[0:01] This meeting will be conducted as a Zoom webinar to allow for public

[0:06] participation and comments. The Contra Costa Transportation Authority does not

[0:12] condone hate speech in any form. We continually strive to make life better

[0:17] for all members of our community and create an atmosphere where everyone

[0:22] feels a sense of safety and belonging. We ask that anyone who wishes to speak

[0:28] does so with civility, respect, and kindness for others. Public speakers

[0:33] will have up to 3 minutes to speak. The chair will call upon public speakers

[0:38] at the appropriate time. Each public speaker is requested to state their name

[0:43] and organization, but providing such information is voluntary.

[0:48] Public speakers who wish to speak in person should submit a public speaker

[0:53] card to the clerk. Public speakers participating by Zoom who are wishing to

[0:58] speak should use the raise hand feature or dial star nine if participating via

[1:04] phone. Written public comments received in

[1:07] accordance with the teleconferencing special notice on the meeting agenda

[1:12] will be provided to the members. If authors of any written correspondence

[1:17] would like to speak during the meeting, they should raise their hand or submit a

[1:21] public speaker card. Thank you for participating in a meeting of the Contra

[1:26] Costa Transportation Authority.

[1:31] Thank you. Emily, will you please conduct the roll call?

[1:34] Commissioner Arnerich? Here. Commissioner Alt Here. Commissioner Gee?

[1:39] Here. Vice Chair Kelly? Here. Chair Noack? Here. All right, we do have a

[1:43] quorum. Great. First item on the agenda is public comments.

[1:48] Are there any members of the public that wish to speak?

[1:51] We have no public comments written or virtual. Okay, thank you.

[1:57] Uh that concludes our public comment. The next item on the agenda of chair and

[2:01] vice chair for 2026. Do I have any nominations for chair and

[2:05] vice chair? Darlene? Yes, I would like to nominate

[2:09] Chris Kelly as chair and Newell Arnerich as vice chair.

[2:13] I'll second that. Sorry.

[2:19] I guess I wasn't supposed to do that, huh? All right.

[2:24] Are there any comments or additional nominations from the committee?

[2:29] Okay. Have we written received any written or

[2:33] any member of the public wishing to speak? No written or virtual public

[2:36] comments. Okay. We have a motion and a second. Can we

[2:40] please conduct the roll call vote? Commissioner Arnerich? Aye. Commissioner

[2:43] Alt Bernal? Yes. Commissioner Gee? Aye. Vice Chair Kelly? Yes. Chair Noack? Yes.

[2:49] All right, motion passes unanimously.

[2:54] I think you're up. I guess I guess so. We change in the middle of the meeting.

[2:59] Okay. Uh so, the next item is the consent calendar. Does anyone wish to

[3:04] pull an item?

[3:07] No. Um Emily, do we have anyone who wishes to speak on the any of these

[3:12] consent items? We have no public comments written or

[3:15] virtual. Okay, so bringing it back to the commission here. Uh do I hear a

[3:19] motion? So moved. Okay, motion by Noack. Is

[3:23] there a second? >> I'll second it. Seconded by Gee. No

[3:26] further discussion. Roll call vote, please. Commissioner Alt Bernal?

[3:31] Yes. Commissioner Gee? Yes. Commissioner Noack?

[3:35] Yes. Vice Chair Arnerich? Yes. Chair Kelly? Yes.

[3:40] » Thank you. So, now we're on to our regular agenda items, and the first one

[3:43] is the legislative update to be introduced by Lindy Johnson.

[3:49] Good morning, Chair Kelly and commissioners. It is my pleasure to

[3:52] introduce Mr. Mark Watts, who will start us off with a state legislative update.

[3:57] We'll then turn to the federal update. Thank you, Mark.

[4:00] Hey, thank you. Good morning, and I apologize for the somewhat informal

[4:05] appearance here, but uh I'm in a different time zone, and it's

[4:09] all great. Uh

[4:11] so, the budget has been kind of a confounding item for the last

[4:17] couple weeks since it was introduced. I think the early action item that took

[4:21] care of the um

[4:24] the loan legislation has been cleared and behind us. And overall, the the the

[4:30] budget for transportation was left alone.

[4:33] Uh the governor remained committed to the

[4:36] promises that have been made generally over the last couple years with the one

[4:41] exception for zero emission um electric um

[4:46] vehicle funding. And there's a lot of work going on behind the scenes to

[4:51] address that. Um I don't have a lot more to provide this morning on a big picture

[4:57] um Technically, I think there's a couple

[5:00] bills I wanted to brought bring your attention to. The first, I just want to

[5:04] congratulate staff and and others on the work that they did to get the bill

[5:08] launched that does what deals with your local tax authority. Um

[5:14] Uh 1408 by Mr. Arkin is in motion and has been introduced, and that's all I'll

[5:21] say for now. Um

[5:23] but it it took a lot of work to get to this point, so just congratulations.

[5:27] The other measure I want to highlight is very confusing, and a lot of folks are

[5:32] are zeroing in on it. And it's by new Senator Cabaldon, SB

[5:38] 1087, and it deals with the um um planning grants that were part of

[5:45] SB1, and it would condition the availability of the planning grants to

[5:52] be to be made to to local entities on some

[5:56] housing items, and it's not clear exactly how that will work going

[6:01] forward. So, it's been marked as one of the ones one of the bills that have come

[6:06] along in the last couple years that try to tie um

[6:10] changes in housing policy to SB1, and I think the transportation industry has

[6:17] been very very effective on pushing back on that.

[6:20] Uh in terms of the I have nothing to report in terms of

[6:24] legislative appointments or changes in leadership at this point. Uh we're

[6:29] watching that very carefully. I will remind

[6:33] you that the late date of late February was February

[6:38] 20th, I think, the date to introduce bills, and as a

[6:41] consequence, when the the bills that were introduced that late in the session

[6:46] have 30 days, so late March will be the earliest some of these bills will be

[6:51] assigned to committees and set for hearing. So, we've got a very very um

[6:58] uh tenuous next week uh month or two as we

[7:02] see the bills come through the process and get ready to be set for hearing.

[7:07] So, that would be my presentation for this morning, and thank thank you.

[7:12] Thank you, Mark. Um are there any questions here or comments?

[7:19] Yes, Sue. Sorry.

[7:22] Um On 1087,

[7:25] I'll be meeting with Senator Cabaldon on March

[7:30] 19th. Um he invited me to attend with a couple

[7:33] other elected officials to talk about 1087, so

[7:37] hopefully I can bring back some clarity on that one.

[7:41] Um And do we have an outline on the bill

[7:45] that I have not prepared one for staff yet. I

[7:50] know our bill for the bill that Sorry.

[7:55] Are you referring to the fact sheet? Yeah. Yes, so we do have one in process.

[7:59] We're working with the senator's office to, you know, dot some eyes and cross

[8:03] some Ts, but we should have one hopefully by the end of the week. Okay.

[8:08] Okay, any other questions or comments? Yes, Stu. Yeah, I would just add to what

[8:14] Sue said. I think for the bill that um Jose Aguilar is carrying, I think it's

[8:20] good that we all make sure that we reach out as board members and thank him for

[8:23] his efforts. And it's a big lift, but he seems to be

[8:27] very pleased in doing so. Um the the other bill I would ask that maybe we

[8:32] weigh in. It's um it's about bicycles, but it's e-bikes.

[8:37] And, you know, we we help promote complete streets. RBK has her bill

[8:44] AB 1492.

[8:47] It's about licensing. And I was remember I was telling her a story that I

[8:50] remember back in the late 1950s, I grew up out in the Central

[8:54] Valley. I had to have a license, a metal license that the police department had

[8:57] to crimp on. And if you didn't have it and you rode

[9:01] it to school, a police officer occasionally show up,

[9:05] and they'd take all the bikes without the

[9:07] um licenses and kind of corral them up, and you couldn't you couldn't get out of

[9:12] school and ride home cuz your bike was locked up.

