>> Good morning. It's 11:04 AM.
We are happily ready
to call the meeting
to order. I love the cheer
of the staff. Welcome to the
Planning and Program Committee
meeting of Los Angeles
Metropolitan Transportation
Authority.
>> Madam Clerk, will you please
call the roll
to establish a quorum?
>> Vice Chair Solis?
>> Present.
>> Director Horvath?
>> Here.
>> Director Mitchell?
>> Present.
>> Director Najarian?
>> Here.
>> Director Richardson will be
absent today. Caltrans
Representative Roberts?
>> Here.
>> And Chair Dupont-Walker?
>> Present.
>> Also, I just wanted to make
a note that we are very aware
that the screen behind the
directors is flickering. We
apologize for this. It's very
disruptive. Our IT team is
trying
to troubleshoot right now.
>> Deanna.
>> Thank you. Madam Deputy
Clerk, will you please provide
us with the public comment
instructions?
>> To give public comment,
each speaker needs
to follow a 3-step process.
First, at any time
during the meeting, the speaker
can dial 1-888- 978-8818 and
enter the English or Spanish
access codes. The English
access code is 5647249#. The
Spanish access code is
7292892#. This number and the
access codes are also listed
on the agenda
for this meeting,
which can be found
at boardagendas.metro.net. For
speakers watching the video
feed, there's a 30-second lag
behind the actual meeting. If
any speakers are watching
on video and want
to give public comment,
they should dial in early to
make sure they don't miss the
chance. Second, once a speaker
dials
into the public comment line,
they have
to indicate which item,
item they want to speak on.
When their item comes up,
the speaker should press pound
2 to raise their hand
to speak. Third, when it's the
speaker's turn,
the moderator will call
out the last 4 digits of the
phone number and unmute the
speaker. If the speaker is
listening to the meeting
on another device,
they will need to mute their
speakers and microphone
on that device
to prevent an echo. Speakers
will have 1 minute
to make their comment or 2
minutes including translation.
Consistent
with the board rules posted
on the agenda,
individuals requesting
to speak will be allowed
to speak for a total of 3
minutes per meeting
on agenda items in 1-minute
increments per item, plus 1
minute
for general public comment.
General public comment is
to be used only for items not
on the agenda. Please be
advised that sign-up for public
comment will close immediately
once the public comment portion
of the item begins. If you wish
to speak, make sure
to register beforehand.
Written public comments
received by 5PM the day before
the meeting are compiled and
sent to the board. Please make
sure
to include the item number with
your comment and your position
of 4 against, general comment,
or item needs more
consideration. You may email
your comment to
boardclerk@metro.net or mail it
to Board Administration, 1
Gateway Plaza, Mail Stop
99-3-1, Los Angeles,
California 90012. Thank you,
Chair.
>> Thank you.
That's very important
because we want to assure that
the public can be full
participants
in the deliberation
of this committee. We want
to begin
with the consent agenda. Do any
members of this committee wish
to pull an item
from the consent agenda?
Okay, seeing no one wishes
to pull any item, do we
have members of the public
who have indicated a desire
to speak on items 6 and 7.
>> This public comment for
consent calendar items 6 and
7. Please press pound 2 if
you'd like to make a comment
on any of these 2 items, 6 and
7. No public comments.
>> Thank you.
Motion, is there a second?
>> Okay, it's been moved and
seconded
to approve the consent agenda.
We'll go ahead and vote
on this item. Please call the
roll.
>> Vice Chair Solis?
>> Aye.
>> Director Mitchell?
>> Aye.
>> Director Najarian?
>> Aye.
>> Director Horvath?
>> Aye.
>> And Chair Dupont-Walker?
>> Aye.
>> The consent items carry.
>> Thank you. Now moving
to the non-consent agenda,
we will start with item 8.
Federal Consolidated
Appropriations Act of 2026
award. I believe we have a
presentation. Please introduce
yourselves and proceed.
>> Yes, we do. Good morning,
directors. Selena Reynolds, I'm
the Chief of Innovation and
Games Mobility Planning, joined
by Ernesto Chavez, Senior
Executive Officer
over the games work. And this
morning we are bringing
before you an item
for your consideration We were
extremely grateful
to receive an appropriation
in the fiscal '26 federal
budget for the Olympic and
Paralympic Games. And Ernesto
is going to walk through the
details and appreciate your
consideration.
>> Thank you, Selena. Good
morning, committee members.
The recommendations in front
of you include the programming
of $89.4 million coming
from the Consolidated
Appropriations Act of 2026.
In support of planning, design,
and operations for the 2028
Games, amending the fiscal year
'27 budget
by the same amount, and then
authorizing the CEO or their
designee to negotiate and
execute all necessary
agreements, including
pass-through agreements and
amendments
with agencies contained
within the Games Mobility
Executive's federal funding
allocation, which is included
in Attachment A. The issue is
that Metro will be the lead
agency for this $89 million
coming
from the federal government.
And the proposed board actions
are necessary for us
to be able to initiate not only
the federal fund obligation
process, but also the funding
exchange process. This initial
appropriation in FY26 is, we
hope, an initial installment of
the full federal funding
request that we have made
over the past few years
for the games. The Games
Mobility executives,
we've been working with them
for many, many years, and
over the last few months agreed
to follow a similar
distribution model that we use
for the World Cup
for distributing federal funds
in which Metro would be the
sole recipient of the funds and
then help distribute the
funding
to the participating agencies.
Venue cities have expressed
interest in exchanging these
federal funds with local funds
for more flexible use and more
expedient use. And we're
essentially facilitating that
through this process. There
will be a local match
requirement
for the funds that was set
at 20%
for capital projects and 10%
for operation,
operational projects. In terms
of the scope of work for the,
for this initial allocation,
we've included in Attachment B
a larger description or a more
thorough description
of the work. But generally,
most of it involves the
preliminary design,
preliminary activities,
planning activities,
to various work streams.
In the case
of the venue cities and the
Games Mobility Executives,
they're going to be focusing
on the Games Route Network,
preliminary design for the
Games Route Network. For the
Integrated Transportation
Management, that's primarily
intelligent transportation
system projects. Metrolink is
going to be doing some of the
preliminary planning work as
well for their support
for the Games. And then
at the venue level,
venue cities will be working
on design for temporary
improvements that will enhance
connections
between venues and our
stations. On the Metro side,
we're going
to be using those dollars to
continue advancing planning and
also design for the Games
Enhanced Transit Service, the
GETS continue design and
getting into construction for
the key stations that we're
advancing and mobility hubs for
the games and also final design
for the light rail improvements
accessibility improvements that
we have designed
for the games as well. Next
steps.
With the approval today, or
with the board's approval next
week, we would advance the
Trans Grant application towards
the January 2027 deadline
for obligation,
federal obligation. And then we
would also initiate the process
of entering into agreements
with the local jurisdictions
for task order-based scopes and
cost reimbursement mechanisms.
>> And just one final note,
similar to the World Cup money,
this money flows through SCAG
to Metro, and SCAG's Regional
Council approved this process,
and we just want to offer our
appreciation and gratitude
for their partnership.
>> Thank you. Madam Clerk, are
there any members
of the public who wish
to speak on this item?
>> This is public comment
for item 8. Please press pound
2 if you'd like
to make a comment
on this item. No public
comments.
>> Thank you. I, I join, I'm
sure, the entire board
in commending Metro staff and
our Games Mobility Executive
Partners
for successfully securing $90
million through the Federal
Consolidated Appropriations
Act of 2026. As you indicated,
it's important
down payment preparing
for our transportation network
for 2028 Olympics and
Paralympics Games. and reflects
the strong collaboration among
our regional partners. A few
questions, and you may have
answered one of them. Could you
share the anticipated timeline
and process
for local jurisdictions
to draw down on the program?
You indicated SCAG,
but if there's any more detail.
And secondly,
what are the major milestones
for disbursing the funds?
>> Thank you. The first
milestone entails coming
to an agreement
with the local jurisdictions
on the scope, the schedule,
and the budget
for the projects. We'll be
working with them
over the next couple of months
to complete that. That will
lead us to, the requirement
to complete an agreement,
either an MOU or a funding
agreement with them. And then
once we establish that
agreement and the work
commences, they can start
essentially invoicing
on a reimbursement basis. So,
we anticipate completing that
process over the next 3 months.
So, by around November or so,
we should have the agreements
ready and they can begin
invoicing us.
>> Just to add another couple
of points to that. First, local
agencies will need to come up
with the local match
to match the funds. And the
work is coming up through all
of the work streams. And we've
been coming
before you and reporting out
on that work stream progress.
So, these are projects and
planning that is sort
of already underway,
and it's meant to bring those
into the implementation phase.
>> Thank you.
I see several board members
who have questions.
Supervisor Solis?
>> Yes, thank you, Madam
Chair. First of all, I want
to say thank you to the team,
and I think all
of us are really excited
about what just took place
with the FIFA festivities in
the fan zone and seeing the
excitement and people coming
and utilizing Metro services as
well as bus, rail,
and everything else
in between. And I know that
moving forward that our ask was
actually a lot higher than what
we received, right? So, our ask
was about $2 billion,
is that correct?
>> So, we are woefully behind,
but I hope that we can compile
the data information
to show that even
in our precursor here with FIFA
that we actually did a good
job. And people brought in
resources and did local match.
And I want to just describe
for you what we went through
at the Whittier Narrows. I want
to first thank Caltrans and our
public works
for helping us with, actually,
with the open streets.
Repaving Rosemead Boulevard was
a major undertaking. Had not
been done in decades. And that
will help us prepare
for the upcoming LA-28 SCEETs.
Games that are going
to be held right there. So, it
helps to provide, I think,
that level of awareness and
hopefully gives a signal
to the feds that, hey, we are,
we are here,
we are participating. And we
also set aside $1 million
of our own LA County funds,
road improvement funds that
come through my office,
to dedicate for this effort.
So, it shows you that there's
participation, collaboration
in that way. But we can We can
think creatively, and I think
that's what the FIFA Games kind
of gave us, an opportunity
to think out of the box,
where we're reliant, yes,
on outside support, but we can
also look innovatively.
But we do need monetary support
to continue to sustain that.
And I just want to say that
for the first time,
we had close to 10,000 people
show up at this park,
obscure park that is hidden
behind trees next
to a freeway. And for people
to come out 3 days,
and it kept growing, growing,
growing. And I would just say
that one
of the most positive parts
about it was that we acquired
our own shuttle services.
Coming not exactly directly
from rail, but yes,
I would say for the El Monte
Metro Hub, yes,
there was an easy way
to get there.
But other than that,
Montebello Mall, Steinmetz
Park, which is in Hacienda
Heights, Avocado Heights, they
don't have any rail system
running through there or even
Metrolink. So people did board
those and they used them. And
there was sufficient,
how could I say, roadway
passage safety pedestrian
measures put in place. And I
had never seen, this was
something we just thought
about, but to see it in reality
and how it was utilized
by young, old, people
with disabilities, really gave
me that hope that even in areas
that are unincorporated and are
hard to get to,
that we know how to do this and
we can improve upon it. And I
certainly want
to see us moving forward
to collaborate and do much more
in any way that we can. So, I
am totally supportive of moving
forward and hopeful that we can
hopefully get to that $2
billion and show that we are
cooperating in a way that has
never been seen before. And I
believe our public,
once we get the feedback of how
many people actually joined our
shuttles or used our other
services, what that looks like
for us, even in faraway places
like San Gabriel Valley. So, I
just want to say thank you.
And I want to thank our CEO and
the staff because believe me,
Metro had a big presence there.
And I am very grateful for that
and honored that we were able
to pull that off. Thank you.
>> Thank you.
>> Director Najarian.
>> Thank you. Thank you,
Madam Chair. So, we're looking
for $2 billion. That's our
target.
>> And now I present
to you a check for $2 billion.
>> So, was that Ed McMahon?
>> So, this is the first
tranche that we're receiving.
This 90-some million
at this point?
>> The number is now down at
$1.85 with this as well as some
other grants that we've
received, but yes,
you are correct.
>> Okay.
