item, your name, and your organization. Any comments, handouts, presentations, or other materials from the public intended for distribution at the Board meeting should be received by the Clerk of the Board no later than 12 noon, two working days prior to the meeting. All public comments and materials received by the deadline become part of the official project record, will be provided to the members for their review at the meeting, and will be posted to the agenda file as a part of the handouts following each meeting.

In order to keep the public informed in an efficient manner and facilitate public participation, SANDAG also provides access to all agenda and meeting materials online at www.sandag.org/meetings. Additionally, interested persons can sign up for e-notifications via our e-distribution list either at the SANDAG website or by sending an email request to [email protected].

SANDAG operates its programs without regard to race, color, and national origin in compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. SANDAG has developed procedures for investigating and tracking Title VI complaints, and the procedures for filing a complaint are available to the public upon request. Questions concerning SANDAG nondiscrimination obligations or complaint procedures should be directed to the SANDAG General Counsel, John Kirk, at (619) 699-1997 or [email protected]. Any person who believes himself or herself or any specific class of persons to be subjected to discrimination prohibited by Title VI also may file a written complaint with the Federal Transit Administration.

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

SANDAG agenda materials can be made available in alternative languages. To make a request, call (619) 699-1900 at least 72 hours in advance of the meeting.

Los materiales de la agenda de SANDAG están disponibles en otros idiomas. Para hacer una solicitud, llame al (619) 699-1900 al menos 72 horas antes de la reunión.

如有需要, 我们可以把SANDAG议程材料翻译成其他語言.

请在会议前至少 72 小时打电话 (619) 699-1900 提出请求.

SANDAG offices are accessible by public transit. Phone 511 or visit 511sd.com for route information. Bicycle parking is available in the parking garage of the SANDAG offices.

3

BOARD OF DIRECTORS Friday, December 15, 2017

ITEM NO. RECOMMENDATION

+1. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES APPROVE

+1A. November 3, 2017, Board Policy Meeting Minutes +1B. November 17, 2017, Board Business Meeting Minutes

2. PUBLIC COMMENTS/COMMUNICATIONS/MEMBER COMMENTS

Public comments under this agenda item will be limited to five public speakers. Members of the public shall have the opportunity to address the Board on any issue within the jurisdiction of SANDAG that is not on this agenda. Other public comments will be heard during the items under the heading “Reports.” Anyone desiring to speak shall reserve time by completing a “Request to Speak” form and giving it to the Clerk of the Board prior to speaking. Public speakers should notify the Clerk of the Board if they have a handout for distribution to Board members. Public speakers are limited to three minutes or less per person. Board members also may provide information and announcements under this agenda item.

+3. ACTIONS FROM POLICY ADVISORY COMMITTEES (Victoria Stackwick)

APPROVE

This item summarizes the actions taken by the Policy Advisory Committees since the last Board Business Meeting. The Board of Directors is asked to ratify these actions.

CONSENT

+4. APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONTRACT AWARDS (Laura Coté) APPROVE

The Board of Directors is asked to authorize the Executive Director to execute contract awards for Roadway Toll Collection Systems and the Poinsettia Station Improvements Project.

+5. REVISED 2018 CALENDAR OF MEETINGS OF THE SANDAG BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND POLICY ADVISORY COMMITTEES (Victoria Stackwick)

APPROVE

The Board of Directors is asked to approve the revised 2018 Board and Policy Advisory Committee annual meeting calendar.

+6. FY 2017 TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT AUDIT EXTENSION REQUEST (Lisa Kondrat-Dauphin)

APPROVE

The Board of Directors is asked to approve a Transportation Development Act audit extension request until January 31, 2018, for North County Transit District, as permitted by the California Public Utilities Code and California Code of Regulations.

4

+7. WEIGHTED VOTING FORMULA UPDATE (Julie Wiley)* INFORMATION

In accordance with Assembly Bill 805, this report outlines the weighted voting formula for the Board of Directors as of January 1, 2018.

+8. REPORT ON MEETINGS AND EVENTS ATTENDED ON BEHALF OF SANDAG (Victoria Stackwick)

INFORMATION

Board members will provide brief reports orally or in writing on external meetings and events attended on behalf of SANDAG since the last Board Business meeting.

+9. REPORT SUMMARIZING DELEGATED ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (André Douzdjian)*

INFORMATION

In accordance with various SANDAG Board Policies, this report summarizes certain delegated actions taken by the Executive Director since the last Board Business meeting.

CHAIR’S REPORT

+10. ELECTION OF 2018 SANDAG BOARD OFFICERS* APPROVE

The Nominating Committee recommends that the Board of Directors approve Del Mar Mayor Terry Sinnott as 2018 Chair, and consider both National City Mayor Ron Morrison and Poway Mayor Steve Vaus for the position of 2018 Vice Chair. Nominations for any officer position may be made by Board members at the meeting.

REPORTS

+11. PROPOSED NEW BOARD POLICY NO. 039: AUDIT POLICY ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND AUDIT ACTIVITIES (Vice Chair Terry Sinnott; Julie Wiley, Diane Eidam)*

APPROVE

The Executive Committee recommends that the Board of Directors approve the proposed new Board Policy No. 039: SANDAG Audit Policy Advisory Committee and Audit Activities.

+12. REGIONAL GROWTH FORECAST METHODOLOGY – SAN DIEGO FORWARD: THE 2019 REGIONAL PLAN (Mayor Mary Salas, Regional Planning Committee Chair; Ray Major, Charles "Muggs" Stoll)

INFORMATION

Staff will present the methodology being used to develop the Regional Growth Forecast for San Diego Forward: The 2019 Regional Plan.

5

+13. TransNet SMART GROWTH INCENTIVE PROGRAM AND ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION GRANT PROGRAM: CYCLE 4 CALLS FOR PROJECTS (Mayor Jim Desmond, Transportation Committee Chair; Mayor Mary Salas, Regional Planning Committee Chair; Carolina Ilic)

APPROVE

The Board of Directors is asked to approve the evaluation criteria, and release the Calls for Projects for the Cycle 4 TransNet Smart Growth Incentive Program and Active Transportation Grant Program.

+14. AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES PROGRAM: PROPOSED SANDAG PROJECT SUBMITTAL (Mayor Mary Salas, Regional Planning Committee Chair; Coleen Clementson)

APPROVE

The Regional Planning Committee recommends that the Board of Directors approve the proposed SANDAG role in the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities (AHSC) evaluation process. The Board also is asked to approve the submission of the proposed application to the AHSC Program in collaboration with Community Housing Works.

+15. MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT WITH CITY OF LA MESA: TransNet DEBT FINANCING PROGRAM (Mayor Jim Desmond, Transportation Committee Chair; Lisa Kondrat-Dauphin)*

APPROVE

The Transportation Committee recommends that the Board of Directors authorize the Executive Director to execute a Memorandum of Agreement with the City of La Mesa to issue $2 million in commercial paper through the TransNet Debt Financing Program.

16. CONTINUED PUBLIC COMMENTS

If the five-speaker limit for public comments was exceeded at the beginning of this agenda, other public comments will be taken at this time. Subjects of previous agenda items may not again be addressed under public comment.

17. UPCOMING MEETINGS INFORMATION

The next Board Policy meeting is scheduled for Friday, January 12, 2018, at 10 a.m. The next Board Business meeting is scheduled for Friday, January 26, 2018, at 9 a.m.

18. ADJOURNMENT

+ next to an agenda item indicates an attachment

* next to an agenda item indicates that the Board of Directors also is acting as the San Diego County Regional Transportation Commission for that item

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

AGENDA ITEM NO. 17-12-1A

DECEMBER 15, 2017 ACTION REQUESTED: APPROVE

BOARD OF DIRECTORS DISCUSSION AND ACTIONS

NOVEMBER 3, 2017

Chair Ron Roberts (Supervisor, County of San Diego B) called the meeting of the SANDAG Board of Directors to order at 9:05 a.m.

1. PUBLIC COMMENTS/COMMUNICATIONS/MEMBER COMMENTS

There were no public or member comments.

REPORTS 2. SANDAG EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR RECRUITMENT (DISCUSSION/POSSIBLE ACTION)

Vice Chair Terry Sinnott (Mayor, Del Mar) presented an update on the status of the Executive Director recruitment.

Action: This item was presented for discussion/possible action.

3. SANDAG “PLAN OF EXCELLENCE” (DISCUSSION/POSSIBLE ACTION)

Vice Chair Sinnott presented a plan to implement ideas discussed by the Board of Directors and recommendations from the Hueston Hennigan LLP report regarding improvements to SANDAG operations.

Action: This item was presented for discussion/possible action.

4. IMPLEMENTATION OF ASSEMBLY BILL 805 (DISCUSSION)

Assembly Bill 805 (AB 805) (Gonzalez Fletcher) goes into effect on January 1, 2018, and will require a wide range of changes at the agency. Staff presented an overview of tasks required for implementation.

Chair Roberts introduced the item.

Julie Wiley, Special Counsel, presented the item.

Jack Shu, Cleveland National Forest Foundation, spoke regarding the implementation schedule.

2

Gretchen Newsom, IBEW 569, spoke regarding the implementation schedule.

Action: Upon a motion by Vice Chair Sinnott, and a second by Mayor Ron Morrison (National City), the Board of Directors approved the use of $50,000 of contingency reserve funds to begin implementation of AB 805, and directed staff to expedite the implementation timeline. Yes – Chair Roberts, Vice Chair Sinnott, Mayor Matt Hall (Carlsbad), Mayor Mary Salas (Chula Vista), Mayor Richard Bailey (Coronado), Mayor Catherine Blakespear (Encinitas), Mayor Sam Abed (Escondido), Mayor Serge Dedina (Imperial Beach), Councilmember Kristine Alessio (La Mesa), Councilmember Jerry Jones (Lemon Grove), Mayor Morrison, Deputy Mayor Chuck Lowery (Oceanside), Mayor Steve Vaus (Poway), Mayor Kevin Faulconer (City of San Diego A), Council President Myrtle Cole (City of San Diego B), Mayor Jim Desmond (San Marcos), Mayor John Minto (Santee), Councilmember David Zito (Solana Beach), and Councilmember John Aguilera (Vista) (weighted vote, 100%). No – None (weighted vote, 0%). Abstain – None (weighted vote, 0%). Absent – El Cajon and County of San Diego A.

5. SANDAG 7-POINT DATA ACCURACY AND MODELING WORK PLAN (INFORMATION)

Mayor Vaus introduced the item.

Ray Major, Director of Technical Services and Chief Economist, provided an update on the implementation of the 7-Point Data Accuracy and Modeling Work Plan, which is included in the proposed SANDAG “Plan of Excellence.”

Action: This item was presented for information.

6. CONTINUED PUBLIC COMMENTS

There were no continued public comments. 7. UPCOMING MEETINGS

The next Board Business meeting is scheduled for Friday, November 17, 2017, at 9 a.m. Please note, this meeting is scheduled for the third Friday of the month due to the holiday schedule. 8. ADJOURNMENT

Chair Roberts adjourned the meeting at 10:35 a.m. .

Meeting Start Time: 9:05 a.m.

Meeting Adjourned Time: 10:35 a.m.

3

CONFIRMED ATTENDANCE SANDAG BOARD OF DIRECTORS’ MEETING

NOVEMBER 03, 2017

JURISDICTION NAME

ATTEND

OPEN

SESSION

City of Carlsbad Matt Hall (Primary) Yes

City of Chula Vista Mary Salas (Primary) Yes

City of Coronado Richard Bailey (Primary) Yes

City of Del Mar Terry Sinnott, Vice Chair (Primary) Yes

City of El Cajon Bill Wells (Primary) Yes

City of Encinitas Catherine Blakespear (Primary) Yes

City of Escondido Sam Abed (Primary) Yes

City of Imperial Beach Serge Dedina (Primary) Yes

City of La Mesa Kristine Alessio (Primary) Yes

City of Lemon Grove Jerry Jones (Primary) Yes

City of National City Ron Morrison (Primary) Yes

City of Oceanside Chuck Lowery (1st. Alt.) Yes

City of Poway Steve Vaus (Primary) Yes

City of San Diego – A Kevin Faulconer (Primary) Yes

City of San Diego – A Lorie Zapf (1st Alt.) Yes

City of San Diego – B Myrtle Cole (Primary) Yes

City of San Marcos Jim Desmond (Primary) Yes

City of Santee John Minto (Primary) Yes

City of Solana Beach David Zito (Primary) Yes

City of Vista John Aguilera (1st Alt.) Yes

County of San Diego – A Dianne Jacob (Primary, Seat A) No

County of San Diego – B Ron Roberts, Chair (Primary, Seat B Yes

Caltrans Cory Binns (1st. Alt.) Yes

MTS Mona Rios (Alternate) Yes

NCTD Rebecca Jones (Primary) Yes

Imperial County Sup. John Renison (Primary) No

US Dept. of Defense Joe Stuyvesant (Primary) Yes

SD Unified Port District Garry Bonelli (Primary) No

SD County Water Authority Mark Muir (Primary) Yes

Mexico Marcela Celorio (Primary) No

Southern California Tribal

Chairmen’s Association Cody Martinez (Primary) No

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

AGENDA ITEM NO. 17-12-1B


BOARD OF DIRECTORS DISCUSSION AND ACTIONS

NOVEMBER 17, 2017

Chair Ron Roberts, Supervisor, County of San Diego B, called the meeting of the SANDAG Board of Directors to order at 9:05 a.m.

1. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES

Action: Upon a motion by Councilmember Jerry Jones (Lemon Grove), and a second by Mayor Mary Salas (Chula Vista), the Board of Directors approved the minutes from the October 13, 2017, Board Policy meeting, and the October 27, 2017, Board Business meeting. Yes – Chair Roberts, Vice Chair Terry Sinnott (Mayor, Del Mar), Mayor Matt Hall (Carlsbad), Mayor Salas, Mayor Richard Bailey (Coronado), Mayor Bill Wells (El Cajon), Mayor Catherine Blakespear (Encinitas), Mayor Sam Abed (Escondido), Mayor Serge Dedina (Imperial Beach), Councilmember Kristine Alessio (La Mesa), Councilmember Jones, Mayor Ron Morrison (National City), Councilmember Jerry Kern (Oceanside), Mayor Steve Vaus (Poway), Council President Myrtle Cole (City of San Diego B), Mayor Jim Desmond (San Marcos), Mayor John Minto (Santee), Councilmember David Zito (Solana Beach), Mayor Judy Ritter (Vista), and Supervisor Dianne Jacob (Chair, County of San Diego A) (weighted vote, 100%). No – None (weighted vote, 0%). Abstain – None (weighted vote, 0%). Absent – City of San Diego A. 2. PUBLIC COMMENTS/COMMUNICATIONS/MEMBER COMMENTS

Chair Roberts announced that a public workshop on San Diego Forward: The 2019 Regional Plan is being held on December 4, 2017, from 11:30 a.m. to 1 p.m. at Caltrans Headquarters. Details can be found on the SANDAG website.

Mayor Dedina stated that he would like the Board of Directors to set a date for the next annual Tribal Summit.

3. ACTIONS FROM POLICY ADVISORY COMMITTEES (APPROVE)

This report summarized the actions taken by the Policy Advisory Committees since the last Board Business Meeting. Action: Upon a motion by Vice Chair Sinnott, and a second by Mayor Minto, the Board of Directors approved Item No. 3. Yes – Chair Roberts, Vice Chair Sinnott, Mayor Hall, Mayor Salas, Mayor Bailey, Mayor Wells, Mayor Blakespear, Mayor Abed, Mayor Dedina, Councilmember Alessio, Councilmember Jones, Mayor Morrison, Councilmember Kern, Mayor Vaus, Council President Cole, Mayor Desmond,

2

Mayor Minto, Councilmember Zito, Mayor Ritter, and Supervisor Jacob (weighted vote, 100%). No – None (weighted vote, 0%). Abstain – None (weighted vote, 0%). Absent – City of San Diego A.

CONSENT

4. REPORT ON MEETINGS AND EVENTS ATTENDED ON BEHALF OF SANDAG (INFORMATION)

Board members provided brief reports orally or in writing on external meetings and events attended on behalf of SANDAG since the last Board Business meeting. 5. REPORT SUMMARIZING DELEGATED ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

(INFORMATION)

In accordance with various SANDAG Board Policies, this report summarized certain delegated actions taken by the Executive Director since the last Board Business meeting.

7. QUARTERLY STATUS REPORT ON TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS – JULY THROUGH

SEPTEMBER 2017 (INFORMATION)

This quarterly report summarized the current status of major transit, highway, arterial, traffic management, and Transportation Demand Management projects in the SANDAG five-year Regional Transportation Improvement Program. Action: Consent Item Nos. 4 through 5, and 7 were presented for information. Vice Chair Sinnott requested that Item No. 6 be pulled from consent, and staff presented the report. 6. OVERVIEW OF DEVELOPMENTS IN THE FINANCIAL MARKETS AND QUARTERLY FINANCE

REPORT FOR THE PERIOD ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2017 (INFORMATION)

This quarterly report provided various finance-related items, including: (1) a quarterly report of investments, including all money under the direction or care of SANDAG; (2) an update on the SANDAG debt portfolio; and (3) information about the latest developments in the financial markets, the economy, and sales tax revenues. André Douzdjian, Finance Director, presented this item. Action: Item No. 6 was presented for information.

CHAIR’S REPORT 8. REPORT FROM NOMINATING COMMITTEE ON SLATE OF 2018 SANDAG BOARD OFFICERS

(DISCUSSION)

The Nominating Committee met on November 3, 2017, to review and discuss the candidate applications for the 2018 SANDAG Board Officers. This report summarized the discussion and provided recommendations for consideration by the Board of Directors. Chair Roberts presented this item.

3

Gretchen Newsom, IBEW569, spoke in support of this item. Action: This item was presented for discussion.

REPORTS 9. HEARING OF NECESSITY: ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY INTERESTS LOCATED IN THE CITY OF SAN

DIEGO FOR THE DOWNTOWN BUS STOPOVER AND MULTIUSE FACILITY (APPROVE)

The Board of Directors was asked to: (1) receive public testimony; (2) adopt Resolutions of Necessity Nos. 2018-07 through 2018-11 by a two-thirds vote, pertaining to acquisition of property interests for the Downtown Bus Stopover and Multiuse Facility; and (3) authorize staff to proceed with all condemnation filings and proceedings necessary to acquire the interests in the subject parcels. Laura Coté, Director of Administration; Ryan Kohut, Senior Legal Counsel; Richard Chavez, Principal Project Manager; and Andrew Rauch, Rauch APC; presented the item. Chair Roberts opened the public hearing at 9:29 a.m. Councilmember Chris Ward, City of San Diego, spoke in support of this item. Paul Jablonski, Metropolitan Transit System, spoke in support of this item. Jacqueline Venaccia, member of the public, spoke in opposition to this item. Ben Haddad, a member of the public, spoke in opposition to this item. William Trititler, a member of the public, spoke in opposition to this item. Chair Roberts closed the public hearing at 9:44 a.m. Action: Upon a motion by Supervisor Jacob, and a second by Mayor Hall, the Board of Directors voted to end debate. Yes – Mayor Hall, Mayor Bailey, Mayor Wells, Councilmember Alessio, Councilmember Kern, Mayor Vaus, Councilmember Lorie Zapf (City of San Diego A), Mayor Desmond, Mayor Minto, and Supervisor Jacob (weighted vote, 48%). No – Chair Roberts, Vice Chair Sinnott, Mayor Salas, Mayor Blakespear, Mayor Abed, Mayor Dedina, Councilmember Jones, Mayor Morrison, Council President Cole, Councilmember Zito, and Mayor Ritter (weighted vote, 52%). Abstain – None (weighted vote, 0%). Absent – None. The motion failed. Action: Upon a motion by Mayor Desmond, and a second by Supervisor Jacob, the Board of Directors voted to delay action on this item and directed staff to further negotiate with property owners and return within 60 days with alternatives. Yes – Mayor Hall, Mayor Bailey, Mayor Wells, Mayor Abed, Councilmember Alessio, Councilmember Kern, Mayor Vaus, Councilmember Zapf, Mayor Desmond, Mayor Minto, Mayor Ritter, and Supervisor Jacob (weighted vote, 56%). No – Chair Roberts, Vice Chair Sinnott, Mayor Salas, Mayor Blakespear, Mayor Dedina, Councilmember Jones, Mayor Morrison, Council President Cole, and Councilmember Zito (weighted vote, 44%). Abstain – None (weighted vote, 0%). Absent – None.

4

10. 2018 STATE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (APPROVE)

The Transportation Committee recommended that the Board of Directors approve the submission of the proposed 2018 State Transportation Improvement Program to the California Transportation Commission. Mayor Desmond introduced the item. José Nuncio, TransNet Department Director, introduced the item. Dawn Vettese, Financial Programming Manager, presented the item. Action: Upon a motion by Mayor Abed, and a second by Councilmember Alessio, the Board of Directors approved the submission of the proposed 2018 State Transportation Improvement Program to the California Transportation Commission. Yes – Chair Roberts, Vice Chair Sinnott, Mayor Hall, Mayor Salas, Mayor Bailey, Mayor Wells, Mayor Blakespear, Mayor Abed, Councilmember Alessio, Councilmember Jones, Mayor Morrison, Councilmember Kern, Mayor Vaus, Councilmember Zapf, Council President Cole, Mayor Desmond, Mayor Minto, Councilmember Zito, and Mayor Ritter (weighted vote, 100%). No – None (weighted vote, 0%). Abstain – None. (weighted vote, 0%). Absent – Imperial Beach and County of San Diego A. 11. 2018 STATE CAP-AND-TRADE TRANSIT AND INTERCITY RAIL CAPITAL PROGRAM: PROPOSED

PROJECT SUBMITTALS (APPROVE)

The Transportation Committee recommended that the Board of Directors approve the submittal of the proposed applications for the State Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program. Mayor Desmond introduced the item. Linda Culp, Principal Regional Planner, presented the item. Action: Upon a motion by Mayor Hall, and a second by Mayor Vaus, the Board of Directors approved the submittal of the proposed applications for the State Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program. Yes – Chair Roberts, Vice Chair Sinnott, Mayor Hall, Mayor Salas, Mayor Bailey, Mayor Wells, Mayor Blakespear, Mayor Abed, Councilmember Alessio, Councilmember Jones, Mayor Morrison, Councilmember Kern, Mayor Vaus, Councilmember Zapf, Council President Cole, Mayor Desmond, Mayor Minto, Councilmember Zito, and Mayor Ritter (weighted vote, 100%). No – None (weighted vote, 0%). Abstain – None. (weighted vote, 0%). Absent – Imperial Beach and County of San Diego A. 12. CONTINUED PUBLIC COMMENTS

There were no continued public comments.

5

13. UPCOMING MEETINGS

The next Board Policy meeting is scheduled for Friday, December 1, 2017, at 10 a.m. The next Board Business meeting is scheduled for Friday, December 15, 2017, at 9 a.m. Please note these meetings are scheduled for the first and third Fridays, respectively, due to the holiday schedule. 14. ADJOURNMENT

Chair Roberts adjourned the meeting at 10:53 a.m.

Meeting Start Time: 9:05 a.m.

Meeting Adjourned Time: 10:53 a.m.