[9:14] So, she's proposed this for the class two, class three bikes. And our police

[9:19] departments throughout California are are starting

[9:22] to get together that they would also do the license plates in colors, different

[9:28] colors, one for a class two, one for a class three. And the reason why there's

[9:31] no way right now to do any kind of enforcement. You don't know if it's

[9:35] electric motorcycle or that. They have to spend all those times, so

[9:39] maybe there might be a way we could weigh in to help support her. She's from

[9:43] our jurisdiction, and I think it would be good that we could and and

[9:47] thoughtfully add any comments to that, too. Thank you.

[9:50] Yeah, that's that's a great suggestion about the different color light plate

[9:54] license plates because people and school officials and police, they have no idea

[9:58] which class it is sometimes. And e-bikes are in some instances causing some real

[10:03] issues. Okay, any other questions or comments

[10:06] for Mark? Chair Kelly, just Yes. one little comment. So, at planning

[10:11] committee today, we're actually going to be considering an item to put out an RFP

[10:15] for a county-wide micro-mobility model ordinance and and basically like a

[10:20] toolkit for cities to deal with these e-bike issues and and micro-mobility

[10:24] issues. So, um we're trying to just develop some

[10:27] best practices cuz we know this is a big issue for all the local jurisdictions.

[10:31] That's great. Great. Thank you.

[10:34] Okay, I think we'll >> Mr.

[10:36] Yes. >> May I just interrupt? I

[10:38] I'm remiss. I did not mention something that's been very important to me and I

[10:42] think it's going to be very beneficial for the authority and that is the fact

[10:47] that on January 1st, I merged with a firm with a led by Senator Bill Dodd.

[10:53] Yes, we noticed. You may Okay, that's We pay it.

[10:57] » wanted to acknowledge that and it's it's very helpful for me in doing the work

[11:00] for you guys, as well as his reach is really really good for the

[11:06] transportation arena. So, I'm very happy to move forward working together with

[11:10] him on your behalf. Great. Great. And thank you very much,

[11:14] Mark. Thank you.

[11:16] » Okay. All right. So, Mark, thank you for your

[11:19] comments and Lindy. Thank you, Mr. Watts. I will now

[11:23] introduce Mr. Jason Tai to provide us a federal update.

[11:27] Mr. Tai?

[11:32] Morning. How's everyone doing?

[11:34] Uh looks like a beautiful sunny day once again in California, so I'm very very

[11:39] jealous. We've had a full week of cloudiness and rain. So, as always, I'm

[11:44] just kind of moping around here now. Um but we have been um

[11:48] continuing to monitor and aggressively pursue a number of different

[11:53] initiatives. Um but first off, uh wanted to say thank

[11:58] you for the opportunity to speak here at once again. Uh chair, vice chair,

[12:02] members, um wanted to give a quick snapshot in terms of what is going on

[12:08] this session um outside of what we are reading in the news.

[12:13] Um I think one of the first things that we should probably uh provide a little

[12:17] perspective on is the uh more rapidly decreasing um kind of thin margins in

[12:25] the House of Representatives between the Rs and the Ds. Um this does mean that uh

[12:31] this year the razor-thin majority will result in a lot of challenges in passing

[12:37] legislative initiatives in the House. Um so, with that in mind, I think there

[12:42] are probably some expectations that there are will only be a few large items

[12:48] of note that are will be on the priority. One of them will be the FY

[12:53] 2027 appropriations package. As you may have

[12:58] seen uh and read and heard from us and from our monthly reports, just within

[13:04] the last uh month or two, uh Congress finally passed the FY 2026

[13:10] appropriations bills, uh which includes a number of um allocations, CDPs, CDSs,

[13:17] or as I still continue to call them cuz I'm older, uh earmarks,

[13:21] uh within uh all of these various appropriation bills. Um I have to give a

[13:25] uh spectacular uh shout-out to our amazing congressional delegation.

[13:31] Um Congressman DeSaulnier simply being a fantastic advocate across the board.

[13:36] Uh Congressman Garamendi, and I know with Prop 50, there will be some shifts

[13:40] in in the map. Uh we recently had a meeting, I think, with Congressman Josh

[13:44] Harder, who winds up picking up um some parts of Contra Costa on the

[13:49] northeastern side, I believe, along the Delta, northern side. Uh he is a member

[13:53] of the Appropriations Committee. So, I think he's well positioned to um provide

[13:58] a lot of support uh for CCTA. So, building back into this FY 2027

[14:04] appropriations process has begun in earnest.

[14:07] Uh that will be an initiative that hopefully uh will result in a full year

[14:12] spending package sometime by the end of this year, uh probably during lame-duck

[14:17] Congress following in November elections.

[14:20] Um just met with a senior Democratic member on the House Transportation

[14:25] Appropriations Subcommittee. Very very inspired that they were able

[14:30] to work in a bipartisan fashion, the Appropriations Committee, to finalize a

[14:35] final budget for FY 2026. So, there's an expectation and a hope and a desire that

[14:41] that will continue to happen through the course of this year. Currently, the

[14:45] portals have opened for programmatic and various other funding requests. So, that

[14:50] is moving on a very very quick clip in the House. Uh the Senate has also, I

[14:55] think, as of tomorrow will close their portals, at least for the two California

[14:59] senators. So, all of these things that are moving in a much more aggressive

[15:03] clip than in previous years. So, I'll take a pause there for the

[15:07] appropriations process um and answer any questions that may be

[15:12] out there. Um Okay, any questions here?

[15:17] No. I'm sorry, I thought Sue was Sue. Um I

[15:21] just left. And Jason, maybe this might not be for you, but to Tim one of the

[15:25] other. Um do we have an update on the mega grant process? I could see you were

[15:29] jumping. Yeah, I mean, really positive news. I

[15:33] mean, I I give all the credit to Stephanie. I mean, she's been really

[15:36] staying on top of this and making sure we are being very responsible along the

[15:40] way. Um but we got a really positive email last

[15:44] week that basically says they're loading the agreement into their system for

[15:47] execution. Yes. So, we're we're getting closer. We're getting closer. Thank you

[15:52] all. Great. Any other questions or comments

[15:55] about appropriations? No? Okay, Jason, do you have more?

[16:01] Um just a quick snapshot on another large legislative package. Um there is a

[16:07] desire to pass this by the end of this year, and that is the surface

[16:12] transportation reauthorization bill, which as you may remember passed in the

[16:16] earlier part of this decade, which I'm a little concerned that this decade's

[16:20] moving so quickly for me. Uh but IIJA, which was $1.2 trillion,

[16:25] uh which included a large number of discretionary programs, all the formula

[16:30] programs that are pushed out the states and um large urbanized areas through

[16:34] federal highways, as well as the FTA formula funds, and all of the large

[16:38] discretionary programs such as BUILD, uh what was previously called TIGER, MEGA,

[16:44] all of the large discretionary grants that uh CCTA under the leadership of the

[16:49] board and uh Tim and the rest of the great team and Lindy have been so

[16:53] successful in winning, including the last $166 million tranche.

[16:58] Um with this Republican-controlled

[17:00] Congress, um there is an expectation now, and they've been telegraphing it as

[17:05] much, that the top lines for funding might be lower than it was before under

[17:12] IIJA. Um the House has not yet moved in terms

[17:17] of the Transportation Committee, in terms of the formula programs, in terms

[17:21] of the discretionary grant programs. They have started preliminary

[17:25] negotiations between the Republicans and the Democrats in the House T&I

[17:29] Committee, of which Mr. DeSaulnier is a senior member of, uh as well as Mr.