>> So, I agree with Director
Solis that our actions really
speak loudly when they can look
back and see how we handled the
World Cup transportation,
safety, everything that we did,
and there was a lot going on. I
really think that we should
send a heartfelt thank you note
to the federal government,
whoever it is, to let them know
that we deeply appreciate this
albeit small piece of what
we're looking for. I think. I
mean,
we know there's certain issues
at the federal level. It's not
always,
funding isn't always made based
on merit and quality
of projects and history
of doing it. But I think a nice
thank you note to let them know
that we appreciate this. Maybe
we hope that this is the
beginning of a beautiful
relationship going towards the
Olympics in 28, just so they
know that okay,
we appreciate it. And I think
that might go farther than just
the strict look what we've done
and we use our money
efficiently and we're you know
doing that. Just thank you. We
hope that we can continue
working together to make our
country proud.
I don't know.
Something, something a
little bit gushy.
Like this.
Yeah.
The heart.
That's just my thoughts. So
that's all I would like
to chime in on
at this point.
>> Noted. Thank you,
Director.
>> Director Horvath.
>> Thank you, Madam Chair. I
too want to thank our Metro
team for your stellar outreach
and work to achieve where we
are today. I do want
to thank our federal government
for making this initial
investment. And I also want to
understand if we believe there
is opportunity
for the remainder
of our request to come
to fulfillment? And if it
doesn't,
do we have contingency plans
to address what needs will
exist on the ground?
>> We still remain optimistic
that in working with,
in partnership with our,
with the organizing committee,
with LA28,
that there is still a window
for us to achieve the full
funding that we need
to execute what we need
to execute. When you say
contingency plans, can you,
to address the needs
on the ground, can you address,
can you say a little more about
what specifically you mean?
>> Well, if we,
I assume we requested the
$1.85 billion now because there
are specific things that are
not
in our budget that we cannot do
without funding. So if we don't
get funding
from the federal government,
I see that you have been able
to get down from $2 billion
to $1.85 through some
additional grant funding,
so that's great. Are there
other opportunities like that
or something else that exists,
or are we going to have to say
there are just certain things
that despite our best planning
we won't be able to do?
>> Understood.
So, when it comes
to the projects that we need
to finish construction on that
this board has funded and that
we've received funding from
elsewhere we do feel as though
there are opportunities for us
to finish those projects or
come up with contingency plans
to meet those needs. However,
the 2 largest items in that
$1.85 billion are $1 billion
for the supplemental transit
service that we will need. So
similar to what we executed
for the World Cup
with the extra buses, working
with our municipal partners
and, and our friends
in the charter industry,
we will need 1,700 roughly
additional buses and the costs
that go along with them,
as well as the games route
network,
which is a significant cost.
It's about $333 million.
That's where it sits right now,
largely on the Caltrans system,
on the state highways,
but also about $80 million or
so of that is
for venue cities. So local
agencies, the rest
of the way there between the
freeway and the venues
for hopefully our buses
for spectators and workforce,
but really for the athletes and
the officials and the media.
Those 2 items are almost
impossible to fund any other
way because they are purely
operational
in nature and temporary. And
so, what we have with our MOU
with the organizing committee
is very clear that if there is
not outside funding, Metro will
not be able to serve in that
capacity as delivery partner,
and the organizing committee
will need to figure
out alternate plans.
>> Okay, that's, I'm glad we're
managing those expectations
early, especially if we don't
get that funding. So, also,
I know that for the new
crossover and siding track
project on the A and E lines
what is the timeline
for that project? And will
there be any disruption
to service
during construction?
>> The timeframe
for finishing design and Tim is
here.
>> I heard the seat.
>> Just go ahead and keep
going, Ernesto. So that portion
of the project is yet
to be completely funded,
right? And that requires a lot
of special track work that
needs to be ordered. And we are
right up against the clock
on those projects. So, we do
have a procurement that's
ongoing right now. We're hoping
to bring it forward in
September to put us
in the best position
to be able
to construct those projects.
So, all hope is not lost.
We're trying.
But what I would say about
those is that they are projects
we need to do anyways,
Olympics or not. They are very
useful to operations. The
downside with those projects is
that they're very high impact
in terms of impact
to customers. You can't put new
interlockings in without bus
bridges and shutdowns. And so
that's kind of part
of the mix we need
to figure out. But we're still
giving it a shot. We're still
trying to fund them. We're
going to put ourselves
in the best position, but, yes,
they are difficult projects to
achieve while also providing
service.
>> And for the Olympic and
Paralympic venue approach
enhancements, some of the
improvements are indicated as
temporary, including the
intersections and bike lanes.
Where are the temporary bike
lanes and why are they not
permanent?
>> So just one addendum to
Tim's note. Those projects,
those track projects are also
in the TIFIA letter that we
brought before you. So, we are
pursuing alternate ways to fund
those because we do need them
either way. Regarding the venue
approach,
so these venue approach
improvements, which is the
category that includes crowd
management, heat mitigation
measures, wayfinding,
all kinds of things, they also
may include some temporary or
permanent infrastructure
for people biking and walking.
Those decisions are really the
decisions
of the venue cities themselves.
So, through that first last
mile work stream,
we have been bringing together,
that work stream is led
by the City of Los Angeles,
by LADOT. They've been bringing
together those venue cities and
working through all
of those scopes
for those projects. And so,
it's really kind
of a local decision. We can
certainly get the latest
for you on the details of
what's going where and when and
how, or at least what they're
envisioning at the moment.
But that's kind
of the high level.
>> Yeah, I can imagine these
investments being legacy
investments in the community,
especially if they,
we expect them
to be highly used facilities,
that it might be nice
to keep them longer term. But I
hear you that that's not a
Metro call. So, thank you.
>> Supervisor Mitchell.
>> Thank you very much, Madam
Chair. I want
to just echo the comments
from all of my colleagues.
Congratulations on the, I'll
just keep emphasizing first
installment because that would
suggest an additional
installment is forthcoming.
Agree with you, Director
Najarian. Let's thank them.
And I was wondering if there
are ways from your perspective
that the board could be
supportive of Metro's advocacy
for a second 3rd, 4th,
10th installment. And I,
and I asked because, as
Director Horvath talked
about if not this, then what?
And you talked about what the
$1 billion from the, for the
supplemental transit plans are
needed. It reminds me that we
have a fundamental
responsibility to make sure
that we're maintaining frequent
and reliable service for
Angelenos who rely on Metro
for their transit needs. So, is
there anything from your
perspective the board could do
to be helpful?
>> One is in Washington and
Sacramento. In Washington, the
issue right now is What exactly
is the appropriations process
that's remaining? The key step
in that process is that we need
the administration
to communicate to Congress the
need to include this money in
whatever appropriations bills
move. You've probably heard the
discussion about a supplemental
funding primarily oriented
towards war funding. There may
or may not be something enacted
before the election. We've
heard most likely something
would be enacted
after the election, but
in either way,
in either case,
we need communication
from the White House to
Congress that this needs
to be a priority. And we're
working very closely with LA28
to secure that. A lot
of these roads lead
through OMB, so working
through OMB is important. We
had a very good visit
with the Secretary when he came
out to the ESOC, and I think he
understood the importance
of the success of the World
Cup to the Olympics. So we're
continuing to work
through the Department of
Transportation, but really
It's between the White House
and Congress with respect
to the $1.8 billion. In
Sacramento, we're also working
on a $379 million ask.
In fact, Madeline and Alex are
on phone calls all day today
talking to members
about that specific ask. We, we
pulled things out of our
federal program and oriented a
state ask towards the kind of
things we thought the state
would be most likely to fund.
So, we really need the LA
delegation to unify around that
and secure that when the
legislature comes back
from recess. So, I'd really
direct your focus towards
Sacramento in this case.
>> And so, this is an ask
for current budget year,
budget year plus 1?
>> Current budget year.
Current budget year. Because
what,
there was a budget that was
adopted, but we have heard
there will be, well, There's
more than one budget in
California these days. You
usually get the budget and then
subsequent budgets.
>> Additional trailer bills.
>> Trailer bills, right. So, we
would be looking
in the month remaining
in session
to try and secure something
of the 379.
>> Okay, so that's where you'd
like us
to focus our energy.
>> That's.
All right, okay, thank you.
I'm glad I asked that question
because I had no idea
about that piece.
Thank you.
Director Solis, I couldn't
agree with you more. I wrote
down your quote. We know how
to do this. And I was not
convinced
before that we knew how
to do it. Maybe I'll speak for
myself. I wasn't convinced I
knew how to do it.
But let me say,
I couldn't agree
with you more. The countywide
nature of the official FIFA and
the official Metro programs was
just breathtaking. And I can't
imagine what our region needed
more than that success right
now. It was phenomenal. I mean,
it was just phenomenal. I can't
speak more highly
of it. I want to thank Metro.
We too had shuttles running
from Rosa Parks. I told CEO
Wiggins that I was amused
by the Angelenos who came up
to me
with utter surprise. I took
Metro when I got here. Like,
right,
people do that every day. Go
Metro. So, I hope that we earn
some raving Metro fans,
in addition to you know,
World Cup fans. I completely
agree. And from the, from, and
from the county's perspective,
from the JCOD bus on site,
that partnership with Metro and
Metro's presence at Magic
Johnson Park, I couldn't agree
with you more. I'm very proud
that that we had that shared
experience. And it really
absolutely is a perfect, it was
a perfect training ground. We
do know how to do this. And I
think, I hope that will instill
a higher level of confidence
in all of us, speak
for myself again, as well as
the federal government and the
state government, that with
investment it will be a
seamless system
with the investment. Because
we've got to maintain access
for our Metro riders as well as
guarantee the athletes and the
Olympians that they too can
rely on us for transport. So,
thank you
for the homework assignments
in terms of what we can do
to try to put our shoulder
to the grindstone to help
Metro staff in accessing these
additional resources. Thanks,
Madam Chair.
>> Thank you. And Supervisor
Mitchell, you're exactly right.
I'm keeping a list
of first-timers on Metro. My
friends are calling, and the
commemorative cards that they
were going to file away,
they're now using.
But thank you, CEO Wiggins, for
your regular updates and your
postings, which we were able to
share and encourage some people
just to go where they thought
it was just too crowded. This
certainly was a wonderful,
wonderful trial run.
Trial run.
This is an action item.
Could I have a motion and
second, please?
>> Okay, this is something we
all want to vote on, so Madam
Clerk, will you please try,
>> Vice Chair Solis?
>> Aye.
>> Director Mitchell?
>> Aye.
>> Director Najarian?
>> Aye.
>> Director Horvath?
>> Aye.
>> And Chair Dupont-Walker?
>> A unanimous aye.
>> The motion carries.
>> Thank you. I thank you
for the presentation. We are
now ready for item 9,
Antelope Valley Line
Improvements, San Fernando
Valley and Pacoima Metrolink
Stations and Mobility Hub.
Mr. Sosa, do we have a
presentation?
>> Good morning, Chair,
committee members. Ray Sosa,
Metro Chief Planning Officer.
As folks get settled in,
I did also want to thank all
of the staff in the Planning
Department and other supporting
departments,
not only bringing the number
of items today to the Planning
and Programming Committee,
but also being the MVPs out
in the field supporting
on FIFA World Cup MVPs, work
streams, fan zones, transit
fans, first fans, still doing
all that while being able
to bring these items
to the board this July. So, I
wanted
to extend that thank you,
especially since many
of them are
in the building as opposed
to being out
in the field. I'm not used to,
to that sort of effort. So
really want to say thank you
to all of them. This item
before you is the Antelope
Valley Line Improvements, San
Fernando Valley Pacoima
Metrolink Station and
Mobility Hub. I'm joined by
Michael O'Connor, Executive
Officer, and Karen Swift,
Deputy Executive Officer.
Michael O'Connor will go
through the presentation.
>> Thank you, and thank you,
Madam Chair. I appreciate it.
It's a little bit drafty
in the boardroom, so I had
to bring out my Argentina scarf
just to keep me warm. Down,
down to business.
>> We are all English.
>> You told me you wouldn't
wear it.
>> Yeah, yeah. You're supposed
to give it to me, right?
>> Well, it's a pleasure
to be here. This item is a
continuation of prior board
actions that were taken
December of 2025 and April
2026, focused on creating a
broader multimodal
transportation vision
for connecting the City of
San Fernando and the
Northeast San Fernando Valley
communities to the rest of the
regional transportation system.
This item here is focused
on the Pacoima Metrolink
station and mobility hub.