6

CONFIRMED ATTENDANCE SANDAG BOARD OF DIRECTORS’ MEETING

NOVEMBER 17, 2017

JURISDICTION NAME

ATTEND

OPEN

SESSION

City of Carlsbad Matt Hall (Primary) Yes

City of Chula Vista Mary Salas (Primary) Yes

City of Coronado Richard Bailey (Primary) Yes

City of Del Mar Terry Sinnott, Vice Chair (Primary) Yes

City of El Cajon Bill Wells (Primary) Yes

City of Encinitas Catherine Blakespear (Primary) Yes

City of Escondido Sam Abed (Primary) Yes

City of Imperial Beach Serge Dedina (Primary) Yes

City of La Mesa Kristine Alessio (Primary) Yes

City of Lemon Grove Jerry Jones (Primary) Yes

City of National City Ron Morrison (Primary) Yes

City of Oceanside Jerry Kern (2nd. Alt.) Yes

City of Poway Steve Vaus (Primary) Yes

City of San Diego – A Lorie Zapf (1st Alt.) Yes

City of San Diego – B Myrtle Cole (Primary) Yes

City of San Marcos Jim Desmond (Primary) Yes

City of Santee John Minto (Primary) Yes

City of Solana Beach David Zito (Primary) Yes

City of Vista Judy Ritter (Primary) Yes

County of San Diego – A Dianne Jacob (Primary, Seat A) Yes

County of San Diego – B Ron Roberts, Chair (Primary, Seat B) Yes

Caltrans Ann Fox (2nd. Alt.) Yes

MTS Harry Mathis (Primary) Yes

NCTD Rebecca Jones (Primary) Yes

Imperial County Sup. John Renison (Primary) No

US Dept. of Defense Joe Stuyvesant (Primary) Yes

SD Unified Port District Garry Bonelli (Primary) No

SD County Water Authority Mark Muir (Primary) Yes

Mexico Gaspar Orozco (Alternate) Yes

Southern California

Tribal Chairmen’s Association Cody Martinez (Primary) No

BOARD OF DIRECTORS AGENDA ITEM NO. 17-12-3

DECEMBER 15, 2017 ACTION REQUESTED – APPROVE

ACTIONS FROM POLICY ADVISORY COMMITTEES File Number 8000100

Introduction

The following actions were taken by the Policy Advisory Committees since the last Board of Directors meeting.

BORDERS COMMITTEE MEETING (November 17, 2017)

The Borders Committee meeting was cancelled.

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING (December 1, 2017)

The Executive Committee took the following actions and recommended the following approvals:

• Approved the draft agenda for the December 15, 2017, Board Business meeting, as amended.

• Approved cancellation of the January 12, 2018, Board Policy meeting if no agenda items are identified.

• Recommended that the Board of Directors approve the proposed amendments to Board policies, as revised, and renew the annual delegation of authority to the Executive Director pursuant to Board Policy No. 003: Investment Policy, and its approval of Board Policy No. 032: San Diego County Regional Transportation Commission Interest Rate Swap Policy.

• Recommended that the Board of Directors approve Board Policy No. 039: Audit Policy Advisory Committee and Audit Activities.

• Approved the following Service Bureau project priorities: first priority, San Diego Forward: The 2019 Regional Plan and other agency priorities; second priority, member and other government agency project requests; and third priority, private-sector development project requests.

REGIONAL PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING (December 1, 2017)

The Regional Planning Committee recommended the following approvals:

• Recommended that the Board of Directors approve the evaluation criteria and release the call for projects for the Cycle 4 TransNet Smart Growth Incentive Program.

• Recommended that the Board of Directors approve the proposed SANDAG role in the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities (AHSC) evaluation process, and directed staff

Recommendation

The Board of Directors is asked to ratify the actions of the Policy Advisory Committees.

2

to further explore a potential application to the AHSC Program in collaboration with Community Housing Works.

TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MEETING (December 8, 2017)

The Transportation Committee took the following action and recommended the following approvals:

• Approved a seven-month extension to Mountain Health and Community Services’ Volunteer Driver Program for the Senior and Disabled Mountain Empire Residents project.

• Recommended that the Board of Directors approve the evaluation criteria and release the call for projects for the Cycle 4 TransNet Active Transportation Grant Program.

• Recommended that the Board of Directors authorize the Executive Director to execute a Memorandum of Agreement with the City of La Mesa to issue $2 million in Commercial Paper through the TransNet Debt Financing Program.

PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MEETING (December 8, 2017)

The Public Safety Committee was cancelled.

KIM KAWADA Chief Deputy Executive Director Key Staff Contact: Victoria Stackwick, (619) 699-6926, [email protected]

**REVISED**

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

AGENDA ITEM NO. 17-12-4


APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONTRACT AWARDS File Number 8000100

Introduction

Pursuant to Board direction, construction and professional services awards associated with an original solicitation valued at $5 million or more require approval by the Board of Directors.

Discussion

Roadway Toll Collection Systems At its October 28, 2016, meeting, the Board of Directors authorized the Executive Director to conduct a solicitation for Roadway Toll Collection Systems. The existing roadway systems for Interstate 15 Express Lanes and State Route 125 South Bay Expressway would be replaced under a new contract. The scope of the contract also is intended to cover the State Route 11 Roadway Toll Collection System, once the route is fully constructed. As required by federal provisions and SANDAG Board Policy No. 016: Procurement of Services, an independent cost estimate was prepared by SANDAG resulting in an estimated amount of $63 million over a seven-year period, with the potential of five, one-year maintenance options to extend the contract. Several factors were considered in developing the estimate, including historical use of outside consultants and current market conditions based on prices obtained from recent proposals on similar toll facilities. Overall, four proposals were received in August 2017. All four consultants were invited to interviews in September 2017 and the following firm is being recommended for an award. Summaries of overall evaluation results are included in Attachment 1. • Kapsch TrafficCom USA, Inc. The proposed contract is for a seven-year term with the potential of five, one-year maintenance options to extend the contract. The timing and amount of work will be based on future task orders. The maximum aggregate value of the contract awarded from the solicitation will not exceed the original solicitation value of $63 million.

Recommendation

The Board of Directors is asked to authorize the Executive Director to execute contract awards for Roadway Toll Collection Systems and the Poinsettia Station Improvements Project, as detailed herein.

2

Poinsettia Station Improvements Project

In September 2017, SANDAG conducted an invitation for bids to construct a new pedestrian underpass at the existing Poinsettia Coaster Station. The existing railroad tracks also will be realigned farther to the west, the eastern station platform will be widened, and the existing western platform will be replaced. The project is the last high priority/phase 1 project identified in the LOSSAN Strategic Implementation Plan, and once constructed, will facilitate an increase in COASTER frequencies during the peak period, subject to implementation by NCTD. As required by federal provisions, an Engineer’s Estimate was prepared by SANDAG prior to the solicitation, resulting in an estimated amount of $14.09 million.

Three bids were received; the lowest responsive bidder was Flatiron & H&H, Joint Venture. A summary of bids is included as Attachment 2. Staff is recommending approval of a contract award to Flatiron & H&H, Joint Venture with a term of 330 working days and a contract amount of $19.29 million. A protest is was pending regarding this award at the time the report was mailed out. The protest has since been resolved, and staff recommends an award to Flatiron & H&H, Joint Venture at this time. Staff will update the Board prior to its consideration of the award as to whether the protest has been resolved. If the protest on this project has not been resolved prior to the meeting date, staff recommends that the Board take no action on this project award at this time. The lowest responsive bid amount is 36.92 percent above the Engineer’s Estimate of $14.09 million. A detailed price analysis was completed to determine the most significant differences between the Engineer’s Estimate and the low bid. It was noted that items such as mobilization, roadway excavation, aggregate base, and concrete, were higher. Further research shows that these items were specifically identified in the Caltrans Price Index as having significant construction cost increases each consecutive quarter in 2017. Based upon adequate price competition amongst the bidders, it was determined that Flatiron and H&H’s bid price is fair and reasonable. The FY 2018 Program Budget includes funding for this proposed contract including the additional amount needed in Capital Improvement Program Project No. 1239805: Poinsettia Station Improvements, and No. 1239816: Batiquitos Lagoon Double Track.

KIM KAWADA Chief Deputy Executive Director Attachments: 1. Summary of Overall Evaluation Results: Roadway Toll Collection Systems 2. Summary of Bid Results: Poinsettia Station Improvements Project Key Staff Contact: Laura Coté, (619) 699-6947, [email protected]

Attachment 1

3

Summary of Overall Evaluation Results Roadway Toll Collection Systems Request for Proposals

Proposer Evaluation Criteria

Total Combined Weighted

Score

Total Combined Weighted

Score Possible

Sum of Ranks

Overall Rank *

Neology, Inc.

Firm Qualifications 21.19 37.50

15 3

Key Team Qualifications 24.75 50.00

Approach-Technical Requirements 87.50 175.00 Approach-Project Plan/Implementation

22.75 50.00

Approach-Maint./Software Support 29.69 62.5

Price Proposal 125.00 125.00

Total Score 310.88 500.00

TransCore, LP


14 2



28.00 50.00




Parsons_Indra Joint Venture


16 4



29.00 50.00




Kapsch TrafficCom USA Inc.


5 1



36.25 50.00




* Final Proposer Overall Rank is determined using the Sum of Ranks instead of the Total Combined Weighted

Score. Each evaluator’s total scores are sorted into individual Proposal ranks. Their individual ranks are then added together for a Sum of Ranks. The Sum of Ranks are ordered into Overall Ranks, with the lowest number indicating which Proposal scored the highest across the evaluators. This measure is more objective, mitigating for and normalizing the evaluator’s scoring differentials.

Attachment 2

4

$14.09

$17.05

$19.29

$20.63

$-

$5,000,000.00

$10,000,000.00

$15,000,000.00

$20,000,000.00

$25,000,000.00

Engineers Estimate USS Cal Builders Inc. - DEEMED NON-RESPONSIVE

Flatiron and H&H, Joint-Venture Reyes Construction, Inc.

Bid Summary ChartPoinsettia Station Improvements Project

Invitation for Bids 5007025, Capital Improvement Program Project No. 1239805

Agenda Item No. 5, Board of Directors, December 15, 2017

REVISED 2018 CALENDAR OF MEETINGS OF THE SANDAG BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND POLICY ADVISORY COMMITTEES

Board of Directors – Policy or Business

(Normally second Friday,

10 a.m. to 12 noon)

Board of Directors – Business

(Normally fourth Friday,

9 a.m. to 12 noon)

Transportation Committee

(Normally first and third Fridays,

9 a.m. to 12 noon)

Regional Planning Committee

(Normally first Friday, 12:30 noon to 2:30

p.m.)

Executive Committee

(Normally second Friday,

9 to 10 a.m.)

Public Safety Committee

(Normally third Friday, 1 to 3 p.m.)

Borders Committee

(Normally fourth Friday,

12:30 to 2:30 p.m.)

January 12, 2018 January 26, 2018 January 5, 2018 January 19, 2018

January 5, 2018 January 12, 2018 January 19, 2018 January 26, 2018

February 7-9, 2018: Board Retreat

February 23, 2018 February 2, 2018 February 16, 2018

February 2, 2018 February 9, 2018 (Held at Board Retreat)

February 16, 2018 February 23, 2018

March 9, 2018 March 23, 2018 March 2, 2018 March 16, 2018

March 2, 2018 March 9, 2018 March 16, 2018 March 23, 2018

April 13, 2018 April 27, 2018 April 6, 2018 April 20, 2018

April 6, 2018 April 13, 2018 April 20, 2018 April 27, 2018

May 11, 2018 May 25, 2018 May 4, 2018 May 18, 2018

May 4, 2018 May 11, 2018 May 18, 2018 May 25, 2018

June 8, 2018 June 22, 2018 June 1, 2018 June 15, 2018

June 1, 2018 June 8, 2018 June 15, 2018 June 22, 2018

July 13, 2018 July 27, 2018 July 6, 2018 July 20, 2018

July 6, 2018 July 13, 2018 July 20, 2018 July 27, 2018

August 10, 2018 August 24, 2018 August 3, 2018 August 17, 2018

August 3, 2018 August 10, 2018 August 17, 2018 August 24, 2018

September 14, 2018 September 28, 2018 September 7, 2018 September 21, 2018

September 7, 2018 September 14, 2018 September 21, 2018 September 28, 2018

October 12, 2018 October 26, 2018 October 5, 2018 October 19, 2018

October 5, 2018 October 12, 2018 October 19, 2018 October 26, 2018

November 2, 2018 (First Friday due to Holiday Schedule)

November 16, 2018 (Third Friday due to Holiday Schedule)

November 9, 2018 (Only one meeting; Second Friday due to Holiday Schedule)

November 2, 2018 November 2, 2018 (First Friday due to Holiday Schedule)

November 9, 2018 (Second Friday due to Holiday Schedule)

November 16, 2018 (Third Friday due to Holiday Schedule)

December 7, 2018 (First Friday due to Holiday Schedule)

December 21, 2018 (Third Friday due to Holiday Schedule)

December 14, 2018 (Only one meeting; Second Friday due to Holiday Schedule)

December 7, 2018 December 7, 2018 (First Friday due to Holiday Schedule)

December 14, 2018 (Second Friday due to Holiday Schedule)

To be scheduled only if needed

Changes to normal meeting schedule shown in bold.

BOARD OF DIRECTORS



FY 2017 TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT File Number 1500300 AUDIT EXTENSION REQUEST

Introduction

In accordance with California Public Utilities Code (PUC) Section 99245, each Transportation Development Act (TDA) claimant must submit an audit within 180 days after the end of the fiscal year. SANDAG, acting as the Regional Transportation Planning Agency for the San Diego region, may grant up to a 90-day extension, moving the deadline from December 27, 2017, to no later than March 27, 2018. No further extensions are permitted.

The TDA audit requirements are governed by the California PUC and California Code of Regulations, which specifically prohibit approval of the FY 2019 TDA allocations until the FY 2017 TDA audits are submitted to the State Controller’s Office.

Discussion

The North County Transit District (NCTD) audit fieldwork is complete; however, the final independent auditor draft audit review may not be concluded by December 27, 2017. NCTD is requesting an extension to allow sufficient time to provide final documentation for the audit process.

NCTD is expected to issue the audit reports no later than January 31, 2018.

KIM KAWADA Chief Deputy Executive Director

Attachment: 1. Extension Request for FY 2016 TDA Audit

Key Staff Contact: Lisa Kondrat-Dauphin, (619) 699-1942, [email protected]

Recommendation

The Board of Directors is asked to approve a Transportation Development Act audit extension request until January 31, 2018, for North County Transit District, as permitted by the California Public Utilities Code and California Code of Regulations.

NORTH COUNTY

TRANSIT DISTRICT

810 Mission Avenue

Oceanside, CA 920S4

(760) 966-6S00

(760) 967-2001 (fax)

www.GoNCTD.cam

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Rebecca Jones Vice Mayor, [ily al Son Morcos

Boord Chair

John J. Aguilera (ouncilmemher, lily al Vista

Boord Vice-Choir

Mark Packard [ouncilmembar, [ity of [nrlsbnd

Dave Druker [ouncilnrernber, City of Del Mor

Tony Kranz Oepuly Mayor City of Encinitas

Ed Gallo [ouncilrnember, City of Escondido

Chuck Lowery Oepur1 Moyor, City of Oceo111ide

Bill Horn

Supervisor,CountyolSunDiego

Jewel Edsan Councilnrernber, City of Solano Beach

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR l,lotthew 0. fufker

GENERAL COUNSEL Lori A Winfree

November 29, 2017

Ms. Lisa Kondrat-Dauphin Senior Accountant San Diego Association of Governments 401 B Street, Suite 800 San Diego, CA 92101-4231

Re: Extension Request for FY2017 Transportation Development Act Audit

Dear Ms. Kondrat-Dauphin:

In accordance with California Public Utilities Code (PUC) §99245, a Transportation Development Act (TOA) claimant must submit an audit within 180 days after the end of the fiscal year to its respective Regional Transportation Planning Agency (RTPA). As a TOA claimant, the North County Transit District (District) submits its annual certified fiscal audit (audit) to the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), who acts as the RTPA for the San Diego region. Under PUC §99245, SANDAG may grant an extension of the submittal deadline of up to 90 days as it deems necessary.

The District audit fieldwork is complete; however, the final independent auditor draft audit review may not be concluded by December 27, 2017, which is the due date for the District's fiscal year (FY) 2017 audit submittal. While the District is working diligently to have its FY2017 audit completed by the December 27, 2017 deadline, in an abundance of caution, I am requesting an extension to January 31, 2018, as allowed under PUC §99245.

The District understands that the TOA audit requirements, which are governed by the California PUC and the California Code of Regulations, specifically prohibit approval of the FY2019 TOA allocations until its FY2017 audit is submitted to SANDAG and the State of California Controller's Office.

I sincerely appreciate your consideration of this request. If you have any questions, or need additional information, please contact Mary Aykroid, Deputy Chief Accounting & Finance Officer, who may be reached at 760-966-6522 or via e-mail at [email protected].

2

Attachment 1

Re: Extension Request for FY2017 Transportation Development Act Audit November 29, 2017 Page 2 of 2

s.) z Cofresi-Howe · Financial Officer

cc: Matthew 0. Tucker, Executive Director, NCTD Mary Aykroid, Deputy Chief Accounting & Finance Officer, NCTD Janee Harris, Compliance Officer, NCTD

3

BOARD OF DIRECTORS


DECEMBER 15, 2017 ACTION REQUESTED: INFORMATION

WEIGHTED VOTING FORMULA UPDATE File Number 8000100

Discussion

Public Utilities Code (PUC) Section 132351.2 defines the weighted voting formula to be used by the SANDAG Board of Directors. The weighted vote is proportional to each jurisdiction’s population as a percentage of the San Diego County region and is limited to a total of 100 votes. Each agency must have at least 1 vote and there are no fractional votes. Assembly Bill 805 (AB 805) (Gonzalez Fletcher) made certain amendments to that section, including raising the weighted vote cap from no more than 40 votes per voting member agency to no more than 50 votes per agency. PUC Section 132351.2(g), as well as Article IV, Section 5 of the SANDAG Bylaws, requires that the weighted vote formula be recomputed on July 1 of each year. The Bylaws further specify that the population figures to be used in this recalculation shall consist of those determined for each member agency as certified by the California Department of Finance (DOF). AB 805 takes effect on January 1, 2018, but because the weighted vote recomputation date was not modified by the legislation, the recomputation of the voting formula will not occur until July 1, 2018. The existing allocation of weighted votes will continue to apply until that time. Based on provisions outlined in AB 805 regarding when the tally and weighted votes are used, the law will be implemented on January 1, 2018, using the existing weighted vote computation.

Next Steps

Population numbers for 2018 are expected to be released by the DOF in May 2018. Those updated numbers will be applied in recomputing of the weighted vote allocations, and information on those updated vote allocations—including application of modified vote caps per AB 805—will be brought to the Board in or around June 2018.


Key Staff Contact: Julie Wiley, (619) 699-6966, [email protected]

BOARD OF DIRECTORS



REPORT ON MEETINGS AND EVENTS ATTENDED File Number 8000100 ON BEHALF OF SANDAG

Since the last Board of Directors meeting, Board members participated in the following meetings and events on behalf of SANDAG. Key topics of discussion also are summarized.

November 20, 2017, Oceanside Transit Center Grand Opening Oceanside, CA Oceanside Deputy Mayor Chuck Lowery attended the Oceanside Transit Center Grand Opening as the SANDAG representative. SANDAG and the North County Transit District (NCTD) expanded the Oceanside Transit Center to increase the number of trains that can board passengers simultaneously and to allow freight trains to pass through the station while passengers are boarding. Deputy Mayor Lowery greeted passengers on Monday morning and answered questions about the new improvements.

November 27-28, 2017, California Association of Councils of Governments Board of Directors Retreat Oakland, CA National City Mayor Ron Morrison attended the California Association of Councils of Governments Board of Directors Retreat as the SANDAG representative. The Board of Directors engaged in a Strategic Planning Roundtable to discuss the status of the Board’s goals and strategic plan implementation. The Board also discussed offering a Leadership Training Program for mid-level staff and funding the program; and approved various administrative actions, including legislative principles, audit report, budget amendments, bylaws amendments, and committee appointments. December 6, 2017 Los Angeles – San Diego – San Luis Obispo Rail Board of Directors Meeting Los Angeles, CA Vice Chair Terry Sinnott, Del Mar Mayor, attended the Los Angeles–San Diego–San Luis Obispo Rail Corridor Board of Directors meeting as the SANDAG primary representative. The Board of Directors discussed and approved a revised fare policy, the final legislative program, a request for proposals for a corridor wide service optimization analysis, and the quarterly financial report.


Key Staff Contact: Victoria Stackwick, (619) 699-6926, [email protected]

BOARD OF DIRECTORS



REPORT SUMMARIZING DELEGATED ACTIONS File Number 8000100 TAKEN BY THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

Introduction

Various Board Policies require the Executive Director to report certain actions to the Board of Directors on a monthly basis or upon taking specified actions.

Discussion

Board Policy No. 003

Board Policy No. 003: Investment Policy, states that a monthly report of all investment transactions shall be submitted to the Board of Directors. Attachment 1 contains the reportable investment transactions for October 2017.

Board Policy No. 008 Section 6 of Board Policy No. 008: Legal Matters, authorizes the Office of General Counsel or outside counsel to file documents and make appearances on behalf of SANDAG in court proceedings.

The following documents were filed and appearances were made on behalf of SANDAG in relation to the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project:

• On November 8, 2017, Best Best & Krieger filed, on behalf of SANDAG, an Ex Parte Application for Order Continuing Trial Date in the matter of SANDAG v. Navarra Morena Properties (Superior Court Case No. 2016-00018198).

• On November 9, 2017, Nossaman appeared, on behalf of SANDAG, for the Legal Issues Motion in the matter of SANDAG v. La Jolla Canyon Gardens (Superior Court Case No. 2016-00025276).

• On November 15, 2017, Best Best & Krieger appeared, on behalf SANDAG, at the Ex Parte Hearing for Order Continuing Trial Date in the matter of SANDAG v. Navarra Morena Properties (Superior Court Case No. 2016-00018198).

• On November 21, 2017, Nossaman filed, on behalf of SANDAG, a Disclaimer of Interest in the matter of SANDAG v. 8650 Villa La Jolla Inc. (Superior Court Case No. 2017-39831).

• On November 27, 2017, Nossaman filed, on behalf of SANDAG, a Disclaimer of Interest in the

matter of SANDAG v. 8650 Villa La Jolla Inc. (Superior Court Case No. 2017-39831).

2

• On December 5, 2017, Nossaman filed, on behalf of SANDAG, Requests for Dismissal in the matter of SANDAG v. La Jolla Country Day School (Superior Court Case No. 2016-00018119).

• On December 5, 2017, Nossaman filed, on behalf of SANDAG, a Disclaimer of Interest in the matter

of SANDAG v. 8650 Villa La Jolla Inc. (Superior Court Case No. 37-2017-39831).

The following appearances were made on behalf of SANDAG in relation to the South Bay Rapid Project:

• On November 21, 2017, SANDAG specially appeared at an Ex Parte Hearing regarding an Application for Temporary Restraining Order in the matter of Spector v. SANDAG, et al. (Superior Court Case No. 2017-00044112).

Board Policy No. 024

Board Policy No. 024: Procurement and Contracting – Construction Policy, Section 5.2, states that the Executive Director is delegated the authority to accept contracts on behalf of the Board, and shall report to the Board all contract acceptances over $25,000. The following construction project was accepted.

In a letter dated November 17, 2017, HMS Construction, Inc., was granted Acceptance for the Ruffin Road BRT Station Project – Effective November 2, 2017 (Capital Improvement Program Project No. 1201515, Contract No. 5007500, JOC7500-02). The contract value was $142,612.26.