[17:35] Garamendi. Um the Senate may actually be moving somewhat

[17:41] Um it is and I won't bore too much on the detail, but their jurisdiction is

[17:45] split amongst multiple different committees in terms of who handles

[17:49] transit, who handles rail, who handles highways. There's a uh some intelligence

[17:55] coming out, including from the leadership, Republican leadership at the

[17:59] Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, by the majority chair, that

[18:03] the numbers will be lower, and what that means and I think the impact to CCTA and

[18:09] many other uh local units of government is that they will

[18:13] probably plan to push out most of their funding through the formula programs,

[18:18] which means states will probably get the majority of the funding. Um and

[18:23] discretionary grants, especially the large discretionary grants that local

[18:27] units of government and others have so successfully pursued, there's an

[18:32] expectation that that the the discretionary grants will be either cut,

[18:36] reduced, or folded into the formula programs. So, that is something to keep

[18:41] an eye out for. Um and certainly under this current administration, this

[18:46] current makeup of Congress, things that are considered green, or perhaps um

[18:52] perceived as left-of-center, um will probably take a lower priority and or

[18:58] result in some level of cuts. So, um that is more of a makeup of the the the

[19:04] composition of Congress and this administration, and something we will

[19:07] continue to work uh to push our priorities, but we do want to level set

[19:12] that there is a certain level of uh the composition will drive a lot of the

[19:16] policies. So, we'll take a pause here. Um the only

[19:19] thing I would add is that the current bill expires at the end of this federal

[19:24] fiscal year, which also means that they're all trying to get a bill done

[19:29] before September 30th. The expectation that um a bill will be done by before

[19:35] then is probably very very unlikely. There's never been a surface

[19:39] transportation reauthorization package passed on time,

[19:43] probably since 1982. So, but hey, we could be proven wrong.

[19:49] So, we'll happy to answer any questions. Thank you. Any questions here from the

[19:53] commission? Committee.

[19:57] No. Any comments? No. Emily, do we have any public comment on

[20:02] this or on state? No public comments written or virtual.

[20:07] Okay. Well, Jason, thank you very much for your report and thanks for watching

[20:12] out for us. >> Great to see you and great to see the

[20:15] sunshine outside.

[20:18] Wonderful. And I want to thank both Mark Watts and Jason Tai for for their

[20:22] reports. Okay, so moving on the next agenda item will be the countywide smart

[20:30] signal project update here and Andy Dillard is going to present this.

[20:40] Good morning, Chair Kelly and Commissioners.

[20:43] So, the item before you is seeking approval of resolution 2609P

[20:49] to authorize approval of construction advertisement for the countywide smart

[20:54] signals project. So, with final PS&E largely complete for

[20:59] this project, staff is preparing to submit a request for authorization to

[21:03] Caltrans to proceed to construction pending issuance of the authorized

[21:09] authorization to proceed. Staff is prepared to release the project for

[21:14] construction advertisement anticipated for late March or early April.

[21:19] So, in summary, as you all know, the the countywide smart signals project

[21:23] involves all 19 cities in the county. It's a $30.8 million project

[21:28] funded with 26.5 million in one barrier grant cycle three funds as well as

[21:34] approximately 3.6 million in local match measure J funds as well as SB1 formulaic

[21:40] local partnership program funds. So, the project will upgrade now 365

[21:47] traffic signals across the again all 19 cities in the county. It's going to

[21:51] enhance the sharing of real-time traffic signal operations information between

[21:56] the agencies and it's going to also provide a unified

[22:00] technology communication systems in the form of a countywide center-to-center

[22:06] advanced traffic management system that'll be hosted here at CCTA.

[22:10] And this is going to enable the Contra Costa region to advance preparation to

[22:15] integrate emerging technologies and smart city initiatives going

[22:20] forward. So, just to review some of the elements

[22:23] of the project, very similar to some of the earmark projects you've heard

[22:26] recently. Of course, this is a little more intensive project, but this also

[22:30] includes implementation implementation of local advanced traffic management

[22:35] systems as well as the aforementioned countywide center-to-center system.

[22:40] It includes advanced traffic signal controllers at the cabinets, video radar

[22:46] detection systems, battery backup systems, communications infrastructure

[22:51] and cloud-based transit signal priority system.

[22:57] As with the signal earmark, CCTA will be taking the lead in procurement of all

[23:01] the equipment and providing that as agency furnished materials to the

[23:05] contractor. Contractor will be tasked with the installation and the system

[23:10] integration of of all the equipment. Just to go back a little bit of

[23:14] background. So, beginning in 2022, this project started with coordination of all

[23:19] the the agencies in Contra Costa County. We developed stakeholder working groups

[23:24] developed a concept of operations procured consultant teams. There's two

[23:29] consultant teams working on this project split between the East and Central

[23:35] region and the West and South region of the county.

[23:38] We've been researching and evaluating all the various technologies out there,

[23:43] hardware and software solutions and all those associated costs and then finally

[23:47] reviewing and developing this all the stages of the PS&E.

[23:53] In addition, over the last month and over the next few weeks, authority staff

[23:58] along with the consultant teams and the equipment vendors have been

[24:02] visiting the individual agencies one for one-on-one meetings to go over their

[24:07] systems, make sure they understand them, meet with their IT folks to understand

[24:12] the the system requirements answer any questions they may have and

[24:16] we intend to do this uh leading up to construction, of course,

[24:20] all throughout construction as needed and as requested by the cities.

[24:26] So, the schedule. So, we're anticipating, as I mentioned at the

[24:29] beginning, to go advertise for construction in April with

[24:34] anticipated award in May. We can begin contract execution and then

[24:39] equipment procurement in June. Equipment procurement can take anywhere from 1 to

[24:44] 3 months depending on the equipment. So, for example, traffic signal

[24:49] controllers and video detection systems, those are probably a little bit more

[24:53] readily available, whereas items like traffic signal cabinets, fortunately

[24:58] there aren't many, but those have longer lead times anywhere up to 4 to 5 months.

[25:03] So, start of construction is anticipated for July and we anticipate it's going to

[25:08] take about 11 months to complete the project.

[25:12] We've had a lot of questions about phasing, how's it going to work? A lot

[25:15] of it's going to be prescribed by the contractor, but we anticipate that it's

[25:20] going to be a city by city for efficiency.

[25:24] Although some of that's going to be prescribed too by the available of the

[25:29] availability of the equipment as it comes in.

[25:32] So, with that, staff is seeking approval of resolution 2609P. It will authorize

[25:39] the executive director or designee to approve the project plans, design and

[25:43] coordinate in accordance with government code section 830.6 to preserve design

[25:48] immunity. Two, it to publicly advertise the

[25:51] construction contract at the executive director designee's discretion. Three,

[25:56] to approve changes and issue addenda to the bidding documents during the

[26:00] advertisement period and finally to publicly open all bids received.

[26:06] So, with that, I'd be happy to answer any questions.

[26:10] Thank you. Any questions here or comments? Yes, Darlene.

[26:15] Thank you, Andy. This is stating the obvious, I hope, but

[26:20] can you share a little bit I assume all of this is completely compatible and

[26:24] integrated with what we're doing in Danville and Concord and Lamorinda. Can

[26:28] you talk about that a little bit in terms of how it's all

[26:32] interfacing with each other? Absolutely. So, the signal earmarks

[26:37] you've heard to this point, the Danville project, Lamorinda and the Concord

[26:41] projects, it's all the similar nature as far as

[26:45] the signal controllers, the video detection systems and the advanced

[26:49] traffic management system. So, those systems that are going in as part of

[26:53] those earmark projects, it's all the same

[26:57] type of equipment and vendors that's included in the countywide signal

[27:01] project. So, it's it's all compatible. Okay. Noelle. Just a comment. I just

[27:07] sort of on it's impressive

[27:10] how how quickly this project's moving forward. It seems incredibly well

[27:14] organized and it's actually really crucial not

[27:18] just for some of the things that we just heard

[27:21] and that's in the report, but also for um

[27:24] our our countywide evacuation plans. Particularly for a fire.