Today we're asking
for this item to program $6.9
million that will help us do
the conceptual planning,
environmental clearance,
preliminary engineering,
and the community outreach
for the San Fernando Valley
Pacoima Metrolink station and
mobility hub. And I just want
to note before we start that
this effort really is a
multimodal team effort across
Metro, but also our partners
at different agencies, and
tremendous outreach that we
have done
with the communities,
listening to them and trying to
incorporate their concerns and
items within our approach to
designing and planning
different improvements
in this area to make a seamless
integrated approach
to transportation in this part
of the area that really
deserves high-quality
transportation options. So,
part
of that vision here is really
to leverage the Metro-owned
Metrolink Antelope Valley Line
right-of-way and the
Metro-funded Metrolink
Antelope Valley Line service
that does run through the
corridor you see there
from the north, the northwest
to the southeast. The I want
to orient you
to the gold star there, number
5. That is the proposed
location for the Pacoima
Metrolink station,
which would basically be
at the terminus of the East
San Fernando Valley light rail
project that we are moving
forward currently. This will
provide an opportunity
to connect 2 systems at a very
key convenient transfer point
that will connect this area to
opportunities north and south.
east and west across the
Allen Valley Line into Santa
Clarita, San Fernando Valley,
down to Los Angeles. Focus you
on Burbank Airport North,
for example. The terminal is
being moved to the northern
area where we have a Metrolink
station on the north side of
Burbank Airport, and as well as
the future opportunities the
East San Fernando Valley
Light Rail project will offer
connecting everyone further
south and eventually even
to the future Sepulveda
Transit Corridor project. So,
there's a lot
of opportunity here,
and this is why we're bringing
in a lot
of different teams and agencies
to help us put together a
vision on how we can put forth
the most integrated system
possible to create value
for the Pacoima Station as a
key link for a transfer
between our 2 systems.
Previously, the prior board
actions that I did mention were
revolving around the East San
Fernando Valley Shared
Right-of-Way Study. And
at the end of that study, the
board did take a preferred
alternative that they approved
to adopt the new Pacoima
Metrolink Station and
to move it forward through
design and environmental
clearance. And we're,
this is part
of a larger effort,
of course, in terms of at-grade
crossing improvements that we
heard earlier in April this
year and other key items you're
going to hear about later on
in this presentation.
But ultimately, one of the key
features here is the multimodal
mobility hub that we're going
to be bringing to this. It's
not just a transfer station
platform to platform. We're
looking at integrating
different multiple rail
systems, of course,
but also bus systems, Metro
operations,
we have municipal operations
in the area, and we also want
to bring
in active transportation
options in an area that
desperately needs more
opportunities
to access transportation by
walking or bicycle or other
kinds
of safe and convenient methods.
As mentioned previously,
ultimately there's a future
where this line for the
Antelope Valley Line is going
to become intercity rail
potentially and could extend
down to San Diego in terms
of access. So, we're really
trying to bring as much value
as we can. to this part of LA
County. The local residents
will benefit tremendously
from this investment,
and this initial phase
of work is specifically for the
station and the work we need
to do there,
as mentioned previously. The
mobility hub I want
to bring up as a, as a key,
as big as a key feature. This
really is an opportunity
for us to put together all the
best practices and the
different things we've been
working on into one location
for this area,
even featuring some
of the things we talked about
for the World Cup
with heat mitigation,
for example, thinking about
ways that we move people back
and forth so that it's
people-focused and it's safe
and convenient. And it really
spurs a reliance
on public transportation
in this area
to provide greater value,
not just for the residents,
but for local businesses and
just general commuting. So,
we're very excited
about this. The mobility hub is
something that we're going to
be developing and moving
forward, and obviously
in concert with community
engagement. and conversations
about how does this space
potentially provide the best
value
for the local residents. And
I'd like to turn it over to
Karen Swift, who will talk
about the community engagement
piece.
>> Thank you, Michael. Karen
Swift, Deputy Executive
Officer in Community
Relations. So following board
action this month, our
department will issue a
communications bench task order
to engage Northeast San
Fernando Valley communities
on the latest developments in
all these planning efforts that
Michael's described. Our
outreach efforts will build
upon the robust engagement
conducted for the shared
right-of-way study back in
2025. This committee may recall
that we had not just the
traditional briefings and
community meetings,
but we had Spanish language
roundtables partnered
with our CBOs in the North
Valley. We also hosted our own
resource fair in partnership
with the City of San
Fernando, where we distributed
more than 150 boxes
of fresh produce.
to groups up there,
which was just great. So, you
see some pictures
of that here. So going forward,
we want to build
from that model. And so,
we'll have design charrettes,
roundtables again, working
with CBOs, hands-on workshops.
I picture us building little
mobility hubs and sort
of playing around
with some 3D elements. We'll
have strategic partnerships
with elected officials, local
jurisdictions, CBOs, and
of course youth. We've got
Mission College up there and
some other connectivity we want
to make sure we tap into. And
then following that, countywide
planning will execute a task
order to start the conceptual
planning, environmental
clearance,
and preliminary engineering.
That concludes our
presentation.
>> So next steps here before we
conclude actually is the,
we have a task order we're
going to be issuing this summer
that will move this forward
with board support this month.
So with that, we're happy
to take any questions.
>> Thank you. Thank you
for the presentation and for
the excitement that we continue
to feel. As usual,
we normally hear
from the public before the
board members deliberate. or
ask questions.
But today I want to be sure,
because of uniqueness
on this item,
that our board clerk is
prepared
to make the necessary changes.
Oh, okay, absolutely.
Thank you.
Okay I'm moving ahead too
quickly. Do any board members
have questions or comments?
Okay, this is Director
Horvath.
>> Thank you, Madam Chair.
This is an exciting step
following the approval
of the next steps for the
shared right-of-way study in
December of last year. So, I
really want to thank staff
for all of your work on this
project. I know it's highly
anticipated in the Northeast
San Fernando Valley, which
certainly has been eager
to see more investment
in transportation solutions.
So, I know this is going,
going to,
and certainly means a lot
already, and we want to make
sure we're getting it right. I
know our board approved
Scenario 2 in December
of last year,
as well as direction
to move forward
with environmental clearance,
safety improvements at the, at
the 6th at-grade railroad
crossings within the project
area and the identification
of funding. This segment
of the project began moving
on a track separate
from the 6.7-mile Van Nuys
running segment. So, I just
want to make sure we're clear
about timeline and we manage
expectations so community
members know exactly what's
coming and they can stay
engaged appropriately. As well
as for budgetary purposes,
I know this action looks
to approve just $6.9 million
for planning work, but the
project is still estimated
to cost more than $250 million.
So, is it the intent of staff
to deliver the shared
right-of-way segment along
with the Van Nuys running
segment?
>> So, we're obviously aware
that it'd be very important to
provide that connectivity as
soon as possible for the value
for both systems. We have a lot
of work ahead of us to be able
to put forth the timing because
a lot of it may just depend
on phasing of the project or
the design scope
for the station itself,
or what we can do potentially
in different steps. So we'll
have more information
on that timing when we come
back to the board
with the next report.
But our intention is to try
to maximize that value of,
of connectivity when the East
San Fernando Valley Light Rail
opens, if possible.
>> So, if you continue to,
to diverge, do you have an
estimated timeline
for construction and delivery
And should we expect to see
sizable budget allocations
for the project in the
near future, given where,
what's being allocated today
versus what the total project
cost will be?
>> Well, the conceptual
planning and the preliminary
engineering phase is going
to be about 20 months. That
will tell us a lot
about what we're dealing with,
of course, in terms
of the scope,
potential future costs. And we
would come back to the board,
of course, to certify the
environmental documentation and
the program funds
for the design. So right now,
we don't have a lot
of information
about the exact steps forward
for those pieces. We want to
make sure that we have that
information when we come back.
But we'll know more about the
overall construction schedule
and the overall project budget
as we proceed
through these different steps
for planning and preliminary
engineering, et cetera. Plus,
we have more community
engagement we have to do to
make sure that we're getting
the scope correct
in that area. So, we'll
establish a funding plan,
but that will be in a future
date when we come back
with more information.
>> I'm just trying to help
in that community work part.
So, people know exactly when
to show up and when
to comment, because sometimes
any opportunity to comment
means people will come forward
to talk about something that
might not be the specific thing
you're asking for
in that moment. So, it sounds
like they should just continue
to keep coming forward every
opportunity that exists so that
way they don't miss the
opportunity to talk about
timeline and funding
accordingly.
>> Yeah, I think that's
correct. And we also are out
there obviously building the
light rail now. So,
construction relations is
deeply engaged door to door
with the community. So, we'll
continue to partner
with them so that if people
come to a construction update
meeting or our meeting,
we're sharing information. We
recognize the community sees
one Metro. So, we want to make
sure they always have those
opportunities
to share feedback.
>> And our December action
called on staff
to continue planning work on
the rail crossing safety
improvement. as well at the 6
at-grade crossings along the
2.5-mile corridor as part
of improvements to the
Metrolink Antelope Valley
Line. So, what is the status
of that work? And what is the
timeline
for those improvements to move
into construction?
>> Sure. So those 6 at-grade
crossings, they're in the 30%
preliminary design phase. And
so, we were about 20 to 25%
of the way through
with the consultant,
and we're planning to have 30%
preliminary design plans ready
for us to review sometime
around September. And so, we're
anticipating 30% completion
by late 2026, early 2027. That
will give us a lot
of information, of course,
in terms of those next steps
for costs and funding plans as
well.
>> Okay, thank you very much.
>> Director Najarian.
>> Thank you, Mike. I just want
to reiterate a lot of your
comments. I think this is just
an incredibly well-planned
project to place the Metrolink
station right there connecting
to the East San Fernando
Valley. It's going
to open up a new world
for the commuters in the
Antelope Valley who are
constrained. They don't have
much transit. Many
of them rely on the vehicles,
their cars, just because there
aren't that many other options.
This way,
someone who is employed
in that employment center
at the Van Nuys Courthouse,
state buildings, city
buildings, will be able
to take the Metrolink and
with a change, just change
once, and drop right down
into the Van Nuys Center using
the East San Fernando Valley.
And then future trips, as you
see, it's lining up
with our,
Sepulveda corridor route a
few years down the road.
But it's, I just think it's
really a very good and
well-thought-out series of
plans that have come together.
And I think it's just wonderful
and would just like to
congratulate planning staff as
all these projects just fit
together really well
at this location. So, thank
you very much and good work.
>> Any other comments? I just
want to share, Director
Najarian explained the
interlocking, which I
experienced actually a couple
weeks when I was in City of
San Fernando
for a meeting. I have
to admit I took a lot
of bows because my Metro pin
seemed to draw people
with smiles. So, thank you for
the outreach. I even took bows
for Metrolink. But I think
what's important is what you're
creating is a welcoming
atmosphere, and it is evidence
of a level of trust they have
that what you are saying is
going to happen. So, thank you
for that. Do we have any
comments from the public?
>> This is public comment
for item 9. Please press pound
2 if you'd like
to make a comment
on this item.
>> Caller ending in 2074,
please state your name.
You have 1 minute
to state your comment.
That caller has lowered his
hand.
>> Did you unmute 2074?
>> Oh, they lowered their hand.
They just re-raised it.
Unmuting them now.
>> Sorry about that. Good
morning. Paula Basingana,
Planning Director for Council
District 7 in the City of LA.
On behalf of Councilwoman
Rodriguez, I'd like
to express her support
for this funding action. We are
grateful
to see the investment come
in a timely manner after the
board made the decision
to complete the northern
segment of the East San
Fernando Valley project via
this Metrolink connection. We
look forward
to continue working with Metro
to ensure this connection and
mobility hub is as successful
as possible. Thank you.
>> Thank the councilwoman.
>> That was the last public
comment.
>> Thank you. This is an action
item. And Madam Clerk, will you
please call the roll?
>> Can I get a motion and a
second, please?
>> Second.
>> Oh, wonderful. Thank you.
Vice Chair Solis?
>> Aye.
>> Director Mitchell?
>> Aye.
>> Director Najarian?
>> Aye.
>> Director Horvath?
>> Aye.
>> And Chair Dupont-Walker?
>> Aye.
>> The motion carries. Thank
you.
>> Thank you. Okay, I'm back
now. Item 10. Measure R
Multimodal Highway
Subregional Program
Semiannual Update.