Attachment: 1. Monthly Activity for Investment Securities Transactions for October 2017

Key Staff Contact: André Douzdjian, (619) 699-6931, [email protected]

MONTHLY ACTIVITY FOR INVESTMENT SECURITIES TRANSACTIONS FOR OCTOBER 1 THROUGH OCTOBER 31, 2017

Yield toTransaction Maturity Par Original Maturity

Date Date Security Value Cost at CostBOUGHT

10/02/2017 11/09/2020 INTER-AMERICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK 3,605,000.00$ 3,638,415.12$ 1.81%10/06/2017 04/04/2018 JP MORGAN SECURITIES LLC COMM PAPER 850,000.00 843,808.22 1.52%10/10/2017 04/10/2018 BANK OF TOKYO MITSUBISHI UFJ COMM PAPER 850,000.00 843,589.58 1.53%10/10/2017 04/10/2018 BNP PARIBAS NY BRANCH COMM PAPER 850,000.00 843,803.26 1.48%10/10/2017 04/10/2018 CREDIT AGRICOLE CIB NY COMM PAPER 850,000.00 843,974.21 1.44%10/11/2017 04/09/2018 TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORP COMM PAPER 850,000.00 843,752.50 1.50%10/23/2017 10/30/2019 HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL CORP NOTES 545,000.00 544,574.90 1.84%10/23/2017 02/01/2021 BRANCH BANKING & TRUST (CALLABLE) NOTES 1,000,000.00 999,540.00 2.17%10/26/2017 09/29/2020 FHLMC NOTES 825,000.00 821,139.00 1.79%

TOTAL BOUGHT: 10,225,000.00$ 10,222,596.79$ 1.72%

MATURED10/01/2017 10/01/2017 MS ST TXBL GO BONDS 230,000.00$ 230,000.00$ 1.09%10/01/2017 10/25/2017 FANNIE MAE 102,437.46 103,463.26 1.08%10/01/2017 10/25/2017 FNMA 81,996.34 82,816.26 1.05%10/01/2017 10/25/2017 FNMA 30,041.66 30,342.07 1.20%10/01/2017 10/25/2017 FNMA 18,507.94 18,692.95 0.83%10/01/2017 10/25/2017 FNMA 35,753.22 36,110.48 1.26%10/06/2017 10/06/2017 JP MORGAN SECURITIES LLC COMM PAPER 850,000.00 844,296.50 1.33%10/10/2017 10/10/2017 BANK OF TOKYO MITSUBISHI UFJ COMM PAPER 850,000.00 843,851.67 1.41%10/10/2017 10/10/2017 BNP PARIBAS NY BRANCH COMM PAPER 850,000.00 844,370.64 1.32%10/10/2017 10/10/2017 CREDIT AGRICOLE CIB NY COMM PAPER 850,000.00 844,444.31 1.31%10/11/2017 10/11/2017 TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORP COMM PAPER 850,000.00 844,786.67 1.21%10/15/2017 10/15/2017 CNH ABS 64,716.66 64,710.77 1.27%10/15/2017 10/15/2017 TOYOTA ABS 42,546.58 42,544.17 1.25%10/26/2017 10/26/2017 FHLB NOTES 825,000.00 824,043.00 0.68%10/26/2017 10/26/2017 FANNIE MAE GLOBAL NOTES 1,500,000.00 1,503,960.00 0.68%10/26/2017 10/26/2017 FANNIE MAE 3,000,000.00 2,997,900.00 0.91%

TOTAL MATURED: 10,180,999.86$ 10,156,332.75$ 1.04%

SOLD10/03/2017 12/14/2018 FNMA NOTES 1,915,000.00$ 1,917,202.25$ 1.08% 1

10/03/2017 02/26/2019 FNMA BENCHMARK NOTE 1,760,000.00 1,755,846.40 0.97% 1

10/23/2017 09/28/2020 FHLB NOTES 1,000,000.00 996,790.00 1.48% 1

10/30/2017 04/30/2019 US TREASURY NOTES 500,000.00 512,949.22 0.70% 1

TOTAL SOLD: 5,175,000.00$ 5,182,787.87$ 1.08%

1 Proceeds from this sale were used to purchase new securities that would provide higher returns over a longer holding period.

Attachment 1

3

BOARD OF DIRECTORS



ELECTION OF 2018 SANDAG BOARD OFFICERS File Number 8000100

Introduction

Consistent with SANDAG Bylaws, in October 2017 Chair Ron Roberts appointed the following Nominating Committee for SANDAG Board Officers: San Diego Council President Myrtle Cole (City of San Diego), Solana Beach Councilmember David Zito (North County Coastal); San Marcos Mayor Jim Desmond (North County Inland); El Cajon Mayor Bill Wells (East County); and Coronado Mayor Richard Bailey (South County). Chair Roberts served as the County of San Diego representative as well as the Nominating Committee Chair.

In November, the Nominating Committee provided its recommendations to the Board of Directors. In accordance with SANDAG Bylaws, Board members may make additional nominations for any officer position during the December Board meeting.

Discussion

Annual Nomination Process

The SANDAG Bylaws set forth the annual nomination and election process for SANDAG Board Officers. The process calls for an application form for the Chair and Vice Chair positions to be made available on the SANDAG website in or around July. To be regarded for initial consideration for one of the officer positions, prospective applicants must provide information about their current status and term of office, SANDAG experience, and other public agency experience; describe their reasons for seeking a Board Officer position; and describe their vision and leadership qualities.

Additionally, nominations of any primary member of the Board may be made from the floor on the day of the elections.

Nominating Committee Recommendations

The applications received included Del Mar Mayor Terry Sinnott for Chair, and National City Mayor Ron Morrison and Poway Mayor Steve Vaus for Vice Chair (Attachment 1). In November, the Nominating Committee unanimously recommended Mayor Sinnott for the 2018 Chair position, recognizing his dedication and commitment to the agency, and his leadership in several Board initiatives during this past year. During consideration of the candidates for the Vice Chair position, the Nominating

Recommendation

The Nominating Committee recommends that the Board of Directors approve Del Mar Mayor Terry Sinnott as 2018 Chair and consider both National City Mayor Ron Morrison and Poway Mayor Steve Vaus for the position of 2018 Vice Chair.

2

Committee recognized that both candidates are experienced individuals who are dedicated to the agency and the San Diego region as a whole. Committee members also recognized that both candidates could provide the time commitment involved as a SANDAG Board Officer. As such, the Nominating Committee unanimously recommended that both candidates move forward in the election process for the Board’s consideration.

Election Process

The SANDAG Bylaws provide for the use of a preliminary vote when there is a need to limit options in advance of a formal vote. If there is more than one candidate for either of the leadership positions, a preliminary tally-only vote will be taken on all nominees for that position with each jurisdiction voting for one of the nominees.

The candidate receiving the most preliminary tally votes will be voted on first for office, requiring both a formal motion and second. That first candidate would then be formally voted on using SANDAG’s existing voting process, and must receive a majority of both the tally and weighted vote to be elected. If that candidate receives less than the required threshold, the candidate that received the second most preliminary tally votes would then be presented for consideration in the same manner, with the process continuing until a successful candidate emerges or until all initial candidates have been considered. If no candidate has been elected per the outlined process, additional candidates may be considered or a previously-unsuccessful candidate may be reconsidered.

Once elected, new officers will serve a one-year term beginning on January 1, 2018.

RON ROBERTS Chair, SANDAG Board of Directors Nominating Committee Chair

Attachment: 1. Applications for 2017 SANDAG Chair and Vice Chair Positions

Key Staff Contact: Victoria Stackwick, (619) 699-6926, [email protected]

SINNOTT

SANDAG BOARD OFFICER APPLICATION FORM FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2018

Position Applying For (more than one box can be marked):

Chair Application Name Terry Sinnott Local Jurisdiction City of Del Mar Elected Official Title Member, Del Mar City Council No. Years in Position 7 Date Current Term of Office Expires (month/date/year) December 3, 2018 Are you eligible to Run in the Next Election? Yes Next Election Date (month/date/year) November, 2018

SANDAG EXPERIENCE Please list current and prior involvement in SANDAG activities, including membership on Board, Policy Advisory Committees, and working groups. Group or Activity Time Period Alternate, SANDAG Board, City of Del Mar

2010-2012

Primary, SANDAG Board, City of Del Mar

2012-Present

Executive Committee

2013-2017

Chair, Environmental Mitigation Working Group

Feb. 2014 - Present

Chair, Public Safety Committee

2016

Vice Chair, SANDAG Board

2016-Present

ARJIS Organization Study

2016

Measure A Independent Investigation

2017

Testimony To Legislature; AB 805

2017

3

Attachment 1

SINNOTT

INTEREST IN SERVING ON SANDAG Attach separate pages as needed.

Do not exceed three (3) pages in addition to this application form. 1. Why do you want to serve as a SANDAG Board Officer?

I respect the SANDAG organization and the unique value it plays in making the San Diego Region a better place. It is critical that SANDAG fulfill its commitments to voters by planning and building effective transportation infrastructure for the future. To do this the Board must provide leadership and work as a group to meet these high expectations. I have the leadership skills which I think can contribute to that effort ….. and continue our record of success.

2. What is your vision for SANDAG next year and in five years?

Next year I would like to see these issues resolved:

a) That we put in place new leadership that improves the trust and confidence in the Agency. b) That we strengthen our delivery of information to Board Members and their jurisdictions c) The Board create a new vision and strategic plan for the implementing the RTP and communicating that vision to

our region. d) That SANDAG audits its data-collection / forecasting efforts throughout the organization and ensures that we are

complying with all transparency goals of the Board and best management practices.

In the next five years, I would like to see: a) The mid-coast trolley extension is well-underway ….. on schedule, on budget. b) Projects like Otay Mesa East, I5 Improvements, I5 & 78 Interchange, Genesee Ave, … are progressing successfully. c) That SANDAG’s toll road operations are well managed and meet transportation goals. d) That a succession plan for SANDAG is fully developed and on track. e) Our bond rating continues strong.

3. Describe how you believe you are in touch with your constituents and give examples of why you have

represented them well in the past.

a) I am in my second term in a small city where everyone knows everyone. b) The City of Del Mar is very liberal, very conservative and very “no-preference”. c) I revitalized our Finance Committee and tackled the pension liability issue. d) I drafted a new public art policy for the City. e) Established a Business Support Advisory Committee for Del Mar businesses to voice their recommendations. f) Sponsored a fresh look at building restrictions in Del Mar to satisfy opposing factions. g) We are progressing on building a new City Hall h) We have identified a need for stronger law enforcement in Del Mar. i) Created high-involvement public outreach to master plan our one remaining open-space park.

4. Availability: I am open to serving as Chair for one year (2018). My term on the Del Mar City Council ends in December 2018. My availability for SANDAG appointment after 2018 is not certain.

4

SINNOTT

OTHER PUBLIC AGENCY EXPERIENCE Please list current and prior involvement in other public agency activities, including membership of boards, councils, or committees. Group or Activity Time Period Board Member, Regional Solid Waste Association

2012 to Present

City of Del Mar Legislative Advocacy

2012 to Present

Coastal City Fire Cooperative (Del Mar, Encinitas, Solana Beach)

Quarterly

Board Member, LOSSAN

Monthly

Do you anticipate service to these agencies to be in conflict with a leadership position at SANDAG?

No Please explain, as needed. N/A Signature Terry Sinnott Date 8/13/2017 Please return completed application form by 5 p.m. on Monday, August 14, 2017, to: SANDAG Attn: Tessa Lero, Executive Assistant/Clerk of the Board 401 B Street, Suite 800 San Diego, CA 92101-4231 E-mail: [email protected] Tel: (619) 699-1991 Fax: (619) 699-1995

5

mailto:[email protected]

Terry Sinnott

Terry is a native San Diegan. He grew up in Mission Hills, attended San Diego High School and frequently vacationed in Del Mar as a teenager.

Terry attended Pomona College, graduating in 1967. He then went on to U.S. Navy Officers Candidate School in Newport Rhode Island. He was commissioned in 1968 and served one tour on the U.S.S. Bon Homme Richard (CVA-31) in Vietnam, and one tour as an instructor at Fleet Training Center, San Diego.

In 1972, Terry joined San Diego Gas & Electric, where he spent 22 years in various roles, including Industrial Engineering, Marketing, Distribution Planning, and Customer Service. He completed his SDG&E career after serving as Director of Customer Service Operations for north San Diego County. It was in this position that Terry gained experience in the unique character of local municipalities in north county.

While at SDG&E, Terry earned his MBA in management from San Diego State University.

Terry left SDG&E in 1994 and established his own management consulting business, specializing in organizational development, strategic planning, executive leadership, and customer service. His clients included over 26 local profit and non-profit organizations including UCSD, Cubic Corporation, the County of San Diego, and the San Diego Padres.

Terry has been active in the Del Mar community for over 13 years. In 2003, he helped define the City’s future by facilitating Del Mar’s Vision 2020 workshops. He successfully brought residents together to underground utilities in the Ocean View Pines neighborhood. Terry has served on the City’s Finance Committee from 2004-2007, and the boards of Del Mar Community Connections and the Friends of Del Mar Parks.

Terry is currently Mayor, City of Del Mar. He also serves as Vice Chairman of the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG).

Terry and his wife Judi moved to Del Mar in 1976, where they raised two children, Leslie and John; and now have five grandchildren. Terry became a widower in 2007. He remarried in 2012 to his wife Marilyn and now spends his time working in the community, traveling, and enjoying his family.

6

SANDAG BOARD OFFICER APPLICATION FORM FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2018


Chair X Vice Chair Application Name Ron Morrison Local Jurisdiction National City Elected Official Title Mayor No. Years in Position 11 Date Current Term of Office Expires (month/date/year) 12-4-2018 Are you eligible to Run in the Next Election? Yes Next Election Date (month/date/year) 11-16-2018

SANDAG EXPERIENCE Please list current and prior involvement in SANDAG activities, including membership on Board, Policy Advisory Committees, and working groups. Group or Activity Time Period Board of Directors

1998 - Present

Executive Committee

2000 - Present

Vice Chairman of the Board

2000 - 2002

Chairman of the Board

2002 - 2004

Vice Chair of Transportation Committee

2000 - 2002

Executive Board of C.A.L.C.O.G.

2000 – Present

President of C.A.L.C.O.G.

2005 and 2013

Executive Board of N.A.R.C

2006 - Present

President of N.A.R.C

2012 - 2013

7

2

INTEREST IN SERVING ON SANDAG Attach separate pages as needed.

Do not exceed three (3) pages in addition to this application form. 1. Why do you want to serve as a SANDAG Board Officer?

SANDAG is at the preverbal crossroads of reshaping itself from either pressure from within or pressure from outside. I believe this is going to be a time, as we look at change and remodeling that the leadership will need to; (1) have a firm grasp and a working understanding of the complexities of SANDAG compared to other C.O.G.’s and M.P.O.’s, (2) have a working knowledge of the history and different levels of involvement of the organization, (3) experience in meeting and understanding overall regional needs and the ability to balance the regional needs and desires, (4) being seen as neutral in sub-regional and partisan issues.

I believe that the many years of involvement and leadership that I have provided at the local, regional, state and nation level on regional governance would be extremely beneficial to SANDAG during these ensuing years. My heart has always been with the betterment of our region through SANDAG, and I am willing to be of service in any way I can.

2. What is your vision for SANDAG next year and in five years? Obviously this next year will be one of retrospect and looking hard at where we want to go as we head toward our next level of maturity as an organization. I see SANDAG doing serious evaluation, from within and independently from outside, as we look to addressing the present and future needs of our region. Being open to substantive and positive change is going to be essential as we are being deliberate, thoughtful and not being reactionary to momentary winds. This next year will be consumed with finding and establishing new leadership, plus evaluating and implementing organizational structural changes. Over the next five years we will need to establish a new level of professionalism and trust so that we can continue to compete for the resources that are needed if we are to continue to be a premiere implementation agency.

3. Describe how you believe you are in touch with your constituents and give examples of why you have represented them well in the past. My 25 years in office (14 as Councilmember and 11 as Mayor) I’ve had the honor of representing on the local level a very diverse, lower income, inner urban city that has made tremendous positive strides, while also having the highest percentage of votes for any jurisdiction concerning SANDAG initiatives.

I have prided myself with being able to think regionally while representing my city at SANDAG, and more globally while representing SANDAG and providing leadership at the State and National level. I am a full time Mayor that has and is able to avail myself to as much time as is needed to perform whatever task is before us. I’ve always had a reputation of hearing and acting on the concerns and diverse opinions from many sides and viewpoints without reference to their sub-regional, political or social background. I have a long history of consensus building that I believe has and will serve SANDAG well.

4. For Vice Chair position. Is your interest in serving only as a Vice Chair, or do you see yourself wanting to serve as Chair in the future? In the current state of re-evaluating the future direction of SANDAG, I would be flexible to its needs.

8

3

OTHER PUBLIC AGENCY EXPERIENCE

Please list current and prior involvement in other public agency activities, including membership of boards, councils, or committees. Group or Activity Time Period County Water Authority

2004 - Present

Sweetwater Water Authority

2003 – Present

MTDB - MTS

2000 – 2004

Regional Solid Waste Association

1996 – Present

San Diego County Solid Waste Association

1993 – 1996


Yes X No Please explain, as needed. N/A Signature Ron Morrison Date 14 August 2017 Please return completed application form by 5 p.m. on Monday, August 14, 2017, to: SANDAG Attn: Tessa Lero, Executive Assistant/Clerk of the Board 401 B Street, Suite 800 San Diego, CA 92101-4231 E-mail: [email protected] Tel: (619) 699-1991 Fax: (619) 699-1995

9


SANDAG BOARD OFFICER APPLICATION FORMFOR CALENDAR YEAR 2018

DATE: August 9, 2017


SANDAG EXPERIENCEPlease list current and prior involvement in SANDAG activities, including membership on Board, Policy Advisory Committees, and working groups.

Chair Vice Chair

Application Name Steve Vaus

Local Jurisdiction Poway

Elected Official Title Mayor Years in Position Mayor 3yrs (Council 2yrs)

Date Current Term of Office Expires (month/date/year) 2018

Are you eligible to Run in the Next Election? Yes - I will be running for reelection

Next Election Date (month/date/year) November 6, 2018

Group or Activity Time Period

SANDAG Board Member, City of Poway 2014 to present

Executive Committee 2016 to present

Measure A Investigation Subcommittee 2017

ARJIS Assessment Ad Hoc Committee 2016 - 2017

Public Safety Committee Chair 2016

Public Safety Committee Vice-Chair 2015 - 2016

Public Safety Committee 2015 to present

NARC (National Association of Regional Councils) alternate current

10

INTEREST IN SERVING ON SANDAGAttach separate pages as needed.

Do not exceed three (3) pages in addition to this application form.

1. Why do you want to serve as a SANDAG Board Officer?

SANDAG’s success is critical to San Diego County’s well-being and advancement. I’d welcome the opportunity to help guide the agency to a new era of accomplishment, respect, trust and enhanced regional cooperation.

Consistent with the recommendations made in SANDAG’s bylaws (Article V, Section 3d) I have the time, executive experience and skills necessary for such a role and I would bring geographic diversity to board leadership.

My interest in serving as a SANDAG Board Officer is also based on the importance of continuity of leadership and the fact that my office is not subject to term limits. There is a reasonable certainty I will be on the SANDAG Board of Directors at least another five years.

Finally, I believe I have demonstrated effective consensus-building leadership, reaching across geographical and partisan divides, in my efforts related to the Measure A investigation.

2. What is your vision for SANDAG next year and in five years?

SANDAG’s most critical and challenging task in the next several years is to rebuild public trust. That can only be achieved with inclusive collaboration among stakeholders, consideration of the needs of all communities, respect for the public and their input, pragmatic problem solving, and open, honest, and timely communication in all circumstances. The effort to restore the public’s confidence in SANDAG will also be aided by effectively telling the story of SANDAG’s past successes, its ongoing projects and the regional benefits of its efforts. Further, we must be sure that projects currently underway stay on time and on budget.

In the near term, policies and procedures developed as a result of the Measure A investigation must be effectively implemented and monitored.

3. Describe how you believe you are in touch with your constituents and give examples of why you have represented them well in the past.

Connection with Poway residents was a hallmark of my community service before I was even elected. Prior to holding office, I rallied the community to recall a council member who had abused the power of her position - in the final tally 79% of Poway’s voters supported that recall. Subsequent to that, also prior to my election, following the substance abuse related deaths of three Poway teens in a short span of time, in the absence of response or action by Poway’s elected leaders, I organized a Town Hall gathering to begin a community conversation about teen substance abuse. That standing-room-only meeting catalyzed unprecedented collaboration between the City, the school district, law enforcement, treatment professionals, faith institutions and the community-at-large. In the same time period, I created “Poway Secret Service” - a text message based alert system to connect Poway residents with small volunteer activities that could be accomplished in under an hour - i.e. returning an orphaned shopping cart to its “home”; trail and open space clean up; assisting an elderly community member; and more. Thousands of residents signed up to participate.

Subsequent to being elected I have remained connected with my constituents through a weekly email reaching two-thirds of Poway households; extensive use of social media; monthly coffee-with-the-mayor open houses; and frequent appearances on broadcast media.

Following are two examples of how my “constituent-connected” approach has benefited Poway since taking office: Tony Gwynn was a beloved resident of our city. After his passing Poway residents expressed

11

overwhelming support for a memorial statue and plaza but the price tag was $150,000. I opposed spending tax dollars on the project and pledged to raise the money privately. Residents and local businesses contributed over $200,000 allowing us to unveil the project in May of this year - on time and on budget. In fact the success of the fund raising allowed for a reserve account to be created for upkeep and maintenance of the installation.

Revitalizing and reimagining our main corridor, Poway Road, has long been talked about in Poway but prior to my election as mayor there was little action. Under my leadership our current council created a citizen led Poway Road Corridor Study group to hold community workshops and work with development professionals to create an incentive-based development model to breathe new life into the two mile stretch of our “Main Street”. In recent weeks our council gave the green light to the plan.

4. For Vice Chair position. Is your interest in serving only as a Vice Chair, or do you see yourself wanting toserve as Chair in the future? I am interested & willing to serve as chair in the future.

OTHER PUBLIC AGENCY EXPERIENCE

Please list current and prior involvement in other public agency activities, including membership of boards, councils, or committees.


Please return completed application form by 5 p.m. on Monday, August 14, 2017, to:

SANDAGAttn: Tessa Lero, Executive Assistant/Clerk of the Board 401 B Street, Suite 800San Diego, CA 92101-4231E-mail: [email protected]

Group or Activity Time Period

City of Poway Council Member 2012-2014

City of Poway Mayor 2014 to present

City of Poway & Poway Unified School District Joint Use Subcommittee 2012 - 2014

Goodan Ranch JPA 2012 - 2014

City of Poway Budget Review Committee Chairman 2010 - 2012

San Dieguito River Park JPA Board alternate 2012 - 2014

Misc: Crimestoppers Board of Directors; National Academy Television Arts & Sciences Pacific Southwest Chapter Board of Directors; Poway Community Leadership Institute (Executive Director); founder Poway Secret Service

Yes No

Signature Steve Vaus Date August 9, 2017

12

Tel: (619) 699-1991 • Fax: (619) 699-1995


BOARD OF DIRECTORS



PROPOSED NEW BOARD POLICY NO. 039: AUDIT POLICY File Number 8000102 ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND AUDIT ACTIVITIES

Introduction

As discussed at the November 3, 2017, Board of Directors meeting, Assembly Bill 805 (AB 805) (Gonzalez Fletcher) goes into effect on January 1, 2018, and there are many steps to carry out over the following months to implement its provisions. This report concerns the new provisions that AB 805 adds to Public Utilities Code Sections 132351.4 and 132354.1, which require the creation of a new Policy Advisory Committee, known as the Audit Committee, and independent performance auditor position.

Discussion

The proposed new Board Policy No. 39: Audit Policy Advisory Committee and Audit Activities, is provided as Attachment 1. The discussion below summarizes each section of the policy. Audit Committee Provisions

Section 1

This section states that the purpose of the policy is to specify the functions of the Audit Committee and the agency’s independent performance auditor.