[27:29] You know, earthquakes, you're not moving people as much. It's pretty much getting

[27:32] people into support. But in case of catastrophic fires, we have to move

[27:37] people. This project is a key solution. We've seen Houston and other places

[27:42] around the country. So, impressive. We get this done even 11 months, that's

[27:47] that's pretty good. So, well done. Thanks, Andrew.

[27:50] Okay. Any other comments here? Yes. Chair Kelly, I just want to mention

[27:56] so, Daniel Elkins, our deputy executive director of planning, she's actually

[28:00] participating right now in a countywide Office of Emergency Services workshop.

[28:05] You know, to and and basically you know, flushing out those things that you just

[28:08] very much said. And then I think I just want to give credit to Andy here.

[28:13] Andy's really the one that kind of picked this ball up and ran with it when

[28:16] he got here and really made this project happen. So, I really appreciate Andy and

[28:20] all his effort. I mean, this guy's working 12 hours a day trying to get

[28:23] this thing out the door and all the work and all the hours. And so, just really

[28:27] appreciate everything you've been doing for these projects and all the work that

[28:30] you're doing, Andy. Thank you.

[28:33] And I have a comment. I think this is a

[28:36] really important project particularly for emergency services, but just also

[28:40] for you know, helping transit and move things. And I understand that the

[28:43] Richmond Parkway is not part of this. Is that correct?

[28:47] It's not included in this countywide signals? Not in this phase, no, it is

[28:51] not. So, the Richmond Parkway is kind of like an abandoned child. You know, it's

[28:55] like part of it is in Richmond, part of it is in the county. Nobody owns it. So,

[28:59] when staff initially went and asked about, you know, what are the important

[29:04] routes that we might, you know, apply the signals project, nobody brought that

[29:08] up. And at WICTAC, you know, had we known about that and have been we've

[29:13] been allowed to kind of comment on that, we would have added it on because right

[29:18] now the traffic in the after going northbound on the Richmond Parkway is

[29:22] just jam-packed. And if the signals were more reasonably timed, we could save

[29:27] like, you know, 13 to 14 minutes in traffic and it's getting worse and worse

[29:31] and worse. The Richmond Parkway is a route of regional significance.

[29:35] So, going forward, I think just just highlight sort of, you know, regional

[29:39] coordination and consultation. So, I just want to point that out. And

[29:43] hopefully at some point we can get smart signals project on that uh abandoned

[29:48] child. Thank you. Actually, I'd just add a

[29:51] comment. I was just there yesterday and I've been keeping track over the past 12

[29:55] months. So, I end up going through there particularly during rush hours. There's

[30:00] actually only one signal that's it's a mess.

[30:04] It takes I don't care if there's four cars or 300 cars.

[30:09] It takes three signal cycles to get through that intersection.

[30:14] » Which one is that? Do you recall? I I It's if you're coming if you're heading

[30:18] east, I guess you'd call it. >> Yeah. You came off of um

[30:22] 580. >> Yeah. Um it would be 1 2 3. It's about

[30:26] the fourth signal. I think I know what you're talking about.

[30:30] » always the same. Yeah. It's it's disconnected from everything else and I

[30:35] don't know who owns that what what jurisdiction, but there can be no cars

[30:41] Yeah. trying to get through from the other way and this timing device just

[30:44] stalls. And it it took us exactly I told my wife

[30:49] just wait, it'll be three complete cycles. It took us three times to get

[30:52] through there. Yeah, so that just just highlights one of those. Like I said,

[30:56] the Richmond Parkway is an abandoned child. At one point, you know, we tried

[30:59] to get Caltrans take it over and they just they wouldn't do it. So, hopefully

[31:03] in the future um something can be done there.

[31:07] Sure Kelly, just really quick. I mean, I was I met with um Shasha Curl from the

[31:11] city manager Richmond and and she also brought this to my attention, you know,

[31:15] and so we're I think we're we're we'll be looking at that in terms of like a

[31:19] tap and all these things. I think to your point, I think it's a really

[31:22] important critical link in our network and I think it's really important that

[31:25] we you know, prioritize it. The one thing though I I is and we'll take we'll

[31:30] This is good information. We'll take this back and and see how we can

[31:33] potentially look at how we address the signal sync synchronization on the

[31:36] corridor. I mean, one just me and Ryan were just talking one potential option

[31:40] would be to a congressional earmark um and just put in a congressional earmark

[31:43] just for rich just for Richmond Parkway. So,

[31:46] um so let's we'll take it back and see if we can make things happen. Okay, that

[31:50] that would be great. Okay, any other comments?

[31:55] Yes, Andy. >> Uh yeah, I'd just like to add to I I

[31:57] appreciate the kudos, but I also want to give a shout-out to our stakeholder

[32:00] working group. So, we just to add a little bit more to that, we had a core

[32:04] working group uh which was uh a select group of mostly traffic engineers uh

[32:10] throughout the cities as well as a larger stakeholder working group.

[32:13] And then the two consultant teams I I mentioned in the AMG staff. There's been

[32:17] a lot of folks involved in this project including our new executive deputy

[32:21] director projects. So, um it's been a really uh

[32:25] a huge team effort. So, and it's going to be to get this to the finish line.

[32:29] So, I just wanted to make sure that we acknowledge them too as well. So,

[32:33] Great. Great. Thank you. Thank you. Um Emily, are there any public comment

[32:37] on this item? No public comment written or virtual.

[32:41] Okay, so before us I believe we have a resolution. I would move the item um as

[32:47] presented here today. Thank you. >> Okay, so motion by Arnerich and is is

[32:50] there a second? >> I'll second. Uh seconded by Bernal.

[32:54] No more discussion. Okay, roll call vote, please. Commissioner Bernal.

[32:59] Yes. Commissioner Gee. Yes. Commissioner Noack.

[33:02] » Yes. Vice Chair Arnerich. >> Yes. Chair Kelly. Yes. The motion passes

[33:05] unanimously. Great. Thank you. And Andy, thank you for all your work on this.

[33:10] It's wonderful. Okay, so our next item is the approval

[33:14] of the fiscal year 25-26 mid-year budget uh for the authority and the congestion

[33:19] management agency and this will be presented by Ru- Yuli Chang.

[33:33] Thank you. Good morning, Chair and Commissioners. I'm Yuli Chang, finance

[33:37] manager for CCTA. I'm pleased to present the fiscal year

[33:41] 25-26 mid-year budget for both the authority the authority and um the CMA.

[33:47] This morning, I'll briefly walk through what has changed since the budget was

[33:51] last adopted in June, uh what has remained the same, and what

[33:55] those updates mean for uh the the rest of the fiscal year.

[34:01] Overall, the authority's financial position remains stable. Most of the

[34:06] adjustment you'll see today are uh

[35:10] us an opportunity to review how revenues and and expenditures are tracking at the

[35:15] midpoint of the fiscal year. And third, it uh aligns project and program budget

[35:22] uh with their current implementation timeline. Program allocations continue

[35:27] to follow the voter approved Measure J sales tax percentages and the program uh

[35:32] the uh capital commitments remains consistent with prior board approved uh

[35:38] funding resolutions. So, overall, this update simply helps ensure the project

[35:43] to reflect how projects are actually uh progressing this year.

[35:51] So, I'll start with the main take takeaway. We're proposing a 32.2 million

[35:56] reductions to the overall budget, bringing it from 203.2 million down to

[36:02] 171 million. I'd like to emphasize a point an

[36:06] important point here. This uh reduction reflects uh timing, not cuts. There are

[36:12] no program eliminations, no policy changes, no changes to the Measure J

[36:17] funding allocations. Most of the adjustments are related to

[36:21] construction schedule shift between fiscal year and reimbursement timing

[36:26] from partner agencies. So, while the total annual number uh

[36:31] decreases, the actual project commitments remain the same.

[36:39] This slide gives a high-level snapshot of the adjustments that make up that

[36:43] 32.2 net reductions. The staff report includes the full details, but overall,

[36:50] the changes are largely driven by project schedule shifts and

[36:54] reimbursement timing. Over the next few slides, I'll walk

[36:57] through the major revenue and expenditure categories behind those

[37:01] changes.