>> Thank you, Chair. This is
the semiannual update for the
Measure R Highway Program. Up
with me are Robert Machuca,
Deputy Executive Officer, and
Avital Barnea, Senior
Executive Officer,
to make the presentation.
>> Thank you, Madam Chair and
committee members, for hearing
out our, our item. If you can
please bear with me,
it's a long set
of considerations,
but approving $125 million
in additional programming
with the capacity of Measure R
multimodal highway subregional
programs along with the funding
changes via the updated project
list shown in Attachment A,
approving the obligation of $8
million
in previously approved Measure
R multimodal highway
subregional program funds and
reallocating to other existing
board-approved Measure R
projects,
or returning remaining funds
to the Measure R subregional
fund balance as shown in
Attachment A, and authorizing
the chief executive officer or
their designee to negotiate and
execute all necessary
agreements
for board-approved projects.
This chart provides an overview
of the Measure R program
with the various line items
in the Measure R. These are the
sub-regional programs that are
the responsibility
of the sub-regions to identify
and prioritize projects within
their sub-regional allocations.
As you can see, there's over
350 projects that have been
vetted through this process
with the percentages that
you'll see on the right column
with the spent percentage
with how they're doing
with each of their individual
projects and programs in each
of the sub-regions. An example
of one of the projects
within this program is
within the city of Norwalk.
This is the Bloomfield Avenue
at Imperial intersection
improvements. This has a series
of various improvements looking
at doing some westbound left
turn lane improvements,
really allowing
for capacity to,
to function well there,
but also includes other
Mobility improvements,
such as ramp upgrades, meeting,
making sure that ADA standards
are being met, new crosswalks,
improved striping, and also
some bicycle facilities that
are in place will stay
in place. With regards
to equity-focused communities,
this update includes board
actions that advance the local
priority projects and EFCs
within cities of Bell
Gardens, Commerce, Downey,
Glendale, Los Angeles,
Paramount, Norwalk, and other
parts of unincorporated Los
Angeles County. So next steps
will be staff will continue
working with the subregions to
execute necessary agreements
and work
with the various subregions,
local jurisdictions
for their consideration
of multimodal, safe, equitable,
and sustainable investments
within the Measure R multimodal
highway subregional program.
With that being said, that
concludes my presentation.
>> Thank you. We are going to
handle this a little bit
differently today, and
before I call
for board members or myself
to comment, I want
to be sure, Madam Clerk, that
you're prepared to make
whatever changes will come.
Thank you. Okay, I have a
question. I appreciate the
semiannual update on Measure R
multimodal highway subregional
programs. These investments are
indeed critical
to improving the mobility
across the county
by addressing congestion,
enhancing safety, and
delivering projects that
reflect the unique
transportation needs
of each subregion. And that's
so important. I'd also like
to know how Metro is measuring
the success of these
investments. I know that
deliver, delivering timely
within budget is important.
Are there any other measures?
>> Certainly, yes. Well, first
of all, you're, you pointed out
something very important the,
the selection and
prioritization
of these projects
by the unique features of each
of the subregions. So that's
why we get a broad range
of various types
of projects that come through.
So, one
of our main responsibilities in
ensuring that these projects
are eligible within the
guidelines that we have in the
project we're also ensuring
that there's consistency
with a lot of the board actions
that have taken place such as
with BMT, complete streets
equity-focused elements that
the projects are consistent
with those line items. One
thing that I am excited to
announce is that we also have
been able to integrate all 350
projects into the MyGrants
portal. And this is a portal
where cities are now being able
to utilize for consistency. It
cuts down on redundancy, labor,
manual entries of information
of their projects. They're able
to process their invoices
through this portal. So, this
portal has already been in use
with Measure M projects,
but we finally have been able
to integrate the Measure R
projects into the system. So,
it's a lot, it's going to
facilitate the process a lot
better.
>> That's really important,
especially as we talk about the
many sub-regional partners and
local agencies that are working
with us. Supervisor Solis.
>> Just a quick question.
Appreciate the presentation and
agree with a lot
of what we have before us,
but I wanted to ask,
and maybe it's not a big deal,
but there was 60, I think it
was $60 million that was
deobligated from a Caltrans
hotspot project from I-605
intersection improvement, and I
wasn't clear where the fund
surplus was allocated to.
You see, it's a good thing. We
had a surplus, but where.
>> So those funds would
replenish the overall
subregional equity fund so that
we'd be eligible
for that subregion to apply
for another grant.
>> Yeah, the remaining.
>> Yeah, good.
>> It wasn't given
to a specific project
but is available for,
>> So, it's available.
Okay.
That's good to know. Thank
you very much. Thank you.
>> Supervisor Horvath, I'm
going to call Director
Najarian first,
and I'll come back
to you.
>> Yes, you're next.
>> Okay. Thank you. There's a
lot of projects here. Some
cities were able
to use them; others not. The
obligated and all that.
But I just want to,
I just put this
in perspective, that when
Measure R was passed. These
were intended
to be highway funds
to equalize and
to compensate those areas
of the city, of the county,
that did not have a significant
transit line going
through them. So, this is how
it all came about. It was only
later that this board decided
to make those funds more
flexible by permitting them
to be used
for pedestrian bike path,
active transportation, and
frankly, a very broad series of
other improvements. I think
that was Director Bonin who I
guess was spearheading that.
So, it has caused me some
heartburn when our COG and our
sector and our subregion is
trying to decide how
to use these funds. Often there
was a large demand
for the active transportation.
At that point, I was saying,
well, we really need
to reserve this
for some highway improvements,
on-ramps, off-ramps,
safety features.
But they said, no,
that's not what the Metro
Board wanted to do. They wanted
these funds
to be very flexible, very
broad, to serve all modes
of transit. So, I just want
to put that
out there as we deal with these
many different projects, some
highway, some active
transportation, pedestrian,
bike, and all that. This has
truly become a very broad and
flexible pool of money,
significant pool of money,
that the subregions
in their wisdom will decide how
to use. So, I just want
to put that out in terms of,
Being the historian,
I can only do this for like,
>> Very important. Yeah, very
important.
>> I won't do it anymore
after that. So that's all I
wanted to say.
>> No, no, the historical
memory is extremely important.
Thank you for sharing that.
Supervisor Horvath.
>> Thank you, Madam Chair. I do
know that that is the history,
and I appreciate your
acknowledgment of that. And I
also know we get to be the
policy-setting body that helps
to guide how we make
investment. And I think,
I know as part of the, our
board retreat and discussions
around impending fiscal cliff
and our financial
decision-making going forward,
I want to make sure that,
at least from my part,
that we're doing all we can
to invest in transit solutions
that provide alternatives
to people being in cars one
by one on all
of our streets and highways.
And so, I would ask if,
if you are open to it, Madam
Chair, that we would request
this item to be bifurcated
to vote on the $21 million
allocation for MR 35.74
westbound SR 91 Alondra
Boulevard to Shoemaker Avenue
improvement project separately.
Thank you.
>> Let me get the consensus
of the committee. If there is
anyone who would object
to the item being bifurcated?
Okay, let me make sure the
public understands that what we
are proposing is to make an
adjustment and vote first on
the items minus the last item
referenced by Supervisor
Horvath. We'll make that
notation so that we're very
much aware of the first vote.
And then we would take a vote
on these items separately.
>> Appreciated. Thank you.
>> So I'll move the balance.
Well, have we done public
comment?
>> Yeah, we haven't gotten
there yet. Are we ready?
Okay. Is there a member
of the public that wishes
to speak
on the items minus SR 91?
>> There's public comment
for item 10. Please press pound
2 if you'd like to make,
>> You know what, let's just
speak on all of them.
>> Yes.
>> Yes. Item 10 as a whole.
Yes. No public comments.
>> Okay, a motion's
in order.
>> So accepting the bifurcation.
>> As on the screen.
>> As, oh, yeah, we're
on the screen already.
>> We're ready. Our clerk is
ready.
>> Okay, there we go. So I
guess I will move item 10A1.
10A.
>> Do I have a second? Okay,
moved and seconded that we
approve item 10A.1. Will you
call the roll?
>> Vice Chair Solis?
>> Aye.
>> Director Mitchell?
>> Aye.
>> Director Najarian?
>> Aye.
>> And Chair, excuse me,
Director Horvath?
>> Aye.
>> And Chair Dupont-Walker?
>> Yes.
>> The motion carries.
>> Thank you.
>> And now we will move
to the next item.
>> Just give it a second
to reset so she can.
There we go.
>> Okay, could I have a motion,
please?
>> This is,
so that the first one was for,
we had pulled
out just the one section,
so it was A1,
which removed the one section,
B and C. So, then this 2nd vote
is just for the Shoemaker
Avenue project approval.
>> As presented.
>> Correct?
>> So, what would the proper
name of that motion be?
>> You can move it
to approve it, just this
project.
>> I will move just this
project.
>> There you go.
>> Do I have a 2nd?
>> I'll second. Please call
the roll, Madam Clerk.
>> Vice Chair Solis?
>> Aye.
>> Director Mitchell?
>> Aye.
>> Director Najarian?
>> Aye.
>> Director Mitchell, excuse
me, Director Horvath?
>> No.
>> And Chair Dupont-Walker?
>> Yes.
>> The motion carries.
>> Thank you. We now move
to item 11, Measure M 10-Year
Comprehensive Assessment
Objectives and Criteria. Do we
have a presentation?
>> Yes, we do, Chair. Ray
Sosa, Chief Planning Officer,
accompanied by Mike O'Connor,
Executive Officer, and Paul
Backstrom, Senior Director,
will go
through the presentation
on the Measure M 10-Year
Comprehensive Assessment
Objectives and Criteria.
>> Thank you again, Madam
Chair, members
of the committee. This is kind
of actually building on
Director Najarian's earlier
comments about Measure M and
the history of it. This is
really a through line from
Measure M as a bottoms-up,
transparent, consensus-based
sales tax measure securing 71%
of the vote and the
accountability measures that
were built into that ordinance
that have helped provide the
structure for Measure M going
forward and allowing
for an opportunity 10 years
later
to do a comprehensive
assessment of the measure
to set ourselves up
for the next decade.
of delivering Measure M
in the region. So, with that,
I'll begin the presentation.
So, our recommendation today is
to approve the objectives and
the criteria for the Measure M
10-Year Comprehensive
Assessment. This action is
consistent with the Measure M
guidelines, and in addition
to what the ordinance directs,
the guidelines also state that
the Measure M Independent
Taxpayer Oversight Committee
shall review the objectives and
criteria prior to presentation
to the board. We completed that
step in June, presenting
to them, and so we are now
bringing this item forward
to the board this cycle to
approve these objectives and
criteria. Next slide. So, the
fundamental purpose of the
comprehensive assessment is to
provide accountability and
transparency in how Metro and
our partners are performing
in the delivery
of the voter-approved Measure M
program and
to use that information
to guide our actions
over the next decade. The
ordinance requires the
preparation of a comprehensive
assessment every 5 years. You
may recall that we had our
first 5-year assessment for
Measure M in October of 2023,
which this board approved.
At the 10-year interval mark,
the Measure M ordinance also
requires that Metro assess and
expenditure plan major projects
and multi-year subregional
programs, or MSPs to see how
they are completed or
anticipated to be completed
during the next 10-year period.
That means when we go through
this assessment process,
we're looking back 5 years,
but also looking forward 10
years, creating a 15-year
fiscal year window. So,
to prepare for this work,
we have to do several things.
We have to estimate the
financial capacity for Measure
M and compare our forecasted
revenues against our
anticipated expenditures. We
also have to assess project and
program benefits associated
with Measure M investments.
coordinate
across the agency departments
with numerous teams,
conduct stakeholder engagement,
which will be a critical
element of this work
to ground our findings
in the lived experiences
of our riders and also
to gather feedback
on any proposed amendments we
may bring forward to you. And
finally,
once the assessment is
complete, we will bring it
to the Board for consideration
along
with any potential amendments.
One key item, just we want to
keep saying this every time we
come back to you, is that the
end process requires a 2/3 vote
to approve the comprehensive
assessment and a 2/3 vote
to approve any amendments. So
that consensus building, that
transparency, that community
engagement,
we take that very seriously
during this process. We want
to come back to you
with the opportunity
to have items
before you that will allow
for that consensus
to take hold. So, the framework
and the objectives
for the assessment. There's 2
major analyses that compose the
assessment framework. Part 1 is
that system-wide assessment
of progress to date,
going back the past 5 years and
building on the first 5-year
assessment that we conducted.