Section 2

Pursuant to AB 805, this section provides that the Audit Committee is to consist of five voting members, with two Board members and three members of the public, all of which are to be appointed by the Board of Directors. AB 805 does not discuss how officer positions of the Committee will be filled, or whether there will be alternates. The language in the proposed policy is consistent with the process used for other SANDAG Policy Advisory Committees, under which the Chair of the Board would select who will serve as the Chair and Vice Chair of the Committee. Unlike the other Policy Advisory Committees, the term of office for the Chair and Vice Chair is proposed to be two years instead of one, and primary members would not be able to select their own alternates. This

Recommendation

The Executive Committee recommends that the Board of Directors approve the proposed new Board Policy No 039: SANDAG Audit Policy Advisory Committee and Audit Activities (Attachment 1). The Board also is asked to direct that SANDAG’s existing Principal Management Internal Auditor report on audit matters to the Audit Committee once established.

2

approach is recommended because of the unique learning curve associated with serving on the Audit Committee as compared to other Policy Advisory Committees, and the goal of ensuring that the voting members, whether they be primary or alternate members, have the desired qualifications.

Section 3

Section 3 focuses on the responsibilities of the Audit Committee. Most of the responsibilities listed are specified in AB 805; these include making recommendations to the Board of Directors regarding the selection of the audit firm to be hired to conduct the annual SANDAG independent financial audit and hiring of the independent performance auditor, and approval of the annual audit plan. In addition, Sections 3.1.3, 3.1.6, 3.1.8, and 3.1.9 authorize the Committee to oversee the implementation of corrective actions as necessary. AB 805 specifies that the independent performance auditor can only be removed for cause by a two-thirds vote of the Board and the Audit Committee; however, it does not state what constitutes cause. In Section 3.1.11, the draft policy proposes that sufficient cause include, but not be limited to, incompetence, dishonesty, unethical behavior, violation of state or federal laws, or failure to maintain required professional certifications. Section 4

Section 4 is broken out into two parts. Section 4.1 describes the criteria for selection of the Board members, and Section 4.2 describes the criteria for selection of the public members on the Audit Committee. The draft policy requires that Board members who serve on the Committee have served on the Board of Directors for at least three years, have a basic understanding of the role of the Committee, and are willing to work through the Committee to pursue opportunities for improvements identified through the agency’s audit products. On the other SANDAG Policy Advisory Committees, each subregion (North County Coastal, North County Inland, East County, South County), the City of San Diego, and County of San Diego have a representative; however, per AB 805, only two Board members may serve on the Audit Committee. For this reason, the policy proposes that the SANDAG Chair recommend the Board members and alternates who will serve on the Committee, subject to approval by a majority vote of the Board. Section 4.2 of the proposed new policy would require that the three public members who serve on the Committee have accounting, financial or auditing experience, including at least ten years of experience as a certified public accountant or as a certified internal auditor, or ten years of other professional accounting, financial, or legal experience in audit management. The proposed public member criteria and selection process in Section 4.2 are a hybrid of the process used by the City of San Diego to select its audit committee members and the process SANDAG currently uses to select members of the TransNet Independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee. The selection process for public members allows for a screening committee to recommend applicants for both the primary and alternate seats if enough qualified candidates submit applications. Public members on the Audit Committee would be subject to approval by a majority vote of the Board, following an application and screening process.

3

Independent Performance Auditor Provisions

Section 5

This section of the draft policy contains the process for selecting the independent performance auditor. Rather than focusing on financial matters, performance auditing generally refers to the independent examination of a program, function, operation, or management systems and procedures to assess whether the entity is achieving economy, efficiency, and effectiveness in the employment of available resources. AB 805 requires that SANDAG “hire” an independent performance auditor. It does not dictate whether the independent performance auditor be a consultant firm or a contract employee of the agency. Staff is in the process of gathering information on the pros and cons of the two options and plans to bring the information to the Board at a future meeting for direction. The section delineates a two-year term and significant qualifications and experience criteria that would be used by the Committee to select the independent performance auditor.

Section 6

The purpose of Section 6 is to list the scope of authority and responsibilities of the independent performance auditor. Most of the responsibilities are specified in AB 805, such as the requirement that the independent performance auditor annually prepare an audit plan and perform planned audits in accordance with Government Auditing Standards, and that the independent performance auditor has unrestricted access to employees, information, and records for both audits and investigations into material claims of financial fraud, waste, or impropriety. In addition, this section requires that the independent performance auditor follow procedures recommended by the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners’ manual for investigations into allegations of financial fraud, waste, or impropriety.

AB 805 also provides that the independent performance auditor may examine any agency officer, agent, or employee; any claimant; or other person under oath. The proposed policy includes steps the independent performance auditor must take in coordination with the Committee and legal counsel to invoke this provision in order to mitigate risk exposure to the agency. Additionally, this section would require that the independent performance auditor coordinate audit functions with audits performed by the Independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee to avoid duplication and requires the independent auditor to employ existing SANDAG procedures for hiring, firing, and procurements when acting within the auditor’s area of purview.

Next Steps

An initial timeline for the creation of the Audit Committee and hiring of the independent performance auditor was presented to the Board of Directors at its meeting on November 3, 2017. This initial timeline concluded implementation in December 2018. At that meeting, the Board expressed a desire to significantly reduce the time necessary for implementation. In response to that direction, staff proposes a revised timeline.

Upon Board approval of the proposed Board Policy No. 039, it is likely that the creation of the Audit Committee could be completed by the Board in spring 2018. This could make it possible for the independent performance auditor to be hired by late summer/early fall 2018, reducing the original timeline by up to six months. Additionally, upon convening the Audit Committee in the spring, the

4

existing SANDAG Principal Management Internal Auditor could begin reporting on all matters, except administrative matters, to the Audit Committee. Such a move would allow the Committee to oversee the existing internal audit effort on an expedited basis.

Additional information on the costs associated with the creation of the Audit Committee and independent performance auditor position will be provided at a future meeting.


Attachment: 1. Draft Board Policy No. 039: Audit Policy Advisory Committee and Audit Activities

Key Staff Contact: Julie Wiley, (619) 699-6966, [email protected] Diane Eidam, (916) 300-2267, [email protected]

Attachment 1

5

BOARD POLICY NO. 039

AUDIT POLICY ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND AUDIT ACTIVITIES

1. Purpose

The purpose of this policy is to specify the functions of the Audit Committee and the SANDAG independent performance auditor.

2. Governance and Role of the Audit Committee

2.1. The Audit Committee shall be overseen by the SANDAG Board of Directors and shall govern itself in accordance with Public Utilities Code Sections 132351.4 and 132354.1, and the policies and procedures applicable to all SANDAG Policy Advisory Committees.

2.2. Membership of the Audit Committee shall be as set forth in Board Policy No. 002: Policy Advisory Committee Membership. The Audit Committee shall consist of five voting members with two members of the Board of Directors and three members of the public, all of which shall be appointed by the Board of Directors. Due to the qualification requirements and selection process described in this policy, Audit Committee members and alternates shall be selected according to the processes below.

2.3. The Chair of the Board will select which members of the Audit Committee will hold the Chair and Vice Chair positions on the Audit Committee every two years or whenever a position is vacant.

2.4. The role of the Audit Committee is to assist the Board in fulfilling its oversight responsibilities and provide a forum for pursuing the opportunities for improvements in operations, financial reporting and internal controls identified through the agency’s audit products.

3. Authority of the Audit Committee

3.1 The Audit Committee may hear items within the subject areas of audits, internal controls and investigations into fraud, waste, or impropriety, and may be asked to provide actions or recommendations on other matters within the Audit Committee’s purview. The responsibilities of the Audit Committee include:

3.1.1 Recommend to the Board which firm to contract with to conduct the annual financial statement audits.

3.1.2 Meet with management and the independent performance auditor to review and discuss SANDAG’s annual financial statement audits, internal control reports and other audits performed by external auditors.

3.1.3 Review and oversee the implementation of corrective action to address noted audit deficiencies.

6

3.1.4 Based on the Board’s direction regarding whether to hire an individual or firm, recommend to the Board which individual or firm to hire to carry out independent performance auditor responsibilities.

3.1.5 Recommend to the Board the annual compensation of the independent performance auditor.

3.1.6 Oversee the work of the independent performance auditor in preparing and issuing audit and investigative reports and other audit, review or attest activities.

3.1.7 Approve the annual audit plan after discussion with the independent performance auditor pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 132354.1(b), and make recommendations to the Board regarding the budget needed to carry out the annual audit plan of the independent performance auditor.

3.1.8 Monitor the implementation of the annual audit plan and provide an annual report the Board.

3.1.9 Monitor the implementation of corrective action identified in audit and investigative reports and inform the Board when corrective action is insufficient or untimely.

3.1.10 Conduct the independent performance auditor’s annual performance evaluation against performance measures established and adopted by the Audit Committee.

3.1.11 Vote on whether to remove the independent performance auditor for cause including, but not limited to incompetence, dishonesty, unethical behavior, violation of state or federal laws, or failure to maintain required professional certifications; such removal being subject to an approving vote by two-thirds of the Audit Committee and the Board.

3.1.12 Recommend internal control guidelines to be adopted by the Board to prevent and detect financial errors and fraud based on the internal control guidelines developed by the State Controller pursuant to Government Code Section 12422.5 and the standards adopted by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants.

4. Selection of Audit Committee Members

4.1 The Board members serving on the Audit Committee shall be appointed by the Board using the procedures in this subsection 4.1.

4.1.1 The two Board members and any Board member alternates serving on the Audit Committee shall be recommended for appointment by the Chair of the Board. The Chair of the Board shall select Board members to recommend to the Board based on the following criteria:

4.1.1.1 The Board member shall have served on the Board for at least three years;

4.1.1.2 The Board member shall have a basic understanding of the role of the Audit Committee; and

7

4.1.1.3 The Board member shall express a willingness to work through the Audit Committee to pursue opportunities for improvements in operations, financial reporting, and internal controls identified through the agency’s audit products.

4.1.2 The Board members recommended by the Chair of the Board shall be subject to approval by a majority vote of the Board.

4.1.3 Audit Committee members shall serve until their successors are appointed. In the event that the Board member who has been appointed to serve on the Audit Committee is no longer a primary or alternate member of the Board of Directors, the position shall be considered vacant. If and when vacancies in the voting membership of the Audit Committee occur, the same selection process as outlined above shall be followed to select a replacement.

4.1.4 Board members appointed to the Audit Committee shall serve a term of two years. At the completion of a term, eligible incumbent members will need to apply for reappointment for another term. In no case shall any member serve more than five years on the Audit Committee.

4.2 The public members serving on the Audit Committee shall be appointed by the Board using the procedures in this subsection 4.2.

4.2.1 Whenever there is a vacancy for a public member seat on the Audit Committee, application forms will be made available on the SANDAG website for persons interested in applying for an Audit Committee position. Applications shall be due within 30 days after the application forms are posted. Only candidates who submit an application by the deadline will be considered.

4.2.2 Applicants shall possess the independence, experience, and technical expertise necessary to carry out the duties of the Audit Committee. This expertise includes, but is not limited to, knowledge of accounting, auditing, and financial reporting. The minimum professional standards for public members shall include at least ten years of experience as a certified public accountant or as a certified internal auditor, or ten years of other professional accounting, financial, or legal experience in audit management.

4.2.3 The candidates shall be recommended by a majority vote of a screening committee composed of a member of the Board selected by the Chair of the Board, the chief financial officer or finance director of a SANDAG member agency, and at least one outside financial expert appointed by the other two members of the screening committee and confirmed by the Board. Persons serving on the screening committee shall sign a declaration establishing that they do not have a conflict of interest.

4.2.4 The screening committee may interview one or more of the candidates. The screening committee shall submit its recommended nominee(s) for the position(s). The screening committee also may nominate alternates from among the applicants.

4.2.5 In the event that the screening committee is unable to recommend any of the applicants for any or all positions, or an insufficient number of applications have been received, the screening committee may recommend a supplemental process, subject

8

to Board approval. The constraints set forth in the normal nomination process shall not be mandated to apply to the supplemental process.

4.2.6 The public members nominated by the screening committee shall be subject to approval by a majority vote of the Board.

4.2.7 Audit Committee members shall serve until their successors are appointed. If and when vacancies in the voting membership of the Audit Committee occur, the same selection process as outlined above shall be followed to select a replacement to fill the remainder of the term.

4.2.8 Public members appointed to the Audit Committee shall serve a term of two years. At the completion of a term, eligible incumbent members will need to apply for reappointment for another term. In no case shall any member serve more than five years on the Audit Committee.

5. Selection of Independent Performance Auditor

5.1 The independent performance auditor shall serve a two-year term and shall be selected on the basis of qualifications and experience, which include, but are not limited to:

5.1.1 At least ten years of experience performing audits under Government Audit Standards;

5.1.2 At least five years of management experience;

5.1.3 A Bachelors or higher degree in business, public administration, finance, accounting or a related field; and

5.1.4 Possession of a Certified Public Accountant or Certified Internal Auditor license or certificate.

6. Scope of Authority and Responsibilities of Independent Performance Auditor

6.1 The independent performance auditor shall annually prepare an audit plan and conduct audits in accordance therewith and perform those other duties as may be required by the Board or as provided by the California Constitution and general laws of the state. The independent performance auditor shall follow Government Auditing Standards.

6.2 All officers and employees of SANDAG shall furnish to the independent performance auditor unrestricted access to employees, information, and records, including electronic data, within their custody regarding powers, duties, activities, organization, property, financial transactions, contracts, and methods of business required to conduct an audit or otherwise perform audit duties. It is also the duty of any consolidated agency officer, employee, or agent to fully cooperate with the auditor, and to make full disclosure of all pertinent information, with the exception of information that is protected by law from disclosure.

6.3 The independent performance auditor shall prepare a proposed budget and submit it to the Audit Committee for a recommendation to the Board of Directors for its approval 180

9

days prior to the beginning of each fiscal year or as otherwise requested by the Director of Finance.

6.4 The independent performance auditor shall have the power to appoint, employ, and remove assistants, employees, and personnel as deemed necessary for the efficient and effective administration of the affairs of the independent performance auditor. The independent performance auditor may prescribe the duties, scope of authority, and qualifications of employees and consultants overseen by the independent performance auditor. The independent performance auditor’s authority shall be subject to the annual audit plan and the budget approved by the Board, SANDAG rules and policies related to the management and hiring of SANDAG employees and consultants, and the scope of the independent performance auditor’s purview as determined by the Board.

6.5 The independent performance auditor may investigate any material claim of financial fraud, waste, or impropriety within SANDAG and for that purpose may summon any officer, agent, or employee of the consolidated agency, any claimant, or other person, and examine him or her upon oath or affirmation relative thereto. The independent performance auditor will conduct investigations generally following the procedures recommended by the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners’ Fraud Examiners Manual for any allegations of financial fraud, waste or impropriety. Prior to questioning any person under oath, the independent performance auditor shall advise the members of the Audit Committee of that intention, seek legal counsel from the Office of General Counsel or outside counsel under contract to SANDAG regarding the relevant legal issues, and document the reasons why the questioning must be done under oath instead of by some other form of affirmation.

6.6 The independent performance auditor shall coordinate audit functions such that there is no duplication of effort between the audits undertaken by the independent performance auditor and audits undertaken by the Independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee.

6.7 All SANDAG contracts with consultants, vendors, or agencies will be prepared with an adequate audit provision to allow the independent performance auditor access to the entity’s records needed to verify compliance with the terms specified in the contract.

6.8 Results of all audits and reports shall be made available to the public in accordance with the requirements of the California Public Records Act (Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 6250) of Division 7 of the Title 1 of the Government Code). Final versions of formal reports also shall be posted on the SANDAG website.

6.9 All materials or services needed by the independent performance auditor shall be procured using an open and competitive basis with solicitation of proposals from the widest possible number of qualified firms as prescribed by SANDAG’s procedures for procurement. The scope of work of all such consultant work shall be subject to approval by the independent performance auditor prior to any such solicitation.

Adopted ________ 2018

BOARD OF DIRECTORS



REGIONAL GROWTH FORECAST METHODOLOGY – File Number 3100900 SAN DIEGO FORWARD: THE 2019 REGIONAL PLAN

Introduction

Every three to five years, SANDAG develops a long-range forecast of population, housing, and employment for the San Diego region and its communities. The long-range forecast consists of two components: (1) the regionwide forecast, which draws upon demographic and economic trends and assumptions to look at the region as a whole; and (2) the subregional forecast, which allocates the regionwide population, housing, and employment numbers to individual jurisdictions and communities based on local land use plans, zoning ordinances, and other factors.

The forecast serves as a key input for the Regional Transportation Plan, the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA), and other important planning and development efforts in the region. SANDAG last updated the Regional Growth Forecast (Series 13) in 2015 as part of the adoption of San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan. This report provides an overview of the methodology that is being used to produce the Regional Growth Forecast for use in the development of San Diego Forward: The 2019 Regional Plan (2019 Regional Plan).

Discussion

In prior forecasts, SANDAG used a custom-built model known as the Demographic and Economic Forecasting Model (DEFM) to produce regional forecasts for population, housing, and employment. As reported to the Board of Directors at its November 3, 2017, meeting, SANDAG discontinued the use of DEFM at the end of the Series 13 forecasting process and currently is developing a new long-range forecasting system that is under expert review. The new modeling system will not use any DEFM components and is expected to be completed in the next year. In the meantime, an alternative methodology will be used to produce the growth forecast information needed to develop San Diego Forward: The 2019 Regional Plan.

Regional Growth Forecast Methodology

The Regional Growth Forecast for the 2019 Regional Plan will use data from the California Department of Finance (DOF), including vital statistics rates, such as birth and death rates and forecasted population controls totals, to determine future population growth in conjunction with job forecasts provided by the California Employment Development Department. This approach will provide SANDAG with the necessary data for the preparation of the 2019 Regional Plan, including population by demographic characteristics, jobs by industry sector, housing units, and households by structure type. It also will help to ensure compliance with state law, which requires that SANDAG be within plus/minus 1.5 percent of the county-level population forecast released by the DOF.

2

A draft Regional Growth Forecast is expected to be completed in April 2018. In accordance with the SANDAG Plan of Excellence, the draft forecast will undergo both an internal quality review by SANDAG staff and an external review by an expert peer review panel.

SANDAG is slated to provide forecast information to the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) in the next couple months to begin the negotiations for the RHNA allocation for the San Diego region. This will allow time for negotiations with HCD and the development of allocation methodologies with local jurisdictions as in previous RHNA cycles.

Subregional Forecast

The second component of the long-range forecast is the subregional forecast, which takes into account residential capacities collected during the past year from the local jurisdictions. The subregional forecast allocates the regionwide population, housing, and employment data to the parcel-level by phase year throughout the region. The subregional forecast is not dependent upon the methodology of the regionwide forecast. The subregional data serve as the input to the transportation modeling efforts for the 2019 Regional Plan and are used in the RHNA process to indicate where additional housing capacity is available.

Next Steps

The Board of Directors is scheduled to receive an update on the Regional and Subregional Growth Forecasts in spring 2018 for approval to use in the development of the 2019 Regional Plan. Pending action by the Board at that time, the 2019 Regional Plan would be scheduled for adoption by the deadline of October 2019.


Key Staff Contact: Rachel Cortes, (619) 699-0726, [email protected]

Agenda Item No. 17-12-13

Date: December 15, 2017

File Number: 3300100

Memo to: Board of Directors

From: Kim Kawada, Chief Deputy Executive Director

Subject: TransNet Smart Growth Incentive Program and Active Transportation Grant Program: Cycle 4 Calls for Projects

Overview

The TransNet Extension Ordinance provides funding for two SANDAG competitive grant programs: the Smart Growth Incentive Program (SGIP) and the Active Transportation Grant Program (ATGP). A combined total of approximately $30 million is available this cycle—approximately $27 million for the SGIP, and $3.6 million for the ATGP.

This is the fourth cycle of funding. Two changes are required this cycle based on commitments made in San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan. The new requirements are: (1) a local jurisdiction must have an adopted Climate Action Plan (CAP) and complete streets policy to be eligible to receive SGIP and ATGP funding; and (2) the evaluation criteria must provide greater weight to project proposals that directly reduce greenhouse gas emissions. In addition, if a local jurisdiction does not have an adopted CAP or complete streets policy, SANDAG shall make available competitive funding through the grant programs for preparation of a CAP and/or complete streets policy. Up to $1 million is proposed from the SGIP for this purpose. A one-year “phased funding approach” is proposed for jurisdictions to meet the SGIP and ATGP eligibility requirements to adopt a CAP and/or complete streets policy. The staff report includes final evaluation criteria proposed for each grant program, including the new CAP/complete streets subprograms.

Budgetary Impact: Cycle 4 funding is generated from sales tax revenues generated from FY 2017-FY 2019, pending Board approval of the SANDAG FY 2019 Program Budget in May 2018.

Next Steps

Pending Board action, materials would be finalized and potential applicants (the 18 cities and the County) would be notified. Applications would be due on March 15, 2018.

Recommendation Action Requested: Approve

The Transportation and Regional Planning Committees recommend that the Board of Directors approve the Calls for Projects for the Cycle 4 TransNet SGIP and ATGP.

Key Staff Contacts: Carolina Ilic, (619) 699-1989, [email protected] Allison Wood, (619) 699-1973, [email protected]

Staff report and support information attached

2

TransNet Smart Growth Incentive Program and Active Transportation Grant Program: Cycle 4 Calls for Projects

Introduction

The TransNet Extension Ordinance provides funding for two SANDAG competitive grant programs: the Smart Growth Incentive Program (SGIP) and the Active Transportation Grant Program (ATGP). A combined total of approximately $30 million1 is available for distribution this cycle—approximately $27 million for the SGIP and $3.6 million for the ATGP2.

This is the fourth cycle of funding for both grant programs. Through these programs, the Board of Directors has awarded more than $50 million to over 100 projects throughout the San Diego region, leveraging over $34 million in local matching funds. This has resulted in a total investment of almost $85 million for smart growth and active transportation projects across the region since 2009.

Before each call for projects, input is sought on potential changes to the program goals and objectives, funding maximums, and evaluation criteria. In addition, changes are required this cycle based on the commitments made in San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan (Regional Plan), including mitigation measures in the Regional Plan’s Environmental Impact Report (Attachment 1). The new requirements are: (1) a local jurisdiction must have an adopted Climate Action Plan (CAP) and complete streets policy to be eligible to receive SGIP and ATGP funding; and (2) the evaluation criteria for these programs must provide greater weight to project proposals that directly reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

In addition, per the mitigation measure, “if a local jurisdiction does not have an adopted CAP or complete streets policy, SANDAG shall make available competitive funding through the grant programs for preparation of a CAP and/or complete streets policy.” This requires two new grant subprograms, with new criteria for each. The staff proposal includes allocating up to $1 million from the available SGIP funds for this purpose, with any unused funds to be returned to the SGIP. Attachment 2 provides a status update on local climate action and complete streets planning efforts in the region.

Per SANDAG Board Policy No. 001: Operations Policy, the Regional Planning Committee is responsible for making recommendations to the Board of Directors on the SGIP criteria, and the Transportation Committee is responsible for making recommendations to the Board on the ATGP criteria. Since the CAP and Complete Streets Policy Grant Subprograms would be funded from the SGIP, and therefore included under the umbrella of the SGIP, the Regional Planning Committee was requested to make the recommendation to the Board on their evaluation criteria.

1 The TransNet Extension Ordinance sets aside 2 percent of annual TransNet sales tax revenues each for the SGIP and

ATGP. The ATGP is supplemented with Transportation Development Act revenues. Cycle 4 funding is generated from

sales tax revenues generated from FY 2017-FY 2019, pending Board approval of the SANDAG FY 2019 Program

Budget in May 2018.