[37:07] Uh let me start with the revenues. Sales tax uh revenues steady at about 120

[37:13] million based on the uh the latest projections from our

[37:17] consultant HDL and our current collections, sales tax performance has

[37:22] been essentially flat year over year. So, we're not recommending any change to

[37:28] the forecast at this time. Investment income uh

[37:32] on the other hand is performing slightly better than expected. We're increasing

[37:38] the investment income by about 988,000, bringing to the revised total to 5.9

[37:45] million. This mainly reflects stronger investment

[37:48] earnings on reserve balances and debt service funds, which continue to support

[37:53] the authority's financial position.

[37:59] Sales tax uh This actually this chart gives us a visual view of sales tax

[38:04] performance. As you can see, revenues has been uh have been fairly steady. Um

[38:10] Last fiscal year, we closed at about 120 million, just a little over 20 120

[38:16] million. And we're projecting about the same level this year. So, there's uh at

[38:21] this point, there's no change at the adopted forecast.

[38:27] Next are the grant revenues tied to capital projects. We're increasing grant

[38:33] revenues to about 1.2 million, bringing the revised total to 30.5 millions.

[38:40] Many of these grants are uh they operate on a reimbursement timing. So, the uh

[38:47] timing of project activity can affect when uh those revenues show up in a

[38:52] given fiscal year. Example this year include adjustments related to

[38:57] right-of-way work for the I-80 uh SR 4 interchange project, uh schedule

[39:03] updates for the I-80 I-80 San Pablo Dam Road improvements, and final billings

[39:08] for the Iron Horse Trail overcrossing project. Again, these are schedule

[39:13] adjustments rather than funding changes.

[39:19] On the planning and CMS side, we continue to receive surface

[39:22] transportation program and PPM funds uh along with other reimbursements for

[39:28] projects such as the uh San Pablo multimodal

[39:32] um effort and street light data analysis.

[39:35] We're receiving uh 1.6 million in transportation fund uh

[39:41] for clean air and along with uh about 5.8 million in local contributions to

[39:47] support initiatives like safe street for all county wide smart signal and other

[39:52] partner supported projects. This funds help leverage local resources

[39:58] to support planning and mobility initiatives across the county.

[40:06] Turning to Sorry, I think I skipped one. All right.

[40:10] So, turning to project expenditures, we are decreasing the project

[40:16] expenditures by 11.3 million bringing the revised total to roughly about 20

[40:23] 32.2 million. The largest adjustments are related to

[40:27] construction schedule updates including the SR 239 schedule refinement,

[40:33] environmental phase timing for the I-80's SR4 interchange project, right of

[40:39] way timing for the I-80 projects, and several components of the innovate 680

[40:44] shifting into fiscal year 27. Several non-Measure J projects are also

[40:51] shifting into fiscal year 27 including county smart signals, the Antioch bike

[40:57] garden, Lamorinda signal improvements, and SS4A corridor planning work.

[41:03] Again, these changes mainly reflect timing between fiscal years.

[41:12] Program expenditures decreased slightly by about 1.8 million bringing the

[41:17] revised total to 76.6 million. Program

[41:22] This program includes the bus services, ferry service, TLC, pet by commute

[41:27] alternatives, and paratransit all funded according to the

[41:32] Measure J expenditure plan. The adjustments mainly reflect

[41:37] updated spending schedules and reimbursement timing.

[41:41] One item worth highlighting is return to source funding for local and subregional

[41:46] street maintenance which remains fully funded.

[41:50] That allocation continues at the about at 20.09%

[41:55] of sales tax revenues totaling about 24.1 million this year.

[42:04] Planning expenditures decreased by about 2.3 million bringing the revised total

[42:10] to 4.7 million. These changes simply aligns the planning

[42:15] budget with the contracts and work that are actively

[42:21] underway this year. Major efforts including CMA support and

[42:26] county wide transportation plan update, big data initiatives, San Pablo Avenue

[42:32] multimodal of effort and county wide emergency evacuation study.

[42:40] So, administrative expenses also decreased but it's really slightly to

[42:45] about 4 million. Salaries and benefits represent about 0.91% of sales tax

[42:52] revenue which remains comfortably below the 1% administrative

[42:58] cap on under Measure J. Professional services costs are also

[43:03] trending lower than originally projected.

[43:08] Debt service funds remains unchanged at 42.9 million

[43:14] including 28.5 million for principal and 14.5 million for uh

[43:19] interest. All obligations remain fully on schedule.

[43:27] In term of staffing, the authority currently has 27.5

[43:32] authorized positions with 27.4 full-time equivalents filled.

[43:39] Uh pension contribution rates remain stable at 11.94%

[43:44] for classic and 7.96% for PEPRA members or employees.

[43:49] Our other post-employment benefits obligations remain fully funded and

[43:54] overall we continue to

[43:58] maintain a strong long-term financial position.

[44:04] So, to summarize, sales tax revenues remain stable. Investment income is

[44:10] performing slightly above projections. Grant revenues reflect normal

[44:15] reimbursement timing. Most expenditure adjustments are tied to project schedule

[44:19] shifts between fiscal years. Administrative costs remain below the

[44:24] Measure J cap and debt service obligations remain fully on track.

[44:29] So, overall the proposed budget adjustments reduce the budget by

[44:34] 32.2 million from 203.2 million to 171 million primarily due to project timing.

[44:42] And importantly, no policy changes are included in this update.

[44:48] Staff recommends adoption resolution 25-12-A

[44:53] revision one to approve the fiscal year 25-26 Measure budget. And Chair, that

[45:00] concludes my presentation. I'll be happy to answer any questions. Great. Thank

[45:05] you. Any questions here? No? Uh Yuli, thank you for that. Brian?

[45:10] » Thank you. This is always fascinating. It is always complicated because

[45:15] we give away everything we do in the end and the timing is very complex.

[45:20] Um just as a small suggestion, we always

[45:23] list because we're cash basis. Um you know, how much is going to

[45:27] principal, how much is going to interest. I want to see the declining

[45:31] number just as And by the way, our outstanding total debt is X because that

[45:36] way the next time I see I'll go, "Wow, we dropped 40 million."

[45:40] It just be nice to know. We are on a a vent horizon out to 2034. It's just kind

[45:46] of nice to see that. And I think we ought to be

[45:50] you know, highlighting it because it's important in our process, renewals, and

[45:55] everything where we're at. So, just a small suggestion. Otherwise, this

[45:59] is fantastic news. Thank you. Thank you. And that would also just show that, you

[46:02] know, we're responsible in in paying for everything on the time schedule. That'd

[46:06] be great. Any other questions here or comments?

[46:09] » Ron, yes. Yeah, thank you, Yuli. On the sales tax

[46:14] revenue projections, it shows 63.99 million for the first 6 months and then

[46:19] 120 million for the whole year. Does that Does it drop down in the second

[46:24] half of the year as far as it's not 50/50, obviously, correct? Yes, thank

[46:29] you for your questions. When when it comes to budgeting

[46:34] revenues, we always try to be conservative. So, currently, as as you

[46:38] mentioned, we we already at the midpoint of the fiscal year and it shows a little

[46:43] above the half of the 120 which is 63 which is a little over.