It's a state of the system and
a quality-of-life assessment
of the administration of
Measure M to date. It will
encompass a broad range of
analysis that includes
revenues, expenditures,
major project status, Metro
employment and vacancy rates,
access to opportunity,
and economic benefits, as well
as some external factors that
are affecting the construction
market outlook. The assessment
objectives and criteria
in this report primarily apply
to this portion
of the analysis. The work
that's completed in Part 1 will
then inform our work in Part
2, which is the capital project
and program assessment. This
portion is the evaluation of
the expenditure plan major
projects and programs including
the MSPs, that are completed or
anticipated to be completed
in the next 10-year period. We
are developing a project
evaluation framework, metrics,
and weighting for this work,
which we'll bring
to you this fall. The 5
recommended assessment
objectives, which you see
on the right, carry over
from the 2023 assessment that
we conducted
with a minor revision
to the first objective, which
really broadens our analysis to
include other actors that are
delivering Measure M projects
and implementing projects
funded by Measure M in terms
of direct and subrecipients
of Measure M funds. We want to
make sure it's a holistic
approach to everyone involved
in delivering Measure M. The
language used in these 5
objectives draws directly
from the Measure M ordinance to
ensure that we are meeting the
requirements of the ordinance
in preparing the assessment.
So, the proposed assessment
criteria, similar
to the objectives, it builds
upon those that were used
in the 2023 Measure M 5-year
assessment
with some modifications to
address the specific needs that
are required
for the 10-year assessment.
So, we began
with those criteria
from the 5-year assessment,
and we modified them
to reflect relevant changes
since then,
including recommendations
from the Oversight Committee
and Metro staff that were
included in the Measure and
5-Year Assessment report. We
had board direction via motion
at that time when the board
approved the 2023 report,
and that is included. We also
have report recommendations
themselves from the 5-Year
Assessment that we wanted
to continue forward, and again,
the needs that are specific
for the, the ordinance's
10-year assessment
requirements. So, there are 7
assessment areas. There's a lot
on the screen, so I won't go
through the entire thing. This
is all in Attachment A
to the report,
but essentially, it's,
this is a sampling
of those criteria. So
basically, it's not the entire
element, but it's,
it gives you a good sense
of what's in each
of these assessment areas. 2
new assessment areas have been
added to the original 2023
criteria. The first is the
planning assessment area,
which includes 2 criteria. The
first one related to project
performance as amended
by the board with the adoption
of the 2023 Comprehensive
Assessment and whether Measure
M is helping to address the
board-adopted VMT targets or
vehicle miles traveled. The
second new assessment area is
economic impact, and that will
examine direct and indirect
jobs created during and after
project implementation and
examine the cost-benefit of
Measure M projects and programs
consistent with their
cost-benefit analysis process.
Equity is pulled
out as its own assessment area,
and consistent
with staff recommendations
in the 2023 5-year assessment,
we are working very closely
with the Office of Equity and
Race to improve our definition
for access
to opportunity and what it
means for the 10-year
comprehensive assessment as we
go forward. So, the application
of these criteria in totality
will produce a transparent
examination of how Metro and
its agency partners have
invested Measure M dollars,
whether set-asides
for operations and state of
good repair have been
sufficient, how revenues and
expenditures are tracking
against our original forecast,
identify associated benefits
of Measure M and who benefits,
and examines the external
forces that have complicated
project delivery and prepare us
for the next decade
of investment. So
for the financial capacity,
we're in the process
of developing this analysis to
determine whether there is
capacity
to add new projects or programs
to Measure M. The financial
forecast that was prepared
for the Metro 2025
Short-Range Transportation
Plan demonstrated that Measure
M revenue is down from the
original revenue forecast
in the 2016 expenditure plan.
However, we are currently
updating the financial forecast
based on the UCLA Anderson
School of Business sales tax
forecast and that will be used
to inform stakeholder
discussions and coming
recommendations
of any potential amendments
to the expenditure plan. So, as
you look forward
for the next steps again,
this is a long process. We have
various touchpoints
with you and the Oversight
Committee and the public as we
move towards that Board action
in fall of 2027.
With the approval
of the objectives and criteria,
today and at the full board,
we'll begin an extensive data
collection process
to prepare the assessment.
In the fall of this year,
we will bring to the board a
project evaluation framework
with metrics and weighting
to prepare to assess Measure M
expenditure plan projects.
In spring 2027, we will bring a
draft assessment and proposed
draft amendments to the both
the board and the oversight
committee
for discussion and feedback.
Following that process, we'll
incorporate the direction that
is received
to complete the final work on
the assessment draft
recommendation and draft
amendments, excuse me, the
assessment and the draft
amendments. Then we'll come
back to the Oversight
Committee in the summer
for review and comment on the
assessment and any necessary
findings
on the proposed amendments,
and then incorporate all
of that recommendations,
feedback, etc., and come back
to the Board in fall 2027 to
present the final assessment,
which will require a 2/3 vote,
and any proposed amendments,
which require a 2/3 vote.
Stakeholder engagement,
of course, will be conducted
throughout this process. It's
very important that we continue
to engage our communities and
those that helped pass Measure
M and share the vision with us
to implement what is in
Measure M, and that will help
ground truth our findings and
assess the amendment process as
we go forward. And I believe
that is the final slide. I'd be
very happy to take any
questions or receive direction.
Thank you.
>> Thank you for that very
comprehensive report. Do we
have any members
of the public who've requested
to speak?
>> This public comment
for item 11. Please press pound
2 if you'd like
to make a comment. No public
comments.
>> Public comment is now
closed. I believe, and,
and this is a nostalgic moment
for me as I think about
Director Najarian and the
historic memory that he has and
the years that he has put in
to make sure that all
of this came to fruition. I
remember the trips around
Measure M, crowding
in cars going from the San
Fernando Valley to San Pedro
to the beach cities, all
to talk about Measure M. And I
just think
about you wanting this being
one of your legacy projects
because you were
one of those who seemed
to be able to talk
to all kinds of audiences,
and I was amazed.
>> Are you calling me old?
>> That means I was there.
>> What does that mean?
>> No.
>> Just briefly, I think it
was, it's a huge testament
to the residents of LA County
who stood up and accepted not
one
but two sales tax measures.
And I can't say the
immeasurable credibility that
gives us when we go to
Washington or to Sacramento
and ask
for funding because they say,
you guys stood up and made it
happen, and you're putting your
money where your mouths are.
Of course, leadership from the
supervisors and the mayors that
were,
LA mayors that were involved
in this, and board members, as
well as yourself and others who
we've sat with,
played a great role in that.
So I'm just, I was just part
of the team. Thank you.
>> And I know we're not
supposed to offer trinkets, but
I do remember the M&M's that we
carried and how popular we were
with them. But this certainly
is a testament
to voter confidence, and it's
so important as we look forward
to stimulating this ridership
explosion that has started
with FIFA, but also
to find ways to meet the
emerging challenges and
opportunities, preparing
for major events, adapting
to evolving travel patterns,
embracing new technology, and
building the most resilient and
sustainable transportation
system in the world. Thank you,
CEO Wiggins and Metro staff,
for developing this framework,
and we look forward to what is
to come. I see requests from
Supervisor Solis.
>> Yes, thank you.
I too want to join you and,
and thank you and, and Ara and
all the folks that really made
this all possible. It seems
like 10 years went
by so fast, and this is my,
going on my 12th year,
and some of us won't even be
on the board
by the time they get to 27,
year 27. So I'll be watching.
But I want to say that it's
been my privilege to serve on
this board and actually see the
workings of Measure M and how
we were able to meet the needs
of our community. And I,
for one, will say I got
to sit here and be able
to vote on some very
significant projects,
like the Gold Line extension
to Pomona that some people
thought would never happen,
the Metro Regional Connector
that we saw famously, and the
NoHo to Pasadena BRT. Ara, come
on, we were there
in those battles. It's tough.
And it's still tough,
but we're getting there. And
I'm very excited about the
Eastside extension and also
Sela, cause that's kind
of where, well, it was called
Sela before, that line.
But just
to say how far we've come. And
I know that there's going
to be a lot
of assessment feedback coming
in from all parts
of our communities
in the county, but I do want
to say that that we look
at also keeping our commitment
to the voters. Because I know
in my situation with the
Eastside Gold Line, we knew
that there was funding for 2
rails, 2 rails that could have
been proposed. One was R60,
right? And that didn't happen
because we didn't have
sufficient funding. So there
was a decision made to go
to a BRT. from down here in
El Monte all the way out to
Pomona. And that was a way of
still continuing our commitment
to our communities out there
that still don't have that area
covered in a rail system. So I
would hope that we would think
about committing to keeping the
monies that were set aside
for SR 60 to stay in the area
for the East LA Gold Line
because it still will impact
the areas in Whittier, going
through Whittier and extending
as far as we can from East LA
out
to those different communities.
And I believe it's an
obligation that we made. And it
was pretty clear
to me what the trade-offs were.
But not to say that somehow
this money then could be left
over and reprogrammed somewhere
else for something else.
I think that would really go
against the grain of what our
commitment was and what we sold
our communities on, that we, we
were lifting up these equity
areas. So for me, that would,
that would be something that I
would like to be
on record for. Thank you very
much.
>> Supervisor Horvath.
>> Thank you, Madam Chair. In
2023, along with consideration
of the 5-year assessment,
our board adopted a set
of evaluation criteria,
and I see some
of that being incorporated
in what you presented. Thank
you for that.
But I'm not seeing some others,
and so I just, for example,
wanted to highlight under the
economic impact criteria will
staff be evaluating access to
jobs as well as direct and
indirect job creation?
>> Yes, Supervisor. Our equity
assessment area will include
criteria for measuring access
to opportunity, and that also
includes examining access
to jobs. So yes.
>> Okay, and will staff
evaluate whether projects and
programs are anticipated
to connect
to major economic centers,
which we know will increase
sales tax growth,
which I know you sort of led
with that we're not on track
at this point. So, if that's
being done,
where is that criteria
captured, and where does
project feasibility and
competitive competitiveness
for local, state,
or federal dollars factor
into the criteria?
>> Sure, thank you. There's 3
areas that I would focus on.
The first is the planning
assessment area
with a criterion that's
specific to connectivity. Under
the equity assessment area,
there's also some, some
elements there that are focused
on that. And then you have the
access to opportunity. So, all
3, I mean, there may not be one
direct hit on it, but there's
3 areas that converge
on that will help us to explore
that area that you requested.
>> And the Board report notes
criteria being incorporated
into both retrospective
evaluation as well as
prospective. And I saw a lot
of the retrospective in
Attachment A,
and that was very helpful.
Where will we see the criteria
being factored into prospective
analysis?
>> I appreciate that. So, we're
setting up the look back first,
and then we'll be coming back
in the fall with a report on
the project evaluation
framework, the metrics, the
weighting,
the look forward part. So,
we're kind
of setting up how we've done
to date first,
and then we're transitioning.
So, you will see that in the
fall when we come back.
>> Okay. And just
on the going forward, I think
the more explicit we can be
in sort of highlighting since
the board passed that criteria
how we're addressing that
criteria in evaluation, I
think,
I know that would be helpful
to me and maybe
for others as well. Thank you.
>> Supervisor Mitchell.
>> Thank you, Madam Chair, and
I'm looking forward
to this process. I'm glad
to join this committee again
to have this opportunity to
take this 10-year comprehensive
assessment.
On your assessment area slide,
I think it's slide 6, I just
want to comment on the first
bullet and the last bullet, the
financial analysis and equity.
I am hoping to learn from the
assessment's analysis whether
our operations and our
maintenance funding has been
sufficient
for existing budgets, as well
as if our current operations
and maintenance funding levels
are going to meet the needs
of our growing system. That's
going to be really, I think,
important to me,
particularly as operations
chair, and really trying
to make sure I keep my eye on
the operations and maintenance
budget. Because
from my perspective, it, it
funds and fuels the core
element of our system. And so,
I am hoping that the assessment
will give me that kind
of insight.
>> Yes, we've received clear
direction,
and we are not doing this work
in a silo, even though the
assessment itself and the
comprehensive assessment is
more of a capital assessment.