2 The ATGP is referred to as the “Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Neighborhood Safety Program” in the TransNet Extension

Ordinance. When the SANDAG Board approved the Regional Bike Early Action Program in September 2013, it limited

the ATGP to $1 million per year. This cycle includes additional funding due to cost-savings carried over from previous

cycles.

http://www.sandag.org/organization/about/pubs/policy_001.pdf

3

The draft call for projects packages for each program, including background information on each grant program, application forms for each grant type, and a grant agreement template for successful applicants, among other documents, are posted on the SANDAG website at sandag.org/cycle4grants.

Discussion

The Regional Planning and Transportation Committees, TransNet Independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee (ITOC), and various working groups have discussed the proposed changes to the SGIP and ATGP multiple times over the course of the past year.

Table 1 summarizes the final recommended changes and proposed adjustments for the Cycle 4 calls for projects based on the extensive input received throughout the year and staff analysis. These changes are also shown in “track changes” in Attachment 3, which includes specific text from the TransNet Extension Ordinance and provides additional background information on each grant program. Attachments 4A – 4F contain the final evaluation criteria proposed for each of the grant programs. Attachment 5 summarizes the extensive process undertaken during 2017 to prepare for the calls for projects. Attachment 6 outlines methodological refinements proposed for two evaluation criteria, described in the last section of the table below.

Table 1: Summary of Recommended Changes for Cycle 4 Calls for Projects

Recommended Changes:

Goals and Program Objectives

SGIP:

• Maintain the existing SGIP goals. Modify the first SGIP program objective to incorporate reference to mobility hubs and advanced technologies.

ATGP:

• Modify the first ATGP goal to add reference to multiple travel choices for the region’s visitors and businesses, in addition to the region’s residents.

• Modify the first, third, and fifth ATGP program objectives to add reference to active transportation connections to health care facilities; incorporate reference to mobility hubs and advanced technologies; and increase not only community support, but also awareness, for biking and walking as a viable transportation choice for all trip purposes.

Funding Percentage Allocations and Funding Maximums

SGIP:

• Maintain the funding percentage allocation of 80 percent for capital and 20 percent for planning.

o Increase the maximum funding request for capital projects from $2 million to $2.5 million due to increasing construction costs.

o Increase the maximum funding request for planning projects from $400,000 to $500,000 due to increasing costs of preparing planning documents and associated environmental documents.

http://www.sandag.org/index.asp?classid=12&projectid=545&fuseaction=projects.detail

4

ATGP:

• Maintain the funding percentage allocation of 75 percent for capital and 25 percent for non-capital.

o In the non-capital category, eliminate the current funding percentage allocations for each of the three sub-categories, allowing greater flexibility to award funding to the best projects in the Planning, Education/Encouragement/Awareness, and Bike Parking categories.

o In the non-capital subcategory of Education/Encouragement/Awareness, establish a maximum funding request amount of $300,000, the same as the existing maximum funding request amount for the Planning subcategory (this subcategory currently does not have a maximum funding request).

Eligibility Criteria

• To be eligible to receive SGIP and ATGP funding, the local jurisdiction is asked to self-certify that it has adopted a CAP and complete streets policy in a public meeting.

o Consistent with the mitigation measure, the CAP shall include measures to reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, and achieve further reductions beyond 2020 consistent with adopted regional or local GHG reduction targets.

o The complete streets policy should be consistent with the California Complete Streets Act. The policy can be a stand-alone document or consist of policies in the general plan or other documents adopted by the governing body.

• Allow a “phased funding approach” for jurisdictions to meet the eligibility requirement(s) to adopt a CAP and/or complete streets policy within one year from when the Board of Directors approves funding awards for the SGIP and ATGP. Contract execution and grant funding for successful applications would be withheld until the jurisdiction met the eligibility requirement. Upon conclusion of the one-year period, if the requirements are not met, funding would be allocated to the next eligible project(s) in ranked order.

Funding for the Preparation of Climate Action Plans and/or Complete Streets Policies

• Provide up to $1 million from the available SGIP funds to fund CAPs and complete streets policies, to be awarded through a competitive process.

• Provide a higher range of funding for CAPs that include a specified California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) analysis.

• Provide grant amounts in the following ranges, based on the scope of work included in the project application submitted by the local jurisdiction, and require a 20 percent minimum match:

o Up to $75,000 for complete streets policies

o Up to $75,000 for CAPs

o Up to $150,000 for CAPs that include a specified CEQA analysis

• Allow jurisdictions to submit applications for CAPs, complete streets policies, SGIP, and ATGP grants concurrently, with the phased funding approach in effect, to maximize funding for the best projects in the region and further reduce GHG emissions.

• Redirect any unused funding from the $1 million back to the SGIP for potential allocation to the next eligible project(s) in ranked order.

5

• Add, as eligible projects in the SGIP planning category, updates to complete streets policies and updates to existing CAPs that already meet the requirements of the GHG mitigation measure.

Evaluation Criteria

• GHG emission reductions: Add a qualitative criterion asking the applicant to describe how well the proposed project directly reduces GHG emissions, such as through implementation of a CAP, parking strategies, advanced technologies, or other strategies, and award points to jurisdictions that have an adopted CAP and/or complete streets policy at the time that the applications are due.

• Advanced technologies: Add a qualitative criterion asking the applicant to describe how the proposed project advances mobility hub concepts and/or leverages advanced technologies that encourage multi-modal travel options.

Weighting

• Adjust the weighting of the SGIP and ATGP to reallocate five percentage points to the new GHG emission reduction criterion, as summarized below.

o SGIP Capital:

Remove 2 percent from Evidence of Local Commitment

Remove 3 percent from Cost Effectiveness

o SGIP Planning:

Remove 2 percent from Evidence of Local Commitment/Community Support

Remove 3.5 percent from Implementation

Add 0.5 percent to Relationship to Regional Transit

o ATGP Capital:

Remove 1.5 percent from Supportive Plans and Policies


Remove 1.5 percent from Matching Funds

o ATGP Non-Capital:


Methodological Adjustments

• Refine the methodology for the calculations of the Cost Effectiveness and Matching Funds criteria, and change the Cost Effectiveness criterion to “Efficient Use of Program Funds.” Refinements to the calculations are explained in Attachment 5.

Phased Funding Approach

Based on direction from the Regional Planning and Transportation Committees, the Cycle 4 calls for projects include a recommended one-year “phased funding approach” for jurisdictions to meet the SGIP and ATGP eligibility requirements to adopt a CAP and/or complete streets policy consistent with the mitigation measure. Contract execution and grant funding for successful SGIP and ATGP applications would be withheld until a

6

jurisdiction adopts its CAP and/or complete streets policy. If the CAP and/or complete streets policy is not adopted by the local jurisdiction within one year of when the Board of Directors recommends funding awards for the SGIP and ATGP grant programs, then funding would be allocated to the next eligible project(s) in ranked order.

Staff anticipates that SGIP and ATGP funding recommendations will be made in summer 2018, meaning jurisdictions would have until approximately July 2019 to adopt a CAP and/or complete streets policy under the one-year phased funding approach. Under this approach, a jurisdiction would be able to concurrently apply for funds for the development of a CAP and/or complete streets policy as well as apply for funding from the SGIP and/or ATGP.

Evaluation Panels

The evaluation panels for the SGIP and ATGP will consist of staff from SANDAG, Caltrans, the transit agencies, the academic and/or public health community, and members of the Regional Planning Technical Working Group, Cities/County Transportation Advisory Committee, and/or Active Transportation Working Group whose jurisdictions did not submit applications. The evaluation panel for the CAP and Complete Streets Policy Grant Subprograms will consist of SANDAG staff and local jurisdiction or other public agency staff members with expertise in either climate action planning and/or complete streets policy development whose jurisdictions did not submit applications.

Social Equity Analysis

As in previous grant cycles, a social equity analysis will be conducted to ensure that the funding for projects recommended for award are distributed such that low-income and minority communities receive an equitable proportion of the benefits. The social equity analysis would be conducted in the latter half of the grant cycle, between the time that the evaluation panels rank and recommend the projects for funding, and staff presents the project rankings and funding recommendations for action by the policy advisory committees and Board of Directors.

Next Steps

Pending action by the Board of Directors today, all application materials would be finalized and posted on the SANDAG website at sandag.org/cycle4grants, and potential applicants (the 18 cities and the County of San Diego) would be notified. Applications would be due on March 15, 2018. Funding recommendations would be sought from the Regional Planning Committee, Transportation Committee, and Board of Directors in spring/summer 2018.

Attachments: 1. GHG Mitigation Measures 4A and 4E included in the Environmental Impact Report for San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan

2. Status of Local Climate Action and Complete Streets Planning Efforts in the San Diego Region

3. Summary of Current Information from Cycle 3 and Recommended Changes for Cycle 4 of the TransNet Smart Growth Incentive Program and Active Transportation Grant Program

4. Proposed Final Scoring Criteria Matrices for Cycle 4 4A. SGIP – Capital Grants 4B. SGIP – Planning Grants 4C. SGIP – Climate Action Plan Grants 4D. SGIP – Complete Streets Policy Grants 4E. ATGP – Capital Grants 4F. ATGP – Non-Capital Grants


7

5. Process Undertaken During 2017 to Prepare for the Cycle 4 Calls for Projects 6. Proposed Methodological Adjustments to Cost Effectiveness and Matching Funds

Criteria Key Staff Contacts: Carolina Ilic, (619) 699-1989, [email protected]

Allison Wood, (619) 699-1973, [email protected]


Attachment 1

8

Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures 4A and 4E included in the Environmental Impact Report for

San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan

GHG-4A: Allocate Competitive Grant Funding to Projects that Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions (SANDAG)

SANDAG shall revise the TransNet Smart Growth Incentive and Active Transportation Grant Programs in the following ways to achieve greenhouse gas (GHG) reductions:

• Adopt new or revised grant criteria to give greater weight to a project’s ability to directly reduce GHG emissions. Criteria include, but are not limited to, awarding points to projects that directly implement local Climate Action Plans (CAPs) that reduce GHG emissions, or that directly implement parking strategies that reduce GHG emissions.

• Require locally adopted CAPs and complete streets policies as prerequisites to be eligible for grant funding. The locally adopted CAPs shall include measures to reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, and achieve further reductions beyond 2020 consistent with adopted regional or local GHG reduction targets.

• If a local jurisdiction does not have an adopted CAP or complete streets policy, SANDAG shall make available competitive funding through the grant programs for preparation of a CAP and/or complete streets policy.

• In addition to grant funding, SANDAG shall provide technical assistance to local jurisdictions for the preparation of CAPs as described in GHG-4E.

These changes shall be adopted and effective for the fourth cycle of funding for both programs, which is expected to be released in December 2017.

GHG-4E: Assist in the Preparation of Climate Action Plans and Other Measures to Reduce GHG Emissions (SANDAG)

SANDAG shall assist local governments in the preparation of CAPs, and other policies/measures to reduce GHG emissions. SANDAG shall assist local governments in identifying all feasible measures to reduce GHG emission to 1990 levels by 2020, and achieve further reductions beyond 2020 consistent with adopted regional or local GHG reduction targets. Specific forms of SANDAG assistance include, but are not limited to:

• Assisting its member agencies in obtaining funding for, directly funding, updating and implementing CAPs, and other climate strategies through continued implementation of the SANDAG Energy Roadmap Program.

• Providing funding and energy planning assistance to local governments to implement projects that save energy and reduce energy-related GHG emissions.

• As described in GHG-4A, for local jurisdictions that do not have an adopted CAP, SANDAG shall make available competitive funding through the grant programs for preparation of a CAP.

Attachment 2

9

Status of Local Climate Action Plan and Complete Streets Policy Planning Efforts in the San Diego Region

December 2017

Jurisdiction

Climate Action Plan Complete Streets Policy/

Equivalent

Adopted (year adopted)

Underway Adopted

(year adopted) Underway

Carlsbad 2015 2015 (GP)

Chula Vista 2017 2015 (CSP)

Coronado (ATP)

Del Mar 2016 2017 (CSP)

El Cajon (ATP)

Encinitas 2011 2016 (CSP)

Escondido 2012 2012 (GP)

Imperial Beach (CSP)

La Mesa 2013 (GP)

Lemon Grove (CSP)

National City 2011 2011 (GP)

Oceanside 2012 (CSP)

Poway

San Diego 2015 2008 (GP)

County of San Diego (unincorporated)

2011 (GP) (CSP and ATP)

San Marcos 2013 2012 (CSP)

Santee 2017 (CSP)

Solana Beach 2017 2014 (CSP)

Vista 2012 2012 (CSP)

GP = General Plan CSP = Complete Streets Policy ATP = Active Transportation Plan

Note: This document is in draft form and is based on publicly available information and/or self-reported information provided by local jurisdictions. Prior to receiving Smart Growth Incentive Program and/or Active Transportation Grant Program funds, jurisdictions would be required to self-certify that the local governing body has adopted the Climate Action Plan and complete streets policy at a public meeting, and would need to provide electronic links to the Climate Action Plan and complete streets policy that SANDAG could post on its website and make available to the public.

Attachment 3

10

Summary of Current Information from Cycle 3 and Recommended Changes1 for Cycle 4 of the TransNet Smart Growth Incentive Program and Active Transportation Grant Program

SGIP ATGP

TransNet Extension Ordinance Language (from 2008)

TransNet Ordinance SECTION 2.C.3:

“Smart Growth Incentive Program: An estimated $280 million will be allocated to the Smart Growth Incentive Program to provide funding for a broad array of transportation-related infrastructure improvements that will assist local agencies in better integrating transportation and land use, such as enhancements to streets and public places, funding of infrastructure needed to support development in smart growth opportunity areas consistent with the Regional Comprehensive Plan, and community planning efforts related to smart growth and improved land use/transportation coordination. These funds shall be allocated on a regional competitive grant basis. It is intended that these funds be used to match federal, state, local, and private funding to maximize the number of improvements to be implemented. The Commission shall establish specific project eligibility criteria for this program.”

TransNet Ordinance SECTION 2.E:

“Bicycle, Pedestrian and Neighborhood Safety Program: A total of two percent of the total annual revenues available (an estimated $280 million) will be allocated to the Bicycle, Pedestrian and Neighborhood Safety Program to provide funding for bikeway facilities and connectivity improvements, pedestrian and walkable community projects, bicycle and pedestrian safety projects and programs, and traffic calming projects. These funds shall be allocated on a regional competitive grant basis. It is intended that these funds be used to match federal, state, local, and private funding to maximize the number of improvements to be implemented. The Commission shall establish specific project eligibility criteria for this program.”

Required Changes

to Cycle 4

Required changes resulting from San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan actions and associated EIR Mitigation Measures adopted by the SANDAG Board:

• Local Climate Action Plans (CAPs) and complete streets policies are required for a local jurisdiction to be eligible for funding from either grant program;

• The grant program must provide funding for local jurisdictions to develop a CAP and/or complete streets policy if they do not have one or both; and

• The evaluation criteria must be updated to:

o Give a greater weight to a project’s ability to directly reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions,

o Consider program alignment with Transit Oriented Development (TOD) readiness metrics, and

o Consider how well completed grant projects are meeting the grant program objectives.

Current Goals and Proposed

Changes

SGIP Goals:

• Encourage comprehensive public infrastructure projects and planning activities that facilitate compact, mixed-use development focused around public transit, and that aim to increase housing and transportation choices, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and improve public health.

• Fund projects that can serve as models around the region and attract private development.

• Create great places in the San Diego region.

ATGP Goals:

• Encourage the planning and development of Complete Streets and provide multiple travel choices for the region’s residents, visitors, and businesses, though safe and well-connected bicycle and pedestrian networks.

• Promote a comprehensive, neighborhood-based approach to planning and implementing active transportation improvements and traffic calming by coordinating existing and planned land use and transit to increase connectivity for bicyclists and pedestrians.

1 Recommended changes are shown in track changes.

11

SGIP ATGP

• Support the program objectives outlined below derived from the goals in SANDAG Riding to 2050: The San Diego Regional Bicycle Plan.

Current Program Objectives

and Proposed Changes

SGIP Program Objectives:

• Implement a comprehensive approach to influence land development by improving the public realm and encouraging private smart growth projects that, in combination, create great places, advance mobility hub concepts, and leverage advanced technologies.

• Serve as model examples for smart growth development in a variety of settings throughout the region.

• Contribute to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and vehicle miles travelled, and improve public health by encouraging travel means other than single occupant vehicle. In particular, proposed projects should support public transit usage by improving access to transit and be located in areas served by transit.

• Support future housing development.

• Fund proposed Capital Projects that are “ready to go” and serve as catalysts for further smart growth development.

ATGP Program Objectives:

• Encourage the development of a cohesive network of complete streets that is well-connected to transit and every day destinations such as schools, jobs, shopping, and recreation, and health care facilities.

• Create safe environments for bicyclists and pedestrians through traffic calming, complete streets design principles, and smart growth placemaking, and promote active transportation as a means of improving health outcomes.

• Serve as models for the region by featuring new and innovative active transportation solutions, advancing mobility hub concepts, and leveraging advanced technologies.

• Provide equitable access and transportation opportunities for all users, regardless of age, ability, race, ethnicity, or income.

• Increase community support and awareness for bicycling and walking as a viable transportation choice for all trip purposes.

• Support reductions in GHG emissions and increase in levels of bicycling and walking in the region by providing supportive facilities, amenities, and programs for bicyclists and pedestrians.

Current and Anticipated

Funding Amounts

Actual Funding for Cycle 3: $12 million

Anticipated Funding for Cycle 4: $27 million

Actual Funding for Cycle 3: $3 million

Anticipated Funding for Cycle 4: $3.6 million

Current and Proposed Funding

Percentage Allocations and

Funding Maximums

• Capital (80%; $2 million cap $2.5 million cap)

• Planning (20% plus any rollover from Capital; $400,000 $500,000 cap)

• Capital (75% with $500,000 threshold for large projects; 60% maximum toward large projects; $1.5 million cap)

• Non-Capital (25% plus any rollover from Capital; varying funding caps)

o Planning ($300,000 cap) (15%)

o Education/Awareness/Encouragement ($300,000 cap) (5%)

o Bicycle parking ($100,000 cap) (5%)

Current Eligibility

Criteria and Required/ Proposed Changes

• Must be a local jurisdiction

• Must be located in a Smart Growth Opportunity Area

• Must be a local jurisdiction

New eligibility prerequisite: Locally adopted CAP and complete streets policy

Recommended changes:

• The local jurisdiction is asked to self-certify that both the CAP and complete streets policy have been adopted by the local governing body in a public meeting.

o The CAP shall include measures to reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, and achieve further reductions beyond 2020 consistent with adopted regional or local GHG reduction targets.

12

SGIP ATGP

o The complete streets policy should be consistent with the California Complete Streets Act, and can be a stand-alone document or consist of policies in the general plan or other documents adopted by the governing body.

• Allow a one-year “phased funding approach” for jurisdictions to meet the eligibility requirement(s) to adopt a CAP and/or complete streets policy within one year from when the Board of Directors approves funding awards for the SGIP and ATGP. Contract execution and grant funding for successful applications would be withheld until the jurisdiction met the eligibility requirement. Upon conclusion of the one-year period, if the requirements are not met, funding would be allocated to the next eligible project(s), in ranked order.

New Requirement:

Funding for the Preparation of

CAPS and Complete

Streets Policies

New requirement: Grant programs must provide funding for preparation of CAPs and complete streets policies for jurisdictions that do not have one or both


• Provide up to $1 million from available SGIP funds to fund CAPs and complete streets policies, to be awarded through a competitive process.

• Provide a higher range of funding for CAPs that include a specified CEQA analysis.

• Provide grant amounts in the following ranges and require a 20 percent minimum match:

o Up to $75,000 for complete streets policies

o Up to $75,000 for CAPs

o Up to $150,000 for CAPs that include a specified CEQA analysis

• Allow jurisdictions to submit applications for CAPs, complete streets policies, SGIP, and ATGP grants concurrently.

• Redirect any unused funding from the $1 million back to the SGIP for potential allocation to the next eligible project(s) in ranked order.

• Add, as eligible projects in the SGIP planning category, updates to complete streets policies and updates to existing CAPs that already meet the requirements of the GHG mitigation measure.

Current Evaluation Criteria and

Proposed Approach for Changes for

Cycle 4

• See Cycle 3 criteria, with recommended changes for Cycle 4 shown in tracked changes in the September 1, 2017 Regional Planning Committee agenda packet (Item 8, Attachments 8a – 8b)

• See Cycle 3 criteria, with recommended changes for Cycle 4 shown in tracked changes in the September 1, 2017 Regional Planning Committee agenda packet (Item 8, Attachments 8c-8d)

New requirement: Give a greater weight to a project’s ability to directly reduce GHG emissions


Evaluation criteria:

• GHG emission reductions: Add a qualitative criterion asking the applicant to describe how well the proposed project directly reduces GHG emissions, such as through implementation of a CAP, parking strategies, advanced technologies, or other strategies, and award points to jurisdictions that have an adopted CAP and/or complete streets policy at the time that the applications are due.

• Advanced technologies: Add a qualitative criterion asking the applicant to describe how the proposed project advances mobility hub concepts and/or leverages advanced technologies that encourage multi-modal travel options.

Weighting:

• Adjust the weighting of the SGIP and ATGP to reallocate five percentage points to the new GHG emission reduction criterion, as summarized below.

http://www.sandag.org/uploads/meetingid/meetingid_4452_22416.pdf






13

SGIP ATGP

o SGIP Capital:

Remove 2 percent from Evidence of Local Commitment (resulting in a reduction of points in this criterion from 4% to 2%)

Remove 3 percent from Cost Effectiveness (resulting in a reduction of points in this criterion from 5% to 2%)

o SGIP Planning:

Remove 2 percent from Evidence of Local Commitment/Community Support (resulting in a reduction of points in this criterion from 5% to 3%)

Remove 3.5 percent from Implementation (resulting in a reduction of points in this criterion from 17% to 14%)

Add 0.5 percent to Relationship to Regional Transit (resulting in an increase of points in this criterion from 7.5% to 8%)

o ATGP Capital:

Remove 1.5 percent from Supportive Plans and Policies (resulting in a reduction of points in this criterion from 1.5% to 0% and the elimination of this criterion, which was focused on complete streets and comprehensive active transportation plans)


Remove 1.5 percent from Matching Funds (resulting in a reduction of points in this criterion from 5% to 3.5%)

o ATGP Non-Capital:


Methodological adjustments:

• Refine the methodology for the calculations of the Cost Effectiveness and Matching Funds criteria, and change the Cost Effectiveness criterion to “Efficient Use of Program Funds.

Other Administrative Information

Evaluation Panels: For Cycle 3, evaluation panels for each grant program consisting of staff from SANDAG, Caltrans, the

transit agencies, the academic community, and from members of the Regional Planning Technical Working Group and/or

the Cities/County Transportation Advisory Committee whose jurisdictions did not submit applications were convened to

evaluate and rank the applications. For Cycle 4, the addition of representatives from the public health community and

members of the Active Transportation Working Group whose jurisdictions did not submit applications are proposed.

Smart Growth Concept Map: In order to apply for funding from the SGIP, projects must be located in a Smart Growth

Opportunity Area (SGOA) on the SANDAG Smart Growth Concept Map. SANDAG will use the current Smart Growth

Concept Map in the Cycle 4 SGIP call for projects. The current map, updated in May of 2016, contains the transportation

network from the Regional Plan and the land use inputs from the Series 13 Regional Growth Forecast.