[46:49] So, I think we're projecting we might be a little over, you know, like 1 or 2%

[46:54] this year than our projected and that'd be good

[46:58] because we try to build up our reserve at the

[47:01] same time for any, you know, financial issues or any anything that might come

[47:07] up later. All right. Thank you. Yes, Brian? Just

[47:11] really quick. When you think about sales tax, sales

[47:14] tax in the holiday season, in the second quarter of the fiscal year, it'll always

[47:20] be higher because of the extra expenses. Gas prices go up, consumer spending goes

[47:25] up, those type of things. And then so, that's always our biggest quarter of the

[47:29] year. So. Okay. And then also noticing that the the um

[47:34] the investment income is up about a million

[47:38] dollars which is good. Do we see that trend continuing as well

[47:42] or is it hard to is it hard to tell right now with

[47:45] all the uncertainty around the world? Our consultant investment consultant

[47:50] PTM, in the beginning, we heard that they're

[47:55] projecting there will be interest rate reductions. And that's why from the

[47:59] beginning we tried to like slow down the investment income. But

[48:06] as we we are now, we don't see that many decrease in term of the reduced

[48:11] reduction of interest and rate. So,

[48:16] we will just keep it this way for now and then as we continue meet with our

[48:21] consultant, we will update again, you know, whether it should be higher or

[48:25] will stay the same or yeah. Yeah, I mean, it's not it's not a lot but a

[48:30] million dollars is a million dollars. So, it's always nice to get a little

[48:32] more money. So, thank you. It's significant. Yes.

[48:36] Okay. Any other questions here? Um I have one small one and maybe this

[48:41] is too much in the weeds. On slide nine, your gross expenditures, under the

[48:45] subregional projects, what is the subregional Marner Martinez railroad, I

[48:50] guess, improvements? Um increased expenses of 532,000. What

[48:55] is that project? Ishaan?

[48:58] Yeah, that's that's actually uh the

[49:02] expansion of the parking lot as well as the pedestrian bridge that were

[49:06] completed many years ago. However, we just

[49:11] got the final bill. Uh Oh, wow. Uh

[49:16] Because of a legal there is litigation on the project. So, we just got the bill

[49:21] from the city. That's why it's showing up.

[49:24] Okay. All right. So, nothing more is going to be happening there. It seems to

[49:28] work now. Okay, thank you. Any others? Uh

[49:32] Emily, do we have any public comment on this item? No public comment written or

[49:36] virtual. Okay, so we do have a resolution before

[49:40] us for the mid-year budget. So moved. Okay, motion by Noack. Is

[49:45] there a second? I'll second it. Seconded by G. Any further discussion? No. Roll

[49:51] call vote, please. Commissioner Arbronn? Yes. Commissioner G? Yes. Commissioner

[49:55] Noack? >> Yes. Vice Chair Arnerich?

[49:58] » Yes. Chair Kelly? Yes. And motion passes unanimously. Thank you.

[50:02] Okay, so our last um item for today uh is the overview of consultant costs

[50:08] for fiscal year 24-25, and Ryan McLane is going to present this

[50:13] one.

[50:28] Thank you, Chair Kelly. Good morning, commissioners.

[50:36] All right, so uh this is following up on Julie's report on the mid-year budget.

[50:41] We thought this would be a good time to kind of take a deeper dive into some of

[50:45] our our consultant costs that we have every year.

[50:48] Uh this is jumping back to fiscal year 24-25 just cuz that was the last

[50:53] complete year, and with invoices coming in it's tough at different times it's

[50:57] tough to do sort of a mid-year snapshot. So, this is the full 1-year snapshot

[51:02] from 24-25. Uh and our intention here is that we

[51:07] would actually come back every year that we do the mid-year budget and go through

[51:10] these numbers cuz again, since this is a snapshot it's it's not this is going to

[51:15] evolve over time in terms of where these costs are going.

[51:22] So, CCTA uses staff for a variety or consultants for a variety of reasons. Uh

[51:28] this is for staff augmentation, uh it's to bring in expertise and

[51:32] outside perspectives that we may not have internally.

[51:36] Uh it's to accommodate the fluctuations in workload, and also reduce fiscal

[51:40] liability in terms of taking on additional staff internally that we are

[51:45] then having pensions and etc. for.

[51:52] And I hope you like pie charts. There's a lot of pie charts. That's not a pie

[51:56] chart. It will be.

[52:00] I just want Uh so, I thought I'd start with our

[52:03] revenue from 24-25. Uh this is uh

[52:07] 172 million in change spread across several different areas. Obviously, most

[52:12] of this is coming from our sales tax that has remained around 120 million as

[52:17] discussed earlier. Uh and then we've got income coming from local in the form

[52:23] mostly of of match for grants that we've gone after uh especially on the smart

[52:29] signal side. Um we've got some state grants in there,

[52:33] uh federal grants, and then investment income, that sort of thing.

[52:42] So then, where does the money go out of?

[52:51] I'm not sure why those other labels aren't showing up.

[52:55] Let me pull that up on here.

[53:02] Yeah, the labels aren't coming up. So, I'm going to describe the labels to you.

[53:06] Uh so, uh

[53:09] uh this is a pretty well split out pie chart and kind of spread evenly across

[53:14] several different areas. Uh the local street maintenance is on there as the

[53:20] orange. Uh other programs like bus services, paratransit is the green.

[53:26] Project expenditures, so that's direct expenditures onto various projects is

[53:32] the lighter blue uh 42 million. We had uh 26 million or excuse me, 44

[53:40] million in debt services, and about 26 million in other expenses, and that was

[53:45] things such as as uh administration and uh CMA, and

[53:53] the fur fund, go momentum station accounts, those types of things.

[54:00] So, I wanted to break out the chunk of this that is going towards consultants.

[54:04] And initially, I'm going to talk about consultants in kind of a broad term, and

[54:08] that's going to include construction contractors, that's going to include

[54:13] public agencies who were paying to support projects such as City of

[54:17] Richmond helping us deliver the I-80 Central project. So, that's included in

[54:21] this 41 million. Uh we pay the county to do a lot of our right-of-way work,

[54:25] that's included in this. Uh it's also including vendors, so Beep and May

[54:31] Mobility that are running our that we're running our ADS programs are also

[54:35] included in this 41 million.

[54:41] So, in terms of type of of consultants and costs that this is going to, the

[54:47] biggest chunk is going to the engineering and planning work, and

[54:49] that's to push both our plans and our and our projects forward uh with

[54:55] consultants. Uh

[54:57] you see that big chunk of public agency cost, that's what I was talking about in

[55:02] terms of having public agencies support us on projects.

[55:06] Uh vendors, um communications is basically all the

[55:10] different outreach efforts that we've done.

[55:13] Uh office expenses and for this year was primarily the remodel that we did. So, a

[55:19] lot of that shows up here, that's why that cost is a bit higher than usual. Um

[55:23] university, that's our partnership with UC Berkeley and their support on

[55:27] projects. Uh

[55:29] and then construction contractor is actually that's primarily the Bollinger

[55:34] Overcrossing is where that was going.

[55:41] So, this gets into the actual consultants that were on this. Uh one

[55:45] thing to note on this, this does include subconsultant costs within the prime

[55:50] consultant. So, uh Myers Schimek had a bunch of subcontractors that was that

[55:55] were working on the Bollinger Overcrossing. AMG has a lot of

[55:59] subconsultants that work under their contract, that's all grouped into this

[56:03] total cost that is shown for each consultant.

[56:07] This graph is the uh and I should say we had around 100 payees for that year. So,

[56:14] this is basically the top 10 or so for contracts that were over 900,000

[56:21] combined. So, this also doesn't break out individual agreements, this is the

[56:25] total agreements for each of those consultants.

[56:28] So, uh we have Myers Schimek that was working on the Bollinger Overcrossing.

[56:33] AMG uh does this is for our PMO work, but also direct project support, it's

[56:38] also including 511, uh and also a lot of pass-throughs to their to consultants or

[56:45] subconsultants that they have on board. Uh

[56:49] WSP is on Innovate 680. AECOM is supporting on San Pablo Dam Road

[56:56] interchange. WMH is on the 684 interchange. Uh Fair & Piers, this was

[57:02] primarily working on the countywide transportation plan.

[57:05] Uh Beep was for the ADS for the SAV

[57:10] grants. And Kimley-Horn working uh on the smart

[57:15] signals and I believe the safety action plans, and it goes on from there. So,

[57:21] these are kind of our biggest expenses that we had back in 2024-2025.