We are not bifurcating
in any way, shape, or form, and
have had clear direction that
where are there,
where there are opportunities
to reduce our reliance on
operations-eligible funding or
assist that in any way,
we are seeking them. So, we've
already started our work there,
and we understand the marching
orders.
>> Thank you. I appreciate
that. I understand both in the
report and you articulated that
you're working
on the definition of access
to opportunity under equity.
And so, I'll be interested in
hearing what that ultimately is
defined as, but I'm hoping that
we think broadly, macro versus
micro, when we think
about access to opportunity,
and that it's not just making
sure people,
that we're not just focusing
on access to work and school,
but,
medical facility, but
that's not an urgent care or a
hospital. So, we're trying
to do some of that work
in culling through the data.
>> Thank you very much
for that.
Thanks, Madam Chair.
>> Okay, this is an action
item. Could I have a motion and
second, please?
>> Second.
>> Thank you. Madam Clerk, will
you please call the roll?
>> Vice Chair Solis?
>> Aye.
>> Director Mitchell?
>> Aye.
>> Director Najarian?
>> Aye.
>> Director Horvath?
>> Aye.
>> And Chair Dupont-Walker?
>> Aye.
>> The motion carries.
>> Thank you. Moving to item
12, Eastside Transit Corridor
Phase 2 Project.
>> Thank you, Madam Chair. Ray
Sosa, Chief Planning Officer,
being joined at the desk by
Jill Liu, who is our project
manager and senior director
for the East Side, and our
senior executive officer,
David Meagher, to initiate the
presentation.
>> Thank you, Ray. I think
Director Solis may have already
given our introduction for this
project just a few moments ago.
But this is a project that's
been coming a long, long time.
Eastside, the first cycle 1,
the phase 1
of the project was completed,
and now we have a chance
to complete a project that gets
to Whittier Boulevard, serves
Atlantic, gets over to City
of Commerce, which has more
attendees than Disneyland, they
claim, every year, as a major,
at the head
of the I-5 freeway coming in
from the south,
a major transfer point
from cars to get
into transit and move
through the east side to get
to downtown. So, this has been
a long time coming, and I think
we have a progress report on a
major milestone that we're
achieving
with the project right now.
And I'll turn it over to
Jill, our project manager.
>> Good morning, Chair
Dupont-Walker and committee
members. Staff is here
to present agenda item number
12 for the Eastside Transit
Corridor Phase 2 project. This
is a 9-mile project, as David
mentioned, from East LA to
Whittier. This 9-mile project
has been environmentally clear
under CEQA. After 19 years
of making in the history. And
right now, we're focused on
design and federal
environmental clearance for the
initial 4.7-mile alignment
for this project. In May, we
published the NEPA document
environmental assessments,
and then in June, we completed
the public review process based
on the findings of the
environmental assessment and
the feedback received
from the public and agencies.
We are recommending 3
recommendations
for the board's consideration
to receive and file the NEPA
document, including the project
mitigation measures
for the LPA, a 4.7-mile IOS
to Montebello. Also approve a
new and smaller maintenance and
storage facility, MSS Site 3,
in the City of Commerce
for the board-approved LPA,
while maintaining the entire
9-mile project all the way to
Whittier and the end of
Lambeau Road in Whittier.
That's the full project
definition. And then amending
the 2020 Long-Range
Transportation Plan to reflect
the board LPA and the new MSF
site for the Eastside Phase 2
project. Just for context,
this project has been
in the making for 19 years. As
I mentioned, the existing E
Line currently has 22 miles
long and 29 stations and
provides 1-seat rides from
East LA to Santa Monica. Once
the full 9-mile project is
built,
this project will extend the E
Line service to 30 miles, 31
miles long with 7 new stations
connecting more people
to more jobs and more places.
Similar to the other Metro
Rail projects, we will be
implementing the project
in phases
with the initial phase to
Montebello connecting the
hearts of East LA, Commerce
Citadel that has 17 million
visitors, and then downtown
Montebello. And the future
extension will further extend
the E Line by another 4 miles
to, from Montebello to
Whittier. Because the 9 Mile
project has been
environmentally clear
under CEQA, and the project has
well-defined alternative and
station alignment,
we have FTA's approval for this
1-year expedited NEPA process
so that we can make a federal
action for funding
for this project. This new
alignment, the IOS,
will include 3.1 miles
underground from East South
Atlantic Station to Commerce
Citadel. 0.9 miles
of aerial alignment north of,
near the Garfield-Washington
intersection in Commerce, and
then 0.7 miles
of street-level alignments in
Montebello. The NEPA study also
evaluated 3 new MSF sites,
which we'll talk a little bit
more about it later. And then
overall, the project schedule
is once we complete the NEPA
process in fall,
we will start utility
relocation,
property acquisition in 2027.
Groundbreaking
for station and guideways in
2029 and opening
for the project in about 10
years. The project does have
many benefits,
reduced travel time from 16
minutes by car down to 8
minutes by rail, regardless
of traffic. Better quality
of life, less traffic, less
emissions, and then reduced
transportation costs for over
75,000 individuals that are
transit dependent
in a study area. it generates
over $3.1 billion economic
benefits
in this region and then 11,000
new jobs for the construction
and operation of the project.
During the NEPA phase,
we heard from the community the
39-acre site in Montebello was
too large. It covers 500
employees and 6 large
properties.
During NEPA phase, we tried
to look at ways
to reduce impact. We started
thinking about within the box
of 2 options, MS Site 1 and 2
in Montebello, which shows
in yellow and green
on the map. And those are
smaller than 39 acres, 25 to
29 acres. However, that's still
too big to the City of
Montebello. And we started
to think outside of the box.
What can we do? We look at the
properties that were already
identified in the final EIR
for tunnel boring activity,
and we're going
to use those 9-acre sites in
Commerce Twice
after construction
of tunnel boring
for the underground alignment
in Commerce, we're going
to use it
for a junior MSF site
in the city of Commerce. MSF
Site 3 is recommended because
it meets the operational
requirements, we need
for the IOS, reduce the number
of property acquisitions,
reduce the impact
to the community
without displacing 500
employees in Montebello. It
also minimizes construction
impact along Washington
Boulevard. We conducted the
weighted benefits and cost
analysis also for the 3
options, and all MSF sites are
viable, but MSF Site 3
performed the best. As you can
see, we, across all 5 goals,
MSF Site 3 delivers similar
benefits from safety, health,
environmental sustainability,
and deliver economic benefits.
However, it, we could deliver
all the similar benefits
with much lower cost. Reduce
construction impact and
environmental impact
to our community. We have also
conducted very comprehensive
outreach, starting even prior
to entry into the NEPA phase
in early 2025. We hosted 4
public meetings in East LA,
Montebello, Commerce, and also
virtually. We had 200 attendees
at those events. And throughout
the whole NEPA process,
we worked very closely
with our 14 community-based
organizations on this project.
to continue increasing
awareness for this project. We
made the environmental
assessment document available
online, which we had 1,300
visits over 30 days. We have
hard copies available
at local libraries,
distributed 50,000 flyers
door-to-door
to our community station area,
transit intercepts, small
businesses, legal notices,
digital and physical flyers
through many, many channels.
And then we want to really
thank the board offices and the
cities and the Gateway Cities
Corps for helping us informing
the community
of this project. A little bit
about the finding from the
environmental assessment. The
LPA to Montebello has no
adverse environmental impact
that cannot be mitigated. It
has minimal impact
to historical resources, and
the impact that had been
identified in the EA can either
be avoided, minimized,
or mitigated
with the implementation of the
project. measures and the NEPA
mitigation measures. And as I
mentioned,
this project creates $3.1
billion of benefits in terms
of economic condition.
Finally, what we heard
from the public in June during
the 30-day public review period
and the 4 public hearings in
East LA, Commerce,
Montebello, and virtually is
that we have received 140 total
comment submission letters,
which encompass over 350
comments. These comments are
very, very similar
to what we have heard
from the previously,
the final EIR. It shows really
strong support
for the project,
for the extension to
Montebello and further
extension to Whittier. And
there's some common suggestions
about how we can work
with the cities and communities
on the design
of the alignment and the
station to ensure appropriate
traffic access and safety
during construction. and also
considering transit-oriented
development, community benefits
throughout the project
development process. So today
we are requesting your approval
and to receive and file
for the NEPA document,
select the MSF site in
Commerce, and also updating the
long-range plan. Upon your
approval for these actions,
we will work
with our lead agency FTA
to publish the NEPA document,
the findings of no significant
impact findings by fall 2026,
And we'll work with the,
our cities to continue engaging
the public throughout the
environmental process. I would
just really acknowledge FTA
Region 9
for their expedited review
for this process, also their
partnership,
and also our borough offices
in terms of outreach support
during the NEPA phase. And
also, behind me and work
with me, 175 staff members
from Metro departments and our
consultant team,
including our SBE and DBE,
who worked really hard
for the outreach effort.
With that, I'm happy
to answer any questions.
>> Thank you
for that presentation. Do we
have any members
of the public who asked
to speak?
>> Yes, we do. I have item 12
here. Patrick Lewis, please
come up to lectern A. Ashley
Lujan, please come up
to lectern B. Gabriella Eddy,
please come up to lectern A.
If you're on the phone,
please press pound 2.
>> Thank you. We're glad
to hear your voice today.
>> Good afternoon. My name is
Patrick Lewis, and I'm speaking
on behalf of the Gateway
Cities Council of
Governments. Today we voice our
support for the Eastside
Transit Corridor Phase 2
project and the environmental
assessment
before the committee. This
project represents an important
step
toward expanding reliable,
high-quality transit service
throughout Southeast Los
Angeles County and the
Gateway Cities region.
Improved regional connectivity
will make it easier
for residents to reach jobs,
schools, medical facilities,
commercial areas, and other key
destinations while reducing
transportation barriers
for many communities. We urge
the committee to receive and
file the environmental
assessment, approve the
recommended maintenance and
storage facility site in
Commerce, and amend the
long-range transportation plan
to incorporate the
board-approved locally
preferred alternative.
Advancing these approvals will
bring the project closer to
implementation and help realize
long-term transportation,
economic, and quality
of life benefits
for our communities. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Next, please.
>> Good afternoon. My name is
Ashley Lujan. I represent the
Mexican American Opportunity
Foundation. As a grassroots
organization that provides
services to community members
throughout the East Side,
Commerce, Montebello, and
neighboring communities, we
witness firsthand how important
public reliable transportation
is to the people we serve.
This is why we support the
Eastside Corridor Transit
Corridor Phase 2 project. Many
of our community members rely
on transit every day to get
to work, go to school,
attend medical appointments,
and other essential
destinations. We encourage the
Metro Board
to continue advancing the
Eastside Transit Corridor
Phase 2 project so future
generations can benefit
from a stronger,
more connected system.
Expanded transport, expanding
transportation is not a luxury
but a crucial step to creating
greater opportunities
for families and neighborhoods.
Thank you.
>> Thank you. Next, please.
>> Can you hear me?
>> Thank you. Yes.
>> Good morning, Chair,
members. I'm Gabriela Eria,
community organizer
with SVCC representing today,
and we want
to express our strong support
for the Eastside Transit
Corridor Phase 2 project.
Every day we work with
residents and families
throughout our community who
rely on public transportation
to get to work, to school, to
medical appointments and
services they need. We know
that having reliable and
accessible transit is not just
about getting from one place
to another. It's
about creating opportunities,
reducing barriers, and helping
our communities stay connected.
I'm from Mexico City, so I know
about these things firsthand.
And expanding transit access
will help connect residents
to jobs, education, healthcare,
sports, and recreation. And we
also appreciate that Metro's
commitment engaged community
organizations like us and
residents throughout this
process, giving local voices
the opportunity
to be heard and
to help us that to project like
this reflects needs and
priorities of the community.
Thank you for your time,
and we support this. Go
Metro!
>> Go Metro! We have 2 people
from the phones. Please unmute
the first caller.
>> Caller ending in 9370,
please state your name. You
have 1 minute
to state your comment.
>> Hi, my name is Jacqueline. I
am a South Montebello resident,
and I decided to call
in because I'm in support
for the Metro Eastside
Extension all the way to
Montebello. I would get service
from the last train station,
which would be, at least
for this portion, the
Greenland and Washington. And I
am here in support because we
Don't have that many. We have
many. We have the Montebello
transit, but
at the same time, it's not as
like,
it's not as consistent as
Metro. And I feel like
with this Metro extension, we
would have much more reliable
service to get
to downtown LA or to get
to even closer places
like the Citadel, which is,
which was the station prior.