14

Summary of Previous Funding Cycles and Amounts and Anticipated Cycle 4 Amounts

Smart Growth Incentive Program

Cycle Release of Call

for Projects Projects

Awarded FY of Funding

Available Funding

Number of Projects

Recommended for Funding

1 December 2008 May 2009 FY 2009, FY 2010

$9.4 million 13 projects

2 September 2012 June 2013 FY 2011,

FY 2012, FY 2013 $9.6 million 13 projects

3 December 2014 July 2015 FY 2014,

FY 2015, FY 2016 $12 million 17 projects

4 Est.

December 2017 Est.

July 2018 FY 2017,

FY 2018, FY 2019 Est.

$27 million TBD

Active Transportation Grant Program2

Cycle Release of Call

for Projects Projects

Awarded FY of Funding

Available Funding

Number of Projects

Recommended for Funding

1 April 2009 June 2009 FY 2009, FY 2010

$7.8 million 29 projects

2 April 2012 Sept 2012 FY 2011,

FY 2012, FY 2013 $8.8 million 26 projects

3 December 2014 July 2015 FY 2014,

FY 2015, FY 2016 $3 million 12 projects

4 Est.

December 2017 Est.

July 2018 FY 2017,

FY 2018, FY 2019 Est.

$3.6 million TBD

2 The ATGP is supplemented with Transportation Development Act funds.

SMART GROWTH INCENTIVE PROGRAM Attachment 4A CAPITAL GRANTS

TransNet SMART GROWTH INCENTIVE PROGRAM CALL FOR PROJECTS FOR FOURTH CYCLE OF FUNDING – CAPITAL GRANTS

15

SCORING CRITERIA MATRIX Points calculated by SANDAG are marked with an asterisk (*) in the Scoring Matrix

NO. CATEGORY PTS CRITERIA PTS

POSSIBLE WEIGHT

SCORE POSSIBLE

%

1. LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION CHARACTERISTICS OF THE AREA AROUND THE PROPOSED CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS (26% of total points)

A. Intensity of Planned Development in the Project’s Smart Growth Opportunity Area (SGOA)

A1. Planned Densities Relative to SGOA

Place Type Thresholds*

For Metropolitan Center/Urban Centers/Town Centers: Up to 6 1 6 2%

3 Exceeds minimum residential requirements by 100 percent or more

2 Exceeds minimum residential requirements by 50-99 percent


AND

3 Exceeds minimum employment requirements by 100 percent or more

2 Exceeds minimum employment requirements by 50-99 percent


OR For Community Centers/Rural Village/Mixed-Use Transit Corridor:




A2. Expedited

Approval Process

Specific plan, master Environmental Impact Report, or other mechanism allows for administrative approval of development projects.

Up to 4 1 4 1%

B. Existing and Entitled Land Development Around the Proposed Capital Project

B1. Existing Development

Density within a 0.25-mile radius

of proposed capital project

site*





AND








B2. Entitled Development

Density within a 0.25-mile radius

of proposed capital project

site*





AND








SMART GROWTH INCENTIVE PROGRAM CAPITAL GRANTS


16


POSSIBLE WEIGHT

SCORE POSSIBLE

%

B3. Mix of Uses* (Single-family residential, retail, office, civic, parks, visitor within a 0.25-mile of project site):

Up to 3 2 6 2%

3 Multi-family residential + 6 other uses

2 Multi-family residential + 4-5 other uses

1 Multi-family residential + 2-3 other uses

B4. New Uses 2 New uses will be added to the project area 2 1 2 1%

C. New Affordable Housing Development

C1. New Affordable Housing*

Percent of income-restricted affordable housing provided in proposed new development (within a 0.25-mile of project site):

Up to 3 2 6 2%

3 100 percent of units affordable

2 75-99 percent of units affordable

1 25-74 percent of units affordable

C2. Low to very low-income affordable units*

2 50-100 percent of units in the development are restricted to low to very low-income residents

Up to 2 1 2 1%

D. Transportation Characteristics (within walking and biking distance of proposed capital project)

D1. Relation to Transit*

Scale of actual walking distance to existing or programmed transit station or transit stop:

Up to 12 1 12 4%

COASTER, SPRINTER, Trolley, Rapid, and Rapid Express service:

12 Project abuts or is onsite

10 Project is within a 0.25-mile


High-Frequency Local Bus Service, Shuttles, or Streetcars (15 minutes all day)


D2. Bike Facilities* Existing or Planned bike lanes, bike boulevards, cycle tracks, or separated bike paths (Class I) (as identified in San Diego Regional Bike Plan or local bike master plan):

Up to 2 2 4 1%

2 Direct connection to proposed project

1 Facilities within a 0.25-mile radius of project

D3. Walkability* Intersection Density per Square Mile: Up to 4 2 8 3%

4 290 or greater

3 225-289

2 100-224

1 Less than 100

D4. TDM Strategies and Advanced Technologies

2 EXISTING TDM programs or policies in place OR

Up to 4 1 4 1%

1 Proposed TDM programs and policies, including implementation strategy, And

Up to 2 How well does the project advance mobility hub concepts and/or leverage advanced technologies that encourage multi-modal travel options in the project area?

E. Community Design Features

E1. Urban Design Characteristics

and Community Context

Design Characteristics of existing community, and/or proposed design characteristics prescribed by documented guidance for the area or jurisdiction through design guidelines, form-based codes, or renderings of proposed development.

Up to 6 2 12 4%



17


POSSIBLE WEIGHT

SCORE POSSIBLE

%

2. QUALITY OF PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (35% of total points)

A. Support for Public Transit

How well does the project support use of regional public transit service in the project area?

Up to 5 5 25 8%

B. Providing Transportation

Choices

How well does the project support transportation choices that would reduce vehicle miles traveled, specifically walking and bicycling?

Up to 5 5 25 8%

C. Community Enhancement

How well does the project enhance the public realm in the project area, to engender support for smart growth, through place making and creating regional destinations?

Up to 5 4 20 7%

D. Addressing Project Area

Issues

How well does the project address identified special needs and concerns of the community, such as improving access for elderly, disabled, low-mobility populations, or increasing public safety? How well does the project preserve and appropriately integrate cultural and natural resources in the project area?

Up to 5 3 15 5%

E. Sustainability How well does the proposed project incorporate Green Streets/Low-Impact Development principles to address stormwater runoff, energy conservation, and landscaping and street trees?

Up to 2 1 2 1%

F. Universal Design How well does the project incorporate Universal Design principles to ensure access for users of all ages and abilities?

Up to 2 1 2 1%

G. Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emission

Reductions

1 The jurisdiction adopted a Climate Action Plan (CAP) on or before the application due date.

Up to 4 4 16 5%

1 The jurisdiction adopted a complete streets policy (or the equivalent) on or before the application due date.

Up to 2 How well does the proposed project directly reduce GHG emissions such as through implementation of a CAP, parking strategies, advanced technologies, or other strategies?

3. PROJECT READINESS (9% of total points)

A. Major Milestones Completed*

1 Environmental Clearance Up to 4 5 20 7%

1 Right-of-way Acquisition

1 Final Design

1 Project Fully Funded

B. Evidence of Local

Commitment

The Project is supported by the community as evident by a comprehensive, public participation process that significantly involved a diverse group of stakeholders.

Up to 2 3 6 2%

4. EFFICIENT USE OF PROGRAM FUNDS* (2% of total points)

Points for efficient use of program funds are awarded based on dollar amount requested. See point scale below.

Up to 6 1 6 2%

5. MATCHING FUNDS* (3% of total points)

Points for matching funds are awarded based on a scale with a matching fund percentage range of 0 percent to 45 percent and above. See point scale below.

Up to 10 1 10 3%

6. REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT – BOARD POLICY NO. 033 POINTS* (25% of Points)

Points are awarded per jurisdiction based upon the methodology adopted in Board Policy No. 033.

Up to 75 1 75 25%

TOTAL PROJECT SCORE 300 100%



18

Efficient Use of Program Funds: Maximum points = 6 points

Dollar Amount Requested Points for SGIP Capital

$2,083,335 – $2,500,000 1

$1,666,668 – $2,083,334 2

$1,250,001 – $1,666,667 3

$833,335 – $1,250,000 4

$416,668 – $833,334 5

$1 – $416,667 6

Matching Funds Point Scale: Maximum points = 10 points

Match Fund Percentage Points for

SGIP Capital

0% 0

0.01 – 4.99% 1

5.00 – 9.99% 2

10.00 – 14.99% 3

15.00 – 19.99% 4

20.00 – 24.99% 5

25.00 -29.99% 6

30.00 – 34.99% 7

35.00 – 39.99% 8

40.00 – 44.99% 9

45% and above 10

SMART GROWTH INCENTIVE PROGRAM Attachment 4B PLANNING GRANTS

TransNet SMART GROWTH INCENTIVE PROGRAM CALL FOR PROJECTS FOR FOURTH CYCLE OF FUNDING – PLANNING GRANTS

19

S CORING CRITERIA MATRIX Points calculated by SANDAG are marked with an asterisk (*) in the Scoring Matrix

NO. CRITERIA POINT

POSSIBLE WEIGHT

SCORE POSSIBLE

%

1. RELATIONSHIP TO REGIONAL TRANSIT*

Is the transit infrastructure and service within the SGOA existing, programmed, or planned?

4 4 16 8%

2. POTENTIAL FOR SMART GROWTH DEVELOPMENT AND ADVANCED TECHNOLOGIES Evidence of opportunities to develop smart growth plans or projects at or above the densities for the area’s smart growth place type in the proposed planning area.

Evidence of opportunities to advance mobility hub concepts and/or leverage advanced technologies that encourage multi-modal travel options in the proposed planning area.

5 4 20 10%

3. PROPOSED PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES AND GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSION REDUCTIONS How well do the proposed objectives support smart growth development in the project area? Would the plan result in development that increases transportation and housing choices? (Up to 8 points 8)

The jurisdiction adopted a Climate Action Plan (CAP) on or before the application due date? (1 point)

The jurisdiction adopted a complete streets policy (or the equivalent) on or before the application due date? (1 point)

How well does the plan directly reduce GHG emissions such as through implementation of a CAP, parking strategies, advanced technologies, or other strategies? (Up to 5 points)

15 2 30 15%

4. METHOD TO ACCOMPLISH PROJECT OBJECTIVES

How will the planning project accomplish stated objectives?

How well does the Scope of Work facilitate meeting the objectives and include public outreach?

6 5 30 15%

5. IMPLEMENTATION

Is the planning project ready to go?

Will it result in specific implementation actions such as zoning changes or a master EIR?

7 4 28 14%

6. EVIDENCE OF LOCAL COMMITMENT / COMMUNITY SUPPORT How has the applicant demonstrated a commitment to implement smart growth (ordinances, policies, incentives)?

How will the planning process engage the community?

Is the proposed project supported by the community?

3 2 6 3%

7. MATCHING FUNDS*


20 1 20 10%

8. REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT – BOARD POLICY NO. 033 POINTS*


50 1 50 25%

TOTAL POINTS POSSIBLE 200 100%

SMART GROWTH INCENTIVE PROGRAM PLANNING GRANTS

TransNet SMART GROWTH INCENTIVE PROGRAM CALL FOR PROJECTS FOR FOURTH CYCLE OF FUNDING – PLANNING GRANTS

20



SGIP Planning

0% 0

0.01 – 4.99% 2

5.00 – 9.99% 4

10.00 – 14.99% 6

15.00 – 19.99% 8

20.00 – 24.99% 10

25.00 -29.99% 12

30.00 – 34.99% 14

35.00 – 39.99% 16

40.00 – 44.99% 18

45% and above 20

SMART GROWTH INCENTIVE PROGRAM Attachment 4C CLIMATE ACTION PLAN GRANTS

TransNet SMART GROWTH INCENTIVE PROGRAM CALL FOR PROJECTS FOR FOURTH CYCLE OF FUNDING – CLIMATE ACTION PLAN GRANTS

21

SCORING CRITERIA MATRIX

Points calculated by SANDAG are marked with an asterisk (*) in the Scoring Matrix

NO. CATEGORY/CRITERIA SCORE

POSSIBLE %

1. CLIMATE ACTION PLAN CONTENTS

Will the climate action plan (CAP) include a greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions inventory for an appropriate recent baseline year, in accordance with adopted protocols?

Will the CAP include GHG emissions forecasts and reduction targets for 2020 and post-2020 in alignment with state GHG reduction goals?

Will the CAP include specific, quantifiable GHG reduction measures that will achieve the GHG reduction targets?

30 30%

2. IMPLEMENTATION AND MONITORING

Will the CAP include a program for implementing each of its GHG reduction measures that may include but is not limited to identification of responsible parties, key actions, timeline, costs, and funding sources?

Will the CAP include a program for monitoring progress toward achievement of its GHG reduction target(s) that may include but is not limited to metrics for tracking progress, periodic updates to its GHG emissions inventory, regular reporting of progress, and timing of future CAP updates?

30 30%

3. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

Will community engagement be incorporated into the development, implementation, and/or monitoring of the CAP?

10 10%

4. MATCHING FUNDS*

Points for matching funds are awarded based on a scale with a matching fund percentage range of 21 percent to 41 percent and above. See point scale below. (Note: 20% minimum match required)

5 5%



25 25%



Match Fund Percentage Points for Climate Action Planning

0 – 20.99% 0

21.00 – 25.99% 1

26.00 – 30.99% 2

31.00 – 35.99% 3

36.00 – 40.99% 4

41.00% and above 5


SMART GROWTH INCENTIVE PROGRAM Attachment 4D COMPLETE STREETS POLICY GRANTS

TransNet SMART GROWTH INCENTIVE PROGRAM CALL FOR PROJECTS FOR FOURTH CYCLE OF FUNDING – COMPLETE STREETS POLICY GRANTS

22



NO. CATEGORY/CRITERIA SCORE

POSSIBLE %

1. COMPREHENSIVENESS AND CONTEXT SENSITIVITY

Will the Complete Streets Policy apply to all transportation projects and phases, including those involving reconstruction, new construction, retrofits, repaving, rehabilitation, or other changes in the allocation of pavement space on an existing roadway?

Will the Complete Streets Policy apply to all departments in the jurisdiction, outside agencies, and private development projects whose work affects the roadway?

Will the Complete Streets Policy consider the current and planned context when planning and designing transportations solutions?

Will the Complete Streets Policy promote a well-connected street network?

20 20%

2. POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

Will the policy development process engage all departments and garner support for the adoption and implementation of the Complete Streets Policy?

Will community engagement be incorporated into the policy development process?

20 20%

3. IMPLEMENTATION AND MONITORING

Will the Complete Streets Policy establish a public process for reporting implementation of the Policy?

Will the Complete Streets Policy include performance standards with measurable outcomes to evaluate implementation of the Policy?

Will the Complete Streets Policy establish a means to collect data to evaluate implementation of the Policy?

30 30%

4. MATCHING FUNDS*

Points for matching funds are awarded based on a scale with a matching fund percentage range of 21 percent to 41 percent and above. See point scale below. (Note: 20% minimum match required)

5 5%



25 25%



Match Fund Percentage Points for Complete Streets Policy

0 – 20.99% 0

21.00 – 25.99% 1

26.00 – 30.99% 2

31.00 – 35.99% 3

36.00 – 40.99% 4

41.00% and above 5


ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION GRANT PROGRAM Attachment 4E CAPITAL GRANTS

TransNet ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION GRANT PROGRAM CALL FOR PROJECTS FOR FOURTH CYCLE OF FUNDING – CAPITAL GRANTS

23

SCORING CRITERIA MATRIX Points calculated by SANDAG are marked with an asterisk (*) in the Scoring Matrix


POSSIBLE %

1. PROJECT CONNECTIONS AND SAFETY (24% of total points)

A. Regional Bike Network*

6 Project will directly connect to the Regional Bike Network Up to 8 4%

or

8 Project will construct part of the Regional Bike Network

B. Local Bike Network 8 Closes a gap between existing bike facilities Up to 8 4%

C. Existing Pedestrian Network

8 Closes a gap in the existing pedestrian network Up to 8 4%

D. Connection to Existing or

Programmed Transit*

6 Bike improvement within 1.5 miles of a regional transit station Up to 12 6%

and/or

2 Pedestrian improvement within 0.25 mile of a local transit stop

4 Pedestrian improvement directly connects to a local transit stop

4 Pedestrian improvement within 0.5 mile of a regional transit station

6 Pedestrian improvement directly connects to a regional transit station

E. Safety and Access Improvements

Completes connection in existing network at location with documented safety hazard or accident history (within the last seven years):

Up to 12 6%

2 One to two correctable crashes involving nonmotorized users

4 Three to four correctable crashes involving nonmotorized users

6 Five or more correctable crashes involving nonmotorized users

and/or

6 Creates access or overcomes barriers in area where hazardous conditions prohibit safe access for people walking and biking.

2. QUALITY OF PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (20.5% of total points)

A. Project Impact and Effectiveness

Up to 5 How well will the proposed traffic calming address the identified need in the project area? Are the proposed solutions appropriate for the situation?

Up to 15 7.5%

Up to 5 How well will the proposed pedestrian improvements address the identified need in the project area?

Up to 5 How well will the proposed bike improvements address the identified need in the project area?

B. Program Objectives How well does the project meet the ATGP program objectives? Up to 18 9%

C. Innovation and Advanced

Technologies

Is this project an FHWA or state experimentation effort? Up to 8 4%

Does the project use innovative solutions or propose solutions that are new to the region and can potentially serve as a replicable model? How well does the project advance mobility hub concepts and/or leverage advanced technologies that encourage multi-modal travel options in the proposed project area?

ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION GRANT PROGRAM CAPITAL GRANTS


24


POSSIBLE %

3. SUPPORTIVE POLICIES AND PROGRAMS (6.5% of total points)

A. Complementary Programs

Are capital improvements accompanied by supportive programs such as an awareness campaign, education efforts, and/or increased enforcement?

Up to 3 1.5%

B. Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emission

Reductions

1 The jurisdiction adopted a Climate Action Plan (CAP) on or before the application due date.

Up to 10 5%

1 The jurisdiction adopted a complete streets policy (or the equivalent) on or before the application due date.

Up to 8 How well does the proposed project directly reduce GHG emissions such as through implementation of a CAP, parking strategies, advanced technologies, or other strategies?

4. DEMAND ANALYSIS (GIS) (7.5% of total points)*

Factors contributing to score: population and employment, population and employment densities, intersection density, vehicle ownership, and activity centers.

Up to 15 7.5%

5. PROJECT READINESS (10% of total points)*

Completion of Major Milestones

2 Neighborhood-level plan, corridor study, or community active transportation strategy.

Up to 20 10%

4 Environmental Clearance

Up to 4 Right-of-Way Acquisition

Up to 10 Final Design 30 percent design (3 points) 60 percent design (6 points) 90 percent design (9 points) Final design (10 points)

6. EFFICIENT USE OF PROGRAM FUNDS (3% of total points)*

Points for efficient use of program funds are awarded based on dollar amount requested. Points are calculated separately for large-category and small-category projects. See point scales below.

Up to 6 3%

7. MATCHING FUNDS (3.5% of total points)*


Up to 7 3.5%

8. REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT – BOARD POLICY NO. 033 POINTS (25% of total points)*


Up to 50 25%

TOTAL PROJECT SCORE 200 100%

ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION GRANT PROGRAM CAPITAL GRANTS


25


Dollar Amount Requested Points for ATGP Capital – Large Category

$1,333,340 – $1,500,000 1

$1,166,672 – $1,333,339 2

$1,000,004 – $1,166,671 3

$833,336 – $1,000,003 4

$666,668 – $833,335 5

$500,000 – $666,667 6

Dollar Amount Requested Points for ATGP Capital – Small Category

$416,668 – $499,999 1

$333,335 – $416,667 2

$250,001 – $333,334 3

$166,668 – $250,000 4

$83,335 – $166,667 5

$1 – $83,334 6


Match Fund Percentage Points for ATGP Capital

(both Large Category and Small Category)

0% 0

0.01 – 7.99% 1

8.00 – 15.99% 2

16.00 – 23.99% 3

24.00 – 31.99% 4

32.00 – 39.99% 5

40.00 – 47.99% 6

48% and above 7

ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION GRANT PROGRAMS Attachment 4F NON-CAPITAL GRANTS

TransNet ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION GRANT PROGRAM CALL FOR PROJECTS FOR FOURTH CYCLE OF FUNDING – NON-CAPITAL GRANTS

26



NO. CATEGORY CRITERIA POINTS POSSIBLE

PLANNING EEA1 BIKE

PARKING 1. ATGP PROGRAM OBJECTIVES AND ADVANCED TECHNOLOGIES

All How well does the proposed project address ATGP objectives?

How well will the proposed effort advance mobility hub concepts and/or leverage advanced technologies that encourage multi-modal travel options in the proposed planning area?

30 20 20

2. COMPREHENSIVENESS AND GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSION REDUCTIONS Planning How comprehensive is the proposed plan? 15 N/A N/A

EEA Programs Bike Parking

Does this effort accompany an existing or proposed capital improvement project?

N/A 15 10

All The jurisdiction adopted a Climate Action Plan (CAP) and a complete streets policy (or the equivalent) on or before the application due date?

2 2 2

All How well will the proposed effort directly reduce greenhouse gas emissions such as through implementation of a CAP, parking strategies, advanced technologies, or other strategies?

8 8 8

3. METHODOLOGY All How well will the planning process or proposed effort meet the

demonstrated need and project goals? 30 30 10

4. COMMUNITY SUPPORT Planning Does the planning project include an inclusive process? 15 N/A N/A

EEA Programs Bike Parking

Does the project involve broad segments of the community and does it have broad and meaningful community support?

N/A 15 10

5. EVALUATION EEA Programs Bike Parking

How will the project evaluate its effectiveness? N/A 20 10

6. INNOVATION EEA Programs Bike Parking

Is this project new to the region and have the potential to serve as a replicable model for other cities in the region?

N/A 10 30

7. DEMAND ANALYSIS (GIS)* Planning

Bike Parking Factors contributing to score: population and employment, population and employment densities, intersection density, vehicle ownership, and activity centers.

20 N/A 20

8. EFFICIENT USE OF PROGRAM FUNDS* All Points for efficient use of program funds are awarded based on dollar

amount requested. See point scales below. 10 10 10

9. MATCHING FUNDS* All Points for matching funds are awarded based on a scale with a matching fund

percentage range of 0 percent to 45 percent and above. See point scale below. 20 20 20

10. REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT – BOARD POLICY NO. 033 POINTS* All Points will be allocated according to methodology described in Board

Policy No. 033 50 50 50

TOTAL POINTS POSSIBLE 200 200 200

1 (EEA) Education, Encouragement, and Awareness Programs

ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION GRANT PROGRAMS NON-CAPITAL GRANTS


27


Dollar Amount Requested Points for ATGP Non-Capital: Planning and EEA

$270,001 – $300,000 1

$240,001 – $270,000 2

$210,001 – $240,000 3

$180,001 – $210,000 4

$150,001 – $180,000 5

$120,001 – $150,000 6

$90,001 – $120,000 7

$60,001 – $90,000 8

$30,001 – $60,000 9

$1 – $30,000 10

Dollar Amount Requested Points for ATGP Non-Capital: Bike Parking

$90,001 – $100,000 1

$80,001 – $900,000 2

$70,001 – $80,000 3

$60,001 – 70,000 4

$50,001 – $60,000 5

$40,001 – $50,000 6

$30,001 – $40,000 7

$20,001 – $30,000 8

$10,001 – $20,000 9

$1 – $10,000 10

ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION GRANT PROGRAMS NON-CAPITAL GRANTS


28



ATGP Non-Capital: All

0% 0

0.01 – 4.99% 2

5.00 – 9.99% 4

10.00 – 14.99% 6

15.00 – 19.99% 8

20.00 – 24.99% 10

25.00 – 29.99% 12

30.00 – 34.99% 14

35.00 – 39.99% 16

40.00 – 44.99% 18

45% and above 20

Attachment 5

29

Process Undertaken During 2017 to Prepare for the Cycle 4 Calls for Projects

During 2017, an extensive process was undertaken to prepare the TransNet Cycle 4 calls for projects for the Smart Growth Incentive Program (SGIP) and Active Transportation Program (ATGP), including the development of the Climate Action Plan (CAP) and complete streets policy grants under the umbrella of the SGIP. The primary committees and working groups involved during this yearlong process included the SANDAG Regional Planning and Transportation Committees which serve as the Policy Advisory Committees (PACs); the TransNet Independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee (ITOC); and the following working groups: the Regional Planning Technical Working Group (TWG), the Cities/County Transportation Advisory Committee (CTAC), and the Active Transportation Working Group (ATWG). Informational reports were also provided to the Regional Energy Working Group and the San Diego Traffic Engineers Council (SANTEC).