[57:29] So, I wanted to kind of break out just that engineering and planning piece so

[57:33] we can kind of get a little bit more down into the details of the consultants

[57:37] helping us deliver projects.

[57:41] So, that brings that total to 22 million

[57:46] where we're dividing that up into a pie on there is uh

[57:51] well, that orange cost is the is AMG. I'll figure out why these labels are not

[57:56] showing up on this on the presentation, but uh

[58:00] so, that's they're the the biggest piece of that,

[58:03] and then again, you'll see this has removed the

[58:07] contractor costs, so Schimek is no longer showing up on here, and also

[58:12] removes the vendors, and removes the uh the public agencies as well. So, that

[58:19] takes us down to 22 million total, and added a couple more uh consultants on

[58:25] there at the bottom to kind of show everything that's down to 300 contracts

[58:31] that are 350,000 or above. So, that's what this is showing.

[58:40] I also wanted to just show an example of a project that we're working on. This is

[58:45] both kind of wrapping up some of the construction of the earlier phases and

[58:49] moving towards the construction of the next phase, so a lot of expenditures

[58:53] going on on this one. And so, the largest chunk of this is WMH

[58:58] who's leading the design for this project. Uh the next cost is actually

[59:02] the sanitary district because due to them designing their relocations and

[59:07] actually started to do some of the relocations that are required for this

[59:09] project. Uh AMG is next, they're providing the PMO support on this

[59:15] project, but also this was around 100,000 that was spent to go after

[59:20] grants which resulted in 58 million dollars awarded to this project, so AMG

[59:25] led those efforts as well. And uh let's see, Parsons is working on

[59:30] the trail connector that's part of the mitigation for this project looking at

[59:35] the Iron Horse Trail to Canal Trail connector. So, that's what the cost is

[59:40] for Parsons. Um Fehr & Peers has been working on the

[59:43] traffic. And so, those are really how a typical

[59:47] project gearing up for construction. This is how we see this layout.

[59:52] I think we're going to see a a big change in all of this as we move into

[59:55] the next couple years as we enter into you know, we've got $600 million of

[59:59] construction coming up. So, it's going to change a lot of how this all lays

[1:00:03] out. But, this is the type of fluctuations

[1:00:07] from design or environmental into design into construction where those

[1:00:12] fluctuations it's really important to have these consultants come to help kind

[1:00:16] of smooth that workflow out.

[1:00:21] So, that's the end of the presentation. Happy to revisit any of that. Also, just

[1:00:25] want to thank Brian and Yuli for all their support on helping me put this

[1:00:28] together. Great. Great. Thank you. Any questions

[1:00:32] here? Yeah, Darlene. Thank you very much, Ryan.

[1:00:37] If you can, can you and Tim explain a little more about how you balance? I

[1:00:42] mean, I think we all understand if you have a a significant size discrete

[1:00:46] project that's going to design or construction or whatever you're doing a

[1:00:50] standalone RFP for that. But, um I'm curious how you're deciding to balance

[1:00:56] what AMG is doing versus some of those other consultants that have overlapping

[1:01:02] skills like Fehr & Peers and Kimley-Horn and things like that in terms of

[1:01:07] balancing the efficiency of what you're getting out of AMG's contract versus

[1:01:12] um some of those other consultants. I'm just curious how that thought process

[1:01:16] goes. Yeah, thanks for that question. Uh so, I

[1:01:21] do want to point out that around 1.2 million of that 5 million uh plus was

[1:01:27] going towards consultants with direct path through to subconsultants.

[1:01:32] And so, that is providing us

[1:01:35] somewhat of a mechanism to get broader uh

[1:01:38] resources from that contract. So, that does take that number down a bit. Um

[1:01:44] but, otherwise I think you know, this is a lot of direct project support and then

[1:01:48] a fair amount of 511 CCTA. So, these are these aren't necessarily giving

[1:01:57] additional it just takes a lot to run those

[1:02:00] projects and manage the consultants that are working on those projects. So,

[1:02:03] that's really the role that AMG is taking on with those. I wouldn't say

[1:02:07] that they're getting um a a lot of extra work that isn't kind of

[1:02:13] those core roles.

[1:02:17] No? Yeah, just maybe maybe just to quickly

[1:02:20] add. I think it just to build on what Ryan was saying. I think the the key for

[1:02:25] us is just using AMG as an extension of staff. I mean, they're basically helping

[1:02:29] us like review these consultant invoices, you know, processing and

[1:02:33] contracts and agreements, you know, working with stakeholders, you know,

[1:02:37] attending Caltrans PDT meetings. I mean, it's it's really an extension of staff

[1:02:43] that they're that they're serving, you know, for CCTA because

[1:02:47] as you can tell by the project portfolio, I mean, it's this is this is

[1:02:51] more work than like, you know, Stephanie and and all of us here, you know,

[1:02:56] Hisham, all of us here can can handle on our own in terms of all the meetings,

[1:03:00] the contracts, the agreements, the invoices, all these things and you know,

[1:03:04] and so we're a small team and so I think managing a large portfolio of projects

[1:03:08] and so we're trying to really balance like, you know, making sure that you

[1:03:13] know, what we have done in the past is that, you know, when we hire these

[1:03:16] consultants do the work, I mean, they're doing the core the core work, you know,

[1:03:20] based on scope, you know, they're doing the design, the right-of-way, the PAED,

[1:03:24] the planning, the I mean, they're really doing the deliverables, right? And I

[1:03:29] think that's probably the balance is really comparing it to like the actual

[1:03:33] deliverables versus like the administration. And so, I think what AMG

[1:03:37] is helping us with is that administration, you know, in terms of

[1:03:39] like I mentioned earlier like, you know, the the invoices, the contracts, the

[1:03:43] agreements, the you know, um the meetings and preparing for

[1:03:47] meetings and all those things. And then CCTA staff, depending on how big the

[1:03:50] project is cuz there are I mean, there's a lot of us here that actually manage

[1:03:53] projects on our own without AMG support, too. But, it depends on the nature of

[1:03:57] the project. And so, we we rely on them to kind of organize, you know, the

[1:04:02] project and kind of keep everyone on task, you know, particularly the

[1:04:05] consultant, you know, and so so that's how we use, you know, AMG in that and

[1:04:09] then I think Ryan also mentioned it. The other key component I think AMG serves

[1:04:13] is on the grant side of things. And so, so that's another big component of this

[1:04:18] is really focusing on like, you know, you know, the TCIF grant and all these

[1:04:23] other things. I mean, they do have a provide a core function to help us

[1:04:25] secure additional funding for all of these projects.

[1:04:30] Hopefully that's helpful. Yeah, I guess I would

[1:04:33] and so, um given that they have so many subconsultants, too, like um I'm just

[1:04:38] curious if you have like if you have a really small need like like let's say

[1:04:43] you need $30,000 worth of traffic engineering. Um is that going to one of

[1:04:48] AMG's subconsultants that or AMG, you're not you're not doing a standalone RFP

[1:04:53] for something that small, right? Yeah, that's correct. And that's exactly

[1:04:58] kind of the team that AMG pulled together for this contract is to

[1:05:02] basically serve a wide variety of needs that could come up for exactly that

[1:05:06] reason. I think the the grant application for uh 684 is a good example

[1:05:12] where we needed to do a benefit cost analysis that

[1:05:15] really the the consultant on board and and

[1:05:19] uh even AMG couldn't do on their own. So, we're able to have Fehr & Peers work

[1:05:23] on that. It Yeah, maybe just just to add really

[1:05:26] quick. I mean, in that 5 million there's a there's a lot there, right? There's

[1:05:29] there's the PMO, there's 511, there's support for innovate 680. They also have

[1:05:34] con they actually have project agreements contract project agreements

[1:05:37] to deliver the ADS, the automated driving system in the mod grant. So, the

[1:05:41] PMO of that 5 million is actually roughly about 3.6 million. It's it's

[1:05:45] it's not the entire 5 million. And then roughly about 3.6 of that million, I

[1:05:49] mean, a good portion of that is going to

[1:05:52] subconsultants. And and so, like for example, um on right-of-way like ARWS,

[1:05:57] that's a sub to AMG. They're supporting us on you know, um

[1:06:01] on the 684 project, you know, in terms of the dealing and and taking on that

[1:06:06] owner the owner responsibility CCTA's owner responsibility around the

[1:06:10] right-of-way. So, that's being handled under AMG's contract. So, so yeah, I

[1:06:13] mean, the the purpose of the contract is just to give us a wide variety of

[1:06:17] support to be able to deal with any issues that are arising as we're moving

[1:06:21] through any of the, you know, planning program and project delivery.