And I'm here
in support because I feel like
it would benefit our community
to have reliable
transportation,
to have reliable transportation
to downtown LA.
>> Moving on
to the next caller.
Caller ending in 3705,
please say your name. You have
1 minute
to state your comment.
>> Good afternoon,
board members. My name is
Cesar Roldan, Director of
Public Works for the City of
Montebello. The city supports
Metro's continued advancements
of the Eastside Transit
Corridor Phase 2 project and
the environmental assessment
being presented today.
However, we respectfully
request that the board consider
relocating the proposed
maintenance and storage
facility to a more appropriate
site outside of the City of
Montebello. This project is an
important investment
in regional mobility. It will
expand access to jobs,
education, healthcare,
and other essential services
for residents in East Los
Angeles, Commerce,
Montebello, Pico, Santa Fe
Springs, Whittier, and the
surrounding communities. We
urge the committee to receive
and file the environmental
assessment, approve the
proposed maintenance storage
facility site in Commerce, and
amend the long-range
transportation plan to advance
the board-selected locally
preferred alternative. I want
to thank the board, and I want
to thank Metro staff
for working with the City of
Montebello. Thank you.
>> That was the last public
comment.
>> Thank you. Supervisor
Solis.
>> Yes, thank you, Madam
Chair. I especially want
to thank the staff. I want
to thank you, Ray, and your
team Jill, Lou, especially
Lillian De Losa Gutierrez,
Lorena Sanchez, Dolores
Roibal, Annette Cortez, and I
especially want
to thank our CEO, Stephanie
Wiggins, and everyone, because
when you mentioned earlier this
has been a 19-year project,
I had to shake my head. I
haven't even been here 12 yet,
and look at, I mean,
people have been on this,
and it took mountains,
moving mountains. And I want to
say that you have not let us
down, Metro, and the community
has not let us down. And it is
important because this,
for me, is one
of the biggest legacy projects
for the East Side. And we're
finally going
to see some pathway forward.
And given all the challenges
and hardships, to come
to this day,
to see that we're going
to submit our NEPA, go
through the NEPA process,
and we've had our hearings, and
we've done tremendous outreach.
So I want to commend you for
that because I know this was
not easy. And including
figuring
out where we were going
to put the maintenance yard,
going back and forth with
Montebello and Commerce. And
the person who called earlier,
we're looking at Commerce. So
just
to clear the record there and
to let you know that now
because of this process,
we'll be able to move into the
other step forward now that'll
open up the capital investment
grant program so we can receive
more funding. And I'm just I'm
just overwhelmed. I can't
believe that today has finally
come for me, at least sitting
here knowing that all things
were coming together. Because
last year or 6 months ago, I
was very fearful that things
were not going
to go this way,
that they were going to go
in another direction. But I'm
very happy that the wisdom
of your committee, this
committee, and your staff,
as well as the community coming
out to support. And I want
to thank my staff too, Wakas,
Raymond, and others that have
been involved in this process
for many years. What a
tremendous opportunity is
for all of us. And I would just
ask us to continue to do the
outreach so people are fully
aware that we have our eyes and
our ears focused here,
and that this is going to be a
very beneficial project
economically for people who are
so transit-dependent
on the bus right now, and
to see them making progress,
economic development,
and just the creation
of jobs, all of that is going
to be so meaningful
for this space, for East LA,
which has gone
through a whole lot, as many
of you know, in the last 3
weeks. So, thank you so much,
and I want to congratulate the
planning team and again our
CEO. Thank you.
>> I love the confidence
already being expressed and
this project. Director
Najarian.
>> Well, I have another story
to tell.
>> We're ready, we're ready,
we're ready.
>> It was almost 17 years ago,
it was November of 2009, that
I,
as a freshly minted chairman
of this august agency,
was there and able
to officiate at the
ribbon-cutting and the
dedication of the East Side,
they called it the Gold Line
back then. Phase 1. And it was
attended by all the incredible
community leaders, Gloria
Molina, Representative Lucille
Roybal-Allard, the mayor was
Antonio Villaraigosa, and
everyone was there. And I have
to tell you,
it was such a proud moment
for East LA at that time,
because up until then, they
really felt that they were
being ignored
in the transit allocation.
The West Side had all their,
the Red Line was already going,
the Purple Line was going, and
this was something that really
brought some identity and some
pride
to the entire community.
Supervisor, you were probably
in Washington, and you probably
heard all the good news and
everything that was that was
going on at that time. And then
let's move forward a little
bit. I can't, I mean,
I can't overstate the amount of
controversy that we were facing
trying to decide which
alignment was going
to be used. Is it going
to be the SR 60, or is it going
to be the Washington
Boulevard? And all the heavy
hitters were out there trying
to lobby the board. Richard
Alatorre, A big proponent
of the SR-60. Mike Ruse and all
these other folks were coming
in and lobbying. And I think it
was a contamination discovery
on the SR-60 route that really
shifted everyone back to
Washington. And I'm so happy
that we're here today approving
the NEPA, moving forward. It's
something that the East Side
desperately deserves and is
entitled to. Thank you.
Especially since we've had all
the excitement
on the west side, right? We've
got the K Line and the, the C
Line and the D Line and all
that stuff. This is something
that's truly deserved and
equitable. And if nothing else,
this board tries to be
equitable. I think there's
still some allocations that
need to be made
to the east side
of the county,
but certainly this is a step
in the right direction. So I
wholeheartedly support this.
>> Well, thank you
for sharing that. Really,
really important. But I do,
I want to just add kudos
to you for the outreach. It's
such an outstanding notation of
how the community has been
engaged. And actually, the only
public comment today has been
on this item,
so it continues. And kudos
to you. Thank you. Thank you so
much, Madam Clerk. I'm going
to have a motion,
please. I know Mr. Najarian is
going to second it.
>> Vice Chair Solis?
>> Yes.
>> [ SPANISH ].
>> Director Mitchell?
>> Aye.
>> Director Najarian?
>> Aye.
>> Director Horvath?
>> Aye.
>> And Chair Dupont-Walker?
>> [ SPANISH ].
>> The motion carries.
>> Thank you. Thank you so
much. We are now at item 13,
Open and Slow Streets Grant
Program update.
>> Thank you, Chair. Joining me
at the table is Jacob Lieb,
Deputy Executive Officer, and
Neha Chawla, Senior Director,
who will go
through the presentation.
>> Thank you.
>> Good afternoon. We will be
presenting the Open and Slow
Streets grant update
for your consideration. The
staff recommendation is
to provide assistance
to local jurisdictions
to use local return and
Transportation Development
Act, or TDA, Article 3 as the
only available funding for
Open and Slow Streets events
occurring between September
2026 and March 2028. The
Metro Board approved cycles 6
and 7 of the program in
December 2026, 2025. The action
included an amendment
to report back on a series of
recommendations and analysis,
to obtain input
from community stakeholders
to identify ways
to make the program permanent,
initiate an abbreviated cycle
with identified funding
for events occurring between
September 2026 and March
2028, and offer technical
assistance,
including alternative sources
of funding
for events not funded
through cycles 6 and 7.
>> Thank you, Neha. Good
afternoon, Madam Chair, members
of the committee. I will talk
you through the staff response
to direction from the board
from back in January, as Neha
described. This is
substantially described
within the board report itself,
but I'll be describing some
of the high points
of our staff response.
For the first item,
which directed us to come back
with recommendations
for a permanent Open and Slow
Streets program, what we're
describing is that staff
intends to return to the board
in 2028 with recommendations
for a permanent program. A
couple of things that we want
to emphasize here. First
of all,
that the currently awarded
Cycle 6 and 7 Open and Slow
Streets events,
and I'd say unlike prior cycles
of the grant program, we have
retained the program evaluation
activities, whereas in the past
we've asked our grantees
to evaluate individual events.
That evaluation is ongoing
with the current slate
of events, will continue
with the 2028 Open and Slow
Streets events,
and that will provide us
with a depth of information to
inform that recommendation that
we'll be bringing back to you.
in 2028. The other thing
to emphasize is that we do
within this Board report
describe some guideposts or
considerations
for a permanent program,
and we felt it was important to
inform you and get your
feedback as our Board, as well
as to provide an indication
to stakeholders and partners
about how we want
to pursue that discussion
over the next couple
of years. And it features
things like a closer tie
to specific intended outcomes,
such as improving transit
ridership, both on day of event
and measuring the impact that
open and slow streets events
have on everyday choices
to ride transit. Additional
outcomes that we are featuring
include creating some distinct
and measurable momentum
toward the implementation of
permanent active transportation
infrastructure,
and then as well moving
toward a more regular,
predictable cadence of open and
slow streets events, as we see
with some of the most popular
and successful and long-running
open street and slow streets
programs around the world. All
of those objectives that we
described in the board report
are also underpinned
by a key consideration,
which is cost efficiency. What
we've observed,
and specifically recently
with the program,
are dramatically increasing
costs,
and everything else that we
want to accomplish
with this program requires us
to deliver these events as
efficiently as possible
with our partners. The second
item that the Board asked us
to come back
with recommendations
on is funding
for an abbreviated cycle and
to identify $1 million
for that purpose. What we have
described in the board report
is that there is both broadly
eligible, very flexible,
and available funding in
locally programmed fund
sources, including
Transportation Development
Act Article 3, as well as local
return. We've provided as
attachments to the board
reports the current fund
balances for both of those
Funding sources. We've also
described that
for all prior cycles of the
Open and Slow Street programs
we have tapped on Proposition C
25%, PC 25, as the only
eligible Metro, directly
Metro-programmed funding source
for programming events like
Open and Slow Streets. The
PC-25 funding source for this
time period is fully subscribed
to high-priority investments
such as the Vermont Transit
Corridor, the freeway service
patrol other items that,
that we've described
within the board report. And,
and we do not want to be
in a position
of creating a funding hole
within those other priorities
and, and then having
to come back to you
with recommendations for how
those funding holes might be
plugged. And then the final
item that the board asked us
to report back on is technical
assistance. I want
to emphasize here, of course,
that we provide technical
assistance to grantees and
prospective grantees routinely.
We've done that as part
of the cycle 6 and 7 debrief,
both with successful and
unsuccessful applicants. And we
will be,
pending the board's action
on this item, we will be
initiating an intensive
technical assistance effort
to assist jurisdictions with
accessing the available
funding, navigating trade-offs,
providing grant writing
assistance in instances where
that's appropriate,
and so forth. Open and Slow
Streets program, of course, is
an equity-focused effort that's
reflected in our grant
selection criteria, where in
fact these events are taking
place. As noted on slide 25,
of the current 29 funded events
are
in equity-focused communities,
and filters through with how
the events are produced and
mounted. Many of the events are
themselves produced by
community-based organizations,
and all of the events place a
great emphasis on making sure
that the full range of Los
Angeles residents have access
to events and are enjoying
them. Next steps as described,
we will be continuing
to evaluate the current slate
of funded program events
in cycles 6 and 7. returning
to you in 2028
with recommendations tied to
Cycle 8 and an ongoing
permanent program as directed
by the board. That concludes
our presentation.
>> Thank you very much. Do we
have any public comments?
>> If you'd like
to make a comment on item 13,
Open and Slow Streets Grant
Program Update, please press
pound 2 to raise your hand.
From the room, we have Rommel
Ramel Pasqual, please come
to podium lectern A, and Wes
Ruttenman, please come
to lectern B.
>> Good morning,
directors. I'm Ramel Pasqual.
I'm the executive director of
CicLAvia. Let me just begin by,
Metro has been an outstanding
partner in making Open Streets
one of the region's greatest
success stories. These events
have consistently delivered
benefits, increasing transit
ridership, supporting local
business, improving public
health, encouraging active
transportation, and most
importantly,
bringing communities together.
That's why today's report is so
disappointing. It arrives
months late. No permanent
program developed,
no funding allocated
for events in 2027. No
commitments
to longer multi-route,
multi-mile routes that have
made Open Streets so
successful. And I want
to be clear on this, is we
would have welcomed being
engaged as a report was being
developed. As the region's
longest-running and most
experienced Open Streets
organization, we believe our
experience could have helped
strengthen its recommendations.