• In January, February, and March 2017, the working groups and the PACs reviewed the timeline.

• In April, two joint workshops were held between the TWG, CTAC, and ATWG to kick-off the Cycle 4 update and develop a framework for approaching the required changes.

• In June, a joint meeting between the Regional Planning Committee (RPC) and Transportation Committee (TC) was held to receive the input resulting from the joint working group workshops and for PAC members to provide initial input.

• In July, feedback was reported to the working groups from the RPC and TC and additional input was sought based on the feedback from the PACs.

• In the fall, the RPC and TC discussed the changes recommended up to that point based on working group feedback, and the working groups provided input on the proposed criteria for the two new SGIP grant subprograms – the CAPs and complete streets policy grants. Staff also provided informational reports to the Regional Energy Working Group and the SANTEC.

• In September, the ITOC was asked to review and discuss the potential recommended changes for consistency with the TransNet Extension Ordinance.

• In October, the PACs weighed in on the evaluation criteria for the CAP and complete streets grants.

• In early December, the PACs were requested to recommend Board approval of the evaluation criteria and the release of the calls for projects for each of the grant programs: SGIP (Capital, Planning, CAP grants, and Complete Streets Policy grants); and ATGP (Capital and Non-Capital).

• In mid-December, the Board is requested to approve the evaluation criteria and release the calls for projects.

Attachment 6

30

Proposed Methodological Adjustments To Cost Effectiveness and Matching Funds Criteria

Cost Effectiveness Point Calculations and Proposed Changes

Previous cycles of the Smart Growth Incentive Program (SGIP) and Active Transportation Grant Program (ATGP) contained a criterion named Cost Effectiveness. The calculation for the cost effectiveness criterion consisted of the ratio of the grant request to the project score, with the project grant request divided by the score in various categories, ranked relative to each other. This criterion allocated the highest points to the projects requesting the least amount of grant funds and fewest points to those requesting the highest amount of grant funds. This criterion more accurately reflects an efficient use of program funds than cost effectiveness, and provides projects requesting a smaller grant amount with the opportunity to compete more effectively against projects seeking larger grant amounts. This criterion also tends to be duplicative of various other criteria, and does not necessarily measure cost effectiveness against a particular measure, as the grant score quotient was based on the compilation of numerous varying indicators. Staff recommends changing this criterion from “Cost Effectiveness” to “Efficient Use of Program Funds.” Staff also recommends refining and simplifying the methodology by awarding points based on dollar amount requested, as shown on the proposed point scales in Table 1, and reducing the weight of this criterion across all grant programs where it exists (SGIP Capital, ATGP Capital [Large-Category and Small-Category], and ATGP Non-Capital). These changes would more accurately capture the meaning of this criterion and would increase the transparency of its scoring.

Table 1: Proposed Point Scales for Efficient Use of Program Funds

Dollar Amount Requested Points for SGIP Capital

$2,083,335 – $2,500,000 1

$1,666,668 – $2,083,334 2

$1,250,001 – $1,666,667 3

$833,335 – $1,250,000 4

$416,668 – $833,334 5

$1 – $416,667 6

Dollar Amount Requested Points for ATGP Capital – Large Category

$1,333,340 – $1,500,000 1

$1,166,672 – $1,333,339 2

$1,000,004 – $1,166,671 3

$833,336 – $1,000,003 4

$666,668 – $833,335 5

$500,000 – $666,667 6

31

Dollar Amount Requested Points for ATGP Capital – Small Category

$416,668 – $499,999 1

$333,335 – $416,667 2

$250,001 – $333,334 3

$166,668 – $250,000 4

$83,335 – $166,667 5

$1 – $83,334 6

Dollar Amount Requested Points for ATGP Non-Capital: Planning and EEA

$270,001 – $300,000 1

$240,001 – $270,000 2

$210,001 – $240,000 3

$180,001 – $210,000 4

$150,001 – $180,000 5

$120,001 – $150,000 6

$90,001 – $120,000 7

$60,001 – $90,000 8

$30,001 – $60,000 9

$1 – $30,000 10

Dollar Amount Requested Points for ATGP Non-Capital: Bike Parking

$90,001 – $100,000 1

$80,001 – $900,000 2

$70,001 – $80,000 3

$60,001 – 70,000 4

$50,001 – $60,000 5

$40,001 – $50,000 6

$30,001 – $40,000 7

$20,001 – $30,000 8

$10,001 – $20,000 9

$1 – $10,000 10

32

Matching Fund Point Calculations and Proposed Change

In previous cycles, points for matching funds were awarded by dividing the total project cost as proposed in the application by the grant request. The project(s) with the largest quotient would receive the highest points, and the project(s) with no matching funds would receive no points. A new methodology is proposed to increase transparency of scoring where points for matching funds would be awarded based on a scale with a matching fund percentage range of 0 percent to approximately 50 percent. This new methodology would allow applicants to more clearly determine how many points would be awarded for dollars matched, as shown on the proposed point scales in Table 2.

Table 2: Proposed Point Scales for Matching Funds

Match Fund Percentage Points for SGIP Capital Points for

SGIP Planning and ATGP Non-Capital

0% 0 0

0.01 – 4.99% 1 2

5.00% – 9.99% 2 4

10.00 – 14.99% 3 6

15.00 – 19.99% 4 8

20.00 – 24.99% 5 10

25.00 – 29.99% 6 12

30.00 – 34.99% 7 14

35.00 – 39.99% 8 16

40.00 – 44.99% 9 18

45% and above 10 20

Match Fund Percentage Points for ATGP Capital

(both Large Category and Small Category)

0% 0

0.01 – 7.99% 1

8.00 – 15.99% 2

16.00 – 23.99% 3

24.00 – 31.99% 4

32.00 – 39.99% 5

40.00 – 47.99% 6

48% and above 7

BOARD OF DIRECTORS



AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES File Number 3100400 PROGRAM: PROPOSED SANDAG PROJECT SUBMITTALS

Introduction

On October 6, 2017, the Regional Planning Committee received an update on the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities (AHSC) Program, a statewide program administered by the Strategic Growth Council (SGC). The Program is funded through California cap-and-trade auction proceeds which provides funding for projects that will reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and benefit disadvantaged communities.

Because SANDAG serves as both the regional transportation planning agency (RTPA) and the metropolitan planning organization (MPO) for the San Diego region, the agency has three roles in the AHSC Program.

1. Applicant: – As the RTPA, SANDAG qualifies as an eligible applicant, and can choose to submit an application either by itself or as a participant with another entity. The status of potential applications is described below.

2. Reviewer – As the MPO, SANDAG is invited to review applications from the San Diego region for their ability to support implementation of the region’s Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS). Staff performed this review in the previous funding cycles and proposes to do the same in the upcoming funding cycle. Any project from the region that is consistent with the local general plan or the assumptions in the adopted SCS will be considered by SANDAG to support implementation of San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan (Regional Plan) and the SCS. SANDAG also has the option to develop a process to prioritize projects from the San Diego region and submit the prioritized list to the SGC for consideration in recommending funding awards.

3. Support Role – As the MPO, SANDAG can and has been playing a proactive role in promoting collaborative relationships that may result in more successful applications from the San Diego region and help implement the Regional Plan.

Recommendation

The Regional Planning Committee recommends that the Board of Directors approve the proposed SANDAG role in the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities (AHSC) evaluation process; and the Board of Directors is asked to direct staff to further explore and potentially submit an application to the AHSC Program in collaboration with Community Housing Works.

http://www.sgc.ca.gov/m_contact.php

2

Discussion

Potential Application

As noted in the October 2017 report to the Regional Planning Committee, SANDAG has applied for AHSC grant funds in the past as a stand-alone applicant and as a partner with an affordable housing developer. SANDAG staff has not identified any stand-alone transportation projects that would be competitive for funding in this application cycle. However, SANDAG has been asked by an affordable housing developer, Community Housing Works, to consider participating in an application that would potentially include funding for the following elements:

• Affordable Housing – Community Housing Works would construct a 71-unit affordable housing family complex in the Southcrest neighborhood of the City of San Diego.

• Transit Service Improvements – The Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) would provide transit improvements in the Southcrest neighborhood.

• New Regional Bikeway – SANDAG would construct the Imperial Avenue Bikeway Project, a Bike Early Action Program project that includes a 3-mile stretch of bike and pedestrian improvements from Downtown San Diego through Sherman Heights, Grant Hill, and Mountain View with a connection to Lincoln Park.

• Local Pedestrian Improvements – The City of San Diego would permit the construction of pedestrian improvements, lighting, Americans with Disabilities Act enhancements, and landscaping to link the affordable housing, bikeway, and transit.

Conversations on the potential collaboration between Community Housing Works, MTS, and the City of San Diego are ongoing. Currently, the SANDAG staff and Community Housing Works have been determining the roles and potential sustainable transit infrastructure that could be funded by the grant. SANDAG staff is seeking approval to further explore a collaborative proposal and potentially submit an application to the AHSC program, if it is determined that the application would be competitive.

Reviewer

SANDAG performed a reviewer function in the first year of this grant program using the SANDAG Board-adopted quantitative criteria from the TransNet Smart Growth Incentive Program capital grants. Because SANDAG input did not affect SGC funding recommendations, the Board of Directors has since directed staff to provide general support to applicants in the development of their proposals in lieu of the optional MPO role of prioritizing project applications. There has been no change in circumstances in this cycle of the grant program that would suggest a different course of action should be taken regarding the SANDAG reviewer role.

Support Role

SANDAG has taken a proactive role in promoting collaborative relationships that could result in more successful applications from the San Diego region over the past two cycles of this program. A key goal of the AHSC program is to encourage cooperative partnerships between affordable housing developers, local jurisdictions, and transportation providers, including MPOs and transit operators, to

3

achieve reduced GHG emissions. SANDAG co-hosted a workshop with the San Diego Housing Federation this fall, bringing together affordable housing developers, local planning and public works staff, transit operators, SANDAG bike and transit planners, and SGC staff to learn about the program and discuss potential opportunities for collaboration. SANDAG updated the dedicated webpage (sandag.org/ahsc) and created a contact list to disseminate additional information as it becomes available. In addition, staff has scheduled GHG emissions reduction calculation training workshops for potential applicants.

Next Steps

Based on action by the Board of Directors, staff will continue its collaborative work with Community Housing Works on a potential application to the AHSC Program.


Key Staff Contact: Coleen Clementson, (619) 699-1944, [email protected]


Agenda Item No. 17-12-15

Date: December 15, 2017

File Number: 1500100

Memo to: Board of Directors

From: Kim Kawada, Chief Deputy Executive Director

Subject: Memorandum of Agreement with City of La Mesa: TransNet Debt Financing Program

Overview

The City of La Mesa has requested to borrow $2 million of commercial paper through the TransNet Debt Financing Program to provide needed funding for the completion of the West La Mesa Improvements Project. The City would repay the debt with its annually allocated TransNet Local Street Improvement funds over a five-year period. This is a high priority project of the City that would provide congestion relief to the area while enhancing bicycle and pedestrian safety.

Budgetary Impact: No impact on SANDAG Program Budget. Pending approval by the Board, there would be $42.4 million remaining in available (uncommitted) commercial paper under the TransNet Debt Financing Program.

Considerations: The West La Mesa Improvements Project requires an amendment to the 2016 Regional Transportation Improvement Program prior to execution of a Memorandum of Agreement.

Next Steps

Pending action by the Board of Directors, an amendment to the 2016 Regional Transportation Improvement Program to include funding changes for the project is scheduled for consideration by the Transportation Committee at its April 20, 2018, meeting.

Recommendation Action Requested: Approve

The Transportation Committee recommends that the Board of Directors authorize the Executive Director to execute a Memorandum of Agreement with the City of La Mesa to issue $2 million in commercial paper through the TransNet Debt Financing Program, in substantially the same form as Attachment 1.

Key Staff Contact: Lisa Kondrat-Dauphin, (619) 699-1942, [email protected]

Staff report and support information attached

2

Memorandum of Agreement with City of La Mesa: TransNet Debt Financing Program

Introduction

In accordance with Rule No. 16 of Board Policy No. 031: TransNet Ordinance and Expenditure Plan Rules, local jurisdictions may access commercial paper through the TransNet Debt Financing Program to advance local TransNet-eligible projects with a repayment period of up to five years. Local jurisdictions must document their understanding of the requirements of the TransNet Debt Financing Program in an executed Memorandum of Agreement (MOA). The City of La Mesa has requested access to TransNet commercial paper to cover the shortfall in funding for the West La Mesa Improvements Project (Project). The draft MOA between SANDAG and the City of La Mesa is included as Attachment 1.

Discussion

The City has several large projects either under way or scheduled that are utilizing a portion of its annual TransNet LSI allocations. Delivering these larger projects, which includes the Project, typically results in cost savings through economy of scale, attraction of more bidders, and increased competition. While the current estimated rate of interest on commercial paper is 2.5 percent, the 2018 forecasted Caltrans Construction Cost Index is 2.8 percent. As a result, use of commercial paper would enable the City to leverage funds for construction using today’s dollars and realize a savings over the life of the Project.

The Project is located in multiple areas throughout the west La Mesa neighborhood and would enhance safety by completing more than 4.8 miles of bicycle and pedestrian enhancements, linking four schools and a city park. An educational campaign would further promote active transportation as a viable mode. Participation in the TransNet Debt Financing Program with a requested amount of $2 million is needed to meet grant and community commitments, and to ensure that this Project, along with the other City projects, are completed without interruption.

Commercial Paper Requirements

The TransNet Debt Financing Program includes certain eligibility requirements to advance-fund projects with either bond proceeds or commercial paper. The City has requested the use of commercial paper, which is a short-term note, and therefore full repayment is required within five years. To be eligible for these funds, the City must meet the following requirements:

Eligibility Requirement Results

Congestion Relief Project

Congestion relief enhancements include a new road extension and street improvements that include new curb and gutter, sidewalk, bicycle signing and striping, and traffic-calming measures and lighted crosswalks.

Useful life exceeds repayment term; at least ten years

The Project’s expected useful life is 50 years.


3

Eligibility Requirement Results

Debt service requirements met prior to allocating TransNet to other projects

A capacity analysis of the City’s estimated revenues over the five-year period was prepared (Attachment 1) and provides sufficient coverage of the estimated principal and interest payments on the requested commercial paper with enough to cover currently planned TransNet projects programmed in the Regional Transportation Improvement Program.

Project cannot include private use The Project would be entirely for public use.

City must fund expenditures and receive CP on reimbursement basis

City agrees to these terms.

Economic and/or community benefit Low cost; ability to keep state grant; safety enhancements for community

Capacity available in the TransNet Debt Financing Program

Of the $75 million commercial paper, there currently is $44.4 million available (uncommitted).

Commercial Paper Considerations

The Project is regionally significant and eligible for TransNet LSI Congestion Relief funding. It currently is funded with state Active Transportation Program grant and local funds, but requires approximately $2 million in matching funds, which includes a cost increase of $568,000. Due to the size of the Project and other TransNet project commitments, the City does not have sufficient TransNet LSI funds to provide the match needed to fully fund the Project. Without the required match, the City stands to lose its grant of approximately $1.9 million.

As explained in the City Council Staff Report (Attachment 2), there are enough annual TransNet LSI allocations to fund this Project, but only at the expense of other projects. The City carefully considered advance-funding the Project while continuing with its other scheduled priority projects and meeting economic and community benefits. Based on the capacity analysis prepared by SANDAG, the City’s expected cost of borrowing $2 million is approximately $117,000, and the City has sufficient TransNet LSI funding to cover currently programmed projects and debt service repayment terms.

General advantages of using commercial paper include accelerating the delivery of TransNet-funded LSI projects, with historically significantly lower cost of capital than fixed-rate bonds, and the flexibility to refinance.

With approval of the City’s request, there would be $42.4 million in commercial paper remaining for other jurisdictions’ requests or for SANDAG’s use.

At its October 10, 2017, meeting, the La Mesa City Council reviewed and approved the use of advance funding through the SANDAG TransNet Debt Financing Program for the Project. At its November 8, 2017, meeting, the TransNet Independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee discussed the City’s request and no concerns were raised.

Attachments: 1. Draft Memorandum of Agreement between SANDAG and the City of La Mesa, including City of La Mesa Capacity Analysis

2. La Mesa City Council Staff Report and Resolution, October 10, 2017

C-70229 (Rev 09/05)

OHSUSA:767407459.1

MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN SAN DIEGO ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS, ACTING AS THE

SAN DIEGO COUNTY REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AND

THE CITY OF LA MESA REGARDING DEBT FINANCING THROUGH THE TRANSNET PROGRAM

SANDAG AGREEMENT NO. 5005246

This Memorandum of Agreement (“MOA”) is made and entered into effective as of this ____ day of ______, 201__, by and between the San Diego Association of Governments, acting as the San Diego County Regional Transportation Commission (“SANDAG”) and City of La Mesa (City).

RECITALS

The following recitals are a substantive part of this Agreement:

WHEREAS, SANDAG serves as the San Diego County Regional Transportation Commission, and in that role is responsible for the administration of programs under the TransNet Extension Ordinance (Proposition A, November 2004), which sets forth permitted uses for revenues from a ½ cent transactions and use tax in San Diego County (TransNet Extension Program); and

WHEREAS, in order to accelerate the implementation of TransNet tax funded projects, SANDAG has established a debt financing program to provide advanced funding for eligible projects under the TransNet Extension Ordinance; and

WHEREAS, SANDAG requires that an agency receiving proceeds from the TransNet debt financing program shall be responsible for its proportionate share of the issuance costs, as well as the ongoing interest and related administrative costs from the date the proceeds are issued until the principal amount of the loan is fully repaid; and

WHEREAS, the City wishes to borrow two million dollars ($2,000,000) through the TransNet debt financing program for its West La Mesa Improvements project, or other projects eligible under the terms of the debt financing and applicable SANDAG policies that have been approved in the Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) and hereinafter called “PROJECTS”; and

WHEREAS, the parties wish to memorialize their agreement in this MOA to carry out the purposes set forth above;

DRAFT

Attachment 1

4

C-70229 (Rev 09/05)

OHSUSA:767407459.1

AGREEMENT

NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises set forth herein, the parties agree as follows:

SANDAG AGREES:

1. To lend the City two million dollars ($2,000,000) through the TransNet debt financing for thePROJECTS subject to certain conditions set forth below and SANDAG Board Policies concerningTransNet Extension Program loans.

2. SANDAG will transfer the borrowed funds to the City within 30 days following a request forreimbursement of valid expenditures for the PROJECTS.

THE CITY AGREES:

1. The governing body of the City at its October 10, 2017, meeting approved the request to borrowtwo million dollars ($2,000,000) through the TransNet debt financing program for thePROJECTS.

2. The City agrees to use the funding provided under this MOA solely for the PROJECTS. ThePROJECTS consist of the acquisition or construction of public capital improvements that will beowned by the City or a state or local governmental agency. The City will not allow the fundingprovided by this MOA or the PROJECTS to be used (for example, by lease or contract) in thetrade or business of any non-governmental persons other than in their roles as members of thegeneral public (i.e., no private business use of the PROJECTS). The City expects to use thePROJECTS for the purposes described above for the entire useful life of the PROJECTS and willconsult with SANDAG prior to any change in use of the PROJECTS.

3. The City has not and will not finance any of the costs of the PROJECTS that will be reimbursedunder this MOA with proceeds of other debt issued by the City or any other entity. The Citywill submit a request for reimbursement of valid expenditures on a timely basis following theCity’s expenditures for the PROJECTS, and the City understands that federal income taxrestrictions generally limit the ability to use TransNet debt financing program to reimbursingcosts paid within the prior 18 months or with respect to an asset placed in service in the prior18 months.

4. The City agrees to submit a request for reimbursement with all applicable documentation nomore than one time per quarter and in increments of $100,000 and in $1,000 incrementsthereafter. Any reimbursement request that includes an excess over a $100,000 (or additionalincrements of $1,000) increment will be carried forward to the next reimbursement requestuntil such time that the next available increment is achieved.

5. The City will pay its proportionate share of the commercial paper issuance costs, and annualdebt service costs which include principal and interest payments, and annual administrativecosts from the date the debt is issued until the final principal and interest amounts of theapplicable commercial paper are fully repaid.

DRAFT

5

C-70229 (Rev 09/05)

OHSUSA:767407459.1

6. Repayment of the principal amount shall commence within three years of the receipt of theproceeds and shall be completed within five years. Repayment of the proceeds may beaccomplished by rolling the outstanding amount into a long-term bond issued during the five-year repayment period if the opportunity for the conversion exists and is agreed to by SANDAG.In such cases, the City would be responsible for their proportionate share of bond issuance costsand annual debt service costs. The repayment of debt, in all cases, is the first priority on the useof the City’s annual TransNet revenues. The accounts may be deducted and the terms ofrepayment are estimated in Attachment A hereto.

7. The repayment of debt, in all cases, shall be the first priority on the use of the City’s annualTransNet revenues. The City agrees not to subordinate SANDAG’s lien on the TransNet revenuesto any other claim upon these funds. The amounts to be deducted and the terms of repayment(if appropriate) are estimated and set forth in the Repayment Schedule, which is Attachment Ahereto.

8. The City agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and defend SANDAG, the San Diego CountyRegional Transportation Commission, and all officers and employees thereof against all causesof action or claims related to projects financed through funding provided under this MOA.

THE PARTIES MUTUALLY AGREE:

1. That all obligations of SANDAG under the terms of this MOA are subject to the appropriationof the required resources by SANDAG and the approval of the SANDAG Board of Directors.

2. Any notice required or permitted under this MOA may be personally served on the other party,by the party giving notice, or may be served by certified mail, return receipt requested, to thefollowing addresses:

For SANDAG: For City: 401 B Street, Suite 800 8130 Allison Avenue San Diego, CA 92101 La Mesa, CA 91941 Attn: Director of Finance Attn: Director of Finance

3. That unless it is amended by the parties in writing, this MOA shall terminate on__________________ or on such earlier or later date as the parties may agree to in writing.

4. The indemnification provisions of this MOA shall survive termination of the MOA.

5. This MOA shall be interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of California. If anyaction is brought to interpret or enforce any term of this MOA, the action shall be brought ina state or federal court situated in the County of San Diego, State of California.

6. All terms, conditions, and provisions hereof shall inure to and shall bind each of the partieshereto, and each of their respective heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns.

7. For purposes of this MOA, the relationship of the parties is that of independent entities andnot as agents of each other or as joint venturers or partners. The parties shall maintain sole andexclusive control over their personnel, agents, consultants, and operations.

DRAFT

6

C-70229 (Rev 09/05)

OHSUSA:767407459.1

8. No alteration or variation of the terms of this MOA shall be valid unless made in writing andsigned by the parties hereto, and no oral understanding or agreement not incorporated hereinshall be binding on any of the parties hereto.

9. Nothing in the provisions of this MOA is intended to create duties or obligations to or rights inthird parties to this MOA or affect the legal liability of the parties to this MOA to third parties.