[1:06:25] Yeah. Thanks. Noel.

[1:06:28] Uh yeah, I just had a little bit on that. You know, that's one of the

[1:06:30] reasons why we do these on-call agreements so we can pick up these

[1:06:34] things as come. And and I have to admit the one thing that was most impressive,

[1:06:38] nobody's as good as AMG as getting grants. I mean, they've helped us on

[1:06:42] every major grant that we have. And um you know, it's something that

[1:06:46] most of us cities I wish we could afford. But, the fact is their track

[1:06:50] record uh speaks for itself. But, I just have to say I think this is actually one

[1:06:54] of the best presentations that we've seen on this.

[1:06:57] It's very simple. It's straightforward. And I think we ought to um

[1:07:02] institutionalize this. Make it an annual touch base. You know, it I mean, other

[1:07:06] than the questions cuz it's the first time we've really seen this.

[1:07:10] It's a 10-minute presentation. I think we all need to see this.

[1:07:13] And I think it kind of makes us as transparent as possible. I think this is

[1:07:17] really well done. So, thank you.

[1:07:21] Yeah, just really quick sorry, Chair Kelley. I think just on that point and

[1:07:25] Ryan and I have talked a lot about that. This is the first time we've ever done

[1:07:27] this. This is the first time we And then we

[1:07:30] did this in response, you know, to some of the comments that we've gotten from

[1:07:33] APC in the board. And so, um and I think this is really helpful. And I think our

[1:07:38] plan, um Commissioner Arnrich, is that it was we would do this presentation

[1:07:43] every year at the same time as the midyear budget. That's that's that's the

[1:07:48] goal. That's that's kind of what we're planning on doing, you know, and so

[1:07:51] every year we do the midyear budget and then we have this presentation to kind

[1:07:53] of share where kind of where the consultant costs are at. I think that's

[1:07:56] good timing, you know, relative to um this content in the presentation.

[1:08:02] Yeah, I I I would agree. It it it really is good because when we see all of these

[1:08:06] consultant agreements come one by one throughout the year as Sue has said,

[1:08:10] it's just very very confusing. So, um this is really great. And then on the

[1:08:16] large dollar amounts when you can break them down a bit into who's working on

[1:08:20] what exactly that is also helpful, too. Thank you.

[1:08:25] Okay. Uh yes, Ryan. >> Yeah, thank you, Ryan. It's excellent. I

[1:08:29] agree with everybody that, you know, this is something we want to continue

[1:08:32] with. Um and I like the way it drills down, you know, it starts big and then

[1:08:36] it gets smaller, see examples. The only question I would have is, you know, this

[1:08:40] is from this is the last fiscal year, right? And we're already 7 8 months into

[1:08:45] the new fiscal year. Is there is there a way to show the first 6 months of the

[1:08:50] new year somehow without complicating this? Because, you know, it's really

[1:08:54] we're really always looking forward, right? And so, we're just a a few months

[1:08:58] behind on what's really happening for this year.

[1:09:00] Yeah, we did look at basically year-to-date fiscal year-to-date data.

[1:09:06] The challenge is that we make a big push to make sure everybody gets their

[1:09:10] invoices in at the end of the fiscal year and make sure that we get our

[1:09:13] reimbursements done through the through the grants. And so,

[1:09:17] looking at the data for the first half of the 25 26 fiscal year, it just

[1:09:24] it wasn't very reflective of halfway through the budget. So, I think that's

[1:09:30] the challenge with it is that we just don't do this big mid-year push to get

[1:09:35] all the everybody to make sure their invoices are all in. So, that's where I

[1:09:39] just be a little bit concerned about it not kind of providing

[1:09:42] the the full picture on that. I mean, we could do this presentation

[1:09:47] earlier and kind of decouple it from the mid-year budget. I mean, I I think yes,

[1:09:52] I think it's fine with the mid-year. It's just uh I was just curious. I know

[1:09:55] if it doesn't if it doesn't serve any purpose, then it isn't worth the brain

[1:09:58] damage, but you know, if if it does, then um that's fine. So, this is this is

[1:10:02] great though. Thank you. Darlene. Darlene. Um yeah, the only other um I I

[1:10:07] agree with everyone. This is this is great and I think this is important and

[1:10:11] good for us to see. Um I think going forward as um

[1:10:15] my suggestion would be given how much construction contracting we've got

[1:10:19] coming up, it would be nice to you know, break that out, split the consultant um

[1:10:25] part from the contracting part so that we can see it a little bit more clearly.

[1:10:30] Yeah, makes sense. >> And so, I would just say so, this is all

[1:10:33] based on the invoices that have been paid rather than just the amounts that

[1:10:38] were appropriated in the resolutions. And if we wanted to look forward as Ron

[1:10:43] was possibly suggesting, we would just be looking at the approved amount

[1:10:47] agreement amounts even though the invoices had not come in.

[1:10:51] True. Yeah, and we could use that mid-year budgets. It I mean, we could

[1:10:55] look at how much is budgeted and how much we expect to see each consultant.

[1:10:59] Yeah. >> Uh that could be a second part of this.

[1:11:01] But, basically It's a little hard to do because one of those contracts is

[1:11:06] you know, they have to on on-call contract. It's there in case you need

[1:11:09] it. So, trying that I just don't know how you would do that.

[1:11:14] Yeah, I I think keep it simple.

[1:11:18] Let's kiss each other here and keep it simple because it gives us the point in

[1:11:23] time 8 weeks after the end of the first 6 months. I think it's a perfect window.

[1:11:29] Um you know,

[1:11:30] um and it's a good first step. So, let's

[1:11:33] not, you know, add too much I was going to suggest at

[1:11:37] this point because I think we have some you know, newer members here who have no

[1:11:43] background. So, I think the way you presented it is very simple for people

[1:11:47] to see. I think I'd start here. And if people ask more questions as we go along

[1:11:51] after a couple of these, great. We can expand it.

[1:11:55] All right. Okay, so we'll see how it goes over at

[1:11:58] the full authority board meeting. See what kind of questions we've got. Sounds

[1:12:01] good. Thank you, Ryan. Appreciate it. Is there any public comment, Emily, on any

[1:12:05] of these? No public comment written or virtual. Okay, great.

[1:12:09] Okay, thank you, everyone. Um so, that's the last of our regular items.

[1:12:14] Correspondence communications, I don't think we have any.

[1:12:17] Uh commissioner and staff comments, I don't have any. Other commissioner

[1:12:20] comments? I just want to say, but she left. I just want to make sure we said

[1:12:24] thank you to Sue. Given how busy that woman is on MTC, um

[1:12:29] which is a 2-year commitment, it's almost a full-time job, and the mayor,

[1:12:34] uh just to say thank you for ABC. And I think she left so fast cuz she was good

[1:12:38] to have to not to run into anything. Yeah, yeah, and she had to get to

[1:12:42] another um event. Okay. So, thank you. Um any executive staff comments? No

[1:12:47] executive executive staff comment. Okay, thank you. So, we will now adjourn and

[1:12:52] our next meeting is on April 2nd at 8:30 a.m. Thank you, everyone.

Administration and Projects Committee Meeting - 03/05/2026

Transcript