As we move forward,
I'm asking the board to make
Open Streets permanent. Thank
you.
>> Thank you. Next, please.
>> Good morning, directors.
Wes Ruderman, Deputy Director
with active SGV.
Over the past decade,
we we've had the pleasure
of hosting 10 events in the
San Gabriel Valley made
possible by Metro. Our region
is filled
with small communities, and
these cities generally do not
have the staff capacity or the
discretionary funding
to host large regional events
like this. However, thanks to
Metro's program,
we've been able
to do really iconic events,
some of the biggest events
in the San Gabriel Valley.
For example,
our first one connected 6 new
Gold Line cities all the way
from Azusa to South Pasadena.
It was 8 communities together,
18 miles of open streets.
There was even a point-to-point
half marathon. People were able
to run, get a TAP card,
and take the train back. And
again, things like events
like that, or Arroyo Fest, when
the Arroyo Seco Parkway was
reopened, only possible with
Metro's leadership and support.
And unfortunately,
our region will not be able
to do events like this if there
isn't a strong partner at
Metro and a Metro program.
Thank you.
>> That was the last public
comment.
>> Okay, thank you. I hear the
public comment. I'm also struck
by the staff report, which
indicates that this is the only
available pot of money for this
use. I remember joining this
board,
and we were actually looking
at these kinds of activities as
being very much out-of-the-box
thinking. We've come a long way
but I must say I would be very,
very concerned if we put any
of our projects at risk
by doing this. So, we must find
a way
to be out-of-the-box thinkers
at the same time that we don't
forget our core focus. I am
very concerned if anything
would threaten the Vermont
Corridor. I am struck
by the continued memory
of a video that talked
about the last train, red car,
that went in. It was Vermont,
and it was promised that it
would return. And we start
with the BRT.
And so, I hope we can,
I know you will because you're
creative, continue to look.
And thank you for that. And I'm
sure none of us would want
to put
at risk a legacy project
like the Vermont Corridor BRT.
Thank you. Supervisor
Horvath.
>> Thank you, Madam Chair. I,
I just want to echo the
sentiments that were expressed
by members of the public. And
given the hour we're at, I, I
know we have a couple more
items and I probably need
to wrap up soon. I just wanted
to ask my colleagues to
consider potentially moving
this item for full board
consideration. I know there are
other members of the board who
also have a passion
for these programs,
and I too am disappointed,
not only what it says
about our investment
in this kind of programming,
but with a 4-month delay, even
if we did stand up something
alternatively,
it takes away the opportunity
for people to apply and go
through the process that's
necessary. The intention
behind this wasn't simply to
provide technical assistance.
It was to look at how we could
make a program permanent. And I
agree with the Chair that we
have to be mindful
of what our finances are. And
unfortunately, the pot of money
that was identified is not a
pot of money that we actually
have discretion over. And so, I
think that given the challenges
of what has been presented
to us and sort of the lateness
of where we are
in our committee meeting
at this point in time,
I think there's a lot
to discuss
about what would be possible
for us to do at this point. I
think a major motivation
for us
to consider this was not only
to create a long-term permanent
program, which I think is a
priority, but also
to identify opportunities
between the World Cup and the
Olympics and keep sort of the
energy going as it relates
to open streets and the kind
of activity that it can bring,
the kind of engagement
opportunities that it gives
Metro for, to engage people who
are interested in all of the
solutions that we're bringing
forward to communities. So, I
would just offer that perhaps
we could forward this
to the full board for
consideration without
recommendation today.
>> I think that our full Board
has a lot of items
on it because we were dark in
June. So, if this committee
would want to vote today,
it doesn't close the issue out,
but I think it's important
for us, given what I've seen
already and been advised we
might have before us
in the meeting next week. If we
could move this item today,
it would be very helpful.
Thank you. But let me hear
from the rest
of the committee.
>> My note says this was a
receive and file. Is that not
the action?
>> You're right, it is. It is a
receive and file.
>> No, it's not. It's not.
It's an action
to be taken.
>> So, our notes are wrong.
Okay.
>> Thank you very much, Madam
Chair. Let me say, I have
thoroughly enjoyed partnering
with some of the Open and
Slow Streets partners.
CicLAvia specifically partnered
and brought, helped to bring
CicLAvia to South LA. It's just
partnered with Metro on the
Paseo Willowbrook Open Street
event just 4th of July. And
when I consider You know,
what I hear
from constituents when we bring
CicLAvia, coupled
with the fact that the 2nd
Supervisory District,
in my other day job,
when we look at the Vision
Zero project that the county
voted on years ago, I am clear
that it's the 2nd district that
has the highest rate of vehicle
pedestrian fatalities. And so
Open and Slow Streets is a
wonderful program
to bring those communities
to create a safe opportunity
for community members
to try transit,
to walk and bike
in their own communities. And
so, I've supported. The reason
I chuckled is,
these are the kinds of
decisions that make our jobs
very difficult when it's
Sophie's Choice, if you will.
As Director Najarian talked
about this last item,
we just heard how it took 19
years and how there was real
concern for many of those years
that there were certain aspects
of the community that had
expansion of transit and other
aspects that didn't. In reading
the report and the funding
source that would have
to be tapped is a community,
the Vermont Transit Corridor,
that currently sees close to
40,000 Angelenos a day.
>> As we talked a moment ago
about how you're going
to define the, under the equity
rubric acknowledging that
40,000 people per day
conservatively rely
on our presence
on that corridor
to live their lives. And so, if
that is the only viable funding
source, it's,
it's a non-negotiable for
someone who represents that
district and hears
from those people every day
about what that BRT means
to them, their ability to go
to work, to go to school,
to go to not just work but
to multiple jobs. And so that
is challenging for me. I'm not
really clear what a delay
in a vote would get us.
Director Horvath, you've hit
your button,
you must have an answer.
>> More opportunity for
engagement and discussion. I do
not believe that the Vermont
Corridor bucket
of money is the only source
of funding. CMAC, CBG. There
are other sources that we could
consider. And again,
given the lateness
of where we are, I think that
just deserves discussion. If
we're interested
in funding this,
I don't think the Sophie's
Choice that you reference is
appropriate or fair. But I
don't think it's the only
option that we have
to consider. And I think we
could, if there's willingness
of the board to continue
to fund this, that we could
have a more robust discussion
around what we would want to
fund and where we would fund it
from.
>> And so, is staff prepared
to talk about those other
funding sources and
opportunities today?
>> We appreciate the question.
We are, we are not prepared
to talk about,
>> Good afternoon, Michelle
Navarro, interim CFO.
Unfortunately, we do have very
limited sources
of eligible money
for these type
of projects and programs. The
only other source of funding
would be operating eligible
dollars,
which we are being very prudent
in under, in,
in protecting those dollars
for our operations.
>> We do have fiscal challenges
ahead, and we are trying to
protect those dollars as much
as possible.
>> I have a question,
but answer, Supervisor Mitchell?
>> It has.
>> Okay.
>> Thank you.
>> Any other comments? I think
given where we are,
I would ask for a motion.
>> I would move that we advance
this item
without recommendation
to the full board for full
board consideration.
>> The motion fails for lack
of a second. Could I have a
motion
to move it forward?
>> So moved.
>> Second.
>> Moved and seconded that we
move the items accepting the
staff recommendation. Will you
please call the roll?
>> Vice Chair Solis?
>> Aye.
>> Director Mitchell?
>> Aye.
>> Director Najarian?
>> Aye.
>> Director Horvath?
>> No.
>> And Chair Dupont-Walker?
>> Aye.
>> The motion carries.
>> But if I might add, I don't
think this forecloses the
efforts
to find other funding pools,
both
on the funding side and also
on the cost containment side in
the preparation and production
of these CicLAvias. So.
>> I think we all agree. Yeah, I
think we all agree. I think
what's important is there are
communities who have not
enjoyed the benefits. You've
talked about that today,
and I think we need to make
sure that they understand it's
still a priority for us. Item
15, Countywide Planning Major
Project Status Report. Oh, I'm
sorry, did I skip 14? Yes, I
skipped 14. Thank you,
Supervisor Horvath.
Transportation Demand
Management Master Plan and
Policies.
>> Thank you, Chair. This item
is a receive and file
on the master plan. We can go
through an expedited
presentation considering the
time, if that may be the wish
of the Chair.
>> Yes.
>> Good morning. We are here
to present the TDM Master Plan
and policies. This is part
of the pre-games trip reduc,
or VMT reduction goal for the
Olympics. Next slide. We are
recommending
to receive and file the report
on implementation of the
Metro Transportation Demand
Management Master Plan Yes,
ma'am. So staff have developed
a Transportation Demand
Management Master Plan and
policies to address demand
in the Greater Los Angeles
region and
to provide a TDM roadmap
to support the 2028 Olympic and
Paralympic Games, as indicated
in the 2028 Mobility Concept
Plan. The goal of implementing
the master plan and policies is
to reduce VMT in Los Angeles
County by 20%. Before the 2028
games, as established
by SCAG and LA 28. And I will
mention that this is just one
of the measures that will help
meet that 20% reduction goal.
The elements of the TDM master
plan are transit corridors and
mobility hubs. We want
to engage with communities
around planned mobility hubs
and transit lines to increase
transit use as well as
multimodal trips. Really
concentrating on those short
non-commute trips,
so those leisure trips,
errands, trips to school, and
promoting transit corridors and
mobility hubs as real assets
to the community. We also have
on-demand shared mobility
engaging residents in areas
with limited transit access by
offering incentivized on-demand
carpooling as a less expensive
option to driving alone. So
This would be similar to
Uber, but it would be a carpool
model where users could find
carpools
in a dynamic situation. Also,
I'd like to point
out that this is great for
employers who have shift
workers who don't have regular
schedules, and it's also great
for our transit-dependent folks
to have an additional mode of
mobility because you don't need
to own a car in order
to participate. You can just
simply be a rider. The next is
fostering multimodal kids
for the future. So it's going
into schools near the transit
corridors and mobility hubs and
engaging the kids and the
parents through the kids
in learning about walking,
biking, and transit, not only
to create future generations
that embrace multimodal travel,
but also to get to the parents
and get the parents taking
their kids on transit
at a young age. And finally,
we have transit tourism.
Promoting transit-accessible
destinations
to tourists as well as
residents
to reduce vehicle demand.
We'll do this
through partnering
with hotels,
training concierge on Metro's
programs, and also
through reaching out to our
residents and engaging them
to take transit
to leisure destinations. The
total budget
for this program is $11.295
million, funded by a $10
million CMAQ grant.
To support implementation
of the TDM Master Plan and
policies for the 2028 Games,
Metro will partner with SCAG,
which is coordinating the TDM
subcommittee of the Games
Mobility Concept Plan. Metro
will initially implement the
TDM Master Plan and policies as
targeted pilot projects and
conduct stakeholder outreach.
After completion, staff will
review all the data collected
from the pilot program, and if
the pilot analysis indicates
effective TMD VMT reduction.
Based on that recommendation,
the 5 initiatives,
the pilots will be expanded
to the entire region.
>> Is that the presentation?
>> That's the presentation.
>> Any questions or comments
by members of committee? Thank
you. This is received and
filed. Appreciate it. Item
15, I'm sorry, public comment,
please.
>> This is public comment
for item 14. Please press pound
2 if you'd like
to make a comment. No public
comments.
>> Okay this is received and
filed, and we will, we have
received it and it will be
filed. Item 15, countywide
planning major project status
report. We have polled. We
thank you
for receiving the report. Do we
have any questions? Okay, we
will review and we'll be in
contact should there be any
comments. We're now
at the public comment.
>> This is public comment
for item 15. Please press pound
2 if you'd like
to make a comment on item 15.
No public comments.
>> My crystal ball told me
that. We
at general public comment now.
Do any members
of the public have any comments
on items that are not
on today's agenda?
>> We don't have anybody
in the room
for general public comment. If
you're on the phone,
please press pound 2. No
general public comments.
>> Public comment is now
closed. The agenda is now
exhausted. The meeting stands
adjourned.
>> Construction committee will
begin at 1:30.
>> Let me say before we go,
I just want to say to you,
Director Najarian, it is such a
joy, and we look forward
to remaining in contact. We
know you won't go far away
from transportation, but you
have a legacy that is worth
repeating.
>> Thank you, Madam Chair. I
have loved working with you.
Thank you.