10. This MOA may be executed in any number of identical counterparts, each of which shall bedeemed to be an original, and all of which together shall be deemed to be one and the sameinstrument when each party has signed one such counterpart.

11. This MOA may be executed and delivered by facsimile signature, and a facsimile signature shallbe treated as an original.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have executed this MOA effective on the day and year first above written.

SAN DIEGO ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS

CITY OF LA MESA

KIM KAWADA

Chief Deputy Executive Director MARK ARAPOSTATHIS

Mayor

APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Office of General Counsel Legal Counsel

DRAFT

7

City of La Mesa Capacity Analysis$2.0 Million Commercial Paper

FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23 Total

Beginning Balance (est) $1,019,494 966,494$ 774,484$ 492,033$ 238,434$ 1,621,684$ $1,019,494Estimated Allocations1 1,569,000 1,633,000 1,697,000 1,765,000 1,834,000 1,834,000 2 10,332,000 CP Proceeds 500,000 1,500,000 - - - - 2,000,000 CP Principal Repayment - (263,915) (434,021) (434,021) (434,021) (434,021) (2,000,000) CP Interest/Other Fees3 - (29,096) (38,429) (27,578) (16,728) (5,877) (117,708) CP Disbursement (500,000) (1,500,000) - - - - (2,000,000) RTIP programmed projects (1,622,000) (1,532,000) (1,507,000) (1,557,000) - - (6,218,000) Ending Balance $966,494 774,484$ 492,033$ 238,434$ 1,621,684$ 3,015,786$ 3,015,786$

Notes:

DRAFT

1. Estimated revenues based on proposed February 2017 projections for the next five years, updated on an annual basis. Assumes 100% of estimated revenuesare programmed for Congestion Relief projects.2. Estimated revenues are projected for five years; therefore FY 2023 uses the estimated amount for FY 2022.3. Interest repayments are calculated at 2.5% for the capacity analysis, but are paid based on actual costs. This includes interest costs and the City'sproportionate share of CP program fees.

8

Attachment 2

9

10

11

12

13

MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT

BETWEEN SAN DIEGO ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS, ACTING AS THE

SAN DIEGO COUNTY REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION

AND

THE CITY OF LA MESA

REGARDING DEBT FINANCING THROUGH THE TRANSNET PROGRAM

SANDAG AGREEMENT NO. 5005246

This Memorandum of Agreement ("MOA") is made and entered into effective as of this _ _ day of _ _ , 201_, by and between the San Diego Association of Governments, acting as the San Diego County Regional Transportation Commission ("SANDAG") and City of La Mesa (City).

RECITALS

The following recitals are a substantive part of this Agreement:

WHEREAS, SAN DAG serves as the San Diego County Regional Transportation Commission, and in that role is responsible for the administration of programs under the TransNet Extension Ordinance (Proposition A. November 2004), which sets forth permitted uses for revenues from a ½ cent transactions and use tax in San Diego County (TransNet Extension Program); and

WHEREAS, in order to accelerate the implementation of TransNet tax funded projects, SAN DAG has established a debt financing p�ogram to provide advanced funding for eligible projects under the TransNet Extension Ordinance; and

WHEREAS, SANDAG requires th_at an agency receiving proceeds from the TransNet debt financing program shall be responsible for its proportionate share of the issuance costs, as well as the ongoing interest and related administrative costs from the date the proceeds are issued until the principal amount of the loan is fully repaid; and

WHEREAS, the City wisheno borrow two million dollars ($2,000,000) through the TransNet debt financing program for its West La Mesa Improvements project, or other projects eligible under the terms of the debt financing and applicable SANDAG policies that have been approved in the Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) and hereinafter called "PROJECTS"; and

WHEREAS, the parties wish to memorialize their agreement in this MOA to carry out the purposes set forth above;

C-70229 (Rev 09/05)

OHSUSA:767407459.1

ATTACHMENT C

14

AGREEMENT

NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises set forth herein, the parties agree as follows:

SANDAG AGREES:

1. To lend the City two million dollars ($2,000,000) through the TransNet debt financing for thePROJECTS subject to certain conditions set forth below and SAN DAG Board Policies concerningTransNet Extension Program loans.

2. SANDAG will transfer the borrowed funds to the City within 30 days following a request forreimbursement of valid expenditures for the PROJECTS.

THE CITY AGREES:

1. The governing body of the City at its October 10, 2017, meeting approved the request to borrowtwo million dollars ($2,000,000) through the TransNet debt financing program for thePROJECTS.

2. The City agrees to use the funding provided under this MOA solely for the PROJECTS. ThePROJECTS consist of the acquisition or construction of public capital improvements that will beowned by the City or a state or local governmental agency. The City will not allow the fundingprovided by this MOA or the PROJECTS to be used (for example, by lease or contract) in thetrade or business of any non-governmental persons other than in their roles as members of thegeneral public (i.e., no private business use of the PROJECTS). The City expects to use thePROJECTS for the purposes described above for the entire useful life of the PROJECTS and willconsult with SAN DAG prior to any change in use of the PROJECTS.

3. The City has not and will not finance any of the costs of the PROJECTS that will be reimbursedunder this MOA with proceeds of other debt issued by the City or any other entity. The Citywill submit a request for reimbursement of valid expenditures on a timely basis following theCity's expenditures for the PROJECTS, and the City understands that federal income taxrestrictions generally limit the ability to use TransNet debt financing program to reimbursingcosts paid within the prior 18 months or with respect to an asset placed in service in the prior18 months.

4. The City agrees to submit a request for reimbursement with all applicable documentation nomore than one time per quarter and in increments of $100,000 and in $1,000 incrementsthereafter. Any reimbursement request that includes an excess over a $100,000 (or additionalincrements of $1,000) increment will be carried forward to the next reimbursement requestuntil such time that the next available increment is achieved.

5. The City will pay its proportionate share of the commercial paper issuance costs, and annualdebt service costs which include principal and interest payments, and annual administrativecosts from the date the debt is issued until the final principal and interest amounts of theapplicable commercial paper are fully repaid.

C-70229 (Rev 09/05)

OHSUSA:767407459.1

15

6. Repayment of the principal amount shall commence within three years of the receipt of the

proceeds and shall be completed within five years. Repayment of the proceeds may be

accomplished by rolling the outstanding amount into a long-term bond issued during the five

year repayment period if the opportunity for the conversion exists and is agreed to by SANDAG.

In such cases, the City would be responsible for their proportionate share of bond issuance costs

and annual debt service costs. The repayment of debt, in all cases, is the first priority on the use

of the City's annual TransNet revenues. The accounts may be deducted and the terms of

repayment are estimated in Attachment A hereto.

7. The repayment of debt, in all cases, shall be the first priority on the use of the City's annual

TransNet revenues. The City agrees not to subordinate SANDAG's lien on the TransNet revenues

to any other claim upon these funds. The amounts to be deducted and the terms of repayment

(if appropriate) are estimated and set forth in the Repayment Schedule, which is Attachment A

hereto.

8. The City agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and defend SANDAG, the San Diego County

Regional Transportation Commission, and all officers and employees thereof against all causes

of action or claims related to projects financed through funding provided under this MOA.

THE PARTIES MUTUALL V AGREE:

1. That all obligations of SAN DAG under the terms of this MOA are subject to the appropriation

of the required resources by SAN DAG and the approval of the SAN DAG Board of Directors.

2. Any notice required or permitted under this MOA may be personally served on the other party,

by the party giving notice, or may be served by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the

following addresses:

For SAN DAG:

401 B Street, Suite 800

San Diego, CA 92101

Attn: Director of Finance

For City:

8130 Allison Avenue

La Mesa, CA 91941

Attn: Director of Finance

3. That unless it is amended by the parties in writing, this MOA shall terminate on

________ or on such earlier or later date as the parties may agree to in writing.

4. The indemnification provisions of this MOA shall survive termination of the MOA.

5. This MOA shall be interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of California. If any

action is brought to interpret or enforce any term of this MOA, the action shall be brought in

a state or federal court situated in the County of San Diego, State of California.

6. All terms, conditions, and provisions hereof shall inure to and shall bind each of the parties

hereto, and each of their respective heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns.

7. For purposes of this MOA, the relationship of the parties is that of independent entities and

not as agents of each other or as joint venturers or partners. The parties shall maintain sole and

exclusive control over their personnel, agents, consultants, and operations.

C-70229 (Rev 09/05)

OHSUSA:767407459.1

16

8. No alteration or variation of the terms of this MOA shall be valid unless made in writing and

signed by the parties hereto, and no oral understanding or agreement not incorporated herein

shall be binding on any of the parties hereto.

9. Nothing in the provisions of this MOA is intended to create duties or obligations to or rights in

third parties to this MOA or affect the legal liability of the parties to this MOA to third parties.

10. This MOA may be executed in any number of identical counterparts, each of which shall be

deemed to be an original, and all of which together shall be deemed to be one and the same

instrument when each party has signed one such counterpart.

11. This MOA may be executed and delivered by facsimile signature, and a facsimile signature shall

be treated as an original.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have executed this MOA effective on the day and year first

above written.

SAN DIEGO ASSOCIATION OF

GOVERNMENTS

KIMKAWADA

Chief Deputy Executive Director

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Office of General Counsel

OHSUSA:767407459.1

CITY OF LA MESA

MARK ARAPOSTATHIS

Mayor

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

legal Counsel

C-70229 (Rev 09/05)

17

BOD Item 11 | December 15, 2017 1

Proposed NewBoard Policy No. 039

1

Advisory Committee and Audit Activities

Board of Directors Item 11 | December 15, 2017

Introduction

As discussed at the November 3, 2017, Board of Directors

meeting, Assembly Bill 805 (AB 805) (Gonzalez Fletcher)

goes into effect on January 1, 2018, and there are many

steps to carry out over the following months to implement

its provisions.

This report concerns the new provisions AB 805 adds to

Public Utilities Code Sections 132351.4 and 132354.1,

which require the creation of a new policy advisory

committee, known as the Audit Committee, and

independent performance auditor position.

2


Purpose of Policy

3

AB 805 Requirement Discretionary

Specify the functions of the Audit Committee and independent performance auditor

Governance and Role of the Audit Committee

4


The Audit Committee will consist of five voting members (two Board members and three public members)

Board chair appoints the PAC chair and vice‐chair, and selects alternates for two‐year terms


Authority of the Audit Committee

5


Recommend to the Board which firm to contract with to conduct the financial statement audit

Flexibility to direct the Audit Committee whether to hire an individual or a firm

Recommend the hiring of the independent performance auditor, who may only be removed for cause

Recommend compensation to the Board

Approve the annual audit plan Recommend annual budget to the Board

Oversee the work of the independent performance auditor and the implementation of necessary corrective action

Conduct annual performance evaluation against established performance measures

Defines cause for removal

Recommend internal control guidelines to be adopted by the Board.

Selection of Committee Members

6


Qualifications criteria for the Board members who are selected by the chair and approved by the Board

Qualifications criteria for public members

Defines application, screening, and appointment process for public members, including requirement that screening committee's recommendation is subject to approval by the majority of the Board


Selection of Independent Performance Auditor

7


Two‐year term

Education, experience and certification or license minimums

Independent Performance Auditors Authorities and Responsibilities

8


Prepare an annual audit plan Defines procedures to follow in the conduct of investigations into allegations of fraud, waste, or impropriety

Perform planned audits in accordance with Governmental Audit Standards

Defines process to invoke the "under oath" provision

Have the power to appoint, employ, or remove staff, as well as prescribe their duties, authorities, and qualifications

Requires the results of audits and investigations to be posted to the SANDAG website

Have unrestricted access to employees, information, and records for both audits and investigations into claims of fraud, waste, or impropriety

Subjects the independent performance auditor's authority to the annual audit plan and budget approved by the Board

Examine parties under oath Requires the use SANDAG's procurement, management, and hiring rules and policies

Audits and investigations be made available under the California Public Records Act


Next Steps

Upon Board approval of the proposed Board Policy No 039, it is likely that the creation of the Audit Committee could be completed by the Board in spring 2018. This could make it possible for the independent performance auditor to be hired by late summer/early fall 2018.

Upon convening the Audit Committee in the spring, the existing SANDAG Principal Management Internal Auditor could begin reporting on all matters, except administrative matters, to the Audit Committee. Such a move would allow the committee to oversee the existing internal audit effort on an expedited basis.

9

Recommendation:

The Executive Committee recommends that the Board of Directors approve the proposed new Board Policy No 039: SANDAG Audit Policy Advisory Committee and Audit Activities (Attachment 1).

The Board also is asked to direct that SANDAG’s existing Principal Management Internal Auditor report on audit matters to the Audit Committee once established.

10


Regional Growth Forecast Methodology San Diego Forward: The 2019 Regional Plan Board of Directors Item 12 | December 15, 2017

2019 Regional Plan

• 2019 Regional Plan development process

• SANDAG forecast products and uses• Department of Finance projections for San Diego County

• 2019 Regional Plan forecast process• Subregional forecast• Schedule and next steps

Overview

2


2019 Regional Plan

2019 Regional Plan Development Process

2050RegionalGrowthForecast

Vision, Goals, andPolicy

Objectives Select Preferred

Transportation Scenario

Select Preferred

Transportation Scenario

Draft/Final2019

RP/SCS, Air Quality

Conformity,and EIR

Draft/Final2019

RP/SCS, Air Quality

Conformity,and EIR

Network Development(All Modes)

EvaluateTechnologies

DefineUnconstrained Network

Revenue and Cost

Projections

Active Transportation

and Roadways

Apply Performance Measures

Draft/Final RHNA

Fall 2017 / Early 2018 Summer 2018 Spring / Fall 2019Spring 2018

Ongoing Public Involvement

Revenue Constrained Scenarios

3

Evaluate Revenue

Constrained Scenarios

2019 Regional Plan

• Long‐range economic and demographic forecast– Population– Jobs – Housing– Income

• Transportation forecast

• Sales tax revenue forecast

• Short‐term economic forecast

• Uses– Regional Plan and Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA)– Local planning and economic development – Research purposes – Plan of Finance

SANDAG Forecast Products

4


2019 Regional Plan

Department of Finance Projections for San Diego County with ±1.5% Range (±60,000 persons)

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

3,500,000

4,000,000

4,500,000

Total Population

DOF projection +1.5% ‐1.5%

DOF = 4 million

5

2019 Regional Plan

Regionwide Forecast

Historical data

Current demographics

Demographic trends

Current estimates

Jobs, housing, population

Local land use plans/policies

Zoning ordinances

Local review

Subregional Forecast

Population

Jobs

Housing units

2019 Regional Plan Forecast Process

Transportation model

Forecast inputs DOF (Forecast) UrbanSim ABM

6


2019 Regional Plan

Schedule and Next Steps

7

December 2017

Winter2017

January/February 2018

Spring 2018

• Present Regional Growth Forecast to the Board of Directors, Regional Planning, and Transportation Committees

• Continue data and model development for regionwide and subregional forecast

• Draft regionwide forecast

• Start RHNA consultation process with Housing and Community Development

• Draft subregional forecast

• Present regional and subregional forecast to Board of Directors to approve for planning purposes


Smart Growth Incentive Program (SGIP) and Active Transportation Grant Program (ATGP)

Cycle 4 Calls for Projects

SANDAG Board of Directors Item 13 | December 15, 2017

Overview

• Available funding amounts• $27 million for SGIP; $3.6 million for ATGP

• Traditionally review goals, objectives, criteria, and funding maximums

• Several changes proposed this cycle• Some required

• Some recommended

2


Competitive GrantsThree previous cycles

• More than 100 projects

• More than $50 million awarded and almost$35 million leveraged

• Applicants: Local jurisdictions

3

Smart Growth Incentive Program and Active Transportation Grant Program Projects

4

Total•More than 100 grants•More than $50 million

Total•More than 100 grants•More than $50 million


Success Stories on Story Map KeepSanDiegoMoving.com/grants

5

Maple Street Pedestrian Plaza, Escondido

6


Paseo Santa Fe, Phase II, Vista

7

Mission Avenue Improvement, Oceanside

8


Carlsbad Bike Projects

9

Del Mar Bike Parking Facilities

10


La Mesa Downtown Streetscape Improvement

11

Lemon Grove Trolley Plaza

12


Downtown San Diego Wayfinding Signage

13

Commercial Street Streetscape, San Diego

14


Third Avenue Streetscape, Chula Vista

15

National City Boulevard Projects

16


Highlights of Key Changes in Cycle 4

17

• Increased SGIP funding maximums• Capital: Increase from $2 million to $2.5 million

• Planning: Increase from $400,000 to $500,000

• New eligibility requirements: CAPs and complete streets policies required to receive SGIP and ATGP funds

• SANDAG must provide funding for preparation of CAPs and complete streets for jurisdictions that don’t have them • Up to $1 million from SGIP – any unused funds redirected back to SGIP

• 20 percent minimum match

• Up to $75,000 for complete streets policies

• Up to $75,000 for CAPs

• Up to $150,000 for CAPs that include a specified CEQA analysis

Highlights of Key Changes (continued)

18

• One‐year “phased funding approach” to meet eligibility requirements

• Would allow jurisdictions to complete their CAPs and complete streets policies within one year of funding recommendations

• Would provide opportunity for jurisdictions to submit applications for CAPs, complete streets, SGIP, and ATGP concurrently

• New evaluation criteria must give greater weight to GHG emission reductions

• 5 percent for GHG reductions

• Weighting reallocations

• Evaluation criteria included in Attachments 4a‐4e

• Draft application materials posted at sandag.org/cycle4grants


Anticipated ScheduleDecember 2017

• Release call for projects

January 2018

• Pre‐application workshop

March 2018• Applications due

Spring/Summer 2018• Evaluation panels• Project rankings and funding recommendations• Board approval

Fall/Winter 2018/2019• Contracts executed, work begins

19

Looking forward to great projects throughout the region!

Recommendation

• The Transportation and Regional Planning Committees recommend that the Board of Directors approve the Calls for Projects for the Cycle 4 TransNet Smart Growth Incentive Program and Active Transportation Grant Program.

20

CHULA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT

84 EAST J STREET• CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91910 • 619 425-9600

EACH CHILD IS AN INDIVIDUAL OF GREAT WORTH

December 13, 2017

Honorable Ron Roberts, Chairman, and Board of Directors San Diego Association of Governments 401 B St., Suite 800 San Diego, CA 92101

Dear Chairman Roberts and Board:

I am writing in support of community members who live in the neighborhoods near Hedenkamp Elementary School. A six-lane road is being constructed in front of the school, which historically has been a four-lane road. This news has created considerable consternation in the community, as well as with our Board of Education. If this construction continues, Hedenkamp Elementary will be the only school in the District that will front a six-lane road. This situation exists because the San Diego Association of Governments (SAN DAG) is constructing the last leg of the South Bay Rapid (SBR) route along East Palomar Street to Interstate 805 right through the Hedenkamp community.

While our school and District are creating and promoting safer routes for our children to walk or bike to school, this six-lane road challenges our initiatives to create healthier, walkable communities. Community members voiced that there was not proper notice to residents in the Hedenkamp community about the SBR project. In particular, the path was redirected to include the stretch in front of Hedenkamp without proper community input and feedback. Residents do not feel that SAN DAG and the City of Chula Vista (City) did their due diligence in notifying them of changes.

While an environmental impact report was prepared about the project, the safety considerations in the report have not been adequately addressed. There are practical considerations as well. For example, existing lanes on this stretch of East Palomar will be narrowed in order to allow the construction of the SBR lanes. As a result, the flow of traffic on the south side of East Palomar will be impeded when parents drop off or pick up their children; they will have nowhere else to queue for drop-off/pick-up other than the lane in front of the school. Traffic will be effectively reduced to one lane, which will create daily challenges for the school and residents.

BOARD OF EDUCATION

LESLIE RAY BUNKER • ARMANDO FARiAS • LAURIE K. HUMPHREY • EDUARDO REYES, Eo.D. • FRANCISCO TAMAYO

SUPERINTENDENT

FRANCISCO ESCOBEDO, Eo.D.

The Chula Vista Elementary School District's programs, activities, and practices shall be free from discrimination based on race, color, ancestry, national origin, ethnic group identification, age, religion, marital or parental status, physical or mental disability, sex, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity or expression, or genetic information; the perception of one or more of such characteristics, or association with a person or group with one or more of these actual or perceived characteristics. (CVESD Board Policy 0410.)

This Relates to Agenda Item No. 2, Board of Directors, December 15, 2017

Honorable Ron Roberts, Chairman, and Board of Directors Page 2 December 13, 2017

In addition, ample parking is needed for many of Hedenkamp's special events. We have been informed by City staff that our special event parking needs will be dealt with on a case-by-case basis. Hedenkamp Elementary has about 1,000 students. Whole families like to attend school events. Without the ability to park on the street for special events, school activities will be dramatically curtailed. This would be a direct consequence of the SBR project. I respectfully ask for the City to consider re-directing SANDAG's SBR project to another route that does not pass in front our elementary school.

My Board and I feel that unless the SBR project is re-routed, its completion will be a setback to the quality of life for students, families and residents in the Hedenkamp community.

Please feel free to communicate with me directly about any questions or concerns. We pride ourselves on being a SANDAG partner. We look forward to continue our positive relationship.

Sincerely,

�2�� Superintendent

From: Douglas Johnson [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2017 10:17 AM To: Lero, Tessa <[email protected]> Cc: Douglas Johnson <[email protected]> Subject: SANDAG South Bay Rapid Transit - Segment 1A Heritage West on E. Palomar to I805

Hello My name is Douglas(Doug) Johnson and I live at 1602 Santa Sierra Ct. Chula Vista, CA 91913 and I would like to submit the following Attachment to be included as part of the public record as well as the opportunity to speak Friday at the Board of Directors meeting. I have been working with numerous neighbors and community stakeholders in trying to get the current proposed project temporarily suspended, in order to effectuate an alternative project solution that works for all stakeholders involved, and that can be adopted and implemented by the Board of SANDAG. The alternative solution will increase public safety(school children and pedestrians primarily) and potentially reduce project costs while keeping the original project objectives in place.

I am in opposition of the proposed Segment 1A of the South Bay Rapid Transit project (SANDAG South Bay Rapid Transit - Segment 1A Heritage West on E. Palomar to I805) and I am asking the Board to adopt a motion Friday December 15, 2017 to suspend construction on the current project until an alternative solution can be adopted, that will re-route the existing proposed segment 1A back through the originally planned path whereby the mass transit system would meet its final destination at currently installed E. Palomar/I805 Park and Ride. I am seeking the Board’s support to re-route the segment currently proposed along E. Palomar to head North on Heritage Rd. after exiting East Palomar at the cross section of E. Palomar and Heritage Rd. From there the mass transit system would travel and enter on Telegraph Canyon Rd heading west, exiting at Medical Center Drive and then proceed South on Medical Center Drive. The route would then re-enter E. Palomar off Medical Center Drive, heading west until its final destination at I805 park and ride center.

This proposed solution will ensure the safety of 1,100 elementary students that attend Hedenkamp Elementary School and appease residents in the Otay Ranch Three master planned community and the adjacent Sunbow community while preserving the project end goals, such as a functioning and safe public mass transit system. The proposed re-route would potentially decrease project costs and possibly have an improvement in Travel route schedules as the speed limit on Telegraph Canyon is 50mph(higher than E. Palomar) and does not run next to an adjacent Elementary School or next to high volume pedestrian flow. This safer project solution will also improve the safety of the citizens of Chula Vista, residing in the Otay Ranch Three Community.

Sincerely,

Douglas M. Johnson

This Relates to Agenda Item No. 2 Board of Directors

December 15, 2017




Documents

Del Mar BOARD OF DIRECTORS AGENDAWelcome to SANDAG. Members of the public may speak to the Board of Directors on any item at the time the Board is considering the item. Please complete