[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.